No different than Washington, Franklin, FDR, JFK, RFK, Bushes, Clinton, Trump, Obama, and just about any "hero" the US has fabricated over the 2.5 centuries of its short life.
someone commented the other day about the coincidence that mlk is the Hebrew word for sacrifice (and that no one refers to him as Martin King, it’s always MLK)
As far as trust is concerned, on thinking we are among true Christians, even in the churches, it brought Proverbs 5:14 to mind: 14 I was almost in all evil in the midst of the congregation and assembly. If it was so evil back then, imagine how it has proliferated to NOW, centuries later. And how cunningly and artfully they disguise themselves as Christians to gain people's, especially Christians' trust. Wow! Sure holds true...disguised as lambs, but inwardly are ravening wolves. Thank you for this valuable insight. And most people are trusting their pastors and leaders, like I once did, and what I have since learned most were actually Masonic Pastors, or wolves, bringing in damnable heresies into the churches of God, to lead the flock astray. But actually are serving the syna-gog-ue of satan. To lure the world into their traps and snares. No wonder Jesus said: COME OUT OF HER MY PEOPLE!
To me he is not much more than a fabricated character used to push society in a certain direction. Like (almost) all on the world stage. Mr. Mathis has written an interesting piece about him.
So are you catholic? You certainly sound it. HIS name is not Jesus Christ. His name was Yeshua. He was the Word. He does sit at the right hand of GOD the Father. He and GOD the Father are one in thought word and deed. He never claims to be the Father. GOD has not left His throne. Yeshua was the Messiah. He came to pay the price of our sins which is death. His death erased the curtain between us and GOD. He specifically says to pray to the Father using His name. He loved the Father and was obedient to the point of death. The Father raised Him from death. He ascended back to the Father. As for Dr King, I don't know the truth of his heart. I have heard the stories of his actions but I have heard stories of the truth of Billy Graham. That he was not who he appeared to be. Only GOD knew his heart as well. Maybe one day we will know the truth on both. There are many others in the "churches" that have questionable histories. As well as many churches have questionable histories. Believe in GOD the FATHER and follow The WAY. That is Yeshua. He said He was the way, the truth and the light. He was the only way to the Father. Early followers were called Followers of the Way.
While I respect your zeal, I must push back firmly on the many assertions you’ve made. I ask you to set your aside preconceived notions and prayerfully consider what I’m about to say.
I’ve spoken openly against the errors in Catholic doctrine (https://dfreality.substack.com/p/sacramenti-sanguinis-jan-hus-and), but to dismiss a Biblical truth simply because Catholics also affirm it is both fallacious and shortsighted. Truth is not invalidated by who believes it. The question isn’t whether Catholics believe in the Trinity but whether the Trinity is taught in Scripture.
Contrary to your assumption here, the doctrine of the Trinity is not a New Testament or Catholic invention, it is firmly rooted throughout the Old Testament. Consider Isaiah 48:16, where the Servant of the Lord declares: "Come ye near unto me, hear ye this; I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; from the time that it was, there am I: and now the Lord God, and His Spirit, hath sent me." Here we see three distinct persons: the Speaker (the Servant, later revealed as Christ), the Lord God (the Father), and His Spirit (the Holy Spirit). The Speaker identifies Himself as eternal — He existed "from the beginning" — and yet He is sent by the Father and the Spirit. This passage prefigures the roles of the persons of the Trinity as seen in the New Testament.
Or take Daniel 7:13-14, for instance. The "Son of Man" is presented before the "Ancient of Days" and given everlasting dominion and glory (something which God says he does not share, Isaiah 42:8). Critically, He receives worship — the Aramaic word "pelah," used here, refers exclusively to worship reserved for God alone. If the Son of Man is merely a created being, this passage would be blasphemous. But it’s not — it’s a declaration of the divine nature of the Son, a distinct person but equal to the Father in essence.
