NT verses about who Jesus was/is

[BCsenior]

I just solved your problem ...

All you need to do is change your denomination's name to:
Old Testament Oneness.
Then, you will be more believable.

[Costeon]

Originally Posted by BCsenior

Excellent question

No, I don't recall any, but of course that doesn't mean there aren't any.

In John, I see the Father sending the Holy Spirit,
so at least They do communicate!

I couldn't recall any either, so I did some searching just to confirm, and there aren't any. The Holy Spirit never speaks to the Father, and there are no explicit examples where the Father is speaking to the Spirit. The sending language you mention really doesn't seem to be anything like what we observe occurring between the Father and Son and can reasonably be interpreted to fit with the Oneness view. An obvious interpersonal relationship only occurs between the Father and Son and, therefore, the simplest way to interpret that is that the relationship is the result of the incarnation and not a multipersonal nature of God.

[Costeon]

Originally Posted by BCsenior

I just solved your problem ...

All you need to do is change your denomination's name to:
Old Testament Oneness.
Then, you will be more believable.

In Scripture, Jews never believed in a multipersonal God. The Old Testament does not teach that God is a trinity of divine persons. If God is a trinity, none of God’s people before the Christian era understood this. None of the prophets understood this. Abraham, Moses, David were all ignorant of God’s basic nature.

It’s inconceivable that a new revelation about, of all things, the nature of God would not be explicitly stated in the NT. Jesus could say things like “you have heard it said . . . but I say to you.” Paul is very plain in explaining the differences in the new covenant regarding the marks of the old covenant, like circumcision, sabbath, and food laws. What is new is explained. Yet no one gives a simple unambiguous statement to the effect, “God’s people worshiped a unipersonal God in the past; but now it has been revealed that he is multipersonal.”

Short of an explicit statement to the contrary, we should assume that the Jews did in fact understand the nature of the one God, and so all teaching about the the nature of God and the person of Christ have to begin with and harmonize with the OT revelation of the one God.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Costeon

In Scripture, Jews never believed in a multipersonal God. The Old Testament does not teach that God is a trinity of divine persons. If God is a trinity, none of God’s people before the Christian era understood this. None of the prophets understood this. Abraham, Moses, David were all ignorant of God’s basic nature.

It’s inconceivable that a new revelation about, of all things, the nature of God would not be explicitly stated in the NT. Jesus could say things like “you have heard it said . . . but I say to you.” Paul is very plain in explaining the differences in the new covenant regarding the marks of the old covenant, like circumcision, sabbath, and food laws. What is new is explained. Yet no one gives a simple unambiguous statement to the effect, “God’s people worshiped a unipersonal God in the past; but now it has been revealed that he is multipersonal.”

Short of an explicit statement to the contrary, we should assume that the Jews did in fact understand the nature of the one God, and so all teaching about the the nature of God and the person of Christ have to begin with and harmonize with the OT revelation of the one God.

Very good post.

[Ehud]

Originally Posted by Costeon

In Scripture, Jews never believed in a multipersonal God. The Old Testament does not teach that God is a trinity of divine persons. If God is a trinity, none of God’s people before the Christian era understood this. None of the prophets understood this. Abraham, Moses, David were all ignorant of God’s basic nature.

It’s inconceivable that a new revelation about, of all things, the nature of God would not be explicitly stated in the NT. Jesus could say things like “you have heard it said . . . but I say to you.” Paul is very plain in explaining the differences in the new covenant regarding the marks of the old covenant, like circumcision, sabbath, and food laws. What is new is explained. Yet no one gives a simple unambiguous statement to the effect, “God’s people worshiped a unipersonal God in the past; but now it has been revealed that he is multipersonal.”

Short of an explicit statement to the contrary, we should assume that the Jews did in fact understand the nature of the one God, and so all teaching about the the nature of God and the person of Christ have to begin with and harmonize with the OT revelation of the one God.

[JamesGlen]

Originally Posted by JamesGlen

BC, YES or NO?

Originally Posted by BCsenior

Jesus, the Son of God,
was obviously part man and part God (John 1 and 1 John 1).

For da God part of Jesus ... NO
For da man part of Jesus ... YES

You have made the step of openly stating you believe the Holyghost is the Father.
That is awesome.
I appreciate that. I’m glad you don’t believe in the son of 2 Gods. You may be making some headway in your theology

Now would that mean that you believe there are 2 in the Godhead, since you believe the Holyghost is the Father?


Also, I am curious as to if you only try to learn of your need for salvation from the New Testament as well?

[BCsenior]

Originally Posted by Esaias

John 1 says, among other things,
that whoever or whatever the Word was with,
the Word also was.

Yes, you know it says ...
the Word was with GOD,
and the Word was GOD,
and the Word was with GOD in the beginning!

[BCsenior]

Originally Posted by Costeon

The sending language you mention really doesn't seem to be anything like what we observe occurring between the Father and Son ...

It doesn't have to.

Father God sent the Holy Spirit to replace Jesus who returned to heaven.
The Holy Spirit was "another" ("allos" meaning "another of the same kind").

And here we have the Triune Godhead.

[BCsenior]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Very good post.

Simply an excuse for not believing in the NEW covenant.

[BCsenior]

Originally Posted by JamesGlen

You have made the step of openly stating you believe the Holyghost is the Father.

Also, I am curious as to if you only try to learn of your need for salvation from the New Testament as well?

Yes, if you have One of the Trinity, you have all Three!

The NT quotes the OT in many dozens of places!
The NT fully describes the deplorable situation of fallen man!
The NT fully describes how to be saved.

Unfortunately, Jesus will spit today's lukewarm Laodicean church
out of His mouth, which means they (generally) are NOT saved!

Only the faithful obedient BACs who are in relationship
with the Lord will be saved.

What an incredible difference between the early church and today's church.
.