THE TRINITY HERESY

God speaking in the first person specifically in scriptures refers to the parts of a mans body (made in his own image) to describe father son and spirit and yet that is modalism by definition which trinitarians call heresy but God NOWHERE refers to himself as three in fact the worship of three different god-self’s with different amounts of knowledge, power and authority ordering each other around is nothing but a perverted pantheon and trying to lay claim to monotheism is like claiming your three different cars are the “one vehicle……..but trinity make logical sense?!?…. You literal God damned fools!?!?!… ….HOW MANY GODS ARE THERE FOR THE ONE GOD TO TALK TO?? Who was Jesus praying to??!?…. The real question should be … How does having multiple different persons keep this one God/being/entity from praying to himself?! (The trinitarian “schizophrenic” “god-head”) The Trinitarians want to have their cake and eat it too as the saying goes. On the one hand they need to say they only worship one indivisible God being/ entity but on the other hand they feel the need for some reason to keep Jesus or God from praying and talking to himself by dividing him up into different persons!?! It never occurs to them that that since there is only one indivisible God to pray too and Jesus is that indivisible God come in the flesh that he would need to talk to himself as to show us how to live, suffer, pray and die for our/ flesh) benefit not his!?!…..

So while Trinitarians are quick to complain that God was not talking to himself at Christ baptism or in Gen “let us” they ignore the logical demands of their own theology! If Jesus is the ONE GOD in flesh and the Father is the SAME ONE GOD in heaven then Trinitarianism demands THE ONE GOD is talking to HIMSELF the same “being”! Claiming that God is multiple different persons as the reason for why God is not talking to himself (because God is three different “selfs”) only demonstrates that what they really worship is in fact not a ONE GOD who talks to himself but three different god “selfs”/ and they all talk to each other! When they speak about who God was talking and praying to, they are quick to say “the other person, NOT HIMSELF!” But if you ask them how many gods do they pray to then they will say “ONLY ONE”!?! They expect you to believe that those three different persons are THE ONE GOD-BEING” which is like calling three different cars “THE ONE VEHICLE” (they are text book examples of prov 26:12)

Mark 12:28…Which is the first commandment of all? 29. …Hear, O Israel; THE LORD OUR GOD IS ONE LORD: 30. And ………..this is the first commandment….. 31. And the second is….. IF YOU CAN’T GET THIS “FIRST OF ALL COMMANDMENTS” RIGHT, ALL THE REST OF YOUR “FAITH” AND PREACHING ON LOVE & SIN IS MOOT -The Trinitarian apologist pretend to have superior understand of more complex issues in statements where the purpose of God is NOT DEFINING how many persons he is while the simplest of statements by God FOR THE EXPRESS PURPOSE of defining how many persons God is eludes them. They also seem to “excel with glee” in giving their translations of oblique/obscure passages that have NO demand or intention of defining a specific number of persons of God to then cherry pick demands and assumptions of “great piety” into them. The difference is clear: Oneness show & use specific words that demand one person as well as God’s own specific descriptions who’s whole contextual purpose/point is to define a specific number of persons of God, while Trinitarians on the other hand try to use vague and or oblique passages with ambiguities who’s context and or point of the passage is NOT to define a specific number of persons of God to make demands on the passages that are specific in claim!?! In other words, they pretend that specific passages/words whose purpose is to define a number of persons they claim are not literal / just figures of speech or do not define a specific number of person while they point to the oblique and obscure passages whose purpose is NOT to define a specific number of persons and claim the translations somehow provides them license to make cherry pick demands they use to redefine the specifics with in favor of the obscure. Jesus Is the Father ; Jesus is his own father if he were not then he would just be the bastard child of someone else!?!? that is what it means to be a son who’s is a different person then his father is NOT married to the women who gives birth ….however since he is his own father/ he is the father come in the flesh as scriptures state that he is then he is not the bastard child that trinitarians make him out to be!!

JOHN 14: 8-20 ….Note Isaiah 9:6. For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: …: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counseller, … the everlasting Father ….The son, father/Holy Spirit are all the same person, NOT like two different persons working together even as “one flesh” ….The “oneness” between Christ and the father is not comparable to a man & his wife, for only a fool would say “When you have seen me you have seen my wife, how sayest thou then, Shew us your wife?” Notice they asked to see THE FATHER and the response was Jn 14:9 ..“HAVE I BEEN SO LONG time with you, and yet hast THOU NOT KNOW ME, Philip…..Now image some fool trying to claim that statement if you asked to see his wife!?!!? You want to see the FATHER but have I been with you but you don’t know me!?!?! Jn 14 continued….…………..17. Even THE SPIRIT OF TRUTH; (Jn 14:6 I AM the way, THE TRUTH,) whom the world cannot receive, .. for HE DEWLLETH WITH YOU, (present tense/standing next to them in the flesh) and SHALL BE IN YOU… (future tense “In them”) 18. I will not leave you comfortless: I WILL COME TO YOU (future tense “In them”) Jesus himself here makes the point that the same person who was the HOLY SPIRIT that would come was standing next to them but lets them know “I will come to you again to be Inside of you”

The whole point to Gal 3:20.a mediator is NOT A MEDIATOR OF ONE, (HEIS) but GOD IS ONE. (HEIS) again, point blank, identifies the number of persons of God! The “but” points out the contrast between multiple persons in a mediation party v the “one” of God. God is not like a mediation party with multiple different persons. …..”the express image of his person” ( the person of God; singular not plural).Any attempt to lay claim otherwise is willful ignorance and delusional nonsense TRINITARIANS CONFESS JESUS /THEY ARE NOT POLYTHEIST BUT ARE MONOTHEIST LIKE A LIAR & THIEF WHO “CONFESS” THEY DO NOT LIE OR STEAL The simple fact is that just because you confess or deny that you are in an adulterous relationship and denounce all forms of adultery has nothing to do with whether or not it is in fact adulterous! .. …A rose by any other name is still just a rose AND calling it a water lily does not change the definition of what a water Lilly or a rose is either!…No, Trinitarians confess & preach literally …”ANOTHER JESUS” 2 Cor 11:4 – Like a thief in your house caught stealing your things insisting he was not there stealing “I CONFESS I am NOT stealing”. You just do not “properly understand” what he is doing/saying. Further, since you never had a “proper understanding” of what he is doing/saying you have no business accusing him since you do not even know what you are talking about in the first place. It is with and in your own ignorance that you base your “false accusations” & “ad homonym attacks” against him…… Ridiculous of course it is ……2Thess 2:11; Titus 1:16; 2Tim 3:5; …… should have given you a hint, harking back to Satan in The garden…God said you will die…Satan comes along and states no you will be more WISE……today .God said He is one; but Satan’s children come along and say no three is more WISE and humble in the face of God’s grandeur only “a mystery” that can be understood “in faith”. God uses head and right arm to explain the distinctions between father and son..

However, the Trinitarian heretics say to the effect: “NO, that is just a figure of speech, or that is not what God really means. What God is really saying is that God is three different persons”. Fools, hypocrites and blind guides, God said he was One and by your traditions and vain imaginations have taken the words of God and made them of no effect, refashioning God into your image!

Rom 1:20.  For THE INVISIBLE THINGS OF HIM from the creation of the world are CLEARLY SEEN, being understood by the things that are made, EVEN his eternal power AND GODHEAD; so that THEY ARE WITHOUT EXCUSE;…..

First: “CLEARLY SEEN” …”EVEN HIS GODHEAD”………Can’t appeal to “beyond the limited human mind to comprehend” …..Can’t appeal to “Incomprehensible”. This Trinitarian idea of God head is nowhere to be seen certainly not clearly by “the things which are made such that they are without excuse” (no, it is “incomprehensible” by their own pious “confessions of faith”/ arguments …?!?)….On the other hand we shall “explore” & “discover” from what IS in the scriptures what IS and can be “CLEARLY SEEN” without employing vain imaginations under the guise of humility and piety in the face of an “awesome” and “incomprehensible God” / God-head.

Second: Where do folk get the idea that “the GODHEAD” is some mystical “head” that has three persons in side of it?! (as if the fact “the god head” is a mystical concept that somehow imply intrinsically a head not like your head but a special head that is multiple different persons in it ..where does that even come from?!?) In fact, the original Greek & English words used had nothing to do with “a head” or body part period. The Greek word as in acts 17:29 the Greek word is “theios” (means “godness” or godlike/divinity)Roms 1:20 “theiotes” (means divinity/ divine nature) Colossians 23:20 “theotes” (means divinity/ divine nature)  Where here the greek word goes into Old English as the word “godhad” which is “divine nature” was first used. Latter, in a couple of places the words & old English were translated/transformed into middle English as the word “godhede” (Middle English -hede, cognate with -hood and German -heit. Along with maidenhead, this is the sole survival of this form of the suffix) by John Wycliffe in the 1300’s.   It was simply a translational transformation (similar to the  Greek word transformation from  Iēsous via the Latin into English as  “Jesus”!?!)

While the old English word “had” and middle English word “hede” as pronounced can sound kinda like the modern English word “head” the meaning of the word “God -HEDE” has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with a head/body part period even in the English language! Incorporating the idea of a “head” (body part) into “hood” (essence or “ness”) simply and solely because the word “hede” has a similar sound to “head” from middle English to modern English is nothing more then a slight of hand transformation/ incorporation/ redefinition of terms!!

But now when folks hear the word Godhead they think oooo the mystical head of God that somehow intrinsically means that God has a head with different persons “running around” greeting each other inside of it!?! The word in the text simply means GODHOOD or godness …..It does NOT mean a head with multiple personality disorder.

-The Trinitarian apologist pretend to have superior understand of more complex issues in statements where the purpose of God is NOT DEFINING how many persons he is while the simplest of statements by God FOR THE EXPRESS PURPOSE of defining how many persons God is eludes them. They also seem to “excel with glee” in giving their translations of oblique/obscure passages that have NO demand or intention of defining a specific number of persons of God to then cherry pick demands and assumptions of “great piety” into them. The difference is clear: Oneness show & use specific words that demand one person as well as God’s own specific descriptions who’s whole contextual purpose/point is to define a specific number of persons of God, while Trinitarians on the other hand try to use vague and or oblique passages with ambiguities who’s context and or point of the passage is NOT to define a specific number of persons of God to make demands on the passages that are specific in claim!?! In other words, they pretend that specific passages/words whose purpose is to define a number of persons they claim are not literal / just figures of speech or do not define a specific number of person while they point to the oblique and obscure passages whose purpose is NOT to define a specific number of persons and claim the translations somehow provides them license to make cherry pick demands they use to redefine the specifics with in favor of the obscure.

You can download the complete FREE book from https://www.scribd.com/doc/305367608/The-Trinity-Heresy OR https://www.academia.edu/23463667/THE_TRINITY_HERESY or http://www.globethics.net/gtl/10920799 THE TRINITY HERESY