Who Is the Word in John 1? | Episode 159
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 12 май 2024
- Debates about the nature of the Godhead often reference the opening verses of the Gospel of John. In this episode, Dr. David K. Bernard explains the significance of this passage and what the apostle John intended to communicate to his readers, including us.
If you enjoy this video, keep in touch with Dr. Bernard on social media and make sure to subscribe to this channel for upcoming episodes.
============================
Connect With Dr. David K. Bernard:
============================
Facebook: / davidkbernard.upci
Instagram: / davidkbernardupci
X: / davidkbernard
=====================================
Listen to Apostolic Life in the 21st Century on:
=====================================
Apple Podcasts: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/29oEKyZ...
Amazon Music: music.amazon.com/podcasts/5f9...
#theology #bible #biblestudy #bibleteaching #pentecostal #upci #doctrine
You are so loved and appreciated Bro Bernard! Thank you for your many years of studying His Word and sharing it with the world....the world needs Bible Truth and God uses you to deliver it!!!
Thank you Dr. Bernard. You are such a blessing to all. God bless you. 🙏
Excellent, clear and insightful explanation! The Word - God in expression! THANK you Dr. Bernard!
Micah 5:2
“But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.”
Amen! Truth i came out of the trinitarian doctrine 40 years ago... Thank you, Jesus, for leading me to the truth of who you truly are. Trinitarians use 1 John 5:7 where it says, "For there are three that bear witness in heaven : the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; As proof they say of the trinity But The LORD is ONE! Not Three! That verse concludes that these three are ONE NAMELY JESUS CHRIST!
Dearest Donald, I'm not sure I understand your comment. Do you mean you're anti-trinitarian now?
@jesusfollower247 Abosolutly Not... I have a love for all souls, and my prayer is that all come to the knowledge of the truth of who Our Lord and Savior Jesus truly is... I've never made a cruel or derogatory statement or comment for anyone who believes differently than myself... Jesus has put a love for truth in my heart... he never calls us to argue he calls us to share the truth of the Gospels... that's what is in my heart. The Lord has been wonderful to me, and I'm so grateful for all he has done for me, past,present, and for every day until the Lord comes back and takes us home. Blessing to you, my friend In Jesus' name 🙏
@@donaldperea7069 Thank you for replying in such a warm, Christ-like fashion. It's almost as if I 'hear' His voice through you! May God bless you abundantly!🙏🙏
@jesusfollower247 And thank you for asking me that question without any cruel comments...people can be so negative and cruel when responding it was a joy and so refreshing to hear your christ-like responce. GODS BLESSINGS TO YOU AND YOUR LOVED ONE.
Psalms 33:6
“By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth.”
Genesis 1:3
“And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.”
Amen praise GOD
12:51 I think a way for us to relate to the use of the phrase “with” would be when we say “Let me sit with my thoughts for a bit” in regards to thinking about a subject or a feeling.
Well put together DKB
Thank You!..... Your own personal 'expression' of the Logos always adds more understanding. Every time you 'speak', more truth is 'revealed'. Every 'word' spoken together 'manifests' into a clearer image of the one God. Showing that (in the beginning) God's singular 'personality' was only with God. Until it was made/formed/conceived into flesh as Jesus the Christ. God's unknown personality finally revealed through the Christ...... As you say "God' in self-revelation".... We could also say.... God in 'self-expression'.... (that's one of my personal favorites).
May the spirit of the one God (revealed, expressed, and manifest in Jesus the Christ) unify us, lead us, and guide us into all truth!
Trinitarians do love the english wording of "with God" and "was God", because they can fit that into their narrative. But they also love to overlook two things about this verse. First, they overlook that if this is a description of the trinity, why is there zero mention of a 3rd person? Why is the Holy Spirit left out? Second, they overlook that there is no context in which the Greek "logos" can be used that would fit the trinitarian narrative.
As a trinitarian, I have no such narrative as you try to assert…. And I am fairly certain that John is focusing ‘the Word’ being made flesh - the ‘devar Yahweh’ - Because Christ, without corruption was incarnate when the Holy Spirit overshadowed the Virgin Mary, and became man. The Logos existed before all ages…. Before the Incarnation… And. Also, I love how the word he… in the English text… where it is written ‘I am he’… doesn’t exist in the Greek…. It’s just ‘I am’.
I am not like a Muslim where the Quran is the word of God… I am in love with the person of Jesus Christ, and I declare him as both Lord and Christ - to the Glory of God the Father….
@@realmccoy124 you must believe Jesus Christ as God Almighty, the Father , The Everlasting Father , The One & Only True God. The Only One you will see in the end. The “Trinity” concept / doctrine is of the Devil. Search the scriptures !
@@realmccoy124 Question. Since the Holy Spirit made Mary pregnant, wouldn't that mean the one Trintitarians call "God the Father" technically NOT be the father of Jesus? Wouldn't Jesus be the Son of the Holy Spirit?
@@OneGodAlone - where in Scripture does it say the Trinity is of the devil? Or is this a conclusion that you have derived by your own concepts outside of Scripture. As much as the word ‘Trinity’ is not found in the Scriptures, neither is the word ‘oneness’ is found in the Holy Tradition of Scriptures. The word one… and three are found - for certain.
I have searched the Scriptures… your organization’s publications… like old school stuff like Search for Truth… Into His Marvelous Light… Exploring God’s Word… I have also read most of Dr Bernard’s books.
We definitely have Yahweh Elohim… devar Yahweh… and Ruach Yahweh detailed in the Old Testament…. They are together before all ages… and agree together.
I would be / and am very careful in my biblical exegesis… of precisely who Christ God is…. And is not…. The moment Oneness Pentecostals begin dividing up the Godhead… as say ‘this is the trinity’…. They err and state misinformation… and embellish heretical teachings that are not (nor have ever been) part of Orthodox Christianity…. Folks in the Protestant world have a whole lot of teachings that are not part of the Church’s teachings and traditions.
Father. Son. Holy Spirt. One in Essence…. AND Undivided.
@@germanwulf40 - We lovingly call Mary, the Theotokos. Theotokos means ‘God bearer’ - when we say, Mary - Mother of God … we are making a dogmatic statement against the heresies of Nestorianism and Arianism…. And technically Unitarianism as well… Nestorious erred with his teachings - stating Christ was a good man, infused with God’s spirit. Arius erred when he stated that Christ was not Divine, but was created like an Angel….
Like good Protestants, Oneness Pentecostals kind of place Mary in the basement…. Bring her out once a year, dust her off and conveniently use her at the Nativity.
But, in Orthodoxy - by calling her the Theotokos … rather than ‘Christotokos’ - we declare and defend that Jesus Christ IS God…
Father Son and Holy Spirit… One in Essence… AND Undivided. So to answer your question… One Theos / One Godhead [Father Son Holy Spirit] these three are One…
The scripture does not say ‘I AM’ overshadowed Mary… it says ‘Holy Spirit’… the wording in the Greek is exact - and ‘ego emini’ isn’t there.
I suppose we can revamp the Holy Scriptures to change it to match up with our doctrines, I suppose. I wouldn’t recommend it.
God bless this brother,,,,Great Mysyery Oneness,,,,Isaiah, 9:6 and 1Tim,3:16 and Acts,2:38,,,,,obey, Acts, 2:38 from your Heart, and GOD, keeps his word, You will Biblically receive his Spirit evidence, Your spirit man will praise GOD in supernatural Language❤❤❤❤
Outside of 1 Cor 14…. Where is this supernatural language mentioned in Paul’s Soteriology and Theology …. tongues are NOT mentioned in every Conversion in Acts… not mentioned in Paul’s conversion story… not given in his account in Acts…. So. It’s not central in any of the Epistles….
