Oneness Pentecostal
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Oneness Pentecostalism is a movement of Pentecostal Christianity that teaches the atoning death of Jesus Christ, His resurrection, His soon return, and the inerrancy of the Word of God as contained in the Bible. They consider water baptism to be essential, and stress it should be administered in the name of Jesus Christ. They display utterances of tongues (glossalalia), and regard this as initial evidence of the infilling of the Holy Ghost in the believer. They teach that personal conversion is to be followed by holy living and exhibiting the fruit of the Spirit. The church services are often punctuated with demonstrative acts of worship including dancing, shouting, and glossalalia. Although both Oneness and Trinitarian denominations acknowledge the God of the Bible as the only God in existence, and that Jesus was born, died, and resurrected, Oneness doctrine differs from mainstream Christian denominations in that the traditional concept of the Trinity is rejected as an inadequate and inaccurate description of God. According to the United Pentecostal Church International, the largest Oneness Pentecostal body in the United States, Oneness Pentecostals identify Jesus essentially as the human manifestation of God the Father, i.e. God incarnate. [1].
Citing 1Timothy 2:5, the Oneness doctrine affirms that God is indivisibly one in number, and sees the biblical distinction between God the Father and Jesus (the Son of God), as being a proper, observable father-son distinction, except between an incorporeal, transcendent, eternal God as Father, and a human, begotten man as Son, in whom God manifested Himself for the purpose of salvation. They affirm the full deity of Jesus, by holding that God chose to make Himself known to humanity through the man Jesus. In their view, the deity of Jesus is God the Father. They deny the Trinitarian proposal that the one, true God is comprised of three co-divine, co-equal, co-eternal, co-powerful persons. In the sense that the one God and one man of 1Timothy 2:5 co-exist simultaneously, they teach that God exists simultaneously both as the human man Jesus (the Son of God), and as God the Father (invisible, transcendent, Spirit), inseparably united (see John 10:30). Citing John 4:24 (God is a Spirit), they see the terms God the Father and Holy Spirit as references to the same one God, who is Spirit. In affirming that the Holy Spirit is God the Father, they deny that God’s own Spirit is another divine person separate from Him.
Oneness Pentecostals are often referred to as "Jesus Only." The label arose early on in reference to their insistence on baptizing only in the name of Jesus, but it tends to be used only by the movement's critics today, and is generally disliked by Oneness Pentecostals. "Oneness", "Apostolic" and "Jesus' Name" are adherents' preferred self-designations.<ref>Dr. David K. Bernard, Unmasking Prejudice, Cyberjournal for Pentecostal-Charismatic Research</ref>
Oneness Pentecostals differ from mainstream Protestant Christianity by holding that salvation is attained by water baptism in Jesus' name only and speaking in tongues in addition to repentance and trusting in Jesus Christ as Saviour. Protestants have traditionally taught salvation by repentance and faith alone in Christ alone apart from works, including baptism and any other sacrament.
Contents |
[edit] History
Many people believe that the Oneness doctrine came into existence only in the early 20th century during the latter days of the Azusa Street Revival. Oneness historians, however, such as Dr. Curtis Ward, William Chalfant, Dr. Gary P. Reckart Sr., Dr. David Bernard, Dr. Marvin Arnold, and Thomas Weisser have gathered substantial evidence that they believe reveals there were Oneness believers long before the Azusa Street Revival that lead all the way to the beginning of the first century Christian church.
There are no indications, however, that the pioneering Oneness Pentecostal figures in the early twentieth century were either guided or inspired by ancient Modalists such as Sabellius, Noetus or Praxeas. However, modern Oneness people often stress dependence solely upon God and the Bible for the formation of their doctrines, seeking guidance not from post-biblical writings of men, but from illumination by God upon the Bible. Post-biblical church history is deemed by Oneness people to be of interest, but not binding upon them for their doctrinal views. Thus, they are unorthodox in the literal sense of the word.<ref name="Oneness.Trinity.and.orthodoxy">Oneness Christians regard the historic Ecumenical Councils and creeds to be merely the opinions of men. In contrast, orthodox Christians (by the very definition of orthodox) must regard all post-apostolic doctrinal developments as having been guided by God's hand via the councils and church leadership, and all the post-biblical stream of creeds, decisions, and judgments by the councils and church leaders as binding upon them for their doctrinal views. This poses a conundrum for Protestant Christians, who on one hand protest against the Catholic church as doctrinally wrong on important issues, and yet on the other hand seem to define themselves (doctrinally) as orthodox. Thus, they reject parts of orthodoxy as wrong (not guided by God), and yet regard other aspects of the same orthodoxy as proper and as their own. For a Trinitarian Protestant Christian to protest against the Catholic church in one breath, and yet criticize Oneness Christians as unorthodox in the next breath, is a great curiosity for Oneness Christians. A Oneness argument would be that the post-biblical stream of decisions is either flawed, or not. It cannot be both entirely right, and yet still present a valid need to protest against parts of it. One man's orthodoxy then, is another man's unorthodoxy.</ref>
In 1913, John Schaepe (whose name is often misspelled in a number of sources) claimed to receive a revelation directly from God during a camp meeting revival that the baptismal command posited by Peter in Acts 2:38- i.e., baptism "in the name of Jesus" - was the fulfillment of the Great Commission in Matthew 28:19 - i.e., baptism "in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." This conclusion was accepted by several others in the camp and developed further theologically by a minister named Frank J. Ewart. By 1914, Frank Ewart and Glenn Cook publicly baptized each other in "the name of Jesus." Thus, in 1913 Oneness Pentecostalism was "revealed" to a handful of individuals, and in 1914 it was first publicly practiced. Later, a number of ministers claimed that they baptized "in the Name of Jesus" long before 1914, including Frank Small and Andrew D. Urshan. Even Charles Parham himself baptized using a Christological baptismal formula prior to Azusa Street (Dr. Charles Wilson, Our Heritage, p. 12). However it was not their baptismal formula which was the issue, but rather the rejection of the Trinity that was the bigger issue to other Pentecostal ministers.
