PDA

View Full Version : The "one God"



dberrie2000
05-31-2012, 05:46 AM
Originally Posted by Billyray
"one" is not a ***le I could have just as easily said a single God in three persons.



dberrie---There is no such phrase as the "single God" in the Bible NT, that I am aware of.

But the phrase "one God" is found in the NT:

1 Cor8:6--"But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him."

If one were to notice--Paul separates out God the Father as the "one God"--and separates out Jesus Christ as the "one Lord"--even though they are both referenced in the same sentence.


Could anyone explain why Paul and the Biblical text never combines Jesus and God the Father into the same "one God" phrase, even though this phrase is used more than once in the NT, with both Christ and God the Father mentioned within the same few verses?

Billyray
05-31-2012, 07:29 AM
Could anyone explain why Paul and the Biblical text never combines Jesus and God the Father into the same "one God" phrase, even though this phrase is used more than once in the NT, with both Christ and God the Father mentioned within the same few verses?

"one God" is not a ***le for God. The Father is God and is referred to as God and the Son is God and referred to as God some verses and Lord in other verses. The verses you mention are simply distinguishing the Father from the Son.

James Banta
05-31-2012, 07:44 AM
"one God" is not a ***le for God. The Father is God and is referred to as God and the Son is God and referred to as God some verses and Lord in other verses. The verses you mention are simply distinguishing the Father from the Son.

The word we use as Lord is YHWH in the Hebrew.. Jesus is identified as LORD in John 8:58. Moses makes it clear that The YHWH our Elohim is one YHWH.. There is no way for mormonism to have any solid scriptural footing to teach there is more than one true and living God.. IHS jim

dberrie2000
06-02-2012, 05:28 AM
The word we use as Lord is YHWH in the Hebrew.. Jesus is identified as LORD in John 8:58. Moses makes it clear that The YHWH our Elohim is one YHWH.. There is no way for mormonism to have any solid scriptural footing to teach there is more than one true and living God.. IHS jim


Then, if what you say is true, that would have to be God the Father--and would exclude Jesus Christ:

St John17:3--"And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent."

Billyray
06-03-2012, 07:20 PM
Then, if what you say is true, that would have to be God the Father--and would exclude Jesus Christ:

James Banta said,
. . . YHWH our Elohim is one YHWH..


DB can you comment on this statement above and how it relates to LDS theology?

BigJulie
06-03-2012, 09:59 PM
James Banta said,
. . . YHWH our Elohim is one YHWH..


DB can you comment on this statement above and how it relates to LDS theology?

Yes--if you read it as the Jews did--it would exclude Christ which is why they were so against Him.

Billyray
06-03-2012, 10:06 PM
Yes--if you read it as the Jews did--it would exclude Christ which is why they were so against Him.
Per LDS teaching

Who is Elohim?

Who is Jehovah (YHWH)?

BigJulie
06-03-2012, 10:18 PM
Per LDS teaching

Who is Elohim?

Who is Jehovah (YHWH)?

Per LDS teaching---the terms Elohim and YWHY as used in the Bible mean strickly God.

Per LDS teaching so that WE (not the Jews) recognize the difference we call them separate names (so it is clear to us), but as the Bible (in English) do not use these terms, but LORD and God--both can be used for God the Father or His Son and therefore--when the Bible is written in English---we understand it to be both---Hence---the same for Hebrew (in terms of the Bible) as well.

Billyray
06-03-2012, 10:21 PM
Per LDS teaching---the terms Elohim and YWHY as used in the Bible mean strickly God.


So you don't believe that Elohim refers to the Father and Jehovah refers to the Son?

BigJulie
06-03-2012, 10:23 PM
So you don't believe that Elohim refers to the Father and Jehovah refers to the Son?

Not in the OT---they are translated as God or Lord---which can mean either the Father and/or the Son (usually both).

We use the terms we do to distinguish---but do not make the mistake of thinking that we use the Hebrew terms when we read the Bible and then try to distinguish which is which because that would not be accurate.

What is accurate is the English terms "God" or "LORD" which would be both--but to the Jews, it would be just God because they did not understand who Christ was yet.

The mistake you are making is that the modern terms we use to keep who is the Father and the Son separate (and this is not their names---you know this right...but merely ***les) cannot be applied to the OT when reading in Hebrew.

Billyray
06-03-2012, 10:33 PM
Not in the OT---they are translated as God or Lord---which can mean either the Father and/or the Son (usually both).



. . . YHWH our Elohim is one YHWH..

So you don't know who this is referring to then?

BigJulie
06-03-2012, 10:37 PM
. . . YHWH our Elohim is one YHWH..

So you don't know who this is referring to then?

Did you read my post?

As the Bible is translated in English and we read it in English (not Hebrew)---we do not attribute our modern date ***les that we use to distinguish between the Father and the Son (because the Son is also refered to as the Father) to the OT (which is what you are trying to do.)

So, read it this way--The Lord our God is One Lord. This to us speaks of the oneness of God (just as we would say "one flesh")

To the Jews--this verse lets them know who they should turn to for salvation and who is their God.

But keep in mind---it was verses like these that caused the unspiritual but well-read Jews to reject Christ.

Billyray
06-03-2012, 10:39 PM
. . .What is accurate is the English terms "God" or "LORD" which would be both [Father and Son]. . .

Don't you agree with the LDS Bible Dictionary that Jehovah is Jesus which is indicated in the Bible as LORD


LDS Bible Dictionary
Jehovah
Jehovah. The covenant or proper name of the God of Israel. It denotes the “Unchangeable One,” “the eternal I AM” (Ex. 6:3; Ps. 83:18; Isa. 12:2; 26:4). The original pronunciation of this name has possibly been lost, as the Jews, in reading, never mentioned it, but subs***uted one of the other names of God, usually Adonai. Probably it was pronounced Jahveh, or Yahveh. In the KJV, the Jewish custom has been followed, and the name is generally denoted by Lord or God, printed in small capitals.

Jehovah is the premortal Jesus Christ and came to earth being born of Mary (see Mosiah 13:28; 15:1; 3 Ne. 15:1–5; D&C 110:1–10). Although Ex. 6:3 states that the God of Israel was not known by the name Jehovah before Moses’ time, latter-day revelation tells us otherwise (Abr. 1:16; 2:8; cf. JST Ex. 6:3; see also Gen. 22:14).

