What was the appearance of the three [LORD,lords] who visited Abraham.

[7djengo7]

Saying that God is Reason (or Logic) is no different - no different at all so far as I see it - than saying that God is Love. You don't have a problem with saying that do you?

I don't have a problem with saying it, since the Bible says it. But, I admit, I'm a bit hazy as to what the Bible means by it. Well, let's put it this way: when I consider that creatures love -- and often love evil -- it makes me think that not all love could be the love that the Bible says God is. But in the text, no "some" or "all" quantifier is used next to "love", as in "God is some, but not all love," or "God is all love". Yeah, when it comes down to it, unfortunately, I'm definitely not well-studied or certain on the question of what exactly is meant by that.

 

[Bladerunner]

"Christ hater?"

Why "was" past tense? If that is an accurate translation, then the word had been God but is no longer God, thus the word is something else after it ceased to be God.

What is the word now?

Logos means message or communication or saying. The message was God

Why pollute scripture?

Why change what GOD has already inspired. Rem, Changing the WORD of GOD (any word) is spoken against in Rev 22, 18-19.

 

[Bladerunner]

I don't have a problem with saying it, since the Bible says it. But, I admit, I'm a bit hazy as to what the Bible means by it. Well, let's put it this way: when I consider that creatures love -- and often love evil -- it makes me think that not all love could be the love that the Bible says God is. But in the text, no "some" or "all" quantifier is used next to "love", as in "God is some, but not all love," or "God is all love". Yeah, when it comes down to it, unfortunately, I'm definitely not well-studied or certain on the question of what exactly is meant by that.

You have to look at the words as they at that time would have heard (interpreted) it. Not what we want to make it say. for We are not supposed to be living on the World....and that is what most people do every day.

 

[Clete]

I don't have a problem with saying it, since the Bible says it. But, I admit, I'm a bit hazy as to what the Bible means by it. Well, let's put it this way: when I consider that creatures love -- and often love evil -- it makes me think that not all love could be the love that the Bible says God is. But in the text, no "some" or "all" quantifier is used next to "love", as in "God is some, but not all love," or "God is all love". Yeah, when it comes down to it, unfortunately, I'm definitely not well-studied or certain on the question of what exactly is meant by that.

I'm very certain that there isn't anyone on Earth who is certain on the question of what EXACTLY is meant by, "God is Love".

"God is loving" is a lot easier, obviously, but "God is Love"? What could that mean? I do not know. I mean, there's plenty to say about various things in that direction, but none of it really settles the question.

One of the things I happen to like very much about my theology proper is that when there are mysteries that are beyond my grasp, they never take the form of absurdities. That is, I don’t have to believe that God is somehow arbitrarily just or dynamically immutable or any other such contradictory nonsense. “God is Love” is mysterious, yes, but it is not irrational. It’s profound, not dumbfounding. It’s a truth that stretches the mind, but not one that breaks it.

And that’s actually one of the reasons I find “God is Reason” to be such a powerful and clarifying truth. Love becomes meaningful only when it is grounded in something rational, something with coherence, purpose, and moral substance. Without reason, love could be anything, even the kind of love that leads a person to embrace what is evil. Pete Buttigieg actually believes he loves his "husband". The fact is that he hates both him and himself and is destroying both. The kind of love that God is, on the other hand, must be perfectly rational, pure, righteous, principled and truly relational.

So I think the statement, “God is Love” and the statement, “God is Reason” are not just both true, they actually require each other. If God were not Reason, then His love would lose its moral clarity. If God were not Love, then His reason would be cold and impersonal (i.e. not love at all). When we see both as essential to His being, when we see love as rational and reason as loving, then perhaps we start to glimpse something of what these deep statements might really mean.

 

[Insight me]

in another great forum here at heologyonline there is a wonderful page entitled " The results of the Jews rejection and crucifixion of Jesus "

in this forum I explain that in the Catholic Translation and also the Greek Septuagint there are hundreds of places where the Hebrew words “ LORD “ and " ANOINTING " are used throughout the Hebrew Old Testament

and of these hundreds of instances, the Septuagint and Catholic Douay Rheims replaces the word ANOINTING with the Greek word Christ in selected passages where the translators feel and consider that the passages is a prophecy or reference to Jesus in the future

meaning

in the Septuagint and Catholic Douay Rheims they directly insert the Greek word Christ into the Old Testament when translating it to Greek and also English

the word Christ literally means _ " THE ANOINTING ... " "

the Translators simply left this Greek word as : Christ " instead of translating the word into Italian or English.... unless a Christian can understand simply basic facts such as these they will never understand or comprehend what I was trying to explain,

a well meaning individual here was replying but did not feel very comfortable engaging on the conversation, I hope this individual can someday understand and verify the things I have said by looking directly to the scriptures instead of making a list or a chart of the thousands of denominations or drawing out a mental triangle

may the Anointing alway be with you. in love

 

[Clete]

in another great forum here at heologyonline there is a wonderful page entitled " The results of the Jews rejection and crucifixion of Jesus "

in this forum I explain that in the Catholic Translation and also the Greek Septuagint there are hundreds of places where the Hebrew words “ LORD “ and " ANOINTING " are used throughout the Hebrew Old Testament

and of these hundreds of instances, the Septuagint and Catholic Douay Rheims replaces the word ANOINTING with the Greek word Christ in selected passages where the translators feel and consider that the passages is a prophecy or reference to Jesus in the future

meaning

in the Septuagint and Catholic Douay Rheims they directly insert the Greek word Christ into the Old Testament when translating it to Greek and also English

the word Christ literally means _ " THE ANOINTING ... " "

the Translators simply left this Greek word as : Christ " instead of translating the word into Italian or English.... unless a Christian can understand simply basic facts such as these they will never understand or comprehend what I was trying to explain,

a well meaning individual here was replying but did not feel very comfortable engaging on the conversation, I hope this individual can someday understand and verify the things I have said by looking directly to the scriptures instead of making a list or a chart of the thousands of denominations or drawing out a mental triangle

may the Anointing alway be with you. in love

Yes, Christ literally means “Anointed One,” and it is used in places to translate the Hebrew Mashiach (Messiah). However, the idea that the Septuagint or Douay-Rheims arbitrarily replace the Hebrew word “anointing” with Christ everywhere is simply false. Translators render Christos only where the context clearly points to the promised Messiah, not in every instance of the word “anointing.” To claim otherwise shows ignorance or deception.

Also, “LORD” (YHWH) and “anointing” are entirely different terms and concepts. YHWH is God’s personal name; it is never interchangeable with “anointing” or “Christ.” Conflating these reveals a theological confusion that undermines Christian doctrine or else, once again, an intentional deception.

Most importantly, reducing the person and work of Christ to nothing more than “the anointing” misses the entire biblical witness of His deity, incarnation, and redemptive mission. The New Testament reveals Christ as fully God and fully man, the eternal Son of God, not merely a title meaning “anointed.”

John 8:24 Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for if you do not believe that I am He, you will die in your sins.”​

John 8:28 Then Jesus said to them, “When you lift up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am He, and that I do nothing of Myself; but as My Father taught Me, I speak these things.​

Revelation 1:18 I am He who lives, and was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore. Amen. And I have the keys of Hades and of Death.​

Further, your repeated emphasis on “the Anointing” along with the dismissive comment about the “drawing out a mental triangle” are clear signs not only of hostility toward the biblical doctrine of the Trinity but also of adherence to the Oneness Pentecostal heresy. This rejection of biblical theology distorts the true nature of God as revealed in Scripture and leads to serious theological error. It is crucial to recognize and reject these errors if one truly desires to understand and honor the full biblical revelation of Jesus Christ.

 

[Insight me]

The word "Christ" appears 39 total times in the Septuagint Old Testament


The word "Christ" appears 8 total times in the Catholic Douay Rheims Old Testament

exactly as I previously mentioned -

I agree --- not to arbitrarily and wildly replace the words - but to take the Hebrew words " LORD " and ANOINTING and replace these two words with the Greek word Christ ....... where the translators feel and consider that the passages is a prophecy or reference to Jesus in the future

I honestly did not want to have a side line, rear lobe discussion about the Trinity. If the Trinity is something you would like to discuss... I am patiently waiting for a full brain, frontaly and rearwardly brain with both hemispheres, as full discussion and not a wink, wink cue card, hint and run.

I was simply saying of the hundreds of instances where these two word = ANOINTING and LORD appear in the manuscripts of the Hebrew Masoretic Text, the Septuagint and Catholic Douay Rheims replaces the words = ANOINTING and LORD with the Greek word Christ.

we would not know that the original Hebrew word was -ANOINTING or LORD unless we read the Masoretic Text,

in selected passages where the translators feel and consider that the passages is a prophecy or reference to Jesus in the future ..... the Greek word Christ is inserted to replace LORD and ANOINTING.

only . only where the translators feel, and personally consider that the passages is a prophecy or reference to Jesus in the future.


i believe this is unfair to the Hebrew men and women of the Old Testament who knew nothing of Jesus the Son of God.

does this not paint an untruthful picture of the Jews who rejected Jesus and also undermines the words of Jesus and scripture that explains that the coming of Jesus was completely hidden from the Jews ..

Mat 13:35 I will utter things hidden from the foundation of the world.
1Co 2:7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, a wisdom which is hidden, which God ordained before the world
Eph 3:9 the mystery which hath been hidden from eternity in God who created all things:

Col 1:26 The mystery which hath been hidden from ages and generations, but now is manifested to his saints,


I hope to establish an better understanding of my original comment and hope that my words are not lost and misrepresented by those who refuse to read and clarify basic English

 

[Clete]

The word "Christ" appears 39 total times in the Septuagint Old Testament


The word "Christ" appears 8 total times in the Catholic Douay Rheims Old Testament

exactly as I previously mentioned -

I agree --- not to arbitrarily and wildly replace the words - but to take the Hebrew words " LORD " and ANOINTING and replace these two words with the Greek word Christ ....... where the translators feel and consider that the passages is a prophecy or reference to Jesus in the future

I honestly did not want to have a side line, rear lobe discussion about the Trinity. If the Trinity is something you would like to discuss... I am patiently waiting for a full brain, frontaly and rearwardly brain with both hemispheres, as full discussion and not a wink, wink cue card, hint and run.

I was simply saying of the hundreds of instances where these two word = ANOINTING and LORD appear in the manuscripts of the Hebrew Masoretic Text, the Septuagint and Catholic Douay Rheims replaces the words = ANOINTING and LORD with the Greek word Christ.

we would not know that the original Hebrew word was -ANOINTING or LORD unless we read the Masoretic Text,

in selected passages where the translators feel and consider that the passages is a prophecy or reference to Jesus in the future ..... the Greek word Christ is inserted to replace LORD and ANOINTING.

only . only where the translators feel, and personally consider that the passages is a prophecy or reference to Jesus in the future.


i believe this is unfair to the Hebrew men and women of the Old Testament who knew nothing of Jesus the Son of God.

does this not paint an untruthful picture of the Jews who rejected Jesus and also undermines the words of Jesus and scripture that explains that the coming of Jesus was completely hidden from the Jews ..

Mat 13:35 I will utter things hidden from the foundation of the world.
1Co 2:7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, a wisdom which is hidden, which God ordained before the world
Eph 3:9 the mystery which hath been hidden from eternity in God who created all things:

Col 1:26 The mystery which hath been hidden from ages and generations, but now is manifested to his saints,


I hope to establish an better understanding of my original comment and hope that my words are not lost and misrepresented by those who refuse to read and clarify basic English

@Insight me,
So, I'm running very low on patience with this literal stupidity. I wrote what follows and then ran it through Chat GPT to help tone down my irritation with this nonsense because I'm trying my best not to create needless enemies. This, however, is your last opportunity to respond directly to the arguments made below. If you choose to simply repeat yourself again, I'll simply put you on ignore and pretend you no longer exist.



You're doubling down on a flawed argument rooted in a fundamental misunderstanding of translation, textual history, and biblical theology. You're trying to make a case from translation choices without understanding the texts themselves or the doctrines you are casually dismissing.

The word Christ (Greek Christos) is a title, not name. It means “anointed one.” That much is simple. However, your claim that Christ is used in place of both anointing and LORD in the Septuagint and Douay-Rheims is completely inaccurate. The Greek Christos never replaces the divine name YHWH. That substitution never occurs. YHWH is God's personal name. Christ is the title of the prophesied Messiah. They are not interchangeable. Conflating the two shows a basic confusion between the identity of God and the role of the Messiah or else an intentional misrepresentation - I believe it to be the later.

Your concern that it is "unfair" to the Jews for the Old Testament to contain prophetic references to Christ misses the purpose of prophecy entirely. Just because a prophecy is not fully understood at the time it is given does not make it deceptive or dishonest. God did not require Israel to predict every detail. He required faith in what He had revealed. Jesus said the Scriptures testified of Him. Paul used the Old Testament to reason that Jesus was the Christ. The mystery of the Body of Christ was indeed hidden, as Paul states clearly, but the prophesied coming of the Messiah to Israel was revealed in several ways. You are confusing prophecy with mystery and using that confusion to criticize translators for decisions they did not actually make.

Furthermore, your repeated focus on “the Anointing” and your sarcastic remarks about the Trinity (e.g. references to “mental triangles” and “rear lobes”) are not neutral observations. They reveal the theological lens you are working from. It is the language of Oneness Pentecostalism, which denies the distinct personhood of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. This is not a harmless difference of opinion. It is a rejection of who God has revealed Himself to be.

If you want to discuss the text, that is great, I'd love it. However, what you are presenting is not careful exegesis, it is wordplay wrapped in confusion and served with a side of mockery toward essential Christian doctrine. That is not how truth is handled by honest people. Truth requires clarity, precision, and a willingness to rightly divide the word of God rather than twist it into a system that fits your preference. You sound exactly like a cult leader because you use the exact same techniques to mold the scripture into whatever shape your doctrine demands of it.

 

[Insight me]

Greetings

thank you " Clete " for taking the time and for the patience


I really have no answers or feel need for opportunity to crisscross between Trinity doxicals and everything else in between

i honestly was not focusing upon the Trinity

perhaps you are now where I found myself a few years ago when I was heavily entrenched in many, many hundreds of discussions with wonderful brothers and sister in the Lord.

I know your heart and mind is racing like a burning fire, consuming and devouring every source of fuel in your blazing path, you consume fuel very quickly without knowing everything you are devouring.

My original comments were not about the Trinity nor intended to spark and ignite an implosion of Trinitarian flurry.

I simply was opening a passage of scripture found in - " Act 3:18 " - describing the Anointing / Christ who existed as a manifestation of God's " Spirit of Holy " whom / CHRIST - The Anointing - Spirit of Holy - was inside / IN the men and women of the Old Testament

1Pe 1:10 - 12

:10 ................ the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you:

:11 Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of The ANOINTING / CHRIST which was IN them

did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of the anointing / Christ, and the glory that should follow.


Act 3:18 But those things, which God before had shewed by the mouth of all his prophets, that the Anointing should suffer, he hath so fulfilled.

the fulfilment of the fullness of the divinity of God bodily.

Please notice the passage here in - Col 2:9

:9 For in him { Jesus } dwelled all the fulfillment of the divinity bodily.

The scriptures explain - to make a man literally God himself on earth, this man was the Spirit of the Father manifested in the flesh, this man was a physical manifestation of God’s invisible spirit which was the fulfillment,

fulfillment - meaning = the completion, accomplishment, performance, achievement, - of God’s divinity to mankind

This Greek word Divinity / Divine

“ divinity “ has a meaning that is much more than to just simply posses an attribute of deification, worship veneration, glorification, exaltation, and worship.

But the word “ DIVINITY “ applied to the God of the Bible indicates his Omniscience, all knowing - and power of divinization, knowledge of the future discerning, forecasting, foretelling, perceiving and prophesy as fore - knowledge

would this say that = Jesus was the fulfillment of the divinity of God bodily. ?

 

[Clete]

Greetings

thank you " Clete " for taking the time and for the patience


I really have no answers or feel need for opportunity to crisscross between Trinity doxicals and everything else in between

I have not asked you to do so. I have made no argument whatsoever, either against nor in favor of the Trinity doctrine. The things I've said have some connection to the doctrine but are not predicated on it. In other words, the things you say are false but not because you deny the Trinity. Indeed, I'd suspect that both errors share a common premise. That, however, is a theory that cannot be established unless and until you engage in a two way discussion where you actually respond to and actually address the points I make.

i honestly was not focusing upon the Trinity

Neither was I!

What do you think it suggests when someone who doesn’t even know you picks up on your rejection of the Trinity from something you believe has nothing to do with that doctrine?

perhaps you are now where I found myself a few years ago when I was heavily entrenched in many, many hundreds of discussions with wonderful brothers and sister in the Lord.

I very much doubt that. You have yet to display any ability to think clearly. So far, you've only parroted things that are demonstrable nonsense that you've heard someone else say.

I know your heart and mind is racing like a burning fire, consuming and devouring every source of fuel in your blazing path, you consume fuel very quickly without knowing everything you are devouring.

Nonsense.

I've responded directly to your own words and demonstrated that they have no basis in either biblical doctrine or actual history, much less sound reason. It barely rises to the level of an imbecile's standard of logic.

My original comments were not about the Trinity nor intended to spark and ignite an implosion of Trinitarian flurry.

I know that.

I ask you again, what do you think it means that it was a rejection of the Trinity doctrine that your original comments sparked inside the mind of a man who doesn't know you from Adam?

Do you suppose it was ESP?

I simply was opening a passage of scripture found in - " Act 3:18 " - describing the Anointing / Christ who existed as a manifestation of God's " Spirit of Holy " whom / CHRIST - The Anointing - Spirit of Holy - was inside / IN the men and women of the Old Testament

1Pe 1:10 - 12

:10 ................ the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you:

:11 Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of The ANOINTING / CHRIST which was IN them

did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of the anointing / Christ, and the glory that should follow.


Act 3:18 But those things, which God before had shewed by the mouth of all his prophets, that the Anointing should suffer, he hath so fulfilled.

the fulfilment of the fullness of the divinity of God bodily.

Please notice the passage here in - Col 2:9

:9 For in him { Jesus } dwelled all the fulfillment of the divinity bodily.

The scriptures explain - to make a man literally God himself on earth, this man was the Spirit of the Father manifested in the flesh, this man was a physical manifestation of God’s invisible spirit which was the fulfillment,

fulfillment - meaning = the completion, accomplishment, performance, achievement, - of God’s divinity to mankind

This Greek word Divinity / Divine

“ divinity “ has a meaning that is much more than to just simply posses an attribute of deification, worship veneration, glorification, exaltation, and worship.

But the word “ DIVINITY “ applied to the God of the Bible indicates his Omniscience, all knowing - and power of divinization, knowledge of the future discerning, forecasting, foretelling, perceiving and prophesy as fore - knowledge

would this say that = Jesus was the fulfillment of the divinity of God bodily. ?

Most of that was nearly impossible to follow. The writing jumps around with half-phrases and sentence fragments, making it difficult to follow any logical flow. However...

You claim in one sentence not to be discussing the Trinity and then write this near complete nonsense which implies that Jesus is not the second person of the Trinity, but the one God Himself manifested in the flesh; that the Holy Spirit, the Father, and Christ are not distinct persons, but different modes or manifestations of the same singular God; and that the "Spirit of Christ" in the prophets is the same Spirit that became incarnate as Jesus.

All of which is, very obviously Oneness Pentecostal doctrine.

The fact is that, yes, Colossians 2:9 affirms that Jesus is fully God in bodily form, but the Oneness Pentecostal reinterpretation you quoted tries to collapse all distinctions between Father, Son, and Spirit. It muddles the biblical teaching of Christ's divinity by using intentionally unclear language and blatantly faulty reasoning, which are the hallmarks of cults, not Christian doctrine. You really do sound a whole lot like Yahweh Ben Yahweh (not in topic but in style and form of argument - if it can be rightly called an argument.)