Saturday, May 21, 2011

EVANGELISTIC ESCAPADES: The Watchtower Strikes Back

I don’t mean to keep playing the same one-string fiddle…but I had yet another encounter with Jehovah’s Witnesses last week. The Lord just keeps bringing them to me.

It was Monday, one day before Joe would have to return to the States, and he wanted to go for one last open air excursion in Centro. So we took the subway and headed to our usual fishing spot in Plaza Tapatía. As I was ready to get up on my box—microphone and Bible in hand—two girls in their twenties, and a young man who wasn’t at all dressed like a Watchtowerite, approached us. One of the young ladies asked me if I knew any deaf and mute people around the area, because they were looking to give assistance to any they could find, and share with them about “Jehovah’s Kingdom”. “Even if I did know any,” I thought to myself, “you would just about be the last person I would refer one to for spiritual advice.” I told her that I could not help her, but offered both of them a Gospel tract. The girl who had asked me accepted it, but the other refused. I asked the other why she didn’t want the tract—after all it was based on the Word of God. She said she already knew the Word of God and the JWs believed and taught what the Bible teaches. I told them I disagreed with that assertion, and added that we could spend the whole afternoon debating the subjects on which we disagreed—but the most important one, which I would like to discuss with them, concerned salvation. How is one saved? So I let that be the topic of debate. Though my mouth got really dry again and I had to be sipping water during our conversation, the atmosphere was not one of contention at all; it was actually very calm, and the girls even ended up listening to what I had to say. The Lord poured out His grace, wisdom and compassion on me during the entire conversation.

They basically explained to me that we are saved by our works, pointing to Matthew 24:13 as proof positive that we must persevere in good works in order to eventually be saved in the end. I shared with them Ephesians 2:8-9 about salvation by grace through faith, and asked them to please explain the passage to me, in the light of Watchtower doctrine. They could not, and began to instead point me to other passages that seemed to them to imply salvation by works. Not wanting them to use that opportunity to change the subject, I stayed on point and began teaching them how one is saved according to the Bible (particularly, the book of Romans). They surprisingly listened to me; they didn’t seem to have much knowledge of the Word and I had to correct them several times when they misquoted passages and biblical references, and took verses out of context. I then asked them if they had ever read the whole book of Romans, and if so, would they kindly give me a summary of what it was about. One of them said she read the Bible once, but could not tell me the general theme behind the epistle. However, both of them quietly allowed me to explain it to them. I shared that there is a common thread in the entire Bible—namely, salvation by faith apart from any works…faith in Jesus’ sacrifice entirely and once and for all purchased for us on the cross. I explained that Paul’s epistle to the Romans could be summed up in one word: justification. I then went on to explain this glorious doctrine to them, and even shared my testimony of how the Lord had saved me. I told them that now I do good works not to be saved, but because I am already saved and want to follow Christ. While I was explaining the nature of salvation and the new birth to them and how we can come to really know Christ in a personal, saving relationship, one of the girls objected by telling me that “John 3:16 says that ‘This means everlasting life, their taking in knowledge of you, the only true God…’” I immediately corrected her, “I think you mean John 17:3,” and showed them the difference between this verse in my version of the Bible and in theirs. I read out loud that passage from my Bible: “this is eternal life, that they may know You the only true God…” I explained that there is a world of difference between “taking in knowledge” of someone and actually knowing them: “If I’m your doctor, I can know all about your body’s anatomy and how your ears, eyes, mouth, etc. work…but that doesn’t mean that I actually know you.” To know someone is to have a personal relationship with them, I argued, explaining that one can “take in knowledge” of God and His Word all they want, but that doesn’t mean they actually know Christ in a saving way. After all, reasoned I, the devil has vast knowledge of the Scriptures, and yet we know that he will never experience salvation. They actually agreed with me, and one of the girls, contemplating my words, commended me for giving them a very good illustration. The Lord gave me more Scriptures to quote to them about assurance of salvation and the guarantee of eternal life right now to those who trust in Christ. What I said seemed to make them both think.

I pleaded with them to read the Bible for themselves to see if what I was saying was true. They insisted that they had, and that the Watchtower organization encouraged them to do so. I disagreed, and pulling out my little tract, quoted to them from their own literature the warnings and admonishments to JWs not to read the Bible for themselves, and to avoid independent thinking. As I cited the exact sources of the quotes and their dates, one of the girls asked me to repeat them and hurriedly wrote them down on a piece of paper, saying she would look them up. I told them that if anything was wrong in the tract they could come back another day and let me know. They seemed genuinely interested in verifying if those quotes were true, so I offered the girl that had initially rejected the Gospel tract my JW tract, if she wanted it. I did so hesitantly, knowing that they are discouraged from taking “apostate literature” (reading any literature that critiques the Watchtower organization is equated to looking at pornography). But she actually took it! She said she would research the quotes, and the other girl said she would read the book of Romans by herself. I encouraged her to do so all by herself without the filters of the Watchtower explaining to her what the Bible is supposedly saying. They had to leave so we ended the conversation with a friendly farewell. The Lord gave me the grace not to be contentious that day, praise the Lord. Please keep the two young ladies and the young man in prayer.

Wednesday, May 18, 2011

Visitor from the States

We were very blessed to have Joe, a brother from PA, visit us last Tuesday. He stayed for a week. He has a burden for Latin America and is considering serving the Lord somewhere in this part of the world in the near future. He is currently learning Spanish. We took him out for some evangelism, and also visited the Josiah and Bethany Children's Home.

Joe (center) with brother Artemio and I.

Brother Juan preached first...

And even Joe got up the courage to do Spanish and without a translator. 

These are some of the kids from the orphanage. They're a wild bunch.

Working with kids is a lot of work, and leaves you dead tired at the end of the day. But I love it.

Pretty soon we're going to have a children's home of our own. Lord willing, we will be taking some of those kids. You can read more about it HERE.

Tuesday, May 17, 2011


A few days ago there was a malfunction in Blogger, and unfortunately this post got deleted as a result. Here it is again. Enjoy.

I was able to use my new Jehovah's Witnesses tract against some JWs on Easter Sunday, when a brother and I ran into a pack of them while preaching the Gospel. It was an interesting encounter, to say the least. I'll recount a little bit of what happened that day in order to demonstrate that the questions in the last Cult Chronicles post really do work.

It was Easter, and brother Giancarlo and I did our best not to squander the excellent opportunity to share the Good News with the masses of people who were going to crowd the squares in Downtown Guadalajara. We headed for Plaza Tapatía and started to open air preach. As I was standing on my stool and had just about finished preaching, I saw a group of well-dressed folk walk by me, and then approach Giancarlo, who was sitting on a bench just a couple yards in front of me, witnessing to a young man. As soon as I saw this group of people, I smelled I got off the stool and walked up to all of them. A heavyset middle-aged man, who was the "spokesman" for the group, had interrupted Giancarlo as he was witnessing to this young Catholic man. When I found out that they were JWs I really did not desire to debate them--but for the sake of the young unbeliever who they were trying to confuse (it's just like Satan to interrupt the preaching of the Gospel), I jumped in on the fight. The old man was trying to convince us that Jesus did not die on a cross, but on a "torture stake". We didn't take the bait, however, trying to stick mainly to the topic of salvation by grace through faith. But as is standard procedure for JWs, he repeatedly kept trying to change the subject, jumping from topic to topic, so it was hard to corner him. He had a supremely arrogant air about him, and even disdainfully referred to Giancarlo and I as "little boy". The JWs surprisingly had no Bibles with them, and I had made the dumb mistake of forgetting mine, so we had to all pass around Giancarlo's Bible from person to person the whole time we were there. The old man even went as far as to angrily snatch the Bible from our hands and would refuse to give it back (!!!). Apalled at his shocking and immature behavior, we demanded Giancarlo's Bible from him and eventually gave it back. This occurred repeatedly. On one ocassion he even asked us for the Bible to allow his little son to read a we gave it to him--but he kept it and read out of it himself! The man was a malicious, conniving liar. And not only that, but he would frequently taunt us, and even call Giancarlo "stupid"! (And mind you, as far as JW doctrine goes, he was the most knowledgeable of the whole bunch, their leader). I've come across many mean-spirited Jehovah's Witnesses throughout my life...but none who even comes close to this guy.

But anyway, I pulled out my new little JW tract and started to read aloud some quotes from Watchtower literature; namely the ones about utilizing "Theocratic War Strategy" on your opponents, about avoiding independent thinking, and about not studying the Bible for yourself. I told the young Catholic that Satan is the father of lies; only children of the devil will try to justify lying. He seemed a bit shocked to hear that the Watchtower actually taught that. I didn't look at the old man's face, but Giancarlo later told me that as I read from my tract his eyes just about bulged out in anger. He of course denied those quotes and accused me of lying, so I immediately cited my sources and told him that he himself could look them up and verify that what I was saying was true. Having been discovered, he then accused me of taking those quotes out of context and not understanding what they really mean...though he didn't even attempt to explain what they "really" meant. I said that they were in their proper context, and asked him to show me from the Bible where it condones lying and hiding the truth from someone. He couldn't, of course, and as I pressed him hard for an answer, he even admitted so, but immediately tried to change the subject.

A young JW lady then started talking to me, so now the group split into two. Giancarlo kept debating with the man and trying to help the young Catholic, while I took on this girl and some of her pals. She was also beaming with arrogance, and had a prideful, demonic smile on her face that made me uneasy. We debated different subjects. She claimed to have read the Bible 12 times, but when asked to explain to me what the book of Romans was about she angrily and dismissingly told me that she knew very well what it was about and changed the subject. Like the older man she was a liar, "bending" the truth several times during our conversation. But one of the old man's sons was quietly listening in on our discussion, as was a newly indoctrinated Jehovah's Witness, so it was worth it to keep debating. Near the end of our conversation I told her that I am righteous because Christ had justified me. Upon hearing this she went into a fit and accused me of being prideful for daring to claim that I was righteous (they have a works-righteousness mentality so they don't understand grace). I tried to explain the doctrine of justification to her to no avail, she would even dismiss the Bible verses from the book of Romans that I read to her. She told me that not even Jesus claimed this about Himself when He was here--when the rich young ruler ran up to Him and asked Him, "Good Master, what must I do to inherit eternal life?" Jesus told him that none is good but God. Of course, she was completely twisting Scripture, and besides, Christ claimed to be the "good Shepherd", and even said worse things like, "I and the Father are One"...but instead of pointing this out I cornered her with the question:

"So then, was Jesus good?"

No answer, she just kept telling me how disgusted she was at my lack of humilty for claiming to be righteous.

"Answer the question. Was Jesus good?"

She continued to ignore my question and kept on rambling.

"Was Jesus good?" I asked this question many times, and she refused to give me a straight answer.

I turned to the rookie JW next to her and asked him the same question, but he had a confused look on his face and did not want to answer, either.

I said, "If Jesus wasn't good, then we're all lost, because He wasn't the perfect sacrifice for our sins. But if He IS good, then He's GOD--because only God is good."

I didn't really receive a reply...she didn't know how to respond, other than continue to accuse me of being prideful.

Suddenly, a professing Christian who I had met earlier called me over to where he was to introduce me to a friend of his. So I parted from the group and the debate ended there. The JW wolves promptly left and the young Catholic man told Giancarlo that he would read the Bible for himself, and the tracts we gave him, and contact us. It was a great spiritual battle—in the beggining of the ordeal my mouth became so dry that I could not even talk; I had to be sipping my water bottle the whole time of the debate, something that has never happened to me before. Satan must have really wanted the soul of that young man.

