What do you think?
Rate this book
Jesus Christ Is Not God
The expressions "God the Father," "God the Son" and "God the Holy Spirit" are almost cliche" in their association with Christianity. The doctrine of a three-in-one God is so familiar that the vast majority of Christians believe it to be the keystone of Christian faith. The author of this explosive study was also reared to believe in the "trinity." Yet, through his Biblical research, he gradually came to see that Jesus Christ is not God-that he is the Son of God, but not "God the Son." Without "God the Son" there is no trinity. What is Christianity without a trinity? It is placed back at the point when the first century apostles lived and dynamically taught those things which God revealed to them and which Jesus himself had shown them during his life. The Bible clearly teaches that Christianity is monotheistic. God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is the one and only true God whom Jesus Christ and his followers are to worship as above, before and over all things. How can Christians hope to please God when they aren't clear on who God is? The author contends that separating the Father from the Son does not at all discredit the Son. Rather, trinitarian dogma placing the Son on God's level degrades God from His elevated, unparalleled position; besides, it leaves man unredeemed. This book looks at the historical evolution of the trinity, since trinitarianism simply was not a part of the doctrine of the first century apostles, nor in fact, a part of Church doctrine for the first four centuries. Then, Biblical study elucidates the beauty and significance of God's relationship with His Son. Jesus Christ was not an extension of God, but one who was willing to be the sacrificial Passover lamb-the redeeming, second Adam.
180 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1981
5 people are currently reading
86 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
April 7, 2025
Throughout time for every truth that God established, the adversary, God’s arch enemy answered with at least one lie. I can’t think of a more destructive lie than to promote that somehow, Jesus Christ is God and that He is also the creator of the heavens and the earth. On its face it is illogical.
Dr. Victor Paul Wierwille, one of the greatest researchers of who I have never met, discovered or rediscovered that God’s word IS His will. In a world rife with lies, misinformation, and deception it is comforting to know that truth and deliverance are available. I would like to share what Dr. Wierwille wrote in the introduction of this great book:
“I didn’t begin research of this topic from a negative framework. It was never of my motivation to disprove the trinity. If the Bible had taught that there is a Christian trinity, I would have happily accepted it. Obviously, when a person does unpreconceived research, he does not determine beforehand what he will find. Research doesn’t begin with the answers; it looks for the answers. I did not willfully choose to find what I have found.”
I remember the first time I heard that Jesus Christ is not God, it was a profound shock to my system. I asked questions and I kept getting answers until one day I had to make up my mind and either trust God’s word or trust the masses.
Let’s face it, the three-in-one-god doctrine is alive and well and very popular. It is in our movies, writings, songs, and just everywhere! But I also knew that there was something seriously wrong with the world we live in. And that if I want answers that I can trust, I am better off placing my “bet” (faith) with God’s word.
But emotionally, I was a wreck, I had to digest the truth that God does not play games. If we are to believe this three-in-one-god , doctrine does that mean that our salvation was somehow rigged? That the fix was in from the beginning? That God somehow was just play-acting our deliverance?
Just like Dr. Wierwille illustrated in his book, it was a gradual process of learning and relearning. Logically, I was able to see the inconsistencies, the fact that there is a documented history of the three-in-one-god doctrine. A doctrine that is about 1500 years old, was voted on twice by the political power brokers of the day. A doctrine that was promoted orally, at first, approximately 300 years after Jesus Christ’s crucifixion, and then raised from the dead, and His ascension.
Chapter 2 titled “Who Is Jesus Christ?” makes the case that Jesus Christ had to be a real man and not God. Look at the requirements for the Old Testament sacrifices, God was very specific about the requirements. There were some specific requirements that applied to our Lord Jesus Christ, He had to be one from the flock, and a perfect man. For me, if the three-in-one-god doctrine is true then it feels like God is patronizing (me) mankind. Here’s the definition of condescending patronization according to Google:
To patronize someone means to treat them in a way that seems kind or helpful but that subtly implies they are inferior or incapable, often by speaking to them in a condescending or “talking down” manner.”
Does that mean that somehow mankind is incapable of obeying God, God made a mistake with Adam, and that Jesus Christ was an afterthought? If God knows everything, that will mean He is never in a position where He must react to something.
So, the answer is that the only way God could redeem mankind was that He God had to come down here Himself and redeem us? That would violate His law that he established in the Old Testament. And…and that would relinquish man’s responsibilities to God, giving us an easy out, that we just can’t get right! (There is some truth to that. We can’t get right without God’s help.) It’s all on God to deliver us and we just get to sit back and reap the benefits.
Here is another great phrase from Jesus Christ is not God:
…Similarly, if Jesus Christ had been God, he would not have legally redeemed man for he could not have willfully chosen to do so.”
I realize that this doctrine, that Jesus Christ is not God, is a radical departure from traditional beliefs, but that does not mean it is not true. When we think about our salvation and what God has done for us, don’t you think the identity of His only begotten Son is important? Is there a margin of error that we can afford to gamble with? Are you willing to stake your life (eternal life) on the three-in-one-god doctrine?
Lastly, I would like to address those concerns that sometimes we can overly intellectualize topics, especially Biblical topics and that somehow, we must take some things by faith. That would amount to blind faith. That is not Biblical.
For me, the common sense of the true God, His Son Jesus Christ, and that God is Holy and He is Spirit sells itself. Why complicate what is already written? Who created these complicated and competitive ideas about Jesus Christ in the first place? What sources of information are you willing to “stake your life on” about the identity of our Lord Jesus Christ.
While it might appear that I am attempting to be melodramatic, coerce, and brow beat someone into seeing things “my”, I am not. I am simply being a witness to what I believe is the truth. If there is one thing I have learned as “one from the flock” of the South, there is no amount of reasoning, discussions, common sense examples, scripture reading, and praying that is going to change someone’s mind about the three-in-one-god doctrine. They will have to do that (change their minds) for themselves.
Dr. Victor Paul Wierwille, one of the greatest researchers of who I have never met, discovered or rediscovered that God’s word IS His will. In a world rife with lies, misinformation, and deception it is comforting to know that truth and deliverance are available. I would like to share what Dr. Wierwille wrote in the introduction of this great book:
“I didn’t begin research of this topic from a negative framework. It was never of my motivation to disprove the trinity. If the Bible had taught that there is a Christian trinity, I would have happily accepted it. Obviously, when a person does unpreconceived research, he does not determine beforehand what he will find. Research doesn’t begin with the answers; it looks for the answers. I did not willfully choose to find what I have found.”
I remember the first time I heard that Jesus Christ is not God, it was a profound shock to my system. I asked questions and I kept getting answers until one day I had to make up my mind and either trust God’s word or trust the masses.
Let’s face it, the three-in-one-god doctrine is alive and well and very popular. It is in our movies, writings, songs, and just everywhere! But I also knew that there was something seriously wrong with the world we live in. And that if I want answers that I can trust, I am better off placing my “bet” (faith) with God’s word.
But emotionally, I was a wreck, I had to digest the truth that God does not play games. If we are to believe this three-in-one-god , doctrine does that mean that our salvation was somehow rigged? That the fix was in from the beginning? That God somehow was just play-acting our deliverance?
Just like Dr. Wierwille illustrated in his book, it was a gradual process of learning and relearning. Logically, I was able to see the inconsistencies, the fact that there is a documented history of the three-in-one-god doctrine. A doctrine that is about 1500 years old, was voted on twice by the political power brokers of the day. A doctrine that was promoted orally, at first, approximately 300 years after Jesus Christ’s crucifixion, and then raised from the dead, and His ascension.
Chapter 2 titled “Who Is Jesus Christ?” makes the case that Jesus Christ had to be a real man and not God. Look at the requirements for the Old Testament sacrifices, God was very specific about the requirements. There were some specific requirements that applied to our Lord Jesus Christ, He had to be one from the flock, and a perfect man. For me, if the three-in-one-god doctrine is true then it feels like God is patronizing (me) mankind. Here’s the definition of condescending patronization according to Google:
To patronize someone means to treat them in a way that seems kind or helpful but that subtly implies they are inferior or incapable, often by speaking to them in a condescending or “talking down” manner.”
