Is Oneness Pentecostalism a Modern Invention? | Episode 164
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 16 июн 2024
- Some critics argue that Oneness Pentecostalism is a modern religious concoction seasoned with a dash of ancient heresy. Dr. David K. Bernard refutes this claim by citing evidence of key Oneness Pentecostal doctrines both in the New Testament and throughout church history.
If you enjoyed this video, keep in touch with Dr. Bernard on social media and subscribe to this channel for more content.
============================
Connect With Dr. David K. Bernard:
============================
Facebook: / davidkbernard.upci
Instagram: / davidkbernardupci
X: / davidkbernard
=====================================
Listen to Apostolic Life in the 21st Century on:
=====================================
Apple Podcasts: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/29oEKyZ...
Amazon Music: music.amazon.com/podcasts/5f9...
#theology #pentecostal #upci #churchhistory #christianhistory
There are so many that have experienced Act 2:38 for themselves. And a cloud of witnesses throughout history.
Thank you Dr Bernard for another great Podcast. I have been enjoying every one of them. I received the Holy Ghost at 6 yrs old and baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ in 1969. My humble sweet Dad was an ordained minister. My Mom was a wonderful woman of God. Sister Vesta Layne Mangun and my late mother were prayer partners for a while. My family and I are from the Ohio Valley area. My mother was from Rev. E.C. Sowards Sr church. He was the Superintendent of the West Virginia District and Western Maryland District many years ago.
WHEN were you Born Again ????
@@REVNUMANEWBERN When will you be Born Again?
It seems to me that She was born of the water when she was baptized in Jesus name and born of the Spirit when she received the Holy Ghost with the evidence of speaking in tongues, thus born again in 1969 when she was 6 years old.
@@micheleallen1402 Thank you for explaining. Very kind of you. God bless.
I am so thankful to be part of the UPCI as well as having a Gen Superintendent who is well versed, traveled, wise and knowledgeable. ❤
I Really Enjoy These Podcasts Bishop Bernard
Tremendous explanation and teaching!
There were certainly organized groups in history that taught as the UPCI mostly teaches today… the Montanists were certainly similar… Sabellianism certainly resurfaces throughout different periods of Church history. Just as Nestorianism is assailing the Church, primarily popular with Roman Catholics with the defrocked Assyrian Bishop Mar Mari Emanuel down in Australia.
Amen. I needed to hear this.
🎉OH HOW I LOVE THE TRUTH ❤ thank you again DKB .
Dr Bernard is semi correct in stating that what is now the standard of Orthodox Christian acceptable worship was codified in the Imperial Church Age… but, it slowly developed over time as Christianity branched its way out of Judaism and the synagogue system of worship. Many of the Ancient Christian practices were certainly preserved, for example, Vespers, Matins, and prayer by the hours…. I think it would be fair to counter Dr Bernard’s assertion here that ‘no one has’… with ‘How closely does the UPCI reflect worship of the Ancient Christianity with their modes and methods employed in their worship services? Is there a continuity that’s unbroken, or is there a disjointed version of worship that is based on emotionalism and manipulation?
@@ShyGuy_238 - hey Kaiden238…. Nah. I was having some spotty coverage with my internet. It may have done this for me. lol
@@realmccoy124 have you ever noticed that your comments disappear after you post them on this channel? I’m wondering because I know you comment here a lot. I have a friend who every time he comments his post are totally invisible to anyone other account. It’s very odd
History is written by the victors - Church history certainly preserved different movements and their associated doctrines that attempted to innovate the faith. Sabellianism, for example, was rejected not only in Rome. But by other Bishops in other jurisdictions over multiple movements. In so much, that Arianism accused the one of the Councils that they were likened to Sabellius. One can read the copious amount of writings by different witnesses who were addressing these strange winds of doctrines that blew into the Church - and precisely why they were rejected.
Amen
I do admire Bro. David Bernard for uplifting our LORD God Jesus Christ as the one true God of the Bible. The only one that he is lacking is remembering the Sabbath day since our LORD God Jesus Christ is LORD of the Sabbath and the Sabbath is the Seal of His Kingdom in Heaven.
I think the Orthodox Church is very precise in her terminology and understanding of just who Jesus Christ is… and in our liturgical prayers - when we pray ‘by the Lord Jesus Christ our God.’ Or in the Jesus Prayer, ‘Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, Have mercy on me - a Sinner’. No where in Orthodoxy do we say or teach of a divided up Godhead with 3 gods… we fully understand that Jesus is Fully God and Fully Man… that He truly is God manifested in the Flesh.
How do you justify saying that there are 3 persons in the Godhead without saying that you worship 3 gods? That is what we call mystery Babylon / confusion.
To call God a trinity when neither the prophets, apostles, or even Christ Himself use the word “trinity” in describing the person of God. This alone is proof that the whole doctrine is error, and is unbiblical.
The doctrine of Deuteronomy 6:4 is the foundational pillar of the Jewish faith. Otherwise known as the “Shema” that says the the LORD our God is one. This is what distinguished Israel from the whole world. That they worshipped a singular, ONE God.
@@maxwellhufford7115 - great questions. No where does the Dogma of the Trinity speak of dividing up the godhead. When you start off splitting up the godhead - you no longer are Orthodox…
Father. Son. Holy Spirit. One in Essence and Undivided. One God and Godhead. Theos. Theote. Deus. Divinitas. God. Godhead. Greek. Latin. English.
Yahweh Elohim. Davhar Yahweh. Ruach Yahweh.
Yahweh Elohim has always been together with davhar Elohim and Ruach yahweh… ego eimi, logos, pneumos.
The fullness of Divinity is in Christ God….
Trust you are well. Lovingly, Cuthbert.
I love this 💝 @@realmccoy124
@@realmccoy124But, isn't the orthodox church a trinitarian church??
@@maxwellhufford7115Amen, praise GOD
I can’t believe the blatant mischaracterization of modern day theologians when it comes to oneness Pentecostals. Have reason to think theologians in the 2nd and third centuries did the same type of thing
Could you make a video about the differences of the doctrine of oneness from UPCI and the doctrine of oneness of Gino Jennings. For example would you be comfortable saying God made a suit (the son of man) and got in that suit?
This sounds like the heresies of Nestorianism and Unitarianism wrapped into one.
Gino Jennings understands the Oneness of God. He left the UPCI organization but retained the Oneness doctrine, the New Birth doctrine, and the Holiness doctrine.
David has strange doctrine, so does Gino Jennings. But we must seek the lord rather than a man.
@@Severn-935 i didn't know Gino was originally a member of the UPCI do you have a source for that ?
@@daanjans2616 Gino Jennings - Letter From The UPC (United Pentecostal Church)
Unga-bunga Caveman - what’s the World Wide Web? What is a URL? What is an e-commerce website that I can purchase books online? My point here is that in the 80s and early 90s these terms may not have existed - fully - and how we understand them today… Dr Bernard assertion here of terminologies were created by theologians … well, yeah … language has to come into the arena of apologetics and theology to describe things …. Imagine Dr Bernard’s books without explanations of his doctrinal positions. What would that look like?
Could someone reading the bible by herself, with no outside input from any person or church, find the teachings of the current United Pentecostal Church in them? Would she come to the exact same beliefs as Oneness Pentecostals? If no, why not? If yes, why doesn't this happen more often?
I think it depends where you start. If you start with the OT, you would end up oneness (if it's possible to read the Bible without prior bias) Jews are a great example. They are hardcore monotheists.
If you start in the NT, it's more complex (hence why it comes after the OT) It would be like taking on calculus before basic math.
Sadly majority of churches have a dearth of complete Scripture knowledge. See how many Christians know much about the OT . . .
Fair question. Meanwhile, would that same person come away from the reading speaking of a Triune God who consists of three distinct persons who are each coequal, coeternal and cosubstantial, with one proceeding from the other, with one proceeding from another?
@@josestirtabudi6247Jews are not hardcore monotheists. Even Jewish scholars like Benjamin Somer admits that the Jewish around the time of Christ believed in a multiplicity in God: two-powers theology. And even today in Jewish Kabbalah God does not at all seem that absolutely one as Oneness would have us believe.
This is bad question because such a person cannot exist and should not exist. The Bible is not meant to be read outside of the context of Christian tradition or the Christian church.
@@Johnbobon - this statement of the Trinity is NOT Orthodox. The last sentence, in particular, I believe is more along the lines of what caused the Latin Church to divide herself from Orthodoxy in 1054 CE. As an Orthodox Christian - I just heard nails going down a chalkboard. The Son and the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father…. Not from one another. The Constantinople Creed, the Symbol of the Faith, defends the fullness of Diety of Christ against the heretics that would have made him a created being likened to an angel, or a mere man infused with God’s spirit. It clearly explains what Christians have believed all along. Holy God. Holy Mighty. Holy Immortal - Have mercy on us. Trust you’re well. Lovingly, Cuthbert.
I recently got my hands on "The Oneness of God", and I love that book... but I fear that the people who need to learn its message the most will either not read it at all, calling it heresy without even picking up, or at the very least, read it only to attempt to debunk it.
Hey Germanwulf - I read that book years ago and it graced my bookshelf for at least a decade or maybe two. I accepted it carte blanche at first … but over the years - I came to disagree with many of Dr Bernard’s teachings. Trust you’re well. Lovingly, Cuthbert.
