Mormonism

Jehovah's Witnesses

Oneness Theology
(modalism) 
 
Roman Catholicism

Apologetic
 Articles

Debates

Early Church Documents

Support this ministry
DONATIONS

Certificate
of Theological Apologetics
Program

*FEATURE
ARTICLES

How to share your faith with Jehovah’s Witnesses

"Firstborn" and the JWs

Definite Atonement

John 1:1 and the Jehovah's Witnesses' New World Translation

The Rise of False Teachings within the Church


The Do’s and Don’ts of Effective Witnessing
 

Most utilized unitarian Objections to the Trinity
 

The term "Jehovah" and the Jehovah's  Witnesses

Mormonism and Black Skin
 

Irresistible Grace: The Effectual Calling of God
 

The Security of the Believer: Perseverance of the Saints
 

The Big Three

The Jehovah's Witnesses most used three passages to show that Jesus was created

Prov. 8:22; Col. 1:15; and Rev. 3:14

Proverbs 8:22: “Jehovah produced me as the beginning of his way. . . .” (NWT).

 JW theological starting point: God is unitarian (i.e., one Person, Jehovah) thus Jesus is not God, but created. 

RESPONSE:

 1. “Possessed” (Heb. quanah), means “to get” or “to buy” (e.g., Prov. 1:5; 4:5, 7).

 2. The context of Proverbs chapters 1-9 is *Wisdom*. Wisdom is personified as a woman (cf. 8:1, 2, 3, 9:1-3; etc.). But to maintain that the chapter is referring to the Messiah, the NWT  (the Watchtower's translation of the Bible) changed the original gender of the Hebrew pronouns ("her," "she") to neuter pronouns, "it," its" (8:2, 3, 11; 9:1, 2, 3, etc.).  

3. There has been no Jewish Rabbi or Jewish literature that has interpreted Proverbs 8 as speaking of Messiah. For Scripture does not teach that the Messiah of Israel would be female.

4. Even though some church Fathers saw these passages as referring to Christ, none saw the passages teaching that Christ was created. So,  appealing to church history does not support the WT view.

5. Scripture presents that Jesus is eternal God, Creator of all things (cf. John 1:1; 8:24; Col. 1:16-17; Heb. 1:3, 8-10; Titus 2:13).

--------------------------------

Colossians 1:15: Christ is, “the firstborn of all creation.”

JWs assume here that "firstborn" mean "first-created" as they see Jesus.

RESPONSE:

  1. Historic note: Paul wrote Colossians for the express purpose to refute the Gnostic heresy that taught Jesus was not God, nor the Creator of all things. They taught that sprit was good and matter (earth, flesh, etc.) was inherently evil, see more on Colossians 1:15-17 here.

2. The word translated “firstborn” (prōtotokos) primarily means "supremacy" or "superiority" as the entire context of chapter 1 indicates: all things have been created through Him and for Him. He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.

Biblical examples of where prōtotokos means supremacy:

*Exodus 4:22: Israel is called “firstborn” yet there were many nations before Israel--Israel had the supremacy being God's chosen nation.

*In Psalm 89:27, David is called “firstborn,” but David was technically last born.

Referring to Psalm 89:27, the Watchtower correctly recognized that fact that "firstborn" here refers to David's preeminent position as stated in their JW training book, Aid to Bible Understanding:

David, who was the youngest son of Jesses, was called by Jehovah the "first-born," due to Jehovah’s elevation of David to the preeminent position in God's chosen nation (Aid to Bible Understanding, 1971, 584; emphasis added).

Genesis 41:51, Manasseh is called “firstborn” and Ephraim is called “second.” But in Jeremiah 31:9, Ephraim is called “firstborn.” Moreover,

Thus, in these contexts "firstborn" does not indicate "first-created" as JWs assumes of Christ in Colossians. Hence, Christ as Creator had supremacy over "all things" created.

3. If Paul wanted to convey that Jesus was “first-created” he certainly could have used the word prōto-ktistos meaning “first-created” to do so (cf. 2 Cor. 5:18: kainē  ktisis, “new creation”).

--------------------------------

Revelation 3:14: Jesus is, “the beginning of the creation by God.”

The JWs assume here that Jesus is said to have had a beginning.

RESPONSE:

1. The Greek word translated “beginning” is archē can mean  "source" or "ruler" (e.g., architect, archbishop).

2. Concurring with this meaning, the NWT translates archē in Luke 20:20 as “governments.” See also Ephesians 6:12 where archē is translated by the NWT as “governments.”

3. Note that in Revelation 22:13,  Jehovah, whom JWs believe is eternal,  is called archē.

4. The the NWT mistranslates the passage. The Greek does say "by God," but rather "of God" (tou theou, lit., "of the God"). The term God (thou) is in the *genitive* case (i.e., the case that expresses possession) indicating that  Christ is the "ruler" or "architect"  (archē) of God's creation.

For more information on the JWs see Jehovah's Witnesses

sola gratia   solo Christo   sola fide     sola Scriptura   soli Deo gloria

The atoning cross-work of God the Son was not a vague non-specific universal work for which no one is actually (but only potentially) atoned, but rather it was a *definite atonement and according His perfect *sovereignty and pleasure of His own will (cf. Eph. 1:4-5, 11). 

ALWAYS BEING READY TO MAKE A DEFENSE

   In the first century the axiom of the church was: "Contend for the Faith" (Jude 3), but regrettably that has  changed. Through the Apostle Peter, God commands all Christians to always be ready to provide a defense (apologia) and reason (logos) for their faith (cf. 1 Pet. 3:15; Titus 1:9, 13). If Christians do not speak out against false teachings that confuse as well as deny definitive Christian theology, thus deny Christ, the false teachings will be construed as truth. Christian should be able to reasonably and biblically communicate essential Christian doctrines such as the Tri-Unity of God, the full Deity of Jesus Christ the Son of God and Justification through faith alone. Accurately affirming and defending who God is, thus, how He revealed Himself in Scripture, not only honors Him as He should be honored, but highly glorifies Him--for it is an act of true worship.  
    
                     See  The Rise of False Teachings within the Church

A Definitive Look at Oneness Theology: Defending the Tri-Unity of God (by Edward L. Dalcour, University Press, 2005)--Order here   

"For those who do not have time to conduct the exegetical work necessary to refute Oneness claims but who wish to be theologically informed or to discuss the doctrine of the Trinity with theologians in the United Pentecostal tradition, Dalcour has provided a valuable resource."—John D. Laing, Harvard School for Theological Studies, Southwestern Journal of Theology, Vol. 47.  

A Concise Look at Oneness Beliefs

Theological Identification: “Oneness” theology, historically known as “modalism.”[1]

Who: Oneness churches include the United Pentecostal Church International (hereafter UPCI), which is the largest Oneness domination. In addition to the UPCI, there are many other Oneness churches having generic names such as “Apostolic,” “Bethel Temple,” “Higher Ground,” “Jesus’ Name,” or even “Jesus Only,” etc. Further, there are many popular and prolific preachers on the airwaves that propagate Oneness theology (e.g., Trinity Broadcasting Network [TBN] features one of the most recognized Oneness preachers, T. D. Jakes of the Potters House, Dallas, TX. [2]

Theological Distinctives:  

1. Oneness theology rejects the doctrine of the Trinity, for they are unitarian (i.e., believes that God exists as one Person—unipersonal).

2. Oneness theology rejects the eternality of the Person of the Son.

3. Oneness theology rejects that the Son was the actual Creator.

4. Oneness theology rejects the personhood of the Holy Spirit.

5. Many Oneness churches especially the UPCI rejects justification through faith alone by teaching that one must be water baptized (“in the name of Jesus” only) to be saved—with the evidence, as the UPCI teaches, of speaking in other tongues.

