Mainstream Religion and the Trinity Myth

[iris89]

What Are The Differences Between Mainstream Religions and Monotheistic Bible is the Standard Religions?

There has been much contention with respect just what are the REAL differences between mainstream religions and monotheistic Bible is the standard religions. So let's clear the air so to speak and cut right to the chase or basics with respect this question. First, although let's look at the guiding principle for all monotheistic Bible is the standard Christian religions, 2 Timothy 2:15, "Give diligence to present thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, handling aright the word of truth." (American Standard Version; ASV).

Now let's consider the real and NOT the hyped differences between monotheistic Bible is the standard religions such as the Christedelphians, the Jehovah Witnesses, the IBS, the Church of Bishop Arius (Norge), the Old Brethren, etc. all reject all doctrines accepted by the Council of Nicea of 325 A.D. and the Council of Ephesus of 431 A.D. The Council of Nicea of 325 A.D. was called and followed the bidding of a pagan Roman Emperor, Constantine; Whereas most mainline religions accept all or most of the doctrines spewed forth by this council, the monotheistic Bible is the standard religions accept NONE. Now a quote on this council to give all an understanding about it.

"By the third and fourth centuries, Christians were weary of Pagan persecution. The temptation was to compromise. Besides, the Pagan emperor Constantine needed Christians to salvage his shaky empire. Constantine embraced; howbeit only on his deathbed. However, he saw Christianity as a tool he could use to firm up his shaky empire. To this opportunity for political intrigue, and happy blend of politics and people was the chief triumvirate of Roman gods Jupiter, Juno and Minerva. Jupiter was the principal deity of Roman mythology and Juno was the next highest divinity. Minerva, the "offspring of the brain of Jupiter" was regarded as the "personification of divine thought, the plan of the material universe of which Jupiter was the creator and Juno the representative" (26). Many Pagan ideas, in fact, were incorporated into Christianity. "Christianity did not destroy paganism; it adopted it" (*26).

Roman Emperor Constantine needed to make his subjects feel secure if he were to maintain control of the empire; he wanted to rule a unified empire, be it pagan and/or Christian. But first he would have to find a way to end the dispute over the divinity of Jesus-was he a man or God? So he ordered his Christian bishops to meet at Nicaea in 325 A.D. to settle the matter once and for all. To do this, "he made himself the head of the church, and thus the problems of the church became his responsibilities. As a whole the Western Empire with its Roman influence, with some exceptions, had accepted Tertullian and his new theory of the Trinity in the early part of the previous century, but in the East the church adhered more closely to the older formula of baptism in the name of Jesus, or Jesus the Christ. Especially was this true with the Armenians, who specified that baptism "into the death of Christ" was that which alone was essential (*28) .

Now let's see how Constantine got the Trinity. As previously shown, The Roman Empire at this time was being torn apart by religious differences between pagans, mostly Sun God worshippers, and Christianity. Constantine the Emporer was a worshipper of the Unconquered Sun, but he was a very pragmatic individual and saw the need to bring religious unity to his empire. The central doctrine of the pagans was the dogma of a Trinity that they had received from earlier pagans in Babylon (Chaldea). In this, the pagan Emperor, Constantine, saw a possibility for unifying his empire if he could only lead the majority of the Christians to accept a Trinity or a Duality. He knew however that he had to make them think it was their own idea. To this end, he, the Roman emperor Constantine summoned all bishops to Nicaea, about 300, but even though it was the emperor's direction, only a fraction actually attended.

This council went on for a very long time and the emperor worked behind the scene to get support for a Trinity or a Duality. This effort was not completely successful, but finally he got a majority and declared under imperial degree
that this hence forth would be the central doctrinal pillar of the Christian church, which by this time was apostate. Even with this declaration by the emperor himself not all bishops signed the creed. (*29).

So is was the political product of an apostate church, an apostate church that allowed a pagan Roman Emporer, Constantine, to tell it which dogma to accept at the Council of Nicea in 325 A.D., and then have it rammed down their throats as blessed dogma by another Roman Emporer, Theodosius, at the Council of Constantinople in 381 A.D. This in direct violation of God's (YHWH's) word found in the Bible " Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God." (James 4:4 AV), " If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." (John 15:19 AV).
Their solution was to create a creed making it illegal for anyone to believe Jesus was not the same as God by inventing the notion of a Trinity. This intellectual tower remained in full force for well over a thousand years, until the Reformation. (*29)." [Discourse on Mainstream Religion by Iris the Preacher, for more information see the starting post on the The Endless Dogmatic Scourge of the World thread.].

Most mainline religions accept all or most of the doctrines that came out of this Council and that of Ephesus with the salient ones being:

The Trinity and its concomitant connected celebrations such as Christmas.
That Sunday is the Sabbath whereas God (YHWH) declared Saturday was [note, this has nothing to do with the day of the week religious services are held].
The ever virginity of Mary which clearly goes against Matthew 1:24-25, "And Joseph arose from his sleep, and did as the angel of the Lord commanded him, and took unto him his wife; 25 and knew her not till she had brought forth a son: and he called his name JESUS." (ASV).
The genius or worship of the Emperor or the state.
That the Bible is not the sole source of truth.
The Mother of God doctrine of the Council of Ephesus in 431 A.D.
The liturgical year of the apostate church.
The superiority of the Church hierarchy over others.

Now all of the monotheistic Bible is the Standard Christian groups accept only the written word of God (YHWH) as the ultimate standard with special emphasis on: (all from the American Standard Version; ASV).

John 3:17, "For God sent not the Son into the world to judge the world; but that the world should be saved through him." (ASV)

John 3:3, "Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except one be born anew, he cannot see the kingdom of God." (see also 1 Corinthians 15:50).

John 14:6, "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, and the truth, and the life: no one cometh unto the Father, but by me".

Matthew 6:33, "But seek ye first his kingdom, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you."

Matthew 24:14, "And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world for a testimony unto all the nations; and then shall the end come".

1 Corinthians 3:19, "For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He that taketh the wise in their craftiness:"

1 Peter 1:14-16, "as children of obedience, not fashioning yourselves according to your former lusts in [the time of] your ignorance: 15 but like as he who called you is holy, be ye yourselves also holy in all manner of living; 16 because it is written, Ye shall be holy; for I am holy."

1 Peter 4:3-4, "For the time past may suffice to have wrought the desire of the Gentiles, and to have walked in lasciviousness, lusts, winebibbings, revellings, carousings, and abominable idolatries: 4 wherein they think strange that ye run not with [them] into the same excess of riot, speaking evil of [of]: "
Romans 8:14-17, "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God. 15 For ye received not the spirit of bondage again unto fear; but ye received the spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father. 16 The Spirit himself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are children of God: 17 and if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with [him], that we may be also glorified with [him]. "
Matthew 28:19-20, "Go ye therefore, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit: 20 teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I commanded you: and lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world."
John 6:39-40, "And this is the will of him that sent me, that of all that which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day. 40 For this is the will of my Father, that every one that beholdeth the Son, and believeth on him, should have eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day."
James 4:11-12, "Speak not one against another, brethren. He that speaketh against a brother, or judgeth his brother, speaketh against the law, and judgeth the law: but if thou judgest the law, thou art not a doer of the law, but a judge. 12 One [only] is the lawgiver and judge, [even] he who is able to save and to destroy: but who art thou that judgest thy neighbor?"
Matthew 23:13-23, "But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye shut the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye enter not in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering in to enter. 14 [Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, even while for a pretence ye make long prayers: therefore ye shall receive greater condemnation.] 15 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte; and when he is become so, ye make him twofold more a son of hell than yourselves. 16 Woe unto you, ye blind guides, that say, Whosoever shall swear by the temple, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the temple, he is a debtor. 17 Ye fools and blind: for which is greater, the gold, or the temple that hath sanctified the gold? 18 And, Whosoever shall swear by the altar, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gift that is upon it, he is a debtor. 19 Ye blind: for which is greater, the gift, or the altar that sanctifieth the gift? 20 He therefore that sweareth by the altar, sweareth by it, and by all things thereon. 21 And he that sweareth by the temple, sweareth by it, and by him that dwelleth therein. 22 And he that sweareth by the heaven, sweareth by the throne of God, and by him that sitteth thereon. 23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye tithe mint and anise and cummin, and have left undone the weightier matters of the law, justice, and mercy, and faith: but these ye ought to have done, and not to have left the other undone."
1 John 4:3, "and every spirit that confesseth not Jesus is not of God: and this is the [spirit] of the antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it cometh; and now it is in the world already.

Revelation 3:14, "And to the angel of the church in Laodicea write: These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God:
All these monotheistic Bible is the Standard Christian groups reject all the apostate baggage of the Council of Nicea 325 A.D. and the Council of Ephesus of 431 A.D.; whereas, all mainline groups accept most of it. Foremost is the rejection of the Trinity as false doctrine of men, but this in no way means the rejection of the divinity of Jesus (Yeshua). In fact, all these monotheistic Bible is the Standard Christian groups declare this fact and that his Father (YHWH) has given all judging onto his Son, Jesus (Yeshua) as shown by Matthew 25:31-32, "But when the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the angels with him, then shall he sit on the throne of his glory: 32 and before him shall be gathered all the nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as the shepherd separateth the sheep from the goats;" (ASV).
In fact, all criticism of these groups is due to what is stated at 1 Peter 4:3-4, "For the time past may suffice to have wrought the desire of the Gentiles, and to have walked in lasciviousness, lusts, winebibbings, revellings, carousings, and abominable idolatries: 4 wherein they think strange that ye run not with [them] into the same excess of riot, speaking evil of [of]: " (ASV)
In summary, Isaiah 5:20, says it all, "For the time past may suffice to have wrought the desire of the Gentiles, and to have walked in lasciviousness, lusts, winebibbings, revellings, carousings, and abominable idolatries:" (ASV)
Thus the difference between so called mainstream Christian religions is that asking what doctrine or belief one has is a legitimate question as it depends on what the denomination accepts or rejects of the false doctrines adopted at the Council of Nicea and/or of Ephesus; Whereas, it is a defective question when asked of a monotheistic Bible is the Standard Christian groups for whom the Bible is the only standard. To these groups, one should ask what does the Bible say as this is their only theology. They follow Romans 12:1-2, "I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, [which is] your spiritual service. 2 And be not fashioned according to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, and ye may prove what is the good and acceptable and perfect will of God." (ASV).

[iris89]

The Trinity is False Doctrine – Revised w/Historical Note and Links, below:

PART I :The doctrine of the Trinity is a false belief that there are Three Persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, these Three Persons being truly distinct one from another. Thus in the words of the Athanasian Creed: ‘the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God, and yet there are not three Gods but one God.” (The Catholic Encyclopedia, New York; 1912, Volume XV, page 47).

First, to be true all would have had to exist for all of time since as we all know Yahweh (YHVH) has always existed, “ Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God.” (Psalms 90:2 AV). However, Jesus Christ the claimed second member of this false doctrine was the first of Yahweh (YHVH), “ Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:” (Colossians 1:15 AV), “ And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God;” (Revelation 3:14 AV), “ And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.” (John 17:5 AV), “ What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?” (John 6:62 AV), and “ Jesus (Jehoshua) said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.” (John 8:58 AV); from these scriptures we can see Jesus (Jehoshua) was created by Yahweh (YHVH), had been used by Yahweh (YHVH) in the creation of the earth and the creatures on it, and had previously been in heaven with him before coming down to earth and being born of a virgin, Mary. Now, the Holy Spirit is not a spirit in the sense of being a heavenly creature such as God or Jesus (Jehoshua) or the angels, but Yahweh’s (YHVH) active force; By far the majority of occurrences of ru'ach and pneu'ma relate to God’s spirit, his active force, his holy spirit. The Holy Spirit has been demonstrated not to be a spirit person since people can descend on people being baptized, “Now when all the people were baptized, it came to pass, that Jesus (Jehoshua) also being baptized, and praying, the heaven was opened, 22 And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased. 23 And Jesus (Jehoshua) himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,” (Luke 3:21-23 AV), “One of the two which heard John speak, and followed him, was Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother. 41 He first findeth his own brother Simon, and saith unto him, We have found the Messias, which is, being interpreted, the Christ.” (John 1:40-41 AV), and “ How God anointed Jesus (Jehoshua) of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.” (Acts 10:38 AV)’; from these we can clearly see the Holy Spirit is a different type of entity or substance from either Yahweh (YHVH) or Jesus (Jehoshua). This clearly invalidates the Trinity since it requires the ‘Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God, and yet there are not three Gods but one God’ be one substance which clearly they are not.

Further, the concept of the Trinity would require all claimed members of it to be equal if there is to be one God and not three, and this is clearly not the case, “ Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.” (John 14:28 AV), “Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: 8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. 9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: 10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; 11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” (Phillipians 2:5-8 AV), “ But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.” (1 Corinthians 11:3 AV), “ And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.” (1 Corinthians 15:28 AV), and “ Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.” (John 5:19 AV). From these we can see Jesus (Jehoshua) clearly acknowledged that his father, Yahweh (YHVH), was his superior, i.e., greater than he; therefore, we can see the so called members of the Trinity are not equal as they would need to be for any possibility for the Trinity to be reality; just another proof of it being false.

Now for the Trinity to be true, all worship would have to be directed to this ‘three Gods in one’ but this is not the case as clearly shown, “ Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.” (Matthew 4:10 AV), “But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him. 24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.” (John 4:23-24 Av). As we see, Jesus (Jehoshua) said all worship should be directed to his father, Yahweh (YHVH), and not to him or some icon.

Also, if there was, as the Trinity doctrine claims, ‘three Gods in one’ and Jesus (Jehoshua) had been put to death on the Cross (stake) who would have resurrected him if he and his father, Yahweh (YHVH), and the Holy Spirit were ‘three Gods in one’? Obviously this could not be the case so likewise the Trinity could not be so for this reason alone.

The Doctrine of The Trinity defies the universally accepted and historically always held meaning of the words for father and son. Not only does it defy the meaning of these words, it destroys their meaning! This fact is important to realize for God gave us language. It was not invented by man as the evolutionist tries to say. Thus, we are not destroying man made terms, but God-given terms! These terms, as given to us by God, require that the father exists before the son, and for the son to be brought into existence by the father. This universally accepted and recognized definition is what these terms have meant from the beginning of this creation. Therefore, who has given anyone the authority to change these God-given terms now? In fact, The Lord Jesus Christ verifies the meaning of these terms when he says, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord; neither he that is sent greater than he that sent him." John 13:16 "Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I." John 14:28. Here, he establishes that God is his lord, that he was sent by his lord, that God is his Father, and that his Father is greater than he himself. How could any of these declarations be true if the Doctrine of The Trinity is true? It is clearly impossible for these declarations of The Lord Jesus Christ to be true and the Doctrine of The Trinity to be True! It is easy to see that these words of the Lord Jesus Christ and the Doctrine of the Trinity are mutually exclusive and opposing views! Some believers in the Trinity use the same argument that the Catholic church put forth at the Council of Constantinople, 381 A.D. that it is a mystery and the words have a unique meaning; however, Now, I ask you why would the Creator want to change the meaning of a word in one place and not else where. He never sought to confuse his followers; this defies not only language, but common sense.

Interestingly, there is a scripture, Jeremiah 23:6, that confuses some as they do not understand the nature of ancient Jewish names and titles, and how they all had a meaning as clarified by a brief exert, is NOT a personal name but a title for the messiah (Jesus) as shown by the “Easton’s Revised Bible Dictionary, ”Jehovah our rightousness, rendered in the Authorized Version, "The LORD our righteousness," a title given to the Messiah..—Jer. 23:6; 33:16.” Now let’s us look at several Bible translations: “ In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is his name whereby he shall be called, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.” (Jeremiah 23:6 AV), “In his days Judah shall be saved, Israel shall dwell in security. This is the name they give him: “The Lord our justice.” (Jeremiah 23:6 The New American Bible – World Catholic Press, approved at the Vatican by the Pope on Sept. 18, 1970), “In his days Judah will be saved, and Israel itself will reside in security. And this is his name with which he will be called, "Jehovah Is Our Righteousness.” (Jeremiah 23:6 NWT). This actually shows we are speaking of two different entities or beings, and that title for Jesus (Yeshua) which means “YHWH our righteousness” is most fitting as he was the first born, first of Almighty God’s creation, Jeremiah 23:5-7 is actually a Messianic prophecy describing the future king sprouting from David’s line to “execute justice and righteousness in the land.” That king would be Jesus.

Now, the word Trinity does not appear in any of the 66 books of the inspired Bible Canon; this would not be logical if it were the center part of Christian belief. This alone, should make it very highly suspect, but when you consider almost all pagan groups had a Trinity, it is obviously something that must have slipped into apostate Christianity from pagan beliefs. This is indeed the case as the Reverend Alexander Hilsop clearly showed in his detailed account of how this came to pass in his book, “The Two Babylons” by Alexander Hilsop.

In summary, even a cursory reading of the scriptures on this subject or of religious history (as found in ‘The Two Babylons’ by Alexander Hilsop, and in many other history books of religion) with an open mind, it will be clear that the Trinity is a false doctrine that slipped into Christianity after most had become apostate. [see also Appendix on John 1:1]

PART II :The History of Arius and His Fellow Believers in Scripture Alone to the 16th Century.

Ins and outs of religious false dogma starting with the council of Nicea in 325 A.D.
This council may seem a strange place to start discussing how false doctrine started to enter the early Christian church that had drifted from following the teachings of Jesus Christ into backsliding. However, the Council of Nicea marked a real turning point that led from a slight drift from the true teachings of Christ to precipitous jump into false dogma for political reasons. First we need to look at the major players at this council:
Emperor Constantine, a pagan who wanted a fusion of Christian beliefs with pagan beliefs to solidify his empire that was being torn apart over the controversy of religion. He called, even though not a Christian, for the convening of this council.
Bishop Athanasius, a prominent figure in the so called Christian church at the time and a very suave politician who knew what the emperor’s goals were and aimed to fulfill them.
Bishop Arius , a stickler for not deviating from the inspired word of God, the Bible, maintained that ‘the Son of God was a creature, made from nothing; that there was a time when he had no existence; that he was capable of his own free will of right and wrong,’ and that, ‘were he in the truest sense a son, he must have come after the Father, therefore the time obviously was when he was not, and hence he was a finite being.’
Eusebius Pamphili-Compromising Bishop of Caesarea -Compromising Bishop of Caesarea who supported the ideas of Arius, but switched sides since he was also the ‘right hand man’ of the Emperor Constantine and knew maintaining principles and what he knew to be truth would not be in his personal best interest.

The Council of Nicea was convened at the order of the Pagan Emperor Constantine and only one sixth of the bishops of Christendom came. Emperor Constantine, who presided over the Council, and he made the opening oration on behalf of the 318 bishops assembled and in praise of the emperor who had convened the assembly. Many doctrines were discussed and Arius, a stickler for maintaining Christian purity, opposed the adoption of most doctrines put forth on the basis they were not in accord to the written inspired word of God (Yahweh (JHVH)). This tried the patience of Constantine because all he wanted was unity in his empire; therefore, he sought a fusion of pagan and Christian beliefs so there would be uniformity. He, Constantine, cared nothing with regard to Christian purity and the inspired word of God, the Bible. On one proposed doctrine, the trinity, the concept of three Gods in one, co-equal, co-substantial, co-eternal much debate arose as Arius hotly contended it was clearly against the inspired word of God, (Yahweh (JHVH)), and the debate continued on for months. At first, Eusebius Pamphilj, Bishop of Caesarea took Arius’s side, but quickly switched when his mentor/boss Emperor Constantine obviously told him to. Even after months of debate, they could not agree as to whether Arius or Athanasius had the truth. Finally, the yet unbaptized pagan Emperor Constantine, decreed in favor of the trinity and declared illegal all religious opinions that were not in line with that dogma.

Bishop Arius, however, would not let the matter die as he believed in true worship and felt as the Apostles “ God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.” (Romans 3:4 AV). Arius’s insistence on truth won him the animosity of the Emperor and for this Arius and two other Bsihops that would not compromise were banished. Later many sought to catch Arius and put him to death, but he successfully escaped all of his persecutors and went and preached to nations not under the control of Rome.

However, the controversy did not end. While the birth of the Catholic Church may be pinpointed at A.D. 325, when Constantine decided the debate on the trinity held at Nicea in favor of Athanasius and against Arius, it was not until after the year A.D. 440 that the bishop of the Roman see, Leo I, became in fact the first pope, according to history but not the Catholic church. After he became Pope, Leo I, set out, not on a Christian path as a footstep follower of Jesus Christ (Jehoshua), but on a presumptuous path. Beacon Lights of History, Vol. III, Page 244 states, “I will revive government once more upon this earth; not by bringing back the Caesars, but by declaring a new theocracy, by making myself the vicegerent of Christ, by virtue of the promise made to Peter, whose successor I am, in order to restore law, punish crime, head off heresy, encourage genius, conserve peace, heal dissensions, protect learning; appealing to love, but ruling by fear. Who but the Church can do this? A theocracy will create a new civilization. Not a diadem, but a tiara will I wear, a symbol of universal sovereignty, before which barbarism shall flee away.” In fact, he and some later Popes tried to gain control over many secular governments and with some success. This was directly against the teachings of the one whom they claimed they were vicegerents of as recorded at “ Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” (James 4:4 AV). This is not surprizing as in the Apostle Paul’s day there were ambitious men like Leo I and he said in a letter to the Corinthians, “ Now ye are full, now ye are rich, ye have reigned as kings without us: and I would to God ye did reign, that we also might reign with you.” (1 Corinthians 4:8 AV)

Moving on in time, others took up the cry for pure worship and against the dogma that was only accepted because of an imperial degree. Francis David, superintendent of the Reform Church appeared before the Diet of Torda (1568 A.D.) as a supporter of the pure religion ideas of Arius, and on the other side was Peter Melius, leader of the Transylvanian Reformed Church. Francis David appealed to the Bible alone; whereas, Peter Melius appealed to the results of the Council of Nicea. This debate went on for some days an most considered Francis David had won it, and he was given a hero’s welcome in his home town of Kolozsvar (now Cluj-Napoca, Romania). Francis David then joined forces with Georgia Biandrata another who believed as Arius. The two of them produced a book, “De falsa et vera unius Dei Patris, Filii, et Spiritus Sancti cognitione,” (The False and True Knowledge of the Unity of God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit). This book contained a historical examination of many learned men who refused to believe the Trinity.

However, Francis David and Georgia Biandrata were not the only people of the time wanting to maintain pure worship, there were others. The Spanish theologian Michael Servetus, was a learned scholar that maintained the Bible was the only and ultimate source of truth and the dogma of man was not acceptable to God. For this he and Westphal paid with their lives, both being roasted alive by counterfeit Christians who held for man’s dogma as having a higher authority than God’s word (both were supporters of pure worship as exposed by Arius and one was his very distant decendent). The motto of all of these men was ‘sola Scriptura’ (Scripture alone).

In Belgium, many were accepting the moto, ‘sola Scriptura’ (Scripture alone). Van Liesvelt a publisher wanted the common people to know the truth and accept only the scripture and not church dogma. In 1526 A.D. he printed a complete Dutch Bible with this view in mind. In his edition, of 1542 A.D., he put a woodcut picture of the Devil as a bearded monk with a rosary and goat’s feet next to Matthew 4:3, and a marginal note, “Salvation comes through Jesus Christ alone.” This infuriated the Catholic church and was used as the basis for getting Val Liesvelt condemned to death. Yet this is exactly what the Bible says as Arius had pointed out approximately a millennium earlier. Another individual that believed the moto, ‘sola Scriptura’ (Scripture alone), was an ordained priest William Tyndale. He wanted to let the common people have a chance to learn the truth directly from the word of God, the Bible. He set out to translate the Bible into English and by 1526 he was successful in publishing a new testament in English. However Catholic authorities under the direction of Bishop Tunstall were determined to prevent the common people from reading the Bible. Finally in May 1535 A.D. William Tyndale was arrested in Antwerp, Belgium. He was tied to a stake, strangled, and burned; however his ultimate words were, “Lord, open the King of England’s eyes!”
Actually, much of William Tyndale’s translation lives on in the King James Version (AV) and this because the eyes of King Henry VIII of England were ‘opened.”

Some of the sources (many sent to me as copies of pages or read in libraries in major cities) are:

1. A Short History of Christian Doctrine, by Bernhard Lohse [translated from the German by F. Ernest Stoeffler in 1963], 2 nc. Paperback printing 1980.
2. An Essay of the Development of Christian Doctrine by John Henry Cardinal Newman, 6 th. Ed. 2989
3. The International Standard Bible encyclopedia 1982
4. The Formation of Christian Dogma byMartin Warner 1957
5. Gods and the One God by Robert m. Grant 1986
6. The Church of the First Three Centuries by Dr. Alan Lamson 1869
7. “De falsa et vera unius Dei Patris, Filii, et Spiritus Sancti cognitione,” (The False and True Knowledge of the Unity of God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit) by ). Francis David and Georgia Biandrata
8. Beacon Lights of History, Vol. III
9. The Search for The Christian Doctrine of God by R.P. C. Hanson
10. The Story of the Early Church by Dr. Martin Werner
11. Short Story of the Early Church by Dr. H. R. boer
12. The Apostolic Fathers by Robert A. Kraft 1965
13. The Library of Christian Classics edited by Cyril C. Richardson 1953
14. Dictionary of Christian Theology edited by Alan Richardson, 1969
15. The New Encyclopaedia Britannica, 15 th. Ed. 1985
16. The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. I edited by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson [American Reprint of the Edinburgh Edition] 1885
17. The Influence of Greek Ideas on Christianity by Edwin Hatch
18. Entschlues/Offen-April 1985 (German Jesuit Magazine)
19. Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament
20. Antiquities of the Jews by Josephus
21. The Two Babylons by Alexander Hilsop
22. New Catholic Encylopeadia
23. Should you Believe in the Trinity WB&TS
24. Masters Thesis, When Will This System of Things or World End, Taken in Relationship with Jesus’s Statement, no oneKnows the Hour or Day Except my Father Who Art in Heaven, Copyright #TXu 217 406, of Oct. 9, 1985 by my husband
25. Several unpublished theological papers by my husband and others.

