The Trinity : revisted

[First and the Last]

I am not saying that God couldn't be three persons. I believe He could. I am just saying nowhere in Scripture is it said or discussed "persons of God" but all through Scripture is Says God is ONE numerically, inseparably strictly monotheistic. I have already quoted all those Scriptures earlier.

 

[Charlie24]

I don't believe in One person of God interacting as 3 at the same time. I believe in ONE God (who doesn't have a body accept Jesus Christ) interacting as 3 at the same time. God if He chose to could put the fullness of the Godhead into anyone He chooses then we would have many person of God. After all He is God without limits.

Jesus Christ is a person. He is sitting right now at the right hand of the Father in a glorified body. He ascended into heaven with a glorified body and will appear the second time in a glorified body.

Flesh and blood cannot enter into heaven but the glorified flesh that has no blood can.

 

[Charlie24]

I am not saying that God couldn't be three persons. I believe He could. I am just saying nowhere in Scripture is it said or discussed "persons of God" but all through Scripture is Says God is ONE numerically, inseparably strictly monotheistic. I have already quoted all those Scriptures earlier.

John plainly told us that the Word (which later became flesh) was with God and was God.

That is 2 persons John is speaking of, there's no way around that.

 

[Charlie24]

John plainly told us that the Word (which later became flesh) was with God and was God.

That is 2 persons John is speaking of, there's no way around that.

"The Word" is the eternal logos, it's one of the names given to Christ. We know this from Rev. 19:13.

"And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God."

 

[First and the Last]

John plainly told us that the Word (which later became flesh) was with God and was God.

That is 2 persons John is speaking of, there's no way around that.

The Logos (Word) of John 1 is not equivalent to the title Son in Oneness theology as it is in trinitarianism. Son is limited to the Incarnation, but Logos is not. The Logos is God’s self expression, “God’s means of self disclosure,” or “God uttering Himself.” Before the Incarnation, the Logos was the unexpressed thought, plan, and mind of God, which had a reality no human thought can have because of God’s perfect foreknowledge and, in the case of the Incarnation, God’s predestination. In the beginning, the Logos was with God, not as a separate person but as God Himself—pertaining to and belonging to God much like a man and his word. In the fullness of time God put flesh on the Logos; He expressed Himself in flesh.

It is also interesting to note that this verse does not use the word Son, but Word. If Son were the special name of a distinct person in the Godhead, and if this verse were trying to teach distinct persons, why did it use Word instead of Son? Son does not refer primarily to deity, but Word does. The Word is not a distinct person from the Father any more than a man and his word are distinct persons. Rather, the Word is the thought, plan, or mind of God and also the expression of God.

The Word did not emanate from God over a period of time; it was with God in the beginning (John 1:1-2). Jesus Christ, the Son of God, was none other than the Word, or God, revealed in flesh. Note also that the Greek word pros, translated “with” in verse 1, is the same word translated “pertaining to” in Hebrews 2:17 and 5:1. John 1:1 could include in its meanings, therefore, the following: “The Word pertained to God and the Word was God,” or “The Word belonged to God and was God.”

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. . . . And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us” (John 1:1, 14). Literally, the Word (God) was tabernacled or tented among us. When did God tabernacle or robe Himself in flesh? In Jesus Christ. Both verses prove that Jesus is God—that He is God manifest (revealed, made known, made evident, displayed, shown) in flesh. God is a Spirit—without flesh and blood and invisible to us. In order to make Himself visible to us and in order to shed innocent blood for our sins, He had to put on flesh. Jesus is not another God or a part of God, but He is the God of the Old Testament robed in flesh. He is the Father incarnate; He is Jehovah who came in flesh to bridge the gap between humanity and God that sin had created. He put on human identity as a person puts on a coat (which mind you He is inseparable from now since the conception in Mary's womb.)

Another interesting Scripture is:

I John 5:7 “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one”

Some interpret this phrase to mean one in unity as husband and wife are one. But it should be pointed out that this view is essentially polytheistic. If the word one referred to unity instead of a numerical designation, then the Godhead could be viewed as many gods in a united council or government. If unity were meant, the verse should have read, “These three agree as one.”

