Skipping Church? Facial Recognition Software Could Be Tracking You
Could Big Brother be coming to a church near you? One software company is now providing churches with facial recognition software to better track who shows up at their worship services.
Manually tracking attendance is a chore for some churches, especially large ones that have multiple services and entrances. Now a company called Churchix provides facial recognition software, which captures someone’s face through a photo or video and then identifies it by comparing it with those in a database of photos. Now used by Facebook and dating apps and at traffic stoplights, the software is becoming more common in every day interactions.
Moshe Greenshpan, founder & CEO of the Israeli facial recognition company Skakash, said its subsidiary Face-Six’s clients include airports, law enforcement agencies and casinos. After an international church asked the company for a similar service, they decided to launch Churchix, a company designed to help churches specifically, in February.
Greenshpan said about 40 churches have signed on, including eight in the United States, although he declined to name any of them. He also declined to say how much the churches pay for the software. He said the churches that use the software range in membership from 100 to 3,000.
A church will upload a database of photos of its members, and they usually use security cameras they already have in place to match the video with existing photos. Churches could use it to track regular attendance or see who’s missing.
“It’s simple to see if a member isn’t attending three or four events. Then they can give the member a call and say something like, ‘See you on Sunday,’” Greenshpan said.
It could also be used as a tool for the church to ask for donations, Greenshpan said. “If they see a member who is regularly attending events, they could feel more comfortable giving them a call and asking for a donation,” he said. Or it can blacklist someone who might have caused trouble in the past, such a disruptive visitor.
Greenshpan said he usually sees two kinds of responses to the idea of facial recognition software in churches. Most churches already keep track of attendance in some way, so some church officials are enthusiastic when they discover an automated system. But many members, Greenshpan said, feel their privacy might be compromised. He advises churches to ask members to register so the software is transparent, but most churches using Churchix are using the software without the knowledge of their members, he said.
“We think facial recognition is going to be normal,” Greenshpan said. “And as the technology improves, it’s becoming cheaper.”
Most churches have some database to keep track of their members, said Scott Thumma, director of the Hartford Institute on Religion, who focuses on megachurch research. When he asked congregations of all sizes and religious traditions in 2005, 72 percent of churches used some software to track membership engagement.
When Thumma asked the same question in a national survey of megachurches in 2005, 99 percent of megachurches said they have a computerized database that holds the names and addresses of members or attendees, compared with 95 percent of churches that had a congregational Web site. Many of the member databases include photos, Thumma said.
Thumma said he hasn’t come across any megachurches that use facial recognition software, but most have security cameras and people who are trained to get a sense of how many people are in the church. Part of the appeal of a megachurch is that you can walk in without people noticing, he said.
“I don’t think that kind of facial recognition software would play well at all with members because it strikes as ‘Big Brother,’” Thumma said. “While God sees everything, we’re not sure we want our pastor to be omniscient.”
Two of the challenges facing many megachurches is finding ways to create accountability, a sense of belonging or responsibility to a church, and creating a sense of intimacy so that the church understands individual needs and how people are progressing in their faith. Most megachurches, Thumma said, would probably prefer not to invade privacy by using the software at worship services and instead create smaller groups and ministries to get to know parishioners and their habits.
“The larger the crowd, the easier it is to have the permeable boundary, you can slip in and more or less be anonymous,” Thumma said. “For the staff, it’s always a challenge because you don’t want your people just to remain spectators.”
Most churches that have databases track whether members are in small groups, youth groups, ministries and other areas of the church. Church officials train people who are in charge of Sunday school classes or a homeless ministry to track who shows up. The information is often added to a larger database so people aren’t just mentally keeping track of church engagement.
“If a congregation doesn’t have those kinds of often technologically-advanced tools, how do they know if the 5,000 or 10,000 people who show up are doing more than just coming for a Sunday morning show?” Thumma said. “You can’t cull the spiritual maturity of hundreds of people in your head.”
As technology changes so quickly, what once might have seemed strange will become normal. In the 1990s, the idea of church marketing, or targeting specific people through outreach or advertisements, was seen as strange but now is quite common, said Kent Shaffer, founder of Openchurch.com, a Web site that encourages digital Christian collaboration. Giving Facebook your personal information or seeing personalized Google advertisements was initially seen as an invasion of privacy but is now accepted.
Still, Shaffer said that facial recognition software will face specific challenges among churchgoers.
“With the concept of facial recognition software is an underlying subconscious hunch that this is wrong because it’s an inauthentic substitute for one-on-one relationships,” Shaffer said. “Imagine, ‘And then the apostles walked into the assembly, and their faces were scanned.’ It seems like it misses the authenticity.”
Public opinion, however, shifts pretty quickly as people adapt to new ways of life, like watching a pastor give a sermon on a big screen.
“What once seemed shocking will gradually seem normal,” he said. “Ultimately, we’re going to see this type of technology become far more prominent.”
ProjectNOLA, an independent, nonprofit crime camera network, has been seeking — and has begun to find — financial support for a plan that would place such cameras on more than 100 places of worship… (Source)
Project NOLA’s first phase is to spend $1 million dollars on surveillance cameras in places of worship.
A key component of the partnership’s $1 million first phase is a plan to expand the nearly nine-year-old ProjectNOLA camera network.
Every place of worship to have surveillance cameras
Big Brother wants surveillance cameras in every place of worship.
Equipping every church in New Orleans with a surveillance camera is one of the goals of the NOLA Partnership for Public Safety and Peace. (Source)
Just think about that for a moment, soon every place of worship will have surveillance cameras. Even Orwell’s book 1984 wasn’t that grim.
Who needs God’s all-seeing eye, when the police can do it for him in real-time?
Law enforcement will spy on worshipers in real-time
Learn More: Watch Video:
The above video shows how law enforcement has been using Project NOLA to spy on citizens in real-time since 2011.
Church surveillance cameras, combined with license plate readers, will give Big Brother unimaginable real-time spying capabilities.
It appears that Project NOLA is mirrored after DHS’s ‘See Something Say Something’ program that encourages businesses and homeowners to spy on one another.
As I mentioned two months ago, Project NOLA has been so successful that it appears DHS has copied it and renamed it “Virtual Block Watch” (VBW).
Virtual Block Watch is law enforcement’s latest national surveillance program that encourages the public to use surveillance cameras to spy on one another.
Nothing says police state quite like Project NOLA making $200,000 annually on surveillance camera maintenance fees.
What do Project NOLA and VBW have in common?
First off, Project NOLA was designed by former police officer Bryan LaGarde who charged homeowners and businesses $346.00 dollars for a “crime camera kit.”
A surveillance network designed by a police officer? Nothing suspicious about that, right?
Please don’t be fooled by whatever names law enforcement calls them. Hopefully, most of us know what their real names are: ‘Project DHS’ and ‘Police Surveillance Watch.’
Americans need more privacy not less.
You can read more from MassPrivateI at his blog HERE, where this article first appeared.
As we look around at the Police State being built across the world, combined with enhanced mind control techniques, it is easy to draw direct parallels with books like 1984 and Brave New World. It’s almost as if these books formed a clear blueprint for anyone seeking control over large populations.
