logo
 

Go Back   HuntingNet.com Forums > Non Hunting > Religion

Religion Discuss how your religious views affect your hunting lifestyle. All religions are welcome to post.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 10-16-2006, 06:07 PM   #1
Dominant Buck
 
Chuck7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 23,569
Default Beginings of Oneness

The modern beginnings of Oneness
The Pentecostal movement was from its inception Trinitarian. It was from the revival at the Azusa Street Mission from 1906 to 1909 that the Pentecostal experience spread throughout the world. When this modern day revival had first occurred with the baptism of the Holy Spirit and speaking in tongues, it was upholding Trinitarianism.
Their message of Oneness was first delivered to the Pentecostals that fateful day on 1913 in a camp meeting in Arroyo Seco, California, where hundreds of preachers were attending. The truth of the Oneness of God was given accompanied by the new revelation of baptism in the name of Jesus. Evangelist R.E. McAlister was selected to preach on the subject of water baptism. He began with the accepted baptismal message and spoke on the different modes of baptism, mentioning trine immersion by which the candidate was immersed three times face forward. He summed it up by "they justify their method, by saying that baptism is in the likeness of Christ's death, and make a point from scripture that Christ bowed his head when he died." that to them, it was necessary to baptize once for each person in the Godhead (Father, Son, and Holy Ghost). He concluded his message abruptly by saying that the Scriptural answer to this was that the Apostles invariably baptized all their converts once in the name of Jesus Christ. He ended by stating the words Father, Son, and Holy Ghost were never usedby the early church in Christian baptism .
McAlister introduced in 1913 a "new thing[/i]," a Jesus name baptismal formula--[/i] that had no mention of the Father and the Holy Spirit. McAlister was taken aside at the time and told not to preach the this new theory about the "baptismal formula."

However, many hearing McAllister speak received the new revelation of the name Jesus. Three important men attended and were influenced by this new revelation, these were Frank Ewart, G.T.Haywood, Glenn Cook.
By the spring of 1914,Ewart accepted the "new found truth[/i] "became one of its leading advocates. Ewart reached the conclusion that the singular "name" in Matthew 28:19 was Jesus Christ. He came to believe that the one true God who had revealed himself as Father, in the Son, and as the Holy Spirit was none other than Jesus Christ. To support this view, he pointed to Colossians 2:9, which states that in Jesus dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.
Ewart explained his discovery to other Pentecostal ministers, some of whom rejected his teaching, but others enthusiastically embraced it. On April 15, 1914, Ewart rebaptized Glenn A. Cook, his assistant and a veteran evangelist of the Azusa Street Mission, in the name of Jesus Christ, and Cook rebaptized Ewart. This would set in motion an issue that would divide the Pentecostal movement between the Trinitarians and the Jesus Name only, or Oneness, believers.

After Ewart and Cook were rebaptized, they began to rebaptized thousands of Pentecostals with the shorter new found formula "in Jesus name." Claiming those baptized with Mt.28 were not valid, it must be "in the name of Jesus" (only).

Anyone baptized in the threefold name of "Father, Son and Holy Spirit", must renounce that baptism and be rebaptised with the right words said over them, before they can be regarded as biblically baptised.

Today it is added one must speak in tongues to have salvation. This evidence of receiving the Holy Spirit (i.e. speaking in tongues) must be present or they are not born again, and they cannot enter the Kingdom of God.


Frank Ewart stated of this message it was "the shot had been fired, and its sound was destined to be heard around the world, as Christendom would soon be shaken by this new doctrine (p.106) But it was hardly new, it was a revived ancient heresy of Sabellian. Not unlike the Campellites and Kip Mckean, who also stated of his discovery in restoring the ancient Gospel of salvation by water, what a revelation !
When the new baptismal formulae was promoted and accepted it opened the door to the Sabellian heresy that was dealt with so long ago in the early Church. All these conclusions were arrived by a method of interpretation[/i], that used only a "part" of Scripture not the "whole" teaching in Scripture. In other words they made the whole bible [/i]to "fit" the new baptismal formula.
This movement began to sweep through the church's, especially the newly formed Assembly"s of God. The issue of baptism in Jesus name was debated at the general council in 1915.Trinitarians within the Assembly of God stood their ground, opposing the new doctrine and embraced the traditional formula. A "Statement of Fundamental Truths was drawn up adopting a Trinitarian statement in 1916 as a basis for membership. With this stand it severed 156 ministers from the 585 which were in the organization. From this the Oneness denomination was formed. The Pentecostal Church officially Incorporated in 1945 separating with the Assemblies. In January 1918 the General Assembly of the Apostolic Assemblies merged with the Pentecostal Assemblies of the World, a Pentecostal organization that be in Los Angeles in 1906 (Golder, 1973, 31)
According to Oneness, they were promoting false doctrine and were not saved because they did not follow the prescribed formulae of being baptized in Jesus" name "only," nor did they renounce the Trinity. But Oneness wouldn"t even know there was a baptism of the Spirit or the gift of glossalia if it were not for those Trinitarians who received it first. Considering the Oneness position that is held today, we would have to believe that those who first had the evidence of the gift of tongues (but were Trinitarians) were unsaved and practicing paganism.
So they trace their own beginnings to Trinitarian's, then turn around and claim they alone have the truth, being the one true Church. So the Church was refound 85 years ago by a new revelation and an experience.What started as a new baptism formula actually became a restoration of a lost gospel -- salvation by water. It was not salvation in Jesus name but specifically salvation by baptism in Jesus name. They then took the position of being the "only church" who preaches the true "Apostolic doctrine" the same as the first church." Up until this time all the people that loved and served the Lord were all lost, not having the Spirit or truth, because of an improper baptism and no tongues. The truth of the matter is that most agree it was they who departed from historic Christian doctrine. By isolating themselves and thinking that they alone hold to the true Apostolic doctrine apart from the Christian church, they have joined with many others that have preceded them to lay their claim to restoring the truth. The Mormons, 7th day Adventists, Jehovah"s Witnesses, Christadelphians, the Campellites ( today"s Int. Churches of Christ) and those who came afterwards like Iglesia ni Cristo, ad infinitum.
__________________
The Day I Saw Jesus
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p20E0nA7pZI
Chuck7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2006, 06:58 PM   #2
Giant Nontypical
 
Leafrivermac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: South Mississippi
Posts: 5,233
Default RE: Beginings of Oneness

Tertullian (c. 150- c. 225 A.D.) was the first person recorded by history to use the words trinity (Latin: trinitas), substance (substantia), and person (persona) in relation to God. He was the first to speak of three persons in one substance (Latin: una substantia et tres personae). Tertullian adhered to the economic conception of the trinity. That is, he believed that the trinity exists for the purpose of revelation only, and after this has been accomplished the distinctions between the persons will cease. However, he definitely differed from Irenaeus in that he used the Logos doctrine of the Greek apologists. Tertullian equated the Logos with the Son. He believed the Father brought the Logos into existence for the creation of the world and the Logos was subordinate to the Father. The doctrine of the trinity posed no problem for Tertullian, for his whole theology rested on the thought that the more impossible the object of faith is, the more certain it is. He has been characterized by the statement, "I believe because it is absurd."
There is some question as to what Tertullian actually meant by his trinitarian formulation, especially his use of the Latin word persona. According to a handbook of theological terms, in Roman law the word meant a legal entity or party. In drama it meant a mask worn by an actor or, by extension, a role played by an actor. Neither usage necessarily indicates the modern meaning of person as a self-conscious being. For example, one actor could play several roles (personae) and one legal corporation (persona) could consist of several individuals. On the other hand, presumably the word could also designate individual human beings.
In the fourth century, the Greek word hypostasis was used in the official formulation of trinitarian doctrine. According to Noss, hypostasis was an abstract word meaning subsistence or individualized manifestation. He says, "When this formulation was translated into Latin, the rather abstract Greek for individualized manifestation became the rather concrete word persona, and connotations of distinct and self-contained personality were suggested in a way not intended by the original Greek wording." However, this concrete Latin word was precisely the one Tertullian had used earlier. Another scholar states that by the time hypostasis was translated into persona the two words were basically equivalent, both meaning "individual being."
It is apparent that many people in Tertullian's time opposed his new formulation. By his own admission the majority of believers in his day rejected his doctrine on two grounds: Their Rule of Faith (early creed or statement of belief) prohibited polytheism, and his doctrine divided the unity of God. Our knowledge of the early modalist (Oneness) believers, Noetus and Praxeas, comes from their strong opposition to Tertullian and his strong opposition to them. If Tertullian meant only that God had three roles, masks, or manifestations, there would be no conflict with modalism, especially since Tertullian did not believe in an eternal trinity. Therefore, we conclude that Tertullian did mean three essential differences in God and that persona did connote or imply a distinct personality, as suggested by Noss. In any case, it is clear that in Tertullian's day Oneness believers saw his doctrine as sharply opposed to their own, which was the majority belief of the time.
Here is one final note on Tertullian. He became a follower of Montanus, an early heretic who claimed to be the Paraclete (Comforter) promised in John 14 and the last prophet before the end of the world. Tertullian eventually began to praise celibacy and condemn marriage. In the end, he was excommunicated along with the rest of the Montanists.

__________________
And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another.
Leafrivermac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2006, 09:22 PM   #3
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,824
Default RE: Beginings of Oneness

it opened the door to the Sabellian heresy that was dealt with so long ago in the early Church.

Chuck; Since you have researched this out to verify that it is truth, when and where was this Sabellian heresy dealt with?
Snooky is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Oneness Heresy Chuck7 Religion 37 10-20-2006 10:20 AM
The problem with oneness. Chuck7 Religion 88 01-30-2006 11:57 AM
Oneness & Trinity Chuck7 Religion 6 09-17-2005 01:09 PM
Oneness Leafrivermac Religion 33 09-09-2005 11:03 AM
Can someone define "oneness" please? etothepii Religion 3 05-21-2004 01:35 PM

 

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:11 PM.