Jesus Christ

Originally posted by clickclick
Yes, the devine word of God. We know that. Now please, tell me when you are going to address the fact that the Word was being referred to as a HE, who DID things. What things? Who created everything that has been created. Who made himself into a servant. Who was the alpha and the omega.

Still waiting..... The word becoming flesh and then talking about Jesus was that, is not clear enough for you? Interesting, VERY.

Simply because it was not Christ Himself who was in the beginning. (Why? The Bible has no mention of Christ Himself existed before He was born)
It was not Christ Himself who was with God in the beginning. (Why? The Bible would explicitly tell us so that Christ Himself was there with God in the beginning)
It was not Christ Himself who was God. (Why? It would appear that aside from the Christ who was with God, we would end up believing in two Gods: Christ who is God with another God)

And it was not Christ Himself who became flesh and lived among us. (Why? It would appear that if Jesus existed in the beginning as God, He transformed Himself from being God into an infant - purely unbiblical)

My view regarding the "Word" still remains Biblical.

I know that Jesus was the "Word" mentioned from the Bible. But in the passage itself: "In the beginning was the Word (Logos, Verbo), and the Word was with God, and the word was God (Gk. theos)". [John 1:1], it means that before everything was created, God has already a plan concerning Jesus Christ. It is not the same as saying that Jesus Christ Himself already existed with form - whether a spirit or a human being - the Bible did not mention about it.

1. a word, not in the grammatical sense of a mere name ... but a word as embodying a conception or idea.
A Manual Greek Lexicon of the New Testament, pp. 270-271

1,1: ... St. John employs the term Word. It is so used only by St. John ... and designates the Son as a kind of intellectual emanation from the Father.
Douay Version

Clearly, what was with God in the beginning was His concept or plan or idea (logos) about the Christ who would be coming into the world. The term "logos" does not refer to someone who was co-existing with God in the beginning.

The Word or "logos" is not another God but refers to the idea about Christ, which was "with God" or in God's mind in the beginning.

Thus, the clause, the "logos" was with God, indicates that the "logos" is different or distinguished from God. This position does not contradict the biblical doctrine on the absolute oneness of God. On the other hand, if we were to accept the position that the "logos" is a being who, although is distinguished from God, is also God, we would face the prospect of accepting an unbiblical position that there are two Gods.

Now, what does it mean that the "logos" was "with God"? About what was this concept or idea that intellectually emanated from Him?

I Peter 1:20 has the answer:

"For He was foreknown before the foundation of the world, but has appeared in these last times for the sake of you."

God has foreknown Christ before the foundation of the world. To foreknow means to know something before it happens: to have knowledge or awareness that something is going to happen. The Greek word used in this verse is "proginosko" which is defined in Perschbacher's The New Analytical Greek Lexicon as "to determine on beforehand, to foreordain." (p.345)

Now, when did Christ, who was a plan or word in the beginning, come into existence? -- When he was born of a woman. The Bible says:

"But when the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the law."
Galatians 4:4

Christ existed only when He was born. He had no prior existence. In the beginning, it was not Christ Himself who was with God; it was the concept or idea (logos) that was in the mind of God, for God had destined Christ to play an integral part in His master plan of salvation (Ephesians 3:20-21). 🙂

The word "God" (in Greek, theos) in the third clause of John 1:1 is not a noun but an adjective. And this is attested to by Greek grammarians, such as R.H. Strachan. In his book The Fourth Gospel: It's Significance and Environment, he explains:

The closing words of v.I should be translated, "the Logos was divine". Here the word "theos" has no article, thus giving it the significance of an adjective." (p.99)

William Barclay, another Greek grammarian, agrees with Strachan in classifying the term "theos" in the third clause of John 1:1 as an adjective.

Finally John says that the word was God. This is a difficult saying for us to understand, and it is difficult because Greek, in which John wrote, had a different way of saying things from the way in which English speaks. When Greek uses a noun it almost always uses the definite article with it. The Greek for God is "theos" and the definite article is "ho". When Greek speaks about God it does not simply say "theos"; it says "ho theos". Now when Greek does not use the definite article with a noun that noun becomes much more like an adjective. John did not say that the word was "ho theos"; that would have been to say that the word was identical with God. He said that the word was "theos" - without the article - which means that the word was, we might say, of the very same character and quality and essence and being as God. (p.39)

Even the Bible translators agree that the term "theos" in the third clause of John 1:1 is an adjective. Here's one of the versions:

The Logos existed in the very beginning, the Logos was with God, the Logos was divine (Moffatt's Translation)

What does it mean that the "logos" was divine? It means that the word of God is with power (Like 1:37) for the true God who has spoken the word is powerful (Genesis 35:11). Since God is Almighty, He alone has the ability to plan something and the power to bring it to completion as He testified in Isaiah 46:11,

Truly I have spoken; truly I will bring it to pass, I have planned it surely I will do it.

God's plan of bringing His Son into the world was fulfilled when Jesus was born of His mother Mary. His birth is the fulfillment of what John wrote that "the Word was made flesh" (John 1:14).

Contrary to what some have postulated that Christ took a different form, i.e., from being God into being human, Christ never transformed Himself from being a pure spirit into an infant. He was conceived in Mary's womb through the agency of the Holy Spirit.

The Bible is clear in its teaching that God does not change (Malachi 3:6) like what you are suggesting: from Spirit to flesh, even a shadow of turning (James 1:17).

🙂

Originally posted by clickclick
Well, who exactly is God?

Originally posted by clickclick Thats what im saying, there are different manifestations of God.[/b]

Originally posted by clickclick
Was Jesus ever the father? No. But he was by very nature of Being, God. [/b]

Afterall, still it didn't prove your allegation that Jesus (who is not exactly God) is part of God.

Originally posted by clickclick
You have to stop that lame arguing technique. Please by all means tell me how ive been inconsistent. I said Jesus wasnt exactly god, then came back saying that I wasnt sure. To which, I said no. To which later on you even said that I said I wasnt sure. Please, just stick to what ive said, be honest here. If you want to find those parts and post them where ive been "incosistent" please by all means do. Make sure to take nothing out of context but post it as a whole.[/b]

That's why I asked you which is your point?

Jesus is not exactly God... or Jesus is God.

Originally posted by clickclick
Anyway, Jesus is not the father nor is he the holy spirit. Ive mentioned that many times. So what then is he? Well Jesus Christ was a man, but obviously not just any man. So who was this man? Well its made quite clear in the bible who he was. He was the word that became flesh, he was by very nature God but made himself into a servant. Does this change the being of God? No. Jesus was the incarnation, he was, a man. The divinity of God remained the same.[/b]

OKay... Jesus Christ was the "Word" as what I said the "Word" was God's plan regarding Christ. It is not the same as saying that the "Word" is Christ Himself who later became flesh.

Now, if Jesus Christ existed before He became flesh, what was His form before he became flesh? You might say he was the "Word"... Meaning the "Word" was not yet a flesh, so what was His form? You might say He was God. Okay... This God (Word) was with God in the beginning, right? So how many Gods do you have? Of course you will say one God in three manifestations... So I am asking you, where in the Bible does it say that God has three manifestations?

We only have one God, right? when we say God, we take it as a whole. Only one. One God. This only one true God is the Father, right? When the Bible say Jesus was in the very nature God, does it mean Jesus is God? I am asking you this. Because if Jesus appeared to be God, it would also appear that He is the Father. You might say, "that's why I suggest God in three manifestations: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit"... Therefore, I'll ask you the same question: where in the Bible does it say that God is made up of three: the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

That was my original question which until now, you didn't make an answer.

🙂

I am saying Jesus is not God. He is a man.
I am saying God is not a man.
I am saying a man is not God.
I am saying there is only one God.
I am saying this one true God is the Father.
I am saying that Jesus is the Son of God.
The Bible tells us so.

Now, I am asking for your side, clickclick, before you respond to me previous post. Make a clarification.

What is Jesus for you?
Is He God or not?

Take for the instance what John the Baptist did when he asked who he is. Didn't he use a Biblical passage to respond to the question at hand?

It's up to you how you interpret your Biblical view... But what I did is obviously with Biblical proof. My answers come from the Bible. Unlike you, your concept of Trinity is unbiblical.

That's why I asked you where in the Biblie does it say that Jesus is part of God.

Refer to what I said. What you did was unbiblical. You took the passage out of context and failed to respond to the bulk of it. Just responding to one word or line is not sufficient. This is quite simple really.

Simply because it was not Christ Himself who was in the beginning. (Why? The Bible has no mention of Christ Himself existed before He was born)
It was not Christ Himself who was with God in the beginning. (Why? The Bible would explicitly tell us so that Christ Himself was there with God in the beginning)
It was not Christ Himself who was God. (Why? It would appear that aside from the Christ who was with God, we would end up believing in two Gods: Christ who is God with another God)

And it was not Christ Himself who became flesh and lived among us. (Why? It would appear that if Jesus existed in the beginning as God, He transformed Himself from being God into an infant - purely unbiblical)

My view regarding the "Word" still remains Biblical.

Actually, the bible does make mention numerous times that he existed before he was born as a man. It says that the word was with God, the word was God. Most certainly, that is not two Gods.

Nice try though.

I know that Jesus was the "Word" mentioned from the Bible. But in the passage itself: "In the beginning was the Word (Logos, Verbo), and the Word was with God, and the word was God (Gk. theos)". [John 1:1], it means that before everything was created, God has already a plan concerning Jesus Christ. It is not the same as saying that Jesus Christ Himself already existed with form - whether a spirit or a human being - the Bible did not mention about it.

1. a word, not in the grammatical sense of a mere name ... but a word as embodying a conception or idea.
A Manual Greek Lexicon of the New Testament, pp. 270-271

1,1: ... St. John employs the term Word. It is so used only by St. John ... and designates the Son as a kind of intellectual emanation from the Father.
Douay Version

Clearly, what was with God in the beginning was His concept or plan or idea (logos) about the Christ who would be coming into the world. The term "logos" does not refer to someone who was co-existing with God in the beginning.

The Word or "logos" is not another God but refers to the idea about Christ, which was "with God" or in God's mind in the beginning.

Thus, the clause, the "logos" was with God, indicates that the "logos" is different or distinguished from God. This position does not contradict the biblical doctrine on the absolute oneness of God. On the other hand, if we were to accept the position that the "logos" is a being who, although is distinguished from God, is also God, we would face the prospect of accepting an unbiblical position that there are two Gods.

Now, what does it mean that the "logos" was "with God"? About what was this concept or idea that intellectually emanated from Him?

I Peter 1:20 has the answer:

"For He was foreknown before the foundation of the world, but has appeared in these last times for the sake of you."

God has foreknown Christ before the foundation of the world. To foreknow means to know something before it happens: to have knowledge or awareness that something is going to happen. The Greek word used in this verse is "proginosko" which is defined in Perschbacher's The New Analytical Greek Lexicon as "to determine on beforehand, to foreordain." (p.345)

Clearly, the word is refered to as he, he who DID things. He who saw. Again, it most certainly therefore could not simply be a plan. How could God have foreknowledge of God before the begining of the world? Thats a simple one. Christ the man didnt come about before but the Word was most certainly there. God obviously knew of his plan for redemption.

Now, when did Christ, who was a plan or word in the beginning, come into existence? -- When he was born of a woman. The Bible says:

"But when the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the law."
Galatians 4:4

Christ existed only when He was born. He had no prior existence. In the beginning, it was not Christ Himself who was with God; it was the concept or idea (logos) that was in the mind of God, for God had destined Christ to play an integral part in His master plan of salvation (Ephesians 3:20-21). smile

The word "God" (in Greek, theos) in the third clause of John 1:1 is not a noun but an adjective. And this is attested to by Greek grammarians, such as R.H. Strachan. In his book The Fourth Gospel: It's Significance and Environment, he explains:

The closing words of v.I should be translated, "the Logos was divine". Here the word "theos" has no article, thus giving it the significance of an adjective." (p.99)

William Barclay, another Greek grammarian, agrees with Strachan in classifying the term "theos" in the third clause of John 1:1 as an adjective.

Finally John says that the word was God. This is a difficult saying for us to understand, and it is difficult because Greek, in which John wrote, had a different way of saying things from the way in which English speaks. When Greek uses a noun it almost always uses the definite article with it. The Greek for God is "theos" and the definite article is "ho". When Greek speaks about God it does not simply say "theos"; it says "ho theos". Now when Greek does not use the definite article with a noun that noun becomes much more like an adjective. John did not say that the word was "ho theos"; that would have been to say that the word was identical with God. He said that the word was "theos" - without the article - which means that the word was, we might say, of the very same character and quality and essence and being as God. (p.39)

Even the Bible translators agree that the term "theos" in the third clause of John 1:1 is an adjective. Here's one of the versions:

The Logos existed in the very beginning, the Logos was with God, the Logos was divine (Moffatt's Translation)

What does it mean that the "logos" was divine? It means that the word of God is with power (Like 1:37) for the true God who has spoken the word is powerful (Genesis 35:11). Since God is Almighty, He alone has the ability to plan something and the power to bring it to completion as He testified in Isaiah 46:11,

Truly I have spoken; truly I will bring it to pass, I have planned it surely I will do it.

God's plan of bringing His Son into the world was fulfilled when Jesus was born of His mother Mary. His birth is the fulfillment of what John wrote that "the Word was made flesh" (John 1:14).

Contrary to what some have postulated that Christ took a different form, i.e., from being God into being human, Christ never transformed Himself from being a pure spirit into an infant. He was conceived in Mary's womb through the agency of the Holy Spirit.

The Bible is clear in its teaching that God does not change (Malachi 3:6) like what you are suggesting: from Spirit to flesh, even a shadow of turning (James 1:17).

Again, ive already disproved your opinion that the Word was a plan. God didnt change either. Ive already explained that one too though I can elaborate if need be.

Clearly, the Bible say it's the Father.

That's what I am asking for... where in the Bible does it say that?

More than once, it says that Jesus is God. Clearly.

Jesus was by very nature of being God... not in the sense that He is God Himself (since the nature of God is Spirit)... it is in the sense that He has qualities of God given to Him by God Himself. Now, even though He has these qualities of God, He didn't use these qualities to make Himself God but instead humbled Himself and still lived as human being like us... He humbled Himself even up to the death on the cross. - this is the best example of Humility. I already explained this in my previous post with Biblical explanation (not with prejudice notion).

Afterall, still it didn't prove your allegation that Jesus (who is not exactly God) is part of God.

WRONG. It didnt say that Jesus was in the nature of God but not the spirit. It said that he was by very nature God but made himself into a man. Therein lies a huge difference. Whenever you feel like sufficiently responding to that passage, let me know. In the passage it says that he was made into a servant and then God gave him things. Thats still consistent with what im saying and not at all supporting what you are saying. It clearly states that he was by very nature God but made himself into a man. How much clearly can it get and when are you going to address it?

You declared that Jesus is exactly God. So I presumed that you were not sure since you cannot admit even upto this moment that Jesus Christ is God. Instead you keep using the verses that allegedly proclaim that Jesus is God. You also claim that the concept of the Trinity can be found in the Bible... But the Trinity claims that Jesus is God.

That's why I asked you which is your point?

Jesus is not exactly God... or Jesus is God.

Okay. Jesus Christ is a man. That is my point. But I didn't say He is just a man.

OKay... Jesus Christ was the "Word" as what I said the "Word" was God's plan regarding Christ. It is not the same as saying that the "Word" is Christ Himself who later became flesh.

Now, if Jesus Christ existed before He became flesh, what was His form before he became flesh? You might say he was the "Word"... Meaning the "Word" was not yet a flesh, so what was His form? You might say He was God. Okay... This God (Word) was with God in the beginning, right? So how many Gods do you have? Of course you will say one God in three manifestations... So I am asking you, where in the Bible does it say that God has three manifestations?

We only have one God, right? when we say God, we take it as a whole. Only one. One God. This only one true God is the Father, right? When the Bible say Jesus was in the very nature God, does it mean Jesus is God? I am asking you this. Because if Jesus appeared to be God, it would also appear that He is the Father. You might say, "that's why I suggest God in three manifestations: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit"... Therefore, I'll ask you the same question: where in the Bible does it say that God is made up of three: the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

That was my original question which until now, you didn't make an answer.

Again, ive already debunked your thought that the Word was a plan. That is easily disproven.

Funny that you said this "You might say He was God. Okay... This God (Word) was with God in the beginning, right? So how many Gods do you have? Of course you will say one God in three manifestations... So I am asking you, where in the Bible does it say that God has three manifestations?"

How many Gods do you think you have? One. Obviously. Yes it does say that the word was with God in the begining and then it follows that by saying that it was God. Just as we have later been told aswell.

As to the three manifestations, just follow the book. 🙄

Id really like you to address what you have blatently avoided for much time now.

Thanks in advance.

I am saying Jesus is not God. He is a man.
I am saying God is not a man.
I am saying a man is not God.
I am saying there is only one God.
I am saying this one true God is the Father.
I am saying that Jesus is the Son of God.
The Bible tells us so.

Now, I am asking for your side, clickclick, before you respond to me previous post. Make a clarification

Jesus Christ was a man. God is not a man. Ive already explained what Jesus was, so does the bible. Whenever you feel like addressing it.

Let's end all this misunderstanding and unsupported optimism with the following:

Instead of the Trinity being comprised of A:Father; B: Son and C: Holy Spirit, it is rather this: A: Absent Father, B: Orpaned Son and C: Holy Shit which haunts us like a reeking ghost.

May the created gods bless you all!

Philo, I checked out your bio. and was very impresses with all you have accomplished. Your taste in music, etc.. I even visited your web page. Impressive. Not everyone can say they've written a book. I've also many classic music CD's along with rock, country etc...

For such an intelligent person, and I don't agree with philosophy,
you do come across quite angry. Why is that?

I suffer from clinical depresion and anxiety disorder, so maybe it's got that kind of extra effect on me. I'm very emotional and sometimes just snap for no reason at all.

I do sincerely appologise if I offended you or anyone else here - it was not my rational intention, but rather an irrational, emotional reflex.
😮

Originally posted by clickclick
Refer to what I said. What you did was unbiblical. You took the passage out of context and failed to respond to the bulk of it. Just responding to one word or line is not sufficient. This is quite simple really.

Originally posted by clickclick
Actually, the bible does make mention numerous times that he existed before he was born as a man. It says that the word was with God, the word was God. Most certainly, that is not two Gods.

Nice try though.

Now, it appears that you agree that He was God.

If Jesus was God before He became a man, then He must be the One God of all eternities.

Before, He was God... then later He became a man. That's what you think He is. While He was God, He was the Word (since the Word was God).

When Jesus as Word which was God became a man, and this man lived with us on earth, who remained as God in heaven? Seems nobody, right? ...since that One God became a man and lived with us on earth. Did this One God split into different persons? And when Jesus finally became a man... did He remain as God? Of course, He didn't, right? Jesus was God and when He became a man He was not already God because if He remained as God when He became a man, we would end up with two Gods: one God in heaven and another God on earth... Is it?

The Word was with God. Meaning to say, the Word is distinct to God since the Word was "with" God. Yes, the Word was God (Logos theos), but does it mean to say the "Word" was the God Himself(Logos ho theos)? There's a difference.

If Jesus Himself the "Word" who was with God, and Jesus as Word was God Himself, it would appear that: In the beginning was Jesus (as God), and Jesus (as God) was with God (distinction: two Gods), and Jesus was God.

Can you explain that?

Again, the Bible say that Jesus is the Seed of Abraham. Meaning He was Abraham's offspring... Logically and Biblically, Jesus appeared later than Abraham. Jesus Christ Himself did not exist before the time of Abraham... When Jesus proclaimed "Before Abraham was born, I AM"... there's a Biblical explanation... Read the whole context. In what sense does Jesus born before Abraham?

John 1:1 best explains... but you insist that the Word was Jesus Christ Himself.

There's a difference. The "Word" is certainly not a "person" as Jesus Christ is a "person". Jesus Christ only existed by the time He was born onward. Before He was born, of course there was no Jesus Christ... From the time God created the world.. He already had the plan. This plan was all about the coming of Christ. It is not the same as the God who created the world was Jesus Christ Himself who later became a man.

The "Word" (Logos), as agreed upon by Greek scholars, was used by John to convey the idea that it was an "intellectual emanation" from God. The "Word" was an idea, a thought, or a plan of God concerning Jesus Christ.

That's why the Bible decalred that Jesus was "foreknown (proginosko)before the foundation of the world".... He was chosen in the beginning by God to fulfill His will in later times. Just as how God chose, foreknown, His people since the creation of the world. Jesus was not there in the beginning that's why the term used was proginosko.

I already had discussed this before. 🙂

Originally posted by clickclick
Again, ive already disproved your opinion that the Word was a plan. God didnt change either. Ive already explained that one too though I can elaborate if need be.

When Jesus Christ was God, and when He became a man... did He remain as God? What's your side regarding this? Since the Trinity believes that Jesus is God - in your case He was God. So now, which idea should we consider? The Trinity or you?

Originally posted by clickclick
More than once, it says that Jesus is God. Clearly.

My question was.. where in the Bible does it say that God was in three manifestations:

Your answer: More than once, it says that Jesus is God.

Are you sure it is the answer? Read my question again (what is being asked):

Where in the Bible does it say that God has three manifestations?

Originally posted by clickclick
Funny that you said this "You might say He was God. Okay... This God (Word) was with God in the beginning, right? So how many Gods do you have? Of course you will say one God in three manifestations... So I am asking you, where in the Bible does it say that God has three manifestations?"

How many Gods do you think you have? One. Obviously. Yes it does say that the word was with God in the begining and then it follows that by saying that it was God. Just as we have later been told aswell.

As to the three manifestations, just follow the book. 🙄

Id really like you to address what you have blatently avoided for much time now.

Thanks in advance.

How many Gods do I think I have? Of course One.

This one God is the Father.

The "Word" was a plan in the beginning.
The "Word" was with God: a plan or a thought or an intellectual emanation from the Father.
The "Word" was God (i'm not saying the Word was God Himself: that's why in Greek it has no article ho; giving it the sense of adjective. The Word was God: The Word was Divine... The Word was Powerful: as the word of God is powerful).

It is not saying that the Word was Jesus Christ Himself. You will end up with absurdity... Like what's going on to your responses.

Still, up to this moment my original question left ananswered:

Where in the Bible does it say that God is made up of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit?

🙂 For once, give me a Bible passage saying that God is made up of these three. (Imagine, how many times I have asked this?)

If you can show me... our discussion ends.

🙂

"Comparing spiritual from spiritual"... the Holy Spirit suggests to maintain the harmony of the words of God. This process is obviously Biblical. Do I need to cite the verse?

What you did is NOT biblica. It was taking something out of context. There is an entire passage and you avoided parts of it because it completely refutes what you are saying. It paints a VERY clear picture and its the reason why you STILL avoid it.

What you did is COMPLETELY unbiblical. Address the passage already.

As to the three manifestations, just follow the book. roll eyes (sarcastic)

Id really like you to address what you have blatently avoided for much time now.

Thanks in advance.

Those were my presumtions... I expected you to respond to those questions.. but you chose to avoid them.

How many Gods do I think I have? Of course One.

This one God is the Father.

The "Word" was a plan in the beginning.
The "Word" was with God: a plan or a thought or an intellectual emanation from the Father.
The "Word" was God (i'm not saying the Word was God Himself: that's why in Greek it has no article ho; giving it the sense of adjective. The Word was God: The Word was Divine... The Word was Powerful: as the word of God is powerful).

It is not saying that the Word was Jesus Christ Himself. You will end up with absurdity... Like what's going on to your responses.

Still, up to this moment my original question left ananswered:

Where in the Bible does it say that God is made up of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit?

smile For once, give me a Bible passage saying that God is made up of these three. (Imagine, how many times I have asked this?)

If you can show me... our discussion ends.

You talk about following the book and you still cant address the passage? You sit there asking me to explain it... Umm its clear. Why dont YOU address it. Otherwise, you are admitting to being wrong. Ive already shown you that that they three are God but obviously you have your tactics of avoidance.

Ive stated numerous times that they make up God. To ask me to answer the question "are there three God's" is just you being extremely repetitive.

The word is described as HE and doing things. Jesus said that he was the alpha and the omega. You still havent addressed that. Jesus said that before Abraham, he was. He said when asked how he saw Abraham.

Again, you havent addressed any of that. Why do you keep avoiding?

Now you are saying that Jesus is God. Why did you say before that He is not exactly God. If you believe that He is God... He is God... so why "not exactly"? ...because of the three manifestations (to justify your allege consistency). That's why I asked you:

My question was.. where in the Bible does it say that God was in three manifestations:

Your answer: More than once, it says that Jesus is God.

Are you sure it is the answer? Read my question again (what is being asked):

Where in the Bible does it say that God has three manifestations?

Now I am saying? Im not the one who wrote the bible, it is the BIBLE that states that Jesus is God.

As to God having three manifestations, that is easy once you get over the hump. We are still working on you understanding the Word. The fact that it is described as a HE who DID things. Once you understand that part, we can move on to the holy spirit. See, this is real easy. The bible doesnt even have to say it one passage that all three were manifestations of God. If you follow the bible and learn what it says on this subject, it becomes clear. First step? You gotta stop being in denial and start addressing things.

Originally posted by clickclick
What you did is NOT biblica. It was taking something out of context. There is an entire passage and you avoided parts of it because it completely refutes what you are saying. It paints a VERY clear picture and its the reason why you STILL avoid it.

What you did is COMPLETELY unbiblical. Address the passage already.

Check all my posts. 🙂