Oneness Questions

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Luke

Jesus was not born before the woman that gave birth to him was born to say so simply shows a grasping at straws. The passage you refered to in colosians when taken context clearly is speaking of rank not actual birth order.

Col. 1:15 who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
16 for by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
17 and he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.

If Jesus created all things and was before all things how did he have a beginning point?

LOOK WHAT YOU QUOTED LUKE, YOUR (GOD) WAS BORN in verse 15
YOUR (GOD) WAS RAISED FROM THE DEAD in verse 18.
WAS REV. 13:8 about his birth order also???(JESUS WAS "SLAIN" BEFORE THE WORLD BEGAN)

I told you Jesus preexisted only in the "mind" of God.(read my previous threads again) But the scripture is YOUR PROBLEM to deal with here.

[Luke]

Originally Posted by Sean

LOOK WHAT YOU QUOTED LUKE, YOUR (GOD) WAS BORN in verse 15
YOUR (GOD) WAS RAISED FROM THE DEAD in verse 18.


I told you Jesus preexisted in the "mind" of God.(read my previous thread again) But the scripture is YOUR PROBLEM to deal with here.

You should really read what i posted then you would have seen that as i pointed out the passage is not speaking of a literal birth but rather of rank.

Is Jesus not your God also?

Jesus was not born before the woman that gave birth to him was born to say so simply shows a grasping at straws. The passage you refered to in colosians when taken context clearly is speaking of rank not actual birth order.

Col. 1:15 who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
16 for by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
17 and he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.




If Jesus created all things and was before all things how did he have a beginning point?

Even if you want to say that really it God the Father speaking the world into existance and those words were Jesus that still does not work because according to that line of reasoning there was a time when Jesus did not exist and the though of those words preceeded those words therefore Jesus was not before all things. Also those words would have been made by someone other than Jesus and that would have been something that Jesus did not make again contradicting the very passage you ascribe to. God may speak of things that havent yet happened as if they alread have but He does not speak of what did not happen as if it did that is called lying.

Please address the last paragraph of my post as you neglected to do so earlier.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Luke

You should really read what i posted then you would have seen that as i pointed out the passage is not speaking of a literal birth but rather of rank.

Is Jesus not your God also?

Jesus was not born before the woman that gave birth to him was born to say so simply shows a grasping at straws. The passage you refered to in colosians when taken context clearly is speaking of rank not actual birth order.

Col. 1:15 who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
16 for by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
17 and he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.




If Jesus created all things and was before all things how did he have a beginning point?

Even if you want to say that really it God the Father speaking the world into existance and those words were Jesus that still does not work because according to that line of reasoning there was a time when Jesus did not exist and the though of those words preceeded those words therefore Jesus was not before all things. Also those words would have been made by someone other than Jesus and that would have been something that Jesus did not make again contradicting the very passage you ascribe to. God may speak of things that havent yet happened as if they alread have but He does not speak of what did not happen as if it did that is called lying.

Please address the last paragraph of my post as you neglected to do so earlier.

THIS IS GOOFY LUKE, I JUST QUOTED IT, you are seeing it cross eyed or something. ANSWER MY QUESTIONS...YOU MUST BE ON THE DEFENSE HERE.

YOUR "ETERNAL SON" WAS BORN...LUKE, AND YOUR "ETERNAL SON" DIED...LUKE, AND YOUR "ETERNAL SON" WAS RAISED FROM THE DEAD...LUKE. DEAL WITH IT... AND ALL OF THIS WAS BEFORE CREATION...LUKE


THESE PASSAGES SPECIFICALLY SAY JESUS WAS (1st)FIRSTBORN OF ALL THE LIVING(every living thing)....SLAIN BEFORE THE BEGINNING(foundation) OF THE WORLD(1st to die)....AND(1st) FIRSTBORN FROM(resurrected) THE D-E-A-D(DEAD)

Your fancy bible school words and conjecture will not make these verses go away. They are stuck in your head for life...

[Luke]

Originally Posted by Sean

THIS IS GOOFY LUKE, I JUST QUOTED IT, you are seeing it cross eyed or something. ANSWER MY QUESTIONS...YOU MUST BE ON THE DEFENSE HERE.

Why must i be on the defensive?

Originally Posted by Sean

YOUR "ETERNAL SON" WAS BORN...LUKE, AND YOUR "ETERNAL SON" DIED...LUKE, AND YOUR "ETERNAL SON" WAS RAISED FROM THE DEAD...LUKE. DEAL WITH IT... AND ALL OF THIS WAS BEFORE CREATION...LUKE

Did you read what you just posted? There are two very fatal flaws with your comment:

1. Of who was Jesus born if He was born before creation and therefore there was no one to give bith to Him? There was no egg to fertilize?

