Trinity Passages Can you spot the trinity in each?

[Andyindauk]

Hi Andy,

What you've examined here would be more akin to Modalism than Trinitarianism. Modalism is the idea that there is one God who manifests Himself as three different persons. Trinitarianism is the idea that there are three separate persons that are one God.

Hi Butch,

I've never been one for labels, what I've said is what I believe. That's why I have no problem with chanting the Apostles Creed when I go to an Anglican church.

 

[complete]

Hello @only son, @Andyindauk, @Butch5,

Reading your responses, I am made so aware that we are treading on holy ground here. How intrusive our own understanding can be upon revealed truth. I can empathise with the words of David in Psalm 139:6:-

'Such knowledge is too wonderful for me;
it is high, I cannot attain unto it.'

I choose to lay my flawed intellect in the dust, and worship God, Who alone knows all things.

Thank you
In Christ Jesus
Chris

'Jesus said unto them,
If God were your Father, ye would love me:
for I proceeded forth and came from God;
neither came I of myself,
but He sent me.'
(John 8:32)

Hello @only son,

Thank you for quoting John 8:42 (above). The same is said concerning the Holy Spirit in Joh 15:26,

'But when the Comforter is come,
Whom I will send unto you from the Father,
even the Spirit of truth,
which proceedeth from the Father,
He shall testify of Me: ... '

And again of the Lord Jesus Christ in John 16:27-28:-

For the Father Himself loveth you,
because ye have loved Me,
and have believed that I came out from God.
I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world:
again, I leave the world, and go to the Father.'

See also the testimony of John in his first epistle, (1 John 1:1-3). Glorious word:-

'That which was from the beginning,
.. which we have heard,
.... which we have seen with our eyes,
...... which we have looked upon,
........ and our hands have handled,
.......... of the Word of life;
(For the life was manifested,
.. and we have seen it,
.... and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life,
...... which was with the Father,
........ and was manifested unto us )
That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you,
.. that ye also may have fellowship with us:
.... and truly our fellowship is with the Father,
...... and with His Son Jesus Christ.'

Precious truth!

Thank you
In Christ Jesus
our risen and glorified
Saviour, Lord and Head.
Chris

 

[Sue D.]

@Andyindauk -- you mentioned chanting the Apostles Creed. Is it something that you actually Believe or simply 'chant'.

 

[Sue D.]

@only son -- the trinity = God the Father, Jesus Christ His Son and the Holy Spirit. They are throughout Scripture.

John 14:6 "I am the Way the truth and the life, no man comes to the Father, but by / through Me." That is Jesus Christ talking to all of us.

And there is Genesis 1:1 "In the beginning, God created....".

John 3:16 "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son , that who so ever believeth in Him , will not perish but have everlasting life."

Upon a person's salvation, the Holy Spirit comes to indwell the person. He lives within our heart / soul.

 

[JerryfromMass]

"Hear O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is One." One God manifested in three eternal beings: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Each eternally united to the other.

Blessings

 

[Downunder]

@Butch5 --- you may be interested in a copy of a much treasured book that I purchased for my library
TWO POWERS IN HEAVEN - Early Rabbinic Reports About Christianity and Gnosticism - by Alan F. Segal 1977 (Baylor University Press, 2012)
Alan Segal was a Jewish rabbinic scholar of note and in this book "examines rabbinic evidence about early manifestations of the "two powers" heresy within Judaism.
Segal sheds light upon the development and relationship among early Christianity, Gnosticism, and Merkabah mysticism and demonstrates that belief in the "two powers in heaven" was widespread by the first century,
and may have been a catalyst for the Jewish rejection of early Christianity." from the backcover of book

This book is quoted and referred to by Dr. Michael Heiser in his book "The Unseen Realm"

Genesis 19:24 Then the LORD (YHVH) rained on Sodom and Gomor′rah brimstone and fire from the LORD (YHVH) out of heaven; 25 and he overthrew those cities, and all the valley, and all the inhabitants of the cities,
and what grew on the ground.

