Believe Scripture or Follow the Credo: "Because My Bishops Told Me So"

One Hundred Scriptural Arguments for the Unitarian Faith
Samuel Barrett - American Unitarian Association Boston 1825

Unitarian Christians believe Jesus Christ to be the Son of God and the Saviour of men. They believe in the divinity of his mission and in the divinity of his doctrines. They believe that the Gospel which he proclaimed came from God; that the knowledge it imparts, the morality it enjoins, the spirit it breathes, the acceptance it provides, the promises it makes, the prospects it exhibits, the rewards it proposes, the punishments it threatens, all proceed from the Great Jehovah. But they do not believe that Jesus Christ is the Supreme God. They believe that, though exalted far above all other created intelligences, he is a being distinct from, inferior to, and dependent upon, the Father Almighty. For this belief they urge, among other reasons, the following arguments from the Scriptures.

1. Because Jesus Christ is represented by the sacred writers to be as distinct a being from God the Father as one man is distinct from another. “It is written in your law, that the testimony of two men is true. I am one who bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me,” John 8:17, 18.

2. Because he not only never said that himself was God, but, on the contrary, spoke of the Father, who sent him, as God, and as the only God. “This is life eternal, that they might know Thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent,” John 17:3. This language our Saviour used in solemn prayer to “his Father and our Father.”

3. Because he is declared, in unnumbered instances, to be the Son of God. “And lo, a voice from heaven, saying, this is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased,” Matt. 3:17. Can a son be coeval and the same with his father?

4. Because he is styled the Christ, or the anointed of God. “God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power,” Acts 10:38. Is he who anoints the same with him who is anointed?

5. Because he is represented as a Priest. “Consider the ….High-Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus,” Heb. 3:1. The office of a priest is to minister to God. Christ, then, as a priest, cannot be God.

6. Because Christ is Mediator between the “One God,” and “men.” “For there is one God, and one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,” 1 Tim. 2:5.

7. Because, as the Saviour of men, he was sent by the Father. “And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world. 1 John 4:14.

8. Because he is an Apostle appointed by God. “Consider the Apostle,…Christ Jesus, who was faithful to him that appointed him,” Heb. 3:1, 2.

9. Because Christ is represented as our intercessor with God. “It is Christ that died, yea, rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us,” Rom. 8:34.

10. Because the head of Christ is God. “I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of every woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God,” 1 Cor. 11:3.

11. Because, in the same sense in which we are said to belong to Christ, Christ is said to belong to God. “And ye are Christ’s; and Christ is God’s,” 1 Cor. 3:23.

12. Because Christ says, “My father is greater than all,” John 10:29. Is not the father, then greater than the son?

13. Because he affirms, in another connection, and without the least qualification, “My Father is greater than I,” John 14:28

14. Because he virtually denies that he is God, when he exclaims, “Why callest thou me Good? There is none good but one, that is God,” Matt. 19:17.

15. Because our Saviour, after having said, “I and my Father are one,” gives his disciples distinctly to understand that he did not mean one substance, equal in power and glory, but one only in affection and design, &c; as clearly appears from the prayer he offers to his Father in their behalf, –“that they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us,” John 17:21

16. Because the Father is called the God of Christ as he is the God of Christians. “Jesus saith unto her, ….Go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father and your Father; and to my God and your God,” John 20:17.

17. Because an Apostle says of God, in distinction from the “Lord Jesus Christ,” that He is the “only Potentate,” and that He “only hath immortality,” 1 Tim. 6:15, 16.

18. Because it is the express declaration of the same Apostle, that the Father is the one God, and there is none other. “Though there be that are called Gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,) yet to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things,” 1 Cor. 8:5, 6.

19. Because the power which Christ possessed was, as he affirmed, given to him. “All power is given unto me,” &c., Matt. 28:18.

20. Because he positively denies himself to be the author of his miraculous works, but refers them to the Father, or the holy spirit of God. “The Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works,” John 14:10. “If I cast out devils by the spirit of God,” &c., Matt. 12:28.

21. Because he distinctly states, that these works bear witness, not to his own power, but that the Father had sent him, John 5:36.

22. Because he expressly affirms that the works were done, not in his own, but in his Father’s name, John 10:25.

23. Because he asserts, that “him hath God the Father sealed,” i.e. to God the Father he was indebted for his credentials, John 6:27.

24. Because he declares that he is not the author of his own doctrine. “My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me,” John 7:16, 17.

25. Because he represents himself as having been instructed by the Father. “As my Father hath taught me, I speak these things,” John 8:28.

26. Because he refers invariably to the Father as the origin of the authority by which he spoke and acted. “The Father hath given to the Son authority,” & c., John 5:26, 27.

27. Because he acknowledges his dependence on his Heavenly Father for example and direction in all his doings. “The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do,” John 5:19. “The Father loveth the Son, and showeth him all things that himself doeth” John 5:20.

28. Because he says “I seek not mine own glory; but I honor my Father,” John 8:49, 50.

29. Because he declares, “If I honor myself, my honor is nothing: it is my Father that honoreth me,” John 8:54.

30. Because an Apostle declares, that in Christ dwelt all fullness, because it so pleased the Father, Col. 1:19.

31. Because Christ is uniformly represented in the Scriptures, not as the primary, but the intermediate, cause of all things relating to our salvation. “One God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him,” 1 Cor. 8:6.

32. Because he declares, “I am not come of myself” into the world, “for I proceeded forth and came from God,” John 8:42; 7:28. Jesus knowing… that he came from God, and went to God,” &c., John 13:3.

33. Because he affirms that he had not the disposal of the highest places in his own kingdom. “To sit on my right and on my left is not mine to give, but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared of my Father,” Matt. 20:23.

34. Because our Saviour, referring his disciples to a future time, when they would understand more accurately concerning him, expressly declares that then they would know him to be entirely dependent upon the Father. “When ye have lifted up the Son of man (i.e. crucified him), then shall ye know that I am he (i.e. the Messiah), and that I do nothing of myself, but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things,” John 8:28.

35. Because our Saviour always professed to have no will of his own, but to be ever entirely guided and governed by the will of his Heavenly Father. “For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.” John 6:38.

36. Because he expressly denies that he is possessed of the Divine attribute of independent existence. “As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father,” &c., John 6:57

37. Because he expressly disclaims the possession of the Divine attribute of underived existence. “As the Father hath life in himself, so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself,” John 5:30.

