Responding to Sabellianism (e.g. United Pentecostals)

The view briefly stated:¹

“The Scriptures teach that the Godhead is comprised of one person (Jesus Christ) – not three, and that all who teach otherwise are false teachers and will be lost in hell” (Billy Lewis, Lipe-Lewis Debate [Winona, MS: Choate, 1984]: ii).

Arguments Considered:

“John 10:30 shows that Jesus is the Father.” Jesus himself explains his oneness with the Father. In John 17:11, 21, 22 he prayed to his Father on behalf of his disciples, asking “that they may be one as we are …. that they may be one, as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be one is us … that they may be one just as we are one.”² Jesus never said that he was the same person as his Father but rather expressed his oneness (unity) with the Father; they are one in purpose (Eph. 3:10-11), teaching (2 John 9-11), words and work (John 14:10-11; 5:36), nature (Col. 2:9), love (John 15:10), et al.

“Passages like John 8:19; 14:9; 15:23 show that Jesus is the Father.” Jesus stated in Mark 9:37, “Whoever receives one of these little children in my name receives me; and whoever receives me, receives not me but him who sent me.” If this statement and similar ones teach that Jesus is the same person as his Father, it also teaches that one of these little children is the same person as Jesus. To receive a child is to receive Christ; to receive Christ is to receive the Father – but they are not all one and the same person! If any other man had said, “If you’ve seen me, you’ve seen my father,” we would clearly understand that he is referring to similarities of traits rather than identity. John 1:18, “No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has declared him.” John 14:24, 28 = Jesus is clearly not the Father. John 14:7; 15:23, “my Father also” = plurality, distinction. John 15:24, “both me and my Father.”

“John 14:10, 11 show that Jesus is the Father.” Jesus being “in” the Father and the Father “in” him does not make them one and the same person. John 14:20, “I am in my Father, and you [disciples] in me, and I in you” (cf. 1 John 3:24; 4:12-13). John 17:21, “that they all may be one, as you, Father, are in me, and I in you; that they also may be one in us …”

“Colossians 2:9 shows that Jesus is the only Person of the Godhead.” This passage clearly does not limit the entire Godhead to the physical body of Jesus. Otherwise no part of God could be outside of Christ, thus God was no longer omnipresent if limited to a physical body, and the events at Jesus’ baptism would be impossible to explain (Matt. 3:13-17). Eph. 3:19, “that you [Christians] may be filled with all the fullness of God” (cf. 4:13).

“Jesus is prophetically called ‘Mighty God’ and ‘Everlasting Father’ in Isaiah 9:6.” The term “father” is employed here as an anthropomorphic metaphor, signifying a progenitor, authority figure, and caregiver (cf. 2 Kgs. 2:12; Job 29:16; Isa. 22:21; 1 Cor. 4:15), which is descriptive of Jesus’ earthly role in relation to God’s children (Isaiah 8:18; Heb. 2:13; 12:2). As deity Jesus is both mighty and eternal (cf. Micah 5:2), but the later New Testament distinction between God the Father and the Son of God is relevant only to the incarnation (cf. Luke 1:35) and the corresponding messianic scheme (cf. Isaiah 53:4, 6, 10).

“Baptism is valid only if it is administered in the name of Jesus alone as a verbal formula.” There is a difference in baptizing in Jesus’ name and in using the name of Jesus as a verbal baptismal formula. The apostles preached “in the name of Jesus” (Acts 4:2, 17-18; 9:27, 29; etc.), but this involved more than merely saying his name. They preached by his authority (Matt. 28:18-20). All that we do must be done “in the name of” (i.e. by the authority of) Jesus (Col. 3:17; cf. 2 Thess. 3:6; Acts 4:7, 10). To baptize “in the name of Jesus” is to baptize according to his authority. Jesus has been given “all authority,” and he commanded to baptize “in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit” (Matt. 28:18-19). When the early disciples baptized in the name of (by the authority of) Jesus, they did just that. If one insists on a specific verbal formula, what exactly is to be said: “Jesus Christ” (Acts 2:38), “Lord Jesus” (Acts 8:16), “Lord” (Acts 10:48), “Father, Son, Holy Spirit” (Matt. 28:19), or nothing at all (Acts 8:38; 16:15, 33; 18:3)?

