THE ONENESS DOCTRINE:
FULL GOSPEL OR FOOL GOSPEL?
by Edgar L. Havaich

Article #2 on this page
See Why He Left The United Pentecostals
Christians occasionally encounter people who appear committed to Jesus Christ but profess some beliefs about the nature of God that are radically different from those of traditional Christianity. These often zealous individuals come under a variety of names: Apostolic Pentecostals, Oneness Believers and Jesus Only's. Christians would do well to take a second look at the underlying belief structure of the Oneness adherent.

Oneness teachings are much like those of a man named Sabellius, a third-century figure who was labeled a heretic by the Christian Church. Believed to have been born in Libya, North Africa, his ante-Nicene unitarian doctrine spread both in Rome and Egypt and has been refined, amplified and propagated down through the centuries.

Unlike the Church's belief that there is one God expressed in a unity of three distinct persons all having the attributes of God and claiming to be God, Sabellius taught that the Godhead was one person revealed in three different manifestations. Furthermore, Sabellius believed that the Godhead was expressed through its operations: The Father was revealed in creation; the existence of the Son was limited to the period of His earthly redemptive work; once He had returned to heaven, God was revealed as the Son no longer but as the Holy Spirit in his operation of sanctification of the Church. This teaching is called modalism.

Because of his beliefs, Sabellius was excommunicated from the Church. Yet the idea of modalistic monarchianism, the belief that God reigns while manifesting Himself through different modes of operation, is perpetuated today through the Apostolic Pentecostal Church.

Today's Oneness movement got its start at a 1913 camp meeting for the relatively young Pentecostal Church. In Arroyo Seco, near Los Angeles, a message was given noting that in the days of the apostles baptism was performed in the name of Jesus Christ (Acts 2:38) instead of using the Trinitarian model given by Christ, who instructed Christians to baptize in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost (Matthew 28:19). After deliberating for one night over the message he had heard, a man by the name of John C. Scheppe revealed his "new insight" into what he saw as the true nature of the Godhead. His "revelation" was the beginning of the modern Apostolic Pentecostal Church.

Modern Oneness Pentecostals believe that Jesus is the Father or the Son-Father (hyiopator), that is Jesus is the physical manifestation of the Father who is Spirit. The Holy Ghost is not considered a part of the Trinity but merely the spirit and power of the Son-Father.

Oneness theology also embraces the teaching that salvation comes through repentance and baptism by immersion in the name of Jesus only. The question posed by many apostolics, "Have you been baptized in the name?", is one way they determine if the person they are conversing with meets their criteria of a "true believer." One further proof of a "legitimate" conversion is whether the individual has been baptized in the Holy Ghost with the evidence of speaking in tongues.

The basis for Oneness doctrine lies with a group of key scriptures that have been misinterpreted or misunderstood by apostolic adherents. One such verse is Colossians 2:9, "For in Him [Christ] dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily." In considering the title of Oneness, author Gordon Magee's booklet, Is Jesus in the Godhead or is the Godhead in Jesus?, it would appear that we must make a choice as to who is dwelling in whom. Since God is Spirit (John 4:24) we realize that this cannot refer to all three persons residing within the body, or being incarnate within the earthly body of Jesus. Yet if, according to Oneness theology, the Godhead is in Jesus, but Jesus is not in the Godhead, we find a contradiction when Jesus Himself says "the Father is in Me, and I am in the Father (John 10:38).

The more plausible explanation of Colossians 2:9 is that the divine nature of the Godhead was totally revealed through the person of Jesus Christ. Jesus also went on to state that we, too, share this unique union when in John 14:20 he said, "I am in My Father, and you in Me, and I in you." In other words, being made in the image and likeness of God (Genesis 1:26) and having Christ living within us (Colossians 2:20), we also have a part in revealing the loving nature of our God to a lost and dying world. To maintain the apostolic position that Colossians 2:9 means the Godhead resides in Jesus but Jesus does not reside in the Godhead would force us to go one step further when considering John 14:20 and come to the blasphemous conclusion that we, too, are a part of the Godhead.

Isaiah 9:6 is another verse that Oneness theology uses to substantiate its doctrine. Referring to Christ's title, "everlasting Father," the apostolic feels justified in drawing the conclusion that scripture has affirmed his position that the Father and the Son are one and the same.

However, the word "Father" is merely the tool used to address Christ's deity, just as the word "Son" depicts His humanity. Moreover, the Hebrew word for Father 'ab' is used in accordance with a custom usual in Hebrew and in Arabic, where he who possesses a thing is called the father of it. Thus Abialbon (II Samuel 23:31), "father of strength," means "strong"; Abiasaph (Exodus 6:24), "father of gathering," means "gatherer"; Abigail (I Chronicles 2:16), "father of exultation," is a woman's name meaning "exulting"; and so forth." Therefore, in keeping with the Hebrew custom the title "everlasting Father" or as it has also been translated, "Father of eternity" would simply be stating that Christ is eternal. (Albert Barnes, Notes on the Old Testament and Practical: Isaiah, Vol. I, Grand Rapids, MI.: Baker Book House, 1950 reprint, pg. 193, as quoted in Robert M. Bowman, Jr., "Oneness Pentecostalism and the Trinity", Forward, The News and Research Periodical of the Christian Research Institute, Vol. 8, Number 3, 1985, p. 23-24.)

Trinitarians have been accused by Oneness writers of believing in three gods. Oneness writer Thomas H. Weisser even went so far as to state "The theologians with their babblings will be brought to their knees before the One God in Jesus Christ. Their trinitarian beliefs will do them no good as Christ tells them to depart from Him because they are workers of iniquity. He will remind them of the scripture they know so well: 'If ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins (John 8:24).'" (3 Persons? From The Bible or Babylon, pg. 43) In spite of numerous articles by Trinitarians declaring their belief in the one God as defined by the Bible, Oneness adherents persist in their accusations that we believe in three Gods and are only paying lip service to the Bible. Such statements lead us to believe that those who issue them are either uninformed as to true trinitarian doctrine, or have deliberately ignored this position in an attempt to make their point.

True trinitarian doctrine is substantiated throughout scripture. It states first and foremost that there is only one God.


See the following:

Deuteronomy 4:35 - Unto thee it was shewed, that thou mightest know that the LORD he is God; there is none else beside him.

Deuteronomy 6:4 - Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:

II Samuel 7:22 - Wherefore thou art great, O LORD God: for there is none like thee, neither is there any God beside thee, according to all that we have heard with our ears.

Isaiah 43:10 - Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Isaiah 44:8 - Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have not I told thee from that time, and have declared it? Ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God beside me? Yea, there is no God: I know not any.

Mark 12:32 - And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he.

Galatians 3:20 - Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one.

I Timothy 2:5 - For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.

Apostolics and other anti-Trinitiarians seek to support their theology on the basis of many of the above verses. However, these verses do not limit the number of persons contained in the Godhead, but only emphasize that there is one God. This in no way contradicts Christian theology. It should be noted also that within the Shema, the great Jewish confession of faith (Deuteronomy 6:4), the Hebrew word for "one" is achid. Achid means a united one, whereas the Hebrew word yachid means absolute one or only one. While the word yachid would have much better fit Oneness theology, God Himself declares that He is achid (united one). (See further, Genesis 1:5 and 2:24 for other uses of achid in compound unity.)

Yet within the nature of the one God there are three beings: Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. scripture designates each one as being God as the following passages show:


The Father is called God

I Peter 1:2 - ... elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ.

II Peter 1:17 - For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased."

Isaiah 64:8 - "But now, O LORD, thou art our father; we are the clay, and thou our potter; and we all are the work of thy hand."


The Son is called God

John 1:1-3 - In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

John 10:30 - "I and my Father are one." (Jesus is speaking.)

John 20:28 - And Thomas answered and said unto him, "My Lord and my God."

Hebrews 1:8 - But unto the Son He saith, "Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom."


The Holy Spirit is called God

Job 33:4 - "The Spirit of God hath made me, and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life."

Job 26:13 - "By his Spirit he hath garnished the heavens; his hand hath formed the crooked serpent."

Acts 5:3,4 - But Peter said, "Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land? While it remained, was it not thine own? And after it was sold was it not in thine own power? Why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? Thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God."

The fact that there is only one God and that we acknowledge the Bible differentiates between the three persons making up the Godhead does not mean we believe in three Gods. The question we need to be asking is not "is there one God or three Gods?" but "is there distinction within the Godhead?" Cal Beisner makes this observation: "The great Presbyterian theologian at the turn of the century, Dr. Benjamin Breckenridge Warfield, pointed out that when we say these three things: 'That there is but one God,' 'That the Father;, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit is each God,' and, 'That the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit is each a distinct person,' then we have enunciated the doctrine of the Trinity in its completeness." (The Trinity or "Jesus Only," What Do The Scriptures Teach? transcript from "The John Ankerberg Show,")

Beisner further observes that the need for definition is crucial in the event of a debate because it defines the boundaries of the debate. Most debates over this doctrine waste much time arguing points already agreed upon. The definition B.B. Warfield has given makes clear that there are two important points on which we and Oneness adherents are totally agreed -- namely that there is but one God and that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit is each God. The disagreement comes entirely from the trinitarian declaration that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are distinct persons. Here is where any debate should be centered.

While Trinitarians see three distinct persons within the Godhead, Oneness believers see three different manifestations in the Godhead. The following quote from Oneness author David K. Bernard helps illustrate the point:
"It is necessary to distinguish clearly between the deity and the humanity of Christ. While Jesus was both God and man at the same time, sometimes He acted from the human viewpoint and sometimes from the divine viewpoint. As Father, He sometimes spoke from His divine self-consciousness; as Son He sometimes spoke from His human self-consciousness. Only as a man could Jesus be born, grow, be tempted by the devil, hunger, thirst, become weary, sleep, pray, be beaten, die, not know all things, not have all power, be inferior to God, and be a servant. Only as God could He exist from eternity, be unchanging, cast out devils by His own authority, be the bread of life, give living water, give spiritual rest, calm the storm, answer prayer, heal the sick, raise His body from death, forgive sin, know all things, have all power, be identified as God, and be King of kings. In an ordinary person, these two contrasting lists would be mutually exclusive, yet the scriptures attribute all them to Jesus, revealing His dual nature." (Essential Doctrines of the Bible, by David K. Bernard, pp. 9,10)


Trinitarians see the use of plural pronouns as identifying distinct persons. Oneness adherents see the use of plural pronouns as showing the dual nature of Jesus Christ, as another apostolic writer explains:
"All we have to do when we read our Bibles is to keep in mind this simple thought: Is Jesus acting as a man now or is He acting as God? - because He was both God and man, In him deity and humanity were fused but not confused. He could speak from two separate standpoints, He could talk as Almighty God - He could talk as a human. For instance, when He walked on the sea He was acting as God. When He walked beside the sea He was acting as man. When He sat down on the wall and was weary in every limb, He was weary as to His humanity, but Isaiah 40:28 says that everlasting God - the Creator - faints not nor is weary. Jesus was not weary as to His deity; He was weary merely as to His humanity.

To understand what a scriptural passage says about Jesus, then, we must ask the question, Is He now taking the part and place of God or is He taking the part and place of man? There we have a wonderful key, and unfolding key to the Jesus of the four Gospels." (Is Jesus in the Godhead or Is the Godhead in Jesus?, by Gordon McGee, pg. 14)

When plural pronouns and terms such as "both," "another" and " not alone" are used in reference to the Father and the Son, distinction is evident. To state, as do Oneness believers, that this is the Father speaking from two different points of view or modes, is eisegesis in its most pronounced form. The following scriptures illustrate the distinction of persons.


Both:

John 15:24 - "If I had not done among them the works which none other man did, they had not had sin: but now have they both seen and hated both me and my Father."

II John 9 - "Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son."


We and Our:

John 14:23 - "Jesus answered and said unto him, 'If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.'"


Another:

John 14:16 - "And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever."


Not Alone:

John 8:16 - "And yet if I judge, my judgment is true: for I am not alone, but I and the Father that sent me."

John 8:29 - "And he that sent me is with me: the Father hath not left me alone; for I do always those things that please him."

John 16:32 - "Behold the hour cometh, yea, in now come, that ye shall be scattered, everyman to his own, and shall leave me alone: and yet I am not alone, because the Father is with me."

Nothing in the texts quoted implies that there is a unipersonal God, manifesting different roles or modes. It would be more logical and more scripturally sound to conclude that the Father, Son and Holy Ghost are separate and distinct individuals. It would also be more judicious to allow scripture to speak of the nature of the Godhead rather than relying on man's "revelations" of what they believe the Godhead to be. Scripture speaks clearly on this issue when it states clearly and concisely in Proverb 30:6: "Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar." God is stern in His warning regarding His nature, for "such is the antichrist - he that denies the Father and the Son."
(I John 2:22)

Placing Faith In The Baptizer
PLACING FAITH IN THE BAPTIZER, NOT THE BAPTISM

One Man's Exodus from The United Pentecostal Church
by David Vivas, Jr.

"Am I your brother in Christ, yes or no?" asked Dr. Walter Martin in a debate with United Pentecostal Church representatives Nathaniel Urshan and Robert Sabin, which took place on the "John Ankerberg Show" in 1985. As I sat and observed Brother Urshan's reluctance to give a direct response to the question, my mind pondered in dismay over the fact that my own General Superintendent would not answer, "No, you are not my brother in Christ." This would have been a common response coming from a Oneness adherent to a Trinitarian believer.

I would like to share with you my experience in the United Pentecostal Church. The intentions of this article are not to bash Oneness believers, but rather to help inform the Christian Church of the dangers that exist in legalistic movements of our day.

I was raised in the Assemblies of God. My mother, who was Catholic, had intentions of sending me to the Catholic Church. My father, who was Protestant, would not allow my mother to send me to the Catholic Church. Instead, he sent me every Sunday with his parents to Sunday School at the Assemblies of God. My mother and father were saved several years later, and we attended a Pentecostal Church in a nearby city. I was involved in the church and saw 15 of my high school friends saved. By this time I was 15 years old. At school I began encountering classmates who attended the United Pentecostal Church in our city. I had countless discussions with them on the subjects of the godhead and water baptism. After several vigorous attempts to respond to their Oneness claims and the many scriptures on water baptism, I became persuaded of their theology, and even went as far as to doubt my salvation.

I became very angry and bitter with my parents, pastor, and Sunday school teachers whom I thought had led me in error since I was a child. I was told by the UPC that the doctrine of the Trinity was in actuality a belief in "three Gods." They also told me that I had been baptized the wrong way. They insisted that the name Jesus Christ must be spoken over an individual when being baptized and that those who have been baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit had been erroneously baptized. They asked me to show them in the Bible where anyone was baptized in the Triune formula and insisted that every instance of biblical baptism occurred "in the name of Jesus Christ," (that is, with the name pronounced over them).

I soon told my parents of my decision to attend the United Pentecostal Church. They opposed my decision. By this time I had attended the UPC on several different occasions without the consent of my parents. After becoming aware of my excursions they grew concerned. After my first few visits, I was determined to be baptized "the right way" so that I could surely be saved.

Since my attending the UPC went against my father's will, I moved out of my parents' home at age 16. As a result, I found myself living with different members of the church. Three months later, I was set up on the platform for preaching purposes.

I became heavily indoctrinated with various books and materials published by the UPC. I devoted my time to the listening of debate tapes between Oneness preachers and Trinitarians. I learned all the Oneness responses to Trinitarian theology, and became dogmatically opposed to Trinitarians. In August 1989, after being a part of the ministerial staff of the local UPC church, I became licensed with the organization. I started a prison ministry in which about 75 inmates were baptized in two years. I was very zealous with church activities.

I was familiar with Dr. Walter Martin and had obtained a number of his writings and tapes. Although I didn't believe he was saved at the time, I admired his knowledge in the area of comparative religions. Upon hearing of Dr. Martin's passing in June of 1989, I attended his Memorial service in Southern California. During the Memorial Service, I was moved by the comments made by different individuals concerning him, and was battling in my mind how I was to consider this man lost and in error, when his very life and ministry had helped so many thousands through the years. Yet, I could not compromise with what I thought was the "Truth."

I was loaned a video of the debate mentioned above which took place on "The John Ankerberg Show" ("The Trinity or 'Jesus Only':What Do The Scriptures Teach?"). My first impressions of the debate left me disappointed. Dr. Martin and Cal Beisner were very thorough in their presentation and defense of Orthodox Christianity, while in my prideful opinion, the opposition delivered a poor defense of Oneness theology. So to more effectively present and defend Oneness doctrines, I began investing in scholarly works in the areas of Church History and Word Studies in Hebrew and Greek. To my astonishment, I discovered several faulty interpretations of church history as taught by the UPC. There were also a number of grammatical discrepancies of certain key passages that had gone by unnoticed and are in fact used to distort the meaning within the context of the passage.

