Guest Post: Christ & Antichrist

Anti is a Greek prefix which not only means "opposed to" but "in the place of." Antichrist  will indeed oppose Christ, but in the most diabolically clever way possible: by pretending to be Christ. For the world to follow and worship him, a false antichrist "Christianity" must become the world religion—a "Christianity" that all religions can accept and which embraces all religions into "one faith." Hence the necessity for today's growing apostasy: to create an apostate church to be the Antichrist's earthly bride, just as the true church is Christ's heavenly bride. Such is the important role of the New Age movement and the many accelerating delusions and seductions in these "last days."

Through a false gospel, false prophets, occultic religious practices and lying "signs and wonders," today's churches are being filled with millions who call themselves Christians, but who are not. Left behind at the Rapture, and happy that the "negative" influence of the vanished troublemakers has been removed, they will worship and follow the Antichrist, thinking he is the true Christ and that they have "never had it so good." An ecumenized "Christianity," in partnership with all religions, will carry on and prosper even more after the Rapture than before. The unifying factor will be concern for Mother Earth. Working for peace and ecological wholeness will have replaced truth as the basis of Christianity, as the World Council of Churches has already decreed.

Far from being a cop-out invented by those who desire to escape persecution (which could become very severe in America before the Rapture), a pretribulation Rapture is essential for a number of reasons: first of all, to remove the true Christians from earth. If they were present when Antichristwas revealed, they would oppose and expose him. Such opposition must be removed in order to give Satan and man, under Antichrist's leadership, full freedom to prove that this earth can be turned back into a garden paradise without God. The Holy Spirit, who is omnipresent, will still convict and draw many to Christ during the Great Tribulation. The restraining influence, however, which He has wielded in this world through the millions of true Christians, will have suddenly been removed, leaving a moral and spiritual vacuum in homes, neighborhoods, businesses, and schools such as we cannot even imagine.

A pretrib Rapture is also necessary because the Antichrist will be given authority by God "to make war with the saints, and to overcome them" (Rev:13:7
). Such a fate could not befall the church, for Christ said that the "gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (Mat:16:18
). Moreover, true Christians have authority and power to "resist the devil" and "he will flee" (James:4:7
), for "greater is he that is in [us], than he that is in the world" (1 Jn:4:4
). So the fact that Antichrist is given power by God "to make war with the saints and to overcome [i.e., kill] them" is proof that the true church is no longer present.

The "saints" mentioned are those who have not heard and rejected the gospel prior to the Rapture and who believe in Christ during the Great Tribulation. They will pay for their faith with their lives. Those who take the mark of the beast suffer the wrath of the Lamb, while those who don't are slain by Antichrist. Thus a post-trib rapture would be a classic nonevent, for there would be very few if any surviving believers to be raptured at that time. And surely those Christians who were left alive, seeing the judgment of God poured out upon mankind and earth's armies gathered for the battle of Armageddon in an attempt to destroy Israel, would know beyond the shadow of a doubt that the Second Coming was about to occur—and would be watching for their Lord to appear. Yet Christ declared that He would return at a time of such ease that even the "five wise virgins" would "slumber and sleep." He warned, "[F]or in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh" (Mat:24:44
). Hardly likely in the midst of the greatest tribulation and destruction the world has ever seen or ever will see!

To understand how the stage is being set for the final conflict between Christ and Antichrist, it is helpful to consider some comparisons and contrasts between these two antagonists. First of all, the procession of events is in God's hands. While we cannot know the day or hour of our Lord's return, the Bible does give us many clues as to the general timing of this great occurrence.

There is a precise time for Christ's second coming just as there was for the first: "But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son..." (Gal:4:4
). The same is true of the Antichrist. Though already present in the world and waiting in the wings, this "man of sin" known as "that Wicked [one]" (2 Thes:2:3
,8) can only take power when it is God's time: "And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time" (2:6).

Interestingly, the Roman Empire plays an integral part in the timing for the revelation both of God's Messiah and Satan's. Ancient Rome set the stage for Christ's birth: "And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed" (Lk 2:1). It was this decree that caused Joseph and Mary to be in Bethlehem so that Christ would be born there in fulfillment of Micah:5:2
. And of course He also had to be executed during the time of the Roman Empire, which introduced crucifixion, in order to fulfill Psalm 22.

For Christ to return, the Roman Empire must be revived. This is clear from Daniel's interpretation that the distinct parts of the image seen by Nebuchadnezzar "...head was of fine gold, his breast and his arms of silver, his belly and his thighs of brass, his legs of iron" (Dan:2:32-33
) represented four world kingdoms: the Babylonian, Medo-Persian, Grecian and Roman. That the "feet and toes, part of potters' clay, and part of iron" (2:41) represent the fourth world kingdom revived in the last days is clear from the statement, "And in the days of these kings [i.e., represented by the ten toes] shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed ...[and] it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever" (2:44).

Christ did not establish His kingdom the first time He came, so He must come again to do so. When? "In the days of those kings"—i.e., when the Roman Empire has been revived, out of which the Antichrist will arise. No longer "as a lamb to the slaughter" (Isa:53:7
), but now returning in power and glory to execute judgment upon those who crucified Him, Christ will destroy this evil empire in its revived form at His second coming. So although the date is not given, the timing of Christ's return is clearly indicated.

It is also essential for the Roman Empire to be revived in order for the Antichrist to appear. Daniel prophesied that "the people of the prince that shall come [i.e., Antichrist] shall destroy the city and the sanctuary..." (Dan:9:26
). The Roman armies under the command of Titus destroyed Jerusalem and the temple in a.d.70. It is therefore from these people that the Antichrist must arise. That doesn't necessarily mean that he has to be Roman, since her legions came from many parts of the Empire. It does mean, however, that he must come from that world kingdom—and for that to happen the Roman Empire must be revived. We are seeing the fulfillment of this most remarkable prophecy in our day.

Calling Antichrist "the prince that shall come" indicates that he, like the ancient Caesars, will rule the Empire when it is revived. Moreover, the ancient Roman Empire was not only a political, economic and military entity, but also a religious one with the god-emperor the head of the pagan priesthood. So in conjunction with a world government, a world religion headed by the new Caesar, the Antichrist, must be established in the last days exactly as Revelation 13 indicates.

During the periodic waves of Roman persecution which the early Christians endured, all citizens of the Empire were required to bow down to an image of the current Caesar and worship him as god. Those who did not were killed. Such will also be the case under Antichrist in the revived Roman Empire: "And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life...[and] as many as would not worship the image of the beast [Antichrist] should be killed" (Rev:13:8
,15).

The contrasts between Christ and Antichrist are also instructive. Our Lord was despised and rejected by Israel and by the world: the Antichrist will be hailed and embraced. Christ was mocked and jeered: the Antichrist will be praised. The cry of those who rejected Christ was, "We'll not have this man to reign over us!" It is awesome to realize that in contrast the Antichrist will be accepted not only by the world but by Israel as well. Jesus told the Jewish leaders in His day, "I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive" (Jn:5:43
).

Christ's kingdom of light and truth is heavenly ("My kingdom is not of this world"- Jn:18:36
); Antichrist's kingdom of darkness is built upon a lie and is totally of this world. It is sad to see so many evangelical Christians becoming increasingly entangled in this world, joining with Catholics, Mormons and other cultists and occultists to pursue its political and social agendas—and in the process losing their hope of heaven. It was characteristic of the early church that they knew they were the ekklesia, the called-out ones who were no longer of this world (Jn:17:6
,14,16) but were eagerly waiting (1 Thes:1:10
) and watching for Christ to return to take them to heaven (Heb:9:28
; Jn:14:2-3
). That hope must be awakened!

Mystery surrounds both Christ and Antichrist. Of Christ, Paul wrote, "great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh..." (1 Tim:3:16
). And of Antichrist he wrote, "[T]he mystery of iniquity doth already work" (2 Thes:2:7
). Each has a mysterious bride, one a virgin, the other a harlot. The mystery of godliness, which will be revealed in Christ's bride, the church, has been "kept secret since the world began" (Rom:16:25
) and is "Christ in you, the hope of glory" (Col:1:27
). It can only be fully revealed at the last time (1 Pt 1:5).

The mystery of iniquity, which could conversely be called "Satan in you, the hope of damnation," will also be revealed through a bride, the Antichrist's. She is called "mystery, babylon the great, the mother of harlots and abominations of the earth" (Rev:17:5
). As Christ loves and preserves His bride, so Satan will "hate the whore, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire" (Rev:17:16
).

