Serious Question: Is Modalism a Damnable Heresy or just a Heresy ?

[Call me Nic]

Again, "Everlasting Father" is used in a Messianic passage which would apply to a Messianic attribute. It could as easily mean Messiah is Everlasting Father of the Kingdom. It could also mean Author of Eternal Life as Messiah lays down His life for the sheep.

One could argue that, but the key word is "everlasting." There is only one everlasting Father (i.e. the one who has always and will always be the Father). If Jesus is called the "everlasting Father," than that is indicative of the title of his position, especially since it comes after the title, "the mighty God." Either throw both those titles and their authority out, or have them both mean what they say, you can't have it in between.

 

[oldrunner]

Or any of the other errors too for that fact:

Adoptionism - God granted Jesus powers and then adopted him as a Son.

• Albigenses - Reincarnation and two gods: one good and other evil.

• Apollinarianism - Jesus' divine will overshadowed and replaced the human.

• Arianism - Jesus was a lesser, created being.

• Docetism - Jesus was divine but only seemed to be human.

• Donatism - Validity of sacraments depends on character of the minister.

• Eutychianism - Jesus finite human nature is swallowed up in His infinite divine nature.

• Gnosticism - Dualism of good and bad and special knowledge for salvation.

• Kenosis - Jesus gave up some divine attributes while on earth.

• Marcionism - An evil God of the O.T., good God of the N.T. 11, books in the Canon

• Modalism - God is one person in three modes.

• Monarchianism - God is one person.

• Monophysitism - Jesus had only one nature: divine.

• Nestorianism - Jesus was two persons.

• Patripassionism - The Father suffered on the cross.

• Pelagianism - Man is unaffected by the fall and can keep all of God's laws.

• Semi-Pelagianism - Man and God cooperate to achieve man's salvation.

• Socinianism - Denial of the Trinity. Jesus is a deified man.

• Subordinationism - The Son is lesser than the Father in essence and or attributes.

• Tritheism - The Trinity is really three separate gods.

Nice links! I've been going here: https://www.gotquestions.org/Modalistic-
Monarchianism.html

To A Thinker: Paul did tell Titus to reject a heretic after rebuking him. (Titus 3:-10-11, Gal 5:20, 2nd Pet. 2:1). If you look up the Greek or use another translation. It's someone who causes division, and you read the context- that false teachers are in view is pretty clear.

The point is, if we do not change our views when we are exposed to what is clearly the truth, we were probably never a true follower of Jesus. The Holy Spirit guides us into all truth, and all these different heresies back in the day are just repackaged for today's generation; in Oneness, Watchtower, and Mormon, doctrine.

 

[Call me Nic]

Actually, it says

"He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest:" - Luke 1:32a. That's future tense too, but it doesn't change the fact that he is eternally called the Son of God.

 

[redleghunter]

Then why does Jesus say that when a person looked upon him, they saw the Father as well? (John 14:7).

Because there is only One God. Thought I made that clear in the other post. The Father is God, Jesus Christ the Son of God (God the Son) is God, The Holy Spirit is God---One God.

Otherwise, you start delving into polytheism by dividing and separating the power and functions of the different "persons," even though the Bible clearly teaches that Christ is the same Creator that the Father is (Colossians 1:16-17). You can't have more than one Creator.

Colossians 1:16-17 actually confirms the Deity of Jesus Christ.

Then you are saying that Jesus is not equal with the Father, which is blasphemy (Philippians 2:5-6). You can't say that God the Father and God the Son are both equally God that are inseparable and then claim that Jesus dying on the cross is not the equivalent to the Father dying on the cross.

Nope did not suggest that at all. I responded that the Father was not crucified. The simple answer of Who died on the cross is what the Bible reveals----Jesus Christ.

 

[redleghunter]

The thing is when you start saying "Three persons," you're adding to scripture, because no where in the Bible does it ever say that God is made up of three persons. It just says record-bearers, which doesn't vindicate a Trinitarian. The reason is because in 1 John 5:7, it says that the three (who bear record in heaven) are one (altogether one who bears record in heaven).

Then I gather you have no theological standings on Holy Scriptures? The very height of theology is to painfully explain what is painfully obvious.

 

[Call me Nic]

Because there is only One God. Thought I made that clear in the other post. The Father is God, Jesus Christ the Son of God (God the Son) is God, The Holy Spirit is God---One God.

You missed my entire point. If Jesus says that you look upon him, then you SEE the Father, he is saying that when you look upon Jesus, it is the same as looking upon the Father - meaning that they are the same person. Otherwise, Jesus would have point blank lied if the Godhead was in fact made up of "three persons."

Colossians 1:16-17 actually confirms the Deity of Jesus Christ.

I never denied the deity of Jesus Christ. In fact, I'm more of an advocate for it than you are. "God" is a title, and belongs to only one (Deuteronomy 6:4), so if you assign that title to three different persons, you are dividing the power of God amongst three without agreeing they are indeed one person with one title. Not to mention, you're setting up a straw-man argument against me.

Nope did not suggest that at all. I responded that the Father was not crucified. The simple answer of Who died on the cross is what the Bible reveals----Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ is the one who died on the cross, yes, but if he is God manifested, and ALL the fullness of the Godhead dwells in him bodily (meaning the Father, the Spirit, and the Word are in him and his body), then it is indicative that his death was equal to the death of the Father.

I use the word equal because I'm not saying the Father (the invisible) God was the one who physically died, but because the Bible teaches that Jesus and the Father are the same person and inseparable, when Christ died upon the cross, it's as if the Father died upon the cross.

 

[Call me Nic]

Then I gather you have no theological standings on Holy Scriptures? The very height of theology is to painfully explain what is painfully obvious.

I take the scriptures for what they say. It doesn't say persons, it says record-bearers. Period. I don't add or take away scripture to fit my presuppositions. You should try it some time.

 

[redleghunter]

The fact of the matter is that you cannot get around the fact that scripture teaches the unity of the Godhead as being absolutely inseparable, and yet when you teach the individuality of each "person" as being separate within the Godhead, you start treading into dangerous waters, in my opinion.

Inseparable in what way? Essence? Attributes? You seem to be arguing that Jesus Christ, The Father and the Holy Spirit are not distinctly mentioned separately in Holy Scriptures. Is this your point because they are mentioned separately when Jesus speaks in His sermons. I think you are confusing attributes here.

Scripture clearly doesn't teach that.

Scripture teaches there is One God. Scripture teaches that there is the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit and all three are God. One God. Do the math.

I think it's more of a problem to say that Jesus is not the Father, then it is to say that Jesus is the Father.

Once again heading in the wrong direction. Saying Jesus and Father are One is not the same (as you suggest) Jesus=Father. Big difference and why we still have Modalists among us.

Christ clearly taught you cannot separate the two at all, which is what most Christians try to do.

Christ said "I and the Father are one." He said if you see Me you see the Father. Jesus did not say "I am the Father."

I hope you can see the distinctions.

 

[sdowney717]

I take the scriptures for what they say. It doesn't say persons, it says record-bearers. Period. I don't add or take away scripture to fit my presuppositions. You should try it some time.

How do you fit this into your thinking, specifically v24 to 28??

Clearly Paul is teaching there exists a distinctness between the Son and the Father.

1 Corinthians 15
20 But now Christ is risen from the dead, and has become the firstfruits of those who have [d]fallen asleep. 21 For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive. 23 But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are Christ’s at His coming.

24 Then comes the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God the Father, when He puts an end to all rule and all authority and power.
25 For He must reign till He has put all enemies under His feet.
26 The last enemy that will be destroyed is death.
27 For “He has put all things under His feet.” But when He says “all things are put under Him,” it is evident that He who put all things under Him is excepted.
28 Now when all things are made subject to Him, then the Son Himself will also be subject to Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all.

 

[redleghunter]

First you are making a lot of presuppositions which you say the Bible supports, but does not. I explain:

You missed my entire point. If Jesus says that you look upon him, then you SEE the Father, he is saying that when you look upon Jesus, it is the same as looking upon the Father

Ok, I'm tracking this just fine.

meaning that they are the same person.

No, by adding the above you burst the bubble as not Scripturally supported.

Otherwise, Jesus would have point blank lied if the Godhead was in fact made up of "three persons."

One does not follow the other, only if one agrees with your erroneous assertion Jesus=Father.

I never denied the deity of Jesus Christ. In fact, I'm more of an advocate for it than you are. "God" is a title, and belongs to only one (Deuteronomy 6:4), so if you assign that title to three different persons, you are dividing the power of God amongst three without agreeing they are indeed one person with one title. Not to mention, you're setting up a straw-man argument against me.

A common misunderstanding of the Trinity. I think it has been beaten to death that there is no "power" lost by dividing up God as that is not Trinitarian doctrine. One God, Three Divine Persons. The Bible attests to this.

Jesus Christ is the one who died on the cross, yes, but if he is God manifested, and ALL the fullness of the Godhead dwells in him bodily (meaning the Father, the Spirit, and the Word are in him and his body), then it is indicative that his death was equal to the death of the Father.

Luke 23:46 squelches this assertion.

I use the word equal because I'm not saying the Father (the invisible) God was the one who physically died, but because the Bible teaches that Jesus and the Father are the same person and inseparable

You still have not established Jesus and the Father are the 'same person.' The Bible does testify Jesus and the Father and the Holy Spirit are God. And we are told also there is only One God. The math is not that hard as the solution ends up as infinity.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Then why does Jesus say that when a person looked upon him, they saw the Father as well? (John 14:7). You can't say that if you look upon my son, that you see me personally because we are different people entirely. Thus, Jesus couldn't have made that statement unless he was making the point that when you look upon him, you are looking upon the Father as well, the reason being that they are the same person.

Very common mistakes here.
For one, whenever (for a few years) someone looked at my son , they saw me. In every important detail he was the same as me.

Note that physical appearance is not an important detail at all - Jesus warns us strictly NOT to appraise anything by what we can see with our eyes, or hear with our ears, or feel with our natural physical senses - that is carnal/ earthly/ worldly/ flesh AND of NO VALUE./ profits nothing.

Yes, Just like the Father and the Son are different entirely,yet they have been echad for eternity past without beginning, without being created, and without end in the future.
They are (one) = "echad" as written in Scripture.
Likewise the true disciples are (one)="echad" with Jesus and the Father today.

Obviously the true disciples are not all the identical same persons, but as written in Scripture are (one), "echad", just as the Father and the Son are "echad", forever.

This is never understood IN THE FLESH, nor with the natural mind.

 

[sdowney717]

The trinity of the Godhead is one of the mysteries of the faith.

1 Timothy 3:9 Holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience.

1 Timothy 3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

 

[redleghunter]

I take the scriptures for what they say. It doesn't say persons, it says record-bearers. Period. I don't add or take away scripture to fit my presuppositions. You should try it some time.

Bolded above is plural. Taking your wooden approach you can only come up with the Trinity or Tritheism.

 

[Call me Nic]

How do you fit this into your thinking, specifically v24 to 28??

Clearly Paul is teaching there exists a distinctness between the Son and the Father.

1 Corinthians 15
20 But now Christ is risen from the dead, and has become the firstfruits of those who have [d]fallen asleep. 21 For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive. 23 But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are Christ’s at His coming.

24 Then comes the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God the Father, when He puts an end to all rule and all authority and power.
25 For He must reign till He has put all enemies under His feet.
26 The last enemy that will be destroyed is death.
27 For “He has put all things under His feet.” But when He says “all things are put under Him,” it is evident that He who put all things under Him is excepted.
28 Now when all things are made subject to Him, then the Son Himself will also be subject to Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all.

I feel like this is a very good point, friend. It's clear in this passage that Paul separates and makes the distinction between the Son and the Father, with the Son delivering the kingdom unto the Father.

However, when we read of this taking place in Revelation 21 and 22, it's clear that the Bible unifies the Father and the Lamb as one with one throne.

For example, take into consideration these verses:

Revelation 21:22-23 "And I saw no temple therein (speaking of New Jerusalem): for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it. And the city had no need of the sun, neither the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof." The word "the" is a definite article that articulates a noun, whether plural or singular, and the word temple is "singular." If there is only one temple, and both the Lord God Almighty (referencing the Father) and the Lamb are the same single temple, it's indicating they are both one.

Revelation 22:1 "And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb." How is one single river proceeding from two different sources if it's one river? It must be originating out of one throne.

Revelation 22:3 "And there shall be no more curse: but the throne (singular) of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him:" This distinguishes between the Father and the Lamb, but uses the singular 3rd person pronoun to describe the servants of God, saying they're his (singular) servants. This also unifies the Father and the Son.

