Could God's plan for the lost be this simple?

[Alfred Persson]

Sad to hear, that means you dont know what Jesus teaches, thus cannot obey him and remain in Gods wrath. The teachings of Jesus back the JW teachers, as does true God worship history.

No, it means you cannot refuse me as you do EX JWs, automatically. I was never a JW, I only read their materials and unfortunately, distributed them on my own when I was deceived into thinking they were "a prophet among us."

The Watchtower doesn't want you to talk to ex-JWs because you will learn things they don't want you to know.

If ex-JWs left because they were "demonized" or apostates whatever, that would be easily seen when you speak to them. So THAT can't be the reason why the Society doesn't want you to talk to them, to try to win them back.

The ex-JWs I met are now Christians, and they left because they realized the Bible condemns JW doctrine. That is what the Society doesn't want you to know. They can show you from the Bible where the Watchtower is wrong.

 

[Alfred Persson]

There is no difference at all.
"In", "By': the end result is the teachings got done by the Holy Spirit in the past.
Like it says in 1 Peter 1:9-11.

I don't follow false church's philosophies.

It is the believers of the false "hell-purgatory" doctrine that proffer the Jesus went to hell to teach the already dead doctrine.

How can you say there is no difference?
In the Spirit means Christ's spirit was "in the Spirit" as He preached to the spirits in prison.
By the Spirit means Christ didn't do anything, the Spirit did it all.

The Catholic Magisterium set the tone for Christianity for hundreds of years. The Reformers were good Catholics, who reacted the abuse of indulgences and then doctrines about Bible authority and God's grace. But they didn't revisit everything they learned as Catholics.

And someone really steered you wrong about Christ preaching to spirits in prison:

8 Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.
9 (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth?
10 He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.)
(Eph. 4:8-10 KJV)


18 Because Christ also suffered for sins once, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God; being put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit;
19 in which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison,
20 that aforetime were disobedient, when the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water:
21 which also after a true likeness doth now save you, even baptism, not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the interrogation of a good conscience toward God, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ;
22 who is on the right hand of God, having gone into heaven; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him. (1 Pet. 3:18-22 ASV)

 

[Cnkw3]

Bible is the Word of God, that's how I know. It calls them Jews, that's who they are, period. "This I know for the Bible tells me so."

The Bible does NOT call the people currently living in Israel “Jews”. The Bible does not even recognize what ever they are. They sure dont worship the way the Jew did. They arent organized in the same way. They have no Levitical priesthood. They have no temple. They are a false religion.

 

[Cnkw3]

Christ was physically dead when He preached to them, so where "on earth" did He preach to them?

18 For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit,
19 by whom also He went and preached to the spirits in prison,
20 who formerly were disobedient, when once the Divine longsuffering waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water.
(1 Pet. 3:18-20 NKJ)

Through Noah. Look at the context. The passage states that Jesus preached…Through the spirit.
It was Noah who was called a “preacher of righteousness”. How did Noah know what to preach? Through the guidance of the Spirit.
These “spirits” are the ones mentioned in vs 20 as those who were “disobedient” In the times of Noah. How is this? He preached for 100+ years and they didnt listen.

 

[Cnkw3]

No, I didn't. Read again.

This is what you said…
In John 5:24, those who obey Christ's word and believe, pass from death into life.
You specifically said….obey then believe . You did that on purpose because you want the word “hear” in vs 24 to mean obey, but it doesn’t. It means hear then believe which actually means one obeys. This is your argument. It is a false one.

 

[Hopeful]

How can you say there is no difference?
In the Spirit means Christ's spirit was "in the Spirit" as He preached to the spirits in prison.
By the Spirit means Christ didn't do anything, the Spirit did it all.

"By which"...He went and preached.
It was the Spirit of Jesus that told the prophets of old what to preach.
Not Jesus Himself.

The Catholic Magisterium set the tone for Christianity for hundreds of years. The Reformers were good Catholics, who reacted the abuse of indulgences and then doctrines about Bible authority and God's grace. But they didn't revisit everything they learned as Catholics.

It was the most successful splinter from the original church.
That is all.

And someone really steered you wrong about Christ preaching to spirits in prison:

Back at you.

8 Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.
9 (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth?
10 He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.)
(Eph. 4:8-10 KJV)

That would be His grave that he "descended" into.

 

[Alfred Persson]

The Bible does NOT call the people currently living in Israel “Jews”. The Bible does not even recognize what ever they are. They sure dont worship the way the Jew did. They arent organized in the same way. They have no Levitical priesthood. They have no temple. They are a false religion.

Incorrect. The book of Revelation was written after the Temple's destruction and its genealogical records necessary for its priesthood. But the clear implication of the "synagogue of Satan, who say they are Jews" is that Jesus believes real Jews exist:

"Indeed I will make those of the synagogue of Satan, who say they are Jews and are not, but lie-- indeed I will make them come and worship before your feet, and to know that I have loved you. (Rev. 3:9 NKJ)

If Jesus didn't believe any Jews exist, it would be worded differently. Perhaps: "Only those who believe in me are Jews, they are a synagogue of Satan" or some variation which would state its impossible "their claim" be true.

 

[Alfred Persson]

Through Noah. Look at the context. The passage states that Jesus preached…Through the spirit.
It was Noah who was called a “preacher of righteousness”. How did Noah know what to preach? Through the guidance of the Spirit.
These “spirits” are the ones mentioned in vs 20 as those who were “disobedient” In the times of Noah. How is this? He preached for 100+ years and they didnt listen.

"Spirits" is not a term applied to physical people. The verse says Jesus preached to spirits in prison, not crowds people of Noah's day, not in prison.

 

[Alfred Persson]

This is what you said…
In John 5:24, those who obey Christ's word and believe, pass from death into life.
You specifically said….obey then believe . You did that on purpose because you want the word “hear” in vs 24 to mean obey, but it doesn’t. It means hear then believe which actually means one obeys. This is your argument. It is a false one.

I cited the lexicon that grouped "hear" in John 5:24 with those meaning "obey". That's an expert opinion, it could be used in a court of law to prove the word means Obedient Hearing, not just hearing. Here it is again:

191. ἀκούω akoúō
…

(IV) To obey (Luke 10:16; 16:29, 31 [cf. John 5:24; 8:47; 18:37; Acts 3:22, 23; 4:19; 1 John 4:5, 6]; Sept.: Gen. 3:17; Ex. 16:20; Deut. 11:27; 2 Chr. 20:14; Is. 48:18). Here belongs the phrase “he who hath ears, let him hear,” i.e., give heed, obey (Matt. 11:15; 13:9, 13 [cf. the phrase, “he who has a mind” in Rev. 13:18 {a.t.}; see also Rev. 2:7, 11, 17, 29; 3:6, 13, 22; 13:9; 17:9, “he who has wisdom” {a.t.}]). In the writings of John as spoken of God, meaning to heed, regard, i.e., to hear and answer prayer (John 9:31; 11:41, 42; 1 John 5:15; Sept.: Ps. 10:17, eisakoúō [1522], to listen to).-Zodhiates, S. (2000). In The Complete Word Study Dictionary: New Testament (electronic ed.). AMG Publishers.

 

[Cnkw3]

Incorrect. The book of Revelation was written after the Temple's destruction and its genealogical records necessary for its priesthood. But the clear implication of the "synagogue of Satan, who say they are Jews" is that Jesus believes real Jews exist:

"Indeed I will make those of the synagogue of Satan, who say they are Jews and are not, but lie-- indeed I will make them come and worship before your feet, and to know that I have loved you. (Rev. 3:9 NKJ)

If Jesus didn't believe any Jews exist, it would be worded differently. Perhaps: "Only those who believe in me are Jews, they are a synagogue of Satan" or some variation which would state its impossible "their claim" be true.