2. You comment says all of this happened before creation but the passage if we are going to take the term firstborn to mean a literal birth then we must also accept the fourth word of that phrsae as literal and here your argument unravels. "the firstborn of every creature" creature is a created being how do you have a created being before creation?

Originally Posted by Sean

THESE PASSAGES SPECIFICALLY SAY JESUS WAS (1st)FIRSTBORN OF ALL THE LIVING(every living thing)....SLAIN BEFORE THE BEGINNING(foundation) OF THE WORLD(1st to die)....AND(1st) FIRSTBORN FROM(resurrected) THE D-E-A-D(DEAD)

It does not say that Jesus was the first born of all living things. Since He is the literal firstborn in your opinion does this mean that Adam and Eve came before Him since they were not born?

Originally Posted by Sean

Your fancy bible school words and conjecture will not make these verses go away. They are stuck in your head for life...

I am not trying to make the verse go away and i didnt realize that i was useing fancy words or conjecture. I also didnt remember mentioning that I attended bible college (though I did).

You are still avoiding that last paragraph though i can understand it is kind of hard to explain but I will repost it again in case you are just overlooking it.

Even if you want to say that really it God the Father speaking the world into existance and those words were Jesus that still does not work because according to that line of reasoning there was a time when Jesus did not exist and the though of those words preceeded those words therefore Jesus was not before all things. Also those words would have been made by someone other than Jesus and that would have been something that Jesus did not make again contradicting the very passage you ascribe to. God may speak of things that havent yet happened as if they alread have but He does not speak of what did not happen as if it did that is called lying.

[Sean]

Jesus was only in the "mind" of God with God in the Beginning. God is not bound by time like we are. He has the ability to speak of the the things that do not yet exist as though they already happened. Rom 4:17..... He even went and got Jesus as a human being (in His mind) and created Adam in the likeness of the "future" Jesus. Romans 5:14. Body, soul and spirit.

It is really not complicated to see what I am saying here.



I am tired now,,, I put together a big rebuttal to your last thread and lost it(frustrating). I just finished with the end of it. Weve been at this for hours...HUH...see u later...enjoy your Friday night

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by bjhs08

Hello all,

I am new to this forum and to Oneness Pentecostalism in general. I am a trinitarian pentecostal, but I have been doing alot of research on Oneness doctrine and am feeling drawn to it. However, I have a few questions for the community here. Please do not take these as an attack or challenge, but as form one seeking more information. Thanks

1) If God and Jesus are one, who was Jesus speaking to on the Cross when he said "Forgive them Father for the know not what they do.", and "My God, why have you foresaken me?"

2) What about passages that say that Jesus is seated at the right hand of the Father?

Thank you for your help.

1) There are definitely TWO involved when we read of Jesus speaking to the Father. But the question is not whether there is one or two. The question is what is the nature of the TWO?

Two "whats"?

Two persons?

Two manifestations?

Which is it?

That is where the argument lies. And the bible does not spell out what the two "elements" or "units" are. It just shows Jesus speaking to the Father.

So, church movements tried to assess that evidence and nail down what the two are. The Tradition that took hold more than any other was that they are two persons. Now, this is sort of understandable, because a person talks to another person, normally. So it sounds reasonable to say they are two "persons". But the only basis upon which we can determine THIS PARTICULAR conclusion about this sort of thing is the human race comprised of many "persons".

Because the human species involves more than one individual, we have come to coin the term "PERSONS" and "PERSON" to describe each individual. That is because there is not simply ONE OF OUR KIND in existence. We are MANY.

But that is not the case with GOD. To say that there is ONE GOD who is comprised of THREE PERSONS is to say that His SPECIES is like ours, except there are only three of HIS KIND where there have been multiplied billions of ours.

But when you think of it carefully, GOD is called a HE, while the human race is not. And if this HE has THREE PERSONS INVOLVED, then why is not the human race called a HE with billions of persons involved? We would never use the term HE to describe the human race like we would God.

So, really, we cannot say the three units are PERSONS in the Godhead because it does not fit the way it does with mankind. We have to use a different term to harmonize a plurality, yet maintain the single HE of God.

I claim that the entire basis of saying GOD IS THREE PERSONS is by a mistaken notion that we use mankind as a standard to determine who and what God is, and that is extremely illogical. Yes, man was made in His image, but a SINGLE MAN was made in His image. The entire body of humanity is not the image. And a single man has a spirit, soul and a body, but has ONE NAME and is ONE PERSON.