During the last year of my involvement with the UPC, I analyzed the teachings of my local church. We were taught by our local pastor that he was going to answer for us on Judgment Day concerning our lives and personal experiences with God. We were taught that if we missed a church service, we would have to give an account to God as to why we missed. We were discouraged from attending family outings on a church night. When wanting to do so, members young and old alike, had to ask permission from the pastor. More often than not, the answer was "no." "Where are your priorities," he would ask, "to God or your family?" This would engender a sense of guilt among the members of the church. Scriptures were manipulated and effectively used to intimidate members who consequently had no rights or say-so. The pastor was always right, because he proclaimed himself "the man of God" who was not to be questioned.

In my experience I wanted to attend a Memorial Service of a relative. I was asked by the pastor if it was really necessary for me to attend since it was on a church night. He answered "Let the dead bury the dead." Needless to say I was in church that night. I found that not only did he manipulate scripture and coerce the people but was in fact acting as a dictator.

There were also the extremes of legalism which exist in most United Pentecostal congregations. Men were not permitted to wear mustaches, women were not allowed to wear pants or slacks, make up, jewelry or cut their hair. And neither could wear sleeves above the elbows. These were all considered "Holiness Standards." Television was disapproved of since it was considered "a pipeline from hell into the home." To violate any of these standards, a member was considered to be rebellious and disobedient to the Word of God, not to mention their pastor. It became a salvation of works rather than grace. If a person did not follow these standards, they could not possibly be saved. The church was governed by modern-day Phariseeism.

Looking back now, I can see the bondage of the people caused by presumed self-righteousness -- which they flaunted by their "holy" attire. It became, as the Apostle Paul said, "...a form of godliness" (II Timothy 3:5).

Another incident happened that further disturbed me. Different people from our local church left to attend another United Pentecostal Church and were informally disfellowshipped because they did so. We were taught that we must attend the church wherein we were "saved." If one left the local assembly to attend another Oneness Church, they were considered rebels and lost, thus the disfellowshiping.

I knew that this teaching was not even remotely Biblical. I then began to thoroughly re-examine the teachings of the church. These and other situations prompted me to analyze the teachings of the organization as a whole. I asked a friend of mine (who was a disfellowshipped member attending a nearby United Pentecostal Church) to once again review with me the Ankerberg debate, this time, with open hearts, open minds, and unbiased intentions.

All of the evidences given by Martin and Beisner were irrefutable. We checked out many of the references and found them to be accurate and correct. Martin explained many of the passages the UPC representatives quoted. For example in John 10:30 Jesus said, "I and my Father are one." Oneness adherents maintain that this proves Jesus and the Father are one person.

Yet Martin brought out that the Greek in this passage reads: "...we are in union." (See further a Greek Interlinear Bible in this passage for the Greek word "esmen." It translates "we are.") Deuteronomy 6:4 was also quoted. Again, Martin and Beisner explained that the Hebrew word for "one" in this passage is "echad" -- meaning a compound unity.

Finally, at the end of the program Martin asked Nathaniel Urshan if all those who had been baptized in the "Triune formula" were lost and going to hell. Urshan expressed his uncertainty with a hesitant response. My stomach turned because the answer should have been an emphatic: "Yes! They are lost and going to hell." The UPC emphatically teaches that one must be baptized with the name Jesus Christ pronounced over them. Further, one must speak in tongues as the essential evidence of being filled with the Holy Spirit. One could not be saved otherwise. In addition, members must follow the legalism taught in their church, be it shaving off one's mustache or wearing sleeves below the elbow, or for women refraining from wearing pants, cosmetics jewelry, and so forth. Therefore it then becomes a salvation by works, and not by grace.

What I never understood was how one who believed in the Trinity, and yet was filled with the Holy Spirit, could be lost. "How could the Holy Spirit dwell in an unclean temple?", I thought. Sins were washed away only after being immersed in water. The Scriptures did not teach baptismal regeneration as I was taught to believe. This doctrine was contrary to the biblical conceptof salvation by grace.

I was deliberating at this time whether to continue with the UPC or withdraw membership. I finally decided one month later to turn in my ministerial license with the UPC. At first I questioned my decision. I felt as though my very soul was in jeopardy. But I just could not deny the evidence of Scripture. What was I to listen to? My pastor? The UPC? No! The Word of God!

The Bible was clear in Ephesians 2:8-9, "For by grace are ye saved through faith"




Who Are The Gods of Mormonism? | Back Home | Is Water Necessary For Salvation?