Popular author Rob Skiba is intentionally deceiving his followers. It is a matter of public record that I have confronted him concerning his denial of the trinity, specifically the personhood of the Holy Spirit. Terms like “trinity” have specific definitions that reasonable people agree on in order to make communication possible. Think about it this way, if I decided to redefine the word “red” to match the color green and then started stopping at green lights I would cause a traffic accident. Well Skiba is causing a theological pileup on the freeway. Recently he published a statement of faith on the internet. His disingenuousness ( I will prove) is apparent right from the start in point number one:
I believe in one eternal God whose name is YHWH (Deuteronomy 6:4). He is the Father of the only begotten Son, Yeshua (a.k.a. Jesus – John 3:16) , and He has sent His Holy Spirit to empower, comfort and encourage us in our walk with Him. I believe the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are one (Genesis 1:1-4; Isaiah 11:1-5; John 1:1-14; 10:30; 17:11; 1 John 5:7), thus, commonly referred to as the Trinity. [1]
He wants people to read it and think he is affirming the trinity. But he really is not. The above statement is intentionally deceptive. I have undeniable proof that he does not believe what is “commonly referred to as the Trinity.” He argues vigorously against the trinity and my facebook notes comment section have a record of it. What is “commonly referred to as the trinity” is undeniably “one God in Three persons.” Here are some sources.
Pocket Dictionary of Apologetics & Philosophy of Religion:
Trinity. The Christian understanding of God as triune. Trinity means that the one divine nature is a unity of three persons and that God is revealed as three distinct persons: Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The ultimate basis for the Christian doctrine of the Trinity lies in the divine self-disclosure in Jesus, who as the Son revealed the Father and poured out the Holy Spirit. See also economic Trinity; immanent Trinity.[1A]
Here’s another theological dictionary:
Trinity A reference to the doctrine that God is one and yet exists eternally in three persons.[2]
Even a non-specialist dictionary like Webster’s gets it right:
Trin•i•ty \ˈtri-nə-tē\ n
[ME trinite, fr. AF trinité, fr. LL trinitat-, trinitas state of being threefold, fr. L trinus threefold] 13c
1 : the unity of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as three persons in one Godhead according to Christian dogma
2 not cap : a group of three closely related persons or things
3 : the Sunday after Whitsunday observed as a feast in honor of the Trinity[3]
It doesn’t get any more “common” than Webster’s. Clearly, what is commonly referred to as the trinity is the belief in “one God in three persons.” Rob denies the Holy Spirit is a person just like the Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons. This is Rob’s comment from our facebook discussion that first alarmed me to his cultic theology.
Skiba denies Holy Spirit and calls Trinity doctrine the “real heresy.”
Note in the last paragraph he writes the majority view (one God in three persons) “is the very definition of absolute heresy.” So he has effectively called every Christian theologian over the last 1700 years a heretic. He has no respect for anyone who has come before him and, as shown in previous posts, his cultist views are based on a surface reading of an English translation. Very poor form. But now he publishes a faith statement giving the reader the impression he affirms what he so vehemently denies? His conscience is apparently seared. He is very well aware that what he believes is far removed from what is “commonly called the trinity.” So why is Rob misleading you about his beliefs? He wants to keep his fans and followers who might (and should) leave his fold if he told the truth.
It is common practice amongst the cults. For example The Way International holds a similar stance. Ken Boa writes, “The Way often uses the right terminology but in the wrong way.”[4] Similarly, “Theosophy proceeds deceitfully and parasitically by its practice of using (misusing) Christian terminology.”[5] Also, “Though this cult uses Christian terminology to communicate its mystical Eastern concepts to a Western audience, it is vehemently opposed to every major tenet of biblical Christianity.”[6] If it walks like a duck then it’s probably a ___ *quack! Skiba’s deceptive faith statement is clearly cultic because it uses known Christian theology to deceive followers into thinking he affirms Christian doctrine. If you follow Rob Skiba’s teaching and attend his church you have joined ranks with these cult groups listed here. Birds of a feather…
Addendum, here’s another argument from Skiba that clearly shows he does not believe “what is commonly referred to as the trinity”:
[1] Rob Skiba, “Statement of Faith” http://www.babylonrisingblog.com/Faith.html (accessed September 24, 2013).
[1A] C. Stephen Evans, Pocket Dictionary of Apologetics & Philosophy of Religion (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2002), 118.
[2]Millard J. Erickson, The Concise Dictionary of Christian Theology, Rev. ed., 1st Crossway ed. (Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Books, 2001), 204.
[3] Merriam-Webster, Inc. Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary. Eleventh ed. Springfield, Mass.: Merriam-Webster, Inc., 2003.
[4]Kenneth Boa, Cults, World Religions, and the Occult (Canada; England: Victor Books, 1990), 244.
[5] Boa, Cults, World Religions, and the Occult, 138.
[6]Boa, Cults, World Religions, and the Occult, 131.
About Cris Putnam
Kevin J……………Really?????? You ask if posters actually “read the thread”……. and then show that even if the time is taken to read the “entire” discussion………it does not mean you understood what you read. Rob never calls the trinity itself “heresy”, only the majority view/understanding of how it works. As for accusing others of being prideful….. just calling it like I see it…..and…….again……you obviously read but did not understand what was actually being said “IF” you are referring to “MY” post because I certainly do not claim to be the only one speaking any sense BUT I do give this credit to someone else. I believe that alot of the misunderstanding about Rob’s view stems from this apparently widespread problem of being able to read while at the same time not understanding the context of what you are reading. I have a nephew who is struggling with this same problem and it has kept him from graduating High School so it’s an obvious real problem for him as well as others. Also…..no arrogance in pointing out the truth and certainly nothing prideful about doing so. I think you should read the “ENTIRE” thread “AGAIN” 🙂
Actually, I was pretty clear that the issue is not that he verbally denies the Trinity, per se, or that he doesn’t use the term “Trinity” in his statement of faith. I stated that we all agree there. As you yourself stated, he called “the majority view of how it works” heresy. The “view of how it works” is the key element here, especially so if one is calling all who hold a specific “view of how it works” heretics, which is what one is doing when referring to the “view” held by others as a “heresy”.
If you call me Kevin, but were to say I’m not the son of Ron and Cindy who was born in Oakland, then you only have my name correct. You are otherwise denying who I am. That’s more than semantics or misunderstanding. And if someone who knew me pointed out that I’m not the Kevin born in New York to Tom and Ann, but rather the Kevin born in Oakland to Ron and Cindy, and you called that person a liar, then you are unyieldingly and vehemently stating that your understanding of who I am is absolutely correct, and thereby criminalizing the one who holds the true understanding of who I am.
When it comes to God, who He is is of highest importance and significance! The correct “view of how it works” in regard to how God has revealed himself is imperitave at the highest level. It’s like if your son’s trouble in school was misunderstanding math as English, and answering equations with entirely unrelated poems. That’s no minor issue.
My reference you mentioned was not to your post, but in regard to your latter post, it is not -calling it like you see it- to call someone prideful who is simply clarifying details of what was stated by another and making defense for what one holds to be the accurate view. I think that’s more -accusing it like you’re reading into it-.
I’m once again thankful for this forum, as I would have continued listening to Rob’s lectures otherwise. Thanks guys!
And, for the record: my statements are based in love for God, love for the truth, and love for others whether wrong or right, and are not argument for argument sake. God bless!
Kevin J……..read the last paragraph of Rob’s initial response. Like I said before………reading without understanding……and you are far from being the only one. Calling the majority view “heresy” is something there should be more of i.e. the majority of Christians who do not keep the true SABBATH holy and right off the bat when questioned on this they quote Paul and his message of grace because Paul’s (let’s not forget that he is a MAN btw) words are obviously more important than those of Jesus. Then they claim that Jesus said he came to abolish the law (hence their excuse) when he absolutely did not. Then you have the celebration of Easter which we are not directed to celebrate anywhere in the bible yet the majority view is that it’s OK simply because they put the name of Jesus on this day……..bottom line……..it’s a doctrine of man. My whole point here is that maybe the majority view opposing Rob’s in this discussion is wrong and he is actually right. The majority is totally wrong everywhere else in Christianity so no surprise if their view on this is corrupt also. The only thing Christians can seem to get right these days is their agreement that Jesus was/is the son of GOD. Why do you think there are so many different denominations? All different interpretations of God’s word and everyone of them completely wrong in most areas because they want to insert meanings and definitions into God’s word that are simply not there. YOU HAVE TO READ CAREFULLY and in-between-the-lines. AGAIN….LAST PARAGRAPH OF ROB’S INITIAL RESPONSE. His statement makes perfect sense to me. It’s in English and he makes a point that I don’t know how anyone could argue with……….but I’m sure there are plenty who will (and have) simply by twisting his words to say something they don’t just like they do with the scriptures………
I believe that Kevin J is referring to myself, although he is guilty of the same thing as Cris Putnam is, and that is twisting someone’s words to make it fit their perspective. Kevin, please re-read my statement (11 posts prior to this one). What I said was [quote]: “… when I read this article last weekend and then this entire thread, the absence of a strong voice of reason was glaringly missing, so I decided to step up :p ” [end quote]. What you claimed i said is that I am [quote] “the only one speaking any sense in this thread” [end quote]. f you can’t see the difference in those two statements, it explains exactly why you can’t understand the discussion going on in this debate. I did see other “voices of reason” on this thread, but no one was putting it all together, giving a big picture of what was going on, which is what I tried to do — albeit based on my perspective, after having prayed for wisdom and understanding.
What is truly “great stuff,” Kevin J, is how you stated that you [quote]: “always find it interesting when one is pridefully calling another prideful, or accusing others of being an accuser” — and then you end your defensive post by claiming that I sound pretty arrogant and prideful [see above paragraph for quote] — thus placing yourself directly in the same camp you’ve placed myself in! But maybe because yours was “just an observation,” you don’t qualify as an accuser ;p
I’ve noticed that there are no longer any defenders of Cris on this post (Cris himself seems to have run out of interest and/or answers) besides you, Kevin, along with “Marcia” — who, after months of slandering Rob (and yes, the word “slander” is used correctly here, in the same context that Jesus “correctly” called the Pharisees “hypocrites”) — she still doesn’t know that Mr. Skiba’s name is Rob and not “Ron.” This illustrates and underscores what Daniel just said: that one can read this thread (thoroughly) but not necessarily see what’s right in front of them. Maybe Daniel’s suggestion to read the entire thread again — with a more open (less biased) mind — would be good?
I’m not your enemy, Kevin — or even Marcia’s or Cris’ — and it’s very sad that Satan has so divided us. We are all fighting for truth. Of course it’s right to debate spiritual truths, as we all know there indeed ARE false teachers among us. But we have to do it in the right way — in love — or else we are just “clanging symbols” and our efforts will be brought to naught. Or worse — we crucify one of our own because we were blinded by our own pride.
oops, meant “cymbal” not “symbol”
I believe the following verse is relevant to this thread, in regards to humanity’s bent for believing in the traditions of man:
“Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it. Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it.” – Matthew 7:13-14
In essence, Jesus is warning us about following “the crowd” because the crowd will lead you to your destruction. The crowd does not want to pay the price of following Christ; they will always take the easy road. We’ve got to learn to think for ourselves and be wary of latching on to a herd mentality. I’m not advocating that ALL Christian beliefs held by the “majority view” are false doctrines; but just reminding you that some COULD be.
Remember, God tells us in Daniel 12:4 that He has new revelation that He will reveal in these end times. Make sure you’re not holding so tightly to a [false] belief that there is no room in your understanding for newly revealed truth. He wants to lead His people out of the world’s Babylonian system, so that we don’t partake of her sins and suffer her plagues (Revelation 18:4). This means we need to be willing to let go of things — which may turn out to be lies that we once thought were truths (to use Daniel’s example, like Christians celebrating Easter, a pagan holiday).
After reading this post, reading Chris’ ‘logic’ (which has to be stretched quite often to fit), and Rob Skiba’s logic, I am sold on the issue of the “Trinity” NOT being 3 “persons”, but rather, as Rob Skiba puts it! Skiba’s logic & explanation, backed purely by scripture, rather than humanistic literature (dictionaries, etc.) has convinced me of what I have heard discussions on but had little understanding of. The first time someone broached the subject of the Trinity being a false doctrine in the church, as so many other false doctrine’s (such as the christianized pagan holiday’s) I was flabbergasted, as I had only heard the mantra about the Trinity of “3 persons in 1 Godhead” over & over in church, never questioning it. After I was challenged, rather than believing mere men & humanistic writings (preachers, dictionaries, commontaries), I went straight to the Word of God. The first thing I discovered was the “3 persons in 1” wording & concept in our common bibles was merely a gross addition (yes, I said addition) from the original texts. I have felt for some time that Jesus is the Son, (not “God” but the “Son” of God), making Him a divine being as well (& Savior). Jesus never said He WAS God, but often He deferred to God, listened to God, even “learned” from God, but never stated He was God. He did say He AND the Father were One, meaning, they were in unity (such as a husband & wife. Because a husband & wife are “one” does not make them the same person!! How ridiculous that we Christians ever believed that nonsense). Skiba gave the best explanation ever for explaining who & what the Holy Spirit is. Thank you Chris Putnam for posting this information. I needed clarification. Just because a doctrine has been taught (& believed by ignorant sheep, oops, I mean the church-going Christians) for centuries, and even written in commentaries (which include dictionaries), does not make it truth. Good grief people. No wonder the scriptures state the people will be blind AND deaf. I get that now.
