Churchianity teaches it to mean that "In the beginning was Jesus, and Jesus was with Jesus, and Jesus WAS Jesus.

And we swallowed that as churchoids (people who believe Church rather than the Bible).

Lets take a MUCH closer look at John 1:1, and what Jesus' words have to say about it IN ORDER from the book of John!

• Jehoshua (je-hosh’-u-ah) = Jehovah saves. Same as Joshua = Jehovah is salvation; the LORD (is his) salvation; LORD of salvation; the LORD saves.
• Jehoshuah (je-hosh’-u-ah) = Same as Joshua = Jehovah is salvation; the LORD (is his) salvation; LORD of salvation; the LORD saves.
• Jehovah (je-ho’-vah) = He will be; i.e., the Eternal who always is; the Eternal One; (root = to be; to breathe); the I AM THAT I AM; (He) was, is, will be, the LORD God. He is, He was. (There are but two tenses in Hebrew, the past and the future, with the latter denoting what is continued even in the present.)
• Jehovah-Jireh (je-ho’-vah-ji’-reh) = The LORD will see; the LORD will provide; i.e., give a means of deliverance; (root = to see); the LORD will see and provide.
• Jehovah-M’Kaddesh = The LORD is my/our sanctification.
• Jehovah-Nissi (je-ho’-vah-nis’-si) = The LORD is my/our banner or ensign; (root = something lifted up; to be seen afar off; a banner; a signal flag; an ensign).
• Jehovah-Rohi = The LORD is my/our Shepherd.
• Jehovah-Rophi = The LORD is my/our healing.
• Jehovah-Sabaoth (je-ho’-vah-sab’-a-oth) = The LORD of warrior hosts.
• Jehovah-Shalom (je-ho’-vah-sha’-lom) = The LORD is my/our peace; the peace of the LORD.
• Jehovah-Shammah (je-ho’-vah-sham’-mah) = The LORD is there (ever present).
• Jehovah-Tsidkenu = The LORD is my/our righteousness.
•  Jehozabad (je-hoz’-a-bad) = Whom the LORD gave; Jehovah gave; Jehovah has endowed.

Part -2

• Jehoshua (je-hosh’-u-ah) = Jehovah saves. Same as Joshua = Jehovah is salvation; the LORD (is his) salvation; LORD of salvation; the LORD saves.
• Jehoshuah (je-hosh’-u-ah) = Same as Joshua = Jehovah is salvation; the LORD (is his) salvation; LORD of salvation; the LORD saves.
• Jehovah (je-ho’-vah) = He will be; i.e., the Eternal who always is; the Eternal One; (root = to be; to breathe); the I AM THAT I AM; (He) was, is, will be, the LORD God. He is, He was. (There are but two tenses in Hebrew, the past and the future, with the latter denoting what is continued even in the present.)
• Jehovah-Jireh (je-ho’-vah-ji’-reh) = The LORD will see; the LORD will provide; i.e., give a means of deliverance; (root = to see); the LORD will see and provide.
• Jehovah-M’Kaddesh = The LORD is my/our sanctification.
• Jehovah-Nissi (je-ho’-vah-nis’-si) = The LORD is my/our banner or ensign; (root = something lifted up; to be seen afar off; a banner; a signal flag; an ensign).
• Jehovah-Rohi = The LORD is my/our Shepherd.
• Jehovah-Rophi = The LORD is my/our healing.
• Jehovah-Sabaoth (je-ho’-vah-sab’-a-oth) = The LORD of warrior hosts.
• Jehovah-Shalom (je-ho’-vah-sha’-lom) = The LORD is my/our peace; the peace of the LORD.
• Jehovah-Shammah (je-ho’-vah-sham’-mah) = The LORD is there (ever present).
• Jehovah-Tsidkenu = The LORD is my/our righteousness.
•  p 127 Jehozabad (je-hoz’-a-bad) = Whom the LORD gave; Jehovah gave; Jehovah has endowed.
• Jehozadak (je-hoz’-a-dak) = The LORD has made just; Jehovah is just.
• Jehu (je-hu) = The LORD; Jehovah is He; He is. He shall be (subsist).

Read, think, and enjoy! It's a bit long for those who don't have this resource in their Logos Library. CM

SOURCE:

Smith, S., & Cornwall, J. (1998). In The exhaustive dictionary of Bible names (pp. 126–127). Bridge-Logos.

