Trinity on Trial An in-depth examination of Trinitarian doctrine
The Council of Ephesus

by K.N. Stovra

"They well exploit you with well-turned words."

The Crafting of a Lie.

The following is absolutely shocking. If you believe in the Trinity then you accept the very same things as defined by the men of Ephesus whether you realize it or not. The Church Council of Ephesus which was key to finalizing the doctrine of the Trinity, states that the person Jesus did not die on the cross for your sins. Yes that's right. Trinitarians teach the very same thing today. They "say" that Jesus died but they do not really believe he died. This is the original lie, "you will not "really" die." Please read it carefully and then even more carefully read the analysis which follows. What they do is use word trickery and they talk about the Son of God as if he were a person one minute and a nature the next minute. In other words, they do a smoke and mirror shell game where they switch between discussing him as a "who" and a "what." In one breath the Word of God is a "who" and in the next breath that they implicitly switch to a "what" to deceive you. But in the end their lie is exposed. They are simply resorting to Word Wizardry. In effect, they have Jesus twins: one who died, and one who did not die, one who died, and one who escaped; one who remained behind dead on the cross and one who went up from his body and did not die. These are the "two natures" they teach. They teach two natures but suggestively get everyone to think "two persons." It is a deception. In the end, they say the person did NOT die but a nature died. So they will say the one, God the Son, did not die, but the other, Jesus the man, was dead. They really teach two persons here although they deny they do just as a dishonest person would do. In other words they "say" they don't teach two persons in words, but in concept they actually do. This is actually what is accepted by Trinitarians today although they make sure they cloak it in well turned clever words of deception. What they are teaching is the Antichrist teaching John warned about in his first letter. This IS Trinitarianism, the spirit of the Antichrist. Any words in square brackets in the following are mine to help illustrate what they are saying.

The holy and great Synod therefore says, that the only begotten Son, born according to nature of God the Father, very God of very God, Light of Light, by whom the Father made all things, came down, and was incarnate, and was made man, suffered, and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven. These words and these decrees we ought to follow, considering what is meant by the Word of God being incarnate and made man. For we do not say that the nature of the Word was changed and became flesh, or that it was converted into a whole man consisting of soul and body, but rather that the Word having personally united to himself flesh animated by a rational soul, did in an ineffable and inconceivable manner become man, and was called the Son of Man, not merely as willing or being pleased to be so called, neither on account of taking to himself a person, but because the two natures being brought together in a true union, there is of both one Christ and one Son; for the difference of the natures is not taken away by the union, but rather the divinity and the humanity make perfect for us the one Lord Jesus Christ by their ineffable and inexpressible union. So then he who had an existence before all ages and was born of the Father, is said to have been born according to the flesh of a woman, not as though his divine nature received its beginning of existence in the holy Virgin, for it needed not any second generation after that of the Father (for it would be absurd and foolish to say that he who existed before all ages, coeternal with the Father, needed any second beginning of existence), but since, for us and for our salvation, he personally united to himself a human body, and came forth of a woman, he is in this way said to be born after the flesh; for he was not first born a common man of the holy Virgin, and then the Word came down and entered into him, but the union being made in the womb itself, he is said to endure a birth after the flesh, ascribing to himself the birth of his own flesh. On this account we say that he suffered and rose again; not as if God the Word suffered in his own nature stripes, or the piercing of the nails, or any other wounds, for the Divine nature is incapable of suffering, inasmuch as it is incorporeal, but since that which had become his own body suffered in this way, he is also said to have suffered for us; for he who is in himself incapable of suffering we conceive respecting his dying; for the Word of God is by nature immortal and incorruptible, and life and life-giving; since, however, his own body did, as Paul says, by the grace of God taste death for every man, he himself is said to have suffered death for us, not as if he had any experience of death in his own nature (for it would be madness to say or think this), but because, as I have just said, his flesh tasted death. In like manner his flesh being raised again, it is spoken of as his resurrection, not as if he had fallen into corruption (God forbid), but because his own body was raised again. We, therefore, confess one Christ and Lord, not as worshipping a man with the Word (lest this expression "with the Word" should suggest to the mind the idea of division), but worshipping him as one and the same, forasmuch as the body of the Word, with which he sits with the Father, is not separated from the Word himself, not as if two sons were sitting with him, but one by the union with the flesh. If, however, we reject the personal union as impossible or unbecoming, we fall into the error of speaking of two sons, for it will be necessary to distinguish, and to say, that he who was properly man was honoured with the appellation of Son, and that he who is properly the Word of God, has by nature both the name and the reality of Sonship. We must not, therefore, divide the one Lord Jesus Christ into two Sons. Neither will it at all avail to a sound faith to hold, as some do, an union of persons; for the Scripture has not said that the Word united to himself the person of man, but that he was made flesh. This expression, however, "the Word was made flesh," can mean nothing else but that he partook of flesh and blood like to us; he made our body his own, and came forth man from a woman, not casting off his existence as God, or his generation of God the Father, but even in taking to himself flesh remaining what he was. This the declaration of the correct faith proclaims everywhere. This was the sentiment of the holy Fathers; therefore they ventured to call the holy Virgin, the Mother of God, not as if the nature of the Word or his divinity had its beginning from the holy Virgin, but because of her was born that holy body with a rational soul, to which the Word being personally united is said to be born according to the flesh. These things, therefore, I now write unto you for the love of Christ, beseeching you as a brother, and testifying to you before Christ and the elect angels, that you would both think and teach these things with us, that the peace of the Churches may be preserved and the bond of concord and love continue unbroken amongst the Priests of God. (Council of Ephesus 431 A.D., emphasis mine).

