วีดีโอ

Thanks for watching by video and wishing me blessings. Can you please show me where God is “dual” in the Bible and has both destructive and a creative (bad and good) sides? Where it states God has human weaknesses? When you say there is no such thing as pure good and pure bad, is that statement good or true? If that statement has tones of gray then why should I believe it? Thanks again.

Thanks for watching my video. Colossians 2 is clear, let no one judge you by a sabbath day. Paul confirms this elsewhere. Romans 14:5-6 "One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord." There's no misunderstanding here, but I would welcome where you think Paul got it wrong.

@ the bible defines the 7th day of the week,Saturday we call as the sabbath lev 23:1-3, Any other day would not be biblically defined as the sabbath. Here Paul is talking to Colossians [2:16-17] who are now starting to keep the laws, statues and commands of God to not let the people judge them for doing so. For the Colossians, being gentiles, where not given the oracles of God. That only was given to the Israelites which Paul, who was one, backs up in romans 9:4. So when you using col 2:16-18, it pertains to things that are biblically defined, feast days /sabbath etc not traditions of man rooted in paganism. If you Love Jesus you are going to keep his commands just he kept his Fathers. John 15:10. Remember his fathers commands and his are the same because they are one.

@ romans 14:5-6 is not an exclusion to worship any day as you see fit because you like this day better than the next. Rather it’s goes to the point of judging someone unrighteously for things that doesn’t constitute sins. Because the romans is a letter and he sent this as a response to some disputes they were having. As long as they serving God, why care if someone chooses to eat vegetarian or eat meat [biblically clean that is] so he add the days part it just another analogy to his point. You have to read in context. Not cherry pick so you worship God NOT in spirit and truth.

Thanks for your comments. 1) The Sabbath changed in the Old Testament: 1) Genesis- Celebration of God's work (Ex 20:11). 2) Exodus-Celebration of God's deliverance of Israel from Egypt (Deut. 5:12-15). And in the New Testament 3) Resurrection-Celebration of Jesus Christ rising (Acts 20:7; 1 Corinthians 16:2; Heb. 4:9). 2) Christ's resurrection and ascension, both of which occurred on a Sunday, caused the Christian church to move the day of worship from Saturday, the last day of the week, to Sunday, the first day of the week (cf. Acts 20:7; 1 Corinthians 16:2). A third-century document titled The Teaching of the Apostles says that "the Apostles further appointed" the first day of the week as a day of worship "because on the first day of the week our Lord rose from the dead, and on the first day of the week he ascended up into heaven, and on the first day of the week he will appear at last with the angels of heaven." 3) The only time the Sabbath is mentioned from Acts through Revelation it is for evangelistic purposes to the Jews and the setting is usually in a synagogue (Acts chapters 13-18). Paul wrote, “to the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might win Jews” (1 Corinthians 9:20). Paul did not go to the synagogue to fellowship with and edify the saints, but to convict and save the lost. 3) Once Paul states “from now on I will go to the Gentiles” (Acts 18:6), the Sabbath is never again mentioned. 4) Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.” (Colossians 2:16-17). The Jewish Sabbath was abolished at the cross where Christ “canceled the written code, with its regulations” (Colossians 2:14). This idea is repeated more than once in the New Testament: “One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord” (Romans 14:5-6a). “But now that you know God - or rather are known by God - how is it that you are turning back to those weak and miserable principles? Do you wish to be enslaved by them all over again? You are observing special days and months and seasons and years” (Galatians 4:9-10). 5) The Sabbath command was to do no work on the Sabbath day (Exodus 20:8-11). Nowhere in Scripture is the Sabbath day commanded to be the day of worship. 6) The Sabbath was given to Israel, not the church. The Sabbath is still Saturday, not Sunday, and has never been changed. But the Sabbath is part of the Old Testament Law, and Christians are free from the bondage of the Law (Galatians 4:1-26; Romans 6:14). Sunday is “The Lord’s Day” for Christians, the day we celebrate Christ’s resurrection from the dead. If any Christian insists Sunday be called their Sabbath, they are allowed to do that (Colossians 2:16-17). But technically, the Sabbath is still Saturday, not Sunday, and has never been changed. I worship on Sunday, not because it is my Sabbath, but because it is the Lord’s Day. 7) All the Ten Commandments are repeated in the New Testament except the Fourth Commandment. Why? Because all of the above points. More specifically to your comments: "Here Paul is talking to Colossians [2:16-17] who are now starting to keep the laws, statues and commands of God to not let the people judge them for doing so." You are turning everything Paul said on its head by making such a claim. Wow! Paul judged them for exactly that--the law does not save.

