Hidden Bible Codes

Dr. Couch, I know of some Bible teachers who believe in what they call the "hidden Bible codes." Is this heresy?

ANSWER: I know some of these brothers personally and I think it is unfortunate that they take this view. The problem is God has revealed to us His revelations in full without any hidden messages or methods needed to find out what the truth is. This means that some people are "in" on secret truth and some are "out" in knowing what God has revealed. This makes them special and gives them an "up" on the rest of us.

If God is giving us His truth why would He then give a secret code in order to unlock what He has to say? It does not make sense! The book of Acts says the Bereans searched the Scriptures daily in order to confirm the truth of the gospel (Acts 17:11). They used inductive reasoning and searching and did not employ some secret key to try to understand the Word of God. Paul says the Thessalonians "received from us the word of God's message, you accepted it not as the word of men, but for what it really is, the word of God" (1 Thess. 2:13). Again, no secret code was needed.

Some people like to be sensationalists and mystics in interpreting the Bible. Don't fall for it. God spoke to us in plain language!

Is the "code" view heresy? No, maybe not, but it is certainly wrong and terribly misleading!

Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch
#296

Essential Doctrines

Dr. Couch, does Scripture help us to determine what the essential doctrines are for fellowship and for joint ministry with another church?

ANSWER: I believe the many verses that discuss heresy and error could be put together to form a guide to whom one should fellowship with. I think there are several layers of relationships to take note of that come from Scripture. (1) I can be glad for any true believer who is my brother in Christ. (2) While any true believer may be my spiritual brother, still, he may be destroying a large part of the Bible by his denial of certain doctrines. This would include those in the Reformed faith who deny the proven doctrines of the apostasy, the rapture of the church, the seven year tribulation period, and the bodily return of Jesus the Messiah who will reign on the throne of David for 1000 years in Jerusalem. (3) And then there are the believers who may outright hold to way, way out beliefs.

I could not see my church having joint ministries with any who deny the fundamentals of the Word of God. I may have a certain kind of accepting fellowship with them on a personal level but I could not share ministries with them. However, no one has ever called me an isolationist or legalist when it comes to these issues. I may write in very strong words against those who continue to give false interpretations against clear doctrinal issues but I do not have a fighting fundy mentality.

I believe a church should adopt a strong biblical doctrinal statement such as we have with Scofield Ministries. I wrote that some years ago and it has stood the test of time for a long while. Anyone reading it may feel free to use it however they wish.

A few years ago I got involved with a man who had come out of the Funda____ Bap_____ group. I thought I had him pegged right, and I thought he had disavowed some of the attitudes of that group, but when we began to do ministry together his narrowness and legalism came through. When he left our group, sure enough, he went right back to that persuasion. He lied about the fact that that had been his orientation. In fact, I caught him in over five lies on various issues. I find it interesting that he virtually claimed to walk sinless in his Christian life but he could tell fibs at the drop of a hat!

The Christian life is tricky in that groups and individuals can be deceptive and can look at the Bible in such a restrictive way. If they become embedded within a church they will set about to destroy that assembly or certainly try to take it over. They may doctrinally be in agreement but their attitude and their legalism can take a church down! Such folks I would avoid when it comes to sharing ministry.

Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch
#291

Choosing Your Church Membership

Dr. Couch, why do believers stay in churches that do not fully teach the Word of God when they have an opportunity to attend a Bible teaching church down the street? ANSWER: The answer is complicated because of the nature of people. A lot of people stay in their Baptist church because that is their tradition and they are not looking for the right thing when it comes to selecting a church. They want to be in a "busy bee" church with a lot of activity. Or, they like the music and entertainment over against the teaching of the Word. They remain in a church because this is where grandma went, they like the people, the pastor is a good guy, they have a lot of supers and feeding, they like the social environment, they can be the big dog in a little kennel, etc. Generally, tradition is the main reason. They feel comfy there and do not evaluate what is really going on in the church. In other words, teaching is the last issue on the list, over against some of the things I've listed above. Most people have no idea how to evaluate a church doctrinally. Doctrine is the last on the list of how they look at a church. I know some people who returned to a Baptist church that does not teach the doctrines of the rapture of the church, the seven year tribulation, or the coming kingdom reign of Christ. These are not important issues to them. The Bible Knowledge Commentary makes an excellent point about 1 Thessalonians 5:1-11 and those in the church who have fallen asleep. Paul is not referring to sin per se, but to the fact that the believer is asleep in regard to the important issue of the return of Christ and His earthly reign. They just don't care about or believe in His coming back to establish the Davidic kingdom is an urgent subject. They have spiritual lethargy, They are not watchful and soberly waiting for the Lord's return. They are not self-disciplined, they are passive and just marking time. They think they are "spiritual" but they are not! They go in and out of the church, having little response as to what is taking place around them. They are not spiritually awake! Thanks for asking. Dr. Mal Couch (11/10)

Talmud and Midrash

Dr. Couch, what is the Talmud and the Midrash? ANSWER: The body of Hebrew laws, civil and canonical, is based on the Torah, the Law of Moses, or the Pentateuch, the first five books of our Bible—Genesis through Deuteronomy. The Talmud is like a commentary based on the learned opinions and decisions of Jewish teachers from around 300 BC until 500 AD. The word "Talmud" means "teaching" or "doctrine." The Talmud is divided into two parts: (1) the Mishnah meaning "the repetition or explanation." This is a collection or digest of "oral laws" traditions and explanations of OT Scripture. (2) the Gemara, meaning "the supplement", a further commentary on the preceding part, the Mishnah. The Midrash is also a formal doctrinal and "preaching" exposition of the Hebrew Scriptures written in Hebrew or Aramaic (which is a language related to Hebrew). The Midrash is a commentary not simply a translation. The Midrash is a further expansion of the Law of Moses. I believe commentaries on the Old and New Testaments are helpful in giving us an understanding of the Bible. But they do not become the Bible itself! Commentaries are simply "helps" that we do not take as authoritative. But the Jews begin to see these writings as having absolute authority as if they were the Word of God itself! The Midrash flourished from about 100 BC to 300 AD. This was at first an oral writing but was then turned into permanent written form. These were the earliest synagogue readings or "sermons" that were quoted and read to the common people in their assemblies. Unfortunately, the people moved farther and farther away from reading the OT Scriptures themselves to simply reading these commentaries and avoiding the OT manuscripts specifically. In other words, the commentaries became authoritative and the writings of the prophets who wrote under the guidance of the inspiration of the Holy Spirit began to be ignored. This specifically has happened also in Catholicism. What the Church Fathers say has more weight than the prophets or the apostles! Thanks for asking. Dr. Mal Couch (11/10)

Church of Christ

Dr. Couch, what is the Church of Christ? ANSWER:  While they deny they are a denomination, they are a denomination! They used to be called the Campbell-ites, from the founder Alexander Campbell (1788-1866). Each Church of Christ may have different doctrinal ideas but generally, they hold to five points for salvation. (1) You must believe in Christ, (2) Be baptized in the Church of Christ, (3) Repent, (4) Confess, and (5) Join their church.    Their creed is: "Where the Scriptures speak we speak, and where the Scriptures are silent we are silent." While this may sound good, they really do not hold to that. And too, they can be very wooden-headed. For example, since the NT does not speak of music in the church, they do not believe in using musical instruments. One could argue, the NT does not speak of using electricity in the church, so therefore, we should not use electricity.    The Church of Christ are famous for splits and counter-splits. They pick on each other. They push doctrines up against the wall and fight and fuss over minor points.    My main complaints are about their un-biblical view of salvation, and their un-biblical view of the return of Christ. They are amillennial in prophecy and "almost" do not believe in studying the OT, though that may be a bit unfair. Because of their "tight" view on salvation they would say that those who are not Church of Christ are not saved.    They are unable to discuss doctrine because they believe that such is un-biblical. Because of their false view of baptism, they can easily be defeated in a discussion by taking them to 1 Corinthians 1:12-17. Some years ago, I took a Church of Christ guy to this passage and after he read the verses, he got literally physically sick and just walked out of the room. They cannot answer what Paul is saying in these verses.    Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch (11/10)

