Apostolic But Not Believing Jesus is The Father?

[Aquila]

The end result of this theology is that the man, Jesus Christ, is the Son of God... meaning He is an authentic human being with a human body, soul, and spirit... yet the Father indwells, and permeates, this human being's entire being (body, soul, and spirit). Jesus is therefore a man who is also God. So, when we say that Jesus is the Father what we mean is that the man Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is also the Father.

This is NOT Unitarianism. Unitarians deny Christ's divinity and consider Him only a human being. When discussing Oneness we should use the very terms Jesus used when describing His "oneness" with the Father:

John 10:30
30 I and my Father are one. (KJV)

John 10:38
38 But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him. (KJV)

John 12:45
45 And he that seeth me seeth him that sent me. (KJV)

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)

If you walked the earth with Jesus, you'd get to know Him as a man. He'd teach. He'd laugh. He'd eat. He'd use the restroom. He'd sleep. He'd rest. He'd pray and speak of His Heavenly Father. He'd fast. He'd cry. He'd sweat. He'd bleed. However... at times you'd feel something otherworldly emanating from deep within Him. Something emanating from the very core of His being. Something powerful. Something that has authority over all creation. Something that speaks to the winds... bringing them into obedience. Something that raises the dead and heals all manner of sickness. Something indescribable. You'd sense GOD Himself at the core of Christ's own person. You'd realize that this man is... also God.

However, keep in mind...God did not reside in Christ as a vehicle. God resided in and permeated Christ's very being. A Oneness so complete, so majestic, and so divine that in Christ it can be said that God became a man... and that this very same man was also God.

[good samaritan]

So, when we say that Jesus is the Father what we mean is that the man Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is also the Father.

When discussing Oneness we should use the very terms Jesus used when describing His "oneness" with the Father

Jesus never used the terms "I am the Father" nor did anyone else in the scripture. Sometimes people try to prove their point so strongly that they add things that aren't there. He said I and my Father are one and He said I am in the Father. He said if you have seen me you have seen the Father (He is the image of the invisible). The way we define things will have bearing on whether we can convert trinitarians to the truth.

Scripture never says we must understand the Godhead in order to be saved,
(some understanding is necessary to understand Jesus name baptism and not the titles) but we must be born again. That is repentance, Jesus name baptism, and the infilling of the Holy Ghost.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by good samaritan

Jesus never used the terms "I am the Father" nor did anyone else in the scripture. Sometimes people try to prove their point so strongly that they add things that aren't there. He said I and my Father are one and He said I am in the Father. He said if you have seen me you have seen the Father (He is the image of the invisible). The way we define things will have bearing on whether we can convert trinitarians to the truth.

Scripture never says we must understand the Godhead in order to be saved,
(some understanding is necessary to understand Jesus name baptism and not the titles) but we must be born again. That is repentance, Jesus name baptism, and the infilling of the Holy Ghost.

True, I have never seen someone make the Godhead a big deal prior to conversion, with the exception of staunch religious folks. Most folks just want to be saved without all the details.

[Aquila]

So, my Oneness brethren... are the following statements I posted in some of my previous posts "Oneness" or are they some form of Unitarianism???

That Jesus had a complete human nature and complete divine nature at the same time is the teaching of Scripture, but we cannot separate these two natures in His earthly life. It is apparent that Jesus had a human will, mind, spirit, soul, and body, but it is equally apparent that He had the fullness of the Godhead resident in that body. From our finite view, His human spirit and His divine Spirit were inseparable.

The divine Spirit could be separated from the human body by death, but His humanity was more than a human body – the shell of a human – with God inside. He was a human in body, soul, and spirit with the fullness of the Spirit of God dwelling in that body, soul, and spirit. Jesus differed from an ordinary human (who can be filled with the Spirit of God) in that He had all of God’s nature within Him. He possessed the unlimited power, authority, and character of God. Furthermore, in contrast to a born-again, Spirit-filled human, the Spirit of God was inextricably, and inseparably joined with the humanity of Jesus.

The humanity of Christ prayed, cried, learned obedience, and suffered. The divine nature was in control and God was faithful to His own plan, but the human nature had to obtain help from the Spirit and, had to learn obedience to the divine plan. Surely all these verses of Scripture show that Jesus was fully human – that He had every attribute of humanity except the sinful nature inherited from the Fall. If we deny the humanity of Jesus, we encounter a problem with the conception of redemption and atonement. Not being fully human, could His sacrifice be sufficient to redeem mankind? Could He really be a true substitute for us in death? Could He truly qualify as our kinsman redeemer?

The Word or Logos can mean the plan or thought as it existed in the mind of God. This thought was a predestined plan – an absolutely certain future event, - and therefore it had a reality attached to it that no human thought could ever have. The Word can also mean the plan or thought of God expressed in the flesh, that is in the Son.

People don't get it... take this in real good...

The deity in the Son is the Father, we do believe that the Father is in the Son (John 14:10). Since Jesus is the name of the Son of God, both as to His deity as Father and as to His humanity as Son, it is the name of both the Father and the Son.

Thus, the man Jesus Christ is the Father only by virtue of the Father residing in His being.

I'm curious, share your thoughts.

[Abiding Now]

Originally Posted by Aquila

So, my Oneness brethren... are the following statements I posted in some of my previous posts "Oneness" or are they some form of Unitarianism???

That Jesus had a complete human nature and complete divine nature at the same time is the teaching of Scripture, but we cannot separate these two natures in His earthly life. It is apparent that Jesus had a human will, mind, spirit, soul, and body, but it is equally apparent that He had the fullness of the Godhead resident in that body. From our finite view, His human spirit and His divine Spirit were inseparable.

The divine Spirit could be separated from the human body by death, but His humanity was more than a human body – the shell of a human – with God inside. He was a human in body, soul, and spirit with the fullness of the Spirit of God dwelling in that body, soul, and spirit. Jesus differed from an ordinary human (who can be filled with the Spirit of God) in that He had all of God’s nature within Him. He possessed the unlimited power, authority, and character of God. Furthermore, in contrast to a born-again, Spirit-filled human, the Spirit of God was inextricably, and inseparably joined with the humanity of Jesus.

The humanity of Christ prayed, cried, learned obedience, and suffered. The divine nature was in control and God was faithful to His own plan, but the human nature had to obtain help from the Spirit and, had to learn obedience to the divine plan. Surely all these verses of Scripture show that Jesus was fully human – that He had every attribute of humanity except the sinful nature inherited from the Fall. If we deny the humanity of Jesus, we encounter a problem with the conception of redemption and atonement. Not being fully human, could His sacrifice be sufficient to redeem mankind? Could He really be a true substitute for us in death? Could He truly qualify as our kinsman redeemer?

The Word or Logos can mean the plan or thought as it existed in the mind of God. This thought was a predestined plan – an absolutely certain future event, - and therefore it had a reality attached to it that no human thought could ever have. The Word can also mean the plan or thought of God expressed in the flesh, that is in the Son.

People don't get it... take this in real good...

The deity in the Son is the Father, we do believe that the Father is in the Son (John 14:10). Since Jesus is the name of the Son of God, both as to His deity as Father and as to His humanity as Son, it is the name of both the Father and the Son.

Thus, the man Jesus Christ is the Father only by virtue of the Father residing in His being.

I'm curious, share your thoughts.

Thank you.

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by Aquila

So, my Oneness brethren... are the following statements I posted in some of my previous posts "Oneness" or are they some form of Unitarianism???

That Jesus had a complete human nature and complete divine nature at the same time is the teaching of Scripture, but we cannot separate these two natures in His earthly life. It is apparent that Jesus had a human will, mind, spirit, soul, and body, but it is equally apparent that He had the fullness of the Godhead resident in that body. From our finite view, His human spirit and His divine Spirit were inseparable.

The divine Spirit could be separated from the human body by death, but His humanity was more than a human body – the shell of a human – with God inside. He was a human in body, soul, and spirit with the fullness of the Spirit of God dwelling in that body, soul, and spirit. Jesus differed from an ordinary human (who can be filled with the Spirit of God) in that He had all of God’s nature within Him. He possessed the unlimited power, authority, and character of God. Furthermore, in contrast to a born-again, Spirit-filled human, the Spirit of God was inextricably, and inseparably joined with the humanity of Jesus.

The humanity of Christ prayed, cried, learned obedience, and suffered. The divine nature was in control and God was faithful to His own plan, but the human nature had to obtain help from the Spirit and, had to learn obedience to the divine plan. Surely all these verses of Scripture show that Jesus was fully human – that He had every attribute of humanity except the sinful nature inherited from the Fall. If we deny the humanity of Jesus, we encounter a problem with the conception of redemption and atonement. Not being fully human, could His sacrifice be sufficient to redeem mankind? Could He really be a true substitute for us in death? Could He truly qualify as our kinsman redeemer?

The Word or Logos can mean the plan or thought as it existed in the mind of God. This thought was a predestined plan – an absolutely certain future event, - and therefore it had a reality attached to it that no human thought could ever have. The Word can also mean the plan or thought of God expressed in the flesh, that is in the Son.

People don't get it... take this in real good...

The deity in the Son is the Father, we do believe that the Father is in the Son (John 14:10). Since Jesus is the name of the Son of God, both as to His deity as Father and as to His humanity as Son, it is the name of both the Father and the Son.

Thus, the man Jesus Christ is the Father only by virtue of the Father residing in His being.

I'm curious, share your thoughts.

I am not agreeing or disagreeing openly about any of the above, but what you have written is not the traditional teaching and understanding of the Oneness doctrine of God and Christ.

The Oneness view is that Jesus is the Father, PERIOD. Not by indwelling, not by manifestation, not by permeation, and not even by the Incarnation, but by ontological self-existence (and pre-existence, as Michael has tried to point out).

Again, I'm not coming against your views, per se. I'm only indicating that they do not fall under the category of traditional Oneness.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

I am not agreeing or disagreeing openly about any of the above, but what you have written is not the traditional teaching and understanding of the Oneness doctrine of God and Christ.

The Oneness view is that Jesus is the Father, PERIOD. Not by indwelling, not by manifestation, not by permeation, and not even by the Incarnation, but by ontological self-existence (and pre-existence, as Michael has tried to point out).

Again, I'm not coming against your views, per se. I'm only indicating that they do not fall under the category of traditional Oneness.

So, would a position have to agree with Rev. Bernard or the UPCI, ALJC, or other established Oneness organization to be considered "Oneness" in the "traditional" sense? I'm only trying to see the standard by which you're viewing the points I've presented.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Aquila

People don't get it... take this in real good...

The deity in the Son is the Father, we do believe that the Father is in the Son (John 14:10). Since Jesus is the name of the Son of God, both as to His deity as Father and as to His humanity as Son, it is the name of both the Father and the Son.

Thus, the man Jesus Christ is the Father only by virtue of the Father residing in His being.

I'm curious, share your thoughts.

Sounds like two persons. One is God and the other is not, but then you contradict that by saying the Man is the Father....because the Father is inside of the man..which in itself sounds nonsensical.

Is the Son a Person? And is that Person the same one as the Father?

Is the Son just a body?

Is the Son God? Or just a man? Or just a body?

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Sounds like two persons. One is God and the other is not, but then you contradict that by saying the Man is the Father....because the Father is inside of the man..which in itself sounds nonsensical.

Is the Son a Person? And is that Person the same one as the Father?

Is the Son just a body?

Is the Son God? Or just a man? Or just a body?

It depends on how one defines "person". Let's start where we know we agree. There is only one "divine person", that is the Father, aka God.

The human being (the man) Jesus Christ is the express image of God's own person in full humanity. Therefore, He is the perfect reflection of the Father's own person. Because of this we can say that we see the person of the Father in Him. But there is a distinction. In Christ there is a distinct human mind, a human will, human spirit. He's not just a body.

From conception, this full humanity was inseparably one with the Father. This means that there is an unexplainable and inseparable union of the divine essence with the human essence. Therefore, through this union each nature partakes in the very essence of the other. Thus, in Christ, God becomes man... and that man was born being a man... but also God.

No analogy is perfect. But I have tried to explain it by saying, imagine that we have two half full wine glasses. One has wine... the other has water. Now, let's pour them together into one glass. What is in the filled glass, wine or water? Both. God poured Himself into the zygote that became the man Jesus Christ. What therefore is this man, is He man or God? Both.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Aquila

It depends on how one defines "person". Let's start where we know we agree. There is only one "divine person", that is the Father, aka God.

The human being (the man) Jesus Christ is the express image of God's own person in full humanity. Therefore, He is the perfect reflection of the Father's own person. Because of this we can say that we see the person of the Father in Him. But there is a distinction. In Christ there is a distinct human mind, a human will, human spirit. He's not just a body.

From conception, this full humanity was inseparably one with the Father. This means that there is an unexplainable and inseparable union of the divine essence with the human essence. Therefore, through this union each nature partakes in the very essence of the other. Thus, in Christ, God becomes man... and that man was born being a man... but also God.

No analogy is perfect. But I have tried to explain it by saying, imagine that we have two half full wine glasses. One has wine... the other has water. Now, let's pour them together into one glass. What is in the filled glass, wine or water? Both. God poured Himself into the zygote that became the man Jesus Christ. What therefore is this man, is He man or God? Both.

It sounds like you are equating Nature to Person.