Apostolic Pentacostal beliefs?

[Aeg071]

Aeg -

In an earlier post I quoted the Council of Milan affirming the Trinity in the Apostles Creed. Here also is the writing of Rufinus writing in the 4th century commenting on the Apostles Creed. ** The link is here.**

In #10 he writes after speaking of the Holy Ghost

**This is the Trinity, everywhere latent, and everywhere apparent, distinct in names and persons, but inseparable in the substance of the Godhead. **And although the Son alone is born of the Virgin, yet there is present also the Highest, there is present also the Holy Ghost, that both the conception and the bringing forth of the Virgin may be sanctified.

The Apostles Creed is Trinitarian Aeg. You still haven’t provided any writings from The Church that says otherwise. Should one believe the writings of the Council of Milan and Rufinus, close in time to when the Apostles Creed was written or someone 1,600 years later with a different interpretation? What does logic tell you to do?

PnP

The creed is used for Trinitarians but it is actually very nuance in that it does not like the Nicene creed express a explicit individuality in God’s essence and being . When I read the Apostle’s creed I do not envision three Divine hypostasis sharing the Ousia. While the revised Nicene creed give an explicit notion that the Ousia is shared among 3 Divine Hypostasis… unfortunately words such as share,co equal,co eternal, co etc, each of the 3 indicates more than one being by virtue of the definition of those words. To say we Christians are monotheistic using such words that imply plurality in God’s nature is a contradiction and borders on tritheism.

 

[ahs]

Aeg,

Does your church has have a statement of belief on this, if so can you post it?

Who in your church has the power to turn the bread and wine into the blood and body of our Lord and how is this power conferred? Can both your pastor and laity do so? If not, why not?

PnP

Aeg071, were you able to provide the statement of belief and an answer to the above? I am interested in this as well.

 

[ahs]

When I come back to an old thread, I tend to read it backwards, which is what I did here. I saw a post where you said you don’t come off as hostile like some others do. And then I read what I thought was a relatively hostile remark in the very first post you made in this thread:

It **amazes me how ignorant Trinitarians are **in there **attempt to define **what Oneness or even the ancient modalist as you put it believe. You people argue that everybody is wrong based on a doctrine that isn’t even actually written in scripture. Yet **you people **have always been so quick to throw around the word heresy. … **You Trinitarians **can argue all day long…

So, “you people” and “you Trinitarians” is plural. But at that moment, only 2 people had contributed to this thread…me and another guy. So, please tell me what in the following post, or subsequent post that I made represents anything you said. How was I “ignorant” to ask if someone could give me some insight? How is it “ignorant” or some “attempt to define” when I ASK what similarities we might have? Where did I argue that someone was wrong? Where did I “throw around the word heresy”? Where did I argue?

Or were you just over-generalizing in a hostile manner, trying to lump all “Trinitarians” into the same boat, becoming guilty of the very thing you accused Trinitarians of?

I saw a fella on facebook recently whose Faith is “Apostolic Pentacostal”. Anyone familiar with that faith and what they believe? What common ground is there between them and Catholics? So far all I have gleaned from this person’s response to a random post is that they think Catholics worship Mary…but I’d like to know what similarities we share.

I did find this:
angelfire.com/ky/BricksHomePage/apbeliefs.html

I’m not certain if this is representative or not though. I see some similarities to Catholicism there in the moral area, and in the fact that we have free will to reject God’s grace after we have been saved. It’s hard to tell whether they believe in a Triune God or not though…and if they do, it almost sounds like they believe that ALL of God (the Trinity, as it were) is present in the form of Christ?

 

[Darryl_B]

When I come back to an old thread, I tend to read it backwards, which is what I did here. I saw a post where you said you don’t come off as hostile like some others do. And then I read what I thought was a relatively hostile remark in the very first post you made in this thread:

So, “you people” and “you Trinitarians” is plural. But at that moment, only 2 people had contributed to this thread…me and another guy. So, please tell me what in the following post, or subsequent post that I made represents anything you said. How was I “ignorant” to ask if someone could give me some insight? How is it “ignorant” or some “attempt to define” when I ASK what similarities we might have? Where did I argue that someone was wrong? Where did I “throw around the word heresy”? Where did I argue?

