Community post
PART 7 AT THE RIGHT HAND
(1) When we say God sent his right arm into human flesh this kind of image (this here is the left arm) or the kind of idea that some have conjured up for others to scoff and mock...however, God is a omnipresent spirit so God did not need to detach any part of himself he just simply used that part of his omnipresent self and put it in/ attached it to the flesh that would be born male (son) human flesh without ever being separated or detached from that part of himself......God did not detach anything...GOD can be anywhere and everywhere at the same time as such any part of God can be anywhere he so chooses to "place it" so a better conceptualization is the other diagrams .........and NO the devil is not God's left arm nor is he even a part of God, the devil is NOT God..( he is a created being)
Pg 143............... .But wait someone would say, I would never consider my right arm to be my son so why would God consider his right arm to be his son?..God is a omnipresent spirit that “lives” primarily in heaven (as a spirit in the spiritual) God calls that part of himself that he considers to be his right arm His son because of the physical birth of male (son) human flesh that was born into the physical world as a “son of man” (that was in fact God himself) and as such belongs to God. His own right arm came into the physical world via a natural physical birth into human male (son) flesh!!.Was it Mary’s son or God’s son? It is simply a matter of perspective. The male child was born of a virgin but the male human flesh was animated or only had life via that part of God considered to be his own right arm and as such that male human flesh was literally the human flesh of God since it was A SON and God had no other human flesh (or son) it was literally the ONLY or unique birthed BEGOTTEN SON (male human flesh) OF GOD (belonging to / the possession "of God") Jesus is a son because of the circumstance .NOT because some other different god person who was not a powerful and knowledgeable as the father God person! .....Except you believe it you will die in your sins..
Pg 14 ..It is superfluous even fallacious to insist on a second person of God because a son must be a different person then a human father because Jesus did not have a human father and God does not take a wife and have children like men do ?!?!… God via the angel told Mary that what was going to be born was to be called the son of God, (NOTE: here in Heb it states “I WILL BE TO HIM A FATHER, AND HE SHALL BE TO ME A SON?) NOT because the servant/Right arm sent is a different person then the father who sent his right arm/ “My servant” the son. Jesus is a literal son by virtue of the birth into human flesh NOT by virtue of having a different person then the father. Further, it is important to understand that there was no son of God until the son was born however that part of God himself that He considers to be God’s own hand / right arm (by which he created all things and would latter send via a physical birth) had always existed. The fact that God has distinctions between father son and Holy Spirit is not any more incomprehensible then a man with a head and right arm (that comes to “man” via a physical birth ergo called the “son of man” & “Son of God”) and a sprit that animates them all. One might be tempted to think that God actually intended for us to understand his nature by using the very creation (even in the language and terminology) that was made in that image.
(2) I am a father and a son..I am only one person Likewise God is father and son and is only one person…The difference is I am a human I cannot be my own son or my own father ….WHY?
The circumstance of God’s person is different then the circumstance of my person
My person exist and is limited it had a beginning an origin/genesis…….God’s person is eternal self existent and does NOT require a beginning or origin to exist …that is why he can claim the beginning and the end….I cannot not…a father is the beginning the son is the end of that cycle as a created being with a beginning or origin I cannot be my own beginning as such cannot complete my own origins.
The only reason I cannot be my own father is that as a father I had a beginning so I had to FIRST BE A SON BEFORE I BEGAME A FATHER…….BUT GOD DID NOT HAVE TO BE A SON BEFORE HE BECAME A FATHER…I cannot be my own father because of my finite circumstance (I had a beginning, as a created human) not because a number of persons defines what a father is or who can be a father or son. The Human flesh of Jesus had a beginning and was created but the person and spirit of that man Jesus was God and had always existed before the son of man came to be. WHAT MAKES AND DEFINES WHAT IT IS TO BE A FATHER AND A SON IS NOT A CERTAIN NUMBER OF DIFFERENT PERSONS BUT RATHER AND SIMPLY CIRCUMSTANCE. The son of God was born and thus became the son of god when and only when that part of Gods eternal self was born into the physical world into male human (ergo “son”) flesh was born….It was God and that male human flesh (ergo son) was the sole possession of God as such it was “OF GOD” ( belonging to God)…not a different person.
God had NO SON before Christ was born........ it makes this point clear in the OT as well as in the NT period! ..But YES JESUS HAD ALWAYS EXISTED!?!
