#5 Individual Responds
AUTHOR: Bobby - Bogue Chitto (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Thursday, July 16, 2009
POSTED: Thursday, July 16, 2009
Bobby G. Richardson contact information:
P.O. Box 377, Bogue Chitto, MS 39629
601-833-3223 or 601-695-8173
email acts2@impact-ministry.com
Even though I am the subject of this ripoffreport.com web site, I don't drop in very often ....
http://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/0/218/ripoff0218635.htm
But, on July 15, 2009 I did drop in, and was surprised to find Bro. Burch's "clarification" regarding my reward. While he is certainly entitled to his opinion, I prefer to clarify what I have said, myself, instead of having someone with a different position doing the clarifying for me.
I have been very actively and aggressively embracing, promoting and defending the Apostles One God Monotheistic Doctrine for over 20 years (over 10 years on the Internet). And, based on these years of acquired knowledge and past experience, it is my firm position that verbal dialogue with someone with an adversarial position ... with or without time constraints ... OR on a moderated Internet discussion board, can be exceedingly frustrating to say the least. Also, although a pretty fast typist, not being able to type fast enough to respond in live Internet chat rooms to different people with adversarial positions is also exceeding frustrating experience. Therefore, for these many years, I have found it best to "put it in writing" ... or email ... dialogue. Not only that, but I maintain the files of the discussions and dialogues from years ago. In so doing, everything is preserved, and remains intact. No one can deny having said something, nor sweep something underneath the rug, or change it, edit it, or "moderate" it off of a discussion board, to sway the dialogue in their favor.
I do have a web page called "50 Reasons why the Bible doesn't mention TRINITY or refer to God as PERSONS." It can be found here: http://www.impact-ministry.com/acts2/trinity.html
Furthermore, it is my understanding that the major distinctions in the Godhead is flesh and Spirit ... NOT "persons" as you and I are different "persons". God is a Spirit ... ONE SPIRIT. However, not one place in the KJV Text of the Holy Bible does it refer to God or the Godhead as "persons", as the trinitarian theory is very clearly defined and very adamantly defended ... which, by the way, neither you nor I have the luxury nor the authority to "re-define" the trinity, or come up with a hybrid variation. The "trinity" has been very clearly defined by the church of Rome ... where it originated a couple centuries AFTER Christ. Whereas, the Apostles' One God Monotheistic Doctrine originated in Jerusalem at the inauguration of the "original" New Testament Church on the Day of Pentecost in Acts Chapter 2. At any rate, God has manifested Himself as the Father in Creation, as the Son in Redemption, and as the Holy Spirit living in the hearts of born again believers throughout the New Testament Church Age. And I just don't find any place in the Bible where anyone ever referred to the ONE TRUE God as "persons", as multitudes do today. I embrace the concept of three forms of God ... three manifestations of God ... three offices of God ... three positions of God ... three roles of God. Now, if it is a matter of semantics, then dropping the unbiblical descriptive term of "persons" (that evolved centuries AFTER Christ) in reference to God, should bring true monotheists into the unity of the faith concerning this matter. However, it is my position that those who insist on using the "persons" designation in their description of God, are treading on some very dangerous territory. There is a TREMENDOUS difference in "THREE PERSONS" of God, and that of THREE POSITIONS, OFFICES OR MANIFESTATIONS of God. The distinctions in the Godhead is FLESH and SPIRIT - not THREE separate and distinct PERSONS! God is a SPIRIT (John 4:24) and a spirit hath not flesh and bones (Luke 24:39). God is the WORD (John 1:1) and the WORD was made flesh (John 1:14). God was manifest in the flesh (1 Timothy 3:16). It was NOT the body of Jesus Christ that was Deity, but rather the Spirit of Almighty God that dwelled in that sinless body (John 14:10). As man, Jesus knew pain, hunger, thirst, etc. As God, Jesus forgave sins, healed the sick, performed miracles, walked on the water, raised the dead, etc. Because of this "DUAL NATURE" of Jesus Christ, there were times when the human side (flesh) spoke, and there were times when the Divine side (Spirit) spoke. The THREE PERSONS THEORY has been so well indoctrinated that hardly anyone questions it! I am a father, I am a son and I am a husband, but none of these TITLES is my name! These are TITLES of the different positions (offices) that I occupy, YET I am ONE PERSON. The THREE PERSON DOCTRINE is a product of man - PERIOD, END OF ISSUE! I have absolutely NO malice or animosity in my heart towards trinitarian people. As a matter of fact, most of my blood relatives are trinitarians, and I love 'em all very dearly. However, I know the TRUTH shall remain standing when everything else has fallen. Be that as it may, some "die hard" trinitarians VICIOUSLY attack me because I dare question their THEORY of the Godhead and point out its many SERIOUS flaws. And some Jews attack me because they refuse to accept Jesus as their Messiah. Every once in a while, though, I run across a person who is really a "TRUTH SEEKER," who isn't afraid of TRUTH in its entirety, and are man enough or woman enough to admit error when the Bible does not agree with their theology. Then they very willingly make the necessary adjustments and get over it and get on with it! It really isn't hard to PROVE where the trinitarians' doctrine originated, when it originated and by whom it originated. Even though most of them will insist that it came straight from the Bible. **IF** there was a trinity or **IF** God was THREE separate and distinct co-equal, co-eternal and co-existent PERSONS as the trinitarians insist, certainly the Bible ought to say so some place. But it doesn't! Since the Bible does NOT give any SPECIFIC authority for such a belief, MILLIONS are told it is a "MYSTERY" which they must accept by faith, because it cannot be explained or understood. You may accept that. I once did myself, but there came a time in my life when I had to find answers to my many questions about the trinity, and I was not afraid of what I would learn when I began to search it out! If you have a Strong's exhaustive concordance and look at every scripture in the New Testament which mentions the words "mystery" or "mysteries" ... as I did ... you will discover that, that excuse can NOT be used to explain why the trinity can't be adequately explained or fully understood from a Scriptural standpoint. No, it has to be explained by someone highly educated (which Peter, James and John certainly were NOT) using all sorts of big words and slide ruler explanations (which gets so convoluted that you don't know if you're afoot or horse back), but even then, after all of that, it has to be understood and accepted by faith, NOT from a purely Scriptural standpoint. And, the time came when I just decided to search things out for myself. I put aside all of my preconceived ideas, theories, traditions AND indoctrination and went into the Word of God with my heart as open as the lot gate. And, God started revealing things to me that I had never thought of, let alone heard of in all my years.
English was my worst subject in school, but I do remember a few things. For illustration purposes only, it is not proper to link the singular pronoun "He", which refers to one "person", to verbs like: "see", "hear" and "warn" ... which would look like this ... "He see", "He hear" and "He warn". When using the singular pronoun "He", it is necessary to use the verbs "sees", "hears" and "warns" ... "He SEES", "He HEARS" and "He WARNS". In order to use the verbs "see", "hear" and "warn", you must use a noun or pronoun which is "plural" and identifies "more" than one person like, "People" ... "People see", "People hear" and "People warn". Yet, intelligent people who know this rule, but who have been indoctrinated to believe that there are three "persons" of God, ignore this rule when it comes to the word "GOD" (the Hebrew word Elohim).
**IF** the word "GOD" (Elohim) identifies more than one "person", as the trinitarians insist, the Bible should read like this, "God SEE", "God HEAR" and "God WARN" ... AND IT DOESN'T! The word "GOD" is never linked to a verb like that. Instead, the word "GOD" is ALWAYS linked to verbs just as the word "He" (a singular person) is ... like this, "God SEES", "God HEARS" and "God WARNS". Again, I use these particular words for illustration purposes only, but I hope I have made my point ... and that it's CLEAR.
With all of this said, the following is the entire email dialogue I had with Bro. Burch, between August 6, 2006 and August 25, 2006, and my last contact from him on March 10, 2007.
The following is lengthy. And, except for some dialogue and other information with Bro. Burch which is either not germane to this subject or his post on RipOffReport.Com regarding his clarification of my reward ... everything is else is included (below). With all of this said, I'll report. You decide. The facts will speak for themselves. Thanks ... and God bless! Bobby
Bro. Burch Sunday, August 06, 2006 : Mr. Richardson, I am a former 700 Club phone counselor. In the early 80's, I recall receiving a circulation detailing Stalin's plan to take America without a shot. This documentation spurred me to become actively involved in politics. I became a Republican delegate in '84 and '88. The proposition of communist infiltration from the pulpit infuriates me even now. I have long since moved away from Minneapolis, but I still wish to be a light where I feel God has led me. In the course of moving, I have lost the circular. I am currently engaged in news discussions on the internet and wish to document this plan with the facts. I am searching for information on the web that outlined Stalin's plan in detail. Your website is the first I've come across that mentions indoctrination. Would you please share any sources you may have with me regarding the subject? God Bless!
Bobby: Praise the Lord, Bro. Burch! While I must confess that I haven't read the book, myself, there does appear to be some good reference material to what you are looking for in the following book ...
Conquest without War: An Analytical Anthology of the Speeches, Interviews, and Remarks of Nikita Sergeyevich Khrushchev with Commentary by Lenin, Stalin, and others. Contributors: Jacques Katel - editor, Jacques Katel - compiler, Nikita Sergeevich Khrushchev - author, N. H. Mager - editor, N. H. Mager - compiler. Publisher: Simon and Schuster. Place of Publication: New York. Publication Year: 1961.
Here's a link to it ...
http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=7880167
I hope this helps. If you are interested in receiving (via blind carbon copy .. to protect your privacy) copies of the Bible discussions/debates that I am involved in from time to time, and/or to study with me, just let me know and I will add you to my growing email list of "observers". I only know a few of these folks personally. Therefore, unless they choose to tell me, I have no way of knowing who a person is, where a person is, or what a person's religious beliefs are, as I don't ask. However, I am NOT in this for any other reason than to promote the Apostles' One God Monotheistic Doctrine as preached, practiced, taught and embraced by the "footprint followers" of Jesus Christ ... and the "original" New Testament Church leaders of the First Century. By the way, you don't have to just be an "observer", who only reads the email Bible discussions/debates that I am involved with from time to time. You are invited, even encouraged, to ask questions, make comments, critique, criticize or what have you. After I remove the email address and other personal information, that would compromise the privacy of the person I am corresponding with, I email it to myself and blind carbon copy it to those on my email list ... which also protects everyone else's privacy too. Also, if you would like to receive some of my latest emails let me know and I'll forward the communications to you.
(standard email response omitted to conserve space)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Bro. Burch: Dear Brother Bobby, Please call me Charlie B. Thank you so much for taking the time to respond to my request. You and I seem to have much in common. Yes, I would like you to keep my email address: xxxxxxxxxx. Or, you may also reach me at xxxxxxxxxxxxxx. Mxxxxx is my fiance' and I use her computer now and then. Her user ID pops up and I've yet to figure out a way to get around it, save buy my own laptop.
You may have heard of the Sons of Thunder christian motorcycle ministry. I was a prospect with them in '93 and was involved in producing christian music videos at the time. I also play guitar myself, though somewhat rusty now. I was saved while in the hospital in Ukiah, CA on Christmas day, 1976. I have been studying Scripture ever since and church history in the last few years.
I grew up in a conservative xxxxxxxx church in xxxxxxxxxx, MN. Being a typical product of a broken home, I was "Hell on wheels" as a teen, considered myself an agnostic in my early 20's, was into the drug scene & rock and roll, and nearly died in a car wreck before the age of 22. My wife, xxxxxxxxx, divorced me after I met the Lord in the hospital. She thought I went off the deep end and married someone else. I moved to xxxxxxxxxx, TX after that so I could get to know my father, who just got out of a mental hospital. I went to an xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx church in xxxxxxxxx and work at xxxxxxxxxxx assembling airline seats. After a few years, xxxxxx employees went on strike and I could not abide the union violence. I had a falling out with my father, who still exhibited mental illness, and moved back to xxxxxxxxx were I grew up.
I got involved with the 700 Club in '83 and trained as a phone counselor. The training helped straighten out my own personal problems. I married a christian woman, got involved with a non-denominational church, and lived a blessed life until my wife, xxxxxxx, divorced me because I would not consent to buying her brothers old house. I thought it a better idea to buy a house in the xxxxxxxx area where we worked and went to church, but no. She since remarried and moved out of state with my 2 young children. I was devastated but tried to stay working and involved in ministry. God was not finished shaking my world and I watched my job and video ministry fail.
Since '94, I have been working hard driving truck around the 48 states. I was an owner/operator from '98 to '02. I lost my truck and found myself deep in debt with back taxes as a result of the 2000 recession and the management's desire to build his business during that time. Now, at the age of 51, I am at a crossroad. Do I continue to drive truck and let my health suffer or do I take a leap of faith, stay home and take my life back from the endless road is the question. I choose to serve God and decided that staying home, working a home based business seems to be what He is leading me to do.
I praise God for input! You have given me more than I asked for. You gave me what I needed. I will be happy to swap e-mails with you in the future and I will surely study the Word regarding your doctrinal discovery. Keep in mind that I have been though the "Charismatic Movement" and have seen winds of doctrine come and go. I do still bear the gifts of the Holy Spirit and will apply discernment always. I guess, theologically, you can call me a "funny duck" because I still consider some of my xxxxxxxxx theology to be valid, have visited many different denominational churches, and have worked side by side in unity with charismatic xxxxxxxx, xxxxxxxx, xxxxxxxxx, etc. I guess, as a former Boy Scout, being trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean, and reverent is still my foundation along with the Word. Without His love, we are nothing.
I love you brother! Please keep me in prayer as I will you. Please stay in touch as I will you. Thanks again and may God richly bless you and yours!
Bobby: Bro. Charlie B., I believe we do share some common ground. And, I have total confidence that God will lead you into the path He wants you to travel. It was less than a year from my mile marker seven experience on Dec. 10, 1985 that I moved my family to Florida, and started all over again. By the way, that is not to say that God will have you actually move anywhere. But, in my case, the 15 years in Florida very much helped to establish me ... and to make my calling and election sure. I learned a lot about many things, including myself ... most of which I didn't like. While the majority of folks who are just following the crowd out there are looking for changes to begin "around" them, people like you and I understand a little known fact. And, that is, true change always begins from "within", first. This is why it is so crucial for us to take a trip down to the potter's house, and allow the potter to mold us into the vessel he wants us to be. And, once that is accomplished, to we can rest assured when we do our best, He will do the rest. Please keep me posted on how things are going with you. And, I will certainly have you in my thoughts and prayers. My best advice is to be very sensitive to the leading of the Spirit of God, and submissive to His will. It is important for us to know when to stand still and when to move. If you're like me, most of my life's problems have stemmed from zigging when I should have been zagging. And, later, having the benefit of 20/20 hindsight. By the way, if you would like to take a look at our home-based business, please let me know. We would be glad to help you develop it into a full time (mobile) business, if you wanted to travel. However, travel is not necessary at all. But, it is good to know that you have that option if you want to. And, we plan to develop ours into a "mobile" business because my wife and I would like to travel some before we get too old. By the way, on Dec. 25 of this year I will turn 54. So, there's not much difference in our age. At any rate, please keep me posted on how things are going with you ... and whether or not you'd like me to add you to my email list of Bible discussions/debates observers and/or send you some information about our home-based business. Wishing you God's very best ... God bless you my brother!
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Bro. Burch: Hi Brother Bobby! Yes, I know exactly what you mean about moving in the Holy Spirit's lead. We each have our roll to play in the cosmic scheme of things. (John 21:21-22) I am a strong willed person that sometimes takes things into my own hands, even with good intentions. I need to be broken, at times, that I may truely enter into His rest. Your info was greatly needed and appreciated. I know for sure God led you to share it with me. I am not only interested in starting a home business now, I feel led to teach others to prosper. I'm trusting the Lord to help me surpass my xxxxxxx monthly budget and move on to be a lender, not a debtor, as I believe Christians are meant to be people of substance.
This area I moved to is kind of a backwater economically. The public schools here are typical xxxxxxxxx Marxist indoctrination centers. I am praying about getting a christian school started in the abandoned elementary school here in xxxxxx. My fiance' shared with me what a church in xxxxxxxxx, MO was doing. They have a ministry of starting businesses and employing church members, so no one goes without a job. Cool!
I will be out and about this week taking care of things that went neglected while I was on the road. I will respond to your e-mails as quickly as I can, however. I have a herniated disc in my lower back that is bothering me when I hit a multiple dip in the road last week. This has been a chronic affliction that gets exasperated by bouncing around in the truck. So, it's time, ready or not, to stay home and get my health back. I will study your websites when I get home tonight. God bless your day!
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Bobby: Bro. Charlie B., I'm just winding up a pretty long day. If we can be of any help in getting you going in this business we're in, just let us know. We'll be happy to send you some to sample at no charge ... just to see what kind of performance you get, yourself. We're expecting a shipment in any day. I believe the demand for our product is going to continue to grow, especially with the price of fuel continuing to climb like it is. And, if we can save the average person 20-25% off their fuel bill, that is substantial in most cases. I'll catch ya later. God bless!
Bobby PS: By the way, I'm still in contact with the former CEO of Think and Grow Rich, Inc. It was his success training material back in the 80's that was very instrumental in me making my way back to God. My initial interest and motivation was the greed to succeed ... and that of making lots of money. But, little did I know that the training was going to have a profound impact upon my life in more than just a positive mental attitude way. And, while I give God the full credit, I also feel a sense of gratitude regarding this man's influence upon my life during that time. He's sort of been in seclusion for the past 15-20 years. But, he told me the other night that he is planning on making a come back. And, wants me to be involved with it. I don't know how much time I'm willing to put into it with everything I have going on. But, I hope he does make a come back. At any rate, I truly believe in success training. The principles are found throughout the Word of God. And, I believe God's people should live a prosperous life ... balanced in the four major areas: mentally, spiritually, physically and financially.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Bro. Burch: Hi Brother Bobby! Caught xxxxxxx downloading new software from the digital camera we just bought. I have an opportunity to buy and sell on eBay now. We have an auctioneer here in town that does auctions every other week. It's amazing, all the antiques around this area could bring in some good money, too. By the way, xxxxxxxx is not far from xxxxxxx, MN. (Little house on the prairie country) We intend to work eBay on the sidelines. Got to download the book on "Taking America without a shot." It will come in quite useful, thanks! I've yet to open the address on the business info you sent, but will do so later tonight. Yes, I will be contacting you with questions, if any. Sounds like helping people save energy will go good around here. Later, dude!
Bro. Burch: Hi Brother Bobby, I read your link concerning the fuel additive. Sounds great! xxxxxxx said she used a similar product (if not the same) back in the early 80's. She said it worked great, but her former brother-in- law told her that it would ruin her engine. She quit using it. I have heard that this stuff was tested by a consumer group and found that it didn't do a thing. I also have heard testimonies from consumers that use the product and endorse it. I personally suspect that the consumer group could have been bought off by "big oil." I have also heard many stories, over the years, of inventions being bought up and suppressed by "big oil." I personally would like to try the product myself. I usually test a product anyway before I can sell it. If I'm sold on it, it becomes easy to sell for me; just as walking around with a big smile on my face sells the Gospel when people ask me why I'm smiling all the time. I would like to place an order and try it for a month. Also, can this product be sold on eBay?
Regarding the Trinity, I hope that we can have a friendly exchange of ideas and mutually respect each others' positions. No, the Trinity cannot be found in the Word any more than the word "rapture." Since the rapture cannot be found verbatim in the Scriptures, does it mean the premise is not sound? The Trinity is alluded to in many Scriptures, including the Scriptures you are professing; such as "being of the same essence." The Bible speaks of our hearts as being our core essence, not our physical blood pumper.
After a raging discussion of centuries concerning the Godhead, a doctrine was finally emerged, known as the doctrine of the Trinity, namely: that God consists of three separate and distinct, co-equal, co-eternal, co-existent, "persons". Thus, making Jesus Christ a "junior partner", instead of Him being LORD OF ALL, as the Bible states.
I am puzzled by the way the author of this tract jumped from Jesus being co-equal in the Trinity to being a "junior partner" in the next sentence. Trinitarians do not regard Jesus as second to anyone, however, they see a distinction in the roles they play in ruling over creation. Who was the author of that tract? What denominational source published it? Could it be Seventh Day Adventist? As a Charismatic Lutheran, this is one of the theological doctrines I find to be sound theology within the Lutheran church. I disagree with the Lutherans regarding dispensation and infant baptism.
In his book, "The Great Doctrines of the Bible," William Evans states on page 28, "The doctrine of the Trinity is clearly taught in the New Testament; it is not merely intimated, as in the Old Testament, but is explicitly declared. This is evident from the following:
First: The baptism of Christ: Matt. 3: 16 & 17. Here the Father speaks from heaven; the Son is being baptized in the Jordan; and the Spirit descends in the form of a dove.
Second: In the Baptismal Formula: Matt. 28: 19- "Baptizing them in the name of the (singular) Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."
Third: The Apostolic Benediction: 2 Cor. 13: 14-"The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ...love of God...communion of the Holy Ghost."
Fourth: Christ Himself teaches it in John 14: 16-"I will pray the Father...He will give you another Comforter."
Fifth: The New Testament sets forth:
A Father who is God, Rom. 1: 7
A Son who is God, Heb. 1: 8
A Holy Spirit who is God, Acts 5: 3 & 4.
The whole is summed up in the words of Boardman: "The Father is all fullness of the Godhead invisible, John 1: 18; the Son is all the fullness of the Godhead manifested, John 1: 14-18; the Spirit is all the fullness of the Godhead acting immediately upon the creature, 1 Cor. 2: 9&10."
There are other Scriptures not mentioned in his book regarding the Trinity. John 1: 1-18 is a Scripture I often share with Jehovah's Witnesses. The King James version would not support their "no Trinity" doctrine, so they had to rewrite the Bible in their own translation. They still consider the King James as an authoritive source, though. Genesis 1:26 alludes to the Trinity when He said, "Let us make man in our image." I also find trinities within ourselves. You are a spirit. You have a soul. You live in a body. Your body is made up of flesh, bone, and blood. Your soul is your mind, will, and emotions. Your spirit is light, love, and power. You are these distinct things, but they are still you.
The entire Gospel message is congruent to the law of thermodynamics. Energy will deteriorate unless re-energized from an outside source. God is our creator and source of life. When we separate from God by sin, our spirits will deteriorate to their demise unless we embrace our salvation and reconnect to God through Jesus Christ. Most unbelievers are hedonistic because they are spiritually weak or dead and prone to their animalistic nature. We must feed our spirits, souls, and bodies to be strong and well balanced human beings.
If your Bible study is truly inter-denominational, beloved brother, I suggest you pick up "The Great Doctrines of the Bible" by William Evans as a guide. It is available in most Christian book stores. If you can't find one, I would be happy to buy one for you. These are the doctrines mainstream Christianity shares across the board. I studied to become a pastor in my church just prior to Mary divorcing me. This book was required reading.
Love you, brother! May God bless you and yours always. I'm going to the Twin Cities later today and spend a couple days helping my 82 year old mother around the house. I will resume conversing with you when I return. In Christ's bosom,
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Bobby: Praise the Lord, Bro. Charlie B., Please, please, please, don't ever get the feeling that I hold you ... or anyone else, who embraces the theory of a trinity of three separate and distinct co-equal, co-eternal and co-existent persons who, collectively, make up the one God of the Bible ... in contempt. Nothing could be further from the truth. I grew up trinitarian, too. Most all of my family ... and many of my friends ... are trinitarians. And, I love 'em all ... very dearly ... and I love you too, Brother. I just no longer subscribe to that theory. But, instead, have some exceedingly strong feelings ... and zeal ... for the Apostles' One God Monotheistic Doctrine, that's all. However, while I am unapologetic about it, I try not to be over bearing with it, either. Nor, do I wish to come across as being condescending or Pharisaic with those who don't embrace the Apostles' One God Monotheistic Doctrine. Brother, you are certainly well within your rights to embrace, uphold and defend the trinity. But, at the same time, I am certainly within mine, too. Over the past 20 years I have dealt with each point listed from the trinitarian book, and will gladly re-address them with you point by point if that is what you really want to do. All I know to say, is **IF** you believe I've stepped out of the traces in any of my writings, please call it to my attention ... point by point. I'll evaluate everything you put forth and/or counter with, and won't take it as a rebuke, either. But, I concluded my study of the trinity over 20 years ago. Now, having said that, there are massive amounts of material written in support of the trinitarian theory, and I acknowledge that openly. If you so choose, I'll try not to mention the Apostles' One God Monotheistic Doctrine to you any more ... and I'll still be your friend. Maybe the best thing to do, at this point, is to just copy and paste some dialogue I recently had with someone named, Michael (whom I haven't heard back from yet) ...
Michael: Hello. My name is Michael. I came across your website and I have a question. I was reading your article entitled: "Have ye Received the Holy Ghost since ye first Believed?" You mentioned that the trinity doctrine is not mentioned in the bible. I agree that I do not see that word in the bible; however, I do clearly see the relationship and distinction of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.
Bobby: I once was a trinitarian, myself. As a matter of fact, I was a baptized member of a main line denominational (trinitarian) church. And, I still visit it and other trinitarian churches from time to time. As a matter of fact, I am invited to take my guitar and play and sing for them from time to time ... which I do. So, don't get to thinking that I hold trinitarians in contempt or anything like that. I just no longer embrace the "theory" they dogmatically regard as "sound doctrine", that's all. I mean, I love the people. **IF** I have an ax to grind, it is with the hirelings who are lining their pockets off the blood, sweat and tears of good, decent and honorable ... but misled ... souls, as these wolves in sheep's clothing fleece their flock. Now, that gets me riled up a bit ... especially when these hirelings fight against the Apostles' One God Monotheistic Doctrine. At any rate, my understanding of the Scriptures today is NOT the result of having been indoctrinated. Instead, it is the result of very diligent study, prayer and research. When God revealed to me, through His Word, the Apostles' One God Monotheistic Doctrine, I had a decision to make ...
1) I could continue on in my indoctrination and totally ignore this revelation, or
2) I could pursue more indepth study into this revelation and learn to love it, embrace it, promote it AND defend it **IF** that's the way it "really' is.
Needless to say, I chose #2. At any rate, where you apparently see the distinction being three different people ... I mean, "persons" who collectively make up the ONE GOD (like that of three family members ...a dad, a mom and a child ... making up ONE FAMILY), I see the distinction being ONE PERSON who occupies three different offices, or functions in three different roles, much like that of me occupying the offices of father, son and husband OR student, teacher and administrator. Futhermore, I can be in the same room with my mother, my wife and my children, and can speak, act and function as father, son and husband without having to morph into three different people ... or "persons" ... and without confusing anyone as to how many people ... or "persons" ... I truly am. Which, by the way brings up a very interesting ... and legitimate ... question for any trinitarian: **IF** threre are really three separate and distinct CO-EQUAL, CO-ETERNAL, CO-EXISTENT "persons" who make up the ONE GOD, how do you explain it is possible for there to be one or more of these "persons" who was actually "begotten" by the other? Actually, Michael, the real distinction is "Spirit" and "flesh" ... or "Divinity" and "humanity". And, the Incarnate Christ was BOTH God and man ... "Spirit" and "flesh" ... or "Divinity" and "humanity", which is why I so often use the Clark Kent/Superman analogy to help people understand why Jesus said and did some of the things He said and did. I do this because most people can relate to Clark Kent/Superman. And, I contend that Jesus Christ, in bodily form on this Earth, was, indeed, the REAL Superman. At any rate, Jesus often spoke of the Father as if the Father where someone other than Himself who was way off in another galaxy or solar system. And, I can see how a person who has been indoctrinated to believe there's two or three of 'em up there and/or who interprets the words of Jesus "literally" could be persuaded to believe such. However, Jesus was unlike any man who has ever lived. While He possessed the Glory and Power of Deity, He went about as a lowly servant. He had a "human" nature as a result of actually being born of a woman. And, He had a "Divine" nature as a result of Him being God manifested in the flesh. Also, Jesus served as the example ... or the template (so to speak) ... for all Christians to pattern themselves after. And, as a result, He said and did many things for our benefit ... AND to set an example for us to follow. By the way, I am NOT saying Jesus was deceitful, nor that He lied ... far from it. It's just that He could (and did) speak, act and function as any "ordinary" man, at times. And, He also could (and did) speak, act and function as Almighty God, at other times, while here on Earth. Those who have ears to hear, hears what the Spirit saith, and aren't trying to fuel a flawed, man-made, pre-conceived and indoctrinated agenda, will, I believe, come to the understanding as to who Jesus "really" is **IF** they truly hunger and thirst for righteousness. Then, it will be up to them what they do from that point. They can continue on in their traditions and doctrines of men OR they can come out from among them and be ye separate. At any rate, I'll get more into this subject in a minute.
