The purpose of this presentation is to reflect on Oneness Pentecostalism through the lens of the Nicene Creed, and the doctrine of the Trinity in particular. It is not intended to denigrate that denomination, but to respectfully engage in dialogue with the intention of affirming the Nicene Creed.
Oneness Pentecostalism is a modern form of Sabellianism (ca. third century), also known as Modalism, that asserts “The dominance of the one over the many, unity over plurality….” (Holcomb, Trinitarian Heresies: What is Lost,” Theo Global Journal, Vol 1, p 245).
Oneness Pentecostalism is sometimes justified as a reaction to Tritheism—sometimes perceived, sometimes actual—but in no case can be justified as a rejection of creedal doctrine of the Trinity.
There are many reasons why Oneness Pentecostalism should be rejected in favor of the credal definitions of the doctrine of the Trinity. This paper elucidates three reasons:
1) The phraseology of the uses of “baptism in the name of Jesus” in Acts (2:38; 8:16; 10:48; 19:5; 22:16) and 1.00 Corinthians 1:13, vary so significantly in their wording, both the use of Jesus, Christ, and Lord, and also the prepositions (ἐπί, εἰς, ἐν), as to preclude any possibility that they were intended as a formula.
2) The occurrence of “baptism in the name of the Lord” and the formula “in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit” in one document, the Didache (ca. 125), compels the conclusion that the early Church understood the phrase “in the name of the Lord” as a euphemism for the formula, “in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.”
3) Sabellianism (Modalism), à la Oneness Pentecostalism, cannot accommodate the doctrine of substitutionary atonement. A Modalist view of God cannot encompass the idea of the Son, the Second Person of the Trinity, becoming a substitute whose sacrifice satisfies the debt owed for sin to the Father, nor a separation from the Father, the First Person of the Trinity, without devolving into a kind of Arianism in which one man dies on a cross abandoned by God. Substitutionary atonement is understood differently by many Trinitarians, but it is at least a conversation Trinitarians can have.
As a Trinitarian who first became a Christian in a Oneness Pentecostal church, the author experienced both the trauma and the redemption of learning the historic doctrines and the value of the creeds. This presentation shares that personal journey.