Apostolic Pentacostal beliefs?

[ISearchforLight]

Thanks very much for your insight of the Trinity.The Trinity is all about the nature of God,which is mutual love. I wish you the best on your journey back home to the Catholic Church.

Thank you! I maniacally keep emphasizing love because God is so much more than a solitary Pie in the Sky. And I begin catechesis next month at St. Agnes Cathedral in the Diocese of Springfield-Cape Girardeau . So please pray for me.

 

[Aeg071]

Dear Aeg071,

Thanks for replying in good faith to my post and assuming right off the bat that I’m a liar. However, I assure you that I am the son of a Oneness preacher! I spent a happy childhood singing Pentecostal Sunday School favorites such as “The Holy Ghost Will Take the Chicken Out of You” or anything by Lance Appleton. Also, I can recite Acts 2:38 by heart. I designed Sunday School billboards and even wrote a song about the books of the Bible that my class sang in front of the congregation. I even spoke in tongues! I was devout as Pentecostals go! Please, please, please believe me when I say I grew up in the Oneness movement.

Indoctrinated? No, but I read books concerning doctrine, the Bible being chief among them. And it has brought me to Love Himself in Trinity, realizing that, in and of Himself, God is a relationship.

How is this believing in three gods? As the Son of God, Jesus does not duplicate any Deity, from everlasting to everlasting He is Deity.

The Son is eternal God, but is distinct in Person not separate in Divine Substance from His Father.

Congratulations on completely understanding Orthodoxy. You’ve accomplished more than the Apostles! Whereas Paul saw our struggle in this mortal coil as peering into Truth as a glass darkly, you’ve entirely shattered the glass, knowing that you are as God knowing completely both good and evil. I think I’ve read about a serpent who had a mantra like that–he liked hanging out in gardens. A strange bedfellow, he prowls the world to and fro seeking whom he may devour. Might check the Yellow Pages for Madison Square Garden if you want to chat with that reptile, I hear that Eden’s been under angelic quarantine.

I thought that right belief was based on an encounter with the living God, not just a checklist of things to be believed?

I can’t speak for your Ignatian buddy, but I believe that he isn’t employing Orwell’s doublespeak. One God in Three Persons would imply that God is, in a sense, a relationship within Himself. One God in subsequent manifestations would imply that God only manifests Himself as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, in time. Again, that would be illusory of Him to suggest that He is feigning to have a relationship with ways He’s acted with people in time.

Either God is Love (an eternal action which suggests relationship), or He happens to love (a feeling based on relative mood).

Which will I trust? Love. Faith, hope, and love abide these three; but the greatest of these is love. Love never fails. God never fails. Because He never changes.

The Oneness God changes. He never knows who He is because He’s never in a relationship in eternity.God becomes like Lucifer, who, to quote Chesterton, “fell by the force of gravity” because he takes Himself too seriously. He revels in isolation. Hell is isolation. Do we see the problems arising here?

It comes down to this: do you trust in a God Who says, “I AM WHO I AM.”? And is concrete in knowing that He simply is by being known? Or do you put your trust in those things which are mutable, childish, where moth and dust corrupt?

Yours,

ISearchforLight

Aeg071
I am not calling you a liar. I’ve been Oneness all my life and your expression of Oneness is incomplete and incorrect .We as Christian must confess God has made Himself known by His Logos and His Spirit.Three eternal Divine person standing side by side in heaven is not what scriptures affords. Trithism by any other name ie Trinity is still Trithism. Nowhere in scripture do we see three divine beings.I know Oneness is right and I will quote a modern Trinitarian theologian to prove my point.God is distinguishable in thought,but not separable in fact."Is quote actually stay true to the ancient definition of three persons.

Before I continue I would like to get your understanding of the word person as used by the Greek and Latin,not English.

I stated Trinitarians fall in two camps.

If you say God in three persons with the English meaning.You sound trithistic
or

If you say God in three persons with the original Greek and Latin meaning.You would have a Oneness understanding of God with Trinitarian terminolgy.

Without making God sound like three separate divine individuals(ie three floating heads in heaven with no bodies), please tell me your understanding of the word person…

 

[Aeg071]

And…um, the Oneness believe that the Incarnation was just the Father putting on flesh and calling it “Son”. See, the Oneness create a dichotomy in the Person of Christ: Christ the Father and Christ the flesh suit called Son. We never know Who’s talking because His humanity is at war with His divinity. There’s no relationship. Just an illusion which becomes an indulgence of self known as pride–the sin by which Satan fell. Wait, God can sin? Zoinks, Scoob, that’s scary.

