Looking for UPC views of a few verses

[Bulldog]

I'd like to say the modalist/UPC view of these couple scriptures (I will probably bring up a few later, but just these for now):

Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Joh 17:5 And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed.

Thanks and God Bless

 

[Peaceful Warrior]

I'm likely not modalist/UPC in my thinking but I'll give my opinion. To me it sounds much like the LDS view of things. The Word is Jesus Christ and God is the Father, though Christ is also God, and that together they share the same Glory. It seems to me to describe the LDS Godhead perfectly. The Father Son and Holy Ghost are One as a GodHead in Glory Power etc., and thus are often called "God" but they are each separate beings who are also Gods of their own right. But there is only One God who is our God, and that is the Father.

Christ in other scriptures clearly taught that His God was our God, and that He was subject to the Father as we are subject to Him. Yet He was still the Christ, and God, since He is a major player in the GodHead. I just thought interesting also that at the cross Christ asks the Father to forgive those who crucified Him because they knew not what they did. This clearly seems to fly in the face of the common traditional Christian teaching that God will dam those to hell who did not accept Christ in this life. Since this is clearly so, then Christians should be more forgiving of those not like them in understanding, because God will provide a way for them as well, meaning they will also have the chance to be saved. Especially since it could be them themselves who could be in the wrong as to understanding God, so wouldn't they think they deserved a little in the Grace and Mercy department, simply because they knew not?

 

[Bulldog]

I'm likely not modalist/UPC in my thinking but I'll give my opinion. To me it sounds much like the LDS view of things. The Word is Jesus Christ and God is the Father, though Christ is also God, and that together they share the same Glory. It seems to me to describe the LDS Godhead perfectly. The Father Son and Holy Ghost are One as a GodHead in Glory Power etc., and thus are often called "God" but they are each separate beings who are also Gods of their own right. But there is only One God who is our God, and that is the Father.

Sounds like Modalism. Does this view teach that The Holy Spirit and the Son are just the Father in different manifestions?

 

[Peaceful Warrior]

No, it teaches that they are separate and distinct individuals but serve in the same office but with different missions and purposes. Three beings, only one being actually the Most High God and that is the Father. The Son and the Holy Ghost act only for the Father in their respective missions. Christ as the Savior and Mediator for man, and the Holy Ghost as the testifier and testator of God.

 

[ralrachaan]

I'd like to say the modalist/UPC view of these couple scriptures (I will probably bring up a few later, but just these for now):

Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

So now are you saying the Word is part of the trinity? I'm not understanding your logic here. And you forgot to put the last part of that verse in bold: "and the word was God". Not just part of God, but was God.

Joh 17:5 And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed.

Not sure about this one. I'll ask my pastor.

 

[Bulldog]

So now are you saying the Word is part of the trinity? I'm not understanding your logic here.

Are you going to give your view or are you going to try to back me into a fallacy.

And you forgot to put the last part of that verse in bold: "and the word was God". Not just part of God, but was God.

False distinction.

 

[Peaceful Warrior]

I had two other thoughts. For the first verse it seems that is also might be refering to the Eternal Nature of the Word, meaning Eternal Truth. After all, that is what the Word of God as well as Christ's nature is. Stating that the Word was with God and then stating that the Word was God seems to imply a time in which the Word wasn't "with God". Otherwise, there is no reason to include this separate idea. This also seems to further support the LDS idea that some things are Eternal and that God Himself "progressed" to become God.

The second scripture also seems to imply a pre-exhistance, and that Christ was one of the three of the GodHead who shared His power. As it is known also in scripture God created the earth through Christ. In otherwords, Christ created the earth, and He was able to do this because He shared in Gods Glory. The verse indeed supports well that the Father and the Son are separate beings, who only share Glory, not essence, meaning the same being. Notice also that there is no reason for all this "separate" talk if the Trinity is really one being manifested as three persons. I think they would be stating things differently if it really was that way.

 

[Blackmarch]

I'd like to say the modalist/UPC view of these couple scriptures (I will probably bring up a few later, but just these for now):

Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Joh 17:5 And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed.

