
The following is another section from my thesis.
Tommy Tenney
Another popular Modal-Evangelical is Tommy Tenney. He has grown in popularity in recent years particularly because of his most famous book, "The God Chasers." He has authored and co-authored several other books which are following on the heels of his original work. Because of his popularity, he is in demand as a conference speaker around the world, and is a weekly feature on TBN.
History
This self proclaimed “Holy Ghost Arsonist” (Phil, I suppose he is a Pyromaniac too!) was born in 1956 and began preaching when he was at the age of 16. He claimed to have received a genuine experience of the Holy Spirit while he was in the UPC: “I am a fourth generation Spirit-filled Christian, three generations deep into ministry.” He spent almost 10 years pastoring in the UPC until he became an itinerant evangelist in the early 1980’s and continued in that role until he left the UPC in 1992.
It appears that he left the organization because of their strict stance on holiness codes and their condemnatory attitude towards those who do not adhere to all of the holiness code. Tenney says that he left the group when he “‘couldn’t enforce some of the views’ of the UPC – including rules that to this day forbid pastors in the group from owning televisions.” Tenney never mentions the most prominent argument for leaving the UPCI: their denial of the Trinity.
Exposing his Modal-Evangelical position, Tenney says that “when he left the UPC, his eyes were opened to ‘how big the body of Christ really is.’” Apparently any distinction between an Oneness and Trinitarian God is not significant enough to mention. The mere fact that Tenney omits any reference to the nature of God (or a clear definition of it) as being a reason for his break with the UPC is an indicator that the issue had no part in his departure from the organization. Therefore, it is reasonable to believe that Tenney still holds to the same view of God as does the UPCI.
The “God moment” that changed Tenney’s life occurred on October 20, 1996. Invited as a guest speaker at Christian Tabernacle in Houston, Tenney was with the church’s pastor, Richard Heard. Heard took the stage and Tenney retreated to the back of the auditorium because he sensed that something awful was about to happen. With no warning, “a loud cracking sound jolted the audience. At that same instant the church’s acrylic pulpit split in half and fell on the carpet with a thud.” Pastor Heard was thrown back several feet and the congregation began to respond with fear.
The condition of the pulpit was the most remarkable display of the event. Acrylic pulpits do not naturally split in half. In the words of J. Lee Grady, “There was no logical explanation for what happened . . . . The company that manufactured the pulpit said it was made of a polymer material that isn’t supposed to crack even under hundreds of pounds of pressure.” In spite of the fact that most preachers would question themselves if God literally destroyed their pulpit, Tommy Tenney believed God was affirming his message. Tenney says that the “tangible presence of God . . . . ruined him forever.” The event traumatized him so much that he says “it messes me up when I talk about it. I cry for days after I do, so that’s why I decided to write about it.” Although the event ruined him, traumatized him, and practically rendered him incapable of re-telling the story, he has profited from the book financially and publicly. He would have his readers believe that he is really “embarrassed by the attention that the book has given his ministry.” However, this ministry is now sending out promotional tapes that require members to include a “$30 minimum” donation for participation (italics mine).
Doctrine
As previously stated, Tommy Tenney’s most famous book is "The God Chasers." It raises many issues that need to be addressed within the mundane Church. Tenney calls for a “chasing” Church dedicated to the Lord, genuinely seeking Him and His manifest presence in worship services. The concerns of this book reflect a heartfelt need of the universal Church, and are very attractive for those who love the Lord and desire a more meaningful relationship with Him. Although Tenney’s concerns are apparently written with the best intentions, there is an underlying spirit of deception in relation to his past in the Oneness Pentecostal movement and his present understanding of the Oneness of God.
Tommy Tenney clearly admits his salvation experience took place in the UPCI and that he ministered for 10 years in the anti-trinitarian organization. In attempt to validate his godly heritage, Tenney states that his father was “a national leader in a Pentecostal denomination in America.” Tenney is careful not to tell his readers the denomination in which his father is a leader. Upon investigation, it was discovered that the Reverend Tom F. Tenney has been the District Superintendent of the Louisiana District United Pentecostal Church since 1978. Even his mother Thetus Tenney is an international speaker and Coordinator of the World Network of Prayer, an international prayer service sponsored by the UCPI.
In a show of unity, father and son have co-authored the popular book, Secret Sources of Power. It is certainly difficult to conceive of writing a devotional book with a man who does not share the same view of the nature of God, yet this book is advertised on “The God Chasers” website, along with other books by Tommy Tenney. Furthermore, Tommy Tenney’s father endorses The God Chasers by saying, “this book points you in the right direction. I commend my son, Tommy, and this book that matches the times.” It appears that there are no serious qualms between the two men vis-à-vis Tommy’s break with the UPCI or on their respective understandings of the nature of God.
In spite of these obvious ties, Tenney downplays the association by describing his departure from the UPCI as being based on legalistic issues, not the doctrine of God. In fact, he never discusses the issue. To try to distance himself as much as possible from the Oneness issue, Tenney says “I am not ‘Jesus only.’ I believe God revealed Himself as the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit . . . . I ignore the issue to death . . . . At some point we have to stop caring about where people came from and find out where they are going.” This is made practical on Tenny’s website where there is no doctrinal statement.
In similar fashion as T. D. Jakes, Tommy Tenney’s careful use of semantics guards his views on the Godhead. He denies being “Jesus Only,” but this does not necessarily mean that he denies being Oneness. As previously observed, David Bernard stated that Oneness Pentecostals do not care for the title “Jesus Only” because it conveys the idea that they deny the Father and Holy Spirit as “manifestations” of God. This evidently represents Tenney’s point of view. He says that God “revealed” himself as the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, but he is careful not to attribute these titles to distinct persons.
Acceptance
Tenney is a regular conference speaker, and regularly graces TBN. In fact, Tommy Tenney’s parents have now become popular guests on TBN. As with T. D. Jakes, Tommy Tenney has all of the pragmatic credentials for someone who is ripe for acceptance within evangelicalism. He has also received endorsements for his publications from popular evangelical personalities such as James Dobson, Bill Bright, and Tony Evans.
Summary
From the evangelical standpoint, T. D. Jakes and Tommy Tenney have gained respect and acceptance for their ability to sell books and draw crowds. Evangelicals interpret their charismatic, powerful, insightful sermons to be evidence of their spiritual giftedness. Many people have been positively impacted by their inspiring messages of hope, and have enjoyed their lively worship services where the manifest presence of God is experienced. In addition, their appearances on TBN with the most prominent charismatic leaders in America are enough to convince most people that they are evangelical.
Modally, Jakes and Tenney clearly avoid describing the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as “Persons;” there is an aversion to attributing any numerical system to God; they use key Modal terms such as “manifestations” and “revelations” when referring to the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; and they have close dealings with Modal organizations and persons. Despite these strong ties, neither man has openly repudiated or criticized the Modal god, nor felt that those Oneness pastors with whom they are ministering are in error. Rather, they seem to be searching for ways to unify despite their differences, no matter how radical they may be. In the opinion of this author, this is adequate information to label T. D. Jakes and Tommy Tenney as Modal-Evangelicals.

46 comments:
Jonathan, thanks for posting this. It's quite good. Just curious, what was the overall subject of your thesis?
"A Critical Analysis of the Contemporary Modal-Evangelical Movement." I will probably post the Conclusion in a day or two if there is interest.
I'd be interested in reading it (I'm kind of a geek that way.) By the way, do you know Kent Dresdow? He's the Associate Pastor at my church and I think he may have been at TMS the same time as you.
Sure do! Tell him "hi" for me.
I too would be interested in reading it (hi KJ!). I don't know if you are willing to share it in full or not, but I'd love to read it, or see it here on your blog. What I've seen so far is great stuff.
Big Chris
Because I said so blog
mrclm.blogspot.com
Thanks again for an informative article. If possible, I'd also like to receive an email copy of your original with footnotes.
The doctrine of the Trinity is just as important today as it was 1700 years ago. Any supposed Christian leader who dismisses the doctrine of the godhead as unimportant isn't fit to stand in a pulpit.
hi
glad to visit your blog
thanks
mummyjumuahia@yahoo.com
Get a life and find something else to do besides criticize other mend of God.
Grow up!
other MEN of God
of what god?
Hi, I'm Brad Pierce. I am just wondering, by not referring to the Godhead using the words persons or numerical value to the Godhead other then one, how is that in violation to the biblical uses of describing God's nature? Whether you are trinitarian or not, you can't deny that the methods used by Tenney and others to describe the personhood of God is unbiblical, for the Bible itself doesn't mention the words Trinity, Persons, or 3 inreference to God's divinity at all. I'm not trying to argue here, I just don't see why people are so adament against the oneness groups as there is nothing in Scripture that can refute them, only tradition.
Brad, good questions. Precision with language is very important because there are many different views on the nature of God. As you know, the difference between Jesus and the Father being distinct “persons” versus the same “person” is radical. In fact, you would be talking about two different gods. You are correct that the Bible does not use the word “Trinity,” but neither does it use the word “inerrancy.” We must use language to describe what we find in the Bible, even if the terms are not explicitly mentioned in Scripture.
For theological and textual arguments against Oneness, please see my article, Modal Theology and Textual Issues. Hope this helps! Regards.