PART III : Links etc.

www.ecclesia.org/truth/trinity.html

www.antipas.org/magazine/...tter1.html (do go to this one)

www.tellway-publishing.com

www.heaven.net.nz/writings/trinity.htm

www.eliyah.com/talmidim/trinity.html

www.angelfire.com/pa/grey...inity.html

www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPN...#TopOfPage

www.watchtower.org/librar...cle_04.htm

www.antipas.org/books/tri...nity1.html

www.spiritualabuse.org/is...inity.html

www.geocities.com/stateme...ctrine.htm

www.sos.net/~lofquist/trinity4.htm

www.truechristian.org/are...rinity.htm

www.mostmerciful.com/trinity.htm

members.aol.com/SDBible/sdbs1.htm

Links to information about the Councils:

www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/const1.txt (minutes of the Council of Constantinopile in 381AD)
www.near-death.com/experi...igen6.html (comments on Council of Nicea 324/325 AD)
www.yashanet.com/library/antisem.htm (details of political intrigue & paganism of Coun. Of Nicea)
members.aol.com/davecrnll/corrupt4.html (paganism into Christianity, Council of Nicea 325AD)
www.piar.hu/councils/ecum01.htm (Catholic take on the Council of Nicea and its canons)
history.hanover.edu/early/trent.htm (Council of Trent of 1545 and 1563 A.D.)

PART IV: Additional Scriptures to Be Considered:

And the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, filled with wisdom: and the grace of God was upon him. Luke 2:40.
And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man. Luke 2:52.
But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only. Matt. 24:36.
But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father. Mark 13:32.
For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel. John 5:20.
And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power. Acts 1:7
The revelation of Jesus Christ which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John. Rev. 1:1.

Acts 4:31 "the word of God"; 6:2 "the word of God," 7 "the word of God"; 7:22; 8:14 "the word of God," 25 "the word of the Lord"; 10:36 "the word which God sent"; 12:24 "the word of God"; 13:5 "the word of God," 7 "the word of God," 44 "the word of God," 48 "the word of the Lord," 49 "the word of the Lord"; 15:35 "the word of the Lord," 36 "the word of the Lord"; 16:32 "the word of the Lord"; 17:13 "the word of God"; 18:11 "the word of God"; 19:10 "the word of the Lord," 20 "the word of God."

Your friend in Christ Iris89

[iris89]

DISCOURSE ON MAINSTREAM RELIGION:

INTRODUCTION:

Mainstream religion or the religion that is considered 'orthodox' in any era has varied tremendously with time. What one era or time or nation or group of nations considers mainstream religion varies greatly both with time and geography. In the western world, the Catholic Church and the groups that split from it, the eastern or Orthodox church, and Protestant groups are generally viewed as mainstream religion; whereas, in the eastern world, depending on area, the Islam Religion or the Hindu Religion is considered mainstream. Now one could wonder if the mainstream groups have anything in common? Or they correct in belief?

BIBLE POINTS TO SERIOUSLY CONSIDER:

In considering whether the mainstream groups of Christianity are correct in belief or in serious error, one needs to consider several scriptures in the new testament showing the Truth with respect what God (YHWH) has to say through inspired writers and then reflect back to how this would apply to mainstream Christianity to which most so called Christians belong. First let's consider both Luke 13:24 and Matthew 7:13-14, it is in both of these that the road followed by true believers would be narrow and cramped, Luke 13:24, "Strive to enter in at the strait gate: for many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in, and shall not be able." (Authorized King James Bible: AV); And Matthew 7:13-14, "Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, abroad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: 14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it." (AV); thereby, clearly showing few would be entering the narrow gate "which leadeth unto life." In reality, it will be difficult for even true Christians to enter as testified to at 1 Peter 4:18, "And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear." (AV). In order to enter, we must have the right sort of guide, Luke 1:79, "To give light to them that sit in darkness and in the shadow of death, to guide our feet into the way of peace." (AV). Now, if one picks the wrong group, just because it is popular or the so called 'one to belong to in a community' and not because of Bible Truths, there is an important warning given at Matthew 15:14, "Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch." (AV). In fact, being with the wrong group can mean you are NOT having fellowship with the Son of God, Jesus (Yeshua) as testified to at 1 John 1:6, "If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not [have] the truth." (AV). This danger is made abundantly clear at Luke 12:32 when Jesus (Yeshua) spoke of his true followers as a little flock and not a large one, "Fear not, little flock; for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom." (AV). Simply stated, his true followers will be relatively few in number which should cause all sincere individuals to question whether mainstream religion with its vast membership is heading for the narrow gate!

SATAN'S TRICK - FALSE DOCTRINE EVOLUTION:


Now do most mainstream religions through the ages have anything in common be they so called Christian or pagan? Absolutely, history shows that one mainstream religion evolved into another one while maintaining many of the beliefs of the one before it, but simply changing the name of the God(s). No where is this more self evident than with respect to the doctrine of the Trinity. In has been with us since at least the time of ancient Sumeria as shown by The historian H. W. F. Saggs explains that the Babylonian triad consisted of three gods of roughly equal rank. Their "inter-relationship is of the essence of their natures." Is this positive proof that the Christian trinity descended from the ancient Sumerian, Assyrian, and Babylonian triads? (*1). No. However, Hislop furthers the comparison: "In the unity of that One, Only God of the Babylonians there were three persons, and to symbolize that doctrine of the trinity they employed...the equilateral triangle, just as it is well known the Romish Church does at this day." (*2).

Yes, the concept of a trinity has been a prevailing belief for a very, very long time perhaps longer than most Christians would imagine. While worshipping innumerable minor deities, triads of gods appeared in all the ancient cultures of Sumer, Babylonia, Egypt, India, Greece and finally Rome. The "mysteries" of the first universal civilization, Babylonia, were transported down in time. The names of the gods changed. The details of ancient incomprehensible religions changed, but the essential ideas were the same. The Sumerians worshipped Anu (the Father), Enlil (the god of earth) and Enki (the lord of wisdom). The Egyptians worshipped Amun who was really three gods in one: Re was his face; Ptah his body and Amun his hidden identity "combined as three embodiments or aspects of one supreme and triune deity." (*4 - page 201).

Now with respect the next evolution of mainstream religion, the Egyptian, Egypt's history is nearly as old as Sumeria's. In his Egyptian Myths, George Hart shows how Egypt also believed in a "transcendental, above creation, and preexisting" one, the god Amun. Amun was really three gods in one. Re was his face; Ptah his body; and Amun his hidden identity (*3). The well-known historian Will Durant concurs: "In later days Ra [sic], Amon [sic], and Ptah were combined as three embodiments or aspects of one supreme and triune deity." (*4). A hymn to Amun written in the 14th century BC distinguishes the Egyptian trinity: "All Gods are three: Amun, Re, Ptah: they have no equal. His name is hidden as Amun, he is Re before [men], and his body is Ptah." (*5). Certainly is not this positive indicator that the Christian trinity descended from the ancient Egyptian triads? However, Durant submits that "from Egypt came the idea of a divine trinity..." (*6). Laing agrees when he says that "it is probable that the worship of the Egyptian triad Isis, Serapis, and the child Horus helped to familiarize the ancients with the idea of a triune God and was not without influence in the formulation of the doctrine of the trinity as set forth in the Nicene and Athanasian creeds." (*7). And The Encyclopedia of Religions goes even farther when it states that as Christianity "came in contact with the triune gods of Egypt and the Near East, it developed a trinity of its own." (* .

The next evolution or more correctly one concurrent with the Egyptian but originating also from the early Sumeria was the Babylonian. A very important evolution of spread originated from the Babylonian trinity that ultimately spread to Rome by way of the Etrusans. The Etruscans were a group that all indicators indicate as having originated in Babylon. As they slowly passed through Greece and went on to Rome, they brought with them their trinity of Tinia, Uni, and Menerva (*9). This trinity was a "new idea to the Romans," and yet it became so "typical of Rome [that] it was imitated in the capitolia of Italy. . . (*7 - page 26)" Even the names of the Roman trinity: Jupiter, Juno, and Minerva, reflect the ancestry. Is this positive proof that the Christian trinity descended from the Etruscan and Roman triads? No, but an extremely significant indicator of this fact. However, Dr. Gordon Laing convincingly devotes his entire book Survivals of the Roman Gods to the comparison of Roman Paganism and the Roman Catholic Church. (*7). Pelikan adds to Laing's work when he states that the early church fathers used and cited the Roman Sibylline Oracles so much that these were called "Sibyllists" by the 2nd century critic Celsus. (*10). There was even a medieval hymn, "Dies irae" which prophesied the coming of the day of wrath on the "dual authority of David and the Sibyl." (*10 - page 64-65).

Now let's consider the ancient Grecian world; And in order to fully understand it, we need to digress to gaining an understanding of the origins of the word Trinity and the two types that existed in the ancient world and evolved into the Trinity of mainstream so called Christian religions. First, the word trinity comes from the kemetic language. It consist actually of two words: hemt (three) and neter (which carries the concepts of gods). Therefore, Trinity defines a concept of three gods.

Ths pantheon of Gods is composed of two categories of Gods. We have the creator and self-created Gods on one side and the creator gods that are non autogenic on the other. The creator Gods that are self-created are those who form the first group of trinities. The gods that are not self-created then form the second group of trinities. The Gods of the second trinity exist only in the context o***roup of Gods composed o***od-father, a Goddess-mother, and a God-son. They are somehow considered very close to the human nature. The original second group of trinities came from a story known as the holy drama, and is composed by a God-father called Wsr (Osiris) and a goddess-mother Aishat (Isthar or Isis) and the God-son Heru (Horus). It is the second group of trinities that taught humanity the concept of a family, giving a man and woman the idea of a spiritual union with the goal of procreation. We should observe that the importance of the trinities is such that they became a serious problem for the monotheistic religions that are stubbornly talking about the creation of the world by one single god while they are still maintaining the concept of a trinity.

The ancient Trinities of the Greek's were composed of the God-son Perseus, born from Zeus and Danae; Hercules born from Zeus and Alcmene; Apollo born from Zeus and Leto; Dionysos born from Zeus and Semele; Minos born from Zeus and Europe; Aesculapius born from Apollo and Coronis. (*11).

It if from an evolutionary merging of ancient Greek trinities and Roman trinities that in themselves partially evolved from the Greek, but with a precedence being taken by the Etruscans' of their trinity of Tinia, Uni, and Menerva. (*9). This trinity as previously mentioned, became the ancient Roman Trinity of Jupiter, Juno, and Minerva, which was campaigned by the mainstream religions of the empire of that era. Even the names of the gods in this Trinity reflect from whence it came. (*7). This one is of extreme importance to us of the modern era as it evolved into the Trinity of the mainstream so called Christian religions of today. This Trinity consisted of Jesus born from Yahweh and Mary. However, this new concept of trinities that is presented by the new Christian authorities only comes to add on the contradictions that were undermining the psychological stability of the human of the modern society. The Trinity of the modern time that the religions want us to accept is composed o***od-father, a God-son and a mother that is purely human and considered virgin. (*11).

However since the mother, the Virgin Mary, she is a human, she cannot be classified as a Goddess, and that will not complete the concept of trinity. In this evolution, the religious authorities had to use a little creativity to overcome this; the concept of personalizing the power or force of the supreme God (YHWH), Yahweh. To do this, something new had to enter the equation. What was this?

Whereas, the Gods of the first trinities stayed really far away from the philosophical and political arguments of the society, but the leaders used that fact to kind of drown them in the collective memory of the society. The world has been created in stages. The Gods of the first trinity are recognized by the fact that the first two of them have created the four elements (fire, air, water and matter) and the third God has used them to fashion and create everything that exists. The gods of the first trinity do not intervene in our daily lives, but they guarantee the harmony of the universe. They some-how occupy a very important place in the spiritual essence of anything that exists. By recognizing their exist-ence, we are illuminating the universal conscious on the makers of this world that we are trying to redefine. (*11).

At this point, we need to pause and regress a little. One may ask, How do we know these trinities are not just misrepresentations of the real threeness of God? (After all there were "flood stories" in every culture too reminiscent of the Genesis account.) Assyrian clay tablets now available have most strikingly confirmed the narrative of Scripture which give us revealing insight into our questions (*12). Where did the idea of a three-in-one God originate? After the flood, Nimrod a descendent of Noah's son Ham settled in Asia: "And Cush begat Nimrod: he began to be a mighty one in the earth. He was a mighty hunter before the LORD and the beginning of his kingdom was Babel out of that land went forth Asshur [mar., "he went out into Assyria"] and builded Nineveh" (Genesis 10:8-11). "Mighty hunter" was the title given to the great conquering warrior-monarchs of the time. In rebellion of God's command to disburse and people the earth, Nimrod built the Tower of Babel, became very powerful and was even worshipped. We now know the ancient Babylonians worshipped the first person in the Godhead, the Great Invisible, also the Spirit of God incarnate in the human mother and also the Divine Son. Nimrod was this "Son," the first king of Babel, Babylon. And so in this the first notion of a triune God was born. (*7).

In the immediate centuries before the advent of Jesus Christ, we see Plato even in his deeply philosophical mode proposing a trinity of sorts. ("The Supreme Reality appears in the trinitarian form of the Good, the Intelligence, and the World-Soul"). Through all cultures, this perversion of the truth about God was handed down. (*7).

One God (YHWH), One culture, however, escaped this corruption of truth. From the line of Shem, Noah's other son, Abraham was called out of "Ur of the Chaldees" (Genesis 11:31; 12:1,2), the ancient Babylonian empire. His descendants were given the revelation of God by Moses from Mount Sinai. "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD" (Deuteronomy 6:4). No Hebrew scripture supports the idea of a trinity god. Some verses have been pressed into use by Trinitarians, but without success. For example, in the creation account, Genesis says, "God [elohim, plural.] created the heavens and the earth" (1:1). However, the plural does not have to do with number; it is "plentitude of might" (Pentateuch & Haftorahs, The Soncino Press). In any case, the verb "created" is singular, and would not indicate two gods, let alone three. Even the New Catholic Encyclopedia admits that the doctrine of the Trinity is not taught in the Old Testament (Vol. XIV, 306). And the world renown "International Standard Bible Encyclopedia" says, under the article on the Trinity in it, "The term 'Trinity' is NOT a biblical term....In point of fact, the doctrine of the Trinity is a purely revealed doctrine...As the doctrine of the Trinity is indiscoverable by reason, so it is incapable of proof from reason." (*14).

While he walked the earth, Jesus clearly acknowledged, "My Father is greater than I" (*15) and that it was his Father who sent him, "He that receiveth you receiveth me, and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me" (*16). He consistently acknowledged God as the source of power for his miracles and finally implored his Father, "yet not my will but thine be done." (*17) he be the one sent and also the Sender and why would he pray to himself that not his will but His other will be done? It seems the Trinitarians only answer, "It's a mystery"?

If the trinity is supposed to be an unexplainable "mystery," why do the apostles always talk about revealing mysteries to Christians? "I would not have you ignorant of this mystery [about Jewish blindness] (*1 the revelation of the mystery (*19) the mystery hidden God hath revealed (*20 1 Corinthians 2:7) Behold I show you a mystery (*21) "having made known the mystery of his will" (*22) "to make known the mystery of Christ" (*23) "make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory" (*24), etc. So how did the Christian Church accept a mystery of a trinity? This will be shown in the next part.

HISTORY OF POLITICAL INTRIGUE AND DECEIT THAT EVOLVED THE TRINITY INTO SO CALLED CHRISTIANITY:

To understand how the Trinity wormed its way into so called Christianity we need to know the political and social climate of the first three centuries after the passing of Jesus (Yeshua) and his apostles, and why true faith deteriorated into compromise; and then total acceptance by the mainstream so called Christian groups, not withstanding its violation of the Word of God, the Holy Bible. Now let's look at that period and try an insert ourselves mentally into it.

In the early church the apostles needed to refute another rising belief system gnosticism. It considered matter to be evil and sought salvation through knowledge. Gnosticism also focused on the "mysteries" meant only for the intellectuals to understand. Christ, the gnostics said, entered Jesus at baptism and left just before he died on the cross. The Apostle John particularly addressed this budding heresy: "Many false prophets, have gone forth into the world, You gain knowledge of the inspired expression from God by this: Every inspired expression that confesses Jesus Christ as having come in the flesh originates with God, but every inspired expression that does not confess Jesus does not originate with God. Furthermore, this is the anti-christ's [inspired expression] which you have heard was coming, and now it is already in the world." (*25). Jesus' humanity was repulsive to gnostics. After the Apostles died, Christians responded to gnosticism by claiming not only did Jesus Christ come in the flesh as the Son of God.

By the third and fourth centuries, Christians were weary of Pagan persecution. The temptation was to compromise. Besides, the Pagan emperor Constantine needed Christians to salvage his shaky empire. Constantine embraced; howbeit only on his deathbed. However, he saw Christianity as a tool he could use to firm up his shaky empire. To this opportunity for political intrigue, and happy blend of politics and people was the chief triumvirate of Roman gods Jupiter, Juno and Minerva. Jupiter was the principal deity of Roman mythology and Juno was the next highest divinity. Minerva, the "offspring of the brain of Jupiter" was regarded as the "personification of divine thought, the plan of the material universe of which Jupiter was the creator and Juno the representative" (26). Many Pagan ideas, in fact, were incorporated into Christianity. "Christianity did not destroy paganism; it adopted it" (*26).

Roman Emperor Constantine needed to make his subjects feel secure if he were to maintain control of the empire; he wanted to rule a unified empire, be it pagan and/or Christian. But first he would have to find a way to end the dispute over the divinity of Jesus-was he a man or God? So he ordered his Christian bishops to meet at Nicaea in 325 A.D. to settle the matter once and for all. To do this, "he made himself the head of the church, and thus the problems of the church became his responsibilities. As a whole the Western Empire with its Roman influence, with some exceptions, had accepted Tertullian and his new theory of the Trinity in the early part of the previous century, but in the East the church adhered more closely to the older formula of baptism in the name of Jesus, or Jesus the Christ. Especially was this true with the Armenians, who specified that baptism "into the death of Christ" was that which alone was essential (*28) .

See Part 2:

[iris89]

Part 2:



Now let's see how Constantine got the Trinity. As previously shown, The Roman Empire at this time was being torn apart by religious differences between pagans, mostly Sun God worshippers, and Christianity. Constantine the Emporer was a worshipper of the Unconquered Sun, but he was a very pragmatic individual and saw the need to bring religious unity to his empire. The central doctrine of the pagans was the dogma of a Trinity that they had received from earlier pagans in Babylon (Chaldea). In this, the pagan Emperor, Constantine, saw a possibility for unifying his empire if he could only lead the majority of the Christians to accept a Trinity or a Duality. He knew however that he had to make them think it was their own idea. To this end, he, the Roman emperor Constantine summoned all bishops to Nicaea, about 300, but even though it was the emperor's direction, only a fraction actually attended.

This council went on for a very long time and the emperor worked behind the scene to get support for a Trinity or a Duality. This effort was not completely successful, but finally he got a majority and declared under imperial degree
that this hence forth would be the central doctrinal pillar of the Christian church, which by this time was apostate. Even with this declaration by the emperor himself not all bishops signed the creed. (*29).

So is was the political product of an apostate church, an apostate church that allowed a pagan Roman Emporer, Constantine, to tell it which dogma to accept at the Council of Nicea in 325 A.D., and then have it rammed down their throats as blessed dogma by another Roman Emporer, Theodosius, at the Council of Constantinople in 381 A.D. This in direct violation of God's (YHWH's) word found in the Bible " Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God." (James 4:4 AV), " If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." (John 15:19 AV).
Their solution was to create a creed making it illegal for anyone to believe Jesus was not the same as God by inventing the notion of a Trinity. This intellectual tower remained in full force for well over a thousand years, until the Reformation. (*29).

Contrary to popular belief, it was not Constantine's fourth century Council of Nicea in A.D. 325 that formalized the "Doctrine of the Trinity." The Athanasian Creed in the fifth century finally included the three, "the godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost...the glory equal, the majesty co-eternal So likewise the Father is God, the Son is God and the Holy Ghost is God; and yet they are not three Gods, but one God." Furthermore, this creed added that belief in the trinity "is necessary to everlasting salvation." Strong belief led to action. "Probably more Christians were slaughtered by Christians in these two years ([A.D.]342-3) than by all the persecutions of Christians by pagans in the history of Rome." (*30).


The fact is Christianity never conquered paganism--paganism conquered Christianity. (*31).

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION OF DISCOURSE ON MAINSTREAM RELIGION:


The search for the origins of the Trinity begins with the earliest writings of man. Records of early Mesopotamian and Mediterranean civilizations show polytheistic religions, though many scholars assert that earliest man believed in one god. The 19th century scholar and Protestant minister, Alexander Hislop, devotes several chapters of his book The Two Babylons (*2) to showing how this original belief in one god was replaced by the triads of paganism which were eventually absorbed into Catholic Church dogmas. A more recent Egyptologist, Erick Hornung, refutes the original monotheism of Egypt: '[Monotheism is] a phenomenon restricted to the wisdom texts,' which were written between 2600 and 2530 BC (50-51); but there is no question that ancient man believed in 'one infinite and Almighty Creator, supreme over all' (*2); and in a multitude of gods at a later point. Nor is there any doubt that the most common grouping of gods was a triad. (*32).

As the apostles died, various writers undertook the task of defending Christianity against the persecutions evoked by the Church's expansion. (*10)
The most famous of these Apologists was Justin Martyr (c.107-166 AD). He was born a pagan, became a pagan philosopher, then a Christian. He believed that Christianity and Greek Philosophy were related. According to McGiffert, "Justin insisted that Christ came from God; he did not identify him with God. . . [He] conceiv[ed] of God as a transcendent being, who could not possibly come into contact with the world of men and things." (*10).

An exhaustive review of Scripture and history reveals the simple fact that the Trinity teaching was unknown to the early New Testament Christians. That the doctrine of the Trinity is a "borrowed doctrine" and foreign to the Scriptures is supported by many authorities. Under the article Trinity we read, "The term 'Trinity' is not a biblical term...In point of fact, the doctrine of the Trinity is a purely revealed doctrine...As the doctrine of the Trinity is indiscoverable by reason, so it is incapable of proof from reason" (*14).


As can readily be seen from the foregoing, even the concept of the Trinity came from the pagan world, and the Bible shows " In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them." (*33) is trying to keep out the glorious gospel of Christ. Satan the Devil is slipping false dogma in its place. Do not be trapped by him, reject false dogma of the Trinity.

See References & Appendix

REFERENCES:

*1 - Saggs,H. W. F. "The Greatness that was Babylon: A Sketch of the Ancient Civilization of the Tigris-Euphrates Valley." New York: New American Library. 1968.
*2 - Hislop, Alexander. "The Two Babylons: Or, the Papal Worship." 1853. 2nd American ed. Neptune: Loizeaux. 1959.
*3 - Hart, George. "Egyptian Myths." Austin: U of Texas. 1990.
*4 - Durant, Will. "Our Oriental Heritage". New York: Simon. 1935. Vol. 1 of The Story of Civilization.11 vols. 1935-75. (page 201)
*5 - Hornung, Erik. "Conceptions of God in Ancient Egypt: The One and the Many." Trans. John Baines. Ithaca: Cornell UP. 1982.
*6 - Durant, Will. "Caesar and Christ." New York: Simon. 1944. Vol. 3 of The Story of Civilization. 11 vols. 1935-75. (page 595)
*7 - Laing, Gordon Jennings. "Survivals of Roman Religion.". New York: Cooper Square Publishers. 1963.
*8 - The Encyclopedia of Religions.
*9 - Carter, Jesse Benedict. "The Religious Life of Ancient Rome: A Study in the Development of Religious Consciousness, from the Foundation of the City Until the Death of Gregory the Great." New York: Cooper Square Publishers. 1972. (page 16-19).
*10 - Pelikan, Jaroslav. "The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition" (100-600). Chicago: U of Chicago P. 1971. Vol. 1 of "The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine." 5 vols.
*11 -
*11 - Morodenibig, Naba Lamoussa. "Light From the Trinities."
*12 - Edersheim Bible History (page 59-62).
*13 - New Catholic Encyclopedia, (Vol. XIV, 306).
*14 - International Encyclopedia of the Bible," Vol. 5, (page 3012).
*15 - The New Chain-Reference Bible, 4 th. Ed. (King James Bible), (page 116 in NT, John 14:29)
*16 - The Holy Bible (King James Bible), American Bible Society, NY (page 10 in NT, Matthew 10:40).
*17 - The Holy Bible, The Douay Version of the OT-The Confraternity Edition of the NT, John C. Winton Co., Philadelphia, Pa., (page 109 in NT, St. Luke 22:42).
*18 - The Holy Bible, The Douay Version of the OT-The Confraternity Edition of the NT, John C. Winton Co., Philadelphia, Pa., (page 205 in NT, Romans 11:25).
*19 - The Holy Bible, The Douay Version of the OT-The Confraternity Edition of the NT, John C. Winton Co., Philadelphia, Pa., (page 210 in NT, Romans 16:25)
*20 - The Holy Bible, The Douay Version of the OT-The Confraternity Edition of the NT, John C. Winton Co., Philadelphia, Pa., (page 213 in NT, 1 Corinthians 2:7).
*21 - The Holy Bible, The Douay Version of the OT-The Confraternity Edition of the NT, John C. Winton Co., Philadelphia, Pa., (page 227 in NT,1 Corinthians 15:51).
*22 - The New Chain-Reference Bible, 4 th. Ed. (King James Bible), (page 202 in NT, Ephesians 1:9).
*23 - The New Chain-Reference Bible, 4 th. Ed. (King James Bible), (page 206 in NT, Ephesians 6:19).
*24 - The New Chain-Reference Bible, 4 th. Ed. (King James Bible), (page 210 in NT, Colossians 1:27).
*25 - New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures, 1984 revision, (pages 1517 and 1519, 1 John 7; also 1 John 4:1-3).
*26 - McClintock & Strong's Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, Vol. 6
*27 - Lamson, Newton & Durant, Will, "Caesar and Christ," cited from Charles Redeker Caesar and Christ, W. Duran (page 595).
*28 - ENCYLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, 11th Edition, Vol. 3, (page 366).
*29 - Payne, Robert, "The Holy Fire: The Story of the Early Centuries of the Christian Churches in the Near East" (1957); BETHUNE-BAKER, J,F. "An Introduction to the Early History of Christian Doctrine". Methuen; 5th Ed., 1933 and ENCYLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, 11th Edition, Vol. 3, (page 366); David, Francis and Blandrata, Georgio, "De falsa et vera unius Dei Patris, Filii, et Spiritus Sancti cognitone" [Latin](The False and True Knowledge of the Unity of God the Father, Son, and Holy spirit), 1566 A.D.; Eklof, Todd F., "David's Francis Tower, Strength through Peace," (06-16-02); The New Encyclopedia Britannica: " Micropædia, Vol. X, p. 126. (1976); Parkes, James, "The Foundation of Judaism and Christianity," 1960; Durant, Will. "Caesar and Christ." New York: Simon. 1944. Vol. 3 of The Story of Civilization. 11 vols. 1935-75.
*30 - Durant, Will, "Age of Faith,"
*31 - Jonas, Hans, "The Gnostic religion: the message of the alien God and the beginnings of Christianity," 2nd ed., 1963.
*32 - Hagensick, Cher-El L, "The Origin of the Trinity: From Paganism to Constantine."
*33 - The Holy Bible (King James Bible), American Bible Society, NY (page 185, 2 Corinthians 4:4).

APPENDIX TO DISCOURSE ON MAINSTREAM RELIGION:


(1) it wasn't until the Council of Nicea that Babylonian paganism became the official doctrine of "modern" Christianity. [The Foundation of Judaism and Christianity, James Parkes, 196

(2) It is customary in Trinitarian language to speak of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. These are assumed to be proper titles, and used extensively. Yet in the Scriptures only one of these appears, "God the Father," and that not as a title, but an expression denoting that God is the Father. "There is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things ... and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things" (1 Corinthians 8:6). The term appears 11 times in the New Testament. By contrast, the terms "God the Son" and "God the Holy Spirit" appear zero times.


(3) Will Durant, the popular Catholic historian of our day, wrote: "Christianity did not destroy paganism; it adopted it ... pagan cultures contributed to the syncretist results. From Egypt came the ideas of a divine trinity ... [Caesar and Christ, page 595) (Lamson, Newton & Durant cited from Charles Redeker, To Us there is One God, June 197 ]

(4) When Constantine succeeded in becoming sole emperor of Rome in A.D. 324, he publicly embraced Christianity. Politically, he saw Christianity as an effective tool of unifying his domain and therefore viewed the Arian controversy as a significant threat to his goal. To solve the problem, in 325 he convened the first ecumenical council of Christendom since Bible days, paying for the delegates to come to the town of Nicea, near the imperial residence. [The FORWARD magazine, January - March 1996, volume 28, No. 1]

(5) It was of great importance in Christian and even in world history," wrote historian W.H.C. Frend about the first Council of Nicea. In Christian history, the doctrine of Christ's divinity (a doctrine essential and unique to Christianity) was formally affirmed for the first time. In world history, never before had the entire church gathered to determine policy and doctrine (let alone at the bidding of the Roman emperor).The follow article, written by the late writer and biographer Robert Payne (d. 1983), is excerpted and adapted from his "The Holy Fire: The Story of the Early Centuries of the Christian Churches in the Near East" (1957).

A - It was at the Council of Nicea, in 325 AD that the Roman Sun-day or day of the Sun was declared to be the Christian Sabbath along with the worship of the sun being the official state religion.

B - It was at the Council of Nicea, in 325 AD that the emblem of the Sun god, the cross of light, was adopted as the emblem of Christianity. ....

(6) Around the start of the 4th Century AD, The Roman Empire was governed by the Emperor Constantine. The Empire at this time was not in the best of health, being a morass of different cults and belief systems. The official state religion was the worship of Sol Invictus, the Sun God, and this was Constantine's own religion. However, the relatively new cult, as it then was, of Christianity was starting to enjoy a groundswell of support, and it did not require much thought to see that steps needed to be taken if Rome's tenuous grip on the Empire was to be strengthened. [British Broadcasting Corp., www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A307487]

(7) CONSTANT1NE was faced with a very difficult problem when he became Emperor of the Roman Empire in 313 A.D., for he made himself the head of the church, and thus the problems of the church became his responsibilities. As a whole the Western Empire with its Roman influence, with some exceptions, had accepted Tertullian and his new theory of the Trinity in the early part of the previous century, but in the East the church adhered more closely to the older formula of baptism in the name of Jesus, or Jesus the Christ. Especially was this true with the Armenians, who specified that baptism "into the death of Christ" was that which alone was essential [ENCYLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, 11th Edition, Vol. 3, page 366]

( "The three-in-one/one-in-three mystery of Father, Son and Holy Ghost made tritheism official. The subsequent almost-deification of the Virgin Mary made it quatrotheism . . . Finally, cart-loads of saints raised to quarter-deification turned Christianity into plain old-fashioned polytheism. By the time of the Crusades, it was the most polytheistic religion to ever have existed, with the possible exception of Hinduism. This untenable contradiction between the assertion of monotheism and the reality of polytheism was dealt with by accusing other religions of the Christian fault. The Church - Catholic and later Protestant - turned aggressively on the two most clearly monotheistic religions in view - Judaism and Islam - and persecuted them as heathen or pagan. The external history of Christianity consists largely of accusations that other religions rely on the worship of more than one god and therefore not the true God. These pagans must therefore be converted, conquered and/or killed for their own good in order that they benefit from the singularity of the Holy Trinity, plus appendages." - {The Doubter's Companion (John Ralston Saul)}

(9)To Jesus and Paul the doctrine of the trinity was apparently unknown; . . . they say nothing about it." - [Yale University Professor E. Washburn Hopkins: Origin and Evolution of Religion.]

(10)As early as the 8th century, the Theologian St. John of Damascus frankly admitted what every modern critical scholar of the NT now realizes: that neither the Doctrine of the Trinity nor that of the 2 natures of Jesus Christ is explicitly set out in scripture. In fact, if you take the record as it is and avoid reading back into it the dogmatic definitions of a later age, you cannot find what is traditionally regarded as orthodox Christianity in the Bible at all." - [Tom Harpur states, For Christ's Sake. ]

(11) Historian Arthur Weigall: "Jesus Christ never mentioned such a phenomenon, and nowhere in the New Testament does the word 'Trinity' appear. The idea was only adopted by the Church three hundred years after the death of our Lord." - [Historian Arthur Weigall: The Paganism in Our Christianity ]

(12) Neither the word Trinity, nor the explicit doctrine as such, appears in the New Testament, nor did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict the Shema in the Old Testament: 'Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord' -- Deut. 6:4
. . . The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies . . . By the end of the 4th century . . . the doctrine of the Trinity took substantially the form it has maintained ever since." -[The New Encyclopedia Britannica: " Micropædia, Vol. X, p. 126. (1976) ]

(13) The formulation 'one God in three Persons' was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century. But it is precisely this formulation that has first claim to the title the Trinitarian dogma. Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective." [The New Catholic Encyclopedia states: "- (1967), Vol. XIV, p. 299. ]

See Part 3:

[iris89]

Part 3:

(14) The Encyclopedia Americana: "Christianity derived from Judaism and Judaism was strictly Unitarian [believing that God is one person]. The road which led from Jerusalem to Nicea was scarcely a straight one. Fourth century Trinitarianism did not reflect accurately early Christian teaching regarding the nature of God; it was, on the contrary, a deviation from this teaching." -[ The Encyclopedia Americana: " (1956), Vol. XXVII, p. 294L. ]

(15) The Nouveau Dictionnaire Universel, "The Platonic trinity, itself merely a rearrangement of older trinities dating back to earlier peoples, appears to be the rational philosophic trinity of attributes that gave birth to the three hypostases or divine persons taught by the Christian churches . . . This Greek philosopher's [Plato, fourth century B.C.E.] conception of the divine trinity . . . can be found in all the ancient [pagan] religions." -[ The Nouveau Dictionnaire Universel, " (Paris, 1865-1870), edited by M. Lachâtre, Vol. 2, p. 1467.]

(16) "The belief as so defined was reached only in the 4th and 5th centuries AD and hence is not explicitly and formally a biblical belief. The trinity of persons within the unity of nature is defined in terms of "person" and "nature: which are Gk philosophical terms; actually the terms do not appear in the Bible. The trinitarian definitions arose as the result of long controversies in which these terms and others such as "essence" and "substance" were erroneously applied to God by some theologians." [Dictionary of the Bible by John L. McKenzie, S.J. p. 899 ]

(17) "Anyone who can worship a trinity and insist that his religion is a monotheism can believe anything." - [Robert A. Heinlein]

First, From www.convert.org/differ.htm GOD Judaism insists on a notion of monotheism, the idea that there is one God. As Judaism understands this idea, God cannot be made up of parts, even if those parts are mysteriously united. The Christian notion of Trinitarianism is that God is made up of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. Such a view, even if called monotheistic because the three parts are, by divine mystery, only one God, is incompatible with the Jewish view that such a division is not possible. The Jewish revolutionary idea is that God is one. This idea allows for God's unity and uniqueness as a creative force. Thus, for Jews, God is the creator of all that we like and all that we don't. There is no evil force with an ability to create equal to God's. Judaism sees Christianity's Trinitarianism as a weakening of the idea of God's oneness. Jews don't have a set group of beliefs about the nature of God; therefore, there is considerable, and approved, debate within Judaism about God. However, all mainstream Jewish groups reject the idea of God's having three parts. Indeed, many Jews see an attempt to divide God as a partial throwback, or compromise with, the pagan conception of many gods.

Second, Why was the Trinity adopted and for what reason? To understand we need to look at the conditions of the Roman Empire in the early 4 th. Century. The Roman Empire at this time was being torn apart by religious differences between pagans, mostly Sun God worshippers, and Christianity. Constantine the Emporer was a worshipper of the Unconquered Sun, but he was a very pragmatic individual and saw the need to bring religious unity to his empire. The central doctrine of the pagans was the dogma of a Trinity that they had received from earlier pagans in Babylon (Chaldea). In this, the pagan Emperor, Constantine, saw a possibility for unifying his empire if he could only lead the majority of the Christians to accept a Trinity or a Duality. He knew however that he had to make them think it was their own idea. To this end, he, the Roman emperor Constantine summoned all bishops to Nicaea, about 300, but even though it was the emperor's direction, only a fraction actually attended.

This council went on for a very long time and the emperor worked behind the scene to get support for a Trinity or a Duality. This effort was not completely successful, but finally he got a majority and declared under imperial degree that this hence forth would be the central doctrinal pillar of the Christian church, which by this time was apostate. Even with this declaration by the emperor himself not all bishops signed the creed.

So is was the political product of an apostate church, an apostate church that allowed a pagan Roman Emporer, Constantine, to tell it which dogma to accept at the Council of Nicea in 325 A.D., and then have it rammed down their throats as blessed dogma by another Roman Emporer, Theodosius, at the Council of Constantinople in 381 A.D. This in direct violation of God's (YHWH's) word found in the Bible " Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God." (James 4:4 AV), " If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." (John 15:19 AV).

(18) Jamieson, Fausett and Brown, volume 6, page 643, regarding I John 5:7 "The only Greek manuscripts, in any form which support the words 'in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth...' are the Montfortianus of Dublin, copied evidently from the modern Latin Vulgate; the Ravianus copied from the Complutensian Polyglot; a manuscript at Naples, with the words added in the margin by a recent hand; Ottobonianus, 298, of the 15th century, the Greek of which is a mere translation of the accompanying Latin. All old versions omit the words."

(19) World Book Encyclopedia, volume 19, page 363 "Trinity - is a term used of God to express the belief that in the one God there are three divine persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (or Holy Ghost). The idea of trinity is drawn from the teaching of Christ as recorded in the New Testament. Belief in Father, Son and Holy Spirit was first defined by the earliest general council of churches. This was the First Council of Nicaea in 325. This council declared that the Spirit is of the same substance as the Father. The Eastern and Western branches of the church later disagreed as to how the Holy Spirit proceeds from the other divine Persons. The Eastern Church held that the Spirit comes from the Father and the Son comes from the Father through the Spirit. The Western Church held that the Spirit comes from the Father and Son together. Most Christians believe that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit have equal power and glory. Each has His own activity. The Father creates; the Son saves souls; and the Spirit makes holy."

(20) From Funk and Wagnalls New Encyclopedia, 1972, volume 23, page 291 "Trinity - in Christian theology, doctrine, according to the Book of Common Prayer that in 'unity of the Godhead there be three Persons, of one substance, power, and eternity, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost'. The most elaborate statement of the doctrine is to be found in the Athanasian Creed, which asserts that 'the Catholic faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity, neither confounding the persons nor dividing the substance, for there is one person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost is all one; the glory equal; the majesty coeternal.' "The term Trinitas was first used, in the second century, by the Christian ecclesiastical writer Tertullian, but the concept took form only in the debates on Christology. It was not until the progress of opposing parties sought, on the one hand, to degrade the divine dignity of Christ (Ebionitism in its various forms and Arianism) or, on the other hand, to confound the personality of Christ with God the Father, that the Church was led to define in the Nicaean Creed the relation of the Son to the Father and further, in the Nicaeno-Constantinopolitan Creed, the relation of the Holy Ghost to the Father."

(21) From Sacred Origins of Profound Things, by Charles Panati, pages 302-306 "Among the three great monotheistic religions, only Christianity embraces the Trinitarian Creed: the coexistence of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit in a single Godhead, distinctly different, yet one and the same." "One might ask - as Jews and Muslims repeatedly have - isn't it cheating for a religion to be monotheistic if it recognizes three distinctly different Gods? Three Gods; three different names; three different functions: the Creator, the Redeemer, the Sanctifier. Should, Muslims suggested, this not be called 'tritheism'? "Significantly, the Christian books of the Bible - the Gospels, Acts, Epistles (or letters), Revelation, and the Apocrypha ('things that are hidden') - make no explicit reference to a three-fold Godhead. "Nor did Jesus, a Jew, perhaps with rabbinic training, violate the Judaic motto - 'Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord' - in his teachings. "God the Father does mention God the Son in the New Testament, and the Son in turn mentions the Father and the Holy Spirit. The outline of a trinity is there, but it is never clearly delineated "Early in the fourth century, the Trinitarian controversy heated to the high point of heresy, pitting two theologians, Athanasius and Arius, against each other and drawing concern from the Roman emperor Constantine himself who had warmed up to Christianity and would eventually convert. "Today, Arius' name is a byword for heresy: the Arian Heresy. "Back in 320, Arius, who knew Scripture inside and out - and was a skilled propagandist and musician - insisted that Christ, the Word, Logos could only be a creature like ourselves, created by God. When he put his ideas to music and sang songs of Christ's second-rank status to God, thousands of ordinary Christians, once content in their monotheism, became aware of the passionate debate raging among bishops. "Christian bishops gathered at Nicaea on May 20, 325, convening the Council of Nicaea, which, after much acrimonious contention, decided upon the crucial formula for the Trinitarian doctrine, setting it forth in a credo, the Nicaean Creed. The Son, it declared, is 'of the same essence as the Father.' The creed said troublingly little about the Holy Spirit. "In fact, the entire lengthy creed, as first written, wrestles with logic and common sense to equate Father and Son, giving nod to the Holy Spirit only in the last passing line: 'And we believe in the Holy Ghost.' "The controversy raged on for some years. Later the Nicaean Creed was revised under the leadership of Basil, bishop of Caesarea. It was altered to end 'We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father'.

(22) "Thus, the concept of the Trinity did not take its present form until some 400 years after Christ's death." From Brewer's Dictionary of Phrase and Fable, revised by Ivor H. Evans, page 1101.

(23) "The Trinity - the three Persons in one God - God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost. "And in this Trinity none is afore, or after other; none is greater or less than another; but the whole three Persons are co-eternal together; and co-equal. The Athanasian Creed "The term triad was first used by Theophilus of Antioch (c. 180) for this concept; the term Trinity was introduced by Tertullian about 217 in his treatise Adversus Praxean." From Hastings Bible Dictionary, volume 12, page 458

(24) From the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, volume 4, page 3012-3014, "The term 'Trinity' is not a Biblical term and we are not using Biblical language when we define what is expressed by it as the doctrine that there is one only and true God, but in the unity of the Godhead there are three coeternal and coequal Persons, the same in substance but distinct in subsistence. A doctrine so defined can be spoken of as a Biblical doctrine only on the principle that the sense of Scripture is Scripture. And the definition of a Biblical doctrine in such un-Biblical language can be justified only on the principle that it is better to preserve the truth of Scripture than the words of Scripture.
"...the doctrine of the Trinity is given to us in Scripture, not in formulated doctrine, but in fragmentary allusions.
"The doctrine of the Trinity is purely a revealed doctrine. That is to say, it embodies a truth which has never been discovered, and is indiscoverable, by natural reason.
"Triads of divinities, no doubt, occur in nearly all polytheistic religions, formed under very various influences. Sometimes, as in the Egyptian triad of Osiris, Isis and Horus, it is the analogy of the human family with its father, mother and son which lies at their basis. Sometimes they are the effect of mere syncretism, three deities worshipped in different localities being brought together in the common worship of all.
"Sometimes they are the result apparently of nothing more than odd human tendency to think in threes, which has given the number three wide-spread standing as a sacred number.
"It should be needless to say that none of these triads has the slightest resemblance to the Christian doctrine of the Trinity.
"As the doctrine of the Trinity is indiscoverable by reason, so it is incapable of proof from reason. There are no analogies to it in Nature, not even in the spiritual nature of man, who is made in the image of God. In His Trinitarian mode of being, God is unique; and, as there is nothing in the universe like Him in this respect, so there is nothing which can help us to comprehend Him. Many attempts have, nevertheless, been made to construct a rational proof of the Trinity of the Godhead.
"Certainly we cannot speak broadly of the revelation of the doctrine of the Trinity in the Old Testament. It is a plain matter of fact that none who have depended on the revelation embodied in the Old Testament alone have ever attained to the doctrine of the Trinity.
"It would seem clear that we must recognize in the Old Testament doctrine of the relation of God to His revelation by the creative Word and the Spirit, at least the germ of the distinctions in the Godhead afterward fully made known in the Christian revelation."

(25) "Trinity: Because the Trinity is such an important part of later Christian doctrine, it is striking that the term does not appear in the New Testament. Likewise, the developed concept of three coequal partners in the Godhead found in later creedal formulations cannot be clearly detected within the confines of the canon.
"Later believers systematized the diverse references to God, Jesus and the Spirit found in the New Testament in order to fight against heretical tendencies of how the three are related. Elaboration on the concept of a Trinity also serves to defend the church against charges of di- or tritheism. Since the Christians have come to worship Jesus as god (Pliny, Epistles 96.7), how can they claim to be continuing the monotheistic tradition of the God of Israel? Various answers are suggested, debated, and rejected as heretical, but the idea of a Trinity - one God subsisting in three persons and one substance - ultimately prevails.
"While the New Testament writers say a great deal about God, Jesus, and the Spirit of each, no New Testament writer expounds on the relationship among the three in the detail that later Christian writers do.
"The earliest New Testament evidence for a tripartite formula comes in 2 Corinthians 13:14, where Paul wishes that 'the grace of the Lord Jesus, the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit' be with the people of Corinth. It is possible that this three-part formula derives from later liturgical usage and was added to the text of 2 Corinthians as it was copied. In support of the authenticity of the passage, however, it must be said that the phrasing is much closer to Paul's understandings of God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit than to a more fully developed concept of the Trinity. Jesus, referred to not as Son, but as Lord and Christ, is mentioned first and is connected with the central Pauline theme of grace. God is referred to as a source of love, not as father, and the Spirit promotes sharing within the community. The word 'holy' does not appear before 'spirit' in the earliest manuscript evidence for this passage." From The Oxford Companion to the Bible, edited by Bruce M Metzger and Michael D Coogan, page 782.

(26)McClintock and Strong's Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, "proves only that there are the three subjects named, . . . but it does not prove, by itself, that all the three belong necessarily to the divine nature, and possess equal divine honor."

(27) "Trinity - this word is not used in the Bible. It is the name given to the statements about God in the creeds drawn up in the early centuries of the church to explain what is meant by saying that God is Father, Son and Holy Spirit. This is the teaching of Jesus and the New Testament as a whole. From earliest times it was stated at every Christian baptism.
"The Jewish teaching was that there is only one God. No one and nothing must compromise that belief. Yet the New Testament writers clearly show God as the Father who created and sustained everything in his love and power, as the Son who came into this world, and as the Spirit who worked in their own lives.
"After the end of the New Testament period the church found it necessary to work out carefully worded statements about three persons in one God, in order to uphold the truth of the New Testament against false beliefs." From The Lion Encyclopedia of the Bible, page 158.

(24) The Trinitarian dogma, The Cyclopoedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, New York 1871, by John M'Clintock and James Strong, Vol. II, page 560-561, states, "We worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; neither confounding the persons, nor dividing the substance. For there is one person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost is all one: the glory equal, the majesty coeternal. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Ghost.....The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Ghost eternal...So likewise the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, and the Holy Ghost almighty...So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet there are not three Gods, but one God...The Father is made of none, neither created nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone; not made, nor created, but begotten. The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son; neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding...And in this Trinity none is afore or after other; none is greater or less than another. But the whole three persons are coeternal together, and coequal. So that in all things, as is afore said, the Unity in Trinity and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshipped. He therefore that will be saved must thus think of the Trinity." [this is the Athanasian Creed quoted in the above mentioned Cyclopoedia].

(25) Ralph Martin, in The Epistle of Paul to the Philippians, says of the original Greek: "It is questionable, however, whether the sense of the verb can glide from its real meaning of 'to seize', 'to snatch violently' to that of 'to hold fast.'" The Expositor's Greek Testament also says: "We cannot find any passage where [har·pa'zo] or any of its derivatives has the sense of 'holding in possession,' 'retaining'. It seems invariably to mean 'seize,' 'snatch violently'. Thus it is not permissible to glide from the true sense 'grasp at' into one which is totally different, 'hold fast.'" From the foregoing it is apparent that the translators of versions such as the Douay and the King James are bending the rules to support Trinitarian ends. Far from saying that Jesus thought it was appropriate to be equal to God, the Greek of Philippians 2:6, when read objectively, shows just the opposite, that Jesus did not think it was appropriate. The context of the surrounding verses (3-5, 7, 8, Dy) makes it clear how verse 6 is to be understood. The Philippians were urged: "In humility, let each esteem others better than themselves." Then Paul uses Christ as the outstanding example of this attitude: "Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus." What "mind"? To 'think it not robbery to be equal with God'? No, that would be just the opposite of the point being made! Rather, Jesus, who 'esteemed God as better than himself,' would never 'grasp for equality with God,' but instead he "humbled himself, becoming obedient unto death." Surely, that cannot be talking about any part of Almighty God. It was talking about Jesus Christ, who perfectly illustrated Paul's point here-namely the importance of humility and obedience to one's Superior and Creator, Jehovah God.


LINKS TO USEFUL SITES ON THE TRINITY:

www.maxpages.com/yahshua/Trinity_Links www.yahsaves.org/learn/Booklets/trinity.htm www.geocities.com/yhwhbible/ghoward.htm hector3000.future.easyspace.com/mark2.htmhttp://www.yahsaves.org/learn/Booklets/trinity.htm www.nazarite.net/holytrinity.html www.yahsaves.org/learn/Booklets/trinity.htm askelm.com/doctrine/d910201.htm www.heraldmag.org/olb/FACTS%20ABOUT%20THE%20TRINITY.htm www.uq.net.au/~zzrlakes/trinity.html www.gospeloutreach.net/trinbrief.html members.aol.com/hector3001/christology.htm www.reslight.addr.com/jesusnotyahweh.html www.ubook.org/upapers/ubpaper104.html www.torahofmessiah.com/ www.eliyah.com/talmidim/trinity.html home.earthlink.net/%7Eeeshgeebor/Messiahrevealed.htmhttp://pub13.ezboard.com/fneedsomewisdomfrm10.showMessage?topicID=228.topic pub13.ezboard.com/fneedsomewisdomfrm10.showMessage?topicID=226.topic pub13.ezboard.com/fneedsomewisdomfrm10.showMessage?topicID=224.topic pub13.ezboard.com/fneedsomewisdomfrm10.showMessage?topicID=110.topic pub13.ezboard.com/fneedsomewisdomfrm10.showMessage?topicID=109.topic pub13.ezboard.com/fneedsomewisdomfrm10.showMessage?topicID=106.topic pub13.ezboard.com/fneedsomewisdomfrm10.showMessage?topicID=104.topic pub13.ezboard.com/fneedsomewisdomfrm10.showMessage?topicID=103.topic

[iris89]

WESTMINSTER CONFESSION AN EXAMPLE OF TWISTING BY USE OF HERMENEUTIC February 15 2005, 1:10 AM

WESTMINSTER CONFESSION AN EXAMPLE OF TWISTING BY USE OF HERMENEUTIC METHODOLOGY TO BACK UP A MYTH/FALSE DOCTRINE:

<INTRODUCTION>

The Westminster Confession of faith was written by one Cornelius Burges, Assessor to the Westminster Assembly, in 1646. He was a very skilled individual with respect twisting the scriptures and chose hermeneutic methodology over 'Sola Scriptura' methodology as hermeneutic methodology was well suited for twisting the scripture to eloquently make it appear that the Word of God supported what ever you wanted it to; whereas, this could NOT be done with 'Sola Scripture' methodology unless it was greatly distorted and no longer true 'Sola Scriptura' methodology.

In Section 2 of the Westminister Confession of faith dealing with the Trinity myth which he supported, he did a masterpiece of deception in obfuscating the Word of God to make it appear that it backed his favorite myth/false doctrine of the Trinity which of course it does not. In fact, nowhere does the word Trinity even appear in the Bible, as was noted by the International Encyclopedia of the Bible (*1). He carefully crafted his deception in three parts, the first, 'There is but one only living, and true God:' is true and designed to throw one off guard to the deception to follow in the last part of Section 2, clever as is the deception of any con man. The second part, 'God hath all life,(a) glory,(b) goodness,© blessedness,(d) in and of Himself;' is likewise basically true, but with some very subtle deception or twisting in it designed to develop the readers confidence so the reader will gulp down the God (YHWH) dishonoring false doctrine and myth of the third part as Truth which of course it is anything but.

<FIRST AND SECOND PART OF A CLEVER DECEPTION>

I. There is but one only,(a) living, and true God:(b) who is infinite in being and perfection,© a most pure spirit,(d) invisible,(e) without body, parts,(f) or passions,(g) immutable,(h) immense,(i) eternal,(k) incomprehensible,(l) almighty,(m) most wise,(n) most holy,(o) most free,(p) most absolute,(q) working all things according to the counsel of His own immutable and most righteous will,® for His own glory;(s) most loving,(t) gracious, merciful, long-suffering, abundant in goodness and truth, forgiving iniquity, transgression, and sin;(u) the rewarder of them that diligently seek Him;(w) and withal, most just and terrible in His judgments,(x) hating all sin,(y) and who will by no means clear the guilty.(z)

(a) Deut. 6:4; I Cor. 8:4, 6.
(b) I Thess. 1:9; Jer. 10:10.
© Job 11:7, 8, 9; Job 26:14.
(d) John 4:24.
(e) I Tim. 1:17.
(f) Deut. 4:15, 16; John 4:24, with Luke 24:39.
(g) Acts 14:11, 15.
(h) James 1:17; Mal. 3:6.
(i) I Kings 8:27; Jer. 23:23, 24.
(k) Ps. 90:2; I Tim. 1:17.
(l) Ps. 145:3.
(m) Gen. 17:1; Rev. 4:8.
(n) Rom. 16:27.
(o) Isa. 6:3; Rev. 4:8.
(p) Ps. 115:3.
(q) Exod. 3:14.
® Eph. 1:11.
(s) Prov. 16:4; Rom. 11:36.
(t) I John 4:8, 16.
(u) Exod. 34:6, 7.
(w) Heb. 11:6.
(x) Neh. 9:32, 33.
(y) Ps. 5:5, 6.
(z) Nah. 1:2, 3; Exod. 34:7.

II. God hath all life,(a) glory,(b) goodness,© blessedness,(d) in and of Himself; and is alone in and unto Himself all-sufficient, not standing in need of any creatures which He hath made,(e) nor deriving any glory from them,(f) but only manifesting His own glory in, by, unto, and upon them: He is the alone fountain of all being, of whom, through whom, and to whom are all things;(g) and hath most sovereign dominion over them, to do by them, for them, or upon them whatsoever Himself pleaseth.(h) In His sight all things are open and manifest;(i) His knowledge is infinite, infallible, and independent upon the creature,(k) so as nothing is to Him contingent, or uncertain.(l) He is most holy in all His counsels, in all His works, and in all His commands.(m) To Him is due from angels and men, and every other creature, whatsoever worship, service, or obedience He is pleased to require of them.(n)

(a) John 5:26.
(b) Acts 7:2.
© Ps. 119:68.
(d) I Tim. 6:15; Rom. 9:5.
(e) Acts 17:24, 25.
(f) Job 22:2, 3.
(g) Rom 11:36.
(h) Rev. 4:11; I Tim. 6:15; Dan. 4:25, 35.
(i) Heb. 4:13.
(k) Rom. 11:33, 34; Ps. 147:5.
(l) Acts 15:18; Ezek. 11:5.
(m) Ps. 145:17; Rom. 7:12.
(n) Rev. 5:12, 13, 14.

Please note his reference to scripture in both part 1 and 2 designed to gain the readers confidence who does not realize the difference between hermeneutic methodology which is usually used to twist and true 'Sola Scriptura' methodology which is designed to bring out Bible Truths or to let the Bible interpret itself per 2 Peter 1:20, "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.," (Authorized King James Bible; AV). Also, please bear in mind the following two scriptures from the Old Testament when we next discuss Section 3 and think why they show this whole section is error. These scriptures are:

Psalm 80:17 "Let thy hand be upon the MAN of thy right hand, upon the son of man whom thou madest strong for thyself." (AV).

In Colossians 3:1 "If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God." (AV).

Now just thing, If Jesus Christ sits on the right hand of God, then he must be the MAN mentioned in Psalm 80:17. And if Jesus Christ is the MAN that sits on the right hand of God...., obviously Cornelius Burges, Assessor to the Westminster Assembly, is a deceptive twister and all he says is to be rejected as the God (YHWH) dishonoring teaching of mankind warned against at Titus 1:10-11, "For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they of the circumcision: 11 Whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre's sake." (AV); remember many false prophets like Cornelius Burgess, per 1 John 4:1, "Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world." (AV).

<SECTION THREE, THE GREAT DECEPTION>

Section three shall be covered by first presenting exactly what the deceiver Cornelius Burgess wrote, and the scriptures he used in a hermeneutics methodology way of deceiving to seemingly back up the false doctrine and myth he was presenting. Then, each scripture he used in his deception will be commented on individually to show its true Biblical significance as the Word of God so all will be able to understand how Cornelius Burgess was being deceitful and twisting the Word of God.

III. In the unity of the Godhead there be three persons, of one substance, power, and eternity; God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost.(o) The Father is of none, neither begotten, nor proceeding: the Son is eternally begotten of the Father:(p) the Holy Ghost eternally proceeding from the Father and the Son.(q)

(o) I John 5:7; Matt. 3:16, 17; Matt. 28:19; II Cor. 13:14.
(p) John 1:14, 18.
(q) John 15:26; Gal. 4:6.

Now we shall deal with each scripture individually by section:

<<Sub Section 'O' Commentaries on the Scriptures>>

The first scripture, the deceiver Cornelius Burgess used was an added to scripture of 1 John 5:7 as contained in the Authorized King James Bible which is the most well known intentional distortion of scripture in the entire Bible, what lack of integrity and honesty:

Commentary on 1 John 5:7:

1 John 5:7 "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one." (Authorized King James: AV)

1 John 5:7 "And there are Three who give testimony in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost. And these three are one." (Douay-Rheims Catholic Bible)

1 John 5:7 " For there are three that testify:" (New American Standard Bible: NASB)

1 John 5:7 "There are three that testify:" (New Revised Standard Version; NRSV)

1 John 5:7 "quia tres sunt qui testimonium dant (The Latin Vulgate)

As one can clearly see these three scriptures all of 1 John 5:7, are quite different, now why is this? Let's find out!

Many say 1 John 5:7 is the center masterpiece for the concept of the Trinity, i.e., the center or sustaining gem so to speak of this doctrine. One such follows:

This is the only passage in the whole Bible that gives any color to the trinity or "oneness" doctrines. It is the central crystal of the Christian faith upon which we hold the blessed trinity to be ever eternal self-evident to all. [Catholic pamphlet from 1903]

Now for this to be true, the Authorized King James and the Douay-Rheims Catholic Bible versions would of necessity have to be true and the New American Standard Bible rendering false; but then Jerome's original Latin Vulgate had a rendering more in line with the New American Standard Bible (NASB) so there is cast the question of why the earliest Catholic bible was quite different from the present.

Really one or the other would have to be an intentional corruption of scripture in violation of Revelation 22:18, "It testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God shall add to him the plagues which are written in this book;" (NASB)

Clearly someone has added to one of these two renderings of 1 John 5:7 since this is clearly NOT a difference resulting from differs in translation. Now which has been added to in violation of God's (YHWH's) commandment as recorded by his Apostle John?

Well let's see what the Moody Bible Institute has to say on this in one of their publications. "The text of this verse should read, 'Because there are three that bear record.' The remainder of the verse is spurious. Not a single manuscript contains the Trinitarian addition before the fourteenth century, and the verse is never quoted in the controversies over the Trinity in the first 450 years of the church era." [The Wycliffe Bible Commentary," edited by Charles F. Pfeiffer (OT) and Earett F. Harrison (NT), by Moody Press, Chicago, a division of Moody Bible Institute, ISBN: 0-8024-9695-4, Library of Congress Catalogue Card #: 62-20893, page 1477].

Quite an admission from an institute that is pro-Trinitarian; therefore, the New American Standard Bible is correct and the Authorized King James and the Douay-Rheims Catholic Bible are in gross error here with respect to this addition made in violation of the command of Revelation 18:22. My what a surprise. In fact this corruption, "and these three are one" was added by a monk, and is so well knows, as previously mentioned, as a corrupt and spurious verse addition that it even has its own name, Comma Johanna (in Greek, Comma Ioanneum), can you imagine that?

In fact this corruption of scripture does not appear in any manuscript in or out of the New Testament earlier than the 13 th. Century. It occurs in NO ancient Gree, manuscript, nor in the writings of any Greek Christian writers. "It is universally discredited by Greek scholars and editors of the Greek text of the New Testament." ["The Goodspeed Parallel New Testament," by Edgar J. Goodspeed - Chicago 1943, page 557].

Strange, all good Bible scholars recognize this as spurious including Catholic scholars, but, "....most Catholic writers of the present day agree the words were not contained in the original test; at the same time, until further action be taken by the Holy See it is not open to Catholic editors to eliminate the words from a version made for use of the faithful." [The Westminister Version of the Sacred Scriptures," Cutbert Lattey, S.J., and Joseph Keating, S.J., general editors, Vol. IV, pages 145 and 146, London 1931]. Now really why is this, obviously they do NOT want the 'faithful' to know they have NOT been told the truth and that their false Trinity doctrine does not 'hold water.'

Most modern Bibles have eliminated this spurious addition done against the command found at Revelations 22:18: see the following:

For there are three that testify: (New American Standard Bible: NASB)

There are three that testify: (New Revised Standard Version: NRSV)

And the Spirit is the witness, because the Spirit is the truth. (The Revised Standard Version; RSV)

There are three witnesses: (The Good News Translation)

So there are three witnesses that tell us about Jesus: (New Century Version)

It is the Spirit who bears witness, because the Spirit is the truth. (World English Version)

For they that bear witness are three. (The Darby Translation)

For there are three that testify: (Holman Standard Christian Translation)

For there are three that give testimony-- the Spirit, the water, and the blood; (Weymouth Translation)

For there are three that testify: (New International Version)

Now really, how can anyone in all honesty believe a false doctrine whose principle support has been text that is spurious or test that can be translated at least nine (9) different ways without violating the grammatical rules of Koine Greek as can John 1:1? Especially so when the common rendering is shown to be out of context by John 1:2 and John 1:14 right after it.

Obviously thinking individuals should recognize the nonsense doctrine of the three-in-one god as spurious God (YHWH) dishonoring doctrine of men and NOT from God (YHWH).

<<<APPENDIX TO COMMENTARY ON 1 JOHN 5:7>>>:

(1) The Textual Problem in 1 John 5:7-8 by Daniel B. Wallace, Ph.D.
"5:7 For there are three that testify, 5:8 the Spirit and the water and the blood, and these three are in agreement." --NET Bible

Before toV pneu'ma kaiV toV u{dwr kaiV toV ai|ma, the Textus Receptus reads ejn tw'/ oujranw'/, oJ pathvr, oJ lovgo", kaiV toV a{gion pneu'ma, kaiV ou|toi oiJ trei'" e{n eijsi. 5:8 kaiV trei'" eijsin oiJ marturou'nte" ejn th'/ gh'/ ("in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one. 5:8 And there are three that testify on earth"). This reading, the infamous Comma Johanneum, has been known in the English-speaking world through the King James translation. However, the evidence-both external and internal-is decidedly against its authenticity. Our discussion will briefly address the external evidence.1

This longer reading is found only in eight late manuscripts, four of which have the words in a marginal note. Most of these manuscripts (2318, 221, and [with minor variations] 61, 88, 429, 629, 636, and 918) originate from the 16th century; the earliest manuscript, codex 221 (10th century), includes the reading in a marginal note which was added sometime after the original composition. Thus, there is no sure evidence of this reading in any Greek manuscript until the 1500s; each such reading was apparently composed after Erasmus' Greek NT was published in 1516. Indeed, the reading appears in no Greek witness of any kind (either manuscript, patristic, or Greek translation of some other version) until AD 1215 (in a Greek translation of the Acts of the Lateran Council, a work originally written in Latin). This is all the more significant, since many a Greek Father would have loved such a reading, for it so succinctly affirms the doctrine of the Trinity.2 The reading seems to have arisen in a fourth century Latin homily in which the text was allegorized to refer to members of the Trinity. From there, it made its way into copies of the Latin Vulgate, the text used by the Roman Catholic Church.

The Trinitarian formula (known as the Comma Johanneum) made its way into the third edition of Erasmus' Greek NT (1522) because of pressure from the Catholic Church. After his first edition appeared (1516), there arose such a furor over the absence of the Comma that Erasmus needed to defend himself. He argued that he did not put in the Comma because he found no Greek manuscripts that included it. Once one was produced (codex 61, written by one Roy or Froy at Oxford in c. 1520),3 Erasmus apparently felt obliged to include the reading. He became aware of this manuscript sometime between May of 1520 and September of 1521. In his annotations to his third edition he does not protest the rendering now in his text,4 as though it were made to order; but he does defend himself from the charge of indolence, noting that he had taken care to find whatever manuscripts he could for the production of his Greek New Testament. In the final analysis, Erasmus probably altered the text because of politico-theologico-economic concerns: he did not want his reputation ruined, nor his Novum Instrumentum to go unsold.

Modern advocates of the Textus Receptus and KJV generally argue for the inclusion of the Comma Johanneum on the basis of heretical motivation by scribes who did not include it. But these same scribes elsewhere include thoroughly orthodox readings-even in places where the TR/Byzantine manuscripts lack them. Further, these KJV advocates argue theologically from the position of divine preservation: since this verse is in the TR, it must be original. But this approach is circular, presupposing as it does that the TR = the original text. Further, it puts these Protestant proponents in the awkward and self-contradictory position of having to affirm that the Roman Catholic humanist, Erasmus, was just as inspired as the apostles, for on several occasions he invented readings-due either to carelessness or lack of Greek manuscripts (in particular, for the last six verses of Revelation Erasmus had to back-translate from Latin to Greek).
In reality, the issue is history, not heresy: How can one argue that the Comma Johanneum must go back to the original text when it did not appear until the 16th century in any Greek manuscripts? Such a stance does not do justice to the gospel: faith must be rooted in history. To argue that the Comma must be authentic is Bultmannian in its method, for it ignores history at every level. As such, it has very little to do with biblical Christianity, for a biblical faith is one that is rooted in history.

Significantly, the German translation done by Luther was based on Erasmus' second edition (1519) and lacked the Comma. But the KJV translators, basing their work principally on Theodore Beza's 10th edition of the Greek NT (1598), a work which itself was fundamentally based on Erasmus' third and later editions (and Stephanus' editions), popularized the Comma for the English-speaking world. Thus, the Comma Johanneum has been a battleground for English-speaking Christians more than for others.

Unfortunately, for many, the Comma and other similar passages have become such emotional baggage that is dragged around whenever the Bible is read that a knee-jerk reaction and ad hominem argumentation becomes the first and only way that they can process this issue. Sadly, neither empirical evidence nor reason can dissuade them from their views. The irony is that their very clinging to tradition at all costs (namely, of an outmoded translation which, though a literary monument in its day, is now like a Model T on the Autobahn) emulates Roman Catholicism in its regard for tradition.5 If the King James translators knew that this would be the result nearly four hundred years after the completion of their work, they'd be writhing in their graves.

1 For a detailed discussion, see Metzger, Textual Commentary, 2nd ed., 647-49.
2 Not only the ancient orthodox writers, but also modern orthodox scholars would of course be delighted if this reading were the original one. But the fact is that the evidence simply does not support the Trinitarian formula here-and these orthodox scholars just happen to hold to the reasonable position that it is essential to affirm what the Bible affirms where it affirms it, rather than create such affirmations ex nihilo. That KJV advocates have charged modern translations with heresy because they lack the Comma is a house of cards, for the same translators who have worked on the NIV, NASB, or NET (as well as many other translations) have written several articles and books affirming the Trinity.
3 This manuscript which contains the entire New Testament is now housed in Dublin. It has been examined so often at this one place that the book now reportedly falls open naturally to 1 John 5.
4 That Erasmus made such a protest or that he had explicitly promised to include the Comma is an overstatement of the evidence, though the converse of this can be said to be true: Erasmus refused to put this in his without Greek manuscript support.
5 Thus, TR-KJV advocates subconsciously embrace two diametrically opposed traditions: when it comes to the first 1500 years of church history, they hold to a Bultmannian kind of Christianity (viz., the basis for their belief in the superiority of the Byzantine manuscripts-and in particular, the half dozen that stand behind the TR-has very little empirical substance of historical worth). Once such readings became a part of tradition, however, by way of the TR, the argument shifts to one of tradition rather than non-empirical fideism. Neither basis, of course, resembles Protestantism

See Part 2:

[iris89]

Part 2 - Westminister:

Commentary on Matthew 3:13-17 all 'Sola Scriptura,' covering Matthew 3:16-17 and more.

Matthew 3:13-17 Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to the Jordan unto John, to be baptized of him. 14 But John would have hindered him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me? 15 But Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer [it] now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffereth him. 16 And Jesus when he was baptized, went up straightway from the water: and lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove, and coming upon him; 17 and lo, a voice out of the heavens, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. [American Standard Version; ASV]

Clearly this scripture shows that Jesus' (Yeshua's) Father, Almighty God (YHWH) approved of his Son, and sent his spirit, the Spirit of God. This was also testified to at Acts 10:38, "How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him." (Authorized King James Bible; AV); And at Luke 9:34-35, "And there came a voice out of the cloud, and overshadowed them: and they feared as they entered into the cloud. 35 And there came a voice out of the cloud, saying, This is my beloved Son: hear him." (AV); And at Matthew 17:5, "While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him." (AV). In fact, John the Baptist said as recorded at John 1:32, "And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him. 33 And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the holy Ghost." (AV). Clearly these scriptures show two separate individuals or beings, a superior one, Almighty God (YHWH), and a subordinate one, his Son, Jesus (Yeshua).

Now what is this Spirit or Holy Spirit that John the Baptist mentioned? The Holy Spirit is only God's (YHWH's) active force and not even a spirit being or person. This is clearly shown at Pentecost where the Holy Spirit was poured out onto all there, Acts 2:1-4, "And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. 2 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting. 3 And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them. 4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance." (AV). This entire scripture bespeaks of a force and not a being as you do not get filled with a being! And this fact is reaffirmed at Acts 4:31, ""And when they had prayed, the place was shaken where they were assembled together; and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and they spoke the word of God with boldness." (AV); And 2 Corinthians 1:21-22, "Now he which stablisheth us with you in Christ, and hath anointed us, is God; 22 Who hath also sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts." (AV), surely a being would not be in our hearts as that is ludicrous, thus this scripture talks of God's (YHWH's) active force; This is clearly shown at Luke 11:13, "If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?" (AV). Once more, why? Why? Do many say they are coequal and coeternal when clearly they are not and the Holy Ghost is just God's (YHWH's) active force? Only to try to give some resemblance of reality to a myth as we shall later see. An interesting note on the Spirit is that the neuter Greek word for spirit (pneu'ma) is used, the neuter pronoun "it" is properly employed. This fact is conveniently over looked or hidden by most Trinitarian translators as admitted in the "New American Bible Catholic Bible," regarding John 14:17: "The Greek word for 'Spirit' is neuter, and while we use personal pronouns in English ('he,' 'his,' 'him'), most Greek MSS [manuscripts] employ 'it.'" So when the Bible uses masculine personal pronouns in connection with pa·ra'kle·tos at John 16:7, 8, it is conforming to rules of grammar, not expressing a doctrine.

Jesus' (Yeshua's) coming and his anointing by his Father (YHWH) was foretold in advance at Isaiah 42:1 where God (YHWH) called his Son his servant, "Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles." (AV); And Matthew 12:18 foretells the fulfillment, "Behold my servant, whom I have chosen; my beloved, in whom my soul is well pleased: I will put my spirit upon him, and he shall shew judgment to the Gentiles." (AV). Likewise, this is testified to at Isaiah 11:2, "And the spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the Lord;" (AV). In fact, Jesus (Yeshua) prayed to his Father (YHWH) just before his execution, saying at John 12:28, "Father, glorify thy name, Then came there a voice from heaven, saying, I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again." (AV).

Yet there are those misguided ones that accept the false God (YHWH) dishonoring doctrine of the Trinity that claim the Father (YHWH) and the Son, Jesus (Yeshua) are coequal which clearly when one prays to the other, this claim can NOT be true. In fact, the doctrine of The Trinity defies the universally accepted and historically always held meaning of the words for father and son. Not only does it defy the meaning of these words, it destroys their meaning! This fact is important to realize for God gave us language. It was not invented by man as the evolutionist tries to say. Thus, we are not destroying man made terms, but God-given terms! One well known document, The Westminister Confession, even goes so far as to state, "In the unity of the Godhead there be three persons, of one substance, power, and eternity." But we have seen this is impossible if the Bible is true. At John 14:28, "Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I." (AV); thus, clearly no coequality as required by the Godhead theory of this document as clearly earlier shown. The Spirit is not even a being, but God's (YHWH's) active force.

Commentary on 2 Corinthians 13:13-14 all 'Sola Scriptura,' covering 2 Corinthians 13:14 and more:

2 Corinthians 13:13-14 All the saints salute you. 14 The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit, be with you all. (American Standard Version; ASV)

Here the Apostle Paul expresses the hope that the grace of the Lord, Jesus (Yeshua) Christ, and of love of his Father, God (YHWH), and the spirit or power of God (YHWH) shall be on all true Christians. And the Apostle John follows through with this thought at John 14:26, "But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you." (Authorized King James Bible; AV). Of this Holy Spirit or Ghost, Jesus (Yeshua) spoke of the holy spirit as a "helper," and he said it would teach, guide, and speak as recorded at John 14:16-17, "And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; 17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you." (AV). And this same thought is carried at John 16:13, ""Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. 14 He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you." (AV). The Greek word he used for helper (pa·ra'kle·tos) is in the masculine gender. Thus, when Jesus referred to what the helper would do, he used masculine personal pronouns as shown at John 16:7- 8, "Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you. 8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment." (AV). On the other hand, when the neuter Greek word for spirit (pneu'ma) is used, the neuter pronoun "it" is properly employed. This fact is conveniently over looked or hidden by most Trinitarian translators as admitted in the "New American Bible Catholic Bible," regarding John 14:17: "The Greek word for 'Spirit' is neuter, and while we use personal pronouns in English ('he,' 'his,' 'him'), most Greek MSS [manuscripts] employ 'it.'" So when the Bible uses masculine personal pronouns in connection with pa·ra'kle·tos at John 16:7, 8, it is conforming to rules of grammar, not expressing a doctrine.

This scripture, 2 Corinthians 13:13-14 previously quoted, brings up the need for unity among all true Christians as do the scriptures immediately prior to it, 2 Corinthians 13:11-12, "Finally, brethren, farewell. Be perfected; be comforted; be of the same mind; live in peace: and the God of love and peace shall be with you. 12 Salute one another with a holy kiss." (ASV), and this need is further testified to at Ephesians 4:13, "Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ:" (AV). We need to per Ephesians 4:21-22, "If indeed you have heard Him and have been taught in Him, just as truth is in Jesus, 22 that in reference to your former manner of life, you lay aside the old self, which is being corrupted in accordance with the lusts of deceit," (New American Standard Bible, Ref. Ed., by Moody Press; NASB-MP), this scripture clearly showing the need to make over our personality unto the new personality acceptable to Jesus (Yeshua) Christ as testified to at Ephesians 4:23, "And be renewed tn the spirit of your mind; 24 And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness." (NASB-MP). This is necessary as there is only one Almighty God (YHWH) as testified to at Ephesians 4:6, "One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all." (AV). For a certainty each of us, if we accept, is, Ephesians 4:7, "But unto every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ." (AV).

Clearly since there is but one Almighty God (YHWH) There can be no Trinity which is a myth requiring a 'Godhead' of three equal beings, coeternal and coequal as affirmed in the Westminister Confession, "In the unity of the Godhead there be three persons, of one substance, power, and eternity." But as we have seen, no such relationship exist between Almighty God (YHWH), the superior one; his son, the Son of God, Jesus (Yeshua) of which the Bible testifies at 1 Corinthians 11:3, "But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God." )AV) clearly showing God (YHWH) is the head of Jesus (Yeshua) Christ; thus proving they are not coequal. Likewise Revelations 3:14 clearly shows they are not coeternal, "And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God;" which shows him as the first of God's (YHWH's) creation. In fact, when Jesus (Yeshua) was ascending to be with his Father in heaven, he prayed, as recorded in John 17:5, "And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was." (AV). Showing he was returning to where he had been before with his Father (YHWH), see John 6:62, "What then if you should behold the Son of Man ascending where He was before?" (NASB-MP). Once returned to heaven, God's (YHWH's) Son, Jesus (Yeshua) is, 1 Peter 3:22, "Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him" (AV).

<<Sub Section 'P' Commentaries on the Scriptures>>

Commentary on John 1:14 all 'Sola Scriptura.'

John 1:14 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us (and we beheld his glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father), full of grace and truth. (American Standard Version; ASV)

This scripture emphasis that Jesus (Yeshua) was sent to the earth to dwell among us as testified to at 1 John 4:9, "In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him." (AV); And 1 John 4:14, "And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world." (AV), clearly Jesus' (Yeshua's) Father (YHWH) sent him showing he was superior and not coequal with His Son; And Romans 6:23, "For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." (AV). In fact, the scriptures clearly show that all true Christians must confess Jesus (Yeshua) has come in the flesh as testified to at 1 John 4:2, "Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God." (AV); whereas, 2 John 7 states shows many deceiver would come, "For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist." (AV).

Clearly the only way to God (YHWH) is through his Son, Jesus (Yeshua) whom he has appointed as, 1 Timothy 2:5, "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;" (AV); and this is made even clearer by Jesus (Yeshua) at John 14:6, "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." (AV). God (YHWH) has given his Son Jesus (Yeshua) an assignment and given him power over everything except himself to carry it out as testified to at 1 Corinthians 15:22-28, "For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. 23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming. 24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. 25 For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. 27 For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him. 28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all." (AV), testifies that God (YHWH) had given his Son, Jesus (Yeshua) over all except himself when the scripture says "it is manifest that he is excepted."

Jesus (Yeshua) actually prayed to his Father (YHWH) just before being put to death as a human to give him back the glory he previously had with his Father (YHWH) in heaven as recorded at John 17:5- "And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was. 6 I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept my word. 7 Now they have known that all things whatsoever thou hast given me are of thee. 8 For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me." (AV). Unmistakably Jesus (Yeshua) acknowledges in his prayer that his Father, Almighty God (YHWH) had given him everything and was his superior when he stated, "I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me." Therefore, we see that the Trinity is but a myth as the reality is that Jesus (Yeshua) is NOT coequal with his Father (YHWH), but that his Father, Almighty God (YHWH) is the Supreme one.

Commentary on John 1:18 all 'Sola Scriptura.'

John 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. (American Standard Version, ASV)

Now this scripture seem straight forward and it is, but some translations did a poor job of translating it. Let's look at how the New International Version (NIV) translates this, "No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father's side, has made him known.' Would appear to show Jesus (Yeshua) as the One and Only, but this is just an error in translation in the NIV as shown by both the Authorized King James (AV) which renders it, ""No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him." And the Douay-Rheims Catholic Bible renders it, "No one has at any time seen God. The only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has revealed him." Now some may ask, how do you determine for sure which way of translating is correct. You do this quite simply by investigation the scripture from the Old Testament actually being quoted here by the Apostle John for the first part of this scripture which is Exodus 33:20, "And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live." (Authorized King James Bible; AV); And compare with similar scriptures in the New Testament such as John 6:46, "Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father." (AV). Then you check the Old Testament scripture from which the Apostle John took the second part, Proverbs 8:30, where Jesus (Yeshua) while in heaven was speaking, "Then I was by him, as one brought up with him; and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him," (AV). And cross reference this in the New Testament to John 13:23, "Now there was leaning on Jesus' bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved." (AV).