Sounds good huh? Well it's a pack of demonic lies and now we will see why. They "say" one thing but they teach another and even tell you right here to "think" another concept when you hear the words they "say." What many people do not fully comprehend is that words have concepts attached to them. The word spoken or written is one thing, but the concept attached to it is quite another. It is for this very reason we have communication difficulties between us. What these men have done is changed the concepts behind the spoken words they "say" and the word of Scripture, in order to perpetuate their lie. Now let us sort out this lie they are telling and undo the knots of their crafty deception and undeniably prove beyond all doubt they are teaching that the person Jesus Christ did not die for our sins.

What these men are teaching here at Ephesus is a pack of lies. Now read the following which reveals the absurdity of that above statement. The Word of God they are talking about in the above statement is the same person as the person Jesus Christ. There was only one person, not two. What immediately follows begins to unravel the deception. They, and Trinitarians today, actually teach the person who was also the person Jesus, did not "really" die and was not dead in the tomb. They teach the man Jesus was really an incorporeal phantom-like spiritual entity who himself did not die but escaped a the point of death to leave a dead body behind on the cross and placed in the tomb. The following exposes how they deceive everyone in the above statement with their word trickery. Since "the Word" is just another name for the same person who is Jesus we can replace the name "Jesus" whenever they are talking about that person and not a nature. You will see clearly that they teach Jesus did not die for our sins on the cross and was not dead in the tomb. These men are a pack of liars who have crafted a deception in well turned words to deceive many.

The holy and great Synod therefore says, that the only begotten person who is Jesus born according to nature of God the Father, very God of very God, Light of Light, by whom the Father made all things, came down, and was incarnate, and was made man, suffered, and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven. These words and these decrees we ought to follow, considering what is "meant" by the Word of God being incarnate and made man. For we do not "say" that the nature of person who is Jesus was changed and became flesh, or that the person who is Jesus was converted into a whole man consisting of soul and body; but rather that the person who is Jesus having united to himSelf flesh animated by a rational soul, did in an ineffable and inconceivable manner become man, and was called the Son of Man, not merely as willing or being pleased to be so called, neither on account of taking to himself a person, but because the two natures being brought together in a true union, there is of both one Christ and one Son; for the difference of the natures is not taken away by the union, but rather the divinity and the humanity make perfect for us the one person who is Jesus by their ineffable and inexpressible union. So then the person who is Jesus who had an existence before all ages and was born of the Father, "is said" to have been born according to the flesh of a woman, not as though the divine nature of the person who is Jesus received its beginning of existence in the holy Virgin, for the person who is Jesus needed not any second generation after that of the Father (for it would be absurd and foolish to "say" that the person who is Jesus who existed before all ages, coeternal with the Father, needed any second beginning of existence), but since, for us and for our salvation, the person who is Jesus personally united to himSelf a human body, and came forth of a woman, the person who is Jesus in this way "is said to be" born after the flesh; for the person who is Jesus was not first born a common man of the holy Virgin, and then the person who is Jesus came down and entered into him, but the union being made in the womb itself, the person who is Jesus "is said" to endure a birth after the flesh, ascribing to himSelf the birth of his own flesh. On this account we "say" that the person who is Jesus suffered and rose again; not as if the person who is Jesus suffered in his own nature stripes, or the piercing of the nails, or any other wounds, for the person who is Jesus is incapable of suffering, inasmuch as the person who is Jesus is INCORPOREAL [a phantom incognito who escaped at death], but since that which had become the body of the person who is Jesus suffered in this way, the person who is Jesus is also "said" to suffer for us for the person who is Jesus is in himSelf incapable of suffering was in a suffering body. In the same manner also we "conceive" respecting his dying; for the person who is Jesus is by nature immortal and incorruptible, and life and life-giving; since the body of the person who is Jesus did, however, as Paul says, by the grace of God "taste" death for every man, the person who is Jesus himself is "said" to have" suffered death for us, NOT as if the person who is Jesus had any experience of death in his own nature (for it would be madness to say or think this), but because, as I have just said, the flesh of the person who is Jesus "tasted" death. In like manner the flesh of the person who is Jesus being raised again, "it is spoken of" as the resurrection of the person who is Jesus, not as if the person who is Jesus had fallen into corruption (God forbid) [with such words they try to scare you from believing the person Jesus really died and was dead], but because the body of the person who is Jesus was raised again. We, therefore, confess one Christ and Lord, not as worshipping a man with the person who is Jesus (lest this expression "with the Word" should suggest to the mind the idea of division) [that's a distraction so you don't see what they are really saying], but worshipping the person who is Jesus as one and the same, forasmuch as the body of the person who is Jesus, with which the person who is Jesus sits with the Father, is not separated from the person who is Jesus himSelf [except when "his body was dead"], not as if two sons were sitting with him, but one by the union with the flesh. If, however, we reject the personal union as impossible or unbecoming, we fall into the error of speaking of two sons, for it will be necessary to distinguish, and to "say", that the person who is Jesus who was properly man was honoured with the appellation of Son, and that he who is properly the Word of God, has by nature both the name and the reality of Sonship. We must not, therefore, divide the person who is Jesus into two Sons [if you read this carefully you will see that is a pack of lies because rather than "saying" they divide him into two persons, they hypocritically just do it and they divide him into two persons under the guise of two natures; they "say" on thing and do another] Neither will it at all avail to a sound faith to hold, as some do, a union of persons; for the Scripture has not said that the person who is Jesus united to himself the person of man, but that the person who is Jesus was made flesh [here they will redefine the word "made" to "added" and nullify the Word of God for the sake of their tradition] This expression, however [now they will tell you what to think instead when you hear those words "they say"; they deceptively say one thing but believe and teach another], "the Word the person who is Jesus was made flesh," can "mean" nothing else but that the person who is Jesus partook of flesh and blood like to us [He was not himself really made into flesh but added flesh to his person as a possession]; the person who is Jesus made our body his own [he "had" a body but was not himself that body], and came forth man from a woman, not casting off his existence as God, or his generation of God the Father, but even in taking to himSelf flesh remaining what the person who is Jesus was. This the declaration of the correct faith proclaims everywhere. This was the sentiment of the holy Fathers; therefore they ventured to call the holy Virgin, the Mother of the person who is Jesus , not as if the person who is Jesus or his divinity had its beginning from the holy Virgin, but because of her was born that holy body with a rational soul, to which the person who is Jesus being personally united "is said" to be born according to the flesh. These things, therefore, I now write unto you for the love of Christ, beseeching you as a brother, and testifying to you before Christ and the elect angels, that you would both think and teach these things with us, that the peace of the Churches may be preserved and the bond of concord and love continue unbroken amongst "the Priests of God".

