# T.D Jakes on the Trinity



## Anton Bruckner (Feb 12, 2007)

Theology: Apologetics Journal Criticizes Jakes
Christian Research Institute publication questions preacher's view of Trinity
By Douglas LeBlanc

February 7, 2000

Christian Research Journal strongly questions the theology of T.D. Jakes in its latest issue, published in January.

The quarterly journal of the southern California-based Christian Research Institute (www.equip.org) quotes from public remarks by Jakes to argue that, whatever baptismal formulas he uses in different venues, his primary theological language for the Godhead remains Oneness Pentecostal.

Members of Oneness Pentecostal churches historically have rejected the doctrine of the Trinity as polytheism. The more combative members of Oneness churches say Trinitarians will go to hell.

One of the Journal's most detailed quotations comes from a Los Angeles radio show, "Living By the Word." KKLA-FM broadcast host Jim Coleman's interview with Jakes on August 23 and 30, 1998.

Coleman asks Jakes how important it is for Christians to believe in the Trinity. Jakes responds:
*
I think it's very, very significant that we first of all study the Trinity apart from salvation, and first of all that we embrace Christ and come to him to know who he is. Having come to know who he is, then we begin to deal with the Trinity, which I believe is a very complex issue. The Trinity, the term 'Trinity,' is not a biblical term, to begin with.
It's a theological description for something that is so beyond human comprehension that I'm not sure that we can totally hold God to a numerical system. The Lord said, "Behold, O Israel, the Lord thy God is one, and beside him there is no other." When God got ready to make a man that looked like him, he didn't make three. He made one man. However, that one man had three parts. He was body, soul, and spirit. We have one God, but he is Father in creation, Son in redemption, and Holy Spirit in regeneration.
*
The ...

http://www.ctlibrary.com/ct/2000/february7/5.58.html


----------



## py3ak (Feb 12, 2007)

How many people do you suppose read that and through sheer ignorance come away supposing that the man is Trinitarian after all?


----------



## No Longer A Libertine (Feb 13, 2007)

When TD Jakes speaks of the Trinity he probably means Michael Irvin, Emmit Smith and Troy Aikman.

That cooky man has brainwashed a resume worth of Dallas athletes especially in the black community.


----------



## ReformedDave (Feb 13, 2007)

As one who spent many years in the United Pentecostal Church I know that Jakes is a 'closet' modalist. Every once in a while he preaches for a UPC church though he keeps his charismatic friends probably due to the $$$$.


----------



## VictorBravo (Feb 13, 2007)

Slippery said:


> We have one God, but he is Father in creation, . . . .



Uhoh, what do we do with John 1?


----------



## KMK (Feb 13, 2007)

I was just last night reading an article in a Biola magazine that Jakes is in fact a modalist but does not believe that the doctrine of the trinity is an important doctrine. I doubt he preaches from John 1 very often.


----------



## ReformedDave (Feb 13, 2007)

KMK said:


> I was just last night reading an article in a Biola magazine that Jakes is in fact a modalist but does not believe that the doctrine of the trinity is an important doctrine. I doubt he preaches from John 1 very often.



Truthfully, there's not much meaningful exegesis in his sermons.


----------



## Anton Bruckner (Feb 13, 2007)

KMK said:


> I was just last night reading an article in a Biola magazine that Jakes is in fact a modalist but does not believe that the doctrine of the trinity is an important doctrine. I doubt he preaches from John 1 very often.


T.D Jakes like many WOF don't preach, all they do is engage in the demagoguery of self justification under the guise of Christianity. This is what appeals to the masses. "How to get that promotion", "How to be successful", "How to get your breakthrough". Their sermons are totally without substance but they do possess excessive flare and powerful emotionalism.


----------



## KMK (Feb 13, 2007)

http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:ZWkpCYqoPQ4J:www.equip.org/free/DJ902.pdf+jakes+%22i+am+too+busy+trying+to+preach%22&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us is an article on Jakes from CRI.

This is a quote from the article:


> Jakes’s sentiment that “there are a few things I would die for; a few more I would argue strongly; afterthat I am too busy trying to preach the Gospel to split hairs” would be admirable if only he correctlyidentified the things for which it is worth dying. The courageous church father Athanasius would havecertainly advised him that the doctrine of the Trinity is one of those things, since he fought againstseemingly the entire world to establish it permanently in the church. Thanks in no small part to his effortsthe “faith that was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 3) has been preserved for the past 16centuries so that untold billions of souls could believe unto salvation. In our own generation, contrary toJakes, many “are dying without knowing God” not only for “lack of love,” but also for “lack of theology” — the essential doctrines of the Christian faith that are inseparable from the gospel of salvation.



We must redouble our efforts to teach the whole counsel of God so that when sheep hear this stuff from men and women like Jakes they will at least think twice about it. 

Also this should remind us all what is so important about confessionalism.


----------



## toddpedlar (Feb 14, 2007)

ReformedDave said:


> As one who spent many years in the United Pentecostal Church I know that Jakes is a 'closet' modalist. Every once in a while he preaches for a UPC church though he keeps his charismatic friends probably due to the $$$$.



CLOSET? 

Must be a glass closet, 'cause I'm quite certain he don't hide his modalism very hard (and isn't the UPC a safe harbor for modalists, anyway?)....


----------



## ReformedDave (Feb 14, 2007)

toddpedlar said:


> CLOSET?
> 
> Must be a glass closet, 'cause I'm quite certain he don't hide his modalism very hard (and isn't the UPC a safe harbor for modalists, anyway?)....



He runs with people for whom the trinitarian/modalism controversy is a mere tempest in a teapot. And you are correct that the UPC is modalistic to the core.


----------



## No Longer A Libertine (Feb 14, 2007)

ReformedDave said:


> He runs with people for whom the trinitarian/modalism controversy is a mere tempest in a teapot. And you are correct that the UPC is modalistic to the core.


A devil's advocate question for you here, does modalism pervert the nature of God enough to reject Jesus Christ as savior since it displays God as being all three parts of the trinity but in stages or dispensations if you will instead of a simultaneous mystery?

Is this a heresy that is on par with Arminianism and therefore one could still understand grace but not as fully as they would with a fully revealed Biblical knowledge?

Or is one who is adherent to modalism automatically anathema?

Thoughts?


----------



## Anton Bruckner (Feb 14, 2007)

No Longer A Libertine said:


> Or is one who is adherent to modalism automatically anathema?
> 
> Thoughts?


anathema. To believe in modalism is to deny that God has a Son and a Holy Spirit. Modalist says God manifests Himself as the Son. The question then become, "The Son of Whom? Himself? That is unscriptural and wrong. If they say of His previous manifestation they are simply saying, "He is the Son of Himself".

Anathema. God has a Son. God sent His Son. To believe otherwise is not to believe the Gospel and the truth of God as revealed in scripture.


----------



## ReformedDave (Feb 15, 2007)

No Longer A Libertine said:


> Or is one who is adherent to modalism automatically anathema?
> 
> Thoughts?



As one who has many relatives in the UPC, including my wife and my late parents, I fight with this issue in a psychological way. But I have to say a regretful 'yes'.


----------

