Recently I was informed that Bishop T. D. Jakes, pastor of the Potters House Church was interviewed by pastor Mark Driscoll of Mars Hill Church and pastor James MacDonald of Harvest Bible Chapel in regards to him now embracing the Trinity Doctrine. This was a live interview with T. D. Jakes, Mark Driscoll, and James MacDonald that took place on January 27, 2012 at Harvest Bible Chapel in Illinois at the second annual Elephant Room. (check out Baptist Press/ affiliated with the Southern Baptist Convention www.bpnews.net/BPnews.asp?ID=37054)
Reading the T. D. Jakes interview was very interesting to me since for many years Bishop T. D. Jakes has been labeled a heretic, because he was one who taught and believed in the heresy of Modalism or Oneness Pentecostalism. In fact at Berean Perspective we have two articles that have been written dealing with what T. D. Jakes has said he believes concerning the doctrine of the Trinity. T. D. Jakes denies the doctrine of the Trinity and he affirmed the Oneness perspective, thus we labeled him as being in the heresy of Modalism. (Oneness Pentecostalism) We believe that Modalism (Oneness Pentecostalism, Jesus Only, United Pentecostal Church International, UPCI) is a false teaching and has many false doctrines. (check out Oneness Pentecostalism) Now, after reading what was posted from the Baptist Press post (affiliated with the Southern Baptist Convention) I am somewhat encouraged and at the same time still not at ease with what T. D. Jakes believes concerning the Trinity Doctrine.
I respect both pastor Mark Driscoll and pastor James MacDonald and I am glad that they had this opportunity to talk with T. D. Jakes. But if I would have been involved somehow in that discussion I would have asked some more direct questions to get to the real meat of this issue concerning the Trinity Doctrine and the Gospel with T. D. Jakes.
I would have asked Bishop T. D. Jakes the following:
- When you say you now embrace the doctrine of the Trinity as being three persons, does that mean the Father and the Son are distinct personages?
- When you say you believe in one God whom is the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, do you believe that in heaven Jesus Christ and the Father will be seen as Revelation 3:21 and Revelation 5:8 indicates?
- According to what Jesus taught in John 17:5 in praying to the Father that He was going to be glorified and be with the Father again before the world was, do you believe that Jesus Christ (the personage) existed with the Father (the personage) from eternity?
- According to Oneness Pentecostalism (Oneness theology/ Modalism) a person is to be baptized in the name of Jesus only, not in the name of the Father, name of the Son, (name of Jesus) and the name the Holy Spirit. If you were to baptize someone how would you baptize them?
- According to Oneness Pentecostalism one must be water baptized in Jesus name only and speak in tongues for the forgiveness of sins. What do you believe now?
- You said you were saved in a Oneness Pentecostal Church. Now, knowing that the Oneness Pentecostal Church has doctrines that teach another version of whom Jesus is in comparison to the Trinitarian understanding…and knowing that Oneness Pentecostalism teaches another gospel message in comparison to the true gospel of Jesus Christ, then how could you have been saved back then with believing in another Jesus and another gospel?
- You said basically that Oneness theology and Trinitarian theology are the same, that we are saying the same things. How can you say that honestly?
“T.D. Jakes wants to have both Trinitarians and Oneness Pentecostals, who are Unitarian Modalists, classified as brothers in Christ at the same time. But you cannot affirm both are in the realm of truth without removing the Trinity as a fundamental basis of the Christian faith. You cannot have both beliefs at the same time: either God is both three and one (as Trinitarians believe and Unitarians deny) or God is only one (as Unitarians like Oneness Pentecostals believe and Trinitarians deny). There is no bridging this divide without losing the Trinity itself, for He is the God we worship.” (Malcolm Yarnell)
I agree with Malcolm Yarnell that T. D. Jakes is wrong in his view that Trinitarians and Oneness Pentecostals are essentially the same. Malcolm Yarnell gave many good points in regards to his perspective with what T. D. Jakes shared in regards to his beliefs, with things that good and things that are still false. One thing for sure is this interview will be of much interest in the years to come and to see what transpires with T. D. Jakes and various Christian churches and affiliations, and within the Southern Baptist Convention. Along with that how will T. D. Jakes be treated by the Oneness Pentecostal churches and affiliations?