"You won't 'really' die" - The Serpent, Eden

What a brood of liars. These men are not Shepherds of the flock but a pack of wolves feeding on the blood of God's children. They actually say the person Jesus did not die for our sins but was an incorporeal phantom who escaped at the point of death. The Bible clearly teaches that the person in question was hanging dead on the cross and put dead in the tomb.

When JESUS had received the vinegar, he said, "It is finished"; and HE bowed HIS head and gave up HIS spirit. (John 19:30).

Then JESUS, crying with a loud voice, said, "Father, into your hands I commit MY spirit!" And having said this HE breathed HIS last. (Luke 23:46).

Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us. For it is written, "Cursed be every one who hangs on a tree." (Galatians 3:13).

So the soldiers came and broke the legs of the one, and of the other who had been crucified with him. But when they came to JESUS and saw that HE was already dead, they did not break HIS legs. But one of the soldiers pierced HIS side with a spear. (John 19:32-34).

Therefore order the tomb to be secured until the third day, lest his disciples go and steal HIM away, and tell the people, "HE has risen from the dead,' and the last deception will be worse than the first." (Matthew 27:64).

Now in the place where he was crucified there was a garden, and in the garden a new tomb where no one had ever been laid. So because of the Jewish day of Preparation, as the tomb was close at hand, they laid JESUS there. (John 19:42).

And when he learned from the centurion that he was dead, he granted the body to Joseph. And he bought a linen shroud, and taking HIM down, wrapped HIM in the linen shroud, and laid HIM in a tomb which had been hewn out of the rock; and he rolled a stone against the door of the tomb. Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joses saw where HE was laid." (Mark 15:45-47).

So Mary Magedelene ran, and went to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one whom Jesus loved, and said to them, "They have taken THE LORD out of the tomb, and we do not know where they have laid HIM"... Peter then came out with the other disciple, and they went toward the tomb. They both ran but the other disciple outran Peter and reached the tomb first and stooping to look in, he saw the linen cloths lying there, but he did not go in. Then Simon Peter came, following him, and went into the tomb; he saw the linen cloths lying, and the napkin, which had been on HIS head, not lying with the linen cloths but rolled up in a place by itself. Then the other disciple, who reached the tomb first, also went in, and he saw and believed. For as yet they did not know the Scripture, that HE must rise from the dead. Then the disciples went back to their homes. But Mary stood weeping outside the tomb, and as she wept she stooped to look into the tomb and she saw two angels in white, sitting where the body of Jesus had lain, one at the head and one at the feet. They said to her, "Woman, why are you weeping?" She said to them, "Because they have taken away MY LORD, and I do not know where they have laid HIM." (John 20:2-14).

But the angel said to the women, "Do not be afraid; for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. HE is not here; for HE has risen, as he said. Come, see the place where HE lay. Then go quickly and tell his disciples that HE has risen from the dead. (Matthew 28:5-7).

While they were going, behold, some of the guard went into the city and told the chief priests all that had taken place. And when they had assembled together with the elders and taken counsel, they gave a sum of money to the soldiers and said, "Tell the people, 'His disciples came by night and stole HIM away while we were asleep.' (Matthew 28:11-13 RSV).

And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, bought spices, so that they might go and anoint HIM.....And he said to them, "Do not be amazed; you seek JESUS OF NAZARETH, WHO was crucified. HE has risen, HE is not here; see the place where they laid HIM. (Mark 16:1-6).

"I" was DEAD. - the Son of God (Revelation 1:18).


A person, "I", not just a nature, was dead.


Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us. For it is written, "Cursed be every one who hangs on a tree." (Galatians 3:13).

Now, let us look at why they concocted this lie. Trinitarians say that the Word is the same person who is Jesus and the Word is God the Son and therefore "Jesus is God" and is appropriately therefore called "God." So in the following, we now will do the same referring to Jesus as "God." The reason they are concocting this lie is because God cannot be dead flesh in the tomb so they had to devise a scheme around it. They need to avoid the annoying implication of their lie that if God had become flesh then God was dead. Watch what happens here. Now remember there is only one person here, not two. In Trinitarianism, "Jesus" and "God the Son" are the exact same person. If one says "Jesus is "God" meaning "God the Son", then:

When GOD had received the vinegar, he said, "It is finished"; and GOD bowed HIS head and gave up HIS spirit. (John 19:30).

Then GOD, crying with a loud voice, said, "Father, into your hands I commit MY spirit!" And having said this GOD breathed HIS last. (Luke 23:46).

GOD redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us. For it is written, "Cursed be every one who hangs on a tree." (Galatians 3:13).

So the soldiers came and broke the legs of the one, and of the other who had been crucified with him. But when they came to GOD and saw that GOD was already dead, they did not break HIS legs. But one of the soldiers pierced HIS side with a spear. (John 19:32-34).

Therefore order the tomb to be secured until the third day, lest his disciples go and steal HIM away, and tell the people, "GOD has risen from the dead,' and the last deception will be worse than the first." (Matthew 27:64).

