Questioning the Trinity

By Leicester Westleigh 

Questioning the Trinity

The doctrine of the Trinity is one of the most widely held beliefs in mainstream Christianity. Ask most believers, and they will affirm it without hesitation: God is one, yet three persons—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—co-equal, co-eternal, and of one essence. But ask for an explanation, and things get complicated.

Many who advocate for the Trinity find themselves in a difficult position when challenged to articulate it. They believe it because they have been told it is true, not necessarily because they have examined the Scriptures and reached that conclusion themselves. This can often result in a kind of intellectual retreat—a “foetal position” response—where believers acknowledge they can’t explain it, but insist it must be accepted on faith.

But why does this happen? Why do those who firmly hold to this doctrine struggle to explain it? And what does this say about the doctrine itself?

The Common Response: “It’s a Mystery”

One of the most frequent defenses of the Trinity is that it is beyond human understanding. “It’s a mystery,” people say. “We aren’t meant to fully comprehend it.”

While there’s no question that some aspects of God’s nature may be beyond human grasp, this reasoning raises a key concern: If God wants us to know Him, why would He define Himself in a way that is impossible to explain? The Bible consistently portrays God as desiring to be understood. Scripture is full of passages that describe His character, His purpose, and His expectations in clear and straightforward terms. The message of salvation is simple enough for a child to grasp. So why, when it comes to the nature of God Himself, should we accept a doctrine that is so confusing that even its strongest proponents admit they don’t understand it?

Deflection Tactics and False Psychology

Because the Trinity is difficult to explain, discussions about it often take on a defensive tone. Those who challenge it are frequently met with responses designed to shift the focus away from the question itself.

For example:

Appeal to Church Authority: “This is what the church has always taught, so who are we to question it?”
Emotional Deflection: “Are you saying all the great theologians throughout history were wrong?”
Intimidation by Complexity: “You just don’t understand theology well enough to grasp it.”
Shaming the Questioner: “Denying the Trinity is heresy. You’re treading dangerous ground.”

These tactics reveal something important: Many who believe in the Trinity are uncomfortable discussing it at a theological level. If the doctrine were clear and biblically straightforward, there would be no need for such evasive strategies. The very fact that these deflections exist suggests that, deep down, many believers recognize the difficulty—but instead of questioning the doctrine, they retreat into positions that protect them from having to think about it too deeply.

The Clarity of a Biblical Unitarian View

In contrast, the Christadelphian (or broader biblical unitarian) perspective presents a straightforward, consistent understanding of God:

God is one individual being, the Father (Deuteronomy 6:4, 1 Corinthians 8:6).
Jesus is the Son of God, not God Himself (Luke 1:35, John 20:17).
The Holy Spirit is not a separate person but the power of God at work (Luke 1:35, Acts 2:17-18).

This perspective does not require intellectual gymnastics or theological paradoxes. It aligns with the way God speaks of Himself throughout the Bible and avoids the need for appeals to mystery or tradition.

Why This Matters

Some may argue that this is just a theological debate that doesn’t impact day-to-day faith. But understanding God’s true nature is not a trivial issue. It affects how we relate to Him, how we pray, and how we understand the role of Jesus.

The Trinitarian position requires believers to accept something that they cannot fully explain—something that was not clearly taught by Jesus or the apostles but instead developed over centuries of church councils and philosophical debates. In contrast, a biblical unitarian understanding allows believers to read the Bible and simply take God at His word without theological complexity or contradiction.

So, the question is this: Should we accept a doctrine simply because we’ve been told to, even if it doesn’t make sense? Or should we be willing to examine Scripture for ourselves, asking whether God has truly revealed Himself in a way that requires no confusion or mystery?

A Call to Re-examine Beliefs

If you’ve ever felt uneasy about the Trinity but were told that questioning it was dangerous or heretical, you’re not alone. Many sincere believers have struggled with it. But God invites us to seek Him with an open heart and mind (Acts 17:11, Proverbs 2:3-5). Faith should be built on conviction, not fear—on understanding, not blind acceptance.

So perhaps the real question isn’t whether the Trinity can be explained—but whether it was ever meant to be believed in the first place.

"There is ONE GOD- the Father..."

1 Corinthians 8:4-6

Therefore, concerning the eating of things sacrificed to idols, we know that “no idol in the world really exists,” and that “there is no God but one.” For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”), yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things, and we are for him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and we are through him.

"This verse clearly distinguishes between Jesus and God. There is one God and Father, and there is one man, Jesus, who is our “Lord.” This verse shows how God and Jesus work in unity to get the Church what it needs. God gave Jesus all authority and made him head over the Church, so now we get what we need “through” Jesus. Some Trinitarians say that this verse supports the doctrine of the Trinity because it says that all things came through Jesus Christ. But what the verse actually says is that all things came “from” God, “through” Jesus. That stands in contradiction to Trinitarian doctrine because it places Jesus in a subordinate role to God. According to this verse, Jesus is not “co-equal” with the Father; the Father is “God” and the ultimate source of all things, and Jesus is not called “God.” [REV Commentary]

This is no "mystery."

Christ Before Creeds

THE BOOK: "Just when you thought you knew who Jesus was, along comes a book like this to profoundly challenge and wonderfully inspire. Most Christians are unaware of how different their Western worldview is from those who wrote the original accounts of Jesus’ life. Pastor Jeff Deuble issues a clarion call to prioritize biblical testimony over the later church creeds that were influenced by Greek philosophical thinking, so as to rediscover simple, uncluttered Christianity.

Meticulously presenting information from biblical, historical, Jewish, and Christian sources about how the early followers of Christ thought about him, this book promises new insight and an enriched understanding of Christ’s identity. More than informative, Christ Before Creeds is an invitation to examine the identity of Jesus the Messiah, engaging with respect and grace."

Click Photo To Order

The Summary Argument: "The Bible declares why Jesus is unique in so many ways--the perfect reflection he is of God, the special place he holds in God's heart and purposes for the world, the ideal example he is of how we are meant to live and what we are destined to be.

By God's Spirit, Jesus was divinely chosen, conceived, and commissioned; divinely anointed and appointed, authorized and authenticated, empowered and endowed, infused and inspired. He was totally surrendered and submissive to the Father so that he could fully represent and reflect God's heart, character, and purposes, his will, and his word.

Therefore, God has glorified him above all, giving him a name above every name (Phil 2:9-11), conferring on him a kingdom (Luke 22:29) and everlasting glory forever and ever (Rev. 5:11-14). Through faith in Jesus Christ, his God and Father can be our God and Father, too (John 20:17, 31), and in him we are positioned and destined to enter into his inheritance, his future and fullness (Rom. 8:16-17). 

The Bible teaches that this Jesus came in the flesh as a human being. He was born and lived as a man: completely human. He is not a Gnostic or Trinitarian Jesus with a composite nature, a humanity compromised or compartmentalized by his deity.

Such a Jesus would not be genuinely and authentically human. Hence, he could not be truly mortal, tempted and tested, perfected, capable of completely identifying and sympathizing with us. He would be less fully the model, mediator, pioneer, perfector, brother, and High Priest that the Bible declares him to be." [Chapter 6 Page 125 Christ Before Creeds]

Other books: All Books - BiblicalUnitarian.com

Commenter Offers Some Go-To Trinitarian Verses

A commenter offered some go-to verses presumably to prove that Jesus is God, in the article "A Man, Christ Jesus."

Keeping in mind that up to 7000 times Yahweh/God is called ONE/ALONE/NO OTHER in scripture and keeping in mind that less that 10 times in scripture the word god/God is used in reference to Yeshua, and keeping in mind that the word god/God is also used in reference to angels and divine beings, humans in positions of authority, false gods and idols, and satan, a thorough theological study would consider that these references to "god/God" illustrate the diverse usage of the term "god" or "gods" in scripture. Thorough study would consider the context of the usage and honest study would not use a few scriptures to develop an entire doctrine that was not codified until about six hundred years after the birth of the Church.

If you are willing to start an honest study on the subject of the Trinity, here are the verses shared by the commenter and the commentary on each verse (from the REV):

Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? He that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, show us the Father? John 14:9 KJV

Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Matthew 28:19 KJV

I and my Father are one. John 10:30 KJV

But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him. John 10:38 KJV

But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, He shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you. John 14:26 KJV

REV Commentary

“Whoever has seen me has seen the Father.” The consistent theme throughout the book of John is that Jesus reveals God the Father to the world (John 1:18; 9:3; 14:9; 15:15; 17:6, 26). This simple truth demonstrates that Jesus is someone different from God. Many Trinitarians or Oneness believers see equivalence between Jesus and God in the Gospel of John, however, the author seeks to show how Jesus reveals the Father, not how Jesus is the Father. Knowing this helps the reader understand what Jesus means by phrases like, “whoever has seen me has seen the Father,” (John 14:9) and “I am in union with the Father and the Father is in union with me” (John 14:11). Neither of these phrases states that Jesus is the Father, nor should they be understood that way. Rather, these verses, when properly seen in light of the rest of the Gospel, demonstrate that God was working so powerfully through Jesus and Jesus was demonstrating God’s character so clearly that when one looked at Jesus, it was as if you were looking at the Father. This concept is not too difficult to grasp, as we use language similar to this in our modern culture. For instance, if a son is displaying a characteristic similar to his father (named Jim), we might say, ‘You’re just like your Dad,’ or, ‘Jim, is that you?’ or, ‘I see your Dad in you.’ No one takes that to mean the son literally is Jim, but that he resembles Jim in some ways. This is how we should understand Jesus’ statements of his similarity with his Father. Jesus never intends to teach that he is his Father, because he sees God his Father as someone different from himself (John 10:29; 14:28; 20:17), and he reveals his Father clearly through his works and teachings (John 14:10). This phrase in John 14:9 is also very helpful for understanding what Thomas may have meant in John 20:28 when he said to Jesus, “My Lord and my God.” Since Jesus taught Thomas here in John 14:9 that, “Whoever has seen me has seen the Father,” this is likely what Thomas was finally realizing in John 20:28. He was not realizing that Jesus was the Father, as Jesus had never taught Thomas that. Jesus taught Thomas that the Father was someone different from himself (John 14:6, 12, 16, 24; etc.). Rather, Thomas was realizing that the Father was “in union with” Jesus (John 14:11), that the Father was working in Jesus (John 14:10), and that Jesus’ words were the Father’s words (John 14:24). So, Thomas was realizing that the Father could be seen in Jesus, and thus could say, “My Lord and my God” (John 20:28). REV

