This Site Is No Longer Active

Check out RESTITUTIO.org for new blog entries and podcasts. Feel free to browse through our content here, but we are no longer adding new posts.

Is Jesus the Father?


by Mike Hicks

The Full-Orbed Deity of Jesus Christ by Gordon Magee

Jesus Is the Father

Plain Statements
“For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called . . . The everlasting Father” (Isaiah 9:6).
“He that hath seen me hath seen the Father” (John 14:9). “I and my Father are one” (John 10:30).

Verses to Compare

1. Who raised Jesus from the dead?
John 2:19-22 says Jesus; Romans 6:4 says the Father.
2. Who answers prayer?
John 14:14 says Jesus; John 15:16 says the Father.
3. Who has the drawing power?
John 12:32 says Jesus; John 6:44 says the Father.
4. Who is the Alpha and Omega?
Revelation 1:8 says Jesus; Revelation 21:6-7 says the Father.
5. Who is the coming One?
John 14:3 says Jesus; I John 3:1-2 says the Father.
Surely we cannot think that two persons raised Jesus from the dead, that two persons answer prayer, that two persons draw us to God, that two persons are the Alpha and Omega, and that two persons are coming.

Let’s begin by looking at the author’s sub-title “Jesus is the Father”. Consider that statement for awhile and its implications:

• The Father begat the Father
• The Father was born
• The Father had a mom
• The Father was tempted
• The Father didn’t know the day or hour of His return, only the Father did
• The Father died
• The Father raised the Father to life
• The Father sits at the right hand of the Father

These are obvious absurdities and it is very unlikely that the author would agree with these statements. Nevertheless these statements are valid if it is true that “Jesus is the Father.” The Bible is clear that Jesus is “the Son of the Father” (2 John 1:3). To say that Jesus is the Father is to make a statement that the Bible never makes and which flatly contradicts and makes nonsense of Scriptures too numerous to cite. Leading Oneness theologian David Bernard makes the same mistake in his book, The Oneness of God:

“If there is only one God and that God is the Father (Malachi 2:10), and if Jesus is God, then it logically follows that Jesus is the Father.”

However, Bernard later explains further:

“Although we do not believe that the Father is the Son, we do believe that the Father is in the Son (John 14:10)” (Italics in original).

If we put this together in a syllogism based on Bernard’s claims then we are left with the following conclusion:

1. Jesus is the Father
2. The Father is not the Son
3. Jesus is not the Son

Or, mathematically:

1. A = B
2. B ≠ C
3. A ≠ C

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

If your theology leads you to the conclusion that Jesus is not the Son of God, perhaps it is time to re-evaluate your theology.

Let us now move on to the specific Scriptures raised to support the idea that Jesus is the Father.

1. John 2:19-22 – “Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days? But he spake of the temple of his body. When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them; and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said.”

The Bible is abundantly clear that God, the Father, raised Jesus from the dead (that is, restored Him to life), (Acts 2:24, 32, 3:15, 26, 4:10, 5:30, 10:40, 13:30, 33, 34, 37, Rom. 6:4, 1 Cor. 6:14, Gal. 1:1, Col. 2:12), and so we should be careful not to build a doctrine out of one Scripture that may have another meaning. Jesus was a man and died just as other men die. He was not alive somewhere as a “disembodied soul” just waiting to come back into His body; He was dead. The immortality of the soul is a false doctrine that comes from Plato, not the Bible. This being the case, it is important to note that Jesus, in saying that He would raise up His body, was not saying that He would restore life to Himself, but simply that He would rise again or raise Himself up off of His burial stone. It would be similar to a believer testifying “when Jesus returns I will raise this body up out the ground.” The statement does not necessarily imply that I am the cause of my life being restored, but rather that I will in fact lift my body out of the grave.

2. John 14:14 – “If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it.”

First of all, this Scripture (from the King James translation) does not say that disciples are to pray to Jesus. It does not tell us who it is that we are asking; however it is implied in the context that we are asking the Father in the name or authority of Jesus. Different translations are varied in whether or not they add the word “me” after the word “ask”, as both textual variants exist. However, when comparing this verse with John 15:16 and 16:23 it appears that the KJV rendering is the correct one.

Secondly, we are told in 1 John 1:3 that “our fellowship is with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ.” Fellowship includes conversation. As Christ is the head of the body, the church (Eph. 5:23), it only stands to reason that the body of Christ would communicate with its head. There is a word for a body that does not communicate with its head: paralysis.

