The Trinity vs the ‘wordprophet’

I had always intended to write on the essentials of the Christian faith, but I didn’t expect to start that just yet. What changed my mind was a so-called “christian” account called the ‘wordprophet’ I ran across on a social media site called ‘Gab’ a week ago that openly flaunted the rejection of the doctrine of the Trinity. [1] What makes this one different is that it seems to defy a label like Arianism or Jehovah’s Witness or Oneness Pentecostal. All three of these deny the classical definition of the Trinity and all three have been thoroughly dealt with by Christian apologists in the past. But what I saw was very limited, if any, engagement of his posts even though he has about 250 followers, but has over 16K YouTube subscribers and over a decade of videos defending his view that the Trinity is a false ‘Christian’ doctrine.

Besides the history and theology of the matter, there are three things about this account that bother me. First, he calls himself a prophet, the ‘wordprophet.’ Now, maybe the intent is a play on words or an inside joke that no one gets, but the obvious is still the most likely, which is, he thinks his content and his understanding are far superior to anyone else’s in history and that he believes he is actually a modern day ‘prophet’ of God sent to the Church. Unfortunately, I question anyone that self promotes themselves as a ‘prophet.’

The second problem I have is his apparent view that the King James version (KJV) of the Bible is the only ‘true’ English version of the Word of God, which would seem to make this version a modern-day ‘revelation.’ That tells me that he does not understand what Desiderius Erasmus, a Catholic priest, did to create an updated version of the Greek New Testament for which it is based upon, or what the KJV translators, all Trinitarians I might add, did to create the English version of it. Someday I hope to address this topic as well, but back to the topic at hand. And, since, to him, both Erasmus and the KJV translators were heretics, how can the KJV be trusted as reliable? I wonder if he ever explains that one.

And third, anytime someone has some type of ‘revelation’ about a new doctrinal truth that no one in the last 2000 years have ever clearly seen or understood in Scripture, that should concern you. It should be a gigantic ‘red flag’ with “DANGER!” written all over it. I don’t think that any of the early Church fathers were perfect or infallible, nor are there any infallible modern-day theologians. Everyone has their theological and doctrinal blind spots. But to say that you, 2000 years removed from the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus, and having none of the direct revelation that the Apostles had, have all of a sudden been revealed a truth so essential to the Christian faith, that has eluded the Church for 2000 years just makes absolutely zero sense. I’m sure it makes sense to the person with the delusion, but to thinking people, who have read some of the greatest and most brilliant Christian minds over the past 2000 years, all of whom this guy states boldly are heretics and currently in hell, how can anyone believe a word he says, much less consider him ‘prophetic’? But here we are.

To write comprehensively on this subject is out of scope for this blog, but to address this error I don’t need to do that. Errors generally reveal themselves right up front, and this one is no different. So, this inspection will touch upon history and some of the Scripture concerning the Trinity. The point will be to identify a fallacy or two to help the reader reject this person’s abhorrent doctrine.

Definitions

What is the Trinity? Jehovah’s Witnesses love to say, “The word ‘Trinity’ is not in the Bible,” which is true even though the concept is clearly there in the pages of Scripture, regardless of what the ‘wordprophet’ says. So, let’s start with a working definition of what the Trinity is.

The Trinity in Christianity is the doctrine that the one God eternally exists as three distinct Persons: the Father, the Son (Jesus Christ), and the Holy Spirit. These three share the same divine essence yet remain one God, not three gods. Each Person is fully God, co-equal, and co-eternal, meaning that each Person of the Trinity has existed from eternity past and will always exist. According to Scripture, they operate in perfect unity and consistency while maintaining distinct roles in creation, redemption, and the believer’s daily life.

What does the Trinity mean in Christianity?

I don’t know if this is the best definition out there, but it is a pretty good one to use for this blog. Now, what is the definition of God for the ‘wordprophet’ in question? That is not so straightforward.

According to his website and the video I watched, Jesus is the begotten physical form of God the Father, who is spirit. But he also states that God the Father has both spirit and flesh.

In order for it to be true that Jesus of Nazareth was begotten of God, it must also be true that there was a time when the begetter existed without the begotten, otherwise the word begotten would have no meaning. … Jesus Christ of Nazareth … is God the Father, manifested in the flesh.

Who is the Lord Jesus Christ, according to the Bible? | Epistles/Teachings | Sword of the Valiant (the title means to click and open this specific block to see its content.)

So, God the Father and Jesus are not two beings but the same being. The name, “Jesus,” is God the Father’s name.

Now, I have read a lot of early Church history, but this specific view I have never heard of before. It does, however, have similarities to both Sabellianism and Patripassianism, although it doesn’t technically look like either. Now, I know that these words are a mouthful to say, but stick with me on this while I give you a quick definition of each term.

Sabellianism - The belief that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are not three distinct persons, but are simply different manifestations of the same divine being.
Patripassianism - The belief that the Father and Son are not two distinct persons, and both God the Father and the Son suffered on the cross as Jesus.

List of Christian heresies - Wikipedia

Now, Wikipedia is not necessarily known for being a paragon of truthfulness, especially since its virtual hostile takeover of the platform by leftists with political agendas. But this is a nice list of heretical beliefs the Church has faced throughout the centuries. And this one might need to be added to that list.

There are two avenues to take in refuting this anti-trinitarian viewpoint, the most important of those is what Scripture says. It isn’t really that difficult to understand what Scripture says about the Trinity, although you might think it difficult to wrap your head around the concept. The second is the historical viewpoint of what the Church fathers said about the concept and how early. The earlier the Trinity is spoken of, the more reliable the concept should be considered since the more likely it came from Jesus and/or the Apostles. While the second approach doesn’t prove the concept is true, it is still important historical information to review.

But there are some problems that will naturally be encountered. The ‘wordprophet’ is biased toward the KJV as a type of modern-day revelation in the English language. There is nothing wrong with using the KJV, but it is NOT revelation because it's a translation. The revelation is in the original Greek! Also, he does not generally go back to the original language of the text to get a better understanding of the English words in Scripture. The fact that he does some is at least a little encouraging.

Another problem the ‘wordprophet’ faces is the changing meanings of words. That is one of the reasons that using the KJV is troublesome at times. Unless you are consistent in explaining some of the archaic words it contains, the reader unfamiliar with the KJV will undoubtedly misunderstand the meaning of some verses.

He has also used resources like Strong's Concordance in some of his written and likely video presentations, but the problem he has is that these resources were created by what he would claim were ‘heretics.’ If ‘heretics’ created the resources you depend upon for your ‘prophetic’ revelation, then how do you know you have the correct meanings of the words you use to persuade those you encounter? This is likely a bigger problem than he is willing to admit.

And another problem that the ‘wordprophet’ has is that he considers everything that has ever referenced the ‘Trinity’ in the early Church to be heavily influenced by Catholicism. This only demonstrates his ignorance of Church history, as it does for both Catholic and Orthodox believers, who make similar erroneous type statements. I have significant issues with both, but within the early Church a modern label of Catholicism simply does not apply.

A Little History

Who was the first person to use the word, Trinity? If you know anything about Church history, you are most likely going to answer either Athanasius or Tertullian. Or maybe you’re familiar with the phrase, “Athanasius contra mundum” which means, “Athanasius against the world.” Even though neither of these were the first, I would nonetheless be proud of you. The other 99% have no clue because Christians generally know nothing about Church history. I know we’ve all had that boring and dry history teacher from high school that we remember, which makes even the thought of reading history too overwhelming to consider! But frankly, more Christians need to find a way to educate themselves about their history. The ‘wordprophet’ would do well to educate himself too.

