Standing Firm On The Foundation Of Christ: Why It Matters What We Believe
I recently had a conversation with a friend of mine who raised an interesting question. It was this: “What are your ‘brick wall’ doctrines, and what are your ‘picket fence’ doctrines?” He and I were in an interesting dialogue about the chronology of events surrounding the return of Jesus to the earth to establish His Kingdom, and though we came to different conclusions about this particular topic, it was clear that this was a ‘picket fence’ discussion.
There are, however, certain things that are not ‘picket fences,’ but are indeed the ‘brick walls,’ the foundational truths upon which the Christian faith is established. These foundation stones are eternal and essential, and must be maintained in each generation if we are in fact going to call ourselves Christian. These are the bedrock belief systems that, if you change them, you can no longer honestly call yourself part of that company that makes up historic Christianity.
One of these ‘brick wall’ realities is the nature of God as a Triune Being, one God in three Persons, with each Person – Father, Son, and Holy Spirit – being eternal, fully God, yet each with His own personality and role within the Godhead. Within this Trinitarian formula falls the nature of Jesus Christ, the eternal Son, the second Person of the Trinity, who existed with the Father as the Word (Logos), and who took on humanity when He was born of the Virgin Mary. He always has been fully God, before He was human, while He was on the earth in His first visit to the planet (the Incarnation), and now as the Heavenly Man in the Father’s presence as He awaits the timing of His return to earth.
This Jesus was the agent of creation, the unique Son of God, the One who holds all things together, in Whom is life itself. He is the one Mediator between God and man, and if you attempt to change His identity you are in grave danger. The New Testament tells us that in these last days many different “Christs” will be presented, but there is only one who is true, and who is worthy of our trust and confidence. Faith in another Jesus – one not presented in the Bible – will not be sufficient for relationship with God and hope for eternal life, no matter how sincerely that faith is held.
Jesus Himself raised the issue to His disciples when He asked the question, “Who do men say that I am?” Several answers were given, and then Jesus made it personal: “Who do you say that I am?” When Peter answered, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God!” Jesus declared that Peter was blessed by the Father with supernatural revelation that could not come by reasoning process or by the instruction of men. Only the Spirit of God can show us who Jesus is by revealing Him in agreement with the Scriptures. If the revelation you have received does not square with the Jesus of the apostles and the Scriptures, you need to scrap that revelation and turn to the truth as quickly as possible. In 2 Corinthians 11:1-4 we are warned that through a deception similar to what happened in the Garden of Eden, our minds may be corrupted to believe in another Jesus, one that is different from the one presented by Paul and the other writers of Scripture.
I hear many who are excited in our time because people like Glenn Beck are calling us to return to God and to Jesus for the restoration of our nation. That’s a good idea, but don’t go to Beck’s Jesus, for as a Mormon, he is talking about a different Jesus than the one the Bible speaks of. There are those who find it difficult to comprehend the Trinitarian teaching of the Scripture, so they change the nature of Jesus to make it more understandable. This is not acceptable! You end up with another Jesus, a different gospel, and leave yourself open to other levels of deception.
There are certain things to be passionate about, and this is one of them. I’m not talking about mindless acceptance – believe me, there is so much room for inquiry into the vast realms of the knowledge of the Son of God – but it must be inquiry within the boundaries, the ‘brick wall’ of the nature of Christ as revealed in the Bible. Though He is beyond comprehension, He will fascinate you and thrill you with the revelation of who He is as our Champion, our Prophet, Priest, and King.
Gary Wiens
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
Amen. In full agreement with this. Thanks, Gary.
ReplyDeleteThis is incredible for anyone with any historical education or practical experience in the kingdom to say. The trinity is a doctrine hammered out at the same time, by the same people, for the same reasons, as the rest of the teachings which constitute the foundations of what became the Catholic Church, east and west.
