Shalom! My name is Adam Pastor

Welcome to ADONI MESSIAH which means
"My Lord Messiah" -
a fitting epithet to who Jesus (or Yeshua) is!

Here, I attempt to present the Apostolic Truths according to the Scriptures, that there is
One GOD, the Father, namely, YAHWEH,
and One Lord, GOD's only begotten Son,
Yeshua the Messiah.

And that one day YAHWEH will send His Son back to Earth to inaugurate the Everlasting Kingdom of GOD



Enjoy!


Sunday, November 30, 2014

There is only ONE GOD and Jesus is his SON.


There is only ONE GOD and Jesus is his SON.



Came across this defense of the One God view on Facebook.
It was given by someone who used to be a Oneness believer! Whose eyes has been opened. I refer to him as JB.

May the ONE TRUE GOD continue to open the eyes of Oneness people that they may see His Son, our one Mediator, the man Christ Jesus. Amen!

So you dont believe God and Jesus are the same so how do you do away with 1Tim 3:16 because God's word does not lie and does not change

 JB's Response:

This goes back to the fact that you are relying on a translation (KJV) authorized and manipulated by Catholics to prove your variation of a Catholic doctrine: that Jesus IS GOD.


  • 1 Timothy 3:16 (KJV) 

16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory. 

Many try to use this Scripture to prove their theory of a literal incarnation of God into the flesh. Hence, their unbiblical phrases “God robed Himself in flesh” and “God became flesh” etc.

In the oldest GREEK manuscripts, the word for God (theos) is NOT IN THIS VERSE. The verse in the older manuscripts actually reads: And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness:
"HE" was manifest in the flesh…


... notice other Bible translations, which were translated from manuscripts MUCH OLDER than the manuscripts the KJV was translated from:

1 Timothy 3:16 (ESV)
16 Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of godliness: 

He was manifested in the flesh, 
vindicated by the Spirit, 
seen by angels, 
proclaimed among the nations, 
believed on in the world, 
taken up in glory.

...
It simply does not reconcile to say that GOD was vindicated (justified) by HIS OWN SPIRIT. Why would God need to be JUSTIFIED by ANYONE, especially Himself? Yet, the MAN Christ Jesus, would absolutely need to be justified by the SPIRIT OF GOD.

Hence, this verse is NOT saying that God became flesh. It is saying that CHRIST was flesh. And this statement was made by Paul to contradict the false Gnostic doctrine that Jesus was not really a "MAN." John also battled this false Gnostic doctrine in his epistle with such statements as 2 John 7.

What this false Gnostic doctrine eventually developed into was the belief that Jesus was both GOD AND MAN, or as it is currently labeled the "dual nature" doctrine that is subscribed to by Trinitarians and Oneness proponents alike.

So that you can see for yourself that the word "God" (Greek = theos) is not even in the older original manuscripts please click here: 
http://biblehub.com/interlinear/1_timothy/3-16.htm

...
A quote made to me by a Oneness pastor: 
"The scriptures are not going to say in plain letters that Jesus has a dual nature." 
Since, beginning to preach the WHOLE TRUTH of who Christ is, the SON OF GOD, and NOT God robed in flesh, many have had to come to grips with the TRUTH and admit, as I myself had to do, that the BIBLE does NOT teach a “dual nature” in Christ. What many are unaware of is that the doctrine of a "dual nature" in Christ was developed by the TRINITARIANS long AFTER the death of the Apostles. Both the doctrines of a "dual nature" in Christ AND the doctrine of an "incarnation" were eventually summarized in the Catholic doctrine known as the "hypostatic union." ...

These TRINITARIAN doctrines of a "dual nature" and an "incarnation" although they got their start in the 2nd and 3rd centuries, did not fully evolve until the 4th and 5th centuries, more than 300 years AFTER the death of the Apostles. Hence, THAT IS WHY Jesus or his Apostles NEVER spoke of a "dual nature" in Christ, because THERE WAS NO SUCH concept. It was developed LATER by MEN trying to make their false doctrine FIT into the Scriptures.

Fast forward into the early 1900's with me... Many men around the turn of the century who had previously been TRINITARIAN, began to receive the revelation of baptism in Jesus' Name instead of the trinitarian formula:
"Father, Son, and Holy Ghost." This was WONDERFUL!


The problem is that once God gave them this revelation, they began to leave their TRINITARIAN denominations, and began to develop ONENESS denominations. The fault was that in their transition, they brought with them the man-made false doctrines of a "dual nature" and an "incarnation." They simply took these EXTRA-Biblical concepts and gave them new definitions. Such as, when the Trinitarians developed they doctrine of the "incarnation" they believe that Jesus Christ pre-existed the womb of Mary as the pre-incarnate "God the Son" as they erroneously call him. Therefore, they believe when he came out of heaven, and took upon himself flesh, and that was the "incarnation." The Oneness proponents continued believing this erroneous doctrine, but defined it in a different way. They believed that God the Father, took upon himself, flesh, and became His own Son, and that was their definition of an "incarnation." However, BOTH interpretations are wrong in that the BIBLE says NOTHING about an "incarnation" AT ALL.