Unfortunately, neither of them was the first to use the word Trinity. That goes to Theophilus of Antioch (modern day Turkey). We know he died in 183 AD but not when he was born. We have very little of what he wrote, but was spoken highly of by Eusebius, a 4th century Church historian, as an apologist defending the Church against heretical attacks. That places its usage around 150 years before Athanasius. That is significant because it cannot be said to be ‘invented’ in the middle of the patristic age of the Church (100-800 AD) or by Athanasius. Nor can it be said to be ‘Catholic’ as the ‘wordprophet’ seemed to use the term, since Catholicism did not exist at the time.

I also find this interesting,

It [Trinity] seems to have been used by this writer in his lost works, also; and, as a learned friends suggests, the use he makes of it is familiar. He does not lug it in as something novel: “types of the Trinity,” he says, illustrating an accepted word, not introducing a new one.

The First Use of The Word Trinity in the Ante-Nicene Fathers – The Baptist Sentinel

So, if the first usage of the word ‘Trinity’ indicates it was a common and accepted word used by Christians in describing God and used in a time period where few documents survived the ravages of time, it would seem reasonable that the word was used much earlier in time and in documents that did not survive. Now, to be fair, it is speculation to say that it must have been in earlier documents, but if it was used in a general manner then it is also quite likely to be true.

Next, we have Clement of Alexandria, Egypt (150-215 AD). Now, I’ve made no secret of my disdain for his integration of philosophy into his school of theology and the allegorical interpretations that followed from its inclusion. But this is about a reference to God as existing in a Trinity. Clement wrote,

I understand nothing else than the Holy Trinity to be meant; for the third is the Holy Spirit, and the Son is the second, by whom all things were made according to the will of the Father.

The First Use of The Word Trinity in the Ante-Nicene Fathers – The Baptist Sentinel

That would be a classical understanding of the Trinity stated somewhere around 200 AD.

But what really should make the most impact on the concept of the Trinity in the early Church is Ignatius of Antioch, born roughly around 35 AD and died somewhere close to 110 AD. These are estimated dates so his death might be a little earlier or later, but the point to take away from this is that He lived and wrote in the first century of the Church’s existence and was said to be a disciple of the Apostle John. Speaking of Ignatius,

His writings often explored the complex relationship between the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, asserting their unity as three divine persons forming one divine being. In his letters, Ignatius referred to Jesus as ‘God’ fourteen times, emphasizing His divinity.

Tertullian on the Trinity: Views from an Early Church Father | by M. J. Kelley II | Medium

Now, if Ignatius was a disciple of the Apostle John, then would it not also be likely that his view of the nature of God came from John as well? Does the ‘wordprophet’ now need to declare the Apostle John is a heretic as well?

Furthermore, Ignatius articulated a nuanced view of Christ’s nature. He wrote of Jesus as ‘generate and ingenerate, God in man…son of Mary and Son of God…Jesus Christ our Lord.’ This portrayal underscores Christ's dual nature as both human and divine, a cornerstone in later theological discussions. Ignatius also highlighted the Holy Spirit’s role, particularly in the context of the Lord’s virginal conception, pointing to a triune cooperation even in Jesus's incarnation.

Tertullian on the Trinity: Views from an Early Church Father | by M. J. Kelley II | Medium

Somewhat like the Jehovah’s Witnesses, the ‘wordprophet’ likes to say the Trinity is a foreign concept imported from Babylon, but I think Ignatius disproves his belief altogether.

So, what these three examples show is an understanding of the concept of the Trinity that existed very early on within the Christian Church. Ignatius is by far the best example since he was a disciple of the Apostle John. So, unless you are going to call John a heretic, Ignatius’ testimony is damning for the ‘wordprophet.’

However, once again, to be fair, it must be said that as compelling as this information is, it is not 100% proof that the concept of the Trinity came from the Apostles. Someone could maintain that Ignatius perverted the truth. Of course, to do that, one would have to provide proof that he did in fact pervert or invent the concept. That in itself would be impossible to do without some sort of direct historical evidence to the contrary.

What these examples from history do is demonstrate that the concept was known much earlier than most people think, and the earlier it occurred, the closer it is to the Apostles, and we’ve identified a direct link for the Trinity to the Apostle John, even if we cannot prove that John taught Ignatius the concept.

The Scriptures

This is where the ‘wordprophet’ presents his case with a lot of Scripture, but just because you can paste a lot of Scripture around your belief, does not necessarily mean you’ve proven your case. So, the chore here is to put chinks in those chain links he thinks he’s built by showing that the Trinity is clearly taught in Scripture. And to do that, I’m going to approach this from a classical perspective of how the Trinity is defined and taught.

We have already seen that the concept of the trinity can be traced back to the first century and very likely to the teachings of the Apostle John, but here we switch to the testimony of Scripture itself. One issue that everyone has, even those from history, is that we can describe the Trinity as taught in Scripture but understanding or comprehending it is another matter altogether. How does God exist in three persons? That is likely to remain a true mystery. That mystery plays into the ‘wordprophets’ presentation since he believes he can demystify the nature of God and jettison the Trinity along the way.

Most of the heresies of the early Church can be traced to people or groups that had issues comprehending how Jesus could be both God and man at the same time. In this case, though, it’s about how God can be more than one person and still be one God. So, in this short blog, I will do my best to avoid misrepresenting his belief while being faithful to representing what the Trinity is. But at the same time, I am not going to listen to hours and hours of his videos to determine all the nuances of his version of God.

Even in a video I watched he says that Jesus and the Father are one in the same being, that Jesus is the physical representation of the Father who is a spirit, and that His physical being was begotten, fits into the category of ‘it can be described but not fully understood.’ The point being, his view has some of the same drawbacks He accuses the classical definition of Trinity as having. He tries to take some of the mystery out, but it's still there.

The definition I’m going to use comes from What does the Bible teach about the Trinity? | GotQuestions.org. [2] Also, I will be using the NASB95 (unless otherwise stated), which I’m sure is considered an heretical version, but since I don’t consider his views damning to me, I’ll use the version I’ve used for a generation now. I will also validate any definitions needed with Bible Search and Study Tools - Blue Letter Bible, since it's an easy tool that anyone would be able to utilize for the same purpose.

1) There is one God (Deut 6:4; 1 Cor 8:4; Gal 3:20; 1 Tim 2:5). So, a belief in the Trinity is not a belief in three gods.

The verses documented above are presented below:

“Hear, O Israel! The LORD is our God, the LORD is one!” (Deut 6:4)
Therefore concerning the eating of things sacrificed to idols, we know that there is no such thing as an idol in the world, and that there is no God but one. (1 Cor 8:4)
Now a mediator is not for one party only; whereas God is only one. (Gal 3:20)
For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, (1 Tim 2:5)

I don’t think anything else needs to be said here, and it's my understanding from what I’ve listened to and read, he would be in agreement with the above portion (i.e., one God), since he believes in One God. But moving forward, he will disagree with what follows.

2) The one God exists in three Persons (Genesis 1:1, 26; 3:22; 11:7; Isaiah 6:8, 48:16, 61:1; Matthew 3:16–17, 28:19; 2 Corinthians 13:14). A common Old Testament Hebrew name for God is Elohim, a plural noun. Some passages quote God as speaking of Himself with plural pronouns such as us (Genesis 1:26; 3:22; 11:7; Isaiah 6:8) While the use of plural words is not an explicit argument for the Trinity, it does denote an aspect of plurality in God. The name Elohim, being plural, definitely allows for a tri-unity.

So, let’s read each of these verses:

In the beginning God ['ĕlōhîm] created the heavens and the earth. (Gen 1:1)

As you can see in Gen 1:1, “God” is the plural, “'ĕlōhîm.” Angels cannot create, so why and how is God plural here?

