A 317 page full size book mailed to your house for only $12.   S&H included

The book
Think About it...
contains numerous interesting police stories related to Gospel principles and
Answers to Anti-Mormon Questions
See our rear cover and our unsolicited reviews.

Chapter Five:


       THE HOLY TRINITY?
                     ...or THE GODHEAD! You decide.

 

This investigation deals with the controversy over the Holy Trinity and the Godhead, two popular worldwide beliefs. Yet both conflicting beliefs concern the same God.

                    One of the two beliefs has to be true
                                       and evidence to support the truth
                                                  ...has to be out there.

This investigation involves sensitive subject matter. Religion is one of those subjects that can turn
friends into enemies rather quickly! Even more touchy than the subject of religion, is the belief a man has about his God. As I enter this section on the two beliefs: the Holy Trinity or the Godhead, I want the reader to understand that I have no intent to offend anyone, to belittle anyone or to ridicule their beliefs about God. Our beliefs about God are very personal and sacred to us all. So, before we start, I need to warn you of three things to guard against.

One:    I got a call once to meet the victim of a burglary. When I arrived, he told me how his
            house had been burglarized, numerous items stolen and how one day, he came unannounced to his friend’s house, only to find all his stolen belongings. There were about eighty items that belonged to the victim, all of which were listed on the police report. The suspect had fled prior to my arrival but this was his home and his wife was inside. She was not involved in the burglary.

She was very offended and extremely indignant that her husband could be accused of burglarizing someone’s home. Not to mention that that someone was a friend. She admitted that the items in the carport were not theirs and she recognized some of them as being the victim’s, but she refused to believe that her husband could have done it. She allowed us to search their bedroom as proof of her husband’s innocence. We did so and found several more of the victim’s stolen items hidden in their room. Even then, her attitude never changed. No matter how much evidence we showed her, she dismissed the reasonableness of it all and simply refused to believe anything ...except that her husband was innocent.

                              Point number one is this:
             Regardless of what the facts show and prove,
                    some people simply cannot see anything except what they want to see!

Two:     I got an assault call one night and I met a man who had a large gash in the back of his
             head. He told me that he and his wife had been watching television when their son came bursting through the front door with five other teenage boys chasing him. The father came to the door and pushed the boys away from the doorway and into the front yard. As he stood on his front lawn, one of the teenagers came around from behind and struck him on the head with a large wrench. He was lucky he wasn’t killed. The boys fled, but the son knew who they were. Within an hour, we had all the boys rounded up. One of the suspects made it home and told his mother his side of the story and that he was innocent. His mother, without even hearing the other side, bought it hook, line and sinker. She came to the group interview with the attitude that her son was unjustly accused. The other boys admitted to the incident, But that one mother’s focus never changed. In spite of all the evidence and admissions, she refused to believe anything except that her son was innocent.

                                  Point number two is this:
                 No matter what I said, it made no difference to her.
                                                                 Why?
                        Because she came to the interview with her mind already made up.

Three: Years ago I took a burglary report from a man who was a retired Naval officer. He
             told me that he had just polished his back patio and then left his home on personal business. When he returned he found his home had been broken into and that he sustained a twenty-eight thousand dollar loss. He directed me through the crime scene. It all seemed to be there. The forced entry, the rummaged belongings and the missing items. It looked like just another residential burglary.

The patio had been wet polished and before it dried, someone walked across it. He showed me the footprints leading from the backyard across the patio and up the stairs to his office. The office had a ten pane French door and the door was secured by two single key locks, one being a single key dead bolt. Entrance to the home was made by forcing the French door open with pry tools.

After entry was made, the victim showed me where the suspect had gone downstairs and defeated his alarm system and then returned upstairs and rummaged through all the belongings in the master bedroom and office area. At first glance, it seemed typical. I didn’t think I would be there long. Residential burglaries are usually done by entering through a window or door from the rear yard, and the two rooms in the house hit the most are the master bedroom and living room, and or office. However, the more I looked at the evidence, the more I realized my first impression was wrong. This was anything but a typical burglary.

As I studied the point of entry, I noticed the suspect had taken pry bars and pried and fractured the jamb, shoving the pry bars all the way through the jamb and wall into the inside of the house. I noticed some marking on the inside sheetrock from the pry tools. Even the inside molding around the door jamb was slightly damaged. There were multiple jab marks from the pry tools on the outside molding. Jab marks that would have made noise. Also, to do that much damage, it would have taken the suspect about fifteen minutes or more. All this effort to defeat the two one inch keyed locks that could have been defeated simply by breaking out one of the panes and reaching inside and unlocking the locks with his hand. I also noticed that the window panes were not wired which meant that no alarm would have sounded. I looked at the locks from the outside through the windows, and I noticed that I could see that they were single key locks, which meant the burglar could have seen that too. “What kind of self respecting burglar would force his way through a jamb, when he could have merely broken one window and let himself in,” I thought!

After entry was made, the victim had showed me where the alarm system had been defeated. Burglars usually don’t worry about alarms, unless they are audible. The reason is because burglars do their work believing someone saw them enter the home and called the police. They figure they have about three to five minutes before the police actually arrive. The alarm was located in the downstairs hallway. The suspect would had to have known where to find it. Defeating an alarm is the mark of an experienced burglar. Hacking and prying on a door jamb is the mark of a complete novice. About twenty-eight thousand dollars worth of belongings were taken, including a commemorative Colt US Government model 1911, 45 ACP auto pistol. This pistol was given to the retired commander when he retired from the Navy. He showed me the decorative wooden display box it came in. This pistol was a highly polished and highly tooled pistol. It’s value was over three thousand dollars and it had his ship’s name and the outline of his ship etched into the slide.