If Daniel 7:13-14 declares that the Son of Man is worshiped with "pelah," a term used exclusively for God, and Isaiah 48:16 reveals the interplay of the Lord God, His Spirit, and the eternal Servant, how can you reconcile these Old Testament passages with a denial of Christ’s divinity, when they ascribe to Him worship and attributes reserved for God alone?
Now let’s dive into your points in detail:
"HIS name is not Jesus Christ. His name was Yeshua."
The Holy Spirit inspired the Apostles to write His name as Ἰησοῦς (Iēsous) in Greek, ensuring the gospel reached all the nations of the Roman Empire (Matthew 28:19). Jesus is a transliteration of that Greek name. The exact pronunciation is irrelevant to salvation. Acts 4:12 declares salvation is found in His name, but not because it’s a magic word. It’s the Person behind the name, whether you say Yeshua, Jesus, or Iēsous.. The idea that His name in one language holds special power reeks of superstition, not sound theology.
"He was the Word."
Yes, and John 1:1 makes it clear: "The Word was God." Jesus isn’t just God’s messenger — He is God Himself, eternally preexistent, and the very foundation of the cosmos (John 1:3). You can’t sidestep this. If Jesus is indeed the Word — which we agree on — then He must be divine, eternal, and one with the Father in essence.
"He does sit at the right hand of GOD the Father."
Correct, and Hebrews 1:3 explains why: He is "the brightness [or reflection] of His glory and the express image of His person [hypostases, or substance]." Furthermore, the Father explicitly declares to the Son, "Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever" (Hebrews 1:8), a recitation of Psalm 45. How can the Father call the Son "God" if the Son is not divine?
"He and GOD the Father are one in thought, word, and deed."
Jesus claimed far more than unity of purpose: "I and my Father are one" (John 10:30). The Greek word for "one" (ἕν) refers to unity of essence, not simply agreement. The Jews understood this perfectly: "For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God" (John 10:33). Their reaction really says it all.
"He never claims to be the Father."
Correct. Trinitarians affirm the distinction between the Father and the Son. Jesus reveals the Father (John 14:9) but remains a distinct person within the Godhead. This is a straw man argument against a belief I and no orthodox Trinitarian holds to.
"GOD has not left His throne."
Agreed. God’s omnipresence ensures this (Isaiah 66:1; Psalm 139:7-10). The Incarnation doesn’t mean the throne is empty; it means the eternal Word took on flesh (John 1:14) while remaining fully God.
"Yeshua was the Messiah. He came to pay the price of our sins, which is death. His death erased the curtain between us and GOD."
Christ's assumption of human nature was integral to salvation. Hebrews 2:14-17 explains that He took on flesh and blood so that "through death He might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil." By uniting human nature with the divine, He opened the path to eternal life for all who abide in Him (John 15:4-5). Psalm 49:7-8 explicitly states, "None of them can by any means redeem his brother, nor give to God a ransom for him." If Christ were only a man, how could His death provide salvation for the entire human race when Psalm 45 says that is impossible?
"He specifically says to pray to the Father using His name."
Yes, and this demonstrates His divine authority. No prophet would dare command this. Jesus has the authority to answer prayers because He is God. If Jesus is not divine, how could He claim the authority to forgive sins (Mark 2:5-7), a prerogative explicitly reserved for God alone?
"The Father raised Him from death."
Yes, and Scripture reveals that all three persons of the Trinity were involved in the resurrection. Jesus declared in John 2:19, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up," explicitly referring to His own body. The Holy Spirit's role is revealed in 1 Peter 3:18, which says Christ was "put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit." The resurrection was not the work of one person alone, but yet another demonstration of the shared divine power of the Father, Son, and Spirit — confirming both the deity of Christ and the triune nature of God.
Jesus is not merely a messenger, prophet, or moral teacher — He is Emmanuel, God with us (Isaiah 7:14; Matthew 1:23). Friend, I urge you to prayerfully consider what the Scriptures teach about the divinity of Christ, for it is utterly essential to our salvation. If Christ did not share the same exact divine substance as the Father, His death would be incapable of atoning for the sins of the world.
No different than Washington, Franklin, FDR, JFK, RFK, Bushes, Clinton, Trump, Obama, and just about any "hero" the US has fabricated over the 2.5 centuries of its short life.
someone commented the other day about the coincidence that mlk is the Hebrew word for sacrifice (and that no one refers to him as Martin King, it’s always MLK)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moloch
So very needed Scipio! Thanks
As far as trust is concerned, on thinking we are among true Christians, even in the churches, it brought Proverbs 5:14 to mind: 14 I was almost in all evil in the midst of the congregation and assembly. If it was so evil back then, imagine how it has proliferated to NOW, centuries later. And how cunningly and artfully they disguise themselves as Christians to gain people's, especially Christians' trust. Wow! Sure holds true...disguised as lambs, but inwardly are ravening wolves. Thank you for this valuable insight. And most people are trusting their pastors and leaders, like I once did, and what I have since learned most were actually Masonic Pastors, or wolves, bringing in damnable heresies into the churches of God, to lead the flock astray. But actually are serving the syna-gog-ue of satan. To lure the world into their traps and snares. No wonder Jesus said: COME OUT OF HER MY PEOPLE!
To me he is not much more than a fabricated character used to push society in a certain direction. Like (almost) all on the world stage. Mr. Mathis has written an interesting piece about him.
https://mileswmathis.com/mlk.pdf
Tough read and reminder that those held up are mere humans
So are you catholic? You certainly sound it. HIS name is not Jesus Christ. His name was Yeshua. He was the Word. He does sit at the right hand of GOD the Father. He and GOD the Father are one in thought word and deed. He never claims to be the Father. GOD has not left His throne. Yeshua was the Messiah. He came to pay the price of our sins which is death. His death erased the curtain between us and GOD. He specifically says to pray to the Father using His name. He loved the Father and was obedient to the point of death. The Father raised Him from death. He ascended back to the Father. As for Dr King, I don't know the truth of his heart. I have heard the stories of his actions but I have heard stories of the truth of Billy Graham. That he was not who he appeared to be. Only GOD knew his heart as well. Maybe one day we will know the truth on both. There are many others in the "churches" that have questionable histories. As well as many churches have questionable histories. Believe in GOD the FATHER and follow The WAY. That is Yeshua. He said He was the way, the truth and the light. He was the only way to the Father. Early followers were called Followers of the Way.
While I respect your zeal, I must push back firmly on the many assertions you’ve made. I ask you to set your aside preconceived notions and prayerfully consider what I’m about to say.
I’ve spoken openly against the errors in Catholic doctrine (https://dfreality.substack.com/p/sacramenti-sanguinis-jan-hus-and), but to dismiss a Biblical truth simply because Catholics also affirm it is both fallacious and shortsighted. Truth is not invalidated by who believes it. The question isn’t whether Catholics believe in the Trinity but whether the Trinity is taught in Scripture.
Contrary to your assumption here, the doctrine of the Trinity is not a New Testament or Catholic invention, it is firmly rooted throughout the Old Testament. Consider Isaiah 48:16, where the Servant of the Lord declares: "Come ye near unto me, hear ye this; I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; from the time that it was, there am I: and now the Lord God, and His Spirit, hath sent me." Here we see three distinct persons: the Speaker (the Servant, later revealed as Christ), the Lord God (the Father), and His Spirit (the Holy Spirit). The Speaker identifies Himself as eternal — He existed "from the beginning" — and yet He is sent by the Father and the Spirit. This passage prefigures the roles of the persons of the Trinity as seen in the New Testament.
Or take Daniel 7:13-14, for instance. The "Son of Man" is presented before the "Ancient of Days" and given everlasting dominion and glory (something which God says he does not share, Isaiah 42:8). Critically, He receives worship — the Aramaic word "pelah," used here, refers exclusively to worship reserved for God alone. If the Son of Man is merely a created being, this passage would be blasphemous. But it’s not — it’s a declaration of the divine nature of the Son, a distinct person but equal to the Father in essence.