Well, not everything turned out the best, but at the very least we were able to scare off the Watchtowerites and prevent the young man from being deceived. Hopefully the questions in the last Cult Chronicles will prove to be useful tools for engaging Jehovah's Witnesses in meaningful debate, and getting them to actually consider the error of their false doctrine...and the claims of the true Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Sunday, May 8, 2011


That's right...if you ever come across Jehovah's Witnesses, there are certain questions you can give them that they will ABSOLUTELY NOT BE ABLE TO ANSWER.

BUT--please keep in mind that the purpose behind these questions is not to "stump them" for the sake of winning an argument. The purpose of these questions is to get Jehovah's Witnesses to question their own beliefs, to doubt the validity, veracity, and credibility of their own organization and its claims, and--more importantly--to open up a door for the Gospel to be proclaimed to them. Jehovah's Witnesses know nothing about the grace and mercy of God through our Lord Jesus Christ.

If the people your are speaking to have an iota of honesty, they will admit that they don't have an answer to the following arguments and will tell you that they will research the matter (ask their JW elders and/or consult Watchtower publications on the topic) and get back with you (they likely will not come back). When asked these questions they may also try to quickly change the subject, and even present ad hominem attacks against you and your "religion"--but stick to your guns and demand and answer from them. Don't allow for sneakiness, it's one of their prime tactics.


I have recently written a short tract exposing the fact that the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society encourages their members to lie to those who are not Jehovah's Witnesses, especially those who oppose them. They call it "Theocratic War Strategy". Of course, they don't call it "lying", they simply refer to it as "withholding truth" from those who are not "entitled" to know it. Worse, the Watchtower uses the Bible to try to justify deceit. They give examples like Abraham, Rahab, and even Jesus, in support of this perversion.

My tract doesn't get into the topic at great depth, but it does cite clear, shocking quotes from Watchtower literature on the subject. (Fore more info on the topic google "Theocratic War Strategy" and many pages will come up exposing this false teaching). The tract also gives Watchtower quotes in which they admonish their members not to think independently, and warn them not to read the Bible by itself, without the assistance and aid of their literature.
CLICK HERE to read the tract in English.
CLICK HERE to read the tract in Spanish.

While conversing with Jehovah's Witnesses, you can read verbatim those quotes from their own literature, and ask them to explain them to you. If they try to justify lying with Scripture, show them the verses (found in the tract) that show that the apostle Paul clearly did not endorse lying, not even "hiding the truth". You can then tell them that no liar will inherit God's kingdom, and from there go directly to their conscience, asking them if they've commited any other specific sins ("good person test")...and then explain the Cross and the way of salvation. 

The same thing can be done with the quotes about not thinking independently and not reading the Bible by itself. Ask them if their organization recommends that one think independently and read the Bible. Their claim is usually that they want you to think for yourself and study the Bible (by this they mean the Bible plus their literature) when you read those WT quotes to them and they see an obvious contradiction between their own words and the words of the WT organization, their mouths will be stopped. Once again, just compare those quotes with what the Scripture says, then go for their conscience, and finally, present the Gospel.

The same pattern is also to be followed with the below arguments--get them to see that the teachings they've learned are contrary to the Bible, and therefore their organization cannot be trusted, and then present the Law and the Gospel to them.


You can show them verses like John 1:3 and Colossians 1:16-17, which clearly state that Jesus Christ is the creator of everything. They will agree with you; the Watchtower teaches that Jesus was the first created being of Jehovah, and Jehovah used him to create everything else. Then take them to Isaiah 44:24, which says:

"Thus says the LORD [Jehovah], your Redeemer, who formed you from the womb: "I am the LORD, who made all things, who alone stretched out the heavens, who spread out the earth by myself..."

And Isaiah 45:11-12:

"Thus says the LORD [Jehovah], the Holy One of Israel, and the one who formed him: 'Ask me of things to come; will you command me concerning my children and the work of my hands? I made the earth and created man on it; it was my hands that stretched out the heavens, and I commanded all their host.'"

In the JW [per]version of the Bible, the New World Translation, these pasages are not very different. Clearly, Jehovah is said to have created the universe by Himself, with His own hands. Ask the JW how Jehovah can say He created everything all by Himself--without any help--if, according to JW doctrine, God  first created Jesus, and then used Jesus to create the everything else. If Jesus is not Jehovah, then there is a glaring contradiction in Scripture. To this day I have not received an adequate response from any Jehovah's Witness for this argument.


The Watchtower teaches that before coming to earth, Jesus existed as Michael the Archangel in heaven. Ask them to show you where this is found in Scripture. They will likely point you to 1 Thes. 4:16, which says that Jesus will descend from heaven with a shout, with "the voice of an archangel, and with the sound of the trumpet of God." This prooftext doesn't really help make their case. Ask them to show you where it clearly says that Jesus is Michael the Archangel. They will not be able to, because there is not a single verse in the entire Bible that says so. Show them how Michael, when disputing with the devil, "did not presume to pronounce a blasphemous judgment, but said, 'The Lord rebuke you.' (Jude 9). He did not dare to condemn the devil directly. And yet we see that Jesus did directly reubke Satan (Mat. 4:10; 16:23).


One of the Bible passages that Jehovah's Witnesses use to show that Jesus is not God is Mark 10:17-22, the account of the rich young ruler who runs up to Jesus and asks Him, "Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?" Jesus responds by saying, "Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone." The Jehovah's Witness commentary to this passage is something to the effect of, "See, Jesus himself claimed to NOT be God! He didn't even claim personal goodness, he said that only GOD is good." My response to such an answer is, "Was Jesus good? He undoubtedly had to be good to be the perfect sacrifice for our sins. And yet Jesus Himself said that only God is if Jesus was good, then He's God." The very passage they try to use against the deity of Christ works against them. This is a good stumper to use on them, since it's not likely that they ever logically thought this through. The reality is that in the passage Jesus was not discouraging the rich young ruler from calling Him "good"--He didn't say, "Don't call me good! Only God is good!" He simply asked him a question, "Why do you call me good?"  He asked this in the same manner that God asked Adam in the Garden, "Where are you?" and Saul of Tarsus, "Why are you persecuting Me?" Obviously, He already knew the answer to these questions; the purpose behind them was to get those He was questioning to realize something important. And Jesus in the passage wanted the young man to realize that he did not at all understand what "good" meant. He wanted him to realize the implications of what he was saying--namely, that this "good teacher" was God, standing right in front of him. Far from being a denial of His deity, Jesus' statement in this passage was in reality an affirmation of it.


Take them to John 15:13: "Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends." Clearly, the greatest act of love a person can perform is to sacrifice his life for his friends. So, then, this begs the question-- If Jehovah never gave His life for us but Jesus did, does that mean that Jesus' love for us is greater than Jehovah's? Ask them if the god of the Jehovah's Witnesses has performed the greatest act of love. The obvious reality is that he hasn't; rather than sacrifice himself, he sent someone else to die in our place (not very loving, if you ask me...). In the light of this verse of Scripture, the Watchtower seems to be teaching that Jehovah didn't love us as much as one of his creatures. Ask them how it's possible that the love of a created being can be greater than God's love. This will probably leave them baffled and hard-pressed for an answer. Explain to them that if Jesus is God, this verse makes perfect sense. God the Son came to earth, took on a human nature, and laid down His life for us, thus performing the greatest act of love on our behalf.

