And In That Day Ye Shall Ask Me Nothing...
 

mfblume left the following post on another forum. I think it is very interesting and wanted to present it here as well.

This post is brought over to AFF with permission from mfblume. Thanks again Brother Blume for sharing your insight.

Begin Quote of Brother Blumes post:
This is an interesting issue.

Jesus said these words:


Then we read:

But then we read this:


Comments?

Most of us believe Oneness here. And I am oneness. But the above clearly states some issues regarding praying to the Son or the Father. Jesus distinctly said in that day ye shall ask me nothing.

Many oneness people dismiss this as though there is no purpose for it in the Bible, but it is in the bible and Jesus, Himself, said it. I think we miss it when we say that Jesus is God so if we pray to the Son or the Father it does not matter. I disagree. The Son still has a role that is apart from the role as Father. And we are to keep those distinctions in mind, though I certainly do not agree they are distinct persons.
End Quote:

Any Thoughts?

Hi D4T,

Thank you for valuing my thoughts. You are very kind.

This issue reminds me of the issue regarding Christ who is STILL operating as High Priest, while seated at the right hand throne of Power. Many believe the Son's distinction from the Father is over now, but that is not the case. Hebrews teaches that we presently have a High Priest after the order of Melchisedek. It is not a past issue. There presently "IS" one mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus. This is still occurring.

The most oft-quoted verse from the Old Testament that we read in the New is Psalm 110 where we read Christ is seated at the right hand. I think something has been lost in this regard from much of the church. This verse weas preached in Acts 2 on the day of Pentecost and is found in 1 Cor 15 and Hebrews 10 and Col 3, to name just a few.

As oneness people, we can dismiss the idea that references to Father and Son are irrelevant, since they are one and person, anyway. But the bible does make these statements, and for a very good reason, whether we think ther eis one or not. And if we dismiss any significance, we will miss something God wants us to understand.

But we are to call on His name and the early church called ON his name

Joh 14:13 And I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son.
Joh 14:14 If you ask me anything in my name, I will do it.

1Co 1:2 to the church of God that is in Corinth, to those who are sanctified in Christ Jesus, and called to be saints, with all those in every place who call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, their Lord and ours.

Act 9:14 and here he has authority from the chief priests to imprison all who call on your name!"

Also the following is evidence that to ask "In Jesus name" is synonymous with asking HIM
Joh 16:26 At that day ye shall ask in my name: and I say not unto you, that I will pray the Father for you:

Notice that? Why would he need to pray the Father for us if we are praying NOT to Jesus but to the Father?

Another good verse...
Paul had a conversation with Jesus.

One more verse I did not add

Joh 14:6 Jesus replied, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
Joh 14:7 If you have known me, you will know my Father too. And from now on you do know him and have seen him."
Joh 14:8 Philip said, "Lord, show us the Father, and we will be content."

Now, some of you are probably focusing in on the part about seeing him...but notice that Jesus said NO ONE comes to the Father EXCEPT through Jesus.

Jesus is our mediator. He is our intercessor and right now Jesus is...if you will, our God by proxy sitting on God's throne having ALL power in heaven and earth AND...AND...Jesus is our great high priest.
Edit/Delete Message

Right. But Jesus said we do not pray to Him and spoke as the Son. Of course, we know the name is common to Father, Son and Spirit. So we do not pray to the Son.

Asking the Father is not asking the Son, though. And that is the point. The same principle applies when we know the Father did not die for our sins, but the Son died.

Correct. But as High Priest, he is glorified man. The mediator is not the Father, but the Son. The MAN Christ Jesus is the mediator.

Well when Jesus said "in that say you shall ask me nothing" I think he was meaning something different than saying "after this you will never talk to me again" or "pray to me again", for Jesus also said "uptill now you have not asked me anything, ask and you shall receive" or something to that affect. I kinda think he was more in a way of warning them.

I may be wrong, but also we have to understand what he means by "that day"...is this AFTER New Jerusalem is come down and we shall all dwell in that city where it is said "God himself shall dwell with his people"

Brother if you start back at chapter 14 you will notice that Jesus speaks in a certain way where first he says the Father sends the Spirit, the it's the Son that sends the Spirit. Then it's praying to the Father, then it's Praying to the Son. Then it's the Holy Spirit will come then it's "WE" will come. Jesus refers to the Spirit already being WITH them and that they already KNEW Him and then He would be IN them. Was he not referring to Himself?

Robert Sabin did an excellent article on this, though his conclusions on the interpretation of the verse that was the point of his article might not be something we all agree on, he did note how Jesus used the same language when referring to Himself, the Spirit and the Father...

An example
Joh 15:15 I no longer call you slaves, for the slave does not know what his lord does. But I called you friends, because all things which I heard from My Father I made known to you.

Joh 16:13 But when that One comes, the Spirit of Truth, He will guide you into all Truth, for He will not speak from Himself, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will announce the coming things to you.

