TommyRadd Loc: Midwest USA

What Zemirah has done, in this post, as usual, is called “proof-texting.” It is an infamous method that is most often used for the purpose of teaching false doctrines that are not taught in scriptures. In this response, I’m going to prove conclusively that Zemirah has resorted to proof-texting in order to teach things the Bible never teaches, and in fact, she is teaching against what the Bible does teach. Why is that an issue? Because Christians are under a commandment:

"...command...people not to teach a different doctrine" 1 Timothy 1:3

Since proof texting is used to teach things the Bible never teaches, and things the apostles never openly declared, it is a form of lawlessness against that clear command.

Let me say that, in analogy from current events, Trinitarians who handle the word of God deceitfully like this, are like Pelosi and Schiff. In the case of Trinitarians, they shamelessly break the rules of law (the Bible) in order to “impeach” the human Jesus from his rightful throne, inherited from King David, as promised by sworn oath from God. Like America, the kingdom of God is a Kingdom of laws. Paul was clear that Christians are under the “law of Christ”:

“to those without law, as without law -- (not being without law to God, but within law to Christ ) -- that I might gain those without law” 1 Corinthians 9:21

Jesus condemned those who practice “lawlessness”:

“The Son of Man will send forth His angels, and they will gather out of His kingdom all the stumbling blocks and those practicing lawlessness,” Matthew 13:41

So those who teach other doctrines, particularly those who teach a “different” Christ than the apostles taught and preached, aren’t to be “celebrated” or “honored” for their “creativity”, but held to be accursed:

“6I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: 7Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. 8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. 9As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed. (Galatians 1:6–9)


“But I am afraid that somehow, as the serpent deceived Eve in his craftiness, so your minds might be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.” 2 Corinthians 11:3

Proof-texing is precisely one of the most common methods (along with jumping to conclusions and creating false dilemmas, which are all related), for producing false doctrines. Proof-texting is explained more fully here:
https://www.biblestudy.org/beginner/definition-of-christian-terms/prooftexting.html
Which is the opposite of “Hermeneutics” and “exegesis”, which is explained here:
http://www.spirithome.com/bible_exegesis.html

Basically speaking, “proof texting” is when you refer to, or string a bunch of verses together, taking them out of context, in an attempt to “prove” the Bible teaches something that it never actually teaches, and the authors never meant to say. Hermeneutics, on the other hand, is taking into consideration what the Bible says in context, the context of the writer’s place in history and situation, etc. It is meant to hear from the writer, as opposed to “putting words in the writer’s mouths” which is what Trinitarians do. They are constantly putting words into the mouths of the apostles regarding concepts that weren’t even developed or spoken of until centuries after the apostles departed this world.


To begin, let’s first look at how the Bible clearly teaches a doctrine, and then we’ll compare it to a proof-texted doctrine. Here is how the Bible clearly teaches something. I don’t even have to tell you up front what the topic is, because you can get it straight from the quoted Scripture:

“26...the angel Gabriel was sent from God... 27to a virgin pledged to be married to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David. The virgin's name was Mary ... 30The angel said to her... 31”Behold, you will conceive in your womb, and bring forth a son, and will call his name 'Jesus.' 32He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father, David, 33and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever. There will be no end to his Kingdom." 34 Mary said to the angel, "How can this be, since I do not know a man?" 35The angel answered her, "The Holy Spirit will come on you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. Therefore also the holy one who is born from you will be called the Son of God.” Luke 1:26-35

18Now the birth of Jesus Christ came about in this way: His mother Mary, having been pledged to Joseph, before their coming together, was found holding in womb through the Holy Spirit. 19Then Joseph her husband, being righteous and not willing to shame her publicly, resolved to divorce her quietly. 20But on his having pondered these things, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, you should not be afraid to receive Mary as your wife, for that having been conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. 21And she will bring forth a son, and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins.” 22And all this has come to pass, so that it may be fulfilled that having been spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying, 23“Behold, the virgin will hold in womb, and will bring forth a son...” Matthew 1:18-20.

What is obvious, in simply reading these verses, is that the very subject matter, the topic, is the virgin birth of Jesus via Mary. It isn’t talking about one thing, and then suddenly presents a concept that is totally off topic, and then returns to the original topic. Furthermore, we don’t have to “interject” the word “virgin”, the word is actually used in the Bible. We also don’t have to guess about the meaning of the word “virgin”, for even the description of the virgin birth is spelled out and reiterated in the text itself: 34And Mary said to the angel, “How will this be, since I do not know a man?” "35The angel answered her, "The Holy Spirit will come on you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. Therefore also the holy one who is born from you will be called the Son of God.” And again, “18Now the birth of Jesus Christ was like this; for after his mother, Mary, was engaged to Joseph, before they came together, she was found pregnant by the Holy Spirit.”

It would be impossible not to understand that the Bible explicitly and clearly teaches in these verses that Jesus was born of a virgin named Mary; it is clearly mentioned and just as clearly defined. The point is, the virgin birth is “what we get out of” (exegesis) these passages, not “what we read into” (eisegesis) these passages. Thus, to teach otherwise, and to say, for example, that Jesus was, instead rather, born of the natural union of Mary and Joseph, would be to “teach another doctrine” contrary to the Bible’s commandment to not teach any other doctrines. Clear enough? I hope so.

Unfortunately, this difference between eisegesis and exegesis isn’t clear enough to Trinitarians. They believe they can read into the scriptures what they want it to say, and even negate or change what the Bible does say in order to justify their imposing their extrabiblical ideas on the text.