That the second coming of Christ in power and glory to rescue Israel, destroy the armies that are about to destroy her, and to set up His kingdom upon the throne of His father David is a separate event from the rapture of His bride, the church, is very clear. Some try to make them one event by suggesting that we will be "caught up to meet the Lord in the air" on His way to earth and will immediately turn around and accompany Him to the Mount of Olives and His intervention at Armageddon. However, Revelation:19:7-14
 tells of Christ's marriage to His bride in heaven before He comes to earth to execute judgment and set up His kingdom.

A major purpose of the Second Coming is to destroy Antichrist: "whom the Lord shall...destroy with the brightness of his coming (2 Thes:2:8
). Thus it is clear that the Second Coming cannot take place until the Antichrist has been revealed and has established his kingdom upon earth. If the Rapture were not a separate event from the Second Coming before the Antichrist is revealed, then Christians would not be watching, waiting and looking for Christ, but for the Antichrist, which is unthinkable!

One of the growing delusions today is the belief that the church is not to be raptured at all, but that when we have taken over the world (and not until then) Christ will return to reign over the kingdom we have established for Him. Yet Christ promised, "And if I go and prepare a place for you [in heaven], I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also" (Jn:14:3
). Paul wrote that "the dead in Christ shall rise first: then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air [obviously to be taken home to His Father's house of many mansions]: and so shall we ever be with the Lord [in heaven, where He has gone to prepare a place for us]" (1 Thes:4:16-17
).

Instead, many who claim to be Christians are looking forward to meeting a "Christ" with their feet planted firmly on planet earth—a "Christ" who has not arrived to take them to heaven but to reign over the kingdom they have established for him. What a delusion! Such have not been working for the true Christ, but for the counterfeit, the Antichrist. They have not been "lay[ing] up...treasures in heaven" (Mat:6:20
), but have been building an earthly kingdom. May our Bridegroom reawaken our love for Him, and may our hearts, as it should be with a bride, long to see and be with Him! TBC

By Dave Hunt

https://www.thebereancall.org/content/christ-antichrist

Guest Post: The Problem of Self-Love

The last two months we have pointed out examples indicating a sad fulfillment in our day of Paul's warning that in the last days prior to Christ's return sound doctrine would be scorned and in its place professing Christians would turn to myths. We noted that as a result there is a diminishing biblical and increasing humanistic content in Christian books and sermons. The very foundations of the Christian faith are being undermined by many of those who are looked to as its chief defenders. Yet at the same time, most if not all of those involved in this destructive process stoutly and sincerely insist that what they teach is "biblical."

How is such delusion possible? It has been accomplished by a subtle redefinition. Whereas to be "biblical" used to mean that a teaching was derived from Scripture, it now means that it may be derived from anywhere so long as it can somehow be interpreted as being compatible with Scripture. Thus the Bible and Christ the Living Word are no longer "The Truth" as Scripture so clearly claims. Instead, under the specious slogan that "all truth is God's truth," Holy Writ is now seen as only one of many ingredients in a new recipe for happiness to which anything may be added so long as the mixture still tastes somewhat "biblical." As a result, Christians are losing their taste and appetite for unadulterated Truth.

This accelerating erosion of spiritual discernment is compounded by the fact that exegesis of Scripture has fallen into disfavor with both shepherds and sheep. Ears are being tickled instead with humanistic concepts which are introduced as allegedly necessary and helpful supplements to God's Word, complete and sufficient though it is in itself. Far from being helpful, however, these "supplements" subtly effect reinterpretations of Scripture—and a generation grows up with a "Christianity" whose foundations have been undermined without their knowing it.

Let's take a simple example. Jesus commanded His disciples, "But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things [food, clothing, shelter] shall be added unto you" (Mt 6:25-33). From humanistic psychology, however (now a legitimate source of revelation according to the "all truth is God's truth" thesis) so-called "Christian psychologists" have borrowed another myth: Abraham Maslow's "hierarchy of needs." It states that man's physical needs for such things as food, clothing and shelter must first be met, then so-called psychological needs, and last of all spiritual needs. Although it blatantly turns Christ's command upside down, Maslow's theory and its derivatives now permeate the books and sermons of many church leaders and influence evangelism. Biblical exegesis has been abandoned for a new source of "truth."

Let's take one more example. Paul solemnly warns, "...in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves..." (2 Tim:3:1-2
). Then follows a list of sins which peculiarly characterize our world today and all of which have their root in self-love. Once again from humanistic psychology, however, "Christian" psychologists have borrowed the seductive myth that self-love (along with its concomitant self-esteem/worth/acceptance, etc.) is a vital ingredient for "mental health." Thus, instead of the prevalence of self-love, as the Bible declares, a lack of it is now stated to be the root of the sins listed in verses 2-4, which have been redefined as "behavior problems" requiring newly discovered "psychological solutions."

As we have so often noted and documented, this pop psychology myth, having been introduced into Christianity by leaders of impeccable reputation, has become so popular that today it is the prevailing belief throughout the church. It is as though Paul actually wrote, "...in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be haters of their own selves, and as a consequence will need to undergo therapy and attend seminars in order to learn to love themselves properly...." Such mutilations would be required before one could derive the current self-love/self-worth fad from Scripture.

Acceptance of psychology's delusion that a lack of self-love is our major problem meant that Christ's statement to "love your neighbor as yourself" had to be re-interpreted as a command to love ourselves. Why would Christ command us, if we all lack self-love, to love our neighbors as we [fail to] love ourselves? Christ's apparent error is now corrected by books and seminars teaching us how to first of all love self so that we can fulfill His command.

In contrast, simple exegesis of Christ's command to "love your neighbor as yourself" would derive from Scripture the following: (1) clearly we must already love ourselves, or such a command would be foolish; (2) this is confirmed by Ephesians:5:29
 ("For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it....), which is substantiated by the obvious fact that we feed, clothe and care for ourselves and seek to satisfy our own desires; (3) we are thus commanded to manifest love for our neighbors in the same way; ie., by caring for them as we care for ourselves; and (4) the fact that this command is necessary indicates that, rather than lacking in self-love, our problem is an excessive amount of it, which causes us to be selfish and thus to neglect caring for others. It is this self-centeredness that Christ seeks to correct. Such had been the consistent interpretation of this Scripture for 1,900 years until humanistic psychology was embraced as a valid source of "God's truth."

As a result, Christian leaders now promote the very love of self that Paul warned would characterize men in the last days and from which Christ came to deliver us by His cross!

That we must derive Truth from the Bible itself and from no other source is clear from Christ's statement: "If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; and ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (Jn:8:31-32
). Simple exegesis indicates that the Truth which alone sets us free from sin and self is (1) revealed only through His Word; (2) understood only by those who "are of God" and obey ("if ye continue") His Word; and (3) hidden to all others (see vv 43-47). Each of these points is denied by the "all truth is God's truth" myth. It credits those "not of God" with revelations of "God's truth" which supplement the very Word of God which they oppose.

Solomon wrote, "My son, give me thine heart, and let thine eyes observe my ways. For a whore is a deep ditch; and a strange woman is a narrow pit" (Prov:23:26-27
). Here we have the simple ingredients of a godly life. There must first of all be the relationship to God as children ("My son...") born into His family by His Spirit. Then follows surrender of our hearts to Him ("give me thine heart"), which involves both love and commitment. Next we observe His ways, follow His example, obey His Word. How can we do this? Motivation comes through our love for Him and the wisdom imparted by His Word. No matter how pleasurable for the moment, unfaithfulness to God (as to one's spouse) and disobedience to His Word eventually become a deep ditch and a narrow pit bitter as death itself.

Why should husband and wife be faithful to one another? Why not so-called free sex? For one thing, sex is never "free," but always carries obligations and consequences that cannot be escaped. Of course it is possible for a husband or wife to "tire" of each other and to "fall in love" with someone else—but that is not real love. God's Word tells us that "love" is more than sexual passion or pleasure. The God-ordained relationship between male and female (like our relationship to Him) involves total commitment. The man who cheats on his wife or divorces her to marry a "more attractive" woman may enjoy what seems to be pleasure and fulfillment for a time. Eventually, however, the remorse for having broken his marriage vows and having dishonored the God who created him will turn illicit pleasure into great pain. Obedience to God's Word gives joy now and eternally. Exchanging that deep and lasting satisfaction for temporary pleasure is a bad bargain indeed.

Psychology allows one to say, "I can't love my wife or husband or parent." Yet we are commanded to love: first of all God, then neighbor as ourselves, and finally even our enemies. True love comes from obedience to God's Word and is thus based upon commitment to sound doctrine. Nor is there any excuse under any circumstances for not loving spouse or parent, friend or foe, whether they mistreat or even hate us. The same is true of all of the ingredients of a happy, productive, fruitful, victorious life: they come from obedience to sound doctrine. Far from being divisive as some complain, doctrine is our very life. Those who will not endure it delude themselves with a false "Christianity" that will be severely judged for its fundamental disobedience.

The Bible does not say, "Rejoice in the Lord always...unless you are unable to do so because of an unhappy childhood, a bout of 'depression,' or adverse circumstances." It does not say, "Be anxious for nothing...unless you have a nervous disposition." It does not say, "Forgive...unless you are unable to because of abuse, etc." We are not excused from obeying the command, "Be not afraid," because we happen to be timid and fearful. Nor are we excused from the command, "Let the peace of God rule in your hearts," because we have been diagnosed as susceptible to stress. Nor are we excused from the command to love because we find certain people unlovable. Unfortunately, however, the simple obedience to God's Word that sound doctrine compels has been undermined by psychological "counseling" that nourishes unbelief and rebellion. Therapy then offers to justify our disobedience, to comfort us in our rebellion, and to provide the peace and joy that only God can give to those who trust and obey Him.

Love, joy, peace, etc. are clearly declared to be the fruit not of therapy but of the Holy Spirit working in our lives. How? Through some magic process by which God "zaps" us and we are transformed? No, but as God's Truth so grips our hearts that we are fully persuaded to be ruled by His Word, to obey Him and to trust Him to fulfill in us what He has promised. This is not to deny the miraculous working of the Holy Spirit powerfully in our hearts and through us in others, in ways beyond human comprehension. It is merely to say that the Bible clearly declares that God works in our lives through our obedience to His Word. As Jesus said, "If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; and ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (Jn:8:31-32
).

The litmus test of truth for victorious Christian living must be: Is it derived from Scripture, or is it the wisdom of this world, packaged in Christian terminology in order to make it appear to be compatiblewith Scripture? This test should not only be applied to the sermons and writings of others, but to ourselves. We should each get on our knees and ask God, "How much of my daily life is rooted in Your Word, and how much is rooted in the world? When I am happiest, is it because I know I have pleased my Heavenly Father, am rejoicing in His grace and love, and 'the joy of the Lord is my strength' (Neh:8:10
); or is it because I have achieved worldly goals that bring the same joy to those who 'know not God and obey not the gospel'?"

Jesus accused the Pharisees of establishing traditions that nullified Scripture. Even the clear command to "Honour thy father and mother" had been turned completely around by the Pharisees (Mt 15:1-6). Christ indicted them with their having established a system of religion that allowed men seemingly to honor God outwardly while in their hearts they remained committed to self. What left men's hearts far from God while their lips seemed to praise Him? Christ summed up His indictment by declaring that Israel's religious leaders had substituted the traditions of men for the true doctrine of God's Word (vv 7-9). This same "leaven of the Pharisees" is fermenting in today's church. May God help us to boldly expose it and to stand uncompromisingly for obedience to His Word. TBC

By Dave Hunt

https://www.thebereancall.org/content/problem-self-love

Guest Post: The Trinity

Many Christians are at a loss to understand, much less to defend, the "Trinity." Critics argue that that word is not even found in the Bible. To deal with that issue, we must begin with God, as the Bible itself does. There are two general concepts of God: (1) pantheism/naturalism, that the universe itself is God; and (2) supernaturalism, that the Creator is distinct from His creation. Within these are two more opposing views: (1) polytheism, that there are many gods; and (2) monotheism, that there is only one true God.

Monotheism itself is divided into two rival beliefs: (1) that God is a single being; and (2) that God has always existed in three Persons who are separate and distinct yet One. Obviously, Christians are the only ones who hold the latter view—and even some who call themselves Christians reject it. Yet it is the only logically and philosophically coherent view of God possible.

Pantheism has the same fatal flaws as atheism. If everything is God, to be God has lost all meaning and so nothing is God. The problems with polytheism are equally obvious. There is no real God who is in charge, so the many gods fight wars and steal one another's wives. There's no basis for morals, truth or peace in heaven or earth. Polytheism's basic problem is diversity without unity.

The belief that God is a single being is held by both Muslims and Jews, who insist that Allah and Jehovah are single entities. It is also held by pseudo-Christian cults such as the Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons—and by various aberrant Christian groups who also deny the deity of Christ. Some Pentecostals claim that God is a single being and that Father, Son and Holy Spirit are God's three "titles" or "offices." Here we have unity without diversity.

That God must have both unity and diversity is clear. The Allah of Islam and the Jehovah of Jehovah's Witnesses and Jews, for instance, is incomplete in himself, unable to experience love, fellowship and communion before creating beings with whom he could have these experiences. The Bible says that "God is love." But the God of Islam and Judaism could not be love in and of himself—for whom could he love when he was alone before creation?

This belief that God is a single entity (Unitarianism) and not three Persons existing eternally in one God (Trinitarianism) was first formulated in the early church around A.D. 220. by a Libyan theologian named Sabellius. He attempted to retain biblical language concerning Father, Son and Holy Spirit without acknowledging the triune nature of God. Sabellius claimed that God existed as a single Being who manifested Himself in three activities, modes or aspects: as Father in the creation, as Son in redemption, and as Holy Spirit in prophecy and sanctification. This heresy, though condemned by the vast majority of Christians, survives to this day.

The Bible presents a God who did not need to create any beings to experience love, communion and fellowship. This God is complete in Himself, being three Persons: Father, Son and Holy Spirit, separate and distinct, yet at the same time eternally one God. They loved and communed and fellowshiped with each other and took counsel together before the universe, angels or man were brought into existence. Isaiah "heard the voice of the Lord [in eternity past] saying, "Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?" (Isa:6:8
). Moses revealed the same counseling together of the Godhead: "And God said, Let usmake man in our image, after our likeness"; and again, "Let us go down, and there confound their language" (Gen:1:26
;11:7). Who is this "us" if God is a single entity? Why does God say, "The man is become as one of us" (Gen:3:22
)?

Moreover, if God is a single Being, then why is the plural Hebrew noun elohim (literally "gods") used for God repeatedly? In fact, this plural noun is in the center of Israel's famous confession of the oneness of God! The Shema declares, "Hear, O Israel, The Lord our God is one Lord" (Deut 6:4; Mk 12:29). In the Hebrew it reads, "Jehovah our elohim [gods] is one [echad] Jehovah." The Hebrew word echad allows for a unity of more than one. For example, it is used in Genesis:2:24
 where man and woman become one flesh; in Exodus:36:13
 when the various parts "became one tabernacle"; in 2 Samuel:2:25
 when many soldiers "became one troop"; and elsewhere.

Nor is the word elohim the only way in which God's plurality is presented. For example: Psalm:149:2
, "Let Israel rejoice in him that made him" (literally "makers"); Ecclesiastes:12:1
, "Remember now thy Creator (lit. "creators"); and Isaiah:54:5
, "For thy Maker is thine husband (lit. "makers, husbands"). Unitarianism has no explanation for this consistent presentation of God's plurality all through the Old Testament. Although the word "trinity" does not occur in the Bible, the concept is clearly there, providing the unity and diversity which makes possible the love, fellowship and communion within the Godhead. Truly the trinitarian God is love—and He alone.

Jesus said, "The Father loveth the Son and hath given all things into his hand" (Jn:3:35
). God's love is not just toward mankind but first of all among the three Persons of the Godhead. And three Personsthey must be. Father, Son and Holy Spirit can't be mere offices, titles or modes in which God manifests Himself, for such cannot love, consult and fellowship together. Not only the Son is presented as a Person, but so are the Father and the Holy Spirit. The Bible presents each as having His own personality: each wills, acts, loves, cares, can be grieved or become angry. "Offices" or "titles" don't do that! Unitarianism isn't biblical—and it robs the Godhead of the necessary qualities of true Deity.

Godhead? Is that a biblical term? Yes, indeed. It occurs three times in the King James New Testament in Acts:17:29
, Romans:1:20
, and Colossians:2:9
. In contrast to theos, which is used consistently throughout the New Testament for "God," three different but related Greek words occur in these verses (theios, theiotes, theotes), which the King James translators (here's another reason for preferring the KJV!) carefully designated by the special word, Godhead. That very term indicates a plurality of being. Paul wrote, "In him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily" (Col:2:9
). Did he simply mean that in Christ dwelt all the fullness of Himself? That would be like saying that in me dwells all the fullness of me. Well, of course it does—so why say it, and what does it really mean? Nothing!

Does it simply mean that in Christ dwells all the fullness of Deity as non-KJV translations render it? That, too, would be redundant—or it would detract from the deity of Christ. For if Christ is intrinsically God, then what is the point of saying that "in Him dwells all the fullness of deity"? Of course it does! But if Christ is the Son and there are two other persons in the Godhead, then it does mean something. It means that just as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one God, so when the Son became man He brought that fullness of the Godhead with Him into flesh.

In Romans:1:20
 Paul argues that God's "eternal power and Godhead" are seen in the creation He made. God's eternal power—but His Godhead? Yes, as Dr. Wood pointed out years ago in The Secret of the Universe, the triune nature of God is stamped on His creation. The cosmos is divided into three: space, matter and time. Each of these is divided into three. Space, for instance, is composed of length, breadth and width, each separate and distinct in itself, yet the three are one. Length, breadth and width are not three spaces, but three dimensions comprising one space. Run enough lines lengthwise and you take in the whole. But so it is with the width and height. Each is separate and distinct, yet each is all of space—just as the Father, Son and Holy Spirit is each God.

Time also is a trinity: past, present and future—two invisible and one visible. Each is separate and distinct, yet each is the whole. Man himself is a triunity of spirit, soul and body, two of which are invisible, one visible. Many more details could be given of the Godhead's triunity reflected in the universe. It can hardly be coincidence.

The Hebrew word elohim (gods) occurs about 2,500 times in the Old Testament, while the singular form occurs only250 times and most of those designate false gods. Genesis:1:1
 reads, "In the beginning, elohim created the heaven and the earth"; i.e., literally, "gods created the heaven and the earth." Though a single noun is available, yet the plural form is consistently used for God. And in violation of grammatical rules, with few exceptions, singular verbs and pronouns are used with this plural noun. Why?

At the burning bush it was elohim (gods) who spoke to Moses. Yet elohim did not say, "We are that we are," but "I AM THAT I AM" (Ex 3:14). One cannot escape the fact that, all through the Bible, God is presented as a plurality and yet as One, as having both diversity and unity. This is unique among all the world's religions! To reject the Trinity is to reject the God of the Bible.

The New Testament presents three Persons who are distinct, yet each is recognized as God. At the same time we have repeatedly the clear statement that there is only one true God. Christ prays to the Father. Is He praying to Himself? "The Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world" (1 Jn:4:14
). Did He send Himself? Worse yet, did one "office" pray to and send a "title"? Father, Son and Holy Spirit each has distinct functions, yet each works only in conjunction with the others. Christ said, "The words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself [on my own initiative]: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works" (Jn:14:10
); "I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another comforter...even the Spirit of truth" (Jn:14:16-17
). Throughout the New Testament, Father, Son and Holy Spirit are each separately honored and act as God, yet only in concert with one another.

The Old Testament also presents three Persons in the Godhead interacting. For example: "Hearken unto me, O Jacob and Israel, my called; I am he; I am the first, I also am the last. Mine hand also hath laid the foundation of the earth, and my right hand hath spanned the heavens....From the time that it was, there am I: and now the Lord God, and his Spirit, hath sent me" (Isa:48:12-16
). The One speaking through Isaiah refers to Himself as "the first and the last" and the Creator of all, so He must be God. But He speaks of two others in the same passage who must also be God: "the Lord God, and his Spirit, hath sent me." Jesus presented a similar passage to the Pharisees (Mat:22:41-46
) when He asked them who the Messiah was, and they said, "The Son of David." He then quoted, "The Lord said unto my Lord, sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool" (Ps:110:1
). Then Jesus asked them, "If David then call him Lord, how is he his son?" The Pharisees were speechless. Unitarianism cannot explain these two "Lords."

It is a mystery how God can exist in three Persons yet be one God; but it is also a mystery how God could have no beginning and create everything out of nothing. We can't understand what a human soul or spirit is. Nor can we explain love or beauty or justice. It is beyond human capacity to comprehend the full nature of God's being. But neither can we understand what it means for us or anything else to exist—nor can we comprehend what space is or what time is or matter is. For every door science opens, there are ten more unopened doors on the other side. The more we learn, the more rapidly the unknown expands before us like receding images in a hall of mirrors. The Jehovah's Witnesses and other Unitarians argue that because the Trinity can't be understood it can't be. But the fact that it is beyond human comprehension is no reason for rejecting what the Bible so consistently presents to us. God is telling us about Himself so we can believe in and know Him. We dare not reject what He says or lower it to the level of our finite minds. TBC

By Dave Hunt

https://www.thebereancall.org/content/trinity