After further reading of the below web site, I have decided to tell everyone to stay away from John Clark’s teaching. He denies the Trinity (go to April 20, 2004 conversation). He denies that the Holy Spirit is a person. Here is a brief survey over the past 5 minutes:
– You can lie to the Holy Spirit (Acts 5.3)
– You can resist the Holy Spirit (Acts 7.51)
– The Holy Spirit comforts (Acts 9.31)
– The Spirit speaks (Jn 16.13; Acts 10.19; 20.22)
– How does one explain the presence of all three distinct persons of the Trinity at Jesus’ baptism (Mt 3.16-17)?
– How does one explain being baptized in three distinct names (Mt 28.18-20)?
Clark falls into a serious error by trying to make up his own interpretation of the Scriptures and passing them off as what the Bible teaches. Heresies start this way, and this is another example of this.
Granted, the Holy Spirit is spoken of in abstract, “spiritual” ways. But he is a person. To say that he is only the Spirit of God fails to take into account the whole teaching of Scripture!
It is not just that he denies the Trinity, it is his entire foundation for his denomination. He claims to strip away all the past interpretations and find the true religion of Jesus. Dangerous! While I think his intention is good, in the end it will ruin many. How can anyone be sure they have interpreted something right until they pass it by John Clark to see if that is what was really meant in the Bible. If one doesn’t have to double-check one’s own interpretation, then everyone can do what they see fit in their own eyes (remind you of Judges?).
In a good desire to put things together in our minds, we oftentimes make words very technical. For example, Clark says that the Spirit is only a spirit and not a person. This is setting up a false dichotomy. Indeed, it drives a wedge between spirit and person. This is a serious fault. Don’t try to scour through the Bible and see a word and impute to that word the same meaning you understood from another context. That is, when you see the word “righteous” it does not always mean “finally justified” before God. It can mean “good” “pure” “just” etc. But don’t make words so technical. Words must be read in their context!
Does anyone else have thoughts out there after perusing his web site?