Is Our God Really "Triune"?
I'm not a "Oneness Pentecostal" [what ever that means]. To be honest, I
have heard of the term before, but I have not taken the time to find out what it means exactly. Nor am I a Modalist, or an Unitarian. Don't get me wrong, I'm not against labels. I like labels. They help define and keep things organized. But let's not be guilty of haphazardly slapping on labels where they don't belong. So, just because I'm examining whether or not The Godhead is Triune, that doesn't automatically mean I espouse all or any of the beliefs of the faiths that claim God is only one, not three in one. I would rather label myself as one who is of The Way; I'm not talking about the ecumenical, power for abundant living cult started in the early 40's by Victor P. Weirwille, either. Labels can be kinda of confusing.
In an effort to pull no punches (rather than beating around the bush), I'm going to let the cat out of the bag regarding this topic, right now. I no longer believe in the Trinity. There. I said it. And as a result, I've probably lost most of my readers even before they took the time to find out why I say any of this! That's too bad, because even though it is true that the word "Trinity" is NOWHERE in the Bible, even so, surly they believe that the Word of God contains it's basic definition, right? Logically, that should be the case if the Trinity is taught as an important doctrine, but even the definition (given to us by pastors) isn't even found in the Old Testament (and therefore it isn't the New Testament). Yes dear reader, even though many of the scholars who espouse this belief (including Martin Luther) have readily admitted that the prophets and the apostles didn't teach this doctrine - even so, many readers have clicked off this article in disgust, or disappointment. Why? Well, mainly because many people honor man-made traditions and doctrines rather than Scripture; that's the sobering truth.
For those who have bravely stuck it out this far, but you are satisfied with your belief that God is Triune, all I ask is that you read all of the information presented here, and then perhaps you will see and face all of the problems and errors of the Trinity doctrine with the help of Scripture and the Holy Spirit, and not merely my humble opinion. We must keep in mind that the true Church of Jesus, was and always has been persecuted, and its members killed by those of this world, or even by those who claimed to be followers of Christ. Scriptural error eventually drove out and forced real Christians to flee to other parts of the world, or even to go underground, and so they were never truly free to proclaim the truth of Christ without earning the dubious label of "heretic," being excommunicated, or even becoming martyrs. So really, any of the historically recorded first century church debates that modern Christians look to for guidance regarding the nature and identity of God, were actually taken up by Anti-biblical attitudes that I will call: "Camp Error," "Camp Super Error," and "Camp Gross Error."
And so, if you are a wounded soul who is sick and tired of being lied to by Modern Churchianity, and you are seeking for the absolute truth after coming to the realization that your suspicions might be true, that what you have learned for years is a complete lie, then dear reader - please read on, as you are most welcome! If you are one of those who don't believe in the Trinity either, but refuse to acknowledge Jesus' deity; you may be a Jehovah's Witness, or a Christadelphian, or an Unitarian, then you too will benefit from this page. I must say that Christadelphians do a wonderful job providing much evidence that refutes the Trinity doctrine, yet they leave out, ignore, or explain away the many Scriptures that showcase Christ's divine nature, that he is not only the Son of God, but also God in the flesh. Not to mention the whole reason for his coming, his selfless act of love to redeem us from sin, which once and for all brought us into the reality of peace between God and man. We simply can't ignore the reference of Christ being "The Rock" that accompanied Israel in the wilderness [1 Cor.10:4], and subsequent O.T. scriptures that contain references to the LORD [Yahweh/Jehovah] being the very same Rock [Num. 20:10-11; Deut. 8:15, 32:4,15,18; 2 Sam. 22:47, 23:3], etc. So I urge you to read on, and perhaps you too will find something here you have not yet considered.
Yes, I encourage all of us, who call ourselves "Christians" to ask God to give us the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him...Eph. 1:17, because he will give wisdom and knowledge liberally to anyone who humbly asks for these things and he won't belittle you either. When you or I are genuinely hungry for the truth, and believe he will give it to you, then he won't deny it to us! I must warn you, this is a rather lengthy article as there is much information to cover, so forgive me for being blunt when I say: If you have a short attention span, or hate reading and thinking, or your conscience is seared (1 Tim. 4:2), then sadly, this page may not be for you. For the rest, let's begin!
have heard of the term before, but I have not taken the time to find out what it means exactly. Nor am I a Modalist, or an Unitarian. Don't get me wrong, I'm not against labels. I like labels. They help define and keep things organized. But let's not be guilty of haphazardly slapping on labels where they don't belong. So, just because I'm examining whether or not The Godhead is Triune, that doesn't automatically mean I espouse all or any of the beliefs of the faiths that claim God is only one, not three in one. I would rather label myself as one who is of The Way; I'm not talking about the ecumenical, power for abundant living cult started in the early 40's by Victor P. Weirwille, either. Labels can be kinda of confusing.
In an effort to pull no punches (rather than beating around the bush), I'm going to let the cat out of the bag regarding this topic, right now. I no longer believe in the Trinity. There. I said it. And as a result, I've probably lost most of my readers even before they took the time to find out why I say any of this! That's too bad, because even though it is true that the word "Trinity" is NOWHERE in the Bible, even so, surly they believe that the Word of God contains it's basic definition, right? Logically, that should be the case if the Trinity is taught as an important doctrine, but even the definition (given to us by pastors) isn't even found in the Old Testament (and therefore it isn't the New Testament). Yes dear reader, even though many of the scholars who espouse this belief (including Martin Luther) have readily admitted that the prophets and the apostles didn't teach this doctrine - even so, many readers have clicked off this article in disgust, or disappointment. Why? Well, mainly because many people honor man-made traditions and doctrines rather than Scripture; that's the sobering truth.
For those who have bravely stuck it out this far, but you are satisfied with your belief that God is Triune, all I ask is that you read all of the information presented here, and then perhaps you will see and face all of the problems and errors of the Trinity doctrine with the help of Scripture and the Holy Spirit, and not merely my humble opinion. We must keep in mind that the true Church of Jesus, was and always has been persecuted, and its members killed by those of this world, or even by those who claimed to be followers of Christ. Scriptural error eventually drove out and forced real Christians to flee to other parts of the world, or even to go underground, and so they were never truly free to proclaim the truth of Christ without earning the dubious label of "heretic," being excommunicated, or even becoming martyrs. So really, any of the historically recorded first century church debates that modern Christians look to for guidance regarding the nature and identity of God, were actually taken up by Anti-biblical attitudes that I will call: "Camp Error," "Camp Super Error," and "Camp Gross Error."
And so, if you are a wounded soul who is sick and tired of being lied to by Modern Churchianity, and you are seeking for the absolute truth after coming to the realization that your suspicions might be true, that what you have learned for years is a complete lie, then dear reader - please read on, as you are most welcome! If you are one of those who don't believe in the Trinity either, but refuse to acknowledge Jesus' deity; you may be a Jehovah's Witness, or a Christadelphian, or an Unitarian, then you too will benefit from this page. I must say that Christadelphians do a wonderful job providing much evidence that refutes the Trinity doctrine, yet they leave out, ignore, or explain away the many Scriptures that showcase Christ's divine nature, that he is not only the Son of God, but also God in the flesh. Not to mention the whole reason for his coming, his selfless act of love to redeem us from sin, which once and for all brought us into the reality of peace between God and man. We simply can't ignore the reference of Christ being "The Rock" that accompanied Israel in the wilderness [1 Cor.10:4], and subsequent O.T. scriptures that contain references to the LORD [Yahweh/Jehovah] being the very same Rock [Num. 20:10-11; Deut. 8:15, 32:4,15,18; 2 Sam. 22:47, 23:3], etc. So I urge you to read on, and perhaps you too will find something here you have not yet considered.
Yes, I encourage all of us, who call ourselves "Christians" to ask God to give us the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him...Eph. 1:17, because he will give wisdom and knowledge liberally to anyone who humbly asks for these things and he won't belittle you either. When you or I are genuinely hungry for the truth, and believe he will give it to you, then he won't deny it to us! I must warn you, this is a rather lengthy article as there is much information to cover, so forgive me for being blunt when I say: If you have a short attention span, or hate reading and thinking, or your conscience is seared (1 Tim. 4:2), then sadly, this page may not be for you. For the rest, let's begin!
The Trinity: An Inverstion of God's Divine Nature
Pagans do love their sacred geometry.
What is an inversion?
oooo, what a spooky image huh? Well, I'm only using it to make you consider the notion that God's divinity has been inverted. What do I mean by that? Well, I have come to the conclusion, by studying the Scriptures, that there is indeed only one God, and much of his divine nature, as taught in Scripture, has been tampered with, on purpose by Greek philosophers since Jesus' ascension, but mostly in the first thru fourth century church by so-called "father's of the faith", and subsequently by sincerely deceived teachers at the pulpit who don't dare question what those early theologians doctored up. Yes, dear reader, this tampering involves something called: syncretism. Syncretism is the practice of blending pagan religious teachings, and humanistic philosophies with God's word, which will lead to the pollution of His prescribed way of worshiping Him. Biblical syncretism is a definite "no no!" Many examples of the sin of syncretism are given to us in the Old Testament. Before I expound upon this topic, first, I need to define what an inversion is, and then I will define God's true divine nature, or what makes him divine, according to definitions of our English language, and Scripture - of course.
Inversion – (n.) a reverse of the order, arrangement, position, or nature of something.
The inversion I am referring to is this: instead of there being one God, who rules the universe via many titles, such as God the Father, the Son of God, and the Holy Spirit (and many more), we have been taught that there are three separate persons (I call them: the "God the's") who are all sharing the one office, or title of "God." What I aim to show in this treatise is how the nature of the one and only monotheistic God, The Almighty, has been expertly twisted, or inverted. Anything that is twisted is wicked, and anything wicked is of Satan, wouldn't you agree? So, before I get into the meat and potatoes of my Anti-Trinity treatise, let's look at some other Satanically inspired inversions, shall we?
oooo, what a spooky image huh? Well, I'm only using it to make you consider the notion that God's divinity has been inverted. What do I mean by that? Well, I have come to the conclusion, by studying the Scriptures, that there is indeed only one God, and much of his divine nature, as taught in Scripture, has been tampered with, on purpose by Greek philosophers since Jesus' ascension, but mostly in the first thru fourth century church by so-called "father's of the faith", and subsequently by sincerely deceived teachers at the pulpit who don't dare question what those early theologians doctored up. Yes, dear reader, this tampering involves something called: syncretism. Syncretism is the practice of blending pagan religious teachings, and humanistic philosophies with God's word, which will lead to the pollution of His prescribed way of worshiping Him. Biblical syncretism is a definite "no no!" Many examples of the sin of syncretism are given to us in the Old Testament. Before I expound upon this topic, first, I need to define what an inversion is, and then I will define God's true divine nature, or what makes him divine, according to definitions of our English language, and Scripture - of course.
Inversion – (n.) a reverse of the order, arrangement, position, or nature of something.
The inversion I am referring to is this: instead of there being one God, who rules the universe via many titles, such as God the Father, the Son of God, and the Holy Spirit (and many more), we have been taught that there are three separate persons (I call them: the "God the's") who are all sharing the one office, or title of "God." What I aim to show in this treatise is how the nature of the one and only monotheistic God, The Almighty, has been expertly twisted, or inverted. Anything that is twisted is wicked, and anything wicked is of Satan, wouldn't you agree? So, before I get into the meat and potatoes of my Anti-Trinity treatise, let's look at some other Satanically inspired inversions, shall we?
The CrossIn Satanism, a well know inversion is the upside-down or “inverted”cross. I'm willing to bet that most of us, at some point in our lives, have seen a horror flick, or read a mystery novel that has had this symbol depicted. On a side note, I still don't understand why Peter insisted on being crucified upside-down, all his talk of being unworthy of dying like Jesus- typical Peter, I guess. I sometimes wonder if that is really how he died, so I will have to investigate that claim further. And now getting back to my point, Satan uses this symbol, the inverted cross, quite effectively, as a mockery of Jesus' righteous sacrifice. Look up “St. Peter's throne” on Google images, and you will see an inverted cross on the back rest of the Papal throne. It is claimed to be an allusion to “St. Peter” being crucified upside down, and according to Catholicism, Peter was the “first Pope." Therefore, in their dogma, the Pope is sitting, as it were, on Peter's -not Satan's throne. Sure - if that is their spin on it and they are sticking to it, so be it, but I and everyone who has the ability to put two and two together knows that they are really sitting on Satan's throne - so to speak. The upright cross of Christ is a symbol of His holy and atoning sacrifice that brings peace between God and man, but this inverted symbol reeks of mockery and disdain for our Lord.
|
The StarsWhen a five pointed star is turned so the single point faces downward, this is know as the Satanic symbol, or "Sigil" of Baphomet, the Goat of Mendes, Lucifer, and really, Satan himself. This wicked symbol is, ironically, an inversion of another witchcraft symbol, the pentacle [pentacle and pentagram, according to a practicing witch's website I used to research this topic], are basically interchangeable. Within witchcraft, there are "white witches" and "black witches" - both factions use these symbols. However, the Bible makes no such distinctions, and so, all witchcraft is evil. The white witches think they are "good" witches and worship nature mostly and they use the Pentacle [a 5-pointed star] that points upward, because it is supposed to symbolize order, among other things, but other symbols can be used within that magic circle as well, such as an ankh, or hexagram, or other pagan symbol, depending on the ritual to be performed. The inverted pentagram is considered to be evil, because it attracts sinister forces and overturns natural order, and is thus used in summoning demons, and all kinds of mayhem. So this symbol is primarily used by black, or satanic witches, but is not restricted to them alone, like I said, even so-called "white" witches use the inverted pentagram at times.
|
The DoveAnother slightly less well know Satanic inversion is that of the dive-bombing dove, as seen on Calvary Chapel's famous logo, and it is on TBN's logo as well. It is also displayed on some occult organization logos too. How do I know that this is a Satanic symbol and not a holy one, which Satanic orders like the OTO (Ordo Templi Oirientis) have usurped? Well, Aleister Crowley and Madam Helena Blavatsky (high ranking occultists) describe this logo in their occult literature as the Satanic representation, or perversion, of the symbolism of the Holy Spirit. In other words, according to them, it is a visual symbol of an unclean, or unholy spirit (Satan). In Scripture, it is recorded that John the Baptist saw a vision of the Holy Spirit descending upon Jesus, coming from heaven, like a dove, but not as a literal dove. No one else saw this, only John the Baptist did, as this was a sign to him from God, letting him know that Jesus was indeed the Messiah [John 1:33-34]. At any rate, in the natural realm, all birds alight upon things with their feet down, not beak down. Can you imagine, John the Baptist seeing a dive-bombing "dove" heading for and landing on Jesus' head? It sounds like a scene from Albert Hitchcock's horror flick, “The Birds”.
|
Ah yes, Aleister Crowley and Madam Blavatsky-- they were definitely not Christians! They were the founders and members of many well known occult groups, some of which I have done a little research on, but I've mostly concentrated on Freemasonry. I have since learned how Freemasons twist, pervert, and invert the things of God, yet they mask themselves with other religions that espouse a belief in some god, or higher power, so apparently that leaves atheists out in the cold. While I was studying Freemasonry, that is when I first began to suspect that the Trinity is nothing more than another Satanic inversion, and that it was an intentional wresting of God's true divine nature. The Bible warns us that there are agents of evil who creep in unawares and spoil our love feasts with their false teachings. How does this apply to the false doctrine of the Trinity?
What is the purpose of this diabolical teaching? Will it ultimately be used for the purpose of Satan to receive worship by proxy, instead of God? Shocking question, I know. Here's the answer. There is a future false religion, the apostasy Paul spoke of in 2 Thessalonians, and it will have an accompanying mark of allegiance, which is referred to in Revelation. If the Lord's people truly believed in one and only one God, then they would be entirely immune to the coming delusion. I am going to suggest something very controversial; the so-called "un-holy" trinity comprised of The Beast, Anti-Christ, and False Prophet is the real Trinity, while its counterfeit is the so-called "holy" trinity. If this is true, then this is so evil isn't it? Satan will often give a false teaching a supposed "holy" aspect, which gives it a false light that covers the darkness beneath. This form of false teaching involves some high level deception tactics, and is well able to fool the elite, if it were possible. By the way, the Greek meaning of that phrase actually means that it is possible to fool the elite, hence the warning. This is very serious stuff, dear reader!
What is the purpose of this diabolical teaching? Will it ultimately be used for the purpose of Satan to receive worship by proxy, instead of God? Shocking question, I know. Here's the answer. There is a future false religion, the apostasy Paul spoke of in 2 Thessalonians, and it will have an accompanying mark of allegiance, which is referred to in Revelation. If the Lord's people truly believed in one and only one God, then they would be entirely immune to the coming delusion. I am going to suggest something very controversial; the so-called "un-holy" trinity comprised of The Beast, Anti-Christ, and False Prophet is the real Trinity, while its counterfeit is the so-called "holy" trinity. If this is true, then this is so evil isn't it? Satan will often give a false teaching a supposed "holy" aspect, which gives it a false light that covers the darkness beneath. This form of false teaching involves some high level deception tactics, and is well able to fool the elite, if it were possible. By the way, the Greek meaning of that phrase actually means that it is possible to fool the elite, hence the warning. This is very serious stuff, dear reader!
An Illustration of the Trinity
Polytheism Illustrated
Here is a picture of the Trinity as taught to us sheeple in our churches by pastors, who sincerely profess to teach sound doctrine, but unwittingly don't. I have attempted to put the verbal equation the Trinity doctrine as reduced God into with a visual equation for you logic minded math buffs (the symbol ≠ means "is not") :
God the Father ≠ God the Son ≠ God the Holy Spirit = 1 God
(three separate co-equal, co-eternal “persons” forming one “God”)
Yeah, I know, I might get some flack for this equation. I'm not a good mathematician, but it is the best I can do to mathematically represent the Trinity formula as presented by the Romish Church. For the visually oriented people, study the picture carefully, as it is said: "a picture is worth a thousand words." Notice that in the illustration here, it makes it perfectly clear that the Father is God, but he's NOT the Son, nor the Spirit, while claiming that the Son is God, but not the Spirit or the Father, and so on. Again, I'm not the best mathematician, but this visual aid clearly demonstrates 3 separate beings, or persons that aren't each other, but all claim to be God. So, we really have no rational, or logical choice, but to admit that Trinitairans believe in three separate gods, not one God like they claim. Let's be honest here and not put that searing hot iron of hypocrisy upon our consciences; just because a liar claims they are telling the truth, that doesn't mean that they are. How much worse is a deceived liar? This diagram clearly shows that there are three distinct and separate "persons" that all claim to be "God." I will not accept the explanation of "quality" to explain the plurals, since the words "three" and "persons" both obviously denote quantity. This will be expounded upon later.
I also intended to show that the concept of a trinity is pagan in origin. Just show this diagram to an honest pagan, and they can easily insert their "trinity" of gods such as: Isis, Horus, and Set; Odin, Thor, and Frey; Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva; or witchcraft's triad of Maiden, Mother, and Crone, into it's formula, which would in essence, make the God of the Bible to be like all of the pagan gods. Scripture clearly says that God is unique, he is not like other gods. For me, this also raises the puzzling question: “Why would God reveal himself as the unique, one true monotheistic God to his own people, through the law and the prophets, if he was really "Triune" like all the other idolatrous deities of the surrounding nations of Israel? "
Yes, let us consider this question. Why would the very same God who mandated that the Hebrew people be his witnesses and representatives to all mankind (idolaters) that he is the one and only true God, and then turn around and supposedly reveal to his church that he is really a “Trinity” or "Triune" God made up of three separate persons ? Does this make any logical, or reasonable sense? No! If the Hebrew faith of Abraham and Moses, and all the other godly prophets proclaim that there is only one God, then why do Christians, who are offshoots of the original root, claim that they have the real understanding of God's divine nature as being three separate “persons” in one God? There is something very wrong here wouldn't you agree? Now, when I say “nature”, or “divine nature” what do I mean?
God the Father ≠ God the Son ≠ God the Holy Spirit = 1 God
(three separate co-equal, co-eternal “persons” forming one “God”)
Yeah, I know, I might get some flack for this equation. I'm not a good mathematician, but it is the best I can do to mathematically represent the Trinity formula as presented by the Romish Church. For the visually oriented people, study the picture carefully, as it is said: "a picture is worth a thousand words." Notice that in the illustration here, it makes it perfectly clear that the Father is God, but he's NOT the Son, nor the Spirit, while claiming that the Son is God, but not the Spirit or the Father, and so on. Again, I'm not the best mathematician, but this visual aid clearly demonstrates 3 separate beings, or persons that aren't each other, but all claim to be God. So, we really have no rational, or logical choice, but to admit that Trinitairans believe in three separate gods, not one God like they claim. Let's be honest here and not put that searing hot iron of hypocrisy upon our consciences; just because a liar claims they are telling the truth, that doesn't mean that they are. How much worse is a deceived liar? This diagram clearly shows that there are three distinct and separate "persons" that all claim to be "God." I will not accept the explanation of "quality" to explain the plurals, since the words "three" and "persons" both obviously denote quantity. This will be expounded upon later.
