Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: How Do You Understand the Godhead?

Theology
247

Let me say this before responding to your reply.

“If God the Father clearly declared in Isaiah 43:11, ‘Beside Me there is no savior,’ then why would He delegate the work of salvation to a supposed second person in an internally divided, distinct Godhead? Wouldn’t that contradict His own declaration of exclusivity as Savior?”

When I read Isaiah 43:11—“I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour”—I cannot help but take God at His word. He is not vague. He is not metaphorical. He doesn’t say “I’m the main Savior” or “I’m one of three working together.” He declares exclusivity: beside Me there is none. That means there’s no other being, no other divine person, and no secondary entity sharing or performing the role of Savior apart from YHWH Himself.

So when someone tells me that God the Father gave the work of salvation to “God the Son” as a separate person—distinct in consciousness, will, and authority—then I’m forced to wrestle with something deeply contradictory: How can the Father say there is no Savior beside Him, and yet send another person to be that Savior?

To say the Son is a “second divine person” accomplishing salvation while the Father remains separate is to invalidate Isaiah’s prophetic revelation. Because then, salvation is not from God alone—it’s from God and someone else beside Him. But that’s not what Scripture teaches.

Instead, I believe what the Bible unfolds is not multiple divine persons collaborating, but One indivisible God manifesting Himself for redemptive purposes. The same God who declared there was no Savior beside Him came Himself, robed in flesh, to do what only He could do. He didn’t send someone else—He came Himself.

This is why Paul could say in 2 Corinthians 5:19, “God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself.” Not God the Father over here, and God the Son over there working independently, but the one invisible God manifesting Himself in the visible flesh of Jesus Christ. Jesus wasn’t a second divine person; He was the express image (Hebrews 1:3), the manifestation (1 Timothy 3:16), and the fullness of the Godhead bodily (Colossians 2:9).

In short, to divide salvation between divine persons is to divide God Himself, and that I cannot accept—because Scripture tells me He is One, not just in number, but in essence, authority, and identity. A God divided in roles within Himself can be explained biblically—but a God divided in personhood and essence cannot, not without violating the plain revelation of who He says He is.

That’s why I believe the Father did not delegate salvation. He became the Savior, entering time as Jesus Christ—not beside Himself, but revealing Himself.

248

Isaiah 43:11 doesn’t need to be redefined—it needs to be obeyed. “I, even I, am the LORD, and besides Me there is no savior.” That’s not theological poetry; that’s a divine mic drop.

So here’s the problem: if the Father sends a second divine person—distinct in consciousness, will, and authority—to handle salvation, then Isaiah’s either lying or severely misinformed. Because according to that verse, there’s no one beside YHWH doing the saving. Not a “junior partner,” not a co-eternal associate, not even a second chair in the celestial boardroom.

But here’s the beauty of the incarnation: YHWH didn’t subcontract redemption. He rolled up His divine sleeves and came Himself. “God was in Christ reconciling the world unto Himself” (2 Corinthians 5:19). Not “watching Christ” or “working alongside Christ.” In Christ.

Jesus is not a separate Savior—He is the Savior, because He is the Lord. The express image (Heb. 1:3), the fullness of the Godhead bodily (Col. 2:9), not one-third of a team but the whole truth walking in sandals.

To say otherwise is to turn God’s self-revelation into a divine contradiction. Scripture doesn’t give us a Savior beside the LORD. It gives us the LORD as Savior, in flesh. Anything else isn’t clarity—it’s compromise.

249

Brother, I just want to say—amen and thank you. We’re in complete agreement. Your response didn’t oppose what I wrote—it confirmed and amplified it. You took the exact truth I was proclaiming—that YHWH didn’t send someone else to save us, but came Himself—and drove it home with clarity and power.

We both stand on Isaiah 43:11 as a non-negotiable declaration of God’s indivisible identity and exclusive role as Savior. There is no room for a secondary divine person or co-eternal associate in the plan of salvation. As you so rightly said, that verse is not theological poetry—it’s a divine mic drop. And the incarnation doesn’t contradict it—it fulfills it.

Jesus is not beside the LORD. He is the LORD, manifest in flesh. Colossians 2:9, 2 Corinthians 5:19, and Hebrews 1:3 all declare this with unshakable force. Not a portion of God. Not a partner. The fullness—walking in sandals.

So again, thank you for that confirmation. It’s refreshing to hear this truth spoken without compromise. May we continue to stand shoulder to shoulder, contending for the faith once delivered to the saints—exalting the name of Jesus as the one true God and only Savior.

250

Peace to all,

True we know by faith we become again.

