What about the Oneness Pentecostals?

FerventDisciple said:

Just as concerning to me is their teaching that one must be baptized in the name of Jesus and speak in tongues to be saved. I find that very hard to reconcile with the position that they are preaching the same gospel.

While I don't believe one must have a full theological grasp of the Trinity in order to be saved, I think the ground they are standing is very unstable.

Am I in the wrong here with my reservations? Some people close to me have been having a lot of fellowship with these or similar churches lately. Should I be concerned?

Click to expand...

Let me put it this way; if anyone tried to present the Oneness position regarding the Trinity on this or most forums then they would be quickly jumped on by forum members and moderators.

They are certainly Born Again but their many odd doctrines have kept them apart from mainstream Pentecost since the split of (1914?).

FerventDisciple said:

I know this will send a shiver down your spine Biblicist:

Many of them are also KJV Only.

Click to expand...

Am I surprised that a group that is based on so much man-made tradition relies on the antiquated KJV, not really. In fact I would expect that most odd groups would be KJO types, it simply goes with the turf.

I should state that not all KJV users are KJO's as they may be using it simply because their congregation does or that they were raised on the KJV in their youth but whenever a group says that it is God's version then we need to quickly find the nearest exit door.

Probably harder for Modalists to have faith and receive grace. Could be a good opportunity for you to rediscover the Trinity if your faith is strong and you like debate. Motivating to read Augustine bishop of Hippo and other classics and to talk with elders, study scripture and essays like, The Blessed Three in One by Alan Morrison, an evangelical English Jew but who opposes Charismatic teachings. Leads onto maybe some current theology, church history, the search for the opposite of St Paul's warning, of, "Strange New Teachings". Looking for the familiar old, the apostolic essence and apostolic succession. Polycarp and Mark to bishop Augustine at which time all the different types of heresy were addressed. I think the early church at the time of the invention of infant baptism had a streak of austerity in it regarding God, and how to gain eternal life.

We see life in the first five centuries of Christendom, then politics and we lose Constantinople. Both Constantine and the earlier were problem turning points. But life or vive, and revival history! It turns out there old testament revivals like in Genesis calling on God's name, and in Isaiah's day. In the early church and after there were saints' revivals, like Saint Francis, who spoke with the pope. After Martin Luther some of the revivals were not Catholic. Like the Moravians and John Wesley.

Oneness Pentecostals are a break away from the Azusa St revival the latter founding the Pentecostal Assemblies of God.

Good luck to you.

FerventDisciple said:

While I don't believe one must have a full theological grasp of the Trinity in order to be saved, I think the ground they are standing on is very unstable.

Click to expand...

That pretty much sums up my view on Oneness Pentecostals, in a nutshell.

I do also feel, however, that I don't mind accepting them as a Brother or Sister in Christ as long as they have genuinely accepted Jesus as their savior. Then I leave it up to God to correct other peoples' theology, unless I am in a specific circumstance in which I feel He is leading me to share.

From what I understand, however, there are a large number of Oneness Pentecostals who would not afford me the same consideration; and would consider me to be un-saved because of not being part of their group. That makes even social "fellowship" quite a lot harder.

I think they cross the line when they actively deny the Father and Spirit. If I'm not mistaken, they refuse to acknowledge or even worship them as Jesus is everything to them. Perhaps I'm wrong, but from what I've heard and seen, those who deny the Father and Spirit are in danger of condemnation like any unbeliever.

I don't see the problem. Nobody understands it. Who thinks Jesus was one Person while on earth? He was three Persons in one Body, God with us, called Eternal Father according to Isaiah 9:6 and not only God the Son with us. I guess most saw Him as one Person. They don't deny Jesus, so they don't deny the Father.

Of course they don't deny the father...more important things to concern ourselves with.

mrhappy3 said:

Of course they don't deny the father...more important things to concern ourselves with.

Click to expand...

I based my statement off the position that Jesus is the Father and Spirit. Seems as though they deny him, but I could be wrong.

PersephonesTear said:

there are a large number of Oneness Pentecostals who would not afford me the same consideration; and would consider me to be un-saved because of not being part of their group.

Click to expand...

BINGO!!! Oneness groups have all different levels of rabidity.

To the "Doctrinally sound" hard-line segment, since I was Baptized in the "three titles" (exclusive of other considerations), I was NEVER saved, My entire Christian life has been a cruel farce, the "Tongues" I speak are false, and i'm TOAST when I die.

Not anything I'll lose any sleep over, of course. It's just "THeology".

The Oneness groups try to use the terminology of "three manifestations" of the One Person. This is an inadequate attempt to explain references to the three persons in the Godhead. There are constituent elements of a person found in each of the three persons of the Godhead. The Father and the Holy Spirit are never spoken of as "manifestations." Only Jesus is described as God "manifest in the flesh." (I Timothy 3:16)

If the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are simply manifestations, why is there such a painstaking care to distinguish them one from another in the Scriptures?

Can one manifestation be said to love another?.

If only manifestations, and the reason for the manifestations ceases to exist, why are they said to exist forever individually?

Why would One manifestation sit at the right hand of Another?

Why would One manifestation need to remove a book from the hand of the Other?

The other term used by some in the Oneness group is PERSONALITIES. The Trinity are three different persons. Yet, the Oneness camp seeks to use the term to refer to three personalities of the same Person.

This is unacceptable because Webster's definition includes- "alternating, double, or dual personality is a condition of mental dissociation in which one individual shows in alternation two different characters." In other words, as in our own day, anyone exhibiting different personalities at different times is thought to be crazy.


A split personality is an abnormality. It is a instability. God is not a schizophrenic, or have a Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde personality.

In these types of disassociate personalities, there is a definite difference in traits and characteristics. Yet, in the Trinity, they are all loving, joyful, merciful, etc.

A true personality requires a person. Unless the Father, the Son, and the Spirit each were persons, They could not be true personalities.

The proper ideas is that they are three separate Persons. The Oneness group shy away from the definition of a "person". When pinned down, they say "'person' can be applied to each of the three manifestations."

Since the Father, the Son, and the Spirit each have the same traits as the Others, we have to admit that Each is, without need of the Others, a Person.

I always see doctrinal matters as... what happens if you pray with someone and they genuinely want to follow Christ. But Christianity is illegal where they are and they have no access to the bible. What doctrines would they come up with...??

We can't judge people bc their doctrines are wrong. We can only judge by how they treat the truth when it is plain to see. The Trinity is sometimes a difficult doctrine. I know for years after being a mormon, it was very difficult for me to understand God as being a Triune God... eventually the Lord explained it but I was saved before I understood it.

If they are trying to be faithful to scripture, I think the Lord is looking on hearts... most churches only give lip service to the Holy Spirit.

Its a good thing theres no IQ test before you become a Christian. You don't have to know how to read and can be dumb as a door knob....

God bless, andrea

Jesus is called, "The Eternal Father", better worded for meaning, "The Father of Eternity". God who created all space, matter and time. I AM THAT I AM who is outside and above time, and who entered humanity to save us. Fully God, fully man.

So Jesus is the author of time, the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. Not the same person as God the Father.

Biblicist2 said:

Let me put it this way; if anyone tried to present the Oneness position regarding the Trinity on this or most forums then they would be quickly jumped on by forum members and moderators.

Click to expand...

I agree, that corrective action would most likely result as this forum is for Trinitarians and not for Oneness believers or any other kind of unorthodox theology discussion.

No one should be trying to present the Oneness position here in this forum as Oneness Pentecostalism is considered 'unorthodox theology'.

From the Unorthodox Doctrinal Discussion forum:
http://www.christianforums.com/t7758825/#post63568632

So this thread is in essance a group patting themselves on the back while those who hold such a teaching to be true can not defend their view....seems to lack in our command to streangthen the faith of our fellow believers.

rick357 said:

So this thread is in essance a group patting themselves on the back while those who hold such a teaching to be true can not defend their view....seems to lack in our command to streangthen the faith of our fellow believers.

Click to expand...

This forum is not the place to present and debate unorthodox theology (Oneness Pentacostalism). This forum is designated for Trinitarians.

If one wants to debate unorthodox theology, they should do it in the Unorthodox Doctrinal Discussion forum or the Formal Debate forum.

http://www.christianforums.com/f130/

http://www.christianforums.com/f1135/

mrhappy3 said:

The hard liners who preach Acts 2v38 kicked out the former doctrine that said Repentance was enough to be saved and baptism and reception of the Holy Ghost with tongues was to come after. In 1992 the westburg vote - made it illegal to preach it the old way- thousands of ministers resigned. SO its not as cut and dried as we think.

Click to expand...

If you feel that it is 'not as cut and dried as we think' then this should be on the unorthodox forum for debate... but here, we find it very cut and dried, very certain... and it is established as undebateable here...

rick357 said:

So this thread is in essance a group patting themselves on the back while those who hold such a teaching to be true can not defend their view....seems to lack in our command to streangthen the faith of our fellow believers.

Click to expand...

They have a place to defend their views, on the unorthodox forum... Here, it is established and sure... We are not here for unorthodox debate.

I John 5:7
"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost; and these three are one."

This last verse in I John is condemned by the Oneness groups as uninspired. They claim to be the strongest defenders of the Word, and yet, they want to remove passages which disagree with them.

The true understanding of any doctrine will be supported by all Scripture. When any group needs to discount, remove, or ignore any passage... there is something wrong with their doctrine.

In the Scripture, the use of the word "one" is more of "unity" than it is of number. For instance, let us examine Deuteronomy 6:4:
"Hear of Israel, the Lord our God is one..."

The word translated "one" is "achid" which means "a united one." The Lord could have used the word "yachid" which means "an absolute one", but He chose to use the other word.

This is because the "Elohim" (plural of "El", which means 'Almighty God') is one in unity of mind and purpose.

Some other examples of the words "achid" and "yachid" are these:

Genesis 1 says that the "evening and the morning" were "one (achid) day."

Genesis 2:24 tells us that two partners were married by God and became "one flesh." This is also "achid."
Genesis 22:2 shows Abraham being commanded to "take thy son, thine only son..." This is the word "yachid" for it was the absolute one son that was referred to...

Oneness groups have committed the same sin as mentioned in Jeremiah 23:36:
"For ye have perverted the words of the living God, of the Lord of hosts, our God."

The Hebrew letter 'schin' is the initial letter of the word "Shaddai." It had been taken by the Jews to represent the divine existence. It is composed of three perpendicular lines, with one to unite them. In pronouncing the priestly benediction of Numbers 6:24-26, the rabbis today still lift their hands in blessing over the people. The hands are held with the fingers of each hand depicting three strokes joined together as in the letter 'schin'.

Judaic monotheism has now become Christian monotheism. We believe in One God, a united One, made up of three personalities Who are united in will, mind, and purpose so much that it is often hard to distinguish between Them.

Oneness exponents might expect smooth sailing for their principal doctrine, if the Bible only contained their favorite scriptures. But there are numerous Scriptures that indicate a plurality in the Godhead.




"The good ship 'Oneness' was barely launched when she ran aground on the shoal of 'Plurality'"
Carl Brumback