I have chosen to answer a person calling himself: Faithful witness on a blog called *Day of reckoning* with a bunch of shallow arguments he posts on a regular basis that he somehow thinks destroys Oneness doctrine, nothing could be further from the truth.... So At the following
http://onenessheresy.blogspot.com/2009/03/author-has-made-statement-that-because.html#comment-form
I decided to bring his comment over to my blog and answer him just in case he would not have posted it.
FW:Adam preceded Jesus in the sense that he was a type or shadow of Jesus the second Adam. Oh, and by the way, "In the beginning The Word was with God."
Mlculwell:(Psalm 33:6 Septuagint *Greek of the OT*)the word/Logos came from the breath of God's... So the day you can make the word/Logos by the breath of God's mouth another person of God is the day you will have an argument from (John 1:1) and concerning your so called argument On Adam being a type or shadow of Jesus...
(1st.Cor. 15: 45-46) Says: howbeit that was not first which was SPIRITUAL but that which is natural, AFTERWARD that which is spiritual. if Jesus already existed as another person it would be impossible for this passage to be worded the way it is! the passage is talking about the incarnation. God always existed as spiritual but the passage has Jesus coming after Adam and that is because Jesus did not pre-exist accept as his deity that of God the father and not "God the son."
FW:Two natures cannot communicate with each other. A man without a spirit is dead.
Your argument is ad hock.
mlculwell: If you can find where I argued for two natures in this I will print this out and eat it? the fact is I did not! I am not talking about two persons of God! I am talking about the real son of God who was a man and the real spirit who is the only God and Jesus as the real man was given that spirit by no measure.(John 3:34)
FW:I did not imply that the Godhead or Jesus is a result of a sexual union. It is the other way around, the relationship with a married couple is meant to mirror the relationship held within the Godhead between the Son and the Father.
mlculwell: You gave the scripture pointing to the unity like a husband and wife which can only be explained in a sexual union. you wrote the following:"Genesis 2:24 Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife and they become one(echad) flesh. (esv, parenthesis mine)"
FW:Now let me ask you how many Lord's do you see here?
Psalm 110:1 The Lord says to my Lord:Sit at my right hand,until I make your enemies your footstool
mlculwell: The passage is a prophecy of the coming incarnation...It is also found in (Psalm 45:6) and (Hebrews 1:8-9) Did you purposely omit those facts or was that an accident? Because the both says: God even thy God hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. How does God have a God and fellow God's? The fact is the first part deals with his deity in the incarnation the other part deals with his humanity being incarnated By the One LORD above all men (Isa. 11:2, John 3:34, Rev. 5;6)
I initially dealt with your false view of Gen.1:26 where God said let us make man in our image after our likeness. God was not speaking to another person of God! God was already giving us a glimpse of the incarnation and included the son(His real sinless son man) in the incarnation when he said let us as God was invisible that no man ever saw nor could see(John 1:18,5:37,1st. Tim.1:17,) Jesus is the Image of the invisible God that Adam who came before Jesus was created..(Col.1:15, Romans 5:14)
2 comments:
Your explaination of Genesis 1:26 is ridiculous, here is why. You must either believe that the Genesis narritive is a historic account or that it is in some way metaphorical in its writing. Did God actual say that what is written? Of course He did. Therefore since the fall had not yet occured and the context of the passage has nothing to do with redemption, your argument is one of little basis. Perhaps it might have stood a chance if that were the only time the plural was used in reference to God by God. But as you well know this was no isolated incident. (Genesis 1:1, 3:22, 11:7-8,Isaiah 6:8.) For a relativley brief overview I will refer you to my post titled "The Triune God of the Old Testament."
Using the greek OT to derive word meaning may not be the best way to go. Why not use the Hebrew? Perhaps it is because your reading into words becomes far more difficult.
Time and time again the scripture expounds upon the fact that the Son came from heaven. He was sent from heaven. Never does the scripture say that the Father has come to earth, or that the Father has been manifest in the flesh.
(Heb 10:5, John 3:16-17, Gal 4:4, John 6:33)
1John 5:20 And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true; and we are in him who is true, in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life.
So far as my use of Genesis 2:24; The verse was used to demonstrate the meaning of the Hebrew word one, and nothing else. Don't isogete my own writings please. I know it is hard, but contain yourself.
John 1:18 No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father, he has declared Him.
Tell me who walked with Adam, who appeared to Lot and Abram, who wrestled with Jacob? Who spoke with Hagar? When was Christ at the side (or bosom) of the Father?
By the way, give me your expert exegesis on the verse below. After all your attitude suggests far superior wisdom to the likes of a simpleton like me.
Acts 7:55 But he, full of the Holy Spirit, gazed into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God.
Get 'em, Manny. I have delivered enough answers to him, but he now refuses to post them!
Post a Comment