Schaepe's revelation caused a great stir within Pentecostalism. During the next year, Frank J. Ewart, another Pentecostal minister, struggled between his Trinitarian teachings and the new issue. He often spent hours debating with R. E. McAlister, attempting to bring the two doctrines together. (R.E. McAlister, the man who had fired the shot heard around the world at Arroyo Seco, defected. He formally renounced the Oneness doctrine in 1919. Thereafter, he became one of the greatest Canadian champions of orthodox Trinitarianism among Pentecostals in Canada as well as a propagator of the 'finished work of Calvary' doctrine). The camp ground in Arroyo Seco, California, just outside Los Angeles, where the revelation occurred was also owned by Seymour's Mission. Many were rebaptized in the new formula in an attempt to bring unity within the new Assemblies of God. However the re-baptisms also had the opposite effect on the Assemblies causing a backlash from many Trinitarians who feared the direction their organization might be heading. By October 1916 the issue finally came to a head at the Fourth General Council of the Assemblies of God. The mostly Trinitarian leadership, fearing the new issue might overtake their organization, drew up a doctrinal statement affirming the Trinity among other issues. When the final votes were tallied the "Statement of Fundamental Truths" was adopted. More than one quarter of their ministerial and assembly membership left to form their own Oneness fellowships.
Oneness Pentecostals have, as have most other denominations and Pentecostal groups, some division over a number of issues. From 1920-1950, many ministers split from the Pentecostal Assemblies of the World (P.A.W.), a Oneness Pentecostal denomination that was originally racially integrated. Due to the social, political and national policies of the day such as the Jim Crow Era, white Oneness Pentecostal leaders saw that the white Southern brethren were in conflict with the racially integrated movement, and several smaller organizations were founded. In 1945, a merger of two predominantly white Oneness Pentecostal organizations (the Pentecostal Church Incorporated and the Pentecostal Assemblies of Jesus Christ) resulted in the formation of the United Pentecostal Church International (U.P.C.I.). In recent decades the organization has stressed multicultural ministries and racial integration. [2]
The Pentecostal Assemblies of the World have never left their original vision of a racially integrated body of believers. To this day, although predominately black, they continue to reach out and work toward racial unity in worship and organization. There have been both white and black presiding bishops in this group. The Pentecostal Assemblies of the World is the oldest Oneness Pentecostal organization in existence. It began in 1906, the same year the Azusa Street Revival began, making it older than even most of the Trinitarian Pentecostal organizations. It was never a part of the Assemblies of God and therefore never came out from it. The group which was ousted by the Assemblies of God later joined the Pentecostal Assemblies of the World, but then demerged later (Dr. Charles Wilson, Our Heritage, p. 22). The U.P.C.I. has suffered a few minor splits since its inception in 1945. For example, in 1986, Pastor L. H. Hardwick, a U.P.C.I. pastor in Nashville, Tennessee, broke away from what he called "legalists" (referring to the issue of dress code and standards), took his church (Christ Church) and formed Global Christian Ministries (now Global Network of Christian Ministries).
[edit] Contrast
Both Trinitarian and Oneness adherents maintain that there is only one God, who was manifested in the flesh, and that He became fully known to humanity in the person of Jesus Christ. The traditional doctrine of the Trinity teaches that God is, and eternally has been, existent in three Divine persons or members in the Godhead (specifically "God the Father, "God the Son" and "God the Holy Spirit"). These three are taught to be co-eternal, co-equal, and co-powerful. Ancient as well as modern art displayed in many Catholic churches show the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as three separate people standing or sitting next to each other. Yet it is affirmed that these three separate Divine persons are one in essence. Much information is available about the traditional doctrine of the Holy Trinity.