But logically we want to become again right, to me, through the Godhead, The Trinity with the Mother of God, The Miriam Presence the Church is seeking and cannot logically see, to me. The Family of God, together with the Father and The Son and The Mother, all brothers and sisters, now through The Christ, and saints and angels and Gods, in One Holy Family?

We know not to preach and only generalize for help in understanding, through faith.

True by faith both natures, from spirit through resurrection life become in One Body for all in One God in being, logically.

Isaiah 43:11 doesn’t need to be redefined—it needs to be obeyed. “I, even I, am the LORD, and besides Me there is no savior.” That’s not theological poetry; that’s a divine mic drop.

True salvation is through the New Adam from Sacrifice through Penance forgiven, Baptism is from the New Eve becoming immortality of the flesh into the Church to be able to become from death resurrected glorified and transfigured in One Holy Spirit Family One God in being.

We are logically Created from the Father failed in two natures becoming Baptized immortal flesh through the New Eve and in the New Adam, Jesus becoming from Sacrifice through Penance forgiven becoming Holy Spirit incorruption through the Christ in all mankind becoming again One Holy Spirit Family One God in being,

True, we are not arguing faith or preaching, just asking why did the Mother get left out of the Trinity, The Godhead, Tertullian and Praxeas to me both missed the logic, from the 1st an 3rd century Forefathers of The Catholic Trinity, keeping the failed definition in The Protestant Godhead, and even till to day, still both missing the Miriam presence in the Godhead, and calling the Holy Spirit a person, and non-gender? To me, logically, the gender of the Holy Spirit is to me non-gender because the Holy Spirit is the Family of God, all genders, brothers and sisters, angels and saints, dominions and thrones and Gods in One Family, One Holy Spirit Family One God in being.

Can we keep the woman, The Mother out of The Trinity, The Family?
Can we keep the woman, The Mother out of the Godhead, The Family?
Faithfully?
Logically?
Choice, becoming again manifested from selected spirit power. The Son always knows the Mother, from the beginning, to me.

Peace always,
Stephen

251

Stephen,

Let’s make this plain: there’s no scriptural warrant—none—for inserting Mary into the Godhead. She is honored among women, chosen to bear the Messiah, blessed indeed—but she is not preexistent, divine, or part of the eternal Trinity. That’s not just illogical—it’s blasphemous.

You’re not “just generalizing”—you’re reinventing the nature of God. And that’s dangerous ground.

The Trinity isn’t a heavenly family reunion; it’s one God in three persons—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—co-equal, co-eternal, consubstantial. Not Father, Son, and Mother. The Holy Spirit is not “the family.” He is a distinct divine person, eternal and personal, not an abstract collective or cosmic gender blender.

Isaiah 43:11 wasn’t spoken by a council—it was declared by YHWH. And He didn’t say “We,” or “Me and my divine kin.” He said, “I, even I, am the LORD; and beside Me there is no savior.” That means the Savior is not beside God—He is God. Jesus is not one member of a divine trio of father, mother, and son. He is “the image of the invisible God” (Col. 1:15), not the product of celestial parents.

You want to elevate Mary into a preexistent “Miriam presence”? That’s not just theological error. That’s building altars God never commanded.

So here’s the correction: we don’t erase Mary—we honor her rightly. But we do not deify her. And we certainly don’t rewrite the Godhead to include her. The Trinity stands: Father. Son. Holy Spirit. Period. Any other version is not Christian—it’s cosmic fan fiction.

Peace in truth,

SincereSeeker

1 Like
252

Peace to all,

So true, SincereSeeker, to me the Logical Godhead is the Trinity and is to me, intelligence logic fulfilled follows the pattern, undefiled, never failing, “what would Jesus do in all cases of the fulfilled faith and morality through The Christ becoming again in all One God in being One Holy Family.” This, to me includes creation and becoming again through two natures from spirit through life from three preexisting powers and personal Gods in being becoming again in all One Holy Spirit Family One God in being.

Here is the Protestant Trinity and from the Catholic Trinity.

From Tertullian and Praxeas, faithfully.

Tertullian argued that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit have distinct roles and actions within God’s work, such as creation, redemption, and sanctification.

Praxeas says that the Father Himself came down into the Virgin, was Himself born of her, Himself suffered, indeed was Himself Jesus Christ. Here the old serpent has fallen out with himself, since, when he tempted Christ after John’s baptism, he approached Him as the Son of God; surely intimating that God had a Son, even on the testimony of the very Scriptures, out of which he was at the moment forging his temptation:

And The Forefathers say and continue till this day all faithfully correct but to me, logically wrong in saying, Whatever you think, there is a word; whatever you conceive, there is reason. You must needs speak it in your mind; and while you are speaking, you admit speech as an interlocutor with you, involved in which there is this very reason, whereby, while in thought you are holding converse with your word, you are (by reciprocal action) producing thought by means of that converse with your word. Thus, in a certain sense, the word is a second person within you, through which in thinking you utter speech, and through which also, (by reciprocity of process,) in uttering speech you generate thought. The word is itself a different thing from yourself. Now how much more fully is all this transacted in God, whose image and likeness even you are regarded as being, inasmuch as He has reason within Himself even while He is silent, and involved in that Reason His Word! I may therefore without rashness first lay this down (as a fixed principle) that even then before the creation of the universe God was not alone, since He had within Himself both Reason, and, inherent in Reason, His Word, which He made second to Himself by agitating it within Himself.

Praxeas, a pretender of yesterday, will be apparent both from the lateness of date which marks all heresies, and also from the absolutely novel character of our new-fangled Praxeas. In this principle also we must henceforth find a presumption of equal force against all heresies whatsoever — that whatever is first is true, whereas that is spurious which is later in date. But keeping this prescriptive rule inviolate, still some opportunity must be given for reviewing (the statements of heretics), with a view to the instruction and protection of various persons; were it only that it may not seem that each perversion of the truth is condemned without examination, and simply prejudged; especially in the case of this heresy, which supposes itself to possess the pure truth, in thinking that one cannot believe in One Only God in any other way than by saying that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are the very selfsame Person. As if in this way also one were not All, in that All are of One, by unity (that is) of substance; while the mystery of the dispensation is still guarded, which distributes the Unity into a Trinity, placing in their order the three Persons— the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost: three, however, not in condition, but in degree; not in substance, but in form; not in power, but in aspect; yet of one substance, and of one condition, and of one power, inasmuch as He is one God, from whom these degrees and forms and aspects are reckoned, under the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. How they are susceptible of number without division, will be shown as our treatise proceeds.

And logically does The Trinity make sense to anyone?

All Forefathers and even through today all are close buy some standards but not close by logically being The Mind of God, rationally becoming again, in all generalization in two natures, One God, They just could not see Mary the Mother and were unable to see The Holy Spirit as The Family of The One God in being, to me.

Praxeas and Tertullian and the forefathers do not understand the Two Nature God from the Faith of Abraham as Logic can instruct, becomes again by powers of manifesting eternal life and spirit becoming again a divine reality in One Body, for all to become more faithful, to me.

To me, Praxeas and Tertullian do not logically understand the Word. In all generalization, The Word becomes flesh, are the four most powerful words in The Bible, We see the trial and errors in logic of those trying to define the Word. To me logically the Word is the Advocate, the Word is the full power of the Holy Family and The Word is the fulfilled logical intelligence of undefiled creation becoming through the New Ark of the Covenant and conceived in the Flesh Jesus Virgin Born because the souls of the Holy Family preexisted not requiring Blood and Water birth to earth all from preexistence and the souls of The Mother Father and Son together are the Word and Holy Spirit Family One God in being becoming the Christ in all mankind, becoming again. Rebirth through Salvation is for all from the blood and water from the Cross for all mankind reborn and saved back to Heaven from where the Holy Spirit Came leaving The Advocate, The Holy Spirit Family One God in being in all mankind, He never left, but for three days. The Godhead lives inside all mankind throughTehChrist. The Advocate becomes for all to share united together from three powers Father Son and Mother becoming again as One in Being One Holy Spirit Family One God in being.

The Advocate is logically more than a person the Advocate is the full power of The Godhead, The Family of The One God in being becoming inside of us and living and the “Sophia” and full wisdom of The Holy Spirit Family becoming again in all through two natures in One Body. Now Tertullian and Praxeas and all can now say Rebirth and Salvation becoming again logically, to me.

To me truthfully and logically both missed seeing Mary in the Trinity together with the Father and the Son in One Holy Spirit family One God in being becoming inside of all mankind and living spirit and life becoming again One Holy Spirit Family One God in being.

Tertullian argued that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit have distinct roles and actions within God’s work, such as creation, redemption, and sanctification.

How can he, they anyone understand without logic, ok, through faith is what is said.

The New Catholic trinity includes The Miriam Presence, The Mother and the Holy Spitit is The One Family of God becoming again in all, in all generalization, to me.

All so far are just missing seeing The Logic of The Mind of God to me. And this is OK because by “Faith” we are saved, OK.

