Our Trinitarian Brothers and Sisters in Christ

[Amanah]

Pel please comment for me, thanks

Originally Posted by Amanah

Pel - I need to respectfully ask you something, because I want to understand.

Would you say that there is no distinction between standard Oneness doctrine on the Godhead, and standard Trinitarian doctrine on the Godhead?

I don't think Trinitarians view it that way

http://www.gospeloutreach.net/optrin.html



HERESY?

We have seen that the Oneness doctrine of God is not faithful to the Biblical revelation of the Father and Son as two persons, and that the Oneness rejection of the Trinity is in error. The question now must be asked how serious an error this is, since theological errors vary in their harmfulness.

Evangelicals commonly suppose that a professed Christian movement may be judged orthodox or heretical simply on the basis of whether or not it affirms the full deity and humanity of Christ. Consequently, some Christians have concluded that the Oneness doctrine, despite its denial of the Trinity, is essentially Christian.

This is far too simplistic, however. While it is true that adherence to the two natures of Christ is critical to orthodoxy, and while most pseudo-Christian sects do deny that Jesus is both fully God and fully man, simply affirming the two natures is not enough. Indeed, it is possible to call Jesus "God" and still have "another Jesus" (2 Corinthians 11:4), if in calling Him "God" one means something significantly different from what the Bible means.

Such is the case with the Oneness understanding of the deity of Christ. When Oneness believers say that Jesus is God, what they mean is that He is the Father. That is not what the Bible means, as we have seen. Rather, when the Bible says that Jesus is "God," it means that He exists eternally as a divine person in relationship with the Father; or, to use the Church's theological shorthand, it means that He is the second person of the triune God.

The apostle John warns us, "Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father; the one who confesses the Son has the Father also" (1 John 2:23). Oneness Pentecostals will not admit to denying the Son, of course; but that should come as no surprise. It is doubtful that any heretic, including those about whom John specifically warned, has ever admitted to denying the Son. Instead, heretics of all kinds have simply redefined the meaning of the term "Son" (and along with it the meaning of "Father"). Thus the Jehovah's Witnesses define "Son" as "direct creation," while the Mormons claim that Jesus is the "Son" of God by virtue of having been begotten through physical union between God and Mary. The Oneness redefinition of "Son" as the human nature of Jesus (and "Father" as His divine nature) may be less offensive than the Mormon version, and less obvious than that of the Jehovah's Witnesses, but it is a redefinition nonetheless. The fact is that the Son and the Father are two persons, co-existing eternally in relationship with one another. To deny this fact is to deny the biblical Son, and thus to have a false view of Jesus.

It turns out, then, that one's view of Christ cannot be separated from one's view of the Trinity. Deny the Trinity, and you will lose the Biblical Christ; affirm the Christ of Scripture, the Christ who was sent by the Father and who sent the Holy Spirit, and you will find that your God is the Trinity. It is, in fact, the doctrine of the Trinity that is the distinctive feature of the Christian revelation of the nature of the true God. As Calvin expressed it: "For He so proclaims Himself the sole God as to offer Himself to be contemplated clearly in three persons. Unless we grasp these, only the bare and empty name of God flits about in our brains, to the exclusion of the true God." (38) Only the Christian God is triune, and consequently, to deny the Trinity is to say that, historically, Judaism and Islam have been right about the being of God, while Christianity has been wrong. Oneness writers have said as much. (39) Therefore, while there may be individual Oneness believers who are saved [Editor's Note: If, like the Jehovah's Witnesses or Mormons, a Oneness believer does not have faith in the Biblical Jesus, then how can it be considered possible that such a person is saved?], the Christian community has no choice but to regard the Oneness movement as a whole as having departed from the Christian faith.

We must conclude, then, that the Oneness teaching is a heresy, that it denies a fundamental, basic belief of biblical Christianity, and that those churches and denominations which teach this heresy are actually pseudo-Christian sects. In popular Evangelical terminology, such a heretical sect is known as a "cult," a term which simply means that the group's beliefs are in some important respect non-Christian.

In this sense, we regretfully conclude that the Oneness churches are indeed cults, and we urge Christians to reach out to Oneness believers in love and share with them the triune God revealed in the Scriptures.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Amanah

Pel - I need to respectfully ask you something, because I want to understand.

Would you say that there is no distinction between standard Oneness doctrine on the Godhead, and standard Trinitarian doctrine on the Godhead?

I don't think Trinitarians view it that way

http://www.gospeloutreach.net/optrin.html

No, I would not say that, especially of today. However, the state of affairs in the Second and Third Centuries was quite a bit different. At times, it seemed that most of the arguments centered around "Dispensational Modalism" and "Simultaneous Modalism."

"Dispensational Modalism" (or "Sequential Modalism") is the idea that Father, Son and Holy Ghost were manifestations of the one God that appeared at different times in history. This implied that at some point God "stopped being the Father" and "became the Holy Ghost" and etc.

Sabellius (an ancient Modalist "heretic") is said to have argued that God did not ever stop being "Father" and etc. His theological adversary, Tertullian, actually praised Sabellius for this. It is from the writings of Tertullian that we get Sabellius' famous analogy of God being likened to the sun. I've discussed this recently in another thread, so I don't want to bore you be repeating it over and over. But I do find it significant.

The guy who coined the phrase "Trinity" (trinitas) in the first place (Tertullian) was in fact more of a Modalist than even many later Trinitarians have believed. At that time, it probably was just a matter of "semantics."

Then, with the barbarian invasions and the fall of Rome, the writings of Tertullian were lost in the West for almost 1,000 years. During this time the Latin language changed and developed - just like all languages do over time. Tertullian's phrase "persona" was adopted to mean more than a "theater mask" or role. It took on the idea of "hypostasis" - the underlying reality of what makes a person or being what they are. Thus, the "Trinity" in the minds of many became "Three Beings Who are All God."

Yet, the ancient creeds and other writings refute this interpretation. I'm not advocating a "modern Trinitarian" view be adopted. I am saying that the ancient beliefs that "modern Trinitarians" claim as their own were really more "Modalist" than they realize.

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by Hoovie

I suspect Epley would not say this same thing in his church... He enjoys the liberties of a media sounding board.

Certainly, if someone said something like, "I have NO Trinity Brothers and Sisters in Christ. There are NO Trinitarians in Christ." in my church I would walk out.

I have made that statement plenty. We would wave at you as you are leaving.

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by Amanah

Pel - I need to respectfully ask you something, because I want to understand.

Would you say that there is no distinction between standard Oneness doctrine on the Godhead, and standard Trinitarian doctrine on the Godhead?

I don't think Trinitarians view it that way

http://www.gospeloutreach.net/optrin.html



HERESY?

We have seen that the Oneness doctrine of God is not faithful to the Biblical revelation of the Father and Son as two persons, and that the Oneness rejection of the Trinity is in error. The question now must be asked how serious an error this is, since theological errors vary in their harmfulness.

Evangelicals commonly suppose that a professed Christian movement may be judged orthodox or heretical simply on the basis of whether or not it affirms the full deity and humanity of Christ. Consequently, some Christians have concluded that the Oneness doctrine, despite its denial of the Trinity, is essentially Christian.

This is far too simplistic, however. While it is true that adherence to the two natures of Christ is critical to orthodoxy, and while most pseudo-Christian sects do deny that Jesus is both fully God and fully man, simply affirming the two natures is not enough. Indeed, it is possible to call Jesus "God" and still have "another Jesus" (2 Corinthians 11:4), if in calling Him "God" one means something significantly different from what the Bible means.

Such is the case with the Oneness understanding of the deity of Christ. When Oneness believers say that Jesus is God, what they mean is that He is the Father. That is not what the Bible means, as we have seen. Rather, when the Bible says that Jesus is "God," it means that He exists eternally as a divine person in relationship with the Father; or, to use the Church's theological shorthand, it means that He is the second person of the triune God.

