Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: Oneness Godhead view versus Trinitarian

  1. #1
    Tom Boots
    Guest

    Default Oneness Godhead view versus Trinitarian

    I believe we need a separate discussion to discuss this idea versus having one started in the Achilles heal post.
    Oneness hold God is one, that God is Lord and there is only One Lord, that God is eternal, invisible, omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent.
    That God is Spirit, God begot a son, God made this son of a Woman, God made this son in time under the Law.
    That God was in Christ the Son, the body, his tabernacle of flesh.
    That God's express image is the Son, that the Son was a man of flesh and bones, that the Son was not God, for the Son was a visible seen man and scripture says No man hath seen God at anytime, and this jaws after the incarnation of the Son.
    I hold Jesus has two natures as Spirit he is God as flesh he is the man Christ the anointed of God, the Son.
    Last edited by Tom Boots; 06-06-2013 at 11:02 AM.

  2. #2
    Tom Boots
    Guest

    Default

    Dealing with important texts.
    JOHN 1:1 Trinitarian view shot down if God is what they say he is.
    "IN THE BEGINNING WAS THE WORD AND THE WORD WAS WITH GOD AND THE WORD WAS GOD"
    If God is as Trinitarians who have forced this view on men say he is, then the passage should read and they have some explaining to do as follows...
    "IN THE BEGINNING WAS THE WORD AND THE WORD WAS WITH the Trinity AND THE WORD WAS the Trinity."
    They say to us God is the Father there, so!...
    "IN THE BEGINNING WAS THE WORD AND THE WORD WAS WITH the Father AND THE WORD WAS the Father."
    That is a Trinitarian problem if I say so.
    Then there is the persons problem that they are not making up one God, but rather three and two of them are here and one missing.
    "In the beginning was the person and th person was with another person and the person was the other person."

    Trinitarians must insert ideas into the text, not follow that the Greek word LOGOS has a broader meaning than our English.
    It is not persons, Son, but what LOGOS means , idea, thought as in the mind of God, expression which can be AS ORIGINALLY VIEWED HERE AS IDEA, TO BEING SPOKEN, TO AS WELL BEING ABLE TO BE WRITTEN, TO IN TIME BEING MADE FLESH AND COME ALIVE.

    Apostolic Oneness do not believe God is three beings, persons, en*t*i*t*ies, individuals and thereby being three god, which Trinitarian Jimmy Swaggart said is like sheep, one could say one sheep, two sheep, three sheep, which means you people hold to three god.

    next text Gen. 1:26-27 after this discussion.

  3. #3
    RealFakeHair
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Boots View Post
    Dealing with important texts.
    JOHN 1:1 Trinitarian view shot down if God is what they say he is.
    "IN THE BEGINNING WAS THE WORD AND THE WORD WAS WITH GOD AND THE WORD WAS GOD"
    If God is as Trinitarians who have forced this view on men say he is, then the passage should read and they have some explaining to do as follows...
    "IN THE BEGINNING WAS THE WORD AND THE WORD WAS WITH the Trinity AND THE WORD WAS the Trinity."
    They say to us God is the Father there, so!...
    "IN THE BEGINNING WAS THE WORD AND THE WORD WAS WITH the Father AND THE WORD WAS the Father."
    That is a Trinitarian problem if I say so.
    Then there is the persons problem that they are not making up one God, but rather three and two of them are here and one missing.
    "In the beginning was the person and th person was with another person and the person was the other person."

    Trinitarians must insert ideas into the text, not follow that the Greek word LOGOS has a broader meaning than our English.
    It is not persons, Son, but what LOGOS means , idea, thought as in the mind of God, expression which can be AS ORIGINALLY VIEWED HERE AS IDEA, TO BEING SPOKEN, TO AS WELL BEING ABLE TO BE WRITTEN, TO IN TIME BEING MADE FLESH AND COME ALIVE.

    Apostolic Oneness do not believe God is three beings, persons, en*t*i*t*ies, individuals and thereby being three god, which Trinitarian Jimmy Swaggart said is like sheep, one could say one sheep, two sheep, three sheep, which means you people hold to three god.

    next text Gen. 1:26-27 after this discussion.
    Some one once told me to stop beating the dead horse, but I kept doing it anyway.
    Then one day I realized I was the horse, and stopped.

  4. #4
    Senior Member MacG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    961

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Boots View Post
    Dealing with important texts.
    JOHN 1:1 Trinitarian view shot down if God is what they say he is.
    "IN THE BEGINNING WAS THE WORD AND THE WORD WAS WITH GOD AND THE WORD WAS GOD"
    If God is as Trinitarians who have forced this view on men say he is, then the passage should read and they have some explaining to do as follows...
    "IN THE BEGINNING WAS THE WORD AND THE WORD WAS WITH the Trinity AND THE WORD WAS the Trinity."
    They say to us God is the Father there, so!...
    "IN THE BEGINNING WAS THE WORD AND THE WORD WAS WITH the Father AND THE WORD WAS the Father."
    That is a Trinitarian problem if I say so.
    Then there is the persons problem that they are not making up one God, but rather three and two of them are here and one missing.
    "In the beginning was the person and th person was with another person and the person was the other person."

    Trinitarians must insert ideas into the text, not follow that the Greek word LOGOS has a broader meaning than our English.
    It is not persons, Son, but what LOGOS means , idea, thought as in the mind of God, expression which can be AS ORIGINALLY VIEWED HERE AS IDEA, TO BEING SPOKEN, TO AS WELL BEING ABLE TO BE WRITTEN, TO IN TIME BEING MADE FLESH AND COME ALIVE.

    Apostolic Oneness do not believe God is three beings, persons, en*t*i*t*ies, individuals and thereby being three god, which Trinitarian Jimmy Swaggart said is like sheep, one could say one sheep, two sheep, three sheep, which means you people hold to three god.

    next text Gen. 1:26-27 after this discussion.
    When I wrote ""In the beginning was Jesus, and Jesus was with Jesus, and Jesus was Jesus. Jesus was in the beginning with Jesus.""

    You said "Smartmouth huh?" I guess that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery
    "Said I'm not what I ought to be, but I'm better, better than I used to be, I'm gettin better all the time" - Blind Boys of Alabama Ephesians 4:22-24 NASB ..."that, in reference to your former manner of life, you lay aside the old self, which is being corrupted in accordance with the lusts of deceit, and that you be renewed in the spirit of your mind, and put on the new self, which in the likeness of God has been created in righteousness and holiness of the truth"

  5. #5
    Tom Boots
    Guest

    Default

    Where was or is this post, I don't remember it and searched for it.
    It may be I did, but maybe something else was said in the post that I was referring to.

  6. #6
    Senior Member MacG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    961

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Boots View Post
    Where was or is this post, I don't remember it and searched for it.
    It may be I did, but maybe something else was said in the post that I was referring to.
    http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/showthread.php?3100-John-1-1-real-problems-in-there-for-Trinitarians
    "Said I'm not what I ought to be, but I'm better, better than I used to be, I'm gettin better all the time" - Blind Boys of Alabama Ephesians 4:22-24 NASB ..."that, in reference to your former manner of life, you lay aside the old self, which is being corrupted in accordance with the lusts of deceit, and that you be renewed in the spirit of your mind, and put on the new self, which in the likeness of God has been created in righteousness and holiness of the truth"

  7. #7
    Tom Boots
    Guest

    Default

    So it was not as you posted.

    Trinies are always trying to insert a idea Or a different idea than what is In the text.
    Son for Word, Jesus for Word, person for Word.

    In the beginning was the Logos/Word and the Logos/Word was pertaining to/with God [not a part of God], and the Logos/Word was THAT God.

