3 in 1 - I'M MORE ONENESS THAN YOU ARE ...

[sola gratia]

well - JESUS was not yet glorified when Thomas saw HIM, and he called HIM GOD, though he was resurrected - not glorified - When JESUS was body - he called HIMSELF the "I AM" - the body says the fullness of the GODHEAD was in him bodily - so I cannot agree with that

in relation to him not being in forms of "distinction" now - Not sure how you can state that

1Co 15:24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.
1Co 15:25 For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet.
1Co 15:26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.
1Co 15:27 For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him.
1Co 15:28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.


This is a futuristic event yet to happen -so I must contend the distinctions at least exist in the now

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

If we ignore him, will he stop talking?

I think he is looking for a talk show to host!
He's getting experience on this forum.

[SDG]

TB .... silences his critics ....

It goes back to the role of the Holy Spirit as a servant and the means by which God raised up Jesus from the dead. I think you're intelligent enough and know the Bible well enough to know that there is a distinction made between Father, Son, and Holy Ghost

[SDG]

Brett Prince weighs in on TB's original statement:

At times, TB, I think I get a glimpse of what you are saying, but this statement throws me.

I see that God is a Spirit. That is His substance. His nature is holy. Thus God is A Holy Spirit. There is none than can approach until His holiness, nor His magnitude and power, thus we establish absolute the definite article "the," and describe God as The Holy Spirit. I see no distinction there. I see FAR MORE distinction when I look at Jesus Christ because of the flesh aspect, but consider that God's Word was manifest or BECAME flesh to be observed by humankind.

[Neck]

Originally Posted by BoredOutOfMyMind

You make less and less sense than in the first post.

HOW can you be "more Oneness" than anyone?

Maybe He can define it more clearly. Many Oneness folks are Oneness by association not revelation.

I know when I share the truth the folks that have been Oneness for 30 years get a blank look.

Nathan Eckstadt

[SDG]

RRFord admits to distinctions:

Indeed there are distinctions between Father, Son and Holy Ghost. Just not some of the distinctions being alluded to be some posters.

If we are saying there are 3 persons, with all that entails, then we leave distinctions behind and enter into trinitarian theology. However, if we say distinctions, and realize there is but one God manifest in different ways then we have a good basic understanding of the Godhead.

[rrford]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

TB .... silences his critics ....

Daniel, believe it or not context is important. It is quite ridiculous to paste a post from another thread here without any context to support it. All you are doing is confusing the issue and driving your post count up. Neither of which means a whole lot.

Further, you are entitled to your opinion that his post silenced his critics. I disagree wholeheartedly. But of course, I am learning that you do not understand the real means of topical debate and conversation. Carry on.

[rrford]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

RRFord admits to distinctions:

DUH! Big red truck!

Who in their right mind would not admit to distinctions?

[SDG]

Originally Posted by rrford

Daniel, believe it or not context is important. It is quite ridicualous to paste a post from another thread here without any context to support it. All you are doing is confusing the issue and driving your post count up. Neither of which means a whole lot.

Further, you are entitled to your opinion that his post silenced his critics. I disagree wholeheartedly. But of course, I am learning that you do not understand the real means of topical debate and conversation. Carry on.

I think your post speaks for itself RR.

[SDG]

Originally Posted by rrford

DUH! Big red truck!

Who in their right mind would not admit to distinctions?

Some posters in this thread have already expressed that some OPs are not comfortable with making distinctions.