Our Trinitarian Brothers and Sisters in Christ

[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.

[Steve Epley]

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

[Jermyn Davidson]

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

The bolded is simply not true.

[Steve Epley]

The bolded is simply not true.

Tis true. Not one no not one.

[Jermyn Davidson]

Tis true. Not one no not one.

This is just one of the reasons why I felt it best to leave the Apostolic movement-- I will not disrespect Apostolics who believe this way, but I can't really fellowship with them knowing that I just don't agree with them on this and several other issues.

Where I see the Grace of God, they dismiss that Grace as the work of satan, with their logic leading them to a dangerously judgmental place.

[hometown guy]

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.

Trinity people don't believe Jesus is the father therefore they believe in more then one god. that means they don't serve the same god as me so they are not my brother or sister in christ

[Steve Epley]

This is just one of the reasons why I felt it best to leave the Apostolic movement-- I will not disrespect Apostolics who believe this way, but I can't really fellowship with them knowing that I just don't agree with them on this and several other issues.

Where I see the Grace of God, they dismiss that Grace as the work of satan, with their logic leading them to a dangerously judgmental place.

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

[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.

[Jermyn Davidson]

Trinity people don't believe Jesus is the father therefor they believe in more then one god that means they don't serve the same god as me so they are not my brother or sister in christ

They don't believe in more than 1 god.

[hometown guy]

They don't believe in more than 1 god.

Look it up.... They believe they are one in "unity"

[Jermyn Davidson]

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

That scripture doesn't apply to me as I really did believe all Trinitarians were lost at one time-- but the scriptures don't make that case.


The scriptures make the case for Heaven to be filled with Trinitarian and Oneness believers in Christ.

[Steve Epley]

You are confused.

[Jermyn Davidson]

Look it up.... They believe they are one in "unity"

I attend church and fellowship with a lot of them.

You would be hard pressed to find someone who is a Trinitarian who believes in 3 gods.

The Trinity just isn't presented that way.

[Jermyn Davidson]

You are confused.

Nope.

I know in whom I believe.
I know who has changed my life.

His NAME is JESUS-- SAVIOR of the world, SAVIOR of my soul.

[hometown guy]

I attend church and fellowship with a lot of them.

You would be hard pressed to find someone who is a Trinitarian who believes in 3 gods.

The Trinity just isn't presented that way.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity
Your mistaken

[Jermyn Davidson]

New American Standard Bible

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16Simon Peter answered, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” 17And Jesus said to him, “Blessed are you, Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. 18“I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it. 19“I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.” 20Then He warned the disciples that they should tell no one that He was the Christ.



The very FOUNDATION of the Church of Jesus Christ is His Identity as the Son of the Living God, not the Father.

[Steve Epley]

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity
Your mistaken

Thanks.

[Jermyn Davidson]

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity
Your mistaken

According to this doctrine, God exists as three persons but is one God, meaning that God the Son and God the Holy Spirit have exactly the same nature or being as God the Father in every way.
(from your link)



Take out the word "persons" as used in this sentence and replace it with "manifestations" and the meaning of that sentence does not change.

[Hoovie]

According to this doctrine, God exists as three persons but is one God, meaning that God the Son and God the Holy Spirit have exactly the same nature or being as God the Father in every way.
(from your link)



Take out the word "persons" as used in this sentence and replace it with "manifestations" and the meaning of that sentence does not change.

Or insert "persona" instead of persons...

[hometown guy]

According to this doctrine, God exists as three persons but is one God, meaning that God the Son and God the Holy Spirit have exactly the same nature or being as God the Father in every way.
(from your link)



Take out the word "persons" as used in this sentence and replace it with "manifestations" and the meaning of that sentence does not change.

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

[Jermyn Davidson]

Or insert "persona" instead of persons...

Talk about an instance of "lost in translation!"

[Jermyn Davidson]

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

I present to you Exhibit A: Matthew 3:13 - 17 (KJV).

13Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to Jordan unto John, to be baptized of him.

14But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?

15And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him.

16And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:

17And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

[Hoovie]

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


Let's not read too much into this... they are not saying coexistence with other "Gods".


You do believe Jesus was God? And at the same time His father in heaven (to whom he prayed was God, right?

Co-existence. Or what I prefer, "simultaneous modes of existence".

[Hoovie]

Now if anyone is expecting three beings in heaven, we part ways on that.

[Jermyn Davidson]

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



A better question would be how can you believe in the ONE GOD of the Bible without acknowledging the clear difference in roles of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost?


One GOD, different roles.
One GOD, different manifestations.
One GOD, dfferent personae.



I didn't continue with, "One GOD, different persons" because Christians who believe in the Trinity do NOT believe GOD to be three persons like Reagan, Clinton and Obama.

[Hoovie]

A better question would be how can you believe in the ONE GOD of the Bible without acknowledging the clear difference in roles of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost?


One GOD, different roles.
One GOD, different manifestations.
One GOD, dfferent personae.



I didn't continue with, "One GOD, different persons" because Christians who believe in the Trinity do NOT believe GOD to be three persons like Reagan, Clinton and Obama.

Right. On that last note - this is exactly what many OP accuse.

The fact is, the teaching of "three beings" is anathema in most all Trinitarian circles.

[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.

[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.

[Amanah]

I get trying to build a bridge of fellowship and understanding.
I get that we are not the judge of who goes to heaven.
But, we have a precious truth, the Oneness of God and baptism in the name of Jesus.
Shouldn't we be more interested in sharing what we know then in trying to rationalize away the differences?
I'm afraid we are in danger of not passing on the truths that we know to a future generation.

[pelathais]

Look it up.... They believe they are one in "unity"

Look it up, there is a huge diversity of thought on the matter and many, many ways in which it has been articulated over the centuries - just like there is with us on Oneness. It's difficult to lump everyone together. You certainly can't lump everyone together very neatly.

For this reason alone, it is the height of hubris and folly to pretend to be able to judge the eternal destinies of millions (billions!) of souls that we have never known nor heard out on the matter.


"Therefore let us not pass judgment on one another any longer, but rather decide never to put a stumbling block or hindrance in the way of a brother." Romans 14:13

[pelathais]

"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 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transcendence_(religion))), "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]

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 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homoousian)."

[pelathais]

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]

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.

:bump

[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]

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]

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.

[Amanah]

Pel please comment for me, thanks :)

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]

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]

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.:thumbsup

[Steve Epley]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

[Steve Epley]

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.

On this you are wrong I have never gleefully sent folks to hell. I am happy I know the one and only saving message and have obeyed it and preach it, but I am sadden for those who are decieved and heading for judgment unprepared.

[Steve Epley]

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.

They are decieved.

[LUKE2447]

They are decieved.

but they had good intention while being deceived.... :smack

[Steve Epley]

but they had good intention while being deceived.... :smack

True. By the way Jim Jones was a Trinitarian he belonged to the Disciples of Christ.:happydance

[houston]

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.

You also are high. I have never met a trinhtarian that made such a statement.

[LUKE2447]

You also are high. I have never met a trinhtarian that made such a statement.

Simply because people make blanket general statemens doesn't mean they believe the same or the doctrine is remotely close. People make general statements all the time that almost everyone can agree with until you get down to the mindset of what is really meant and why. That is when the rubber meets the road. Justifying people because.... oh they say such in such.... uh no!

[deltaguitar]

You also are high. I have never met a trinhtarian that made such a statement.

I have heard my pastor say this and he pastors one of the largest churches in the US. He believes that being baptized in the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost is no different than the Acts 2:38 baptismal formula.

The question was asked in our membership class if they would allow people to be baptized in Jesus name and he stated that FS&HG is being baptized in Jesus name.

[Sherri]

You also are high. I have never met a trinhtarian that made such a statement.Well, I have. They don't even seen a difference. The only ones that might argue it would be trinitarian pastors. The general run-of-the-mill saints are not staunch about being baptized in the titles. It's all the same to them.

[Sherri]

We've asked people before what was said over them when they were baptized and they don't have a clue. They just know that they gave their lives to Jesus and they were baptized in water. It just wasn't an issue.

[UnTraditional]

Matthew 28:19 is the commandment. Acts 2:38 is how the Apostles fulfilled that commandment.

[riverslivnwtr]

This is a mental wrestling match...

The battle is over what people think in their minds not, what they believe in their hearts...

trinnie's believe there is one God manifested in three distinct ways. Father , Son and Holy Ghost.

This is the thing...though. nobody owns him..

He owns everything..

He defines himself in the bible....

and the odds are that no one will on his own believe the way Pentecostals do unless he is told...

Pentecostals do have the advantage though...and that is the Holy Ghost..:happydance:highfive

[Sherri]

Matthew 28:19 is the commandment. Acts 2:38 is how the Apostles fulfilled that commandment.This is exactly what we say when we baptize people, and we get criticized for it on here. Lol

[hometown guy]

This is exactly what we say when we baptize people, and we get criticized for it on here. Lol

You guys say "in the name Of Jesus" and the criticize you for it?

[Hoovie]

True. By the way Jim Jones was a Trinitarian he belonged to the Disciples of Christ.:happydance

Maybe so, but he himself was baptized "in Jesus Name" I believe.

[Sherri]

You guys say "in the name Of Jesus" and the criticize you for it?
We quote Matt. 28:19 and then say, "as was fulfilled in the book of Acts, I now baptize you in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ." We get the criticism for quoting Matt. 28:19 first.

HELLO?????? It's Bible.

[Praxeas]

This is a mental wrestling match...

The battle is over what people think in their minds not, what they believe in their hearts...

trinnie's believe there is one God manifested in three distinct ways. Father , Son and Holy Ghost.

This is the thing...though. nobody owns him..

He owns everything..

He defines himself in the bible....

and the odds are that no one will on his own believe the way Pentecostals do unless he is told...

Pentecostals do have the advantage though...and that is the Holy Ghost..:happydance:highfive
Sorry but that is not what Trinitarians believe. They are not "ways", the are actualy persons according to the doctrine of the Trinity

[Praxeas]

We quote Matt. 28:19 and then say, "as was fulfilled in the book of Acts, I now baptize you in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ." We get the criticism for quoting Matt. 28:19 first.

HELLO?????? It's Bible.
I don't see a problem with that. Who criticizes you?

[Praxeas]

I have heard my pastor say this and he pastors one of the largest churches in the US. He believes that being baptized in the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost is no different than the Acts 2:38 baptismal formula.

The question was asked in our membership class if they would allow people to be baptized in Jesus name and he stated that FS&HG is being baptized in Jesus name.
technically., it's not. They might believe it, but it's not

As has been said by Trinitarians "in the name of Jesus" refers to authority. Jesus is the name of the person where we get that authority.

It's like my first pastor used to say, if he signed his check "son", it would not get cashed even though he is a son. That's not the authority of the person.

[RandyWayne]

technically., it's not. They might believe it, but it's not

As has been said by Trinitarians "in the name of Jesus" refers to authority. Jesus is the name of the person where we get that authority.

It's like my first pastor used to say, if he signed his check "son", it would not get cashed even though he is a son. That's not the authority of the person.

But if the kings Father was still alive and signed it "son" it probably would be cashed. It is no different than a town crier shouting "in the name of the king!" without actually using his name.

[mfblume]

We quote Matt. 28:19 and then say, "as was fulfilled in the book of Acts, I now baptize you in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ." We get the criticism for quoting Matt. 28:19 first.

HELLO?????? It's Bible.

I was always amazed at this being criticized. I simply say "in the name of Jesus Christ," but I see no error in your invocation. It's like the critics have lost the whole point of the name in baptism, and are getting too narrow minded by insisting on putting it in the face of trinitarians as much as they can, unreasonably so, by not saying the titles in any manner whatsoever. Baptism is more a chance to put it in the face of people rather than accomplish what baptism is for.

[Steve Epley]

Maybe so, but he himself was baptized "in Jesus Name" I believe.

IN his early years. But he learned better like some other folks.

[Sherri]

I don't see a problem with that. Who criticizes you?
Lots of people on here in the past. Also on FCF, NFCF, etc. I just don't get it. They say we are compromising by quoting Matt. 28:19, just to side with trinitarians. Blows my mind - it's the words of Jesus about baptism!

[TruthGuy]

I attend church and fellowship with a lot of them.

You would be hard pressed to find someone who is a Trinitarian who believes in 3 gods.

The Trinity just isn't presented that way.

I'm a Oneness believer, and yet even I must say that the Trinity is misunderstood most of the time. Anti-Trinitarians that simply want to bash "the other guy" say that the Trinity is 3 Gods, and polytheism- This is not true!!!

The Trinity, as is held by its proponents, is 1 God comprised of three distinct (not separate) persons, all are God in every sense, yet still are just 1 God.

I'm of the opinion that Oneness proponents should drop the sound bytes and study, for themselves, what their opponents believe (Is this not what the Bible says: to prove all things! When you always look at things from your POV, you don't prove anything, you simply justify your existing beliefs!) What better way to know what you believe than to know, for yourself, why your opponent is wrong!

[houston]

...

[houston]

JD is trying to convince himself that his new membership at the trinity church is ok.

[UnTraditional]

I'm a Oneness believer, and yet even I must say that the Trinity is misunderstood most of the time. Anti-Trinitarians that simply want to bash "the other guy" say that the Trinity is 3 Gods, and polytheism- This is not true!!!

The Trinity, as is held by its proponents, is 1 God comprised of three distinct (not separate) persons, all are God in every sense, yet still are just 1 God.

I'm of the opinion that Oneness proponents should drop the sound bytes and study, for themselves, what their opponents believe (Is this not what the Bible says: to prove all things! When you always look at things from your POV, you don't prove anything, you simply justify your existing beliefs!) What better way to know what you believe than to know, for yourself, why your opponent is wrong!

I backslid into Reformed trinitarian theology for a while, and let me tewll you, what they say and what they believe are two different stories. According to them, God is not a person, but is a nature shared by three persons. In this context, you have three gods, not three persons making up one God. How? If you have three persons with a human nature, you have three humans. If you have three persons with a God nature, you have three gods. And this is true. I am not just using talking points someone else made up, but is from their own words and studies. So, your point here friend is mute, because I have studied and I know what they believe and why it is unbiblical.

[Norman]

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

Not so. "Rapture" means "caught up," which is found in the Bible. "Trinity" is usually understood to mean "God in three persons," which is not found in the Bible.

[Amanah]

I backslid into Reformed trinitarian theology for a while, and let me tewll you, what they say and what they believe are two different stories. According to them, God is not a person, but is a nature shared by three persons. In this context, you have three gods, not three persons making up one God. How? If you have three persons with a human nature, you have three humans. If you have three persons with a God nature, you have three gods. And this is true. I am not just using talking points someone else made up, but is from their own words and studies. So, your point here friend is mute, because I have studied and I know what they believe and why it is unbiblical.

be careful, it's not politically correct on this forum to tell the truth. People may not want to believe there is a difference in the doctrine, but there is. Trins don't believe that Jesus is the Father. Trins think Oneness people are heretics. Trins baptize in the titles.

The protestant reformation happened because someone said, wait a minute, something isn't right here. Luther's intent was not to say that his church was on its way to hell, he just wanted to reform it because he read his bible and saw something more. He didn't leave the church, they kicked him out.

The Oneness people saw something more, they didn't leave the trins, the trins forced them out.

Now apparently we want back in and are backtracking to make amends I guess. We don't have to give up truth to want to fellowship with other HG filled people. Unless they won't have us until we do.

[deacon blues]

The word "Oneness" isn't in the Bible either. In fact, Oneness means "unity". This is what trinitarians believe about God. They say God is a tri-unity. I don't tell people I am Oneness. I tell people I believe in God and Jesus is His name. I recognize there is One God and that there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit and these three are one.

I recognize that distinctions are made between the three revealings of God. Jesus speaks of the Father as though He is somebody other than Himself, prays to the Father, defers glory and praise to the Father, says that what He spoke came from the Father, not of Himself. He also speaks of the Holy Spirit as though He were someone other than Himself. He calls Him "another Comforter" and says that He, Jesus, must go so that the Holy Spirit will come and speaks of the HS as "he", rasther than "me". These distinctions seem to be anomolies to the One God paradigm. The disciples post-resurrection continue the distinctions. "Grace to you from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ" is evoked often throughout the Epistles.

I think it is the height of arrogance to say that "we've got God figured out". Oneness ppl do it. Trinitarians do it. We can understand one. That's simple. We can understand three. That's simple. Now we see through a glass darkly, then face to face. We shall see Jesus as He is. We do all, whether in word or deed, in the name of Jesus. The Father is all about bringing glory to Jesus. The Holy Spirit testifies and points to Jesus. I refer to God as God the Father, the Son of God and the Holy Spirit. I'm not comfortable with "God the Son" and "God the Spirit" since they are not Biblical terms.

The Bible does not declare anywhere that you must have a perfect understanding of the Godhead to be saved. "Except you believe that I am He" in context is Jesus telling the Pharisees that unless they believed He was their Messiah, they would die in their sins. Jesus then says, "...He who sent me is true..." And the next verse says "They did not understand that He spoke to them of the Father." To interpret thast to mean that unless you have a "Oneness" understanding of God, you are lost is unbiblical teaching. Even the early One God believers in the 1900s called trinitarians their brothers.

I believe in One God. I believe in Jesus. Trinitarians would say the same thing. That's good enough for me. If they are not brothers, why does God baptize them with the Holy Ghost? Peter said, "So God, who knows the heart, acknowledged them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He did to us." Acts 15:8 (NKJV).

[Amanah]

Holy Ghost filled, One God, Jesus name preachers are taking our glory and show casing it for the world in charismatic circles, but are not quite forthcoming about our roots. Maybe it's working now, but what about the next generation?

I'm not saying to not fellowship with other HG filled people, not at all.

Maybe I'm deceived that thinking the Oneness of God and Jesus name baptism are precious truths that I think should be freely preached despite whether its popular or not. despite whether TBN will give you a spot or not.

[Aquila]

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

My point is that IF the Apostolic message is a revival of pure doctrinal truth, why marginalize the message? Why not present the message in a reformative way instead of a condemnatory way?

[Michael The Disciple]

Holy Ghost filled, One God, Jesus name preachers are taking our glory and show casing it for the world in charismatic circles, but are not quite forthcoming about our roots. Maybe it's working now, but what about the next generation?

I'm not saying to not fellowship with other HG filled people, not at all.

Maybe I'm deceived that thinking the Oneness of God and Jesus name baptism are precious truths that I think should be freely preached despite whether its popular or not. despite whether TBN will give you a spot or not.

The Oneness of God and baptism into Jesus name are indeed great treasures. I agree with you having seen it just recently. A Oneness Pastor who did not make an issue out of Oneness is losing his kids to Trinity Churches. He is wondering why. Well its because they were left with the impression that fellowship with Trins was more important than standing firm for the truth.

And Im not a hater of Trins. I was one.

[Michael The Disciple]

My point is that IF the Apostolic message is a revival of pure doctrinal truth, why marginalize the message? Why not present the message in a reformative way instead of a condemnatory way?

I always have presented it that way. The point is not to go out and try to make enemies. Whenever people dont see it they get offended. Thats the way it usually goes.

[Michael The Disciple]

Deacon Blues

The Bible does not declare anywhere that you must have a perfect understanding of the Godhead to be saved. "Except you believe that I am He" in context is Jesus telling the Pharisees that unless they believed He was their Messiah, they would die in their sins. Jesus then says, "...He who sent me is true..." And the next verse says "They did not understand that He spoke to them of the Father." To interpret thast to mean that unless you have a "Oneness" understanding of God, you are lost is unbiblical teaching.

It is not unbiblical teaching. The context shows Jesus meant he was the Father.

http://www.freeforum101.com/inthelight/viewtopic.php?t=166&mforum=inthelight

[Orthodoxy]

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

“We must have fellowship with anyone and everyone who is in fellowship with God through faith in Jesus Christ. If we refuse to have fellowship with them, then our actions deny the gospel. We are making a distinction that God himself does not make. We are adding some qualification to the only thing God requires, which is faith in Jesus Christ.” - Philip Graham Ryken, Galatians

"Make every effort to keep the unity of the spirit through the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to one hope when you were called—one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.” - Ephesians 4:3-6

[deltaguitar]

technically., it's not. They might believe it, but it's not

As has been said by Trinitarians "in the name of Jesus" refers to authority. Jesus is the name of the person where we get that authority.

It's like my first pastor used to say, if he signed his check "son", it would not get cashed even though he is a son. That's not the authority of the person.

In your opinion it might not be but to these guys, who really are pretty intellectual guys don't just do things without thinking about it. I am pretty sure that in an area this diverse there are many if not hundreds of former Oneness Christians going to this church.

Here is an excerpt from the baptism classs manual that you might find interesting.

BAPTISM SERVICES:
1. We have regular (currently quarterly) celebration services in which the church celebrates baptisms
together. We encourage those wishing to be baptized to do so within the context of these gatherings.12
2. Participants are asked to personally share their testimonies if possible or to have the person baptizing them
to share for them.13
3. After the testimony, the person performing the baptism will ask, “Do you confess and believe Jesus Christ
as Lord and Savior?” to which the baptizee will respond, “Yes” or “I do.”
4. The baptizer will then immerse and subsequently raise the baptizee out of the water while saying, “I baptize
you, my (brother or sister) in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.” 14 [Some will choose to
also say, “Buried with Christ in baptism, raised to walk in newness of life” which is taken from Romans 6:4
We were buried therefore with Him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the
dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.]

There is a footnote at the bottom of the page that says, "14 Following the formula of Matthew 28:19, we baptize using the Trinitarian confession. In Acts, the apostles typically baptized “in the name of Jesus Christ,” but this should not be viewed as differing in meaning from Matthew’s prescription. The context of Acts is concerned with testify-ing to the resurrection of Christ, and thus He is distinguished among the persons of the Trinity, but all that is true of the character (“name” often represents character in the Scriptures) of Christ is true of the Father and Spirit, as well.

[Steve Epley]

“We must have fellowship with anyone and everyone who is in fellowship with God through faith in Jesus Christ. If we refuse to have fellowship with them, then our actions deny the gospel. We are making a distinction that God himself does not make. We are adding some qualification to the only thing God requires, which is faith in Jesus Christ.” - Philip Graham Ryken, Galatians

"Make every effort to keep the unity of the spirit through the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to one hope when you were called—one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.” - Ephesians 4:3-6

Who is Phillip Ryken and why should I care what he says? Paul said 'let them be accursed.'

[Orthodoxy]

Who is Phillip Ryken and why should I care what he says? Paul said 'let them be accursed.'

Who is Steve Epley and why should I care what he says? :heeheehee

[deltaguitar]

I backslid into Reformed trinitarian theology for a while, and let me tewll you, what they say and what they believe are two different stories. According to them, God is not a person, but is a nature shared by three persons. In this context, you have three gods, not three persons making up one God. How? If you have three persons with a human nature, you have three humans. If you have three persons with a God nature, you have three gods. And this is true. I am not just using talking points someone else made up, but is from their own words and studies. So, your point here friend is mute, because I have studied and I know what they believe and why it is unbiblical.

This is simply not true. The idea of the persons of God in the trinity is only used to explain a God and a concept of God that is very difficult. Many trinitarian teachers will admit that the use of the words "person" are not the best and may be unhelpful in understanding the trinity.

