What did Paul mean?

[Elijah John]

who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped

For debate:

What did Paul mean when he said Christ was "in the form of God"?

-Aren't we all made in the image of God?
-Did Paul believe that Christ was God? Or that Christ was God in disguise?

[dio9]

Paul's meaning is very close maybe the same as the Upanishads Atman and Brahman relationship ,where his soul is (homouslous) of the same stuff as Father, not the Father , he is the person of the son.
The difference between Brahmanism and Christianity is one of quantity not quality. Brahmanism holds the very substance of God is in everyone to be uncovered.
Quantitatively greater than the Christian distinction where this quality is exclusively only in Jesus.

What about the rest of us?

[bluethread]

I don't see how "The LORD is one" has any bearing on the nature of Christ, or vice versa. There is really no problem with seeing Christ exactly as he is presented in the Scriptures. (I Corinth.11:3)

I do agree that life is about service and not privilege, and that we should view it the same way.

I'm not sure, "I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God." is a slam dunk either. Whether Yeshua is a seperate being, or a different form of the same being, is not directly addressed there. The point of the passage is the establishment of an auhtority structure, not a differentiation beween Yeshua and Elohiem. I figure I will know that when I get there. For now, I just acknowledge the authority structure.

[onewithhim]

I don't see how "The LORD is one" has any bearing on the nature of Christ, or vice versa. There is really no problem with seeing Christ exactly as he is presented in the Scriptures. (I Corinth.11:3)

I do agree that life is about service and not privilege, and that we should view it the same way.

I'm not sure, "I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God." is a slam dunk either. Whether Yeshua is a seperate being, or a different form of the same being, is not directly addressed there. The point of the passage is the establishment of an auhtority structure, not a differentiation beween Yeshua and Elohiem. I figure I will know that when I get there. For now, I just acknowledge the authority structure.

Very good. Do you agree that if one person has authority over another that they are not EQUAL in authority?

[ttruscott]

Yes a THING can be made up of three components, but people are not made up of three other people.

If I may suggest...
Sure but GOD is not one person but is the UNITY, `echad, of three persons even if it is acceptable and proper to speak of HIM in the singular to emphasise that unity which
is not logically impossible so therefore it is open to this interpretation...

`echad is used to talk about the unity of two people during sex, Gen 2:24 That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh....a unity of flesh that cannot be seen so it remains mysterious. The Trinity is spoken of in this same way in the Shemah, as an unseeable but real Unity which we find out later is a unity of 3.

I tend to see this Unity of GOD being expressed by humans in the unity of flesh during sex as the reason why sex should be restricted to one marriage partner in accord with its type.

[ttruscott]

People can be made up by a body, a mind, and a soul... Or made up as blood muscles, and bone... Or limbs, head, and torso

This attack of the 'GOD in three persons' doctrine is considered a heresy by most Christians under the name of Sabellianism or modalism.

[2timothy316]

If you guys have back stepped on failed prophecies, what make you think you shouldnt backstep on this?

Because JWs did backstep on the trinity. Because the trinity was created in the 2nd and 3rd centuries. John, Matthew, etc. none of them teached the trinity. So JWs did backstep on the false teaching of the trinity and other failed teachings. Such as Christmas, Halloween, Easter...and people talk about us backstepping. Why aren't most religions backstepping on teaching of these false pagan holidays BTW?

Teaching there is one God and only one God was first. So if 'what is older' is what you go by to determine what is true than read the Bible, it will tell you there is only one Almighty God, Jehovah.

“Jehovah Our God Is One Jehovah�—Deuteronomy 6:4 (Written 1600+ years before the trinity was even thought of.)

[Checkpoint]

If Jesus were in the "form of God", wouldn't that have been obvious to all? Even the Pharisees and Saducees, even the Romans who crucified him?

Seems Jesus, even if he were God, was in the form of a completely human man.

If Jesus was in the "form of God" seems he even had his disciples fooled. At least until his resurrection. Then, was Jesus simply glorified, or did he simply shed his human disguise, and reveal his true form?

After his resurrection, Jesus sets the record straight.

John 20:17

Jesus said, "Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, 'I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.'"

Nothing could be clearer.

Paul agrees with him.

Ephesians 1:17

and asking that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the glorious Father, may give you a spirit of wisdom and revelation in your knowledge of Him.

Excellent.

Clear. Simple. I have to wonder why people, in the face of such clear unadulterated statements, choose to insist on the validity of verses that (there is scholarly evidence that they) have been tampered with.

Tampered with? Maybe in some cases.

But to me, it seems more likely they misread or misinterpret less clear verses and make them what decides the issue.

[Monta]

People can be made up by a body, a mind, and a soul... Or made up as blood muscles, and bone... Or limbs, head, and torso

This attack of the 'GOD in three persons' doctrine is considered a heresy by most Christians under the name of Sabellianism or modalism.

What Tart said is spot-on - body mind and soul.
And we are not three persons are we.

In God we have three attributes:
Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit.

[Checkpoint]

People can be made up by a body, a mind, and a soul... Or made up as blood muscles, and bone... Or limbs, head, and torso

This attack of the 'GOD in three persons' doctrine is considered a heresy by most Christians under the name of Sabellianism or modalism.

What Tart said is spot-on - body mind and soul.
And we are not three persons are we.

In God we have three attributes:
Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit.

I beg to differ.

Chalk and cheese.

God is one person, not two or three.

God IS Spirit;the Spirit is not an attribute.

The Son is a separate person, and is not an attribute of God.

[Checkpoint]

People can be made up by a body, a mind, and a soul... Or made up as blood muscles, and bone... Or limbs, head, and torso

This attack of the 'GOD in three persons' doctrine is considered a heresy by most Christians under the name of Sabellianism or modalism.

So?

As they do your PCE theology.

It's not about what the majority consider to be heresy, but what Jesus tells us is truth.

John 17:3

Now this is eternal life: that they know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom You have sent.