Now of course, people have seen Jesus (Yeshua). The Apostle John, who wrote John 1:18, saw Jesus. He even said four verses earlier that Jesus (God
according to Trinitarians) had become flesh, John 1:14, "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth." Yet no one has seen God. If John were trying to say in John 1:1 that Jesus (Yeshua) was God (YHWH) and then a few verses later say no one has seen God (YHWH), would he not need to put some type of qualifying statement explaining how this can be? Or are we to assume his readers had a firm grasp of the Duality or Trinity and needed no explanation of this paradox? While some Bibles say "only-begotten son" the oldest manuscripts say "only-begotten god". Most Bible do not want to translate it literally that way since this would imply Jesus (Yeshua) was made a god by God (YHWH). So the New International Version (NIV) reads as I quoted above "God the One and Only". However, the footnote to the NIV reads "or the Only-Begotten". It is proper that the NIV placed that footnote in its Bible translation because we are inclined to ask, "the One and Only what?" In what way is the Son the 'One and Only God' that the Father (YHWH)is not? John said that Jesus (Yeshua) was with God (YHWH) and yet was a god and Jesus (Yeshua) was the only begotten son of God (YHWH), the context supports a literal translation of John 1:18. Jesus (Yeshua) was the "only-begotten god". That is, God Almighty created Jesus and put him in the position o***od or mighty spirit person whom He used to create the rest of the universe.

While it is true that angels and men can be referred to as "gods", they were not begotten directly by Almighty God.

Interestingly the NIV says, John 6:27, "Do not work for food that spoils, but for food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give you. On him God the Father has placed his seal of approval." (NIV). It is obvious that there are two individuals here: the Son of Man (Yeshua) and God the Father (YHWH). Two separate and distinct persons. Also notice that the Father (YHWH) places his "seal of approval" on the Son. But nowhere in the Bible is there a Scripture where the Son, Jesus (Yeshua) places approval on the Father (YHWH). This shows or indicates that the Father is in the superior position and the Son is in the inferior position, i.e., they are NOT COEQUAL.

The NIV reaffirms this fact, they are NOT COEQUAL at 1 Peter 1:1-2, "Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To God's elect, strangers in the world, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia, 2 who have been chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit, for obedience to Jesus Christ and sprinkling by his blood: Grace and peace be yours in abundance." (NIV). Once more we see two separate and distinct beings here: God the Father (YHWH) and Jesus (Yeshua) Christ.

Now some will say that Jesus (Yeshua) and His Father (YHWH) are one-and-the-same based on the usual out of context rendering of John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. Well, try to keep the mental context of who Jesus was to the people who lived and studied about him when the Bible text was written. Apart from this verse, there is no indicator that anyone thought that Jesus (Yeshua)was God (YHWH). This is made clear by John 1:2, which shows, "The same was in the beginning with God." (AV); And John 1:10, "He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not." (AV); Last consider John 1:14, previously quoted, and it is quite clear that they are NOT the same individual. But two distinct individuals. Note, some Bibles correctly render this as either as "the Word was a god," or "the Word was Divine." Both of these are in harmony with the remaining scriptures in John the first chapter.

The fact is that no Apostle nor any other writer of the Bible ever came out and stated that "there is One God: Father, Son, and Holy Ghost". No example of the thousands of occurrences of YHWH and God in the original manuscripts can be shown to mean 'God in three Persons' as some falsely claim. In fact neither the word Duality nor Trinity appear nowhere in the scriptures. So be ye not mislead into believing the doctrines of men, but remember John 8:32, "And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." (AV).

See Part 3:

[iris89]

Part 3 - Westminster


<<Sub Section 'Q' Commentaries on the Scriptures>>

Commentary on John 15:26 all 'Sola Scriptura."

John 15:26 But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, [even] the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall bear witness of me: (American Standard Version; ASV)

This scripture clearly shows that the Spirit comes from the Father (YHWH), but we need to ask just what is this spirit, and to look at the scriptures immediately proceeding John 15:26. Let's now look at these scriptures. John 15:18-25, "If the world hateth you, ye know that it hath hated me before [it hated] you. 19 If ye were of the world, the world would love its own: but because ye are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you. 20 Remember the word that I said unto you, A servant is not greater than his lord. If they persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they kept my word, they will keep yours also. 21 But all these things will they do unto you for my name's sake, because they know not him that sent me. 22 If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin: but now they have no excuse for their sin. 23 He that hateth me hateth my Father also. 24 If I had not done among them the works which none other did, they had not had sin: but now have they both seen and hated both me and my Father. 25 But [this cometh to pass], that the word may be fulfilled that is written in their law, They hated me without a cause." (ASV). Here Jesus (Yeshua) clearly testified that he had been sent, i.e., by a superior one, "they know not him that sent me," and this is reinforced when he said, "He that hateth me hateth my Father also." So Jesus (Yeshua) had been sent by his Father (YHWH) to do his Father's (YHWH's) will, and clearly testified at John 5:19, "Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise." (AV); therefore we see that Jesus (Yeshua) was doing the will of his Father (YHWH).

Now let's consider the Holy Spirit, the Comforter, that Jesus (Yeshua) would send to true Christians from his Father (YHWH). What exactly is it? This Spirit or Comforter is God's (YHWH's) active force that goes forth or emanates from Almighty God (YHWH). One of its functions is to act as a Comforter to mankind, see John 14:26, "But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you." (AV); And this is reaffirmed at John 14:16-17, "And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; 17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you." (AV).

In summary, It is the Creator's (YHWH's) force for getting things accomplished, 1 Corinthians 2:10, " And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:" (Ephesians 6:17; AV), " But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God." (AV). This is made even clearer as the Bible shows that God (YHWH) pours out his active force onto his followers, Joel 2:28-29, "And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions: 29 And also upon the servants and upon the handmaids in those days will I pour out my spirit." (AV), and also caused inspired individuals to, 2 Peter 1:21, " For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost." (AV). Clearly then the Trinity is just a myth as defined as follows in the Westminister Confession, "In the unity of the Godhead there be three persons, of one substance, power, and eternity;" since Jesus (Yeshua) is NOT COEQUAL with his Father, Almighty God (YHWH), NOR is the Holy Spirit, since this is not an individual, but clearly the power and/or force of God (YHWH). Note, in ancient Koine Greek, the Spirit is always grammatically of the neutral gender, the neuter Greek word for spirit (pneu'ma) is used, the neuter pronoun "it" is properly employed. This fact is conveniently over looked or hidden by most Trinitarian translators as admitted in the "New American Bible Catholic Bible," regarding John 14:17: "The Greek word for 'Spirit' is neuter, and while we use personal pronouns in English ('he,' 'his,' 'him'), most Greek MSS [manuscripts] employ 'it.'" So when the Bible uses masculine personal pronouns in connection with pa·ra'kle·tos at John 16:7, 8, it is conforming to rules of grammar, not expressing a doctrine. It is now clear beyond question that the Trinity is just false doctrine warned against at Titus 2:1, ""But speak thou the things which become sound doctrine:" (AV); this means we must reject myths being put forth as doctrine.

Commentary on Galatians 4:6 all 'Sola Scriptura."

Galatians 4:6 And because ye are sons, God sent forth the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, Abba, Father. (American Standard Version; ASV)

Let's first look at the scriptures immediately proceeding this to gain an understanding of the contest of this scripture, Galatians 4:1-5, "But I say that so long as the heir is a child, he differeth nothing from a bondservant though he is lord of all; 2 but is under guardians and stewards until the day appointed of the father. 3 So we also, when we were children, were held in bondage under the rudiments of the world: 4 but when the fulness of the time came, God sent forth his Son, born of a woman, born under the law, 5 that he might redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons." (ASV). Here is shown God's (YHWH's) purpose for sending his only begotten Son, Jesus (Yeshua) to the earth and this is clarified at Romans 5:12, "Through one man sin entered into the world and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men because they had all sinned." (The Kingdom Interlinear Lexicon). So he was sent by his Father (YHWH) to redeem mankind of inherited sin, 1 John 4:14, "And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world." (Authorized King James Bible, AV); Thus clearly showing his Father (YHWH), as the superior one, sent his Son, Jesus (Yeshua) to the world clearly showing a superior subordinate relationship and not one of coequality.

Now let's look at the scriptures immediately after this to gain an even better understanding of the contest of Galatians 4:6, see Galatians 4:7-11, "So that thou art no longer a bondservant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir through God. Howbeit at that time, not knowing God, ye were in bondage to them that by nature are no gods: 9 but now that ye have come to know God, or rather to be known by God, how turn ye back again to the weak and beggarly rudiments, whereunto ye desire to be in bondage over again? 10 Ye observe days, and months, and seasons, and years. 11 I am afraid of you, lest by any means I have bestowed labor upon you in vain." (ASV). So God (YHWH) sent his Spirit, Romans 8:16, "The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:" (AV); And this Spirit of God (YHWH), 1 John 3:24, "And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him. And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us." (AV); And the drelling of his active force or spirit in us is affirmed at 1 John 4:13, "Hereby know we that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit." (AV). And 1 John 3:230-24 shows, "And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another as he gave us commandment. 24 And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him. And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the spirit which he hath given." (AV).

Now exactly what is the Spirit of God (YHWH) which is also called the Comforter? It is God's (YHWH's)active force or power that he uses to accomplish his will as shown by John 14:26, "But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you." (AV); And this is reaffirmed at John 14:16-17, "And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; 17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you." (AV). And Romans 5:5 shows God (YHWH) gives true Christians a part of his power or holy spirit, "And hope maketh not ashamed; because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us." (Authorized King James Bible;" (AV); and this is reaffirmed at Mark 14:33-36, "And saith unto them, My soul is exceeding sorrowful unto death: tarry ye here, and watch. 35 And he went forward a little, and fell on the ground and prayed that, if it were possible, the hour might pass from him. 36 And he said, Abba, Father, all things are possible unto thee; take away this cup from me: nevertheless not what I will, but what thou wilt." (AV). Here Jesus was praying to his Father, Almighty God (YHWH) and acknowledging him as the superior one contrary to the untruths put forth by man such as in the Westminister Confession which clearly contradicts the Word of God by stating of one substance and power; whereas, God (YHWH) has been shown by the scriptures to be the superior one that even his Son, Jesus (Yeshua) prays to. It is time for all to disgard myths such as the Trinity put forth as supposed truth by misguided documents such as the Westminster Confession which are the product of hermeneutic methodology used by those who seek to hide the truth of the scriptures instead of letting the scriptures speak for themselves as they do in true 'Sola Scripture' comments on the Word of God; This per 2 Peter 1:20, "This, then, you must understand first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is made by private interpretation." (The Confraternity Edition of The New Testament by John C. Winston Co. -Catholic).

<CONCLUSION>

Unfortunately, the clever deceiver and twister of the scripture who was one of the best masters with respect using hermeneutic methodology to deceive unwary ones into false doctrine and mythology, Cornelius Burges, Assessor to the Westminster Assembly, was only one of many; but more polished in the art of deception than most.

As the apostles died, various writers undertook the task of defending Christianity against the persecutions evoked by the Church's expansion. (*2)


The most famous of these Apologists was Justin Martyr (c.107-166 AD). He was born a pagan, became a pagan philosopher, then a Christian. He believed that Christianity and Greek Philosophy were related. According to McGiffert, "Justin insisted that Christ came from God; he did not identify him with God. . . [He] conceiv[ed] of God as a transcendent being, who could not possibly come into contact with the world of men and things." (*2).

An exhaustive review of Scripture and history reveals the simple fact that the Trinity teaching was unknown to the early New Testament Christians. That the doctrine of the Trinity is a "borrowed doctrine" and foreign to the Scriptures is supported by many authorities. Under the article Trinity we read, "The term 'Trinity' is not a biblical term...In point of fact, the doctrine of the Trinity is a purely revealed doctrine...As the doctrine of the Trinity is indiscoverable by reason, so it is incapable of proof from reason" (*1).

The moral of this discourse is accept the Word of God, reject the clever twisting of the Word of God by deceitful men in keeping with Titus 2:1, ", "But speak thou the things which become sound doctrine:" (AV); this means we must reject myths being put forth as doctrine as does the Westminister Confession and similar deceptive documents by others.

See Appendix:
REFERENCES AND APPENDIX TO WESTMINSTER CONFESSION AN EXAMPLE OF TWISTING BY HERMENEUTIC METHODOLOGY:

REFERENCES:

*1 the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, volume 4, page 3012-3014, "The term 'Trinity' is not a Biblical term and we are not using Biblical language when we define what is expressed by it as the doctrine that there is one only and true God, but in the unity of the Godhead there are three coeternal and coequal Persons, the same in substance but distinct in subsistence. A doctrine so defined can be spoken of as a Biblical doctrine only on the principle that the sense of Scripture is Scripture. And the definition of a Biblical doctrine in such un-Biblical language can be justified only on the principle that it is better to preserve the truth of Scripture than the words of Scripture.
"...the doctrine of the Trinity is given to us in Scripture, not in formulated doctrine, but in fragmentary allusions.
"The doctrine of the Trinity is purely a revealed doctrine. That is to say, it embodies a truth which has never been discovered, and is indiscoverable, by natural reason.
"Triads of divinities, no doubt, occur in nearly all polytheistic religions, formed under very various influences. Sometimes, as in the Egyptian triad of Osiris, Isis and Horus, it is the analogy of the human family with its father, mother and son which lies at their basis. Sometimes they are the effect of mere syncretism, three deities worshipped in different localities being brought together in the common worship of all.
"Sometimes they are the result apparently of nothing more than odd human tendency to think in threes, which has given the number three wide-spread standing as a sacred number.
"It should be needless to say that none of these triads has the slightest resemblance to the Christian doctrine of the Trinity.
"As the doctrine of the Trinity is indiscoverable by reason, so it is incapable of proof from reason. There are no analogies to it in Nature, not even in the spiritual nature of man, who is made in the image of God. In His Trinitarian mode of being, God is unique; and, as there is nothing in the universe like Him in this respect, so there is nothing which can help us to comprehend Him. Many attempts have, nevertheless, been made to construct a rational proof of the Trinity of the Godhead.
"Certainly we cannot speak broadly of the revelation of the doctrine of the Trinity in the Old Testament. It is a plain matter of fact that none who have depended on the revelation embodied in the Old Testament alone have ever attained to the doctrine of the Trinity.
"It would seem clear that we must recognize in the Old Testament doctrine of the relation of God to His revelation by the creative Word and the Spirit, at least the germ of the distinctions in the Godhead afterward fully made known in the Christian revelation."
*2 - Pelikan, Jaroslav. "The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition" (100-600). Chicago: U of Chicago P. 1971. Vol. 1 of "The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine." 5 vols.
APPENDIX:

(1) Jamieson, Fausett and Brown, volume 6, page 643, regarding I John 5:7
"The only Greek manuscripts, in any form which support the words 'in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth...' are the Montfortianus of Dublin, copied evidently from the modern Latin Vulgate; the Ravianus copied from the Complutensian Polyglot; a manuscript at Naples, with the words added in the margin by a recent hand; Ottobonianus, 298, of the 15th century, the Greek of which is a mere translation of the accompanying Latin. All old versions omit the words."
(2) Sacred Origins of Profound Things, by Charles Panati, pages 302-306
"Among the three great monotheistic religions, only Christianity embraces the Trinitarian Creed: the coexistence of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit in a single Godhead, distinctly different, yet one and the same."
"One might ask - as Jews and Muslims repeatedly have - isn't it cheating for a religion to be monotheistic if it recognizes three distinctly different Gods? Three Gods; three different names; three different functions: the Creator, the Redeemer, the Sanctifier. Should, Muslims suggested, this not be called 'tritheism'?
"Significantly, the Christian books of the Bible - the Gospels, Acts, Epistles (or letters), Revelation, and the Apocrypha ('things that are hidden') - make no explicit reference to a three-fold Godhead.
"Nor did Jesus, a Jew, perhaps with rabbinic training, violate the Judaic motto - 'Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord' - in his teachings.
"God the Father does mention God the Son in the New Testament, and the Son in turn mentions the Father and the Holy Spirit. The outline of a trinity is there, but it is never clearly delineated
"Early in the fourth century, the Trinitarian controversy heated to the high point of heresy, pitting two theologians, Athanasius and Arius, against each other and drawing concern from the Roman emperor Constantine himself who had warmed up to Christianity and would eventually convert.
"Today, Arius' name is a byword for heresy: the Arian Heresy.
"Back in 320, Arius, who knew Scripture inside and out - and was a skilled propagandist and musician - insisted that Christ, the Word, Logos could only be a creature like ourselves, created by God. When he put his ideas to music and sang songs of Christ's second-rank status to God, thousands of ordinary Christians, once content in their monotheism, became aware of the passionate debate raging among became aware of the passionate debate raging among bishops.
"Christian bishops gathered at Nicaea on May 20, 325, convening the Council of Nicaea, which, after much acrimonious contention, decided upon the crucial formula for the Trinitarian doctrine, setting it forth in a credo, the Nicaean Creed. The Son, it declared, is 'of the same essence as the Father.' The creed said troublingly little about the Holy Spirit.
"In fact, the entire lengthy creed, as first written, wrestles with logic and common sense to equate Father and Son, giving nod to the Holy Spirit only in the last passing line: 'And we believe in the Holy Ghost.'
"The controversy raged on for some years. Later the Nicaean Creed was revised under the leadership of Basil, bishop of Caesarea. It was altered to end 'We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father'.
"Thus, the concept of the Trinity did not take its present form until some 400 years after Christ's death."
(3) Peakes Commentary on the Bible, page 1038
"The famous interpolation after 'three witnesses' is not printed even in the RSV, and rightly. It cites the heavenly testimony of the Father, the Logos and the Holy Spirit, but it is never used in the early Trinitarian controversies. No respectable Greek manuscript contains it. Appearing first in a late 4th century Latin text, it entered the Vulgate and finally the New Testament of Erasmus."

See Part 4:

[iris89]

Part 4 - Westminster


(4) The Oxford Companion to the Bible, edited by Bruce M Metzger and Michael D Coogan, page 782
"Trinity: Because the Trinity is such an important part of later Christian doctrine, it is striking that the term does not appear in the New Testament. Likewise, the developed concept of three coequal partners in the Godhead found in later creedal formulations cannot be clearly detected within the confines of the canon.
"Later believers systematized the diverse references to God, Jesus and the Spirit found in the New Testament in order to fight against heretical tendencies of how the three are related. Elaboration on the concept of a Trinity also serves to defend the church against charges of di- or tritheism. Since the Christians have come to worship Jesus as god (Pliny, Epistles 96.7), how can they claim to be continuing the monotheistic tradition of the God of Israel? Various answers are suggested, debated, and rejected as heretical, but the idea of a Trinity - one God subsisting in three persons and one substance - ultimately prevails.
"While the New Testament writers say a great deal about God, Jesus, and the Spirit of each, no New Testament writer expounds on the relationship among the three in the detail that later Christian writers do.
"The earliest New Testament evidence for a tripartite formula comes in 2 Corinthians 13:14, where Paul wishes that 'the grace of the Lord Jesus, the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit' be with the people of Corinth. It is possible that this three-part formula derives from later liturgical usage and was added to the text of 2 Corinthians as it was copied. In support of the authenticity of the passage, however, it must be said that the phrasing is much closer to Paul's understandings of God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit than to a more fully developed concept of the Trinity. Jesus, referred to not as Son, but as Lord and Christ, is mentioned first and is connected with the central Pauline theme of grace. God is referred to as a source of love, not as father, and the Spirit promotes sharing within the community. The word 'holy' does not appear before 'spirit' in the earliest manuscript evidence for this passage."
(5) The Lion Encyclopedia of the Bible, page 158
"Trinity - this word is not used in the Bible. It is the name given to the statements about God in the creeds drawn up in the early centuries of the church to explain what is meant by saying that God is Father, Son and Holy Spirit. This is the teaching of Jesus and the New Testament as a whole. From earliest times it was stated at every Christian baptism.
"The Jewish teaching was that there is only one God. No one and nothing must compromise that belief. Yet the New Testament writers clearly show God as the Father who created and sustained everything in his love and power, as the Son who came into this world, and as the Spirit who worked in their own lives.
"After the end of the New Testament period the church found it necessary to work out carefully worded statements about three persons in one God, in order to uphold the truth of the New Testament against false beliefs."
(6) Francis David's Tower, Strength through Peace, by Todd F. Eklof (06-16-02)
Yet his extraordinary life becomes even more meaningful if we find in it relevance for the circumstances of our own day. As we shall see, Francis David, the 16th Century son of a Saxon shoemaker, helped lay the foundation for a new sort of tower that may at last provide humanity with an enduring refuge.

The problem with most towers, that is, with the ideological constructs we adopt to make us feel safe, is that they are maintained by force. For example, when the Roman Emperor Constantine became a Christian, he wanted to rule a unified Christian empire. But first he would have to find a way to end the dispute over the divinity of Jesus-was he a man or God? So he ordered his Christian bishops to meet at Nicaea in 325 A.D. to settle the matter once and for all. Their solution was to create a creed making it illegal for anyone to believe Jesus was not the same as God by inventing the notion of a Trinity. This intellectual tower remained in full force for well over a thousand years, until the Reformation.
(7) The Origin of the Trinity: From Paganism to Constantine by Cher-El L. Hagensick]The search for the origins of the Trinity begins with the earliest writings of man. Records of early Mesopotamian and Mediterranean civilizations show polytheistic religions, though many scholars assert that earliest man believed in one god. The 19th century scholar and Protestant minister, Alexander Hislop, devotes several chapters of his book The Two Babylons to showing how this original belief in one god was replaced by the triads of paganism which were eventually absorbed into Catholic Church dogmas. A more recent Egyptologist, Erick Hornung, refutes the original monotheism of Egypt: '[Monotheism is] a phenomenon restricted to the wisdom texts,' which were written between 2600 and 2530 BC (50-51); but there is no question that ancient man believed in 'one infinite and Almighty Creator, supreme over all' (Hislop 14); and in a multitude of gods at a later point. Nor is there any doubt that the most common grouping of gods was a triad.1
( Durant, Will. , Caesar and Christ. New York: Simon. 1944. Vol. 3 of The Story of Civilization. 11 vols. 1935-75.- note, I believe this author was Catholic With this background, let's look at the growth and evolution of the Trinity. As previous stated, the Bible does not mention the trinity. Harnack affirms that the early church view of Jesus was as Messiah. After his resurrection he was "raised to the right hand of God" - but not considered as God. (7 Lonergan concurs that the educated Christians of the early centuries believed in one, supreme God. (119). As for the Holy Spirit, McGiffert tells us that "They [early Christians] thought of [the Holy Spirit] not as an individual being or person but simply as the divine power working in the world and particularly in the Church." (111) Durant summarizes Apostolic Christianity thus: "In Christ and Peter Christianity was Jewish; in Paul it became half Greek; in Catholicism it became half Roman." [
(9) Pelikan, Jaroslav. The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition (100-600). Chicago: U of Chicago P. 1971. Vol. 1 of The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine. 5 vols. As the apostles died, various writers undertook the task of defending Christianity against the persecutions evoked by the Church's expansion. The writers of these "Apologies" are known to us now as "Apologists". Pelikan states that "it was at least partly in response to pagan criticism of the stories in the Bible that the Christian apologists... took over and adapted the methods and even vocabulary of pagan allegorism."
(10) Dictionary Of The Bible 1995 John L. Mckenzie
"The trinity of persons within the unity of nature is defined in terms of 'person' and 'nature' which are Greek philosophical terms; actually the terms do not appear in the Bible. The trinitarian definitions arose as the result of long controversies in which these terms and others such as 'essence' and 'substance' were erroneously applied to God by some theologians."
(11) The Encyclopedia Americana 1956
"Christianity derived from Judaism and Judaism was strictly Unitarian (believing in one God). The road which led from Jerusalem to Nicea was scarcely a straight one. Fourth century trinitarianism did not reflect accurately early Christian teaching regarding the nature of God; it was, on the contrary, a deviation from this teaching."
(12) The Church of the First Three Centuries 1865 Alvan Lamson
" . . . The modern doctrine of the Trinity is not found in any document or relic belonging to the Church of the first three centuries. . . so far as any remains or any record of them are preserved, coming down from early times, are, as regards this doctrine an absolute blank. They testify, so far as they testify at all, to the supremacy of the father, the only true God; and to the inferior and derived nature of the Son. There is nowhere among these remains a coequal trinity. . . but no un-divided three, -- coequal, infinite, self-existent, and eternal. This was a conception to which the age had not arrived. It was of later origin."
"The three-in-one/one-in-three mystery of Father, Son and Holy Ghost made tritheism official. The subsequent almost-deification of the Virgin Mary made it quatrotheism . . . Finally, cart-loads of saints raised to quarter-deification turned Christianity into plain old-fashioned polytheism. By the time of the Crusades, it was the most polytheistic religion to ever have existed, with the possible exception of Hinduism. This untenable contradiction between the assertion of monotheism and the reality of polytheism was dealt with by accusing other religions of the Christian fault. The Church - Catholic and later Protestant - turned aggressively on the two most clearly monotheistic religions in view - Judaism and Islam - and persecuted them as heathen or pagan. "
(13) The Doubter's Companion (John Ralston Saul) "The external history of Christianity consists largely of accusations that other religions rely on the worship of more than one god and therefore not the true God. These pagans must therefore be converted, conquered and/or killed for their own good in order that they benefit from the singularity of the Holy Trinity, plus appendages." -
(14) Colliers Encyclopedia "In brief, the ante-Nicene Fathers taught the real distinction and divinity of the three persons . . . but in their attempts at a philosophical interpretation of the Dogma, the ante-Nicene Fathers used certain expressions which would favor sudordinationism. In the late 17th century, the Socinians cited these expressions that the ante-Nicene tradition agreed rather with Arius than with Athanasius . . . Catholic theologians commonly defend the orthodoxy of these early Fathers, while admitting that certain of their expressions were inaccurate and eventually dangerous."
(15) The Nouveau Dictionnaire Universel, "The Platonic trinity, itself merely a rearrangement of older trinities dating back to earlier peoples, appears to be the rational philosophic trinity of attributes that gave birth to the three hypostases or divine persons taught by the Christian churches . . . This Greek philosopher's [Plato, fourth century B.C.E.] conception of the divine trinity . . . can be found in all the ancient [pagan] religions." -- (Paris, 1865-1870), edited by M. Lachâtre, Vol. 2, p. 1467.
(16) Dictionary of the Bible by John L. McKenzie, S.J. p. 899 "The belief as so defined was reached only in the 4th and 5th centuries AD and hence is not explicitly and formally a biblical belief. The trinity of persons within the unity of nature is defined in terms of "person" and "nature: which are Gk philosophical terms; actually the terms do not appear in the Bible. The trinitarian definitions arose as the result of long controversies in which these terms and others such as "essense" and "substance" were erroneously applied to God by some theologians."
(17) Quoting Bruce L. Shelley, a writer for Christian History, we read:
"The Council of Nicea, (was) summoned by Emperor Constantine and held in the imperial palace under his auspices. Constantine viewed the Arian teachings-that Jesus was a created being subordinate to God-as an 'insignificant' theological matter. But he wanted peace in the empire he had just united through force. When diplomatic letters failed to solve the dispute, he convened around 220 bishops, who met for two months to hammer out a universally acceptable definition of Jesus Christ.
"The expression homo ousion, 'one substance,' was probably introduced by Bishop Hosius of Cordova (in today's Spain). Since he had great influence with Constantine, the imperial weight was thrown to that side of the scales. . . . As it turned out, however, Nicea alone settled little. For the next century the Nicene and the Arian views of Christ battled for supremacy. First Constantine and then his successors stepped in again and again to banish this churchman or exile that one. Control of church offices too often depended on control of the emperor's favor." [Christian History, Bruce L. Shelley, "The First Council of Nicea," Issue 28 (Vol. IX, No. 4), 1990, p. 11. ]
(18)Eusebius' Ecclesiastical History, The Council of Nice, Isaac Boyle, p. 27.] Furthermore, John 1:1 could not be a proof of the Trinity, for no mention is made of the holy Spirit. That is most embarrassing when the key scripture to the whole Trinity concept omits one-third of the Trinity. Therefore, whatever John 1:1 proves, it does not mention the holy Spirit, and it fails to provide the third part necessary to support the Trinity. Trinitarians have combed through the Bible using every possible text to prove their point. In the overwhelming majority of texts used, you find them doing the same thing as in John 1:1, using arguments that God and Jesus are one, hoping we will not notice that none of their proof verses include the third part necessary - the holy Spirit. The idea is to get people so involved in the discussion that they will forget the holy Spirit is not mentioned. Therefore, the debate lacks the third part needed for rational proof. In order to prove the Trinity doctrine, it is necessary to find Biblical statements of the oneness of being of Father, Son and holy Spirit. Even if we could prove the Father and Son were one being, would it give us a Trinity? When the Nicean Council ended on August 25, 325 A.D., Emperor Constantine delayed the festivities of his twentieth anniversary until the close of this council. We quote the following:
"A magnificent entertainment was provided by that prince, 'for the ministers of God' . . . No one of the bishops was absent from the imperial banquet, which was more admirably conducted than can possibly be described. The guards and soldiers, disposed in a circle, were stationed at the entrance of the palace with drawn swords. The men of God passed through the midst of them without fear, and went into the most private apartments of the royal edifice. Some of them were then admitted to the table of the emperor, and others took the places assigned them on either side. It was a lively image of the kingdom of Christ(?), and appeared more like a dream than a reality."
(19) Edward Gibbon says, in his preface to History of Christianity: "If Paganism was conquered by Christianity, it is equally true that Christianity was corrupted by Paganism. The pure Deism of the first Christians . . . was changed, by the Church of Rome, into the incomprehensible dogma of the trinity. Many of the pagan tenets, invented by the Egyptians and idealized by Plato, were retained as being worthy of belief."8 [History of Christianity, Edward Gibbon, preface. ] Note: Gibbon is an historian's historian. He would not speak so forthrightly without an enormous basis for his evaluations.
(20) Outline of History, H. G. Wells, p. 421. Commenting on the state of affairs in the early Church, H. G. Wells writes: "We shall see presently how, later on, all Christendom was torn by disputes about the Trinity. There is no clear evidence that the apostles of Jesus entertained

Your Friend in Christ Iris89

[iris89]

Documentary on the Book of John Being Anti-Trinitarian:

JOHN 1:1-2 - LEARN THE FACTS:

Many emotionally diehard Trinitarians point to how John 1:1 is erroneously worded in many Bibles as, "In the beginning was the Word, and the word was with God, and the Word was God." (American Standard Version; ASV), and neglect to look at John 1:2 in those same Bibles which says, "The same was in the beginning with God." (ASV); Clearly showing two distinct individuals. Moreover the overlook John 1:14 in those same Bibles which says, "And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us (and we beheld his glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father), full of grace and truth." (ASV) which clearly shows his as the only begotten of his Father, Almighty God (YHWH) in harmony with 1 John 4:9, "Herein was the love of God manifested in us, that God hath sent his only begotten Son into the world that we might live through him." (ASV) once more clearly showing them as two distinct individuals, one superior to the other and sending the subordinate, his Son, to be among mankind.

The next problem for Trinitarians is the salient fact that no matter how you analyze or translate John 1:1 you only get two individuals or as they falsely claim manifestations of one individual, which makes NO Trinity or group of three, neither of individuals and/or manifestations; my, my, so much for John 1:1 proving a trinity. It does not do this even with the biased translations of Trinitarians; moreover, there are more accurate ways of translating John 1:1 such as the way the New English Bible whose translators had access to older manuscripts that did the translators of the King James Bible, the Douay-Rheims Catholic Bible, and the American Standard Bible. In the New English Bible, John 1:1 reads, "When all things began, the Word already was. The word dwelt with God, and what God was, the Word was." (The New English Bible; NEB). In fact, the NEB renders John 1:2, "The Word, then, was with God at the beginning, and through him all things came to be;" (NEB), and the fact that his Father (YHWH) after creating him used Jesus (Yeshua) as his master worker is revealed at Proverbs 8:22-30 about Jesus (Yeshua) being brought forth and being his Father's (YHWH's) master workman, "Jehovah possessed me in the beginning of his way, Before his works of old. 23 I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, Before the earth was. 24 When there were no depths, I was brought forth, When there were no fountains abounding with water. 25 Before the mountains were settled, Before the hills was I brought forth; 26 While as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields, Nor the beginning of the dust of the world. 27 When he established the heavens, I was there: When he set a circle upon the face of the deep, 28 When he made firm the skies above, When the fountains of the deep became strong, 29 When he gave to the sea its bounds, That the waters should not transgress his commandments, When he marked out the foundations of the earth; 30 Then I was by him, as a master workman; And I was daily his delight, Rejoicing always before him." (ASV); And Jesus' (Yeshua's)existence before the earth was is affirmed at John 8:58, "Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was born, I am." (ASV); Thus as Colossians 1:17 says, ""and he is before all things, and in him all things consist." (ASV); And at Revelation 3:14, "And to the angel of the church is Laodicea write: 'These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God:" (ASV), Jesus (Yeshua) is once more shown as the first of creation. Clearly, then, he, Jesus (Yeshua) is neither the same individual and/or manifestation of the same individual; Nor co-eternal, nor co-equal with his Father (YHWH).

All this in strict compliance with the Jewish Law of Agencies which is basically as follows, "Jesus (Yeshua) was God's (YHWH's) appointed agent in accordance with the 'Biblical law of agency' described as, "Scripture mentions something being done by Person A, whilst another mentions it being done by Person B. This is best understood when we grasp the Schaliach Principle, or the Jewish Law of Agency, which is expressed in the dictum, "A person's agent is regarded as the person himself." Therefore any act committed by a duly appointed agent is regarded as having been committed by the principle." (The Encyclopedia of the Jewish Religion, R.J.Z. Werblowski and Geoffrey Wigoder). And 1 Timothy 2:5 says, "For there is one God, one mediator also between God and men, [himself] man, Christ Jesus," (ASV). This is why Jesus (Yeshua) could say, John 16:23, "And in that day ye shall ask me no question. Verily, verily, I say unto you, if ye shall ask anything of the Father, he will give it you in my name."(ASV).


This fact is further affirmed at Ephesians 1:20-23 which shows that his Father (YHWH) raised him from the dead and put him at his right hand to administer all for him, "Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, 21 Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come; 22 And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church, 23 Which is his body, the fullness of him that filleth all in all." (ASV); This fact, that his Father (YHWH) placed him over all things except himself, a superior one, is highlighted at 1 Corinthians 15:20-28, "But now hath Christ been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of them that are asleep. 21 For since by man [came] death, by man [came] also the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive. 23 But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; then they that are Christ's, at his coming. 24 Then [cometh] the end, when he shall deliver up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have abolished all rule and all authority and power. 25 For he must reign, till he hath put all his enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy that shall be abolished is death. 27 For, He put all things in subjection under his feet. But when he saith, All things are put in subjection, it is evident that he is excepted who did subject all things unto him. 28 And when all things have been subjected unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subjected to him that did subject all things unto him, that God may be all in all." (ASV). This will bring the fulfillment foretold at Isaiah 45:23, "By myself have I sworn, the word is gone forth from my mouth [in] righteousness, and shall not return, that unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear." (ASV). This scripture shows that God (YHWH) will bring the earth back to perfection, i.e., a place where everyone will love their creator, Almighty God (YHWH), and his chief agent or mediator of life, Jesus (Yeshua) Christ, and their neighbor, and he, God (YHWH) will once more be using his Son, the Son of God, Jesus (Yeshua) as his master worker to accomplish this as shown by 1 Corinthians 15:20-28, previously quoted.

Now when we look at other constructs or translations of John 1:1 the fact that John 1:1 can NOT even support a Duality let alone a Trinity becomes even more readily apparent.
Let's look at the 10 possible constructs of John 1:1 that do NOT violate any rule of Koine Greek grammar with the exception of the fact is that THEOS (=God) is a count noun, not a mass noun or an adjective. As a count noun it MUST BE countable, i.e. either definite or indefinite (i.e. either "a god" or "the God") for two of the constructs:

<1> "and a god was the Logos." [example of Bible using, Das Evangelium nach Johannes, by Jurgen Becker Harwood, 1979]

<2> "the nature of the Word was the same as the nature of God" [example of Bible using, Schonfield, 1976]

<3> "The Word dwelt with God, and what God was, the word was." [example of Bible using, The New English Bible, NEB, 1961-present standard Bible agreed to by most denominations in the United Kingdom]

<4> "And the word was a god" [example of Bible using, The New Testament in An Improved Version, Upon the Basis of Achbishop Newcome's New Translation: With a Corrected Text.]

<5> "and the Word was divine" [example of Bible using, The Bible: An American Translation, by J.M.P. Smith and E.J. Goodspeed. }

<6> "and the Word was God" [example of Bible using, American Standard Version, ASV] [note, this construct violates the count noun rule of Koine Greek and is the common biased rendering of this scripture]

<7> "He was the same as God" example of Bible using, Today's English Version.]

<8> "the Logos was divine" [example of Bible using, The New Testament: A New Translation, by James Moffat]

<9> "r war bei Gott und in allem Gott gleich"[He was with God and in all like God] [example of Bible using, Haenchen (tr. By R. Funk), 1982]

<10> "Gott (von Art) war der Logos" [God (of Kind/kind) was the Logos/logos] [example of Bible using, Die Bibel in heutigem Deutsch, 1980]

As we can see, here are ten different constructs possible without violating any rule of Koine Greek grammar except the count Noun rule. So, now, let's look at what follows in context in general format at John 1:2:

"The Word, then, was with God at the beginning," (The New English Bible, NEB)

"The same was in the beginning with God." (American Standard Version, ASB)

"The same was in the beginning with God." (Authorized King James Bible; AV)

"He was in the beginning with God." (Revised Standard Version; RSV)

"He was in the beginning with God." (The Confraternity Edition of the New Testament - Catholic)

As is easily seen, John 1:2 is substantially the same in all translations. However, in context it does not harmonize with some of the constructs used which do not violate any rule of Koine Greek grammar with the exception of the count Noun rule to be explained later.

However clearly some of the ten (10) or more basic constructs agree in context with John 1:2 and some do NOT. Let's look at the point where some do not agree or harmonize with the context of John 1:2:

John 1:2 plainly says that the Word, or Logos, who is Jesus (Yeshua) was with God in the beginning which would be impossible if Jesus (Yeshua) was Almighty God (YHWH) himself. This rules out constructs 6, 7, and 10, represented below, as impossible as they do NOT harmonize with context.

<6> "and the Word was God" [example of Bible using, American Standard Version, ASV] [note, this construct violates the count noun rule of Koine Greek]

<7> "He was the same as God" example of Bible using, Today's English Version.]

<10> "Gott (von Art) war der Logos" [God (of Kind/kind) was the Logos/logos] [example of Bible using, Die Bibel in heutigem Deutsch, 1980]

And two of these constructs do violate the count Noun rule of Koine Greek; to wit, constructs 6 and 7.

Now exactly what is the count Noun rule of Koine Greek? It is as follows:

The fact is that THEOS (=God) is a count noun, not a mass noun or an adjective. As a count noun it MUST BE countable, i.e. either definite or indefinite (i.e. either "a god" or "the God"). The trinitarian argument hinges on stripping THEOS of its count-ability, so that it is purely qualitative. However, if a noun is PURELY qualitative, it is not a count noun. An adjective or a mass noun may fit their requirement for emphasizing qualitativness only, but a count noun MUST BE countable, for that is what *count* means when describing a count noun. If he accepts this rather elementary rule of English grammar, you can demonstrate that, as a count noun, THEOS may be translated either "the Word was God" (="the Word was The God", which is Sabellianism), or "the Word was a god". Since orthodox trinitarians reject "the Word was The God" (=Sabellianism), they are left with "the Word was a god" -- that is, if they remain true to English syntax (and English syntax is what ENGLISH translations are supposed to follow!). If one argues the point, let them provide an example of a non-countable *count noun* that is not used in a contrary-to-fact situation, such as a metaphor. I have yet to find anyone, trinitarian or otherwise, who is able to meet this challenge. Rolf Furuli, one of the two best living Koine Greek scholars, discusses this in his book, THE ROLE OF THEOLOGY AND BIAS IN BIBLE TRANSLATION, as does Greg Stafford, in his, JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES DEFENDED: AN ANSWER TO SCHOLARS AND CRITICS. There are also some very good posts by Wes Williams on greektheology that discuss this issue.

"To preserve in English the different nuance of theos [god] with and without the article, some (Moffat) would translate 'The Word was divine.'"

Notice a literal translation of John 1:1,2:

"In the beginning was the world and the word was toward the god and god was the word. This (one) was in beginning toward the god."

In these two verses we see six nouns, three referring to the Greek word logos (word, which most recognize to be Jesus - Yeshua) and three referring to the Greek word theos (god). We notice each reference to logos (word) is preceded by the definite article "the", while two of the three times the word theos (god) occurs, it too is preceded by the definite article "the". For some reason, John does not provide the definite article with theos when it is associated with "The Word". We thus see two definite individuals mentioned in this verse. "The Word", Jesus (Yeshua) Christ, and "The God", who is Almighty God Jehovah (YHWH). John does not say "The Word" is "The God". (In fact, most Trinitarian scholars would argue that if John had said the word was "ho theos" (The God), it would amount to sabellianism (the belief that Jesus is both the Father and the Son). As such, it is commonly agreed upon that John was not identifying Jesus (Yeshua) as God (YHWH) but rather, was describing him as deity.) But if John did not say "The Word" is "The God", then what did he mean by saying, "the word was god"?

In Greek, it is possible for a noun to act as an adjective when it is not accompanied by the definite article. Consider a Biblical example of this in John 6:70. "Jesus replied, "Have I not chosen you, the Twelve? Yet one of you is a devil!" (NIV)

Here the noun (devil) is not proceeded by the definite article (the). To reflect this most Bibles place the indefinite article (a) in front of it. Thus, Jesus was not identifying Judas as "THE Devil", he was saying Judas had the qualities of the devil. He was acting like the devil so he was A devil though not THE devil. This example helps us to see how the lack of the definite article can cause a noun to act as a predication rather than an identification.

Regarding this point, noted Bible scholar William Barclay writes:

"When in Greek two nouns are joined by the verb to be and when both have the definite article, then the one is fully identified with the other; but when one of them is without the article, it become more an adjective than a noun, and describes rather the class of the sphere to which the other belongs...

"John has no definte article before theos, God. The Logos, therefore, is not identified as God or with God; the word theos has become adjectival and describes the sphere to which the logos belongs...

"This passage then [John 1:1] does not identify the Logos and God; it does not say that Jesus (Yeshua) was God (YHWH), nor does it call him God; but it does say that in his nature and being he belongs to the same class as God." Or as the New English Bible states, "and what God was, the Word was."

Mr. Barclay's observations are duly noted in the example we considered with Judas Iscariot being "a devil".

Now let's consider what the Greek Scholar Jason BeDuhn from the Northern Arizona University has to say: "The Greek phrase is 'theos en ho logos', which translated word for word is "a god was the word." Greek has only a definite article, like our the, it does not have an indefinite article, like our a or an. If a noun is definite, it has the definite article 'ho'. If a noun is indefinite, no article is used. In the phrase from John 1:1, 'ho logos' is "the word." If it was written simply logos, without the definite article 'ho', we would have to translate it as "a word". So we are not really "inserting" an indefinite article when we translate Greek nouns without the definite article into English, we are simply obeying rules of English grammar that tell us that we cannot say "Snoopy is dog," but must say "Snoopy is a dog."

Now in English we simply say "God"; we do not say "The God." But in Greek, when you mean to refer to the one supreme God, instead of one of the many other beings that were called "gods," you would have to say "The God": 'ho theos'. Even a monotheistic Christian, who believes there is only one God and no others, would be forced to say in Greek "The God," as John and Paul and the other writers of the New Testament normally do. If you leave off the article in a phrase like John 1:1, then you are saying "a god." (There are some exceptions to this rule: Greek has what are called noun cases, which means the nouns change form depending on how they are used in a sentence. So, if you want to say "of God," which is 'theou', you don't need the article. But in the nominative case, which is the one in John 1:1, you have to have the article.) So what does John mean by saying "the word was a god"? He is classifying Jesus in a specific category of beings. There are plants and animals and humans and gods, and so on. By calling the Word "a god," John wants to tell his readers that the Word (which becomes Jesus when it takes flesh) belongs to the divine class of things. Notice the word order: "a god was the word." We can't say it like this in English, but you can in Greek. The subject can be after the verb and the object before the verb, the opposite of how we do it in English (subject-verb-object). Research has shown that when ancient Greek writers put a object-noun first in a sentence like John 1:1 (a be-verb sentence: x is y), without the definite article, they are telling us that the subject belongs to the class represented by the object-noun: :"The car is a Volkswagen." In English we would accomplish the same thing by using what we call predicate adjectives. "John is a smart person" = "John is smart." So we would tend to say "The word was divine," rather than "The word was a god." That is how I would translate this phrase. "The word was a god" is more literal, and an improvement over "The word was God," but it raises more problems, since to a modern reader it implies polytheism. No one in John's day would have understood the phrase to mean "The word was God" - the language does not convey that sense, and conceptually it is difficult to grasp such an idea, especially since that author has just said that the word was with God. Someone is not with himself, he is with some other. John clearly differentiates between God from the Word. The latter becomes flesh and is seen; the former cannot be seen. What is the Word? John says it was the agent through whom God made the world. He starts his gospel "In the beginning..." to remind us of Genesis 1. How does God create in Genesis? He speaks words that make things come into existence. So the Word is God's creative power and plan and activity. It is not God himself, but it is not really totally separate from God either. It occupies a kind of ambiguous status. That is why a monotheist like John can get away with calling it "a god" or "divine" without becoming a polytheist. This divine thing does not act on its own, however, does take on a kind of distinct identity, and in becoming flesh brings God's will and plan right down face to face with humans.

All this is in keeping with what John the Baptist is recorded by the Apostle John at John 1:15, "John beareth witness of him, and crieth, saying, This was he of whom I said, He that cometh after me is before me: for hi was before me." (ASV).

See Part 2:

[iris89]

Part 2 of Documentary on the Book of John Being antiTrinitarian:


A MORE POWERFUL BAPTISM BY MEANS OF JESUS (YESHUA):

John the Baptist was grilled by some priests, Levites, and Pharisees at John 1:20-34, "'I am not the Messiah.' 'What then? Are you Elijah?' 'No', he replied. 'Are you the prophet we await?' He answered 'No.' 'Then who are you?' they asked. 'We must give an answer to those who sent us. What account do you give of yourself?' He answered in the words of the prophet Isaiah: 'I am a voice cryinhg aloud in the wilderness, 'Make the Lord's highway straight.' Some Pharisees who were in deputation asked him, 'If you are not the Messiah, nor Elijah, nor the prophet, why then are you baptizing?' 'I baptize in water,' John replied, 'but among you though you do not know him, stands the one who is to come after me. I am not good enough to unfasten his shoes.' This took place at Bethany beyond Jordan, where John was baptizing. The next day he saw Jesus coming towards him. 'Look," he said 'there is the Lamb of God; it is he who takes away the sin of the world. This is he of whom I spoke when I said, 'After me a man is coming who takes rank before me'; for before I was born, he already was. I myself did not know who he was; but the very reason why I came, baptizing in water, was that he might be revealed to Israel.' John testified further: 'I saw the Spirit coming down from heaven like a dove and resting upon him. I did not know him, but he who sent me to baptize in water had told me, 'When you see the Spirit coming down upon someone and resting upon him you will know that this is he who is to baptize in Holy Spirit.' I saw it myself, and I have borne witness. This is God's Chosen One." (NEB). If he had been a part of a Trinity consisting of Father (YHWH), Son (Yeshua), and the Holy Spirit or Spirit the above could NOT have occurred since one individual could NOT come down on himself, and the above record would be utter linguistic foolishness; however, it is NOT as this God (YHWH) dishonoring doctrine is the fable or myth of mankind per the warning at 2 Timothy 4:3-4, "For the time will come when they will not endure the sound doctrine; but, having itching ears, will heap to themselves teachers after their own lusts; 4 and will turn away their ears from the truth, and turn aside unto fables." (ASV); why so? It is due to the activities of Satan the Devil as shown at Corinthians 4:4, ""In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them." (AV); due to their not seeking sound doctrine per Titus 2:1, "But speak thou the things which become sound doctrine:" (Authorized King James Bible; AV).

Interestingly right after this in John the first chapter, the Apostle John wrote with respect Simon Peter the following, at John 1:42, "And he brought him to Jesus. And when Jesus beheld him, he said, Thou art Simon the son of Jona: thou shalt be called Cephas, which is by interpretation, A stone." (AV).

GOD LOVES HIS SON, JESUS (YESHUA) AND SENT HIM TO EARTH WITH AUTHORITY:

John the Baptist testified to the fact that Jesus (Yeshua) did NOT come of his own volition, but had been sent by his Father (YHWH) with full authority as shown at 1 Corinthians 15:20-28, previously quoted. At John 3:31 to 36, we see the absolute truth of this testified to, "He that cometh from above is above all: he that is of the earth is of the earth, and of the earth he speaketh: he that cometh from heaven is above all. 32 What he hath seen and heard, of that be beareth witness; and no man receiveth his witness. 33 He that hath received his witness hath set his seal to this that God is true. 34 For his whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God: for he giveth not the Spirit by measure. 35 The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand. 36 He that believeth on the Son hath eternal life; but he that obeyeth not the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abideth on him." (ASV). This scripture reveals two important facts, First, that God (YHWH) loves his son; Second, Almighty God (YHWH) has sent his Son, Jesus (Yeshua) to earth to carry out an assignment and given him the concomitant authority to be able to do so as shown at 1 Corinthians 15:20-28, previously quoted.

And at John 4:24-26, "God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and in truth.' The woman answered, "I know that Messiah' (that is Christ) 'is coming. When he comes he will tell us everything.' Jesus said, 'I am he, I who am speaking to you now." (NEB). Now note, at this time the Son of God (YHWH), Jesus (Yeshua) was on earth as a perfect fleshly man; whereas the scripture clearly shows, "God is spirit," thus invisible. But Jesus (Yeshua) was flesh and blood and clearly visible at this time; therefore, there is NO way that they could be one and the same individual unless God (YHWH) is a liar and the Bible clearly shows this is NOT the case at Titus 1:2, "In hope of eternal life, which God, who cannot lie, promised before times eternal." (ASV).

And at John 5:25-26, "In truth, in very truth I tell you, a time is coming, indeed it is already here, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God, and all who hear shall come to life. For as the Father has life-giving power in himself, so has the Son, by the Father's gift." (NEB) clearly once more showing all the power and authority Jesus (Yeshua) Christ has were given to him by a superior one, his Father, Almighty God (YHWH); And at John 5:36, "But I rely on a testimony higher than John's. There is enough to testify that the Father has sent me, in the works my Father gave me to do and to finish-the very works I have in hand." (NEB) once more clearly showing that his Father, a superior one, had given him works to do in full compliance with the principles of the Jewish Law of Agencies previously explained as his master worker as shown at Proverbs 8:22-30, previously quoted. And this is affirmed at John 5:37, "This testimony to me was given by the Father who sent me, although you never heard his voice, or saw his form." (NEB); however, unfortunately the Father's (HYWH's) word through his Son per John 5:38, "But his word has found no home in you for you do not believe the one whom he sent." (NEB). Likewise, Jesus (Yeshua) stated at John 5:43-44, "I have come accredited by my Father, and you have no welcome for me; if another comes self-accredited you will welcome him. How can you have faith so long as you receive honour from one another, and care nothing for the honour that comes from him who alone is God?" (NEB), once more testifying to two facts, First, Jesus (Yeshua) was both sent by and accredited by his Father (YHWH), and Second, he, Jesus (Yeshua) is a distinct individual separate and apart from his Father (YHWH) who had sent him and accredited him. Just as Jesus (Yeshua) said, John 5:45-47, "Do not imagine that I shall be your accuser at God's tribunal. Your accuser is Moses, the very Moses on whom you have set your hope. If you believed Moses you would believe what I tell you, for it was about me that he wrote. But if you do not believe what he wrote, how are you to believe what I say?" (NEB).

TRUE CHRISTIANS MUST DO THE WORKS OF GOD AS SHOWN BY HIS SON:

Many read Jesus' (Yeshua's) assignment to his true followers at Matthew 24:14, "And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come." (New International Version; NIV). Now let's see what John 6:28-29, "They said therefore unto him, What must we do, that we may work the works of God? 29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent." (ASV); And Jesus (Yeshua) went on to show that his Father (YHWH) was the superior one at John 6:31-33, "Our fathers ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written, He gave them bread out of heaven to eat. 32 Jesus therefore said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, It was not Moses that gave you the bread out of heaven; but my Father giveth you the true bread out of heaven. 33 For the bread of God is that which cometh down out of heaven, and giveth life unto the world." (ASV); And at John 6:37, "All that the Father gives me will come to me, and the man who comes to me I will never turn away. I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me." (NEB). Now how much explicit can Jesus (Yeshua) get with respect who sent him and whose will he is doing; thereby, clearly showing neither a Duality or a Trinity exist except as a fable of mankind who are being deceived by none other than Satan the Devil as shown at 2 Corinthians 4:4, previously quoted. Jesus (Yeshua) specifically said at John 6:40, "For this is the will of my Father, that every one that beholdeth the Son, and believeth on him, should have eternal life: and I will raise him up at the last day." (ASV), as clearly noted, he was once more showing what the will of his Father (YHWH) is and not his own will; thereby, showing that his Father (YHWH) was the superior one and that he, Jesus (Yeshua), was an obedient Son. This same fact is testified to at John 6:45-47, "It is written in the prophets, And they shall all be taught of God. Every one that hath heard from the Father, and hath learned, cometh unto me. 46 Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he that is from God, he hath seen the Father. 47 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth hath eternal life." (ASV); And at John 6:57, "As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father; so he that eateth me, he also shall live because of me." (ASV) once more, here we find Jesus (Yeshua) testifying with respect whom had sent him and showing he was subject to him.

THE WORLD HATES JESUS (YESHUA) AND THOSE ACCURATELY TEACHING HIM:

The fact that the world hates Jesus (Yeshua) was testified to by none other that Jesus (Yeshua) at John 7:7, "The world cannot hate you; but it hates me for exposing the wickedness of its ways." (NEB), with this being spoken to his fleshly brothers [actually half brothers as his father was NOT Joseph, but Almighty God (YHWH) himself] who had not yet become believers in him at John 7:5, "For even his brothers were not believers in him." (NEB). And at John 7:16-18, Jesus (Yeshua) said, "Jesus therefore answered them, and said, My teaching is not mine, but his that sent me. 17 If any man willeth to do his will, he shall know of the teaching, whether is is of God, or whether I speak from myself. 18 He that speaketh from himself seeketh his own glory: but he that seeketh the glory of him that sent him, the same is ture, and no unrighteousness is in him." (ASV); once more, here Jesus (Yeshua) is showing he was sent by a superior one and that it was the will and teachings of this superior one that he was making known, and that he was NOT doing his own will. We should all believe Jesus (Yeshua) that he was sent by Almighty God (YHWh), his father, to do his Father's (YHWH's) will and not his own since Jesus (Yeshua) is not a liar anymore than is his Father (YHWH).

The fact that he had NOT come of his own accord is testified to by Jesus (Yeshua) at John 7:28-29, "Jesus therefore cried in the temple, teaching and saying, Ye both know me, and know whence I am: and I am not come of myself, but he that sent me is true, whom ye know not. 29 I know him; because I am from him, and he sent me." (ASV); Now how much clearer can it be that Jesus (Yeshua) was sent by a superior one, his Father, Almighty God (YHWH). But what did the Jews under control of the God of this System per 2 Corinthians 4:4, previously quoted, want to do? Let's look at John 7:30, "They sought therefore to take him: and no man laid his hand on him, because his hour was not yet come." (ASV). It is to be noted that at this time the Spirit had not yet been given as shown at John 7:39, "But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believed on him were to receive: for the Spirit was not yet given; because Jesus was not yet glorified." (ASV).

JESUS (YESHUA) IS THE LIGHT OF THE WORLD AS HIS FATHER (YHWH) HAS GIVEN HIM FULL AUTHORITY ON EARTH AND IN HEAVEN:

Now Jesus (Yeshua) is shown to be the 'Light of the World' at John 8:12, "Again therefore Jesus spake unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in the darkness, but shall have the light of life. 13 The Pharisees therefore said unto him, Thou bearest witness of theyself; they witness is not true. 14 Jesus answered and said unto them, Even if I bear witness of myself, my witness is true; for I know whence I came, and whither I go; but ye know not whence I come, or whither I go. 15 Ye judge after the flesh; I judge no man. 16 Yea and if I judge, my judgment is true for I am not alone, but I and the Father that sent me." (ASV); To this these individuals seeking to do him harm because they were being misguided by Satan the Devil, he said at John 8:19, "They said therefore unto him, Where is thy Father? Jesus answered, Ye know neither me, nor my Father: if ye knew me, ye would know my Father also." (ASV). And that he was doing his Father's (YHWH's) will and was from his Father (YHWH) they understood not as recorded in John 8:26, "Jesus answered, 'Why should I speak to you at all? I have much to say about you-and in judgment. But he who sent me speaks the truth, and what I heard from him I report to the world.'" (NEB); herewith clearly showing NOT only that he was NOT his Father (YHWH), but had also been taught all he knew by his Father (YHWH). Thus once more showing that he, Jesus (Yeshua) is neither co-eternal NOR co-equal with his Father (YHWH).

In fact, Jesus (Yeshua) as testified to by himself always, per John 8:28, "So Jesus said to them, 'When you have lifted up the Son of Man you will know that I am what I am. I do nothing on my own authority, but in all that I say, I have been taught by my Father." (NEB). He said to those seeking to kill him, per John 8:37-38, "'I know that you are descended from Abraham, but you are bent on killing me because my teaching makes no headway with you. I am revealing in words what I saw in my Father's presence; and you are revealing in action what you learned from your father." (NEB); And at John 8:41, "Ye do the works of your father. They said unto him, We were not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God." (ASV); And Jesus (Yeshua) answered them at John 8:42, "Jesus said unto them, If god were your Father, ye would love me: for I came forth and am come from God; for neither have I come of myself, but he sent me." (ASV) clearly he was showing that he had been sent by his Father and was doing his Father's (YHWH's) works as his Father's (YHWH's) master worker per Proverbs 8:22-30, as previously quoted, and was definitely a distinct being separate and apart from his Father (YHWH). Jesus (Yeshua) clearly showed that these individuals that were persecuting and harassing him were of the Devil at John 8:44-47, "Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father it is your will to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and standeth not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father thereof. 45 But because I say the truth, ye believe me not. 46 Which of you convicteth me of sin? If I say truth, why do ye not believe me? 47 He that is of God heareth the words of God: for this cause ye hear them not, because ye are not of God." (ASV). These Devil guided individuals answered saying, John 8:48-50, "'Are we not right in saying that you are a Samaritan, and that you are possessed?' "I am not possessed,' said Jesus; 'the truth is that I am honouring my Father, but you dishonour me. I do not care about my own glory; there is one who does care, and he is judge." (NEB); And at, John 8:54-55, "Jesus replied, 'If I glorify myself, that glory is of mine is worthless. It is the Father who glorifies me, he of whom you say, 'He is our God', though you do not know him. But I know him; if I said that I did not know him I should be a liar like you. But in truth I know him and obey his word." (NEB); Clearly, once more showing that he, Jesus (Yeshua) was not his Father (YHWH) by saying that, "If I glorify myself, that glory is of mine is worthless. It is the Father who glorifies me," so we can plainly see he is a distinct being apart from his Father (YHWH) and taking directions from his Father (YHWH). This fact is clearly shown by 1 Timothy 2:5, "For there is one God: and one mediator of God and men, the man Christ Jesus:" (Douay-Rheims Catholic Bible; DRCB).

GREATER LOVE HATH NO MAN THAN TO GIVE HIS LIFE IN BEHALF OF OTHERS:

Jesus (Yeshua) being the 'good shepherd' was willing to and did give his life for others as recorded at John 10:14- "I am the good shepherd; and I know mine own, and mine own know me, 15 even as the Father knoweth me, and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep. 16 And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and they shall become one flock, one shepherd. 17 Therefore doth the Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I may take it again. 18 No one taketh it away from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment received I from my Father." (ASV); Once more clearly showing that he was distinct from his Father, Almighty God (YHWH) and much loved by him since he was willing to lay his life down on behalf of the 'sheep' [the followers of his Father, Almighty God (YHWH) that he had given to his Son, Jeusu (Yeshua)].

As Jesus (Yeshua) himself said at John 10:25-29, "My deeds done in my Father's name are my credentials, but because you are not my sheep of my flock you do not believe. I give them eternal life and they shall never perish; no one shall snatch them from my care. My Father who has given them to me is greater than all, and no one can snatch them out of the Father's car." (NEB), clearly here showing that his Father (YHWH) is greater than himself; And at John 10:30, showing that both he and his Father (YHWH) are one in purpose, "I and my Father are one." (ASV); And at John 10:32-36, "At this Jesus said to them, 'I have set before you many good deeds, done by my Father's power; for which of these would you stone me? The Jews replied, 'We are not going to stone you for any good deed, but for your blasphemy. You a mere man claim to be a god.' Jesus answered, 'Is it not written in your own Law, 'I said: You are Gods'? Those are called gods to whom the word of God was delivered-and Scripture cannot be set aside. Then why do you charge me with blasphemy because I, consecrated and sent into the world by the Father, said, 'I am God's son'?" (NEB). Once more showing that he was doing NOT his own will, but that of his Father (YHWH) whom sent him; likewise, we to be acceptable to God (YHWH) must do his will and reject doctrines and fables of mankind originating with Satan the Devil and accept the truthful doctrines originating from God (YHWH). This fact is made clear at John 10:37-38, "If I am not acting as my Father would, do not believe me. But if I am, accept the evidence of my deeds, even if you do not believe me, so that you recognize and know that the Father is in me, and I in the Father." (NEB); That he should be doing the will of his Father is made clear at Colossians 1:15-16, "who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation; 16 for in him were all things created, in the heavens and upon the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things have been created through him, and unto him." (ASV). Hence we can see he would be like his Father (YHWH) as his Father (YHWH) created him in his own image and used his as his master worker, for details of the Jewish Law of Agencies and Proverbs 8:22-30 expounding on this, go back to the first part of this Documentary.

See Part 3

[iris89]

Part 3 of Documentary on the Book of John Being Anti Trinitarian:

PART 2 OF Documentary on the Book of John Being Anti-Trinitarian:

GOD LISTENS TO HIS SON, JESUS (YESHUA) AND GRANTS WHAT HE ASKS:

John the eleventh chapter clearly shows that Almighty God (YHWH) listens to his Son, the Son of God, Jesus (Yeshua) and grants him what he asks at John 11:21-25, "Martha said to Jesus, 'If you had been here, sir, my brother would not have died. Even now I know that whatever you ask of God, God will grant you.' Jesus said, 'Your brother will rise again.' " I know that he will rise again', said Martha, 'at the resurrection on the last day.' Jesus said, 'I am the resurrection and I am life." (NEB); And at John 11:27, "She saith unto him, Yea, Lord: I have believed that thou art the Christ, the Son of God, even he that cometh into the world." (ASV); Clearly once more testifying to the fact that he is a distinct being apart from his Father (YHWH) and that his Father (YHWH) hears him and grants his wishes.

Then Jesus (Yeshua) prayed to his Father (YHWH) at John 11:41, "So they took away the stone. And Jesus lifted up his eyes, and said, Father, I thank thee that thou heardest me. 42 And I knew that thou hearest me always; but because of the multitude that standeth around I said it, that they may believe that thou didst send me." (ASV).

JESUS' (YESHUA'S) FATHER (YHWH) WILL HONOR WHOEVER SERVES HIM:

Jesus (Yeshua) clearly stated at John 12:26-28, that anyone serving him would be honored by his Father (YHWY), "If anyone serves me, he must follow me; where I am, my servant will be. Whoever serves me will be honoured by my Father. Now my soul is in turmoil, and what am I to say? Father, save me from this hour. No, it was for this that I came to this hour. Father, glorify they name.' A voice sounded from heaven: 'I have glorified it, and I will glorify it again." (NEB); Now many accepted his as the Messiah, the Son of God, which he truly was, but others did not as recorded at John 12:39-42, ""For this cause they could not believe, for that Isaiah said again, 40 He hath blinded their eyes and he hardened their hearts; Lest they should see with their eyes, and perceive with their heart, And should turn, And I should heal them. 41 These things said Isaiah, because he saw his glory; and he spake of him. 42 Nevertheless even of the rulers many believed on him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess it, least they should be put out of the synagogue:" (ASV). Their having ears and not hearing was also confirmed at Matthew 13:14, "And unto them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall in no wise understand; And seeing ye shall see, and shall in no wise perceive:" (ASV). Though many believed on him, Jesus (Yeshua) they said nothing due to fear as testified to at John 7:12-17, "And there was much murmuring among the multitudes concerning him; some said, He is a good man; others said, Not so, but he leadeth the multitude astray. 13 Yet no man spake openly of him for fear of the Jews. 14 But when it was now the midst of the feast Jesus went up into the temple, and taught, 15 The Jews therefore marveiled, saying, How knoweth this man letters, having never learned? 16 Jesus therefore answered them, and said, My teaching is not mine, but his that sent me. 17 If any man willeth to do his will, he shall know of the teaching, whether it is of God, or whether I speak from myself." (ASV); Clearly here Jesus (Yeshua) showed what he taught was NOT from himself, but from his Father (YHWH) a superior one who had sent him. But the multitude was in fear and spoke not in his defense.

JESUS' (YESHUA'S) FAREWELL DISCOURSE:

John 13:1 clearly shows that Jesus (Yeshua) knew the time had come for him to lay his life down in behalf of the 'sheep', "It was before the Passover festival. Jesus knew that his hour had come and he must leave this world and go to the Father. He had always loved his own who were in the world, and now he was to show the full extent of his love." (NEB); Clearly he knew his time had arrived and he said, at John 13:20, "In very truth I tell you, he who receives any messanger of mine receives me; receiving me, he receives the One who sent me." (NEB), clearly showing his followers were one in purpose with him and his Father (YHWH). His giving his life as a human up both as a ransom for his 'sheep', the obedient from among mankind who were one in purpose with him and his Father (YHWH), and to glorify his father as stated at John 13:31-35, "When he had gone out Jesus said, 'Now the Son of Man is glorified, and in him God is glorified. If God is glorified in him, God will also glorify him in himself; and he will glorify him now. My children, for a little longer I am with you; then you will look for me, and, as I told the Jews, I tell you now, where I am going you cannot come. I give you a new commandment: love one another; as I have loved you, so you are to love one another. If there is this love among you, then all will know that you are my disciples.'" (NEB). This act of permitting himself as a perfect human to be a sacrifice for all of obedient mankind clearly shows that Jesus (Yeshua) not only was an obedient Son, but clearly had perfect love for his creator and Father, Almighty God (YHWH); Likewise, Jesus (Yeshua) showed that he had been created in the image of his Father (YHWH) as stated at Colossians 1:15, previously quoted. Therefore, as he, Jesus (Yeshua) stated, we should if we are his true followers have love among ourselves.

In his farewell to his followers, Jesus (Yeshua) stated at John 14:1-2, "'Set your troubled hearts at rest. Trust in God always; trust also in me. There are many dwelling-places in my Father's house; if it were not so I should have told you; for I am going there on purpose to prepare a place for you." (NEB); And at John 14:6-16, Jesus (Yeshua) states, "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way and the truth, and the life: no one cometh unto the Father, but by me. 7 If ye had known me, ye would have known my Father also: from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him. 8 Philip saith unto him, Lord show us the Father, and it sufficieth us. 9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and dost thou not know me, Philip? He that hath seen me hath seen the Father; how sayest thou, Show us the Father? 10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? The words that I say unto you I speak not from myself: but the Father abidinhg in me doeth his works. 11 Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake. 12 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than those shall he do; because I go unto the Father. 13 And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. 14 If ye shall ask anything in my name, that will I do, 15 If ye love me, ye will keep my commandments. 16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may be with you for ever," (ASV); clearly showing that he was the very image of his Father (YHWH) per Colossians 1:15, previously quoted, and as John 5:19-21 states, "To this charge Jesus replied, 'In truth, in very truth I tell you, the Son can do nothing by himself; he does only what he sees the Father doing: what the Father does, the Son does. For the Father loves the Son and shows him all his works, and will show greater yet to fill you with wonder." (NEB); And at John 14:19 Jesus (Yeshua) states, "Yet a little while, and the world beholdeth me no more; but ye behold me: because I live, ye shall live also. 20 In that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you. 21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself unto him." (ASV); Clearly showing that all obedient men/women would be in Jesus (Yeshua) and his Father (YHWH) just as they are in each other, that is in purpose and love.

This fact is further testified to at john 14:23-24, "Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my word: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him. 24 He that loveth me not keepeth not my words: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's who sent me." (ASV); Once more showing two very important facts, First, that all who keep his word and love one another are in union or a part of him as he is apart of us per John 14:20, "In that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you." Previously quoted above; and Second, Jesus (Yeshua) shows the words that he speaks are not his but those he heard from his Father (YHWH) clearly once more showing he is a being separate and distinct from his Father (YHWH). At John 14:25, he states, "I have told you all this while I am still with you; but your Advocate, the Holy Spirit whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you everything, and will call to mind all that I have told you." (NEB); once more clearly showing his Father (YHWH) as the superior and stating that his Father (YHWH), not himself, would sent an Advocate, the Holy Spirit. And at John 14:28, he clearly states that his Father (YHWH) is greater than himself, "Ye heard how I said to you, I go away, and I come unto you. If ye loved me, ye would have rejoiced, because I go unto the Father: for the Father is greater than I." (ASV); And at John 14:31, "but that the world may know that I love the Father, and as the Father gave me commandment, even so I do. Arise, let us go hence." (ASV); clearly it can now be seen it is entirely indefensible to argue for a Duality or a Trinity as clearly none exist, but only a Father (YHWH) and a Son, the Son of God, relationship exist as testified above by none other than Jesus (Yeshua) himself-hence the Duality and the Trinity have clearly been shown to be God (YHWH) dishonoring doctrine.

JESUS IS THE VINE AND HIS FATHER IS THE GARDENER:

Clearly Jesus (Yeshua) can be likened to a vine and his Father (YHWH) to a gardener and this fact is shown in scripture at John 15:1-10, "I am the real vine, and my Father is the gardener. Every barren branch of mine he cuts away; and every fruiting branch he cleans, to make it more fruitful still. You have already been cleansed by the word that I spoke to you. Dwell in me, as I in you. No branch can bear fruit by itself, but only if it remains united with the vine; no more can you bear fruit, unless you remain united with me. 'I am the vine, and you the branches. He who dwells in me, as Idwell in him bears much fruit; for apart from me you can do nothing. He who does not dwell in me is thrown away like a withered branch. The withered branches are heaped together, thrown on the fire, and burnt. 'If you dwell in me, and my words dwell in you, ask what you will, and you shall have it. This is my Father's glory, that you may bear fruit in plenty and so be my disciples. As the Father has loved me, so I have loved you. Dwell in my love. If you heed my commands, you will dwell in my love, as I have heeded my Father's commands and dwell in his love." (NEB); clearly once more showing that his Father (YHWH) and himself, Jesus (Yeshua) are separate and distinct beings; however, working with the same purpose in mind, and also one with their followers in this activity.

Now what is really important and must exist among Jesus' (Yeshua's) followers? John 15:11-14, shows that love is the all important ingredient, "'I have spoken thus to you, so that my joy may be in you, and your joy complete. This is my commandment; love one another, as I have loved you. There is no greater love than this, that a man should lay down his life for his friends. You are my friends, if you do what I command you." (NEB).

He, Jesus (Yeshua) calls us friends because he has disclosed to us everything he heard of his Father (YHWH) as testified to at John 15:15-21, "I call you servants no longer; a servant does not know what his master is about. I have called you friends, because I have disclosed to you everything that I heard from my Father. You did not choose me: I chose you. I appointed you to go on and bear fruit, fruit that shall last: so that the Father may give you all that you ask in my name. This is my commandment to you: love one another." (NEB); Likewise he reveals at John 15:18, that the world would hate his followers, "If the world hates you, it hated me first, as you know well. If you belonged to the world, the world would love its own; but because you do not belong to the world, because I have chosen you out of the world, for that reason the world hates you. Remember what I said: 'A servant is not greater that his master.' As they persecuted me, they will persecute you; they will follow your teachings as little as they have followed mine. It is on my account that they will treat you thus, because they do not know the One who sent me." (NEB). And at John 15:24-25, shows they hate without reason, "If I had not worked among them and accomplished what no other man has done, they wiould not be guilty of sin; but now they have both seen and hated both me and my Father. However, this test in their Law had to come true. 'They hated me without reason." (NEB); thus clearly showing the world would despise his true followers without reason. And at John 15:26-27, Jesus (Yeshua) showed he would send the Spirit to comfort his true followers, "But when your Advocate has come, whom I will send you from the Father-the Spirit of truth that issues from the Father-he will bear witness to me. And you also are my witnesses, because you have been with me from the first." (NEB). Clearly he was doing the work of his Father, but his enemies knew not this Father (YHWH) who had sent his as clearly stated as follows, "they will treat you thus, because they do not know the One who sent me."

See Part 4

[iris89]

Part 4 of Documentary on the Book of John Being Anti Trinitarian:

HIS TRUE FOLLOWERS WILL BE PERSECUTED BECAUSE THEY DO NOT RUN WITH THE WORLDLY SYSTEM:

Since his followers are to be persecuted per John 16:1-4, "I have told you all this to guard you against the breakdown of your faith. They will ban you from the synagogue; indeed, the time is coming when anyone who kills you will suppose that he is performing a religious duty. They will do these things because they do not know either the Father or me. I have told you all this so that when the time comes for it to happen you may remember amy warning. I did not tell you this first, because then I was with you; but now I am going away to him who sent me." (NEB); Now much clearer could Jesus (Yeshua) be than he had NOT come on his own volition but had been sent by another, a superior, his Father (YHWH), and that in the end times his followers would undergo sever persecution?

AT John 16:17-18, he reveals to his disciples, "Some of his disciples said to one another, 'What does he mean by this: 'A little while, and you will not see me, and again a little while, and you will see me', and by this: 'Because I am going to my Father'? So they asked, 'What is theis 'little while' that he speaks of We do now know what he means.'" (NEB); And at John 16:24, "In very truth I tell you, if you ask the Father for anything in my name, he will give it you. So far you have asked nothing in my name. Ask and you will receive, that your joy may be complete." NEB). He further emphasis this at John 16:25-28, "'Till now I have been using figures of speech; a time is coming when I shall no longer use figures, but tell you of the Father in plain words. When that day comes you will make your request in my name, and I do not say that I shall pray to the Father for you, for the Father loves you himself, because you have loved me and believed that I came from God. I came from the Father and have come into the world. Now I am leaving the world again and going to the Father." (NEB). Here once more he shows that the Father (YHWH) is distinct from him, and that he is doing his Father's (YHWH's) work, and that his Father (YHWH) loves his followers. And at John 16:31-33, "Jesus answered, 'Do you now believe? Look, the hour is coming, has indeed already come, when you are all to be scattered, each to his home, leaving me alone. Yet I am not alone, because the Father is with me. I have told you this so that in me you may find peace. In the world you will have trouble. But courage! The victory is mine: I have conquered the world." (NEB); Here he shows that his Father is one in purpose with him, clearly distinguishing the Father (YHWH) and his Son, the Son of God, Jesus (Yeshua) as two distinct and separate individuals.

THE LONGEST PRAYER BY JESUS (YESHUA) CLEARLY IS ANTI-TRINITARIAN:

As will be shown the entire prayer found at John 17:1-26 is anti-Trinitarian, this will be done by a 'Sola Scripture,' critical analysis of this entire chapter, "These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee:<[ These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes--"John very seldom depicts the gestures or looks of our Lord, as here. But this was an occasion of which the impression was indelible, and the upward look could not be passed over" [ALFORD]. Father, the hour is glorify thy Son--Put honor upon Thy Son, by countenancing, sustaining, and carrying Him through that "hour." (a) At John 17:5, Jesus asks for, "And now glorify thou me, O Father, with thyself, with the glory which I had, before the world was, with thee." (The Douay-Rheims Bible), "Jesus said to them: Amen, amen, I say to you, before Abraham was made, I AM." ." (John 8:58 The Douay-Rheims Bible), "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?" (John 6:62 The Douay-Rheims Bible). As can clearly be seen, Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) had been in heaven with his Father, Almighty God (YHWH) before he came down to earth to prove himself faithful under temptation, and here he was asking his Father (YHWH) for what he had had before in heaven. This clearly shows two individuals, one a superior being prayed to and a subordinate asking the superior for what he had had before in heaven. (b) ]>

2 As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him. <[ given--gavest him power over all give eternal life to as many as, &c.--literally, "to all that which thou hast given him." (a) "27 For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him. 28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all." (1 Corinthians 15:28 AV) Here we clearly see God has given his Son, Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) jurisdiction over all things except himself, Almighty God (YHWH) and after he, the Son, has accomplished all the work his Father has given him, he will, "then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all." This once more clearly shows they are two separate entities in heaven with one the superior, Almighty God (YHWH) and the other the subordinate, Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) (b) ]>

3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. <[this is--that. life eternal, that they might--may. know, &c.--This life eternal, then, is not mere conscious and unending existence,.but a life of acquaintance with God in Christ (Job 22:21). (a) Notice here that Almighty God (YHWH) sent his Son, Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) to earth to do his, the Father's will. Clearly the sender is the superior one. (b) ]>

4 I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do. <>

5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was. <[And now--in return. glorify thou me--The "I Thee" and "Thou Me" are so placed in the original, each beside its fellow, as to show that A PERFECT RECIPROCITY OF SERVICES of the Son to the Father first, and then of the Father to the Son in return, is what our Lord means here to express. with the glory which I had with thee before the world was--when "in the beginning the Word was with God" (John 1:1), "the only-begotten Son in the bosom of the Father" (John 1:18). With this pre-existent glory, which He veiled on earth, He asks to be reinvested, the design of the veiling being accomplished--not, however, simply as before, but now in our nature. (a) As can clearly be seen, Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) had been in heaven with his Father, Almighty God (YHWH) before he came down to earth to prove himself faithful under temptation, and here he was asking his Father (YHWH) for what he had had before in heaven. This clearly shows two individuals, one a superior being prayed to and a subordinate asking the superior for what he had had before in heaven. (b) ]>

6 I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word. <[ From praying for Himself He now comes to pray for His disciples. I have manifested--I manifested. thy name--His whole character towards mankind. to the men thou gavest me out of the (a) Here the Son, Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) acknowledges that the men belonged to Almighty God (YHWH), but he gave them to his son, "thou gavest them me; " clearly showing two individuals, a superior who can give things to a Son, and a Son who can receive things from his father; not two individuals in one Godhead as proclaimed by the Cathars. (b) ]>

7 Now they have known that all things whatsoever thou hast given me are of thee. <[Here, the Son, is acknowledging the gifts from his Father, and stating that the gifts are of thee, the Father, "are of thee." Obviously an interaction between two individuals, one the superior, the Father, the giver, and the subordinate, the Son, the receiver of the gifts. (b) ]>

8 For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me. [This is also shown at Ephesians 4:12-16, as follows, "they . . . have known surely that I came out from (a) Here he, the Son, Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) , mentions that he has given to his followers, "the words which thou gavest me," and his followers, "and they have received them." Then he, the Son, continues, "and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me," showing that his followers would surely know that they were one is purpose, "12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: 13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: 14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive; 15 But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ: 16 From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love." (AV) and Ephesians 3:9-14, "And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ: 10 To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God, 11 According to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord:
12 In whom we have boldness and access with confidence by the faith of him. 13 Wherefore I desire that ye faint not at my tribulations for you, which is your glory.
14 For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ," (AV). And at, 1 Timothy 2:5, "These clearly show that Almighty God (YHWH) and Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) although not one in body, are one in purpose, and since the Father has given mankind to the Son for the present time, we should all recognize the Son as the only mediator between God and mankind, " For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;" (1 Timothy 2:5 AV)]. (b) ]>