So, there is no problem in saying there are two in the Godhead, It's just the TWO "WHATS" that is the real question. Since PERSONS does not fit, because it was based upon comparing God with man's nature, then another term ought to be used. Since 1 Tim 3:16 says GOD WAS MANIFEST in the flesh, most Oneness people prefer TWO MANIFESTATIONS.

Yes, there is more than ONE in God, but not more than one person. It's more than one "manifestation."

2) RIGHT HAND is a HEBREW IDIOM for POWER. Jesus sits on the throne and it is called the RIGHT HAND. A throne is a place of power. And there is ONLY ONE THRONE:

Rev 3:21 KJV To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.

Rev 22:1 KJV And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb.

[Sean]

Good analogy here my brother..I guess when it all comes down to it, we must, including myself, confront the scriptures to make sense to us personally. I was showing an unrelated "revelation" of mine on a topic to a Bible college teacher recently. He told me that he had ?marks in his faith in the Bible in this area.(it effected his faith negatively). My concept "cleared it up" and he left my house rejoicing. It all started because it affected my faith and I needed answers when I was "confronted" in a debate.

I would like all to participate here. I apologize to all for getting too assertive with my opinion on this thread. I will just watch for a while...

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Sean

Good analogy here my brother..I guess when it all comes down to it, we must, including myself, confront the scriptures to make sense to us personally. I was showing an unrelated "revelation" of mine on a topic to a Bible college teacher recently. He told me that he had ?marks in his faith in the Bible in this area.(it effected his faith negatively). My concept "cleared it up" and he left my house rejoicing. It all started because it affected my faith and I needed answers when I was "confronted" in a debate.

I would like all to participate here. I apologize to all for getting too assertive with my opinion on this thread. I will just watch for a while...

Amen! Great questions that need to be answered.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Sean

Praxeas...I am not sure you understand me here. Jesus was a man on earth...NOT A GOD/MAN. JESUS WAS NOT GOD UNTIL THE RESURRECTION. GOD WAS IN HIM. JESUS SAID THAT HE HAD A GOD(the Father) BEFORE HIS ASCENSION MULTIPLE TIMES. ONLY A HUMAN BEING CAN HAVE A GOD. GOD CANNOT HAVE A GOD. HE WAS TOTALLY,100% human just like us....

Yup..sounds like you have two persons.

One is God.

The other is just a man who became God upon resurrection.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Yup..sounds like you have two persons.

One is God.

The other is just a man who became God upon resurrection.

Not quite Prax...I was trying to say the Father WAS inside the man on earth, and inside the 'omnipresent body" of Christ NOW...God just "rebirthed" the destroyed body of His human son and the Father(God) DWELLS in it now. The Spirit is in the man.

2 Cor. 5:19....to wit(to understand),,,that God(Father, Jehovah) was "in"(inside) Christ(son,man, human being) reconciling the world unto Himself(God, Father, Jehovah)

Col.2:9... For in Him(Jesus,glorified man, resurrected begotten son from the dead) dwelleth(continues to dwell) all the fullness(everything that God consists of) of the Godhead bodily. (inside his body)

1 Tim. 3:16....great is the "mystery"(isnt that the truth) of godliness, for God(Father, Jehovah) was manifest(revealed) in the flesh(human son, Jesus)........How could He(God, Jehovah) be seen of Angels, being He is invisible?....The "IMAGE"(Jesus)




When Jesus was on earth, the Father, in the FORM of the Spirit(Holy Ghost), Dwelled in him, The Father still does (BUT IN THE FULLNESS OF ALL OF HIS POWER NOW)


Simply, almighty God who forbid image worship in the O.T. did that because He some day would provide an EXPRESS IMAGE OF HIMSELF SOMEDAY for us to get to worship. For instance, I never pray to anything but Jesus, understanding that He is the IMAGE of almighty God. (HE IS A "FORM" OF THE FATHER, OR in my mind...a "MANIFESTATION" of the Father) I DONT SAY GOD WHEN I PRAY, I say Lord Jesus. (GOD COULD BE ANYTHING)

Ok, for all the Catholics watching,,,Jesus is my "STATUE" of the FATHER(IT IS A STATUE OF THE FATHER WITH THE IMAGE AND THE NAME JESUS ON IT)....Sorry, that was my B.C. coming out...LOL


All I have been saying from the start Prax....Its not God AND Jesus, but God IN Jesus.

I dont see 1 AND 1, but I see 1 IN 1.(God in man) (I guess you dont see what I see) sorry.


I have not studied this certain topic, but I heard Dr. David Bernard in a debate say the "purpose" of the Son will cease in heaven and God will be "all in all". I cannot further comment on this teaching because I have not researched it, but if anyone can, feel free to bring it out.


I am keeping a low profile here.