The Trinitarians illustrate their triune god in which the center something an unknown god or unidentified god in the center in which the three persons got their powers, the said illustration cannot coincide in the Scriptures. While this is the way the NT illustrates God, the Father is basically pointed as the only true God and even Jesus recognizes that many times. So the right illustration of God, the top\leader is the identified God who is the Father where the Son and Holy Spirit got their powers.
Does Oneness theology (Modalism) teach a "sock puppet" view of God's nature?
- Thread starter UnitedWithChrist
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
We don't claim there is a Person at the center from where the three Persons get their power.
Apparently you are trying to force your understanding into our worldview which results in chaos.
We believe there is one God yet three Persons, each co-eternal and co-essential.
God is one in sense of "what". There is one Being or Essence. "Being" does not mean Person in this sense. "Being" means the "substance" that the object is composed of. In making this statement, though, one must understand that I am discussing God and he is not "made" from a substance, nor is God an object. However, I am talking about the "what" of God, just like the "what" of a human being is his body and spirit.
God is three in the sense of Person. There are three Persons sharing the one "substance". They are co-essential, in other words. The Holy Spirit shares the same substance as the Father, and the Son shares the same substance as the Father. There is a mutual indwelling of the three Persons.
And, God is immutable, unchangeable, so this condition has never been different.
The Son added an additional nature at the Incarnation. God did not change during this Incarnation. An additional nature was added. Jesus was truly human and truly God. Hypostatic union describes how these two natures were joined.
Oneness theology cannot be correct because it does not allow for inter-personal relationships between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. That is the very point behind my sock-puppet analogy. Oneness people believe that there is one Person who, in essence, interacts with himself. Additionally, they do not believe that God exists as three Persons at all times.
Therefore, it is impossible for the Father to love the Son in any real sense of the word, because love requires two persons. It is impossible for the Son to intercede with the Father for the saints, because intercession requires two persons. It is impossible for the Father to send the Son, because sending requires two persons. It is impossible for the Father to witness for the Son, because witnessing for someone requires two Persons. If there are not two Persons, then these interpersonal activities cannot exist.
Apparently you are trying to force your understanding into our worldview which results in chaos.
We believe there is one God yet three Persons, each co-eternal and co-essential.
God is one in sense of "what". There is one Being or Essence. "Being" does not mean Person in this sense. "Being" means the "substance" that the object is composed of. In making this statement, though, one must understand that I am discussing God and he is not "made" from a substance, nor is God an object. However, I am talking about the "what" of God, just like the "what" of a human being is his body and spirit.
God is three in the sense of Person. There are three Persons sharing the one "substance". They are co-essential, in other words. The Holy Spirit shares the same substance as the Father, and the Son shares the same substance as the Father. There is a mutual indwelling of the three Persons.
And, God is immutable, unchangeable, so this condition has never been different.
The Son added an additional nature at the Incarnation. God did not change during this Incarnation. An additional nature was added. Jesus was truly human and truly God. Hypostatic union describes how these two natures were joined.
Oneness theology cannot be correct because it does not allow for inter-personal relationships between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. That is the very point behind my sock-puppet analogy. Oneness people believe that there is one Person who, in essence, interacts with himself. Additionally, they do not believe that God exists as three Persons at all times.
Therefore, it is impossible for the Father to love the Son in any real sense of the word, because love requires two persons. It is impossible for the Son to intercede with the Father for the saints, because intercession requires two persons. It is impossible for the Father to send the Son, because sending requires two persons. It is impossible for the Father to witness for the Son, because witnessing for someone requires two Persons. If there are not two Persons, then these interpersonal activities cannot exist.
OK. It will be interesting to see your reply.
Jesus himself said that he had an existence with the Father prior to the creation. If I am not mistaken, Oneness people deny Christ's pre-existence, prior to the Incarnation. Instead, they claim that the word "Logos" means "Plan" and that Jesus only existed as a plan in God's mind.
However, I realize there are different Oneness beliefs in this regard. Can you clarify your position?
The word "with" in John 1:1-3 would imply a face-to-face relationship which two Persons share. Additionally, Jesus made claims regarding his existence before the Incarnation. I suspect you would simply account those to the radical monotheistic view of God that Oneness people hold, though.
By the way, do you think that God only became a Father at the point when the Son was incarnated?
The Trinitarian teaching is that the Father eternally begat the Son, and therefore has always been the Father. The term "begat" is difficult in this case because it doesn't mean an event that happened in time, as the Son has eternally been with the Father. The word used for this same concept with the Holy Spirit is "proceeded". The Holy Spirit proceeded from the Father and Son eternally.
By the way, when I discuss the Trinity teaching, be assured that I do not give any credence to non-Trinitarian positions. In fact, I stand solidly with Trinitarian theology and consider alternative views to be heretical. Some saved people may be indoctrinated with false teachings in this regard, but ultimately I think they will reject them.
Jesus himself said that he had an existence with the Father prior to the creation. If I am not mistaken, Oneness people deny Christ's pre-existence, prior to the Incarnation. Instead, they claim that the word "Logos" means "Plan" and that Jesus only existed as a plan in God's mind.
However, I realize there are different Oneness beliefs in this regard. Can you clarify your position?
The word "with" in John 1:1-3 would imply a face-to-face relationship which two Persons share. Additionally, Jesus made claims regarding his existence before the Incarnation. I suspect you would simply account those to the radical monotheistic view of God that Oneness people hold, though.
By the way, do you think that God only became a Father at the point when the Son was incarnated?
The Trinitarian teaching is that the Father eternally begat the Son, and therefore has always been the Father. The term "begat" is difficult in this case because it doesn't mean an event that happened in time, as the Son has eternally been with the Father. The word used for this same concept with the Holy Spirit is "proceeded". The Holy Spirit proceeded from the Father and Son eternally.
By the way, when I discuss the Trinity teaching, be assured that I do not give any credence to non-Trinitarian positions. In fact, I stand solidly with Trinitarian theology and consider alternative views to be heretical. Some saved people may be indoctrinated with false teachings in this regard, but ultimately I think they will reject them.
Clarify this for me:
Was Jesus, in the Incarnation, a different person from the Father, or was he the same person?
If the same Person, then what meaning does sending, prayer, intercession, love have?
Also, do you believe that Christ is interceding for the saints with the Father in heaven right now? How do you account for this in your worldview? Intercession requires three parties: the person being interceded for (the believer), the intercessor (Jesus) and the one being interceded to (the Father).
How do you make sense of this in your worldview?
Was Jesus, in the Incarnation, a different person from the Father, or was he the same person?
If the same Person, then what meaning does sending, prayer, intercession, love have?
Also, do you believe that Christ is interceding for the saints with the Father in heaven right now? How do you account for this in your worldview? Intercession requires three parties: the person being interceded for (the believer), the intercessor (Jesus) and the one being interceded to (the Father).
How do you make sense of this in your worldview?
As I told you before the humanity of Jesus distinct to the divinity of the Father for what I have said the Son does not know his second coming but only the Father and so about his will own is contrary to Father's will. I do not know why you did not still get the point, why you still ask me that question.
Your second question if Christ is interceding for the saints with the Father right now. My answer is Yes, base on the Book of Revelation it is Jesus interceding to the Father for the seven churches, Jesus is the Spirit in the book of Revelation doing his role of Holy Spirit.
But then, Jesus humanity still one with the divinity of the Father, by your own term Hypostatic union. Why we believe such union like Hypostatic union, we can read in John 16:26-27 it says "At that day ye shall ask in my name: and I say not unto you, that I will pray the Father for you: For the Father himself loveth you, because ye have loved me, and have believed that I came out from God." Analyze this verse is related to Christ interceding, but it reveals that it was really Jesus as the Father hearing our prayers!
Your second question if Christ is interceding for the saints with the Father right now. My answer is Yes, base on the Book of Revelation it is Jesus interceding to the Father for the seven churches, Jesus is the Spirit in the book of Revelation doing his role of Holy Spirit.