 

[Downunder]

@Butch5 -- here is some of Dr. Michael Heiser's review of the book "Two Powers In Heaven" :

Twenty-five years ago, rabbinical scholar Alan Segal produced what is still the major work on the idea of two powers in heaven in Jewish thought. Segal argued that the two powers idea was not deemed heretical
in Jewish theology until the second century C.E.
He carefully traced the roots of the teaching back into the Second Temple era (ca. 200 B.C.E.). Segal was able to establish that the idea’s antecedents were in the Hebrew Bible, specifically passages
like Dan 7:9ff., Exo 23:20-23, and Exo 15:3.
However, he was unable to discern any coherent religious framework from which these passages and others were conceptually derived. Persian dualism was unacceptable as an explanation since neither of the two powers in heaven
were evil.
Segal speculated that the divine warrior imagery of the broader ancient near east likely had some relationship.
In my dissertation (UW-Madison, 2004) I argued that Segal’s instincts were correct. My own work bridges the gap between his book and the Hebrew Bible understood in its Canaanite religious context.
I suggest that the “original model” for the two powers idea was the role of the vice-regent of the divine council.
The paradigm of a high sovereign God (El) who rules heaven and earth through the agency of a second, appointed god (Baal) became part of Israelite religion, albeit with some modification.
For the orthodox Israelite, Yahweh was both sovereign and vice regent—occupying both “slots” as it were at the head of the divine council. The binitarian portrayal of Yahweh in the Hebrew Bible was motivated by this belief.
The ancient Israelite knew two Yahwehs—one invisible, a spirit, the other visible, often in human form. The two Yahwehs at times appear together in the text, at times being distinguished, at other times not.

Early Judaism understood this portrayal and its rationale. There was no sense of a violation of monotheism since either figure was indeed Yahweh. There was no second distinct god running the affairs of the cosmos.
During the Second Temple period, Jewish theologians and writers speculated on an identity for the second Yahweh.
Guesses ranged from divinized humans from the stories of the Hebrew Bible to exalted angels. These speculations were not considered unorthodox.
That acceptance changed when certain Jews, the early Christians, connected Jesus with this orthodox Jewish idea.
This explains why these Jews, the first converts to following Jesus the Christ, could simultaneously worship the God of Israel and Jesus, and yet refuse to acknowledge any other god.
Jesus was the incarnate second Yahweh.
In response, as Segal’s work demonstrated, Judaism pronounced the two powers teaching a heresy sometime in the second century A.D.

 

[Butch5]

The very reference in the Bible to the Trinity is Genesis 1:24‭-26 NKJV
Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth the living creature according to its kind: cattle and creeping thing and beast of the earth, each according to its kind”; and it was so. Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”

Can anyone spot it?

That's not a reference to the Trinity. The Hewbrew language uses a device called the Royal We. This is where an individual is referred to in the plural to emphasize majesty. The same term is used of pagan gods which are only one being. Hebrew sometimes uses the plural to express a superlative. This is a Roual We.

 

[Butch5]

@Butch5 -- here is some of Dr. Michael Heiser's review of the book "Two Powers In Heaven" :

Twenty-five years ago, rabbinical scholar Alan Segal produced what is still the major work on the idea of two powers in heaven in Jewish thought. Segal argued that the two powers idea was not deemed heretical
in Jewish theology until the second century C.E.
He carefully traced the roots of the teaching back into the Second Temple era (ca. 200 B.C.E.). Segal was able to establish that the idea’s antecedents were in the Hebrew Bible, specifically passages
like Dan 7:9ff., Exo 23:20-23, and Exo 15:3.
However, he was unable to discern any coherent religious framework from which these passages and others were conceptually derived. Persian dualism was unacceptable as an explanation since neither of the two powers in heaven
were evil.
Segal speculated that the divine warrior imagery of the broader ancient near east likely had some relationship.
In my dissertation (UW-Madison, 2004) I argued that Segal’s instincts were correct. My own work bridges the gap between his book and the Hebrew Bible understood in its Canaanite religious context.
I suggest that the “original model” for the two powers idea was the role of the vice-regent of the divine council.
The paradigm of a high sovereign God (El) who rules heaven and earth through the agency of a second, appointed god (Baal) became part of Israelite religion, albeit with some modification.
For the orthodox Israelite, Yahweh was both sovereign and vice regent—occupying both “slots” as it were at the head of the divine council. The binitarian portrayal of Yahweh in the Hebrew Bible was motivated by this belief.
The ancient Israelite knew two Yahwehs—one invisible, a spirit, the other visible, often in human form. The two Yahwehs at times appear together in the text, at times being distinguished, at other times not.

Early Judaism understood this portrayal and its rationale. There was no sense of a violation of monotheism since either figure was indeed Yahweh. There was no second distinct god running the affairs of the cosmos.
During the Second Temple period, Jewish theologians and writers speculated on an identity for the second Yahweh.
Guesses ranged from divinized humans from the stories of the Hebrew Bible to exalted angels. These speculations were not considered unorthodox.
That acceptance changed when certain Jews, the early Christians, connected Jesus with this orthodox Jewish idea.
This explains why these Jews, the first converts to following Jesus the Christ, could simultaneously worship the God of Israel and Jesus, and yet refuse to acknowledge any other god.
Jesus was the incarnate second Yahweh.
In response, as Segal’s work demonstrated, Judaism pronounced the two powers teaching a heresy sometime in the second century A.D.

That fits with the Christian's using the LXX to prove to the Jews that Jesus was the Christ.

 

[Butch5]

@Butch5 --- you may be interested in a copy of a much treasured book that I purchased for my library
TWO POWERS IN HEAVEN - Early Rabbinic Reports About Christianity and Gnosticism - by Alan F. Segal 1977 (Baylor University Press, 2012)
Alan Segal was a Jewish rabbinic scholar of note and in this book "examines rabbinic evidence about early manifestations of the "two powers" heresy within Judaism.
Segal sheds light upon the development and relationship among early Christianity, Gnosticism, and Merkabah mysticism and demonstrates that belief in the "two powers in heaven" was widespread by the first century,
and may have been a catalyst for the Jewish rejection of early Christianity." from the backcover of book

This book is quoted and referred to by Dr. Michael Heiser in his book "The Unseen Realm"

Genesis 19:24 Then the LORD (YHVH) rained on Sodom and Gomor′rah brimstone and fire from the LORD (YHVH) out of heaven; 25 and he overthrew those cities, and all the valley, and all the inhabitants of the cities,
and what grew on the ground.

Is it in print now?

 

[Butch5]

'Jesus said unto them,
If God were your Father, ye would love me:
for I proceeded forth and came from God;
neither came I of myself,
but He sent me.'
(John 8:32)

Hello @only son,

Thank you for quoting John 8:42 (above). The same is said concerning the Holy Spirit in Joh 15:26,

'But when the Comforter is come,
Whom I will send unto you from the Father,
even the Spirit of truth,
which proceedeth from the Father,
He shall testify of Me: ... '

And again of the Lord Jesus Christ in John 16:27-28:-

For the Father Himself loveth you,
because ye have loved Me,
and have believed that I came out from God.
I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world:
again, I leave the world, and go to the Father.'

See also the testimony of John in his first epistle, (1 John 1:1-3). Glorious word:-

'That which was from the beginning,
.. which we have heard,
.... which we have seen with our eyes,
...... which we have looked upon,
........ and our hands have handled,
.......... of the Word of life;
(For the life was manifested,
.. and we have seen it,
.... and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life,
...... which was with the Father,
........ and was manifested unto us )
That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you,
.. that ye also may have fellowship with us:
.... and truly our fellowship is with the Father,
...... and with His Son Jesus Christ.'

Precious truth!

Thank you
In Christ Jesus
our risen and glorified
Saviour, Lord and Head.
Chris

Jesus saying He came out of God presents difficulties for the Teinity doctrine.

 

[Butch5]

Hi Butch,

I've never been one for labels, what I've said is what I believe. That's why I have no problem with chanting the Apostles Creed when I go to an Anglican church.

Hi Andy,

I wasn't labeling you. I was simply pointing out the differences in the two models.

 

[Downunder]

Is it in print now?

Yes but it is not cheap being in demand and limited to whatever stock is available - I paid $70 AU for my copy through Amazon
do a browser search <book: two powers in heaven> and you should get available stock for sale.
Wonderful scholarship.