38. Because he positively denies that he is possessed of the Divine attribute of omnipotence. “I can of mine own self do nothing,” John 5:30.

39. Because he expressly disclaims the possession of the Divine attribute of omniscience. “But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but my Father only,” Matt.24:36, Mark 13:32.

40. Because Christ is said in the Scriptures to have been “tempted of the devil,” Matt. 4:1. But “God can not be tempted with evil.” James 1:13.

41. Because it is related of our Saviour, that “he continued all night in prayer to God,” Luke 6:12. Why should Christ thus pray, if he himself were God?

42. Because, in the presence of a numerous company before the resurrection, he gave thanks to the Father for having heard him. “Father, I thank thee that thou has heard me, and I knew that thou hearest me always,” John 11:41, 42.

43. Because Jesus besought his Father to glorify him. “And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thyself with the glory which I had with thee before the world was,” John 17:5. The being who prayed to God to glorify him, cannot be God.

44. Because he implored that, if it were possible, the bitter cup might pass from him, adding, “Nevertheless, not as I will, but as thou wilt,” Matt. 26:39.

45. Because he said, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” Matt 27:46 Can he who uttered this be the Supreme God?

46. Because he never paid his adoration to himself, the Son, nor to the Holy Ghost, as he should have done, had the Son and the Holy Ghost been God; but always to the Father.

47. Because he never instructed his disciples to worship himself or the Holy Ghost, but the Father, and the Father only. “When ye pray, say Our Father which art in heaven,” Luke 11:2. “In that day, ye shall ask me nothing. Whatsoever ye ask of the Father in my name,” &c., John 16:23. “The hour cometh and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth; for the Father seeketh such to worship him,” John 4:23.

48. Because it was not the practice of the Apostles to pay religious homage to Christ, but to God the Father through Christ. “I thank God through Jesus Christ,” Rom. 7:25. “To God only wise, be glory through Christ,” Rom. 16:27. “I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,” Eph. 3:14.

49. Because St. Peter, immediately after being filled with the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost, thus addressed the Jews: “Ye men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles, and wonders, and signs which God did by him, in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain; whom God hath raised up,” &c., Acts 2:22-24.

50. Because St. Paul expressly states, that “all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ,” 2 Cor. 5:8.

51. Because the same Apostle gives “thanks to God, who giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ,” 1 Cor.15:57.

52. Because it is said that it is “to the glory of God the Father,” that “every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is the Lord,” Phil. 2:11.

53. Because the Scriptures affirm that “Christ glorified not himself to be made a high priest, but He (glorified him) who said unto him, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee,” Heb. 5:5.

54. Because it is expressly asserted that God gave to Christ the Revelation which was made to the author of the Apocalypse, Rev. 1:1.

55. Because an Apostle speaks of Christ, only as the image of God. “Who is the image of the invisible God,” Col. 1:15. 2 Cor. 4: 4. It would be absurd to call anyone his own image.

56. Because Christ is stated to be “the first-born of every creature,” Col. 1:15.

57. Because he is said to be “the beginning of the creation of God,” Rev. 3: 14.

58. Because the Scriptures affirm, in so many words, that “Jesus was made a little lower than the angels,” Heb. 2:9. Can God become lower than his creatures?

59. Because Peter declares that “Christ received from God the Father honor and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, this is my beloved son,” &c., 2 Peter 1:17.

60. Because it is represented as necessary that the Saviour of mankind should “be made like unto his brethren,” Heb. 2:17.

61. Because, in the Epistle to the Hebrews, Christ is compared with Moses in a manner that would be impious if he were the Supreme God. “For this man (Christ) was counted worthy of more glory than Moses, inasmuch,” &c., Heb 3:3.

62. Because he is represented as being the servant, the chosen, the beloved of God, and the recipient of God’s spirit. “Behold, my servant, whom I have chosen, in whom my soul is well pleased; I will put my spirit upon him,” &c., Matt. 12:18.

63. Because he himself expressly declares that it was in consequence of his doing what pleased the Father, that the Father was with him and did not leave him alone. “He that sent me is with me; the Father hath not left me alone, for I do always those things that please him,” John 8: 29.

64. Because he is said to have “increased in wisdom, and in favor with God and man,” Luke 2:52.

65. Because he speaks of himself as one who had received commands from the Father. “The Father, who sent me, he gave me a commandment,” John 12:49.

66. Because he is represented as obeying the Father, and as having been “obedient unto death,” Phil 2:8. “Even as the Father said unto me, so I speak,” John 12:50. “I have kept my Father’s commandments,” John 15:10.

67. Because Christ “Learned obedience by the things he suffered,” and through sufferings was made perfect by God, Heb. 5:8.

68. Because he is spoken of in the Scriptures as the first born among many brethren. Rom. 8:29. Has God brethren?

69. Because Christ calls everyone who obeys God his brother. “Whosoever shall do the will of my Father in heaven, the same is my brother,” Matt. 12:50.

70. Because he offers to the faithful the like distinction and honor that himself has with the Father. “To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne,” Rev. 3: 21.

71. Because God, in the later ages, hath spoken by his Son, and appointed him heir of all things, Heb 1:2.

72. Because Christ is styled the first-begotten of the dead, Rev. 1:5.

73. Because it is declared that God raised him from the dead. “This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we are all witnesses,” Acts 2:32; Rom. 10:9, 10.

74. Because God poured out upon the Apostles the Holy Spirit, through Jesus Christ, Titus. 3:6.

75. Because the reason assigned for the Holy Spirit not having been received earlier, is that Jesus was not then glorified. “The Holy Ghost was not yet given because that Jesus was not yet glorified,” John 7: 39.

76. Because it is affirmed that Christ was exalted by God to be a Prince and a Saviour, Acts 5:31.

77. Because God made that same Jesus, who was crucified, both Lord and Christ, Acts 2: 36.

78. Because God gave him a name which is above every name, Phil.2:9.

79. Because Christ was ordained of God to be the judge of the quick and the dead, Acts 10:42.

80. Because God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, Rom 3: 16.

81. Because all judgment is committed to Christ by the Father, John 5:22.

82. Because our Saviour grounds the importance of his judgment solely upon the circumstances, that it is not exclusively his own judgment which he pronounces, but that of the Father who sent him. “If I judge, my judgment is true; for I am not alone, but I and the Father that sent me,” John 8:16.

