The issue is as follows……..is Jesus talking to Himself?? If so, Who answered when He was baptized from heaven?? Is Jesus just a Divine Ventriloquist, throwing His voice so it SEEMS the Father is answering??

And,if THAT is true, then you have made Him a deceiver, because He Himself said the voice from heaven was there to confirm HIS Words. In other words, He LIED about that voice being a confirmation from outside Himself. He just threw His voice to deceive the disciples into THINKING this was confirmation from outside Himself.

You make Jesus a 2 bit Vegas novelty act, and a liar.

Also,there’sthe little problem of Jesus giving things to Himself, coming to Himself, claiming to send ANOTHER after He departs when He’s NOT really going to the Father because He IS the father, and He’s not really leaving as He claimed and sending the Spirit because Jesus IS the Spirit and therefore He never left (He lied again) and never sent ANOTHER (which in the Greek means another BESIDE Himself) since He has no other beside Himself to send (Either Jesus just keeps on lying……..or you are. I know which way I’m leaning).

(MN: Actually you haven’t you haven’t done any such thing. And your statement about my own beliefs merely indicates that you really have no understanding about Trinitarian teachings. And actually, the essay wouldn’t sound the same because then you would have a person sending himself, giving things to himself, and being in relationship with himself. Why do you guys seem to think that you have addressed an issue just because you say you have addressed it? It’s a really interesting phenomenon. It’s right up there with believing that somehow, the 1611 Kings James translation is an inspired translation. By the way, I assume the Germans have an inspired translation as well, along with the French, the Burmeses, and the Oclawan Indians in the Amzon Basin. )

(MN: I don’t know what “he walked away from that on his own terms” means. He has not said that he has walked away from oneness doctrine. It has proven impossible to get him to give a clear, unambiguous Trinitarian confession. Every time he opens his mouth to talk about it [when anyone can get him to talk about it] he gives a statement that is more reminicient of a Oneness confession. He is still a part of “Higher Ground Always Abounding Assemblies [he’s the vice pre-late there. Do you really think they are going to make a Trinitarian a vice-prelate?]. Click on the “National Registry” at the home page. Jakes’ name is the second one listed. )

Gino Jennings from what I heard sticks to scripture and you people seek to bring him down. As I said I’m not defending him because I’m a follower because I follow CHRIST, but I’ve listened to him and I’ve heard more scriptures than anything with a few opinions that I’ve heard almost every pastor do.

(MN: Jehovah’s Witnesses stick to Scripture. The difficulty is the interpretation they put on that Scripture. )

The people in onenss, Jesus only, or Jesus movement you so obviously try to mock have not that I know of ever created tons upon tons, upon tons of websites to disdain a trinitarian. (MN: This demonstrates that you don’t “know of.” Oneness dudes come by and regularly dump links to sites that denigrate and attempt to mock the Trinitarian view. )

I’ve counted well over 500 to 1000 from just typing in words that are contorted to destroying oneness and calling it a heresy, and it got me thinking.

While websites like this expose true false pastors, i’ve seen some and they’re on here true enough. You then turn around and spurn the truth. You say its not truth, but if its biblical then it is truth. I don’t hear people lining up to join the oneness faith that people claim is heresy and people run too for itchy ears. I’ve heard speaking and its hard pressed to the point, against sin, all about JESUS talk. That doesn’t sound like something somebody wants to join.

Given notice we jump around holler speak in tongues, means abosolutely nothing if you don’t have a walk with the one GOD JESUS. If you have no walk then strong delusion has been handed too you. So while websites like this one bash the truth also and has become unsubcribed too because of the bashing by others as well proves that while people claim to follow the most high GOD they clearly take too much time on their hands with so-called Christians then sinners of the world. So in defense of oneness, don’t bash it because the truth escapes you or even if you just don’t know it yet. I encourage you to find more about it instead of clinging to tradition and get back to the bible.

(MN: I have no idea what you said in the the last couple of paragraphs. Maybe you’d like to try again. )

Thank you so much!!!…I’ve responded to the both of you by email…and Gary, I promise to go easy on your fingers in the future!!!…You need those!!!! lol…Be blessed gentlemen, and check your emails as I have responded with a message for the both of you…

In Him,
R4C

Hello!!! Remember me? Yep, it’s me, Ready4change.

Well, I just wanted to let everyone know that I am doing well, and I am currently still praying and seeking the Lord for a new church home here in the area, as I have visited one and plan to visit another very soon.

I’ll keep this as brief as possible.

I am certainly convinced of the orthodox teaching of the triune nature of God, so do not take my request as a statement of unbelief. I was wondering if you could do something for me (particularly Gary V). I’ve found myself reading from time to time articles written by those who believe in the oneness doctrine, not because I am wavering, but because I feel the need to prepare myself to defend the truth of scripture when the time arises.

I think the best way to do that would be to investigate the grounds by which the oneness doctrine is formed. I must admit to you, it has been a very gruesome experience for me, because what I am discovering very rapidly is that whenever I have defended the oneness doctrine, I have done so with a partial view of scripture. Since that has been the case, when I read some articles (old and new) written by oneness adherents, I have even found some arguments and claims that I did not even use myself when I was debating for that position!
Personally, this has revealed to me how much of a novice that I really am in the scriptures.

Let me explain it the best way that I can.

For years I have been learning parts of scripture, but there have only been a few times where I have followed the train of reference of a scripture throughout its existence in the bible to learn what the whole of scripture was saying concerning that subject. I was not unaware of this necessity, but the reason I did it was because I really only wanted to see things through “oneness” eyes or the slant and bent by which I was taught, so I only looked at scripture through “oneness” lenses.

So, in light of this information and where the Lord has brought me to now, I have placed myself in somewhat of an incognito position (I was in public ministry as a oneness believer) and have now assumed the role of “student of the word” rather than “preacher of the word” other than when the bible declares how we should share the gospel with unbelievers and be living epistles or ministers of the new covenant.

My next statement is to by no means put myself on a pedestal, just expressing to you how the Holy Spirit has led me to study His word. Instead of looking at parts of scriptures for “revelation” or “to get fired-up sermons” or to “prove trinitarians wrong” like I used to, I am now simply studying the word of God for personal edification, teaching my family and expressing to others the gospel of Jesus Christ and the gift of salvation when it does not necessarily involve public ministry (meaning sharing the gospel with whom the Spirit directs).

I am reading chronologically through the Old Testament repeatedly, and as far as the New Testament is concerned, I have adopted a method that I heard from Dr. John McArthur a few years ago. He suggested that in order to know what scripture “means” we must first know what it “says”. So he advocates every believer to first possess a working knowledge of the bible for what it says, then and only then can you understand what it means by what it says.

I still remember this method like it was yesterday (which is why I don’t know why I did not adopt it sooner), where McArthur states to take no more than 7-8 chapters of the New Testament at a time and read those same chapters for 30 days. When finished, move to the next group of 7 or 8 chapters and read that for 30 days. Whenever there is a book with less than 7 chapters like Phillipians, Jude, the epistles of John or Galatians, then just study those books in their entirety for 30 days.

When you have books of more than 8 chapters like the gospels, Acts, Romans and the letters to Corinthians, break those into divisions of 7 and read each division for 30 days. McArthur states that this will take about 2 and a half years to go through the new testament, but by the end of that period you will have a firm grasp on what the bible “says”.

I realize that at distinct times I can do more than read it, because McArthur even makes the true statement of how one can begin to see the flow of scripture and make notes along the way when the text is grasped (for example, if I read the book of Jude multiple times for 15 days in constant prayer and meditation, by the 16th day I should be able to know the text well enough to where I can begin to point out key words, themes or ideas, other references in scripture, cultural context, historical context and eventually linguistic context, etc.,).

I think the idea is to gain a good memorization of what the scripture says and to be able to retain it by repetition. The first book that I am beginning with is Romans, and for the last few days I have been reading chapters 1 through 8. I know it will take me a while, but I am willing to know the truth of God’s word rather than base my theology on partial scriptures. Well, I said all of that to say this. Since I have my hands full with going back to the very “basics” of Christian faith, would any of you be so kind as to take a look at this website (http://www.angelfire.com/space/thegospeltruth/trinity.html), particularly this article (http://www.angelfire.com/space/thegospeltruth/trinity/articles/questions.html) written by oneness adherents?

I am not convinced by what it says, neither am I concerned, I have just never read this “perspective” before and would like someone who I consider to be well-versed in the scriptures to critique it for me. I have to remind you that the majority of my family on both sides is Oneness Apostolic, and many of my friends also adhere to the same doctrine, so I’d like to be able to respond with a prayerful, biblical response if I am encountered with similar questions and arguments. I realize this may take a while, so I understand if you do not immediately respond to me. GaryV, if you want to correspond by email, it is anointed2servejc@hotmail.com

In Him,
R4C

(MN: My man, my mouth is still hanging open after reading your comment. Praise God [and don’t any of you tell anyone I said that] for what He is so richly working in your life! )

Norman: But there was no explosion.

Harry Mudd: I lied.

Norman: But…

Kirk: He lied. Everything Harry tells you is a lie. Remember that. Everything Harry tells you is a lie.

Harry Mudd: Now, listen to this carefully, Norman. I am lying.

Norman: You say you are…lying, but if everything you say is a lie then you are telling the truth but you cannot tell the truth because everything you say is a lie but you lie, you tell the truth, but you cannot for you lie…illogical! Illogical!

Though, after all, I AM the Minister of Monikers

I think that’s great brother about your boy!! I have the same experience with my son. He loves it too! And the Scripture references bring out so much as well, it makes the process of establishing them in the Word SO much easier.

What are you doing for the memorization?? We talk about the points and I let him give me illustrations so I know he understands the concepts,but I really haven’t thought about memorizing the questions/answers.

Hey..I’ve started doing the catechism with my 7 year old son and guess what?, . he loves it! (Albeit I think his greatest joy is that he can memorise far more than his Dad!)

Mentioning the catechism, a simple thing struck me that showed this generation’s departure from the word. Out of the 107 catechisms the 2nd reads:

Q. 2. What rule hath God given to direct us how we may glorify and enjoy him?
A. The Word of God, which is contained in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, is the only rule to direct us how we may glorify and enjoy him.

They submitted themselves to the authority of the Word of God. What a shame on many of us today.

He PURPOSELY left the disciples with the ERRONEOUS impression that ANOTHER Divine Person was validating Him and His ministry.

The Oneness Jesus is a deceiver………

“The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit.”

I’m not going to get into a thorough exegetical expedition, rather be simplistic as possible. In this context (above) of Scripture Paul is clearly referring to the Trinitarian God. In addition, uncover Eph. 4:4-6, “There is one body (of Christ) one SPIRIT… one LORD… one GOD and FATHER of all who is over all and through all in all.” (3 in 1)

In the above context of Scripture, Paul paints the picture clearly that the God of Scripture is Trinitarian.

Finally, Matthew 28:19, “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.” (3 in 1)

If you can notice Jesus said “The Name (hence, not names).” “Name,” is in the singular tense, in addition, Jesus named three persons Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The Scripture speaks for itself. There are many more Scriptures that solidify this doctrine.

As I stated, earlier the doctrine that you proclaim was condemned at the Council of Nicea in 325 (Modalism/ Sabellism). My question is, “Why do you defend a heresy, rather than the truth?” Again, please reason with me, I’m not trying to humiliate you as a person or win a theological debate, but rather, state the facts (truth) so you may come away with a clear understanding of the nature of God. This is essential when we are referring to the Biblical God. However, if you do not accept that the God of Scripture is Trinitarian, you are in danger of following another god. If we cannot concretely solidify the nature of God, how can we accurately interpret Scripture on a whole? I hope and pray the few Scriptures and the brief history I conveyed, shed some light on this most important subject.

Otherwise you have the even DUMBER situation of God the Son praying to God the Father

In John 17 God the Son is praying to God the Father. Just as in Hebrews 1:8-9 God the Father says to God the Son:

But of the Son he says,

“Your throne, O God, is forever and ever,
the scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your kingdom.
9) You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness;therefore God, your God, has anointed you
with the oil of gladness beyond your companions.”

(I used ESV because that’s what is commonly used on this blog, but read it in the KJV, it reads the same.)

Is the Father “dumb” for speaking to His Son?

There is a real Trinity at work. God is One comprised of 3 and they even talk to each other.

It was not Jesus telling himself of His own throne, it was HIS FATHER telling Him of it. And the conversation takes place in Heaven, so you can’t claim it was discussion towards a “man”.

Conclusion?? NOT.