Probably the most misunderstood and often misread doctrine taught in the Bible is that of the Trinity. It is a veritable truth that most of us as Christians, particularly early in our conversion, have struggled with firmly grabbing hold of the concept of the tripartite Godhead. For we are told that God is the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. We know this chiefly from what the Bible tells us of the internal nature of ‘whom’ and ‘what’ God is. Scripture informs us of God’s omnipotence, omniscience and omnipresence. And it also describes God as being expressed in the person of the Father, His Son Jesus and the Holy Spirit.

However, this doctrine of Trinitarianism is not something that is universally accepted in all churches or in all denominational creeds. Accordingly, there are those who deny the existence of what a traditional scriptural interpretation states, embracing an alternative nontrinitarian view. These individuals are known as modalists, or Sabellianists (a term derived from the name of a third century priest/ theologian that subscribed to modalistic views) and through ignoring the personal distinctions of God’s expression of Himself present the modern theologian with some rather serious charges to answer; and rightly so. After all, there is nothing more important to a sound doctrine than that of clearly defining the nature of God, or at least as much as God has seen fit to reveal to us. Let us then explore the issue of Modalism on a more intimate level.

Initially, the idea of Modalism came from an early belief concerning the persons of God. In the early church some believers, in the reading of scripture, came to the conclusion that God was not only one being, but one person. These individuals deduced that if God were indeed three separate persons, they would be in effect three separate beings. So, to uphold the Old Testament edict of worshipping only one God, there seemed to be a logical association between the two issues. In so much as one were to view God as three person, there was a misinterpreted blasphemy. The term Modalism, then, was used to describe the revelatory nature of the three persons in the Bible. Although God is depicted as being three separate persons, He reveals Himself in three distinct ‘modes’ of personhood. It isn’t so much that God is somehow ‘schizophrenic’, but rather it is we who are confused in light of this view. For just as the ripples of the waves that turn upon a lake or stream present one with numerous colors yet with one essence, i.e. a lake or river, so to is God’s presentation of Himself in three persons a superficial reflection of the singular ‘whoness’ of God.

On the flipside, many find Modalism to be a very dangerous theory on the Godhead. For one, if we were to suppose that what is revealed about God is subject to not only our perception of Him but some sort of dispensational epoch of His personality, then who is to say that other parts of the Bible, if not all of it, is malleable and uncertain. Furthermore, if God is one person then what is He doing ‘praying’ to Himself, as Jesus did so many times. If the Trinitarian model of God were merely perceptive, or even sequential, then the elements of that being would be superficially different but ontologically (really) the same. And yet if they are the same, then certainly Jesus talking to God ‘as if’ He was a separate person would undoubtedly result in God being schizophrenic; a deficiency in God which is an impossibility.

I will not name the denominations that subscribe to this doctrine. Indeed, I am only aware of one that is modalistic, but not entirely modal in principle. Namely, this anonymous denomination views God’s humanity as a distinct garment that the Father clothed Himself with. This is in contrast to the more extreme forms of Modalism that would have one believe that it was the Father that died on the cross (a view dubbed Patripassianism by the ancient Christian author Tertullian). However, even with a modified Modalism, the criticisms lodged against it are the same. So, whether or not the child who is confused who to pray to before they go to bed, whether it be Jesus or Father God, is in the grips of a dilemma, I say it is not an inevitable one. For just as St Patrick used the leaves of a plant to explain the divine trinity to his newly born converts in Ireland, I feel we can say that God is one what in three ‘who’s’. We can use models to explain this without resorting to modes of God’s existence, since that is how He revealed Himself. And who are we to try to change this situation?

Send This To A Friend