BelieveTheSign

An Overview of Bernard's The Oneness of God: Difference between revisions

← Older editNewer edit →
VisualWikitext
Line 54: Line 54:


== Why This Constitutes False Doctrine ==
== Why This Constitutes False Doctrine ==
From our work in publishing ''[[Under The Halo]]'', we have come up with 6 primary characteristics of false doctrine:
1.     False doctrine is based on scripture.
1.     False doctrine is based on scripture.


William Branham used proof texts to back up his doctrine. A proof text is a biblical statement or citation that [purportedly!] doesn’t require a context to be coherent and meaningful.[i] It’s a scripture intended to show the basis for a particular theological assertion. The danger in proof-texting is well known: proof-texts can be misused and their contextual meaning distorted to use them to support teachings they don’t really support.[ii] This is exactly what William Branham did.
David Bernard and all proponents of Oneness doctrine use proof texts to back up their doctrine. A proof text is a biblical statement or citation that [purportedly!] doesn’t require a context to be coherent and meaningful.<ref>Michael R. Emlet, Crosstalk: Where Life & Scripture Meet (Greensboro, NC: New Growth Press, 2009).</ref> It’s a scripture intended to show the basis for a particular theological assertion. The danger in proof-texting is well known: proof-texts can be misused and their contextual meaning distorted to use them to support teachings they don’t really support.<ref>John M. Frame, The Doctrine of the Knowledge of God (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 1987), 197.</ref> This is exactly what Bernard does in his book.
 
In addition, contrary to 2 Peter 3:15–16, he twisted the meaning of scripture to suit his own purposes. We see this clearly in Revelation 10:7. We will examine this further in Chapter 16.


2.     False doctrine is plausible.
2.     False doctrine is plausible.


On the surface, Branham’s doctrines appear plausible, but they don’t stand up under close scrutiny.
On the surface, Oneness doctrines appear plausible, but they don’t stand up under close scrutiny. I understand this because I was raised in a Oneness Pentecostal church and never really questioned its claims for most of my adult life.


3.     False doctrine is self-centered and self-focused.
3.     False doctrine is self-centered and self-focused.


William Branham encouraged people to stay away from other churches:
Oneness theology points to non-Oneness churches as following false doctrine. It encourages people to stay away from other churches. Oneness churches are almost generally insular and self-focused.
 
Now, stay away from those denominations, they’re leading you to death.[iii]
 
Message churches, the fruit of Branham’s teaching, are insular and self-focused.


4.     False doctrine is reductionist.
4.     False doctrine is reductionist.


In the Message, the gospel is reduced to “God sent a prophet; you must believe what he taught.” Failure to believe that means that you have not received the Holy Spirit. That is the heresy of the Message.
In Oneness churches, the gospel is reduced to Acts 2:38. You need to reject Trinitiarianism in favour of Oneness. Salvation only comes through repentance, baptism in Jesus name, and speaking in tongues as a demonstration that you have the Holy Spirit. People who have not been baptized in Jesus name or have not spoken in tongues are not real Christians. That is the heresy of Oneness theology.


5.     False doctrine is divisive.
5.     False doctrine is divisive.


William Branham was a source of division. He created division within the church:
Oneness theology is a source of division. The UPCI and most Oneness followers require separation from churches that are Trinitarian.


How contrary is denomination to God’s Word. He never had one, never dealt in one, and never dealt with one. I want some historian to show me where ever a prophet ever come out of the church. Show me where God ever blessed the church after it was organized. She went on the shelf and died with intellectual wisdom from the devil by their leaders and refused the Word of God as it growed up into the perfect stature of Christ. Now, it’s at the head. How contrary … Separate from that unbelieving Eve, you children of the evening light.[iv]
6.     False doctrine rejects the historic teaching of the Christian church.  


The Message calls for a separation from people in other churches, a characteristic of false doctrine.
The ancient church identified the teaching that Father, Son, and Spirit are not genuinely distinct persons but are the same person appearing in different modes, as a heresy. This wasn't a political decision made for convenience. It was a theological judgment that this view misrepresented what the New Testament actually says about God.


All five characteristics of false doctrine are present in the Message. We must, therefore, conclude the Message constitutes false doctrine.
All six characteristics of false doctrine are present in Oneness theology as outlined in ''The Oneness of God.'' We must, therefore, conclude that Oneness theology constitutes false doctrine.
----[i]       Michael R. Emlet, Crosstalk: Where Life & Scripture Meet (Greensboro, NC: New Growth Press, 2009).
 
[ii]      John M. Frame, The Doctrine of the Knowledge of God (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 1987), 197.
 
[iii]     65-1127B, Trying to Do God a Service without It Being God’s Will, para. 139.
 
[iv]     65-0801M, The God of This Evil Age, para. 67.
 
 
The ancient church identified the teaching that Father, Son, and Spirit are not genuinely distinct persons but are the same person appearing in different modes, as a heresy. This wasn't a political decision made for convenience. It was a theological judgment that this view misrepresented what the New Testament actually says about God.


The New Testament describes the Father as distinct from the Son in ways that cannot be reduced to one person playing two roles. The Father speaks to the Son at his baptism while the Spirit descends from outside. The Son prays to the Father with real anguish in Gethsemane. The Father does not spare the Son. The Son says "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" The Spirit intercedes within us while the Son intercedes at the Father's right hand. The throne in the new creation belongs to "God and the Lamb" — two persons named side by side in eternal distinction. These are not descriptions of one person acting. They are descriptions of genuine relationship between genuinely distinct persons within the one God.
The New Testament describes the Father as distinct from the Son in ways that cannot be reduced to one person playing two roles. The Father speaks to the Son at his baptism while the Spirit descends from outside. The Son prays to the Father with real anguish in Gethsemane. The Father does not spare the Son. The Son says "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" The Spirit intercedes within us while the Son intercedes at the Father's right hand. The throne in the new creation belongs to "God and the Lamb" — two persons named side by side in eternal distinction. These are not descriptions of one person acting. They are descriptions of genuine relationship between genuinely distinct persons within the one God.
Line 100: Line 87:
Bernard's book never adequately accounts for this pattern. His framework requires that every verse showing Father-Son interaction is either the human nature in dialogue with the divine nature, or the divine persons acting in their respective roles for our benefit. But neither explanation fits the intimacy, the anguish, the sending and being sent, the loving and being loved — the actual texture of what the New Testament describes.
Bernard's book never adequately accounts for this pattern. His framework requires that every verse showing Father-Son interaction is either the human nature in dialogue with the divine nature, or the divine persons acting in their respective roles for our benefit. But neither explanation fits the intimacy, the anguish, the sending and being sent, the loving and being loved — the actual texture of what the New Testament describes.


God is one. The New Testament insists on this, and so does Trinitarianism. But the God who is one is the God who, within his own eternal being, is Father and Son and Spirit in genuine relationship — and who, in the fullness of time, sent his Son into the world, gave him up for us all, and sent his Spirit into our hearts so that we cry out "Abba, Father." That's the gospel. And it requires the Trinity to be true.
God is one. The New Testament insists on this, and so does Trinitarianism. But the God who is one is the God who, within his own eternal being, is Father and Son and Holy Spirit in genuine relationship — and who, in the fullness of time, sent his Son into the world, gave him up for us all, and sent his Spirit into our hearts so that we cry out "Abba, Father." That's the gospel. And it requires the Trinity to be true.
----
----


{{Bottom of Page No Ref}}
{{Bottom of Page No Ref}}
[[Category:Godhead]]
[[Category:Godhead]]
Retrieved from "https://en.believethesign.com/index.php/An_Overview_of_Bernard%27s_The_Oneness_of_God"