Do Apostolics (Oneness Pentecostals) deny the Son of God?

[robert skynner]

“I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins. Then said they unto him, Who art thou? And Jesus saith unto them, Even the same that I said unto you from the beginning. 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. They understood not that he spake to them of the Father. 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.” (John 8:24-28, KJV).



Oneness Pentecostals as well as Christadelphians and Jehovah’s Witnesses will all deny that the Son is the I AM (YHWH), and instead will rather affirm a created Son who comes into existence at a point in time. Most Oneness people however, will try and get around this verse, by claiming that “Jesus” is the “I AM,” by which they only mean that God the Father, whom the call “Jesus” is YHWH the one true God. This is easily resolved by reading from verse 16 onto verse 28. For at verse 16 the Son speaks, and says; “I am not alone, but am with the Father who sent me.” Then at verse 28 the Son is still speaking when he identifies himself as the “Son of Man.” Thus the speaker for this entire passage is the Son of Man, and not God the Father.


So verse 24 clearly states that IF A PERSON DOES NOT BELIEVE THAT THE SON IS THE "I AM" (EGO EIMI) THEN THAT PERSON IS NOT A TRUE BELIEVER, AND WILL DIE IN HIS SINS. So to deny that the speaker, the Son of Man is the eternal unchanging ‘I am’ that is Yahweh God, a person will die in their sins and cannot be saved according to John 8:28.

 

[Albion]

"Oneness Pentecostals" (but not all "Apostolic" churches or Pentecostal churches) are anti-Trinitarian, that's right.

 

[robert skynner]

"Oneness Pentecostals" (but not all "Apostolic" churches or Pentecostal churches) are anti-Trinitarian, that's right.

Yes, but in order to prevent opposition by Trinitarians, and also to join local ecumenical pastoral groups, some of these Oneness people play word games and will identify themselves as believing in a tri-unity or even sometimes in a trinity, simply to stop any opposition by trinitarians. As a former apostolic myself, I know that they like to play these word games and often what a Oneness (apostolic) pastor will say to Trinitarian lay people, in an attempt to sheep steal them, is completely different to what he might say to their pastors when he will want to come across as less extreme and more ecumenical.

 

[gadar perets]

“I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins. Then said they unto him, Who art thou? And Jesus saith unto them, Even the same that I said unto you from the beginning. 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. They understood not that he spake to them of the Father. 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.” (John 8:24-28, KJV).

...

So verse 24 clearly states that IF A PERSON DOES NOT BELIEVE THAT THE SON IS THE "I AM" (EGO EIMI) THEN THAT PERSON IS NOT A TRUE BELIEVER, AND WILL DIE IN HIS SINS. So to deny that the speaker, the Son of Man is the eternal unchanging ‘I am’ that is Yahweh God, a person will die in their sins and cannot be saved according to John 8:28.

Interesting, the way you capitalized "I AM" to make it read like Exodus 3:14. Not even modern trinitarian translators would do such a thing.

John 8:24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.
​

"I am" ... who or what?

John 8:23 And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world.​

Therefore, verse 24 means, "...for if you do not believe that I am from above and, therefore, sent by my Father, you shall die in your sins."

In the next chapter, the blind man said, "Ego eimi" (John 9:9) proving that the mere utterance of those words does NOT mean one is proclaiming to be the great I AM of Exodus 3:14.

To answer your question, no, oneness Pentecostals do not deny the Son of God. They deny the true Father by making the Son the Father.

 

[robert skynner]

Interesting, the way you capitalized "I AM" to make it read like Exodus 3:14. Not even modern trinitarian translators would do such a thing.

John 8:24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.
​

"I am" ... who or what?

John 8:23 And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world.​

Therefore, verse 24 means, "...for if you do not believe that I am from above and, therefore, sent by my Father, you shall die in your sins."

In the next chapter, the blind man said, "Ego eimi" (John 9:9) proving that the mere utterance of those words does NOT mean one is proclaiming to be the great I AM of Exodus 3:14.

To answer your question, no, oneness Pentecostals do not deny the Son of God. They deny the true Father by making the Son the Father.

Those Jews whom Christ was addressing, knew very well that I AM is a derived and shortened form of the divine name YAHWEH, which the Jews were not supposed to utter in daily life. At John 8:58, his use of I AM caused the jews to try to kill him ... WHY, if I AM only means I AM this or I AM that; with absolutely no reference to God? In Judaism to kill a person by stoning was a sin, unless it was for some heinous crime such as blasphemy, and at John 8:58, those jews did try to kill him, for blasphemy, as they very well understood Christ's application of I AM to himself as a claim to deity on Christ's part.

 

[gadar perets]

Those Jews whom Christ was addressing, knew very well that I AM is a derived and shortened form of the divine name YAHWEH, which the Jews were not supposed to utter in daily life. At John 8:58, his use of I AM caused the jews to try to kill him ... WHY, if I AM only means I AM with no reference to God?

Why didn't they try and kill the blind man?

If Yeshua was really telling them that he was the I AM of Exodus 3:14, the Greek would not read, "ego eimi, but "ho on" as the Septuagint Greek has it;

"καὶ εἶπεν ὁ θεὸς πρὸς Μωυσῆν Ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὤν· καὶ εἶπεν Οὕτως ἐρεῖς τοῖς υἱοῖς Ισραηλ Ὁ ὢν ἀπέσταλκέν με πρὸς ὑμᾶς."

"And God spoke to Moses, saying, I am THE BEING; and he said, Thus shall ye say to the children of Israel, THE BEING has sent me to you." Brenton's LXX​

 

[gadar perets]

In Judaism to kill a person by stoning was a sin, unless it was for some heinous crime such as blasphemy, and at John 8:58, those jews did try to kill him, for blasphemy, as they very well understood Christ's application of I AM to himself as a claim to deity on Christ's part.

Yeshua was sinless. Therefore, any accusation of blasphemy would have been false. The Jews were constantly misunderstanding Yeshua.

 

[Albion]

Yeshua was sinless. Therefore, any accusation of blasphemy would have been false. The Jews were constantly misunderstanding Yeshua.

That isn't the point. They interpreted what they heard Jesus to say as a claim of divinity. "I Am" clearly was not understood by them to mean "It was me who...."

 

[gadar perets]

That isn't the point. They interpreted what they heard Jesus to say as a claim of divinity. "I Am" clearly was not understood by them to mean "It was me who...."

If they interpreted verse 24 as a claim to divinity, why didn't they stone him right then and there? They simply continued conversing with him and many came to believe on him (vs. 30). Therefore, it was clearly NOT understood to be a claim of divinity at that point in the discussion.

 

[robert skynner]

If they interpreted verse 24 as a claim to divinity, why didn't they stone him right then and there? They simply continued conversing with him and many came to believe on him (vs. 30). Therefore, it was clearly NOT understood to be a claim of divinity at that point in the discussion.

This is a good point, but remember that Christ says at John 8:24 that to deny him as I AM means that a person will die in their sins; so whatever can this mean?

 

[gadar perets]

This is a good point, but remember that Christ says at John 8:24 that to deny him as I AM means that a person will die in their sins; so whatever can this mean?

He did not say, "to deny him as I AM." He said, "for if you believe not that I am ...". The "I am" refers back to the previous verses.

Joh 8:16 And yet if I judge, my judgment is true: for I am not alone, but I and the Father that sent me.
Joh 8:17 It is also written in your law, that the testimony of two men is true.
Joh 8:18 I am one that bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me.
Joh 8:19 Then said they unto him, Where is thy Father? Yeshua answered, Ye neither know me, nor my Father: if ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also.
Joh 8:20 These words spake Yeshua in the treasury, as he taught in the temple: and no man laid hands on him; for his hour was not yet come.
Joh 8:21 Then said Yeshua again unto them, I go my way, and ye shall seek me, and shall die in your sins: whither I go, ye cannot come.
Joh 8:22 Then said the Jews, Will he kill himself? because he saith, Whither I go, ye cannot come.
Joh 8:23 And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world.
Joh 8:24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am, ye shall die in your sins.
​

Unless one tries to read the "I AM" of Exodus 3:14 into this passage, it is obvious what Yeshua is saying. The Jews were not understanding that Yeshua was sent by God who Yeshua referred to as his "Father". They were thinking in earthly terms and wondering where his Father lived (Jerusalem, Bethlehem, Nazareth, etc.) They did not know the Scriptures (Psalm 2) which proclaimed Almighty YHWH as Messiah's Father. Even if they did know that, they did not know Yeshua was the Messiah of Psalm 2. So Yeshua goes on to make it clearer by saying he is from above and not of this world. That was a hint to where his Father was living. By verse 27, they still did not understand he was talking about Father YHWH.

Father YHWH is the great I AM.

Exo 3:14 And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.
Exo 3:15 And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, YHWH God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations.
​

This passage clearly tells us who the I AM is (in bold). The NT clarifies this further;

Acts 3:13 The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified His Son Yeshua; whom ye delivered up, and denied him in the presence of Pilate, when he was determined to let him go.
​

In other words, the being known as the "I AM" is the Father of Yeshua. Yeshua is the Son of the great I AM.

 

[Albion]

If they interpreted verse 24 as a claim to divinity, why didn't they stone him right then and there?

Well, we do know that the Jews on one occasion did pick up stones to stone him for making this kind of claim, but he eluded them and wasn't hurt.

Therefore, it was clearly NOT understood to be a claim of divinity at that point in the discussion.

Yes, it was. You merely are asking why they didn't kill him for it.

 

[gadar perets]

Well, we do know that the Jews on one occasion did pick up stones to stone him for making this kind of claim, but he eluded them and wasn't hurt.

Reference?

Yes, it was. You merely are asking why they didn't kill him for it.

The text does not suggest they understood him to be claiming deity. If so, cite the exact words showing that is how the Jews took it.

 

[Albion]

Reference?

