I have been looking at many of the topics here on the site and finding a confusion about the Lord Jesus. Is he God or Not. I have notice many different doctrine that have been put forth.
But may I add just one more to the pot please, “Diversified Oneness�.
What is it? It is the doctrine that was taught by the Lord Jesus himself to his apostles, and written in the scriptures. I know the very first question you’re thinking right now is “where is this diversity in the scriptures". really all over the bible, from Genesis to Revelation.
First let me define it by the scriptures and then show it in the scripture. Definition, Scripture, Revelation 22:16 "I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star�.
Notice that word “offspring�. it is the Greek word, according to Mickelson's Enhanced Strong's Dictionaries of the Greek and Hebrew Testaments, G1085 γένος genos (ǰe'-nos) n.
kin.
{abstract or concrete, literal or figurative, individual or collective}
[from G1096]
KJV: born, country(-man), diversity, generation, kind(-red), nation, offspring, stock
See how the KJV can translate offspring, “diversity�. Meaning, that he, Jesus is God “diversified� or “shared� in flesh as a man, a OFFSPRING of man kind.
I have read, as said, some of the responses to this subject matter. Everyone has an angel to the Godhead, but what if we’re not asking the right question to get the right answers?
I would like to put forth a series of question that will eliminate any doubt about the deity of our Lord and the Godhead in totality.
My first question is this, “Who raised the Lord Jesus body up after he died on the cross?�. who did it.
I’ll be looking for your responses.
My motto is this. “where there is knowledge, stay not ignorant�.
Diversified Oneness
Moderator: Moderators
Post #41
It means that whenever you see the word "God", or something equivalent, that's Christ. Of course, the word "God" isn't God. It's the word that represents God. On some level words are symbols. Symbols are substituted for what they signify. Symbols are signs, and Christ is a sign pointing to or signifying God. John is literally presenting a theological version of Abbott and Costellos's "Who's on First" skit.dio9 wrote: What does it mean when John writes Jesus is the word,
He got the idea from the biblical account where Moses asks the burning bush what he's supposed to say if anyone asks who is saying, 'Let my people go". When Pharaoh asks Moses who is telling him to let the Israelites go out into the desert to worship, Moses replies, "I AM". Of course this was immediately met with scorn and incredulity which was God's plan all along.
You could say it, but it wouldn't be as accurate as saying that just as the invisible thought is manifested in the spoken word, so too the invisible God is manifested in the eternal living wordyou could say Jesus was in the mind of God as an idea a logos from the beginning.
Post #42
[Replying to post 41 by shnarkle]
the SHARE of God is equal "with" God per John 1:1. that which is wisdom is now manifested.
other words, that which was ABSTRACT, is now CONCRETE. manifested in flesh and bone.
yes the "WISDOM" of God is God, and Jesus is the wisdom of God now made concrete. supportive scripture, 1 Corinthians 1:24 "But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God".
yes that which was spoken, "WISDOM" Proverb 8:22-36. yes God speak "WISDOM", and God said let there be ......... and it was. just read the creation account, "God said".
the SHARE of God is equal "with" God per John 1:1. that which is wisdom is now manifested.
other words, that which was ABSTRACT, is now CONCRETE. manifested in flesh and bone.
yes the "WISDOM" of God is God, and Jesus is the wisdom of God now made concrete. supportive scripture, 1 Corinthians 1:24 "But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God".
yes that which was spoken, "WISDOM" Proverb 8:22-36. yes God speak "WISDOM", and God said let there be ......... and it was. just read the creation account, "God said".
Post #43
[Replying to post 42 by 101G]
Did you miss my response again, or just ignoring it?
Here it is for the third time
You assume that the form of God is equal to God; it isn't. Let's look at the context:
Quote:
Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
rather, he MADE himself nothing
by taking the very nature of a servant,
being MADE in human LIKENESS(I.E FORM).
And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
by becoming obedient to death—
even death on a cross!
So from this it becomes quite evident that the author isn't equating the form of a man as equal with God at all. The appearance of a man indicates that he can't be God as God is not a man (Numbers 23:19). The definition of person begins with "a man, woman, or child...etc."
Quote:
here "Form" is G3444 μο�φή morphe (mor-fee') n.
1. form.
2. (intrinsically) fundamental nature.
[perhaps from the base of G3313 (through the idea of adjustment of parts)]
KJV: form
Yep, and there should be no doubt that God is incomparable.
Quote:
With whom, then, will you compare God? To what image will you liken him? “To whom will you compare me?
Or who is my equal?� says the Holy One. Isaiah 40:18,25
Quote:
the "NATURE" of God is "Spirit, (see John 4:24a). but the million dollar question is what kind of Spirit is the Lord Jesus in order for him to be "EQUAL" with the Spirit/God.
That's not the million dollar question. When you start talking about form, kind, or type, you have crossed over into a system of classification, and there is no classification for God. God is the one who creates the system of classification. God cannot be classified because the incomparable cannot be classified. God gives Adam the task of naming, and classifying the different species, phyla, etc., yet God cannot be classified.
Quote:
the answer lay in the root of G3444 μο�φή morphe, which is G3313 μέ�ος meros (me'-ros) n.
1. a portion (i.e. an amount allotted, a part of something).
2. a part.
3. (as an adverb) partly, in part.
4. (as a participle) participating (i.e. the act of taking part in).
5. a piece (i.e. a limited portion).
6. (of location) a district.
7. (of livelihood) an occupation (i.e. as ones' portion in life).
8. a portion in Jesus (see John 13:8).
{literally or figuratively, in a wide application}
[from an obsolete but more primary form of μείÏ�ομαι mȇÃrÈ�mai “to get as a section or allotmentâ€�]
KJV: behalf, course, coast, craft, particular (+ -ly), part (+ -ly), piece, portion, respect, side, some sort(-what)
Here again, there is no way that the part is equal to the whole, especially when we're dealing with types, kinds, forms, species, phylum, "each after their own kind" etc.
Quote:
definition #1 holds the answer to the "EQUAL" Nature of God. another word for portion is "Share". so the Lord Jesus is the Equal SHARE of God in Flesh. not two separate persons, NO, but one person "SHARED" in flesh. this sharing of one person of himself is what the Greeks calls G243 allos. I'll give this definition again, Allos expresses a numerical difference and denotes another of the same sort.
And Adam has a share as well, and yet he did grasp at divinity, and lost it so having a share doesn't make one God.
Quote:
Just look up the word "Sort" I use the online dictionary... dictionary.com and see what "Sort" means. and then put it with the numerical difference as the definition states, you get two of the SAME. see a share is the SAME. and allos express another of the SAME.... Sort.
Yes, a sort is a type, form, kind as in "each after their own kind"; God is not a kind, type, sort. There is no classification for God. The texts declare that God is incomparable.
Quote:
the "ARM" of God is a WHO, and God said that his ARM is him.
Nope, His arm is "his"; not "him".
Quote:
"MY OWN ARM". God "SHARED" himself in flesh as a man.
No. Christ taught to "deny yourself", and he only did what he saw the father doing so we can safely conclude that the father also denies this notion of the self as well. There is no self to share when one has denied the self.
Quote:
this man standing in the water of John's baptism is the "US" and the "OUR" mention in Genesis 1:26.
Nope. The "Us" and "our" mentioned in Genesis is referring to "Elohim" who created "Adam" in their image. Christ is the image of God, and points out that if you've seen the Son, you've seen the father. Why? Because Christ is the "image of the invisible God". The problem with your analysis is that the image you see in your mirror isn't you; it's an image of you. Likewise, the image of God can't be God. Christ is the Icon of God, and an Icon can't be God, or a god. To worship the Icon as if it were God, is to make it into an Idol. Worshipping Idols is strictly forbidden in scripture, and one should never make anything into an Idol; even the Icon of God. One should never objectify God.
Quote:
the root is the Spirit without flesh,
No, not according to Paul who points out that the Father is "OF WHOM" are all things. God is the root; the source, the origin. Period.
Quote:
the Offspring is the SHARED spirit with flesh, in the Image of God... a MAN.
I would agree except for the fact that God shares his spirit with the celestial realm as well. They are also created in his image; and they are not men. It is not fallen man that is created in God's image either. It is the "new creature in Christ" that is a "son of God" created in God's image.
I comprehend your theory, but it needs more work in order to be coherent.
Did you miss my response again, or just ignoring it?
Here it is for the third time
You assume that the form of God is equal to God; it isn't. Let's look at the context:
Quote:
Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
rather, he MADE himself nothing
by taking the very nature of a servant,
being MADE in human LIKENESS(I.E FORM).
And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
by becoming obedient to death—
even death on a cross!
So from this it becomes quite evident that the author isn't equating the form of a man as equal with God at all. The appearance of a man indicates that he can't be God as God is not a man (Numbers 23:19). The definition of person begins with "a man, woman, or child...etc."
Quote:
here "Form" is G3444 μο�φή morphe (mor-fee') n.
1. form.
2. (intrinsically) fundamental nature.
[perhaps from the base of G3313 (through the idea of adjustment of parts)]
KJV: form
Yep, and there should be no doubt that God is incomparable.
Quote:
With whom, then, will you compare God? To what image will you liken him? “To whom will you compare me?
Or who is my equal?� says the Holy One. Isaiah 40:18,25
Quote:
the "NATURE" of God is "Spirit, (see John 4:24a). but the million dollar question is what kind of Spirit is the Lord Jesus in order for him to be "EQUAL" with the Spirit/God.
That's not the million dollar question. When you start talking about form, kind, or type, you have crossed over into a system of classification, and there is no classification for God. God is the one who creates the system of classification. God cannot be classified because the incomparable cannot be classified. God gives Adam the task of naming, and classifying the different species, phyla, etc., yet God cannot be classified.
Quote:
the answer lay in the root of G3444 μο�φή morphe, which is G3313 μέ�ος meros (me'-ros) n.
1. a portion (i.e. an amount allotted, a part of something).
2. a part.
3. (as an adverb) partly, in part.
4. (as a participle) participating (i.e. the act of taking part in).
5. a piece (i.e. a limited portion).
6. (of location) a district.
7. (of livelihood) an occupation (i.e. as ones' portion in life).
8. a portion in Jesus (see John 13:8).
{literally or figuratively, in a wide application}
[from an obsolete but more primary form of μείÏ�ομαι mȇÃrÈ�mai “to get as a section or allotmentâ€�]
KJV: behalf, course, coast, craft, particular (+ -ly), part (+ -ly), piece, portion, respect, side, some sort(-what)
Here again, there is no way that the part is equal to the whole, especially when we're dealing with types, kinds, forms, species, phylum, "each after their own kind" etc.
Quote:
definition #1 holds the answer to the "EQUAL" Nature of God. another word for portion is "Share". so the Lord Jesus is the Equal SHARE of God in Flesh. not two separate persons, NO, but one person "SHARED" in flesh. this sharing of one person of himself is what the Greeks calls G243 allos. I'll give this definition again, Allos expresses a numerical difference and denotes another of the same sort.
And Adam has a share as well, and yet he did grasp at divinity, and lost it so having a share doesn't make one God.
Quote:
Just look up the word "Sort" I use the online dictionary... dictionary.com and see what "Sort" means. and then put it with the numerical difference as the definition states, you get two of the SAME. see a share is the SAME. and allos express another of the SAME.... Sort.
Yes, a sort is a type, form, kind as in "each after their own kind"; God is not a kind, type, sort. There is no classification for God. The texts declare that God is incomparable.
Quote:
the "ARM" of God is a WHO, and God said that his ARM is him.
Nope, His arm is "his"; not "him".
Quote:
"MY OWN ARM". God "SHARED" himself in flesh as a man.
No. Christ taught to "deny yourself", and he only did what he saw the father doing so we can safely conclude that the father also denies this notion of the self as well. There is no self to share when one has denied the self.
Quote:
this man standing in the water of John's baptism is the "US" and the "OUR" mention in Genesis 1:26.
Nope. The "Us" and "our" mentioned in Genesis is referring to "Elohim" who created "Adam" in their image. Christ is the image of God, and points out that if you've seen the Son, you've seen the father. Why? Because Christ is the "image of the invisible God". The problem with your analysis is that the image you see in your mirror isn't you; it's an image of you. Likewise, the image of God can't be God. Christ is the Icon of God, and an Icon can't be God, or a god. To worship the Icon as if it were God, is to make it into an Idol. Worshipping Idols is strictly forbidden in scripture, and one should never make anything into an Idol; even the Icon of God. One should never objectify God.
Quote:
the root is the Spirit without flesh,
No, not according to Paul who points out that the Father is "OF WHOM" are all things. God is the root; the source, the origin. Period.
Quote:
the Offspring is the SHARED spirit with flesh, in the Image of God... a MAN.
I would agree except for the fact that God shares his spirit with the celestial realm as well. They are also created in his image; and they are not men. It is not fallen man that is created in God's image either. It is the "new creature in Christ" that is a "son of God" created in God's image.
I comprehend your theory, but it needs more work in order to be coherent.
Post #44
Sorry, but you're going to have to do better than referring to God as "ABSTRACT" or "CONCRETE". God isn't an abstract idea nor is God concrete. Ideas are ideas, and concrete is a diverse mixture of cement, sand, aggregate and water combined into one. This does appear to be the closest thing you've got to your theory of diversifed oneness, and yet a big block of concrete isn't much of a god. However, with a little imagination I do believe you might be able to constuct quite an impressive idol which you could then chisel up into diversified chunks. This seems to be the best case scenario you've come up with so far for this doctrine.101G wrote: [Replying to post 41 by shnarkle]
the SHARE of God is equal "with" God per John 1:1. that which is wisdom is now manifested.
other words, that which was ABSTRACT, is now CONCRETE. manifested in flesh and bone.
yes the "WISDOM" of God is God, and Jesus is the wisdom of God now made concrete. supportive scripture, 1 Corinthians 1:24 "But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God".
yes that which was spoken, "WISDOM" Proverb 8:22-36. yes God speak "WISDOM", and God said let there be ......... and it was. just read the creation account, "God said".
Post #45
My second question of the Day, concering our Lord's deity.
Everyone is filimiler with the apostle Paul, then Saul, conversion on the road to Damascus. but a burning question linger as to who "chose" Paul then Saul to be his minister/apostle to the gentiles.
some say God the Father chose Paul, others say the Lord Jesus chose him, maybe others the Holy Ghost.
but this question can be settle in a second, but I would like to hear your position first.
if this question is answered correctly then it will eliminate any third, or second person in the Godhead completely.
I'll be looking for your answers. thanks in advance.
Everyone is filimiler with the apostle Paul, then Saul, conversion on the road to Damascus. but a burning question linger as to who "chose" Paul then Saul to be his minister/apostle to the gentiles.
some say God the Father chose Paul, others say the Lord Jesus chose him, maybe others the Holy Ghost.
but this question can be settle in a second, but I would like to hear your position first.
if this question is answered correctly then it will eliminate any third, or second person in the Godhead completely.
I'll be looking for your answers. thanks in advance.
Post #46
101G wrote: My second question of the Day, concering our Lord's deity.
Everyone is filimiler with the apostle Paul, then Saul, conversion on the road to Damascus. but a burning question linger as to who "chose" Paul then Saul to be his minister/apostle to the gentiles.
Who chose Billy Graham? People preach because they feel they have been inspired so to do. Paul interpreted his Damascus encounter as something of a miracle rather than a delusion or a fit. Is it sensible to enquire whether the Holy Spirit was involved, or Jesus or the Father himself? My own view that none of these was.
Post #47
thanks for the response, but I believe you missed my point. the choosing of Paul will clear up a Godhead issue. that's why I asked the question.marco wrote:101G wrote: My second question of the Day, concering our Lord's deity.
Everyone is filimiler with the apostle Paul, then Saul, conversion on the road to Damascus. but a burning question linger as to who "chose" Paul then Saul to be his minister/apostle to the gentiles.
Who chose Billy Graham? People preach because they feel they have been inspired so to do. Paul interpreted his Damascus encounter as something of a miracle rather than a delusion or a fit. Is it sensible to enquire whether the Holy Spirit was involved, or Jesus or the Father himself? My own view that none of these was.
and i see you said, "NONE" of these, but the bible say different. Paul was chosen by someone.
I'll let you in on who choose Paul, then Saul. read Acts 22:14 and tell me who was it that chose Paul?
Post #48
101G wrote:
I'll let you in on who choose Paul, then Saul. read Acts 22:14 and tell me who was it that chose Paul?
Here's the context so we can all see who is doing what. First we read that Jesus is speaking to Saul.
Next we read of Ananias speaking to Saul.I fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to me, ‘Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me?’ 8“And I answered, ‘Who are You, Lord?’ And He said to me, ‘I am Jesus the Nazarene,
12“A certain Ananias, a man who was devout by the standard of the Law, and well spoken of by all the Jews who lived there, 13came to me, and standing near said to me, ‘Brother Saul, receive your sight!’
This is Paul talking about what Ananias said to him about God.
Here Ananias is referring to "the God of our Fathers", and that Paul has been appointed to know God's will. Jesus was quite clear in pointing out that he did nothing of his own will, but only what was appointed to him to know from the father.And at that very time I looked up at him. 14“And he said, ‘The God of our fathers has appointed you to know His will
The Righteous One is Christ, and it is from his mouth that he heard "Why are you persecuting me?"and to see the Righteous One and to hear an utterance from His mouth.
