-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
A
"I through the Law died to the Law, so that I might live to God. I have been crucified with Christ, and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life that I now live in the flesh I live by faith—faith in the Son of God, who loved me and handed himself over to death for me."
For Paul, the former Pharisee who sought to live in total obedience to the Law and experienced it as a tyranny that held him in thrall, it was an inexpressible relief to know that in Christ’s death and resurrection he was released for life in the new age. That element of the theology of redemption became for him an existential reality: his life under the domination of Law had ended, and life henceforth was fellowship with the risen Christ; or, otherwise expressed, the risen Christ was the continuing source of his life, as he daily lived by faith in the Lord who loved him and died for him.
What it does NOT mean is that the person of God the Father and the person of God the Holy Spirit don't exist. They certainly do exist actually as scripture teaches they do.
God is one essence in three persons fulfilling functional roles.
At the heart of Paul’s view of salvation, however, is not so much new ‘performance’ as new relationship: i.e. restoration to God. Israel looked forward to ‘salvation’ as the lavish pouring out of the Spirit upon them (Is. 32:15; 44:3; Ezek. 36–37; Joel 2), because this was to be the return of God to Israel in transforming grace.
Accordingly:
a. Paul describes both the church and the individual as the eschatological temple which God now indwells by his Spirit (1 Cor. 3:16; 6:19; Eph. 2:22, etc.), and the believer is said to have access to God through the Spirit (Eph. 2:18; cf. Rom. 8:26–27).
b. However, these ideas are Christocentric. Paul’s writings are dominated by a rich ‘in Christ’ mysticism, and his understanding of ‘salvation’ is summarized in such passages as Galatians 2:19–20: ‘I have been crucified with Christ, and it is no longer I who live, but it is Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh, I live by faith in the Son of God who loved me and gave himself for me’ (nrsv, cf. 1 Cor. 12:13; 2 Cor. 5:17; Phil. 1:21; 3:10, etc.). Christ, as much as the Father, is the indwelling, self-revealing presence of God, but only through the Spirit of God, now experienced as the Spirit of Christ (Rom. 8:9–11; Phil. 1:19; cf. Gal. 4:6).
If salvation is above all ‘union with Christ’, that union is effected and maintained only through the Spirit. The corollary is stated in Romans 8:9b: ‘anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ, that person does not belong to him’. Fundamentally, then, the Spirit is ‘the Spirit of adoption/sonship’ (Gal. 4:6; Rom. 8:15).
So we see that God is one but in three persons operating in perfect unity fulfilling different functional roles, exactly what scripture teaches and exactly what the doctrine of the Trinity states.
For Paul, the former Pharisee who sought to live in total obedience to the Law and experienced it as a tyranny that held him in thrall, it was an inexpressible relief to know that in Christ’s death and resurrection he was released for life in the new age. That element of the theology of redemption became for him an existential reality: his life under the domination of Law had ended, and life henceforth was fellowship with the risen Christ; or, otherwise expressed, the risen Christ was the continuing source of his life, as he daily lived by faith in the Lord who loved him and died for him.
What it does NOT mean is that the person of God the Father and the person of God the Holy Spirit don't exist. They certainly do exist actually as scripture teaches they do.
God is one essence in three persons fulfilling functional roles.
At the heart of Paul’s view of salvation, however, is not so much new ‘performance’ as new relationship: i.e. restoration to God. Israel looked forward to ‘salvation’ as the lavish pouring out of the Spirit upon them (Is. 32:15; 44:3; Ezek. 36–37; Joel 2), because this was to be the return of God to Israel in transforming grace.
Accordingly:
a. Paul describes both the church and the individual as the eschatological temple which God now indwells by his Spirit (1 Cor. 3:16; 6:19; Eph. 2:22, etc.), and the believer is said to have access to God through the Spirit (Eph. 2:18; cf. Rom. 8:26–27).
b. However, these ideas are Christocentric. Paul’s writings are dominated by a rich ‘in Christ’ mysticism, and his understanding of ‘salvation’ is summarized in such passages as Galatians 2:19–20: ‘I have been crucified with Christ, and it is no longer I who live, but it is Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh, I live by faith in the Son of God who loved me and gave himself for me’ (nrsv, cf. 1 Cor. 12:13; 2 Cor. 5:17; Phil. 1:21; 3:10, etc.). Christ, as much as the Father, is the indwelling, self-revealing presence of God, but only through the Spirit of God, now experienced as the Spirit of Christ (Rom. 8:9–11; Phil. 1:19; cf. Gal. 4:6).
If salvation is above all ‘union with Christ’, that union is effected and maintained only through the Spirit. The corollary is stated in Romans 8:9b: ‘anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ, that person does not belong to him’. Fundamentally, then, the Spirit is ‘the Spirit of adoption/sonship’ (Gal. 4:6; Rom. 8:15).
So we see that God is one but in three persons operating in perfect unity fulfilling different functional roles, exactly what scripture teaches and exactly what the doctrine of the Trinity states.
The thing about baptism is that it was originally considered a Jewish rite or sacrament. Notice that when the first Gentiles received the Holy Spirit, Peter proclaimed that no one could deny them water to be baptized.
No one is saying to forbid baptism. What I am saying is that baptism does not save. You cannot say that if one does not get baptized that they are not saved, anymore than you can say that one must believe in the trinity to be saved.
This is what I find amazing. When being called heretics by those who believe the trinity, now you are doing the same thing, about baptism. Truly, in the way we judge, we are judged.
No one is saying to forbid baptism. What I am saying is that baptism does not save. You cannot say that if one does not get baptized that they are not saved, anymore than you can say that one must believe in the trinity to be saved.
This is what I find amazing. When being called heretics by those who believe the trinity, now you are doing the same thing, about baptism. Truly, in the way we judge, we are judged.
Acts 10
44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.
45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.
46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?
48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.
Peter COMMANDED them to be baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus
44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.
45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.
46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?
48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.
Peter COMMANDED them to be baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus
A
The Greek, that would be the original language this scripture verse was written in, states that Peter commanded them to be baptized to the account of Jesus Christ who himself said to baptize in the name of the father, the son, and the Holy Spirit. God is one essence in three persons fulfilling different functional roles.You're just showing your own ignorance and stubborn refusal to conform to what the verse says in the original language here. In other words, you are taking an English translation of "in the name of" which is not literal and using it out of context. The literal Greek to English translation is "to the account of."
And what of the ones who had been baptized in John's baptism of repentance? Did the apostles command that they too be baptized in the name of Jesus, that they be baptized again? Did they not lay hands on them and they received the Holy Spirit?
When the Spirit fell upon them, they were God's children, right then. Period.
When the Spirit fell upon them, they were God's children, right then. Period.
Actually yes they did command them to be baptized again in the name of Jesus.
Acts
1 And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples
2 He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.
3 And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism.
4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.
5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.
I am starting to wonder if you have ever read Acts or if you are secretly on our side trying to get us to prove our point to other with scripture by setting us up with the questions?
Acts
1 And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples
2 He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.
3 And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism.
4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.
5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.
I am starting to wonder if you have ever read Acts or if you are secretly on our side trying to get us to prove our point to other with scripture by setting us up with the questions?
C
So, I have been asked to differentiate between the various oneness persons. This is what I have come up with:
1. DMurray, mpaper345 and studentofgod are UPCI and classic modalists. Ricke says he isn't a UPCI but that he is in agreement with their theology.
2. distinctministry and forerunner are espousing a form of unitarianism that recognizes the diety of Jesus.
Now is the time to speak up. Did I miss anyone or any variations?
1. DMurray, mpaper345 and studentofgod are UPCI and classic modalists. Ricke says he isn't a UPCI but that he is in agreement with their theology.
2. distinctministry and forerunner are espousing a form of unitarianism that recognizes the diety of Jesus.
Now is the time to speak up. Did I miss anyone or any variations?
Well i think your guessing. I would say you are wrong on all accounts. I do not think even the UPCI itself adheres to what you would call the classic form of modalism. Furthermore i have never met a unitarian that espouses the deity of Christ. I think what you were asked to do was not to put every Oneness believer in one box. Because just like you being Trinitarian doesn't make you calvinist or catholic, there are difference in doctrinal opinions within Oneness believers.
How about call it what it is true Oneness
THE DOCTRINE OF ONENESS:
God is one and has always been one. Jesus is the man God became. Jesus did not exist before incarnation as God the Son. In His pre-incarnate state, He existed as the Father, God Himself. Now the two of them are in heaven together, God the Father and the man he became, the Son of God, Jesus Christ. The problem is that when I say the Father became a man people think it means I believe he stopped being an eternal Spirit after incarnation and that heaven was empty. This is not what I believe. God the Father continued to exist as a transcendent, unlimited Spirit, while also becoming a man. The Father did not become confined to a human existence. It is not as though the omnipresent Spirit of God transformed Himself into a man, to the exclusion of His existence as the Holy Spirit.
When God assumed a human existence with a complete human mind, psyche, will, and emotion etc. He was distinct from the Father while he continued to exist as the Father in heaven. As a genuine human being, Jesus was and is distinct from the Father. This is because of His humanity not because he is the second person of the Trinity. While I confess that the deity of the Son did pre-exist incarnation, I do not see that deity as the second person of the Trinity, known as " God the Son ", and separate from the Father or Holy Spirit, but rather as the uni-personal God of the old testament. Yahweh, the Father, the Great I Am.
Concerning the Holy Spirit, I believe He is the Spirit of God the Father and not a separate person of the Trinity, the third person known as " God the Holy Spirit. " The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God, He is the Spirit of the Father, He is the Spirit of Christ. God is a Spirit, the Holy Spirit. There is one God not three, nor are there three persons that create one God. He is one uni-personal God that He Himself became flesh. There is no such person as God the son nor God the Holy Spirit but only God the Father, the son of God and the Spirit of God.
THE DOCTRINE OF ONENESS:
God is one and has always been one. Jesus is the man God became. Jesus did not exist before incarnation as God the Son. In His pre-incarnate state, He existed as the Father, God Himself. Now the two of them are in heaven together, God the Father and the man he became, the Son of God, Jesus Christ. The problem is that when I say the Father became a man people think it means I believe he stopped being an eternal Spirit after incarnation and that heaven was empty. This is not what I believe. God the Father continued to exist as a transcendent, unlimited Spirit, while also becoming a man. The Father did not become confined to a human existence. It is not as though the omnipresent Spirit of God transformed Himself into a man, to the exclusion of His existence as the Holy Spirit.
When God assumed a human existence with a complete human mind, psyche, will, and emotion etc. He was distinct from the Father while he continued to exist as the Father in heaven. As a genuine human being, Jesus was and is distinct from the Father. This is because of His humanity not because he is the second person of the Trinity. While I confess that the deity of the Son did pre-exist incarnation, I do not see that deity as the second person of the Trinity, known as " God the Son ", and separate from the Father or Holy Spirit, but rather as the uni-personal God of the old testament. Yahweh, the Father, the Great I Am.
Concerning the Holy Spirit, I believe He is the Spirit of God the Father and not a separate person of the Trinity, the third person known as " God the Holy Spirit. " The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God, He is the Spirit of the Father, He is the Spirit of Christ. God is a Spirit, the Holy Spirit. There is one God not three, nor are there three persons that create one God. He is one uni-personal God that He Himself became flesh. There is no such person as God the son nor God the Holy Spirit but only God the Father, the son of God and the Spirit of God.
Well since unitarianism explicitly denies the deity of Christ, saying that one is a unitarian who accepts the deity of Christ is to express a contradiction. I've yet to meet any unitarians on this thread. And I see that you didn't capitalize it, but that just means not the Unitarian denominations. All unitarians agree in their denial of Christ's deity, so forerunner and I have nothing in common with them beyond upholding that God is One.
Forerunner and I are closer to trinitarians who deny the separate personhood of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit than to modalists who deny the ongoing manifestation of God in all three forms.
Forerunner and I are closer to trinitarians who deny the separate personhood of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit than to modalists who deny the ongoing manifestation of God in all three forms.
Very well worded, forerunner. We may have to discuss the "full humanity" and "full deity" of Christ sometime to see if we're entirely on the same page, but from what you wrote I think this is a very good summary of Oneness belief.
God the Father, not in three consecutive modes, but in three concurrent manifestations.
God the Father, not in three consecutive modes, but in three concurrent manifestations.
Your trinitarian leanings make in necessary for you to make a very long answer to a very simple question: "What does it mean when it says "Christ lives in me".
My less convoluted answer is this...it means Christ who is God lives in you, which isn't different from saying the Spirit of God lives in you, or God lives in you.
See how that works? It means what it says.
My less convoluted answer is this...it means Christ who is God lives in you, which isn't different from saying the Spirit of God lives in you, or God lives in you.
See how that works? It means what it says.
I agree I have more in common with trinitarian that I do with either unitarian or modalist. I am in no way either. Matter of fact I am not really anti trinitarian as i believe many trinitarians are true Christians. I am a non trinitaian, but not an anti trinitarian. If you want to label me, label me as ONENESS.