Trinity Discussion

[Coder]

I’m proposing:

a.) That the Holy Spirit is a manner of speaking about God in Judaism that Jesus and the Apostles knew.
b.) That manner of speaking had no more bearing on their understanding of God as being manifested in persons than Jews today have.
c.) “sons of God” and “son of God” had connotations and meaning in both Jewish Scripture and theology as well as Greek and Roman pagan beliefs.
d.) Jewish Scripture and terminology itself may have been influenced by pre-monotheistic/pagan beliefs/writings.
e.) These underdeveloped ways of speaking in Judaism as well as Greek and Roman pagan “god” terminology and concepts influenced the wording of Christian Scriptures.
f.) Jesus tried to straighten them all out by explaining about Himself as God become man.
g.) Christians got the message, but carried over too much of this ancient Jewish and pagan terminology including by trying to relate the reality of God becoming man to a huge pagan environment including government that thought in terms of “gods” and “sons of gods”.
h.) 1700 years later, people still use this terminology to talk about God becoming man and instead of enlightening them to God as it did pagans, it confuses them and they accept it even though it can give incorrect concepts about the oneness of God.
i.) People have asked Jews for centuries why you don’t accept Jesus and it’s because they have stayed true to their covenant in belief in the one God, the same God that became man. However our speaking about God this way has and continues to interfere with the acceptance of Christ by those that may be more open to Him.

***That’s ***what I’m saying.

 

[Coder]

THE JEWISH «ROOTS» OF THE HOLY SPIRIT
Lea Sestieri

…
…
Although in Jewish scripture the Holy Spirit is never presented as a person but rather as a divine power capable of transforming the human being and the world, the fact remains that Christian pneumatological terminology is rooted in that of the Jewish religion. In preaching and Catechesis therefore it will be necessary to point out this connection, underlining the main aspects.
…
…

vatican.va/jubilee_2000/magazine/documents/ju_mag_01021998_p-24_en.html

I see this as a small step in the right direction.

 

[Coder]

Can you demonstrate that the Father, Son, and Spirit each being distinct but all worthy of being worshipped as the one God is a pagan influence?

Hi Wesrock,

No doubt there are Scriptures that support the Trinity e.g. in the Gospel of John, a later Gospel and interestingly different than the synoptics.

Consider all the Scriptures that refer to baptism in the name of Jesus (God) alone.

Acts 2:38, Acts 8:16, Acts 10:48, Acts 19:5, Acts 22:16

Consider all the Scriptures like St. Paul “He is the image of the invisible God”. This is the correct terminology from a devout Jew who would know. But we also had to relate the Gospels to a huge pagan environment.

There are sometimes apparent contradictions in Scripture that the Church as must decide the weight and meaning of and form doctrine. The Church is (rightly) not a Bible-only Church because the Bible is not in 100% agreement (on the surface, at least in terminology etc.) in all Scriptures.

I propose that the Church adopted some Father-Son (e.g. Saturn-Jupiter) terminology in order to help relate to Roman pagans. This would also be understandable especially if it could help end persecution. I also propose that the Church insisted on including the “Holy Spirit” in the terminology to clarify that we are talking about the one Judeo-Christian God.

Ever notice all the emphasis in the Creeds on the “one God”, you alone are the Most High… They are dealing with pagans who believed in many “gods” and “sons of gods”.

 

[jcrichton]

The Holy Spirit is known in Judaism and is spoken of in Judaism today. …incorporeal God and His presence and acts, and in no way implies that God can be thought of as having parts/persons.

…God Himself simply took on the form of a human being while also remaining infinite - somewhat analogous to the burning bush when God spoke to Moses. Pure and simple theology as God, is Pure, Holy, and One.

Many Catholics may accept the Trinity theology not because they understand it and embrace but because this is what was “handed down”.

I don’t dispute that Catholic Church leaders and faithful are sincere… What I’m saying is that people might want to take a look at the proper perspective that Catholicism has of the Bible (unlike fundamental Protestants). That is that is must be understood in its context and I propose that it’s context was in a Greek/Roman/pagan world that may have influenced not only the wording but also the accepted canons. The proper Jewish theology may have been overridden to too much an extent.

Jewish theology we should respect and refer to because of the Jewish roots. The Church doesn’t pagan roots. The Church doesn’t have Greek roots. The Church doesn’t have Roman roots. The Church has Jewish roots.

Christians are simply fortunate enough to be grafted on the same tree and heirs of the same promise - that’s all. How can you have a valid theology that contradicts the tree you are grafted on to in regards to the oneness of God? The Church has corrected many errors in views of other faiths, and theology over the centuries. Consider that it’s possibly time to correct this one and purify the theology of influences that don’t come from the Jewish roots.

Godo Bless

Hi!
I see that you’ve given this issue much thought.

Please do not misunderstand my confrontational approach as dismissive of my Jewish roots. As a Catholic I cannot separate Judaism from my Faith base–it would be tantamount to Protestants (and the world at large) removing Catholic roots from their existence: saying it isn’t there don’t make it so!

Theology… it is one of the most perplexing terms that I know… it is a source of thousands of years in the making and composed by tens if not hundreds of disciplines. While you speak of Judaism as the foundation of Catholicism (Christianity) you seem to not take into consideration that Judaism is not a single discipline. It is the reason why Christ condemned the religious elite since they incorporated tenets that God did not intend and they ignored (and more damaging, taught) God’s Law (Commandments) in place of their own diluted versions.

There’s a passage in Scriptures where some of these elite confront Jesus–He corrects them and even His own Disciples are taken back by His Command: “it was not so from the Beginning…” In another similar example we have the Sadducees challenging Jesus as He shuts them down pointing out the flaw in their theology: “it will not be so in Heaven, for you will be as angels” As it turns out Judaism was not practiced according to God’s Commandments but through selective and water down versions to fit the various branch theology.

As for your conclusions… it would be as clear cut as you surmise (One God–hold everything else theology) if that One God would have chosen to Reveal Himself in such clear cut way. But He did not!

Let’s visit one premise:

Do you believe in God? Do you believe God?

If you believe God, why do you challenge (question in your heart and mind) His Revelations?:

because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. (St. Matthew 1:20c)

“Where is the one who has been born king of the Jews? We saw his star when it rose and have come to worship him.” (St. Matthew 2)

35 The angel answered, “The Holy Spirit will come on you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called** the Son of God.** (St. Luke 1:35)

41 When Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit. 42 In a loud voice she exclaimed: “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the child you will bear! 43 But why am I so favored, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? 44 As soon as the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy. (St. Luke 1:41-44)

21 When all the people were being baptized, Jesus was baptized too. And as he was praying, heaven was opened 22 and the Holy Spirit descended on him in bodily form like a dove. And a voice came from heaven: “You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased.” (St. Luke 3:21-22)
It is God’s Revelation that He Exists as the Father, as the Son, and as the Holy Spirit.

…it is difficult to comprehend such relationship… but there are enough windows in Scriptures to allow the Light to shine in:

24 God is a spirit; and they that adore him, must adore him in spirit and in truth.

(St. John 4:24)
…and as far as contradicting theology, here’s what Jesus had to say about Judaism and God’s Command in reference to Worship:

21 Jesus saith to her: Woman, believe me, that the hour cometh, when you shall either on this mountain, nor in Jerusalem, adore the Father

. 23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true adorers shall adore the Father in spirit and in truth. For the Father also seeketh such to adore him. (St. John 4:21, 23)
Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Hi Wesrock,

Greek: The god Apollo is the son of the god Zeus.
Roman: The god Jupiter is the son of the god Saturn.

Apollo is a god.
Zeus is a god.
Zeus is not Apollo.

The list goes on and on.

They have gods that are patrons of things. We have saints that are patrons of things.

Their statues are similar to Christian statues.

Christianity gives new meaning to Jewish passover. Christianity gives new meaning to Roman and Greek theology/culture. This is fine as long as we don’t let it over-impact our understanding of the oneness of God IMHO.

Hi!
I think you are confusing One God Revealed as Three Divine Persons with a smorgasbord of Gods (monotheism vs. pantheism)–Zeus was but one of many gods and demigods, which he and the other gods brought to existence.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[Coder]

Hi, suggest read post #21, #22, #23 (just previous) to yours in this thread. It discusses the possible Roman pagan (and perhaps Greek pagan) influences in Scripture itself. This is not unusual for Scriptures to use the terminology of the audience that you are trying to reach but the audience is different today. The Pope says that this is not an era of change, but a change of an era.