Michael: Additionally, you mentioned about the "Apostles' One God Monotheistic Doctrine"---what exactly is that? I did not see monotheistic in the bible either;
Bobby: Actually, the Apostles' One God Monotheistic Doctrine is redundant because "One God" and "Monotheistic" means the same thing. However, I prefer to use this redundant term because it makes any reference to God very, very, specific. You see, some trinitarians I've discussed the Scriptures with make it sound like there are three different people ... like you are one person, I am one person and Billy Graham is one person, who make up ONE GOD. While others make it sound like there is ONE PERSON who has three heads sitting on their shoulders. And, neither one of these portrayals will I accept any longer. I am not totally against using non-Biblical terms or words. However, what I am against is dogmatically holding any doctrine whose very existence depends upon the use of non-Biblical terms or words. Personally, I try to remember to use the words "caught up" or "the catching away" when talking about the Bride of Christ being taken out of this world, because of past discussions and debates when a person would argue that the terms "trinity", "triune" and "persons" (pertaining to God and/or the Godhead) when this subject would come up. For a person to accept, promote and defend the words "trinity", "truine", or "persons" (pertaining to God and/or the Godhead) ... on the same grounds, and with the same logic, as the word "rapture", just ain't even on the same level, as far as I'm concerned ... seeing as how, there are no contextural Biblical words which could be used as a substitute for the words "trinity", "triune", or "persons" in a personal observation or explanation, as the contextural Biblical words of "caught up" that most definitely could be used as a substitute for the word "rapture" in a personal observation or explanation. In other words, I don't know of any Biblical words which will do for the words "trinity", "triune" or "persons" (pertaining to God and/or the Godhead) what the words "caught up" will do for the word "rapture" in anyone's personal observation or explanation. And I try to always make a point to stress this when I am dealing with someone who puts forth the argument and logic that the non-Biblical words "trinity", "triune" or "persons" (pertaining to God and/or the Godhead) should be accepted just as the word "rapture" is .... or even the word "sandwich" (for that matter). And, even though that word is not in the Bible, either, I know they're real 'cause I ate one yesterday. So, my point ... or my question ... is, what Biblical words could you use in the place of the words "trinity", "triune" OR "persons" pertaining to God and/or the Godhead? I wouldn't have any trouble at all finding Biblical words to use in the place of "sandwich", "rapture" and "Bible". They are: "bread" and "meat", "caught up" "Word of God" and "book". Now, what Biblical words would you use for trinity, triune or persons (pertaining to God and/or the Godhead)? If there are none (which was the result of my investigation), I would suggest that you not be found guilty of adding to or taking from (depending on how you look at it) the Word of God by holding something so dogmatically which isn't even specifically mentioned ... nor any Biblical words found to use in its stead ... in the Bible. While I do NOT believe in three "persons" who jointly form God, I do believe the Bible accurately describes God as the Father in Creation, the Son in Redemption and the Holy Spirit living in the hearts of believers throughout the New Testament Church Age. Three "forms" of God ... three "manifestations" of God ... three "titles" of God ... three "offices/positions" which God holds and functions in ... three "roles" which God occupies ... BUT NOT THREE PERSONS. NOWHERE do you find in the Bible which says what trinitarians so often say ... that is that there is one God "in three persons". That's an "add on" that people would do well to just leave off. Men started "reading" that into the Scriptures a couple centuries or so AFTER Jesus ascended back up into Heaven and the "foot print followers" of our Lord had passed on.
Michael: however, it is clear that there is but one God
John 17:3 reads: 3And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.
In addition to that verse, for me, my conviction is as follows:
1 Corinthians 8:6 reads: 6But 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.
And of course, Jesus said that the Holy Spirit was sent in His name, from the Father, to flow out of the belly of those who believe on Him. Thank you Lord for the Holy Spirit...
My question Bobby is this: how does my conviction, as outlined in 1 Corinthians 8:6 and my conviction (as the Word says) pertaining to the Holy Spirit, how does it all fit into the "trinity" and "monotheistic" doctrines? I dont know---I guess these titles seem to not fully express God (well I dont know the fullness of the two, so perhaps that is the problem)...I just simply refer to God as the Word says, without clinging to a "title" to "sum Him up" perse...but nevertheless, from what I shared, how would it fit into those two doctrines? Or does it? Thanks for your time! Hope to hear from you soon.
Bobby: It is possible to cherry pick a Scripture or two here and there and assert just about anything from a Biblical standpoint ... using the very carefully selected Scripture(s). However, the true test of the proper understanding and interpretation ... IN MY OPINION ... is whether or not the PREPONDERANCE of Scriptural evidence will support that particular assertion ... or point of view. Before I list some things from another one of my web pages which addresses this subject, I would like to ask you to give me your answers to the following questions at your earliest convenience ....
1. When it comes to Spiritual matters, what does the term being "saved" mean to you? And, what would you actually tell a person if they were to, point blank, ask you what they needed to do be "saved"?
2. Do you believe a person can be "saved" without repenting?
3. Do you believe a person can be "saved" without being "born again" BOTH of water (baptized correctly) AND of the Spirit (empowered and indwelled by the Spirit of God ... the Bible way)?
4. Do you believe a person can be "saved" without continuing in the "Apostles' Doctrine" and living a "holy" -consecrated, dedicated, set apart, separate- life?
5. How do you define a "person"?
6. How many "persons" make up God?
7. When you refer to "Deity" (God), are your referring to Almighty God the Father ONLY ..., OR are you referring to any other person(s) of Deity? If any other person(s) of Deity, please list several of the main Scriptures upon which you base your belief, that there is actually MORE than ONE "person" of "Deity" (God).
8. Concerning Deity (God), how many "Fathers" (UPPER CASE) are there?
9. Concerning Deity (God), how many "LORDS" (UPPER CASE) are there?
10. Concerning Deity (God), how many "Saviours" (UPPER CASE) are there?
11. Concerning Deity (God), how many "Spirits" (UPPER CASE) are there?
12. Concerning Deity (God), how many "Spirits" (UPPER CASE) dwelled between the cherubims in the Most Holy Place?
13. In what form did Jesus exist prior to the Incarnation?
Now, from my web page ....
50 Reasons why the Bible doesn't mention TRINITY or refer to God as PERSONS.
http://www.impact-ministry.com/acts2/trinity.html
POINT # 6. Bobby: English was my worst subject in school, but I do remember a few things. For illustration purposes only, it is not proper to link the singular pronoun "He", which refers to one "person", to verbs like: "see", "hear" and "warn" ... which would look like this ... "He see", "He hear" and "He warn". When using the singular pronoun "He", it is necessary to use the verbs "sees", "hears" and "warns" ... "He SEES", "He HEARS" and "He WARNS". In order to use the verbs "see", "hear" and "warn", you must use a noun or pronoun which is "plural" and identifies "more" than one person like, "People" ... "People see", "People hear" and "People warn". Yet, intelligent people who know this rule, but who have been indoctrinated to believe that there are three "persons" of God, ignore this rule when it comes to the word "GOD".
**IF** the word "GOD" identifies more than one "person", as the trinitarians insist, the Bible should read like this, "God SEE", "God HEAR" and "God WARN" ... AND IT DOESN'T! The word "GOD" is never linked to a verb like that. Instead, the word "GOD" is ALWAYS linked to verbs just as the word "He" (a singular person) is ... like this, "God SEES", "God HEARS" and "God WARNS". Again, I use these particular words for illustration purposes only, but I hope I have made my point ... and that it's CLEAR.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Bro. Burch: Hi Bother Bobby, Thanks for getting back to me so soon. I am just about to leave for the Cities so I'll make this quick. Yes, I already consider you a friend and brother in Christ. I am just getting to know you and it seems like you are easy going, full of God's love. I would like to futher understand were you are coming from and how you became sold out to this doctrine. I can agree to disagree with you without getting offended. I've been dealing with my fiance's sister, xxxxx, who is a xxxxxxxxxxx, lately. She was very offended with xxxxxx and I because we pulled up information on the web to counter her seminar training.
I have encountered the "Jesus only" doctrine back in the 80's. Another "wind of doctrine" that flowed through the Charismatic movement then. This Apostolic doctrine sounds similar. I've even had a doctrine flow through my camp regarding forgivenenss for the devil. My response was, "Forgiveness requires repentance on the devil's part." Never heard of it again! I would like a point by point response to William Evans and the discourse I laid out when you have the time. By the way, I have gone through Evan's entire book many times and disagree with one thing: tongues. His aguement as tongues being a known language was answered in his own retort. Tongues is the universal language we had before the tower of Babel. I feel as though the Apostolic doctrine is just a diffence in semantics, and yet it could be as important as did Jesus really die on the cross? Why did He call out, "Father, why have you forsaken me?" As Paul once said, "If any should have a disagreement, let them humble themselves and pray. God will reveal the answer." (paraphrase) Even the Apostles had their disagreements, too. We are all human and God's ways are higher than ours.
I would appreciate your prayers for the Lord to release the money from my late cousin's estate. It has been held up for one reason or another for the last three years. I feel as if the devil wants to siphon as much money out of it in legal fees before I see a dime. Now is the time I need it most to make this transition off the road. Gotta go!
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Bobby's POINT BY POINT Response to Bro. Burch:
In his book, "The Great Doctrines of the Bible," William Evans states on page 28, "The doctrine of the Trinity is clearly taught in the New Testament; it is not merely intimated, as in the Old Testament, but is explicitly declared. This is evident from the following:
First: The baptism of Christ: Matt. 3: 16 & 17. Here the Father speaks from heaven; the Son is being baptized in the Jordan; and the Spirit descends in the form of a dove.
Bobby: There is only one Spirit of Deity ... Ephesians 4:4 There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; ... And, that one Spirit, while residing "in" the Incarnate Christ, was still omnipresent throughout the universe ... and, as a result, could SIMULTANEOUSLY be manifested to people in more than one geographical location OR in one geographical location in more than one form ... all without having to morph into more than one Spirit ... or "person". What you have at Jesus' baptism is TWO Divine witnesses ... the voice from heaven and the Theophany descending like a dove ... NOT two additional "CO-EQUAL, CO-ETERNAL, CO-EXISTENT "persons". At the baptism of Jesus, the voice and the Dove were the two "Divine" witnesses which verified to John the Baptist that Jesus (his cousin, according to the flesh) was indeed the Messiah as recorded in St. John Chapter ONE ...
29 The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.
30 This is he of whom I said, After me cometh a man which is preferred before me: for he was before me.
31 And I knew him not: but that he should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with water.
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.
34 And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God.
35 Again the next day after John stood, and two of his disciples;
36 And looking upon Jesus as he walked, he saith, Behold the Lamb of God!
Likewise, the voice from Heaven was a Divine Witness and for the benefit of those who heard it .... as explained in St. John Chapter 12 ....
28 Father, glorify thy name. Then came there a voice from heaven, saying, I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again.
29 The people therefore, that stood by, and heard it, said that it thundered: others said, An angel spake to him.
30 Jesus answered and said, This voice came not because of me, but for your sakes.
Now, here's a copy and paste Point #24 from my web site at:
http://www.impact-ministry.com/acts2/trinity.html
POINT # 24. Bobby: When Jesus was baptized by John in Jordan River, the voice of God spoke, "This is my beloved Son, IN WHOM I am well pleased." Matthew 3:17. Notice, God said, "IN WHOM" - not with whom! "To wit, that GOD WAS IN CHRIST, reconciling the world unto Himself..." 2 Corinthians 5:19. "... the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works." John 14:10.
The difference in the tabernacle of badgers skins and the tabernacle of flesh was the tabernacle of badgers skins was inanimate, and the tabernacle of flesh was a living, breathing, supernaturally conceived and born human who had 2 natures ... one Divine and one human. I use the analogy of Clark Kent and Superman a lot when talking about the relationship of the Father and the Son because most people can relate to Clark Kent being Superman incognito ... not two separate "persons."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Second: In the Baptismal Formula: Matt. 28: 19- "Baptizing them in the name of the (singular) Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."
Bobby: Since 1986, there has not been a single person to come forward with the Biblical proof necessary to claim my $ 10,000.00 REWARD:
$10,000 Reward:
Offered to anyone who can find ONE scripture in the authorized King James Version of the Holy Bible TEXT:
(1) with the word "trinity" in it;
(2) where the term "persons" (plural) was ever used to describe God or the Godhead; OR
(3) where anyone was ever baptized with the TITLES "Father, Son and Holy Ghost" pronounced over them. (These "titles" are quoted by virtually every religious denomination today among BOTH Catholic and Protestants, regardless of whether they baptize by sprinkling or by immersion).
The "formula" (words invoked) at baptism has become of particular interest to me. It is my understanding that the Great Commission given in Matthew 28:19, ""Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the NAME of the Father, AND of the Son, AND of the Holy Ghost," is where Jesus instructed His followers to ...
