Scene Two

Here is my second correspondence with "Josephine." Please feel free to watch the video, and pause it as you go so you can read my corresponding notes. I hope and pray this is an encouragement to you!

Josephine,

I will try to respond to your emails one at a time to avoid confusion. So, In response to this:

Simply my opinion: I believe that by not allowing comments or responding to replies(like Jeff) only allows for others to view your efforts as prideful, closed-minded, and unaccepting of non-Christians and Christians. I believe that if you want to bring others to your faith or learn from it, that you should allow room for questions, concerns, or opinions. If someone is rude or disrespectful, it is quite simple to delete those comments. By not allowing them, you are closing the door to any opposing or insightful statements that you yourself could learn and grow from. I love anti-mormons because they further prove the confusion that exists and also the closed-mindedness of their beliefs....(you however are different and are very polite and appear non-judgemental, but realize you are rare and could benefit from allowing comments) again ONLY my opinion.

I do appreciate your opinion, however, there is a very good reason why we, as a ministry, do not allow comments. We simply do not have the time to police our page. I understand what you are saying, however, that does not stop people from daily sending us emails with their opinions, questions, and concerns. We receive many ugly, hateful, vulgar, and inappropriate emails all the time. We do not want any of that content to ever be on our page. And believe me, as much of that trash that we receive, we could never keep up with it. Our policy is that if someone actually wants to dialogue with us, and not just post hateful comments from behind a keyboard, they will do it. So far, this policy has worked great, as we are constantly dialoguing with people from literally around the world. You also have to realize that this ministry is not the only ministry we are involved with on a daily basis, so time is a major issue with this concern. I am glad that you realize we are different from many “anti-Mormons” you encounter, however, I hope that you would also realize that we are not at all “anti-Mormon.” We deeply love and have a great respect for the LDS community. I know you are taught that anyone who teaches differing views that the LDS Church is “anti-Mormon,” but I hope you will see by our actions that this is not the case with us.

I also watched the video you sent me, so in response to this:



Trinity Doctrine, A False Teaching Of Man, Council of Nicaea
The trinity doctrine, is a false doctrine of Man that teaches ANOTHER JESUS as warned in the Bible at - 2nd. Cor. 11: 3,4).

That is to say, it teaches a Jesus that greatly differs from how Jesus spoke of himself in clear SIMPLE language throughou...

I will try to respond to the video slide by slide. I do appreciate you trying to provide a response to the Triune God of the Bible and to the Council of Nicea, however, my fear is that you really haven’t researched it for yourself like I asked you to. You have posted a video, that frankly, as I will show in a minute, is not very accurate at all, and takes verses completely out of context. Therefore, I earnestly ask you to please research this for yourself. Even Wikipedia does a good job of explaining the Council of Nicea for what is really was, and not what this video says it is!

So, the video:

Slide1: The question is which Jesus? The Jesus of the Bible or the Jesus of Joseph Smith?

Slides 2-3: Absolutely I believe Jesus, as I will show you.

Slides 4-5: These slides provide a major issue I have with this video. They take a verse out of context to try to disprove the Triune God. Here are my issues:
1) Jesus does not say that his Father is “superior” to him. In the KJV, John 14:28 says this:

“Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come [again] unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.”

Now, as a Christian, I would say that this verse perfectly describes the Triune God. Because God is one Being, but three Persons, there has to be order; because God is a God of order, as you would agree. Even though they are the same Being, the Father is head of the Son in order, just as Christ is head of the Church, and a husband is head of the wife (Ephesians 5:23).

2) Also, if you look a few verses earlier in the chapter, John 14:10-11 says;

“Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. Believe me that I [am] in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.”

You see, this whole chapter/passage is Christ telling his disciples that they have seen God, because He (Christ) and the Father are ONE. The only way a Mormon can respond to this is through the next slide.

Slides 6-7: The problems I have with these slide are as follows:

1) This is very misleading. It says that, “Jesus taught that He and His Father are ONE IN PURPOSE.” Jesus never taught that. That is added Mormon doctrine.
2) I love that Slide 7 even goes so far as to quote John 17:22:

“And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:”

I believe this verse complies completely with the Triune God. You see, the Jesus never said that He and the Father were ONE IN PURPOSE, he simply said, “even as We are One!” In order for a Mormon to justify their take on John chapter 14, they have to add the words “IN PURPOSE” for it to make sense. How do you justify that? And again, please don’t respond with what you are told to say, but please search your heart and honestly tell me how you can justify adding words to Scripture to make your doctrines make sense.

Slide 8: I love how this slide says that, “Jesus taught us exactly who he was, in the simplest of terms.” If the creator of this video were to follow what this slide says, they wouldn’t have to add “IN PURPOSE” to John 17:22. I have on several occasions been accused by Mormons of adding to the text and making things too complicated, yet I am not the one that has added anything to Scripture. I would also say that Jesus taught who He IS, not just who He WAS. Jesus is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow.

Slides 9, 10, 11: I love that the creator of this video used 2 Corinthians 11:3, 4 here, simply because I have brought up these very same verses to Mormons on several occasions. The KJV says the following:

“But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or [if] ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with [him].”

I completely agree with these two verses and would say the same to any Mormon. The Jesus and the Gospel I preach are the same Jesus and Gospel of the Bible, which I am trying to prove to you by reasoning in the Scriptures. The Bible says that the Jesus and the Gospel of Joseph Smith is a different Jesus and a different Gospel than that which the Apostles of the New Testament preached

Slide 12: I completely agree that, “heresy is an opinion or a doctrine at variance with established religious beliefs.” The Book of Mormon and Joseph Smith teach a variance from what is taught in the Bible.

Slide 13: To answer the following question, “Does the Trinity Doctrine that originated from the Council of Nicaea – teach the same Jesus that Jesus himself taught?”; YES the Trinity Doctrine teaches the same Jesus that Jesus taught; however, as I explained to you before, this doctrine was NOT created at the council of Nicea. I am disappointed that this video is your response to me asking you to earnestly research the Council of Nicea. I again encourage you to research it for yourself. Just for clarity, I will briefly cover this again. The Council of Nicea gathered in 325 AD to define what was already being taught about the relationship of God and Jesus, and to destroy a false view of God, being taught by Arius, much like what is being taught by Mormons, that Jesus was not God in the flesh, but a created being. Please, please look into this. I am not making it up, and again, even Wikipedia does a good job of explaining this. What this video portrays, frankly, is a lie. It is very deceiving. And just for the record, I’m not sure if it is correctly spelled Nicea or Nicaea. I have seen it spelled both ways. I’m not sure that it matters though.

Slides 14, 15, 16, 17, 18: I’m really not sure what the point of these slides are other than try to say the Council of Nicea came up with the term “Trinity.” If that is the creators best complaint against the Triune God of the Bible, it a feeble at best attempt to destroy it. Also, this video claims that “one man,” whom I’m assuming is Arius, “showed how all strictly biblical language could also be interpreted to support his belief that there was a time when the Son (JESUS) did not exist.” Although I agree that this was his BELIEF, I fail to see where this “strictly biblical language” exists to prove his belief. I noticed the creator of this video also failed to do the same.

Slides 19, 20, 21, 22: So, I will admit that I had no idea what this filioque statement was. So, I researched it so that I know how to respond. Basically the filioque, which is nothing more than, “the Lord, and giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son.” was added to the end of the Nicene Creed. It was simply saying that the Holy Spirit comes from the Father and through the Son. It can also be noted that this statement was added in 381 AD, not 589, as the video claims. It was added to the Catholic Eucharist in 589 AD. Although I do not disagree with the statement theologically, and I’m not sure that you would either, it really doesn’t matter to me, because, again, just like the original Nicene Creed, it’s simply a statement about what was already being taught in scripture in order to fight a developing heresy. It also doesn’t matter to me, because it appears that this statement was added by the Roman Orthodox church, and is used by them today. Also, I found it very interesting that this video mentions how Photius of Constantinople later deemed this statement as heresy, which did happen in 858 AD, however, Photius was later excommunicated in 863 AD for being a heretic! So, again, it really doesn’t matter what he thinks either. My point is this, these slides use very deceitful attacks on church history to try and disprove the Triune God of the Bible. Not once does it use a verse here to do so. If this video is not going to attack Scripture, then why even attack? Please consider this. Please try and find Scriptural evidence to disprove this doctrine. It cannot be done.

Slides 23, 24, 25: I certainly agree with James 3:14-16, which says:

“But if ye have bitter envying and strife in your hearts, glory not, and lie not against the truth. This wisdom descendeth not from above, but [is] earthly, sensual, devilish. For where envying and strife [is], there [is] confusion and every evil work.”

Although I would agree with you that God is not a God of confusion, this verse is not saying that. Once again, this verse has been taken completely out of context. This entire passage is speaking about the power of the tongue to cause division and evil, and how it needs to be bridled. This verse is not at all talking about God, doctrine, the Gospel, Jesus, etc. not being confusing. The “wisdom” that verse 15 speaks of is the wisdom of “bitter envying and strife” in verse 14. Therefore, the “confusion” that verse 16 talks about, is when a man curses out of one side of his mouth and blesses out of the other (please read the entire passage).

Slides 26, 27, 28: I too went to the official Assemblies of God website and checked it out. Although I disagree with their statement on the Baptism of The Holy Spirit, and speaking in tongues, I will say that their statements on a Triune God and how you come to know Him are correct. Now, it is interesting that the creator of this video used a quote from Augustine that was used on the Assemblies of God website. Before I address the quote, it really does not matter to me what Augustine said, as this creator still has yet to use a verse to back up his point. I want to see supporting scripture, not a quote from hundreds of years ago. I could not find this quote on the Assemblies of God website, and I have no idea what the context of the quote is. I have seen many times before when Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses have tried to use quotes from early church fathers taken way out of context to try and disprove the Triune God of the Bible. Now, in response to Augustine’s quote, assuming this is exactly what he said, notice he never mentions “confusion,” as the creator tries to imply. He does say that, “anyone” who “tries to understand” the “Trinity” is “in danger of losing his mind.” Again, without understanding the context of this quote, it’s really hard to try and dissect it. I will, however, say that it is impossible for us to fully understand God (Isaiah 55:8, 9). If we could fully understand God, then we would be equal to Him. This still does not disprove the Triune God of the Bible. Slide 28 even says that, “this is not fully explained in Scripture.” Again, I believe I am showing that it is, and this creator has once again failed to show how it is not, or even show me who the God of Mormonism is!

Slides 29: The verse in this slide is Matthew 15:9, as follows:

“But in vain they do worship me, teaching [for] doctrines the commandments of men.”

Once again, this verse is taken completely out of context. Yes, Esaias did prophesy that people would worship him in vain and follow the “commandments of men’ (Matthew 15:7-9); however, if you again were to sit down and read the entire passage, you would see that Esaias was speaking of, and Christ was speaking directly to the Pharisees, who, as you know and would agree, set up their own set of rules and laws to follow, separate from the what God had established. The whole point of this passage, is that Christ was saying that our outward appearance and actions don’t matter in the eyes of God. It’s what is in your heart that counts (Please read the entire chapter of Matthew 15). That being said, I do completely agree that we shouldn’t follow the commandments and doctrines of man (such as the Pharisaical laws). I could ask you the same question though. Are the teachings of the Book of Mormon and Joseph Smith from God, or are they from a man? I believe I am showing you that there is no Scriptural evidence to say they are from God!

Slides 30, 31: I’m not really sure how, “The Trinity Doctrine is preventing you from knowing who Jesus’ Father Jehovah is.” The creator uses John 8:54, 55, which states:

“Jesus answered, If I honour myself, my honour is nothing: it is my Father that honoureth me; of whom ye say, that he is your God: Yet ye have not known him; but I know him: and if I should say, I know him not, I shall be a liar like unto you: but I know him, and keep his saying.”

I am so glad that these verses were used to try and prove this point. I know I am starting to sound like a broken record, but context, context, context! John chapter 8 is one of my favorite chapters in the whole Bible! Please take the time to read the entire chapter. The context of this chapter is Jesus explaining how to know the Father! This passage not only disproves that the “Trinity Doctrine” prevents you “from knowing who Jesus’ Father Jehovah” is, but also blows the God of Mormonism right out of the water. Please pay special attention to the following verses, John 8:24, 28, and 58. The creator of this video claims that, “Jesus taught us exactly who he was, in the simplest of terms.” So, please, let’s do it! If you were to look up verses 24, 28, and 58 in the original Greek, Jesus claims that he is “ego aimi,” which literally means “I Am.” If you look at Exodus chapter 3, when God appears to Moses in the burning bush, and Moses’ question to God was, “whom shall I say sent me (Exodus 3:13)?” In verse 14, God replies to Moses by saying, tell them, “I AM hath sent me unto you.” Does this sound familiar? In the Greek Septuagint, it is the same words, “ego aimi,” “I AM.” Therefore, in John 8, Jesus is not only saying how to know his father, He is making a direct claim to be God! That to me, is, “the simplest of terms!” And as a side note, the word for God in Exodus 3:14 is not Jehovah, but Elohim. Also, if you look at the end of John 8 (verse 29), the Jews pick up stones to stone Jesus, but he disappears. In John chapter 9, Jesus heals the blind man, and then in John chapter 10, He talks about being the sheep gate. In verse 31, the Jews again pick up stones to stone Jesus. In verse 32 He asks them, “Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?” And there response in verse 33 is, “For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.” One way in Old Testament Law to be stoned on the spot, is to claim to be God. The Jews tried to stone Christ, because he claimed to be God. Again, “simplest of terms!” I again, ask you to earnestly research what I am saying. You will not be able to find a Biblical answer to counter it.

Slide 32: This slide is very deceiving because it is not clearly stating what the Bible says. We must understand who God is, absolutely! The problem, is that the Bible doesn’t just talk about “Jehovah God.” The Greek word for “God” is “Theos,” and can be translated as either “Jehovah” or “Elohim.” When it is translated as, “Elohim,” it refers to His power and preeminence. When it is translated as “Jehovah,” it is referring to His unoriginated, immutable, eternal, and self-sustained existence. I find it interesting that this slide is trying to prove “Jehovah God” when Mormons don’t believe that God was eternally God, or that he had an origin!

And again, the creator mentions that Christ and God are “ONE IN PURPOSE.” Where does it say that?

Slide 33: So this video ends on John 17:3, which says:

“And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.”

Amen to that! I love that it ends on this verse! The question again, becomes, who is, “the only true God, and Jesus Christ?” If you can just bear with me for one more quick Greek lesson; the word for “God” here is again, “Theos.” Interestingly enough, it is the same word used for “God” in Mathew 1:23, when it is talking about Christ and it says, “Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.” Jesus is God! They called him “Emmanuel,” “Theos with us!” Please see this!


Well, I believe I have rambled on enough about this. Again, I beg of you to please research everything I have brought up on your own! I have just spent almost 6 hours responding to this video, not because I want to try and prove you wrong, but because I believe your sincere earnestness is misguided; and I dearly want to see you come to saving knowledge of the one true Lord and Savior Jesus Christ! Please get back to me when you can. I know it will take awhile to respond to this. I also ask that you please respond to each point I have brought up with research and not just another video. Please feel free to call me anytime you want as well. I can be reached on my cell at 219-746-1746. I am earnestly praying for you.

In the name of Christ,


Luke Pierson