There are other good arguments you could use; Lord willing I will post them at a later time. But for now, using one, some, or all five of these can really help you the next time you encounter a Watchtowerite.  It's good to also keep in mind that while the above are excellent objections to give them, ultimately the power and ability to convince and save rests on the Holy Spirit. May you trust in the Lord alone, and may He give you grace, patience and humility in dealing with these poor, blinded souls.

Tuesday, May 3, 2011

Answering the Critics: Oneness Pentecostals

A while ago I recieved a comment by a disgruntled Oneness Pentecostal because of my earlier post about this cult and their denial of the Trinity. I thought it profitable to openly respond, because it's representative of the faulty and illogical reasoning behind those who defend this false doctrine. I will reply to each individual assertion of the person who posted (who will remain anonymous). The person's comments are in red.

He begins by saying:

The scriptures you used when looked at from a monotheistic view seems to establist Oneness. Gods people "The Jews" believed in One God. Deuteronomy 6:4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:
[Before anything, notice that the person does not give a response to the arguments I presented in my blog post refuting the heresy of Modalism. At best, the person will take some of the verses that I used, give his own explanation of them, and challenge me with those explanations. Whenever you refute a cult member's assertions with a solid biblical response, normally what the person will do is completely ignore your arguments and either change the subject, or present to you a preprogrammed reply that doesn't at all deal with what you have just said. It can be really frustrating at times, as it may feel that you are talking to a wall. Cult members are usually taught not to think through important issues, only to repeat what they've been taught.]

Ok, so first of all, Deuteronomy 6:4 is used to somehow prove that God is only one person. Yet this verse does not at all contradict the argument for the Trinity, but actually supports it. The doctrine of the Trinity is that there is ONE God who exists in three Persons, and each Person is fully God. Deuteronomy 6:4 states that there is ONE God. No contradiction there--this passage just doesn't go on to explain further the nature of God with respect to His personhood. It can be argued that the word for "one" in Hebrew is echad, which denotes a composite unity (e.g.: Gen.2:24, a man and his wife will become one [echad] flesh), but even if we discount that argument, many other passages in the Old Testament do give us a glimpse into the plurality of Persons in the Godhead, such as:

-Genesis 1:26, where God says, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness." This is a verse that has puzzled Jewish scholars for centuries. Some have suggested that God was using a form of "majestic" speech, using the third person to adress Himself, the way some ancient kings have done in history (e.g., "We have decided to grant your petition"). However, there is no precedent for this, either in Israel's history, or in the Bible. Others have suggested that God was speaking to angels. However, this argument is quickly ruled out when one realizes that man was not created in the image of angels, and that angels had no part in the creation of the world, or in the creation of man (Isaiah 44:24).

-Genesis 3:22: "Behold, the man has become like one of us in knowing good and evil."

-Genesis 11:7: "Come, let us go down and there confuse their language..."

-Isaiah 6:8: "...Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?" (Notice that in this passage the plural, "us", and the singular, "I", are combined).

-Psalm 45:6-7: "Your throne, O God, is forever and ever. The scepter of your kingdom is a scepter of uprightness; you have loved righteousness and hated wickedness. Therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness beyond your companions..." This is clearly speaking of God, and yet two seperate Persons are referred to as God. This passage is quoted in Hebrews 1:8, and applied to Christ.

-Psalm 110:1: "A Psalm of David. The LORD said to my Lord: 'Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool.'" Again, this passage is also quoted in the New Testament (Mat. 22:24-26) and refers to Jesus. David is calling two different Persons "Lord".

John 1:1 the word ("logos")
does not mean Jesus, it does mean reason, idea or words that became Jesus.
Quoting the explanation of this verse from my previous blog post on Modalism, which the person did not even address:
"Some Oneness Pentecostals maintain that this Word was a mere idea or thought that existed in the Father’s mind. However, the Word was with God from the beginning (Jn.1:2), created everything (Jn.1:3), was life and light itself (Jn.1:4-5, 9), and was made flesh and came to its own creation (Jn.1:10-14). Far from being only an “idea”, this passage clearly describes Jesus Christ as a person, existing for all eternity with the Father.  Moreover, you cannot be with another person and be that person at the same time. The clear and logical explanation is that Jesus was with God and was God simultaneously because there are three Persons that make up the Godhead."

Collossians 1:16-17 only makes sense if God and Jesus are one because in Genesis the bible says in the beginning "GOD" created the heavens and the earth, but in Colossians 1:16-17, Corinthians 8:6 and Hebrews 1:2-10 says "JESUS" was the creator, so they are one in the same or are you saying the bible is in error.
Again, this Oneness Pentecostal throws out an argument for monotheism to somehow prove that there are not three distinct Persons in the Godhead. It appears to me that this person does not even know what the doctrine of the Trinity is. No one ever said that Jesus is not God; the Trinitarian argument is that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, while being ONE God, are THREE distinct Persons. Furthermore, the verses quoted above completely refute the heresy of Modalism, as Modalism teaches that Jesus was a mere idea in the Father's mind before the foundations of the earth. How can a mere idea create the universe? If the Son is the creator of everything, then He has to be more than a concept, He has to be a Person...a Person who existed alongside the Father in eternity past. And if the Son and Father existed at the same time, this flagrantly contradicts Oneness Pentecostal doctrine, which states that two "modes" of God cannot coexist simultaneously.

John 17, Matthew 11:25, Luke 5:16Jesus was God and a man, as a man He was tempted grew in wisdom, aged and had a different will than God. In the garden He said Gods will not my will even though the bible says He had all power (a kingdom divided will fall, Gods words not mine) but yet of the increase of His kingdon there will be no end.
This, of course, refers to the Oneness Pentecostal argument that God had two different wills, not because the Son is a different Person than the Father, but because God, one Person, became flesh--and the will of His flesh was different than the will of His spirit. In other words, the physical nature of God spoke to His spiritual nature. So in passages like Matthew 26:39, when Jesus said "not as I will, but as You will", it was merely the body of Jesus speaking to God. God's body spoke to Himself. I fail to see how this is not blasphemously making out God to be a schizophrenic.

For further info on the nonsensical nature of this whacky doctrine, click HERE to read a conversation between Matt Slick from and a Oneness Pentecostal.
As God He healed, forgave sin, raised folks from the dead etc. Just one question did GOD die on the cross) or a sinless man that was the tabernacle of GOD.
Finally, the last argument that this Oneness Pentecostal puts forth...and, really, the cherry on top of the deadly, heretical sundae. I am bewildered and shocked by the insinuation behind the question in the latter sentence. Is this person implying that Christ was merely a "sinless man"? Is he denying the incarnation of the Lord Jesus Christ? Is he saying that God did not really become a man and dwell among us, and we did not behold His glory (John 1:14)? Whether he meant this or not, this is the logical conclusion of Modalism, which teaches that Jesus was just God's flesh that spoke to His spirit that was in a different location. To say that Christ was and is not 100% man and 100% God at the same time is unbiblical and outright heresy.

But to respond to this question, it's an "either/or" logical fallacy. The answer is neither. God the Son became a man so He could "taste death for everyone" (Heb.2:9). God the Son died on the cross. The Father did not become a man and die on the cross, and neither did the Holy Spirit. It was only the Son...and He died physically. And while it’s true that as a man He “tasted” spiritual death for us also, in the sense of Him dying under the wrath and abandonment of God (Mat.27:46), it is clear that His “spirit” could NOT have died in the sense of ceasing to exist, since God is eternal, immortal and infinite and thus cannot die.

Well, I hope that was of blessing and edification for all those reading. May we always earnestly "contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints" (Jude 3). 

Sunday, May 1, 2011

In Honor of David Wilkerson

I pray the Lord raises up more men like him. He will definately be missed.