1) go;
2) teach; and
3) baptize in THE NAME (SINGULAR ... ONE NAME) of the Father, AND of the Son, AND of the Holy Ghost
In other words, it is my understanding that this is where Jesus told His followers what to DO ..... NOT what to SAY. When the "footprint followers" and "original" New Testament Church leaders carried out this "Great Commission" they ALWAYS baptized converts to Christianity in the NAME of JESUS, as documented by BOTH the Scriptures AND History .....
Acts 2:38 & 41 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. .... Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.
Acts 8:12 & 15-16 But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women. .....Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost: (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)
Acts 10:47-48 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.
(NOTE: In the following Versions of the Bible this verse reads, "in the name of Jesus" .... NLT, NASB, RSV, and the ASV.)
Acts 19:1-7
1 And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples,
2 He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.
3 And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism.
4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.
5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.
7 And all the men were about twelve.
The Bible is very specific in admonishing us, that whatsoever we do in word or deed, to do ALL in the name of the Lord Jesus (Colossians 3:17).
Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics (1951). II, 384, 389: "The formula used was "in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ" or some synonymous phrase; there is no evidence for the use of the trine name… The earliest form, represented in the Acts, was simple immersion… in water, the use of the name of the Lord, and the laying on of hands. To these were added, at various times and places which cannot be safely identified, (a) the trine name (Justin)…"
Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible (1962), I 351: "The evidence… suggests that baptism in early Christianity was administered, not in the threefold name, but 'in the name of Jesus Christ' or 'in the name of the Lord Jesus.'"
Otto Heick, A History of Christian Thought (1965), I, 53: "At first baptism was administered in the name of Jesus, but gradually in the name of the Triune God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
Hasting's Dictionary of the Bible (1898). I, 241: "[One explanation is that] the original form of words was "into the name of Jesus Christ" or 'the Lord Jesus,' Baptism into the name of the Trinity was a later development."
Williston Walker, A History of the Christian Church (1947), page 58: "The trinitarian baptismal formula,,, was displacing the older baptism in the name of Christ."
The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge (1957), I, 435: "The New Testament knows only baptism in the name of Jesus… which still occurs even in the second and third centuries."
Canney's Encyclopedia of Religions (1970), page 53: "Persons were baptized at first 'in the name of Jesus Christ' … or 'in the name of the Lord Jesus'… Afterwards, with the development of the doctrine of the Trinity, they were baptized 'in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost.'"
Encyclopedia Biblica (1899), I, 473: "It is natural to conclude that baptism was administered in the earliest times 'in the name of Jesus Christ,' or in that 'of the Lord Jesus.' This view is confirmed by the fact that the earliest forms of the baptismal confession appear to have been single-not triple, as was the later creed."
Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th ed. (1920), II 365: "The trinitarian formula and trine immersion were not uniformly used from the beginning… Bapti[sm] into the name of the Lord [was] the normal formula of the New Testament. In the 3rd century baptism in the name of Christ was still so widespread that Pope Stephen, in opposition to Cyprian of Carthage, declared it to be valid."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Third: The Apostolic Benediction: 2 Cor. 13: 14-"The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ...love of God...communion of the Holy Ghost."
Bobby: This verse is very similar to the greetings and salutations in some of the epistles which refer to God the Father "and" the Lord Jesus Christ. The mere fact that God the Father, Lord Jesus Christ or Holy Ghost is mentioned in the same verse, to some, means that there must be two or three different entities ... or persons ... being referenced. However, Jehovah/God manifested in the flesh, Himself, said He has a Throne. And, the ONE and only Throne of Jehovah/God which John saw is called the Throne of God "and" of the Lamb in Revelation 22:1. Now, some start trying to split hairs by saying the little word "and" separates, instead of joins together. Well, that's just the kind of shell game with words that I've had presented to me by no telling how many people trying to defend the theory of the trinity. Consider this: The Greek word that was translated into English as "and" in Revelation 22:1 and over 8,000 other places in the New Testament, is kai (Strong's # 2532) pronounced {kahee}. It serves as a copulative to connect. Let me further explain how ministers and teachers who either don't know that they don't know, OR who are just wolves in sheep's clothing, and make it their business to deceive as many good, decent and honorable, yet misled, people as they possibly can ... which is what really gets me riled up. I really and truly love people, but I really and truly detest those who deceive, mislead and take advantage of others. If I have an ax to grind, it is with the wolves in sheep's clothing who deceive, lie and mislead people while they line their pockets from the blood, sweat and tears of the flocks they fleece. As far as I'm concerned that ranks right up there with spouse abuse, grave robbing and child molestation. At any rate, here's just one of the ways modern day deceivers (whether by design or through ignorance) are able to be so effective with their "shell games". And the sad part is, most of the common, everyday people (who are unwittingly supporting these deceivers) don't have a clue they're being led down the wrong trail, because they either believe their "leader(s)" to be right and/or they are not as Biblically literate as they really need to be in order to know when someone is leading them down the wrong trail. Any how, this Greek word is used to CONNECT ... NOT SEPARATE. But, some brainiac has come along and convinced good people that the word "AND" separates instead of joins together. And, here's what I mean. Those who oppose the Apostles' One God Monotheistic Doctrine so badly would, no doubt, say the following (small) sampling of verses is where this Greek word that was translated into English as "AND" proves that the Father and Son were "SEPARATED" by this word in order to make a distinction to support their two different persons theory (instead of being joined together by this word to reveal that the Father and the Son are the SAME PERSON) ...
Romans 1:7 To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.
1 Corinthians 1:3 Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.
2 Corinthians 1:2 Grace be to you and peace from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.
Now, I will expose the hypocrisy and deception of such a "shell game" with the word "and". While the above references would emphatically be promoted and defended as being positive proof that Jehovah/God the Father and Jesus Christ are two separate and distinct "persons" ... these same deceivers would deny the fact that the same word "and" would separate into distinct "persons" in the following Scriptures because it would refute their theology. As a matter of fact, there are those who would fight tooth and nail to defend a position in the following verses that the word "and" joins together ... like the word is really meant to do, any way. By the way, and as a side note, I want it very clearly understood that I have NOT denied a distinction in the Godhead as it relates to salvation. I just emphatically deny and reject the notion that the distinction is in the number of "PERSONS" involved. At any rate, here's the examples that expose the hypocrisy and inconsistency of the use of this little Greek word that was translated into English as "AND" because **IF** they used the same argument and logic from the above verses in the following verses, it would conclusively prove that Jehovah/God AND the Father are two separate "PERSONS" ... and they for sure can't do that ...
2 Corinthians 11:31 The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which is blessed for evermore, knoweth that I lie not.
Ephesians 1:3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:
1 Peter 1:3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,
What follows next is how the shell game with the word "and" has to continue in order to support man-made theology. **IF** the word "and" is used to separate, as some insist, the following would prove that the New Covenant Saviour and Jesus are two separate persons ... AND would either give us TWO SAVIOURS or would prove Jesus really wasn't the New Covenant Saviour after all ... in the event they insisted there is only one Saviour. Do you see how convoluted these shell games can get when deception, ideas, opinions, indoctrination, traditions, human reasoning, logic and LITERAL interpretations gets involved??? Neither Jesus, nor any of the "original" New Testament Church leaders were this complicated and messed up. Anyway, here's a real zinger (**IF** you use this method of interpreting the Bible) ...
1 Timothy 1:1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the commandment of God our Saviour, and Lord Jesus Christ, which is our hope;
Now, I contend that Jesus Christ was Jehovah/God manifested in the flesh, but using the word "and" to separate in 1 Timothy 1:1 is the Lord Jesus Christ our hope or our Saviour ... or BOTH?? I say BOTH.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Fourth: Christ Himself teaches it in John 14: 16-"I will pray the Father...He will give you another Comforter."
Bobby: There is only ONE SPIRIT. Ephesians 4:4. "For by ONE SPIRIT are we all baptized into one body..." 1 Corinthians 12:13. The Bible proves that the ONE Spirit is the Holy Ghost. "This spake He (Jesus) of the SPIRIT, which they that believe on Him should receive: far the HOLY GHOST was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified." John 7:39.
The Bible proves that the ONE Spirit is the Father. "There is but ONE GOD, the FATHER..." 1 Corinthians 8:6. In John 4:24, Jesus said, "GOD is a SPIRIT..." Here the human side was speaking of the Divine side ... the Father ... the Spirit (NOT Spirits -plural). No one would deny that He was speaking of the Father here.
The Bible proves that the ONE Spirit is Jesus. There is ONE LORD JESUS CHRIST. 1 Corinthians 8:6. "Now the LORD (Jesus) is that SPIRIT..." 2 Corinthians 3:17.
"There are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are ONE." 1 John 5:7.
Notice it does NOT say, "these three "persons" are one" ... AND it does NOT say, "these three are "as" one." The Father, the Word and the Holy Ghost are three offices which God (singular -one) occupies and functions in, just as you and I are one, and also occupy more than one office and function in more than one capacity ... like father, son and husband ... or teacher, student and administrator.
By no means did Jesus teach that the Holy Ghost was another Person. Jesus said, "The Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, He shall teach you all things..." John 14:26. Again Jesus said, "...if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send Him unto you. John 16:7. Also Jesus said, "I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you." John 14:18. Compare John 14:26 with John 16:7; Jesus spoke of the Father and Himself as ONE. Compare John 14:26 with John 14:18. Jesus spoke of the Holy Ghost and Himself as ONE. Since the Father and Jesus are one, and Jesus and the Holy Ghost are one: then the Father, Jesus and Holy Spirit are ONE. The Holy Spirit is referred to as "He." But that should come as no surprise since the Father and the Holy Spirit are one and the same. Besides, God is referred to as "He" throughout entire the Bible. (Also compare the following Scriptures which show that the Father, Jesus and the Holy Ghost are ONE: Matthew 10:20, Mark 13:11, Luke 21:15.)
The Bible says the Father and Jesus are ONE. The Bible says Jesus and the Holy Spirit are ONE. And the Bible says the Father, the Word and the Holy Ghost are ONE. Those who try to create a separate "person" by Jesus' reference to "another" Comforter in John 14:16 fail to acknowledge and/or understand that the Holy Spirit living in the hearts of believers throughout the entire New Testament Church Dispensation (as opposed to God manifested in flesh living among believers during that time) is another form of God -NOT another "person" of God.
When the Holy Ghost came on the day of Pentecost, 120 disciples were filled (including Mary, the mother of Jesus) and began to speak with tongues as the SPIRIT gave them utterance. Acts 2:4. Peter preached that the Holy Ghost was the Spirit of God. As he used the prophecy of Joel 2:28, he said, "It shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of MY SPIRIT (singular ... not my Spirits -plural) UPON ALL FLESH..." Acts 2:17.
Paul used the terms "Spirit of God" and "Spirit of Christ" as synonymous terms in reference to the Holy Spirit. He said, "Ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the SPIRIT OF GOD dwell in you. Now if any man have not the SPIRIT OF CHRIST, he is none of His." Romans 8:9. And we've already established that there there is only one Spirit of Deity. (Also see Colossians 1:27 and Galatians 4:6.)
There is ONE GOD and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and IN YOU ALL. Ephesians 4:6. There is only ONE GOD manifested in the flesh and received in the hearts of believers today ... and His name is JESUS!
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Fifth: The New Testament sets forth:
A Father who is God, Rom. 1: 7
A Son who is God, Heb. 1: 8
A Holy Spirit who is God, Acts 5: 3 & 4.
The whole is summed up in the words of Boardman: "The Father is all fullness of the Godhead invisible, John 1: 18; the Son is all the fullness of the Godhead manifested, John 1: 14-18; the Spirit is all the fullness of the Godhead acting immediately upon the creature, 1 Cor. 2: 9&10."
Bobby: I agree. God is the Father. God is the Son. And, God is the Holy Ghost. However, I do NOT subscribe to the theory that there are three entities (or persons), each of whom are individually and "fully" and "completely" God ..., NOR that there are three entities (or persons), each of whom are a 1/3 "part" of God, and who collectively make up the "fullness" or totality of God. The Godhead is made up of "both" invisible Spirit and visible flesh and blood. And, according to Colossians 2:8-10 Jesus is the bodily form of the "fullness" of the Godhead ... and we are COMPLETE in Him. So, it's really not "Jesus Only", but, rather, Jesus "Fully" ... or Jesus "Completely". That's why one can't even access the Spirit (the Father), except through the flesh and blood ... Jesus. And, that's why when one truly has the Son, they also have the Father.
There are other Scriptures not mentioned in his book regarding the Trinity. John 1: 1-18 is a Scripture I often share with Jehovah's Witnesses. The King James version would not support their "no Trinity" doctrine, so they had to rewrite the Bible in their own translation. They still consider the King James as an authoritive source, though. Genesis 1:26 alludes to the Trinity when He said, "Let us make man in our image." I also find trinities within ourselves. You are a spirit. You have a soul. You live in a body. Your body is made up of flesh, bone, and blood. Your soul is your mind, will, and emotions. Your spirit is light, love, and power. You are these distinct things, but they are still you. The entire Gospel message is congruent to the law of thermodynamics. Energy will deteriorate unless re-energized from an outside source. God is our creator and source of life. When we separate from God by sin, our spirits will deteriorate to their demise unless we embrace our salvation and reconnect to God through Jesus Christ. Most unbelievers are hedonistic because they are spiritually weak or dead and prone to their animalistic nature. We must feed our spirits, souls, and bodies to be strong and well balanced human beings.
Bobby: From my web page ... http://www.impact-ministry.com/acts2/trinity.html
POINT # 7. Bobby: "Hear, 0 Israel: the Lord our God is ONE LORD." Deuteronomy 6:4. This commandment given to Israel is confirmed in the New Testament (Mark 12:29) and must be obeyed by all Christians today. "Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble." James 2:19. "God is a Spirit..." John 4:24. "No man hath seen God at anytime..." John 1:18. God, the invisible Spirit, has only revealed Himself to man by manifestations.
Although there were various "theophanies" (manifestations) of God before the Incarnation (as the burning bush, pillar of fire and cloud, etc.), the Scriptures teach that there are three offices in which God has manifested Himself to mankind. God manifested Himself as the Father in creation, the Son in redemption, and the Holy Spirit (Comforter) living in the hearts of believers as the "earnest" (part) of our inheritance for the entire duration of the New Testament Church Dispensation until that which is perfect is come .... which, according to John 7:39, Acts 1:4-5 and Acts 2:1-4, began on the Day of Pentecost in Acts Chapter 2 ... following the departure (ascension) of the resurrected body of Jesus Christ.
POINT # 8. Bobby: In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." Genesis 1:1. No one else but God performed the miracle of creation. "Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;" Isaiah 44:24. And God said, "Let us make man in our image..." Genesis 1:26.
To use the word "us" and try to form other Gods ... or other "persons" ... as if there was "more" than ONE involved in the creation, clashes not only with the Scriptures, but with common sense. The word God means Supreme Being, the eternal and infinite Spirit, Creator and Sovereign of the universe. There cannot be more than one Supreme Being. By no means was God talking or counseling with other "persons" or other Gods. It should be obvious that God was NOT talking to any assistants or co-equal, co-eternal and co-existent PERSONS who were about to help Him make man. God knows the end from the beginning (Isaiah 46:10).
The Incarnation did not take place until centuries later when the virgin conceived and gave birth to the Christ child (Galatians 4:4). God is an invisible Spirit without flesh and bones (Colossians 1:15; John 4:24; and Luke 24:39). God speaks of things that are not as though they are (Romans 4:17). And He counsels with Himself ... His own will (Ephesians 1:11). We know that God did not have any assistants in the creation of man because of what the very next verse says ... So God created man in HIS (singular) own image, in the image of God created HE (singular) him (NOT "created 'they' him"); male and female created HE (singular)them (NOT "created 'they' them"). Genesis 1:27.
POINT # 9. Bobby: Furthermore, we know that angels are in the presence of God, but they weren't involved in the actual creation process either. So the explanation of Genesis 1:26 has to be found in the foreknowledge of God who knows the beginning from the end and the end form the beginning ... and speaks of those things which are not as though they are ... because man was created in the image and likeness of God, but was created flesh and bones ... NOT an invisible spirit as God is ... even though there couldn't have been a flesh and bones person physically present at the time Adam was created.
POINT # 10. Bobby: At the time Adam was created, and in the mind of God (the eternal Spirit), He foresaw and precisely knew everything about the image (body) of the Son (as He would be known), and in which He would one day reveal Himself to man. Furthermore, God knows everything from beginning to end and vice versa. He already knew about temporary tabernacle that He would have Moses to construct, and the temporary tabernacle of flesh that He would prepare of a virgin and one day reveal Himself to mankind in. He already knew about Gethsemane, Golgotha and the Day of Pentecost in Acts Chapter 2. The Son (the tabernacle of flesh) did not exist at the creation as a separate Spirit, being or "person" ... but only in the mind, foreknowledge and plan of God.
The Bible is correct is saying the Word "was with" God, and the Word "was" God, because God cannot be separated from His Thought, Plan or Word any more than you and I can. Otherwise, (regardless if it is held that the Word "was" God, but no longer is, or if it is held that the Word "was" God and still is), those who believe John 1:1 describes two separate and distinct "persons" (God and the Word) would be clashing with Monotheism by putting forth a TWO God theory ... because John 1:1 specifically states, "... and the Word WAS God."
Our thought, plan or word is NOT a separate "person" from us ... IT IS US! "But when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth His Son (the tabernacle of flesh), made of a woman, made under the law." Galatians 4:4. The Son, who is the image of God, was begotten thousands of years after the creation. Also God spoke of things which be not as though they were. Romans 4:17. "So God created man in HIS OWN IMAGE," Genesis 1:27. "Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of Him that was to come. Romans 5:14. God made Adam in the figure of Him that was to come ... JESUS!
POINT # 11. Bobby: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." John 1:1. The Word cannot be separated from God. The term "Word" is derived from the Greek term "logos" which means "thought or plan". God's thoughts are with Him, but they cannot be separated from Him any more than we can be separated from our word, thought or plan. "The Word was with God, and the WORD WAS GOD." "All things were made by Him (Word); and without Him (Word) was not anything made that was made." John 1:3. "...The worlds were framed by the Word of God..." Hebrews 11:3. "And God said" is found throughout the story of Creation in Genesis Chapter One. So by His "Word" God created all things by speaking them into existence ... except Adam, and later on Eve ... who was made from Adam.
Some try to make a play on words here as if the Word and God are two separate "persons." "Was" was used three times in John 1:1 because the Creation was being discussed in the "past" tense. "Is" is used when discussing something in the "present" tense. It would NOT have been proper to have written John 1:1 like this ... "In the beginning "is" the Word, and the Word "is" with God, and the Word "is" God. Therefore, for anyone to take the words of John 1:1 and try to build a case for two different "persons" is grossly in error.
POINT # 12. Bobby: "Thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God Himself that formed the earth and made it...I am the LORD; and there is NONE ELSE." Isaiah 45:18. "...I am the Lord that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens ALONE; that spreadeth abroad the earth BY MYSELF." Isaiah 44:24. ".. Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any." Isaiah 44:8. "See now that I, even I, am He, and there is NO GOD WITH ME..." Deuteronomy 32:39. "Have we not all ONE Father? Hath not ONE God created us" Malachi 2:10. Do you see three "persons" in any of the above? I sure don't!
POINT # 13. Bobby: God is an invisible, omnipresent Spirit who fills the universe, and cannot be completely contained within any tabernacle, temple or building. God dwelled in the Most Holy Place between the cherubims above the Mercy Seat over the Ark of Covenant, and yet was still omnipresent throughout the universe. Keeping this in mind consider the following:
Micah Chapter 1
2 Hear, all ye people; hearken, O earth, and all that therein is: and let the Lord GOD be witness against you, the LORD from his holy temple.
3 For, behold, the LORD cometh forth out of his place, and will come down, and tread upon the high places of the earth.
Job 9:8 Which alone spreadeth out the heavens, and treadeth upon the waves of the sea.
POINT # 14. Bobby: A lamb without spot or blemish had to be offered to atone for the sins of Israel each and every year. However, Jesus, as the Lamb of God, slain from the foundation of the world, became the sacrifice without spot or blemish (sin) to be the sacrifice to end all sacrifices. Remember what Abraham told Isaac in Genesis 22:8, "And Abraham said, My son, God will provide "Himself" a lamb for a burnt offering: so they went both of them together." That day God did supply a substitute for Isaac, but He actually became the Lamb in the body of Jesus Christ.
Without shedding of blood there is no remission of sins. Hebrews 9:22. So by His plan (Word), God, the invisible Spirit, prepared Himself a body, born of the virgin Mary, and dwelt among us. "And the Word (which was God) was made flesh, and dwelt among us..." John 1:14. This "flesh" was the only "begotten" Son of God. Paul said that the Son (flesh) is the image of the invisible God. Colossians 1 :13-15 ... the "express image of His person (singular)." Hebrews 1:3.
POINT # 15. Bobby: The body (flesh), the Lamb/image of God ... the Son, as He was to be known ... was in the mind of God from the foundation of the world (Revelation 13:8) and prophesied as early as Genesis 3:15. Hundreds of years later the prophet Isaiah prophesied," ... Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call His name Immanuel ... which being interpreted is, GOD WITH US." Isaiah 7:14; Matthew 1:23. "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon His shoulder; and His name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty GOD, The everlasting FATHER, The Prince of Peace." Isaiah 9:6. To Joseph the angel said, "...thou shall call His name JESUS: for He shall save His people FROM THEIR SIN (NOT in their sin) ... and he called His name JESUS." Matthew 1:21-25.
POINT # 16. Bobby: Fosset's Bible Encyclopedia declares that Jesus means Jehovah-Salvation, or Jehovah is become Saviour.
In as much as I have tried to accomodate you with point by point explanations, please answer the following questions for me. And, I assure you I am NOT offended, mad or upset. Thanks ... and God bless! -Bobby
1. When it comes to Spiritual matters, what does the term being "saved" mean to you? And, what would you actually tell a person if they were to, point blank, ask you what they needed to do be "saved"?
2. Do you believe a person can be "saved" without repenting?
3. Do you believe a person can be "saved" without being "born again" BOTH of water (baptized correctly) AND of the Spirit (empowered and indwelled by the Spirit of God ... the Bible way)?
4. Do you believe a person can be "saved" without continuing in the "Apostles' Doctrine" and living a "holy" -consecrated, dedicated, set apart, separate- life?
5. How do you define a "person"?
6. How many "persons" make up God?
7. When you refer to "Deity" (God), are your referring to Almighty God the Father ONLY ..., OR are you referring to any other person(s) of Deity? If any other person(s) of Deity, please list several of the main Scriptures upon which you base your belief, that there is actually MORE than ONE "person" of "Deity" (God).
8. Concerning Deity (God), how many "Fathers" (UPPER CASE) are there?
9. Concerning Deity (God), how many "LORDS" (UPPER CASE) are there?
10. Concerning Deity (God), how many "Saviours" (UPPER CASE) are there?
11. Concerning Deity (God), how many "Spirits" (UPPER CASE) are there?
12. Concerning Deity (God), how many "Spirits" (UPPER CASE) dwelled between the cherubims in the Most Holy Place?
13. In what form did Jesus exist prior to the Incarnation?
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Bro. Burch: Hello Brother Bobby, Wow! You given me a lot to research and I will. I just got back from the Twin Cities. I will answer your questions when I am more awake to give you coherent answers. On the surface this seems to be a difference in semantics. I need to get a new Bible with the original text side by side. Looks like another trip to the Twin Cities for that. I fully concede your point about the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit being of the same essence. I'm curious as to why Jesus would refer to the Father and the Holy Spirit so many times instead of referring to himself in those passages. He also referred to himself as the Son of Man. This to me is the distinction between Himself and the Father/Holy Spirit. Jesus was both fully God and fully man in order to be a redeemer according to Jewish law. No need for a response on this. This will be for me to chew on. I don't see Trinitarian theology as being sinister indoctrination but I truly will research these things that you have expounded upon. Anyway, don't worry, be happy my friend! May God bless you and yours,
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Bobby: Praise the Lord, Bro. Charlie B., Glad you had a safe trip. I've got a full platter right now. So, don't be too concerned about the time frame. Thursday, I met with two Jehovah's Witness elders for a couple of hours, and started what I hope is going to be a rather lengthy Bible study. My approach with them is to firmly establish that (according to their own Bible) Jehovah/God is the Messiah ... and no one else. This is going to require quite a few meetings. But, I am in the process of laying the foundation ... reading from their own Bible ... the fact that Jehovah/God had no assistance in creation nor in redemption ... He did it ALONE ... and by HIMSELF. And, I am doing that by starting things off, reading the following chapters from Isaiah (from their Bible) 41, 43, 44, 47, 48, 49, 53, 54, 59, 60 and 63. I was able to read through Chapter 53 before we had to quit, Thursday. We would discuss things as I read through each Chapter. And, at the end of each Chapter I would ask if they saw anywhere in there where Jehovah/God was referring to anyone else, besides Himself, who was involved in creation or who was, is or going to be involved in redemption. So far, they have conceded that there is no evidence in the Sciptures. Granted, they're chomping at the bits to get to a few pet Scriptures (which I have assured them we will cover before we're done). But, they're squiring in their chairs right now. And, I intend to keep Isaiah in their face all the way ... as well as the fact that we must not take interpret a selection of Scripture in such a way that it clashes with the PREPONDERANCE of Scriptural evidence on the same subject found elsewhere in the Bible. To do so is just plain error. At any rate, while I did get through Isaiah Chapter 53, Thursday, I haven't taken the time, yet, to go over the Scriptures concerning "the arm of the Lord", to prove that the arm of the Lord is Jehovah/God, Himself, and NOT another deity, person, spirit, angel or whatever. However, I will be doing so later. When we start back up next week, we'll be picking right back up with Isaiah Chapter 54, then on to 59, 60, 63. I would read the whole Book of Isaiah with them, verse by verse, if they want to. But, I am zeroing in on the very narrow subject of Jehovah/God ... Creator ... Messiah.
Any how, I just wanted to respond to this ...
"I'm curious as to why Jesus would refer to the Father and the Holy Spirit so many times instead of referring to himself in those passages."
Jesus, most of the time, spoke in a mixed multitude. And at other times, in a way to teach and lead His followers to an impending event after His Ascension ... the New Birth experience, when He would, then, lead them and guide them into all Truth AND bring all things to their remembrance. At any rate, He very well could have come to Earth and said, "Look, everybody, I'm God manifest in the flesh. And, I'm going to prove it everybody by walking on water, raising the dead, unstopping deaf ears, opening blind eyes, cleansing lepers, revealing the thoughts and intents of the heart of others, turning water into wine, feeding thousands with a few loaves and fish, harnessing the winds and waves with my voice, forgiving sins and laying life down and picking it back up again." But, he didn't. He used what I refer to as "Clark Kent" speech, referring to God in a way that would shift attention away from Him being God manifested in the flesh, Himself. This, in my opinion, was done for several reasons ...
1) He didn't come here to set up an earthly Kingdom
2) He didn't want people setting their affections on the here and now, as they would have surely done if He would have assumed His rightful place here on Earth at that time ... being a Throne of worship and praise.
3) He only wanted those who had "ears to hear" and "eyes to behold" to hear and understand who He was and what it was He was saying and doing. And, that's what happened!
The Bible confirms this by revealing stuff like this (just a very few examples) ...
Psalm 78:2 I will open my mouth in a parable: I will utter dark sayings of old:
Matt. 13:35 That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation of the world.
John 12:16 These things understood not his disciples at the first: but when Jesus was glorified, then remembered they that these things were written of him, and that they had done these things unto him.
John 5:39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.
Psalm 100:3 Know ye that the LORD he is God: it is he that hath made us, and not we ourselves; we are his people, and the sheep of his pasture.
John 10:27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:
Well, I'll catch ya later. Got a bunch to do today. However, I woke up a little early, and may go back in there and try to finish my nap (ha). God bless!
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Bro. Burch: I was Googling information concerning the Nicene Creed and found this. This is the history behind the council's decision. Mentions the Latin word for "person." What are your thoughts on this?
((googled info ommitted here to conserve space))
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Bobby: Praise the Lord, Bro. Charlie B. There have been many, many books written about the theory. But, I would like to encourage you to continue your research, and see what you turn up as being the very earliest date where anyone ever expressed the belief in One God in "three persons". This dogmatically held doctrinal phrase is embraced by both Catcholics and Protestants, today. Not finding it explicitly stated in the Scriptures the way it is dogmatically held and put forth today, I turned my attention to history. And, this is what I turned this up ...
New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967 Edition, Vol. 13, p. 1021 The first use of the Latin word "trinitas" (trinity) with reference to God, is found in Tertullian's writings (about 213 A.D.). He was the first to use the term "persons" (plural) in a Trinitarian context.
Encyclopedia Americana, 1957 Edition, Vol. 27, p. 69 The word "Trinity" is not in Scripture. The term "persons" (plural) is not applied in Scriptures to the Trinity.
World Book Encyclopedia, 1975 Edition, Vol. T p. 363 Belief in Father, Son and Holy Ghost was first defined by the earliest general council of churches. This was the First Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D.
New International Encyclopedia, Vol. 22 p. 476 The Catholic faith is this: We worship one God in trinity, but there is one person of the Father, another of the Son and another of the Holy Ghost. The Glory equal - the Majesty co-eternal. The doctrine is not found in its fully developed form in the Scriptures. Modern theology does not seek to find it in the Old Testament. At the time of the Reformation the Protestant Church took over the doctrine of the Trinity without serious examination.
Life Magazine, October 30, 1950, Vol. 29 No. 18 p. 51 The Catholics made this statement concerning their doctrine of the Trinity, to defend the dogma of the assumption of Mary, in an article written by Graham Green: "Our opponents sometimes claim that no belief should be held dogmatically which is not explicitly stated in scripture...But the Protestant Churches have themselves accepted such dogmas as The Trinity, for which there is no such precise authority in the Gospels.
By the way, I don't know of any serious Bible scholars who insist that the doctrine of the trinity was a dogmatically held belief that was explicitly expressed and/or taught in the Old Testament in the same way it is explicitly expressed and taught today. Also, even though it was the "official beginning" of what turned out to be an evolutional process in defining the theory, the formulation of the phrase, "one God in three persons" was NOT established at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD ... nor at any time prior to it. Instead, "one God in three persons" evolved into a dogmatically held doctrinal phrase by the Roman Catholic Church in the years following the 1st Council of Nicaea in 325 AD. Furthermore, this dogmatically held doctrinal phrase was passed on to, and adopted by, the Protestant movement as a result of being introduced by Martin Luther, the ex-communicated monk who started the Protestant Movement .... the Protest ... the Reformation. At any rate, let me know what your research turns up. I will be interested to know. Thanks ... and God bless!
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Bro. Burch: Hi Brother Bobby! Thanks for getting back to me so soon. I got your reply concerning the Trinity. It seems I will have to go to Seminary after I make my first million. Learning foreign languages has always been a tough one for me. Once again, I will point out that the Trinity is not found verbatim in the Bible any more than the "rapture." Do you believe in the rapture? Are you pre-trib, mid-trib, post-trib in your belief? Does your church preach that a future Pope will become the "Anti-Christ? Whether the Trinity, persons, or rapture is in the Bible verbatim is not the issue for me. It's how the Bible is properly interpreted that matters most to me.
The Arian doctrine set out to destroy Christ's divinity. The Nicene Council set out to restore Christ's divinity theologically speaking. I believe that God is so much greater than our human minds can comprehend. Paul said in 1 Cor. 13: 9-10, "For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when perfection (Jesus) comes, the imperfect disappears." NIV This is what I long for; the day Christ returns and removes the theological differences from the church. The pastor that wrote the tract you sent went from co-equal to "junior partner" in the next sentence, as if the Nicene Creed were an Arian creed. I don't buy it, but I will continue to research the matter even though the best theologians have been debating this for centuries.
Who am I? Just a lowly, sold out believer. That's why I gravitate to William Evans because it is theological doctrine shared by the majority of mainstream Christianity. As I prosper financially, I will buy some of the best Bible commentaries I can find. Any recommendations? By the way, Luther was only one of the early reformers of his day. You also had Calvin, Tyndale, Knox, and others. I do know this; Jesus loves me and loves you!
God bless you and yours!
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Bobby: Praise the Lord, Bro. Charlie B! My main focus of Bible study is done mostly just using the King James Version of the Bible and the Strong's Exhaustive Concordance. However, I do use some on line Bible study tools found on this web site (as a matter of fact, this web site is the home page on my computer) ...
http://www.eliyah.com/lexicon.html
When you pull up a verse from a word search (in the top box on the web page ... the Strong's Concordance) you can click on the book, chapter, verse and it will go to that verse. Then, you can look to the left and there are several study tools available ... including some commentaries.
Here's an example using a word search for "repent" ...
Mar 6:12 And 2532 they went out 1831 , and preached 2784 that 2443 men should repent 3340 .
You can click on the book, chapter, verse and pull up this ...
Mar 6:12 And they went out, and preached that men should repent.
Then, you can click on the "L" and look at several different commentaries. When I do read from a commentary, I usually read Matthew Henry's commentary. However, having said that, I always, always, always interpret scripture with scripture. And, what I mean by that is, if I am studying "repent" I look at the Hebrew or Greek meaning of the word, where (and how) it is used in other places in the Bible ... and, then, compare ... what all the Bible has to say about "repent" and go with what the PREPONDERANCE of Scriptural evidence sets forth ... regardless of what a commentary may or may not say.
Brother, most all of my people and a whole lot of my dearest and closest friends still embrace the trinitarian theory. And, the last thing is this world I would ever want to do is to make any of them feel that I think I'm better than them because I espouse the Apostles' One God Monotheistic Doctrine, and no longer join them in espousing the trinitarian theory. **IF** I get an opportunity to share with any of them what God has revealed to me through His Word, I certainly do. But, I certainly don't try to cram anything down their throat. Furthermore, if a person wants to worship a stump and howl at the moon, I've learned how to be a friend to them, although I would not participate in that practice with them. I hope this makes some sense.
Well, I've got to scoot for now. Love ya, Brother! God bless!
Bobby's PS: In response to the pre-trib, post-trib or mid-trib subject, I honestly can't say that I have a clear understanding on that subject yet. But, there is one thing I don't do: I don't turn that subject into a Heaven or Hell issue OR a test for gauging one's spirituality. Also, I believe there are things in the Book of Revelation which are yet to be revealed. And, they will be revealed in God's own time. Furthermore, I believe those to whom it will be revealed will speak the same thing by the leading of the Holy Ghost and in harmony with the Word of God ... and won't have communicated among themselves about any of it, either.
Here's some dialogue I had a while back, which pretty much explains my feelings along this line ...
Dave: Hello Bobby, I read your discussion this morning with Jon and it was very insightful. Many times when I read the discussions things that I know pieces of or parts of become clarified and for that I very much appreciate your studies. In this humble mans opinion you are doing a good work and a mighty service. I believe that God would say," in this man I am well pleased"!
Bobby: Thank you for you kind words of encouragement and support. **IF** God calls me by way of the grave before that long awaited trumpet sounds, I would like for my grave's head stone to bear words something like this ...
Here lies a man who "truly" loved God ... AND people.
Dave: My question for you this morning is. I know you believe that we are in the end times, #1 Do you believe that the Anti-Christ has been born and is living among us today?
Bobby: I must confess that I do NOT have all the answers (I wish I did). I do believe we are living in the End Times. But, just how everything is going to unfold, I don't know. What I do try to do is keep things very simple. I AM ONLY ONE HEART BEAT AWAY FROM ETERNITY AT ANY GIVEN MOMENT. Now, that that is out of the way, **IF** the anti-Christ will include a man who will sit in a "re-built" Temple over yonder in the Middle East ... and the animal sacrifices "re-instituted" ... then, I would be inclined to believe the person who will do that is more than likely alive and well as I type this email ... but, of at what age and/or station in his life, at this time, I wouldn't venture to guess. This, I do know. The following Scripture speaks of the anti-Christ as being a spiritual matter which was already present in the Apostles' day ...
1 John 4:3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.
Dave (question ) #2 Though no word is mentioned in the Bible about the rapture, do you feel this will take place where God removes form the Earth those that believe?
Bobby: The terms I try to always remember to use is being "caught up" ... or "the catching away of the Bride of Christ", instead of "The Rapture". Not only because many take exception to using unscriptural terms ... just as I do about other unscriptural terms. At any rate, here's why I try to always remember to use the terms I use ....
1 Thessalonians 4:15-18 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. Wherefore comfort one another with these words.
Also, Revelation Chapters 6, 7 and 8 contain things that I do NOT have a good handle on. However, if you will notice IMMEDIATELY after the "sealing" of the 144,000 (12,000 from each of the 12 Tribes of Israel) ... beginning in Revelation 7:9 ... John saw the Bride of Christ in white robes and psalms in their hands before the Lamb AND the throne. And, the reason I say that has to the the Bride of Christ is because of the description given of that particular mulitude .... which no man could number. Now, will 144,000 "natural Jews" receive the Apostles' Doctrine and acknowledge Jesus as their Messiah, and then be guided through the exceedingly fierce wrath of God, and later be re-united when the Lord comes with 10,000s of His Saints to set up a 1,000 year Millenial Reign? Or will the Bride of Christ go through the wrath of God before it is caught up? Dave, I really don't know. I do know this, though. Whether, I (as a child of God) go through the fierceness of the wrath of God, He is NOT going to destroy obedient and faithful children in the process. Read Revelation Chapters 6, 7 and 8, and tell me what your thoughts are.
Dave (question) #3 If so do you see the beginning of the 7 years of tribulation as being immanent? I am not trying to put you on the spot I am just curious as to your opinion as I respect you frankness and intelligence. God Bless Dave C
Bobby: I believe it is essential to study and compare the Book of Daniel along with the Book of Revelation. And, it does appear to me that there will be a seven year period in which Israel will be lead by a man, whom they believe to be their Messiah. And, **IF** that is the case, there will definitely be a Temple "re-built" and the daily sacrifices re-instituted. However, about half way through this seven year period, it will be revealed that the one they believed to be their Messiah was actually the Abomination of Desolation. Now, that gets me to this part. I don't know if that's when the 144,000 Jews will be sealed and be guided through the fierceness of the wrath of God AND have all nations assembled together to destroy them and the Bride of Christ "caught up" out of all of this mess or not. I wish I did know. I just know that I am NOT a "natural" Jew ... but a "spiritual" Jew. And, I know those who have been born of water AND of the Spirit (the Bible way) ... AND who embrace the Apostles' One God Monotheistic Doctrine from all the various nations are those who make up the Bride of Christ. I'm sorry if that doesn't help you out much. But, I am under the gun for time, and have a very full day, today. There are those who spend massive amounts of time studying and/or debating whether or not the Bride of Christ will go through the tribulation, be caught up before the tribulation or caught up during the tribulation. I really and truly don't have a solid Scriptural answer for you. And, I'm just not much on getting into opinions about stuff like this. My advice to ANYONE is to keep the main thing the main thing, and don't be consumed about what may ... or may not ... happen somewhere down the road, later on. God bless!
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Bro. Burch: Good point about keeping the main thing the main thing. Some doctrinal interpretations can really be far out. (See attachment) I have also found that many ministries that consider the King James version to be the only "true" Bible authority have "way out" doctrines that sneak into the church because it is difficult to translate and interpret Shakespearean language into today's tongue. This attitude is a carry over from the Anglican church, as well as a blind hatred for Catholicism.
I have found that, whenever I had a question of interpretation of a King James verse, the answer I received from scholars and pastors pretty much line up with the New International Version. This version is now my main source of Scripture when I minister to average people, unless they too consider the KJV as authority like the JW's. I still use other translations, including the King James, in my studies. I just had some Bible software I ordered come in the mail today. It has 5 translations, cross referencing, Word studies, 3 dictionaries, commentaries, maps & charts, a daily devotional, and 100 hymns. Praise the Lord! I have my work cut out for me. Next, I will be looking for Bible software that explains each word of the original text along side an English translation. I used to have a nice leather bound Bible with the KJV next to the original text. I gave it as a gift, many years ago, to a good friend who wore her Bible out with voracious study.
Don't get me wrong, beloved brother, I find these debates help me grow in understanding of the Word and reveal my weaknesses. I asked if you believe in the rapture to make a point. I could offer a $10,000 reward to anyone who could find the word "rapture" in the Bible, knowing it's not there, and would never have to pay up. I could go on preaching it is a false doctrine because the word rapture is not there verbatim and probably gather a following, maybe start a new denomination. Isn't life strange?
Aside from our doctrinal differences, I love you as a brother in Christ. I have taken your points to heart and will continue to study them. Whether I agree or disagree should be secondary to loving each other as brothers in Christ. What matters is our feet standing on the Solid Rock and our walk being guided by the Holy Spirit's leading. I even have a close friend that believes we were created by extra-terrestrials. Far out, man! Who created them? I have a fundamentalist friend who believes it is impossible to have extra-terrestrial life on other planets and claims the Bible supports that. I say it is man's arrogance to believe such a thing. If humanity doesn't kill itself with war and makes it to the stars, who is to say it won't be like Star Trek? We shall see as God reveals things in His own time.
I have not found a single denomination yet that had everything right. Denominations are of men, not the Lord. Christians were meant by God to be of one mind, heart, and body which is Christ's. The Charismatic Movement revealed that to the Church. Denominations are the Devil's tool to separate us and make us ineffectual ministers of the Gospel.
Please keep praying for us. I just got a letter from my lawyer in Dallas. The Probate Court is about ready to release the money from my late cousin's estate. It seems as though there is just one more person they need to track down. I pray that person will be found or that they will release the money to everyone they have found. Please also feel free to share any prayer requests you and your family may have with us. Marlene and I pray for people daily. Let me know when you get some product in. I'll buy a bottle from you. Can this be sold on eBay? In Christ's love,
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Bobby: Praise the Lord, Bro. Charlie B! Brother, you will find that, while I no longer embrace the trinitarian theory, myself, I will NOT compromise the Apostles' One God Monotheistic Doctrine with anybody, anywhere, at any time, for any reason. However, I really do love those who still embrace the theory, and will not cross swords with them UNLESS they attempt to use Un-Scriptural terms to present it and/or establish it as being something other than what it really is ... a theory ... OR they hold the Apostles' One God Monotheistic Doctrine in contempt and/or speak disparagingly of it. In any of those cases, I will step up to the plate and defend the Apostles' One God Monotheistic Doctrine against all comers, and let the chips fall where they may. There is a major difference in examining the words "trinity" and "rapture". My $ 10,000.00 Reward is not just calling into question the word "trinity". That's only part of it. Instead, it deals directly with the three main pillars of the theory, itself ...
1) the word, "trinity", and its origin;
2) the trinitarian's baptismal formula; and
3) their expression, one God in three "persons" ...
none of which is part of the Apostles' One God Monotheistic Doctrine. But, all of which is regarded as "sound doctrine", and held very dogmatically by those who embrace the trinitarian theory. On the other hand, the "catching away" of the bride of Christ is NOT a theory. It is an established (sound) Bible doctrine, which can be documented with VERBATIM Scriptural evidence. Whereas, the same cannot be said for the trinitarian theory. Brother, please do NOT misunderstand me, I would say (and have said) these same things to my own flesh and blood relatives, whom I love so very dearly. However, I cannot and will not compromise what God has shown me through His Word ... and which I have scrutinized very extensively AND compared it to Catholicism, Protestantism, Mormonism and the Jehovah's Witnesses beliefs, and found it to stand up to all the scrutiny anyone wants to put it under. My main problem is finding people who come to the table without any preconceived ideas or bias. In my opinion, independent thinking, independent Bible students are few and far between. Not everyone can truly lay aside their traditions and indoctrination and go into the Word of God with an open heart and an open mind. Those who do, in my opinion, are immensely blessed by our GREAT and merciful God. Granted a whole lot of people "nibble around the edges", but cling to their traditions and indoctrination which may or may not harmonize with the Word of God. And, relatively few will actually take the approach those of us who truly hunger and thirst after righteousness take. At any rate, I will not trouble you about your theory of God. **IF** you are not troubled by the theory, we will not talk about it from this point forward. However, **IF** you want to talk about it, we will (I'll leave that entirely up to you). Otherwise, we know where each other stands. And, I will respect your right to believe anything you wish.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Bro. Burch: Hi Brother Bobby! Thanks for getting back to me so soon again. I never once thought I would dissuade you from your doctrinal beliefs. I am truly studying your points and you gave me enough to look into for the next decade, I think. I'm pointing out some things that have raised my "red flags" which make it harder for me to understand and work through with their inconsistencies.
Point one: The Bible tract going from co-equal to "junior partner" in the next sentence.
Point two: Finding the word Trinity verbatim as part of a reward which will never be paid out.
Point three: Making an about face in logic on the question of rapture being sound doctrine. The points you made for rapture are the points I'm making for the Trinity.
Point four: The anti-Catholic rhetoric contained in the tract. Catholicism is what it is. Luther tried to change it from within and never wanted a denomination named after him.
Point five: The King James Version was translated mainly from the Latin Vulgate.
The Dead Sea scrolls were unavailable at the time.
I am saying that for now I will keep an open mind, agree to disagree with you, and fully research your points. The points you raised that stuck with me are the ones promoting the Apostolic Monotheism doctrine rather than the points against the Trinity doctrine. I will be going through them and have them at my fingertips. What I'm lacking now is software with the original text explained. Praise God! The software I received yesterday can be updated with what I need. Please don't feel as if I'm attacking you personally. I do admire your depth of understanding the Word. Perhaps we should give it a rest while I research more.
I would like to know more about you and your family. Tell me about your scoot. Are you still riding with a ministry? I plan to get a full grown Honda again, Lord willing, maybe a Big Dog, too! I would like to build a new home on my property in xxxxxxxx. My house in xxxxxxx is way too small for the both of us and our grandkids. Please pray for xxxxxx, xxxxxxx daughter, to receive Christ and go to church. We have been working with her to get her children back. xxxxxx got them out of the system after xxxxxx lost them doing drugs. Meth use is an epidemic here in prairie land. She is clean and sober now, but having difficulty adjusting to meet responsibility. xxxxxxxxx is all she knows as a profession. We pray for her deliverance and have done about all we can do. The alternative for us is raising grandchildren into our 70's. The children's names are xxxxx (10) and xxxxxx (4).
God bless you and yours!
Bro. Burch's PS: By the way, I think everyone has preconceptions of belief, Scriptural or not. My Catholic friend, xxxxx, thinks that God is an angry taskmaster waiting to throw lightning bolts at us the moment we sin. I don't consider Mormon's and Jehovah's Witnesses on the same plane as mainstream Christianity. They are clearly cults. Catholicism and Seventh Day Adventism are considered Christian cults. I have grown up a Lutheran. I have my beliefs, which I feel the Holy Spirit has given insight to. That is why I differ from some orthodox Lutheran practices. I am, however, still a work in progress. I am an old man and a child in that respect. If this is the Holy Spirit dealing with me on a subject, I will prayerfully work through it. Church history is still a relatively new field of study for me. I've even had my arguments with God on things I didn't understand. No lightning bolts, but He did win the arguments! While a part of the Charismatic Movement, many "winds of doctrine" floated about because of some believers' holding on to the unscriptural. Other "winds of doctrine" were floating about because someone had a "Divine revelation." These things were all debated in the movement. The Holy Trinity debate came up when the "Jesus Only" doctrine floated about. It came and went while the Holy Trinity remained. Got to go!
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Bobby: My heart really goes out to to you, xxxxxx, xxxxxx, xxxxxx and xxxxx! I've stood toe to toe with a nearly grown grandson who came up here to live with us because the trouble he got into in Florida. He was on meth and weed. We used to have a very close relationship. But, unless God intervenes we may never be close again. I refused to let him do like he was used to doing in Florida. And, as result, he has threatened to kill me on more than one occasion ... once with a baseball bat. But, old paw paw stood his ground, and refused to allow satan, working through him, to intimidate me or back me down. While he was here, he spent a good bit of time in jail, juvenile lock up and in a couple treatment centers. He's a real player, and knows what to say and do so that counselors "think" he's making progress. At any rate, the last time he got out, he went back to Florida. My heart is still burdened over all of it. But, all I can do is pray that God will have mercy on him before he ends back up in a hospital, beat unconcious ... again ... (although, not by me) or worse, yet, in the grave yard. Having been out there in the real world, myself, I know unless he changes it is just a matter of time before his alligator mouth is going to over load his humingbird behind, and somebody is going to seriously hurt him or kill him ... and that really pulls at my heart strings because Chris (that's his name) was always such a well mannered, and good, kid. But, unless a person runs into that strong and mighty tower of the name of the Lord, and finds safety, those demons of alcohol and drugs will absolutely distroy a home, a marriage, a life or anything else. And, to my shame, I speak these words from my very own experience.
.... we head out for Georgia, Monday. And, I'm also trying to get a few loose ends tied up, just in case I meet with the two Jehovah Witness elders tomorrow evening. If we don't get together tomorrow, it will have to wait a couple of weeks. But, I need to address a couple things, and have it ready when we do meet again.
As I have already said, I will be happy to talk to you about the trinitarian theory as long as you want to talk about it. But, I will also leave it alone if you wish to do so. Whatever you want to do is alright with me. At any rate, now, I will try to address your red flag points ...
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Point one: The Bible tract going from co-equal to "junior partner" in the next sentence.
Bobby: I'm not sure which tract your're talking about ... if it's something I sent you or something I wrote, I honestly don't remember. But, just off the cuff, I would say the "junior partner" remark is pointing out the inconsistency and/or contradiction in the trinitarian theory of how it would be impossible for any one of the three co-existent, co-eternal and "co-equal" members to also be an inferior subordinate ... i.e., "junior partner". I think I may have mentioned early on what I believe is a legitimate question to pose to any trinitarina. And, that is, "How is it possible for one co-existent, co-eternal and co-equal person to be "begotten" by another co-existent, co-eternal, and co-equal person?" At any rate, give me some more information about the tract and I'll address this matter further if I am off base on what it meant about the "junior partner" reference.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Point two: Finding the word Trinity verbatim as part of a reward which will never be paid out.
Bobby: The focus on the word "trinity" and its origin is only one part of my $ 10,000.00 reward. There are two other parts to the reward .. only one of which is required to be met in order to claim the reward. But, the reason I even have the reward out there in the first place is NOT to be a smart elleck or to be cute. No siree, the reason is explained in the fourth paragraph of the web page which has the reward on it. And, is as follows ...
From the reward web page: http://www.impact-ministry.com/acts2/reward.html
Since 1986 I have been offering a $10,000.00 REWARD to any priest, clergyman, layman or "professing" Christian in an effort to provoke serious, but "independent" Bible study and research. I am convinced that the majority of "professing" Christians have been so indoctrinated that they've accepted a doctrine that has absolutely no "specific" Bible authority, but is the works of man and is as phony as a "three dollar bill."
Granted, there have been many over the past 20 years to take exception to my reward. But, of the many, many people I've had dialogue with, as a result, not a single, solitary one of them has ever been able to Scripturally refute the Apostles' One God Monotheistic Doctrine ... NOR Scripturally support the three main pillars of their indoctrinated theory which is directly challenged by the reward. Now, let me quickly add, I've been called everything but a dirt farming hick kid from Mississippi for doing what God called me out of the honky tonks to do. And, let me also quickly point out, doing what I do sho 'nuf ain't for the faint of heart, either, I can assure you of that. However, **IF** doing God's bidding was a cotton candy job, all of the Old Testament prophets would have had it made, Jesus wouldn't have been crucified and the Apostles would have all lived a life of ease, and retired in style.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Point three: Making an about face in logic on the question of rapture being sound doctrine. The points you made for rapture are the points I'm making for the Trinity.
Bobby: I am not making an about face on the sound doctrine of "rapture". I no longer use the word "rapture" when referring to the future of God's people ... UNLESS it is in a discussion with someone who brings it up and/or is used for illustrative purposes to document the Scirptural terms regarding the departure of the Bride of Christ ... while at the same time pointing out that there is a Scriptural void which prohibits trinitarians from being able to do the same for the words "trinity" and "persons" (in reference to God). Basically, what I try to do is to create a thought provoking environment. Because I am convinced most people are just like I am. And, **IF** they ever do start studying the Bible with an open heart and an open mind ... and put aside all of their bias, pre-conceived ideas, opinions, traditions and indoctrination ... God will start opening up their understanding of the Scirptures, just like He has done for me. Brother, contrary to what I've been accused of, my religious beliefs are NOT the result of having been indoctrinated. At one time in my life, I would have never in a million years ever imagined I would believe as I do today. And, I for sure would have never thought I'd be one of them "holy rollers". To make a long story short, I will tell you how I came to embrace the Apostles' One God Monotheistic Doctrine. I'll just copy and paste part of my testimony ...
Mile marker seven wasn't my first meeting with the Lord. You see, I was a back slider. Since coming back to God, I do NOT take my eyes off of Him and place them on man anymore. I have been humbled. There was a time when I was so spiritually arrogant that I acted as if God had to clear things with me before He made a decision. I grew up in a mainline Protestant church, where I accepted Christ as my personal savior, was baptized and became a member. For a while I felt pretty good, but then I begin to get this nagging feeling that there had to more to it than that. I did not know how or what or anything, just a feeling.
Some years later I met this Pentecostal girl who witnessed to me and gave me some tracts. One in particular stirred my heart. It had a hand with a finger pointing straight at you and said, "Your Important Appointment" on the cover. When you opened it up, on the inside it read, "With Death." I took these tracts home with me and set down at the kitchen table with my mother and showed them to her (she is VERY dedicated to her religion ... ). She saw to it that we were in church every time the doors swung open. Anyway, she suggested that I leave that stuff alone, and I did.
Later, this little Pentecostal gal backslid. I did not understand anything about that, and as a matter of fact, I did not care at that time. Then still later on, we started dating and finally we got married. Shortly after we married she decided she wanted to go to church. I said, "O.K., we will go to my church," and she said, "No, I want to go to a Pentecostal church." I told her that she could if she wanted to, but I wasn't about to go to one of those "holy roller" churches. (My wife is so wise, and I love her so much!) She just said, "Bobby, if you can prove to me from the Bible that what my church teaches is wrong, then I will go to whatever church you want to go to." Boy, that was like saying sick'em to a dog. I figured that, that would be a piece of cake, after all everybody knew them holy rollers were just a bunch of ignorant and unlearned, pew jumping crazy people.
Little did I know that God was about to "open my understanding" as to who He REALLY is. I will never forget it. I bought myself a Thompson Chain Reference Bible (which I still use, most of the time, to this day). At that time I worked for the railroad and I carried it to work with me every night. During the slow times when I did not have any trains or paper work to contend with, I would read, read, read. I started in the book of Matthew and just started reading, like you would do with a good novel. Boy, it was some slow plowing for a long time. Then one night, after I had made it all the way over to 1 Timothy 3:16, God removed the scales! It came to me as clear as day! The "oneness" of the Godhead became crystal clear to me. The Bible came alive to me! My understanding of God's Word was DRAMATICALLY improved. I could not believe that I had not seen this beautiful truth before.
My brother has a 3-D picture on the wall in his den. It looks like modern art with lots of colors. When I asked him about it, he said it had a hidden message (picture) inside. He then explained how, if I looked "deep into it" I could see the scene of the crucifixion. That was an incredible object lesson for me! Using this anology, is how I now explain the way this "ONENESS" Truth was revealed to me. I saw something in the Bible that I did not see at first, even though it had been staring me in the face all along.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Point four: The anti-Catholic rhetoric contained in the tract. Catholicism is what it is. Luther tried to change it from within and never wanted a denomination named after him.
Bobby: Personally, I am NOT anti-Catholic "people". However, I do NOT embrace the basic and fundamental (core) doctrine (the trinitarian theory) which was introduced and established by the "universal" (Catholic) church. Here's a copy and paste from another one of my web pages ...
50 Reasons why the Bible doesn't mention TRINITY or refer to God as PERSONS.
http://www.impact-ministry.com/acts2/trinity.html
POINT # 49. Bobby: Revelation Chapter 17 describes a great city which is referred to as a whore who sits on seven mountains and who is arrayed in purple and scarlet and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having in her hand a golden cup full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication. She is rich, powerful and very influential in the world of commerce and politics. She has some daughters, and is called the "MOTHER" of harlots. This city of seven mountains had been made drunk with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus Christ. The enrollment system was quite simple ... either a person aligned themselves with the "universal" state run church and its doctrine or they were targeted for execution. If it has been a while since you've read Revelation Chapter 17, you should read it again real soon! Where is the City of Seven Hills? What doctrine originated from the City of seven hills? What was done to those who would not accept her doctrine and/or compromise? Simple, they were targeted for execution! That's how serious this stuff is. Either most people are unaware of this, or they think it was just a blight in our history or some ancient myth, and nothing to be concerned about today. You've probably heard about the catacombs underneath Rome where Christians would hide to hold their worship services in secret because of severe persecution. Remember ... the Apostle Paul was executed at Rome for the One God Monotheistic Doctrine he preached by revelation from God after his conversion ... the message that infuriated some of the Jews, while others recognized Jesus as their Messiah and converted to it just like Paul did ... and as is true to this very day.
Also, let me say here, that this is NOT an attack on people who are Catholic nor am I anti-Semetic. There are many God-fearing Catholics and Jews. As a matter of fact, both of my sisters are Catholic. I do not feel that my life is in danger by either one of them. And I would no more attack them than I would attack people whose ancestors were cruel slave owners. Being from Mississippi, I know how biased and prejudiced people can be on BOTH sides of that issue! We can't be held responsible for that which we had absolutely no control over and were never a part of. Likewise, good and decent Catholic people shouldn't be held responsible for the actions of the Catholic Church's past ... nor should Jews be mistreated because of the crucifixion.
However, it is the doctrine of the Catholic Church which I want to address here. Revelation Chapter 17 is very significant concerning the church of Rome and the "mother of harlots".
History records that a Roman Emperor named Constantine was very instrumental in setting up the First General Council of Churches in 325 A.D., known as the Council of Nicaea. The Church of Rome became the Official Church of the Roman empire with Constantine as its head. This "universal" church with its man made doctrine was established so that EVERY subject of the Empire would belong to the Official Church of the Rome. The THREE PERSON DOCTRINE which later evolved and was very clearly defined as such, was purely an orchestrated effort by Constantine designed to appease both the MONOTHEISTS (One God Christians) and the POLYTHEISTS (Multiple god pagans). From a strictly political standpoint, I guess you might say it was a brilliant move. Constantine stopped the persecution of Christians for a while so I don't guess he was all bad. However, the Roman Emporers were responsible for killing and torturing people (Christians) much like that of Hitler's Nazi death camps. The True Church was literally driven underground. As a matter of fact, the May 1976 revised edition of Halley's's Bible Handbook reports on pages 761-763 "...the church was regarded as a secret society..."; "...Christians were hunted in cave and forest; they were burned, thrown to wild beasts, put to death by every torture cruelty could devise." "Christian graves are variously estimated at between 2,000,000 and 7,000,000." Papal Persecutions against Protestants in later centuries far out numbered the Early Christian Martyrs under Pagan Rome.
Anyone who thinks I am making this stuff up may be interested in the following:
.
What are the seven hills of Rome?
Rome is known to be built upon seven hills. Rome was said to have been founded when Romulus and Remus, twin sons of Mars, ended up at the foot of the hill Palatine and founded the city. The other six hills are Capitoline (the seat of government), Quirinal, Viminal, Esquiline, Caelian, and Aventine.
______________________________________
.
Pope Asks Pardon For Sins Of Church
By Sarah Delaney
Special to The Washington Post
Monday, March 13, 2000; Page A01
VATICAN CITY, March 12 -- In an unprecedented plea, Pope John Paul II today asked divine forgiveness for the sins committed by the Roman Catholic Church over the last 2,000 years against Jews, other Christian faiths, women, the poor and various ethnic and racial groups. - (I'll send you the rest of the lengthy article if you are interested).
_______________________________________
It is my position that this unprecedented move by the pope took place in order to set the stage for the coming together of Catholics and Protestants. Which, I believe, is going to take place as we move towards a one world government, economy, and "universal" religious system (which, by the way, will NOT be accepted by everyone). I am NOT saying that an end to the blood shed between Catholics and Protestants in places like Ireland would be a bad thing, but I am saying the "signs of the times" are all around us. And those who believe the Bible, and in the Second Coming of Jesus Christ, had better wake up and set their house in order.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Point five: The King James Version was translated mainly from the Latin Vulgate. The Dead Sea scrolls were unavailable at the time.
Bobby: It is my understanding that the Dead Sea scrolls did an outstanding job in validating the accuracy of the King James Version, as the Book of Isaiah comparison is almost VERBATIM. I am aware that there is a movement under way today to undermine and/or discredit the King James Version of the Bible. And, over the course of the past 20 years or so, I have dealt with that, too. Personally, I haven't found the King James Version to be hard to understand. And, I'm a dirt farming hick kid from Mississippi, who graduated high school in 1970 by the skin of his teeth. Those who believe the King James Version was just thrown together or is a poor translation, in my opinion, have some sort of ulterior motive ... or, at least, the ones I've dealt with extensively have been that way. **IF** a person wants to use the Old Farmer's Almanaac for their moral compass, that is certainly their right, privilege AND business. However, I plan to stay with the King James Version of the Bible, myself.
Bobby's follow up: Brother Charlie B., I am in the Atlanta area (Lithia Springs) right now, and on my lap top. I don't have a bunch of time to devote to my Internet work. As a matter of fact, I have someone else who is getting geared up for a major Trinitarian vs Oneness debate. And, I've just emailed him to go ahead and send his opening statement and first round, but to understand that I will not be able to get right back to him right now ... that there will be a delay, possibly until I get back home. So, with that being said, I hope you understand my situation, and realize that I am not just ignoring you. If you would like to be added to me email list of observers, I can send you copies of our dialogue. From the posturing that has gone on up to now, it should be a good 'un. But, if you are not interested in that, I will try to address your email, here, when I get back home. I'm just trying to keep from getting too far behind on my Internet work (I had to wade through almost 300 emails just from the time I signed off the night before we left until we get settled in our room last evening. Sooo, I'm not trying to offer an excuse. Just trying to be as straight forward and honest as I can. God bless!
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Bro. Burch: Hi Brother Bobby! Don't bother responding to my email regarding the Holy Trinity. For me the debate is over. Since the truth that the book, "Misquoting Jesus" by Bart D. Ehrman, revealed has strengthened my "literalist" point of view, continuation of the discourse between us would be pointless and absurd. I will agree to disagree with you and still love you as a fellow Christian brother. We will have all things revealed to us when our Lord returns, OK?
I am looking for answers regarding the business questions I have on the EcoEnergizer websites. I am moving on to focus on my immediate need of paying bills. My probate money has not come yet, though it looks like it may be soon, it's not soon enough. If I go back to trucking tommorrow, I will still be late paying my obligations. If I do go back to trucking, my health will continue to deteriorate. Without a laptop, I will only be able to focus on working the internet a couple days a month. I may become just another trucking statistic: dead at 53 years old from a heart attack. God bless you and yours.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Bro. Burch Wednesday, August 23, 2006 : Hi Brother Bobby! Had a great weekend and even got some good research in. Yes, I would be glad to pray for your grandson, if you would share his name for my prayer list. Over the weekend, I read the book, "xxxxxxxx" by xxxxxxx. Very revealing and I recommend it wholeheartedly. You would probably be able to find it in a major bookstore like Walton's, B. Dalton's, or order it on Amazon.com. xxxx is a "born again" believer who Is about our age, went to Bible college, and wrote this magnificent book. This book confirms why I am a "literalist" by saying the Bible "contains" the Word of God. The original manuscripts no longer exist. The early copies were written by scribes of little or no education in literacy. Of the 5,700 plus known copies of the Greek manuscripts, there are well over 100,000 variations in the text. The originals were also translated into Latin, which were also distributed over the western Roman empire in it's day, before the Catholic Church began. Jerome gathered all the manuscripts (Latin, Greek, Aramaic, Hebrew, Syriac, etc.) he could find to incorporate into the Latin Vulgate which was then the authoritative Bible in the western church for over a thousand years. The Latin copies were more accurate among themselves than the Greek texts. Note in your King James Bible 1 John 5: 7-8, the passage was found in the majority of Latin copies and a few Greek copies. My NIV has changed this passage because it is not in the majority of known Greek texts, but footnotes the KJV translation.
The Canon came about, in part, as a result of Marcion's heresy. Marcion proclaimed that the God of Jesus (and Paul) was not the God of the Old Testament. In a discussion I had with a Jewish brother 3 years ago, he said that proclaiming Jesus as God was blasphemy because Jesus was a human being. I doubt if Paul would have preached your monotheistic doctrine without being stoned to death at every Jewish synagogue in the Roman world. I am not about to try and dissuade you, but I am coming to the conclusion that your declarations cannot be supported historically or by using Biblical Greek terminology. Which Greek copy of text is true to the original written work?
So far, my friend, I remain convinced that the Holy Trinity is as sound a doctrine as the "rapture." If you could refer me to an original, authoritative Greek manuscript explaining the Apostolic Monotheistic theory, I might be convinced; but there are none. If you could refer me to an authoritative historical document of any kind that would prove you right, I would welcome it. What I'm saying is, "Prove it." Most of what I have received is indoctrination conspiracies, anti-Catholic rhetoric, and spurious Greek words that may have been mistaken or added by scribes. I will show you by going back over my points from our last e-mail.
Point 1) The tract I was referring to was the one you had referred me to from one of your websites. I'm sorry I didn't have time to bring it up on screen. It was written by a pastor back in the 50's and reprinted by your church. It presented the Holy Trinity as an indoctrination conspiracy founded in Catholicism. Is that not anti-Catholic rhetoric? By the way, Jesus had to be born of a virgin to fulfill prophecy and the Jewish Law of Redemption and, therefore, was the only "begotten" Son of God. The Father did not impregnate but one individual throughout the history of mankind, Mary, mother of our Lord. He created mankind but "fathered" only one child. How could Jesus "father" himself? And more importantly, how could Jesus raise himself from the dead? He died on the cross and dead is dead is it not?
Point 2) I read the entire reward and it still could never be paid out under it own terms, even if the Apostle Paul were alive and responding to it.
Point 3) Yes, you are making the same argument for the rapture as I am for the Trinity. There is no difference because I, as I said before, could start a following or new denomination by refuting the rapture as a Christians' hope of avoiding suffering and offering a different interpretation. My thoughts on the rapture include martyrdom, in it's context, as God's way of sorting the sheep from the goats, not just suddenly being "taken away." I sense that you may believe what your church is teaching out of love for your better half than anything else and that's OK. This is not a heaven or hell kind of issue.
Point 4) You have a Thompson Chain Bible? Good! In the back, possibly page 1685, as it is in mine, there is an analysis of the Book of Revelations. It says the author most likely wrote it around 96 A.D. The Scripture you quoted to me speaks of the old Roman empire and pagan Rome itself. Having proclaimed himself to be God, Nero was considered anti-Christ. The Catholic Church had yet to appear. This is what I'm talking about when I say anti-Catholic rhetoric. I've heard this so many times interpreted this way and it is flat out of context historically. Guess what? You won't find the Pope verbatim in the Bible either. Yes, the Catholic Church is what it is, had it's good days and bad, but the Vatican has the most accurate books of it's own history and theological debates going back to ancient times. I find no historical evidence of a conspiracy to indoctrinate against apostolic teachings, save the Gnostic gospels. I also do not believe a future Pope will be the anti-Christ.
What I do see is that theological debates will go one until Christ's return. One, because the original manuscripts are forever lost and two, because of mankind's feeble mental abilities and pridefulness. As Paul said in 2 Timothy 2: 23, "Don't have anything to do with foolish and stupid arguments, because you know they produce quarrels." Therefore, I'm glad we had this debate. I have grown in knowledge by it. I thank you for being the "iron that sharpens iron." I consider the case closed and will continue to view William Evans work as definitive regarding the Great Doctrines of the Bible.
God bless you and yours!
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Bobby Friday, August 25, 2006 : I will respect your decision to continue to adher to the trinitarina theory, and will not attempt to discuss the Apostles' One God Monotheistic Doctrine with you any further. And, of course, I will continue to love you as a brother, as well. Well, I'll close for now. God bless!
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Bro. Burch: Saturday, March 10, 2007 Hey Bobby! Sorry I haven't e-mailed you in awhile. Aside from having personal struggles financially, xxxxxx's computer is still not working right. I'm driving truck for xxxxxx out of xxxxx. I don't get home much but they pay good. I'm moving back to my house in xxxxx next month. Though I moved here to help out, I feel it's not right since we are not married yet. Appearance of evil ya know. Maybe that's why God has been holding back the blessing for me. I'm still a Trinitarian, by the way. God bless ya'll! Your in my prayers, brother.
Why file a report here? Ripoff Report is a permanent record! Other complaint sites copy our content then remove reports for money.
