The Results Of My Poll Are Shocking

[DaffyDuck]

Originally Posted by rgcraig

Seems simple to me, but I'm being told I'm no longer oneness because I believe this.

Wow. My mother would be shocked. She's in heaven, maybe she can confirm for me and send me a sign.

If she does, she'll have to send it in three segments.

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by Hoovie

"The deity of Jesus is numerically identical to the deity of the Father; i.e. they are the same person"

I do agree with this statement. Yet, in spite of the Oneness of deity I believe it's confusing to say Jesus is the Father. By definition the Father is God's mode of continued existence outside and apart from the incarnation. Jesus, the Son of God, was always incarnate. Even though he was God himself, he prayed to His Father in Heaven.

The Terms Father and Son are given and used for good reason in scripture, why would we wish to make them something less?

Question for you? If its confusing to say Jesus is the Father why is it NOT confusing to say he is God? After all many scriptures make distinctions between Jesus and God right?

[A.W. Bowman]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

Question for you? If its confusing to say Jesus is the Father why is it NOT confusing to say he is God? After all many scriptures make distinctions between Jesus and God right?

Interesting point. If that is a scriptural fact, I wonder why we can't seem to accept it?

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

Ok my dear fellow Apostolic friends,

What I actually did was put forth the most simple, easy confession a Oneness Pentecostal could make.

It's actually NOT the simplest or easy confession. It's confusing. Are you asking "Is the Son the Father". Yes some things need explaining. Sorry but welcome to the real world of thinking individuals.

2Pe 3:15 And think of the long-suffering of our Lord as salvation (as our beloved brother Paul also has written to you according to the wisdom given to him
2Pe 3:16 as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable pervert, as also they do the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction).

As far as Theology goes no one simple undefined statement does justice to any theology. Most bumper sticker theologies over simplify their respective theologies to subjectivity.

For example many Trinitarians have learned "three in one"..can a Trinitarian vote "God is three in one"? If so what does that mean? Is that like three in one oil? Is that like three parts to an egg? It's way way to simplistic and statements like that are really used and meant for the less informed

many of those same Trinitarians usually describe their God as three separate beings contrary to the actual teaching of the Trinity. Simple is not better. Simple is simple

For some people simple is just easier to deal with, because they don't want to grow in knowledge or intellect or perhaps they are unable to.

But to think the great Eternal God is not a complex being to our finite minds is beyond illogical in my opinion.

BTW I started another poll and you did not vote, meaning you are apathetic using your own criteria for apathy

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

But Praxeas I never asked about all the ins and outs of everything the Bible says about the relationship between God and Christ. All I asked for was THE MOST BASIC of all Oneness confessions.

As far as Jason Dulle if you recall he came here and I discussed his teaching with him. He does teach that Jesus is God the Father. He just says a lot more things also which I myself do when I am trying to explain Oneness to others.

I am not quite so foolish that I would try to bring someone into this truth by saying "Jesus is God the Father" then closing my Bible and walking away! I have been teaching Oneness since 1980 and have brought a number of people into it.

In all those years I cant remember ONE teacher of Oneness doctrine that did not teach that the One God of the Bible is Jesus Christ and that the one God is the Father.

And the PROBLEM is you decided for everyone else that the most basic of Oneness confessions HAS to be "Is Jesus the Father".

And such a confession, being as basic and simplistic as it is, is a means for gross OVER SIMPLIFICATION of the Oneness view and because of that sort of thinking the Oneness ranks are full of Nestorians, Unitarians and Monophysites who have all listened to the same simplistic confessions that due to their simplicity are also very subjective

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

And the PROBLEM is you decided for everyone else that the most basic of Oneness confessions HAS to be "Is Jesus the Father".

And such a confession, being as basic and simplistic as it is, is a means for gross OVER SIMPLIFICATION of the Oneness view and because of that sort of thinking the Oneness ranks are full of Nestorians, Unitarians and Monophysites who have all listened to the same simplistic confessions that due to their simplicity are also very subjective

Bingo!

[OnTheFritz]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

For some people simple is just easier to deal with, because they don't want to grow in knowledge or intellect or perhaps they are unable to.

But to think the great Eternal God is not a complex being to our finite minds is beyond illogical in my opinion.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

Praxeas,

And furthermore in the thread where Jason came to the Forum YOU said this:



This is what I said at the beginning. This is what I have said all the way through. I said in the first post it is assumed we all believe Jesus is the Son. Then I asked who among us believed Jesus is also God the Father.

Jason after saying he opposes calling Jesus the Father actually says this:

So I was saying what I always do and what the Bible teaches, and what Oneness has always taught and what YOU and Jason said was correct! Peace, Michael

No you didn't actually "say that from the beginning". In fact you have admitted to offering "the most basic of all Oneness confessions"...basic or simple means really what it means and our sampling here proves it...Many saw the poll, they did not see explanation...they saw a simple statement...they saw oneness reduced to a overly simplistic statement that could be read as "is the Son the Father"...