83. Because it is said, that, when he was received up into heaven, he “sat on the right hand of God,” Mark 16:19.

84. Because St. Paul affirms, that Christ, even since his ascension, “liveth unto God,” and “liveth by the power of God,” Rom. 6:10; 2 Cor. 12:4.

85. Because it is affirmed of Christ, that “when all things shall be subdued under him then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all,” 1 Cor. 15:28.

86. Because the Apostle John asserts that “no man hath seen God at any time”; which is not true, if Christ were God.

87. Because, in the prophecies of the Old Testament that relate to Christ, he is spoken of as a being distinct from and inferior to God, Deut. 18:15; John 1:45.

88. Because the Jews never expected that any other than a being distinct from and inferior to God was to be their Messiah, and yet there is no evidence that our Saviour ever so much as hinted to them that this expectation was erroneous.

89. Because it does not appear from the Scriptures, that the Jews except in two instances, ever opposed our Saviour on the ground that he pretended to be God or equal with God; whereas, had it been his custom to assume such identity or equality, in his conversation with a people so strongly attached to the doctrine of the divine unity, he would have found himself involved in a perpetual controversy with them on this point, some traces of which must have appeared in the New Testament.

90. Because in these two instances , when charged, in the one case, with making himself God, and in the other, with making himself equal with God, he positively denies the charges. In reply to the charge of assuming to be equal with God, he says immediately, “The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do”; and directly after, “I can of mine own self do nothing,” John 5:19, 30. In answer to the charge of making himself God, he appeals to the Jews in substance thus: Your own Scriptures call Moses a god, and your magistrates gods; I am surely not inferior to them, yet I did not call myself God, but only the Son of God, John 10:34-36.

91. Because, had his immediate disciples believed him to be the Almighty, would they have been so familiar with him, have argued with him, betrayed him, denied him, fled from him, and left him to be dragged to the cross?

92. Because the Apostles, after they had been filled with the Holy Ghost on the day of Pentecost, did not preach that Christ was God; but preached what was altogether inconsistent with such a doctrine, Acts 2:22; 13:23; 17:3, 31; 22:8.

93. Because there is no evidence to prove that the first converts to Christianity ever incurred the imputation of idolatry from the Jews, as they must have done had they believed and taught that the Son, as well as the Father, is Jehovah; while it is notorious that this imputation has been among the most common of the Jewish reproaches against Christians, since the Trinity became a doctrine of the Church.

94. Because there are in the New Testament seventeen passages, wherein the Father is styled one or only God, while there is not a single passage in which the Son is so styled.

95. Because there are 320 passages in which the Father is absolutely, and by way of eminence, called God; while there is not one in which the Son is thus called.

96. Because there are 105 passages in which the Father is denominated God, with peculiarly high titles and epithets, whereas the Son is not once denominated.

97. Because there are 90 passages wherein it is declared that all prayers and praises ought to be offered to Him, and that everything ought to be ultimately directed to his honor and glory; while of the Son no such declaration is ever made.

98. Because of 1,300 passages in the New Testament wherein the word God is mentioned, not one necessarily implies the existence of more than one person in the Godhead, or that this one is any other than the Father.

99. Because the passages wherein the Son is declared, positively, or by clearest implication, to be subordinate to the Father, deriving his being from Him, receiving from Him his divine power, and acting in all things wholly according to His will, are in number above 300.

100. Because, in a word, the supremacy of the Father, and the inferiority of the Son, is the simple, unembarrassed, and current doctrine of the Bible; whereas, that of their equality or identity is clothed in mystery, encumbered with difficulties, and dependent, at the best, upon few passages for support.

Stop Lying

 

Commentary from the REV:

7. Jesus called God “the only true God.”

Jesus called the Father “the only God” (John 5:44 ESV). The New American Standard Bible goes so far as to translate it as “the one and only God.” The straightforward reading of this verse is that Jesus did not think of himself as God.

Similarly, on the night he was arrested, Jesus prayed to God that people would “know you, the only true God” (John 17:3). It seems disingenuous, or at least confusing, that Jesus would refer to his Father as “the only true God” if he knew that both he and “the Holy Spirit” were also “Persons” in a triune God, and that the Father shared His position as “God” with them. It seems much more likely that Jesus spoke the simple truth when he called his Father “the only true God.”

Furthermore, Jesus called God the “Lord of heaven and earth.” Luke 10:21 says, “In that same hour he [Jesus] was full of joy in the holy spirit, and said, ‘I thank you, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that you hid these things from the wise and understanding, and revealed them to little children. Yes, Father, because this was well-pleasing in your sight.’” If the Trinity was true and Jesus was co-equal and co-eternal with the Father, he would not have addressed him as “Lord of heaven and earth.” That is not the way equals address each other. Also, if the Holy Spirit was a third member of the Trinity and thus also “Lord of heaven and earth,” it seems that Jesus would not have left him out of his prayer, which was to the Father.

Premeditated Ignorance

"...that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent."

The Biblical Promise is Resurrection, NOT Dis-embodied Escape to Heaven

Hear the 20-minute podcast from Bill Schlegel, Hebrew Scholar and author of 

Satellite Bible Atlas/Historical Geography of the Bible 

"Now we do not want you to be ignorant, brothers and sisters, concerning those who are asleep, so that you do not grieve like the rest of humankind, who have no hope. For since we believe that Jesus died and was raised, so also we believe that through Jesus, God will bring to life those who have fallen asleep so that they will be with him. For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep." 1 Th 4:13-15

It's Up To YOU- Not Your Spiritual Hierarchs

"Be diligent to present yourself approved before God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth."

 

KEEP SPEAKING THE TRUTH

THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO ARE MAD AT YOU FOR SPEAKING THE TRUTH ARE THOSE PEOPLE WHO ARE LIVING A LIE. KEEP SPEAKING THE TRUTH.

Let them be mad. Let them whisper. Let them distance themselves. Because if your honesty shakes the foundations of their false reality, that’s not your burden to carry. You are not responsible for their discomfort when faced with the light of your truth. You are only responsible for standing in integrity — for refusing to bend your voice to please those who are invested in illusions.

The truth is not always easy to speak. It can be raw, uncomfortable, and isolating. But it is also freeing. It breaks chains, clears the fog, and creates space for authenticity to breathe. People who live in lies will always resist it — not because they don’t understand, but because they do.

Deep down, they know the truth threatens the narrative they’ve built to protect their ego, their image, or their control.

But you — you were not born to be silent. You were not created to blend in with the noise of falsehood. You carry something sacred: clarity, awareness, and the courage to voice what others only dare to think. And that courage? That is rare. That is powerful.

You might lose people when you choose truth. But you’ll find peace. You’ll find self-respect. You’ll find your tribe — people who value honesty, who live with intention, who see your truth as strength, not a threat.

So keep speaking. Speak with fire. Speak with compassion. Speak when your voice trembles and when it roars. Speak for those who are still finding the strength to do the same. Speak, even when it’s inconvenient — especially when it’s inconvenient.

Because the truth doesn’t just change minds — it transforms lives. And one voice, spoken with conviction, can be the beginning of a revolution.

So never stop.

Keep speaking the truth.

[Author Unknown]

This Post Is For You

"Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies and God of all comfort, who comforts us in all our affliction, so that we are able to comfort those who are in any affliction, with the comfort with which we ourselves are comforted by God. For just as the sufferings of Christ overflow in abundance to us, even so through Christ our comfort also overflows in abundance. But if we are afflicted, it is for your comfort and salvation, or if we are comforted, it is for your comfort, which produces in you the patient enduring of the same sufferings that we also suffer. And our hope for you is steadfast, knowing that, as you are partakers of the sufferings, so also you are of the comfort."

Thanks To JTO Readers Who Love and Fear God

 In case you are wondering why JTO deletes or doesn't allow some comments, here is an example:

...and then they yell, "censorship!". Sure is.

This type of attack comes with the territory, along with veiled threats and other vile lies and innuendos. I am sure many of you commenters with any semblance of allegiance to the Lordship of Jesus have and will face the same while standing for righteousness in this evil-filled world. 

For now, JTO will get back to posting and allowing your voices to be heard while limiting the ability of evil players to participate. In doing so, civil comments may take a little longer to see, but they will be posted.

Here are a couple of seemingly controversial conclusions I have come to that may cause you to flee, but if you stick around, we can partner on the things on which we do agree, or you can do your own research and see the world as it actually is 😇.

1. The Trinity doctrine did not exist until 400 years after the birth of the church. It is not biblical, meaning it cannot be found in the scriptures. You can surely find it in the later church councils, though. Constantine was baptized by an Arian and supervised the mass murder of all those who did not comply with his religious edicts, designed to preserve peace in his empire. Jesus is everything the scriptures say he is. He is the Son of God, not God the son. Jesus said the Father is HIS god. (see numerous JTO posts)

2. The Earth is geocentric, not heliocentric. The sun and the moon revolve in a circuit above the Earth and are relatively close to the Earth, not millions of miles away. We do not live on a spinning ball, but rather a plane-t, as attested to by every civilization back to antiquity, including the Hebrews. There is a dome of water above and water below as the scripture states. NASA is a Luciferian/Masonic organization/religion with the purpose to deceive the world and promote atheism and an accidental creation. (see numerous JTO posts)

3. The twin towers and building seven (Three buildings fell on 911) were brought down in a free-fall planned demolition by the "Deep State". Over 3000 architects and structural engineers, who are bold enough to put their names to the website, 911 Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth, prove the scientific impossibility of the government's official narrative.

4. Many people in religious systems are there for sincere reasons but are prevented from asking or getting answers to relevant questions. They are told that to question is to doubt, to doubt is rebellion, rebellion is heresy, heresy means you are an outcast, their truth/culture is the only gateway to heaven. But Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life and no one comes to the father but through me."  If a bishop or priest or pastor can convince people that their word is the authority of Jesus, then people are following another Christ. The Orthodox cultural practice of having a "spiritual father" to direct your life is a case in point. "Be diligent to present yourself approved before God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth." Or you can let your church fathers or bishops be diligent for you and just believe what they conclude is the truth. "...it is appointed for a person to die one time, and after that comes the Judgment." Your human spiritual leaders will not answer for you then. They will be answering for themselves alone-- one person.

You're welcome...

Impostor Poses As The JTO Editor

Apparently, an evil actor has created a Google account as "JTO Editor Nathan Lee Lewis." The imposter has posted three abhorrent comments posing as the JTO Editor. The comments were promptly deleted. All comments are now moderated before posting. 

To the impostor: "Where sin increased, grace increased even more." "Do not be deceived: God is not mocked; for whatever a person sows, that will he also reap."

JTO encourages all men and women of faith and righteousness to stand strong in the face of evil for the grace of our Lord will increase and the joy of the Lord is our strength! 

"Yahweh is for me; I will not fear. What can man do to me?"

Here is the bottom line: A vicious and evil sexual predator violated young girls as an Orthodox priest. He has been caught, arrested and will go to trial. His relatives now wage an evil online campaign on all who exposed him and all who expose them, even the victims. Their cabal is crumbling. Righteousness will prevail. The strongholds will be brought down and JTO will continue to post pertinent information and editorials related to 

Rape and the Holy Man- The Alleged Sexual Crime of a ROCOR Preist

READ THE FULL ACCOUNT

Rowe, Rowe, Rowe Your (Sinking) Boat

Excerpt from Rape and the Holy Man (posted 2018)

WHEN REPORTING THE STORY BECOMES THE STORY

This JTO editor was one of many who was a recipient of Carole Stephen's numerous e-mails over the last four years. It was difficult to divine the facts and easy to feel helpless to act, being on the outside looking in. As providence would have it, I entered the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia on May 28, 2017. I did not make the connection that I was entering the same Orthodox Jurisdiction as Father Matthew Williams until a few months after that. We now share the same Bishop. The thought that I might eventually see Father Matthew Williams face-to-face, that he might concelebrate in a joint service with my own priest, in my own parish church, brought a discomfort to me, one that I could not ignore. I began to reconnect with Carole Stephens and talk with her personally via e-mail. I assured her that I was compelled to act, not only for her sake and the sake of her daughter, but I had a holy compunction driven by the words of Christ. "Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me." My lack of action would be as grievous a sin as what has been exposed here. At this point and in this case, it is not the mother making the complaint to the ROCOR, it is a member of the ROCOR. In a legal sense, the allegation of sexual misconduct is brought by the mother and not by this writer. In an ecclesiastical sense, the ROCOR is compelled by their own Policies and Procedures to take this mother's account from my hands, making sure, this time, that the event is "diligently investigated" while remembering that, "The person making the complaint is assured of an understanding and respectful reception" and that this complaint is "responded to with justice, compassion and charity for all person's involved."

