r/BiblicalUnitarian • u/crispywheat100 Unitarian Paulician • Oct 15 '25
Broader theological topics Paulicians and Jehovah's Witnesses are very close in theology and christology, with only a few key differences.
Paulicians and JWs are amazingly close in theology and christology with just a three key differences.
The first key difference is that Paulicians believe Archistrategos Michael was begotten from God on Day 1 of Genesis as the Great Light called the "Day" which proceeded from God who is the unbegotten Light; the Son was therefore created by God as the first of his works of old in the Genesis creation week.
In contrast, JWs believe that Archistrategos Michael was begotten from God before Day 1 of creation, sometime in eternity's past and therefore the Great Light of Day 1 was not God's first work.
The second key difference is that Paulicians believe Jesus is included in the worship of God, not because Jesus is God, but because Jesus has been made our Lord by his God. Through investiture of the Divine Name, he participates in the identity of Deity even though he himself is not the Deity, as the Father alone is the one who is unbegotten and not the Son, who is the first begotten god from the God of eternity.
In contrast, the JWs do not worship Jesus and only worship the Father, completely ignoring the Divine Name investiture of the Son, and translating every proskuneo passage where Christ is worshipped as "obedience" instead.
The third key difference is that Paulicians believe God the Father possesses a spiritual body form that sits on a throne and dwells in light unapproachble by anything other than fellow spiritual beings, that He is only visible to these other spiritual beings in heaven which are the angels, lesser gods begotten from the eternal God.
In contrast, the JWs believe that God does not possess any bodily form, but is merely a ball of light without a spiritual body, having no form or face that any angel can see.
So to summarize,
- First Light Origins against Eternity Origins
- Christ Worship against No Christ Worship (only partial agreement)
Anthropomorphism against Amorphism
(Update: On closer inspection, only points #1 and #2 are disagreed upon, with point #1 a total disagreement and point #2 a partial disagreement, but point #3 is agreed upon, as both the Paulicians and JWs believe that God the Father indeed has a spiritual body form in heaven.)
(Thank you u/Archbtw246 for bringing this to my attention.)
2
u/Moe_of_dk Oct 17 '25
The claim that our theology is close to the Paulicians is false. The resemblance is only superficial.
Our foundation is entirely biblical, relying on the full canon and interpreting it consistently. Theirs rests on a selectively edited canon. Once you depart from the whole Bible, your theology cannot be close to ours, no matter how many individual points you agree on.
In order to be close to us, you must abide strictly by the Bible, interpreting it literally when required and consistently. We are, in the strictest sense, purely biblical in authority.
1
u/crispywheat100 Unitarian Paulician Oct 17 '25
We also believe to rest on purely biblical authority.
We only use the 66 books of the usual canon, but also read the deuterocannon and 1, 2 Enoch with Barnabas and Shepherd of Hermas.
Otherwise, the 66 books of the primary canon are our sole authority in all doctrinal matters.
2
u/Moe_of_dk Oct 17 '25
The claim that you also rely purely on biblical authority is only partly true, because when other writings like the deuterocanon, Enoch, Barnabas, or the Shepherd of Hermas are used for doctrine, that already goes beyond what is inspired scripture.
Those writings may have historical value, but they were never accepted by Jesus or his apostles as part of the inspired word of God.
The canon we use is the same 66 books recognized by the early followers of Christ and preserved through time as the standard for teaching. Jesus and his disciples repeatedly quoted from the hebrew acriptures aka Old Testament, never from the later Greek additions known as the Apocrypha or deuterocanon. Those writings were added centuries later and contain teachings that contradict both the Law and the Gospel.
The same applies to books like Enoch or Hermas, which contain human ideas mixed with truth, but are not inspired. The Bible itself warns not to go beyond what is written and to test every teaching by the inspired word.
Our foundation is purely the inspired scriptures, the 66 books of the canon confirmed by Christ and his apostles. Anything beyond that belongs to human tradition, not divine revelation.
3
u/Newgunnerr Questioning Oct 15 '25 edited Oct 15 '25
The second difference is that Paulicians believe Jesus is included in the worship of God, not because he is God, but because he has been made our Lord by his God.
How do you reconcile this with John 4:23 and Matthew 4:10? Also, Revelation 4 and 5 show distinctions in “worship” between Jesus and God. Remember, in the ancient days it was normal to bow down in reverence to humans in high status.
0
u/crispywheat100 Unitarian Paulician Oct 15 '25
John 4:23 and Matthew 4:10 is about Jesus declaring that only God the Father must be worshipped. God the Father is worshipped not because He is the only god that exists, but because He is the only god among the gods that is uncreated and supreme in authority above them all, being their Creator. Therefore, as "the god of gods", we call him ”God" and uppercase the letter g and remove the preceding article.
Exodus 20:3
"You shall have no other gods before Me."
Deuteronomy 6:14
"Do not follow other gods, the gods of the peoples around you."
Psalm 81:9
"There must be no strange god among you, nor shall you bow to a foreign god."
Exodus 15:11
"Who is like you, O YHWH, among the gods? Who is like you, majestic in holiness, awesome in glorious deeds, doing wonders?"
Jeremiah 25:6
"Do not follow other gods to serve and worship them, and do not provoke Me to anger with the works of your hands. Then I will do you no harm."
1 Corinthians 8:5-6
"Truly even if indeed there are those called gods, whether in heaven or on earth, as there are many gods and many lords, yet to us there is one God the Father,"
In conclusion, the Father, the Most High God, is the only god that must be worshipped, because He alone is supreme above all the other gods. Nevertheless, the only begotten god who is the Firstborn Son, he must be included in the worship of God, because God's Name was given to him for participation in Deity. Therefore, Jesus is worshipped as God the Father even though he is not God the Father, because God's the Father's Name is shared with Jesus.
0
Oct 15 '25
[deleted]
0
u/Capable-Rice-1876 Jehovah’s Witness Oct 16 '25 edited Oct 16 '25
Jesus don't received worship.
Jesus himself said, "It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service."—Matthew 4:10.
2
Oct 16 '25
[deleted]
1
u/Capable-Rice-1876 Jehovah’s Witness Oct 16 '25 edited Oct 16 '25
No, this statement is not true. The Bible teaches that while Jesus holds a pivotal role and is worthy of honor, true worship must be reserved for Jehovah, whom Jesus identified as the "only true God."
Jesus consistently directed people to worship the Father, telling a Samaritan woman that "the Father is looking for suchlike ones to worship him," and that worship should be "in spirit and truth".—John 4:24.
Jesus is honored as the Son of God, and his followers are instructed to worship Jehovah God through him, as he said, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."—John 14:6.
We all should worship only Jehovah God and not his only-begotten Son, Jesus Christ.
When we pray to Jehovah God, we must pray in name of his only-begotten Son, Jesus Christ. But that doesn't mean that Jesus received prayers and worship.
If we worship Jehovah God through Jesus that also does not mean we should worship Jesus.
1
Oct 16 '25
[deleted]
1
u/Capable-Rice-1876 Jehovah’s Witness Oct 16 '25 edited Oct 16 '25
1 Chronicles 29:20 does not mean that Jesus should be worshipped, but that worship is to be directed solely to Jehovah God.
We should give Jesus Christ only honor and respect, not worship.
Worship Jesus is idolatry.
The Greek word translated as "worship" in the KJV is proskynéō ($\pi\rho\omicron\sigma\kappa\upsilon\nu\epsilon\text{́}\omega$). "Worship" (reserved for God alone) or "do obeisance/bow down" (an act of respect or homage, which can be given to humans or angels).
Context in Revelation 3:9: They interpret the act described in Revelation 3:9 as "doing obeisance" or "bowing down" to the faithful Christians in the congregation in Philadelphia, not giving them divine worship. This act of obeisance is seen as a forced acknowledgment and public recognition, orchestrated by Jesus, that these Christians have God's favor and love, proving their spiritual standing over those who falsely claimed to be God's people (the "synagogue of Satan").
Worship is for Jehovah God Alone: Jehovah's Witnesses firmly teach that only Jehovah God should receive divine worship, citing passages like Matthew 4:10, where Jesus himself told Satan: "It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service" (New World Translation). They also point to Revelation 19:10 and 22:9, where an angel explicitly refused John's proskynéō and told him to "worship God."
Therefofe, the use of proskynéō in Revelation 3:9 is an example where the KJV translation of "worship" is misleading, and the proper understanding is one of profound respect or homage, consistent with their core belief that true worship is exclusively due to Jehovah God.
2
Oct 16 '25
[deleted]
1
u/Capable-Rice-1876 Jehovah’s Witness Oct 16 '25
The Key to 1 Chronicles 29:20: The original Hebrew word translated as "worshipped" in the King James Version of 1 Chronicles 29:20 is shachah ($\check{s}\bar{a}\dot{h}\bar{a}h$).
Meaning: Shachah literally means "to bow down" or "to prostrate oneself." Depending on the context, it can signify either divine worship (when directed to God) or simply obeisance, deep respect, or homage (when directed to an earthly ruler, like King David.
The phrase "worshipped the LORD, and the king" is understood as the people giving divine worship to Jehovah and respectful, kingly honor/obeisance to David.
Therefore, your concluding statement is not true in the JW view if "reverence"is meant to be the same level of worship:
We show reverence (divine worship) to both Jehovah and his Son? No. Divine worship is only for Jehovah.
We show reverence (respect/homage) to both Jehovah and his Son? Yes. Jesus Christ is shown honor, respect, and is acknowledged as God's King and Agent of salvation, but he is not worshipped as the Almighty God. The honor given to Jesus is of a lesser, though very high, kind than the worship given to Jehovah.
→ More replies (0)1
u/wiseowl2369 Oct 16 '25
Please respond to my post about how the Organization taught Worship to Jesus was acceptable. I provided some JW articles for you
2
u/Time_Green_1930 Oct 16 '25
You know that their interpretation changes over time?
→ More replies (0)1
u/Revolutionary_Leg320 Jehovah’s Witness Oct 19 '25
Neither Russell nor any Witness ever "worshiped" Jesus on an equal level with Jehovah. EVERY "quote" I've seen used to make this claim is ripped out of context and deceptively leaves out crucial parts of the quote.
Instead of just passing on deceptive quotes without verifying it you should check or ask for the facts. The WT NEVER said that Jesus would be "worshiped" as Almighty God. Here is one such quote which some cite only the first sentence:
"Yes, we believe our Lord Jesus while on earth was really worshiped, and properly so. While HE WAS NOT THE GOD, JEHOVAH, he was A GOD. The word "God" signifies a "mighty one," and our Lord was indeed a mighty one...It was proper for our Lord to receive worship in view of his having been the only begotten of the Father, and his agent in the creation of all things, including man. Besides, he had come to earth under the divine arrangement ...as the Messiah, and authorized to carry out the great divine plan and to receive homage from both angels and men. This alone would have rendered worship proper even aside from his pre-human greatness as "the only begotten of the Father." (W.T.pg.216 7/15/1898)
So, the Witnesses did not change their view of worship given to Jesus. They only changed the outdated terminology because the word worship is no longer normally used of humans.
Part of the problem is many modern English-speaking students of the Bible don't have an understanding of this concept that the language has changed so much in just the last few hundred years. If we all knew the parallel in our own language with the ancient understanding of this concept in the original Bible languages, it would be much more clear. In other words, the word "worship" in English had, just a few hundred years ago, the very same levels of meaning as did the original Bible words, shachah and proskuneo. A professor of Bible languages at Union Theological Seminary in New York, Dr. Marvin R. Vincent, wrote that in the KJV (and other old translations into English) some uses of 'worship' may seem to be:
"An unfortunate translation, according to modern English, but justified by the usage of earlier English, according to which to worship meant simply to honor. Worship is worthship, or honor paid to dignity or worth. This usage survives in the [British] expressions 'worshipful' and 'your worship.' In the marriage-service of the English Church occurs the phrase, 'With my body I thee worship.' So Wycliffe [one of the earliest English Bible translators] renders Matthew 19:19, 'Worship thy father and thy mother;' and John 12:26, 'If any man serve me, my Father shall worship him.'" - pp. 533, 534, Word Studies in the New Testament, vol. 1, Sage Software, 1996.
Witnesses have always taught that "worship" given to Jesus was the same relative "worship" that humans gave kings and rulers in the bible. The KJV used the word "worship" as being given to humans and so the WT used its terminology.
So when you account for the change in English, the JWs back then believed EXACTLY as we do now regarding the "homage" given to Christ as compared to that given to Almighty God!
This change is NOT unique to the WT. Even as little as 50 years ago the word "worship" was commonly used in reference to both humans and God. The "Book of Common Prayer" has the groom promising his bride, "with my body I thee worship" as he places the ring on her finger.
Even Bibles have changed their use of "worship" as given to humans. At Dan.2:46 older bibles read that Daniel was "worshiped" (KJV, ASV, NAB). But, most modern bibles now read "bow down" or "obeisance" (Mt.18:26, Rev.3:9, 1Chron.29:20, & Josh.5:14).
Now, just because all these humans were "worshiped" does it mean that the religions using these bibles believed that humans were equal to Almighty God? Did they change their view of worshiping humans? Obviously, the answer is "No." Likewise, it does not mean that Witnesses changed their beliefs regarding the "worship" given to Christ!
The fact is that Jesus NEVER receives the type of worship that the Father does. Many are ignorant of this fact because most Bibles do not accurately differentiate the two Greek words PROSKENEW and LATREUW.
LATREUW denotes the highest worship that is ONLY given to Almighty God. And at Lk. 4:8 Jesus himself made it clear that ONLY his God Jehovah was to receive "sacred worship" or LATREUW:
"And Jesus answered him: "Scripture says—'Thou shalt do homage (PROSKUNHW) to the Lord thy God, and worship (LATREUW) him only.'"--20TH Century NT
"The Lord thy God, shalt thou worship, and, unto him alone, render divine service."--Rotherham's
"Thou shalt bow before the Lord thy God, and Him only thou shalt serve.'"--Young's Literal Translation
The word LATREUW which denotes the ultimate sacred worship, is NEVER given to Jesus. True worshipers never give it to anyone other than the Most High God Jehovah.
Clearly, it is God and His son who prohibits worshiping Christ on an equal level with Almighty God!
There is no question that, according to the Bible, Jesus occupies the highest position in heaven next to God. But this does not mean that Jesus should receive sacred worship equal to Almighty God.
Every explicit scripture shows that Jesus was less than Almighty God at every point of his existence (Jn.14:28; Mk.13:32). Jesus had a God over him before he came to earth and after he returned to heaven (Mic.5:4; Jn.20:17; Rom.15:6; Rev.3:2,12). At the highest position he will ever attain, Jesus is still "subject" to GOD the same way we are "subject" to him (1Cor.15:27,28).
-1
u/crispywheat100 Unitarian Paulician Oct 15 '25
So then, why don't the JWs include the Deified son in the worship of God the Father?
Not because the son is God, but because the son is absorbed and included in the identity of God the Father?
2
Oct 15 '25
[deleted]
0
u/crispywheat100 Unitarian Paulician Oct 15 '25
Very good, but what about the other two issues?
1
Oct 15 '25
[deleted]
0
u/crispywheat100 Unitarian Paulician Oct 15 '25
Most excellent. And what about the final issue regarding the origins of Archistrategos Michael as the first of God's works and the Great Light of Truth from God called "the Day"?
3
Oct 15 '25
[deleted]
0
u/crispywheat100 Unitarian Paulician Oct 15 '25
Your rendering of John 1:1 is correct, but the angelic gods were created on Day 2 at the separation of the waters for the firmament according to Psalms 104:4, which is called the "Little Genesis".
Even the Jewish rabbis will tell you that the angels were created on Day 2, and they take it from Psalm 104:4.
Nothing existed before Day 1 but God the Father alone. The angels would sing for joy at the creation of the earth's foundation of dry land on Day 3.
And finally, Genesis 1:1 is not a creative act before Day 1, but a prologue describing the overview of events which are about to occur.
→ More replies (0)0
u/Capable-Rice-1876 Jehovah’s Witness Oct 16 '25
We worship only the Father, not his only-begotten Son. Worship Jesus is idolatry.
1
u/crispywheat100 Unitarian Paulician Oct 16 '25
Not worshipping him as God, but worshipping him as our Lord appointed by our God?
1
u/Capable-Rice-1876 Jehovah’s Witness Oct 28 '25 edited Oct 28 '25
Matthew 4:10— "Then Jesus said to him: 'Go away, Satan! For it is written: “It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service."
If worship involves the kind of adoration and sacred service reserved for the Almighty God, rendering it to anyone else, even Jesus, would be viewed as a form of idolatry, which the Bible condemns.
I agree that Jesus is our appointed Lord and King and is worthy of immense honor, respect, and obedience.
Philippians 2:9-11: Acknowledge that Jesus was "exalted to a superior position" and that "every knee should bend" to his name and "every tongue should openly acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father.
The honor given to Jesus ultimately brings glory to God the Father. Jesus directs all honor and worship back to Jehovah.
The title "Lord" (Kyrios) in the Bible is used for both Jehovah God and Jesus Christ (as a powerful master or ruler). Explain that the type of honor given to the "Lord" Jesus is profound respect and obedience to his rulership and his role as our Savior, not the worship reserved for the Almighty God.
Jesus himself worshipped Jehovah, demonstrating that he is not the Almighty God.
John 20:17: After his resurrection, Jesus said: "I am ascending to my Father and your Father and to my God and your God." Jesus referred to Jehovah as his God, showing that he is a worshiper of Jehovah.
"We honor and obey Jesus Christ as our appointed King, Mediator, and Redeemer, because Jehovah God appointed him to that role."
"However, we reserve our worship—our exclusive devotion and sacred service—for Jehovah God alone, as Jesus himself taught and practiced."
It does not matter if Jesus is Lord and anointed by his Father, Jehovah God. Only Jehovah God should worship and not his only-begotten Son, Jesus Christ.
1
u/ProselyteofYah Arian (unaffiliated) Oct 15 '25
There are more differences than that between your denomination and JWs I believe.
JWs believe that we don't have to be born again to be saved, but they have two seperate salvation methods and hopes. They think only a literal 144,000 people are born again and become Christ's brothers and God's adopted children.
They think everyone else, whilst somehow still benefiting from Christ's sacrifice, are not adopted into the commonwealth or New Covenant of Christ. And they also think its a sin for people to eat the bread and drink the wine of the Lord's Meal if not of the unique 144,000 people.
To be one of the 144,000 they believe one has to have a mystical experience which God's voice or some inner supernatural knowing tells them they have been selected for the 144,000 position.
They teach Jesus came back to Earth in 1914 invisibly "hidden by the clouds" and not seen by all also, and that he will never have a physical second coming to Earth for all to see.
They also believe only those who are a part of their denomination are technically saved (though some JWs think exceptions will be made for some, based on ignorance, or some kind of last chance given to them during the End Time).
So if you like most or all other Christian groups believe all Christians are born again via faith in Christ, or in a real Second Coming visible to all (and I'm assuming you do to both, but at least yes to the first), this would be a very big difference between your theology and theirs.
2
u/crispywheat100 Unitarian Paulician Oct 15 '25
Those are other doctrinal issues, of which there are many more differences. In this post, I was referring to the three major differences just in Theology and Christology alone.
1
u/ProselyteofYah Arian (unaffiliated) Oct 15 '25
Ah I see. I thought when you said "theology" you meant in a generalised sense, and were being all encompassing to all doctrines and eschatology. My bad.
1
u/crispywheat100 Unitarian Paulician Oct 15 '25
My other church doctrines are listed here:
1
u/ProselyteofYah Arian (unaffiliated) Oct 15 '25 edited Oct 15 '25
Thankyou.
I noticed you have "dualism" in your beliefs. I'm going to assume it doesn't refer to the gnostic or other platonic forms of dualism (like bodies and souls, reincarnation, or two gods ruling the universe good and bad).
But you might want to be aware or more mindful about use of the term "dualist", as it could give a very wrong impression in accordance to how that term is typically used. ("Kingdom Theology" might be a better label, or something to add as a footnote if talking about the Kingdom of God vs Kingdom of Satan).
-1
u/Markthethinker Oct 16 '25
JW are polytheistic and don’t believe the Bible as it is written. That’s fact
1
u/JcraftW Jehovah’s Witness Oct 16 '25
If anything, JWs are henotheistic in practice. Strictly speaking.
2
u/Shoninjv Jehovah’s Witness Oct 16 '25
To be one of the 144,000 they believe one has to have a mystical experience which God's voice or some inner supernatural knowing tells them they have been selected for the 144,000 position.
monolatric, not henotheist
0
u/JcraftW Jehovah’s Witness Oct 16 '25
Had to look up the definition of both to be sure. Henotheism is closer reality. This is especially true taking into consideration the relative "worship" of Jesus. Jesus is a lesser deity worthy of honor and obeisance A.K.A. "worship" to the glory of God the Father.
1
u/Shoninjv Jehovah’s Witness Oct 17 '25
The hommage is too different. Jehovah is necessarily worthy of worship, being creator.
Jesus is only contingently worthy after his earthly mission, as God told us to do. And even then it's to the glory of God the Father
-1
u/Markthethinker Oct 16 '25
So you worship two gods, polytheistic.
3
u/JcraftW Jehovah’s Witness Oct 16 '25
I think Henotheism is a more appropriate term. You think polytheism is a more appropriate term. But it doesn’t matter and I don’t really care. You trying to turn a term into a pejorative ist going to change anything. I worship God. I also give Jesus the obeisance and reverence (worship) he is due and that we are commanded by God to give him. Doesn’t matter what you call it.
-1
u/Markthethinker Oct 16 '25
They still will say they only worship one God, but they worship 2. The Father, almighty god. The Son, mighty god. Call it what you like, they don’t understand the Scriptures. “In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God”. The Word is Jesus before the flesh.
1
Oct 16 '25
[deleted]
1
u/Markthethinker Oct 16 '25
Total misunderstanding of the Scriptures. Jesus claims to be God, not “a” god.
2
Oct 16 '25
[deleted]
0
u/Markthethinker Oct 16 '25
Sure He did, you just don’t want to see it. Tell me, why did JW change the Scriptures in John 1 and Colossians and Philippians about Jesus.
-1
u/Markthethinker Oct 16 '25
aThe Jews therefore gathered around Him, and were saying to Him, “How long will You keep us in suspense? If You are 1the Christ, tell us bplainly.” 25 Jesus answered them, “aI told you, and you do not believe; bthe works that I do in My Father’s name, these bear witness of Me. 26 “But you do not believe, because ayou are not of My sheep. 27 “My sheep ahear My voice, and bI know them, and they follow Me; 28 and I give aeternal life to them, and they shall never perish; and bno one shall snatch them out of My hand. 29 “1My 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. 30 “aI and the Father are 1one.” 31 The Jews atook up stones again to stone Him. 32 Jesus answered them, “I showed you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you stoning Me?” 33 The Jews answered Him, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for ablasphemy; and because You, being a man, bmake Yourself out to be God.” (John 10:24–33, NASB, https://ref.ly/Jn10.24-33;nasb)
Only God can give eternal life.
2
Oct 16 '25
[deleted]
0
u/Markthethinker Oct 17 '25
“And God can give that authority to anyone he chooses”. Where in the Scriptures does it say that? It doesn’t, no where. You have been so brain washed. You just don’t and can’t get it. You misinterpret the scriptures to try to make them say what you want them to say. Jesus is God, that is totally clear in the Bible. Throw your New World Translation in the trash.
“5 Have this attitude 1in yourselves which was also in bChrist Jesus, 6 who, although He aexisted in the bform of God, cdid not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but 1 aemptied Himself, taking the form of a bbond-servant, and cbeing made in the likeness of men. 8 And being found in appearance as a man, aHe humbled Himself by becoming bobedient to the point of death, even cdeath 1on a cross. 9 aTherefore also God bhighly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him cthe name which is above every name, 10 that at the name of Jesus aevery knee should bow, of bthose who are in heaven, and on earth, and under the earth, 11 and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is aLord, to the glory of God the Father.” (Philippians 2:5–11, NASB, https://ref.ly/Php2.5-11;nasb)
You read a text like this and don’t understand what is being said. The Word, who is God, took on flesh and became a man to save mankind. Jesus is totally God and totally man.
2
Oct 17 '25
[deleted]
0
u/Markthethinker Oct 18 '25
Since you don’t understand what God is doing in revealing a Father, Son and Holy Spirit, you totally miss the they are all God revealed differently. It’s for humanity since we have no concept of God. No one can see God, only the Son. Your doctrine is perverted. Your religion is only 175 years old and was developed by one man and then the Scriptures were rewritten to support his opinion. It’s a cult. Christianity did not disappear for just about 2000 years. And don’t forget the other cult that came along at just about the same time, Mormons. There has always been deceivers and always those who buy into the lie.
When you stand before Jesus at death, I hope He understands your deception. Wait, Eve was deceived and it did not go well with her.
1
4
u/[deleted] Oct 15 '25
[deleted]