Christ Equals the One God!
An Answer to Tertullian
Recently I have seen before God the importance of believing in the Deity of Christ. This site is about assembly life. REAL assembly life depends on REAL experience of the unsearchable riches of Christ as Head flowing as body-life supply to and through His members. If there is not this, there is nothing. This also has very much to do with the fellowship flowing between the Father and the Son. This fellowship is the Spirit and this Spirit is the very life and heartbeat of His Body. But if folks come in that are not believing in the deity of Christ, it makes all of this impossible. They are to be regarded as hereitics according to the scriptures. Jesus said we must honor Him, the Son, EVEN AS we honor the Father. That about says it all. Except there is the factor that the Divine Godhead is so msyterious that no human mind could possibly understand God fully, even as a robot could never understand in full it's human maker. So some things we understand, and some things we only grasp by faith. Now, how could Christ be the unsearchable riches of God in you and me both and flow between us His members, if He was not Almighty God?? So, I have chosen to reply to a guy who, although he seems to be on my side because in this writing as he is a Trinitarian fighting against a heretical modalist. Still, he is wrong on some things. That is why, in his book he does not mention Isaiah 9:6 even once. I speak of Tertullian. The background image on this web page is the suirface of the sun because Tertullian very expertly uses this illustration in his book in a correct way. So in many things you'll see me write: good job Tertullian!
Now on the 1st day of 2017, I am re-writing to correct a false teaching I did not know I was propounding, because it is not only a false doctrine, but confuses people and has confused me for quite some time: it is the doctrine of the "eternal Sonship" of Christ. Unbeknowst to me, this is a false doctrine, however, now I understand that it really seriously confuses this very issue I am addressing here.
OK, so so there are some things I beg to differ with Tertullian (see http://www.christiandefense.org/Tertullian.Prax.htm
for my reference material here) even though he says he's a Trinitarian. Now this may not seem fair because he is not alive to reply back - but if he were, would he reply? So here goes: 1st of all he is quotingin I Corinthians concerning the Son delivering the kingdom back to the Father:
"Now, from this one passage of the epistle of the inspired apostle, we have been already able to show that the Father and the Son are two separate Persons, not only by the mention of their separate names as Father and the Son, but also by the fact that He who delivered up the kingdom, and He to whom it is delivered up -- and in like manner, He who subjected (all things), and He to whom they were subjected -- must necessarily be two different Beings."
Now how could 2 omnipresent and omniscient entities be TWO DIFFERENT BEINGS??? IMPOSSIBLE! This I do not believe since there is only ONE God. Besides he has NO Biblical ground as the scriptrue NEVER once mentions the word "persons" or 2 beings concerning them!!!!! Not there! Now there may have been some truth to this based on Jesus Christ being a man AS A MAN, butthis is based on the limitations of His humanity, not anything of His Divine nature.
"When He prepared the heaven," says Wisdom, "I was present with Him; and when He made His strong places upon the winds, which are the clouds above; and when He secured the fountains, (and all things) which are beneath the sky, I was by, arranging all things with Him; I was by, in whom He delighted; and daily, too, did I rejoice in His presence."
Now some have quoted this saying it is not Christ - but Paul in I Cor says wisdom IS Christ saying that Christ is our wisdom, redemption and righteousness which, by the way, corresponds to the 3 parts of our being: 1. righteousness divinely imputed to us as Christ justifing us so our spirit (the spirits of Christians have NEVER been unrighteous or sinful - that part of a born again person's being is absolutely unspotted and holy) can receive the very life of God (zoe, John 3:16). 2. Wisdom - this is the HARD part and believers are more or less willing. Christ as our wisdom relates to the soul, our mind, will and emotion. Bit by bit we have to deny our soul to have it transformed so our choices will be wise. The only wise choice, of course is Christ. 3. Redemption - has to do with future resurrection - easy as pie for God to do - no problem. The fact that Proverbs represents wisdom as female makes perfect sense in that the rib part of Christ having been taken from Him in crucifixion is His life and nature which is being worked into us: building His she who has always been in Him from eternity but could not be released or built till Calvary.
"formed by Him first to devise and think out all thinks under the name of Wisdom -- "The Lord created or formed me as the beginning of His ways;" then afterward begotten, to carry all into effect -- "When He prepared the heaven, I was present with Him." Thus does He make Him equal to Him: for by proceeding from Himself He became His first-begotten Son, because begotten before all things; and His only-begotten also, because alone begotten of God, in a way peculiar to Himself, from the womb of His own heart -- even as the Father Himself testifies: "My heart," says He, "has emitted my most excellent Word." The father took pleasure evermore in Him, who equally rejoiced with a reciprocal gladness in the Father's presence: "You art my Son, today have I begotten You;" even before the morning star did I beget You."
Here Tertullian wrongly associates something other than the man Jesus with beginnings. This is heresy. As God there was no begining and this is why the concept of "Son" must be explained as being related to time only for the concept of Son is a time-bound concept. Christ has ALWAYS BEEN THE EXPRESSION OF THE FATHER: AS HIS WORD. THE FATHER HAS NEVER BEEN SEPARATED OR WITHOUT HIS WORD. In this passage he also uses the word "nativity" which word should only be used of the creation Jesus birth as a man in Bethlehem. AS MAN ONLY He began and because all things are in Him, He is counted as the 1st of creation or the FIRSTBORN. He is indeed the ROOT of all created things as a CREATURE as well as being the CREATOR HIMSELF. Also He takes " You art my Son, today have I begotten You" out of context. Here is the context: Acts 13:30 ....
but God raised him from among the dead,
31 who appeared for many days to those who had come up with him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are now his witnesses to the people.
32 And *we* declare unto you the glad tidings of the promise made to the fathers,
33 that God has fulfilled this to us their children, having raised up Jesus; as it is also written in the second psalm, *Thou* art my Son: this day have *I* begotten thee.
34 But that he raised him from among the dead, no more to return to corruption, he spoke thus: I will give to you the faithful mercies of David.
35 Wherefore also he says in another, Thou wilt not suffer thy gracious one to see corruption.
The context is speaking of His resurrection: He was born again THAT DAY AS A MAN NOT AS GOD. The man part of Jesus till that day had NEVER YET been fully part of the Sonship of God or He would not have needed a second birth. The GOD He was did not need sonizing; nor should it need to be, but as a man He needed this fully: thus a MAN has been brought into the Godhead (because He already was this as Deity from eternity past: Micah 5:2, then His humanity was taken on by thsi same eternal Being) and the rest of born again men have been brought into God, though not the Godhead. It is still true that as a man during his earthly life the fullness of the Godhead still was in Him because the God natur, DNA and residence was there.
As to the false accusation that the concept of Trinity comes from heathen sources instead of the Word of God, Tertullian is correct when he says "Truth must not therefore refrain from the use of such a term, and its reality and meaning, because heresy also employs it. The fact is, heresy has rather taken it from Truth, in order to mould it into its own counterfeit ." So the argument from many others besides turtullian and many godly men about the nations having their own versions of idolotry and false god trinities of various kinds contains no water. In fact, if you are at all aware of Satan's usual tactics and tricks, he USUALLY employs much truth (maybe even exciting and enlightening truth!!) to draw men in (this INCLUDES Christians and so-called Chrsitians!)so he can deceive them with lies. He may even tell 99% truth to pawn off a 1% lie if his purposes can be obtained by doing so. But don't worry! God is in control of ALL these things and He wills according to the scriptures that ALL men be saved and come to the full knowledge of the truth! Adn He is well able to do it in His Own time and way. However we must attempt as we are led to unsheath truth and be in truth as much as we are being graced to do so for without Him: we can do nothing. Let's face it, the devil sometimes just does some things out of pure spite. Jesus said "he is a liar from the beginning."
In Ch 9 he says: "For the Father is the entire substance, but the Son is a derivation and portion of the whole, as He Himself acknowledges: "My Father is greater than I." In the Psalm His inferiority is described as being "a little lower than the angels." Thus the Father is distinct from the Son, being greater than the Son, inasmuch as He who begets is one, and He who is begotten is another; He, too, who sends is one, and He who is sent is another; and He, again, who makes is one, and He through whom the thing is made is another. "
This is true from the standpoint of His humanity and self emptying to be born into this world. But Tertullian is speaking heresy by being one-sided and disagreeing with Isaiah in Isaiah 9:6 - For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder; and his name is called Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Father of Eternity, Prince of Peace. - where the Son is called the Eternal Father and the child Who was sent is called the mighty God Who did the sending. By the way this means that He was on earth and same time in the heavens, yeah, in all places and all times. He did NOT SAY before Abraham was I was for that would be understandable if He were mere creature but rather He said before Abraham was I AM meaning He was at the same time (His kind of time-eternity) talking to the Pharisees and with Abraham and even in times before Abraham He was and IS and IS TO COME!!!! (this means He is already in all future times and ages unto eternity!! His greatness? Endlessly infinite!!!!!!!!) Turtullian here, however is calling Isaiah a liar. Maybe not intentionally, but that is the logical conclusion.
