Oneness Vs. Trinity Debate

[Don]

If Jesus was praying that makes Jesus inferior therefore they are not co equal. And that is contrary with the doctrine of the Trinity.

Brian, it's not a matter of "if" Jesus was praying. Read Matthew 26:39 & 42, Mark 14:35 & 39, Luke 22:41 & 44-45. Then try to deny that Jesus was praying to God.

And scripture is still clear: Jesus is equal to, and is, God in the flesh, even though God says "this is my son" and Jesus says "My father which is in heaven."

I see exactly what you're trying to say about the Trinity; the fact is that we're actually a lot closer in belief on the subject than you'd like to think. I just happen to look exactly at what scripture says--every precept, every line, every little bit here and there. And what I continually see are references to the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost--separate, but the same. I gave you several of those references.

what do you think baptism is for?

1 Peter 3:21 is very clear on what baptism is for: not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God.

A good conscience? Is that what salvation is?

It's also very clear in Romans 6:5 -- For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection.

Likeness? Is that what salvation is?

And it's also very clear that baptism was commanded (Mark 16), so what do we do with a command? We obey it.

Obedience? Is that what salvation is?

My friend, you should think on this for several minutes as well. If there is nothing that you and I can do to obtain salvation than why do we even have to believe.

Be careful, Brian. Don't confuse belief with action. Word or deed, remember? Free gift, remember?

Read Chapter 11 in acts and find out why Peter went.

Brother, perhaps you should re-read Acts 11 yourself. Take a special look at verse 14: Who shall tell thee words, whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved.

Then, after you've read that, go back to chapter 10 and re-read what exactly those words were that Peter told them (Acts 10:34-43).

You'll find two things: 1) Acts 11:14 says "tell thee words whereby thou...shall be saved." Not "tell thee to be baptized" or even "tell thee what thou must do." 2) Acts 10:34-43, the words which are referenced in Acts 11:14, never mention baptism. In fact, the Holy Ghost fell upon those Gentiles after they heard the preaching of Christ crucified and risen, and before they were baptized in water. If the Holy Spirit is the "proof" of salvation, then these Gentiles were most certainly saved before they were ever immersed in water.

Now, just to put some icing on that cake, go back to Romans 10:17 and see how it fits in with the verses that YOU brought up in Acts 11 and Acts 10: So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Not "faith cometh by baptism."

My friend, if you're basing your salvation on your baptism, then you've got a false salvation. You've got a salvation that's based on something YOU did, an action that you took. You said to yourself at some point, "If I don't get myself into that water, I don't have a hope of getting into heaven." You made a conscious decision that YOU had to participate in your salvation by making sure that YOU got in that water.

Whereas, if you've been convicted in your heart to say "I believe that Christ died on the cross for me, and finished the work, one sacrifice that covers all my sins," then you've done...nothing. Except accept what Christ has done for you.

Repentence? Oh, most certainly that gets preached. But only those that are convicted in their hearts of what repentence means and why they should do it will actually work at repentence. In other words, which comes first: The repentence, or the change of the heart? Without the change of the heart, there is no repentence.

My friend, you did not respond to Hebrews 5:8. You brought up Hebrews 5:7; all I'm asking you to do is to keep it in context by including the next verse.

Now, I think we're at an impasse. You've come up with nothing that has been able to change what I see the scriptures saying; and I'm not holding my breath that I'm going to come up with anything more that might change what you see the scriptures saying.

I've presented what I can, and worked through your arguments the best I'm able. I take my leave of this conversation.

[ October 12, 2002, 01:31 AM: Message edited by: Don ]

 

[ONENESS]

Brian, it's not a matter of "if" Jesus was praying. Read Matthew 26:39 & 42, Mark 14:35 & 39, Luke 22:41 & 44-45. Then try to deny that Jesus was praying to God.

And scripture is still clear: Jesus is equal to, and is, God in the flesh, even though God says "this is my son" and Jesus says "My father which is in heaven."

Yes Don the Son was praying, I think you may have read a little to deep in it. I understand and know that Jesus is equal and is God. But the “Son” is not. The Spirit inside of the Son is equal, but the flesh is not. It is so crystal clear to see that the “fleshly” nature or the humanity was praying, not the eternal spirit.

Now if you say that it was the eternal spirit praying to the other eternal spirit that shows that the one praying is inferior to the other. And if the eternal Spirit of Christ is inferior to the Eternal Spirit of the Father, that means that the doctrine of the Trinity is contradictory to what scripture teaches then. The Doctrine of the Trinity says “they are all co eternal and co equal

How can they be co equal if one has to get his orders from someone else?

A good conscience? Is that what salvation is?

You tell me Don LOL, What is Baptism for? That’s what I am asking you. Haha

Then, after you've read that, go back to chapter 10 and re-read what exactly those words were that Peter told them (Acts 10:34-43).

But why do you just stop at 43 if we believe on him we shall receive remission of sins? And what did peter tell them to do for the remission of sins? Hint Acts 2:38. Did they receive remission of sins? Yes! How did they do that, was it simply by believing of Did Peter have to tell them to do the same thing as he told everyone on the day of Pentecost to do to receive remission of sins? Hint Acts 10:48

My friend believing is not a stopping point, its just the first step we can take to obey God. B/c if we don’t believe how can we go on to do the things that we are supposed to do?

You'll find two things: 1) Acts 11:14 says "tell thee words whereby thou...shall be saved." Not "tell thee to be baptized" or even "tell thee what thou must do." 2) Acts 10:34-43, the words which are referenced in Acts 11:14, never mention baptism. In fact, the Holy Ghost fell upon those Gentiles after they heard the preaching of Christ crucified and risen, and before they were baptized in water. If the Holy Spirit is the "proof" of salvation, then these Gentiles were most certainly saved before they were ever immersed in water.

Who ever said that the Holy Ghost was proof of Salvation? The Holy Ghost is only part of it…. That’s why Peter Commanded them to be baptized.

My friend, if you're basing your salvation on your baptism, then you've got a false salvation. You've got a salvation that's based on something YOU did, an action that you took. You said to yourself at some point, "If I don't get myself into that water, I don't have a hope of getting into heaven." You made a conscious decision that YOU had to participate in your salvation by making sure that YOU got in that water.

Whereas, if you've been convicted in your heart to say "I believe that Christ died on the cross for me, and finished the work, one sacrifice that covers all my sins," then you've done...nothing. Except accept what Christ has done for you.

Don I promise you I am not basing my salvation on baptism. That is where you have got us wrong. There was not point in my life that I have ever said to myself that I need to get myself into water b/c I won’t have a chance at getting to heaven if I don’t.

But I did say to myself “if I don’t do what the Word of God tells me to, I won’t make it to heaven”

Don obedience is the number on factor which leads us to salvation. Do you believe that?

My friend, you did not respond to Hebrews 5:8. You brought up Hebrews 5:7; all I'm asking you to do is to keep it in context by including the next verse.

Don think on this please. Hebrews 5:8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered.

Does the eternal Spirit of God that is Perfect, Pure, Righteous, Holy, etc need to learn obedience? No b/c if the “Son” is eternal he would already know obedience, he would all ready arrived the moment he came out of his mothers womb. But the bible tells us that the “Son” Grew, learned, gained knowledge and so on. Its only the flesh that had to learn, it was his humanity.

Now, I think we're at an impasse. You've come up with nothing that has been able to change what I see the scriptures saying; and I'm not holding my breath that I'm going to come up with anything more that might change what you see the scriptures saying.

I've presented what I can, and worked through your arguments the best I'm able. I take my leave of this conversation

Don I don’t think we should ever be a the point of impasse. B/c that’s when we stop and say I have learned all that I need to know. The reason why I say that is this, Chemnitz is not my most favorite person on the board, but we were debating something and he showed me something that I have not really ever thought of before. It was not pertaining to the Godhead, but no matter what You can always find a nugget somewhere.

God bless

 

[ONENESS]

Anyone else have any arguments?

 

[MEE]

Originally posted by ONENESS:
Anyone else have any arguments?

Brian, where have you been? I feel like you have "abandoned ship"...leaving me behind with all of these Trinitarians.

BTW, have you received your answer to your prayer request?

MEE

 

[Chemnitz]

Yes Don the Son was praying, I think you may have read a little to deep in it. I understand and know that Jesus is equal and is God. But the “Son” is not. The Spirit inside of the Son is equal, but the flesh is not. It is so crystal clear to see that the “fleshly” nature or the humanity was praying, not the eternal spirit.

If it is so crystal clear than why does everybody disagree with you? Are you still trying to give Jesus a split personality? With your one statement you are now not only guilty of the Sabellian heresy but you are now guilty of Arianism and Adoptionism.

There is only one person of Christ so for any action both the divine and the human are involved. Which of course means during the prayer both the divine and the human are involved in making the prayer. The act of prayer does not make Christ any less than the Father. Instead, He has forgone using the fullness of his divinity, which through the one divine essense of God is in communication with the other persons of God, he has instead for our benefit chosen to say this prayer. He is not any less God at this moment than at anyother time because the fullness of diety is still there.

 

[ONENESS]

Originally posted by Chemnitz:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Yes Don the Son was praying, I think you may have read a little to deep in it. I understand and know that Jesus is equal and is God. But the “Son” is not. The Spirit inside of the Son is equal, but the flesh is not. It is so crystal clear to see that the “fleshly” nature or the humanity was praying, not the eternal spirit.

If it is so crystal clear than why does everybody disagree with you? Are you still trying to give Jesus a split personality? With your one statement you are now not only guilty of the Sabellian heresy but you are now guilty of Arianism and Adoptionism.

There is only one person of Christ so for any action both the divine and the human are involved. Which of course means during the prayer both the divine and the human are involved in making the prayer. The act of prayer does not make Christ any less than the Father. Instead, He has forgone using the fullness of his divinity, which through the one divine essense of God is in communication with the other persons of God, he has instead for our benefit chosen to say this prayer. He is not any less God at this moment than at anyother time because the fullness of diety is still there.</font>[/QUOTE]Chemnitz

There is only one person of Christ so for any action both the divine and the human are involved.

Chemnitz The Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are all present in Jesus. Do you agree or No? Again, Yes and No will be sufficient.

How much common knowledge do you need to understand that when someone prays to another person, the One praying is inferior to the one being praid to.

Jesus said "John 14:28 ¶ Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I."

Now you tell me... Is the Person of the Son Less than the Person of the Father?

Please all I need is a Yes or No. Please respond with a Yes or a No.

Is the Father the Head of the Trinity? Please, A yes or No.

Thanks Chemnitz

 

[Chemnitz]

Chemnitz The Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are all present in Jesus. Do you agree or No? Again, Yes and No will be sufficient.

Unfortunately a simple yes or no is not a sufficient answer. No I do not believe that the Father or the Holy Spirit are present in the person of Christ, only the Son is present. However, in the Son the there is the fullness of the Godhead.

Prayer does not mean communication between inferior to superior. Prayer is only a form of communication with no connotation of superiority, especially when the two parties are equal.

 

[Chemnitz]

Again why do you insist that there is more than one person called Jesus?

[ October 22, 2002, 11:56 AM: Message edited by: Chemnitz ]

 

[ONENESS]

Originally posted by Chemnitz:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Chemnitz The Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are all present in Jesus. Do you agree or No? Again, Yes and No will be sufficient.

Unfortunately a simple yes or no is not a sufficient answer. No I do not believe that the Father or the Holy Spirit are present in the person of Christ, only the Son is present. However, in the Son the there is the fullness of the Godhead.

Prayer does not mean communication between inferior to superior. Prayer is only a form of communication with no connotation of superiority, especially when the two parties are equal.</font>[/QUOTE]What are you saying then You do or you don’t? First you said I do not believe that the F,S,HG are present in Jesus and then you say they are according to Col 2:9. Which one is it?

Do you adhere to what you believe or the bible?

The bible says
Colossians 2:9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

What is the fullness of the Godhead bodily? It is everything that God is made up of. His many attributes, Power, Deity, and everything else that God is.

The Father, Son and Holy Ghost are all present in Jesus b/c in him dwells ALL THE FULLNESSof the Godhead Bodily.

Prayer does not mean communication between inferior to superior. Prayer is only a form of communication with no connotation of superiority, especially when the two parties are equal.

If the two parties are equal than why does Jesus say the father is Greater than himself?

Who's right, God or you?

Is The Father Greater than the "Son"?(John 14:28)

[ October 22, 2002, 04:31 PM: Message edited by: ONENESS ]

 

[ONENESS]

Originally posted by Chemnitz:
Again why do you insist that there is more than one person called Jesus?

Ok, I'm not sure where you are getting this from? Could you help me out to understand you better?

Godbless Chemnitz

 

[Chemnitz]

Ok, I'm not sure where you are getting this from? Could you help me out to understand you better?

You keep stating that the human prayed to the divine, that means you believe there are two persons called Jesus because for one to pray to the other they would have to be seperate people.

Who's right, God or you?

Is The Father Greater than the "Son"?(John 14:28)

In the humilation of Christ, the Son made Himself lower than the Father by not utilizing the fullness of his divinity.

What is the fullness of the Godhead bodily? It is everything that God is made up of. His many attributes, Power, Deity, and everything else that God is.

The Father, Son and Holy Ghost are all present in Jesus b/c in him dwells ALL THE FULLNESSof the Godhead Bodily.

He has the fullness of the divinity but he is neither the Father or the Holy Spirit. The Father did not become flesh and neither did the Holy Spirit, only the Son became flesh.

 

[ONENESS]

Originally posted by Chemnitz:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Ok, I'm not sure where you are getting this from? Could you help me out to understand you better?

You keep stating that the human prayed to the divine, that means you believe there are two persons called Jesus because for one to pray to the other they would have to be seperate people.

Who's right, God or you?

Is The Father Greater than the "Son"?(John 14:28)

In the humilation of Christ, the Son made Himself lower than the Father by not utilizing the fullness of his divinity.

What is the fullness of the Godhead bodily? It is everything that God is made up of. His many attributes, Power, Deity, and everything else that God is.

The Father, Son and Holy Ghost are all present in Jesus b/c in him dwells ALL THE FULLNESSof the Godhead Bodily.

He has the fullness of the divinity but he is neither the Father or the Holy Spirit. The Father did not become flesh and neither did the Holy Spirit, only the Son became flesh.</font>[/QUOTE]

You keep stating that the human prayed to the divine, that means you believe there are two persons called Jesus because for one to pray to the other they would have to be seperate people.

Hebrews 5:7 Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared;

The Human did pray to the divine. Also let me point out this scripture shows us a very clear example of how the doctrine of the Trinity contradicts what the bible teaches. Your doctrine states that they are co equal. This verse expresses otherwise. The “Son” is not equal to the Father.

He has the fullness of the divinity but he is neither the Father or the Holy Spirit. The Father did not become flesh and neither did the Holy Spirit, only the Son became flesh

No… The Son did not become flesh. Show me that in the word of God. The bible says that the Word became flesh. (John 1:1-14). Chemnitz, you or anyone else as still not explained to me why the Son is referred to as the Word. What does the word “Word” mean to you?

Do you believe that Jehovah is the Father?

 

[Chemnitz]

Hebrews 5:7 Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared;

The Human did pray to the divine. Also let me point out this scripture shows us a very clear example of how the doctrine of the Trinity contradicts what the bible teaches. Your doctrine states that they are co equal. This verse expresses otherwise. The “Son” is not equal to the Father.

Actually it is a clear example of your continued inability to read in context. If you read this verse in isolation of the rest of the canon it would appear to be a contradiction but because Trinitarian theology does not read any one single verse in isolation it does not contradict the Trinitarian theology. Once again you have found a verse that is speaking of the humiliation, it has nothing to do with him a "lesser diety".

No… The Son did not become flesh. Show me that in the word of God. The bible says that the Word became flesh. (John 1:1-14). Chemnitz, you or anyone else as still not explained to me why the Son is referred to as the Word. What does the word “Word” mean to you?

the Logos became flesh and dwelt among us and The baptismal scenes where the Father addresses Christ as Son. It doesn't take a genius to put it together and realize the Logos and the Son are one in the same.

Do you believe that Jehovah is the Father?

no. YHWH is the true name of the Trinity.

 

[ONENESS]

Originally posted by Chemnitz:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> Hebrews 5:7 Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared;

The Human did pray to the divine. Also let me point out this scripture shows us a very clear example of how the doctrine of the Trinity contradicts what the bible teaches. Your doctrine states that they are co equal. This verse expresses otherwise. The “Son” is not equal to the Father.

Actually it is a clear example of your continued inability to read in context. If you read this verse in isolation of the rest of the canon it would appear to be a contradiction but because Trinitarian theology does not read any one single verse in isolation it does not contradict the Trinitarian theology. Once again you have found a verse that is speaking of the humiliation, it has nothing to do with him a "lesser diety".

No… The Son did not become flesh. Show me that in the word of God. The bible says that the Word became flesh. (John 1:1-14). Chemnitz, you or anyone else as still not explained to me why the Son is referred to as the Word. What does the word “Word” mean to you?

the Logos became flesh and dwelt among us and The baptismal scenes where the Father addresses Christ as Son. It doesn't take a genius to put it together and realize the Logos and the Son are one in the same.

Do you believe that Jehovah is the Father?

no. YHWH is the true name of the Trinity.</font>[/QUOTE]Chemnitz, you dont sound like your old self in your responses....You feeling sick??

Actually it is a clear example of your continued inability to read in context. If you read this verse in isolation of the rest of the canon it would appear to be a contradiction but because Trinitarian theology does not read any one single verse in isolation it does not contradict the Trinitarian theology. Once again you have found a verse that is speaking of the humiliation, it has nothing to do with him a "lesser diety".

Chemnitz come one give me a little bit of credit. You know I have not taken this verse out of context. It means exactly what it says. First off it proves that the humanity of Christ prayed to the deivine.

Second in the context with the rest of scriputre that does prove that the "Son" is inferior.

Once again you have found a verse that is speaking of the humiliation, it has nothing to do with him a "lesser diety".

No once again i have found a verse speaking of his humanity and it does have something to do with the Flesh submitting itself to the eternal Spirit.

the Logos became flesh and dwelt among us and The baptismal scenes where the Father addresses Christ as Son. It doesn't take a genius to put it together and realize the Logos and the Son are one in the same.

your right they are one in the same. But you have not yet identified what "Logos" is. Is it a person, what is it?

no. YHWH is the true name of the Trinity

So is that the Name that Matt 28:19 is decribeing, and Which person of the Trinity was speaking through Isaiah? Or would you just sum it up as it was the Father doing all the talking representing the Trinity in all of the Old Testament?

God bless

 

[Chemnitz]

Chemnitz come one give me a little bit of credit. You know I have not taken this verse out of context. It means exactly what it says. First off it proves that the humanity of Christ prayed to the deivine.

Second in the context with the rest of scriputre that does prove that the "Son" is inferior.

I only give credit where credit is due and your statement does not deserve credit.

And it is out of context because to claim that the Son is lower than the Father you have to deny his divinity, which would be contrary to him possessing the fullness of the Godhead. You also are denying the fact that the Son placed himself in a state of humiliation during the time His local presence walked among us. His humiliation is not from a lack of divinity and presence in the flesh rather it is from His non-use of His divinity.

No once again i have found a verse speaking of his humanity and it does have something to do with the Flesh submitting itself to the eternal Spirit.

Your doing it again, where in the Bible does it ever say that there are two persons of Christ?

But you have not yet identified what "Logos" is. Is it a person, what is it?

That is pretty self explanitory. Go figure it out, it ain't that hard. If, I just stated that the Logos and the Son are one in the same then obviously the Logos is the person of the Son.

 

[ONENESS]

Originally posted by Chemnitz:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Chemnitz come one give me a little bit of credit. You know I have not taken this verse out of context. It means exactly what it says. First off it proves that the humanity of Christ prayed to the deivine.

Second in the context with the rest of scriputre that does prove that the "Son" is inferior.

I only give credit where credit is due and your statement does not deserve credit.

And it is out of context because to claim that the Son is lower than the Father you have to deny his divinity, which would be contrary to him possessing the fullness of the Godhead. You also are denying the fact that the Son placed himself in a state of humiliation during the time His local presence walked among us. His humiliation is not from a lack of divinity and presence in the flesh rather it is from His non-use of His divinity.

No once again i have found a verse speaking of his humanity and it does have something to do with the Flesh submitting itself to the eternal Spirit.

Your doing it again, where in the Bible does it ever say that there are two persons of Christ?

But you have not yet identified what "Logos" is. Is it a person, what is it?

That is pretty self explanitory. Go figure it out, it ain't that hard. If, I just stated that the Logos and the Son are one in the same then obviously the Logos is the person of the Son.</font>[/QUOTE]

I only give credit where credit is due and your statement does not deserve credit.

And it is out of context because to claim that the Son is lower than the Father you have to deny his divinity, which would be contrary to him possessing the fullness of the Godhead. You also are denying the fact that the Son placed himself in a state of humiliation during the time His local presence walked among us. His humiliation is not from a lack of divinity and presence in the flesh rather it is from His non-use of His divinity.

What does the word “Greater” mean to you? This verse shows us that the “Son” is lower than the Father. The “Son” said that the Father is Greater than I

John 14:28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.

No I am not denying anything. God humbled himself and became a Man. (Phil 2:6-8) He humbled himself. Just b/c he did this does not mean that he lost his divinity, it just means that he chose not to use it while he was a man but at the same time he still maintained his wonderful attributes. He still healed people, preformed miracles, rose people from the dead etc.

He did not come down here to rule over us. He came to minister and to seek and save those who were lost. So as the “Son” he is lessor than the Father.

Your doing it again, where in the Bible does it ever say that there are two persons of Christ?

Christ does not have two persons. He is one Person with Two Natures. The flesh and the Spirit. You are looking at what I am saying the same way you look at the Trinity. I am not referring to two persons, In one body.

That is pretty self explanitory. Go figure it out, it ain't that hard. If, I just stated that the Logos and the Son are one in the same then obviously the Logos is the person of the Son

That is very weak Chemnitz. Why does the bible not say that in the beginning was the Son, and the Son was with God and The Son was God?

It is so easy to see that the Son did not exist as person until he was begotten. If you look up the word “Logos” which I am sure that you have you will find it to mean “1b6) what is declared, a thought, declaration, aphorism, a weighty saying, a dictum, a maxim” and you will find out the first time it was ever used A Greek philosopher named Heraclitus first used the term Logos around 600
B.C. to designate the divine reason or plan which coordinates a
changing universe. This word was well suited to John's purpose in
John 1.”

That’s what the concordance says not me. If you look you will understand that is why the term “Son” is not used in John 1 and in 1 John 5. B/c the Son was a plan ever since day one. And when that Word became flesh, the flesh was Called the Son.

Sorry for such a brief explanation but I am in a really big hurry.

God bless

 

[Chemnitz]

He did not come down here to rule over us. He came to minister and to seek and save those who were lost. So as the “Son” he is lessor than the Father.

Then how as a oneness person can you believe in the humiliation? Because if there is only one person of Christ, which means the divine and human are inseperable, God would have to be less than himself which is impossible.

Christ does not have two persons. He is one Person with Two Natures. The flesh and the Spirit. You are looking at what I am saying the same way you look at the Trinity. I am not referring to two persons, In one body

Then you are saying that Jesus is not full man if the only part of humanity is his flesh. To be fully man he would have to have a human soul and spirit.

If they are both the same person then how is one praying to the other? To have communication you must to have at least two parties. So to insist that the flesh was praying to the spirit requires to seperate persons.

logos - The independent personified expression of God: It is the distinctive teaching of the Fourth Gospel that this divine 'Word' took on human form in a historical person, that is, in Jesus (BDAG Greek/English Lexicon of the NT)

logos - God's full self-revelation through Jesus Christ, the Word (Friberg Analytical Lexicon of the Greek NT)

The hole in your argument is now you have made God a plan. Because if you follow through with your meaning of logos then God would have to be a plan because as it says in Jn 1 and the Word was God.

 

[ONENESS]

Originally posted by Chemnitz:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />He did not come down here to rule over us. He came to minister and to seek and save those who were lost. So as the “Son” he is lessor than the Father.

Then how as a oneness person can you believe in the humiliation? Because if there is only one person of Christ, which means the divine and human are inseperable, God would have to be less than himself which is impossible.

Christ does not have two persons. He is one Person with Two Natures. The flesh and the Spirit. You are looking at what I am saying the same way you look at the Trinity. I am not referring to two persons, In one body

Then you are saying that Jesus is not full man if the only part of humanity is his flesh. To be fully man he would have to have a human soul and spirit.

If they are both the same person then how is one praying to the other? To have communication you must to have at least two parties. So to insist that the flesh was praying to the spirit requires to seperate persons.

logos - The independent personified expression of God: It is the distinctive teaching of the Fourth Gospel that this divine 'Word' took on human form in a historical person, that is, in Jesus (BDAG Greek/English Lexicon of the NT)

logos - God's full self-revelation through Jesus Christ, the Word (Friberg Analytical Lexicon of the Greek NT)

The hole in your argument is now you have made God a plan. Because if you follow through with your meaning of logos then God would have to be a plan because as it says in Jn 1 and the Word was God.</font>[/QUOTE]

Then how as a oneness person can you believe in the humiliation? Because if there is only one person of Christ, which means the divine and human are inseperable, God would have to be less than himself which is impossible.

I’m trying to figure out what you believe. So do you believe in Nestorianism? Are you saying that Jesus is two persons? And do you consider humiliation and humbling the same thing?

If they are both the same person then how is one praying to the other? To have communication you must to have at least two parties. So to insist that the flesh was praying to the spirit requires to seperate persons.

It does not require two separate persons. It requires a God who is bigger than you and myself to be able to do it. We know God is not three persons. John 4:24 lets us know that God is a Spirit, The bible lets us know in Ephs 4 that there is only one Spirit. And finally 1 Timothy 3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

That is what the mystery is. It is how God became man but at the same time maintained his deity. As Trinitarian will try to say that The God head or the “Trinity” itself is a mystery and cannot be understood. Romans 1:20 says “For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they arewithout excuse.

God never intended his Godhead to be a mystery, and it is not. The One and Only eternal Spirit of God manifested himself to Israel through the Person and Name of Jesus Christ. Lived on the Earth as the Son of God, Died for our sins, Rose again And is now in heaven at the right hand of Power. He is not a separate Person, Spirit or Being. He is still the same One Spirit that he has always been.

Everyone in the Old Testament knew who Jesus was. They knew that he was making himself out to be God himself, not another Person. The Godhead was clearly understood through the eyes of the Apostles. They understood what Jesus meant when Jesus told them about baptizing in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. They understood the Godhead. They understood that it could be understood. They understood that Jesus was the Fullness of the God head. They knew that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost were all present in Jesus. It was clearly seen by them and without excuse and it should be said for us today.

Its not a mystery that our Father, walked on Earth as the Son of God and is living in our hearts as the Holy Spirit today. The only thing that’s a mystery is how he could be man and God at the same time.

And Please feel free to mention which person of the Trinity was Speaking through the prophet Isaiah.

God bless and Sorry it took me so long to respond, but I was about to finish typing up my response and we had a black out here where I work out. Glad I hit the save button a few minutes prior.

Have a good day

[ October 25, 2002, 10:31 AM: Message edited by: ONENESS ]

 

[Chemnitz]

I’m trying to figure out what you believe. So do you believe in Nestorianism? Are you saying that Jesus is two persons? And do you consider humiliation and humbling the same thing?

Since, I told you that I follow the teachings on the nature of Christ as laid out by the Council of Chalcedon, I obviously can not be Nestorian because that is one of the heresies rejected at that council.

No I am saying that you are saying that there are two persons called Christ.

Depends on your definition. I define humiliation as the periods of time that the divinity of Christ was not as evident than at other times.

That is what the mystery is. It is how God became man but at the same time maintained his deity. As Trinitarian will try to say that The God head or the “Trinity” itself is a mystery and cannot be understood. Romans 1:20 says “For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they arewithout excuse.

God never intended his Godhead to be a mystery, and it is not. The One and Only eternal Spirit of God manifested himself to Israel through the Person and Name of Jesus Christ. Lived on the Earth as the Son of God, Died for our sins, Rose again And is now in heaven at the right hand of Power. He is not a separate Person, Spirit or Being. He is still the same One Spirit that he has always been.

Actually, yes He did intend to leave it as a mystery. He frequently admits to not revealing the totality of His being to us.

Everyone in the Old Testament knew who Jesus was. They knew that he was making himself out to be God himself, not another Person. The Godhead was clearly understood through the eyes of the Apostles. They understood what Jesus meant when Jesus told them about baptizing in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. They understood the Godhead. They understood that it could be understood. They understood that Jesus was the Fullness of the God head. They knew that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost were all present in Jesus. It was clearly seen by them and without excuse and it should be said for us today.

They did? Then why was nobody ever baptised in Jesus name? I only see people being baptized by the authority of Christ. Not one single direct quote demonstrating that people were baptized in the name of Jesus.

 

[ONENESS]

Originally posted by Chemnitz:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />I’m trying to figure out what you believe. So do you believe in Nestorianism? Are you saying that Jesus is two persons? And do you consider humiliation and humbling the same thing?

Since, I told you that I follow the teachings on the nature of Christ as laid out by the Council of Chalcedon, I obviously can not be Nestorian because that is one of the heresies rejected at that council.

No I am saying that you are saying that there are two persons called Christ.

Depends on your definition. I define humiliation as the periods of time that the divinity of Christ was not as evident than at other times.