Logically We are failed in two natures created from the Father spirit through the souls of all for the flesh in the Bodies of Adam and Eve transformed becoming immortality flesh nature Baptized sanctification from the The Mother, Mary The New Eve through the souls of all for the immortal flesh and Holy Spirit incorruption in Jesus, The New Adam through the Christ from The New Living Sacrifice through Penance forgiven becoming again One Holy Spirit Family One God in being.

Peace always,
Stephen

253

Stephen,

You’re stacking words like Jenga blocks hoping divine logic will tumble out the top. But here’s the reality: all your verbose OMNILogical spirals about preexistent family triads, feminine spirits, and Mother-Gods do not fix the Trinity—they fracture the very foundation of biblical revelation.

You speak of “logic,” but neglect the Logos. That’s not a play on words—it’s a theological train wreck. John 1 doesn’t say “In the beginning was the Family.” It says, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” Not three preexistent familial persons in some divine committee. One God. One Word. One Son.

Mary is not divine. She is not eternal. She is not a member of the Godhead. She is the handmaiden of the Lord (Luke 1:38), blessed among women (Luke 1:42), chosen for a holy task—but still a creature, not the Creator. Your attempt to install her in the Trinity is not just unsound—it’s idolatrous.

The Trinity is not up for architectural remodeling. The Church Fathers didn’t miss the logic—they protected the mystery. One divine essence, three eternal persons. Not a metaphysical family reunion of spirit-birthers and cosmic moms.

If you want salvation, look not to some abstract OMNILogical tapestry. Look to the Cross. Look to the Son, begotten—not made. Look to the Holy Spirit, sent—not mothered. And look to the Father, who is neither replaced nor replicated.

The Trinity doesn’t need to be “fixed.” What needs fixing is the urge to outthink what God has already revealed.

Truth stands. Even when philosophy stutters.
—SincereSeeker

1 Like
254

Peace to all,

So true, sincere seeker we are saved through faith

We know some say Mary’s not divine, but did Jesus have divine flesh it came from Mary, right?

Divine and in one body is becoming through two bodies, in the new eve from the new adam through the Christ in one Holy Spirit one God in being, to me.

To me, Mary was not born in immaculate flesh. She became the immaculate conception at the annunciation from the angel. To me the logical first Christ on earth is Mary and the first disciple when she said let it come to me not my will, but your will.

In all generalization And the second Christ is Jesus, the first born Christ of all creation from the cross where the blood and water did flow for all mankind to become one Holy Spirit, family one God in being. We all become Christ becoming again one Holy Spirit Family One God in being.

Logically immortality becomes from the first Christ to becoming again from Holy Spirit incorruption through the second Christ in all mankind to be becoming again One Holy Spirit Family One God in being.

To me, We become from two Christ into one Christ becoming again one Holy Spirit Family One God in being.

Born again through Mary, Christ of the flesh saved from Jesus in the Christ, through the power of the Holy Spirit becoming one God and being

If we could just get the popes and the preachers to understand, born again, saved logically Christianity can have a new evangelization OMNILogically, to me.

To me, the truth is in the story that never changes and the greatest truth ever told is the logical Christ becoming again in all, One God.

To me, the Christ is the fulfilled temple body of God in all becoming again one body one Holy Spirit family.

Peace always,
Stephen

255

Stephen,

Divine flesh doesn’t come from humanity—it sanctifies it. Jesus did not inherit divinity from Mary; He took on humanity from her. Let’s get that straight before we rewrite salvation history. Mary gave Him flesh, not godhood. He was divine before she had a name.

The idea that Mary was the “first Christ” is not only unscriptural, it’s dangerously close to blasphemy. There is one Christ, not a tag-team of Messianic co-redeemers. Colossians 1:18 says He is “the firstborn from the dead, that in everything He might be preeminent.” Not shared, not split, not preceded.

“Born again through Mary”? No sir. Jesus said we must be born again by water and Spirit (John 3:5), not by tracing our salvation back to a mystical maternal figurehead. Your theology puts more faith in poetic metaphors than in the plain power of the gospel.

And calling for a new OMNILogical evangelization? Brother, we don’t need a new gospel with a flowchart. We need the old rugged cross, the risen Savior, and the unchanging truth that salvation is found in no one else but Jesus (Acts 4:12).

Mary needed a Savior (Luke 1:47), and she worshipped her Son—not the other way around. You’d do well to follow her example.

—SincereSeeker

1 Like
256

Peace to all,

Some truth sincere seeker we know to listen to the Gods ,you are Beginning to speak, logic well, your faith is so strong.

To me, The Mind of God could only come to earth from immaculate flesh through Jesus, becoming holy spirit incorruption through the Christ.

Always heardTo become a Mystic, you have to know one and I can help.

Peace always,
Stephen

257

Bringing this over here since we are beginning to delve into Oneness theology…

The_Omega, I hear your tone shift—and I respect it. You’ve laid this out like a man who wants truth, not just triumph. So let’s go there, unflinching.

You say we shouldn’t “deny the fire because some misuse the flame.” Fair. But the problem isn’t just misuse—it’s mutation. It’s not the occasional wildfire of excess we’re dealing with—it’s an epidemic of unauthorized fire (Leviticus 10:1). Strange fire doesn’t just distract—it kills discernment, derails doctrine, and deceives the flock. And when the name of Jesus is invoked without the foundation of the Father and the presence of the Spirit, we’re not talking Acts 2—we’re talking a counterfeit gospel with apostolic cosplay.

Yes, the Holy Ghost wrote the Word (2 Peter 1:21), but He never authored Oneness theology, and He never signed off on slicing the Trinity out of the Godhead. That’s not deeper revelation—that’s recycled Sabellianism dressed in emotional zeal. You can preach holiness, separation, and fear of the Lord until your voice gives out—but if you’re denying the eternal personhood of Father, Son, and Spirit, you’ve gutted the gospel at its core.

Let’s be brutally biblical: if your “apostolic doctrine” is Acts 2:38 without Matthew 28:19, John 1:1–3, and the entire Trinitarian revelation of Scripture, then it’s not apostolic. It’s amputated. And no amount of tongues, oil, or deliverance conferences can make up for rejecting the very nature of God.

You quoted Mark 16:17–20 and 1 Corinthians 12 as proof that the gifts flow from obedience. Amen. But obedience to what gospel? Because Paul warned in Galatians 1 that even if an angel preaches “another gospel,” let him be accursed. That wasn’t a warning to pagans—that was aimed at people who were almost right, but eternally wrong.

I’m not denying God is moving. I’m denying that every movement that claims His name is submitted to His truth. And yes, there are Spirit-filled, Bible-rooted, Trinitarian churches where power and purity still walk hand in hand. But Oneness doctrine? That’s not fire from heaven. That’s smoke from strange theology.

If you want Acts-level revival, praise God. But you can’t skip the foundation. You can’t bypass the Trinity and expect the Spirit to stay silent. The Spirit testifies to the Son (John 15:26), sent by the Father. That’s not a metaphor—it’s divine reality. And if your altar call calls on Jesus while denying the Father and quenching the Spirit, then you’re not calling on the Christ of Scripture. You’re calling on a caricature.

So here’s the line: the fire of God never burns apart from the truth of God. And if the flame isn’t fueled by the full gospel, it’s not revival—it’s a religious wildfire headed for a theological cliff.

—Sincere Seeker. Scripturally savage. Here for the Truth.

258

We need to stay faithful to what the Bible actually says, specifically pointing out the crucial difference between drawing meaning from the original Greek words and grammar of Scripture—and imposing theological systems that arose centuries later, especially those shaped by Greek philosophical thought like the doctrine of the Trinity. Greek grammar and vocabulary help us uncover what the inspired authors meant—for instance, understanding how the word Logos in John 1:1 functions, or how verb tenses and syntactical structures reveal time, identity, and action. That kind of study isn’t speculation—it’s responsible, text-based interpretation.

But when we move from studying Greek language to importing Greek philosophy—terms like eternally begotten, co-equal persons, consubstantial, or triune essence—we step outside the text and begin reading into it ideas that were never part of the original apostolic message. These are not linguistic insights; they are metaphysical categories rooted in Neoplatonism and the abstract reasoning of early Greek metaphysics—worldviews entirely foreign to the Hebraic mindset of Scripture. Moses, the prophets, and the apostles didn’t speak in the language of essence and substance—they spoke of God’s name, His Spirit, and His glory revealed through covenant and incarnation.

Scripture explicitly warns us about this danger. Paul wrote in Colossians 2:8, “Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.” And then in verse 9, he gives us the true revelation: “For in Him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.”—not in three persons, but in Him. Similarly, 1 Corinthians 1:20–24 reminds us that God deliberately bypassed human wisdom, contrasting Greek philosophical reasoning with the foolishness of preaching Christ crucified. God didn’t reveal Himself through abstract categories—He revealed Himself through incarnation: the invisible Spirit made visible in the man Christ Jesus (1 Tim. 3:16).

