RESPONSE  TO  SLANDER

 

 

Recently myself and other prominent Messianic Leaders have come under attack.  These attacks have taken the form of lies, slander and Lashon HaRa. These attacks originate from two vicious women who spend most of their time attacking the leaders of Messianic Judaism. Other fine men who have been targeted and attacked by these two women are: David Hargis; Avi ben Mordechai; Michael Rood; Moshe Konicowski; Michael Boaz (FFOZ); Michael Detwiler and Ralph Messer. And the "witch hunt" list just keeps expanding. (I do not always agree with everything these men teach, but they are fine men, undeserving of such slanderous attacks).

 

The first of these two women is Kathryn Kern. Kathryn is a woman who initially brought her accusations against me in the year 2000. At that time she insisted that the International Nazarene Beit Din (of which I served as Rosh Beit Din) investigate her charges against me (this was her own choice). An independent committee was formed to investigate the matter and the committee exonerated me of all of her accusations. Then Kathryn asked an independent Hebraic-Roots Torah ministry called Gaftedin2Torah to judge the matter. This was a third party and neither of us knew the judges prior to that time. Graftedin2Torah ALSO exonerated me of all of Kathryn's charges and directed her to stop slandering me by Sukkot of that year. The following are excerts from their ruling:

 

We find James Trimm's use of the pseudonym of Rabbi Yosef

not inappropriate on the Mormon forums within James Trimm's

frame of reference. ....

 

There is no evidence that would suggest that James Trimm

used his earned doctorate in any matter intended to deceive; i.e.;

apply for a position at a State-supported institution claiming that

he had credentials that they recognized as accredited.

 

In our opinion, Kathryn has committed Lashon hara against

James Trimm and owes restitution. …

 

Kathryn's own webpages show the lie in her allegation that his Bet din

made no investigation of the charges.  She owes restitution to James

Trimm and his Bet-Din....

 

We are... impressed…, with those witness who have counseled with her

advising her that her website and continued emailings to the BODY

of Messianic believers is Lashon hara.

 

Jo herself has seen Kathryn commit lashon Hara against James Trimm

on the IsraeLight forum. ...

 

She needs to recognize that James Trimm has solid legal grounds to bring

a suit for (1) Defamation of character as well as (2) slander and liable against

her and that the courts would probably award him punitative damages.  In our

opinion, Kathryn needs to make restitution and thanksgiving to James Trimm.

 

Because this is the season of introspection and restitution and repentance,

we will allow Kathryn fellowship on our forums until after the HOLY DAYS are

over.  However, if she has not attempted to restore James Trimm and the

members of his Bet-Din and has not taken down her slanderous website

immediately after or before Sukkot, she will be disfellowshipped from our forums

and we will mention her name no more.

 

 

Kathryn refused to comply and was disfellowshipped for engaging in slander. She has since expanded the scope of her attacks and is now also attacking David Hargis; Michael Boaz (FFOZ); Michael Detwiler and Ralph Messer.

 

We are not certain of Kathryn's motives except to say that the attacks from her began shortly after she strongly opposed our 1999 article exposing the anti-Semitic book "Christianity Unmasqued". This book openly teaches that today's "Jews" are not true Jews but are the literal seed of Satan; misquotes the Talmud out of context to "prove" that the Talmud advocates Sodomizing young children; that the Jews are Christ-Killers and that a world Jewish conspiracy controls the media and economy.  The expose can be viewed at:

 

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Chazak-VEmatz/message/19

 

The author of the book had been the official representative of the ISR in the USA but in the wake of the publication of this highly anti-semitic book they ended this relationship with him and issued a statement saying in part:

 

The ISR wishes to issue the following statement regarding

the recent rebuttal on the Internet regarding the book

"Christianity Unmasqued", by Dan Israel / Chaput,

and the involvement of Dan Chaput with the ISR. …

 

With the recent publication of the above book by Dan Chaput, and his

involvement in the distribution of our publications, we feel that we can no

longer allow any individual to compromise our mission due to their own

beliefs, publications or doctrines. For this reason we decided to divorce

the distribution of our publications from all individuals in an official

capacity. …

 

With regards to Dan Chaput’s recent book, we felt compelled to issue the

following statement in respect to his controversial Chapter 12.

 

We, in our belief and conduct, are opposed to racism in all its forms, or

any intimation that salvation is determined genetically or genealogically.

 

We wish to state that we are unequivocally opposed to anti-Semitism and /

or anti-Jewishness; and for the purpose of this statement the term Jew /

Jewish shall be understood to include:

 

The tribe of Judah / Yehudah

The House of Judah / Yehudah

“He who calls himself a Jew, is Jewish”,  as stated by David ben Gurion

 

(Complete statement at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Chazak-VEmatz/message/18 )

 

Yet Kathryn defended the book against our expose to the very end insisting that these teachings were not anti-Semitic.

 

On 8/17/99 at 9:25 PM She posted on the Eliyah Forum (in response to my expose):

 

I would like to post a rebuttal to James Trimm's slanderous accusations,

against Pete Vacca and Dan Chaput….

 

Concerning Dan, and the book Christianity Unmasked, again,

Dan was not approached by James to clarify or question anything.

They also have not met or spoken to each other.

            Chapter 12 of this book, is about Judeo-Christianity. It states that the

term is an oxymoron. Christianity is against Judaism, therefore

you cannot use that term for believers of Yahuweh/Yhwhists.

It is incongruous. Dan stated, not knowing if James read the whole

book, that James took the parts that he might have read, out of context.

The book is about Christianity, not Judaism. Chapter 12 also,

defines Semetic. This involvs ALL the descendants of SHEM.

That includes Aram, Ashshur, Persia, and since Abraham was Semetic,

then Ishmael, would also be Semetic. THe term anti-semetic does not

mean against Jews alone.  Both of these men stated that James did not

contact them to talk with them before he publicly spread his slander.

Both stated that he never came to them, as a brother in Yahuweh,

about this matter. He went against Torah and slandered them.

 

            Both of these men are Torah observant. They follow True Torah.

They walk in the ways of Yahuweh. They do make a distinction

between that which is Torah of Yahuweh and that which is Talmud

and Tradition of Judaism. They follow what is in Scripture. This does

not make them anti-semetic; anti-mens traditions, maybe, but not

anti-semetic.   What I would like to know James, is why, having

come from a unity conference, you sought to divide the Yhwhistic

community in this fashion, by slandering men you have not even

spoken to, on these matters?

 

And on 8/25/99 at 3:18 PM she posted to the same forum:

 

James you left out the quote by Jew concerning themselves.

             "Consider the quote from a Jewish author, 'You make much

noise and fury about the undue Jewish influence in your theaters

and movie palaces. Very good; granted your complaint is well-founded.

But what is that compared to our staggering influence in your churches,

your schools, your laws, and your governments, and the very thoughts

you think everyday?' This statement was made in 1928 by Marcus Eli

Ravage in Century Magazine, Feb. 1928, p. 347."