Billyray
06-03-2012, 10:41 PM
Did you read my post?


You said

What is accurate is the English terms "God" or "LORD" which would be both
Which I took to mean that Elohim and Jehovah to you means both the Father and the Son.

Billyray
06-03-2012, 10:42 PM
So, read it this way--The Lord our God is One Lord. This to us speaks of the oneness of God (just as we would say "one flesh")


So "Lord" means the Father and the Son and "God" means the Father and the Son?

Billyray
06-03-2012, 10:44 PM
As the Bible is translated in English and we read it in English (not Hebrew)---

Would it be helpful to look at the Hebrew words?

BigJulie
06-03-2012, 10:46 PM
So "Lord" means the Father and the Son and "God" means the Father and the Son?

Did you read my post?????


Not in the OT---they are translated as God or Lord---which can mean either the Father and/or the Son (usually both).

And the quote you gave is modern terms and does not refer to the Elohim or Jehovah in Hebrew. In fact--Jehovah is very anti-OT.

Billyray
06-03-2012, 10:48 PM
Did you read my post?????


I have read your posts but they don't really make sense to me at all. Perhaps you could just clarify for me who is this refering to, the Father, the Son, or both?

. . . YHWH our Elohim is one YHWH..

BigJulie
06-03-2012, 10:52 PM
I have read your posts but they don't really make sense to me at all. Perhaps you could just clarify for me who is this refering to, the Father, the Son, or both?

. . . YHWH our Elohim is one YHWH..

You are reading something in Hebrew rather than English. In English, it would refer to the "one God" as in "one flesh" but as the Jews did not yet really understand Jesus Christ or the Son of God as we do---it is God to them.

Billyray--who is it to you---God the Father or God the Son or both?

Billyray
06-03-2012, 10:53 PM
Here is the Hebrew maybe this will make it easier for you to explain who is this speaking about "The LORD our God [is] one LORD"



http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Deu&c=6&v=1&t=KJV#conc/4

Hear, h8085
שמע shama`

O Israel: h3478
ישראל Yisra'el

The LORD h3068
יהוה Yĕhovah

our God h430
אלהים 'elohiym

[is] one h259
אחד 'echad

LORD: h3068
יהוה Yĕhovah

BigJulie
06-03-2012, 10:54 PM
Here is the Hebrew maybe this will make it easier for you to explain who is this speaking about "The LORD our God [is] one LORD"

I can read this in Hebrew.

Do you realize how many meanings "echad" has?

And if you were to read this in Hebrew--they would say "Adonai" as EV's use of YHWH is very offensive to them.

Billyray
06-03-2012, 11:17 PM
I can read this in Hebrew.


That's great. So who is "The LORD our God [is] one LORD" referring to, the Father, the Son or both?

BigJulie
06-04-2012, 06:42 AM
That's great. So who is "The LORD our God [is] one LORD" referring to, the Father, the Son or both?


And again:


In English, it would refer to the "one God" as in "one flesh" but as the Jews did not yet really understand Jesus Christ or the Son of God as we do---it is God to them....and as such, it is God to us. It doesn't matter whether it is the Father or Son or both because their words and purpose are the same. In fact, the LDS will use the term "God" in the same way today.

You know, this is almost commical, that a EV could begin to think that they understand the Hebrew enough to criticize another's religion. Jews themselves will spend time arguing about the meaning of different verses because there are so many possible translations for each word---but for you to think you fully understand the Hebrew and then use it to criticize another religion is fascinating.

It would be like a 3 year old thinking they know Calculus and so using their non- understanding to argue with an engineer regarding physics.

Billyray
06-04-2012, 06:51 AM
It doesn't matter whether it is the Father or Son or both because their words and purpose are the same. In fact, the LDS will use the term "God" in the same way today.


So your "God" is the Fsther and the Son?

BigJulie
06-04-2012, 06:55 AM
So your "God" is the Fsther and the Son?

You know Billyray, I know you are really trying hard to get a "gotcha" moment here. I think you should give it up. If you want to know my understanding of the Father and the Son---look to the New Testament and see what Christ states about Himself and His Father.

As noted, the way you interpret these verses is the same reason the Pharisees (who were well studied in the scriptures) gave themselves for rejecting Christ.

Billyray
06-04-2012, 06:56 AM
You know, this is almost commical, that a EV could begin to think that they understand the Hebrew enough to criticize another's religion.
You do realize that this same statement is also in Greek in the NT don't you?



http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Mar&c=12&v=1&t=KJV#1

[is], Hear, g191
ἀκούω*akouō

O Israel; g2474
Ἰσραήλ*Israēl
*
The Lord g2962
κύριος*kyrios
*
our * g2257
ἡμῶν*hēmōn
*
God * g2316
θεός*theos


Mar 12:29 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments [is], Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:


Who is Jesus referring to in this verse?

BigJulie
06-04-2012, 07:06 AM
You do realize that this same statement is also in Greek in the NT don't you?



Mar 12:29 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments [is], Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:


Who is Jesus referring to in this verse?

From the NT--we can learn what Christ believes about being one with God:

From the other thread where you ask the exact same question:


Okay--let's look at how Christ sees Himself with God the Father.
Jhn 10:29-30 My Father, which gave [them] me, is greater than all; and no [man] is able to pluck [them] out of my Father's hand. I and [my] Father are one.

(So even in these words, Christ recognizes the Father as greater than He, but then states they are one.)


And what Christ sees as being "one"--

Jhn 17:20 ¶ Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;

Jhn 17:21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, [art] in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.

Jhn 17:22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:


And then from Paul the apostle:
1Cr 12:12 For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also [is] Christ.

1Cr 10:17 For we [being] many are one bread, [and] one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.

Rom 15:6 That ye may with one mind [and] one mouth glorify God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

(Here Paul states that God is the Father of of Lord Jesus Christ, btw).

This seems to go along with the idea in the OT of being "one flesh".


I am curious if you take from these scriptures that somehow our mouths all blend together into one substance or something?

Now, from the teachings in the NT, there should be no mistake the relationship that Christ has with His Father as the Jews would have in that did not fully understand Christ.
__________________
I am a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon)--Luk 24:32 And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?

Billyray
06-04-2012, 07:37 AM
From the NT--we can learn what Christ believes about being one with God:

Mar 12:29 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments [is], Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:

So you believe that Jesus is referring to Himself in this verse. Right?

jdjhere
06-04-2012, 08:21 AM
Deuteronomy 6:4. "Hear, O Israel: The LORD [Jehovah] your God [Elohim] is one LORD [Jehovah]."

Notice the word "one" in this verse. It must be noted that there are two words for "one" in Hebrew: echad and yachid. Echad, the word that is used here, "stresses unity, while recognizing diversity within that oneness." For instance, we have one army, but within it there are many members. The oneness described in this verse does not suggest a "oneness of purpose," but a singleness of Being. The word yachid could have been used to designate one that does not allow for a plurality within the oneness.
The following conclusions are in order: (1) Jehovah and Elohim are the same God. (2) While there is only one God, a plurality of divine Persons within that oneness is suggested in the Old Testament.

BigJulie
06-04-2012, 08:27 AM
Deuteronomy 6:4. "Hear, O Israel: The LORD [Jehovah] your God [Elohim] is one LORD [Jehovah]."

Notice the word "one" in this verse. It must be noted that there are two words for "one" in Hebrew: echad and yachid. Echad, the word that is used here, "stresses unity, while recognizing diversity within that oneness." For instance, we have one army, but within it there are many members. The oneness described in this verse does not suggest a "oneness of purpose," but a singleness of Being. The word yachid could have been used to designate one that does not allow for a plurality within the oneness.
The following conclusions are in order: (1) Jehovah and Elohim are the same God. (2) While there is only one God, a plurality of divine Persons within that oneness is suggested in the Old Testament.

This seems like an awful lot of mumble jumble to make your case.

Christ and Paul explain in the NT what it means to be one. Why not go there instead of these great lengths to try to make a case using a langauge that even the Hebrews would spend hours trying to come up with a united :) meaning. ;)

When the term "yachid" is used--it denotes "only"---as in Isaac being Abraham's "only" son--even though Abraham had more than one son--this means Isaac was the son of the Covanent.

When we are asked to be "one flesh" or glorify God as "one mouth"---I think it makes a pretty clear statement about what it means to be "one."

jdjhere
06-04-2012, 09:23 AM
If you say so, BigJulie. I disagree, of course. Let the readers decide.

BigJulie
06-04-2012, 10:08 AM
If you say so, BigJulie. I disagree, of course. Let the readers decide.

Ummm--yes, but yachid, we can clearly means the child of the covenant or Abraham would have been wrong to ***ume it was Isaac rather than Ishmael.

James Banta
06-04-2012, 11:05 AM
This seems like an awful lot of mumble jumble to make your case.

Christ and Paul explain in the NT what it means to be one. Why not go there instead of these great lengths to try to make a case using a langauge that even the Hebrews would spend hours trying to come up with a united :) meaning. ;)

When the term "yachid" is used--it denotes "only"---as in Isaac being Abraham's "only" son--even though Abraham had more than one son--this means Isaac was the son of the Covanent.

When we are asked to be "one flesh" or glorify God as "one mouth"---I think it makes a pretty clear statement about what it means to be "one."

So what you want Deut 6:4 to mean is to have the same inclusion you put into 2 Nephi 31:21.. The infamous "in purpose".. And yet that doesn't fit into the tradition of of the Jews or the writtings they have always held as scripture:


Isaiah 43:10, 44:8
Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have not I told thee from that time, and have declared it? ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any.

You do believe that Jesus is a god, do you not? So when did He become such? Was it before or after the Father was formed as God? This p***age said no god was so formed. How do you justify that? I have heardyou say this only means for this world.. Aren't both the Father and the Son the God of this world? Of course so still Isaiah 43;10 condemns the teaching of Mormonism..

The idea that other Gods exist also slaps God in the face as being a liar.. He said there was never any other God formed, that He who knows all things doesn't know what Joseph Smith knew, and what the LDS church teaches. that other gods actually exist. Who is the authority here Smith or God?

Finally there is the name Elohim. Yes it has the meaning of more than one divine person.. But mormonism uses it as a proper name for ONE God/Man. The Father in Heaven.. You can't have it both ways. Which is it a word meaning gods, or the proper name for the Father? Is the Father more than one person, more than one God? Please clear this up with the quote of accepted LDS authority.. Is the Father Elohim or is Elohin a word that means gods.. IHS jim

BigJulie
06-04-2012, 11:19 AM
Finally there is the name Elohim. Yes it has the meaning of more than one divine person.. But mormonism uses it as a proper name for ONE God/Man. The Father in Heaven.. You can't have it both ways. Which is it a word meaning gods, or the proper name for the Father? Is the Father more than one person, more than one God? Please clear this up with the quote of accepted LDS authority.. Is the Father Elohim or is Elohin a word that means gods.. IHS jim

The word "Elohim" is a ***le we use in modern times to distinguish God the Father from the Son (who is also called Father). The Hebrew word "elohim" when found in the OT means "gods" literally.

James Banta
06-04-2012, 12:01 PM
The word "Elohim" is a ***le we use in modern times to distinguish God the Father from the Son (who is also called Father). The Hebrew word "elohim" when found in the OT means "gods" literally.

See your leaders found a word that means god and used it as a proper name for the Father. No where in all the Bible is that term used as such.. It is always used for either The Lord, the gods of the people of the land, or the powerful men of Israel that were set apart to judge the people of Israel.. It was never used to set up a separate god from the being of YHWH.. That is a new usage invented by Joseph Smith.. IHS jim

jdjhere
06-04-2012, 12:12 PM
Mormon Apostle James Talmage in Articles of Faith stated:
" The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints proclaims against the incomprehensible God, devoid of body, parts or p***ions, as a thing impossible of existence, and ***erts its beliefs in the allegiance to the True and Living God of scripture and revelation. Jesus Christ is the Son of Elohim both as spiritual and bodily offspring; that is to say, Elohim is literally the Father of the spirit of Jesus Christ and also of the body in which Jesus Christ performed His mission in the flesh. Jehovah who is Jesus Christ the Son of Elohim, is called The Father. Jesus Christ, whom we also know as Jehovah, was the executive of the Father, Elohim, in the work of creation as set forth in the book Jesus the Christ " chapter IV (pp48, 466, 467)
Talmage here is making Elohim and Jehovah two separate Gods, but Elohim (the greater god) and Jehovah (Jesus, the lesser god) are COMPOUNDED in the Hebrew as "Jehovah the Mighty One" or simply " Jehovah God." ( Look in a concordance)
Talmage also states " to deny the materiality of Gods person is to deny God; for a thing without parts has no whole and an immaterial body cannot exist."

What about the Holy Spirit, does HE possess a body? D&C 130:22 states "The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man's; the Son also; but the Holy Ghost has not a body of flesh and bones, but is a personage of Spirit. Were it not so, the Holy Ghost could not dwell in us."
So then, the Holy Spirit CANNOT exist by Talmage's definition- "for a thing without parts has no whole and an immaterial body cannot exist."

Are Elohim And Jehovah Separate Gods?
The Bible uses the names Elohim, Jehovah, and Adonai interchangeably for the one true God, along with combinations of these names and a number of other less frequently occurring terms. In fact, one of the names of God in the Old Testament is Jehovah-Elohim. It is translated in our King James Bible as "The LORD God" and literally means "Jehovah is Elohim," or "The LORD is God." (Jehovah-Elohim is rendered "LORD God" 20 times in Genesis 2-3, and there are scores of other examples in the Old Testament).
Since the name Elohim is a general Hebrew word for "God" and was also used to designate the false gods of Israel's heathen neighbors, we have the proclamation in the biblical Scriptures that Jehovah is our Elohim. It is a proclamation that Jehovah is the true God.
There are over 700 verses in the Old Testament that show Jehovah (LORD) and Elohim (God) are the same God. Many of these verses also state that Jehovah is the only Elohim. Following are a few examples.
Isaiah 43:10,11. Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD [Jehovah] and my servant whom I have chosen; that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God [Elohim] formed, neither shall there be after me. I, even I, am the LORD [Jehovah]; and beside me there is no savior.
Note from these verses that there are several things which God wants us to know, believe, and understand: (1) There is only one God (Elohim) and Jehovah is that one true God. (2) There were no Elohims formed before Jehovah. This means that Jehovah does not have a Father. That is, no God (Elohim) preceded him, by whom He was procreated. (3) There will be no Elohims formed after Jehovah. Some say that Isaiah 43:10,11 is talking about idols. But that cannot be true for there certainly have been idols and false gods made and worshiped since this p***age was written. Therefore, when God said no gods would be formed after him, it must mean no real, true Gods.
Isaiah 44:6,8. Thus saith the LORD [Jehovah) the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God [Elohim] ... Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have not I told thee from that time, and have declared it? ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God [Elohim] beside me? yea, there is no God [Elohim] I know not any.
The emphatic "Thus saith Jehovah" in the above verse commands our attention. The following points are made under authoritative declaration: (1) Jehovah is the first Elohim and the last Elohim. There can be only one first and only one last. Again, this rules out the possibility of any other Gods existing throughout all of eternity past and all of eternity future. It also again shows that Jehovah and Elohim are not different Gods. (2) Jehovah is the only God (Elohim) that exists. This again rules out the possibility of other sovereigns existing. (3) No reasonable person would challenge the intellect of God. When He says that He does not know of something, this certainly does not imply any limitation in the scope or capacity of His knowledge. On the contrary, when He says He does not know of something, we may be ***ured this means that thing does not exist. So it is plain that when God says He does not know of any other Gods it is because they do not exist. Thus, these verses affirm in the clearest possible terms that no other Gods exist, nor will exist, throughout all of time and space, in this universe or any other.
Deuteronomy 6:4. Hear, O Israel: The LORD [Jehovah] your God [Elohim] is one LORD [Jehovah].
Notice the word "one" in this verse. It must be noted that there are two words for "one" in Hebrew: echad and yachid. Echad, the word that is used here, "stresses unity, while recognizing diversity within that oneness."7 For instance, we have one army, but within it there are many members. The oneness described in this verse does not suggest a "oneness of purpose," but a singleness of Being. The word yachid could have been used to designate one that does not allow for a plurality within the oneness.
The following conclusions are in order: (1) Jehovah and Elohim are the same God. (2) While there is only one God, a plurality of divine Persons within that oneness is suggested in the Old Testament.
Psalm 110:1. The LORD [Jehovah] said unto my Lord [Adona], Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.
A plurality of divine Persons within the one God is exactly what we find in this verse. It has been universally recognized for centuries by both Jews and Christians as a Messianic psalm. Matthew 22:41-46 shows that Jews in Jesus day understood the "Lord" (Adona) in Psalm 110:1 to refer to the Messiah. Read Acts 2:32-36 and Hebrews 1:13 and you will see that the New Testament clearly presents Psalm 110:1 as an invitation by God the Father ("LORD"/Jehovah) to His Son, Jesus Christ ("Lord"/Adona) to sit at His right hand. Two observations are in order:
Notice that Jehovah is speaking to Adona (a singular form of Adonai). As was mentioned earlier, when the word 'Lord' is used for God it is usually written in the plural form (Adonai), which is in harmony with the historic Christian doctrine of God's Tri-une nature (Trinity). In this verse Jehovah is speaking to a specific Person within the Trinity, so he uses the singular word for Lord. God is in fact speaking to God, or to state it from the perspective of the Apostle Peter's sermon in Acts 2:32-36, the Father is speaking to His pre-incarnate Son, Jesus Christ.
However, this points up a major contradiction between Mormon doctrine and the Bible, for according to the LDS Church, Jehovah is Jesus. In the words of President Spencer W. Kimball, "There are three Gods: the Eternal Father, Elohim, to whom we pray; Christ or Jehovah, and the Holy Ghost." Thus, in the popular brochure, "What Mormons Think of Christ," the late Mormon apostle Bruce R. McConkie offered this translation of Psalm 110:1: "The Lord (Elohim, the Father) said unto my Lord (Jehovah, the Son), sit at my right hand."9 As we have seen, the KJV system for designating the divine names does not allow for this translation; it is completely impossible. The text clearly states that it is Jehovah (LORD), not Elohim, who is inviting the Messiah to sit at His right hand. In order to support the Mormon doctrine of God, Elder McConkie was forced to manipulate the clear text of Scripture.
The Inescapable Conclusion
As we have seen from the Old Testament Scriptures above, it is surely wrong to say that Elohim, Jehovah, and the Holy Ghost are separate Gods. The Bible states emphatically and repeatedly that there is only one God, it declares that Elohim is Jehovah, and it uses the names Elohim, Jehovah, and Adonai interchangeably. The Bible also teaches that the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God (Acts 5:3,4). The awesome but inescapable conclusion is that God is Triune in nature.

James Banta
06-04-2012, 01:38 PM
Mormon Apostle James Talmage in Articles of Faith stated:
" The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints proclaims against the incomprehensible God, devoid of body, parts or p***ions, as a thing impossible of existence, and ***erts its beliefs in the allegiance to the True and Living God of scripture and revelation. Jesus Christ is the Son of Elohim both as spiritual and bodily offspring; that is to say, Elohim is literally the Father of the spirit of Jesus Christ and also of the body in which Jesus Christ performed His mission in the flesh. Jehovah who is Jesus Christ the Son of Elohim, is called The Father. Jesus Christ, whom we also know as Jehovah, was the executive of the Father, Elohim, in the work of creation as set forth in the book Jesus the Christ " chapter IV (pp48, 466, 467)
Talmage here is making Elohim and Jehovah two separate Gods, but Elohim (the greater god) and Jehovah (Jesus, the lesser god) are COMPOUNDED in the Hebrew as "Jehovah the Mighty One" or simply " Jehovah God." ( Look in a concordance)
Talmage also states " to deny the materiality of Gods person is to deny God; for a thing without parts has no whole and an immaterial body cannot exist."

What about the Holy Spirit, does HE possess a body? D&C 130:22 states "The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man's; the Son also; but the Holy Ghost has not a body of flesh and bones, but is a personage of Spirit. Were it not so, the Holy Ghost could not dwell in us."
So then, the Holy Spirit CANNOT exist by Talmage's definition- "for a thing without parts has no whole and an immaterial body cannot exist."

Are Elohim And Jehovah Separate Gods?
The Bible uses the names Elohim, Jehovah, and Adonai interchangeably for the one true God, along with combinations of these names and a number of other less frequently occurring terms. In fact, one of the names of God in the Old Testament is Jehovah-Elohim. It is translated in our King James Bible as "The LORD God" and literally means "Jehovah is Elohim," or "The LORD is God." (Jehovah-Elohim is rendered "LORD God" 20 times in Genesis 2-3, and there are scores of other examples in the Old Testament).
Since the name Elohim is a general Hebrew word for "God" and was also used to designate the false gods of Israel's heathen neighbors, we have the proclamation in the biblical Scriptures that Jehovah is our Elohim. It is a proclamation that Jehovah is the true God.
There are over 700 verses in the Old Testament that show Jehovah (LORD) and Elohim (God) are the same God. Many of these verses also state that Jehovah is the only Elohim. Following are a few examples.
Isaiah 43:10,11. Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD [Jehovah] and my servant whom I have chosen; that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God [Elohim] formed, neither shall there be after me. I, even I, am the LORD [Jehovah]; and beside me there is no savior.
Note from these verses that there are several things which God wants us to know, believe, and understand: (1) There is only one God (Elohim) and Jehovah is that one true God. (2) There were no Elohims formed before Jehovah. This means that Jehovah does not have a Father. That is, no God (Elohim) preceded him, by whom He was procreated. (3) There will be no Elohims formed after Jehovah. Some say that Isaiah 43:10,11 is talking about idols. But that cannot be true for there certainly have been idols and false gods made and worshiped since this p***age was written. Therefore, when God said no gods would be formed after him, it must mean no real, true Gods.
Isaiah 44:6,8. Thus saith the LORD [Jehovah) the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God [Elohim] ... Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have not I told thee from that time, and have declared it? ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God [Elohim] beside me? yea, there is no God [Elohim] I know not any.
The emphatic "Thus saith Jehovah" in the above verse commands our attention. The following points are made under authoritative declaration: (1) Jehovah is the first Elohim and the last Elohim. There can be only one first and only one last. Again, this rules out the possibility of any other Gods existing throughout all of eternity past and all of eternity future. It also again shows that Jehovah and Elohim are not different Gods. (2) Jehovah is the only God (Elohim) that exists. This again rules out the possibility of other sovereigns existing. (3) No reasonable person would challenge the intellect of God. When He says that He does not know of something, this certainly does not imply any limitation in the scope or capacity of His knowledge. On the contrary, when He says He does not know of something, we may be ***ured this means that thing does not exist. So it is plain that when God says He does not know of any other Gods it is because they do not exist. Thus, these verses affirm in the clearest possible terms that no other Gods exist, nor will exist, throughout all of time and space, in this universe or any other.
Deuteronomy 6:4. Hear, O Israel: The LORD [Jehovah] your God [Elohim] is one LORD [Jehovah].
Notice the word "one" in this verse. It must be noted that there are two words for "one" in Hebrew: echad and yachid. Echad, the word that is used here, "stresses unity, while recognizing diversity within that oneness."7 For instance, we have one army, but within it there are many members. The oneness described in this verse does not suggest a "oneness of purpose," but a singleness of Being. The word yachid could have been used to designate one that does not allow for a plurality within the oneness.
The following conclusions are in order: (1) Jehovah and Elohim are the same God. (2) While there is only one God, a plurality of divine Persons within that oneness is suggested in the Old Testament.
Psalm 110:1. The LORD [Jehovah] said unto my Lord [Adona], Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.
A plurality of divine Persons within the one God is exactly what we find in this verse. It has been universally recognized for centuries by both Jews and Christians as a Messianic psalm. Matthew 22:41-46 shows that Jews in Jesus day understood the "Lord" (Adona) in Psalm 110:1 to refer to the Messiah. Read Acts 2:32-36 and Hebrews 1:13 and you will see that the New Testament clearly presents Psalm 110:1 as an invitation by God the Father ("LORD"/Jehovah) to His Son, Jesus Christ ("Lord"/Adona) to sit at His right hand. Two observations are in order:
Notice that Jehovah is speaking to Adona (a singular form of Adonai). As was mentioned earlier, when the word 'Lord' is used for God it is usually written in the plural form (Adonai), which is in harmony with the historic Christian doctrine of God's Tri-une nature (Trinity). In this verse Jehovah is speaking to a specific Person within the Trinity, so he uses the singular word for Lord. God is in fact speaking to God, or to state it from the perspective of the Apostle Peter's sermon in Acts 2:32-36, the Father is speaking to His pre-incarnate Son, Jesus Christ.
However, this points up a major contradiction between Mormon doctrine and the Bible, for according to the LDS Church, Jehovah is Jesus. In the words of President Spencer W. Kimball, "There are three Gods: the Eternal Father, Elohim, to whom we pray; Christ or Jehovah, and the Holy Ghost." Thus, in the popular brochure, "What Mormons Think of Christ," the late Mormon apostle Bruce R. McConkie offered this translation of Psalm 110:1: "The Lord (Elohim, the Father) said unto my Lord (Jehovah, the Son), sit at my right hand."9 As we have seen, the KJV system for designating the divine names does not allow for this translation; it is completely impossible. The text clearly states that it is Jehovah (LORD), not Elohim, who is inviting the Messiah to sit at His right hand. In order to support the Mormon doctrine of God, Elder McConkie was forced to manipulate the clear text of Scripture.
The Inescapable Conclusion
As we have seen from the Old Testament Scriptures above, it is surely wrong to say that Elohim, Jehovah, and the Holy Ghost are separate Gods. The Bible states emphatically and repeatedly that there is only one God, it declares that Elohim is Jehovah, and it uses the names Elohim, Jehovah, and Adonai interchangeably. The Bible also teaches that the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God (Acts 5:3,4). The awesome but inescapable conclusion is that God is Triune in nature.

Julie is sharp enough to see that the teachings of mormonism as to "ELOHIM" is erred. But instead of being honest she goes about trying to make it work both ways.. The term elohim does mean gods.. It is used to call YHWH God, to speak of the gods of the people of the land such as Moloch or the Baals, and to set apart the rulers of the people, the men with the power of life or death over them. All the text of the OT is block letters the only way to understand which of these is being refereed to is though the context of the text.. IHS jim

Billyray
06-04-2012, 02:03 PM
When we are asked to be "one flesh" or glorify God as "one mouth"---I think it makes a pretty clear statement about what it means to be "one."

But in the OT before the incarnation neither the Father or the Son had flesh.

BigJulie
06-04-2012, 02:26 PM
But in the OT before the incarnation neither the Father or the Son had flesh.

Luckily, we can gain new insight about the OT by the NT and see that it does not limit God to have a body of flesh and bones.

Billyray
06-04-2012, 08:03 PM
The Hebrew word "elohim" when found in the OT means "gods" literally.

So when you see "elohim" you couldn't tell me if this is the Father, the Son, the HS, false gods, men or judges?

Billyray
06-04-2012, 08:38 PM
Now, from the teachings in the NT, there should be no mistake the relationship that Christ has with His Father as the Jews would have in that did not fully understand Christ.


Are you using the above verses in your attempt to try and nulify all of the Biblical verses that speak about one God?

James Banta
06-05-2012, 07:14 AM
So when you see "elohim" you couldn't tell me if this is the Father, the Son, the HS, false gods, men or judges?

Not is just seeing the word, no. The context of the p***age always makes it clear the meaning of the word. Is the p***age about false gods, mere men appointed as judges over the people, or is it about YHWH.. The context reveals the meaning.. IHS jim

dberrie2000
06-05-2012, 09:44 AM
So when you see "elohim" you couldn't tell me if this is the Father, the Son, the HS, false gods, men or judges?

No. The Gods of the divine council were referred to as "Elohim" in the Hebrew Bible.

There is only one name given in the Bible for any of the Godhead--and that is God the Son--such as Jesus Christ. God the Father nor the Holy Ghost were ***igned any specific names--only ***les.

The Gods of the divine council were referred to as "Elohim". Some had specific names in the Ugarit texts, possibly.


Michael Heiser--


1. The plural ʾĕlōhîm of Psalm 82:1, 6 are divine beings, not human judges or humans fulfilling any role.

2. The term monotheism is inadequate to describe what it is Israel believed about God and the members of his council. As the text explicitly says, there are other ʾĕlōhîm.

3. References to "us" and "our" in p***ages like Genesis 1:26 do not refer to the Trinity. The plural ʾĕlōhîm of Psalm 82 are also not members of the Trinity.

Billyray
06-05-2012, 11:10 PM
Billyray
So when you see "elohim" you couldn't tell me if this is the Father, the Son, the HS, false gods, men or judges?


No. The Gods of the divine council were referred to as "Elohim" in the Hebrew Bible.



Genesis 1
1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.


So you believe that in this verse God could be a false god or a man or judge since you can't be sure? Right?

dberrie2000
06-06-2012, 12:55 PM
Originally Posted by Billyray
So when you see "elohim" you couldn't tell me if this is the Father, the Son, the HS, false gods, men or judges?



dberrie----No. The Gods of the divine council were referred to as "Elohim" in the Hebrew Bible.

There is only one name given in the Bible for any of the Godhead--and that is God the Son--such as Jesus Christ. God the Father nor the Holy Ghost were ***igned any specific names--only ***les.

The Gods of the divine council were referred to as "Elohim". Some had specific names in the Ugarit texts, possibly.


Michael Heiser--


1. The plural ʾĕlōhîm of Psalm 82:1, 6 are divine beings, not human judges or humans fulfilling any role.

2. The term monotheism is inadequate to describe what it is Israel believed about God and the members of his council. As the text explicitly says, there are other ʾĕlōhîm.

3. References to "us" and "our" in p***ages like Genesis 1:26 do not refer to the Trinity. The plural ʾĕlōhîm of Psalm 82 are also not members of the Trinity.





Genesis 1
1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.


So you believe that in this verse God could be a false god or a man or judge since you can't be sure? Right?


Let me clarify my statement to you. As I posted above--the Gods addressed of the divine council as found in Psalm82 are not members of the Trinity, nor judges, nor men. Nor are they false Gods.

The reference you make in Genesis is the Godhead, which are not the Gods addressed in Psalm82, as stated above in my post.

Billyray
06-06-2012, 12:58 PM
Let me clarify my statement to you. As I posted above--the Gods addressed of the divine council as found in Psalm82 are not members of the Trinity, nor judges, nor men. Nor are they false Gods.

Then who are they?

dberrie2000
06-06-2012, 01:11 PM
Then who are they?

Are you looking for names? Even if I gave some of the names that the Ugarit text gives--what difference would that make?

The fact of the matter is--if the scriptures are true--and the divine council was made up of deities--that would destroy the faith alone doctrine of the Trinity, no matter what their names were.

Billyray--the Hebrew Bible, the Early Church Fathers, and the Ugarit text all agree--there are other Gods than what comprises the Godhead.

RealFakeHair
06-06-2012, 01:14 PM
Are you looking for names? Even if I gave some of the names that the Ugarit text gives--what difference would that make?

The fact of the matter is--if the scriptures are true--and the divine council was made up of deities--that would destroy the faith alone doctrine of the Trinity, no matter what their names were.

Billyray--the Hebrew Bible, the Early Church Fathers, and the Ugarit text all agree--there are other Gods than what comprises the Godhead.

Okay, just for curiosity how many mormon gods are out there?

Billyray
06-06-2012, 01:17 PM
Are you looking for names? Even if I gave some of the names that the Ugarit text gives--what difference would that make?


I am looking for who these gods are that are spoken about in Psalm 82.

You are honestly telling me you have no idea?

dberrie2000
06-06-2012, 01:26 PM
I am looking for who these gods are that are spoken about in Psalm 82.

You are honestly telling me you have no idea?

As have been explained already--they are the Gods of the divine council. Deities.

Again--there is a difference in explaining the Gods of Psalm82 were Gods of the divine council--and dropping names for each one of them.

Billyray
06-06-2012, 01:30 PM
As have been explained already--they are the Gods of the divine council. Deities.


And who are these deities exactly? Are they spirit children of God the Father and his wife?

dberrie2000
06-06-2012, 01:46 PM
Originally Posted by dberrie2000
As have been explained already--they are the Gods of the divine council. Deities.



And who are these deities exactly? Are they spirit children of God the Father and his wife?

Whatever one might believe--they are given as Gods--deities. How does that effect your theology?

Can you explain to us how this compares to the Trinitarian theology?

Billyray
06-06-2012, 01:56 PM
Whatever one might believe--they are given as Gods--deities. How does that effect your theology?


You believe that Psalm 82 is speaking about gods that are distinct from the Godhead. Who are these gods? Are they spirit children of the Father? Are they God the Father's brothers? Are they God the Father's Father?

RealFakeHair
06-06-2012, 02:03 PM
You believe that Psalm 82 is speaking about gods that are distinct from the Godhead. Who are these gods? Are they spirit children of the Father? Are they God the Father's brothers? Are they God the Father's Father?

I've often wondered where the 3 stooges came from.
Now if anyone doesn't believe me then prove me wrong!;)

dberrie2000
06-11-2012, 05:15 AM
Originally Posted by dberrie2000
Whatever one might believe--they are given as Gods--deities. How does that effect your theology?



You believe that Psalm 82 is speaking about gods that are distinct from the Godhead. Who are these gods? Are they spirit children of the Father? Are they God the Father's brothers? Are they God the Father's Father?


Again--the Bible does not address that issue, anymore than it addresses who the various Gods are in the OT.

Even the name of Jesus Christ was not revealed in the OT--and the name of God the Father was never revealed in the Bible at all.

But that does not touch the problem of the Trinitarians of the existence of numerous Gods in the divine council.

If there were other Gods, as the Hebrew Bible states--then the Trinity theology falls--period. Names or no names.

If you are interested enough--a study of the Ugarit text reveals some of the names of the Gods. But that's throwing water on a house that is already burned down.

Billyray
06-26-2012, 05:15 PM
But that does not touch the problem of the Trinitarians of the existence of numerous Gods in the divine council.

Who are these gods in Psalm 82? Are they the Father's brothers or the Father's uncles who are gods? Enlighten us DB.

dberrie2000
07-18-2012, 04:19 AM
Originally Posted by dberrie2000 View Post---But that does not touch the problem of the Trinitarians of the existence of numerous Gods in the divine council.


Who are these gods in Psalm 82? Are they the Father's brothers or the Father's uncles who are gods? Enlighten us DB.

The text describes the Gods using the same term as the NT does--the sons of God--with the ruler of the divine council being El.

Who they are, by name(even that is given for some) does not touch your problem. They were Gods regardless of their names.

Billyray
07-18-2012, 10:28 PM
The text describes the Gods using the same term as the NT does--the sons of God--with the ruler of the divine council being El.

Who they are, by name(even that is given for some) does not touch your problem. They were Gods regardless of their names.

My biggest problem is trying to get you to actually answer my question directly.

Who are these gods in Psalm 82? Are they the Father's brothers or the Father's uncles who are gods? Enlighten us DB.

dberrie2000
07-19-2012, 04:54 AM
Originally Posted by dberrie2000 View Post----The text describes the Gods using the same term as the NT does--the sons of God--with the ruler of the divine council being El.

Who they are, by name(even that is given for some) does not touch your problem. They were Gods regardless of their names.




My biggest problem is trying to get you to actually answer my question directly.

Who are these gods in Psalm 82? Are they the Father's brothers or the Father's uncles who are gods? Enlighten us DB.


Where does one find brothers or uncles in the text?

They are divine beings that are Gods--His sons and children.

Psalm82:6--"I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High."

The Ugarit text names a few of those Gods--but the damage is already done to the Trinitarian theology. If what we know now is true--then the Trinitarian theology is false. But the LDS theology remains in tact.

Billyray
07-19-2012, 08:56 AM
They are divine beings that are Gods--His sons and children.



So the gods of Psalm 82 are spirit children of God the Father such as you and Marvin who are gods?

dberrie2000
07-19-2012, 09:40 AM
Originally Posted by dberrie2000 View Post--They are divine beings that are Gods--His sons and children.