Some good points are made, of which I choose not to "argue", as I don't believe in arguing. I'll agree to disagree! However, I am of strong conviction that people whose services include fervent prayer, powerful manifestations of the Holy Ghost including speaking in tongues, healing, prophetic messages from God, anointed preaching, baptising in Jesus' name which fulfills the book of Acts and bringing the Jewish monotheistic pattern into the new covenant...I simply don't understand why most christians is letting their fear of questioning the validity of the doctrine of the Trinity in light of such a revival happening in Christiandom because of the Pentecostal movement. I mean, if we all examine the Scriptures and church history without ANY bias, (which I feel I have genuinely done, believe me!), we would find that Oneness Pentecostalism at least deserves a respected place amongst Christianity, don't you think? We, as Protestants, are in definition protesting the Catholic church, whose doctrines were corrupted by the joining of the church and state in the 4th century. Why defend these supposed "church fathers" and their creeds which didn't acknowledge the majority of the christians beliefs at that time? Even the "modalists" most prominent opponent, Tertellian (sp?) who was the first person to use the term Trinity if I'm not mistaken, admitted that the majority of early christians adhered to that modalist mode of belief. Also, Paul was a strict monotheistic jew, I don't understand why, if the trinitarian doctrine is so important, he didn't make it clear in his teachings that the Jews concept of one God now had a different meaning? He spoke to Jewish people with an understanding of one God with the assumption that his teachings needed no explanation because there was nothing new about God's nature in person revealed, just that "all the fullness of the Godhead dwelt in Jesus bodily" and that this one God was manifest in Jesus. It is my desire that we would all lay aside our traditions and study the truth with an un-biased fervor and seek to be a 21st century Acts- based church. That continues to be my wish!
God Bless,
Bradley
Because... sometimes it is hard to question your own beliefs.
Just like some Muslims would rather resort to violence than to question what the Quran says. Their rational brain cannot accept even the supposed possibility that what they believe in could be false.
Most Oneness Pentecostals I know are normal Christians (Trinitarian) who questioned their own beliefs, struggled with the issue for months and finally decided that denying the oneness of God was just impossible.
Not all of us believers are closed minded, of course, but often, we are just clinging on to traditional doctrines concerning the Godhead, much like some less-educated individuals would insist on their superstitions.
Have you Read Matthew 7:1? David,even though Saul had lost the Annointing of God, would dare not touch God's Annointed.Do you believe that this is another Gospel being preached. I also do not believe in the oneness movement. I also am a proponent of the Trinity. I just don't understand why prayer is not used to change men, instead of bashing them. Your Brother in Christ.
Denny
Matthew 7- Good Read
David did not touch God's annointed (Saul) Even though he had lost his annointing. And he had every right to kill Saul if necessary. I believe if a brother be overtaken in a fault we should go one on one and try to win that brother, instead of landbasting them. I also am a Proponent of the Trinity. But, Jesus's words haunt me. When he said woman where are your Accusers. They dropped the stones and went away. Why are we grabbing up stones and trying to stone a brother to death? What has happened to prayer and brotherly love? I am your servant, but I also love those people who err. God will set the record straight..God is by the way sovreign! Thank You for letting me comment.
Denny, I respect your concern for unity in the body of Christ. However, as my article indicates, I do not believe that Tenney or Jakes are a part of the body of Christ. They have always rejected the orthodox view of God and thus worship a different god. Additionally, the UPC has typically taught works salvation.
Concerning Matthew 7, I encourage you to read beyond verse 1 all the way through verse 5. Jesus is not saying that we should not judge others. In fact, Scripture commands us to expose false teachers and that is what I believe I am doing with Tenney and Jakes. Regards,
This Is Denny- I have in my possesion an e-mail from God Chaser's Ministry. Please read this with an open Heart?
Dear Dennis,
Thank you for contacting our office. We are always blessed to hear from
fellow GodChasers who share in the heart of this ministry.
Pastor Tommy was once affiliated with the UPC but is no longer
affiliated with any particular denomination. The Lord has called Tommy
as a visionary to fulfill a worldwide task of helping people experience
the manifest presence of God. Tommy is a member of both Integrity
Leadership Ministries and Harvest Missions. Both Integrity Leadership
Ministries & Harvest Mission Ministries are best described as
non-denominational. Tommy is ordained through the World Fellowship of
Ministers. He is accountable to GodChasers Network's Executive Board,
and to his pastor, Charles Green, the Senior Pastor at Faith Church in
New Orleans, LA, where Tommy and his family are members.
May God richly bless you in all your endeavors.
Sincerely,
The GodChasers.network Staff
The ministry of Tommy Tenney
GodChasers Confidentiality Notice - This transmission is intended for
recipient only. If you have received this transmission in error please
notify the sender and delete the message. Unauthorized interception of
this email is a violation of federal criminal law. Any ideas, concepts,
or other materials expressed in this email are the property of
GodChasers Network and permission is needed before the use of it.
Denny, nothing in that letter is contradictory to my paper. In fact, I mention several of those points in my paper. Did you read the whole post?
Jonathan,
I agree with Denny."Judge not, lest you be judged." I remember the story of the men who were speaking against Moses. God opened up the Earth and swallowed them, their families, anyone who was with them and even their animals. It is not for us to speak against the Pastors. I'd rather not be swallowed into that trap. God will judge, and even if these men were leading anyone astray, God reveals himself to those who seek Him with all their heart.
