Clarifying the Truth. Bringing understanding to the message of the Gospel


My Background:
My name is Eric Bolden. I am a Biblical thinker who discusses various spiritual topics. While I did have the influences of a Baptist grandmother (Bethany Baptist in Brooklyn, pastored by Rev. William Jones), and a charismatic godmother (storefront in the South Bronx), I was basically raised in an agnostic home, and in my teens became antagonistic towards Christianity and its claims to truth (and also the politics of some). It was in 1986, at the age of 20, that I began really paying attention to the Plain Truth and Good News magazines, published by Herbert W. Armstrong, who at this time, had started excerpting his new booklet Who or What is the Prophetic Beast in the magazines. I was so fascinated by the prophecies of Revelation. How things that would take shape in the future were predicted, in symbolic form in Revelation (as well as Daniel). For the first time, I saw REASON for belief in the Bible! As a "high functioning autistic" person (which none of us knew about at the time), my difficulty adapting in the world made me see the validity of the biblical doctrine of "sin". I was also impressed by some other doctrines I saw, but then there were others which troubled me, so I kept at arms length from the group. I eventually met a street evangelist named Leo, who used to preach in Times Square during lunch, and over time, he showed me the errors of this group from the Bible, and I began moving towards orthodox evangelicalism. By mid-1988, I had pretty much accepted most mainstream Christian beliefs, and the "new birth". (Armstrong's entire organization later followed, a few years after he died!).

Over time some questions remained (such as proving soemthing we claim is clear as the desk before you, even though it in practice isn't, and the Church being divided in many areas yet each person preaching so authoritatively; some of which I address), and I eventually "de-constructed", but have not renouced the faith. In debating doctrine, I encountered the system of "full preterism", and eventually saw that a variant of it seemed to explain things better. So I went from "evangelical' in the sense of trying to convince everyone to "get saved", to a "comprehensive Grace" or "Fulfilled View" that realizes the "judgment" warned about in the New Testament was referring to the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple and the last of the Old Covenant system in AD70, and that an unconditional Grace has now apread to the world. (this was the "Blessed Hope" the Church waited for, and yet was exptended to the present by conventional assumption, wheh Christ Himself said it would occur in His original listeners' lifetimes; Matt.16:28). So this raises a whole new crop of disputes, as this is anathema to the conventional view!

Statement of Faith:


There is one God, the Father; almighty, invisible, uncreated, and the Creator of all reality. Within His divine nature is also His only begotten Son, the Word incarnate in the Person of Jesus of Nazareth; and the Holy Spirit, the personal power of God in the lives of believers. Father, Son and Spirit are neither three separate "beings" acting in unity, nor one sole person acting three roles, but rather the personal ways the one God works in the world. Neither is God a "person" in a human sense (apart from the incarnate Son), and neither is God an abstract force or sentiment. He is the great and almighty Creator who is above our comprehension; the universe not being able to contain Him (1 Kings 8:27)
(This is the original, pre-Athanasian "orthodox" view. Discussed in first linked essay).

Man and the plan of salvation:

Man was created good, but has fallen *(reverted to "instinctual" nature that breaks God's commands and thus falls short of His standard (i.e. sins)). Because of this, we **are plagued with shame, and seek to cover up our sin through self-righteousness and/or denial. God provided for this by sending His Son to live a perfect life and die to pay the penalty our sins deserve, and then rise again to glory. (Why did he use a sacrificial system? Perhaps to demonstrate the severity of sin [since men sense this through their shame]). This is not intended to be the promotion of one "religion" over others, but the full proclamation of the one God who was present in the suffering savior redeeming men to Himself. (2 Corinthians 5:19)
The church is not supposed to be just another religion, but rather fellow believers united in Christ, worshipping Him, learning about Him and experiencing Him in one another. This is what the true church continues to be, despite the institutions built around it.

previous views:
*"...become corrupted with a self-serving nature that likes to break..." (since dropped a necessary "deliberateness" premise. "slelf-serving" is basically "instinct")
**"...are not naturally fit to live with Him in eternity, and therefore would be sent out of His presence upon death and judgment." (still true in a sense, but now the focus is on the shame, and its true remedy, of a fuller unconditional grace)