 

The second of these women is Vickie Dillen. Vickie Dillen is an enemy of the Hebraic Roots Movement in general. Ms. Dillen has a reputation for lying and slandering other ministries with which she disagrees. In fact another anti-Hebraic-Roots Christian "Discernment" ministry hosts the "lies and distortions of Vicky Dillen" Website at: http://www.banner.org.uk/sum_heb.html Vickie Dillen even misquotes the Talmud out of context in an effort to "prove" that the Talmud advocates the sodomizing of young Children (just as does the book which Kathryn Kern insisted was not really anti-Semitic). Vickie has also launched attacks against: David Hargis; Avi ben Mordechai; Michael Rood and Moshe Konicowski.

 

Unfortunately, we live in a world in which a person of good reputation can be attacked by persons of ill repute, who have established a reputation for slander and lies, and people will actually take these attacks seriously.

 

Moreover anti-missionaries, persons who disagree with my textual-origins theories and others opposing various of my teaching have found opportunity in repeating the personal attacks and slander from these unscrupulous persons and joining in chorus with them in order to promote their own agendas. These persons would rather resort to personal attacks than seriously debate the apologetic, textual or theological issues on their own merits.

 

Answering these false accusers is like fighting the pagan mythical hydra. For every head one cuts off three more appear. For every false accusation we answer and dispel these slanderers invent several more.

 

To run down a few of the false accusations:

 

 

BOOK OF MORMON SLANDER

 

I absolutely do NOT hold a belief that the Book of Mormon is true.

 

The BoM quotes and paraphrases many phrases, verses, concepts and even whole chapters from the Bible.  In fact as much as half or more of the BoM actually closely parallels passages in the Bible.

 

As a result there is much Biblical truth in the BoM.  These are Biblical truths that first appeared in the Bible.

 

Now regardless of whether or not the BoM is true or not there is none-the-less a great deal of truth in the BoM.

 

If one takes a Hebraic-Roots approach to these Biblical truths that appear in the BoM one is able teach these truths to Mormons from a "Jewish Perspective" and thus deal with what could be called "Jewishness" in/of the BoM.  This "Jewishness" is simply the result of applying a Hebraic-Roots approach and a Jewish perspective to Biblical truths that appear in the BoM.  These Biblical truths appear because the BoM quotes and paraphrases many phrases, verses, concepts and even whole chapters from the Bible.

 

Now because of the fact that the BoM contains Biblical truth, it can be very useful in reaching Mormons with these Biblical truths.  And by applying a Jewish/Hebraic-roots perspective on these Biblical truths one can effectively reach Mormons with both Torah and Messiah.

 

Christian ministries have used this type of approach for years in attempting to reach Mormons with Orthodox Christianity.  One tract published by Personal Freedom Outreach says:

 

        Anyone visited by a Mormon Missionary has heard

        the Elder's testimony concerning the Book of Mormon:

        That he knows this book is the Word of God

        and that the founder of the Mormon Church,

        Joseph Smith, Jr., translated it by the gift and power of God.

        Further, the prospect is encouraged sincerely

        to study the Book of Mormon and "The divine truths

        it contains."

 

        The Book of Mormon indeed does contain a number of

        "divine truths", first set forth in the Bible,...

 

        [the author then lists six of these]

 

        Much of the major theology set forth in the Book of Mormon

        is indeed in harmony with orthodox Christianity.

        However, many who are visited by the LDS Missionaries

        are unaware that the present theology of the Mormon Church

        is very different from their own Book of Mormon. ...

        Mormon theology is not contained in,

        but rather contradicted by the Book of Mormon....

 

        The presence of "Divine Truths" within the Book of Mormon

        is merely a result of Joseph Smith, Jr. incorporating

        much of the Bible into his work. (see 'The use of the Bible

        in the Book of Mormon by H. Michael Marquardt).

        - DIVINE TRUTHS IN THE BOOK OF MORMON

        http://www.associate.com/ministry_files/The_Reading_Room/False_Teaching_n_Teachers_1/Divine_Truths_In_The_Book_Of_Mo.shtml

 

 

There are a number of Christian tracts and ministries that have taken this same approach to disprove Mormon theology and teach Orthodox Christian theology to Mormons using the divine truths in their Book of Mormon.

 

For example the tract THOSE PLAIN AND PRECIOUS THINGS from Saints Alive:

http://www.saintsalive.com/mormonism/plainandprecious.htm

 

and an article called:  Joseph Smith vs. the Book of Mormon By Gary F. Zeolla

 http://www.dtl.org/cults/article/smith.htm

 

 

There is another I have which is also called  Joseph Smith vs. the Book of Mormon but was authored by Bill McKeever and published by Mormonism Research Ministry; Box 20705; El Cajon, CA 92021-0955 but I have not found it on the net.

 

Some years ago I adapted this same approach to Messianic/Nazarene Judaism.  By taking a Hebraic-Roots Jewish approach to these "divine truths" in the Book of Mormon I could actually reach Mormons with real Torah based divine truth USING THEIR OWN BOOK!

 

This approach becomes very important because  Mormons put more stock in the Book of Mormon than in the Bible.  As a Saints Alive tract correctly states:

 

        "I (Joseph Smith) told the Brethren that

        the Book of Mormon was the most correct

        of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion,

        and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts,

        than by any other book."

        (History of the Church, Volume 4, Page 461)

 

        It is the LDS concept that the Bible is the Word of God

        as far as it is translated correctly, that is,

        what is left of the Bible after many Plain and Precious

        Things were removed by the great and abominable church.

        The Mormon also "knows" that the Book of Mormon

        is the Word of God. It did not have many

        Plain and Precious Things removed. It did not

        suffer at the hands of many translations.

        (Those Plain and Precious Things tract- Saints Alive)

 

This tract goes on to show that the many unique Mormon doctrines do NOT appear in the Book of Mormon which actually teaches against them.  The tract continues further down:

 

        1 Nephi 13:26-36 says that the "great and abominable church"

        (verse 26) took away from the gospel many parts and covenants

        which were Plain and Precious, in order to pervert the ways of the Lord

        and blind the eyes and harden the hearts of the people.

        The Bible was corrupted because of this (verse 28). What were

        some of those Plain and Precious Things? Are these those that

        separate Mormonism from the Christianity that grew out of the past?

        Are these not the law of eternal progression, salvation,

        baptism for the dead, the nature of God, temples, and polygamy?

