Christian Churches of God
Binitarianism and Trinitarianism
(Edition 5.0 19941112-20001202-20080503-20100714)
This paper deals with the logical basis of both Binitarianism and Trinitarianism. The non-biblical nature of the doctrines and their establishment is demonstrated. The paper examines a series of logical inconsistencies developed from Trinitarian exposition that are framed in terms of questions arising from Trinitarian contradiction of New Testament doctrine arising from key Scripture.
The assertion of some Churches of God that the early Church was Binitarian is an unqualified late twentieth century fabrication.
Binitarianism and Trinitarianism
Theological and Philosophical Discussion in the WCG and its Splinter offshoots
Over the last twenty years we have watched many of the branches of the Churches of God advance theories that have no historical basis or which themselves are later incorrect theories advanced as fact and the members of those churches have taken them on as facts simply because they were told those things by ministers they wanted to trust.
The following things are fact:
1. Herbert W. Armstrong had no formal accredited academic training either in Religious Studies or the Philosophy of Religion and Ethics and neither did any of his senior ministry including those referring to themselves as “Dr”. Armstrong had no formal academic training at all.
2. None of the theologians of the major Churches of God has such training with the exception of CCG. One person who is not a church theologian claims graduate-level training in early church theology but his writings do not reflect such training.
3. Much of what these people say is complete misrepresentation of historical fact.
4. Much of what they said has been discredited or withdrawn by the writers. Some publications, such as the United States and British Commonwealth in Prophecy are straight plagiarism (in this case from J. Allen’s Judah’s Sceptre and Joseph’s Birthright).
5. Each offshoot is comprised of people that have a combination of views on the nature of God. For example, UCG has ministers and members that are comprised of Radical Unitarians, Ditheists, Binitarians and Trinitarians. The other offshoots such as LCG and RCG are comprised of mixtures of the same groups. Conflicts are also arising on the Calendar issue.
Radical Unitarianism: A Radical Unitarian denies the pre-existence of Jesus Christ and defines Christ as being a product of the Father from the time of the conception in the womb of Mariam (called Mary by them) (see also the paper Origins of Radical Unitarianism and Binitarianism (No. 076C)).
Unitarian: A Biblical Unitarian is one who holds to the existence of One True God and acknowledges that He created the Host and He sent Jesus Christ to mankind. Any Monotheist also qualifies as a Unitarian (cf. Universal Oxford Dictionary art. ‘Unitarian'). Monists are logically excluded from such a definition.
Ditheist: A Ditheist claims that there were two true Supreme Gods in existence who were both co-eternal and co-equal. Zoroastrians and Manicheans held they were in opposition. The later doctrine of Herbert Armstrong held that one of these two Gods agreed to come down to Earth and become the son of the other to be sacrificed and hence become the Christ. The Christ or Messiah only exists in his function from the incarnation. Prior to that he was the co-equal, co-eternal God existing beside the other who became the Father (cf. also Univ. Oxf. Dict.). This is logically a form of polytheism. The doctrine was published by WCG in the Good News Magazine prior to Tabernacles 1991 and was given as a sermon by Gerald Waterhouse in the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) during the Feast of Tabernacles 1991 (see the paper Ditheism No. 076B)).
Modalism: The Sabellian doctrine that the distinction in the Trinity is ‘modal’ only, i.e. that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are merely three different modes of manifestation of the Divine Nature (Univ. Oxf. Dict.).
Binitarian/Binitarianism: Of or belonging to a belief in a Godhead of two persons only (Univ. Oxf. Dict.), it was used by Loofs in 1898 as the German binitarisch. Within the understanding of the Churches of God a Binitarian is a believer that one God existed and sent part of Himself to the Earth, which element was Christ. The original doctrine of this being was that of the worship of Attis, Adonis and Osiris. This view of the Godhead did not enter Christianity until after the adoption of the festival of the goddess Easter in 154 CE and was insinuated from about 160 onwards. The history of the development is explained in the paper Binitarian and Trinitarian Misrepresentation of the Early Theology of the Godhead (No. 127B). It was formalised by adoption at the Council of Nicaea in 325. The Canons of Nicaea were dismissed as heresy in 327 CE and the Unitarians were reappointed to control the church and did so until 381 CE when the Trinity was formulated and adopted at Constantinople. Kirk and Rawlinson (Ess. Trin. and Incarn.) refers to the matter of Binitarianism and on page 215 refers to the Binitarianism of Tertullian’s earlier Catholic thought (Oxford English Dictionary Supplement, Vol. 1 A-G, p. 263).
This view was essentially the doctrine of Antichrist in that it sought to separate the humanity from the divinity of Christ. 1John 4:1-2 was altered by those seeking to separate the humanity of Jesus Christ from his divinity (Socrates VII, 32, p. 381.) (It can be reconstructed from Irenaeus ANF, Vol. 1, fn. p. 443.)
Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth Jesus Christ came in the flesh is of God: and every spirit which separates Jesus Christ is not of God but is of Antichrist (cf. also Statement of Beliefs (A1) 4th ed., p. 7).
Trinitarian. A1. Belonging to the order of the Holy Trinity. 2. Theol. Relating to the Trinity; holding the doctrine of the Trinity (opp. To Unitarian) 1656. 3 Forming a Trinity: triple or threefold. B. sb (with a capital T). 1 A member of the religious order of the Trinity; = Mathurin 1628 2. Theol. One who holds the doctrine of the trinity of the Godhead; a believer in the Trinity 1706 Hence Trinitarianism, Trinitarian belief (Univ. Oxf. Dict. p. 2248).
The doctrine of the Trinity was not developed until the Cappadocians, Gregory of Nyssa, Gregory of Nazianzus and Basil. They developed it and it was presented for the Council of Constantinople in 381 CE. Prior to that time it was unknown in Christianity.
Some of the followers of Armstrong are now trying to claim that he was a Binitarian and that he and his ministry advocated Binitarianism. This is untrue. Armstrong and his ministry taught that God was a family comprised of two beings who were both co-eternal and co-equal and one of whom agreed to become the son of the other and die as a sacrifice to redeem mankind. They taught that the elect of the Churches of God would also become part of this God family as elohim. The writer has studied their material since 1964. It is beyond question that these people were not Binitarians and, indeed, until the writer began to quantify their religious structure and the history of the Churches of God they had never used and seemingly had never even heard of the term.
The claim is now being made that they exclusively used the term elohim to refer to this Binitarian structure. It is a matter of absolute fact that the Long Bible Correspondence Course taught for decades that the original name for God was Eloah and that was a singular name and the extension of that name to Elohim was to include Christ as the son. The absolute conflict between the Unitarian position espoused in the Long Course (L. 8) (which remained in situ for some forty years and was still in use under Joseph Tkach Snr.) and the God Family Dietheist position merely demonstrates the theological ineptitude of the senior ministry and the conflict in their views. They had Unitarians, Radical Unitarians, Ditheists and Trinitarians in their ministry and they rarely taught on the Nature of God because it was too disruptive given their uncertain theology. What is certain is that the Church was never Binitarian except as a transitional position in the final death throes of inducing people to accept Trinitarianism under Tkach. It was used by Trinitarians, who either never understood and repented of their error, or who came into the Church of God to deliberately undermine it. There were many of these people and they are still at work in the offshoots.
The Churches of God were not Binitarian in their formation or in their general beliefs over two thousand years. That view was the basis of the Athanasian faith, which came to power for two short years in 325 CE under Constantine, and then finally in 381 CE at Constantinople. Constantine reinstated the Unitarian structure in 327 CE and was himself baptised a Unitarian on his deathbed by Eusebius of Nicomedia. Trinitarians term these people Arians to disguise the antiquity of their faith. The structure of the Faith was presented to the Friends of the Sabbath as the paper The Role of the Fourth Commandment in the Historical Sabbath-keeping Churches of God (No. 170) in 1996. Despite being warned in 1994, the Church of God (Seventh Day) declared itself Binitarian in 1995. It had been Unitarian as had the Seventh Day Baptist Church before it. The Unitarian Structure of the pre-Reformation Churches of God can be seen clearly from the work Sabbatarians in Transylvania (CCG Publishing 1998). The assertion that LCG is Binitarian is a last-minute attempt at formulating a false historical position and using a faulty theology. See the paper Ditheism (No. 76B).
Modern Jewish or Hillel Calendar
The Hillel calendar was never in place during the Temple period. It was brought to Hillel II by two Babylonian rabbis in 344 CE. Hillel authorised its introduction to Judaism in 358 CE. It was altered as late as the 12th century by Maimonides (Rambam) to correct errors. It is not the calendar that Christ and the Apostles kept. It is based on the Babylonian system of intercalation and is incorrect most of the time in relation to the Temple system.
Some of the Armstrongite ministers have deliberately misrepresented the system as being in operation during the Temple period. That is a blatant and provable fabrication.
If God gave us a Book of Laws and told us to keep the days in that book holy and to keep the festivals and the Jubilee system holy, is it permissible for us to change those days and devise a calendar of our own choosing?
The answer to any sane thinking person is no. If our children used that reasoning on us we would discipline them.
In the same way the implementation of a theological structure of Ditheism or Binitarianism or Trinitarianism is a punishable offence.
No theologian has ever claimed the Bible is anything other than a Unitarian structure. The significant theologians (e.g. Calvin, Harnack, Brunner) agree that Rational Theism, Judaism, the Bible, and Islam are Unitarian (cf. Christ and the Koran (No. 163)).
Why was this fallacy invented by the WCG under Armstrong and why does it persist? The answer is that it was invented for the same reasons it was invented as Modalism and then as Binitarianism in the Roman system in the fourth century. That reason was to appeal to the masses that were corrupted by the worship of Attis and Adonis and the Mystery and Sun Cults. The doctrine that God consisted of two elements of father and son, and of which the son came down to Earth to be sacrificed, was not biblical. It was the doctrine of Attis and Adonis. It was a doctrine of the gods of the corn and the oil and wine, as James Frazer has so amply demonstrated in The Golden Bough. The portraits of Christ and Mariam that proliferate the icons of the Trinitarians are simply a carry on from the Mother goddess and the dying God (Attis and Adonis) with the cross of pine that developed to represent the unhappy stake of pine used for their deaths. They had long hair and looked effeminate in their icons, as did their castrated priests. Christ did not have long hair and he was a Jewish man, not this castrated eunuch the Trinitarians flout, which was their Binitarian God introduced by stealth.
The same sort of slippery reasoning we see in the web sites of the people claiming to be of the Churches of God.
One writer, B. Thiel, Ph.D. (not in theology, philosophy or religious studies), who writes as an independent writer and claims membership of the Living Church of God, has written two articles seeking to claim that the early Church was Binitarian. The articles are titled:
“Binitarianism: One God, Two Beings Before the Beginning” at:
“Unitarianism: Is it Taught in the Bible And Was it the Position of the True Church?” at:
Both papers differ slightly but have similar subsections and use the same material interchangeably almost word for word. The papers start with the same introduction and then place the heading Old Testament and then in that section use a quotation from one paper to attempt to selectively discredit CCG’s position and the writer on the subject when there are many more papers that deal with the subject and the position of the early Church more thoroughly and in a rigorous way that shows Thiel’s writing to be serious misrepresentation and an attempt to appeal to the readers ignorance and mistrust of the OT writings.
Thiel also discusses those who claim to be part of the Church of God yet espouse Unitarianism, as though they are not, although despite his rhetoric allows in the section Philadelphia and Beyond that concerning the Laodicean era it “may be possible that it may contain some confused Unitarians”. His incoherent rambling is quoted as follows:
Philadelphia and Beyond
The next church in succession in Revelation 3 was Philadelphia. Most outside of the Sardis era of the Church of God, who believe in Church eras, believe that this was what was once known as the Radio Church of God, and for most, the Worldwide Church of God (WCG) under Herbert W. Armstrong. A major portion of the remnant of this era became the old Global Church of God and then the current Living Church of God (LCG). As the beginning of this article has pointed out, LCG is clearly binitarian (as was quoted in the beginning of this article) as was the Radio Church of God and the old WCG. In the letter to the angel of the church in Philadelphia, Jesus states, "you have not denied my name" (Revelation 3:8). And while this also has something to do with governance, this may also be distinguishing the fact that the true portion of the Philadelphia church never denies Jesus' deity (perhaps, unlike some who might be part of other eras).
The last church in succession in Revelation 3 is Laodicea. This is to be the predominate church at the time of the end. While its major branches, splinters, and independents are binitarian, it may be possible that it may contain some confused unitarians, though this may be doubtful (see Acts 4:12).
His discussion of the era system of the seven churches of Revelation adopts Armstrong’s claim to be the Philadelphia Church of God and the Church of God (7th Day) was Sardis. He conveniently overlooks the serious facts of Christ’s condemnation of the marker Church of the Sardis era that has the name of being Living yet is dead. It is a fact that his own church, the Living Church of God, is the only church in history to adopt that name and Christ specifically mentions them as being Sardis and being dead.
The Introduction and the quotation referred to are as follows:
What is God? How is God one? Are the Father and Son God?
This article will attempt to provide biblical and historical evidence on the nature of God and contrast it with unitarian teachings.
This article will discuss the Bible, unitarian views, and the writings of certain historians to provide biblical and historical proofs to see if unitarianism should be considered to be the correct view of the Christian Godhead.
While Islam is the largest "unitarian" religion in number of adherents, this article will focus on Unitarians who claim to be Christian. (One reason that Islam will be ignored is that it teaches that essentially the entire Bible has been corrupted by Jews and Christians, hence no statement from the Bible would be considered conclusive from the perspective of Islam.)
This article will also discuss the beliefs of some who claim to be in the Church of God--yet who espouse unitarianism.
To begin this, we will start with the beginning of the Bible:
In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth (Genesis 1:1, NKJV throughout, unless otherwise noted).
The Hebrew word translated as 'God' in the above passage is 'elohiym (or sometimes spelled elohim). So the first time God is mentioned in the Bible, the indication is that God is mentioned as plural ("indication" because in some places 'elohim can refer to singular).
And to make sure the plurality of God was known, Genesis 1:26 states,
Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.
Genesis 1:26 shows that 'elohim above refers to "Us". Us is also plural.
Thus, there is no doubt that from the beginning of the Bible, the plurality of God was shown. And this is accepted by both binitarians and trinitarians.
However, one unitarian assertion is (bolding mine),
There is no doubt that the elohim are a plural structure and that they are the messengers in the Bible texts referred to as angels and that Christ himself was the Angel of the Presence or the Angel of YHVH. It is thus absurd to suggest that no angel was referred to as creator when Christ was admitted to be creator and was also the Angel of YHVH. Moreover, there is no indication that the plural terms involving creators were confined to two Beings which were God and Christ. This is an unsupported assumption that is contrary to the Bible. It is, moreover, a basic assertion of Binitarianism, which is logically absurd and conveys within its structure the logical inevitability of Trinitarianism. This error entered the Church some 30-40 years ago and some people cannot divest themselves of their paradigm (Binitarianism and Trinitarianism (No. 76) (Edition 3.0 19941112-20001202). Copyright 1994, 2000, Wade Cox, Christian Churches of God).
The quotation ignores the earlier comments that show the structure of the name of God and its singular origin.
It is a complete fabrication to assert that the early Church was Binitarian and an examination of the papers will demonstrate that fact. The claims regarding Constantine and the Council of Nicaea by these people are also fiction quoting erroneous sources but not identifying the unqualified sources. Constantine revoked the Binitarian position and their bishops within two years and by 327 had installed Unitarianism and was himself baptised a Unitarian on his deathbed by Eusebius of Nicomedia. No Binitarian or Trinitarian emperor ever sat on the throne nor was that faction in power until Theodosius was appointed by Gratian and convened the Council of Constantinople in 381. The Canons of Nicaea were lost or, more correctly, thrown out and they had to be re-invented from the Canons of Constantinople.
It is clear that the early Church was not Binitarian but Unitarian and to claim otherwise is a fabrication. The prominent Theologians also agree that is the case (see also the Appendix to the Statement of Beliefs of the Christian Faith (A1)). Theology was developed by the Catholics to defeat the Biblical Unitarianism so that the Athanasian Bintarianism could be developed into the Trinitarian model by the Cappadocians.
Refer also to the papers Original Doctrines of the Christian Faith (No. 88); Early Theology of the Godhead (No. 127); Arianism and Semi-Arianism (167) and Socinianism, Arianism and Unitarianism (No. 185).
The Illogical Position of Trinitarianism
The Trinitarians attempted to make sense out of a Three-headed God by using the Stoic term hypostases and the Platonic term ousia which mean, in effect, the essence of being.
The term hypostases became ultimately incorporated into Catholic doctrine, resulting in the anathemas of the Councils of Chalcedon and Constantinople II. The structure resulted in the declarations of the Monarchia and the Circumincession. The declaration that the Godhead is distinct but not separate is essentially a statement of the Monarchia and the Circumincession. It is philosophically absurd given the functions of English. The use of hypostases and ousia as terms appears to attempt to cover up the incoherence. The Godhead is held by Trinitarians to be three hypostases in one ousia using the Stoic and Platonic terms to attempt a distinction.
Some Trinitarians attempt to deny that God is a Being, hoping thereby to introduce some additional vagary to defend against the charges of being illogical, which they defend by declaring the whole thing a mystery. The denial of the term Being to God and Christ effectively denies their existence, which is absurd. Saying that God is Universal Mind (or Universal Soul) utterly depersonalises God and denies the reality of the Son of God except that the Son's existence is notionally declared as a hypostasis. It is a word game that gives no reality to the Saviour. On the other hand, were the reality of the Son to be insisted on, then the doctrine is essentially an insipient breach of the first commandment: You shall have no other elohim before me.
The entity here is the YHVH Eloheik (YHVH Your Elohim) who is identified at Psalm 45:7-8 as the Elohim who anointed the Elohi of Israel. By elevating our intermediary elohim, one of the Council (Ps. 89:7), to the level of Eloah, God the Father, we are in breach of the first commandment. This is the sin of Satan who claimed to be El of the Council of the Elohim (Ezek. 28:2).
The doctrine of the Trinity rests on a series of false premises designed to enable a paradigm shift. These are:
a) That elohim as the Godhead refers to two entities only, making no distinction between Eloah and the multiple entities including the Council and Host (Dan. 7:9 ff.).
b) That these two entities (and the Spirit) are incapable of separation in fact or in thought and are not properly describable as Beings.
c) That the preincarnate existence of Christ was not as the Angel of YHVH.
d) That Christ was the only Son of God before the creation of the world (see Job 1:6; 38:7).
e) That Christ and Satan were the only two Morning Stars (see Job 38:7; Isa. 14:12; Rev. 2:28; 22:16)
f) That Christ is God in the same way that God is God and not a subordinate God (Heb. 1:9) sent by the Lord of Hosts (Zech. 2:10-11). Hence he is made an object of worship and prayer contrary to Exodus 34:14 and Matthew 4:10, etc.
g) That Christ was the only begotten Son and not the Only Born God and Son (monogenes theos & uion) (Jn. 1:18; 3:16; 1Jn. 4:9; see also Lk. 7:12; 8:42; 9:38; Heb. 11:17 for comparison). He was the first begotten (proototokos) of all creation (Col. 1:15) hence the beginning of the creation of God (Rev. 3:14, not as per the NIV).
h) That Christ had existence separate to his incarnation hence he could have prayed to himself as God. Such a proposition effectively denies the distinction between Father and Son and the totality of the resurrection. It is of anti-Christ (1Jn. 2:22; 4:3; 2Jn. 7).
i) That Christ and God were of the same will and that Christ was not possessed of a separate will which he subordinated to God through willing obedience contrary to Matthew 21:31; 26:39; Mark 14:36 and John 3:16; 4:34.
j) That Divine nature admits of no gains and no losses in Christ. Logically this would deny the resurrection of the saints as explained in 1Corinthians 15, and in the biblical promises to the elect. The Trinity seeks to assert that the divine nature given to the elect differs from the way in which it is shared by Christ.
k) That the Holy Spirit is given by fixed measure contrary to John 3:34 (RSV) and Romans 12:6.
l) That Christ could not have sinned (from the false premise of divine nature admitting of no gains and no losses rather than from the Omniscience of God, who knew that Christ would not sin).
m) That Christ was consubstantial with God in such a way that he was co-equal and co-eternal with God contrary to Philippians 2:6 and 1Timothy 6:16, which shows that only God is immortal. Christ's eternality or aioonion life (1Jn. 1:2) and that of all Beings, including Christ, derive from that entity. Both Christ and the elect are of the same origin Hebrews 2:11 (RSV) deriving their life and eternality from conditional obedience to the Father (Jn. 5:19-30) who created us all (Mal. 2:10-15). As the Father has life in Himself, so He gave the Son to have life in himself (Jn. 5:26), and we are co-heirs being ordained to have life in ourselves by authority of God.
n) That the elect are not Sons of God in the same way that Christ is a Son of God and hence not co-heirs, contrary to Romans 8:17; Galatians 3:29; Titus 3:7; Hebrews 1:14; 6:17; 11:9; James 2:5 and 1Peter 3:7.
o) That the Supreme God came down in the flesh and dwelt among men (stemming from the fraudulent insertions in 1Timothy 3:16 in Codex A. The false insertions were retained in the KJV and manipulated into the preamble in the NIV). The assertion that the Supreme God came down in the flesh is contrary to John 1:18 (and Jn. 1:14 where it was the logos (or Memra) who became flesh) and the numerous texts distancing Christ from the One True God (Eloah or Theon, who is God the Father), the God of Jesus Christ (Jn. 17:3; 20:17; 1Cor. 8:6; 2Cor. 1:3) who stands in His name (Mic. 5:5).
The concept of how God is One is misunderstood by Trinitarians. The Shema (Deut. 6:4) is too detailed to be examined here (see the paper Joshua, the Messiah, the Son of God (No. 134)). The entity at Deuteronomy 6:5 is identifiable as God Most High, the God who anointed Christ as Elohi of Israel in Psalm 45:7. The unity of God, necessary to Monotheism, is of an extended order dwelling in unity under a central will in agreement and spiritual interaction through the Spirit and Power of God (1Cor. 2:4-14), which through Christ is towards God (2Cor. 3:3-4).
The Trinity denies the unification necessary to monotheism and is logically polytheist. It occurs because the rulers do not understand, being unspiritual (1Cor. 2:8,14).
If God is one being in three hypostases, or persons, as Father, Son and Holy Spirit, how is it possible for the following to occur, as it so obviously does within the Bible narrative?
· For Jesus Christ to receive revelation from God?
Revelation 1:1 says that it is “The Revelation of Jesus Christ which God gave to him, to show his servants things which must shortly take place. And he sent and signified it by his angel to His servant John.”
· For Christ to sit on his Father's throne?
(Rev. 3:21) “To him who overcomes I will grant to sit with me on my throne, as I also overcame and sat down with my Father on his throne.”
· For the head of Christ to be God?
(1Cor. 11:3) But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man and the head of Christ is God.
· For Christ to cry out to God?
(As he did in Mat. 27:46; Mk. 15:34): “My God, My God, why have you forsaken me.”
· For Christ to ascend to God as per John 20:17?
“Jesus said to her, Do not cling to me, for I have not yet ascended to my Father, but go to my brethren and say to them, 'I am ascending to my Father and your Father and to my God and your God.”
· For all those with God's spirit to be Gods?
In John 10:34-36: “Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, 'I said you are gods'? If he called them gods to whom the word of God came – and the Scripture cannot be broken – what about the one whom the Father set apart as His very own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said I am God's Son?”
The Scripture cannot be broken is introduced here to show that we are to be elohim and that our destiny cannot be broken or defeated. How can Christ be set apart from others by God as His own and sent into the world if he is God and there are no others?
· For Christ to be created by the Father?
For him to be the beginning (arche - not ruler as per NIV) of the creation of God (Rev. 3:14), “… the image of the invisible God, the first born over all creation” (Col. 1:15).
Trinitarians attempt to assert that arche and proototokos are titles, to avoid the obvious conclusions flowing from these texts compared with 1Timothy 6:16, which shows that only God is immortal.
· For a being to beget itself?
(Jn. 3:16) For God so loved the world that he gave His only begotten Son ...
· For only the Father to be over all?
(Eph. 4:6) One God and Father of all who is above all and through all, and in you all.
Thus this text denies that the Father is in the Son and the Son in the Father only. This reciprocal relationship extends to the elect.
Jesus is Son of the Most High God (Mk. 5:7) who is his God and Father (Col. 1:3; 1Thes. 3:11), being distinguished from the God and Father of us (2Thes. 2:16). That he said God was his Father did not make himself equal with God, as was asserted by the Pharisees in John 5:18. Thus the Trinitarian assertion is the same lie as Christ was accused of then. How is this so?
· If there are three hypostases, how can the seven spirits of God exist (Rev. 5:6)? Are these seven eyes in the seven horns of the Lamb not seven separate subdivisions or authorities sent out under direction of Christ as the Lamb to control the Earth?
· How can a being sacrifice to itself?
(1Pet. 1:19) But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot ... who through him believe in God, who raised him from the dead and gave him glory, so that your faith and hope are in God.
Romans 5:15 says: For if by the one man’s offence many died, much more the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one man Jesus Christ abounded to many.
Our faith and hope are in God, not in Christ, but rather through Christ by means of the Spirit, which is the Spirit of Faith and Truth.
· How can one being pray to itself and/or give itself something? For example:
(Lk.. 11:13) “... How much more will your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him!”
(Jn. 17:4) “... I have finished the work which you have given me to do.”
(Jn. 17:9) “I pray for them, I do not pray for the world but for those whom you have given me, for they are Yours.”
(2Jn. 5:10) … because he has not believed the testimony that God has given of His Son.
· How can a being be greater than itself?
(Jn. 14:28) “You have heard me say to you, I am going away and coming back to you. If you loved me you would rejoice because I said, 'I am going to the Father', for my Father is greater than I.”
· How can a being be divided as to what it knows?
(Mat. 24:36) “But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, but my Father only.”
(Rev. 1:1) The revelation of Jesus Christ which God gave to him to show his servants what must soon take place.
· How can a being mediate to itself?
(1Tim. 2:5) For there is one God and one Mediator between God and Men, the Man Christ Jesus.
(Gal. 3:20) Now a mediator does not mediate for one only but God is one.
(1Jn. 2:1) ... we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.
(1Jn. 2:22) Who is a liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist who denies the Father AND the Son.
· How can a being be subordinate to itself?
(Jn. 10:18) “... This command I have received from my Father.”
· How can a being deny its own doctrine?
(Jn. 7:16) “My doctrine is not mine, but His who sent me.”
· How can one being differ in wills yet have one element, Christ, obey the superior, that is, God?
(Mat. 7:21) “Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord' shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my Father in heaven.”
(Mat. 12:50) “For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother.”
(Mat. 26:39). “O My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless not as I will, but as You will.”
(Mk. 3:35) “For whoever does the will of God is my brother and my sister and mother.”
(Jn. 4:34) “My food is to do the will of Him who sent me and to finish His work.”
(1Thes. 5:18) ... in everything give thanks for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus for you.
· How can elements of the one being be subordinate yet co-equal and co-eternal and still be part of an extended structure, namely the body of Christ without the same state being extended to all members of the body?
· How can a being worship itself without having serious psychological problems?
God is the object of worship stated in Isaiah and repeated by Christ in Matthew 15:10: “They worship me in vain; their teachings are but rules taught by men.”
(Lk. 4:8) “Get behind me, Satan! For it is written, 'You shall worship the Lord your God and Him only shall you serve'.”
(Jn. 4:21-23) “... worship the Father. You worship what you do not know. We know what we worship, for salvation is of the Jews. Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshippers will worship the Father in spirit and in truth; for the Father is seeking such to worship Him.”
(Eph. 3:14-15) For this reason I bow my knees to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, from whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named.
· How can an omnipresent being in hypostases come and go from itself?
(Jn. 14:28) “You have heard me say to you, 'I am going away and coming back to you.' If you loved me, you would rejoice because I said, 'I am going to the Father,' for my Father is greater than I.”
(Jn. 16:27-28) “... and have believed that I came forth from God. I came forth from the Father ... I leave the world and go to the Father.”
· Similarly how can it be greater than itself? Or how can it be seen and yet deny that anyone has seen it?
(Jn. 6:46) “Not that anyone has seen the Father, except He who is from God; he has seen the Father.”
(Jn. 5:37) “And the Father himself, who sent me, has testified of me. You have neither heard His voice at any time, nor seen His form.”
· How then can God have form but not shape?
· How can a being listen to itself and be the object of its own prayer?
(Jn. 11:41-42) “... Father I thank you that you have heard me. And I know that you always hear me, but because of the people who are standing by I said this, that they may believe that you sent me.”
· How can a being be powerless yet dependent upon itself?
(Jn. 5:19) “... Most assuredly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of himself, but what he sees the Father do; for whatever He does, the Son also does in like manner.” How can it imitate itself?
· How can a being attribute independent authority to itself?
(Jn. 12:49-50) “For I have not spoken on my own authority; but the Father who sent me gave me a command, what I should say and what I should speak. And I know that His command is everlasting life. Therefore, whatever I speak, just as the Father has told me so I speak.”
· How can a being be subject to itself and deliver something up to itself?
(1Cor. 15:28) Now when all things are made subject to Him, then the Son himself will also be subject to Him who put all things under him, that God may be all in all.
(1Cor. 15:24) Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father, when he puts an end to all rule and all authority and power.
· Similarly how can a being reallocate its power?
(Jn. 5:30) “I can of myself do nothing. As I hear, I judge; and my judgement is righteous, because I do not seek my own will but the will of the Father who sent me.”
(Jn. 5:19) ... “Most assuredly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of himself, but what he sees the Father do; for whatever He does, the Son also does in like manner.”
· How can Christ attribute the Kingdom of God to the Father if they are one being?
(Mat. 26:29) “But I say to you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.”
(Mk. 10:15) “Assuredly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the Kingdom of God as a little child will by no means enter it.”
(Lk. 12:32) “Do not fear little flock for it is you Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom.”
· How can a co-equal being have something bestowed by the Father in order to bestow it upon its own subordinates?
(Lk. 22:29-30) “And I bestow upon you a kingdom, just as my Father bestowed one upon me, that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.”
· How can the elect be co-heirs with Christ if Christ is already God possessing the Godhead from eternity? What was or is there to inherit?
(Rom. 8:27) ... and if children, then heirs - heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ ...
· How can a being confess or deny others to itself?
(Mat. 10:32-33) “Therefore whoever confesses me before men, him I will confess before my father who is in heaven. But whoever denies me before men, him I will also deny before my Father who is in heaven.”
· How can a being love or hate itself in any meaningful way other than as a psychological condition?
Trinitarian Questions on the Nature of God and Christ that show error in understanding, or attempt to mislead the Bible Student
Q1. Why did Thomas call Jesus God in John 20:28?
A1. The text in John 20:28 refers to the The Angel of YHVH (No. 24) in Exodus 34:6 where Christ declares himself as: “The Lord the Lord a god merciful and gracious.” This text is again repeated in Psalm 86:15 and the relationship is declared again in Psalm 45:7-7 and Hebrews 1:8-9. He was the subordinate elohim of Israel of which there were 72 over the nations (cf. Deut. 32:8 (RSV, LXX, DSS). Follow this sense through Hebrews 1:7-10 below referring back to Psalm 2:9 and Revelation 2:27; also Hebrews 3:1,14. The qualification is listed in Luke 4:18 where the Spirit of the Lord was upon him to preach good news to the poor and release to the captives. This was achieved through the Holy Spirit as he was created a son of God and sent in the spirit of God (cf. Acts 4:27; 10:38; 2Cor. 1:21).
Q2. Why is Jesus called God in Hebrews 1:8 and what does it mean? How is He the representation of God?
A2. The text in Hebrews 1:3 says he reflects the glory of God and bears the very stamp of His nature. That is why he is a called the Morning Star which reflect the power of the sun and reflects the Holy Spirit.
Hebrews 1:1-14 In many and various ways God spoke of old to our fathers by the prophets;  but in these last days he has spoken to us by a Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world.  He reflects the glory of God and bears the very stamp of his nature, upholding the universe by his word of power. When he had made purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,  having become as much superior to angels as the name he has obtained is more excellent than theirs.  For to what angel did God ever say, "Thou art my Son, today I have begotten thee"? Or again, "I will be to him a father, and he shall be to me a son"?  And again, when he brings the first-born into the world, he says, "Let all God's angels worship him."  Of the angels he says, "Who makes his angels winds, and his servants flames of fire." But of the Son he says, "Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever, the righteous scepter is the scepter of thy kingdom. Thou hast loved righteousness and hated lawlessness; therefore God, thy God, has anointed thee with the oil of gladness beyond thy comrades." And, "Thou, Lord, didst found the earth in the beginning, and the heavens are the work of thy hands;  they will perish, but thou remainest; they will all grow old like a garment, like a mantle thou wilt roll them up, and they will be changed. But thou art the same, and thy years will never end."  But to what angel has he ever said, "Sit at my right hand, till I make thy enemies a stool for thy feet"?  Are they not all ministering spirits sent forth to serve, for the sake of those who are to obtain salvation?
Hebrews repeats Psalm 45:6-7.
The purpose of the chapter is to declare the position of Christ as one that is elevated because of his incarnation. The translation is a false rendering in that the Christ was appointed heir of all things.
The text is translated as: "Through whom he created the world", but that is false as the word translated "world" in verse 2 is in fact Aeonas or age of the earth and its administration. Christ did not create the world. He created the ages from Adam. God sent the Christ as the prototokos of the angelic Host to redeem the Host and he appointed the angels as ministering spirits to mankind and they were sent forward so that mankind could receive salvation. Christ was placed above them.
Christ was sent to redeem both mankind and the Fallen Host and for which he went to preach to the Host in Tartaros, as we see in 1Peter 3:14-4:6:
 But even if you do suffer for righteousness' sake, you will be blessed. Have no fear of them, nor be troubled,  but in your hearts reverence Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to make a defense to any one who calls you to account for the hope that is in you, yet do it with gentleness and reverence;  and keep your conscience clear, so that, when you are abused, those who revile your good behavior in Christ may be put to shame.  For it is better to suffer for doing right, if that should be God's will, than for doing wrong. For Christ also died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit;  in which he went and preached to the spirits in prison,  who formerly did not obey, when God's patience waited in the days of Noah, during the building of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were saved through water.  Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,  who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers subject to him.
1Peter 4:1-6 Since therefore Christ suffered in the flesh, arm yourselves with the same thought, for whoever has suffered in the flesh has ceased from sin,  so as to live for the rest of the time in the flesh no longer by human passions but by the will of God.  Let the time that is past suffice for doing what the Gentiles like to do, living in licentiousness, passions, drunkenness, revels, carousing, and lawless idolatry.  They are surprised that you do not now join them in the same wild profligacy, and they abuse you;  but they will give account to him who is ready to judge the living and the dead.  For this is why the gospel was preached even to the dead, that though judged in the flesh like men, they might live in the spirit like God.
The texts show perfectly that Christ is the subordinate elohim of Israel who was the servant of his God the Father and one of the comrades of the sons of God who were the Host.
The text is translated as: He reflects the Glory of God and bears the very stamp of His nature upholding the universe by the word of His power. The translation is rendered to make it appear that it is upheld by Christ's power but it is upheld by the word of God's power. That is: "bearing all things by the word of the power of him (i.e. God)" (cf. Marshalls Interlinear Greek English).
The writer of Hebrews has also shown the role in Hebrews 3:1-6.
Hebrews 3:1-6 Therefore, holy brethren, who share in a heavenly call, consider Jesus, the apostle and high priest of our confession.  He was faithful to him who appointed him, just as Moses also was faithful in God's house.  Yet Jesus has been counted worthy of as much more glory than Moses as the builder of a house has more honor than the house.  (For every house is built by some one, but the builder of all things is God.)  Now Moses was faithful in all God's house as a servant, to testify to the things that were to be spoken later,  but Christ was faithful over God's house as a son. And we are his house if we hold fast our confidence and pride in our hope.
In Hebrews 3:2 it clearly says that Christ was faithful to him who made him. The word is Poiesanti meaning “the one making him” and it is only translated as appointed in this one place and elsewhere it is translated as "making" in both the NT and the LXX.
Refer also to the paper Introduction to the Godhead (No. 193).
In this way he was the firstborn of the Creation of God (Col. 1:15) and the Beginning (Arche) of the Creation of God (Rev. 3:14).
Q3. Why does John the apostle state that Jesus was the Word which was God that became flesh (Jn. 1:1,14)?
A3. The term Word comes from the Greek Logos which is from the Hebrew Memra who was the spokesman for God. John 1:1 is incorrectly translated by the Trinitarians. It should read: In the beginning was the word and the word was toward God and [a] God was the word. The indefinite article always has to be inferred from the Greek. The Concordant Literal NT omits the indefinite article by translating it thus. The New World Translation infers the article but changes the end word order. Verse 14 merely states that the Memra became flesh and tabernacled amongst us and we gaze at his glory as of an only begotten from the Father. The sense of this is explained in John 1:18 where the monogenese theos, or only born god, the one dwelling in the bosom of the Father spoke or declared. The word “Him” has been added incorrectly or fraudulently (read also On the Words: Monogenes Theos in Scripture and Tradition (No. B4)). God had never been seen by any human ever (Jn. 1:18, 6:46 1Tim. 6:16).
This is also explained in the paper The Pre-Existence of Jesus Christ (No. 243).
The distinction of the Beings is made in the text in Jude 4 but disguised by these Trinitarians and supported by the Binitarians/Ditheists (see A13 below).
Q4. Why is the phrase "Call upon the name of the LORD" (Hebrew, YHVH, i.e., Psalm 116:4) used only of God in the OT, and translated into the Greek in the LXX as: "Call upon the name of the LORD (Greek, KURIOS)," applied to Jesus in the NT (1Cor. 1:2) if Jesus is not God in flesh?
A4. This question is a fraudulent proposition in its structure and facts. The question shows no knowledge if the two names Yahovah (SHD 3068) and Yahovih (SHD 3069) and their application within the Host. The name Yahovah applies to the Subordinate God of Israel or any of the sons of God speaking or representing Yahovah of Hosts who is Eloah. Yahovah is the Third person form of the verb meaning He cause to be and it is applied to all the angelic Beings as messengers for God (that is Eloah), who is the Elyon (The Most High God) or Yahovah of Hosts meaning the senior Yahovah who is Yahovih.
This distinction between the two beings is well understood and when the two words are read in the Hebrew they do not say Yahovih and Yahovah, they say Elohim for 3069 and Adonai for 3068.
The texts show in Genesis chapters 18 and 19 that when God sent them to Abraham and Lot there were three Yahovahs present and one stayed with Abraham and the other two went to Lot and then they pronounced judgment and called fire down from Yahovah in heaven (see the paper The Angel of YHVH (No. 24).
The term kurios has similar distinctions in the Greek but the applications are applied to many beings both heavenly and human. The claims re the Hebrew and the association are fraudulent and show no understanding of the OT texts and the names of God.
Q5. Why does the apostle John say that Jesus was, "...calling God His own Father, making Himself equal to God" (John 5:18)?
A5. John 5:18 is usually rendered:
 This was why the Jews sought all the more to kill him, because he not only broke the sabbath but also called God his Father, making himself equal with God.
The text reflects the distinction found in Psalm 45:6-7 where the subordinate elohim of Israel was the son of God from the texts. He was the son of Ha Elohim thus making himself an elohim. He as elohim had God the Father as his elohim. He was an elohim but he was not the one True God. The equality is that he made himself equal to the subordinate theos of Israel. The distinction is deliberately blurred by the Trinitarians to disguise the distinction. The One True God was always referred to as Ton Theon or Ho Theos in the Greek and the subordinates and, indeed, any of the elohim was simply referred to as Theos (SGD 2316). The two distinctions of Ton Theon and Theos are both rendered 2316 and applied as accusative and nominative case respectively when the Koine is used in this way to preserve the Eloah /elohim or Ha Elohim and Elohim or the Yahovih /Yahovah distinctions in the Greek which the Trinitarians ignore. In this text it is said that he was thus making the Father Ton Theon equal to the /a God (Theos). The text has two God-beings one superior to the other.
See also the paper Psalm 45 (No. 177)
Q6. What did Jesus say that caused the Pharisees to claim that Jesus was making himself out to be God?
A6. Once again the distinction of the Superior and subordinate Theoi (pl.) was understood by the early church and the Jews and this was hidden by the Binitarians and Trinitarians that took over from the last quarter of the second century in Rome.
Q7. How was it possible for Jesus to know all things (John 21:17)?
A7. This again is a Trinitarian fraudulent mistranslation. The word translated as knowing is the word oidas (eidos) (SGD 1491) meaning perceiving or viewing all things. It was then rendered as SGD 1492 (but it does not appear in Strong at all as 1492) which is Eido having the implication of knowing but the text eidos means simply to be able to see or view.
John 21:17 is translated with the two words oidas and ginoskeis as know when of the two words only ginosko has that connotation.
It properly means “you perceive all things and you know that I love you.” It is another Trinitarian fraud in the English text.
Matthew 24:36 "But of that day and hour knoweth no man, not the Angels of Heaven, but My Father only."
Christ clearly was not omniscient and Revelation 1 states clearly that it is the Revelation God gave to Christ. He did not know the facts of it and is therefore not omniscient. When given the text he was already resurrected and before God.
He is not co-equal:
Matthew 26:53 "Thinkest that I cannot now pray to My Father, and he shall presently give Me more than 12 legions of Angels?"
If Christ were co-equal he would summon his own Host.
The Father is in control at all times.
Mark 14:36: "And He said Abba, Father, all things are possible unto Thee; take away this cup from Me, nevertheless not what I Will, but what Thou Wilt."
Knowledge is imparted from the Father to Christ and the prophets who then reveal it to men. They are not co-equal, or co-eternal with the Father Eloah who alone is the One True God and He chooses which of us is to be given to Christ and given the Holy Spirit. We then set up our relationship with the Father in the name of Christ.
John 16:23-33 And in that day ye shall ask me nothing. Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, he will give [it] you.  Hitherto have ye asked nothing in my name: ask, and ye shall receive, that your joy may be full.  These things have I spoken unto you in proverbs: but the time cometh, when I shall no more speak unto you in proverbs, but I shall shew you plainly of the Father.  At that day ye shall ask in my name: and I say not unto you, that I will pray the Father for you:  For the Father himself loveth you, because ye have loved me, and have believed that I came out from God.  I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world: again, I leave the world, and go to the Father.  His disciples said unto him, Lo, now speakest thou plainly, and speakest no proverb.  Now are we sure that thou knowest all things, and needest not that any man should ask thee: by this we believe that thou camest forth from God.  Jesus answered them, Do ye now believe?  Behold, the hour cometh, yea, is now come, that ye shall be scattered, every man to his own, and shall leave me alone: and yet I am not alone, because the Father is with me.  These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world.
Christ said that “all things have been told to me of my father.”
Matthew 11:27 All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and [he] to whomsoever the Son will reveal [him].
Luke 10:22 All things are delivered to me of my Father: and no man knoweth who the Son is, but the Father; and who the Father is, but the Son, and [he] to whom the Son will reveal [him].
John 14:26 But the Comforter, [which is] the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
John 15:15 Henceforth I call you not servants; for the servant knoweth not what his lord doeth: but I have called you friends; for all things that I have heard of my Father I have made known unto you.
Q8. How can Jesus know all men (John 16:30)?
A8. The word men is not mentioned in the text in 16:30 and the word translated know is oidamen and oidas (SHD 1491) meaning now we see that you perceive all things. It is another misrepresentation. The context is as above.
Q9. How can Jesus be everywhere (Mat. 28:20)?
A9. This text says nothing about Christ being everywhere. It merely says he will be with us until the end of the age which is obviously achieved through the Holy Spirit given the texts: More misrepresentation.
Q10. How can Jesus, the Christ, dwell in you (Col. 1:27)?
A10. He dwells in us by the Holy Spirit which is the power of God sent by God (Eloah).We partake of the body and blood of Christ. Christ dwells in those who have taken of the body and blood of Christ.
Through baptism and the laying on of hands, the elect are given yearly renewal by taking the Lord’s Supper at the Passover season. Christ dwells in us by the express will and power of God the Father. The full text gives a fuller understanding of this simple principle:
Colossians 1:20-29 And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, [I say], whether [they be] things in earth, or things in heaven.  And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in [your] mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled  In the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight:  If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and [be] not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, [and] which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister;  Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body's sake, which is the church:  Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God;  [Even] the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints:  To whom God would make known what [is] the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory:  Whom we preach, warning every man, and teaching every man in all wisdom; that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus:  Whereunto I also labour, striving according to his working, which worketh in me mightily.
The Father dwells in Christ through the same vehicle that he dwells in us. They are one as we are one with Christ when reconciled and partakers of his sacrifice. He (Christ) will present us to the Father that He (the FATHER) may be all in all.
Christ dwells in us by the will of Eloah who gives us to Christ and sends us the Holy Spirit by which that is accomplished and by which we understand the Mysteries of God and are given the fruits of the Holy Spirit.
Matthew 7:21 Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter into the Kingdom of Heaven, but he that does the Will of My Father, which is in Heaven.
It is through the will of God that we are coheirs with Christ and are given eternal life as Christ was given it.
Q11. How can Jesus be eternal (Micah 5:1-2)?
A11. This question is a fabrication to misconstrue the text of Micah 5:1-3. The text is explained using the Hebrew authorities in the paper Micah 5:2-3 (No. 121). Like all Trinitarian renderings and Binitarian and Ditheist renderings it is an unbiblical misconstruction.
Q12. How can Jesus be the one who gives eternal life (John 10:27-28)?
A12. Verse 29 goes on to explain it is Christ that is given eternal life through God. We are made co-heirs in this inheritance. The texts that explain this can be found at Mark 10:17; John 3:15; 17:2-3 (see also the paper Eternal Life (No. 133)).
Q13. How can He be our only Lord and Master (Jude 4)?
A13. Jude 4 is another misconstruction and fraud of the Trinitarians.
The RSV text in Marshalls Greek English Interlinear is:
For admission has been secretly gained by some who long ago were designated for this condemnation, ungodly persons who pervert the grace of our God into licentiousness and deny our only master and lord, Jesus Christ.
This text talks of the grace of God and also about our only master and lord Jesus Christ (or the only master and our lord Jesus Christ as per some texts (see Marshalls).
The KJV reads denying the only Lord God and our Lord Jesus Christ. Bullinger and the authorities admit the texts do not read Lord God and in fact the Lord is actually the word despotes meaning master and not Lord.
It is just another forgery adding the word God where there is no such word in the Greek texts.
Q14. How can Jesus be called the Mighty God (Isaiah 9:6) if there is only one God in existence (Isaiah 44:6-8; 45:5)?
A14. This matter has been answered in the paper Isaiah 9:6 (No. 224).
There are many elohim or theoi. Psalm 45:6-7 (Hebrews 1:8-9) shows there are two Gods. There is a superior and subordinate and the subordinate has many comrades.
Paul says there are theoi polloi meaning there are many gods.
Isaiah 9:6 uses the word El (SHD 410) and El can mean mighty person or God and refer to anyone of the Host or man.
The LXX of Isaiah 9:6 calls Christ the Angel of Great counsel so we are definitely speaking of the Angel of the Presence in this text. The Trinitarians never refer to a text that proves the opposite of what they say unless they are claiming it as a proof text and assert it means the opposite of what it actually does say, like Philippians 2:5-8 where Christ did not seek to grasp after equality with God which was the sin of Satan.
The Greek says Megales Boules
Aggelos. The Greek aggelos is always translated as Angel in the NT. It means messenger but the Trinitarians only
translate it as messenger when it refers to Christ. They want it both ways.
The Hebrew of Isaiah 9:6 says Mighty El. The word El can be used of the angelic Host and the human host. The LXX used aggelos to translate Mighty El (in the words SHD 3289 counsellor, SHD 410 El, and SHD 1368 Mighty). The words do not refer to the one True God Eloah. This one's name is Pele (6382). The Greek was chosen to reflect the fact that this text referred to the Messenger of God and he is identified in Psalm 45:6-7, and Hebrews 1:8-9 identified him as Christ who is the subordinate elohim of Israel.
Q15. How can Jesus be called the Mighty God (Isaiah 9:6) and "God" also be called the Mighty God in Isaiah 10:21?
A15. There are two beings involved. The First above in the El and the Being in Isaiah 10:21 is explained in verse 23 as Yahovah of Hosts which is the One True God, Eloah. Again a confusion of terms in not understanding the Hebrew names involved. See above.
Q16. How was Jesus able to raise himself from the dead (John 2:19-21)?
A16. John 2:19-21 refers to the Temple as the body of the Resurrection. The Bible says elsewhere that it was God that raised him from the dead (cf. Acts 2:24,30; 26:8; 2Cor. 4;14; Eph. 1:20, Heb. 11:19).
He was actually saying his body would be resurrected in 3 days.
+ Etymology:probably akin to the base of 58 (through the idea of collecting one's faculties);
- Definition: to waken (transitively or intransitively), i.e. rouse (literally, from sleep, from sitting or lying, from disease, from death; or figuratively, from obscurity, inactivity, ruins, nonexistence)
+ KJV usage:--awake, lift (up), raise (again, up), rear up, (a-)rise (again, up), stand, take up.
Christ died. The Immortal God Eloah who is the Father of all cannot die. The Father clearly raised him from the dead. The Father sent him. I go to my Father...I pray the Father who SENT me etc. Christ was clear that he was sent BY God... not as God (Eloah).
Q17. How can Jesus create all things (Col. 1:16-17), yet it is God who created all things by Himself (Isaiah 44:24)?
A17. Colossians 1:16-17 states that Christ created thrones and dominions and principalities and authorities. He did not create the Beings called sons of God who are the heavenly Host.