The way we gained from the scriptures the teaching of the virgin birth is NOT how Zemirah, or any other Trinitarian goes about attempting to “prove” the Trinity is in the Bible. There simply are no scriptures that either use the word “Trinity”, or that spell out the extrabiblical idea that “God is three coequal persons in one substance” as Trinitarians insist the Bible must mean. Rather, Zemirah and her merry band of lawless Trinitarians, not willing to be satisfied with what the Bible actually does teach, set themselves adamantly against what the Bible does openly teach. In this way they are in open rebellion against the Constitution of the Kingdom of God, which is the New Covenant/Testament, which commands us to teach no other doctrine. Why would they do that? Well, the Bible tells us why:

“because the mind of the flesh is hostile towards God; for it is not subject to God's law, neither indeed can it be.” Romans 8:7

This explains why Trinitarians like Zemirah aren’t content to submit themselves under the first commandment of Jesus or the commandment to “teach no other doctrine” and the commandment to call anyone “accursed” who preaches another good news. This also explains why they react in hostility (through false accusations and ad hominem attacks, even creating their own laws by which to accuse people) when confronted with the truth of scripture that contradicts their proof-texted, jumped-to, false-dilemma conclusions.

In other words, they react in the same pattern many Democrats typically do when they are presented with facts that don’t fit their ideology. Namely:
Lie
Project
Double down.

This has been the historic response of the majority of leftists to President Trump, just as it has been my experience with the response of these Trinitarians to my presentations to them of historic facts and scriptures that contradict their “proof-texted”, extrabiblical, jumped to, false conclusions.

Continued in Part Two

TommyRadd Loc: Midwest USA

Part Two

Having laid that foundational overview, let’s begin looking at the details of Zemirah’s “proof-texting”.

The false, preconceived idea that Trinitarians start with, in this case, for one, is the pagan and antichristian Gnostic idea that “logos” (“word”) is the name of a preexistent “deity” that incarnated into a human by “joining” himself to human flesh. For this they will use John 1:1-14 as a “proof-text” that actually says and teaches no such details. In fact, when you read what it actually says and compare it to what Trinitarians think it means, they don’t really believe what it says. It says, “the word was made flesh”. If the logos was a preexistent being, then the passage would be saying that the logos was made flesh. But Trinitarians say he remained God and was only “joined” to flesh. The Bible doesn’t say that. The Trinitarians simply don’t really believe what it does say. It doesn’t say the preexistent son was made flesh, it says God’s “word” was made flesh. If your “word” was made flesh, would that mean you, personally, were joined to a new distinct human nature? Of course not.

The secondary false, antichristian idea that Trinitarians presuppose the Bible means, is the doctrine of “dual natures.” The point for now is that nowhere does the Bible actually teach these doctrines as clearly as, say, the virgin birth, or the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Rather, they were both teachings that were inherent in the teachings of the ones the Bible calls “antichristians.”

In fact, Jesus himself rejected and renounced the idea that he was claiming to be “God”, for one, when the Jews accused him of being a man who made himself equal with God. Jesus replied that it was written in their law that men were called “elohim [god] unto whom the word of God came” (John 10:24–38). Jesus clearly told them that they were misunderstanding both him and the scriptures:

33The Jews answered him, "We don't stone you for a good work, but for blasphemy: because you, being a man, make yourself God." 34Jesus answered them, "Isn't it written in your law, 'I said, you are gods?' 35If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture can't be broken), 36do you say of him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, 'You blaspheme,' because I said, 'I am the Son of God?' 37If I don't do the works of my Father, don't believe me. 38But if I do them, though you don't believe me, believe the works; that you may know and believe that the Father is in me, and I in the Father." 39They sought again to seize him, and he went out of their hand.” John 10:33-39

Here is a place where the Jews were literally accusing Jesus of being equal to God. This is very nearly the same idea as the “coequal” doctrine of the Trinitarians. Did Jesus tell them, “you’re right, except that I’m God made into a man and the works I do prove that I am God in the flesh”. No, not at all. Jesus never said any such thing here or anywhere else! In fact, he consistently refuted the idea when he spoke and taught clearly, as we shall see. His answer to them, in this case, was that he was doing the works of the Father, not of himself. He was claiming all deity to the Father. There is no talk here of Trinity, of “coequality”, or that Jesus is God incarnate; except out of the mouths of the unbelieving Jews who wanted to put Jesus to death over that false idea.

And even though Jesus explained to them, out of their own scriptures, how their jumped to conclusions were untrue and unfounded, these unbelieving Jews continued to accuse Jesus, in various ways, of making himself equal to God. For their part, the apostles, in the Bible, called them false witnesses for doing so:

“The Jews sought…to kill him [Jesus], [for] making himself equal with God.” (John 5:18)

The unbelieving Jews claimed Jesus was claiming himself to be “equal” with God just as Trinitarians claim Jesus was claiming himself to be equal to God. This is no coincidence. The source of such error is the same.

“Jesus said to them... 43Why don't you understand my speech? Because you can't hear my word. 44You are of your father, the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and doesn't stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks on his own; for he is a liar, and its father. 45But because I tell the truth, you don't believe me.” John 8:43-45

Furthermore, the apostles did not agree with the unbelieving Jew’s conclusions. Rather, they called them false witnesses:

“Now the chief priests, the elders, and the whole council sought false testimony against Jesus, that they might put him to death; …at last two false witnesses came forward, and said, ‘This man said, ‘I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to build it in three days.’’ (Matthew 26:59-65 & Mark 14:55-62)

So, these Trinitarians have literally taken up the “false witness cause” of the Jews who claimed Jesus was claiming himself to be “equal to God”, and now imply, if not blatantly claim, that the Jews knew what they were talking about, and Jesus, therefore, must have been being less than honest with them for refuting their accusations. And not only are they making Jesus out to be a liar, but they are making the apostles liars because they called the unbelieving Jews false witnesses!

Can you see that Jesus nowhere in this passage expounded on the idea of himself as a coequal person in the Godhead in the manner that the other passages simply, obviously, and clearly taught his virgin birth?

This is the big switcheroo of Trinitarianism. They took the very same disbelief and false witnessing of the unbelieving Jews and made it the founding plank of whole their whole religion: that Jesus is somehow coequal with God because God was in him and working through him! That is their false dilemma conclusion. But the Bible explains something else, as we shall see.

Continued in Part Three

TommyRadd Loc: Midwest USA

Part Three



This is the false preconception of Trinitarians. This is where Zemirah has taken up the false witness of the unbelieving Jews who had Jesus put to death because they believed he was making himself equal with God.

