Why Second Person of Trinity incarnated?

Thread starter #1
Another question was how could only the second person of the Trinity incarnate? Read where the Church struggled to understand this fully for 600 years.

Reading about the Incarnation we see all three persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit each having a role but only the second person incarnating.

Why the Son? Answers I have found were Creation was made through him therefore he was the One to become a part of that Creation. The Word became flesh.

Another reason was a Son could inherit Heaven. After the Son, then we as sons could become adopted sons and co-heirs.

The second person being the Son was able to humble himself and not see Himself as equal with the Father. This being a Father/Son relationship.
Thread starter #2
Why did the Son incarnate? The One who incarnated is the Son?

Simple answer; It was God's plan. The Lamb was slain from the foundation of the World.
Thread starter #3
The Holy Spirit was involved with the incarnation. He visited Mary and she became pregnant. Jesus was anointed by the Holy Spirit according to His human nature. Thereby God acknowledged Jesus as the Messiah, the "Anointed One."
Jesus Christ was the Father, Son, Holy Ghost right here on earth but only one person stood there ..not three and he tells us in many ways ...Phillip called him out and said show us the Father ...he told Phillip how long have I been with you and you don't know me ...if you have seen me you have seen the Father ...when we see him we will see the father, he said I will not leave you comfortless but that he , the comforter ( the Holy ghost ) would come to us ...Christ in the form of the Holy Ghost dwelling in us ...he said I overcame and sit with my father in his throne... that's God in flesh sitting in one throne ...1 person on one throne , not 3 persons ....3 persons would be three Gods .. no such a thing as that that's why the Trinity is not in the Bible.. It's man made doctrine that came out of the catholic church and that's why no man understands the Trinity even though they say they believe it..the angel told Mary you will be found with child of the Holy ghost ... The Holy Ghost is the Father , one in the self same spirit, not two persons.... God has many titles ..Father,Son, Holy ghost, King of Kings, Lord of Lords ...Father , Son ,Holy ghost is God manifest in different forms / acting out in different forms . That's why Jesus could say my father is greater than me ...he was speaking as the Son of God and then at the same time say if you have seen me you have seen the father ..He told his disciples to go into all the world baptizing in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost and they went into the world baptizing people in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ .. they knew who the Father, Son , Holy Ghost was. They understood Jesus when he said I come in my fathers name, the only name he came in was Jesus Christ ...that is God's name ( not Father, son, Holy Ghost) those are titles ...my father's name was not father ...that was his title .That's why Paul taught baptism in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and said if any man or even an angel from heaven teach it any different they be accursed. The Trinity doctrine is wrong teaching ..Jesus said if you believe not that I am he we will die in our sins ( the same I am that spoke from the burning bush ). Don't get any clearer than that ...one person , one God ..it takes a revelation from God to understand it ..it's that great mystery that only he can reveal to us . No one taught it better than William Branham ...he believed and taught every word of the Bible and the modern day Pharisees looked down on him for teaching the word ...Hope this helps ...it sure helped me and it took me years to understand it but God made it clear as clear can be. Don't let anyone tell you the word doesn't line up . I know a many a men that left their denominations once God showed them this truth ...they were called out of that .
Thread starter #5
Jesus Christ was the Father, Son, Holy Ghost right here on earth but only one person stood there. It takes a revelation from God to understand it ..it's that great mystery that only he can reveal to us . know a many a men that left their denominations once God showed them this truth ...they were called out of that .
That's the same thing the Trinitarians tell me. Jesus did say name and not names.

Then you see the incarnation as the One God incarnate as the Son? The Word was with God and was God. The Word incarnate as man.

It is a hard concept to believe in the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit but to also believe in their Oneness. I would guess you believe God can only be in one mode at a time and is now in Jesus mode. The only "name" of God.

Does that make Mary the Mother of God? In an adoptive way I can see Mary as our Mother as well when we become adoptive sons.
it makes Mary the incubator that God used to bring forth a body in which he was pleased to dwell in. Mary was just a woman that had to be saved the same way we are saved ...she had to believe he was God and she was baptized in God's name the same as all Saints of the Bible the trinitarian preachers will tell you that Acts 2:38 is not true ...when its the prescription that Peter gave , it's a revelation of Mathew 28:19 ..Paul didn't know anything about a trinity and wrote 14 books of the Bible ...the history of the trinity doctrine is very interesting when you dig into it, false but interesting.


Senior Member
Again I consider what a man may even know of himself, or be brought to know, in the light.
The scripture speaks much, particularly in Romans 2 and 3, of the man who acts in accord with his conscience. His conscience. This acting is no less attributed to the gentile than it is particularly reserved to the jew. In fact, Paul makes the very pointed argument that the man who acts in accord (even if he be a gentile) with his conscience (that may be in accord with God's law) shows himself superior (so to speak) than the man who claims the knowledge of God's law, but does not act according to it.
One man is shown hypocrite, one may be shown, not.

But, back to the matter of conscience (which it would appear one would have a difficult time in separating from the notion of consciousness, even in word form) and its relationship to the man. And, in the man. In some way...it is, or is noted as a thing apart by some strictness...from the man.

I concede a difficulty here for our perceptions of self, and our perceptions of others are not unusually skewed, assuming to ourselves an integrity that may be rarely extended. If we, like surgeons in the gallery set to the learning might dissect a man under our observations, we may be yet totally ignorant we are no less, dissecting our own selves, as "man". We may find many things of personal help if we are able to abide in "That man is the me man", and likewise have things hidden from us if not.