    There is no divisions of God as God the Father the first person of the Trinity and God the Son the second person and the missing third Trinity bird god person the God the Holy Ghost.

    Trinitarians cannot stick to the same idea of God each and every time, they must change the definition to fit the text.

    God is not separate beings or persons as three sheep, each called god.
    Last edited by Tom Boots; 06-07-2013 at 11:31 AM.

  8. #8
    Tom Boots
    Guest

    Default

    If you don't want to hear, see this why come on the board that is here to discuss such differences in the true church from that of the false Trinity church?

    But I will be glad to discuss any Catholic Trinity idea that is in error and against scripture and the Trinity church and Oneness church history.

  9. #9
    Senior Member MacG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    961

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Boots View Post
    So it was not as you posted.
    Here this is the link http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/s...l=1#post145022
    "Said I'm not what I ought to be, but I'm better, better than I used to be, I'm gettin better all the time" - Blind Boys of Alabama Ephesians 4:22-24 NASB ..."that, in reference to your former manner of life, you lay aside the old self, which is being corrupted in accordance with the lusts of deceit, and that you be renewed in the spirit of your mind, and put on the new self, which in the likeness of God has been created in righteousness and holiness of the truth"

  10. #10
    Tom Boots
    Guest

    Default

    You did take out of context my post.
    It was not calling you smart mouth for saying...
    ""In the beginning was Jesus, and Jesus was with Jesus, and Jesus was Jesus. Jesus was in the beginning with Jesus.""

    It was for the latter part of the post...
    THE PART OF THE PLIERS AND TEETH.

    Now you see two persons as people in the verse, Trinitarians are always wanting to make a person the Word and God who is with another person and God, and want it to be One God and plural beings making up such.

    It is not person, god, being, Son as the Word, for the Word was not in the beginning the Son, but the Word in time was made flesh, became real after being ideal.

    So you need to 19 relook at what I was referring to about what you said fully and 2) not try and insert Jesus for Word in John 1:1 and have it as Jesus with Jesus.
    It would be the LOGOS with Jesus, the Word of Jesus and that it pertained to God as his own Spirit and then later in time became flesh.

  11. #11
    Tom Boots
    Guest

    Default

    Was taken out of context what I was referring to as being smartmouth though, se the other post in this thread dealing with it.

  12. #12
    kjos013
    Guest

    Default

    POST Deleted
    Last edited by kjos013; 06-10-2013 at 03:20 PM.

  13. #13
    Tom Boots
    Guest

    Default

    Nope, I am Tom Boots from Walter Martin board, what is CARM?
    I am a Apostolic Oneness Pentecostal.

  14. #14
    kjos013
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Boots View Post
    Nope, I am Tom Boots from Walter Martin board, what is CARM?
    I am a Apostolic Oneness Pentecostal.
    My sincere apologies for thinking that,I was thinking that you were someone
    familiar on that board. CARM(Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry) is another message board in a format very similar to this.

  15. #15
    Tom Boots
    Guest

    Default

    Nope, no problem, I didn't know you said anything to get the post deleted for.
    I think the problem is Trinitarians don't understand that Oneness have and hold the same doctrine, it is not like Trinitarians , who can be all over the place on issues, we believe in and teach Jesus as God and as the Son of God.
    We all hold Jesus name baptism the same and For the majority the baptism with the Holy Ghost with tongues , some vary on Holiness standards a bit, but still adhere to most of the same principles, Trinitarians are divided on so many things.
    So I can understand you thinking we are the same person many times.

  16. #16
    Super Moderator alanmolstad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    8,911

    Default

    unity on who Christ is......diversity on the life we walk to him...is far better than the other way around.

  17. #17
    Super Moderator alanmolstad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    8,911

    Default

    The Oneness teachings are error....
    From the Forum RULES : "As you know, the Walter Martin website takes the position that Mormon theology is not Christian theology. Use of the term "LDS Christian" is inaccurate and misleading, and as such is not acceptable on this board."

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •