Our Trinitarian Brothers and Sisters in Christ

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by hometown guy

"The three persons are distinct yet coexist in unity, and are co-equal, co-eternal"
How can one god coexist and be coeternal?

How can one God be simultaneously "above all" (Transcendent), "through all" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immanence) and "in you all" (as Spirit indwelling human beings)? (Ephesians 4:6).

Transcendence and Immanence are contradictory conditions. Technically, God can't be both... and yet He is.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by houston

Y'all pass the pipe and get high on STUPID? Today's trinitarians believe that they will see 2 persons, the Father and Jesus, and a dove perched on Jesus' shoulder. It is not semantics.

I've met people who tried to articulate it that way, though more "reverently;" however these folks tended to be only nominally "religious" and almost always confessed that they had never really tried to study the thing out, let alone think the matter through.

When it comes to speaking with "mature" Christians and even pastors and Bible teachers - you won't find anyone who will say "Beings" when it comes to God. They'd be lambasted by their fellow Trinitarians.

Remember the Nicene Creed? "One in Being with the Father..." (concerning Jesus Christ). One Being. See also the Greek word "homoousia."

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by UnTraditional

The trinity doctrine is an invention of man wherein paganism was breached into true theology proper. Do they believe in three gods? They claim no, but when God is a mere nature shared by three persons, and those three persons are equal, then you have three gods, no matter how much you shake the tree otherwise. This is truth and pure common sense.

There is only one God, one person who is pure and holy, who is a Spirit, manifested in the flesh as the Lord Jesus Christ. There are none beside Him, before Him, or above Him. He is God and God alone.

The "mere nature" that they affirm as being shared by "Three Persons" is Almighty God, Bro.

I feel that Trinitarians have erred in continuing to use the word "Person" long after its Latin meaning had been changed through time.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by pelathais

Tertullian coined the phrase "personae" into Latin from the old Etruscan word for a theater mask. He did so around the time of 180 A.D. "Personae" was intended to be a Latin translation for the Greek word "hypo-stasis." Until that time there was no word in Latin for this idea.

- hypo-stasis means "hupo" or "under" + "stasis" or condition, nature or state of being. Hypo-stasis was the term for the fundamental nature of a thing or a being, in this case the fundamental state of God's being.

He also coined many new terms like "trintas" and so forth. Modern scholars have counted well over 100 words that Tertullian introduced into the Latin vocabulary.

Most importantly, he did NOT use the word "personae" in the same sense that the word "person" is used today. After he died and in the midst of the terrible persecutions and the later civil wars within the Roman Empire his writings were lost. They were not rediscovered until after the fall of Constantinople in 1453.

That means the guy who could best explain what he meant by "Person" and "Trinity" - the guy who coined the terms - was silent [in the West] for over 1,000 years of theological debate and formulation. His writings were not even extant at the time of Nicea in 325. He was only known from second hand references in the writings of others.

It is "modern scholarship" that has unraveled the mysteries around Tertullian's theology, and "modern scholarship" that has shown just how shaky the ground is beneath "Orthodox Trinitarianism."

Sadly, OP's tend to revile "modern scholarship" more vociferously than they do their hated Trinitarian foes. It's amazing what we could learn if we set aside our prejudices. We might even discover - much to our own amazement! - that we were right about a few things and that most people have come to see that.

[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.

[Michael The Disciple]

Trinitarianism is heresy. They dont confess the true doctrine of Christ. Isaiah taught that the Messiah would be BOTH the Father and the Son.

9:6 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 Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Isaiah 9:6

Christ is not JUST the Son. He is also the Eternal Father.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

I have NO Trinity Brothers and Sisters in Christ. There are NO Trinitarians in Christ.

It's possible for one's theology to be imperfect and yet they be saved. I knew an ol' Baptist woman who was in her eighties. She would sit on her porch and rock back and forth. A very modest woman. She also believed in the "gifts". I remember my mother talking to her about "Oneness" and her churches "Trinitarian doctrine". This ol' woman simply said, "I don't know all your big words hon... I don't understand every mystery. But I know Jesus."

I believe that woman may have been saved. Ultimately only God can judge the heart of a person and the relationship they have developed with Him.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

John said 'they went out from us because they were not of us"

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.

[Sherri]

How can a finite man understand an infinite God? There are some things I don't claim to understand - some Scriptures even. But I just know the one who bled and died for me and I love Him! I'm passionate about Jesus.

I know where I draw the line personally with the whole godhead thing. But I don't think those ideas and conclusions will save me. The blood of Jesus saves me. I also think it saves those who don't see the godhead just like we do.

[Aquila]

I believe the Apostolic movement would be of greater enfluence globally among all Christians if Apostolics saw themselves as a Revival/Restoration movement... instead of seeing themselves as the only true religion condemning all others... including nearly 2000 years of Christians and the very men who gave their lives to translate and propogate the very Bible we use.