        The Lord God (Elohim) promised that a day would come

        when these things will be restored (verse 32) after the Gentiles

        stumble about because of this act of the "mother of harlots"

        taking the most Plain and Precious Things of the Gospel

        of the Lamb (verse 34).   The Lamb of God (Jesus) says exactly

        how this restoration of all the Plain and Precious Things

        will come about. In verse 35 He says He will manifest Himself

        to the Seed of Nephi and they shall write many things all

        the precious things taken away by that church and even

        after they (your seed) are all gone. These things shall be

        hidden up to come forth unto the Gentiles. Verse 36 says,

        "And in them shall be written my gospel., saith the Lamb,

        and my rock (word "rock" refers to the gospel' see D&C 11:24)

        and my salvation."  Therefore, the Plain and Precious Things

        taken away by the great and abominable church must be restored

        in the Book of Mormon. This is verified by Latter-day

        revelations also:

 

        "For in them are all things written concerning

        the foundation of my church, my gospel, and my rock." (D&C 18:4)

        "And again, I command thee that thou shalt not covet

        thine own property, but impart it freely to the printing

        of the Book of Mormon, which contains the truth and

        the Word of God." (D&C 19:26) "And gave him power from on high,

        by the means which were before prepared, to translate

        the Book of Mormon; which contains a record of a fallen people,

        and the fullness of the gospel of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles

        and to the Jews also." (D&C 20:8&9) "And again, the elders,

        priests and teachers of this church shall teach the principles

        of my gospel, which are in the Bible and the Book of Mormon,

        in the which is the fullness of the gospel." (D&C 42:12)

 

        What are the things contained in the fullness of the gospel,

        the Book of Mormon, which are lost, hidden and not contained

        in the Bible?  By the Word of God, they must be in the Book

        of Mormon. Where are these teaching of Mormonism?

        The critical doctrines that separate Mormonism from

        the Christianity that was debased for the loss of "many

        Plain and Precious Things" from its scriptures by the

        "great and abominable church" are listed here:

 

        [the author then lists several unique Mormon doctrines]

 

        The Book of Mormon is the "Stick of Joseph."

        Either these doctrines must be found in the Book of Mormon

        or Mormonism is subject to the words of Jesus in

        His judgement of 3 Nephi 27:11; Alma 13:20; 2 Nephi 28:15;

        2 Nephi 28:16, 21-24, 25.

 

        Not only can these things not be found in the Book of Mormon,

        but the doctrine of the Book of Mormon is ABSOLUTELY OPPOSED

        TO SOME OF THESE "LDS ONLY" DOCTRINES! ...

 

The Author goes on to list several examples.  Note also that this Christian author [Saints Alive founder Ed Decker?] takes a "for arguments sake" type approach.  (In fact in this and many similar Christian writings the authors, in taking this approach say many things that could be quoted out of context so as to imply that they believe the BoM is true.)

 

Now many years ago I did in fact go onto Mormon and Islamic discussion groups under pseudonyms and argued against Mormonism and Islam respectively by using their own books in a “for arguments sake” type approach. 

 

The slanderers have taken advantage of this fact to falsely imply that I secretly believe the Book of Mormon to be true.

 

My true views of the Book of Mormon may be seen in the articles at the links below:

 

A NAZARENE LOOKS AT THE BOOK OF MORMON:

THE ANTI-NOMIAN BOOK OF MORMON

By James Trimm

http://www.yourarmstoisrael.org/Articles_new/guest/?page=NAZARENE_LOOKS_MORMON

 

A NAZARENE LOOKS AT THE BOOK OF MORMON:

THE TEST OF TORAH

By James Trimm

http://www.yourarmstoisrael.org/Articles_new/guest/?page=NAZARENE_LOOKS_MORMON_2

 

A NAZARENE LOOKS AT THE BOOK OF MORMON:

PAY NO ATTENTION TO THE MAN BEHIND THE CURTAIN

By James Trimm

http://www.yourarmstoisrael.org/Articles_new/guest/?page=NAZARENE_LOOKS_MORMON3

 

 

 

“FALSE DOCTORATE” SLANDER

 

I have been accused by slanderers of purchasing my doctorate from a diploma mill.  This is totally false.  I earned my degree from St. John Chrysostom Theological Seminary.  Although this was a non-accredited seminary, it is not unusual for Seminaries not to be accredited.  

 

My diploma may be viewed at:

http://trimmfamily.com/James_doctoratediploma_revised

 

And my transcript may be viewed at:

http://trimmfamily.com/doctoratetranscript.jpg

 

 

St. John Chrysostom Theological Seminary

 

The following is quoted from the 1991 Seminary Bulletin:


In 1973 , Stephen M. Corradi, Ph.D., Exarch in North America for the Patriarch of Caracas, authorized the establishment of Saint Charles College in memory of Dom Carlos Duarte Costa, founder of the Catholic Apostolic Church in Brazil (ICAB).  Consecrated January 23, 1949 by Dom Luis Fernando Castillo Mendez, Archbishop Corradi settled in Albuquerque, New Mexico.  Saint Charles College was founded with the purpose of preparing students for the priesthood in the North American branch of the ICAB.  Consecrated January 23, 1949 by Dom Luis Fernando Castillo Mendez, Archbishop Corradi settled in Albuquerque, New Mexico.

 

Archbishop Corradi appointed one of his priests, Father Francis Jerome Joachim to be in charge of the seminary which was located 47 miles south of Albuquerque at Veguita, New Mexico.  During the ensuing five years, five men were prepared and raised to the priesthood.

 

In 1977, having succeeded Archbishop Corradi in 1974, Archbishop Joachim determined to keep the Seminary focus on the task of preparation for Holy Orders.

 

The Seminary was formally incorporated in California in 1983 as Saint John Chrysostom Theological Seminary, ten years after its canonical erection as Saint Charles College.

 

During the summer of 1987, the Seminary Trustees determined to improve the course of study and broaden its constituency.  In 1989 Don Bryant de Cordova, Bishop of Santa Fe and Professor of Theology, completed a four year research project which enhanced the curriculum, redesigned the Seminary program and instituted an integrated approach to theological education.  The task was completed with a new emphasis in theological competence and pastoral preparation.

 

The Seminary is the Provincial Seminary of the Metropolitan Province of Santa Fe, a recognized ecclesiastical territory of the Catholic Apostolic Church in North America.

 

The Seminary ended operations in either 1995 or 1997 after its more than 20 year history.

 

Saint John Chrysostom Theological Seminary was exempted from the State of New Mexico Higher Education Regulations for degree granting and course requirements, due to its religious (to wit: church) status. New Mexico by virtue of exemption and the Religious-Nonprofit status did not disallow or disapprove of the Seminary to operate and function as a authentic ministry of the Catholic Apostolic Church in North America. New Mexico did not prohibit nor approve of theological degrees based on the separation of Church and State issue prevalent at that time.  Saint John Chrysostom Theological Seminary has never intimated or actually offered religious and theological degrees in Texas, nor solicited in Texas.  Contrary to claims by slanderers Saint John Chrysostom Theological Seminary never offered anything other than Theological degrees anywhere.

 

 

No Other Students?

 

The Slanderers have claimed that there were never any other students of the Seminary.  Although I do not know of many of them personally I have no doubt that there were MANY other students over the Seminaries twenty year plus history.  A quick search of the internet turned up two persons who mention having been students of the Seminary in their credentials posted on the web.  No doubt there are many more who do not have this fact posted in the internet.

 

Alicia Solomon, M.S.M.