Jesus', claims to deity is when he spoke metaphorically of His person: e.g.

• "I am the bread of life" (Jn 6.35)
• "I am the gate" (Jn 10.9)
• "I am the good shepherd" (JN 10:14)

Yet he didn't say "I am God". To say so:

• In a Jewish context would have caused controversy and confusion.
• In a Pagan context, it would have caused misunderstanding.

The Christians belief that Jesus was one with God is gathering or collaboration of materials about Jesus by others:

• The uniqueness of his person.
• The authority of His teaching
• The awesomeness of His deeds.
• Above all the power of His resurrection.

These are from those who knew Him personally and the language of divinity in proclaiming devotion to Him.

Early Christians background was rooted in a strict Jewish monotheism. Jews/Christians would accept death over sacrificing to Caesar or to the pagan deities.

Please note that Christians from the very beginning addressed Jesus as Lord (1 Cor. 8:5, 6) immediately and not a long process. It was an open, natural, unforced devotion to Jesus as Lord and Messiah. This caused a rift between Christians and their Jewish parent.

The NT reserves referring to Jesus as God directly. However, there are seven specific references that refer to Jesus as God:

• JN 1:1, 18 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
  • "No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him. 
• JN 20:28. "Thomas answered and said to Him, “My Lord and my God!”
• Rom. 9:5 -- "whose are the fathers, and from whom is the Christ according to the flesh, who is over all, God blessed forever. Amen".
• Titus 2:13 -- "looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus".
• Heb 1:8 -- But of the Son He says, “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, And the righteous scepter is the scepter of His kingdom".
• 2 Pet 1:1 -- "Simon Peter, a bond-servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who have received a faith of the same kind as ours, by the righteousness of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ."

"The use of theos ["God"] as a christological title shows NOT that Jesus is God-in-action or God-in-revelation but rather that he is God-by-nature:

• The deeds and words of Jesus the deeds and words of God.
• The nature of Jesus is the nature of God; what God is, Jesus is.
• By nature, as well as by action, Jesus is God."

Read and think. Many of you have made your point on the passages above, elsewhere in these forum, spare this thread the rehashing of them here. STAY turned!... CM

Let me begin by saying, all anti-Trini­tarians, it's evidence, they don't believe in inspiration of the Bible and that it is God's book to man. This is why we have all the back and forth. They have issues with the power of God and His prerogatives. They are trying to re-define the nature, power and the character of God. In their view, Christ can't be more than their little pea brains can envision. Christian cannot and should not succumb to their construct of The Eternal One. Christians and the Christian Community should not tolerate blatant blasphemy of ancient, warmed-over heresies, in twenty-first Century clothing, within their ranks. They need to be called out. That is:

1. Docetism -- Denied Christ had real physical nature, asserted that He was a mere phantom, flitting across the stage of the world—a transient apparition.
2. Gnosticism -- Denied that a divine Person could become incarnate, or unite Himself with a human body.
3. Docetic Gnostics -- Maintained that a divine element descended upon Christ at His baptism and departed before the crucifixion, stating the Deity did not suffer on the cross.

On the other hand, there are those who don't know better, may espoused incorrectly, the truth about God or the Trinity, while in their Christian journey. Wrong is wrong, just the same. Such as:

1. Modalism (i.e. Sabellianism, Noetianism and Patripassianism) ...taught that the three persons of the Trinity as different “modes” of the Godhead. Adherents believed that Father, Son and Holy Spirit are not distinct personalities, but different modes of God's self-revelation. A typical modalist approach is to regard God as the Father in creation, the Son in redemption, and the Spirit in sanctification. In other words, God exists as Father, Son and Spirit in different eras, but never as triune. Stemming from Modalism, Patripassianism believed that the Father suffered as the Son.
2. Tritheism ...Tritheism confessses the Father, Son and Holy Spirit as three independent divine beings; three separate gods who share the 'same substance'. This is a common mistake because of misunderstanding of the use of the term 'persons' in defining the Trinity.
3. Arianism ...taught that the preexistent Christ was the first and greatest of God’s creatures but denied his fully divine status. The Arian controversy was of major importance in the development of Christology during the fourth century and was addressed definitely in the Nicene Creed.
4. Docetism ...taught that Jesus Christ as a purely divine being who only had the “appearance” of being human. Regarding his suffering, some versions taught that Jesus’ divinity abandoned or left him upon the cross while other claimed that he only appeared to suffer (much like he only appeared to be human).
5. Ebionitism...taught that while Jesus was endowed with particular charismatic gifts which distinguished him from other humans but nonetheless regarded Him as a purely human figure.
6. Macedonianism...that that the Holy Spirit is a created being.
7. Adoptionism ...taught that Jesus was born totally human and only later was “adopted” – either at his baptism or at his resurrection – by God in a special (i.e. divine) way.
8. Partialism ...taught that Father, Son and Holy Spirit together are components of the one God. This led them to believe that each of the persons of the Trinity is only part God, only becoming fully God when they come together.

There is a different between "ignorance " and the arrogance. the Bible makes clear that "the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent (Acts 17:30). When we know better we do better, in words, deeds, declaration, and proclamation.

We don't need to debate the Word (Bible). We need to read, believe, accept and proclaim it. God needs witnesses not lawyers or debaters. This doesn't rule out the opportunity to give a reason for the hope that's within -- what one experienced in Christ through the Word (Bible).

“For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily”. From the view of a believer who believes in the inspiration of the Bible, what does this phrase means? CM

SOURCE:

https://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/sdg/Trinitarian%20Heresies.html

1. How long did it took God to create the World? Was it 24-hour periods or one thousand years for each day?
2. What is the Hebrew word for "day" and its original meaning?
3. Was the creation done by some "evolutionary process" or as revealed in Scripture? That is:
   1. Creation Narrative (Gen. 1:1 to 2:4a)
   2. Creation of Adam and Eve (Gen. 2:4b-25)

This study of theology (God as Creator and Savior) calls for sober minds and accurate reading of the Word (Bible). Share with me. CM

Trinity is a hard concept to understand. There are three persons in God. Yet, the Old Testament emphasizes:

• The exclusive unity of God (Deut 6:4; 5:7–11).
• Alludes to the plurality of God (Gen 1:2, 26; 11:7; 18:1–33; Exod 23:23).
• This plurality of God in the OT, Isa 42:1 and 48:16, comes very close to a Trinitarian formulation.

The New Testament does not have any explicit statement on the Trinity—

• 1 John 5:7, is referred to by many but it has been rejected as a medieval addition to the text.

Notwithstanding, Trinitarian evidence is overwhelming.

• Jesus is clearly described as divine in the gospel of John (John 1:1–3; 20:28).
• Jesus, himself, proclaims his own divinity (John 8:58).
• In the NT, we find references to the three persons of the Godhead:
  • All three are mentioned at the baptism of Jesus (Matt 3:16–17).
  • During the Lord’s Supper, Jesus comforts his disciples with the thought that he and the Father would send the Holy Spirit to guide them after his departure (John 14:16–17).
  • All three persons are part of the baptismal formula found in Jesus’ great commission to his disciples (Matt 28:19).
  • Paul readily refers to all three persons in many of his epistles (Rom 8:9–11; 2 Cor 13:14; 2 Tim 1:3–14; Eph 1:13–14; 3:14–19).
  • Peter acknowledges the work of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit in the salvation of people (1 Pet 1:2).
  • John is a witness of the Spirit’s testimony regarding Jesus, the Son of God (1 John 5:5–9).
  • The book of Revelation also presents three persons involved in the final events of this world (Rev 1:4–5; 22:16–18).

All these biblical evidence to the triune God causes concern for some people because the Holy Spirit is often referred to with metaphors of objects:

• A dove (Matt 3:16)
• The wind (John 3:8)
• Fire (Isa 6:6, 7)
• Water (John 7:37–39)
• Oil (Matt 25:1–4)

In addition, New Testament statements appear to refer to Jesus as having had a beginning when he is referred to as “begotten” (monogenes) or “firstborn of all creation” (prototokos) (John 3:16; Col 1:15).

In history, the doctrine of the Trinity in the early church struggled with the Trinity. When the early church addressed it through a series of councils confirming the eternal divinity of Jesus. With the acceptance of Jesus as Savior and Lord, the Trinity quickly found its way into the creeds of the church.

The Niceo-Constantinopolitan creed

Please Note: Later western versions of the Nicene Creed added the filioque clause:

The addition of this clause was one of the issues that led to the great schism between east and west in 1054.

The early church fathers gave us the vocabulary we use and discuss today:

• Irenaeus spoke of the “economy of salvation,” in which each member of the Godhead has a distinct yet related role.
• Tertullian argued that “substance” is what unites while “person” is what distinguishes the members of the Godhead. “The three persons of the Trinity are distinct, yet not divided, different yet not separate or independent of each other.” 
• The eastern Cappadocian fathers expanded on Tertullian’s thought and tended to emphasize the distinct individuality of the three persons while safeguarding their unity by stressing the fact that both the Son and the Spirit derived from the Father. Note: Cappadocian fathers, Orthodox theology teaches that the Son is the “only begotten” of the Father and the Holy Spirit “proceeds” from the Father. 
  • They spoke of one “substance” (ousia) in three “persons” (hypostases).” 

One needs to be aware the that vocabulary and thought used today assumed ancient Greek dualism and metaphysics, which are very distant and confusing to us now.

Augustine's theology of the Trinity was based on the concept of relationship and on the bond of love between Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. This doctrine continued to experienced challenges to this day.

• Arianism holds that the Son was created by nature and did not exist before the Father brought him into existence. As such the Son is subordinate to the Father’s authority (subordinationism). Arians have also consistently denied the personhood of the Holy Spirit.

The many forms of Modalism:

• Sabellianism -- teaches that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three different modes or manifestations of the same God at different times.
• Monarchianism -- is a form of modalism that denied the plurality of God. It holds that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are a succession of modes or operations; they are not separate persons.
• Socinianism had been criticizing the doctrine of the Trinity on both biblical and rational grounds.

I don't accept the traditional Platonic dualistic worldview and metaphysics that were foundational to the church fathers’ theology of the Trinity, one of these being the concept of the immortality of the soul.

Do we have common ground on the development of this doctrine thus far? In view of the texts cited above isn't it clear that Trinitarian evidence is overwhelming? CM

1. What do you believe is the consensus of the cited thread above?

Consider the current thread, basically, the same question, except for the ending: "Do Christians and Jews worship the same God"? Is there a set standard to worshipping God? If so, what is it? If not, Why not?

Mitch and Jan, considering the current OP ["Do Christians and Jews worship the same God"?] do you want to change your response or outlook on the Bible, Jesus, and the way of salvation when the Muslims were the point of focus, but, now the Jews? If so, why? If not, why not? This topic is one, like many others, that calls for the serious-minded and sober thinkers. 

We need to let this year (2020) be the year of addressing topics (original thoughts and/or quoted sources) and not the person or personalities. I would even invite GaoLu to chime back in with the new subject matter at hand. He and all former CD Users still have access to these forums. 

We must avoid personal attacks, driven, many times, by inflated egos. Don't let your political persuasion influence or color your biblical knowledge and understanding. Again, we have to want to do better. Don't you think the times demand it? Please address the topic at hand, the best way you can! CM

Once upon a time there was a little village in the desert. All inhabitants of this village were blind. One day a great king with his army passed by. He was riding a huge elephant. The blind had heard many stories about elephants and desired to approach the king and touch and investigate his elephant in order to get an idea of what elephants are like. Some of them stepped forward, bowed before the king and asked for permission to touch his elephant.

The first blind man grasped his trunk, another one his leg and foot, and a third his flank. One man seized his ear, and still another was allowed to ride on the back of the elephant. Delighted with their discoveries the blind men returned to their village. The people encircled them and asked eagerly what kind of being the monstrous animal elephant was. The first one said: “It is an immense hose, and woe to him who will be grabbed by it.” The second one responded: “It is a pillar clothed with skin and hair.” The third said: “It is like a rampart having also skin and hair.” The man, who had seized the ear, replied: “It is not a wall at all but a very thick carpet which moves as soon as one touches it.” And the last one declared: “This is all nonsense. It is a huge mountain which moves.”

Similarly, we are like these blind men in our efforts to describe God. He surpasses us so much, He is so highly exalted and lives in a sphere significantly different from ours that He is not totally accessible to us. What we know about Him is what He has revealed to us. Therefore, we have only parts of all that can be known about God. However, these parts are true and allow us to relate to God and be saved.

I ran across this story. I don't know the origin. A helpful tool to understand the Trinity. What think ye? CM