ReplyDeleteInteresting that you don't bring up Maryology, celibacy for priests, prayers to saints, papal authority, calling the Pope "Father", and on and on and on as one reads Catholic doctrine. Are these picket fence doctrines or brick wall doctrines to you or are you fine with them?
Virtually none of the words, phrases, or concepts used to define the trinity are found in Scripture. That doesn't bother you?
Nowhere in Scripture does it say anyone must believe God is a three-some. Doesn't that bother you?
Nowhere in Scripture does it suggest that anyone who doesn't believe in a three-some Godhead can not be a "saved" person. Doesn't that bother you that you are joining those who think they can define who is saved and who isn't based upon something not found in Scripture?
Many people around you who you accept as "saved" actually do not believe in a triune Godhead, yet because you don't know that is how they believe, you are fine fellowshipping with them and you would say that you witness to God's spirit in their lives. But once you find out they are not triune God believers, you change your mind and decide they are going to hell. Doesn't that bother you?
Many fine people who are accepted all throughout history as significant Christian souls did not or do not currently subscribe to an interpretation of Scripture which is trinitarian. They are not dismissed as unsaved by most of the trinitarian Christians around them. Why be so outrageously dogmatic about something which is so easy to trip you up on in any fair debate? There are hundreds of questions that could be asked of you regarding this doctrine that in front of an objective audience would reveal your inability to reconcile what you say you believe with actual Scripture. I pray that the day is coming soon when the Reformation can move forward out of the remnants of the Dark Ages and the church can have a new look at what has been handed down as "the historical faith". Until then, can we try to be civil and stop sending one another to hell? I thought our job was saving people from that place.
I need to qualify myself above on a term I used. I used "three-some" in a way that upon further reflection I see can denote something I didn't mean to imply. In today's culture, which is so over-sexualized and twisted, "three-some" may carry sexual overtones and I certainly was not trying to hint at that or be sarcastic in that way. I simply meant "tri-partite" or a Godhead consisting of three parties. I don't want that careless use of language to degrade my overall points.
ReplyDeleteI, personally, have only been to IHOP at the old location, for about 2 hours on two occasions. I have friends who attend there, none of whom I spoke to before posting the above except from one who mentioned this blog.
Who ever you are.. "Bar"
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with your comments and concerns... I could not have said it better. Thank you for you insights and objectivity. Blessings, Mark
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteBarJ, thanks for your insight on the Trinity, very interesting and fascinating. Definitely some points I've never thought about. I appreciate finding views I have not given my mind to studying out. Definitely some food for thought.
ReplyDeleteThe only thing I have in passing is not to say that your view is right or wrong. But I think your comment is a bit out of context in relationship to that which is most important in this blog. I don't think this blog is going after the topic of "The Trinity" as much as it is going after the necessity of understanding "The Divinity of Jesus Christ".
I too agree with you that no one should be able to condemn another only with man's weak ideas of one of the greatest mysteries that God has entertained us with: The Nature of the Trinity. What I get from this blog instead is the necessity to give careful consideration to the divinity of Jesus Christ. Within that conversation, there will always be a portion of thought devoted to the Trinity, but that single topic is a small piece of the the whole.
Again, I really do appreciate your thoughts. But I find them defending a topic that is not the main point of the blog in the last two-thirds of writing. That being: "Can Jesus' divinity be questioned WITHOUT believing in His pre-existence before His birth on earth?"
With that in mind, I hope we can both agree that the divinity of Jesus Christ is a topic that can be talked about in a salvation equation. Again, the Trinity is just a piece of this argument, but seems to not be the main focus. I think the point being made is that those who have a view of the Trinity, explained about in this blog, often have other underlying differences of the DIVINITY OF JESUS CHRIST, which then becomes a topic of salvation.
Actually Brandon, the Trinity is the culmination of the “Divinity of Christ” debate for centuries and this is the reason why Trinitarian history has found it necessary to codify their thoughts in creeds from the early Roman Catholic church. What non-Trinitarians object to is multiple divinities and in all good conscience, this is what confessing the Trinity is to many Christians. When Trinitarians say that each “person” of the Trinity is a “divine” person and when they identify them together as “3 divine persons”, they have made their God 3 divinities. Just saying that they have not, does nothing to justify their demand that all other believers must answer to their conscience.
ReplyDeleteIn all honesty, I cannot call God “3 divine persons”. Since the Bible does not, it is so wrong of anyone to demand that of God’s people in order to be recognized as part of the body of Christ. I am a born-again, spirit-filled Christian and nowhere in scripture are we commanded to believe teaching that is outside of scripture. Thomas recognized God in the face of Jesus Christ (II Corinthians 4:6), but it is a leap of logic to conclude that Thomas was concluding that the human nature of Christ was divine. So Trinitarians should not balk at the idea that other Christians understand that Thomas was not calling the human person “God”.
Non-Trinitarians believe that God was manifest in the flesh and that “the flesh” means a fully human person, body soul and spirit. Trinitarians believe that the person of Jesus is the 2nd divine person of 3 divine persons. I have also read that Trinitarians call Jesus a “God-man” and I have found it disingenuous that they say they believe in God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit; when in fact they believe in God the Father, God-man the Son and God the Holy Spirit. These are not 3 equal persons and at the incarnation, the 2nd person of the Trinity changed from the immutable God to a mutable god.
These are just a few of the underlying biblical differences why my conscience cannot in all honest accept the Trinitarian teaching on the “Divinity of Christ”.
Here's are questions to ponder. The Bible says in Heb 4:15 "For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin."
ReplyDeleteHebrews is clearly referring to the "man Christ Jesus" our mediator and high priest.
We also know that Man was tempted not God. God cannot be tempted.
James 1:13 says: "Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:
The Man Jesus was clearly tempted in all points. To be tempted means that He was tempted to sin.
The question is: Could Jesus have sinned? And if he did sin did God have a plan B? What would be the next step? Another Christ raised up on our behalf?
The fact is Jesus did overcome sin and death. Praise God!
It seems to me that being tempted without the real potential to sin is not really overcoming the temptation to sin.
This is a problem unless you believe that Jesus was merely make believe example of Man overcoming sin and death for our edification.
This is indeed a problem for the Trinity's "God the Son" an non biblical reference to "Son of God."
Also, Who Died on the cross? Did God die? Interesting questions to ponder wouldn't you say?
The Doctrine of the Trinity misses crucial revelations about our role in His plan and purpose in relation to He and Jesus.
ReplyDeleteGod knew that one man would overcome and fulfill his divine plan and purpose.
God wanted the first Adam who represented all of mankind and His creation - to live by the tree of life not the tree of the knowledge of Good and evil. The choice was God's way or Man's - the first Adam chose the wrong way.
God before the foundations of the world, knew that there would be a Man that would live according to His plan and purpose. God say his son, the Man Christ Jesus overcome sin and death.
The last Adam, Jesus did live by the tree of life, every word that proceeded from the mouth of God -- not by His knowledge of Good and Evil.
The first Adam failed, the last Adam prevailed and fulfilled God's plan and became the true firstborn among many brethren. He's our pattern or example. The "firstborn" of an entire body of Christ living according to His example.
Rom 8:29 "For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate [to be] conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren."
God could dwell in Christ in fullness because Jesus was the embodiment of all of God and his plans and purposes for all of mankind. Jesus was sinless and lived according to every Word His father gave him. He was obedient even to death on the cross. Referring to Jesus:
Col 1:18-20 "And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all [things] he might have the preeminence.For it pleased [the Father] that in him should all fulness dwell;And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, [I say], whether [they be] things in earth, or things in heaven."
Just a few questions that come to my mind right away...Why would Jesus accept worship if He was man and not God? How could man atone for the sins of all? Why is Jesus called Emmanuel (God with us)? There is no other name under heaven by which we may be saved--so our salvation is in Jesus. Only God can save...right? How can man dwell before the world began? Only God can...right? I just want to give Jesus the glory due His name and speak as rightly of Him as I can.
ReplyDeleteMark, your consideration regarding Jesus being tempted has long been of interest to me, because I can see from the scripture that Jesus was not tempted to sin, though he went out into the dessert for that one reason; to be tempted.
ReplyDeleteThe understanding comes from recognizing that the word “tempted” is a verb that means: to entice to do something wrong and that word “entice” is also a verb that means: to lead on by exciting hope or desire; allure. This is exactly what the scripture teaches, found in James 1:14:
14”But each one is tempted when he is carried away and enticed by his own lust.”
James 1 NAS
Temptation from an outside source is not what defines whether a person is divine or not; because there are those in scripture that did try to tempt God (Ex.17:2). Some would say; ‘I am not tempted to eat snake meat’, or many other things that some people find delectable; because they are admitting that the desire to partake has not been sufficiently motivating. This is why Jesus was never tempted in the desert to sin, because all of the ungodly offers the devil made to Jesus were, for a lack of better words; not tempting to Him.
Our Lord’s extreme hunger was not a sinful condition. So the scripture teaches that it is not the hunger of the fish that tempts a person; but the worm on the hook and we see in Jesus; the worm on the devil’s hook was completely unable to arouse any kind of lust in Jesus. He was not in violation of James 1:14 because he was not carried away and enticed by a lust of His own. We never see Jesus lusting in scripture at all.
The next verse in James 1 demands that a lust must be present and conceived for temptation to give birth to sin and this is how Jesus is the pattern for all mankind to overcome sin by stopping the birth of sin when we prevent lust before it is conceived. Jesus simply had no lust because He nipped that rose in the bud continually.
15”Then when lust has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and when sin is accomplished, it brings forth death.”
James 1 NAS
However, your consideration points to the excellent truth, that because God led Jesus to be tempted, we rightfully understand it was because He is a man. Being enticed by the devil was a test that we needed to see Jesus pass 100% and He did.
1”Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil.”
Matthew 4 NAS
Why would God lead God to be tempted if God cannot be tempted?
He wouldn’t.
Jenn, you ask; “How could man atone for the sins of all?”, and I have to ask; do you understand that a man is much more than the simple spotless lamb that made atonement for the sins in the Old Covenant? The human sacrifice of Christ is all that God required, because He met the only criteria that was necessary to be an offering for us, being without sin and the Word has made that perfectly clear. If we expected God to die for our sins, then we would still be in our sins; because everyone knows that God has not died yet. He never will die; because He is eternal.
ReplyDelete28Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. Romans 20 NAS
Is Romans 20:28 saying that it was God’s blood that purchased our salvation? The Greek for “blood” in this verse is haima and it means blood, but it carries the meaning of more than just the red fluid flowing thru our veins. The same word is also used in the context of kindred and kinsmen. In Galatians 1:16, we find the same word used to signify a people; not the red fluid flowing thru their veins.
16”to reveal His Son in me so that I might preach Him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately consult with flesh and blood”
Galatians 1 NAS
And this we know, that God gave his only begotten kindred in His Son Jesus Christ. It was God’s blood in His Son that purchased the church.
Jesus is called “God with us” because in Him, God is with us. This is the biblical teaching, God in Christ; not God was Christ.
9”For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form”
Colossians 2 NAS
19a "Namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself"
II Corinthians 5 NAS
He bore His Father’s name and you are absolutely right; man could not dwell before the world began. Why would Jesus accept worship if He was man and not God? Because we worship God in Christ. Jesus is the Word of God and we worship God directly in Jesus. He is the manifest logos; the divine expression made flesh. The Trinitarian Nicene creed states that Jesus was “begotten, not made”, but this is completely contrary to John 1; which states the Word was made flesh.
We speak rightly of Jesus without discounting His humanity. He was a full human person and no part of His person was divine. This is the error that has been apart of the church for centuries and the expectation that the church is perfect is all too clearly seen in the world today; that the leaders of the church are not perfect. We can only depend on God’s Word; not the teachings of men.
Excellent Word Gary !!!!!!!!
ReplyDeleteIt really is too bad that Gary's word is far from God's Word. But don't take my word for it.
ReplyDeleteThere is a book written by a well known defender of the Trinitarian faith, in refutation of Oneness theology named Carl Brumback and the book is titled God in Three Persons.
http://www.amazon.com/God-Three-Persons-Carl-Brumback/dp/0871483548
On page 138, Brumback makes a statement that I think is poignant in how Trinitarians make up answers as they go and have absolutely no idea of how far from the scriptures they have to go to try and bandage such a debauched set of theological gymnastics.
In response to the concern that Jesus did not have certain divine attributes at His command as the supposed 2nd divine person of God while He was a man, and in response to Jesus' own words that the Father is greater than He is (John 14:28); Brumback offers reasoning in support of the Trinitarian assertion that Philippians 2:6-7 teaches that "God the Son" put His divine nature in abeyance before He became man, effectively removing from the human Jesus His own attributes of His divine being. Brumback stated, quote:
"The true explanation lies in the fact that the mediatorial son---before His earthly life, during it, and after it---was subject to the Father. The mediatorial office includes the incarnate life of the Son, in which the attributes of omniscience, omnipresence and omnipotence were held in abeyance (Mark 13:21; John 4:3; II Corinthians 13:4), and in which the Son was less than even Himself."
I find this confession absolutely amazing!
How many Trinitarians understand that their doctrine demands that Jesus has not been Himself since His incarnation?
How many Trinitarians understand that their doctrine demands that since Jesus was bodily resurrected and will continue eternally in His glorified humanity and will come again in His glorified humanity; demonstrates that they also believe He will never be Himself again?
Does the everyday Trinitarian even begin to comprehend the just of their faith or is it just their own insecurity regarding their faith that they blindly accuse and attempt to cast doubt on the faith of their non-Trinitarian brethren?
8"Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross."
Philippians 2 NAS
Hear the Word of God, Oh ye Trinitarians; the very next verse says that Jesus humbled Himself AFTER He was already in appearance as a man.
continued...
continuing...
ReplyDeleteEternal Generation is also a primary tenant of the Trinitarian doctrine that is enshrined in the creeds that many notable Trinitarians have rejected. Walter Martin, the author of The Kingdom of the Cults, on pages 340 & 341 states; quote:
"Bringing this chapter to a conclusion, I would contend that the three basic propositions given at the beginning of the preceding chapter are sufficient to express the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity. When the church went beyond these three in its conciliar deliverances and added the two additional propositions that the Son’s essence is eternally generated by the Father and that the Spirit eternally and essentially proceeds from the Father and the Son, I would urge that it went beyond the deliverances of Scripture and that these last two propositions should not be made elements of Trinitarian orthodoxy."
The Athanasius creed specifically condemns all those who do not adhere to the creed, but here we find that this notable Trinitarian, who is widely accepted among Trinitarians as a true Trinitarian and considered saved; has openly rejected one of the main tenants of that faith.
Since this man can find saving faith without complete faith in the Trinitarian creeds, who are any Trinitarians to judge the salvation of anyone who rejects any of the other tenants of that faith? The creeds condemn anyone for not believing them in their entirety and yet the spirit of many Trinitarians reject the notion that Walter Martin is not saved.
The fallibility of Trinitarian creeds is what proves they are just the mere teaching of men and not the infallible Word of God.
Martin Luther, the father of the Reformation, in his Sermon taken from his Church Postil, 1522 pages 406 & 407 stated; quote:
“It is indeed true that the name "Trinity" is nowhere to be found in the Holy Scriptures, but has been conceived and invented by man. For this reason it sounds some-what cold and we had better speak of "God" than of the "Trinity."”
http://www.orlutheran.com/html/mlsetrin.html
Worshipping a doctrine named by the creeds of men above God’s Word is idolatry. No matter how hard one tries to claim it to be God’s Word, the simple truth is; Luther admitted the name “Trinity” was coined by men; because it is not God’s Word.
The simple truth is that; without employing the name of the doctrine and all the other unbiblical terminology Trinitarians employ; the doctrine wouldn’t exist.
I have conceived and invented a name for God, but I haven't given it to the world yet. I ascribe to it all the attributes of God I can find in the scriptures, but should anyone be required to worship it as a name of God if the name I give it isn't in the Bible? That's silly. Why would anyone NEED to?
The name "Trinity" is a confession that lacks faith in God, because it says His Word was and still is; not sufficient for Trinitarians.
16All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 17so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.
II Timothy 3 NAS
According to the English dictionary, adequate means sufficient.
I surrendered religious terminology that did not allow me to confess my faith solely from the Bible. Trinitarians cannot do this. They NEED their creeds. This is the light Trinitarians call darkness in their accusation of apostate against their brethren.
I have only one question then: "Who do you say Jesus is?" It's the very question Jesus asked His disciples. Without these long discourses, lets just keep it simple
ReplyDeleteWho do YOU say He is?
I know what Mormons say, I know what Muslims say and I know what Jehovah's Witnesses say, but what do YOU say?
In a simple sentence . . . is He simpy a man/ Is He God? Is He and angel? What are you saying? Who are you praising?
John 1:1 says:
ReplyDelete"In the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word was God" The Greek reads: En arche en ho logos, kai ho logos en "pros ton theon," kai theos en ho logos,
The Word is not just referring to Jesus Christ but to all aspects of God's plan and purpose. Word or Logos denotes "a plan or blueprint that involves actions"
God's Logos was expressed through Jesus, the written words of the Bible, His very creation is an expression of God's plan. So the LOGOS of God is God's plan expressed through all aspects of His creation. Obviously in Christ fist and foremost but also expressed in us as well.
We the body of Christ are part of God's plan or Logos. As I mentioned, The original greek says: The LOGOS (Word) was "PROS" or Toward God, not with "The" God. PROS TON THEON "Toward the God" The = definite article (the one true God)
In other words all that God has created and designed points mankind "Toward God" toward God so HE alone receives all Glory in His Creation and plan.
This is the BIG Picture of God's plan and purpose from the foundations of the world -- To reveal Himself in and through Jesus, the body of Christ, His Word and His creation. All creation testifies to His marvelous works , Jesus being the pinnacle of God's Creation and the physical dwelling place for ALL the fullness of God. Everything that God is for this creation dwelled or tabernacled in Christ.
Christ or the Messiah = the Anointed one - anointed by God and filled with the fullness of God
"God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself"
II Corinthians 5
Jesus was the Firstborn among many brethren. So God the Father and His Son Jesus desire to reveal their plan and purpose through us too, the body of Christ. Jesus said "Greater works shall you do because I go to the father."
Our plan and purpose as Mankind is to reveal God's plan and purpose, "God's LOGOS" to a world that's dying in sin.
There's a lot more to our role on earth than salvation and spreading the Gospel. That's the first critical step.
Our role is to become workers together with God in order to reveal His plan and to experience God's, love, heart, power, and compassion for His creation.
Salvation is just the first step in the process of "Making Man in God's image and after His Likeness - the process of being transformed into His new creation.
We, as the body have an active role in God's master plan. The bible is very clear as to our role in His plan. This passage really conveys our relationship as partakers and ministers of God's plan and purpose. HIS LOGOS:
2Cor5:18 All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation: 19 that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting men’s sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation. 20 We are therefore Christ’s ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ’s behalf: Be reconciled to God.
Thank you Bob, because brevity is the confession I have of who Jesus is. It is the longevity in the efforts of Trinitarianism that I object to. Wordy antiquated creeds assume themselves on the Word of God; when all I have to believe and confess to be saved is the same confession of His disciples.
ReplyDeleteI say, Jesus is “the Christ, the Son of the living God.”
It is Trinitarians that are not satisfied with the biblical explanation of who Jesus is. Demanding that I explicitly call Jesus God when the Bible does not is not yours or anyone else’s place to do and this is why after 25 years as a Trinitarian; the scales have been removed from my eyes.
No longer do I have to worry about being perceived as someone holding my hands over my ears and speaking over others with la-la-la-la, me-me-me-me…..
Mark and jwankum, I guess I am missing something in your reponses. I only asked who you say Jesus is if you do not hold to the doctrine of the Trinity. From what you declare, I assume you are saying He is not God,right? Therefore you must be saying He is a created man or and angel. Could you tell me which it is? or is there another option?
ReplyDeleteWhat you are missing Bob is the extra-biblical language you would like to hold us to. Yes, I do believe that Jesus is God; but no, I do not believe the human person Christ is God. Trinitarians define their doctrine according to “persons” and neglect the fact that for Jesus to be fully human; His person must be human.
ReplyDeleteInstead of owning up to their dilemma of having a 2nd person of the Trinity being 2 persons, one human and one divine; they think they are covering their error with simple denial by just saying the one person of Christ is both natures.
Sorry, but that doesn’t work. A person’s preference of doctrinal construct cannot trump not only the meanings of words; but more importantly the Words of Scripture. Experientially, both you and I know that being a “person” is integral to the one nature of being fully human and Trinitarians cannot have their cake and eat it too.
To the Trinitarian, as a separate person of God; a mutation of personhood became necessary and Christ changed to become the God-man and His person was no longer a God-person, but a God-man-person. The Father is a God-person, the Holy Spirit is a God-person and the Son was a God-person, but then the Son changed to become a God-man-person from the point of his incarnation and forward. Thus their doctrine demanded a mutation of the immutable God and an alteration of “substance”; when one of their God-persons changed forever.
Effectually, Trinitarians are not being honest every time they say they believe in God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit; because this is not actually an accurate statement of their faith. They believe in God the Father, God-man the Son and God the Holy Spirit. Never mind that the scriptures do not call Jesus a “God-man”, much less “God the Son”. Extra-biblical terminology demands further extra-biblical explanations. This is the conundrum that has erroneously asserted itself on the church from the historical deviation of certain members who sought doctrinal control through power.
Changing a divine person who is supposed to be immutable is the contradiction within the Trinitarian doctrine and Trinitarians cannot blame those who are being honest with themselves about it and are attempting to be careful with their handling of the scriptures.
I am being completely honest when I say that I believe the scriptures teach that the man Jesus is “the Christ, the Son of the living God”. Asking who Jesus is, should be as simple as asking me what do I read in the scriptures; not what I think the scriptures say in other words.
Do I believe Jesus is “God the Son”? No, because the Bible does not call Him “God the Son”. Do I believe that Jesus is the name of God? Yes, because the name Jesus means; “Yahweh the Savior”. Do I believe that any part of Christ’s human person is a divine person (God-man person)? No, because the scriptures call Him “the man Christ Jesus”.
5”For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus”
I Timothy 2 NAS
If you have a problem with Jesus being a created man Bob, then your problem is with the scripture and not my faith; because the Word was MADE flesh (John 1:14). “Made” means created. His human nature was created and the Trinitarian Nicene creed specifically denies that the Son was made.
I believe Yahweh the Savior is God and that He is one. Since the Bible does say there is “one God”, my conscience is completely at ease with the biblical confession of the Oneness faith.
Hey Gary,
ReplyDeleteI know this is an old post, but it is one for which I am grateful. It has shown me the seriousness of knowing what we believe because of the "many Jesus'" that will come and are already here. Praise the Lord for Jesus Christ our Savior, King, God and Father!
Bless you Gary!