So the gods of Psalm 82 are spirit children of God the Father such as you and Marvin who are gods?

I have no spirit children, and the Gods of Psalm82 are not mortals. My children are of the flesh. All spirits are Fathered by God the Father.

Psalm82 refers to the Gods that are the spirit children of the Father--heavenly divine beings--the sons of God.

Billyray
07-19-2012, 09:42 AM
I have no spirit children, and the Gods of Psalm82 are not mortals. My children are of the flesh. All spirits are Fathered by God the Father.

Did I ever say you have spirit children?



Psalm82 refers to the Gods that are the spirit children of the Father--heavenly divine beings--the sons of God.

So the gods of Psalm 82 are spirit children of God the Father such as you and Marvin who are gods?

dberrie2000
07-19-2012, 09:52 AM
Originally Posted by Billyray View Post
So the gods of Psalm 82 are spirit children of God the Father such as you and Marvin who are gods?



dberrie---I have no spirit children, and the Gods of Psalm82 are not mortals. My children are of the flesh. All spirits are Fathered by God the Father.

Psalm82 refers to the Gods that are the spirit children of the Father--heavenly divine beings--the sons of God.



Did I ever say you have spirit children? So the gods of Psalm 82 are spirit children of God the Father such as you and Marvin who are gods?

No. Neither Marvin nor I are heavenly beings. The Gods of Psalm82 are heavenly beings, not mortals such as Marvin and I are. Yes, we are spirit children just as those of Psalm82 are.

Billyray
07-19-2012, 09:56 AM
No. Neither Marvin nor I are heavenly beings. The Gods of Psalm82 are heavenly beings, not mortals such as Marvin and I are.
But you and Marvin are spirit children of the Father and you say that spirit children of the Father are the gods of Psalm 82. You and Marvin could have been some of those gods in Psalm 82 prior to your birth. Right?

dberrie2000
07-20-2012, 04:44 AM
Originally Posted by dberrie2000 View Post---No. Neither Marvin nor I are heavenly beings. The Gods of Psalm82 are heavenly beings, not mortals such as Marvin and I are.




But you and Marvin are spirit children of the Father


Of the Father? But that is what the Bible teaches--you have stated it was the Son who created the spirits--did you not?



and you say that spirit children of the Father are the gods of Psalm 82.


That's the language of the text--children--sons of God. If that is true--then could the ECF have been right? :

Irenaeus--Against Heresies--Book 5, preface


For it is thus that you will both controvert them in a legitimate manner, and will be prepared to receive the proofs brought forward against them, casting away their doctrines as filth by means of the celestial faith; but following the only true and steadfast Teacher, the Word of God, our Lord Jesus Christ, who did, through His transcendent love, become what we are, that He might bring us to be even what He is Himself.

Billyray
07-20-2012, 09:37 AM
But you and Marvin are spirit children of the Father and you say that spirit children of the Father are the gods of Psalm 82. You and Marvin could have been some of those gods in Psalm 82 prior to your birth. Right?


That's the language of the text--children--sons of God.


So you and Marvin could have been the gods that were spoken about in Pslm 82. Correct?

dberrie2000
07-21-2012, 06:15 PM
Billyray---and you say that spirit children of the Father are the gods of Psalm 82.


Originally Posted by dberrie2000 View Post---That's the language of the text--children--sons of God.


So you and Marvin could have been the gods that were spoken about in Pslm 82. Correct?

Regardless of who you believe might have been there, the divine council consisted of a number of Gods, who were referred to as the sons of God.

Again--down comes the pillars of the Trinitarian theology, if that is true, dberrie and Marvin be whatever they are, were--or ever will be.

Billyray
07-21-2012, 11:24 PM
Regardless of who you believe might have been there, the divine council consisted of a number of Gods, who were referred to as the sons of God.


But you didn't answer my question.

So you and Marvin could have been the gods that were spoken about in Pslm 82. Correct?

alanmolstad
02-05-2014, 01:01 PM
Could anyone explain why Paul and the Biblical text .....

I can tell you where things appear in the text and what they mean.
But there are many more things that we can ask questions about that are not found in the text.....

Its like the question that people always ask, "Where did CAIN get his wife from?"
We can guess an answer, but thats all, the truth is that the answer does not appear in the text, and therefore any answer i come up with as to "why is it not found in the text?" is just a guess....

James Banta
02-06-2014, 12:29 PM
I have no spirit children, and the Gods of Psalm82 are not mortals. My children are of the flesh. All spirits are Fathered by God the Father.

Psalm82 refers to the Gods that are the spirit children of the Father--heavenly divine beings--the sons of God.


Just what kinds of gods die like men? Even Jesus didn't die like men die.. He had the power to lay down His life and take it up again (John 10:18).. Yet in Psalm 82 these elohim die like men not like gods.. Sorry but you and your pal Heiser missed that point.. Or more likely ignore it so as to be able to put your pet doctrine forward. IHS jim

dberrie2000
10-05-2014, 06:02 AM
Originally Posted by Billyray"one" is not a ***le I could have just as easily said a single God in three persons.

There is no such phrase as the "single God" in the Bible NT, that I am aware of.

But the phrase "one God" is found in the NT:

1 Cor8:6--"But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him."

If one were to notice--Paul separates out God the Father as the "one God"--and separates out Jesus Christ as the "one Lord"--even though they are both referenced in the same sentence.

Could anyone explain why Paul and the Biblical text never combines Jesus and God the Father into the same "one God" phrase, even though this phrase is used more than once in the NT, with both Christ and God the Father mentioned within the same few verses?

Bump for anyone

dberrie2000
02-02-2015, 06:42 AM
Originally Posted by Billyray"one" is not a ***le I could have just as easily said a single God in three persons.

There is no such phrase as the "single God" in the Bible NT, that I am aware of.

But the phrase "one God" is found in the NT:

1 Cor8:6--"But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him."

If one were to notice--Paul separates out God the Father as the "one God"--and separates out Jesus Christ as the "one Lord"--even though they are both referenced in the same sentence.

Could anyone explain why Paul and the Biblical text never combines Jesus and God the Father into the same "one God" phrase, even though this phrase is used more than once in the NT, with both Christ and God the Father mentioned within the same few verses?

Bump for anyone