• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Trinitarians' interpretation of "us"

sandy whitelinger

Veteran Member
writer said:

"Heaven," describing the abode of God, has the same intonation, as in "In my Father's house are many mansions."
Same chapter that the Son reveals the 3 in 1.
Except like grapes on vine (Jn 15),
the many abodes comprise the Son's Body (Jn 14:23, 2, 10).
Not heaven.
Thanks

You do stretch scripture to mean what you want it to. Just because there is mention of dwelling, an abode, and a place in those verses in no way means they are talking about the same thing. This is a similar problem exibited in another thread by you. You want to relate things that have no relation.
 

writer

Active Member
You do stretch scripture to mean what you want it to.
No i dont. U distorted it by speaking of "heaven"

Just because there is mention of dwelling, an abode, and a place in those verses in no way means they are talking about the same thing.
To the contrary: the same word (abode, abide), in the same context, the same chapter, the same speech, mean they're talking about the same thing.
"Heaven" is your stretch

This is a similar problem exibited in another thread by you.
Thats untrue. Please don't accuse me for what u practice sir

You want to relate things that have no relation.
"Heaven" has no relation to John chapter 14.
"My Father's house" relates to the Body of Christ.
Just as the Son said in John chapter 2.
His Father abides in Him, per His own words (14:10), and the Son abides in His Father.
Is called "coinherence."
He creates a place for His believers to abide by His being crucified and resurrected.
Not by going to heaven and putting on a tool belt and getting a bunch of nails or angels.
Exactly parallel to John 15: His many members are His many abodes.
14, 15, 16, and 17 all approach the same thing w/ different illustrations.
None of them are speaking of heaven
 

sandy whitelinger

Veteran Member
writer said:
You do stretch scripture to mean what you want it to.
No i dont. U distorted it by speaking of "heaven"

Just because there is mention of dwelling, an abode, and a place in those verses in no way means they are talking about the same thing.
To the contrary: the same word (abode, abide), in the same context, the same chapter, the same speech, mean they're talking about the same thing.
"Heaven" is your stretch

This is a similar problem exibited in another thread by you.
Thats untrue. Please don't accuse me for what u practice sir

You want to relate things that have no relation.
"Heaven" has no relation to John chapter 14.
"My Father's house" relates to the Body of Christ.
Just as the Son said in John chapter 2.
His Father abides in Him, per His own words (14:10), and the Son abides in His Father.
Is called "coinherence."
He creates a place for His believers to abide by His being crucified and resurrected.
Not by going to heaven and putting on a tool belt and getting a bunch of nails or angels.
Exactly parallel to John 15: His many members are His many abodes.
14, 15, 16, and 17 all approach the same thing w/ different illustrations.
None of them are speaking of heaven

You're full of crap. I'd ask you to show a scripture to prove that Jesus=My fathers house but I'm sure you will offer up some more crap.

That you fail to see I offered up heaven as an illustation of the plurality of Elohim used in the same manner seems to have eluded you as well and now you are speeding off down another screwy bunny trail.
 

writer

Active Member
I'd ask you to show a scripture to prove that Jesus=My fathers house
i already did. Post 40, last paragraph. And post 42, concerning John 2

but I'm sure you will offer up some more crap.
Jesus Christ's not crap,
nor His words

That you fail to see I offered up heaven as an illustation of the plurality of Elohim used in the same manner seems to have eluded you
Your post 39 seems to offer up "abodes" or "mansions" as illustrating Elohims' plurality.
Since "heaven" there is a singular word.
But i agree w/ u that God's Body (Christ's Body) is also a Plural-Singular. One Person composed with many persons, many members, but one Body, one new man.
This is also His thought in John 17:21-23.

as well and now you are speeding off down another screwy bunny trail.
another?
i was only disagreeing w/ u that "My Father's house" in Jn 14 is heaven.
The central point here; of our Creator being 3-1, Plural-Singular;
remains
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
The "us" in Genesis 1 is God speaking to the heavenly "court." We have to remember that the story is from an oral tradition hundreds of years before Judaism. The monotheistic Hebrews leave the term in the story plural, as it was, in all probablility, orally handed down to them.
 
Polaris said:
Corrrect me if I am wrong, but don't you believe that they are of one substance? Does that not mean that they are essentially one being?

You say they are separate, in what way?
One being, three Persons.

Were they separate before the incarnation of Jesus Christ?
Yes, they were also One before the incarnation of Jesus Christ...God is eternal and unchanging.

Why are all other instances in scripture where God references himself done so with a singular pronoun ("I the Lord am God"), why in this particular case doesn't the verse say "And the Lord God said I will make man in my own image"? Where is the consistancy in your interpretation of scripture here?
Well that's easy...all other instances in Scripture are not done with a singular pronoun. :) Genesis 1:26, 3:22, 11:7, and Isaiah 6:8 all apply a plural pronoun to God.
And as for the second part, the passage DOES also use a singular pronoun regarding the image...immediately after saying "Let Us make man in Our image" in 1:26, 1:27 says, "So God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them."

Everywhere else He refers to himself with "I", this passage uses the pronoun "us", it seems natural to interpret the creation process as involving more than one being.
Then why does the very next verse say "His image"? More than one Person was involved, not more than one God.
 

Polaris

Active Member
FerventGodSeeker said:
One being, three Persons.

What is the difference between a person and a being in this context?

FerventGodSeeker said:
Well that's easy...all other instances in Scripture are not done with a singular pronoun. :) Genesis 1:26, 3:22, 11:7, and Isaiah 6:8 all apply a plural pronoun to God.

OK let me clarify. All instances in which God presents himself to the people He uses the pronoun "I". In all of the examples you listed God uses the term "us" in a very similar context with which he does so in Genesis 1:26. They all sound like some sort of heavenly council, which by the sounds of it consistantly involved more than one being.

FerventGodSeeker said:
And as for the second part, the passage DOES also use a singular pronoun regarding the image...immediately after saying "Let Us make man in Our image" in 1:26, 1:27 says, "So God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them."

I'm glad you brought this up, it actually strengthens my claims. In Ephesians 3:9 we learn that God created all things by Jesus Christ. So it makes sense that verse 26, which involves the planning of the creation, involves more than one being. Then in verse 27, since Jesus is the one who actually carried out the creation, it makes sense to see a singular pronoun. So the planning council involved more than one ("us"), and the actual realization of the creation was carried out by Jesus ("he").

Otherwise we'd have a very inconsistant usage of pronouns to describe this 3-in-1 God idea.
 

BruceDLimber

Well-Known Member
Hi.

Polaris said:
I don't think I made myself very clear. Who is the "us" referring to when in Genesis it says "let US make man in our image"?

As several people have already pointed out, this is simply God using the "royal we."

Peace,

Bruce
 

NoahideHiker

Religious Headbanger
Polaris said:
In Genesis 1:26 we read "And God said let US make man in OUR own image and after OUR likeness". To us non-trinitarians this makes perfect sense since we believe that both God the Father and Jesus Christ were involved in the creation. I'm curious though, how do trinitarians interperet the references to "us" and "our" in this passage?
Here is the text with Rashi's (Torah sage from the 15th century) commentary. It can shed some light on it.

26. And God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness, and they shall rule over the fish of the sea and over the fowl of the heaven and over the animals and over all the earth and over all the creeping things that creep upon the earth."


Let us make man From here we learn the humility of the Holy One, blessed be He. Since man was created in the likeness of the angels, and they would envy him, He consulted them. And when He judges kings, He consults with His Heavenly household, for so we find regarding Ahab, that Micah said to him, (I Kings 22:19): “I saw the Lord seated on His throne, and all the host of heaven were standing by Him, on His right and on His left.” Now do “left” or “right” apply to Him ?! But rather, [the passage means that] these [angels] were standing on the right to defend, and these [angels] were standing on the left to prosecute. Likewise, (Dan. 4:14): “By the decree of the destructive angels is the matter, and by the word of the holy ones is the edict.” Here too, He took counsel with His heavenly household. He said to them, “Among the heavenly beings, there are some in My likeness. If there are none in My likeness among the earthly beings, there will be envy among the creatures of the Creation. ” - [from Tanchuma, Shemoth 18; Gen. Rabbah 8:11, 14:13]
Let us make man Even though they [the angels] did not assist Him in His creation, and there is an opportunity for the heretics to rebel (to misconstrue the plural as a basis for their heresies), Scripture did not hesitate to teach proper conduct and the trait of humility, that a great person should consult with and receive permission from a smaller one. Had it been written: “I shall make man,” we would not have learned that He was speaking with His tribunal, but to Himself. And the refutation to the heretics is written alongside it [i. e., in the following verse:]“And God created (וַיִּבְרָא) ,” and it does not say,“and they created וַיִּבְרְאוּ.” - [from Gen. Rabbah 8:9]


in our image in our form.
after our likeness to understand and to discern.


and they shall rule over the fish Heb. וְיִרְדּוּ This expression contains both the meaning of ruling and the meaning of subservience. If he merits, he rules over the beasts and over the cattle. If he does not merit, he becomes subservient to them, and the beast rules over him. — [from Gen. Rabbah 8:12]
 

writer

Active Member
45 The "us" in Genesis 1 is God speaking to the heavenly "court."
No, it's "to" the Plural-Singular Head of His court. Himself.
"Let Us"

We have to remember that the story is from an oral tradition hundreds of years before Judaism.
To the contrary: the story's from the 3-1 Himself, however He inspired Moses, at the inception of Judaism, if not about five hundreds of years after Triune Jehovah called and dealt with 3 persons: Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob the fathers of the Hebrews.
But regardless: that changes not His Addressee

The monotheistic Hebrews leave the term in the story plural, as it was, in all probablility, orally handed down to them.
The monotheistic Moses wrote Jehovah Elohim's plural pronouns "Us" and "Our" right before their next sentence's "His" and "He" (Gen 1:26-27).
Whether the triune Elohim Jehovah inspired Moses orally or inwardly, or whether He also inspired others simultaneously, or before, with the same recount, is not as clear

47 In Ephesians 3:9 we learn that God created all things by Jesus Christ. So it makes sense that verse 26, which involves the planning of the creation, involves more than one being.
God and Jesus Christ are not more than one being. They're one God. There's only one God.
Deut 6:4; Gen 1:27; Ex 3:14; Mk 12:29; Mt 28:19; Jn 10:38; 8:58; 1:1-2.
Jesus is Jehovah.
Jn 1:1-2, 14; 8:24, 28, 58; 10:38; 14:10-11; 17:21-23; 8:12; 1 Jn 1:5; etc.
In flesh

Then in verse 27, since Jesus is the one who actually carried out the creation, it makes sense to see a singular pronoun.
If 47's saying that God is One who is Three, he's accurate

48 As several people have already pointed out, this is simply God using the "royal we."
As others have pointed out (including within the "Genesis 1:26-27" thread):
simply not. Thanx
 

roli

Born Again,Spirit Filled
This is great listening to so many opinions and perspectives about the Trinity or should I say Godhead.
But realistically we will never fully understand how the trinity actually functions as 3 in 1 or how 3 are separate etc.
We can discuss all we like as to whether the trinity exists or not in it's title or actual form,but the fact is that the 3, being Father ,Son and Holy Ghost are mentioned throughout scripture,from creation to revelations,to the writing of the scripture,to the birth of Christ to his death and resurrection and without either of them we would not have anything that we presently have in existence now including the Judeo Christian faith
 

Polaris

Active Member
roli said:
But realistically we will never fully understand how the trinity actually functions as 3 in 1 or how 3 are separate etc.