Hello Kat,
Scripture shows Yeshua being called the son of God by the apostles. This was never disputed by Yeshua and I do not think you dispute this either. To be a son of God is to be God just as to be a son of a human is to be a human, we regenerate after our own ‘kind’. Yeshua is the *only* begotten son of God (birthed by a woman son of God). There are other sons of God who were created not begotten (angels, adam and those reborn by the Spirit). Yeshua was the son of God and therefore God.
However,
Prior to being born the son of man (human through Mary) and being born the son of God (God through God), Yeshua pre-existed. He was not the *son of God* until he was born. Yeshua pre-existed as the Word of God who is described in scripture as God.
“In the beginning was the Word. The Word was with God and the Word was God.” We later see the Word becoming flesh, this happened when He was begotten and became the Son of God.
Prior to His birth the scripture is clear that the Word was God. He was both *with God* and *was God*. The word with implies at least two here. He was with another. Plurality. (As in “Let us make man in our image.”) We are also told that Yeshua had existed in the form of God but did not consider equality with God something to be grasped. Instead He made himself a little lower than the angels (a man). When Yeshua entered into the world by being born of a woman, He became a part of creation (the seed). He subjected Himself to the God in Heaven (now His Father) who did not become flesh. Yeshua is indeed God. He always was God. He was the Word who was God. He became the son of God…still God, even through birth, but now also the son of man through birth.
Yeshua is indeed God.
God bless.
Fᴀɴᴛᴀsᴛɪᴄ…ᴡᴇʟʟ sᴀɪᴅ, I ʙᴇʟɪᴇᴠᴇ ʏᴏᴜ sᴘᴏᴋᴇ ʙʏ ᴛʜᴇ sᴘɪʀɪᴛ ғʀᴏᴍ ᴛʜᴇ Sᴘɪʀɪᴛ, ᴛʜᴇʀᴇ ɪs ɴᴏ ᴡᴀʏ ʏᴏᴜ ᴄᴏᴜʟᴅ ʜᴀᴠᴇ ᴜɴᴅᴇʀsᴛᴏᴏᴅ ᴛʜɪs ᴡɪᴛʜ ᴏᴜᴛ ᴡɪsᴅᴏᴍ ғʀᴏᴍ ᴛʜᴇ Hᴏʟɪᴇsᴛ ᴏғ Hᴏʟɪᴇs, I sᴀʏ ᴛʜɪs ʙᴇᴄᴀᴜsᴇ ᴏɴʟʏ ʙʏ ᴛʜᴇ SPIRIT ᴄᴀɴ ʏᴏᴜ ᴜɴᴅᴇʀsᴛᴀɴᴅ sᴘɪʀɪᴛᴜᴀʟ ᴛʜɪɴɢs, ᴛʜᴏsᴇ ᴛʜᴀᴛ ᴄᴀɴɴᴏᴛ ᴜɴᴅᴇʀsᴛᴀɴᴅ ᴛʜᴀᴛ ALL ᴛʜɪɴɢs ᴀʀᴇ ᴘᴏssɪʙʟᴇ ᴡɪᴛʜ ᴛʜᴇ Sᴏᴠᴇʀᴇɪɢɴ LORD, ᴄᴀɴɴᴏᴛ ᴄᴏᴍᴘʀᴇʜᴇɴᴅ ᴛʜᴇ ᴛʜɪɴɢs ᴏғ ᴛʜᴇ Sᴘɪʀɪᴛ, I ʜᴀᴠᴇ ɴᴏ ᴅᴏᴜʙᴛ ᴛʜᴀᴛ ʏᴏᴜ ʜᴀᴠᴇ ʜᴀᴅ ᴀ sᴘɪʀɪᴛᴜᴀʟ ᴏɴᴇ ᴛᴏ ᴏɴᴇ ᴡɪᴛʜ ᴛʜᴇ LIVING Cʜʀɪsᴛ, ʙᴇᴄᴀᴜsᴇ ʏᴏᴜ ᴜɴᴅᴇʀsᴛᴀɴᴅ ᴛʜᴇ sᴄʀɪᴘᴛᴜʀᴇs sᴏ ᴠᴇʀʏ ᴡᴇʟʟ ᴀɴᴅ sᴏ ᴇʟᴏǫᴜᴇɴᴛʟʏ ᴘᴜᴛ ɪɴ ʏᴏᴜʀ ᴄᴏᴍᴍᴇɴᴛ. Tʜᴇ ᴡᴀʏ ʏᴏᴜ ᴇxᴘʟᴀɪɴᴇᴅ GOD ᴛʜᴇ WORD ʙᴇғᴏʀᴇ HE ʙᴇᴄᴀᴍᴇ GOD ᴛʜᴇ SON ɪs ʜᴀʀᴅ ᴛᴏ ᴄᴏᴍᴘʀᴇʜᴇɴᴅ ᴛᴏ ᴡʜᴏᴍsᴏᴇᴠᴇʀ ᴀʀᴇ sᴍᴀʟʟ ɪɴ ғᴀɪᴛʜ ᴀɴᴅ ʜᴀᴠᴇɴ’ᴛ ᴛʜᴇ Sᴘɪʀɪᴛᴜᴀʟ ᴅɪsᴄᴇʀɴᴍᴇɴᴛ ᴏғ GOD ᴛᴏ ᴛᴇᴀᴄʜ ʜᴏᴡ ᴛᴏ ᴄᴏᴍᴘʀᴇʜᴇɴᴅ sᴜᴄʜ ᴛʜɪɴɢs (Tᴏ ᴏᴘᴇɴ ᴛʜᴇ ᴇʏᴇs ᴀɴᴅ ʜᴇᴀʀᴛ sᴏ ᴛᴏ sᴘᴇᴀᴋ) Yᴇs ɪɴᴅᴇᴇᴅ, ᴡᴀʟᴋɪɴɢ ʙʏ ғᴀɪᴛʜ ᴄᴀɴ ᴛᴇᴀᴄʜ ʏᴏᴜ ᴀ ʟᴏᴛ ᴏғ ᴛʀᴜᴛʜs , I ᴄᴏᴍᴍᴇɴᴅ ʏᴏᴜʀ sᴘɪʀɪᴛᴜᴀʟ ᴋɴᴏᴡʟᴇᴅɢᴇ…Tᴏ Gᴏᴅ ʙᴇ ᴛʜᴇ Gʟᴏʀʏ
I’m humbled. To God be the glory, amen.
I need some more information about this… I’m so confused but yet I understand… Please help
Chelsea, once the truth is pointed out, it becomes clear and plain when reading scripture. Once the brain-washing rhetoric we’ve been bottle fed all our lives, by the brain-washed herd & clergy, it is clear, but only if one is open to truth. Too many christians want to hang on to doctrine and dogma they have believed all their lives, as changing their mind set may mean changing some traditions (Yahshua talked about this, how the Pharisees forced the people into following traditions, of which we have been warned about). IF you are truly open to Truth, it will become very clear when reading scripture. If you are open to truth, and willing to make the shift, which may entail realizing you or any other christian may have been wrong on certain details, you will get it. In the long haul, I am sure the Father & Yahshua understand many won’t get it on the details, however, They look at our heart. As long as They have our heart (which means we are willing to be corrected if necessary), They can fix the details later. Don’t let other christians ever shame you into conforming. We were called sheep because sheep easily conform, and are even willing to follow the herd over the cliff. The Father, and His son, Yahshua, want true sons.
Laura…… Seems the slip of clanging “symbols” vs. “cymbals” fits better in the entire context of the debate. 🙂
Are you so bored that you have to spend time arguing about things most people don’t even understand. There are tons of “teachers” out there. Take what you find good and just leave the rest. But a whole article about what is wrong with someone else is a bit childish. Rob has a lot of good things to say…if you dont like it dont read it and let the chips fall where they may..
A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump
What are you doing rebuking people for believing the truth? Trinity is a horrible, blasphemous, pagan lie. It takes a few minutes of the study of scripture to see how fallacious that Roman invention is. Please do your due diligence in the scripture before you attack those who believe in the only true God the Father and His Son.