OT…..Ecclesiastes 4:8. There is ONE ALONE, and there is NOT A SECOND; yea, HE HATH NEITHER CHILD (BEN/SON) nor brother: yet is there no end of all his labour; neither is his eye satisfied with riches; neither saith he, For whom do I labour, and bereave my soul of good? This is also vanity, yea, it is a sore travail.....................(Solomon here is mentioning in his discourse and making reference to GOD as comparison/ contrast to the vanity of men....Solomon here is NOT talking about himself nor is he talking about some or any old lonely man that happens to be out there.... i only mention this because i get the most ridiculous comments sometimes)......................
NT……Heb 1:5 Thou art my Son, THIS DAY (at a certain point & specific day)………. HAVE I BEGOTTEN THEE? And again, I WILL BE TO HIM A FATHER, AND HE SHALL BE TO ME A SON? 6. And again, WHEN HE BRINGETH IN The first begotten into the world ............ ?
John 17: 4-5 does not help the trinitarians because as demonstrated JESUS has ALWAYS Existed but NOT always as a son and John 17: 4-5 does not say that Jesus was a son before the world began it ONLY speaks to the fact that Jesus who is the son was in existence with the father before the foundation of the world....Again trinitarian faulty exegesis. They like to ignore the plain scriptures in favor of oblique references and interpret them in a way that directly contradicts clear passages and even though John 17:4-5 is still just as true just as describe here as the right arm of God that would latter come and be born into male (son) human flesh .....The male child was born of a virgin but the male human flesh was animated or only had life via that part of God considered to be his own right arm and as such that male human flesh was literally the human flesh of God since it was A SON and God had no other human flesh (or son) it was literally the ONLY or unique birthed BEGOTTON SON (male human flesh) OF GOD (belonging to / the possession "of God") Jesus is a son because what was physical born was male human flesh and a son that was the possession of God because it was God in that male (son) human flesh .NOT because some other different god person who was not a powerful and knowledgeable as the father God person! .....Except you believe it you will die in your sins..
There is alot of perspective that folks seem to gloss over and do not consider. Of course Jesus has always existed because Jesus is nothing but that part of the spirit of God considered his right hand that God would send and put into flesh via a physical birth…However, from another perspective it is just as equally true that, Jesus the man ( “son of man”/ “son of God”) did not exist before he was born into the flesh (ergo Ps 2:7…this day have I begotten thee; Lk 1:35. )….because before he was born into the flesh he was just God specifically the right arm of God that was promised to come latter. That part of God that God would send into flesh has always existed but that part of God has not always existed in flesh or as a man!?!.....Thus when folks argue over or point fingers on whether or not Jesus existed before he was born into the physical world has everything to do with perspective. No man (or “son of man”) existed for all of eternity prior to the time before God(Jesus) created Man….There was only God (Jesus) who created man and all things…This brings us to another important point and concept to understand. Man is a spirit animating flesh. When God put himself (that part of his eternally existent self) into flesh via a physical birth then God literally became a man and a son. That son of man did not exist prior to the point that man was born. However, that part of the spirit of God that was born into that flesh had always existed because it is God in the same way that if I put my right hand into a leather glove (of human flesh) that part of me that is put into that leather glove existed before during and after it leaves that leather glove of flesh. Never the less, the man did not exist until the male human flesh (son) Jesus was born. The God which is the spirit because God is a spirit and Jesus is God had always existed before he was born into the world but he did not exist as a man (or “son of man”) prior to the time that he himself as God created man/ “son of man”!?! Before the son came into the world he was only considered to be the right hand of God, that would come and when it did he would be called the only begotten son of God, for the very reason that while many have been called "sons of God" Jesus was the ONLY BEGOTTEN son God had via a human women!?!?
NO God did not create a right arm at any point in time...that eternal part of God that God himself considers to be his right arm that has ALWAYS existed came to be born into human male flesh and at that point because of the birth and male human flesh became THE SON OF GOD....by virtue of circumstance NOT by virtue of being newly created..!?!? Jesus as THE SON had a point in time in which he BEGAN to be a son.......but Jesus had always existed because the man Jesus is that part of God that God considers to be his own right arm that God would send via a physical natural birth into human male (son) flesh!?!
NEXT IS: Slide #2 "where is God"?.....Jesus who is God standing at the right hand of God, YES himself! (Acts 7:56;) ....When I sit down my right hand (an object) is “at my right hand" (a location). Take a look at the diagrams in this Chapter which conceptualizes the whole idea of "where God is". There are many other things we shall continue to explore in this study and once you see it you should realize just how simple it all really is. Then your next question will be “how come then so few or almost no one ever saw all this before”; to which i suggest (A) a few have (B) 2 Thess 2:10-11.
It is rather ironic even hypocritical that some would also try to point to Rev 5:7. And he came and took the book out of the right hand of him that sat upon the throne. Note the diagram could have just as easily drawn this to show a lamb and a man sitting on a throne. They attempt to point to this verse to claim “see Jesus is not the literal right hand of God because Jesus took it out of the right hand of God” and thus as such, they will argue, Jesus must be a different person then the father.
(1) These are the same people who claim “you cant take revelation literal it is symbolic” and “metaphorical”. These are double minded, cherry picking hypocrites. Look, verse 6 states “ and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain.”…So, there is a “man” sitting on the throne but, it was the lamb (look like a slain animal not a human man) that took the book NOT a different man who comes and takes the book out of the hand of the man who is sitting on the throne not that it would matter if it did for the reasons explained here, The point should become obvious once you understand that God can take as many and as many different bodies as he chooses all at the same time without being different persons. Remember, Christ who is our High is also the sacrificial lamb of God, multiple simultaneous roles are not difficult for the omnipresent God. God is “omnipresent” (and not limited to a singular body or body type even at the same time, Side one demonstrates the fact that God did take multiple different bodies at the same time, so pointing to that as “evidence” that God is multiple different persons is just pointing to your Trinitarian conclusion as “evidence” for itself!?! ) Angels are spirits also but they have bodies that they are limited/confined within/ to and they are NOT “omnipresent”. God on the other hand is not “confined to the limited space of a singular body. He created all things and can take as many different bodies as he likes all at the same time without being multiple and or different omnipresent persons! God is ONE PERSON who can be anywhere at the same time!?
(2) Take note of the omnipresence of God and how the anthropomorphic (with the likeness of man; hands arms, sitting on a throne or chair) God sitting on the throne is NOT everything or all there is to God. (Obviously the same omnipresent “ONE GOD” was in heaven and on earth at the same time!!) The anthropomorphic God (man sitting on the throne) is only that part of God that is manifested or projected into the place that God created called heaven (spiritual universe); the environment where the angels also live. God created environments for spirits and angels to live in, God exist external of any and all environments (He is “omnipresent) that angels/demons, humans et al live in. God has a anthropomorphic projection of HIMSELF in heaven but God can be in multiple different locations (or bodies) at the same time, doing different things because God is omnipresent/ everywhere! God is not limited to the confines of any singular anthropomorphic manifestation/projection into “heaven” or earth (Gen 18:2) because God is everywhere and anthropomorphisms are just the projections/ manifestations that God who is “omnipresent” (and not limited to a singular body) uses to show things either to his other heavenly host and or to men on earth. God is not limited by any number of anthropomorphism . But God is limited by His own word which is that he does have what he considers to be a right arm and that is what he would send and call his son, and except you believe it you will die in your sins! God can and is in/ manifested/projected in multiple different locations doing multiple different things all at the same time, for the very Reason that ONLY HE the omnipresent God could, be “all in all”!?!
What John saw in heaven was literal but it was not God in a box it was a box that God projected himself into as a animal that had been slain and as the father sitting on the throne before the angels and other heavenly host. But the omnipresent God is not totally encapsulated in any number of different bodies and or certainly not the limited forms of a lamb and a man sitting on a throne!?
There are many different ways these diagrams could have been draw and even if you do not like my illustrations common sense should tell you that if Jesus is God then he is the OMNIPRESENT GOD and the “difficulty” is only one of proper conceptualization not anything found in the text.
While some have tried to point to John " Who is a liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist who denies the Father and the Son. Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father either; he who acknowledges the Son has the Father also.”..they dont seem to realize this is speaking of all those groups who claim that Jesus was a different person then the father Trinitarians/ JW islam et al....why?.. because while some deny the divinity of Christ other make Christ a different divinity and deny it. You see both sets of groups make the same error they point to arguments and say Jesus was a different person then his father.....thus even Jw and Islam claims Jesus was the Jewish messiah/Christ who was to come in the flesh) they like the trinitarians all deny WHO it was (or what person) that came (to be the Christ) in the flesh!?!...."WHO" it was (what person) that came "IN THE FLESH", IS THE DETERMINING FACTOR IN WHAT IT MEANS TO BE “ANT-CHRIST”! To deny the father is to deny the son because they are one and the same person that came in the flesh!......one denies divinity the other creates a pantheon....both are damned....
In fact the holy spirit is the same right arm as well…..go back and look at part 3 and NOTE that what is revealed is the right arm ……
(D) WHO IS THE HOLY SPIRIT? Pgs 72-81
John 14:9. Jesus saith unto him, HAVE I BEEN SO LONG TIME WITH YOU, AND YET HAST THOU NOT KNOWN ME, Philip? HE THAT HATH SEEN ME HATH SEEN THE FATHER; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?......The "oneness" between Christ and the father is not comparable to a man and his wife, for only a fool would say "When you have seen me you have seen my wife, how sayest thou then, Shew us your wife?"
.................. 10. Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me?.... 13 And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, THAT WILL I DO, THAT THE FATHER MAY BE GLORIFIED in the Son. 14. If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I WILL DO IT. …………..
NOW WE GET TO THE HOLY SPIRIT:
…………..17. Even THE SPIRIT OF TRUTH; (Jn 14:6 I AM the way, THE TRUTH,) whom the world cannot receive, .. for HE DEWLLETH WITH YOU, (present tense/standing next to them in the flesh) and SHALL BE IN YOU... (future tense “In them”) 18. I will not leave you comfortless: I WILL COME TO YOU (future tense “In them”) Note: The spirit of Christ is the sprit of God and the holy spirit that is why Christ said “I will come to you” (to comfort them, because Christ is the comforter). The spirit was standing next to them in flesh... ....latter it would come to them to be inside of them (inside of their flesh as the spirit we are given).....that is why. he would send the spirit...... However, Jesus himself here makes the point that the same person who was the HOLY SPIRIT that would come was standing next to them but lets them know “I will come to you again to be Inside of you” The present condition was external to them but in the flesh dwelling with them but, the future condition would be internal to them .. Rom 8:9 When you “see” or “pray” to the father (in the name of the father covered further in Ch 7) you are “seeing” and praying to Jesus and visa versa and Jesus will be the one to “come” and answer because father and son are just different parts/manifestations of the same person!?
Eph 4:4. There is one body, and ONE SPIRIT, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; 5. ONE LORD, ONE FAITH, ONE BAPTISM, 6. ONE GOD AND FATHER of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.
1Peter 1:10. Of which salvation THE PROPHETS have inquired and searched diligently, WHO PROPHESIED of the grace that should come unto you:11. Searching what, or what manner of time THE SPIRIT OF CHRIST WHICH WAS IN THEM, when IT TESTIFIED beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow………
2Peter 1:21. For THE PROPHECY CAME not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as THEY WERE MOVED BY THE HOLY GHOST.
Col 1:27. … THIS MYSTERY among the Gentiles; WHICH IS CHRIST IN YOU, the hope of glory: ….
Rom 8:9.....if so be that THE SPIRIT OF GOD DEWELL IN YOU. Now if any man have not THE SPIRIT OF CHRIST, he is none of his.........
John 6:63. It is THE SPIRIT that quickeneth; … THE WORDS … they ARE SPIRIT, and they are life…
Rom 8:9. … THE SPIRIT dwell IN YOU. Now if any man have not THE SPIRIT OF CHRIST, he is none of his.
There is only ONE SPIRIT not one spirit for Christ the man another spirit for the Father person (who is a spirit) and a third spirit called the Holy Spirit!?!?!....1Cor 12:13....There is no such thing as three different spirits who are also the same ONE SPIRIT ...
You can download the complete FREE book from
https://www.scribd.com/doc/305367608/The-Trinity-Heresy
OR
https://www.academia.edu/23463667/THE_TRINITY_HERESY
Replies (2)
Whew! I just finished all 8 of your most recent posts on The Trinity Heresy in one sitting!
I am super impressed and for the first time in many years may be experiencing a significant upgrade in my understanding of Jesus. For that I thank you.
It almost didn't happen though. I must admit that I found your writing style so off-putting, so offensive, so insulting, so unnecessarily accusatory and confrontational that I almost threw it aside (to my loss) many times in the past two hours. It was only the grace of God, my intense interest in the subject matter, and the fact that you were masterfully making your case based solely on Scripture that caused me to persevere.
You might want to work on your bedside manner, doctor, if you expect to heal anyone.
For now, I will simply write it off to the intensity of your passion for your subject.
Allow me now to humbly attempt to return the favor, as iron sharpens iron.
Consider how Jesus spoke to Phillip when he said, "Show us the Father." As I recall, Jesus said something like, "Phillip you double minded, cherry picking, trinitarian hypocrite! How dare you misunderstand Me. You are hereby damned for all time!"