@@realmccoy124 I remember your screen name. Not sure if you remember me or not, but we've debated before. To be honest, since you and I aren't going to agree on anything theologically, I'd rather not waste my time again.
@@germanwulf40 - funny - I am not really here to debate…. You make it sound like I’m an insufferable bully. Trust you’re well.
@@realmccoy124 Sorry, that actually wasn't my intention at all. I don't view you that way. It's just that last time we debated, we got nowhere, discovering only how greatly our theological beliefs differed, and I really didn't want to go down that road again. To your credit, you're at least one of the most polite people I've debated... like... ever!
@@germanwulf40 - oh. I wasn’t offended by your comment…. So need to apologize. I actually enjoy talking with you. This channel is my Monday jam - I like to listen to the content and to read the comments. There are certainly arrogant Oneness Pentecostals out there … and many of whom say a lot of ignorant things… I do not place you in that category. I love it when the Unitarians and the Arians show up with their perspective.
I always say that the full deity of Jesus was taught before the Trinity 🤷🏼♂️
I always say that the fully deity of Jesus Christ was preserved and defended before and after and unto the Ages of Ages post Trinity.
Bro. Bernard, do you have a video about saying 'oh my god'? First off it's a bad habit and sounds immature but is it a sin? Is it taking the name of the Lord in vain? People in oneness who teach Jesus name baptism still say using the word God is taking his name in vain. I would like to know what you thought about this as there are discussions about this everyday online somewhere. Thank you for your time.
Excellent points! The New Testament was written by Oneness Pentecostals.
You love to say that the apostles received the spirit in acts. Are you sure about that? Can you describe in detail when the apostles received the Spirit? Because it didn't happen at pentecost
So, the Spirit didn't fill them in the upper room, cloven tongues of fire 🔥 and they spoke as the Spirit gave them utterance, didn't happen?
Acts Chapter 2
Yeah it did... read John 7:39.
Prove they didn't. Acts 2:4 (KJV) 4 And they were ALL filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. ALL MEANS ALL. So you are saying the Bible is incorrect. You cover your face because you don't want to see the truth.
Tongues were certainly NOT central to the Apostle Paul’s soteriology. No where in Scripture does Paul say ‘you gotta speak in tongues to be saved’. The only mention of tongues in Paul’s writings in 1 Corinthians- and with that he is correcting them for their abuses and misuse of tongues in their worship services. This is precisely why the Orthodox Church does not have tongues in their Divine Liturgy.
The Orthodox Church does not state that tongues ceased in her teachings. But, the Church looks warily with the how things transpire in the Charismatic movements.
Speaking in tongues is the action of drinking living water (Isa 28:11-12). You don’t think everyone needs living water? Speaking in tongues is where the power is. You’re denying the power by denying tongues (2 Tim 3:5).
@@JivTurky1986 - I am not denying anything that is Truth. You cannot find ‘tongues’ being central to Paul’s teachings on ‘getting saved’… that statement just makes me chuckle because it is a fluffy statement from the American Revivalist period.
Paul was struck down from his horse and was blinded… is that the effectual working power of the Holy Ghost that everyone must also experience ‘to be saved’? Who was the Bishop who taught Paul the Faith after his encounter with Christ God?
@@realmccoy124 Paul DID say that without receiving the Holy Ghost we don’t belong to Jesus (Rom 8:9). The Holy Ghost is the Spirit of adoption (Rom 8:15). If we can both agree with Scripture that receiving the Holy Ghost is essential to our salvation, the question becomes how do we know that we’ve received it? I would say there are 3 examples of people speaking in tongues as they received the Holy Ghost in Scripture (Act 2:4; 10:44-46; 19:6). In your opinion how does someone know they have the Holy Ghost?
Paul’s blindness is an example of God humbling someone who wouldn’t humble themselves. Scripture shows that just as Paul received his sight after water baptism and Spirit baptism, our eyes are spiritually opened upon conversion (Eph 1:18).
The Holy Ghost is only tongues then? Have we reduced the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver of Life, who spake by the prophets to tongues?
No where does it say ‘with the initial evidence of speaking in other tongues’…. And not every conversion experience recorded in Acts do we see clearly tongues were evident…. Jews, Gentiles, the Disciples of John the Forerunner…. Yes. Indeed. But not with the Samaritans, the Ethiopian eunuch, Paul… nope.
Of the spiritual gifts, tongues is the least. Paul’s correction to the Corinthian Church is why tongues are not present in the Divine Liturgy in Orthodox worship.
To the Pentecostal, tongues seems to be the focus. To the Orthodox - the Eucharist is the centrality of our worship - John 6 … the actual blood and body of our Lord.
Trust you are well. Be encouraged. Lovingly - Cuthbert.
@@realmccoy124 I ask again, how do you (I’m talking to you) know for certain that you’ve received the Holy Ghost? You are dodging my question by asking other questions.
I believe the apostolic Pentecostal church with the Acts 2.38 baptisms in Jesus name message. IS the original doctrine. That said EVEN THE ONENESS APOSTOLIC PENTECOSTALS divide God.
Ask any oneness apostolic who Jacob Wrestled with, who Gideon called the Adonoy, who Abraham worshipped on the plaine of Mamre and there are countless other examples?
Most will tell you it was a Theophany of God but when you ask if that theophany was Jesus Christ?
They will tell you NO Jesus wasnt there he was not begotten. Even the host of this podcast would tell you the same.
Like it or not that is division.
An expressed image Of God for Old-Testament encounters and Jesus Christ for the New-Testament encounters.
I personally believe that every time God made himself physically known in the Old Testament he expressed himself as the only expressed image glorified. THE SAME IMAGE THE DISCIPLES SAW AND WORSHIPED AFTER RESURRECTION.
If you tell the apostolic oneness church you believe that, then you are accused of believing Divine Flesh and believing in multiple Gods.
And they will disfellowship for it.
Yes, the modern apostolic doctrine is in some regard a modern invention.
Who is the Angel of the LORD in the old testament?
Hint: God the Father is invisible and cannot be seen by men.
I 100% agree most oneness Pentecostals do not.
Angelis Domini - the Roman church, if I understand correctly, sing a hymn entitled ‘Angelis Domini’ that is generally sung at Noon, that considers the miracle of the Incarnation - and one performs an ‘examination of conscience’ …
But, I believe with the set up and the hint you have stated … you are probably wanting to bring up the off shoot doctrines that were addressed in the 4th Century - and were fought against by the Cappadocian Father because the Arians were attempting to lessen Christ God - to that of an angel - which differed from the teachings and understanding of the Faith, where Jesus Christ is the only begotten Son of the Father, begotten before all ages - and in the miracle of the Incarnation, without corruption became man… Jesus is fully God and Fully Man.
We have theophanies in the Old Testament - which seem to defy our rational thought and linear chronological understanding. Of course we have types and shadows in the Old Testament too.
Trust you are well. Lovingly, Cuthbert.
Dr Bernard seems to allude that some of the earliest of Christian theologians ‘may have thought in these Trinitarian terms - you cannot say they were ‘Credal Trinitarians’. If I am understanding him here, he’s brushing aside that these foundational understanding of the Early Church Fathers of just who Jesus is… and that laid the foundation for subsequent development of dogmas.
Sir, should we trust post apostolic church more than the New Testament church?! I personally think not. I don’t think Jesus’ intention with his church was meant to be what it is today. The denominational tree is crazy and there is clear evidence of that before the First Council of Nicaea as you have mentioned with many of the post apostolic groups in your previous posts. If it’s not scripture it shouldn’t be doctrine.
@@kevinsmith5775 - hi. So. I am actually talking about the Apostolic Fathers who were nurtured in the Faith by the Holy Apostles - their writings predating the first Council - certainly has language that resembles the is used in Trinitarian theology which was used in refuting Arianism. It was by that standard the gnostics were refuted and all other subsequent innovations were push out from the True Faith handed down by the Apostles. These terminologies were used the earliest Christian theologians, who were taught by the Apostles. Their commentary expounded the formulating Christian standard of Scripture - which wasn’t finalized until the 5th Century.
So. Since the Constantinople Creed wasn’t drafted until the 4th Century - and later ratified and confirmed as the Symbol of Faith - as Dr Bernard states - you cannot technically say the various teams of writers of the New Testament - were ‘Credal Christians’…. It is in fact - a misleading statement. You couldn’t go to an e-commerce website to purchase a DKB book in the 80s… but the darpanet existed and things developed overtime.
The problem is - the UPCI are restorationists - Dr Bernard candy coated this with some puffery statements - to make it sound less severe. The gates of hell did overrun Christ’s Church and was restored in the various children movements from the American Revivalist period … which is utterly false in my position. But, when one is dealing with an offshoot expression from the True Faith - you gotta make your distinction has the groups that merged to form the UPCI organization has done … and at its core - Roman theology is the basis of the organization’s teachings… borrowed from Presbyterians and is rooted in the worse parts of Saint Augustine’s teachings.
Rome left her Orthodoxy officially behind in 1054, but she was already drifting away from the Faith and was corrected as early as the 8th Century.
The UPCI is a hodgepodge mixture of Reformed theology…
The True Faith has never wavered from her Christ God - and has preserved and defended the teachings of the Apostles that was delivered once. My theosis and salvation is found in Christ God alone… and is worked out in Community in the one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church - which remains steadfastly Ancient and Unbroken Christianity. Trust you are well. Lovingly, Cuthbert.
@@kevinsmith5775 - hi. I responded to you this morning. And my comment was removed by the censor. Control the flow of information… a grand conspiracy… or just RUclips didn’t receive the update. Who knows. But it seems to happen A LOT on this channel. So. I kind of lean towards control side - than RUclips not updating. Who knows. Trust you’re well. Cuthbert.
@@kevinsmith5775 - hi again. If we were to assess your statement of ‘if it isn’t in Scripture - then it shouldn’t be in there. One. Three. Person. Definitely these words show up in scripture. Trinity and Oneness - neither are in scripture. Hear O Israel, the Lord is ONE. Isn’t numerically one … but a unified one. Father. Son. Holy Spirit - Wisdom all are mentioned. Ego eimi, Logos, Pneumos, Sophos - all in there. And of course there is Yahweh Elohim. Davar Yahweh. Ruach Yahweh - and Chokhmah…
Most OP folks state a heretical or an inaccurate version of what they present as the ‘Trinity’ and then rail against this alternate version as if it is the real deal. Not yet has anyone accurately described the Dogma of the Trinity in their comments, to include Dr Bernard. And. If I hadn’t studied to show myself approved, to rightly divide the word outside of the UPCI lens… I, too, would agree hook, line, sinker with Dr Bernard. BUT - what he says the Trinity is… is not what it is at all. I agree, what he presents as the trinity… it is more akin to tritheism or Arianism. The Orthodox Church has never taught in that manner - so, this strange doctrine blows from another origin.
The Constantinople Creed - which is the Universal Symbol of the Faith - is part of an Orthodox Christian prayer rule and is said in every Divine Liturgy. This way there is no question to anyone what the Church teaches.
It clearly refutes Nestorianism, Arianism, and a whole bunch of other isms that were not Apostolic.
The same scriptures one generally uses to state the oneness… are precisely the same scriptures used in the development of the Constantinople Creed and defends Christ God against the heretical teachings that would lessen Him to an Angel… or a good man infused with the Spirit of God.
Jesus Christ is my Lord and my God. Lovingly, Cuthbert. - Be encouraged!
Debate James white
He has. Twice.
@@bpollock82 it was a voice call 15 years ago. Where he lost twice. White offered a 3-hour debate. A real one. Bernard avoids till this day
@isaacsandoval9316 I have listened to both phone debates no less than ten times each. Whatever needed to be covered was probably already covered. Whatever could be profited was probably already profited. There seems to be nothing to gain through further debate because learning is not the objective at this point. "Gotcha" and being "right" would seem to be the objective. I have never found debate to be a New Testament ministry, but I have found evangelism to be a hallmark. Some spend a lot of time debating. Others spend a lot of time evangelizing.
God bless you. Let's keep the name of the Lord going forward!
@@bpollock82 I think the nature of god matters. I think the truth of god matters. If you believe that Trinitarians are liars and are willing to make that claim then I think to say that a debate is unnecessary is obviously a cope out. If you thought truth didn't matter you wouldn't have created an organization purely built on those doctrines. God bless you too.
@@bpollock82 Paul built a ministry off of both debate and evangelism.
Priscilian was onenness in his writings
You cannot relegate the prayers of Christ to the Father to the humanity and expect that to do the trick. In the New Testament we see one person interacting with another distinct person. The divine nature did not receive prayers from the human nature. Christ, in a manner pertaining to his human nature, prayed to his Father.
"I and my Father are one" -John 10:30
"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one" 1 John 5:7
To say that God is not one is to reject His word in many different places
@@225Joshua I do not reject the idea that God is one, but not in the way Pentecostals say he is one, which completely contradicts the way the New Testament talks about the oneness of God. In what way does the Christ say He is one with the Father? I ask this question because it is not immediately apparent how we should interpret this verse as ‘oneness’ is not a monolithic concept. In his prayer to the Father, Christ desires the oneness he shares with the Father to be oneness shared between the believers. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are One in a way more analogous to the way Peter and Paul are one, rather than the dribble that Pentecostals present as what the scriptures teach.
John 17:20-22:
“Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:”
“that they may be one, even as we are one”
Addressing 1 John 5:7, “there are three that bear record in heaven” if the persons of the Trinity were merely God in different roles as some Pentecostals, then there could not be three that bear record in heaven. Just think logically for a moment, what court whatsoever would allow you to testify three times as three distinct witnesses because you were a father, a son, and perhaps a doctor? None whatsoever, roles do not serve as testifiers or witnesses, but of Christ says that his Father bears witness of him. Not only that but that the Father loves the Son. My role as RUclips commenter doesn’t love my role as a Cook, because that is not what roles are. Having said all that, it’s not really necessary to go into depth as I have in these particular scriptures when Christ bears witness that the Holy Spirit would lead the church into all truth. If your theory of the church is that it fell into complete contradiction and darkness alienated from the truth for centuries only to be restored in the modern day then you make Christ a liar who said the Spirit of Truth would lead the church into all truth. Allowing the church to completely blackout is no wise a fulfillment of this promise. And there other several verses which I pull up to prove that the Christianity is not religion that can be destroyed and restored. As Christ said “this generation shall not pass till all things are fulfilled.”
Now you may be inclined to say that the reason why there is love shared between the Father and Son is because it is simply the humanity loving the divinity, which goes back to my original point, natures do not pray to one another, love one another, etc. this cope Pentecostals use to cover up the hole in their systems and hide the darkness in their heats is completely wrong headed. Christ performs the action of praying to the Father, now he may do it in accordance with a human nature, such as how I might play golf with my hands, but I cannot say “I am not playing golf, my hands are.” Neither can we put locus of who performs these actions upon the Divine and Human natures. The Father loves the Son, testifies of Him and shares glory with Him. This indicates an entirely differ kind of oneness than what you presuppose.
@@225Joshua Addressing 1 John 5:7, “there are three that bear record in heaven” if the persons of the Trinity were merely God in different roles as some Pentecostals, then there could not be three that bear record in heaven. Just think logically for a moment, what court whatsoever would allow you to testify three times as three distinct witnesses because you were a father, a son, and perhaps a doctor? None whatsoever, roles do not serve as testifiers or witnesses, but of Christ says that his Father bears witness of him. Not only that but that the Father loves the Son. My role as RUclips commenter doesn’t love my role as a Cook, because that is not what roles are. Having said all that, it’s not really necessary to go into depth as I have in these particular scriptures when Christ bears witness that the Holy Spirit would lead the church into all truth. If your theory of the church is that it fell into complete contradiction and darkness alienated from the truth for centuries only to be restored in the modern day then you make Christ a liar who said the Spirit of Truth would lead the church into all truth. Allowing the church to completely blackout is no wise a fulfillment of this promise. And there other several verses which I pull up to prove that the Christianity is not religion that can be destroyed and restored. As Christ said “this generation shall not pass till all things are fulfilled.”
@@225Joshua strange how I made a reply to you posts yet I can no longer see it. Can you?
@@225Joshua Perhaps it was the length of the post or something I said in it. I will try again. I do not reject the idea that God is one, but not in the way Pentecostals say he is one, which completely contradicts the way the New Testament talks about the oneness of God. In what way does the Christ say He is one with the Father? I ask this question because it is not immediately apparent how we should interpret this verse as ‘oneness’ is not a monolithic concept. In his prayer to the Father, Christ desires the oneness he shares with the Father to be oneness shared between the believers. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are One in a way more analogous to the way Peter and Paul are one, rather than the doctrine that you present as what the scriptures teach. (John 17:20-22)
Dr Bernard in his comment about engaging with a Trinitarian Pentecostal pastor is misleading with his Oneness assertion. While Dr Bernard correctly states that the Fourth Century council began to formulate officially the teachings and traditions of the Church - Dr Bernard fails to identify that there were certain standards that were understood as acceptable doctrines - insomuch the Church could identify and address the Gnostics early on as heretical. There were other movements that were also addressed by a standard prior to the 4th Century Council…. The errors of others… at that time of the Council mentioned by Dr Bernard - Arianism was entering into the Church and subverting whole assemblies with the non Apostolic understanding of the Godhead - that lessened Christ to a created being - likened to an angel… I would think most Oneness Pentecostals would also reject that teaching as well, and identify it as modern day JW movement.
Emmanuel Swedenborg, is that you? have you come back to life?
Haha. Thanks for the chuckle. I haven’t seen any algebra in Swedish here to date. So. I think we can say nope. lol.
@@realmccoy124 it is true that he does not speak swedish, but he certianly speaks the same language. He who reads understands.
@@daniel_moralesC I spoke to my wife about your comment… and she was like ‘you googled that’…. And I said. No, actually, I heard about Swedenborg from another UPCI channel who celebrated him as a champion of the faith. Trust you’re well. Cuthbert.
@@realmccoy124 If you read what Swedenborg wrote you will realize that in terms of his conception of God, it is the same as what Bernard says, the point is that Swedenborg was the most recognized spiritualist and witch in Sweden.
@tbow8954 well agreed upon and historical are not the basis for establishing correct doctrine. If what's the basis, you should be attending Latin Mass on Sunday. Jesus said the way is narrow and that the way to destruction was wide. Consensus is the path to hell.
The trinity is the path to Hell.
The doctrine of the trinity is the broad way. And trinitarians are linked to the Catholic Church.
Actually, the Latin Mass is primarily rejected by the current pope - as it strives to return to the ways of Roman Catholicism pre Vatican 2 … Serious Roman Catholics who like the Latin Mass - are at odds with the present policy …. And other strange innovations from this particular pope.
@@wjdyr6261 - that’s a bold statement placing you in the judgment seat of Christ… I wouldn’t say that of the doctrines you state you believe in would lead you to that destination. Who can really know?
@@realmccoy124 I'm not wrong. Prove me wrong
Just like any other religions , absolutely it is invention!!!!!
It sure is right up until one actually meets Jesus, then you see all other religions are an invention. Jesus is 100% real my friend. I use to think like you until the Lord revealed himself into me and baptized me with His Holy Spirit. Believe me when I tell you k wasn’t even looking for God when this happened. I was one despicable guy when this happened. I pray the Lord reveals himself unto you as well my friend.
@@AMx39 I was the same Christian as you probably more devoted than you but all things are your imaginations and delusions my brother, coz the same Hindu or other Christian’s also say “Krishna or marry is my best friend and I will pray for you for you too for this kind of revelation “ I was also saying this so many years but when i come to realization of every delusions i become free from any religious slavery!
@@AMx39 even if bible is 100% accurate oneness is not biblical , Unitarianism would be correct my brother dig up more for this truth !
@@Adonaymekonnen my guy, I am not delusional, I have met God, the real God and Jesus is that God. Before meeting him I knew of him due to meeting evil and through the grace and love of Jesus my family and I survived it. The things we survived most people including the most devout Christians such as you said you were would of buckled and ran or have gone insane. There is real ebrio out there and you have no idea how real he his but just as real as he is , so is The Lord. I met Jesus one on one and I didn’t imagine it. I felt his comforting spirit and both saw and felt his overwhelming power and glory all imitating from with in the person before me, he was Jesus and spoke to me of whom he was is and always will be. This came to be not because I was searching for me, on the contrary, I was mocking him, mocking the Holy Spirit such as you are now. I am not your typical spoiled American who is born into everything. I have tasted real poverty and real pain, real abuse, real hatred. Years later even after meeting him my life shattered once more an lasted 9 years. I began to distance myself from him and ended up hating him and did everything I could to rip him away from me but no matter what I did or tried I couldn’t deny Him or the fact that He is real and His Love is real. I was marked by Him since way back when He first revealed Himself unto me, and always had me in His arms even at my darkest. I don’t claim to be the most devout Christian, in reality you’ve might of been more devout than I as I am not worthy of my God, I am however someone who will love Him until he calls me away. He has restored me and transformed my pain and sorrow into Joy again. You can serve whom ever you want but me any my house shall serve the Lord. I pray in Jesus name you find your way back to Him.right now you are filled with hate, pain, sorrow, disappointment, disbelief, anger, but through all that He still Loves you and if you were once His, you will always belong to him like it or not and there will come a time when the Lord reclaims all that is his. You just have to decide how much longer you want to be in this swamp your drowning in. Jesus pulled me out of mine, He will pull you out of yours and one day you will be speaking these same words unto someone else who speaks and thinks as you do now. I Declare this in the name of Jesus to whom was given the name that is above all others to whom EVERY knee in heaven and below it will now down to him and EVERY tongue will confess that Jesus is the Lord, to the glory of God the father. Amen
John 10:30, I and my Father are “one”- Greek “ev” meaning Oneness, unity.
Jesus is not Baptist, Anabaptist, Seventh-day Adventists, LDS, Catholic, Presbyterian, Pentecostal, Apostolic, Denominational, Non-Denominational, Mormon, Muslim, Buddha, Hindu, Ethiopian Bible, or any other Man-Made Religion..
Jesus is the “WAY” - The Only “WAY” !
It is 100% a modern invention that disagrees with easily understood history and well accepted doctrine. You are trying to reset back to the beginning of the church, and that was strictly Jewish first. You refuse to see thay things changed when the Gospel was taken to the gentiles and the baptism of the Spirit was introduced through faith
How come gentiles were speaking in tongues in the first century?
Not sure what you're talking about. I can't speak for Dr. Bernard, but I think that the introduction of the gospel to the gentiles in Acts chapter 10 is one of the most important moments in the history of the church. You should read it. Gentiles speaking in tongues was the confirmation to the Jews that the gospel was for the gentiles as well. It was the key evidence for Peter and his associates to believe this, and what they used to convince the council when they returned.
Accepted doctrine by man does not equal accepted by God.
Dispensationalist huh?
Well, Acts 19 and 1 Cor 1 say otherwise. Acts 19 was written after 1 Corinthians, meaning Jesus Name baptism and tongues being the evidence of receiving the Spirit are still in effect.
Also: Peter said the Gentiles received the Spirit just as they did 'in the beginning'. Jesus said in John 16 He had to leave so the Spirit would come. He left to take his high priestly role at the Ascension. Pentecost was only a few days later.
Jesus as a human was the first person to receive the Spirit and have the Spirit remain on Him according to John 1.
The above facts show the 120 received the Spirit at Pentecost.
You are Catholic. You have not researched the history. You are on the broad road that Jesus spoke against. Doctrine isn't established because of how many believe it. You are a modalist because You preach that Jesus is the Lamb of God, the Lion of the Tribe of Judah, the King of Kings, Lord of Lords, the High Priest, the Son of David, the Bread of life, the living water, but you think that God can not be God come in flesh unless He is a separate person.
Amen
History is written by the victors - Church history certainly preserved different movements and their associated doctrines that attempted to innovate the faith. Sabellianism, for example, was rejected not only in Rome. But by other Bishops in other jurisdictions over multiple movements. In so much, that Arianism accused the one of the Councils that they were likened to Sabellius. One can read the copious amount of writings by different witnesses who were addressing these strange winds of doctrines that blew into the Church - and precisely why they were rejected.
Zephynrius and Callixtus were Bishops of Rome and Oneness. No one knows what Sabellius taught except through Tertullian's writings. He didn't even know Sabellius personally.
@@shaunbutler238 - I am fairly certain that the Doctrine of Sabellianism resurfaces hundred of years after on multiple occasions post his death and was addressed by different Bishops - interesting enough - Tertullian ended up I believe with the Montanists - even though as an early Christian apologist spoke about ‘Trinitas’ and was early in developing a teaching … technically in theology - modalism is considered trinitarian doctrine, but is disconnected from Orthodoxy. The Montanists were definitely modalist in their understanding of the One God and godhead - I would say that the Arians and the Unitarians are *more* oneness than Oneness Pentecostals - and that’s precisely who the Cappadocian Fathers were fighting against in the development of the Constantinople Creed … the Arians were certainly more popular than the Apostolic teachings - and of course the Nestorians and a bunch of other groups - all of whom were bent on stripping the deity of Christ - and the Cappadocian Fathers skillfully thwarted the attempt to alter the True Faith.
Unless things have dramatically changed in the UPCI and in Oneness Pentecostal groups that are likeminded … no one would agree that Jesus was merely a man, just infused with the Spirit of God…. Or an angel - these are the errors of Nestorianism and Jehovah Witnesses.
As an Orthodox Christian - no where in my fronema (mindset) do I consider my doctrinal positions as described by OP folks … as most present their version of the ‘trinity’ - is 100 percent unorthodox and heretical. No catechized Orthodox Christian would ascribe to that version - and remain Orthodox. Trust you are well. Be encouraged. Lovingly - Cuthbert.
Dr Bernard is semi correct in stating that what is now the standard of Orthodox Christian acceptable worship was codified in the Imperial Church Age… but, it slowly developed over time as Christianity branched its way out of Judaism and the synagogue system of worship. Many of the Ancient Christian practices were certainly preserved, for example, Vespers, Matins, and prayer by the hours…. I think it would be fair to counter Dr Bernard’s assertion here that ‘no one has’… with ‘How closely does the UPCI reflect worship of the Ancient Christianity with their modes and methods employed in their worship services? Is there a continuity that’s unbroken, or is there a disjointed version of worship that is based on emotionalism and manipulation?
It's about obedience and not worship in general.
One God. Baptism in the name of Jesus. Stay within the teachings and doctrine of Jesus and the apostles.
DR. Bernard is a 100% correct. You are semi.
@@wjdyr6261 - what about strange fire offered as worship in the Old Testament what was the outcome of that? So. It does matter. What exactly are the Apostles teachings … were all of them included in your Bible? Or is Scripture only part of Holy Tradition - and that there was an oral tradition that weren’t necessarily passed down in Scripture. Obedience is certainly central to the Christian walk - and to abide in the Apostles teachings…. Absolutely. Otherwise - you have an offshoot from the True Faith… the hymns I sing… my liturgical prayers I pray… The Divine Liturgy I experience every week - many are well over 1500 years old… Paul corrected those over emphasizing tongues. I am wary of those who stress that all hyped and amped up - emotionalism.
Does the Holy Spirit require modified bar tunes to actually move in your congregations … drinking at the springs of living water… or it’s the Holy Ghost and fire that’s keeping me alive… tell me how did you feel when you came out of the wilderness …. Oh, is central never busy on that royal telephone?
@@realmccoy124 you're trapped in a man-made doctrine and religion that can't save. There is no trinity in heaven.