And we might also concede the scriptures do indeed, a lot of dissecting. We are given stories of what men have done, with no less, their often inner workings of thoughts to the why. Thoughts and intents, along with actions, are often on the display.

And we must admit, Jesus does this...a lot. He hears the inner dialogues and makes them plain, hears words a man speaks within himself (to whom? to what?) and discloses them. "And, do not say within yourselves..."
Speaks parables of a man building barns of storage...and discloses what the man...says to his own soul.

It becomes plain...men in themselves speak to themselves. And out of these conversations come all actions of man to be seen in the world, and words uttered into, and to be heard, in the world. And, like an audience watching, we approve of the "heroes"...and boo at the villains. We applaud those of sensitive conscience who are able to prevail in acting consistent to it...and revile those who seem to have none at all, or rather disregard its plain dictates. Or, what we assume should be so.
Rarely, perhaps too rarely, do we admit to the tripping up of, and by, our own assumptions. Its far too easy, like those surgeons...to either willingly forget, or to willfully deny "the man on the table...is me". "That thing there has no power in itself to resist its dissection, while I can and do...keep myself to an intactness"

But...to observe, to watch, to seek to know "what is in that man" is the very thing that entraps us to an engagement we might not seek to acknowledge...or may even seek...to resist. In one way...it seems a trick, a feint to get us involved, but it is not. We simply already are in any seeking "to know". And what man...denies he knows...or has come to know...something? looking at.jpg


Senior Member
From Lewis above:
In other words, you can step outside one experience only by stepping inside another. Therefore, if all inside experiences are misleading, we are always misled.
"But the period of brow beating must end."

And yet, after the passage of 73 years, and in the face of this sage advise, the brow-beating has not ended, but become largely the norm of daily discourse.

And yet again, to the glory of God, for those who see (Hab. 3)


Senior Member
God's Son in the Old Testament


"I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee." (Psalm 2:7)
There are many today (especially Muslims, Jews, and Christian "liberals") who are monotheists, believing in one supreme God but rejecting the deity of Christ. They argue that the doctrine that Jesus was the unique Son of God was invented by the early Christians and that the God of the Old Testament had no Son. Orthodox Jews in particular emphasize Deuteronomy 6:4: "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD."
The fact is, however, that there are a number of Old Testament verses that do speak of God's only begotten Son. Note the following brief summary.
First, there is God's great promise to David: "I will set up thy seed after thee, . . . I will be his father, and he shall be my son. . . . thy throne shall be established for ever" (2 Samuel 7:12, 14, 16).
Consider also the rhetorical questions of Agur. "Who hath established all the ends of the earth? what is his name, and what is his son's name, if thou canst tell?" (Proverbs 30:4).
Then there are the two famous prophecies of Isaiah, quoted so frequently at Christmas time. "Behold, a (literally 'the') virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel (meaning 'God with us')" (Isaiah 7:14). "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: . . . and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace" (Isaiah 9:6).
Perhaps the most explicit verse in this connection is our text. "The LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son" (Psalm 2:7). Then this marvelous Messianic psalm concludes with this exhortation: "Kiss the Son, . . . Blessed are all they that put their trust in him" (Psalm 2:12). HMM

My dear brothers in Christ, you are making this far too complicated. There is but one God and He Is. There is a period after "is" for a very good reason. The "name" of God is, "I am." It is not "we," or "all of us" or even "three persons." There is one God.

God is the creator, designer, initiator, and sustaining power of all we have, can now, and will ever experience. God is present in our lives, not as a "spirit" watching and guiding, but instead as the very essence of who and what we are. In a very real way, we are all made of God. Everything in the universe was created by God, everything is the essence of God, so we are all made of God stuff. One God, one universe, one creation, ONE.

To try to figure out whether God the Creator, God in the person of Jesus, and God the Holy Spirit are separate entities, different incarnations, or serial timelines of God - is wasted effort. God is.

C. S. Lewis (mentioned above) tried for decades to explain God, but like all Apologists before him he ran into mountains of wannabe spiritualists trying to understand God one separate piece at a time. Lewis retreated to allegory, metaphor, and even science fiction to try to make the point that there is but one God. Eventually, I got his point, but too many still waste precious time on the pieces, instead of celebrating the whole.

As prophets, saints, apologists, and faithful people for thousands of years have tried to explain, the only difference between the one God, and all the individual "persons," "experiences," "visions," and "expressions" of God is our own personal journey in this life.

Jesus is NOT the only person of God who can "incarnate." Jesus is simply our means of experiencing the forgiveness of the ONE God in person. The "one God, three persons" description is nothing more than an attempt to help people connect with our Creator.
Thread starter #11
“Glorify Me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed.”

It sounds like that persona of Elohim existed before that persona became man. That persona known as Son was sent by the persona known as Father.
Interesting, I was reading on another thread the Father never called the Son, Jesus.

Jesus. The name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit was never called by that name by his Father.

My Dad calls me Son and by my name as well. Not sure that means anything, just interesting in the "name" discussion.

Maybe all three personas were capable of incarnating but only one, the one known as Word, was the One that became man. The Father persona sent the Son persona.

Is it possible we are all closer to this Oneness of God than we know? That in some way explaining the Trinity gets lost? And in reverse, some way of explaining the Oneness gets lost as well?

Could it be that man has came up with the Trinity rules and the Oneness rules and not God?

Psalm 110:1
Of David. A psalm. The LORD says to my lord: "Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet."
Last edited:
Thread starter #12
Colossians 2:9
For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

Maybe it was all three. A “trimanifestation” if you will. Could it be a “trimanifestation” of all three personas with an incarnation of only the second person of the Trinity?