Ask a Question
or
Create a Poll
  1. Home /
  2. Questions /
  3. Social Sciences
  4. / Religions
  5. / Religions A - Z

by atreadia on December 27th, 2007

atreadia

Question

Help answer this question below.

If modalism is classically defined as the belief that God was manifest as the Father in the Old Testament, Jesus in the first century, and the Holy Spirit in present days... how is this applied to Apostolic Pentecostal beliefs?

  • Like
  • Report
Share:
Other

Answers. 5 helpful answers below.

  • by The Galaxy Hitchhiker on January 15th, 2009

    The Galaxy Hitchhiker

    Modalism is probably the most common theological error concerning the nature of God.
    Present day groups that hold to forms of this error are the United Pentecostal and United Apostolic Churches. They deny the Trinity, teach that the name of God is Jesus, and require baptism for salvation. These modalist churches often accuse Trinitarians of teaching three gods. This is not what the Trinity is. The correct teaching of the Trinity is one God in three eternal coexistent persons: The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

    • Like
    • Report

    3 comments | Post one | Permalink

  • by Greywillow on December 28th, 2007

    Greywillow

    Modalism is a term applied to Apostolic Pentecostals by those who do not have a clear picture of what they (AP's) believe about the godhead.

    • Like
    • Report

    No comments. Post one | Permalink

  • by Gone! on September 21st, 2011

    Gone!

    o.k. then... I'll try to answer the question. You state that modalism is classically defined as you referenced above. There is some difference in early modalism in that they actually believed that the Father was all 3, not Jesus as all 3. So applying modalism to Apostolic Pentecostal's today would still be an appropriate designation of a form of modalism. Not the ancient interpretation, but that Jesus is Father, Son and Holy Spirit as opposed to the Father be Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

    No comments. Post one | Permalink

  • by springissprung on May 12th, 2011

    springissprung

    1. God was not manifest in the OT as the "Father" of Jesus. Use your head.
    2. People who accuse Oneness Pentecostals of resurrecting a doctrine from the 3rd century do not understand the doctrine of Oneness as taught by Oneness churches.

    The revelation of the Oneness of God goes along with water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ and the gift of the Holy Ghost with the initial sign of speaking in tongues. I have been a Oneness, Apostolic doctrine believer for the past 44 years. My father was the pastor of an Apostolic Church for a number of years. I have my ownself a tract writing and book writing ministry. Since I entered this forum I have done some research into Sabellianism.

    I have never heard Oneness preachers say that God exists in 3 "modes". But, "modes" make more sense than "Persons." I like to teach that God holds 3 "offices." No one can prove by the BIBLE that God exists in 3 "Persons", but God is one in "substance"; that the Son exists "consubstantially" with the Father; that the Son was ETERNALLY BEGOTTEN, etc. One must delve into pagan Greek philosophy and metaphysics to attempt a definition to such terms as "Persons", "substance", and "consubstantial." We find these things, not in the Bible, but early, "Christian" / Catholic history.

    The revelation of the oneness of God held by the Apostles in the 1st century, along with the use of the name of Jesus Christ in baptism, glossalalia, and the spiritual gifts , GRADUALLY disappeared as Catholicism developed and took over. There was an "apostacy," a "falling away" from the early church's teachings and practices. The Catholic Church is called the "Church of the Falling Away." This gradual "back-sliding" explains any surviving existance of Oneness teaching in early, so-called, "Christian" history. Sabellius and the Montanists, it is reported, spoke in tongues and baptized in one name. But, to really make a comparison between what Sabellius taught on the Godhead with modern day teaching of Oneness Pentecostals is not possible, since what was written by Sabellius was written by his opponents, and all of his documents were burned.

    From what I have learned about Sabellius, I would have to say that he was trying to hold on to, or revive, the monotheistic doctrine of the Apostolic era. He was a Catholic priest and was ex-communicated by the Pope because he opposed "trinity", which was still formative. As vicious and cruel as the "Church" has a history of being, it is a wonder he was not tortured and martyred instead of simply ex-communicated. Perhaps, he was. Servitus, who also opposed Trinity, was martyred.

    Teachers such as Noetus, Praxeas, Sabellius, and the Montanists are simply historical proof the early church baptized in Jesus' name, believed in Oneness, and spoke in tongues.

    The Pentecostal Movement, which began in our country in 1900, was not a revival of anything from the 3rd century. Leaders in the movement knew nothing of a Sabellius nor "modalism." The Pentecostal Movement was a move of God that went around the world, that was of a RESTORATION of the spiritual manifestations of the early church of the 1st century. The revelation of the Oneness of God, glossalalia, baptism in Jesus name; the gifts of the Spirit, the Catholic Church tried to stomp out, were all restored.

    It is impossible to ascertain exactly what Sabellius was teachng on the Godhead. If he used words such as "substance" or "essence" he was not teaching a modern day doctrine on Oneness. If he believed the Son was eternally begotten, this is false. The anaology, he is said to have made, of God with the sun sounds questionable to me. Because the sun has 3 characteristics hardly serves as examplary of 3 "modes" of God. Roundess, or heat, are not "modes" or "forms" of the sun. Also, it is said, Sabellius taught God had 3 "masks." But, God manifested Himself; He did not hide behind a false face. Moreover, if Sabellius did not make a distiction between the FLESH (Son) and the SPIRIT (Father), he did not have the revelation of Oneness. But, whatever his belief on the Godhead was, it was enough to anger the Pope.

    No comments. Post one | Permalink

  • by Gone! on March 28th, 2011

    Gone!

    I can't comment on every sect, but the United Pentecostal Church does in fact believe as you stated. It is also known as Sabellianism. Sabellias taught that the Father, not Jesus, was all all three. It was considered heresy, and I believe remains heresy. The bible clearly described God as a Father, a Son, with the Holy Spirit emanating from both. Jesus was with the Father before the world began as the Word (logos/memra). And the Word became flesh (Jesus). Jesus throughout scripture is never the Father in heaven. He remains in union with the Father, but obviously waiting for the day that He will return to the Glory He had "with" the Father, before the world began. The Father is clearly not the son and vice versa.

    No comments. Post one | Permalink

Want to attach an image to your answer? Click here.

Did this answer your question? If not, then ask a new question or create a poll.

More Questions. Additional questions in this category.

You're reading If modalism is classically defined as the belief that God was manifest as the Father in the Old Testament, Jesus in the first century, and the Holy Spirit in present days... how is this applied to Apostolic Pentecostal beliefs?

Follow us on Facebook!

Related Ads

Related Questions

Professionally Researched

ANSWERBAG BUZZ

Whats a song that makes you want to clean
Who defined modalism
Modalism and salvation
Memra oneness apostolic
Pentecostal beliefs

Answerbag

a Demand Media company