Now in the place where he was crucified there was a garden, and in the garden a new tomb where no one had ever been laid. So because of the Jewish day of Preparation, as the tomb was close at hand, they laid GOD there. (John 19:42).

And when he learned from the centurion that he was dead, he granted the body to Joseph. And he bought a linen shroud, and taking HIM down, wrapped HIM in the linen shroud, and laid HIM in a tomb which had been hewn out of the rock; and he rolled a stone against the door of the tomb. Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joses saw where GOD was laid." (Mark 15:45-47).

So Mary Magedelene ran, and went to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one whom Jesus loved, and said to them, "They have taken GOD out of the tomb, and we do not know where they have laid GOD"... Peter then came out with the other disciple, and they went toward the tomb. They both ran but the other disciple outran Peter and reached the tomb first and stooping to look in, he saw the linen cloths lying there, but he did not go in. Then Simon Peter came, following him, and went into the tomb; he saw the linen cloths lying, and the napkin, which had been on HIS head, not lying with the linen cloths but rolled up in a place by itself. Then the other disciple, who reached the tomb first, also went in, and he saw and believed. For as yet they did not know the Scripture, that GOD must rise from the dead. Then the disciples went back to their homes. But Mary stood weeping outside the tomb, and as she wept she stooped to look into the tomb and she saw two angels in white, sitting where the body of GOD had lain, one at the head and one at the feet. They said to her, "Woman, why are you weeping?" She said to them, "Because they have taken away GOD, and I do not know where they have laid GOD." (John 20:2-14).

But the angel said to the women, "Do not be afraid; for I know that you seek GOD who was crucified. GOD is not here; for GOD has risen, as he said. Come, see the place where GOD lay. Then go quickly and tell his disciples that GOD has risen from the dead. (Matthew 28:5-7).

While they were going, behold, some of the guard went into the city and told the chief priests all that had taken place. And when they had assembled together with the elders and taken counsel, they gave a sum of money to the soldiers and said, "Tell the people, 'His disciples came by night and stole GOD away while we were asleep.' (Matthew 28:11-13 RSV).

And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, bought spices, so that they might go and anoint HIM.....And he said to them, "Do not be amazed; you seek GOD, WHO was crucified. GOD has risen, GOD is not here; see the place where they laid GOD. (Mark 16:1-6).

"GOD" was DEAD. - the Son of God (Revelation 1:18).


Now if you read the following carefully, then you will see more clearly below why they concocted this lie.

The holy and great Synod therefore says, that the only begotten GOD born according to nature of God the Father, very God of very God, Light of Light, by whom the Father made all things, came down, and was incarnate, and was made man, suffered, and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven. These words and these decrees we ought to follow, considering what is "meant" by the Word of God being incarnate and made man. For we do not "say" that the nature of GOD was changed and became flesh, or that GOD was converted into a whole man consisting of soul and body; but rather that GOD having united to himSelf flesh animated by a rational soul, did in an ineffable and inconceivable manner become man, and was called the Son of Man, not merely as willing or being pleased to be so called, neither on account of taking to himself a person, but because the two natures being brought together in a true union, there is of both one Christ and one Son; for the difference of the natures is not taken away by the union, but rather the divinity and the humanity make perfect for us the one GOD by their ineffable and inexpressible union. So then GOD who had an existence before all ages and was born of the Father, "is said" to have been born according to the flesh of a woman, not as though the divine nature of GOD received its beginning of existence in the holy Virgin, for GOD needed not any second generation after that of the Father (for it would be absurd and foolish to "say" that GOD who existed before all ages, coeternal with the Father, needed any second beginning of existence), but since, for us and for our salvation, GOD personally united to himSelf a human body, and came forth of a woman, GOD in this way "is said to be" born after the flesh; for GOD was not first born a common man of the holy Virgin, and then GOD came down and entered into him, but the union being made in the womb itself, GOD "is said" to endure a birth after the flesh, ascribing to himSelf the birth of his own flesh. On this account we "say" that GOD suffered and rose again; not as if GOD suffered in his own nature stripes, or the piercing of the nails, or any other wounds, for GOD is incapable of suffering, inasmuch as GOD is INCORPOREAL [a phantom incognito who escaped at death], but since that which had become the body of GOD suffered in this way, GOD is also "said" to suffer for us for GOD is in himSelf incapable of suffering was in a suffering body. In the same manner also we "conceive" respecting his dying; for GOD is by nature immortal and incorruptible, and life and life-giving; since the body of GOD did, however, as Paul says, by the grace of God "taste" death for every man, GOD himself is "said" to have" suffered death for us, NOT as if GOD had any experience of death in his own nature (for it would be madness to say or think this), but because, as I have just said, the flesh of GOD "tasted" death. In like manner the flesh of GOD being raised again, "it is spoken of" as the resurrection of GOD, not as if GOD had fallen into corruption (God forbid) [with such words they try to scare you from believing the person Jesus really died and was dead], but because the body of GOD was raised again. We, therefore, confess one Christ and Lord, not as worshipping a man with GOD (lest this expression "with the Word" should suggest to the mind the idea of division) [that's a distraction so you don't see what they are really saying], but worshipping GOD as one and the same, forasmuch as the body of GOD, with which GOD sits with the Father, is not separated from GOD himSelf [except when "his body was dead"], not as if two sons were sitting with him, but one by the union with the flesh. If, however, we reject the personal union as impossible or unbecoming, we fall into the error of speaking of two sons, for it will be necessary to distinguish, and to "say", that GOD who was properly man was honoured with the appellation of Son, and that he who is properly the Word of God, has by nature both the name and the reality of Sonship. We must not, therefore, divide GOD into two Sons. Neither will it at all avail to a sound faith to hold, as some do, a union of persons; for the Scripture has not said that GOD united to himself the person of man, but that GOD was made flesh [here they will redefine the word "made" to "added" and nullify the Word of God for the sake of their tradition] This expression, however [now they will tell you what to think instead when you hear those words "they say"; they deceptively say one thing but believe and teach another], "the Word GOD was made flesh," can "mean" nothing else but that GOD partook of flesh and blood like to us [He was not himself really made into flesh but added flesh to his person as a possession]; GOD made our body his own [he "had" a body but was not himself that body], and came forth man from a woman, not casting off his existence as God, or his generation of God the Father, but even in taking to himSelf flesh remaining what GOD was. This the declaration of the correct faith proclaims everywhere. This was the sentiment of the holy Fathers; therefore they ventured to call the holy Virgin, the Mother of GOD , not as if GOD or his divinity had its beginning from the holy Virgin, but because of her was born that holy body with a rational soul, to which GOD being personally united "is said" to be born according to the flesh. These things, therefore, I now write unto you for the love of Christ, beseeching you as a brother, and testifying to you before Christ and the elect angels, that you would both think and teach these things with us, that the peace of the Churches may be preserved and the bond of concord and love continue unbroken amongst "the Priests of God".