If Daniel 7:13-14 declares that the Son of Man is worshiped with "pelah," a term used exclusively for God, and Isaiah 48:16 reveals the interplay of the Lord God, His Spirit, and the eternal Servant, how can you reconcile these Old Testament passages with a denial of Christ’s divinity, when they ascribe to Him worship and attributes reserved for God alone?
Now let’s dive into your points in detail:
"HIS name is not Jesus Christ. His name was Yeshua."
The Holy Spirit inspired the Apostles to write His name as Ἰησοῦς (Iēsous) in Greek, ensuring the gospel reached all the nations of the Roman Empire (Matthew 28:19). Jesus is a transliteration of that Greek name. The exact pronunciation is irrelevant to salvation. Acts 4:12 declares salvation is found in His name, but not because it’s a magic word. It’s the Person behind the name, whether you say Yeshua, Jesus, or Iēsous.. The idea that His name in one language holds special power reeks of superstition, not sound theology.
"He was the Word."
Yes, and John 1:1 makes it clear: "The Word was God." Jesus isn’t just God’s messenger — He is God Himself, eternally preexistent, and the very foundation of the cosmos (John 1:3). You can’t sidestep this. If Jesus is indeed the Word — which we agree on — then He must be divine, eternal, and one with the Father in essence.
"He does sit at the right hand of GOD the Father."
Correct, and Hebrews 1:3 explains why: He is "the brightness [or reflection] of His glory and the express image of His person [hypostases, or substance]." Furthermore, the Father explicitly declares to the Son, "Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever" (Hebrews 1:8), a recitation of Psalm 45. How can the Father call the Son "God" if the Son is not divine?
"He and GOD the Father are one in thought, word, and deed."
Jesus claimed far more than unity of purpose: "I and my Father are one" (John 10:30). The Greek word for "one" (ἕν) refers to unity of essence, not simply agreement. The Jews understood this perfectly: "For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God" (John 10:33). Their reaction really says it all.
"He never claims to be the Father."
Correct. Trinitarians affirm the distinction between the Father and the Son. Jesus reveals the Father (John 14:9) but remains a distinct person within the Godhead. This is a straw man argument against a belief I and no orthodox Trinitarian holds to.
"GOD has not left His throne."
Agreed. God’s omnipresence ensures this (Isaiah 66:1; Psalm 139:7-10). The Incarnation doesn’t mean the throne is empty; it means the eternal Word took on flesh (John 1:14) while remaining fully God.
"Yeshua was the Messiah. He came to pay the price of our sins, which is death. His death erased the curtain between us and GOD."
Christ's assumption of human nature was integral to salvation. Hebrews 2:14-17 explains that He took on flesh and blood so that "through death He might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil." By uniting human nature with the divine, He opened the path to eternal life for all who abide in Him (John 15:4-5). Psalm 49:7-8 explicitly states, "None of them can by any means redeem his brother, nor give to God a ransom for him." If Christ were only a man, how could His death provide salvation for the entire human race when Psalm 45 says that is impossible?
"He specifically says to pray to the Father using His name."
Yes, and this demonstrates His divine authority. No prophet would dare command this. Jesus has the authority to answer prayers because He is God. If Jesus is not divine, how could He claim the authority to forgive sins (Mark 2:5-7), a prerogative explicitly reserved for God alone?
"The Father raised Him from death."
Yes, and Scripture reveals that all three persons of the Trinity were involved in the resurrection. Jesus declared in John 2:19, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up," explicitly referring to His own body. The Holy Spirit's role is revealed in 1 Peter 3:18, which says Christ was "put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit." The resurrection was not the work of one person alone, but yet another demonstration of the shared divine power of the Father, Son, and Spirit — confirming both the deity of Christ and the triune nature of God.
Jesus is not merely a messenger, prophet, or moral teacher — He is Emmanuel, God with us (Isaiah 7:14; Matthew 1:23). Friend, I urge you to prayerfully consider what the Scriptures teach about the divinity of Christ, for it is utterly essential to our salvation. If Christ did not share the same exact divine substance as the Father, His death would be incapable of atoning for the sins of the world.