No. The book of Rev in my opinion was written before 70AD. Prove to me it wasn’t. You are going to just have some scholars hearsay. The book also in my opinion is about the coming destruction of the Jewish system. So you believe that “jews” today can trace their tribe back through the first century? Hahah. Then why dont they? You people want to cling to every Jewish thing you possibly can for some odd reason.

 

[Alfred Persson]

"By which"...He went and preached.
It was the Spirit of Jesus that told the prophets of old what to preach.
Not Jesus Himself.

It was the most successful splinter from the original church.
That is all.

Back at you.

That would be His grave that he "descended" into.

A grave is not the "lowest parts of the earth"

For a fire is kindled in mine anger, and shall burn unto the lowest hell, and shall consume the earth with her increase, and set on fire the foundations of the mountains. (Deut. 32:22 KJV)

 

[Cnkw3]

"Spirits" is not a term applied to physical people. The verse says Jesus preached to spirits in prison, not crowds people of Noah's day, not in prison.

Thats not true. We are commanded to
1 Jn 4:1. Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
These are actual false teaching people.
It says spirits plural. Why cant that be a crowd? Also the old world that these people lived under could be a prison. They were bound by all the corruption that permeated that entire world.
And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
Genesis 6:5
Seems like satan had control over this entire pre flood world. This is why God destroyed it.
If that’s not a prison for the soul then I dont know what is.

 

[Cnkw3]

I cited the lexicon that grouped "hear" in John 5:24 with those meaning "obey". That's an expert opinion, it could be used in a court of law to prove the word means Obedient Hearing, not just hearing. Here it is again:

191. ἀκούω akoúō
…

(IV) To obey (Luke 10:16; 16:29, 31 [cf. John 5:24; 8:47; 18:37; Acts 3:22, 23; 4:19; 1 John 4:5, 6]; Sept.: Gen. 3:17; Ex. 16:20; Deut. 11:27; 2 Chr. 20:14; Is. 48:18). Here belongs the phrase “he who hath ears, let him hear,” i.e., give heed, obey (Matt. 11:15; 13:9, 13 [cf. the phrase, “he who has a mind” in Rev. 13:18 {a.t.}; see also Rev. 2:7, 11, 17, 29; 3:6, 13, 22; 13:9; 17:9, “he who has wisdom” {a.t.}]). In the writings of John as spoken of God, meaning to heed, regard, i.e., to hear and answer prayer (John 9:31; 11:41, 42; 1 John 5:15; Sept.: Ps. 10:17, eisakoúō [1522], to listen to).-Zodhiates, S. (2000). In The Complete Word Study Dictionary: New Testament (electronic ed.). AMG Publishers.

Haha. Court of law? I dont think so. Your lexicon proves NOTHING! Nice try. Any man can write whatever he wants but that does not mean it is truth.

 

[Alfred Persson]

No. The book of Rev in my opinion was written before 70AD. Prove to me it wasn’t. You are going to just have some scholars hearsay. The book also in my opinion is about the coming destruction of the Jewish system. So you believe that “jews” today can trace their tribe back through the first century? Hahah. Then why dont they? You people want to cling to every Jewish thing you possibly can for some odd reason.

Bible Question:
When was the book of Revelation written? You need to do a little more research concerning the dating for the Book of Revelation. Ken Gentry in his book, “Before Jerusalem Fell” cites evidence for a pre 70 AD date. The only source for the 95 date was Irenaeus, who by the way said that Jesus died at 50 years of age! Both John A.T. Robertson and William Foxwell Albright dated the NT as having been written between 20-80 AD! Finally, Moses Stuart writing in 1835 said that in his day the majority of scholars held to a pre 70 AD date. “Only the fool deceives himself. ”

Bible Answer:​

The book of Revelation was written by the apostle John (Revelation 1:1, 4, 9; 22:8). That is the internal evidence of the book and the external testimony of early church fathers. The Muratorian Fragment, an early document listing most of the books belonging to the New Testament, states that the apostle John wrote the Apocalypse or Revelation.

The dating of the book of Revelation has sometimes been driven by one’s view of future things. Since Ken Gentry is a preterist, that is, someone who believes that Jesus Christ returned in A.D. 70, it is not surprising that he wants a pre-A.D. 70 date for the book of Revelation. The bigger question is what did the early church fathers actually say about the book of Revelation? Listen to the following evidence from men who hold different theological viewpoints about the future.

William Hendricksen, a well-known amillennialist, who has written a commentary set on the New Testament, makes this comment about the date of the book of Revelation.

The question now arises, when did John write the Apocalypse? In the year 69 (or even earlier), or must we reverse the figure and make it 96 (or perhaps 95)? One cannot find a single really cogent argument in support of the earlier date. The arguments produced are based on late and unreliable testimonies, on the wholly imaginary idea that John did not yet know his Greek when he wrote the Apocalypse, and on a very questionable literal interpretation of certain passages . . . The late date has very strong support. Says, Irenaeus: “For that (the apocalyptic vision) was seen not a very long time since, but almost in our own day, toward the end of Domitian’s reign.” Again he says: “. . . the church in Ephesus founded by Paul, and lived in by John until the time of Trajan (AD 98-117), is a true witness of the tradition of the apostles.”[1]

It is important to note that Domitian’s reign occurred during the years of A.D 81-96.[2] This supports Dr. Hendricksen’s statement that the book of Revelation was written around A.D. 95. Irenaeus says that Revelation was written near the end of Domitian’s reign, and since Domitian ruled as Caesar after A.D. 81 to A.D. 96, a date of A.D. 95 for Revelation is the most credible date for its authorship.

G. K. Beale quotes Swete’s conclusion about the date of Revelation’s authorship with this comment,

Sweet’s conclusion about the issue of Revelation’s date reflects a balanced judgment: “To sum up, the earlier date may be right, but the internal evidence is not sufficient to outweigh the firm tradition stemming from Irenaeus.”[3]

Dr. J. MacArthur, a premillennialist, makes these comments

Those who hold to the early date [pre- A.D. 70] see in Jerusalem’s destruction the prophesied second coming of Jesus Christ in its first phase. External evidence for the earlier (Neronian) date is almost nonexistent. On the other hand, the view that the apostle John penned Revelation near the end of Domitian’s reign was widely held in the early church. The second-century church father Irenaeus wrote . . .[see above quote] . . . The church fathers Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Victorinus, Eusebius, and Jerome also affirm that Revelation was written during Domitian’s reign . . . The testimony of the early church that Revelation was written during Domitian’s reign is difficult to explain if it was actually written during Nero’s reign.[4]

Conclusion:​

The evidence supporting a A.D. 95 authorship for the book of Revelation is not based solely on Irenaeus. it is based on the statements of numerous early church fathers.

https://www.neverthirsty.org/bible-qa/qa-archives/question/when-was-the-book-of-revelation-written/

 

[keiw1]

No, it means you cannot refuse me as you do EX JWs, automatically. I was never a JW, I only read their materials and unfortunately, distributed them on my own when I was deceived into thinking they were "a prophet among us."

The Watchtower doesn't want you to talk to ex-JWs because you will learn things they don't want you to know.

If ex-JWs left because they were "demonized" or apostates whatever, that would be easily seen when you speak to them. So THAT can't be the reason why the Society doesn't want you to talk to them, to try to win them back.

The ex-JWs I met are now Christians, and they left because they realized the Bible condemns JW doctrine. That is what the Society doesn't want you to know. They can show you from the Bible where the Watchtower is wrong.

Jesus clearly teaches in EVERY translation on earth.--Matt 6:33--Therefore, keep on seeking-FIRST - the kingdom and his( YHWH(Jehovah) righteousness--And John 17:3 where he clearly teaches--The one who sent him= Father is THE ONLY TRUE GOD--His real teachers that have him teach exactly what he taught. So no they are not christian, The teaching of a trinity is calling Jesus a liar--Not a wise place to be standing

 

[Alfred Persson]

Jesus clearly teaches in EVERY translation on earth.--Matt 6:33--Therefore, keep on seeking-FIRST - the kingdom and his( YHWH(Jehovah) righteousness--And John 17:3 where he clearly teaches--The one who sent him= Father is THE ONLY TRUE GOD--His real teachers that have him teach exactly what he taught. So no they are not christian, The teaching of a trinity is calling Jesus a liar--Not a wise place to be standing

A verse taken out of context becomes a pretext, and that axiom isn't better illustrated than JW eisegesis of this verse.

1 Jesus spoke these words, lifted up His eyes to heaven, and said: "Father, the hour has come. Glorify Your Son, that Your Son also may glorify You,
2 "as You have given Him authority over all flesh, that He should give eternal life to as many as You have given Him.
3 "And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.
4 "I have glorified You on the earth. I have finished the work which You have given Me to do. (Jn. 17:1-4 NKJ)

The Watchtower's argument requires Christ be comparing Himself to the Father, but Christ explicitly says RIGHT AFTER----He is 'glorifying the Father on the earth' by affirming the gods of the earth are False Gods, in contrast to the only True God.

"The Son" is not comparing Himself to the Father, He is comparing God the Father (who is Infinite Spirit) to every other "spirit" in the world that men call "god".

As Christ is NOT comparing Himself to the Father, the JW argument is non-sequitur.


This is confirmed by the elegant fact no one believed Christ was God in the flesh at the time.

It took Divine Intervention for the apostles to realize the full implication of everything Christ taught, and that happened after Pentecost when the Holy Spirit caused them to remember what Christ said:

"But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you. (Jn. 14:26 NKJ)

That Jesus is God the Son is clearly taught by Jesus Himself, but "confirmation bias" can blind people preventing them from the full implications of Jesus' many statements "He and the Father are One" etc.

It requires divine intervention for us to really see Christ for who He is, and that happens when the Father glorifies Him in our hearts.

An analogous situation, although Christ often told them He had to die, and be raised up; the apostles never understood this, until God opened their eyes to the truth:

22 "Yes, and certain women of our company, who arrived at the tomb early, astonished us.
23 "When they did not find His body, they came saying that they had also seen a vision of angels who said He was alive.
24 "And certain of those who were with us went to the tomb and found it just as the women had said; but Him they did not see."
25 Then He said to them, "O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken!
26 "Ought not the Christ to have suffered these things and to enter into His glory?"
27 And beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, He expounded to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself.
28 Then they drew near to the village where they were going, and He indicated that He would have gone farther.
29 But they constrained Him, saying, "Abide with us, for it is toward evening, and the day is far spent." And He went in to stay with them.
30 Now it came to pass, as He sat at the table with them, that He took bread, blessed and broke it, and gave it to them.
31 Then their eyes were opened and they knew Him; and He vanished from their sight.
32 And they said to one another, "Did not our heart burn within us while He talked with us on the road, and while He opened the Scriptures to us?" (Lk. 24:22-32 NKJ)

 

[keiw1]

1 Jesus spoke these words, lifted up His eyes to heaven, and said: "Father, the hour has come. Glorify Your Son, that Your Son also may glorify You,
2 "as You have given Him authority over all flesh, that He should give eternal life to as many as You have given Him.
3 "And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.
4 "I have glorified You on the earth. I have finished the work which You have given Me to do. (Jn. 17:1-4 NKJ)

A verse taken out of context becomes a pretext, and that axiom isn't better illustrated than JW eisegesis of this verse.

"The Son" is not comparing Himself to the Father, He is comparing God the Father (who is Infinite Spirit) to every other "spirit" in the world that men call "god".

The Watchtower's argument requires Christ be comparing Himself to the Father, but Christ explicitly says RIGHT AFTER He is glorifying the Father denying all other so-called gods on earth are actually God.

As Christ is NOT comparing Himself to the Father, the JW argument is non-sequitur.

This is confirmed by the elegant fact no one believed Christ was God in the flesh at the time. It took time for the apostles to realize the full implication of everything Christ taught, and that happened after Pentecost when the Holy Spirit caused them to remember what Christ said:

"But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you. (Jn. 14:26 NKJ)

That Jesus is God the Son is clearly taught by Jesus Himself, but "confirmation bias" can easily blind one to the full implications of what He claimed about Himself. It requires divine intervention for us to really see Christ for who He is, and that happens when the Father glorifies Him in our hearts.





And they said to one another, "Did not our heart burn within us while He talked with us on the road, and while He opened the Scriptures to us?" (Lk. 24:32 NKJ)

Both Jesus and Paul warn of false gods then name the true God= Father only--John 4:22-24, 1Cor 8:5-6

 

[Alfred Persson]

Both Jesus and Paul warn of false gods then name the true God= Father only--John 4:22-24, 1Cor 8:5-6

Both texts proved my point, especially Paul. He is looking at the false gods of the earth, and saying there is only one true God. He isn't saying Jesus is not the true God:

20 And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us an understanding, that we may know Him who is true; and we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life.
21 Little children, keep yourselves from idols. Amen.

(1 Jn. 5:20-21 NKJ)

Again the contrast is The True God of the Bible, Father Son and Holy Spirit versus the "idols of the world".

John is not saying the Father isn't the True God. The Person of the Father is not in the context, the false gods (idols) of the earth are.

 

[keiw1]

Both texts proved my point, especially Paul. He is looking at the false gods of the earth, and saying there is only one true God. He isn't saying Jesus is not the true God:

20 And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us an understanding, that we may know Him who is true; and we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life.
21 Little children, keep yourselves from idols. Amen.

(1 Jn. 5:20-21 NKJ)

Again the contrast is The True God of the Bible, Father Son and Holy Spirit versus the "idols of the world".

John is not saying the Father isn't the True God. The Person of the Father is not in the context, the false gods (idols) of the earth are.

Yes he did he said Jesus was Lord and the Father was God. Verse 20 you quoted above is calling him who is true God, not Jesus.

 

[Alfred Persson]

Yes he did he said Jesus was Lord and the Father was God. Verse 20 you quoted above is calling him who is true God, not Jesus.

Incorrect. The false teachers were claiming to know God apart from Jesus, apart from His coming in the flesh. John is affirming the "one who is true" can be known only by us being "in Him who is true, Jesus Christ." This is an example where God the Son is being referred to as "the True God". The pronoun "this (one)" grammatically points to the last person named, Jesus Christ:

20 And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us an understanding, that we may know Him who is true; and we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life.
21 Little children, keep yourselves from idols. Amen. (1 Jn. 5:20-21 NKJ)

This is the climax, the entire point of John's argument, that Jesus is the connection to the Father True God. No way to the Father except through Jesus. And John has no problem calling Jesus God (John 1:1; 12:41 cp. Isa. 6:5; 1 John 5:7). It is fitting John double down on that proof by referring to the Person of the Son as the only true God.

If you know Jesus (the True God) you know the Father (the True God) also. No doubt John is thinking of this context as He argues knowing Christ the True God is knowing the Father the True God:

7 "If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also; and from now on you know Him and have seen Him."
8 Philip said to Him, "Lord, show us the Father, and it is sufficient for us."
9 Jesus said to him, "Have I been with you so long, and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say,`Show us the Father '?
10 "Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me? The words that I speak to you I do not speak on My own authority; but the Father who dwells in Me does the works.
11 "Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father in Me, or else believe Me for the sake of the works themselves. (Jn. 14:7-11 NKJ)

And the contrast with idols, the false gods, is exactly what Jesus was doing when He called the Father the Only True God. Just as doing that does not imply Jesus is not God, neither does John's saying the Son is the only True God, imply the Father isn't God.