Unless God chooses to reveal such information through His ordained prophet:)
 

writer

Active Member
51 But realistically we will never fully understand how the trinity actually functions as 3 in 1
i 'gree

or how 3 are separate etc.
3 aren't separate.
3 r 1.
Deut 6:4; Mk 12:29; Jn 10:38; 8:58; Mt 28:19; Gen 1:1, 26-27; Isa 6:8; Zech 2:8-10; Gal 4:4-6; 2 Cor 13:14; Rv 1:4-8; 1 Jn 1:5+Jn 8:12; etc

fact is that the 3, being Father ,Son and Holy Ghost are mentioned throughout scripture,from creation to revelations,to the writing of the scripture,to the birth of Christ to his death and resurrection and without either of them we would not have anything that we presently have in existence now including...faith
amen
 

UnityNow101

Well-Known Member
Question.—What is the meaning of the Trinity, of the Three Persons in One?
Answer.—The Divine Reality, which is purified and sanctified from the understanding of human beings and which can never be imagined by the people of wisdom and of intelligence, is exempt from all conception. That Lordly Reality admits of no division; for division and multiplicity are properties of creatures which are contingent existences, and not accidents which happen to the self-existent.
The Divine Reality is sanctified from singleness, then how much more from plurality. The descent of that Lordly Reality into conditions and degrees would be equivalent to imperfection and contrary to perfection, and is, therefore, absolutely impossible. It perpetually has been, and is, in the exaltation of holiness and sanctity. All that is mentioned of the Manifestations and Dawning-places of God signifies the divine reflection, and not a descent into the conditions of existence.
God is pure perfection, and creatures are but imperfections. For God to descend into the conditions of existence would be the greatest of imperfections; on the contrary, His manifestation, His appearance, His rising are like the reflection of the sun in a clear, pure, polished mirror. All the creatures are evident signs of God, like the earthly beings upon all of which the rays of the sun shine. But upon the plains, the mountains, the trees and fruits, only a portion 114 of the light shines, through which they become visible, and are reared, and attain to the object of their existence, while the Perfect Man is in the condition of a clear mirror in which the Sun of Reality becomes visible and manifest with all its qualities and perfections. So the Reality of Christ was a clear and polished mirror of the greatest purity and fineness. The Sun of Reality, the Essence of Divinity, reflected itself in this mirror and manifested its light and heat in it; but from the exaltation of its holiness, and the heaven of its sanctity, the Sun did not descend to dwell and abide in the mirror. No, it continues to subsist in its exaltation and sublimity, while appearing and becoming manifest in the mirror in beauty and perfection.
Now if we say that we have seen the Sun in two mirrors—one the Christ and one the Holy Spirit—that is to say, that we have seen three Suns, one in heaven and the two others on the earth, we speak truly. And if we say that there is one Sun, and it is pure singleness, and has no partner and equal, we again speak truly.
The epitome of the discourse is that the Reality of Christ was a clear mirror, and the Sun of Reality—that is to say, the Essence of Oneness, with its infinite perfections and attributes—became visible in the mirror. The meaning is not that the Sun, which is the Essence of the Divinity, became divided and multiplied—for the Sun is one—but it appeared in the mirror. This is why Christ said, “The Father is in the Son,” meaning that the Sun is visible and manifest in this mirror.
The Holy Spirit is the Bounty of God which becomes visible and evident in the Reality of Christ. The Sonship station is the heart of Christ, and the Holy Spirit is the station of the spirit of Christ. Hence it has become certain and proved that the Essence of Divinity is absolutely unique and has no equal, no likeness, no equivalent. 115
This is the signification of the Three Persons of the Trinity. If it were otherwise, the foundations of the Religion of God would rest upon an illogical proposition which the mind could never conceive, and how can the mind be forced to believe a thing which it cannot conceive? A thing cannot be grasped by the intelligence except when it is clothed in an intelligible form; otherwise, it is but an effort of the imagination.
It has now become clear, from this explanation, what is the meaning of the Three Persons of the Trinity. The Oneness of God is also proved.~Abdulbaha~
Source: Bahai Referance Library
 

Polaris

Active Member
UnityNow101 said:
The descent of that Lordly Reality into conditions and degrees would be equivalent to imperfection and contrary to perfection, and is, therefore, absolutely impossible. It perpetually has been, and is, in the exaltation of holiness and sanctity. All that is mentioned of the Manifestations and Dawning-places of God signifies the divine reflection, and not a descent into the conditions of existence.
God is pure perfection, and creatures are but imperfections. For God to descend into the conditions of existence would be the greatest of imperfections; on the contrary, His manifestation, His appearance, His rising are like the reflection of the sun in a clear, pure, polished mirror. All the creatures are evident signs of God, like the earthly beings upon all of which the rays of the sun shine. But upon the plains, the mountains, the trees and fruits, only a portion 114 of the light shines, through which they become visible, and are reared, and attain to the object of their existence, while the Perfect Man is in the condition of a clear mirror in which the Sun of Reality becomes visible and manifest with all its qualities and perfections. So the Reality of Christ was a clear and polished mirror of the greatest purity and fineness. The Sun of Reality, the Essence of Divinity, reflected itself in this mirror and manifested its light and heat in it; but from the exaltation of its holiness, and the heaven of its sanctity, the Sun did not descend to dwell and abide in the mirror. No, it continues to subsist in its exaltation and sublimity, while appearing and becoming manifest in the mirror in beauty and perfection.
Now if we say that we have seen the Sun in two mirrors—one the Christ and one the Holy Spirit—that is to say, that we have seen three Suns, one in heaven and the two others on the earth, we speak truly. And if we say that there is one Sun, and it is pure singleness, and has no partner and equal, we again speak truly.
The epitome of the discourse is that the Reality of Christ was a clear mirror, and the Sun of Reality—that is to say, the Essence of Oneness, with its infinite perfections and attributes—became visible in the mirror. The meaning is not that the Sun, which is the Essence of the Divinity, became divided and multiplied—for the Sun is one—but it appeared in the mirror. This is why Christ said, “The Father is in the Son,” meaning that the Sun is visible and manifest in this mirror.

Interesting analogy.

UnityNow101 said:
This is the signification of the Three Persons of the Trinity. If it were otherwise, the foundations of the Religion of God would rest upon an illogical proposition which the mind could never conceive, and how can the mind be forced to believe a thing which it cannot conceive?

I don't find the idea of God the Father and Jesus Christ as his son (two separate beings) as being illogical or inconceivable? What is so illogical or inconceivable about that?

UnityNow101 said:
A thing cannot be grasped by the intelligence except when it is clothed in an intelligible form; otherwise, it is but an effort of the imagination.
It has now become clear, from this explanation, what is the meaning of the Three Persons of the Trinity. The Oneness of God is also proved.

I fail to see how anything has been proven here.
 

UnityNow101

Well-Known Member
You cannot have two seperate beings labeled as God, otherwise you go against the very fabric of Judaism, the religion on which Christianity is built. If you say that The Father is God and Jesus is guided by God, His Father, and is but a servant to the Almighty, then you are on the right track I believe. But in everything you must stay based in Judaism's monotheistic beliefs. "The Lord our God is ONE."
 

writer

Active Member
54 how can the mind be forced to believe a thing which it cannot conceive?
"forced"?

A thing cannot be grasped by the intelligence except when it is clothed in an intelligible form; otherwise, it is but an effort of the imagination.
The 3-1 is clothed in flesh, in the Son in the man Jesus.
Which's not imagination, but history 'n a person
 

Polaris

Active Member
UnityNow101 said:
You cannot have two seperate beings labeled as God, otherwise you go against the very fabric of Judaism, the religion on which Christianity is built.

It's true that Christianity is a descendent of Judaism of sorts, but I clearly don't put as much trust in the doctrinal integrity of Judaism as you do. They failed to understand or recognize the arrival of the long awaited Messiah.

UnityNow101 said:
If you say that The Father is God and Jesus is guided by God, His Father, and is but a servant to the Almighty, then you are on the right track I believe. But in everything you must stay based in Judaism's monotheistic beliefs.

I do believe that The Father is God and that Jesus works under His direction. Jesus himself declared that the Father was greater that he. However I also believe that Jesus is part of the Godhead and therefore shares the title of God. My beliefs are monotheistic in that I worship only God the Father, and I do so in the name of Jesus Chris, His Only-Begotton Son.

UnityNow101 said:
"The Lord our God is ONE."

Exactly. The Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are ONE in the exact same way that Jesus commanded that we (his disciples) be ONE -- in purpose and unity.
 
Top