Qumran where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered in 1946-1947

Claim: Oneness (also known as Modalism) teaches that God is not three distinct persons, but one person who manifests as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Why Oneness Theology is Heresy

1.     It Denies the Distinct Persons of the Godhead

a.     Oneness teaches that God merely takes on different “modes” like masks instead of being three coequal, coeternal persons.

Scripture presents clear inter-relational distinctions between the Father, Son, and Spirit:

Matthew 3:16–17 – “After being baptized, Jesus came up immediately from the water… and behold, a voice out of the heavens said, ‘This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.’”

Here, all three persons act distinctly simultaneously: Jesus is baptized, the Spirit descends, and the Father speaks. Modalism cannot explain this.

John 14:16–17– “I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may be with you forever.”

Jesus speaks of the Father sending another Helper (the Spirit). These cannot all be one person playing roles.

Historical Heresy: Sabellianism

Oneness theology is a repackaging of Sabellianism, condemned as heresy in the 3rd century. Church fathers like Tertullian and Hippolytus defended the tri-personal nature of God:

Tertullian (c. 200 AD), Against Praxeas: “We… believe that there is one only God… but under the following dispensation, or œconomy, that this one only God has also a Son… and that the Son is distinct from the Father.”

The early church recognized that Oneness theology distorts God’s self-revelation.

Key Resources

• CARM: What is Oneness Pentecostalism?
• GotQuestions: What is Modalism?
• Bible.org: The Trinity

A Biblical Defense of the Trinity

1. God is One (Monotheism): Deuteronomy 6:4 –  “The Lord our God, the Lord is one.”

2. The Father is God: Philippians 1:2

3. The Son is God: John 1:1, John 20:28, Hebrews 1:8

4. The Holy Spirit is God: Acts 5:3–4, 1 Corinthians 3:16

5. The Three Are Distinct: Matthew 28:19 – “baptizing them in the name [singular] of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit”

The use of one name but three persons confirms the unity of essence and diversity of personhood.

PART 2: Does Baptism Save You?

Claim: Some groups teach baptismal regeneration, that a person is not saved until baptized.

Why Is Baptismal Regeneration Unbiblical?

Salvation is by grace through faith, not through a ritual. Baptism is a sign, not the substance of salvation.

Key Biblical Refutations

Ephesians 2:8–9 (NASB) – “For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not a result of works.”

Titus 3:5 –“He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we did in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit.”

Note: the “washing” here refers to spiritual renewal, not water baptism.

Misused Verses Explained

1.      Mark 16:16

“He who believes and is baptized will be saved…”

But it continues: “but he who does not believe will be condemned.”

It’s unbelief, not un-baptism, that condemns.

2.     Acts 2:38 “Repent and be baptized… for the forgiveness of your sins…”

The Greek word “eis” (εἰς) can mean “because of”, i.e., be baptized because your sins are forgiven.

Early Church Teaching

Even early church fathers like Augustine acknowledged that baptism follows conversion:

“Visible baptism is the sacrament of invisible grace.” – Augustine

While some later church traditions emphasized baptismal regeneration, the New Testament always presents baptism as a response to faith, not a prerequisite for salvation.

Key Resources

• CARM: Does baptism save you?
• GotQuestions: Is baptism necessary for salvation?
• Monergism: Baptismal Regeneration Refuted

PART 3: Is the King James Version (KJV) the Best Bible Translation?

Claim: Some believe the KJV is the only true or best Bible version. This is known as KJV-Onlyism.

Before continuing, please note that the idea here is not that the King James is bad, but rather that there are better translations.

Why the KJV is Not the “Best” Translation

While the KJV was monumental in English-speaking Christian history, it is based on limited manuscripts and uses archaic language that confuses modern readers.

Manuscript Limitations

The KJV was translated in 1611 using the Textus Receptus, a Greek manuscript compilation based on only a handful of late medieval texts.

Since then, thousands of older and more reliable manuscripts have been discovered, such as:

• Codex Sinaiticus
• Codex Vaticanus
• Dead Sea Scrolls (OT)

Modern translations like the NASB, ESV, and CSB use Critical Texts that draw from a much wider and older range of manuscripts.

The Evolution of the King James Version:

Many people are unaware that there is not just “one” King James Bible; there are actually several different editions over the past 400+ years:

• 1611 KJV (First Edition): Contained the Apocryphal books (e.g., Tobit, Judith, Maccabees, Wisdom of Solomon) between the Old and New Testaments. These were later removed in Protestant editions after the mid-1600s.
• 1769 KJV (Oxford Edition): The most common edition used today. Modern KJV printings usually follow this, not the 1611 text.
• Other revisions (1629, 1638, 1762): Corrected printing errors, standardized spelling, and adjusted word usage.

Old English Words That Confuse Modern Readers

The KJV translators wrote in early 17th-century English, which employed vocabulary and grammar that differ from those used today. Many words have changed their meaning, leading to misunderstandings.

For example:

• “Let” (KJV: 2 Thessalonians 2:7) → then meant “restrain,” not “allow.”
• “Suffer” (KJV: Matthew 19:14) → then meant “permit,” not “experience pain.”
• “Conversation” (KJV: Philippians 1:27) → meant “conduct” or “lifestyle,” not spoken words.
• “Study” (KJV: 2 Timothy 2:15) → meant “be diligent,” not reading books.

What was once clear in 1611 is often misleading to modern readers.

The Apocrypha in the Original KJV

When the KJV was first published in 1611:

• The Apocryphal books were included as part of the Bible.
• These writings were considered “useful for history and devotion” but not inspired Scripture by Protestants.
• Later Protestant editions removed the Apocrypha entirely, while Catholic Bibles still include them.

This means that the “original KJV” differs significantly from the versions most KJV-only advocates use today.

Modern Translations Maintain Accuracy

Modern versions like the NASB, ESV, and NET are:

• Based on more complete manuscripts
• Produced by scholarly translation teams
• Translated into modern English with clarity and accuracy

Key Resources

• CARM: Is the KJV the best translation?
• GotQuestions: Is the KJV the only Bible we should use?
• Bible.org: Bible translation philosophy

Final Thoughts

The Christian faith stands on truth, not tradition or emotional loyalty to forms.

• Oneness theology undermines God’s triune nature.
• Baptismal regeneration adds works to grace.
• KJV-Onlyism clings to tradition over clarity and accuracy.

We must remain faithful to Scripture, historic orthodoxy, and sound doctrine.

Jude 1:3 – “Contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all handed down to the saints.”