The History of Christian The History of Christian DoctrineDoctrine

“History is written by the victors.”

Trinitarian Proof-textTrinitarian Proof-text ““In fact, if we concentrate on the entire In fact, if we concentrate on the entire

body of Christian literature rather than on body of Christian literature rather than on the apologetic corpus, it becomes evident the apologetic corpus, it becomes evident that the basis for the fullest statement of that the basis for the fullest statement of the Christian doctrine of the divine in Christ the Christian doctrine of the divine in Christ as Logos was provided not by its obvious as Logos was provided not by its obvious documentation in John 1: 1-14 but by documentation in John 1: 1-14 but by Proverbs 8:22-31 (LXX) – which may, for Proverbs 8:22-31 (LXX) – which may, for that matter, have been more prominent in that matter, have been more prominent in the background of the Johanine prologue the background of the Johanine prologue than theologians have recognized.” Pelikan than theologians have recognized.” Pelikan The Christian TraditionThe Christian Tradition P 186 P 186

The Pre-existent SonThe Pre-existent Son

It has become part of the conventional It has become part of the conventional scholarly wisdom that in the New scholarly wisdom that in the New Testament “Son of God” had referred to the Testament “Son of God” had referred to the historical person of Jesus, not to a historical person of Jesus, not to a preexistent being. Therefore “the transfer preexistent being. Therefore “the transfer of the concept ‘Son’ to the preexistent of the concept ‘Son’ to the preexistent Christ is the most significant factor in the Christ is the most significant factor in the pluralistic distortion of the Christian pluralistic distortion of the Christian doctrine of God .. and the monstrosities of doctrine of God .. and the monstrosities of the Monophysitic Christology.” Pelikan the Monophysitic Christology.” Pelikan The The Christian TraditionChristian Tradition

HomoousiosHomoousios

This came to describe the nature of This came to describe the nature of the Three Persons in one.the Three Persons in one. coined by Gnostic heretics, dictated by coined by Gnostic heretics, dictated by

an unbaptized emperor, jeopardized by an unbaptized emperor, jeopardized by naïve defenders, but eventually naïve defenders, but eventually vindicated by its orthodox opponents. P vindicated by its orthodox opponents. P 210210

Interpenetration/Interpenetration/CircumincessionCircumincession

In other words, the nature of each is fully contained in the others and each partic-ipates fully in the work of the others, yet each remains distinct.

Unbiblical TitlesUnbiblical Titles

The bible does not speak of God the The bible does not speak of God the Father, God the Son and God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit. Holy Spirit.

It speaks of God the Father, the Son It speaks of God the Father, the Son of God Jesus Christ and the Holy of God Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit.Spirit.

The Name of God cont’dThe Name of God cont’d ““Following the instructions of Holy Scripture, Following the instructions of Holy Scripture,

we have been taught that [the nature of we have been taught that [the nature of God] is beyond names or human speech. God] is beyond names or human speech. We say that every [divine] name, be it We say that every [divine] name, be it invented by human custom or handed on to invented by human custom or handed on to us by the tradition of the Scriptures, us by the tradition of the Scriptures, represents our conceptions of the divine represents our conceptions of the divine nature, but does not convey the meaning of nature, but does not convey the meaning of that nature in itself.” And the specific that nature in itself.” And the specific “name” to which he was applying this “name” to which he was applying this stricture was “Godhead [stricture was “Godhead [qeovthVqeovthV]” itself, ]” itself, the very title he used in his accommodation the very title he used in his accommodation to Greek theism. Pelikan to Greek theism. Pelikan The Christian The Christian TraditionTradition P 222 P 222

God is not God!!??God is not God!!??

In a derivative or a metaphorical sense In a derivative or a metaphorical sense – as passages like Psalm 82:6, – as passages like Psalm 82:6, interpreted through John 10:34, interpreted through John 10:34, showed – the term “god” could be showed – the term “god” could be applied to creatures. But when the applied to creatures. But when the church applied it to Christ, it was church applied it to Christ, it was contending” not for the name ‘God,’ for contending” not for the name ‘God,’ for its sound or its written form, but for the its sound or its written form, but for the substances to which the name substances to which the name belongs.” Pelikan belongs.” Pelikan The Christian The Christian Tradition Vol 1Tradition Vol 1

God is not God!!?? cont’dGod is not God!!?? cont’d

Just as Oneness believers attest that Just as Oneness believers attest that the bible speaks of the man Christ the bible speaks of the man Christ Jesus from both a divine and human Jesus from both a divine and human perspective, Trinitarians attest that perspective, Trinitarians attest that the term God in scripture sometimes the term God in scripture sometimes means person of God and at other means person of God and at other times means nature of God.times means nature of God.

However, the latter cannot be However, the latter cannot be proven.proven.

God is not God!!?? cont’dGod is not God!!?? cont’d

There is only one person that has His There is only one person that has His nature, not three.nature, not three. ““Who being the brightness of his glory, Who being the brightness of his glory,

and the express image of his person, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high; (Hebrews hand of the Majesty on high; (Hebrews 1:3 )”1:3 )”

ImpassibleImpassible

Although he was said to suffer in the Although he was said to suffer in the flesh, impassibility continued to be flesh, impassibility continued to be characteristic of him insofar as he characteristic of him insofar as he was God. He was incapable of was God. He was incapable of suffering of his flesh could be said to suffering of his flesh could be said to be his own. But then the question be his own. But then the question was : “In what sense does not [the was : “In what sense does not [the impassible Logos] himself suffer?” impassible Logos] himself suffer?” Pelikan Pelikan The Christian TraditionThe Christian Tradition p231 p231

Impassible cont’dImpassible cont’d

To the early anti-modalistic To the early anti-modalistic trinitarians, it is acceptable that the trinitarians, it is acceptable that the God the Son was incarnate in flesh God the Son was incarnate in flesh and did not suffer but, if you say that and did not suffer but, if you say that God the Father was incarnate in flesh God the Father was incarnate in flesh you are a patripassionist. If divinity you are a patripassionist. If divinity can’t suffer how does the label can’t suffer how does the label patripassionist warrant any merit. It patripassionist warrant any merit. It is misinformed rhetoric.is misinformed rhetoric.

1 to 3 to 1?1 to 3 to 1?

There There ISIS definitely a scriptural definitely a scriptural distinction between the God the distinction between the God the Father, His Son Jesus Christ and the Father, His Son Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost. This distinction is one of Holy Ghost. This distinction is one of manifestation and not persons.manifestation and not persons.

Orthodoxy can misinterpret scripture Orthodoxy can misinterpret scripture to create an illusion of three persons, to create an illusion of three persons, but this doctrine by itself is tritheism. but this doctrine by itself is tritheism.

1 to 3 to 1?1 to 3 to 1?

Their claim to monotheism is the portion Their claim to monotheism is the portion of the doctrine that claims that three share of the doctrine that claims that three share the same substance. This cannot be found the same substance. This cannot be found in scripture anywhere. In other words they in scripture anywhere. In other words they can expand Him into three, but they can’t can expand Him into three, but they can’t put Him back together again.put Him back together again.

When the bible says God is one it is not When the bible says God is one it is not talking just in nature but in person. Not talking just in nature but in person. Not one in unity, but singular, numerical one in unity, but singular, numerical oneness.oneness.

The Cop OutThe Cop Out

Gregory of Nyssa was willing to look Gregory of Nyssa was willing to look for rational supports in his reflection for rational supports in his reflection on the One and the Three; but if on the One and the Three; but if none were forthcoming, it was most none were forthcoming, it was most important to “guard the tradition we important to “guard the tradition we have received from the fathers, as have received from the fathers, as ever sure and immovable, and seek ever sure and immovable, and seek from the Lord a means of defending from the Lord a means of defending our faith.” P 223our faith.” P 223

SourceSource

““Ancient Ancient Champions of Champions of Oneness: An Oneness: An Investigation of the Investigation of the Doctrine of God in Doctrine of God in Church History”Church History” by by William B. Chalfant William B. Chalfant (Pentecostal (Pentecostal Publishing House)Publishing House)

MonarchianismMonarchianism

monarchian monarchian from Greek words from Greek words meaning “one rule,” referring to the meaning “one rule,” referring to the one, sovereign God who rules the one, sovereign God who rules the universe.universe.

Two types that are often mistaken as Two types that are often mistaken as the same:the same: Dynamic MonarchianismDynamic Monarchianism Modalistic Monarchianism (modalism)Modalistic Monarchianism (modalism)

Dynamic MonarchianismDynamic Monarchianism

AdoptionismAdoptionism The belief that Jesus was not Christ until The belief that Jesus was not Christ until

He was baptized and the Holy Spirit He was baptized and the Holy Spirit descended upon him. descended upon him.

Theodotus of Byzantium was Theodotus of Byzantium was disfellowshipped by Victor of Rome disfellowshipped by Victor of Rome because it did not believe Christ was because it did not believe Christ was God at His incarnation.God at His incarnation.

Modalistic Modalistic MonarchiansimMonarchiansim

Also known as Asiatic Also known as Asiatic modalismmodalism.. Asiatic because the belief is that it Asiatic because the belief is that it

originated and exclusively resided in originated and exclusively resided in Asia Minor.Asia Minor.

The Patripassionist LabelThe Patripassionist Label As with all debates, there was rhetoric As with all debates, there was rhetoric

involved. The term patripassionist (literally, involved. The term patripassionist (literally, the Father sufferedthe Father suffered) is a term that the ) is a term that the trinitarians used against the monarchians.trinitarians used against the monarchians.

In this they put words in the mouths of the In this they put words in the mouths of the monarchians saying that they claim the monarchians saying that they claim the Father suffered. What monarchians did Father suffered. What monarchians did say,however, is that the Son suffered and say,however, is that the Son suffered and the Father was in the Son.the Father was in the Son.

According to Monarchian doctrine, the only According to Monarchian doctrine, the only way the Father suffered was way the Father suffered was sympathetically.sympathetically.

The Patripassionist Label The Patripassionist Label cont’dcont’d

From the Trinitarian standpoint of From the Trinitarian standpoint of interpenetration and interpenetration and circumincession:circumincession: If their “God the Son” died and God the If their “God the Son” died and God the

Father takes part in all that the God the Father takes part in all that the God the Son does, doesn’t that mean that the Son does, doesn’t that mean that the Father also died with the Son? Father also died with the Son?

Teachers of ModalismTeachers of Modalism

Praxeas Noetus Zephyrinus Callistus Sabellius Victor

The First ChurchesThe First Churches

Asia MinorAsia Minor AntiochAntioch RomeRome

Asia MinorAsia Minor

In the New In the New TestamentTestament SmyrnaSmyrna LaodiceaLaodicea EphesusEphesus SardisSardis ThyatiraThyatira PergamosPergamos PhiladelphiaPhiladelphia

Troas (?)Troas (?) ColossaeColossae

Asia MinorAsia Minor

MagnesiaMagnesia TrallesTralles HierapolisHierapolis

Roman Apostolic Roman Apostolic SuccessionSuccession

Peter 42-67 ADPeter 42-67 AD Linus, 67-79Linus, 67-79 Anacletus, 79-90Anacletus, 79-90 Clement 90-99Clement 90-99 Evaristus, 99-107Evaristus, 99-107 Alexander, 107-16Alexander, 107-16 Sixtus, 116-25Sixtus, 116-25 Telesphorus, 125 – Telesphorus, 125 –

3636

Hyginus, 136-40Hyginus, 136-40 Pius, 140-54Pius, 140-54 Anicetus, 154-65Anicetus, 154-65 Soter, 165-74Soter, 165-74 Eleutherus, 174-89Eleutherus, 174-89 Victor, 189-98Victor, 189-98 Zephyrinus, 198-Zephyrinus, 198-

217217 Callistus, 217-22Callistus, 217-22

Noetus

From Smyrna in Asia MinorFrom Smyrna in Asia Minor Greatest Opponent: HippolytusGreatest Opponent: Hippolytus

Fought against Trinitarianism in Asia Fought against Trinitarianism in Asia minor and then moved to Rome.minor and then moved to Rome.

VictorVictor

Bishop of RomeBishop of Rome Greatest opponent: TertullianGreatest opponent: Tertullian

Praxeas

From Asia Minor, moved to Rome and From Asia Minor, moved to Rome and then to Carthagethen to Carthage

Greatest opponent: TertullianGreatest opponent: Tertullian His name is not Praxeas but His name is not Praxeas but

Tertullian calls him this in his Tertullian calls him this in his Against Against PraxeasPraxeas

Praxeas meansPraxeas means busybody busybody

Praxeas cont’d

Tertullian had made a strong case to Tertullian had made a strong case to Victor for Montanists being received Victor for Montanists being received in fellowship by the church at Rome.in fellowship by the church at Rome.

Praxeas became “busybody” to Praxeas became “busybody” to Tertullian when he persuaded Victor Tertullian when he persuaded Victor to rescind his letter of fellowship.to rescind his letter of fellowship.

Tertullian Fights BackTertullian Fights Back For after the Bishop of Rome had acknowledged the For after the Bishop of Rome had acknowledged the

prophetic gifts of Montanus, Prisca, and Maximilla, prophetic gifts of Montanus, Prisca, and Maximilla, and, in consequence of the acknowledgment, had and, in consequence of the acknowledgment, had bestowed his peace on the churches of Asia and bestowed his peace on the churches of Asia and Phrygia, Phrygia, hehe, by importunately urging false , by importunately urging false accusations against the prophets themselves and accusations against the prophets themselves and their churches, and insisting on the authority of the their churches, and insisting on the authority of the bishop’s predecessors in the see, compelled him to bishop’s predecessors in the see, compelled him to recall the pacific letter which he had issued, as well recall the pacific letter which he had issued, as well as to desist from his purpose of acknowledging the as to desist from his purpose of acknowledging the said said gifts. By this Praxeas did a twofold service for gifts. By this Praxeas did a twofold service for the devil at Rome: he drove away prophecy, and he the devil at Rome: he drove away prophecy, and he brought in heresy; he put to flight the Paraclete, brought in heresy; he put to flight the Paraclete, and he crucified the Father. and he crucified the Father. Against PraxeasAgainst Praxeas

Tertullian Against Tertullian Against PraxeasPraxeas

But after all these, again, one Praxeas introduced a heresy which Victorinus was careful to corroborate. He asserts that Jesus Christ is God the Father Almighty. Him he contends to have been crucified, and suffered, and died; beside which, with a profane and sacrilegious temerity, he maintains the proposition that He is Himself sitting at His own right hand.

Zephyrinus

Bishop of RomeBishop of Rome Seceded VictorSeceded Victor

Goes on record as saying:Goes on record as saying: ““I know one God, Christ Jesus, and I know one God, Christ Jesus, and

besides him no other born and besides him no other born and suffering,” which he announced with the suffering,” which he announced with the limiting clause, “the Father did not die, limiting clause, “the Father did not die, but the Son,” Harnack, but the Son,” Harnack, The History of The History of DogmaDogma

Callistus

Bishop of RomeBishop of Rome Was deacon to Zephyrinus and seceded Was deacon to Zephyrinus and seceded

him as bishophim as bishop Excommunicated HippolytusExcommunicated Hippolytus

Hippolytus led a schismatic church Hippolytus led a schismatic church against him. He eventually was exiled to against him. He eventually was exiled to the Sardinian mines and died shortly the Sardinian mines and died shortly after his release.after his release.

Sabellius

Born in Ptolemais in LibyaBorn in Ptolemais in Libya Educated in monarchianism in RomeEducated in monarchianism in Rome Was the last prominent defender of Was the last prominent defender of

monarchiansim, but the movement monarchiansim, but the movement carried on for hundreds of years after carried on for hundreds of years after he left.he left.

Moved to North Africa and preached in Moved to North Africa and preached in Carthage and Alexandria and spread Carthage and Alexandria and spread the Oneness doctrine all over.the Oneness doctrine all over.

SabelliusSabellius

In Rome Monarchians were known as In Rome Monarchians were known as PatripassionistsPatripassionists

In North Africa they were known as In North Africa they were known as Sabellianists.Sabellianists.

OthersOthers

EpigonusEpigonus Deacon to NoetusDeacon to Noetus

CleomonesCleomones Deacon to EpigonusDeacon to Epigonus Was a teacher at the school at Rome.Was a teacher at the school at Rome.

CleomenesCleomenes

Cleomenes and his party maintain Cleomenes and his party maintain that “he who was nailed to the cross, that “he who was nailed to the cross, who committed his spirit to himself, who committed his spirit to himself, who died and did not die, who raised who died and did not die, who raised himself on the third day and rested in himself on the third day and rested in the grave, who was pierced with the the grave, who was pierced with the lance and fastened with nails, was lance and fastened with nails, was the God and Father of all.” Harnack the God and Father of all.” Harnack History of DogmaHistory of Dogma

Catholic ContradictionsCatholic Contradictions

Victor, Zephyrinus, and Callistus are Victor, Zephyrinus, and Callistus are still recognized as popes.still recognized as popes.

Violence in RomeViolence in Rome

“… “… as the schools now attacked each as the schools now attacked each other more violently, and an other more violently, and an agreement was past hoping for, the agreement was past hoping for, the Bishop determined to Bishop determined to excommunicate both Sabellius and excommunicate both Sabellius and Hippolytus, the two heads of the Hippolytus, the two heads of the contending factions.” Harnack contending factions.” Harnack History of DogmaHistory of Dogma

Callistus was murdered by trinitarian Callistus was murdered by trinitarian supporters.supporters.

Violence in Rome cont’dViolence in Rome cont’d

Apparently the sword was settled the Apparently the sword was settled the dispute between Oneness and dispute between Oneness and Trinitarianism.Trinitarianism.

The next bishop elected was The next bishop elected was arguably the first Trinitarian bishop arguably the first Trinitarian bishop of Rome.of Rome.

66ThTh Century Synod of Century Synod of BragaBraga

It decreed: “If anyone does not confess It decreed: “If anyone does not confess that the Father and the Son and the Holy that the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit are three persons of one essence Spirit are three persons of one essence and virtue and power, as the catholic and virtue and power, as the catholic and apostolic church teaches, but says and apostolic church teaches, but says that [they are] a single and solitary that [they are] a single and solitary person, in such a way that the Father is person, in such a way that the Father is the same as the Son and this One is also the same as the Son and this One is also the Paraclete Spirit, as Sabellius and the Paraclete Spirit, as Sabellius and Priscillian have said, let him be Priscillian have said, let him be anathema [cursed].anathema [cursed].” ”

Scriptures that Contradict Scriptures that Contradict TripersonalityTripersonality

““And the use of “Lord” for the Spirit And the use of “Lord” for the Spirit in 2 Corinthians 3:17 continued to in 2 Corinthians 3:17 continued to require explanation even after the require explanation even after the Trinitarian issues appeared settled.” Trinitarian issues appeared settled.” History of the Christian Tradition History of the Christian Tradition ((Pelikan)Pelikan)

Scriptures that Contradict Scriptures that Contradict Tripersonality cont’dTripersonality cont’d

““Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us. Jesus saith unto Father, and it sufficeth us. Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father? (John 14:8-9)”us the Father? (John 14:8-9)”

““Believe me that I am in the Father, and Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in methe Father in me: or else believe me for : or else believe me for the very works' sake. (John 14:11)”the very works' sake. (John 14:11)”

Who Resurrected Christ?Who Resurrected Christ?

Tertullian argued that …. “he who Tertullian argued that …. “he who raised up Christ and is also to raise raised up Christ and is also to raise up our mortal bodies will be as it up our mortal bodies will be as it were another raiser-up than the were another raiser-up than the Father who died and the Father who Father who died and the Father who was raised up, if it is the case that was raised up, if it is the case that Christ who died is the Father…. Let Christ who died is the Father…. Let this blasphemy be silent…” this blasphemy be silent…”

However, The Bible SaysHowever, The Bible Says ““Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy

this temple, and in three days I will raise it this temple, and in three days I will raise it up…. he spake of the temple of his body. (John up…. he spake of the temple of his body. (John 2:19 )”2:19 )”

““Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead;) (Galatians 1:1)”raised him from the dead;) (Galatians 1:1)”

““But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you. (Ro 8:11)” you. (Ro 8:11)”

““I Go to the Father”I Go to the Father”

“… “… I go to my Father, and ye see me I go to my Father, and ye see me no more; (John 16:10 )”no more; (John 16:10 )”

““A little while, and ye shall not see A little while, and ye shall not see me: and again, a little while, and ye me: and again, a little while, and ye shall see me, because I go to the shall see me, because I go to the Father. (John 16:16)”Father. (John 16:16)”

God’s Word Is Not VoidGod’s Word Is Not Void

This a general statement for God’s This a general statement for God’s word not a prophecyword not a prophecy ““So shall my word be that goeth forth So shall my word be that goeth forth

out of my mouth: it shall not return unto out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it. (Isaiah the thing whereto I sent it. (Isaiah 55:11)”55:11)”

A Need for Vindication?A Need for Vindication?

Will the differences between Will the differences between Trinitarian and Oneness Believers Trinitarian and Oneness Believers ever be resolved?ever be resolved? In my opinion no. Neither is it necessary In my opinion no. Neither is it necessary

for it to be.for it to be. Even the first apostolic church weren’t Even the first apostolic church weren’t

the only ones claiming to have the truth.the only ones claiming to have the truth.

The CreationThe Creation

Jesus is the Word (John 1:1, 14) of Jesus is the Word (John 1:1, 14) of God and the world was made by the God and the world was made by the Word (Genesis 1) of God.Word (Genesis 1) of God. Therefore when Col 1:15-16 says that Therefore when Col 1:15-16 says that

Jesus made the worldJesus made the world

When Did He Empty When Did He Empty Himself?Himself?

The Carmen Christi is believed to be a portion of The Carmen Christi is believed to be a portion of an ancient Hymn.an ancient Hymn.

““Who, being in the form of God, thought it not Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. Philippians (2:6-8)”the death of the cross. Philippians (2:6-8)”

““Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself said also that God was his Father, making himself equalequal with God. (John 5:18)” with God. (John 5:18)”

The Right Hand of GodThe Right Hand of God

““So then after the Lord had spoken So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of heaven, and sat on the right hand of God. (Mark 16:19)”God. (Mark 16:19)”

The “right hand” is a Hebrew idiom The “right hand” is a Hebrew idiom that referred to the fulness of God’s that referred to the fulness of God’s power.power.

Fullness of DietyFullness of Diety While the KJV says that “all the fullness of the While the KJV says that “all the fullness of the

Godhead” dwells in Christ, the NIV declares that “all Godhead” dwells in Christ, the NIV declares that “all the fullness of deity” dwells in Christ. They leave off the fullness of deity” dwells in Christ. They leave off the definite article (the definite article (testes, or the) for a “better” , or the) for a “better” reading. This is significant. The fullness of deity can reading. This is significant. The fullness of deity can be interpreted as “the fullness of qualities of a be interpreted as “the fullness of qualities of a deity.” This would claim that Christ is Divine. There deity.” This would claim that Christ is Divine. There is nothing wrong with this translation, but the text is nothing wrong with this translation, but the text also reveals even more than this. It literally says He also reveals even more than this. It literally says He is the “fullness of is the “fullness of thethe deity.” This lifts Christ from deity.” This lifts Christ from being Divine (but in Person not solely Divine) to being Divine (but in Person not solely Divine) to being being thethe one and only Deity. one and only Deity.

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

The Glory He SharedThe Glory He Shared

The Word of God shares the glory of The Word of God shares the glory of God.God. ““And now, O Father, glorify thou me with And now, O Father, glorify thou me with

thine own self with the glory which I had thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was. (John with thee before the world was. (John 17:5)”17:5)”

A Need for Vindication? A Need for Vindication? cont’dcont’d

The Apostolic Church was always The Apostolic Church was always fighting false docrine.fighting false docrine.

This is why we must:This is why we must: ““Earnestly contend for the faith that was Earnestly contend for the faith that was

once delivered unto us. (Jude 1:3)”once delivered unto us. (Jude 1:3)”