I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods before me.[1]
Dr. T.D. Jakes Does Not Believe In God
In this piece I offer more information about Ed Young, Jr. having Oneness Pentecostal and Word Faith mogul Dr. T.D. Jakes at his Creative Church Conference 2007 (C3 2007) in February. Leaving aside other heresies in this pillar of Satan’s Ecumenical Church of Deceit the central issue with T.D. Jakesis his patent denial of the cardinal (non-negotiable) doctrine of the Holy Trinity. Here is a succinct definition of this essential doctrine of the Christian Church:
Within the nature of the one true and living God there are three co-equal and co-eternal Persons (cognizant egos) existing simultaneously; The whole undivided essence of God belongs equally to each of the three Persons; God the Father; God the Son – Who is Christ Jesus of Nazareth – and God the Holy Spirit. And these three Persons are that one God. [2]
Here again is how the Belief Statement from The Potter’s House where T.D. Jakes is pastor currently reflects his Oneness Pentecostal view of God:
God--There is one God, creator of all things, infinitely perfect, and eternally existing in three manifestations: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. [3]
The above is unquestionably the language of Oneness Pentecostalism which is virtually identical to that expressed by anyone involved in the various offshoots of this non-Christian cult.
Grasping The Oneness Pentecostal View Of God
Oneness Pentecostalism (aka Jesus Only) resurfaced around 1913 just after the Azusa Street Pentecostal revival. It is itself another revival of what has been called Sabellianism (after Sabellius excommunicated 220 AD) and Modalistic (modes; ways) Monarchianism (one king). I can tell you assuredly that Jakes believes there is one God. We do as well. However, he believes God is a single (cognizant ego) person who showed (manifested) himself, and/or acted in three different ways (modes or dimensions).
Jakes would teach that in the Old Testament God shows himself as Father through creation, then as Jesus Christ the Son in redemption, and now he is acting as Holy Spirit in regeneration. As such: one God, one individual and solitary person, performing or manifesting himself in three different modes or ways of operation. I have long known Jakes was a modalist/Oneness Pentecostal but had never dreamed that any mainstream evangelical church–let alone SBC–would ever bring him in. I do pray this helps you notice even more that Satan simply re-uses old heresies.
He waits until the Church is soft in an area and then reintroduces it at that vulnerable time. If this foolish C3 2007 conference put on by Ed Young, Jr. was simply a big secular Amway-type “bigger is better” pep rally of “success=more money” then Jakes would certainly be welcome. Without a doubt T.D. Jakes is quite a charismatic figure, a powerful speaker and a very successful business man.
However, this C3 2007 is allegedly a “Christian” church function with two high profile members of the SBC and it is being held in an SBC church. I already showed that Jakes believes in a god who is a solitary person that has three different titles and who simply has only acted in three different ways. The SBC however believes in the God of the Bible Who is three Persons; Who are not each other, but are in fact the one God. Therefore Jakes actually believes in another god altogether; a different god. This is what people are missing here.
So, if Jakes–who flatly denies the Trinity defined above–is to be included with Christians because he supposedly “loves” Jesus; then why not invite the Mormons in too? After all, the LDSChurch is a hugely successful conglomerate made up of ostensibly “nice” people who also believe in a trinity and they love their “Jesus” too? Or how about the Jehovah’s Witnesses? The average Jehovah’s Witness does far more for their “Jesus” whom they also love than those of us who really do know Him. And they also believe in a god who is one person. Let’s consider the world religion of Islam, they also believe in a god who is one person and they revere their “Jesus” as a prophet who is almost equal to Muhammad.
The Door Of No Spiritual Return
Opening the door to Oneness Pentecostals as genuine Christians (though some might know Christ but are ill-informed) is to then have to open the door to all those other groups as well. But right now it looks as if that’s where we’re headed with T.D. Jakes and Oneness Pentecostals. My opinion is that president of the SBC Dr. Frank Page won’t make a stand and from all the letters I sent out I have gotten zero feedback–let alone offers to step in–from any major names in the evangelical world.
How very sad, the alleged Church “militant” is so tepid and timid will not even defend the Holy Trinity. So a flaming heretic like Dr. T.D. Jakes will now come right into this SBC meeting as he did last year at C3 2006 and from there other “evangelical” church groups will be even more emboldened to follow suit. Jakes will go from someone who was once on the fringe of the Church to front and center stage. But know this: Opening this door to Jakes will also be opening the door for mainstream acceptance for a whole host of other Word Faith and Emergent Church spiritual “knuckleheads.”
Unfortunately I must say there are quite perilous times ahead. However, we take heart that there won’t be any of their blood on our hands if we keep faithfully sounding the alarm. And may God have mercy on us all…
Disclaimer: Worldview Weekend, Christian Worldview Network and its columnists do not necessarily endorse or agree with every opinion expressed in every article posted on this site. We do however, encourage a healthy and friendly debate on the issues of our day. Whether you agree or disagree, we encourage you to post your feedback by using the feedback button.
Let me begin by asking you to find for me ONE reference to the word Trinity, Triune, or Three in the Bible. Then let me ask you to find ALL of the references to the word ONE in reference to our GOD. The scripture does not lie. It is without error, and it is the undisputed, unmanipulated Word of God. Who are we to question God when He says.....Hear O Israel: The Lord thy God is ONE LORD. ???? I suggest that you pick up your Bible, and read it, instead of some doctrine that was voted on by a Roman council and approved as a truth but still remains a mystery. There are no mysteries in the WORD OF GOD!!!! God wills that we know and understand every aspect of His Word. Being a scholar of the Bible is knowing the difference between Truth and Deception. Most of the practices of the church today (if you study their origins) are paganistic. Which is right? I let God tell me. I suggest that you put this topic to pasture. It seems evident that no one can debunk Oneness Pentecostalism, or it would not be thriving today. I think we could all use a healthy dose of James 4:11-12. God Bless you all! In Jesus Name! Click here to reply to this post
Re: T.D. Jakes and Oneness Pentecostalism (aka Modalism)
Posted On: 01/17/07 01:54:19 PM
Age 40, TX
Pastor Ken,
I think I can tell you why you are not joined in your outrage by Dr. Page and others. While I agree with your assessment of T.D. Jakes theology, there simply is a difference of opinion as to when and when not to work with someone who does not mesh theologically. Right next to your article are products being sold for David Jeremiah, Bob Lepine, and Frank Harber. Are you sharing the stage with them? If you say you are not, you are sharing the stage with Brannon Howse who runs the site and sells the product. You have told us that David Jeremiah is promoting contemplative. Brannon Howse himself has condemned Bob Lepine for promoting Rick Warren on Family Life radio with Dennis Rainey. Frank Harber was a mega church seeker sensitive pastor (I have been there) who recently had to resign from his church. You can share the stage while disagreeing with their theology but Ed Young is not given that privilege. One more example: Ingrid Schleuter points to Joseph Farah articles on WorldNet Daily that uses immodest women to sell t-shirts. Do you have a problem with that? Darren Click here to reply to this post
Re: Re: T.D. Jakes and Oneness Pentecostalism (aka Modalism)
Posted On: 01/19/07 07:43:40 AM
Age 51, NH
Darren, in your apparent effort to simply be contrary (and we've been through this before) you widely miss here. The issue with Jakes and Young, Jr. is the Holy Trinity - the very nature of God Himself. Jakes consciously holds a view which as been condemned as heresy for 1800 years. Apples and oranges my brother. It's a tired old horse Darren, you really ought to put her out to pasture now. Click here to reply to this post
Re: Re: Re: T.D. Jakes and Oneness Pentecostalism (aka Modalism)
Posted On: 01/20/07 11:58:11 AM
Age 40, TX
Pastor Ken,
There is not effort to oppose you for opposition sake. I am trying to get to a core issue that you pick and choose when it is appropriate to share a stage with someone. You may want to put this to pasture because you have no answer. This is the third time I have brought this issue up with you and you never answer it. I have applied this argument to people who do not deny a core doctrine so dont try to suggest this is a special case. You apply your best ad hominem argument and dismiss me as if I were an annoying, yapping dog. Here is the question again; lets see if you answer it. When is it o.k. to share the stage with someone? You have stated that with T.D. Jakes it is a no because he clearly denies a core doctrine of the church. I agree that he denies it. Would you share the stage with David Jeremiah, Bob Lepine, Frank Harber? If you say no, then why are you sharing the stage with Brannon Howse who sells and promotes their products? Please read my original post and tell me why you support the way Joseph Farah sells t-shirts. Here is the question again. Where do you draw the line at which you would not share the stage with someone? Tell us why T.D. Jakes and Ed Young are apples and you and David Jeremiah are oranges. Darren Click here to reply to this post
Re: Re: Re: Re: T.D. Jakes and Oneness Pentecostalism (aka Modalism)
Posted On: 01/22/07 08:31:19 AM
Age 51, NH
