S
Another false dichotomy... There wasn't a "persons" term to deny for nearly 200 years. I've never represented that anyone did such a thing. Nobody said God wasn't a pink elephant, either. The key is... nobody affirmed Trinity or persons for 200 years. There is no written source that says, "I disaffirm the future term "persons" for doctrinal formulation 'til 200AD."
None spoke of it... PERIOD. Clement of Rome? Polycarp? Ignatius? NADA. You originally said they did, 'til I whittled you down.
^ See my previous post. ^
Agreed. (Though you'll likely perceive that as arrogance.)
I clearly said scholars agreed it was lost. I found nothing in 13 years of research to indicate otherwise. I don't just make casual ignorant general statements that are unfounded. I provided events, names, dates. You should at least admit that.
From what is written, there is nothing to indicate they did, and that's substantial. I seldom use the word stupid, but I'm gettin' close to doing so with your reasoning here. There is no indication of such exception your hopeful presumption. The concensus of Trinity scholars concurs with this simple assertion. Only the GOC claims an unsubstantiatable oral tradition that defies history of Trinity formulation.
You're welcome. Somebody's gotta do it to refute all the supposition masquerading as truth. Shame on you for ignorantly saying something different.
You forgot. "Persons" emerged to refute well-developed Sabellianism. I've never denied it was PART of the early church landscape; that's actually been my point all along... it was merely one of many formulations during that period. You, on the other hand, just ignore the 5 other formulations that were also a PART of the early church.
None spoke of it... PERIOD. Clement of Rome? Polycarp? Ignatius? NADA. You originally said they did, 'til I whittled you down.
^ See my previous post. ^
Agreed. (Though you'll likely perceive that as arrogance.)
I clearly said scholars agreed it was lost. I found nothing in 13 years of research to indicate otherwise. I don't just make casual ignorant general statements that are unfounded. I provided events, names, dates. You should at least admit that.
From what is written, there is nothing to indicate they did, and that's substantial. I seldom use the word stupid, but I'm gettin' close to doing so with your reasoning here. There is no indication of such exception your hopeful presumption. The concensus of Trinity scholars concurs with this simple assertion. Only the GOC claims an unsubstantiatable oral tradition that defies history of Trinity formulation.
You're welcome. Somebody's gotta do it to refute all the supposition masquerading as truth. Shame on you for ignorantly saying something different.
You forgot. "Persons" emerged to refute well-developed Sabellianism. I've never denied it was PART of the early church landscape; that's actually been my point all along... it was merely one of many formulations during that period. You, on the other hand, just ignore the 5 other formulations that were also a PART of the early church.
So, are you arguing from silence that because, as you think, no Church father said Trinity or persons till after 200 AD, no one before then believed in the Trinity? How do you know that? You presume too much. You admit Oneness comes from Sabellianism. Sabellianism was rejected by the Church. There is such a Body of Christ, the Church, which is visible and identifiable in history. And the Church always believed in the Trinity, as Trinity is apostolic doctrine (Matthew 28:19 speaks of the Trinity).
Here is what we can learn about Oneness Pentecostalism.
"UNITED PENTECOSTAL CHURCH INTERNATIONAL Founded: 1945 Membership: est. 600,000 in 3,876 churches (2000)
"The United Pentecostal Church International (UPCI) was founded in 1945 by the union of the Pentecostal Assemblies of Jesus Christ and the Pentecostal Church, Inc. Each of those bodies was itself the result of mergers of other Pentecostal bodies in the 1930s. All the constituent members were "oneness" ("Jesus only") Pentecostals who withdrew from the Assemblies of God in 1916.
"The doctrinal view of the UPCI reflect most of the beliefs of the Holiness-Pentecostal movement (See HOLINESS CHURCHES: PENTECOSTAL CHURCHES), with the exception of the "second work of grace," the historic doctrine of the Trinity, and the traditional trinitarian formula in water baptism. Holiness of life is understood to be an aspect of God's salvation of an individual, not the result of a subsequent experience. The oneness view held by the UPCI asserts that God "revealed Himself in the Old Testament as Jehovah and in the New Testament revealed Himself in His Son, Jesus Christ." Jesus Christ is thus the one true God manifested in flesh and the Holy Ghost [sic[ is the Spirit of God/ the resurrected Christ. Baptism is carried out in Jesus' name only. The church embraces the Pentecostal view that speaking in tongues is the initial sign of receiving the Holy Spirit. For the UPCI, the Bible is the inerrant and infallible Word of God, and the church rejects all extra-biblical revelations and writings, such as church creeds and writings." (page 289). Handbook of Denominations in the United States 11th Edition. Frank S. Mead, Samuel S. Hiklll 11th Edition revised by Craig D. Atwood. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 2001.
If the UPCI rejects all extra-biblical writings and creeds, why does it have a publishing house and sell Oneness books which explicate the Oneness creed? These are all extra-biblical writings. There is no rejection of extra-biblical writings. They write plenty of Oneness commentary upon the Bible, from their Oneness, Jesus only point of view!
Note: this group existed only from approximately 1945 years after the birth of Christ. The belief in the Trinity is apostolic doctrine and existed in the words of Our Lord God and Saviour Jesus Christ from the day St. Matthew heard Him speak His words which Matthew recorded in Matthew chapter 28, verse 19. Father, Son, Holy Spirit: Trinity.
Take care.
In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington