A Waldensian chimes in

[Strict Baptist]

Allow me to express my appreciation to participate on these forms. I was for 21 years a Pentecostal who later altogether left after both intensive study of scripture (now sitting, praise the blessed and only Potentate, at fifteen times in four years), theology as well as the history and doctrines of both Romanism and traditional Pentecostalism. Without belaboring the point, I left in 2014 when Dr GO Wood, former General Superintendent, violated 12 of the 16 non-negotiable Statement of Fundamental Truths of the Assemblies of God (grounds for utter extripating excommunication) by his ecumenism with the Mormons at Brigham Young University. Those articles actually arose during the 1914 to 1916 split among Pentecostals. Interestingly enough, Drs Trask and Zimmerman, his predecessors, broke these identical articles for decades in ecumenical participation with Rome in various charismatic congresses. Being a native of southern Louisiana, I know Romanism like few do; it was a total slap in the face to read of this years later when for leaving I was effectively called the devil's son. The most alarming thing of it all is all three to this very hour are in good standing within the Assemblies; not one peep of protest has ever been publically voiced. Leaving was costly, but it lead to discovering my Waldensian heritage, being among the oldest Christians yet extant who have for centuries predated Rome as well as have been viciously persecuted, but on the main body in Italy this is wholly lost...

I am privy to a little-known bit of Pentecostal history if it might be shared -- RS King was my first pastor, who was rather influential in establishing and broadening Pentecostalism in this area. After Swaggart's original 1989 adultery, dear, sweet Pastor King offered to counsel Swaggart even after he haughtily left the Assemblies (he called their whole General Presbytery morons and stormed out, refusing to undergo any rebuke). It would have been a simple drive down I-10, but Swaggart rudely refused. He now teaches in his Expositor's Study Bible where sickeningly more of his bold, italicized red comments drown out the text in Deuteronomy 4.16 the Spirit has a body and wine, even a drop, is a damnable sin. Perhaps someone ought to tell him never to use mouthwash in his multi-million dollar homes in Baton Rouge!

Let me state, however, that I never was involved neither would be with the various Oneness groups. Therefore, while I am studying its history and have read the entire 2017 UPCI manual (that shockingly copies not merely the format but almost the exact language of the AG documents), I come for research purposes, hoping to understand the Oneness interpolations of Sabellianism as they play out in an individual daily level. Does anyone know of a documented history of the Oneness movement? I have some histories of Pentecostalism, including biographies (and AS McPherson's autobiography plus some of Fire Baptized Holiness Church premier Frank Bartleman's works) but little is covered in the Oneness side of the group. The UPCI manual was of no help because it ironically lists Trinitarians as its forefathers, such as the Holiness movement, CF Parham, the Quakers and even Tertullian who wasn't orthodox as a Trinitarian but still one nonetheless. Any suggestions are appreciated.

[Amanah]

Hello SB.

I was curious so did a google search on Waldensian. Is this a fair summary:

The Waldensians (also called the Waldenses or the Vaudois) were a religious group that arose in the late Middle Ages and is now seen as a precursor to the Protestant Reformation. In the beginning the Waldensians were simply a group of traveling lay preachers within the Roman Catholic Church, but as time went on and they faced mounting persecution, they broke from Catholicism and embraced Calvinism.

Most histories trace the origin of the Waldensians to Peter Waldo (also called Valdes), a wealthy merchant in Lyons, France. In 1174, Waldo renounced his wealth, started giving his money away, and committed to living a life of voluntary poverty from then on. In 1176, Waldo became a traveling preacher. Others joined his group, and they became known as the Poor Men of Lyons. While the early Waldensians still considered themselves Roman Catholic, they soon ran into problems with the established church for two reasons: they had no formal training as clergy, and they were handing out Bibles in the vernacular (instead of Latin). Church officials told Waldo and his Pauperes (“Poor”) to stop preaching without the consent of the local clergy.