That is one of the problems with Oneness is we have bumpersticker theology. We have dumbed down our Theology to "simple statements" that are misleading and subjective.

Here is an example. I just posted a list of things David Bernard has said from the chapter on "The Son of God" from his book the Oneness of the Godhead

And HE says Jesus has both the Divine and human natures....but because we have reduced theology down to statements like "Jesus is the Father", most OPs believe David Bernard is saying "Jesus is the Father and The Son" when in reality what he was saying is the SON is both Deity and Humanity.. when David uses the name Jesus and says Jesus is both Deity and Humanity..

Rather this is the chapter on The Son of God and Everything David is saying is about the Son of God. But because he uses the name Jesus many OPs will read that, having learned to memorize "Jesus is the Father" , every time the bible says or tells us Jesus is God they don't think "The Son is God", they think "Oh that is speaking of the Father".

Yet DB says the term Son refers to both Deity and Humanity..

The problem, as I said, is an apologetical one. How we are representing and presenting Oneness both to those outside Oneness and those within. And those outside Oneness are getting the message that we are Nestorians, Unitarians and Patripassionist..That we make of two natures two persons. That our two natures are called Father and Son. Or that we have no distinctions between Father and Son. Or that we have 2 Persons, one Is God the Father and the other is the Man Christ Jesus who is not God...

That is also what I have come across not just from what non OPs think we are saying but I have come across OPs saying just that...I have come across OPs that are in fact Nestorian, or Unitarian or Patripassionist and the problem is not always theology but Apologetics. In other words the problem is not our theology but how we have explained it.

And men like Daniel Segraves and Jason Dulle have attempted to better explain (Apologetics) our Theology.

And as I pointed out earlier, why have Oneness Sympossiums if we've done it all right so far?

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson
I guess I run the risk of seeming unlearned in Bible theology by asking, outside of the Book of Isaiah, is Jesus ever referred to as the, "Everlasting Father" or "Father of Eternity", or "Father" at all?

Its there you just have to dig. Or at times we run across things just in our study time.

For instance many yeas ago as a young Charismatic/Pentecostal believer I read where Jesus said "I and my Father are one". My very first reaction was to think jesus is saying he is the Father.

Since I did not have any Apostolic friends or teachers I just moved on and did not get the full force of it. It was there all the time I just did not understand it.

When Jesus said "I and my Father are one" it was in answer to a question asked him.

10:24 Then came the Jews round about him, and said unto him, How long dost thou make us to doubt? If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly.10:25 Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me.
10:26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.
10:27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:
10:28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.
10:29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.
10:30 I and my Father are one.

They wanted to know if he was THE CHRIST.

What kind of Christ were they looking for?

Isaiah had prophesied long ago:

9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
9:7 Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.

Jesus leads into telling them the answer by saying that his hand and the Fathers hand are the same hand. Then he says I and my Father are one.

He is referring to Isaiahs prophecy. They asked if he were the Christ. Now he is telling them plainly. He (the Son) was ALSO the Eternal Father. This fulfills the prophecy perfectly. Jesus told them he was the Father. They immediately rejected him and tried to kill him.

Of course he did not try to stop and explain the distinction between himself and the Father. Why? They were not ready to hear. Same as today. Theres nothing wrong with us telling someone Jesus is the Father. Then if they have any interest in hearing you can say MUCH MORE to them and give them more detail.

The majority will always act like these Jews who instead of rejoicing that the Christ had come immediately became angry with him. How dare he would say such a thing!

One of the huge things students of Jesus today fail to understand is that Isaiah 9:6 is the BASIS for the doctrine of Christ. He would be a Son who was born. Yet he would be called ETERNAL FATHER.
Eternal is simply describing Gods attribute of being eternal. Just like Mighty God is just presenting GOD as being mighty. Because Jesus is not referred to in the New Testament as THE MIGHTY GOD is not proof that he is not God is it?

I rejoice that I am able to fulfill Isaiahs prophecy! Millions of Oneness believers do this. Oddly enough they are the ONLY ONES in the world who do! The Church is built on the revelation that Jesus is Christ the son of God.

Where did the doctrine of "Christ" come from? Isaiah 9:6!

That Christ, that Son would ALSO be called the Everlasting Father. If Jesus is THAT CHRIST we are supposed to call him this. Hope that helps!

[Socialite]

MTD, it's there, just takes digging? And stretching you mean?

What you posted above isn't so clear. You must also remember that though Isa 9 is a Messianic prophecy, it also had a primary meaning, which had much to do with a real King over Israel. "Everlasting Father" has some great significance with that. Dig around and see what you find out this phrase meant to the original audience