Oneness theology maintains that the biblical terms God the Father and Holy Spirit<ref>As well as all other similar biblical terms, including God, Father, Spirit, and Spirit of Christ, etc.</ref> both refer to the same one eternal, incorporeal, ever-transcendent Deity, that is indivisibly one in number (with Father describing God in relationship and Spirit describing God in action or emanation, see John 4:24, "God is a spirit"), and their doctrine holds that the biblical terms for Jesus Christ (including His name, as well as various other titles, such as Son, Son of man, and Son of God) refer to an historic figure, a real man, who was and ever will be the human manifestation of the invisible God, inseparably united with the Father (see John 10:30).
Certain Bible verses about Jesus seem to cause both Trinitarian and Oneness adherents to feel supported and justified in their views. The scriptures describe the Son (Jesus) as "God ... manifest in the flesh" (1Timothy 3:16), the one in whom dwells "bodily" (see Colossians 1:19 and Colossians 2:9-10) the "fullness of the Deity" (NIV, NNAS, NASB, NRSV) or "fulness of the Godhead" in some translations (KJV, NKJV), and the express image of the invisible God (the Son is "the exact representation of His [God's] nature" Hebrews 1:3 and "the image of the invisible God" Colossians 1:15).
Oneness Pentecostals generally describe God in singular terms and do not endorse terms such as Trinity, Divine persons, members (i.e. of the "Godhead"), separate (i.e. Divine persons), they, them, etc., to describe the Judeo-Christian God. Additionally, they do not endorse common para-biblical terminology such as co-eternal, co-equal, and co-powerful. They welcome the often-used biblical phrase "Son of God" but not the Trinitarians' reversal of it ("God the Son") as a way to refer to Jesus.
Oneness Pentecostals do not deny the existence or divinity of Father, Son or Holy Spirit. They do deny that God is three divine persons that are one in essence (as per Trinitarianism).
[edit] More than one consciousness within God
Some on both sides of the debate have questioned whether Oneness doctrine allows for any more than one mind, consciousness, or will within God, and some have even posed that it does not.<ref name="Oneness.see.both.divine.and.human.wills.etc">Some rank-and-file Oneness people, i.e. non-scholars, have struggled with this, and some Trinitarian authors have sought to deny Oneness proponents the freedom to observe any distinction between the Deity manifested in Jesus Christ and His humanity. Examples are found in "The Gospel According to Oneness Pentecostalism" by Mike Barden (self-published via the Internet) and Oneness Pentecostals and the Trinity by Gregory A. Boyd (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1992).
Barden alleges of Oneness: “Any relationship between the Father and the Son is between Jesus' deity and Jesus' humanity (in other words, when Jesus prays, He's really talking to Himself). Otherwise, there is no real distinction or relationship between the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, because ‘God is one’; any personal relationship between these ‘modes’ of God is not real, but only apparent.”
According to Oneness scholars, such attacks are arguments against a straw man; Oneness proponents do not hold that there can be no distinction observed between the Deity manifested in Jesus Christ and His humanity. Rather, as stated by U.P.C.I. author David Bernard, a noted Oneness scholar (in "An Answer to a Critic", a review of Gregory Boyd’s above mentioned work), “a distinction between the Father and the Son (not of eternal personhood, but relative to the Incarnation) is at the very core of Oneness theology.” According to Bernard and other Oneness scholars, the scriptural distinction between the Father and the Son is held by Oneness believers as obvious and very real (not “faked”). See also David K. Bernard, Teaching the Apostolic Faith p. 16.</ref> However, Oneness scholars have written quite plainly<ref name="Oneness.see.both.divine.and.human.wills.etc" /> that, because they see both Deity and humanity (two natures, or dual-nature) inseparably united in the Incarnation, then both Divine and human minds, consciousnesses, wills are present. They point out that Jesus, in His humanity, prayed thus, "Father ... not my will, but thine, be done" (Luke 22:42). They cite this and other verses as proof of Jesus' humanity both in mind, will, emotion, intellect, and consciousness. They hold that clearly there is the Divine mind, will, consciousness, as well as the human. To them, these two (Divine and human, Father and Son) are united in the Incarnation, and both essential to the Incarnation.
Trinitarians use the same passage (Luke 22:42) to prove two (of three) Divine persons. Oneness scholars respond that, in order to prove the Trinity, the passage would need to prove two Divine wills, not one human will and one Divine will. They point out that the Divine will is perfect, by its very nature flawless/inerrant, while the passage shows Jesus' human will (the second of the two wills present) not as flawless, but quite the opposite: a human will that must not be followed, that must be eschewed in favor of the Father's flawless and perfect (Divine) will. Both sides of the debate have come away from this passage feeling it supports their view, often with little understanding of how the other side could miss the truth they see in the passage.
Oneness people see in Jesus the incarnation of the fullness of God (Colossians 2:9-10), not the incarnation of but one of three "Divine persons" (i.e. "God the Son"). To them, according to Jesus' Deity, He is God (shown in the scriptures as LORD/Lord, Spirit of God, Spirit of the LORD, Holy Spirit, Spirit of Christ, Father, etc.). Their use of the term "Jesus is God" is a shortened way of stating that "Jesus is God manifest in the flesh." Their doctrine or teaching is referred to by some Trinitarians as Jesus-Only doctrine or Sabellianism as well as other terms. Some on either side believe Christians on the opposite side to be in heresy, although the differences between the two groups can sometimes seem nuanced or semantic if one is not familiar with Christology or with the Bible.
[edit] Trinitarian Interpretation and Oneness Reply
Anti-trinitarian teachings are rejected as heretical by the Roman Catholic Church and the Protestant churches. Trinitarians have made various allegations about Oneness doctrine in efforts to debate against it. Both modern Trinitarians and modern Oneness adherents have asserted that certain elements of Oneness doctrine existed in some ancient Christian movements and teachings, including Sabellianism, which is also referred to as Modalism or Patripassianism. There have been debatable assertions that modern Oneness doctrine and ancient Sabellianism are one and the same. For a brief discussion of why this is a moot topic, see paragraphs 3 and 4 of the "Jesus-Name doctrine" article. Tertullian, one of the earliest recorded Trinitarians to argue about the matter, coined a Latin phrase from which the modern term Patripassianism is derived. It means to accuse Oneness people of either claiming or believing that God the Father suffered and died on the cross instead of Jesus, the Son of God. However, Oneness people believe that the man Christ Jesus, the human manifestation of God, died on the cross, not God the Father.
A common Trinitarian viewpoint is:
| A core difference between the Trinitarian and Oneness interpretation of God is whether the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are three persons that constitute one God or whether there is but one God that exists in various manifestations. Most people essentially define a person as synonymous with a being. Therefore the concept of God existing as one being and yet three persons, seems like a contradiction. However, since the issue has been raised modern Trinitarian apologists have clearly distinguished the concepts of person and being:
A person is a function of a sentient being, in that a person is a type of being that has higher functions of reason, self-awareness, self-reflection, and other identifiable capacities not found in animals. However, a being in itself, is not a person. All animals are considered beings, yet animals do not have the respect of being persons. An analogy would be to say that apples are fruit, but one cannot call all fruit apples. In the Trinitarian concept, God exists still as one being, and one Deity, while having the capacity to interact as three distinct (but not separate), persons who are eternally in perfect unison and harmony with each other (which would logically be essentially necessary for them to be the same being). This is shown throughout the Bible, as Jesus speaks of Himself, the Father, and the Holy Spirit consistently in the first, second, and third person. For Trinitarians, if God were to not exist in this fashion, then the interactions found throughout the Bible would be meaningless, and an unnecessary layer of theological interpretation and confusion. To assert that these are manifestations and not persons is to imply to Trinitarians that God was creating an elaborate hoax or illusion in order to merely test the perceptions of the followers. A similar case against a self-generating circular manifestation can be also found in Trinitarian rejections of Koranic verses describing God having someone else put on the cross but made to look like Jesus in order to fool otherwise devout and sincere followers. This is the interpretation of 21st century Trinitarianism. However, classic Trinitarianism has always been understood as the Father and the Holy Spirit being "persons" in the traditional sense. This can be seen in both ancient and modern paintings of an elderly man with a staff in his hand (Father God), a younger man (God the Son), and either a dove or a faceless person portraying the Holy Spirit. Within the Bible, especially the New Testament, these roles, or titles, interact with each other as persons would, and are able to respond to each other as well as to humanity. Most Christian groups recognize this relationship between the identities. If Oneness acknowledge Jesus as "a person" then obviously God would be "another" person that Jesus would be talking to, hearing, responding to, and addressing in the past, present, and future tense. Otherwise Jesus would be addressing a false idol, or a non-existent being, as "you", and "him". |
A Oneness reply is:
| The words person and manifestation are not mutually exclusive terms. As the completely human manifestation of (i.e., revealing of) the invisible God, Jesus was and is a human person and the manifestation of God. To imply that person and manifestation are mutually exclusive terms is an erroneous statement, and a needless accusation against Oneness. It is a straw-man argument.
Oneness doctrine acknowledges that Jesus was and is human in body, soul, will, emotions, intellect, consciousness, and these functions are in addition to the continued existence of the Divine will, emotions, and consciousness of God, which exist even while God is manifested in Jesus. Thus, there are two wills, consciousnesses, etc. present in the Incarnation, and the Divine will, consciousness, etc., continue as transcendent to the Incarnation, even during it. Some scriptural terms for these two are "Father"/"Son" and "one God"/"one man." This does not take away from Jesus' Deity. To the contrary, it properly ascribes it. To force unbiblical language into the issue, is to force confusion into the debate. The biblical interactions mentioned above (between God the Father and the Son of God) were very genuine, and they do not disprove Oneness, nor prove the Trinity. In fact, since the Trinity argues that the Son is co-equal, co-powerful, co-divine, and co-eternal with the Father and Spirit, then having a human man as Son cry out to the Father for help not only does not prove the Trinity, it is problematic for it. If the Son really is co-powerful and co-equal, then Him praying for help is actually a Trinitarian "hoax" similar to the type accused of Oneness (above). On the other hand, Oneness doctrine acknowledges, and in fact strongly holds to, the presence of "one God" and "one man" in the Incarnation (see 1 Timothy 2:5) and acknowledges, and strongly holds to, the ongoing transcendence of the Father/Spirit, even while He was and ever will be manifested in the Incarnation. That genuine human being (Jesus) was and is a genuine human person. Acknowledging Him as God's exact representation in flesh, or God manifest in flesh, or God revealed as a human, does take away from Him being quite real as a human person (and not just an "elaborate hoax or illusion"). |
[edit] In the Name of...
One essential difference that spawned the Azusa revival and forms the backbone of the theological difference between Oneness and Trinitarian Christianity is who, or what name essentially is preeminent in the identification of God. The issue regarding the name of God is codified in the differences in how Oneness and Trinitarians identify God and Jesus, how the two groups differ in worship, and how water baptisms are performed.
[edit] YHWH: Name of God
Oneness Pentecostals believe that God revealed His name to Moses as a name that would be forever throughout all generations.
"And Moses said to God, Behold, when I come to the Israelites and say to them, The God of your fathers has sent me to you, and they say to me, What is His name? What shall I say to them? {14} And God said to Moses, I AM WHO I AM and WHAT I AM, and I WILL BE WHAT I WILL BE; and He said, You shall say this to the Israelites: I AM has sent me to you! {15} God said also to Moses, This shall you say to the Israelites: The Lord, the God of your fathers, of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob, has sent me to you! This is My [c]name forever, and by this name I am to be remembered to all generations" (Exodus 3:13-15).
"I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob as God Almighty [El-Shaddai], but by My name the LORD [YHWH] I did not make Myself known to them..." (Exodus 6:3).
The YHWH name is derived from the Hebrew for "I am". Scholars call it the "Tetragrammaton". Today it is often pronounced as "Yahweh", although its original pronunciation is not known with any certainty.<ref name="YHWH.pronunciation.not.known.with.certainty">Old Testament Jews were commanded by God (via Moses in the Ten Commandments) to not take the name of the Lord God in vain. Their zealous caution resulted in the decision to not say the name aloud. Furthermore, the ancient Hebrews' written alphabet had only consonants. (Vowel sounds were spoken, but no written vowel markings existed.) The Hebrew monarchic period saw the beginnings of a limited system for writing vowel designations (middle Hebrew). Much later, the Maseretes, a sect of Jewish scribes, developed a full system for writing vowels. However, even then the four consonants of the Lord's name were written not with vowel signs intended to guide them in pronouncing the name, but with vowel signs intended to hint at a less sacred word for God, to remind the reader to say Adonai (Lord) instead of actually saying the sacred name aloud. Thus, the sure and certain pronunciation of this name was lost.</ref> Modern scholars have theorized different pronunciations such as Yehwah, Yahowah, and (more popularly) Yahweh.<ref>Considering all the variations of vowel sounds in the Hebrew language, there are some nine to sixteen possible pronunciations.</ref> However, the original pronunciation may never be known for certain (Egytian and Semetic Cults, Tripolitis, op. cit., p. 49). For this reason, many Oneness Pentecostals believe the name was restored by its inclusion in the name of Jesus, which means (in both Aramaic and Hebrew) "YHWH Savior" (Bloodstains, Ward, p. 57). The ancient Eastern Orthodox Church, while not modalists, also taught that the name of the Father was realized in the name of the Son.
[edit] YHWH: included in Jesus' name
Oneness scholars point out that the YHWH name is included in the name of Jesus.<ref>Some modern groups advocate pronouncing the Lord Jesus' name in some variation of proto-/ancient-, middle-, or late-Hebrew (e.g. Yeshua’, where the apostrophe represents the Hebrew letter Ayin, a guttural sound virtually unpronounceable by today's English-speaking Westerners). Others point out that recent scholarship reveals that Christ spoke Aramaic, and that in northern Judea (which at that time did not pronounce any 'SH' consonant-blend sound) His name would phonetically have been pronounced "YESU" or "EESA." In Greek, due to a lack of one-to-one match in phonetic language tools from the donor language to the receptor language, and due to the fact that in Greek masculine names were required to have an ending 'S' for declension, His name yielded something like "EE-AY-SUS" i.e. "EE-AY-SOOS". His name at birth was the then-current derivation of an ancient name "Joshua" (Moses' successor) and had already been translated, long before Jesus' birth, into both Aramaic and Greek (e.g. the Greek Septuagint). The New Testament was written primarily in Koine Greek (common man's Greek), and later translated into Latin. In Latin translation, His name was rendered as "IESUS". In the legitimate development of the English language (in both type-style and pronunciation) the initial "I" became its own new letter "J". Except for the "J" sound, the ancient pronunciations are not far from the way Jesus name is pronounced in English today.</ref> It is believed by Oneness theologians that the YHWH name of God was not replaced or done away with, but was given, in conjunction with the meaning of salvation, to the Son of Man as the name JESUS thus showing Gods plan of becoming savior being fulfilled in Christ (in the same manner that Abram's name signified the fulfilled covenant promise by fulfilling his name as Abraham). Bible scholars show that the name of Jesus means "YHWH Savior" or "Yahweh is salvation" and signifies fulfillment of God becoming our Savior.
[edit] Implications for water baptism & Soteriology
Both sides of the debate would agree that salvation is a practical matter that God intended to be understood by all. The consummation of Christ's earthly ministry was the "great commission" to His disciples in the final chapters of the synoptic (or parallel) gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke). There is seen one of most debated scriptures relating to water baptism:
| Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: {20} Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen (Matthew 28:19 KJV). |
Oneness believers cross-reference that verse with Acts 2:38 (and others) to show support for their practice of Jesus name baptism, and they believe that an abrogation (a contradiction in scripture) would exist if their view were incorrect:
| Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost (Acts 2:38 KJV). |
Oneness followers teach that the Savior's singular name, "Jesus", meets all three qualifications of Matthew 28:19. According to their view:
- The proper formula for Christian water baptism is to baptize in the name of the one who was crucified for us (1Corinthians 1:11-13) — that is in Jesus name, since Jesus is the one who was crucified for us.
- Converts are to be baptized in the name of the Son (Matthew 28:19), and the Son’s name is Jesus (Matthew 1:21).
- Converts are to be baptized while calling upon Jesus name (see Acts 2:38, Acts 8:16, Acts 10:48, Acts 19:5, and Acts 22:16).
- Being baptized in Jesus name is the proper way to obey Matthew 28:19, because only the name of Jesus singularly qualifies as being the name of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
They say that Jesus can be accepted as the name of the Father because:
- Jesus came in His Father’s name (John 5:43),
- The Father and Son (Jesus) are one (John 10:30),
- It was prophesied that the Lord’s name is to be one (Zechariah 14:9),
- Since the Son’s name is Jesus (Matthew 1:21), and since God the Father is glorified when believers worship Jesus by bowing to Him and confessing Jesus Christ as Lord (Philippians 2:11), then all should recognize that by calling upon the name of Jesus we have access to God the Father, and that, for those alive in the New Covenant, Jesus is the person and name by which God the Father desires to be addressed and accessed.
Similarly, according to their view, Jesus can be accepted as the name of the Holy Spirit because:
- “God is a Spirit” (John 4:24). The terms Spirit and Ghost are synonymous. They hold that all the prior points, about the name of the Father, should apply.
- There is only one Spirit (Ephesians 4:4), and only one Lord (Ephesians 4:5).
- According to Philippians 2:11, Jesus is the Lord.
- According to 2 Corinthians 3:17, “the Lord is that Spirit.”
- While Jesus was describing the Holy Spirit’s arrival to dwell within believers, He said, “I will not leave you comfortless, I will come unto you” (John 14:18).
- The Holy Spirit is “Christ in you, the hope of glory” (Colossians 1:27).
- Regarding Jesus name, scripture states, “Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved” (Acts 4:12).
- Citing 2 John 1:9, they believe that believers who have the one Spirit dwelling in them and who abide in the doctrine of Christ, have both the Father and the Son.
In one of the parallel accounts of the great commission (Luke 24:47), the three titles do not appear. Instead, "repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his [Christ's] name [i.e., the name of Jesus] among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem." Acts 2:38 directly links this mention of "repentance and remission of sins" with repentance and water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins. Oneness believers hold that God’s/Christ’s redemptive name for New Covenant believers is Jesus, and that the command of our Lord in Matthew 28:19-20 refers to baptism in His own name of Jesus. They see support for this view in that His words were carried out by the Apostles, who baptized/commanded baptism in Jesus name in the Book of Acts (see Acts 2:38, Acts 8:16, Acts 10:48, Acts 19:5, Acts 22:16).
According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, the baptismal formula was changed by the Catholic church from the name of Jesus Christ to the words Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, in the second century AD.<ref>Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th ed., vol. 3, pp.365-66</ref> Another source shows that the early church always baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus until the development of the trinity doctrine in the second century.<ref>Canney Encyclopedia of Religion, p. 53</ref> The Catholic church has taken credit for the changes that have been made regarding water baptism.<ref>1913 Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 2, p. 365</ref> The Hastings Encyclopedia of Religion pointed to the time of Justin Martyr for when the change to the Trinitarian formula began, and showed that, previously, Christian baptism was administered using the name of Jesus.<ref>Hastings Encyclopedia of Religion, vol. 2, pp.377-78,389</ref> The same source, in commenting on Acts 2:38, also showed that name was an ancient synonym for person. Payment was always made in the name of some person, referring to ownership. Therefore, one being baptized in Jesus name became His personal property (note 1Corinthians 3:23: "Ye are Christ's").
This portion of the issue may seem trivial to some, but the distinction is important to Oneness people because they believe that water baptism is an essential step of obedient faith for salvation (John 3:3-5, Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38, 1Peter 3:18-22). Some Christian groups seem to convey that saving faith can be separated from obedience, and that one can be saved by "believing" even when important, essential Christian doctrines/rites such as repentance and water baptism are relegated to optional status and essentially ignored and disobeyed.<ref>It is frequently pointed out that the thief on the cross was promised that he would be with Jesus in paradise, even though he was not water baptized and the Holy Spirit baptism was not given until the day of Pentecost, after the thief died. Oneness Pentecostals point to Hebrews 9:11-17 and note that at the time of the promise to the thief, the "Testator" (Jesus) had not yet died and therefore the New Testament salvation was not yet in effect when Christ was alive on the cross. They believe the thief's confession was a unique circumstance and salvation was accordingly granted because he confessed his sin to the "Lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the World".</ref> Some other groups stress the importance of water baptism while considering as trivial the mode (i.e., immersion vs. sprinkling) and formula (i.e., Jesus name vs. three titles). (Oneness people believe the mode should be immersion.) Other soteriological differences are debated as well.<ref name="other.soteriological.differences">For example, the baptism of the Holy Spirit is presumed by Oneness Pentecostal Christians to be accompanied by evidence, including the initial, physical evidence of speaking in tongues as the Spirit gives the sound, and the long-term evidences of the gifts of the Spirit and the fruit of the Spirit. The same event is presumed by non-pentecostal Christians to be innocuous at the time it happens, indiscernible by outward sign or evidence. Also, some reject that the gifts of the Spirit still operate today, although the fruit of the Spirit seems more broadly accepted. Oneness believers understand and teach the saving virtue of Spirit baptism is not in tongues, but rather in the Spirit which gives the utterance to speak. In addition many, but not all, Oneness Pentecostals adhere to strict holiness standards.</ref> An official website of the United Pentecostal Church (a Oneness Pentecostal church organization) has this to say regarding the importance of, mode of, and formula for water baptism.
In summary, after the inception, implementation, and acceptance of the Trinity doctrine, the most commonly-used baptismal formula in most churches has been the Trinitarian formula drawn from Matthew 28:19 ("in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost"). However, Oneness Pentecostals object to the removal of Jesus' name from baptism, and instead baptize "in the name of Jesus Christ" or a similar phraseology such as "in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ" or "in the name of Jesus", while citing the primitive church baptizing in the name of Jesus.
[edit] Common misunderstandings
[edit] Unitarianism is not Oneness
Some confuse the terms Unitarian and Oneness. Although Unitarians and Oneness people are similar in the belief that there is not a plurality of persons in the Godhead, Unitarians believe that Jesus was only a moral authority whereas the Deity and humanity of Jesus Christ are essential to Oneness doctrine.
[edit] Trinitarians and Oneness should seek respectful dialog
Many inaccurate statements are made from both sides of the discussion. Some Oneness Pentecostals have insisted on declaring the inward views/beliefs of Trinitarians (on their behalf), in claiming they are secretly or subconsciously following a tri-theistic belief. While a few Trinitarians might warrant such an accusation (e.g. Finis Jennings Dake, author of a well-known Bible commentary, indicated a belief in three divine bodies, three divine souls, and three divine spirits), the vast majority do not believe or even consider the belief in three gods. The body of the Trinitarian community does not commune with believers such as Phineas Dake. Such accusations can seem to imply a deeper charge that Trinitarians are working either in ignorance of, or under the thumb of, polytheistic forces (whether spiritual or earthly), in order to falsify the truth. These accusations ignore the sincere statements of Trinitarians given in definition of their beliefs throughout the ages, thereby ignorantly fighting against a perspective that many Trinitarians simply do not have.
The reverse also occurs. Trinitarians have sometimes decided what belief systems to attribute to groups such as the ancient Sabellians or modern Oneness Pentecostals, and/or have propagated (on behalf of Oneness people) misleading or even deceptive doctrines and doctrinal titles, such as Monophysitism (the accusation that Oneness people believe Jesus has only one nature; Divine nature), and Patripassianism (the accusation that Oneness people believe God the Father suffered and died on the cross). While a very few Oneness people in extreme cases might warrant such accusations, most do not.
It would be prudent for each to realize that, on both sides, from individual to individual, there is a vast degree of variation in biblical knowledge, intellect/intelligence, wisdom, etc., and to avoid labeling or falsely accusing others. Instead, each should seek to judiciously discover what a given individual actually (inwardly) believes, and then dialog from there, in a non-confrontational way that seeks to avoid personal attack.
[edit] Followers of Oneness Pentecostalism
Some of the better-known persons associated with Oneness Pentecostals are Steve and Annie Chapman, Tonéx, David & the Giants, Lee Greenwood, The Katinas, Phillips, Craig and Dean, Tanya Goodman Sykes, Mark Hanby, Gary Oliver, Tommy Tenney and T.D. Jakes (although the strength of each person's present identification with the movement may be uncertain or disputed). Because of their elevated status within Christendom, many of these individuals have been accepted by Trinitarians without awareness of their doctrinal positions or associations.
Elvis Presley, the well known entertainer of early rock and roll, frequented Oneness Pentecostal Churches as well as Trinitarian Assemblies of God Churches and it is claimed that from these sources he picked up the rythym and lively antics he incorporated into his performances. It is reported that Presley was baptized in the AOG church, but was later rebaptized in the name of Jesus Christ by a Oneness Pentecostal in Tennessee. [3]
[edit] References
[edit] See also
[edit] External links
[edit] Articles, indexes, & other resources
[edit] Favoring Oneness view
- Institute for Biblical Studies (Index of Oneness Pentecostal theological articles)
- The Oneness of God (Book by Oneness scholar David K. Bernard, J.D., part of Series in Pentecostal Theology, Volume 1, freely available online)
- Testimonies of Jesus Christ by Oneness Pentecostals
- The Voice of the Pastor Study And The Word Became Flesh
[edit] Opposing Oneness view
- The Pentecost Incident (Use of tongues in Bible during the Pentecost)
- Speaking in Tongues (Use of tongues)
- Oneness Pentecostal theology, also known as Jesus Only theology (What is Oneness Pentecostal Theology?)
[edit] Indexes of articles both for and against Oneness
- Oneness Versus Trinity Links to various writings from one side of the issue.
[edit] Other
- My Views on the Godhead - Christianity Today Magazine Bishop T. D. Jakes responds to Christianity Today article, "Apologetics Journal Criticizes Jakes."
[edit] Oneness Pentecostal Groups
[edit] A few Oneness organizations & churches in North America
- Apostolic Assembly of the Faith in Christ Jesus
- The Associated Brotherhood of Christians
- Institute for Biblical Studies Oneness Pentecostal theological web site
- Pentecostal Assemblies of the World
- United Pentecostal Church International
- Assemblies of the Lord Jesus Christ
- International Church of Jesus Christ (headquarters in Columbus, Ohio)
- Apostolic Brethren (headquarters in Columbus, Ohio)
- Christ Church (home church to Steve and Annie Chapman, The Katinas, Lee Greenwood, Tanya Goodman Sykes, who have all made strong ties with Trinitarians)
- The Church of Jesus Christ
- First Pentecostal Church of Tulsa, OK, USA
- New Life Worship Center, Bossier City, LA, USA.
- The Apostolic Church of Barberton, OH, USA
- Abundant Life Tabernacle, Fort Wayne, IN, USA
- First Apostolic Church of Rome, GA, USA
- Apostolics of Taylor, MI, USA
- Fresh Anointing Apostolic Church, Fredericktown, MO, USA
- The Church of Jesus Christ, Gleason, TN, USA
- Church of Jesus Christ of Prophecy (a.k.a. Mercy Tabernacle, Headquarters: Benton, Tennessee)
- Antioch Church of Jesus Christ, Athens, TN, USA
- The Apostolic Church of the Faith in Jesus Christ
- The Bible Way Church of Our Lord Jesus Christ World Wide
- The Church of Our Lord Jesus Christ of the Apostolic Faith
- The Apostolic Overcoming Holy Church of God
- Liberty Harvest Ministries In Jesus Inc., Texas
- Evangelistic Churches of Christ of the Apostolic Faith - Apostle Lymus Johnson, Overseer
- House of God
- Holy Church of the Living God
- The Pillar and the Ground of the Truth
- The House of Prayer for All People (Sabbath Keeping Apostolic Church)
- The Great Commission Ministry Church of the Lord Jesus Christ. Kingdom of Bahrain and Angeles City, Philippines
- Biblical Apostolic Church of Borger Texas... www.acts2.us
[edit] Other countries
Oneness Pentecostal groups with headquarters in other countries include the United Pentecostal Church of Colombia, an indigenous church and the largest non-Catholic church in the country; the United Pentecostal Church of Australia; the Apostolic Church of the Faith in Christ Jesus, with headquarters in Mexico; the Oneness Pentecostal movement in the former U.S.S.R.; and the True Jesus Church ([4]), an indigenous church founded by Chinese believers on the mainland but whose headquarters was later moved to Taiwan. They claim a membership of 1.5 million constituents in 39 countries. There are many smaller organizations (approximately 130 worldwide), independent churches, and charismatic fellowships that are Oneness Pentecostal in doctrine.
In existence also is the Apostolic World Christian Fellowship which has been trying to unite all Oneness Pentecostal denominations in existence through a loose fellowship.
