Hey brother,
That would require more than a simple yes or no for me. But if you wouldn't mind, so that the topic doesn' t derail, maybe starting a new thread. It is a good question.
what of the incarnation?
derek-- i'd be happy to start a new thread.. but i'm not sure how to do that. i am a relative novice at forum procedure.
TK
TK
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
"Were not our hearts burning within us? (Lk 24:32)
I think Trinitarians "in the old sense" actually believe in three divine Individuals or "Persons" who comprise One God. That is the "mystery of the Trinity", incomprehensible and self-contradictory.I believe myself to be a trinitarian in the old sense. It is my understanding that the modalist believes God can be only one "person" at a time. (Correct me if I'm wrong on this) I believe He fills three roles (persona) simultaneously, "nothing is impossible for God".
My understanding of modalism is that God puts on "three faces" or "masks" and can express all three simultaneously. I understand their position to be identical with the one which you express. Perhaps the most rational expositor of this position is David K. Bernard in his book The Oneness of God.
Perhaps I am a raving heretic or I hope, just a weaker brother who can not understand what is inscrutable.
That's okay. The "stronger" classical Trinitarian brothers don't understand it either. It's impossible. It makes no sense. But that's the genius of "divine mysteries"!
Well, I'm not sure of that either if Peter's confession is a confession of Jesus being "my Lord and my God". That doesn't seem to fit the prayer of our Lord who said, "This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God and Jesus Christ whom You have sent. Many think Peter was expressing a moment of worship of the Father.Thankfully, Peter's confession, I believe, sets the minimum we are required to understand, else God did not provide salvation for us "weak" folk!
Although the Father is the only true God, yet Jesus is God in the sense of being Deity like His Father. He is the Father's begotten Son, or "the only begotten God" according to the earliest manuscripts of John 1:18.
Yes, and the corresponding Greek word "prosopon" has exactly the same meaning. This word is found in the New Testament 73 times. It is usually translated as "face", but is sometimes translated as "person".P.S. Found this in an article which says it well:
"Two words have been used historically to speak about the Trinity. One is the Latin word "persona"; God is three persons in one nature or substance. Derived from the language of the theater, the word "persona" refers to masks worn by actors in their roles on stage. Today we give the word "person" more individualistic connotations, but in trinitarian theology the persons are three different characterizations of one dynamic actor."
A Greek word which is a combination of "prosopon" and "lambano" (take) is used in the statement that "God is no respecter of persons".
Modalists agree that there are three "faces" by which the one God expresses Himself. But they say that there is only one one "hupostasis", whereas Trinitarians of the fourth century argued that there are three. In Hebrews 1:3, "hupostasis" is translated in the AV and in the NKJV as "person".
Hebrews 1:3 [Jesus] being the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person... NKJV
As I understand the verse, Jesus bears the very stamp of His Father's hupostasis (essence), and yet is a different Individual from the Father.
If Oneness is correct, then who was Jesus praying to? Himself?
Last edited by _PTL on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
Paidion
Avatar --- Age 45
"Not one soul will ever be redeemed from hell but by being saved from his sins, from the evil in him." --- George MacDonald
Avatar --- Age 45
"Not one soul will ever be redeemed from hell but by being saved from his sins, from the evil in him." --- George MacDonald
Paidion,
We may be talking past one another here. I do not think the way the Trinity is expressed today has exactly the same meaning as it once did based on the etymology of the word "person".
Are you confusing Peter with Thomas? I was referring to Peter's confession "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God".Well, I'm not sure of that either if Peter's confession is a confession of Jesus being "my Lord and my God". That doesn't seem to fit the prayer of our Lord who said, "This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God and Jesus Christ whom You have sent. Many think Peter was expressing a moment of worship of the Father.
If I understand the oneness position (and perhaps I don't), I do not believe they are correct. I believe the Son prayed to the Father. Francis Schaeffer maintained there is both unity and diversity in God; I agree.If Oneness is correct, then who was Jesus praying to? Himself?
