A Refutation of Oneness Pentecostalism

Thanks for doing this, very well documented that the UPC is a modern invention. At around @8:19 notice how sloppy Bernard's theology is. Jesus IS the Father incarnate AND the Father IS the Spirit that dwelt IN the man who is the Son of God. What!!? So the Father is begotten as the Son who is one person whom the Father, another person, who is the Spirit, indwells? In one short statement, Bernard blurs the nature/person distinction, teaches a form of Nestorianism, unitarianism and that the Father begets himself into a man that is distinct from himself! Talk about really bad theology.

This video deserves more views, it is so thorough and many good points are brought up. I feel like too often people defending the Trinity overly focus on the deity of Christ and not enough on the multiplicity of persons.

Thanks for the video man. The only thing I wish it had was all the dozens of verses they personally use to prove their oneness & what the correct interpretation of those scriptures are. “He will be the everlasting father” “If u have seen me u have seen the father” “The father dwells in me” Etc etc.

Thnak you brother, I'm putting this video on my playlist with all the other heretical sectarian* Protestant so-called churches. 🔥

Wow! At around @12:00 Bernard goes full Modalism. They morph into different heresies in order to deny the Trinity. It's a site to behold!

It's total delusion 😢 sadly, but they do not see it.' Let us pray for them.

God bless you man! You are doing Gods work here. As somebody who grew up in this, their doctrine sends people to Hell. And shortcuts salvation. A complete denial of Jesus Christ the son of God.

The link to the PowerPoint is located in the description

They should read the didache (poss. Earliest Church writing from est. About late 90's - early 100s AD.) Where it CLEARY is THEE widely accepted practice of baptism in the Godhead. (In Jesus' name alone is not what the Bible teaches!)

I'm a almost former protestant (thinking on converting) and born and raised in a protestantish family with some of my dad's side being catholic and also pencostal. The protestant side of the family had the most influence on me as a kid and I never really knew about all these denominations up until 12 or 13. Now I can't really tell you what protestant christian denmonation I was apart of because of the fact my mom and her family along with some of my dad's family originally were Pentecostals from Puerto Rico. But then some went non-denominational when they migraded to the mainland United States with some still being pencostal. But my mom went to a Baptist church before she became non-denominational and also I had friends who were baptist aswell. So I bounced around A LOT of different churches ranging from non-denominational, pencostal, and Baptist churches. Over the past year or so I have been getting more into Christian theology and understanding the history of the Christian faith/Church ranging from The Great Schism to the Protestant Reformation. Since I have been learning about these topics I have started to see how the Early Church christians worshiped and how the way protestants worship today isn't biblical and how they denounse things like Church Authority, not having female pastors, and the Sacraments of God's phyical presence. I've also learned how one of the reformers like Martin Luther took out 7 books of the bible to fit his ideas/theology and I know some protestants will be like "Oh well those books weren't inspired by God!" or "The catholic church put those books in and are false". But Like he wanted to even take out the book of James from the bible because he thought it "Didn't express the nature of the Gospel" because it contradicted paul's statements of justification by "faith alone" like with James 2:21-26 but thankfully most of his supporters and even his most trusted friends did not feel comfrotable taking it out so he allowed it stayed in. So if he wanted to take James out of the bible because HE himself (with no authority to dictate what goes in scripture and what doesn't btw) just didn't agree with it I wonder why he took out the other 7 books of the bible like for example in 2nd Maccabees 12:42-44 talks about praying to the dead that was removed by Martin Luther. In which now protestants will use things like Hebrews 9:27 and Deuteronomy 18:11 to bash both Catholics and Orthodox over praying for the dead even though protestants unfortunately do not know the full context because they are reading an uncomplete bible with only 66 books and not the full 76 books of the bible. I've started to really see how false protestant chrisitanity is and how illegitiment it really is... and how weak and of a bases it was built upon with it just being a complete mess. I don't really know which church I should convert to wether it may be the Catholic church or Orthodox I'm not really certain. I'm kinda stuck here so I kinda need someone to help me out here because I know Catholic and Orthodox like to argue who is the "True church" so I kinda need some more clarification on that whole thing.

I watched the entire video and it was pretty good. Growing up in this type of church I realized there was no interpretation of tongues and an ignorance of Paul on spiritual gifts. I plan on getting Christianity without the Cross to look more into the historical development of oneness pentecostalism. But essentially, oneness theology reguires an absurd reading of the text and a rejection of church history.

Well done brother ☦️

** Go to 1:36:22 for doctrines on SPEAKING IN TONGUES** 🎉🎉

In response, nobody ran from you. Rather, you insisted on using eveything except scripture and you disagreed to that. Only after badgering me many times, did you seem to agree. However, it's a ploy on your part. And thereafter slandered anyone disagreeing with the trinity. However uncouth you are doesn't justify your paper tiger beliefs that your teachings are right. All I require for debate is proof that the word trinity is in scripture. And that the words God the son and God the holy spirit are in it; that along with eternal son are in them. And you could not respond. So tilt the narritive your way, but if you had evidence for your ideas you could of given it then or now. Since you decided to slander the truth with your tradition, why not easily refute the truth now by scripture? Instead of blocking me, why not obey scripture and openly reveal the truth? Because you can't! It's only word play, innuendos and misrepresentations. I'm debating you now with written word and you won't respond. What use would it have any further? None.