PDA

View Full Version : How To Believe in Oneness


Timmy
04-18-2007, 11:44 AM
To say I'm confused would be an understatement. All the debate between Oneness and Trinnies (and the debate among Oneness folks about how evil the Trinnies are) is interesting. But here's the thing: how does one come to believe in Oneness in the first place? Is it by logical reasoning, reading and comprehending the Bible? Is it a matter of intelligence? Do Trinnies have a lower IQ than you guys?

Or is there more to it?

I've read in various places on these forums that there is some kind of "revelation" of the truth. Almost as if to say that God has to reveal the truth to you, before you "get it". If that's so, to whom does God choose to reveal that truth? To anyone that asks? Well, He hasn't revealed it to me, yet, and I've asked! Or is it to whoever is worthy? Guess I'm not worthy. (Can't argue with that!)

But if it is a matter of comprehension, of understanding what you read etc., would anyone like to take another stab at educating me?

I've posted questions elsewhere about this, and I haven't seen good answers yet, or at least not ones I understand! E.g., I've written about the person-like behaviors of the Son, the Father, and the Holy Spirit. The answer was that I was equating God with human beings. I wasn't, but that's OK, I got the point: that I was describing God in human terms. But isn't that also what Oneness does? I.e., describe God in human terms, such as "office" or "manifestation"?

It's been said that God, being divine, is able to manifest Himself simultaneously in different ways, and that is what allows Him to talk to "Himself", etc. OK, that's fine, but how is it not also possible for God, being divine, to miraculously be three persons simultaneously?

More to the point, why does it matter so much if we use the word "person" or "office" or whatever? Does God really care?

Apparently He cares a great deal about certain things, like which words are used at one's baptism (the ones Jesus used or the ones Peter used), so you better guess right! So if that's true, sure, I can see how He might get really mad at someone for saying He is three "persons". :aaa

mfblume
04-18-2007, 11:50 AM
To say I'm confused would be an understatement. All the debate between Oneness and Trinnies (and the debate among Oneness folks about how evil the Trinnies are) is interesting. But here's the thing: how does one come to believe in Oneness in the first place? Is it by logical reasoning, reading and comprehending the Bible? Is it a matter of intelligence? Do Trinnies have a lower IQ than you guys?

It's basically tradition versus the bible alone. Anyone not primed with tradition of trinity, which came through centuries and centuries since the 4th, would never come up with a trinity of persons in reading the Bible. TRADITION ALONE has caused people to think trinity.

Leave a person on a desert island with a bible, with no former influence of the Bible, and no one to traditionalize their reading, and they would NEVER come up with the trinity. The bible says ONE GOD and GOD IS ONE. Period.

mfblume
04-18-2007, 12:00 PM
Another note on traditional influence. Trinity was demanded at PAIN OF excommunication when first contrived, and soon became one at pain of DEATH. That has quite a bit of influence on people. And when death penalty was no longer demanded, the doctrine had done its work -- it was ingrained into people. And no one simply hardly questioned it.

Timmy
04-18-2007, 12:06 PM
It's basically tradition versus the bible alone. Anyone not primed with tradition of trinity, which came through centuries and centuries since the 4th, would never come up with a trinity of persons in reading the Bible. TRADITION ALONE has caused people to think trinity.

Leave a person on a desert island with no former influence of the Bible, and no one to traditionalize their reading, and they would NEVER come up with the trinity. The bible says ONE GOD and GOD IS ONE. Period.

When they read about the Father sending His Son to us, about Jesus talking to His Father ("why hast thou forsaken me", e.g.), and about their different wills ("not my will, but thine, be done"), about the Spirit raising Jesus from the dead, about the Father talking about His Son in whom He is well pleased, etc. etc., they couldn't possibly come up with the idea that these are different persons? Hmm.

mfblume
04-18-2007, 12:21 PM
When they read about the Father sending His Son to us, about Jesus talking to His Father ("why hast thou forsaken me", e.g.), and about their different wills ("not my will, but thine, be done"), about the Spirit raising Jesus from the dead, about the Father talking about His Son in whom He is well pleased, etc. etc., they couldn't possibly come up with the idea that these are different persons? Hmm.

Because the bible stressed GOD IS ONE so much. Anyone would realize, like Oneness people teach, that it is God manifesting Himself in various ways. But to say there are three eternal persons, who love each other for eternity, and are aware of each other for eternity and communicate with each other for eternity -- before God created anything -- is more like three gods. And people would realize that.

Joelel
04-18-2007, 12:48 PM
To say I'm confused would be an understatement. All the debate between Oneness and Trinnies (and the debate among Oneness folks about how evil the Trinnies are) is interesting. But here's the thing: how does one come to believe in Oneness in the first place? Is it by logical reasoning, reading and comprehending the Bible? Is it a matter of intelligence? Do Trinnies have a lower IQ than you guys?

Or is there more to it?

I've read in various places on these forums that there is some kind of "revelation" of the truth. Almost as if to say that God has to reveal the truth to you, before you "get it". If that's so, to whom does God choose to reveal that truth? To anyone that asks? Well, He hasn't revealed it to me, yet, and I've asked! Or is it to whoever is worthy? Guess I'm not worthy. (Can't argue with that!)

But if it is a matter of comprehension, of understanding what you read etc., would anyone like to take another stab at educating me?

I've posted questions elsewhere about this, and I haven't seen good answers yet, or at least not ones I understand! E.g., I've written about the person-like behaviors of the Son, the Father, and the Holy Spirit. The answer was that I was equating God with human beings. I wasn't, but that's OK, I got the point: that I was describing God in human terms. But isn't that also what Oneness does? I.e., describe God in human terms, such as "office" or "manifestation"?

It's been said that God, being divine, is able to manifest Himself simultaneously in different ways, and that is what allows Him to talk to "Himself", etc. OK, that's fine, but how is it not also possible for God, being divine, to miraculously be three persons simultaneously?

More to the point, why does it matter so much if we use the word "person" or "office" or whatever? Does God really care?

Apparently He cares a great deal about certain things, like which words are used at one's baptism (the ones Jesus used or the ones Peter used), so you better guess right! So if that's true, sure, I can see how He might get really mad at someone for saying He is three "persons". :aaa

Hi Timmy,I pray In Jesus name that he will now open your understanding to this truth.I will post the next post about the trinity and oneness teaching.I'm very concerned about your thought.To start with both the trinity and oneness teach many things wrong because over the years both has been taught by man and not God.The # 1 reason that man can't see truth is because sin in their life blind them to truth.Another reason is that many people who think they have the Spirit do not and the word says the Spirit will teach us and the Spirit is truth and in him is no lie.

ICor.2:009 But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him. 002:010But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. 002:011For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. 002:012Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. 002:013Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. 002:014But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. 002:015But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. 002:016For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.
003:001 And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ. 003:002I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able. 003:003For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?

(Them that sin are forever learning and never able to come to the knowledge of truth.)
2 Tim:2:018 Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some. 002:019Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity. 002:020But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honour, and some to dishonour. 002:021If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified, and meet for the master's use, and prepared unto every good work. 002:022Flee also youthful lusts: but follow righteousness, faith, charity, peace, with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart. 002:023But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes. 002:024And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, 002:025In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; 002:026And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.
003:001 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. 003:002For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, 003:003Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, 003:004Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; 003:005Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. 003:006For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts, 003:007Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

(Sin will darken your understanding) Eph.4:011And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; 004:012For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: 004:013Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: 004:014That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive; 004:015But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ: 004:016From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love. 004:017This I say therefore, and testify in the Lord, that ye henceforth walk not as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind, 004:018Having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart

(Them that practice sin or are lost are blinded to truth) 2 Cor.4:001 Therefore seeing we have this ministry, as we have received mercy, we faint not; 004:002But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God. 004:003But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: 004:004In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them

1 John 2:[26] These things have I written unto you concerning them that seduce you.[27] But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him

John.16
[13] Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

Jack Shephard
04-18-2007, 01:34 PM
It's basically tradition versus the bible alone. Anyone not primed with tradition of trinity, which came through centuries and centuries since the 4th, would never come up with a trinity of persons in reading the Bible. TRADITION ALONE has caused people to think trinity.

Leave a person on a desert island with a bible, with no former influence of the Bible, and no one to traditionalize their reading, and they would NEVER come up with the trinity. The bible says ONE GOD and GOD IS ONE. Period.


You can not lump all the trinitarians together in that they are just following traditions. Some might but there are alot of them that really believe what they believe. I am oneness from top to bottom, but to discount all of them as just following a tradition is not correct. I have talked extensively with some trinitarians and they verses they use and quote are valid, but once you know Jesus is God then the verses really fit together nicely. So they get their ideals from the Bible, but it is just misunderstood or misinterperatation of scripture.

Joelel
04-18-2007, 01:45 PM
Hi Timmy,One thing the oneness teach wrong about their oneness teaching is.#1,They say Jesus is the father God,that is not totally correct.Jesus is ONLY the Fathers woed.Only the Word of the father was made flesh.The Spirit of the Father is IN the Son Jesus.When Jesus the word of God died ONLY the word died.The father or Spirit of God did not die.When Jesus the Son the word of God died he gave up the ghost or Spirit of God.

The word of God is God because it is his word but his word is not Spirit.It is spirit with a small s because it shows God's word is his and comes from God.

John1: 1: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2: The same was in the beginning with God.

14: And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth

1 Cor.5:19: To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation

Acts3:[26] Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities

See here, the Spirit that is IN the Son Jesus raised him from the dead.Also the Same Spirit is IN us but we are not the Father as Jesus the Son is not the Father but the Father is IN Jesus and the Father is IN us.
Rom.8:[11] But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you

John.19
[30] When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.

This is why the trinity don't agree with the oneness.The we have the trinity and the oneness don't teach Jesus is the family name.

Is there a separation between the Father and Son ? Yes.There is a family.Look at it this way. I am my mother and father,Both of them are IN me but they are still their own separate being.It's the same with the Father God and his Son.Did all the fullness of God dwell in the Son ? Yes.God is a Spirit,the fullness of the Spirit can be in Jesus and everywhere at the same time.God is IN me and all true believers,does that make God more then one ? no. Same one God in all of us even though we are separate people.Did God the Father send his Son as the scripture teaches ? Yes. The Spirit of God sent his word.Did the Son ascend to the Father ? Yes.The Word of God the Son ascended to the Father the Spirit.Is there one God ? Yes. The Spirit and his word is one God.

Are Father Son and Holy Ghost names? No,They are titles. Jesus said to baptize in the name. What is the Son's name? It's Jesus, Isn't It?

Jesus didn't come in his own name.Jesus Said In 1 John 5 ;43. I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.( Here we find Jesus came in his Fathers name ,So his Father's name is Jesus ? )

The Father sent the Holy Ghost in his Son's name.John 14:26. But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, .( Here we find The Father Sent the Holy Ghost In Jesus name,So the Holy Ghost name Is Jesus.)

Eph.3:014 For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, 003:015 Of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named, ( Here we find the whole family is named after the Father.( So Jesus Is A family name and is the name of the Father Son And Holy Ghost.)

Who did the Son inherit his name from?You don't inherit something from yourself.Heb.1:004 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they. ( We find here Jesus Inherited his name from the Father. What name does a Son Inherit? The family name.)

Timmy
04-18-2007, 01:57 PM
Ah, I'm beginning to understand! It is sin that blinds the Trinnies to the truth! Yes! I get it now!

(I could cut and paste the above to an analogous discussion on a Trinny forum, replacing "Trinnies" with "Oneness folks" and it would be just as valid there.)

Everyone has sin. How is it that this sin blinds some to the truth, and not others? Why does God lead some into truth and not others? How can one be held responsible for not seeing something when, as you say, they are blind? Or they have not been chosen by God to be enlightened?

Do you really believe that Trinnies are so evil that they intentionally allow sin (or whatever else) to hide the truth from them? Even just choosing the wrong side in this debate is, apparently, sin, correct? What is their motivation for such "sin" as not believing the Oneness doctrine? Sin typically has some lure, some perceived (albeit selfish and fleeting) benefit. Do Trinnies, in your view, just love to wallow in error, getting some kind of pleasure from doing so? "Ah," they must be saying, "gotta love being wrong! It sure feels good!"

I think what I'm really getting from all this is that it is simply a matter of understanding. We each read the same Bible and get different things from it, for this issue as well as any number of other things. Some will see trinity. Some will see oneness. Some, like me, will not see a clear win either way, and be content to conclude that there is a certain "threeness" in God's nature and, simultaneously, a "oneness" in God's nature. That truth cannot be denied by either side. (Can it??)

Timmy
04-18-2007, 01:59 PM
( We find here Jesus Inherited his name from the Father. What name does a Son Inherit? The family name.)

Uh, yeah, and usually a family consists of more than one person.

mfblume
04-18-2007, 02:00 PM
You can not lump all the trinitarians together in that they are just following traditions. Some might but there are alot of them that really believe what they believe.
Of course they really beleive what they believe. I never said they did not.
But what is the impetus behind why they believe it? I still am convinced it is traditional pressure. There are oneness folks who never really thought about WHY for their own belief, and they simply do it out of commitment to a movement, thinking NOTHING their movement believes can be wrong. It gets to be a mob mentality in many people's minds. And after time, people simply look for more ways to argue for their belief rather than actually want to know truth.

I am wholly oneness. But I believe I have honestly considered what the bible teaches.

I am oneness from top to bottom, but to discount all of them as just following a tradition is not correct. I have talked extensively with some trinitarians and they verses they use and quote are valid, but once you know Jesus is God then the verses really fit together nicely. So they get their ideals from the Bible, but it is just misunderstood or misinterperatation of scripture.

I still think they look at the bible and make their studies through perceptual grids. And that is so in every case of trinitarianism. Like I said, none of them would have ever believed it without tradition and by having no influence from anyone except a bible.

That goes for many other doctrines as well. Who really believes what they believe without tradition, but through pure biblical study, knowing that even if something is a tradition it may still be correct?

mfblume
04-18-2007, 02:01 PM
Timmy,

God made man in His image. Man is spirit, soul and body. But is man more than one person? Do these three elements each comprise a person?

After MUCH talk with trinitarians in debate and outside debate, I am still convinced that without trinity tradition, no one would believe it.

Timmy
04-18-2007, 02:34 PM
"Our image" is what He said. Oh sure, Oneness has an answer to the "plural" problem of Genesis. They have an answer for everything. The twists look reasonable to some, because of their Oneness tradition, and other twists look better to the Trinnies, because of their tradition. (Actually, I'm not sure I buy into the idea that the plural is there because it's a team, the trinity, talking and creating. Just for the record! :winkgrin)

I'm not sure I agree with your contention that no one would believe trinitarianism without tradition. Take a complete Bible newbie. Present him with a Bible, a written statement of trinitarianism, and a wrtten statement of oneness. Let him choose the statement that makes the most sense, that lines up best with the Bible. I can't predict which one would win, but it sure looks to me like the trinity needs a lot less fancy footwork!

OGIA
04-18-2007, 02:41 PM
I think what I'm really getting from all this is that it is simply a matter of understanding. We each read the same Bible and get different things from it, for this issue as well as any number of other things. Some will see trinity. Some will see oneness. Some, like me, will not see a clear win either way, and be content to conclude that there is a certain "threeness" in God's nature and, simultaneously, a "oneness" in God's nature. That truth cannot be denied by either side. (Can it??)
Hi Timmy:

I've come to the conclusion that the matter all boils down to Jesus Christ and how you worship Him.

My question to you: do you worship Him as one of the persons of the trinity or do you worship Him as the only God of eternity?

What say ye? :tiphat

Timmy
04-18-2007, 02:54 PM
Hi Timmy:

I've come to the conclusion that the matter all boils down to Jesus Christ and how you worship Him.

My question to you: do you worship Him as one of the persons of the trinity or do you worship Him as the only God of eternity?

What say ye? :tiphat

Talk about a loaded question! :winkgrin

I worship God. Period.

How's that for an answer? :tiphat

Seriously, I really don't get the issue. Is there more to it than whether we use the word "person" or some other word? Nothing I've read here has convinced me that there is. And nobody has convinced my that it is utterly evil to use the word "person"! (I've never heard a trinny say that there are three gods! Some here may have heard that, but it must have been from a woefully uninformed trinny who hasn't put a lot of thought into it!)

And back to my question earlier: Does God really care? I just can't see Him getting bent out of shape over it.

OGIA
04-18-2007, 03:02 PM
Seriously, I really don't get the issue. Is there more to it than whether we use the word "person" or some other word? Nothing I've read here has convinced me that there is. Yes, there is more to it than terminology. It, as I said in my previous post, is about WHO you worship, not what words you use to define Him (as long as their scriptural). HE defines Himself, and if WE don't worship Him as HE defines Himself then WE are practicing idolatry.

THAT is what it boils down to, IMO.


And back to my question earlier: Does God really care? I just can't see Him getting bent out of shape over it. I've come to believe He cares as much or more about this than anything else. It is, as we know, the greatest commandment.


I worship God. Period.So you worship Allah?

Joelel
04-18-2007, 03:11 PM
Ah, I'm beginning to understand! It is sin that blinds the Trinnies to the truth! Yes! I get it now!

(I could cut and paste the above to an analogous discussion on a Trinny forum, replacing "Trinnies" with "Oneness folks" and it would be just as valid there.)

Everyone has sin. How is it that this sin blinds some to the truth, and not others? Why does God lead some into truth and not others? How can one be held responsible for not seeing something when, as you say, they are blind? Or they have not been chosen by God to be enlightened?

Do you really believe that Trinnies are so evil that they intentionally allow sin (or whatever else) to hide the truth from them? Even just choosing the wrong side in this debate is, apparently, sin, correct? What is their motivation for such "sin" as not believing the Oneness doctrine? Sin typically has some lure, some perceived (albeit selfish and fleeting) benefit. Do Trinnies, in your view, just love to wallow in error, getting some kind of pleasure from doing so? "Ah," they must be saying, "gotta love being wrong! It sure feels good!"

I think what I'm really getting from all this is that it is simply a matter of understanding. We each read the same Bible and get different things from it, for this issue as well as any number of other things. Some will see trinity. Some will see oneness. Some, like me, will not see a clear win either way, and be content to conclude that there is a certain "threeness" in God's nature and, simultaneously, a "oneness" in God's nature. That truth cannot be denied by either side. (Can it??)

Yes most sin from time to time and some sin more then others.I should have said sin by habit blinds people to truth.Glad you caught me.Sin by habit is when a person does the same sin over and over and never stops or tries to stop.Rom.6
[12] Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof.

sola gratia
04-18-2007, 03:13 PM
You oneness folks are really confused. It is not tradition alone Bro Blume. That is simply ridiculous. There is more than ample biblical evidence validating the Trinity. it is the oneness view that is void of biblical credibility

Timmy
04-18-2007, 03:13 PM
So you worship Allah?

Was that TIC?

Timmy
04-18-2007, 03:15 PM
Sin by habit is when a person does the same sin over and over and never stops or tries to stop.

Like trinitarians. I see.

Joelel
04-18-2007, 03:18 PM
Uh, yeah, and usually a family consists of more than one person.

Right,you got it.I guess that's why some around here say there are oneness trinities or Jesus name trinites but the fact is if people would leave trinity and oneness out of their speach and just preach the word they would do well.

Timmy
04-18-2007, 03:29 PM
I've come to believe He cares as much or more about this than anything else. It is, as we know, the greatest commandment.

So, you believe that God cares more about us using the word "persons" in describing Him than He does about, say, our treatment of others? He's just as angry (or more) with Trinnies as He is with rapists and murderers? Not to put words in your mouth, but you did say "He cares as much or more about this than anything else."

Joelel
04-18-2007, 03:30 PM
Like trinitarians. I see.

No,like trinites and oneness.As I said before both teach things that are not true.Both have some truth.It's the sin by habit in both of there lives that keep them blinded and can't come together in one true truth.

Timmy
04-18-2007, 03:36 PM
No,like trinites and oneness.As I said before both teach things that are not true.Both have some truth.It's the sin by habit in both of there lives that keep them blinded and can't come together in one true truth.

Oh, OK! I guess we're pretty much on the same page, then. There is truth in both sides, and a major error (on both sides) is claiming absolute truth, to the exclusion of the other side. Is that about right?

mfblume
04-18-2007, 03:52 PM
You oneness folks are really confused. It is not tradition alone Bro Blume. That is simply ridiculous. There is more than ample biblical evidence validating the Trinity. it is the oneness view that is void of biblical credibility

Right. One God means trinity of persons. (not). Oneness is the most sensible and scriptural of all views, since it maintains an absolute Oneness of Old Testament statements, and retains Christ as that one God. Sorry. There is no explicit teaching in the entire bible that says anything about God's nature being three eternal persons. That a conclusion based upon a fanciful interpretation of interaction between Father and Son, for the most part. And since God says He is ONE, period, then trinitarianism is way offkey. Regardless, I have talked to many trinitarians, and it is all pressure from tradition. No one would come up with that.

mfblume
04-18-2007, 03:55 PM
"Our image" is what He said. Oh sure, Oneness has an answer to the "plural" problem of Genesis.

Ezra shows an example of the singular king calling himself "WE".

They have an answer for everything.

Everyone does, Timmy. If they didn't, they know their doctrine would fail.


The twists look reasonable to some, because of their Oneness tradition, and other twists look better to the Trinnies, because of their tradition. (Actually, I'm not sure I buy into the idea that the plural is there because it's a team, the trinity, talking and creating. Just for the record! :winkgrin)

A team of gods is all one can say.

The very basic instinct of a person would deny the idea of three persons, since it is flat-out three gods in reality. I know at least one trinitarian who is honest enough to say he believed in three gods. The gentile philosophers entered the church with the likes of Justin Martyr, who thought Philo, a heathen, heard from God about LOGOS as another person, and brought in their tendency for polytheism, and VOILA! Trinity!

I'm not sure I agree with your contention that no one would believe trinitarianism without tradition. Take a complete Bible newbie. Present him with a Bible, a written statement of trinitarianism, and a wrtten statement of oneness. Let him choose the statement that makes the most sense, that lines up best with the Bible.

I would give him no written statements, but bible alone. ANd then ask Him what is God's nature.

I can't predict which one would win, but it sure looks to me like the trinity needs a lot less fancy footwork!


Only if you will agree for there being three gods. :)

OGIA
04-18-2007, 04:05 PM
So, you believe that God cares more about us using the word "persons" in describing Him than He does about, say, our treatment of others? He's just as angry (or more) with Trinnies as He is with rapists and murderers? Not to put words in your mouth, but you did say "He cares as much or more about this than anything else."You many have meant "not to", but you did.

I said He cares more about this aspect of His nature (His "oneness") and that man understand that than probably anything else.



So you worship Allah?
Was that TIC?
No, it was not. You said you worship God. I asked if His name was Allah. Is it?

mfblume
04-18-2007, 04:14 PM
I asked if His name was Allah. Is it?


"Allah... kazam!", or "allah... peanut butter sandwiches"? lol

Timmy
04-18-2007, 06:16 PM
You many have meant "not to", but you did.

I said He cares more about this aspect of His nature (His "oneness") and that man understand that than probably anything else.

So, by "anything else" were you referring only to the possible things man might believe about God's nature? I.e., my example about rapists and murders didn't apply?

OK, let's say you're right. God really, really cares about what word we use to describe each of His three main manifestations. Doesn't mind if we call them "offices". He's cool with "manifestations". "Titles" is fine. The manifestations can talk with each other. One of the offices can send another one as the Comforter. Two of the titles can have different desires. God can be His own Father. Just don't dare say that that Father and that Son are two persons!

Is that about right?


No, it was not. You said you worship God. I asked if His name was Allah. Is it?

That's not a name I use for Him. Some say that the Muslims worship a false god named Allah, some say it is the same God as we worship, with a different name. I dunno, haven't really studied that issue much. That's another semantic issue, I suppose. If the Muslims describe God differently than I do, and use a different name for Him than I do, does that prove they are two different beings? If I described the president very differently than you do, or if I call him Dubya and you call him President Bush, would that mean you and I have different presidents (assuming you're a U.S. citizen)?

Praxeas
04-18-2007, 06:28 PM
To say I'm confused would be an understatement. All the debate between Oneness and Trinnies (and the debate among Oneness folks about how evil the Trinnies are) is interesting. But here's the thing: how does one come to believe in Oneness in the first place? Is it by logical reasoning, reading and comprehending the Bible? Is it a matter of intelligence? Do Trinnies have a lower IQ than you guys?

Or is there more to it?

I've read in various places on these forums that there is some kind of "revelation" of the truth. Almost as if to say that God has to reveal the truth to you, before you "get it". If that's so, to whom does God choose to reveal that truth? To anyone that asks? Well, He hasn't revealed it to me, yet, and I've asked! Or is it to whoever is worthy? Guess I'm not worthy. (Can't argue with that!)

But if it is a matter of comprehension, of understanding what you read etc., would anyone like to take another stab at educating me?

I've posted questions elsewhere about this, and I haven't seen good answers yet, or at least not ones I understand! E.g., I've written about the person-like behaviors of the Son, the Father, and the Holy Spirit. The answer was that I was equating God with human beings. I wasn't, but that's OK, I got the point: that I was describing God in human terms. But isn't that also what Oneness does? I.e., describe God in human terms, such as "office" or "manifestation"?

It's been said that God, being divine, is able to manifest Himself simultaneously in different ways, and that is what allows Him to talk to "Himself", etc. OK, that's fine, but how is it not also possible for God, being divine, to miraculously be three persons simultaneously?

More to the point, why does it matter so much if we use the word "person" or "office" or whatever? Does God really care?

Apparently He cares a great deal about certain things, like which words are used at one's baptism (the ones Jesus used or the ones Peter used), so you better guess right! So if that's true, sure, I can see how He might get really mad at someone for saying He is three "persons". :aaa
Im only going to get into specific areas of theology and what the bible says, not speculations.

What matters is what the bible says and who and what God is. Truth is truth, not because any individual or organization says so.

Is God a Trinity of persons? If that is what you believe you are welcome to argue it and address counter arguments. Is God a single person? If you deny that you are welcome counter it or ask specific theological scriptural questions. Im not interested in arguing the emotions of "So...do you say I am going to hell because I don't baptize x y and z?

Praxeas
04-18-2007, 06:30 PM
If I described the president very differently than you do, or if I call him Dubya and you call him President Bush, would that mean you and I have different presidents (assuming you're a U.S. citizen)?
What if a pagan says he worships Diana and that Diana is the same God you worship, but just has a different name and description...are you worshiping the same God?

Unfortunately this is not a biblical scriptural discussion. It's a philosophical discussion

Timmy
04-18-2007, 06:46 PM
What if a pagan says he worships Diana and that Diana is the same God you worship, but just has a different name and description...are you worshiping the same God?

Unfortunately this is not a biblical scriptural discussion. It's a philosophical discussion

OK, but I'm not the one that brought it up!

Timmy
04-18-2007, 07:01 PM
Im only going to get into specific areas of theology and what the bible says, not speculations.

What matters is what the bible says and who and what God is. Truth is truth, not because any individual or organization says so.

Is God a Trinity of persons? If that is what you believe you are welcome to argue it and address counter arguments. Is God a single person? If you deny that you are welcome counter it or ask specific theological scriptural questions. Im not interested in arguing the emotions of "So...do you say I am going to hell because I don't baptize x y and z?

Okaaaaay. I don't feel the need to argue those emotions, either. But some oneness folks (maybe not you?) do say I will go to hell if I'm baptized "in the titles" (as specified by Jesus), or for any number of other reasons that don't make sense. It's a pretty emotional thing to consider.

Do I believe God is a Trinity of persons? I've said before that I see some truth to both sides of the issue. I see no reason for either side to say that the other side is totally wrong. God has "oneness" characteristics, and He has "threeness" characteristics.

That is Bible!

What is not in the Bible is that the silly little word "person" should cause such a fuss! Or is it?

OGIA
04-18-2007, 08:44 PM
So, by "anything else" were you referring only to the possible things man might believe about God's nature? I.e., my example about rapists and murders didn't apply?I'm sorry, but I'm not following you.


OK, let's say you're right. God really, really cares about what word we use to describe each of His three main manifestations. Doesn't mind if we call them "offices". He's cool with "manifestations". "Titles" is fine. The manifestations can talk with each other. One of the offices can send another one as the Comforter. Two of the titles can have different desires. God can be His own Father. Just don't dare say that that Father and that Son are two persons!

Is that about right? No, that's not even close to right. I'm not talking about what words are used to describe Him. I'm talking about the truth of His nature that we call "oneness" -- His One, indivisible nature of Spirit. THAT is what is important to Him, because from that comes the truths we profess and the answers to the questions you (and so many trinitarians) have.


That's not a name I use for Him.So, then, what god are you talking about that you worship? I'm not getting a clear answer. I know of about a dozen gods whose name I could call besides Allah, but I'd prefer you just tell me yourself. :tiphat


Some say that the Muslims worship a false god named Allah, some say it is the same God as we worship, with a different name. I dunno, haven't really studied that issue much.I would hope you either know or will find out very quickly whether that's true or not.


If I described the president very differently than you do, or if I call him Dubya and you call him President Bush, would that mean you and I have different presidents (assuming you're a U.S. citizen)? No, but your analogy fails, because we're talking about ONE PERSON, not three.

Timmy
04-18-2007, 09:25 PM
I'm sorry, but I'm not following you.

Let's recap, then.

I asked, "Does God really care? I just can't see Him getting bent out of shape over it", referring back to "why does it matter so much if we use the word 'person' or 'office' or whatever?"

You answered, "I've come to believe He cares as much or more about this than anything else. It is, as we know, the greatest commandment."

Thinking (wrongly?) that you really meant "anything else" that God may get angry about, I wondered if you thought God cared about our understanding of His nature at least as much as He cared about how we treat each other. I gave the extreme example of rapists and murderers.

Now, that's when you said I put words in your mouth. True, you didn't say anything about rapists and murderers. Then I tried to see if what you really meant when you said "anything else" would not go that far, but would only include things pertaining to His nature.

Or did you literally mean "anything else"? Like rape and murder?

Just trying to understand.

OGIA
04-18-2007, 09:29 PM
Let's recap, then.I explained. It's not about words. It's about His nature. The greatest commandment is about His nature --- His oneness.


Now, how about addressing the issue of the name of the god you worship. :tiphat

stmatthew
04-18-2007, 09:33 PM
Gentlemen,

Please remember as you discuss this topic that you are on a Oneness, Apostolic forum. While we do encourage discussion, we will not allow the ridicule of those that believe or teach the Apostolic, Oneness message.

Carry on. :)

Timmy
04-18-2007, 09:45 PM
No, but your analogy fails, because we're talking about ONE PERSON, not three.

Not sure we're talking about the same thing, here. It's kind of off topic, I guess, but I was referring to the fact that Christianity and Islam have different names for God and different descriptions of God, and whether that proves that they worship literally two different Gods.

How does the president analogy not apply?

Oh, but it's not off topic, is it? You believe that, since Trinnies describe God differently, they worship a different God! That's why you want me to tell you my God's name! You may think I can't give Him a name, because of some weirdness with my (or Trinnies') belief that God is three Persons, and Three Persons can't have a name! Something along those lines?

Well, my God has many names. Jesus, Jehovah, I Am, Emmanuel, etc. Yes, Jesus is one of His names. Jesus is God. The Son is God. (Trinnies believe that, you know!) The Father is God. The Holy Spirit is God. So, do you and I worship the same God or not?

Joelel
04-18-2007, 09:48 PM
Oh, OK! I guess we're pretty much on the same page, then. There is truth in both sides, and a major error (on both sides) is claiming absolute truth, to the exclusion of the other side. Is that about right?

Yes

crakjak
04-18-2007, 09:55 PM
Gentlemen,

Please remember as you discuss this topic that you are on a Oneness, Apostolic forum. While we do encourage discussion, we will not allow the ridicule of those that believe or teach the Apostolic, Oneness message.

Carry on. :)

Joelel I believe he is speaking to you?:winkgrin

Timmy
04-18-2007, 10:07 PM
I explained. It's not about words. It's about His nature. The greatest commandment is about His nature --- His oneness.


Mark 12:29 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments [is], Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord: 30 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this [is] the first commandment.

OK. Yes, there is just one God. Not three. And if it's not about words, does that mean I've been fussing about the word "person" for nothing? You're OK with it? God's OK with it?

Praxeas
04-19-2007, 12:15 AM
Okaaaaay. I don't feel the need to argue those emotions, either. But some oneness folks (maybe not you?) do say I will go to hell if I'm baptized "in the titles" (as specified by Jesus), or for any number of other reasons that don't make sense. It's a pretty emotional thing to consider.

Do I believe God is a Trinity of persons? I've said before that I see some truth to both sides of the issue. I see no reason for either side to say that the other side is totally wrong. God has "oneness" characteristics, and He has "threeness" characteristics.

That is Bible!

What is not in the Bible is that the silly little word "person" should cause such a fuss! Or is it?

First of all I am persuaded that in everything we do, whether it can save us or whether it's something the saved will automatically do because they are saved and do have faith...what the bible says is critically important. If not then we can really just pick and choose what path we take. Christians believe the word is our rule of faith, correct? If then it can be argued that baptism was done and was taught to be done in a certain way should we not obey it regardless of "what it does"?

Salvation aside, now can it be said we are true worshipers in Spirit and in Truth....that we are servants of God...that we are humble followers of God and yet treat what He commands and what the bible says with casual amusement? Even with a cavalier attitude? Legalism is frightening to some but so is the opposite end of the spectrum. It's the same attitude that leads the Jesus Seminar folks to "cut out" parts of the bible saying Jesus never said that or Jesus never did that.

If the Apostles baptism by submerssion in Jesus name and that is how we are to baptize, then what difference does it make what baptism does, if anything, if you really do have faith and really love the Lord and are saved?

When Abraham, the Father of the faithful, was told by God to leave his father and country and go into a new country He did not question God why. He did not seek to do it a different way from what God told him. He just did it....what if he had not done it....could it be said still that Abraham had faith? if so let's consider that if he did have faith and did not go he would have had faith and yet still NOT recieved the promise that God promised him.

Thus any and all discussions on baptism must strictly be done in light of what the word of God says and from there you and anyone else must make a determination as to how you should be baptized, or if you should be rebaptized. Making a statement of one's salvation based on how they were or were not baptized on my part is irrelevant to the discussion.

Person. The greek word for person is in the bible...actualy there are two. The mean slightly different things theologically. One is prosopon and has been translated person, presence, face..I think it can even mean mask like an actor in a play

The other is hypostasis which is translated person in the KJV and in others as substance and means foundation or that which is under. They reason they used it as person was to refer to the core or central "self" that "animates" whatever nature one possesses....

However the plural persons is never used of God. Hypostasis is used only once of God in Hebrews 1

Praxeas
04-19-2007, 12:17 AM
BTW Timmy, don't I know you from NFCF and GNC? PM me if you will

justasaint
04-19-2007, 02:39 AM
timmy i had the traditional view of God and was raised believing it.
I was Oneness. What I have found out is that both sides have lied to people,
not on purpose.

It is man trying to describe the operation of God in a human language.

I havent in scripture found where the understanding of this operation is salvational.
I am not trinitarian nor oneness I think they are both right and it dosen't matter.

Most Chistians believe in one God same as the Jews.
All Christians believe in Christ and identify with him.
The early Christians were killed and persecuted because they believed that Christ was the Messiaha. His message gave hope and they understood his
shed blood wasn't just blood but forgiveness of sin.

Its like trying to understand revelation, there are many theories but we really won't know until we know.

OGIA
04-19-2007, 06:56 AM
Not sure we're talking about the same thing, here. It's kind of off topic, I guess, but I was referring to the fact that Christianity and Islam have different names for God and different descriptions of God, and whether that proves that they worship literally two different Gods. Allah is not Jehovah. They are not the same God.


How does the president analogy not apply?Because George Bush is one person, not three. According to trinitarian theology, God is 3 persons, not one.


You believe that, since Trinnies describe God differently, they worship a different God!It's not about how they describe Him, Timmy. It's about WHO they think He is and if they understand how He has revealed Himself to us.

If someone describes God as wonderful, awesome, might and eternal, then I would agree that, based on this, we do worship the same God. If they then go on to say that He is their healer, rock, strong tower and provider, I'd still be with them. If they went even further and said that He is their Father, the Son of God and the Spirit that resides within them, I'd STILL agree. But, if they then said that the Lord Jesus Christ is not that One God they are describing, then I am not worshipping the same God as them, for the God they describe does not equate to the One I know. They bring another element outside of Jesus Christ, and we know that that element is two other persons.


Well, my God has many names. Jesus, Jehovah, I Am, Emmanuel, etc. Yes, Jesus is one of His names. Jesus is God. The Son is God. (Trinnies believe that, you know!) The Father is God. The Holy Spirit is God. So, do you and I worship the same God or not?Do all of those names apply to all three of the persons of God? Is the Father Jehovah and Jesus? Is the Holy Spirit Jehovah and Jesus? Is Jesus Jehovah and Father?

But, the real simple question I asked is this: what is the name of your God? If someone who knew nothing of Christianity asked you what your God's name is, what would you tell them?

Chan
04-19-2007, 08:50 AM
To say I'm confused would be an understatement. All the debate between Oneness and Trinnies (and the debate among Oneness folks about how evil the Trinnies are) is interesting. But here's the thing: how does one come to believe in Oneness in the first place? Is it by logical reasoning, reading and comprehending the Bible? Is it a matter of intelligence? Do Trinnies have a lower IQ than you guys?

Or is there more to it?

I've read in various places on these forums that there is some kind of "revelation" of the truth. Almost as if to say that God has to reveal the truth to you, before you "get it". If that's so, to whom does God choose to reveal that truth? To anyone that asks? Well, He hasn't revealed it to me, yet, and I've asked! Or is it to whoever is worthy? Guess I'm not worthy. (Can't argue with that!)

But if it is a matter of comprehension, of understanding what you read etc., would anyone like to take another stab at educating me?

I've posted questions elsewhere about this, and I haven't seen good answers yet, or at least not ones I understand! E.g., I've written about the person-like behaviors of the Son, the Father, and the Holy Spirit. The answer was that I was equating God with human beings. I wasn't, but that's OK, I got the point: that I was describing God in human terms. But isn't that also what Oneness does? I.e., describe God in human terms, such as "office" or "manifestation"?

It's been said that God, being divine, is able to manifest Himself simultaneously in different ways, and that is what allows Him to talk to "Himself", etc. OK, that's fine, but how is it not also possible for God, being divine, to miraculously be three persons simultaneously?

More to the point, why does it matter so much if we use the word "person" or "office" or whatever? Does God really care?

Apparently He cares a great deal about certain things, like which words are used at one's baptism (the ones Jesus used or the ones Peter used), so you better guess right! So if that's true, sure, I can see how He might get really mad at someone for saying He is three "persons". :aaaOneness and trinity are both nothing more than men's interpretations of scripture.

Chan
04-19-2007, 08:51 AM
Because the bible stressed GOD IS ONE so much. Anyone would realize, like Oneness people teach, that it is God manifesting Himself in various ways. But to say there are three eternal persons, who love each other for eternity, and are aware of each other for eternity and communicate with each other for eternity -- before God created anything -- is more like three gods. And people would realize that.Of course, the trinity doctrine also teaches that there is one God.

Chan
04-19-2007, 08:54 AM
Hi Timmy,One thing the oneness teach wrong about their oneness teaching is.#1,They say Jesus is the father God,that is not totally correct.Jesus is ONLY the Fathers woed.Only the Word of the father was made flesh.The Spirit of the Father is IN the Son Jesus.When Jesus the word of God died ONLY the word died.The father or Spirit of God did not die.When Jesus the Son the word of God died he gave up the ghost or Spirit of God.

The word of God is God because it is his word but his word is not Spirit.It is spirit with a small s because it shows God's word is his and comes from God.

John1: 1: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2: The same was in the beginning with God.

14: And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth

1 Cor.5:19: To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation

Acts3:[26] Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities

See here, the Spirit that is IN the Son Jesus raised him from the dead.Also the Same Spirit is IN us but we are not the Father as Jesus the Son is not the Father but the Father is IN Jesus and the Father is IN us.
Rom.8:[11] But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you

John.19
[30] When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.

This is why the trinity don't agree with the oneness.The we have the trinity and the oneness don't teach Jesus is the family name.

Is there a separation between the Father and Son ? Yes.There is a family.Look at it this way. I am my mother and father,Both of them are IN me but they are still their own separate being.It's the same with the Father God and his Son.Did all the fullness of God dwell in the Son ? Yes.God is a Spirit,the fullness of the Spirit can be in Jesus and everywhere at the same time.God is IN me and all true believers,does that make God more then one ? no. Same one God in all of us even though we are separate people.Did God the Father send his Son as the scripture teaches ? Yes. The Spirit of God sent his word.Did the Son ascend to the Father ? Yes.The Word of God the Son ascended to the Father the Spirit.Is there one God ? Yes. The Spirit and his word is one God.

Are Father Son and Holy Ghost names? No,They are titles. Jesus said to baptize in the name. What is the Son's name? It's Jesus, Isn't It?

Jesus didn't come in his own name.Jesus Said In 1 John 5 ;43. I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.( Here we find Jesus came in his Fathers name ,So his Father's name is Jesus ? )

The Father sent the Holy Ghost in his Son's name.John 14:26. But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, .( Here we find The Father Sent the Holy Ghost In Jesus name,So the Holy Ghost name Is Jesus.)

Eph.3:014 For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, 003:015 Of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named, ( Here we find the whole family is named after the Father.( So Jesus Is A family name and is the name of the Father Son And Holy Ghost.)

Who did the Son inherit his name from?You don't inherit something from yourself.Heb.1:004 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they. ( We find here Jesus Inherited his name from the Father. What name does a Son Inherit? The family name.)The "Word" in John 1:1 is the logos or divine expression. The term John used was based on the Aramaic word "memra" that the Jews used to describe God's revealed essence, meaning God as He has revealed Himself to and interacted with humanity. This revealed essence is differentiated from God's hidden essence or God as He is in all His fullness.

Chan
04-19-2007, 08:56 AM
Timmy,

God made man in His image. Man is spirit, soul and body. But is man more than one person? Do these three elements each comprise a person?

After MUCH talk with trinitarians in debate and outside debate, I am still convinced that without trinity tradition, no one would believe it.That depends on how you're defining the term "person." Of course, those who first formulated the trinity doctrine never used "person" (since English didn't even exist as a language back then).

Chan
04-19-2007, 08:59 AM
"Our image" is what He said. Oh sure, Oneness has an answer to the "plural" problem of Genesis. They have an answer for everything. The twists look reasonable to some, because of their Oneness tradition, and other twists look better to the Trinnies, because of their tradition. (Actually, I'm not sure I buy into the idea that the plural is there because it's a team, the trinity, talking and creating. Just for the record! :winkgrin)

I'm not sure I agree with your contention that no one would believe trinitarianism without tradition. Take a complete Bible newbie. Present him with a Bible, a written statement of trinitarianism, and a wrtten statement of oneness. Let him choose the statement that makes the most sense, that lines up best with the Bible. I can't predict which one would win, but it sure looks to me like the trinity needs a lot less fancy footwork!Timmy, I consider myself a Trinitarian but even I don't believe that the "us" and "our" in Genesis 1:26 refers to individual divine beings. I believe God was speaking to the angels and then, in Genesis 1:27, went on to create man in His image.

For further reading...

http://www.amazon.com/Three-Examination-Persons-Trinity-Doctrine/dp/1424143713/ref=sr_1_1/104-3426840-8706309?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1176994720&sr=8-1

Chan
04-19-2007, 09:02 AM
Gentlemen,

Please remember as you discuss this topic that you are on a Oneness, Apostolic forum. While we do encourage discussion, we will not allow the ridicule of those that believe or teach the Apostolic, Oneness message.

Carry on. :)
But you'll allow oneness folks to ridicule those that believe in the trinity doctrine?

mfblume
04-19-2007, 09:03 AM
But you'll allow oneness folks to ridicule those that believe in the trinity doctrine?

Who ridiculed PEOPLE?

mfblume
04-19-2007, 09:04 AM
That depends on how you're defining the term "person." Of course, those who first formulated the trinity doctrine never used "person" (since English didn't even exist as a language back then).

It does not depend upon how we use the term "person". The point is there were not three anythings conversing with each other as conscious beings for eternity. That would be three gods, no matter which way we slice it.

mfblume
04-19-2007, 09:05 AM
Of course, the trinity doctrine also teaches that there is one God.

Because it HAS to, since the Bible says ONE GOD. But it is the closest you can get to three gods without saying three gods. :(

mizpeh
04-19-2007, 09:13 AM
To say I'm confused would be an understatement. All the debate between Oneness and Trinnies (and the debate among Oneness folks about how evil the Trinnies are) is interesting. But here's the thing: how does one come to believe in Oneness in the first place? Is it by logical reasoning, reading and comprehending the Bible? Is it a matter of intelligence? Do Trinnies have a lower IQ than you guys?

To come to an understanding of the Oneness of God or the Trinity, you have to read the Bible. There is clearly only ONE God. The difficulty comes in when we read that the Father is God, Jesus is God,and the Spirit is God. Where you go from there is what will bring you to either a Oneness or Trinitarian definition of who or what God is.


I've read in various places on these forums that there is some kind of "revelation" of the truth. Almost as if to say that God has to reveal the truth to you, before you "get it". If that's so, to whom does God choose to reveal that truth? To anyone that asks? Well, He hasn't revealed it to me, yet, and I've asked! Or is it to whoever is worthy? Guess I'm not worthy. (Can't argue with that!)

Mt 11:27 All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.

I believe in seeking God in prayer and fasting, studying His word, and walking with Him, God will reveal His truths to you. I sought God for a long time to understand who He was when I first became a Christian. I was told He was one God and not a Trinity, but the NT can be confusing especially when Jesus is praying to God as someone other than God. It took me a long time to understand the dual nature of Christ and the incarnation is still a mystery to me.

I did receive a revelation from the Spirit/God one night many years ago that God is a Spirit who fills all heaven and earth. Once I had that understanding down and knowing that He is just one Spirit, the Trinity made absolutely no sense. I can see God in manifestations or different ways He reveals himself and not "persons" which to me more accurately reflects the concept of ONE God and scripture. I AM that I AM does not reflect a Trinity.

But if it is a matter of comprehension, of understanding what you read etc., would anyone like to take another stab at educating me?It's a matter of both comprehesion and revelation. If you sincerely want the truth, God will reveal it to you. I haven't found an understanding of "God manifest in flesh" yet that I can agree with completely.

I've posted questions elsewhere about this, and I haven't seen good answers yet, or at least not ones I understand! E.g., I've written about the person-like behaviors of the Son, the Father, and the Holy Spirit. The answer was that I was equating God with human beings. I wasn't, but that's OK, I got the point: that I was describing God in human terms. But isn't that also what Oneness does? I.e., describe God in human terms, such as "office" or "manifestation"?

To me it is acceptable to speak of the man, Jesus Christ, as a person, but not of God, the Spirit, as a person. God is an omnipresent Spirit and is everywhere at the same time the same. He can speak to you and me at the same time if He wishes and say "I am here" to me and "I love you" to you at the same exact time and not be two persons, ie. one person speaking to you and one person speaking to me. This idea can be multiplied a zillion times and God is still the same being but capable of an infinite number of interactions all at once and still be one. It would be impossible for you or I or even an angel to physically be in two places at once or for us to speak to two different people and say two different things to each. God is not a person. Not even in a theological sense as some Trinitarians would make that distinction.


It's been said that God, being divine, is able to manifest Himself simultaneously in different ways, and that is what allows Him to talk to "Himself", etc. OK, that's fine, but how is it not also possible for God, being divine, to miraculously be three persons simultaneously?

Like I said God is not three persons. Can you find a place in the OT where it says there is one person of God speaking to another person of God and we can discuss those verses? The NT is a whole other kettle of fish! If you believe God is one and has one consciousness then when it says God was manifest in the flesh, it only stands to reason, the God of the Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the "I AM" became flesh and blood or was made man.

And here is where the confusion sets in. When Jesus speaks does He speak as a man or as God or both? Why does Jesus, if He is God, have to pray, has to grow in wisdom, doesn't have all knowledge, gives all credit for the words He speaks and the works He does to His Father? Why does He say He can do nothing of His own self? (We can discuss this later)

As for the Holy Spirit being another "person", can you find a place where the Father and Spirit are actually speaking to each other in the Bible? I discount Romans 8 where it speaks of the Spirit making intercession for us and 1Cor 14 speaking in tongues because of the human element. Spirit of God, God's Spirit, is God himself. God is a Spirit. This for me was a revelation from God with many scriptures to prove it. Other verses speak of the Spirit of the Father, the Spirit of Christ, the Spirit of the Lord, yet there is only one Spirit and we are baptized by this one Spirit into one body. Different names and titles for God who is a Spirit not a person or persons.

More to the point, why does it matter so much if we use the word "person" or "office" or whatever? Does God really care?

Yes, I believe He does. He wants to be worshipped in Spirit and in truth. So if you are worshipping God in a Trinity, you are not worshipping in truth.

Apparently He cares a great deal about certain things, like which words are used at one's baptism (the ones Jesus used or the ones Peter used), so you better guess right! So if that's true, sure, I can see how He might get really mad at someone for saying He is three "persons". :aaa

Baptism is another subject.

Michael The Disciple
04-19-2007, 09:19 AM
It does not depend upon how we use the term "person". The point is there were not three anythings conversing with each other as conscious beings for eternity. That would be three gods, no matter which way we slice it.

Exactly.

Michael The Disciple
04-19-2007, 09:21 AM
Timmy, I consider myself a Trinitarian but even I don't believe that the "us" and "our" in Genesis 1:26 refers to individual divine beings. I believe God was speaking to the angels and then, in Genesis 1:27, went on to create man in His image.

For further reading...

http://www.amazon.com/Three-Examination-Persons-Trinity-Doctrine/dp/1424143713/ref=sr_1_1/104-3426840-8706309?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1176994720&sr=8-1

Chan,

I clicked the link and found where you were "led" out of Oneness into Trinity. Thats odd because I was led out of Trinity into Oneness!

mfblume
04-19-2007, 09:24 AM
Chan,

I clicked the link and found where you were "led" out of Oneness into Trinity. Thats odd because I was led out of Trinity into Oneness!

If God leads anyone anywhere, it will never be from oneness to trinity. :D

sola gratia
04-19-2007, 09:49 AM
Right. One God means trinity of persons. (not). Oneness is the most sensible and scriptural of all views, since it maintains an absolute Oneness of Old Testament statements, and retains Christ as that one God. Sorry. There is no explicit teaching in the entire bible that says anything about God's nature being three eternal persons. That a conclusion based upon a fanciful interpretation of interaction between Father and Son, for the most part. And since God says He is ONE, period, then trinitarianism is way offkey. Regardless, I have talked to many trinitarians, and it is all pressure from tradition. No one would come up with that.

I disagree with you Bro Blume. I am sorry, but I think your misguided here. Your tradition teaches you trinitarianism is stupid, nonsensical, and non-biblical. My guess would be you have never really looked at it. Should you ever choose we could interact via email or something on the eternal composition of God. I dont think the trinity is the end all of answers, certainly not, but I dont think mainstream oneness is either, and I can prove it

thanks

Timmy
04-19-2007, 09:51 AM
It does not depend upon how we use the term "person". The point is there were not three anythings conversing with each other as conscious beings for eternity. That would be three gods, no matter which way we slice it.

So, if there were three somethings conversing with each other as conscious beings for eternity, that would be three gods.

OK, what if there were three somethings that conversed with each other as conscious beings for a really long time? Three gods, or not? Or a short time? How long does it have to be?

Or is "eternity" the key? If so, why? If God manifested Himself for a finite time as three conscious somethings (call them manifestations, if you like) who conversed with each other for a finite time (which He did, do you agree?), then why couldn't He have done that for eternity, if He so desired? Never mind that He didn't. He could have, right? If He had done that, He would have fit your model for three gods. Again, why does it matter if He did this for eternity of for a short time?

BoredOutOfMyMind
04-19-2007, 10:00 AM
I disagree with you Bro Blume. I am sorry, but I think your misguided here. Your tradition teaches you trinitarianism is stupid, nonsensical, and non-biblical. My guess would be you have never really looked at it. Should you ever choose we could interact via email or something on the eternal composition of God. I dont think the trinity is the end all of answers, certainly not, but I dont think mainstream oneness is either, and I can prove it

thanks

sola,

Your proof will be moot as Bro Blume has a long history of being a defender of the Faith.

For the benefit of others, why not post here why you feel Oneness is as errant as the falsehood of The Trinity.

Praxeas
04-19-2007, 10:14 AM
timmy i had the traditional view of God and was raised believing it.
I was Oneness. What I have found out is that both sides have lied to people,
not on purpose.

It is man trying to describe the operation of God in a human language.

I havent in scripture found where the understanding of this operation is salvational.
I am not trinitarian nor oneness I think they are both right and it dosen't matter.

Most Chistians believe in one God same as the Jews.
All Christians believe in Christ and identify with him.
The early Christians were killed and persecuted because they believed that Christ was the Messiaha. His message gave hope and they understood his
shed blood wasn't just blood but forgiveness of sin.

Its like trying to understand revelation, there are many theories but we really won't know until we know.
How does a person lie to someone else "not on purpose"?

Praxeas
04-19-2007, 10:17 AM
Timmy, I consider myself a Trinitarian but even I don't believe that the "us" and "our" in Genesis 1:26 refers to individual divine beings. I believe God was speaking to the angels and then, in Genesis 1:27, went on to create man in His image.

For further reading...

http://www.amazon.com/Three-Examination-Persons-Trinity-Doctrine/dp/1424143713/ref=sr_1_1/104-3426840-8706309?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1176994720&sr=8-1
As a Oneness person I also believe the plural there refers to angelic beings who were present with God at creation and probably share a similiar image with God being themselves spirits and moral agents

Praxeas
04-19-2007, 10:19 AM
I disagree with you Bro Blume. I am sorry, but I think your misguided here. Your tradition teaches you trinitarianism is stupid, nonsensical, and non-biblical. My guess would be you have never really looked at it. Should you ever choose we could interact via email or something on the eternal composition of God. I dont think the trinity is the end all of answers, certainly not, but I dont think mainstream oneness is either, and I can prove it

thanks
Do you want to set up a debate with someone so you can do your proving and do more I hope than just the anti-oneness posturing you have done so far?

Chan
04-19-2007, 10:20 AM
Because it HAS to, since the Bible says ONE GOD. But it is the closest you can get to three gods without saying three gods. :(
Depending on which version of the doctrine you're referring to.

Chan
04-19-2007, 10:23 AM
It does not depend upon how we use the term "person". The point is there were not three anythings conversing with each other as conscious beings for eternity. That would be three gods, no matter which way we slice it.Oneness folks don't use the term "person" in reference to those the BIBLE identifies as Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Not all versions of the trinity doctrine, and especially not the doctrine in the early Creeds, teach three conversing with each other as conscious beings for eternity.

Chan
04-19-2007, 10:24 AM
Who ridiculed PEOPLE?Ask STMATTHEW.

mizpeh
04-19-2007, 10:37 AM
Uh, yeah, and usually a family consists of more than one person.

There is such a thing as the family of God and we are his children, but are you suggesting God is a family? That's the first time I've heard that one!:toofunny

I don't believe in an eternal Son. Ask Chan, he will tell you it is an oxymoron.

mizpeh
04-19-2007, 11:08 AM
I disagree with you Bro Blume. I am sorry, but I think your misguided here. Your tradition teaches you trinitarianism is stupid, nonsensical, and non-biblical. My guess would be you have never really looked at it. Should you ever choose we could interact via email or something on the eternal composition of God. I dont think the trinity is the end all of answers, certainly not, but I dont think mainstream oneness is either, and I can prove it

thanks

You have to give some of us some credit. I've looked into the doctrine of the Trinity and found it lacking. It is all those things you said about it. I've spent the last year learning about it and was receptive to knowing whether it was true or not....really, I was open to believing it if it was the truth of God, but truly it isn't and it doesn't make sense.

mfblume
04-19-2007, 11:12 AM
So, if there were three somethings conversing with each other as conscious beings for eternity, that would be three gods.

You wanna believe it! What else woudl three gods be?


OK, what if there were three somethings that conversed with each other as conscious beings for a really long time? Three gods, or not? Or a short time? How long does it have to be?

Eternity. Eternal beings are gods. The humanitu of Christ had a consciousness, but was human.

Or is "eternity" the key? If so, why? If God manifested Himself for a finite time as three conscious somethings (call them manifestations, if you like) who conversed with each other for a finite time (which He did, do you agree?), then why couldn't He have done that for eternity, if He so desired?

Then that would be three gods. Eternaity makes the difference.


Never mind that He didn't. He could have, right? If He had done that, He would have fit your model for three gods. Again, why does it matter if He did this for eternity of for a short time?

God cannot do everything. He cannot lie, for instance. And if God is One, He could not eternally be three consciousnesses. That woudl make Him three Gods.

mfblume
04-19-2007, 11:16 AM
I disagree with you Bro Blume. I am sorry, but I think your misguided here. Your tradition teaches you trinitarianism is stupid, nonsensical, and non-biblical.

Strawman. That is not true whatsoever.

My guess would be you have never really looked at it.

never really looked at it? I have pages of debates with several trinitaraisn, including an author who wrote a book on trinity. I know more about trinity than most trinitarians, not to brag.

Should you ever choose we could interact via email or something on the eternal composition of God. I dont think the trinity is the end all of answers, certainly not, but I dont think mainstream oneness is either, and I can prove it

thanks

Everyone claims they can prove things. After careful and LONG analysis of the trinity teaching, it is a faulty concept based upon comparing God's works with human persons, and ascertaining that if one human person cannot simultaneously do what God did simulatenously, without being in actuality more than one person, then neither can God. And that is the simplest way to explain the whole conundrum. Disagree if you like. Whatever floats your boat. But I am convinced of it after personal interaction in this issue in great detail.

sola gratia
04-19-2007, 11:44 AM
yea whatever Bro

sola gratia
04-19-2007, 11:46 AM
Strawman. That is not true whatsoever.



never really looked at it? I have pages of debates with several trinitaraisn, including an author who wrote a book on trinity. I know more about trinity than most trinitarians, not to brag.