The Key is this

Joh 16:23 In that day you will ask nothing of me. Truly, truly, I say to you, whatever you ask of the Father in my name, he will give it to you.
Joh 16:24 Until now you have asked nothing in my name. Ask, and you will receive, that your joy may be full.
Joh 16:25 "I have said these things to you in figures of speech. The hour is coming when I will no longer speak to you in figures of speech but will tell you plainly about the Father.
Joh 16:26 In that day you will ask in my name, and I do not say to you that I will ask the Father on your behalf;
Joh 16:27 for the Father himself loves you, because you have loved me and have believed that I came from God.
Joh 16:28 I came from the Father and have come into the world, and now I am leaving the world and going to the Father."

See, I see these verses as a prophetic/allegorical way of saying Father and Son are truly One in person and Spirit. Trinitarians see it as just the opposite. Also as I pointed out early, "my name" is often a reference to the Person. God said in the OT that He would put His name there (Temple)
Names, in Acts 1 (number of names) was a way of speaking about persons. Perhaps because the name represented the person. When they called on the name of Jesus, where they not calling on His person?


Im not saying the Father is the Son. But in praying To the Son you are praying to the Father. Remember Jacobs ladder? Angels ascending and descending on the ladder? Jesus is the ladder that extends from man to heaven. The real essential thing is that we are praying in that name to God Himself. God is our Father and God is our redeemer. We are not praying to a body or a nature, but via His Spirit God is in us and through us and hears us and answers us

I just thought that verse meant that the disciples would no longer go to Jesus as a man with their needs but would go to Him as their Heavenly Father. Sort of like what Paul meant that we may have known Jesus in the flesh in the past but now our relationship to Him is with a spiritual being (2 Cor 5:16).

Bro. Blume, I'm not disagreeing with you but some of the language you used would be called "trinity" by some OP's who would have a problem quoting John 3:16 or Acts 10:38.

Maybe, look again from chapter 14 on how the topic moves from Him to Father to Spirit etc etc...Spirit does not come till he goes away...I will send him to you....I will come to you?

I disagree somewhat, but please bear with me, as I think you have some awesome points, and this entire conversation has just opened something up to my spirit. I hope I can explain it well enough. Please consider it open-mindedly.

Joh 14:20 KJV At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.

When Jesus spoke of a time when Jesus would be in us and us in Him, this was speaking about the church age, as I see it. Jesus is presently in us and we in Him. We do not have to await post resurrection time for us to say we are in Christ.

So, John 14:1-3 is speaking about Christ going to the cross and then to the Father in making and providing atonement for our souls in order "to prepare a place for us" that WHERE HE SAID HE WAS they might be with Him. He was standing right there with them when He said this. So he was not speaking about a physical location. He was the only one who was indwelt by the Father at that time. And He was the only one who could directly speak to the Father.

Watch the implication that they could not beforehand speak directly to the Father:

He not only did miracles, but HE PRAYED DIRECTLY TO THE FATHER.

Continue...

This is the same Greek word for ABODE as MANSIONS in verse 2. It speaks not of physical indwelling, because we know ONLY ONE SPIRIT indwells us, not two or three. David Bernard had it right, I think, when he said it speaks of union in purpose and mind. But it is a bit more than that, too. It is the idea that we are in union with the Father through the work of the Son on the Cross so that we can directly pray to the Father.

Continues in chapter 16

The above clearly shows that the Son had to pray for us before the cross. But we can go directly to the Father instead of through the Son, implying the Son had to pray to the Father for us. But when atonement is made, the Father Himself loves us. The only way to understand this is to see that verse 27 is the reason for the statements in verses 23 and 26. The reason we will not pray to the Son, and the reason we will pray in the name of Jesus, and the reason He said He is NOT PRAYING FOR US, is because the Father himself loves us. And the Father loves us because we have believed in the work of the Son in salvation. We are ONE with the Son and therefore are now LOVED OF THE FATHER AS WELL.

That little statement.... "I say not unto you, that I will pray the Father for you" explains it all. That explains why we do not ask the Son. They asked the Son beforehand since that was the only way they could get a prayer through to the Father -- the Son alone could go directly to the Father. And when Jesus said He would prepare a place for us that WHERE HE IS WE MAY BE ALSO, we will be able to PRAY IN JESUS' NAME since we will be IN THE POSITION OF THE SON -- where He is. That is what it means to do something IN ONE'S NAME. We stand in that one's position. And since He alone can go to the Father, and we are IN HIM AND HE IN US, then WE can go to the Father IN HIS NAME!!

This is entirely speaking of the church age now. He was going to the cross and to the Father in order for the Spirit to come to us, and put us in Christ - IN THE PLACE WHERE HE WAS!

Notice He did not say we would be WHERE HE WOULD BE, as though His place was FUTURE TENSE from the perspective of the moment He spoke it. He spoke in PRESENT TENSE and said "THAT WHERE I AM". This proves he is not speaking about a physical city in our future as that place. It was a POSITION He held when He said that, which would become OUR POSITION as well. The position of ability to go directly to the Father.

It is all a picture of atonement, when He as High Priest would make atonement for us immediately after His resurrection when he ascended to the Father. That is the reason the chapter mentions about His going to the Father so we could have the Spirit. If this is shooting ahead to a time when the Holy City is supposed to come to earth, then we see a jumbling of two thoughts of (1) Him going to the Father -- which already occurred - with (2) something future which has not yet occurred.

Needless to say, I personally believe this entire concept of a place for us being actual heavenly mansions is way offcourse compared to the intended understanding. This may ruin a lot of funeral sermons, but it has really nothing to do with our "afterlife". It is the place of being in the position as Christ since we can PRAY IN HIS NAME -- pray in His Proxy position.

Jesus even said expressly that the Father dwelt in Him right after He spoke of the "Father's house."

continued...

Yes, and that is why the chapter is about the church age. But He speaks as per His person. His person is the same in all three roles. But when He speaks of His roles, He is speaking of distinctively different things.

His Person, yes. But He is not speaking of His varying manifestations which trinitarians confuse for "persons".

And that is because they are one Person. But, still, never is Sonship ever made synonymous with Fatherhood.

This proves the PERSON is the same in Father and Son, but the Father role is distinct from that of the Son.

As I see it, He plainly said above that we pray directly to the Father, and not to Him, because speaking to the Son was accomplished because we were not yet atoned for and could not call upon the Father directly. But after the atonement, which is the subject of the "place" where Jesus said He was going -- to the Father to make reconciliation and atonement -- we could directly speak to the Father in Jesus' name.

It gives us the understanding that before atonement and calvary the believers spoke to the Son so that the Son might speak to the Father for them. And the reason we do not ask the Son anything now in the church age is because we can go directly to the Father ourselves, since we're in the position of the Son - IN HIS NAME. This implies the reason they formerly had need of speaking to the Son was due to their inability to go directly to the Father.

This is also why Jesus specifically told Mary on the day He resurrected that He was going to His Father and "HER FATHER". That was an unusual point of emphasis.

He was speaking of something entirely NEW! THEY were now in on it since the cross! They would be born again since the cross.

I wholeheartedly agree. But it does not remove the fact that the roles of Father and Son are not the be confused as one and the same. As I said, the Mediator is not the Father.

Exactly!!!! But not the Son, as such. When we do not speak to the Son, but to the Father "IN JESUS' NAME", it does not mean we are speaking to the Son.

If you are speaking of praying to the Person, then yes. But otherwise, no. But Jesus distinctly said we would not pray to Him, and He was speaking as SON when He said that. Otherwise it makes no sense.

Yes. But more specifically it is JESUS AS SON.

I indeed think it is that, plus much more! Consider that the chapter speaks of praying directly to the Father and not having to go to the Son in order to indirectly get to the Father. And it also speaks of preparing a place for us so that we can be where Jesus is and pray to the Father ourselves.

Summary: Here is what I think the chapters 14 and 16 are saying: We are praying to the Father in the name of Jesus because that name specifically points to SALVATION. It's even what the name JESUS means! And we are praying to the Father directly because of what salvation occurred through the work of the cross. And that is exactly what I am claiming Jesus meant when He said He was going to prepare a place for us so that we could be where He is and thereby pray directly to the Father. Nobody was in the place to pray directly to the Father before the cross, because all had to go to the Son. But when we are where He is, then we can pray to the Father directly, ourselves!

Consider how Jesus said He would not pray to the Father for them, in explanation of why they would not ask Him anything. And then He said they would speak to the Father themselves. And consider that this is excatly what it means to pray in JESUS' NAME. It means IN HIS POSITION.

When a policeman knocks on your door and tells you to open up in the name of the law, he is telling you that he stands in the position AS THE ENTIRE LAW SYSTEM, and not one man who chose to be a cop one day. We are intended to regard him as the entire law system.

Being baptized into Christ causes us to be baptized into HIS PERSONAL DEATH, so that we can say we are dead indeed unto sin. Same principle. As His death stands as my death when I am baptized into it in HIS NAME, my position before the Father is as THE SON OF GOD, since I am there in His name. This does not detract from the fact the name Jesus is common to Father, Son and Holy Ghost, but in this case it is not implying that truth. It is implying we are standing as though the Son Himself is speaking to the Father, which alone is allowed. Only the Son can go to the Father. But we are in His name. So we can, too, and the picture is that the Son still alone can go to Him.

Yes, many OP's do not properly understand oneness, and think that reading about the Son speaking to the Father is something we should cast out of our minds, and make themselves convinced that these are statements that are not in the bible, although the bible uses those terms! lol.