The apostle John warns us, "Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father; the one who confesses the Son has the Father also" (1 John 2:23). Oneness Pentecostals will not admit to denying the Son, of course; but that should come as no surprise. It is doubtful that any heretic, including those about whom John specifically warned, has ever admitted to denying the Son. Instead, heretics of all kinds have simply redefined the meaning of the term "Son" (and along with it the meaning of "Father"). Thus the Jehovah's Witnesses define "Son" as "direct creation," while the Mormons claim that Jesus is the "Son" of God by virtue of having been begotten through physical union between God and Mary. The Oneness redefinition of "Son" as the human nature of Jesus (and "Father" as His divine nature) may be less offensive than the Mormon version, and less obvious than that of the Jehovah's Witnesses, but it is a redefinition nonetheless. The fact is that the Son and the Father are two persons, co-existing eternally in relationship with one another. To deny this fact is to deny the biblical Son, and thus to have a false view of Jesus.

It turns out, then, that one's view of Christ cannot be separated from one's view of the Trinity. Deny the Trinity, and you will lose the Biblical Christ; affirm the Christ of Scripture, the Christ who was sent by the Father and who sent the Holy Spirit, and you will find that your God is the Trinity. It is, in fact, the doctrine of the Trinity that is the distinctive feature of the Christian revelation of the nature of the true God. As Calvin expressed it: "For He so proclaims Himself the sole God as to offer Himself to be contemplated clearly in three persons. Unless we grasp these, only the bare and empty name of God flits about in our brains, to the exclusion of the true God." (38) Only the Christian God is triune, and consequently, to deny the Trinity is to say that, historically, Judaism and Islam have been right about the being of God, while Christianity has been wrong. Oneness writers have said as much. (39) Therefore, while there may be individual Oneness believers who are saved [Editor's Note: If, like the Jehovah's Witnesses or Mormons, a Oneness believer does not have faith in the Biblical Jesus, then how can it be considered possible that such a person is saved?], the Christian community has no choice but to regard the Oneness movement as a whole as having departed from the Christian faith.

We must conclude, then, that the Oneness teaching is a heresy, that it denies a fundamental, basic belief of biblical Christianity, and that those churches and denominations which teach this heresy are actually pseudo-Christian sects. In popular Evangelical terminology, such a heretical sect is known as a "cult," a term which simply means that the group's beliefs are in some important respect non-Christian.

In this sense, we regretfully conclude that the Oneness churches are indeed cults, and we urge Christians to reach out to Oneness believers in love and share with them the triune God revealed in the Scriptures.

There you have it.

[Steve Epley]

All Trinitarians are lost. Sad but true.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

All Trinitarians are lost. Sad but true.

According to you, NO ONE was saved for almost 1800 years out of the 2000 year Church Age. You not only gleefully "send people to hell," you boast that the "Gates of Hell" can prevail against the Church.

[TJJJ]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

I have met maybe two Trinnies in my life who really thought that God is 3 persons as in three separate individuals-- maybe a couple more if you want to count my elementary school friends.

The Bible says, "Great is the mystery of Godliness...."

The word "rapture" is a convention to describe a biblical truth.
The word, "Trinity" fits in the same category.


For most folks, the difference is semantics.

Jermyn, what makes a family is the family name. Do these so called trinitarians baptize in the only saving name? If not then they are not my brothers.

[Sherri]

Originally Posted by TJJJ

Jermyn, what makes a family is the family name. Do these so called trinitarians baptize in the only saving name? If not then they are not my brothers.

If you ask them, "Are you baptized in Jesus' name?", they will say YES! Because to them they were baptized into Christ and they understand that it's all about Jesus.

[LUKE2447]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Let me guess... you sing hymns written by Trinitarians.
Read a Bible translated and propogated throughout the entire world by Trinitarians.
Your church no doubt has a congregational structure that was formed by Trinitarians.
Your pastor counsels which was an innovation started by Calvin.
Your church has a pulpit, something incorporated to be used by Trinitarians.
You have "Sunday School", a service originally designed by Trinitarians to assist with teaching children who worked in the sweat shops how to read using the Bible.
Your holiness standards were originally codified by the original holiness Weslyans, Nazarenes, and Methodists.
The Pentecostal Pioneers in the Apostolic Movement all came from Trinitarian churches who rejected them... while THEY still loved their Trinitarian brothers and sisters, praying that they might receive more truth.

Frankly... without Trinitarians and their devotion to God... we'd not even have a Bible today.

My point is this... IF you are Apostolic... and you believe the Apostolic doctrine is a perfected doctrine... why not believe that APOSTOLICS and Apostolic Doctrine is part of the great endtime REVIVAL God has sent to the global Christian church??? Instead of painting yourself as being of another religion and condemning Trinitarians... why not bill the Apostolic movement as the very REVIVAL the Reformers, and preachers of the Great Awakening longed for??? Why not see ourselves as the culmination of God's refining fire, purifying His church to draw us closer as the coming of Christ draws even nearer? For example, after the great Apostasy and decent into Catholicism we see several revivals that brought out several phases of church development. In each revival an essential doctrine came into focus...

• Lutheran Church - AD 1517: Saw - Justification by faith...
  
• Presbyterian Church - Ad 1536: Saw - Communion as a Memorial...
  
• Congregational Church - AD 1580: Saw - Separation of Church and State...
  
• Baptist Church - AD 1609: Saw - Water Baptism by Immersion...
  
• Methodist Church - AD 1739: Saw - Personal Holiness...
  
• Christian Church - AD 1820: Saw - Baptism for Remission of Sins...
  
• Trinitarian Pentecostalism - AD 1900: Saw - Baptism of the Holy Ghost - Evidence: Speaking with Tongues as in Acts chapter 2 on the day of Pentecost...
  
• AD 1914 Invasion of Apostles Doctrine from 33 A.D.
  The revelation of God in Christ (ONENESS), and the truth of baptism in the Name of Jesus Christ by immersion for the remission of sins brought the fire of Apostolic Christianity into full focus again to the Church Father Christians and the Reformation Christians.

Why not see our movement as part of God's restoration of the Apostolic Church? The gates of Hell will not prevail...Christ will return to a bride that is reformed and without spot or wrinkle.

Why not believe that many before the Oneness movement knew the Lord, though seeing him through the stained glass tradition of the Trinity? Why not believe that these walked in all the light they knew and will no doubt receive their reward.

One of the reasons why I left the Apostolic church is because of it's insistance on condemning all comers and marginalizing itself. Truth wouldn't do that. I had always believed that the church needed Reform and God sent mighty Reformers...

Martin Luther
John Calvin
John Huss
John Knox
John Wesley
George Whitefield
Charles Parham
David Urshan

...and many others...

I used to leave Trinitarian friends speechless by expressing my belief that the Apostolic Movement as a WHOLE is the answered prayer of the very Reformers they admire and cherish. They understand REFORMATION movements (every Protestant church was part of one)... they don't understand a movement that repudiates anything the world has ever known about Christianity.

By divorcing ourselves from historical Christianity we've divorced ourselves from our historic foundation, making us a cult that believes it is the final arbiter of salvation and condemns all others, allowing no mercy or justice towards nearly 2000 years of devout Christians... many of which surrendered their lives to the flames because of their love for Christ... even if their understanding was imperfect.

But this is one of MANY reasons behind why I left the Apostolic movement.

One can only laugh when you use Historical Christianity as a argument.

[LUKE2447]

Originally Posted by Sherri

If you ask them, "Are you baptized in Jesus' name?", they will say YES! Because to them they were baptized into Christ and they understand that it's all about Jesus.

Reality and assumption is alway a interesting combination.