Please review and comment
http://www.askelm.com/newsletter/l201201.pdf
In part, due to the educational preeminence of Dr. Martin CV, it would seem that cooler minds may want to review the PDF newsletter compiled by Mr. David Sielaff in Jan. 2012. It is my opinion that a “God on our side” position lacks true Godly Character. As I recall, the Son of God the Father wanted us to think and consider both our positions and actions without malice and contempt.
Thank you all for your Faithful dillegence
Chris I really thank you for posting this article challenging Rob Skiba’s beliefs. You have done an excellent job. Before this I had a little respect for Rob Skiba. Now I know his beliefs about the trinity I now have an awful lot more! What you meant for evil seems to have turned out for good. It is funny how God works. By you trying to expose Rob Skiba’s views you have actually broadcast them to a wider audience including me. Those who are wise can read and learn what they might not have before. For those who are not it will make little difference anyway.
So I thank you for this. One thing I have realised is that one is either enlightened and freed from one’s set in stone and rigid traditional beliefs or one is still in them and unwilling and hence unable to learn anything more. It is true that new wine cannot be poured into old wine skins. I really hope and pray that the eyes of people in this camp will be opened, but I know also that this only happens when God does it for them. My time came about 5 years ago. I hope yours and others in the ‘majority camp’ will also come soon.
“I pray that the eyes of your heart will be enlightened…’ Ephesians 1:18
Thanks again and I will now be making a point of researching more of Rob Skiba’s materials.
Appreciated the opportunity to fully examine Rob’s views and explanations. My understanding of the Trinity was greatly enhanced. I have now bookmarked many of Rob’s sites and videos. He seems, after watching him, and listening to him for the past several days, to be intent upon discovering only truth… no matter where it takes him.
I agree with you Cindy. Rob is helping people to break with the “sacred cows” of Christianity and go deeper into the Word while listening to the Holy Spirit. I don’t always agree with every conclusion he arrives at but I am certainly thankful God has put him in a position to help people question the “status quo”. The Trinity doctrine has been the basis of accusations of heresy and even executions (such as Michael Servetus). Who do you think inspired that kind of hatred? Satan always attacks with violent anger when he is being exposed.
Rob Skiba is painfully right, I’ve been following his work and will definitely continue to do so… 🙂
Does he believe Jesus Christ came IN THE FLESH, died, was buried, and resurrected the third day? That’s the “litmus test,” according to scripture.
This all sounds like a witch hunt. Rob Skiba has used the scripture to back up everything he professes. The trinity is not even in the bible. But he does believe in the father, the son and the holy spirit. He also stated that Jesus is God in the flesh.
The gospel of John pretty clearly says that Jesus is God in the flesh (cf. Jn. 1:14 on Jn. 1:1)
Hello Dino. I’m not taking sides in this argument but I wanted to address something you said.
You shared: “Rob Akiba has used the scripture to back up everything he professes.”
I would urge everyone to listen very carefully to what a speaker is saying and to what the scripture is saying. People quote scripture all the time and can *seem to be saying* what the scripture is saying when in reality they are indeed misinterpreting the scriptures they are using to ‘back up’ what they profess. An excellent example of this is the scriptures used by those who ‘back up’ the false doctrine of the pre-tribulation rapture (like quoting the scripture which says we are not appointed to wrath to support a pre-trib rapture). They are not careful in their exegesis. It can sound like they are backing up their teaching but they misuse the scripture (whether purposely or not only God knows).
I have seen Rob Skiba do the same (not with pre-trib). He is not as careful as he needs to be with ~some~ of his exegesis. He is not always proficient with English grammar which leads to misunderstanding on his part when incorrectly diagraming sentences during his study which leads to his thinking that a subject refers back to something that it does not refer back to. Please don’t get me wrong, I agree with *much* of what our brother Skiba believes (and I reached my conclusions through scripture long before I ever heard of Skiba) but I do not agree with everything he says because some of what he says does not line up…it is not careful exegesis. I’ve done it, Skiba’s done it, we’ve all likely done it at some point in our studies. My point is not to ever take anyone’s side, only to take the side of God’s word and to be careful in how we hand His word. I hope those who read this understand that I am coming from a pure place and from peace. God bless.
Again, such amazing sentiments..God bless you Brother or Sister
Thanks for helping to expose the falsehood of the Trinity belief which claims eternal Sonship and puts Mary the eternal mother of God.
I see Father, Son and Spirit mentioned together in several places (I see what some call the trinity) but I agree with you that the teaching of the eternal sonship is a false teaching. The one we call Yeshua pre-existed as the Word. As the Word He was both with God and He was God. He became the son when He was born of a woman. He lowered Himself…He didn’t consider existing in the form of God something to be grasped, rather He gave up existing in the form of God in order to exist in the form of a man. He became the son at a point in time. Amen to that, brother.
This trinity argument is absurd. WHY do you all care what another believes? And you all are trying to interpret what Rob Skiba says and believes, nit-picking it to death. Such a waste of time. Seriously. Bottom line, the “trinity” is a pagan concept and practice. NO where in the holy Bible does it even mention a “trinity”. Modern christians extrapolate from the verse that has been [incorrectly] translated & [incorrectly] interpreted about the Father, Son & Holy Ghost as the the doctrine of trinity. It is so absurd how you christians are believing the rhetoric the churches have been promoting for a long time. I supposed you all buy into the “christian” holidays as well, you know, the pagan holidays that have been christianized & justified, Christmas & Easter. I would love to see everyone start slinging justifications on that. While everyone was out celebrating the fertility festival of Ishtar last Sunday (what christians call “Easter”), I was happily sleeping in, then reading my Bible, then enjoying a good healthy salad, while everyone else was choking down the pagan tradition of ham, on another Sunday, which christians refer to as “the Lord’s day” (another pagan tradition), the day of the Sun to be more accurate.
No matter what is stated by anyone – Jesus is the Word of God pre-existant to the person Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus said He was/existed before as He said “before Abraham I Am”! He referred to the Holy Spirit as a He. In Isaiah we are told the Son will be called Wonderful Counselor (name of Holy Spirit), Everlasting Father, Mighty God, Prince of Peace. These 3, Father Son & Holy Spirit are one. You can go into all the mumbo jumbo of big words but in reality the Bible is clear. Jesus is God, Abba Father is God and the Holy Spirit is God and these three are one. The Holy Spirit isn’t an ‘it’ He is a “He” with emotions, power, understanding , wisdom etc. He is God and He is here to lead us into all Truth and declare Jesus to us. If you want to call Him an ‘it” then you are not in touch with the True God and are following the god of your imagination who in fact is not a god at all, but a promise of the lying serpent in the garden of Eden I see it sort of like a chord. C E G. When played together they make a perfect harmony yet each key is all a separate sound. We don’t have to be able to understand it all. After all He is God and we mere mortals. We just have to trust and believe what He said as He is the Way, the Truth and the Life and no-one goes to the Father but through Him. Jesus is the only way of salvation and we can believe what He said as He proved who He is by raising from the grave to live forevermore!
We should use the scripture for this argument the bible never once said anything about a “trinity” rather youll find things like I and my father are one…if you have seen me you have seen the father. … God the father the son and the spirit is One Person there is no reason to make up words like trinity when it is not stated in the scriptures
“Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,(Mt 28:19)
Thanks Chris, I was looking for more background on Rob. He rips-off Chuck Missler on everything except the Rapture of the Church. Then he states that he trust Moses over the New Testament. One can hear Legalism creeping through the door. The thing that does not add up: when Rob talks about Flat Earth, he does not reference his experience as a pilot. So did Rob “Fly Helicopters” or did he “Fly in Helicopters?” There is a difference. Why did Rob rent a boat to check out the Chicago skyline from New Buffalo Michigan; It would have made better research to rent a Helicopter and use his Piloting skills for his test. However, Rob is not very clear about his Military background and yet leads you to believe he is a pilot. This is my first consideration about Rob & Truth. If one goes through aviation training in the Military to fly rotary wing aircraft, you do not give up your rating and walk away from flying. And what about Rob’s Missionary work? Pilots rating would have been a great asset to have and use. Again, this is just one of many things that raises Red Flags. I do not need what man “thinks or believes” – I just need The Word proving all things.
Thanks for the forum. R L Welsh
Is the belief that the Holy Spirit is a physical person? I’m asking the author of this webpage
no – The Spirit is not physical and that is not what we mean by person. see http://www.logosapologia.org/the-forgotten-trinity/
and http://www.logosapologia.org/ra-torrey-on-the-personhood-of-the-holy-spirit/
I think I can shed some light on the issue. In the Hebrew, ie tanakh the word for the Spirit (of GOD, aka El Elyon, aka YHVH, etc) is Ruach. Now, ruach can be translated “wind”, or “breath” or “spirit”. Thus on the day of Pentecost, the Holy Spirit, Ruach Ha Qodesh, manifested as a mighty rushing wind. It could easily have been translated as a mighty rushing breath of God. In Genesis Elohim created in v1 (Elohim is the plural of Elohe thus right in verse 1 of scripture we’re being told YAH had a family because there was plurality of persons involved in creation- John 1:1 tells us (confirms) that without the WORD (Yeshua) who was in the beginning with YAH, was nothing made that was made. Now later in the chapter it says they created Adam from the earth and BREATHED (input the RUACH of Elohim) into him and he became a living soul.Yeshua also referred to the HS when telling his disciples He would ascend to the Father but send them the HS to lead them into all truth, as “HE” ie He would lead them into all truth. So thus Yeshua is saying the HS aika RUACH HA QODESH or RUACH YAHWEH was not an IT but rather a manifestation of YHVH as a different type of person (for lack of a better word – I don’t like PERSON since it’s derived from Latin PERSONA ak MASK like an actor wears to appear / play a different role & since the Mystery Babylon the elite Tim refers to (global illuminati banksters) redefined the word to be a “coroporate tntity, artificial / legal person” bu wjocj they’ve ensnared all as Yeshua told Tim as surety for the national debt since 1933 / 1934.For anyone seeking to understand this more check out Mary Elizabeth Croft’s free pdf online ebook available from the getoutofdebtfree.org site’s resources
I have purchased both the Hebraic Roots Bible – A Literal Translation & the aleph tav cepher (sefer) v ersion – the latter retains the original Hebrew names for GOD and Yeshua, along with the divine signature (the letters aleph tav)
The bible is the final authority for faith and practice. The biblical teaching on the Godhead is complex. For that reason, the early creeds attempted to make an authoritative statement regarding the essence of the Godhead. Remember, the Trinity is a doctrine. God is truth. We only know what God reveals. Our knowledge of God is partial. In fact, the Trinity is not like a mathematical formula that defines and limits God. God is what God is. He is beyond our comprehension and greater than our definitions. He cannot be placed in a box. We affirm the Trinity because it comes from the ancient church and it rightly teaches the doctrine of the early church. Those teachings were forged in the fire of controversy and disagreement. For that reason, we should not carry a large axe and seek to chop off the head of everyone who does not affirm or understand the detailed nuances of the doctrine provided that the affirm the faith, love Jesus, and submit to God’s reign. Let me be blunt. The bible is revelation. Doctrine is not. Show some grace.
Matthew 28:18-20 continues to be the go-to scripture for Trinitarians, however it is also the subject of much debate among students of the Scriptures. After the so-called Great Commission was given we see many places where there was no mention of the Father or the Holy Spirit being included when speaking of baptism, only the name of Christ Jesus/Yeshua. This seems odd to me.
For example, when we look at Acts 2:38 we read the words of Peter saying, “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.”
I agree with what Bill stated above, God/YHVH cannot be placed in a box. That places limits on the Personage of the Creator, which is not possible.
We can also read of the “seven spirits of YHVH” spoken of in Revelation. Why are these other manifestations of the Heavenly Father not included as part of the so-called “Godhead”?
isaiah 11v1 And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots:
2 And the spirit of the (1)Lord shall rest upon him, the spirit of (2)wisdom and (3)understanding, the spirit of (4)counsel and (5)might, the spirit of (6)knowledge and of the (7)fear of the Lord;
^isn’t this the 7 Spirits of God? Holy Spirit included as 1, then the 6 attributes?
how many gifts are we supposed to be capable of receiving as followers of Christ?
from what i understand, 1 corinthians 12 says that it is the Holy Spirit which distributes the gifts to us depending on His own choosing
The Spirit and the Father were also present at the baptism of Jesus. Jesus made many references to Spirit and Father in the gospels. The Gospel of John is full of references to Spirit and Father language. Human languages create categories of understanding. Words represent idea. Jesus is the eternal Son of God. He is not a biological Son. He is an eternal Son who shares the nature of the Father and is one with the Father and the Spirit. The Son became flesh. In the OT, the Son appeared as the Angel of the Lord (theophony). The Son manifests God. The fullness of God dwells in him. Unfortunately, Son has a defined meaning and usage in human language. Even though the word does not capture the full essence of Jesus’ relationship to the Father, it is the word that scripture uses. The idea is beyond human comprehension. Trying to fix mystery often leads to heresy. It’s best to accept the mystery and believe what the bible says even when we don’t fully comprehend it.