The "Idea of Love"

In the wake of the Bruce Jenner controversy, I saw many professing "Christians" comment to other "Christians" who disagree––with Bruce Jenner, how the media and society has portrayed it, and what the Bible has to say about it––with the (now) old catchphrases, "God loves and accepts everyone", and, "This is why Christians are considered intolerant now, because they hold to narrow-minded principles in an out-dated book", and, "Jesus taught love not division". When these things are written by unbelievers, that's to be expected. Apostle John writes, "the world does not know us, because it did not know Him" (1Jn. 3:1b, NKJV). But to see comments like these from professing "Christians" always lead me to question, at worst, are they truly born-again, or at best, are they that benighted. There is simply no way a biblically-grounded born-again disciple of Jesus can utter statements like these from their heart. But the problem goes much deeper.

Far too many people (professing "Christians" and non-Christians alike) are reinterpreting God's "love" to include tolerance and acceptance for everyone and everything. Thus they strip "love" from the biblical God and plain reality, and make "love" an illogical, subjective, humanistic, fanciful "idea" which imposes unrealistic expectations that benefits whomever determines the definition and context of the "idea of love" at that time. It is commonplace now to hold this "idea of love" worldview and interpretation. And by commonplace I mean there has been a normalizing of desensitization toward this hazardous view and interpretation. This commonplace has also crept into the church pews and pulpits, small groups, bible studies, and Christian colleges, bookstores, and blogosphere. In North America and Europe this commonplace now sits proudly in the front row and publicly speaks as if it's a member of the Church. It is a ravenous wolf dressed in sheepskin.

The "idea of love" has no fundamental point. It's a formless "idea" able to be configured to the liken of whomever. In contrast, the fundamental point of knowing and understanding God's love is His unchanging Scripture properly interpreted (because we all know Scripture can be interpreted to say and affirm anything). In Scripture we see God's love is unconditional and has been demonstrated on all mankind in the life, death, and resurrection of His Son, Jesus. But we also see in Scripture God's love is holy and not tolerant and accepting of everyone or everything. Here are 3 examples:
1. God hates sin.

"There are six things the Lord hates—–no, seven things He detests: haughty eyes, a lying tongue, hands that kill the innocent, a heart that plots evil, feet that race to do wrong, a false witness who pours out lies, a person who sows discord [among brethren]." (Prov. 6:16-19, NLT)
"You must not worship the Lord your God the way the other nations worship their gods, for they perform for their gods every detestable act that the Lord hates. They even burn their sons and daughters as sacrifices to their gods." (Deut. 12:31, NLT)

2. God hates the wicked.

"God is a just judge, and God is angry with the wicked every day." (Ps. 7:11, NKJV)
"The Lord tests the righteous, but His soul hates the wicked and the one who loves violence." (Ps. 11:5, ESV)

3. God's special love is only bestowed on His children––which means there is partiality with God's love.

"See what great love the Father has lavished on us, that we should be called children of God!" (1Jn. 3:1a, NIV)

Also in Scripture, we, the people of God, are told that if we "love" and revere God we are to "hate" evil. This is clearly not teaching tolerance and acceptance of everyone or everything.

"You who love the Lord, hate evil!" (Ps. 97:10, NKJV).
"The fear of the Lord is hatred of evil." (Prov. 8:13, ESV).

We see God's love (and teaching) in Scripture stands in direct opposition to this reinterpretation of His "love". It's one or the other, God's love as revealed in Scripture or God's "love" as reinterpreted in the "idea of love".

In addition, the reality of "authentic love" between humans must too display partiality at times; it cannot logically and realistically be tolerant and accepting of everyone and everything. An example of this is a man whom genuinely loves his wife and children will not choose the life of another over his wife and children. Even more, a man whom genuinely loves his wife and children will defend their life, if need be, to the point of death of himself or another. Or, a parent whom genuinely loves their children will not be tolerant and accepting of someone molesting or abusing their children. When people with "authentic love" for another have a choice to make, more times than not, they logically and instinctively will choose the one whom they love more over the one whom they least love. This indicates the reality of "authentic love" as not being absolutely tolerant and accepting of everyone and everything.

Those who hold to the "idea of love" are living an illusion. That "love" that supposedly is tolerant and accepting of everyone and everything is a fantasy. It's not real. It can never be real. Those who demand the biblical God and others to hold to this "idea of love" are delusional and self-refuting, because (i)their belief is "firmly maintained despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality or rational argument"*, and (ii)they themselves are not being tolerant or accepting of the biblical God or others who disagree with their "idea of love".

In no way am I saying that as Christians we are not to "love" others. Loving others is a direct command from Jesus (Matt. 22:36-40). We obey our Lord, no matter what. However, loving others in a subjective, humanistic fashion is not the "love" Scripture teaches. The "love" Scripture teaches is patient, kind, gentle, humble, unselfish, hopeful, and many other favorable virtues (1Cor. 13:3-8). Yet, the "love" Scripture teaches also does not rejoice in/with sin but rejoices in the truth, does not behave rudely, does not love this world nor the things of this world, hates evil, and much more (1Cor. 13:3-8, 1Jn. 2:15). Scripture teaches believers a balanced, holy love (like that of their Savior & God), not a subjective, humanistic "idea" (like that of the world). So yes, we as believers are to love others, but in accordance with all of Scripture not only the virtues some deem favorable because they're more likable to others, but also the virtues that may/will pit us against the world as well.

When I started writing this it was suppose to be a tweet. After I realized it was more than 140 characters, I said it'll be a Facebook post. But, once I saw I had multiple paragraphs I decided to post it as a blog article. This has nothing to do with Bruce Jenner. It was the comments from professing "Christians" in defense of Mr. Jenner that were the tipping point and ushered me to write. This is about the poisonous and deadly deception of viewing and interpreting God's holy love as revealed in His holy Word through the lenses of this illogical, subjective, humanistic, fanciful "idea of love". This is about how this "idea of love" is not even in touch with reality and an innumerable amount of people across generations and countries are dismally lost in it's illusion. If you are a professing "Christian" and you continue in this deception you may prove yourself not truly one of His regenerate children (e.g. 2Thess. 2:10-12), and if you die in that state of deception you will find out firsthand how God's holy love is not what you thought when you experience the hell for those He hates (Prov. 16:4-5, 1Thess. 1:6-9). Please hear my heart, my previous sentence is not from a harsh place (though I'm sure it may have been received as such). As Apostle Paul writes in 2Thess. 3:15, "do not count [them] as an enemy, but warn [them] as [brethren]" (NKJV). I am simply pointing out another biblical reality that opposes this "idea of love": "Those who refuse to embrace the Word of Truth have not been saved by the truth and are furthering their own deception."**

My hope and prayer is if any of this is true in your life you come to repentance and escape the snare of the enemy. You cannot hold to two opposing beliefs, for in your heart you will uphold one and reject the other (e.g. Matt. 6:24).


____________________
*1. Dictionary. Version 2.2.1. Apple Inc
**2. Quote from sermon, "Trick, Cheat, Deceit, or the Word pt. 6"

June 5, 2015

Colossians 1:15 in Context

"He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation."
(Col. 1:15, NASB)

Many read Colossians 1:15 and get hung up on the term "firstborn". What does that mean? How is "He" the firstborn?

Jehovah Witnesses believe and teach that Jesus is the “first creation” before all creation through which all other things were created.(1) Mormons believe and teach that Jesus was created in the image of God like we are and is the “firstborn child” of God (the Divine Father) and Mary (a mortal human).(2) And know that there are others who butcher this as well. This is what led me to post this today. May we come to properly understand the enormity and beauty of the truth in this verse. 

As biblical believers, we should understand the use of the term "firstborn" in its original language and in its proper context. The Greek term for "firstborn" used here in Colossians 1:15 is prototokos. I'll start with what it does not mean.

"does not mean"
First, in context, it does not mean "first-birth". We know that the "first-birth"—the first  human to be born from the womb of a woman—would be Cain (Gen. 4:1). There is no biblical evidence of Jesus being "born" at any time before Cain.

Second, we know it does not mean "first-created". Theologically we know this isn't the case because Scripture is clear that Jesus, God the Son, is eternal, He has no beginning, and He is the "is, was, and is to come" (Jn. 1:1-2; 17:5, Rev. 1:8, 17; 22:13). Furthermore, since Scripture teaches that Jesus is in essence/nature God, then He could not have been created, for God is self-existing (Ex. 3:14, Isa. 40:28; 43:10-13). Philippians 2:6 explains that Jesus has always existed in the nature of God and equal with God. Even in the beginning phrase of Colossians 1:15 it says He is the image of the invisible God. The word "image" here in Greek is eikṓn, and in context it is conveying the exact reflection of the source, as in a mirror reflecting the exact image of the real person standing in front of it.(3). Thus, because the source here is the invisible God, Jesus is then the invisible God reflecting His own image visibly (cf. 2Cor. 4:4). And 1Timothy 1:17 additionally explains that God is eternal and immortal. Concluding that Jesus cannot be the "firstborn" (prototokos) as in the "first-created".

"does... mean"
So now knowing what it does not mean, what does this prototokos in context mean? If we look at this term in context with the four verse passage (vv. 15-18) and in context with the whole scope of Scripture we'll see that this term is conveying "firstborn" as first in placement or position.(4). Edwin Lutzer says, "It's not a matter of time but status that determines who the firstborn is."(5). Additionally, Israel is called God's firstborn (Exod. 4:22) and David is referred to as the firstborn (Ps. 89:27). Both are in context with "first in placement or position". This four verse passage is about Jesus being over all, creating all, holding it all together, and all things being for Him. Paul culminates his point in the last part of verse 18, Jesus Christ is the "firstborn" that He may in all things have the preeminence, the first place. Thus, we can very well read Colossians 1:15 as... 

"He is the image of the invisible God, the preeminent (prototokos) of all creation".

As biblical believers, when confronted with this verse by Jehovah's Witnesses or Mormons or some other dissenter, we should take them on the journey of proper interpretation. We should ask them questions and show them what this verse is not saying first, then go on to show them what it is saying in context. If they still refuse it, leave them to the Holy Spirit and keep them in prayer. Hopefully a seed was planted and they begin to question their faulty beliefs. It is not us who will open their eyes, but the illuminating work of the Holy Spirit that will.

___
References:
1. www.religionfacts.com/jehovahs-witnesses/beliefs
2. www.mormon.org/beliefs/godhead || www.lds.org/scriptures/nt/col/1.15?lang=eng || www.lds.org/manual/jesus-christ-and-the-everlasting-gospel-teacher-manual/lesson-7-jesus-christ-gods-only-begotten-son-in-the-flesh?lang=eng
3. http://concordances.org/greek/1504.htm
4. http://concordances.org/greek/4416.htm
5. Lutzer, Edwin. (1998). The Doctrines that Divide. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications. p. 32.

6/19/2013

Do Mormons & Christians Believe in the same God?

A fellow brother in the Faith, added me to a Facebook conversation about Mormonism and Christianity. His heart was to win back another fella we all mutually know who has drifted back again into the Mormon belief. In the process of him trying to do so, the fellow Mormons invited another Mormon. So my fellow brother invited some friends too. I happened to be one of those friends. I told myself I wasn't going to say anything. I resisted the early urges to read the thread between them. But this morning, the Spirit drew me to respond. The Mormon men were arguing that Mormons are nothing more than another denomination in Christianity...we all believe the same essentials just differ in the non-essentials. My response was an attempt to simply draw a line in the sand and show how we are not on the same team just with simple differences.

Here are my responses:
__________
"I'm not sure what all the going back [and forth] is for. Mormons and Christians believe in two different Gods.
1. Mormons deny the Tri-union of God––God the Father, God the Son (Jesus), God the Holy Spirit, all 1 God yet distinct in their divine personhood, and yet co-equal in nature and characteristics, and co-eternal. | 1. Biblical Christianity fundamentally holds to the essential truth of the Tri-union of God [see http://bit.ly/11WrVSB for more info on the Holy Trinity]. This is not a non-essential, it is [an] essential to salvation.
2. Mormons are polytheistic, they believe in multiple "Gods" not simply multiple little "gods". (Which those verses and terms mentioning men as "gods" [in the Bible] are taken way out of its original and historical context; but that doesn't change the fact the Mormon theology inherently believes and teaches polytheism). | 2. Biblical Christianity is monotheistic. The Bible only supports and teaches monotheism. There is only One God, only One (Deut. 6:4, Isa. 43:10; 44:6, 8; 45:5, 22, Rom. 3:30, Gal. 3:20, Revelation). This too is not a non-essential, for it too is [an] essential to salvation.

Just from these two, and not mentioning the numerous other things we fundamentally disagree on, we believe in two different Gods. We cannot be the same. It is logically incompatible. That's the same as saying nothing created something, an effect without a cause. It's fallacious.

This then leads to the greater concern, one of us is right and one of us is wrong. Two opposing beliefs vying as the same truth cannot both be true. That too is a fallacy. Only one of us truly is right.

There is nothing more to say. There is no reason to continue on with the inbox dialogue unless there is going to be a sincere, open, friendly, and reasonable meeting discussing which belief is right. Otherwise, we are simply wasting words and we all shall see once we die and stand before the True God which belief is right. I bet my eternity on the biblical God, YAHWEH, the Eternal Spirit, Jesus, the Incarnate. Are the rest of you willing to bet your eternity on your Mormon beliefs? (That is meant to be rhetorical). If you are, then we all shall see on that Great Day!

Please know that I write this from a place of love and not hate."
__________
There was a response telling me that based on the Mormon articles of faith (http://mormon.org/articles-of-faith), they believe the same thing..."The article of faith is in plain black and white. We believe in God the eternal Father, and His Son Jesus Christ and in the Holy Ghost."

Here is my follow-up response:
"Wow. Mormons have changed their statement of faith and core beliefs. I'm not sure if you know this [name deleted], but Mormonism was not founded on those statements on that link you shared. Why have they changed from what was once taught as Mormon truth to something different now? Truth doesn't change.

Secondly, showing two of our essential differences is just that, showing why we're not the same. And fellowship with the Body can only be with those in the Body. If we're not in the same Body, then we can't have biblical fellowship. We can hang out! But it won't be called fellowship. However, I can understand why it's hard for you to see that because that link states and reads like any other church would. But, that statement of faith still did not affirm belief in the Tri-union of God. Here is the Mormon's belief on the Trinity...."Godhead":

"Unlike Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant Christianity, Mormonism does not include belief in a Trinity, in which the one God consists of three persons. Instead, Mormons believe that the "Godhead" is made up of three distinct beings who are "one in purpose" but not in being." (Religionfacts.com/mormonism/beliefs/godhead_not_trinity.htm; dated 2005)

And this, "Among the most important differences with other Christian churches are those concerning the nature of God and Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit." (Mormonnewsroom.org/topic/core-beliefs)

And this, "Mormons believe He [God the Father] has a human-like body but is immortal and perfected. " (Mormonnewsroom.org/article/the-godhead)

And here's one of the Mormons belief on Jesus: "Mormons do not agree with mainstream Christians that Jesus is the eternal Word of God or God himself. In Mormon belief, Jesus was a created spirit and "son of God" before being given a physical body, just like all humans."
(Religionfacts.com/mormonism/beliefs/jesus_christ.htm; dated 2005)

We are believing in two very different things bro. And that's why I said one of us is right and one of us is wrong. We can't both be right."
__________

I shared this to help anyone who has asked or thought about this question, "Do Mormons and Christians believe in the same God?" The answer is no, we do not; (and the same can be said for Jehovah's Witnesses, see http://bit.ly/10NtKQO for more on this). Mormons are not Christians. Christians are not Mormons. We both believe in completely different Gods. And there is so many, many more differences between Mormonism and Christianity than the two that I shared. But these two are adequate enough to show how we don't believe in the same God and we both cannot be right/true.

Be sure to know what you believe and why you believe it.

2013

Salvation: Does Baptism Save?

About a week ago, a brother from my church called me asking for some assistance. His problem was that a new convert in his small group had been targeted by another religious group. The religious group eventually planted its claws in this new convert and he was telling my brother (the small group leader) that he was confused about his salvation. The religious group told him that baptism is a requirement for his salvation, but his small group leader was telling him that is false teaching. The religious group told my brother to meet and discuss this issue with the new convert. So, I and another brother from my church (Lance Evans) started to prepare an outline to specifically defend what the Bible says about salvation and baptism and give it to our brother to use. I wanted to share this outline with everyone (which has been cleaned up and turned into a blog), so we all can see the truth about this matter.

Most Christians are familiar with what apologetics is—the rational defense of our Faith for those outside our Faith. But what do we call it when we have to soundly defend the truths of our Faith from others who claim to be sharing truth from within the same Faith? This “defense within” is called polemics. This outline is a polemical writing meant to defend the truth about salvation from the false teaching of salvation through baptism.
____________________________
1. Putting Acts 2:38 in Context

*Acts 3:19 - Once again Peter addresses a different crowd about salvation and leaves out water baptism, but mentions repentance and faith.
*Acts 8:35-37 - Phillip clearly makes it plain to the Ethiopian Eunuch that belief proceeds water baptism.
*Acts 10:34, 42-27 - Peter clearly makes it plain that belief proceeds water baptism.
*Acts 16:30-33 - Paul and Silas clearly make it plain that belief proceeds water baptism.

In Acts alone we see 2 Apostles and 2 church elders who have taught that believing is what saves and baptism proceeds but is not a necessity for salvation.

2. Putting 1Peter 3:21 in Context
(The same Peter in Acts 2:38 now speaking in his own Letter/Epistle)

*What is Peter not saying? Peter is not saying water baptism saves a person, because that would contradict the point Peter makes in verses 18-20; which is Jesus died for sin to save people from God’s judgment on sin, just as the Ark saved Noah and the 8 souls from the water, the water didn’t save anyone—the water was God’s judgment on the world (Gen. 6).
*The Ark is an Old Testament prefigure of Jesus. And just as the Ark carried them through the water, our Ark—Jesus, after we believe in Him as shown by multiple people in the multiple passages in Acts—leads us to the water in baptism (Rom. 6).
*This point, belief in Jesus first for salvation and then baptism proceeds, goes along with Peter’s introduction in 1Peter 1:17-25. If he showed us in chapter one that it is the blood of Christ and the Word of God that redeems us, why would Peter teach a blatant contradiction in chapter 3 that baptism saves us?

3. The Apostles learned their theology on salvation from the Old Testament & Jesus who affirmed it (i.e. the theology of salvation) in the New Testament.

