And God Said
The word of the Lord which came to Hosea the son of Beeri, during the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz and Hezekiah, kings of Judah, and during the days of Jeroboam the son of Joash, king of Israel. Hosea 1:1 NASB
Word of the Lord – If I asked you, “What is God’s word?” how would you respond? Would you say, “Oh, God’s word is the Bible.” Or maybe you would give me a list of the books in the Bible or something like that. But what if I asked, “But what words did God say?” Would you still tell me that all the words in the Bible are what God said? Or would you realize that most of the words in the Bible are not what God said but rather what men wrote about the circumstances, feelings and interpretations of what God actually said. If you were very careful about your reply, you would tell me that God did say some things, but God inspired men to write the rest. Do you agree?
God’s actual words are found in the mouths of His prophets. They speak what God actually said, even if those words are recorded in narrative (like Genesis 1:3). Those words, and only those words, are the words of God. All of the rest of the biblical material, although we view it as inspired, treat it as sacred and consider it canon (remember the differences?), are not God’s words. They are the words of men writing about God’s words. Without a prophet, we simply do not have words from God.
Unfortunately, most believers do not consider this distinction. They treat everything in the Bible as God’s words. They think that inspired, sacred canon means “the words of God.” But clearly it does not. The Bible is full of material borrowed from other sources than God. It contains inspiring and uplifting encouragement, warnings, historical records, erotic poetry, songs, letters and a host of other words of men. The fact that these words are motivated by a love of YHVH does not make them YHVH’s words. It makes them inspired and sacred, but not divine. This distinction prevents us from becoming idolaters of the Bible, worshipping the Book rather than the God who inspired it. And it answers a lot of questions that come up if we treat all the words as if they are God’s actual words. All of it might now be canon, but God only spoke some of it.
And that helps us realize that what God actually spoke is of utmost importance.
Suppose you went through your Bible and paid special attention to only those words that YHVH said. What would you find? You could begin with Genesis 1:3. But most of the spoken words of God would occur in the revelation to Moses and the prophets. Would that make a difference in your understanding of the text? Would you treat all the rest of the biblical material differently? It is sacred and inspired, but is that the same as theopneustos (“breathed out by God” – 2 Timothy 3:16)? What exactly did Paul have in mind in that often-quoted verse? Would it be possible to ignore the actual words God spoke on the basis of an inspired commentary by the writers of the Bible?
Topical Index: inspired, sacred, word of God, theopneustos, Hosea 1:1, 2 Timothy 3:16
We may miss something of the “Word of God” if we say that it’s confined to just “thus saith YHVH”.
I think we should keep in mind that the “Word of God” was made flesh, dwelt among us and was God. How many times do the Apostles refer to the word of God in ways other then “Thus saith YHVH, in their letters? Or to Obey the word of the Lord that was spoken and given by Yeshua? The “Word of the Lord” or “Word of God” appears over 200 times, in the Apostolic text alone.
The Spirit of God was given to the Apostles that they would be able to recall and remember all that Yeshua said and did. And quite often that’s called the word of the Lord. When the Spirit of God came upon a prophet or Apostle to speak or write, I think it would be safe to say we can take that as the Word of God. Hence, God breathed/inspired/Sacred Words/Revelations/Instructions etc., but nonetheless, the Word of God.
“God’s actual words are found in the mouths of His prophets.” Meaning that of prophets as recorded in the Tanakh. There are no more such prophets.But, there are heaps of false and self-proclaimed ones who loved to be exalted by man, unlike the ones in Tanakh, who shy away from such heavy responsibilities of being called to speak from YHWH. Shalom.
So are you saying the actual “words of God” were not in Yeshua and spoke by Him?
“words in Yeshua” – I’m not sure what you mean by that phrase. If you look at the prophets, the Hebrew expression is not “the word CAME to” so-and-so. It is “the word BECAME in” so-and-so. I would suggest the same for Yeshua. His words ARE YHVH’s words in the same way that Isaiah’s words are YHVH’s words. He speaks for YHVH.
Is that what you are questioning?
No. I was asking Ester, since she said ” Meaning that of prophets as recorded in the Tanakh. There are no more such prophets.”. So I was asking is she implying that Yeshua couldn’t be speaking the word of God? Or be, at the very least, speaking as a prophet in the Tanach?