But then, Jesus humanity still one with the divinity of the Father, by your own term Hypostatic union. Why we believe such union like Hypostatic union, we can read in John 16:26-27 it says "At that day ye shall ask in my name: and I say not unto you, that I will pray the Father for you: For the Father himself loveth you, because ye have loved me, and have believed that I came out from God." Analyze this verse is related to Christ interceding, but it reveals that it was really Jesus as the Father hearing our prayers!
Please review my previous post in which you can see my statement regarding the Incarnation. To reiterate my previous statement and to make it clearer regarding the Incarnation. To make it clearer, the Incarnation already began when still plan, and what I have told you in God's mindset the plan is already a reality where relation started between the Father and the Son, just like the Lamb was already slained since from the foundation of the world.
Your next question, if I think that God only became a Father at the point when the Son was incarnated? Let, the scriptures speak, I will quote a verse from different versions:
New International Version
In the same way, Christ did not take on himself the glory of becoming a high priest. But God said to him, "You are my Son; today I have become your Father."
New Living Translation
That is why Christ did not honor himself by assuming he could become High Priest. No, he was chosen by God, who said to him, “You are my Son. Today I have become your Father.”
English Standard Version
So also Christ did not exalt himself to be made a high priest, but was appointed by him who said to him, “You are my Son, today I have begotten you”;
Berean Study Bible
So also Christ did not take upon Himself the glory of becoming a high priest, but He was called by the One who said to Him: “You are My Son; today I have become Your Father.”
So what do you expect to be my answer if I read this verse in different reliable translations?
Your next question, if I think that God only became a Father at the point when the Son was incarnated? Let, the scriptures speak, I will quote a verse from different versions:
New International Version
In the same way, Christ did not take on himself the glory of becoming a high priest. But God said to him, "You are my Son; today I have become your Father."
New Living Translation
That is why Christ did not honor himself by assuming he could become High Priest. No, he was chosen by God, who said to him, “You are my Son. Today I have become your Father.”
English Standard Version
So also Christ did not exalt himself to be made a high priest, but was appointed by him who said to him, “You are my Son, today I have begotten you”;
Berean Study Bible
So also Christ did not take upon Himself the glory of becoming a high priest, but He was called by the One who said to Him: “You are My Son; today I have become Your Father.”
So what do you expect to be my answer if I read this verse in different reliable translations?
I believe Jesus is the Living Word of God manifested in the flesh. What does that make me?
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God
as ourselves ... if Jesus was standing behind me, He'd scoff severely at these third
millennium Pharisee questions.
John 16:4-7 “I did not say these things to you from the beginning, because I was with you. 5 But now I am going to him who sent me, and none of you asks me, ‘Where are you going?’ 6 But because I have said these things to you, sorrow has filled your heart. 7 Nevertheless, I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you. But if I go, I will send him to you (ESV Strong's)
Romans 8:26-27 26 Likewise the Spirit helps us in our weakness. For we do not know what to pray for as we ought, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words. 27 And he who searches hearts knows what is the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for the saints according to the will of God (ESV Strong's)
Romans 8:26-27 26 Likewise the Spirit helps us in our weakness. For we do not know what to pray for as we ought, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words. 27 And he who searches hearts knows what is the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for the saints according to the will of God (ESV Strong's)
In regards to this subject, you need to understand that in ancient Israel, the Davidic King became God's son at the point when he was coronated.
Here is how God speaks of the Davidic king:
2 Samuel 7:11-16 11 from the time that I appointed judges over my people Israel. And I will give you rest from all your enemies. Moreover, the Lord declares to you that the Lord will make you a house. 12 When your days are fulfilled and you lie down with your fathers, I will raise up your offspring after you, who shall come from your body, and I will establish his kingdom. 13 He shall build a house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. 14 I will be to him a father, and he shall be to me a son. When he commits iniquity, I will discipline him with the rod of men, with the stripes of the sons of men, 15 but my steadfast love will not depart from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away from before you. 16 And your house and your kingdom shall be made sure forever before me. Your throne shall be established forever.’”
In fact, the Psalm that you are quoting relates to the coronation of the Davidic king if you research it.
Psalms 2:7 I will tell of the decree: The Lord said to me, “You are my Son; today I have begotten you.
Psalms 2:7 2:7 You are my son. Recalls God’s promise to David regarding his son Solomon: “I will be his father, and he will be my son” (2 Sam 7:14). The Davidic kings would henceforth be “sons” of God, reflecting the close bond between the divine King and human kings. David’s descendants were expected to be vice-regents in God’s stead on earth in a kingdom whose “capital” was Zion (see v. 6 and note). Scripture later reflects this many times (e.g., 1 Chr 28:5; 2 Chr 13:8). See “Sonship.” These words are repeated at Jesus’ baptism (Mark 1:11) and are also applied to his resurrection (Act 13:33). They also proclaim his superiority to the angels (Heb 1:5) and his appointment as the new high priest (Heb 5:5).
(NIV Biblical Theology Study Bible)
So, Jesus was called the Son of God in two different senses: One, he is the son of God eternally, and two, he is the son of God in the sense that he is the Messiah, who is the final Davidic King. He is the one that will rule over all the Earth when he returns.
At either his baptism or his resurrection, he was coronated as this Davidic king.
He did not begin to exist at his birth; he has existed eternally.
Here is how God speaks of the Davidic king:
2 Samuel 7:11-16 11 from the time that I appointed judges over my people Israel. And I will give you rest from all your enemies. Moreover, the Lord declares to you that the Lord will make you a house. 12 When your days are fulfilled and you lie down with your fathers, I will raise up your offspring after you, who shall come from your body, and I will establish his kingdom. 13 He shall build a house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. 14 I will be to him a father, and he shall be to me a son. When he commits iniquity, I will discipline him with the rod of men, with the stripes of the sons of men, 15 but my steadfast love will not depart from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away from before you. 16 And your house and your kingdom shall be made sure forever before me. Your throne shall be established forever.’”
In fact, the Psalm that you are quoting relates to the coronation of the Davidic king if you research it.
Psalms 2:7 I will tell of the decree: The Lord said to me, “You are my Son; today I have begotten you.
Psalms 2:7 2:7 You are my son. Recalls God’s promise to David regarding his son Solomon: “I will be his father, and he will be my son” (2 Sam 7:14). The Davidic kings would henceforth be “sons” of God, reflecting the close bond between the divine King and human kings. David’s descendants were expected to be vice-regents in God’s stead on earth in a kingdom whose “capital” was Zion (see v. 6 and note). Scripture later reflects this many times (e.g., 1 Chr 28:5; 2 Chr 13:8). See “Sonship.” These words are repeated at Jesus’ baptism (Mark 1:11) and are also applied to his resurrection (Act 13:33). They also proclaim his superiority to the angels (Heb 1:5) and his appointment as the new high priest (Heb 5:5).
(NIV Biblical Theology Study Bible)
So, Jesus was called the Son of God in two different senses: One, he is the son of God eternally, and two, he is the son of God in the sense that he is the Messiah, who is the final Davidic King. He is the one that will rule over all the Earth when he returns.
At either his baptism or his resurrection, he was coronated as this Davidic king.
He did not begin to exist at his birth; he has existed eternally.
It appears as if your teaching is that the humanity of Jesus and the deity of the Father is treated in Oneness theology like distinct Persons, even though you don't want to use the word "person".
If this is true, it seems like you realize the appearance of inter-personal activity, and you cannot account for this, so you treat the humanity of Jesus and the deity of the Father something like distinct "Persons" but you don't want to use the word..is this correct?
One of the issues in communication is your command of English. I have communicated with Filipinos a lot..only about a fifth of them communicate well in English, despite the fact that it is one of the common languages. It doesn't matter as much in normal conversations, but these are precise details and it is hard for me to understand your English. It would be impossible for me to understand your Tagalog so I am not trying to degrade you but there is some communications issues just due to different native languages. Additionally, it is difficult for a Trinitarian to relate to Oneness teaching very well. I am trying to understand but their view of God is unusual to me. I was an anti-Trinitarian at one time but I was never a Oneness person.
"Jesus is the Spirit in the book of Revelation doing his role of Holy Spirit."
How can you prove that Jesus is now the Spirit, as you claim in this sentence? Please show Scripture. The presence of Christ in the believer is mediated through the Spirit, but Jesus is not the Holy Spirit. The presence of the Father in the believer is mediated through the Holy Spirit, but the Father is not the Holy Spirit. They are distinct Persons.
In Scripture, Jesus was conveyed to the presence of the Father by the clouds in Acts 1. This implies that he occupies a glorified body that is material.
See these notes:
John 16:26-27 26 In that day you will ask in my name, and I do not say to you that I will ask the Father on your behalf; 27 for the Father himself loves you, because you have loved me and have believed that I came from God.
John 16:26 16:26 that day. See note on v. 23. in my name. See note on 14:13. I am not saying that I will ask. Does not contradict Rom 8:34; Heb 7:25; 1 John 2:1. Those passages focus on Jesus’ mediatorial role in the plan of redemption: he is the basis on which God accepts Christians. Jesus does not mechanically convey a Christian’s prayers to the Father, as if by so doing he restricts a Christian’s access to the Father; rather, his role is to provide his disciples with ready access to the Father.
(NIV Biblical Theology Study Bible)
If this is true, it seems like you realize the appearance of inter-personal activity, and you cannot account for this, so you treat the humanity of Jesus and the deity of the Father something like distinct "Persons" but you don't want to use the word..is this correct?
One of the issues in communication is your command of English. I have communicated with Filipinos a lot..only about a fifth of them communicate well in English, despite the fact that it is one of the common languages. It doesn't matter as much in normal conversations, but these are precise details and it is hard for me to understand your English. It would be impossible for me to understand your Tagalog so I am not trying to degrade you but there is some communications issues just due to different native languages. Additionally, it is difficult for a Trinitarian to relate to Oneness teaching very well. I am trying to understand but their view of God is unusual to me. I was an anti-Trinitarian at one time but I was never a Oneness person.
"Jesus is the Spirit in the book of Revelation doing his role of Holy Spirit."
How can you prove that Jesus is now the Spirit, as you claim in this sentence? Please show Scripture. The presence of Christ in the believer is mediated through the Spirit, but Jesus is not the Holy Spirit. The presence of the Father in the believer is mediated through the Holy Spirit, but the Father is not the Holy Spirit. They are distinct Persons.
In Scripture, Jesus was conveyed to the presence of the Father by the clouds in Acts 1. This implies that he occupies a glorified body that is material.
See these notes:
John 16:26-27 26 In that day you will ask in my name, and I do not say to you that I will ask the Father on your behalf; 27 for the Father himself loves you, because you have loved me and have believed that I came from God.
John 16:26 16:26 that day. See note on v. 23. in my name. See note on 14:13. I am not saying that I will ask. Does not contradict Rom 8:34; Heb 7:25; 1 John 2:1. Those passages focus on Jesus’ mediatorial role in the plan of redemption: he is the basis on which God accepts Christians. Jesus does not mechanically convey a Christian’s prayers to the Father, as if by so doing he restricts a Christian’s access to the Father; rather, his role is to provide his disciples with ready access to the Father.
(NIV Biblical Theology Study Bible)
Yes correct, Just like the Hypostatic union, the two unions (Divine and humanity) are never two persons, your question goes back to you?
Moses is not good in communication skills even in his own language, but God really uses him for the deliverance of Israel. I am like a babe is somewhat have my flaws, but the Scripture tells us in Matthew 11:25 “I thank You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from the wise and prudent and have revealed them to babes".
Read the book of Revelation chapter 2 and 3, you can see it was Jesus as the Spirit speaking to each seven churches.
In 2 Corinthians 3:17 tell us this way "Now the Lord is the Spirit", no doubt who is the Lord here is now the Spirit, see 1 Corinthians 8:6.
Again, see John 16:26-27 "In that day you will ask in my name, and I do not say to you that I will ask the Father on your behalf; 27 for the Father himself loves you, because you have loved me and have believed that I came from God." Cannot you see Jesus somewhat playing his words? Only have the spiritual discernment that can come to grasp this verse, that indeed Jesus the loving Father who hears our prayer for loving him.
Moses is not good in communication skills even in his own language, but God really uses him for the deliverance of Israel. I am like a babe is somewhat have my flaws, but the Scripture tells us in Matthew 11:25 “I thank You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from the wise and prudent and have revealed them to babes".
Read the book of Revelation chapter 2 and 3, you can see it was Jesus as the Spirit speaking to each seven churches.
In 2 Corinthians 3:17 tell us this way "Now the Lord is the Spirit", no doubt who is the Lord here is now the Spirit, see 1 Corinthians 8:6.
Again, see John 16:26-27 "In that day you will ask in my name, and I do not say to you that I will ask the Father on your behalf; 27 for the Father himself loves you, because you have loved me and have believed that I came from God." Cannot you see Jesus somewhat playing his words? Only have the spiritual discernment that can come to grasp this verse, that indeed Jesus the loving Father who hears our prayer for loving him.
Yes correct, Just like the Hypostatic union, the two unions (Divine and humanity) are never two persons, your question goes back to you?
Moses is not good in communication skills even in his own language, but God really uses him for the deliverance of Israel. I am like a babe is somewhat have my flaws, but the Scripture tells us in Matthew 11:25 “I thank You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from the wise and prudent and have revealed them to babes".
Read the book of Revelation chapter 2 and 3, you can see it was Jesus as the Spirit speaking to each seven churches.
In 2 Corinthians 3:17 tell us this way "Now the Lord is the Spirit", no doubt who is the Lord here is now the Spirit, see 1 Corinthians 8:6.
Again, see John 16:26-27 "In that day you will ask in my name, and I do not say to you that I will ask the Father on your behalf; 27 for the Father himself loves you, because you have loved me and have believed that I came from God." Cannot you see Jesus somewhat playing his words? Only have the spiritual discernment that can come to grasp this verse, that indeed Jesus the loving Father who hears our prayer for loving him.
Moses is not good in communication skills even in his own language, but God really uses him for the deliverance of Israel. I am like a babe is somewhat have my flaws, but the Scripture tells us in Matthew 11:25 “I thank You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from the wise and prudent and have revealed them to babes".
Read the book of Revelation chapter 2 and 3, you can see it was Jesus as the Spirit speaking to each seven churches.
In 2 Corinthians 3:17 tell us this way "Now the Lord is the Spirit", no doubt who is the Lord here is now the Spirit, see 1 Corinthians 8:6.
Again, see John 16:26-27 "In that day you will ask in my name, and I do not say to you that I will ask the Father on your behalf; 27 for the Father himself loves you, because you have loved me and have believed that I came from God." Cannot you see Jesus somewhat playing his words? Only have the spiritual discernment that can come to grasp this verse, that indeed Jesus the loving Father who hears our prayer for loving him.
UnitedWithChrist after the ascension of Christ the Holy Spirit began his role to the Church, now tell me who is the Spirit doing the role in the book of Revelation to the Seven Churches?
The history of Christian doctrine shows that the whole emphasis on "Oneness" comes from Augustine and the Western Church. Latin was never able to properly translate Greek terms regarding the Trinity, so it stuck to the one God. Persona, the Latin name for hypostasus, doesn't mean "person" as we have translated it into English. Persona is a mask or actor. The three hypostasis are NOT wearing masks, or acting, they are authentic, honest and real. The western church falls short of answering the Biblical question of who God is, although fortunately, through the ages, most western church did come to understand the 3 in 1. Unfortunately the Oneness Pentecostals are completely lost as to the real nature of God.
This is not to say God is not One, of course he is! But the Greek Church, particularly the Cappadocian Fathers, started with the Threeness of God. Rather than "persons" in Latin, the began with 3 hypostasis, and then moved to one being, or ousia. So, by starting with the threeness of God, and moving to the being of God, you don't lose the three separate hypostasis, namely the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Plus, you can see at a glance that the "being" of the three is the same.
In fact, God is love. If you only have one Hypostasis, you totally lose that quality. There is no object to receive the love of God, within Oneness. 1 John 4:8, 16, proclaims "God is love." Three hypostasis love each other. There is never a time when God is not completely loving, and out of this, came God's love for humanity. The Father loves the Son, the Son loves the Father. The Father loves the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit loves the Son, which is mutual, and the Holy Spirit loves the Father. There is always love. Without separate hypostasis, no one is loving anyone. A single being, in oneness, does not have anyone to love. Therefore God is NOT love, nor will God love humans, because love has no object within the oneness to love.
I have always looked at Oneness theology as being made up by people without a solid understanding of Greek and Hebrew, and a weak attempt to try and answer the questions of who God is. They start with the Shema in Deuteronomy 6, and then continue down a blind ally that is meaningless. I don't say this to insult people, but rather to gently show these people how lost they are. Like the video on page 1 of this thread, I also take Trinitarian belief to be salvic. Which means that Oneness is wrong, and the person is not saved.
We have been friends for 40 years with a man that we met in a regular Pentecostal Church. They believed in the Trinity. Many years later, he was trying to trip me up on the Trinity, and prove there was only one God. I hadn't been to seminary, at that time, yet, but I had studied the Trinity. I spent a lot of time arguing this with him, using Scripture to back myself up. He was dead stuck on Oneness, and went on to write a whole commentary in the Bible from a Oneness perspective. Except he had poor grammar, and the worst spelling. I tried to help him with his English, but gave up, overwhelmed by the English mistakes. I have literally never seen anyone with such a poor understanding of English. Yet, he published that commentary, and set himself up as a teacher and preacher, and many followed him. It's beyond my understanding why anyone would follow someone not just with bad writing skills, but also with a total disregard for theology. So, yes, it is important how and what you write. But if a Oneness Pentecostal had perfect English, but held onto bad theology, we still need to walk away from terrible theology.
This is not to say God is not One, of course he is! But the Greek Church, particularly the Cappadocian Fathers, started with the Threeness of God. Rather than "persons" in Latin, the began with 3 hypostasis, and then moved to one being, or ousia. So, by starting with the threeness of God, and moving to the being of God, you don't lose the three separate hypostasis, namely the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Plus, you can see at a glance that the "being" of the three is the same.
In fact, God is love. If you only have one Hypostasis, you totally lose that quality. There is no object to receive the love of God, within Oneness. 1 John 4:8, 16, proclaims "God is love." Three hypostasis love each other. There is never a time when God is not completely loving, and out of this, came God's love for humanity. The Father loves the Son, the Son loves the Father. The Father loves the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit loves the Son, which is mutual, and the Holy Spirit loves the Father. There is always love. Without separate hypostasis, no one is loving anyone. A single being, in oneness, does not have anyone to love. Therefore God is NOT love, nor will God love humans, because love has no object within the oneness to love.
I have always looked at Oneness theology as being made up by people without a solid understanding of Greek and Hebrew, and a weak attempt to try and answer the questions of who God is. They start with the Shema in Deuteronomy 6, and then continue down a blind ally that is meaningless. I don't say this to insult people, but rather to gently show these people how lost they are. Like the video on page 1 of this thread, I also take Trinitarian belief to be salvic. Which means that Oneness is wrong, and the person is not saved.
We have been friends for 40 years with a man that we met in a regular Pentecostal Church. They believed in the Trinity. Many years later, he was trying to trip me up on the Trinity, and prove there was only one God. I hadn't been to seminary, at that time, yet, but I had studied the Trinity. I spent a lot of time arguing this with him, using Scripture to back myself up. He was dead stuck on Oneness, and went on to write a whole commentary in the Bible from a Oneness perspective. Except he had poor grammar, and the worst spelling. I tried to help him with his English, but gave up, overwhelmed by the English mistakes. I have literally never seen anyone with such a poor understanding of English. Yet, he published that commentary, and set himself up as a teacher and preacher, and many followed him. It's beyond my understanding why anyone would follow someone not just with bad writing skills, but also with a total disregard for theology. So, yes, it is important how and what you write. But if a Oneness Pentecostal had perfect English, but held onto bad theology, we still need to walk away from terrible theology.
This kind of message is somewhat humiliating just to harass the faith of Oneness, but rinitarian Tertullian wrote the following: “The simple, indeed I will not call them unwise and unlearned (referring to Oneness believer), who always constitute the majority of believers" ... Tertullian himself states that the oneness believers outnumbered those who believed in Trinity during his time.