However is he correct in ch. 10 saying there are distinctions between the Father and the Son? Yes! This also is biblical. And here is where you have to leave your limited human understanding and receive the Word BY FAITH. HE WHO USES MERE UNDERSTANDING TO APPROACH THE SCRIPTURES ON THIS SUBJECT IS USING ONLY HALF THE FACULTIES GOD GAVE HIM. Here I'm going to say this is far more serious than you think. I really do think that anyone who does not believe in the absolute Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ is lost. I think the enemy has suceeded in fooling possibly 1st by making you believe he doesn't exist and 2nd by then deceiving you to think that your thoughts and feelings of types you never had before you got baptized in the Holy Spirit could only be of one kind since there is really no such thing as demons and devils so all these new feelings in the spiritual realm and revelation must be of God. NOT!!!!!! There are 2 sides in the heavenlies and a big fight in Canaan (WHICH SYMBOLIZES THE SPIRITUAL REALM) and not all thoughts and feelings spiritual or supernatural are God. There are very serious tests to test these things. so if you do not realize that satanic spirits can counterfeit the things of God, the feelings of God ect. ect. , then the enemy has an open door to deceive you. But beware! I once had a horrible dream of someone being lost like an abducted child - it was awful and I had to test it over and over. But JESUS SAID: "If you do not believe that I AM, you shall die in your sins." This is that person's future missing the 1st resurrection or the 2nd resurrection life part as there are 2 parts to that one if they or you or anyone else denies the Deity of Christ. I will not shy away: I WILL TELL YOU THE TRUTH!!!
He goes on in human reasoning: " Moreover, inasmuch as I ought to leave one of these relations in order to be the other; so, if I am to be both together, I shall fail to be one while I possess not the other. For if I must be myself my son, who am also a father, I now cease to have a son, since I am my own son. But by reason of not having a son, since I am my own son, how can I be a father? For I ought to have a son, in order to be a father. Therefore I am not a son, because I have not a father, who makes a son. In like manner, if I am myself my father, who am also a son, I no longer have a father, but am myself my father. " What he is fogetting here is that the being of God is so much higher than the being of man, that human logic is a sorry sorry EXTREMELY limited way to appraoch the mystery of the Triune processed and consumated God. The main atrtributes of God are omniscience, omnipresence and omnipotence. Now, how can 2 distinct ones be everywhere, have all power and know all things without being ONE??????? IMPOSSIBLE!!!!!!!!!!! Those two CANNOT even think a thought without knowing what the other one was thinking or be anywhere without the other and because they are both INFINITE and have access to ALL thoughts, feelings, intents and plans, it is impossible that they would not be one in EVERY WAY. There CANNOT BE any disagreement. Does "seeing eye to eye" make sense here?!!!! Now AS A MAN there could have been at that time a problem (see Gethsemane for instance) because He CHOSE to empty Himself of divine powers for a season to beat the devil. Now, some may ask "why wouldn't He just use His divine powers to do so?" What? What's the accomplishment of that? He had to beat the devil as a man to pave the way for us and to be the process and be processed so we could be processed through Him so we can be mingled with God in His divine life and divine nature. "God became man THAT man might become God." Though NOT in the Godhead or as the One Who is to be worshipped. SO, IF ALL THE ABOVE IS TRUE, how could there be more than ONE God?? No way Hosea!
In ch 11 "You must bring forth the proof which I require of you -- one like my own; that is, (you must prove to me) that the Scriptures show the Son and the Father to be the same, just as on our side the Father and the Son are demonstrated to be distinct; I say distinct, but not separate " ... hmmm ....
He is correct to say they are distinct but they are also the same at the same time: So He was WITH but He also WAS. This means He was 2 because He was with God but He was also 1 because He WAS GOD. This is why Isaiah 9:6 is absolutely correct. DO NOT twist that verse!!! Leave it alone and leave it be what IT IS. Jesus Christ IS the Father because He is God and God IS our Father and there is only ONE Father. PERIOD! No ifs, ands or buts. But again to prove his one-sidedness on the 3 side but fogetting the one side, he again quotes out of resurrection context the verse "You art my Son, this day have I begotten You."
"Still, in these few quotations the distinction of Persons in the Trinity is clearly set forth. For there is the Spirit Himself who speaks, and the Father to whom He speaks, and the Son of whom He speaks. In the same manner, the other passages also establish each one of several Persons in His special character -- addressed as they in some cases are to the Father or to the Son respecting the Son, in other cases to the Son or to the Father concerning the Father, and again in other instances to the (Holy) Spirit ."
OK, here I will quote Christ concerning the sending of the Spirit in 2 different verses spoken the same evening before Calvary. 1st: John 14:26: but the Comforter, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, *he* shall teach you all things, and will bring to your remembrance all the things which I have said to you.
2nd: John 15:26: But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who goes forth from with the Father, *he* shall bear witness concerning me; Now, the word from in these verses is from-with in the Greek!!! In the first the name denotes the person of Jesus! In the 2nd the Son does the sending. So Who sent the Spirit here? The Son sends the Spirit from/with the Father. So the One sending came along with the One He sent!!! These three are three and are one and cannot be separated!!!
Speaking absolutely truthfully Tertullian says "If the number of the Trinity also offends you, as if it were not connected in the simple Unity, I ask you how it is possible for a Being who is merely and absolutely One and Singular, to speak in plural phrase, saying, "Let us make man in our own image, and after our own likeness;" whereas He ought to have said, "Let me make man in my own image, and after my own likeness," as being a unique and singular Being? " That's right! He is THREE! The quote in Genesis is correct. BUT This brother forgot the reality of the other verse in this same passage quoting the ONE side of God: " And God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. " Hmmmm .. .. here the him is them and vice versa because we were all in Adam WHEN he was created. So in the verse I just quoted Moses writes the terms He created him but then immediately says them. Let us not forget that He is three and ONE at the same time!! Isaiah quoted Him: "whom shall I send and who will go for us? " So is He I or is He US?? HE IS BOTH!! Did He not say so? Yes, He did! So the I = US and the US = I!!! But on the other hand, WHY does Turtullian quote the us verse but ignore the fact of the singular side of God? He forgets: "And God created Man in his image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
" Do you notice all the sudden it's "he" instead of "us"? So which is it? This is where human understanding needs to be DROPPED! IT'S BOTH!! The "Word was God" means literally what it says - not something else. It means the Word WAS the Triune God complete - NOT part of God. He is ALL of God!!! Hallelujah! So you don't have to live with confusion thinking: "Which One should I worship? Which should I pray to? Father, Son or Spirit? " Quit worrying about it and get lost in the Being of God!!! "The Godhead dwells in Him bodily" - He is the embodiment of the Trinity.
says: " Isaiah also says to the Person of Christ: "The Sabaeans, men of stature, shall pass over to You; and they shall follow after You, bound in fetters; and they shall worship You, because God is in You: for You art our God, yet we knew it not; You art the God of Israel." For here too, by saying, "God is in You, and "You art God," he sets forth Two who were God: (in the former expression in You, he means) in Christ, and (in the other he means) the Holy Ghost ." This is a correct statement. So is this one: "listen to the psalm in which Two are described as God: "Your throne, O God, is for ever and ever; the sceptre of Your kingdom is a sceptre of righteousness. You have loved righteousness, and hated iniquity: therefore God, even Your God, has anointed You or made You His Christ." Now, since He here speaks to God, and affirms that God is anointed by God, He must have affirmed that Two are God" ... now have you considered this statement of worship from the Father to the Son saying "you are God" and "you are anointed" and "above your brethren"????? What do you do with this? But my most important question still remains: WHO or what kind of being was Christ BEFORE He became a creature in Bethlehem before He became a man? Because He states " the glory I had with you before the foundation of the world." And ,correct me if I am wrong, but before the foundation of the world there WERE NO CREATED THINGS!!! So WHO or WHAT WAS He before that time began?????? Add to this scripture after scripture where Christ is the Creator AND THE One through Whom God created all and the One IN Whom He created the invisble and visible!!!! So does this mean the vast seemingly endless galaxies of outer space were created inside Christ? Yup!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! So before anything was created where else would God have put anything except inside Himself?Since He is infinite: .... EXACTLY!
