Can You Spot a Heresy?

Mobile_Ed_LogoThe history of the Christian church is riddled with teachers whose work looked and sounded like orthodox Christianity—but wasn’t.

Sometimes their teaching was so close to Christianity it was hard to tell the difference. The same is true today.

Can you spot the difference between Christian orthodoxy and heresy?

Distinguishing Christianity from false teachings

Anyone responsible for teaching other Christians should be able not only to distinguish proper Christian thought from false teachings that are disguised as Christianity, but also help others do the same. Unfortunately, it’s not always clear which is which.

  • What are the different forms of revelation, and what does an orthodox understanding of Christian revelation mean for those claiming to have “heard from God”?
  • What are the divine relationships in the Trinity, and how does this teaching differ from polytheistic religions?
  • What does the Bible actually have to say about the end times, in contrast to what pop culture has portrayed as entertainment?

In TH200 Christian Thought: Orthodoxy and Heresy, Dr. Beth F. Jones walks you through major doctrines such as revelation, Trinity, Christology, soteriology, ecclesiology, and eschatology—as well as their heretical counterparts. Watch this clip to hear Dr. Jones describe how this course can help you distinguish Christianity from false teachings:

Equip yourself to discern the truth

Mobile Ed’s Christian Thought: Orthodoxy and Heresy offers eight hours of video teaching and quizzes that are fully integrated with Logos Bible Software, ensuring that you can tell the difference between Christian orthodoxy and heresy, and that you are well equipped to help others do the same.

***

Pre-order TH200 Christian Thought: Orthodoxy and Heresy today and get 40% off the full price!

Comments

  1. @Ryan, it is ironic that your measuring stick of “orthodoxy” is “the relationships in the Trinity” since that is not something that scripture teaches but is simply a Catholic/Protestant dogma. What the scriptures actually teach is strict monotheism:

    1Co_8:6a But to us there is but one God: the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him…

    Of course, to “Christians”, Paul’s assertion is “heresy”:

    1
    a : adherence to a religious opinion contrary to church dogma
    b : denial of a revealed truth by a baptized member of the Roman Catholic Church
    c : an opinion or doctrine contrary to church dogma
    2
    a : dissent or deviation from a dominant theory, opinion, or practice
    b : an opinion, doctrine, or practice contrary to the truth or to generally accepted beliefs or standards
    http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/heresy

    But, no doubt you’ll be permitted to “buy and sell” in “Christendom” by teaching the party line.

    • Mervin Lin says:

      @WoundedEgo, you need to read the entire sentence:

      “For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,) But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.” 1 Co 8:5-6 (KJV)

      It is supposed to echo the following verse in the OT that has both gods and lords in the same verse:

      “For the LORD your God is God of gods, and Lord of lords, a great God, a mighty, and a terrible, which regardeth not persons, nor taketh reward:” Dt 10:17 (KJV)

      • Hello Merv and thank you for your comment. ISTM that that would not be a very useful verse to allude to since it does not mention “one God” but rather says that Yehovah is one God among many gods. A “God of gods”. That would not contradict the polytheism of Rome. No, Paul is clearly reaffirming the Shema:

        Deuteronomy 6:
        4 Hear, O Israel: Yehovah our God is one Yehovah:
        5 And thou shalt love Yehovah thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might.

        The reference to “but one lord” is alluding to the Roman imperial cult where the Caesar (KURIOS) was the divinely selected leader. But most importantly it must be admitted that Jesus was *promoted by Yehovah* to become lord (KURIOS) because of his obedience to God:

        Acts 2:36King James Version (KJV)
        36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made the same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

        Philippians 2:9King James Version (KJV)
        9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:

        Hebrews 1:4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.

        Jesus has a God that he worships and serves, Yehovah does not. Jesus was begotten, Yehovah was not. Jesus was born, seen, obedient, died, was raised by Yehovah, exalted by Yehovah, sits at Yehovah’s right hand, and so on while Yehovah never does any of those things. Yehovah gave Jesus authority and Jesus can do nothing but what Yehovah directs him to do and permits him to do.

        • Scott Gray says:

          WoundedEgo,
          If I understand correctly, you have asserted that Jesus is not “Yehovah.” There is a flaw to your theological understanding that Jesus is not GOD. John 2:19-21 says, “Jesus answered them, ‘Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.’ The Jews then said, ‘It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will you raise it up in three days?’ But he was speaking about the temple of his body” (ESV). Who raised up Jesus’ body from the dead? According to John quoting Jesus, He would raised Himself up from the dead. Jesus said, “I will raise it up.”
          You said, “Jesus was begotten, Yehovah was not.” If you knew and understand Koine Greek, the English word “begotten” is not the best translation of the Greek. Scholars have realized that the Latin Vulgate was more accurate in its translation of the Greek as “unicus” to mean “one and only,” “one-of-a-kind,” and “unique.” So Jesus is the “monogenes theos” in John 1:18. He is the “one and only,” the “one-of-a-kind,” the unique GOD, as several Greek manuscripts have “theos” (GOD) rather than “huios” (Son). The more difficult rendering of “monogenes theos” would have been the original writing.
          You also said “Jesus was born, seen, obedient, died…Yehovah never does any of those things.” That doesn’t make Jesus less than GOD Himself. It only means that GOD was incarnated in human flesh. You said that “Yehovah gave Jesus authority and Jesus can do nothing but what Yehovah directs him to do and permits him to do.” Yes, that doesn’t cause Jesus to be lesser in nature than GOD Himself. It means that the second person of GOD took on the limitations of humanity by becoming one of us. Jesus was both fully human and fully divine. It seems that you have a lack of understanding of the incarnation, that is, GOD the Son becoming human. As a human, Jesus suspended His divine power by emptying himself to become nothing.
          Romans 8:11 says, “If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit who dwells in you.” Jesus said in John 2:19 that it would be He that would raise His own body. Therefore, Jesus’ soul was and is fully GOD, since Jesus has a soul, for all humans have souls.

          • Jesus was dead and did not restore himself to life:

            Acts 17:31 Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.

            Romans 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

            Colossians 2:12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.

            So God, who cannot die, raised Jesus from the dead, period.

            John, on the other hand, uses a metaphor comparing his body to a temple. We’ll see this same metaphor in Paul. Again, this is metaphor and not metaphysics. Like Jesus being a door or a vine. It is like Nick’s question:

            John 3:4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother’s womb, and be born?

            It is straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel to upend millennia of strict monotheism because one insists on literalism on what is clearly metaphor.

            Humans do not “have souls” but rather *are* souls. A “soul” is simply a “living being”. Consider:

            Genesis 2:7 And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

            If MONOGENHS THEOS is original then the intention is that Jesus is a different god from Almighty God, ala the JWs. “…and the word was a god”. The meaning/usage of MONOGENHS needs to be derived from context.

          • Scott Gray says:

            You said, “Jesus was dead and did not restore himself to life.” So then you just called Jesus a liar, for He said “«I» will raise it up” in John 2:19. Jesus’ body was dead, but His Spirit was not. Every human is a soul, as you believe as well as I do. Jesus’ soul is divine. His soul is GOD. That’s why Jesus said He would raise His own body back to life. The Scriptures say that GOD raised Him from the dead. Therefore, Jesus’ soul is GOD.

          • Scott wrote:
            You said, “Jesus was dead and did not restore himself to life.” So then you just called Jesus a liar, for He said “«I» will raise it up” in John 2:19.

            WoundedEgo replies:
            I’ve already addressed this at length so I won’t repeat it.

            Scott wrote:
            Jesus’ body was dead, but His Spirit was not. Every human is a soul, as you believe as well as I do. Jesus’ soul is divine. His soul is GOD. That’s why Jesus said He would raise His own body back to life. The Scriptures say that GOD raised Him from the dead. Therefore, Jesus’ soul is GOD.

            WoundedEgo replies:
            Jesus’ “spirit” (aka “breath”) was returned to the God who gave it:

            Luk_23:46 And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.

            (Both “spirit” and “ghost” are merely synonyms of “breath”).

            Jas_2:26 For as the body without the spirit [breath] is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

            Psa 104:29 Thou hidest thy face, they are troubled: thou takest away their breath, they die, and return to their dust.
            Psa 104:30 Thou sendest forth thy spirit [breath], they are created: and thou renewest the face of the earth.

            Man is composed of two things:

            * flesh (which derives from dirt)
            * breath (which animates the dirt)

            By definition, when Jesus died his body was deanimated and God’s animating breath returned back to him. To be reanimated the breath was returned:

            1Pe_3:18 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened [made really fast (joke)] by the Spirit [breath]:

            To remove any difficulty about Jesus “raising” the temple just consider the verses where Jesus’ “body” refers to the temple that is the assembly of saints:

            Eph 2:17 And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh.
            Eph 2:18 For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.
            Eph 2:19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;
            Eph 2:20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;
            Eph 2:21 In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord:
            Eph 2:22 In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.

    • So there is more than one God then if you don’t accept the Trinity. We know of at least two, God the Father, and Christ.

      • Let’s not forget the Satan, who is apparently referred to as “the god of this world” (and apparently as a “son of God” as well).

        So again, as Paul says, “to us there is but one God: the father”. The father, as Jesus said, is the “one true God”:

        And “John” says the same:

        https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+17:3&version=KJV

        • Scott Gray says:

          WondedEgo, if GOD the Father is the “one true GOD,” then Jesus is not the “one true GOD,” which would make Him a lesser deity. There are major theological problems with this. Let me mention one that I use against Jehovah’s Witnesses. Genesis 1:26 says that we were created in GOD’s image. Romans 8:29 says that believer’s are predestined to be conformed into the image of His Son. Jesus being our example, are we to imitate Jesus to be like a lesser deity ourselves, to be angel-like (JWs), or to be GOD-like? How can we be imitators of GOD as Paul says in Ephesians 4 if we are following a lesser deity as our primary example?

          • Scott wrote:
            WondedEgo, if GOD the Father is the “one true GOD,” then Jesus is not the “one true GOD,” which would make Him a lesser deity. There are major theological problems with this.

            WoundedEgo replies:
            Whatever theological “problems” might be resolved by deciding that the one true god is a combination of three persons are simply replaced by much greater difficulties such that Trinitarians refer to its teachings as “incomprehensible mysteries”. Now, except for parts of Daniel, and a reference or two in the Psalms, the Jewish scriptures are extremely monist. Monism is the belief in a single source of all things, good and evil while. Philosophic Dualism is the belief that evil is the independent work of an opposing deity. In the Hebrew scriptures “Satan” as a proper noun occurs about four times. In the NT, some 260 times and he is referred to as “the god of this world” and “the ruler of this world”. Yehovah’s conflict with Satan is resolved by warfare:

            Rev 12:1 And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars:
            Rev 12:2 And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered.
            Rev 12:3 And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads.
            Rev 12:4 And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born.
            Rev 12:5 And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne.
            Rev 12:6 And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days.
            Rev 12:7 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,
            Rev 12:8 And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.
            Rev 12:9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
            Rev 12:10 And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.
            Rev 12:11 And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death.
            Rev 12:12 Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time.
            Rev 12:13 And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child.
            Rev 12:14 And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent.
            Rev 12:15 And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood.
            Rev 12:16 And the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast out of his mouth.
            Rev 12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ. So the idea of a lesser god (which is what “daemon” means) is well entrenched in the NT so it is not impossible that both Jesus and Satan be referred to as “gods”:

            Psa_82:6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.

            Joh_10:34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
            Joh 10:35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
            Joh 10:36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?

            Notice above that Jesus didn’t call himself “God” but rather “the son of God”.

            Scott wrote:
            Let me mention one that I use against Jehovah’s Witnesses. Genesis 1:26 says that we were created in GOD’s image. Romans 8:29 says that believer’s are predestined to be conformed into the image of His Son. Jesus being our example, are we to imitate Jesus to be like a lesser deity ourselves, to be angel-like (JWs), or to be GOD-like? How can we be imitators of GOD as Paul says in Ephesians 4 if we are following a lesser deity as our primary example?

            WoundedEgo replies:
            You are using what I refer to as the “string together” method of exegesis. (Actually, this is not exegesis but eisegesis – which is pronounced “I-see-Je-sus”)! With this method of pseudo-logic one can prove anything they care to. All you have to do is pull a verse out of one context and place it in another by common words and “voila” you create a new “truth”. Proper exegesis always considers a passage in its original context. Contextually, the image of God in Genesis 1:26 refers to the physical form of Adam. Adam looked like Yehovah. This is what “image and likeness” clearly means. Being conformed to the image of Christ refers, contextually, to being Christ-like in terms of lives modeled after his. And you left out an important reference to “image”:

            1Co_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.

            Now, can you honestly tell me that 1 Cor 11:3 allows for any notion of Jesus being equal to God? Note that Paul is not referring to Jesus while on earth but rather to Jesus, clearly under the authority of God.

          • Scott Gray says:

            The reference of 1 Cor. 11:3 does not mean that Jesus’ subjection to the Father is because His nature is different. He is in subjection because His role and function are different. Just as a woman is in subjection to the man. Her nature is not different from the man’s, for they both have a shared human nature. The woman is in subjection to authority because her role is different. Therefore, GOD the Father’s nature is not differ than the Son’s nature. Jesus is the Son of GOD and shares the same essence, nature, and character as the Father, just as a human son shares in the same nature as a human father.

          • Scott Gray says:

            If Jesus never claimed to be equal with GOD, why was He charged with blasphemy? Why did the religious leaders want to kill Jesus? By the very use of the title, Son of God, the religious leaders knew exactly what Jesus was claiming. Jesus said He could forgive sins. Who but GOD alone can forgive sin? WoundedEgo wants us to believe that GOD didn’t subject Himself to the human condition to identify with us by becoming one of us. Rather GOD had a lesser deity to die for humanity. GOD the Father is guilty of child sacrifice then, to sacrifice “a god” for the sins of the world. Which is more loving? To send a lesser deity to die on our behalf or for GOD to take on human form Himself to have His body put to death for the sins of the world? If GOD sent a messenger, a lesser deity on His behalf, then GOD couldn’t do what only GOD can do, that is, save us Himself!

          • Scott wrote:
            The reference of 1 Cor. 11:3 does not mean that Jesus’ subjection to the Father is because His nature is different. He is in subjection because His role and function are different…

            WoundedEgo responds:
            What 1 Cor 11:3 says is that Christ is subject to *God*. And you even admit that him being “subject to God” refers to him being “subject to the father”. Jesus said it so plainly:

            Joh_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***.