Fr. Mark Rowe

With the ROCOR Policies and Procedures in mind, the JTO editor prepared a cover letter along with the full context of this post for the ROCOR Metropolitan, with the intent being to deal with the matter in a more private manner and foregoing the public posting. After first presenting the material to my local priest to get his advice and counsel on the matter, and taking him up on his offer that he would get the materials to the Metropolitan rather than me mailing it directly to the Metropolitan's office, I was surprised and disappointed to later discover that Father Mark Rowe, the "boss" of my local priest, intercepted and read the letter and document addressed to the Metropolitan. He justified this by saying, in a subsequent phone call, that, "This is the way it is done...No one sends communication directly to the chief hierarch." Where is this rule found that one can't talk directly with his or her pastor and who appointed this priest to be the spokesman and chief interceptor of communications sent to the Metropolitan? I would venture to say that there is no such rule and Father Mark Rowe appointed himself. Father Mark Rowe and other ROCOR priests would do well to familiarize themselves with their own procedures regarding reporting clergy sexual misconduct: 

Any person who intends to make a complaint of sexual abuse against a bishop, priest or deacon of the Church, or against any other clergyman, including subdeacon or psalm-reader, or against a parish warden (starosta), may telephone or may write to their Diocesan Office of Clergy Personnel at 75 East 93rd Street, New York, NY 10128, telephone 212-534-1601 (if writing, please indicate a way that you may be contacted, either in writing, or by telephone). The person making the complaint is assured of an understanding and respectful reception. In some instances, a complaint is first brought to a local priest or an official of a school or other Church institution. In such cases, the person receiving the complaint must advise the person making the complaint that the allegation and the identity of the person making the complaint will, to the extent possible and desired, be maintained as confidential. The person receiving the complaint must also make every effort to encourage the person who has made the complaint to contact the Office of Clergy Personnel directly.  [1.b. Procedures, The Policy and Procedures of the Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia Regarding Sexual Misconduct by Clergy]

The key word here is "directly" to the Metropolitan's office. Not only did Father Mark Rowe not encourage me to talk directly to the Metropolitan's office, but he inferred that doing so is forbidden: "...no one sends communication directly..."  In this case, Father Mark had no authority to open, read, advise, or in any other way offer unsolicited instruction related to the document and letter addressed to the Metropolitan. Archpriest or not, Father Mark Rowe did not follow ROCOR's own procedures to which he as a clergy is bound. It is not up to Father Rowe or any other local priest to filter, approve and in any other way decide whether or not a communication should go directly to the Metropolitan's office, especially in a matter of clergy sexual misconduct. 

By his own admission, Father Mark Rowe is a priest, not a bishop, nor an official spokesman for the office of the Metropolia in matters of clergy sexual misconduct. He is an Archpriest of a Western Rite ROCOR Mission in Sarasota, Florida. In this case, he far overstepped his authority and a subsequent phone call with the JTO Editor revealed part of his motive.

In the phone call set up by my local priest, Father Mark Rowe initially reverted to the default, knee-jerk, circle-the-wagons, protect-the-institution position, by lashing out at the JTO editor, saying, "That document, frankly because of the way that you basically tell him, 'hey if I don't get the answer that I want, I'm blasting this all over social media...' "  At that point in the conversation, I could only think of the mother, Carole Stephens, and the years of similar intimidation she had endured, trying to get someone to listen and show some godly integrity. It seems that ROCOR and a few of its sister jurisdictions have an unofficial system of filters through which information regarding sexual misconduct of its clergy must pass. If one does not know the established procedures of reporting, then they may have to endure what Carole Stephens did when she was confronted by these filters from several priests. First, comes the seemingly consoling words, but they are soon laced with subtle warnings, then the criticism as to the methods, then the unofficial brush off, then the ad hominems such as "unstable woman" when she dared to take it public. 

It took Father Mark Rowe no more than three minutes into a one-hour phone conversation with the JTO Editor to jump right to the criticisms. It took him only three seconds to realize that he couldn't bully me as he might a grieving mother. Father Rowe backed down and apologized only after I cut him off, talked over his attempt to talk over me, and told him that the conversation was over and would only continue if he would be just a "little more courteous" and did not impugn my methods or character. I also let him know that I would decide my own actions in this matter and did not care what anyone thought of me. I reiterated to him that my heart and first choice was not to "blast" anything and that I was trying to help a girl who had been raped (allegedly) by one of our priests. He said, "You're right. You're right. I apologize if it came off that way." I also informed him that I would not discuss the matter with him unless or until he was officially assigned by the Metropolitan to reinvestigate the matter. The rest of the phone conversation was he predominantly talking, and cutting me off numerous times in the middle of a sentence. However, the bulk of his diatribe was agreeing with the content of the document, communicating that something did not pass the smell test with Father Matthew, that the 15 Questions contained in the document was his favorite part, that it was not necessary to have the victim come forward to adequately investigate, that the victim's own e-mails may constitute new evidence that warrants a new look into the matter, and that he would love to be appointed to re-investigate the matter. The most startling revelation in his diatribe was when he revealed that he, himself, was part of a "group" a while back that discussed priests that were having issues and that "this case came up." He said he remembered specifically that she (the victim) was not willing to cooperate and that's where they "left off." Father Rowe also pointed out that this case originally went through the "protocols of sexual abuse cases in the Russian Orthodox Church."

So this ROCOR priest and, by his account, a group of ROCOR priests, knows and have known of the allegation toward Father Matthews Williams. Did the determination that "she was not really willing to cooperate" take into account her alleged call to one of their fellow priests, Father Anastasy P. Vatrelis, just hours or days after the event? Was Fr. Anastasy P. Yatrelis in that "group" with Father Rowe that day? Would not such a call from the 15-year-old victim constitute cooperation, at least for the purposes of verifying that an event occurred?

***

Arkansas

Holy Transfiguration Orthodox Church

292 Co Road 390 Mountain Home, AR 72653

Phone: 815-258-3668

www.ozarksorthodox.com

Rector: Archpriest Mark Rowe

Email: fr.markrowe@gmail.com

She DID Come Forward!

According to Carole Stephens, this is the ROCOR priest that her daughter contacted just hours after the alleged rape by Father Matthew Williams.

From the article Rape and the Holy Man:

Fr. Anastasy P. Yatrelis

[I]f the girl is raped as a minor, her parents have a right to prosecute and avenge her. In a church there is no place for even seducing a minor or statutory rape, and especially under the guise of babysitting. NO! You DO NOT bully a 15 year old child into silence for the good of position and a senior priest as Father Anastasy, should certainly have reported the rape as a mandated reporter to his bishop and to the civil authorities. He is also culpable for the cover up, thus prosecution. The girl would have been forced into counseling, which would have made her life better. The parents would not have been kept under the guise of spiritual well being in such an environment. God parents should be co-parents in the faith. The right people would have paid for their misdeeds instead of young girls suffering violation and shame. 

Fr. Anastasy Yatrelis

Home Phone: (843) 873-3718

Mobile Phone: (843) 469-8666

Email: padreernesto1@gmail.com

Has ROCOR asked this priest if he talked with the 15-year-old victim of rape? Has ROCOR asked him why he did not report to civil authorities? Did this priest report to his own hierarchy? If he did, then all of the hierarchy are liable for the cover-up. If he didn't, then shouldn't this priest be defrocked? Did this priest at least warn Bishop Hilarion that there was an accusation of sexual crime perpetrated by the deacon he was about to ordain to the priesthood?

Editor's NOTE: Indeed, the 15-year-old girl did not report to civil authorities at the time.  She was an immature 15-year-old who had just been allegedly raped by her godfather, Deacon Matthew Williams, then cajoled into forgiving and forgetting by her godparents, Matthew and Elizabeth Williams. HOWEVER, IF SHE REPORTED THE RAPE TO FATHER YATRELIS, SHE DID COME FORWARD! Why didn't he? ...or did he? "The matter you have brought up was open to investigation by our ecclesiastical channels previously, but it was curtailed due to lack of accusation on the part of the alleged victim." Metropolitan Hilarion in a letter to JTO.

READ Carole Stephens' article: To Orthodox Hierarchy: What is your game?

Editor's NOTE: If Father Yatrelis would like to refute this accusation by Carole Stephens, he may contact JTO at journeytoorthodoxy@gmail.com. JTO will post his rebuttal in full without editing.

Is It Scriptural To Accuse Your Bishops?

Monks of Jordanville and others of the Eastern Orthodox Church, pay attention. 

It is the responsibility of the people to accuse a bishop who is in sin. The idea that to do so is sinful and that bishops or priests are to be shielded from such accountability is cultish. Here is the scriptural mandate: 

"Do not accept an accusation against an elder except on the basis of two or three witnesses." 1 Tim 5:19 

The wording of this Scripture is akin to, "Do not drive a car except with a license." Does this statement suggest you cannot drive a car? No, it suggests the proper way to do it. Likewise, does 1 Tim 5:19 suggest you cannot accuse an elder? No, it suggests the proper way to do it.

This passage from 1 Timothy 5:19 emphasizes the importance of fairness and accountability in leadership within the Church. The requirement of two or three witnesses aligns with Jewish legal traditions, ensuring that accusations are not based on hearsay or personal vendettas but on credible testimony.

The interpretation suggests that the verse is not about merely hearing accusations but about establishing their (the accusations) validity. This protects both the accused and the integrity of the Church, preventing unjust claims from causing division. At the same time, it does not allow wrongdoing to persist unchecked. Leaders are expected to be reasonable and maintain a good reputation among the people. If multiple credible accusations arise, reason dictates that the leader should be held accountable.

"Except on the basis of two or three witnesses..." 

"It was standard practice in Jewish law that there had to be two witnesses to any act before it could be conclusively adjudicated (Num. 35:30; Deut. 17:6; 19:15; Matt. 18:16; 2 Cor. 13:1; Heb. 10:28). This is to prevent malicious accusers from tearing the Church apart. If an elder does something offensive, the individual wronged is to go to the person and work out the problem. If there is no solution, he or she is to take others (Matthew 18:15-17). At that point, there would be witnesses. This is to be a general practice. It is not to be a law that allows for unrighteousness to continue. 

The Bible is not against common sense, and one of the requirements of leaders is that they are to be “reasonable,” and we write in the commentary on 1 Timothy 3:3 above: “The concepts of “moderation, forbearance, gentleness, sweet reasonableness” all touch a side of the full meaning of this word. The meaning is yielding, not insisting on one’s legal rights to the end that the legal rights become moral wrongs.”

If a leader had case after case where usually credible people said that they were spoken or acted against one on one by a certain individual in leadership, but that the leader had denied what he had done when the wronged person went to him to rectify the situation, and again when the individual went back to the leader with witnesses about both the original problem and the denial, then “reason” would dictate that the accused leader must be doing something wrong, or so many people would not witness to the same fault in his life. 

Leaders are to have a good report among the people, and when that ceases to be the case, the leader will cease to be effective and should step out of leadership, or be removed by others."  From REV Commentary

"However, do not be afraid of them, because there is nothing concealed that will not be revealed, and nothing hidden that will not be made known. What I tell you in the darkness, speak in the light; and what you hear whispered in your ear, proclaim on the rooftops. And do not be afraid of those who kill the body but are not able to kill the soul. But rather fear him who is able to destroy both soul and body in Gehenna...But whoever denies me before people, I will also deny him before my Father who is in heaven." Matthew 10: 26-28,33

Enabling Sexual Predator Priests is Relative

From Carole Stephens via Rape and The Holy Man

"BETRAYAL AT ITS WORST!!!