Does T. D. Jakes believe in the Trinity Doctrine? Does T. D. Jakes deny the Trinity Doctrine? Or is T. D. Jakes using Trinitarian wording with Oneness beliefs? I will be taking some time to think more about what I have read from the interview with T. D. Jakes and his recent changes in what he now says he believes concerning the doctrine of the Trinity. As I do some more research and examination I will update more here. You are welcome to share your thoughts from checking the interview with T.D. Jakes, Mark Driscoll, and James MacDonald.
Related articles
- Explaining the Trinity Doctrine: What is the Trinity Doctrine? What does the Bible teach? (rootedinchrist.org)
- Baptist Press – T.D. Jakes says he has embraced doctrine of the Trinity – News with a Christian Perspective (www.bpnews.net)
A former Oneness person believes T. D. Jakes is not being honest and is misleading people on what he has said. Check out this link http://grbcav.org/2012/01/er2-qa-with-a-former-oneness-pastor/
I know people are this this post, any comments out there?
Posted by Kelly Powers | January 30, 2012, 8:03 PMSir I respect your sincere faith in Christianity and your desire to defend what you perceive to be true.
But you are drastically incorrect to call Oneness Pentecostals Unitarians. We affirm the Deity of Jesus even more emphasized than Trinitarians and we do NOT deny the existence of the Father as many Trinitarians accuse. You also need to check your definition of Modalism.
I highly recommend I AM: a Oneness Pentecostal Theology for a proper definition of the Oneness Pentecostal’s belief on God. Or will you just keep slandering a people you know nothing about?
Posted by Jeremy Castellanos | February 4, 2012, 10:15 PMHello Jeremy, thanks for coming here and sharing some comments.
I did not label Oneness being the same as Unitarianism, that was a quote I posted from Malcom Yarnell. I would agree with you, they are not the same. However, I do not agree that Oneness emphasizes the Deity of Jesus Christ more than Trinitarianism.
As to Modalism, check my definition? How about you check http://www.rootedinchrist.org/2008/01/01/what-do-oneness-pentecostals-believe-official-doctrines-teachings-of-the-upci/ and you let me know if I got something wrong there on what Oneness theology is.
Can you please explain how we are slandering people?
Posted by Kelly Powers | February 4, 2012, 11:38 PMIt is slander because you present us as heretics. The link you gave made a few incorrect assessments.
One: we do not say you must speak in tongues in order to be saved. Never is the emphasis on tongues alone alright or sound in our faith. The emphasis would be the same as if one were to say that in order to fulfill all righteousness Jesus would need to have had the dove land upon His shoulder. The correct manner to have presented that would be to say that He was getting baptized to fulfill all righteousness and the dove landing was of consequence. I am not using this analogy to argue necessity of baptism at this time but am just an on the fly example.
Second we do not state any salvation apart from the grace through faith in Jesus. We do not work to be saved or even to stay saved but we work BECAUSE we are saved.
But like with many, that comment is a cheap shot at our doctrine of what it means to be justified and sanctified and born again. We do not say that you do any work to be saved.
Posted by Jeremy Castellanos | February 5, 2012, 8:31 AMOne thing does not make sense. The baptismal formula, baptizing ‘in the name of Jesus’, is the only formula used in the Apostles’ writings. These men were taught by, and spent time with Jesus himself. (excluding Paul, of course.) And yet, we are told that the men taught directly by Jesus were WRONG, and 2,000 years later, individuals such as yourself got it RIGHT.
Posted by Greg Laile | February 6, 2012, 7:10 PMHello Jeremy,
You said: “One: we do not say you must speak in tongues in order to be saved. Never is the emphasis on tongues alone alright or sound in our faith”
Where did I say “alone” in regards to tongues? Now, what I wrote in this post was a few years ago and I see the links have changed but what I shared was accurate. I will share what I found currently at the UPCI official site.
quote: “Peter, with the support of the other apostles, gave a precise, complete, and unequivocal answer: “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost” (Acts 2:38). As this verse shows, we respond to the gospel, obey the gospel, or apply the gospel to our lives by repentance from sin (death to sin), water baptism by immersion in the name of Jesus Christ (burial with Christ), and receiving the Holy Spirit (new life in Christ)” http://www.upci.org/about-us/beliefs/21-about-us/beliefs/91
quote: “To become a subject in the kingdom of God, Jesus said a person must be “born again,” or “born of water and of the Spirit” (John 3:3-5). The birth of the Spirit and the baptism of the Spirit are synonymous terms…The new birth, consisting of water and Spirit, was never set forth as being optional or unessential. “Ye must be born again” are the words of Jesus in John 3:7. Until a person is born of the Spirit, he cannot be called a “son” of God.” http://www.upci.org/resources/instructional-devotional-leadership/84-the-gift-of-the-holy-ghost
quote: “The baptism of the Holy Ghost is the birth of the Spirit (John 3:5). This spiritual baptism is necessary to put someone into the kingdom of God (God’s church, the bride of Christ) and is evidenced by speaking in other tongues (other languages) as the Spirit of God give utterance.” http://www.upci.org/resources/instructional-devotional-leadership/78-the-apostles-doctrine
Jeremy according to the UPCI official site being born again a person must speak in tongues, that is not optional, it is not unessential but essential. Now maybe you are not of the UPCI and maybe you will reject their statements, if that is the case, could you please provide for me a link/resource for which church you attend and what you believe in regards to doctrines.
You said: “Second we do not state any salvation apart from the grace through faith in Jesus. We do not work to be saved or even to stay saved but we work BECAUSE we are saved.”
Can you honestly tell me if a person who says they believe in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, the Son of God, God come in the flesh sent from the Father, that they put all their trust in Him for His death and shed blood on the cross, and that He rose from the dead proving He is the Messiah, and that they choose to follow Him…BUT they never speak in tongues and they are not baptized in the name of Jesus only but in the name of the Father Son and Holy Spirit, and they at times fall into temptation and sin, that they are born again and saved in Christ?
I have not met a Oneness Pentecostal who has said yes that person is saved in Christ with those beliefs and life. You maybe someone different, I cannot speak for you, but I can speak from what I have learned in my life in talking with people and those whom are ex Oneness Pentecostals.
So Jeremy. You said I was a slander cause I according to you have stated things wrongly on what you believe. I would like for you to prove to me what I have shared is wrong.
Jeremy, when I have talked with those who claim to be Oneness and they say to be because I believe in the Tri-Unity of God being three personages (not Jesus in different modes) and that I am a heretic and false believer, would that be considered slanderous on their part? When they have told me that I do not believe in the necessity of tongues for being born again that I am not saved, are they slandering me?
Jeremy, the reason I shared the above on what I have been accused of is for you to understand there are many different perspectives and beliefs out there, and many people take a very strong stand on certain things. I try my best to respect people but I want you to know that many things that I have at this site is because I was told by them (various religious groups) that I was not saved and that I was the heretic in so many words. What I have done in my life, at least the last 20 something years is seek the Lord and His Word for truth in regards to what it really means to be a Christian and what false doctrines and movements there are out there leading people astray. I hope you can at least understand my heart in that.
Posted by Kelly Powers | February 6, 2012, 10:07 PMHello Greg, welcome here to our site. Thank you for taking the time to share a comment with us.
You said: “One thing does not make sense. The baptismal formula, baptizing ‘in the name of Jesus’, is the only formula used in the Apostles’ writings. These men were taught by, and spent time with Jesus himself. (excluding Paul, of course.) And yet, we are told that the men taught directly by Jesus were WRONG, and 2,000 years later, individuals such as yourself got it RIGHT.”
I agree that when we read in the book of Acts it states that people were baptized in Jesus name. However, I do not read anywhere where we are told that this was the only way in order for people to do it and be saved. The real issue you are presenting, at least what I believe you are addressing is the topic of the Trinity doctrine. May I ask you just a few questions?
Question 1 – When Jesus was baptized in Matthew 3:16-17, who spoke from heaven to Jesus? Whom descended upon Jesus? If God is only 1 in person, and Jesus was God in the flesh on the earth, who was the voice from heaven and the one whom descended on Jesus?
Question 2 – In John 17:5 Jesus speaking to the Father, “Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was” (NASB) Would you agree that Jesus was alive and well with the Father before the world was? Was Jesus a distinct person with the Father or a thought?
Question 3 – According to Rev. 3:21 and Rev. 5:7 John the apostle sees in heaven the Father and Jesus distinct from one another. Was John wrong in what he wrote that the Father and Jesus are distinct persons?
Thanks for reading and I look forward to reading your reply.
Posted by Kelly Powers | February 6, 2012, 10:24 PMKelly Powers, I do understand. Your heart beat is the same as mine. You are only defending what you know to be true. And as I pointed out I do respect that in you. I’m responding to this because you are doing exactly what you have had happen to you. You are presenting in so many words the Oneness people in a false light. Now at the end of the day each of us must take in to consideration of what we heard, because even the Pharisees knew of the coming of the Messiah, but when He came they hardened their hearts as I believe it was David who said “today if you do not harden your hearts…” in reference to our day since Jesus.
I gave an analogy of what I meant concerning tongues. I go to a UPCI Bible College and of course a UPCI church. I am very much a Oneness Pentecostal. But if I were to ask any one Trinitarian to define for me what they believe about the trinity, I would get a wide array of comments. But sometimes it would be a little off on what the church they believe in actually teaches. After all not everyone is a theologian. And I KNOW that many churches especially those like Mark Driscoll’s are working to get a more common confession about the trinity among Trinitarians because they are not all saying the same thing. The same consideration must be given to Oneness people. I have heard Oneness Pentecostals say that you have to speak in tongues to be saved. And you are saying we say that. But that is not the true Oneness Pentecostal confession for either you or them.
What I was saying about Jesus being baptized was that He didn’t get baptized so the dove could rest on His shoulder, but BECAUSE He was baptized the dove rested on His shoulder. The same thing with tongues. You are saying we believe you have to speak in tongues to be saved. No, we are saying you must receive the Holy Spirit, and when you do you will speak in tongues. Holy Spirit, not tongues is what we claim saves us.
Now I’m not God. In the end God will judge. But my job is not to make exceptions or find loopholes, my job is to tell you what I was told and let God judge the rest. What about those who cannot find water to be baptized in? I see your point (and I know you didn’t say that, just a manner of speaking) and that frigthens me for them, but God is just and I’ll let Him handle that. But what about you? In the words of the Eunech what hinders you to be baptized in Jesus’ name? How about the man that has no tongue due to an accident or surgery? I don’t know, let God be the judge. What about those who all they knew was to confess that Jesus was the Lord of all and were trusting Him to save them but stranded on an island? We can speculate and even gain some ground.
On the flip side many Evangelicals would face the issue of the man with no tongue and state he believed in his heart- Yet we could charge he never confessed with his mouth according to many Evangelical confessions who teach you must confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord in order to be saved (known as the sinner’s prayer).
therefore YOU and WE have to trust that God knows what He’s doing and let Him be God for the exceptions if they exist. There are many people like Cornelius in the earth who don’t know of Jesus. Will you quickly place them all in hell if they die in ignorance? I think we should all be HOPEFUL universalists in that we all are hoping that somehow everyone would be saved in the end, but that is them. What about you? These exceptions are extreme and by no means the common case. But in spite of my wishful thinking I must take a stand to tell you what it means to BE saved, to GET saved, and WHAT that looks like and invite you to celebrate and even at times warn of the dangers.
So what does Scripture say?
Well all come to Scripture with our own bias and worldview, but the true theologian and Christian will for a moment lay those aside in order to gain the perspective of the one writing. I have a quick story for you to read in my own words but inspired by one of my professors.
There were two men in a train. One was a professor at some highly credible University. The other was taking a nap.
The Professor looked pleased having just read the novel through and wanted to strike up a conversation to boast about how much he knew about that book.
So he said “Wow, that was an awesome book I just read!” The other man still napping barely moved. “I say sir, I think this book is a wonderful critique of modern day religions.
The other man peeking from his sleep looked over and said “I’m not so sure that’s what it’s about.”
The professor, shocked, said “No, I’ve studied these things and I know all the latest trends- you have to dig under the writing to get to this. You can be sure of it!”
But the other awake now responded “Sir, with all due respect I don’t think that’s what that means.”
Losing patience the professor screamed “Alright, tell me ONE good reason why I should believe anything you have to say about that book!”
“Well” the other man said, “The only reason I can think of, is, I wrote it.”
Posted by Jeremy Castellanos | February 7, 2012, 10:23 AMSo, you do accept the legitimacy of the Oneness baptismal formula, which is taken directly from the original Apostles, whom Jesus HIMSELF taught. That us good. Now, do u believe the Father is really the father of Jesus, in the same sense of a human father and son relationship? or is it symbolic? Because a father is older than a son. Is the Father older than Jesus? and why not a familial reference to the Holy Spirit? Is he not related to the other 2?
Posted by Greg Laile | February 7, 2012, 10:30 AMIf you are willing to read the Scriptures without too much bias from creeds of centuries later or from your own reading or even the reading of your church affiliates, and just take the Apostles and their associates at their own confession you may be able to see what we are trying to saying. But if you think you have all the answers and like the Pharisees know Scripture inside and out, you may just miss the coming Messiah no matter your experience and knowledge.
I have much more to write. But my people have been slandered and misrepresented (and we’ve done it from our end too of course) since we became a movement in North America in the early to mid 1900′s. I want you to hear from one their own what we believe articulated and expounded. Take it or leave it, but I pray the former and I wish for the best. I really do.
Posted by Jeremy Castellanos | February 7, 2012, 10:33 AMJeremy I appreciate your comments. I will give more thorough reply later. I did give official statements so what I have shared is true. Also you didn’t reply to my questions, I hope you do.
I’ll be back…
Posted by Kelly Powers | February 7, 2012, 10:43 AMGreg I asked 3 specific areas of questions, can you please give a reply to them?
Posted by Kelly Powers | February 7, 2012, 10:44 AMI will respond, but like you, I need some time to get back to it. I too will be back :)
Posted by Jeremy Castellanos | February 7, 2012, 10:47 AMI do not want to get the discussion off track on our discussion of Oneness people. But you mentioned that we are Modalists. This is a true statement. But how you define modalism is important. For the sake mostly for other readers but also yours Mr. Powers, Modalism is an umbrella term which included a very large number of people. Three men stand out the most who were termed Modalists, but each are significantly different. They are Praxeus, Sabellius, and Noetus. It must also be noted that the majority of information available about them are from their religious opponents. Many Trinitarians have labeled us Sabellians. This is a very strong mislabel. First, I am suspicious of their opponents painting them in a wrong light, but assuming their opponents were correct, Sabellius did not present a normative confession for other Modalists and certainly not for modern Oneness Pentecostals. We do not believe that God became the Father, then became the Son, then became the Holy Spirit. This was what Sabellius’ opponents said he believed. We have NO writings from Sabellius. According to Tertullian, Praxean Modalism was the majority of believers in his day. If there was a representative Modalist back in that era, you may say that we are Praxean Modalists and not Sabellian Modalists. I would again strongly recommend you reading I AM: a Oneness Pentecostal Theology by Dr. David Norris.
Posted by Jeremy Castellanos | February 7, 2012, 3:15 PMYou will have to tell me what I haven’t answered already, and by all means I will answer what I can. I don’t claim to know everything nor do I need to.
EDITED from Admin: I will explain in my post.
Posted by Jeremy Castellanos | February 7, 2012, 9:57 PMHi Jeremy. I want you to know that I have edited your post only because I do not want to jump all around on this and that, when we are still working on things, and you said you wanted to know what I asked. In your post you gave a whack load of stuff, which there was nothing offensive or rude, but it was going off on a new area and away from what we were addressing and you can bring that up later when we get to it. I have emailed what you posted so you can have it for yourself, just in case you did not have it saved. One thing I do request, is that you write your own answers and info, that way we can talk with each other, not at each other. Below is what I wrote previously that I wish for to reply to so I can know what you truly believe.
quote from my previous post to you: Can you honestly tell me if a person who says they believe in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, the Son of God, God come in the flesh sent from the Father, that they put all their trust in Him for His death and shed blood on the cross, and that He rose from the dead proving He is the Messiah, and that they choose to follow Him…BUT they never speak in tongues and they are not baptized in the name of Jesus only but in the name of the Father Son and Holy Spirit, and they at times fall into temptation and sin, that they are born again and saved in Christ?
I have not met a Oneness Pentecostal who has said yes that person is saved in Christ with those beliefs and life. You maybe someone different, I cannot speak for you, but I can speak from what I have learned in my life in talking with people and those whom are ex Oneness Pentecostals.
Could you read what I have asked over, and address these questions I have asked you on what you believe.
Posted by Kelly Powers | February 7, 2012, 10:21 PMIn my post about God being the judge, I think I gave at least a half answer to your first question. I wish everyone on earth were somehow saved in the end, but I do not make that call. We both agree (I assume) that not everyone is going to make it. And we know this is because it is not our standard. God is absolutely perfect and alone is that standard by which we are saved. We then both say that the only way that we could ever possibly attain to the righteousness of God is through Jesus. Without His sacrifice we are left to our own righteousness, which Isaiah says is like a dirty…well….cleansing rag…
So we know we can’t save ourselves. But if Jesus is the only way to be righteous in God’s sight, then how does one accept that sacrifice to his or her own credit- how is it credited to him? in other words one can ask when is one Justified? I posted my essay because it gave a succinct answer to your questions in one swoop. But I admit it was overwhelming for the flow of this discussion. I cannot honestly answer in a short space and give you a justified answer so my response to this needs to be lengthy.
depending on how you define justification and whether it is punctiliar (happening in one moment) or holistic (whole process/period of time) greatly defines what it means to be saved.
For centuries Christians have stated that justification is punctiliar- for example the sinner’s prayer and similar Evangelical confessions. Meaning that when one has believed and confessed Jesus as Lord at that MOMENT he is justified- the sacrifice/blood of Jesus is applied to one’s life. If you view this dogmatically you will never be able to see anything else. All other definitions of justification would seem heretical.
But Oneness Pentecostals view justification as holistic. There are reasons for this. But right here right now you have to confess that unless one is justified he cannot be saved. There are no unjustified persons already in Christ and in this age there is no one that is saved who is not in Christ. You know that if I tell you that that person who only believed ends up in hell it would make you shake your head and perhaps seemingly confirm your ideas of Oneness Pentecostalism. But we are put in hell by Evangelicals all day long. Go to any Lifeway or Christian book stores and you will see us labled among the damned, among the heretics. what I’m saying is that you and Evangelicals would do the same for us.
Posted by Jeremy Castellanos | February 7, 2012, 11:07 PMJeremy, you still have not answered…
if a person believes in the Trinity is 3 distinct persons the Father the Son and the Holy Spirit, can a person be saved if this is wrong according to what you believe?
If a person has not been water baptized in Jesus name only, but was water baptized in the name of the Father the Son and Holy Spirit (Trinity), can that person be saved if this is wrong according to what you believe?
If a person does not speak in tongues, ever, has not the “evidence” that the UPCI states is necessary for the baptism of the Holy Spirit, can this person be saved according to what you believe if this is wrong?
These are questions that divide what we both believe and I would like to have you answer these please. I allowed your last post cause you had some things in reference to what was asked, but you did not address the questions asked specifically. I am being more clear on my questions since I was not clear enough before.
Posted by Kelly Powers | February 7, 2012, 11:14 PMI too haven’t made myself clear enough. I can give you no justification for someone who hasn’t been born again of Jesus’ name baptism and Holy Spirit which is evidenced by speaking in tongues. I would like to but IF there are any in this age saved who have not been born again according to ACTS 2:38 we do not have the authority to say so.
Now to say that a belief in the trinity is of salvific value would absolutely matter IF it causes you to persecute Oneness adherents or refuse submitting to Jesus name baptism in favor of the Trinitarian baptism.
But what I have personally witnessed and countless others is that the average belief among evangelicals and, especially Baptists, has many practical similarities.
I would certainly condemn a Social Trinity advocation but when we talk economic trinity doctrine- I don’t honestly know for sure. But what I will always boil down to is I love Jesus and want to know Him better. So for me and I suggest for you, that what we are suggesting does in fact honor Him.
Posted by Jeremy Castellanos | February 8, 2012, 12:19 AM