( http://aliciasolomon.com/resume.htm )

 

The Most Rev. John Sebastian A. Lula, OSB

( http://www.ind-movement.org/people_le_lz.html )

 

 

My GED

 

My detractors have alleged that I never graduated from High School and that I therefore could not have earned a doctorate.  The truth is that my father died during my final year of high school.  I was very upset and “blew-off” most of my classes leaving me ½ of a credit short of what I needed to graduate.  Under the rules at that time I would have had to go back to school for an entire year in order to graduate.  My alternative was to take the G.E.D. test and get my High School equivalency diploma right away.  So on June 8th 1985 I took the G.E.D. test and passed with flying colors.  Each section of the test was also given to graduated high school seniors for comparison and each test was given a “percentile” score.  The percentile score expressed what percentage of graduating high school seniors scored below you on the test in each section.  I am pleased to say that in writing skills I did better than 62% of graduating seniors.  In Social Studies I did better than 88% of graduating seniors.  In science I did better than 86% of graduating seniors.  And in reading skills I did better than 89% of graduating seniors.  At any rate I do have a High School equivalency diploma from the State of Texas.

 

 

The Letters of Recommendation

 

As a doctoral candidate the Seminary required at least two letters of recommendation from scholars with doctorate level degrees recommending me for the degree of doctor.  The Seminary received three such letters on my behalf from:  Rabbi Herbert J. Gilner, Dr. James De Francisco and Dr. J. Phillip Arnold.

 

The Seminary also received a fourth, non-required letter of recommendation from Phillip Arnn.  Mr. Arnn had sent a letter as a cover sheet for some articles I had written for the Watchman Expositor, for which I was to receive Seminary credit.  In an additional paragraph Mr. Arnn added a short recommendation of his own.  This recommendation was never a requirement for the degree but it has gotten far more attention than the letters of recommendation that were required.

 

 

The Phil Arnn Letter

 

The Phil Arnn letter can be viewed at:

( http://trimmfamily.com/arnn_letter_revised.jpg )

 

Phil Arnn related in a statement a great many "recollections" including a "recollection" that he had NOT written any letter of recommendation for me. Phil Arnn later retracted his earlier statement saying that when shown the actual letter in question he *did* recall writing it and then he characterized his previous statement as based on "one phone conversation" he only "vaguely recall[ed]".

James,
When I was first told about the letter in question ( it was not available
on-line at the time) I did not remember ever writing a letter for you. I was
also under the impression that the letter was an endorsement of your present
theology and movement. Now that I have read the letter, it is obvious that
it is mine
and was limited to the recommendation of yourself and the work
you had done on the Branch Davidian theology articles for the Expositor.
As to the reason for your receiving the degree, our recollections differ.
But, I only vaguely recall you mentioning the degree in one phone
conversation.
The Word clearly says that a truth is established in the
mouths of two or three witnesses, not just one.
At the present time, 2003, we obviously have taken different roads as to
theology. But, as far as the two issues I have mentioned above, I hope this
sets the record straight.

Phillip Arnn,
Senior Researcher
Watchman Fellowship, Inc.

 

In a later email Phil Arnn said:

 

This is like a television crime drama. Where were you on June 3ard, 1995?

Did you have a phone conversation with one James Scott Trimm on the

morning of - - - ? What did he say to you? What did you say to him?

Frankly, I did not remember writing the letter until I saw the letter again

on James's website. I do not remember with a certainty what we said.

            ( http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Chazak-VEmatz/message/17 )

 

Phil Arnn (not to be confused with Phil Arnold) is not a good witness for the slanderers to cite because:

 

            a.  He has changed a MAJOR factor from his original version of his story.

            (i.e. He originally denied writing any letter for me and then realized he

recalled WRONGLY.)

 

b.       Having REALIZED that he had recalled a major element wrongly he was

wise enough to realize that his own recollections were (after eight years) not

dependable.  Thus HE HIMSELF stated that ALL of his recollections concerning

my degree were from ONE phone call (eight years ago) which he only "vaguely"

recalled.  So while he repeats that his recollection differs from mine he characterizes

his recollection as "vague" and admits that his recollection had been in error on

            a major point already.

 

c.       The "witness" himself says that he should not be used as a "witness"

because the scripture requires two witnesses and he is only one man with

"vague" recollections that have turned out to be inaccurate in one major point

already.

 

d.       Arnn also "recalls" me telling him that Gilner was a "Conservative Rabbi". 

Now it is easily documented that Gilner was an Orthodox Rabbi so what

POSSIBLE motive would I have had in telling Arnn he was a Conservative Rabbi? 

This is clearly an error on his part rather than mine which again calls his recollection

into question (and he himself says his recollection was "vague").

 

e.       The original purpose of Phil Arnn's letter was as a cover letter for

a copy of an issue of the Expositor in which I had written three articles

on the Branch Davidians.  The material was being sent to the Seminary

so that I would receive Seminary credit for the material.  This itself was

because it was            an earned degree not merely an honorary degree. This is

also evidenced by the transcript and the            letter from Dr. Arnold which refers

to "formal and non-formal curricula involving years of study and research".

 

These slanderers should forget using Phil Arnn as a witness... he himself has said to forget using him as a witness.  At this point I think Phil Arnn was sincerer, but I also think his recollection is WAY off after eight years (and I think he has realized that himself, so there is no shame in having only a vague, faulty recollection of a single phone conversation eight years ago).

 

Rabbi Gilner a Real Orthodox Rabbi and Linguist

 

Rabbi Gilner was an Orthodox Rabbi and linguist who wrote a letter of recommendation for my doctorate and served as a recommending advisor for my doctorate degree saying in part:

 

            James Trimm is a young man who, despite his youth, has already

            demonstrated his fine linguistic and analytic powers.  I have known

            him since I arrived in Texas more than a year and a half ago.  I have

            seen his work and listened to his translation and interpretation of

            numerous verses in the Peshitta New Testament.  Moreover, we have

            had many interesting discussions on the Aramaic portions of the NaKh.

            I find his linguistic instincts to be sound.

-           Rabbi Herbert J. Gilner, Orthodox Rabbi and linguist

 

            Complete Signed copy: http://trimmfamily.com/Rabbi_Gilner.jpg

            Gilner Prifile: http://trimmfamily.com/Gilner.html

            Gilner Newspaper piece: http://www.trimmfamily.com/gilner_newspaper.jpg

 

 

Now the slanderers have taken two courses of attack on the Gilner letter. 

 

The first has been to deny that Gilner was a real Orthodox Rabbi saying:

 

Rabbi Gilner's last address was Arlington, Texas, so that

is where I began. I called the synagogues and shuls in that location.

None knew of him but one. I simply asked for Rabbi Herbert Gilner.

The one that answered, which was a Reformed Synagogue, asked

why I needed him. They said if I needed a Rabbi for a wedding

or something, that they would rather recommend someone else,

as this guy was not reputable and they were pretty sure that he was

not even a Rabbi. They said that he did not attend at any of the

congregations that they knew of. I even called Fort Worth and surrounding

areas with the same result.

 

So I called the Rabbinical Assembly, in New York, for the conservatives.

They did not have a Rabbi Herbert Gilner on record. I called the Rabbinical Council,

in New York, for the Orthodox, and they dont (sic) have a Rabbi Herbert Gilner.

One of the Reformed Synagogues that I spoke with, accessed their database

of listed Rabbis and the Reformed dont (sic) have a Rabbi Herbert Gilner either.

 

Ms. Kern pretends that no one ever heard of a Rabbi Gilner.  However the truth is that Rabbi Gilner’s move to the Dallas/Ft. Worth area in 1994 was such a big deal it prompted a full page newspaper profile on Rabbi Gilner in the paper of record for the Fort Worth area, the Fort Worth Star-Telegram ( http://www.trimmfamily.com/gilner_newspaper.jpg ).  This profile reveals that Rabbi Gilner was a well known Orthodox Rabbi with a special expertise in Biblical Languages.  In fact the article reveals that Rabbi Gilner was involved in my very area of research:

 

            “Gilner is researching selected New Testament books,

            taking them back to the original Hebrew to pin down

            what they actually say.”

 

When Ms. Kern speaks of “a Reformed Synagogue” in “Arlington” she almost certainly spoke of Rabbi Keith Stern of Beth Shalom Congregation.  Rabbi Keith Stern (who is Reformed)  is mentioned in the 1994 Newspaper Profile on Rabbi Gilner.  When asked about Rabbi Gilner in 1994 Stern said he was unfamiliar with the Rabbinic court with which Gilner held association and that all one needed to be an ordained Rabbi is “three rabbis to say you are ordained”.  However the same newspaper profile also interviewed Rabbi Bernard Honan of Temple Emanu-El in Longview Texas.  Rabbi Honan had known Rabbi Gilner for decades and spoke of Rabbi Gilner as a “scholarly, genteel, probing man.”

 

Since Gilner died in May of 2002 some slanderers have taken advantage of that fact to accuse me of "grossly elaborating" (exaggerating?) our "relationship".

 

But lets look at the facts:

 

1.       Gilner stated in his letter that he had known me since moving to my area

a year and a half earlier.

2.       Gilner was researching the “original Hebrew” of “New Testament books”

“to pin down what they actually say”.

3.       Gilner wrote “James Trimm is a young man who, despite his youth,

has already demonstrated his fine linguistic and analytic powers. …  I have

seen his [Trimm’s] work and listened to his translation and interpretation

of numerous verses in the Peshitta New Testament. … I find his linguistic

instincts to be sound.”

 

I think these facts make it apparent that I have in no way exaggerated in calling Rabbi Gilner my old friend and mentor.

 

 

James De Francisco Letter

 

http://trimmfamily.com/defrancisco_letter.jpg

 

 

Doctor Phillip Arnold is Alive!!

 

Doctor J. Phillip Arnold served as a recommending advisor for my doctorate.  He issued a letter of recommendation, which said in part:

 

            This letter serves as a strong recommendation that Mr. James Scott Trimm

            be awarded the doctorate degree from Saint John Chrysostom Theological

            Seminary.  A doctorate degree presupposes that the recipient possesses

            a broad range of knowledge about the field as well as having command

            of a specialized area of study.  Mr. Trimm has fulfilled both these qualifications

            through formal and non-traditional curricula involving years of study and

            research in the fields of theology, biblical studies, church history, comparative

            religion and linguistics.  A doctorate degree also assumes that the recipient

            has made a significant contribution of an original nature to his area of

            specialization.  Mr. Trimm has accomplished this task through his creative

            work in Semitic studies which has focused on recovering the Jewish and

            Aramaic background for the origin and development of early Christianity. 

            His life’s study and research represent the equivalent of doctoral programs

            offered in many seminaries and universities in this country and abroad.

 

            Mr. Trimm has worked with me at Reunion Institute as a colleague, leading

            seminars and writing academic papers.  While acquiring scholarly understanding

            and skills, Mr. Trimm has not forfeited his spiritual development.  His intellectual

            talents and academic achievements are committed to acquiring a deeper

            appreciation of the faith of Jesus the Nazarene and to communicating this

            faith to those who follow Him.  The doctorate degree from Saint John Chrysostom

            will enable Mr. Trimm to more effectively fulfill his vocation as a scholar and

            teacher of theology and biblical studies.  I recommend him without reservation

            for the doctorate degree.

 

            Sincerely Yours,

            J. Phillip Arnold

            (actual letter: http://www.trimmfamily.com/arnold_letter.jpg )

            ( Dr. Arnold’s profile is at: http://www.trimmfamily.com/Arnold.html )

 

One slanderer wrote as follows:

 

 

            Phil Arnold is also dead, so we can't simply ask him if James is,

like with Gilner, grossly elaborating on any relationship.

 

 

The slanderers are in such a hurry to slander me that they have declared Dr. J. Phillip Arnold to be dead!!!!

 

This is an outright fabrication!!!!  These slanderers just make these things up out of thin air!  I spoke with Dr. Arnold this afternoon and he was very specific about not being dead.  

 

The following is an email Dr. Arnold sent today verifying that he is alive:

 

            From: jpa <reunion@...>

            Subject: Re: Phil Arnold

            X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information

            X-MailScanner: Found to be clean

 

 

            Just because I ascend to Paradise from time to time, does not mean that

I have left the abode of the living. All is well.

 

            Thanks for the concern,

 

            Phillip Arnold

 

And in another follow-up :

 

            From: jpa <reunion@...>

            Subject: your message

            X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information

            X-MailScanner: Found to be clean

 

            James, I sent out one message to some of our friends in response to your enquiry

            to them regarding my existence in this world. ...

 

            Again, thank you for the concerned phone calls.

It is good to know our friends care about us.

 

            Phil

 

And finally:

 

            X-Sender: reunion@...

            X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1.1

            Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 15:40:07 -0500

            To: James Trimm <jstrimm@nazarene.net>

            From: jpa <reunion@...>

            Subject: Re: Concerning your Death ?!?!?!

            Cc: craig_amanyahu@..., netzari_storage@...

            X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information

            X-MailScanner: Found to be clean

 

 

            James,

 

            You have never taken advantage of me either in my death or in my life. 

All is well with me. It seems that the fable of my passing was based,

not on primary sources,             but secondary sources replete with errors. 

As usual, you were correct to check with the primary source, first edition.

And that is good scholarship.

 

            I look forward to seeing you and your family here at The Reunion Institute in the Fall. 

            Let's put together another lecture program for you to present.

 

            Phil Arnold

            President

            The Reunion Institute

            August 25, 2003

 

 

The reports of Dr. Arnold's death have been greatly exaggerated.  In fact they have been blatantly fabricated by individuals wanting only to engage in slander.

 

 

 

My Competence as a Semitist

 

 

The Slanderers have accused me of not actually knowing Hebrew and Aramaic.  The following quotes are intended to put to rest any claim that I am ignorant of Aramaic and/or Hebrew:

 

Let's put this to rest. I learned Hebrew and Aramaic

at Johns Hopkins University from William Foxwell Albright.

I have read Dr. Trimm's works and our disagreements are

in interpretation alone.  In short, Dr. Trimm knows what the hell

he's talking about and that's all that is necessary. You cannot fake

a knowledge of Hebrew and Aramaic vocabulary, grammar

and syntax any more than you can fake being a brain surgeon.

-  Jack Kilmon, Aramaicist

(BTW Jack is a chief opponent of my textual theories for some seven years now.)

 

 

            James Trimm is a young man who, despite his youth, has already

            demonstrated his fine linguistic and analytic powers.  In have known

            him since I arrived in Texas more than a year and a half ago.  I have

            seen his work and listened to his translation and interpretation of

            numerous verses in the Peshitta New Testament.  Moreover, we have

            had many interesting discussions on the Aramaic portions of the NaKh.

            I find his linguistic instincts to be sound.

-  Rabbi Herbert J. Gilner, Orthodox Rabbi and linguist

 

Signed copy:  http://trimmfamily.com/Rabbi_Gilner.jpg

Gilner Prifile: http://trimmfamily.com/Gilner.html  

Gilner Newspaper piece: http://www.trimmfamily.com/gilner_newspaper.jpg

 

 

Aramaic scholar James Trimm, of Ft. Worth, Texas, will be the primary

person involved in the preliminary examination [of Codex Khaboris].

James Trimm will also serve as our main consultant for the Original Bible Project

in incorporating Aramaic and Syriac readings in our work of translating the Greek New Testament.

- Dr. James Tabor; Original Bible Project

 

What every Gospel scholar dreams about is a verifiably ancient copy

of Matthew in Hebrew... It now appears that such a manuscript very well

might exist! Such a find would be so valuable that I am not even going to reveal,

at this point, the reported location, other than to say it is in the "East."

However, James Trimm, Phillip Arnold, J. David Davis, an associate of mine,

and I are jointly involved in the highly confidential process of locating

and obtaining this manuscript.

 

- Dr. James Tabor; Original Bible Project

 

            Dear James Trimm,

            …I have heard from Prof. Frank Hibbin (of the Univ. of N.M.) that on nearby

            __________ Mountain, there are inscriptions in the same script.  This should

            be checked out.  Can you visit ______ Mountain and copy the inscription(s)?…

            best wishes,

            [Dr.] Cyrus Gordon

(world’s leading Semitist and my friend and mentor until his death March 30th, 2001)

            (I have omitted the name of the mountain because it is part of an ongoing

            project we were working on and now I am working on alone.)

 

 

Although Andrew Gabriel Roth wrote two essays alleging that I do not know Aramaic he has since admitted that these issues are “scholarly differences” and that the implication in these essays that I do not know Aramaic was written out of “anger”:

 

I am also going to re-edit BOTH ESSAYS so that the anger that

I have exhibited is eliminated. ….I am doing TESHUVAH

to the extent that I should have confined my language in the essays

to just the scholarly differences. I could have made the same points,

but cast them in a better way, and that I also regret. Let's agree

to disagree then,…

-  Andrew Gabriel Roth

http://www.smartgroups.com/message/readmessage.cfm?gid=1353506&messageid=4008&startid=4009

 

And in another email Andrew said:

 

            I don't think you are stupid or ignorant of Aramaic.

I might have greatly downplayed your knowledge

in my rhetoric, that is true, and it was done out of anger

and frustration on my part.

-          Andrew Gabriel Roth

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Chazak-VEmatz/message/16

 

 

Dr. Cyrus Gordon

 

My detractors have accused me of having lied about my having had a personal friendship and academic collaboration with the eminent Semitist Dr. Cyrus Gordon prior to his death on March 30th, 2001.  The following letter written to me by Dr. Gordon in 1996 should make it apparent that I have in no way lied about this relationship.

 

The original of the following letter is signed and written in Dr. Gordon’s own hand on his own personalized stationary.  Dr. Gordon and I were working on a project, which I am now carrying

on alone.  I have placed blanks in certain key places to preserve the confidentiality of this

on going project until I am ready to publish.

 

12 March 96

Dear James Trimm:

 

Last Friday (March 8th) I was operated to clean out my right carotid artery,

which was 90% occluded.  The operation went well, but the anesthetic had

a bad side-effect so that I am catheterized and quite uncomfortable. 

Tomorrow I visit with the urologist who, I hope, will be able to remove

the catheter.

 

Your critique of _____ does not surprise me.

 

As for the _______ text: I heard from Prof. Frank Hibben (of the Univ. of N.M.)

that on nearby ________ Mountain, there are inscriptions in the same script.

This should be checked out.  Can you visit _______ Mountain and copy the

inscription(s)?

 

I know nothing about an article by Pfeiffer in Isis.  When you locate the article,

Please give me the volume and page number in Isis.

 

The Brazil inscription is not very ancient.  I have reason to think it is the work

Of a secret society akin to the Masons.  My error in taking it to be of ancient

Phoenician  origin was due to my ignorance of secret societies.

 

I think I have a copy of my article on the Brazil text with transliteration of

every letter.

 

In my present condition, I cannot get up to my third floor to get reprints

for you.

 

Are you sure you will be able to get permission to excavate _______ ? 

The director of antiquities is located in _______.     _________ and the

academic establishment is in _______.  They are not likely to grant

permission to an outsider.

 

Best wishes,

Cyrus Gordon

 

 

PLAGIARISM SLANDER

 

The slanderers have also accused me of plagiarizing the HRV NT from other translations.  They have attempted to “prove” this allegation of plagiarism by comparing verses of the HRV NT to verses from a literal translation of the Peshitta NT.

 

Let me be clear:

 

No the HRV NT was not plagiarized from other translations. The HRV NT was translated directly from the original Hebrew and Aramaic texts. The HRV is a literal translation, which follows the Hebrew and/or Aramaic sentence structure closely. As such it will have close agreements with other translations that do the same. Moreover a translator cannot avoid being influenced by other translations with which he is familiar. I can point to many elements in the HRV NT translation which differ from any translation published to date, and which could only be derived directly from the Hebrew and Aramaic texts. The extensive footnotes to the HRV NT are a strong evidence of this fact.

 

There are passages in which the HRV translates words which other translations leave untranslated (for example in Mark 1:13 the HRV translates the Aramaic word KAD (“while”) but no other translation from the Aramaic translates this word.)  Thus the HRV has “while being tempted” but other translations have only “being tempted” or “being tested”.  The HRV could not have derived this from any of the English translations of the Peshitta because they all omit the word in their translations.  There are also many passages in which the HRV translates ambiguous Aramaic words in ways that are substantively different from any other translations from the Aramaic.  There are many passages in which the HRV translates ambiguous Aramaic words differently but in ways that are NOT substantively different from any other translations from the Aramaic (do not change the meaning.)  And there also are many passages in which the HRV follows the Aramaic text of the Old Syriac while other translations from the Aramaic follow the Aramaic Peshitta in those passages.  These differences can also only result from working directly from the Aramaic source documents.