The same mistake was made with the man-made doctrine of men referred to as the "dual nature" of Christ. The Trinitarians developed this doctrine with the understanding that Christ "divine" nature was "the Son of God" and his human nature was as "the son of man." The Oneness proponents continued in this UNBIBLICAL fallacy by defining the "dual nature" in Christ as his "divine" nature being "the Spirit of God" and his "human" nature being "flesh." The problem is that the BIBLE NEVER SAYS that Christ had a "dual nature," as many now are being honest enough to admit.

Those who believe in the false ASSUMPTION of a "dual nature" in Christ, make the fatal error of interpreting the WHOLE Bible by a FALSE ASSUMPTION. 

For example:
  • The Bible CLEARLY says that God sent HIS SON. Yet, the Oneness doctrine, because of this ASSUMPTION, teaches that God did not sent HIS SON, but sent HIMSELF.
  • The Bible CLEARLY says that Jesus HAS A GOD. Yet, the Oneness doctrine, because of this ASSUMPTION, teaches that Jesus somehow is his OWN GOD.
  • The Bible CLEARLY says that Jesus prayed to HIS GOD. Yet, the Oneness doctrine, because of this ASSUMPTION, teaches that Jesus was somehow praying to HIMSELF.
  • The Bible CLEARLY says that God testified of HIS SON. Yet, the Oneness doctrine, because of this ASSUMPTION, denies God's testimony and teaches that God testified of HIMSELF.
  • The Bible CLEARLY teaches that Christ was tempted and that GOD CANNOT be tempted. Yet, the Oneness doctrine, because of this ASSUMPTION, teaches that God WAS TEMPTED in that they believe Jesus WAS GOD.

The list goes ON and ON...

The point is, that because of one false ASSUMPTION (that they CANNOT PROVE with even JUST ONE VERSE) they then filter the ENTIRE BIBLE through this FALSE ASSUMPTION.

Why will they not just BELIEVE GOD? Why will they not believe God's testimony of HIS SON? Why must they try to change God's testimony to fit their ASSUMPTION?

1 John 5:10 (KJV)
10 He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son.

I ask all my brothers and sisters currently believing the Oneness doctrine to be HONEST with the SCRIPTURES. Please admit to YOURSELF that it is ludicrous to filter the ENTIRE BIBLE through an ASSUMPTION that you CANNOT prove with Scripture? Why not BELIEVE GOD? Why not believe GOD'S OWN TESTIMONY instead of the ignoring what God's Word PLAINLY declares, just to believe the ASSUMPTIONS of MEN?

...

[We] must allow Jesus HIMSELF to interpret exactly what he means, instead of jumping to [our] own conclusions.

  • John 10:30 (KJV)
30 I and my Father are one.

Is Jesus claiming to LITERALLY be the Father, or is he declaring that he and the Father are one in Unity?

Scripture must interpret Scripture.

In Jesus' prayer to the Father in John 17 He tells us EXACTLY how he was one with the Father:

John 17:22 (KJV)
22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:

He prayed that we would be one as "we" (Christ and God - Father and Son) are one.  ... we can't be LITERALLY one with another human being or LITERALLY be one with God. THE ONLY way we can be one with anybody is in UNITY. When a man marries a woman they become one flesh (Matthew 19:5). But this is OBVIOUSLY NOT in a LITERAL sense. The man and the woman are ONE in UNITY, but not LITERALLY the same person. 

Hence, that is why Jesus prayed that we would be one, even as "we" (Father and Son) are one. So, if Christ and God were LITERALLY one, and I'm supposed to be one "even" as they are one, then that would mean that I would have to be a LITERAL incarnation of God. Obviously, this is NOT the case. Jesus is explaining that he is one with the Father in UNITY, but not LITERALLY.

If you go back and read the whole context of John 10 you will see this distinction between God and Christ all over that chapter.


...
Everything I have said above is ABSOLUTELY true. The Bible teaches that Jesus is the SON of God. But, Oneness doctrine teaches that Jesus is BOTH God AND the Son of God. 

...

  • Colossians 2:9 (KJV)
9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

The fulness of God was IN Christ. But Oneness theology teaches that the fulness of God WAS Christ. The fulness of God should be in us, but that doesn't make us any more a literal incarnation of God that it did Jesus Christ. Scripture proves this:

Ephesians 3:19 (KJV)
19 And to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fulness of God.


Obviously, we can have the "fulness of God" in us but that doesn't make us literally God. Neither did it make Jesus Christ a literal incarnation of God as Oneness theology claims. Even the context of the ENTIRE book of Colossians proves this:

Colossians 1:19 (KJV)
19 For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;

It pleased the FATHER that the fulness should dwell in Christ. Even in this verse there is a clear distinction between the FATHER and the SON. But, obviously, you don't ever here modalists quoting this verse, yet this verse interprets the Colossians 2:9.

In Summary, the fullness of God was in Christ AS IT PLEASED THE FATHER, but the fullness of God should be in us too, yet that doesn't make us a literal incarnation of God. Neither did it make the MAN Christ Jesus a literal incarnation of God, but he was a man anointed of God and sent by God:

Acts 10:38 (KJV)
38 How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.

Again, God was "WITH" Him, and NOT God WAS him as Oneness theology claims.

In summary, Paul is saying the same thing in Colossians 2:9 that he was saying here:

2 Corinthians 5:18–19 (KJV)
18 And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation; 19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.

Did Paul teach that God WAS CHRIST as the Oneness doctrine proclaims? 

Or did Paul ACTUALLY teach that God was IN CHRIST?

Obviously, Paul ACTUALLY taught the latter.



Do you believe in oneness? ... John 20.17 ... He sent himself. So he spoke in third person there .

 JB's Response:

No. I no longer believe what the Oneness doctrine teaches about Jesus Christ.

But as I stated in my initial post, I believe there is only ONE GOD, and Jesus is His SON.

John 20:17 (KJV)
17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.


He did NOT send Himself. 

John 7:28–29 (KJV)
28 Then cried Jesus in the temple as he taught, saying, Ye both know me, and ye know whence I am: and I am not come of myself, but he that sent me is true, whom ye know not. 29 But I know him: for I am from him, and he hath sent me.

There is not ONE VERSE in the entire Bible that says Jesus sent himself. It actually says that God sent Christ. 

And he is not speaking in third person in John 20:17. But he IS speaking in third person here:

John 17:1–3 (KJV)
1 These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee: 2 As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him. 3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

Jesus prayed to HIS GOD, and stated that HIS GOD is the ONLY TRUE GOD.


...
1) Scripture does NOT teach that Jesus was the Almighty God AND man. It actually teaches that Jesus is a man, that was anointed by the Almighty God to be the Christ.

2) We have already addressed I Timothy 3:16 above. ...

3) John 8:58 (KJV)
58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

Many mistake this verse to mean that Jesus was claiming to be the great I AM of the Old Testament (Exodus 3:14-15). However, one must understand the entire context of the gospel of John to TRULY understand Jesus’ statement in this particular verse. Remember: SCRIPTURE MUST INTERPRET SCRIPTURE, as we are NEVER to privately interpret any one single verse (II Peter 1:20).

Here is a list of ALL of the OTHER "I am" statements in the gospel of John. 

John 6:35, 48
John 8:12
John 9:5
John 10:11
John 11:25
John 14:6
John 15:1

Notice this vitally important fact: in NONE of these statements is Jesus claiming to be the GREAT I AM of Exodus 3:14. Jesus is simply stating what he is: the bread of life, the light of the world, the good shepherd, the resurrection, the way, the truth, and the life, and the true vine. But in NONE of these statements is Jesus claiming to BE GOD. To jump to this conclusion concerning John 8:58 is to ignore the rest of the gospel of John.

So, that leads us to this question: “What was Jesus claiming to be here?”

He had already plainly told them just a few verses prior:

John 8:25–29 (KJV)
25 Then said they unto him, Who art thou? And Jesus saith unto them, Even the same that I said unto you from the beginning. 26 I have many things to say and to judge of you: but he that sent me is true; and I speak to the world those things, which I have heard of him. 27 They understood not that he spake to them of the Father. 28 Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things. 29 And he that sent me is with me: the Father hath not left me alone; for I do always those things that please him.

Notice verse 28: Jesus makes an “I am” statement here as well, but who is he claiming to be in this statement?
“THE SON OF MAN.” He is NOT claiming to be GOD. He then goes on to explain his relationship with God in the verse 29.


As we stated, Scripture MUST interpret Scripture. Many jump to the conclusion that Jesus was claiming to be the Father in verse 58, but neither the Old Testament prophecies about the Christ, or the New Testament explanations of the Christ teach that Christ claimed to be God. 

Notice the WHOLE chapter of John 8. It clearly shows distinctions EVERYWHERE between the Father and Son, God and Christ:

Notice how the Apostle John closed out his gospel:

John 20:31 (KJV) 
31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name. 

John was not saying that Jesus IS GOD. He, through the CONTEXT of the entire book, was ALWAYS declaring that Jesus is the Christ, the SON of God.

So, in John 8:58, Jesus is not claiming to be the great I am. He is claiming that before Abraham was born, God already knew that He (God) would send His Son (the MAN Christ Jesus) to die for our sins.


...
Jesus has all power because it was GIVEN to him by God:

Matthew 28:19 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

So, Jesus' power was GIVEN to him. But by whom?

John 17:1-3 These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee: As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him. And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.


John 3:34-35 For he whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God: for God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him. The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand.

...
When a King would send an ambassador into another country to conquer it, he would give that ambassador ALL power over that territory. That does not mean that the King gave up any of his power. It simply means that the King gave the ambassador AS MUCH power as the King himself has. This is the EXACT dynamic going on between God and Christ.

Truly sound words by JB
Amen!