The "Claim to the Name"

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by MrsMcD

Do any of your churches sing "How Great is Our God?"

And age to age He stands
and time is in His Hands
Beginning and the End,
Beginning and the End
The Godhead, three in one
Father, Spirit, Son
the Lion and the Lamb,
the Lion and the Lamb

I'm curious because our oneness church and Baptist church sing it here.

Yes, and I get suspicious when I hear our Oneness churches changing the words, because somehow we can't use biblical language to describe God anymore. I've heard it MULTIPLE times now. Shows dishonesty.

[notofworks]

Originally Posted by mizpeh

Let me make it very easy for you so you will not think I'm insinuating anything. Jesus Christ is the one who died for us. We are to be His disciples. Therefore we should or maybe I should say MUST be baptized in his name. We are buried together will Him in baptism. So, do you not want to be His disciple? Do you not want to be buried with Him? Then by all means, don't take on his name when you are baptized.



Your phrasing, "Splashing through baptismal waters" insinuates that baptism is nothing and means nothing to you. And God forbid that anyone should call on the name of Jesus Christ when a new believer decides to obey the command of the Lord and be buried with Him and receive His spiritual circumcision.

I can match your incredulousness with even greater incredulousness! Baptism is part and parcel of becoming Christ's disciple. Invoking the name of the One who died for them, calling on Christ at baptism is essential.

It may simply mean that Oneness Pentecostals value the name more than others since they are willing to call on the name of Christ when they are baptized and not that others don't value the name of Jesus. So some value the name of Christ but are not will to be baptized in His name. Others value the name of Christ MORE because they are willing to be baptized in his name and become his disciples.

What do you mean by the highlighted statement?

The insinuation was very clear that trinitarians don't value the name of Jesus because they haven't been baptized "In Jesus' Name."

"Splashing through the waters of baptism" insinuates nothing except it is a descriptive way of describing baptism. Are you saying there was no splash of water when you were baptized?

But here you clearly say that those who are baptized "In Jesus' name" value the name of Jesus more than those who aren't. I'm sorry, Mizpeh, but there isn't a "non-oneness" believer who wouldn't hear that as being theologically and/or spiritually arrogant. Clearly, you see your standing in Christ as superior to that of others. I have a difficult time with that.

[notofworks]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

In fairness, NOW, they (Trinitarians) would say as much, or far worse, about Oneness brothers.

In some groups, yes. In the particular spiritual culture that I associate with, it wouldn't be true. But still....I don't see the perceived theological and/or spiritual arrogance of others to be a plausible excuse.

[ManOfWord]

Originally Posted by notofworks

The highlighted statements are exactly what I'm talking about! Yes, it certainly is unfortunate that "some with this understanding" hold it in the way you just said it.

So you're saying that a trinitarian "can't get a handle on what God did"??? Are you serious???

Serious as a heart attack! They can't get a handle on it like "we" do.

Different understandings bring different things we can get a handle on. Most oneness folks haven't a CLUE of what justification is WITH a oneness understanding. Most Trinitarians have a good handle on justification but not a handle on what God did if they don't really know the price that was paid. HUGE difference between God sending the 2nd person of the godhead to earth to pay the price and Him coming Himself. I certainly don't beat Trinitarians up over it, but there is a big difference. My comment wasn't condescending but a factual statement from personal experience and observation.

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

Yes, and I get suspicious when I hear our Oneness churches changing the words, because somehow we can't use biblical language to describe God anymore. I've heard it MULTIPLE times now. Shows dishonesty.

I thought all the Godhead was in Christ and not Christ in the Godhead?

[notofworks]

Originally Posted by ManOfWord

Serious as a heart attack! They can't get a handle on it like "we" do.

Different understandings bring different things we can get a handle on. Most oneness folks haven't a CLUE of what justification is WITH a oneness understanding. Most Trinitarians have a good handle on justification but not a handle on what God if they don't really know the price that was paid. HUGE difference between God sending the 2nd person of the godhead to earth to pay the price and Him coming Himself. I certainly don't beat Trinitarians up over it, but there is a big difference. My comment wasn't condescending but a factual statement from personal experience and observation.

I'm not sure what I can do except chuckle. Exhibit A in theological arrogance. Oh well, at least you're honest about your superiority.

But this is validation of what NotforSale said about war. How can there ever be peace within the Christian Community of our world with attitudes like this? My goodness.

I guess this is why I was never able to assimilate into the "ex-upc" culture. For most, it was just the upc with no dress code. Same exclusivity, different clothes.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by MrsMcD

Do any of your churches sing "How Great is Our God?"

And age to age He stands
and time is in His Hands
Beginning and the End,
Beginning and the End
The Godhead, three in one
Father, Spirit, Son
the Lion and the Lamb,
the Lion and the Lamb

I'm curious because our oneness church and Baptist church sing it here.

We sing it

[Praxeas]

BTW this might be a little off topic but I was actually thinking if of this last night. I remember listening to a well known evangelist on tape, a service I think I was at but was listening to it again.

Over and over and over the Evangelist,during alter call, would say "In Jesus name, In Jesus name, In Jesus name" and from time to time you could hear an emphasis "In Jesus NAME"

And I think there is more a reason to say "In Jesus name" for the sake of hearers to know we are doing something in that name, but I don't think we have to keep saying "In Jesus name" in order to have the authority we are given.

If something isn't happening, I doubt saying "in Jesus name" one more time is going to make it happen. We need faith. We need prayer (preparatory) and fasting (preparatory).

We have men that are used of in the gifts and great faith, but I think this lack of understanding is bad for the organization. It's the same problem with the Holy Magic Hair issue.

I want to relate something I read in the Winds of God. I can't quote it verbatim but the book was talking about Asuza street and how it was made up of different groups. It noted that the group that struggled the most to actually receive this blessing (baptism/speaking in tongues) were the Holiness groups. They did receive it, but it was always more of a struggle for them.

I wonder if we have that same problem. How come a group that boats of the supernatural so much does not emphasize the gifts more?

We don't have a name. We have authority and if we really were the people of the name we'd understand and emphasize that more. Instead we've backpeddled again into the works mentality. The whole hair issue is a works mentality. It's ironic but I heard LS say once that people got the Holy Ghost in our ranks not because of us but INSPITE of us. LS was one of the biggest "name" preachers I knew who also emphasized the gifts of the Spirit and YOU operating in them, not merely women.

He encouraged us to seek God like he did, in prayer, fasting and faith. We've backpeddled from those early days it seems to a stronger emphasis on obedience and uncut hair as a means not just to salvation but the supernatural works of God in our midst. However that seems to have been the natural progression of a works based system.

[Michael Phelps]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

Yes, and I get suspicious when I hear our Oneness churches changing the words, because somehow we can't use biblical language to describe God anymore. I've heard it MULTIPLE times now. Shows dishonesty.

I remember a few years ago when I was at a very large minister's conference in the southern region in January and the church's choir began singing "Holy, Holy, Holy.......Lord God Almighty...." ...and the crowd was very quiet.....waiting......wondering........a little nervous..........but, when the choir got to the part of the song that says "God in three persons, blessed trinity"......the choir sang "God in Christ Jesus, blessed Deity".......once they sang that line, the tension broke and everyone began to worship!

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by mizpeh

I thought all the Godhead was in Christ and not Christ in the Godhead?

Godhead means what?

My bible says the fullness of Deity dwells in Christ in bodily form.

That means something different than what I was taught when I first started this. That is incarnational. God became one of us, rather than indwelling, God was inside one of us.

But since "godhead" has no real definite meaning it seems, then it can mean whatever the hearer wants.

You know Mizpeh, a lot of Trinitarians don't realize this but when they say Modalism is a heresy they don't realize it was a Trinitarian heresy.

The so called heresy was not a rejection of the unity of Father, Son and Spirit but a rejection that Father, Son and Spirit were three distinct persons.

Andrew Urshan I am told still referred to what he believed as a Trinity, just not one of three different persons.

So here is the question, does Oneness believe in the Unity of Father, Spirit and Son or is there a division?