*Matt. 26:26-28 - Jesus confirming that it’s through His blood where we receive the forgiveness of sins.
*The Old Testament clearly teaches that God required blood (of animals) to provide forgiveness for the people. Hebrews chapter 9 all to 10:18 talks about the blood of Jesus being the fulfillment of that Old Testament requirement for the forgiveness of the sins of those who believe. If the blood of Jesus does this, what need/function is there for baptism? There is nothing left to do! The blood Jesus shed when He died as a sacrifice/atonement for sin has paid it all. God’s wages for sin has been paid in full!
*This clears up what Mark and Matthew penned in the last chapter of their gospels (Mk. 16:16-17, Matt. 28:18-20). These two learned their theology from Jesus and the Old Testament (Mark from Peter and the Old Testament, but Peter learned his from the Old Testament and Jesus). Thus, this understanding is essential because in both we see belief still precedes the act of baptism, and if belief is absent (not baptism, but belief) the person is not saved.

4. Putting Eph. 2:1-9 in Context

*Anything added to the grace of God freely given in the life and death of Jesus Christ, and our faith (our believing) in what God’s grace through Jesus Christ has done, is works! God’s grace and our faith is it for salvation. Baptism is a work! Furthermore, before Apostle Paul nailed this point in chapter 2, he actually introduced his letter to Ephesus by making it clear that it’s through God’s grace in Jesus’ blood and our belief in what God did through Jesus that we have forgiveness and redemption (Eph. 1:7, 13-14, cf. Col. 1:13-14).

5. Putting John 3:3-8 in Context

*The context of the term “water” in John 3:5 is ambiguous (to some extent). It could mean water as in physical birth (flesh v.6), baptism (but that would be a work added to grace and faith which contradicts scripture, so that’s out), or water as the washing and regeneration of the Holy Spirit in Titus 3:5-6. The point Jesus is making in John 3:3-8 is the same point he reiterates in John 6:63, the Spirit gives Life (eternal life), the Flesh profits nothing. The water is not what gives life to the person dead in sins and trespasses, but rather the Holy Spirit.

Scripture does not, will not, nor cannot contradict Scripture. Whatever verse/passage is pulled out, it MUST stay in line (agree with) the whole scope of Scripture, not just part. If not, then whatever the interpretation of that verse/passage is should not be taken as biblically sound and thus not accepted, since the whole biblical context doesn’t agree with it. We can conclude with this, water baptism does not save a person. Salvation is through the grace of God in the blood of Jesus and our believing in what He’s done—death/atonement and resurrection. Anything more than this is a false gospel!

1/2011

The Interpretive Journey of Colossians 3:1-4

"Therefore if you have been raised up with Christ, keep seeking the things above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God. Set your mind on the things above, not on the things that are on earth. For you have died and your life is hidden with Christ in God. When Christ, who is our life, is revealed, then you also will be revealed with Him in glory." (Col. 3:1-4, NASB)

1. Summarize the original situation and the meaning of the text for the biblical audience.
Paul wrote the letter to the Colosse church during his imprisonment in Rome, somewhere between the late 50’s and early 60’s AD. One of Paul’s converts, Epaphras, requested Paul’s help in dealing with a dangerous threat to this young, but vibrant fellowship. It is said that Paul didn’t establish this church but rather Epaphras (1:7, 2:1). Paul’s relationship with the church at this time would’ve been strictly by way of letter (probably the letters to the Ephesians and Laodiceans) and fellow laborers in the ministry (Epaphras, Archippus, Philemon, and Onesimus). This letter is the response to the problem within this church. The Colosse church of Paul’s day was a mixture of Jewish and Gentile Christians. Jews had ventured to this province of Phrygia two centuries earlier. So Colosse was a melting pot of religion, philosophy, and Gentile practices; this in turn being the problem for the young Colosse church. The dilemma was known as “syncretism”—combining ideas from other philosophies and religions with Christian truth. In light of the mixture of cultures within the church, there were various Jewish teachings and the early hint of what later became known as Gnosticism taking root. Paul calls out the outbreak of the heretical teachings in the Colosse church particularly in chapter 2, but uses both chapter 1 and 2 to target what actually to believe. Thus by the end of chapter 2 those listening had sat through a serious heretical gut-checking. They were then ready to hear how they are to respond to this blessed information (chapters 3 and 4). In verses 1-2 of chapter 3, Paul starts with a conditional charge to the believers in Colosse on what he previously explained in chapters 1 and 2, (“If then you were raised…Seek those…Set your…”). In verses 3-4 Paul sums up the “why” for the influence behind what is to be their new way of living and thinking—which is to follow in the remaining verses and subsequent chapter.

2. What are the differences between the biblical audience/situation and us today/our situation?
There are three noticeable differences between us today and the church of Colosse in the first century. One, we are in America not first century Asia Minor. Two, we are not made up of first century Jew and Gentile believers, nor are we struggling with legalistic Judaism and early Gnosticism. And three, we are not all young Christians or members of new-found churches. Despite these three, the river separating them from us is not that wide. We today continue to struggle with heretical teachings, some lingering from Judaism (Sabbath and dietary observances) and Gnosticism (mysticism, new-age spirituality, etc.). Greek philosophical thinking and teaching is still prevalent. The denial of the humanity and deity of Jesus (Modalism) and the worship of other beings as mediators between us and God (Catholicism) carry on today as back then. This letter from Paul is just as much for us now as it was for the Colosse church.

3. What are the timeless theological principle(s) communicated in this passage?
The theological principles in this text are “seek those things which are above where Christ is sitting at the right hand of God”, and “set your minds on things above, not on things on the earth” like traditions and deceptive philosophy (knowledge for knowledge sake).

4. How should Christians today apply the theological principle(s) in their lives?
The theological principles found in this text are for every Christian facing teachings (e.g. rejection of the humanity and/or divinity of Jesus, knowledge is enough for salvation, etc) and traditions in opposition to Christ (e.g. the worship of angels, circumcision, etc). Since our day in age is similar to the time when Paul wrote this letter to Timothy, as far as the heavy presence of religious traditions and philosophy, we can take hold of these principles immediately in just about any situation where tradition or philosophy opposing the truth in Christ is present. Some of our workplaces function in ways contrary to Christ, we then can set our minds on things above and not be persuaded to conform to those things on our job. Or for students who are facing secular philosophies in high-school and college, praising knowledge and science and belittling faith in Christ, we can seek those things which are above where Christ is sitting at the right hand of God and not be deceived with persuasive words or empty philosophy. Some may be caught up in traditionalism at their place of worship or in their family, but these traditions are not in accordance with the truth we have and know in Christ. In this we can seek and set our mind on things above where Christ is and not be cheated through the traditions of men, which have an appearance of wisdom in self-imposed religion. These principles can be applied to any area that is attempting to get us to view or accept Christ less than what He truly is.

The Holy Trinity...for those who don't know

A lot of issues arise from not clearly and properly defining the meaning of the Trinity. The Holy Trinity, as expressed in Scripture, is nothing more than the one and only Covenant God (I AM Who I AM) revealed in three co-equal and co-eternal but distinct persons (members): the Father, the Son (Jesus the Christ), and the Holy Spirit.

This short writing is to speak against the “modalism” teaching and there not being distinction within the Godhead. According to this false doctrine, Jesus, the Holy Spirit, and the Father are simply modes (simultaneous manifestations) of one God, not distinct co-equal and co-eternal divine members of one Godhead. I will show 9 distinctions between the three, which then also affirms their co-equal divine mono-nature.

Distinction #1: Jesus says of the individuality of the Father, “My Father is greater than I” (Jn. 14:28 cf. Phil. 2:5-11)

Distinction #2: Jesus says to the Father of the individuality of Himself, “Glorify Your Son” (Jn. 17:1)

Distinction #3: Jesus said of the individuality of Himself and the Holy Spirit to the scribes and Pharisees that they will be forgiven if they blaspheme Him but not if they blaspheme the Holy Spirit (Matt. 12:31-33)

Distinction #4: Jesus speaks of the individuality of the Holy Spirit, Himself, and the Father (Jn. 14:25-26; 16:13-15)

Distinction #5: Jesus quoted to the Pharisees David’s prophetic divine distinction and equality of the individuality of Himself and the Father (Matt. 22:41-46)

Distinction #6: Peter, in the first sermon recorded after Jesus, mentions the individuality of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:22-36)

Distinction #7: Paul speaks on the individuality of one Lord, one Spirit, and one Father of us all (Eph. 4:4-6 cf. Rom. 8:26-27, 1Cor. 15:15-28)

Distinction #8: John talks about fellowship with the Son and the Father (1Jn. 1:1-3) and that the Spirit serves as a witness to Jesus coming in the flesh (1Jn. 5:6-8)

Distinction #9: Jesus said if He bears witness of Himself by Himself His witness is not true. So Jesus says the Father and the Holy Spirit bear witness of Him––showing a distinction of the individuality of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (Jn. 5:31-37; 15:26; 8:14-18).

Just from these 9 alone we see this is not some doctrine picked up in later centuries as some suggest. Not to mention the book of Hebrews by itself displays––based on the Old Testament laws, the tabernacle, and such––the distinct persons of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit! That’s some good company to have (Jesus, David, Paul, Peter, John) if you’re going to hold to a doctrine!

The Holy Trinity, or the plurality of the Godhead, is apparent in Scripture (e.g. Gen. 1:26; 11:7, Isa. 6:8, Jn. 3:11; 17:11, 21) and supported in history––for it is recorded that the first century and second century believers also believed, accepted, and worshipped the Triune God (e.g. Justin Martyr AD150, Polycarp AD116 [disciple of the Apostle John], Irenaeus AD185 [disciple of Polycarp], and in the late 2nd century/early 3rd century AD, Tertullian).

The Apostles got it from Jesus, the early church got it from the Apostles, and we got it from the scriptures passed on to us from the early church.

_________________________________________________________________

For those who may have questions about the heretical "Oneness/Modalism" doctrine, please check this site...Trinity versus Oneness.

2009

Unmasking the Witnesses: Putting the JW's on the stand

“It is important, then, that you “keep testing whether you are in the faith,” as Paul declared. Keep checking to see whether the things you believe are in keeping with God’s Word. But the question is, are you willing to put your religion through such a test? There is nothing to fear, because if you have the right religion you can only be reassured by the examination. And if what you believe is not in keeping with the Bible, then you should welcome the truth, because it leads to light and life.” (Watchtower May 1 1958 p.261 Is Your Religion the Right One?)

Allow me to put the Jehovah’s Witnesses on the stand and unmask some of the fallacies of their belief. This is very close to my heart. I had a young cousin who was a JW and he committed suicide because he had no hope of a better way out of his mess and I have a grandfather who is presently a JW, so I’m not doing this to bash but rather to challenge minds to see false for false and create the opportunity to come to the Truth. I should’ve done this a long time ago.

Timeline of the origin of JW’s
1852- Birth of Charles Taze Russell, founder of the Jehovah’s Witnesses.
1872- Charles Taze Russell founds the International Bible Students Association in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
(Only 20 years old, he’s still a kid. He’s not even old enough to have finished a 4 year degree in Biblical Studies, hmm.)

1874- Year designated by Charles Taze Russell as the year of Christ’s invisible return (with the visible return to occur in 1914).
(Wow, 22 years old and making prophecies about the return of Christ.)

1879- Russell begings publishing the Zion’s Watch Tower and Herald of Christ’s Presence magazine.
1884- Zion’s Watch Tower Tract Society established as an incorporated body.
1886- Russell begins writing Studies in the Scriptures, which came to be considered second only to the Bible in importance.
(Now he has cornered the market on authoritative writings, interesting.)

1914- Year designated by Russell for Christ’s visible second coming.
(No return of Christ. Prediction is false, yet he is the JW’s inspired, authoritative and prophetic founder/leader.)

1916- Russell dies and is succeeded by “Judge” Joseph Franklin Rutherford (1869-1942).
1925- Year predicted by Rutherford as the year Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and the prophets would return to earth. (From a booklet in 1920 entitled Millions Now Living Will Never Die. pp.89-90)
(Nowhere in the Bible does it say Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob would return after their death. Oh, and the prediction was false. This would be the second false prediction in 20 years of the new birth of this religion. So much for being inspired.)