But, to what you were asking me Skip. Yes I believe the text says that Yeshua, thee “Word of YHVH” did come, just as was spoken by John. And I believe He most definitely was the one whom was prophesied in Isaiah 9:6, Mighty God and Father from all eternity.
Take another look at the Isaiah 9:6 passage. Look at what has been written here, including the piece by Rodney in Australia. It might give you an even greater appreciation for that “name”
And, yes, Yeshua was certainly a prophet in the first century – and more. But I am pretty sure Esher didn’t mean to exclude him.
Hi Mark, A prophet is more than a mouthpiece of YHWH, they are called to lead and save, living a humble life of service and sacrifice, and such is The Messiah drawing all to worship the Father as a deliverer, healer, and a mediator. Shalom!
Job 38-42. God describes/defines Himself to man for the 1st time since the fall of Adam/Eve.
I would like to know how the prophets “heard” the word of God. Was this directly though the mind or audibly through the ear? If it was audible, could anyone else have heard it? Was it a loud shout “now hear this, prophet” or was it a gentle whisper? Was it a male or female voice? Did it have any special inflection or tone that would indicate It’s authority. How did the prophets know who was speaking? Would there have been any dialogue? If not why not? Were the prophets ordinary people or did they already have a certain religious status and training? Jesus didn’t did he?
If it was received directly through the mind, was it during working hours or while asleep? How do any or all the questions above apply? According to Heschel the weekdays are all about what you do and the Sabbath is all about how you think so would the Word only have been received on the Sabbath?
Would Micah and Isaiah have “compared notes”, had any dialogue before “going to press”? They must have known each other. Did they “compete” with each other?
My “Greek” mind and my newbie status to Bible study wants to understand these things (amongst a thousand others LOL). Any thoughts on this or are they impossible questions to answer? Is it relevant? Any recommended reading?
I’ve often thought about what does God sound like too. I’m always pretty sure that when i think i hear God it’s just me talking to myself or my ego or something. I ‘feel’ Him more then anything or ‘see’ His hand in things.
My only thought is that it has to be an experience that changes you or makes you think you are about to die. But then you have moments where Moses is arguing with God so maybe it changes. Like the burning bush scene, ‘Be the prophet Moses” “You got the wrong guy”, “Speak for me Moses” “Telling you, wrong guy”. I mean at some point to me at least it’s hilarious, kinda like a three stooges act, “yes” “no” “yes” “no” “yes it’s final” – so in those instances has to be something that one would approachable enough – maybe it changes..?
Like your questions you asked and I’ll be reading other people’s responses.
I wrote a few things about this years ago. Under “and the word of the Lord came to _______” Take a look. I think it was the first verse of Hosea.
How far off am I to say the bible would be much shorter?
Yes, it would. But it wouldn’t be the Bible which is the canon of our faith and it is all needed in order to understand how God said and what God said.
George, During OT times there was a school for prophets. They trained for most of their lives. One way they heard HaShem’s voice was during deep meditation. Ezekiel was the last prophet and he saw his vision during a state of deep meditation. It was unusual because he was in exile. Prophecy closed with the destruction of the Second Temple.
Darlene, what makes you think/say that the age of the prophets has ended? Is there something in scripture that actually verifies this? And if that is so, how do we rectify the scripture that says in Joel 2:28 and in Acts 2:17 “It will come about after this That I will pour out My Spirit on all mankind; And your sons and daughters will prophesy, Your old men will dream dreams, Your young men will see visions. 29″Even on the male and female servants I will pour out My Spirit in those days.… ?
“The gift of prophecy is one of the nine spiritual gifts of the Holy Spirit.
1Corinthians 12:4, does not make one a prophet. To be a Prophet is a calling,
and not by an occasional prophecy or two, but is called (Malachi 4:6) to restore-
“He will restore the hearts of the fathers to their children and the hearts of the children to their fathers, so that I will not come and smite the land with a curse.”
There is a difference between the office of a Prophet and the gift of prophecy, between being called a prophet and prophesying. Shalom.
.
I think I’m going to make this my on going project. Someone commented (jokingly) on another post about ‘the purple words’ (instead of the red words for Yeshua) which is hilarious the way they put it but I think they are onto something.
So question to anyone before I start this because I don’t want to get half way through and realize that I did it wrong: You would highlight something that starts off with, “The Lord said…”? But does, “Then God said to _____” count?
