SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Looking for free sermon messages?
Sermon Podcast | Audio | Video

Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : Trinity and TD Jakes

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 Next Page )
PosterThread
Zapthycat
Member



Joined: 2003/8/5
Posts: 75
Livermore, CA

 Re: Trinity and TD Jakes

Fairly simple difference, in that Jakes believes that there is one God, and has manifested (or shown himself) in three forms... God the Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit.

Trinitarians believe that God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit are three seperate beings, co-equal and co-eternal, and all three are God.

Without disputing or cutting down anyone's doctrine, that's a fairly simple definition of both views... :)

J


_________________
J. Wilson

 2005/6/16 11:00Profile
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Re:

Quote:
The Father IS NOT the Son, The Son IS NOT the Holy Spirit, The Holy Spirit IS NOT the Father. Is the way you are pertraying this.



You left out the last part:

But they are all [b]God[/b]. Elohyim.

See my article [url=http://www.sermonindex.net/modules/articles/index.php?view=article&aid=1993]"ONE 'Yachid' or one 'Echad'?"[/url].

God Bless,

-Robert


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2005/6/16 11:04Profile
Zapthycat
Member



Joined: 2003/8/5
Posts: 75
Livermore, CA

 Re:

Didn't see this post, sorry...

Jakes doesn't believe there is co-existance because he doesn't believe that God is three seperate persons, but one person, one being. How can you co-exist with yourself?

God CAN and DOES use Jakes in a mighty way.

Hope this helps explain the confusion a bit...

J


_________________
J. Wilson

 2005/6/16 11:04Profile
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Re:

Quote:
Here is another question, same topic. Can God use TD Jakes? If he believes such lies? This is a bit of a weird question now, but it seems like God is getting the glory..right? or is he like benny hinn but in a different way.

Meaning, 'alot of show', and some Glory to God.



All error begins with a misunderstanding of God. A question was posed a while back whether or not genuine revival has ever flowed from the Oneness Camp. As far as I know no one answered that.


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2005/6/16 11:07Profile
Zapthycat
Member



Joined: 2003/8/5
Posts: 75
Livermore, CA

 Re:

...everything that we know about revival has come from the oneness camp. It started in Acts 2, then moved to Samaria, and all over the world.

If that's not revival, then I don't want it. I prefer to let scripture define us and what revival is rather than the sad movements (in comparison) that we have today...


_________________
J. Wilson

 2005/6/16 11:11Profile
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

Quote:
If that's not revival, then I don't want it. I prefer to let scripture define us and what revival is rather than the sad movements (in comparison) that we have today...

Does this mean you reject all the classical revivals in known history where, so as we can ascertain, they would all have rejected Sabellian Modalism. Are you saying 'you don't want' classical revival because it is not Sabellianism?


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2005/6/16 12:07Profile









 Re:

Robert W, good article.

Hmm what is Sabellianism?? Philologos

 2005/6/16 15:23
Zapthycat
Member



Joined: 2003/8/5
Posts: 75
Livermore, CA

 Re:

As Paul said "I am determined to know nothing among you but Jesus Christ, and him crucified", so then I am determined to know nothing but the example as set forth in the word of God.

This doesn't mean I reject the "revivals" that have happened, such as Azusa or Wales or Lewis, etc... but it means that I let the Bible define what I believe and want. If something, as good sounding as it portrays itself, is against the Bible in any way, then I'm against it as well.

That's all I'm saying.


_________________
J. Wilson

 2005/6/16 15:30Profile
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

The full description of this ancient heresy is [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modalism]Sabellian Modalism[/url]. I thought I would introduce the extra word for folks wanting to research things further.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2005/6/16 15:39Profile
couch
Member



Joined: 2003/10/29
Posts: 62
College Station, TX

 Re:

Zapthycat,

It seems you may be missing the point of this thread. Yeshua wanted to know what Modalism was, and how it was different from the biblical doctrine of the Trinity.

There were a few who helped him with the definition, to which he was satisfied. Then, he asked a follow up question concerning whether or not God could use someone who had such a faulty view of the Trinity.

The question was replied to with the simple response that no true revival has ever come from the camp containing the heresy of modalism, or the "oneness camp".

Your reply sounded odd in that you said that all revival had come from this heretical camp. I am sure this is not what you meant, you probably meant to say that God is one and all revivals came from a true understanding of the Biblical truth that God is one.

Indeed He is one, but when we say "oneness" we are referring to the heresy of modalism, from which I hope you would agree that the bible clearly mitigates against, especially as one who "lets the Bible define what I believe and want."

Modalism, or Sabellian Modalism, or that which springs from the "oneness camp" is heresy; but the Biblical view of the Trinity is truth. Robert's point was that no true revival has sprung out of heresy.

I hope this helps un-muddy the waters...


_________________
Ryan Couch

 2005/6/16 16:38Profile





©2002-2019 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy