Apostolic But Not Believing Jesus is The Father?

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Still two persons

If "person" is defined as a self-conscious reality, yes, two "persons". However, only one divine person revealed in both. One is human, the other divine. Two distinct personalities that mutually indwell one another. Jesus said,

John 14:11
Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.

This is plain language. "I am IN the Father", and, "the Father in me". That is quite different from saying, "I am the Father, and, "the Father is me".

Do you believe we see two self-conscious realities relating to one anther when we behold both the Father and the Son?

[Aquila]

If the man, Jesus Christ, had a human body, human soul, and human spirit... He was a complete human person. Who can disagree with this?

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by Aquila

If the man, Jesus Christ, had a human body, human soul, and human spirit... He was a complete human person. Who can disagree with this?

He was fully God and fully man. He is still fully God but I cant say at present he is FULLY man. Man? Yes!

When is the last time you saw someone who was FULLY man walking around with no blood in his body? He is now a "spiritual" man or a glorified man.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Yahweh is Who He is

Agreed, but I would not look at the humanity of Christ and say that humanity is to be worshiped. In fact, Jesus forbade people even calling Him good saying there is none good but God. I reject the idea that Jesus was testing the man to see if he believed He was God in flesh. I would worship Him if I saw Him in flesh, but I would not whatsoever be worshiping the flesh. He'd see my heart and know that.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Aquila

If the man, Jesus Christ, had a human body, human soul, and human spirit... He was a complete human person. Who can disagree with this?

That is two persons, like Praxeas said. This is confusing the concept of person with His manifestation as a man. If you say that a complete human spirit, soul body is a complete person and you are using that human spirit, soul and body to distinguish what is NOT deity, and calling it a person, then you have two persons. We cannot refer to the spirit, soul and body as comprising what is called a human "person" and remain oneness.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

He was fully God and fully man. He is still fully God but I cant say at present he is FULLY man. Man? Yes!

I agree. However, did the "man" (Christ Jesus) have a distinct center of self-conscious reality? We know that when Jesus speaks of the Father He speaks in second and third person consistantly. Linguistically, this establishes a distinct person/personality/personhood.

2.a category used in the classification of pronouns, possessive determiners, and verb forms, according to whether they indicate the speaker (first person), the addressee (second person), or a third party (third person). - Wikipedia

A person is a being, such as a human, that has certain capacities or attributes constituting personhood - Wikipedia

5: the personality of a human being : self - Merriam-Webster

In essence, did the man, Jesus Christ, speak to the Father, speak of the Father, and reference the Father with a distinct sense of "self"? If yes, we have a distinct human personhood. Linguistically, there is no way around it. The Modalistic model can only stand IF one can argue that the distinct human person of Jesus, as established by His own words, is only apparent and cannot be trusted at face value.

When is the last time you saw someone who was FULLY man walking around with no blood in his body? He is now a "spiritual" man or a glorified man.

Good point. I too believe that Jesus is currently a glorified man.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

He was fully God and fully man. He is still fully God but I cant say at present he is FULLY man. Man? Yes!

When is the last time you saw someone who was FULLY man walking around with no blood in his body? He is now a "spiritual" man or a glorified man.

MTD, I think you are missing the fact that mankind was never meant to be mortal. That was a result of the fall. Christ is still fully man, but do not mistaken fallen state of mortality with man's intended state. Christ is still fully man, but the man aspect is now immortal which is what God intended with us to begin with before sin brought death.

It seems mankind has been in fallen state so long with mortality that people think man is meant to be that way, until they say a restored immortal man is no longer a man.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Aquila

If "person" is defined as a self-conscious reality, yes, two "persons". However, only one divine person revealed in both.

That is a self contradiction. Two persons yet one divine person in both?

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Aquila

I agree. However, did the "man" (Christ Jesus) have a distinct center of self-conscious reality? We know that when Jesus speaks of the Father He speaks in second and third person consistantly. Linguistically, this establishes a distinct person/personality/personhood.

2.a category used in the classification of pronouns, possessive determiners, and verb forms, according to whether they indicate the speaker (first person), the addressee (second person), or a third party (third person). - Wikipedia

A person is a being, such as a human, that has certain capacities or attributes constituting personhood - Wikipedia

5: the personality of a human being : self - Merriam-Webster

In essence, did the man, Jesus Christ, speak to the Father, speak of the Father, and reference the Father with a distinct sense of "self"? If yes, we have a distinct human personhood. Linguistically, there is no way around it. The Modalistic model can only stand IF one can argue that the distinct human person of Jesus, as established by His own words, is only apparent and cannot be trusted at face value.



Good point. I too believe that Jesus is currently a glorified man.

That is where you go wrong. Yes, there was a distinct circle of consciousness in the man, but that does NOT mean a distinct person is therefore considered. This is precisely where trinitarianism started -- with that kind of reasoning.

It is ONE person in every sense of the term, simply manifesting in flesh.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by mfblume

That is two persons, like Praxeas said. This is confusing the concept of person with His manifestation as a man. If you say that a complete human spirit, soul body is a complete person and you are using that human spirit, soul and body to distinguish what is NOT deity, and calling it a person, then you have two persons. We cannot refer to the spirit, soul and body as comprising what is called a human "person" and remain oneness.

I believe we can. There is only one divine person, the Father. Even the human person of the man, Christ Jesus, is fashioned in the express image of the Father's own person, so even the humanity reflects the reality and personality of the divine person, the Father. So, only one person is truly revealed between the revealed person of the Father and the human person of the man Jesus Christ.

"Oneness", defined:

one·ness noun \ˈwən-nəs\

: the state of being completely united with or a part of someone or something ~ Marriam-Webster

Please note... "oneness" isn't "singleness". Oneness can only exist through a union of two distinct realities. So, technically, this view is solidly "Oneness" while the traditional position known as Oneness (Modalism) professes a "Singleness" that in fact... rules out "oneness".