I really don’t know what God said at the end, never really thought of it in that light – know the story not the details. Gen 1:26, Exodus 34:6-7 know that – but there is a lot of scripture outside of that and in between – think it would be an interesting study and probably beneficial beyond anything else. I would imagine spoon for spoon of scripture that’s got to have some weight.
Well here’s a joke about putting theology above the Lord – it has only indirect relevance to the topic, I know.
“Yeshua said to them – who do you say that I am? They said – you are the kerygma, the very ground of our being and interpersonal relationships. And Yeshua said – What?”
Would someone please explain, to this 20th century grandmother, how to use the box in this website entitled: Search more than 4000 word studies here. I thank you in advance for your assistance.
Type in a word(s) or scripture you would like to look up on and see if Skip has a teaching on it.
It is like Yahoo or Google but it will only look for information on this blog post site.
Ah, the simplicity of knowing! I was trying to use the mouse after typing in my word rather than hitting the return button. Thank you!
just put a word or verse you want to search in the box and press RETURN
The inserted addition of the “is” in 2 Timothy 3:16 does not make sence at all, in the KJV. It almost makes the verse a lie
“all writings are not given by the inspiration of God” take out the man inserted “IS” and all is well again.
Why did you type the word “not” into the verse? The KJV does NOT contain “not” in that verse.
It was my statement of fact, not the verse. The “is” was added by man. It is a fact that all writings are not inspired by God would you agree?
Is our Bible, the “Holy Bible” the word of God? There are those among us (humans) who believe it to be so. “Search the scriptures” is not only for “them” (the original hearers) but for us as well. Is this so? Is this true? (once again, -this time with feeling!-)
“Faith” (that which pleases God) comes by (what?) – hearing.- Got your ears on?
It’s so easy, even a caveman can do it.. – that is if he (or she) is able to read – or will hear. But, before we continue, know this.. – the opposite of “faith” is “doubt!” Do you (sumdumguy inquired) believe the Bible (to be the yes, inspired/God-breathed Book of God) or not? If it is not, then it is only another book on our already too crowded bookshelf. Well, looky here.. – the battle (now) is for the Bible! lol! Just as was (this is too funny!) “predicted!!”
Why, – Was the man I heard that from a “prophet?” Maybe so.
Now we return to our educated caveman. He is blessed with the ability to read and he (or she) reads these words: “Because God so loved the world, He gave His one and only (unique and beloved Son.. “ (John 3.16)
Not all have heard these words as we (very privileged ones) have. But we are the ones who have not only heard, but now believe this.. – then act accordingly, and confess (or agree with what God has said in the Book He wrote), Christ died for me. He paid with the price of His own blood, a debt I never could pay, and He paid for in full, in its entirety, this man’s “sin-debt.” Yes, – (Hallelujah!) in full.
I have been “redeemed.” I now belong to Him. Lock, stock and barrel. – All I know of me, now belongs to all I know of Him.
Yes, we have been bought and paid for at a very high price. Remember our definition of love? “Benevolence towards another at great cost to myself?”
Consider Calvary – once again.. – and see “Who it is” we knowingly and willingly crucified.
Yes, our Bible contains inspiring and uplifting encouragement, warnings, historical records, erotic poetry, songs, letters and a host of other words of men, because
God ALWAYS speaks to a human heart THROUGH a human heart!!
Christ (Himself) was human! –And far more “human,” far more a man, than either you or I. Yes, all the prophets (amazing isn’t it?) were human beings.
Every miracle of God takes two! God AND man. God and Moses, God and Elijah. God and David. God and Peter. – Need we go on? It takes two.
Does God still “inspire” people today? lol! If not,.. I dare not think what life would be without Him! – for “if the light that is in you be darkness.. – how great is that darkness!!”
Christ (Himself, the Living Word of God) had three repeated words to say to the “Deceiver of the brethren,” – three words we all should know and use frequently, – “It is written.”
The temptation we are facing today is the very same one asked of Adam, “back in the day..” “Has God said?”
Friends, may I say this (please?). Hallelujah for Word of God!! We the sheeple, would be SO lost without it!!
May David’s words find a home in our hearts today ..
“Oh, how I love your Law! It is my meditation all the day.”
Please – does this mean Jesus’s words are not God’s words? Ref: “God’s actual words are found in the mouths of His prophets… All of the rest of the biblical material… are not God’s words.”
Isn’t Yeshua the greatest of the prophets? Doesn’t he speak the words of YHVH just as the prophets before him? Doesn’t he claim divine authority? Of course. Now, does James claim the same, or Peter, or Paul? Or do they teach and explain what YHVH said and what His son said?
Jesus is God, in the person of the Son. This is much more than God’s greatest prophet.
Christianity certainly says so, but even some Jewish scholars admit that his words carry prophetic insight.
As for the Christian distinctive concerning the divine status of the Son, there has been a lot of discussion on this web blog about those doctrinal claims. Whether true or a matter of faith proclamation makes little difference to the importance of the words spoken by Yeshua. As Messiah, and future king of the earth, his words are of a different authority than prior prophets who proclaimed his coming. So we treat them with the status they deserve. But my point in the article was that no one will claim that ALL the words of Scripture were SPOKEN by YHVH. They will claim that all the words are INSPIRED by YHVH and the distinction is important.
Thank you for your reply! And I appreciate the fact that there is other blog discussion about the claims of Jesus’ divine status. But aren’t the two issues integrally intertwined (questions regarding deity of Jesus and whether all the Bible is God’s Truth)? To deny Jesus’s deity, would we not have to reject such scripture as John 1? “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God… And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us…”
And to your premise that it “makes little difference”: To accept that premise, would we not have to reject John 5:23: “He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him.” In other words, “the difference it makes” is whether we worship and honor God, in His three persons of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. When we do not honor and worship the Son, God’s Word tells us that we do not honor the Father.
please consider the previous discussion of “deity” and of John 1:1. Honoring the Son does not NECESSARILY mean honoring him as God. After all, Jews honor even now the Messiah (yet to come in their view) but that does not mean they worship him as God. The paradigm of the trinity interprets these verses as if they require Yeshua to be YHVH, but that is not demanded by the verses themselves. In fact, this doctrine was developed from inferences, not direct Scripture, and in opposition to Jewish views. Please tell me where in Scripture it says that if we do not WORSHIP the Messiah as God we dishonor God/
…….waiting……
I’m wondering if you could clarify “being divine”? Does that mean he’s “not” a man? Or sort of but, not really? I mean a angel (malakh) is divine but, then they wouldn’t be born from a woman either.
In my experience, when someone says Yeshua is divine but yet still just a man, it’s kind of a oxymoron. I’m not saying you are but am wondering how you would define His being divine as opposed to a great prophet.
And of course how would we be able to look at the prophecy in Is 9:6 and say He’s Just a man or some kind of “lesser divine” being?
On a side note. Rabbinic Judaism isn’t looking for or thinking about “a Messiah” in anything even close to what Yeshua was and is. We could talk about that for a long time but, my point is, they aren’t looking for what Yeshua “Thee Messiah” is and represents, not even close. They don’t think they need anyone else to redeem them or for atonement.
OK, here’s a little exercise. Go to the Tanakh and list all the people, persons human or non-human, who are called divine or who are given honor as representatives of YHVH. No oxymoron there. Our issue is not the issue of the Tanakh. Our issue is that we have DEFINED “divine” to mean “God.” But was that true in the ancient world of Abraham or in the first century of Paul? Hardly. In our post-Christian world, we think of divine as a category occupied by only one being, and since there can only be one being, any assertion that so-and-so is divine must also mean that so-and-so is God. But that was NOT true in the first century. It was true for Israel, but Israel was distinctively different than all the rest of the Roman world on this point. So, is Paul addressing Israelites when he writes about this topic, or is he addressing Gentiles whose worldview would include all kinds of “divine” beings? The same hold for John, of course.
Now you get to ask yourself if these circumstances were also not the case when Isaiah prophesied.
Do the homework and tell me, “What is the meaning of ‘divine’ IN THE CONTEXT of the culture of the authors?”
Honestly, I just don’t see the Apostles as having had any issue at all with seeing Yeshua as YHVH in the flesh. Just as Abraham didn’t have any problem with YHVH that appeared to him , in the flesh, either.
I think it’s a modern issue that we primarily develop when we try to shake all the bad theology that we’ve received from the Christian church after we’ve been blessed to have our eyes opened to a “whole bible view”. We have this natural propensity to just want to trash it all and even reject any of it that even remotely looks “Christian”, even if the text still shows some of it to be true.
That’s my opinion and observation on issues such as dealing with the divinity of Yeshua, and many others as well.
Some time back I included several scholars and books on the perspective of the authors of the NT. I don’t remember them all now, but you might take a look. As always, many of the really crucial texts have been translated via the Trinitarian paradigm, and not necessarily the way the author could have intended them. As I said before, there is NO definitive textual evidence for the Trinity. It is doctrine by inference, and since it is such a crucial one, you have to wonder why this is the case.
I’m not talking about, mean to imply, nor do I hold to a “Trinitarian paradigm” or doctrine.
Got it.
Oh, I forgot. Rabbinic Judaism also looked for a personal Messiah. Not uniformly, of course, but they did seek Messiah ben Joseph. See Daniel Boyarin on this.
Skip, THANKS for your question about where in scripture does it say “if we do not WORSHIP the Messiah as God we dishonor God.”
What is your take on John 5:23? “That everyone should honor The Son as one honors The Father. He who does not honor The Son is not honoring The Father who sent him.”
The clear meaning of these words is that we MUST treat the Son in the same manner (“as”) we treat the Father.
That this WILL occur is recorded in Revelation 5:13-14: “And then I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and in the sea…And the twenty-four elders fell down and worshiped the Lamb.”
This is further portrayed in Philippians 2:10 “That at the name of Jesus every knee SHOULD bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth.”
And to ensure we don’t take “knee bow” to mean simply paying homage to Jesus without worshiping Him as God, we are given a picture of this sort of false homage, by the Roman soldiers who crucified Him: Mark 15:19 “Falling on their knees, they paid homage to him.”
To “honor the Son but not necessarily as God” is not honoring the Father.
We just can’t get away from the Trinitarian paradigm, can we? The most divisive Christian doctrine, admitted by nearly all scholars to NOT actual and definitively be stated in the text, yet clung to as if life and death depended on asserting a formulation that came 300 plus years after the apostles and is nowhere to be found as a solid and clear declaration of any apostle. Somehow we think that Yeshua as Messiah, designated by the Father will all authority, future king of the Messianic age, granted the power to forgive, perfect representative of YHVH’s character and expectations, the epitome of what it means to be human as YHVH designed it, IS NOT ENOUGH. Somehow we MUST read Deuteronomy 6:4 as if “one” means “many.”
There are many scholars, both in antiquity and in the present, who raise serious questions about reading the text from this paradigmatic viewpoint and demonstrate that no orthodox Jew, including Paul, would have ever considered what the Trinity claims. But that doesn’t matter, does it? After all, this is what the CHURCH has taught us, and of course, the CHURCH is right. Forget the Greek import of categories of being that oppose Hebrew thought. Forget the idea of individual person in opposition to Hebrew function and action. This is DOCTRINE! and if you don’t believe it, then you are condemned to Hell, right?
Poor Abraham.
I don’t have time right now for full exegetical discussion of the above verses, but here is a brief commentary. John 5:23 – a legitimate reading of this verse also suggests that one should honor the Son (who YHVH sent) with the same regard as one honors YHVH. The Greek kathos (adverb comparative) suggests “to the same degree,” but does not require that the two subjects compared by exactly the same. For example, kathos could be used to compare apples and oranges. “Just as you enjoy the taste of an apple, in the same manner enjoy the taste of an orange.” But no one will argue that apples ARE oranges. In order to argue that this verse supports the Trinity, you must read the verse with the Trinity already in mind, something that the verse itself does not say.
Rev. 5:13 here the issue is what the word “worship” means in the first century apocalyptic literature. It is important to recognize that the meaning we attach to the word prosekynesan comes from a post-Christian world where worship is attached only to God, but in the first century Greco-Roman world, high officials, pagan gods and kings were worshipped. Since Yeshua is King of kings, granted all authority, the verb is appropriately attached to him. But this does not imply, unless you bring that meaning to the text, that he is GOD!
Phil 2:10 – same comment as above, and the same issue. To make this a Trinitarian prooftext, you need to bring the doctrine TO THE TEXT. The text itself requires only that Yeshua be recognized as the Messianic King, chosen by YHVH and validated by the resurrection.
Mark 15:19 is the same. You rightly note that “homage” DOES NOT NECESSARILY mean worship of someone AS GOD. But if this is true of the word in Mark 15:19, what has occurred so that the same word means something different in the passages in Phil. and Rev.?
I happen to read the strong proclamations about NOT in any way divvying up the G-dhead as another valid way of reading “echad”. Yes, we have surely tried our best to make a mess. We also attempted to divvy up the nephesh, too, in exactly the same way, if you go think about it, and ostensibly for similar reasons. If we can split up the functions of either into so many pieces of pie, then everybody can have their ‘own’ separate pieces to do with as they wish. Split up the functions of G-d and, voila! each major religion can make off with what suits them. The Jews and Muslims can have the Father, the East and New Age can enjoy the Spirit, and the Christians can have the Son (and the Mother gets thrown in for free!). Hurray!
Further, if you split up the functions of the nephesh, the church can have the spirit, the secular world, including the educational establishments and the shrinks can have the mind, and the medical establishment can have the body. Everyone on all sides just agrees to stay off the turf of each other, and if you want to amuse yourself some fine afternoon, go start to list all the laws on this planet that ENSURE that nobody ever really goes putting each of these pieces in any of these dimensions back together. Why? Way, way too much money. Could I put a big fat period right here? Shouldn’t this make at least one person suspicious?
The pagan world needed all these splits. They needed the spirit to exist ‘on its own’ so as to ignore the minds and exploit the bodies of the vast majority of nephesh on the planet without having to answer for it. Anyone read POWER and PROFIT here? They needed to get the power of the G-dhead away from its Administrator so as to manipulate it as they pleased (key buzz word of the New Age: “energy”). They needed to get the Representative away by Himself, so as to ensure everybody got to have one for themselves. Glorified Divine humans by the score can happily co-exist without interference. Why, everybody can then have one (and does!), and the New Age gets to become one for themselves! And the Father, without earthly power and representation can sit up there and be Himself, very neatly separated from us down here: He does His thing, and we do ours. Heaven and hell and all that jazz get to exist in any form required to line folks up so as to benefit other folks, without all that annoying physical stuff to intervene, and the medical establishment gets to do its thing, too, without having to answer to the religious establishment, if the body is truly separate from the soul. Why, at the end of the day, just everybody has benefited!
I am going to stop. I think I should go scrub the kitchen floor now….
Except that I forgot the third unity: the unity of G-d, us, and each other. As it turns out, how we split up the G-dhead (or not), and how we split up the nephesh (or not) is ultimately going to also play out in like measure in how we split up our relationships with that G-d, ourselves, and each other (or not). One action plays out in like manner on all three fields: how we treat one IS going to be how we end up treating the other two. Trinity per se, is divisive in nature: it assumes that fracture is possible. After all, you have to break apart before you can count. I am positing that the fracture in any dimension that we allow is going to likewise be found in all the others. “What G-d hath joined together, let no man put asunder”. Go back and read back into the text what is already there: we were all meant to be “ONE” in all dimensions, and in all ways. One Body, one flesh, one nephesh, one in Yeshua as He is One in His Father. One. One. One. All we should be counting is one. If we THINK we can count more than that, a crime has already gone down. All sin is fracture of One. Unity.
well said Laurita, isn’t it interesting how a correct view of scripture shows us what is really going on. All things in this creation operate according to the principles of His Kingdom, we can’t get away from it no matter how hard we try. David said “you have made me wiser than the ancients” (or something close too that) When YHWH opens up the eyes, the “unseen” becomes amazingly visible. Thank you Lord of heaven and earth.
YHWH bless you and keep you……
Skip, I appreciate your hosting this site where different perspectives can be shared. I see strong statements of doctrine in your and other’s followon comments, but would you care to respond to the scripture references that I cited in answer to your question? Thanks again.
Jim, Welcome to our community. Yes, here you will find believers with different perspectives (which only a few of us share) and yes, there are sometimes strong statements made (some be of doctrine- whether sound or not, I cannot say), but please do Skip and us the curtesy of reading (at least some of) the scores of posts he has written over the years regarding this topic and the legion of corresponding comments of those who both agreed and sometimes vehemently disagreed with his ideas on the trinitarian issue (including me…in the beginning). It will give you the framework in which you can understand the complexities of the issue and a better platform on which to preach to us …other than “I believe” “I’ve been taught” or even “I think”. Hoping you hang around and both learn and unlearn with us. Michael
Thanks, Michael. Yes, I have read dozens of the notes which have been posted regarding this topic over quite some time. And I don’t plan to say “I believe … think.”
I was asked a question on the blog and was interested in any responses to the scriptures I cited in response.
I am glad to have your questions and comments. That’s how we learn. Push the envelope to understand and never give up until it makes sense.