Oneness Questions

[votivesoul]

There are three main views of the nature of Christ. They are as follows:

1.) Monophytism, or single-natured

This is the view that the humanity of Christ, on one end of the spectrum, was actually divine (i.e. divine flesh) meaning there is no real human nature in Christ, all the way to the other end of the spectrum, in which it is believed that though he was human, the divine nature so overwhelmed the human aspects of Christ to the point of subsummation. This is called Eutychianism. Somewhere in between is Apollinarianism, which believes Jesus was human, had a human body, but His mind and inner identity was divine, i.e. the Logos, which was the chief/more important nature.

This first view is like an inflated balloon or a glass of water. The skin of the balloon or the vessel that holds the water is merely a shell or container for the real contents. In this way, the human body of Jesus is merely a container for God's Spirit. The man Christ Jesus is merely "God robed in flesh". The phrase "Jesus is God" when not properly qualified in any other theological terms (e.g. in the Incarnation, in the flesh, in the form of a man, and etc.), tends to imply monophytism, even if not actually intended.

This view is typically considered a heresy or a fringe view, but has found a foot-hold in some Oneness circles.

2.) Dyophytism (sometimes spelled duophytism), or dual-natured.

This view is the most common view, including most if not all Oneness and Trinitarian groups. That in Christ, two different, but mutually shared natures are present, one human, the other divine. This is where the theathropic or God-man principle comes from. If you've ever heard or read "Jesus was 100% man and 100% God", it comes from this view of Christ. Dyophytism was adopted as official Roman Catholic doctrine at the Council of Chalcedon in 451 AD.

This view is like a bicycle. Two wheels, completely independent entities (i.e. Father and Son), nonetheless interacting with each other in harmony, sharing the same reality of what they are (i.e. God).

Common to one side of the spectrum of dyophytism is Nestorianism, which completely separates the natures to the point of having two persons in Christ, one the man, the other the God. Note, however, that a Nestorian Christology is Trinitarian only, in that it holds that God the Son united with the man Christ Jesus in the Incarnation. The council of Chalcedon was convened to address Nestorius' teachings, which they ultimately rejected as heresy.

Divisions of course erupt between Oneness and Trinitarians, as well all know, whether over Nestorianism or otherwise.

In an interesting turn, the other side of the spectrum is Unitarianism, which does not believe God became a man, and all that was and is God, while in Christ, was and is completely separated from the man Christ Jesus, so that Christ was just a man only, no more, no less, while the One God remains always and only God.

3.) Miaphytism, or mix-natured

This view holds that in Christ, the divine and human natures blend into each other so much, that one cannot tell where one begins and the other ends, to such an extant, that, in Christ, it is as if an entirely new nature has been created.

This view is common among Oriental Orthodox churches, who reject a Chalcendonic Christology as heresy. It's like a peanut butter and jelly sandwich. Once the two sides of the bread are joined, there is no separating the peanut butter from the jelly. In Christ, once the divine and human natures were joined in Mary's womb, there was no separating or distinguishing them.

This view has been accused as monphytism by opponents, because they believe that it means Christ only had one nature. Proponents of the view deny the accusation however.

__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _____________

With these three views in mind, we all have to ask ourselves, what do we believe and why?

What Scriptures seem to prove our views?

What Scriptures give us pause and make us reconsider our views?

Can two people who have different views of Christ still consider each other believers and brothers in the Lord?

Are any of the above views so heretical as to become damnable to the soul?

I can't answer for anyone else but myself. But I do recommend that each of us study to show ourselves approved, with a willingness to admit error if error is proven.

After that, to our own master we rise and fall.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _____________

With these three views in mind, we all have to ask ourselves, what do we believe and why?

If I understood it correctly, I'm more of a Dyophytist. I believe what the Bible describes illustrates this belief best.

What Scriptures seem to prove our views?

John 14:10
Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own authority, but the Father who dwells in me does his works.

What Scriptures give us pause and make us reconsider our views?

Hmmm... good question.

Can two people who have different views of Christ still consider each other believers and brothers in the Lord?

Yes! At least, I believe they can. No man can fully understand the mechanics of God.

Are any of the above views so heretical as to become damnable to the soul?

I don't believe so. As long as Christ is considered "God" in some manner, I don't think it will condemn one. To deny Christ's deity and relegate him to being a mere man, to me, that would endanger the soul.

I can't answer for anyone else but myself. But I do recommend that each of us study to show ourselves approved, with a willingness to admit error if error is proven.

Amen.

After that, to our own master we rise and fall.

Amen.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

This is describing perichloresis, if anyone wants to go on a study.

Amen. Perichoresis is a very interesting study.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

So...his body is everywhere?

Yes

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

A Lot of people would say Jesus IS the Father.

A casual reading of the uncareful posts might lead one to see Unitarianism not Oneness.

Jesus wasn't a box of flesh god was inside of. Jesus was God HIMSELF, fully Human and fully Divine (God)

Good point. Jesus wasn't just a man with God inside. He was a man in whom God was manifest within His very being. A man who was literally "one" with the Father from conception. This "Oneness" allows each to share in the others very being and nature. Therefore, in the man Jesus Christ one can say that God became a man; and that the man Jesus Christ was also... God.

I don't believe that this "Oneness" began at Christ's baptism either. Some do, I don't. I believe that this oneness began at Christ's very conception.

[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)

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

I got it the first time.

You have two persons. God (Divine person), who was inside Jesus (Human person)..

I got it, you don't have to keep repeating it. I got it the very first time

Let's stop and consider something. Let's imagine that we do have two persons... the Divine Person of the Father and the human person of Jesus, the Son of God. So far, we hear the phrase "two persons" and we become troubled. However, let's stop and look closely at the "human person" of Jesus. That human person which the Bible calls, "the man Christ Jesus", the one who prays to the Father; He isn't just "another person" in the way that you and I are. The Scriptures also state that this man, Jesus Christ, is the express image of God's own person. If this is so, the "human person" of Jesus reflects the very image and likeness of the Father's own person... in a very real human being. With this in mind... how many persons are revealed in these two persons?

Only one.

So, if we look at it one way we can say that we see two persons; the Father and the Son of God. If we look at it in another way we can say that the very person of God is perfectly revealed in these two persons. We see God in His Godhead... and we see God perfectly manifested in the man Jesus Christ.

So... in my mind... there can indeed be two persons. And they clearly reflect the very "person" (singular) of God.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Let's stop and consider something. Let's imagine that we do have two persons... the Divine Person of the Father and the human person of Jesus, the Son of God. So far, we hear the phrase "two persons" and we become troubled. However, let's stop and look closely at the "human person" of Jesus. That human person which the Bible calls, "the man Christ Jesus", the one who prays to the Father; He isn't just "another person" in the way that you and I are. The Scriptures also state that this man, Jesus Christ, is the express image of God's own person. If this is so, the "human person" of Jesus reflects the very image and likeness of the Father's own person... in a very real human being. With this in mind... how many persons are revealed in these two persons?

Only one.

So, if we look at it one way we can say that we see two persons; the Father and the Son of God. If we look at it in another way we can say that the very person of God is perfectly revealed in these two persons. We see God in His Godhead... and we see God perfectly manifested in the man Jesus Christ.

So... in my mind... there can indeed be two persons. And they clearly reflect the very "person" (singular) of God.

Amen my brother..."GREAT" is the "MYSTERY" of God, for God was MANIFESTED in the FLESH...This "mystery" can be solved if we put our heads together.

[Light]

Originally Posted by Sean

Amen my brother..."GREAT" is the "MYSTERY" of God, for God was MANIFESTED in the FLESH...This "mystery" can be solved if we put our heads together.

Your quote is not correct. GREAT IS THE MYSTERY OF GODLINESS

Read the whole chapter. You are taking verse 16 out of context.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Light

Your quote is not correct. GREAT IS THE MYSTERY OF GODLINESS

Read the whole chapter. You are taking verse 16 out of context.

Sorry bro. I should know better. I didnt have my coffee and I have quoted this passage 10,000 times in my life. It wont happen again.

thanks, God bless you today.