Does the commonly accepted translation of Matthew 28:19 prove the existence of the Trinity? No. The mention of the Father, Son, and holy spirit together in one context only shows that these three exist. The doctrine of the Trinity that states there are three “Persons” in one God was not codified until AD 381. The Council of Nicea in AD 325 merely decided that Jesus was God, and did not make the Holy Spirit into a “third Person” in the Trinity. Also, there is a debate about whether the English translation of Matthew 28:19 should read “Holy Spirit” or “holy spirit” (the biblical evidence supports “holy spirit”), but in any case, there is no presentation in Matthew 28:19 of any formal doctrine of the Trinity. The doctrine of the Trinity states that the Father, Son, and “Holy Spirit” together make “one God” and that the three “Persons” are co-equal and co-eternal, and that doctrine is not stated in this verse. This verse refers to three, but never says they are “one.” If the phrase about the Father, Son, and holy spirit is original, then the three things this verse refers to are: God the Father; His Son the Lord Jesus Christ; and the holy spirit, a “gift” from God (cf. Acts 2:38). REV

That the word “in” refers to a relationship, a very close relationship, is clear from Jesus elucidating his teaching by using the same vocabulary and speaking of a branch being “in” a vine: “Live in me, and I will in you. As the branch is not able to bear fruit by itself unless it lives in the vine…” (John 15:4). The branch is not “inside” the vine, nor is “in” referring to being of the same mystical essence. It is a simple truth that the branch is in union with the vine; in an intimate relationship with it and united for the same purpose: to produce fruit. Similarly, God and Christ are in an intimate relationship and are in union with each other, and believers are to be in union with them. A few English versions make the relationship between God, Christ, and us somewhat clearer by translating the en (in) as “in union with,” or “unified with” instead of simply “in.” So, for example, in John 10:38, Charles Williams’ translation reads, “the Father is in union with me and I am in union with the Father” (he also uses “in union with,” rather than just “in” in other places in John). The New Testament translated by Edgar Goodspeed also uses “in union with” in John 10:38; 14:10-11, 20; and “united with” in John 15:4-7). The Complete Jewish Bible by David Stern also reads, “united with” instead of just “in” in John 10 and 14. The New English Bible uses “united with” in John 15:4. The point is that when the Bible says that the Father, Jesus, and believers are “in” each other, or being “one,” it refers to being in an intimate relationship with each other; being in union with each other.

"And the helper, the holy spirit, which the Father will send in my name, IT will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you." “And.” The Greek word de (#1161 δέ) can express a small contrast, but can also just express a change of subject. In this case, “but” is too strong a contrast. Some English versions leave the de untranslated and just start the English sentence with the subject, the Helper (cf. CEB), Others translate it “And.” Jesus was speaking with his disciples while he was still alive, and his point was that after he was personally gone from his disciples, the Helper would teach them what it heard. “the holy spirit.” The Greek text has no article “the” but it is supplied in the REV for clarity. The “the” is added in English due to its reference in the immediate context. This refers to the holy spirit that is the gift of God. [For more information on the holy spirit and uses of “holy spirit,” see Appendix 7: “What is the Holy Spirit?” and also see Appendix 15: “Usages of ‘Spirit.’”] “in my name.” In this context, the phrase “in my name” means “in connection with me.” The phrase is used that way many times in Scripture. The specific nature of the connection must be determined from the context (e.g., Matt. 18:5, 20; 24:5; Mark 9:37, 39; John 15:16). REV

ROCOR Bishops Were Warned

ROCOR Bishops were warned and still allowed clergy sexual abusers to remain. 

Know Them by Their Fruit 

Matthew 7:15-27

15 “Beware of false prophets who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are destructive, greedy wolves. 

16 You will recognize them by their fruit. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 

17 In the same way, every healthy tree produces good fruit, but a rotten tree produces bad fruit. 

18 A healthy tree cannot produce bad fruit, neither can a rotten tree produce good fruit. 

19 Every tree that does not produce good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 

20 So then, you will recognize them by their fruit. 

21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter into the Kingdom of Heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven will enter. 

22 Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, didn’t we prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many miracles in your name?’ 

23 And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you. Depart from me, you who practice lawlessness!’  

24 “Everyone, then, who hears these words of mine and does them will be like a wise man who built his house on the rock, 

25 and the rain fell, and the rivers flooded, and the winds blew and beat violently against that house, and yet it did not fall because it had been founded on the rock. 

26 And everyone who hears these words of mine and does not do them will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand, 

27 and the rain fell, and the rivers flooded, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell—and great was its fall!”

"A Man, Christ Jesus"

For there is one God and one mediator between God and humankind, a man, Christ Jesus, (Christ means 'anointed one')

“one mediator between God and humankind, a man.” This is one of the great and clear texts in the debate as to who Jesus really is. If Jesus were God, this would have been a wonderful place to say it. Instead, Jesus is clearly called “a person” using the Greek word anthrōpos, “person, human, man.” The lexicons state that it is “man” in contrast with animals, plants, angels, and of course, God. The Greek text reads that there is one mediator between God and “humankind,” or “people” (the noun is plural in Greek; anthrōpōn, ἀνθρώπων), and that mediator is “a person” or “a man” (the noun is singular; anthrōpos, ἄνθρωπος), Jesus Christ. Although Trinitarians say that the referent to Jesus as “a man” is only referring to his human nature, that is their theology adding things; the Scripture never says that.

