Understanding the Trinity as a doctrine.

I believe in distinctions between the members in the Godhead; so that rules me out from that teaching.

Although I will say that I do believe what it says in Colossians 2:9...that the 2nd Person of the Trinity has the 1st and 3rd Person dwelling within Him as the same Spirit (Ephesians 4:4, John 4:23-24, John 7:39).

@Lynne,

Did you look up the verses in the post before denouncing it as something that you disagree with or don't like?

Well, I presented the scriptures and you still don't see. I did my part and now it's between you and God. I wish you well as well.

I say the same thing to you.

https://christianchat.com/threads/understanding-the-trinity-as-a-doctrine.201406/post-4651747

For all other readers,

1 Cor 15 : 27-28 For He ( the Father) hath put all things under His ( the Christ) feet . But when He saith all things are put under Him,

IT IS MANIFEEST THAT HE ( THE FATHER) IS EXCEPTED WHO DID PUT ALL THINGS UNDER HIM ( THE CHRIST).

Heb 1 : 4 BEING MADE ( the Christ) so much better than the angels, as He hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.

John 6 : 38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will but the will of Him ( the Father) that sent me.

In 1 Cor 15: 27-28 It is the Father who put all things under His ( the Christ) feet except Himself ( the Father).
In Heb 1: 4 The Christ was made ( created) and was the First created by the Father and that is why He has an inheritance.
In John 6: 38 Christ's will is to do the Father's will, but each has their own will.

Read my original post and you will discover many more examples. Jesus Christ is our Lord, Savior, and our God, but the Father is God of ALL ( including Jesus Christ).

Let me say that there is no contradiction between these verses and my concept of the Trinity.

For I believe that Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are distinct from one another.

Also, Hebrews 1:4 does not teach that Christ was created.

Although I will agree that Jehovah has a Maker (Isaiah 45:11, Romans 1:3).

Verse 3
Being (ων). Absolute and timeless existence (present active participle of ειμ) in contrast with γενομενος in verse Hebrews 1:4 like ην in John 1:1 (in contrast with εγενετο in Hebrews 1:14) and like υπαρχων and γενομενος in Philippians 2:6.

The effulgence of his glory (απαυγασμα της δοξης). The word απαυγασμα, late substantive from απαυγαζω, to emit brightness (αυγη, αυγαζω in 2 Corinthians 4:4), here only in the N.T., but in Wisdom 7:26 and in Philo. It can mean either reflected brightness, refulgence (Calvin, Thayer) or effulgence (ray from an original light body) as the Greek fathers hold. Both senses are true of Christ in his relation to God as Jesus shows in plain language in John 12:45; John 14:9. "The writer is using metaphors which had already been applied to Wisdom and the Logos" (Moffatt). The meaning "effulgence" suits the context better, though it gives the idea of eternal generation of the Son (John 1:1), the term Father applied to God necessarily involving Son. See this same metaphor in 2 Corinthians 4:6.

The very image of his substance (χαρακτηρ της υποστασεως). Χαρακτηρ is an old word from χαρασσω, to cut, to scratch, to mark. It first was the agent (note ending =τηρ) or tool that did the marking, then the mark or impress made, the exact reproduction, a meaning clearly expressed by χαραγμα (Acts 17:29; Revelation 13:16). Menander had already used (Moffatt) χαρακτηρ in the sense of our "character." The word occurs in the inscriptions for "person" as well as for "exact reproduction" of a person. The word υποστασις for the being or essence of God "is a philosophical rather than a religious term" (Moffatt). Etymologically it is the sediment or foundation under a building (for instance). In Hebrews 11:1 ψποστασις is like the "title-deed" idea found in the papyri. Athanasius rightly used Hebrews 1:1-58.1.4 in his controversy with Arius. Paul in Philippians 2:5-50.2.11 pictures the real and eternal deity of Christ free from the philosophical language here employed. But even Paul's simpler phrase μορφη θεου (the form of God) has difficulties of its own. The use of Λογος in John 1:1-43.1.18 is parallel to Hebrews 1:1-58.1.4.

And upholding (φερων τε). Present active participle of φερω closely connected with ων (being) by τε and like Colossians 1:17 in idea. The newer science as expounded by Eddington and Jeans is in harmony with the spiritual and personal conception of creation here presented.

By the word of his power (τω ρηματ της δυναμεως αυτου). Instrumental case of ρημα (word). See Hebrews 11:3 for ρηματ θεου (by the word of God) as the explanation of creation like Genesis, but here αυτου refers to God's Son as in Hebrews 1:2.

Purification of sins (καθαρισμον των αμαρτιων). Καθαρισμος is from καθαριζω, to cleanse (Matthew 8:3; Hebrews 9:14), here only in Hebrews, but in same sense of cleansing from sins, 2 Peter 1:9; Job 7:21. Note middle participle ποιησαμενος like ευραμενος in Hebrews 9:12. This is the first mention of the priestly work of Christ, the keynote of this Epistle.

Sat down (εκαθισεν). First aorist active of καθιζω, "took his seat," a formal and dignified act.

Of the Majesty on high (της μεγαλοσυνης εν υψηλοις). Late word from μεγας, only in LXX (Deuteronomy 32:3; 2 Samuel 7:23, etc.), Aristeas, Hebrews 1:3; Hebrews 8:1; Judges 1:25. Christ resumed his original dignity and glory (John 17:5). The phrase εν υψηλοις occurs in the Psalms (Psalms 93:4), here only in N.T., elsewhere εν υψιστοις in the highest (Matthew 21:9; Luke 2:14) or εν τοις επουρανιοις in the heavenlies (Ephesians 1:3; Ephesians 1:20). Jesus is here pictured as King (Prophet and Priest also) Messiah seated at the right hand of God.

Verse 4
Having become (γενομενος). Second aorist middle participle of γινομα. In contrast with on in verse Hebrews 1:3.

By so much (τοσουτω). Instrumental case of τοσουτος correlative with οσω (as) with comparative in both clauses (κρειττων, better, comparative of κρατυς, διαφορωτερον, more excellent, comparative of διαφορος).

Than the angels (των αγγελων). Ablative of comparison after κρειττων, as often.

Than they (παρ' αυτους). Instead of the ablative αυτων here the preposition παρα (along, by the side of) with the accusative occurs, another common idiom as in Hebrews 3:3; Hebrews 9:23. Διαφορος only in Hebrews in N.T. except Romans 12:6.

Hath inherited (κεκληρονομηκεν). Perfect active indicative of κληρονομεω (from κληρονομος, heir, verse Hebrews 1:2), and still inherits it, the name (ονομα, oriental sense of rank) of "Son" which is superior to prophets as already shown (Hebrews 1:2) and also to angels (Hebrews 1:4-58.1.2) as he now proceeds to prove. Jesus is superior to angels as God's Son, his deity (Hebrews 1:4-58.1.2). The author proves it from Scripture (Hebrews 1:4-58.1.14).
https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/rwp/hebrews-1.html

Holman Christian Standard Bible
So He became higher in rank than the angels, just as the name He inherited is superior to theirs.

Aramaic Bible in Plain English
And This One is altogether greater than the Angels, according to how much more excellent than theirs is The Name which he possesses.

Smith's Literal Translation
Being so much better than the angels, inasmuch as he has inherited a more distinguished name than they.

Godbey New Testament
being so much greater than the angels, that he has inherited a name so much more excellent than they.

Mace New Testament
He is so much superiour to the angels, as the authority he possesses is more excellent than theirs.

Worsley New Testament
Being as much superior to the angels, as He inheriteth a name more excellent than they.

+++

In Isaiah 45: 11 , the Holy one of Israel is the Christ and His maker is the Father.

His maker in Isa 45.11 means the maker of Israel, I don't think it is referring to the person who made Jehovah - since God was not "made" but simply is.

And Jesus was "made"... "according to the flesh" which mean that his flesh was made. But he was existing before that, as you stated before, and as John 1.1 states clearly.

New argument for Jesus being God that stump a Christadelphian yesterday at the Library.

Romans 8:9
But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

ME: In this text the highlighted parts clearly indicate that Jesus is God.

Isaiah 45:11
King James Version
11 Thus saith the Lord, the Holy One of Israel, and his Maker, Ask me of things to come concerning my sons, and concerning the work of my hands command ye me.

Isaiah 45:11
Easy-to-Read Version
11 The Lord God is the Holy One of Israel. He created Israel, and he says,

“My children, you asked me to show you a sign.
You told me to show you what I have done

ME: it is clear from the text that God created Israel.

Romans 1:3
King James Version
3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;

Romans 1:3-4
Easy-to-Read Version
3-4 The Good News is about God’s Son, Jesus Christ our Lord. As a human, he was born from the family of David, but through the Holy Spirit[a] he was shown to be God’s powerful Son when he was raised from death.

ME: It is clear that the body of Jesus was made in the womb.

If these texts were looked at in context and in different translations, it is clear that our friend was not saying God was created by someone else.

The LORD, the Holy One of Israel...

The passage shows clearly therefore that Christ is the LORD (YHWH, Jehovah).

Jesus is the LORD.

I am kjv-superior in my theology; so any time there is a discrepancy between the kjv and any other version, I believe that the kjv trumps the other version.

I believe that there are many who have heaped to themselves teachers, in the translators of other versions, to tell them what their itching ears want to hear, when they reject the truth of the kjv and go to other translations (2 Timothy 4:3).

It's par for the course that @Dino246 would give me a blot (Proverbs 9:7-9).

Greek Hebrew culture history trumps translations

God is both sovereign and Omnipotent and loving.

Because He is sovereign and Omnipotent, He is able to preserve His unadulterated message of salvation to us in our native languages.

Because He is loving, He is motivated to do so.

All one has to do is find the translation that does not take away from the word what was originally intended to be in it.

Because those who take away from the word have invisible but severe consequences;

While those who add to it have visible but less severe consequences (Revelation 22:18-19).

If those who translated the kjv or who penned the manuscripts from which the kjv came, had added to the word, the consequences for them would have been visible.

But for those who take away from the word, the consequences are invisible except to God until the day of judgment.

So, it is more likely that modern translations take away from the word than for the kjv to have added to it.

And also, the Textus Receptus of the original Greek and Hebrew manuscripts stands as the manuscript that retains certain things that are left out by other manuscript traditions.

And therefore, if you are going to look at the original Greek and Hebrew,, it is important that you read from the Textus Receptus rather than the other manuscript traditions.

So that you yourself do not impugn upon yourself the judgment that applies to those who take away from the word (Revelation 22:18-19).

That's odd; why did He not do so for the Auca, or the Cree, or the Dene? Why did His word have to be translated into German, or Spanish, or English? Surely if it needed to be translated, it was not "preserved" in those languages.

As it is for you to whine publicly about it. Grow up, man up, and own up to your ignorance, folly, and childish responses to disagreement.

You do know the person who did the Greek Manuscripts added

1 John 5:7

King James Version



7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
Right??

What happened to him?

"On July 12, 1536, during preparations for a move to the Netherlands, Erasmus fell ill and died from an attack of dysentery. Though he remained loyal to the Church of Rome, he did not receive last rites, and there is no evidence that he asked for a priest. "


King James Version | Bible, History, & Background | Britannicahttps://www.britannica.com › ... › Scriptures
The translators used not only extant English-language translations, including the partial translation by William Tyndale (c. 1490–1536),

Tyndale continued to work on the Old Testament translation but was captured in Antwerp before it was completed. Condemned for heresy, he was executed by strangulation and then burned at the stake at Vilvoorde in 1536.

Likewise, these early translators lived and died according to prevailing doctrine. For their iniquity, the brave decoders were often mortally punished, though today these vile scholars are celebrated.

The history of Bible translation is as terrible as it is enthralling. Terrible because of the courageous translators’ torture and death and enthralling because in the history of the translator, as in war, we observe deadly battles over ideas.

Wyclif actually knew no Hebrew or Greek, so relied on Saint Jerome’s Latin Vulgate to make his way.
https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/the-bloody-history-of-bible-translators/

Unlike the rest of the Bible, the translators of the Apocrypha identified their source texts in their marginal notes.[157] From these it can be determined that the books of the Apocrypha were translated from the Septuagint—primarily, from the Greek Old Testament column in the Antwerp Polyglot—but with extensive reference to the counterpart Latin Vulgate text, and to Junius's Latin translation. The translators record references to the Sixtine Septuagint of 1587, which is substantially a printing of the Old Testament text from the Codex Vaticanus Graecus 1209, and also to the 1518 Greek Septuagint edition of Aldus Manutius. They had, however, no Greek texts for 2 Esdras, or for the Prayer of Manasses, and Scrivener found that they here used an unidentified Latin manuscript.[157]

Mistranslations
The King James version contains several mistranslations; especially in the Old Testament where the knowledge of Hebrew and cognate languages was uncertain at the time.[179] Among the most commonly cited errors is in the Hebrew of Job and Deuteronomy, where Hebrew: רֶאֵם, romanized: Re'em with the probable meaning of "wild-ox, aurochs", is translated in the KJV as "unicorn"; following in this the Vulgate unicornis and several medieval rabbinic commentators. The translators of the KJV note the alternative rendering, "rhinocerots" [sic] in the margin at Isaiah 34:7. On a similar note Martin Luther's German translation had also relied on the Latin Vulgate on this point, consistently translating רֶאֵם using the German word for unicorn, Einhorn.[180] Otherwise, the translators on several occasions mistakenly interpreted a Hebrew descriptive phrase as a proper name (or vice versa); as at 2 Samuel 1:18 where 'the Book of Jasher' Hebrew: סֵפֶר הַיׇּשׇׁר, romanized: sepher ha-yasher properly refers not to a work by an author of that name, but should rather be rendered as "the Book of the Upright" (which was proposed as an alternative reading in a marginal note to the KJV text).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_James_Version#Apocrypha