Or were you just over-generalizing in a hostile manner, trying to lump all “Trinitarians” into the same boat, becoming guilty of the very thing you accused Trinitarians of?

I had noticed that hostility too. Which made me wonder exactly what would constitute this supposed “real” hostility within the movement. Besides that the “heresy” statement is a product of a self imposed persecution complex (I used to know that complex very well being once an Arian heretic and very atuned to every Arian argument under the sun). And “ignorance” is a comparative, an appeal to knowledge (well I have a BA) rather than an appeal to truth.

What I also saw was the claim of only quoting Scripture, when in fact there was only explaining according to ones own bias what Scripture meant (it had to be interpreted for us), rather than citation at face value.

 

[Aeg071]

When I come back to an old thread, I tend to read it backwards, which is what I did here. I saw a post where you said you don’t come off as hostile like some others do. And then I read what I thought was a relatively hostile remark in the very first post you made in this thread:

So, “you people” and “you Trinitarians” is plural. But at that moment, only 2 people had contributed to this thread…me and another guy. So, please tell me what in the following post, or subsequent post that I made represents anything you said. How was I “ignorant” to ask if someone could give me some insight? How is it “ignorant” or some “attempt to define” when I ASK what similarities we might have? Where did I argue that someone was wrong? Where did I “throw around the word heresy”? Where did I argue?

Or were you just over-generalizing in a hostile manner, trying to lump all “Trinitarians” into the same boat, becoming guilty of the very thing you accused Trinitarians of?

Yes you are right, I was in fact over generalizing so my response did come off a little abrasive . I say I am not hostile because I don’t believe as many Apostolic Pentecostal do that if your not baptized in Jesus Name and believe as we do your condemned to hell.A judgement reserved for God alone . Not to mention the anticent meaning a century before Nicene of One God in three hypostasis is synonymous with Apostolic Pentecostals interpretation of One God in three manifestations . The majority of my engagement on the subject has been with Protestant Trinitarians who are not as reserved.as you guys on this site. So I will walk back that statement.

 

[Aeg071]

I had noticed that hostility too. Which made me wonder exactly what would constitute this supposed “real” hostility within the movement. Besides that the “heresy” statement is a product of a self imposed persecution complex (I used to know that complex very well being once an Arian heretic and very atuned to every Arian argument under the sun). And “ignorance” is a comparative, an appeal to knowledge (well I have a BA) rather than an appeal to truth.

What I also saw was the claim of only quoting Scripture, when in fact there was only explaining according to ones own bias what Scripture meant (it had to be interpreted for us), rather than citation at face value.

I could go so many ways with what you said but considering at the time of the early church after the Apostles. All the Dogmas and creeds formulated was centuries of politics instead of the move of the Holy Spirit. So now we have the traditions of men and then the actual word of God second. Being called a heretic my the Mother Church is a compliment I assure you,because most of what you hold steadfast to is more from the tradition of men than from The Holy Spirit .Himself.

 

[ahs]

Yes you are right, I was in fact over generalizing so my response did come off a little abrasive . … The majority of my engagement on the subject has been with Protestant Trinitarians who are not as reserved.as you guys on this site. So I will walk back that statement.

That is most appreciated! Thank you.

Were you able to find anything regarding Post #55? I still do run across "Apostolic"s somewhat often and I’d really like to know what our common grounds are, and are not. A statement of belief would be a tremendous help for me in dialog.

 

[onemangang]

Aeg071

How close are your views to say Karl Rahner in regards to God’s being?

Have you read anything from Rahner?

He has been called a Modalist of sorts, it sounds like you have some similar views, but to be honest I know next to nothing about Apostolic Pentacostals, other than Jesus only baptism!

We do have a Apostolic Trinitarian Church down the street from me, that has added the Trinitarian to there name more recently.

Perhaps the common ground in understanding a Modalist view of God, may be found in the writings of Karl Rahner

I hope I am not being offensive by using the term Modalism, it just seems closest to what you espouse!

Peace and love In Christ!

 

[Aeg071]

That is most appreciated! Thank you.

Were you able to find anything regarding Post #55? I still do run across "Apostolic"s somewhat often and I’d really like to know what our common grounds are, and are not. A statement of belief would be a tremendous help for me in dialog.

                                                 Apostolic Doctrinal Statement

We believe that the Bible is the inspired, infallible (unalterable), Word of God, written by Holy men of old, as they were moved by the Holy Ghost

We believe in One God
Who is infinite in power, Holy in nature, attributes and purposes, as well as omniscient and omnipresent.
We believe that He was revealed to us as Father in creation, as Son in redemption, and as the Holy Spirit in His grace that never leaves those who trust Him.
We believe that in Jesus dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily, for it pleased the Father that in Him should all fullness dwell.
We believe in the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus, and that He ascended on high and has sent His Spirit, The Holy ghost, speaking in other tongues as the Spirit gives utterance. This constitutes the new birth.
We believe in living a Holy, Sanctified life.
We believe in divine healing and communion
(which includes the “washing of feet” ritual, John 13:5).

We believe also in the glorious catching away (The Rapture) of the Saints when Jesus returns in the clouds in glory to take His people to Heaven.

We further believe that Jesus is the only NAME… and whatsoever you do in word or in deed, do ALL in the Name of Jesus.

There are different variations depending on the denomination, but those are minor differences.

 

[jtkalehua88]

They would baptize in the name of Jesus and argue that its just the same thing as the trinity. You could also get baptized more than once just so you can be cleansed of your sin.

We would sometimes have church for a whole month straight with no days off , twice a day and they would preach until midnight or sometimes 2 am, this is called a revival. Yelling, shouting, screaming with joy and loud music was all a part of normal life as well as speaking in tongues…

I didn’t like that they would condemn other churches, they would tell a JW or Mormon that they would burn in the Netherworld if they didn’t repent and get baptized in Jesus name. As for my Apostolic Pentecostal Church, they would preach that the Catholics have gone astray but that they would return to there right ways in the end times.

It would really hurt my feelings when they talked bad about Catholics because my sweet grandmother was a Catholic, it was just kind of emotional…

Now are many of the Apostolic Pentecostal congregations and denominations under that banner primarily African-American? I know the Church of God in Christ has some rules like women cannot wear slacks in church, but I’ve never known whether or not that particular church is Apostolic Pentecostal. Are they mostly African-American congregations?

 

[4Squarebaby]

Now are many of the Apostolic Pentecostal congregations and denominations under that banner primarily African-American? I know the Church of God in Christ has some rules like women cannot wear slacks in church, but I’ve never known whether or not that particular church is Apostolic Pentecostal. Are they mostly African-American congregations?

COGIC is not Apostolic Pentecostal

 

[ltwin]

Now are many of the Apostolic Pentecostal congregations and denominations under that banner primarily African-American? I know the Church of God in Christ has some rules like women cannot wear slacks in church, but I’ve never known whether or not that particular church is Apostolic Pentecostal. Are they mostly African-American congregations?

Agree with 4squarebaby that the COGIC are Trinitarian. The COGIC actually has in recent years worked to develop a closer relationship with the Assemblies of God (in essence, these two denominations are as mainstream Pentecostal as you can find, one is primarily black the other primarily white).

Additionally, the rule that women can’t wear pants (as I understand it, not being a COGIC member I could be wrong) actually applies to wearing pants in CHURCH. It does not apply to wearing pants outside of church. In addition, (again as I understand it) this “rule” is not the same in every COGIC congregation.

Oneness Pentecostal (I avoid the label “Apostolic” because I believe that many of their beliefs and teachings aren’t apostolic at all) female church members tend to never wear pants at all, at least a good many of them never do. When it comes to racial composition, Oneness Pentecostals can be white or black.

 

[FathersKnowBest]

How do non-trinitarians explain the beginning of St. John’s gospel?

Here’s what I understand about this:
Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word - “the Word” was uncreated and eternal

and the Word was with God - this shows that somehow, “the Word” is distinct, which is consistant with Trinitarian theology and inconsistant with Apostolic Pentacostal beliefs

and the Word was God. - this shows that somehow, “the Word” is of the same substance with God, which is consistant with both Trinitarian theology and with Apostolic Pentacostal beliefs

Joh 1:2 He was in the beginning with God; again reinforcing that “the Word” is disctinct; see above

So, as is usually the case, the non-Catholic belief is consistant with SOME of scripture and in opposition to some, whereas the Catholic belief is in harmony with ALL of scripture.

 

[cajunhillbilly]

 

[ISearchforLight]

I was raised in the Oneness Pentecostal faith, the son of a preacher who went to Gateway College of Evangelism (which used to be St. Stanislaus Seminary).Mine was a tradition that thrived on upbeat gospel music and fiery preaching. The people were always friendly, but they didn’t have Truth.

Coupling lack of Truth with random “holiness rules” made me lose faith in God. I was for a long time a Secularist Humanist.

Exploring all nuances and errors of Oneness Pentecostalism would take a book. However, I would like to focus on the Person of Christ. It is this deviation that makes what Oneness organizations teach a terrible heresy of antichrist.

Oneness Pentecostals are adamant about saying “Jesus is God in the flesh” to support a seeming Incarnation. Their Christology is skewed. They only believe one person to be in the Godhead. So when the man called Jesus is deemed by Oneness followers to be divine, they mean that the Father was in the man, that there was no Eternal Son, just the Father in a flesh suit.

This opens a whole can of worms when compared to Orthodoxy. How is Jesus His own Father? When He’s praying in the wilderness, does He basically seek His own advice? Is He full of Himself? What ever happened to “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God?”

Oneness teaching basically says that the Word, or Logos, was merely an idea. Not a Divine Person. They say the Logos was only a idea of the Father, which He planned to reveal in the man Jesus. This is wrong. Why? Because God is in eternity. God is Love. Love requires a relationship in dialogue.

God is Dialogue. The first chapter of Hebrews shows us God calls His Son God when He says, “Thy reign, O God, is forever and ever”. God is not talking to Himself. He’s talking to His Beloved. God cannot be adoring Himself. Adoration. Ad ora. To the mouth. If God only be Father, how can He be at His mouth? He’s not. He’s at the mouth of His Son, and they share the life-giving breath Who is the Holy Ghost.

Furthermore, when we see that Jesus Christ is Who He said He is, we cannot assign a different meaning of the Word. The Son of God became a man. Not the Father. The Father sent the Son into the world. To send something, one must first possess it.

Thus, Proverbs 8. “The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old. I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was”(22-23). So God possessed Someone before creation. He possessed Someone in eternity. When creation happens by God,Someone must say, “when he gave to the sea his decree, that the waters should not pass his commandment: when he appointed the foundations of the earth: then I was by him as one brought up with him: and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him” (29-30).

If God be only one person, who then is daily His delight before ever the worlds were made? Who was brought up with Him? Does Sacred Scripture lie?

No it doesn’t. God has a Son in eternity. An Eternal Word. He’s never been alone. His Son has been with Him. When the worlds were made, God used His Word, His daily delight to bring about creation. There’s a reason why He said “Let us make man in our own image.”

God is a Communion.The Love that moves the sun and the other stars as Dante quipped. Love requires of One Self to be given to another Self so that a Self be shared.

Thus we arrive at the concept of Triunity. It’s not strained or of pagan origin. The Trinity as declared by the Catholic Church is the Truth expressing our limited understanding. God is Three Persons and yet One Being. I don’t have to understand Him, but I do know that if God claims to have a Son, and said Son claims to have been with His Father before the worlds, and that if He didn’t ascend the Holy Ghost could not come, then so it is. Trying to explain this away will lead you into despair.

