Oneness Questions

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Nope

I didn't say "in the godhead"...you say there are two. God and a Man in whom He was inside of who was not God but became God.

Jesus became the Father(The express image of the Father)

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Sean

Jesus became the Father(The express image of the Father)

So you have two persons who merge into One? Jesus wasn't the Father but became the Father?

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

So you have two persons who merge into One? Jesus wasn't the Father but became the Father?

God was in Jesus and still is...There is one mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus> The body of Jesus is the temple of God.

If not, in your words, please explain God IN Christ for us now in the "present tense".(or maybe what you think is going on in heaven as far as the Godhead appears to be right now)... (almost)Everyone I know just "slings" scriptures around these days but offer no explanation in detail. I would like to hear someone elses "version" of Oneness doctrine sometime. It could have made it a lot easier to give everyone my 20 oneness scriptures too, but I like to take it a step further and try to explain what I see.


I would like to see somebody "take charge" and present the case for oneness. Its easy to observe and ask micro-questions.

I personally know very few of my brethren that can "explain" our position well. They just rollout scriptures and hope you get it..

By the way, I am just a roofer of 31 years and have NEVER been to Bible school. (Anyone here can out do me).

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Sean

God was in Jesus

Yes..you said that already. So you have two persons. God and the man God was inside of "Jesus" and then Jesus became God (the Father, so they merged into one Person)

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Yes..you said that already. So you have two persons. God and the man God was inside of "Jesus" and then Jesus became God (the Father, so they merged into one Person)

As long as we dont have 2 Gods Im ok with however you see it. I said a long time ago, I dont know the "ingredients" of How an almighty God works and lives in Christ. I just know for certain he did NOT preexist as a SON-GOD before He was born. And I may have to just resort to answering with nothing but "God in Christ" scriptures like most folks do.


My question is for anyone here today.

Can anyone in our movement tell us "exactly" how the Godhead is explained?. In general, we think we have the answers, but we are trying our best to figure it out ourselves. I could probably stump most of my brothers with trinity questions they cant answer. Like who is God talking to in Gen. 1:26,,,,,,I bet I will get some varying answers on that. There is NO "universal" agreement on Oneness teaching. You and I just have to figure it out the best we can. (unless Daniel Seagraves or David Bernard is your pastor)

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Sean

As long as we dont have 2 Gods Im ok with however you see it. I said a long time ago, I dont know the "ingredients" of How an almighty God works and lives in Christ. I just know for certain he did NOT preexist as a SON-GOD before He was born. And I may have to just resort to answering with nothing but "God in Christ" scriptures like most folks do.


My question is for anyone here today.

Can anyone in our movement tell us "exactly" how the Godhead is explained?. In general, we think we have the answers, but we are trying our best to figure it out ourselves. I could probably stump most of my brothers with trinity questions they cant answer. Like who is God talking to in Gen. 1:26,,,,,,I bet I will get some varying answers on that. There is NO "universal" agreement on Oneness teaching. You and I just have to figure it out the best we can. (unless Daniel Seagraves or David Bernard is your pastor)

How can we say "there isn't universal agreement on Oneness" if Oneness is not defined?

I'd say from a Scholarly standpoint, as codified by men like Segraves, there is.

Id also say what many believe is really Unitarianism (with a twist in your case where he becomes God and merges back into one person)

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

How can we say "there isn't universal agreement on Oneness" if Oneness is not defined?

I'd say from a Scholarly standpoint, as codified by men like Segraves, there is.

Id also say what many believe is really Unitarianism (with a twist in your case where he becomes God and merges back into one person)

Prax, I dont even know what unitarianism is...You guys have a bad habit of labeling each other with some weird philosophies on this Forum (I see it everywhere)...that is nothing but condiscending. My "revelation" comes from debate tapes and wondering how certain scriptures must have a oneness application ,that look like theres a trinity to me.

Luke could probably spank many of you guys in a debate here. (I havent seen anyone stand up to him). I dare somebody here to challenge him to a debate.


Unless you guys are intimidated.......