[one God]

That is incorrect. The Trinity defines the Godhead as 3 persons, each is God. The 3 persons are one God. The trinity does not define each member of the Godhead as three gods. That is an extremely incorrect view of the Trinity.

THANK YOU.

People have no idea how the doctrine of the Trinity works these days.

[We can become gods?]

I think that the bible speaks of 2 kinds of what the old testament calls "elohim" (gods). Both uses can be seen in Psalm 82. First, the very word "elohim" is not a proper name, but is a generic title that usually refers more to a plane of existence. There are a few instances when it is used to talk about human judges (Ex 21:6; 22:8-9), and I think it's used to denote the function as an elohim rather than being, in the present tense, an elohim. The elohim are in heaven, men are on earth. I think this has carried over to our language today to what we call "angels" and "demons". Angels and demons are elohim (and yes I have verses).

Then there is a unique use of the of the title elohim when it refers to Israel's God. He is THE Elohim, Ha'elohim. He is utterly unique from everything else and is incomparable to anything else. He is the One and only Creator of everything, including all other elohim. Nothing is, was, or will be like Him. YHWH (Jehovah) is Elohim and no ther elohim is YHWH.

Deut 6:4:

Shema Yisrael,.. YHWH.........Eloheinu,. YHWH....... Ehud.

Hear O, Israel, Jehovah [is] our God, Jehovah [is] One.

Until now.

The Shema actually screams the doctrine of the trinity. As I think many of us know, the word "Elohim" denotes three or more figures. And the word used for "one" in the passage is "echad", which describes a compound unity among 2 or more figures (the same word is used when the Bible describes marriage as becoming one flesh in Genesis 2:24).

So what the Shema is saying about YHWH is that He is three or more figures united as one Being.

[We can become gods?]

This Psalm has fascinated me mainly because of a constant reference to it from people outside traditional orthodoxy and Judaism. I respectfully, and humbly (since they are much smarter than me), disagree with Geisler and Howe on this one (I'm protestant, btw).

Here's my take on Psalm 82.

I think it's used as a polemic tactic against the gods of the nations. The Psalm does not address explicitly whether or not those gods are real or fake idols. It does seem to assume they are real in some sense, otherwise who is it God is judging? The Psalm carries with it a strong Canaanite theme to it:

82:1 Elohim stands in the assembly of El;

in the midst of the elohim he renders judgment.

The "assembly of El" is a phrase only used here in the entire bible. There is another possible reference to it in Isaiah 14 where it says, "stars of El". I see only 2 real possibilities here. (1) vs. 1 is a polemic tactic against the Canaanite high god El. Israel's God stands in El's assembly and just begins to run the show thereby showing the impotence of El to do anything about it. (2) El is refering Israel's God Himself and the one taking a stand in His assembly is a plenipotentiary agent.

I think (2) is more likely since at the end of the Psalm the standing elohim that has been rendering judgment calls on Elohim to stand and render judgment. The picture is that the El in vs. 1 is seated as judge and at the end of the Psalm the Elohim that has been rendering judgment on the gods of the nations calls on the seated One to stand and execute judgment on the nations themselves.

The other "elohim" (gods) mentioned in the passage are the gods of the nations. But they are not god in the same sense as either El that is seated or the Elohim that is standing. They are in fact incapable of executing justice properly as they make unjust decisions according to vs. 2. These gods don't even "know or understand" and they stumble around in darkness. In fact, they will die "like men" and fall like any other ruler. There is a distinction drawn between the elohim and men. The elohim here are not men. But they are not elohim in the same sense as the standing one or the seated one are because they are being judged by these other 2 and can't do anything about it.

The standing Elohim would be a plenipotentiary of the seated El since it seems that the execution of the verdict depends solely on the seated El.

Now, since I am Christian, I must also be able to cohere this understanding with the way Jesus is using it in John 10 or I must find another way to explain it.

In the conext of the passage, Jesus is defending His unique relationship to the Father. And He does this by appealing to Psalm 82.

The first thing to note is that He says "Is it not written in your law". This is interesting because this is a Psalm and is not located in the Torah. What is Jesus talking about? Does Jesus not understand what the Torah is? Of course he understands, and I think this shows a high degree of understanding of Torah. I think He is talking about the "Oral Torah" which many Jews adhered to, and Jews today adhere to. This was a Pharisee belief that God had delivered a written Torah and an oral Torah to Moses on Sinai. Lucky for us, the Rabbi's eventually wrote down the oral Torah. So, what does the Oral Torah say about Psalm 82?

Mishnah Avot:

And also in the Targum, an interesting version of Psalm 82 shows up:

This is the mindset Jesus is addressing. In Hebrew, "elohim" doesn't always refer to deity, and that reading was how the Jewish people were reading the Psalm ("rulers" or "judges"). The people he was addressing thought that Psalm 82 was talking about rulers/judges of Israel who God gave the Torah to on Sinai. In John 10, Jesus is using this and turning it in on them and this is evident in the passage:

10:35 If those people to whom the word of God came were called ‘gods’ (and the scripture cannot be broken),

and he was doing this while defending His unique relationship to the Father. He is not affirming that they are indeed gods. He is using the Psalm with the same intent that the original author did - polemic. If they had applied the entire Psalm to themselves they would have seen that the "gods" there do not "know are understand", a phrase Jesus picks on in John 10 also:

10:38b so that you may come to know and understand that I am in the Father and the Father is in me.”

and they would have been aware that these gods in the Psalm are killed. Not really someone you want to identify with huh? I think Jesus is also identifying Himself with the elohim that is standing in Psalm 82 and rendering judgment since the context is Jesus defending His unique relationship with the Father and since Jesus says, "I said you are gods". I think Jesus is identifying Himself as the One that is rendering judgment. In Psalm 82 the judgment is rendered on the gods of the nations. In John 10 the judgment is rendered on the Jewish leaders, who identify themselves as the "gods" in the Psalm.

Jesus is not affirming they are gods; that grossly takes the passage out of context. He's, if anything, doing the opposite by rendering judgment on them, but I think affirming or denying their deity is not involved in the passage or a concern of the passage at all, especially since Jews didn't consider themselves to be divine.

He is not affirming that their understanding of Psalm 82, "rulers" or "judges" of the Torah, is correct either since there is a remark to "your law" that seems to draw a distinction between what Jesus was affirming and what they affirmed (kind of like, "your law, not mine").

The original context of Psalm 82 is judgment on the gods of the nations. If anything, the the oral law has misapplied that Psalm and Jesus exploits the opprotunity to defend His unique relationship to the Father and their subordination to Him. Just as Psalm 82 was a polemic against the gods of the nations, Jesus uses Psalm 82 as a polemic against those standing there due to their understanding of Psalm 82.

Hope that helps.

That is a very helpful response.

[We can become gods?]

May I ask you a question?

Why differentiate between God and god? Why not say, "There are no gods formed after me rather than Gods?"

Well, when the Bible says "gods", with the lower case "g", it's referring to idols, which are in reality demons posing to be "gods".

They sacrificed unto demons who are not God; To gods whom they knew not, To new ones, who came newly up, Whom your fathers revered not. - Deuteronomy 32:17

The Old Testament Hebrew original languages usually uses the word "elohei" for them rather than "el, ela, or elohim".

So if you're saying "Gods" with an upper case "G", you're suggesting there is more than one all-powerful, transcendent, and sovereign Being.

[We can become gods?]

Just really quick compare to Psalms 82:6 and John 10: 34-35

I touched upon this in another thread, which you might have read:

http://www.lds.net/forums/learn-about-mormon-church/14485-one-god-2.html#post263047

"The context of this passage reveals that Christ had just pronounces Himself one with the Father saying, "I and My Father are one" (10:30). The Jews wanted to stone Him because they thought Christ was blaspheming since He was making Himself out to be equal with God (vv. 31-33).

Jesus responded by quoting Psalm 82:6 which says, "I said, you are gods." This psalm addresses judges who are judging unjustly [Psalm 82:2]. The title of "gods" is not addressed to everyone, but only to these judges about whom Jesus said are those to "whom the word of God came" (v. 35). Jesus was showing that if the OT Scriptures could give some divine status to divinely appointed judges, why should they find it incredible that He should call Himself the Son of God? Thus, Jesus was giving a defense for His own deity, not for the deification of man." (Geisler/Howe 417 The Big Book of Bible Difficulties)

That's the best response I can come up with.

[We can become gods?]

I'm doing some research on this. But in part of Isaiah chapter 43, the people were being chastized for worshipping idols. They were being asked to repent and return to the Lord. Part of what was being explained was the Lord reminding the people that HE is the one God...not the idols they were worshipping.

Yes, that's part of the context. But the other half is God's statement: There has been no God before Him, and niether will there be after Him.

Let's say I got in a line to buy lunch for myself. If I was the only one in line, and also somehow the only customer the restaurant had all day, that would make me both the first customer and the last customer for that day, right?

Well, rather than using a time segment of a day, God declares He is the first and the last for all eternity (Isaiah 44:6). The first and the last what? The first and the last God. He even adds (in that verse reference I just put) that besides Him there is no other God. He has been the first for the entire infinite duration that He has been in existence, and because He is the only God, He will also be the last for the entire infinite duration that He will continue to exist in.

It may sound a little silly, but if we go back to my analogy, this would be the equivalent of me saying "I am the first and the last customer today, and besides me there is no other customer today."

[We can become gods?]

Let me see if I understand the LDS beliefs on this topic correctly:

Human beings were born in heaven as the son or daughter of a god and goddess before they were born physically here on earth.

Being born into this life here on earth is something that we agreed to in heaven. This life serves as a test and a means of obtaining exaltation one day to godhood.

One achieves exaltation by living a life of obedience to Mormon teaching and practices. Those exalted to godhood will inhabit a planet and procreate spirit children.

A supporting quote from Brigham Young would be this: "the Lord created you and me for the purpose of becoming Gods like himself...We are created to become Gods like unto our Father in heaven.” (Journal of Discourses, 3:93)

So, having that all being said (and if I'm wrong, please correct me), how does the Mormon Church interpret Isaiah 43:10?

Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

[one God]

How can they be three different "Gods" under one "Divine Council" if God made this statement in Isaiah 44:6 & 8?

6 Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God...

8Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have not I told thee from that time, and have declared it? ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any.

Scripture clearly states there there is only one God. If there is only one God, and scripture declares that the Father is God, Jesus is God, the Holy Spirit is God, (note: not "a" God) then we are forced to conclude that They are all one God existing in three centers of consciousness.

[There is ONLY ONE GOD]

Well it's good that we can at least agree that their is only one God.

Yay for Unity!

But doesnt Abraham 5:1-21 mention several "Gods" creating everything in Pearl of Great Price?

[one God]

But doesn't A Pearl of Great Price mention several "Gods" creating everything in Abraham 5:1-21?

[There is ONLY ONE GOD]

Deuteronomy 6:4 doesn't even say that 'there is only one God' anyway. Sheesh.

-a-train

Isaiah 46:9 does

"Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me."

so does Isaiah 45:22

"Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else."

so does 1 Kings 8:60

"That all the people of the earth may know that the LORD is God, and that there is none else."

.....and Deuteronomy 4:39

"Know therefore this day, and consider it in thine heart, that the LORD he is God in heaven above, and upon the earth beneath: there is none else."

[who i am, what i believe]

Hello, I'm a non-denominational Christian who attends a Calvary Chapel in California

I believe in the sacrifice of Christ on the cross, that He was crucified for the sins of the world by His own decision because He loves us with an infinite and immeasurable love. I believe that three days after His crucifixion, Jesus rose again from the dead. I believe that Jesus Christ alone is the Mediator between man and the Father, and that He alone is worthy for this purpose. I believe that all who believe this in their heart and confess it with their mouth will be saved by faith alone in Him.

I do not believe in salvation by good works, but rather, good works by salvation.

I believe that the Holy Bible (Old Testament + New Testament) and the Holy Bible alone to be the inerrant and infallible word of God. It is God breathed, written by men, has succesfully withstood scrutiny from generation to generation, and the final authority over my life. It is a document that God holds on higher importance than His own name (Psalm 138:2).

I believe in the doctrine of the trinity and it's fullness: There is only ONE God, that God has one nature, but three centers of consciousness - the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. I also believe that this doctrine is undeniably supported throughout scripture (1 John 5:7, Deu 6:4, John 1:1). Anyone who says Jesus is not God, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, is calling Jesus a liar (Exodus 3:14, John 8:58).

I believe that Jesus Christ has niether returned to this world yet, nor has established His millenial kingdom. I believe that when He does this, EVERY EYE will see Him, and that it will be no secret event whatsoever.

I believe in a place of eternal punishment called Hell, and that all who do not put their faith in Jesus Christ will be condemned to this place.

[I have a question...]

Ugh not this question again.

I apologize if I'm personifying annoying cliche's

[I have a question...]

How would you be able to find scientific evidence that a world has become celestialized? How would you be able to find scientific evidence that spirits lived on a planet? I don't know.

In answer to your question, No. No scientific evidence.

I have a question. Do you know of any scientific evidence that the world was created in six days? The scriptures say it is so. God says he did it in six days, so it must be so.

Ben Raines

I'll quote the Apologetics Study Bible on this one:

"Old earth creationists (OCs) argue against 24-hour creation days for reasons such as these: (1) The Hebrew word for 'day' (yom) is used in different ways in the creation account. For instance, Gn 1:5 refers yom only to daytime (daylight), not night-time. Also, Gn 2:4, literally translated, speaks of 'the yom that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens.' (2) God's rest on the seventh 'day' has no evening and morning (Gn2:2-3), and Heb 4:3-11 portrays this same Sabbath as continuing to the present time. (3) Adam could not have named all the birds and animals in 24 hours according to Gn 2." (Cabal 4)

[I have a question...]

I wouldn't know, I'm new here. lol

Is there a response to this though?

[I have a question...]

I read where Brigham Young, the second president of the LDS Church, taught that both the moon and the sun were inhabited by people (Journal of Discourses, 1870, v.13, p.271). Has the Mormon Church ever found scientific evidence of that to be true?

"We are called ignorant; so we are: but what of it? Are not all ignorant? I rather think so. Who can tell us of the inhabitants of this little planet that shines of an evening, called the moon? When we view its face we may see what is termed "the man in the moon," and what some philosophers declare are the shadows of mountains. But these sayings are very vague, and amount to nothing; and when you inquire about the inhabitants of that sphere you find that the most learned are as ignorant in regard to them as the most ignorant of their fellows. So it is with regard to the inhabitants of the sun. Do you think it is inhabited? I rather think it is. Do you think there is any life there? No question of it; it was not made in vain. It was made to give light to those who dwell upon it, and to other planets; and so will this earth when it is celestialized."