^5:12For when by reason of the time you ought to be teachers, you again need to have someone teach you the rudiments of the first principles of the oracles of God. You have come to need milk, and not solid food. ¹³For everyone who lives on milk is not experienced in the word of righteousness, for he is a baby. ¹⁴But solid food is for those who are full grown, who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern good and evil.

^6:1Therefore leaving the doctrine of the first principles of Christ, let us press on to perfection—not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works, of faith toward God, ²of the teaching of baptisms, of laying on of hands, of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment. ³This will we do, if God permits. (Hebrews 5:12–6:3)

The foundational passage for this section teaches us to adhere to the first principles of the word of God. It seems that a lot of people, both Trinitarians and Onenessians, believe that the foundational “first principles” that this passage is referring to are those of their denominational affiliation, or the traditions they’ve been taught from their pastors or in their seminaries. Nothing could be further from the truth if those traditions stray from the faith once delivered to the saints.

Instead of just assuming that everyone knows the first principles of the oracles of God, we’re going to lay them out as plain as day so any reader can see whether we are merely showing what the Scripture teaches or whether, conversely, we are adding our own opinions and conclusions.

This section is particularly important for demonstrating some basic biblical principles. Certainly, right along with Onenessians, we know that Trinitarians need to learn the foremost rudiment of all of the first principles of the Hebrew Bible: God is one. Yet, perhaps surprisingly, that is also true of the Onenessian view of Christ: saying that God is one means not only that He is one person, but that He is also, as He has always been, one in nature or essence.

And again, these are lessons we also had to relearn and be retaught. Our assertions aren’t meant to be personal attacks any more than Onenessians intend when they try to show the errors of Trinitarianism. Sometimes truth just needs to be taught, whether or not a recipient decides to become defensive or to not give the messenger the time of day. We hope better of our Onenessian neighbors. We feel very confident that those who have a sincere love for the truth and are willing to try the spirits, and reason together with us, will be able to see just how, where, and why the Onenessian viewpoint simply isn’t the biblical view of the Christ the apostles preached.

In order for us to teach the truth, it is critical that we stand on the firm foundation of biblical concepts of the Messiah. What we intend to demonstrate in this section is that foundation, and just how far Onenessians and Trinitarians have strayed from it.

Surely the Lord YHWH will do nothing, unless he reveals his secret to his servants the prophets. (Amos 3:7)

It is safe to say that most Christians realize that the idea of a Messiah (a Hebrew word), which we call “Christ” (from the Greek translation of the Hebrew word), is a Jewish concept. That isn’t to say there weren’t types of “Christs” in other cultures and religions. It is to say that the true, biblical Christ is not one of those others. We believe in and are contending for belief in the Messiah that was prophesied throughout the Jewish OT Scriptures and has been made known in the Christian NT Scriptures.

As our opening verse tells us, we believe that God told the OT prophets exactly what He planned to do. We believe it also means that God would not clearly say He was going to do one thing and then do something completely different.

The biblical descriptions of the Messiah go all the way back to God’s first promise of a savior. (This is known by many scholars as the principle of “First Mention,” where the first mention of a topic usually establishes its usage and understanding in subsequent mentions of the same idea.) God made that first messianic prophecy in judgment against the serpent for deceiving Eve and causing sin to enter the world. Simply put, nothing beyond the human offspring of Eve was stated or implied in that first messianic promise. Moreover, this basic, foundational truth did not change throughout the OT:

YHWH God said to the serpent, “Because you have done this, cursed are you above all livestock… I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and h er offspring. He will bruise your head, and you will bruise his heel.” (Genesis 3:14–15)

This passage is as first principle as one can get on the subject of the Messiah. As we can see, God called the offspring of the woman “ he,” and this particular “ he” was all that God says would be needed to ultimately bruise, or crush, the head of the serpent. Furthermore and most importantly, God our Father speaks of the woman’s male offspring in a third person pronoun (he, not I), showing quite clearly that He, God, was speaking of a different individual from Himself. Thus, the idea that the Messiah would be an incarnation of God our Father Himself is ruled out here in the same way that Genesis 1:27 rules out that God was implying He was a Trinity in verse 26.

Even the word offspring is contrary to human traditions regarding Christ: the very word means he would be a descendant, genetically downstream from Eve. The unbiblical idea that the Messiah would be recreated with a pre-fall human nature is actually disproven by this word “offspring.”

This concise yet complete description of the future Messiah is a very important first principle because it proves that the opposite idea is not what is prophesied in the Scriptures. Rather, the opposite idea can be seen to be pagan in origin. For example, we have the following pagan philosopher explaining his view of the requirements of a pagan savior…

…it seems to me that, as the body (by itself naturally) tends to become dispersed, it would need a savior that was a divinity.
–Numenius, The Neoplatonic Writings of Numenius, collected and translated from the Greek by Kenneth Guthrie (Lawrence, KS: Selene Books, 1987), 8.

Numenius is well known among Oneness theologians because of Charles Biggs. Biggs pointed out something that Onenessians are known to use against the Trinitarian position. Biggs wrote, “…Numenius… boasts that he has gone back to the fountain head, to Plato, Socrates and Pythagoras, to the ancient traditions… and has restored to the schools the forgotten doctrine of Three Gods.” Charles Bigg, Christian Platonists of Alexandria, (1886; rpt. Kessinger Publishing, 2003), 249–252.

Thus, the idea of a savior being a deity “ only” is pagan in origin, just as much as the Trinity itself is, and both are contrary to the OT prophecies. In other words, God consistently said He would do one thing (i.e., save humanity through the offspring of Eve), yet many people believe He actually did something completely different (i.e., save humanity by incarnating Himself in human form).

The NT clearly spells out the same idea we read in God’s first mention of a savior, and which is seen throughout the OT:

²¹For since death came by man, the resurrection of the dead also came by man . ²²For as in Adam all die, so also in Christall will be made alive. (1 Corinthians 15:21–22)

¹²Therefore, as sin entered into the world through one man, and death through sin ; and so death passed to all men, because all sinned… ¹⁵…For if by the trespass of the one the many died, much more did the grace of God, and the gift by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, abound to the many… ¹⁶The gift is not as through one who sinned: for the judgment came by one to condemnation, but the free gift came of many trespasses to justification…¹⁸So then as through one trespass, all men were condemned; even so through one act of righteousness, all men were justified to life. ¹⁹For as through the one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the one will many be made righteous. (Romans 5:12–19)

Here we clearly see that the false, pagan idea that Jesus “had to be God in order to save us” is clearly refuted by the plain wording of Romans 5:12–19. The key here is that something else is clearly spelled out. This passage teaches that, just as Adam sinned and passed death onto mankind, likewise the Messiah had to be a man in order to reverse Adam’s disobedience and redeem us through obedience.

This passage says nothing about the Messiah needing to be a hybrid God-man in order to meet what is actually a man-made requirement to be both God and man; nor does any other Scripture. Finally, it would simply be nonsensical, and certainly extrabiblical, to claim that God had to be obedient to himself in order to reverse the human Adam’s transgression! And yet that’s what both Trinitarians and Onenessians subtly want us to believe. No Scripture teaches or explains in detail such a doctrine. So, they want us to believe that pagans had a better idea, a better explanation, of what our savior should be made of than what God’s words in the Bible describe! We think that kind of thinking is both absurd and faithless, because faith comes from hearing the word of God!

Now all this isn’t to say that God would not be involved in man’s salvation. And this is where many get tripped up, because God does declare Himself as humanity’s Savior and Redeemer. But the question is in what way does the Bible explain all of this? What is obvious in the Bible from beginning to end is that it is God’s power and plan, and no one else’s. And that includes Jesus Christ, as we see in his own words:

Jesus therefore said to them, “When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am he, and I do nothing of myself, but as my Father taught me, I say these things.” (John 8:28)

Here we see that Jesus disagrees with anyone claiming that Jesus was the person of the Father. He also disagrees that he is personally God, because he says he can do nothing of himself. He didn’t say he couldn’t do anything of his human nature; there is no such talk or wording in the whole Bible! You never hear the Father say such things, for with God all things are possible.

Jesus therefore answered them, “ My teaching is not mine, but his who sent me.” (John 7:16)

Even his teaching wasn’t his! Jesus was explicitly not alone and was not acting on his own. In fact, he did nothing of himself. Rather, he gave all credit to God and away from himself. God plans and speaks, and man hears, believes, and acts on God’s direction, and this truth extends to Christ being himself a man! Christians ought to understand this concept completely. They certainly understand it when it applies to themselves. It is just as Paul said, “I worked more than all of them; yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me” (1 Corinthians 15:10; see also Galatians 2:20). This was also the pattern of Christ’s (“I do nothing of myself”) life, and it is the same formula found in righteous people throughout the Bible (Hebrews 11:8–11).

The OT taught throughout that Christ would be made entirely from Abraham and David according to the flesh. NT Scripture sums up the following OT biblical verses like this, “For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham” (Hebrews 2:16, KJV).

