https://www.facebook.com/the70sproject/
https://denverseminary.academia.edu/MichaelEdiger
Subject: reviewed website
From: Michael Ediger <the70sproject@yahoo.com>
To: ask@thepathoftruth.com
Date: 12/3/2013 6:16 PM
To Whom It Concerns:
Just reviewed your website, and must agree with those who label you as a cult. While there are some things on your site that I can agree with, there is much that raises the “red flag” and cries out, “cult!” Not interested in any kind of debate with you, just want to add my voice to the mix as a child of God, and a defender of the true faith.
One brief note: your definition of “cult” is severely lacking. Time does not allow for an explanation at present, but maybe in the future I can give you the definition of “cult” that I have found, and that I use.
A True Believer
From: Paul Cohen
Sent: Saturday, December 07, 2013 9:28 PM
To: the70sproject@yahoo.com
Cc: ‘Victor Hafichuk’
Subject: Re: reviewed website
A “true believer” or “child of God” has something of substance and truth to say, Michael, especially when charging God’s servants. You say nothing verifiable because you aren’t a true believer or child of God and never were. You’ve identified yourself as an accuser of the brethren.
So what good would a true definition of a cult do for one such as yourself, who is delivered over to the deception of thinking he serves God, while he serves Satan?
“And for this cause, God will give them up to the power of deceit and they will put their faith in what is false: So that they all may be judged, who had no faith in what is true, but took pleasure in evil [arrogantly judging others according to their own vain understanding]” (2 Thessalonians 2:11-12 BBE).
Contending for the faith once delivered to the saints,
Paul and Victor
www.ThePathofTruth.com
Subject: comment
From: Michael Ediger <the70sproject@yahoo.com>
To: ask@thepathoftruth.com
Date: 12/12/2013 4:40 PM
Just finished reading your article, “The True Marks of a Cult.” While I have many things to say about this article, I will save them for later when I have the time to sit down and carefully re-read, make notes, and put my comments down carefully.
The only thing I will comment on at this time is, you obviously have no idea what the Doctrine of the Trinity teaches! You mistakenly claim (as do all cultists) that the Trinity teaches “three gods in one god.” This is NOT what the doctrine of the Trinity teaches! Furthermore, the Trinity does not come from pagan sources. There is not one single pagan religion that teaches the Trinity as does the Christian faith. If you were at all interested in the truth of the matter, you would take the time to carefully study the subject before making such blatantly false claims.
At such a time as I finish my rebuttal of your article, I will send my comments. Having studied the cults as well as the Christian faith for over 45 years, I believe I am fully qualified to speak on these matters.
May God forgive you for your sins against His disciples.
A True Believer
From: Victor Hafichuk
Sent: Saturday, December 21, 2013 8:02 AM
To: the70sproject@yahoo.com
Cc: Paul Cohen
Subject: Re: Comment
Michael, we’ll await your critique on The True Marks of a Cult, not that it matters if we hear from you or not.
Concerning the trinity, you say, “you obviously have no idea what the Doctrine of the Trinity teaches!”
Have you red all that we’ve had to say on the subject in The Trinity section? Not that we expect to convince you, but at least you’ll have a better idea of what we do teach. But seeing you contemn us as a cult, you likely have little interest in what we teach, except to fault us.
There’s some truth to what you say. It’s not easy understanding what Trinitarians believe when they don’t know themselves. We certainly haven’t found a Trinitarian who even claims to fully understand, much less is able to explain, the concept. “It’s a mystery,” they say, “it’s not for us to comprehend the unfathomable.” So we don’t think it’s that much of a shame for us to not understand.
The shame should come when you claim to know something you can’t explain, or bear substantial witness of. Of course, we both know of Trinitarians like you who have no shame in their ignorance because they deem themselves to be intelligent and knowledgeable emperors, anything but ignorant.
You use the phrase, “three gods in one god,” claiming we use it. The only place we see that wording on our site is in the introduction to the Diabolical Doctrine #6) God is three persons
“It’s impossible to reconcile the Scriptures with the concept of a trinity – three gods in one. What is taught in the Bible is that God took on human flesh as Jesus Christ and indwells His people after the resurrection and ascension by the Spirit of Christ, which is the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of God. It’s all the same Being. We worship only One God Who has different titles and manifestations. Anything else is polytheism and confusion.”
What we’re referring to from Trinitarians as we hear them speak is, “three persons yet one God.” But we’ve heard members of Trinitarian churches use various expressions. Whether they know what their pastors, priests and theologians teach or believe is another matter. It may be ignorance on the part of many of the mainline, orthodox, nominal Christian sheep who are in just as much confusion on the matter as are their shepherds, who have never found a way to explain what they call inexplicable.
