This is a commentary upon an essay that was found at
http://www.bible.ca/trinity/trinity-modalism-UPC-60-questions-godhead.htm. Fred Shewmaker wrote it in response to "60 Questions on the Godhead" a Catechism of the United Pentecostal Church. Which can be found on their Web site, http://www.upci.org/tracts/godhead.htm. Shewmaker begins…Before noticing the questions we wish to make certain observations:
a.. It appears the questions are based upon the King James Version.
b.. The author of the questions seems unaware that the words Lord, LORD, God, GOD are translated from various Hebrew and Greek words.
If the translators did their job correctly, one can ignore such facts because the idea or essence of Scripture would be kept when translated into a new language. We speak of the Inspired Word of God. The Holy Spirit's work of Inspiring the Holy Word did not stop when all the Biblical books were assembled. The Holy Spirit continues to guide translators to preserve the ideas contained in his word. Therefore, the translators did their job correctly. To doubt the veracity of all English translations is to doubt the Holy Spirit.
c.. When LORD and GOD appear in the King James Version they translate the Hebrew word Yahweh (or the contraction Jah) which the American Standard Version renders Jehovah.
d.. The plural Hebrew word Eloheem is translated God.
The Hebrew word "elohim" (or "eloheem" for phonetics) can be singular or plural depending upon how it is conjugated. Shewmaker is either unaware of this (doubtful considering his apparent study of the term) or chooses to ignore it.
e.. Lord and God do not always refer to each other.
This is Biblically rare, though true.
f.. The author of the questions was either unaware of 2 - 5 or else ignored those facts.
Since most of these "facts" have little or no bearing upon the issue, several are worthy of being ignored (as noted above).
g.. The expression Holy Spirit is a descriptive basically meaning separate Spirit.
The Hebrew word "Kodesh" which is most often translated as "holy" can mean "set apart." In the English Language, "Set Apart" does not convey separation. It instead it means to "Allocate," "Earmark," "Appoint," "Designate," "Appropriate," "Allot," or "Assign." This is not a meaning of Identity or Location. It might be stretched to mean "chosen" rather than "separate." The word speaks of those that are set apart from the world by their righteousness.
h.. Godhead is an old English word for Godhood (That which makes God, God).
In the New Testament it is translated from three Greek words: theios - divine, deity - meaning 1. Relating to God 2. Characteristic of God 3. Godlike (Acts 17:29); theiotes - divinity, divine nature - meaning 1. Quality of being divine 2. Condition of being divine 3. Divine being 4. A god 5. Deity (Ro. 1:20) and theotes - deity - meaning 1. State of being God 2. Divine nature 3. A god (Col. 2:9).
While the words may have common roots they have separate meanings. Today "divinity" is preferred in common English to the clumsy and archaic "godhood." Medieval English has no matter on the meaning of a document written centuries earlier. Shewmaker does not recognize the difference between "godhead" and "Godhead." The lower case spelling of the word can be defined as he says. Capitalizing the word defines it as the identity of the Supreme Being himself and that which comprises that being. The word "godhead" refers to those attributes which separate God from that which is not Divine. The word "Godhead" refers to that which actually comprises God, his substance and essence. The difference is as simple as the difference between "god" (such as Apollo, Thor, Zeus, etc) and "God" (the true Christian God).
i.. No one is obligated to defend a position he does not hold.
j.. Notice that these "60 Questions" are in fact in the form of a Catechism. (UPC raises a question then provides an immediate answer)
k.. The 60 questions of the United Pentecostal church (UPC) in red. The UPC then provides their own answer to their own question. Bible Answer/refutation to the UPC position are below each question/answer in black text.
Fred Shewmaker
For the clarity of this article, I've altered the color scheme. The UPC questions and self-answers are in Bold Text, questions in red and answers in blue. Shewmaker's Answer's are in Navy Blue. My own comments are in Black. Shewmaker had used columns in his article, I've chosen not to do so.
UPC Question #1. "Is the word trinity in the Bible?
No"a. There is a difference between believing there are three who possess
deity and holding one of the positions recognized by theology as trinity doctrine. Each of those positions is loaded down with baggage which many who believe there are three who possess Godhead are unwilling to carry.b. The word trinity is not in the Bible neither was "prodigal" prior to
the publication of the New King James Version in 1979, but I dare say the author of the questions prior to 1979 did not object to using the word "prodigal".
UPC Question #2. "Does the Bible say that there are three persons in the Godhead?
No"It does not. The Bible simply identifies three who possess Godhead.
While the Bible does identify God as three distinct persons (while never using that term) it shows that they are One being, that there are three persons who comprise the Godhead.
UPC Question #3. "Does the Bible speak of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost?
Yes"In ways which show that they are not the same being.
The Bible does indeed speak of them as distinct persons who are united as one being.
UPC Question #4. "Do these titles as used in Matthew 28:19 mean that there are three separate and distinct persons in the Godhead?
No, they refer to three offices, roles, or relationships to humanity."a. Neither Father nor Son is the title of an office and therefore there
is no reason to think that Holy Spirit is such a title.b. The Bible does not use the word office, role nor relationships when
referring to any connection which the Father, Son or Holy Spirit have with humanity.c. Matthew 28:19 deals with "the name of the Father and of the Son and
of the Holy Spirit," not offices, roles nor relationships to humanity.UPC Question #5. Does the Bible use the word three in reference to God?