For all the land which you see, I will give to you, and to your offspring forever. (Genesis 13:15–16)

I will give to you, and to your seed after you , the land where you are traveling, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession. I will be their God. (Genesis 17:8)

Behold, the word of YHWH came to him, saying, “This man will not be your heir, but he who will come forth out of your own body will be your heir.” (Genesis 15:4–5; see also Genesis 28:13, 35:12)

Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. He doesn’t say, “To seeds,” as of many, but as of one, “To your seed,” which is Christ. (Galatians 3:16)

As we can see, the OT prophecies concerning the nature of Christ are consistent. Although the first three verses do not refer only to the Messiah, Galatians 3:16 does, and it limits the Messiah to being the offspring of Abraham. More specifically, the Messiah is to be the offspring of Eve, Abraham, and David. “Offspring” necessarily means genetically descended from, and therefore just as clearly and specifically, not a re-creation of a purer humanity upstream from his ancestors. In fact, no prophecy claimed that the Messiah would be a recreation made of untainted humanity. Such an idea is a total man-made fabrication! In fact, the very idea of a “sin-nature” is foreign to Jewish thought, but it certainly exists in pagan philosophical thought, where it is called dualism . Why then do some Christians believe that the OT isn’t as good a schoolmaster as pagan philosophy is? It can only be because they aren’t really as interested in hearing the Scriptures as they are in using the Scriptures to justify pagan ideas that make more sense to them…and they just don’t admit they are pagan ideas.

Furthermore, no prophecy of the Jewish Scriptures state that Christ would be an incarnation of God. In fact, the NT faithfully restates these OT truths in many ways. One such NT passage makes it very clear and specific that Jesus was made in all things just like you and I are:

Since then the children have shared in flesh and blood, he also himself in like manner partook of the same , that through death he might bring to nothing him who had the power of death, that is, the devil, and might deliver all of them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage. For most assuredly, not to angels does he give help, but he gives help to the seed of Abraham. Therefore he was obligated in all things to be made like his brothers, that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make atonement for the sins of the people. For in that he himself has suffered being tempted, he is able to help those who are tempted. (Hebrews 2:14–18)

All flesh is not the same flesh, but there is one flesh of men , another flesh of animals… (1 Corinthians 15:39)

Not only was Jesus made in all things like us, but furthermore, there is only one type of flesh “of” humanity. That means if Jesus came in a different flesh from all other humans, he would have been a different kind of creature from us. If he was different than us, then he didn’t come to save us. Hebrews 2:14–18 makes it abundantly clear that Christ couldn’t be any different than us because it is us that he came to save! Thus, the NT Scriptures reiterate the OT truth that the Messiah was to be made from the seed, or offspring, of David:

Concerning His Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh… (Romans 1:3, KJV)

My relatives according to the flesh… Are Israelites… From whom is Christ as concerning the flesh… (Romans 9:3–5)

Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel. (2 Timothy 2:8, KJV/NKJV)

For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. (1 Timothy 2:5, WEB, KJV, NKJV)

As we close this chapter, consider again our opening verse. Notice that the foundational truth of God’s promise regarding Eve’s offspring did not change genetically or mathematically over time. God grounded His people in the concept by expounding on the idea, progressing from Eve’s seed, to further being Abraham’s seed as a great blessing, to being David’s seed that would build a house for the name of the Lord. But never once did God say through the prophets anything to the effect of, “and furthermore it will be I myself who will incarnate myself into that promised offspring so that I myself will become the Messiah.” Just as there is no such language describing the Trinity in the OT, there is no such language describing this Oneness conclusion either. The Messiah of the OT would be born of the seed of Eve, Abraham, and David.

Jumping to Conclusions versus “It is Written”: The idea that the Messiah would be made of the seed of Eve, Abraham, and David, and would thereby be their offspring according to the flesh, is consistently taught in both Testaments. It would definitely be jumping to conclusions to determine that God was “trying to say” that He would incarnate Himself as the Messiah.

The OT Schoolmaster: The idea that Christ would be human is the only description the OT gives of the Messiah. The idea that humans need a savior that is only deific is of pagan origin.

Teach No Other Doctrine: It is clearly written in 1 Corinthians 15:21–23 that since death came by man, the resurrection of the dead also comes through a man. The idea that humans need a savior, who would reverse the sinfulness of man, who is personally deific is a pagan, philosophical teaching that is not stated in the Scripture and should thus be discarded and rejected.

 Print This Post