I also noticed that there was no point of exit. Which means the burglar had to have exited through the point of entry, down the stairs and back across the patio, yet there were no other footprints in the patio. Not even a smudge or scuff in the fresh finish. Also, the burglar would have had to bring all his pry tools up the stairs on his first trip and one of the pry tools used was a heavy crowbar type tool that left a once inch tool mark.

It was too coincidental that his patio had just been wet polished before he left home and that the
burglar came immediately afterward and left obvious tracks across the wet polish. Entry was made in the upstairs office instead of a lower more accessible door and more concealable door from the neighbors. The whole scene looked like what a non-burglar would think a burglary scene would look like.

But the clincher that told me this was an insurance fraud was the strike plate itself. As much damage to the jamb as there was, the jamb was not spread and it never broke away from the wall. The door and jamb never shattered around the lock and the dead bolt had not been broken. Nor had the dead bolt been twisted out of the door. So last and most crucial was the strike plate. It had not been torn from the jamb. It was still attached. The door opened inward. The hinge pins were inside the home. From the outside, there was no way to force that door open and still leave the strike plate attached to the jamb. Absolutely no way. It would have been ripped from the jamb by the dead bolt. I knew that entry had not been made into this home through this door. My suspicions were strengthened even more when he called me the next day to report he had found his 45 auto pistol under the desk in the office, saying it must have been dropped by the burglar.

That commemorative pistol with his name and ship’s name, was irreplaceable. It was virtually a one of a kind item. That pistol was serial numbered and registered to him and given to him by the United States Government. Insurance could in no way replace a commemorative pistol like that. If he reported it stolen, there would be no way he could ever produce that pistol and show it to anyone ever again. I know he thought about that after I left and realized the same thing. If he wanted to ever show his retirement pistol to anyone again, it had to be found and taken off the list of stolen property. The investigation showed that the scene was a set up.

                                 Point number three is this:
        Examine the evidence and draw your conclusions based on the evidence.
                      Don’t be fooled by what looks like evidence! ...Stick with the evidence.

                                        So as we investigate this issue, remember;
               One:    Open your mind. Don’t see only what you want to see.
               Two:    Stay Objective. Don’t come to the investigation
                                              with your mind already made up.
               Three:  Don’t be fooled by what looks like evidence.
                                                                    ...Stick with the evidence.

Ready? Let’s go...

Knowing the truth about God is very important. The crime scene is the Bible and world history. That is where all the evidence is. When I began this investigation, I wanted to better understand the belief of the Holy Trinity. So I read the New Testament very slowly and carefully looked for evidence to support that belief. To my surprise, I did not find one single scripture that said anything about a “Holy Trinity.” I was sure I had missed what I was looking for. So I went back through the New Testament to look for scriptures that supported a belief that there was a Godhead. (Three Gods; three personages; three essences.) Again to my surprise, I found over 180 scriptures in just the four Gospels that speak so plainly, they would breeze right through examination and cross examination.

However, I still wanted to better understand the belief of the Holy Trinity. (One God; three
personages; one essence.) There was nothing in an LDS Christian book store about the Holy Trinity so I started asking around. Not coming up with anything, I went to a non-LDS Christian book store. I asked specifically for books on the “Holy Trinity.” I found two that were labeled, “The Trinity.” I bought what I was told was the best of the two. The book was called, “The Trinity” by Charles Swindoll. Swindoll has a chapter devoted to the Trinity titled, “Finally, Some Essential Facts.” Being exactly what I was looking for, I jumped right to that chapter and read what he had to say. It was interesting. His facts were very short and brief. In fact he said,

“There is one God yet three distinct persons. The Godhead is coequal, coeternal, coexistent:
God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit. Much of that remains a profound mystery.
Don’t lose sleep if you cannot unravel the truth of the Trinity.”

Puzzled, I went back to the Christian book store and with the aid of the sales attendant, we looked or more possible books that might help me with scriptures. I was able to come up with a Bible reference book called, NIV - Topical Bible (New International Version) by John Kohlenberger III. I looked up “Holy Trinity” and read the following;

“The word Trinity is not used in the Bible. Plurality in the unity of God is implied in the
Old Testament. Father, Son, and Spirit are called God in the New Testament.”

Still not satisfied and yet very intrigued by the word “implied,” I then went to the public library. I now doubted that the belief of the Holy Trinity was rooted in the Bible. I felt that maybe it came forth from the Council of Nicaea in the year 325. I knew that the church that came up with the doctrine of the Holy Trinity was the Catholic Church. So I began my investigation there.

The New Catholic Encyclopedia V-10 p.432, gave me what I was looking for on the Council of Nicaea. It was called into being by Emperor Constantine. The council lasted from about May 20th to August 25th of 325. The reason for calling the council together was the dissension and religious controversy in his kingdom. To restore unity in his kingdom and unity in the Christian faith, Constantine summoned a universal council that represented the whole church. They met in Nicaea and Constantine presided over the council himself. “During the crucial part of the debate, he himself chaired and took an active part in guiding the proceedings. He used his imperial presence to secure an inclusive formula with which all except ardent Arians could agree, proposing the phrase ‘of one essence’ (italics added) to express the Son’s relation to the Father.”

Constantine wanted to give Christianity the protection of the state because, “...in line with the old Roman idea, he regarded himself as Pontifex Maximus of Christianity.” The council met in Nicaea (modern day Iznik, Turkey) and about 300 bishops attended the conference. The purpose of the council was to unify their beliefs. No official minutes of the council were kept, but the Encyclopedia of Catholicism said, “Specifically, the council in the creed declared the Son ‘from the substance of the Father,” and “begotten not made” and “of one substance with the Father.” The New Catholic Encyclopedia V-10 p.433 said “...it is clear that the Nicene Creed proclaims numerical identity of the Father’s nature and the Son. The Creed does no more than mention the third person, for the divinity of the Spirit was not at issue.”

After the council, everyone who didn’t agree with that belief was called a heretic and was exiled. “Constantine made the Creed law in the empire.” None dared speak against it. He used his political clout to force the issue of God the Father and Jesus Christ being “of one essence.” Yes! Now I knew that the roots of the Trinitarian belief came from Constantine, ...Not the Bible. Even the actual wording, “of one essence” was Constantine’s.

Because there were no official minutes taken, I was not able to find the original Nicene creed.
However, in 381 the First Council of Constantinople met to affirm the council of 325 and they added to, and formalized the Nicene Creed. Here it is in it’s entirety. Actually it’s rather impressive. In looking it over, there are only four issues I can see where the members of the LDS Church are not taught the same thing. I’ve highlighted them in italics.

The Nicene Creed

          We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth,
                     of all that is seen and unseen.
          We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten
                     of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God,
                     begotten, not made, one in being with the Father.
          Through him all things were made. For us men and for our salvation he came
                     down from Heaven: by the power of the Holy Spirit he was born of the
                     Virgin Mary, and became man.
          For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered, died, and was
                     buried. On the third day he rose again in fulfillment of the Scriptures; he
                     ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
          He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom
                     will have no end. We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
                     who proceeds from the Father and the Son. With the Father and the Son
                     he is worshiped and glorified.
          He has spoken through the prophets.
          We believe in one holy Catholic and apostolic church. We acknowledge one
                     baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
                    We look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come.
                                                                                      Amen.

“...one in being with the Father.” We believe they are one in purpose. We do not believe that God the Father and Jesus Christ His Son, are one being. In the four gospels, God is called the Father of Jesus Christ 170 times. Four times in Mark, fifteen times in Luke, forty-two times in Matthew and one hundred and nine times in John. If God the Father and Jesus Christ are the same person, why the contradiction with the Holy Scriptures?

“...the Lord, the giver of life,” We do not believe the Holy Ghost is the Lord, the giver of life.

“...Catholic ” The word Catholic is a Latin word meaning general or universal and the word
universal is not used as in throughout the universe. When you study that era, you learn that
Constantine’s motives for unifying Christianity were not solely to unify Christian beliefs, they were also to unify the Roman empire by unifying the people.

The word “apostolic” would depend on how they meant it. If they meant that the church stemmed from the apostles, we would disagree. If they meant it stemmed from Jesus Christ and is helped along here on earth by the apostles, we would agree.

The Encyclopedia of Religion V-15, p.53-54 gives some “liturgical scriptures” of the Trinity mentioned in the Bible. (Liturgical means: referring to) It gives a total of fifteen. I adopted the attitude that I believed in the Holy Trinity and read through the list. Here is their scriptural proof of the Trinity in the Bible.

II Corinthians 5:19, “To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of Reconciliation.” II Corinthians 13:14, “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen.”

Note:     The above scriptures are from the King James Version of the Bible. The example
              cited as evidence of the Holy Trinity in the New Catholic Encyclopedia is in II Corinthians 13:13, not 13:14. But it didn’t say which Bible they used. It reads: “The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the charity of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all.”

I find it interesting that there would be two versions of what Paul said, don’t you?
Especially when the issue of the Trinity vs. Godhead beliefs are based on semantics.

Did you notice that Paul said, “and” three times in that scripture? And, is an inclusive word. It is not a singular word. It means in addition to. For example, you and your spouse! You and your children, etc. If Paul is speaking about three different individuals, how could he have said it more clearly than he did? If what Paul actually meant was that all three are the same person, how more confusing could he have said it than he did? Look at the actual language of the scripture. If Paul meant that God the Father, His Son Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost were all one being, then the word, and would not have been used. Think about it. How do you talk about three people without using the word, and?

Matthew 28:19, says, “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the
Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.”

The above three scriptures are mentioned as being the strongest in support of the Trinitarian belief by the Encyclopedia of Religion. The New Catholic Encyclopedia suggests that II Corinthians 13:13 and I Corinthians 12:4 thru 6 are the best. However, if you read around any of those scriptures, you will see where the author is not preaching or even suggesting a Trinitarian concept. Here are the remaining scriptures: 

Rom. 4:24, 8:11.- 2 Cor. 4:14.-Col. 2:12.- 1Tim. 2:5&6. - 6:13. -2 Tim 4:1 - I Cor.6:11. - 2
Cor.1:21&22. - Thes. 5:18:19. - Gal. 3:11 thru 14.

There are the scriptures and they are from nine different books in the Bible. However, do you notice the one common denominator of all the scriptures except the one in Matthew? The common denominator is Paul. Every other scripture mentioned, is written by the Apostle Paul. So I guess the question is, does the Apostle Paul believe in the Holy Trinity? Or is the Apostle Paul being mis-interpreted. Let’s take a look at some of those scriptures and see.

Romans 1:7, “To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.” The key word in that scripture is and. The word and, makes it inclusive, not singular. In addition to. In the “Literal Translation of The Greek New Testament,” the word “kia” is used between the names. “Kia” means and in Greek.


Romans 5:10-11, “For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life. And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement.”

The key words in those scriptures are: by the death of his Son...and...joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ. Those word groups are inclusive. They are not singular.

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

The key words in those scriptures are: one God, the Father, and one Lord Jesus Christ. Again, the word and, makes it inclusive. In addition to, not singular.

Galatians 1:1&3, “Paul, an apostle, not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead; Grace be to you and peace from God the Father, and from our Lord Jesus Christ.”

Again, we have the key word and. And means two or plus or in addition to. By the language used, you can’t suggest that Paul believed that God the Father and Jesus Christ were one being. In verse one, Paul said, “neither by man, but by Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised Him from the dead.” If you believe Paul was suggesting that God the Father and Jesus Christ are a singular person, then you have to believe that God raised himself from the dead and that Paul was trying to confound us with his language. In actuality, Paul said that Christ was raised from the dead by His Father. That statement by Paul is very simple, clear and easy to understand.

In II Corinthians 13:14, or II Corinthians 13:13, there are two “ands” in that scripture. There is an and between the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost. The same is true with the scripture in Matthew 28:19. There are two ands in that scripture. “...baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” If the ands were “who is,” instead of the word and, you might have an argument. For example: “...baptizing them in the name of the Father, who is the Son, who is the Holy Ghost.” But the scripture does not say that. Perhaps if it were just commas, “In the name of the Father, the Son, the Holy Ghost.” But it doesn’t say that either. With the word and between the three names, to conclude that he is speaking about a singular person, you have to read something into the scripture that the scripture simply does not say.

Think about this... If you were telling someone about a fishing trip that you, and your father, and your uncle took, how would you tell them more clearly about who went fishing, than to use the word and between the names of those who went fishing? I guess you could merely say that, “Me, my father, my uncle went fishing” and by using the same argument used for that last scripture, I guess the listener could infer that you, your father, your uncle are one person and that you went fishing by yourself. ...Be logical!

              Look at the actual language used by the writer!
                                       The word and is inclusive. It is not singular.

Probably the interpretation of the scripture that puzzled me the most is this scriptural reference as given by The Encyclopedia of Catholicism as a liturgical (referring to) scripture that refers to the Trinity. The book calls it, “The most explicit triadic texts.” 2 Cor.13-14. Matt. 3:16&17.

“And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him: And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.”

Read it again with the inclusive words in italics, emphasizing the italicized words.

“And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him: And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.”

The language of that scripture could not be more clear. To infer that that scripture really means: When Christ was baptized, the heavens were opened and His Spirit descended upon Himself and then His voice from heaven said “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased,” also means that Christ was actually talking to Himself, about Himself, while projecting His voice from Heaven. That’s not only an interesting interpretation of that scripture, but that’s opposite of the language used. The language of that scripture is very clear and it is not confusing. There are three separate individuals involved in that occurrence. To infer that there is only one person in that scripture is an inference that is unsupported by the language. In other words, you simply have to want the scripture to mean what it does not say. You have to consciously or unconsciously make the decision to ignore the plain language and make the conscious decision that the wording is wrong. ...Why do that?

Try this test... Adopt the belief that God the Father, Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost are three distinct persons. Ready? Now, if you were telling others about Christ’s baptism, how would you tell it more clearly than to use the language used in that scripture? See what I’m getting at? The language in that scripture is very clear. It is talking about three individual beings.

In II Corinthians 5:19, Paul makes a statement that could be used as a good argument for the Holy Trinity. He says: “To wit, that God was in Christ...” However, if you read around that scripture, what Paul is talking about is the reconciliation to God through Jesus Christ. In verse 5:18, Paul says: “And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ.” The key word in that verse is by. By is inclusive, not singular.

When you read and study about Paul, you quickly realize, that he makes too many statements about God and Jesus being two separate beings to suggest that Paul believed they were one person. Read his works. Study the actual language. Look for the inclusive words. ...They are there.

Romans 2:14, “In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ...”

Romans 5:1, “Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.”

Romans 5:5, “And hope maketh not ashamed; because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost...”

Romans 5:11 “And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ...”

Romans 6:4, “Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father...”

Romans 8:11, “But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall...”

Romans 8:16-17, “The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God: And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.”

Romans 8:32, “He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all...”

Romans 8:34, “Who is he that comdemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us.”

Acts 7:55-56, (stoning of Stephen), “But he being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up steadfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God, and said, behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.”

We could go through the rest of the books by Paul, examining his language and collecting even more evidence, but it would all say the same thing. Paul walked throughout the land, teaching different groups the same gospel. There is no evidence that Paul believed in the Trinity. One can only imply Paul believed in the Trinity. But that implication contradicts Paul’s own statements.

Think about this... In over twenty years of police work, I have written over a thousand police reports. When I go to court, it never fails that the defense attorneys will take two or three paragraphs out of the report and focus on those paragraphs. They won’t even consider the rest of the report. They want to prove their point and hold trial on just two or three paragraphs. They don’t want the jury to be aware of the rest of the police report or the remainder of the evidence. Don’t be the same way. Don’t take selective scriptures out of the Bible to prove the point you want to prove and refuse to look at the rest of the scriptures. What sense does that make? Who’s getting fooled except you? If you are looking for the truth look at all the evidence. Look at all the Bible.

In the Encyclopedia of Catholicism on p.1270, it says, “The doctrine of the Trinity as such is not revealed in either the Old Testament or the New Testament.” In the New Catholic Encyclopedia p.306 of V-14 reads, “The doctrine of the Holy Trinity is not taught in the Old Testament. In the New Testament the oldest evidence is in the Pauline epistles, especially 2 Cor. 13:13, and I Cor. 12:4 thru 6. In the Gospel’s evidence of the Trinity is found explicitly only in the baptismal formula of Matthew 28:19.” In the Encyclopedia of Religion on p.54 of V-15, this statement is found,

“Exegetes and theologians today are in agreement that the Hebrew Bible does not
contain a doctrine of the Trinity...Further, exegetes and theologians agree that the New Testament also does not contain an explicit doctrine of the Trinity.”

The New Catholic Encyclopedia, p.306 of V-14, talks about the devotion to the Holy Trinity. It says: “There are few signs of devotion to the Trinity in the early Church...” Later on it says: “Devotion to the Trinity as it is known today seems to have begun in the monasteries at Aniane and Tours in the 8th century.” The book gives more examples of its coming into being as years continue to pass. “A feast of the Trinity was introduced at Cluny in 1091...and at Canterbury in 1162...Rome resisted the observance...until 1331.” All three encyclopedias talk about the confusion among the church and the dissension the Trinitarian belief brought about. On page 295 of the same volume, it reads: “This blurring of focus...‘one God in three Persons...” created problems. In an attempt to quail the problems it then says that: “Catholics the world over are still familiar with the prayer, the summational act of faith: ‘O my God, I believe that you are one God in three Divine Persons...I believe these and all the truths which the Holy Catholic Church teaches, because you have revealed them.” Interesting, don’t you think? Brought to the forefront at the turn of the century, the people had a hard time accepting this new belief so the church introduced a, “Summational act of faith.” A prayer for the people to repeat. But the issue is not that hard to understand if you remain objective. If you look at the evidenceas an investigator, ...the evidence is clear.

         The reason why belief of the Trinity cannot be backed up by the Bible,
                         ...is because it is not rooted in the Bible. It is rooted in the Nicene Creed.

No one seems able to explain the Trinity concept, and the argument for that is, “It’s too complicated for our finite minds.” Thus, the Catholic Church adopted the prayer, “O my God, I believe that you are one God in three Divine Persons...I believe these and all truths which the Holy Catholic Church teaches...” (I think that should be a clue.) In looking further, when Paul said, “For though there be that are called Gods...as there are Gods many and Lords many, but to us there is but one God, the Father and one Lord Jesus Christ...” ...What’s to misunderstand? Think about it,

              if you’re not going to base your religious beliefs on the Bible,
                                                                                     ...why bother to read the Bible?

Another, and often quoted scripture by Trinitarian believers is St. John 1:1. Some Trinitarian believers say it proves that God and Jesus are the same person. Does it? Let’s see.

"In the beginning was the Word,
and the Word was with God,
and the Word was God."

So you tell me, does that scripture prove that there are three persons in one body? Before we look closer at this scripture, let me give you a scripture that examples the theory of the Godhead. (God the Father, His Son Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost. All being Gods with Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost being subject to God the Father who is the most high God) Again it is St. John, the exact same Apostle as in John 1:1. Here is what he says in John 20:31;

"But these are written, that ye might believe that
Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that
believing ye might have life through His name."

John says that Jesus is the Son of God. There is nothing to misunderstand about that scripture. So if John 1:1 infers a three in one God, then that scripture is contradicted by this scripture that very explicitly says Jesus is the Son of God. So where do we go from here?

In this chapter I have referred a lot to the actual language of the scripture. That’s because in matters of law, when a question comes up as to what the law means, police officers, attorneys, and judges, have to refer to the actual language of that law, by the writers of that law. If the actual language is unclear, then they will refer to the definitions section of the law book to understand what the writer of that law actually meant. Each group of laws are coupled with a definition section. If the definitions are unclear, then they will look at the intent of the law. If the intent is unclear, they will look at a reasonable interpretation of the law and case history. In other words, is there a precedence set by another court? How did another court rule on a similar matter? Those are fair and reasonable ways to look at the law as well as the scriptures.

If you apply those same principles to the above two scriptures, they are very easy to understand and very hard to misinterpret. Look at the actual language used by John in his writings. Look at the case history of his writings in similar words in other scriptures he wrote! If you look at his intent based on the totality of the scriptures he wrote and what he said, you cannot say John believed a Trinitarian belief. There is too much evidence to the contrary. By examining John’s writings, you will find that John believes that Jesus Christ has a Father who lives in heaven, and that Jesus Christ came to earth "to do the will of His Father who sent Him." In fact, John has over 125 scriptures that show just that. One hundred and twenty-five scriptures that say or show Jesus Christ is the Son of God. When John says, "Jesus Christ is the Son of his Father who lives in heaven," you cannot get more clear and plain than that. To get something other than that, you have to come up with a meaning that is opposite the language John used. Let’s be logical for a minute and think about this:

                           If we accept what John actually said,
                                           then we don’t have to infer things
                                                           about what we think he meant!

The same can be said for every other scriptural writer in the Bible. So let’s take an examining look at John 1:1 and see if we can determine what John meant. I think its fair to say that all Christians believe the word "Word" stands for Jesus Christ! With that, let’s be logical and try an experiment. Let’s see if the scripture is easier to understand if we replace the word "Word" with the name of Jesus Christ and then re-read the scripture.

"In the beginning was Jesus Christ,
and Jesus Christ was with God,
and Jesus Christ was God."

Let’s reread that scripture with a Trinitarian viewpoint and see what we have to do to that scripture to get it to fit the Trinitarian belief.

"In the beginning was Jesus Christ"

If we believe in the Holy Trinity, then there is no problem with line one. However, notice that it does not say, or indicate, that Jesus Christ was alone in the beginning. It just says He was there from the beginning. Let’s look at line two.

"And Jesus Christ was with God"

If we believe in the Holy Trinity, then now we have a problem. Line two says that Jesus Christ was with God. It does not say He was in God, nor does it say He was God. It says He was with God. It obviously means two beings. Jesus Christ, and God! Now let’s look at line three.

"And Jesus Christ was God"

If we believe in the Holy Trinity, then now we have a big problem. Line two says there was two
people. "Jesus Christ was with God." So what did Jesus Christ do? Did He replace God? Did He become the only God? If so, what happened to the God Jesus Christ was with in line two?

There are only two possibilities.

One:    Jesus Christ either replaced God and became God,
Two:    OR, God The Father made Jesus Christ a God.

While you are thinking about your two possibilities, and before you answer, think about this scripture. It is in John, the exact same John who wrote John 1:1. This is John 17:5. Listen to what Christ says and John records, and then tell me that John 1:1 means a three in one God!

"And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self
with the glory which I had with thee before the world was."

In this scripture, Jesus Christ is obviously praying to His Father. He is asking His Father to give Him the Glory He had when He was with His Father before the world was. If Jesus Christ was merely an additional personage of Himself, that same person who is also The Father, then He wouldn’t be asking Himself to give Himself the glory He had with Himself before the world was. If He is merely the third part of Himself, He would assume that glory again and not be asking Himself for it. In the Bible, Christ has much conversation with God the Father. So, if Christ is not having that conversation with God the Father, then who is He having it with? Think about it. The language is very clear. Christ is not trying to confuse us. He is the Son and He is praying to His Father. He is asking His Father to give Him the same power He had with Him before the world was. There is no other inference that can be made from what Jesus Christ said.

Everything becomes clearer and easier to understand if we will stop and remember that the Trinitarian belief, the three in one God, was not a part of early Christianity. The foremost proof of that statement is the Bible itself. History proves it came to the forefront at the council of Nicaea and that it was a forced issue by Emperor Constantine, almost seventeen hundred years ago.

"A study of Christianity prior to 325 AD reveals that they believed in Heavenly
Father, Jesus Christ and The Holy Ghost--3 distinct persons of the Godhead."
                     J.D.N. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines. San
                                 Francisco, 1978, Harper and Row. p93-96-129-233.

At the council, we don’t know how many of the attending bishops disagreed with it yet went along with it anyway but we do know that there was a lot of objection to it and those apposed to it, kept their objection to the Emperor’s stance to themselves. We also know that there were two bishops, Secundus of Ptolemais and Theonas of Marmariea that refused to sign the creed. As a result both were sharply exiled and talking against the new Trinitarian belief became prohibited. So keep that in mind as you investigate. While you are at it, think about this scripture in John.

"I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgement is just;
because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father that sent me."
                      John 5:30

Wanting to go further, wanting to know more about the Trinitarian belief, I looked for the examples in the Bible where Jesus Christ actually told the people that He and His Father were one. I came up with some interesting scriptures.

Deuteronomy 6:4, "Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord."

Mark 12:29, "And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord."

1st John 5:7, "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."

John 10:30, "I and my Father are one."

If taken by the strictness of the language, you could infer that Christ, God the Father and the Holy Spirit are one. The only other possible alternative is that Christ meant that all three are one in purpose. Which is more logical? Christ commanded the apostles to be one. Did he mean one in being, or one in purpose. In John chapter sixteen, Jesus Christ is saying goodbye to His apostles. Here are excerpts from that chapter. LOOK for the inclusive words. Those where Christ actually makes the distinction between He and His Father. They are very plain and easy to see.

"...Yea, the time cometh that whosoever killeth you, will think that he doeth God service. And these things will they do unto you because they have not known the Father, nor me. But now I go my way to him that sent me. It is expedient for you that I go away, for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you...I go to my Father, and ye see me no more."

"All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you...Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, he will give it 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."

In John chapter seventeen, Jesus Christ offers a prayer to God the Father in the garden of Gethsemane. Here are excerpts from that prayer. Again, look for the inclusive words.

"These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee. And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do. And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was. For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me."

"And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are. (Notice how Christ uses the word: one.) While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost but the son of perdition. I have given them thy word...Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth. As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world. That they all may be one as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, (Notice again how Christ used the word: one. Is He talking about a physical merge, or is He talking about being one in purpose? Which is more reasonable?) that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me."

"And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one. (That’s the third time He used the word one, in that context. He’s talking one in purpose.) I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me. Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovest me before the foundation of the world. And I have declared unto them thy name, and will declare it: that the love wherewith thou hast loved me may be in them, and I in them."

That prayer offered by Christ is offered to God the Father. If Christ is God the Father, why would He ask Himself for these things? Why wouldn’t He just do it? If Christ is physically one with His Father, why does He keep asking that the apostles be one with Him as He and His Father are one? Five times in that prayer Christ makes that request of His Father!

                     Why can’t people believe the words that Christ said?
              Why do they feel that Christ meant something other than what He said?
                                                              ...Think about it!

God the Father and Jesus Christ are either who Jesus Christ said They are, ...or... They are who Constantine said They are! And that’s what it really boils down to. Who are you going to believe in all this? Christ, or Constantine! ...The decision is yours!

In the Book, Judaism’s Truth Answers the Missionaries, by Beth Moshe, she writes: "In no place did Jesus say he is God, or God incarnate, or part of a Trinity, or in any unique way the substance of God! He never said he was one essence with God in any special union. How then, did the concept of the Trinity become a basic dogma of Christianity? It was mandated as a belief three hundred years after Jesus’s death by Christianity’s Council of Nicaea in 325 AD. A council said this is the truth, not Jesus."

Finis Jennings Dake (not LDS) compiled the Dake’s Annotated Reference Bible. He spent, "100,000 hours over a 43 year period searching the scriptures" The Dake’s Bible includes nearly 9,000 headings, an outline to all the books of the Bible, 500,000 cross-references, 35,000 notes and comments and facts. In Dake’s Annotated Reference Bible it lists "The Trinity-18 fallacies." Backed up by Bible Scripture. He follows with, "All such statements are unscriptural in the extreme and are contradicted by thousands of plain passages about God. If this is what God is, why did He not say this instead of what He did say? ...In over 20,000 references about God in the Scriptures we get to know all we need to know about the subject. If we will take the Bible literally as to what it says about Him, as we do with other things the subject will be very clear, but if we ignore the plain statements of scripture about Him, and refuse to believe the many descriptions of God, given by those who have seen one, two and three separate persons called ‘God’ then we will remain in ignorance."

The book, Religions of the World, by Spencer Palmer and Roger Keeler, says under the heading Trinity: "In traditional Christian thought, Christians learn some unique lessons as they are confronted with Jesus Christ. First, they learn that the Father has a Son. Second they learn that the Son, is God. And third, they learn that the Holy Ghost is one with the Father and the Son and is thus God also. Mentioned earlier in this chapter is the transition which took place in Christian thought as the gospel moved into the Hellenistic (Greek) world. The God who had been described in active terms by early Jewish Christians was now ascribed in static neo-Platonic terms by Hellenistic Christians." The book goes on to say that because the Greeks could not understand, "The answer was given that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost must all be of one essence." So there’s the tap root of the Trinitarian belief. Modern day Christianity gets it from the Council of Nicaea. The Council of Nicaea got it from Constantine. Constantine got it from the Greeks who came up with it because of their inability to understand. Now think about that for a minute.

            History can prove that the civilization that introduced the Holy Trinity,
                   The God who is the Father, who is the Son, who is the Holy Ghost,
                          changing and becoming the personage needed at the time in question,
                                  was the same civilization, ...during the same era,
                                                     that introduced the Gods,
                                                                      Apollo, Atlas, Thor, Zeus....

I’m not trying to say that one cannot have a close personal relationship with God if he believes in the Holy Trinity because he most certainly can. Nor am I trying to insult anyone or their religious beliefs with this investigation or any investigation in this book. But as in any investigation, the investigator has to decide for himself, ...just how much truth he wants to know.

"...Imagine the joy when you learn for the first time that God is not an incomprehensible
spirit, but instead is your loving Heavenly Father. That you were created in His image and
that He sent His only begotten Son Jesus Christ, to atone and sacrifice for your sins
that you may return to live with Him again!"
                    Ginny Mackinlay

Jesus Christ always taught that all glory was unto His Father, and not unto Him. He never taught that He was equal with the Father, or that He was the Father. He continually said He was "sent" by His Father. Throughout His whole ministry, He espoused those teachings continually. I wonder how He feels now, when over 95% of the Christian world believes and teaches, that He is the Father! In fact, one of the greatest frustrations Christ endured throughout the scriptures was that,

                  "They believe me not." He repeated that several times in the scriptures.
         People would simply not believe that Jesus Christ was who He said He was.

I read the Four Gospels of the New Testament (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John). I added up the scriptures that positively differentiate Heavenly Father, Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost. I came up with some interesting statistics. There are over 180 scriptures that show that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. Here are some of the sources of those scriptures:

The evidence for trial includes:

            5 scriptures where Matthew says it.
            6 scriptures about devils who recognize Christ immediately, say it
            2 scriptures where angels say it.
            2 scriptures where a Centurion says it
            11 scriptures where John says it.
            1 scripture where Mark says it.
            1 scripture where Peter says it.
            4 scriptures where Luke says it.
            1 scripture where Martha, the sister of Lazarus says it
            3 scriptures where God Himself says it, and,
            124 scriptures where Jesus Christ Himself says it.

Paul also says it numerous times. So did Stephen as he was being stoned.
So did the Prophet Jude say it. In fact, you cannot say that one writer in the
New Testament didn’t say that Jesus Christ was the Son of God.

I’ve listed 180 scriptures from the Four Gospels. They, without a doubt, differentiate between God the Father, His Son Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost. Read them. Think about them and examine the actual language used. Read the words as the words are said and don’t read into them. Remember this: The Lord and His apostles did not try and mislead us with tricky language.

          The Great God of Israel, The Great Jehovah, even Jesus The Christ,
                          is exactly who He said He was. He is the Son of God The Father.

    The evidence speaks for itself. It far exceeds the requirements set forth by the law.
              It is overwhelming. It is clear and convincing, and it is far beyond a
                               reasonable doubt. ...It is even far beyond a shadow of a doubt.

The Witness list for trial includes:

                                              Seven Apostles,
                                              One Centurion,
                                              One Angel,
                                              One Prophet,
                                              Martha
                                              Jesus Christ,
                                              God the Father, and more.

All are reliable witnesses in a court of law and all can testify to these three facts:

            1) Heavenly Father is who the Bible says He is.
                    He is God Almighty and the Father of Jesus Christ.
            2) Jesus Christ is who the Bible says He is.
                    He is the Son of God Almighty, our Lord and our Savior.
            3) The Holy Ghost is who the Bible says He is.
                    Our comforter, our bearer of truth. The witness of Jesus Christ.

The following are a few of the 180 scriptures. They are here for you to look at. The remainder are given as scriptural reference that you can look up for yourself. At the end, I break the evidence down into it’s simplest form. However, don’t skip these scriptures. Read and ponder them.

Matt 3:16-17; And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him. And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

Matt 16:13-17; When Jesus came into the coast of Caesarea Phillippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? And they said, some say that thou art John the Baptist; some Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. He saith unto them, but whom say ye that I am? And Simon Peter answered, thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in Heaven.

Matt 26:39; And he went a little further, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O My father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt.

Matt 27:46; And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, E’-li, E’-li, la-ma sa-bach-tha-ni? That is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?

Matt 28:19; Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.

Luke 22:69-71; Hereafter shall the Son of man sit on the right hand of the power of God. Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God? And he said unto them, Ye say that I am. And they said, What need we any further witness? For we ourselves have heard of his own mouth.

Luke 23:34; Then said Jesus, Father forgive them; for they know not what they do.

John 3:16; For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten son, that whosoever believeth in him, should not perish, but have everlasting life.

John 5:17-27; But Jesus answered them, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work. Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the Sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God. Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise. For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel. For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them; even so the Son quickeneth whom he will. For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgement unto the Son: That all men should honor the Son, even as they honor the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him. Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they shall hear shall live. For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself; and hath given him authority to execute judgement also, because he is the Son of man.

John 6:37-40; All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will no wise cast out. For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. And this is the Father’s will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day. And this is the will of him that sent me, that everyone which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.

John 7:28-29; Then cried Jesus in the temple as he taught, saying, Ye both know me, and ye know whence I am: and I am not come of myself, but he that sent me is true, whom ye know not. But I know him: for I am from him and he hath sent me.

John 8:16-19; And yet if I judge, my judgement is true: for I am not alone, but I and the Father that sent me. It is also written in your law, that the testimony of two men is true. I am one that bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me. Then said they unto him, Where is thy Father? Jesus answered, Ye neither know me, nor my Father: if ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also.

John 8:26-29; I have many things to say and to judge of you: but he that sent me is true; and I speak to the world those things which I have heard of him. They understood not that he spake to them of the Father. Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things. And he that sent me is with me: The Father hath not left me alone; for I do always those things that please him.

John 14:11-24; Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works’ sake. Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father. And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If ye shall ask anything in my name, I will do it. If ye love me, keep my commandments. And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you forever; Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you. Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also. At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you. He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him. Judas saith unto him, not Iscariot, Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the world? Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him. He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father’s which sent me.

John 17:21-26, That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me. Father, I will that they will also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me for thou lovest me before the foundation of the world. O righteous Father, the world hath not known thee: but I have known thee, and these have known that thou hast sent me. And I have declared unto them thy name, and will declare it: that the love wherewith thou hast loved me may be in them, and I in them.

Think about this... If the Father and Jesus are one as the Trinitarian belief teaches, then the original 12 apostles are going to merge into the same physical body as Christ and the Father! So is Jesus speaking one in purpose? Or one in body? Is He speaking literally? Or figuratively!

The remainder of the scriptural references are these: Matthew 7:21, 8:29, 10:32-33, 11:25-27, 12:32, 16:27, 17:5, 18:35, 19:17, 26:42, 26:53, 27:43, 27:43. Mark 1:1, 1:10-1, 3:11, 5:7, 9:7, 13:32, 14:36, 16:19. Luke 1:30-32, 2:49, 2:52, 4:18, 4:33-34, 4:41, 6:12, 9:33-36, 10:22, 11:13, 12:10, 18:19, 23:46, 24:49. John 2:16, 3:2, 3:35-36, 4:34, 5:30, 5:36-38, 5:43, 5:45, 6:27-29, 6:32-33, 6:65, 6:69, 7:16-18, 7:33, 8:38, 8:42, 8:54-55, 9:4, 10:36-38, 11:27, 11:41, 12:26-30, 12:44-50, 13:3, 13:16, 13:20, 14:1-2, 14:6-10, 14:26, 14:31, 15:21, 15:23-24, 15:23-24, 16:3, 16:25-28, 16:30- 32, 17:1, 17:3-5, 17:11, 17:18, 18:11, 20:17, 20:21. For your examination.

Remember that the four Gospels are just four books out of the twenty-seven books that make up the New Testament. There is no confusion when the evidence in the Bible is taken as a whole. So take the Bible as it was intended, ...as a whole. Don’t take things out here and there that you choose to believe in, forgetting the rest. Take it as a whole.

                                      Come follow me the Savior said.
                                             Then let us in His footsteps tread.
                                      For thus alone can we be one,
                                             with God’s own loved begotten Son.
                                                                                        John Nicholson,
                                                                                        1839-1909. LDS

Five Undeniable Facts...

This chapter could probably be reduced to these five undeniable facts. Here are the facts, broken down into their simplest form:

One:    There are over 180 scriptures that say Christ is the Son of God the Father.

Two:    There are 15 or so scriptures that could be interpreted to suggest that Christ, His
            Father, and the Holy Ghost are one person.

Three: Which means that the vast majority of the people, the vast majority of the time,
            (including the apostles themselves) thought Christ was the Son of God The Father.

Four:   If the Trinitarian concept is correct however, then only a very small minority believed
            Christ was His own Father, as well as the Holy Ghost! So no matter how you justify it by saying, "God can do anything, or it’s not for us to know, etc.," if the Trinitarian concept is correct, then Christ spent His ministry on earth talking to Himself, about Himself, and praying to Himself about Himself, all the while confusing and misleading the majority of the people who listened to Him.

                              Because the majority of the people
                                       believed He was who He said He was.
                                                ...He was the Son of God the Father.

Five: The only other possibility is that Christ is exactly who He said He was, and He did not
          confuse or mislead anyone, and that Christ is, The Son of God, and He spent His
ministry talking about His Father and praying to His Father. That is the truth in it’s simplest form.

"He that believeth on me, believeth not on me, but on him that sent me.
For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me."
                        Jesus Christ

...so who are you going to believe...

                                                                               Samuel

                                                                                                               Chapter 6 >>>>>

You can also visit us and other fine LDS book sites at
 www.BooksSquare.com
Go to Religion, Christianity, Latter-day Saints

A 317 page full size book mailed to your house for only $12.   S&H included

S&J Liberty Publishing
P.O. Box 7899   Mesa, AZ 85216-7899
 A 317 page full size book mailed to your house for only $12.   S&H included