Oh, wait, he didn't say that did He? It was more like a gentle father rebuking a child for not thinking clearly, "Philip, I have been with you all this time, and still you do not know Me? Anyone who has seen Me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?
What about the thief on the cross? Did Jesus interrogate him about the fine points of his theological understanding of the relationship between the Father and the Son? Um, no. “Jesus, remember me when You come into Your kingdom!” And Jesus said to him, “Truly I tell you, today you will be with Me in Paradise.” I wonder how many of your advanced concepts were in that new believer's mind at the time that promise was made.
And of course there is Romans 14 and Paul's rebuke: "Accept the one whose faith is weak, without quarreling over disputable matters." and "Who are you to judge someone else's servant? To their own master, servants stand or fall. And they will stand, for the Lord is able to make them stand."
Anyone who is acting like a good Berean and "diligently searching the Scriptures to see whether these things are so" is a loved and valuable servant of Christ and does not need to be rebuked with vitriol when they use a slightly improper metaphor to describe the mystery of God.
Misquoting Paul to drive home the point:
Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in the way of a brother or sister. ..Do not by your [harsh rhetoric] destroy someone for whom Christ died. Therefore do not let what you know is good be spoken of as evil. For the kingdom of God is not a matter of [theological metaphors], but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and receives human approval. Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification.
And how did our Lord address Peter when he proclaimed Who He was? Simon Peter answered, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah! For this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by My Father in heaven.
Nope, I don't see Jesus rebuking Peter here for not correctly articulating that he was in fact the Father Himself wrapped in human flesh. Instead, he affirmed the still limited understanding that Peter had just received.
Returning to your substance of your arguments:
A couple days ago as a classic Methodist "Trinitarian", I posted this: Jesus is the God of the Old Testament
At no time did my nominal Trinitarian working model of God prevent me from recognizing Who Jesus is. As I read your "Heresy" series I kept looking for something I disagreed with. Despite the volumes you wrote about it, your whole argument seemed to hinge on an objection to the meaning of the word "Person".
Is a member of the Star Trek Borg collective a person? Or is the hive mind the person and each instance of that mind one of its "right arms"? The individuals seem to communicate with each other while simultaneously knowing each other's thoughts while offloading some of the thinking workload among the individual instances. Is the Borg hive mind one train of thought or a massively parallel collection of somehow integrated thought trains?
I'm not saying that God Almighty is in any way like a Borg collective. I'm just saying that proper understanding the word "person" in the context of God can fail 99% of God's children -- and the most they are likely to get for it is a soft rebuke like Jesus gave Phillip or more encouragement like He gave Peter.
Are you really saying that while God is using His right hand to "animate" the incarnation of His Son He is not equally able to allocate any number of independent trains of thought to that same appendage giving it the appearance and actual fact of "thinking for itself"? Can He not have a separate Linux style "process" totally dedicated to "Helping" each and every one of His children? How, exactly, would our limited minds perceive the "process" that is interacting with us if not as a unique person, omnipresent or not?
How do you know which model of God's thought processes are correct, given that His thoughts are higher than your thoughts? Should we foolishly attempt to model them as massively parallel or single threaded? If they are massively parallel, why can't a simple minded Child of God think of each instance as a Person? Might God not laugh at your puffed up opinion of your slightly better mental model of His mind just as well, saying "Who is this that obscures my plans with words without knowledge? Brace yourself like a man; I will question you, and you shall answer me. Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation? Tell me, if you understand."
You've got some great material here, soundly rooted in Scripture. If you want to communicate those insights to all the Children that Christ died for, I suggest you consider what Peter himself might tell you:
"Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect." 1 Peter 3:15
The seven or eight parts that you read were only the summary notes at the end of the ~155pg book...You can download the complete FREE book from
https://www.scribd.com/doc/305367608/The-Trinity-Heresy
OR
https://www.academia.edu/23463667/THE_TRINITY_HERESY
PS it matters not how anyone defines what a person is...God only specifically claims to be only one as well as specifically uses modalims by definition to define father and son while trinitarians denounce modalism as a heresy........no thoes men are "God damned fools" literally not a wish for them or curse upon them just a fact........ .......Now, does 1cor 15:36 offend you?..It should, it still applies to most to this very day....if you consider me too harsh with fools then consider prov 26:12 and take note that is WORSE then just a mere fool and most gloat in their condition.........they do not need a pillow across the theological head they need a brick wake up and judge not according to appearances or according to your human sensibilities ....et al ad fin