See my previous comments.

Thanks for watching my video. The validity of one's argument is based on truth or reason. When I stack Taoism up against the Bible there is abundantly more truth and reason in the Bible. There's serious doubt that Lao-Tzu ever existed. No serious historian doubts not only Jesus' existence but His teachings that have changed the world. The Tao Te Ching makes no reference to external events, people, or places, so it's hard to place it in a historical context. Again, historical and archaeological support cannot corroborate Tao Te Ching. The Bible is the best-attested manuscript of all of ancient literature. In Taoism, death is simply a transformation from being to non-being. The person's individual consciousness ceases to exist. But does this match up with what we intuitively know? If the Bible is what corresponds to reality, that God "has set eternity in the hearts of men" (Ecclesiastes 3:11), the Taoist teaching is nothing but a deception.

Thanks for watching my video. The true God did not come from anything, He has always existed.

@PatrickTube644 within the nameless nothing that you say your god came from, the tao may be found.

Thanks for watching my video. This probably won't change your mind about the Bible but I have this video about the biblical origination and transmission you might be interested in here: th-cam.com/video/-YgHjqiBM9w/w-d-xo.html Most believe (including all religions that say they believe in some form of the Christ) Jesus was unique. What did Jesus think of the Bible? Jesus had a high view of Scripture. He went into the synagogue to read from a scroll of the prophet Isaiah. After reading it He said "Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing" (Luke 4:16-21). Jesus also said these things about Scripture: "It is written: 'Man does not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God'" (Matthew 4:4)...I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished (Matthew 5:18)...You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures (Matthew 22:29)...have you not read what God said to you (Matthew 22:31)...These are the Scriptures that testify about me (John 5:39)...the Scripture cannot be broken (John 10:35). Jesus confirmed the historical reliability of the Scriptures by referring to Adam and Eve and the Genesis account (Matthew 19:4-5); Jonah and the whale (Matthew 12:40); Noah and the flood (Matthew 24:37-39) as real events. Jesus also spoke of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Matthew 8:11), Moses (John 5:46), Isaiah (Matthew 15:7), David (Matthew 12:3), Solomon (Matthew 12:42), and Daniel (Matthew 24:15). And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, He explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning Himself (Luke 24:27)...'This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.' Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures (Luke 24:44-45).

Thanks for watching my video and for your comments. Remember that Chad said he grew up a Protestant and is just now testing the waters of the Catholic Church. My goal was to challenge him to go back to his Protestant roots and not go into unknown territory that he knows nothing about. Sure, he offered little counter--arguments because he is totally unaware of the unbiblical Catholic doctrines. My pointing that out was completely appropriate (2 Tim. 4:3-4; Jude 3). All of the quotes I gave I documented in the video so you or anyone is welcome to check them out.

Thanks for watching my video and for your comments. Yes, the Bible does say God creates light and good but I would like to see where you think it says He creates evil. I can guess that you are referring to Isaiah 45:7. One version says, "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things." However, if you read the context, a better translation is this, "I form light and create darkness; I make well-being and create calamity; I am the LORD, who does all these things." Why calamity instead of evil? The context explains it. God is creating calamity, or judgment through King Cyrus. 47:11 in the same context says that God will bring evil on disobedient Israel and He's using a heathen king to do it. God will use Cyrus to bring calamity to disobedient Israel. Since evil is the absence of good it's not something that is created, but God can use the evil man has already perpetuated to bring calamity back on them.