Aeg071
The definition of Incarnation is the decent of a god or immaterial in human or animal form. I will quote a Trinitarian who does n’'t sound Trithistic as his view of the Logosis my Oneness understanding.He said"

As the Logos, Jesus Christ is God in self-revelation (Light) and redemption (Life). He is God to the extent that he can be present to man and knowable to man. The Logos is God,[Jn 1:1] as Thomas stated: “My Lord and my God.”[20:28] Yet the Logos is in some sense distinguishable from God, for “the Logos was with God.”[1:1] God and the Logos are not two beings, and yet they are also not simply identical. In contrast to the Logos, God can be conceived (in principle at least) also apart from his revelatory action─although we must not forget that the Bible speaks of God only in his revelatory action. The paradox that the Logos is God and yet it is in some sense distinguishable from God is maintained in the body of the Gospel. That God as he acts and as he is revealed does not “exhaust” God as he is, is reflected in sayings attributed to Jesus: I and the Father are one"[Jn 10:30] and also, “the Father is greater than I.”[14:28] The Logos is God active in creation, revelation, and redemption. Jesus Christ not only gives God’s Word to us humans; he is the Word.[1:14] [14:6] He is the true word─ultimate reality revealed in a Person. The Logos is God, distinguishable in thought yet not separable in fact.

As Classical Oneness states The Logos is God’s means of self disclosure.God uttering Himself and most importantly God’s image.

As you quote Christ who being in the form(morph) God did not think His equality was something to grasp.If I may be technical,it is the Logos whose image we are in because it is the Logos that is literally God’s image.The Logos took to Himself the form of a servant and came in our likeness.Humbled Himself and became obedient to death. He ascended to the heavens and sit at the right hand of the Majestic. Jesus Christ was a man as you and I .The only difference is that it was God Himself not some second person,(in the English definition) but God Himself(Greek and Latin definition of person) who was that man.MAMA THERE GO THAT MAN…

The Bible use the word Manifestation as Oneness Pentecostals use.The original Greek and Latin meaning of hypostasis/prosopon/personae is synonymous and encompass the meaning of manifestation which is the proper context to understand when Oneness Pentecostals say One God in three manifestation. I will admit because Oneness are so terrified of Trinitarian terminology it blinds and limit many from truly expressing The Divine absolute Oneness.

 

[ISearchforLight]

Aeg071,

The Logos is God, distinguishable in thought yet not separable in fact.

Which would make God, in and of Himself a dialogue. His One Being exists in eternity in three ways, Father, Son, Holy Spirit. Everything that God the Father is finds completion in the spoken Word. But that one Word is an eternal act of communication. That mere act of distinguishing is a giving of one’s self to another. Which is Love.

The Logos has always existed. Even before creation. The Logos speaks in the Person of God, because He is God. He is the means of creation. The firstborn of creation. All things were created by Him, for Him, and with Him. God calls Him Son in eternity. Today you are my son, this day I have begotten you. With God, eternity is one day and one day eternity.

This is what Trinitarians mean. Without a giving of self to another self so a person may be shared, there is no love. I think you’re closer to Classical Christianity than you may think. Trinitarians use a lot of jargon because we’ve had to define these simple truths from many heresies over 2,000 years. But I’ll leave it at that. It’s too easy on forums to go round and round about the same points.

May God, the Father of Our Lord Jesus Christ, richly bless and keep you, leading you into all righteousness.

Pax vobiscum.

 

[Aeg071]

How do non-trinitarians explain the beginning of St. John’s gospel?

Here’s what I understand about this:
Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word - “the Word” was uncreated and eternal

and the Word was with God - this shows that somehow, “the Word” is distinct, which is consistant with Trinitarian theology and inconsistant with Apostolic Pentacostal beliefs

and the Word was God. - this shows that somehow, “the Word” is of the same substance with God, which is consistant with both Trinitarian theology and with Apostolic Pentacostal beliefs

Joh 1:2 He was in the beginning with God; again reinforcing that “the Word” is disctinct; see above

So, as is usually the case, the non-Catholic belief is consistant with SOME of scripture and in opposition to some, whereas the Catholic belief is in harmony with ALL of scripture.

Aeg071
Distinct and being with does not necessarily make something or someone else.Most Trinitarians define distinct as a separate individual perhaps unintentionally.

As a oneness I will quote a Trinitarian theologian’s view of the Logos which is my belief He states.

As the Logos, Jesus Christ is God in self-revelation (Light) and redemption (Life). He is God to the extent that he can be present to man and knowable to man. The Logos is God,[Jn 1:1] as Thomas stated: “My Lord and my God.”[20:28] Yet the Logos is in some sense distinguishable from God, for “the Logos was with God.”[1:1] God and the Logos are not two beings, and yet they are also not simply identical. In contrast to the Logos, God can be conceived (in principle at least) also apart from his revelatory action─although we must not forget that the Bible speaks of God only in his revelatory action. The paradox that the Logos is God and yet it is in some sense distinguishable from God is maintained in the body of the Gospel. That God as he acts and as he is revealed does not “exhaust” God as he is, is reflected in sayings attributed to Jesus: I and the Father are one"[Jn 10:30] and also, “the Father is greater than I.”[14:28] The Logos is God active in creation, revelation, and redemption. Jesus Christ not only gives God’s Word to us humans; he is the Word.[1:14] [14:6] He is the true word─ultimate reality revealed in a Person. The Logos is God, distinguishable in thought yet not separable in fact.
A Trinitarian said it, but that is the Oneness Pentecostal view of the Logos.

 

[Crusader13]

I had never put much thought into Oneness Theology until about 7 or 8 years ago when one of my best friends converted to an (what he calls) Apostolic Church.

His entire conversion process was a bit strange at first. Prior to entering what he referred to as “the Program”, he was a non-denominational christian. He found this program through a church here in AZ called the Apostolic Faith Center designed to help those who had hit rock bottom. I say rock bottom because the rules and guidelines were very strict and those who willingly entered the program were not allowed regular contact with family or friends on the outside. If I remember correctly they weren’t really allowed to even use the phone except for family emergencies. My friend could leave to visit with friends on certain weekends, but only if he brought along a chaperon (a brother from the church).

I could understand the need for such isolationism if a person was struggling with drug addiction, alcohol addiction, sex addiction, etc, etc. And it seems this type of program was designed for those individuals in mind. However, my friend wasn’t suffering from any type of addiction, but he was lost and looking for something better in life.

I remember when he completed the program, which I think lasted a few months or so, he told me and another friend of ours that he no longer believed in the Trinity. He said it was a man-made doctrine created at the council of Nicaea by the Catholic Church. He then began diving into several other doctrinal differences between my faith (Roman Catholicism) and my friend’s faith (non-denominational Christianity).

 

[Crusader13]

So over the last 8 years or so he and I have debated the doctrine of the Trinity on many occasions. I’ve heard a few of the same arguments that Aeg has been using here. So please Aeg feel free to elaborate into more detail on anything else that I say here. I would love for my friend to jump on this site and share his beliefs as well, because I don’t’ want to misquote his arguments or misrepresent his church and their beliefs. However, I do know they share many of the same, what he called ‘Holy Standards, as the other Oneness Pentecostal Churches.

A few that struck me as odd were the fact that they don’t exchange weddings rings with their spouse, but instead give watches. I don’t recall the exact reasons as to why, but it stems from a belief that wedding rings are pagan in origin and therefore they don’t practice it. He also stated that they won’t attend movies at a movie theatre. Now he will watch movies at his home, but he stated that it is because at home he has the control over what he’s watching and can skip over scenes that are overly offensive or inappropriate for his kids. I did ask him about watching G rated kids movies at the theatre, but again he said he still won’t take that risk and perhaps watch a trailer for another movie that may have offensive scenes in it.

 

[Crusader13]

Now as to his arguments against the Trinity go; When I quoted him the verse in Matthew 28:19, he said that Jesus was in fact speaking a parable to the disciples. They believe that the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit is none other than Jesus himself. It also appears that many of their beliefs stem from the book of Acts, as my friend used that particular book often when backing up his arguments.

When arguing against John 1:1, they believe that the Word was merely God’s Plan. It was the Plan that was always with God and it was that Plan that became flesh and dwelt among us. So when the verse says “…and the Word was God.” He argues that that was God telling us that the Word/Jesus, was in fact God the whole time. But not as the 2nd person of the Trinity, but instead just God himself merely taking on the role of the savior for the benefit of Humanity.

He also believes that in Genesis 1:26, God is speaking to the Angels not Jesus or the Holy Spirit. Whether or not that means God turned his head to physically look at Jesus or the Holy Spirit, I cannot say. However, I find this interpretation a little problematic. Because if you break down the verse I found that God couldn’t have been speaking to Angels. Because God says “let US MAKE man in Our Image.”

First problem is if God is speaking to the Angels, He’s essentially including them in helping with Man’s creation. Like a head chef saying to his crew, “Let us make the best wedding feast ever.” Well even if the chef is mixing all the ingredients himself and doing the main course himself, his crew is still expected to help in some way. So my problem is, if God is speaking to the Angels, then where do read that God and the Angels created man??? We don’t. In fact if we jump down to verse 27, we read* “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.” *

So that US that God just earlier referenced no longer makes sense if it was the Angels he was speaking to. Because now the bible tells that God (alone) created man; we don’t read about God creating man in the image of God and the Angels, but simply God’s OWN image and likeness.

 

[Crusader13]

My friend also sent me a link to a book by a Oneness theologian by the name of David K Bernard, the link is titled “The Oneness of God.” When I first read through it, some arguments appeared to make sense on the surface. However, after studying up on the Trinity and the theology behind it, those arguments no longer made any sense.