Actually, Jesus cannot be God or a God-man in this verse. The whole point of a mediator between people and God is that “God” cannot be the mediator. The mediator in this verse is “between” God and the people. If the mediator is God, then he is not between God and the people. In this verse, the mediator is playing part of the role of the priest, one who stands between the people and God. In fact, Jesus is called our High Priest in the New Testament (e.g., Heb. 2:17; 3:1; 4:14, 15; 5:5, 10; 6:20; 9:11). Both as our mediator and as High Priest, Jesus cannot be God or a God-man. The priest is a person who stands between God and people, and we learn from 1 Timothy 2:5 that this is also what a mediator does, which is why the verse specifies that Jesus is “a man, Christ Jesus.” That is the simple truth of Scripture, that Jesus was a man, a flesh-and-blood human being.

If Jesus were a God-man, this would be one of the many places to say it, but Scripture never says it, ever. Instead, Jesus is stated to be a member of the human race, just as the Old Testament prophecies foretold he would be.

This verse is commonly translated in English Bibles as, “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, THE man Christ Jesus,” but there is no definite article, no “the” in the Greek text before the word “man.” Adding the “the” before “man” could possibly distort the verse a little, as if it were saying that Jesus was “the man” in a slang way, as in the phrase, “You are the man!” William Mounce writes that the lack of the definite article (“the”) before the Greek word anthrōpos (man, human) is “emphasizing the quality of being human; i.e., it was as a human being that Christ gave himself for all humanity…ἄνθρωπος [anthrōpos] is anarthrous, designating not identity (“the Son of man”) but quality (i.e., that which makes a person human).”a

Mounce’s analysis of the grammar is correct: 1 Timothy 2:5 is pointing out that Jesus is “a man,” “a person,” a human being. Romans 5 shows that it was a person who sinned and got mankind into the mess it is in, and it was a person, Jesus, who got us out of that mess.

Another valuable thing taught by 1 Timothy 2:5 concerns the proper understanding of what happens to a person when they die, and thus, that today, the only mediator between people and God is Jesus. Although the traditional Christian teaching is that the soul (or “spirit”) of a person lives on after the body dies, the proper biblical teaching is that when a person dies they are dead in every way, body, soul, and spirit, and they are awaiting the resurrection. Sadly, the orthodox Christian teaching that dead people are actually alive in some form has led to a number of false teachings and practices in the Church. These false practices and beliefs include people trying to contact the dead, which is strictly forbidden by God (cf. Deut. 18:9-14), or of thinking that the dead have come to contact them (which would mean that dead believers would be deliberately disobeying God, which is an untenable belief).

However, another false doctrine that stems from the belief that dead people are not really dead but alive in heaven or “hell” is the doctrine held by some Christians that dead people are praying for the living and interceding for them before God. But 1 Timothy 2:5 makes it clear that there is only one mediator between God and humankind, and that is the Lord Jesus Christ.

Neither the Mother Mary, nor any well-known “saint,” nor anyone else, is interceding for the living before the throne of God. Doctrines like that come from the false belief that when a person dies they are not really dead, but alive as a spirit.

Right now, the only human in heaven is the Lord Jesus Christ, and he is our mediator between us and God as 1 Timothy 2:5 says, and he is interceding for us (Rom. 8:34).

Also, the partial sentence in 1 Timothy 2:5 is only the first part of the sentence. The whole sentence is in 1 Timothy 2:5-7, and there is more important information about Jesus Christ in verse 6 (see commentary on 1 Tim. 2:6).

[For more on Jesus being a fully human man, see Appendix 6: “Jesus is the Son of God, Not God the Son.” For more on the difference between Holy Spirit and holy spirit, see Appendix 7: “What is the Holy Spirit?” For more on dead people being dead in every way, see Appendix 3: “The Dead are Dead.”]

From: 1 Timothy 2:5, REV Bible and Commentary

"God is not a human being that he would lie, nor the son of man, that he would change his mind."

Robert Simmon "Mr. Blue Marble"

If it is news to you that you have never seen a photo of a round, spinning globe taken from outer space, then you may be living in the clouds. No photo exists because the round spinning globe does not exist.

"It is photoshopped but it's, it's, it has to be." Robert Simmom

Have You Been Psyoped?

Modern day "science" isn't science, it's a pseudo-science religion. The Earth is geocentric and stationary with water above and water below. The stars, sun and moon are in the firmament above and are relatively close. NASA is an Illuminati-Freemason organization. Do you trust their spokesmen more than you do the Scriptures?

Two choices: Call the JTO Editor an idiot conspiracy theorist or spend the years I have in deep research of the facts. Most will choose the lazy way out.

NOTE: For your convenience, see the other posts on this site regarding the true science of the Geocentric Earth.