NoOnly one verse in the entire Bible does so-1 John 5:7. It speaks of the
Father, the Word (instead of Son), and the Holy Ghost, and it concludes by saying, "These three are one."Due to the fact John wrote this, he should be an acceptable authority
regarding the meaning of the word "one." In John 17:21 he quoted Jesus as praying for His apostles, "that they may be one, as You, Father, [are] in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me." Unless you think that Jesus was praying for His apostles to become one being, we acknowledge that "these three are one" does not mean they were/are a single being.Here Shewmaker is taking a metaphorical or spiritual use of the word "one" in the Gospel of John and extending it's meaning to the use of the word in the epistle of 1 John. It does not work because there are fundamental (and obvious) differences between Man and God. While individual Humans are indeed separate, they can be "one" in goal or intent. God is capable of all things (Luke 1:37) therefore God can indeed be a single being with distinct persons where Man cannot.
It is apparent that "one" in 1 John 5:7 is meant to be literal because it is preceded by another number, "three." The three who are referred to are mentioned in the verse previously which makes the word "three" literal, not metaphorical. The laws of grammatical agreement demand that both "three" and "one" be either Metaphorical or Literal together. Therefore all of 1 John 5:7 must be taken literally.
UPC Question #6. "Does the Bible use the word one in reference to God?
Yes, many times. For example, see Zechariah 14:9; Malachi 2:10, Matthew 23:29, 32; John 8:41; 10:30; Romans 3:30; 1 Corinthians 8:4; Galatians 3:20; 1Timothy 2:5; James 2:19."
a. Zechariah 14:9 does not even use the word God. It uses the word LORD
twice. What is teaches is that "'Yahweh is one' And His name one." Yahweh (singular) is the Hebrew name of eloheem (plural) who in the beginning created the heavens and the earth. Deuteronomy 4:35 and other Old Testament passages explain that "the LORD (Yahweh - singular) Himself is God (eloheem - plural) there is none other besides Him." Yahweh (Jehovah, LORD) is the singular name of a plurality eloheem (God). The biblical doctrine of one God refers either to the one plurality eloheem or to the singular Yahweh which is the name of the one plurality eloheem.b. Malachi 2:10 will be addressed when consideration is given to question 14.
c. In Matthew 22:32 the word God is translated from the Greek word
theos. Matthew there quotes Exodus 3:6. In Exodus 3:6 the word God is translated from the plural Hebrew word eloheem. There is one plurality named Yahweh. Theos may refer either to separate beings of that plurality or to the plurality as a unit.d. John 8:41 "one Father--God" is not the same as saying one God. This
verse only shows the nature of the "one Father" to whom they referred wah not that of man, but rather that of "God." Theos refers to one being of the plurality - eloheem - "Father."UPC Question #7. "Can the mystery of the Godhead be understood?
Yes, Romans 1:20; Colossians 2:9; 1 Timothy 3:16."See observation 8. I am curious regarding why Acts 17:29 was omitted. in
1 Timothy 3:16 "Godliness" is not the same as Godhead. Thayer defines the word translated "godliness" as meaning: "reverence, respect;" and comments,1. "in
2. the mystery which is held by
godliness and nourishes it, 1 Tim. 3:16;".1) The verses mentioned each refer to God's power, Christ's Divinity, or Living a Holy life. Acts 17:29 states that God is not an idol (& vice versa). None of these verses directly say that the Mystery of Godhead can be understood.
Conversely, The following verses each say quite directly that God is beyond human understanding.
Job 11:7-8;36:26;37:5. Eccles. 11:5;11:45. Is 40:18;40:28
Man cannot understand the Godhead itself. To believe that one can understand is the first error one makes when studying the Trinity.
2) As to "Observation #8." The observations at the top of Shewmaker's essay are lettered, not numbered. I presume he means Observation "H" where he compares the words "Godhead" and "Godhood."
Therefore Shewmaker's observation is completely invalid.
UPC Question #8. "Has the Christian only one Heavenly Father?
Yes, Matthew 23:9"
The Christian also has only one teacher "the Christ" (Mt. 23:10). "One"
(v. 9) and "one" (v. 10) is two in every math book I ever saw. What proves too much proves nothing.This shows two Distinctions of person. No more, no less. No Separate Gods, No One Person.
UPC Question #9. "Then why did Jesus say to Philip, 'He that has seen me hath seen the Father' (John 14:9)?
Because Jesus is the express image of God's person. Hebrews 1:3. The Greek word for person in this verse literally means 'substance.'"
If we accept that the verse should be translated "the express image of
His substance," it still proves that one is the "image" and one is the "substance." That makes two because an image is not the same as a substance. What proves too much proves nothing."Person" is not said in this verse. However, if I accept this translation also, It makes two Distinctions only. All things have Image and Substance even singular objects. Separate objects have two images and two substances, even if they are identical.
UPC Question #10. "Does the Bible say that there are two persons in the Godhead?
No"
Instead it reveals and describes three.
That is to say, three distinct persons who are one being.
UPC Question #11. "Does the Bible say that all the Godhead is revealed in one person?
Yes, in Jesus Christ. 11 Corinthians 4:4; Colossians 1:19; 2:9; Hebrews 1:3."
In 2 Corinthians 4:4 refers to "Christ, who is the image of God."
Colossians 1:19 refers "to the church, which is His body, the fullness of Him who fills all in all" (Eph. 1:22 & 23). Colossians 2:9 "In Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily." is not the same as saying "all the Godhead is revealed in one person." To say that in one man dwells all the fullness of humanity certainly does not mean that all the fullness of humanity does not, indeed cannot, dwell in other men. Hebrews 1:3 see comments regarding question 8.The Godhead is revealed fully in the person of Jesus Christ. It is also revealed fully in the person of the Father, and the person of the Holy Spirit. Each member of the Trinity is Wholly God. Their only Distinction is in their relationships to one another and to Man. Shewmaker again fails here to realize we speak of God, not men.
UPC Question #12. "Is the mystery of the deity hidden from some people?
Yes. Luke 10:21-22."
