Modalistic Monarchianism & The Praxaen Heresey

I don't want to get overly theological and or technical, as I do not consider myself the one to lead into indepth or comprehensive theological discourse, but I have noticed that in debate and conversation with most believers who oppose trinitarianism in favor of Sabellianism or what is otherwise known as modalism or oneness teachings, there is often a caveat or an idea that emerges that can be rather disturbing. The thought is summarized in the following statement:

"Jesus is the Son of God according to the flesh and the very God Himself according to the Spirit"

This is a statement that can be found on many Apostolic church web sites and within statements of faith. It  is often thought to be a purely oneness statement. But in reality it is a belief system taught by an excommunicated late second century early third century priest named Praxeas and is the root of a heretical teaching that could be called Praxeanism. 

To draw a distinction, I must lay a little ground here.

Modalism 

First, modalism, often referred to as monarchianism and Sabellianism (after a priest named Sabellius who taught the idea) is a Christiological theory that God has revealed himself to man in 3 manifestations, roles or modes as opposed to 3 persons with mind, will, intellect and awareness of one another. Under modalistic belief, the Son has no personal independence or subsistence. A modalist contends that there is only one God and he is revealed as the Father, Son and Holy Ghost. Oneness Pentecostals further contend that the name of that one God, that is common to all three modes, is the name Jesus. Therefore Jesus is not only God, but ontologically the Father and the Holy Ghost and each mode is summarized by the name Jesus, thus "Jesus only" is often an appellation applied to those who hold this belief.

Praxeanism 

The teaching that Jesus is forever and always the God/Man or theantropist, describes what is called the hypostatic union of Christ. Praxeanism essentially denies the unalterable hypostatic union of Jesus's nature as both 100% man and 100% God. Praxeanism in its endeavor to emphasize the oneness of God in his being, actually dissolves the hypostasis of Jesus as God, by contending that  the "flesh" (or physical body) of Jesus is human only, while his Spirit, is God only, therefore creating two distinct beings within one, as opposed to one complete inseparable being known as Jesus. 

Church apologist Tertullian (Quintus Septimius Florens Tertullianus) who lived roughly at the same time as Praxeus and Sabellius, noted the following in his defense of the faith regarding Praxean teaching:

"For, confuted on all sides on the distinction between the Father and the Son, which we maintain without destroying their inseparable union... they endeavour to interpret this distinction in a way which shall nevertheless tally with their own opinions: so that, all in one Person, they distinguish two, Father and Son, understanding the Son to be flesh, that is man, that is Jesus; and the Father to be spirit, that is God, that is Christ. Thus they, while contending that the Father and the Son are one and the same, do in fact begin by dividing them rather than uniting them."

Further, phrases of Jesus such as "nevertheless, not my will but thy will be done" (Lk. 22:42; Matthew 26:36-46; Mark 14:32-42) under Praxean interpretation,  could be seen as the man Jesus, surrendering his will to Christ (aka: God), as there would have been a distinction between the two.   

Now, at first glace some of this may make sense, as we know that God cannot die, neither can his spirit or any spirit bleed. However, Jesus as God, took upon himself the limitations of humanity (John 1:14) and lived, suffered and died to redeem us from our sins. It was not the corpuscles of his blood that saved us, but it was the act of Jesus, pouring out his passion and love for us as God that actually redeems us. That is what is inferred when we speak of being redeemed by his blood.  

Of A Certainty This Is A Great Mystery
Paul told Timothy that this whole and complete story of the nature of Jesus is without any argument, a topic and subject full of great "mystery":

1 Tim. 3:16 ~ And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

Immediately the focus of most oneness adherents when looking at this verse, is the word "manifest".  But that is not the point of the scripture or the emphasis of the verse. The emphasis is the how, why and method of God in doing what he did through and by Jesus in redeeming us. What Paul is saying that everyone agrees that it is a great mystery. The thought of God's method of redemption is "without controversy" a mysterious event and fact.  

