The God of Jesus — The Only Most High

Many people do not think of Jesus as having a God, since they believe that Jesus is the only true God. However, the Bible shows that Jesus believes that the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is his God. Despite the claims of many who said that he did, Jesus never claimed to be the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. All of the claims people make that would have any scripture saying that Jesus is Yahweh actually assumes that thought due to the spirit of human imagination by which assumptions have been formulated, and those assumptions have been placed over the scripture to make it appear that the scripture is declaring Jesus to be Yahweh (Jehovah), the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

Jesus has One who is the Supreme Being over him; Jesus is not his Supreme Being whom he worships, prays to, and who sent him, and whose will he carried out in willful obedience. (Deuteronomy 18:15-19; Matthew 4:4 [Deuteronomy 8:3; Luke 4:4]; Matthew 4:7 [Deuteronomy 6:16]; Matthew 4:10 [Exodus 20:3-5; 34:14; Deuteronomy 6:13,14; 10:20; Luke 4:8]; Matthew 22:29-40; Matthew 26:42; Matthew 27:46; Mark 10:6 [Genesis 1:27; Genesis 2:7,20-23]; Mark 14:36; 15:34; Luke 22:42; John 4:3; 5:30; 6:38; 17:1,3; 20:17; Romans 15:6; 2 Corinthians 1:3; 11:31; Ephesians 1:3,17; Hebrews 1:9; 10:7; 1 Peter 1:3; Revelation 2:7; 3:2,12)

The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, by means of his holy spirit, reveals through the scriptures that Jesus was sent by Yahweh, speaks for Yahweh as his unipersonal God and Father, represents Yahweh, and was raised and glorified by the unipersonal God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Jesus never claimed to be, nor do the scriptures present Jesus as, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, whom Jesus represents and speaks for. — Deuteronomy 18:15-19; Matthew 22:32; 23:39; Mark 11:9,10; 12:26; Luke 13:35; 20:37; John 3:2,17,32-35; 4:34; 5:19,30,36,43; 6:57; 7:16,28; 8:26,28,38; 10:25; 12:49,50; 14:10; 15:15; 17:8,26; 20:17; Acts 2:22,34-36; 3:13-26; 5:30; Romans 15:6; 2 Corinthians 1:3; 8:6; 11:31; Colossians 1:3,15; 2:9-12; Hebrews 1:1-3; Revelation 1:1.

The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, by means of his holy spirit, reveals through the scriptures that Jesus is son of the unipersonal Most High, Yahweh. Jesus is never spoken of as the “Most High”; he is not the only Most High Yahweh of whom he is the son. — Genesis 14:22; Psalm 7:17; 83:18; 92:1; Luke 1:32; John 13:16.

The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is never once presented in the Bible as more than one person; He is always presented as one person. In the Bible, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is always presented unipersonally as separate and distinct from His son. His Son is not once presented as the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. — Acts 3:13-26; Hebrews 1:1,2.

The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, by means of his holy spirit, reveals through the scriptures that Jesus is son of the unipersonal Most High, Yahweh. Jesus is never spoken of as the “Most High”; he is not the only Most High Yahweh of whom he is the son. — Genesis 14:22; Psalm 7:17; 83:18; 92:1; Luke 1:32; John 13:16.

If Jesus is the Most High, then the Most High and another Most High is over the Most High, and thus you have two Most High, one Most High that is not as Most High and the other Most High, in which case, you really would not have two Most Highs, since the very fact that one Most High is higher than the other Most High would render that one not the Most High.

For more information, please see:

There is Only One True God

The Unipersonal God Spoke Through His Son

Does God Share His Glory as Most High With Jesus?

Revelation 1:1,8 and the Unipersonal God

The God of Jesus Speaks

Far Above All Rule

“Most High” Scriptures

Did Jesus Really Say that the Father is the Only True God?

The Logos Was Theos

The God (Supreme Being) of Jesus

“I am” (Ego Eimi)

Your Questions

Earnest (not foolish — 2 Timothy 2:23)  questions related to the Bible or religion may be presented in comments of this page. CLICK HERE to ask your question. I cannot guarantee that I know all the answers, but at least I am willing to discuss questions as God and time permits.

Acceptable and Unacceptable Worship

ACCEPTABLE AND UNACCEPTABLE WORSHIP

“God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.” — John 4:24.

Unless otherwise noted, all scriptural quotations are from the World English translation.

WORSHIP is that outward manifestation of reverence for holy things which is pleasing to God, if done in a proper manner and from the right motive. But it is possible to assume the attitude of worship, and yet not offer worship that would be acceptable to God. In His conversation with the Samaritan woman, our Lord is declaring the manner of worship which the Father would accept. One might worship and bow down, and yet not be acceptable to the Father. And so the Lord indicates here that acceptable worship is that which is offered to God in spirit and in truth.

Our Lord makes a distinction between worship in spirit and worship in truth. We might have the Truth and know a great deal about the Lord; but if we did not go to Him in Spirit — in the right attitude of heart — our worship would not be acceptable, no matter how much we might know. On the other hand, a man might be a heathen and yet have a great deal of the spirit of worship, but he could not render acceptable worship unless he had the Truth. Take, for example, Cornelius, the centurion. He prayed often and gave much alms to the poor, but he was a Gentile. He had the real heart intention to come near to God, but God did not accept him at that time. Why not? Because he did not have the Truth, and could not receive it until the due time for the Gentiles. But we find that when the right time came, this Gentile was the first one to receive from God the knowledge of the Truth, so that he might worship, not only in spirit, but in truth also. He received the assurance that his prayers were now accepted by God.

The truth which was sent to Cornelius is the essential thing that we must all have to come near to God and be acceptable. This truth necessary to Cornelius was that though he was a sinner, God had provided in Jesus a redeemer, a satisfaction for sin. He learned that by becoming a follower of Jesus and seeking to do the will of God as expressed by Jesus, he would be in harmony with God’s arrangement. This was the great Truth made known to Cornelius. He received the holy spirit, and came into the family of God.

The same principle holds good today. There are people in heathen lands who have the spirit of worship, but they are without the truth respecting Jesus. And this truth must be known to the person before he can be a worshiper of God in the proper sense.

This was true also in respect to the Samaritans, to one of whom the words of our text were addressed. The Samaritans were a Gentile people, who worshiped God in Mount Gerizim, the mountain of Samaria. And they took delight in thinking that God was their God. When this woman of Samaria inquired of Jesus she said, We worship God in this mountain of Samaria, but you Jews say that the only place to worship God is in Jerusalem.

Jesus explained to her, saying in substance, You worship not knowing what you worship, but we Jews have the truth on this subject — we know what we worship. We Jews may worship God because, under the Divine Covenant made with our nation, we have the privilege of coming to God in prayer, and of having God hear and answer prayer. We are worshiping according to God’s directions. And He might have added, Many of you have the spirit of worship, but you do not have the truth on the subject. It would have been possible for the Samaritans to become proselyte Jews. But they did not know the necessity for this; hence they did not come in.

During the Gospel Age we, through Christ, have the privilege of becoming sons of God, and heirs of God. Some have thus come into God’s family. If, however, we should come with this truth, but not in the proper spirit, our prayers would not rise above our heads. It is those only who have come into proper relationship with God as children of the Father through Jesus Christ our Lord, who can worship in Spirit and in Truth. These and these only will receive the fulfilment of the exceeding great and precious promises.

Adapted from Reprints 5321

The Logos of God

It is claimed by many unitarians and some others that that Jesus had no sentient existence before his coming into the world. Many base such a claim on certain things said by Philo and some other Jewish writers who adopted and adapted heathen mythologies and philosophies into their writings.

Just because the apostate Philo, or any other apostate Jew, believed something concerning the word “Logos” does not mean that John was speaking of the Logos in John 1:1,2 in the same manner, or that John was confirming the apostate’s belief. That John is applying the term “Logos” to the Son of God can be seen from Revelation 19:13, where Jesus is called by the titular name, “The Logos of God.” Jesus is the word of God because he is the promised prophet like Moses, who Yahweh foretold: “I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I shall command him.” — Deuteronomy 18:18.