The word person is used to convey that there is an ability to relate and have roles within the God head. I am not an expert on trinitarian theology or any theology for that matter but we have to be intellectually honest or we will always be in the dark.

Most of us on these forums are amateurs. I don't see a lot of folks with doctorates on here. Half of our misunderstandings are because we assume what other people believe. I get called out all the time for broad brushing Oneness pentecostals.

[deltaguitar]

Holy Ghost filled, One God, Jesus name preachers are taking our glory and show casing it for the world in charismatic circles, but are not quite forthcoming about our roots. Maybe it's working now, but what about the next generation?

I'm not saying to not fellowship with other HG filled people, not at all.

Maybe I'm deceived that thinking the Oneness of God and Jesus name baptism are precious truths that I think should be freely preached despite whether its popular or not. despite whether TBN will give you a spot or not.

Amanah, I think we should all be transparant about our beliefs. The Oneness/Trinitrain rift is huge and part of being a submissive christian is to be able to allow debate or discussions with the willingness to be corrected if it is shown that our doctrine is wrong.

Oneness pentecostals are not just wrong on the Godhead but they then more error over to the new birth, baptism of the Holy Ghost, and other areas like standards, etc. Many trinitarians will just point at the fruit of the movement and their case is made that Oneness doctrine leads to even more dangerous doctrine and possibly away from the gospel.

Lets not forget that AOG, COG, and charismatics are all accepted within the christian world because they still hold strong to major christian doctrines. Much of the world believes in the gifts of the spirit, however, there has been both good and bad that has come out of the pentecostal movement. The verdict is still out on the pentecostalm movement as a whole and history hasn't decided if the movement has had any value.

I can gladly fellowship with pentecostals as long as they aren't trying to convert everyone to their way of thinking. It is just better for me to stay away and work in a church where I feel comfortable and altar call and crazy stuff isn't happening.

I do not believe that Oneness folks have truth however I do not believe they are unsaved. There are many sincere oneness folks who are christians and many one this forum who I would count as brothers.

[Steve Epley]

Who is Steve Epley and why should I care what he says? :heeheehee

NO one and you shouldn't but you should care what the Apostles said more than some pinhead.:thumbsup

[Orthodoxy]

NO one and you shouldn't but you should care what the Apostles said more than some pinhead.:thumbsup

Did you notice that I quoted Saint Paul as well in my post? :thumbsup

[Amanah]

Amanah, I think we should all be transparant about our beliefs. The Oneness/Trinitrain rift is huge and part of being a submissive christian is to be able to allow debate or discussions with the willingness to be corrected if it is shown that our doctrine is wrong.

Oneness pentecostals are not just wrong on the Godhead but they then more error over to the new birth, baptism of the Holy Ghost, and other areas like standards, etc. Many trinitarians will just point at the fruit of the movement and their case is made that Oneness doctrine leads to even more dangerous doctrine and possibly away from the gospel.

Lets not forget that AOG, COG, and charismatics are all accepted within the christian world because they still hold strong to major christian doctrines. Much of the world believes in the gifts of the spirit, however, there has been both good and bad that has come out of the pentecostal movement. The verdict is still out on the pentecostalm movement as a whole and history hasn't decided if the movement has had any value.

I can gladly fellowship with pentecostals as long as they aren't trying to convert everyone to their way of thinking. It is just better for me to stay away and work in a church where I feel comfortable and altar call and crazy stuff isn't happening.

I do not believe that Oneness folks have truth however I do not believe they are unsaved. There are many sincere oneness folks who are christians and many one this forum who I would count as brothers.

Brother, if I am wrong I pray God shows it me. I want nothing but Jesus. I want to make heaven my home. I want to understand the truth of His Word. And I want to make sure that the words I speak will cause others to make heaven their home also.

[Steve Epley]

Did you notice that I quoted Saint Paul as well in my post? :thumbsup

Yes and it had nothing to do with the discussion.