Darren you say: "Pastor Ken, There is not effort to oppose you for opposition sake." I'm sorry but you could have fooled me. You even went onto another site and stated that I avoided your questions. However, what you didn't tell them is that I have taken time on a couple of occasions and dialogued with you privately via email about similar issues. You could have done so again but you chose this route instead. Next you do not tell the truth when you say: "This is the third time I have brought this issue up with you and you never answer it." I have answered you each time Darren and you just don't happen to like my answer. Fine, but don't lie when it's in print right above you that I have answered you. Then you ask: "Would you share the stage with David Jeremiah, Bob Lepine, Frank Harber? If you say no, then why are you sharing the stage with Brannon Howse who sells and promotes their products?" I share no stage here at CWN because this is not a local church. This site is as a Christian newspaper and one needn't agree with every product sold or every person promoted in order to contribute an occasional column. Apples and oranges again Darren. And finally you ask: "Tell us why T.D. Jakes and Ed Young are apples and you and David Jeremiah are oranges." If I remember correctly you graduated DTS. If so, how is it you can't see this: Apples - The Holy Trinity. A pillar of the historic orthodox Christian faith. Jakes denies it (as you yourself admit) and clearly holds a view about the nature of God considered heretical by the Body of Christ for 1800 years. Ed Young is sharing his pulpit in his actual local SBC church with Jakes. Oranges - David Jeremiah foolishly quoted so-called "Christian" mystics and possibly endorses contemplative mysticism which it seems many evangelicals have no problem with anyway. I do not even know where Dr. Jeremiah currently stands on this issue and what I do in Christ right now does not involve Jeremiah and myself with each other personally in any way. Darren, I would certainly hope that you'd have enough wisdom to see the clear difference between these two situations. Click here to reply to this post
Re: T.D. Jakes and Oneness Pentecostalism (aka Modalism)
Posted On: 01/22/07 04:03:51 PM
Age 40, TX
Pastor Ken,
I went to another site to see if I could get you to respond and actually answer my question and it appears to have worked. Had you provided this information pertaining to the original question in your first post, you would have answered me. Why would I try e-mailing you in private when you can just answer me in public and we can share the dialogue? Isnt that what this website is for? I think it is quite contentious for you to call me a liar and suggest you answered the question in your first response when you did not really answer the question but chose instead to argue that I should not even ask the question. You suggest that I dont like your answer, but you assume that you always answer the question. I get T.D. Jakes denies the Trinity and that is a huge deal but you have made a huge deal of David Jeremiah telling me to watch out for him so why wouldnt I want to explore that further. Now I know Jeremiah is apples and no big deal according to you. Thank you for answering. Why use such a strong word as liar when people can see our dialogue for themselves. I think any reasonable person can see that I was reaching further in my question than your answer provided. For the record, I attend DTS and have not graduated. I do see the clear difference but your vigorous pursuit in previous articles causes me to not see any difference in the way you feel about these different people. Now lets quit the pickin at each other and get to the real issue. T.D. Jakes speaks at a conference at a church. That does not mean Ed Young agrees with his theology. A conference is not the local church. That is the difference. If T.D. Jakes were preaching the worship service that would be different. This to me, is just like Willow Creek having Jim Collins (a non-believer as far as I can tell) speak at a Leadership Conference in the church building but not part of the worship service of that local church. A church conference is very much like CWN in the way it is perceived by the public. I think that is why Dr. Page has not done anything further. An exception would be having T.D. Jakes speak at a conference on the Trinity or the essence of God and the facilitator wanted him to support the historic orthodox position. That would be ridiculous. Now let me ask this question a third time: Ingrid Schleuter points to Joseph Farah articles on WorldNet Daily that uses immodest women to sell t-shirts. Do you have a problem with that? I am not asking just to be contrary. I really want to know how you feel about that and trying to understand how you discern who apprising ministries exposes. Darren Click here to reply to this post
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: T.D. Jakes and Oneness Pentecostalism (aka Modalism)
Posted On: 01/22/07 03:24:53 PM
Age 30, TN
Hi Ken. Just to be sure I understand you correctly, you said: "I share no stage here at CWN because this is not a local church. This site is as a Christian newspaper and one needn't agree with every product sold or every person promoted in order to contribute an occasional column." But on your Apprising Ministries website you write the following: "As I mentioned in 'For Our Readers,' the direction we have felt the Lord take His Apprising Ministries has been toward a kind of an online 'local' church with an 'Internet' pulpit through which our 'congregation' could then be in touch with the remnant that is literally scattered all over the world. No doubt this is an odd idea, but since when has our great God and Savior played by mankinds 'conventional' rules? The times we live inso many feel it just might be the very Endwould call for us to be willing to listen to God the Holy Spirit and then obey Him, no matter how peculiar our Lords directive might seem. However, and I wish to be as clear to the reader as I possibly can here, everything must be in accord with what the Bible saysin context and rightly interpretedor it must be rejected immediately as coming from Satan." http://www.apprising.org/archives/2005/10/apprising_you.html I don't want to misunderstand you, Ken, so could you please tell us what is a "local church" exactly, and what makes AM so qualitatively different from CWN? Is the difference that AM performs the Biblical ordinances of the church, baptism and the Lord's Supper, in an online kind of way while CWN does not? I certainly agree with you where you write "everything must be in accord with what the Bible saysin context and rightly interpretedor it must be rejected immediately as coming from Satan", so I look forward to your reply. Thanks, --Brian Click here to reply to this post
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: T.D. Jakes and Oneness Pentecostalism (aka Modalism)
Posted On: 01/23/07 06:58:56 AM
Age 51, NH
Note carefully what I said: "we have felt the Lord take His Apprising Ministries has been toward a kind of an online 'local' church." You see there; a kind of...as in similar too for people to receive teaching. To me the context is clear that AM is not usurping the local church - which by definition is...well, local. And I am not suggesting at all AM is a local church but that it can act in a similar fashion temporarily for those who haven't been able to find a good church locally as yet. Click here to reply to this post
Re: Re: T.D. Jakes and Oneness Pentecostalism (aka Modalism)
Posted On: 01/18/07 04:29:33 PM
Age 30, IA
There is definately alot of picking and choosing that goes on! Alot of hypocrisy,inconsistency, and double standards on the part of some of the authors on this sight!For instance, I was shocked the other day when I was at Mark Cahill's web sight and found that he had recently spoken at a conference called Konnection winter conference where there was a speaker from the XXX church!So he is also guilty of sharing the pulpit with heretics!Patrick Burwell wrote an article that bashed Greg Laurie yet praised Franklin Graham who is President and CEO of the extremely ecumenical,tolerant, and possibly apostate, Billy Graham evangelistic association!Franklin and others of this organization are just as guilty as Mr.Page(if not more so)of sharing the pulpit with heretics, including catholics!If you're going to call out some based upon a certain standard you must use that standard against all whether they're your pet teacher or not!!! Click here to reply to this post
Re: T.D. Jakes and Oneness Pentecostalism (aka Modalism)
Posted On: 01/17/07 12:56:18 AM
Age 61, TX
Thank you Pastor Silva for another excellent article that shows the lukewarm result of the tolerance movement within organized religion. I know we're headed for the "anything goes'" apostate church, I just didn't expect it to be so blatantly apparent. To call Jakes a flaming heretic is strong language, but after a little research, I can not disagree with your statement. Gal. 1:6-10 "I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel--which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned!....Am I now trying to win the approval of men or of God?...If I were still trying to please men, I would not be a servant of Christ." I looked up the word "different" used in verse 6. If my reference is correct, the original Greek translation would be "heteros," meaning another totally different kind. To be "heterodox" is to be a heretic. So I can understand and agree with your statement in view of Paul's terminology, having the meaning that they were embracing a heretical concept of the Gospel. Yours is a much-needed but tough and timely topic to teach. So many people just don't want to know the truth. But then, you're not trying to please men, you're trying to please God! May He greatly bless you! Click here to reply to this post
Re: T.D. Jakes and Oneness Pentecostalism (aka Modalism)
Posted On: 01/15/07 01:06:41 PM
Age 30, TN
Mr. Silva, I suspect that politically you are in favor of higher taxes and bigger government. If you are not of that political bent, then you sometimes resemble someone who is, and here is why. People in favor of big government look to that big government to solve all of their problems for them rather than taking action to solve those problems themselves. For example, someone in favor of big government might say, "I neglected to save for my own retirement; good thing the government will give me social security." Or "I lost my job because I won't do what my employer tells me to do; good thing the government will give me welfare checks and food stamps." Or even, "There is an impending natural disaster headed straight for me; I could take action personally, but it is far easier to sit here where I am and complain that FEMA isn't doing enough for me." So where you write, "My opinion is that president of the SBC Dr. Frank Page wont make a stand and from all the letters I sent out I have gotten zero feedbacklet alone offers to step infrom any major names in the evangelical world," perhaps this is an indication that even though you keep sounding the alarm and complaining that those "major names in the evangelical world" are not doing enough for you, it is time instead to take action for yourself. As far as I know, you are free to make the attempt, and free either to succeed or to fail. But you are not necessarily entitled to free help from other men who are busy taking action themselves for other causes. Why be upset if a man will not abandon his personal crusade in order to help you fight yours? --Brian Click here to reply to this post