Tongues are the least of the spiritual gifts… and Paul was correcting those in Corinthians…. you cannot find a single verse to support the UPCI’s innovation of receiving the Holy Ghost with ‘with the initial evidence of speaking in other tongues.’
It’s an unbiblical teaching that is presented as biblical. Dig deeper into the scriptures… Lovingly, Cuthbert.
@@realmccoy124 you must receive the Holy Ghost with evidence. You just can’t say you have it without evidence . They knew they received the Holy Ghost BECAUSE they Heard 👂 them speak in tongues .
Acts 10:45-48
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.
@@OneGodAlone - when Paul was converted…. Where in Scripture does he speak in tongues? Not mentioned on the road to Damascus. The Ethiopian - no tongues. Samaritans? So. If you are trying to add to the Scriptures saying that ‘unless you spoke in tongues, you don’t have the Holy Ghost’… you’re gonna have a hard time… no where in scripture is this receiving the Holy Ghost ‘with the initial sign of speaking in tongues’ evidence thingy you’re trying to interject stands in Scripture Alone… most but not all … few but not all - tongues is evident… that would be Scripture.
Soteriologically speaking, the whole tongue thing as you purport… isn’t central to Paul’s theme… and outside of Acts, only one place comes immediately to mind - 1 Cor 14…. And there Paul is correcting the misuse of tongues and untoward behavior of the tongue talker assembly…
I’m not against tongues…. Just its misuse and abuse… and I am against adding to the Scriptures ‘with this initial evidence of speaking in other tongues’ nonsense that’s unbiblical.
@@realmccoy124 in regards to speaking in tongues Jesus stated :
Mark 16:16-18
He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. [17] And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; [18] They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.
Tongues are for a sign . Its not only evidence that one initially recieves the Spirit but it is also direct communication with God which can not be understood less one comes to interpret..
1 Corinthians 14:22 KJV
Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.
Acts 10:46-47
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?
Acts 2:4
And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.
Amen
I do admire Bro. David Bernard for uplifting our LORD God Jesus Christ as the one true God of the Bible. The only one that he is lacking is remembering the Sabbath day since our LORD God Jesus Christ is LORD of the Sabbath and the Sabbath is the Seal of His Kingdom in Heaven.
God bless you more Dr. David Bernard. If we buy all your books, is there any restrictions if we use it in our organization.
The word is simple . A God of his word meaning anything God says it must happen
Brother Bernard, I have heard and read you saying many times that Pros in JN 1:1 should be taken as “pertaining to” as we see in Hebrews 2 and 5. Some Greek scholars have said that Pros only means “of” or pertaining to when the subject is neuter. In Hebrews we have the neuter “Ta” (the things) as the subject. So, Things pertaining to God.
But I’m JN 1 Logos is a masculine noun, not neuter. So it is argued that it cannot mean pertaining to I JN 1:1 because of the masculine noun Logos. So it should simply be understood as WITH or TOWARDS in JN 1:1.
Your thoughts?
Since we can technically affirm the original 325 nicean creed and apostles creed, we should adopt them.
No
The "nicean creed" is not the word of God, our foundation of truth should be the HOLY BIBLE ALONE. All of these "creeds" that were drafted AFTER the canon of scripture were based on religious tradition, which ADDS to the word of God. The Bible NEVER used the terms, "holy trinity", "triune godhead", "thrice holy god", nor NEVER referred to Jesus as "the second person in the godhead". The Bible ALWAYS speaks of God as ONE, never three! The NAME of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost is JESUS, that is why the apostles baptized IN THE NAME OF JESUS CHRIST (Isaiah 9:6)
@@davidderitis9068 - you do realize that it was by one of those Councils, which you state to reject, formulated the Standard of Scripture … right? You wouldn’t have your Protestant Bible to lean on, if it weren’t for the actions of the Church to preserve and vet the written Tradition of the Church’s narrative.
@@davidderitis9068 - God and Godhead are two different words… Deus / Divinitas… Theos / Thoeste… God and Godhead….Father Son and Holy Spirit… One in Essence … AND Undivided. Yahweh Elohim… devar Yahweh… Ruach Yahweh……. That three in heaven bearing record…. These three are One…. This verbiage is in the same Bible you hold in your hand. God and His Godhead… isn’t math, philosophy, concepts and opinions….
Somehow, I wonder if you really meant this as you suggested… You couldn’t agree with the Nicean Creed … and walk in that agreement… and remain with any organization outside of the One, Holy Apostolic and Catholic Church…. And by Catholic, I am not meaning the ‘Roman’ Church because she left her orthodoxy - officially - in 1054.
God was the Voice Creator of the Beginning.
As humans, we run into a problem when we try to use our human intellect and ignore what the Holy Spirit reveals about the Word.
Good description of the word .there are some sentences and words whose meaning only the Lord Jesus knows like word of God. Please read Revelation chapter 19 verses verses 12 and 13.it is written on he had a name written that no man knew but he himself and his name is called the Word of God. So how can we try to describe meaning of word of God when it's meaning only the Lord knows. Ephraim qaiser village Martinpur district Nankana Sahib Pakistan
It would be helpful if Bro. Bernard would do a video addressing using the name Jesus vs Yeshua. As oneness Pentecostals believe strongly in the importance of using the correct name (Col 3:7) especially in regards to baptism. There is a strong case being made the we are not using the same name used by the apostles. Not just a different pronunciation but a different name with a different meaning.
I don't think Jesus cares what language we say His name in.
ruclips.net/video/nT3kYjBe-J4/видео.htmlsi=7ldJg2wXblxDF6LR
@@Used777_07 Yeshua is not Jesus in Hebrew. ruclips.net/video/nT3kYjBe-J4/видео.htmlsi=7ldJg2wXblxDF6LR
Oneness are so close to the truth
Closer than the trinitarians who worship a false doctrine and pagan god
@@wjdyr6261 I agree that the Trinity is false
@@emmanuelmakoba6085 then what is missing or askew with the doctrine of one God or "oneness"?
@@wjdyr6261 It makes Jesus that one God. In reality, Jesus is the son of God and not God himself. God is simply the Father and his name is YHWH.
@emmanuelmakoba6085 so, Jesus is just a man? A sinful man with a sinful nature?
Jesus isn't God manifest in the flesh?
I want to ask Sir
Is the Word on John 1:1 is the God the Father?
Many NT scholars have argued that John's use of logos is best understood in its Greek pagan context, but more have been noticing its Jewish background in relation to the concepts of Wisdom and the Word of God (particularly the "memra" as it appears in the Aramaic Targums). In these contexts, the Word is God's self-revelation--the mediator between God and creation. Bernard covers this to some extent, but leaves out some relevant info that hurts his case.
In the Targums, when God walks in the Garden, it is actually the Word (Memra) of God who walks in the garden. When God created man in His likeness, the Targums tell us that is actually the Word of God who created man in his likeness. In second temple Judaism, rooted in what they found in the Hebrew Bible, the idea of two powers in heaven can be found in lots of places.
In sum, Bernard is simply wrong when he says that Jews would have never understood John to be saying that Jesus is "the second person."
