kenosis . . ?

You are just playing word games. You understand the point. You just don't care for the way it was made. You can misconstrue my meaning if you like, but you can't actually change what I intended. I may be a poor communicator. That doesn't change my intended message. And you are well aware of what it is.

Do you really think I would follow the doctrines of men, and not compare them with Scripture? The Word of God is the final authority.

I am a man. I figured out my trinitarian view from interpreting the Greek and Hebrew received texts of the Bible.

i do find a lot of orthodox trinitarian diehards are obviously dishonestly over-dogmatic in dismissing any ambiguity in their many of their assumed proof-texts. And I believe in distrusting this obvious dishonesty many unbelievers feel justified in rejecting out of hand the doctrine itself, and therefore the Christianity that they are told requires them to believe it.

My take on this (for what it’s worth) is based on Galatians 4 and Philippians 2. Jesus is the God Man, born of a virgin, born under the Law and that he emptied Himself of His own authority and lived as a man, under the law and without ever sinning. He submitted Himself completely to the will of the Father and the things He did were done through the power of Gods Holy Spirit. He set the example of how we are to live; completely submissive to the Father and living by the power of His Holy Spirit. That made Him the sinless sacrifice that paid the price to ransom us from sin and death. Hebrews 9 He presented His own blood in the holy place as the payment for sin as our High Priest and it was accepted as once and for all.
thoughts??

Arians partying like it's 300AD

I think I agree with all of that, but what do you mean by "He emptied Himself of His own authority"? If I understand the claims of the Nicean Council correctly, according to orthodox/classical trinitarianism God is one shared substance/essence owned by three distinct Persons. That would mean that the Holy Spirit's omnipotence is, in fact, the same power shared equally by the Father and the Son. Therefore, if the eternal Person called "God the Son" kept omniscience and omnipotence and omnipresence when incarnating, anything He did using "the Holy Spirit's power" was really also the Son using His own power., since that power was single and jointly owned.

This is why I think of the ultimate authority "God/Yahweh" as a unanimously agreeing council or community of three "Elohim" who each have their own omnipotence, omniscience, omnipresence etc. but whose will is perfectly one. By thinking of God in this way, the eternal Son is able to divest Himself of His own omnipotence etc. and truly depend on the Holy Spirit's omnipotence to perform miracles as the Holy Spirit directs. This model of the Trinity seems to me to best accommodate all that the scriptures say about Jesus before, after and during His incarnation. It accounts most simply and logically for Jesus not knowing things during His earthly sojourn that the Father and Holy Spirit knew, Matt. 24:36.

Slaves to tradition pigeon-holing like it's 1300 AD.

Odd how some think God kept their unique understanding from everyone else for 2000 years.

Odd how some think their own opinions on Christian doctrine were the only opinions Christians had in the first century AD.

That's a well-founded belief.

This tetrahedron is everywhere in Christianity- and it is the first explanation of the godhead I encountered; and it will allow you to make some sense out of the scriptures: In my initial studies this was used because it was practical- it was not a revelation of the father- it was a picture in a study-bible.


Until you actually encounter someone with unorthodox beliefs there's not really a reason to question it... it's just there and it makes sense so, why do any further investigation?

When you're finally challenged, it makes you pray and grind bible study; and the conclusion I came to, is that...

Jesus didn't explain it this way. The Apostles didn't explain it this way.... So why are we, and why do I need to talk about "Persons" and "Essence"?

I have a different analogy that I use to explain my understanding of the Trinity. What I do is take a blank sheet of paper and draw a dot on it. And around this dot a draw a random perimeter. This page represents all of reality. This dot represents my centre of consciousness, my identity as a distinct person, situated in a particular place and time in reality. And the perimeter represents the limits of my awareness at that place and time. I then place one dot elsewhere on the page to represent the identity of the Father as a distinct person, but His awareness reaches over the whole page and beyond. I then place a second dot on the page to represent the Son's distinct identity, and His own awareness and power have a reach overlaps and is equal to the Father's. I then place a third dot on the page to represent the Holy Spirit's distinct identity, and His awareness and power overlaps and equals those of both the Father and the Son. This community of three divine persons (Elohim) reign together as the one God (Yahweh). Because they are all three all-knowing, they agree 100% on all things and rule in unison. the others concur with whatever one commands or does using their own power and wisdom. Hence, one God and three Persons. Within this community of Elohim, the individuals are free to distribute divine functions among themselves as they see fit. They are each capable of doing all, but practice co-operation and humility by doing only some.

Now we can see that if the Son voluntarily limits the scope of His consciousness (I draw a random perimeter around the dot representing the Son) then he becomes like me. He gives up His own omnipotence and omniscience and omnipresence to become limited to human consciousness. He is the same beginningless Person who created the world, but existing now as a human being. But the Father and Holy Spirit remain with their omnis and take up the functions the Son had been handling, so as to uphold the world by the word of Their power. I have found only this model of God satisfactory to allow for the Father, Son and Spirit to be one God and also for Jesus as an unglorified human not to know things that God knew.

While Christ suppressed His divine attribute of Omniscience because He had to be a like type figure of Adam before the Fall, we also know that….

Jesus had power as God:
(During His Earthly Ministry):


So Scripture confirms Jesus had power during His earthly ministry. But stop and think a moment. To be anything less than God is to not be God. Meaning, if Jesus lost His powers, He technically would not fit the definition of God anymore, and the Trinity would have been fractured, which is not possible. In other words, if Superman gave up his superpowers to be with Lois Lane, that means he is no longer Superman because he does not have the power to be super like he used to be. He would be just a powerless person, and not Superman anymore. This is why the Kenosis is bogus. Also, Modern Bibles like the NLT in Philippians 2:7 say that He gave up His divine privileges. The ESV says he emptied Himself, with most Christians interpreting this to mean He gave up his divine powers. So the Modern Bibles are teaching falsely here and the KJV is teaching correctly on Philippians 2:7 when it simply says He made Himself of no reputation. This is not a surprise because many other false doctrines can be found in Modern Translations, as well.

It is interesting how one disagrees with my post but they do not offer any biblical explanation to the points I made. Is one saying they disagree that Jesus had power as God during His earthly ministry? Is one disagreeing that the Modern Bibles are teaching falsely here? If so, why would they believe it is not saying that? So just disagreeing and not offering an explanation is not sufficient in my view. In my opinion, there should not be a “disagree button” option here. It appears in my opinion to be childish if a person disagrees and they are shaking their head and they run away. One has to deal with the issues involved to prove that they are correct. I mean no offense of course. I love all here in Jesus Christ. I am just puzzled by the unintellectual approach is all.

The Holy Spirit in Christ had power.

"To be anything less than God is to not be God."
LOL! What gives you the wisdom to define God and tell Him what He can be, do and not do? If the "I", the centre of consciousness that had no beginning takes on a human nature, that human is one of the Persons who created the worlds. So, is that person only human,? or also God,? since God created the worlds.
"... the Trinity would have been fractured, which is not possible." What does that even mean. And why would that be impossible?

I am not disagreement over Jesus operating also by the Holy Spirit and by God the Father. This is not in conflict with the verses I put forth that clearly showed Jesus also operated by His own power, too. Just go back and slowly read those verses in prayer. Only if you do not like that belief will you then either ignore these verses or you will try to find a work around to explain them away.


I don’t determine anything. It’s called believing the Bible.

It is clear from Scripture that Jesus took on a human body, but please show me where Jesus took on a human nature. Jesus said He came down from Heaven and He did not become a newly created being that never existed before. Jesus said He was the I AM to the Jews whereby they wanted to pick up stones and kill him in John 8. Meaning, Jesus is the same I AM from Exodus 3. So how can He take on a newly created human soul so as to have a human nature? He could not declare He is the I AM if He was something entirely new in the Incarnation. This is what your failing to grasp.

Because 1 John 5:7 says there are three that bear record in Heaven. Jesus said in John 3:13 that the Son of Man is in Heaven even as He spoke to Nicodemus. Then again, Modern Bibles have helped to brain wash people today. 1 John 5:7 is not in their Modern Bible, and neither is John 3:13. One believes in another Jesus all because of the Modern Bibles that came late onto the scene. You can thank Westcott and Hort and yet they were into Catholic practices and they had Unitarians on their Revised Standard Version team. No wonder because Modern Bibles have 14 changes that favor the Catholic Church, and we have verses that support Unitarians in Modern Bibles. Then again, this is a spiritual issue.

Also, Colossians 2:9 says the fulness of the Godhead dwelled within Christ bodily. So if the Trinity was fractured then this verse is lying. Oh wait. Modern Bibles change this verse, too.

Update: I am saying John 3:13 is in Modern Bibles but its full entire version is not in it.

No. Col. 2:9 says that in the time Hebrews was written "For in Him all the fullness of the Godhead dwells (present tense) bodily:.

I don't know what you mean by "if the Trinity was fractured"?

If the Fulness of the Godhead is the Father, Son and Holy Spirit plus omnipotence, omniscience, omnipresence etc., and Jesus was telling the truth that the Father and Holy Spirit with their omnis were working in Him and through Him, then this verse is true, even if Jesus had divested Himself of His own personal omnis to incarnate as a human being Ph'p 2:6-8, and to be made like unto us in ALL THINGS, as Heb. 2:17 says, even if you have misapplied Col 2:9 to the past of the writing of Hebrews.

Heb. 2:17 Wherefore in ALL THINGS it behoved Him to be made like unto His brethren, that He might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the people. 18. For in that He Himself has suffered being tempted, He is able to succour them that are tempted.

1 Tim. 2:5 For there is one mediator betwen God and men, THE MAN Christ Jesus.

Peter had power to raise the dead just as Jesus and the Father had power to raise the dead. Does that make Peter God? Acts 9:40