Now let us sort this out very, very carefully.

The holy and great Synod

A convenient term to make you feel fearfully humbled in the presence of their self proclaimed greatness and never question what they "say."

therefore says, that the only begotten Son, born according to nature of God the Father, very God of very God, Light of Light, by whom the Father made all things, came down, and was incarnate, and was made man, suffered,

Now below, we will undeniably discover how they "say" one thing but teach another and also teach others to "think" ideas other than what these words actually mean. In other words, the words are one thing but their concepts are quite another and this is the basis of their illusion here. This is what they "say" but that they do not "really" teach that the person really did die. The "say" one thing in words but teach another thing in concepts. They use a smoke screen by referring to the person of Jesus Christ the Son as "the Word" which is not immediately suggestive to the human mind as a person, but as a thing, and then dicuss natures being born and dying instead of a person being born and dying. They do this so they can switch back and forth from referring to him as a nature (a "what") and a person (a "who") and pull off this deception. These men are saying, at times, that the Word is a person but they deny the word became and was flesh. The Bible clearly teaches us that the Word was himself that flesh, which these men deny. In fact, John makes this point because of this very lie. (Jn 1:1,14; 6:51; 1 John 1:1-3; 4:2-3; 2 Jn 1:7).

and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven. These words and these decrees we ought to follow, considering what is meant by the Word of God being incarnate and made man.

Now right here you can see what is happening already. They "say" one thing in words but now they are going to tell you what concepts they want you to think in your mind despite those words. You will see that there is what "they say" in order to sound like they are being Scriptural, and then there is what "they mean," and these two things are not the same. This is the work of deceivers.

For we do not say that the nature of the Word was changed and became flesh,

Now we see the smoke and mirrors already at already at work. They are going to pull a fast one right here. Where the Bible says that the Word became and was made flesh, according to the seed and flesh of David, they are going to claim the Word did not become flesh but "added" flesh to his divine nature such that he himself was not that flesh but only lived in and with flesh. Notice that they say it is wrong to presume the divine nature became human nature. That's a trick because this is not the question. It's called a "false dilemma." No one needs to know if the person's nature was changed from one to another but if the person himself changed from one nature to another. The real question is not whether the divine nature changed into a human nature. No one needs to know whether the divine nature was changed into a human nature but whether the person changed from being in one one nature to being in another nature. The real question is whether a person changed from having a divine nature to a human nature. The Bible says Yes!

or that it [the Word's nature] was converted into a whole man consisting of soul and body; but rather that the Word having PERSONALLY united to himSELF flesh animated by a rational soul,

Again they distract you with their illusions. It does not matter if the Word's nature was converted. What matter is whether the person converted from one nature to another. They are saying the divine person with a divine nature by nature "added" a human nature to his person. Now we have one person who is divine by nature but "has" also a human nature along with his divine nature but is not himself human by nature.

did in an ineffable and inconceivable manner

Another word trick to control people by fear. They say it is a mystery so that it cannot and should not be figured out. But of course they have it all figured out don't they? The idea here is to cause everyone to presume it is an unfathomable mystery so that no one bothers to look into their lie.

become man, and was called the Son of Man, not merely as willing or being pleased to be so called, neither on account of taking to himSELF a person,

Another false dilemma. It does not matter whether this issue is about Nestorius or not; the dilemma is still false because the real issue is not whether the Word added a person to himself. They say no which is correct. But then they do another shifty move. Instead of saying the Word added a human person to himself, they say the word added a human nature to himself and discuss this "nature" as if it "were" a person anyway. This is why they will say "Jesus was dead in the tomb" but will also say "God the Son was not dead in the tomb." That's two people folks. So here they say person, the "who" has two natures, one divine nature which he is by nature, and one human nature which he is not by nature. Effectually, they say the Word did not become flesh but added a body of flesh as a possession.

but because the two natures being brought together in a true union, there is of both one Christ and one Son; for the difference of the natures is not taken away by the union, but rather the divinity and the humanity make perfect for us the one Lord Jesus Christ by their ineffable and inexpressible union.

So what we have now is one person with two natures which is classic Trinitarianism. But if you will notice their language here you will see that one nature is his nature by nature (the divine nature) and the other nature (human nature) is not his nature by nature. He simply "has" a human body of flesh as a possession of his but he himself, the person, is not himself that body of flesh. They must do this or they are caught saying God was dead flesh which is why they are spending so much effort on that issue here.

So then HE who had an existence before all ages and was born of the Father, is said to have been born according to the flesh of a woman,

Notice the language here, "is said to have." There is a reason many Catholic theologians do not really like discussing Jesus as the Son and seed of David. It is because to be the seed of David as WHO you are, and sit on his throne, then you must BE that flesh of his flesh. They teach that "he" the person was not that flesh, and to afford the lie they must, or then they would also have to say "God" was dead flesh in the tomb.

not as though his divine nature received its beginning of existence in the holy Virgin, for it needed not any second generation after that of the Father (for it would be absurd and foolish to say that he who existed before all ages, coeternal with the Father, needed any second beginning of existence), but since, for us and for our salvation, he PERSONALLY united to himSELF a human body, and came forth of a woman, HE is in this way said to be born after the flesh;

Notice the language here again, "is said to be." In other words, they "say" the Word was born flesh of the flesh of Man but not "really." What we have so far is that the PERSON, who has a divine nature, and is divine by nature, adding a human body to himself as a possession of his but he himself is not that flesh. He as a person simply possesses a body and a body belongs to him although he the person is not that body. Again, they craft this lie so they can avoid the implication that God was dead flesh in the tomb.

for HE was not first born a common man of the holy Virgin, and then the Word came down and entered into HIM, but the union being made in the womb itself, HE is said to endure a birth after the flesh, ascribing to himSELF the birth of HIS own flesh.

Wow, he the person was not born but his human nature was born? There goes the Catholic Theotokos, "Mary Mother of God" doctrine right out the window. He is just "said to have" been born. This is just what Protestants argue although if they are Trinitarian there arguement does not stand (if Jesus was "God" then the Catholic argument is right because if it were true, but it isn't, that if the person born was "God" then Mary is indeed the Mother of God. Natures are not born; people are born. But right here these fellows are saying a person was not born. It would be laughable if were not so a pathetic.). And the Catholic argument against Protestants is that Mary is the mother of a person who was born and not a nature that was born. But that is not what they are saying here at Ephesus. They are caught in their own craftiness.

On this account we say that HE suffered and rose again; not as if God the Word suffered in HIS own nature stripes, or the piercing of the nails, or any other wounds, for the Divine nature is incapable of suffering, inasmuch as it is INCORPOREAL,

See it is right here. Notice they shift now to an "it" that can suffer and an "it" that cannot, and avoid discussing whether a person suffered. Its a trick. They are saying that the person who is the Word did not suffer and die because that person is by nature divine and so it was the body he was in that suffered. In other words, they say his body suffered by he the person did not.

INCORPOREAL. This is the exact same Doceticism John was writing about as the teaching of the Spirit of the antichrist who taught Jesus Christ was not himself that flesh that suffered and died but a phantom spirit that simply appeared in and with flesh and himself did not suffer and die but escaped from his suffering and dying body at the point of death, in that, his escape was that point of death.

but since that which had become HIS own body suffered in this way, HE is also said to have suffered for us;

Did you hear that? Once again they "say" one thing but mean another thing . They "say" he, the person, suffered and died but he, the person, did not truly suffer and die. They are saying that the person himself could not and did not die. In other words, Jesus did not die.

for HE who is in himSELF incapable of suffering we conceive respecting his dying; for the Word of God is by nature immortal and incorruptible, and life and life-giving;

Did you hear that one? They "conceived" this whole lie. They deceive and do not perceive. They are saying the person Jesus himself was incapable of suffering and dying and that person was not flesh but incorporeal and immortal and incapable of dying but just happened to be in a mortal body that was dying and did die although he himself did not. In other words, he not only did not die; they teach he, the person, Jesus, could not die and did not die.

since, however, his own body did,

Again they say the person did not die, the person's body died. According to them, he himself did not die and was not dead.

[his own body did,] as Paul says, by the grace of God taste death for every man,

The word trickery here is to claim that "he" did not "really" die but "tasted" death because he was with a body that died. They are redefining the meaning of the word "tasted" used in Hebrews to mean he experienced what it was like to die but did not die himself. But this is a lie. If he did not die then God did not need to raise him from the dead either. The Bible says God rose Jesus himself from the dead, not a body for Jesus.

HE HIMSELF is "said to have" suffered death for us,

Notice that they teach that "he" did not die but they "say" he died. And so "it is said" he suffered death for us but that "he," Jesus, really did not!

not as if HE had any experience of death in HIS own nature (for it would be madness to say or think this),

Of course it would be madness to say a divine nature died because divinity does not die. Thsi is just stating the obvious to distract you from their lie. And furthermore, these men are the ones speaking madness because natures don't die either; people die. Rocks don't die because they don't have a spirit of life and are not people. Natures do not live and die; people live and die. This is just smoke and mirrors to keep you confused. Notice that they are saying that "he," the person Jesus, did not himself die!

but because, as I have just said, HIS flesh tasted death.

Carefully notice that they are saying that "he" did not die, the person did not die but a nature died! The Bible says "he" the person Jesus died.

In like manner HIS flesh being raised again, it is "spoken of as" his resurrection, not as if HE had fallen into corruption (God forbid),

Read it carefully. They are saying "he" did not die and they are trying to scare you from thinking otherwise by using the words "fallen into corruption." In other words they are saying that dying is itself "falling into corruption and therefore "he," the person Jesus, did not die and therefore he, the person Jesus, did not really rise again. They are saying rather his body died and God rose a body but not he himself, the person, Jesus..

but because his own body was raised again. We, therefore, confess one Christ and Lord, not as worshipping a man with the Word (lest this expression "with the Word" should suggest to the mind the idea of division),

But they do indeed divide him here and that's the deception. They divide the nature from the person and claim the nature died and the person did not die. See how they distract you in this illusion? They pretend they he was not divided by saying one person had two natures, yet they divide him all the way through this thing.

but worshipping him as one and the same, forasmuch as the body of the Word, with which he sits with the Father, is not separated from the Word himsSELF,

Notice carefully. They are saying the Word, the person Jesus, was not himself human flesh. They are saying he was just an incorporeal phantom spirit that appeared in a human body.

not as if two sons were sitting with him, but one by the union with the flesh.

Here they create a false dilemma so you can agree this is wrong and be distracted from the real question at hand and accept the lie they teach. The question is not whether there are two people. The question is whether the person died and was himself that body of flesh that died. They say no, Jesus the person, did not die. They instead divide him into two another way in order to deceive you. It is classic divide and conquer tactics.

If, however, we reject the personal union as impossible or unbecoming, we fall into the error of speaking of two sons,

No we do not and this is another lie. They make it sound as if you don't accept what they say, then you have no other options. That is an outright lie and the Bible reveals it clearly. The truth is that the divine person Jesus emptied himself and left his divine nature behind and changed into existing in a human nature and the Scripture is very clear on this. The Word WAS deity and he emptied himself and was made into the form of a man and in this way the Word BECAME flesh. It is plainly taught in the Bible in many places. IN fact, at 1 John 1:1-3, John is telling you that the disciples had touched the Word in the touching of his flesh. But these lying men here say the Word was an incorporeal and untouchable entity.

for it will be necessary to distinguish, and to say, that HE WHO who was properly man was honoured with the appellation of Son, and that HE WHO is properly the Word of God, has by nature both the name and the reality of Sonship. We must not, therefore, divide the one Lord Jesus Christ into two Sons.

This is irrelevant to the lie they are pepetuating. They are saying a body died but the person did not. They are saying the person who is Jesus Christ did not die.

Neither will it at all avail to a sound faith to hold, as some do, an union of persons; for the Scripture has not said that the Word united himSELF to the person of man, but that he was made flesh.

Notice that you have to believe this lie of theirs to be in the "sound faith." This is control by fear of evil men and not the power of the Love of God. Control often masquerades as power. Notice that they admit that the Scriptures do not say that the Word added flesh to himself but that he was made flesh. But now have a look what they do next. They are going to tell you that you should not believe the Bible, that the Word, the person, was made flesh but you should believe the Word, the person, added flesh to himself.

This expression, however, "the Word was made flesh," can mean nothing else but that HE partook of flesh and blood like to us;

There it is again. They use carefully crafted words here again. He "partook." But they do not believe that he actually BECAME that flesh; they teach he just had it as a possession of his but was not himself that flesh. They "say" one thing and teach another. The work of liars.

HE made our body HIS own,

There again they say "he" was not himself that body but took a body as his own possession but he was not himself that flesh. IN other words, the person Jesus Christ, did not suffer and die for us because he himself was not that body that was dead in the tomb.

and came forth man from a woman, not casting off HIS existence as God, or his generation of God the Father, but even in taking to himSELF flesh remaining what HE was. This the declaration of the correct faith proclaims everywhere. This was the sentiment of the holy Fathers; therefore they ventured to call the holy Virgin, the Mother of God, not as if the nature of the Word or HIS divinity had its beginning from the holy Virgin, but because of her was born that holy body with a rational soul,

There they did it again. They claim the person was not born of Mary but the human nature was born of Mary. This is ridiculous. That cannot even work. Natures are not born and die; people are born and die.

to which the Word being personally united "is said to be" born according to the flesh. These things, therefore, I now write unto you for the love of Christ, beseeching you as a brother, and testifying to you before Christ and the elect angels, that you would both think and teach these things with us, that the peace of the Churches may be preserved and the bond of concord and love continue unbroken amongst the Priests of God.

And there you have it. You must accept this insidious lie since after all, it is spoken by the "Holy and Great Synod" and the "Priests of God."

Yes that's right, they are teaching that the person who is Jesus most certainly did not die and was not dead in the tomb. The have stolen him away from the tomb. When you concoct a lie you must be careful what you "say." "We will say..." "He is said to have died..." These are the words of hypocrites and Liars. They mask their inner hypocrisy in outer words. They "say" one thing in words but really teach another in concept. They have followed the way of the the original lie, "You will not 'really' die." Notice what they have here. They have a divine person called "the Word" (which is fine because he is) and that divine person had (perhaps was) a "divine nature" and that divine person added to himself a "human soul" and that divine person also added to himself a "human body of flesh." In other words, this divine person "added" these things to himself but was not himself these things. This is the root of the Docetic Gnostic lie John was combatting in his first letter and these men have succeeded in getting everyone to buy it, and like complete fools Trinitarians everywhere are falling for it. In effect, they created a Jesus who did not "really" die. They used a classic "divine and conquer" routine here. In the end, they effectually create a split personality Jesus: one who died and one who did not die. Instead of Jesus' spirit going up from him and leaving him behind on the cross dead and who was put into the tomb, they say that the incorporeal person who appeared incognito as a human "in" a body of human flesh, escaped from the cross at the moment of death such that this incorporeal person left the dead body behind and was not dead on the cross and was not dead in the tomb. They are lying. John 1:1,14 and 1 John 1:1-3 tell us that that divine person BECAME flesh and the apostles TOUCHED the Word when they touched his flesh and John clearly tells us that it was JESUS who was in the tomb. These men say the Word was incorporeal and not flesh. John says the Word was flesh. In fact, John makes that very statement in his letter because that is what this letter is about. There were some men who "went out from them" and preached the teaching of the Antichrist. And folks, Trinitarianism is it.