6. Virtually all Oneness churches reject that water baptism should be done in the *triune* formal as instructed by Jesus in Matthew 28:19, rather, as they insist, it should be dome in the name of Jesus only.

 God: Oneness believers categorically reject the doctrine of the Trinity, thus rejecting the true nature of God—rejecting God Himself. Oneness doctrine holds to the idea that God is a unitarian deity, thus existing as one Person (or unipersonal).

This one unitarian/unipersonal deity (whose name is “Jesus”) has manifested as one of three modes or roles, as either the “Father” (the divine nature of Jesus who is God—eternal), or the Son (the human nature of Jesus, not God—not eternal), or Holy Spirit (synonymous with the Father mode). Hence, Oneness believers firmly deny that there is one God revealed in three distinct Persons. For this reason, believers in this doctrine are called “Oneness” believes. As seen, this belief is also defined as *unitarian* (a one Person God).  In an official UPCI doctrinal tract titled, “60 Questions on the Godhead with Bible answers,” we read in question 11:

 Does the Bible say that all the Godhead is revealed in one person? Yes, in Jesus Christ. II Corinthians 4:4; Colossians 1:19; 2:9; Hebrews 1:3 (http://www.upci.org/doctrine/60Questions.asp).

Jesus: As indicated, according to Oneness theology, the “name” of this unipersonal deity is “Jesus.” Therefore, as they believe, Jesus, while on earth, had two natures: divine as the Father/Holy Spirit and human as the “Son of God,” though not “God the Son,” only the Father is God. Therefore, Jesus (the name of the unitarian deity) revealed Himself as three different modes or roles.

As a result, Oneness teachers assert that when Scripture speaks of Jesus as God (e.g., John 8:24, 58; 20:28 Titus 2:13; etc.) it is speaking of Jesus in the Father mode. But when Scripture speaks of Jesus as the human man (e.g., “I thirst” or “who touched Me”) it is really speaking of Jesus in the human Son mode. So, when reading Scripture, one must determine, according to this doctrine, in which mode or manifestation Jesus was speaking: the “Father” mode, the human “Son” mode, or the “Holy Spirit” mode?

By asserting that Jesus’ divine nature was merely the mode of the Father (and Holy Spirit), Oneness believers are able to proclaim that “Jesus is God in the flesh.” However, this is a play-on-words, for when they say “God” what they mean is that Jesus as the Father is God—namely, His divine nature. In this way, they can say that Jesus (as the Father) is the eternal God, or that Jesus (as the Father) preexisted; while claiming that it was only for the sake of redemption that the Father (Jesus’ divine nature, not the preexistent Son) came down and wrapped Himself in human flesh (though, not actually becoming flesh). In this view, Oneness doctrine teaches that the Person of the Son was not eternal His life started in Bethlehem.
            For a short outline on the Oneness rejection of the Son's preexistence see this  See The Preexistence of the Son and Oneness Theology.

The Father: Jesus’ divine nature, God.

 Son: Jesus’ human nature, the Son of God, not God the Son, for only the Father is God. Jesus’ divine nature is the Father (or the Holy Spirit), His human nature is the Son.

Holy Spirit: Jesus’ divine nature. Thus, as to His divine nature, Jesus is both Father and Holy Spirit depending on His particular function (e.g., Jesus as the Father created all things, but Jesus as the Holy Spirit mode is the Comforter).

See10 Questions to ask Oneness Believers

NOTES

[1] Oneness theology was first known as monarchianism, which comes from the Greek word monarchia, meaning single principle. There were two forms of monarchianism: modalistic, and the far less accepted, dynamic (or more properly called adoptionism), both of which emerged at the end of the second century. Modalistic monarchianism, known also as modalism, Sabellianism (named after the heretic Sabellius, who came to Rome and taught it at the beginning of the third century) and even patripassianism (from Lat., meaning, “father to suffer”). Today, however, modalism is generally classified as “Oneness.” Modalism earned its name from its distinctive theology. Basically, modalism (or Oneness theology) teaches that God is a unitarian (i.e., unipersonal), indivisible monad. Hence, the titles “Father,” “Son,” and “Holy Spirit” were merely the different modes, roles, or offices that the unipersonal deity temporally manifested for the sake of redemption. Oneness teachers today tell us that Jesus is the name of the single, lone Person behind the three masks of the “Father,” “Son” and “Holy Spirit” (in contrast to early modalism, which taught it was the Father Person behind the masks).