This notification is to alert you that a horrible offense was committed against my daughter at the hand of your brother or brother in law and then swept under the rug, as my daughter was coerced into silence, then later harassed by phone when this finally came to light.  She could not help but to confide in  someone, namely her older sisters, and feared disrupting the stability of her family as well as that of the perpetrator as she suffered in tears.  The senior priest she confided in also told her that this should never be found out. To my dismay, there exists a huge organization called SNAP and a whole website, pokrov.org, dedicated to counseling victims and families of victims abused by clergy  AND I HAVE HAD TO GO THERE!!!  Think about your own lovely daughters when you consider this.  The victim pays the price and so does the victim's family.  Mothers, be forewarned and vigilant.  Clergy members...JUST STOP IT!!!  There are enough sex offenders running around hurting children.  Can the church NOT be a refuge?  Where is God in all of this?"

Father John Oliver is the brother-in-law of Matthew Williams and is the senior priest at Saint Elizabeth Orthodox Church (Antiochian) Murfreesboro, TN.

Father John Oliver 

"Father Matthew and his matushka did call me after my circulating the letter. They had been confronted by Metropolitan Hilarion's office.  I was actually stranded in a Megabus atop Donner's Summit when they reached me.  We went round and round for a couple of hours.  Prior to that phone call, a few days earlier, Fr. John Oliver of St. Elizabeth's Orthodox Church in Murfreesboro (who NEVER called me) called me when I was at my brother's house in California, saying that Fr. Matthew wanted to arrange a meeting with me at St. Elizabeth.  He was willing to drive all of the way from Bristol to meet me in Murfreesboro to discuss the matter.  But I was in California.  When I returned to TN I asked Father John what Fr. Matthew had said to him about the matter.  He claimed that he did not know the details: though I did send the first letter addressed directly to Fr. John.  To me, they were passing the buck around.  They were careful not to admit to what extent the assault happened nor have anything in writing. I was the one who discovered the orgin of the rape and DID make a [*] written police report in Roswell, GA.  But they did not maintain it nor give it a case# because the victim did not want to come forward."

Fr. Christopher Stanton is an OCA priest in Lebanon, TN, who happens to be a second brother-in-law of Father Matthew Williams. This is a letter sent to Carole Stephens from him:

Greetings in the Lord,

Joyous feast of St. Andrew the First Called!

Father Christopher Stanton

I am troubled at the pain I hear in your email. Our first concern needs to be towards healing, both for the victim and those who surround her. I hope she and those who need it are getting the counseling and attention they need at this time. Closely following this needs to be careful attention given to the accused. If this accusation mentioned involves a minor at the time of the event then the authorities need to be contacted for an official investigation to understand what has happened and what needs to be done for, not to, the accused. If the event does not have to do with a minor then the appropriate ecclesiastical authority should be contacted towards the same conclusion.  

I am saddened by the need for such a general and widely broadcasted email. In today's world rumor and hear say holds the same power and often more so than the truth, and the ambiguous nature of this email certainly lends itself to such; if not plain slander. The scriptures call for us to cover our brother's sin (not to hide it which could lead to further sin) so as to not color nor prejudice others against each other. We live in a world of sin, even and especially in the sinless and spotless Church of Christ, and because of this we need each other for support, confidence, and consolation. Let us not think, say, or do anything to cause division nor disruption among us. 

Finally, I offer my prayers, sympathy, and what ever counsel I can for your recovery, health and wellbeing at this time. 

In Christ's love,

Fr. Christopher Stanton 

JTO Editor's Note: Read Rape and the Holy Man for further details.

Is the ROCOR/Antiochian/OCA Sexual Crime Coverup Cabal Crumbling?

Feel free to contact these shepherds at the publicly posted addresses or phone numbers. Surely, you will be received with the utmost love, respect, patience, and transparency! You may also refer to the posted link at the bottom for the names and addresses of others who knew of FMW's crimes for years and did little or nothing to protect the innocent.  Also ask Antioch and The Orthodox Church of America, what role their priests played in the cover-up of Father Matthew Williams' crimes.

ROCOR

Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia

75 E. 93rd Str.
New York, NY 10128
USA
Tel: (212) 534-1604

Remember: The Church is the bride of Christ, and all are accountable, especially the shepherds.

Journey To orthodoxy: Rape and the Holy Man Part Three -All are Punished!

[A cabal is a group of people who are united in some close design, usually to promote their private views or interests in an ideology, a state, or another community, often by intrigue and usually without the knowledge of those who are outside their group. The use of this term usually carries negative connotations of political purpose, conspiracy and secrecy. It can also refer to a secret plot or a clique, or it may be used as a verb (to form a cabal or secretly conspire.]

ROCOR, We Hardly Knew Ye...Or Did We?

[JTO Editor Note: This Press Release was issued only a short time after the alleged rape of the Stephens girl) 

Priest-monk Is Defrocked for Sexual Misconduct

SNAP

July 2, 2009

http://www.snapnetwork.org/snap_press_releases/2009_press_releases/070109_priest_monk_is_defrocked_for_sexual_misconduct.htm

[letter from Metropolitan Joseph]

Church Hierarchy Can't Shut Down Wisconsin Monastery

Clerics Are Linked to Notorious Now-Closed Monastery in Texas

Support Group Says “Vulnerable Teens and Adults May Still Be At Risk”

SNAP Urges Victims & Witnesses to "Come Forward, Get Help and Call Police"

An Eastern Orthodox priest has been defrocked because of credible allegations that he molested a teenaged girl in the 1990s in Wisconsin.

In March, Metropolitan Joseph Bosakov of the Bulgarian Eastern Orthodox Diocese of the USA, Canada and Australia ousted Archimandrite Simeon Gitlis from the priesthood. Gitlis was also removed as abbot of a monastery in Boscobel, Wisconsin (between Dubuque, Iowa and La Crosse, Wisconsin). A woman who had lived at the monastery in the late 1990s, when she was in her late teens and early twenties, had made a written complaint to the bishop alleging that Gitlis had sexually molested her.

"We're grateful that this dangerous man has been ousted from the priesthood, but fear he may still be at this facility so children and young adults may still be vulnerable," said Melanie Jula Sakoda of Moraga, California. She's the co-founder of SNAP Orthodox and of a website called Pokrov.org, dedicated to helping those who've been victimized by Eastern Orthodox clergy.

Sakoda urged victims or witnesses to call SNAP, the nation's oldest and largest support group for clergy abuse victims. "I want to let victims know they are no longer alone, that they are supported no matter how they choose to start their healing journey, and that despite the pain, there is hope," she said.

In an April letter, notifying the victim that Gitlis was defrocked, Bosakov noted that the monastery was owned by an independent non-profit corporation. The Bulgarian diocese has since removed the monastery from its website, but the bishop cannot stop the group from operating independently. As a result, leaders of a support group called SNAP fear that vulnerable teens and adults may still be at risk at the facility.

The Boscobel monastery, called St. Isaac’s Skete, is an offshoot of Christ of the Hills Monastery (COTH) in Blanco, Texas. In 1999, a boy filed sex abuse charges against two Christ of the Hills monks. In response, the Russian Church Outside of Russia (ROCOR), to which both monasteries belonged at the time, ordered COTH to disband. The Blanco monks refused. ROCOR removed COTH from its jurisdiction, but could not shut it down because the monastery was owned by an independent non-profit corporation. In solidarity with COTH, St. Isaac's Skete left ROCOR, later joining the Bulgarian Diocese. Additional allegations of child sexual abuse at COTH were made by other boys in 2006. The new charges resulted in convictions for four Blanco monks (one of whom was also convicted in 1999) and the suicide of COTH?s founder. The Blanco monastery is now defunct.

SNAP strongly suspects there are others who saw or suffered similar abuse by Gitlis, either as teens or as adults. The group is urging victims and witnesses to come forward, get help, call police, and contact independent sources of support.

Boskov and his diocese are based in New York City.

Founded in 1989, SNAP has more than 8,000 members and 65 support groups. Most members were molested by Catholic priests, nuns, bishops, and seminarians, but a growing number were abused by religious figures in other denominations. SNAP has a nation-wide toll-free hotline, 1 877 SNAP HEALS. The organization's web site is SNAPnetwork.org

"These Allegations Are Baseless!"

"Tread Carefully" Commenters...

Anonymous12:42 PM

A not-so-former Baptist tries to slander one of the kindest priests in ROCOR. Go take your nonsense somewhere else.

RobertNG1:17 AM

Do you know Fr. Matthew Williams? He is a kind man and a good soul. When I read these emails, I see nothing but crazed hysteria and slander. This is a disgusting article

Theodore_Harris1:09 PM

Fr Matthews is a saintly priest. St Nektarios was accused of raping nuns, several early desert father's were accused of impregnating prostitutes, but in the end (like this story); we see the same "one" is behind these baseless accusations

Theodore_Harris3:04 PM

Fr Matthew will be expulcated either here or the hereafter. This is an attack from the same "one" who baselessly accused St Nektarios of raping nuns and a particular desert father of impregnating a prostitute. Fr Matthew is a saintly priest and anyone who has known him can attest

Anonymous8:20 PM

I met Fr Matthew in 2023 for a friends wedding at his parish. He let me stay in the room at the church for a weekend. He would come to visit me and chat, making sure I had what I needed. Never a weird feeling and I have good instincts from experience. A kind and saintly man. I think these allegations are baseless. I watched him with his Matuska and children, and his parishioners. Slander and persecution are to be expected for men who are going the work of God. We should keep him and his family (and the girl and her mother) in our prayers 🙏🏼

Confronting the Blame Shifters Part Two

 

Confronting The Blame Shifters

Some commenters claim that Elizabeth Williams is being victim shamed. What they fail to understand is that Elizabeth is both victim and perpetrator. This blog and hundreds of commenters expose Elizabeth's intentional coverup of her husband's sexual abuse of her goddaughter 20 years prior to current events. When confronted with this fact, the commenters neither confirm nor deny the rape of the 15-year-old Stephens girl by Matthew Williams and Elizabeth refuses to comment. Insults and misdirection are the commenter's most common tactics. We are told to "rot in hell" and that it is we and not Elizabeth who are causing harm to the children. This is classic blame shifting.

Blame-shifting. This involves blaming someone else for the unwanted outcome that they caused or contributed to.

JTO has called on Elizabeth Willams to confirm or deny that she knew of Matthew's sexual abuse of the Stephen's girl 20 years ago. Her silence on this matter for 20 years is not acceptable and will continue to be the catalyst for others to refuse to see her as a victim in the current situation. Meanwhile her apologists and defenders continue their futile campaign to malign the reputation and character of those who have exposed her 20-year cover-up of her husband's crimes.

Elizabeth: What did you know and when did you know it?

 

Matthew Williams Arrested- UPDATE

Matthew Williams

According to Detention Officer Eller of the SW Regional Jail Authority in Abington, VA, Matthew Williams was arrested and booked into the jail today with no bond.

According to Eller, specific charges are pending, and other information will be released on the facility website by Sunday or Monday.

JTO will keep readers apprised of the ongoing situation. Readers are welcome to contact JTO with information at journeytoorthodoxy@gmail.com.

Updates:

1. According to at least one unconfirmed report, Williams turned himself in. UPDATE - Confirmed.

2. https://virginia.arrests.org/Arrests/Mathew_Williams_64382611/

Hebrews 12 Destroys The Trinity Illusion

By: David Lopez 

Hebrews 12:23–24 pulls back the curtain on HEAVEN ITSELF.

And what do we see?

23. to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God, the Judge of all, and to the spirits of {the} righteous made perfect, 24. AND to Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood, which speaks better than {the blood} of Abel.

 

Bonus Verse: 1 Timothy 2:5. For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men the man Christ Jesus.

GOD — the Judge of all.

JESUS — the mediator of a new covenant.

The Holy Spirit? Completely missing.

Let that sink in.

This is the final, climactic heavenly vision in the Book of Hebrews—and there's NO Trinity here. Just TWO distinct beings:

God — the Ultimate Judge of all!

Jesus The Mediator— highlights Jesus' subordinate and distinct role; he's not God, he's mediating to God!

Use logic: If Jesus were God, he couldn’t mediate to God.

If the Holy Spirit were a co-equal divine person, why is he absent in heaven’s ultimate roll call?

No “three-in-one.”

No Three co-equal divine persons.

Just what the Bible actually says: ONE GOD, and one glorified Son.

Hebrews 12:23–24 is a devastating blow to Trinitarian doctrine—and a powerful confirmation of True Biblical Monotheism.

When the veil is lifted and heaven is revealed, it's simple and stunning:

The Father is God.

Jesus is not God.

The Holy Spirit isn’t present as a separate third

person Being.

This is the Trinity’s blind spot—and it’s wide open!