See the following passages:
John 10:30-33

John 8:56-59

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

From what I have heard of Oneness, in fact the only thing perhaps, is that it denies God as three persons. This is probably the catch22 of Pentecostal in that different scriptures places the Holy Spirit as many things. In some scripture the HS is called the Spirit of Christ and in seen in the office of carrying on Jesus' ministry on earth. But it must be remembered that the Holy Spirit led and moved Jesus during His time on earth. His baptism, the dove and being led into the wilderness fi

 

[Alithis]

“I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins. Then said they unto him, Who art thou? And Jesus saith unto them, Even the same that I said unto you from the beginning. 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. They understood not that he spake to them of the Father. 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.” (John 8:24-28, KJV).



Oneness Pentecostals as well as Christadelphians and Jehovah’s Witnesses will all deny that the Son is the I AM (YHWH), and instead will rather affirm a created Son who comes into existence at a point in time. Most Oneness people however, will try and get around this verse, by claiming that “Jesus” is the “I AM,” by which they only mean that God the Father, whom the call “Jesus” is YHWH the one true God. This is easily resolved by reading from verse 16 onto verse 28. For at verse 16 the Son speaks, and says; “I am not alone, but am with the Father who sent me.” Then at verse 28 the Son is still speaking when he identifies himself as the “Son of Man.” Thus the speaker for this entire passage is the Son of Man, and not God the Father.


So verse 24 clearly states that IF A PERSON DOES NOT BELIEVE THAT THE SON IS THE "I AM" (EGO EIMI) THEN THAT PERSON IS NOT A TRUE BELIEVER, AND WILL DIE IN HIS SINS. So to deny that the speaker, the Son of Man is the eternal unchanging ‘I am’ that is Yahweh God, a person will die in their sins and cannot be saved according to John 8:28.

Yes that is what he said
now may i ask why your pointing it out /
and ask do YOU believe on the Lord Jesus ?

why would one who labels his "faith' as Humanist .. care what the scripture states ?

 

[robert skynner]

"Oneness Pentecostals" (but not all "Apostolic" churches or Pentecostal churches) are anti-Trinitarian, that's right.

Yes Albion, all Oneness Pentecostals are anti-Trinitarian, but to prevent opposition from educated Trinitarians and counter cult ministries, some of them identify themselves as believing in a tri-unity or even possibly Trinity (which they will not clearly define as their definition of the Trinity is as modalism), as that shuts up the trinitarians and confuses them. i.e. they are notorious for playing endless word games.

 

[robert skynner]

Why didn't they try and kill the blind man?

If Yeshua was really telling them that he was the I AM of Exodus 3:14, the Greek would not read, "ego eimi, but "ho on" as the Septuagint Greek has it;

"καὶ εἶπεν ὁ θεὸς πρὸς Μωυσῆν Ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὤν· καὶ εἶπεν Οὕτως ἐρεῖς τοῖς υἱοῖς Ισραηλ Ὁ ὢν ἀπέσταλκέν με πρὸς ὑμᾶς."

"And God spoke to Moses, saying, I am THE BEING; and he said, Thus shall ye say to the children of Israel, THE BEING has sent me to you." Brenton's LXX​

Agreed, but Ἐγώ εἰμι at John 8:24 is a shortened form of Ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὤν· (Septuagint at Exodus 3:14), as this is a matter of a persons eternal salvation, he isn't simply saying ..... I AM nothing at John 8:24, he is making a direct reference to himself to the divine being of God, just as he also does again at John 8:58.

 

[robert skynner]

If they interpreted verse 24 as a claim to divinity, why didn't they stone him right then and there? They simply continued conversing with him and many came to believe on him (vs. 30). Therefore, it was clearly NOT understood to be a claim of divinity at that point in the discussion.

He repeated it at John 8:58 and yes, then they did want to stone him to death for blasphemy.
They understood him all right, but sadly they did not accept his claim to be I AM (YHWH of the OT).

 

[gadar perets]

See the following passages:
John 10:30-33

http://biblia.com/bible/nasb95/John 10.30-33
At no time in that passage did Yeshua claim to be deity. He claimed to be the Son of deity (the Son of Elohim/God). The jews, as usual, misunderstood his words. He refuted their ignorance by quoting Psalm 82:6 in which YHWH calls men "elohim". So if the Scriptures can call men elohim, why are you accusing me of blasphemy by merely saying, I am the Son of Elohim. After all, which is worse, to say you are elohim or the Son of Elohim?

John 8:56-59

Yeshua's words in verse 58 were the culmination of an encounter that was so offensive to the Jews that they couldn't restrain themselves anymore. They simply couldn't take it anymore so they sought to stone him, not because of two simple words, "ego eimi," but because he was making himself out to be greater than their beloved father Abraham.

It is a Scriptural FACT that Yeshua could NOT be the great I AM of Exodus 3:14. I'll repeat what I wrote in post #11 which no one addressed.

Exo 3:14 And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.
Exo 3:15 And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, YHWH God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations.
This passage clearly tells us who the I AM is (in bold). The NT clarifies this further;

Acts 3:13 The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified His Son Yeshua; whom ye delivered up, and denied him in the presence of Pilate, when he was determined to let him go.
In other words, the being known as the "I AM" is the Father of Yeshua. Yeshua is the Son of the great I AM.