The Head We Hold Fast to Is Christ, not the “Godhead”

Colossians 2:19 tells us to “hold fast to the head,” speaking of Jesus Christ.  Indeed we should.  Why then do Trinitarians say we should instead hold fast to something they call “the Godhead”?  I’ve written previously on the unfortunate term “Godhead,” so I won’t elaborate that point here.

I will say here that the Bible is clear that the only head we should be holding fast to is Christ our Lord.  Never let Him go!

To learn more about Christ versus the Trinity, see:

There Is No Trinity; There Is Christ

Posts to Date on the Trinity Versus Christ

The Evangelical Movement Has Forgotten About Jesus

I am a child of the evangelical movement.  I believed in Jesus after someone confessed to me, “I have accepted Jesus Christ has my personal Lord and Savior.”  I examined the claims reading the Bible and acknowledged Him myself.

Nevertheless, the evangelical movement has strayed far from this simple and powerful message.  The message has been corrupted into “I have accepted the church as my corporate Lord and Savior.”  This is a sad state of affairs.  Let us return to Him from whom we have deeply defected (Isaiah 31:6).

Read A Nonchurchgoer’s Guide to Jesus and His Kingdom.

They Strain Out a Gnat and Swallow a Camel

Jesus spoke of those who strain out gnats and swallow camels (Matthew 23:24).

Here are a couple of current-day examples:

Jeffrey Small, author of The Breath of God, recently wrote a piece for the Huffington Post titled The Bible: History or Myth?  In it he said, “The Bible…is full of inconsistencies. How can it be an accurate historical record, when the various books contradict each other?”  He goes on to cite as his proof a quote from University of North Carolina professor Bart D. Ehrman, taken from a debate transcript [I used to provide a hyperlink to the full transcript, but the source is no longer maintaining that web page – July 30, 2014.]:

“Just take the death of Jesus. What day did Jesus die on and what time of day? Did he die on the day before the Passover meal was eaten, as John explicitly says, or did he die after it was eaten, as Mark explicitly says? Did he die at noon, as in John, or at 9 a.m., as in Mark? Did Jesus carry his cross the entire way himself or did Simon of Cyrene carry his cross? It depends which Gospel you read. Did both robbers mock Jesus on the cross or did only one of them mock him and the other come to his defense? It depends which Gospel you read. Did the curtain in the temple rip in half before Jesus died or after he died? It depends which Gospel you read … Or take the accounts of the resurrection. Who went to the tomb on the third day? Was it Mary alone or was it Mary with other women? If it was Mary with other women, how many other women were there, which ones were they, and what were their names? Was the stone rolled away before they got there or not? What did they see in the tomb? Did they see a man, did they see two men, or did they see an angel? It depends which account you read.”

You don’t even have to examine these so-called discrepancies to see that they are picayune in light of unanimous agreement among the gospel writers about the major facts of  the narrative: that Jesus was crucified by people and raised from the dead by God.  Moreover, if you were to examine each of Ehrman’s assertions you would find that there is reasonable reconciliation of such details where he sees only contradictions.

People who deny the moon landing or affirm a flat earth do so on just the kind of reasoning that Small and Ehrman use here.  That is, they major on the minors.

The Trinity Doubts the Word of Christ

The Trinity concept does not believe that Jesus kept His word to come again in the generation of His contemporaries (Matthew 24:34, and elsewhere).  However, Jesus did keep His promise, and thus He is filling the heavens and the earth and not still restricted to the right hand of God.

Because those who formulated the Trinity doctrine did not believe in Jesus’ accomplished Second Coming, they have God stuck in a state of suspended animation whereby Jesus has not yet come to judge the living and the dead.  If Jesus is not yet Judge of heaven and earth, then not only is His word unreliable, but no one has gone to heaven, the dead are still in Sheol below, Satan and his host still occupy places of authority in heaven.

Fear not, however, for Jesus did keep His promise, the dead live in heaven, Satan has been cast down to earth, and Jesus reigns over all of His enemies.

There is no need to doubt the word of Christ.

To learn more about Christ versus the Trinity, see:

There Is No Trinity; There Is Christ

Posts to Date on the Trinity Versus Christ

The Trinity Diminishes Christ, but the Bible Exalts Him

The Trinity concept says that if you have Christ, you only have a partial understanding of God.  It says that Christ is only one-third of God, and He’s the “second” third at that.

On the other hand, the Bible exalts Christ and says that if you have the Son, you have the Father (1 John 2:23).

Seek Jesus Christ, and you will find all of God.  Diminish Jesus Christ and you will miss God.

To learn more about Christ versus the Trinity, see:

There Is No Trinity; There Is Christ

Posts to Date on the Trinity Versus Christ

The Trinity Says Christ Is In God, but the Bible Says God Is in Christ

The Trinity concept says that Christ is one of three entities that comprise God.  The Bible, however, says that God “was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself”  (2 Corinthians 5:19, italics added).

Therefore, if you embrace the trinity concept it blocks your view of the glory of God in Christ.

To learn more about Christ versus the Trinity, see:

There Is No Trinity; There Is Christ

Posts to Date on the Trinity Versus Christ

Why Don’t Proponents of the Trinity Put Forward a Straightforward Biblical Case for It?

While the Bible stresses Christ as the proper focal point for all seekers of God, post-apostolic church leaders stress the Trinity instead.  I have recently attempted to get proponents of the Trinity to present a scriptural case for it, but so far they have not done it.

Instead, proponents of the Trinity tend to assume it’s true and then proceed to read it into all sorts of Bible verses that don’t say anything about a Trinity.  And when you don’t agree with these proponents, they tend become offended rather than offer a gentle explanation of the concept (a la 2 Timothy 2:24-26).

For example, I recently wrote a short post, The Biggest Problem with the Trinity.  I made a comment similar to it on two blogs that I respect for their stand for Christ.

The first was Triablogue by Steve Hays (and others).  You’ll find our exchange here (I show up as “blogforthelordjesus” in the comment string).  The other was Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth by Nick Norelli.  You’ll find that exchange here (I show up as Mike Gantt in the comment string.)  (By the way, I always try to comment in my own name – that is, Mike Gantt – but different blogs have different, and sometimes confusing, outputs when you enter comments.)

Note that neither Steve nor Nick wanted to engage on the subject, even when I tried to narrow the focus to something that would take less time.  I don’t know why these proponents of the Trinity do not make a biblical case for their concept, but it’s clear that they didn’t.

Maybe I’ll try them again.  And I’ll try others as well.

Be assured that I raise this topic for the purpose that we might better know and obey God.  Mere philosophical discussion wastes precious time.

To learn more about Christ versus the Trinity, see:

There Is No Trinity; There Is Christ

Posts to Date on the Trinity Versus Christ

Why I Love the NASB

I love the New American Standard Bible (NASB) and believe it is the most useful of all English translations of the Bible.  Here are my reasons:

1. It is the most literal of all English translations.  For a native-English-speaker who is not fluent in Greek or Hebrew, the NASB is as close as I will ever get to what the prophets and apostles originally wrote.

2. Because of its faithfulness to the what the prophets and apostles originally wrote, the NASB makes an exhaustive concordance (e.g. Strong’s) most effective.  That is, it is much easier to do study specific words with the NASB, allowing Scripture to interpret Scripture.

3. Most editions of the NASB include a cross-reference apparatus which correlates a given verse with other similar verses, many of which a concordance word study wouldn’t necessarily catch.

4. Those who created the NASB translation were convinced that the Scriptures are the word of God.  While many Bible translators have this conviction, the breadth and depth of this belief among the NASB translation committee is noteworthy.  I believe it drove them to literalness and discouraged undocumented emendations to an unparalleled degree.

The only improvement I could see to make to the NASB would be to have its Old Testament based on the Septuagint text (i.e. Greek) rather than on the Masoretic text (i.e. Hebrew).  This is because, of course, the New Testament when quoting the Old Testament seems to be referring much more often to Greek than to Hebrew renderings of the Old Testament text.

There are other literal English translations of the Bible (e.g. the King James Version, the English Standard Version, the New King James Version), and they are all useful.  There are also good translations of the Bible which are less literal (e.g. the New International Version, the Good News Bible, the Living Bible), and they, too, have their appropriate uses.  And there are certainly other worthwhile English translations which I have not mentioned specifically here.  My favorite of all English Bible translations, however, remains the NASB – for the reasons I have given.

Was the New Testament Canon Settled by 150 A.D.?

David Trobisch in his book The First Edition of the New Testament (Oxford University Press, 2000, 175 pages) claims that the documents to be part of the New Testament were determined as early as the mid-2nd Century CE.  Contrary to the traditional methods of dating the canon which look for testimony from church fathers, Trobisch focuses on the extant copies we have of the biblical texts and believes a complete Greek Bible including all the New Testament books was produced in that time period.

You can check the Google Books preview of the book, or its Amazon page.  And here is a review of the book from The Good Book Blog, which is produced by the faculty of Talbot School of Theology titled The Most Important Book on Formation of the New Testament Canon You’ve Never Heard Of.