We may be talking past one another here. I do not think the way the Trinity is expressed today has exactly the same meaning as it once did based on the etymology of the word "person".
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
A Berean
Paidion,
Consider this:
CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS & RESEARCH MINISTRY www.carm.org
HOME PAGE
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Modalism
Modalism is probably the most common theological error concerning the nature of God. It is a denial of the Trinity which states that God is a single person who, throughout biblical history, has revealed Himself in three modes, or forms. Thus, God is a single person who first manifested himself in the mode of the Father in Old Testament times. At the incarnation, the mode was the Son. After Jesus' ascension, the mode is the Holy Spirit. THESE MODES ARE CONSECUTIVE AND NEVER SIMULTANEOUS. In other words, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit never all exist at the same time, only one after another. Modalism denies the distinctiveness of the three persons in the Trinity even though it retains the divinity of Christ.
I am definately not a modalist; you need to come up with another "ist" for me!
Consider this:
CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS & RESEARCH MINISTRY www.carm.org
HOME PAGE
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Modalism
Modalism is probably the most common theological error concerning the nature of God. It is a denial of the Trinity which states that God is a single person who, throughout biblical history, has revealed Himself in three modes, or forms. Thus, God is a single person who first manifested himself in the mode of the Father in Old Testament times. At the incarnation, the mode was the Son. After Jesus' ascension, the mode is the Holy Spirit. THESE MODES ARE CONSECUTIVE AND NEVER SIMULTANEOUS. In other words, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit never all exist at the same time, only one after another. Modalism denies the distinctiveness of the three persons in the Trinity even though it retains the divinity of Christ.
I am definately not a modalist; you need to come up with another "ist" for me!
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
A Berean
Evangelion,
Do you believe that Jacob saw God (or diety) in the encounter described in Genesis 32:24-32? If not, what is your belief about this encounter? And if so, do you believe God was confined to this location with Jacob and was nowhere else? Perhaps if you answer these questions I will understand your position better.
Do you believe that Jacob saw God (or diety) in the encounter described in Genesis 32:24-32? If not, what is your belief about this encounter? And if so, do you believe God was confined to this location with Jacob and was nowhere else? Perhaps if you answer these questions I will understand your position better.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
A Berean
Hi again, Homer. Yes, concerning Peter's confession, I had a senior moment there 
I did some reading on modalism, and the position that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit cannot co-exist simultaneously, seems to have been true only of Sabellianism. That was only one form of modalism. I have a friend who is a United Pentecostal minister, and I have had a lot of exchanges with him on the topic. I know the belief of that group is Oneness, and DOES believe that all three can co-exist, that Jesus was "God in the flesh", and that when He prayed to the Father, the fleshly part of Him was praying to the Spiritual part in heaven.
The explanation of Modalism whichyou shared, namely that the Father, Son, and Spirit, do not co-exist simultaneously, is in error unless the term "modalism" is restricted to Sabellianism. Here is part of another article which may interest you. It comes from www.faithalone.com
Tell me whether you are a modalist according to the following description.
Modalism:
The "Jesus-Only" heretical doctrine
From the beginning, Modalism was based on the Platonic doctrine that God was an indivisible Monad and could not be divided into three separate Persons. Thus, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are not to be viewed as three distinct Persons, but as three different manifestations, modes, administrations, disguises, roles, or offices of one and the same Person.
If this is true, then how can the Bible describe the Father speaking to the Son in such places as Matthew 3:17? If there is only one Person in the conversation, is He talking to Himself? The Modalist's typical answer is that the divine nature or the spirit of Jesus is talking to the human nature or the flesh of Jesus. Thus, the dual natures of Christ are talking to each other.
Admittedly, this concept is quite confusing. How can two natures talk to each other? Doesn't a conversation require two persons interacting? How can one nature be the Master and the other nature the servant? How can one nature send the other nature to do a task for Him? The Modalist doctrine of the two natures of Christ talking to each other is a greater mystery than the Trinity.
Jesus is the Father
Who is this One Person? The first Modalists believed that the Father was the Person hiding behind the masks. Thus, if you removed the mask of the Son or the mask of the Holy Spirit, you would find the "Father only." It was, thus, the Father who was incarnate in the womb of the Virgin. It was the Father who lived on earth and died for our sins. It was even the Father who descended upon Jesus as the Holy Spirit at His baptism. It was the Father who was poured out on the day of Pentecost. The Son and the Holy Spirit are only the Father manifesting Himself in different disguises, ways, or modes.
The Father is Jesus
Instead of saying that "Jesus is the Father," most modern Modalists reverse the order and say that "the Father is Jesus." Jesus is the indivisible Person behind the masks of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. And, once you remove those masks, you will see "Jesus only."
In the end, it does not really matter whether the one indivisible Person is the Father or Jesus because the Trinity is destroyed either way. The main problem confronting both kinds of Modalists is that they begin with the a priori assumption that God is one indivisible Person and cannot be divided into more than one person. When they reject the Trinity on this basis, they are simply arguing in a circle.
Modalism Today
The United Pentecostals, the Church of the Lord Jesus Christ, Church of the Lord Jesus Christ of the Apostolic Faith, the Pentecostal Assemblies of the World, Church of Jesus, and over a hundred other "Jesus Only" groups teach that Jesus is the Person who manifests Himself as the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Thus, they baptize in the name of "Jesus only" instead of in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
In contrast to the above, there are "Father Only" Pentecostal churches which believe that it is the Father who manifested Himself as the Son and the Holy Spirit. They, likewise, reject the Trinitarian formula and baptize in the name of the "Father Only."
I did some reading on modalism, and the position that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit cannot co-exist simultaneously, seems to have been true only of Sabellianism. That was only one form of modalism. I have a friend who is a United Pentecostal minister, and I have had a lot of exchanges with him on the topic. I know the belief of that group is Oneness, and DOES believe that all three can co-exist, that Jesus was "God in the flesh", and that when He prayed to the Father, the fleshly part of Him was praying to the Spiritual part in heaven.
The explanation of Modalism whichyou shared, namely that the Father, Son, and Spirit, do not co-exist simultaneously, is in error unless the term "modalism" is restricted to Sabellianism. Here is part of another article which may interest you. It comes from www.faithalone.com
Tell me whether you are a modalist according to the following description.
Modalism:
The "Jesus-Only" heretical doctrine
From the beginning, Modalism was based on the Platonic doctrine that God was an indivisible Monad and could not be divided into three separate Persons. Thus, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are not to be viewed as three distinct Persons, but as three different manifestations, modes, administrations, disguises, roles, or offices of one and the same Person.
If this is true, then how can the Bible describe the Father speaking to the Son in such places as Matthew 3:17? If there is only one Person in the conversation, is He talking to Himself? The Modalist's typical answer is that the divine nature or the spirit of Jesus is talking to the human nature or the flesh of Jesus. Thus, the dual natures of Christ are talking to each other.
Admittedly, this concept is quite confusing. How can two natures talk to each other? Doesn't a conversation require two persons interacting? How can one nature be the Master and the other nature the servant? How can one nature send the other nature to do a task for Him? The Modalist doctrine of the two natures of Christ talking to each other is a greater mystery than the Trinity.
Jesus is the Father
Who is this One Person? The first Modalists believed that the Father was the Person hiding behind the masks. Thus, if you removed the mask of the Son or the mask of the Holy Spirit, you would find the "Father only." It was, thus, the Father who was incarnate in the womb of the Virgin. It was the Father who lived on earth and died for our sins. It was even the Father who descended upon Jesus as the Holy Spirit at His baptism. It was the Father who was poured out on the day of Pentecost. The Son and the Holy Spirit are only the Father manifesting Himself in different disguises, ways, or modes.
The Father is Jesus
Instead of saying that "Jesus is the Father," most modern Modalists reverse the order and say that "the Father is Jesus." Jesus is the indivisible Person behind the masks of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. And, once you remove those masks, you will see "Jesus only."
In the end, it does not really matter whether the one indivisible Person is the Father or Jesus because the Trinity is destroyed either way. The main problem confronting both kinds of Modalists is that they begin with the a priori assumption that God is one indivisible Person and cannot be divided into more than one person. When they reject the Trinity on this basis, they are simply arguing in a circle.
Modalism Today
The United Pentecostals, the Church of the Lord Jesus Christ, Church of the Lord Jesus Christ of the Apostolic Faith, the Pentecostal Assemblies of the World, Church of Jesus, and over a hundred other "Jesus Only" groups teach that Jesus is the Person who manifests Himself as the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Thus, they baptize in the name of "Jesus only" instead of in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
In contrast to the above, there are "Father Only" Pentecostal churches which believe that it is the Father who manifested Himself as the Son and the Holy Spirit. They, likewise, reject the Trinitarian formula and baptize in the name of the "Father Only."
Last edited by _PTL on Thu Jul 20, 2006 1:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason:
Reason:
Paidion
Avatar --- Age 45
"Not one soul will ever be redeemed from hell but by being saved from his sins, from the evil in him." --- George MacDonald
Avatar --- Age 45
"Not one soul will ever be redeemed from hell but by being saved from his sins, from the evil in him." --- George MacDonald
-
_Jesusfollower
- Posts: 207
- Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 11:11 pm
- Location: NW
[quote="Jim"]Derek,
I agree with you concerning JF. Very sad pray that the Lord lifts the veil from his eyes and ears.
Gal 1:6-9 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. s we said before, so say I now again, If any [man] preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
1Ti 6:3-5 If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, [even] the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.
Pray for him,
You little devils, the other Jesus that was preached is the God-Man, three Gods, so once again you have fallen in the trap of thinking these verses are talking of anything but Orthodoxy, for course through the years Orthodoxy changed many times
I always pray for you all.
I agree with you concerning JF. Very sad pray that the Lord lifts the veil from his eyes and ears.
Gal 1:6-9 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. s we said before, so say I now again, If any [man] preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
1Ti 6:3-5 If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, [even] the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.
Pray for him,
You little devils, the other Jesus that was preached is the God-Man, three Gods, so once again you have fallen in the trap of thinking these verses are talking of anything but Orthodoxy, for course through the years Orthodoxy changed many times
I always pray for you all.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
-
_Jesusfollower
- Posts: 207
- Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 11:11 pm
- Location: NW
TK we are not believers in BU as you say, we believe God and his scripture. And a better question might be "can one who believes Jesus is God believe that God raised him from the dead"?TK wrote:Hi all..
i was up for some light reading so i decided to go ahead and plow through the 6 pages of posts here... i had been resisting doing so because it looked rather daunting, and it was a tad tough to follow given the length of some of the posts and some of the side issues, etc.
it seems as if you have reached an impasse, my friends! I never even heard of BU before (call me sheltered) so i am at least now educated in that view. it appears that BU's have an answer for every argument, and the other side has a counterargument to their counterarguments, which, well, makes for a very long argument, as we have seen.
as i am sure is true for others here, nothing will convince me that Jesus did not pre-exist his birth, unless Jesus Himself tells me some day. If He does, then, my bad. my excuse will be that the scriptures deceived me, despit emy best efforts to understand them. but i certainly don't expect that to be the case.
my question for those arguing against B.U. -- do you believe that a sincere believer in B.U. is "saved?" just curious.
Romans 10:9-10 (New International Version)
9That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved.
Also all the counter arguments made come down to, there are more of us than you and our beliefs have been established longer. So any-who your excuse will be worthless to Jesus.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
-
_Jesusfollower
- Posts: 207
- Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 11:11 pm
- Location: NW
Remember you said that.LOL.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason: