The Oneness Anti "Christ" doctrine ....

[Sam]

Originally Posted by Scott Hutchinson

DAN I think this is really referred to as Jesus Only.
The Jesus Only group baptizes saying In The Name Of Jesus and not Jesus Christ because they say that the name Christ glorifies the flesh of Jesus.
Of course Christ means Messiah or anointed one ,there were and are many Jesuses in the world and false messiahs or Christs but there was only virgin borned Messiah Jesus The Christ.
I think the Jesus Only group teaches that when Jesus was here on the earth ,Heaven was vacant of God.

Scott,
There are several OP organizations around that use "Church of Jesus Christ" in their organization name and as the name for their local churches. Their take on the name is a little different than what you mention. Some of them teach that Jesus is His human name and Christ is His divine name. One Scripture they use is "Many shall come in my name saying I am Christ," and to them that means His name is Christ. Also, in Matthew 1:4 they see His name as Christ (God) before He was born but in Matthew 1:21 they see Him named Jesus (human) after He was born. To them His name is "Jesus Christ" nothing more and nothing less. Jesus is His "given name" or "first name" and Christ is His "family name" or "last name." I don't believe that way but I still like to hear Him called "Jesus" and called "Jesus Christ."

[Scott Hutchinson]

See In the Bible days there other false messiahs running around teach similiar things to what Jesus Christ was teaching but He was virgin borned and they were not ,and they were not performing the miracles that Jesus The Christ was doing.
The Roman govt. actually thought Jesus Christ to be another political insurrectionist like the many false messiahs were.
But Jesus Christ was not trying to overthrow Imperial Rome.

[SDG]

Originally Posted by Sam

Scott,
There are several OP organizations around that use "Church of Jesus Christ" in their organization name and as the name for their local churches. Their take on the name is a little different than what you mention. Some of them teach that Jesus is His human name and Christ is His divine name. One Scripture they use is "Many shall come in my name saying I am Christ," and to them that means His name is Christ. Also, in Matthew 1:4 they see His name as Christ (God) before He was born but in Matthew 1:21 they see Him named Jesus (human) after He was born. To them His name is "Jesus Christ" nothing more and nothing less. Jesus is His "given name" or "first name" and Christ is His "family name" or "last name." I don't believe that way but I still like to hear Him called "Jesus" and called "Jesus Christ."

Don't we have to consider that the original writers ... had hebraic minds when the wrote ... and although the Greek use Cristos ... they meant the "Anointed One" ... the One they were waiting for ...

I can see how to some that the word Christ sounds somehow Catholic or Trinitarian ...

[Scott Hutchinson]

There used to be a group around Nashville called The Church Of The Firstborn at least I'm told that denied the name Christ and would only baptize in the name Of Jesus.I understand they taught that when Jesus Christ was in the grave that heaven and earth was vacant of God.
Perhaps Elder Epley has encountered that teaching.

Maybe it is BG and RS that have moved from the basic doctrine espoused by Oneness Apostolics and have published a volume of material focused on traditional reformed teaching and promotes the teaching of said group "In Christ Alone through faith alone". i am not arguing the error or lack of error in BG's and RS' teaching. I am simply pointing out that this is their mantra and it is offensive to the strong believer in Jesus being the mighty God.

[Scott Hutchinson]

It was sad to me that RS left the initial evidence doctrine.

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

I remember, in the early 1990's, here in Houston, there were a group of ultraconservative churches headed by some extreme pastors who were killing the rest of the Spanish-speaking fellowship for using the word "Cristo" or Christ.

They believed that those who used the term lacked revelation and were somehow unholy being that Jesus is his name. They asserted that after the resurrection he was no longer the Christ .... the Christ died at Calvary.

They even formulated a well-thought out doctrine to support this belief. They sought to lift the name of Jesus Christ and shunned those that used "Christ" in their testimonies, songs, or preachings.

Dozens of songs containing Christ/Cristo were edited and the name Jesus replaced the blasphemous lyrics .... even if it disregarded rhyme or the author's intent

It was their new "revelation", and air of higher spirituality, that brought huge division and problems to the Spanish work especially here in the Houston area.

Ironically, some of these ministers leading "the revelation" were dealing with other immoral issues.

Even today, this teaching is pervasive in many Spanish speaking churches, especially here in the South.

I also recall Bishop Scotty Teets stating that this teaching was formulated many years ago by an American pastor ... does anyone know anything about the genesis of this teaching ?

Dan, this does not sound like a "new" revelation, but sounds like someone was trying to start something new since the old didn't fit their paradigm.
Hopefully, this was addressed and corrected over time.
While I do agree that "Christ" is not a name, it is titular in that it identifies the man Jesus as divintiy which He is.
But, to say that it is blasphemous is to say that using the title with the name that is above all names is so as well.
It sounds like your family opposed this and I am glad to hear it.

[Rico]

Jesus Christ just means Jesus the Messiah. What's wrong with just saying the Messiah (Christ)? I've never heard of this being an issue.

[SDG]

Originally Posted by NobodyImportant

Dan, this does not sound like a "new" revelation, but sounds like someone was trying to start something new since the old didn't fit their paradigm.
Hopefully, this was addressed and corrected over time.
While I do agree that "Christ" is not a name, it is titular in that it identifies the man Jesus as divintiy which He is.
But, to say that it is blasphemous is to say that using the title with the name that is above all names is so as well.
It sounds like your family opposed this and I am glad to hear it.

We did oppose this teaching .... it lacked balance and understanding of scripture ... I simply felt it was used as pre-text to bring strife within the body and a feeling of spiritual superiority ....

I agree there is no efficacy in the title but to abandon it's usage is outright LOONEY ....

[SDG]

Originally Posted by Rico

Jesus Christ just means Jesus the Messiah. What's wrong with just saying the Messiah (Christ)? I've never heard of this being an issue.

Bro ... it was a real issue in the Spanish fellowship for a few years and still taught in some circles.