Reply to Rob Skiba’s Twisting and Distorting Colossians 2

Rob SkibaThis a reply to Rob Skiba’s Facebook note: Twisting and Distorting Colossians 2. The problem is that Skiba is simply uninformed and incorrect. In Colossians, Paul is addressing a situation quite similar to Skiba’s own “ministry” that also asserts New Covenant believers need concern themselves with the obsolete Mosaic covenant stipulations (Hebrews 8:13). Despite his special pleading, historians and biblical scholars universally agree that the dangerous teaching at Colossae was heavily steeped in Jewish customs. Recent President of the Evangelical Theological Society, Clinton Arnold of Talbot School of Theology and Biola University, observes, “The fact that there are many distinctively Jewish elements to the false teaching (such as Sabbath observance, Jewish festivals, and an interest in angels; see 2:16–18) has led a number of scholars to contend that the competing teaching had something to do with Judaism”[1] Arnold continues, “The best explanation for this dangerous teaching is that it comes from the context of the local Jewish and pagan folk belief.” [2] He believes a charismatic leader attracted a following and was presenting himself as a guide to the “true Christianity” which included Jewish customs, feasts, and Sabbath keeping (remind you of anyone?).

Thus, the excuse that folks who cite Colossians 2:16 against Skiba’s Judaizing heresy is some sort of “bible twisting” is completely spurious. It is also instructive that the only people who make such a claim are folks like Jim Staley and Michael Rood who are also deeply invested in Hebrew Roots teaching. Real biblical scholars, steeped in study of the historical context, univocally identify it in a Judaizing context. For example, Robert Wall writes:

Several scholars have recently concluded that the clipped references in Colossians (cf. 2:9, 18, 21, 23) to a “hollow and deceptive philosophy” that “depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world” (2:8) to fashion “fine-sounding arguments” (2:4) suggest that the Colossian congregation was being influenced by a Hellenized form of piety (Francis 1975), probably of Jewish origin (Bornkamm 1975). If to be a Christian meant in some important sense to be Jewish, as opponents to the Gentile mission would have argued, then believers would quite naturally look to their Jewish-Christian teachers (perhaps even to the rabbinate of the local synagogue) for instruction. [3]

Indeed, this sounds very much like Skiba’s teaching that to be Christian means to keep the Jewish feasts, dietary restrictions and Sabbath observance. Now that the context is clear, let’s examine the passage.

Skiba argues that the passage is teaching believers not to let pagans judge them for doing the things of God. But the passage actually says “let no one pass judgement on you” not just pagans.  Thus, the passage teaches do not let Rob Skiba imply you will be a “janitor in heaven” for not keeping the feasts.  Many similar HRM teachers seem to operate under the delusion that the festivals mentioned in Colossians were not the typical Jewish feasts but no historian will support that contention. It’s just a manufactured excuse for the HRM error. While in English translation it is easy to generalize a term like “festival” and then assert it was some unknown pagan festival, the original text is crystal clear. The Greek term used is ἑορτή transliterated heortē and below is a snip of the Lexham Greek-English Septuagint which verifies that the term ἑορτήis used in Leviticus 23.

Feasts Lev 23

More pertinent to the discussion at hand, ἑορτή appears 25 times in 23 verses of the New Testament. A few examples include:

  • “But they said, “Not during the feast, lest there be an uproar among the people” (Mt 26:5).


  • “Now the Feast of Unleavened Bread drew near, which is called the Passover”(Lk 22:1).


  • “Now when he was in Jerusalem at the Passover Feast, many believed in his name when they saw the signs that he was doing” (Jn 2:23).


  • “Now the Passover, the feast of the Jews, was at hand” (Jn 6:4).


  • “Now the Jews’ Feast of Booths was at hand” (Jn 7:2).


Indeed, without exception the term heortē is used to denote the Jewish feasts in the New Testament. Skiba has not provided one shred of historical evidence that it meant anything different in Colossians: “Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath” (Col 2:16).

The fact of the matter is that no one outside the Hebrew Roots Movement agrees with Rob Skiba and Jim Staley. Again scholars are univocal. Arnold comments, “The false teacher(s) were advocating a number of Jewish observances, arguing that they were essential for spiritual advancement”[4] Wall’s comment is particularly instructive:

The list of these celebrations, which includes a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day, is fairly typical (compare Hos 2:13; Ezek 45:17; Jubilees 1:14). Since the list encompasses annual festivals (such as Passover or Yom Kippur), monthly meetings (such as the New Moon celebration) and the weekly observance of sabbath, it is evident that Paul’s opponents required a rather comprehensive obligation. Moreover, within Judaism most of these celebrations were intended to help the community look forward to Messiah’s deliverance of Israel from its suffering and to its entrance into God’s promised shalom. Thus, for the Christian to participate in these Jewish celebrations was tantamount to a denial of Jesus’ messiahship. [5]

That last line brings this Judaizing heresy into sharp focus and ought to bring deceived Christians still amongst Skiba’s following to heartfelt repentance. This is not a trivial error, especially now that one has been made aware of its depth into apostasy.



[1] Clinton E. Arnold, “Colossians” in The ESV Study Bible (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 2290.

[2] Arnold, “Colossians,” 2290.

[3]Robert W. Wall, Colossians & Philemon, The IVP New Testament commentary series (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1993), Col 1:1.

[4] Arnold, “Colossians,” 2297.

[5]Wall, Colossians & Philemon, Col 2:18.

RA Torrey on the Personhood of the Holy Spirit

R.A. Torrey

R.A. Torrey

R.A. Torrey (1856–1928) was an independent Congregationalist educator and evangelist. He was ordained in 1883 as a Congregationalist minister serving as a pastor and missions supervisor (1883–1889). In 1889, D. L. Moody asked Torrey to become the first superintendent of the Moody Bible Institute where he served until 1908. Torrey pursued his interest in mass evangelism and missions with overseas tours, including meetings in Australia, New Zealand, India, China, Japan, Germany, Great Britain, Canada, and elsewhere. In 1912, Torrey took leadership of the newly formed Bible Institute of Los Angeles (Biola). His leadership was foundational for the school which today boasts one the top apologetics programs in the country as well as the well respected Talbot School of Theology. Torrey stayed at Biola until 1924. We need more men like him today.

In our increasingly pagan environment, poorly educated false teachers are infiltrating the body and spreading heresies and denying basic biblical theology. Recently the Lord has led me to address the attacks upon the Holy Spirit by Russ Houck (who claims a doctorate in theology from an unaccredited school) and his popularizer Rob Skiba, both who teach that that He is merely an impersonal force. While its common among the cults, it is a dangerous heresy. Torrey wrote an excellent book The Person and Work of the Holy Spirit stating in the very first chapter that this is not an optional doctrine but rather one that is fundamental to the worship of the true God:

It is of the highest importance from the standpoint of worship that we decide whether the Holy Spirit is a Divine Person, worthy to receive our adoration, our faith, our love, and our entire surrender to Himself, or whether it is simply an influence emanating from God or a power or an illumination that God imparts to us.If the Holy Spirit is a person, and a Divine Person, and we do not know Him as such, then we are robbing a Divine Being of the worship and the faith and the love and the surrender to Himself which are His due.
RA Torrey, The Person and Work of the Holy Spirit, (New York: Fleming HL Revell Company, 1910), 7.

I highly recommend this book to anyone who has questions or perhaps was misled by the heretical teachings of Houck and Skiba. It is available as free download here.

Rob Skiba’s Faith Statement the Mark of a Cult

Babylon Book200Popular 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."

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”:

Skiba Denies Personhood


[1] Rob Skiba, “Statement of Faith” (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.

Will Believers Who Do Not Keep the Feasts Be Janitors in Heaven?

By Cris Putnam
HRMPeople in the Hebrew Roots Movement (HRM) like to celebrate the Jewish feast days as described in the Torah. This seems fine to me unless someone is teaching that they are required or that not celebrating them somehow diminishes one’s spiritual stature. Unfortunately, many popular teachers do just that. The feasts of Israel are those described in Leviticus 23. The three pilgrimage feasts—the Passover, the Feast of Weeks, and the Feast of Tabernacles—demanded that every male Israelite travel to Jerusalem to worship at the temple. The Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread are closely related and ran consecutively (Lev 23:4–8). The Feast of Weeks (Pentecost) followed seven weeks later, and connected the Passover of the exodus with the conquest. Both Passover and Pentecost were practiced by early Christians because Christ was crucified at the Passover, and the Holy Spirit personally descended upon the disciples on Pentecost (Acts 2). The Bible ends with the anticipation of one final feast: the Marriage Supper of the Lamb (Rev 19:9).

Because Jesus fulfilled the Spring feasts: Passover-Pentecost with his death burial, resurrection, ascension and subsequent outpouring of the Holy Spirit. This leads many to suspect the Fall feasts: (Trumpets, Day of Atonement, Tabernacles) are connected to his second coming. This is somewhat compelling but not necessary. It is speculative. God nowhere promised that Jesus would return on a certain feast day and certainly never implied that observing them is required to be found in good stead when he returns. Yet Rob Skiba instructs his Virtual House Church that this is the case and those who do not celebrate them have diminished status.

While the feasts of the Lord are interesting for prophetic study, some have wandered away from biblical theology by implying new covenant believers are required to observe the Mosaic laws regarding feast observance. Russ Houck writes that Constantine, “single-handedly stopped the New Church from observing the feasts of the Lord ordained by the Bible. Robbed of its Hebrew roots, the disconnected church became paganistic in spirit and anti-biblical in its customs.”[1] But is this really so? The teaching of the New Testament is that old covenant feast observance is no longer required. This error was dealt with by Paul when false teachers in Colasse:

“I say this in order that no one may delude you with plausible arguments. For though I am absent in body, yet I am with you in spirit, rejoicing to see your good order and the firmness of your faith in Christ. Therefore, as you received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in him, rooted and built up in him and established in the faith, just as you were taught, abounding in thanksgiving. See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.”(Col 2:4–8)

This is exactly what is re-occuring in our own context with teachers putting folks back under the obsolete ceremonial law by implying that feast observance is needed for spiritual advancement and sanctification. There are 3 types of OT law 1) ceremonial; 2) civil; 3) moral. While God’s moral character does not change, the old covenant stipulations were only for Israelites under that conditional covenant. The conditions were violated and the old covenant was replaced by the new covenant. Rob Skiba implies that Christians should be feast observant to be “at the right place at the right time when Jesus shows up” at the 1:07:49 mark in the video below:

He misapplies Matthew 5:16-19 (as explained by Douglas Moo below) and then at the 1:10:05 mark uses verse 19 to argue that those who disagree with him are going to be “janitors in heaven.” While I am sure that hard-working custodians take exception with Rob’s degradation of their work, Skiba implies that non-observance diminishes one’s status with God. I say balderdash. The idea that there is a spiritual reward for keeping dietary or ceremonial laws is a false teaching, it is a misapplication of scripture. Paul addressed the feasts specifically:

“Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath.” (Col 2:16)

Paul was addressing the false teachers in Colasse who were advocating a number of Jewish observances, arguing that they were essential for spiritual advancement.

“These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.”(Col 2:17)

The old covenant observances pointed to a future reality that was fulfilled in the Lord Jesus Christ (cf. Heb. 10:1). Hence, Christians are no longer under the Mosaic covenant (cf. Rom. 6:14–15; 7:1–6; 2 Cor. 3:4–18; Gal. 3:15–4:7). Christians are no longer obligated to observe OT dietary laws (“food and drink”) or festivals, holidays, and special days (“a festival … new moon … Sabbath,” Col. 2:16), for what these things foreshadowed has been fulfilled or will be fulfilled in Christ. You will not be demoted for not celebrating as a Torah observant Jew.

Hebrews 8-10 explains very clearly that Christ’s atoning death on the cross was the end of the law and it is now obsolete for everyone.

