Refuting modalism

[xapis]

We have old heresies in new clothes popping up everywhere these days. And perhaps one of the most easily masked is the non-Trinitarian heresy of modalism. This one is really hitting close to home for me now as I am having to deal with a new "Apostolic" church plant just across the road from my house. Sadly, some of my neighbors are being sucked into their trap... contributing money... allowing them to hold meetings in their homes, etc. One dear old fellow, 94 years old and presumably a Christian for most of those years, was recently re-baptized and is now saying that he doesn't believe he was truly saved until recently. He apparently believes this because his doctrine wasn't right before (but he believes it is now that he's been taught this church's doctrine).

I'm getting this info from a friend whose sister has been attending their meetings. This same friend sat in on one of their meetings last night and said it gave him a headache and made him sick to his stomach to sit there and listen to all the lies and misinterpretations of Scripture being propagated.

Of all the silly doctrines they teach, the most dangerous (and seemingly most central) is that of modalism. So, my request for you guys is, first and foremost, to pray that this farce of a church never gets off the ground. The fewer people they can deceive the better. But odds are that I will eventually run into these folks and I want to be able to give a thorough refutation of this spurious doctrine.

If any of you guys can pass on some online resources or some book recommendations on this topic it would be greatly appreciated.

Here's an example of what I'd be up against. They insist that the only valid formula to recite in baptism is "in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins" (Acts 2:38). They say that the Mat. 28:19 formula ("in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost) is not to be recited directly because those are Jesus' titles. They point to the fact that it says "in the name" and they believe Jesus is that name. Of course, this stems from their modalistic beliefs.

Some of what they teach as supporting evidence for modalism is very easy to refute. But some of it, on the surface, isn't quite as easy. I can just imagine the fruitless tit-for-tat one might have with them on something like the aforementioned baptism formula.



Thanks in advance.
-Lane

 

[mlqurgw]

You might ask them how it is that all three Persons of the Godhead were present at the baptism of Jesus.

 

[david01]

I think the baptism of Christ question is really excellent. However, in my limited dealings with members of the Apostolic church, I have found them to be utterly and completely unwilling to engage in any discussion. One night I was doing some street evangelism when a car drove up and four women came flying out of it. Two each pounced upon the two of us and began hammering us with their doctrine, asking rhetorical questions and not allowing us to interject a single word. After their volley, they ran back to the car and drove off.

Make no mistake, modalism is a heresy and these folks are as difficult as any other cult.

 

[MesaMike]

I used to be a United Pentecostal (a long time ago...), but I escaped from that pseudo-christian cult after listening to quite a bit of Dr. Walter Martin ("The Bible Answer Man") on the radio, and it finally sunk in that the beliefs were just stupid, and VERY legalistic and oppressive (don't be caught with a TV in your house, or be found at a bowling alley!), and that's just not the Gospel.

You will find reasoning with these people very difficult, and if you do get a few good salvos in, they will most likely just start avoiding you, so that they don't become talked out of the truth by your reprobate use of logical sleight-of-hand (it's very easy to be fooled by it, you know).

You might want to try to have a discussion about what "In the name of ..." means. "Jesus" seems to be a magical incantation for them, and nothing you do is effective (especially baptism) unless you say, "In the name of Jesus", out loud, of course. I chuckle whenever I imagine a cop chasing down a crook, shouting, "Stop, in the name of the law!", and the crook turns around and demands, "Well just what IS the name of the law?", as if the cop has no authority at all if he doesn't provide an actual "name."

 

[GrinningDwarf]

I think a good book is James White's The Forgotten Trinity. I picked it up when a Christian neighbor was getting into Gwen Shamblin's Weigh-Down Workshop...and then began swallowing her anti-Trinitarianism, as well. (These folks were into the prosperity stuff as well...maybe they were doomed!! )

 

[xapis]

Thanks for the responses so far, guys. Keep 'em coming.

However, in my limited dealings with members of the Apostolic church, I have found them to be utterly and completely unwilling to engage in any discussion.

This must be common with them. My friend actually invited the pastor to sit down and talk with me some time but he said he was very apprehensive after he told him I was an OPC member and a religion major in college.

My friend also noted that anytime he asked the pastor questions or said anything the guy disagreed with him on, he got defensive and recoiled to repeating the same few arguments over and over again. This is a typical response of cult leaders.

I would love just to go knock on the guy's door and tell him to take his heresy elsewhere but I don't think that's the right thing to do. Hopefully, God will soon expose them for what they are to our little community.

 

[cajunhillbilly]

I had a friend in college named David Goodin. He and his father were both UPC members. In fact his dad was the pastor of the church. I spent hours talking to him and just asking simple questions about what a verse meant and so on. i then moved on in life and he did too. A few years ago I founjd out he had left that church and joined the CMA church, a solid Biblical denomination. In fact he is now the pastor of the c CMA church in Morgantown, WV. He told me recently that my constant calling him to task on his supposed prooof texts finally drove him to reexamine his beliefs and led him to denounce modalism for the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity. His dad also joined the CMA church shortly before his (the dad's) death and going to be with the Lord. I can't claim all the credit, though. He said his meeting several Trinitarians that had such an abundance of the fruit of the Spirit in their lifes also contributed to his change of opinion. It just takes lots of time and patience.