yes " Clete " i believe that the two men with the Lord who appeared to Abraham were the two angels who went down to Sodom ...
because the Scripture explains
Gen 18:22 And the """" two """" men turned their faces from thence, and went toward Sodom: but Abraham stood yet before the LORD.
Gen 19:1 And there came two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground;
this is basic bible stuff, second grade learning material....
This does not explain why you believe that it is "God manifested in flesh and two angels".
Do you even know how to have a normal discussion with people?
i was hoping we could move beyond a single step in our discussions and move away from the labeling part with " " " Godheadian and " " " Trinitarian " " " disagreements and accept the Scripture as it is transmitted in the original manuscripts and meaning..
No, you weren’t hoping for honest dialogue. You were hoping to cloak your denial of the Trinity in just enough vague spiritual language to pass it off as something other than it is. If you actually believed your views were normal, you'd write like a sane adult instead of typing like a cult pamphlet with a corrupted USB stick.
If you really thought your position could stand up to scrutiny, you'd want people to know exactly what you believe. You wouldn’t need to hide it under slippery phrases like “Godheadian” and “original manuscripts.” What you wanted was to float your heresy and pray no one in the room had the theological grounding or the spine to challenge you.
Sorry to disappoint you! That tactic might work on the crowd you preach to in real life, but it doesn’t fly here.
lets move together, ..... you and I, lets move beyond the first day visit with grandma in first grade sunday school and since you like to lurch and quickly recoil back to step one lets begin taking a second step together, to understands an adult lesson entering a basic bible class about God here on earth in the Lord Jesus Christ.
Wouldn't you like that! You'd love to pretend that the last couple of weeks didn't exist; that the fact that practically every syllable your come here to say has been handed back to you as a shredded mass of thoroughly refuted stupidity.
we see the passage in - John 3:13
:13 - And no man hath ascended into heaven, but he that descended from heaven, the Son of man who is in heaven.
we notice that Jesus did not come down from heaven in the same way he went back up to heaven, i believe that this detail is where so called " Godheadians / Trinitarians " do not fully do the gadget thingy through and many questions and disagreements arise between all of us Christians ..
simply that we do not consider the simple fact that Jesus did not come down from heaven as a man or even as human being
he came down from heaven implanted and conceived as nothing more than a spiritual seed of God in a human body that grew into a zygote, an embryo, a fetus and then began to absorb the blood and DNA from Mary
a command code / word from the Spirit - conceived Jesus the Anointing power.
the humanity of Jesus was not provided by God nor did God send Jesus to earth as a human but as a spiritual miracle that absorbed the humanity of Mary.
You’ve got so much confusion tangled up here, it’s hard to know where to start. But let’s take it from the top.
First, John 3:13 doesn’t say what you seem to think it does. It’s a statement about Christ’s authority, not about the method of His descent. The verse reads...
"No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man who is in heaven."
Jesus is speaking of His origin and His divine nature. He's not giving a lecture on biology. The verse affirms that the Son existed in heaven before taking on flesh. A point that demolishes Oneness theology, by the way!
Second, this idea that Jesus “absorbed humanity” from Mary has no scriptural basis whatsoever and is as heretical as anything I've ever heard in my entire life!
Hebrews 2:14 Inasmuch then as the children have partaken of flesh and blood, He Himself likewise shared in the same.
Not “absorbed,” not “implanted with code,” but
shared in the same!
He became fully human, body and soul. Philippians 2:7–8 says He was "made in the likeness of men" and was "found in appearance as a man." That’s full incarnation, not some weird halfway thing.
Third, your language about “command codes” and “spiritual seeds” sounds more like Gnostic mysticism or science fiction than Christian theology. Scripture doesn’t describe the incarnation using tech metaphors. The angel told Mary plainly, "That Holy One who is to be born will be called the Son of God" (Luke 1:35). He didn't say anything remotely similar to "That programmable entity that will gradually become human."
Finally, the eternal Word
became flesh (John 1:14). That’s not God pretending to be human, or growing into humanity like downloading a software update. That is God the Son - pre-existent, divine, and personal - taking on real, complete human nature. Not only that but doing so for the purpose of suffering death!
Revelation 1:11 saying, “I am the Alpha and the Omega, the
First and the
Last,”
17b “Do not be afraid; I am the First and the Last. 18 I am He who lives, and was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore."
You’re trying to defend Oneness theology by dismantling the full humanity of Christ, and in the process, you’ve made a mess of both Scripture and biology.
i hope this can repair the great chasm that heretical, erratic or radical groups and others have divided over. If we can start from basic Scriptural reality of what is in scripture - we can begin to move away from man made theories and see the simplicity of ourselves and even the simplicity of Mary herself
and see God for the power and greatness he truly is,. please remember that Roman Catholicism is a starting line or the birthplace and conception for many disagreements, debates and divisions - rather that we start from the truth in Gods word
You’re calling for unity, but you’re doing it by quietly accusing everyone else of being heretical, erratic, or radical. That’s not any sort of rhetorical bridge, that’s you being a hypocrite!
You say we should return to “basic Scriptural reality,” but that’s exactly what Trinitarians have always stood on. Scripture teaches clearly that the Word became flesh (John 1:14), not that “the Word became a zygote and slowly absorbed humanity from Mary.” That’s not “basic”; it’s irrational mysticism. It’s not simple; it’s a convoluted attempt to explain away the full personhood and incarnation of Christ.
Yes, Roman Catholicism introduced errors, no argument there. But you can’t point to Rome as the fountainhead of all disagreement and then use that as an excuse to reject the very doctrine the early church rightly preserved from Scripture, the full deity and full humanity of Jesus Christ, the eternal Son, distinct from the Father, made flesh for our salvation.
If we want to return to truth, we don’t do it by rewriting the incarnation with pseudo-biological metaphors and dismissing everything that came before us as “man-made.” We return by believing what is plainly written:
1 Timothy 3:16 “Great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifested in the flesh…”
Not “God projected code into a human shell.” Not “God became an impersonal anointing.” God became a man!
That’s not man-made, that’s Scripture! You don’t get to discard it under the guise of simplicity, no matter how conciliatory your tone.