Flat Earth Is Not A Conspiracy

"Flat earth is not a conspiracy. Far from it. Did you know the entire heliocentric system of a spherical Earth rotating and revolving around the sun with other planets was actually designed after ancient occultic beliefs? The heliocentric system is not real. It never was, but its imaginary design fulfills Satan’s grand purpose of misdirecting the human race away from the True Creator God. It’s an endlessly complex design that fills the time and energy of millions of people who grew up playing with toy space shuttle’s and imagining what it would be like to become astronauts and explore far away planets and galaxies. As adults, millions have become fixated on all things NASA. They watch every new video, gape over every new CGI (computer generated image), hang on every word of scientists who wax eloquent with fantastical pseudoscientific theories. The elaborate scheme constructed over centuries, launched officially with Copernicus’ book in 1543, has been Satan’s single greatest act of sorcery and occult magic on Earth. It achieved the grand success he pursued to turn billions of souls away from any recognition or acknowledgement of a God of Creation. Satan’s sorcery has accomplished something few are aware of, even theologians and pastors, and something that Satan fully intended in the heliocentric design. What is this purpose that drives Satan’s hatred and passion? The heliocentric design of the sun and the Earth and the planets mocks God. It mocks God as the Creator of the “heaven and the Earth.” It mocks God by appropriating his Glory in creation. It mocks God by counterfeiting God’s own creation story. It mocks God with false gods. And the heliocentric system mocks God by trying to expunge the entire history of God’s miraculous works on Earth, but most importantly it mocks God with the claim that there never was a savior, Jesus Christ. If you ever thought as a Christian that the controversy of whether the Earth is flat or a sphere is not important, think again. God does not consider mocking his holy character or denying him the glory that is due him as an insignificant matter. Considering how God values his glory, to mock him so boldly in front of the entire human race, to mock God to all the angels of Heaven, and to mock God to all the fallen angels who can see, is a reminder to the genuine believer of what this means to a Holy God whose wrath is coming against all ungodliness. It’s truly amazing how occult sorcery put such evil plans out in the open, yet we all have missed the obvious. This is the magician distracting his audience from God’s reality and deceiving all the spectators into believing a false reality. What is so extraordinary is that this heliocentric sorcery is on a grand scale, and yet we still missed the obvious. Do you know why it has not even occurred to pastors and theologians that the heliocentric system mocks God? Because they have been ensnared by Satan’s sorcery like everyone else. They think heliocentrism is real, and therefore the thought that it mocks God never enters their minds. This book will reveal the entire heliocentric system for the occultic design that it is, and when you see the whole picture, you'll be shocked."

The Coming Threat to Worldwide Liberty

Mankind is being programmed to accept a coming fraudulent event. The fraud will be perpetrated in order to bring all governments into a unity of purpose, to remove the liberty of life from the masses and control the Earth's population. A One World intent leading to a One World Government.

The fraud will be the lie that a comet or asteroid will hit the Earth. Marshal Law and other dictatorial mechanisms will be put in place. All freedoms and liberty will be suspended, while the world governmental control is implemented.

Dissenters and whistleblowers of NASA and other Illuminati/Masonic propaganda, will be squashed with an unprecedented, heightened, and aggressive censorship, armed with legal action and imprisonment. The previous repercussions over refusal to wear COVID masks and take the various Jabs, will pale in comparison to what is to come. Restrictive laws will be universally enforced. 

The event will pass with no calamity and no asteroid. The positive spin will be that "we were lucky this time, but another may be on its way." The worldwide governmental structure will remain in place. 

"Choose you this day whom you will serve."

Clergy Sexual Abuse Study

 

Is There Not One ROCOR Bishop Who Will Act?

Who among you has had enough of the desecration of ROCOR and its people via the inaction or subterfuge of its hierarchy regarding sexual predators in its midst? Do you really think you are protecting the Church of Christ by keeping things on the down-low? Is there not one ROCOR Bishop who will act? Whom do you fear most, God or man?

"They Must Be Plucked Out"

Upon the death of Metropolitan Hilarion, Bishop Nicholas was made Metropolitan Nicholas. The torch was passed. To ROCOR's great shame, the toxic fire of the torch of subterfuge and complicity is now burning down the reputation and standing of the ROCOR hierarchy as Metropolitan Nicholas continues in the same sinful vein of conduct. He allowed FMW to remain for six years. Has FMW been deposed? Has FMW been delivered to civil authorities?  Where is today's Saint Athanasius? When will the good Orthodox parishioners rise up and say, "no more", and shout, "They must be plucked out." 

A portion from Rape and the Holy Man (November 2018)

For the Metropolitan to now ignore, table, or brush-off this matter is a sin unto God and his holy church. The Metropolia has had 14 years to deal with this matter. It is time to heed the words of Saint Athanasius the Great, that troublemaker, that rabble-rouser, that excommunicated busybody, that stubborn man, that self-deceived tenacious soul, that confronter of both Bishop and Emperor, that Saint:

 “As we walk the unerring and life-bringing path, let us pluck out the eye that scandalizes us-not the physical eye, but the noetic one. For example, if a bishop or presbyter-who are the eyes of the Church-conduct themselves in an evil manner and scandalize the people, they must be plucked out. For it is more profitable to gather without them in a house of prayer, than to be cast together with them into the gehenna of fire together with Annas and Caiaphas.” — St. Athanasius the Great, PG 26:1257c

Jesus the Christ was more specific in regard to the ramifications of conducting oneself in an evil manner against a child, in particular, a child who is a believer, seeking the Kingdom of God:

"Whoever welcomes a little child like this in my name, welcomes me. But if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to *sin (*Skandalizo- to cause to stumble or fall- to craftily entice or lead to ruin), it would be better for him to have a large millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea."

Both the perpetrator of this alleged crime against a 15-year-old girl, and the Bishop and fellow priests who have allowed him to remain, should they fail to repent, will share the same end. Jesus the Christ is specific as to the demonstrative nature of a such a repentance and the fateful end if one does not repent.

"Woe to the world because of the things that cause people to stumble! Such things must come, but woe to the person through whom they come! If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life maimed or crippled than to have two hands or two feet and be thrown into eternal fire. And if your eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into the fire of hell."

Metropolitan Hilarion Awarding
Father Matthew Williams For
Long and Faithful Service

If the Metropolitan of ROCOR fails in this matter, then the world and faithful Orthodox Christians are presented with two shameful lessons. ONE: ROCOR is either inept or obtuse at investigating sexual abuse in its ranks and this carries the risk of earning a millstone of its own and the fire of hell. TWO: If one is a ROCOR clergy and commits a sexual crime, just make sure the victim doesn't talk and you will be in the clear. Later on, you may even get an award, personally presented by the Metropolitan. 

[NOTE: Today, 2025, the practice of shielding the clergy sexual predators continues under the pastorate of Metropolitan Nicholas and his Bishops and priests.]

Courage!

 

The DNA Of Methods And Tactics

JTO had this exchange in the comment section of Journey To orthodoxy: Does ROCOR "Fear God and Care What People Think?" Perhaps They Should:

Commenter: Sorry, this is just wrong on many levels. I will not participate in public bashing of our Metropolitan, it is just not in my DNA to do that.

JTO: Anon @ 12:09 am : Have you asked yourself what is in your Metropolitan's DNA that allowed a sexual predator to run rampant in his flock? What was in his DNA to know of the allegations of FMW's sexual abuse, rape, and molestation, as early as 2019, and fail to follow ROCOR's own PUBLIC Sexual Abuse Policy? Had your Metropolitan's DNA been pure, he would have removed FMW six years ago perhaps preventing the sexual abuse of his own children. They have DNA also and are forever marred by your Metropolitan's lack of a pastoral heart. So, what is in your DNA? Do you just have it in you to deem public exposing of a sinful shepherd, "bashing?" Since your DNA won't allow you to stand up for the weak, helpless and abused but rather defend the wolf in sheep's clothing, comments such as yours here just expose your own perverse heart.

Commenter: I never said I have not and will not continue to voice my concerns to our Metropolitan. It is just your method and Tactics that I will not support.

JTO: Anon. You didn't answer the questions. Nevertheless, are you aware of how many have "voiced their concerns" directly through private communication and documentation? Numerous priests and bishops have brushed off such communications and, like you, seem to have a propensity to attack and vilify the tactics and methods rather than deal with the real issue of Sexual Predators in their midst. I wonder if you have read the articles that list the many players who have vilified the mother of the raped 15-year-old girl. Over six years JTO has been communicating to the Metropolitan as did the mother of the rape victim many years before that. So, no. You do not get to enter late to this discourse and malign the open exposing of these priests and Bishops who are failing the body of Christ. The day of allowing them to give the silent treatment or the brush off to these very real issues is over. Please take the time to read all of the articles related to this issue. JTO and other public forums will continue to expose sin in the body of Christ until it is weeded out, sinful Metropolitans included. That should be in every Christian's DNA. You are certainly in the minority in advocating keeping all of this quiet and private. You are a good sheep. FMW raped his 15-year-old goddaughter, molested his own daughters, was improper with adult women in his church and your esteemed Metropolitan and others have known of his character and conduct for 10-plus years! Not only did they allow FMW to remain, but they awarded him for "long and faithful service." Please let JTO know when you deem it okay to call them out on their ungodly conduct. Did you see the movie Spotlight, about the Roman Catholic systemic sexual abuse case? Your attitude of squelching information is not new. You sincerely think you are supporting the church and its leaders (DNA) and honoring God, but unfortunately, you are an enabler.

Anyone has the prerogative to participate in open discourse or to choose not to participate, however maligning those who publicly expose the enabling of sexual abuse in the church as being "wrong on so many levels", should be rebuked. To be consistent with this detestable ideology one would need to demand that public forums such as Orthodox Christian Sexual Abuse | Facebook, RAINN | The nation's largest anti-sexual violence organization, and a myriad of others be removed from public view. Handle all things quietly, out of the public eye, you know, sort of like the Roman Catholics do it? A resounding, NO! It's just not in my DNA to do that.

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."

ROCOR, Are You Next?

 Spotlight (film) - Wikipedia

Does ROCOR "Fear God and Care What People Think?" Perhaps They Should

JTO Commentary

To all Orthodox Parishioners:

Had ROCOR exhibited righteousness and, frankly, common-sense decency years ago, the current destruction of a church and so many families would not be happening before your eyes. Do you not see that ROCOR is also responsible before God for the soul of Father Matthew Williams, that they allowed him to fall to his destruction?

All Christians are fully justified to speak privately and publicly regarding ROCOR's actions both historically and currently. Do not let errant men, be they Bishop or King, step on your neck. Although Orthodox culture may frown on it, the scripture allows for the people to bring accusations against an Elder/Bishop:

1 Timothy 5:19-20 Do not accept an accusation against an elder EXCEPT on the basis of two or three witnesses. Those who persist in sin, reprove IN FRONT OF EVERYONE, so that the rest will also be afraid of the consequences.

Firstly, find and use the in-house ROCOR method of contact and appeal. Use it. Go above your Metropolitan if needs be. ROCOR can dismiss JTO as inconsequential, however, if numerous Orthodox voices are raised and persistently, ROCOR may be compelled toward a righteous response.

Hear the words of YOUR Lord:

The Parable of the Persistent Widow

Then Jesus told his disciples a parable to show them that they should always pray and not give up.  He said: “In a certain town there was a judge who neither feared God nor cared what people thought.  And there was a widow in that town who kept coming to him with the plea, ‘Grant me justice against my adversary.’

“For some time he refused. But finally he said to himself, ‘Even though I don’t fear God or care what people think, yet because this widow keeps bothering me, I will see that she gets justice, so that she won’t eventually come and attack me!’”

And the Lord said, “Listen to what the unjust judge says. And will not God bring about justice for his chosen ones, who cry out to him day and night? Will he keep putting them off? I tell you, he will see that they get justice, and quickly. However, when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on the earth?”

Secondly, if ROCOR will not give justice, shout your complaint from the rooftops to ALL who will hear.  Warn others to flee. For surely, the walls they have erected will crumble and all within will be overrun. "Let their days be few and another take their office."

You may be delighted and joyful to find that there is life in Christ and a future and a hope outside the fortress in which you dwell. 

Nathan Lee Lewis

JTO Editor

The Not So Sourcey Source Lashes Out

The posting of What Did Bishop Nicholas Know and When Did He Know It? has prompted a response from the "source". 

In an Instant Message (IM) to the JTO Editor, the source "close to the family" initially responded with, 

"Not cool."

He then followed up with,

"I understand now that any sense of journalistic integrity is a convenience for you, not any real commitment.

"Naming sources is low, and I expected better from you."

"And don't equivocate, you named your source."

"There was more information waiting for you, but you may now content yourself with the anger of the mentally ill. Good job."

JTO responded with an e-mail:

On Tue, Feb 11, 2025, 01:44 Nathan Lewis <journeytoorthodoxy@gmail.com> wrote:

[Name Omitted],

Equivocation would be devoting an entire website to the defense of Elizabeth Williams while omitting her culpability in the rape and cover-up of her 15-year-old goddaughter by her husband.

Equivocation would be refusing to comment when confronted with your 2019 email, which proves you and your family knew, as did Bishop Nicholas, at least six years ago, that your father-in-law was a danger to his family and to the church. This gives validity to much of the public criticism that is coming your way.

I said from the very beginning, 2019, that I reserved the right to share the content of our correspondence while trying not to disclose your identity/name. Your decision to step into the public discourse exposed your identity prior to the last post. Read the comment section. No equivocation is necessary.

What I shared on JTO was relevant information to squelch the disinformation you were putting out there, some regarding Carole Stephens and the veracity of her testimony. You told me you "knew for a fact" that Elizabeth did not try to silence Carole. That was false. And now you say you were going to tell me of another "crazy woman".  Elizabeth has suffered, but her decisions and your decisions have been part of the catalyst for the recent events and damage done to the body of Christ.  I was not fully convinced of that until I reviewed our 2019 correspondence.

You are not the only source of information and have not shared anything I did not already know.  Romans 12:3 For by the grace given me I say to every one of you: Do not think of yourself more highly than you ought, but think of yourself with sober judgment, according to the measure of faith God has given you.

I recommend you step back from your public discourse and take care of your immediate family. Your public activity is not playing well to the masses. Perhaps your attorney would concur.

Nathan Lee Lewis

JTO Editor

His response was simply,

"I trusted your word. My mistake." 

NOTE: JTO Always informs those bringing information that JTO reserves the right to use the information in any way seen fit, while attempting to keep the source anonymous if possible. No promises for total anonymity are ever given. In the case of this "source", the 2019 emails will affirm that this "source" was apprised of such. JTO was and is faithful to its word.  In this case, the "source" identified himself to JTO and willingly entered into an on-going discourse, with an obvious intent to use the JTO forum to express his views on the current matter. JTO was willing until it became obvious that the "source" was using JTO to disseminate erroneous or incomplete information regarding the activities of the Williams family. JTO shut down that conduit.

What Did Bishop Nicholas Know and When Did He Know It?

In November 2018, JTO posted the article Rape and the Holy Man exposing the then Deacon Matthew Williams alleged rape of his 15-year-old goddaughter who was babysitting his young children.

After the article was posted, JTO received an email dated February 2019 from a confirmed source close to the Williams family. In the email the unnamed source confirmed, 

"Upon reading your article, I wasn't particularly shocked by any of the allegations, and they do put certain incidents and behaviors into context... I have taken this issue higher up, and an investigation is pending. I'm close to the family, and I've observed a number of troubling patterns and behaviors, which are frankly not your concern, and have been shared with Bishop Nicholas already..."

If this claim is true, Bishop Nicholas was not only apprised of the Rape and the Holy Man expose' but was informed by a person close to the family that they too had observed troubling issues and incidents presumably related to sexual abuse by Father Matthew Williams.

The takeaway here is that, according to the source, as early as 2019, a full six years prior to the eruption of the current chaos at Saint Tikhon, Bishop Nicholas knew. Family members, including Elizabeth Williams knew, and the source knew. 

Even so, the source implored JTO to follow the ROCOR process of communication with the Bishop or nothing would happen. JTO reminded the source of the numerous prior communications regarding the sexual abuse allegations of Father Matthew Willaims, that did go through the correct channels, even receiving a brush-off correspondence from the late Metropolitan Hilarion. The source claimed, "There was never a formal investigation opened into this case by ROCOR. The complaint was dismissed out of hand, despite ROCOR policy stating,

'In the case of any complaint that initially appears to be credible, or if the findings of the preliminary inquiry are inconclusive, the priest or deacon will be referred for clinical evaluation. The clergyman may also be temporarily removed from his ministry and may have other restrictions placed on him.' "

At the time in 2019 and up to this point, JTO honored the source's desire to remain anonymous and out of the public eye. JTO promised not to use his name, however, the source has recently initiated a high-profile involvement in the public discourse regarding current events and the removal of Father Williams from his parish, so the content of his 2019 correspondence with JTO is being shared here. The source previously indicated, "I'm engaged to FMW's eldest daughter, which should make clear why I'm involved in this. I want the truth to be out, because as it stands, my children aren't going to meet half of their grandparents."

His site, Timeline of misconduct reports in case of Archpriest Matthew Williams, offers a strong defense of Elizabeth Williams (Father Matthew Williams wife) and presents a timeline of her conduct in recent matters. What the site does not share is the fact that as early as 2019, the family knew of the serious character flaws of Father Williams and was appealing to Bishop Nicholas. The site also is silent on the 2008 allegations that Elizabeth Williams was personally involved in the attempt to silence Carole Stephens after the alleged rape of her daughter came to light. The site also does not address the allegations that Elizabeth Williams cajoled the Stephens daughter to not come forward about the event in their home.

Since the current allegations toward FMW have emerged, JTO has been in conversation with the source of 2019, in order to present a balanced view of the current events by posting his perspectives. In keeping with this, JTO recently asked the source to clarify the timeline he publicly presented and informed the source that his past 2019 emails had been archived and seemed to conflict with what he was publicly presenting. His response was to lawyer up, claiming there was a pending court case and their lawyer forbade them to say more. 

JTO told the source, "I am not certain your comment is sufficient. I am not asking about a court case, only for clarification on the timeline you currently publicly post on your website, and an email you wrote to me in 2019."

His response was, "Basically, no comment. I cannot add more to the situation."

JTO responded. "Okay. Do you intend to take down your website?"

His response was, "What's done is done, removals don't do anything. I am just repeating what was told to me by an attorney."

What did Bishop Nicholas know and when did he know it? He knew at least six years before the current sexual abuse revelations came to light that his priest, Father Matthew Williams, had a serious character flaw. He knew by prior testimony by prior victims and by the testimony of FMW's own family members. He knew enough to have removed FMW according to ROCOR's own Sexual Abuse Policy at least SIX YEARS AGO. He Knew. Why didn't he act? He knew. He knew enough. He knew...but so did numerous other clergy. They all knew. 

1 Timothy 5:19-20 Do not accept an accusation against an elder EXCEPT on the basis of two or three witnesses. Those who persist in sin, reprove IN FRONT OF EVERYONE, so that the rest will also be afraid of the consequences.

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

Rise Up People of God!

To Orthodox Hierarchy: "What Is Your Game?

By Carole Stephens

[minor edits by JTO]

Even Nathan is being attacked for trying to bring abuse within the church to light. I communicated with both SNAP and pokrov.org years ago to get support. I also went to attorneys, even a female attorney, who pointed out how church hierarchs do circle their wagons. 

In my personal investigation, speaking with a district attorney, I was told that there were six priests on their [rolls] facing prosecution for child abuse. I am a former missionary wife in Mexico and Central America, who had small children with me on the mission field. I remember such complaints from local girls being assaulted by catholic priests. That is why SNAP exists. With all of the child trafficking being allowed worldwide, with the U.S. being the biggest patron of such, how can you defend the position of anyone who would hurt a child? 

All of our children are at risk for being snatched and sold just for trying to live. "Amber Alert" was created in memory of a 10-year-old girl named Amber who was out riding her bike and was raped and killed, her body dumped in a lake. What are you EVEN defending? Children are coerced in schools and the perpetrators are fired and prosecuted. All school personnel have to be fingerprinted and investigated before entering teaching programs and before hire, yet some do still emerge. 

To my understanding, the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia was founded as a refuge for the persecuted underground church in atheist regimes. How can it now cover up [the abuse of] the most innocent over whom we are to be stewards? Our children are not our possessions. We are gifted with the stewardship over their welfare, and their souls. It would be better for a millstone to be hanged about our necks and we be cast into the depths of the sea than to permit that any harm be done to these little ones, as states the scripture: 

"Matthew 18:5-7 KJV. And whoso shall receive one such little child in my name receiveth me. But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea." 

This is not a GAME. There is no END GAME! The church needs purification. Even the [Apostle] Paul was constantly warning the Church. 

Children need good stewards, good guidance and protection in churches, in schools, and in their homes. There are enough predators running loose to hurt our kids. Can the church not be a refuge? I lost my home and had to sleep in a car over this. My children have to question the validity of the church they were raised in. Looking through history, apostolic succession means nothing if the heart of the priest is corrupt. What is your game?

***

[JTO Editor's Note: Does this sound like the rantings of a "crazy woman?"]

Sibling of 2004 Alleged Rape Victim Speaks Out

Comment left on JTO:

"I’m related to the victim from 2004, and I can say for a fact that Elizabeth knew about it and actively tried to silence her. The turmoil and damage this caused Carol at the time were heartbreaking to witness. Yes, the victim chose not to take action then—that was her decision. But that doesn’t excuse Elizabeth’s role in covering it up and trying to silence Carol when she found out.

I do feel terrible for what Elizabeth’s children are going through now, but knowing what I do about her past behavior, it’s hard for me to feel sympathy for her. Maybe I need to let go of the resentment I still carry, but as children, we were taught to look up to and revere both her and Matthew. Ever since the truth about what he did came to light over a decade ago, I haven’t been able to think of them without feeling anger."

[JTO Note: This public support of Carole from another child is courageous and a long time coming. JTO would offer one correction. It is inaccurate that "the victim chose not to take action then". According to Carole, the day after the alleged rape, her daughter called and spoke with Father Anastasy P. Yatrelis within hours of the alleged rape, and the coercion of this 15-year-old rape victim by Orthodox clergy began.]