[2] If you are unsure about the orthodoxy of a particular church (or pastor), examine the church’s doctrinal statement concerning God. If it avoids the word “Person,” and/or describes God as three “manifestations” or “dimensions” (as T. D. Jakes does, see http://www.thepottershouse.org/PH_doctrine.html use extreme caution! Orthodox Christianity has never described God as merely temporary appearances, manifestations, or even worse, “dimensions.” Oneness churches typically describe God in those terms. However, if a church claims to be Trinitarian, yet uses terms like “manifestations” to describe the three Persons of the Trinity, it reveals theological ignorance or carelessness. In my observation, the term “manifestations” in a doctrinal statement frequently indicates Oneness rather than Trinitarian theology. Therefore, when churches avoid the term “Persons” in their doctrinal statements—beware.

The Canon is closed

So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints, and are of God's household having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the corner stone (Eph.2:19-20).

The foundation of the NT was laid once and for all. It was built on the apostle and prophets. The text does not say that the church was built on Christ, but rather on the apostles and prophets. Jesus Christ is the cornerstone that holds the whole church together. Paul does not envisage a succession of new apostles (as Rome teaches today). This is clear due to the fact that Paul uses the aorist passive participle form of epoikodomeō of  (epoikodomēthentes, lit., “having been built”). Hence, the action of the verb indicates that the foundation that was laid once and thus never needs to be repeated.

The notion of 'successive apostles' as taught by groups such as Roman Catholics and LDS do not consider (a) logically, if there is a need for new foundational apostles, then, the foundation was never really laid to begin with. Hence, something foundational by definition never needs additional foundations, and (b) the idea that we need new apostles or even secondary ones who will add to the fundamental work of the first century are really implying that we need new foundations in addition to or regardless of the foundation that was already laid: viz. the NT "apostles and prophets." Thus, each new foundation would logically require a new cornerstone.

In direct contrast to the Protestant concept of sola Scriptura ("Scripture alone") is sola Ecclesia (i.e., “Church alone”), which is clearly the marrow of groups such as Catholicism. Hence, it is not that the Catholic apologist does not have the ability to exegete, but he has no need, for the Church has done the job for him. For the Catholic sees his Church, not Scripture, as the final sole authority in all areas of life and theology (cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, para. 84-85, 113).

We worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity, Neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the Substance [nature] 
(Athanasian Creed).

There is one Physician who is possessed both of flesh and spirit; both made and not made [agennhtoj]; God existing in flesh; true life in death; both of Mary and of God; first possible and then impossible, even Jesus Christ our Lord (Ignatius, Letter to the Ephesians, 7. 2; c. A.D. 107).

We worship the one Deity in three Persons, subsisting without beginning, uncreated, without end, and to which there is no successor (Methodius, Oration on the Psalms, 5; c. A.D. 305).c. A.D. 305).

We neither separate the Holy Trinity, like some; nor do we as Sabellius work confusion [into it] (Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures, 16. 4; c. A.D. 348).

Sabellianism is Judaism imported into the preaching of the Gospel under the guise of Christianity. . . . 
(Basil the Great “To the notables of Neocaesarea,” in Letter 210; c. A.D. 375)

The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ [tou kuriou Ihsou Xristou], and [kai] the love of God [tou qeou], and [kai] the fellowship of the Holy Spirit [tou agiou pneumatoj] be with you all (2 Cor. 13:14).

Therefore, having been justified by faith, 
we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ
 (Rom. 5:1)

copyright:© 2008
Department of Christian Defense
 all rights reserved



Web design by L. D.