I also intended to show that the concept of a trinity is pagan in origin. Just show this diagram to an honest pagan, and they can easily insert their "trinity" of gods such as: Isis, Horus, and Set; Odin, Thor, and Frey; Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva; or witchcraft's triad of Maiden, Mother, and Crone, into it's formula, which would in essence, make the God of the Bible to be like all of the pagan gods. Scripture clearly says that God is unique, he is not like other gods. For me, this also raises the puzzling question: “Why would God reveal himself as the unique, one true monotheistic God to his own people, through the law and the prophets, if he was really "Triune" like all the other idolatrous deities of the surrounding nations of Israel? "
Yes, let us consider this question. Why would the very same God who mandated that the Hebrew people be his witnesses and representatives to all mankind (idolaters) that he is the one and only true God, and then turn around and supposedly reveal to his church that he is really a “Trinity” or "Triune" God made up of three separate persons ? Does this make any logical, or reasonable sense? No! If the Hebrew faith of Abraham and Moses, and all the other godly prophets proclaim that there is only one God, then why do Christians, who are offshoots of the original root, claim that they have the real understanding of God's divine nature as being three separate “persons” in one God? There is something very wrong here wouldn't you agree? Now, when I say “nature”, or “divine nature” what do I mean?
The words “nature” and "divine" as used here (as defined by a Biblical Lexicon) means:
nature – n. (Greek: "physis" Strong's G5449)
1. a. the inherent character of basic constitution of a person or thing: essence, disposition,
temperament. The sum of innate properties and powers by which one person differs from others,
distinctive native peculiarities, natural characteristics
divine- adj. ( Greek: theîos, thi'-os; from G2316)
1. a. of, relating to, or proceeding directly from God or a false god.
b. being, a deity [divine Savior]
c. directed to a deity [as in: divine worship]
Now let's put the two definitions together:
Divine nature means: the inherent character of God's person, his: essence, disposition, and temperament, and are the sum of his innate properties and divine powers that proceed directly from him.
Therefore, if I were to try and reduce God to a formula, this is the one I'd use:
God = omnipresence + omniscience + omnipotence +omnificence [all creative]
Theoretical equations aside, it is impossible for us to reduce our awesome God into a neat and tidy formula. Not only is he the "4-Omni" God, he is also an all loving, all merciful, all righteous, all just, and all gracious God. Now, couple all of those characteristics with the many title names that declare his dominion and authority such as: The Father, God the Father, The Holy Spirit [aka The Comforter], The Lord of hosts, Adonay Eloyhim, LORD God, The LORD, The Son of God, The Lord Jesus Christ, etc. I will discuss his character associated with his names in more detail a little later on. For now, I will explore the fact that the Almighty is the only God who possessed all of these “omni” attributes which give him exclusive and true divine status and perfectly exhibits his true divinity. All of which make it crystal clear that he, and he alone, is Almighty God, and there is no other "god" like him!
Now, on a side note, I realize that Scripture says we humans are made in God's image and likeness, but that only means we are morally responsible beings with a reasoning soul, and a spirit, so let's not embrace Satan's lie that we are "little gods." The only “omni” attribute we all share is that of being "omni-sinners." Yes, dear reader, even though my existence may be broken down into three parts, meaning: I have a spirit, and a soul, and I live in a body; that in and of itself doesn't prove that God himself is three separate persons any more than I am three separate persons. My physical person can only be in one place at one time, so I am not omnipresent. My spirit is the breath, or life force within my physical body, and my soul contains my reasoning mind, will, emotions, and conscience, yet I don't know everything. It is my physical body that makes it possible for me to exist in this earthly realm, yet as strong as I am, I am not omnipotent. If my spirit and soul (separated by a very fine line) were to leave my body and stand next to it, then I still wouldn't be three persons, I'd simply be dead, according to the conditional rules of existence set in the Bible. In short, my nature is not divine, it is decidedly and completely human.
Now then, as a resident on this earth, I have many roles that I fulfill, such as: daughter, sister, niece, cousin, aunt, wife, mother, friend, and hey, why not the honorary of C.E.O. of the Zubiate family. All these roles, or “hats”, or “offices” have there own responsibilities, which are revealed by the name that is used to denote them. My children don't call me “sweetheart,” and they are not allowed to call me by my first name either, they call me mom, or mommy (Kyle is still a little guy). The title “mom” has authority attached to it, and if I were an actual corporate C.E.O, then this title would also carry much authority in the business realm. My family and friends call me Heather, while only a few have a pet name for me that only they are allowed to use. As wife to my husband, I am known as, well--that is not for you to know, my point is that I answer to all these names and they all label that particular role that they govern. So, does that mean I am more than one person, or being? No.
I was 0nce told by a "Jesus isn't God" supporter, that this example was too simplistic, and it did not answer the impossibility of God being his own Son. Imagine the horror of something being too simplistic for a Scriptural smarty pants ! The person I was debating said that by my reasoning, I can't be my own daughter - and this is true. However, God's divine nature is not limited by natural things, he is after all, supernatural (i.e. "the Omni's") and therefore capable of preforming miracles, and wonders - or even accomplishing -- gasp-- the impossible! - go figure. It wasn't until later (after more study) that I discover the rebuttal to that comment. In fact, Jesus approached this very subject (when the Pharisees where questioning his authority) in the following fashion: “The Messiah, whose son is he?” , Jesus asked them. They replied, “The son of David". Jesus then took them to Psalm 110 where David declared under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, “The LORD [Yahwey/Yahovah] said to my[David's] Lord[adown], 'Sit at my right hand, till I make your enemies your foot stool'”. And then Jesus asked them this amazing question: “If the Messiah is David's son, then why does David call him Lord?” They could not, or would not answer his completely logical question. Well, why not? Because that would mean that David called his own "son," who wasn't even born yet, by a higher name [higher dominion] than his own. David called his son "Lord," which can only mean he was not only David's son (the Son of Man), but also the Son of God [Yahwey]. This doesn't make natural human sense does it? Nope! But it's still a biblical fact, so let's deal with it.
The leading teachers of Jesus' day understood that the coming Messiah would be human (the Son of Man), from the kingly line of David, which is also to say, from the tribe of Judah. I mean, let's not forget that Jesus surely called himself "the Son of Man". When he did this curious thing, that title should have reminded all Judeans of Ezekiel the prophet (who God called the Son of Man at least 90 times), who fore told of the Messiah to come, that he was to come from David's line. But what they didn't understand was the paradox that God would willfully humble himself lower than even the angels for a little while, and become their human Messiah, by being David's son (adown), as well as God's own son, at the same time [Isaiah 42:13]. But that's not all; he would also accomplish the task of the suffering servant, and the Good Shepherd at the SAME time! Truly, Jesus is our All in All, our one and only God! So, if you are still balking at this simple and profound question of Jesus to the Pharisees, then I would like you to ask yourself the question that Jesus basically posed to the Pharisees, "Who is David's "Lord," if not God? " But "adown" is to be understood as being only a human person, not divine like the use of Adonay, which is God alone being referred to as Lord. How is this to be reconciled? Also, to say that it is impossible for God to be his own son, or to become human, is to call his well established divine attributes of being both omnipotent and omnipresent, into question. In Revelation 22:16, Jesus, the Alpha and Omega, reveals that he (God in the flesh) is both the root [beginning, or parent] and the offspring [child, or heir] of David. Again, I ask you, how is this humanly possible? It's not! So who wants to tell Jesus he's wrong? Well, I sure as heck don't. And I would like to remind any Christadelphians specifically, that Revelation comes after the gospel's, and well after Jesus' death, Resurrection, and ascension into heaven. This clearly demonstrates the progressive knowledge we are giving in Scripture, regarding who Jesus really is. I don't know who Jesus can be God in a full human human being, apparently the "how" isn't important, the "why" is.
The Bible clearly teaches that Jesus is the express image or copy of the Father [Col 1:15] and in him is the fullness of the Godhead [Col. 2:9], and that he came from above, or from the Father, and was born into humanity through the kingly line of David. The Bible does say that Jesus is the word made flesh[John 1:1], he's the Light of the world [1 John 1:5], and that he created the world [John 1:1-14; 17:5], but not as a separate 2nd divine person, but as identified under another divine name, or title, that of Elohyim - The Creator. I will get to the "elohyim" debate later on. Amazingly, the people who deny Jesus' divinity, do address Colossians 1:18 in relation to Jesus' preeminence in creation, and his headship of the Church, but they chose to ignore verse 16, which clearly speaks of Jesus as being "Elohyim" prior to his incarnation. So, in the beginning, he (Jesus) was always with God, because he was God (Elohyim), not yet incarnate in the person of Jesus Christ, through David's kingly line. Let's read what is written in Colossians 1:15-19:
“He [Jesus] is the image of the invisible God[Yahweh], the firstborn[preeminent] over creation. For by[through]
him [Jesus/ i.e. Elohyim]all things were created that are in heaven, and that are on earth, visible and invisible,
whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through [by]him and for him.
And he is before all things, and in him all things consist. And he is the head of the body, the church, who is the
beginning, the firstborn[preeminent] from the dead, that in all things he may have the preeminence. For it
pleased [the Father] that in him all the fullness [of the Divine Nature]should dwell, and by him to reconcile all
things to himself, by him, whether things on earth, or things in heaven, having made peace through the blood of
his cross."NKJV [brackets and emphasis mine]
Well, there you have it...Jesus created everything as Elohyim, because in the beginning, it was Elohyim alone [Isa. 44:24] that was doing the creating. Case closed. But if you want to keep reading, there's plenty more to say about Jesus being the express image of the Father!
For instance, in John 14 we are given another glimpse into God's true identity through the conversation between Jesus, and his disciples, Thomas and Philip. This is where Jesus practically says he is the image of the Father several times. You have heard the expression, "wolf in sheep's clothing," right? Well, Jesus is literally God "in human's clothing" but it's more than that. Jesus had to have a subordinate human will, and mind. Or he wouldn't have been completely human. Amazingly this concept is very difficult for many Christian denominations to accept. They either stubbornly cling to the thinly veiled polytheistic notion that God is three separate persons, or that Jesus was physically here on earth, but only as a man, and not God at all, or some even imply that Jesus was hanging around earth as a disembodied spirit, so why all the confusion? Because hardhearted men, who were unstable and untaught in the ways of righteousness, were allowed to dictate to the rest of the sheep, their preconceived notions, pagan philosophies, and doctrine of demons, that they mixed with Christ's gospel. Just take God at his word, Abraham did. He didn't ask God to fully explain in detail HOW he was going to make him a father of many nations, he just believed that he would.
These presumptuous men with beautiful minds then searched the scriptures for verses to “fit” their false notions. That is the text book definition of eisegesis, not exegesis. Exegesis on the other hand, makes the student, or Jesus' disciple, conform to Scripture through its critical mind renewing process. It transforms and renews the mind of his disciple more and more to the truth, to the right way Jesus wants his disciple to think and act. The word of God is alive, and has an anointed spiritual quality, because it is Spirit breathed. Only those who are saved or truly and humbly seeking the Truth in its pages, will find it. Those who are spiritually dead and look to Scripture for gain or mockery, or those who are easily deceived will not be fed its spiritually discerned, sound doctrinal food; the evil spirits that counterfeit true spirituality, and control real and false converts through their senses, will see to it that their captives consciences are seared and receive false and spiritually perverted interpretations of God's word, which they lap up, and then jealously defend as "truth."
nature – n. (Greek: "physis" Strong's G5449)
1. a. the inherent character of basic constitution of a person or thing: essence, disposition,
temperament. The sum of innate properties and powers by which one person differs from others,
distinctive native peculiarities, natural characteristics
divine- adj. ( Greek: theîos, thi'-os; from G2316)
1. a. of, relating to, or proceeding directly from God or a false god.
b. being, a deity [divine Savior]
c. directed to a deity [as in: divine worship]
Now let's put the two definitions together:
Divine nature means: the inherent character of God's person, his: essence, disposition, and temperament, and are the sum of his innate properties and divine powers that proceed directly from him.
Therefore, if I were to try and reduce God to a formula, this is the one I'd use:
God = omnipresence + omniscience + omnipotence +omnificence [all creative]
Theoretical equations aside, it is impossible for us to reduce our awesome God into a neat and tidy formula. Not only is he the "4-Omni" God, he is also an all loving, all merciful, all righteous, all just, and all gracious God. Now, couple all of those characteristics with the many title names that declare his dominion and authority such as: The Father, God the Father, The Holy Spirit [aka The Comforter], The Lord of hosts, Adonay Eloyhim, LORD God, The LORD, The Son of God, The Lord Jesus Christ, etc. I will discuss his character associated with his names in more detail a little later on. For now, I will explore the fact that the Almighty is the only God who possessed all of these “omni” attributes which give him exclusive and true divine status and perfectly exhibits his true divinity. All of which make it crystal clear that he, and he alone, is Almighty God, and there is no other "god" like him!
Now, on a side note, I realize that Scripture says we humans are made in God's image and likeness, but that only means we are morally responsible beings with a reasoning soul, and a spirit, so let's not embrace Satan's lie that we are "little gods." The only “omni” attribute we all share is that of being "omni-sinners." Yes, dear reader, even though my existence may be broken down into three parts, meaning: I have a spirit, and a soul, and I live in a body; that in and of itself doesn't prove that God himself is three separate persons any more than I am three separate persons. My physical person can only be in one place at one time, so I am not omnipresent. My spirit is the breath, or life force within my physical body, and my soul contains my reasoning mind, will, emotions, and conscience, yet I don't know everything. It is my physical body that makes it possible for me to exist in this earthly realm, yet as strong as I am, I am not omnipotent. If my spirit and soul (separated by a very fine line) were to leave my body and stand next to it, then I still wouldn't be three persons, I'd simply be dead, according to the conditional rules of existence set in the Bible. In short, my nature is not divine, it is decidedly and completely human.
Now then, as a resident on this earth, I have many roles that I fulfill, such as: daughter, sister, niece, cousin, aunt, wife, mother, friend, and hey, why not the honorary of C.E.O. of the Zubiate family. All these roles, or “hats”, or “offices” have there own responsibilities, which are revealed by the name that is used to denote them. My children don't call me “sweetheart,” and they are not allowed to call me by my first name either, they call me mom, or mommy (Kyle is still a little guy). The title “mom” has authority attached to it, and if I were an actual corporate C.E.O, then this title would also carry much authority in the business realm. My family and friends call me Heather, while only a few have a pet name for me that only they are allowed to use. As wife to my husband, I am known as, well--that is not for you to know, my point is that I answer to all these names and they all label that particular role that they govern. So, does that mean I am more than one person, or being? No.
I was 0nce told by a "Jesus isn't God" supporter, that this example was too simplistic, and it did not answer the impossibility of God being his own Son. Imagine the horror of something being too simplistic for a Scriptural smarty pants ! The person I was debating said that by my reasoning, I can't be my own daughter - and this is true. However, God's divine nature is not limited by natural things, he is after all, supernatural (i.e. "the Omni's") and therefore capable of preforming miracles, and wonders - or even accomplishing -- gasp-- the impossible! - go figure. It wasn't until later (after more study) that I discover the rebuttal to that comment. In fact, Jesus approached this very subject (when the Pharisees where questioning his authority) in the following fashion: “The Messiah, whose son is he?” , Jesus asked them. They replied, “The son of David". Jesus then took them to Psalm 110 where David declared under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, “The LORD [Yahwey/Yahovah] said to my[David's] Lord[adown], 'Sit at my right hand, till I make your enemies your foot stool'”. And then Jesus asked them this amazing question: “If the Messiah is David's son, then why does David call him Lord?” They could not, or would not answer his completely logical question. Well, why not? Because that would mean that David called his own "son," who wasn't even born yet, by a higher name [higher dominion] than his own. David called his son "Lord," which can only mean he was not only David's son (the Son of Man), but also the Son of God [Yahwey]. This doesn't make natural human sense does it? Nope! But it's still a biblical fact, so let's deal with it.
The leading teachers of Jesus' day understood that the coming Messiah would be human (the Son of Man), from the kingly line of David, which is also to say, from the tribe of Judah. I mean, let's not forget that Jesus surely called himself "the Son of Man". When he did this curious thing, that title should have reminded all Judeans of Ezekiel the prophet (who God called the Son of Man at least 90 times), who fore told of the Messiah to come, that he was to come from David's line. But what they didn't understand was the paradox that God would willfully humble himself lower than even the angels for a little while, and become their human Messiah, by being David's son (adown), as well as God's own son, at the same time [Isaiah 42:13]. But that's not all; he would also accomplish the task of the suffering servant, and the Good Shepherd at the SAME time! Truly, Jesus is our All in All, our one and only God! So, if you are still balking at this simple and profound question of Jesus to the Pharisees, then I would like you to ask yourself the question that Jesus basically posed to the Pharisees, "Who is David's "Lord," if not God? " But "adown" is to be understood as being only a human person, not divine like the use of Adonay, which is God alone being referred to as Lord. How is this to be reconciled? Also, to say that it is impossible for God to be his own son, or to become human, is to call his well established divine attributes of being both omnipotent and omnipresent, into question. In Revelation 22:16, Jesus, the Alpha and Omega, reveals that he (God in the flesh) is both the root [beginning, or parent] and the offspring [child, or heir] of David. Again, I ask you, how is this humanly possible? It's not! So who wants to tell Jesus he's wrong? Well, I sure as heck don't. And I would like to remind any Christadelphians specifically, that Revelation comes after the gospel's, and well after Jesus' death, Resurrection, and ascension into heaven. This clearly demonstrates the progressive knowledge we are giving in Scripture, regarding who Jesus really is. I don't know who Jesus can be God in a full human human being, apparently the "how" isn't important, the "why" is.
The Bible clearly teaches that Jesus is the express image or copy of the Father [Col 1:15] and in him is the fullness of the Godhead [Col. 2:9], and that he came from above, or from the Father, and was born into humanity through the kingly line of David. The Bible does say that Jesus is the word made flesh[John 1:1], he's the Light of the world [1 John 1:5], and that he created the world [John 1:1-14; 17:5], but not as a separate 2nd divine person, but as identified under another divine name, or title, that of Elohyim - The Creator. I will get to the "elohyim" debate later on. Amazingly, the people who deny Jesus' divinity, do address Colossians 1:18 in relation to Jesus' preeminence in creation, and his headship of the Church, but they chose to ignore verse 16, which clearly speaks of Jesus as being "Elohyim" prior to his incarnation. So, in the beginning, he (Jesus) was always with God, because he was God (Elohyim), not yet incarnate in the person of Jesus Christ, through David's kingly line. Let's read what is written in Colossians 1:15-19:
“He [Jesus] is the image of the invisible God[Yahweh], the firstborn[preeminent] over creation. For by[through]
him [Jesus/ i.e. Elohyim]all things were created that are in heaven, and that are on earth, visible and invisible,
whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through [by]him and for him.
And he is before all things, and in him all things consist. And he is the head of the body, the church, who is the
beginning, the firstborn[preeminent] from the dead, that in all things he may have the preeminence. For it
pleased [the Father] that in him all the fullness [of the Divine Nature]should dwell, and by him to reconcile all
things to himself, by him, whether things on earth, or things in heaven, having made peace through the blood of
his cross."NKJV [brackets and emphasis mine]
Well, there you have it...Jesus created everything as Elohyim, because in the beginning, it was Elohyim alone [Isa. 44:24] that was doing the creating. Case closed. But if you want to keep reading, there's plenty more to say about Jesus being the express image of the Father!
For instance, in John 14 we are given another glimpse into God's true identity through the conversation between Jesus, and his disciples, Thomas and Philip. This is where Jesus practically says he is the image of the Father several times. You have heard the expression, "wolf in sheep's clothing," right? Well, Jesus is literally God "in human's clothing" but it's more than that. Jesus had to have a subordinate human will, and mind. Or he wouldn't have been completely human. Amazingly this concept is very difficult for many Christian denominations to accept. They either stubbornly cling to the thinly veiled polytheistic notion that God is three separate persons, or that Jesus was physically here on earth, but only as a man, and not God at all, or some even imply that Jesus was hanging around earth as a disembodied spirit, so why all the confusion? Because hardhearted men, who were unstable and untaught in the ways of righteousness, were allowed to dictate to the rest of the sheep, their preconceived notions, pagan philosophies, and doctrine of demons, that they mixed with Christ's gospel. Just take God at his word, Abraham did. He didn't ask God to fully explain in detail HOW he was going to make him a father of many nations, he just believed that he would.
These presumptuous men with beautiful minds then searched the scriptures for verses to “fit” their false notions. That is the text book definition of eisegesis, not exegesis. Exegesis on the other hand, makes the student, or Jesus' disciple, conform to Scripture through its critical mind renewing process. It transforms and renews the mind of his disciple more and more to the truth, to the right way Jesus wants his disciple to think and act. The word of God is alive, and has an anointed spiritual quality, because it is Spirit breathed. Only those who are saved or truly and humbly seeking the Truth in its pages, will find it. Those who are spiritually dead and look to Scripture for gain or mockery, or those who are easily deceived will not be fed its spiritually discerned, sound doctrinal food; the evil spirits that counterfeit true spirituality, and control real and false converts through their senses, will see to it that their captives consciences are seared and receive false and spiritually perverted interpretations of God's word, which they lap up, and then jealously defend as "truth."