 

[Charlie24]

The Logos (Word) of John 1 is not equivalent to the title Son in Oneness theology as it is in trinitarianism. Son is limited to the Incarnation, but Logos is not. The Logos is God’s self expression, “God’s means of self disclosure,” or “God uttering Himself.” Before the Incarnation, the Logos was the unexpressed thought, plan, and mind of God, which had a reality no human thought can have because of God’s perfect foreknowledge and, in the case of the Incarnation, God’s predestination. In the beginning, the Logos was with God, not as a separate person but as God Himself—pertaining to and belonging to God much like a man and his word. In the fullness of time God put flesh on the Logos; He expressed Himself in flesh.

It is also interesting to note that this verse does not use the word Son, but Word. If Son were the special name of a distinct person in the Godhead, and if this verse were trying to teach distinct persons, why did it use Word instead of Son? Son does not refer primarily to deity, but Word does. The Word is not a distinct person from the Father any more than a man and his word are distinct persons. Rather, the Word is the thought, plan, or mind of God and also the expression of God.

The Word did not emanate from God over a period of time; it was with God in the beginning (John 1:1-2). Jesus Christ, the Son of God, was none other than the Word, or God, revealed in flesh. Note also that the Greek word pros, translated “with” in verse 1, is the same word translated “pertaining to” in Hebrews 2:17 and 5:1. John 1:1 could include in its meanings, therefore, the following: “The Word pertained to God and the Word was God,” or “The Word belonged to God and was God.”

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. . . . And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us” (John 1:1, 14). Literally, the Word (God) was tabernacled or tented among us. When did God tabernacle or robe Himself in flesh? In Jesus Christ. Both verses prove that Jesus is God—that He is God manifest (revealed, made known, made evident, displayed, shown) in flesh. God is a Spirit—without flesh and blood and invisible to us. In order to make Himself visible to us and in order to shed innocent blood for our sins, He had to put on flesh. Jesus is not another God or a part of God, but He is the God of the Old Testament robed in flesh. He is the Father incarnate; He is Jehovah who came in flesh to bridge the gap between humanity and God that sin had created. He put on human identity as a person puts on a coat.

Another interesting Scripture is:

I John 5:7 “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one”

Some interpret this phrase to mean one in unity as husband and wife are one. But it should be pointed out that this view is essentially polytheistic. If the word one referred to unity instead of a numerical designation, then the Godhead could be viewed as many gods in a united council or government. If unity were meant, the verse should have read, “These three agree as one.”

You can beat the bushes to death, but one person making up the Godhead in no way fits into the Scriptures. It's impossible.

 

[First and the Last]

You can beat the bushes to death, but one person making up the Godhead in no way fits into the Scriptures. It's impossible.

I said this once its not one person making up the Godhead. It's One Godhead becoming One Person forever eternally. But also at the same time God is omnipresent and doesn't have to be, if He chooses, confined to one space. When I get to heaven I believe I will see One throne and God forever realized through the eternal glorified body of Christ.

 

[First and the Last]

God is a Spirit—without flesh and blood and invisible to us. In order to make Himself visible to us and in order to shed innocent blood for our sins, He had to put on flesh. Jesus is not another God or a part of God, but He is the God of the Old Testament robed in flesh. He is the Father incarnate; He is Jehovah who came in flesh to bridge the gap between humanity and God that sin had created. He put on human identity as a person puts on a coat (which mind you He is inseparable from now since the conception in Mary's womb.)

 

[Charlie24]

God is a Spirit—without flesh and blood and invisible to us. In order to make Himself visible to us and in order to shed innocent blood for our sins, He had to put on flesh. Jesus is not another God or a part of God, but He is the God of the Old Testament robed in flesh. He is the Father incarnate; He is Jehovah who came in flesh to bridge the gap between humanity and God that sin had created. He put on human identity as a person puts on a coat (which mind you He is inseparable from now since the conception in Mary's womb.)

Ok, let me ask you this. Christ prayed to the Father saying, "so that they may be one as we are one....."

Are we going to be one in number or one in unity in heaven?

Unity, right? Well that's what Christ said about His oneness with God, unity not in number.

 

[Charlie24]

Ok, let me ask you this. Christ prayed to the Father saying, "so that they may be one as we are one....."

Are we going to be one in number or one in unity in heaven?

Unity, right? Well that's what Christ said about His oneness with God, unity not in number.

We're not going to see eye to eye on any of this, I accept that.

I'll leave you alone with your Oneness, there were just some points I had to make.

I've done what I needed to do, so I'll let it go.

 

[First and the Last]

Ok, let me ask you this. Christ prayed to the Father saying, "so that they may be one as we are one....."

Are we going to be one in number or one in unity in heaven?

Unity, right? Well that's what Christ said about His oneness with God, unity not in number.

When we are one with Jesus, then we are one with God, since Jesus is not just a man but God also. Jesus used the plural to emphasize that in order to be united with God we must first receive the atonement through the blood of Jesus. There is one mediator between humanity and God, the man Jesus (I Timothy 2:5). No one comes to God except through Jesus (John 14:6). To be doctrinally correct, we must acknowledge that Jesus is come in the flesh (I John 4:2-3). When we receive Christ, we have received both the Father and the Son (II John 9). Our union with Father and Son is not a union with two persons in the Godhead but simply a union with God through the man Jesus: “To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself” (II Corinthians 5:19).

Another way to think of our union with God is to remember the two different offices or relationships represented by Father and Son. The believer has available to him the qualities of both roles, such as the omnipotence of the Father and the priesthood and submission of the Son. He has both the Father and Son. However, he receives all these qualities of God when he receives the one Spirit of God, the Holy Ghost. He does not receive two or three Spirits. The bodily indwelling of the believer by God is called the gift (or baptism) of the Holy Spirit, and this gift makes all the attributes and roles of God available to us: “For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body” (I Corinthians 12:13).

If, on the other hand, a person were to interpret John 14:23 and 17:21-22 to describe the union of two distinct persons in the Godhead, then to be consistent he would have to interpret the Scriptures to mean that believers become members of the Godhead just as Jesus is. Clearly, then, these passages allude to the union with God that the Son of God had and that we can enjoy by believing and obeying the gospel. (Of course, Jesus is also one with the Father in the sense that He is the Father incarnate, but this is not what these particular verses of Scripture describe.)

 

[First and the Last]

Ok, let me ask you this. Christ prayed to the Father saying, "so that they may be one as we are one....."

Are we going to be one in number or one in unity in heaven?

Unity, right? Well that's what Christ said about His oneness with God, unity not in number.

Understanding that Jesus had a fully human soul is crucial to grasping the Oneness of God (numerically one or one in unity). Let’s delve into this further.

Jesus Christ is both fully God and fully human. This doctrine emphasizes that in the incarnation, God took on complete human nature, which includes a human body, human emotions, and a human soul. This dual nature is essential for understanding how Jesus could experience human limitations, emotions, and even death while still being fully divine.

The human soul of Jesus allowed Him to experience and express genuine human emotions, to grow in wisdom and stature, and to pray to the Father from His human perspective. For example, in the Garden of Gethsemane, Jesus’ prayer, “Not my will, but Yours be done” (Luke 22:42), demonstrates His human will submitting to the divine will. This prayer reflects His genuine human experience and His role as the mediator between God and humanity.

By understanding that Jesus had a fully human soul, it becomes clear how He could communicate with the Father and express human dependence on God while still being the incarnation of the one true God. This helps to reconcile passages where Jesus prays to the Father or speaks of the Father sending Him, not as separate persons in the Godhead, but as expressions of His genuine humanity and His divine mission.

Recognizing Jesus’ fully human soul is essential for understanding the Oneness belief in the absolute oneness of God and the true humanity of Jesus Christ. It helps clarify how Jesus, as God incarnate, could interact with the Father and the Holy Spirit in a manner that reflects His complete human experience while maintaining the unity of the divine nature.

 

[First and the Last]

We're not going to see eye to eye on any of this, I accept that.

I'll leave you alone with your Oneness, there were just some points I had to make.

I've done what I needed to do, so I'll let it go.

Hebrews 1:2 states, "Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son..."

I understand that we may not see eye to eye on these theological matters, and I respect your perspective. Please know that my heart is genuinely open to understanding and seeing the concept of persons within the Godhead. However, I have not yet found this explicitly written in Scripture. Hebrews 1:2 tells us that in these last days, God has spoken to us by His Son, highlighting Jesus as the ultimate revelation of God. We have the full canon of Scripture, and I believe that if the Holy Spirit wanted us to know about distinct persons within the Godhead, it would have been clearly written or spoken of by Jesus Himself. I appreciate your willingness to engage in this discussion and share your viewpoints. It’s through open and respectful dialogue that we can grow in our understanding, even if we don’t come to complete agreement. May God bless you richly in your journey, and may His peace and wisdom guide us all as we seek to know Him more deeply.

 

[First and the Last]

I trust this finds you well and thriving in the grace and peace of our Savior. As we walk together in the faith, I feel compelled to address a matter that deeply impacts our fellowship and witness to both believers and unbelievers alike.

In our journey of faith, we inevitably encounter differences in theological understanding. Such differences can be opportunities for growth, deeper understanding, and mutual edification. However, when we respond to these differences by labeling others as “false” or accusing them of “heresy” without providing scriptural backing for such claims, we do a disservice to ourselves, our fellow believers, and those outside the faith who are watching us.

When we hastily declare something as heretical or wrong without solid scriptural backing, we risk misrepresenting the truth of God’s Word. Paul also warns us in 2 Timothy 4:2-4, saying, “Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.” Here, Paul underscores the importance of teaching with patience and sound doctrine, urging us to ensure that our reproof and rebuke are always grounded in the truth of Scripture.

In our journey of faith, it is vital that we uphold the truth of God’s Word with integrity and love. The Apostle Paul, in his letter to Timothy, urges us to handle the Word of God correctly, saying, “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” (2 Timothy 2:15). This call to rightly handle the Scriptures is not just a recommendation but a profound responsibility.

The Apostle Paul, in his epistles, consistently encourages believers to handle disputes with grace and truth. In 2 Timothy 2:24-25, he writes, “And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth.” This passage underscores the importance of addressing disagreements with kindness and gentleness, providing correction through teaching rather than condemnation.

When we declare, “that is heresy” or “you are wrong” without scriptural evidence, we fail to follow the example set by the Bereans in Acts 17:11. They were commended for their noble character because they “received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.” They did not dismiss or accept teachings based on mere opinion; instead, they diligently searched the Scriptures to discern the truth. This Berean approach should be our standard as well.

Jesus Himself emphasized the importance of truth and love in our interactions. In John 13:34-35, He says, “A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.” Our love for one another, especially in the face of disagreement, is a powerful testimony to the world of the transformative power of Christ’s love.

Paul’s exhortation in Ephesians 4:15 to “speaking the truth in love” calls us to balance our commitment to truth with a heart of love and compassion. This balance is vital in maintaining the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace (Ephesians 4:3).

In light of these scriptures, I urge us all to approach theological discussions with humility and a commitment to scriptural integrity. Let us refrain from labeling or condemning one another without first seeking to understand and provide a scriptural basis for our concerns. By doing so, we uphold the truth of God’s Word and exemplify the love of Christ in our interactions.

May we strive to be like the Bereans, diligently searching the Scriptures, and like Paul, correcting with gentleness and respect. In doing so, we honor God, strengthen our fellowship, and provide a compelling witness to the world.

 

[Charlie24]

I trust this finds you well and thriving in the grace and peace of our Savior. As we walk together in the faith, I feel compelled to address a matter that deeply impacts our fellowship and witness to both believers and unbelievers alike.

In our journey of faith, we inevitably encounter differences in theological understanding. Such differences can be opportunities for growth, deeper understanding, and mutual edification. However, when we respond to these differences by labeling others as “false” or accusing them of “heresy” without providing scriptural backing for such claims, we do a disservice to ourselves, our fellow believers, and those outside the faith who are watching us.

When we hastily declare something as heretical or wrong without solid scriptural backing, we risk misrepresenting the truth of God’s Word. Paul also warns us in 2 Timothy 4:2-4, saying, “Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.” Here, Paul underscores the importance of teaching with patience and sound doctrine, urging us to ensure that our reproof and rebuke are always grounded in the truth of Scripture.

In our journey of faith, it is vital that we uphold the truth of God’s Word with integrity and love. The Apostle Paul, in his letter to Timothy, urges us to handle the Word of God correctly, saying, “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” (2 Timothy 2:15). This call to rightly handle the Scriptures is not just a recommendation but a profound responsibility.

The Apostle Paul, in his epistles, consistently encourages believers to handle disputes with grace and truth. In 2 Timothy 2:24-25, he writes, “And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth.” This passage underscores the importance of addressing disagreements with kindness and gentleness, providing correction through teaching rather than condemnation.

When we declare, “that is heresy” or “you are wrong” without scriptural evidence, we fail to follow the example set by the Bereans in Acts 17:11. They were commended for their noble character because they “received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.” They did not dismiss or accept teachings based on mere opinion; instead, they diligently searched the Scriptures to discern the truth. This Berean approach should be our standard as well.

Jesus Himself emphasized the importance of truth and love in our interactions. In John 13:34-35, He says, “A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.” Our love for one another, especially in the face of disagreement, is a powerful testimony to the world of the transformative power of Christ’s love.

Paul’s exhortation in Ephesians 4:15 to “speaking the truth in love” calls us to balance our commitment to truth with a heart of love and compassion. This balance is vital in maintaining the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace (Ephesians 4:3).

In light of these scriptures, I urge us all to approach theological discussions with humility and a commitment to scriptural integrity. Let us refrain from labeling or condemning one another without first seeking to understand and provide a scriptural basis for our concerns. By doing so, we uphold the truth of God’s Word and exemplify the love of Christ in our interactions.

May we strive to be like the Bereans, diligently searching the Scriptures, and like Paul, correcting with gentleness and respect. In doing so, we honor God, strengthen our fellowship, and provide a compelling witness to the world.

What do you expect when 95% here on these forums disagree with the Oneness agenda you've been pushing since you've been here?

When you meet with resistance you turn to love and compassion and go right back to your agenda.

 

[First and the Last]

What do you expect when 95% here on these forums disagree with the Oneness agenda you've been pushing since you've been here?

When you meet with resistance you turn to love and compassion and go right back to your agenda.

Using love and compassion (which I so admittedly have done throughout) is not about pushing an agenda but rather reflecting the heart of Christ in our interactions. My intention has always been to approach our discussions with love and compassion, using Scripture to back up everything I say. In responding to disagreements or differing perspectives, it’s crucial to uphold the principles of humility, respect, and a genuine desire for understanding. As followers of Christ, our ultimate goal is to reflect His love and truth, even amidst differences of opinion. This approach seeks to foster dialogue and mutual respect, acknowledging that while we may not always agree, we can still engage with kindness and humility. It’s not about pushing an agenda but about embodying the spirit of Christ’s teachings in how we interact and discuss matters of faith and doctrine.

 

[First and the Last]

As we seek to understand and articulate our beliefs, it is crucial to remember that any theology that cannot be backed up Scripturally is fundamentally flawed and needs to be reevaluated.

The Bible, as the inspired Word of God, is our ultimate authority and guide in all matters of faith and practice. 2 Timothy 3:16-17 reminds us that "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works." This underscores the necessity of grounding our beliefs in the clear teachings of Scripture.

When we encounter theological concepts or doctrines, it is essential to examine them through the lens of the Bible. If they align with Scripture, they hold true; if they do not, they must be reconsidered and corrected. Jesus Himself emphasized the importance of building our lives on the solid foundation of His words (Matthew 7:24-27), illustrating the necessity of scriptural backing in our theological understanding.

Engaging in this process with humility and a sincere desire for truth honors God and strengthens our faith. It also ensures that our teachings are not based on human traditions or personal interpretations but on the unchanging truth of God’s Word.

Let us commit to continually studying the Scriptures and evaluating our beliefs against its teachings. In doing so, we uphold the integrity of our faith and remain faithful to the truth that God has revealed to us through His Word.

 

[Charlie24]

Using love and compassion (which I so admittedly have done throughout) is not about pushing an agenda but rather reflecting the heart of Christ in our interactions. My intention has always been to approach our discussions with love and compassion, using Scripture to back up everything I say. In responding to disagreements or differing perspectives, it’s crucial to uphold the principles of humility, respect, and a genuine desire for understanding. As followers of Christ, our ultimate goal is to reflect His love and truth, even amidst differences of opinion. This approach seeks to foster dialogue and mutual respect, acknowledging that while we may not always agree, we can still engage with kindness and humility. It’s not about pushing an agenda but about embodying the spirit of Christ’s teachings in how we interact and discuss matters of faith and doctrine.

Now that you've said that, don't you agree that this Oneness topic has expired itself in conversation?

Is there something else you would care discuss and maybe start a thread on something outside the Oneness thing.

 

[First and the Last]

go right back to your agenda.

I want to clarify that my intention is not to push a personal agenda but to faithfully share and discuss the teachings of the Bible. The foundation of our faith and theology must always be rooted in Scripture. It is the Word of God that guides us, and it is to the Word of God that we must always return for truth and understanding. When I share my beliefs, I strive to base them entirely on the teachings found in the Bible. If my interpretations or explanations seem to push an agenda, I ask that you consider them in light of Scripture. My goal is to be faithful to God's Word and to encourage others to do the same.

 

[First and the Last]

Now that you've said that, don't you agree that this Oneness topic has expired itself in conversation?

Is there something else you would care discuss and maybe start a thread on something outside the Oneness thing.

How about this Understanding the Gifts of the Spirit and Order in Worship (Check here often, slow process)