We can see a parallel of the relationship between God and Christ in the relationship of Pharaoh and Joseph:

“Thou shalt be over my house, and according unto thy word shall all my people be ruled: only in the throne will I be greater than thou. And Pharaoh said unto Joseph, See, I have set thee over all the land of Egypt. And Pharaoh took off his ring from his hand, and put it upon Joseph’s hand, and arrayed him in vestures of fine linen, and put a gold chain about his neck; And he made him to ride in the second chariot which he had; and they cried before him, Bow the knee: and he made him ruler over all the land of Egypt. And Pharaoh said unto Joseph, I am Pharaoh, and without thee shall no man lift up his hand or foot in all the land of Egypt…And when all the land of Egypt was famished, the people cried to Pharaoh for bread: and Pharaoh said unto all the Egyptians, Go unto Joseph; what he saith to you, do.” – Gen. 41:40-44, 55

God has made Jesus both Lord and Christ, and so it is appropriate to communicate with Him through prayer as well as to the Father.

3. John 12:32 – “And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.”

The argument that Jesus is the Father because the Bible ascribes “drawing power” to both He and His Father is strained. Is it not true that as ambassadors of Christ our job as Christians is to draw men to Jesus? If Jesus does it all by Himself then what need is there to preach to the lost? In John 6:44-45, Jesus was rebuking the Jews for their lack of insight into the Scriptures, which were given by the Father to the prophets, which plainly spoke of Him. Does the fact that the prophets actually penned the words that God gave them to write detract from the fact that it was God who was drawing them to believe in Jesus? Would it be wrong to say that the prophets were attempting to draw men to God by preaching His word to the people? Of course not.

4. Revelation 1:8 – “I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.”

Just because many red-letter Bibles put this passage in red and thereby define the speaker as Jesus does not necessarily make it so. Nowhere in Scripture is Jesus ever referred to as the Almighty and it is clear that although He has been given “all power in heaven and in earth” He is still, nevertheless, subordinate to His God and Father (1 Cor. 15:27, Rev. 3:12).

I have already dealt with the fact that God’s representatives, be they human or angelic, can bear the titles of God and even be called “god” as they speak for Him. Please see the full article here.

5. 1 John 3:1-2 – “Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not. Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.”

The author says, “Surely we cannot think that two persons…are coming.” We have already proven from the Scriptures that Jesus and His Father are in fact two people. Jesus is the Son of God the Father. The question is whether or not these two people, God and Christ, Father and Son, are both coming to the earth at some point.

Genesis 3:8 describes God “walking in the garden in the cool of the day.” Whether this is a metaphor for God’s invisible presence or a physical manifestation (theophany) is debated by scholars, but the fact remains that God, who is omnipresent, was present with Adam and Eve before their sin in a way that He has never been with man since.

“And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God. And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.” – Revelation 21:1-4

When sin has been completely done away with, the Bible says that God will once again dwell with man on the earth. While we may not know specifically what that means and how exactly it will play out, it seems safe to assume that our relationship with God will be restored to the point where He will be present with us in the same way that He was present with Adam and Eve.

Jesus will return physically to the earth to establish the Kingdom of God, where He will reign for 1000 years. Following that, “when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.” – 1 Cor. 15:28.

The Oneness assertion that “Jesus is the Father” steps far outside of Biblical language and logic. In attempting to disprove the doctrine of the Trinity, which is also false, they prove too much.

41 Responses to “Is Jesus the Father?”

  1. on 16 Jul 2012 at 3:21 pmSarah

    A well-written and timely article, Mike. I just posted some questions to our visitor Mike Gantt about this issue. Perhaps he would like to continue that discussion in this thread.

  2. on 16 Jul 2012 at 4:27 pmMike Gantt


    As I’ve said, I do not subscribe to Oneness doctrine. Jesus was not the Father; He was the Son. However, at the Second Coming, He became a father once again (2 Cor 6:18). After all, how could the seed of Abraham not become a father?

  3. on 16 Jul 2012 at 7:19 pmtimothy

    Mike Gantt,

    You seem to be playing the mystery man. No beginning, no end and with no affiliation.

    1) Were you baptized with spirit and fire?

    2) Did you speak in tongues after being baptized?

    3) When were you born again?

    4) Have you been raised/changed into immortality?

    5) Are you living in Jerusalem?

    Please answer these five questions.

  4. on 17 Jul 2012 at 4:22 amWolfgang

    @Mike Gantt

    However, at the Second Coming, He became a father once again (2 Cor 6:18). After all, how could the seed of Abraham not become a father?

    If Jesus became “a father ONCE AGAIN”, he must have been a or the father before at some time? when would that have been, and whose father was he at that time?

    What does your next statement (“how could the seed of Abraham not become a father ?”) have to do with the topic here?

    By the way, the answer to your “how could …?” is rather simple and straight forward: By not being married to a woman and having a child with her !


  5. on 17 Jul 2012 at 5:26 amMike Gantt


    Perhaps you did not see my previous response to Sarah to which I was alluding here (Comment 66 at this post: http://lhim.org/blog/2011/04/24/was-jesus-the-agent-of-creation/). That will probably answer your first question here.

    As for your second question, one thing that Unitarian, Trinitarian, and Modalism (incl. Oneness) doctrines have in common is that Jesus never becomes a father. This is problematic. As the seed of Abraham, Jesus inherited all the promises to Abraham, including “A father of many nations have I made you.” Moreover, a signature theme of the Abraham story is that he became a father long after the expected time of fatherhood. It is entirely appropriate therefore that Jesus, as the seed of Abraham, should Himself become a father and that well after the expected time.

    The problem with your answer is that according to your view, a signature promise to Abraham goes unfulfilled in Christ. It is not possible that any of the promises of God should fail for in Christ they are all yes and amen.

  6. on 17 Jul 2012 at 5:35 amtimothy

    Hello Wolfgang,

    Wonderful to see y’all(I’m from below Mason Dixon line) here again.

    Extremely hot summer on NE Florida coast even with climaanlager gehen 24/7 fullapulla.

    Anticipation for seeing you in action jetzt.

    Timothy 8)

  7. on 17 Jul 2012 at 8:34 amMike Gantt


    Regarding your entry at “3” above:

    It’s ironic for you to describe me as “playing the mystery man” when I post with my full and actual name. Moreover, it’s hyper-linked to my blog which has an “About” section.

    As for my affiliation, do I need one other than Christ?

    As for your sectarian questions, I am not a sectarian. As I have been saying, faithfulness to Christ is more important than group identity.

  8. on 17 Jul 2012 at 2:01 pmWolfgang

    @Mike Gantt
    were you referring to the following passage from a post in the other thread?

    God determined that He Himself would forsake His heavenly glory, live as this human being, die, and be raised from the dead – ultimately to re-assume all the glory which had previously been His. Thus the Father handed over all things to the Son. The Father is who He was in the prior (original) age; the Son is who He would be in the eternal age.

    I admit, I am unable to see any scriptural basis for your statement and furthermore no logic in it either.

    You then write above

    This is problematic. As the seed of Abraham, Jesus inherited all the promises to Abraham, including “A father of many nations have I made you.” Moreover, a signature theme of the Abraham story is that he became a father long after the expected time of fatherhood. It is entirely appropriate therefore that Jesus, as the seed of Abraham, should Himself become a father and that well after the expected time.

    What I see to be very problematic is your understanding and/or interpretation of rather simple Scripture passages … You assume things pertaining to one person (Abraham) to be equally true of another person (Jesus), when they are clearly NOT!

    Reading the Scripture could be so simple … if people would only read it at least in the way they read other written material; but alas, they do seem to no longer read properly when they have a Bible in hand and before their eyes. Things are interpreted in the most strange ways … with disregard to other passages dealing with information about the same person, or different person, same time or different time, same place or different place, etc etc etc

    Perhaps you can at least let me in on the secret known to you as to who the wife of Jesus was with whom he begat children in order to become a father “out of due time” ?

  9. on 17 Jul 2012 at 2:23 pmtimothy

    Mike Gantt,

    “The mystery man” is “proclaiming some strange ideas”,you wrote:

    “Growing church by growing its size was only half the answer I was seeking. The other half, which was just as important if not more important, was knowing how you grow each person in the congregation to become more like Christ.”

    “auxano”=causing the growth, increase, inward Christian growth

    “auxin”=plant hormone: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auxin

    1 Corinthians 3: (nasb)
    6 I planted, Apollos watered, but God was causing the growth.

    7 So then neither the one who plants nor the one who waters is anything, but God who causes the growth.

    Answers to questions 1, 2, and 3 would be easy for you to answer if you still believe.

    As for four and five, it would only be possible to answer if indeed Jesus Christ has returned, resurrected his church and is ruling from Jerusalem.

    I clicked your “green name” when it appeared here on KR blog. To my disappointment you are proclaiming that Jesus Christ is GOD and your idolatry would determine whether or not you are Kingdom Ready.

    1 Corinthians 6: (nasb)
    9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, *nor IDOLATERS*, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals,

    10 nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.

    You should be able to come to your senses and snap out of your self inflicted

    11 Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.

    I do know the idiom “a man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still”.

    You must remember……

    Timothy 🙂

  10. on 17 Jul 2012 at 2:32 pmMike Gantt


    The bride of Christ.

    As for Jesus being rightful heir to the promises made to Abraham, do you likewise object to Paul’s use of this logic in Galatians 3?

  11. on 17 Jul 2012 at 2:35 pmMike Gantt


    No one who worshiped Christ was ever condemned in Scripture. Thus I do not take your condemnation to be from God.

  12. on 17 Jul 2012 at 3:46 pmWolfgang

    Mike Gantt,

    hmn …. the bride of Christ ? now, who do you understand the bride of Christ to be? and who would be their children?

  13. on 17 Jul 2012 at 4:02 pmMike Gantt

    The bride of Christ is the New Testament church and the children are humanity of the new age.

  14. on 17 Jul 2012 at 4:18 pmWolfgang

    Mike Gantt

    is your way of interpretation of this matter what is commonly often called “spiritualizing”?

    I also find it interesting how many items seem to come back to how folks interpret various “ages” mentioned in the Scriptures?

    Btw, has the “new age” to which you make reference above already started? if not, when or with what event will it start? do you assume all humanity of that age to be saints?

  15. on 17 Jul 2012 at 6:48 pmtimothy

    Mike Gantt,

    You are saying Jesus Christ the son of GOD is GOD and you claim to be worshiping Jesus Christ who is GOD the son of GOD.

    Jesus Christ(Yeshuah) worshiped GOD(YAHWEH).

    He restated commandments: all agape love

    To LOVE GOD with all your heart, soul and mind.

    To love yourself.

    And to love your neighbor as you love yourself.

    To love one another as I(Jesus Christ) have loved you.

    John 4: (nasb)
    23 But an hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for such people the Father seeks to be His worshipers.
    24 God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.

    Pasturing a charismatic christian church must have given you a view of GOD being worshiped with manifestations of the spirit.

    Please quote(copy/past) the scripture where “No one who worshiped Christ was ever condemned in Scripture.” and scripture where people were worshiping Jesus Christ as GOD.

    Timothy 🙂

  16. on 17 Jul 2012 at 7:52 pmRay

    I believe God’s name or character is that of Jesus and that Jesus is the Father by comparison, and that’s it’s not necessarily wrong to make such comparisions or statements.

    It’s important that we allow for such freedom that we may enjoy what God has given us and learn thereby, remembering that where the Spirit of the Lord is there is liberty.

    Let’s also learn to use our liberty responsibly. (Ecc 12:14)

  17. on 18 Jul 2012 at 3:20 amWolfgang


    how about endeavouring to communicate accurate and precisely to avoid misunderstandings? would that qualify for using our liberty responsibly? Is it responsibly using one’s liberty when we make confusing and/or confused statements?

  18. on 18 Jul 2012 at 6:13 amMike


    2) Did you speak in tongues after being baptized?

    I am curious as to why you ask this question in the context of this discussion about the identity of the Father and the Son. Are you suggesting that one can only reasonably discuss this topic if one has spoken in tongues?

    If so, I would like to admit that, while I did “speak in tongues” for ten years in a Pentecostal church (as I was taught that I should) I have since rejected the modern day tongues phenomenon for a number of reasons, but that is a discussion for another time. The point is that, while being an active tongue speaker for many years, I had the completely false belief that Jesus is the Father. I also held to many other false teachings in spite of my tongues experience, which supposedly was a gift from God that would help lead me into all truth, but in fact helped to confirm me in my false doctrines.

    My concern here is that you may be allowing your subjective experience with tongues to guide your biblical interpretation and exegesis. Many religions endorse and practice speaking in tonguess outside of Christianity, therefore this cannot be used as a support to bolster your arguments about Biblical topics (unless of course we are willing to say that Trinitarian Pentecostals, Charismatics, Mormons, Catholics, and many non-Christians religions are all “in the truth” because they speak in tongues). Don’t get me wrong; I agree with your view of the Father and Christ, and disagree with Mike Gantt’s. But please do not assume that only somebody who “speaks in tongues” can hope to comprehend the truth about God and His dear Son.

    God bless.

  19. on 18 Jul 2012 at 9:09 amtimothy

    Hello Mike,

    I am inspired that you are still here. In a positive way.

    It is difficult for me to stay on topic, the topic being about Jesus Christ being GOD. To understand how Christians have been redeemed, making Jesus Christ GOD throws a monkey wrench into the machinery.

    A lot of supernatural took place when Jesus was baptized by his cousin John. Mainly because GOD acknowledged him as his son and he received a full measure of holy spirit. He was a fully operational human being with holy spirit and without Adams sin nature tainted blood. However, of the nine manifestations listed in 1 Corinthians 12-14, he only operated 7, he did not speak in tongues or speak in tongues and interpret.

    You Mike have the potential to operate the manifestations and greater because Jesus Christ is now siting at the right hand of GOD. Christians have received the spirit of truth and accompanying comforter and can operate the faith of Jesus Christ.

    This is proven when one speaks in tongues after receiving holy spirit. Speaking in tongues is your personal proof of being born again.

    Romans 8: (kjv)
    16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:

    17 And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.

    My questions to MG were to find out if he still believes(1,2,3) as he holds a Dr Degree as a charismatic theologian. And four and five because he claims that Jesus Christ has already returned and the Kingdom of GOD in now here on Earth.

    Mike, I will devote my time to share about the first century church and operating the nine manifestations of holy spirit. Speaking in tongues being the key, operational all the time in your private mind.

    I think it is reckless and selfish for me not to quote scripture, and now with this computer, every version of English scripture is available to copy/paste. So with me the writer their is no guessing, I look up the verses, read them and copy/past to the KR thread. For you the reader, and you are the object to receive the labor of my precious time, you just read through with out an interruption. So we both receive GODs word simultaneously.

    This is important information. Wolfgang and I received *didaskalia*(instruction, teaching,doctrine as in “2 Timothy 3:16) over thirty years ago. I live in Florida and he lives in Germany and translated the study into high GERMAN. Thirty years ago Wolfgang went across the border from West Germany to behind the Iron curtain into East Germany. And there he taught and established underground Christian home fellowships modeled after the first century book of Acts churches.

    James 2: (kjv)
    17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.

    18 Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.

    Wolfgang has written above:

    “Reading the Scripture could be so simple … if people would only read it at least in the way they read other written material; but alas, they do seem to no longer read properly when they have a Bible in hand and before their eyes. Things are interpreted in the most strange ways … with disregard to other passages dealing with information about the same person, or different person, same time or different time, same place or different place, etc etc etc”

    Those are words of wisdom to see, hear and heed.

    You write:

    “Don’t get me wrong; I agree with your view of the Father and Christ, and disagree with Mike Gantt’s. But please do not assume that only somebody who “speaks in tongues” can hope to comprehend the truth about God and His dear Son.”

    Mike I am not assuming, but know experientialy and desire to expound on why,

    GOD bless.

    Timothy 8)

  20. on 18 Jul 2012 at 10:16 amMike


    Mike I am not assuming, but know experientialy

    Indeed, you know because your experience validates you, as it did me for ten years. I assure you that I am fully aware of all of the arguments for the modern day phenomenon labelled “speaking in tongues”. I have expounded them from pulpits, in Sunday School, Youth groups, and in home Bible studies.

    However, as I began to study the Scriptures more carefully I found many points of false doctrine in my life. The nature of God and Christ, the immortality of the soul, the nature of the Kingdom of God, as well as many others. Naturally, and in order to be honest with myself, I had to honestly question the doctrines I had been taught, including speaking in tongues.


    “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?” – Jer. 17:9

    Two things I have learned:
    1) Although we all admit that we can be easily deceived, it is extremely difficult to challenge our own experiences in the light of Scriptural truth.
    2) It is extremely difficult to challenge somebody else’s experiences in the light of Scriptural truth.

    It has been my “experience” that people are more willing to question and challenge the teaching that Jesus is God than they are to question or challenge their own subjective experience regarding tongues.

    It was and is not my intention to hijack this posting and to begin an argument about tongues. I will, however, offer you a link which you may follow and read if you are interested in challenging your own belief system regarding tongues.


    These articles are a start, and certainly not the totality of literature on the “non-miraculous language” viewpoint, which I currently adhere to. I would also suggest reading Renton Maclachlan’s book online at http://www.tonguesrevisited.com.

    So, getting back to the topic. I used to believe that Jesus was a “God-man”, in fact the Father Himself, in spite of the fact that I spoke in tongues. I now no longer speak in tongues (and strongly believe that the modern movement of the last 100 years or so is deceived as to the nature of Biblical tongues), and yet I have the truth of God and Christ. Therefore I must conclude that speaking in tongues does not guarantee a correct understanding and interpretation of the Scriptures, which is the only point I was trying to make.

    God bless.

  21. on 18 Jul 2012 at 4:54 pmtimothy


    I followed one of your link to a dead end.

    However I will read the thesis on the other.

    I too spoke in tongues for 15 years….went away to left field and swimming against the tide I returned….and having abandoned dispensationalism and studying all about matters in the Gospels and now am experiencing what has been written to the church.

    Please take the time to listen/watch sessions *13* and *14*(at least):


    I promise to read your materials.


  22. on 19 Jul 2012 at 1:41 amWolfgang


    I did read R. Zerhusen’s article and found the following summary type statement from him concerning Acts 2 in the opening section to his article no 1Co 14.

    The Judean crowd of Acts 2 had expected to be hearing the “holy tongue” (i.e., Hebrew) the proper language of the temple liturgy, the upper language of the Jewish diglossia. Instead, the disciples of Jesus when filled with the Spirit prophesied in their own native languages (i.e., Aramaic and Greek) and violated the Jewish diglossia. Luke designates these languages as “other tongues” (i.e., languages other than Hebrew).

    I suppose the question is whose “own languages” did the hearers, who were not only Judeans, hear the 12 apostles speak? was it the apostles’ own languages? or was it the hearers’ own languages?
    Furthermore, was Greek indeed a native language to the 12 apostles of whom the record in Acts 2 speaks?

    I would currently question the author’s interpretation based on the fact that he makes certain claims which even the immediate context in Acts 2 does not support.

  23. on 19 Jul 2012 at 6:05 amMike


    Thank you for your thoughts. As I said to Timothy I am not interested in getting into an in depth discussion about tongues here on this thread. Zerhusen’s diglossia theory is just that – a theory. But it does make sense and answers why Judeans were hearing their own “other tongue” being spoken. Suffice it to say that Zerhusen and Maclachlan (and others) raise valid questions that, in my opinion, can only be answered from the non-miraculous viewpoint. I believe that the tongues being spoken in the NT were actual human languages, and were always understood by the speaker, but not alwyas by the hearer (hence the need for interpretation/translation). If this is true then “tongues” today are not Biblical, as they are not understood by the speaker.

    I did not come to this understanding quickly, but through much study of the three major viewpoints (continuationist, cessationist, non-miraculous). Before we can have any real, meaningful discussion on this you would need to completely familiarize yourself with the arguments raised in Zerhusen’s three articles and Maclachlan’s book.

    God bless.

  24. on 19 Jul 2012 at 6:11 amMike


    Sorry for the dud link. Please try this one.


  25. on 19 Jul 2012 at 7:13 pmRay

    I’d like to probe this question a bit:

    Is there any way in which Jesus isn’t the Father?

    I suppose we could say that he isn’t the Father by the simple and plain fact that he did not give birth to himself.

    Yet doesn’t the scripture tell us that he is the good seed which is of God and that the good seed of God does multiply?

    Are there not many ways in which Jesus is the Father?

    I say that he is very much the Father by comparision.

    Jesus was certainly born of the Spirit (Luke 1:35) and that which is born of God will produce the fruit of the Spirit of God.

    Just as Jesus was sent into the world by the Father, so those disciples of his who had been taught by him were also sent.

    As the Father sent Jesus into the world, so Jesus sent his disciples also. There’s another example of how Jesus is as God the Father is.

    Isn’t Jesus God to us? If not him, then who? I say that Jesus is the prime example of God the Father to us. He’s the best example of God to the world that the world has ever seen. He’s the most complete example of the love of God to us that we have ever read about.

    The scripture says that God is love. Isn’t Jesus just as much the love of God that God the Father himself is? I trust that he is.

    I believe it may be perfectly acceptable for a man to say that Jesus is God to him. I trust that whenever I should ever hear such a thing that I first of all ought not to think of it as being anything unacceptable or unusual.

    Why should I think of such a thing to be so strange?

    Just as it’s been said that we can not live on one verse of scripture, isn’t it also true that one can not live on one revelation of God only?

  26. on 19 Jul 2012 at 7:22 pmRay

    I suppose one could say that Jesus in my one revelation of God and I can live on and by him every day.

    I suppose that could work.

  27. on 19 Jul 2012 at 10:13 pmDoubting Thomas

    Hi Ray,
    It is alright to say that Y’shua (Jesus) is like his (and “our”) Father, but it must be understood that the Son and the Father are two separate individuals or beings. There are some people that are confused and believe the Son “is” the Father (Oneness believers), or that the Son and the Father are in reality one living being (part of a Triune Godhead)…

  28. on 20 Jul 2012 at 2:56 amWolfgang


    Isn’t Jesus God to us? If not him, then who?

    Jesus’ Father alone is God …. cp.. Jesus’ words in Joh 17:3

    I say that Jesus is the prime example of God the Father to us. He’s the best example of God to the world that the world has ever seen. He’s the most complete example of the love of God to us that we have ever read about.

    Indeed …. but, please note, the example of someone or something is NOT himself that something or someone of which he is the example

  29. on 20 Jul 2012 at 6:34 pmRay

    Thomas, in light of the fact that he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit, (I Cor 6:17) is it so strange that some might believe that Jesus and the Father are one Spirit?

  30. on 20 Jul 2012 at 6:54 pmDoubting Thomas

    Following that logic, then we and the Father are one Spirit… 🙂

  31. on 20 Jul 2012 at 9:51 pmRay

    If a Christian is truly fully united in Christ, not being divided by anything otherwise or contrary to him, then I suppose he is at one with his maker, as Jesus prayed that he would be and in such a condition, are they not then, of one spirit even as he and God are one?

    I suppose that salvation in it’s true sense would be something like being of one spirit and one spirit only with God, by the Spirit of Christ.

    I’ve heard that in heaven everything is one.

  32. on 20 Jul 2012 at 10:20 pmDoubting Thomas

    You could be right Ray. I can’t argue with that being a possibility… 😉

  33. on 23 Aug 2012 at 3:08 pmLorraine

    This is the reason I have said that the so called NT, does not fulfill the so called OT, because the two books do not coincide. The true name that was given to us of this book by YHWH is ‘The Book of Remembrance’ taught to us in Malachi 3:16. And another fact is, the words christ, and or messiah only means to be anointed, and many were anointed in this book. All of the profits were anointed with the HS of the Creator of all life YHWH. Even a ass was anointed, to speak to Balaam in Numbers 22:28-41, and in vs.31, the eyes of Balaam were opened, he was anointed by the HS.

    First the son of YHWH if you devise the 1611KJV, book, a best version to utilize, you will see that the ‘Son, and Firstborn’ of the Almighty YHWH, He says is “ISRAEL” the chosen people of the coming out of Egypt. There is a reason that the word ‘Firstborn’ was put here by YHWH, there cannot be Two firstborns, is the reason. This is the son of the Creator, YHWH, is what this means. And all through the so called OT, YHWH expresses that the chosen people are His, and that there is a bond of the covenant between He, and them. Somehow, the NT, just runs right over this truth, and include someone else ‘with’ YHWH, as either an equal, or as with Him. But, in contrast again, in many scriptures in the Ot, the Creator of life of the first man, and woman, says that He is alone, and not to liken Him to anyone, or anything, in Isaiah 44:24, and in Isaiah 40:18,21,22,25, and in vs.25 YHWH says He is the Holy ‘One” reading this knowing it is definite, but, yet we do place YHWH with another anyway. Either failing to realize that it angers Him, or we know perfectly well, that it does, but are directed by our own understandings, which is an awful mistake to make, especially to YHWH the King. Also, in Isaiah 40:12-14, YHWH magnifies Himself as the one who has taught the one who will work, and rule for Him, the arm, in Isaiah 40:10,11. This is to let us know who is in charge of this whole movement of the awakening, the resurrection of the truth, and it is YHWH, he is the One and only teacher, Savior, and Redeemer taught in Isaiah 49:26, and in Isaiah 60:16. There is no one else with Him.

    Another contradiction that I find so unbelievable is when the NT teaches that a man, holyghost, what have you ‘DIED’ for our sins. Well, in Ezekiel 14:14-21, it is taught by YHWH through His prophet, for YHWH does nothing without them, said in Amos 3:7, that ‘no man can ever die for another man’s sin’ also in Jeremiah 31:30, and in Ezekiel 18. Now why would the King YHWH say this, and then change it in the NT, as one man is to die for our sins, YHWH is not contrary like this. YHWH teaches us that we are all responsible for our righteousness in these same scriptures.

    All of our sins have been forgiven in Isaiah 44:22, Isaiah 43:25, and YHWH is our Only Savior, in Isaiah 43:1,3,11. And this is for us all, many christians claim that this is only for the chosen Israel, but no, in Isaiah 56, we are all given this salvation. YHWH only asks that we return to Him, and the law of righteousness, the 10 commandments, the sabbath, that is perpetual, and the passover in Exodus 12. All confirmed in Malachi 3:7, Malachi 4:4, and again in Isaiah 44:22, to return to doing what is right by one another no matter who we are.

    Circumcision, and what we eat is important, but in the NT, we are told that it is no longer needed, YHWH changes not in Malachi 3:6, for our own saftey. Circumcision is everlasting, in Genesis 17:13. And in the OT it teaches, and it does not change, not none of YHWHs law, that in Deuteronomy 14, and in Leviticus 11, we are to eat clean. But in Timothy 4:4, he says all creatures are good to eat, and is why YHWH taught us of His anger against these false teachers in Malachi 2, Ezekiel 20, Jeremiah 23:1-5, and in Jeremiah 29:9-22. There paraphrases were not put here to change all of a sudden, for YHWH does teach us also of His enemies in Psalm 83. So that this book must be discerned, as the prophet Micah 7 teaches.

    In Zechariah 14:9, YHWH is One. For example of discerning, In Isaiah 7, we learn that Isaiah’s wife is also used in the transliteration of ‘born of a virgin’ which is not possible for Isaiah’s wife had an older son named in Isaiah 7:3, where Isaiah and his son were to go warn the king Ahaz, and a sign was asked of Ahaz to prove that YHWH will kill the two kings who were going against YHWH, and the law, in Isaiah 7:16. And the sign was Isaiah’s son Immanuel, in Isaiah 7:14-16, and to confirm in Isaiah 8:18, Isaiah teaches us that he, and his sons for ‘Israel’ are signs, and wonders from YHWH. This is a total contradiction from in the NT not true. For the word vigin in Hebrew is bethulah, and it was proven that the word used in the Hebrew writings was ‘almah’ meaning a young maiden, or a veil, or married maiden, not virgin, remember Micah 7 about the guide. T