1931- Judge Rutherford adopts the name “Jehovah’s Witnesses” for the group, based on Isaiah 43:10.
(Though believers/followers of Jesus Christ have been called “Christians” since the middle of the first century in Antioch, and the Apostle Peter confirmed it in one of his epistles-1Peter)

1942- Rutherford dies and is succeeded by Nathan Homer Knorr (1905-77).
1975- Year predicted for Armageddon, based on calculation of Adam’s creation (determined to be 4026 BC) plus 6,000 years. But Watchtowers leading up to that year warn that no one can predict “the day or hour” with certainty.
(Yet we see the founder of this group started with a false prediction, as well as the next three successors. Not to mention, the same “Watchtower” that now says no one can predict with certainty was created by the founder who made a false prediction, hmm. Oh, and again, another false prediction.)

1977- Death of Knorr, who was succeeded by Frederick Franz. Franz explained the uneventful 1975 by noting that perhaps Eve was created several months or years after Adam, and Armageddon would occur 6000 years from that date.
(If this is true, according to the calendar of time recorded in the Bible, we have either passed or are close upon the 6000 years after Eve was created. Another false prediction after they say no one can predict with certainty.)

From this timeline we see the JW’s have no historic depth. They were founded by a 22 year old who made, he and his successors, false predictions and used them as the basis for why they are the one true faith. They have not been affirmed by the scholarly communities as historic or systematically legitimate. And as we are about to further see they are a false offshoot of Christianity.

The JW’s Bible
“For the most part, the NWT is similar to most other modern translations. However, notable differences occur in verses that touch on particular doctrines of the Jehovah's Witnesses that differ from mainstream Christianity.”
     The JW’s say their New World Translation is the “Hebrew Scriptures” and “Christian Greek Scriptures”. How can the NWT (which has only been around for 50 years) truly have the “Hebrew Scriptures” and “Christian Greek Scriptures”—of which they took from the Holy Bible—when they have altered the Holy Bible scriptures to fit their belief and no longer stand in accordance with the 2,400 year old complete Hebrew Bible and the 1,900 year old New Testament? The Hebrew Bible and the New Testament have been consistent for over a thousand years and yet only the NWT—which is supposedly taken from the same Holy Scriptures as the Bible—has altered the context of the content within. Why would one want to trust the NWT? Yet the JW’s say they “affirm the full inspiration of the Bible by God and the preservation of its copies over the centuries.” But how can this be when they have altered it. So despite the “full inspiration of the Bible by God” within the last 50 years they figured God did not do a good enough job the first time and the centuries upon centuries of preserving it so they had to change the very source they got their translation from and make a “New Word of God”. Smells fishy.

JW’s on the End-times
“A belief that is unique to Jehovah’s Witnesses is that the eschatological events predicted in Revelation began in 1914. This is when God gave Jesus his Kingdom, and Jesus has been ruling from heaven ever since. At this time Jesus threw Satan and his demons out of heaven and down to earth, which is why, according to Witnesses, the world has been getting progressively worse since 1914.”
     Jesus said, while He was still on earth amongst His disciples before His death and resurrection, He saw Satan fall from heaven like a flash of lighting (Lk. 10:18). How can this be so if He didn’t throw Satan and his demons out until 1914? Somebody is wrong, the JW’s or Jesus.

JW’s on the Afterlife
“Jehovah’s Witnesses deny the existence of hell. Instead, they hold that the souls of the wicked will be annihilated.”
     And yet they also believe Jesus went to the place of the dead. How can the souls of the wicked be annihilated (to destroy something completely so that it ceases to exist) and yet still have a place where Jesus can go? Where does the Holy Bible—from which they made up the NWT—say anything about the souls of the wicked being annihilated?

“The death that Adam brought into the world is spiritual as well as physical, and only those who gain entrance into the Kingdom of God will exist eternally.”
     Solomon, the wisest man to walk the earth next to Jesus, says in Ecclesiastes that God put eternity in the hearts of men and that man will go to his eternal home (Eccl. 3:11; 12:5-7). Jesus Himself said when speaking to His disciples that some will be raised to eternal life and others to everlasting punishment (Matt. 25:31-46). The Apostle Paul says the same thing to the Thessalonians, as does the writer of Hebrews and Jude (2Thess. 1:6-9, Heb. 6:2, Jude 6-8). And let’s not get into Revelation in regards to this. Yet JW’s hold that only those who gain entrance into the Kingdom of God will exist eternally, how can this be when Jesus just said there will be some who will be raised to everlasting punishment, Solomon affirms an eternity for mankind not just the saved, and the others? Someone is wrong, either Jesus and Solomon and company or the JW’s, hmm. Oh and how can one be certain if they have gained entrance into God’s kingdom? JW’s teach that “eternal life comes not simply from faith in Jesus but from “learning about Jehovah and obeying his requirements,” proving oneself to be God’s loyal subject, and listening to the Kingdom message and acting on it.” So you may never really know if you’re in until you die. That’s a lot of hoping and risk-taking with no guarantee!

JW’s on Jesus
JW’s teach that Jesus was crucified “not on a cross, but a single upright stake.”
     In first century Roman history it has been documented that when they crucified someone, they were nailed to two wooden beams attached in the shape of a cross. The nails went through the wrist (which was considered a part of the hand during that time) and a single nail through both feet, also there would be times the legs where broken so they couldn’t hold themselves up and die quicker. The New Testament’s account of Jesus’ crucifixion also affirms the Roman’s custom of punishment for capital crimes at that time. So who is right the JW’s or the Holy Bible and history? The 1,900 year old New Testament records Jesus being crucified on a cross, and those (both believers and non-believers) during that time who wrote of Jesus after His death says He was crucified.
(Samaritan born historian Thallus AD 52; 1st century Jewish historian Josephus; Roman historian Tacitus AD 112; 2nd century satirist Lucian; and the Jewish Talmud all record Jesus being crucified/hung on a cross)