God (also as Yahovah Elohim) is stated as creating all things (cf. El) (cf. Gen. 1:1; 2:4; Gen. 6:7 (as Yahovah in the observation and the decision of destruction);
Deuteronomy 32:6 (identified as Eloah in 32:15;17 who is The God and the Rock of our salvation);
Isaiah 42:5 (El), 45:18 (Ha Elohim the Creator Yahovah The God using the definite article and He states that He did not create the world Tohu or in vain as it had become in Gen. 1:2);
Malachi 2:10 (The one God who created us all); Mark 13:19 (Christ states here that God created the creation);
Colossians 3:10 Paul states that it was God that created the creation;
Ephesians 1:20 (He wrought power through Christ and raised Christ from the dead);
Ephesians 3:9 (God created and was the origin of the Plan hidden by God who created all things in the Mysteries and who made known to the rulers and the authorities in the heavens through the church according to the purpose of the ages which he made in Christ (cf. Marshalls Interlinear): Thus Christ was the instrument of the organisation of the ages but the creation was of the One True God; see also Rev. 10:6).
The distinction between the two is made in Titus 1:2,4.
Q18. How can Jesus search the hearts and minds of the people (Rev. 2:23)?
A18. Christ is given judgment of the nations in the Resurrection. He was given the Holy Spirit and it searches out all things. Discernment of Spirits is one of the gifts and judgment is given to all of the elect through the Holy Spirit and we shall judge the world and the angels (1Cor. 6:2-3).
Q19. Why was Jesus worshiped (Matt. 2:2,11; 14:33; 28:9; John 9:35-38; Heb. 1:6) when He says to worship God only (Matt. 4:10)?
A19. The same Greek word for worship is used in each place. The word is actually proskuneo which does not mean to worship as God.
Quoted from Deuteronomy 32:43 which in the Septuagint reads: "Rejoice, ye heavens, together with him, and let all the angels of God worship him.....do obeisance, do homage, curtsey, kiss the hand towards.”
In Revelation 3:9 the synagogue of Satan is going to be made to proskuneo to the elect and on this interpretation they will be made to worship us, which is ridiculous. They will pay homage to us as priests and kings.
Q20. In the OT God was seen (Exodus 6:2-3; 24:9-11; Num. 12:6-9; Acts 7:2), yet no man can see God (Exodus 33:20; John 1:18). If it was not the Father that was seen in the OT (John 6:46), who, then were they seeing? See John 8:58.
A20. They were seeing the The Angel of YHVH (No. 24). As we have noted no man has seen God ever. The texts are all explained in the paper.
Q21. Then why did Jesus claim the divine name, "I AM", for Himself in John 8:58? See Exodus 3:14.
Christ spoke for God in Exodus 3:14. The name is not I AM. The words in the Hebrew are ‘eyeh ‘asher ‘eyeh which means I am (becoming) what I will become and refers to the structure of the names of God and the Angelic Host. God is Yahovih (SHD 3069) as Ha Elohim and those who speak for him are termed Yahovah (SHD 3068) which is a third person form of the verb meaning He Causes to be. Thus the One True God will become something which He is causing to become. The Hebrew is read by the Jews as Elohim for Yahovih (SHD 3069) and Adonai for Yahovah (SHD 3068) so as not to confuse the One True God and the other messengers of the Host with him. When Yahovih is referred to as Yahovah it is always as Yahovah of Hosts, so as to denote Him as the Supreme God Eloah or The Elyon; The Most High God.
Q22. Why is it that both the Father and the Son give life (John 5:21)?
A22. It was because God the Father Eloah gave the power to the son as explained in John 17:1-3 (see the paper Eternal Life (No. 133)).
Q23. Why did Jesus bear witness of Himself (John 8:18; 14:6)?
A23. I am one that bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me.
Strong's G3140 – martyreō: to be a witness, to bear witness, i.e. to affirm that one has seen or heard or experienced something, or that he knows it because taught by divine revelation or inspiration
a) to give (not to keep back) testimony
b) to utter honourable testimony, give a good report
c) conjure, implore
Authorized Version (KJV) Translation Count — Total: 79 AV — bear witness 25, testify 19, bear record 13, witness 5, be a witness 2, give testimony 2, have a good report 2, misc 11.
In any legal paper or testament a witness signs as a "witness." They are bearing witness. Anyone can also attest to themselves. It does not make that person God, the One Eloah. It doesn't make Him existing from perpetuity. It's Him attesting to the truth.
John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
He clearly states separateness and lower than the Father in this, and that he has an appointed job; just like in our daily life, no one comes to the CEO except through the appointed mediator or officer. If that officer were to claim to be the CEO or equal to him, he would be fired. That was the sin of Satan to grasp equality with God and which Christ did not seek to do (Phil. 2:5-8)
Q24. Why do Trinitarians and Binitarians/ Ditheists forge or use so many corrupt Bible texts?
A24. In addition to above, examples are as follows:
1John 5:7 in the KJV (Receptus): there is no reference to the Trinity in the Bible so they forged one in 1John 5:7 of the KJV and the Receptus.
In 1Timothy 3:16 the KJV used the known forged text which was forged in the Codex Sanaiticus and the forgery is in two different inks in the text to make the word who based on the uncial O into the Theta sigma as an abbreviation for Theos or God which it is definitely is not.
Bullinger shows the forged texts in his footnotes in the Companion Bible where you will often see the comments such as The Texts Omit which shows it is a Trinitarian forgery.
The Trinitarians and Binitarians have no basis for their theology in the Bible and so they forge whatever they deem necessary, and the Protestants are the worst of the falsifiers.
Here we return to the arguments that are demonstrated in the section: Questions to ask Trinitarians that they and Binitarians cannot logically answer within their paradigm. Christ bore witness of God and stated that he bore of witness of himself and the deeds he did also bore witness of himself. Each of us bears witness of ourselves as sons of God in the Holy Spirit and we are sent by the Holy Spirit to bear witness of both God and Christ and the church. Our deeds bear witness of the faith and of the God through the Holy Spirit.
John 15:23 states that: He who hates me hates my Father also. However, this is not because they are one being as we see from John 5:20: “For the Father loves the Son, and shows him all things that He himself does; and He will show Him greater works than these, that you may marvel”.
Given this, how can an omniscient being be shown something by another omniscient being? How then, given the above (and Rev. 1:1), can Christ be omniscient?
God is a spirit. John 4:24 states: God is a spirit: and those who worship Him must worship him in spirit and in truth. The attempt to make this text read God is spirit is not supported by any of the translations of the text and the sense in which it was used by any of the ante-Nicene theologians or their translators. This claim is to assert the non-individuality and non-specific nature of God. God is then developed to an extended immanent structure. This will go beyond Trinitarianism into Process Theology.
God has a family from Ephesians 3:14-16: “For this reason I bow my knees to the father of our Lord Jesus Christ, from whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named, ...”
Trinitarians/Binitarians attempt to make Christ and God one Being, or assert that Christ is God by reference to the false texts noted above and the mistranslation of John 1:1, which might more correctly say: in the beginning was the word and the word was with The God (Theon) and [a or our] God (theos)was the word.
Reference is made to the text in John 2:19 as holding that Christ was God because he says:
“Destroy this temple and I will raise it again in three days.”
The refutation of the assertion is found in the same Gospel in John 10:18, where Christ says of his life that:
“No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord, I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father.”
There is no doubt that Christ is a subordinate, obedient, loyal servant of the One True God. He is our brother and co-heir in the promise of the Kingdom of God. We do not however worship him or his spiritual symbols. By his command we worship God and do the commandments of God. Calling Christ Lord will not of itself get you into the kingdom of heaven.