First completed essay (1991) Proposed as book, but eventually decided to publish online:

God In A Box: A Comprehensive Look at Problems and Solutions concerning the Tri-UneNature of God

Explores the doctrine of the Trinity, its history, and several opposing views. The main problem in the issue is the language we use to express it. Takes a look at the Biblical and pre-Nicene expressions of this Christian truth.

e-reader version on SCRIBD (15118068)


"Monoevangelion": A new harmony of the four Gospels into a single narrative (aka "diatesseron"). Introduces innovative new ideas to create a free-flowing text.

Dual column format:

.DOC version (on

e-reader version on SCRIBD (15118506)

Harmony of the Resurrection

Are the four Gospel accounts of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ contradictory? Much confusuion is caused by comparing the accounts, but they do match up, if you know what to match. A synopsis of the order of the events on that Resurrection morning. (Put to use in the above harmony of the Gospels)


Pantelism/COMPREHENSIVE GRACE (discusses this "consistent" extension of preterist eschatology)
(short version of above page)(Perhaps start here).
("Pantelism2"; More thoughts spun off from first page)

"Changed Life" concept (the common view, which blurs Law and Grace in salvation)

"Spiritual Power": A much misunderstood subject in conventional theology (the basis of cold reactions to the suffering, and even judgmentalism)

Man "Deserving" Pain, and Where This Notion Comes From (the main justification of both the common view on jugment, as well as the pains of life today)

"Sin" as Deliberate Animosity Towards God (another common and wrong assumption that drives the judgmentalism and "us vs them" premise of conventional preaching)

This one marked the point where I began really questioning things:
Miracle, mystery & authority: the Church's historic defense mechanisms

It starts from debates I was having on a Christian forum (which included evangelicals, as well as even some Catholics and EOC, Church of Christ, and sabbatarians), and seeing proof-texts for basically a works-salvation, that people still claim is some form of "grace". This was showing me the futility of the "commonly accepted message" of "duty-faith salvation"! (on top of growing realization on how we can't prove anything, yet speak as if we have 100% "certainty").
I then afterward put together the Pantelism page to try to articulate the new beliefs in a more concise fashion. It was originally imnspired by the Church of God 7th Day (Denver) doctrinal statement booket from the 80's, which concisely stated each doctrinal point, then supplied the relevant proof-text and brief description of what it says (Proof-texting of course does not necessarily prove the doctrine, but at least this attempts to substantiate it in a clear, concise biblical way). I found the page grew way out of that mold, into the typical prosaic long "wall of text" (and even a second page), and so created the "short version", which more closely fit the original vision.

Here is a more recent article where I lay out my deconstructed position:
The Difficulty of "Faith" in a World of Conflicting Voices and Ambiguous Evidence (The only things certain are the many authoritative arguments)

DEBATE TOPICS (old, but pretty much still relevant)


Discusses the predestination versus free will debate. Does man have any say in his eternal state? If he does, does this rob God of His sovereignty? Or are some people actually born to die and go to Hell, guilty of sins they had no chance to repent of?

e-reader version on SCRIBD (15120064)

CCM Controversy

A discussion of various arguments against contemporary music in general, and especially its use in the Church. This has become one of the most highly charged issues in modern evangelicalism. A Biblical answer to critics who regard all modern music as apostasy. Must reading!

e-reader version on SCRIBD (15119924)

Psychology, Biblical Counseling, and the Emotional Health 'Gospel'

e-reader version on SCRIBD

Discusses yet another controversy in the evangelical church regarding the validity of psychology and its terms, and the role of the Bible in counseling. (largely by the influence of a man named Jay Adams)

Abundant Life", Christian "Victory" and our Responses to Suffering and Negative Emotions:
Picking up on where "Psychology" began; this discusses, with more detail how many Christian leaders who do accept psychology also have been influenced by the "emotional health gospel" (as much as those who don't). This teaching's simplistic "pat answers" some have turned into a multi-million dollar industry through appealing language. This actually makes Christian growth harder than it already is, and the teaching, by misunderstanding various scriptures and terms like "victory" fosters coldness and harsh judgments towards the suffering.
(Further picked up in above newer "Spiritual Power" and "Pain" essays).

Sabbatarianism and the "Faith of Abraham"

An examination of the claim that true believers are required to keep various laws in order to be in God's will today.


Doctrinal Correctness: How gross error can be hidden behind truth in the Right Wing version of "PC"

(Very first writing project, slowly begun in 80's, but sidelined by Trinity book and initial edition finished a few years later, at the height of the 90's political climate. Also had planned as a book).
Exposes a lot of the error in Fundamentalism as well as the Right in general, especially as they are judgmental of others.

Notes on above page a blog-like page discussing my purpose for the project, and reflecting subsequent debates I was in)

MAKERS vs TAKERS: Tax, Lax and Blacks: How Racial Tension is Fueled in the Politics of Blame

My attempt at a book covering the political climate of the Obama era, where right-wing rhetoric was really turned up!
Think of updating it, but now, is for the most part superseded by these more concise articles:
I Didn't Own Slaves (that was 150 years ago), but..." and
A Clever Summary of Conservative Views on Race and Economics (i.e. Limbaugh ally Jim Quinn and his shameless "Ant & Grasshopper" jab at blacks)


Covers this horrific event (visible from my roof) and the ensuing political and religious arguments that followed. Includes discussion of Islamic extremism.

OLD ESCHATOLOGY AND DOCTRINAL ARTICLES (now deprecated due to change of theology)

Revelation: A Bible Interprets Bible View

A verse by verse commentary on this fascinating book of Scripture. There is also a page on the related subject of the Preterist school of interpretation. This marks the period where I had begun learning preterism, and integrating some of the ideas, and then I finally changed over and added a disclaimer to the main page)

Altar Calls, Baptism and Conversion

Altar Calls have become a popular method of evangelism, seemingly replacing baptism as the symbol of a person's receiving of Christ. It has come under fire by many, such as Calvinists and Campbellites as not being scriptural, and not producing true conversion. What is the cause of this, and why is the altar call so prominent now, and what alternative is there for evangelistic rallies?

Sola Scriptura vs. Catholic "Tradition"

Discusses the claims of catholicism, particularly the Eastern Orthodox Church (which maintains an even greater claim of perfectly preserving the apostolic faith than the Roman Catholic church which has admittedly added doctrines), of an "oral apostolic tradition" that includes various doctrines and practices that are not found in the New Testament, and the dismissal of "Sola Scriptura" (The Bible alone as the rule of faith and practice) because of the "thousands of Protestant sects" it has supposedly created.

Defense of the Faith

My old attempt at evangelical apologetics: ("Discusses some of the claims made by the nonreligious world regarding God, Christianity and the Bible. Is the Bible or its one God destructive, barbaric, and just a tool of neurotic control mongers? What is it all about anyway? Just Hell and damnation? Or just peace and love? Or does it address what really is man's problem, and what is its solution?") I even used the Romans 1 argument against homosexuals! I was that "conservative"! (Never politically, though). I was really trying to convince myself, and [not even so] deep down inside, I knew it! (The passage is really, in the context, describing people "shown" special revelation [not "general"] through the Law, and were breaking it, yet preaching it to others, as ch.2 shows!) I also tried my hardest to theodicize the killing of the Canaanites, but that (and a few other things like the stopping of the sun in the sky for several hours), I give up. I can't rationalize these things anymore. I won't renounce "biblical inerrancy", and of course, "God can do anything He wants", but these things, and especially in light with certain principles of the universe that appear "sovereign" and "immutable" ("growth" by slow "process" of your own "choices" instead of instant, "strongest survive", etc. and Christians themselves even going with these things), are what make it very hard to defend to others. (My struggles with faith discussed in above linked article).


Examines Jewish-Christian relations, and the claims that Christians witnessing to Jews is "anti-semitic".


Examines Islam's claim to be the true successor to both Judaism and Christianity