"God the Son" or "The Son of God" ?
Pumpernickel or marble rye?
Even Satan and his demons know that there is only one God, because they rightly refer to Jesus as “the Son of God.” Satan addressed Jesus when he tried to tempt him in the wilderness by saying, “If you are the Son of God ...”, notice he didn't say, “If you are God the Son...” - as there is a difference. The demons that spoke to Jesus said the same thing -- they rightly addressed him as "the Son of God." The word "if" can also be translated as "since," or "whether", because it can aim to question, or tries to prove, something. Even though Satan knew of Jesus' human status, he may not have been so clear as to Jesus' divinity, which may explain the question.
Satan primarily attacked Jesus' human flesh. Hunger may be the one term to fit all the temptations he assaulted Jesus with in the wilderness. Satan tested Jesus' physical hunger with bread. Then he tested his emotional hunger for love by suggesting he harm himself by jumping off the temple pinnacle, and finally, he tested the human hunger for power, both of which for human beings, resides in the soul. According to the Gospel, the human soul is dead in sin. Since Jesus was and is not a sinner, so his soul wasn't and isn't lost. Thankfully, Jesus knew exactly who he was, and where he came from, and for what purpose. He proved himself to be loyal to the Father's plan by not giving in to Satan's very real temptations for even one second. He did this by using Scripture to defuse his temptations, because God, his Spirit can't be fooled or tempted with evil, but human flesh, as Jesus found out, can be fooled and tempted. Let me put it another way: his flesh was very vulnerable and tempted, but thanks to the Word of Truth, or the Holy Spirit, he did not sin. At the end of his life, he even resisted the temptation to sin against God's will to the point of sweating great drops of blood! Wow, that is some serious resisting going on there, so you can't tell me that Jesus doesn't know how it feels to be tempted! Can you say that he isn't fully human? I think not.
Even though he went through great temptations, he didn't sin, and that is why he "knows" what it feels like to be tempted to sin, and can therefore empathize with us. Because Jesus was full of the Holy Spirit, which is his spirit [2 Cor. 3:17], he was then able to demonstrate for us that being filled with his Holy Spirit, will help us to overcome our fleshly appetites. It was Satan who didn't fully know God's divine plan any better than God's holy prophets did. Because if he had, then Scripture tells us, that the kingdom of darkness would have never worked so hard to have Jesus crucified. God had to keep his paradoxical plan a secret from even his own prophets; it was hidden, yet revealed. And thankfully, evil never fully understands the ways of true love! Satan is proud, arrogant, and hateful; the antithesis, or inversion of the humility, meekness [power under control], and true love that Jesus embodies. Well, to be honest, Satan hides his malice with a false and selfish love, which he presents to his victims. Notice how Satan feigned concern for Jesus' hunger, legitimacy, and honor. Remember, real diabolical evil perniciously hides itself behind a mask of goodness.
Satan primarily attacked Jesus' human flesh. Hunger may be the one term to fit all the temptations he assaulted Jesus with in the wilderness. Satan tested Jesus' physical hunger with bread. Then he tested his emotional hunger for love by suggesting he harm himself by jumping off the temple pinnacle, and finally, he tested the human hunger for power, both of which for human beings, resides in the soul. According to the Gospel, the human soul is dead in sin. Since Jesus was and is not a sinner, so his soul wasn't and isn't lost. Thankfully, Jesus knew exactly who he was, and where he came from, and for what purpose. He proved himself to be loyal to the Father's plan by not giving in to Satan's very real temptations for even one second. He did this by using Scripture to defuse his temptations, because God, his Spirit can't be fooled or tempted with evil, but human flesh, as Jesus found out, can be fooled and tempted. Let me put it another way: his flesh was very vulnerable and tempted, but thanks to the Word of Truth, or the Holy Spirit, he did not sin. At the end of his life, he even resisted the temptation to sin against God's will to the point of sweating great drops of blood! Wow, that is some serious resisting going on there, so you can't tell me that Jesus doesn't know how it feels to be tempted! Can you say that he isn't fully human? I think not.
Even though he went through great temptations, he didn't sin, and that is why he "knows" what it feels like to be tempted to sin, and can therefore empathize with us. Because Jesus was full of the Holy Spirit, which is his spirit [2 Cor. 3:17], he was then able to demonstrate for us that being filled with his Holy Spirit, will help us to overcome our fleshly appetites. It was Satan who didn't fully know God's divine plan any better than God's holy prophets did. Because if he had, then Scripture tells us, that the kingdom of darkness would have never worked so hard to have Jesus crucified. God had to keep his paradoxical plan a secret from even his own prophets; it was hidden, yet revealed. And thankfully, evil never fully understands the ways of true love! Satan is proud, arrogant, and hateful; the antithesis, or inversion of the humility, meekness [power under control], and true love that Jesus embodies. Well, to be honest, Satan hides his malice with a false and selfish love, which he presents to his victims. Notice how Satan feigned concern for Jesus' hunger, legitimacy, and honor. Remember, real diabolical evil perniciously hides itself behind a mask of goodness.
For The Love Of Grammar!
Now then, let's look at the definitions of the words “of” and “the” in order to get a better idea of the significance, or magnitude of what is being foisted upon us grammatically, by the teaching of the Trinity. I know - - grammar! Eeek! I'll try to make it as painless as possible.
Of : a preposition - expressing the relationship between a part and a whole, or
expressing the relationship between a scale of measure and a value. [Relationship denotes
how something or someone is related to another, like a father and son.]
The: a definite article – used, especially before a noun, with a specifying or particularizing
effect, as opposed to the indefinite or generalizing force of the indefinite article “a” or “an”.
Ha ha! Easy, huh?! We are told in Scripture that Jesus is “the” only begotten Son “of” God, not that he is "a" begotten son of God, but “the” only begotten Son, and I would like to point out that no Scripture calls Jesus: "God the Son". Mull this over for a while. If your mind is entrenched in the trinity teaching, then you will need to meditate on this in order to fully grasp what is grammatically being said here, because it seems that these are the same statement. Grammatically speaking, they aren't the same at all. When interpreting Scripture using proper exegesis, there are rules that must be followed, and one of those rules deals with grammar. A lot, and I mean a LOT of false teaching sneaks by us with the subtle use of cleverly misused grammar. False teachers and false Bible translators will use "a" instead of "the" (like in John 1:1 found in the New World Translation), or the past, present, and future tenses of verbs are messed with etc. We must be vigilant in thinking while we read, and we must read a direct translation of Scripture as opposed to a paraphrase Bible like The Message. For more on the principles of proper exegesis, you can look here, or you can find many other websites that teach on this very important subject.
Truly, Jesus' humanity did come from Mary via the virgin birth, and his spirit was sent by God to earth. How can this be? Remember, God's "omni's" make the impossible, possible! Even though God the Father is eternal, the Son "incarnation" role is not eternal. Why? The Old Testament doesn't reveal God having a literal "son" from the beginning of time, it only mentions God having laid out a plan of salvation before he started creating the earth and its inhabitants. In the Old Testament, every time God was seen as a theophany, and someone asked his name, the LORD evaded answering, even though in Scripture, he was identified as the Angel of the LORD. Why? Because his physical manifestation was not human, and so it was not time to give him a name. Also, Jesus' atoning work will be completed after the last enemy (Death) is completely defeated. Then according to 1 Cor. 15, Jesus –the Son of God, will hand over all rule and authority back to the office of God the Father, so that God the Father can be all in all, while still having fulfilled Isa. 9:6 and Isa. 7:14! [This will be discussed further in another post.] Remember, he is both the beginning and end, the first and the last, and the root and offspring -- sheesh, that right there tells you that he is the father and the son. Impossible? Not for God!
Of : a preposition - expressing the relationship between a part and a whole, or
expressing the relationship between a scale of measure and a value. [Relationship denotes
how something or someone is related to another, like a father and son.]
The: a definite article – used, especially before a noun, with a specifying or particularizing
effect, as opposed to the indefinite or generalizing force of the indefinite article “a” or “an”.
Ha ha! Easy, huh?! We are told in Scripture that Jesus is “the” only begotten Son “of” God, not that he is "a" begotten son of God, but “the” only begotten Son, and I would like to point out that no Scripture calls Jesus: "God the Son". Mull this over for a while. If your mind is entrenched in the trinity teaching, then you will need to meditate on this in order to fully grasp what is grammatically being said here, because it seems that these are the same statement. Grammatically speaking, they aren't the same at all. When interpreting Scripture using proper exegesis, there are rules that must be followed, and one of those rules deals with grammar. A lot, and I mean a LOT of false teaching sneaks by us with the subtle use of cleverly misused grammar. False teachers and false Bible translators will use "a" instead of "the" (like in John 1:1 found in the New World Translation), or the past, present, and future tenses of verbs are messed with etc. We must be vigilant in thinking while we read, and we must read a direct translation of Scripture as opposed to a paraphrase Bible like The Message. For more on the principles of proper exegesis, you can look here, or you can find many other websites that teach on this very important subject.
Truly, Jesus' humanity did come from Mary via the virgin birth, and his spirit was sent by God to earth. How can this be? Remember, God's "omni's" make the impossible, possible! Even though God the Father is eternal, the Son "incarnation" role is not eternal. Why? The Old Testament doesn't reveal God having a literal "son" from the beginning of time, it only mentions God having laid out a plan of salvation before he started creating the earth and its inhabitants. In the Old Testament, every time God was seen as a theophany, and someone asked his name, the LORD evaded answering, even though in Scripture, he was identified as the Angel of the LORD. Why? Because his physical manifestation was not human, and so it was not time to give him a name. Also, Jesus' atoning work will be completed after the last enemy (Death) is completely defeated. Then according to 1 Cor. 15, Jesus –the Son of God, will hand over all rule and authority back to the office of God the Father, so that God the Father can be all in all, while still having fulfilled Isa. 9:6 and Isa. 7:14! [This will be discussed further in another post.] Remember, he is both the beginning and end, the first and the last, and the root and offspring -- sheesh, that right there tells you that he is the father and the son. Impossible? Not for God!
1 Corinthians 15 makes no sense if you believe in a triune God, where God is assumed to be three separate co-equal, co-eternal persons, especially when one must explain exactly how the Holy Spirit fits into all this supposed "equality." This is the problem that the early church elders and even Constantine ran into and tried to work this out in their vain human counsels, and what got Michael Servetus into big trouble with John Calvin. This truth is what cost many anti-trinity scholars like Sevetus, their lives. So again, according to 1 Cor. 15, there is only to be one God, as it always has been - not two, not three, not seven, or even nine gods, as Benny Hinn tried to teach. That guy was finally rebuked by his own followers--finally! If we look at this verse in the light of the truth, that God was incarnated (made flesh) as Jesus anywhere between 0-4 A.D., then according to human calendar calculations, that means Jesus didn't physically exist as the "Son" of God, or as God being in human flesh before that time. Now we begin to understand that Jesus was with the Father in the beginning, only because he is the manifestation of the Father's plan; his word, which stated that he would obtain a human body for himself via the seed of a woman. (See Psalm 40, Isaiah 9:6, and Jeremiah 31:22 for Scriptures on the coming incarnation.)
Jesus has a unique paradox of being both God and man at the same time. Jesus is God (spiritually), but limited as a man (physically). His flesh was completely capable of warring with the Spirit of God just as our spirit wars with our flesh. However, Jesus isn't a demi-god like Hercules who came about in mythology where the gods literally mated with human women. I would like to point out that unlike the God of the Bible, in mythology, Zeus, the chief god of the Greek pantheon, was born, was afraid of dying, and procreated with human women through deception and rape. We are told that God has no beginning, he has always been. Therefore, the God of the Bible is not comparable to false gods in this respect. And so, how does one explain what happened to Mary? We are told that the Holy Spirit of God overshadowed Mary, and she conceived. It would be like any healing God performed, he simply caused her to become pregnant without sperm. If he can make a man out of a pile of dirt, and breath life into him, then my goodness, fertilizing an egg without sexual union is no big feat. This is why Jesus is the only authorized mediator between God and man, because he is both God and man! How? I don't know how, that is not important. What is important is the "Why". What God says should not be difficult to accept, for the true spiritually redeemed person.
Jesus has a unique paradox of being both God and man at the same time. Jesus is God (spiritually), but limited as a man (physically). His flesh was completely capable of warring with the Spirit of God just as our spirit wars with our flesh. However, Jesus isn't a demi-god like Hercules who came about in mythology where the gods literally mated with human women. I would like to point out that unlike the God of the Bible, in mythology, Zeus, the chief god of the Greek pantheon, was born, was afraid of dying, and procreated with human women through deception and rape. We are told that God has no beginning, he has always been. Therefore, the God of the Bible is not comparable to false gods in this respect. And so, how does one explain what happened to Mary? We are told that the Holy Spirit of God overshadowed Mary, and she conceived. It would be like any healing God performed, he simply caused her to become pregnant without sperm. If he can make a man out of a pile of dirt, and breath life into him, then my goodness, fertilizing an egg without sexual union is no big feat. This is why Jesus is the only authorized mediator between God and man, because he is both God and man! How? I don't know how, that is not important. What is important is the "Why". What God says should not be difficult to accept, for the true spiritually redeemed person.
Getting back to the grammar issue, by wrongly saying:"God the Son", then this affirms that Jesus' son-ship is eternal and that he is a separate and distinct God from God the Father, something which is not literally found in Scripture. A lot of word
gymnastics and Scripture implying and bending are employed in order to make Jesus - "God the Son", and amazingly, many Trinitarians freely admit this. But by rightly saying Jesus is "The Son of God" this affirms that Jesus is "the" only begotten son, in relation to God the Father via the virgin birth. And by rightly calling him the Son of Man, this affirms that he came from David's kingly line, through Mary and his adoptive father, Joseph. This is actually found in the Psalms, and Prophets and all over the New Testament as well. That being said, confusion can set in, because many don't take the time to study the book of Isaiah in particular, as well as the other prophets and the Psalms through proper exegesis. And to be honest, these people apparently don't really believe God possesses all of the divine "omni" attributes like they claim they do, or else the true concept of there being only One God wouldn't be hard for them to grasp, and accept. This is especially true for the followers of the: "Jesus isn't God" movement, because they don't believe God possesses any "omni" attributes, which would make it completely possible for God to have the ability to become flesh, which he did. The book of Isaiah alone contains many verses entailing that God the Father would be sending himself to earth as the one and only atoning Savior, Messiah, and Servant. And this book alone clearly states he is the only God there is - I'll give you these verses a little later on. Again, I will discuss this further in another post regarding God's "Jesus" rule as Messiah, and his coming Immanuel rule as "God with us" beyond the millenium. Oh.....okay, here is a hint, because I can't wait - Immanuel might be his literal "new name," or it may even be Kol Bakol (Hebrew for "all-in all")[Rev. 21:3]!
gymnastics and Scripture implying and bending are employed in order to make Jesus - "God the Son", and amazingly, many Trinitarians freely admit this. But by rightly saying Jesus is "The Son of God" this affirms that Jesus is "the" only begotten son, in relation to God the Father via the virgin birth. And by rightly calling him the Son of Man, this affirms that he came from David's kingly line, through Mary and his adoptive father, Joseph. This is actually found in the Psalms, and Prophets and all over the New Testament as well. That being said, confusion can set in, because many don't take the time to study the book of Isaiah in particular, as well as the other prophets and the Psalms through proper exegesis. And to be honest, these people apparently don't really believe God possesses all of the divine "omni" attributes like they claim they do, or else the true concept of there being only One God wouldn't be hard for them to grasp, and accept. This is especially true for the followers of the: "Jesus isn't God" movement, because they don't believe God possesses any "omni" attributes, which would make it completely possible for God to have the ability to become flesh, which he did. The book of Isaiah alone contains many verses entailing that God the Father would be sending himself to earth as the one and only atoning Savior, Messiah, and Servant. And this book alone clearly states he is the only God there is - I'll give you these verses a little later on. Again, I will discuss this further in another post regarding God's "Jesus" rule as Messiah, and his coming Immanuel rule as "God with us" beyond the millenium. Oh.....okay, here is a hint, because I can't wait - Immanuel might be his literal "new name," or it may even be Kol Bakol (Hebrew for "all-in all")[Rev. 21:3]!
God the Spirit vs. The Spirit of God
Calvary Chapel's inverted dove logo
Just as there is no verbatim use of "God the Son," I would like to point out there is no verbatim mention of “God the Holy Spirit”, to be found in Scripture either; only that of “God the Father”: Jn. 6:27; 1 Cor. 8:6; Gal. 1:1,3; Eph. 6:23; Phi. 2:11; 1 Th 1:1; 2 Tim 1:2; Titus 1:4; 1 Pet.1:2; 2 Pet. 1:17; 2 Jn. 1:3; Jude 1:1. Rather, the correct phrase: “The Spirit of God” is mentioned at least 25 times, and in other passages more simply as the Holy Spirit. So what does that mean, and is it the same as saying: "God the Holy Spirit?" No, it's not the same, because just as Jesus came from God, the Holy Spirit also comes forth from God. No where in the word of God does that phrase- "God the Spirit" appear. Why? "God the Spirit" only exists in the minds and oral traditions of Trinitarians, but "the Spirit of God", a.k.a. the Holy Spirit of God, as written in Eph. 4:30, does in fact exist - as he is God's Spirit, as God is only one spirit being. Not too hard of a concept to accept for the true believer.
There are the questions: If the Holy Spirit isn't the third "person" of the Trinity, then why is The Holy Spirit referred to by using the male pronouns of "he", "his", or "him"?-- And: "What about what we have been taught that spirits (or God specifically) have no gender?" These are good and valid questions. Since Scripture teaches that there is only one God, and since God the Father and Jesus, the Son of God, are referenced to by using male pronouns, then it follows that any reference to God's Holy Spirit would also be male. What do I mean? Well, if I were to die, and my soul and spirit left my physical female body, then would my spirit still be considered a "female"? Of course I'd still be a female without my physical body. God, who is spirit, even refers to himself in male pronouns, yet again, many theologians will tell you that God has no real "gender." Not so fast! I wonder where they got that notion from? Jesus does confirm that God the Father is Spirit, but let us consider that every time God appeared as a theophany [physical bodily manifestation] in the Old Testament, he took on a male gender. So, to refer to God's Holy Spirit by using male pronouns; in no way denotes a separate being, but is an expression used to show us that God himself is in the role, or divine office, of being the sanctified omnipresent spirit that rules in omnipotent omniscience, and also as the comforting counselor.
Now then, if the above information still isn't enough to convince you that the Trinity is a vain, oral false teaching, and an inversion of God's true divine Omni nature, then please continue on, as there is much more to consider. I intend to examine God according to his own words via Scripture, and consider who God's biggest enemy is, and what he is capable of. Also to be discussed will be when the Trinity doctrine was first presented to the church, by whom, and why, and I will also examine the evidence that Trinity doctrine supporters uphold as valid. Then finally, I intend to use all this information to come to a grand conclusion, I will hopefully, certainly not succinctly, show that the Trinity doctrine is unsound and an inversion of God's true divine nature.
There are the questions: If the Holy Spirit isn't the third "person" of the Trinity, then why is The Holy Spirit referred to by using the male pronouns of "he", "his", or "him"?-- And: "What about what we have been taught that spirits (or God specifically) have no gender?" These are good and valid questions. Since Scripture teaches that there is only one God, and since God the Father and Jesus, the Son of God, are referenced to by using male pronouns, then it follows that any reference to God's Holy Spirit would also be male. What do I mean? Well, if I were to die, and my soul and spirit left my physical female body, then would my spirit still be considered a "female"? Of course I'd still be a female without my physical body. God, who is spirit, even refers to himself in male pronouns, yet again, many theologians will tell you that God has no real "gender." Not so fast! I wonder where they got that notion from? Jesus does confirm that God the Father is Spirit, but let us consider that every time God appeared as a theophany [physical bodily manifestation] in the Old Testament, he took on a male gender. So, to refer to God's Holy Spirit by using male pronouns; in no way denotes a separate being, but is an expression used to show us that God himself is in the role, or divine office, of being the sanctified omnipresent spirit that rules in omnipotent omniscience, and also as the comforting counselor.
Now then, if the above information still isn't enough to convince you that the Trinity is a vain, oral false teaching, and an inversion of God's true divine Omni nature, then please continue on, as there is much more to consider. I intend to examine God according to his own words via Scripture, and consider who God's biggest enemy is, and what he is capable of. Also to be discussed will be when the Trinity doctrine was first presented to the church, by whom, and why, and I will also examine the evidence that Trinity doctrine supporters uphold as valid. Then finally, I intend to use all this information to come to a grand conclusion, I will hopefully, certainly not succinctly, show that the Trinity doctrine is unsound and an inversion of God's true divine nature.
Who Is God According To Scripture?
DISCLAIMER:The Father didn't pose for this portrait!
Within the numerous pages of Scripture, God lays out the progressive revelation of his mysterious existence, as well as his well made plan for our existence and salvation. I say "mysterious" not meaning that these things can't ever be made known, or that they can only be known through secret initiation rituals, but that they are revealed to anyone who is dedicated in pursuing God's word for their revelation. The whole Christian faith is based upon the paradox of God saving a lost and sinful world through the seeming defeat of his Son, Jesus Christ (God in the flesh) dying on the cross. I think we are agreed that a supernatural God can't die, right? Only flesh and blood men can die.
Thankfully, the Scriptures give us glimpses of his divine nature and how he thinks -- both of which are mind boggling to us. Yes, God tells us of his existence, works, and why he does what he does to an extent, even still, we can't completely understand how or even why he does what he does, since his thoughts and ways are higher than ours. As humans, we don't fully see, or understand the big picture. However, we aren't completely clueless as students of God's word, so we must not only use our God given faculties of conscience, logic and reason, but also employ faith in God's ability to explain his word to us through his Spirit, so we can understand it from his perspective. Let me put it another way, we must believe that he will assist us in its proper interpretation from his point of view, and acknowledge that he will do what he says he will do, for our eternal benefit.
Thank God that Scripture is open to all to explore, but keep in mind that it is not exhaustive in every detail on any subject, you must realize we are on a “need to know basis." So we need to be careful not to desire to go beyond what is written. Because for one, Scripture is a closed cannon; all the prophesy and "revelation" we will need is already in there, no strange voices need to uttered after the fact. And two, those with “inquiring minds” will be satisfied by cleverly disguised false information - our enemy will see to it. Nor are we to add to, or take away from what is written. And as much accurate information as we are given, again, there are still somethings about him we just don't understand completely, due to our human limitations, and so this is why faith and trust in what God teaches us in Scripture must overcome the unregenerate, or philosophical brand of human reasoning that many people try to apply to it. God bids us to come and reason with him, because we have a mind that he gave us to do that very thing- reason. Are we not also told that we must renew our mind? Flawed human reasoning can be "fixed" or turned into wise and righteous reasoning when we trust the Lord to do the work through the Spirit of his word. Flawed human reasoning can't reconcile God's divinity with his humanity, so the flawed reasoning makes God's divine and human nature an impossibility, meaning that Jesus is not God, because God can't die. Or the flawed reasoning seeks to make God more than one person, which is the philosophical marriage of pagan gods with monotheism. The Trinity, despite what its adherents claim as being a "revelation" taught through inductive reasoning, not only goes beyond what is written, but it is illogical and is completely contradictory to our conscience that there is only ONE God. This doctrine is really an oral, man-made tradition...... really an ancient tradition of polytheistic idolatry wrapped in Christianeze. In my study Bible, John MacArthur bluntly states that the Trinity teaching is not directly taught in Scripture, but rather it is implied. Really? He's right, it is implied, but we must ask ourselves, by whom? God, or Satan? Remember, Satan isn't afraid of quoting Scripture, in order to misquote and teach it out of context effectively to subtly deceive people, he has to know it very well. I will go into this in more detail later on.
"Can we really know who God is?"
The answer is emphatically- "Yes!" Page after divinely breathed page reveals that the one true God wants to be known (that is the meaning behind his name Jehovah, or Yahweh) by his most privileged creature- mankind. Gnostics and Deists defy Scripture by claiming that God is unknowable in a personal way. That. Is. A. Lie! In reality, Scripture encourages us to seek him, so he can be found and known through fellowship, so let's do just that shall we?
But first, I want to explain that I am a simple girl, not a simpleton, so I have not used, and will not use any fancy philosophical arguments to explain the Scriptures, and I won't be using any mystical, or secret Pharisaical Scripture decoding methods, or "Bible" codes either. I take Scripture at face value, and use Scriptures to interpret other Scriptures, and I try very hard to use proper exegesis, and a lexicon/concordance. I believe that what the Bible contains comes from God's mouth to us via divine inspiration, or that it is God breathed, and that it has been faithfully written down by holy men to feed babes in the faith with spiritual milk, while it also feeds adults in the faith with spiritual meat. It is meant to be easily understood by children (or new believers), while at the same time it holds deeper concepts for full grown adults (mature in the faith) to grasp. Thankfully, many of these deeper concepts called "spiritual meat," such as visions and parables, are usually explained in the immediate text by an angel, or God himself, to the one who received them. Or if the meat is prophecy, then it's fulfillment is usually stated. And so, if something is not clear, or if something is hard for you to swallow, then continual reading and meditation or "chewing" upon the Scriptures in question, will eventually bring the proper digestion, or understanding of the item in question, with the help of God's Holy Spirit. Okay now - here we go!
“Let's start at the very beginning, a very good place to start...”
" In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.”, this is what Gen 1:1 states. That is a huge statement, chuck full of meaning! I wish I could convey a lot of meaning so succinctly, and by now I'm sure you do too! God (Elohiym/Yahovah) all ready existed before time, and he created all the heavens and the earth [Col. 1:16]. He did it. No one, and nothing else assisted him[Isa. 44:24; 45:18]. As he spoke words, things happened. Now let's explore plurality. The word used for "heavens" in this verse is the plural word “shamayim” and can singularly mean: the visible sky, atmosphere, universe, and God's own abode. In this case, it is safe to say that the use of this word in context denotes all of the above. So, does the use of the plural form 'elohiym' used for the English word 'God' mean there is more than one god, or that the Trinity was at work here? Not necessarily. We must be good exegetes and use all of Scripture as well as the surrounding text to decide the matter. Because 'Elohiym' can mean several different things such as: false gods, judges, rulers, angels, or God himself, that means we must be careful of giving proper interpretation. I would also like to point out that the seemingly plural nature of "elohiym" can also be singular, much like our words: sheep, fish, and moose in the the modern English language. The singularity or plurality of words depends on both subject and verb tense in a sentence. Is that so far fetched? Well, here is a list of Scriptures where God says he created everything by himself, with absolutely no help from anyone, or anything else, and that he is the only God:
Ex. 20:2-3 "I am the LORD (Jehovah/singular) your God (Elohiym), who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the
house of bondage. You shall have no other gods (elohiym) before me.
Deut.4:39 “Therefore know this day, and consider it in your heart, that the LORD himself is
God (Elohiym) in heaven above, and on earth beneath; there is no other.
Deut.5:6-7 "I am the LORD your God (Ehohyim), who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the
house of bondage. You shall have no other gods (elohiym) before me.
Deut. 6:4 Hear O Israel: The LORD (Jehovah/singular) our God (Elohiym), the LORD (Jehovah/singular) is one.
Isa. 43:10 “You [are] my witnesses,” says the LORD, “and my servant whom I have chosen,
that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he, before me there
was no God (El) formed, nor shall there be after me.
11 I, [even] I [am] the LORD, and besides me there is no Savior.
12 I have declared and saved, I have proclaimed, and there was no foreign god
among you; therefore you are my witnesses”, says the LORD, “that I am
God. [all foreign god heads are Triune by the way]
13 Indeed before the day was, I am he; and there is no one who can deliver out of
my hand. No one can undo what I have done.”
Isa. 44:6 “Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel, and his [Israel's]Redeemer, the LORD of
hosts: I am the first and I am the last; beside me there is no God (Elohiym).
7 and who can proclaim as I do? Then let him declare it and set in order for me, since
I appointed the ancient people. And the things that are coming, and shall come, let
them show these to them.
8 Do not fear, nor be afraid; have I not told you from that time, and declared it? You
are my witnesses-is there a God ('elowahh) besides me? Indeed there is no other rock-
I know not one!”
24 Thus says the LORD, your redeemer, and he who formed you from the womb: “I
am LORD who makes all things, who stretches out the heavens all alone, who
spreads apart the earth by myself;
Isa. 45:6 That they may know from the rising of the sun to its setting that there is none
besides me, I am the LORD, there is no other;
12 I have made the earth and created man on it. I-my hands- stretched out the
heavens, all the hosts I have commanded.
18 For thus says the LORD, who created the heavens, who is God (Elohiym), who formed the
earth and made it, who established it, who did not create it in vain, who formed it to
be inhabited: “I am the LORD, there is no other.”
21 Tell and bring forth your case; yes, let them take counsel together. Who has
declared this from ancient time? Who had told it from the time? Have not I, the
LORD? And there is no other God (Elohiym) besides me, a just God (El) and a Savior; there
is none besides me.
22 “Look to me and be saved, all you ends of the earth! For I am God (El) and there is no
other.
Isa. 46:9 Remember the former things of old, for I am God (El), and there is no other; I am
God (Elohiym) and there is none like me,
Isa. 63:3 “I have trodden the wine press alone, and from the peoples no one was with me.
For I have trodden them in my anger, and trampled them in my fury; their
blood is sprinkled upon on my garments, and I have stained all my robes.
As we can read from these Scriptures, there is no hint, or allusion to more than one "person" in God's divine nature, or Godhead in the context of these verses thanks to our friend, grammar. There is only one God, the LORD -Yahweh, the Lord - Adonay, The LORD God - Yahwey Adonay. If there were more than one “person”, or more than one "God the..." then surely he would have said so. For those who would argue that all persons of the Trinity are talking when "they" use the world "Elohiym," I would like to point out that when God (El-singular) asserts his supremacy, in the very same verse (Isa. 45:21; Isa. 46:9 being just two examples) where elohiym is used, by this action, he is demoting, or negating the other two "persons" of the Trinity, that are supposed to be "equal" to him. Then there is that pesky verb thing, too. Singular nouns have singular verbs, and plural nouns have plural verbs. If that isn't enough to rip the scab off your seared conscience and expose the hypocrisy of the Trinity, then let's now consider the "equal" claim.
Isa. 40:18 To whom then will you liken God (El-singular)? Or what likeness will you compare to him?
Isa. 40:25 To whom then will you liken me, or to whom shall I be equal?” says the Holy One.
Isa. 46:5 “To whom will you liken me, and make me equal, and compare me, that we should
be alike?
The rhetorical answer is - "no one." So much for the supposition of there being three "co-equals", right? There is no one we can compare God to, except the person of Jesus, as he is the only pre-approved "image of God" that is comparable and acceptable, because God is in him, and Jesus is in God. Jesus, we are told in Phil. 2:6, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, or the equality to be something to be grasped at. Ah ha! So Jesus is equal with God, the Bible does say so! Well, yes. Is God confused? Of course not. But, he told us in the O.T. that he has no equal, yet in the N.T. we are told Jesus was equal to God, what gives? Look, we humans tend to brag about who and what we are, but Jesus didn't feel the need to do this. Unlike Eve who was tricked by Satan into grasping at godhood, Jesus didn't grasp at, or steal godhood, because it is something he already has. The word "robbery" could also elude to the robbing of idols from a pagan temple, which is something Jesus would never do. Jesus was equal to God, because he IS God in human flesh.
Now that we've established from God's own words that He is only one God, not three separate co-equal, co-eternal, persons let's move on to God's divine attributes, but first, I feel the need to explain something. I realize that there are words we use that are not literally in the Bible like the Latin words demon(s), and rapture, but these words are explained in some way and given an equivalent, they aren't "implied," but rather, they are plainly defined. The word for demon(s) is equal to evil or unclean spirit(s), and the word "rapture" is used to define the foretold "snatching" or the "gathering together" of the saints with Jesus at his very public second coming. That being said, can someone please tell me where there is a direct and plain description, or definition of the Trinity in Scripture that would be an equivalent to what we have been taught? I haven't found one yet, and like I've said before, even Trinitairans admit this to their shame. And Matthew 28:19 doesn't count, because there isn't an Old Testament Scripture, or definition, or concept, or outright teaching to back it up. We can't be swayed by suggested, or imagined "implications," that kind of logic is the Devil's playground, not God's. If the Trinity definition is not in the Old (and it isn't), then it won't be in the New. Okay - God's real divine attributes, here we go.
Thankfully, the Scriptures give us glimpses of his divine nature and how he thinks -- both of which are mind boggling to us. Yes, God tells us of his existence, works, and why he does what he does to an extent, even still, we can't completely understand how or even why he does what he does, since his thoughts and ways are higher than ours. As humans, we don't fully see, or understand the big picture. However, we aren't completely clueless as students of God's word, so we must not only use our God given faculties of conscience, logic and reason, but also employ faith in God's ability to explain his word to us through his Spirit, so we can understand it from his perspective. Let me put it another way, we must believe that he will assist us in its proper interpretation from his point of view, and acknowledge that he will do what he says he will do, for our eternal benefit.
Thank God that Scripture is open to all to explore, but keep in mind that it is not exhaustive in every detail on any subject, you must realize we are on a “need to know basis." So we need to be careful not to desire to go beyond what is written. Because for one, Scripture is a closed cannon; all the prophesy and "revelation" we will need is already in there, no strange voices need to uttered after the fact. And two, those with “inquiring minds” will be satisfied by cleverly disguised false information - our enemy will see to it. Nor are we to add to, or take away from what is written. And as much accurate information as we are given, again, there are still somethings about him we just don't understand completely, due to our human limitations, and so this is why faith and trust in what God teaches us in Scripture must overcome the unregenerate, or philosophical brand of human reasoning that many people try to apply to it. God bids us to come and reason with him, because we have a mind that he gave us to do that very thing- reason. Are we not also told that we must renew our mind? Flawed human reasoning can be "fixed" or turned into wise and righteous reasoning when we trust the Lord to do the work through the Spirit of his word. Flawed human reasoning can't reconcile God's divinity with his humanity, so the flawed reasoning makes God's divine and human nature an impossibility, meaning that Jesus is not God, because God can't die. Or the flawed reasoning seeks to make God more than one person, which is the philosophical marriage of pagan gods with monotheism. The Trinity, despite what its adherents claim as being a "revelation" taught through inductive reasoning, not only goes beyond what is written, but it is illogical and is completely contradictory to our conscience that there is only ONE God. This doctrine is really an oral, man-made tradition...... really an ancient tradition of polytheistic idolatry wrapped in Christianeze. In my study Bible, John MacArthur bluntly states that the Trinity teaching is not directly taught in Scripture, but rather it is implied. Really? He's right, it is implied, but we must ask ourselves, by whom? God, or Satan? Remember, Satan isn't afraid of quoting Scripture, in order to misquote and teach it out of context effectively to subtly deceive people, he has to know it very well. I will go into this in more detail later on.
"Can we really know who God is?"
The answer is emphatically- "Yes!" Page after divinely breathed page reveals that the one true God wants to be known (that is the meaning behind his name Jehovah, or Yahweh) by his most privileged creature- mankind. Gnostics and Deists defy Scripture by claiming that God is unknowable in a personal way. That. Is. A. Lie! In reality, Scripture encourages us to seek him, so he can be found and known through fellowship, so let's do just that shall we?
But first, I want to explain that I am a simple girl, not a simpleton, so I have not used, and will not use any fancy philosophical arguments to explain the Scriptures, and I won't be using any mystical, or secret Pharisaical Scripture decoding methods, or "Bible" codes either. I take Scripture at face value, and use Scriptures to interpret other Scriptures, and I try very hard to use proper exegesis, and a lexicon/concordance. I believe that what the Bible contains comes from God's mouth to us via divine inspiration, or that it is God breathed, and that it has been faithfully written down by holy men to feed babes in the faith with spiritual milk, while it also feeds adults in the faith with spiritual meat. It is meant to be easily understood by children (or new believers), while at the same time it holds deeper concepts for full grown adults (mature in the faith) to grasp. Thankfully, many of these deeper concepts called "spiritual meat," such as visions and parables, are usually explained in the immediate text by an angel, or God himself, to the one who received them. Or if the meat is prophecy, then it's fulfillment is usually stated. And so, if something is not clear, or if something is hard for you to swallow, then continual reading and meditation or "chewing" upon the Scriptures in question, will eventually bring the proper digestion, or understanding of the item in question, with the help of God's Holy Spirit. Okay now - here we go!
“Let's start at the very beginning, a very good place to start...”
" In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.”, this is what Gen 1:1 states. That is a huge statement, chuck full of meaning! I wish I could convey a lot of meaning so succinctly, and by now I'm sure you do too! God (Elohiym/Yahovah) all ready existed before time, and he created all the heavens and the earth [Col. 1:16]. He did it. No one, and nothing else assisted him[Isa. 44:24; 45:18]. As he spoke words, things happened. Now let's explore plurality. The word used for "heavens" in this verse is the plural word “shamayim” and can singularly mean: the visible sky, atmosphere, universe, and God's own abode. In this case, it is safe to say that the use of this word in context denotes all of the above. So, does the use of the plural form 'elohiym' used for the English word 'God' mean there is more than one god, or that the Trinity was at work here? Not necessarily. We must be good exegetes and use all of Scripture as well as the surrounding text to decide the matter. Because 'Elohiym' can mean several different things such as: false gods, judges, rulers, angels, or God himself, that means we must be careful of giving proper interpretation. I would also like to point out that the seemingly plural nature of "elohiym" can also be singular, much like our words: sheep, fish, and moose in the the modern English language. The singularity or plurality of words depends on both subject and verb tense in a sentence. Is that so far fetched? Well, here is a list of Scriptures where God says he created everything by himself, with absolutely no help from anyone, or anything else, and that he is the only God:
Ex. 20:2-3 "I am the LORD (Jehovah/singular) your God (Elohiym), who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the
house of bondage. You shall have no other gods (elohiym) before me.
Deut.4:39 “Therefore know this day, and consider it in your heart, that the LORD himself is
God (Elohiym) in heaven above, and on earth beneath; there is no other.
Deut.5:6-7 "I am the LORD your God (Ehohyim), who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the
house of bondage. You shall have no other gods (elohiym) before me.
Deut. 6:4 Hear O Israel: The LORD (Jehovah/singular) our God (Elohiym), the LORD (Jehovah/singular) is one.
Isa. 43:10 “You [are] my witnesses,” says the LORD, “and my servant whom I have chosen,
that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he, before me there
was no God (El) formed, nor shall there be after me.
11 I, [even] I [am] the LORD, and besides me there is no Savior.
12 I have declared and saved, I have proclaimed, and there was no foreign god
among you; therefore you are my witnesses”, says the LORD, “that I am
God. [all foreign god heads are Triune by the way]
13 Indeed before the day was, I am he; and there is no one who can deliver out of
my hand. No one can undo what I have done.”
Isa. 44:6 “Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel, and his [Israel's]Redeemer, the LORD of
hosts: I am the first and I am the last; beside me there is no God (Elohiym).
7 and who can proclaim as I do? Then let him declare it and set in order for me, since
I appointed the ancient people. And the things that are coming, and shall come, let
them show these to them.
8 Do not fear, nor be afraid; have I not told you from that time, and declared it? You
are my witnesses-is there a God ('elowahh) besides me? Indeed there is no other rock-
I know not one!”
24 Thus says the LORD, your redeemer, and he who formed you from the womb: “I
am LORD who makes all things, who stretches out the heavens all alone, who
spreads apart the earth by myself;
Isa. 45:6 That they may know from the rising of the sun to its setting that there is none
besides me, I am the LORD, there is no other;
12 I have made the earth and created man on it. I-my hands- stretched out the
heavens, all the hosts I have commanded.
18 For thus says the LORD, who created the heavens, who is God (Elohiym), who formed the
earth and made it, who established it, who did not create it in vain, who formed it to
be inhabited: “I am the LORD, there is no other.”
21 Tell and bring forth your case; yes, let them take counsel together. Who has
declared this from ancient time? Who had told it from the time? Have not I, the
LORD? And there is no other God (Elohiym) besides me, a just God (El) and a Savior; there
is none besides me.
22 “Look to me and be saved, all you ends of the earth! For I am God (El) and there is no
other.
Isa. 46:9 Remember the former things of old, for I am God (El), and there is no other; I am
God (Elohiym) and there is none like me,
Isa. 63:3 “I have trodden the wine press alone, and from the peoples no one was with me.
For I have trodden them in my anger, and trampled them in my fury; their
blood is sprinkled upon on my garments, and I have stained all my robes.
As we can read from these Scriptures, there is no hint, or allusion to more than one "person" in God's divine nature, or Godhead in the context of these verses thanks to our friend, grammar. There is only one God, the LORD -Yahweh, the Lord - Adonay, The LORD God - Yahwey Adonay. If there were more than one “person”, or more than one "God the..." then surely he would have said so. For those who would argue that all persons of the Trinity are talking when "they" use the world "Elohiym," I would like to point out that when God (El-singular) asserts his supremacy, in the very same verse (Isa. 45:21; Isa. 46:9 being just two examples) where elohiym is used, by this action, he is demoting, or negating the other two "persons" of the Trinity, that are supposed to be "equal" to him. Then there is that pesky verb thing, too. Singular nouns have singular verbs, and plural nouns have plural verbs. If that isn't enough to rip the scab off your seared conscience and expose the hypocrisy of the Trinity, then let's now consider the "equal" claim.
Isa. 40:18 To whom then will you liken God (El-singular)? Or what likeness will you compare to him?
Isa. 40:25 To whom then will you liken me, or to whom shall I be equal?” says the Holy One.
Isa. 46:5 “To whom will you liken me, and make me equal, and compare me, that we should
be alike?