If you are a Protestant forget about the "Mary Mother of God" statement they made for now. This is not the issue here. The issue is that Protestants do indeed accept this very same concept of the Trinity as they men are discussing at the Council of Ephesus, and in fact in order to believe in the Trinity with any speck of sanity left, you must accept what they are saying to at least "appear" to have a resemblence of non-contradictory sense. But it really doesn't make sense and it is not Scriptural and it is a deception. They are teaching that the PERSON did NOT really die and was NOT dead. This is the original lie, "you will not really die." Did you hear that?! Wake UP from the lethargy of your slumber! The hour is at hand. They say the PERSON WHO WAS JESUS did not die. That person was Our Savior who gave up his soul unto death as a ransom for us! And they say this person, who happens to be Jesus, did not die! Folks that person was our Lord and Savior and that person really did suffer and die and was dead and rose again. I plead you to wake up. The Trinity is a lie and to accept it, you must accept all these lies that go with it. Jesus was not a person called "God." He is God's only begotten Son. He was not made or created but was the Word who always existed in the Love of God in eternity and when God begat his Word, and all creation came to be through his Word, this Word his Son, the Love of God's own Heart came to exist independently of the Father. The Word always existed in the heart of the Father, but when God begat his Word, he existed independently apart from God, and this was the beginning of time and space, that is, creation. This is why Jesus is the Alpha and Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End. He is the Word by which YAHWEH created when he, God, who is himself light, said "Let there be light," and that Light was Christ. He let his light shine forth from himself and that is how the Son is begotten. This is why Jesus rose on the FIRST day of the week. That is why he prays in Gethsemane to be glorified with the glory he had with his Father before the creation of the world. He went out from his Father at creation for our sake. And this Son of God loved us so much that he left behind his divine regal glory of deity, the divine nature in which he existed, and changed into a humble human, and BECAME a soul of flesh for our sake. John touched the Word himself, not just the body of an incorporeal person as if the body was not he himself, as these deceitful men are saying above. He became flesh of our flesh and became even dead flesh and has risen from the dead and so now holds the Keys of Death and Hades. The "who" of Jesus WAS this soul of human flesh, his person, and that soul of human flesh, our Lord Jesus, that person, gave himself up as a ransom for us. A person truly died and a person was truly dead. They teach the person did not die and was not dead and they do this because they cannot say God was dead. That soul, that person, truly died and that person, that soul of flesh, was DEAD. Because they cannot say God was dead flesh, the Trintarians teach "he" was not that dead flesh and blood but simply lived "in" a body and did NOT "really" die and was not "really" dead. This deception is great; flee from this lie to Jesus. Who can wash away my sins? Nothing but the blood of Jesus.

"The Son of man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his SOUL as a ransom for many."

"This is My BLOOD of the covenant, which is poured out for many." (Mark 14:24; see Gen 9:4-5; Lev 17:11-14; Deut 12:23)

"I WAS DEAD"

- Jesus Christ, the Word of God

(Revelation 1:18; 19:13; John 1:1,14; 1 John 1:1-2).


"HE" was NOT DEAD
- Council of Ephesus and Trinitarians Today.


"You won't 'really' die" - The Serpent, Eden


The person Jesus died and was dead in the tomb. Do not believe the lie. He did not escape death. Praise the wonderful name of Jesus.

This is a very serious issue. In Trinitarianism, the Word, God the Son, Jesus, are all the selfsame one person, but when necessary they divide them up, for example, by changing the Word into an "it" when necessary and then back to a "who" again when necessary and then from a person one minute and nature the next. It is a shell game designed to deceive you. Here is another translation I looked up for your perusal. Notice how they say a body died but a person did not die.

In a similar way we say that he suffered and rose again, not that the Word of God suffered blows or piercing with nails or any other wounds in his own nature (for the divine, being without a body, is incapable of suffering), but because the body which became his own suffered these things, he is said to have suffered them for us. For he was without suffering, while his body suffered. Something similar is true of his dying. For by nature the Word of God is of "itself" immortal and incorruptible and life and life-giving, but since on the other hand, his own body, by God's grace, as the apostle says (Heb. 2:9) tasted death for all, the Word is said to have suffered death for us, not as if he himself had experienced death as far as his own nature was concerned (it would be sheer lunacy to say or to think that), but because as I have just said, his flesh tasted death. So too, when his flesh was raised to life, we refer to this again as his resurrection, not as though he had fallen into corruption--God forbid--but because his body had been raised again.

"We say" he died. Those are the words of liars. They say one thing but believe and teach another. The use the words but believe other concepts. The Word only "is said to have died" but the Word did not really die. His death was an illusion. Docetic Gnosticism anyone? Another heresy to dip into for the sake of convenience? They are Gnostics who believe that the divine and earthly are mutually exclusive and so the Word of God could not himself be that flesh that diee or be that flesh that was dead since they view this as"corruption." This is Trinitarianism and anyone who believes this Council's statement actually makes any sense without dividing Christ is insane. Let's sort it out. Notice the well turned words they use to deceive you. The following table traces what is said in another way:

SubjectPositive/
Negative
Verb
HeDIDsuffer
The Word of GodDID NOTsuffer
The Divine
IS INCAPABLE of suffering
His own bodyDIDsuffer
HeIS SAID TO HAVE
suffered
HeIS WITHOUT
suffering
His bodyDIDsuffer
His IS SOMETHING SIMILARdying
The Word of God IS NOTmortal and corruptible
His own body DIDtaste death
The Word IS SAID TO HAVEtasted death
He himself DID NOTexperience death
His flesh DID taste death
His flesh DID
(DID)
raise to life
(die)
His body
("His")
DIDraise to life
("resurrection")
HeDID NOTfall into corruption
His bodyDID
(DID)
rise again
(die)


"HE" was NOT DEAD
- Council of Ephesus and Trinitarians Today.


"I WAS DEAD"

- Jesus Christ, the Word of God
(Revelation 1:18; 19:13; John 1:1,14; 1 John 1:1-3; 2 John 1:7).


Repent. The Kingdom of God is at hand.



WHO was in the tomb?

Absolute Proof the Trinity is Antichrist



HOME