With the quickening pace of technological advancement it is no surprise to see “ideas” become reality quicker than ever before. Philip K. Dick explored the concept of pre-crime in his short story “The Minority Report” in 1956, but it wasn’t until Steven Spielberg offered it on the big screen as Minority Reportin 2002 that the audience got a true look at a potential day-to-day existence under corporate and government data management and control.
We are now at the point where “Minority Report” is being used as a sound description of current technological applications, even in mainstream news, which means that the future is actually the present. Below you will find 10 signs that we have now entered the world depicted in fiction.
The latest news from Chicago only adds to this list, as police are moving beyond simply possessing the technology and are now putting it into effect.
Chicago’s “Heat List” is an index of approximately 400 people who have been identified by a computer algorithm as being future threats to commit violent crime. Without having actually committed a crime, some of those on the list are beginning to get visits from Chicago police warning them that they are already being watched:
When the Chicago Police Department sent one of its commanders to Robert McDaniel’s home last summer, the 22-year-old high school dropout was surprised. Though he lived in a neighborhood well-known for bloodshed on its streets, he hadn’t committed a crime or interacted with a police officer recently. And he didn’t have a violent criminal record, nor any gun violations. In August, he incredulously told the Chicago Tribune, “I haven’t done nothing that the next kid growing up hadn’t done.” Yet, there stood the female police commander at his front door with a stern message: if you commit any crimes, there will be major consequences. We’re watching you.
Chicago is apparently considering this to be part of “policing in the 21st century.” A report from The Verge explains how Chicago has taken the lead in predictive behavior police tech:
In 2009, the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) made millions of dollars in grants available for any police department with a burgeoning predictive program. Police all over the country applied to tap into those NIJ dollars. The big winner was Chicago; its combination of headline-making homicide rates and already established data- and tech-focused policing made it a perfect fit. The CPD received more than $2 million to test two phases of its experimental program.
Though it took awhile to get started in earnest (staff turnover and internal politics in 2011 and 2012 stalled the project), last year the CPD’s predictive program picked up steam. One man behind that progress was Miles Wernick.
Wernick is the Motorola professor and director of the Medical Imaging Research Center at Illinois Institute of Technology (IIT) in Chicago. He says he’s been doing predictive analysis work since the 1980s, when he worked with the US military to recognize potential targets in the battlefield. From there he proceeded to medical imaging. A lot of his current work focuses on analysing data and brain scans to make automated diagnoses of dementias in elderly patients — not exactly police work.
These paragraphs encapsulate two of the major warnings that the alternative media has been shouting for years: namely that military tech always trickles down into local law enforcement; and, secondly, that Big Data initiatives which are heralded by the establishment as solutions in the computing and medical fields have a range of privacy-killing additional applications that affect people far beyond the initially stated reach.
Also highlighted are the same concerns that are cropping up in the area of NSA spying – association is an assumption of tendency toward eventual guilt. Miles Wernick goes on to say:
“It’s not just shooting somebody, or being shot,” he says. “It has to do with the person’s relationships to other violent people.”
This is in line with what Andrew Papachristos, a Yale sociologist and Chicago native, calls a social networking theory. When it comes to violence, Papachristos recently told Chicago Magazine, “It’s not just about your friends and who you’re hanging out with, it’s actually the structure of these networks that matter.”
So while Wernick acknowledges that sometimes people such as Robert McDaniel — who haven’t been convicted of a violent crime — may find themselves in the wrong social networks, their presence on the list is not random.
A commander of the program stated it even more simply:
If you end up on that list, there’s a reason you’re there.
This indicates a fundamental shift in the way policing will be done in the future of America. Until now, we have been reporting on this type of technology and have been forced to speculate about its coming implementation. Well, now there is no doubt. And lest anyone believe that this is just an outcropping of Chicago’s notoriously Police State-happy mentality, Police Commander Jonathan Lewin matter-of-factly states the following:
This [program] will become a national best practice. This will inform police departments around the country and around the world on how best to utilize predictive policing to solve problems. This is about saving lives. [emphasis added]
Whether or not it will actually save lives is debatable. Has the No-Fly List saved lives? Have any of the other of the many lists one can be added to these days actually saved any lives? These lists are secretive and have become nearly impossible to independently verify as to how someone got on the list, if they deserve to be there; and, if not, how to get off the list … or if the lists are effective.
The Verge article linked below highlights the potential racial profiling of such policies – and indeed this has happened in the case of New York’s own low-tech Stop-and-Frisk policy.
So the verdict is out on saving lives. But one thing is for certain: the arrival of the high-tech Police State is certainly not about saving freedom, nor is it about preserving a Constitution designed to protect us from a Minority Report society.
Individual pieces of news often get lost or forgotten rather easily in today’s fast-paced news cycle, so let’s look at an aggregate of 10 mainstream news items that offer a comprehensive picture of where we are and where we are likely to be headed both from a government surveillance standpoint, as well as targeted advertising.
1. They’re watching … Japanese electronics company NEC develops ‘Minority Report’ style billboard, The Telegraph, 3/10/2010: “Engineers have developed the billboard, similar to one used in the Tom Cruise blockbuster, that uses built in cameras to instantly identify a shopper’s age and gender as they walk past. The facial-recognition system, called the Next Generation Digital Signage Solution, then offers consumers a product it thinks is suited to their demographic.”
3. The Long Eye of the Law: So Who’s Ready for a ‘Minority Report’-Style Future?Motherboard, 3/20/2013: On Monday, Japanese tech developers Fujitsu announced they had created . . . a bit of technology that can measure a person’s pulse using a camera or a computer webcam, just by analyzing that person’s face . . . It’s Minority Report-style technology, to be sure—another in a burgeoning list of tech-driven ways police could prevent crimes before they happen.”
4. Minority Report moves step closer as Lord Sugar launches face recognition adverts, The Telegraph, 7/9/2013: “The media company has launched OptimEyes, which will be used in more than 6,000 of its screens to target over 50m people in the UK, Germany, Poland, Switzerland, UAE, Oman, Kenya, Angola and South Africa. However, the majority of the screens, some 3,561, are in the UK in doctors’ surgeries, hospitals, convenience stores, petrol forecourts, Halifax banks, airports and train stations . . . The product comes less than a week after Sky Deutschland revealed it has developed technology to transfer adverts from train windows directly and silently into commuters’ heads.
6. Gesture Through News Minority Report-Style With New York Times’ Leap Motion App, Fast Company, 7/18/2013: Rather than having to flick through headlines on a touch-screen device or scroll through articles using a mouse — how antiquated! — the company’s new app allows readers to navigate through stories by motioning their hands in mid-air, with Leap Motion sensors interpreting the signals . . . The New York Times has also suggested it will give the company an opportunity to implement new advertising capabilities ‘that [will] allow brands to connect with readers using motion-controlled ad units.’”
7. Minority Report finally becomes a reality: new hi-tech video wall will let law enforcement agencies sift through data with a wave of their hand, The Daily Mail, 7/23/2013: “The hi-tech computer system behind the film Minority Report – where Tom Cruise speeds through video on a large screen using only hand gestures – is making its way into the real world. American computer experts have revealed the software has become a reality – and they hope to sell it to law enforcement agencies around the world. The interface developed by scientist John Underkoffler has been commercialized by the Los Angeles firm Oblong Industries as a way to sift through massive amounts of video and other data.”
*Also see this report on Big Data and pre-crime software.
9. Minority Report-style Advertising Coming to NYC, 247Sports, 8/8/2013: “Recycling bins data mine your smartphone when you are in proximity to tailor ads when you walk by the screen and stuff. Already in London, looking to expand to NYC and other World cities soon.”
10. Google Submits Patent For Minority Report Style Eye Tracking Device, Prison Planet, 8/15/2013: “The patent filing describes a “head mounted device”, for example hi-tech glasses, that would have the ability to track eye movement, effectively monitoring reactions to external stimuli, including changes in emotion.” From The Verge: “Google could be betting that advertisers will pay to know whether consumers are actually looking at their billboards, magazine spreads, and online ads.”
From the patent application, which was filed in May 2011:
The ways that we are tracked, traced, and databased are increasing every day. Some of it is arriving without our agreement and is being utilized by private corporations and governments without our explicit approval, as the recent revelations of data spying have exposed. If we have learned one thing it is that information is knowledge and knowledge is power. The power of data collection in the hands of those who wish to exert more control is not likely to halt. And all indications show that it is not enough to have logged and charted where we have been; the surveillance state wants to know where we are going.
Our Orwellian world is beginning to look nostalgic compared to what is in production. Neuroscientists in 2010 stated that they know you better than you know yourself. Meanwhile, it is being estimated that computers know to a 93% accuracy where you will be, before you make your first move. The recent major global funding of neuroscience and narrative control indicates that the final target is the human brain and every thought that resides there.
However, we ought to be aware that much of our data is willingly being given via social media and the gadgets we choose to buy. As technology continues to march forward at an exponential rate, we might do well to consider how much of this we are comfortable buying into. And if we must, should we be seeking ways to subvert the information stream?
We live in a cybernetic society, which is about continuous surveillance, data collection and analysis.
The Chinese government has begun to implement the tracking, monitoring and labeling of its 1.4 billion citizens into categories of trustworthiness — also known as social credit. From their own State Council document, this is being done in order to:
…allow the trustworthy to roam everywhere under heaven while making it hard for the discredited to take a single step.
As Melissa Dykes highlights, the Chinese system is but a precursor for what can be expected on an ever-widening scale as full-blown Technocracy ensnares the globe.
About the Authors
Aaron Dykes and Melissa Melton Dykes created TruthstreamMedia.com as an outlet to examine the news, uncover the deceptions, pierce through the fabric of illusions, know the real enemy, unshackle from the system, and begin to imagine the path towards taking back our lives, one step at a time, so that one day we might truly be free…
Molech and its symbology is widely known for the owl representing this god. However, the owl is more closely related to Molech’s consort female deity and is especially associated with Lilith, “the queen of the night.” Here again is the merging of male and female deities.
Thus the owl symbolism is related to a deity that kabbalists worship, which the Illuminati also loves to use the owl in their logos and designs. Please familiarize yourself with some of the images.
The owl is actually symbolism for the goddess, which is depicted with the various goddesses like the Greek Athena, and then the Roman Minerva. The owl was depicted as the symbol for wisdom because it had an ability to see in the dark. It was a metaphor because it would illuminate the darkness of the masses and educate the ignorant. It was able to transcend illusions and deception and see the ultimate truths of the world.
The people who believe in these occult practices think that the owl is a perfect representation of their ‘path.’ The owl symbolizes going into the dark in order to find wisdom; as in exploring dangerous realms (like Crowley’s “Abyss”) in order to attain more wisdom.
We see the owl all over the place in the realm of conspiracy, including its most infamous use at Bohemian Grove during the Cremation of Care ceremony where ‘mock’ sacrifices of children are given up to the owl-god:
You can also see it on the DoD Project MINERVA logo:
Richard Cassaro has a great post about owl symbolism, and one of the sections is entirely about the Cremation of Care. From RichardCassaro.com:
The ceremony involves the poling of a small boat across a lake containing an effigy of Care (“Dull Care”). Dark, hooded individuals receive the effigy from the ferryman which is placed on an altar and, at the end of the ceremony, is set on fire.
Domhoff notes: “this is the body of Care, symbolizing the concerns and woes that afflict all men during their daily lives.”
The occult meaning of this ceremony seems clear. These men carry the cares of the world and use a symbolic ritual to cast it off.
The remaining time at the Club represents a careless period, or vacation of sorts, during which time no business is conducted.
By “cremating” care, they expunge the negative energy of such emotions as worry, fear, and anxiety; it is the goal and magical effect of the ritual, which could more properly be called the “Cremation of worry” or “Cremation of negative energy.”
The pertinent evidence to the present article, of course, is the fact that the ceremony takes place next to a 45 foot (14m) high concrete owl statue, symbolizing knowledge and wisdom. The voice of the owl during the ceremony is former newsman Walter Cronkite, himself a member of the Bohemian Club, and music and fireworks accompany the ritual for dramatic effect.
And of course, we tie right back into magic when referencing the ridding of stresses from this ritual:
Magical thinking applies here: they believe they have done it, and so they have.
The owl is connected to magic because Native Americans and Africans both used it as symbolism for magic, prophecy, divination, and protection from evil spirits. Some believe that the owl carries messages back and forth between the nether world and ours. From RichardCassaro.com:
Shamans called upon Owl medicine for insight. Plains Indians wore owl feathers to protect against evil spirits. The Cree and Apache believed the Boreal Owl was a summoning to the spirit world. To this day, Native Americans associate the owl with spiritual vision; the owl is viewed with respect and associated with the souls of deceased ancestors. African cultures viewed the owl similarly to the Native Americans, heralding them as messengers of secrets as well as the bird of sorcerers, witches, and warlocks. In Madagascar owls are said to dance on the graves of the dead, and to the Aboriginal Australians they are companions to medicine people.
Check out that entire RichardCassaro.com post and you’ll see more examples at Yale, and even in Disney films such as Snow White:
The owl is hidden on the American dollar (although I doubt that’s news to you):
It’s also on the layout of Washington D.C.:
There is an owl on a handout of the Bavarian Illuminati:
Some theorists claim the owl is the female evocation of god, while the bull is the male aspect; hence the confusion.
The owl represents the powerful pagan lord of the underworld, as well as Minerva, goddess of wisdom. The Illuminati use this symbol to show their power, and to show that they are the “wise rulers of the planet.”
The most important sections of Washington, D.C. were laid out during the Capitol’s planning phase to form the shape of an owl.
The owl is also the mascot of the Bohemian Grove, a compound that hosts a secret annual two-week gathering of the most powerful men in the world. If you look closely enough, you will even see a small owl hidden on the U.S. 1 Dollar Bill.
A mother was preparing a pot roast for her family’s meal while her young daughter helped. Knowing her daughter was very curious, the mother explained each step. As she was preparing to put the pot roast in the oven, the mother explained, “Now we cut the ends off of each side of the meat.” As young children often do, the daughter asked, “Why?” The mother thought for a moment and replied, “Because that’s the way it’s done. That’s how your grandma did it and that’s how I do it.”
Not satisfied with this answer, the young girl asked if she could call her grandma. The young girl called and asked, “Grandma, why do you cut the ends off the pot roast?” Her grandma thought for a moment and said, “Because that’s the way it’s done. That’s how my mom did it and that’s how I do it.”
Still not satisfied, the young girl called her great grandma, who was now living in a nursing home. “Great grandma,” she said, “Why do you cut the ends off the pot roast?”
Her great grandma said, “When I was a young mother, we had a very small oven. The pot roast wouldn’t fit in the oven if I didn’t cut the ends off.”
The most damaging phrase in the language is: ‘It’s always been done that way.’
The most damaging phrase in the language is: ‘It’s always been done that way.’
The Famous ‘Social Experiment’: 5 Monkeys and a Ladder
A group of scientists placed five monkeys in a cage, and in the middle, a ladder with bananas on top.
Every time a monkey went up the ladder, the scientists soaked the rest of the monkeys with cold water.
After a while, every time a monkey would start up the ladder, the others would pull it down and beat it up.
After a time, no monkey would dare try climbing the ladder, no matter how great the temptation.
The scientists then decided to replace one of the monkeys. The first thing this new monkey did was start to climb the ladder. Immediately, the others pulled him down and beat him up.
After several beatings, the new monkey learned never to go up the ladder, even though there was no evident reason not to, aside from the beatings.
The second monkey was substituted and the same occurred. The first monkey participated in the beating of the second monkey. A third monkey was changed and the same was repeated. The fourth monkey was changed, resulting in the same, before the fifth was finally replaced as well.
What was left was a group of five monkeys that – without ever having received a cold shower – continued to beat up any monkey who attempted to climb the ladder.
If it was possible to ask the monkeys why they beat up on all those who attempted to climb the ladder, their most likely answer would be “I don’t know. It’s just how things are done around here.”
JOHN 8:51 Verily, verily, I say unto you, IF a man keep my saying, he shall never see death.
JOHN 21:16 He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, ADONAI; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my sheep.
JOHN 15:1 IF a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned. If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you.
JOHN 15:7 IF ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you.
MATTHEW 6:15 But IF ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.
MATTHEW 17:20 And YAHUSHA said unto them, Because of your unbelief: for verily I say unto you, IF ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place; and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impossible unto you.
ROMANS 10:9 That IF thou shalt confess with thy mouth Yahusha, and shalt believe in thine heart that ELOHIYM hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
1 CORINTHIANS 15:2 By which also ye are saved, IF ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.
2 CHRONICLES 7:14 IF my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.
EXODUS 19:5 Now therefore, IF ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine:
DEUTERONOMY 7:1 Wherefore it shall come to pass, IF ye hearken to these judgments, and keep, and do them, that YAHUAH thy ELOHIYM shall keep unto thee the covenant and the mercy which he sware unto thy fathers:
DEUTERONOMY 11:13-15 And it shall come to pass, IF ye shall hearken diligently unto my commandments which I command you this day, to love the YAHUAH your ELOHIYM, and to serve him with all your heart and with all your soul, That I will give you the rain of your land in his due season, the first rain and the latter rain, that thou mayest gather in thy corn, and thy wine, and thine oil. And I will send grass in thy fields for thy cattle, that thou mayest eat and be full.
DEUTERONOMY 11: 26-28 Behold, I set before you this day a blessing and a curse; A blessing, IF ye obey the commandments of the YAHUAH your ELOHIYM, which I command you this day: And a curse, if ye will not obey the commandments of YAHUAH your ELOHIYM, but turn aside out of the way which I command you this day, to go after other elohiyms, which ye have not known.
ISAIAH 1:18-19 Come now, and let us reason together, saith YAHUAH: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool. IF ye be willing and obedient, ye shall eat the good of the land:
Not January 1st, of the Roman Calendar nor the Fall Jewish Holiday of Rosh Hashanah.
The Enoch calendar is seasonal/solar. Note, the British Empire used March 25 as the beginning of their new year prior to the 1752 treaty with Rome. Why? Shades of the Saxons? Issac’s Sons?
The moon is never considered in its course in the yearly cycle.
The calendar consists of a 364 day year, divided into seven day weeks, twelve months of thirty days each except for one extra day in the last month of each quarter . The calendar accommodates the 365.24 days of the present time.
The 4 seasons are Spring, Summer, Fall and Winter.
When the 364 count has been accomplished as instructed by Enoch and Jubilees.
Thefirst day of Spring, is the New Year, day one of the 364 day count on the observed daytime event, tekfuah. Enoch, Chapter 72;
“In this way he rises in the first month in the great portal, which is the fourth [those six portals in the cast]. And in that fourth portal from which the sun rises in the first month are twelve window-openings, from which proceed a flame when they are opened in their season. When the sun rises in the heaven, he comes forth through that fourth portal thirty, mornings in succession, and sets accurately in the fourth portal in the west of the heaven.”
We must recognize that the year was possibly 364 day’s in the Creation Epic. It is postulated by some, that due to the Fallen Ones evil deeds, recorded in Genesis chapter 6 and the flood, earth slowed to take up a 365.24 day orbit.
Creator YAHUAH states unequivocally, these are His days and also to “Remember The Sabbath”, not A Sabbath! What day is The Sabbath and who’s week will it register on, Roman, Jewish or Enoch’s?
Because it has been taught and believed as “gospel” for centuries, unearthing the actual roots of the Trinity doctrine can be unsettling for many. Yet, unless beliefs are examined and at times challenged, we may find ourselves in a lifetime of error and never know it. Here are the facts about an ancient doctrine that long predates the New Testament – about a doctrine that was borrowed from mystery religion with no foundation in the sacred Scriptures!
A fundamental teaching and “test” doctrine of both Catholic and Protestant groups [or, “Churchianity”] is the Trinity. The Trinity tenet is probably best expressed by the Trinitarian Bible Society of London, England as “…the belief in the Godhead of the Father and the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, Three co-equal and co-eternal Persons in One Living and True God … in unity of this Godhead there be Three Persons, of one substance, power and eternity the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost.”
“Spirit” is misconstrued as the superstitious “ghost” in 1611 King James wording. The term “ghost” is an erroneous translation of the Greek pneuma, which is better translated as “spirit.” There is no word in the Greek language for “ghost.” The closest Greek word, phantasma, occurs twice (Matt. 14:26; Mark 6:49, translated spirit) which means “apparition, specter, phantom,” but is never used to describe the RUACH HAQODESH (Set-Apart Spirit).
Churchianity teaches that this special Power, this Spirit that emanates from the Father and is shared by the Son, is a person called the Holy Spirit, which together with the Father and Son makes up a Trinity.
Trinity Missing from the New Testament
Under the subject of Trinity, the Encyclopaedia Britannica (15th edition, 1974, vol. 10, p. 126, Micropedia) makes this eye-opening statement, “Neither the word Trinity nor the explicit doctrine appears in the New Testament, nor did [YAHUSHA*] and His followers intend to contradict the Shema of the Old Testament: ‘Hear, O Yashar’el: [YAHUAH*] our [ELOHIYM] is One.’” (Deut. 6:4).
The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia gives this surprising admission: “The term ‘Trinity’ is not a Biblical term, and we are not using Biblical language when we define what is expressed by it…In point of fact, the doctrine of the Trinity is purely a revealed doctrine. That is to say, it embodies a truth which has never been discovered, and is indiscoverable, by natural reason.” (Trinity, vol.5, p. 3012).
The Britannica adds: “The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies… . The Council of Nicaea, in 325, stated the crucial formula for that doctrine in its confession that the ‘Son is of the same substance…as the Father,’ even though it said very little about the Holy Spirit…By the end of the 4th century…the doctrine of the Trinity took substantially the form it has maintained ever since.”
The New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, vol. 14, p. 299, acknowledges: “The formulation ‘one G-d in three Persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century….Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective.”
The issue came to a flash point at the general church Council of Nicaea in 325 C.E., called by Constantine. Two church leaders in Alexandria – Arius and Athanasius – had been in open dispute over whether the Father and Son were equal.
Eusebius, the father of ecclesiastical history, early in the conference offered a compromise resolution that described the relationship of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Supporters of Athanasius realized that the compromise would destroy the doctrine of the Trinity, and was essentially a vote for Arius, who maintained that the Father was superior in some ways.
Emperor Constantine stepped in, rejecting the compromise of Eusebius. But the Trinity idea did not become doctrine until the year 379 when Roman Emperor Theodosius established Christianity as the state religion. Hence, the Roman Catholic Church, and its doctrine of a Triune deity, was born.
Trinity Discounted Early On
In the early years following the resurrection of the Messiah, the Trinity doctrine was not accepted by a number of educated, sincere Scripture-believers. One source informs us about a Michael Servetus, a Spanish physician, who “…was unable to accept traditional formulas defining G-d as ‘Father, Son and Holy [Spirit]’ – one G-d expressed through three personalities. He put his doubts into print and stirred up a furor of indignation. The New Testament nowhere conveys the doctrinal formula as such; it was shaped by church councils of the fourth and fifth centuries…agents of Protestant leaders took Servetus to Champel the next day and burned him at the stake until his body was totally reduced to ashes.” p. 65, Strange Facts About the Bible, Webb Garrison.
Erasmus is noted for his editing of the Greek New Testament, a work of exemplary scholarship. “In preparing the first edition of his Greek New Testament in 1516, the Dutch scholar used the best and oldest manuscripts available to him. For purposes of scholarship he compared Latin and Greek versions by printing them in parallel columns. Ancient copies did not include at 1John 5:7 a reference to the Trinity, standard in medieval copies of the Latin Vulgate. Guided by the principle that the oldest copies of a work are likely to be closer to the original than later copies, Erasmus omitted from the Greek side of His New Testament the allusion familiar to readers of the Latin Bible. The use of parallel columns made the omission immediately obvious,” p. 258, Strange Facts about the Bible.
A Babylonian Survival
As these authorities have revealed, the Trinity doctrine is not based upon the clear teachings of the Scriptures, but is fashioned piecemeal from selected verses that are said to allude to a Trinity.
The simple fact is the doctrine of a Trinity was not initially taught by the early church. The teaching was contrived to replicate the trinitarian beliefs of incoming pagan converts. Abundantly common in pagan religions is the concept of a trinity. Early converts from paganism generally had worshiped a triad of deities. (see pp. 10-11)
In his book, The Two Babylons, Alexander Hislop traces the origin of the Trinity idea to the mother of all pagan concepts, Babylon. Summing up a lengthy study of historical evidence, Hislop concludes: “Will any one after this say that the Roman Catholic Church must still be called Christian, because it holds the doctrine of the Trinity? So did the Pagan Babylonians, so did the Egyptians, so do the Hindus at this hour, in the very sense in which Rome does.” (p. 90).
From the Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics (Trinity, p. 458) we read, “Although the notion of a divine Triad or Trinity is characteristic of the Christian religion, it is by no means peculiar to it. In Indian religion we meet with the trinitarian group of Brahma, Siva, and Vishnu; and in Egyptian religion with the trinitarian group of Osiris, Isis, and Horus, constituting a divine family, like the Father, Mother and Son in mediaeval Christian pictures.”
The Trinity doctrine incorporated a pagan concept embraced long before Christianity by ancient heathens of foreign lands. On page 595 of The Story of Civilization (vol. III), noted historian Will Durant provides these revelations, “Christianity did not destroy paganism; it adopted it… The Greek language, having reigned for centuries over philosophy, became the vehicle of Christian literature and ritual; the Greek mysteries passed down into the impressive mystery of the Mass. Other pagan cultures contributed to the syncretist result. From Egypt came the ideas of a divine Trinity.”
The pagan emperor Constantine favored Christianity because of his mother’s influence. To avert a developing schism among Christians in his realm, he called for a council to unite all Christendom into one religion.
To forestall the growing acceptance of Arianism, the “Nicene Creed” was developed which is even today a part of the liturgy of Catholic, Lutheran and other churches. The first Nicene Creed did not establish or affirm a Trinity. Only later revisions added the concept of a Trinity.
“Oneness” Concept Influential
Another teaching that was gaining ground about that time was “Monarchianism,” in which all three (Father, Son and Holy Spirit) constitute only one essence as well as one person. We know this teaching today under the term “Oneness,” which is taught by various Pentecostal churches.
The Oneness teaching goes back at least to the third century where its chief exponent, Sabellius, proposed that the Father was the Creator, who became the Son at Bethlehem, and then became the Holy Spirit when the Son ascended.
This teaching would have us believe that the Messiah YAHUSHA prayed to Himself when on earth, and that YAHUSHA raised Himself from the dead. But the Scripture says the Father raised (Greek = anistemi) Him up. (see Acts 2:24; 2:30; 2:32; 3:15; 3:26; 13:30; 13:37)
Sabellianism teaches that all three are one in person, successively assuming the role of Father, Son and presently acting as the (Holy) Set-Apart Spirit. This doctrine no doubt influenced the Trinity concept as disseminated today.
Scripture Reinterpreted for the Sake of Trinitarianism
The doctrine of the Trinity began as part of the Nicene Creed of 325, which was altered and amended over the years. To accommodate the pagan converts who worshiped a Trinity, the teachings of the Scriptures were reinterpreted to harmonize with established pagan beliefs.
Hislop’s Two Babylon’s explains these: “In the unity of that only G-d of the Babylonians, there were three persons and to symbolize that doctrine of the Trinity, they employed, as the discoveries of Layard prove, the equilateral triangle, just as it is well known the Romish Church does at this day.” A footnote points out that the Egyptians also used the triangle as a symbol of their triform divinity. (p. 16)
The Trinitarian concept gained acceptance as the Jewish converts were overwhelmed by the growing number of heathen who were taken into the church, bringing with them pagan doctrines nowhere found in the Scriptures. Pagan converts could more easily identify with Christianity and become a part of it by simply changing the names of their deities. Those who worshiped a Trinity could find one in Christianity.
Yashar’el was notably different from virtually all other religions in that they worshiped one Mighty One. The Babylonians, Egyptians, Canaanites, Zorastrians, Hindus and others worshiped a triad of major deities in a worship YAHUAH expressly abhorred. In the very first of the Ten Commandments He thundered that we are to have no other deities before Him.
Christianity began to accept many pagan doctrines, only the names were changed to appear “Christian” (for example, the pagan Roman Saturnalia became Christmas; Assyrian fertility worship of the goddess Ishtar was brought over to create the Easter {“Ishtar”} celebration; Semiramis, the “Queen of Heaven” worshiped by the Babylonians, was transformed into the Madonna worshiped by many today {“Madonna” means “my lord” from Latin mea + domina}; pagan sun worship became manifest in the Christian halo, etc.).”
The Roman Catholic church states: “The Trinity is the term employed to signify the central doctrine of the Christian religion…Thus, in the words of the Athanasian Creed: ‘the Father is G- d, the Son is G-d, and the Holy Spirit is G-d, and yet there are not three G-ds but one G-d.’ In this Trinity…the Persons are co-eternal and co-equal: all alike are uncreated and omnipotent.”
The Catholic Encyclopedia.
The Trinity is considered to be “one G-d in three persons” with each believed to be without beginning, having existed for eternity and are all equal, each being not lesser or greater than the others. Members of the National Council of Churches all espouse a belief in the Trinity.
Scripture clearly shows that YAHUAH is the supreme Mighty One in the heavens. There is no one equal to Him.
Paul wrote: “But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Messiah; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of the Messiah is YAHUAH,” 1Corinthians 11:3.
He said in Ephesians that there is one “Father of all, who is above all,” 4:6. The Savior Himself said, “My Father is greater than I,” John 14:28.
“Elohiym” Means Plural – More Than One- Not “Three” Many recognize that the Trinity teaching is confusing and in the words of the Encyclopedia
Americana is “beyond the grasp of human reason.”The Scriptures clearly teaches a plurality in the Old Testament, for the Book of Genesis begins with “In the beginning G-d [Hebrew ELOHIYM] created…” The word Elohiym is from the Hebrew Eloah with the “im” suffix denoting the plural. Elohiym is a Hebrew collective noun, masculine in gender. It has the same plural concept as words like family, group, school, board, and council. Each of these collective nouns takes a singular verb. We say the family is home. The group is small. The school is on vacation. These collective nouns are all composed of at least two individuals or perhaps more. But the collective noun usually takes a singular verb. We are not told the exact number making up a family, group, or school. So it is with the Hebrew word Elohiym.
Genesis 1:2 reads: “And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness [was] upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of ELOHIYM moved upon the face of the waters.” (Gen. 1:2)
Trinitarians seize upon the word Elohiym, then finding that it means a plurality – more than one – they immediately conclude it must mean three, a Trinity!
Spirit Is a Force
Spirit is translated from the Hebrew ruach and occurs 389 times in the Old Testament. It is rendered spirit 237 times in the King James Version. The Companion Bible says that the basic idea running through all the passages is “invisible force.” In whatever sense the word ruach is used, it means an unseen force except by its manifestations. It can be compared to a physical force like magnetism, gravity, and in our modern age, electricity and radioactivity. The Scriptures likens spirit to wind.
In the New Testament Greek text spirit is pneuma and carries the same meaning—in Greek it means to breathe. (“Pneumatic” tires are filled with air; “pneumonia” affects the lungs—the air- exchanging organs.) Both words have as their basic meaning, “breath,” but the sense extends beyond that primary meaning. Spirit is from the Latin spirare (translation of the Hebrew ruach, which means to breathe). Spirare is found in the word “respiration,” which is the process of breathing.
Is it any wonder that following His resurrection, YAHUSHA gave the RUACH HAQIDESH (Set-Apart Spirit) to His disciples when “He breathed on them,” John 20:22? Heavenly power came from His nostrils, not a person! Both ruach and pneuma mean “wind.” They can also mean the invisible, vital force in living creatures, or a dominant feeling, attitude or disposition. Spirit can refer to the invisible world, including YAHUAH and His angelic creatures as well as the evil, satanic realm. It can also refer to YAHUAH’s holy, active, or life-giving force or power.
All of these meanings have the sense of an active vitality that is invisible to human eyes. We cannot see spirit just as we cannot “see” wind, gravity, radio waves, electricity, or magnetism. But we can see what it does, the results of its activity. We can often see the effects of the special power of YAHUAH’s Set-Apart Spirit, too.
Early Fathers Knew the Essence of the RUACH HAQODESH (Set-Apart Spirit).
Many of the early “fathers,” including Justin Martyr of the second century, taught that the RUACH HAQODESH (Set-Apart Spirit) was an “influence or mode of operation of the Deity.” Hippolytus ascribed no personality to the RUACH HAQODESH (Set-Apart Spirit). In the creation, the RUACH (Spirit) of YAHUAH, or YAHUAH’s Power, went forth from Him and accomplished His will.
The RUACH HAQODESH (Set-Apart Spirit) was the power, the force, the vitality emanating from ELOHIYM that moved and acted upon the face of the waters. The RUACH (Spirit) was not a separate person moving on the waters.
“Proof” Texts to Support Trinity
An attempt to “prove” a Trinity is 1John 5:7. However, newer Scripture translations have corrected this spurious verse. The Catholic Jerusalem Bible says in a footnote to 1John 5:7, “Not in any of the early Greek manuscripts, or any of the early translations, or in the best manuscripts of the Vulgate itself.” This bogus text reads: “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.”
The Companion Bible states that this verse was not found in any Greek manuscripts before the 16th century but was first seen in the margins of some of the Latin copies; from there it crept into the text. Modern translations do not include this verse in the main body of their text but may have a footnote stating that this verse is spurious. It is plainly a forgery inserted by some Trinitarian zealot during the Dark Ages.
Matthew 28:19 is often used to promote the false Trinity, which reads as follows:
“Go therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy [Spirit]:” (Matt. 28:19). Abundant evidence exists that this verse was also not in the original texts (Jerusalem Bible is one such source).
There are four Scriptures in the Old Testament where plural personal pronouns are used in referring to ELOHIYM. The Trinitarians say these prove a Trinity, although the word Trinity itself does not appear in any of these verses:
“And ELOHIYM said, Let US make man in OUR image, after OUR likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth.” (Gen. 1:26)
“And YAHUAH ELOHIYM said, Behold, the man is become as one of US, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:” (Gen. 3:22)
“Go to, let US go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech.” (Gen. 11:7)
“Also I heard the voice of YAHUAH, saying, Whom shall I send, and who will go for US? Then said I, Here [am] I; send me.” (Isa. 6:8)
There is nothing in these verses that would lead us to accept the doctrine of a Trinity. The use of these plural pronouns (us, we, our) in referring to deity only shows plural Mighty Ones.
YAHUSHA told Phillip, “He that has seen Me has seen the Father,” John 14:9. Other verses demonstrate that YAHUSHA is the very image of the Heavenly ABBA Father, that He is the express image of His person (Heb.1:3, Col. 1:15, 2Cor. 4:4). He is the other half of this plural majesty in the heavens.
The appearance of the Set-Apart Spirit is likened to a dove, Matthew 3:16. Genesis 1:27 clearly says man is to be made “in the image of ELOHIYM.” If the Set-Apart Spirit is a third person of a Trinity, man would also look like a bird in some aspect or appear in the image of a feathered dove!
Grammatical Gender Mistaken for the Literal
Another so-called “proof” often presented to show that the Set-Apart Spirit is a sentient being is that the personal pronouns He, Him or His often refer to the Spirit in the English Scriptures.
John 14:17 is misused to force a personality aspect on the RUACH HA’QODESH (Set-Apart Spirit): “[Even] the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it sees HIM not, neither knows HIM: but you know HIM; for HE dwells with you, and shall be in you” (John 14:17).
The use of the personal pronoun WHOM in this text is unwarranted, reflecting simply the translator’s prejudice. Which better renders the Greek neuter form. The Greek pronoun is auto, and refers back to Comforter (Greek = Parakletos), which is a noun of masculine gender, and apparently the reason translators provided the “Him” and “He” pronouns.
Understand that nouns in most European languages have gender. To English-speaking peoples this is a rather peculiar characteristic of their languages. For example, in German “plate” is masculine. In French “knife” is masculine and “fork” feminine. It would be as logical to insist that “plate” and “knife” are persons—because of masculine usage in German and French—as it would be to claim that the comforter is a person because Parakletos (comforter) is masculine in Greek. Pronouns must agree in number, case, and gender.
English is not nearly so sophisticated in its grammar.
The Greek word for spirit (pneuma) is neuter in gender and properly should be translated it. Some translations do not follow the the King James in referring to the Spirit as He but more properly as it. These Scriptures are the Diaglott (a literal translation from the Greek), Rotherham, Literal Concordant, and Goodspeed, among others. Pronouns referring to spirit are also neuter. But those referring to the Father and the Son are masculine.
In contrast to the Greek, Hebrew nouns have no neuter gender. In Hebrew, nouns are either masculine or feminine. Therefore, while ruach (spirit) is masculine in gender, according to rules of Hebrew grammar, the religion of Judaism does NOT look upon ruach as a person, but as a POWER or FORCE.
Personification Doesn’t Make a Person
It is not uncommon for the Scriptures to personify objects or events by giving human characteristics or living attributes to them. Paul says in Romans 5:14, “Nevertheless, death reigned from Adam to Moses…” Death metaphorically sits upon a throne, ruling as a king.
Paul gives sin the attributes of a person in writing, “For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me. (Romans 7:11) Are we to understand that sin deceived and slew Paul? Hardly! Paul did the sinning. He broke YAHUAH’s law and was then condemned to death. Paul is using a figure of speech, giving sin a personality.
Similarly, Paul personifies the Greek word agape (translated charity, love), giving it physical attributes as well:
“Charity suffers long, [and] is kind; charity envies not; charity vaunts not itself, is not puffed up, Does not behave itself unseemly, seeks not her own, is not easily provoked, thinks no evil; Rejoices not in iniquity, but rejoices in the truth; Bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Charity never fails: but whether [there be] prophecies, they shall fail; whether [there be] tongues, they shall cease; whether [there be] knowledge, it shall vanish away.” (1 Cor. 13:4-8)
Paul knows that love is not a person, but by giving agape love personality he is able to show the great power and influence love can exert in our lives. The animation of a thing in the Scripture does not make it a person.
The Scriptures is rich in figures of speech, metaphors, and similes. Note the following examples of personification in the Scriptures where inanimate objects are given living attributes:
“Mercy and truth are met together; righteousness and peace have kissed [each other]” (Ps. 85:10)
“Truth shall spring out of the earth; and righteousness shall look down from heaven” (Ps. 85:11)
“Let the floods clap [their] hands: let the hills be joyful together” Ps. 98:8)
“Then the moon shall be confounded, and the sun ashamed, when YAHUAH of hosts shall reign in mount Zion, and in Jerusalem, and before his ancients gloriously.” (Isa. 24:23)
“The wilderness and the solitary place shall be glad for them; and the desert shall rejoice, and blossom as the rose.” (Isa. 35:1)
“Sing, O you heavens; for YAHUAH has done [it]: shout, you lower parts of the earth: break forth into singing, you mountains, O forest, and every tree therein: for YAHUAH has redeemed Jacob, and glorified Himself in Yashar’el.” (Isa. 44:23)
“For you shall go out with joy, and be led forth with peace: the mountains and the hills shall break forth before you into singing, and all the trees of the field shall clap [their] hands.” (Isa. 55:12)
“And he had in his right hand seven stars: and out of his mouth went a sharp two-edged sword: and his countenance [was] as the sun shineth in HIS strength.” (Rev. 1:16) Does using the pronoun “his” make the sun a person?
“You are the salt of the earth: but if the salt has lost HIS savour, wherewith shall it be salted…” (Mat. 5:13) Is salt a man?
The RUACH HAQODESH’s (Set-Apart Spirit) Nonperson, Inanimate Attributes
The invisible power or force which flows from YAHUAH is unseen, and is often treated as a material substance. The Spirit is POURED out, Isaiah 32:15, 44:3, Acts 2:17); SHED (Titus 3:5- 6, Acts 2:33); BREATHED (John 20:22); and it FILLED people (Acts 2:2-4, Ephesians 5:18). YAHUSHA Himself was ANOINTED with the Spirit (Acts 10:38) and men were BAPTIZED with it (Matt. 3:11).
Is it possible for a person to be “poured out” on other people? If the Spirit is properly recognized as a force or energy, then the correct sense of the Spirit’s empowering the people to abide by YAHUAH’s law is understood, especially if they are filled with that Spirit poured out on them.
We read that YAHUAH anointed YAHUSHA of Nazareth with the Set-Apart Spirit in Acts 10:38. This act is incomprehensible if we accept the pagan teaching that the Set-Apart Spirit is a person equal to the Father and the Son. Why and how could this co-equal, in-power person be poured upon the Son who was equal in power?
If we properly understand the Spirit to be force or energy, (power) poured upon the Son, saturating Him as with oil, then we truly grasp the Scriptural meaning of “spirit” and see why YAUSHA is called the Messiah, YAHUAH’s “anointed” (anointed means to rub with oil).
“Trinity” and Pagan Baal Worship
Proving that a doctrine is not from the Scripture is more difficult when it has been taught as truth for centuries. The liturgies and creeds as well as repetitious songs (like “Holy, Holy, Holy, L-rd G-d Almighty”), heard and sung since childhood, have engrained the Trinity concept in minds and hearts. False concepts become accepted as bedrock truth if never analyzed or challenged. But brought before the piercing light of Scripture, the truth becomes crystal clear to the open-minded and sincere Scripture student.
The concept of trinity does appear in the Old Testament and it should be noted that it involves the worship of the pagan deity Baal:
“And there came a man from Baalshalisha, and brought the man of ELOHIYM bread of the firstfruits, twenty loaves of barley, and full ears of corn in the husk thereof. And he said, Give unto the people that they may eat.” (2 Kings 4:42)
The Hebrew shalishsa, meaning “three”, is connected with the trinitarian Baal! Baal was influential in agriculture, where the trinity of earth, sun, and water were worshiped.
Set-Apart Spirit Symbolizes YAHUAH’s Attributes
The Set-Apart Spirit is an invisible, holy, flowing energy coming from the Heavenly Father and shared by His Son, YAHUSHA. This Spirit, force or power accomplishes their will.
At times YAHUAH refers to His Spirit as a power, an attitude, a pervading force, a powerful vitality, a dynamic influence that comes from Him. His Spirit, emanating from Himself, helps us reach a standard of righteousness and so influences behavior that at times it is seen as almost a living vitality, as evident from the following verses:
“And Yauwah said, My Spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also [is] flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.” (Gen. 6:3)
“But Peter said, Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Set-Apart Spirit, and to keep back [part] of the price of the land?” (Acts 5:3)
“The Spirit itself bears witness with our spirit, that we are the children of ELOHIYM.” (Rom. 8:16)
Those who don’t understand this metaphoric usage, as simply an extension of YAHUAH Himself, leap to the conclusion that He is talking of another Being.
The New Schaff-Herzog Religious Encyclopedia explains that although Scripture uses terms like grieved in reference to the Set-Apart Spirit, the terminology should not be taken for a separate Person. “A similar concept underlies the Johannine terms teaching, reproving, and declaring, as applied to the personal Paraclete. Nevertheless, to interpret these passages as implying a person distinct from G-d and Chr-st, whose Spirit he is called, is not warranted.” (Trinity, Doctrine of, p. 19)
Scriptural Synopsis of Set-Apart Spirit Facts
Not all the following statements have been explained fully within this brief study, yet are important to consider in regard to a Trinity doctrine supposedly supported by the Scriptures:
* The Greek philosopher Plato and the Alexandrine Platonists are the source of the modern trinity doctrine.
Author Alvan Lamson elaborates on the doctrine of the Trinity and sums up what history shows about the Trinity on page 34 of The Church of the First Three Centuries: “… we must look, not to the Jewish Scriptures, nor to the teachings of [Yahshua] and his apostles, but to Philo [the Jewish philosopher of the first century C.E.] and the Alexandrine Platonists. In consistency with this view, we maintain that the doctrine of the Trinity was of gradual and comparatively late formation; that it had its origin in a source entirely foreign from that of the Jewish and Christian Scriptures; that it grew up, and was in grafted on Christianity, through the hands of the Platonizing Fathers…”
* The apostate church about the fourth century accepted the Trinity, which was then passed on to her daughters. Acceptance of a Triune deity was influenced by the polytheistic (“having many deities”) worship everywhere extant among heathen peoples.
* Neither the term Trinity nor its doctrine is found in either the Old or New Testaments.
* The (Holy) Set-Apart Spirit (erroneous “Ghost”) is not a person.
* Ruach (Hebrew) and pneuma (Greek) are the Hebrew and Greek from which we get RUACH HA’QODESH (Set-Apart Spirit) in our Scriptures. They have as their root meaning “wind or breath” in both the Hebrew and Greek.
* The RUACH HA’QODESH (Set-Apart Spirit) is that invisible force or energy flowing from the Father and Son. It might be likened to the rays of the sun that give us light and heat. The rays are not the sun, but are the power from the sun.
* Personal pronouns referring to the Set-Apart Spirit do not make it a person any more than YAHUSHA’s telling Peter to put the sword back into “HIS” place makes the sword a male person (Mat. 26:52).
* The RUACH HA’QODESH (Set-Apart Spirit) can be “shed” (Acts 2:33), “poured” (Acts 2:17), “breathed” (John 20:22), “stirred up” (2Tim. 1:6), “quenched” (1Thes. 5:19), “renewed” (2Cor. 4:16)—all of which are literally incompatible with a person or being.
* The Father and Son converse with each other, but do not talk to the Spirit.
* Nowhere is the Spirit prayed to. If the RUACH HA’QODESH (Set-Apart Spirit) were a person, then the RUACH HA’QODESH would be YAHUSHA’s father and not YAHUAH.
Notice how YAHUSHA was conceived in the flesh: “But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the YAHUAH appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, you son of David, fear not to take unto you Mary your wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Set-Apart Spirit” (Matt. 1:20).
Yet YAHUSHA called YAHUAH His Father, not the RUACH HA’QODESH (Set-Apart Spirit). He was conceived by and through the power of YAHUAH—making YAHUAH His Father.
* Scripture never calls the RUACH HA’QODESH (Set-Apart Spirit) the “third person.”
* Salutations found in the first verse or two of the Epistles by Paul, Peter, and John mention Father and Son, but not Spirit.
In his Epistles Paul greets the brethren in the name of YAHUAH and YAHUSHA. Never in the opening of his letters does Paul ever greet anyone “in the Name of the RUACH HA’QODESH (Set-Apart (Holy) Spirit).” Not a person, the RUACH HA’QODESH (Set-Apart Spirit) has no name as do YAHUAH and YAHUSHA. For example, Ephesians 1:2 reads, “Grace [be] to you, and peace, from YAHUAH our Father, and from the Savior YAHUSHA the Messiah.
* The Scriptural meaning of being “one” means being in accord, harmony, of like mind, united in goals. Not being one personage.
* ELOHIYM, used for the Heavenly Majesty, is a collective noun, and does not specifically mean “three.” It simply means more than one, a plurality.
* Examples given in the Scriptures show the Father on a throne: Ezekiel 1:26; Daniel 7:9; Acts 7:55-56; Rev. 4:2; 5:1,7; 20:11, etc. The RUACH HA’QODESH (Set-Apart Spirit) is not given a throne (but indwells us, as it did Stephen, Acts 7:55).
Let His RUACH (Spirit) Power Transform Your Life
As sincere believers in YAHUAH, it is up to us to be in harmony with His will and allow the supernal power of His Spirit to motivate our actions, permeate our thoughts and elevate our desires for good. As we mature in the Messiah, we overcome our selfish, carnal, worldly desires and strive to walk in that higher, heavenly realm, allowing His Spirit to guide us.
“According as His Divine Power has given unto us all things that [pertain] unto life and righteousness, through the knowledge of Him that has called us to glory and virtue: Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these you might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.” (2 Pet. 1:3-4)
May you find the peace that passes all understanding as you submit to Almighty YAHUAH ELOHIYM and begin living for Him.
Truthers Journal 