He says "as Christ came, and was recognized by us as the very Being who had from the beginning caused plurality (in the Divine Economy), being the second from the Father, and with the Spirit the third, and Himself declaring and manifesting the Father more fully (than He had ever been before), the title of Him who is God and Lord was at once restored to the Unity (of the Divine Nature), even because the Gentiles would have to pass from the multitude of their idols to the One Only God, in order that a difference might be distinctly settled between the worshippers of One God and the votaries of polytheism." ... indeed in the same passage in Hebrews quoted above the Father says "let all the angels of God worship Him. Yet I recntly heard of someone who had a supposed vision of Christ turning away in disgust when she tried to worship Christ??? There must really BE demonic spirits then!! Because that vision is false!!!!! According to the Word of God it is false! Also if after calming the storm His disciples worshipped Him ... and they did, why did He not rebuke them? We must ONLY worship ONE GOD because there IS only one God. You'll find Tertullian uses the word "economy" often. It is based on the Greek NT term Economia. Witness Lee wrote SEVERAL books on the subject of God's economy and those books are the best writings almost ever written besides the scriptures. Almost nothing written comes close. Anyhow the economy is how the Trinity relates to us - so usually in this economy the Father is called God and Christ the Lord, BUT few know how to rightly divide the word of truth and understand this. But the fact He dispenses Himself into us through this economy of the 3 does NOT mean we worship and adore and love and pour our affection upon more than one God!!!! There is only one God and He is Triune. To say there is ANY kind of plurality of gods is the principle of fornication. And so Turtullian correctly says " but I shall follow the apostle; so that if the Father and the Son, are alike to be invoked, I shall call the Father "God," and invoke Jesus Christ as "Lord." But when Christ alone (is mentioned), I shall be able to call Him "God," as the same apostle says: "Of whom is Christ, who is over all, God blessed for ever." For I should give the name of" sun" even to a sunbeam, considered in itself; but if I were mentioning the sun from which the ray emanates, I certainly should at once withdraw the name of sun from the mere beam. For although I make not two suns, still I shall reckon both the sun and its ray to be as much two things and two forms of one undivided substance, as God and His Word, as the Father and the Son. " Awesome job Tertullian!
I know a brother who had a dream from the Lord to explain the Triune Gold to him because he was so bothered by it he could not rest at night, but finally when he did sleep, the Lord gave him a view of the Godhead explaining more to his understanding. He saw a sideways head and that this was the Godhead and on the the head's toungue was the word but as the Word went forth with the breath, the breath was the Holy Spkirit of God. So, you see, although these 3 are inseparable there is a distinction between them, especially as relates to us.
He says "Now the Word of life became flesh, and was heard, and was seen, and was handled, because He was flesh who, before He came in the flesh, was the "Word in the beginning with God " the Father, John 1:1-2 and not the Father with the Word. For although the Word was God, yet was He with God, because He is God of God ; and being joined to the Father, is with the Father ." OK - I say THE SCRIPTURE DOES NOT SAY THIS!!!! AND IT DOESN'T! It didn't use the word Father in that sentence. But Tertullian did! When it says the Word was God it meant God!!!! NOT 1/2 or 1/3 of God. But you deny it even meant God!!! It means ALL of God - the Triune God! Because Tertullian does not see this, he defeats his own arguments. Just thought I'd help him out a bit. There cannot be God without Christ and God IS Spirit so the Word must be the Spirit if He was God because God = Spirit and the Spirit = God. Now I did NOT just say that Jesus did not mean exactly what He said when He spoke of the Spirit as ANOTHER COMFORTER. He DID mean exactly what He said and meant for you to understand it that way. But the same Bible says "the Lord is the Spirit" (II Cor. 3). Hallelujah!!!!!! Again in I Cor 15:45b it says "the last Adam became a life-giving Spirit." Hallelujah!!!!!!! In and through His resurrection, the God imprisoned in the holy of holies was released so that the very zoe-life and DNA of God can be dispensed into men! Hallelujah!!!! This is why Peter in II Peter 1:4 says we can become partakers of the divine nature. This has become possible only through the death and resurrection of the God-Man Christ. Again: GLORY HALLELUJAH!!
At this point Tertullian has a lot of words that men can see God as the Son but not as the Father. However, I think he wastes a lot of time at this and his words are not accurate. He would have been wiser to say that if God is in a intermediary form such as the man Jesus Christ or even the glorified forms but FINITE, then we might be able to apprehend it but finite cannot EVER take in infinite or it would explode. That is all that needs to be explained on the subject. An example of this is that electricity must be broken down for us by transformers to our level at our house as our appliances could not take the full power of the power plant.
In ch 16 he says "Thus was He ever learning even as God to converse with men upon earth, being no other than the Word which was to be made flesh. But He was thus learning (or rehearsing), in order to level for us the way of faith, that we might the more readily believe that the Son of God had come down into the world, if we knew that in times past also something similar had been done
." This also is an inaccurate statement - because He was not yet man but God only (although He, being timeless, had access to His future humanity because He IS in ALL times and all places - that is why He could visit abraham as a man and eat food with him and say to the Pharisees later "Abraham saw my day even though they retorted "you are not even 50 years old" Hmmm.... seems they understood what He said in their language better than you do! THEY PICKED UP STONES!!) because AS GOD He does not need to learn ANYTHING! He already knows it all. As man, later on of course, He had to learn, grow and develop. But that is NO LONGER TRUE!!!!!!! There came a day where the Man Jesus no longer changes: so it says in Hebrews: "Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, today and forever." Yesterday is NOT eternity past! But this about the MAN Christ NOT about the God side. But even the man part of Him solidified and was Sonized into the Godhead in the resurrection and ascension and became unchangeable pretty much except that He will change positions of His physical form in the near future to planet earth!! Hallelujah! With Christ there was changes and processes and learning so we could have complete salvation, but there are not much more!
"For "the Father who loves the Son, and has given all things into His hand," loves Him indeed from the beginning, and from the very first has handed all things over to Him. Whence it is written, "From the beginning the Word was with God, and the Word was God;" to whom "is given by the Father all power in heaven and on earth." "The Father judges no man, but has committed all judgment to the Son" -- from the very beginning even. For when He speaks of all power and all judgment, and says that all things were made by Him, and all things have been delivered into His hand, He allows no exception (in respect) of time, because they would not be all things unless they were the things of all time. It is the Son, therefore, who has been from the beginning administering judgment, throwing down the haughty tower, and dividing the tongues, punishing the whole world by the violence of waters, raining upon Sodom and Gomorrah fire and brimstone, as the LORD from the LORD. For He it was who at all times came down to hold converse with men, from Adam on to the patriarchs " LORD FROM THE LORD ... Remember? One was on earth having just spoken with Abraham - the other sent the fire and brimstone from above at the order of the One to Whom all judgment has been commited.
OK he says "the Son also, and that the Son came under these designations, and has always acted in them, and has thus manifested them in Himself to men. "All things," says He, "which the Father has are mine." Then why not His names also? When, therefore, you read of Almighty God, and the Most High, and the God of hosts, and the King of Israel the "One that is," If Jesus were not the very BEING of God, how could all things be in His hand??? He would have to be infinite and only God has that capacity!! Or at least His capacity would have to be a big as the ocean. Now is THAT what you believe?
In ch 18 he says " The fact is, if He had named Him expressly, He would have separated Him, saying in so many words: "Beside me there is none else, except my Son." In short He would have made His Son actually another, after excepting Him from others. Suppose the sun to say, "I am the Sun, and there is none other besides me, except my ray," would you not have remarked how useless was such a statement, as if the ray were not itself reckoned in the sun? He says, then, that there is no God' besides Himself in respect of the idolatry both of the Gentiles as well as of Israel; nay, even on account of our heretics also, who fabricate idols with their words, just as the heathen do with their hands; that is to say, they make another God and another Christ. " Now this is an awesome statement except, once again, he is denying Isa. 9:6 which also gives the Son the title "Father" God IS our Father and since Christ is God He IS our Father. I'm not saying Christ is not mainly the Son or that there are not 2: the Father and the Son. I am merely quoting the Word of God and WHAT IT SAYS!!!
In ch 20: "For as in the Old Testament Scriptures they lay hold of nothing else than, "I am God, and beside me there is no God ;" so in the Gospel they simply keep in view the Lord's answer to Philip, "I and my Father are one;" and, "He that has seen me has seen the Father; and I am in the Father, and the Father in me." No problem here if you go back to what Tertullian said before about the sun and it's ray being one sun. God is 3-1 and 1-3. But this does not mean there are three Gods. There is only one. Since God is infinite, there is only room for one. There is no God beside Him. Jesus said "baptizing them into the NAME (ONE name) of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." There is only one name for all three: JESUS CHRIST!
CH 21: to the Jews He remarks respecting the cure of the impotent man, "My Father works hitherto, and I work." "My Father and I" -- these are the Son's words. And it was on this very account that "the Jews sought the more intently to kill Him, not only because He broke the Sabbath, but also because He said that God was His Father, thus making Himself equal with God. " NOW DON'T YOU THINK THE JEWS UNDERSTOOD THE LANGUAGE HE WAS SPEAKING HERE BETTER THAN YOU DO??? Yup! They picked up stones because they KNEW what He meant!!! Also "But He at once adds, "You have neither heard His voice at any time, nor seen His shape;" thus affirming that in former times it was not the Father, but the Word, who used to be seen and heard. " WOW!!!! Did you get that???? EVERY appearance in the OT was by the Word - ALL of them. Because the Father was not the visible One - the Son is!! NOT the Son as BEING the Son yet though but interacting through time travel His through humanity communication economia operation such as electricity is broken down for our houses so we can use it. OK, go read your OT again now!