Then God ['ĕlōhîm] said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” (Gen 1:26)

In Gen 1:26, again, God is the plural “'ĕlōhîm” once again, and to make this point even stronger, God says, “Let us make man … according to our likeness.” So, who is the “us” and the “our” in this verse?

Then the LORD God ['ĕlōhîm] said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever”— (Gen 3:22)

Gen 3:22, “... like one of us.” Who is the “us” in this verse?

“Come, let Us go down and there confuse their language, so that they will not understand one another’s speech.” (Gen 11:7)

Gen 11:7, again we see, “Let us go down …”

Then I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, “Whom shall I send, and who will go for Us?” Then I said, “Here am I. Send me!” (Isa 6:8)

Isa 6:8, “... who will go for us?” Again, who is the “us” in this verse? We now have a number of verses that all say the same thing and are all in the Old Testament about God’s nature – He is an “us.” And all of our minds are blown, right?

“Come near to Me, listen to this: From the first I have not spoken in secret, From the time it took place, I was there. And now the Lord GOD has sent Me, and His Spirit.” (Isa 48:16)

Isa 48:16: so, God (Jesus) is sent by the Lord God (Adon Yahweh) and by His Spirit. Did you catch that? Is that not three, a Trinity?

The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me, Because the LORD has anointed me To bring good news to the afflicted; He has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, To proclaim liberty to captives And freedom to prisoners; (Isa 61:1)

And this, as we all know, is a prophetic passage about Jesus. The “Spirit of the Lord God” is a personification of the Holy Spirit as a person in the Godhead. And being “upon me” is a direct reference to Jesus, who we know is God. So, in this short phrase we have God the Father, the Spirit and Jesus. And there you have the Trinity in a single verse, just like we saw in Isa 48:16.

After being baptized, Jesus came up immediately from the water; and behold, the heavens were opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove and lighting on Him, and behold, a voice out of the heavens said, “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well-pleased.” (Mat 3:16-17)

And once again, in this verse we see the Trinity. We have the Spirit of God, the Holy Spirit, descending upon “Him” who can only be Jesus, and the voice out of heaven, who can only be God the Father.

Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, (Mat 28:19)

And in the great commission of Mat 28, we see the Trinity yet again – the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit, be with you all. (2 Cor 13:14)

And one last verse from Paul in 2 Cor 13:14, where he mentions Jesus, God the Father and the Holy Spirit.

This is not happenstance or accidental on the part of God to reveal to us who He is. All throughout Scripture we see God as omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent, holy, just, merciful, loving. Whether we can comprehend how God can be three persons and still be one being is not the point. Neither is our ability to see God as everywhere all at once, all powerful or all knowing. But all of these are how He has chosen to reveal Himself to us through His word. And we do not need to explain it away because it’s difficult to picture. He gave us His word so we would understand exactly who He has always been.

And people say that the Trinity is not explicitly stated in Scripture!

Three Persons, One God

So, let’s continue from the GotQuestions site as we look at the three persons of God,

3) The Persons of the Trinity are distinguished from one another in various passages. In the Old Testament, “Lord” is distinguished from “Lord” (Psalm 110:1). And we learn that the Lord has a Son (Psalm 2:7, 12; Proverbs 30:2–4). The Spirit is distinguished from the “Lord” (Isaiah 48:16) and from “God” (Psalm 51:10–12). God the Son is distinguished from God the Father (Psalm 45:6–7; Hebrews 1:8–9). In one of His prayers, Jesus speaks to the Father about sending the Helper, the Holy Spirit (John 14:16–17). So, Jesus did not consider Himself to be either the Father or the Holy Spirit. There are many other instances when Jesus speaks to the Father. Was He talking to Himself? No. He spoke to another Person in the Trinity—the Father.

What does the Bible teach about the Trinity? | GotQuestions.org

There is more to the doctrine, but I’ll let the reader follow the link and read the rest for themselves.

As I listened to the video of the ‘wordprophet’, one of the things that originally jumped out at me in his explanation of God seemed to border on the view that he was making the case that God consists of two persons in one being. Even though it partly came across that way, I’m sure that was not his intention. But the language of Scripture and our ability to make sense of something that might sound counter intuitive seems to have caused quite a few heresies over the centuries. People have the tendency to try to fill in the gaps where Scripture does not always provide conclusive details. This is most prevalent in interpretations of the Revelation.

But let’s zero in on the persons of God that he denies. Some of this section is taken from chapter 11 of The Forgotten Trinity, by James R. White.

So, let’s start with the basics.

The Father loves the Son and has given all things into His hand. (John 3:35)

This verse states that the Father loves the Son, which means they cannot be the same persons. God is not stating that His spirit loves His physical form. It says the Father loves the Son. There are two persons, one of which is the Father and the other is the Son. And not only does He love the Son, He gives all things into the Son’s hands. This is personification language, and it’s intended in this passage. It is how we would speak about a human father and his love for his flesh and blood son. There is nothing obscure here.

For the Father loves the Son, and shows Him all things that He Himself is doing; and the Father will show Him greater works than these, so that you will marvel. (John 5:20)

This is another verse that clearly shows the Father and the Son as separate persons.

Just as the Father has loved Me, I have also loved you; abide in My love. (John 15:9)

I in them and You in Me, that they may be perfected in unity, so that the world may know that You sent Me, and loved them, even as You have loved Me. Father, I desire that they also, whom You have given Me, be with Me where I am, so that they may see My glory which You have given Me, for You loved Me before the foundation of the world. (John 17:23-24)

In both of these verses, Jesus is comparing His love for His disciples is just like the Father’s love for Him. This is straightforward language. These two verses again clearly show the Father and the Son as separate beings.

And one last example.

“I and the Father are one.” (John 10:30)

Now, I’m not a Greek expert, but Dr. James White is, and this is what he says about John 10:30. (Even though his response is directed towards modalists, it applies to this circumstance as well)

In this context, the assertion would be that the Father and the Son are one person. Yet, this is not what the passage says at all. In fact, the simple citation of the passage, without due regard to its context and meaning, neither proves the modalistic viewpoint nor the deity of Christ! Its witness to the truth about Christ comes from the context, which is most often ignored.

Literally, the passage reads, “I and the Father, we are one.” The verb translated “are” is plural in the Greek, Jesus is not saying, “I am the Father.” The distinction between the Son and the Father remains even in the verb He uses. And in context, He is making specific reference to the oneness He shares with the Father in the redemption of His sheep:

“and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand.” (John 10:28-29)

This is the context of Jesus’ statement, “I and the Father are one.” They are one in giving eternal life, they are one in protecting the sheep, they are one in the covenant of redemption. All this must be said simply to be honest with the passage. And once we see what Jesus is speaking about, we can understand how this passage does, in fact, teach the deity of Christ, for no creature could claim this kind of oneness in redemption with the Father. [emphasis added]

And this is what is wrong with the ‘wordprophets’ understanding of the nature of God. Jesus is NOT the Father, and the Father is NOT the Son. They are separate persons while being one God.

Conclusion

It was never my intention to provide an exhaustive response to this heretical view, but to warn the undiscerning Christian away from this person by giving some history and showing a couple of examples from Scripture of why the Trinity is true.

The question you need to ask yourself is, ‘how well do you know the truth’? Those that investigate counterfeit money know what true money looks like so well that they can spot the counterfeit a mile away. They don’t exhaustively study counterfeit money, they study the real thing while studying the counterfeit. The same is true for Christian apologists; they know what Scripture says so well, that they can spot the counterfeit long before most people have any idea someone is trying to hoodwink them. Unfortunately, far too many ‘run of the mill’ Christians have very little understanding about what it is they actually believe. And there is where the danger lies!

The responsibility for knowing the truth does not reside solely with the Church; it resides with YOU! If you are ignorant of the truth, if you put yourself in a Church that entertains you instead of teaches you, it’s your fault. It might be the Church’s fault too, but the buck stops with you! The Church’s job is to train you, NOT to entertain you. The Church is God’s organization for fellowship and accountability and is His tool along with the Word, to build up the believer is the faith.

All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, (2 Tim 3:16 NIV)

It is God’s word that teaches us about who He is and what He expects from us. His word also rebukes us in our sin because we cannot hide it from God. His word corrects us so that we do not go down the wrong path that leads us away from Him. And it trains us to know Him and His will for our lives. And all four of these are done in the righteousness of God, so that we can live Godly lives, empowered by the Holy Spirit to teach and train others to be followers of Christ Jesus.

But make no mistake, there are false Christs, false prophets and false teachers everywhere whose sole desire and intent in life is to lead you astray. When someone has a message that no one has ever spoken before, that should concern you, not thrill you. It should scare you, not comfort you. Because someone sounds convincing does not mean their message is from God. I say this because of what Scripture says,

For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will show great signs and wonders, so as to mislead, if possible, even the elect. (Mat 24:24)

Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. (Mat 7:15)

And that is exactly what the ‘wordprophet’ is - a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Please understand, I’m not trying to be insulting here. He has a pleasant demeanor, he seems to honestly believe what he preaches. He’s in Christian social media groups talking to people that consider themselves Christians, even acting like someone that is a Christian. He comes across as very knowledgeable, but the problem is that he is preaching a different Gospel! He’s telling everyone that they are unbelievers and only he has the proper understanding of the Christian message. He is saying that you and I have been lied to all our life, and not just us, but virtually everyone for the last 2000 years has been lied to and that all supposed believers that have died up until today, now reside in hell because they did not have the revelation that only he now possesses.

Ask yourself - do you really believe that God’s truth about Himself would be hidden from the likes of a John MacArthur? R.C. Sproul? Charles Spurgeon? John Calvin and Martin Luther? How about Ignatius of Antioch? Irenaeus of Lyon? Augustine of Hippo? Athanasius? John Chrysostom? John Owen? Francis Schaeffer? And I’m not even scratching the surface of some of the most brilliant and godly minds of the Christian faith. Do you really think all of these men of God are in hell? Because he does! So, if you don’t, why are you even listening to this guy?

He uses a great scare tactic to get people to listen to his message because no believer wants to be wrong on essential doctrines of the Chrsitian faith, and the Trinity is an essential doctrine.

Let me state boldly and loudly, the ‘wordprophet’ is a false prophet. He might be a nice guy, but he is a false teacher. Do NOT listen to him. Do not allow yourselves to be sucked in by him. If you are in a local church, ask your leaders about his message. Show them this blog, follow the links in this blog. I will let them direct you forward based on their evaluation of both me and the ‘wordprophet.’

There are a thousand resources at the tips of your fingers, all you need to do is a simple Google search. Now, you obviously cannot trust everything on the internet, but there are so many good Christian resources that will guide you in an understanding of the Trinity. I have even linked some excellent resources here, Christian Resources. Check out my resources against what your leaders say. I am not afraid of their criticism. But you don’t need an unknown source like him. And for the record, you don’t even need an unknown source like me!

Here are a couple of sites that are trustworthy, and places you can find additional trustworthy sites.

These cover a wide spectrum of groups but all of them believe the orthodox view of the Trinity, part of which I presented above.

Footnotes

This is a link to the post on Gab that got me thinking that someone should respond to this individual. TheWordprophet on Gab: "Most people that profess to be Christians in the world today..." And here is a link to the YouTube video: What will God do with all those who believe in a trinity?. I don’t particularly think I’m that wise or gifted so I’m not sure I was the right person for the job, but I attempted to do it anyway.
I will quote from this website and provide my own commentary as needed. Also, many of the Scripture links were left if the reader wants to see other translations, including the KJV.

Search This Blog

shadmans Musings