Apostolic But Not Believing Jesus is The Father?

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

So? Aquila, you are not Oneness

I'd rather be "biblical" than affirm a mere theological brand that is inconsistent and illogical. However, I do classify myself as being "Oneness". I only believe in one divine person, the Father. And the distinct (but not separate) human person of the Son (the human "self" of Jesus) is fashioned in the express image of the Father's person in fully humanity. Therefore, in both we see one person revealed. We see God revealed in the divine person of the Father... and in the human person of the Son.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

My mistake. You are one person short of a Trinity

That would be demand that I believe in two divine persons. I don't. You continue to say "two persons" but you are not defining what I actually believe regarding said "persons". I only believe in one divine person.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

I disagree. All He really needed was a Human nature.

So, you don't believe that a distinct "self" or "self-conscious reality" existed in the man Jesus Christ?

Remember, God could have morphed into a man, having a human nature, and still retained His own sense of "self" and be able to say, "I, the Father, am one." However, Jesus said, "I and my Father are one." This clearly demonstrates a distinct center of human self-consciousness. This distinct sense of "self" in the man Jesus Christ makes Him an authentic human person... who is also God. For the Father dwells within Him (Christ's own terminology).

John 14:7-10
7 If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.
8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?
10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. (KJV)

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Baloney! Ive never heard anyone teach God transmuted from God into a man

I guess you've never studied the Monadic theories of Sebellianism?

Bernard teaches Jesus is the Creator incarnate as the Son. That He has a Human nature and Divine nature

I believe that Jesus is the Creator incarnate as the Son (an authentic human being). That He has a Human nature (that has a distinct human personhood) and a Divine nature (which has a distinct divine personhood).

Please note:

If I said that Jesus possessed a human sense of "self" that was distinct from the Father, you'd agree. However, if I said that Jesus was a distinct human "person" (that which has a distinct sense of "self"), you'd disagree. It appears to me that you agree with the "concept". However, you fear the word "person", although it would be an accurate term.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Incarnation means simply the act of becoming human.

Being Human means having human qualities and or attributes

Isn't human "personhood" (human sense of "self") an intrinsic quality of being human?

God is One person who is both God and Man

Would you agree that God is One person who exists having both a divine sense of "self" and a human sense of "self" by virtue of the incarnation?

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

I propose it was the person of Jesus (the same Person of God) who prayed BECAUSE HE was united with the Human nature. Same one Person. Different "Modes"

You're saying that the same "self" (person) that prayed to the Father is the same "self" (person) as the Father. That means He'd speak with a singular sense of "self". "Hello, me. I'd like to ask me to glorify me with my own self." "I and me are one." lol

It doesn't work that way. If a "mode" (as you call it) has a distinct sense of self, that "mode" has a distinct "personhood" and is therefore a distinct "person" with a distinct line of thought, will, and ability to reason. And that's what we see in the Son.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

No it does not. You assume too much out of pronouns. The same Pronouns could be used to prove the opposite

the subject/object pronoun relationship is merely the result of the incarnation of One Person becoming Human while continuing to exist as God

So again, it is an illusion.

[Aquila]

The question is simply this... does Jesus have a human sense of "self" that is distinct from the Father? If so, this is human personhood, possessing a human personality, and center of self-consciousness. It would have all the makings of a true and authentic human being, i.e.... human person.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Aquila

If something doesn't mean what it says, nor what it implies, it can mean anything. It becomes open to private interpretation.

Aquila, the church is called "her" does that make the church a female PERSON? YES OR NO?

Eph 5:27 so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish.

Sorry Aquila but you apparently don't understand how the bible is written. It is full of figures of speech, anthropomorphisms and personification devices

Read Proverbs and tell me if it's all literally talking about these female persons called Wisdom and Prudence

Go learn about that stuff and when you return I will give you a lesson on what Private interpretation means

Oh that reminds me, you also are not supposed to take a verse out of context to misuse it for your own personal agenda as you just did

2Pe 1:20 knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone's own interpretation.
2Pe 1:21 For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Aquila

So again, it is an illusion.

No. He really was Human. He was not pretending