9 I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine. <>

10 And all mine are thine, and thine are mine; and I am glorified in them. <[all mine are thine, and thine are mine--literally, "All My things are Thine and Thy things are Mine." (On this use of the neuter gender, Absolute COMMUNITY OF PROPERTY between the Father and the Son is here expressed as nakedly as words can do it. (a) Here Jesus as shown at 1 Corinthians 15:27-28, clearly recognizes that everything he has really belongs onto his Father in keeping with, "27 For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him. 28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all." (AV) (b) ]>

11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are. <[I am no more in the but these are in the world--that is, Though My struggles are at an end, theirs are not; though I have gotten beyond the scene of strife, I cannot sever Myself in spirit from them, left behind and only just entering on their great conflict. Holy Father--an expression He nowhere else uses. "Father" is His wonted appellation, but "Holy" is here prefixed, because His appeal was to that perfection of the Father's nature, to "keep" or preserve them from being tainted by the unholy atmosphere of "the world" they were still in. keep through thine own name--rather, "in thy name"; in the exercise of that gracious and holy character for which He was known.
that they may be (a) Here he, the Son, Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) , says after returning to his Father, " And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world," and asks that they, his followers, "be one, as we are," one. " Then he, the Son, continues, "and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me," (part of John 17:8 AV) showing that his followers would surely know that they were one is purpose, "12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: 13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: 14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive; 15 But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ: 16 From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love." (Ephesians 4:12-16 AV) and "9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ: 10 To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God, 11 According to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord: 12 In whom we have boldness and access with confidence by the faith of him. 13 Wherefore I desire that ye faint not at my tribulations for you, which is your glory. 14 For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ," (Ephesians 3:9-14 AV). These clearly show that Almighty God (YHWH) and Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) although not one in body, are one in purpose, and since the Father has given mankind to the Son for the present time, we should all recognize the Son as the only mediator between God and mankind, " For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;" (1 Timothy 2:5 AV). (b) ]>

12 While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled. <[I kept--guarded. them in thy name--acting as Thy Representative on earth.
none of them is lost, but the son of perdition--It is not implied here that the son of perdition was one of those whom the Father had given to the Son, but rather the contrary (John 13:18) [WEBSTER and WILKINSON]. It is just as in Luke 4:26,27, where we are not to suppose that the woman of Sarepta (in Sidon) was one of the widows of Israel, nor Naaman the Syrian one of the lepers in Israel, though the language--the same as here--might seem to express it. son of perdition--doomed to it (2 Thessalonians 2:3, 14:21). (a) ]>

13 And now come I to thee; and these things I speak in the world, that they might have my joy fulfilled in themselves. <>

14 I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.<[ Here Jesus tells his Father in heaven that he has given his followers his Fathers word, but the world hated them because they were no longer part of the world, " Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God." (James 4:4 AV) (b) ]>

15 I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil. <[ I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world--for that, though it would secure their own safety, would leave the world unblessed by their testimony. but . . . keep them from the evil--all evil in and of the world. (a) Here Jesus showed that his followers would not be popular and asked his Father to protect them against evil showing he recognized his Father as the superior. Clearly they would not be poplar and would be small in number as shown "13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: 14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it." (Matthew 7:13-14 AV) (b) ]>

See part 5:

[iris89]

Part 5 of Documentary on the Book of John Being Anti Trinitarian:


16 They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. <[ They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world--(See John 5:18,19). This is reiterated here, to pave the way for the prayer which follows (a) ]>

17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth. <[ Sanctify them--As the former prayer, "Keep them," was "negative," asking protection for them from the poisonous element which surrounded and pressed upon their renewed nature, so this prayer, "Sanctify them," is positive, asking the advancement and completion of their begun sanctification. through--in. thy truth--God's revealed truth, as the medium or element of sanctification; a statement this of immense importance. thy word is truth--(Compare John 15:3, Colossians 1:5, Ephesians 1:13). (a) Here he request that his Father (YHWH) sanctify his followers through his word as Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) clearly shows that he knows that his Father's word is "thy word is truth." (b) ]>

18 As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world. <[ As thou hast sent--sentest. me into the world, even so have I also sent them--sent I also them. into the world--As their mission was to carry into effect the purposes of their Master's mission, so our Lord speaks of the authority in both cases as co-ordinate. (a) Once more, Jesus emphases that he was sent by his Father (YHWH), the superior, for a purpose and also emphases that he, Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) has sent them into the world to continue with his work in keeping with " And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come." (Matthew 24:14 AV) (b) ]>

19 And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth. <[ And for their sakes I sanctify--consecrate. myself that they also might--may. be sanctified--consecrated. The only difference between the application of the same term to Christ and the disciples is, as applied to Christ, that it means only to "consecrate"; whereas, in application to the disciples, it means to consecrate with the additional idea of previous sanctification, since nothing but what is holy can be presented as an offering. The whole self-sacrificing work of the disciples appears here as a mere result of the offering of Christ [OLSHAUSEN]. through--in. the truth--Though the article is wanting in the original here, we are not to translate, as in the Margin, "truly sanctified"; for the reference seems plainly to be "the truth" mentioned in John 17:17. (a) ]>

20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; <[ Neither pray I for these alone--This very important explanation, uttered in condescension to the hearers and readers of this prayer in all time, is meant not merely of what follows, but of the whole prayer. them also which shall believe--The majority of the best manuscripts read "which believe," all future time being viewed as present, while the present is viewed as past and gone. (a) ]>

21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. <[ that they all may be one, as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they may be one in us--The indwelling Spirit of the Father and the Son is the one perfect bond of union, knitting up into a living unity, first all believers amongst themselves; next, this unity into one still higher, with the Father and the Son. (Observe, that Christ never mixes Himself up with His disciples as He associates Himself with the Father, but says I in THEM and THEY in US).
that the world may believe that thou hast sent me--sentest me. So the grand impression upon the world at large, that the mission of Christ is divine, is to be made by the unity of His disciples. Of course, then, it must be something that shall be visible or perceptible to the world. What is it, then? Not certainly a merely formal, mechanical unity of ecclesiastical machinery. For as that may, and to a large extent does, exist in both the Western and Eastern churches, with little of the Spirit of Christ, yea much, much with which the Spirit of Christ cannot dwell so instead of convincing the world beyond its own pale of the divinity of the Gospel, it generates infidelity to a large extent within its own bosom. But the Spirit of Christ, illuminating, transforming, and reigning in the hearts of the genuine disciples of Christ, drawing them to each other as members of one family, and prompting them to loving co-operation for the good of the world--this is what, when sufficiently glowing and extended, shall force conviction upon the world that Christianity is divine. Doubtless, the more that differences among Christians disappear--the more they can agree even in minor matters--the impression upon the world may be expected to be greater. But it is not dependent upon this; for living and loving oneness in Christ is sometimes more touchingly seen even amidst and in spite of minor differences, than where no such differences exist to try the strength of their deeper unity. Yet till this living brotherhood in Christ shall show itself strong enough to destroy the sectarianism, selfishness, carnality, and apathy that eat out the heart of Christianity in all the visible sections of it, in vain shall we expect the world to be overawed by it. It is when "the Spirit shall be poured upon us from on high," as a Spirit of truth and love, and upon all parts of the Christian territory alike, melting down differences and heart burnings, kindling astonishment and shame at past unfruitfulness, drawing forth longings of catholic affection, and yearnings over a world lying in wickedness, embodying themselves in palpable forms and active measures--it is then that we may expect the effect here announced to be produced, and then it will be irresistible. Should not Christians ponder these things? Should not the same mind be in them which was also in Christ Jesus about this matter? Should not His prayer be theirs? (a) Here he, the Son, Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves), then he, the Son, continues, " For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me." (John 17:8 AV), showing that his followers would surely know that they were one is purpose, "12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: 13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: 14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive; 15 But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ: 16 From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love." (Ephesians 4:12-16 AV) and "9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ: 10 To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God, 11 According to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord:
12 In whom we have boldness and access with confidence by the faith of him. 13 Wherefore I desire that ye faint not at my tribulations for you, which is your glory.
14 For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ," (Ephesians 3:9-14 AV). These clearly show that Almighty God (YHWH) and Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) although not one in body, are one in purpose, and since the Father has given mankind to the Son for the present time, we should all recognize the Son as the only mediator between God and mankind, " For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;" (1 Timothy 2:5 AV). (b) ]>

22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: <[ And the glory which thou gavest--hast given. me I have given them, that they may be one, even as we are one--The last clause shows the meaning of the first. It is not the future glory of the heavenly state, but the secret of that present unity just before spoken of; the glory, therefore, of the indwelling Spirit of Christ; the glory of an accepted state, of a holy character, of every grace. (a) See second comment on John 17:21 above (b) ]>

23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me. <[ I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in (a) Once more Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) emphasis that his followers should be one in purpose just as he is one in purpose with his Father (YHWH), for more details see second comment on John 17:21 above. (b)]>

24 Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world. <[ Father, I will--The majesty of this style of speaking is quite transparent. No petty criticism will be allowed to fritter it away in any but superficial or perverted readers. be with me where I that they may behold my glory which thou hast given Christ regards it as glory enough for us to be admitted to see and gaze for ever upon His glory! This is "the beatific vision"; but it shall be no mere vision, for "we shall be like Him, because we shall see Him as He is" (1 John 3:2). (a) ]>

25 O righteous Father, the world hath not known thee: but I have known thee, and these have known that thou hast sent me. <[ O righteous Father, the world hath not known thee--knew thee not. but I have known thee--knew thee. and these have known--knew. that thou hast sent--sentest me--As before He said "Holy Father," when desiring the display of that perfection on His disciples (John 17:11), so here He styles Him "Righteous Father," because He is appealing to His righteousness or justice, to make a distinction between those two diametrically opposite classes--"the world," on the one hand, which would not "know the Father, though brought so nigh to it in the Son of His love, and, on the other, Himself, who recognized and owned Him, and even His disciples, who owned His mission from the Father. (a) ]>

26 And I have declared unto them thy name, and will declare it: that the love wherewith thou hast loved me may be in them, and I in them. <[ And I have declared--I made known or communicated. thy name--in His past ministry. and will declare it--in yet larger measure, by the gift of the Holy Ghost at Pentecost and through all succeeding ages. that the love wherewith thou hast loved--lovedst. me may be in them, and I in them--This eternal love of the Father, resting first on Christ, is by His Spirit imparted to and takes up its permanent abode in all that believe in Him; and "He abiding in them and they in Him" (John 15:5), they are "one Spirit." "With this lofty thought the Redeemer closes His prayer for His disciples, and in them for His Church through all ages. He has compressed into the last moments given Him for conversation with His own the most sublime and glorious sentiments ever uttered by mortal lips. But hardly has the sound of the last word died away, when He passes with the disciples over the brook Kedron to Gethsemane--and the bitter conflict draws on. The seed of the new world must be sown in Death, that thence Life may spring up" [OLSHAUSEN]. (a)]>

(a) - Brown, David, D.D. "Commentary on John 17". "Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible, 1871.
(b) - Iris the Preacher, 2002.

THE FINAL CONFLICT:

But all true followers should strive for a good conscience and seek peace as shown in 1 Peter 3:16, "Having a good conscience: that, whereas they speak evil of you, as of evildoers, they may be ashamed that falsely accuse your good conversation in Christ." (AV). Remember, they did likewise to our leader, Jesus (Yeshua), because they did not like the Truths he spoke, John 18:19-23, "The high priest then asked Jesus of his disciples, and of his doctrine. 20 Jesus aanswered him, I spake openly to the world; I even taught in the synagogue, and in the temple, whither the Jews always resort; and in secret have I said nothing. 21 Why askest thou me? Ask them which heard me, what I have said unto them: behold, they know what I said. 22 And when he had thus spoken, one of the officers which stood by struck Jesus with the palm of his hand, saying, Answerest thou the high priest so? 23 Jesus answered him, If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil: but if well, why smitest thou me?" (AV). This is the way of evil doers that can find no real wrong done by the true followers of God (YHWH) and his Son, Jesus (Yeshua) as affirmed at Acts 25:17-19, Therefore, when they were come hither, without any delay on the morrow I sat on the judgment seat, and commanded the man to be brought forth. 18 Against whom when the accusers stood up, they brought none accusation of such things as I supposed: 19 But had certain questions against him of their own superstitution, and of one Jesus, which was dead, whom Paul affirmed to be alive." (AV); and it is likewise today, clearly showing we are living in the time of the end.

Likewise at John 19:11-16, "You would have no authority at all over me', Jesus replied, 'if it had not been granted you from above; and therefore the deeper guilt lies with the man who handed me over to you.' From that moment Pilate tried hard to release him; but the jews kept shouting, 'If you let this man go, you are no friend to Caesar; any man who claims to be a king is defying Caesar." When Pilate heard what they were saying, he brought Jesus out and took his seat on the tribunal at the place known as 'The Pavement' ('Gabbatha' in the language of the Jews). It was the eve of Passover, 'about noon. Pilate said to the Jews, 'Here is your king.' They shouted, 'Away with him! Away with him! Crucify him!' 'Crucify your king?' said Pilate. 'We have no king but Caesar', the Jews replied. Then at last, to satisfy them, he handed Jesus over to be crucified." (NEB). Here clearly we can see the spirit of this world prevailing over individuals that have been misguided by none other than Satan the Devil, just like many that have been deceived today.


He later, after his resurrection by his Father (YHWH) appeared to his disciples as stated at John 20:19-23, and told them many things and especially this, "as the Father sent me, so I send you," clearly showing his Father (YHWH) a superior one had sent him, "Late that Sunday evening, when the disciples were together behind locked doors, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them. 'Peace be with you!' he said, and then showed them his hands and his side. So when the disciples saw the Lord, they were filled with joy. Jesus repeated, 'Peace be with you!' and then said, 'As the Father sent me, so I send you.' He then breathed on them, saying, 'Receive the Holy Spirit! If you forgive any man's sins, they stand forgiven; if you pronounce them unforgiven, unforgiven they remain." (NEB)

He later appeared to the Apostles by the Sea of Tiberias and had breakfast an emphasis the need to feed his 'sheep' at John 21:15-17, "After breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, 'Simon son of John, do you love more than all else?' 'Yes, Lord,' he answered, "you know that I love you.' 'Then feed my lambs', he said. A second time he asked, 'Simon son of John, do you love me?' 'Yes, Lord, you know I love you.' 'Then tend my sheep.' A third time he said, 'Simon son of John, do you love me?' Peter was hurt that he asked him a third time, 'Do you love me?' 'Lord," he said, 'you know everything; you know I love you. Jesus said, 'Feed my sheep.'" (NEB). Clearly we have seen that the book of John is clearly anti-Trinitarian, and if we want to please God (YHWH) we should not believe in fables and myths that the scripture plainly shows at 1 Timothy 4:7 are nothing but old wives tales, "but refuse profane and old wives' fables. And exercise thyself unto godliness;" (ASV).

Your Friend in Christ Iris89

[Samuel]

iris89 said:

Part 5 of Documentary on the Book of John Being Anti Trinitarian:


16 They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. <[ They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world--(See John 5:18,19). This is reiterated here, to pave the way for the prayer which follows (a) ]>

17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth. <[ Sanctify them--As the former prayer, "Keep them," was "negative," asking protection for them from the poisonous element which surrounded and pressed upon their renewed nature, so this prayer, "Sanctify them," is positive, asking the advancement and completion of their begun sanctification. through--in. thy truth--God's revealed truth, as the medium or element of sanctification; a statement this of immense importance. thy word is truth--(Compare John 15:3, Colossians 1:5, Ephesians 1:13). (a) Here he request that his Father (YHWH) sanctify his followers through his word as Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) clearly shows that he knows that his Father's word is "thy word is truth." (b) ]>

18 As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world. <[ As thou hast sent--sentest. me into the world, even so have I also sent them--sent I also them. into the world--As their mission was to carry into effect the purposes of their Master's mission, so our Lord speaks of the authority in both cases as co-ordinate. (a) Once more, Jesus emphases that he was sent by his Father (YHWH), the superior, for a purpose and also emphases that he, Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) has sent them into the world to continue with his work in keeping with " And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come." (Matthew 24:14 AV) (b) ]>

19 And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth. <[ And for their sakes I sanctify--consecrate. myself that they also might--may. be sanctified--consecrated. The only difference between the application of the same term to Christ and the disciples is, as applied to Christ, that it means only to "consecrate"; whereas, in application to the disciples, it means to consecrate with the additional idea of previous sanctification, since nothing but what is holy can be presented as an offering. The whole self-sacrificing work of the disciples appears here as a mere result of the offering of Christ [OLSHAUSEN]. through--in. the truth--Though the article is wanting in the original here, we are not to translate, as in the Margin, "truly sanctified"; for the reference seems plainly to be "the truth" mentioned in John 17:17. (a) ]>

20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; <[ Neither pray I for these alone--This very important explanation, uttered in condescension to the hearers and readers of this prayer in all time, is meant not merely of what follows, but of the whole prayer. them also which shall believe--The majority of the best manuscripts read "which believe," all future time being viewed as present, while the present is viewed as past and gone. (a) ]>

21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. <[ that they all may be one, as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they may be one in us--The indwelling Spirit of the Father and the Son is the one perfect bond of union, knitting up into a living unity, first all believers amongst themselves; next, this unity into one still higher, with the Father and the Son. (Observe, that Christ never mixes Himself up with His disciples as He associates Himself with the Father, but says I in THEM and THEY in US).
that the world may believe that thou hast sent me--sentest me. So the grand impression upon the world at large, that the mission of Christ is divine, is to be made by the unity of His disciples. Of course, then, it must be something that shall be visible or perceptible to the world. What is it, then? Not certainly a merely formal, mechanical unity of ecclesiastical machinery. For as that may, and to a large extent does, exist in both the Western and Eastern churches, with little of the Spirit of Christ, yea much, much with which the Spirit of Christ cannot dwell so instead of convincing the world beyond its own pale of the divinity of the Gospel, it generates infidelity to a large extent within its own bosom. But the Spirit of Christ, illuminating, transforming, and reigning in the hearts of the genuine disciples of Christ, drawing them to each other as members of one family, and prompting them to loving co-operation for the good of the world--this is what, when sufficiently glowing and extended, shall force conviction upon the world that Christianity is divine. Doubtless, the more that differences among Christians disappear--the more they can agree even in minor matters--the impression upon the world may be expected to be greater. But it is not dependent upon this; for living and loving oneness in Christ is sometimes more touchingly seen even amidst and in spite of minor differences, than where no such differences exist to try the strength of their deeper unity. Yet till this living brotherhood in Christ shall show itself strong enough to destroy the sectarianism, selfishness, carnality, and apathy that eat out the heart of Christianity in all the visible sections of it, in vain shall we expect the world to be overawed by it. It is when "the Spirit shall be poured upon us from on high," as a Spirit of truth and love, and upon all parts of the Christian territory alike, melting down differences and heart burnings, kindling astonishment and shame at past unfruitfulness, drawing forth longings of catholic affection, and yearnings over a world lying in wickedness, embodying themselves in palpable forms and active measures--it is then that we may expect the effect here announced to be produced, and then it will be irresistible. Should not Christians ponder these things? Should not the same mind be in them which was also in Christ Jesus about this matter? Should not His prayer be theirs? (a) Here he, the Son, Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves), then he, the Son, continues, " For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me." (John 17:8 AV), showing that his followers would surely know that they were one is purpose, "12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: 13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: 14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive; 15 But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ: 16 From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love." (Ephesians 4:12-16 AV) and "9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ: 10 To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God, 11 According to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord:
12 In whom we have boldness and access with confidence by the faith of him. 13 Wherefore I desire that ye faint not at my tribulations for you, which is your glory.
14 For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ," (Ephesians 3:9-14 AV). These clearly show that Almighty God (YHWH) and Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) although not one in body, are one in purpose, and since the Father has given mankind to the Son for the present time, we should all recognize the Son as the only mediator between God and mankind, " For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;" (1 Timothy 2:5 AV). (b) ]>

22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: <[ And the glory which thou gavest--hast given. me I have given them, that they may be one, even as we are one--The last clause shows the meaning of the first. It is not the future glory of the heavenly state, but the secret of that present unity just before spoken of; the glory, therefore, of the indwelling Spirit of Christ; the glory of an accepted state, of a holy character, of every grace. (a) See second comment on John 17:21 above (b) ]>

23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me. <[ I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in (a) Once more Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) emphasis that his followers should be one in purpose just as he is one in purpose with his Father (YHWH), for more details see second comment on John 17:21 above. (b)]>

24 Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world. <[ Father, I will--The majesty of this style of speaking is quite transparent. No petty criticism will be allowed to fritter it away in any but superficial or perverted readers. be with me where I that they may behold my glory which thou hast given Christ regards it as glory enough for us to be admitted to see and gaze for ever upon His glory! This is "the beatific vision"; but it shall be no mere vision, for "we shall be like Him, because we shall see Him as He is" (1 John 3:2). (a) ]>

25 O righteous Father, the world hath not known thee: but I have known thee, and these have known that thou hast sent me. <[ O righteous Father, the world hath not known thee--knew thee not. but I have known thee--knew thee. and these have known--knew. that thou hast sent--sentest me--As before He said "Holy Father," when desiring the display of that perfection on His disciples (John 17:11), so here He styles Him "Righteous Father," because He is appealing to His righteousness or justice, to make a distinction between those two diametrically opposite classes--"the world," on the one hand, which would not "know the Father, though brought so nigh to it in the Son of His love, and, on the other, Himself, who recognized and owned Him, and even His disciples, who owned His mission from the Father. (a) ]>

26 And I have declared unto them thy name, and will declare it: that the love wherewith thou hast loved me may be in them, and I in them. <[ And I have declared--I made known or communicated. thy name--in His past ministry. and will declare it--in yet larger measure, by the gift of the Holy Ghost at Pentecost and through all succeeding ages. that the love wherewith thou hast loved--lovedst. me may be in them, and I in them--This eternal love of the Father, resting first on Christ, is by His Spirit imparted to and takes up its permanent abode in all that believe in Him; and "He abiding in them and they in Him" (John 15:5), they are "one Spirit." "With this lofty thought the Redeemer closes His prayer for His disciples, and in them for His Church through all ages. He has compressed into the last moments given Him for conversation with His own the most sublime and glorious sentiments ever uttered by mortal lips. But hardly has the sound of the last word died away, when He passes with the disciples over the brook Kedron to Gethsemane--and the bitter conflict draws on. The seed of the new world must be sown in Death, that thence Life may spring up" [OLSHAUSEN]. (a)]>

(a) - Brown, David, D.D. "Commentary on John 17". "Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible, 1871.
(b) - Iris the Preacher, 2002.

THE FINAL CONFLICT:

But all true followers should strive for a good conscience and seek peace as shown in 1 Peter 3:16, "Having a good conscience: that, whereas they speak evil of you, as of evildoers, they may be ashamed that falsely accuse your good conversation in Christ." (AV). Remember, they did likewise to our leader, Jesus (Yeshua), because they did not like the Truths he spoke, John 18:19-23, "The high priest then asked Jesus of his disciples, and of his doctrine. 20 Jesus aanswered him, I spake openly to the world; I even taught in the synagogue, and in the temple, whither the Jews always resort; and in secret have I said nothing. 21 Why askest thou me? Ask them which heard me, what I have said unto them: behold, they know what I said. 22 And when he had thus spoken, one of the officers which stood by struck Jesus with the palm of his hand, saying, Answerest thou the high priest so? 23 Jesus answered him, If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil: but if well, why smitest thou me?" (AV). This is the way of evil doers that can find no real wrong done by the true followers of God (YHWH) and his Son, Jesus (Yeshua) as affirmed at Acts 25:17-19, Therefore, when they were come hither, without any delay on the morrow I sat on the judgment seat, and commanded the man to be brought forth. 18 Against whom when the accusers stood up, they brought none accusation of such things as I supposed: 19 But had certain questions against him of their own superstitution, and of one Jesus, which was dead, whom Paul affirmed to be alive." (AV); and it is likewise today, clearly showing we are living in the time of the end.

Likewise at John 19:11-16, "You would have no authority at all over me', Jesus replied, 'if it had not been granted you from above; and therefore the deeper guilt lies with the man who handed me over to you.' From that moment Pilate tried hard to release him; but the jews kept shouting, 'If you let this man go, you are no friend to Caesar; any man who claims to be a king is defying Caesar." When Pilate heard what they were saying, he brought Jesus out and took his seat on the tribunal at the place known as 'The Pavement' ('Gabbatha' in the language of the Jews). It was the eve of Passover, 'about noon. Pilate said to the Jews, 'Here is your king.' They shouted, 'Away with him! Away with him! Crucify him!' 'Crucify your king?' said Pilate. 'We have no king but Caesar', the Jews replied. Then at last, to satisfy them, he handed Jesus over to be crucified." (NEB). Here clearly we can see the spirit of this world prevailing over individuals that have been misguided by none other than Satan the Devil, just like many that have been deceived today.


He later, after his resurrection by his Father (YHWH) appeared to his disciples as stated at John 20:19-23, and told them many things and especially this, "as the Father sent me, so I send you," clearly showing his Father (YHWH) a superior one had sent him, "Late that Sunday evening, when the disciples were together behind locked doors, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them. 'Peace be with you!' he said, and then showed them his hands and his side. So when the disciples saw the Lord, they were filled with joy. Jesus repeated, 'Peace be with you!' and then said, 'As the Father sent me, so I send you.' He then breathed on them, saying, 'Receive the Holy Spirit! If you forgive any man's sins, they stand forgiven; if you pronounce them unforgiven, unforgiven they remain." (NEB)

He later appeared to the Apostles by the Sea of Tiberias and had breakfast an emphasis the need to feed his 'sheep' at John 21:15-17, "After breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, 'Simon son of John, do you love more than all else?' 'Yes, Lord,' he answered, "you know that I love you.' 'Then feed my lambs', he said. A second time he asked, 'Simon son of John, do you love me?' 'Yes, Lord, you know I love you.' 'Then tend my sheep.' A third time he said, 'Simon son of John, do you love me?' Peter was hurt that he asked him a third time, 'Do you love me?' 'Lord," he said, 'you know everything; you know I love you. Jesus said, 'Feed my sheep.'" (NEB). Clearly we have seen that the book of John is clearly anti-Trinitarian, and if we want to please God (YHWH) we should not believe in fables and myths that the scripture plainly shows at 1 Timothy 4:7 are nothing but old wives tales, "but refuse profane and old wives' fables. And exercise thyself unto godliness;" (ASV).

Your Friend in Christ Iris89

???