The rhetorical answer is - "no one." So much for the supposition of there being three "co-equals", right? There is no one we can compare God to, except the person of Jesus, as he is the only pre-approved "image of God" that is comparable and acceptable, because God is in him, and Jesus is in God. Jesus, we are told in Phil. 2:6, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, or the equality to be something to be grasped at. Ah ha! So Jesus is equal with God, the Bible does say so! Well, yes. Is God confused? Of course not. But, he told us in the O.T. that he has no equal, yet in the N.T. we are told Jesus was equal to God, what gives? Look, we humans tend to brag about who and what we are, but Jesus didn't feel the need to do this. Unlike Eve who was tricked by Satan into grasping at godhood, Jesus didn't grasp at, or steal godhood, because it is something he already has. The word "robbery" could also elude to the robbing of idols from a pagan temple, which is something Jesus would never do. Jesus was equal to God, because he IS God in human flesh.
Now that we've established from God's own words that He is only one God, not three separate co-equal, co-eternal, persons let's move on to God's divine attributes, but first, I feel the need to explain something. I realize that there are words we use that are not literally in the Bible like the Latin words demon(s), and rapture, but these words are explained in some way and given an equivalent, they aren't "implied," but rather, they are plainly defined. The word for demon(s) is equal to evil or unclean spirit(s), and the word "rapture" is used to define the foretold "snatching" or the "gathering together" of the saints with Jesus at his very public second coming. That being said, can someone please tell me where there is a direct and plain description, or definition of the Trinity in Scripture that would be an equivalent to what we have been taught? I haven't found one yet, and like I've said before, even Trinitairans admit this to their shame. And Matthew 28:19 doesn't count, because there isn't an Old Testament Scripture, or definition, or concept, or outright teaching to back it up. We can't be swayed by suggested, or imagined "implications," that kind of logic is the Devil's playground, not God's. If the Trinity definition is not in the Old (and it isn't), then it won't be in the New. Okay - God's real divine attributes, here we go.
God's Divinity
What makes God divine are his powers of omnipotence, omnipresence, and omniscience, which are exclusive to God, no other person, or personality possesses them. But they are not literally stated in Scripture, except for the word omnipotent; meaning all powerful, which is found in Rev. 19:6. But the concepts and definitions of the other "omni" words are directly found and are clearly defined in Scripture. I was once told that I could not use these Greek words at all to describe our God's divinity, because they were used to describe the Grecian pagan gods. This person also claimed that God didn't know everything, so according to this person God is essentially "a good guesser," and then he predictably refused to acknowledge Jesus' divine status. Let's not be blind. God does indeed know all, he says so, and within the word "predestination," there lies a key to understanding God's omniscience. And as far as I can recall of my studies in Greek Mythology, I never got the impression that any of the Greek gods actually possessed any of these divine attributes they were ascribed. Really, they were nothing more than "immortal" humans that could do really amazing magic tricks. If Zeus really thought of himself as omnipotent, then he would not have feared being usurped, or overthrown by the lesser gods. Also, if Zeus were omniscient, then the other gods would not have been able to fool him. The LORD God, has no such fears of being usurped by lesser spirit beings, and he certainly isn't fooled by them. At any rate I will define these terms here and give Scripture references to them.
Omnipresent – all present, everywhere at one time
1 Kings 8:27 Isa. 43:2 Zech. 4:10
Job 34:21 Isa. 57:15 Matt. 18:20
Ps. 139 Jer. 16:17 Col. 1:17
Prov. 5:21 Jer. 23:24 Heb. 4:12-13
Prov. 15:3 Amos 9:2-3 and many many more...
Omniscient – all knowing, knows everything
Deut. 29:29 Jer. 1:5 Rom. 8:29
Job 37:15-16 Jer. 23:24 1 Cor. 2:11
Ps. 147:5,45 Matt. 10:30 1 Jn. 3:20
Isa. 40:13-14,28 Acts. 1:24 and many, many more...
Omnipotent- all powerful, can do anything, nothing is too hard for him
Job 37:23;38:1-41:34 Isa. 44:24 Jn. 10:17-18
Ps. 33:6 Isa. 46:10-11 Rom 4:17
Ps. 135:6 Jer. 32:17 Heb 1:3
Ps. 147:5 Amos 9:5-6 And many, many more...
and if I may be so bold as to suggest one that is rarely used:
Omnific – or, all creative, meaning he has created everything! [I just love to read the dictionary, don't
you?!]
Gen 1:1 Ps. 146:6 Acts 14:15
Gen. 18:14 Isa. 32:17 Acts 17:24
2 Kings 19:15 Isa. 40:26-29 Col. 1:16
Job 38:1-41:34 Isa. 45:12 Rev. 14:7
Ps. 102:25 Jer. 27:5 And many, many more...
Ps. 115;15 Jn. 1:1-3
All of these Scriptures clearly teach the "Omni's" without using the literal words, and they are not"implied," they are clearly defined and stated. And so, when one supreme being has all these incredible supernatural and divine attributes at his disposal all the time, a person begins to wonder if God really needs to be 3 separate “persons” at all. I say that because we mortals usually wish we had a few clones of ourselves in order to get all of our work done, or a few life times to do everything we want to accomplish, right? The God of the Bible voices no such laments, or musings. If one stubbornly wants to cling to the hypocritical Trinity doctrine, then one should also wonder, how these supernatural attributes get divvied up between the Trinity. Does the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit of the Trinity really share these divine attributes equally, as claimed by the Trinity definition, or does each "person" of the Godhead possess only one, and not the others? Or if they so happen to possess an uneven amount of each attribute, then what's the ratio? Well, if we are to believe the “Trinity” doctrine, then they should be divvied up equally, right? So why is the Holy Spirit hardly ever given any billing in the Old and New Testament compared to, or in tandem with, the Father and then Jesus? Jesus said that the Father is greater than he is, and the Holy Spirit only glorifies the Son of God. Jesus, while on earth before his crucifixion, couldn't be in more than one place at one time, does Scripture say otherwise? Do you see my problem with the "equal" claim?
What makes more logical and biblical 'faith' sense is that God as Father (originator of all creation), whose Spirit [breath, spirit, wind, scent]is Holy, sent himself, as our Lord Jesus Christ (his physical incarnation), to be his own unique and begotten Son by overshadowing a virgin, while he, the Father, remained seated in heaven. The question here isn't "how". The correct question is "Why". To save us from our sins and God's wrath, by being the perfect sinless Lamb of God. There you have it, God as one, displaying all his “omni” attributes within these three titles, or offices: The Father, The Son of God, and The Holy Spirit. Each office having its own responsibilities, yet held by one God. The Father being originator of all life seated in heaven, Jesus the Son of God in the flesh (Incarnation) to be a redeeming sin offering on earth, and God's Holy Spirit executes the power of God from on high (as opposed to an evil spirit), that bears witness of the truth and grace of Jesus, the Son of God. All divine attributes of which are performed under specific names or titles, that reveal the character and nature of that particular role God himself operates under at ALL times. This is how Matthew 28:19 is to be understood, not as some strange polytheistic menagerie, or an "implication" of a Triune God, but as the fullness of God in Christ Jesus. This would explain why the disciples baptized only in the name of Jesus in the book of Acts, rather than the triad of offices in the book of Matthew. And now - to the Scriptures, no really, go read them for yourself in your own Bible, and feel free to find more on your own to confirm this truth!
Omnipresent – all present, everywhere at one time
1 Kings 8:27 Isa. 43:2 Zech. 4:10
Job 34:21 Isa. 57:15 Matt. 18:20
Ps. 139 Jer. 16:17 Col. 1:17
Prov. 5:21 Jer. 23:24 Heb. 4:12-13
Prov. 15:3 Amos 9:2-3 and many many more...
Omniscient – all knowing, knows everything
Deut. 29:29 Jer. 1:5 Rom. 8:29
Job 37:15-16 Jer. 23:24 1 Cor. 2:11
Ps. 147:5,45 Matt. 10:30 1 Jn. 3:20
Isa. 40:13-14,28 Acts. 1:24 and many, many more...
Omnipotent- all powerful, can do anything, nothing is too hard for him
Job 37:23;38:1-41:34 Isa. 44:24 Jn. 10:17-18
Ps. 33:6 Isa. 46:10-11 Rom 4:17
Ps. 135:6 Jer. 32:17 Heb 1:3
Ps. 147:5 Amos 9:5-6 And many, many more...
and if I may be so bold as to suggest one that is rarely used:
Omnific – or, all creative, meaning he has created everything! [I just love to read the dictionary, don't
you?!]
Gen 1:1 Ps. 146:6 Acts 14:15
Gen. 18:14 Isa. 32:17 Acts 17:24
2 Kings 19:15 Isa. 40:26-29 Col. 1:16
Job 38:1-41:34 Isa. 45:12 Rev. 14:7
Ps. 102:25 Jer. 27:5 And many, many more...
Ps. 115;15 Jn. 1:1-3
All of these Scriptures clearly teach the "Omni's" without using the literal words, and they are not"implied," they are clearly defined and stated. And so, when one supreme being has all these incredible supernatural and divine attributes at his disposal all the time, a person begins to wonder if God really needs to be 3 separate “persons” at all. I say that because we mortals usually wish we had a few clones of ourselves in order to get all of our work done, or a few life times to do everything we want to accomplish, right? The God of the Bible voices no such laments, or musings. If one stubbornly wants to cling to the hypocritical Trinity doctrine, then one should also wonder, how these supernatural attributes get divvied up between the Trinity. Does the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit of the Trinity really share these divine attributes equally, as claimed by the Trinity definition, or does each "person" of the Godhead possess only one, and not the others? Or if they so happen to possess an uneven amount of each attribute, then what's the ratio? Well, if we are to believe the “Trinity” doctrine, then they should be divvied up equally, right? So why is the Holy Spirit hardly ever given any billing in the Old and New Testament compared to, or in tandem with, the Father and then Jesus? Jesus said that the Father is greater than he is, and the Holy Spirit only glorifies the Son of God. Jesus, while on earth before his crucifixion, couldn't be in more than one place at one time, does Scripture say otherwise? Do you see my problem with the "equal" claim?
What makes more logical and biblical 'faith' sense is that God as Father (originator of all creation), whose Spirit [breath, spirit, wind, scent]is Holy, sent himself, as our Lord Jesus Christ (his physical incarnation), to be his own unique and begotten Son by overshadowing a virgin, while he, the Father, remained seated in heaven. The question here isn't "how". The correct question is "Why". To save us from our sins and God's wrath, by being the perfect sinless Lamb of God. There you have it, God as one, displaying all his “omni” attributes within these three titles, or offices: The Father, The Son of God, and The Holy Spirit. Each office having its own responsibilities, yet held by one God. The Father being originator of all life seated in heaven, Jesus the Son of God in the flesh (Incarnation) to be a redeeming sin offering on earth, and God's Holy Spirit executes the power of God from on high (as opposed to an evil spirit), that bears witness of the truth and grace of Jesus, the Son of God. All divine attributes of which are performed under specific names or titles, that reveal the character and nature of that particular role God himself operates under at ALL times. This is how Matthew 28:19 is to be understood, not as some strange polytheistic menagerie, or an "implication" of a Triune God, but as the fullness of God in Christ Jesus. This would explain why the disciples baptized only in the name of Jesus in the book of Acts, rather than the triad of offices in the book of Matthew. And now - to the Scriptures, no really, go read them for yourself in your own Bible, and feel free to find more on your own to confirm this truth!
What's In A Name?
Names have meanings because they are words, and words convey information. Names are given to people, places and things so they can be addressed by others who call upon them. So names help identify the place, thing, or person as an individual, apart from others, except for Trinity definition in this case. God is one being, not three separate persons. Anyway, I would be willing to wager that no one likes to be addressed by the wrong name, or as, “Hey, you! ” Names can have the effect of defining the character of the one that bears them and can even convey a sense of authority by title– like “Officer Smith” who we will understand by the title before the name, is a police officer. When you hear the name, Princess Diana what comes to mind? How about Adolf Hitler, or Der Fuhrer? These names and title names invoke strong emotions in us, not just because of their names per-say, but also because their names have a certain amount of authority behind them, and speak of their character.
Do you recall that famous Shakespearean line: “What 's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.”, spoken by Juliet? It is meant to convey the idea that it is not so much what something, or someone is called, but what someone, or something is. This is true to a point, but when someone says “my favorite flower is a rose” we who have smelled and seen a rose before, associate that name with the character of the flower. If it was named something else, then we would still associate its characteristics of shape, and sweet smell with its name, you can't get away from it. This is why having a good name is synonymous with having a good reputation. Again, I would like to reiterate that many of us go by more than one name, based on who is addressing us and for what purpose.
When I was pregnant, my husband and I set out choosing boy, and girl names. We wanted to pick the perfect name for our child. When I suggested a certain name my husband objected, not because he didn't like the name itself, but because it carried with it a bad association, it belonged to someone he didn't care for. And that is a huge issue, and proves why it was so important to God that the Children of Israel obeyed his commandments, statutes, and judgments, so they wouldn't make his name stink among the Gentiles through their poor representation of him, as his people. This is still true today. How many so-called "Christians" make the name of Jesus stink among the unsaved due to their poor example? In the Old Testament, there came many times when God had to finally do something to clear his great name, and bring it glory once more. So he physically disciplined his children with his four sore judgments, and he always warned them in advance, the nations would know that he is God by his punishing them, and so he would redeem his great name in the process.
Do you recall that famous Shakespearean line: “What 's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.”, spoken by Juliet? It is meant to convey the idea that it is not so much what something, or someone is called, but what someone, or something is. This is true to a point, but when someone says “my favorite flower is a rose” we who have smelled and seen a rose before, associate that name with the character of the flower. If it was named something else, then we would still associate its characteristics of shape, and sweet smell with its name, you can't get away from it. This is why having a good name is synonymous with having a good reputation. Again, I would like to reiterate that many of us go by more than one name, based on who is addressing us and for what purpose.
When I was pregnant, my husband and I set out choosing boy, and girl names. We wanted to pick the perfect name for our child. When I suggested a certain name my husband objected, not because he didn't like the name itself, but because it carried with it a bad association, it belonged to someone he didn't care for. And that is a huge issue, and proves why it was so important to God that the Children of Israel obeyed his commandments, statutes, and judgments, so they wouldn't make his name stink among the Gentiles through their poor representation of him, as his people. This is still true today. How many so-called "Christians" make the name of Jesus stink among the unsaved due to their poor example? In the Old Testament, there came many times when God had to finally do something to clear his great name, and bring it glory once more. So he physically disciplined his children with his four sore judgments, and he always warned them in advance, the nations would know that he is God by his punishing them, and so he would redeem his great name in the process.
The Names of God
All throughout the Bible, it is understood that Hebraic names are very important, because they can convey prophetic meaning, as well as give insight into the state of mind of the mother was in during labor and delivery, or hint at what the conditions were at the time of their birth. God, working under his role as Father, meaning he is the originator of all life, uses the name Elohiym as the God of creation, in the first opening chapters. Why did God have Moses use such a "generic" word to describe him? Well, for one thing, as I have said before, God was the only known supernatural ruling entity in town, so he didn't need to be specific. After Satan rebelled in the garden and drew one-third of heavens angels with him, they all started vying for human worship by the time we read Genesis 4:26, so as a result, God had to start being more specific with his person via his divine names. But wait, isn't Jesus said to have created everything? Hold on, I'm getting there, please be patient.
When God is breathing into Adam's nostrils, the name Jehovah, or Yahweh Elohiym (LORD [the existing one]God), I feel, is used to denote the personal nature of God interacting with his creation. I mean, there are few things more personal than blowing air into someone through their nose, right? I have heard it said that God did not reveal himself as Yahweh to his people until Exodus 3:14. Now this can mean one of two things. Either it means that he didn't show his characteristic of being LORD God to them until that time, meaning he put up with the false gods being mistaken for him, or it means that the English translation dropped the Hebrew connotation that is more in keeping with the culture. When the correct Hebraic connotation is used it should be understood as a question; like: "Did I not reveal myself to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as Yahweh [Jehovah]?" To which the answer would be, "Yes Lord, yes you did." It was not until he spoke one on one with Moses from the burning bush did He reveal himself as I Am that I Am. Why? Because Moses just came out of Egypt, the land of many false "gods," and a culture that worshiped a Trinity, something we are told in Ezekiel 20 that he and the Children of Israel were well versed in. So God needed to set the record straight, to teach Moses that he and he alone was the Almighty God, and no one else - including the great Pharaoh who was also worshiped as a god.
Now, I understand that there is great controversy surrounding the use of the names Jehovah and Yahweh, that are used to denote in English the Hebrew letters of YHVH. I will not get into that right now, but my point is that names carry meaning and reveal the character of the person(s) who bear(s) them in the Hebrew culture, as well as that of titles. It is a wonderful study to undertake; that of finding and learning about all the names that God uses to reveal the many facets of his character and authority, but I would caution you dear reader, to take care what websites you use in your research. Beware the Messianic and Kabbalah sites, which are rife with mystical kookiness. That being said, here are just a few names with scripture references that you can then use with a concordance to find other places where these names are used:
Jehovah-Elohiym: LORD-God (Gen 2:4;Deut. 6:3: Ps.31:5; Luke 1:68)
Jehovah-Elohiym Tsaba :LORD-God of Hosts (2 Sam 5:10; Rom. 9:29; Jms. 5:4)
Jehovah- Raah :LORD-My Shepherd Ps. 23
Jehovah-Nissi :LORD-My Banner (Ex. 17:15)
Adonai Jehovah: Lord LORD (I wonder if this name is carried over to Matt. 7:21-23)
El Elyon: The Most High God (Gen. 14:18)
….and many many more.
When God is breathing into Adam's nostrils, the name Jehovah, or Yahweh Elohiym (LORD [the existing one]God), I feel, is used to denote the personal nature of God interacting with his creation. I mean, there are few things more personal than blowing air into someone through their nose, right? I have heard it said that God did not reveal himself as Yahweh to his people until Exodus 3:14. Now this can mean one of two things. Either it means that he didn't show his characteristic of being LORD God to them until that time, meaning he put up with the false gods being mistaken for him, or it means that the English translation dropped the Hebrew connotation that is more in keeping with the culture. When the correct Hebraic connotation is used it should be understood as a question; like: "Did I not reveal myself to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as Yahweh [Jehovah]?" To which the answer would be, "Yes Lord, yes you did." It was not until he spoke one on one with Moses from the burning bush did He reveal himself as I Am that I Am. Why? Because Moses just came out of Egypt, the land of many false "gods," and a culture that worshiped a Trinity, something we are told in Ezekiel 20 that he and the Children of Israel were well versed in. So God needed to set the record straight, to teach Moses that he and he alone was the Almighty God, and no one else - including the great Pharaoh who was also worshiped as a god.
Now, I understand that there is great controversy surrounding the use of the names Jehovah and Yahweh, that are used to denote in English the Hebrew letters of YHVH. I will not get into that right now, but my point is that names carry meaning and reveal the character of the person(s) who bear(s) them in the Hebrew culture, as well as that of titles. It is a wonderful study to undertake; that of finding and learning about all the names that God uses to reveal the many facets of his character and authority, but I would caution you dear reader, to take care what websites you use in your research. Beware the Messianic and Kabbalah sites, which are rife with mystical kookiness. That being said, here are just a few names with scripture references that you can then use with a concordance to find other places where these names are used:
Jehovah-Elohiym: LORD-God (Gen 2:4;Deut. 6:3: Ps.31:5; Luke 1:68)
Jehovah-Elohiym Tsaba :LORD-God of Hosts (2 Sam 5:10; Rom. 9:29; Jms. 5:4)
Jehovah- Raah :LORD-My Shepherd Ps. 23
Jehovah-Nissi :LORD-My Banner (Ex. 17:15)
Adonai Jehovah: Lord LORD (I wonder if this name is carried over to Matt. 7:21-23)
El Elyon: The Most High God (Gen. 14:18)
….and many many more.
God's Adversary Also Has a Name
Yes dear reader, every hero has a foe, and God's biggest nemesis is Satan, and his name even means “Adversary." Let's be clear, Satan is a real being, not some mystical "sin consciousness" or some other weird Gnostic or New Age concept to explain why we do bad things. So as a real being, his character is revealed through his name, which means he is opposed to God and accuses the saints before God in his heavenly court. But just like God, he actually is known by more than one title, or name. He is also called the Devil meaning evil spirit, false god, or diabolical person, and he is also referred to as Beelzebub, which can mean "lord of the flies". All these names mean that he opposes goodness, is the antithesis of godliness, and that he roams about aimlessly searching for a way to do evil. One can even say, he is the inversion of God Almighty, especially since he isn't "omni" anything, well, he's an "omni"liar and murderer, right?
At any rate, why so many names for one foe? Could it be that they all reveal certain character traits he possesses? Definitely so. So where did he come from, and what's his problem? It has been taught that Satan was once known as Lucifer, meaning light bearer, or bearer of light, and was a glorious anointed covering Cherub. I'm not sure that is the case, but what I am sure of is that there is a reference to someone that the Bible calls "the anointed Cherub" in Ezekiel 28:14. The description of that anointed cherub doesn't make me think of a scaly snake. He apparently became a fallen angel due to falling in love with himself (he's the first and worst narcissist) and there by corrupting his wisdom. He was removed, or cast to the ground, as the Lord puts it, and it would seem this event took place right after he enticed Eve to sin against God in the garden of Eden. He is also the perpetrator of a failed coop attempt, in which he took 1/3 of God's heavenly host with him, thanks to his tale-bearing proficiency, which the Bible calls his “abundance of trading.” In 2 Corinthians 11:14 we are told that Satan disguises himself as an angel of light, he may have even been the angel who impersonated Gabriel to Mohammad, and Moroni to Joseph Smith. That is why we are told to "test" the spirits, to avoid deception.
As for his problem, he wants to be like the Most High, but isn't even close. Since he will not stop until his lofty dream of being like the Most High becomes our nightmare, all of creation is temporarily held under his limited authority, until his appointed time of doom fully comes to pass. The less time he has, the more angry and murderous he will get. And yes, he does have a measure of authority, he is for now, the ruling prince of the power of the air, and vassal ruler of this present age, Jesus said so. This is why you must be careful to not be guilty of hurling accusations against high ranking dignitaries. Even though Jesus has defeated Satan via his cross, and we are commanded to resist him, no where does Jesus tell us to hurl insults at Satan, nor does he tell us to go looking for a personal "spiritual brawl" with him either. When you preach the gospel, make no mistake, he or his evil angels with come a runnin' to you.
How, and by what methods, will he attempt to accomplish his lofty and impossible goal within an ever diminishing time constraint? Well, since he lacks the divine "Omni's" he can't create anything, so he has to copy and pervert, or "invert" what God has already created. The only things he is the originator of (or is the father of) are the sins of pride, lying, and murder. Since he is lord over hoards of fallen angels, he has a lot of help in his planned, yet futile attempt to become like God. Again, like lowly cattle, Satan is a created being. He only knows so much, is only as powerful as God allows, and can only be in one place at one time - -how frustrating that must be for his enormous ego! He operates in the lower realm of spiritism, not in the higher supernatural realm of God. This lower realm deals with sorcery, telekinesis, psychic phenomenology, or what the Bible calls, lying wonders. They are pitiful copies of God's awesome wonders, but are not completely void of spiritual power. This is displayed for us in the book of Exodus when the sorcerers and magicians were able to copy only the first three plagues God brought upon the whole nation of Egypt. So, if any being needs to be more than one person in order to fake divinity, it is Satan, not The Almighty. We humans seem to think more is better, but not when it comes to Almighty divinity. To divide God into three separate co-equal, co-eternal Gods, is an insult, it really lowers God's potency. Anyway, I've noticed that not even Satan can deny God's Lordship when in his presence, he must correctly acknowledge God as LORD, and address him as such.
At any rate, why so many names for one foe? Could it be that they all reveal certain character traits he possesses? Definitely so. So where did he come from, and what's his problem? It has been taught that Satan was once known as Lucifer, meaning light bearer, or bearer of light, and was a glorious anointed covering Cherub. I'm not sure that is the case, but what I am sure of is that there is a reference to someone that the Bible calls "the anointed Cherub" in Ezekiel 28:14. The description of that anointed cherub doesn't make me think of a scaly snake. He apparently became a fallen angel due to falling in love with himself (he's the first and worst narcissist) and there by corrupting his wisdom. He was removed, or cast to the ground, as the Lord puts it, and it would seem this event took place right after he enticed Eve to sin against God in the garden of Eden. He is also the perpetrator of a failed coop attempt, in which he took 1/3 of God's heavenly host with him, thanks to his tale-bearing proficiency, which the Bible calls his “abundance of trading.” In 2 Corinthians 11:14 we are told that Satan disguises himself as an angel of light, he may have even been the angel who impersonated Gabriel to Mohammad, and Moroni to Joseph Smith. That is why we are told to "test" the spirits, to avoid deception.
As for his problem, he wants to be like the Most High, but isn't even close. Since he will not stop until his lofty dream of being like the Most High becomes our nightmare, all of creation is temporarily held under his limited authority, until his appointed time of doom fully comes to pass. The less time he has, the more angry and murderous he will get. And yes, he does have a measure of authority, he is for now, the ruling prince of the power of the air, and vassal ruler of this present age, Jesus said so. This is why you must be careful to not be guilty of hurling accusations against high ranking dignitaries. Even though Jesus has defeated Satan via his cross, and we are commanded to resist him, no where does Jesus tell us to hurl insults at Satan, nor does he tell us to go looking for a personal "spiritual brawl" with him either. When you preach the gospel, make no mistake, he or his evil angels with come a runnin' to you.
How, and by what methods, will he attempt to accomplish his lofty and impossible goal within an ever diminishing time constraint? Well, since he lacks the divine "Omni's" he can't create anything, so he has to copy and pervert, or "invert" what God has already created. The only things he is the originator of (or is the father of) are the sins of pride, lying, and murder. Since he is lord over hoards of fallen angels, he has a lot of help in his planned, yet futile attempt to become like God. Again, like lowly cattle, Satan is a created being. He only knows so much, is only as powerful as God allows, and can only be in one place at one time - -how frustrating that must be for his enormous ego! He operates in the lower realm of spiritism, not in the higher supernatural realm of God. This lower realm deals with sorcery, telekinesis, psychic phenomenology, or what the Bible calls, lying wonders. They are pitiful copies of God's awesome wonders, but are not completely void of spiritual power. This is displayed for us in the book of Exodus when the sorcerers and magicians were able to copy only the first three plagues God brought upon the whole nation of Egypt. So, if any being needs to be more than one person in order to fake divinity, it is Satan, not The Almighty. We humans seem to think more is better, but not when it comes to Almighty divinity. To divide God into three separate co-equal, co-eternal Gods, is an insult, it really lowers God's potency. Anyway, I've noticed that not even Satan can deny God's Lordship when in his presence, he must correctly acknowledge God as LORD, and address him as such.
The First Invocation of the Trinity upon Christianity
Ecumenical Nicaea Council
The so-called "Christian" Trinity being: God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit, or three separate, co-equal, co-eternal persons, is what has been orally taught in Christendom since it was crystallized in the 4th century. That's right, it wasn't taught by any of the apostles. According to the traditions of the “fathers of the faith," it really began to be taught as doctrine after the Council of Nicaea. Again, please notice that it wasn't taught in the first century church as sound doctrine, or by the Hebrew prophets, or apostles. So surely, if the Trinity is really "implied" by Scripture (which it isn't ), then the prophets, and apostles have done a great injustice to the Almighty. Really, any New Testament references to a Trinity are usually hotly debated as being added well after the original manuscripts were penned such as 1 John 5:7b-8a. Those verses should read: 7For there are three that bear witness: 8 the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and these three agree as one. Wow! That makes so much more sense than what is in our Bibles now. Read the footnotes in your study Bible, that is why they are there, to aid in proper exegesis!
Now about the Nicaea Council; why was this council called? It was called to hammer out some pressing matters in the so -called "Christian" church at that time, things like:
Wait, notice on the last point, the Holy Spirit isn't mentioned, only the “nature" of The Son of God and his relationship to the Father. It wasn't until a later ecumenical council that they realized their error in leaving out the Holy Spirit in their little “Tri-Divine Menagerie” discussion. This is one of those “D'oh! I forgot something”, or “but wait- there's more!” kinda things I guess. Honestly, that alone should tell you there's something rotten in Nicaea! Remember, by this time many true Christians are being heavily persecuted, and martyred by the fake Christians. The only attendees that were debating God's nature were the members of camps General Error, Special Error, and Gross Error.
Now about the Nicaea Council; why was this council called? It was called to hammer out some pressing matters in the so -called "Christian" church at that time, things like:
- The calculation of the date of Easter [feast of Ishtar and Tammuz, by using the paranormal science of astrology.]
- The construction of the first part of the ecumenical creed of Nicaea [syncretism- the mixing of righteous and pagan faiths]
- The declaration of the principles of cannon law [laws used by fake Christians to persecute and murder real Christians.]
- To hammer out the Trinitarian issue of the nature of The Son of God and his relationship to the Father.
Wait, notice on the last point, the Holy Spirit isn't mentioned, only the “nature" of The Son of God and his relationship to the Father. It wasn't until a later ecumenical council that they realized their error in leaving out the Holy Spirit in their little “Tri-Divine Menagerie” discussion. This is one of those “D'oh! I forgot something”, or “but wait- there's more!” kinda things I guess. Honestly, that alone should tell you there's something rotten in Nicaea! Remember, by this time many true Christians are being heavily persecuted, and martyred by the fake Christians. The only attendees that were debating God's nature were the members of camps General Error, Special Error, and Gross Error.
Who called for this council to convene and why?
I am going to give a way over simplified synopsis here, you can do a more in depth study of your own. I believe that because of the failure of the first Nicaean council, it was Constantine who called for the next conference, because like all psychopaths, he wanted to gain complete control over all the people in his realm, even over the non-pagan Christians. Who was Constantine? He was one of the last Emperors of Rome, who, we are told, converted to Christianity after having a dream, or vision where a cross came out of the sky, and a voice declared that with that symbol (and not the gospel) he would conquer the world. This is not the Biblical definition of salvation by a long shot, nor is the wielding of an actual sword the Scriptural means of spreading Jesus' gospel. On the contrary, Constantine continued in his paganism, and only added Christian lingo and facades to make it seem like he converted. Why, how deceptive he was, like a certain fallen angel we know, right? Some will doubt this, but all you have to do is look at his own monument to himself, it doesn't contain one scrap of Christian symbolism, or teachings. So why did he go to all the trouble of lying?
There is a time for war and a time for peace, the Bible tells us, and even pagan emperors can grow weary of war. Not because they don't like killing people, but because they know that they'll eventually run out of men and other resources if they don't stop. But how do psychopathic pagans make peace with those who refuse to bow down to them? Constantine needed to gain control of the Christian faith, because as any good tyrant knows, total power must be achieved through political kingship and religious means. So, what he actually did, and very cleverly I might add, was gain control of the Christians by using the motto – “If you can't beat them [from the outside], then join them [and destroy them from the inside]! Like his predecessors before him, his persecution tactics were only making the Church grow, so by making the persecution weary Christian leaders an offer they couldn't refuse, that of no more persecution, he conquered opposition by “making nice”, and the rest is history. Yes, Constantine did what his forerunners couldn't do, stem the rising tide of Christianity. Incidentally, he - Constantine, as emperor, apparently he is th e one who helped force the definition of hypostasis to mean a plural- essence of being, or persons, in stead of its true meaning as being a singular person, confidence or, substance.
Who made up this counsel?
The counsel was made up of many religious leaders, all of differing beliefs, all of which claimed to be based on Scripture, and we all know how that goes, right? Denominations are brought about by hard hearts that will not conform to Scriptures, and to Christ Jesus' simple gospel. This council was one of the first attempts at ecumenicism after Christ's ascension. While this attempt at unity sounds nice on the surface, this is nothing more than veiled compromise, which is -as you guessed it - of the Devil. We have the Scriptures. We can read them, and our spirits bear witness with His Spirit that we are sons of God. There are things within Scripture that can only be discerned spiritually and by faith, for as 1 Cor. 2:14 clearly says, spirit bears witness to spirit. There are people who read, study, and enjoy it solely for its merits as a masterful work of literature, and that's fine, but their are also those who read it for the sole purpose of using it as a means of profit, and to gain a following after themselves. Children of God should read it to learn his will, so if we obey Jesus' commandments, then we are his sheep, but if some "sheep" want to redefine already established terms to make a following for themselves and/or to become "culturally relevant" instead of obedient, then they are actually goats and wolves in sheep's clothing i.e. false teachers.
Paul said this when he was instructing the churches in Corinth [1 Cor, 11:16, 1 Cor. 14:37,38], letting them know that there is no tradition of debate regarding sound doctrine in the church of God. He said that if they were indeed spiritual, then they would concede to, and know, that the apostles instructions were from Jesus and not mere men, and then the ecclesia, or called out ones, would obey it. He further instructed them that if anyone did continue to contend with and argue against sound doctrine, then they were to be esteemed as ignorant and patiently instructed in proper doctrine and some were even to be avoided, or shunned, until they repented. Again, if they didn't repent, then they were to be avoided and publicly labeled as heretics and apostates, there were never to be physically harmed.
There is a time for war and a time for peace, the Bible tells us, and even pagan emperors can grow weary of war. Not because they don't like killing people, but because they know that they'll eventually run out of men and other resources if they don't stop. But how do psychopathic pagans make peace with those who refuse to bow down to them? Constantine needed to gain control of the Christian faith, because as any good tyrant knows, total power must be achieved through political kingship and religious means. So, what he actually did, and very cleverly I might add, was gain control of the Christians by using the motto – “If you can't beat them [from the outside], then join them [and destroy them from the inside]! Like his predecessors before him, his persecution tactics were only making the Church grow, so by making the persecution weary Christian leaders an offer they couldn't refuse, that of no more persecution, he conquered opposition by “making nice”, and the rest is history. Yes, Constantine did what his forerunners couldn't do, stem the rising tide of Christianity. Incidentally, he - Constantine, as emperor, apparently he is th e one who helped force the definition of hypostasis to mean a plural- essence of being, or persons, in stead of its true meaning as being a singular person, confidence or, substance.
Who made up this counsel?
The counsel was made up of many religious leaders, all of differing beliefs, all of which claimed to be based on Scripture, and we all know how that goes, right? Denominations are brought about by hard hearts that will not conform to Scriptures, and to Christ Jesus' simple gospel. This council was one of the first attempts at ecumenicism after Christ's ascension. While this attempt at unity sounds nice on the surface, this is nothing more than veiled compromise, which is -as you guessed it - of the Devil. We have the Scriptures. We can read them, and our spirits bear witness with His Spirit that we are sons of God. There are things within Scripture that can only be discerned spiritually and by faith, for as 1 Cor. 2:14 clearly says, spirit bears witness to spirit. There are people who read, study, and enjoy it solely for its merits as a masterful work of literature, and that's fine, but their are also those who read it for the sole purpose of using it as a means of profit, and to gain a following after themselves. Children of God should read it to learn his will, so if we obey Jesus' commandments, then we are his sheep, but if some "sheep" want to redefine already established terms to make a following for themselves and/or to become "culturally relevant" instead of obedient, then they are actually goats and wolves in sheep's clothing i.e. false teachers.
Paul said this when he was instructing the churches in Corinth [1 Cor, 11:16, 1 Cor. 14:37,38], letting them know that there is no tradition of debate regarding sound doctrine in the church of God. He said that if they were indeed spiritual, then they would concede to, and know, that the apostles instructions were from Jesus and not mere men, and then the ecclesia, or called out ones, would obey it. He further instructed them that if anyone did continue to contend with and argue against sound doctrine, then they were to be esteemed as ignorant and patiently instructed in proper doctrine and some were even to be avoided, or shunned, until they repented. Again, if they didn't repent, then they were to be avoided and publicly labeled as heretics and apostates, there were never to be physically harmed.
What Is The “Origen” Of Your Favorite “Christian” Symbol?
There is overwhelming visual evidence, if one is willing to accept it, that paganism is the author of Trinitairan thought and practice. Most of the “Christian”symbols adorning Bibles, churches, cars, banners, etc. are pagan in origin, including the triquetra. The triquetra in particular seems to be mostly linked to the Druids, Celts, and the Norse. Are these people known for their godliness prior to Christian missionaries coming to preach the gospel? No. However, they are known for their "Triune gods" [Odin, Thor, and Frey]though. Besides, what does Scripture say about making images for our selves to represent God? He tells us very specifically not to make any graven images in the form of his creation to represent him. The fish is a sea creature that represented Dagon, and even crosses were stellar symbols of the sun and represented pagan deities, and they still do. By adopting these symbols of creation, this is a direct violation of the first three commandments of God and especially the infraction of the second commandment regarding graven images, as they are forbidden. Jesus was indeed crucified on a pagan cross, but that doesn't mean we should wear one as a means of being identified as a Christian. A Christian is not told in Scripture to be identified to other Christians by using symbols - only our love for our enemies, each other, as well as our love for and our obedience to God, these are to be the hallmarks of a Christian. Then there is the command that we are not to be of this world. God never originated the symbolic concept of idolatry anymore than he originated the trinity concept, which actually came from Nimrod's Babylon [Nimrod will be discussed later].
Throughout thousands of years, these pagan concepts have been slowly and carefully fostered and brought into the Church of Jesus, by wicked and deceived men. Origen of Alexandria is thought of as being a devout Christian by modern Trinitarians, and other Christian sects, like the Universal or Catholic Church. However, Origen, was not surprisingly inconsistent in the way he defined the roles of God the Father and the Son of God found in Scripture. He was more of a semi-Arian according to surviving documented Church history, rather than being an out right Trinitarian, because that belief was not in its final formulation until the late 4th and early 5th centuries. Like his forerunners, he too entertained pagan concepts, even though he himself may not have believed in them fully, which is never a good idea. That kind of thing only leaves room for others to question the truth of God's word and mix it with pagan philosophies. So thanks to Origen, and others like him, it was only a matter of time before those dangerous behaviors and false beliefs fomented the false belief of the Trinity we know today. Now that tri-headed blasphemy sticks like dog poo on your favorite shoe. And stick it has for hundreds and hundreds of years. And its lingering stench has sickened the nostrils of God and his genuine holy people. I am here to tell you again dear reader, that the Trinity concept is the basis for the coming deception of the Anti-Christ, or the apostate religion, or the falling away, which Paul speaks of in 2 Thes. 2:3. The Catholic church that birthed the Trinity also has the one man who claims to be Christs' vicar, which is Latin can mean Christs' "substitute", or Anti-Christ, as its leader. People speak of Satan's "un-holy trinity" consisting of the Anti-Christ, the beast, and the false prophet, but what many don't even consider is the evidence that the entire concept of a Triune god is a pagan and un-holy concept- which it is! When something appears to be light, but is really darkness, how great is that darkness! [Matt. 6:23]. The lesson? Don't entertain theology that is contrary to Scripture and panders to Greek philosophy; it should be nipped it in the bud immediately!
Only a few, or a remnant, will strive to come out of Babylon, and not yearn to go back to Egypt like the sinning Children of Israel did, or to look back at Sodom as Lot's wife did. Only a few will completely throw away all vain man-made oral traditions and superstitious, and old wives tales like Paul did concerning his teachings as a Pharisee in Judaism. He considered them to be as dung, which is a reference to idolatry by the way. Only a few will buy eye salve from Jesus to cure their spiritual blindness. For those who think they can keep pagan practices and mix them with Christianity, or pick and choose the truth from lies without having the truth be tainted, then I will give you a recipe for Kitty Poo Cookies [I have cats]. Please feel free to make them and eat them with those you love. But first, tell them the ingredients and explain that they can pick out the kitty poo, but still eat the cookie. Would your family want to eat them? I don't think so. That is why any pagan practice and false teachings mixed with truth must be treated the same way as kitty poo cookies, with complete and total disdain. My point? Any faith that has the Trinity as at its foundation is not Christian. And any "truth" those false teachers might teach, is tainted by the “poo poo” they mix in and must be discarded with the poo poo that tainted it. Any spiritual practice that was, or is used by pagan peoples, such as using symbols for their pagan gods, must be rejected and avoided, not Christianzied. Just because something like TM [Transcendental Meditation] works (and it does work), that doesn't mean it is of God, or that it is to be put in practice by a Christian.
Throughout thousands of years, these pagan concepts have been slowly and carefully fostered and brought into the Church of Jesus, by wicked and deceived men. Origen of Alexandria is thought of as being a devout Christian by modern Trinitarians, and other Christian sects, like the Universal or Catholic Church. However, Origen, was not surprisingly inconsistent in the way he defined the roles of God the Father and the Son of God found in Scripture. He was more of a semi-Arian according to surviving documented Church history, rather than being an out right Trinitarian, because that belief was not in its final formulation until the late 4th and early 5th centuries. Like his forerunners, he too entertained pagan concepts, even though he himself may not have believed in them fully, which is never a good idea. That kind of thing only leaves room for others to question the truth of God's word and mix it with pagan philosophies. So thanks to Origen, and others like him, it was only a matter of time before those dangerous behaviors and false beliefs fomented the false belief of the Trinity we know today. Now that tri-headed blasphemy sticks like dog poo on your favorite shoe. And stick it has for hundreds and hundreds of years. And its lingering stench has sickened the nostrils of God and his genuine holy people. I am here to tell you again dear reader, that the Trinity concept is the basis for the coming deception of the Anti-Christ, or the apostate religion, or the falling away, which Paul speaks of in 2 Thes. 2:3. The Catholic church that birthed the Trinity also has the one man who claims to be Christs' vicar, which is Latin can mean Christs' "substitute", or Anti-Christ, as its leader. People speak of Satan's "un-holy trinity" consisting of the Anti-Christ, the beast, and the false prophet, but what many don't even consider is the evidence that the entire concept of a Triune god is a pagan and un-holy concept- which it is! When something appears to be light, but is really darkness, how great is that darkness! [Matt. 6:23]. The lesson? Don't entertain theology that is contrary to Scripture and panders to Greek philosophy; it should be nipped it in the bud immediately!
Only a few, or a remnant, will strive to come out of Babylon, and not yearn to go back to Egypt like the sinning Children of Israel did, or to look back at Sodom as Lot's wife did. Only a few will completely throw away all vain man-made oral traditions and superstitious, and old wives tales like Paul did concerning his teachings as a Pharisee in Judaism. He considered them to be as dung, which is a reference to idolatry by the way. Only a few will buy eye salve from Jesus to cure their spiritual blindness. For those who think they can keep pagan practices and mix them with Christianity, or pick and choose the truth from lies without having the truth be tainted, then I will give you a recipe for Kitty Poo Cookies [I have cats]. Please feel free to make them and eat them with those you love. But first, tell them the ingredients and explain that they can pick out the kitty poo, but still eat the cookie. Would your family want to eat them? I don't think so. That is why any pagan practice and false teachings mixed with truth must be treated the same way as kitty poo cookies, with complete and total disdain. My point? Any faith that has the Trinity as at its foundation is not Christian. And any "truth" those false teachers might teach, is tainted by the “poo poo” they mix in and must be discarded with the poo poo that tainted it. Any spiritual practice that was, or is used by pagan peoples, such as using symbols for their pagan gods, must be rejected and avoided, not Christianzied. Just because something like TM [Transcendental Meditation] works (and it does work), that doesn't mean it is of God, or that it is to be put in practice by a Christian.
Trinitarians Biblical “Proof” that there is a Trinity
Permit me a little redundancy, but it is needed when learning something new, or in this case relearning a forgotten truth. Where do Trinitarians get their concept of a Triune God from; the Bible, or men who were influenced by Pagan philosophers and even paganism itself? From what I can ascertain in my studies, they derived the Trinity from pagans and those who revered pagan philosophers like Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. Philo, who was a Jewish philosopher, is a prime example of being a syncratist. In fact here is a little tidbit to chew on regarding the pagan Greek philosopher, Aristotle, and his view of the Trinity:
"In the Fourth Century B.C. Aristotle wrote: 'All things are three, and thrice is all: and let us use this number in the worship of the gods; for, as the Pythagoreans say, everything and all things are bounded by threes, for the end, the middle and the beginning have this number in everything, and these compose the number of the Trinity'" (Arthur Weigall,Paganism in Our Christianity, 1928, pp. 197-198).
Wow! Was Aristotle a Christian? No! In no way is this "thrice" business the same concept as the Shema of Deuteronomy 6:4. In what way are the numbers 1 and 3 synonymous? I can't think of one Scripture where God tells us to use a specific number to worship him, either. I read somewhere that it was Philo who tainted the concept of "logos" because of his love for pagan philosophers. That is another study I have to do. Supposedly, in an effort to bring obstinate pagans into the so-called Christian church, and all their money with them, paganism was Christianized during the first few centuries. However, it can be equally true to say that Christianity was paganized. Anyway, these false teachers who simply couldn't completely let go of the idolatrous concepts of their beloved idolatrous philosophers, found four verses in Scripture that contain the words “us”, and “our” in the text when God is speaking, and used them to make a case for a Triune God. Only four main verses are taken by Trinitarians against the entire Word of God that contains hundreds of Scriptures that put God in a singular existence, as in only ONE God, with no equal. Hmmm....should we go with "implied" or "actual" written information about the Great I Am? Anyway, here are the four O.T. 'proof' Scriptures, besides the New Testament verses in Matthew 28, and 1 John 5:7-8, which they also claim are Trinitarian.
Gen. 1:26 “And God said, 'Let Us make man in Our image, after Our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.'”
Gen 3:22 “And the LORD God said, 'Behold, the man has become as one of Us, to know good and evil: and now lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life and eat and live forever:'”
Gen 11:7 “Come, let Us go down, and there confuse their language, that they man not understand one another's speech
Isaiah 6:8 Also I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send, and who will go for Us?” Then I said, “Here am I, send me.”
Now what these people have done is called eisegesis not exegesis, and I can prove that by the verses surrounding the verses that they claim show God as a "Trinity." The surrounding verses speak of God in the singular tense, as in only ONE God. For example, verse 27 of Genesis 1 reads: “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him, male and female he created them.”
Another example for Gen 3:22 that illustrates God in the singular after an apparent plural is found in verse 24 which states: “So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the Garden of Eden Cherubim, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.”
Gen 3:22 “And the LORD God said, 'Behold, the man has become as one of Us, to know good and evil: and now lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life and eat and live forever:'”
Gen 11:7 “Come, let Us go down, and there confuse their language, that they man not understand one another's speech
Isaiah 6:8 Also I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send, and who will go for Us?” Then I said, “Here am I, send me.”
Now what these people have done is called eisegesis not exegesis, and I can prove that by the verses surrounding the verses that they claim show God as a "Trinity." The surrounding verses speak of God in the singular tense, as in only ONE God. For example, verse 27 of Genesis 1 reads: “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him, male and female he created them.”
Another example for Gen 3:22 that illustrates God in the singular after an apparent plural is found in verse 24 which states: “So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the Garden of Eden Cherubim, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.”
How about Genesis 11:7? The two verses surrounding verse 7 use the word LORD, or 'Yahweh' in Hebrew, not elohiym, as God, which is the plural form of elowahh. Why? To differentiate himself from other foreign so called, "gods". If He were in fact three separate co-equal, co-eternal beings as one God, then He would have said so in the Shema (in Hebrew it is actually Shama which means “to hear, listen to, obey”). If God was indeed Tri-une, then it would have been written like this: “Hear, O Israel: The LORD (Yahweh) our God (elohiym), is three separate co-equal, co-eternal persons, one LORD (Yahweh)", but it doesn't, does it? Show me in the above texts, in context, and with all honesty, how is the number three denoted when the words “us” and “our” are used. Why not four, or ten, or how about 100 persons? Why and where do they get the idea that there are only "3" persons involved with these Scriptures when only singular references are used for God in the context of surrounding verses? The silence is deafening isn't it? Trinitarians like John MacArthur, only see God as Triune through the power of implied suggestion, and the oral teachings of idolatrous men who taught him to ignore his conscience and common sense. Hmmm- this reminds me of that story - "The Emperor's New Clothes".
The Golden Calf - a.k.a Hathor
By far the most egregious sin Israel consistently committed against God was that of idolatry. It seems they were constantly, to the point of being annoying, guilty of breaking the 1st-4th commandments. The first commandment alone should put to rest the false doctrine of Yahweh being Triune, but apparently some people are thick headed, or what Jesus would call, blind and slow of heart. So if any people on the face of this earth can bare witness to what idolatry is and isn't; it is the people of Israel. I don't know of many Orthodox, or Karaite Jewish websites that teach or believe in the Trinity; according to them it is rank paganism, and rightly so. The Bible says that the Israelis were God's chosen people to bring the Gentiles (or the nations)His word, i.e. the law and the prophets. They are the original branches of our Christian faith. So if they, as the original branches, don't espouse the Trinity, then why do Christians, as grafted branches, embrace it? Sure, the Jews are blinded for a time regarding Jesus being their Messiah, but only until the time of the Gentiles is over. Even so, many Jews have come to the faith of Jesus as Messiah, but sadly, many have fallen for this cleaver Triune lie.
Amazingly, Trinitarins do acknowledge God's divine attributes of omnipresence, omnipotence, and omniscience, yet for some mind blowing reason, they say it is impossible for God to be only ONE God. They wrongly reason: How else could his own Son be on earth, while the Father is still reigning in Heaven at the same time without being two separate beings, or “persons”? But does the oneness of God not, in truth, display God's divine attribute of omnipresence? If God is not able to do this thing, then how is Jesus' Spirit (2 cor. 3:17) now able to inhabit all of the millions of souls of those who call him Savior and Lord, while he is bodily in heaven? I mean really, is anything too hard for His attribute of omnipotence either? I have heard a lame argument against God's omnipotence spoken in this way: "Can God make a rock he can't lift?" This is a silly and vain argument. What purpose would that serve? How would this stupidity give him glory and honor? The Rock that God sent, is the one unbelievers stumble over, and the one that falls on others and crushes evil. Now that is The Rock that brings him both glory and honor, and that Rock is himself - The Son Of God, the Lord Jesus Christ!
In an effort to thwart the Trinitairan teaching, I have heard the explanation for these verses, like Gen. 1:26, as being an example of what is called "the plural of majesty", since royalty often refer to themselves in third person, or in "plural" form. Another explanation is the Hebrew concept of the plural intensive as illustrated in Isaiah 53 when the word used in describing the death of the Messiah is actually plural, as in “deaths.” Well, we all know that Jesus only died once, so this word, though plural, is really denoting the very violent nature of his one death, or its magnitude, or quality (hold onto your "ah-ha!" for the moment). Still another viable explanation is that God may also be referring to His royal court, when speaking in the plural in Gen. 1:26. As the Scriptures state: God dwells between the Cherubim, and He does include His angels in His dealings from time to time, like when he was escorted by two angels, and while he met with Abram before he burned Sodom and Gomorrah off the map. God also included all the angels, both his and Satan's, in his dealings with King Ahab. So which view is correct? The second view seems to the most accurate and consistent with Scripture, it was understood this way by Hebrew scholars, and still is understood to be so.
Amazingly, Trinitarins do acknowledge God's divine attributes of omnipresence, omnipotence, and omniscience, yet for some mind blowing reason, they say it is impossible for God to be only ONE God. They wrongly reason: How else could his own Son be on earth, while the Father is still reigning in Heaven at the same time without being two separate beings, or “persons”? But does the oneness of God not, in truth, display God's divine attribute of omnipresence? If God is not able to do this thing, then how is Jesus' Spirit (2 cor. 3:17) now able to inhabit all of the millions of souls of those who call him Savior and Lord, while he is bodily in heaven? I mean really, is anything too hard for His attribute of omnipotence either? I have heard a lame argument against God's omnipotence spoken in this way: "Can God make a rock he can't lift?" This is a silly and vain argument. What purpose would that serve? How would this stupidity give him glory and honor? The Rock that God sent, is the one unbelievers stumble over, and the one that falls on others and crushes evil. Now that is The Rock that brings him both glory and honor, and that Rock is himself - The Son Of God, the Lord Jesus Christ!
In an effort to thwart the Trinitairan teaching, I have heard the explanation for these verses, like Gen. 1:26, as being an example of what is called "the plural of majesty", since royalty often refer to themselves in third person, or in "plural" form. Another explanation is the Hebrew concept of the plural intensive as illustrated in Isaiah 53 when the word used in describing the death of the Messiah is actually plural, as in “deaths.” Well, we all know that Jesus only died once, so this word, though plural, is really denoting the very violent nature of his one death, or its magnitude, or quality (hold onto your "ah-ha!" for the moment). Still another viable explanation is that God may also be referring to His royal court, when speaking in the plural in Gen. 1:26. As the Scriptures state: God dwells between the Cherubim, and He does include His angels in His dealings from time to time, like when he was escorted by two angels, and while he met with Abram before he burned Sodom and Gomorrah off the map. God also included all the angels, both his and Satan's, in his dealings with King Ahab. So which view is correct? The second view seems to the most accurate and consistent with Scripture, it was understood this way by Hebrew scholars, and still is understood to be so.
Trinitarian Analogies Leave Me Both Hungry and Thirsty!
When faced with the truth that there is literally only one God, Trinitarians will balk and argue that they do believe in one God. No - no they don't- not really. Their definition of God is the give away to the theological double talk they bought into, and accepted against the witness of their faculties of reason and conscience. This is because many don't think beyond it, they just accept this vain oral dogma without question. If anyone does question it, then they are bullied by those who defend it, by those who say it is an implied mystery that must be accepted by faith, or they give lame analogies that don't really fit their "Trinity definition". I know this, because I used to do the same things. Trinitarians have all heard these analogies of quality, and have used them without even thinking about their faulty human reasoning. In all honesty, for a "Christian" to say that the Trinity isn't polytheism is like a Catholic saying that they don't worship Mary, they venerate her!
Be honest! Are the three components of an egg: the shell, the yolk, and the white “co-equal” to one another? No. The shell of an egg is not the same as the white, or the yolk. Each one is different in the quality of its nature and also serves a different, unequal role. Is the example of a crumb pie any better? No. Wait - -I don't know about you, but this is making me hungry! The only analogy that seems the closest to fit God's nature is that of water. No matter what form, or state it takes, be it ice, liquid water, or steam, water is still water. Even so, in what way is the state of ice equal to the state of steam? One is a cold solid, while the other is a hot vapor. They have different physical properties, so they are not the same, or equal in "quality." Only in that they are water are they equal. So the concept of a “co-equal”, “co-eternal” three persons God is very flawed at the most, or not defined very well at the least, but I say it is both. God's true divine nature involves the "Omni's" and none of these "explanations" address this biblical concept.
Let's also take into consideration 1 Cor. 15:20-28, which states that Jesus will rule and reign until the last enemy, death, is put under his feet, like Ps. 110 says. This is when Jesus will hand over all rule to God, so he [God]can be all in all. How is this to be reconciled within the current definition of the Trinity? How does this teaching jibe with Scriptures like Isa. 9:6 that say Jesus' kingdom will never end? Why is there only ONE throne spoken of in Scripture in regards to God's throne, not two or even three? Where is the Holy Spirit in all this? Doesn't he have a “co-equal” say, or any stake in this process? Why would Jesus give away his "co-equal" status after death is defeated, why don't all three persons of the Godhead rule equally in the end? To be honest, we must look at this in the perspective of "offices" not persons, or separate individuals. Even so, Trinitarians stubbornly refuse to see the light of day.
Behold, the insanity of Trinitarian double talk --In the words of of the late Bishop of Durham: "Each has His nature, the entire Divine nature, which is quality, not quantity: Each is truly God. Each is necessarily and eternally one in Being with The Others: there are not three Gods. Each is not the Others; There are three Persons." Come on people, pick a lane! For the love of God! By logical and reasonable sanity, "quantity" means an amount, or number. What is "three," a quality, or a number? IT'S A NUMBER! When you use a plural in grammar, that means more than one, not one. This is basic common sense. God gave us these faculties, and I for one intend to use them. When you start hearing this mindless double talk, warning bells should go off in your head, which should be used to guard your heart, the seat of your conscience, or else it will get seared by Gnostic gobbledygook. "Quality" can refer to nature, and guess what? God's nature is defined by the "Omni's!" The "Omni's" are what make him THE ALMIGHTY! The Trinitarians show you a half truth, which is a lie, and really, they are no better than Jehovah Wintesses, Mormons, and Christadelphians, all of whom they hypocritically denounce. Oh the irony, no?
The Scriptural facts are that God holds many offices, or titles. One office or title he holds can supersede another, even while he still maintains his Divine "omni" nature. Sports fans will concede to this concept in relation to the business end of their favorite sport. For example: control freak owner, Jerry Jones, occupies the office of General Manager. I ask you, could he hold other management positions while being the same person? Yes. In this case, it would be wise for him to divvy up these responsibilities, as he cannot do all these jobs well. Even so, the owner can still do both of these jobs, only his position of "owner" still supersedes that of G.M., meaning he can't legally hire a person to be owner. God is our creator, he owns everything, and doesn't have our limitations. So any and all offices he holds with their differing levels of authority, he is well able to execute them without any difficulties. And any offices he holds, such as the Son of God, are subordinate to that of the Father. Are you getting my drift?
Now then, if the pastors and leaders of the body of Christ choose to follow Constantine's lead in defining the Greek word “hypostasis” as “persons” [plural] instead of the well established biblical definitions of: “confidence”, “substance”, or “person”[singular], then that is their neopagan philosophical error, which leads to polytheism. And they will be responsible for this egregious error. All the Scriptures that use this word “hypostasis” don't refer to, or even hint at, more than one thing, especially in Hebrews 1:3 - where the reference is singular, not plural. Most of the Scriptures that use this word are in Hebrews. This book is addressed to the Hebrew people who became Christians. They didn't believe in more than one “person” as being God, they never did – so this concept doesn't fit the context of the book, much less the entire Bible. At least the rebelling Israelites and surrounding Gentile nations of the Old Testament were more honest in their paganism. They outright rejected Yahweh and worshiped the Queen of Heaven and Baal, unlike Aaron the priest who tried to equate Yahweh with the Egyptian false gods Hathor (calf) and Ra (the sun disk) in Exodus 32:5, and the hypocritical priests in Ezekiel 8 who worshiped pagan gods behind closed doors in the temple . This seems to be a pattern with the "priests" and "pastors" doesn't it? [By the way, I just love that little Moses and Aaron cartoon as seen above!]
So what about people who have died believing in the Trinity , are they in outer darkness awaiting their fate – the lake of fire? Dear one, I don't know. I wan't to say "no," but to be honest, it doesn't look good. I truly, truly hope not. All I know is that God is merciful and he knows the thoughts and intents of our hearts and he understands our weaknesses, and I rejoice in his mercy! He was merciful to Paul who, out of ignorance, murdered innocent people for their faith in Jesus, but Jesus set him “straight” in more ways than one. I know ignorance is not a good excuse, and not one we should rely on, because when Paul was confronted with the truth he accepted it. So that is the model we should follow. It is my hope that God knows who would have rejected the Trinity, if they were given the truth about it. Besides, those who trust in Jesus as being God to save them from their sins, will be saved. But don't rely on that when presented with the truth, you better consider well, and choose the truth, rather than a false Jesus.
So, for us who are still in the land of the living, I urge you to conform to the Truth when it is revealed to you, and He will set you free from the bonds of lies. Persistent intentional ignorance is stubborn denial, and disobedience. I have come to know who are of the truth based upon how they react to it. This observation came to me via Scripture. When God's truth is spoken, those who love it are cut to the heart, but instead of being offended to the point of being violently and murderously angry, they are deeply grieved and desire to repent and be saved - as godly sorrow leads to repentance. Those who claim to love the truth, but react to it in a violent and angry manner, so much so, that they desire to harm, or even murder the one who brings them the truth, these are liars and hypocrites, their consciences have been seared.
To be fair, and to be honest, when I was lost in the lie of the Trinity, I never made the connection that there just might be another possibility, that being, there is no Biblical foundation for the Trinity doctrine at all. It never occurred to me that this doctrine was and is a deliberate Satanic inversion of God's true nature sold under the guise of being sound doctrine! Why? Because Bible teachers insist that God is "Triune" and that Satan copies his trinity. This is false. Only when I was completely broken by the loss of my mother to breast cancer, was I really ready to listen to and hear the truth. Unfortunately, for many of us, we need to have our own "Damascus Road" experience, before we are finally ready to receive the truth and have the scales fall from our blind eyes.
Be honest! Are the three components of an egg: the shell, the yolk, and the white “co-equal” to one another? No. The shell of an egg is not the same as the white, or the yolk. Each one is different in the quality of its nature and also serves a different, unequal role. Is the example of a crumb pie any better? No. Wait - -I don't know about you, but this is making me hungry! The only analogy that seems the closest to fit God's nature is that of water. No matter what form, or state it takes, be it ice, liquid water, or steam, water is still water. Even so, in what way is the state of ice equal to the state of steam? One is a cold solid, while the other is a hot vapor. They have different physical properties, so they are not the same, or equal in "quality." Only in that they are water are they equal. So the concept of a “co-equal”, “co-eternal” three persons God is very flawed at the most, or not defined very well at the least, but I say it is both. God's true divine nature involves the "Omni's" and none of these "explanations" address this biblical concept.
Let's also take into consideration 1 Cor. 15:20-28, which states that Jesus will rule and reign until the last enemy, death, is put under his feet, like Ps. 110 says. This is when Jesus will hand over all rule to God, so he [God]can be all in all. How is this to be reconciled within the current definition of the Trinity? How does this teaching jibe with Scriptures like Isa. 9:6 that say Jesus' kingdom will never end? Why is there only ONE throne spoken of in Scripture in regards to God's throne, not two or even three? Where is the Holy Spirit in all this? Doesn't he have a “co-equal” say, or any stake in this process? Why would Jesus give away his "co-equal" status after death is defeated, why don't all three persons of the Godhead rule equally in the end? To be honest, we must look at this in the perspective of "offices" not persons, or separate individuals. Even so, Trinitarians stubbornly refuse to see the light of day.
Behold, the insanity of Trinitarian double talk --In the words of of the late Bishop of Durham: "Each has His nature, the entire Divine nature, which is quality, not quantity: Each is truly God. Each is necessarily and eternally one in Being with The Others: there are not three Gods. Each is not the Others; There are three Persons." Come on people, pick a lane! For the love of God! By logical and reasonable sanity, "quantity" means an amount, or number. What is "three," a quality, or a number? IT'S A NUMBER! When you use a plural in grammar, that means more than one, not one. This is basic common sense. God gave us these faculties, and I for one intend to use them. When you start hearing this mindless double talk, warning bells should go off in your head, which should be used to guard your heart, the seat of your conscience, or else it will get seared by Gnostic gobbledygook. "Quality" can refer to nature, and guess what? God's nature is defined by the "Omni's!" The "Omni's" are what make him THE ALMIGHTY! The Trinitarians show you a half truth, which is a lie, and really, they are no better than Jehovah Wintesses, Mormons, and Christadelphians, all of whom they hypocritically denounce. Oh the irony, no?
The Scriptural facts are that God holds many offices, or titles. One office or title he holds can supersede another, even while he still maintains his Divine "omni" nature. Sports fans will concede to this concept in relation to the business end of their favorite sport. For example: control freak owner, Jerry Jones, occupies the office of General Manager. I ask you, could he hold other management positions while being the same person? Yes. In this case, it would be wise for him to divvy up these responsibilities, as he cannot do all these jobs well. Even so, the owner can still do both of these jobs, only his position of "owner" still supersedes that of G.M., meaning he can't legally hire a person to be owner. God is our creator, he owns everything, and doesn't have our limitations. So any and all offices he holds with their differing levels of authority, he is well able to execute them without any difficulties. And any offices he holds, such as the Son of God, are subordinate to that of the Father. Are you getting my drift?
Now then, if the pastors and leaders of the body of Christ choose to follow Constantine's lead in defining the Greek word “hypostasis” as “persons” [plural] instead of the well established biblical definitions of: “confidence”, “substance”, or “person”[singular], then that is their neopagan philosophical error, which leads to polytheism. And they will be responsible for this egregious error. All the Scriptures that use this word “hypostasis” don't refer to, or even hint at, more than one thing, especially in Hebrews 1:3 - where the reference is singular, not plural. Most of the Scriptures that use this word are in Hebrews. This book is addressed to the Hebrew people who became Christians. They didn't believe in more than one “person” as being God, they never did – so this concept doesn't fit the context of the book, much less the entire Bible. At least the rebelling Israelites and surrounding Gentile nations of the Old Testament were more honest in their paganism. They outright rejected Yahweh and worshiped the Queen of Heaven and Baal, unlike Aaron the priest who tried to equate Yahweh with the Egyptian false gods Hathor (calf) and Ra (the sun disk) in Exodus 32:5, and the hypocritical priests in Ezekiel 8 who worshiped pagan gods behind closed doors in the temple . This seems to be a pattern with the "priests" and "pastors" doesn't it? [By the way, I just love that little Moses and Aaron cartoon as seen above!]
So what about people who have died believing in the Trinity , are they in outer darkness awaiting their fate – the lake of fire? Dear one, I don't know. I wan't to say "no," but to be honest, it doesn't look good. I truly, truly hope not. All I know is that God is merciful and he knows the thoughts and intents of our hearts and he understands our weaknesses, and I rejoice in his mercy! He was merciful to Paul who, out of ignorance, murdered innocent people for their faith in Jesus, but Jesus set him “straight” in more ways than one. I know ignorance is not a good excuse, and not one we should rely on, because when Paul was confronted with the truth he accepted it. So that is the model we should follow. It is my hope that God knows who would have rejected the Trinity, if they were given the truth about it. Besides, those who trust in Jesus as being God to save them from their sins, will be saved. But don't rely on that when presented with the truth, you better consider well, and choose the truth, rather than a false Jesus.
So, for us who are still in the land of the living, I urge you to conform to the Truth when it is revealed to you, and He will set you free from the bonds of lies. Persistent intentional ignorance is stubborn denial, and disobedience. I have come to know who are of the truth based upon how they react to it. This observation came to me via Scripture. When God's truth is spoken, those who love it are cut to the heart, but instead of being offended to the point of being violently and murderously angry, they are deeply grieved and desire to repent and be saved - as godly sorrow leads to repentance. Those who claim to love the truth, but react to it in a violent and angry manner, so much so, that they desire to harm, or even murder the one who brings them the truth, these are liars and hypocrites, their consciences have been seared.
To be fair, and to be honest, when I was lost in the lie of the Trinity, I never made the connection that there just might be another possibility, that being, there is no Biblical foundation for the Trinity doctrine at all. It never occurred to me that this doctrine was and is a deliberate Satanic inversion of God's true nature sold under the guise of being sound doctrine! Why? Because Bible teachers insist that God is "Triune" and that Satan copies his trinity. This is false. Only when I was completely broken by the loss of my mother to breast cancer, was I really ready to listen to and hear the truth. Unfortunately, for many of us, we need to have our own "Damascus Road" experience, before we are finally ready to receive the truth and have the scales fall from our blind eyes.
Trinities Prevail In Paganism
All major false religions have a trinity of some sort. Usually a main god being the 'father”with two supporting gods. One usually being a “son” of the main god and his female consort goddess, representing the “spirit” of widsom. This all began in Babylon with Nimrod. When you study Nimrod it can get a little confusing. Either Semiramis is his wife and/or mother or she was his wife only and mother to a bastard son, she named Tammuz. What seems most accurate is that Nimrod's wife Semiramis, was found to be pregnant with an illegitimate child, so she had Nimrod killed before he killed her[nice family huh?]. Thus she would be sole ruler, and claimed that her child was Nimrod reincarnated and she named him Tammuz. And together they reigned as mother and son over what remained of the Babylonian empire after God's Babel judgement. Either way, this is where the “Trinity” concept was first conceived. Nimrod is spoken of in Gen 10 and 11. He may not have been an ordinary man, he may have been a Nephilim, and "Nimrod" may not have been his actual name, but an epithet God gave him, because "Nimrod" means "rebel". His real name could have been Gilgamesh, or any other Sumerian name. Semiramis is somewhat of an enigma too, she is not mentioned in Scripture outright, nevertheless, she may be referred to as "Ashtoreth" but Tammuz is definitely mentioned by name, in Ezekiel 8 -- very interesting.
The Nephilim [meaning fallen, or earth born] made themselves “gods”, or objects of worship. According to Scripture, fallen angels mated with human women before the flood and even after ward. And their kingdom – Babylon, is the mother of all harlots – or mother of idolatry. So, the argument is that Nimrod may have had some Nephilim blood in him. I see no way of proving that. Nimrod is also said to have been a mighty hunter before God. That doesn't sound ominous until you research this phrase, and what is really being said is that Nimrod was a hunter of man's souls, to turn them against God. When God and his angelic escort broke up the people of the plains plot, by confusing their speech, rather than wiping their memories clean, these "Nimrods" took their brand of paganism that they learned at the step pyramid of Nimrod with them. Over the centuries the peoples of the world renamed and added to the pantheon of their gods, which were the men of old, or the men of renown, but the main three gods seemed to stay intact -the sun god, and moon goddess, and their son. That is why we see step pyramids all around the world in other pagan cultures, and why most pagan cultures have a Triune god - it all came form Babylon. God's judgment against them [different languages] has been quite an effective barrier until recently. Satan has been hard at work trying to reverse it, and soon, once more, he will have all nations under one language, that of symbols. Even now, we humans are being conditioned to use symbols. Just look at your gadgets, no more words, just symbols. And then, the peoples of all nations will be worshiping him once more, as a Triune god at a man made mountain, or at the top of an unfinished step pyramid temple.
The Nephilim [meaning fallen, or earth born] made themselves “gods”, or objects of worship. According to Scripture, fallen angels mated with human women before the flood and even after ward. And their kingdom – Babylon, is the mother of all harlots – or mother of idolatry. So, the argument is that Nimrod may have had some Nephilim blood in him. I see no way of proving that. Nimrod is also said to have been a mighty hunter before God. That doesn't sound ominous until you research this phrase, and what is really being said is that Nimrod was a hunter of man's souls, to turn them against God. When God and his angelic escort broke up the people of the plains plot, by confusing their speech, rather than wiping their memories clean, these "Nimrods" took their brand of paganism that they learned at the step pyramid of Nimrod with them. Over the centuries the peoples of the world renamed and added to the pantheon of their gods, which were the men of old, or the men of renown, but the main three gods seemed to stay intact -the sun god, and moon goddess, and their son. That is why we see step pyramids all around the world in other pagan cultures, and why most pagan cultures have a Triune god - it all came form Babylon. God's judgment against them [different languages] has been quite an effective barrier until recently. Satan has been hard at work trying to reverse it, and soon, once more, he will have all nations under one language, that of symbols. Even now, we humans are being conditioned to use symbols. Just look at your gadgets, no more words, just symbols. And then, the peoples of all nations will be worshiping him once more, as a Triune god at a man made mountain, or at the top of an unfinished step pyramid temple.
The Roots of Idolatry Run Very Deep
So this is the deep root of Idolatry – “You will not surely die. For God knows that in the day you eat of it your eyes will be opened , and you will be like God, knowing good and evil”. Paganism, or idolatry teaches that humans can grasp at achieving godhood, by disobediently eating forbidden fruit, or even through the forbidden knowledge of magical texts, or even by so called mystical Scriptural revelation! You can see the evidenced of that in "The Bible Code" frenzy. This lie is the exact inversion of what God did. Our one and only God became a humble man - Jesus. Not by magical means, or via secret forbidden knowledge, but by God's will and great power, or his omnipotence. Do you see it yet? Do you see the inversion, the reversal? Let that sink in: Our one and only God became a mortal man while still being God, but in a very limited sense. For a time, God had to be lower than his own angels and take on mortal flesh, mind, will, and emotions so he could suffer death (Rev. 1:18). Satan deceived Eve into thinking that she (a human) could become like God. This is an evil inversion, and as it turned out, he was lying. Nothing good ever comes from disobedience, and the end never justifies the means, as far as God is concerned.
Hebrew mysticism, or Kaballah (also spelled Cabala), was formulated while the Jews were in exile in Babylon for– you guessed it -idolatry. Believe it or not, while in Babylon, they came up with their own Triune godhead in Chokmah (absolute male), Binah (absolute female) and Kether(the androgyne). The Greeks have a similar triad in Hermes, Aphrodite, and Hermaphroditus. I have yet to figure out how "Binah" and“Shekinah” are related in Cabala. Binah seems to be an "intangible" understanding, while "Shekinah" appears to be a tangible "presence" of wisdom. Christians be ware, the tangible "presence" of wisdom is perpetrated by Satan, not God. By the way, when you read this stuff [Cabala] dear reader, it is very important that you pray before you start wading through their doo doo, and pray after you're done too. Should you decide to investigate these things on your own, the armor of God is indispensable. Or, there are many websites that have done the poo poo wading for you, that are grounded in the word of God, so it is has been pre-filtered. One such site that I go to often is www.seekgod.ca. For example, one of Kaballah's false teachings involves the word Shekinah. Surely this word sounds familiar to Charismatics the world over. The word 'shekinah' in charismatic circles is supposedly used to describe the visible smoky presence, or the abiding presence of God's glory, even His wisdom. Yet Scripture doesn't use the word 'shekinah' as a "thing," or noun, only as a verb Shakan (Shekan Aramaic)- to dwell, or to abide. "Kabowd" rather, is the Hebrew noun used for God's weighty presence and glory. I will address the false "Hebrew Roots Movement" later. However, Scripture uses these words (nouns) instead of shekinah:
“kabowd”[kah – vowd] masc. noun, to describe God's holy weighty presence, or glory
“chokmah”[hoke-ma] fem. noun, to describe God's wisdom [actually named in the Cabala
Trinity]
“ruwach” [roo'-ack] fem. noun, is used in Scripture to define God's Holy Spirit.
Hebrew mysticism, or Kaballah (also spelled Cabala), was formulated while the Jews were in exile in Babylon for– you guessed it -idolatry. Believe it or not, while in Babylon, they came up with their own Triune godhead in Chokmah (absolute male), Binah (absolute female) and Kether(the androgyne). The Greeks have a similar triad in Hermes, Aphrodite, and Hermaphroditus. I have yet to figure out how "Binah" and“Shekinah” are related in Cabala. Binah seems to be an "intangible" understanding, while "Shekinah" appears to be a tangible "presence" of wisdom. Christians be ware, the tangible "presence" of wisdom is perpetrated by Satan, not God. By the way, when you read this stuff [Cabala] dear reader, it is very important that you pray before you start wading through their doo doo, and pray after you're done too. Should you decide to investigate these things on your own, the armor of God is indispensable. Or, there are many websites that have done the poo poo wading for you, that are grounded in the word of God, so it is has been pre-filtered. One such site that I go to often is www.seekgod.ca. For example, one of Kaballah's false teachings involves the word Shekinah. Surely this word sounds familiar to Charismatics the world over. The word 'shekinah' in charismatic circles is supposedly used to describe the visible smoky presence, or the abiding presence of God's glory, even His wisdom. Yet Scripture doesn't use the word 'shekinah' as a "thing," or noun, only as a verb Shakan (Shekan Aramaic)- to dwell, or to abide. "Kabowd" rather, is the Hebrew noun used for God's weighty presence and glory. I will address the false "Hebrew Roots Movement" later. However, Scripture uses these words (nouns) instead of shekinah:
“kabowd”[kah – vowd] masc. noun, to describe God's holy weighty presence, or glory
“chokmah”[hoke-ma] fem. noun, to describe God's wisdom [actually named in the Cabala
Trinity]
“ruwach” [roo'-ack] fem. noun, is used in Scripture to define God's Holy Spirit.
None of these words even come close to “Shekinah”. Furthermore, ruwach (a feminine noun), means breath, spirit, and wind in Hebrew and like all verbs, it is a noun as well. The only noun form that shakan takes that I can find, is in Joel 3:17. Ruwach can also describe scents, as in God enjoying the “reyach” (masculine noun derived from the verb ruwach) of holy sacrifices offered to God. It is true that God's wisdom is personified as a female in Scripture, but that doesn't mean God, or any part of him, is a female. Since we know from Scripture that God doesn't have or need a wife, or consort in order to have progeny, and does not participate in the physical act of sex, the idea of God having a literal wife, or consort is not Biblical, it is pagan and reminds one of Genesis 6 where the sons of God took human wives.
In Conclusion
According to the information presented here, one of the biggest, and most subtle and diabolically crafted lies to infect the Church, as well as God's creation, is the concept of a "triune" god. The "Trinity" is indeed the Satanic inversion of God's true divine nature, and its source is to be found in Satan the "father of lies"and in Mystery Babylon " the mother of all harlots". Scripture says that God is one and he became a humble servant, a man, the Lord Jesus Christ, for the sole purpose of redeeming his creation from sin, to save us from the wrath of God. "How" he did it is his business not ours. The "why" should be sufficient. His sacrifice of death gave us forgiveness of sin and eternal life, and best of all, peace with God. Satan is adept at hiding the darkness of his false teachings under a guise of light. He teaches men that once they obtain, or grasp at "secret knowledge", or "mystical knowledge," then they can become little gods. False teachers always place their pagan inspired point of view into the gospel. The pagan philosophies they learned through the ages were first sewn in the garden of Eden, then cultivated in Nimrod's Babylon, which spread its evil seeds all over the world, even onto pagan Greece, and then Rome. When it reached Rome, it was stealthily graphed into Christianity to poison millions upon millions of unsuspecting souls, by Constantine and many others, who dare call themselves "Christians."
This evil fruit, or teaching, will come to full and final fruition in the last great apostasy. This apostasy will be the one world religion, and the New World Order of Satan and it will involve the Dragon/Satan, the Anti-Christ/The Beast and the False Prophet as being worshiped as god. I encourage you, dear reader, to do your own research on this fascinating subject. I hope that you will find, without a shadow of doubt, that the concept of a “Triune"god is a pagan one, and a complete inversion of the one true God of Scripture. Is there any wonder why there are so many deceived and lukewarm Christians in these last days? They don't even know who their God is, that he is really absolutely, completely, and truly only ONE God!
Those that reject the overwhelming evidence when confronted with it, they are those that love the lie, and the doctrines of men, and demons far more than the truth, their conscience is calloused and crusty. Yes, this will indeed get many readers angry, but I don't wish to make anyone angry for the sake of ticking people off. I don't get a “kick" out of it, but if you get angry, then there is a reason for it. When truth is spoken it creates a violent reaction in those who hate it, so if you are violently angry - then I can say that truth has done its work and you have been exposed as a murderous hypocrite. But for those who long for the truth, when exposed to it, they are indeed cut to the heart, but they are repentant. Lovers of God's truth do not gnash their teeth in anger, but are instead grieved to find themselves in darkness, or the fake light of a lie, and long to get out of it, and into the true light of salvation. I pray you will be willing to let go of, and repent of, all the lies and half truths you were told and believed regarding The Trinity. I pray Jesus will reveal his absolute truth to you, and I pray you will have the humility, and the guts to accept it. But take heed dear one, if you reject the truth, there will be no other recourse for you other than godly discipline in what ever form Jesus chooses. But, if you choose to remain in apathy, then there is no hope for you at all, and you will eventually be spewed out of Jesus' mouth, and Jesus is not a dog who returns to his vomit.
The bulk of Scripture gives the direct teaching that God is only one, because He speaks of Himself in mostly first person pronouns, sprinkled with third person references. Third person is understood to be one person speaking about himself, not three separate persons. The many arguments, similes, and metaphors, and even a few wrested Scriptures that Trinitarians employ in an effort to explain away the contradictions in their belief, can even leave them confused and befuddled. And we all know who is the author of confusion. As a Christian, I look to the Holy Scriptures, the Bible, as my truth manual, its Spiritually inspired pages are spiritually discerned with the help of intelligent exegesis and God's Spirit. It is an amazing book, sixty-six chapters, many different Holy Spirit inspired writers, written over thousands of years, yet it comes together in miraculous continuity. It is not riddled with actual contradictions either, but is does contain paradoxes. The Bible is the basis of my arguments, it is after all the word of God and gives us the Revelation that Jesus, the Son of God, houses the Father, whose Spirit is Holy, through titles of office and his omni-powers. He is the one true God and the foundation, author, and finisher of our faith, and it should be the first and last word on what we believe. That book has the wondrous ability to interpret itself, if we will be humbly patient and faithful in our exegesis, and if we willfully yield our self to its mind renewing capabilities, then we will grow to full stature, and we will be given the spirit of wisdom and of revelation in the knowledge of Him, our one true God, the Lord Jesus Christ! Amen and Amen!
This evil fruit, or teaching, will come to full and final fruition in the last great apostasy. This apostasy will be the one world religion, and the New World Order of Satan and it will involve the Dragon/Satan, the Anti-Christ/The Beast and the False Prophet as being worshiped as god. I encourage you, dear reader, to do your own research on this fascinating subject. I hope that you will find, without a shadow of doubt, that the concept of a “Triune"god is a pagan one, and a complete inversion of the one true God of Scripture. Is there any wonder why there are so many deceived and lukewarm Christians in these last days? They don't even know who their God is, that he is really absolutely, completely, and truly only ONE God!
Those that reject the overwhelming evidence when confronted with it, they are those that love the lie, and the doctrines of men, and demons far more than the truth, their conscience is calloused and crusty. Yes, this will indeed get many readers angry, but I don't wish to make anyone angry for the sake of ticking people off. I don't get a “kick" out of it, but if you get angry, then there is a reason for it. When truth is spoken it creates a violent reaction in those who hate it, so if you are violently angry - then I can say that truth has done its work and you have been exposed as a murderous hypocrite. But for those who long for the truth, when exposed to it, they are indeed cut to the heart, but they are repentant. Lovers of God's truth do not gnash their teeth in anger, but are instead grieved to find themselves in darkness, or the fake light of a lie, and long to get out of it, and into the true light of salvation. I pray you will be willing to let go of, and repent of, all the lies and half truths you were told and believed regarding The Trinity. I pray Jesus will reveal his absolute truth to you, and I pray you will have the humility, and the guts to accept it. But take heed dear one, if you reject the truth, there will be no other recourse for you other than godly discipline in what ever form Jesus chooses. But, if you choose to remain in apathy, then there is no hope for you at all, and you will eventually be spewed out of Jesus' mouth, and Jesus is not a dog who returns to his vomit.
The bulk of Scripture gives the direct teaching that God is only one, because He speaks of Himself in mostly first person pronouns, sprinkled with third person references. Third person is understood to be one person speaking about himself, not three separate persons. The many arguments, similes, and metaphors, and even a few wrested Scriptures that Trinitarians employ in an effort to explain away the contradictions in their belief, can even leave them confused and befuddled. And we all know who is the author of confusion. As a Christian, I look to the Holy Scriptures, the Bible, as my truth manual, its Spiritually inspired pages are spiritually discerned with the help of intelligent exegesis and God's Spirit. It is an amazing book, sixty-six chapters, many different Holy Spirit inspired writers, written over thousands of years, yet it comes together in miraculous continuity. It is not riddled with actual contradictions either, but is does contain paradoxes. The Bible is the basis of my arguments, it is after all the word of God and gives us the Revelation that Jesus, the Son of God, houses the Father, whose Spirit is Holy, through titles of office and his omni-powers. He is the one true God and the foundation, author, and finisher of our faith, and it should be the first and last word on what we believe. That book has the wondrous ability to interpret itself, if we will be humbly patient and faithful in our exegesis, and if we willfully yield our self to its mind renewing capabilities, then we will grow to full stature, and we will be given the spirit of wisdom and of revelation in the knowledge of Him, our one true God, the Lord Jesus Christ! Amen and Amen!