 

Finally the HRV NT contains over 1,700 footnotes, hundreds of which give special insights into specific Aramaic words and phases, offer alternate renderings from other various Hebrew and Aramaic source texts or offer alternate renderings to ambiguous Aramaic words.  No other translation has these footnotes.  These footnotes demonstrate clearly that the HRV had to have been translated directly from the original Aramaic and could not have been simply plagiarized from other translations.

 

The HRV text of Matthew can be seen complete with approximately 400 such footnotes at  http://www.nazarene.net/hrv/Matthew.pdf .  Any reader can see that these footnotes can only be the result of an actual translation process and consultation of various Hebrew and Aramaic source texts in the original Hebrew and Aramaic.

 

The following is a comparison of five literal translations of Greek Mark.  I have given only the first five verses so as to stay within the realm of “fair usage” and not violate Copyright Laws by reproducing large portions of these versions.

 

This comparison shows clearly that very literal translations will tend to agree closely with each other.  Obviously the KJV and NKJV should not be compared directly to each other, they have both been given so that the other translations could be easily and quickly compared to each of them.  The HRV has no greater agreement with other literal translations from the Aramaic than these literal translations from the Greek have with each other (and probably less).

 

 

 

COMPARISON OF LITERAL TRANSLATIONS OF GREEK MARK 1:1-5

 

 

KJV  1: The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God;

NKJV: The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.

Roth: 1  The beginning of the good news of Yeshua ha Mashiach, the Son of God;

NAS: 1  The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.

ISR: 1 The beginning of the Good News of Yahushua Messiah, the Son of Elohim.

 

KJV  2: As it is written in the prophets,

NKJV 2: As it is written in the Prophets:

Roth  2: As it is written in the prophets,

NAS 2:  As it is written in Isaiah the prophet:

ISR:  2: As it has been written in the Prophets,

 

KJV  Behold, I send my messenger before thy face,

NKJV  "Behold, I send My messenger before Your face,

Roth  Behold, I send my messenger before your face,

NAS  Behold, I send my messenger ahead of you,

ISR: “See,  I  send  My  messenger  before  Your face, 

 

 

KJV  which shall prepare thy way before thee.

NKJV  Who will prepare Your way before You."

Roth  who will prepare Your way before you

NAS  who will prepare Your way

ISR  who  shall  prepare  Your  way  before You,

 

KJV  3: The voice of one crying in the wilderness,

NKJV 3: "The voice of one crying in the wilderness:

Roth  3: The voice of one crying in the wilderness:

NAS 3:  The voice of one crying in the wilderness:

ISR:  3:  a voice of one crying in the wilderness,

 

KJV  Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.

NKJV: 'Prepare the way of the LORD; Make His paths straight.' "

Roth:  Prepare the way of the Lord, make His paths straight.

NAS: Make ready the way of the Lord, make His paths straight.

ISR:  ‘Prepare the way of YHWH, make His paths straight.’ ”

 

KJV  4: John did baptize in the wilderness,

NKJV 4: John came baptizing in the wilderness

Roth: 4: John came immersing in the wilderness,

NAS 4:  John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness

ISR:  4Yohanan came immersing in the wilderness

 

KJV:  and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.

NKJV: and preaching a baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.

Roth:  and preaching the immersion of repentance for the remission of sins.

NAS:  preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins

ISR: and proclaiming an immersion of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.

 

KJV  5:  And there went out unto him all the land of Judaea, and they of Jerusalem,

NKJV 5: Then all the land of Judea, and those from Jerusalem, went out to him

Roth  5: And all the land of Judaea, and they of Jerusalem, went out to him,

NAS  5: And all the country of Judea was going out to him, and all the people of Jerusalem;

ISR:  5 And all the country of Yehudah, and those of Yerushalayim, went out to him

 

KJV:  and were all baptized of him in the river of Jordan, confessing their sins.

NKJV:  and were all baptized by him in the Jordan River, confessing their sins.

Roth:  and were all immersed by him in the Jordan River, confessing their sins.

NAS:  and they were being baptized by him in the Jordan River, confessing their sins.

ISR:  and were all immersed by him in the Yarden River, confessing their sins.

 

KEY:

 

KJV = King James Version

 

NKJV= New King James Version

 

Roth = Book of Life Version from Messianic Vision (Sid Roth)

 

NAS = New American Standard

 

ISR = “The Scriptures” version from the Institute for Scripture Research in South Africa

(In the case of this version I have resolved sacred names, which this version retains in a Hebrew font)

 

 

 

“FALSE JEWISH CLAIMS” SLANDER

 

The Slanderers have also accused me of lying about having “some Jewish ancestry”.  Let me make it clear for the community that I have not lied about having Jewish ancestry.

 

My Father was James H. Trim.

His father was Ernest Vester Trim.

His mother was Rhoda Colvins.

Her mother was Matilda Vinyard.

Her father was Tabor C. Vinyard.

His father was Christian Vinyard.

(His name was originally Weinert but was changed to Vinyard)

His father was Johan Nicholas Weinert

(who came to the New World from Germany in 1749)

His father was Johannes Conradt Weinert

(Who was born in Germany in 1716).

 

"Weinert" is a common European Jewish surname.

 

In fact Jewish Records Indexing of Poland lists "Weinert" as a Jewish surname.

http://www.jewishgen.org/jri-pl/psa/brzezanysurn.htm

 

Johannes Conradt Weinert and his descendents were ethnically Jewish  Christians.

I suspect Johan Nicholas Weinert came to the New World to escape mounting anti-Semitism in Germany (and which Jewish Christians were not immune from). I also suspect the name was later changed from the common Jewish surname Weinert to Vinyard in an attempt to hide Jewish identity. This may also have been the motive in

naming "Christian Vinyard" as well.

 

At any rate my great-great grandmother was Matilda Vinyard (really Weinert).

 

There are other lines I am still researching, but this is sufficient to show that I have not lied about having "some Jewish ancestry".

 

Also let me emphasize that I began practicing Rabbinic Judaism and attending a Rabbinic Synagogue when I was 14 until I became a believer in Yeshua as Messiah when I was 18.  So for the record Judaism has been my only religion since I was a child.

 

I wish to emphasize that I have never claimed that I was a MEMBER of that Synagogue.  For those who do not know, Synagogue membership is not the same as Church membership.  As a rule in Rabbinic Judaism a Synagogue MEMBER is a person who pays (often high) dues or membership fees to the Synagogue.  Often there are regular attendees who are not “members” and there are often members who rarely if ever actually attend,  I was only a teenager so I was NOT paying dues for membership in the Synagogue.  As I have always said I ATTENDED the Synagogue regularly from the time I was fourteen until I was eighteen.  Slanderers have lied in claiming that I claimed to have been a member of that Synagogue and then made much of the fact that I was not on the old membership roles.  This has been done to take advantage of people who are familiar with Church membership roles and who will assume that Synagogue membership works in the same way.

 

I should also point out that my wife is Jewish even by Rabbinic standards (she is the granddaughter of a holocaust survivor) and we have four children together who are Jewish even by Rabbinic standards.