JW’s teach that Jesus is not God “but rather God’s first creation.” “Jesus existed in pre-human form as God’s agent of creation and God’s chief spokesman (the Word), and took on human form as the man Jesus by means of a virgin birth.”
     Here is where it gets steamy. In the JW’s NWT they, and only their translation, have changed John 1:1. No other biblical translation of the Holy Bible has changed the context of any of the content of what has been passed on since the first century. How can someone trust a translation that has altered the context of the content from the historical translations—the same it copied from—which has passed the scrutiny and rigorous analyzing that the New Testament has from the first century? Secondly, where in any Holy Bible does it say that Jesus is God’s first creation? Jesus Himself told John in the heavenly revelation (Rev. 1:8, 17-18; 22:13) that He was the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end—names which in the Old Testament that only God attributes to Himself. Where does the Holy Bible say Jesus ever existed in “pre-human form”? Is not God an invisible spirit (Jn. 4:24, Rom. 1:20, 1Tim. 1:17)? Does not the Apostle Paul say Jesus is the image (Gr. eikon—a likeness, i.e. (literally) statue, profile) of the invisible God (Col. 1:15, 2Cor. 4:4)? This same “image” (eikon) is used in Matthew 22:20 and Mark 12:16 when Jesus said to the disciples about the coin with Caesar’s face on it, “Whose is this image and inscription?” In the Book of Hebrews it says Jesus is the “express image of [God]” (Heb. 1:1-3). The term “express image” in this context in the Greek is charakter which means “exact likeness/exact image”. (This Greek word is where we get our word “character” from). Just from these we see Jesus is portrayed as the visible image of the invisible God. Jesus says out His own mouth that He is God, equal in nature and power (Jn. 5:17-39; 8:57-59; 10:30-39; 17:11, 21-22). And every time He made these claims the Jews who knew exactly what He was saying shouted “blasphemy” and then tried to stone Him as was the custom for blasphemy, death—the exact reason why they wanted Him crucified, because He was a blasphemer. Not only did Jesus say it, but those who followed Him preached it and worshipped Him as the one true God. This has been documented by believers and non-believers as far back as late first century and the early second century (1st century Jewish historian Josephus; First Clement AD 96; Pliny the Younger and Emperor Trajan AD 112; Polycarp AD 116; Suetonius AD 120; Justin Martyr AD 150; Irenaeus AD 185; etc). Yet with just this little bit of data the JW’s still somehow come up with the Jesus they came up with.

JW’s on the Holy Spirit
“Witnesses disagree with mainstream Christianity that the Holy Spirit is one of the three Persons in the Godhead. Instead, they believe the Holy Spirit to be “God’s active force.”
     Jesus, the Apostle John, and the Apostle Paul seem to disagree with JW’s on the Holy Spirit. Jesus specifically makes references to the Holy Spirit as a Person (Jn. 14:15-17, 26; 15:26; 16:7-11, 13-15) not some impersonal “active force”. Apostle’s John and Paul also make references to the Holy Spirit as a Person (Rom. 8:9-16, 26-27, 1Cor. 2:10-14; 3:16, Eph. 4:30, Heb. 9:14, 1Jn. 5:6-8). Whom should one trust, the Savior Jesus and the inspired by God Apostles John and Paul or the JW’s translation which supposedly corrects what they themselves believe was already fully inspired?

More facts and critical examining about the JW’s
–“The Jehovah’s Witnesses organization (The Watchtower Bible and Tract Society) has claimed in its own writings to be THE ONLY channel through which God communicates His truth to the world. (WT, 4/1/1919, p.6414; WT, 1/15/1917, p.6033) Furthermore, it has described itself as a “Prophet-like” group that does not interpret what God’s truth is, but merely puts in writing the truth that God delivers to the world through them, and only them! (WT, 7/1/1943, p.203; WT, 11/1/1931, p.327; WT, 10/1/1994, p.6) Considering these claims to posses the exclusive ability to communicate God’s truth, the Jehovah’s Witnesses must succeed in passing the highest Biblical scrutiny. Deuteronomy 18:20-22 and 13:1-4 give two tests for distinguishing between genuine Prophets of God and False Prophets.
     (1)If one prophesies in God’s name and what they predict does not come to pass, they are a False Prophet.
     (2)If one prophesies in God’s name and the prediction does come to pass, BUT they teach you to follow false gods, they are a False Prophet.
Thus, recognizing False Prophets is achieved by simply applying these tests to the teachings and prophecies of the WTBTS to determine if the claims it makes about itself hold up to Biblical and reasonable scrutiny. If they are THE ONLY TRUE “Prophet” of God, then everything they have ever predicted should have come to pass. Tragically, everything they have ever predicted has FAILED to come to pass. “Judge” Rutherford in his book Light, he wrote that making false predictions is proof positive that someone is a False Prophet, Rutherford stating,

“...their prophecies to date have not come to pass; and that alone is strong evidence that they are false prophets.” (Light Vol.2, p.47).

Anyone can read and study the WTBTS publications from 1879 to present and discover for themselves how deceptive that have been to their followers.”*

–“…reading Russell’s Studies in the Scriptures is enough for many people to realize that the religion Russell started has very little resemblance to the Witnesses today. There are also over 20 wrong dates, many that were part of Watchtower doctrine for over 50 years. “F&D Slave” shows that there has never been a line of Jehovah’s Witnesses that even remotely believe current Watchtower truth. What is disappointing is the way that current Watchtower articles refer to these changes. When a significant doctrine has changed back and forth, or been introduced and then renounced, a person must ask “Can I believe that God directed the Organization to make such mistakes?””**

“Proving that the Organization is not directed by Jehovah took me many years because of fear; fear of change, fear of my own motives and fear of researching outside of the Watchtower.” (Paul Grundy)

Conclusion
I didn’t touch on everything, but I touched on enough to show the falsity of this belief. For how can something continue to profess to be the “truth” with so many falsehoods? Revelation 19:10 says, “Worship God! For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.” And on that note let’s sum this up:

-False predictions since its inception.
-False prophetic leaders.
-False doctrine fostered from an altered version of a tested historic and divinely written source existing over a thousand of years before the JW’s.
-False divine inspiration—the Holy Spirit of God is not with JW’s/Watchtower doctrine as exposed by the false doctrines and false predictions.
-This all equals a false testimony of Jesus, which means JW’s are worshipping a false god and therefore they are a false belief.

If you’re reading this and you are a practicing Jehovah’s Witness, I’m sure the thought of disfellowship and being shunned by family and friends is intimidating. And I will not try and act like I can relate, because I can’t. But I still have to ask, which is worth more...being shunned and rejected by family and friends or being shunned and rejected by God for eternity? I have lost a young cousin to this false belief and I may lose a grandfather, please don’t allow it to take you to Hell—–eternal separation from God in an eternal like prison.

If you want to talk, please contact me. You are not alone. The real Jesus would love to rescue you from the house of bondage, give you eternal life, and truly bring you into His family.

_______________________________________________________________________
*1. Essential for Addressing J.W. Assertions, June 8, 2007 by Chris Cross
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1597815071?ie=UTF8&tag=religionfacts-20&link_code=as3&camp=211189&creative=373489&creativeASIN=1597815071
**2. © Paul Grundy 2005 http://www.jwfacts.com/

All other information on Jehovah’s Witnesses taken from www.religionfacts.com
_______________________________________________________________________

11/2009

From a son to his father

During the ending of September beginning of October my father was hospitalized. At that time no one knew exactly the extent how bad his sickness was. Maybe a day after being hospitalized he called, and we talked. My father and I don't talk about God. So this was a prime opportunity to share the Gospel with him, and when I did it was more subliminally than directly. When I got off the phone my wife said I should've took that opportunity and really told him how I felt. I said I would pray for boldness for the next time God gives me an opportunity to talk with him like that. Well, the next day he got worse. They quarantined him. I immediately felt burdened. I said, "If something happens to him and I never tell him how much I love him and how much Jesus loves him, I won't be able to forgive myself. I already lost a younger cousin to suicide and had many chances to share Jesus and never did. This time I'm not blowing it." So I went to the computer and wrote a letter. I thought about mailing it, then I sensed the Spirit telling me to call him and read it to him. We had a good talk. And since then, I've noticed little changes in how he wants to be around me and my family more. Praise God for the power of His love.

Just yesterday I was told one of my Bible study brothers lost his father. This made me think. If you have someone in your life that you care about who doesn't know Jesus. Don't wait any longer. Tell them how much you love them and how much Jesus loves them. Time is of the essence!

Here is the letter I wrote. Who knows who else God may use it to bless.
"I love you pops, and I wanted you to know that it is going to hurt me when your time comes to leave this earth. But it's going to hurt evermore to know that I won't see you in heaven because you don't believe that Jesus Christ died for your sins and through His death those who believe in Him are forgiven and accepted into God's family forever. I'd rather have you'd be sick and stuff but know the state of your soul and eternity is secure, than to have you well and then one day die and your soul and eternity is doomed. It's on this fact that I am not concerned about grandma's or granddaddy's health and time here, because I know I will see them again in heaven. It's on this fact that I am not concerned about my mother's health and time here, because I know I will see her again in heaven. But I cannot say the same for you, and that sincerely concerns and hurts me. I love you. I want to know that my father has witnessed what Jesus has done in his son's life, the change that Jesus and only Jesus has performed in your son's life, and then in your son's family. You have witnessed this first-hand. It's all because Jesus has saved my soul and has given me access to His power to live a life that pleases, honors, and glorifies Him. And I choose to take hold of His power and live in this way because I want to show Him how grateful I am and how much I love Him for all that He has done for me: saving my soul, delivering me from jail when I was straight-up guilty, delivering me from my many addictions––my sex addiction, drug addiction, control addiction, rage addiction, and so on––restoring my marriage, blessing me with 2 children who shouldn't even have made it out the womb, reconciling my relationship with my mother, and numerous numerous of other things. This is all because of Jesus Christ. I went from being and living one way, to being and living a whole other way.

I know you think all religions and beliefs believe in the same God or point to the same God, but they don't. I have personally researched just about every religion, and each belief has major differences in what they believe, and they all will tell you they don't believe in the same God. Muslims, Jews, Christians, Hindu's, Ba'ha's, Mystical religions, Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses, Wiccans, Universalist, Buddhist, and the many others, all have fundamental differences. And since we're all different and yet we all claim to be the "TRUTH", we all can't be right. One of these is right which will automatically make the others false. So right there we see that they all don't point to the same God or believe in the same God. What separates Jesus Christ from all of the others is that the "god" the rest claim to believe in have no proof or evidence in their "god" actually being the one true God. But Jesus Christ has strong evidence for Him being the one true God. We have historic evidence that Jesus lived, performed miracles, claimed to be God, died on a cross, rose from the dead, and the people who have truly encountered Jesus haven't been the same since. No other belief has more proof for the guarantee of what they claim, except for Jesus Christ. I am a living witness to the reality of Jesus, grandma and granddaddy are living witnesses to the reality of Jesus, and the many other family members of ours are living witnesses to the reality of Jesus. Jesus Christ is not like the others. He stands alone.

I know you also think people who claim to be Christians are hypocrites. You said you know people who don't believe and live better than some of those who you know who do claim to believe. Well, one, not everyone one who claims to believe in Jesus actually belongs to Jesus. Second, even those who have been truly saved and changed by Jesus are all still human; so we all still make mistakes. None of us are perfect, nor do we claim to be perfect, nor do we try to be perfect. We live like I said before, choosing to take hold of His power and live in a way that shows Him how grateful we are and how much we love Him for all that He has done for us.

I am sharing all of this with you so you won't think believing in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is some blind leap with no logic or evidence. Believing in Jesus is just the opposite. There is logic, and most importantly, there is evidence. And the greatest evidence Jesus provides is the truly changed lives of those who truly believe in Him as Lord and Savior. Again, your son pops is a living witness of the truth of Jesus being who He says He is. And as your son, I am asking you to do what I did. Believe that He died to pay your penalty from God for your sins, that He rose to show and prove He has power over death and can give those who believe in Him eternal life after death, and then believe in Him as your personal Lord and Savior. And just like I did and am still doing let Jesus show you how much He loves you, has a better life for you, and will give you His power to change and live for Him. But most of all, He secures your eternal future, pops. No other religion or belief can be certain of their eternal future, only those who believe in Jesus. With Jesus you will no longer have to be concerned with what is going to happen to you when you die, and neither will I or your parents.

I know I probably poured a lot on you. But after Sherman died suddenly, and I had just spoke to him and then he was heavy on my heart later and I never talked to him like I'm talking to you now, it would literally crush me if you died since no one is promised tomorrow and I never told you how much I love you and how much I want you to know that Jesus loves you, gave His life for you, and He wants to be the Savoir of your soul and Lord of your life. Especially in your current condition, I couldn't go another day knowing I have never just straight-up told you that. So I have and now you know where I stand, and I hope you take my concerns seriously and let Jesus into your heart pops. And if you want to know how to do that, let me know. I love you, pops. I'm done."

2008