Furthermore, I became a Christian because I believe that Christ, Who is God, died on the cross. Oneness Pentecostals don’t believe God died on the cross. Rather, that the body of Jesus died. If it be so, that body was a mere man and cannot save me from my sins. The blood of Christ is spilled in vain.

Only God can save me. And He is saving me. With His Son, Who at the Incarnation was fully man and God; the God-man, the Lamb Slain Before the Foundation of the World, gave up Breath that I may be like He is: a son of God through Him, the Only Son.

My whole salvation hinges on being, as C.S. Lewis said, a “little Christ”. If Jesus is not the Son from eternity, there is no hope. The promise of “But as many received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God” (John I: 12-13) is a lie.

Therefore, from having studied Christ’s Catholic Church, wanting to enter it, rejecting it, to becoming an unsure Anglican, I will go again to the Catholic Church. Only She has proclaimed the Son of God to the world since 33 AD. It’s a matter of authority. Christ’s Authority as God the Son establishing a rock that the “gates of hell will not prevail against” the Church built on it.

If you really want to know “Apostolic Pentecostal beliefs” go to the Catholic Church. She has a line of Apostles descending right from Peter, who was near Our Lord’s side in Galilee.Peter, who preached the sermon on the day of Pentecost. Peter, who was crucified upside down in Rome.

Thanks be to God Who only does wondrous things. One thing being that He so Loved the world that He Gave it His Son, so that we might share of His Spirit and cry “Abba!” to Him in thanksgiving.

Thanksgiving to God. That’s what the Church that Jesus established is all about. The Church is eucharistic because She has the True Eucharist in Her, the Truest Prayer to the Father, Our High Priest. The Son of the Living God.

Amen.

 

[Aeg071]

I am certain you were never a oneness Pentecostal, you sound way to indoctrinated with the extra biblical doctrine of the Trinity.Over the years I have learned that Trinitarians fall in to categories. Trinitarians are either Oneness like me or Trithistic like you. I will dissect your straw man Oneness understanding and your Trinitarian trithistic understanding.

You said–Exploring all nuances and errors of Oneness Pentecostalism would take a book. However, I would like to focus on the Person of Christ. It is this deviation that makes what Oneness organizations teach a terrible heresy of antichrist.

Aeg071
Oneness theology stays true to scriptures . Jesus isn’t in a Trinity.The Apostles didn’t preach a Trinity. And Paul most definitely didn’t teach a Trinity.A Catholic calling me a heretic is a compliment because when it is time for the living and the dead to be judged.It will not be by a Trinity of Divine persons,But Christ the radiance of the Almighty Self Existing One/God glory and the express image of is hypostasis is all of God we will ever see.Know that when we stand before Christ in Judgement,we will be standing before God Himself.You can say it is five person in the Godhead if it pleases you,.And still Christ is all of God we will ever see.

You said-Oneness Pentecostals are adamant about saying “Jesus is God in the flesh” to support a seeming Incarnation. Their Christology is skewed. They only believe one person to be in the Godhead. So when the man called Jesus is deemed by Oneness followers to be divine, they mean that the Father was in the man, that there was no Eternal Son, just the Father in a flesh suit.

Aeg071
You clearly was never a Oneness Pentecostals. There is nothing in the Godhead unless your Trithistic.The Bible says God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself.There is no eternal Son unless your Trithistic. The Bible says God was manifested in the flesh,justified in the Spirit etc.You said just the Father in a flesh suit.That’s really funny because Christ is the only begotten son of God which inherently makes Him the Father Incarnate.I am constantly reminding you trithistic Trinitarians that you can not be the express image of God and not actually be God Himself. as Deity can not be duplicated.

You said-Oneness teaching basically says that the Word, or Logos, was merely an idea. Not a Divine Person. They say the Logos was only a idea of the Father, which He planned to reveal in the man Jesus. This is wrong. Why? Because God is in eternity. God is Love. Love requires a relationship in dialogue.

Aeg071
The Logos is God’s means of self disclosure ie the Logos with God and the Logos was God Himself…When the fullness of time came .The Logos took the form of a servant and came in our likeness.Christ is the Logos.A distinction but no separation so that would not make a second Divine hypostasis as you define.I am a Oneness who completely understand so called Orthodoxy better than most Trinitarians I know.

Most Trinitarians define One God in three hypostasis/prosopon/personae/persons incorrectly translating the Greek and Latin meaning.Which make most of you sound extremely Trithistic. especially by saying co equal,co eternal,generated,proceeding sharing of the Ousia. There are some Protestant Trinitarians that understand the ancient definition of One God in three hypostasis/prosopon/personae/persons.

I have always been most hard on my view of Catholics and I went to Catholic school from 7-12 grade.But i was not until recently that I have a knew found respect for Catholics.I would call him a modern theologian. But he was a Catholic Jesuit who because of him I can accept the terms generate,proceed.I Believe his expression of the Trinity is true to the ancient definition of One God in three persons.**.He wrote’In the Blessed Trinity,the properties are to generate,to be generated,and to proceed.The nature not the person of the Father is communicated to the Son.BUT PROPERTIES ARE NOT PERSONAL DISTINCTIONS EVEN IN IDENTITY.As a Oneness Pentecostal I think what he said is double talk but it was in context of the ancient definition of One God in three persons which means One God in the manifestations.**

 

[ISearchforLight]

Dear Aeg071,

Thanks for replying in good faith to my post and assuming right off the bat that I’m a liar. However, I assure you that I am the son of a Oneness preacher! I spent a happy childhood singing Pentecostal Sunday School favorites such as “The Holy Ghost Will Take the Chicken Out of You” or anything by Lance Appleton. Also, I can recite Acts 2:38 by heart. I designed Sunday School billboards and even wrote a song about the books of the Bible that my class sang in front of the congregation. I even spoke in tongues! I was devout as Pentecostals go! Please, please, please believe me when I say I grew up in the Oneness movement.

Indoctrinated? No, but I read books concerning doctrine, the Bible being chief among them. And it has brought me to Love Himself in Trinity, realizing that, in and of Himself, God is a relationship.

So Trinitarians are Oneness like you …does that mean all Oneness are Trinitarians? Is your brand of Oneness exclusive? I thought the modern sect of Oneness believers proudly announce that they broke away from the Trinitarian Pentecostal communities? I must be confused.

Actually, I don’t believe in three gods as you propose. I believe in One God, the Father, the Son, the Holy Spirit. If it’s polytheistic pagans you’re after, I suggest you find an Olympian from a bygone era and question him about Zeus, Athena, or the like. The Lord is my God, the Lord alone.

I never branded you personally a heretic. And I’m not Roman Catholic yet. Thanks for paying attention to my post. I did, however, assert that the Oneness view of Christ is a dangerous heresy. But you’ve arrived at presupposed view of Truth already, so kudos to you. You can confess that to the Way, Truth, and the Life on Judgement and compare notes. After all, both our knees will bow, and tongues confess that He is Lord to the glory of God the Father.

And…um, the Oneness believe that the Incarnation was just the Father putting on flesh and calling it “Son”. See, the Oneness create a dichotomy in the Person of Christ: Christ the Father and Christ the flesh suit called Son. We never know Who’s talking because His humanity is at war with His divinity. There’s no relationship. Just an illusion which becomes an indulgence of self known as pride–the sin by which Satan fell. Wait, God can sin? Zoinks, Scoob, that’s scary.

I maintain that Christ, though He was in the form of God, did not think it robbery to be equal with God, but rather, He humbled Himself, and took the form of a slave to save me through His cross. Every time He speaks, it is as the God-man, the Revelation of the Father.The natures of Humanity and Divinity are One Person, Jesus of Nazareth, Son of the Living God.

How is this believing in three gods? As the Son of God, Jesus does not duplicate any Deity, from everlasting to everlasting He is Deity.