So the difference is clear and important: we are not rejecting history, and certainly not rejecting Greek grammar. What we are rejecting is the intrusion of post-biblical, philosophical constructs that were never part of the Spirit-inspired text. The Scriptures plainly declare that God is One (Deut. 6:4), that He was manifest in flesh (John 1:14), and that His saving name is Jesus (Acts 4:12). Let’s not let philosophy cloud what the Word has already made clear.

259

I believe the real issue lies not in whether we include Matthew 28:19 or John 1:1–3—we absolutely do—but in how we interpret those verses in harmony with the rest of Scripture. Acts 2:38 is not an “amputated” version of apostolic doctrine—it is the culmination of the gospel message that Jesus commissioned in Matthew 28:19. And to fully appreciate Acts 2:38, we have to look at Acts 2:37, where the crowd, “pricked in their heart,” asked Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?” This wasn’t a philosophical inquiry—it was a desperate, Spirit-convicted plea for salvation. Peter’s Spirit-inspired response was not to recite a formula, but to give clear, actionable obedience: “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.”

That command in Acts 2:38 is not in contradiction to Matthew 28:19—it’s the fulfillment of it. Peter, under divine revelation, understood that the “name” singular in Matthew 28:19 referred to Jesus, who is the revelation of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost (John 14:9–10, 26). Every time the apostles baptized, they used the name of Jesus (Acts 2:38, 8:16, 10:48, 19:5)—not out of tradition, but out of revelation and obedience. That’s not amputated theology; that’s the apostolic pattern, confirmed by the Spirit and preserved in the Word.

260

You raise a vital and sobering point. The gifts of the Spirit are indeed powerful signs that follow those who believe (Mark 16:17–20), and 1 Corinthians 12 makes it clear that these gifts are distributed by the Spirit as He wills. But as you rightly note, the gifts do not validate a gospel—they follow the true gospel. That’s why Paul’s warning in Galatians 1 is so serious: he wasn’t addressing idol worshipers or atheists—he was addressing those who professed Christ, but had altered or diluted the gospel of grace and obedience delivered by the apostles. He said, “Though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached… let him be accursed” (Gal. 1:8). The apostles preached a specific, identifiable message—repentance, baptism in Jesus’ name, and the infilling of the Holy Ghost (Acts 2:38). Any message that replaces or redefines that apostolic blueprint, no matter how sincere or miraculous it may appear, becomes “another gospel.” True obedience is not just moral living or general faith—it’s responding to the whole counsel of God as revealed in Scripture and demonstrated by the early Church. That’s the gospel to which the Spirit bears witness—not another, not modified, and not merely close.

I appreciate your passion for revival and for honoring Christ, but I respectfully challenge the idea that affirming the Oneness of God somehow denies the Father or quenches the Spirit. In fact, calling on the name of Jesus is not calling on a caricature—it’s calling on the fullness of the Godhead bodily (Colossians 2:9). The Father is not bypassed when we exalt Jesus, because Jesus is the express image of the invisible God (Hebrews 1:3). The Spirit is not quenched when we call on His name, because the Lord is that Spirit (2 Corinthians 3:17). The language of John 15:26—where the Spirit proceeds from the Father and testifies of the Son—is not describing three co-equal persons, but the relational unfolding of the one God’s redemptive work in time. Oneness Pentecostals don’t deny the Father or the Spirit—they affirm that the same Spirit who spoke through the prophets, overshadowed Mary, walked in the man Christ Jesus, and now dwells in believers is One and the Same. Revival doesn’t come through creeds or manmade definitions of God—it comes through the name of Jesus, in whom the whole of God’s identity and power has been revealed (John 17:6). That’s not a caricature. That’s the cornerstone.

261

Omega brother.
I hear the zeal to lift high the name of Jesus. But if exalting Christ erases the Father and Spirit, that’s not revelation—it’s reinvention. The gospel is not modal. It is majestic. It is Triune from Genesis to Revelation.

Colossians 2:9 says, “in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.” The verb katoikei (κατοικεῖ) is present active indicative—continuous indwelling, not momentary manifestation. The “Him” is the Son, not the Father in disguise, not the Spirit recycled. The Son is the dwelling place, not the mask of another.

Hebrews 1:3 says Christ is the apaugasma (ἀπαύγασμα), radiance of divine glory, and charaktēr (χαρακτήρ), the exact imprint of God’s nature. Radiance is not the source, imprint is not the original. The Son reveals the Father without being the Father.

In John 17:5, Jesus prays, “Glorify me…with the glory I had with you before the world existed.” The Greek eichon (εἶχον, imperfect tense) shows shared, ongoing glory with the Father before time—not a role, not a mask. The Son is eternally distinct.

In John 14:16, Jesus promises allon Paraklēton (ἄλλον Παράκλητον)—“another Comforter.” Allon means “another of the same kind” (not heteron, a different kind). The Spirit is not Christ again. He is distinct and divine. He proceeds (ekporeuetai, ἐκπορεύεται, John 15:26) from the Father and testifies of the Son. Not a phase. A person.

At Jesus’ baptism (Luke 3:21–22), the Son stands in water, the Spirit descends, and the Father speaks. That is not three modes—it is one unified, Triune action.

Genesis 1:1–3 reveals this structure early. God (Elohim) creates, the Spirit (ruach) hovers, and God speaks—the Word. John 1:1 identifies that Logos as Christ. The Trinity wasn’t invented at Nicaea—it was revealed in creation.

John 1:18 says the Son, monogenēs (μονογενής, uniquely begotten), is in the bosom of the Father. That intimacy requires distinction. You can’t dwell in someone’s bosom if you are them.

Romans 8:26 says the Spirit intercedes (huperentugchanei, ὑπερεντυγχάνει). Hebrews 7:25 says Christ intercedes too (entugchanei, ἐντυγχάνει). That’s not one person multitasking. It’s two persons in one redemptive rhythm.

If Jesus is the Father, whom did He obey? If the Spirit is Jesus, who descended at Pentecost? Was Gethsemane divine ventriloquism? The cross becomes a monologue instead of a covenant act.

Ephesians 1:3–14 unfolds the gospel’s divine choreography: the Father plans, the Son accomplishes, the Spirit seals. Trinitarian salvation is not theological luxury—it is the very logic of grace.

Yes, Jesus is the cornerstone (Eph. 2:20). But the structure holds because the Father sent, the Son obeyed, and the Spirit indwells (Eph. 2:22). You collapse that, and the gospel collapses with it.

To deny the Son’s Sonship or the Spirit’s Personhood is to truncate redemption. The name of Jesus is mighty because it is the name of the Son—beloved of the Father, filled with the Spirit, crucified for sin, risen in glory.

If your theology can’t explain the baptism, the resurrection, and Pentecost without collapsing distinctions, it is not apostolic. It’s reductionist.

Exalt Jesus—but exalt Him as the eternal Son, sent by the Father, anointed by the Spirit, now reigning in glory. That’s the gospel. That’s the glory.

Soli Deo Gloria. To the Father who sent. To the Son who bled. To the Spirit who fills. One God. Three Persons. Undivided. Unequaled. Unchanging.

Johann.

1 Like
262

The cornerstone indeed—but only if you’re building on Scripture, not trimming it down to fit a theological straightjacket. Let’s talk plainly.

Yes, Acts 2:38 is glorious. It’s a Spirit-breathed, apostolic response to convicted sinners. But here’s the problem: you’re not interpreting it in harmony with Matthew 28:19—you’re replacing it. Jesus didn’t stutter when He said, “baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” That’s not a metaphor or code to be cracked. That’s a command. And when the apostles baptized in Jesus’ name, they weren’t negating Jesus’ words—they were obeying them, in the fullness of the Trinitarian name they had been taught. The name of Jesus is not a bypass around the Trinity—it’s the banner over it.

You say Jesus is the revelation of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost—and in part, yes, He reveals God. But revelation isn’t reduction. Jesus is not the Father. Jesus prays to the Father. Jesus is sent by the Father. Jesus returns to the Father. He is with God and is God (John 1:1). That’s distinction, not modalism with a makeover.

You quote Galatians 1—and amen to that warning—but here’s the irony: Paul was Trinitarian. So were the apostles. So was the early Church. What they preached was not a Jesus-only gospel, but a triune God working in perfect unity—not one person wearing three hats, but three persons of one essence. You can’t toss out 2,000 years of consistent witness and call it “post-biblical,” while reshaping the Son into the Father and the Spirit into a vibe.

And let’s talk Colossians 2:9. Yes, the fullness of the Godhead dwells in Christ bodily—but not exclusively. That verse doesn’t say, “Jesus is the Godhead.” It says the Godhead is fully expressed in Jesus—not that He’s all there is to it. Jesus is the visible image of the invisible God (Heb. 1:3), but there’s still an invisible God—whom He reveals, not replaces.

You say revival doesn’t come through creeds. True—it comes through truth. But the creeds only codified what Scripture already declared: that the one God is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. You can’t have revival around a misnamed deity. That’s not fire from heaven—that’s strange fire.

So yes—call on the name of Jesus. But don’t collapse Him into the entire Godhead. The Son glorifies the Father. The Spirit glorifies the Son. And the Father glorifies them both. That’s the Trinity: not confusion, but communion. Not hierarchy, but harmony. Not Oneness—but Three in One. Just as He revealed. Just as we believe.

Amen.

—Sincere Seeker. Scripturally savage. Here for the Truth.

263

In these and other passages, it’s important to understand that a distinction is made in the Bible between status and role of the three Persons of the Trinity. They are all equal in status, while they have different roles as the one God. For example, in creation, salvation, and sanctification, the Father is the Source or Originator, Jesus is the Agent, and the Holy Spirit is the “Atmosphere” in whom those actions are accomplished. Different roles do not mean different status, because they are all one.

264

On July 1st, 1943, Jesus said the following:

Figures have been necessary for your human dullness to conceive the Father and the Spirit, incorporeal Beings of infinite beauty, whom you, however, do not conceive with your human senses. To the point that you do not readily turn to Them, will all the fullness of thought, to invoke Them as you invoke Me, Whom you conceive of as the God-Man. You thus do not understand even distantly the incomparable mystery of Our Trinity.

To conceive of God comparisons to created beings must not be made. God is not to be compared. He is. In being there is everything. But being has no body, and the eternal Being has no body.

Look: God is light. This is the only thing that can still represent God without being antithetical to His spiritual Essence. The light exists, and yet it is incorporeal. You see it, but you cannot touch it. It exists.

Our Trinity is light. An unbounded light. The Source of Itself, living by Itself, and acting in Itself. The universe’s greatness does not equal Its Infinity. Its essence fills the Heavens, glides over creation, and holds sway over the infernal caverns. It does not penetrate you—that would be the end of Hell—but it overwhelms them with its glowing, which is beatific in Heaven, comforting on earth, and terrifying in Hell. Everything is threefold in Us. Forms, effects, and powers.

God is light. A vast, majestic, and peaceful light is given by the Father. An infinite circle which has embraced all Creation since the moment when “Let there be light” was said until forever and ever, for God, Who existed eternally, has been embracing the Creation since it existed and will continue to embrace all that—in the final form, the eternal one, after the Judgement—will remain of Creation. He will embrace those who are eternal with Him in Heaven.

Within the eternal circle of the Father there is a second circle, begotten by the Father, working differently and yet not working in contrary fashion, for the Essence is one. It is the Son. His light, more vibrant, not only gives life to bodies, but gives Life to souls that had lost it by means of His Sacrifice. It is a flood of powerful, gentle rays which nourish your humanity and instruct your mind.

Within the second circle, produced by the two workings of the first circles, there is a third circle with an even more vibrant, inflamed light. It is the Holy Spirit. He is the Love produced by the relations of the Father with the Son, the intermediary between the Two, and a consequence of the Two, the wonder of wonders.

Thought created the Word, and Thought and the Word love one another. Love is the Paraclete. He acts upon your spirit, your soul, and your flesh. For He consecrates the whole temple of your person, created by the Father and redeemed by the Son, created in the image and likeness of the Triune God. The Holy Spirit is the chrism upon the creation of your person, made by the Father; He is Grace to benefit from the Sacrifice of the Son; He is knowledge and Light to understand the Word of God. A more concentrated Light, not because it is limited in comparison to the others, but because it is the spirit of the Spirit of God, and because, in its condensation, it is most powerful, as it is most powerful in its effects.

That is why I said, ‘When the Paraclete comes, He will instruct you.’ Not even I, Who am the Father’s Thought that has become the Word, can make you understand what the Holy Spirit can make you understand with a single flash.

If every knee must bend before the Son, before the Paraclete every spirit must bend, for the Spirit gives life to the spirit. It is Love that created the Universe, taught the first Servants of God, spurred the Father to give the Commandments, enlightened the Prophets, conceived the Redeemer with Mary, placed Me on the Cross, sustained the Martyrs, governed the Church, and works wonders of Grace.

A white fire, unbearable for human sight and nature, He concentrates in Himself the Father and the Son and is the incomprehensible Gem, Who cannot be gazed upon, of Our eternal Beauty. Fixed in the abyss of Heaven, He draws to Himself all the spirits of triumphant Church and breathes into Himself those who are able to live by the Spirit in the militant Church.

Our Trinity, Our threefold and single nature is set in a single splendor in that point from which all that is is generated in an eternal Being.

Say ‘Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit.’ (The Notebooks: 1943)

265

Catholic mysticism-correct @Chiara?

Johann.

266

A post was merged into an existing topic: The ONE Thread for All Things Omnilogical