Here is another problem though. He says: " 'Yet a little while am I with you, and (then) I go to Him that sent me.' When, however, He declares that He is not alone, and uses these words, 'but I and the Father that sent me,' does He not show that there are Two -- Two, and yet inseparable? Indeed, this was the sum: and substance of what He was teaching them, that they were inseparably Two; since, after citing the law when it affirms the truth of two men's testimony, He adds at once: "I am one who am bearing witness of myself; and the Father (is another,) who has sent me, and bears witness of me." Now, if He were one -- being at once both the Son and the Father -- He certainly would not have quoted the sanction of the law, which requires not the testimony of one, but of two." I'm not arguing with his words here at all. However, they are still ONE!! NOT in the sense Praxeus was saying BUT AT THE SAME TIME they were BOTH 2 they were both ONE. Isaiah 9:6 again. Again, I don't care whether your brain likes and/or comprehends this or not: THIS IS THE TRUTH!!
Near the end of 22: "Then, again, concerning His sheep, and (the assurance) that no man should pluck them out of His hand, He says, "My Father, which gave them to me, is greater than all;" adding immediately, "I and my Father are one." Here, then, they take their stand, too infatuated, nay, too blind, to see in the first place that there is in this passage an intimation of Two Beings -- "I and my Father;" then that there is a plural predicate, "are," inapplicable to one person only; and lastly, that (the predicate terminates in an abstract, not a personal noun) -- "we are one thing" Unum, not "one person" Unus. For if He had said "one Person," He might have rendered some assistance to their opinion. Unus, no doubt, indicates the singular number; but (here we have a case where) "Two" are still the subject in the masculine gender. " OK, here I got a problem with the "2 BEINGS" thing. God is only one being. I got not much problem with the rest of it except that in the Bible the word "person" is only mentioned in the singular concerning God and that verse is talking about Christ. For the Father and Son to be 2 distinct entities is absolutely true but since both know ALL each others thoughts and both are in all places at all times it is IMPOSSIBLE for them to be 2 beings!!!! (except in the limited sense of the temporary humanity of Christ.) But for the 3 Divine Ones to be separate Beings? Impossible. Again I point to omniscience, omnipotence and omnipresence. Oh! And let jus mention one more thing: all 3 are in all times together also!!! Only the human part of Christ has limitations, beginings (though not ending any more) and boundaries.
"Are there not as many as there are voices? You have the Son on earth, you have the Father in heaven. Now this is not a separation; it is nothing but the divine dispensation. We know, however, that God is in the bottomless depths, and exists everywhere; but then it is by power and authority. We are also sure that the Son, being indivisible from Him, is everywhere with Him. Nevertheless, in the Economy or Dispensation itself, the Father willed that the Son should be regarded as on earth, and Himself in heaven; whither the Son also Himself looked up, and prayed, and made supplication of the Father; whither also He taught us to raise ourselves, and pray, "Our Father Who art in heaven," etc., -- although, indeed, He is everywhere present." Very good!
Problem: "It was, then, the Son of
indeed!God, who was in the Son of man, that was betrayed, as the Scripture says afterwards: "Now is the Son of man glorified, and God is glorified in Him." Who is here meant by "God?" Certainly not the Father, but the Word of the Father, who was in the Son of man -- that is in the flesh, in which Jesus had been already glorified by the divine power and word. "And God," says He, "shall also glorify Him in Himself;" that is to say, the Father shall glorify the Son, because He has Him within Himself; and even though prostrated to the earth, and put to death, He would soon glorify Him by His resurrection, and making Him conqueror over death. " Meant by God? The WHOLE Triune God is meant by the term God. This is where Tertullian misses it.
OK another problem: "it was not the Father whom, after His lengthened intercourse with them, they were ignorant of, but it was the Son; and accordingly the Lord, while upbraiding Philip for not knowing Himself who was the object of their ignorance, wished Himself to be acknowledged indeed as that Being whom He had reproached them for being ignorant of after so long a time -- in a word, as the Son. And now it may be seen in what sense it was said, "He that has seen me has seen the Father," -- even in the same in which it was said in a previous passage, "I and my Father are one." Wherefore? Because "I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world" and, "I am the way: no man comes to the Father, but by me;" and, "No man can come to me, except the Father draw him;" and, "All things are delivered to me by the Father;" and, "As the Father quickens (the dead), so also doth the Son;" and again, "If you had known me, you would have known the Father also." "For in all these passages He had shown Himself to be the Father's Commissioner," through whose agency even the Father could be seen in His works, and heard in His words, and recognised in the Son's administration of the Father's words and deeds. " Although everything said here is correct, it is STILL TRUE THAT WHEN YOU SEE CHRIST YOU SEE THE FATHER BECAUSE HE IS THE FATHER! So believe everything Tertullian said above except that which contradicts that He is the Father at the same time because Isaiah 9:6 says so!!!! For the BIBLE TELLS ME SO!!!!!!
Also "Nothing which belongs to something else is actually the very same thing as that to which it belongs. Clearly, when anything proceeds from a personal subject, and so belongs to him, since it comes from him, it may possibly be such in quality exactly as the personal subject himself is from whom it proceeds, and to whom it belongs. And thus the Spirit is God, and the Word is God, because proceeding from God, but yet is not actually the very same as He from whom He proceeds." ... well it is and is not both at the same time. Tertullian should listen to himself.
Here : "After His resurrection He promises in a pledge to His disciples that He will send them the promise of His Father; and lastly, He commands them to baptize into the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost, not into a unipersonal God. And indeed it is not once only, but three times, that we are immersed into the Three Persons, at each several mention of Their names. " I have explained this already - the NT practice was to call upon the name "Lord Jesus" when men were baptized. ONE NAME.
Good: "if the Word became flesh by a transfiguration and change of substance, it follows at once that Jesus must be a substance compounded of two substances -- of flesh and spirit, -- a kind of mixture, like electrum, composed of gold and silver; and it begins to be neither gold (that is to say, spirit) nor silver (that is to say, flesh), -- the one being changed by the other, and a third substance produced. Jesus, therefore, cannot at this rate be God for He has ceased to be the Word, which was made flesh; nor can He be Man incarnate for He is not properly flesh, and it was flesh which the Word became. Being compounded, therefore, of both, He actually is neither; He is rather some third substance, very different from either. But the truth is, we find that He is expressly set forth as both God and Man; the very psalm which we have quoted intimating (of the flesh), that "God became Man in the midst of it, He therefore established it by the will of the Father," -- certainly in all respects as the Son of God and the Son of Man, being God and Man, differing no doubt according to each substance in its own especial property, inasmuch as the Word is nothing else but God, and the flesh nothing else but Man. Thus does the apostle also teach respecting His two substances, saying, "who was made of the seed of David;" in which words He will be Man and Son of Man. " Yeah!!! Correct! He is both 100% man and 100% God at the same time!!! His human nature did not alter His divine nature; vice versa, though He DID choose to NOT tap into His divine powers for awhile that He might beat the devil up and overcome AS A MAN by the Holy Spirit so we can follow along HIM as the pathway.
Quote: " And so, most foolish heretic, you make Christ to be the Father, without once considering the actual force of this name, if indeed Christ is a name, and not rather a surname, or designation; for it signifies "Anointed." But Anointed is no more a proper name than Clothed or Shod; it is only an accessory to a name ." According to Praxeus definition and taking the ONE side too far: yes!! He was a foolish heretic BUT THE BIBLE STILL SAYS JESUS IS THE FATHER!! So foolish Tertullian: QUIT CALLING THE BIBLE AND GOD A LIE AND A LIAR. GOD IS ONE AND THREE AT THE SAME TIME!!!
Here's something else: "These then testified both that Jesus was the Son of God, and that being the Son, He was anointed by the Father. Christ therefore must be the same as Jesus who was anointed by the Father, and not the Father, who anointed the Son. To the same effect are the words of Peter: "Let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made that same Jesus, whom you have crucified, both Lord and Christ," that is, Anointed." Tertullian is missing something here. Wasn't Jesus Lord BEFORE this ascension already?? Yes!! How then, did God MAKE Him Lord and Christ??????? Pay attention here!! This is a big point! Well He already was Lord and Christ as GOD, but NOT AS A MAN TILL THE ASCENSION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Ha! Now how are you going to handle that one!!!!?? This is waaayyyyy off the charts! Can't touch this! A man is now the Lord of the universe sitting on the throne of the universe (GOD'S throne, by the way!!!!!)!!!!!! Still, also he is not rightly dividing the word of truth by assigning the temporal and time processing factors of Jesus Christ to the humanity part of Him and assigning the eternal factors and realities to the Godhood. This is why we msut teach that the "eternal sonship" doctrine is a false doctrine. Sonship denotes a beginning and beginnings are a property of created things and created beings only, not of eternal Being. God is only associated with beginnings in relation to creation and created objects and persons.
Conclusion: men who do not believe Christ is God need to repent. If not you will die in your sins. This Jesus promised: "John 8:24 I said therefore to you, that ye shall die in your sins; for unless ye shall believe that
Iam , ye shall die in your sins. " The term "I AM" means God. And if not, what does it mean? There is an excellent article on this subject by Witness Lee entitled "What a Heresy — Two Divine Fathers, Two Life-Giving Spirits, And Three Gods!" found at http://www.contendingforthefaith.org/responses/booklets/heresy.html. Please note: not even Witness Lee was free from the eternal Sonship concept. So on that note, I must respectfully disagree with him.
Copyright © 2011 by Kevin “the NorthWest”. Non-commercial use permitted.
Please contact me at: