Are Modalists (Oneness Pentecostals) saved?

[sicksince]

Are Modalists (Oneness Pentecostals) saved?

Yes, they are saved. The doctrine of the Trinity is a great mystery. Just because someone has a little bit different understanding of that doctrine doesn't mean they aren't saved.

 

[Rev Randy]

Yes, they are saved. The doctrine of the Trinity is a great mystery. Just because someone has a little bit different understanding of that doctrine doesn't mean they aren't saved.

I won't address the saved part as that's not within my area of expertise but best left to God.
Now I'd say denying the trinity is not even close to "a different understanding' it's denying it outright. That is a whole different doctrine not a different understanding of the same doctrine.

 

[sicksince]

I won't address the saved part as that's not within my area of expertise but best left to God.
Now I'd say denying the trinity is not even close to "a different understanding' it's denying it outright. That is a whole different doctrine not a different understanding of the same doctrine.

They believe that God is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Their interpretation of how he becomes the 3 in 1 is just a bit different. So what's the beef? We are human beings; can any of us really be expected to fully understand this mystery?

 

[Gregory Thompson]

if you say so it is true to you

if every one agrees with you .. it's true to everyone ..

but may God be true and every man a liar .

 

[Knee V]

if you say so it is true to you

if every one agrees with you .. it's true to everyone ..

but may God be true and every man a liar .

I'm reminded of a Family Guy scene. It is Charles Manson in a jail cell watching TV, saying, "If I haven't seen it, it's new to me."

But I absolutely reject the popular notion of christian relativism. There is one God and there is one Christ. If God can use the church to assemble the Scriptures, then He can use that same church to defend the true knowledge of Himself through her councils. The god of modalism is not the God that was revealed to us in Christ. Period.

 

[Rev Randy]

They believe that God is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Their interpretation of how he becomes the 3 in 1 is just a bit different. So what's the beef? We are human beings; can any of us really be expected to fully understand this mystery?

Not quite accurate. Not three in one but one completely only using different names or titles. The error is that it has Jesus in the garden praying to Himself and ascending to Himself while remaining as the Holy Ghost.
The beef is that it's a heresy and a completely false teaching denying the very creeds of the Church.

A difference in the same doctrine is like my Church and Rome concerning the filioque. Both are triune but differ on the procession of the Holy Spirit.
You are very correct that we can not fully understand that which is not created but always was. But we can come to a correct agreement in brevity and without great and exacting details. I would submit the Creed as such.

Nicene Creed

"I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds; God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God; begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made.

Who, for us men for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the virgin Mary, and was made man; and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate; He suffered and was buried; and the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures; and ascended into heaven, and sits on the right hand of the Father; and He shall come again, with glory, to judge the quick and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end.

And I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of Life; who proceeds from the Father; who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; who spoke by the prophets.

And I believe one holy catholic and apostolic Church. I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins; and I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen."

This is the Christian faith.

 

[Rev Randy]

I'm reminded of a Family Guy scene. It is Charles Manson in a jail cell watching TV, saying, "If I haven't seen it, it's new to me."

But I absolutely reject the popular notion of christian relativism. There is one God and there is one Christ. If God can use the church to assemble the Scriptures, then He can use that same church to defend the true knowledge of Himself through her councils. The god of modalism is not the God that was revealed to us in Christ. Period.

Now that post makes too much sense to ignore.

 

[SwordFall]

I won't address the saved part as that's not within my area of expertise but best left to God.
Now I'd say denying the trinity is not even close to "a different understanding' it's denying it outright. That is a whole different doctrine not a different understanding of the same doctrine.

When taking into account the misleading, though true, notion that Jesus is God, it's not too hard for others to make modalism the simple theological resolve.

They have a different understanding of the metaphysical presence of God, but beyond that, there is nothing of modalism that should limit the understanding of God's nature over a trinitarian.

As such, I don't believe salvation or judgment is even relevant to these doctrines, let alone a condition of favor.
It's denying the explicit Deity of Christ where things start to get ugly.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Yes, they are saved. The doctrine of the Trinity is a great mystery. Just because someone has a little bit different understanding of that doctrine doesn't mean they aren't saved.

They don't have a different understanding of the Trinity, they deny the Trinity.

The doctrine of the Trinity is actually rather clear, that part isn't the mystery. One God, three Hypostases: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. There is Father, there is Son, there is Holy Spirit. The Father is uncreated and unbegotten, the Son is uncreated and only-begotten, the Holy Spirit is uncreated and proceeding.

The differences between over the Filioque is a "little bit different" understanding of the Trinity, whether we say and what we mean by either saying the Spirit proceeds from the Father only or from the Father and the Son. That's a different view of the Trinity.

The Oneness position is to deny the Trinity altogether, and instead state that the one God, Jesus, wears three masks. Jesus the Father wearing the mask of "Son" in the human body of Jesus, Jesus wearing the mask of the Holy Spirit dwelling in us. Oneness proponents say that when speaking of God in heaven that's the Father, when speaking of God veiled in humanity that's the Son, when speaking of God dwelling in us that's the Holy Spirit.

That's not the Trinity, it's just a slightly different version of the ancient heresy of Modalistic Monarchianism, also known as Sabellianism after its chief proponent Sabellius.

Sabellius taught the monarchy of God the Father (hence Monarchianism), this Father placed His divinity into a human person, Jesus, and thus "masked" Himself as Son on earth, in suffering on the cross etc. This same Father poured out Himself as Spirit on Pentecost, and this is Holy Spirit, thus "masked" Himself as Spirit in us. But it's the Father simply acting in different capacities or "modes" (Hence Modalistic Monarchianism). Another term to describe this heresy was Patripassionism, that is "the Father suffers" speaking of the Father suffering in the humanity of Jesus on the cross. Because Jesus, the Son, was simply the Father in human guise.

The Oneness position, just like the Sabellian one of old, is objectively heretical and is just as much alien to the orthodox Christian position as the view of the Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, Christadelphians, Unitarians, and non-Christian religions such as Muslims, Jews, and Bahai's.

Does that damn them? That's not my place.

Does it place them firmly outside of the historic Christian confession and faith of Christ's Church? Yes, without question.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[sicksince]

They believe that one God is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit just as Trinitarians do. We're just splitting hairs here and griping over nothing...it's just semantics. God doesn't expect us to understand his divine nature lest the passage would not say, "Great is the mystery of Godliness for God was manifest in the flesh."

 

[Lion King]

The Oneness position, just like the Sabellian one of old, is objectively heretical and is just as much alien to the orthodox Christian position as the view of the Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, Christadelphians, Unitarians, and non-Christian religions such as Muslims, Jews, and Bahai's.

Does that damn them? That's not my place.

Does it place them firmly outside of the historic Christian confession and faith of Christ's Church? Yes, without question.

-CryptoLutheran

It's actually quite amusing how some of you guys claim that the Oneness church are not part of the historical Christianity circle because of the heretical teachings they hold. But at the same time, consider the Roman catholics, Lutherans, Eastern orthodox, Baptists, SDA etc as valid members of Christianity, though their doctrines are different as night and day.

How does that work exactly?

 

[Gregory Thompson]

I'm reminded of a Family Guy scene. It is Charles Manson in a jail cell watching TV, saying, "If I haven't seen it, it's new to me."

But I absolutely reject the popular notion of christian relativism. There is one God and there is one Christ. If God can use the church to assemble the Scriptures, then He can use that same church to defend the true knowledge of Himself through her councils. The god of modalism is not the God that was revealed to us in Christ. Period.

I'm reminded of the surfin bird episode of family guy

i have yet to find a school of christian thought that demonstrates that it is at the place of the truth .. so i continue with "may God be true and every man a liar"

 

[ViaCrucis]

They believe that one God is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit just as Trinitarians do. We're just splitting hairs here and griping over nothing...it's just semantics. God doesn't expect us to understand his divine nature lest the passage would not say, "Great is the mystery of Godliness for God was manifest in the flesh."

It's not splitting hairs.

Trinitarians believe the Son is Eternal God.

Oneness believe the Son is just God in a human suit.

Trinitarians believe that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are distinct "Persons", actual realities; not just masks worn by God.

Oneness believe Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are just different ways to look at the same God, like different masks worn by God.

Trinitarians believe that Jesus is only the Son.

Oneness believe that Jesus is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

No, it's not splitting hairs.

This is the difference between Orthodoxy and Heresy.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[ViaCrucis]

It's actually quite amusing how some of you guys claim that the Oneness church are not part of the historical Christianity circle because of the heretical teachings they hold. But at the same time, consider the Roman catholics, Lutherans, Eastern orthodox, Baptists, SDA etc as valid members of Christianity, though their doctrines are different as night and day.

How does that work exactly?

It may have something to do with the fact that we confess the Creed of our fathers, the ancient catholic, and apostolic faith, and aren't going off on our own to play DIY religion as some are wont to do.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[By Faith Alone]

It's not splitting hairs.

Trinitarians believe the Son is Eternal God.

Oneness believe the Son is just God in a human suit.

Trinitarians believe that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are distinct "Persons", actual realities; not just masks worn by God.

Oneness believe Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are just different ways to look at the same God, like different masks worn by God.

Trinitarians believe that Jesus is only the Son.

Oneness believe that Jesus is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

No, it's not splitting hairs.

This is the difference between Orthodoxy and Heresy.

-CryptoLutheran

"Legion" outnumber Jesus but were sent up the creek without a boat.

 

[Lion King]

It may have something to do with the fact that we confess the Creed of our fathers, the ancient catholic, and apostolic faith, and aren't going off on our own to play DIY religion as some are wont to do.

-CryptoLutheran

No offense, but how are you not playing your own "DIY religion" when your own teachings contradict each other. For example, the Lutherans believe in faith alone, while their "counterparts", the Romans Catholics consider such a teaching to be heresy.

Now here comes the interesting part; both the Lutherans and Roman Catholics profess to be led by the Holy-Spirit. Is our God schizo then? Does He teach one congregation one thing, and another, a completely different thing?

It seems pretty clear to me that one (or both of you), is telling a lie.

By the way, your last sentence is kinda hypocritical, especially when you consider how Luther cut himself off from the Roman Catholic church to go play his own pope.

 

[Knee V]

"Legion" outnumber Jesus but were sent up the creek without a boat.

?

 

[Frogster]

"Legion" outnumber Jesus but were sent up the creek without a boat.

?

 

[pshun2404]

I ask this because I see some sincere believers like bishop TD jakes who has a great love for God. Although he believes the Trinity doctrine now, he used to believe in the doctrine that God isnt 3 separate persons but one Person who manifests himself in 3 different ways.

Would they still be saved even though they misinterpret the God Head?

You should look up the term "Godhead" (used only once in all of scripture)...it merely means the Divinity or Deity...it says nothing about numbers of persons...

The Bible teaches that the one YHVH is the Father, the same YHVH is the Son, the same YHVH is the Spirit...but there are clear distinctions between the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit...only the Son became Jesus (who was MADE a little lower than the angels)...therefore Jesus cannot be the Father nor the Spirit, thus their doctrine is either false or in severe error thus certainly not correct or true.

Paul

 

[WisdomTree]

"Legion" outnumber Jesus but were sent up the creek without a boat.

?