History Religious Issues Heaven Can Be Yours Order Contact Us |
Table of Contents
|
Dr. Robert Sumner passed away in December 2016. The Biblical Evangelist newspaper is no longer being published and the ministry of Biblical Evangelism has ceased operation. The remaining inventory of his books and gospel tracts was transferred to The Baptist Tabernacle of Los Angeles and may be ordered here. Musician Joel Hemphill Says, "We Are Going to Bring Down the Doctrine of the Trinity" (Part 1) Noted Musician, Joel W. Hemphill Says, “We Are Going to Bring Down the Doctrine of the Trinity!” A Report by the Editor Hemphill is indisputably a recognized top ‘gospel’ artist, eight-time Dove Award winner, three BMI Awards of Excellence recipient, and a member of both the Louisiana Songwriters Hall of Fame and the Southern Gospel Music Hall of Fame. He wrote such songs as “I Claim the Blood,” “It Wasn’t Raining When Noah Built the Ark,” “Wait Till You See My Brand New Home,” “Consider the Lilies,” “Master of the Wind,” “Not in a Million Years,” “Pity the Man,” “I’m In This Church,” and “I’ll Soon be Gone.” In fact, he has written over 350 songs – some with his wife, LaBreeska – and many of them considered ‘classics’ by gospel music fans. LaBreeska’s mother, Gussie Mae Goodman Rogers, was in the music tradition of “the Happy Goodmans,” and LaBreeska, whose first public appearance was singing with her mother, got into professional gospel singing with Uncles Rusty and Howard Goodman and the latter’s wife, Vestal (who became known as “Queen of Southern Gospel Music”) – the founders of the “Happy Goodman” group. Hemphill has also produced 27 albums. One of his webs says, “Over a twenty-year period, from 1970-1990, Hemphill had an average #8 song on the ‘Singing News’ Chart.” He and his family were Jimmy Carter’s guests at the White House for a Gospel Sing and they were regulars on the Gaither Homecoming videos. In addition, his TV gigs include The Grand Ole Opry, the 700 Club, TBN, Crook and Chase, and Gospel Country. He is obviously a talented musician. Alas, that doesn’t make him a theologian or a biblical scholar, of course – in fact, anything but, as indicated in the title of this article! And he is also strongly into speaking in ‘unknown tongues’ and other such ‘manifestations of the spirit,’ as he calls them. Knowledgeable gospel musicians will immediately recognize this man as the one who wrote, nearly three decades ago (1980), “He’s Still Working on Me,” saying that God wasn’t finished with him yet. It stayed #1 on the “Singing News” chart for eight months and became one of the most popular pop gospel songs of the day. Not only did it seem everyone was singing the catchy chorus (if a chorus is ‘catchy’ enough everyone will be humming or singing it, even if it is a ‘fast food’ commercial – like ‘you deserve a break today’), but bumper stickers, T-shirts, wrist bracelets, wall plaques and what-have-you were made of the slogan or its abbreviation, GSWOM. It is now safe to say, however, that God is ‘finished’ with Hemphill and God is no longer working on him, even if the “W” in his name does stand for Wesley, as in John and Charles. Why? He has become an apostate! And God quits working on apostates. An apostate is one who abandons, after first fully knowing the basic, fundamental tenets of Christianity. Since Millard J. Erickson is a man Hemphill quotes repeatedly in his diatribes against the Trinity and the Deity of Christ, it is fitting that we quote him on apostasy. Erickson, in his Concise Dictionary of Christian Theology, defines apostate: “One who departs from the faith,” and apostasy as, “A ‘falling away,’ usually a deliberate and total abandonment of the faith previously held.” More to the point, however, one of the strongest definitions in the Word of God is found in Hebrews 6:4-6, “For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.” (For a phrase-by-phrase commentary on these verses, see the editor’s 546-page Hebrews: Streams of Living Water.) Other passages could be multiplied, including Hebrews 10:26-31 (see the same commentary). In short, this puts Hemphill in the notorious tradition of such anti-God, anti-biblical cult leaders as Pastor Charles Tate Russell (who was never a pastor, but did have a ‘seventh grade’ education – his first wife, Maria, divorced him on the grounds of “his conceit, egotism, domination, and improper conduct in relation to other women”) and Judge Joseph Franklin Rutherford (who was never a judge, but was a lawyer who filled in briefly when one judge was ill), founders of the infamous Jehovah’s Witnesses; Herbert W. and Garner Ted Armstrong, founders of The Worldwide Church of God and The Church of God International – both organizations spewing scores of ‘religious children’ groups, too many to list and more being formed almost daily (or so it seems); Victor Paul Wierwille, founder of The Way International; William M. Branham, founder of a movement called Branhamism; and that movement that is neither Christian nor science, founded by “Mother” Mary Baker Patterson Glover Eddy, Church of Christ, Scientist (usually called Christian Science); – the list is too long to emphasize, but you get the idea. Now, Hemphill may protest loudly at being associated with such a crowd of unbelievers and religious kooks, but we are not talking personally or socially, but doctrinally. He agrees theological with these groups spawned by Satan that Jesus is not God; that the Holy Spirit is not God; that the Trinity is a myth; that Jesus is not the Creator of all things; that Jesus had a beginning in time and therefore is not eternal, even though the Bible describes Him, “… whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting” (Micah 5:2); – but why go on? Surely you get the idea. Our friend, James T. Kieferdorf, who is so hated by the followers of the late Herbert W. Armstrong because of his research getting them booted off Christian radio and television stations, was looking into the Atlanta Bible College (GA) and its “anti-deity of Christ, anti-Trinitarian, anti-Hell” positions when he made a startling discovery. He knew the college is affiliated with the Church of God General Conference – not to be confused with the evangelical Pentecostal Church of God headquartered in Cleveland (TN) or the Church of God headquartered in Anderson (IN) – so that was not what he learned. It was doing this research that he discovered the In case you are not familiar with Buzzard, he graduated from Herbert Armstrong’s How does he know that Hemphill believes what Buzzard teaches? Kieferdorf called Hemphill on the phone to inquire and the latter told him Buzzard is “right on” regarding the person of Jesus Christ. And lest there be any misunderstanding of his position, he added, "Jesus is not God, he did not pre-exist, and the Trinity is unbiblical." That, ladies and gentlemen, is full-blown heresy! After Brother Kieferdorf called my attention to this problem, I went on the web to see for myself and, apparently, Hemphill’s heresy has been around for several years. Either no one knew about it in evangelical circles or those who did ‘hid it under the rug,’ too scared to publicize it. Now, fear of retaliation and/or loss of prestige have never been included among my faults, so I felt we should publicize it immediately in order that Christians could be warned and beware of his apostasy. Since telling some folks once won’t convince them, Kieferdorf offers these statements from Hemphill’s ridiculous book, To God Be the Glory (it is not necessary to read his book to know they are accurate declarations, since Hemphill promotes them on his web): "But Jesus is not a human incarnation of Almighty God as the Oneness teach … nor an incarnation of God the Son, second person of a Triune God ...” “The doctrine of the Trinity is biblically naked ...” “Jesus denied being God ...” “Jesus denied that he is the creator ...” “Paul says Jesus is in the creature class ...” “The incarnation as taught by modern Christianity is a fable …” “A god-man could not redeem us ...” “Being full of God does not make a person God ..." The anti-Trinitarian Kingdom Organization lists Hemphill’s book on its web, advertising it as “The Journey of a Famed Gospel Singer from ‘Jesus Only’ to ‘Father Only’.” That this quite accurately portrays Hemphill’s journey, he assured me on the phone. While he signs his Jesus-is-not-god leaflet, “A Minister of Jesus Christ,” with Hemphill as our Lord’s ‘friend,’ He certainly doesn’t need any ‘enemies!’ But why do we say God has quit working on Hemphill? Look at the text above with which we started this editorial: “For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame” (emphasis added). To the charge of apostasy we add the charge of hypocrisy. Since he claims to have received a revelation from God in 1986 (over two decades ago) that Jesus is not God (that was when he was “Jesus Only”), but merely a “special created human,” to accept induction in 2007 (one of eight last year) into the Southern Gospel Music Hall of Fame is sheer dishonesty and hypocrisy. His position about our Lord Jesus Christ is more Islam than Christianity, more Jehovah’s Witnesses than Christian! To accept this honor when he knew he had not believed in ‘historic’ Christianity for decades – in fact, never had – was hypocrisy of the highest (or should I say, ‘lowest’) order. And according to the SGMA’s web, “Once selected, these highly recognized and distinguished individuals are permanently enshrined in the Hall of Fame with a plaque bearing their picture and list of accomplishments for all to see.” According to SGMA’s own rules, Hemphill, whose stated goal is to bring down the Trinity, is “in” forever – meaning their charter certainly needs to be amended! And since the same web assures one and all, “The nomination and selection of deserving individuals to the Hall of Fame falls under the SGMA's direction and