Does that mean that somehow mankind is incapable of obeying God, God made a mistake with Adam, and that Jesus Christ was an afterthought? If God knows everything, that will mean He is never in a position where He must react to something.
So, the answer is that the only way God could redeem mankind was that He God had to come down here Himself and redeem us? That would violate His law that he established in the Old Testament. And…and that would relinquish man’s responsibilities to God, giving us an easy out, that we just can’t get right! (There is some truth to that. We can’t get right without God’s help.) It’s all on God to deliver us and we just get to sit back and reap the benefits.
Here is another great phrase from Jesus Christ is not God:
…Similarly, if Jesus Christ had been God, he would not have legally redeemed man for he could not have willfully chosen to do so.”
I realize that this doctrine, that Jesus Christ is not God, is a radical departure from traditional beliefs, but that does not mean it is not true. When we think about our salvation and what God has done for us, don’t you think the identity of His only begotten Son is important? Is there a margin of error that we can afford to gamble with? Are you willing to stake your life (eternal life) on the three-in-one-god doctrine?
Lastly, I would like to address those concerns that sometimes we can overly intellectualize topics, especially Biblical topics and that somehow, we must take some things by faith. That would amount to blind faith. That is not Biblical.
For me, the common sense of the true God, His Son Jesus Christ, and that God is Holy and He is Spirit sells itself. Why complicate what is already written? Who created these complicated and competitive ideas about Jesus Christ in the first place? What sources of information are you willing to “stake your life on” about the identity of our Lord Jesus Christ.
While it might appear that I am attempting to be melodramatic, coerce, and brow beat someone into seeing things “my”, I am not. I am simply being a witness to what I believe is the truth. If there is one thing I have learned as “one from the flock” of the South, there is no amount of reasoning, discussions, common sense examples, scripture reading, and praying that is going to change someone’s mind about the three-in-one-god doctrine. They will have to do that (change their minds) for themselves.
December 31, 2024
This book is a hilariously incompetent lie. It was written by a man who claims to have founded a biblical research organization (The Way International). It is anything but: TWI is nothing more than a racket. It uses its religious tax exempt status to hide its finances and exploit its followers for money through its manipulative and coercive practices.
As for the book itself, Wierwille's lies are astonishingly poorly constructed. He claims in the foreword that he asked his boyhood pastor to explain the biblical basis of the trinity to him and that his pastor responded by saying that no one can explain the trinity--it is simply accepted by faith. He also claims that after having discussed the trinity with "theologians of unblemished character" over the course of his life, he "never found more substance than what [his] childhood pastor, Dr. L. H. Kunst, told [him] 42 years ago (page 2)." This is, quite literally, unbelievable. Any religious leader in any Protestant denomination, the Catholic church, or any Orthodox church can explain the biblical basis of the trinity. The only possible way for these claims to be true is that Mr. Wierwille (supported by his staff at TWI) was a profoundly incompetent researcher--he could simply have picked up and read a copy of the Catholic catechism to find an explanation of the trinity. Personally, I don't think he was telling the truth. I think the evidence is overwhelmingly convincing that he was just a liar bent on stealing other peoples' money.
Furthermore, Wierwille makes multiple blatantly obvious factual errors in this excuse for a book. For example, when attempting to refute the trinitarian theology as established by the First Council of Nicaea, he claims that the Council was convened in Nice, France (page 23). This is an extremely easy detail to research that anyone with half a brain could have verified with a short stop to any halfway decent library, and Wierwille got it wrong! A simple web search will tell you that the Council was actually convened in present-day Turkey--about as far across the Mediterranean Sea from France as you can get. It is very telling that the self-professed "Doctor" Wierwille thought he could refute Christian theology agreed upon by Catholics, Protestants, and Orthodox Christians for millennia, yet he's so unbelievably stupid that he didn't know the difference between Anatolia and Gaul. Good riddance.
One of his repeated lies is a claim that people in the Bible are speaking figuratively when they were clearly speaking literally, or vice versa. For example, when he discusses John 20:28 "Thomas answered him, 'My Lord and my God!'", he claims that Thomas wasn't actually referring to Jesus' divinity (pages 34-35). Instead, Wierwille asserts that Thomas was speaking figuratively. Specifically, he claims that Thomas was using a hendiadys figure of speech, in which one descriptor magnifies the other. Thus, his claim is that Thomas actually meant "my godly Lord." He has to do further mental gymnastics to claim that "godly" in this context doesn't actually refer to divinity. The lies unfold quickly. Wierwille doesn't even attempt to pretend to explain why he switched the order of the words from the verse. He simply writes as though it were a foregone conclusion that Thomas meant "my godly Lord" and not "my lordly God." Wierwille also claims that to understand the true meaning of a verse, you have to research its context--not just the verse by itself. Well, he doesn't even attempt to pretend to provide any contextual proof that Thomas was speaking figuratively in this instance, nor does he provide any evidence of Thomas using a hendiadys (or ANY other figure of speech) anywhere else in the entire Bible.
His lack of researching context is also hilariously evident when discussing the verse John 10:30 "The Father and I are one." He writes, "This is the climax of Jesus' claim of oneness with the Father, and this oneness is of purpose (page 50)." Wierwille then conveniently ignores John 10:33, despite claiming to have exhaustively researched the Bible hundreds of times.
Tellingly, Wierwille never even attempts to refute John 8:58 "Before Abraham was, I am," anywhere in his book. Attempting to address this verse would completely derail his butchery of the first chapter of John, in which he claims that Jesus didn't actually exist, but was merely "foreknown" by God before creation, despite the fact that the word "foreknown" doesn't appear anywhere in the chapter. Wierwille simply inserts the word from other verses to validate his own argument. If the rules of the game are you get to pick and choose words from any given verse in the Bible and insert it into another verse, anyone can make the Bible say anything they want.
I could go on with the countless lies spouted by Wierwille in this putrid book, but I have far better things to do with my time like gargle bleach. Anyone with a functioning brain can see through his half-baked falsehoods. If you meet someone who is involved with the Way, don't bother entertaining their asinine theology. TWI is a sham founded on the lies of a con artist for the sake of making himself money. Wierwille may be dead and gone, but the fruit of the poisonous tree is very much alive and well. If you want to learn more, you can research the lawsuits filed against TWI for yourself. It's about as bad as you can imagine.
"Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?"
Matthew 7:16
As for the book itself, Wierwille's lies are astonishingly poorly constructed. He claims in the foreword that he asked his boyhood pastor to explain the biblical basis of the trinity to him and that his pastor responded by saying that no one can explain the trinity--it is simply accepted by faith. He also claims that after having discussed the trinity with "theologians of unblemished character" over the course of his life, he "never found more substance than what [his] childhood pastor, Dr. L. H. Kunst, told [him] 42 years ago (page 2)." This is, quite literally, unbelievable. Any religious leader in any Protestant denomination, the Catholic church, or any Orthodox church can explain the biblical basis of the trinity. The only possible way for these claims to be true is that Mr. Wierwille (supported by his staff at TWI) was a profoundly incompetent researcher--he could simply have picked up and read a copy of the Catholic catechism to find an explanation of the trinity. Personally, I don't think he was telling the truth. I think the evidence is overwhelmingly convincing that he was just a liar bent on stealing other peoples' money.
Furthermore, Wierwille makes multiple blatantly obvious factual errors in this excuse for a book. For example, when attempting to refute the trinitarian theology as established by the First Council of Nicaea, he claims that the Council was convened in Nice, France (page 23). This is an extremely easy detail to research that anyone with half a brain could have verified with a short stop to any halfway decent library, and Wierwille got it wrong! A simple web search will tell you that the Council was actually convened in present-day Turkey--about as far across the Mediterranean Sea from France as you can get. It is very telling that the self-professed "Doctor" Wierwille thought he could refute Christian theology agreed upon by Catholics, Protestants, and Orthodox Christians for millennia, yet he's so unbelievably stupid that he didn't know the difference between Anatolia and Gaul. Good riddance.
One of his repeated lies is a claim that people in the Bible are speaking figuratively when they were clearly speaking literally, or vice versa. For example, when he discusses John 20:28 "Thomas answered him, 'My Lord and my God!'", he claims that Thomas wasn't actually referring to Jesus' divinity (pages 34-35). Instead, Wierwille asserts that Thomas was speaking figuratively. Specifically, he claims that Thomas was using a hendiadys figure of speech, in which one descriptor magnifies the other. Thus, his claim is that Thomas actually meant "my godly Lord." He has to do further mental gymnastics to claim that "godly" in this context doesn't actually refer to divinity. The lies unfold quickly. Wierwille doesn't even attempt to pretend to explain why he switched the order of the words from the verse. He simply writes as though it were a foregone conclusion that Thomas meant "my godly Lord" and not "my lordly God." Wierwille also claims that to understand the true meaning of a verse, you have to research its context--not just the verse by itself. Well, he doesn't even attempt to pretend to provide any contextual proof that Thomas was speaking figuratively in this instance, nor does he provide any evidence of Thomas using a hendiadys (or ANY other figure of speech) anywhere else in the entire Bible.
His lack of researching context is also hilariously evident when discussing the verse John 10:30 "The Father and I are one." He writes, "This is the climax of Jesus' claim of oneness with the Father, and this oneness is of purpose (page 50)." Wierwille then conveniently ignores John 10:33, despite claiming to have exhaustively researched the Bible hundreds of times.
Tellingly, Wierwille never even attempts to refute John 8:58 "Before Abraham was, I am," anywhere in his book. Attempting to address this verse would completely derail his butchery of the first chapter of John, in which he claims that Jesus didn't actually exist, but was merely "foreknown" by God before creation, despite the fact that the word "foreknown" doesn't appear anywhere in the chapter. Wierwille simply inserts the word from other verses to validate his own argument. If the rules of the game are you get to pick and choose words from any given verse in the Bible and insert it into another verse, anyone can make the Bible say anything they want.
I could go on with the countless lies spouted by Wierwille in this putrid book, but I have far better things to do with my time like gargle bleach. Anyone with a functioning brain can see through his half-baked falsehoods. If you meet someone who is involved with the Way, don't bother entertaining their asinine theology. TWI is a sham founded on the lies of a con artist for the sake of making himself money. Wierwille may be dead and gone, but the fruit of the poisonous tree is very much alive and well. If you want to learn more, you can research the lawsuits filed against TWI for yourself. It's about as bad as you can imagine.
"Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?"
Matthew 7:16
July 20, 2025
Who says you can't judge a book by its cover?!! Where and how this man went wrong is anybody's guess. Most likely, it was the result of t h e company he kept. To support his title thesis, he cited proven and convicted Arius who denied the Divinity of Christ and false teacher, E. W. Bollinger, who made a weird, convoluted attempt to say that John 1s declaration of the Word being God and Creator can not mean Christ. No one who denigrate Christ in the way Wierwille does can be a Christian in my humble opinion. To make his case, Wierwille (to his credit) mentioned each of the hundreds of Bible verses that prove the Divinity of both the Son of God (Jesus the Christ) and the Holy Spirit (he has a problem with Him too) BUT he takes each one and delves into the Greek or Hebrew or Aramaic words to twist meanings to their breaking point to disprove God's clear meaning, OR he finds an obscure manuscript that deletes the mention of Divinity altogether (ignoring the fact that a copyist may be relying on his own presupposition against Christ's Divinity, as does Wierwille), OR he simply invents (based on no evidence) the idea that a copyist made a transcription error and MEANT to say the opposite of what he did say in God's Word. Wierwille cites 258 verses in the Bible and attempts the above heretical interpretation of each one to deny that they all state the obvious: that Jesus Chist IS God! His 259th verse,by the way, is Revelation 21:16. It's the ONLY verse from the Book of Revelation he cites, and it simply states the dimensions of the Heavenly Jerusalem. The Book of Revelation is full of references to the Divine Alpha and Omega, our Savior and King, our God and Christ! I am sure Wierwille had his reasons for avoiding that wonderful book. It is the one book that comes with a blessing for those who read and heed its words and a curse for those who change its meaning. Perhaps Wierwille actually feared that curse. This book is clearly #forhereticalresearchonly .
Read
May 15, 2018Very good book, all people have to know what Dr Victor P. Wierwille has developed within this book to better pray our Almighty Father.
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews