It is time to recall the discussion from Part Two about Constantine, and the questions regarding whether the emperors are to be counted as brothers in the faith. But this time, in regard to the Arian view of the Trinity…

What are the chances that the legal heir of the father of all lies was speaking the plain truth in imposing pagan and antichristian concepts? Or are we seeing a major cover up and deception of a massive act of spiritual harlotry being played out before our eyes in the annals of history and perpetuated even to this day? Does God use Satan’s legal heir to authorize and impose truth on His people on pain of excommunication and death? Is that how God operates today?

Well, the historical fact is, the Arians also had their allies in, and brotherhood with, the heirs of the throne of Satan! So, if you are an Arian reading this, you also share a brotherhood with some of these heirs of Satan’s throne.

That’s because, after the Nicaean Council, the battle between the two factions continued to rage, and the position of the emperors wobbled back and forth over this issue. Thus other councils, again presided over by an emperor, reversed the creed of Nicaea…

“…One group of bishops…in a creed of 357…rejected the homoousios formula as being unsupported by scripture, and argued instead for a subordinate Jesus in line with earlier tradition. A compromise creed issued by the emperor Constantius in 360 confirmed the unscriptural nature of homoousios and declared instead no more than that the Son was ‘like’ (homoios) the Father, a definition that solved nothing.” Charles Freeman, https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Threefold+mystery%3A+Charles+Freeman+explains+why+AD+381+was+a+defining…-a0174639385

This refers to the Councils of Sirmium (held in 347, 351, 357, 358, and finally in 375 or 378). All these councils were held under the rule of Emperor Constantius II. Thus, all these councils were also presided over by a legal heir of the throne of Satan. In this case, it was one of Constantine’s sons. The referred to creed contains an admission that the word and concept of homoousios is nowhere to be found in scripture…

“But since many persons are disturbed by questions concerning what is called in Latin substantia, but in Greek ousia, that is, to make it understood more exactly, as to ‘coessential,’ or what is called, ‘like-in-essence,’ there ought to be no mention of any of these at all, nor exposition of them in the Church, for this reason and for this consideration, that in divine Scripture nothing is written about them…” Second Creed of Sirmium, https://www.fourthcentury.com/second-creed-of-sirmium-or-the-blasphemy-of-sirmium/

Thus, the same “church” that once established “same substance” as its official doctrine, later acquiesced realizing that the concept had no basis in scripture at all.

This means that the legal heirs of Satan’s throne weren’t all that concerned about which version to support with their legal authority, the “co-equal, same substance” party or the Arian “subordination, similar substance” party. Both of which proposed, contrary to what God said through Isaiah, that God was not alone in creation.

It didn’t matter to Satan’s legal heirs which lie got the job done, as long as God’s commandment is broken, and a lie is obeyed instead, Satan or his heir, as the case may be, either way, becomes lord of the servant who obeys him. And if you obey Satan’s heir, you are obeying Satan himself, because his heir is his agent and his servant also. Just as Jesus was and is God’s agent and heir, and if you believe and obey him, you are believing in the Father who sent him.

“Jesus cried out and said, “Whoever believes in me, believes not in me, but in him who sent me” (John 12:44).

The emperor’s role as Satan’s agent (as the imitation of the truth) does help us understand Christ’s role as the Father’s heir and agent.

By ignoring the emperor’s role as heir to Satan’s throne, the bishops didn’t realize they were ultimately submitting to Satan himself. But they were tempted by their lust for power. They wanted a place at that table of authority… just like Adam and Eve wanted “to be like gods” determining good and evil for themselves. That is what they were literally doing at the Councils, determining for themselves good and evil.

This is fundamentally the same temptation of those who “want” Jesus to be personally “God” because they want to be “God” when they become “like him”.

To deny Jesus’ role under God is to be ultimately “antichrist” meaning “against the anointed” or “instead of the anointed.” Since God himself doesn’t need to be anointed, to claim Jesus as “true God” in his own person is a double-minded lie that renders Jesus’ anointing beyond redundant to the point of utterly useless and unnecessary… thus a meaningless play-act. That, in turn, makes God a liar for calling His son the “Anointed One” (Christ). Thus, the act of the serpent’s role in the Garden is also a foreshadowing of making God a liar all around.

Recall how things went down with the serpent in the Garden and with Emperor Constantine, both of which were covered earlier. In both cases, the devil needed two elements to achieve his goal of dominion over God’s people. Those two elements were to trick God’s people into breaking God’s commandment and instead being obedient to Satan’s lie.

“Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves slaves to obey, you are that one’s slaves whom you obey, whether of sin leading to death, or of obedience leading to righteousness?” (Romans 6:16, NKJV).

Satan’s legal heir, Emperor Constantius, was eager and willing to, and did, impose an Arian view of Jesus upon God’s people. He would have had no reason for doing so if it wouldn’t have accomplished his goal of domination unless it both broke God’s commandment and caused them to submit to his lie instead.

Therefore, the Arian position is proven to be a lie simply by Satan’s legal heir putting the full support of Satan’s throne behind it, just as was the case of “one substance”. Remember, Jesus said, “You do the works of your father (John 8:41), and then he went on to say, “You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and doesn’t stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks on his own; for he is a liar, and the father of lies” (John 8:44).

So, the same questions that were posed to Trinitarians apply equally to the Arian view of Christ.

Arians need to deal with this fact. An Arian legal heir of the throne of Satan put his full support behind the idea of a preexistent subordinate deity coming to earth in the form of man. That lie was preferred by Constantius II over the lie of homoousios. But that becomes immaterial at this point. That’s because neither Arianism nor Trinitarianism are the views of the truth of scripture, nor obedient to the first commandment. Either idea is just another iteration, or form, of a pagan and antichristian Gnostic view of Jesus Christ. And that idea of “gods come to earth in the form of man” came up in the book of Acts…

“And when the people saw what Paul had done, they lifted up their voices, saying in the speech of Lycaonia, The gods are come down to us in the likeness of men” (Acts 14:11).

The apostles were appalled by this; they did not seek to find common ground with their view of Jesus. Rather, the very idea is totally contrary to what the apostles did preach Jesus to be…

“Men of Israel, hear these words! Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved by God to you by mighty works and wonders and signs which God did by him in the midst of you, even as you yourselves know” (Acts 2:22).

So, dear Arian-leaning friend, are you comfortable knowing that Satan’s legal heir used your doctrine to deceive Christian bishops to submit to him instead of the first commandment? Are you comfortable believing in a doctrine that one of Satan’s heirs authorized as the official state doctrine of Satan’s kingdom on earth? Did the Father reveal to Satan’s heir the same doctrine He revealed to you, just as He did Peter in Matthew 16:16-17?

If not, then I beseech you to reconsider believing it. Because that is what you have been seduced to do, either by carnal reasoning or influenced by pagan philosophy.

“¹⁴Don’t be unequally yoked with unbelievers, for what fellowship do righteousness and iniquity have? Or what fellowship does light have with darkness? ¹⁵What agreement does Christ have with Belial? Or what portion does a believer have with an unbeliever? ¹⁶What agreement does a temple of God have with idols? For you are a temple of the living God. Even as God said, “I will dwell in them and walk in them. I will be their God and they will be my people.” ¹⁷Therefore “‘Come out from among them, and be separate,’ says the Lord. ‘Touch no unclean thing. I will receive you. with darkness and no temptation has overtaken you that is not common to man” (2 Corinthians 6:14-17).

“No temptation has taken you except what is common to man…” (1 Corinthians 10:13).

So then, in either case, Arian or Trinitarian, how could any Christian feel comfortable embracing that which Satan’s legal heirs literally condoned and authorized?

Imagine if you were living during that time when one of the Emperors of Rome was presiding over a council that was defending your view of Christ. Would it bring you comfort or concern to find out Satan’s kingdom had officially adopted your position on God and His son? Would you be comfortable to call Satan’s legal heir a brother in the faith? Would you call Constantine “brother Constantine” or Constantius, “brother Constantius”?

Are you ready to concede that one of Satan’s legal heirs received the same revelation of the son of God as you?

Both emperors had their political adversaries put to death on their command and no murderer has eternal life (1 John 3:15).

For the record, no legal heir of Satan ever approved or authorized the son of God doctrine that I believe in that Jesus is God’s highly anointed and exalted human son of the lineage of King David (2 Sam. 7:14). Nor did any believers in the human son of God ever have any of these emperors (or legal bodies authorized by him) put anyone to death for not believing likewise.

Will you take these facts to heart? Or will you just harden your heart and make excuses for aligning with the emperor, like the excuse, Adam made, blaming Eve, when he got caught buying in to the devil’s lies?

Well, just in case you’re willing to consider a biblical way of interpreting the passages that “appear” to assign Jesus literal preexistence, consider these scriptures…

“And bow before it shall all who are dwelling upon the land, whose names have not been written in the scroll of the life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world” (Revelation 13:8, Young’s Literal).

Did Jesus literally die in his preexistent state, or is this biblical foreknowledge language? No, this is an example of “foreknowledge” talk…

“God… calls the things that are not, as though they were” (Romans 4:17).

This verse agrees with the next one:

“…I am God… declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times things that are not yet done; saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure” (Isaiah 46:9–10).

Scholars call this biblical figure of speech by several names; for example, the “prophetic perfect (tense),” or “Already–not yet.”

Take, for example, John’s baptism:

“The baptism of John, where was it from? From heaven or from men?” (Matthew 21:25).

Obviously, John’s baptism didn’t “preexist” in heaven, other than in God’s foreknowledge of His plan. So it is also with the “Son of Man” who came down out of heaven, not to do his own will but the will of Him who sent him.

“¹⁴I have given them your word. The world hated them because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world… ¹⁶They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. ¹⁷Sanctify them in your truth. Your word is truth. ¹⁸As you sent me into the world, even so I have sent them into the world” (John 17:14).

Here Jesus is, praying to the Father. He has no need to talk in parables, he is just talking matter-of-factly about the way things are. Jesus was sent into the world in the same way that Jesus sends us into the world. We weren’t preexistent in heaven, and yet we were sent by him into the world just as he was sent into the world. These are just figures of speech they use in the Bible. All these examples simply mean that it wasn’t man who directed John, or Jesus; it was God in heaven, according to His plan and will, who directed and ordained John’s baptism, just as God also directed Jesus to be the bread of life that came down out of heaven (an idiom which simply means “of God”).

“³¹Our fathers ate the manna in the wilderness. As it is written, “He gave them bread out of heaven to eat.” ³²Jesus therefore said to them, “Most assuredly, I tell you, it wasn’t Moses who gave you the bread out of heaven, but my Father gives you the true bread out of heaven. ³³For the bread of God is that which comes down out of heaven, and gives life to the world.” ³⁴They said therefore to him, “Lord, always give us this bread.” ³⁵Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life” (John 6:31–35; with Psalms 78:24–25).

Here we have Jesus, again, clearly explaining how it is that he has “come down out of heaven.” He explains that he is the bread of life that came down out of heaven just like the manna that the Israelites ate in the wilderness. That bread also came down out of heaven (again, it is just an idiom which simply means “of God”). But he didn’t explain this as being his preexistent self that came down out of heaven, it was his flesh!

“I am the living bread which came down out of heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. Yes, the bread which I will give for the life of the world is my flesh” (John 6:51).

Did the manna and Jesus’ flesh both physically exist in heaven before coming down out of heaven? Only in God’s plan and foreknowledge. Thus, it is the same with the Son of Man that was in heaven but came down out of heaven, not to do his own will but the will of the Father. That is the key. Saying that he came down from heaven does not mean, biblically, that he literally preexisted in the spiritual realm and eventually “came to earth in the likeness of man” in the pagan sense of incarnation. It means that God in heaven directed it to be so; thus, “out of heaven.”

Again, keep in mind that Jesus spoke and taught in parables. In Matthew 5:29–30, Jesus said that if your eye or hand offends you, you should cut if off, “for it is more profitable for you that one of your members should perish, than for your whole body to be cast into Gehenna” (Matthew 5:29). Was Jesus being literal? Absolutely not, for he who destroys the temple of God, which temple you are, him will God destroy (1 Corinthians 3:17). The point is, we need to look to where the Scriptures explicitly explain these things, rather than jumping to conclusions that make what is explained of no effect. And that is what happens when people insist that Jesus literally preexisted his beginning in Bethlehem: they build their doctrines on figures of speech in the texts rather than accepting the literal explanations given throughout Scripture.

And the legal heirs to the throne of Satan love to approve false interpretations (just like the serpent in the Garden). But we need to listen to the explanations given in the Bible. For example…

“¹⁵Yahweh your God will raise up to you a prophet from among you, of your brothers, like me. You shall listen to him. ¹⁶This is according to all that you desired of Yahweh your God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying, “Let me not hear again Yahweh my God’s voice, neither let me see this great fire any more, that I not die.” ¹⁷Yahweh said to me, “They have well said that which they have spoken. ¹⁸I will raise them up a prophet from among their brothers, like you. I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I shall command him. ¹⁹It shall happen, that whoever will not listen to my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him” (Deuteronomy 18:15-19).

“⁸…Thus says YHWH [to David]… ¹²When your days are fulfilled, and you shall sleep with your fathers, I will set up your seed after you, who shall proceed out of your bowels, and I will establish his kingdom. ¹³He shall build a house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. ¹⁴I will be his father, and he shall be my son” (2 Samuel 7:8–14).

The question is simple. Believe on the Lord who the Bible describes or believe on the Lord in a way that the legal heirs of the throne of Satan approved and authorized and killed anyone who dissented.

“Whoever hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life remaining in him” (1 John 3:15).

 Print This Post