Back to the point of the article:

At no point and time was Jesus not God, even as a baby or even on the cross. A God/man union was born at Jesus birth. Mary did not birth a "God essence" (whatever that ridiculous teaching could possibly mean) From birth Jesus was fully human and fully divine. In addition, God never departed from Jesus, although at times he hid himself behind the veil of flesh. He was 100% human but he was also 100% divine his whole and complete life. To believe to the contrary, is to construct a Jesus that is not taught within the scriptures. 

God In Salvation 

The fact is that if he were just a man, and if the nature of his deity could depart from him on the cross then, (as I would contend) his death as a man only would not be sufficient to redeem us from our sins, but as a mere man his death, as righteous as it may have been, could not take away our sins. The remission of sins is an act that only God can perform. 

Ephes. 1:7 ~ In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace; (Also Col. 1:14) 

I know, the critic here may assert that the scripture says that "whosoever sins ye remit, they shall be remitted" (John 20:23) but the whole and complete issue is that without the shedding of the blood of Jesus on the cross, and faith in HIS works noone has the power to remit anything. Nobody can be saved without the atoning work of Christ on the cross, so the scripture is indicating whosoever(s) sins are remitted through that process of us bringing the souls to Christ through the cross, those sins are the only sins that can be remitted indeed. 

I keep getting distracted...back to the point 
The Revelation Reality

In addition, since according to Revelation 4 and 5 that all heaven worships both the one who "sits on the throne" and the "lamb" who took away the sins of the world, we can only be reminded that it is only God, not men nor angels, that is worshiped in heaven and in earth. 

Rev. 4:8-11~ 8-And the four beasts had each of them six wings about him; and they were full of eyes within: and they rest not day and night, saying, Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come. 9-And when those beasts give glory and honour and thanks to him that sat on the throne, who liveth for ever and ever, 10-The four and twenty elders fall down before him that sat on the throne, and worship him that liveth for ever and ever, and cast their crowns before the throne, saying, 11-Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created.

And

Rev. 5:11-14 ~ 11-And I beheld, and I heard the voice of many angels round about the throne and the beasts and the elders: and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands;12-Saying with a loud voice, Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, and glory, and blessing. 13-And every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heard I saying, Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever. 14-And the four beasts said, Amen. And the four and twenty elders fell down and worshiped him that liveth for ever and ever.

Only GOD is worshiped especially in heaven. There would be no flesh that would be worshiped in heaven unless that flesh is in a glorified state or condition and is God.
Arianism In The Mix

Arianism, which was a rejected doctrine during the same era of time, survived the Council of Nicea in 325AD and was rehashed by demons and adopted in more modern times by what would become known as Jehovah's Witness cult and its founder Charles Taze Russell. This antibiblical and anti-Christian belief contends that Jesus is not God as in the same substance but a lesser god, one who created according to the instructions of God, but one that is also a created being himself, not co-existent and certainly not co-equal with God. However, Jesus was commissioned to do the work of saving the word. 

It would seem that there are some elements of Praxeanism in Arianism or vice-versa and most certainly in modalism or oneness theology as it is taught in most modern circles. If Jesus was a created being, or if Jesus could be separated or divided into a human part and a spiritual part, he would certainly not be God.  Neither could he become God, except in the minds of people who believed in him, but his spirit would have been and must have been "empowered" in some manner to endure saving the world. Either way, all these teachings whether independent of one another or together are contrary to how scripture presents Jesus and are not biblical. 

 

I will end this in as abrupt fashion as John when he spoke in 1 John 4:6:

"We are from God. Whoever knows God listens to us; whoever is not from God does not listen to us. By this we know the Spirit of truth and the spirit of error."

 

These heresies have existed for thousands of years and as we can see, through the years and in every generation these teachings faced the truth of scripture and were put down. They are attempts to comprehend and incomprehensible God, we know that, however, we do not have to contrive or create God to suit our understanding. If he is God, of a certainty he is also incomprehensible and beyond our understandings.

I certainly don;t accept the word of God especially as it pertains to the nature of God because I fully understand it. I accept it because this is what God says about himself and how he has used scripture to describe himself and I submit to HIS understanding of those facts not my rationalizations.

I invite all of my oneness friends to follow that path and to lay down the effort of reinventing or recreating God to suit, but simply follow the scriptures where they lead in the sense that they lead. It is much more easy to believe the truth, rather than contort a lie. That Jesus is God is not the question or issue. But that he is God eternally and of the same substance of the Father forever inseparable as 100% God and 100% man is  the difference maker, and the God that the early church was willing to lay down their lives for...That's the ONE I serve!!!!

Blessed!

Read more!

Commentary & Notes: Colossians 1:12-20 Debunking Modalism

I have addressed the error of Sabellianism or modalism on this blog in various ways including uncovering the misuse of language that backs the Oneness platform of confusion on the nature of God. Recently, I had the opportunity to display why the particular teachings of a heretic were insufficient and non-biblical, only to find out that many believers, who claim to adhere to trinitarian doctrine, really didn't think it was a "big issue" to believe otherwise because they felt that since "belief" of doctrine wasn't an issue at salvation and that adherence to doctrinal teaching along this line was also not a matter or issue of salvation. 

Sentiments of this can be dangerous and could also be unbiblical. Not that it was the case in this particular situation, but it seems that by far and large the church has abandoned indepth teaching as it pertains to the nature of God and the examination of who God is, what HIS nature means to the world, and why those teachings are relevant to the day to day life of every believer. 

The need and longing to know and explore the nature of God has been replaced by the the sentiments and desires to be "peaceful" and "unified" with all them who claim to be "believers" no matter what those "said" believers actually believe.

This is devastating because the fact is that people gave their lives for what they "believed", in the early church and those beliefs were without compromise. What one believes is of great significance and vitally important to the life and relationship and even fellowship of every believer with Christ. In addition, if one can simply redefine God to meet ones own terms and beliefs, then HE is not the God of the bible nor the God of history. When men invent or create a God that they can readily understand or compartmentalize, then it is questionable whether faith is truly placed within the God who has both defined himself as he is and the faith that we were told to earnestly contend for. (Jude 3) 

What do you say? A case of circular reasoning? Well, I don't think so. I believe it is a demand and persistence to seek and know truth. The truth of the matter is that God the Father and God the Son exist eternally, have never changed hats, are not merely defined by their role, and, though distinct, are yet ONE God. This is what the scripture repeatedly affirms and what the Holy Writ, when examined for what it says, certainly affirms. 

Let's review a portion of the first chapter of Colossians in a verse-by-verse study on the nature of God.

Colossians 

Delivered by Tychicus, the epistle to the Colossians was written by Paul while under house arrest in Rome. Written to the mostly Greek Saints and believers who lived in an area located in what was known as Greater Phrygia which included the cities of Antioch in Pisidia , Colosse, Hierapolis, Iconium, and Laodicea . The church itself, probably founded by Epaphras sat on the river Lycus. 

The aim of the letter was to counter false teaching regarding the majesty, nature, mission and complete redemption of mankind found in Jesus himself. The epistle proved to be a strong and poignant stance against the backdrop of an early and developing gnosticism and theosophy of Judaizers who's mission was to redefine the faith. The letter was a direct assault on novel speculations of the day and false teachings which sought to redefine the Jesus of history and his unique place in all of creation and among mankind. 

In this segment, we will look at a section of Chapter 1 of Colossians (v.12-20) that is strong evidence that Jesus and God the Father acted, moved and operated in in relationship to one another and were not confused by early church believers as being one in the same, although they were certainly ONE God. This teaching itself is ample proof, that the nature of God was an issue of utmost importance within the church and among its most early adherents and should not be compromised.   

I have highlighted my commentary within the verses and provided 4 notes as supplement to make sure that context remains clear through and regarding what is being taught in this valuable Pauline epistle. 

Colossians 1:12-20

12-Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light:

13-Who (eg: referring to the Father) hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:(aka: JESUS) 

14-In whom (eg: the "dear Son" aka: Jesus) we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:

15-Who (referring to Jesus) is the image (See note 1) of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: (See note 2)

16-For by him (eg: the "dear Son" aka: JESUS) were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: (All of these are the acts of God Almighty himself)

17-And he is before all things, (eg: everything spiritual and natural can be credited in their existence to God the creator.) [In this case referring to JESUS himself] and by him all things consist.

18-And he is the head of the body, the church: (This is continuing to speak of JESUS) who is the beginning, the firstborn (See note 2) from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.(See note 3)

19-For it pleased the Father (Herein is the distinction) that in him (the "dear Son") should all fulness (see note 4) dwell;  

20-And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.

Special Notes:

(Note 1) ~ v.15 ~ Image: the Greek word from which we get "Icon". Strong's "1504 (eikṓn) assumes a prototype, of which it not merely resembles, but from which it is drawn" (R. Trench). (eikṓn) then is more than a "shadow"; rather it is a replication (F. F. Bruce, Hebrews, 226; see also Lightfoot at Col 3:10 and 2:21).

Something that is separate, yet drawn "from" something that exists and is in itself tangibly real as from the thing it was drawn from. By virtue of that (the image, eikon) would have to have the same "nature" and "essence" but is distinctly NOT the primary thing spoken of though it is identical in every way. 

(Note 2) ~ "firstborn of every creature". Deal with this in 2 parts.

1- "firstborn" ~ From a word group indicating first to experience or one who is in an pre-eminent position. From Strong's 4416 prōtótokos (from 4413 /prṓtos, "first, pre-eminent" and 5088 /tíktō, "bring forth") – properly, first in time (Mt 1:25; Lk 2:7); hence, pre-eminent(Col 1:15; Rev 1:5).4416 /prōtótokos ("firstly") specifically refers to Christ as the first to experience glorification, i.e. at His resurrection (see Heb 12:23; Rev 1:5). For this (and countless other reasons) Jesus is "preeminent" (4416/prōtótokos) – the unequivocal Sovereign over all creation (Col 1:16). [4416 (prōtótokos) refers to "the first among others (who follow)" – as with the preeminent, glorified Christ, the eternal Logos who possesses self-existent life (Jn 5:26).]

2- "creature" ~  Strong's Cognate: 2937 ktísis – properly, creation (creature) which is founded from nothing (this is also the sense of this term from Homer on); creation out of nothing (Lat ex nihilo). See 2936 (ktizō) and 2939 /ktístēs ("the Creator") for lengthy discussion on "creation-facts."

These phrases combined in this verse do not indicate that Jesus is the "first one made" or "created" among creatures that God made. To the contrary, this verse indicates that Jesus is at the arch-pinnacle of all of creation, or the one to whom all creation and everything (everyone) that is made looks. This contextual understanding can be best understood in the antecedent phrase that Jesus is the "image of the invisible God". From that, if Jesus is the image "eikon" of the invisible God, sharing the same nature and essence of that "invisible God" as the scripture indicates, he could have not, in any manner, come into existence, operation or function whether by being created and or by being born of Mary. Thus Jesus himself precedes Mary tracing existence prior to John 1:1 as God would certainly have existed prior to any "beginning" and would have been present "in the beginning". Further, this concept takes better shape in light of the next verse or V.16.

(Note 3) ~ Strong's 4409 "proteuo" same word grouping as note 2, means to be chief, or to have first place, AS OPPOSED to being first as in a succession. Example, The Supreme Court has who is called a "Chief Justice". This Chief Justice may not be the "first Justice" or "first one" chosen to sit on the court, however he has leading or pre-eminent role of authority on the Court. Thus, as this word is used here, it indicates the one who has the preeminent role, place and authority.     

(Note 4) ~ Strong's  says a Cognate: 4138 plḗrōma – "sum total, fulness, even (super) abundance" (BAGD). See 4130 (plēthō). this word also indicates fulfillment or completion. This would be wholly and contextually consistent with the narrative as v.20 deals with the cross and redemption. Simply put, rather than "fulness" having to do with the embodiment of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, in the body and personage of Jesus, as some people contend, this phrase has everything to do with the PLAN of God and what was fulfilled or "finished" by Jesus himself. This verse (v. 19) is rendered as an indicator of the maturity of the plan of salvation contained within Jesus himself. So in this verse, "fulness" and later "fulness of the Godhead bodily" (Col. 2:9) is indicative of the salvation plan, or the highest point at which Heaven (God) speaks and acts in delivering men and mankind from sin and death.  

Blessed!

Read more!