    Therefore, as Moses said from YHWH the prophecy of doing the law is perpetual, it is our life, it is how we are to ‘prolong’ it, as shown in Isaiah 53:10, this servant (no name here), is to ‘prolong’ their life when they do this law by changing his life, meaning ‘when he finds his seed’ ‘a root out of dry ground’ means he doesn’t know yet who he is, and will see his seed and do righteously. For this servant was a sinner, vs.12, ‘he was ‘numbered’ with the transgressors’ meaning he did wrong before, ‘he bare the sins of many’ turned his life around to right, and became the intercessors for the transgressors, praying, and working for YHWH, the arm, in Isaiah 40, 49, and 53. Another confirmation of this servant is in Isaiah 42:18-25. And in Isaiah 59, YHWH saw the man, the arm, in Isaiah 59:15-20, to fit the bill, preferably vs.16. The branch of YHWH in Jeremiah 23:1-8, and in Jeremiah 33:14-22, and it is called YHWH(Lord) Our Righteousness, in progress, 1-773-874-0325, raised to the public in 2006, after the cluster bombings on Lebanon, prophesied to happen in Isaiah 33. YHWH Bless, and Praise unto YHWH.

  34. on 23 Aug 2012 at 3:25 pmLorraine

    In Isaiah 42:18-25, this servant is blind, he is hardheaded, and do not know yet who he is, until this servant seek YHWH wholeheartedly, he will find his seed, and turn his life to the law of righteousness wholeheartedly, to YHWH. A true servant to the law, which has never changed, for remember YHWH changes not, in Malachi 3:6. Praise YHWH.

  35. on 23 Aug 2012 at 4:16 pmTim (aka Antioch)


    Who is David referring to as the second ‘lord’ in Psalm 110?

  36. on 23 Aug 2012 at 4:29 pmLorraine

    To include: The Son, and Firstborn of the Almighty Creator YHWH said by YHWH is “ISRAEL’ His chosen people, there cannot be two firstborn sons right? This is prophesied in Exodus 4:22,23. YHWH Bless.

  37. on 23 Aug 2012 at 5:13 pmLorraine

    Tim, as we know lord, Lord, God, are all transliterations substituted by the original Hebrew name, found in the back of most bibles, the KJV 1611, is one, under yahweh, also not His name. For the Hebrew divine name ‘YHWH’ was Taken out 6800 times by the enemy who knew well what they were doing, those in Psalm 83, during the rewriting of this book in 200bc,2nd century of the alexandrian jews, and the romans before christianity was legalized in 311ce by Constantine at the Council of Nicaea. Many Hebrew Israelites were not talked about anymore after the last jewish roman revolt 135ce of Shimon bar Kokhba, and were all in captivity by then, and until this day.

    Therefore, the first Lord is of the Almighty King YHWH, and the second lord is of the ‘servant, the elect, the seed of David, who will be chosen to work, or rule on the throne (metaphor) for YHWH. In Isaiah 62:1,2, it tells us that YHWH will name this righteous movement from out of His mouth, this is the future prophecy. Until then he, the ruler on the thrown(metaphor), is described as the servant, the elect, the seed of David in all of the past, and future scriptures in the book of remembrance, the so called OT. In Jeremiah 23:1-8, over 200 years later, YHWH names this movement with the prophet Jeremiah, and ‘he’ shall be called, The (Lord) YHWH Our Righteousness.

    And, remember in Isaiah 40, YHWH magnifies Himself as who is to be acknowledged first, for it is taught in the commandments not to put nothing over YHWH, and a good servant whom this servant is, or will surely be of YHWH knows this perfectly! YHWH Bless.

  38. on 24 Aug 2012 at 9:07 pmDT

    I’m wondering if someone here can find a way to send this link to a Modalist on YT who was accusing me of “rejecting my Bible”.


  39. on 25 Aug 2012 at 4:55 pmLorraine

    Modes of being, and not individual persons persay, or just simply use what YHWH gave us the knowledge, and wisdom to know His might, for He knows all, this is obvious that He YHWH is the, ‘He Who Creates’ YHWH, the King, and the one who created it all ‘Life’. Once He puts us to accomplish what He commands it will be done. As with Moses, and all the prophets who were all anointed with His holy spirit, alone with others such as Cyrus the Great, Balaam, who were not Hebrew Israelites but committed to YHWH through His spirit. YHWH is One. Praise YHWH.

    The job of the servant, and the arm of YHWH who the servant is out of Judah, is to bring the ‘light’ the knowledge of His righteousness of His law unto all the other nations.

  40. on 25 Aug 2012 at 5:22 pmLorraine

    The law of the 10 commandments, the law of righteousness. Exodus 20.

  41. on 19 Sep 2013 at 12:53 amRolando Q

    Why you guys misinterpreting oneness?

    The statement “Jesus is the Father” shouldn’t be taken literally. Jesus is the name of the Father. Jesus Christ man is the Father manifested in flesh.

    Jesus is not a distinct “person” from the Father. If he was then how could the Father give him His glory. The Bible shows that God gives his glory to no other.


Leave a Reply