But let's say John was stating a new idea that no one had yet believed. That's possible, right? Bernard asserting that John couldn't have been saying that because Jews didn't think that way (apart form being incorrect) is just begging the question. You can't just say, "you're wrong because Jews didn't think that way so let's make the text say something else" is just a bad faith argument. If we assume that John *could* be trying to say this, we should ask what words he would use if he was trying to communicate this idea. To me it's quite obvious that he would distinguish the Son from the Father while also identifying them as sharing in the same divine nature (John 1:1). He would say that the person of Jesus shared in God's glory before creation (John 17:5). He would say "in the beginning was the Word. And the Word was with God and the Word was God."
I don't want to get bogged down with Greek since there are likely lots of laymen in the comments, but I think we have to because Bernard hangs some major points on what he claims about it. Bernard mentions the phrase "pros ton theon" occurs in Hebrews where it means, roughly, "pertaining to God." In the accusative sense, pros has to do with something being toward a thing or intimate with a thing. A more literal translation of John 1:1 might be "the Word was toward God." There are places in the LXX and NT where this phrase has to do with something said to God (Gen 14:22), prayer made to God (Gen 20:17, Acts 12:5), prayers that rise up to God (Exod 2:23), being gathered against God (Numbers 16:11), a good conscience toward God (Acts 24:16), peace toward God (5:1), and Jesus returning to God (John 13:3). The sense of something pertaining to God is unusual. It occurs in Romans 15:17 and Hebrews 2:17. In both occurences, it is preceded by another word: a neuter accusative definite article (we only have on definitive article in English--"the") "ta." A more literal translation here would be "the toward the God." The word "things" is implied, so translators go with "the things pertaining to God." This article is missing in John 1:1.
It's also missing in John 1:2 where the phrase "pros ton theon" also occurs: "he was in the beginning with God." Would Bernard translate this verse, which occurs immediately after the one he's trying to rewrite, as "he was in the beginning pertaining to God?" Perhaps to be consistent he might try, but I suspect even he knows this would be incoherent.
Speaking of articles, he left out that the article appears before the first use of God, but not the second. This is important because it challenges his assertion that the Trinitarian reading uses equivocal definitions of "theos" (God). The lack of article following the verb for "was" suggests that John has a qualitative sense in mind: that Jesus was God in nature. If the article had been there, this might suggest what Bernard is arguing--that Jesus exhausted who God was. But it isn't. That's why Greek expert Daniel Wallace concludes from the language of this verse: "although the person of Christ is not the person of the Father, their essence is identical."
Bernard's reading that the Word is God's plan, and God's plan was there with Him, is such a tortured reading of the text to be incoherent--mere play and not serious exegesis.
I can’t say I know anything about Aramaic Targums… haha. But I did enjoy your reading your response. Your reference of the Greek expert - who concludes that the person of Christ God isn’t the same as the Father, but they are identically One in Essence - sounds a lot like what the Orthodox have long preserved in their understanding…. There are times in the Divine Liturgy where someone with a booming voice - declares something about hypostasis (sp) and One in Essence.
You are correct that there are many laymen present - and even in the rank and file of UPCI clergy - many have not received proper education outside of their UPCI context. Rarely would they consider an academic source outside of their sect.
Anyways, I appreciated your post and you have given me some things to consider. Lovingly, Cuthbert…. an Orthodox convert from modalism who dabbles in theology and soteriology…
God is Light and Jesus is God. 👇
1 John 1:5 This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, 👉that God is light,👈 and in him is no darkness at all. 👇
John 8:12 Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, 👉I am the light of the world:👈 he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life. 👇
John 1:5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.
The Greek reading of John 1:1
In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and God was the word.
How did God create? He spoke his word.
I have heard David Bernard talk about one’s “inner person” and how it survives after death and is conscious. Question: is this inner person of Jesus the person who is the person of the Son, or is this inner person the person who is the person of the Father?
That would be God and the human spirit of the son.
@@JoseTorres-qc4vc hi, so it would be the divine eternal person of the Father who incarnated, or would it be a human created person of the Son?
The only true God incarnated in the begotten Son. Col.2:9
@@JoseTorres-qc4vc i understand, but maybe I am not communicating clearly what I am asking. I am asking specifically about the non-material internal person in the physical body, is that the person of the Father or the person of the Son?
@@Mopar440HP both
In the beginning the word that rang out in the darkness was the speech of God. God said……..the word that rang out came from God and the one who said it was God. God was the word.
Is there a podcast on how the guy on the cross beside Jesus received salvation or was taken into paradise according to oneness Pentecostal
ruclips.net/video/fTSK0jpTZGs/видео.htmlfeature=shared
My understand the word paradise is the same as Abraham's Bosom. A holding place so to speak until the completion of the work of Christ. Many believe that no one could enter heaven until Jesus ascended into Heaven.
Also, we have no record saying that he wasn't baptized. Was it possible that in his repenting that he was baptized before the crucifixion?
@@hargisP2 - so the thief on the cross is commemorated in every Divine Liturgy… where the Faithful are reminded of his confession - ‘Remember me, O Lord, when thou comest into thy Kingdom’… is loudly chanted several times in the Divine Liturgy.
I don’t have to tell you that Protestant Thought and Roman Thought always align with Orthodox Thought…. Even the Orthodox Cross is shaped because of the thief on the Cross - choose wisely - the angled bar at the bottom - points to heaven and hell.
Unless I am mistaken, the thief is with Christ… because the Kingdom of God is now - and eternity is a perpetual state of nowness.
Regarding Baptism - there is no baptism recorded - and I don’t recall if the thief was Jewish or not in the Scriptures. In Orthodoxy, baptism is certainly part of the Christian Life… but in and of itself, it is not ‘salvation’. I know that baptism is hugely part of your soteriology. In Protestant circles they argue that baptism is a work. … and some may argue that the thief had no work… But I would argue… the cross was his work… and since Christ is God revealed to us in the Flesh - he certainly has the power to save, having mercy on whom he will have mercy.
Hope this helps - Lovingly, Cuthbert.
How will God judge those who fail to condemn genocide. Would he accuse them of being charlatans?
How will God judge those who try to hide their own sins by falsely accusing others?
Word is not "Son", and never referrs to a "second person"
Yet, in the Holy Scriptures we have the Son of God…. Son of Man… in the Gospels. And then there’s that whole bunch of Epistles who speak of the God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit…. That we would have to modify to fit the doctrine you’re presenting. Sorry. The exact wording of the New Testament is problematic with your argument.
The world is filled with false dichotomies. It's rarely one side has the whole truth, now choose.
- There is no Trinitarianism - one too many persons.
- There is no Unity in Unitarianism - missing one more person.
- The Godhead is two Persons who share one Spirit.
Old Covenant:
- In the beginning, two persons in one invisible holy Spirit - Almighty God and the Word of God.
- Jesus Christ, born on our finite timeline, ascends back into eternity (where He came from as the Word), and without the constraint of time or dimension, makes appearances as the angel of the LORD, for instance, in the Old Testament.
New Covenant:
- One of the two persons in the one invisible Spirit, the Word of God, becomes a visible man, the son of God, and Almighty God becomes a Father.
- This Son, Risen and Ascended, returned and reunited with the unseen, “unapproachable light” that is the Father - still an invisible Spirit. Jesus calls Him “the only true God” (John 17:3), because He's the one of the two persons who didn't change form (Php 2:6-8); He's still the original, immortal, invisible God.
God doesn't share His Glory with another. The Father and Son share the Glory. Only God is immortal - the Apostles all agreed the Father and the Son are the only possessors of immortality, they are eternal life itself. God is the invisible Light that no man has seen, except the Son (John 6:46) - because the Word was with Him in the beginning (John 1:1-2). Jesus is Almighty God's invisible light made visible to the world (Rev 21:23). If you have seen Jesus, you have seen the Father (2Cor 5:19). They are one - one Spirit.
1 Timothy 6:15-16 NASB95
… He who is the blessed and only Sovereign, *_the King of kings_* and Lord of lords,
[16] *_who alone possesses immortality and dwells in unapproachable light, whom no man has seen or can see._* To Him be honor and eternal dominion! Amen.
1 Timothy 1:17 KJV
Now *_unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God,_* be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen.
Revelation 19:13 KJV
And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: *_and his name is called The Word of God._*
Genesis 2:22 (NABRE) - "That is why a man leaves his father and mother and clings to his wife, and the two of them become one body."
Is there a church you're associated with, friend?
Read John 1 in the Geneva Bible it is quite different, I don't think Trinitarians today will like the way it reads, it favors Oneness theology.
So does the Greek. It could just as easily be translated "and God was the word."
Challenge accepted. As an Orthodox Christian, I went and read John 1 in the Geneva Bible. It did not read very much different as you suggested. I mean, him his and he… well the usage was limited… and oftentimes was changed to it and this… The lead into the start of John’s Gospel in the Geneva - clearly stated the Dogma of the Trinity… so… you can imagine I am sitting here on my deck during lunch break smiling.
All y’all must have a very different trinitarian belief you’re wrestling against that isn’t Orthodox…. Thanks for the good chuckle.
@@realmccoy124 you will never find three persons. Is that what you call the dogma of the trinity?
@@keithparker5625 - let’s reason together… you claimed that trinitarians wouldn’t like how John 1 reads in the Geneva Bible because ‘it favors the Oneness’… so I read it. I liked it… actually ❤ it… seems like you all a tripping on doubtful disputations…. When you’re wrong…might as go down in a blaze of our own glory … most Oneness folk do not know what they are tempting to speak against. They haven’t read it for themselves. Studied it for themselves. Examined it for themselves.
But they sure heard a whole lotta stuff about something… I mean, why would the nice looking man in a fancy suit yelling at me … ooo he’s anointed. What did he say? Standards. Oh. I missed something when I was emotional and in a tizzy.
@@realmccoy124 I'm sorry, what does that have to do with the discussion of oneness theology vs trinitarian dogma? Both the old and new testaments are clear that God is numerically one, particularly in regard to His person, not three. The word persons never is used in scripture to refer to God; only the singular word person.
In Acts 29, we see clearly concerning the Holy Ghost baptism - ‘with the initial evidence of speaking in other tongues’… else you haven’t received the Holy Ghost’ clause…. …. But, wait - aren’t there 28 chapters in Acts?!?! Yeah, but that’s just a technicality….
I don't quit understand your comment. If you are saying because it isn't in every chapter, that is not a defense against speaking in tongues as evidence. Other mentions on salvation is not mentioned in every chapter.
@@hargisP2 - I have stated… I am not against tongues. Tongues have their proper place AND skopos (function).
Many UPCIers will say ‘the plan of salvation’… then quote Acts 2:38… and oftentimes… they add ‘with the initial evidence of tongues’ concerning ‘gift of the Holy Ghost’.
This is an Pentecostaliciousness add-on . So. Like there is no - Acts 29… neither can we find a verse that says ‘with the initial evidence of speaking in other tongues…
Salvation is indeed in every chapter and in every verse. Sin is disfigurement. Sin diminishes us. Salvation isn’t merely belief…. Its root word means healing. If you look at it juridically, a legal transaction, your understanding misses the mark… every verse permits us to grow in understanding… to slowly lessen our own disfigurement and how we were diminished (by our own actions, or the actions of others)….
Searching the scriptures will bring us towards healing in the present world, while preparing us in the Age to come..
As a ‘trinitarian’ listening to Dr Bernard’s explanation of the Dogma of the Trinity, I would be confused as hades… How the good Dr Bernard speaks of his understanding of the ‘trinity’- is completely alien to the Truth Faith’s understanding of the Holy Trinity.
Majority of what Dr Bernard speaks of the Word of God - and the passages in John that he explains, agrees with the Orthodox fronema (mindset) - and the he starts with little twists and turns and I hear buzzing in my ears.
One God - and Godhead - we certainly have two words in Latin… two words in Greek… and two words in English. Deus/Divinitas…. Theos/Theoste…
In Hebrew, we have Yahweh Elohim, devar Yahweh… and Ruach Yahweh… the three have always been together and agree together…
The phrase ‘And we beheld His glory’ is a technical term in Hebrew… meaning tabernacle… which Dr Bernard briefly and correctly mentions. Yahweh [Elohim, devar, and ruach] the fullness of the theostes - dwelt or was tabernacled in Him - the Incarnate Christ.
I don’t think ‘Mind of God’ and ‘Word of God’ - are quite the same thing and most likely differ in word usage in the Greek…
I am presently reading a book by Father Thomas Hopko, of blessed memory, whose work is esteemed as one of the best Orthodox theologians and was a professor of dogmatic theology… the book is entitled, ‘The Names of Jesus’ - where Father Thomas explains the Orthodox teachings and understanding of God and His Godhead… as he explores things as Jesus as the Word… Jesus as God… Jesus as the Icon of God…. Etc… I think you will find the book helpful, not boringly academic, and most of all - you will hear what the Orthodox Church says of itself, rather than what someone outside of Orthodoxy says about ‘Her Teachings and Traditions.’
Trust you are well. Lovingly, Cuthbert.
Repent and be baptized in the Name of Jesus Christ and receive the Holy Ghost with the evidence of speaking in tongues as the Spirit gives the utterance
@@OneGodAlone - have you repented - and it’s a ‘one and done’ event? Or is repentance a continual journey from revelation to revelation … Faith to faith? You presume I do not know your doctrine… I do… probably better than most… did the Samaritans speak in tongues? Did Paul speak in tongues. Did Paul in the book of Acts in 20-something Chapter… state he spoke in tongues? Is tongues central to Paul’s soteriology… in Romans, Ephesians, Colossians, Thessalonians, Philippians … Is it central to 1 and 2 Peter, Hebrews Jude, and the general Epistles of John?
Show me a verse in Scripture that says - receive the Holy Ghost -- ‘with the initial evidence of speaking in other tongues’…. Because - the Holy Spirit, the LORD and Giver of Life, who spake by the Prophets - is not just ‘tongues’… and is beyond the Gifts of the Spirit -
So - I get it. Acts 2:38, Acts 8…. Acts 10…. Matthew 28:19 Luke 24:47 (?) and Mark 16… baptism.
How is Christian baptism different than Jewish Tevilah… and how was John’s Baptism different than Tevilah… and the folks that were Baptized by Jesus, who baptized more people than John…
@@OneGodAlone - you’ve wrongly added to the verse you’re quoting…. You’ve heard this preached from your pulpits. But. It’s an innovation.
@@realmccoy124 in regards to speaking in tongues Jesus stated :
Mark 16:16-18
He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. [17] And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; [18] They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.
Tongues are for a sign . Its not only evidence that one initially recieves the Spirit but it is also direct communication with God which can not be understood less one comes to interpret..
1 Corinthians 14:22 KJV
Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.
Acts 10:46-47
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?
Acts 2:4
And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.
@@OneGodAlone so there is two problems here. Firstly, the latter part of this chapter in Mark wasn’t always part of the canon…. So some will bring up that point… Like I said, I am not against tongues… but when you alter the Scriptures with this whole ‘initial evidence of speaking in other tongues’ … ‘you don’t have the Holy Ghost if you haven’t spoken in tongues’… Perhaps Pentecostals are likened to Roman Catholics - who always look for the Virgin Mary to give them a ‘sign’… which is unothodox btw - except Pentecostals are looking for tongues, tongues and more tongues… We do not see tongues in every conversion experience… we can pretend there are with the Samaritans, with the Ethiopian, with Paul….we can pretend Paul wrote to the Romans, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, Thessalonians… and that tongues were mentioned more in 1 and 2 Corinthians than just chapter 14 of 1 Cor…. We can pretend that Luke-Acts 2:38 - says “Repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins… and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost **with the initial evidence of speaking in tongues**…. Yes, vain imaginations rewrite Scripture.
Colossians 1:
16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.
19 For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;
20 And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.
Some of us know who the Word was. It's in Colossians 1: 15-20. When the time was right, the Word was born into the flesh to complete His mission on earth, He died to redeem Israel from the curse Israel incurred at Mt Sinai when they broke the blood covenant by erecting the golden calf.
The Word in the flesh was God's Son..Jesus reveals what His mission on earth was. Matthew 15:24. He instituted a renewed covenant for Israel prophesied in Jeremiah 31:31-34. He renewed the covenant at Calvary.This event at Calvary made it possible for all gentiles to receive salvation.
Jesus also proved that He was with the Father before the foundation of earth was laid. John 8:58 and 17:5
He went full circle from Colossians 1:15-20, John 1:1-18, and finally Psalms 110:1-4 where He awaits the Father's signal to return for His chosen.
This isn't rocket science, it's prophecy fulfilled and is pure Biblical.
The Word or Logos is the thought and prophetic mind of God
Jesus is the manifestation and personification of God the Father in human form. God the Father became his own Son
I would agree the Word or (Logos) is the mind of God. But, God didn’t “become” his own Son. You must understand the Son of God was a real authentic human being like us in every way except for sin. With the Son’s humanity and God’s nature being Spirit, there is a real distinction between the Father and Son and we must acknowledge this. Jesus prayed, praised, worshipped and submitted his will to his Father. Everything we must do to fulfill God’s will as a Christian, Jesus did. Everything Jesus did wasn’t a drama play, an act, or a show.
They were real. Therefore, with your assumption of God, becoming his own Son, you have God praying to himself, praising himself, crying to himself, submitting his will to himself. You also have God being born, and you have God dying. All of this ignores the Son (for who he truly is) that God gave.
@@ambrosesmith God the Father was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself. Was there another God in Christ?
Are you a unitarian?
I have to say - I am uncomfortable with your word usage of ‘God becomes his own Son’… because I can’t find this in Scripture… and I know this is how you state the Godhead… you say it a lot. I also have not heard the UPCI or a couple of other Oneness groups use this verbiage as you are stating…
God was in Christ … I accept. Becoming seems to open up the whole ‘created versus begotten’…. While aligning with the created position over the begotten position.
@@realmccoy124 which God was manifest in the flesh, according to 1 Tim 3:16?
@@wjdyr6261 - so… the Orthodox Study Bible has commentary on this passage - and states the Paul is quoting an early creed… or hymn of the Church, and the goes on to list out another such creed in 2Tim 2:11-13. It references chapter 6:15, 16. Ephesians 1:3-14, Philippians 2:6-11, Colossians 1:15-20….
The logos is the subject of the verses 1-14, but Jesus is only mentioned in verse 14. The logos is not a person in verses 1-13.
"The 'Word" in verse 14 is the same 'Word' spoken of in verses 1-13. How is it not?
It is a person.( 'him' v.3)
(him v.4) and v. 10 "He was in the world, and the world was made by him..." these masculine genders belong to 'Word' and clearly personify 'the Word.'
Then ofcourse John 1:14
"And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth."
Just beautiful.
Hallelujah Amen!!
@@audiodrink Greek is a language with grammatical gender, meaning that nouns have gender (masculine, feminine, neuter), and adjectives, articles, and pronouns must agree in gender, number, and case with the nouns they modify or refer to. In John 1, the pronouns refer back to 'logos,' which is masculine. Therefore, the pronouns are masculine.
Isaiah 55:11 states: "So shall My Word (דָּבָר, dabar) be that goeth forth out of My mouth: it shall not return unto Me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it."
Here, dabar is masculine in Hebrew, and similarly, this grammatical gender does not imply personhood but rather follows the rules of Hebrew grammar.
Incarnation and Personhood in John 1:14
The crucial transition in the understanding of the Logos as a person comes in John 1:14: "And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen His glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth."
Here, the Logos is explicitly identified with Jesus of Nazareth, a historical male figure. The term flesh (σάρξ, sarx) and the description of dwelling among humanity indicate a concrete incarnation, emphasizing that the Logos is not merely an abstract principle or impersonal force but has taken on human nature.
John 6:63 KJV
It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
John 4:23-24 KJV
But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him. [24] God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.
Interestingly, in spirit and in truth in this passage are NOT capitalized … the same way ‘God is Spirit’ is capitalized.
@@realmccoy124that’s because it’s speaking of your spirit ie. Your mind . You must worship HIM in mind
@@OneGodAlone - I am more than ‘mind’ - the totality of how I understand myself in God is framed by the first and Greatest Commandment and the knowledge I am created in the image of God… all the entirety of my being… and as long as I shall be - unto the Ages of Ages - I worship the One who calls me… I think we are warned of ‘foolish imaginations’…. So it’s not mind alone. I would have to exegete this passage more to ensure one isn’t taking things out of proper context.
@@realmccoy124 worship starts and stem from your mind . The mind is where God actually wants us to be transformed . He wants it to start in the mind. Yes of course your body will follow in worship , yes you have to present your bodies as a living sacrifice but transformation and worship starts in mind first.
Romans 12:2
And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.
Romans 7:25
I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.
@@OneGodAlone he will start to equivocate drastically when you bring up the spirit.
Why did the devil, who tried to tempt Jesus in the wilderness, say: (Luke 4:3) "And the devil said unto him, if thou be the Son of God, command this stone that it be made bread." And in verse 9, "And he brought him to Jerusalem, and set him on a pinnacle of the temple, and said unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down from hence" And Luke 8:28 - "When he saw Jesus, he cried out, and fell down before him, and with a loud voice said, What have I to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God most high? I beseech thee, torment me not".
Devils made reference to the Lord Jesus as "the Son of God". That's all we need to know, that Jesus was and is the Son of God most high. A theologian can try to break it down for his/her sense of revelatory superiority it gives them, but the Word says what it says, and no man should try to water it down.
In context, son means the flesh.. the body… if thou be the flesh/body/image of God… so in other ways he was saying if you’re God… Jesus that walked the earth was fully man and fully God at the same time…
@@BubbyLewis - stating that Jesus was fully God and fully man is Orthodox - and very trinitarian. Ancient of Days send down the Son of Man in the day of Visitation. And you are correct. Jesus was an actual human being - yet without sin. But if we’re looking at the Incarnate Word - the Anointed One - as just a piece of meat… something to lessen and weaken within our own theological constructs… and begin to look at it as a skopos - a function…. If we think of Jesus Christ as a ‘concept’…. Then we are missing the mark completely. Son of Man. Son of God. Christ. All the fullness of the Godhead [Logos, Pneumos, Sophos, Dynamis] dwelt in Christ Jesus… and we also see elsewhere - that God’s divine actions are fully expressed in Jesus Christ, the express eikon of God’s person.
@@realmccoy124 fortunately by the grace and revelation of God through the Holy Spirit, I don’t believe at all in the trinity😌 BUT.. I can see how people are easily confused.. it takes for God to reveal the truth to those that reject him as being one.. and what’s even worse is people unfortunately become very intellectual when trying to explain the falseness of trinity.. lol everyone wants to sound philosophical.. but 1 Corinthians 1:18, 1 Corinthians 1:27,,, and sadly 2 Corinthians 4:3-6… only time will tell.. I’d say just keep praying first and study next.. time will tell.. if God wants folks, he’ll draw em and give them understanding same as he did me and those that have the Holy Ghost.. understanding that God is one and his name is Jesus is indeed the best thing a person could ask for.. it ties everything scripturally together 😌 with 0 contradictions.. Matthew 28:19 ( in the NAME OF) the father, son and Holy Spirit.. that name is Jesus🔥 it’s singular😌 the NAME.. Acts 2:38🔑🔥 Acts 4:12.. and now we know Gods saving name given is Jesus.. well, it’s so many places😌 John 5:43, John 17:5-6 the son/flesh speaking to his own spirit… John 17:11, John 17:26, John 20:31,,, Hebrews chapter 1 full chapter BUT vs 4!!! Philippians 2:4:11.. 😌 it’s awesome.. he revealed the that saving name and exactly who he was all along.. 1 John 5:11-13.. Revelation 1:7-8, Revelation 1:17-18.. it’s so much more I could say.. but God has to reveal it, same as he did me🤙🏽
@@BubbyLewis - I do think it’s funny how others are confused and deceived in your own mind - because one is justified in your doctrine alone. If I am sound philosophical and intellectual in your assessment, then you’re wrong. I am being precisely who I am framed by God in his image. Perhaps it feels good to puff up and vaunt oneself against others in an attempt to take Christ God away from others … Like most offshoot religious from the True Faith - they retain enough of the original, but create innovations to make them stand apart from the True Faith. How do you know you are not akin to all the others who received special revelation. The Gnostics felt that way. The Arians felt it too. The Nestorians had a new spin on things too. The Sabellians had new / old way. The Montanists were the only ones that got it right…
How do you really examine that your specialness and revelation is of God? If you can’t attack the issue - attack the person… I get it. Intellectual and philosophical. Lovingly, Cuthbert
@@realmccoy124 how do I know? well the answer is simple really 😌 Ephesians 4:4-15 says it all.. One Lord, One Faith, and One Baptism🔥 and how else I know is 1 Corinthians 2:6-16… the same power that created this earth that we stand on is the same power that saves.. and that same power can inhabit those that believe.. and there is indeed a common ground for those that have tasted this power.. it’s far from a puff up from me.. I just know what I know.. not because of me, but because God THE FATHER in heaven who’s name is Jesus,, was gracious enough to reveal it to me and others that have the same Holy Ghost.. those that received it the same way (Acts 2:38) and experience the same signs (tongues etc)… so I guess lastly I’d say just keep studying but more importantly continue to seek the Lord Jesus Christ as I will too.. if he showed it to me and my other apostolic brothers and sisters, than he can show it to anyone.. that’s the thing about how powerful God is.. he has to show you.. it’ll never be just from us studying.. faith comes hearing and hearing of the word yes, but the other part is he has to drop that faith in you.. he has to give you the heart and mind to even want him.. he’s in full control 🔥 it’s awesome…
Is. 9:6 " For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace."
Multifactor authentication uses a combination of multiple/different ways to authenticate one's identity. God using a "name" always identifies a work He has done; or will do for mankind. Jesus Christ is the name assigned to redemption, refreshing, salvation, restitution,
and a host of many works from the beginning to the ending. After the ending, a new name will be revealed: Rev. 3:12 is when we finally know God's name.
The bicker over how many "persons" make up "God" is simply a tool of an adversary, whether, human or spirit. It only proves one thing, they need true understanding.
You’re quoting Is 9:6 in the KJV format. That passage does not read the same in the Greek. Handel’s Messiah wouldn’t sound as good if it were read in the Greek.
What is the Greek word for God… and the word Godhead. In Latin they are deus and divinitas.
Your conclusion to the matter is that folks need to come to ‘true understanding’… implies they must conclude as you have concluded.
But, the question then becomes, have you concluded correctly or not? Or perhaps, can anyone conclude correctly? And if so, is there agreement throughout Church history - or have we concluded with an innovation to the Faith and are changing things to match our own ‘logos’?
Trust you’re well. Lovingly, Cuthbert.
@@realmccoy124 Thank you for allowing me to capture your attention. I am not one to debate, I only teach. Isaiah 28: 14,15 identifies Constantine's
councils of Nicaea and it is self explanatory, making them falsehoods, and lies. God said so, not me. There is one God, and His name is yet revealed, but, His truth has been in Jesus Christ. And no king or government can change the bible to suit themselves. I will agree to be indoctrinated with a falsehood/lie is dangerous.
John was definitely trying to tell us that the Word was in fact the Son of God.
Please read the scriptures with me here as follows...
John 1:14
"And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth."
So beautiful to see how this connects us to John 3:16 in the King James Version through the use of the term "begotten."
And before you say "Word" in v. 1-13 was different than v. 14 and not a person or referring to Jesus...Not so. Read the text. Read John 1:1-14. Its plain as day. V.3 v.4 and v. 10 for example all assign a masculine gender to the Word. The Word is explained to be the creator of the world and the light sent into the world.
Amen!
The question asked based on Trinitarian thought : - What is the definition of the word God in verse John 1?
Is it the Trinity? Is it permissible to say that the Word was with the Trinity and the Word was the Trinity?!
Is it the Father or the Holy Spirit? Is it permissible to say that the Word was with the Father and the Word was the Father, or that the Word was with the Holy Spirit and the Word was the Holy Spirit?!
Is he the son? Is it permissible to say that the Word was with the Son?!
To understand the meaning, we must know the concept of the Apostle John. The opening of his Gospel is almost identical to the opening of the first Epistle, In the Gospel, he said with God, and in the Epistle he said with the Father. Therefore, God is the Father to the Apostle John.
That's why when he said the Word was God, he meant the Word was the Father
Hi Tariq - are you posing a question that properly aligns with ‘trinitarian thought’ - or are you presenting your argument on a faulty understanding of what you think is trinitarian thought … and you are slicing and dicing up a theological delight that is utterly distasteful? If you would truly like to understand what the Church teaches about the Faith - The Nicean Creed tells you precisely who God is…. Who the Son is…. And Who the Holy Spirit is…. Who the Church is…. And how there is One Baptism for the remission of sin - and the Resurrection from the dead and the Age to come.
The moment one’s dialogue starts to divide up the Godhead like a mathematical problem that can be easily solved … and explained away with our rational thinking … you have arrived at a theological precept that is utterly foreign to the Church - an innovation from the True Faith - and are on the same boat as the scholastics and revolters of Rome.
To answer your question about ‘is this permissible’ - the answer is no. It is not in agreement with an Orthodox fronema (mindset). Lovingly, Cuthbert.
@@realmccoy124
My dear brother, I know that Godhead is indivisible, but I want to understand with my Trinitarian brother what does he imagine with this sacred text?. How is the word God mentioned twice in the verse interpreted? Does the first time mean the Father, and the second time means the Son? What is your interpretation? And I helped you with what The Apostle John announces it according to his first Epistle
@@realmccoy124
1That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life; 2(For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;)
John said that the Word and Life is with the Father
So God He is defined by the Apostle as the Father, so when the verse says the Word was God then this means the Word is the Father.
@@tariqhaddad7298 - so. One God and godhead…. Deus and Divinitas… Theos and Theotes… Latin and Greek..
99 percent of the time - Father in the NT is YWHW (ego eimi in Greek)… when you see Word - with a capital W… there is Logos. The phrase ‘and we beheld his glory’ is a technical term in Hebrew …. The word Spirit is Pneumos… and the word Holy Spirit in Greek is the word holy (Haigia) … so the gift of the Holy Spirit in Acts 2:38 - is Haigia and Pneumos…. However it’s conjugated properly on the endings…
Like I said - Check out the Creed with Scripture references…. I am no expert…. But this is the universal symbol of the faith - it is recited in every Divine Liturgy so there’s no question what the Church teaches …. stpaulsirvine.org/the-creed-with-scriptural-references/
Trust you are well. Lovingly, Cuthbert.
@@realmccoy124
Depending on The Orthodox Creed
We believe in one God, God the Father, the Pantocrator
Do you know that Jesus or Son called Pantocrator also as mentioned in Revelation 1:8 Almighty in Greek origins is Pantocrator according to Strong’s 3841 (Παντοκράτωρ - Pantokratōr)
So who’s the Pantocrator The Father’s Person or The Son’s Person, or God is one Person as it mentioned in Hebrews 1: 3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person
What do Oneness apostolics find so distasteful about Jesus Christ, the Son of God, being a true separate entity, and Son of the Father? God can be whatever He chooses to be. God is One, and is sovereign and can find a way to restore humanity to Himself any way He wants, and that means whatever way He is, we must accept. Trinitarians and those who see two (Son and Father) all agree that God is One God. Just because we can't explain it, doesn't mean we want to believe in 3 Gods. If a Oneness teacher wants to be contentious and stubbornly insist that trinitarians want 3 gods, or 2 thrones, they are spinning their wheels. If they would just admit that the Godhead is at times difficult to grasp and allow the Holy Spirit to direct each believer when the read the word, which is a two-edged sword, has power to teach us, we'd all worship our God together and there would be no need to try to steal sheep and cause doctrinal wars.
As a believer in 3 persons, I don't see 3 Gods. I don't see 3 manifestations. Reading the gospels and epistles, I see the importance of believing on the Son of God, who has relationship with our heavenly Father. I see our heavenly Father have relationship with His Son. I just read scripture as it is recorded, believe that the Holy Spirit who called me, just like everyone, will comfort, edify and teach as He sees fit. All we need to know is that the Word of God was with God (John 1:2: The same was in the beginning with God". Why? Because it says so.
Were apostolic oneness teachers there when God created the world? Did they witness it? Do they understand what it means when it says that the Word was in the bosom of the Father? Our finite minds cannot fully understand this. John 1:18: "No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him".
Hi Jackie. Trust you’re well. If I recall correctly, weren’t you once part of the UPCI or like organization?
May I suggest a book? I am reading ‘The Names of Jesus’ by Father Thomas Hopko, of blessed memory. I have found it be refreshing and revealing profound truths of God… Coming from a Oneness background for 25 years, with 7 of those years a ‘Closeted Trinitarian’ - all the fears I had in my heart that God has slowly been unpacking with me… Father Thomas’ book has been a tremendous joy. I ordered it from Ancient Faith Store, an Orthodox website.
You really make some great points above. Be encouraged. Lovingly, Cuthbert.
Thanks for the reply and trust you're well also. Been in UPCI for 12 years, but have since been on a long church furlough, trying to regroup and find faith with those who love the gospel message, and who love the Word and love to spread the gospel message. I've concluded from scripture that the Son of God is everything the Bible describes and is NOT just a manifestation, but a true person, and I John 17:5 perfectly states this to me, "And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was."
I will definitely do my best to find and check out the book "The Names of Jesus". Appreciate the suggestion.
@@jackiet5334- so. Firstly, I hope the furlough hasn’t frazzled ya too much. When I finally left the organization, I didn’t set foot into any church for 7 years… and I honestly thought God hated me… most of my UPCIer friends reinforced that crazy notion…. Bless their hearts. Haha.
I went into the contemporary church setting… and got my footing again… and slowly unpacked a bunch of theological and soteriological baggage.
The Lord beckoned me to a solitary place…. And as my steps were ordered - I saw the Church in her fullness when I began to inquire of Holy Orthodoxy… long before I stepped into an Orthodox Church. I ultimately ended up in the Russian vein of Orthodoxy … after moving across country to Texas.
May I encourage you to ‘Come and See’ - and check out a Divine Liturgy…. Or perhaps using a Saturday evening service (Vespers) … it is a 180 from what I was accustomed to … and it was a Nazarene pastor who suggested, ‘why not try something entirely different’. Haha. And I am glad I did.
The book I recommended was by an Orthodox priest who hosted a call in podcast called Orthodoxy Life … Father Evan Armatas took over the call in show. I found the show really helpful.
To my surprise - there are a lot of UPCIers leaving the organization… as well as other Protestant types - and entering into the Orthodox Church.
Most Orthodox Churches hold services in English with other languages interspersed… for example, Old Church Slavonic, Arabic, Greek, Romanian…. Perhaps one is nearby for you to have a look see.
My parish is super loving - and the first rule of Orthodoxy - there is no coercion. Some parishes might not be so inviting… My priest is a convert - he was an Anglican priest for many years before becoming an orthodox priest…
Wear sensible shoes… haha. Most churches stand the entire service. And it is general courtesy to be modest while in the temple - for ladies it’s skirts or dresses… and in some cases, women wear a head covering … but I don’t think you should be pressured by anyone.
What are your thoughts? Have you considered visiting an Orthodox parish? If you have any questions - I’ll be around unless they ban me.
I am not in love with a ‘mode’ or a ‘manifestation’…. I am in love with Jesus Christ - I think it’s wonderful you have come to that understanding…. I was talking with my wife this evening about you as we were driving to our friend’s new home. Be encouraged. Lovingly, Cuthbert.
@@realmccoy124 Thank you and your dear wife for those thoughtful sentiments. My husband and I are both in a waiting to cross the Jordan moment........hoping we will hook up with like-minded believers as God calls. Feel terribly depressed from the let-down of all those years of zeal and excitement, only to find out some of that zeal was really a need for a spiritual family. Felt like we had to allmost 'pledge' that we denied the trinity, well at least that is how I felt. The pastor idolatry (touch not mine anointed) is so thick and western apostolic churches are too preoccupied with gaining favor with the world. I've almost concluded that we'll just be unchurched, but believe, and hope to be an encouragement to others until our end. I can't see a way out of my health issues and have lost the need for fellowship. We also do not live in a habitable area, where winter dominates here. Pensioners too and we can't travel, so there is that. Appreciate you so, and pray you find that joy of the Lord, in spite of the interesting dialogue with everyone here. God bless you!
A more accurate Oneness understanding includes the Logos being the VISIBLE EXPRESSION of the omnipresent, invisible Spirit. Instead of two God persons, Gods visible form. The form was with the invisible Spirit. The form/logos became flesh at Bethlehem. All the rest of the omnipresent Spirit stayed where he/it always was. Thats how God was manifest in the flesh.
The form of God became the form of man. Only the form/logos changed. Jesus stayed being YAH as omnipresent spirit while taking on the human nature simultaneously. Jesus is both God and man. Not a Godman but God in one mode of being and man in another. A dual nature. 1 Tim. 2:5 reveals One God and one man. Not 2 God persons. It both Jesus.
Isiah 43:10>11 kjv. Luke 23:39>40 kjv . All jews even the thief on the cross knew jesus was GOD in the flesh. All jews believe in one GOD.
Bernard is half right. When he says John wanted to show his audience who Jesus, Bernard overlooks that John said this:
but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name. John 20:31.
John never wanted his audience to believe that Jesus is God..
He's both God and Christ. John shows this also
"John never wanted his audience to believe that Jesus is God.." Read John 8:56-59 and try again.
Who do you think Christ is? Christ is God . Remember Christ was that Rock that followed the children of Israel in the wilderness .
1 Corinthians 10:4
And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.
So when it says “Christ” that’s speaking of Divine & when it’s says “Son of God” that’s speaking of the Flesh
@user-mw5wd2gd5u You are so mistaken. To say that makes Jesus say he is the God of Israel. Moreover, if you are right, how do you explain Paul saying there is one God and one Lord. So I guess they are the same person according to you..
I’m pretty sure John absolutely did want his audience to believe that. John 20: 26 And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you.
27 Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.
28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.
🤔🤔⬆️
No.
The Word is not a thing 'pertaining to God.' The scripture is plain and clearly shows us that the Word is Jesus who is the Son of God.
Therefore...The Son was with the Father.
I'll be honest, with your explanation, it's almost the perfect example of the trinity....
You must not know what the trinity is. There are many people who say they believe in a trinity yet they actually believe in oneness. There is a clear difference.
@@revamp6612 agreed, and John 1:1 is the perfect example of a clear distinction between God and Jesus.
@@governor7203 explain how that is a clear “distinction between God and Jesus”???🤷🏽♂️
Where is the third person mentioned? The Greek reading of John 1:1
In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and God was the word.
How did God create? He spoke his word. You are seeing words that are not there.
@@hargisP2 trinitarian seem to forget their 3rd person often. 🤦🏽♂️
The Word and Creation:
John 1:1
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Correct interpretation:
1 In the beginning was the Word (of Jesus), and the Word was with God (Jesus), and the Word was God (Jesus).
14 And the Word (Jesus) was made flesh, and dwelt among us,
It's not Jesus the son of God.
The word of God says there is none other name under Heaven given among men whereby we must be saved.
Now if we can all agree that there's only one name to be saved by.
I'm sure we all can agree that the son's name is Jesus,
And if there's only one name to be saved by by default the father's name is also Jesus,
And Jesus said unto us a son is given, unto us a son is born and the government shall be upon his shoulders, and his name Shall be Called wonderful, counselor, the Prince of Peace, the Mighty God, the Everlasting father.
Jesus in the word of God, calls himself the Everlasting father, and I'm not going to argue with that.
@scottchapman9931 there is no such thing as the preexisting of the son of God. And yes Jesus is the son of God 100%. Predestination yes, preexisting of the son of God, No.
@Benjamin-yq5nc Jesus said, before Abraham I am.
Jesus also said I am the first and the last, the beginning and the end, the Alpha and the Omega.
And Jesus said I am the fullness of the godhead bodily.
And Jesus said there is no other beside me.
@scottchapman9931
Sorry, you truly do not know your scriptures.
You are believing in Catholic dogma. There is no trinity, maybe one day you'll snap out of it. Oh Israel your God is ONLY ONE! NOT THREE IN ONE.
@Benjamin-yq5nc I agree Trinity is not in the Bible neither by word or concept, Jesus said I, and my father are one.
Regarding JOHN 1:1-3 etc, author of the gospel according to John COPIED the doctrine of LOGOS from PHILO, a Jewish philosopher who was NOT a Christian.
This ANCIENT GREEK PAGAN MYTH LOGOS concept introduced by Philo ALREADY EXISTED decades within the Greek pagan world BEFORE the Gospel of John first appeared.
The author of John LIKED the GREEK PAGAN THEOLOGY concept so he presented it as the "Inspired from God/Word of God".! of JOHN 1:1-3
FUNNY how PLAGIARISED material depicting ancient PAGAN Greek myth theology be considered 'Word Of God' by Christians?
DEUTERONOMY 4:2;
"Do NOT ADD to WHAT I COMMAND you & Do NOT SUBTRACT from it, but KEEP the COMMANDS of d Lord yr God...".
You forgot verse 1. You might understand what deut 4 is talking about.
@@revamp6612
It's about obedience to the COMMANDMENTS of the Only True God / keeping the LAW of MOSES.
Even Jesus himself said that he came NOT to destroy BUT to KEEP the Law of Moses :
Matthew 5:17-18
17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I HAVE NOT COME TO ABOLISH THEM BUT TO FULFILL THEM.
18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.
But Christians follow the teaching of Paul INSTEAD of Jesus.
For example, the Christian churches and homes are full of such graven image and statues which goes against the commandments.:
Exodus 20:4
4 “You shall NOT MAKE for yourself an IMAGE in the FORM of ANYTHING in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below.
@@amwahid6963 yes to fulfill the law. Meaning to “complete” Jesus did that. He was the final and true sacrifice for sins. the sacrifice as required by the law for sins. Don’t get me wrong this doesn’t mean we can live however we want or do what ever we please. Jesus fulfilled and completed the law for us.
Your example was not a good example I’m not sure what church you are talking about?
@@revamp6612
As per Matthew 5:17, Jesus FULFILLED or OBEYED the LAW of Moses.
Again for example, in FOLLOWING the Law of Moses, Jesus was circumcised & Jesus didn't eat pork.!!
BUT you Christians DO NOT FOLLOW Jesus or the COMMANDS of Jesus.
INSTEAD, Christians follow the teachings of Paul - Christians are NOT CIRCUMCISED and Christians EAT PORK.!
Even when Jesus himself had said in Matthew 5:18, "For truly I tell you, UNTIL HEAVEN AND EARTH DISAPPEAR, NOT the smallest letter, NOT the least stroke of a pen, WILL BY ANY MEANS DISAPPEAR from the Law......"
🔹Meaning the Law of Moses should be OBSERVED & FOLLOWED FOREVER.!
@@revamp6612
The Scribes & the early Church Fathers plus the Greek Emperors CORRUPTED & CONCOCTED the Bible in order to infused the ancient Greek pagan theology of Human Blood Sacrifice, Trinity Doctrine, God having a son, Cruxifiction & Resurrection, etc. into Christianity.
🔺Why would a loving and all powerful God require the killing of an innocent human & blood sacrifice in order to forgive sins.?
According to Isaiah 55:6-7, God CAN FORGIVE SINS WITHOUT THE KILLING OF AN INNOCENT MAN & BLOOD SACRIFICE. !!!
Isaiah 55:6-7;
6 Seek the Lord while he may be found;
call on him while he is near.
7 Let the wicked forsake their ways
and the unrighteous their thoughts.
Let them TURN TO the Lord, and HE WILL HAVE MERCY on them, and to our God, for HE WILL FREELY PARDON.
Some errors with this teaching.
Let me help.
Jesus is the Son of God.
God the Father in Heaven sent His actual Son Jesus to Earth to save us. Jesus is the Son of God. He is not His own father.
Dueteronomy 6:4 still works if you accept that we cannot understand everything about God.
God doesn't ask us or even enable us to understand Him completely but to TRUST AND believe in Him.
There are mysteries brothers.
We have to stay humble and accept that.