responsibility” – and leaders in Christian music should have been well aware of his being “out of the closet” – for an organization like this to put him in their “fame” hall (only last year) is inexcusable. Unless they have a good explanation, it deserves a hypocrisy charge for them as well. We find it very sad and have no delight in reporting this, but pastors, evangelists, musicians and conference leaders who have had Hemphill in the past or are considering having him in the present should know the truth about his apostasy. Would you want him peddling his book To God Be the Glory – no matter how fine his music might be – in your church or conference? Christian bookstores should ship all the Hemphill records, CDs and whatever they have of his back to the publishers for credit – explaining why. Christian radio stations should pull all his music and trash it, never again airing Hemphill music. How else should a Christian react to someone trying to destroy a cardinal doctrine of the Christian church? Should he be honored? Perish the thought! I had several exchanges with SGMA about Hemphill being in its Hall of Fame. I had asked first for a doctrinal statement and they replied that they were not a ‘religious’ organization, but a ‘historical’ one – the name ‘Gospel’ in their name really had me fooled! I also wrote Hemphill, pleading with him to change his position and giving him a copy, with my compliments, of my big book, Jesus Christ IS God! Among other things we said to him: “I have a habit of accepting people at their word and if you truly reject the Trinity and deny the full Deity of our Lord Jesus Christ, I do not see how you can, honestly, accept the adulation of folks who do believe those wonderful truths. It seems to me you should give back those eight Dove Awards, three BMI Awards of Excellence, repudiate your membership in the SPMA Hall of Fame, and stop performing concerts in Christian churches. You should probably also ask the Gaithers to delete your portions from their Homecoming videos. Wouldn’t that be a matter of honesty on your part?” As noted above, I also think good Christians should stop buying the books, songs and music of an apostate – and churches holding a biblical position should stop inviting him for special days and/or concerts. Am I wrong? If so, explain how. Word is getting out about Hemphill’s apostasy and conferences are being canceled and major Christian radio stations are refusing to air his songs and are trashing his records/albums from their files. That is as it should be for an apostate from Christianity. Hemphill responded by calling me on the phone and talking, I suppose, for over an hour. He acknowledged to me that he has always been a “Oneness” preacher, even when he pastored a Southern Baptist Church (he said they knew what he believed when they called him; they must have liked music more than doctrine!), a matter I thought was incredible. I still think so! The difference then and now is that then he believed only Jesus was God and now he believes only the Father is God. As I pointed out to him, and he acknowledged it, he has simply exchanged one form of ‘Oneness’ for another. He assured me he has never believed in the Trinity, so what he believes now is not much different than what he has always believed. He also assured me, and I made him repeat it several times and then wrote it down and read it back to him several times so I wouldn’t misquote him: “We are going to bring down the doctrine of the Trinity!” Scary, isn’t it? I assured him he might be right because a lot of Bible doctrines will be “brought down” when the Antichrist rules and reigns during the Great Tribulation. His teaching fits right in with the program of the Antichrist. Sadly, by quoting selective passages in their books, he gives the impression that good, noble biblical theologians like Charles Ryrie and Millard Erickson do not believe the Trinity (something untrue; they merely admit no single verse teaches it; while I John 5:7 does, it admittedly has a faulty background in manuscript authority – more on this later). The next day he sent me an e-mail and in my brief response I said I agreed with Ryrie and Erickson. He replied, “Your email made my point for me. You ‘good men’ are ‘definitely and solidly Trinitarian in spite of clear admissions that it is not a Scripturally based doctrine (neither O.T. nor N.T.). That shows the extent to which you and much of Christianity has been blinded by Greek philosophy … These admissions make my job easier” (emphasis added). By his “job,” I assume he means bringing down the doctrine of the Trinity. I responded by referring to what is boldface in the pervious paragraph: “Note what I have emphasized from your note. THAT IS NOT TRUE, THAT IS NOT WHAT I SAID, AND THAT IS NOT WHAT I BELIEVE. DON'T ADD MY NAME TO YOUR OTHER QUOTES. I never said that; I never thought that. Neither did Ryrie or Erickson, whom you are misrepresenting, [say or