The Logos is God’s one and only spoken Word in eternity. Check. The Logos is the expression of everything God is in totality. Check. Thus, the Logos is God. Check. But the Logos was with God in the beginning. There’s the rub. God is always in a relationship. With Whom? His Son, the Logos. His Son is the complete revelation of Who He is in eternity so God may know Himself. One can only know oneself by knowing another. To indulge in self over the needs of the other is pride, which is sin. God cannot sin.

The Son is eternal God, but is distinct in Person not separate in Divine Substance from His Father.

Congratulations on completely understanding Orthodoxy. You’ve accomplished more than the Apostles! Whereas Paul saw our struggle in this mortal coil as peering into Truth as a glass darkly, you’ve entirely shattered the glass, knowing that you are as God knowing completely both good and evil. I think I’ve read about a serpent who had a mantra like that–he liked hanging out in gardens. A strange bedfellow, he prowls the world to and fro seeking whom he may devour. Might check the Yellow Pages for Madison Square Garden if you want to chat with that reptile, I hear that Eden’s been under angelic quarantine.

I thought that right belief was based on an encounter with the living God, not just a checklist of things to be believed?

I can’t speak for your Ignatian buddy, but I believe that he isn’t employing Orwell’s doublespeak. One God in Three Persons would imply that God is, in a sense, a relationship within Himself. One God in subsequent manifestations would imply that God only manifests Himself as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, in time. Again, that would be illusory of Him to suggest that He is feigning to have a relationship with ways He’s acted with people in time.

Either God is Love (an eternal action which suggests relationship), or He happens to love (a feeling based on relative mood).

Which will I trust? Love. Faith, hope, and love abide these three; but the greatest of these is love. Love never fails. God never fails. Because He never changes.

The Oneness God changes. He never knows who He is because He’s never in a relationship in eternity.God becomes like Lucifer, who, to quote Chesterton, “fell by the force of gravity” because he takes Himself too seriously. He revels in isolation. Hell is isolation. Do we see the problems arising here?

It comes down to this: do you trust in a God Who says, “I AM WHO I AM.”? And is concrete in knowing that He simply is by being known? Or do you put your trust in those things which are mutable, childish, where moth and dust corrupt?

Yours,

ISearchforLight

 

[Darryl_B]

The difference between oneness and Trinitarian is that oneness theology has no restrictions on manifestations, it can be any number God chooses, God could choose to pop up a new one tomorrow. The Trinitarian theology can only ever be three always was always will be.

 

[sennincatholic]

Dear Aeg071,

Thanks for replying in good faith to my post and assuming right off the bat that I’m a liar. However, I assure you that I am the son of a Oneness preacher! I spent a happy childhood singing Pentecostal Sunday School favorites such as “The Holy Ghost Will Take the Chicken Out of You” or anything by Lance Appleton. Also, I can recite Acts 2:38 by heart. I designed Sunday School billboards and even wrote a song about the books of the Bible that my class sang in front of the congregation. I even spoke in tongues! I was devout as Pentecostals go! Please, please, please believe me when I say I grew up in the Oneness movement.

Indoctrinated? No, but I read books concerning doctrine, the Bible being chief among them. And it has brought me to Love Himself in Trinity, realizing that, in and of Himself, God is a relationship.

So Trinitarians are Oneness like you …does that mean all Oneness are Trinitarians? Is your brand of Oneness exclusive? I thought the modern sect of Oneness believers proudly announce that they broke away from the Trinitarian Pentecostal communities? I must be confused.

Actually, I don’t believe in three gods as you propose. I believe in One God, the Father, the Son, the Holy Spirit. If it’s polytheistic pagans you’re after, I suggest you find an Olympian from a bygone era and question him about Zeus, Athena, or the like. The Lord is my God, the Lord alone.

I never branded you personally a heretic. And I’m not Roman Catholic yet. Thanks for paying attention to my post. I did, however, assert that the Oneness view of Christ is a dangerous heresy. But you’ve arrived at presupposed view of Truth already, so kudos to you. You can confess that to the Way, Truth, and the Life on Judgement and compare notes. After all, both our knees will bow, and tongues confess that He is Lord to the glory of God the Father.

And…um, the Oneness believe that the Incarnation was just the Father putting on flesh and calling it “Son”. See, the Oneness create a dichotomy in the Person of Christ: Christ the Father and Christ the flesh suit called Son. We never know Who’s talking because His humanity is at war with His divinity. There’s no relationship. Just an illusion which becomes an indulgence of self known as pride–the sin by which Satan fell. Wait, God can sin? Zoinks, Scoob, that’s scary.

I maintain that Christ, though He was in the form of God, did not think it robbery to be equal with God, but rather, He humbled Himself, and took the form of a slave to save me through His cross. Every time He speaks, it is as the God-man, the Revelation of the Father.The natures of Humanity and Divinity are One Person, Jesus of Nazareth, Son of the Living God.

How is this believing in three gods? As the Son of God, Jesus does not duplicate any Deity, from everlasting to everlasting He is Deity.

The Logos is God’s one and only spoken Word in eternity. Check. The Logos is the expression of everything God is in totality. Check. Thus, the Logos is God. Check. But the Logos was with God in the beginning. There’s the rub. God is always in a relationship. With Whom? His Son, the Logos. His Son is the complete revelation of Who He is in eternity so God may know Himself. One can only know oneself by knowing another. To indulge in self over the needs of the other is pride, which is sin. God cannot sin.

The Son is eternal God, but is distinct in Person not separate in Divine Substance from His Father.

Congratulations on completely understanding Orthodoxy. You’ve accomplished more than the Apostles! Whereas Paul saw our struggle in this mortal coil as peering into Truth as a glass darkly, you’ve entirely shattered the glass, knowing that you are as God knowing completely both good and evil. I think I’ve read about a serpent who had a mantra like that–he liked hanging out in gardens. A strange bedfellow, he prowls the world to and fro seeking whom he may devour. Might check the Yellow Pages for Madison Square Garden if you want to chat with that reptile, I hear that Eden’s been under angelic quarantine.

I thought that right belief was based on an encounter with the living God, not just a checklist of things to be believed?

I can’t speak for your Ignatian buddy, but I believe that he isn’t employing Orwell’s doublespeak. One God in Three Persons would imply that God is, in a sense, a relationship within Himself. One God in subsequent manifestations would imply that God only manifests Himself as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, in time. Again, that would be illusory of Him to suggest that He is feigning to have a relationship with ways He’s acted with people in time.

Either God is Love (an eternal action which suggests relationship), or He happens to love (a feeling based on relative mood).

Which will I trust? Love. Faith, hope, and love abide these three; but the greatest of these is love. Love never fails. God never fails. Because He never changes.

The Oneness God changes. He never knows who He is because He’s never in a relationship in eternity.God becomes like Lucifer, who, to quote Chesterton, “fell by the force of gravity” because he takes Himself too seriously. He revels in isolation. Hell is isolation. Do we see the problems arising here?

It comes down to this: do you trust in a God Who says, “I AM WHO I AM.”? And is concrete in knowing that He simply is by being known? Or do you put your trust in those things which are mutable, childish, where moth and dust corrupt?

Yours,

ISearchforLight

Thanks very much for your insight of the Trinity.The Trinity is all about the nature of God,which is mutual love. I wish you the best on your journey back home to the Catholic Church.

 

[ISearchforLight]

The difference between oneness and Trinitarian is that oneness theology has no restrictions on manifestations, it can be any number God chooses, God could choose to pop up a new one tomorrow. The Trinitarian theology can only ever be three always was always will be.

Exactly. Manifestations may constitute power, but do not offer a concrete relationship. If they start popping up like corn, then each new manifestation ends up burning away, becoming bitter to the taste, and God in the end has never really been someone to somebody.

But, I’d like to think as it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be, world with out end, Amen.