Jesus was speaking regarding the time He was on earth. At that time the
"wise and prudent" did not understand "'the things which God has prepared for those who love Him.' But God has revealed them to us through His Spirit. For the Spirit searches all things, yes the deep things of God (1 Cor. 2:9 & 10). Also cf John 16:13; 1 Peter 1:3; Romans 1:16 & 17 and 2 Timothy 3:16 & 17. Today, "God shows no partiality" (Acts 10:34 et. al.).As I mentioned in my comment to Question 7, the True, Full Mystery of the Deity is hidden from ALL people. Those on Earth who believe that they know God as he Truly is are mistaken, foolish, and prideful. Even if we were revealed these things, we could not comprehend them any more than a dog could understand quantum physics.
UPC Question #13. "Who is the Father?
The Father is the one God, particularly as revealed in parental relationship to humanity. Deuteronomy 32:6; Malachi 2:10."
In Deuteronomy 32:6 no Hebrew word for God is used. The word LORD is not
from a word which means God, but is from Yahweh which in the American Standard Version is translated Jehovah. In Deuteronomy 4:35 Moses told Israel, "...The LORD (the singular Hebrew word - Yahweh) Himself is God (the plural Hebrew word - eloheem). According to Deuteronomy 32:6 the Father is the one Yahweh - LORD - Jehovah. Malachi 2:10 will be considered under question 16.I agree completely with the original author. The Father IS the ONE God and parent of all humanity. No amount of word play can change that.
UPC Question #14. "Where was God the Father while Jesus was on earth?
The Father was in Christ. John 14:10: 11 Corinthians 5:19. He also was in heaven. for God is omnipresent."
The author of the questions apparently thinks of the word "in" as an
indicator of location. "In" sometimes does refer to location, but not always. John 15:1 - 7 uses "in" to mean connection or union. "In" also is used to indicate a relationship as in Ephesians 2:16 "...that He might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity." From a relationship of "enmity" "both" (Jew and Gentile) come to a friendly relationship, a harmonious relationship, with God and each other making up "one body." John 14:10 expresses the harmonious relationship which Jesus had with "the Father." 2 Corinthians 5:19 When Jesus Christ was on earth the Father was harmoniously working through Him to make men friend with Himself.Modalists do in fact interpret "the Father was in Christ" as an indicator of location. They Disregard that in John 14:10 & 11, The phrase "The Father is in me" is preceded by "I am in the Father" both times. They believe that the Spirit inhabiting Christ's Body is the Holy Spirit. This is a major part of the Modalist UPC doctrine.
In spiritual matters, Location is irrelevant because location is a Physical attribute. The Holy Spirit is in all Christians working through us.
UPC Question #15. "Did the prophet Isaiah say that Jesus would be the Father?
Yes, Isaiah 9:6: 63:16."
Isaiah 9:6 the Hebrew word translated Father has several meanings. Brown
- Driver - Briggs - Gesenius List "everlasting Father under "7. fig. of benevolence & protection" (p. 3). This does not translate into "the Father." Isaiah 63:19 shows the "LORD" (Yahweh) as "Father." This is not a reference to Jesus in particular.Jesus and the Father are one being. Jesus is the Father and the Father is Jesus. These verses support this view. Disregarding the English Bible in order to use an obscure interpretation of the Hebrew is deceitful.
UPC Question #16. "When God said, 'Let us make man in our image' (Genesis 1:26), was He speaking to another person in the Godhead?
No, Isaiah 44:24; Malachi 2:10."
Isaiah 44:24 does not use a Hebrew word of God, but rather it uses the
Hebrew word Yahweh (LORD) the singular name for the plurality indicated by the plural Hebrew word eloheem. Malachi 2:10 previously appeared in the questions, but consideration of it has been delayed until this question. The reason for the delay was to allow the author of the questions to show his view of the passage. Here the author connects Malachi 2:10 to Isaiah 44:24. That would makes the Hebrew word el in Malachi 2:10 refer to Yahweh in Isaiah 44:24. Therefore he fails to show that in Genesis 1:26 the speaker was not speaking to another person because LORD (Yahweh - singular) is God (eloheem - plural) Deuteronomy 4:35.Genesis 1:26 "God said 'let us make a man'." Notice that it states "God said" rather than "gods said." This verse is a prime Old Testament example of the Trinitarian Philosophy of our Lord being seemingly plural yet actually one. Disregarding the English Bible in order to use an obscure interpretation of the Hebrew is deceitful.
The other verses each support that there is only one God. I agree.
UPC Question #17. "How many of God's qualities were in Christ?
All. Colossians 2:9."
We Agree.
I also agree.
UPC Question #18. "How may we see the God who sent Jesus into the world?
By seeing Jesus. John 12:44-45; 14:9."
Jesus was "the express image of" the Father, not the Father (Hebrews
1:3).The Image of Something is an aspect of that thing. It may not be the whole of that thing, but the image of a thing is certainly not separate from that thing. Further we are speaking of God, not an inanimate object. As the Image of the Father, Jesus is distinct from the Father but not separate from the Father.
UPC Question #19. "Does the Bible say that Jesus is the Almighty?
Yes. Revelation 1:8."
He possesses all the Father possesses (John 16:15).
This is only one of many places where the Bible supports the Truth. Jesus is the Almighty.
UPC Question #20. "Who do some describe as the first person in the trinity?
God the Father."
What some do or do not do is of no relevance because it proves nothing
one way or the other.Some do this because of the order given in Matt 28:19. It has no other relevance.
UPC Question #21. "Whom do some describe as the last person in the trinity?
The Holy Ghost. But Jesus said that He was the first and the last. Revelation 1:17-18."
Reread the comment regarding #20. What Jesus said has nothing to do with
man made distinctions. He simply declares Himself to be eternal - without beginning and without end - as is true of each member of the eloheem named Yahweh.Some do this because of the order given in Matt 28:19. It has no other relevance. Each Member of the Trinity is indeed "the first and the last."
UPC Question #22. "How many persons did John see sitting on the throne of Heaven?
One. Revelation 4:2."
It should be observed that the word "one" is in italics indicating that
it has been inserted by the translators. Colossians 3:1 It may be that John looked neither to the right nor to the left because Paul writes "...Christ is, sitting at the right hand of God." Acts 7:56 How many did Stephen see? John is not the only witness. He may have seen only one, but that does not prove only one because Stephen saw two. None of these accounts contradicts the others nor invalidates the others.Whether translators inserted the word "one" is irrelevant. Any 5-word sentence in Hebrew could easily be translated to a 7-word sentence in English in order to preserve its meaning. The Holy Spirit's work of inspiring the Holy Word did not stop when all the Biblical books were assembled. The Holy Spirit continues to guide translators to preserve the ideas contained in his word.
John saw Christ, while Stephen saw Both Christ and the Father. Stephen saw Christ at the Right Hand of the Father. This means that they are Equal. That which is Equal to God is God. The Bible teaches there is only one God. None of these accounts contradicts the others nor invalidates the others.
UPC Question #23. "If Jesus is the first and the last, why did God say in Isaiah 44:6 that he was the first and the last?
Because Jesus is the God of the Old Testament incarnate."
In Isaiah 44:6 it is Yahweh who is the first and the last. "Besides Me"
(Yahweh - singular) "no God" (eloheem - plural). cf Deuteronomy 4:35.The Triune God is the first and the last. Jesus is the incarnation of the OT God (or Father).
UPC Question #24. Did Jesus tell Satan that God alone should be Worshiped?
Yes. Matthew 4:10."
If a person only reads Matthew 4:10, it very well may seem that the
author of the questions gave their right answer. However, he did not do his homework. In the verse the Greek word theos is translated God, but Jesus was alluding to Deuteronomy 6:13 and 10:20 where Moses spoke of "the LORD (Yahweh - singular) your God (eloheem - plural). And that means only the singular plurality is to be worshipped. Satan was not a member of that plurality.That "singular plurality" would be the Triune God. God alone should be worshipped. There is no separation within the Trinity. Matt 4:10 can and should be taken at face value.
UPC Question #25. "Does the devil believe in more than one God?
No. James 2:19"
Here again the author misapplies the Scripture. In James 2:19 the King
James Version uses the word "devils" not devil. The New King James Version more correctly renders the word "demons." My comments regarding these 60 questions have shown again and again that the LORD (Yahweh - singular) who is God (eloheem - plural) of the Old Testament is the "one God" of both testaments.The original author's point is that the Devil (and/or his demons) believes in only one God. As is correct.
UPC Question #26. "Does the Bible say that God, who is the word, was made flesh?
Yes. John 1:1, 14."
The same verses say the "Word was God" and "was with God." One was with
the other and that makes two who are God (the author's contentions to the contrary notwithstanding."The Word was God" shows that there is no separation between God and his word made flesh (Christ). "was with God" shows that they are distinct from One another. This verse is a prime example of Trinitarian Theology.
UPC Question #27. "For what purpose was God manifested in the flesh?
To save sinners. Hebrews 2:9. 14."
I agree. cf 1 Timothy 1:15.
Who can dispute this?
UPC Question #28. "Was Jesus God manifested in the flesh?
Yes. 1 timothy 3:16"
I agree. However, I prefer to use John 1:14 which refers to the Word who
was God and was with God and thereby indicates two who are God."The Word was God" (John 1:1) shows that there is no separation between God and his word made flesh (Christ).
We must follow ALL Scripture, not merely that which we prefer. 2 Tim 3:16.
UPC Question #29. "Could Jesus have been on earth and in heaven at the same time?
Yes. John 3:13."
Jesus being God - divine and omnipresent - does not prove nor mean that
He was/is God the Father. The NASB omits "who is in heaven." The reason is that its authenticity has long been in doubt and therefore cannot be considered proof the author's contention.Both the Holy Scripture and Common Sense state that there can only be one Omnipresent God. This will be addressed in a later comment.
To hold any scripture in doubt is to deny the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit's work of Inspiring the Holy Word did not stop when all the Biblical books were assembled. The Holy Spirit continues to guide translators to preserve the ideas contained in his word.
UPC Question #30. "Does the Bible say that there is but one Lord?
Yes. Isaiah 45:18; Ephesians 4:5."
Isaiah 45:18 states "...Thus says the LORD (Yahweh), Who created the
heavens, Who is God (eloheem), Who formed the earth and made it, ... I ... the LORD (Yahweh), and ... no other." Ephesians 4:5 Although it mentions "one Lord" it certainly does not say "there is but one Lord." There are seven ones listed in Ephesians 4:4 - 6. Three of the seven ones are "one Spirit," "one Lord" and "one God." These are not the same one, but three ones.1John 5:7 shows that "these three ARE one." Shewmaker comes close here to spewing nonsense.
UPC Question #31. "Does the Bible say that Christ is the Lord?
Yes. Luke 2:11."
"A savior, who is Christ the Lord" must be viewed in the light of Isaiah
43:11 "I ... I, ... the LORD (Yahweh), And besides Me ... no savior." "LORD" (Yahweh) is the name of the plurality who are members of the eloheem. As a member of the eloheem, Jesus who was crucified, but God made "both Lord and Christ" (Acts 2:36) is our "Savior, who is Christ the Lord."Here Shewmaker retreats again into the plural interpretation of "Elohim." This is flawed because
UPC Question #32. "Does the Bible say that the Lord is God?
Yes 1 Kings 18:39; Zechariah 14:5, Acts 2:39; Revelation 19:1."
1 Kings 18:39 Yahweh, He is eloheem! Yahweh, He is eloheem." Zechariah
14:5 Yahweh my eloheem will come. Acts 2:39 Jesus is both Lord and Christ (verse 36) and as a member of eloheem is "our God." Revelation 19:1 Here salvation is by the savior (Is. 43:11) "the Lord our God" - in the Old Testament Yahweh our eloheem.Shewmaker again resorts to his heretical interpretation of Is 43:11 and the word "Elohim."
UPC Question #33. "How could the church belong to Jesus (Matthew 16:18) and yet be the church of God (1 Corinthians 10:32)?
Because Jesus is God in the flesh."
Certainly Acts 20:28 shows that the God to whom the church belongs is
Jesus Christ. It also may be true that the God intended in each reference to the church of God is Jesus Christ our Lord. However, if that is not the case, there is such a thing as joint ownership and Jesus claimed that with "all things the Father has" (John 16:15). The Old Testament reveals God (eloheem) plural.The Church (and all other things) belongs to both God (Presumably the Father) and Jesus because both of these persons are the same being. The Old Testament reveals Elohim to be Singular yet seem plural.
UPC Question #34. "Will God give His glory to another?
No. Isaiah 42:8"
Isaiah 42:8 does not use the word God. It uses the word "LORD" (Yahweh).
This is the "name" of the plural eloheem (Deuteronomy 4:35 & 39 and 6:4). The plural eloheem is one Yahweh (6:4). Each member of the plural eloheem possesses the same "glory" and it is not shared by any other.If
there were separate Supreme Gods, each possessing the same Glory then each would be sharing that Glory with another. The meaning of "other" is "separate thing." Is. 42:8 shows that YHWH does not share his Glory with another. Since each of the Persons of the Trinity do share that Glory, they are One Being.UPC Question #35. "Was there a God formed before Jehovah, or will there be one formed after?
No. Isaiah 43:10."
Earlier I wrote that it is obvious the author of the questions was using
the King James Version, however, here he makes an exception. Jehovah appears in the king James Version only four times and Isaiah 43:10 is not one of them. In this passage His power, or omnipotence, is under consideration. Due to the fact that Jehovah (Yahweh) is the name of the plural eloheem, the teaching here is that each member of the eloheem is eternal (without beginning) and no others possess their omnipotence nor will any others be given their power.The name YHWH (or JHVH) is in no way plural. While Is 43:10 may consider only God's Omnipotence, Omnipotence can only be held by a single being.
If two beings were omnipotent, that omnipotence could never be a complete control of all Time & Space because the mere existence of the second would undermine the power possessed by the first (and vice-versa). Omnipotence by definition requires that a single being hold that power.
UPC Question #36. "What is one thing that God does not know?
Another God. Isaiah 44:8."
The New King James Version renders the last question and its answer: "Is
there a God besides Me? Indeed there is no other Rock; I know not one." The words "there is" and "one" are in italics. The meaning seems to be that God does not acknowledge any idol.My Bible shows no Italics. The Meaning is clear without any such manipulation. God acknowledges that only he is the Omnipotent God. He is the Solid Rock.
UPC Question #37. "What is the one thing that God cannot do?
Lie. Titus 1:2."
It is certainly true that God does not lie. However, the Greek word
translated "cannot lie" is apseudes. This word is formed by prefixing the Greek alpha (a), which indicates not, to the Greek word pseudes which Thayer defines as meaning: "lying, deceitful, false:" (p. 675). Thayer's definition of apseudes is: without lie, truthful:" (p. 91). The Berkley Version, Confraternity, Douay, Goodspeed, Lamsa, Moffatt, New Testament in Basic English, RSV, TEV, TCNT, Weymouth (3rd, 4th & 5th editions), Williams and Robert Young translations do not render the Greek word apseudes "cannot" in Titus 1:2.I agree that Titus 1:2 states God "cannot lie." No Disclaimer is necessary.
UPC Question #38. "How many Gods should we know?
Only one. Hosea 13:4."
Both times the word God appears in Hosea 13:4 it translates the plural
Hebrew word eloheem. Over and over again the author of the questions has ignored the fact that LORD (Yahweh - singular) is God (eloheem - plural). How many eloheem (a plurality) should we know? Only one. How many Yahweh (singular) should we know? Only one.Over and over again Shewmaker has ignored the fact that the Hebrew word eloheem can be either singular or plural depending upon how it is conjugated. How many separate beings is God? One.
UPC Question #39. "How many names has the Lord?
One. Zechariah 14:9."
This goes back to the first commandment "You shall have no other gods
before Me" (Exodus 20:3). What God commanded then, but Israel did not obey, will be true in the kingdom of which Zechariah prophesies over which Yahweh "shall be king."The English phrase "his name" refers to one's "reputation" and/or "authority" and/or "power." Such as orders given "In the name of the King," acts performed "in the name of decency." The use of the word "name" in Zech. 14:9 does not reflect how God is to be called to or addressed. The Father and the Son each have a name (Ex 3:13-15 and Luke 1:31).
UPC Question #40. "Is it good to think upon the name of the Lord?
Yes. Malachi 3:16."
The word translated "thought upon" in the King James Version is rendered
"meditate on" in the New King James Version which gives a footnote: "Or esteem." It is indeed good to esteem the name Jehovah (Yahweh) In Acts 10:35 Peter said, "...In every nation whoever fears Him and works righteousness is accepted by Him.It is Good to think upon (or meditate on) the name (or attributes) of the Lord.
UPC Question #41. "Does the Bible say that God alone treads upon the waves of the sea?
Yes. Job 9:8."
In the parallel passage (Psalms 104:1 - 3) these things are attributed to
Yahweh eloheem.Again Shewmaker ignores the verse presented to use a "parallel passage" which in Hebrew contains the word "elohim."
UPC Question #42. "Why, then, was Jesus able to walk upon the Sea of
Galilee (Matthew 14:25)?
Because He is God the creator. Colossians 1:16."
Genesis 1:1 "In the beginning God (eloheem - plural) created the heavens
and the earth." Jesus was indeed a member of the eloheem.Christ is indeed the one Omnipotent God. Colossians 1:16.
UPC Question #43. "Is God the only one who can forgive sins?
Yes. Isaiah 43:25; Mark 2:7."
In Isaiah 43:25 the LORD (Yahweh) was speaking. Yahweh is the singular
name of the plural eloheem. Jesus was a member of the eloheem.The name YHWH (or JHVH) is in no way plural. Over and over again Shewmaker has ignored the fact that the Hebrew word eloheem can be either singular or plural depending upon how it is conjugated.
UPC Question #44. "Why then, could Jesus forgive sins in Mark 2:5 - 11?
Because He is God the savior."
The Savior is Yahweh (Isaiah 43:11). Yahweh is the singular name for the
plurality eloheem. Jesus was a member of the eloheem.Jesus Is the savior. The name YHWH (or JHVH) is in no way plural. Over and over again Shewmaker has ignored the fact that the Hebrew word eloheem can be either singular or plural depending upon how it is conjugated.
UPC Question #45. "Is Jesus the true God?
Yes. 1 John 5:20."
Whether the antecedent of the pronoun "this" is Jesus or the Father has
been debated for centuries. For that reason 1 John 5:20 cannot be conclusive proof of the author's contention. However, as a member of the plural eloheem Jesus is indeed the true God along with the other members of the eloheem.Debates upon which person of the Trinity is the antecedent of the pronoun "this" is completely irrelevant to this argument since the persons of the Trinity are together one single omnipotent being. Elohim can be a singular tensed word.
UPC Question #46. "If God and the Holy Ghost are two separate persons,
which was the Father of Christ?
Matthew 1:20 says that the Holy Ghost was the Father, while Romans 15:6, 11 Corinthians 11:31, and Ephesians 1:3 says God was the Father. There is no contradiction when we realize that God the Father and the Holy Ghost are the one and the same Spirit. Matthew 10:20; Ephesians 4:4; 1 Corinthians 3:16."
No one knows how Mary conceived by the holy Spirit. It also should be
observed that the author equates the word God with the Father, but throughout this study it has been shown repeatedly that the word God is not the exclusive designation of one member of the eloheem. God is a designation shared by each member of the eloheem. Matthew 1:20 does not actually say what the author alledges. It says "...That which is conceived in her is by the Holy Spirit." Although I do not believe there was anything artificial about the conception of Jesus, at the same time I do not believe it was by the natural process by which all other humans conceptions occur. It should be understood that in our day when through artificial insemination a woman conceives, the doctor by whom she conceives is not the father of the child. The question is flawed and therefore the author's contentions are inappropriate. There is no contradiction when we understand that God the Father and God the Holy Spirit are separate. In fact the basic idea conveyed by the term holy is separate. There is the Father, the Son and the separate Spirit and they are revealed as being members of the eloheem.God (presumably the Father) and the Holy Ghost are not separate (as the original author shows). The only reason that the Term "holy" can convey separation is because Shewmaker listed it as an observation at the beginning of his essay. The Hebrew word "Kodesh" which is most often translated as "holy" can mean "set apart." In the English Language, "Set Apart" does not convey separation. Instead it means to "Allocate," "Earmark," "Appoint," "Designate," "Appropriate," "Allot," or "Assign." This is not a meaning of Identity or Location. It might be stretched to mean "chosen" rather than "separate." The word speaks of those that are set apart from the world by their righteousness.
Each person of the Trinity is God, the one Omnipotent, and Supreme Being.
The Virgin Birth is a supernatural mystery, therefore unexplainable. The presumption that one person of the Trinity "inseminated" Mary on behalf of another is a flirtation with blasphemy.
UPC Question #47. "When Paul asked the Lord who He was, what was the
answer?
'I am Jesus.' Acts 9:5."
When Saul asked "Who are you Lord?" it is absolutely certain that he was
not using the word "Lord" to mean either God or Father. "Who" was speaking it the information Saul's question sought to discover.Saul asked the question because he did not know to whom he was speaking. Therefore he did not know it was God. Some Bibles even translate "Sir" instead of "Lord." This in no way negates the fact that Jesus is Lord and God.
UPC Question #48. "While Stephen was dying, did he call God Jesus?
Yes. Acts 7:59"
The truth is in Acts 7:59 the word "God" is italicized. The Greek word
for God (theos) does not appear in the original text. The Interlinear Literal Translation of The Greek New Testament by George Ricker Berry, Ph.D. renders the verse: "And they stoned Stephen, invoking and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit." The author of the question is mistaken when he says Stephen called God Jesus in Acts 7:59.Whether translators inserted the word "God" is irrelevant. Any 5-word sentence in Hebrew could easily be translated to a 7-word sentence in English in order to preserve its meaning. The Holy Spirit's work of Inspiring the Holy Word did not stop when all the Biblical books were assembled. The Holy Spirit continues to guide translators to preserve the ideas contained in his word.
My own Bible quotes Stephen, "Lord Jesus, receive my spirit." This echoes back to Christ's own statement on the cross for God to receive his spirit. I have no doubt that Stephen was addressing the one Omnipotent Supreme Being.
UPC Question #49. "Did Thomas ever call Jesus God?
Yes. John 20:28."
Jesus was a member of the eloheem and therefore was God. So also are the
other members of the eloheem.
It would be correct to say that each person of the Trinity is the
one Omnipotent Supreme Being. Therefore Jesus is God, as Thomas professed.UPC Question #50. "How could Jesus be the Savior, when God the Father
said in Isaiah 43:11, 'Beside me there is no Savior'?
Because 'God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself.' 11 Corinthians 5:19."
Actually it is because Isaiah 43:11 does not use the words "God the
Father," but rather, "I, ... I, ... the LORD (Yahweh), And beside Me ... no savior." Yahweh is the singular name of the plurality referred to as eloheem. Jesus was a member of the eloheem. If God being in Christ makes Christ God the Father, as the author is contending, would not Christ, who (according to the author) is God the Father, being in Philip (Jn. 14:20) and in all who have the hope of glory (Col. 1:27) also make all those God the Father? If not, why not. That which prove too much proves nothing.Here Shewmaker retreats again into the plural interpretation of "Elohim," which also has a singular tense. Further the name YHWH (or JHVH) is in no way plural. The argument has no bearing on this verse.
The original author of the questions again uses the word "in" as an indicator of location as he did in Question 14. Modalists do in fact interpret "the Father was in Christ" as an indicator of location. They believe that the Spirit inhabiting Christ's Body is the Holy Spirit. This is a major part of the Modalist heresy.
In spiritual matters, Location is irrelevant because location is a Physical attribute. The Holy Spirit is in all Christians working through us.
UPC Question #51. "Does the Bible say that Jesus was God with us?
Yes. Matthew 1:23."
Again we need to understand that Jesus was a member of the eloheem.
Again we must understand that the Godhead is revealed fully in the person of Jesus Christ. It is also revealed fully in the person of the Father, and the person of the Holy Spirit. Each member of the Trinity is Wholly God, the one Omnipotent Supreme Being. Their only Distinction is in their relationships to one another and to Man.
UPC Question #52. "Did Jesus ever say, 'I and my Father are one'?
Yes. John 10:30."
Is the author aware that in John 17:21 Jesus also prayed, for His apostles, "that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me." Are we to believe that Jesus was praying for his apostles to become one being? If not, Jesus and the Father are not one being.
Here Shewmaker is taking a metaphorical or spiritual use of the word "one" in John 17 and extending it's meaning to the use of the word John 10. It does not work because there are fundamental (and obvious) differences between Man and God. While individual Humans are indeed separate, they can be "one" in goal or intent. God is capable of all things (Luke 1:37) therefore God can indeed be a single being with distinct persons where Man cannot.
UPC Question #53. "Can it be proved scripturally that Jesus and the Father are one in the same sense that husband and wife are one?
No. The Godhead was never compared to the relationship of a husband and wife. Jesus identified Himself with the Father in a way that husband and wife cannot be identified with each other. John 14:9-11."
"Jesus and the Father are one in the same sense that husband and wife are one" is an argument I have never hear before, much less ever made. There is no inclination on my part to defend it. However, regarding the application of John 14:9 - 11 see comments regarding #50
This argument is not scriptural and neither are attacks upon the doctrine of the Trinity. All books in the New Testament were written prior to 100AD. The concept of the Trinity was first attacked after 100AD. All arguments for (or against) the Trinity doctrine are not fully scriptural.
The persons of the Trinity can indeed be joined in the sense that a husband & wife are joined. For "a man leaves his parents and is joined to his wife in such a way that the two become one flesh," (Gen. 2:24). Jesus quotes this scripture in Matt 19:5, then adding for emphasis, "no longer two - but one." Christ himself sees a married couple as one flesh. Some Theologians (including Pope John Paul II) have suggested that the Godhead is, in fact, a family.
Of course, even the union of human marriage pales in comparison to the union of the family of the Trinity because there are fundamental (and obvious) differences between Man and God. God is capable of all things (Luke 1:37) therefore God can indeed be a single being with distinct persons where Man cannot.
UPC Question #54. "Does the Bible say there is only one wise God?
Yes. Jude 25."
The words "there is" and "one" are not used in Jude 25. KJV: "To the only wise God our Savior, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and forever. Amen." NKJV: "To God our Savior, Who alone is wise, Be glory and majesty, Dominion and power, Both now and forever. Amen." "The only wise God our Savior" or "God our Savior," according to Isaiah 43:11 is the LORD (Yahweh) and Yahweh is the singular name for the plurality which is eloheem.
Here Shewmaker retreats again into the plural interpretation of "Elohim," which also has a singular tense. Further the name YHWH (or JHVH) is in no way plural. The argument has no bearing on this verse which speaks of "The only wise God."
If one were to allow for the existence of other gods, this verse states only one god is wise. Therefore, all these other gods would be fools and therefore lesser beings than the wise god would. Therefore that wise god would be left as the one true God, our savior.
UPC Question #55. "Does the Bible call the Holy Ghost a second or third person in the Godhead?
No. The Holy Ghost is the one Spirit of God, the one God Himself at work in our lives. John 4:24; 1 Corinthians 3:16-17; 6:19;
12:13."
Whether or not the Bible calls the Holy Spirit "a second or third person" does not prove that the Holy Spirit "is the one Spirit of God." The basic idea conveyed by the word holy is separate. It is not possible to be separate and the same. See comments regarding # 46
This question is similar to other questions above that refer to how some people refer to the persons of the Trinity as 1st, 2nd, and 3rd. This is done because of the order given in Matt 28:19. It has no other relevance since the Persons of the Trinity are equal.
The only reason that the Term "holy" can convey separation is because Shewmaker listed it as an observation at the beginning of his essay. The Hebrew word "Kodesh" which is most often translated as "holy" can mean "set apart." In the English Language, "Set Apart" does not convey separation. It instead it means to "Allocate," "Earmark," "Appoint," "Designate," "Appropriate," "Allot," or "Assign." This is not a meaning of Identity or Location. It might be stretched to mean "chosen" rather than "separate." The word speaks of those that are set apart from the world by their righteousness.
UPC Question #56. "Can Trinitarians show that three divine persons were present when Jesus was baptized by John?
Absolutely not. The one, omnipresent God used three simultaneous manifestations. Only one divine person was present-Jesus Christ the Lord."
Here the author of the questions assumes the point to be proven and then argues as though it is proven. That alone is enough to invalidate his conclusions. There is nothing absolute about his conclusion. If we grant there was one God present, we would insist that God was the LORD (Yahweh) Who is the one plural eloheem of the Old Testament and the Old Testament was still in force when Jesus was baptized by John.
At Christ's Baptism, the one, omnipresent God indeed used three simultaneous manifestations. These manifestations were each in the guise one of the persons of Trinity, which could even be referred to as God's three offices, roles, or relationships to humanity. Jesus himself was of course present physically; the Voice called Jesus his Son, which would make it seem to be the Father. The Holy Spirit is identified and appears as a dove.
Each member of the Trinity manifested in a manner that was distinct from the others. These distinctions exist only in the mind of Man. Each person of the Trinity is God, the one Eternal, Omnipotent, and Supreme Being.
UPC Question #57. "Then what were the other two whom Trinitarians speak?
One was a voice from heaven; the other was a Spirit of God in the form of a dove. Matthew 3:16-17."
The one whose voice came from heaven was more than "a voice" because the voice identifed the one whose it was by saying, "This is My beloved Son,". The voice identified the one speaking as the heavenly parent of Jesus. His other parent, Mary, was not in heaven. Luke 3:22 identifies the Spirit as the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is a separate Spirit. See comments regarding #46 and #55. Each member of the eloheem was present.
The only reason that the Term "holy" can convey separation is because Shewmaker listed it as an observation at the beginning of his essay. The Hebrew word "Kodesh" which is most often translated as "holy" can mean "set apart." In the English Language, "Set Apart" does not convey separation. It instead it means to "Allocate," "Earmark," "Appoint," "Designate," "Appropriate," "Allot," or "Assign." This is not a meaning of Identity or Location. It might be stretched to mean "chosen" rather than "separate." The word speaks of those that are set apart from the world by their righteousness.
See my Comment to #56. Each member of the Trinity manifested in a manner that was distinct from the others. These distinctions exist only in the mind of Man. Each person of the Trinity is God, the one Eternal, Omnipotent, and Supreme Being.
UPC Question #58. "What did the voice say at Jesus' baptism?
'Thou are my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.' Mark 1:11. As the Son of God, Jesus was the one God incarnate."
"As the Son of God Jesus was" not the Father "incarnate." In John 8:18 & 18 Jesus said, "it is written in your law that the testimony of two men is true. I am One who bears witness of Myself, and the Father who sent Me bears witness of Me." If Jesus and the Father are not two, verse 18 makes no sense whatsoever. Here Jesus' whole argument is that He and the Father are two! (2)! They are not the same being. God the Father was not incarnate (John 4:24). The Holy Spirit was not incarnate (Luke 24:39).
I agree that Jesus is God Incarnate. Jesus and the Father could be seen as two since they are distinct from one another, even though each person of the Trinity is God, the one Eternal, Omnipotent, Supreme Being.
UPC Question #59. "Does the Bible say that God shed His blood and that God laid down His life for us?
Yes, Acts 20:28; John 3:16. God was able to do this because He had taken upon Himself a human body."
God the Son took a human body. The references used do not support the answer given to the question. Neither the Father nor the Spirit took a human body John 4:24 & Luke 24:39). Neither Acts 20:28 nor John 3:16 "say that God shed His blood" nor "that God laid down His life for us." Acts 20:28 does mention "the church of God which He purchased with His own blood." However, that can only refer to the Son because the Father and Holy Spirit are spirits and spirits have no "flesh and bones" (Luke 24:39) and without flesh and bones they had is no blood to shed.
"The Word became Flesh" (John 1:14). Jesus did more than "take on a human body." That phrase suggests that Jesus' Flesh is separate from his Divinity and that he was merely using it to visit us. This "God in a box" view makes his passion and death seem shallow. Jesus humanity and Divinity are both inherent within his whole person.
To define the Father as a Spirit is to limit him because he cannot be fathomed by the mind of man.
The Church was purchased with the blood of the Son of God. The Son is a distinct person of the one Eternal, Omnipotent, and Supreme Being.
UPC Question #60. "The Bible says that God is coming back with all His Saints. (Zechariah 14:5) and also that Jesus is coming back with all His saints (1 Thessalonians 3:13). Are two coming back?
No only one is coming back-our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ. Titus 2:13."
Zechariah 14:5 uses the words Yahweh and elohem, saying they "will come,And all the saints with You." This was written a long time before Jesus came the first time. Neither the author nor any other person, living or dead, has proven (nor can anyone prove) that this refers to the second coming of Christ. For that reason it is no more than supposition on the author's part that it is in some way connected with 1 Thessalonians 3:13 and refers to Jesus coming back. It also should be noted that in 1 Thessalonians 3:13 it says "...at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ with all His saints," not "coming back with all His saints." The question: "Are two coming back?" is based on the author's unprovable supposition and his insertion of the idea of "back" into a passage in which it is not contained. Titus 2:13 refers to "our great God and Savior Jesus Christ," because Jesus is a member of the eloheem named Yahweh who in Isaiah 43:11 proclaims, "...besides Me ... no Savior."
Here Shewmaker retreats again into the plural interpretation of "Elohim," which also has a singular tense. (He is quite the broken record).
Shewmaker shows gall when he accuses the original author of supposing what cannot be proven because very few things about God CAN be proven. They are matters of FAITH.
I am wondering why the original author included this question. I see no suggestion in these verses that they could have been misinterpreted to mean that two were coming back. Since all three views on the subject agree that Jesus is God, there is no confusion on the subject.
For more information, You can read these other articles
Response to the Modalist Lie
or
Comments on an Answer to 'Sharing Your Faith with a Oneness Pentecostal'"
and
The Athanasian Creed