think] that. Some of your songs make me believe you are looking for the rapture. Where is the word ‘rapture’ in the Bible (right side of the word Trinity)? Yet I believe both with all my heart. And don't you dare say I don't! “I believe, as do other Trinitarians, that, rather than being based on one verse somewhere, the teaching is found from Genesis 1:1 repeatedly to Revelation 22:21. If you want to quote me you may quote me on that!” The Trinity is a ‘scripturally based’ doctrine. As a result, while this might be considered a matter of opinion, we think Hemphill is dishonest in his quotes about men like Ryrie, Erickson and others who honestly admit that no single verse clearly states it, but who believe that the Bible, taken as a whole, teaches it. For example, here is what Charles Ryrie, who Hemphill quotes to look like he doesn’t believe it, has to say in his Study Bible. He defines ‘Trinity’: “There is only one God, but in the unity of the Godhead there are three eternal and coequal Persons, the same in substance but distinct in subsistence.” Here is what he offers as proof of the Trinity, very brief as any note in a study Bible must be: “1. O.T. intimations. The O.T. does not reveal the Trinity but it allows for the later revelation of it. a. Passages which use the plural word Elohim and plural pronouns referring to God (Gen. 1:1, 26; Isa. 6:8). b. Passages which speak of the Angel of Jehovah (Gen. 22:11, 15-16). 2. N.T. confirmation. In the N.T. there is clear revelation that Father, Son, and Spirit are God; thus a Triunity or Trinity (neither is a biblical word). a. The Father is God (John In Ryrie’s Basic Theology, which Hemphill obviously has since he quotes a ‘selected portion’ from it, discussing the subject of inerrancy and noting it has no ‘proof text’ (about which Hemphill revels in quoting), he says: “But many doctrines are accepted by evangelicals as being clearly taught in the Scriptures for which there are no proof texts. The doctrine of the Trinity furnishes the best example of this … “How then do we arrive at a clear doctrine of the Trinity? Simply by accepting two lines of evidence in the Bible: (a) clear statements that teach there is only one God; and (b) equally clear statements that there was Someone called Jesus and Someone designated the Holy Spirit who in addition to God the Father claimed to be God.” In the same place Ryrie notes that “many deny that Jesus is God, because, they say, there is no ‘clear’ evidence that He ever claimed to be divine.” Then he added, “Such heresy outrages orthodox believers, and rightly so.” In this same book that Hemphill uses to quote Ryrie’s inference that the Bible is bankrupt on teaching the Trinity, Basic Theology, the latter has an entire chapter of 11 pages on “The Triunity of God,” proving that the teaching of the Trinity is biblical teaching, even including a diagram showing that the Godhead is one, yet “showing each Person as God and also distinct.” Ryrie notes New Testament evidence in this form: “1. The Father is recognized as God … 2. Jesus Christ is recognized as God … 3. The Holy Spirit is recognized as God.” And then he says: “Matthew 28:19 best states both the oneness and threeness by associating equally the three Persons and uniting them in one singular name. Other passages like Matthew 3:16-17 and 2 Corinthians Ryrie closes this chapter on the Trinity by saying: “The richness of the concept of the Trinity overflows into several areas of theology. “The doctrine of redemption is an obvious example, for all persons of the Godhead are involved in that great work (John 3:6, 16; Rev. 13:8). “The doctrine of revelation serves as another example, the Son and Spirit both being involved in communicating God’s truth (John “Fellowship and love within the Godhead is only possible in a trinitarian concept of God, and that fellowship is akin to the believer’s fellowship with Christ (John “Priority without inferiority as seen in the Trinity is the basis for proper relationships between men and women (1 Cor. 11:3). “Prayer is practiced in a trinitarian way. Though we may address any Person of the Trinity, ordinarily, according to the biblical precedent, we address the Father in the name of Christ as the Spirit directs us (John It is very dishonest to imply or infer that Ryrie does not solidly endorse the scriptural doctrine of the Trinity. While we have examined Ryrie’s position, had we space and time we could probably show the same about all the others he quotes. We say ‘probably’ because we have never heard of some of the authors he references. As I note in my Jesus Christ IS God, quoting the illustrious theologian and acknowledged scholar B. B. Warfield (1851-1921) – Harold Lindsell said of him, “Perhaps no theologian of that age is as widely read and has had his books kept in print so long as Warfield” – in The Standard Bible Encyclopedia: “It is not a text here and there that the New Testament bears its testimony to the doctrine of the Trinity. The whole book is Trinitarian to the core; all its teaching is built on the assumption of the Trinity; and its allusions to the Trinity are frequent, cursory, easy and confident.” Yes, the whole Bible, especially the New Testament, is saturated with Trinity teaching. When Hemphill phoned me he emphasized that he wanted to speak his piece; he didn’t want to be interrupted; and when he finished I could say anything I wanted. I said ‘fine.’ The problem with that was he went on and on and on until I finally had to interrupt. By then he had taken so much time I had forgotten most of his arguments. The next day he boasted to a friend that I was ‘unable’ to answer him. So be it! Actually, anyone familiar with the timeworn Jehovah’s Witnesses spiels could answer him. For example, one of the first verses he referenced was Psalm 82 that opens: “A Psalm of Asaph. God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods,” then says in verse 6, “I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.” Jesus, as most folks know, quoted it in John 10:34-39. First of all, note that in Psalm 82 the Name for LORD, Yahweh (which always means Deity), is not used. It is the word Elohim, which can be (and is) also used of angels and humans, as well as God. The reference is to ‘judges,’ God’s representatives (who were judging ‘unjustly,’ as verse 2 notes), men who will “die” and “fall like one of the princes” (Vs.7). To be calling humans “gods” in the sense of Deity would have been blasphemy to these Jews – unthinkable! The reference is hardly to Deity in Psalm 82 and only mental gymnastics could so conclude. The same Hebrew word is translated twice as “judges” in Exodus 22:9. And in verse 28 of that same chapter, the abbreviated form El is translated both as ‘gods’ and ‘ruler.’ In the New Testament, where it was quoted by Jesus, it followed His claim in John 10:30 of Oneness with the Father (oneness of essence, not personage, since the Greek is not masculine, but neuter, even though in the middle of discussing two masculine personages). He was saying that He and the Father were one in essence. The Jews correctly understood Him in this as claiming equality with the Father and wanted to stone Him to death, saying, “For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God” (Vs.33). In short, note that they rightly understood Him as claiming equality with the Father! That was when Jesus quoted Psalm 82. So then the Jews all said, “Well, okay; that’s more like it. We are glad you are admitting you are not God.” Right? Wrong! They still understood Him as claiming to be God and “therefore they sought again to take him; but he escaped out of their hand” (Vs.38). The Jehovah’s Witnesses and Hemphill are wrong in trying to denying the Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ from this passage. Christ was claiming equality with the Father and the Jews knew it! Hemphill and others ought to know it, too. By the way, one of the Trinitarians he quotes to make it appear the scholar in question is denying the Trinity, Lee Stroble in The Case for Christ (which no thinking person would expect from the title to be anti-Trinitarian), he refers to a Ben Witherington of Asbury Seminary about Jesus, “If he had simply announced, ‘Hi, folks’ I’m God,’ that would have been heard as ‘I’m Yahweh,’ because the Jews of his day didn’t have any concept of the Trinity. They only knew of God the Father – whom they called Yahweh – and not God the Son or God the Holy Spirit. So if someone were to say he was God that wouldn’t have made any sense to them and would have been seen as clear-cut blasphemy” (emphasis by Hemphill). Of course! And that is exactly how the Jews saw Christ’s claim in John 10 – “as clear-cut blasphemy”; note how they expressed it: “but for blasphemy” – and that is why they “took up stones again to stone Him” (Vs.31). Witherington is proving the biblical position, not Hemphill’s. He also brought up the verse so popular with the Jehovah’s Witnesses and other antichrist groups (in the sense that John used the term ‘antichrist’ in I John 2:18, 22, etc.), “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one” (I John 5:7). He used the J.W. argument that no manuscript contained those words and that “all scholars” agreed they were interpolations, not a genuine part of the original text. In fact, he made the J.W. blunder his own through a little plagiarism – a blunder many enemies of Christ have made in seeking to “bring down” His Deity, copying the J.W.s – saying in his article What About Emmanuel? “… these words are found in only about seven or eight copies, all from the 15 th or 16 th centuries” (his emphasis). This absurdity is found in the J.W. book, Let God Be True! and it was mis-quoting Benjamin Wilson (who actually said “the fifth century,” a difference of a full millennium). In fact, to say the verse has no authority is not playing with a full deck (to quote an old truism). |