Lexa
Denny and Lexa, I will repeat what I said above about Matthew 7:
"Concerning Matthew 7, I encourage you to read beyond verse 1 all the way through verse 5. Jesus is not saying that we should not judge others. In fact, Scripture commands us to expose false teachers and that is what I believe I am doing with Tenney and Jakes." Regards,
This a good debate.....I to was part of the apostolic, oneness scene years ago. Like every denomination, you get great people (genuine) & the fakes. I left over the lack of love in these organisations & their interpretation of the new birth. Everytime the Godhead was debated,I got a severe headache !!...Both sides sounded convincing. We can be right in the heart & wrong in the head, no matter how convinced we feel we are. I applaud people in the minstry fall stop. If they are loving people, bringing people to know Jesus - more power to them. Met so many who just talk the talk & help no one.....The Lord knows them that are his.
thats my two pence worth.
Jimmy (UK)
hi, i'm from Hungary, and i would like to say thanks to Tommy Tenney, because we loved so much his books. thank you , and God bless you, Tommy!!!!!!!!!
This is a little delayed, but regarding Matthew 7:
7:1 “Judge not, that you be not judged. 2 For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. 3 Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? 4 Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye.
6 “Do not give dogs what is holy, and do not throw your pearls before pigs, lest they trample them underfoot and turn to attack you.
Those dog-gone pigs keep on complaining that I am judging them! :)
... and do not forget Matt. 7:15 ff.:
15 “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. 16 You will recognize them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17 So, every healthy tree bears good fruit, but the diseased tree bears bad fruit. 18 A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Thus you will recognize them by their fruits.
False prophets LOVE to bleat that you are judging them which Matt 7:1 forbids. Usually just before they rip out your throat!
Folks, do a study on judge/judging/judgement/judges! It was an eye-opener for me.
--Rich
Deuteronomy 6:4 states "Hear O Israel the Lord our God is one Lord", and throughout the Word are clearly defined references to the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. People use terms like "persons" or "manifestations" in their theological statements, and both are correct. Be very cautious when applying man's numerology to God, because He does not fit in a box of man's making, nor is He limited by man's lack of understanding of how 1 can equal 3. The most correct term, by today's English definition, is that He is a "Triune God." A concept that there are 3 distinct Gods and another concept that denies the Trinity are both incorrect.
A primary difference in the doctrines is that some baptize in the Name of Jesus Christ, while others baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Acts 2:38 and Matthew 28:19 agree in instruction. Before Calvary, John the Baptist baptized people unto repentance which would equate to "in the name of the Father." A few churches lack teaching of repentance, and simply baptize in the Trinity, with people not even attempting to "love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, soul, and strength" and "love your neighbor as yourself"... not to endorse salvation by works, but repentance was taught by Christ, not just by Old Testament prophets and New Testament apostles... "go and sin no more" is repentance (turning from sin). It is undeniable that the remainder of Acts 2:38 also lines up exactly with Matthew 28:19. Someone who is insincerely baptized... simply a dry heathen prior to baptism and a wet heathen after baptism... may not be saved. Then again, people who have not had the opportunity to be baptized, like the thief on the cross beside Jesus, may be saved... only God knows the heart. Some "oneness" people and some "trinitarian" people are bound for Heaven, even though some of one sect evidently don't expect to see any of the other sect there.
How can I grasp the fact that God does not fit in my numerical definition? I took enough higher-level mathematics classes in college, and I've read enough of the Word to know that the most complex mathematical studies could not begin to define God. Since I lack that understanding, I read Proverbs 3:5-6.
Can we stop bickering, though?
Anonymous, what do you consider "bickering"?
The body of Christ, which is the church, can accomplish much more by working together for His kingdom, instead of working division. For some to claim that those of the Oneness doctrine are not of God, and for others to claim that those of the Trinity doctrine are not of God... that is divisiveness. To continue being divisive is bickering. Many more can be won for the Kingdom if we focus more on the lost, than if we focus on the faults of others... lack of understanding can be considered a fault, but then again there's Proverbs 3:5-6. Oneness people see Trinitarians as having a lack of understanding, and vise versa... but for one to call another unsaved or cultish... that is unacceptable. It is easy to see why Jesus was not part of the religious establishment when he physically walked the earth, because they too applied the law to others as best they could.
Besides the contemplation of who is, or is not, saved, what more is being done? Possession of a Bible, or even reading a Bible, does not in itself make me a Christian... unless I accept that Jesus is my Lord and Savior. Of course if I simply say that I accept Him, without obeying His Word, then chances are that I was just lying about accepting Him. If suddenly it was illegal here in the United States for people to be Christians, and if I were to be put on trial for being a Christian, would there be enough evidence to convict me? Or would they just laugh and say that I was committing perjury when I claimed a Christian?
Anonymous, do you consider works to be vital to salvation? The UPC does. Would you go witnessing with someone who preached that Jesus was the Father and that you must be baptized to be saved? According to Scripture, these people are not witnessing partners, but the mission field.
The older UPC'ers who were of the "salvation by works" doctrine definitely have issues... with a strictly enforced dress code, and their required re-baptism. I have no issues with the likes of Tommy Tenney, TF Tenney, and other progressive UPC'ers, though. As far as Jesus being called The Father, Isaiah 6:9 is not an issue with me... KJV: "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace." Would you have an issue with someone trying to explain that there are 3 distinct Gods, when the Word clearly states otherwise in Deuteronomy 6:4 and elsewhere? As I stated, our God is a triune God, where man's little box of 1 God and man's other little boxes of 3 Gods are inappropriate. Basic algebra, trigonometry, calculus, set theory, infinite series and other higher level mathematic studies can be downright complex... but still cannot begin to define God.
When asked, "Why should God let you into Heaven?", my answer is, "Because of Calvary." It's that plain and simple. Nothing I could possibly do in my entire life could begin to cross the divide between God and man... that divide existed before Jesus sacrificed himself. I could do all the good works known to man, and possibly even invent some good works of my own, but without Calvary I would be just as lost the most extreme sinners that vehemently, vocally, and actively curse God. I am so thankful that Jesus did what was impossible for all of mankind to do.
As I previously stated, though, a person could just be lying when claiming to accept Christ. People usually do not tell lies on their deathbed, though. If someone waits to accept Christ on their deathbed, He is still faithful and true to His Word... and He will forgive and save that person just as He did the thief on the cross... but they could have accomplished so much more in this life had they accepted Him earlier... and I mean truly accepted Him, not just with lip-service, since the tongue lies so easily. The Bible states that those who believe and are baptized shall be saved, but it does not state that those who are un-baptized are absolutely hell-bound... some people add that part without regard to how Jesus applied it. Initial baptism, if a person's time here on earth allows, should be done in obedience to His Word... not an absolute requirement, but a strong preference, since baptism is being obedient.
Re-baptism, though? Only, and I do mean only, when a person was insincerely baptized the first time, should a person be baptized again... since they were not really baptized the first time, but only got a little wet by being sprinkled or dunked. If the first baptism was sincere, then that person was buried with Him in baptism to raise up and walk in newness of life. When a person is sincerely baptized, then re-baptism is be akin to nailing Jesus on the cross again... very un-biblical. He died once for my past, present, and future sins. All of my faults, failures, oversights, disappointments, short-comings... and anything else that has gone wrong in my life... were nailed to the cross with Him.
As far as I have read, I would have no issues witnessing to someone along side you, neither would I have issues witnessing along side a person of the "Oneness Doctrine"... since I am obviously Oneness and Trinitarian. I would agree with you that a person should be confident in their salvation, regardless of their works or lack thereof. When witnessing to a fellow Christian that is not yet baptized, I would encourage baptism... but would not condemn, just as Christ did not. If Christ did not condemn the unbaptized thief, then who am I to do so?
Anonymous, the troubling thing about your comments is that they evidence a disregard for the nature of God and how that manifests itself in salvation. Throughout church history Sabellianism has been condemned as heresy for a reason. It is not as innocuous as you believe it to be, but has far-reaching effects.
On the main page of this blog, in the right column, you will find a section on Modalism. In my concluding remarks I write this:
"As seen in the previous discussion on the textual/theological issues of theology proper, soteriology, and Christology, a proper understanding of the Trinity will have a profound, eternal impact on the state of a person’s soul. John Calvin understood this well when he said, “while he proclaims his unity, he distinctly sets it before us as existing in three persons. These we must hold, unless the bare and empty name of Deity merely is a flutter in our brain without any genuine knowledge.”
Along the same lines, Gerald Bray writes, “Without the Trinity there is no Christian faith, because the specific revelation of God entrusted to us in the New Testament is lost from view. A living relationship with God requires that each of the persons be honoured and adored in the context of their revealed relationship with each other.” Bray goes on to say that “the doctrine of the Trinity must form the basis of our proclamation and of our pastoral practice. This is an issue of life and death for the church, and must be taken with the utmost seriousness.” Bavinck correctly considers that “in the confession of the Trinity throbs the heart of the Christian religion: every error results from, or upon deeper reflection may be traced to, a wrong view of this doctrine.”
It is only logical to assert that in order to know God, a person must know the identity of the God of whom he desires to serve. Paul affirmed this in 2 Corinthians 11:13-15 when he said that there were many Jesus’ in whom men believed, but he preached the Christ. It is the position of this author that the Modal Jesus is another Jesus that falls far short of the God of the Bible. If there is not a true understanding of the Person of Jesus Christ, then there will be no true understanding of the nature of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. In the words of Charles Haddon Spurgeon, “a Gospel without the Trinity! It is a rope of sand that cannot hold together.”
In all fairness, there should be a distinction made between neophyte naiveté, versus a cultivated choice toward Modalism. It has been said that with many new believers there is a tendency to understand God modalistically. One author has observed that Modalism is “the most common theological error among people who think themselves orthodox.” This “naïve modalism” is commonly experienced based on the desire of a babe in Christ to understand Him in simple terms. However, as growth occurs in the life of the believer, a mature understanding of the Trinity is to be expected as a result of the teaching ministry of the Holy Spirit (John 16:13; 1 John 2:27). If this does not occur, then there is good reason to believe that that person is not genuinely regenerate.
The difference between a new convert and the pastor of a church should be obvious. A pastor is expected to have worked through the issues of the faith so as to refute those who contradict true doctrine."
Quotations from post-biblical sources are nice, but some simply are adding to the Word, just as the UPC doctrine often does in its own way. I decline to consider statements such as "throughout church history," since church history also includes the Holy Office of the Inquisition, Salem witch trials, American protestants embracing slavery, racial segregation, and much more... thoughout church history is pretty horrific. Is persecution of Oneness people silimar to persecution of the Jews? Some group, somewhere, sometime must be a target... "We're of God, and they're not" has been a favorite discussion throughout church history. I prefer to base my view solely on the Word, with primary focus on how Jesus ministered to others when He walked this earth in physical form. "Thoughout church history" and "salvation by works in the UPC" too easily correlate to "teaching as doctrine the traditions of men." When something varies even slightly from the Word, then which one is the lie? Let God be true.
Do I look to my pastor, or another minister, to see how I should live my life? I prefer to study the Word, since my pastor and others are human. My pastor is a good man, rivaling my favorite childhood pastor, but he is still human. Does my pastor spoon-feed me, or do I study the Word myself? If spoon-fed then I would be following him, and I would have his faults... then by the time I add my own faults... you know where that is going.
I'm still not going stuff God into UPC's box, your box, nor even into my own box. I hope that when it's my time to leave this life, I will still be as diligently seeking Him as I am right now.
By the way, I acknowledge that my responses here have been abrupt at times, and seemingly unappreciative of your studies and of your thesis. In actuality, I appreciate the thoughts that you have expressed. You have challenged my thinking, and made me think more about God than I otherwise would have taken the time to consider in the last few days. I am not a theologian, but do computer software for a living. I analyze things to the point that I even annoy myself, but I'm not here to hone skills at debating the Godhead. The more I know about Him, though, the more likely I am to live a life that will show Him to others.
Thanks for your thoughts, and God bless.
Anonymous, I'm glad to see that your authority is the Word of God. In that section on Modalism I also wrote a post entitled, Modal Theology and Textual Issues. I believe I cover the Isaiah 9:6 issue you raised.
In my life, modalism was something I unknowingly espoused until a pastor helping me work through some heavy spiritual issues urged me to read a book called Oneness Pentecostals and the Trinity. I had followed Christ since the age of three, spending hours and days and years studying the scriptures for myself, as well as sitting under teaching in a mainline Trinitarian denomination. Yet I thought God was one person, doing a lot of roll-playing for the sake of analogy, so to speak -- in order to relate to us on various levels. I was plagued by performance mentality, and am still coming out from under it.
My life was significantly impacted for the better when I read in this book how belief in a roll-playing God caused us to believe we had to play a part as well. This had actually been one of the roots of my performance mentality. I found additional relief when I began to realize just how human Jesus really was, and that what He went through for me was not just God who could do anything, going through the motions of human suffering, but that He had truly experienced the degree of struggle that I do with a fleshly existance and the costliness of sacrifice. I began to trust Him again, that He really did know what I was going through, and was not unjust in allowing it but had immersed Himself in it with me to make a way out.
If you had asked me before I read that book who I believed Jesus was, I would have told you faithfully that He was both God and man -- I didn't realize how I was lacking in the humanity side of my understanding until I read this book.
Now I am continuing to grow out of layers of legalism and performance, but when I remember what I read there it brings me significant relief. The day I read those things it was monumental -- not only performance issues but codependency began to be sharply cut off by the truth. Who would have known that oneness theology could have been a root to codependency, but in my life it was. Apparently this has been true for others as well. The author went on later in the book to explain what I had already experienced. A theology without clear delineation between the members of the godhead led to a people who would struggle with boundaries in their own lives.
Issues like codependency had been experienced by his friends, by my friends, and by myself. Some of my friends still had very questionable ideas about something called "spiritual connection" with one another -- in which a man and a woman who were each married to someone else became very emotionally and "spiritually" involved with one another. I had to flee to keep my head straight. That's how I landed at the church where they handed me that book.
I had been a Christian, truly born again, for over thirty years, but when I began to recognize and lay down my wrong thinking, I began to get better in some areas that had plagued me for a long time. Even though I had been in the Word since childhood, it took someone else showing me where some of my blind spots were to start finding the freedom that I had so desparately longed for.
gods not going to stand on judgement day and say you cant enter the gates of heaven beacuse you were baptized this way. i doint think it matters to him. if people think it does they ought to check their own salvation all religions are equal in gods eyes. i just got out of the up and am attending a pentecostal church with no standards. i dont believe in them but if thats what it takes to help a christian so be it.... just a thought
well iam a onegod holiness beliving pentacostal. i think in sted of debating on what we believe just try it. oneness isn't something we just thought up one day it's be around sence the beginning of time.
Thomas Tenney is an ass hole! Shouldn't he be christ-like to write a book like this? I dealt with him and he swore at me demanding to be treated like royalty. What a prick!
I am a oneness apostolic, but most of all I am a Christian and as the bible says- a deciple of Christ, I have many trinitarian friends I refer to as brothers and sisters, whom I fellowship with all the time for the fact that we all agree that we need a personl relationship with Christ. both of us believe in the bible alone, and both come to the conclusion that Jesus is LORD. and only through him their is salvation, my church never teaches works salvation, only the blood of Christ, we are not JWs or Mormons.
I don't understand what the problem is IF Tiommy Tenny does still beleive in Oneness Theology!! In Acts 16:30-31, when the Philippian jailer asked Paul & Silas what he must do to be saved; they responded: "Beleive on the Lord Jesus, and you shall be saved"
this is unreal and what ridiculous rebuttals to biblical truths, quite honestly-no offense.Firstly, if we want to accuse baptism as a works salvation, then we must also accuse repentance as such, since both are an act. However acts of obedience to biblical instruction is not works-its obedience...which is what true believing is. baptize in the name of Jesus "FOR" the remission of sins acts 2:38. do you want your sins remitted? well why is it so hard to follow then? its worded quite clearly.btw: the thief on the cross doesnt count-he was still under the law, NT salvation didnt begin until after Jesus' resurrection...remember jn. 7:37-39.."his Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus had not yet died"? how do you give personal application to the death, burial, and resurrection of one that hasnt even died yet, yet alone buried and resurrected?
secondly, oneness makes one codependent?...not hardly. Why do trinitarians and athiests suffer such things then also? im oneness and am far from codependency. I believe in manifestations and roles of God, yet do not have a "performance mentality" neither.
by the way, if every manifestation of God is a person like father, Son, and Holy ghost are explained today, more than 3 would exist. the burning bush, the angel that wrestled with jacob that he called Lord, or the one that spoke with Abraham he called Lord. Theophanies...God manifested angels! Nebuchenezzer saw one like the son of man...how did he know Jesus existed, none of the prophets did, and Jesus wasnt even born yet in flesh...Son of God to them meant "God manifested in flesh".
Did you know one of the reasons some jews wont even consider Christianity is our trinitarian belief? they are instilled from birth God is one, why would that change now? 1 tim. 3:16...God was manifest in the flesh...seems like a biblical terminology to me.
Jesus as a man had human weaknesses, suffered,got hungry, and even prayed. But as God He answered prayer, provided food, delivered, performed miracles. Its important to understand what nature is he speaking from in the bible when he talks. He revealed both natures to us through examples of both. He is one. in jn 14, phillip asked Jesus to show us the "father". jusus responds with phillip, how long have you been with me and you still dont know ME, he who has seen me has seen the father. 1 cor. 15 even talks that the son or "sonship" of God will be done away with when its all said and done. funny how one never finds words concerning Jesus like "eternal Son", but Is. 9:6 calls him the "eternal father".
As far as Sebellius goes: to say he was excommunicated and condemned as a punishment of alleged heresy as a means to confirm Sebellius's falseness kind of blows my mind since Jesus and his entire 12 had the same thing happen to them. condemned due to heresy...so do you think they were heretics, too, since that's apparently a confirmation indicator? another thing concerning this: the opponenets of the condemned also condemn whatever writings they can find along with it, causing us to be quite limited in findings, therefore misleading. The bible however is accurate, and very oneness throughout new and old testament, for God does not change. read the prophecies God gives concerning His oneness throughout Isaiah 43,44,48,etc. one place it says there is no savior beside me! how can you have a physical right hand place as an omnipresent being. "in the power of", like a "right-hand" man persay.
do you wonder why when you call on Jesus, the Holy Ghost appears, or is it Jesus...wait,in Spirit form...in Spirit form? that's the Holy ghost! oh wait, what? nevermind, it's easy to see one.
ok, I really didnt plan on writing all this-i try to avoid these conversations knowing they lead to arguments sometimes as already seen in all the previous discussions...but if it benefits someone, God bless you.
God bless you all, luv you all in Christ...and hopefully at the very least I was somewhat kind.
probably wont even be back on here to see anyone's responses, since I happenned to run across this article accidentally. pretty sure tommy tenney would laugh at where this discussion has gone anyway if he sees it...~grin~
My belief is that Oneness Pentecostals do not understand the separateness of the Godhead just as much as Trinitiarians do not understand the Oneness of the Godhead. It is the mystery of the Godhead that cannot be put completely into human terms. His ways are not our ways and His ways are past finding out. Spiritual pride either prevents thelogians from acknowleging that they do not have God all figured out or deceives them into believing that they know it all. Furthermore, I do not believe that my salvation is dependent upon my complete understanding of the Godhead. Salvation is by faith in Jesus Christ as the Son of God who died on the cross for my sins. It shouldn't be an issue for division.
BB, no one claims "to know it all" about the Godhead and no one is saying that "complete understanding of the Godhead" is necessary for salvation. You misrepresent me. We do what we can with the biblical evidence. Having convictions on this is not pride.
You wrote, "I do not believe that my salvation is dependent upon my complete understanding of the Godhead. Salvation is by faith in Jesus Christ as the Son of God who died on the cross for my sins. It shouldn't be an issue for division."
Taking your statement at face value, do you believe that Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses are Christians? Maybe defining the identity of this "Jesus" is important after all?
Yes, defining Jesus is important. It is essential to believe in the Diety of Jesus. But most trinitarians have an earthly concept of the relationship of the Son of God and the Father.
Mormans & Jehovah's Witnesses do not believe that that Jesus is diety or The Son, but only a son.
Jesus is God!
I have recently been in this same debate with some Oneness brothers as well. They think I am clueless ans lost for sure.
This I know; the bible says "Jesus Christ, the SAME yesterday (eternity past), today (now and when this scripture was written), and forever (eternity future)."
Since this scripture is TRUE then we must conclude that He has never changed in form or appearence or manifestation. It also says "I am The Lord, I change Not."
He has always been the way He is. To be otherwise would contridict these scriptures.
The Father-Creator did not morph into Jesus-the-Son and then into God-the-Holy-Ghost. He always was as He always is - the Same! The Alpha & Omega. As He was in the beginning is as He always will be- unchanging.
The Word says that "in Him (Jesus) contains all the fullness of the Godhead bodliy.) To be true to His Word, He had to be the same in the beginning, before creation. After all it also says that "He is the Lamb Slain from the foundation of the world."
That is not just "in the mind of God" but reality.
We need to realize that we are limited by space and time. God is not. He created time and space.
For the purpose of redemtion The Eternal, unchanging, timeless, Awesome One briefly stepped into time.
The bodily appearenecs of God in the Old Test is Jesus. The manifestation of God in the NT is of course Jesus. God does not not have 3 bodies but one body. His body is Jesus. His Spirit is the Holy Spirit which is also the Spirit of Christ.
I am secure enough in my relationship with God and confident in my faith in the work of the Cross that it doesn't shake me when confronted about my beliefs. I do not get mad or offended or intimidated. This has been my experience with those from both camps. They get upset and defensive over it.
My personal background is Baptist, Assembly Of God, and Charismatic/non-denominational. I attended Baptist churches as a child and young adult. I was always assured of salvation because I prayed the sinner's prayer. Though I knew there was soething still missing. When God began drawing me to Him in my mid 20's I yeilded to His drawing and surrended to Him. At this time He spoke to my heart and told me to go to an AG church. This is where I responded to an alter call and received what I had been longing for. No one had to convince me of my salvation experience. I knew that I knew that I was a new creature. Later I was led to some other independent (Trinitiarian) Pentecostal churches, some non-denominational, and Charismatic. All of which are Trinitarian. But it has always bothered me when people refer to Jesus as the Son of God only and don't see Him as Lord God Almighty as in the Old Test. This was something I always questioned and wondered why they did not see Him as I found Him to be in the Bible.
I have many family members who are Oneness Pentecostal that are fixated on "Jesus Name" and tongues. They seem to have a very condemning and judgemental attitude towards everyone outside of their group. That has made me stay away from those groups. But I have found the same thing in other trinitiarian churches.
I encountered a Oneness Pastor once that was so full of God that it caused me to weep. I was unsaved and delivering a pizza to his house. He did not say anything about God but was very joyful and kind. There was just something about him. I wept all the way back to work under conviction. I later inquired and was told who he was. It was just after this event that I surrendered my life to God at an AG church.
I recall that Finney had similar effects on people that encountered him. They would weep from the very presence of God in him. He wasn't Oneness.
I believe that God is at work in both Oneness and Trinitarian people.
Both have some truth and both have some error. Even in the book of Acts there was disagreements about the Law amongst the Apostles. Arguments and other divisions were recorded so we could see that Man can get it wrong, mess up, but still be a vessal of God!
We should all be learning.
We have not arrived yet.
We should be sucure enough to say "I do not know" sometimes. Or at least say "I am not 100% sure" about somethings. Would it kill us to admit that we have been wrong?
All these denominations saying different things and going to the same place?
Somebody has to be wrong!
Of course it isn't you though, is it?
BB
please overlook the typo's in my previous post :>)
"The doctrine of the Trinity is just as important today as it was 1700 years ago.
And THAT is your problem! You even admit the doctrine is only 1700 years old!
Thank God for apostolic truth! There is ONLY ONE GOD!
Not Three!
"The doctrine of the Trinity is just as important today as it was 1700 years ago.
And THAT is your problem! You even admit the doctrine is only 1700 years old!
Thank God for apostolic truth! There is ONLY ONE GOD!
Not Three!
Copy, of course I did not say that, but the commenter's point is that 1700 years ago marked the time when the debate on the Trinity was heated, and not when it was "created" (as you would say).
You know full well that Trinitarians do not believe in three gods.
Thank you for not disputing the point of my article that Tommy Tenney is indeed a Modalist.
Post a Comment