“For the lips of a strange woman drip honey, and her palate is smoother than oil; but afterward she is as bitter as wormwood, sharp as a two-edged sword. Her feet go down to death; her steps take hold on hell, lest you should meditate on the path of life, her tracks are movable; you cannot know them” (Proverbs 5:3-6 MKJV).
This is, of course, contrary to the Lord’s promise that His Spirit would lead us into all truth and we would know all things.
I overheard two Southern Baptist leaders, one being Henry Blackaby, having a private discussion in his office debating the nature of the trinity. I believe Henry taught the following as defined at http://www.thefreedictionary.com/trinity (not sure if my memory serves me faithfully now; it’s been nearly 40 years):
trin·i·ty (trn-t)
- pl.trin·i·ties
- A group consisting of three closely related members. Also called triunity.
- TrinityTheology In most Christian faiths, the union of three divine persons, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, in one God.
If Trinitarians teach three divine persons, and they are each known as “God,” and if these people still claim God is one, not three, would it be so wrong to use the expression, “three gods in one god”? I fail to see your point. The question is, do you?
The man talking with Henry had another idea of the trinity. He suggested that God is not three persons, but three offices or identities. He had something there, but would still call it the “trinity.”
You see the confusion. We’re educated, we’ve studied the Scriptures for decades, and have spoken with multitudes of Trinitarians from dozens of denominations, including many spiritual leaders, “ordained,” no less, and the confusion remains. It remains with them, not us, for we’ve been delivered out of that cloud of smoky darkness where they remain.
No doubt, you have no explanation other than a sample of the many three-ring circus acrobatic varieties we find everywhere, each contradicting the other, at least in expression if not in the phantom, mythical, incomprehensible essence.
Our confidence isn’t in our education or much study or much talk with the wise of this world, but is in the One God of Israel and Creator of Heaven and earth Who has made Himself known to us as He is in truth. If you read our testimonies, you’ll discover we claim to know Him Who is Lord and the power of His resurrection, and we have known to this day the fellowship of His sufferings.
We, as do all His sheep, hear His voice. Not three voices at once, or each taking his turn, often without identifying himself, but One Voice, the Voice of Jesus Christ, Almighty God, the One Who spoke to Saul of Tarsus on the road to Damascus and to John in Revelation. His sheep hear His, not their, Voice.
We know His suffering of the contradiction of sinners, particularly those wise and prudent, from whom the secret of the Father (yes, the Father) is withheld, but is granted to babes. By His grace, our confidence is in Him and Him alone.
Not so with you, plainly. You’re the wise and scholarly one, the scribe who knows and understands and is fully qualified to teach others a thing or two. Isn’t that so?
No, you don’t belong to a cult by your definition. You set the standards, the parameters, play by your rules and compel others around your throne to play by those rules and no other, the truth be damned. You reign as monarch over all souls. You are the king of Babylon who knows no equal and has no mercy on any subordinate, least of all ignorant, wayward babes.
As such, could it just be you aren’t His sheep and therefore you’ve never heard His Voice? How would we know? He, not they, said we would know you by your fruits. The fruit of your lips in your letters speaks out of the abundance of your heart and reveals your spiritual state and position.
Enough said for now, Michael. You come in here, strutting as a turkey tom with your wings dragging, and you compel us to have you for Thanksgiving dinner.
But if we consume you as God has consumed us, it will be a very good thing and nothing at all to be feared, though initially painful, granted. No problem – “All’s well that ends well,” and the Lord, the “Godhead,” will have His, not “their,” way with you. You’ll be broken by the Stone you’ve stumbled on and ashamed of yourself at last, as you perfectly ought to be, as we all need to be in our appointed time. Then can you begin to rejoice in Jesus Christ, Almighty God, your Lord and Savior and ours, the Savior of all men. You’ll appreciate His grace and mercy.
As for your declaration of forgiveness, I can only say, Amen! May He most definitely forgive us for any offenses against our fellow man, especially those of the faith, His disciples.
And may we always be ready and able to forgive those who have been our enemies, especially those who have been so in His Name, even as He forgave and requires us to forgive.
We’ll be waiting, but passively in any expectation of you, as we continue to contend for the faith once delivered to the saints.
Victor
From: Michael Ediger
Sent: December-24-13 3:11 PM
To: Victor Hafichuk
Subject: Re: Comment
Victor:
I will wait to send you the critique of your article on marks of the cults. I just wanted to take a moment to email you and say what a presumptuous ass you are. I expected no less from someone who thinks he has a “hot line” to God and knows everything about everything. Typical of all cult leaders. You condemn me and say that I have never been a child of God. Who died and made you the one to make such a judgment? Have you forgotten Jesus’ words: “Do not judge so that you will not be judged. For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and [a]by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you.” (Matt. 7:1-2). In other words, you will be judged by God by the very same standards you have judged me and countless other true Christians. Are you comfortable with that? I hope not!
And yes, I have read what you teach regarding the Trinity. And you have a complete misunderstanding of the doctrine. All cultists accuse Christians of teaching “one god in three gods” – those are the cultists’ words, not the words of the Christian. And this is just what you have accused me and other Christians of. Yes, it’s wrong to say “one god in three gods” because that’s not what the Bible teaches. It clearly teaches there is but one God; and all three – Father, Son, and Holy Spirit – are called “God” – thus, the doctrine of the Trinity is the only satisfactory explanation for the biblical teaching. No, we don’t fully understand or comprehend it – are you telling me that you, a mere man, can fully understand and comprehend the infinite God? Don’t be so bold as to claim you can! Only a fool would make such a claim. For FINITE MAN can never fully comprehend or understand the INFINITE GOD! Does one have to fully understand or comprehend everything the Scriptures teach in order to be a Christian? Hardly!
There are several other of your teachings which contradict the Bible as well, but we needn’t go into that; your denial of one of the central tenets of the Scriptures is enough to place you outside the umbrella of the Christian faith, and among the ranks of false teachers.
I have made my notes and will be sending them to you shortly. Until then, I will continue to pray that God will somehow show you the error of your ways and bring you to a saving faith in His one and only Son.
Michael
From: Michael Ediger [mailto:the70sproject@yahoo.com]
Sent: December-24-13 10:59 PM
To: Victor Hafichuk
Subject: Response to article
Victor –
Here’s my response to your article, “The True Marks of a Cult.” I will be as brief and to the point as possible. I am not so naiive as to think you will repent of your sin of teaching false doctrine, but at least I will have done my part as a defender of the faith.
Let me begin by saying that if you had left your definition of “cult” in its basic form, without detailing the so-called “marks” you believe cults have, you would have a good, basic definition of the term, similar to the theological definition I use. That definition, which is not original with me, is: “A cult of Christianity is a group of people, which claiming to be Christian, embraces a particular doctrinal system taught by an individual leader, group of leaders, or organization, which (system) denies (either explicitly or implicitly) one or more of the central doctrines of the Christian faith as taught in the sixty-six books of the Bible.” – Source: Alan Gomes, Cult: A Theological Definition, excerpt from “Unmasking The Cults”
I see your group as a “cult of Christianity” because you do claim to be “Christian.” Therefore, I use the above definition to test your teachings to see if indeed you teach things contrary to the Scriptures. This you do, when your doctrine is tested against Scripture. I do not use the sociological-behavioral definition of “cult” nor do I use the popular definition used by the secular media. Neither of those two definitions would be of use in this situation.
Your problem stems from going beyond the basic definition you propose (“An identifiable group, which, while professing Christianity or faith in Jesus Christ, is contrary, intentionally or otherwise, to true Christianity.”) When you go further than this, and give in detail 32 so-called “true marks” of cults, you have invalidated your own definition.
You make other claims which are impossible to verify or just plain false. For example, you claim that you have defined “cult” according to Christ and/or the Bible. This is impossible to do, because no such definition exists within the pages of Holy Writ. You also claim that your definition & analysis of these so-called “true marks” come by revelation of God – a claim which itself is characteristic of all cults & false teachers, from Joseph Smith to Kenneth Copeland!
You state, “Let it be known that the true marks of a cult that are illustrated and illuminated in this document constitute the mark and number of the beast spoken of in Revelation.” What a fanciful claim! Obviously, you have spiritualized the meaning of the mark and number of the Beast, equating the mark on the forehead as being “in their minds” and the mark on the hand as being “on their works.” What an original interpretation of the Scriptures! There is absolutely no justification for such an interpretation, nor does the text of Revelation even hint as such a spiritualization.
The things you noted in your first paragraph under, “Victor defines a cult . . .” applies to your own definition. It is “prejudiced, partisan, bigoted, contradictory, ignorant, erroneous, justifiably debatable, and therefore potentially harmful to the innocent.” Further, as you state, you are just as “guilty of slander, defamation of character, potential harm to saints of God, and blasphemy against God” as you believe others to be. Despite your claim of a “true and objective definition” of a cult, you still have “yet to see a definition that does not have the characteristics just mentioned”!
Of the 32 “true marks” you detail, there are only 10 which can be considered characteristic of the cults. These 10 are: (1) Emphasis on Externals; (2) Mind Control; (3) Censorship of External Teachings; (4) Ashamed of Jesus Christ; (5) Books Equally Esteemed with the Bible; (6) Lack of Reason & Practicality; (7) Denying the Divinity of Jesus Christ; (8) Claiming to be Jesus Christ Himself; (9) Persons Worshiped, Revered, and Prayed To; and (10) Who Persecutes Whom? Not all cults will exhibit all of these characteristics, and some of them belong to the sociological-behavioral definition, not the theological one. I will not go into detail on each of these.
To sum up: You claim to give a “true and objective definition” of the word “cult,” but you fail miserably. The definition offered is severely colored by your theological position. Few of the “true marks” you list and discuss actually have anything to do with a group being a “cult.” A “cult of Christianity” is determined by a theological definition, which focuses on the doctrines of the group, not whether they take care of the earth or follow dietary instructions God gave the Jews. It is primarily what they believe and teach about God, Jesus Christ, and sin and salvation.
In my study of the cults over the last 40-plus years, I have found that it is the cults who are the persecutors. The tone of your emails to me has only served to strengthen that observation.
May God have mercy on your souls.
For the Truth,
Michael
From: Victor Hafichuk [mailto:victor@thepathoftruth.com]
Sent: December-25-13 12:17 PM
To: ‘Michael Ediger’
Cc: ‘Paul Cohen’
Subject: RE: Response to article
Michael, have you red Victor Hafichuk’s Testimony, Victor’s First Three Dreams from the Lord and Paul Cohen’s Testimony?
If you haven’t, do read them and tell us what you see. Better still, tell us what the Lord makes known to you.
\/
From: Michael Ediger [mailto:the70sproject@yahoo.com]
Sent: December-25-13 2:19 PM
To: Victor Hafichuk
Subject: RE: Response to article
I don’t put any stock in either your testimonies or the “dreams from the Lord.” They are nothing more than the typical cultist drivel. I’m done with you until you answer my response to your article.
From: Michael Ediger
To: renewal@mindspring.com
Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2014 1:53 PM
Subject: Fw: RE: Response to article
Buff –
Here is the email exchange between myself and the Path of Truth guys. Needless to say, they have refused to answer my critique of their “True Marks of a Cult” article! This is par for the course when dealing with cultists – when you have them over a barrel, and show them the truth about things, they shut up! Should they correspond further, I will forward those exchanges to you.
For the Truth,
Michael
From: Buff Scott, Jr. [mailto:renewal@mindspring.com]
Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2014 3:43 PM
To: Michael Ediger
Cc: 14 – Victor Hafichuk; 14 – Paul Cohen
Subject: Re: RE: Response to article
Ahhhh, very good responses, my brother. Well said and well written. They are so solidly entranced in their cultist agenda, a herd of elephants couldn’t move them. Satan has them locked in and he’s not going to open the doors! Nor do they want out.
God bless,
Buff
From: Paul Cohen [mailto:paul@thepathoftruth.com]
Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2014 5:23 PM
To: the70sproject@yahoo.com
Cc: ‘Victor Hafichuk’
Subject: The True Marks of a Cult
Michael, Paul here.
You quote Alan Gomes:
“A cult of Christianity is a group of people, which claiming to be Christian, embraces a particular doctrinal system taught by an individual leader, group of leaders, or organization, which (system) denies (either explicitly or implicitly) one or more of the central doctrines of the Christian faith as taught in the sixty-six books of the Bible.”
This definition is worthless, because it invites the user to exercise his opinion rather than applying objective parameters that are sure and invariable.
For example, what are those “central” doctrines to which Gomes refers? According to whose definition, which church of men? It’s exactly this kind of presumptuous and subjective labelling of cults that we answer in the second part of The True Marks of a Cult, which you’ve ignored.
So after boasting of having a sure fire method of assessing cults, you’ve presented us with someone else’s impotent definition. How lame is that?
As for your critique, you say of the Lord’s definition of a cult:
“You claim that you have defined ‘cult’ according to Christ and/or the Bible. This is impossible to do, because no such definition exists within the pages of Holy Writ.”
The Holy Writ is one continuous exposition of what’s right before God, which receiving and applying by faith, automatically exposes what is wrong. But to the blind and deaf like yourself, who talk and don’t walk, you contradict yourselves by claiming to see while declaring you can’t see what is right before your eyes. To such the Lord said:
“If you were blind, you would have no sin. But now you say, We see. Therefore your sin remains” (John 9:41 MKJV).
You complain that we’re “spiritualizing” the mark and number of the beast by saying it represents the disposition of sinful man who trusts in the arm of flesh rather than in God. You say, “There is absolutely no justification for such an interpretation, nor does the text of Revelation even hint as such a spiritualization.”
The book is called “Revelation,” yet you offer no revelation whatsoever, only tired carnal notions that don’t explain how all men who worship the beast have received his mark in their right hands and foreheads.
But the Lord opens the revelation to those whom He has given the ears to hear.
Revelation 22:18-20 MKJV
(18) For I testify together to everyone who hears the Words of the prophecy of this Book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add on him the plagues that have been written in this Book.
(19) And if anyone takes away from the Words of the Book of this prophecy, God will take away his part out of the Book of Life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which have been written in this Book.
(20) He who testifies these things says, Yes, I am coming quickly, Amen. Yes, come, Lord Jesus.
Those who add to the Words of God receive the plagues described by John, which means they have the mark of the beast.
“And a third angel followed them, saying with a great voice, If anyone worships the beast and its image, and receives a mark in his forehead or in his hand, he also will drink of the wine of the anger of God, having been mixed undiluted in the cup of His wrath. And he will be tormented by fire and brimstone before the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever. And they have no rest day or night, those who worship the beast and its image, and whoever receives the mark of its name” (Revelation 14:9-11 MKJV).
So what’s your explanation after 40+ years of studying cults? You don’t have one that works, because you and your studies are carnal. You put the mark of the beast into the future, where it doesn’t apply to you. Yet it does apply to you, because you’ve added to God’s Words and have taken away from them, a hallmark of all worshippers of the beast.
Consistent with the theme of your letter, trusting in your own subjective interpretations (the arm of flesh) – you condemn us solely by your opinion:
“The things you noted in your first paragraph under, ‘Victor defines a cult . . .’ applies to your own definition. It is ‘prejudiced, partisan, bigoted, contradictory, ignorant, erroneous, justifiably debatable, and therefore potentially harmful to the innocent.’ Further, as you state, you are just as ‘guilty of slander, defamation of character, potential harm to saints of God, and blasphemy against God’ as you believe others to be. Despite your claim of a ‘true and objective definition’ of a cult, you still have ‘yet to see a definition that does not have the characteristics just mentioned’!
Spoken like a pope ex cathedra, without a shred of evidence backing what you say except the presumption of an authority that doesn’t exist. This brings us full circle to your conclusion, a giant zero filled with hot air:
“A ‘cult of Christianity’ is determined by a theological definition, which focuses on the doctrines of the group, not whether they take care of the earth or follow dietary instructions God gave the Jews. It is primarily what they believe and teach about God, Jesus Christ, and sin and salvation.”
That’s precisely how men determine cults, according to their own privately determined doctrines, whereas Jesus says you will know the false by what they do (as pointed out in the second part of our paper, which you conveniently ignored – not that you didn’t ignore this in the part you’ve commented on, giving nothing of substance there either).
“Then Jesus spoke to the crowd and to His disciples, saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. Therefore whatever they tell you to observe, observe and do. But do not do according to their works; for they say, and do not do” (Matthew 23:1-3 MKJV).
Matthew 7:15-21 MKJV
(15) Beware of false prophets who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
(16) You shall know them by their fruits [not just by their doctrines]. Do men gather grapes from thorns, or figs from thistles?
(17) Even so every good tree brings forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree brings forth evil fruit.
(18) A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruits, nor can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
(19) Every tree that does not bring forth good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.(20) Therefore by their fruits you shall know them.
(21) Not everyone who says to Me, Lord! Lord! shall enter the Kingdom of Heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in Heaven.
You focus exclusively on doctrine because that’s all you have – you don’t have the Lord and aren’t producing His righteous fruits. That makes you a tare, promising substance but having none, a cloud without water, and the Lord has come to judge you, as Jude and Enoch tell us:
Jude 1:4-19 EMTV
(4) For certain men have crept in unawares, who long ago were marked out for this condemnation, ungodly men, changing the grace of our God into licentiousness and denying the only Master God and our Lord Jesus Christ.
(5) But I want to remind you, though you once knew this, that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe.
(6) And the angels who did not keep their own domain, but rather having left their own habitation, He has kept with everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day;
(7) as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these, having given themselves over to fornication and having gone after other flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
(8) Likewise indeed even these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, reject authority, and blaspheme glories.
(9) Yet Michael the archangel, when taking issue with the devil, was arguing about the body of Moses, dared not to bring a railing accusation, but said, “The Lord rebuke you!”(10) But these speak blasphemously of those things which they do not know; but what they do know naturally, like unreasoning animals, they are destroyed by these things.
(11) Woe to them! For they have gone in the way of Cain, and in the error of Balaam they have rushed for profit, and have perished in the rebellion of Korah.
(12) These are stains in your love feasts, while they feast with you without fear, caring for themselves, they are waterless clouds being carried along by winds; late autumn trees unfruitful, twice having died, having been uprooted,
(13) raging waves on the sea, casting up the foam of their own shame; wandering stars for whom the darkness of the netherworld has been reserved forever.
(14) Now Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men, saying, “Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of His saints,
(15) to execute judgment against all, and to convict all the ungodly among them about all their ungodly deeds which they have committed impiously, and about all the harsh words which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him.”
(16) These are murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaks puffed up words, flattering people to gain advantage.
(17) But you, beloved, remember the words which were spoken beforehand by the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ,
(18) how they told you that in the last time there would be mockers, walking according to their own ungodly lusts.
(19) These are those who cause divisions, worldly, not having the Spirit.
That’s you, Michael, an anti-Christ accuser of the brethren. We aren’t persecuting you (or anyone else), just speaking the truth you can’t refute. You’re the persecutor who spews trashy opinions and lies. You can’t help doing so – your beastly nature rules over you and must disparage and denounce whoever comes against your righteousness.
“I just wanted to take a moment to email you and say what a presumptuous ass you are. I expected no less from someone who thinks he has a ‘hot line’ to God and knows everything about everything. Typical of all cult leaders. You condemn me and say that I have never been a child of God. Who died and made you the one to make such a judgment? Have you forgotten Jesus’ words: ‘Do not judge so that you will not be judged. For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and [a]by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you.’ (Matt. 7:1-2). In other words, you will be judged by God by the very same standards you have judged me and countless other true Christians. Are you comfortable with that? I hope not!”
The Lord Jesus Christ died, and rose again from the dead, giving us the sight to make the righteous judgments we have of you. You truly know nothing at all; you don’t believe a word of the Bible. Victor has been judged in the way he judges you. Judgment begins at the house of God, and as His sons, God has judged us after cleansing us of our sins, purging us of the very things we see in you.
Therefore, having the beams removed from our eyes and seated with Christ in Heaven, we can plainly see your error and sin, which we address for goodness and not for evil’s sake. This justified judgment the Lord calls “righteous judgment.” You see it as evil because you choose to remain in your sin, independent from God.
You chafe and sputter at being exposed, the impotent gestures of a doomed man, “the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, setting himself forth, that he is God” (2 Thessalonians 2:3-4 MKJV).
So of course it’s no big deal to you if those who profess Christ destroy the earth. As a son of Satan and anti-Christ, destruction comes naturally to you. As long as people believe in the trinity (The Gospel According to Trinitarians) and your other pet doctrines, they can trash themselves and the world. God’s a liar after all and doesn’t really destroy those who destroy the earth, does He?
Of course it’s no big deal to you what you eat – physical things don’t matter after Jesus died and was raised from the dead, right? Non-discriminatory consumption is your way in both physical and spiritual things, explaining your unclean doctrines and ways.
It’s impossible for you to keep things straight with your confusing three-in-one and one-in-three doctrine. We answered the notion there are “three gods in one” in the diabolical doctrine I sent you (along with our other writings), which now you’ve changed to “one god in three gods.” Isn’t that different? Doesn’t that make it a “quadrinity”? Or maybe both do? Apparently one can’t keep track of the trinity, so incomprehensible and confounding a concept it is, which you’re trying to force down people’s throats.
Wicked man! You condemn those who believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and have received His Spirit because they don’t bow down to your shifty trinity doctrine? You arrogant, “wise and prudent” bastard!
Matt Slick has a short article (http://carm.org/christianity/christian-doctrine/trinity-really-teaching-there-are-three-gods) in which he basically presents and defends your argument for the trinity by saying (my emphasis added):
“Theologians admit that the word ‘person’ is not the perfect word to use because it carries with it the idea of individuals who are different beings. This is what we are familiar with and this is one of the problems with using the term ‘person’ when describing the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. But this is what we must use when we see that when the Bible speaks of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, each are called God, each speak, and each have a will. They exhibit attributes of personhood. In describing what we observe, we are forced to use words that we are familiar with. ‘Person’ is just such a word. But it does not necessitate here that each person is an individual being.”
The members of the trinity are persons, but they aren’t persons. They each have a will and separate voice, but they are each the One and Only Unvarying and Unchanging God Who alone speaks to us. No wonder his name is “Slick,” because this is quite the slick trick!
You write:
“It [the Bible] clearly teaches there is but one God; and all three – Father, Son, and Holy Spirit – are called ‘God’ – thus, the doctrine of the Trinity is the only satisfactory explanation for the biblical teaching. No, we don’t fully understand or comprehend it – are you telling me that you, a mere man, can fully understand and comprehend the infinite God? Don’t be so bold as to claim you can! Only a fool would make such a claim. For FINITE MAN can never fully comprehend or understand the INFINITE GOD! Does one have to fully understand or comprehend everything the Scriptures teach in order to be a Christian? Hardly!”
If you admit you can’t comprehend God, then why are you so adamant that your explanation of Him (or “them,” as you insist) is not only right, but unless others swallow it, they are heretics? We agree that you aren’t able to fully comprehend or understand God, but we don’t agree that we aren’t, since He lives in us by His Spirit:
1 Corinthians 2:12-16 MKJV
(12) But we have not received the spirit of the world, but the Spirit from God, so that we might know the things that are freely given to us by God.
(13) These things we also speak, not in words which man’s wisdom teaches, but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
(14) But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.(15) But he who is spiritual judges all things, yet he himself is judged by no one.
(16) For who has known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct Him? But we have the mind of Christ.
We are unworthy but very grateful recipients of the fulfillment of Paul’s prayer:
Ephesians 3:14-19 MKJV
(14) For this cause I bow my knees to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,
(15) of Whom the whole family in Heaven and earth is named,
(16) that He would grant you, according to the riches of His glory, to be strengthened with might by His Spirit in the inner man;
(17) that Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith; that you, being rooted and grounded in love,
(18) may be able to comprehend with all saints what is the breadth and length and depth and height,
(19) and to know the love of Christ which passes knowledge, that you might be filled with all the fullness of God.
Not being filled with all the fullness of God yourself, it’s natural that you think it impossible for anyone else to have His mind and to know Him as He is in truth. And the reason you don’t know Him isn’t because you haven’t given it enough thought – it’s because you don’t keep His commandments:
1 John 2:3-5 MKJV
(3) And by this we know that we have known Him, if we keep His commandments.
(4) He who says, I have known Him, and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
(5) But whoever keeps His Word, truly in this one the love of God is perfected. By this we know that we are in Him.
“May God have mercy on your souls.”
He has, Michael, but you have not. Like John Calvin, you hate His brothers and are their murderer (The Fruit of Cain Multiplied: The Murderer John Calvin). That’s the way it is and will remain, until the judgment we’ve spoken of you has been completed.
Paul
From: Michael Ediger
To: renewal@mindspring.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2014 5:51 PM
Subject: Fw: The True Marks of a Cult
Buff – –
Surprisingly, I received another response from the Path of Truth guys. Typical of cultists who have nothing better to do than bash true Christians, while at the same time claiming to be the only true followers of God. I won’t be replying to this latest garbage. They quote from the Scriptures – or should I say they mis-quote – pulling things out of context and twisting it to suit themselves – and as I believe Peter said, twisting it “to their own destruction.”
Seems they can’t even take a compliment – as I did compliment them on their basic definition of “cult” – which, despite their bashing of Gomes’ definition, mirrors almost exactly the idea of Gomes’ offering!
All we can do is pray for these mis-guided souls.
Enjoy this (hopefully) last installment of insults & name-calling.
And thanks for your words of encouragement!
Michael
From: Buff Scott, Jr. [mailto:renewal@mindspring.com]
Sent: January-07-14 7:21 PM
To: Michael Ediger
Cc: 14 – Paul Cohen; 14 – Victor Hafichuk
Subject: Re: The True Marks of a Cult
Michael:
You hit the nail on the head. These cultists are so indoctrinated and swashed in their own cultist mire they cannot see beyond the veil of their own self-deceiving sectarian agenda. How dare that they compliment anyone for anything until he/she is aligned with their divisive teachings.
The sad thing is that they have deceived themselves so long they actually believe they are God’s only chosen ones who have been specially selected to convert the world. So how can they agree with anyone, for they have reached a state of perfection! After all, God communicates with them directly, so they cannot be wrong. God help them.
Buff
From: Paul Cohen [mailto:paul@thepathoftruth.com]
Sent: Saturday, January 11, 2014 11:21 AM
To: the70sproject@yahoo.com; renewal@mindspring.com
Cc: ‘Victor Hafichuk’
Subject: Re: The True Marks of a Cult
Here’s Michael – before receiving a reply to his critique:
Buff –
Here is the email exchange between myself and the Path of Truth guys. Needless to say, they have refused to answer my critique of their “True Marks of a Cult” article! This is par for the course when dealing with cultists – when you have them over a barrel, and show them the truth about things, they shut up!
Here’s Michael – after receiving the reply to his critique the same afternoon:
I won’t be replying to this latest garbage.
And now, let’s hear how Michael’s full response to his disgruntled compatriot sounds when we put his words in a servant of God’s mouth (the apostle Peter), reporting to his fellow apostle (John). Is this how men of God speak and behave? Is this the victory of the Lord Jesus Christ?
John – –
Surprisingly, I received another response from the Path of Truth guys. Typical of cultists who have nothing better to do than bash true Christians, while at the same time claiming to be the only true followers of God. I won’t be replying to this latest garbage. They quote from the Scriptures – or should I say they mis-quote – pulling things out of context and twisting it to suit themselves – and as I once wrote in one of my epistles, twisting it “to their own destruction.”
Seems they can’t even take a compliment – as I did compliment them on their basic definition of “cult” – which, despite their bashing of Gomes’ definition, mirrors almost exactly the idea of Gomes’ offering!
All we can do is pray for these mis-guided souls.
Enjoy this (hopefully) last installment of insults & name-calling.
And thanks for your words of encouragement!
Peter
From: Michael Ediger
To: Victor Hafichuk
Sent: June, 2019
“Victor – I remember corresponding with you several years ago regarding the article on cults. So I’m not new to your site, your group, or your teaching. One quick question, which I’m sure you’ll answer with uncalled-for length. You say that a false teacher is one “who presume[s] to teach in their own authority . . . often in the name of the Lord, when he has not sent them. . . .” What proof do you offer that shows that God has indeed called you to preach His message?”
On Friday, June 14, 2019, 11:42:22 PM UTC, <victor@thepathoftruth.com> wrote:
Michael E again. Satan, give it up. As Jesus said:
“A wicked and adulterous generation seeks after a sign. And there shall no sign be given to it, except the sign of the prophet Jonah.” “And He left them and went away” (Matthew 16:4 MKJV).
Also, what proof do you have of authority and understanding to question me? No proof will satisfy my enemies and my friends don’t need proof.
Is that long enough for you, devil?
From: Michael Ediger <the70sproject@yahoo.com>
Sent: June-15-19 7:29 AM
To: victor@thepathoftruth.com
Subject: Re: The Path of Truth
Victor –
Just as I thought. You have no proof to offer. Just another self-deluded MAN who THINKS he is called of God. You speak a great mixture of truth and lies – but mostly lies. As Jesus told the Devil, “Get thee behind Me, Satan!”
God called me to the ministry at the young age of 9 years old. Since then, I have spent years in study of His Word. I have done this on my own, and with the guidance of numerous Godly men, steeped in knowledge of the Scriptures. Each one has said, “Don’t take my word for it – do your own study” – advice I have taken seriously all this time. Furthermore, God has given me the gift of Discernment, whereby I am quite sure you’re nothing but a bitter old man with nothing better to do than belittle the true servants of God, tearing them down to try and make yourself look like you have all the answers. NO ONE has all the answers – except God.
Give it up, Victor – only those who are misled by Satan give you any hearing or credence. Those who follow the true God and His Son Jesus Christ and are led by the Holy Spirit know you’re of the Devil!
Michael E.
From: Victor Hafichuk <victor@thepathoftruth.com>
Sent: June-15-19 11:45 AM
To: ‘Michael Ediger’ <the70sproject@yahoo.com>
Cc: ‘Ronnie Tanner’ <rtanner22@gmail.com>
Subject: RE: The Path of Truth
The Lord Jesus Christ rebuke you, Satan.
Father, I thank You for dealing decisively with my enemies, even as promised according to Your Word, and which You have fulfilled many times over the years, even unto their death, “No weapon that is formed against you shall prosper.” I Bless and Praise and thank You, Lord Jesus! Do what You will and must with this devil.
\/