I have attended church service with my friend at his church and got to see first hand what they practiced. It was also the first time I had ever seen people speaking in tongues. It didn’t disturb me,but at the same time it did nothing to edify my either. I saw several member of the church start speaking in tongues and others jumped up out of their chairs and started running around the church in almost a sprint. I understood the reasons why, being filled/moved by the Holy Spirit, but yet I had no idea what the congregation was saying as they spoke in tongues. Also there was no one there to interpret what was being said, so I sat there kind of lost.

 

[Potter]

I grew up in a church that identified as Apostolic, Pentecostal, Oneness, and Holiness. Learning the real meaning of ‘apostolic’ took some doing when I left that at age twenty. I would be happy to answer any questions anyone has, but will offer some general comments about what my church and its organization (the United Pentecostal Church International) were about.

They call themselves Apostolic because they believe their doctrines, practices, and mores has been passed down from the apostles from the moment the Holy Spirit (which they call the Holy Ghost) fell on the Upper Room on the day of Pentecost.

The linchpin of Pentecostal/Apostolic salvation is the upper room experience. According to their doctrine, when the Holy Spirit fills someone, it gives witness to itself by their speaking in tongues Speaking in tongues is a common experience in these churches; it is as mundane to my ears as coughing. “Having the Holy Ghost”, and speaking in tongues regularly, IS being saved. People have to repent constantly to keep old sins away, but by their mark you cannot get into heaven if you don’t have the ‘holy ghost’. To them, the most important verse in the Bible is Acts 2:38, where Peter admonishes a crowd to repent, be baptized, and receive the Holy Ghost.

The Holy Ghost not only offers salvation, but power; those who posses it believe they can be channels for God’s grace, and they believe in the laying on of hands to heal the sick or cast out demonic spirits. Every service has a period set aside for sick people to come up for prayer.

The most peculiar of their beliefs from the standpoint of most Christians is that they deny the Trinity; they hold that Jesus is God, and that the Holy Ghost is God. To them, the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are simply three different job descriptions, like an inscription on a tomb – "Loving Father, Faithful Son, Pillar of the Community.

As mentioned they are a “Holiness” church, meaning they believe the church ought to set itself apart from the world. They maintain strict dress codes for men and women; women can only wear skirts, must not cut their hair, and are forbidden from wearing makeup and jewelry. Men MUST cut their hair, can only wear pants, and are likewise forbidden from makeup and jewelry. Even wedding rings are suspect. Consumption of media or information is carefully censored.

Although the UPCI is a global organization with a developed bureaucratic system (the world is divided into regions, districts, sections, and churches), its basic unit is the local church. The pastor reigns quite supreme there, his opinions carrying the weight of canon. Although he won’t have been appointed and ratified there without strict adherence to official doctrine, life is broad and complex and there’s a LOT of room for his discretion. Throughout my childhood I witnessed a lot of variation; some pastors banned television, some were OK with it.

Worship services are very unstructured. The songs tend to be modern, fast ones with a pronounced beat, and songs will be sung over and over again until people are worked into a kind of trance, at which point they begin speaking in tongues. The services are very ecstatic; there’s lots of yelling, running, and such. “Holy rollers” is not hyperbole; they really do roll on the floors or spin in circles. These services are intense and not for the faint of heart.

I hope this information offered was helpful and fair. I used to be bitter toward the Pentecostals, but time and God’s grace have allowed me to move beyond that.

 

[Aeg071]

My friend also sent me a link to a book by a Oneness theologian by the name of David K Bernard, the link is titled “The Oneness of God.” When I first read through it, some arguments appeared to make sense on the surface. However, after studying up on the Trinity and the theology behind it, those arguments no longer made any sense.

I have attended church service with my friend at his church and got to see first hand what they practiced. It was also the first time I had ever seen people speaking in tongues. It didn’t disturb me,but at the same time it did nothing to edify my either. I saw several member of the church start speaking in tongues and others jumped up out of their chairs and started running around the church in almost a sprint. I understood the reasons why, being filled/moved by the Holy Spirit, but yet I had no idea what the congregation was saying as they spoke in tongues. Also there was no one there to interpret what was being said, so I sat there kind of lost.

I was raised Apostolic Pentecostal.Baptized in Jesus Name at the age of 10.I was 11 the first time I spoke in tongues.I attended Catholic School.When I was 15,I read Superintendent Bernard’s Oneness of God.At that time I wanted to know why most Christians were Trinitarians. I went and studied so called orthodoxy .I thought Trinitarians believed in three persons as the English dictionary define being in effect Trithistic .Now at 43 my understanding of Oneness Theology and Trinitarian dogma has grown.tremendously.

I have come to realize Oneness and Trinitarian alike do not ALL express theology proper.Your friends experience sounds for a lack of a better word primitive.I will admit it’s only been in the last ten years that I’ve been able to be comfortable with women wearing paints to church.Oneness Pentecostal structure is Protestant so it is similar to Trinitarian Pentecostals.Let me add usually. Unlike Trinitarianism,Oneness Theology is not indoctrinated…The Oneness Denomination I grew up in’s Doctrinal Statement states One God in three manifestations Father,Son and Holy Spirit as the believer perceives.Considering The Logos in the form of a servant the only begotten man, of the Most High is all of God we will ever see.I will address Theology proper to your previous post

 

[Aeg071]

Now as to his arguments against the Trinity go; When I quoted him the verse in Matthew 28:19, he said that Jesus was in fact speaking a parable to the disciples. They believe that the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit is none other than Jesus himself. It also appears that many of their beliefs stem from the book of Acts, as my friend used that particular book often when backing up his arguments.

When arguing against John 1:1, they believe that the Word was merely God’s Plan. It was the Plan that was always with God and it was that Plan that became flesh and dwelt among us. So when the verse says “…and the Word was God.” He argues that that was God telling us that the Word/Jesus, was in fact God the whole time. But not as the 2nd person of the Trinity, but instead just God himself merely taking on the role of the savior for the benefit of Humanity.

He also believes that in Genesis 1:26, God is speaking to the Angels not Jesus or the Holy Spirit. Whether or not that means God turned his head to physically look at Jesus or the Holy Spirit, I cannot say. However, I find this interpretation a little problematic. Because if you break down the verse I found that God couldn’t have been speaking to Angels. Because God says "let US MAKE man in Our Image."

First problem is if God is speaking to the Angels, He’s essentially including them in helping with Man’s creation. Like a head chef saying to his crew, “Let us make the best wedding feast ever.” Well even if the chef is mixing all the ingredients himself and doing the main course himself, his crew is still expected to help in some way. So my problem is, if God is speaking to the Angels, then where do read that God and the Angels created man??? We don’t. In fact if we jump down to verse 27, we read* “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.” *

So that US that God just earlier referenced no longer makes sense if it was the Angels he was speaking to. Because now the bible tells that God (alone) created man; we don’t read about God creating man in the image of God and the Angels, but simply God’s OWN image and likeness./QUOTE

Jesus was not speaking in a parable.He gave a command and the Apostle’s obeyed when they baptized in Jesus Name.Oneness theology does come from the book of Acts.But from the book of Genesis all the way through Revelations. Jehovah is Salvation in The Logos Jesus Christ,That’s why we go down in His name.He became obedient unto death shedding His blood for the church.That’s why we go down in His name.At is very name demons tremble.That’s why we go down in His name. The fullness of Deity is ever resident in Himself and it pleases the Father.That’s why we go down in His name.Being the express image of all that is God,He can say to the Son ,your throne O God is forever.That’s why we go down in His name.He is the I AM Jehovah our Salvation in Jesus Christ.That’s why we God down in His name.

Contrary to what Oneness and Trinitarians believe,When Oneness say Jesus is the Father/Incarnate in technical terms as to Oneness theology that is meant to be understood as,The Logos is of the same substance ie with God and God Himself.The only begotten Jesus Christ is that very Substance expressed in the form of a servant.(a distinction but no separation)I think we Christian call that the hypostatic union.That’s why we go down in His name.When we stand before judgement. We will being standing before God Himself expressed in our likeness.That is why we go down in His name.

Many Oneness would accuse me of sounding Trinitarian. An accusation I take major exception to.Traditionally Oneness abhors Trinitarian terminology.I think such rigidness limits expressing scriptures as a believer perceive in rational context of scriptures.

As for John 1:1.
God has made Himself know by His Logos and His Spirit.The Logos is how we can touch,feel and see God.His Spirit is when we can’t see Him,that is how we know He is present moving about,working among and thru His people…Granted the Logos means reason and discourse,which is why a unlearned Oneness may narrow the Logos down to just the thought plan of God.We are made in the Logos image as The Logos is literally God’s image.Clearly one could not say the Logos is the thought plan of God and leave it as a final answer.

Classical Oneness states The Logos is God’s means of self disclosure.God uttering Himself.The morph of God.The thought plan,mind , reason or wisdom of God.

When God said Let us make man in our image after our likeness.He was not speaking to a Divine Son or the Divine Holy Spirit standing right beside Him chatting it up.God Is and has made Himself known by His Logos and His Spirit ie,means of self disclosure.By the Logos all thing are made that was made.When God Himself appeared in the old Testament , it was the Logos whose image we are made in . By His Spirit that moved upon the waters did that which God spoke came to be,All of which is meant to be understood as God uttering Himself.

Now if most Trinitarians understand One God in three hypostasis/prosopon/personae in the original Greek and Latin context.You should understand and interpret correctly what I just stated above.

 

[Aeg071]

Aeg071,

The Logos is God, distinguishable in thought yet not separable in fact.

Which would make God, in and of Himself a dialogue. His One Being exists in eternity in three ways, Father, Son, Holy Spirit. Everything that God the Father is finds completion in the spoken Word. But that one Word is an eternal act of communication. That mere act of distinguishing is a giving of one’s self to another. Which is Love.

The Logos has always existed. Even before creation. The Logos speaks in the Person of God, because He is God. He is the means of creation. The firstborn of creation. All things were created by Him, for Him, and with Him. God calls Him Son in eternity. Today you are my son, this day I have begotten you. With God, eternity is one day and one day eternity.

This is what Trinitarians mean. Without a giving of self to another self so a person may be shared, there is no love. I think you’re closer to Classical Christianity than you may think. Trinitarians use a lot of jargon because we’ve had to define these simple truths from many heresies over 2,000 years. But I’ll leave it at that. It’s too easy on forums to go round and round about the same points.

May God, the Father of Our Lord Jesus Christ, richly bless and keep you, leading you into all righteousness.

Pax vobiscum.

God existing in three ways is what a Oneness Pentecostal would say.I do not believe Oneness would say God eternally existed as Father,Son and Holy Spirit.As a Oneness I would say/Eternally God,His Logos and His Spirit a distinction but no separation. Is Father Son and Holy Spirit.In that context perhaps.To emphasize such a degree of distinctions to the point of individuality seems to be when many Trinitarians end up.Moving away from what the original Greek and Latin meaning of hypostasis/prosopon/personae intended to express.Any distinctions in God does not alter nor divide nor share His identify as God.

Peace be unto you,

 

[Aeg071]

Now as to his arguments against the Trinity go; When I quoted him the verse in Matthew 28:19, he said that Jesus was in fact speaking a parable to the disciples. They believe that the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit is none other than Jesus himself. It also appears that many of their beliefs stem from the book of Acts, as my friend used that particular book often when backing up his arguments.

When arguing against John 1:1, they believe that the Word was merely God’s Plan. It was the Plan that was always with God and it was that Plan that became flesh and dwelt among us. So when the verse says “…and the Word was God.” He argues that that was God telling us that the Word/Jesus, was in fact God the whole time. But not as the 2nd person of the Trinity, but instead just God himself merely taking on the role of the savior for the benefit of Humanity.

He also believes that in Genesis 1:26, God is speaking to the Angels not Jesus or the Holy Spirit. Whether or not that means God turned his head to physically look at Jesus or the Holy Spirit, I cannot say. However, I find this interpretation a little problematic. Because if you break down the verse I found that God couldn’t have been speaking to Angels. Because God says "let US MAKE man in Our Image."

First problem is if God is speaking to the Angels, He’s essentially including them in helping with Man’s creation. Like a head chef saying to his crew, “Let us make the best wedding feast ever.” Well even if the chef is mixing all the ingredients himself and doing the main course himself, his crew is still expected to help in some way. So my problem is, if God is speaking to the Angels, then where do read that God and the Angels created man??? We don’t. In fact if we jump down to verse 27, we read* “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.” *

So that US that God just earlier referenced no longer makes sense if it was the Angels he was speaking to. Because now the bible tells that God (alone) created man; we don’t read about God creating man in the image of God and the Angels, but simply God’s OWN image and likeness.

Contrary to what Oneness and Trinitarians believe, When Oneness say Jesus is the Father/Incarnate in technical terms as to Oneness theology that is meant to be understood as, The Logos is of the same substance ie with God and God Himself. The only begotten Jesus Christ is that very Substance expressed in the form of a servant.(a distinction but no separation)I think we Christian call that the hypostatic union. That’s why we go down in His name. When we stand before judgment. We will being standing before God Himself expressed in our likeness. That is why we go down in His name.

Many Oneness would accuse me of sounding Trinitarian. An accusation I take major exception to. Traditionally Oneness abhors Trinitarian terminology. I think such rigidness limits expressing scriptures as a believer perceive in rational context of scriptures.

As for John 1:1.
God has made Himself know by His Logos and His Spirit. The Logos is how we can touch, feel and see God. His Spirit is when we can’t see Him, that is how we know He is present moving about, working among and thru His people. Granted the Logos means reason and discourse, which is why a unlearned Oneness may narrow the Logos down to just the thought plan of God. We are made in the Logos image as The Logos is literally God’s image. Clearly one could not say the Logos is the thought plan of God and leave it as a final answer.

Classical Oneness states The Logos is God’s means of self disclosure.God uttering Himself. The morph of God. The thought plan, mind , reason or wisdom of God.

When God said Let us make man in our image after our likeness. He was not speaking to a Divine Son or the Divine Holy Spirit standing right beside Him chatting it up. God Is and has made Himself known by His Logos and His Spirit ie,means of self disclosure.By the Logos all thing are made that was made. When God Himself appeared in the old Testament , it was the Logos whose image we are made in . By His Spirit that moved upon the waters did that which God spoke came to be, All of which is meant to be understood as God uttering Himself.

Now if most Trinitarians understand One God in three hypostasis/prosopon/personae in the original Greek and Latin context.You should understand and interpret correctly what I just stated above.

 

[FathersKnowBest]

FathersKnowBest;11704769:

How do non-trinitarians explain the beginning of St. John’s gospel?

Here’s what I understand about this:
Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word - “the Word” was uncreated and eternal

and the Word was with God - this shows that somehow, “the Word” is distinct, which is consistant with Trinitarian theology and inconsistant with Apostolic Pentacostal beliefs

and the Word was God. - this shows that somehow, “the Word” is of the same substance with God, which is consistant with both Trinitarian theology and with Apostolic Pentacostal beliefs

Joh 1:2 He was in the beginning with God; again reinforcing that “the Word” is disctinct; see above

So, as is usually the case, the non-Catholic belief is consistant with SOME of scripture and in opposition to some, whereas the Catholic belief is in harmony with ALL of scripture.

Aeg071
Distinct and being with does not necessarily make something or someone else.Most Trinitarians define distinct as a separate individual perhaps unintentionally.

Being “with” by definition makes a distinction.

A person who believes he can be “with” himself is termed “schizophrenic”. It can’t really happen by definition.

So, yes, when we Trinitarians define “distinct as a separate individual” we are guilty … of believing what the text actually says.

As a oneness I will quote a Trinitarian theologian’s view of the Logos which is my belief He states.

As the Logos, Jesus Christ is God in self-revelation (Light) and redemption (Life). He is God to the extent that he can be present to man and knowable to man. The Logos is God,[Jn 1:1] as Thomas stated: “My Lord and my God.”[20:28] Yet the Logos is in some sense distinguishable from God, for “the Logos was with God.”[1:1]

So far, so good.

God and the Logos are not two beings, and yet they are also not simply identical. In contrast to the Logos, God can be conceived (in principle at least) also apart from his revelatory action─although we must not forget that the Bible speaks of God only in his revelatory action. The paradox that the Logos is God and yet it is in some sense distinguishable from God is maintained in the body of the Gospel. That God as he acts and as he is revealed does not “exhaust” God as he is, is reflected in sayings attributed to Jesus: I and the Father are one"[Jn 10:30] and also, “the Father is greater than I.”[14:28] The Logos is God active in creation, revelation, and redemption. Jesus Christ not only gives God’s Word to us humans; he is the Word.[1:14] [14:6] He is the true word─ultimate reality revealed in a Person. The Logos is God, distinguishable in thought yet not separable in fact.

A Trinitarian said it, but that is the Oneness Pentecostal view of the Logos.

OK, you provided a quote which (sort of) describes the Catholic view and then say it supports your beliefs, which are different from the Catholic view.

Maybe you’d like to take another crack at answering my question on John 1?
You haven’t answered it as of yet …

BTW, I apologize for those who mistakenly labeled oneness beliefs as Arian. They are really closely aligned with Sabellianism.

[edit: whoops, I didn’t see that brought out before. It was properly ascribed in post #2. Sorry. ]

 

[Aeg071]

Now as to his arguments against the Trinity go; When I quoted him the verse in Matthew 28:19, he said that Jesus was in fact speaking a parable to the disciples. They believe that the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit is none other than Jesus himself. It also appears that many of their beliefs stem from the book of Acts, as my friend used that particular book often when backing up his arguments.

When arguing against John 1:1, they believe that the Word was merely God’s Plan. It was the Plan that was always with God and it was that Plan that became flesh and dwelt among us. So when the verse says “…and the Word was God.” He argues that that was God telling us that the Word/Jesus, was in fact God the whole time. But not as the 2nd person of the Trinity, but instead just God himself merely taking on the role of the savior for the benefit of Humanity.

He also believes that in Genesis 1:26, God is speaking to the Angels not Jesus or the Holy Spirit. Whether or not that means God turned his head to physically look at Jesus or the Holy Spirit, I cannot say. However, I find this interpretation a little problematic. Because if you break down the verse I found that God couldn’t have been speaking to Angels. Because God says "let US MAKE man in Our Image."

First problem is if God is speaking to the Angels, He’s essentially including them in helping with Man’s creation. Like a head chef saying to his crew, “Let us make the best wedding feast ever.” Well even if the chef is mixing all the ingredients himself and doing the main course himself, his crew is still expected to help in some way. So my problem is, if God is speaking to the Angels, then where do read that God and the Angels created man??? We don’t. In fact if we jump down to verse 27, we read* “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.” *

So that US that God just earlier referenced no longer makes sense if it was the Angels he was speaking to. Because now the bible tells that God (alone) created man; we don’t read about God creating man in the image of God and the Angels, but simply God’s OWN image and likeness.

This is the beginning of my last post-Jesus was not speaking in a parable.He gave a command and the Apostle’s obeyed when they baptized in Jesus Name.Oneness theology does come from the book of Acts.But from the book of Genesis all the way through Revelations. Jehovah is Salvation in The Logos Jesus Christ,That’s why we go down in His name.He became obedient unto death shedding His blood for the church.That’s why we go down in His name.At is very name demons tremble.That’s why we go down in His name. The fullness of Deity is ever resident in Himself and it pleases the Father.That’s why we go down in His name.Being the express image of all that is God,He can say to the Son ,your throne O God is forever.That’s why we go down in His name.He is the I AM Jehovah our Salvation in Jesus Christ.That’s why we God down in His name.

 

[FathersKnowBest]

This is the beginning of my last post-Jesus was not speaking in a parable.He gave a command and the Apostle’s obeyed when they baptized in Jesus Name.

Except that we know that the Apostles baptized using the Trinitarian formula.

How do we know this? Well, history is one way.

Here is a quote from the Didache, an instructional document of the Early Church that pre-existed much of the NT writings themselves:

Chapter 7. Concerning Baptism. And concerning baptism, baptize this way: Having first said all these things, baptize into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living water. But if you have no living water, baptize into other water; and if you cannot do so in cold water, do so in warm. But if you have neither, pour out water** three times** upon the head into the name of Father and Son and Holy Spirit. But before the baptism let the baptizer fast, and the baptized, and whoever else can; but you shall order the baptized to fast one or two days before.

Funny how actual history lines up so well with Catholic teaching!

Oneness theology does come from the book of Acts.But from the book of Genesis all the way through Revelations. Jehovah is Salvation in The Logos Jesus Christ,That’s why we go down in His name.He became obedient unto death shedding His blood for the church.That’s why we go down in His name.At is very name demons tremble.That’s why we go down in His name. The fullness of Deity is ever resident in Himself and it pleases the Father.That’s why we go down in His name.Being the express image of all that is God,He can say to the Son ,your throne O God is forever.That’s why we go down in His name.He is the I AM Jehovah our Salvation in Jesus Christ.That’s why we God down in His name.

Great. But this doesn’t support your beliefs. In fact, things like God saying TO THE SON “your throne O God is forever” actually disprove your beliefs.

 

[FathersKnowBest]

God existing in three ways is what a Oneness Pentecostal would say.

Funny, it’s also what Sabellius would say.

 

[Aeg071]

Except that we know that the Apostles baptized using the Trinitarian formula.

How do we know this? Well, history is one way.

Here is a quote from the Didache, an instructional document of the Early Church that pre-existed much of the NT writings themselves:

Chapter 7. Concerning Baptism. And concerning baptism, baptize this way: Having first said all these things, baptize into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living water. But if you have no living water, baptize into other water; and if you cannot do so in cold water, do so in warm. But if you have neither, pour out water** three times** upon the head into the name of Father and Son and Holy Spirit. But before the baptism let the baptizer fast, and the baptized, and whoever else can; but you shall order the baptized to fast one or two days before.

Funny how actual history lines up so well with Catholic teaching!

Great. But this doesn’t support your beliefs. In fact, things like God saying TO THE SON “your throne O God is forever” actually disprove your beliefs.

I will say it again,at the end of the day when we all stand before judgement,Christ is all of God that we will ever see.And when we have Christ ,we have all of God.You can say it is three,five or ten hypostasis in the Godhead.AND STILL THE LOGOS MADE FLESH IN THE PERSON OF JESUS CHRIST IS ALL OF GOD WE WILL EVER SEE.WHY WOULD WE NOT GO DOWN IN HIS NAME.History shows that they did not always baptized in a trinity until it became mandatory.Peter baptized in Jesus name so did the early Church…Many sources confirm that as well the the old Catholic encyclopedia.

The way the New Testament is written I am incline to believe Jesus actually said baptize in my name.but that argumentative .Baptism in the book of Acts clearly shows what Jesus said and meant.

Unlearned Trinitarians(English usage as oppose to Greek and Latin original meaning) love to skirt around the fact the scripture say there is One God our Father and One Lord Jesus Christ…I have now come to realize the Trinitarian you know better and the ones that don’t.I use to think all Trinitarians were Trithistic. Now I can tell the
difference.

 

[Isaiah45_9]

I will say it again,at the end of the day when we all stand before judgement,Christ is all of God that we will ever see.And when we have Christ ,we have all of God.You can say it is three,five or ten hypostasis in the Godhead.AND STILL THE LOGOS MADE FLESH IN THE PERSON OF JESUS CHRIST IS ALL OF GOD WE WILL EVER SEE.WHY WOULD WE NOT GO DOWN IN HIS NAME.History shows that they did not always baptized in a trinity until it became mandatory.Peter baptized in Jesus name so did the early Church…Many sources confirm that as well the the old Catholic encyclopedia.

The One you say we will see before the judgement throne said:

Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,

[Whatever] everyone else says, it’s just an opinion or a short version (And yes, that includes Peter in Acts).