 

[Butch5]

Yes but it is not cheap being in demand and limited to whatever stock is available - I paid $70 AU for my copy through Amazon
do a browser search <book: two powers in heaven> and you should get available stock for sale.
Wonderful scholarship.

Thanks! I'll check it out.

 

[Downunder]

The best imagery and understanding that I have for myself of the mystery of the Godhead - The Father and the Son - is the physical example given in our world of twins - same DNA but two distinct persons
sharing the same building blocks or source code ...
we see the same type or analogy given to us again in creation of LIFE when living cells divide to create more living cells and larger living beings - the DNA and mitochondria divide into two cells which become distinct
from each other but yet come out of each other.
As for the Holy Spirit the Bible and Pentecostal baptism of the Holy Spirit reveals to us that the Spirit of God is the operative power and work of both God the Father and God our Saviour here in us and in the World.
sorry folks but it will always be a wonderful mystery for we look into a glass darkly.

Proverbs 8 - Jesus (Wisdom) was with the Father when the Earth was being created and his delight was with the sons of men

 

[Downunder]

The walk to Emmaus with two downhearted disciples

25 And he [Jesus] said to them, “O foolish men, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! 26 Was it not necessary that the Christ should suffer these things and enter into his glory?”
27 And beginning with Moses and all the prophets, he interpreted to them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.

 

[only son]

Firstly - I ask you please accept my humble apology - sincerely, I did not intend to create a confusion or mix-up by mentioning two different verses. But now that we are here - let’s dive deeper into reality.

Dearest - Andyindauk and all other esteemed individuals in the forum.

Please understand…………………….
I would never pretend or imagine - that Trinitarian believers view the Trinity as three separate plural God’s …….. This is not the Trinitarian positional or statement of faith
I do understand the Trinitarian’s dedication and faith - in the way they express it ……
The truth is - Trinitarians wholly affirm that God is Three Different, Distinct, Separated Divine Persons who are “ ALL THREE “ Eternally -
CO- Equal and Eternally CO – Eternal and yet - Eternally ONE SINGLE GOD. - As 3 persons.
My question, however, has been momentarily ignored or just simply lost ………………

THE REASON I WAS PREVIOUSLY ASKING - “ 'If Yahashua was always “ AT “ the right HAND of God , where did he exist before he was located / or placed to be there ? “
Because that the Trinitarian Bible Translation clearly states says concerning Jesus
Mat 22:44 -------- Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool?
Mar 12:36 -------- Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool.
Act 2:34 -------- Sit thou on my right hand, Until I make thy foes thy footstool.
HERE WE SEE that Jesus, the son is not previously or formerly sitting / dwelling on the right hand of God…
God is saying of Jesus - SIT HERE UNTIL THIS TIME COMES
If God is commanding Jesus to sit on his right hand - this means that Jesus was not formerly or previously sitting there - or God would not have cause or reason to command Jesus to relocate himself and then place himself there - ON HIS RIGHT HAND.
JESUS IS BEING ASKED TO BE RE - POSITIONED - TO SIT IN ANOTHER LOCATION - and - this place, “ at the right hand of God “ is not where God intends Jesus to sit for eternity or as a permanent location.

Jesus is only to be there UNTIL a certain time passes. AFTER THIS TIME EXPIRES -
Mar 12:36 -------- Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool.

The idea that ------ Jesus-Holy Spirit is omnipresent, and that there is no where or location for Him, He is everywhere.
This is not what the Bible is saying.. Jesus is relocated to a different seat or place and he is told that he will be seated or present there - O N L Y - until a specific duration of time - until a specific action is completed.
This already proves that Jesus here - was not omnipresent ………………
Can you see, that my proposed question is not answered by simply avoiding the question with an answer that contradicts the very Trinitarian Translation - that Trinitarians are claiming contains their Trinity Doctrine ? ?
This is not an answer - Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool.
This means that Jesus was not always there and that he will not always be there / Jesus is being relocated, passing from one location and moving to another location - a location where he was not previously - and not omnipresent he will be REMOVED and TAKEN OUT, AWAY from the RIGHT HAND OF GOD - once the time has expired………………..

Jesus is told - Sit thou here - on my right hand, until - this time has come.
I simply cannot obtain an answer from the Trinitarian believer…..

And please remember - it was the Pagan King Of Babylon who had mentioned the fourth man in the fiery furnace as - like the Son of God. ”
“Look!” he answered, “I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire; and they are not hurt, and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.” Daniel 3:25 NKJV
This fourth man did not interact and go about communicating and making himself known to the Jews.
The Jews had no idea or concept about the Godhead or the Trinity Doctrine.
And please remember - Abraham WAS NOT paying tithes to Melchizedek king of Salem - this is a complete untruth fabricated by Trinitarians - to prop up their Trinity insertions
….. ! - it is the total opposite
It was the King Melchizedek who gave Abraham a tenth of the bread and wine and the king of Sodom said unto Abram, Give me the “ KIDNAPPED “ persons, and take the goods to thyself.
Abraham never paid tithes nor gave anything to anyone - if you read the verse it is saying
Gen 14:18 And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was the priest of the most high God.

:19 And he “ Melchizedek “ blessed him, “ Abraham “ saying , Blessed be Abram of the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth: :20 And blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand.

And he gave him a TENTH of all. - a tenth of the bread and wine

Melchizedek gave Abraham a tenth of the bread and wine.

Here “ King Melchizedek “ is blessing Abraham and praising God and “ Melchizedek “ then gives Abraham a TENTH of the bread and wine for Abrahams men / servants / workers to eat.


:21 And the king of Sodom said unto Abram, Give me the persons, and take the goods to thyself.
But, Abraham refuses to take anything and simply says….
Gen 14:23 That I will not take from a thread even to a shoelatchet, and that I will not take any thing that is thine, lest thou shouldest say, I have made Abram rich:

:24 Save only that which the young men have eaten, and the portion of the men which went with me, Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre; let them take their portion.

Abraham is referring to the bread and wine that his men were eating - that King Melchizedek had given to Abraham.

The Jews had no concept about the Trinity - there is no a teaching in the Old Testament concerning The Godhead or the Trinity.
There is no mention of - THREE DISTINCT, SEPARATE Co Eternal - Co Equal Persons of God.
The actual translation of ACT 17:29 - is not what the Trinitarians have in their translations
Here is the literal translation - from the Greek

ACT 17:29 - THE OFFSPRING THEREFORE WHO ARE OF GOD NOT SHOULD REGARD GOLD OR SILVER OR STONES ENGRAVED CRAFTS AND THE THOUGHTS OF MAN THE BRIMSTONE ARE THE SAME / SIMILAR / ALIKE.

ACT 17:29 - ORIGINAL GREEK MANUSCRIPTS.
εγενος - ουν - υπαρχοντες - του - Θεου - ουκ - οφειλομεν - νομιζειν - χρυσω - η - αργυρω - η - λιθω - χαραγματι - τεχνης - και - ενθυμησεως - ανθρωπου - το - θειον - ειναι - ομοιον
The Trinitarians took the last three words in the Greek manuscripts = - το - θειον - ειναι
Meaning = the brimstone are the same - and moved these last three words back -
to the beginning of the verse and changed the word Brimstone into the word “ GODHEAD “
Because the Greek word “ θειον - THEION “ always - ALWAYS means brimstone
in every single last place where this word is used in the Bible.
θειον - THEION “ always - ALWAYS means brimstone ..
they moved the last three words saying = το - θειον - ειναι - the brimstone are the same
and changed the word THEION into GODHEAD - because the Greek word for God is “ THEOS

The fact is

all of the words such as - DIVINE DEITY GOD and GODS are all associated as FORMS of the same sounding words that sound somewhat similar and spelling.

all of these words are FORMS of similar meanings - with similar pronunciations

But the only reason that THEION / θειον brimstone is used as the same form of the word dealing and associated with divinity or deity ,
is because the Greek Pagans used the Brimstone upon the very Pagan God's - as a very part of the Pagan God's they were producing and worshiping.....

Their God's / Idols and altars were literally THEION / θειον brimstone.

Brimstone -itself - THEION / θειον - was the makeup and character and substance and very material and physical makeup of their Idols and God's - they worshiped the THEION / θειον brimstone as their Idols were made of Brimstone Theion.


the word is as " divine " in 2 Peter 1: 3-4, "theias - θειας / tʰěː.aː/ is pronounced - it is simply THEIA

Brimstone is TheioN



the word Theion, ending with a " N " Theion is a specific word that always means Brimstone,

there are hundreds of words in the Bible using the Theos related forms of the word God, Divine and Divinity -

NOT A SINGLE ONE OF THEM ARE THE GREEK WORD THEION - except ONE SINGLE TIME when the translators changed and altered the word in Acts 17:29

Never is THEION relating to God or Divinity in the entire Bible - never - just in Acts 17:29.

Of course, all of these forms of the word God are going to be the same forms or similar - and if you are literally worshiping and serving the Brimstone as your God and Altar construction - as a pagan - the word Brimstone will also be included as the form of the word Divinity and Godlike.

But never out of all of the hundreds of words in the Bible using the Theo / Theia related forms of the word God, Divine and Divinity -


NOT A SINGLE ONE OF THEM ARE THE GREEK WORD THEION - except ONE SINGLE TIME when the translators changed and altered the word in Acts 17:29

Never is THEION relating to God or Divinity in the entire Bible - never - just in Acts 17:29.

this was done by moving words around and reconstructing and purposefully changing the message in the sentence.

So what Trinitarians are claiming is that - in him " Jesus " dwelleth all the fullness of the DIVINITY / TRINITY

and claiming that Act 17:29 we ought not to think that the Godhead " TRINITY " is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device.


THIS IS SOMETHING THAT GOD HAD WINKED AT AND IGNORED , AND TURNED A BLIND EYE THOSE DISOBEDIENT IN THE OLD TESTAMENT
WERE IGNORING THE TRINITY AND CONCEPT OF THE GODHEAD. Lord
There was never any laws or commandments stating that “ our Lord God is three separate persons or that our Lord is also God’s son. This simply is not true in the Old Testament
But yet we have an altered and manipulated veres that has been changed from the manuscript message saying that “ we ought not to think that the Godhead " TRINITY " is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device.

And that the Godhead - IS SOMETHING THAT GOD HAD WINKED AT AND IGNORED , AND TURNED A BLIND EYE THOSE DISOBEDIENT IN THE OLD TESTAMENT
So I ask you a new question
Do we go with the original manuscripts that say
ACT 17:29 - THE OFFSPRING THEREFORE WHO ARE OF GOD NOT SHOULD REGARD GOLD OR SILVER OR STONES ENGRAVED CRAFTS AND THE THOUGHTS OF MAN THE BRIMSTONE ARE THE SAME / SIMILAR / ALIKE.
Or the Trinitarian Translation that changes the original manuscripts by saying

Act 17:29 Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the GODHEAD is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device.

:30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:
repent - for abusing the Trinity Godhead with Gold and Silver and Stones of Idols ?

 

[Emmy86]

A

Hello @only son, @Andyindauk, @Butch5,

Reading your responses, I am made so aware that we are treading on holy ground here. How intrusive our own understanding can be upon revealed truth. I can empathise with the words of David in Psalm 139:6:-

'Such knowledge is too wonderful for me;
it is high, I cannot attain unto it.'

I choose to lay my flawed intellect in the dust, and worship God, Who alone knows all things.

Thank you
In Christ Jesus
Chris

Amen and Amen

 

[only son]

I say this in love because the bible really says that Jesus is IN / En Greek " the right of God, exiting out of God.
God's Spirit conceives himself in a woman - the Word made flesh - in the Right Of God - not at or on the right hand. in the manuscripts. the word hand was added / inserted and the Greek word IN replaced with at or on .

this concludes and completes my original unanswered question that is unanswered in the translation.

thank you

Sit EX " ek Greek " my right - sit out of - ex - my Right until I make your enemies a footstool - He is sitting in the Right of God - the eternal word having exited out of the Right of God -

the Greek vs the Canaanite fathers

 

[complete]

Jesus saying He came out of God presents difficulties for the Trinity doctrine.

Hello @Butch5,

Thankfully I am not concerned with defending any doctrine. I am concerned only with what is written. In my flesh dwells no good thing, and my own understanding is flawed. Only God's written word has any validity, I am rejoicing in what is written.

Thank you
In Christ Jesus
Chris