Tyranny of the Trinity - by P. R. Lackey Page 2
Ms. Lackey makes her case with no little passion, research, scripture and testimony. She calls the simplicity of her exercise “See Spot run theology.” She states for example: “God is God because of certain attributes that He has. If Jesus Christ were God, he would have to have the attributes of God. Most theologians agree that for God, these attributes are: unoriginated, self-existent, immortal, unchanging, omniscient, all wise, all good, all-powerful and omnipresent. But Jesus denied every one of these.” She continues with Theology 101 in examining who the lamb of God is, who anointed Jesus (indeed, why he needed anointing), who gave the Revelation to Jesus, how and why did Jesus have a God, and many other challenging questions. She quotes from One God & One Lord, Reconsidering the Cornerstone of the Christian Faith: “47 Reasons Why Our Heavenly Father Has No Equals or Co-Equals.” From that source also comes this thought-provoking quotation: “It has been well said that when a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth he either ceases to be mistaken or he ceases to be honest.”
Author Lackey puts a huge emphasis on believing Jesus and returns time and time again to the simplicity of believing his words. She asks her readers (to whom she writes as friends) to consider whether it is really possible to accept Jesus’ teachings if his own teachings reject who he claims to be? “How does a professing Christian separate Christ from his teachings?” Her very straightforward answer is that we have been duped into believing in a “God-man – a myth,” or in a very thinly veiled polytheism. Jesus says in John 8:45, “If I am telling the truth, why don’t you believe me?” Again, hammering her point, she asks, “Did Jesus not know who he was? Did the Nicene fathers know more than Jesus? What about Jesus’ apostles and disciples — who did they believe him to be? Did any disciple refer to him as ‘Father’ or Holy Father? They did not.”
She recommends Brian Holt’s unique approach in Is Jesus God or the Son of God? Holt states: “Consider [the irrationality] of what is being said by the Trinity doctrine: Jesus can be God’s Son and still be God. He can be at God’s right hand and still be God. He can have a God and still be God. He can be sent and told what to do and still be God. He can have limited knowledge on earth and in heaven and still be God. He can have a different will from God and still be God. He can die while God cannot die and still be God. He can call his Father the ‘only true God’ and yet he is the only true God (John 17:3). Think about what this means. Nothing can refute the Trinity doctrine! No matter how many times Peter, Paul, or Jesus himself says Jesus has a God, [to the Trinitarian zealot] it does not refute the idea that Jesus is God. No matter how many times he is called God’s Son, he is still God. Do not worry about how many times the Bible says he is in subjection to God, the Trinity allows for this too...In other words, if there were 800, 1600 or even 3200 verses that state Jesus is not God, it would not matter because the Trinity doctrine allows for all of these! With that in mind, one [who subscribes to such an ideology] must really ask himself..., ‘Am I allowing the Bible to shape my viewpoint of Jesus or am I allowing a preconceived doctrine to shape it?”
Ms. Lackey’s second point of emphasis has to do with "what" and "who" Christians choose to base their beliefs on, and she pleads with her readers to obey God rather than men. She gives this example: “1 John 5:1 clearly states that Jesus is the Christ and that [he is] the child born of God. Is this verse a mystery? The translator's [interpretation] proceeds to state that ‘He is God’! Now who should I believe? What should you believe? Is Jesus the child born of God, or is he God? One declaration comes directly from scripture, while the other is a translator’s interpretation.” Have we been wise to accept the cry of mystery? Remember Romans 1:19: “For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them.” Obfuscation is not a tool which God uses! Ms. Lackey continues: “If what I have presented to you from these commentaries and translators’ interpretations isn’t enough to get your attention and convince you of the hypocrisy and blatant lack of sensible reasoning, then obviously the god of this age has willing followers. I believe that far too many Christians simply do not care enough to see the deplorable duplicity.”
I have to ask do we really have freedom of thought? I think not, especially here in the Bible belt. The “thought police” descend on one immediately to convince one that although God is the author of logic and rationality, He does not conduct Himself by these principles. (It’s a mystery! But in Eph. 5:6 we are warned not to be deceived with empty words and I can think of none more empty.) As important to us as freedom of speech is, the accompanying freedom of inquiry is notably absent, or to quote Ben Stein: “No intelligence allowed.” Christians cannot have it both ways: Jesus can either be God or the Son of God, but He could not be God and have [a God] (John 20:17). Those in authority, in defensive mode, solve the problem by “heresy-making.”
Ms. Lackey has suffered brutality and hostility at the hands of the Christian church for her inquiring mind. “Let the reader understand.” Why can “the church” not be questioned? Be assured that this hostile approach is not of Jesus. Hers is the pain of seeing that we do have revelation on this matter and yet we continue to be misdirected, deceived and patronized into thinking that it is a mystery as if there was no revelation. It is not lack of revelation; it is unbelief.
As Greg Deuble says, “Truth has nothing to fear from an honest search under God’s light.” Ms. Lackey is one brave lady; a veritable steel magnolia. I stand in admiration of her witness. She defends the cause of the weak against the strong, and mercy and tolerance against brutality and tyranny.