On June 12,13,15,16 1 moderated for Perry Hall, preacher for the church in Caneyville, Kentucky, in a debate with Nathan Lowe of Leitchfield, Kentucky, on the subject of the Godhead. The debate was held in the junior high school in Leitchfield. The debate came about as a result of Perry's call-in radio program. Mr. Lowe called in and challenged Perry to the discussion.

I admit to being apprehensive in the beginning. Perry is a young man of twenty-four and it was his first debate. Mr. Lowe is a polished speaker with a Ph.D. He had their best Pentecostal debaters at his side - Tom Sharp and Marvin Hicks. None of that counted! Perry was well prepared beyond my expectations. Though he experienced the normal quivers of a young preacher in his first debate, he defended the faith with courage, vigor and logical arguments from the Scriptures while conducting himself as a complete gentleman. This review is a look at the major arguments.

Nathan Lowe Affirms

The first two evenings Nathan affirmed: "The Scriptures teach that the Godhead is in one person, namely Jesus Christ." One would never have guessed he was in the affirmative because after reading the proposition he began asking questions that related to Perry's proposition which was not to be affirmed until the third night. Considerable time was spent trying to prove that a person cannot exist without a body. Lowe said "a being is a person characterized by a body" and "you cannot have a person without a body." Thus, he concluded "the trinitarian deity must have three faces and three outward appearances." This limited definition proved to be a real problem. Perry showed that the definition was incomplete and that person was also defined simply as "a being." Possessing a body was not necessary to that part of the definition. The consequence of Lowe's understanding was this: If person means only a fleshly human being, then the Godhead was in only one person. But since Jesus is no longer in the flesh, then the Godhead is no longer in Jesus! It would mean there was no person in the Godhead before Jesus' birth and no person in the Godhead now for Jesus is not now in the flesh. Mr. Lowe's proposition contained the word "is" (present tense).

Of the affirmative arguments Nathan did make, Colossians 1:19; 2:9 were introduced to try to prove that the totality of God dwells in Jesus, i.e., "Jesus was the fulness of the Godhead bodily." He said that referred to quantity. Perry asked, if all the quantity was in the body of Jesus, then who descended from heaven in the shape of a dove (Matt. 3:16,17)? And "if you say Jesus' body descended, did Jesus sit on himself?"

John 14:9 ("He who has seen me has seen the father") was used by Mr. Lowe to prove that the Father and Son were one and the same being. Perry responded by asking, "When they literally saw the flesh, did they literally see the spirit?" And when the disciples asked "When saw we thee a stranger, hungry, naked, sick, etc." (Matt. 25:35-40) they did not see him literally but representatively when they helped a fellow disciple. So when the disciples saw Jesus (Jn. 14:9) they saw him literally, but the Father representatively.

Isaiah 9:6 was used by Nathan to prove Jesus was both the Son and the Father. Perry replied by showing: (1) If the Son is flesh only, and (2) The Son is the Father, then (3) The Father is flesh only!

He also used Hebrews 1:2,3 to show Jesus was "the express image of his (the Father's) person." Perry pointed to the difference between the substance (seal, stamp, or die) of the person and the impression or image of the person. The image of God was righteousness, holiness, knowledge and authority and Jesus fit all these (Eph. 4:24; Col. 3: 10; 1 Cor. 11:7). God's image is spirit whereas man's image is flesh (1 Cor. 15:49). If the image of God includes the physical, then God's image is inferior to the image of animals for the leopard is superior to man in speed, the bear in strength, and the hawk in eyesight!

Perry Hall Affirms

Perry affirmed, "The Scriptures teach that God eternal exists in three co-equal persons: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit." Mr. Lowe apparently felt he had really done something by persuading Perry to sign this proposition, for he spent most of his affirmative speeches attacking this proposition that was not to be debated until the last two nights. Perry showed from the Scriptures that each one of the three is equally deity and that each is eternal. Nathan introduced John 14:28 ("the Father is greater than I"), trying to prove they were not equal. Perry showed they were equal in essence, not role. Jesus "existed in the form of God, did not regard equality a thing to be grasped" (Phil. 2:6). Paul said the one who prophesies is greater than the tongue speaker (1 Cor. 14:5), but the greatness was one of role, not essence. Both the prophet and the tongue speaker were equally human.

Mr. Lowe had earlier used his fingers to illustrate that his index finger was greater than his little finger and said he would rather lose the little one than the index finger. Perry showed they were both equally fingers. The index finger was not more of a finger than the pinkie but they had different roles. Their importance was a matter of opinion. Perry was affirming equality in essence, not role. Jesus willingly took on a subservient role.

On the subject of equality versus inferiority, Nathan said, "When you come to a role of inferiority, you here destroy equality." Perry asked, "Do you believe my wife is inferior to me?" To which Nathan replied, "I certainly do not believe your wife is inferior to you." Perry raised three questions: (1) Is a wife commanded to be in subjection to her husband?, (2) Is a wife an inferior person to her husband?, (3) Are a husband and wife one person? He showed that husbands and wives were distinct beings having different roles but were equally human. Mr. Lowe had contradicted himself.

Nathan made an argument on the omnipresence of God, saying God's presence was in everything. He asked, "How can one omnipresent person send another omnipresent person?" Perry observed that if the totality of the Godhead is in an omnipresent human body then that was a whale of a body! He alsc showed that it would mean God was equally in the drunkard and the Christian and that according to Nathan's concept of omnipresence God could never have forsaken Jesus. He showed the more logical understanding of omnipresence is not that God's presence is in everything, but that everything is in God's presence. (Example: Everything in this room is in my presence, but my presence is not in everything.)

Mr. Lowe had defined omnipresence as "being everywhere at the same time." He then asked, "Where is a place that God isn't?" Perry answered, "If all the quantity of the Godhead was in the body of Jesus then the place where God isn't would be anywhere outside the body of Jesus."

Nathan tried to overcome this by saying that since Stephen saw Jesus (Acts 7:55f) he was still in the body. He quoted Zechariah 13:6 (out of context) to "prove" that Jesus would still have the wounds in his hands. Perry asked: "Do you believe that folks that have cancer are going to have that body that shows the affliction of it up in heaven? What about John the Baptist? Will he have a decapitated body?" All Lowe would say is, "I don't make the wording of the Scriptures. If God had another arrangement for that, that's God's business."

Perry showed that the worst consequences of the oneness position is that deity did not atone (did not die) for man's sins. It was a man, a 33 year old Jew that died. Oneness doctrine teaches that the eternal spirit vacated the body before death occurred.

One admission made by Lowe is that in John 17:20,21 where Jesus prayed that his disciples would all be one as he and his father were one, was a united one, not an absolute one. Thus, he admitted that the word "one" is used in more than one way.

Conclusion

Perry and Nathan are supposed to debate miracles this fall, with specific attention to speaking in tongues. Eddie Pagan, preacher in Hardinsburg, Kentucky, operated the projector and did an excellent job of getting the charts immediately. It was a pleasure to be associated with both of these young men.

Guardian of Truth XXXIII: 16, pp. 489-490
August 17, 1989