Nowhere does the Bible say or teach either an “incarnation” or that Jesus was “100 percent God; 100 percent man, undiminished Deity dwelling in humanity” If it does, Trinitarians would quote the place, like I’ve quoted where the Bible teaches the virgin birth. But since they can’t quote such a place, their only recourse is to rely on proof-texting and interjecting false dilemmas on what they want the Bible to say that it doesn’t say.

Furthermore, nowhere did Jesus say he spoke sometimes from his personal deity and sometimes from his humanity. Rather, he said, in many ways, and many times, he always spoke and did by commandment from God his Father.

Like we did with the biblical teaching on the virgin birth, let’s see if we can find where Jesus himself explained how he came to wield god-like authority. Let’s see whether or not he personally explained himself in terms that clearly state he preexisted as a coequal person in heaven, and then incarnated himself on earth in order to save us and show us what a perfect human being looked like, so he could save us from our sins.

19Jesus therefore answered them, "Most certainly, I tell you, the Son can do nothing of himself, but what he sees the Father doing. For whatever things he does, these the Son also does likewise. 20For the Father has affection for the Son, and shows him all things that he himself does. He will show him greater works than these, that you may marvel. 21For as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son also gives life to whom he desires. 22For the Father judges no one, but he has given all judgment to the Son, 23that all may honor the Son, even as they honor the Father. He who doesn't honor the Son doesn't honor the Father who sent him. 24"Most certainly I tell you, he who hears my word, and believes him who sent me, has eternal life, and doesn't come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life. 25Most certainly, I tell you, the hour comes, and now is, when the dead will hear the Son of God's voice; and those who hear will live. 26For as the Father has life in himself, even so he gave to the Son also to have life in himself. 27He also gave him authority to execute judgment, because he is a son of man. 28Don't marvel at this, for the hour comes, in which all that are in the tombs will hear his voice, 29and will come out; those who have done good, to the resurrection of life; and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of judgment. 30I can of myself do nothing. As I hear, I judge, and my judgment is righteous; because I don't seek my own will, but the will of my Father who sent me.” John 5:19-30

Think back on the teaching of the virgin birth. It explicitly spelled out what we are to believe. It literally used the word “virgin” and it literally spelled out what it meant to be a virgin, “I have not known a husband”, “before they came together”, etc.

Now, where in this passage, wherein Jesus is teaching just as clearly, did he say he was “100 percent God; 100 percent man, undiminished Deity”? He didn’t. Rather, he explained something else entirely. Did he explain that he couldn’t do anything of “himself” because he had emptied himself of his deity in order to play the act of a good human being? No, there is no such wording in his teaching.

So Zemirah wants us to believe, that Jesus, in a passage teaching clearly about how he is a man entirely submitted to God’s will, and how that he speaks and sees by commandment from God, that God shows him what to say and what to do, that somehow in the midst of that teaching, we are supposed to believe he drops a phrase, completely out of context, that she uses as proof text, to attempt to “prove” that even in this passage Jesus is saying that he is in fact, God incarnate, completely to the opposite of the context of the passage or the words that he explicitly uses.

That is what Trinitarian proof-texting looks like. That is what taking verses out of context looks like. And Trinitarians do this constantly; and they think somehow because they have a lot of these types of “proof-texts” that they can impose their meaning on, that “proves” their case.

It is as if, in this case of John 5, for the Trinity to be true, Trinitarians would have to say that Jesus meant something 180 degrees different than what he clearly, simply and specifically said when read in context, which was this:

"Most certainly, I tell you, the Son can do nothing of himself, but what he sees the Father doing. For whatever things he does, these the Son also does likewise. 20For the Father has affection for the Son, and shows him all things that he himself does. He will show him greater works than these, that you may marvel.”

Jesus does not say he has omniscience in some things and in some things he doesn’t. He says he speaks and sees only what the Father shows him. Since the Father is omniscient, then what Jesus said, that he heard from God, and was told to say by commandment, may sound like Jesus was omniscient, but only if Jesus’ explanation is completely ignored or twisted to mean something he never said. But the fact is, Jesus explicitly said it didn’t come from “himself.” That is a particular word in the Greek [auotos]. It means “self”. Think of our word “automobile”, it means something that is self-driven, as opposed to a horse and buggy which is “horse-driven”, thus the buggy isn’t “self-driven”. Just like “virgin” is a particular word, the word for self teaches a particular thing that Trinitarians negate in order to impose their extrabiblical doctrine that what he meant was only his human nature. Or in Zemirah’s case, that he was saying he only acted in “agreement” with God. No. He didn’t say anything to the effect that he was speaking from his “limited human nature”, or merely in agreement, that would be to negate and deny what he actually did say, which was that he could do nothing from himself but was speaking by commandment from God according to what God showed him, and will show him.

So, Jesus just explained in a clear teaching, something other than what Trinitarians believe.

Jesus just explained in a clear teaching what the Jews also thought they heard, but they, like Trinitarians do, just jumped to the false conclusion that Jesus was claiming to be “coequal” with God.

This isn’t the only place where Jesus spoke and taught about himself in such clear and understandable terms that contradict the idea that he was coequal with God and was merely speaking from his “human nature”. For example:

“The works which the Father gave me to accomplish, the very works that I do, testify about me, that the Father has sent me.” (John 5:36)

Here Jesus refuted the idea that “the things he did proved he was inherently deity”; rather, he said he was just doing what the Father gave him to do. To say Jesus was God is to imply that what Jesus did was equally Jesus’ own works, which contradicts what Jesus said. Trinitarians believe they know Jesus better than Jesus, or at least better than Jesus was able to explain of himself when he was speaking clearly and matter-of-factly.

“44Jesus cried out and said, "Whoever believes in me, believes not in me, but in him who sent me... 49For I spoke not from myself, but the Father who sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak. 50I know that his commandment is eternal life. The things therefore which I speak, even as the Father has said to me, so I speak.” (John 12:50)

Here again Jesus taught clearly about himself, just as clearly as the Bible teaches the virgin birth in fact. But here he clearly refuted the idea that the things he did proved he was inherently deity; he spoke not from himself, but from the Father who sent him, and he spoke by commandment from God the Father. Did the son ever coequally command the Father to do anything at all? The very words “father” and “son” militate against the idea of coequality held by unbelieving Jews and Trinitarians. No problem for Trinitarians, they just redefine words that conflict with their beliefs until they can make it sound like the writers intended to mean what they meant. This is a classic case of the intent in dishonest “proof-texting”.

Zemirah says, “how Jesus sometimes was omniscient and sometimes not.”

Jesus never said such things. But don’t take my word for it. Let’s ask Jesus: “Tell us Jesus, did you speak sometimes as a man and sometimes from your own personal deity?”

“For the Father has affection for the Son, and shows him all things that He Himself does.” (John 5:20)

How many things do you do from your own omniscience? Crickets. How many things do you do that were shown to you from your Father? “All things” Jesus answered. Trinitarians just can’t hear his word, that’s all. Sad.

“The words that I tell you, I speak not from myself; but the Father who lives in me does His works.” (John 14:10)

Wait, what, Jesus? Is the contrast of your deific works and your human works a contrast of your human nature with your deific nature? Crickets. What then is the true contrast between your humanity and things you do that only God could do? Jesus answers, “The words that I tell you, I speak not from myself; but the Father who lives in me does His works.”

Jesus continues this line of teaching...

“Jesus answered them, ‘I have shown you many good works from my Father…’” (John 10:32)

“He who sent me is with me. The Father hasn’t left me alone, because I always do the things that are pleasing to Him.” (John 8:29)

Consistently as ever. Jesus never teaches that he speaks sometimes from his [own supposed personal] deity and sometimes from his humanity.

Again, we see another specific word in the mouth of Jesus that Trinitarians can’t hear, and that word is, “because”. Jesus doesn’t anywhere tell us that the Father hasn’t left him alone “because” they are a “Trinity of coequal persons in one substance”, whom, thereby would be impossible to separate from each other. No, he doesn’t say that at all. But he does clearly say and teach something different. He says that the Father hasn’t left him alone “because I always do the things that are pleasing to Him”. The word “because” is a Greek word [hoti] that, grammatically, is “subordinating and causal.” That means it very specifically is teaching us that the reason God hasn’t left Jesus alone is because [that is, “based on the cause that”] Jesus always does what is pleasing to God. This is not a flippant, or misapplied use of the word “because”, and it isn’t applied to Jesus’ mere human nature, but to his person, his “self”, his “autos” in the Greek. There is no place in the Bible where it teaches, let alone teaches so clearly, that God and Jesus are inextricably linked by some extrabiblically defined “deific substance” that they both share. Rather, that idea is explicitly contradicted by what Jesus just said here. And it is a teaching, like the virgin birth, that is often reiterated in the Bible so that it shouldn’t be missed:

“3A Man of sorrows... 5he was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities... 11My righteous Servant shall justify many, For he shall bear their iniquities. 12Therefore I will divide him a portion with the great, And he shall divide the spoil with the strong, Because he poured out his soul unto death, And he was numbered with the transgressors, And he bore the sin of many, And made intercession for the transgressors. (Isaiah 53:3, 5, 11–12; NKJV)

In verse 12, above, Isaiah gave no less than four reasons, that is, prerequisite “causes”, why the Messiah would be counted “great” and “strong.” Not one of these reasons had to do with him being an incarnation of God. The reasons provided were: 1) his death; 2) his being “numbered with the transgressors” (that is, he was made in all things like his brethren, as described in Hebrews 2:17–18); 3) his having borne the sins of many; and 4) his having “made intercession for the transgressors.”

These “causes” are made into a sham by the Trinity doctrine that says, otherwise, that Jesus himself was inherently God, for whom such “trivial actions”, in the scheme of eternity and an eternal God, would have had no bearing on his status or rank with the Father.

Continued in Part Four

TommyRadd Loc: Midwest USA

Part Four

The following twin passages provide two more reasons why Jesus was anointed above the rest of us, his brothers:

“You have loved righteousness, and hated wickedness. Therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness above your fellows. (Psalm 45:7)

“You have loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; Therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness above your fellows.” (Hebrews 1:6–9)

Jesus loved righteousness and hated wickedness, and those are two more reasons, causes, why God anointed him above the rest of us. Two more biblical reasons that Trinitarians make into a sham by teaching what the Bible doesn’t teach, and by neutralizing and belittling what the Bible does teach as the true cause of Jesus’ honor by and exaltation from God.

These passages begin with the personal pronoun “you” [Greek autos]. They are thus not talking about Jesus’ trinitarian-mythical, unbiblical, “human nature” being exalted by his Father for the cause of loving righteousness and hating iniquity. These verses finish by saying that the subject (“you”) person is exalted above other persons (“your fellows”), whom we know as Christ’s brother-followers, not because of deific nature, but because of things he loved and hated.

Anyone who rejects the truth clearly stated in these passages minimizes what Jesus Christ accomplished as a human person. It would be like reading the verses where the Bible clearly teaches the virgin birth and claiming that isn’t what the Bible actually meant. Men have made up the idea that Jesus was God acting as a man, but they have absolutely no Scriptures that say so. If it were true, the Bible would have explained in detail his being so, but instead it clearly and consistently explains and describes in detail something different. If Jesus was the person of God in any manner, then he simply did not accomplish these things as a human being. That is the ugly truth behind the Trinitarian and Onenessian theories and any other theory that assigns deific personality to Jesus the Anointed. In effect, they are implying that he “cheated,” because there is no way that God Himself could ever have really been tempted the way we are. They give lip service to believing in Jesus’ humanity, when they claim he is “also” God. God being tempted while pretending to be a man is just religious nonsense! Jesus was exalted by God because he overcame, and he was foreknown by God to be the man to do so!

This next passage explains the exact reason that Jesus was given a name above all names. Once again, it wasn’t because he “was God”; rather, it was because he was obedient to the one who commanded him:

“Have this in your mind, which was also in Christ Jesus, who, existing in the form of God, didn’t consider it robbery to be equal with God, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself, becoming obedient to death, yes, the death of the cross. Therefore God also highly exalted him, and gave to him the name which is above every name; that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, those on earth, and those under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. So then, my beloved, even as you have always obeyed, not only in my presence, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.” (Philippians 2:5–12)

This passage is another passage, like the ones about the virgin birth, that teach something very clearly. The context is how we are to think of ourselves. Then it explains, very clearly, a certain fact: “being found in human form, he humbled himself”. There is no corresponding explanation, her or anywhere, that Jesus emptied himself of his deity. Rather, it says that in human form, [that is, as a human unless Trinitarians want to claim he wasn’t really human], he humbled himself. But what is most striking, and clearly stated, is the result of his humbling himself: Therefore God also highly exalted him, and gave to him the name.” It doesn’t say Jesus had this name, or deserved this name simply because he was inherently God! And the reason it explains this, it goes on to say: “So then, my beloved...work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.” Let’s see, since Jesus was God incarnate who came to be a human therefore we should work out our own salvation with fear and trembling? NO! Because Jesus was “highly exalted” for his obedient humility, therefore we are to work out our own salvation with fear and trembling. Once again, Trinitarians are totally exposed and guilty of proof-texting their “coequal deity” doctrine in a passage that is clearly teaching anything BUT the coequality of Jesus with the Father.

This passage is often misunderstood in this way, but if we use other Scriptures that talk about the same topic, we can gain a better understanding, and realize just how consistent this teaching is taught in the Bible. For example:

“Therefore the Father loves me, because I lay down my life, that I may take it again. No one takes it away from me, but I lay it down by myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. I received this commandment from my Father. (John 10:17–18)

He didn’t say he received this in eternal counsel with the other coequal persons of the Trinity. No. Jesus said he received this by commandment from God his Father. Trinitarians want us to believe Jesus didn’t know how to explain himself, but they do! That is arrogance!

In fact, the Trinitarian interpretation of Philippians 2:5-12 makes a complete sham out of the whole passage as can be seen in the following paraphrase (or, how it should be written if the Trinitarian interpretation had any basis in reality):

“Once upon a time an accomplished and professional architect named Frank Lloyd Wright (not his real name) jumped into a sandbox with a bunch of four-year-olds. Upon getting into the box, he claimed he was just like them. After all, he had left all his drafting tools and CAD programs at the office. Then he proceeded to build the most marvelous sandcastle any of them had ever seen. Finally, after having compared his masterful achievement to the meager accomplishments of the four-year-olds, he proclaimed himself master architect over them all. And for that we should all hold him in wonder and awe for what a great job he did in the sandbox of the four-year-olds.”

This is the buffoonery of the trinitarian “Jesus the god-man”, whom, in their eyes, God “exalted” (to a position to where he was never really at a loss for) for pretending to be something he is not and for doing something greater than anyone who could never have measured up in anyway to his deific personality. (For more see my thread on this topic: https://www.onepoliticalplaza.com/t-169491-1.html)

Along these same lines, and totally in harmony with what we’ve just seen established by the Scriptures, the Book of Hebrews provides yet another “because... therefore” passage.

“1Therefore, holy brothers, partakers of a heavenly calling, consider the apostle and High Priest of our confession, Jesus; 2[b[color=red]]who [personal pronoun] was faithful to Him [personal pronoun] who appointed him[/color][/b], as also was Moses in all his house. 3Because he has been counted worthy[/b] of more glory than Moses, inasmuch as he who built the house has more honor than the house. 4Because every house is built by someone; but He who built all things is God. 5Moses indeed was faithful in all his house as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were afterward to be spoken, 6but Christ is faithful as a Son over his house; whose house we are, if we hold fast our confidence and the glorying of our hope firm to the end. (Hebrews 3:1–6)

Jesus was faithful to another, his Father, who is God, and Jesus was therefore, as verse 3 says, “counted worthy” of more glory and honor than Moses. The point this passage was making is that he (Jesus) had to be faithful to Him (God the Father) who appointed him (Jesus) just as Moses was faithful. This demonstrates that Jesus was not inherently worthy by “deific substance” (as in Trinitarianism), nor was he an incarnation of the Father (as in Modalism). Rather, it says he had to prove himself through faith; thus, Jesus was “faithful to Him who appointed him.” These personal pronouns specifically mean, not merely imply, “personalities” and not “natures.”

Furthermore, in saying that Jesus was faithful, and thereby counted worthy, this passage in Hebrews reiterated what was said in Psalms 45:7: “You have loved righteousness, and hated wickedness. Therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness above your fellows.” It is in this context that God designated, exalted, and anointed Jesus above all his fellow human beings. It is never taught otherwise, so clearly, that Jesus was above all his fellow human beings because he is, was and always will be “coequal” with God the Father as Trinitarians and the unbelieving Jews that put Jesus to death falsely conclude.

So we have read seven passages of scripture that, when read in context, and using the words they supply, clearly teach that the reason, the “because,” Jesus was exalted, was because of what he did:

Isaiah 53:3, 5, 11–12: Therefore[/color][/b] I will divide him a portion with the great... Because he poured out his soul unto death...

Psalm 45:7: “You have loved righteousness, and hated wickedness. Therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness above your fellows”

Hebrews 1:6–9: “You have loved righteousness, and hated wickedness. Therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness above your fellows”

Philippians 2:5–12: “being found in human form, he humbled himself, becoming obedient to death, yes, the death of the cross. Therefore God also highly exalted him, and gave to him the name which is above every name...”

John 10:17–18: “Therefore the Father loves me, because I lay down my life, that I may take it again... I received this commandment from my Father.”

Hebrews 3:1–6: “1Therefore... the apostle and High Priest of our confession, Jesus; 2who [personal pronoun] was faithful to Him [personal pronoun] who appointed him, as also was Moses in all his house. 3Because he has been counted worthy of more glory than Moses...”

John 5:19–30: “I can of myself do nothing. As I hear, I judge, and my judgment is righteous; because I don't seek my own will, but the will of my Father who sent me

But nowhere does the Bible describe or expound otherwise. Only through proof-texting can Trinitarians come to their extrabiblical, antichristian-invented doctrine of a “trinity of coequal persons in one substance”, as Zemirah herself proves, over and over again, by her lack of ability to produce even one scripture that either states or teaches that “God is a trinity of coequal persons in one substance”.

Continued in Part Five

TommyRadd Loc: Midwest USA

Part Five



Well, I can tell you one place that never ever describes the “the fellowship that exists between the first and second Person of the Trinity” and that is the Bible.

Once again, Zemirah proof-texts in order to impose her preconception on a passage, and hijack it from it’s original meaning. Here is what the scripture actually teaches:

“18But all things are of God, who reconciled us to himself through Jesus Christ, and gave to us the ministry of reconciliation; 19namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself, not reckoning to them their trespasses, and having committed to us the word of reconciliation.” 2 Corinthians 5:18-19.

So, in order to impose a doctrine the bible never teaches, Zemirah and Trinitarians like her take one of the most sublime events in all of creation as a place to impose their false idolotrous Trinity doctrine, and then accuse the Father of abandoning Jesus at Jesus, His Son’s, most faithfully obedient event of his life; the very event over which God would exalt the man over all the rest of humanity and creation.

The fact is, when Jesus was on the cross, he quoted Psalm 22. Those words originated with King David, Jesus’ forefather. The point is that we shouldn’t jump to conclusions or lean on our own understanding of what Jesus meant. We should go to that psalm and see what it says. In order to understand what Jesus was saying or implying, we need to let God’s word explain to us what God’s word was describing, rather than read into false extrabiblical teachings. Otherwise, we would only be jumping to conclusions. When we do read that psalm, we find it isn’t a psalm about being forsaken. Actually, it is a psalm about knowing God is near, especially during those times we don’t feel Him.

“My God, my God, why have you forsaken Me?…They pierced my hands and my feet…They divide my garments among them. They cast lots for my clothing. But don’t be far off, Yahweh. You are my help: hurry to help me…I will declare your name to my brothers. In the midst of the assembly I will praise you…For He has not despised nor abhorred the affliction of the afflicted, Neither has He hidden His face from him; But when he cried to Him, He heard.” (Psalm 22:1, 16, 18–19, 22, 24)

In this scene, King David is bemoaning to God in prayer the circumstances of his life. That’s what Peter told us to do: cast all our cares on Him because He cares for us (1 Peter 5:7). Peter summarized what saints like King David did: he cast his cares on God. God seemed far away from David while his enemies were mocking him, tormenting him, and ridiculing him for trusting the Lord to rescue and deliver him (v.6–18). But David doesn’t care about all that. He doesn’t walk by sight; he walks by faith. The Lord had revealed to David that God was with him from the moment he was taken out of his mother’s womb. Therefore, David will call upon Him, trust in Him to deliver his soul. David will declare His name in the midst of his brethren and will ultimately proclaim that…
“…He has not despised nor abhorred the affliction of the afflicted, Neither has he hidden His face from him; But when he cried to Him, He heard.” (Psalm 22:24)

Far from being a proclamation of abandonment, Jesus’ cry was a declaration of faith. He was certainly speaking in fulfillment of prophecy. Perhaps he wanted those who heard him, and who would recognize the Scripture, to know who he was. One King, David, speaking a millennium before Christ, spoke for another future King. The ancient David prophesied this Jesus in the same Psalm.

“I am poured out like water. All my bones are out of joint. My heart is like wax; It is melted within me. My strength is dried up like a potsherd. My tongue sticks to the roof of my mouth. You have brought me into the dust of death. For dogs have surrounded me. A company of evil-doers have enclosed me. They pierced my hands and my feet. I can count all of my bones. They look and stare at me. They divide my garments among them. They cast lots for my clothing. But don’t be far off, Yahweh. You are my help: hurry to help me. Deliver my soul from the sword, My precious life from the power of the dog. Save me from the lion’s mouth; Yes, from the horns of the wild oxen you have answered me.” (Psalms 22:14–21)

This is the context of Jesus’ cry. Therefore, the rest of the passage also applies: “Neither has He hidden His face from him; but when he cried to Him, He heard.” So we find that, according to scriptural testimony, God did not actually forsake Jesus in that moment of dire need. Neither, in this passage, are we seeing one God-Person who was on the cross praying to another God-Person who had left him there to suffer for man’s sins. Rather, it was like David, who did not cease praising God and depending on God even in the midst of his hardships.

“For David says concerning him, ‘I saw the Lord always before my face, For He is on my right hand, that I should not be moved. Therefore my heart was glad, and my tongue rejoiced. Moreover my flesh also will dwell in hope; Because you will not leave my soul in Hades, Neither will you allow your Holy One to see decay.” (Acts 2:25–27)

David says that he saw the Lord always before his face and on his right hand. Is He a God afar off? No, the deity did not forsake humanity on the cross, as some conclude by reading only one passage of Scripture and jumping to conclusions. Rather, at the moment of the salvation of mankind, oh so truly, “God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself” (2 Corinthians 5:19). As is plain to see, the antecedent to “himself” is God. It is God who is reconciling the world to Himself by being in Christ at the cross. For it was at the cross that reconciliation was accomplished between God and mankind through the body of Jesus Christ.

“For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,” 1 Timothy 2:5

Not the mythological second person of the Trinity. Not the mere “human nature” of a preexistent pagan deity named logos who “joined” himself to flesh. No, it was the man Jesus Christ himself that is the only one mediator between man and God.

“Therefore remember that once you…were at that time separate from Christ, alienated…from the covenants of the promise, having no hope and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off are made near in the blood of Christ. For he is our peace, who made both one, and broke down the middle wall of partition, having abolished in the flesh the hostility, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man of the two, making peace; and might reconcile them both in one body to God through the cross, having killed the hostility thereby.” (Ephesians 2:11–16)

But what the Bible clearly and explicitly teaches isn’t really the way it happened according to Trinitarians.

Those of us who actually believe what the Bible accept what it says as true, rather than hear the words of Trinitarians. Because it is written:

“Yes, let God be found true, but every man a liar. As it is written, "That you might be justified in your words, and might prevail when you come into judgment." Romans 3:4

Continued in Part Six

TommyRadd Loc: Midwest USA

Part Six



Yes, it was the spirit working in Jesus. But Jesus said over and over that it was the Father working in him. Trinitarians can't have it both ways. They say the Spirit is not the Father and the Father is not the Spirit but the Scripture, at times, uses them completely interchangeably. Trinitarians didn’t “officially” bestow complete “personality” upon the “spirit” until 381 AD! In fact, scripture gets even clearer that God is one personal entity. 1 Corinthians teaches that "all these work that one and the selfsame spirit."

“4Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. 5And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord. 6And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which works all in all... 11But all these works that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will.” 1 Corinthians 12:4-11

“...true worshippers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father seeks such to be his worshippers. 24God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth." John 4:24

So, since you are worshipping a “them” you simply aren’t worshipping “Him” in Spirit and in Truth!

“4There is one body, and one Spirit, even as you also were called in one hope of your calling; 5one Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6one God and Father of all, who is over all, and through all, and in us all.” Ephesians 4:4-5

“5For though there are things that are called "gods," whether in the heavens or on earth; as there are many "gods" and many "lords;" 6yet to us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we for him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and we live through him.” 1 Corinthians 8:5-6

"Let all the house of Israel therefore know certainly that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified." Acts 2:36

Remember, Jesus said over and over that it was the Father working in him. According to the Trinitarian theory the Father is not the Spirit and the Spirit is not the Father. So apparently Jesus was confused about “who” or “what” was working through him... or the Trinitarians are, yet again, just proof-texting their way to a false, unbiblical teaching that is never stated in the word of God.

Because, according to the Bible, it is one selfsame person, not three "persons." The Trinitarians have struggled to find a proper word to call what they most often term as "persons." That is because, not only does the Bible not teach "persons" nor use the plural of "persons" for God, but it specifically teaches otherwise. In fact it commands us to believe God is one He.


And now they will go into attack mode, if their history is any indication. And rather than patiently attempting to show where I have misquoted scriptures, or the commandments of God, like leftists would do, they will prejudge me as in error based on their worldview, and because I don't agree with them they will make up all kinds of false accusations, just like the Jews did who didn't want to hear Jesus' explanation of himself, so they falsely accused him of making himself equal to God.

Call me crazy all you want, but you can’t change the disobedient, evil nature and bad fruits of the development of the Trinity doctrine, which evil,fruits are still being emulated today by these evil Trinitarians in breaking first and foremost the most important commandment of all:

The Lord our God is one He:

“Which commandment is the greatest of all?" 29Jesus answered, "The greatest is, 'Hear, Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one: 30you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength.' This is the first commandment... 32The scribe said to him, "Truly, teacher, you have said well that he is one, and there is none other but he...33...Jesus saw that he answered wisely" Mark 12:28-33

If Trinitarians believe and obey this commandment, why have they renamed their God "threeness", and why are they so combatively defenders of asserting God is three? It makes no logical sense whatsoever, so that anyone with any sense of sensitivity to the commandment of God should be able to see through the lie of it!

"God is one He" is the commandment of God.

"God is three he’s" is the commandment of men.

“7But in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.' 8"For you set aside the commandment of God, and hold tightly to the tradition of men—... you do many other such things." 9He said to them, "Full well do you reject the commandment of God, that you may keep your tradition.” Mark 7:7-9

Zemirah didn't die for your sins to save you.
The gnostics who invented the Trinity didn't die to save you.
The "fathers" of the Trinitarian church (Athanasius, Origen, the three Cappadocians, Constantine) didn't die to save you.

Only Jesus did. And he said,

“This is eternal life, that they should know you, the only true God, and him whom you sent, Jesus Christ.” John 17:3

Rose42

I don’t know if anyone read all that (I didn’t) but the Trinity isn’t pagan or gnostic and continually repeating it will not make it true.

The natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.

1 Corinthians 2:14

TommyRadd Loc: Midwest USA

you are just like the leftist minions who parrot the cultic narrative and shows no ability or desire to think for themselves. Your response, or lack thereof actually, only helps to affirm my case, or I should say, the case the Bible has against the false Trinity doctrine.

Thank you for blessing me with yet again another false witness.

P.S... I didn't make this stuff up...

“Surprising though it may seem, there is total agreement among scholars on at least one point. Adolf von Harnack, Ignacio Ortiz de Urbina, Luis M. Mendizábal, George Leonard Prestige, Peter Gerlitz, Éphrem Boularand, John Norman D. Kelly, Frauke Dinsen, Christopher Stead—all without exception agree in claiming that the Gnostics were the first theologians to use the word homoousios…The late Aloys Grillmeir wrote: ‘The early history of the Nicene homoousios shows us that the theologians of the church were probably made aware of this concept, and thus of the doctrine of emanation, by the Gnostics.’” Pier Franco Beatrice, “The Word ‘Homoousios’ from Hellenism to Christianity,” 248. Church History 71:2 (June 2002), available at Highbeam Reasearch, www.highbeam.com. Pier Franco Beatrice is a professor of Early Christian Literature at the University of Padua, Italy. This paper was presented as a Master Theme of the Thirteenth International Conference on Patristic Studies (Oxford, 16-21 Aug. 1999)..

“Having…excluded any relationship of the Nicene homoousios with the Christian tradition, it becomes legitimate to propose a new explanation, based on an analysis of two pagan documents which have so far never been taken into account. The main thesis of this paper is that homoousios came straight from Constantine’s Hermetic background. As can be seen clearly in the Poimandres, and even more clearly in an inscription mentioned exclusively in the Theosophia, in the theological language of Egyptian paganism the word homoousios meant that Nous-Father and the Logos-Son, who are two distinct beings, share the same perfection of the divine nature.” Pier Franco Beatrice, “The Word ‘Homoousios’ from Hellenism to Christianity,”

What this eminent scholar just said was that the idea of understanding the Father, Son and Holy Spirit as being “three persons in one substance” comes straight from paganism, not from Christianity.

“The Gnostic terminologies within the Æon speculations were partly reproduced among the Catholic theologians of the third century; most important is it that the Gnostics have already made use of the concept ‘homoousios’; see Iren., I. 5. I,… I.5.4,… I.5.5…In all these cases the word means ‘of one substance.’…Other terms also which have acquired great significance in the Church since the days of Origen (e.g., agénnetos) are found among the Gnostics…Bigg. (1. c. p. 58, note 3) calls attention to the appearance of trias in Excerpt. ex. Theodotus § 80, perhaps the earliest passage." Adolf von Harnack, History of Dogma, I, 259: “The Attempts Of The Gnostics To Create An Apostolic Dogmatic, And A Christian Theology; Or, The Acute Secularising Of Christianity,” § 3, footnote 357.

“...I am introducing some probolh—that is to say, some prolation of one thing out of another, as Valentinus does when he sets forth Æon from Æon, one after another—... Truth must not therefore refrain from the use of such a term, and its reality and meaning, because heresy also employs it...” Tertullian, Against Praxeas, Chapter 8.

The natural man had no problem whatsoever receiving the Trinity doctrine and the dual nature doctrine, especially seeing as they invented it!

Peewee Loc: San Antonio, TX

Wow, agree where you can and disagree when you can't. But I learn more from Zemirah than I do from you and I enjoy it more.

I have never read that Jesus or the Spirit were created. God is the Father, Jesus is His Son John 1:1 (In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word "was" God. The Spirit "of" God moved over the waters (Gen 1:2). That's three and unlike angels were never created that I've read anywhere. But have always been with God unless they were sent on a mission, both were sent to Mary. The Spirit to overshadow her and Jesus to be born of her. Both were obeying the Father. We know Jesus is also called the Word and the Word "was" God. The Spirit of God is also God. When Jesus walked the Earth God wasn't missing any parts, not His voice or His Spirit. I know I'm not smart enough to explain it but God has many names, so does Jesus and the Spirit. Maybe our brains can't compute what God is capable of doing. I'm sure His right arm could have been edified and called God if He had wanted it that way.

If Satan was the head cherubim or angel, the first created angel/son of God among the other angels/sons of God, then Jesus and the Holy Spirit outrank him and are not created beings. Unless you believe they are cherubim also? If not, that still leaves you with three other, never created beings or parts of God. Or as we Trinitarians call it, the God Head. God even has a divine counsel (Psl 82:1), even if He doesn't really need one. The angels are called the sons of God, and we are called the sons of God but Jesus is called the "only begotten" Son. When Jesus ascended He was replaced by the Comforter or Holy Spirit. Somehow we are dealing with one who is also three.

Canuckus Deploracus Loc: North of the wall

I liked this... It was well written...

Hebrews 1:2-5

Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds。
Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high:
Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.
For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?

This seems to indicate that Christ was made (created)..


And I have read many intelligent posts by you
We agree more often than we disagree

Peewee Loc: San Antonio, TX

Good to know. I wrote a somewhat long reply but then hit a key that erased it all. It happens sometimes when I have too many tabs open at once. My bad. Just looking forward to the future and hope we're neighbors.

Zemirah Loc: Sojourner En Route...

God's Word is an everlasting joy, Peewee.

I agree, none of we Trinitarians, blessed as we are by God's Holy Word, and by His Salvation, are capable, nor will we ever be, of explaining God's reality to the satisfaction of those predetermined to reject it, in deference to their own imaginations.

Genesis 6:5: "And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually."

Zemirah Loc: Sojourner En Route...

To the vast majority of Christians (95.5%), the Holy Trinity is an essential Christian doctrine.

The term comes from the Latin noun "trinitas" meaning "three are one."

There are approximately 2.1 billion Christians in the world, counting all denominations. Of those who do not believe in the Trinity (non-trinitarian denominations), the total membership is under 90 million.

That's only 4 1/2 % that do not believe in the Trinity.

Further, you are incorrect about your proof-texting claim.

Jesus is my example of using appropriate scripture verses to show that a belief is "Biblical" in origin.

He did so repeatedly to rebuke Satan, specifically beginning each time, with "it is written."

For 2,000 years, His followers have followed His example, and will continue to do so, over your strident objections.

Your statements below confusing Christian Apologetics with Political debate are beyond strange and completely inappropriate to the point of desperation:

here:

Tommy: "Let me say that, in analogy from current events, Trinitarians who handle the word of God deceitfully like this, are like Pelosi and Schiff."

and here:

Tommy: "In other words, they (Trinitarians) react in the same pattern many Democrats typically do when they are presented with facts that don’t fit their ideology. Namely:
Lie
Project
Double down."

and here:

Tommy: "This has been the historic response of the majority of leftists to President Trump, just as it has been my experience with the response of these Trinitarians to my presentations to them of historic facts and scriptures that contradict their “proof-texted”, extrabiblical, jumped to, false conclusions."

Tom Raddatz, you have repeatedly highlighted your misinterpretations, false accusations and impotent condemnations, your confusion is on full public display on the internet for the ages.

...to what end?


Sources:

Rose Publishing.Christianity, Cults & Religions (Chart).
Cross, F. L. The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church. Oxford University Press. 2005.
Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry.
Trinity Chart. https://carm.org/trinity

Zemirah Loc: Sojourner En Route...

The 4 1/2% within Christendom who deny belief in the Trinity consist to the most part of the largest recognized "Christian" Cults, including:

Mormonism (LDS),

Jehovah's Witnesses,

Christian Scientist,

Armstrongism,

Christadelphians,

Oneness Pentecostals,

Moon's Unification Church,

Unity School of Christianity,

Scientology - Dianetics

Sources:
Kenneth Boa. Cults, World Religions and the Occult.
Rose Publishing.Christianity, Cults & Religions (Chart).

Canuckus Deploracus Loc: North of the wall

Scientology is considered Christian?

Since when?