“In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.”(Heb 8:13)

As to Rob’s eisegesis of Matthew 5:17-19, atheists and homosexuals also like to use this passage to ask why Christians no longer stone people or why we eat shellfish and pork or wear clothes made of different fabrics. The answer we give them is the same one we give to the HRM, those laws are now obsolete. I guess we should ask our feast-requirers why they don’t also stone people? It’s part of the same covenant stipulations. So what did Jesus mean by saying this:

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished.”(Mt 5:17–18)

Jesus “fulfills” all of the OT in that it all points to him, not only in its specific predictions of a Messiah but also in its sacrificial system, which looked forward to his great sacrifice of himself, this made the old obsolete (Hebrews 8:13). We are now concerned with “the law of Christ” as seen in Galatians 6:2. According to NT scholar Douglas Moo:

Christ has brought the OT law’s fulfillment. But the Christian is bound to “God’s law” (1 Cor 9:20–21; cf. “God’s commands” in 1 Cor 7:19 and 1 John 2:3-4 etc.). “God’s law” is not, however, the Mosaic Law, but “Christ’s law” (1 Cor 9:20–21; Gal 6:2), because it is to Christ, the fulfiller, the τέλος of the law (Rom 10:4), that the Christian is bound. In that “fulfillment” of the law, however, some of the Mosaic commandments are taken up and reapplied to the New Covenant people of God. Thus, while the Mosaic Law does not stand as an undifferentiated authority for the Christian, some of its individual commandments remain authoritative as integrated into the law of Christ. [2]

Christ’s death and resurrection changed everything — by emphasizing the Torah over the cross they are promoting error. The cross made a new paradigm, a new covenant! The New Covenant is celebrated by the Lord’s Supper which has supplanted the feast days.

“And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.” (Lk 22:20)

“In the same way also he took the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.””(1 Co 11:25)

“Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant.” (Heb 9:15) “and to Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel.” (Heb 12:24)

While the feasts make an interesting study and might have prophetic significance, Christians should first and foremost celebrate the new covenant with their a local church body rather than celebrating the Jewish feast days from an obsolete covenant.

[1] Russ Houck, Epidemic Examining the Infected Roots of Judaism and Christianity: How Do We Find God with All This Mess? (volume 1) (Corsicana, TX: Negev Publishing, 2012), 220.

[2]Douglas Moo, “The Law of Moses or the Law of Christ” in Continuity and Discontinuity: Perspectives on the Relationship Between the Old and New Testaments : Essays in Honor of S. Lewis Johnson, Jr. editors S. Lewis Johnson and John S. Feinberg,(Westchester, Ill.: Crossway Books, 1988), 208.

The Forgotten Trinity

Jesus said, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.” (Mt 22:37)

I love the trinity! How can a professing Christian be passionless for what is supposed to be the central doctrine of the faith? The Trinity is an essential Christian doctrine, but these days it seems to be all but forgotten. People who claim to be Christian no longer seem to think it is important yet the very Gospel of our salvation is trinitarian. Note that Dr. White states clearly that the denial of it is to apostatize from the Christian faith: to deny the trinity is a denial of the Gospel. Dr. Norman Geisler says the same here. If you doubt this, you need to listen to this lecture carefully. If you have no doubt, then God bless, this lecture will greatly encourage you.

The doctrine of the Trinity is based on three foundational biblical truths:
1) Monotheism: The Bible teaches there is one and only one true God.

“Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one.”(Dt 6:4)

“You are my witnesses,” declares the LORD, “and my servant whom I have chosen, that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he. Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me.“(Is 43:10) Jesus applied this text from the Septuagint to himself: “I am telling you this now, before it takes place, that when it does take place you may believe that I am he.”(Jn 13:19)

2) Three Divine Persons: There are three distinct persons who are God: The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

  1. The Son speaks to the Father (John 12:28). He is a distinct person.
  2. The Father speaks to the Son (Matthew 3:17). He is a distinct person.
  3. The Holy Spirit also speaks (Acts 13:2). He is a distinct person.
Each has all the basic elements or powers of personhood: mind, will, and emotion.

Son: The three elements of personhood all are attributed to God the Son. The Son can communicate and teach (John 7:17) as only persons do. He has intelligence and knowledge – mind- (John 2:25):“and needed no one to bear witness about man, for he himself knew what was in man.(Jn 2:25); emotion (John 11:35): “Jesus wept”; and will (John 6:38): “For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me.”(Jn 6:38). The personal pronoun “He” is used consistently of the Son.
Father: The three elements of personhood all are attributed to God the Father. He has the power of intellect to know (Matt. 6:32):“your heavenly Father knows that you need them all.”; the emotional faculty to feel (Gen. 6:6): “And the Lord regretted that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him to his heart.”; and the power of will to choose (Matt. 6:9–10): “Our Father in heaven … your will be done on earth as it is in heaven.” In addition, personal attributes, like the ability to communicate (Matt. 11:25) and teach (John 7:16–17), are also attributed to the Father.
Spirit: All the elements of personhood are attributed to the Holy Spirit in Scripture. He has a mind (John 14:26): “But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you.” He has will (1 Cor. 12:11): “All these are the work of one and the same spirit, and he gives them to each one, just as he determines”; and He has feeling (Eph. 4:30): “And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, with whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.”

Personal pronouns (“He” and “His”) are attributed to the Holy Spirit: “When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.”(John 16:13, emphasis added).

The rules of grammar dictate that personal pronouns have an antecedent within the context of the pronoun[1], it is not within the proper use of language to claim that “he” in John 16:13 is referring to anyone other than the Holy Spirit.
3) Co-equal and Co-eternal: The three divine persons are co-equal and co-eternal. Because very few people deny the deity of the Father, most of the attacks center on denying the deity of Christ and deity and personhood of the Holy Spirit. (video: 11:14-11:16)

  1. The Father is called God (Phil. 1:2).
  2. Jesus is called God (John 1:1,14).
  3. The Holy Spirit is called God (Acts 5:3-4).


Father: Yahweh (YHWH) is the name given by God for Himself in the Old Testament. It is the name revealed to Moses in Exodus 3:14, when God said, “I am who I am.”


Jesus: The strongest claim Jesus made to be Yahweh is in John 8:58, where He says, “Before Abraham was born, I am!” This statement claims not only existence before Abraham, but equality with the “I am” of Exodus 3:14. The Jews around Him clearly understood His meaning and picked up stones to kill Him for blaspheming (cf. John 10:31–33). The same claim is also made in Mark 14:62 and John 18:5–6.


Thomas saw Jesus’ wounds and exclaimed, “My Lord and my God!” (John 20:28). Paul wrote, “Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of Christ, who is God over all, forever praised!” (Rom. 9:5). He calls Jesus the one in whom “all the fullness of Deity lives in bodily form” (Col. 2:9). In Titus, Jesus is “our great God and Savior” (2:13), and the writer to the Hebrews says of Him, “Your throne, O God,” The New Testament opens with a passage concluding that Jesus is Immanuel (“God with us”), which refers to the messianic prediction of Isaiah 7:14. The very title “Christ” carries the same meaning as the Hebrew appellation “Messiah” (“Anointed One”). In Zechariah 12:10, Yahweh says, “They will look on me, the one they have pierced.” The New Testament writers apply this passage to Jesus twice (John 19:37; Rev. 1:7) as referring to His crucifixion.


Holy Spirit: Attributes of God such as life (Rom. 8:2); truth (John 16:13); love (Rom. 15:30); holiness (Eph. 4:30); eternality (Heb. 9:14); omnipresence (Ps. 139:7); and omniscience (1 Cor. 2:11) are ascribed to the Spirit. Particular acts are associated only with God; both God the Father and the Son are said to perform these acts, and so is the Holy Spirit. These include the act of creation (Gen. 1:2; Job 33:4; Ps. 104:30); the acts of redemption (Isa. 63:10–11; Eph. 4:30; 1 Cor. 12:13); the performance of miracles by His own power (Gal. 3:2–5; Heb. 2:4); and the giving of supernatural gifts (Acts 2:4; 1 Cor. 12:4–11).

These are the three foundations that all Christians should know in order to give a meaningful defense of the Christian faith. If someone worships a non-triune God, they have constructed a false god. It is not the same God as the God of the Bible.  It is not just a simple doctrinal disagreement because we are not even worshiping the same God. It goes against the first commandment. It is blasphemous. It qualifies as blasphemy against the Holy Spirit to say that the person of the Holy Spirit does not exist, is just a force, or is not God. I hope those of you who claim to love God will love him as the triune God who exists with all of your mind as well as your heart (Matthew 22:37).


[1] “Pronoun”, Glossary of Morpho-Syntactic Database Terminology, Michael S. Heiser, (Logos Bible Software, 2005).