But the Waldensians continued to preach, wearing rough clothing and sandals and preaching repentance. A traveling Waldensian preacher was known as a barba and could be either a man or a woman. The barbes taught poverty, individual responsibility, and self-denial, and they promoted evangelism via public preaching and the personal study of the Scriptures (in one’s own language). The Waldensians loved the Bible and insisted that the Bible be their sole authority; at the same time, they publicly criticized the corruption of the Roman Catholic clergy. The Waldensians rejected many of the superstitious traditions of Catholicism, including prayers for the dead and holy water, and they spoke against indulgences and the doctrine of purgatory. Communion, they said, was a memorial of Christ’s death, not a sacrifice. They did not follow the church’s calendar concerning days of fasting, and they refused to bow before altars, venerate saints, or treat “holy” bread as holy. In short, the Waldensians could be seen as launching a pre-Reformation reform movement.

The Waldensians’ back-to-the-Bible approach appealed to many, and the movement quickly spread rapidly to Spain, northern France, Flanders, Germany, southern Italy, and even Poland and Hungary. But the Catholic Church did not take kindly to the Waldensian call to reform. In 1181 the archbishop of Lyons excommunicated the Waldensians. Three years later, the pope declared them to be heretics. In 1215 the Fourth Lateran Council declared an anathema on Waldensian doctrine.

In the 1230s, persecution against the Waldensians increased and lasted for three hundred years. In some areas Waldensians faced the death penalty if they refused to recant, and the Inquisition began actively seeking the leaders of the various Waldensian groups. The Waldensians went underground, and many groups retreated into remote areas in the Alps in order to survive. In 1487 Pope Innocent VIII pronounced a crusade against two Waldensian groups in the Cottian Alps along the French-Italian border, and many villages were devastated. In April 1545 two Waldensian towns in France, Merindol and Cabrieres, along with twenty-eight smaller villages, were attacked by troops sent by Cardinal Tournon, the archbishop of Lyons. The towns were destroyed, the women were raped, and about four thousand people killed. In response to such severe persecution, many Waldensians fled to Geneva, Switzerland, where they found refuge with John Calvin.

Eventually, most Waldensians became part of the churches of the Reformation, such as Presbyterian, Lutheran, or Reformed. But today there are still Waldensian churches in existence in Germany, Italy, Uruguay, Argentina, the United States, and elsewhere.

The Waldensians are properly remembered for their bravery during a dark period of history, their perseverance under the brutality of the Holy Roman Empire, their commitment to biblical authority, and their conscientious dissent in the face of Catholic error.

https://www.gotquestions.org/Waldensians.html

[Strict Baptist]

Originally Posted by Amanah

Hello SB.

I was curious so did a google search on Waldensian. Is this a fair summary:

The Waldensians (also called the Waldenses or the Vaudois) were a religious group that arose in the late Middle Ages and is now seen as a precursor to the Protestant Reformation. In the beginning the Waldensians were simply a group of traveling lay preachers within the Roman Catholic Church, but as time went on and they faced mounting persecution, they broke from Catholicism and embraced Calvinism.

Most histories trace the origin of the Waldensians to Peter Waldo (also called Valdes), a wealthy merchant in Lyons, France. In 1174, Waldo renounced his wealth, started giving his money away, and committed to living a life of voluntary poverty from then on. In 1176, Waldo became a traveling preacher. Others joined his group, and they became known as the Poor Men of Lyons. While the early Waldensians still considered themselves Roman Catholic, they soon ran into problems with the established church for two reasons: they had no formal training as clergy, and they were handing out Bibles in the vernacular (instead of Latin). Church officials told Waldo and his Pauperes (“Poor”) to stop preaching without the consent of the local clergy.

But the Waldensians continued to preach, wearing rough clothing and sandals and preaching repentance. A traveling Waldensian preacher was known as a barba and could be either a man or a woman. The barbes taught poverty, individual responsibility, and self-denial, and they promoted evangelism via public preaching and the personal study of the Scriptures (in one’s own language). The Waldensians loved the Bible and insisted that the Bible be their sole authority; at the same time, they publicly criticized the corruption of the Roman Catholic clergy. The Waldensians rejected many of the superstitious traditions of Catholicism, including prayers for the dead and holy water, and they spoke against indulgences and the doctrine of purgatory. Communion, they said, was a memorial of Christ’s death, not a sacrifice. They did not follow the church’s calendar concerning days of fasting, and they refused to bow before altars, venerate saints, or treat “holy” bread as holy. In short, the Waldensians could be seen as launching a pre-Reformation reform movement.

The Waldensians’ back-to-the-Bible approach appealed to many, and the movement quickly spread rapidly to Spain, northern France, Flanders, Germany, southern Italy, and even Poland and Hungary. But the Catholic Church did not take kindly to the Waldensian call to reform. In 1181 the archbishop of Lyons excommunicated the Waldensians. Three years later, the pope declared them to be heretics. In 1215 the Fourth Lateran Council declared an anathema on Waldensian doctrine.

In the 1230s, persecution against the Waldensians increased and lasted for three hundred years. In some areas Waldensians faced the death penalty if they refused to recant, and the Inquisition began actively seeking the leaders of the various Waldensian groups. The Waldensians went underground, and many groups retreated into remote areas in the Alps in order to survive. In 1487 Pope Innocent VIII pronounced a crusade against two Waldensian groups in the Cottian Alps along the French-Italian border, and many villages were devastated. In April 1545 two Waldensian towns in France, Merindol and Cabrieres, along with twenty-eight smaller villages, were attacked by troops sent by Cardinal Tournon, the archbishop of Lyons. The towns were destroyed, the women were raped, and about four thousand people killed. In response to such severe persecution, many Waldensians fled to Geneva, Switzerland, where they found refuge with John Calvin.

Eventually, most Waldensians became part of the churches of the Reformation, such as Presbyterian, Lutheran, or Reformed. But today there are still Waldensian churches in existence in Germany, Italy, Uruguay, Argentina, the United States, and elsewhere.

The Waldensians are properly remembered for their bravery during a dark period of history, their perseverance under the brutality of the Holy Roman Empire, their commitment to biblical authority, and their conscientious dissent in the face of Catholic error.

https://www.gotquestions.org/Waldensians.html

I will have to read that at another time, but am highly against GotQuesitons because they are Amyraldian Lordship promoters, despite what other god things might flow from their Baxterian tree. At present, I am catching up on research.

[Amanah]

history of baptism in Jesus name

http://www.apostolicarchives.com/art...925/180090.htm

Trinitarians originated with the Catholic church, who also corrupted baptism.

NEW INTERNATIONAL ENCYCLO. – The term "Trinity" was originated by Tertullian. A Roman Catholic Church Father. Vol. 22, Page 477.

[KeptByTheWord]

Interesting history about the Waldenisians.

Welcome to the forum StrictBaptist

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Strict Baptist

Let me state, however, that I never was involved neither would be with the various Oneness groups. .

Why?

[Strict Baptist]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Why?

That's quite simple -- I cannot affirm what the Sabellian Oneness Pentecostal movement requires in scripture, especially considering we predate Sabellius, Noetus, Praxeaus, Noetus and others who deny hypostasis. I left Pentecostalism altogether for my roots because in reading the sacred writ I could not find but Romanism staring back at me. Recall that it is the Oneness view that baptism by immersion, glossolalia that I have come to call estatic jabberwocky and affirmation of modified Sabellianism is mandatory to be a Chrisitan according to the UPCI 2017 manual, none of which I would dare affirm save the mode of dipping.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Strict Baptist

That's quite simple -- I cannot affirm what the Sabellian Oneness Pentecostal movement requires in scripture, especially considering we predate Sabellius, Noetus, Praxeaus, Noetus and others who deny hypostasis. I left Pentecostalism altogether for my roots because in reading the sacred writ I could not find but Romanism staring back at me. Recall that it is the Oneness view that baptism by immersion, glossolalia that I have come to call estatic jabberwocky and affirmation of modified Sabellianism is mandatory to be a Chrisitan according to the UPCI 2017 manual, none of which I would dare affirm save the mode of dipping.

All that matters is what is in Scripture. Who would doubt that the Father is manifest in the humanity of the man, Jesus Christ (who is the express image of His own person)? Jesus described His oneness with the Father as follows:

John 10:30
30 I and my Father are one. (KJV)

John 10:38
38 But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him. (KJV)

John 12:45
45 And he that seeth me seeth him that sent me. (KJV)

John 14:7-10
7 If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.
8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?
10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. (KJV)

There is also another verse that is quite powerful:

2 Corinthians 5:19
19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation. (KJV)

Imagine actually walking with Jesus for three years. How would you experience Christ's Oneness with the Father first hand? I like to explain it like this:

If you walked the earth with Jesus, you'd get to know Him as a man. He'd teach. He'd laugh. He'd eat. He'd use the restroom. He'd sleep. He'd rest. He'd pray to, and speak of, His Heavenly Father. He'd fast. He'd cry. He'd sweat. He'd bleed. However... at times you'd feel something otherworldly emanating from deep within Him. Something emanating from the very core of His being. Something powerful. Something that has authority over all creation. Something that speaks to the winds... bringing them into total and absolute obedience. Something that raises the dead and heals all manner of sickness. Something indescribable. Something "other". You'd sense the Father Himself at the core of Christ's own person. You'd realize that this man is far more than just a mere man. You'd realize that this man is... also God.

However, keep in mind...God did not reside in Christ as though He were merely a human vehicle. He didn't reside in Christ as a cat in a box. That would be Unitarianism. No, God abides in and permeates Christ's very being. A Oneness so complete, so majestic, and so divine that in Christ it can be said that God became a man... and that this very same man (from conception) was also God. In Christ Jesus, God elevated human nature into union with His own divine nature. In addition, His very own divine nature condescended to establish union with human nature.

No other religion elevates Christ to such an infinite height of majesty and honor. No other religion expresses Christ's true person to such an infinite degree. Most religions merely make Christ a prophet or seek to establish Him as being some second co-eternal divine being or person. No... Christ was not just a prophet. Christ was not a second co-eternal divine being or person. Christ also wasn't God shape-shifted or morphed into the mere appearance of a man who only pretended to pray. Christ was the authentic human tabernacle of God Himself. To deny this imperils the soul... and reduces Christ to being either a lunatic or a liar.

All authority and power has been delivered to Christ Jesus. He will judge Krishna. He will judge Buddha. He will judge Mohammed. He will judge Nanak. He will judge the followers of every false prophet and madman. He will judge all men in accordance to the Father's will as it relates to the Gospel. Through Him, the Father will judge. Because they are one.

[Strict Baptist]

Originally Posted by Aquila

All that matters is what is in Scripture. Who would doubt that the Father is manifest in the humanity of the man, Jesus Christ (who is the express image of His own person)? Jesus described His oneness with the Father as follows:

John 10:30
30 I and my Father are one. (KJV)

John 10:38
38 But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him. (KJV)

John 12:45
45 And he that seeth me seeth him that sent me. (KJV)

John 14:7-10
7 If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.
8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?
10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. (KJV)

There is also another verse that is quite powerful:

2 Corinthians 5:19
19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation. (KJV)

Imagine actually walking with Jesus for three years. How would you experience Christ's Oneness with the Father first hand? I like to explain it like this:

If you walked the earth with Jesus, you'd get to know Him as a man. He'd teach. He'd laugh. He'd eat. He'd use the restroom. He'd sleep. He'd rest. He'd pray to, and speak of, His Heavenly Father. He'd fast. He'd cry. He'd sweat. He'd bleed. However... at times you'd feel something otherworldly emanating from deep within Him. Something emanating from the very core of His being. Something powerful. Something that has authority over all creation. Something that speaks to the winds... bringing them into total and absolute obedience. Something that raises the dead and heals all manner of sickness. Something indescribable. Something "other". You'd sense the Father Himself at the core of Christ's own person. You'd realize that this man is far more than just a mere man. You'd realize that this man is... also God.

However, keep in mind...God did not reside in Christ as though He were merely a human vehicle. He didn't reside in Christ as a cat in a box. That would be Unitarianism. No, God abides in and permeates Christ's very being. A Oneness so complete, so majestic, and so divine that in Christ it can be said that God became a man... and that this very same man (from conception) was also God. In Christ Jesus, God elevated human nature into union with His own divine nature. In addition, His very own divine nature condescended to establish union with human nature.

No other religion elevates Christ to such an infinite height of majesty and honor. No other religion expresses Christ's true person to such an infinite degree. Most religions merely make Christ a prophet or seek to establish Him as being some second co-eternal divine being or person. No... Christ was not just a prophet. Christ was not a second co-eternal divine being or person. Christ also wasn't God shape-shifted or morphed into the mere appearance of a man who only pretended to pray. Christ was the authentic human tabernacle of God Himself. To deny this imperils the soul... and reduces Christ to being either a lunatic or a liar.

All authority and power has been delivered to Christ Jesus. He will judge Krishna. He will judge Buddha. He will judge Mohammed. He will judge Nanak. He will judge the followers of every false prophet and madman. He will judge all men in accordance to the Father's will as it relates to the Gospel. Through Him, the Father will judge. Because they are one.

I hate to burst your bubble, friend, but Hinduism actually states its demiurge is markedly similar to Socinian or Sabellian partialism by placing their false Brhama over Siva and Vishnu, thus actually making their so-called triad much akin to the Oneness view, which is not the three-one definition of classic trinitarianism where the three subsistences are the same singular essences, equal in power and glory but not rank (I John 5:6-9). Again, I'm not going to debate with you in this opening thread, but you can see the Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological & Ecclesiastical Literature for that. Frankly, I would rather begin with a discussion of baptismal regeneration as stated in the debate section.

Much thanks to Esaias for that information. I am a former Trinitarian charismatic (read charis-maniac) so I know how thin and useless that term can be. Despite being altogether backslid at the time, for my oratory they wanted to vaunt me to the zenith of their system, but I declined. How can one occupy the bishopric if they are not qualified? They even compared me to Leonard Ravenhill. The various Oneness orders are not well known there and infrequently discussed since trinitarianism is taken for granted. In all my years therein, I do not recall a full sermon dedicated to McAlister's Oneness doctrines, not to mention the various denominations. They still loathe me to this hour for asking questions, including about we Poor Men of Lyons and our beliefs. The fundamentalists likewise did not enjoy questions despite having read broadly their writings such as Dr Ian Paisley, GC Morgan, RA Torrey, Dr DA Waite, Dr DW Cloud (some of his books just came in the mail), WB Riley, Bishop Ryle, Lester Roloff, RG Lee et al ad infinitum.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Strict Baptist

I hate to burst your bubble, friend, but Hinduism actually states its demiurge is markedly similar to Socinian or Sabellian partialism by placing their false Brhama over Siva and Vishnu, thus actually making their so-called triad much akin to the Oneness view, which is not the three-one definition of classic trinitarianism where the three subsistences are the same singular essences, equal in power and glory but not rank (I John 5:6-9). Again, I'm not going to debate with you in this opening thread, but you can see the Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological & Ecclesiastical Literature for that. Frankly, I would rather begin with a discussion of baptismal regeneration as stated in the debate section.

Much thanks to Esaias for that information. I am a former Trinitarian charismatic (read charis-maniac) so I know how thin and useless that term can be. Despite being altogether backslid at the time, for my oratory they wanted to vaunt me to the zenith of their system, but I declined. How can one occupy the bishopric if they are not qualified? They even compared me to Leonard Ravenhill. The various Oneness orders are not well known there and infrequently discussed since trinitarianism is taken for granted. In all my years therein, I do not recall a full sermon dedicated to McAlister's Oneness doctrines, not to mention the various denominations. They still loathe me to this hour for asking questions, including about we Poor Men of Lyons and our beliefs. The fundamentalists likewise did not enjoy questions despite having read broadly their writings such as Dr Ian Paisley, GC Morgan, RA Torrey, Dr DA Waite, Dr DW Cloud (some of his books just came in the mail), WB Riley, Bishop Ryle, Lester Roloff, RG Lee et al ad infinitum.

Hinduism has a Trinity like Trinitarianism.

Hence they are a Trinity which they all work together as unified effort. Brahma the creator, Vishnu the sustainer, and Shiv the destroyer.