And this is precisely what we read in Paul's letters. He was a witness for Christ.15‘For you will be a witness for Him to all men of what you have seen and heard
Post #49
[Replying to post 48 by shnarkle]
glad you said that, it was the "God of our fathers", meaning the God of the OT.
then you answered "and to see the Righteous One and to hear an utterance from His mouth".
thank you, for it was the Lord Jesus who chose Paul, the GOD of our fathers. can I validate this? yes. for there is another version as to Paul choosing. listen in chapter 26 Paul give his third account of this event to king Agrippa.
Acts 26:12 "Whereupon as I went to Damascus with authority and commission from the chief priests,
Acts 26:13 "At midday, O king, I saw in the way a light from heaven, above the brightness of the sun, shining round about me and them which journeyed with me.
Acts 26:14 "And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking unto me, and saying in the Hebrew tongue, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.
Acts 26:15 "And I said, Who art thou, Lord? And he said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest.
Acts 26:16 "But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee".
did one see the revelation? if not notice the word "make" in verse 16. it is the Greek work G4400 π�οχει�ίζομαι procheirizomai (pro-chei-riy'-zo-mai) v.
1. to handle for oneself in advance.
2. (figuratively) to purpose.
[middle voice from G4253 and a derivative of G5495]
KJV: choose, make
see how the KJV translate this word, " choose".
what makes this word so important, it is found only in one other place..... yes, Acts 22:14 "And he said, The God of our fathers hath chosen thee, that thou shouldest know his will, and see that Just One, and shouldest hear the voice of his mouth".
the WILL and the VOICE of the God of our Fathers is JESUS the Christ.
JESUS is the one who chose Paul as his minister. the revelation is in the word "Make" here in Acts 26:16 and "chosen" in Acts 22:14.
see this eliminates any person(s) in the Godhead. for there is only ONE PERSON who is God. this is what diversified oneness is all about. the G243 allos of God as the EQUAL share with God. the numerically "ANOTHER" who is God shared in flesh.
the same one who meet Paul, then Saul on the road to Damascus.
Diversified Oneness is throughout the bible. from Genesis to Revelation.
glad you said that, it was the "God of our fathers", meaning the God of the OT.
then you answered "and to see the Righteous One and to hear an utterance from His mouth".
thank you, for it was the Lord Jesus who chose Paul, the GOD of our fathers. can I validate this? yes. for there is another version as to Paul choosing. listen in chapter 26 Paul give his third account of this event to king Agrippa.
Acts 26:12 "Whereupon as I went to Damascus with authority and commission from the chief priests,
Acts 26:13 "At midday, O king, I saw in the way a light from heaven, above the brightness of the sun, shining round about me and them which journeyed with me.
Acts 26:14 "And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking unto me, and saying in the Hebrew tongue, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.
Acts 26:15 "And I said, Who art thou, Lord? And he said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest.
Acts 26:16 "But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee".
did one see the revelation? if not notice the word "make" in verse 16. it is the Greek work G4400 π�οχει�ίζομαι procheirizomai (pro-chei-riy'-zo-mai) v.
1. to handle for oneself in advance.
2. (figuratively) to purpose.
[middle voice from G4253 and a derivative of G5495]
KJV: choose, make
see how the KJV translate this word, " choose".
what makes this word so important, it is found only in one other place..... yes, Acts 22:14 "And he said, The God of our fathers hath chosen thee, that thou shouldest know his will, and see that Just One, and shouldest hear the voice of his mouth".
the WILL and the VOICE of the God of our Fathers is JESUS the Christ.
JESUS is the one who chose Paul as his minister. the revelation is in the word "Make" here in Acts 26:16 and "chosen" in Acts 22:14.
see this eliminates any person(s) in the Godhead. for there is only ONE PERSON who is God. this is what diversified oneness is all about. the G243 allos of God as the EQUAL share with God. the numerically "ANOTHER" who is God shared in flesh.
the same one who meet Paul, then Saul on the road to Damascus.
Diversified Oneness is throughout the bible. from Genesis to Revelation.
Post #50
Thank you for your indulgence. Paul chose Paul; Paul interpreted his alleged encounter just as some chosen individuals through the ages have appointed themselves to found Christian religions, again through some mystical meeting.101G wrote:
I'll let you in on who choose Paul, then Saul. read Acts 22:14 and tell me who was it that chose Paul?
Let me ask: if someone today in Jordan, say or in Chad or China announced that they had heard a voice from the sky and had been temporarily struck blind by God, would that be universally accepted as fact? Why, I wonder, does the incredible become plausible when separated from us by a couple of millennia?