God Bless

 

[jcrichton]

I don’t think that Coder is saying that our theology has been influenced by Greek polytheism, but that Christianity has given new meaning to it. We did use Greek terms in describing the Trinity, such as homoousios, and other groups used heteroousios and homoiousios.

…actually, he is saying exactly that… he surmises that if not for adapting pagan values we would have a clean theology of One God (never mind the determination of that One God to Be Known as Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit) so that the human mind can conceive a “proper understanding” of God.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[Coder]

Hi!
I think you are confusing One God Revealed as Three Divine Persons with a smorgasbord of Gods (monotheism vs. pantheism)–Zeus was but one of many gods and demigods, which he and the other gods brought to existence.

Hi, what I proposed:

The Church was teaching pagans about the one God and the Church adopted some of their language of the day for this purpose.

Greeks/Romans/pagans. They even believed that some humans were “sons of on their gods”. So if you’re trying to teach the incarnation, it seems obvious that you must emphasize the Holy Spirit if you are going to use their (Father-Son [Saturn-Jupiter]) terminology to help teach them. Why do you think we ended up with "Father, Son, and very importantly IMHO Holy Spirit.

Suggest, read posts #21 to #23.

The Holy Spirit is the way to distinguish the one true Judeo-Christian God from all the pagan deities.

 

[Coder]

…actually, he is saying exactly that… he surmises that if not for adapting pagan values we would have a clean theology of One God

Yes! that’s basically what I’m saying. Except that I would say “pagan language” as a means of relating to them. And I would say more “simple theology” as the true God is One, Holy, Pure, and Simple

As a fallout from dealing with the pagans of the time, we have to write explanations for how the Trinity does not mean three Gods, etc. Any devout Jew at the time and today would never believe that God has parts/persons even as a concept. Why? Because it confuses the concept of the oneness/purity/simpleness of God.

As you pointed out, Jesus said “God is spirit”. Simple, Pure, Holy, Alleluia, Amen.

That and St Paul’s “He is the image of the invisible God” are the Scriptures we need to be focusing on today, now that we no longer deal mainly with Greek and especially Roman pagans.

 

[jcrichton]

I’m proposing:

a.) That the Holy Spirit is a manner of speaking about God in Judaism that Jesus and the Apostles knew.
b.) That manner of speaking had no more bearing on their understanding of God as being manifested in persons than Jews today have.
c.) “sons of God” and “son of God” had connotations and meaning in both Jewish Scripture and theology as well as Greek and Roman pagan beliefs.
d.) Jewish Scripture and terminology itself may have been influenced by pre-monotheistic/pagan beliefs/writings.
e.) These underdeveloped ways of speaking in Judaism as well as Greek and Roman pagan “god” terminology and concepts influenced the wording of Christian Scriptures.
f.) Jesus tried to straighten them all out by explaining about Himself as God become man.
g.) Christians got the message, but carried over too much of this ancient Jewish and pagan terminology including by trying to relate the reality of God becoming man to a huge pagan environment including government that thought in terms of “gods” and “sons of gods”.
h.) 1700 years later, people still use this terminology to talk about God becoming man and instead of enlightening them to God as it did pagans, it confuses them and they accept it even though it can give incorrect concepts about the oneness of God.
i.) People have asked Jews for centuries why you don’t accept Jesus and it’s because they have stayed true to their covenant in belief in the one God, the same God that became man. However our speaking about God this way has and continues to interfere with the acceptance of Christ by those that may be more open to Him.

***That’s ***what I’m saying.

Let’s take it from your understanding of “call no one Rabbi”

Did you know that it was a practice to pump themselves up? So Jesus is not erasing the word from the vernacular but the inflammatory custom of placing themselves above man–and at times, even above God.

…so while your intentions may be quite benign and edifying, it falls short of its function since you are pronouncing judgment erroneously.

Error slips in when we lack full understanding and full revelation… your argument is based on the merging of preconception, faulty conclusions, and misinformed understanding:

a) only you, Judaism and those such as JWs hold such understanding.
b) ??? I don’t know the mind of every Jewish person who practices Judaism.
c) did you missed the part where they tried to kill Jesus for claiming that He was the Son of God–clearly His claim went far beyond your description!
d) ? So no Inspiration of the Holy Spirit?
e) ? Again, not by Inspiration of the Holy Spirit, but adaptation of “sounds good” terms?
f) ? So in your estimation, Jesus failed completely, correct?
g) ? So Christians contradict Judaic theology but also embraces those things that causes them to force Jews to reject Christ as their Messiah and Lord and Savior?
h) ? So the pagans got it right–yet do not believe–and the Christians believe but do not know the truth that the pagan know?
I) ? …you really don’t understand Judaism do you? Are you not aware that Judaism rejects God becoming man?

Please do not misunderstand my curt counter points as an assault/dismissive–I feel that you are truly seeking to understand God’s Revelations.

May the Holy Spirit Guide you to the Fullness of Truth!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[Coder]

May the Holy Spirit Guide you to the Fullness of Truth!

Exactly, may He guide us all. So why can’t you say “May God guide you to the Fullness of Truth!” ?

Of course you can. There is no difference. So, if there is no difference, why is additional terminology necessary?

The terminology is baggage from having to deal with Greek/Roman/pagans. Jesus and disciples (Jews) and the early Church know that using the term “Holy Spirit” from the OT (remember the NT was not even written/canonized yet) would distinguish the one true God from pagan gods - paganism had a pervasive concept of “father gods” and “son gods”

 

[jcrichton]

Hi, what I proposed:

The Church was teaching pagans about the one God and the Church adopted some of their language of the day for this purpose.

Greeks/Romans/pagans. They even believed that some humans were “sons of on their gods”. So if you’re trying to teach the incarnation, it seems obvious that you must emphasize the Holy Spirit if you are going to use their (Father-Son [Saturn-Jupiter]) terminology to help teach them. Why do you think we ended up with "Father, Son, and very importantly IMHO Holy Spirit.

Suggest, read posts #21 to #23.

The Holy Spirit is the way to distinguish the one true Judeo-Christian God from all the pagan deities.

The problem with that proposition is that God does not identify Himself as God with a couple of cameo appearances in the form of Jesus and the Holy Spirit: Your have Jesus being Baptized by John, the Holy Spirit in corporeal from as a dove, and the voice of the Father from Heaven… unless you can twist this to God confusing issues, there could be but the fact that: Jesus was Baptized by John and as Revelation from the One God, the Father, He made it known that Jesus, His Son (the Eternal Word) was Anointed by God, the Holy Spirit, as the One Messiah, the God Who Is to Come!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[Coder]

The problem with that proposition is that God does not identify Himself as God with a couple of cameo appearances in the form of Jesus and the Holy Spirit: Your have Jesus being Baptized by John, the Holy Spirit in corporeal from as a dove, and the voice of the Father from Heaven… unless you can twist this to God confusing issues, there could be but the fact that: Jesus was Baptized by John and as Revelation from the One God, the Father, He made it known that Jesus, His Son (the Eternal Word) was Anointed by God, the Holy Spirit, as the One Messiah, the God Who Is to Come!

Maran atha!

Angel

Again, it is not unreasonable to understand that the Scriptures themselves were influenced by and used language that the various peoples including Jews/Greeks/Romans/pagans could relate to. Why do you think there such a hodgepodge of ways of referring to God in the NT?

As you pointed out, Jesus said “God is spirit”. Simple, Pure, Holy, Alleluia, Amen.

That and St Paul’s “He is the image of the invisible God” are the Scriptures we need to be focusing on today, now that we no longer deal mainly with Greek and especially Roman pagans.

Please refer to this Vatican document (16 years ago) about terminology). It’s the very first steps IMHO.

THE JEWISH «ROOTS» OF THE HOLY SPIRIT
Lea Sestieri

…
…
Although in Jewish scripture the Holy Spirit is never presented as a person but rather as a divine power capable of transforming the human being and the world, the fact remains that Christian pneumatological terminology is rooted in that of the Jewish religion. In preaching and Catechesis therefore it will be necessary to point out this connection, underlining the main aspects.
…
…

vatican.va/jubilee_2000/m…8_p-24_en.html

 

[jcrichton]

Yes! that’s basically what I’m saying. Except that I would say “pagan language” as a means of relating to them. And I would say more “simple theology” as the true God is One, Holy, Pure, and Simple

As a fallout from dealing with the pagans of the time, we have to write explanations for how the Trinity does not mean three Gods, etc. Any devout Jew at the time and today would never believe that God has parts/persons even as a concept. Why? Because it confuses the concept of the oneness/purity/simpleness of God.

As you pointed out, Jesus said “God is spirit”. Simple, Pure, Holy, Alleluia, Amen.

That and St Paul’s “He is the image of the invisible God” are the Scriptures we need to be focusing on today, now that we no longer deal mainly with Greek and especially Roman pagans.

Now you’ve hit the nail!

Concept!

It is not about our ability to understand God.

It is about God’s Revelations: In the Beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God.

Either you accept this as a theological Revelation or you must reject the Gospel of John.

Yet, if you reject the Gospel of John you must also reject the whole of the New Testament since it attests that Jesus is God, the Holy Spirit is God, the Father is God.

While I must agree with you that the evolving Church had to address issues, form doctrine, using the language comprises the world around her, I cannot more fervently reject your conclusions.

I’m Dominican (born in the Dom. Rep.), Catholic by birth (and later by choice); ignorant of most non-Catholic belief systems; Faithful to God through Scriptures and the Church; Faithful to the Father, though not always calling Him Abba; Faithful to Jesus, in Whom I am coinheritor of the Kingdom; Faithful to the Holy Spirit, the Lord Giver of Life, in Whom I am coinheritor of the Kingdom… Can you show me where ancient pagan belief systems influenced me?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Exactly, may He guide us all. So why can’t you say “May God guide you to the Fullness of Truth!” ?

Of course you can. There is no difference. So, if there is no difference, why is additional terminology necessary?

The terminology is baggage from having to deal with Greek/Roman/pagans. Jesus and disciples (Jews) and the early Church know that using the term “Holy Spirit” from the OT (remember the NT was not even written/canonized yet) would distinguish the one true God from pagan gods - paganism had a pervasive concept of “father gods” and “son gods”

…again, you are missing information–Christ adamantly told His Disciples that He had to return to the Father so that He may send the other Paraclete (the Holy Spirit) Who would guide the Church to the Fullness of Truth.

Jesus made the connection for me. I follow His Command to rely on the Holy Spirit as my Guide.

You are confused my friend (as some of our Popes can become, sometimes). Baggage is that which one carries along to and fro (including the chips on shoulders bit); Revelation is what God determines to let man know. Revelation is never baggage. Revelation is never superfluous. Revelation is never wrong!

You may reject Christ’s Word.

I must adhere to His Teachings!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[Coder]

Now you’ve hit the nail!

Concept!

It is not about our ability to understand God.

It is about God’s Revelations: In the Beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God.

Either you accept this as a theological Revelation or you must reject the Gospel of John.

Yet, if you reject the Gospel of John you must also reject the whole of the New Testament since it attests that Jesus is God, the Holy Spirit is God, the Father is God.

Pagan terminology. Saturn-Jupiter, “father gods”, “son gods”, Father-Son, is the Greek/Roman/Pagan part of Scriptural language to relate God to pagans, “Holy Spirit” is the distinguishing Jewish part of Scriptural language to clarify that we are referring to the one true Judeo-Christian God.

At Mass:

I believe in “one God”
You alone are the Most High
“…in the unity of the Holy Spirit…”

In the early Church you had many, many recent converts from paganism. The language of the mass was relating to them as well as keeping with Jewish roots - that’s all. Now, we have terminology as a fallout - that’s all it is. God is unchangeable, it’s just terminology and maybe the Church in decades centuries to come can gently move further away from these pagan influences to give further glory to the one true God.

(As I said, I don’t [necessarily] dispute that the Catholic Church is the one true Church. However, being a very early/original Church, it has some terminology that must be understood in the proper light IMHO).

