As an Apostolic, are you of the Jesus Only Movement?

[COOPER]

Are you Jesus Only?
We are one God, and his name is Jesus.
Am I confused here ?
I thought "The Jesus only" were a different crowd not UPC.
17 years in the UPC, I was tought to be called Jesus only was a bad thing and that we are not them.
Although because we are oneness and Baptize in the name of Jesus; were are labeled with that crowd of "The Jesus only."
Here is a view of Jesus Only at this link:
http://www.spiritualabuse.org/experi...y_sanders.html

[COOPER]

Why Jimmy Sanders = Would Not Be A Good Member Of The United Pentecostal Church

Reason 1. I could not deny the existence of God the Father. UPC teaches Jesus as the Father. This is dividing Christ Jesus into Divine being the Father, Human being as the Son. scriptures: I John 5:7, John 14:28, Philippians 2:6.{Jesus Only}

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by COOPER

Why Jimmy Sanders = Would Not Be A Good Member Of The United Pentecostal Church

Reason 1. I could not deny the existence of God the Father. UPC teaches Jesus as the Father. This is dividing Christ Jesus into Divine being the Father, Human being as the Son. scriptures: I John 5:7, John 14:28, Philippians 2:6.{Jesus Only}

This guy is confused. There is a God the Father just as there is a Son of God. We do not deny the existence of God the Father. That's asinine. That's like saying we are atheists. We deny the distinction between God and the Son is that of person and we deny there are two persons and an eternally existing Son

Originally Posted by Praxeas

This guy is confused. There is a God the Father just as there is a Son of God. We do not deny the existence of God the Father. That's asinine. That's like saying we are atheists. We deny the distinction between God and the Son is that of person and we deny there are two persons and an eternally existing Son

The Son is not eternally existing?

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by hammondb3klingon1

The Son is not eternally existing?

Yes? How is that funny or wrong as far as OP doctrine goes? Oneness teaches the Son did not exist as the Son until the incarnation when God was ontologically united with a human nature....the hypostatic union

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Yes? How is that funny or wrong as far as OP doctrine goes? Oneness teaches the Son did not exist as the Son until the incarnation when God was ontologically united with a human nature....the hypostatic union

NO oneness doctrine does NOT teach that. Some oneness authors teach that but oneness doctrine does not teach that because that is NOT true/biblical

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by COOPER

Why Jimmy Sanders = Would Not Be A Good Member Of The United Pentecostal Church

Reason 1. I could not deny the existence of God the Father. UPC teaches Jesus as the Father. This is dividing Christ Jesus into Divine being the Father, Human being as the Son. scriptures: I John 5:7, John 14:28, Philippians 2:6.{Jesus Only}

Invite him here.

[theoldpaths]

Originally Posted by COOPER

Why Jimmy Sanders = Would Not Be A Good Member Of The United Pentecostal Church

Reason 1. I could not deny the existence of God the Father. UPC teaches Jesus as the Father. This is dividing Christ Jesus into Divine being the Father, Human being as the Son. scriptures: I John 5:7, John 14:28, Philippians 2:6.{Jesus Only}

1 John 5:7 - This verse is now recognized as being a later "insertion" and all recent versions of the Bible, such as the Revised Standard Version the New Revised Standard Version, the New American Standard Bible, the New English Bible, the Phillips Modern English Bible ...etc. have all unceremoniously expunged this verse from their pages.

1 John 5:7 - The scripture translator Benjamin Wilson explains: "This text concerning the heavenly witness is not contained in any Greek manuscript which was written earlier than the fifteenth century. It is not cited by any of the ecclesiastical writers; not by any of early Latin fathers even when the subjects upon which they treated would naturally have lead them to appeal to it's authority. It is therefore evidently spurious."

1 John 5:7 - did not appear in Erasmus's first 2 editions of the Textus Receptus (TR - also known as the Received Text); but because of pressure put on him from the Catholic Church because of a fragment they supplied, he included it in the 3rd edition; incidentally, it was later found out that that fragment was fabricated by the Catholics for Erasmus to include it in the 3rd edition

1 John 5:7 - Wikipedia discusses the addition - Comma Johanneum - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comma_Johanneum

[Tim Rutledge]

I'm Jesus only.

[jaxfam6]

Originally Posted by Tim Rutledge

I'm Jesus only.

Bible says that in him dwells the fullness of the Godhead bodily.
They can call me Jesus only all they want
They can mean it any way they want
I know in whom I love, live, and serve.