I am seeing a pattern in my reading.

Books written from the Oneness perspective seem to be full of opinion, personal revelation of scripture, and fear but short on footnotes, facts, or other verification of statements presented.

An example is The Phenomenon of Pentecost by Frank J. Ewart. While this book begins with inspiration and an exciting view of early Pentecostalism in America and other places, it soon breaks down into political squabbling and of course Ewart’s point of view is presented as the only correct course. Then, in my opinion, he crosses the line by proclaiming that those who did not see or accept this view began dying in horrible ways or their churches inexplicably burned to the ground shortly after their refusal to join him. Of course, those who joined him were blessed beyond measure with masses of converts, healings, etc; some also seemed to die soon after their conversion but we are not told what caused their deaths and these deaths were seen as natural and simply a sad passing to be mourned by all.

He crosses the line by proclaiming that those who did not see or accept this view began dying in horrible ways.

He crosses the line by proclaiming that those who did not see or accept this view began dying in horrible ways.

Ewart gives no authentication anywhere in his book for events that happened; thus it would be difficult to either prove or disprove his accounts.

I also read a small book created first as a paper submitted to a religious symposium, Essentials of Oneness Theology by David Bernard. Bernard does present some footnotes at the end of his paper but throughout bases a lot of his views or beliefs on simply his understanding of scripture. His implication throughout seems to be that he (and other oneness believers) somehow have a deeper insight than anyone who does not agree with him. Although at one point he quotes a trinity theologian also presenting belief in one God as Jesus Christ, he still insists that all Trinitarians believe in 3 Gods. I have yet to find a single book by any Trinitarian writer that proclaims anything other than One God; the difference is more in the nature of the persons or manifestations of God and understanding of Him but not in the concept of there being one or three or two for that matter. I feel it is disingenuous of Oneness writers, like Bernard, to ascribe a belief in 3 Gods to Trinitarians without allowing an explanation of the real and actual differences in belief.

I have found other Oneness writers also base much of their writing on their own revelation or opinion.

This is a major difference in non Oneness writers such as Thomas Fudge, who gave footnotes ad nauseam to the point that almost every word he uttered could be verified.

I also see a difference in spirit in these books; for example, in Letters from a Skeptic by Gregory Boyd, there is no fear involved in his attempt to convert.

So using the Bible as a final authority, what is the real message of salvation? Is it hard to understand and only given by revelation to a select few? Is it given with intent to cause extreme fear if not immediately accepted and acted upon? Does it come with long lists of performance demands such as found in the Old Testament Law and present day Oneness groups? Is it a message intended to divide those who believe in Christ and his redemptive nature and plan into the haves and have nots? Or did God so love the world that he gave his only begotten Son that WHOSOEVER believeth on Him should have everlasting life? God is Love and he loves me and you; messages of fear and division and pride are nowhere encouraged in the Bible.