          • Scott wrote:
            If Jesus never claimed to be equal with GOD, why was He charged with blasphemy?

            WoundedEgo replies:
            To be charged with a crime is not the same as being guilty thereof.

            Scott wrote:
            Why did the religious leaders want to kill Jesus? By the very use of the title, Son of God, the religious leaders knew exactly what Jesus was claiming.

            WoundedEgo replies:
            It is fascinating to me that you side with his accusers when Jesus says that he was claiming less than even being A god!:

            Joh 10:31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.
            Joh 10:32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?
            Joh 10:33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.
            Joh 10:34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
            Joh 10:35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
            Joh 10:36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?

            Scott wrote:
            Jesus said He could forgive sins. Who but GOD alone can forgive sin?

            WoundedEgo replies:
            The apostles could:

            Joh_20:23 Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.

            Scott wrote:
            WoundedEgo wants us to believe that GOD didn’t subject Himself to the human condition to identify with us by becoming one of us.

            WoundedEgo replies:
            It isn’t like he had no skin in the game. If you sent your wife to be beheaded by ISIS to end the atrocities you would still be a victim of their deeds. This may be implied in the period of darkness at Golgotha.

            Scott wrote:
            Rather GOD had a lesser deity to die for humanity. GOD the Father is guilty of child sacrifice then, to sacrifice “a god” for the sins of the world. Which is more loving? To send a lesser deity to die on our behalf or for GOD to take on human form Himself to have His body put to death for the sins of the world? If GOD sent a messenger, a lesser deity on His behalf, then GOD couldn’t do what only GOD can do, that is, save us Himself!

            WoundedEgo replies:
            How does John 3:16 read in your “the Bible”? Does it say “For God so loved the world that he came down…” or that “God so loved the world that he *gave his special son”…? All attempts to blur that line between God and Jesus are impious and blasphemous.

    • ListeningEar says:

      Interesting indeed. What do you think is the role of Jesus and the Holy Spirit then? Just curious.

      • Jesus’ roles are vast but temporary. Essentially he functions in relation to God much the same as Joseph functioned in relation to Pharaoh. That is, just as Joseph was promoted to Pharaoh’s right hand and operated supremely over the land so Jesus is seated at God’s right hand (deriving authority from God). However, just as Joseph never crossed the line to become Pharaoh so Jesus remains ever his subject. And likewise as Joseph stepped down from his ministry after years so also Jesus will step down at the end of the millennial reign and become just another saint.

        Do you consider “the Holy Spirit” to be a proper name? A title? Or a description? I consider it a description. This is evident in the Greek in that there is no fixed structure or word order as there is in the Trinity paradigm. And I consider the word “spirit” to be a synonym for “breath”. In other words, “the spirit that is holy” is identical to “the breath that is holy”. Ditto for “ghost” (in the KJV). The holy breath/breath of the holy one functions as a kind of intelligent organ of God as our breath does. It’s as simple as that:

        Genesis 2:7 [Full Chapter]
        And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

        Romans 8:2 For the principle of the breath of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the rules of Mr. Sin, and death.

    • Hello WoundedEgo,

      Here is the full verse:

      Yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist. 1Co 8:6

      This is not heresy to Christians. In fact, we read that Jesus is the Lord God. I see two person as one Lord God here. Or maybe you are saying the Father is not Lord? Lord is another name for God.

      Like in John 20.28, Thomas says to Jesus: My Lord and my God! John wants us to know that Jesus is God by telling us the confession of Thomas.

      John tells us that Jesus is God. This is so plain and clear.

      He is the Word of God, he is God (not a God, there is no a here), he is the light of the world. (John 1.1-4). He is the Way, the Truth and the Life (John 14.6). He comes from above (John 3.31). He is the Alpha and Omega. Who is, who was, and who is to come, God Almighty (Rev 1.8).

      • 1 Cor 8:6 is describing two distinct “things”:

        * The one God that Paul says the saints recognize. He identifies that as the father;
        * The one KURIOS (which in this context means “Imperator” or “Emperor” or “Caesar”) which he identifies as Jesus;

        “THEOS” and “KURIOS” are not interchangeable. THEOS refers to God and KURIOS refers to the divinely appointed ruler.

        To confuse THEOS and KURIOS is not correctly distinguishing (“rightly dividing”).

        The father used to be the KURIOS but in the NT he exalted Jesus to be the KURIOS because he was obedient all the way to death. (It was not Jesus’ will that he die but rather God’s will and Jesus just obeyed God). Jesus didn’t love you and decide to die for you but rather God who “so loved the world that he gave his son”.

        Heb_10:7 Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do **thy** will, O God.

        Heb_10:9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do **thy** will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.

        If that is “the confession of Thomas” rather than a spontaneous exclamation to God then he simply didn’t get the memo that Jesus had given because he was assembled with the rest:

        Joh 20:17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto ***my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.***

        Context then says that this was an exclamatory prayer to God for having raised Jesus from the dead:

        Joh 20:28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.

        As to Revelation 1:8, clearly Jesus is proclaiming the words of Almighty God, not claiming to

        Rev 1:6 and has made us a kingdom, priests ***for his God and Father***, be glory and power forever and ever! Amen.
        Rev 1:7 Look! He is coming in the clouds. Every eye will see him, even those who pierced him, and all the tribes of the earth will mourn because of him. So be it! Amen.
        Rev 1:8 “I am the Alpha and the Omega,” declares the Lord God, “the one who is, who was, and who is coming, the Almighty.”

        Isn’t that simpler than upending monotheism for a “3=1” math nightmare?

        • Simpler? Not really! It seems like God as to fit into your skull. Always the problem with the Trinity. Pride.

          In fact, you don’t make any sense. You say that the Father is not Lord anymore and right after you say that he is.

          Which one is true?

          • The emperor’s clothiers convinced the emperor that only a fool could not see his beautiful clothes so he was paraded through the streets butt nekked. So it is with the peddlers of “Trinity” dogma.

            God almighty is and will always ultimately be the lord but again, just as Pharaoh lent his authority to Joseph and made him lord so God lends his authority to Jesus and makes him lord:

            Gen_39:5 And it came to pass from the time that he had made him overseer in his house, and over all that he had, that Yehovah blessed the Egyptian’s house for Joseph’s sake; and the blessing of Yehovah was upon all that he had in the house, and in the field.

            KURIOS (“lord”) is a title that God gave to Jesus because of his obedience. OBVIOUSLY being “KURIOS” does not translate into being “eternally co-equal to God”. Except in the impious traditions of men.

        • Sylvain says:

          I suppose that you deny the virgin birth also?

          Do you believe Jesus is without sin?

          • It is unclear whether or not this is a euphemism for “doing the Hippity Dippity” or not it is clear that both “Matthew” and “Luke” want us to understand that Jesus was the divinely conceived son of God:

            Luke
            1:34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?
            1:35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost [aka “breath”] shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

            There is some ambiguity as to whether or not Jesus had moral failings prior to being filled with holy breath “without measure” at 30 years of age.

        • Sylvain says:

          How can God send a sinner to save us? If Jesus his a sinner, didn’t he die for his own sin then?

          • Isn’t that what the scriptures say?:

            Rom 6:10 For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God.
            Rom 6:11 Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.

            Heb_7:27 Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, **first for his own sins, and then for the people’s**: for this he did once, when he offered up himself.

        • Sylvain says:

          So how justification is done? You talked about sanctification. But if Jesus is a sinner himself, how can he save us since he deserved death him self? Ro 6.23

          • Justification is “done” on account of faith. That is, God counts men as righteous when they trust his record. “Abraham believed God and it[his faith] was counted to him for righteousness”.

    • How about Matthew 28:19?

      • Matthew 28:19 is one of many later manipulations by Trinitarians. Here’s the evidence:

        http://www.biblicalunitarian.com/verses/matthew-28-19

        And as it appears in modern “Bibles” one must wonder what it actually would mean… Is there a single name for these three clearly distinct entities? Or does it mean that the disciples were instructed to baptize into the names of these three distinct entities:

        “I baptize you into the name: Yehovah, and in the name Jesus and in the name “the Holy Spirit””

        ?

        Obviously the name of the father (God) is “Yehovah” and the name of the son is “Jesus” but what is the name of “the Holy Ghost”? Is that a name? Or a title? Or a descriptive substantive?

        Justice is blind so that she does not pursue a foregone conclusion. If you were blind you too would see that, weighed in the balance, the “Doctrine of the Blessed Trinity” is fabrication… a man made idol.

        • “If you were blind you too would see that,” doesn’t make a lot of sense!
          An alternative explanation for the unitarian page is that Eusebius was a unitarian and that the Acts verses were written in shorthand, slang or idiom.

          Matthew 3:16-17. That doesn’t appear to be covered by http://www.biblicalunitarian.com/

          • Kym wrote: “If you were blind you too would see that,” doesn’t make a lot of sense!

            WoundedEgo responds:

            I was being metaphoric:

            Joh_9:39 And Jesus said, For judgment I am come into this world, that they which see not might see; and that they which see might be made blind.

            Kym wrote:
            An alternative explanation for the unitarian page is that Eusebius was a unitarian and that the Acts verses were written in shorthand, slang or idiom.

            WoundedEgo responds:
            Well of course Eusebius was a unitarian (monotheist) because the Trinity had not yet been invented!

            Kym wrote:
            Matthew 3:16-17. That doesn’t appear to be covered by http://www.biblicalunitarian.com/

            WoundedEgo responds:
            @Kym, I don’t think you realize that the coincidence of God, his son and holy breath does not in any way lead to the conclusion that they are all parts of the one true God.

        • And there’s nothing quite like a good bit of circular logic.

          • It was not logic but rather metaphor with a tinge of satire. Justice is not [to be] blind; that is a metaphor for not being a “respecter of persons”. That is, when weighing judgment one is to disregard whether it is a poor man or the king. By saying “If you were blind” I was saying “If you weren’t prejudiced by your tradition…”. But alas you are. You see EVERYTHING through “Trinity-colored glasses”.

            Joh_9:41 Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth.

  2. Donovan Neufeldt says:

    The Christians continued to believe the strict Jewish monotheism of the Hebrew Bible and of second temple judaism, but defined it in Christological terms, including Jesus in the divine identity of YHWH, the one and only true God who created all things, and is ruler of all things. Look at how many times the nt authors quote the old testament YHWH texts and apply them to Jesus, and include Jesus in the unique work and identity of YHWH.

    Read Richard Bauckham’s Jesus and the God of Israel. It is an eye opener and a game changer when it comes to understanding nt christology.

    • Since Jesus is seated at God’s right hand… is he beside himself?

      • Scott Gray says:

        WoundedEgo said, “Since Jesus is seated at God’s right hand…is he beside himself?”
        That would be only true if you adhered to a modalistic monarchianist understanding of GOD. They believe that GOD is only one person in one being who appeared in different modes as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. If GOD is only one person, then Jesus would be sitting beside Himself as both Father and Son. However, this is NOT the Trinitarian understanding of GOD. GOD is THREE PERSONS in ONE being. So if Jesus is GOD, the second person is sitting next to the first person, GOD the Father. Of course, the phrase “seated at the right hand of the Father” is not literal, but a metaphorical expression that conveys the idea that Jesus is as close to the Father as a human person can get. GOD the Father as a spirit doesn’t sit on a physical throne. The human imagery conveys the meaning that GOD is sovereign. In addition, the Bible says that “all power, glory, dominion, and strength” is given to GOD and the Lamb in the book of Revelation. Both GOD the Father and the Lamb (GOD the Son) receive equal worship in Heaven. Also, if Jesus is NOT GOD, then how can GOD the Father give all of His power, glory, dominion, and strength to the Son, but there is no change in His being? If He gives all of His attributes to the Son, wouldn’t He cease to be GOD, since there would be a change in His being? Since Jesus is the second person of the Godhead, this sharing of the divine attributes to the glorified Jesus is a sharing in with the first person and the second person of the Godhead. GOD doesn’t cease to be GOD by giving all of His attributes to a human being, since Jesus is GOD as much as the Father is GOD.

        • You remind me of this:

          https://www.facebook.com/trinitylumberton/posts/553826791322128

          I’m of the opinion that the depictions of God as a manlike deity who lives in the sky are to be taken literally (or at least quasi-literally). We can be sure of it in that Adam was made in the image and likeness of God. In other words, Adam looked like God. in only one place is God described as a “PNEUMA” (moving air, breath) and that is in the context of John’s description of proper worship. Nicodemus was to be born over of the wind in order to take on the characteristic of the wind – borderlessness, just as the Samaritan woman was to do. She was to recognize that the time had just arrived where worship would not be confined to temples made with hands.

  3. Mr. Wounded Ego,

    Do you accept that Jesus Christ is God in the flesh?

  4. Col. 2:9

    • If this meant that all of God metaphysically dwelt in Jesus’ body then that would mean that there was no part of God outside of his body. But context reveals that it is speaking of all the divine matters being found in God’s Christ:

      Col 2
      8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
      9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

      In other words, don’t look to philosophy but to Christ to find out about God.

    • Yes, the fullness of God dwells in Christ. But don’t forget that Christ dwells in me. So, the fullness of God dwells in me. To the extent that I am following God’s will, I am God in the flesh.

      The heart of this is that Christ ALWAYS did the will of God. That is why the scripture can say, “the word became flesh”. It is a beautiful, poetic representation of Christ fully subjugating his will for God’s will.

  5. End Age Disciple says:

    1 john 4:1-6
    1Timothy 6:20

    • 1 John 4:1-6 clearly does NOT say anything about Jesus being divine. What it does say that the antichrists deny is his humanity.

      1 Tim 6:20 appears entirely irrelevant to this discussion.

    • Of 1 John 4:1-6 i would ask this.

      If one confesses that Jesus came in The Spirit – i.e. Jesus is God and John declared in his gospel, “GOD IS SPIRIT”, then Jesus came in spirit. Does that qualify as antichrist?

      Maybe read verse 12 also.

      • NOTHING in 1 John says that God is a Trinity and the only reason that you point to scripture is not to understand it but because you are trying to justify your false religion.

  6. Beware of WoundedEgo, for that person is teaching heresy that follows in the footsteps of the heretic Arius in the 4th century!

    • Being labeled a “heretic” in the 21st century no longer has the zing it once had since Trinitarians no longer murder you for it! But of course, Arius was murdered for it as was Servetus. Arius and Servetus were worthy men.

  7. I agree Scott, I would add that ANY teaching that goes against what the Bible actually teaches, NOT what people think it teaches, is the truth. I would also say that we are supposed to be followers of Yeshua (Jesus) and NOT Saul (Paul). Too many people use what Paul wrote instead of what Yeshua taught. Just food for thought.

  8. William Palmer says:

    It is such an old heresy that fights against the Trinity! It almost seems ridiculous to respond to such nonsense! Although the word Trinity doesn’t appear in scripture; the concept of “Trinity”… however you want to summarize, should be obvious to the scriptural mind. The very name of God “Elohim” in Hebrew hints at the distinctive 3 persons in the Godhead from the beginning. Due to the nature of scripture, God has reveal more and more about Himself and His nature. He purposely revealed Himself to finite human beings throughout history by using scripture employing men. God was not in a rush and was to determined to reveal more of Himself through various prophets over time (Hebrews 1:1-3). The “im” suffix of Elohim is plural. Elohim is translated elsewhere in the Bible as “gods” whenever it refers to false idols or gods. The word for the one true God is Elohim (rendered as a singular) and the same word Elohim (rendered as a plural) for false idols or gods. In scripture where Elohim is used of the one true God, it is always translated as God; a singular monotheistic person or being. In the first 3 verses of the Bible you have the 3 persons of the Godhead practically spelled out. “In the beginning God (Father) created heaven and earth…and the Spirit of God (Holy Spirit) was hovering over the face of the waters…and God said (The Word- Son) spoke words “Let there be light.” Isaiah 9:6 says, “For to us a child is born, unto us a SON is given…and his name shall be called…Everlasting Father.” Matthew 1:23 says, “the virgin will bear a son…Immanuel…which means God-with-us.” Matthew 28:19 says, “…baptizing them in the NAME of the Father and the son and of the Holy Spirit.” Notice the singular form of NAME not NAMES (plural). This means there is one name (singular) for the 3 distinct persons. God is one God and yet 3 persons in this Godhead. Human reason says this is impossible but the one true God does the impossible…He is a Triune!!! I agree, the non-Trinitarians don’t understand from scripture the incarnation and the personal union of the 2 natures in Christ…of the divine and human…this is the 2nd greatest mystery of God who became human which is only eclipsed by the very nature of God himself that He is Triune!!!

  9. It is laughable that the most fundamental “doctrine” of the scriptures is never declared explicitly in the scriptures. What if I told you that the most fundamental teach of scripture is “Shmooziness” which, while never mentioned in scripture can be inferred from the fact that God rested and Jesus rested. Stupid huh? Paul spends many verses describing the qualifications of a janitor… but he never once mentions “trinity”? Rather he explicitly teaches that the one true God is “the father”?

    • William Palmer says:

      Elohim/Immanuel?

      • A word can be plural in form but singular in sense and vice versa.

        “God with us” refers to “God on our side”

        Now isn’t that simpler than upending thousands of years of monotheism for a “3 gods = 1 God” hokum? .

        • William Palmer says:

          Good so you admit that I am right! God’s name has a plurality in it . And you also so felt there was a need to change God with us…intersting!

        • William Palmer says:

          Excellent! I glad to see that you are willing to admit a plurality in God’s name from the beginning. I am somewhat disappointed that you are willing to pervert the plain words of scripture “God with us” to “God on our side.” Think about this…if Jesus is not God in the flesh then his death couldn’t cover the sins of humanity. If Jesus was only human then he would have been conceived and born in sin and of no help to us. However, the Holy Spirit impregnated the Virgin Mary thus making Jesus very God of very God. Therefore when Jesus died on the cross for you and me, it was not only an ordinary sinful man’s blood covering our sins but the blood of God being shed! Only God can cover sins as we learned when God took away the leaves Adam and Eve used to cover their nakedness (sins) and God then covered their sins with “animal skins” a foreshadowing of the “Lamb of God” who takes away the sins of the world John 1:29!

  10. I don’t have much to say–too busy! But I submit John 8:54-59, where the Jews were specifically asking Jesus about His identity, “Who do you say you are?” He claimed to be the “I AM”. Of course, the audience knew right away of Whom He spoke–Jesus identified Himself as the very one who spoke to Moses–who was, indeed, God according to Exodus 3.

    Also in John 5:15-23, Jesus declared that God was His own Father, “making Himself equal with God.” There is no created thing or person equal with God, as is obvious. Also, Jesus even goes so far to say that those who fail to honor the Son to the same degree as they honor the Father do not honor the Father. If this isn’t clear about Jesus declaring His deity, I don’t know what is. And BTW, didn’t God the Father called the Lord Jesus “God” and “Lord” in Hebrews 1?

    • Apparently Paul didn’t get the memo that saying “I am” is tantamount to saying “I am God”:

      1Co_15:10 But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain; but I laboured more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me.

      The Hebrew would read “I will be” and the Greek would read “the being”. Jesus said neither. His “blasphemous” claim was “I am currently before Abraham become born (still future). The Jews made up the part about his claiming equality to God because calling God his father is not a claim to equality:

      Joh_20:17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

      • WoundedEgo, your response lacks any plausibility whatsoever.
        Here is my biblical exposition against those who translate Jesus’ use of ἐγὼ εἰμί or the “I AM” statement in John 8:58 differently, especially Jehovah’s Witnesses:
        Let’s consider how the verse is translated in the New World Translation: “Before Abraham came into existence, I HAVE BEEN.” Instead of translating the word as in the present tense as “I AM”, the NWT renders it in the perfect tense as “I HAVE BEEN.”
        Yet, the KJV, ASV, NASB, NIV, NKJV, RSV, NLT, YLT, Darby, among others, translates the Greek as “I AM.” Which is the correct, the NWT or the numerous English translations?
        First, consider the context. If Jesus said “I HAVE BEEN,” why would the Pharisees become so upset with Jesus that they wanted to kill Him (v. 59)? Since blasphemy was punishable by death, isn’t the ἐγὼ εἰμί statement a confirmation that the best translation is simply “I AM”? Jesus could have used the aorist (I was), or the perfect (I have been) or the pluperfect (I had been), but none of these would warrant a reason for blasphemy and death by stoning.
        In Greek, the literal translation of ἐγὼ εἰμί is present active indicative first person singular. In fact, the 1969 Greek Interlinear used by the WBTS literally renders the Greek as “I am,” but next to the Greek in English, it’s rendered as “I have been.” So the WBTS admits that the Greek is “I am” but asserts that it ought to be translated into English as “I have been.”
        The NWT has a comment as a footnote concerning the relation of John 8:58 to Exodus 3:14. It reads, “It is not the same as ‘ho ohn,’ meaning ‘The Being’ or ‘The I Am’ at Exodus 3:14, LXX.” The LXX is the Septuagint, a Greek translation of the Hebrew OT. The Septuagint translates the Hebrew as “ego eimi ho on.” The WBTS argues that Jesus doesn’t quote the Greek Septuagint of Exodus 3:14. My question is, why would Jesus quote from the Septuagint any? Wouldn’t He have quoted Exodus 3:14 from the Hebrew? So not having “ho on” in John 8:58 doesn’t negate Jesus’ use of ἐγὼ εἰμί from Exodus 3:14 in Hebrew.
        In addition, in John 8:24, Jesus says, “Unless you believe that I am He, you shall die in your sins.” The original Greek doesn’t have the noun “he.” In Greek, it’s literally “If you do not believe that I AM, you shall die in your sins.” The Greek here in John 8:24 is ἐγὼ εἰμί. It’s also used in verse 28. Also consider Mark 14:61-62, “But Jesus remained silent and gave no answer. Again the high priest asked him, ‘Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?’ ‘I am,’ said Jesus. ‘And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.'” Jesus’ reply to the high priest is ἐγὼ εἰμί, “I am.” In John’s gospel, he writes eight “I am” statements from Jesus.
        John 6:35, 48: I am the bread of life
        John 8:12, 9:5: I am the light of the world
        John 8: 58: Before Abraham was, I am
        John 10:9: I am the door
        John 10:11: I am the good shepherd
        John 11:25: I am the resurrection and the life
        John 14:6: I am the way, the truth, and the life
        John 15:1: I am the true vine
        All of these statements are descriptions of the exact nature and essence of Yahweh (Jehovah).
        I think Jehovah’s Witnesses also neglect an additional aspect of the power behind Jesus’ statement in John 8:58. In the Greek text, ειπεν αυτοις ιησους αμην αμην λεγω υμιν πριν αβρααμ γενεσθαι εγω ειμι , Jesus is clearly setting up a contrast with Abraham. He speaks of Abraham as “genesthai,” that is, “came into existence.” Jesus doesn’t apply that to Himself. If Jesus wanted to indicate that He was created and came into existence, He could have used “genesthai” for Himself so that the translation would be “Before Abraham came into existence, I came into existence.” Jesus simply said He existed before Abraham came into existence.
        But let’s remind the objective jury who are weighing in on this conversation on John 8:58 what the Watchtower Society states about their New World Translation, “We offer no paraphrase of the Scriptures. Our endeavor all through has been to give as LITERAL a translation as possible…” It seems that they haven’t been true to their word, for a LITERAL translation of John 8:58 of εγω ειμι in the present active indicative is “I am,” not “I have been.”
        In conclusion, I see the NWT of John 8:58 as the Watchtower’s bias against Jesus’ divinity. If they didn’t alter the ἐγὼ εἰμί from the present tense to perfect tense, then it would contradict their biased theology of Jesus.