How do you reconcile the first Commandment with the trinity?

Why does God have to be three persons? Why can't He only be one?

Do you believe they are not contradictory? Why?
Do you rely on faith to believe they are consistent with each other? Is that an excuse or a reason?

Inquiring minds want to know! Leave your answers below, eh.

.
● John 8:57-58 . . Then said the Jews unto him: You are not yet fifty years
old, and have you seen Abraham? Jesus said unto them: Verily, verily, I say
unto you: before Abraham was, I am.

I get the sneaking suspicion that those Jews knew Messiah's origin was not
only human, but also divine. In other words: Jesus didn't tell them anything
they should've known already by means of passages like Psalm 110:1 and
Psalm 45:6-7. It appears to me their indignation mostly resulted from Jesus
having the audacity to claim he was Messiah; implying of course that he was
that one they expected to arrive on-scene who was God prior to coming into
the world as a human.

Today's Jews seriously have to consider something. It's only a matter of
time before another man comes along making the very same claims about
himself as Jesus' claims in order to convince the Jews that he's the real
Messiah. For example:

● 2Thess 2:3-4 . . Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall
not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be
revealed, the son of perdition; who opposes and exalts himself above all that
is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sits in the temple of
God, showing himself that he is God.

In other words: Messiah's deity is a very important identifier; and cults like
the Jehovah's Witnesses have somehow failed to appreciate its significance.
_

Do you believe they are not contradictory? Why?
Do you rely on faith to believe they are consistent with each other? Is that an excuse or a reason?

Inquiring minds want to know! Leave your answers below, eh.

Do you believe they are not contradictory? Why?
Do you rely on faith to believe they are consistent with each other? Is that an excuse or a reason?

Inquiring minds want to know! Leave your answers below, eh.

Actually, and to be more specific the "rub" for the Jews was not about Jesus Christ being the Messiah, it was Jesus claiming to be the Son of God./God. Let's start with John 5:17-18. "But He/Jesus answered them/the Jews, "My Father is working until now, and I Myself am working." Vs18, "For this cause therefore the Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him, because (or why) He not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God His own Father, MAKING HIMSELF EQUAL WITH GOD."

If you go to Luke 2:49 here is what Jesus said to His parents, "Why is it that you were looking for Me? Did you not know that I had to be in MY FATHER'S HOUSE." Jesus said this when He was twelve years old. Moving on to John 8:56-59, Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and saw it and was glad." Vs57, "The Jews therefore said to Him, You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?" "Jesus said to them, Truly , truly, I say to you, (literally) before Abraham sprang into existence, I am."

What did the Jews do? Vs59, "Therefore they picked up stones to throw at Hinm, but Jesus hid Himself, and went out of the temple." Here again, they did not want to stone Him for claiming to be the Christ/Messiah, but for claiming to be God. Then there is John 10:30 where Jesus says, (again literally), "I and the Father We are one." At vs31, "The Jews took up stones again to stone Him, why?"

Vs32, "Jesus answered them, "I showed you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you stoning Me?" Vs33, "The Jews answered Him, For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God." Now, at this point many tell us that at John 10:30 Jesus is speaking about Him being "one in purpose) with His Father. This goes without saying that He and the Father are indeed one in purpose, but in this instance Jesus is making the case that He is one in nature with His Father.

The reason I know this is true is because of the context of verses 14-38 where Jesus Himself brings up the subject of "gods" when He quotes Psalm 82:6. Why did Jesus quote that Psalm and at vs36 claiming to be the "Son of God?" Finally, there's the trial record at Matthew 26:57-66. Please read it and notice at vs63 what the high priest Caiaphas ask Jesus to do. One last point. I'm pretty sure that no one was every killed by any means claiming to be the Messiah. All through the centuries men have made the claim even including present day. Ask yourself this question? What did Jesus say that made the Jews so mad they accused Him of blasphemy a number of times resulting in His death? What was the blasphemy?

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto

This question is a suggestion to those who hold to the Concept of the Trinity, which is seen in the word of God as a contradiction.

First off, faith and belief are together. One is a noun, the other a verb. We have been given faith by God, and we use it in action that is belief. Jesus is God, The Holy Spirit is GOD The Father is God. All three are seen in the word of God from Genesis to Revelation.


Yet God is one.


If deny Jesus is God, then you can't apprehend the concept of the Trinity or be saved.
If you deny the Holy Spirit is God, you can't apprehend the concept of the Trinity; you are not saved.
If you deny the Father is God, you can't apprehend the Concept, nor can you be saved.

Faith is required because, without Faith, you can't Please God. Human rationality is also carnal. Therefore they can not understand spiritual truth. Even if they read it AND SEE IT IN THE WORD OF GOD.

Do you believe they are not contradictory? Why?
Do you rely on faith to believe they are consistent with each other? Is that an excuse or a reason?

Inquiring minds want to know! Leave your answers below, eh.

What reference work has "before Abraham sprang into existence" ???
that is really cool...

You have absolutely NO CONCEPT of the totality of GOD. Which is O.K. since nobody else does either - but everybody has "Precious Theologies" that they attach "religious significance" to.

Do you believe they are not contradictory? Why?
Do you rely on faith to believe they are consistent with each other? Is that an excuse or a reason?

Inquiring minds want to know! Leave your answers below, eh.

what is the question bro? Did you read Bowmans' outline of the Trinity doctrine I posted the link to?

I want to address the both of “Yutes,” Bob-Carabbio and RestlessWanderer. I think you're both due for a good dousing.