I cannot explain away 1 Corinthians 15, but I do know that scripture wouldn't contradict itself. The only thing I can reconcile is that the Bible indeed makes a distinction between the record bearers in the Godhead, but also keeps them in perfect unity like in 1 John 5:7.

Hebrews 1:3 even says God is one person, "Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high." Either this verse separates the Godhead and contradicts the scripture of 1 John 5:7 which unifies them as one, or God is one person and the brightness of his glory is revealed in the image of the Son, who is God manifest in the flesh, making God one person.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Except the Bible calls Jesus the Everlasting Father (Isaiah 9:6) and since Jesus and the Father are one (John 10:30), it's not too far of a stretch to make that argument.

Abraham is also called our father, but no one should think for a moment that Abraham is God the Father. Isaiah 9:6 does not mean that Jesus is the Father. The language of Isaiah 9 is messianic, and therefore kingly. The idea that the king is a father to his people is a widespread and ancient one. That's also, by the way, the reason why the mainstream Jewish interpretation that this passage refers to Hezekiah, not to the future Messiah, still makes sense for them; Hezekiah as the king of the nation can be called a father in the most sublime sense. As Christians we understand this passage as, ultimately, having messianic tone: This refers ultimately the the birth of the King Messiah, our Lord Jesus. He, as King Messiah, is a father forever to His people. But He is not God the Father, He is not the Hypostasis of the Father who is, from all eternity, the Unbegotten One from whom the Son has His origin as God from God. Jesus is the Son, the only-begotten of the Father, and it is as the only-begotten Son that He is God with the Father, God from the Father, of one Being (homoousios) with the Father.

You cannot have Jesus without having the Father, and you cannot have the Father without having Jesus.

Yes, because there cannot be a Son without a Father, and a Father cannot be Father without a Son. That points to two distinct Persons, two distinct Hypostases.

When Jesus died on the cross, it was the equivalent as having the Father die upon the cross.

No. It is the Son dying upon the cross. It is true enough that the Father and the Spirit are one with the Son, and the Son is never apart from the Father and the Spirit. To that end, the Father and the Spirit are in Christ at all times, including on the cross. But only the Person of the Son suffered, died, was buried, rose again, ascended into heaven, and is seated at the right hand of the Father from whence He will come again in glory to judge the quick and the dead.

However, the Father bears record of Jesus through the works that Jesus did in the name of God (John 5:36), and Jesus bears record of the Father through the judgement and authority that has been given him (John 5:20). The Spirit was sent from the Son according to the will of the Father to reprove the world of sin, righteousness, and judgement, which bears record of the testimony of the Son (John 16:8-11). Just because they bear separate testimony of the same truth doesn't mean they are distinctly different, in that they have different wills, different spirits, different minds. They simply bear separate records as three, but are indeed one (1 John 5:7), with one (unified) testimony, one will, one mind toward creation. There is only one God with one salvation.

We are not merely speaking of of three records. We are speaking indeed of three actual, distinct, Persons and Hypostases. The Son is not merely an extension of God, the Son is a Divine Person, whose Deity He has from all eternity because of eternal origin in and from the Father. The Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit are not fingers extending from a hand, they are not different sides of a prism. They are real. Hypostases.

We know the Father through the Son because God has so desired it to be this way, that no one can know God except through the Son. Jesus isn't simply a human manifestation of God. Jesus is God, He is God the Eternal Son and Word, only-begotten from all eternity as God from God, one in being with the Father. Therefore what we see Jesus saying and doing is not the words and deeds of a human looking divine puppet, but the words and deeds of a real Person. Jesus is a Someone. Jesus is a Who. And this Someone can refer to another Someone when He speaks of the Father, and yet a third Someone when He speaks of the Spirit. There are Three Someones.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[oldrunner]

I THINK I agree with you.
God has manifested Himself in different ways and at different times. But not in the way modulism states.

When God manifested Himself in the O.T., the son was still present and the Holy Spirit were still present. They didn't come about because God "needed" them for some purpose.

Although they DO each serve a purpose. Father did not hang on the cross, Son did. But Father and Holy Spirit were there too. PERHAPS, Father left Son at the words: My God, My God, why hast though forsaken me. (we can't know this for sure).

Too much to know. I always learn something new when we talk about the Trinity.

Ps.22! Jesus Saying, This IS Me People!!! Fulfilling prophecy is the most likely, IMO. This Psalm shows Him on the Cross as a prophecy David made. But this is a hard verse, for sure!

If we compare 2nd Cor. 5:19, Hebrews 2, Isa. 53, and John 17, we see that whatever was going on, God didn't leave Him. Maybe turned His back on Him-as many believe, or maybe something to do with His soul? God was judging everyone's sin-past present, and future, by putting it on the sinless Lamb of God. That's why it only had to be done once. (Hebrews 10:1-10) Praise God!
(by the way, at the end of "Hang on to your life", by the Guess Who, this is quoted). Yeah, I'm an old rocker.

 

[Call me Nic]

Bolded above is plural. Taking your wooden approach you can only come up with the Trinity or Tritheism.

They bear individual testimonies, but they all testify of the same thing. Their testimony is one. The verse says, "These three are one," which unifies the three as being one.

 

[Bobber]

I find this idea of Modalism quite strange. Who then do they say Jesus was praying to in John 12:28 where it states,

"Now My soul is troubled, and what shall I say? ‘Father, save Me from this hour’? No, it is for this purpose that I have come to this hour. Father, glorify Your name!” Then a voice came from heaven: “I have glorified it, and I will glorify it again.”

So Jesus was asking the Father for something but we're to believe Jesus just turned around and did the speaking back? God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit has never been a problem for me even mentally to accept. Water is one but is found in three forms, ice, liquid, and vapor...all H20. God views things which are singular different then we do. God said about marriage the two would be one flesh. Separate entities BUT one.

In the day God created man you can notice he called them both Adam. Genesis 5:2 I think it would help a lot of Christian marriages if they really understood how God would like us to think about it. From the time of your marriage you are one thus the reason for the last name change. I know many buck at that but I still think it's a good thing.

 

[Albion]

They bear individual testimonies, but they all testify of the same thing. Their testimony is one. The verse says, "These three are one," which unifies the three as being one.

All you seem to be saying there is that they are united in purpose or, just that they agree on something. None of that speaks to the concept we call the Trinity, one way or the other.

 

[sdowney717]

I feel like this is a very good point, friend. It's clear in this passage that Paul separates and makes the distinction between the Son and the Father, with the Son delivering the kingdom unto the Father.

However, when we read of this taking place in Revelation 21 and 22, it's clear that the Bible unifies the Father and the Lamb as one with one throne.

For example, take into consideration these verses:

Revelation 21:22-23 "And I saw no temple therein (speaking of New Jerusalem): for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it. And the city had no need of the sun, neither the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof." The word "the" is a definite article that articulates a noun, whether plural or singular, and the word temple is "singular." If there is only one temple, and both the Lord God Almighty (referencing the Father) and the Lamb are the same single temple, it's indicating they are both one.

Revelation 22:1 "And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb." How is one single river proceeding from two different sources if it's one river? It must be originating out of one throne.

Revelation 22:3 "And there shall be no more curse: but the throne (singular) of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him:" This distinguishes between the Father and the Lamb, but uses the singular 3rd person pronoun to describe the servants of God, saying they're his (singular) servants. This also unifies the Father and the Son.

I cannot explain away 1 Corinthians 15, but I do know that scripture wouldn't contradict itself. The only thing I can reconcile is that the Bible indeed makes a distinction between the record bearers in the Godhead, but also keeps them in perfect unity like in 1 John 5:7.

Hebrews 1:3 even says God is one person, "Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high." Either this verse separates the Godhead and contradicts the scripture of 1 John 5:7 which unifies them as one, or God is one person and the brightness of his glory is revealed in the image of the Son, who is God manifest in the flesh, making God one person.

Even in Revelation is mentioned the 2 of them,
for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it.
Every verse you listed distinguishes the 2 of them as distinct, yet both together in purpose.

And Jesus in John 17 also distinguishes Himself from the Father.

1 Jesus spoke these words, lifted up His eyes to heaven, and said: “Father, the hour has come. Glorify Your Son, that Your Son also may glorify You,
2 as You have given Him authority over all flesh, that He should give eternal life to as many as You have given Him.
3 And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.
4 I have glorified You on the earth. I have finished the work which You have given Me to do.
5 And now, O Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.