Thanks and God Bless

Very interesting, which translation is this?

 

[Bulldog]

Esv

 

[Ben_Hur]

NKJV
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

NKJV
John 17:5 And now, O Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.

The rest of John 1 indicates the Word = Jesus (became flesh).

So,

Jesus = Word = God

Father = God

Holy Spirit = God

They are three persons, 1 God. They are not distinct entities, but one God.

In John 15, who was Jesus talking to? The Father.

Don't get it? Neither does/can anyone else. Yet this is what the Bible teaches without reading anything into it. You don't NEED to get it. That is just the way it is. We can come close to understanding by realizing that got is extra-dimensional. But that's about as far as you can go - unless you think you can actually visualize, say, a 6-dimensional object. Because that's not quite as far outside our understanding as is God's physical nature.

 

[Nessie]

May I add that because God is God, He can do anything. He is not bound to the laws of physics like we are. He is not confined to be in only one spot at any given time. He can be in the presence of a church service in China and healing people in Canada. Which explains how He, the one God, can be both the Son and the Father at the same time. Thus explaining why, when Jesus was being baptized by John, He was also up in the Heavens looking down. Now, because humans cannot possibly fathom God's existence, it's very hard for us to explain that.

 

[Bulldog]

May I add that because God is God, He can do anything. He is not bound to the laws of physics like we are. He is not confined to be in only one spot at any given time. He can be in the presence of a church service in China and healing people in Canada. Which explains how He, the one God, can be both the Son and the Father at the same time. Thus explaining why, when Jesus was being baptized by John, He was also up in the Heavens looking down. Now, because humans cannot possibly fathom God's existence, it's very hard for us to explain that.

We can deduct a speration in the Godhead in these verses not only from simple logic and deduction, but also from grammar. Greek grammarian A.t Robisnon on John 1:1:

With God (pros ton theon). Though existing eternally with God the Logos was in perfect fellowship with God. Pros with the accusative presents a plane of equality and intimacy, face to face with each other. In 1 John 2:1 we have a like use of pros: "We have a Paraclete with the Father" (parakleton echomen pros ton patera). See prosopon pros prosopon (face to face, 1 Corinthians 13:12), a triple use of pros (Word Pictures, 5:4).​

As for John 17:5 Oneness leaders force an intepretation that is a clear example of eisegesis by reading their precepts into the passage. "With" in John 17:5 uses para, and term that literally means "beside", "at the side of", or "near to." Again, Robertson:

With Thine own self (para seautōi). “By the side of Thyself.” Jesus prays for full restoration to the pre-incarnate glory and fellowship (cf. 1:1) enjoyed before the Incarnation (John 1:14). This is not just ideal pre-existence, but actual and conscious existence at the Father’s side (para soi, with thee) “which I had” (hēi eichon, imperfect active of echō, I used to have, with attraction of case of hēn to hēi, because of doxēi), “before the world was” (pro tou ton kosmon einai), “before the being as to the world” (cf. verse 24) (Word Pictures, 5:275-76.)​

 

[HappyHomemaker]

I'd like to say the modalist/UPC view of these couple scriptures (I will probably bring up a few later, but just these for now):

Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Joh 17:5 And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed.

Thanks and God Bless

Hi Bulldog!

The Word was with God and the Word was God.
The Word spoken of in this verse is Jesus Christ. Since the beginning God knew He would manifest Himself in flesh. The understanding is this, God had the plan/thought from the beginning. The Word was with God from the beginning...the plan or thought was with God from the beginning.



Joh 17:5 And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed.

Jesus was God in flesh..God made Himself of no reputation and dwelt among us. We know this from scripture.
It was planned from the beginning that the glory would be given to the the Son. He paid the price for our sins. Jesus is the image of the invisible God. God couldnt have came down here as He is or else everyone that seen Him would have died...

Exo 33:20 And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live.

so He manifested Himself in flesh to save us from our sins...


Hope this answers your questions!