God Bless

 

[Coder]

…again, you are missing information–Christ adamantly told His Disciples that He had to return to the Father so that He may send the other Paraclete (the Holy Spirit) Who would guide the Church to the Fullness of Truth.

My dear friend, as I say, suggest read my posts. The Holy Spirit is Jewish language that Jesus and His disciples (not pagans) would understand. They also would not think of God as having parts/persons by speaking of the Holy Spirit (as you say Jesus Himself said “God is spirit”). The term “Holy Spirit” is simply a way of referring to God that the Jewish people already knew. See the Vatican document that I linked to that explains about the Jewish roots of the Holy Spirit.

God Bless.

 

[jcrichton]

Again, it is not unreasonable to understand that the Scriptures themselves were influenced by and used language that the various peoples including Jews/Greeks/Romans/pagans could relate to. Why do you think there such a hodgepodge of ways of referring to God in the NT?

As you pointed out, Jesus said “God is spirit”. Simple, Pure, Holy, Alleluia, Amen.

That and St Paul’s “He is the image of the invisible God” are the Scriptures we need to be focusing on today, now that we no longer deal mainly with Greek and especially Roman pagans.

Please refer to this Vatican document (16 years ago) about terminology). It’s the very first steps IMHO.

vatican.va/jubilee_2000/m…8_p-24_en.html

Again. Terminology. Words. Root. Usage. Definition… none of that is theology; none of that is Revelation.

You are confusing Revelation with terms.

God Calls His Son, Jesus, God–this same God, Yahweh, the Father, Who adamantly Revealed in the Old Testament that He is the Only God–that there existed no other god beside Him; that before, with, and after Him there is not God… Yet He Chooses to Reveal that He is God, and that His Son is God.

God, the Son, transfers to the Holy Spirit that which is God: everything that I have I gave to Him; everything that the Father has is Mine.

Further, He clearly states that only blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is the only sin that will not be forgiven of man.

While the Father Reveals that by no other Name given is there Salvation but through Jesus.

I know that it is hard to understand these Revelations… but Revelations are not meant to be understood by human means:

12 Now we have received not the spirit of this world, but the Spirit that is of God; that we may know the things that are given us from God. 13 Which things also we speak, not in the learned words of human wisdom; but in the doctrine of the Spirit, comparing spiritual things with spiritual. (1 Corinthians 2:12-13)

Let go of what you think you know about God; allow the Holy Spirit to broaden your understanding!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Pagan terminology. Saturn-Jupiter, “father gods”, “son gods”, Father-Son, is the Greek/Roman/Pagan part of Scriptural language to relate God to pagans, “Holy Spirit” is the distinguishing Jewish part of Scriptural language to clarify that we are referring to the one true Judeo-Christian God.

At Mass:

I believe in “one God”
You alone are the Most High
“…in the unity of the Holy Spirit…”

In the early Church you had many, many recent converts from paganism. The language of the mass was relating to them as well as keeping with Jewish roots - that’s all. Now, we have terminology as a fallout - that’s all it is. God is unchangeable, it’s just terminology and maybe the Church in decades centuries to come can gently move further away from these pagan influences to give further glory to the one true God.

(As I said, I don’t [necessarily] dispute that the Catholic Church is the one true Church. However, being a very early/original Church, it has some terminology that must be understood in the proper light IMHO).

God Bless

I respect your understanding… I also see the circle we are running about…

God Bless!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

My dear friend, as I say, suggest read my posts. The Holy Spirit is Jewish language that Jesus and His disciples (not pagans) would understand. They also would not think of God as having parts/persons by speaking of the Holy Spirit (as you say Jesus Himself said “God is spirit”). The term “Holy Spirit” is simply a way of referring to God that the Jewish people already knew. See the Vatican document that I linked to that explains about the Jewish roots of the Holy Spirit.

God Bless.

Not running from this; but it is circular.

Though you point to a Vatican document you misinterpret its content; Catholic understanding is not that the Holy Spirit is as Judaism understand Him; simply stated: they see and understand God as “X.”

Revelation will not change because man has difficulty with it; ask Jesus why He did not change: “you must chew/masticate/consume my flesh…” when all but Twelve in His audience left Him!

God Bless!

Maran atha!

Angel