Everyone claims they can prove things. After careful and LONG analysis of the trinity teaching, it is a faulty concept based upon comparing God's works with human persons, and ascertaining that if one human person cannot simultaneously do what God did simulatenously, without being in actuality more than one person, then neither can God. And that is the simplest way to explain the whole conundrum. Disagree if you like. Whatever floats your boat. But I am convinced of it after personal interaction in this issue in great detail.

Everyone does claim that - just as you are here. You assume one thing, I assume another. You dont want to discuss it, but you do want to complain about it.. That's typical. Could you PM me to your site so I can peruse the "debates"?

BoredOutOfMyMind
04-19-2007, 11:49 AM
Everyone does claim that - just as you are here. You assume one thing, I assume another. You dont want to discuss it, but you do want to complain about it.. That's typical. Could you PM me to your site so I can peruse the "debates"?

I am calling your hand on this.

It seems you are the one complaining and you are the one debating.

:tiphat

mfblume
04-19-2007, 11:59 AM
Everyone does claim that - just as you are here. You assume one thing, I assume another. You dont want to discuss it, but you do want to complain about it.. That's typical.

Oh please.

I am willing to discuss anything. I have not complained about anything, either. When I really deal with the issue I take a huge amount of time. And I get into every issue and request the other side to respond the same and answer all my statements. Few every really did. I do not have the debates on my site any more, just on record. I could email them to you if you wish.

I'll even post the debates here if the Admins see no problem with it.

What is typical is these misrepresentations of my, and others', manners of discussion.

mfblume
04-19-2007, 12:00 PM
yea whatever Bro

Will you say something substantial? So far, your fruits betray lack of honesty in dealing with the issue.

mizpeh
04-19-2007, 12:12 PM
yea whatever Bro

Do you want to discuss the inadequacies of the doctrine of the Trinity or what you find wrong with Oneness theology?

sola gratia
04-19-2007, 12:15 PM
Oh please.

I am willing to discuss anything. I have not complained about anything, either. When I really deal with the issue I take a huge amount of time. And I get into every issue and request the other side to respond the same and answer all my statements. Few every really did. I do not have the debates on my site any more, just on record. I could email them to you if you wish.

I'll even post the debates here if the Admins see no problem with it.

What is typical is these misrepresentations of my, and others', manners of discussion.

you could email me a few of them if your okay with it - I agree to the time issue

mfblume
04-19-2007, 12:49 PM
you could email me a few of them if your okay with it - I agree to the time issue

PM me your email address, and I'll send them to you.

Timmy
04-19-2007, 01:02 PM
There is such a thing as the family of God and we are his children, but are you suggesting God is a family? That's the first time I've heard that one!:toofunny

Well, it seems pretty natural to call a father and son a family. The Son inherited His name from His Father (Hebrews 1:4). The Father/Son relationship is emphasized in Hebrews 1:5. As God's children, we are joint-heirs with Christ (Rom 8:17).

What am I missing, here? (Yeah yeah, I know: a lot! :winkgrin)

Chan
04-19-2007, 02:51 PM
Well, it seems pretty natural to call a father and son a family. The Son inherited His name from His Father (Hebrews 1:4). The Father/Son relationship is emphasized in Hebrews 1:5. As God's children, we are joint-heirs with Christ (Rom 8:17).

What am I missing, here? (Yeah yeah, I know: a lot! :winkgrin)You're missing that the relationship is not a relationship between two divine beings but between God and His only begotten Son.

stmatthew
04-19-2007, 04:07 PM
Ask STMATTHEW.

Chan will be taking a short vacation. Should he wish to come back after that time and post responsibly, and respect the authority that is here, he is able to.

mfblume
04-20-2007, 11:49 AM
you could email me a few of them if your okay with it - I agree to the time issue

I am still waiting for your email address. :)

Praxeas
04-20-2007, 11:56 AM
If you two want a public debate here it can be arranged...just you two

sola gratia
04-20-2007, 12:19 PM
I am still waiting for your email address. :)

I sent it to you

mfblume
04-21-2007, 09:25 AM
If you two want a public debate here it can be arranged...just you two

I am personally so tired of debating, I've done it so much. But I have my files from past debates.

Praxeas
04-21-2007, 12:15 PM
I thought that is what you two were going to do anyways

mfblume
04-21-2007, 12:58 PM
I thought that is what you two were going to do anyways

Nah.

justasaint
04-25-2007, 07:44 PM
PRAX

if someone thinks what they believe is truth and it is not
then they do not know they are lying.

If Jesus name baptism is not the only way
or Father Son Holy Ghost Baptism is not the only way
then someone is lying but not on purpose.

Chan
04-26-2007, 08:03 AM
PRAX

if someone thinks what they believe is truth and it is not
then they do not know they are lying.

If Jesus name baptism is not the only way
or Father Son Holy Ghost Baptism is not the only way
then someone is lying but not on purpose.
In order for the person to be lying, the person has to KNOW that what he believes is not the truth.

Praxeas
04-26-2007, 10:38 AM
In order for the person to be lying, the person has to KNOW that what he believes is not the truth.
Exactly....

Timmy
04-26-2007, 06:07 PM
Thanks, everyone, for trying to help me understand Oneness. Were you successful? Well, I do think I understand your position better, so yes, there's some success. OTOH, I'm still stuck in the middle ground (Luke warm? About to be spewed from God's mouth??), where I don't see a big reason for the rift between the Trinity and Oneness camps. Nor do I yet see a clear winner, from Scripture. It's mildly amusing to read the claim here, that there is no scriptural support for trinitarianism whatsoever. I'd probably be amused by trinnies' claims about the lack of Oneness support, too.

And I still think it simply comes down to whatever resonates with you best. For some, it's Oneness, for others, it's Trinitarianism. And also whatever you've been taught. That's life!

mfblume
04-27-2007, 12:09 PM
And I still think it simply comes down to whatever resonates with you best. For some, it's Oneness, for others, it's Trinitarianism. And also whatever you've been taught. That's life!

That is not the way to treat doctrine, though. Regardless of everyone's taste, only one view is right. ANd only in fear of God and extreme carefulness and open-mindedness to consider we might be wrong, can we ever make it to glory. We cannot leave to "Oh, well, whatever people want to believe." :) I am sure you agree.

Chan
04-27-2007, 12:11 PM
Thanks, everyone, for trying to help me understand Oneness. Were you successful? Well, I do think I understand your position better, so yes, there's some success. OTOH, I'm still stuck in the middle ground (Luke warm? About to be spewed from God's mouth??), where I don't see a big reason for the rift between the Trinity and Oneness camps. Nor do I yet see a clear winner, from Scripture. It's mildly amusing to read the claim here, that there is no scriptural support for trinitarianism whatsoever. I'd probably be amused by trinnies' claims about the lack of Oneness support, too.

And I still think it simply comes down to whatever resonates with you best. For some, it's Oneness, for others, it's Trinitarianism. And also whatever you've been taught. That's life!For further reading:

http://www.amazon.com/God-Three-What-Examination-Doctrine/dp/1424143713/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/103-8322429-6084639?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1177697479&sr=8-1

Timmy
04-27-2007, 12:32 PM
That is not the way to treat doctrine, though. Regardless of everyone's taste, only one view is right. ANd only in fear of God and extreme carefulness and open-mindedness to consider we might be wrong, can we ever make it to glory. We cannot leave to "Oh, well, whatever people want to believe." :) I am sure you agree.

Yes, I do agree! Truth is truth, no matter who believes it or doesn't. But I also think this issue isn't a black and white issue, with one side being right and the other side wrong. I think there is some truth in both sides, and neither side has it 100% right.

Another way I think of it is like the properties of light. Remember any physics? Some experiments show that light behaves as particles. Other experiments show it behaves as waves. The truth is that light is both! It is waves and it is moving particles. Couldn't the same be said of at least some of God's attributes? He is One. He is also a trinity (just in the sense that there are three main somethings about Him).

mfblume
04-27-2007, 05:01 PM
Yes, I do agree! Truth is truth, no matter who believes it or doesn't. But I also think this issue isn't a black and white issue, with one side being right and the other side wrong. I think there is some truth in both sides, and neither side has it 100% right.

Another way I think of it is like the properties of light. Remember any physics? Some experiments show that light behaves as particles. Other experiments show it behaves as waves. The truth is that light is both! It is waves and it is moving particles. Couldn't the same be said of at least some of God's attributes? He is One. He is also a trinity (just in the sense that there are three main somethings about Him).

I agree to an extent. But there are definitely not three persons about God. Three "somethings", yes. Oneness always proposed that. But God is one person no matter what needs to be tweaked in our understanding. Otherwise, he is more than one God.