Re: Re: T.D. Jakes and Oneness Pentecostalism (aka Modalism)
Posted On: 01/16/07 10:27:18 AM
Age 18, MN
I highly doubt Mr. Silva is a "big govt. and high taxes" person. However, church leaders are supposed to be leading in many aspects of a church (alot of it depends on the structure of the church "govt." such as Episcopalian, Presbetyrian, or Congregational). Now, I'm very sure that Mr. Silva is also taking action (I mean, he's informing us about the situation as it is for the SBC for one thing). We need to put pressure on church leaders that aren't glorifying God. It's still, I'm sure, somewhat of a shock that the SBC is suddenly going emergent (or at least, heading that direction), so I'm sure that Mr. Silva is doing everything he can at the moment in his own church and abroad. Perhaps, by telling us what the problem is, we need to also send letters and e-mails to the church leaders and put pressure them. Have a great day! Click here to reply to this post
Re: T.D. Jakes and Oneness Pentecostalism (aka Modalism)
Posted On: 01/15/07 09:58:06 AM
Age 55, CA
As an ex-Oneness Pentecostal minister, who is trying my best to return to just the plain word of scripture, I find difficulty with BOTH sides of the article. NEITHER oneness, nor trinity are scriptural terms, the "three persons" in one God are not in scripture. Both views add to or extract conclusions and make doctrine with words not found in scripture. I do not have the final answer, but if we simply state actual scripture, we err not. For this reason, oneness is just as incorrect as trinity. "I and my Father are one" is an example. It says what it says, Thanks Click here to reply to this post
Re: Re: T.D. Jakes and Oneness Pentecostalism (aka Modalism)
Posted On: 01/18/07 02:06:57 AM
Age 61, TX
I appreciate your dilemma, and I trust the Lord will guide you through this. 2 Cor. 13:14, says "May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all." For me, this is adequately a description of the Trinity. Col. 2:1a-3 "...to the knowledge of the mystery of God, both (plural) of the Father and of Christ, in whom are (not 'is' singular, but 'are' plural) hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge." Col. 2:8a-9- "...and not according to Christ. For in Him dwells all the fullness of the GODHEAD bodily" NKJV. The Bible may not have the words, rapture (exception: Latin), bible, threesome or Trinity in it but it does have Godhead, translated from the Greek "theotes" in that particular verse. ---Forgive me, this is a copy/paste from a partial post I had left on 01/17/07 12:17:01 AM , which is down about 3 responses. Hang in there and pray, the Lord will resolve this for you in His timing. Click here to reply to this post
Re: Re: Re: T.D. Jakes and Oneness Pentecostalism (aka Modalism)
Posted On: 01/23/07 11:54:41 AM
Age 32, DC
"For me, this is adequately a description of the Trinity."
It seems like we're all reaching for a way to define Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The person to whom you are responding is correct in that there is not mention of a "trinity" in the scriptures. We are left to infer that various scriptures speak of a trinity-as if the argument over trinity is the biggest issue a person must deal with in accepting Jesus Christ.
Non-believers are not bogged down in the remedial arguments of trinity and oneness. They need to know the power of Jesus' death and resurrection, not how we view, slice and interpret scripture. The message of Jesus Christ is important for bringing people to the saving power of Christ, not for diving into silly arguments about whether Jakes or Page are true men of God. No one is won to Christ by these inquisitions or vain babblings because they only lead to further distortions of the real power of the blood of Jesus. The message of Jesus' death and resurrection, the presence of the Holy Spirit and the awesomeness of God's love for us is enough to stand on its own. Click here to reply to this post
Re: Re: Re: Re: T.D. Jakes and Oneness Pentecostalism (aka Modalism)
Posted On: 01/23/07 09:04:39 PM
Age 61, TX
Who is arguing? We're encouraged to post feedback, and the website statement invites healthy debating. However, my statement wasn't posted for the purpose of debate. If you re-read it, I think you may find it was meant to be a word of ENCOURAGEMENT. I regret that you consider this "vain babblings" and wonder why you're visiting the website if this is how you view the postings. As you quoted me, I stated "For ME, this is adequately a description of the Trinity." I wasn't insistent and I didn't attempt to lay down a law, I said it was my opinion. Is it vain babbling to continue to study for the accurate interpretation of Scripture, so as to correctly teach the Word to those who haven't heard the true Gospel? Which Christ do you want to lead a non-believer to, the Jesus of Mormonism, whom they consider to be a man who progressed to godhood, or perhaps the Jesus of Jehovah's Witnesses, whom they consider not to have been physically resurrected, who was perfect man only, and no part of God. Islam believes Jesus was a prophet, and their history is so warped they believe His mother was Miriam, the sister of Moses (so I am told, so that is second-hand info), and that He didn't even die from the crucifixion. I think it is crucial to witness and make known the true Jesus Christ, NOT A GENERIC ONE. If you, through the Holy Spirit, teach someone that Jesus is the true way to salvation, and don't continue to disciple them or they don't land in a Biblically sound church, they could fall into the hands of any organization like the JW's that say of course, they believe in Jesus! I find that very frightening. Re: "how we view, slice and interpret scripture," may I refer you to 2 Tim. 2:15 "Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." NKJV That literally translates to "cutting it straight." John MacArthur's footnote on "rightly dividing" says it's "a reference to the exactness demanded by such trades as carpentry, masonry, and Paul's trade of leather working and tentmaking. Precision and accuracy are required in Biblical interpretation, beyond all other enterprises because the interpreter is handling God's Word. Anything less is shameful." I closed my post that you're criticizing by encouraging 55 in CA to "Hang in there and pray, the Lord will resolve this for you in His timing." As I said, my intention was to encourage. Was that also vain babbling? I agree with your last statement, but it's sad to know there are some who are slicing and dicing that, and then passing it out from their pulpits, stages, and TV audiences. It's the topic of the article we're talking about! I'm not bothered that words like Trinity, rapture (except in Latin, from the root word, "rapturo"), and even Bible aren't in the Bible, yet we believe it to be God's Word. Have you ever found the word "apostate" used in the Bible? Do you deny that it was most certainly described, whether the specific word was used or not? Read Heb. 10:26-29. I checked 2 Bible versions, and both use the word "apostasy" in their footnotes on those verses. Apostasy exists! If you don't know what your position on Oneness vs. Trinitarian is, I would like to encourage you to start pursuing it in your Bible studies. There was that word again, ENCOURAGE. God Bless You Click here to reply to this post
Re: T.D. Jakes and Oneness Pentecostalism (aka Modalism)
Posted On: 01/14/07 08:03:06 PM
Age 56, AR
I also believed in one God when I first was saved. I thought that the trinity was three manifestations of God, that they were one and not three different distinct persons and personalities. UNTIL, one Sunday 'new Christians class' I was attending at my church, which I was new in, that the topic was the trinity. When the trinity was explained as three separate persons, I told the Pastor that I thought that when the new covenant started, that's when Jesus came to earth. He came from the Father, and was God as Jesus, who didn't really exist until that time. Very weird to us now, but to a new believer who never went to church, and surely didn't know anything about the bible, it was an eye opener. Click here to reply to this post
Re: Re: T.D. Jakes and Oneness Pentecostalism (aka Modalism)
Posted On: 01/15/07 05:45:11 PM
Age 30, IA
To the writer of the above statement, Age 56 AR. You made the following statement "I also believed in one God when I was first saved." I hope that you still believe that there is one God, but it appears from the context of your statement that you no longer believe that there is only one God! If you now believe that there are more than one God, you MAY have fallen from grace or maybe you're just mis-informed! If this is the case, please get out your Bible and read it from front to back and take note of all the scriptures that refer to there being only ONE GOD! Here are a couple to get you started! Psalm 86:10 "For thou art great, and doest wondrous things: THOU ART GOD ALONE." Isaiah 44:6 "...I am the first, and I am the last; and beside ME there is no God." Isaiah 44:8 "...Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any." Please trust only your Bible and not what men teach! Be a Berean, learn to discern. Acts 17:11! Click here to reply to this post
Re: Re: Re: T.D. Jakes and Oneness Pentecostalism (aka Modalism)
Posted On: 01/17/07 12:17:01 AM
Age 61, TX
I found your selection of OT verses interesting, but limited. What about the prophetic OT Scriptures that reveal the Trinity, or Godhead, if you prefer. Don't dismiss that quite yet. Read to the end. If the Jews had acknowledged their full meanings they would have recognized the Messiah when He came, as did the Gentile wise men. Isa. 53:4-10 "Surely He took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows, yet we considered Him stricken by God, smitten by Him, and afflicted...and the Lord has laid on Him the iniquity of us all...Yet it was the Lord's will to crush Him and cause Him to suffer..." Isa. 63:10-11 "Yet they rebelled and grieved His Holy Spirit...Where is He who set His Holy Spirit among them who sent His glorious arm of power to be at Moses' right hand..." I think one of the best NT examples is Jn. 17, in which Jesus prays to the Father, His and ours, at length. You encouraged our friend to be discerning like the Bereans. When Luke recorded Acts through Divine inspiration, he tells us that the Bereans compared Paul's teachings with the Scriptures daily for truth, and because of his accuracy, many Jews, and Greek men and women became believers. This same Paul wrote 2 Cor. 1:1- "Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God...." He clearly states it was by the will of GOD. The last sentence Paul wrote in that book, 2 Cor. 13:14, says "May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all." While you're referring to the teachings of Paul, look at Col. 2:1a-3-"...to the knowledge of the mystery of God, both of the Father and of Christ, in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge." Col. 2:8a-9- "...and not according to Christ. For in Him dwells all the fullness of the GODHEAD bodily" NKJV. The Bible may not have the words, rapture, bible, threesome or Trinity in it but it does have Godhead, Greek "theotes" in that particular verse. May God make discerning Bereans out of all of us! Click here to reply to this post
Re: Re: Re: Re: T.D. Jakes and Oneness Pentecostalism (aka Modalism)
Posted On: 01/18/07 04:15:09 PM
Age 30, IA
I wasn't cherry picking the old testament scriptures in my reply to the gentlemen above, but rather trying to point him in the right direction!It appears from the context of his statement that he now believes in 3 Gods when he previously believed in ONE!He also made another scripturally true statement when he stated that Jesus came from the father(John 16:27-28), but apparently from the context of his statement he no longer believes this either!My selection of old testament scriptures is a truth that is repeated MANY times in the old testament, and something that continued through the new testament!Here are two verses from two of the greatest teachers themselves, Jesus and Paul!1 Corinthians 8:6"But to us there is but ONE God, the Father,of whom are all things, and we in him;and ONE Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him!"Notice the Clear distinction made between the ONE God(The Father), and his son Jesus Christ!The one there in the greek means ONE, not two or three!John 17:3"And this is life eternal, that they may know thee the ONLY true GOD,AND Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent."Notice Jesus didn't say US the only true God!Once again you see the clear distiction that is made!You also mentioned 2 Corinthians 13:14.This is also an anti-trinitarian verse!Please notice how GOD is distinguised from his son and Spirit!It doesn't say God the father,God the son(an unscriptural term),and God the Holy Spirit(another unscriptural term)!Hebrews 1:3 says that Jesus is the express image of his person(singular)in reference to God not persons,which is what the passage would say if the trinity is true! Click here to reply to this post
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: T.D. Jakes and Oneness Pentecostalism (aka Modalism)
Posted On: 01/19/07 09:58:47 PM
Age 61, TX
I believe in the Triune GODHEAD, the word used in Col.2:8-9, NKJV, One God composed of three distinct persons, which is a mystery that we don't yet fully understand, but are to accept by faith because it's Scriptural. Jn. 1:1-3 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. HE was WITH God in the beginning. Through Him all things were made; without Him nothing was made that has been made." Jn. 1:14 "The Word became flesh and made His dwelling among us." The Word wasn't created. If it had meant the written Word of the Bible, the translated word would have been "rhema." But it was the word, "Logos" and by no accident that John used that term. He was writing in Greek to the polytheistic Greeks who believed the god most responsible for creation was logos. John was straightforwardly telling them that our One God was the True Logos because He was with our True God before He became flesh. The Word was with God before creation, but at creation, mankind was made in His image, the image of the preincarnate Christ. The Son of God said "The Father and I are One." The Son of Man, when in the flesh showed that same unity with the Father, but also great reverence for Him as an example, because Jesus had been made lower than the angels for a time. Please consider that many of Jesus' statements can be understood when that's factored in. Heb. 1:8-9 "But about the Son He (GOD) says, "Your throne, O GOD, will last for ever and ever,...therefore GOD,YOUR GOD, has set you above your companions by anointing you with the oil of joy. Messiah = Anointed One. This is ACTUALLY GOD THE FATHER DECLARING THE DEITY OF GOD THE SON! Clearly, one person of the Trinity is speaking to the other person of the One Trinity. Rev. 1:17-18 "I am the First and the Last. I am the Living One; I was dead, and behold I am alive for ever and ever. Rev. chapter 5, paraphrased says, John saw the right hand of HIM who SAT on the throne holding a seven sealed scroll. But no one in HEAVEN or on earth or under the earth was found worthy to open it. Then the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David was able. John saw a Lamb, looking as if it had been slain, STANDING in the center of the throne. The Lamb took the scroll from the right hand of HIM who SAT on the throne. Rev. 22:17, after the description of the tribulation and Second Coming, etc. has ended, the reader is back to that present time of John. It reads "The SPIRIT and the bride say, 'Come!'" You responded to me "Notice Jesus didn't say US the only true God!" How do you explain that our ONE GOD did say, "Let US make man in OUR image, in OUR likeness?" You and I are not going to reach a point of agreement on this, and I don't want to participate in a long, ongoing exchange that will distract from the subject of the article being discussed. I appreciate your passion, please appreciate mine. It's better than being lukewarm in the Lord's eyes. I, too, wanted 56 in AR to have the truth of the Godhead, Col 2:8-9. Click here to reply to this post
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: T.D. Jakes and Oneness Pentecostalism (aka Modalism)
Posted On: 01/24/07 05:59:32 PM
Age 30, IA
First let me say that I am thankful for your gentle and kind spirit while debating this subject, which is a rarety on this site! Secondly let me say that I really would like to reply once more to your last statement as I feel I have some very good angles that I could present, but as I have thought about it I have decided that it has to end somewhere otherwise we would go on forever and we have both made an equal number of statements so this would be a good stopping point! I'm going to leave a link for you and others to prayerfully and biblically examine! It is a Oneness vs. Trinity ONLINE AUDIO debate between David Bernard and Dr. Gene Cook! Once at the web site click on the appropriate link for this debate! Please also check out the link that I posted below in respose to Age 62, Ga. on water baptism! If you or anyone else at who reads this would like an impartial biblical and historical study on the Godhead and Baptism please leave your e-mail address and I will forward a copy of it to you! Anyway, here's the link that will get you to the audio debate which is almost 2.5 hours long. www.freewebs.com/onenessresource/audiodebate.htm Click here to reply to this post
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: T.D. Jakes and Oneness Pentecostalism (aka Modalism)
Posted On: 01/26/07 01:29:54 AM
Age 61, TX
I don't anticipate changing my position on the Trinity, but I'll try to go to the website you listed tomorrow. Are you equally willing to read these websites?
http://www.equip.org/free/DT160.htm
http://www.probe.org/theology-and-philosophy/theology---god--trinity/what-difference-does-the-trinity-make.html Click here to reply to this post
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: T.D. Jakes and Oneness Pentecostalism (aka Modalism)
Posted On: 01/27/07 02:24:56 AM
Age 30, IA
I will definately check them out and examine them through prayer and scripture! I'm not trying to persuade you to change your position! That's God's department! Philippians 3:15. Click here to reply to this post
Re: Re: T.D. Jakes and Oneness Pentecostalism (aka Modalism)
Posted On: 01/15/07 10:45:48 AM
Age 62, GA
In my early Christian days (1974), I also came face to face with the "Jesus Only" belief structure. I was a brand new believer stationed in Hawaii in the USAF. There was a young man under my supervision who said he was a believer in Jesus and after I was saved and had been baptized (water), I was sharing my testimony with him. He asked me, "Were you baptized in the name of Jesus?" I had to think because it was all so new to me, but I responded, "No, I believe it was in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit." He then said that I had been baptized wrong and needed to be baptized again in the name of Jesus only (Acts 2:38). So, I guess Dr. Jakes, and those who believe as he does, must overlook Matthew 3:16-17; Mk. 1:10-11; Lk. 3:21; and Matt. 28:18-20.
Sincerely,
Rev. Larry E. Teboe, D.Min. Click here to reply to this post
Re: Re: Re: T.D. Jakes and Oneness Pentecostalism (aka Modalism)
Posted On: 01/17/07 02:23:44 AM
Age 30, IA
Would you please list the place (or places if applicable) in the Bible where individuals WERE baptized in the trinitarian 'formula' of father, son, and holy spirit! Please list the book, chapter, and verse! After you have done so, I will list the PLACES, book, chapters,and verses where individuals were baptized in the NAME of the LORD JESUS CHRIST! If you would like to receive a detailed and impartial Biblical and historic study on this issue, please list your e-mail address and I will forward a copy of it to you!!! Click here to reply to this post
Re: Re: Re: Re: T.D. Jakes and Oneness Pentecostalism (aka Modalism)
Posted On: 01/24/07 05:30:51 PM
Age 30, IA
Well I don't think you're going to respond so I thought I would leave you with a link on water baptism that I would encourage you and every one else who reads this to take a look at! It's not the study that I was going to e-mail to you which also included a historical examination of the issue! Any way I would like to encourage all who view this article to read it prayerfully and examine it in light of scripture! I'll leave you with this question regarding this article! If what it says is not so, why is not so? www.jimfeeney.org/waterbaptism.html Click here to reply to this post
Re: Re: Re: T.D. Jakes and Oneness Pentecostalism (aka Modalism)
Posted On: 01/16/07 10:47:27 PM
Age 61, TX
Thank you Rev. for your input. You referred to Jakes as "Dr." May I ask if you or anyone knows where T. D. Jakes got a doctorate? Or for that matter, what, if any, seminary he might have attended? Click here to reply to this post
