It's all answered the proclamation of Faith, the Nicene Creed, Constantioplian form, with links from the Catholic Encyclopedia, which is quite authorative in these matters.
We
believe (I
believe) in one
God, the Father
Almighty, maker of
heaven and earth, and of all things visible and
invisible. And in one
Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten
Son of God, and born of the Father before all ages. (
God of
God) light of light,
true God of
true God. Begotten not
made,
consubstantial to the Father, by whom all things were
made. Who for us
men and for our
salvation came down from
heaven. And was incarnate of the
Holy Ghost and of the
Virgin Mary and was made
man; was crucified also for us under
Pontius Pilate, suffered and was
buried; and the third day
rose again according to the
Scriptures. And
ascended into heaven, sits at the right hand of the Father, and shall come again with
glory to judge the living and the dead, of whose
Kingdom there shall be no end. And (I
believe) in the
Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of
life, who proceeds from the Father (
and the Son), who together with the Father and the Son is to be
adored and glorified, who spoke by the
Prophets. And one
holy,
catholic, and
apostolic Church. We confess (I confess) one
baptism for the remission of
sins. And we look for (I look for) the
resurrection of the dead and the
life of the world to come.
Amen."
One true God, agree. One begotten Son, agree. One Spirit of God. That Spirit proceeds only from God. Christ is sub-servant to God. God can sent Christ out to 'do things'. Some of that is in the past, much more is to come in the future. The right to be able to have the Holy Spirit obey Christ's voice came only after the cross. After the first day of resurrection He could baptise people with the Holy Spirit. That was a 'reward' from God and it was a step in the sequence that eventually leads to the whole earth belonging to God as it was in the beginning.
True, Scripture was the base for your post.
The specific verses that cover all the 'points' their summary do a much better job of defining just how it all works together. True it would also be a much longer read. That isn't an oversight on God's part, He had a purpose for giving us all the tiny bits of information.
Jesus told His Apostles (the 12 specifically) that all Scripture going back to Moses has something to say/do with Christ. Prophecy certainly, but does it go even further. Proverbs says He (Christ) saw everything about creation. If the NT verse about Jesus only being able to do what his Father has shown Him then that would most likely apply to Christ. An event shown to Christ by some event from the OT (that demonstrates power that could only come above) can be manifest by Christ (because the Holy Ghost will listen to Christ words.
The proof that the Spirit of God obeys God's voice is in Ge:1.
The 'us' who man is made in the image of and in the likeliness of is God and the other one mentioned.
This site would certainlt point to not using the general traching about a 'trinity' as it is commonly thought of. I haven't read much past this as this would seem to support that some in that specific Church are changing opinion on what Scripture actually means.
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: The Blessed Trinity
The Blessed Trinity
tt=63 This article is divided as follows:
The dogma of the Trinity
The Trinity is the term employed to signify the central
doctrine of the
Christian religion -- the
truth that in the unity of the
Godhead there are Three
Persons, the Father, the
Son, and the
Holy Spirit, these Three
Persons being truly distinct one from another.
Thus, in the words of the
Athanasian Creed: "the Father is
God, the
Son is
God, and the
Holy Spirit is
God, and yet there are not three
Gods but one
God." In this Trinity of
Persons the
Son is begotten of the Father by an
eternal generation, and the
Holy Spirit proceeds by an
eternal procession from the Father and the
Son. Yet, notwithstanding this difference as to origin, the
Persons are co-eternal and co-equal: all alike are uncreated and
omnipotent. This, the
Church teaches, is the
revelation regarding
God's nature which
Jesus Christ, the
Son of God, came upon earth to deliver to the world: and which she proposes to
man as the foundation of her whole
dogmatic system.
In
Scripture there is as yet no single term by which the Three Divine
Persons are denoted together. The word
trias (of which the Latin
trinitas is a translation) is first found in
Theophilus of Antioch about A.D. 180. He speaks of "the Trinity of
God [the Father], His
Word and His Wisdom (
To Autolycus II.15). The term may, of course, have been in use before his
time. Afterwards it appears in its Latin form of
trinitas in
Tertullian (
On Pudicity 21). In the next century the word is in general use. It is found in many passages of
Origen ("In Ps. xvii", 15). The first
creed in which it appears is that of
Origen's pupil,
Gregory Thaumaturgus. In his
Ekthesis tes pisteos composed between 260 and 270, he writes:
There is therefore nothing
created, nothing subject to another in the Trinity: nor is there anything that has been added as though it once had not existed, but had entered afterwards: therefore the Father has never been without the
Son, nor the
Son without the
Spirit: and this same Trinity is immutable and unalterable forever (P.G., X, 986).
It is manifest that a
dogma so
mysterious presupposes a
Divine revelation. When the fact of
revelation, understood in its full sense as the speech of
God to
man, is no longer admitted, the rejection of the
doctrine follows as a
necessary consequence. For this reason it has no place in the
Liberal Protestantism of today. The writers of this school contend that the
doctrine of the Trinity, as professed by the
Church, is not contained in the
New Testament, but that it was first formulated in the second century and received final approbation in the fourth, as the result of the
Arian and
Macedonian controversies. In view of this assertion it is
necessary to consider in some detail the evidence afforded by
Holy Scripture. Attempts have been made recently to apply the more extreme theories of comparative
religion to the
doctrine of the Trinity, and to account for it by an imaginary law of nature compelling
men to group the objects of their worship in threes. It seems needless to give more than a reference to these extravagant views, which serious thinkers of every school reject as destitute of foundation.
Luke's genealogy ascends from Joseph to Adam, Mathew's from Joseph to Abraham. And a cousin indicates Elizabeth was the daughter of a sibling of St. Joachim, Mary's father.
I wish I had an overlay of how those two seemingly different family trees mesh.
Christ is a 'member' of the priesthood that reigned in Salem back in the days of Abraham. It could be even argued that the High Priest was Christ. The acts committed back then opened the door for acts later (first coming as High Priest to claim more than just Israel as coming under title of 'who is my people')
The next appearance is as King. One form was benifical to life, the King comes with sword then kind words for the small remainder.
Both Jesus and John the Baptist were baptized with the Spirit of God even before they drew breath. Just mentioning that Elizabeth is both a daughter of Aaron and a cousin to the mother of Jesus is enough information to theorize that Jesus was also considered to be a relative of Aaron. That is a priest issue rather than the battling King. Miriam was a rather small part of the very early days of Israel being called 'my people'. Accepting that being mentioned by name in the Bible is quite an honor, even if only once or twice.
M't:1:16:
And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary,
of whom was born Jesus,
who is called Christ.
The above verse describes the history that allows Jesus to rightfully ascend to be the King that sits as King on a throne that is said to be that of David.
Lu:3:23:
And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age,
being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph,
which was the son of Heli,
In this case Mary is the only human part of Jesus, this is a bloodline. The husband of Mary gave Him the right to claim an earthly kingdom.
In that the whole living world would have swore that Joesph was the father of Jesus. When being praised in public the name 'Jesus' would have been associated with his father, Joseph. If in condemnation He would be referred to as son of Mary, like in this verse
M'r:6:3:
Is not this the carpenter,
the son of Mary,
the brother of James,
and Joses,
and of Juda,
and Simon?
and are not his sisters here with us?
And they were offended at him.