Defending Doctrines

Dr. Couch, I was recently reading Philippians 1:11-20 and was convicted that we should all stand firm on defending the gospel but other issues, such as the Pre-Tribulation and Premillennial prophetic issues, we do not have to defend so strongly. What do you think? ANSWER: While the gospel is extremely important, and should be defended to the teeth, to make sure that it is clear and not distorted, when it comes to teaching in the church, we still have an obligation to stand strong on the doctrine of the return of Christ. This includes the Pretribulational rapture issue, and the coming millennial reign of Christ. Those who believe in other views of Christ's return are still our brothers, if they hold to the pure teaching about salvation and the gospel. However, in the building up of the faith of believers, the church has an obligation to continue to speak forth exactly what the Bible is teaching. So I will debate and make firm the issues of Christ's return. I will not say, when teaching believers, "Oh well, it doesn't matter what you think on these doctrines!" When I am responsible for the sheep, I will make sure that they are getting biblical doctrine and not error. Christ and all the apostles (and the prophets of the OT) taught the Premillennial coming of Christ, the Messiah. The orthodox Jews believe and teach the same thing. If one moves off center on some of these great teachings, you will end up in terrible error. And in time, even the gospel will be perverted and distorted. Satan would love for us to teach with error any doctrine of Scripture! So I have a mandate to make sure that the Word of God is clear, all of its doctrines! Thanks for asking. Dr. Mal Couch (10/10)

To Breath In or to Breath Out?

Dr. Couch, the Latin word "inspire" with the "in" means "to breath in." But the Greek word "theopnustos" means to "breath out" as in 2 Timothy 3:16. What does this mean? ANSWER:  "Theopnustos" does not mean "to breath out." It simply means in the Greek "God-breathed." It is used only one time and that is here, in 2 Timothy 3:16.    It is Scripture that is "God-breathed" not the apostles. When they wrote, they were superintended by the Holy Spirit to record exactly what God the Spirit instructed them to write. No more and no less. This subject was my thesis for my Th.M. Degree. I learned a ton by studying this doctrine out. The evidence is seen throughout the Bible—it is inspired and it is inerrant and can be trusted. What a blessed revelation we have to guide us from the mind of our Lord!    Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch  (10/10)

Maranatha and Anathema

Dr. Couch, what do the words Maranatha and Anathema mean? ANSWER:  The word "marantha" can mean either "Our Lord has come!" or "Lord come!" In the lexicons we are told that it is difficult to determine which meaning is correct. The word is used only in 1 Corinthians 16:22. Since it is at the end of the book, it would be assumed that this is a wish, "May our Lord come!" Actually, a wish idea follows in the next verse (v. 23). "The grace of the Lord Jesus be with you!" This is used in the Didache 10:6: "Let grace come and may this world pass away! Hosanna to the God (v. 1 son) of David! If anyone is holy, let him come; if not, let him repent! Amen."    Anathema and its verb is used eleven times in the NT. It means "to curse," or "accursed." Generally, it is for false doctrine that Paul pronounces a curse. This tells us how important truth was in the early church. No one was allowed to fudge with proper doctrine.    In his 1 Corinthian commentary, Hodge says: "This is a solemn warning. The Lord, whom men refuse to recognize and love, is about to come in the glory of His Father and with all His holy angels to take vengeance on those who know not God, and who obey not the gospel."    Interestingly, both words are used together in 1 Corinthians 16:22.    Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch (8/10)

Apostles and Prophets in the OT Economy

Dr. Couch, it seems to me the "apostles and prophets" in Ephesians 2:20 has to do with the apostles and prophets in the OT economy. How would you answer? ANSWER:  Remember we determine doctrine by "observation" of the context, and by the Greek grammar of the sentence. This issue is settled by the grammar of the passage. In the commentary written by Dr. John Witmer and myself, we point out (p. 150) that prophets are listed following apostles, church prophets are in view (cf. 3:5; 4:11; 1 Cor. 12:10, 28-29). Verses 19-20 say "We no longer are strangers (the church saints) and aliens, but you are fellow citizens ... having been built UPON the foundation of the apostles and prophets, ..." The same is repeated in 3:5. "What was (in the past) not made known to the sons of men, revealed to His holy apostles and prophets in the Spirit." And, to the church He had given "some as apostles, and some as prophets, ..." (4:11). And to the church "God has appointed in the church, first apostles, second prophets ..." (1 Cor. 12:28).    It is important to note that in 2:19-20 we have one proposition: "foundation OF the apostles and [EVEN] prophets." This virtually makes the two offices equal, that is, the same thing. So also in 3:5: "His HOLY apostles and [even] prophets." Though the offices are separated in 1 Corinthians 12:28 and in Ephesians 4:11.    The greatest commentary on Ephesians ever written is by Dr. Harold Hoehner (he took 20 years to finish it). He taught Greek that long at Dallas Seminary. He writes: "First, there is only one article for both nouns. ... The one article may indicate that 'groups more or less distinct are treated as one for the purpose in hand.'"    The old Greek scholar Armitage Robinson writes: "Paul is not taking us back from the New Covenant (which he is writing about here in Ephesians 2) to the Old—not speaking of Old Testament prophets in the past—when he says that the apostles and prophets are the foundation of the new House of God."    Even amillennialist Charles Hodge gets it right. He writes: "The prophets here mentioned are those of the new dispensation [of the church], is evident—first from the position of the terms. It would more naturally be prophets and apostles if the Old Testament prophets had been intended. ... The statement here made that the apostles and prophets are, or have laid, the foundation of that house of which the Gentiles are a part, is more obviously true of the New (Covenant), than of the Old Testament prophets. ... The apostle-prophets—or apostles who are prophets. ... Both apostles and prophets belong to the class of Christian teachers [not of the Old Testament]."    Finally, the Bible Knowledge Commentary (BKC) (old Dallas Seminary) says "The 'prophets' are of the New Testament era, not the Old Testament. 'Prophets' follows the word 'apostles' here and in 3:5 and 4:11. These men received the revelation of the mystery of the church in the present Age, which had been hidden in days past, that is, in Old Testament times (3:5)."    Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch (7-10)

Problems in the Church

Dr. Couch, the problems go on in the church I'm involved in. What do I do? ANSWER  You mentioned the terrible confusion in the teaching there in the country where you live. The leaders do not know what they believe and they are mixing kingdom and church issues because of their blindness and ignorance of the Bible. It amazes me how we want science to be precise but we are ready to compromise when it comes to the "science" of interpretation of the biblical texts. What foolishness and blindness!    Someone will say, what do you mean by science of the Bible? They fail to realize that we start with the grammar of Scripture, and we must be "scientifically accurate when approaching the interpretative issues. Science means we also must interpret by logic, history, the social background of the Bible, etc. If we don't, we will not understand what's going on in the passages of Scripture. It is the Holy Spirit who inspired the authors in their usage of the right grammar of the Hebrew and Greek texts. And the Bible has a setting, a social, historic setting, which we must understand in order to be exegetes of the Word. I must follow the interpretative lead of the Holy Spirit. I can't be sloppy in my study of the Bible.    You mentioned that the leaders of the church could not identify whether they were amill, premill, postmill, Arminian or Calvinistic in their understanding of the Bible. And they knew nothing about the clear passages on the rapture of the church, which fouled up their total understanding and teaching of the book of Revelation. And these are teaching leaders?    I predicted many years ago we'd be in this mess once the leaders of the churches abandoned systematic theology and went to "feel good" messages, entertainment and emotion. And sure enough, I was correct!    Don't forget that Paul predicted the apostasy we are now in. He wrote: "For the time will come when they will not endure sound (healthy) doctrine (not feel good messages), but wanting to have their ears ticked (wanting entertainment), they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires; and will turn away from the truth, and will turn aside to myths (lies)" (2 Tim. 4:3-4).    Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch (Dec., 09)

Contradiction Regarding Christ's Resurrection

Dr. Couch, in Philippians 3:11 Paul says "If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead." I have heard some argue that this means Paul had some doubts about the resurrection, and the critics land on the words "if" and "might." This argument would go against what he says in 1 Corinthians 15. How do we answer? – from England ANSWER:  I don't know how the critic could get out of the verse that Paul is having questions about the resurrection! The wording certainly does not lead me to that conclusion. All Paul is saying is that he wants to be worthy of that great truth of Christ's resurrection from the dead! You must start his argument with verse 7 where he says he counts all things as loss "for the sake of Christ." He speaks of the surpassing value of knowing Christ and counts all things as dung (rubbish) so that he might gain Christ (v. 8). He is not doubting the resurrection but he is making it a center piece doctrine around which his life revolves.    From verses 7-14 there is not one piece of evidence that he doubts the resurrection! All of the language has to do with how he is living. Nicoll writes:    "The Resurrection is the Apostle's goal, for it will mean perfect, unbroken knowledge of Christ and fellowship with Him. Paul knows by experience the difficulty of remaining loyal to the end, of being so conformed to Christ's death that the power of sin will not revive its mastery over him. So his apparent uncertainty here of reaching the goal is not distrust of God. It is distrust of himself."    Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch (Dec., 09)

Manhattan Declaration

Dr. Couch, what do you think about the Manhattan Declaration and the statement put together by the leadership of Chuck Colson? ANSWER:  A few months back I wrote online about the fact that Christians need to stand together on immoral issues being imposed upon us by the culture and by our government. Colson has put together a consortium of leaders from the Protestant churches, Catholic and Greek orthodox assemblies. The three issues focused on are:    (1) homosexuality, (2) marriage is the union of one man and one woman, and (3) the issue of abortion.    Some ask, "Should we join hands even with different Christian groups that are so doctrinally diverse?" Because of the urgency of the times, I'm rethinking some of the positions we all have taken in the past.    For example, if I joined and came aboard with the Manhattan Declaration, would I have to compromise my doctrinal beliefs and distinctions? Would I still be free to share the gospel as I understand it from Scripture? And as far as I can tell, those coming on board do not have to compromise such distinctions and beliefs. If that is the case, maybe it is time for us to join forces in order to present a united front. Compromising doctrinal issues is not part of the requirement. I can still believe what I wish to believe and witness to the Scriptures as I see fit.    One of the things that Colson is pushing for is that those who buy into the Manhattan Declaration will stand firm even if it means losing tax-exemption for ministries, and even facing arrest by being accused of promoting "hate crimes." I think many believers in Christ are reaching the point where "enough is enough"! We have taken it long enough, and, it is only getting worse!    Someone has rightly said that none of us makes a firm stand on issues until our own interests are at stake; until what we believe becomes threatened, then we move! And maybe we have arrived where our own circle is threatened.    I would like for those reading this to send me an email on your opinion on what I have just written, and on your opinion on the Manhattan Declaration. We will use your name, or not, whatever you desire. Please let me have your thoughts quickly!    Dr. Mal Couch (Nov., 09)

The Sin of Sodom and Gomorrah

Dr. Couch, I recently debated a woman on the internet who argued that the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah was not about homosexuality but rather about the attempt of gang rape of the visitors [the angels] who had come to these cities, specifically the angels who came and spoke with Lot (Gen. 19:1-29). How do we answer?

ANSWSER: First of all, I would not argue with a woman. They are more emotional and are not to be Bible teachers according to Paul. The apostle writes in 1 Timothy 2:12-15: “I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet [that is, not to be flapping the jaw]. Because it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being quite deceived, fell into transgression.”

Women are emotionally fooled whereby men are simply sinful by the evilness of the heart. This is why we don’t want women pastors. They can so quickly mislead, thus this woman you debated with!

Today, people, even Christians, are misled by the culture. They foolishly buy into the cultural arguments and do not think for themselves. Satan is “the god of this culture” and controls even what many Christians think on doctrinal issues (John 16:11; Eph. 2:2; 2 Cor. 4:4). Satan “is the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience.” He is “the god of this culture who has blinded the minds of the unbelieving.” He can pull the wool over the eyes of Christians as well as the unbelieving.

To argue that the story of Sodom and Gomorrah is not about homosexuality is not only stupid but just plain evil, and, it is quoting what the homosexuals want to say about the passage in order to justify their sins of the most evil and the most filthy of practices. This issue is not really worth answering!

Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch

A Sign of the Apostasy

Dr. Couch, where I live we have no Bible churches, so my family is attending a SBC! Our pastors all come from SBC seminaries where they have only been taught how to run a church and "preach." The preaching we receive from them is simply oration containing baby-step advice on how to live, some of it biblical and some of it not so biblical! It is certainly not exegetical.    The SS is even worse. Each quarter when I open the new SS book (put out by Lifeway), I shudder to see what lightweight material they are putting out. More often than not it is written by women with no theological training at all—they have for the most part simply been SS teachers. Is this a sign of the apostasy? ANSWER:  Thank you for your email letter: I am amazed how those trained at SBC schools think they are getting solid Bible courses. They are not! They get big doses of pablum with no meat or vegetables. But they brag that they are "Bap…" and have no idea what they are missing in understanding the Bible. Unfortunately, independent seminaries, and seminaries that used to give good teaching, are also moving toward the lightweight stuff. Doctrine and exegesis is out and simple how-to stuff is in! I find it most disturbing that the material is being written by women. Men are to be the theological leaders in Bible studies. Apparently, no men are available to write and lead, or this denomination is going Politically Correct (PC) in assigning women "elders" to write.    Many in the denominational churches are just playing church. But I would agree with you that, putting it all together as to what is happening in our churches, we are moving rapidly toward the apostasy of the church. Looking at all the passages of Scripture, the apostasy, as Paul puts it, is a departure from THE Truth and from THE Faith!    In my opinion, there is no turning back. The course has been set. And what the Word of God says about "the departure" from the truth is coming to pass. I wish I had some suggestions for you. I keep praying that men such as you will attempt to band together with other like-minded folks to begin a home-church that has a strong and virile doctrinal statement, and that calls upon soundly trained men to exegete the Scriptures for those who are spiritually hungry.    By the way, I get letters like this almost on a weekly basis. People are in deep trouble!    Thank you for your email.    Dr. Mal Couch

Contemplative Prayer

Dr. Couch, I understand the Contemplative Prayer people use Psalm 46:10 and Matthew 6:6-7 to advocate that we should go into the lotus position, tune out all thoughts, and contemplate God. Is that what these verses are all about? ANSWER:  The Contemplative Prayer advocates are not talking about meditating on God. They are advocating Hinduism by which one pushes out all thoughts, even about God, and go into a silent mental state, whereby then they are filled up with the divine! This is Hinduism and not Christianity! They believe we should divorce the mind from all thinking. God then comes and simply fills up the silence space in a mystical "no thinking" way.    This is a repudiation of all objective, conscious thinking. It is a denial of living by objective doctrine, whereby we act on the truths of God's Word. The Contemplative Prayer people admit that they are uniting their view of "Christianity" with other religions. Most of the advocates are coming out of Anglicanism. They are also going back to contemplation and musing from the "desert fathers," those in the Middle Ages who left the world in order to find God "in silence." This is cultism and it is driven by demonism! It is exploding in liberal churches, but too, it is spilling over into Evangelical churches. This is leading to a one-world religion!    In the NAS Psalm 46:10 reads: "Cease striving and know that I am God; I will be exalted among the nations, I will be exalted in the earth." The "cease striving" is not speaking about tuning out contemplation, it is about waiting on the Lord in His sovereignty to do the work He has determined in His world. In other words, they misuse the passage and do not understand what it is about. Matthew 6:6 is also not talking about going brain-dead and shutting out all thinking. Christ said: "When you pray, go into your inner room, and when you have shut your door, pray to your Father who is in secret, and your Father who sees in secret will repay you." The point is that one simply goes into a private place and speaks with Him alone. Don't "perform" with your praying in order to impress others. Since God is Spirit, He sees and hears all things. He knows our every thought!    Be alert! Satan is working overtime in destroying the truth of God's Word. Because doctrine is no longer "in", especially among those who are thirty-five and under, we can expect all kinds of occultism coming in, in order to destroy biblical Christianity. Satan is working overtime to mislead our churches!    Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch

A Thank You For Emphasizing the Trinity

Dr. Couch, thank you for emphasizing the doctrine of the Trinity. I've noticed in the past that you explain the doctrine clearly. You need to write a book on the subject! ANSWER: Thank you for your comments. In graduate school I had an advanced course on the subject. The professor, Dr. John Witmer, did an outstanding job with all the verses in Scripture that explained the nature of our Lord!    There are several ways to confirm and explain the doctrine of the Trinity. One has to do with the fact that the persons in the Godhead do the same thing. For example, in Isaiah 51:12, God the Father says He is the One who comforts. Christ told His disciples He would send them "another" Comforter (or Helper) (John 14:16 ) who would be the Holy Spirit (v. 17). Christ is saying that He is a Comforter but would send another Comforter, the Spirit. So each person in the Godhead comforts believers! They are doing the same work!    John 3:6 speaks of being born of the Spirit, but 5:4 speaks of being born of God. Paul says that Christ performs signs and wonders by the power of the Holy Spirit (Rom. 15:19 ) but Psalm 136:1-4 says that God the Father also performs great wonders. Thus, all three persons of the Godhead are performing such work!    Satan can fill the heart to lie to the Holy Spirit (Acts 5:3) but also God the Father can be lied to (v. 4). It is possible to try (or tempt) the Holy Spirit (Acts 5:9) but also the Lord God can be tried (or tempted) (Matt. 4:7). The Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit, all three separate persons, are abiding within the believer (John 14:16 -23). Those who are anti-Trinitarian say, "Well, yes, God dwells within, but this idea is not supporting the doctrine of the Trinity!" But it is, because the indwelling is done distinctly be the three persons of the Trinity—Father, Son, and Spirit!    In creating us, all three persons were involved specifically. The Father "has made us" (Psa. 100:3), Christ the Word created all things, including us! ( Col. 1:16) and the Spirit of God made us (Job 33:4). God stills the waves (Psa. 107:29) and so does the Son (Matt. 8:26 ). God the Father can send His Spirit (Isa. 48:16) and so the Son (John 16:7). We are to serve God the Father (Deut. 10:20 ) and also the Son (Col. 3:24).    We could go on and refer to hundreds of additional verses but the passages above make clear what the Bible is saying about the persons in the Trinity.    Early in American history, on the East coast, there was a revolt against the doctrine of the Trinity in many of the congregations. They denied the Trinity and turned to the cult of Universalism. This brought down many of the churches, and even some of the colleges, in the eastern states. Spiritually, many of the churches in that part of the country never fully recovered. That is why the East coast remained so spiritually dead even up until the present time. Transcendentalism filled the gap in many congregations. Spiritual deadness followed.    To fully understand the nature and attributes of our God is extremely important. This becomes a bulwark against a belief in other religions! One cannot say Islam, or Hinduism, are equal to Christianity, if one is fully aware of the biblical revelation of who our God is! If you have not heard recently a full doctrinal teaching on the Trinity, you must see that this happens in your Sunday schools or from the pulpit by your pastor! This issue is extremely important!    Thanks for your comments.    Dr. Mal Couch