To answer the question, I think it of significance to open your Bibles to 1 Cor. 8:6, where the Shema is clearly in reference (1 Cor. 8:4).

Some have taken 1 Cor. 8:6 and argued that lords are a subordinate (and earthly) class of beings distinguished from gods, who are their heavenly counterparts. Thus, it is argued that the “Lord” Jesus (1 Cor. 8:6b) is in a completely different class than “God” the Father (1 Cor. 8:6b). So to argue that 1 Cor. 8:6 speaks of Jesus as “Lord” directly contradicts the notion that Jesus is “a god.”

There are massive contextual problems for those who suggest that lords are the earthly representatives of their heavenly counterparts (the gods). For one, the works (or actions) of the “one Lord” (1 Cor. 8:6b) are placed in direct juxtaposition with God the Father’s (more on this below). Therefore, it is not plausible that this “one Lord” is then seen as an “earthly representative” to the “one God” in heaven, especially when He is being referred to as “Lord” in the context of creation. Moreover, in Romans 11:36, Paul speaks of God the Father as the one “from” whom, “through” whom, and “for” whom everything exists. These three prepositional phrases express God’s causation of all things in three ways: as the efficient cause for (“from whom”), the instrumental cause (“through whom”), and the final cause (“for whom”). In 1 Cor. 8:6, Paul assigns two of the causal functions to the Father, and one to Christ. If this “one Lord” is the subordinate earthly representative of the “one God,” why then does this “one Lord” participate in this one God’s work as dictated in Romans 11:36? Paul does not make this kind of distinction between gods in heaven and lords on earth, as the text specifically dictates in 1 Cor. 8:5, “For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth… .”

1 Corinthians 8:6
Notice the parallelism: Paul begins by stating that just as there is only “one God,” there is also “one Lord.” It is the “one God… from whom are all things,” and “we for Him” which is placed in juxtaposition to the “one Lord… through whom are all things” and “we through Him.” 1 Cor. 8:6b presents a balanced structure resembling 1 Cor. 8:6a.

Jesus’ work in creation is coextensive with God the Father’s. All things that subsist in the category of “creation” — and without exclusion — are “from” the Father. If it exists within the category of “creation” then it is “from” the Father. That means, all things in creation, without exclusion to any created thing. If Jesus is “created,” he falls into that category. Yet, according to Paul, absolutely everything (“all things”) that are “from” the Father, came into existence “through” the Lord. The parallelism between 8:6a and 8:6b does not allow for one to distinguish between the “all things” that are “from” the Father, and the “all things” that are “through” the Lord Jesus, as if they are two distinguishable categories. If 8:6a’s reference to “all things” means that absolutely everything in existence is “from” the Father, then it necessarily follows that 8:6b’s reference to “all things” likewise means that absolutely everything which came into existence “from” the Father did so “through” the one Lord. By placing Jesus’ work in creation in juxtaposition with God’s, this therefore, implies Jesus’ eternality, which is a trait that uniquely belongs to God. Paul places Jesus in this role as joint participant with God the Father in His eternal being and the duo’s joint venture in bringing forth all creation. Simply put, according to Paul, it is the one Creator — the “one God, the Father, from whom,” and the “one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom” — are “all things.”

1 Cor. 8:6b is a polemic against the “many lords” (v. 5) which entails that only “one Lord” exists and He alone is unique. Paul is here drawing upon an allusion to Deut. 6:4, which served to highlight the uniqueness of the “one Lord” of the OT against the polytheistic context that surrounded Israel. This is further evidenced in the latter half of Paul’s argument, specifically in 1 Cor. 10:21-22.

The question raised in 1 Corinthians 10:21-22 (“Shall we provoke the Lord to jealousy?”) is an allusion to the Song of Moses (Deut. 32:21, “They have provoked me to jealousy with what is no god”), the very place Paul alludes to (cf. Deut. 32:4, 15, 18, 31) when he speaks of Christ as “the Rock” (1 Cor. 10:4). Further, Paul’s utilization of δαιμόνιον (“demon”) in 10:20-21 (“…they sacrifice to demons and not to God; and I do not want you to become sharers in demons”) directly alludes to Deut. 32:17 LXX (“They sacrificed to devils and not to God; to gods whom they knew not…”). And of course, Paul’s reference in 10:20-21 to “the Lord” (1 Cor. 10:22) is a reference to Jesus. The “cup of the Lord” and “table of the Lord” are a reference to the Lord’s Supper (cf. 1 Cor. 11:27-28, 10:16-17). There is an interesting parallel found in Malachi 1:7-12, where the expression—“the table of the Lord”—is used for the altar which the prophet Malachi warned against defiling, something the Corinthians were also warned against by Paul. In addition, there is a referential connection being made between 1 Cor. 10:22 (“provoking the Lord”) and 1 Cor. 10:9 (“testing Christ”). This reference to “testing Christ” in 10:9 (“nor put Christ to the test, as some of them did, and were destroyed by snakes”) is an allusion to Numbers 21:5-9. Paul alludes to the OT a number of times throughout the discourse as well (many of which I have not even mentioned), but the point I’m building on is that 1 Cor. 10:4–22 is gushing from the seams with allusions from the Pentateuchal narratives, specifically those regarding idolatry.

This all goes to show that Paul’s reference to Jesus as “Lord” is not mere usage, but is deeply rooted in it's historical Jewish context. In 10:14-21, it is covenant loyalty to the “one Lord” which stands in contrast to pagan idolatry.

Let that sink in.