Question mostly for Christians

[Spirit of Light]

Often Christian people say there is only one God.

In New King James bible it says

"yet for us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and through whom we live."

I am far from an expert on biblical verse, but does not this verse indicate that there are other Gods?

And in King James bible it says

King James Bible
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.

It is the "for us" part i notiser, that could mean this teaching only count for Christian people, not for others.

What is your thought?

 

[EverChanging]

There may be only one ultimate reality but there is still room in the Bible for lesser divinities.

 

[Nimos]

"yet for us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and through whom we live."

I am far from an expert on biblical verse, but does not this verse indicate that there are other Gods?

It have always been a bit strange in that regards.

As you say, there is one God, which God must obviously know. Yet the very first commandment is:

"Thou shalt have no other gods before me."

Commonly the "other" gods are understood as being false gods, which is also why they are sometimes referred to as simply idols. But depending on which part of the bible you read, God seems to be change how "important" it is for people to know this. In some parts God is simply praised in regards to how good and powerful he is and what he have done. Whereas in others the phrase "I am your God", "I am your lord" and stuff like that, is almost used constantly, which sort of give the impression that the ancient Jews, were either extremely forgetful since he had to constantly remind them, or God is simply extremely self centered. So it depends what part of the bible you read.

Personally I think it changes over the cause of the bible, where in the beginning (OT) God seem to be acceptable that other Gods exists, but he is the best one. And as the story unfold it seems to go in the way of him being the only one and the "other" gods are rarely mentioned, which could be explained by them being turned into false gods and idols, rather than competitors to God.

Whether that is true or not, im not sure. But it seems to be like that to me.

 

[Spirit of Light]

It have always been a bit strange in that regards.

As you say, there is one God, which God must obviously know. Yet the very first commandment is:

"Thou shalt have no other gods before me."

Commonly the "other" gods are understood as being false gods, which is also why they are sometimes referred to as simply idols. But depending on which part of the bible you read, God seems to be change how "important" it is for people to know this. In some parts God is simply praised in regards to how good and powerful he is and what he have done. Whereas in others the phrase "I am your God", "I am your lord" and stuff like that, is almost used constantly, which sort of give the impression that the ancient Jews, were either extremely forgetful since he had to constantly remind them, or God is simply extremely self centered. So it depends what part of the bible you read.

Personally I think it changes over the cause of the bible, where in the beginning (OT) God seem to be acceptable that other Gods exists, but he is the best one. And as the story unfold it seems to go in the way of him being the only one and the "other" gods are rarely mentioned, which could be explained by them being turned into false gods and idols, rather than competitors to God.

Whether that is true or not, im not sure. But it seems to be like that to me.

Thank you that explain a lot to me

 

[Vouthon]

The vast majority of Christians - being 'Nicene' in doctrine - understand the verse in question, along with other 'high' Christological declarations in the New Testament, within the paradigm of later 'Trinitarian' philosophical language that was finally defined at the Council of Nicea in 325 (but worked out over the two centuries prior by church fathers).

This Trinitarian formula reconciled the tension in the New Testament - which is very apparent upon even a cursory reading - between competing desires for an idealized monotheism ("there is One God") and the parallel urge to incorporate the historical Jewish Messiah-claimant Jesus into the cultic worship owed to the one God: as that God's eternal, uncreated 'co-agent' of creation through whom the Father ordained and ordered all things in the universe.

Academic historians and source-critical scholars have termed this primitive 'deification' of Jesus, attested in Paul's letters (circa. 50) as an already presupposed, uncontroversial belief (by means of which he was compassed within the cultic worship paid to the God of Israel, as that God's 'emanation' or 'theophany') "binatarian" worship. The Holy Spirit had not, as of yet, been 'personified' as the third 'person' (to use the later Greek term hypostases "Persons") in this equation during the first century, although God had already assumed a 'triadic' discourse for the early Christians ((Hurtado 2010), pp. 99-1) i.e. the Father 'from' whom everything is, the Son 'through' whom and then the 'Spirit' as their immanent activity in the world that is present within people.

Does it amount to polytheism? The New Testament scriptures protest very firmly that they believe in one God, yet one God expressed through two 'persons': the Father and Son, one the trascendent divinity 'from' whom everything originates and the other his emanation 'through' whom everything exists, using a triadic discourse.

Do you find that confusing and paradoxical? Well, so did generations of Christians for the next three hundred years - during which time exegete after exegete came up with ever more elaborate conceptual schemes for reconciling this potent mystery at the heart of Christian dogma.

The eventual solution that become normative for most Christiansm from thereon, was the Trinitarianism of the Nicene creed, which removed all doubt that Christianity was a "monotheistic" faith worshipping one Divine Being in Three Persons that were homooúsion ('same in being, same in essence', from ὁμός, homós, "same" and οὐσία, ousía, "being" or "essence").

Other 'gods', in the Christian conception, were identified as 'angels and demons' by the Patristic authorities. Early Christian did not always deny the existence of 'other gods', just like many Jews in the ancient world did not either, they simply believed that these were supramundane beings ultimately dependent on the One Supreme Creator God which had not existed externally; meaning they were not worthy of worship. St. Paul himself refers to these other divine beings as 'gods' occassionally (the Tanakh also refers to a 'council of divine beings', for example in a few of the Psalms) but distinguished them strictly from the one eternal creator 'God' and his Son (divine agent of creation, the Divine Word and Wisdom) from and through whom all things exist.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Often Christian people say there is only one God.

In New King James bible it says

"yet for us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and through whom we live."

I am far from an expert on biblical verse, but does not this verse indicate that there are other Gods?

And in King James bible it says

King James Bible
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.

It is the "for us" part i notiser, that could mean this teaching only count for Christian people, not for others.

What is your thought?

If you read the passage in context, you'll see it's not leaving room for polytheism.

Right before this passage, the author says "we know that [...] there is no God but one."

The chapter as a whole is talking about eating food sacrificed to idols. Paul is responding to an argument that eating food sacrificed to other gods is okay because those gods don't actually exist.

Paul's response is, effectively, "you and I both know that there are no other gods, but there are lots of false believers out there, so participating in other religions' rituals can create the wrong impression and cause problems."

 

[Vouthon]

The chapter as a whole is talking about eating food sacrificed to idols. Paul is responding to an argument that eating food sacrificed to other gods is okay because those gods don't actually exist.

According to a number of New Testament scholars, such as Paula Fredriksen, he did not actually deny the existence of other (lower-case in English) "gods" but rather understood them to be angelic/demonic beings created by the true one God that were not worthy of worship.

Unqualified 'monotheism' in the sense of no other 'divine' beings / spirits existing save for the uncreated eternal Creator, was not really a feature of any ancient religion.

I guess, its a case of semantics to an extent but 'angels/demons' emerged in the first place because developmental monotheism demoted these beings to a junior status of dependency upon the One God (formerly they'd been part of his 'divine council', the council of gods, hence the lingering vestige of a plural "we" in relation to Elohim in parts of the Tanakh).

 

[Katzpur]

Often Christian people say there is only one God.

In New King James bible it says

"yet for us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and through whom we live."

I am far from an expert on biblical verse, but does not this verse indicate that there are other Gods?

And in King James bible it says

King James Bible
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.

It is the "for us" part I noticed, that could mean this teaching only count for Christian people, not for others.

What is your thought?

You are right; there are numerous instances in the Bible where other gods are spoken of. The first of the Ten Commandments stated, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." If there were no other gods, then what would the point of the first commandment even be? Pretty much all Christians will insist that these other gods are "false gods," but they fail to explain what a false god even is. Is it an imaginary god? Is it an evil god? Is it a powerless god? They imagine that to be the case, and yet the Christian God is referred to on seven different occasions in the scriptures as the "God of gods." Does that mean that He is the God of imaginary, evil or powerless gods? I don't think so. I think that a God of gods would be even greater than a God of men.

The bottom line is that the Bible doesn't tells us much if anything about who these other gods are. It tells us only that we are not to honor or worship them. They exist but they have nothing whatsoever to do with us. For us, there is only one God, because there is only one God we are answerable to and who has any control over anything that happens in this world. There is only one God who can hear and answer our prayers and there is only one God before whom we will someday stand to be judged.

 

[Spirit of Light]

You are right; there are numerous instances in the Bible where other gods are spoken of. The first of the Ten Commandments stated, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." If there were no other gods, then what would the point of the first commandment even be? Pretty much all Christians will insist that these other gods are "false gods," but they fail to explain what a false god even is. Is it an imaginary god? Is it an evil god? Is it a powerless god? They imagine that to be the case, and yet the Christian God is referred to on seven different occasions in the scriptures as the "God of gods." Does that mean that He is the God of imaginary, evil or powerless gods? I don't think so. I think that a God of gods would be even greater than a God of men.

The bottom line is that the Bible doesn't tells us much if anything about who these other gods are. It tells us only that we are not to honor or worship them. They exist but they have nothing whatsoever to do with us. For us, there is only one God, because there is only one God we are answerable to and who has any control over anything that happens in this world. There is only one God who can hear and answer our prayers and there is only one God before whom we will someday stand to be judged.

A good answer @Katzpur

 

[exchemist]

Often Christian people say there is only one God.

In New King James bible it says

"yet for us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and through whom we live."

I am far from an expert on biblical verse, but does not this verse indicate that there are other Gods?

And in King James bible it says

King James Bible
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.

It is the "for us" part i notiser, that could mean this teaching only count for Christian people, not for others.

What is your thought?

There is a fundamental concept in Christianity called the "Trinity": three persons in one essence.

Trinity | Definition, Theology, & History

 

[Vouthon]

The first of the Ten Commandments stated, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." If there were no other gods, then what would the point of the first commandment even be? Pretty much all Christians will insist that these other gods are "false gods," but they fail to explain what a false god even is

Indeed, within the ancient Israelite - and indeed even later Second Temple Judaic conception - many of these "other gods" were assumed to have existed.

However, you see the beginning of a process in the Torah where the 'other gods' are at first refused cultic worship in favour of exclusive worship of the God of Israel (Deuteronomy) even though they are still part of a 'council of the gods' (a few of the Psalms, basically "henotheism"); then onto a stage where these 'gods' are sharply distinguished from the one Creator God (Trito-Isaiah) and ultimately, the result is that in most later Abrahamic monotheisms from Rabbinical Judaism, early Christianity through to Islam, they become created "angels/demons" (if, in fact, they exist at all).

 

[bobhikes]

Often Christian people say there is only one God.

In New King James bible it says

"yet for us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and through whom we live."

I am far from an expert on biblical verse, but does not this verse indicate that there are other Gods?

And in King James bible it says

King James Bible
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.

It is the "for us" part i notiser, that could mean this teaching only count for Christian people, not for others.

What is your thought?

My Christian understanding is there are 2 takes

Catholic (which I Grew up) a few others as well. God the Father, God the Son and God the holy spirit are all one. Three faces of the one true God.

Other Christian (Which I experimented with while searching) God the father, the Son and spirit are not god but elevated from humankind. Like angels and devils are not human but also not God. The Son being the linked that all humans can use to forgive first sin.

 

[Hawkins]

Often Christian people say there is only one God.

In New King James bible it says

"yet for us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and through whom we live."

I am far from an expert on biblical verse, but does not this verse indicate that there are other Gods?

And in King James bible it says

King James Bible
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.

It is the "for us" part i notiser, that could mean this teaching only count for Christian people, not for others.

What is your thought?

It's natural that ants can't have a full understanding of humans. Similarly humans can't possibly have a full understanding of God.

That said. the verse is a symmetric presentation on "one God" doing something, and "one Lord" doing something else. It's not talking about the nature of God.

It is more analogue to saying that "as a president Trump did that.." and "as a human he did that...". It's not necessarily talking about a dual nature of Trump. It can refer to the same person with a symmetric presentation.

 

[rational experiences]

My Christian understanding is there are 2 takes

Catholic (which I Grew up) a few others as well. God the Father, God the Son and God the holy spirit are all one. Three faces of the one true God.

Other Christian (Which I experimented with while searching) God the father, the Son and spirit are not god but elevated from humankind. Like angels and devils are not human but also not God. The Son being the linked that all humans can use to forgive first sin.

O is the pi light signal in the atmosphere that we are psyche mind aware of. Hot gases O circulating as light, cold gases and water and oxygen cooling.

O does not have 3 in it. First awareness that you miss some information in thinking due to science causes.

Science imposed a change to Pi O in the natural higher atmospheric heavenly cloud cooling condition.

O owns burning effects that changes O to a dot point of removed gas, the carbon effect..so O changes its signal into a - rib position at 3. G forms as the next symbolism, as it cooled it went back to O. What the mind first realized in the movement of the spirit on the face of water...the gas light....in actuality.

For you cannot say God O the stone owns the same concept..other than science knew that God the stone was sealed shut by water, that sealed the Sun attack on stone.

Therefore when they tried to copy the effect and forced O G to O to split into D/D....G O D just as they stated in science concepts stayed in the higher heavens.

The veil burnt and wavelengths fell as evil and D the other value cools at the ground to re form O cooling. Not any God.

Hence removing the natural O pi highest signal affected the brain mind in timed equated light causation....what I have been taught by our spiritual Father.

Who is who he says he is. I saw both my Mother and Father first eternal spirit emerge into their human lives. And they came out of a cool state, not a yellow glowing light state.....as the ANTI attack on their life...and I have seen both conditions.

As we are their babies, growing up we got to see on our bio side where they came from...when you live spiritually. I was a baby who nearly died so I was very close to them. Their life was lived and they died, and they loved each other and their babies with a love so pure that not one human today should not believe in them.

But you do.

Spiritually I lived as a learning healer review. I believed only what I was physically affected by, and not by thought alone. I have seen and felt and began to write the detail...but gave up...because it was too difficult to confer such an immense amount of experiences in a small way.

Father explained to me why our brother began to believe in the 3, due to his brain changes in forming the PHI fall out that blocked out the natural brain interactive higher pi formed signals...the very reason for it.