How do you reconcile the first Commandment with the trinity?

It appears to me that there is sufficient evidence to show that the supreme
being is capable of wearing more than one hat; and I suspect that maybe we
shouldn't be thinking of the supreme being as a person, rather, as an
extremely complex form of life that the human mind may not be able to
comprehend no matter how carefully it's explained in the simplest possible
language.

For example The Word-- as depicted in the Bible prior to its coming into the
world as a creature --is somehow a sentient form of radiance. (John 1:4-9,
cf. 1Tim 6:16, Heb 1:3, & Rev 21:23)

* According to the Bible, when Jesus returns; every eye shall see him. (Rev
1:7) I rather suspect he will be glowing very bright with an illumination
similar to the illumination that his friends saw radiating from him during the
so-called transfiguration; which Jesus explained was a glimpse of his
appearance during the kingdom age. In other words; when people see his
arrival, they won't actually see the man himself. Instead; they will see him
cloaked in something akin to a second Sun.
_

does the Son being a Man distinguish Him from the Father and Holy Spirit?

A couple verses that come to mind.

2 Corinthians 4:6
For EL, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of EL in the face of Yeshua Messiah.

Colossians 2

15 He(the Son) is the image of the invisible EL, the firstborn of all creation. 16 For by Him all things were created in the heavens and on the earth, visible things and invisible things, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things have been created through Him and for Him. 17 He is before all things, and in Him all things are held together. 18 He is the head of the body, the assembly, Who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He might have the preeminence. 19 For all the Fullness was pleased to dwell in Him, 20 and through Him to reconcile all things to Himself by Him, whether things on the earth or things in the heavens, having made peace through the blood of His cross.

Your understanding is appreciated. Thank you for the time you spent and explanations you provided on the previous posts as well.

this passage also

Hebrews 2

5 For He(the Father) didn’t subject the world to come, of which we speak, to angels. 6 But one has somewhere testified, saying,
“What is man, that You think of him?
Or the Son of man, that You care for Him?
7 You made Him(the Son) a little lower than the angels.
You crowned Him with glory and honor.
8 You have put all things in subjection under His feet.”*
For in that He(the Father) subjected all things to Him(the Son), He left nothing that is not subject to Him(the Son). But now we don’t yet see all things subjected to Him. 9 But we see Him Who has been made a little lower than the angels, Yeshua, for the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, that by the grace of EL He should taste of death for everyone.
10 For it became Him, for Whom are all things and through Whom are all things, in bringing many children to glory, to make the Author of their salvation perfect through sufferings.

Again, your understanding of these passages would be appreciated. Thank you

Jhn 10:38
But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.

Ipso facto, Jesus is the infinite God, who has in Him the infinite Father. Both of Whom have Names.

Somebody inform the JayJays.

Yahanan/John 14:28, "You have heard that I told you: I go away, but come again to you. If you loved Me, you would have rejoiced that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I."

John/Yahanan 17:17-24, “Set them apart in Your truth – Your Word is truth. As You sent Me into the world, I also sent them into the world. And for them I set Myself apart, so that they too might be set apart in truth. That they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, so that the world may believe that You have sent Me. And the glory which You gave Me, I have given them; that they may be in unity, just as We are in unity. I in them, and You in Me--so that they may be made perfect in unity; and that the world may know that You have sent Me, and have loved them, as You have loved Me. Father, it is My will that they, whom You gave Me, also be with Me where I am, that they may behold My glory which You have given Me; for You loved Me before the foundation of the world.”

1 John/Yahanan 2:6, "He who says he abides in Him, is himself also obligated to walk as He walked."

1 John 3:24, “And the one guarding His commands stays in Him, and He in him. And by this we know that He stays in us, by the Spirit which He gave us.”

Being in Him we can do His will;

John/Yahanan 15:5-16, "I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me, and I in him, produces much fruit; but without Me, you can do nothing. If anyone does not abide in Me, he is thrown away like a branch, and is withered; and they gather them and throw them into the fire, and they are burned. If you abide in Me, and letting My words; abide in you, you will ask what you will, and it will be done for you. In this is My Father glorified: when you produce much fruit; and in this way you become My disciples. Just as the Father has loved Me, so have I loved you; continue in My love. If you keep My Commands, you will abide in My love; just as I have kept My Father's Commands, and abide in His love. These things I have spoken to you, that My joy might remain in you, and that your joy might be complete. This is My Command: Love one another as I have loved you. Greater love has no one than this: that one would lay down his life on behalf of his brothers. You are My brothers, if you do whatever I command you."

If the Son is the "Image of the invisible EL(God, Theos, Elohim, etc)" does that also mean He, the Son, as a Man, is the visible Image of EL(God, Theos, Elohim, etc)?

Just mentioning this more about Calvary Chapel than their explanation of the trinity.
I live in a State that is Left Winged and does not promote anything Godly. However, the biggest Church Denomination is Calvary Chapel and it's supportive enough to have a Radio Station and broadcast. So, any time I am driving, I am listening to several of the Preachers and how they go from Genesis to Revelation and do it again and again until they die. How Chuck Smith did it. He, obviously, was their Top Dog of this Movement.

Personally, I don't think this Movement represents the Book of Acts, and many of the Scriptural Interpretations don't align and in some places just Out There.

I see how they took out of context meaning and applied the Greek Meaning to many Old Testament references. Most of their Churches use the KJV or NKJV and the Septuagint translation is an adulterated 10th Century Latin Vulgate, that had already destroyed the Work of Jerome, by adding baloney in both Testaments [CATHOLIC PERSONAL INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE]. Even Erasmus pointed this out because his Textus Receptus was based upon the 10th Century Version of the Latin Vulgate.

So, I don't buy a great portion of this explanation AT ALL!

It really does not align to even the 385 AD, and definitely NOWHERE close to the 325 AD, Creeds.

of course Hebrews 1 is central to the discussion as well. From HNV with a few edits.

1 EL(God, Theos, Elohim, etc), having in the past spoken to the fathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, 2 has at the end of these days spoken to us by His Son, Whom He appointed Heir of all things, through Whom also He made the worlds. 3 His Son is the radiance of His glory, the very Image of His substance, and upholding all things by the Word of His power, Who, when He(the Son) had by Himself purified us of our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high, 4 having become as much better than the angels as the more excellent Name He has inherited is better than theirs. 5 For to which of the angels did He(Father) say at any time,
“You are My Son.
Today I have become Your Father?”*
and again,
“I will be to Him a Father,
and He will be to Me a Son?”*
6 When He again brings in the Firstborn into the world He says, “Let all the angels of EL(God, Theos, Elohim, etc), worship Him.(the Son)” 7 Of the angels He says,
“He makes His angels winds,
and His servants a flame of fire.”*
8 But of the Son He says,
“Your throne, O EL(God, Theos, Elohim, etc), is forever and ever.
The scepter of uprightness is the scepter of Your Kingdom.
9 You have loved righteousness and hated iniquity;
therefore EL(God, Theos, Elohim, etc), Your EL(God, Theos, Elohim, etc), has anointed You with the oil of gladness above Your fellows.”*
10 And,
“You, Adonai(Kyrios, Lord), in the beginning, laid the foundation of the earth.
The heavens are the works of Your hands.
11 They will perish, but You continue.
They all will grow old like a garment does.
12 You will roll them up like a mantle,
and they will be changed;
but You are the same.
Your years won’t fail.”*
13 But which of the angels has He told at any time,
“Sit at My right hand,
until I make Your enemies the footstool of Your feet?”*
14 Aren’t they(the angels) all serving spirits, sent out to do service for the sake of those who will inherit salvation?

The quotes of the Father in Hebrews chapter 1 are from the Psalms, teaching us that the Psalms contain the prayers of the Son and quotes of the Father speaking to Him as well as the Holy Spirit praising both of them in various Psalms.

This is really quite incoherent.

The term πρόσωπον ("person") isn't applied to most figures in the NT or OT. But how do we determine if they are "persons"? Easy. They can talk. To each other. And can understand each other. And have a mind. And have a will. And never are they confused with the same "person" they are interacting with. The NT is replete with example after example of persons interacting with one another, and in the very same contexts which you draw upon to try to say that Jesus (the "earthly counterpart") speaks to the "heavenly counterpart."

You cite Matthew 10:20, but only put emphasis on a few words, without actually emphasizing the part (which you quoted), that says, "which speaks in you." That does not mean we are "puppets," in the way you suggest Christ (the "earthly counterpart") is.

If the Spirit of the Father speaks "in" and "through" the apostles, that does not make the apostles the same person as the Father, when in fact just a few words prior of the same passage, it states, "it is not you that speaks."

Why not cite Gal. 4:6 ('Because you are sons, God has sent the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying out, 'Abba! Father!'") while you're at it?

Instead of just citing Rom. 8:9 (as you did), why not also cite Rom. 8:26-27 ("...but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words")? How does the Spirit "intercede"? With whom? For whom? Through whom? To whom?

You cite Matthew 10:20, but only put emphasis on a few words, without actually emphasizing the part (which you quoted), that says, "which speaks in you."

If the Spirit of the Father speaks through the apostles, that does not make the apostles the same person as the Father, when in fact just a few words prior of the same passage, it states, "it is not you that speaks."

If it quacks like a duck, walks like a duck: Then it probably isn't a cow.

I have to say that your "Biblical" ignorance" is stunning! Hebrews 1:3 referring to Jesus Christ. "Who being the brightness of His glory, and the express image of His "PERSON, (that is God the Father) and upholding ALL things by the word of His power, (that is Jesus Christ power), when He himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;" KJB

Now, can you please reconcile what the Bible states clearly that God is a person with your statement that, "The Bible does not describe God as a person?" Why don't you understand that? But here's the "kicker" that makes your statement even more worse for you.

In the original Greek the word translated as "person" is "hypostasis" - "the substantial quality, nature, of a person or thing." The same word is rendered as "substance" in Hebrews 11:1. Furthermore, in every case, here we see the word "person" in the Bible (including"hypostatasis" ) and it is routinely used in the original Greek Scriptures in EXACTLY" the same way it is used in the Greek use of these Greek words to explain trinitarian theology to Greek speaking people.

So what does all this really mean, that is the meaning of these Greek words in the context of Hebrews 1:1-3? It means the writer of Hebrews is telling us that Jesus Christ is God because He has the same exact nature of His Father. This is a universal law, that all sons and daughters share the same nature as their father.

One of the other terms translated as "person" here is "prosopon" which is also translated as "face" most often, as "person" and also "presence" and "countenance" throughout the New Testament. In every case it means that by which the identity is expressed or manifest EXACTLY what is meant in trinitarian theology when we say that there are three "person" who share the same "nature."

If you don't believe me just look up in Strong's Lexicon #4383. That word "person" is used at 2 Corinthians 2:10 referring to Jesus Christ and at 1 Peter 1:11, "seeking to know what person or time the Spirit of Christ within them was indicating as He predicted the sufferings of Christ and the glories to follow." Finally, one last bit of advice! Don't ask questions unless you already know the answer.

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto

There are considerable problems here.

Why did you not consider Gen. 1:26, just one verse prior to the passage you’re commenting on, which places the word “likeness” in juxtaposition to “image”? Neither of these two terms are used in Ezekiel 1:5, therefore, why bring it up?

Genesis 1:26-28
Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image [b-tsal’menu], according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”

God created man in His own image [b-tsal’mow], in the image of God [b-tselem Elohim] He created him; male and female He created them. God blessed them; and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over every living thing that moves on the earth.

Further, in the Greek versions (LXX, Aquila, Symmachus, etc.) of the OT, the term used is εἰκών ("image"), from which we get the word, “icon.” However, in the Greek witnesses of Ezekiel, completely different Greek terms are used.

The problem you face is quite a common one: You're conflating ideas into terms, and thereby, losing all meaning and nuances.

Though “likeness” may contain some of the nuances of “image/icon”; one cannot just turn the blind eye to the data points where the two diverge. Yes, εἰκών may carry some of the “baggage,” but it does not quite carry all of it. In order to say they are equivocal, they need to be able to check off all the boxes. You’re only concerned about the data points where the two terms agree; I’m simply pointing at the disparities (the data points where the terms disagree).

For example, take the word “appearance,” and the word, “aura.” “Aura,” though it may contain some nuances akin to that of “appearance,” it is not a semantical one-to-one equivalent. Whereas “appearance” may refer to the manner in which someone visibly appears to the minds eye; “aura,” on the other hand, may reflect ones perception of qualities that emanate from a person.

Think of it like this: Imagine (pun intended!) a sliding scale that goes 0 to 100, and as it gets closer to 100, the deeper its color gets. If we place both terms (“appearance” and “aura”) on that scale their shades may differ in hue. One term’s hue may shade deeper than the other.

Further, imagery from the Genesis creation mandate permeates the letter to the Colossians. In v. 6, Paul declares that “in all the world” the gospel is “bearing fruit and growing.” Similarly, in v. 10 Paul exhorts the Colossians to “bear fruit” in their efforts and “grow” in their knowledge. If you aren’t catching what Paul is laying down: This language echoes the commission of Genesis 1:28 to “be fruitful and multiply.” Likewise, in 1:15 and 3:10, Paul picks up on Imago Dei language to coincide with Gen. 1:26. In ancient correspondences such as “Letters from Assyrian Scholars to the Kings Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal,” King Esarhaddon is addressed as, “the very image of Bel.” In Wisdom 14:15-21, the distant king is represented locally through the presence of his “image.” The Macedonian (Ptolemaic) king Philopator was referred to as “the image of god.” In Themistocles 125, the Persian king is also referred to as, “the image of god.”

Paul’s use of the Imago Dei is consistent with the Ancient Near East practice of referring to kings, authorities, or rulers as the “image” of the one whom they represent.

With all that said, why do you find it necessary to run to Ezekiel 1:5, when what you should be doing is trying to demonstrate some kind of formal connection (thematic, verbal, or intertextual) back to Gen. 1? You made the common man’s mistake of intending to flip to another occurrence (where a term may or may not have been used in such manner), and tried to import that meaning back into the text when there are no conceptual ties. But first, you should try citing a text (not Ezekiel 1:5) that uses the same terms. And then you need to demonstrate the conceptual ties. Only then would you’d be able to import that meaning back into the text.

I didn;t run to Ezekiyl, a member here posted Ez verse and I commented on their post that the word tselem could mean physical but could also mean other charicteristics.

Genesis 1:26-27, “And Elohim said, “Let Us make man in Our image (H6754), according to Our likeness (H1823), and let them rule over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the heavens, and over the livestock, and over all the earth and over all the creeping creatures that creep on the ground. And Elohim created the man in His image (H6754), in the image (H6754) of Elohim He created him – male and female He created them.”

H6754 צֶלֶם tselem (tseh'-lem) n-m.
1. a phantom., 2. (figuratively) illusion, resemblance., 3. (hence) a representative figure., 4. (especially) an idol. [from an unused root meaning to shade] KJV: image, vain shew.

#H1823 - demuth: likeness, similitude, Original Word: דְּמוּת, Part of Speech: noun feminine, Transliteration: demuth, Phonetic Spelling: (dem-ooth'), Definition: likeness, similitude,

I didnt go further becaue it is not a topic I have spent a long time on, I study something out, find a conclusion, then leave it alone for 6 or more months and come back to it, study it from the beginning like I have no prior knowledge and if I come to the same conclusion I will speak on it and continue to study it. If I have not done this I usually dont go too deep unless its a very simpe topic

Easy: This one (and the Other associated texts listed in the post).

I do not know how it is possible for adoption to be a process. Romans 8:15 "For you did not receive a spirit of slavery that returns you to fear, but you received the Spirit of sonship, by whom we cry, “Abba! Father!”"

We become children of God the moment we receive Christ. (John 1:12). That is the moment we are adopted. That is the moment we receive the Spirit of sonship.

C'mon!!!! since the "Son" (the human embodiment of the WORD who became FLESH, and Who, from the beginning was WITH GOD, and WAS God) is a physically human MAN, and God and the Holy SPirit are SPIRITS, it should be EASY the "Distinguish" him from God the Father, and the Holy Spirit - just by watching Him walk around.

So what are you REALLY asking???

That was the question. Thank you for answering.

Can you answer this question too please.

If the Son is the "Image of the invisible EL(God, Theos, Elohim, etc)" does that also mean He, the Son, as a Man, is the visible Image of EL(God, Theos, Elohim, etc)?

Jesus said (John 14:9) that: "he who has seen ME, has seen the Father".

.
● Heb 1:3a . . Who being the brightness of God's glory

The Greek word translated "brightness" speaks of luminosity; but not a
source of illumination, rather, it's the glow produced by a source, i.e. the
shine; sort of like early morning twilight in the east. We see the sun's glow
in the sky at that time of day, but the physical Sun itself remains secluded
below the horizon. (cf. Col 1:15)

* Unfortunately this is the only place in the entire New Testament where
that Greek word is used so we can't compare its application in other places.

● Heb 1:3b . . and the express image of His person

The Greek word translated "express image" pertains to engravings and
stampings which are quite a bit different than when amoeba split and make
a twin of themselves.
_

Isiah 9:6 KJV
John 14:7-9 KJV