 

One of the slanderers had called my mother to inquire about whether or not I had any Jewish ancestry. They report that she denied this was true.  Unfortunately my mother  has Alzheimer's disease and is not clear in many of her memories.

 

 

DISFELLOWHIPPED FROM BETH YESHUA CONGREGATION?

 

In 1989 I left Beth Yeshua Congregation of my own choice. 

 

At the time I was hosting a Torah Study being led by an Orthodox Rabbi who had become a believer in Messiah.  This study was being held some 20 miles from Beth Yeshua, on a night which did not conflict with Beth Yeshua activities and no one from Beth Yeshua (except myself) was attending.  Stan Eisenberg (then the leader of Beth Yeshua) and another member from Beth Yeshua Congregation, came to my door as two “witnesses” that I could not continue to host these studies and remain a part of Beth Yeshua Congregation.  Stan Eisenberg told me that if I continued to host these studies he could no longer be my “covering”.  I told Stan that in Hebrew the word for “covering” is KIPPUR which also means “atonement”.  I told Stan that he was not my “atonement” and never would be.  I also told Stan that if I could not host a private Torah study in my own home without Stan’s permission, that I would no longer be a member of Beth Yeshua Congregation.  The next day was a Wednesday and that Wednesday night at the weekly prayer meeting Stan announced that I was being disfellowshipped from Beth Yeshua Congregation (although I was no longer a member).  The officially announced reason was that I had chosen to “seek [my] own way away from the congregation”.  In a letter dated June 14th 1990 Kuni Beasley, then a member of Beth Yeshua Congregation, recalled the events this way:

 

            “When Stan gathered the congregation to advise us of the decision

            to disfellowship [James] Scott [Trimm], he was very clear on the

            reasons for this action: Scott was in sin, had refused to repent, and

            was determined to seek his own way away from the congregation.”

            (Kuni Beasley 1990 letter page 7)

 

In this 1990 letter Kuni was actually writing in support of Stan’s action and stated that one of the key issues in my departure from Beth Yeshua was my challenge to “Rabbi Eisenberg’s Biblical authority as leader of the congregation” (p. 1) and referred to Stan’s “authority to exercise offices of episkipos (bishop) and presbbuteros (elder) of the congregation, and his calling to minister as the poimen (pastor/shepherd) of Beth Yeshua” (p. 1).  He refers to Heb. 13:17 as supporting Stan’s authority and states that “Scott has a problem with this scripture” (part 2 page 13 n. 58).

 

Nearly two years later, on March 25th, 1992 Kuni Beasley made the following statement to Beth Yeshua Congregation:

 

            “I am committed to Stan Eisenberg’s appointment and ordination by God

            to be the spiritual leader of Beth Yeshua Congregation.  I will assert that

            no one else in the congregation has done more to support and defend

            this over the last year than I have.  I will remain committed to Stan

            Eisenberg’s divine appointment as the spiritual leadership of Beth Yeshua

            Congregation until shown otherwise.”

 

Then two months later on May 30th Kuni issued a written and verbal statement saying:

 

            “I am a witness to the truth of Chris’ testimony.”

 

The testimony he referred to was that of Chris Ayers, another member of Beth Yeshua Congregation.  The testimony they both delivered was written and verbal (they read from it) as follows:

 

            Stan Eisenberg is in error and is leading this congregation in an

            unbiblical manner.  He executes his congregational authority

            without being accountable to anyone.  He quotes Hebrews 13:17

            and demands that the congregation obey him and submit to him.

            But who does Stan submit to?  Who is he accountable to (1Pet. 5:5)?

            All references to the congregational leadership in the Bible indicate

            a leadership made up of a bishop, elders and deacons.  According to

            Stan, no one fits the qualifications except him.  For most of 12 years

            this congregation has not had accountable leaders according [to] the

            Bible.

            (Statement made Chris Ayers and Kuni Beasley at Beth Yeshua on May 30, 1992)

 

Kuni describes the giving of this testimony before the congregation this way:

 

            On May 30, 1992, as the congregational announcements were

            concluding, Chris Ayers and I stood up in the midst of the assembly

            of Beth Yeshua Congregation, Ft. Worth, Texas, and delivered the

            statement… This action was done in accordance with 1Timothy 5:19-20.

            It was not pretty.  Amid the shouting of the Congregation leader,

            Stan Eisenberg, his wife, and various persons in attendance,

            the message was delivered, albeit, after the written statements

            from which we were reading were torn from our hands

            several times by Stan Eisenberg.

 

And in a letter dated June 9th 1992 Kuni writes:

 

            Stan is operating the congregation illegitimately… Stan operates

            without congregational accountability, holds to the supremacy

            and absolute finality of his personal decisions and imposes sanctions

            on those in the congregation who question his authority or his

            personal doctrinal position.

 

In the wake of this testimony several key members left Beth Yeshua Congregation including Chris Ayers and Kuni Beasley for the same reason I had.

 

Sometime later Stan Eisenberg left Beth Yeshua Congregation and was replaced by Rabbi David Stone, the current leader of Beth Yeshua Congregation.  I contacted Rabbi Stone in 1999 and was informed by him that his disfellowshipment by Stan Eisenberg was no longer recognized by Beth Yeshua Congregation. 

 

In 2001 Stan Eisenberg wrote a very negative email about me accusing me of many things.  Almost all of these were negative things my now-late ex-wife had told Stan but had later admitted (prior to her death) to my current wife that she had lied to Stan and others about me in order to get them “on her side” against me.

 

 

 

OTHER MISCELLANEOUS SLANDER

 

 

1. No I did not impregnate my wife out of wedlock when she was seventeen. My wife and I married when she was eighteen on July 15th 1991 (she turned 18 on July 9th) and our first child together was born nearly a year later on June 23rd 1992.

 

2. No I did not once send my blind (now late) ex-wife out to work while I stayed home. In fact my (now late) ex-wife did not become blind until some years after we divorced.

 

3. No I have never abused my children. This was a false accusation my ex-wife made during the divorce but which she later recanted and even signed custody of our daughter together over to me voluntarily. This is one of many things she accused me of but later recanted and admitted that

she had lied in order to manipulate the leader of the Messianic Congregation she had been attending into supporting her divorce and continuing to pay her bills for her as a single mom.

 

4. No I do not practice witchcraft. I do teach the Kabbalistic understanding of the three pillars of the Godhead but this does not mean that I agree with everything that anyone has ever called "Cabbala; Qabbala or Kabbalah". There are many things taught under those names which are NOT in keeping with Torah and which I do NOT advocate, including teachings of witchcraft groups using those names to describe their perverse teachings.

 

5. No I have not rejected the deity of Messiah or the Virgin Birth.

 

6.  No Codex Khaboris was not damaged while in my possession.  Codex Khaboris was never in my possession.  I had “direct access” to Codex Khaboris while it was housed at the Reunion Institute in Houston.  Dr. Arnold NEVER made that statement this is an outright lie on the part of Kathryn Kern.