Further Observations:

     In John 5:31 Jesus said, “If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true.” Jesus had the Father as an additional witness (v. 37). In John 8:13 the Pharisees made the following charge against Jesus: “You bear witness of yourself, your witness is not true.” The Lord replied (vv. 16-18): “And yet if I do judge, my judgment is true; for I am not alone, but I am with the Father who sent me. It is written in your law that the testimony of two men is true. I am One who bears witness of myself, and the Father who sent me bears witness of me.” If the Sabellian (“Oneness”) view is correct, then Jesus was alone in his testimony, and according to the Law (Deut. 17:6; 19:15; John 5:31; 8:17) his testimony was invalid. John 16:32, “I am not alone, because the Father is with me.”

     John 14:23, “We [Christ and the Father] will come to him and make Our home with him.” The pronouns “we” and “our” show plurality. If someone says this has reference to Christ’s divine and human natures, was Jesus therefore saying that both his divine and human natures will indwell those who keep his word? A human being has a human nature whether he is obedient or not.

     If no one has seen God the Father at any time (1 John 4:12), yet Jesus has been seen (John 1:14), how can Jesus be the Father? If the Father knows the day of Christ’s return, but Christ does not know (Mark 13:32), how can Christ be the Father? Since Eph. 4:4-6 shows a distinction between one Spirit, one Lord, and one God/Father, how can they all be one and the same Person? Are the one body, one hope, one faith, and one baptism all the same?

     If the Father and the Holy Spirit are one and the same, does the Holy Spirit make intercession with himself (Rom. 8:26-27)? If Jesus is both the Father and the Holy Spirit, does he divide himself into three parts (John 15:26)? Out of whose hand did Jesus (the Lamb) take the scroll (Rev. 5:1, 7)? If Jesus is the only Person of the Godhead, the following scriptures are confusing and misleading: Gen. 1:26; Matt. 28:19; John 14:23-26; 15:24-26; 16:32; 17:1ff.; 2 Cor. 13:14; Eph. 4:4-6; 1 Pet. 1:2; et al.

     What about 2 John 9, “both the Father and the Son”? If this refers to divine and human natures, how is abiding in Christ’s doctrine a requirement for having a human nature? All human beings have a human nature regardless of whether or not they abide in Christ’s doctrine. This verse clearly shows a distinction between Christ and the Father, who both share the nature of God. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not the same Person: Matt. 3:16-17; Luke 1:35; John 14:26; 15:26; 2 Cor. 13:14; Eph. 2:18; 4:4-6; 1 Pet. 1:2; Jude 20-21; Rev. 1:4-5.

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ Although sometimes attributed to Theodotus of Byzantium (ca. 190), the first on record to have promoted the view that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all the same Person is Sabellius of Libya (ca. 215-220), thus “Sabellianism.” He denied the concept of the triune Godhead and maintained that the designations Father, Son, and Holy Spirit merely denote different capacities or manifestations of the same divine being. The 16th-century Spanish Reformer Michael Servetus reaffirmed this teaching (resulting in his execution by Calvinists in Geneva), as did the 18th-century Swedish philosopher Emanuel Swedenborg. In more recent times this view has been espoused by the United Pentecostal Church and various other so-called “Oneness Pentecostals” or “Jesus-Only Pentecostals.”
     ² Scripture quotations are from the New King James Version. Emphasis added in italics.

Related Posts: The Triune Godhead, Responding to Anti-Trinitarian Arguments, The Lord is the Spirit

Image credit: http://www.factofun.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Jesus-christ.jpg

Responding to Popular Anti-Trinitarian Arguments

     Clear and effective communication is possible only when those involved define, understand, and employ the same terminology in the same way. We therefore begin with clarifying some key words and concepts.

Definition of Terms:

     Monotheism is the belief in only one God, in contrast to the multiple gods of polytheism (cf. Ex. 20:3; Deut. 4:35, 39; 6:4; 1 Kgs. 8:60; 1 Chron. 17:20; Isa. 43:11; Zech. 14:9; Gal. 3:20; Jas. 2:19; etc.). However, there is significant disagreement among monotheists as to how God is to be understood and explained. Unitarianism is the view that God is a single Person or entity, the concept generally held by orthodox Jews and Muslims. Binitarianism is the idea that the one God is comprised of two divine Persons (the Father and the Son),¹ espoused by 7th-day Church of God groups such as the General Conference of the Church of God (7th day), United Church of God, Living Church of God, and a few splinter groups of the Worldwide Church of God. Trinitarianism is the belief that the one unified God is comprised of three divine Persons (the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit)² and has been considered the orthodox view of most mainline believers throughout church history.

     Seeing that strict unitarianism is very difficult to harmonize with the overall teachings of scripture, it is no surprise that a wide variety of unitarian subgroups have proliferated. Sabellianism, named after the 3rd-century theologian Sabellius,³ is the idea that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all the same Person, espoused by the United Pentecostal Church and various other so-called “Oneness Pentecostals” or “Jesus-Only Pentecostals.” Arianism, named after Arius of Alexandria (ca. 250-336), the first on record to have promoted this view, is the idea that Jesus the Son was created by God the Father and is therefore inferior in essence to the Father. A form of this doctrine is held by religious groups such as the Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, and various Unitarian sects. Socinianism is a view maintaining that Jesus did not exist until he was conceived by the virgin Mary.⁴ This theological concept is named after the 16th-century Italian theologian Fausto Sozzini (Lat. Faustus Socinus) and was popularized in Poland. Modern-day proponents of this view include the Unitarian Church of Transylvania (also Poland and England), the Christadelphians, and the Church of God General Conference.

Responding to Popular Anti-Trinitarian Arguments:

     1. “The word 'trinity' is not in the Bible.” Well, the word “Bible” is not in the Bible. Neither are terms such as "monotheism," "incarnation," “omniscience,” "omnipotence," and “providence,” but these words do convey biblical concepts. Irrespective of the descriptive terminology that might be employed for communicative purposes, the question should be whether or not the words convey biblical truth. Perhaps English terms such as Godhead, Divine Nature, Divinity, and Deity are to be preferred.

     2. “The concept of trinitarianism is at variance with the biblical doctrine of monotheism.” This is a false antithesis. The concept of trinitarianism conflicts with unitarianism but not with monotheism (see definitions above). Monotheism is the belief in only one God, which is a conviction held by both trinitarians and unitarians. The unitarian concept is God as a single entity, while the trinitarian concept is one God (the Divine Nature) consisting of three distinct personages (the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit) in perfect unity. Trinitarianism is not the same as tritheism (belief in three separate gods). Note one of the primary differences in the way in which certain passages of scripture are interpreted by unitarians and trinitarians. When unitarians read about “God,” they are thinking of one Person; when trinitarians read about “God,” they allow the context to determine whether one or more divine Persons are intended. When a unitarian imposes his view of God on the text, and reads it with a misconstrued idea of the trinitarian view, he makes nonsensical arguments like: “How could Jesus be his own father?,” or “Was God speaking to himself?,” etc.

     3. “The trinitarian doctrine originated in the 3rd–4th centuries along with other Roman Catholic heresies like transubstantiation, indulgences, maryolatry, etc.” This argument is similar to the sabbatarians’ accusation that Roman Catholicism (viz. Constantine) is allegedly responsible for changing the Sabbath to Sunday. It is a smoke-screen diverting attention from the real issue of what the Bible says. What about the history of the unitarian beliefs of sabellianism, arianism, and socinianism? If modern-day advocates of these teachings claim the Bible as the source of their beliefs rather than Sabellius, Arius, or Socinus, it is disingenuous to make shallow and misleading historical claims about the alleged origin of trinitarian beliefs.

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ Some have claimed that the 2nd-century Melito of Sardis held this view, but this is disputed. By the 381 Council of Constantinople, it was a topic of debate and its proponents (a.k.a. “semi-arians”) rejected both arianism and trinitarianism.

     ² This doctrine was affirmed in the 2nd-century writings of Ignatius of Antioch, Justin Martyr, and Theophilus of Antioch, and in the 3rd-century writings of Tertullian of Carthage.

    ³ This idea has at times been attributed to Theodotus of Byzantium (ca. 190), but the first on record to have promoted it is Sabellius of Libya (ca. 215-220). He denied the concept of the triune Godhead and maintained that the designations Father, Son, and Holy Spirit merely denote different capacities or manifestations of the same divine being. The 16th-century Spanish Reformer Michael Servetus reaffirmed this teaching (resulting in his execution by Calvinists in Geneva), as did the 18th-century Swedish philosopher Emanuel Swedenborg.

     ⁴ This doctrine was espoused as early as the 4th century by the Pannonian bishop Photinus.

Related Posts: The Triune Godhead, Responding to Sabellianism, Responding to Arianism, Responding to Socinianism 

Image credit: http://www.relate4u.org/images/people.203.jpg