That is what the mystery is. It is how God became man but at the same time maintained his deity. As Trinitarian will try to say that The God head or the “Trinity” itself is a mystery and cannot be understood. Romans 1:20 says “For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they arewithout excuse.

God never intended his Godhead to be a mystery, and it is not. The One and Only eternal Spirit of God manifested himself to Israel through the Person and Name of Jesus Christ. Lived on the Earth as the Son of God, Died for our sins, Rose again And is now in heaven at the right hand of Power. He is not a separate Person, Spirit or Being. He is still the same One Spirit that he has always been.

Actually, yes He did intend to leave it as a mystery. He frequently admits to not revealing the totality of His being to us.

Everyone in the Old Testament knew who Jesus was. They knew that he was making himself out to be God himself, not another Person. The Godhead was clearly understood through the eyes of the Apostles. They understood what Jesus meant when Jesus told them about baptizing in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. They understood the Godhead. They understood that it could be understood. They understood that Jesus was the Fullness of the God head. They knew that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost were all present in Jesus. It was clearly seen by them and without excuse and it should be said for us today.

They did? Then why was nobody ever baptised in Jesus name? I only see people being baptized by the authority of Christ. Not one single direct quote demonstrating that people were baptized in the name of Jesus.</font>[/QUOTE]

Depends on your definition. I define humiliation as the periods of time that the divinity of Christ was not as evident than at other times.

What bible are you using? Ok, I am still trying to figure this out so bare with me. Do you believe in the dual natures of Christ? You may have already answered this so I will run back through the posts and check but I don’t remember you ever giving me a solid answer on it. What I mean by dual natures is the Humanity and Divinity or Flesh and Spirit. Just for times sake I will just ask for a yes or no answer.

Actually, yes He did intend to leave it as a mystery. He frequently admits to not revealing the totality of His being to us

So was Paul wrong when he said that the Godhead should be clearly seen? I’m doing my best to supply you with scripture to show you what I believe, If you say that God intended parts of the “Godhead” to be a mystery please show me in the bible.

1 Timothy 3:16 lets us know without controversy at is the mystery of godliness and goes on to tell us that God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory. That’s the mystery. Agreed or disagreed?

Romans 1:20 lets us know that For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

According to Romans 1:20 lets us know that his eternal Godhead can be understood. Agreed or Disagreed?

They did? Then why was nobody ever baptised in Jesus name? I only see people being baptized by the authority of Christ. Not one single direct quote demonstrating that people were baptized in the name of Jesus

Chemnitz, as you would say it “You are swinging at straws”. Let me give you a little bible study on the “Name Of Jesus”

Acts 4:18 And they called them, and commanded them not to speak at all nor teach in the name of Jesus.

In Acts 4 they were commanded not to Speak or Teach in the Name of Jesus. There had to be a little bit more than being bold. They were actually invoking the Name of Jesus.

Acts 5:40 And to him they agreed: and when they had called the apostles, and beaten them, they commanded that they should not speak in the name of Jesus, and let them go.

Again they were commanded not to Speak in the Name of Jesus.

Acts 16:18 And this did she many days. But Paul, being grieved, turned and said to the spirit, I command thee in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her. And he came out the same hour.

Here we find that Paul Turned and said “I command thee in the Name of Jesus Christ to come out of her”. Paul invoked the Name of Jesus b/c there is authority in that Name. That Name causes things to happen, it causes things to be moved.

Acts 4:12 says Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.

Phil 2:9-11 9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;
And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Notice that Name is the highest Name over every Name. At the mention of the Name of Jesus EVERY knee should bow of things in heaven and things in Earth.

From a trinitarians P.O.V. that means the Jesus is above the Father and Holy Ghost.

These verses close with "Confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, Giving Glory to God the Father"

When we confess Jesus it gives the Father Glory b/c the Father as manifested him self in Name and Person of Jesus Christ.

I could go on and on but to sum it up, I think Paul said it best pertaining to Jesus Christ in Col 2:9 when he said “For in Him dwelleth All the Fullness or the Godhead bodily

And that my friend is why we have baptized in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. When we say the Name of Jesus we give Glory to our one true God who manifested as the Father, Son and Holy Ghost. When we say Jesus we are calling on the one true God and All that he is b/c the One true God has manifested himself in the Name and Person of Jesus Christ.

God bless

[ October 28, 2002, 09:27 AM: Message edited by: ONENESS ]