John, of course, is writing retrospectively in John 1:1,2, using the title of the promised one who would speak the words of Yahweh. Nevertheless, he does speak of that one as being in existence before the beginning of the world of mankind — before the beginning of the world that was made by means of the Logos. (John 1:10) This agrees with John 17:5, where Jesus speaks of the glory he had with the only true God before the world of mankind was made. This, of course, does not mean that Jesus was the only true God whom he was with, but rather gives even more evidence that Jesus is not God. It agree with Jesus words concerning himself, that he descended from heaven, the only man on earth who could make that claim, so that he could tell of heavenly things that he had seen in heaven. (John 3:12,13) Thus, Jesus speaks of ascending to “where” he was before. — John 6:62.
http://reslight.net/forum/index.php?topic=51.0

John 1:1,2 does use the word THEOS applied to Jesus, but it should be viewed similar to the usage of forms of the Hebrew EL as used in the Old Testament when applied to others than Yahweh or false gods. This usage is demonstrated by the King James Version rendering in the following verses: Genesis 23:6 (mighty); Genesis 30:8 (mighty); Genesis 31:29 (power); Deuteronomy 28:32 (might); 1 Samuel 14:15 (great); Nehemiah 5:5 (power); Psalm 8:5 (angels); Psalm 36:6 (great); Psalm 82:1 (mighty); Proverbs 3:27 (power); Psalm 29:1 (mighty); Ezekiel 32:21 (strong); Jonah 3:3 (exceeding). Likewise, Jesus, being with the only true God before the world of mankind was made, was not the only true God whom he was with, but he was “mighty” with the only true God, thus the Logos “was” mighty, or “the Logos was a mighty one.”

This speaks of a past situation, that is, before the world of mankind was made, Jesus “was” mighty. In John 17:5, Jesus asks for that glory that he had with his Father before the world was made. Thus, at the time of this prayer Jesus did not have that glory that he formerly had with his Father. Paul, using the glories of physical bodies, illustrates of two general forms of glory of living beings, the celestial (heavenly) and the terrestrial (earthly). (1 Corinthians 15:40) Jesus had the glory of the celestial before became flesh. It was God who prepared Jesus’ body in the womb of Mary (Hebrews 10:5), so that Jesus’ flesh would not be born into this world with the crooked condition that is upon mankind due to Adam’s sin. (Eccleisiastes 1:13-15; Romans 5:12-19) Thus, instead of being crooked, unjust, as the rest of mankind, Jesus was born into this world in an just condition, the same upright, purely just condition (2 Peter 3:18) as Adam had before Adam sinned. (Ecclesiastes 7:29) As such, he had the unblemished crown of glory as a human. — Hebrews 2:9.
However, unlike Adam, Jesus never fell short of the glory of God due to sin, since he never sinned. (Romans 3:23; 2 Corinthians 5:21; 1 Peter 2:22; 1 John 3:5) The maintained the human glory unblemished — just (Hebrews 9:14; 2 Peter 3:18), thus, he had the right to live forever as a human. (Leviticus 8:5; Nehemiah 9:29; Matthew 19:16,17; Romans 10:5; Galatians 3:12; ) Jesus, however, did not hold onto that just human flesh but sacrificed his unblemished flesh for the life of the world. (John 6:51; Hebrews 10:10; 2 Peter 3:18) Having sacrificed that flesh, Hebrews 5:7 speaks of the “days of his flesh” as something past. And Peter tells us that he was the just one [in his flesh], who died for the unjust [the world of mankind dying in Adam], and he was “put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit.” (2 Peter 3:18) Jesus, therefore, no longer has the glory of the human, but he again has to glory that he prayed to be returned to him in John 17:5, that is,
the celestial glory.

Some have confused “mediator” with the term Logos of God. The mediator, however, is not the same function as the Logos of God, although the Logos is also the Mediator.

The mediator between God and Man is is a person, and he is mediator due to fact that he gave up his just flesh as a ransom for all, and has been exalted to the right hand of Yahweh. — Psalm 110:1; Isaiah 53:12; Romans 8:34; 1 Timothy 2:5,6; Hebrews 7:25; 2 Peter 3:18; 1 John 1:1,2.

Items I have written of related interest:

http://reslight.wordpress.com/2007/05/31/oneness-vs-trinity-vs-the-bible/

Items others have written of related interest (I do not necessarily agree with all conclusions given.):

http://www.winpie.com/what-do-you-think-of-the-following-comment-on-john-11/

John 20:28 Part B

Many will insist that Thomas is calling Jesus “the god of me” in John 20:28, and from this they will assume and add to the scripture that Jesus is Yahweh, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. They simply ignore the Hebraic application of the words THEOS, EL, and ELOHIM (the Greek and Hebrew words that are usually rendered as “god” or “God”) as applied to others than the Most High, Yahweh. Once one does a study in the scriptures of the Hebraic usage of these words, it becomes apparent that they can be used of others than Yahweh to denote power, strength, might, rulership, etc., rather than as a title for Supreme Being.

If Thomas was indeed calling Jesus “the god of me” in John 20:28, this would not be the rule in the scriptures, for no where else is the expression, “the god of me”, or “the god of us”, applied to Jesus. The general rule of scripture is to distinguish between Jesus and his God. * However, Thomas would certainly not be blasphemous in calling Jesus “the god of me”, but if this be the application, I would render it “the strength/ruler of me”, in accordance to the usage of EL and ELOHIM in the Hebrew scriptures when used of others than Yahweh.
==========
*http://godandson.reslight.net/jesusnotyhwh.html

In the case of trinitarians, there is certainly nothing there that gives reason to think that the expression used means that Jesus is a person of his God; thus, in addition to adding to the scripture the assumption that Jesus is Yahweh, they would have to also add to that the assumption that Jesus is a person of Yahweh. However, in accepting the leading of God spirit by means of the things that God has revealed in the scriptures, the default reasoning would be to look upon the expression Thomas used in John 20:28 in light of the usage of the Hebraic tradition that would apply the word to one who is not the Most High, which tradition does not have to be added to scripture as does the trinity and oneness doctrines, for the tradition is actual scripture. Thus, for one who would view THEOS, EL and ELOHIM as applied to others than Yahweh, the default assumption would be that Thomas is not calling using THEOS in John 20:28 to designate Jesus as the Supreme Being, but rather that Thomas is designating Jesus as his mighty one, as a ruler.

More more concerning the Hebraic usage of EL, ELOHIM and THEOS:
http://godandson.reslight.net/hebraictitles.html

Other references concerning John 20:28:
http://reslight.net/forum/index.php?topic=260.0
http://reslight.net/forum/index.php?topic=118.0
http://godandson.reslight.net/john-20-28.html

In service of Jesus and his God,
Ronald

John 20:28 Part A

Regarding John 20:28.

The general rule all through the New Testament is to distinguish between “Jesus” and his “God”. In only a very, very, few instances is THEOS actually applied to Jesus. Because of this, and due to Thomas’ use of the definite article twice in the Greek as it reads in John 20:28, some scholars have questioned whether Thomas actually meant the second phrase to be applied to Jesus. The most literal rendering of Thomas’ words to Jesus are “THE LORD [OF] ME AND THE GOD [OF] ME.” If Thomas were referring to one person, then he only needed to have used the definite article once. This is demonstrated in a few verses before John 20:28, in John 10:17:

legei autee ieesous mee mou haptou oupw gar
IS SAYING TO HER JESUS NOT OF ME BE TOUCHING, NOT YET FOR
3004 0846_6 2424 3361 1473_2 0680 0681 3768 1063
anabebeeka pros ton patera poreuou de pros
I HAVE ASCENDED TOWARD THE FATHER; BE GOING BUT TOWARD
0305 4314 3588 3962 4198 1161 4314
tous adelphous mou kai eipe autois anabainw
THE BROTHERS OF ME AND SAY TO THEM I AM ASCENDING
3588 0080 1473_2 2532 1511_7 0846_93 0305
pros ton patera mou kai patera humwn kai theon
TOWARD THE FATHER OF ME AND FATHER OF YOU AND GOD
4314 3588 3962 1473_2 2532 3962 4771_5 2532 2316
mou kai theon humwn
OF ME AND GOD OF YOU.
1473_2 2532 2316 4771_5

Notice that the Jesus only used “one” definite article, thus showing that only one person is being spoken of. Likewise, if Thomas had only been referring to one person in John 20:28, then only one definite article would have been needed.

Additionally, there is no custom of calling Jesus “my God” or “our God” anywhere in the NT. One has to look to later writers to find such a custom.

Nevertheless, as I have shown elsewhere, the word THEOS can apply to Jesus, even as Jesus applied the plural of THEOS to the sons of God in John 10:34,35 (See Psalm 82), without having any meaning that Jesus is his God.

http://reslight.net/forum/index.php?topic=118.0

http://godandson.reslight.net/john-20-28.html

http://godandson.reslight.net/hebraictitles.html

In service of Jesus and his God,

Ronald

“I am” in John 8:58

John 8:58 “Jesus said … Before Abraham was, I AM“

It is being claimed regarding John 8:58 that “I AM” used by Jesus “was the name God used for Himself when talking to Moses (Exodus 3:14) and this is why the Jews wanted Jesus dead … because He made Himself equal with God. ” The purpose is to make the claim that Jesus is a person of triune God. Actually, there is nothing here, or anywhere else in the Bible, about God existing as three separate and distinct persons. Such an idea has to be added to, and read into, what Jesus said.

Was Jesus in John 8:58 quoting from Exodus 3:14? The name in Exodus 3:14 by which Yahweh spoke of himself in its full form is usually transliterated as “EHYEH ASHER EHYEH”. Its short form, which also appears in Exodus 3:14 is simply EHYEH. Was Jesus saying in John 8:58 that his name is EHYEH? Actually, no. The expression in Greek that Jesus used is often transliterated as EGO EIMI. Did Jesus say that this was his name? No, there is no discussion concerning Jesus’ name in John 8:58 nor anywhere in the context. Rather, the discussion is concerning the age of Jesus.

Jesus expressly shows that he is not the only true God who sent him in John 17:1,3. Since there is only one true God, then Jesus, being sent by the only true God, is not the only true God. The only true God who sent Jesus is the One who identified Himself as EHYEH ASHER EHYEH in Exodus 3:14,15.

Exodus 3:14 – God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM [EHYEH ASHER EHYEH],” and he said, “You shall tell the children of Israel this: “I AM [EHYEH] has sent me to you.”

Exodus 3:15 – God said moreover to Moses, “You shall tell the children of Israel this, ‘Yahweh, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you.’ This is my name forever, and this is my memorial to all generations.

EHYEH and YAHWEH are simply two different forms of the same name.

The only true God, by means of his Holy Spirit through the Scriptures, reveals that it is Himself, Yahweh, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, who sent Jesus, and who anointed Jesus, and whom Jesus worshiped and prayed to as his God. — Deuteronomy 18:15-19; Matthew 4:4 (Deuteronomy 8:3; Luke 4:4); Matthew 4:7 (Deuteronomy 6:16); Matthew 4:10 (Exodus 20:3-5; 34:14; Deuteronomy 6:13,14; 10:20; Luke 4:8); Matthew 22:29-40; Matthew 26:42; Matthew 27:46; Mark 10:6 (Genesis 1:27; Genesis 2:7,20-23); Mark 14:36; 15:34; Luke 22:42; John 4:3; 5:30; 6:38; 17:1,3; 20:17; Romans 15:6; 2 Corinthians 1:3; 11:31; Ephesians 1:3,17; Hebrews 1:9; 10:7; 1 Peter 1:3; Revelation 2:7; 3:2,12.

So was Jesus claiming to be his God in John 8:58? Is there any link between John 8:58 and Exodus 3:14? Only as can be seen by the way the translators and others would make such a link. Of course, Jesus did not say, as did the only true God in Exodus 3:14, that his name is EHYEH, nor was he speaking about his name at all, but rather he was talking about his existence before Abraham.

Could it be that Jesus was quoting the Greek Septuagint Version (LXX) of Exodus 3:14 when he says EGO EIMI in John 8:58? Hardly, since in the Greek Septuagint Version, the short name of EHYEH is rendered as HO OHN, not EGO EIMI. The full form is rendered as a sentence: EGO EIMI HO OHN, which means “I am the being”. Thus the Septuagint gives EGO EIMI a predicate, but the short form is simply HO OHN, “The Being”. So if Jesus quoted the LXX, he would have used HO OHN, not EGO EIMI, which, of course, in context would have made no sense at all. Further, if he were quoting the LXX from the long form EGO EIMI HO OHN, then he left the subject and verb “I am” without a predicate, which indicates further that he was not quoting the LXX.

Actually, in the Greek, a present tense can be used in a past setting to denote a continuous condition. In English such is often expressed in some form of the past tense, as in the case of John 8:58: “I was”, or “I have been”, etc. (See John 14:8,9) So, what Jesus was saying is very simple: “I have/had been existing since before Abraham was.”

For more information concerning John 8:58, and “I am” in other scriptures, go to:
http://godandson.reslight.net/?cat=370

To obtain a copy of the book, The Atonement Between God and Man:
CLICK HERE

In service of Jesus and His God,
Ronald

How could Jesus remain sinless?

The question has been asked: If Jesus is not Yahweh, and was simply a man, how is it that Jesus was able to remain sinless cradle to grave when neither Adam nor Eve could do so even for a short time?

Jesus had ample time to learn from his Father before he came to the earth. He was “sanctified” and “sent into the world” of mankind, which implies that he was perfectly prepared for this experience before being sent by the only true God “into” the world of mankind. As a human, however, it appears possible that he was led by the spirit to draw upon this knowledge as needed, similar to the manner that the holy spirit was sent as a helper to the apostles to remind them of the things Jesus had already taught them. Technically, Jesus could have sinned as did Adam, but the scriptures inform us that he always obeyed his God, and was without sin.

After his baptism, we are informed that Jesus had unlimited access to the holy spirit. Before he began his ministry, he had been obedient, but there is no record of his being persecuted for his obedience. The added strength of the holy spirit could also have provided another way for him to remain obedient even while suffering.

For further study, see:
http://atonement.reslight.net

CLICK HERE to comment on this post

Who is Jesus?

There are many conjectures about who Jesus was and is; sad to say, most views presented inadequately reveal who the real Jesus is as portrayed in the Scriptures. Almost every prevailing doctrinal opinion attaches philosophies on the revealed Word in order to make Jesus appear to be some one he never claimed to be. The apostle Paul reported of some in his day who were, in effect, preaching another Jesus (2 Corinthians 11:14), that is, they were preaching Jesus, but not the truth about Jesus. Nor can we in this day – when Satan and his demons are working miracles so as to deceive, if possible, the elect (Matthew 24:24; Revelation 13:14; 16:14; 19:20) – expect that, simply because we have found someone who can perform miraculous or wonderful works, that we have found the true Jesus in the message of the worker of miracles who might be doing miracles in Jesus’ name. (Matthew 7:22) Indeed, many heathen who do not believe in Jesus at all claim miracles performed in the name(s) of their gods or idols.

It is recorded that Jesus once asked his disciples: “Who do men say that I am?” He got a reply, that some reasoned him to be John the baptist risen from the dead; that others thought him to be Elijah risen from the dead, and others considered him as being perhaps one of the other prophets. Then came the point of the question: “But who do you that I am?” Peter responded and said, “You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God.” Jesus admitted the correctness of this, saying, “You are blessed, Simon, son of Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in Heaven.” — Matthew 16:13-17; Mark 8:27-30.

Afterwards, Jesus proceeded to explain to the beloved Twelve the experiences that lay before him — how the Kingdom would be formally proffered to the people of Israel, and how through their representatives, the elders, the chief priests, they would reject Him; how he would be killed, and after three days rise again. This, of course, is not what the Jewish populace in general had expected of Messiah. So what would be the reactions of the disciples concerning this description of Jesus’ own expectations concerning himself? — Mark 8:31; Matthew 16:21.

He made the statement about his death very emphatic, and the disciples clearly understood it. Perhaps they were disappointed, considered it a disgrace upon the Messiah to take such a view of the future, and a disgrace also upon the apostles, because if Jesus had such expectations it would modify and regulate his course, and soon disaster would come to him, and the dashing of all their hopes which he had inculcated — hopes of sitting with him in his throne, etc.

Doubtless all of the apostles were disappointed, but only Peter had the courage to express himself, saying, “Far be it from you, Lord! This will never be done to you.” In effect, Peter was saying: You will, we all know, as the Messiah, attain the throne of Israel and thus eventually the throne of the world, and bring blessing to the whole human race; and as you have promised, we will be with you in your throne. — Matthew 16:22; Mark 8:32.

In this course Peter was opposing the Yahweh’s will and plan, of which the death of Jesus was the very center or hub, from which would radiate all the fulfillments of all the various promises — to his church first, to Israel next, and finally to all nations, peoples, kindreds and tongues. Jesus perceived that these influences were striving to hinder his consummation of his sacrifice, even as Satan tried to do in the beginning of his consecration. To make the matter very emphatic he said to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan! For you have in mind not the things of God, but the things of men.” Then he began to make clear to his followers what had not been “food in due season” to give them before, in such plain terms, namely, that whoever desired to be counted in with him in any part of his work must realize that it would cost him all that he possessed of an this world’s affections; he must deny himself, take up his stauros and follow him.

The great question of eighteen centuries ago is the great question of today! Who is Jesus? If, as some claim, he was merely a good man, a most able teacher, then he was not the promised Messiah, for the promises concerning the Messiah showed that, although he was the embodiment of all the qualities of what man would consider to be “good man”, he was more, much more. To be the Christ, he must have been “the man Christ Jesus,” who gave Himself a ransom price for all, to be testified in due time. (1 Timothy 2:5,6.) And this signifies that he must have been, not of ordinary birth, but extraordinary, born from above, because if born in the ordinary course of nature he would be like others of Adam’s sons, subject to the sentence of death, and hence unable to save either himself or others. But if he was the Christ (which means Anointed One), the Sent of God, who left the glory he had with his God, the only true God (John 17:1,3,5), and was made flesh, having a body prepared by God himself (Hebrews 10:5), with the glory of a sinless man, that he might “taste death for every man.” (Hebrews 2:9; 10:10) Thus, we see him as the great redeemer (deliverer, repurchase) of the world, whose death was necessary as a ransom, or corresponding price, to secure the release of mankind from the death sentence and to make possible the resurrection of Adam and his race. — Romans 5:12-19; 1 Corinthians 15:21,22.

If you have not already done so, we recommend a thorough study of the scriptures presented in the “What We Believe” article.

http://reslight.wordpress.com/2007/05/26/what-we-believe/

Oneness vs Trinity vs the Bible

Many often confuse the trinity doctrine with the oneness doctrine, which I prefer to call modalism. I have even found some trinitarians who use the arguments of modalism to promote the trinity, when actually such arguments often are not in agreement with orthodox trinitarian dogma.

That which is usually called “oneness doctrine” actually teaches that Jesus is his God and that Jesus is his Father; that is, that there is one God expressed in three modes: Father, Son and Holy Spirit. This teaching claims that these three are not three persons, but that they are all one person (unlike the trinity, which claims that these three are all three distinct persons of the one God). The oneness doctrine is also referred to as modalism, although most oneness believers deny that they are “modalists”. The basic ideas related  this doctrine called “oneness“, often confused with “trinitarianism”, appears to have developed earlier than the trinity doctrine.

In reality, however, both the trinity doctrine, and the “oneness doctrine” — as that term is usually used to promote the doctrine that is named as “oneness” — are but doctrines of men. The true “oneness” doctrine taught by Jesus involved Jesus’ oneness with his God and also with his followers. — John 10:30,38; 14:20; 17:10,21,22.

Related studies:

I and the Father Are One

John 10:30 – The Greek Word “Hen”

John 10:30 and the Oneness of Yahweh (Jehovah) and Jesus

Thoughts on Trinity Definitions

General Comments About the Trinity Doctrine

In service of Jesus and his God,
Ronald