Thanks for watching my video. Those who believe the universe is millions or billions of years old assume that the present measurement of distant starlight is the same as the past. But what if the past measurement was different? Would you even consider such a thing and set aside your bias? Jason Lisle, a Christian astrophysicist, and well above yours or my paygrade writes: "Since the stars were created during Creation Week and since God made them to give light upon the earth, the way in which distant starlight arrived on earth may have been supernatural. We cannot assume that past acts of God are necessarily understandable in terms of a current scientific mechanism, because science can only probe the way in which God sustains the universe today. It is irrational to argue that a supernatural act cannot be true on the basis that it cannot be explained by natural processes observed today. It is perfectly acceptable for us to ask, “Did God use natural processes to get the starlight to earth in the biblical timescale? And if so, what is the mechanism?” But if no natural mechanism is apparent, this cannot be used as evidence against supernatural creation. So, the unbeliever is engaged in a subtle form of circular reasoning when he uses the assumption of naturalism to argue that distant starlight disproves the biblical timescale." The age of the universe is not a substance that can be detected in a laboratory, but something Christians can determine by God's revelation (Genesis 1).

Thanks for watching my video. “For all the gods of the nations are idols” (Psalm 96:5). The Tao god is an idol.

@@PatrickTube644 do you even know what non-dualistic means? There is no god like existence in daoism. The word "God", that you understand in context of middle eastern religions, does not exist in daoist philosophy.

Everyone has an idol. Call it what you wish. The Tao concept of the eternal is just another idol however you want to frame it.

​@@PatrickTube644what's wrong with idols? Also why is Christian god jealous?

Thanks for watching my video. Idols are prohibited in the first and second commandments: "3 “You shall have no other gods before me. “You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. You shall not bow down to them or serve them, for I the Lord your God am a jealous God" (Exodus 20:3-4). Idols and God's jealousy go hand in hand. God is jealous for our love and worship are to be reserved to Him alone. God is not jealous or envious because someone has something He wants or needs. No, God is jealous when someone gives to another something that rightly belongs to Him. For example, if a husband sees another man flirting with his wife, he is right to be jealous, for only he has the right to flirt with his wife. This type of jealousy is not sinful. Rather, it is entirely appropriate. Worship, praise, honor, and adoration belong to God alone, for only He is truly worthy of it. Therefore, God is rightly jealous when worship, praise, honor, or adoration is given to idols.

Thanks for watching my video and for your comment. What happens after death? Who/What Won't be in the New Heaven and Earth: • Unbelievers (Rev. 21:8) who reject Christ (John 8:24) • Those who have not taken care of their sin problem (Rom. 6:23a) • Unredeemed flesh (1 Cor. 15:50; Heb. 12:14) • Nothing impure (Rev. 21:27) • Evil desires (1 Pet. 1:4) • Curses (Rev. 22:3) • Grief (Rev. 21:4) • Death (Rev. 21:4) • Sorrow (Rev. 21:4) • Crying (Rev. 21:4) • Pain (Rev. 21:4) • No Temple or Church (Rev. 21:22) • Marriage (Matt. 22:30). . Those who believe in a false Jesus (2 Cor. 11:4), false gospel (Gal. 1:8) and a false god (1 Cor. 8:5-6; Isa. 43:10, this includes Mormons). For those who believe and trust in the biblical gospel--that Jesus, the eternal God the Son, came and lived the perfect life we could not live. He died on the cross for our sins to pay the penalty of sin (death, Rom. 6:23) and He rose from the dead to show that death no longer has a hold on us (1 Cor. 15:45 ff). If one trusts in that finished work (John 19:30) the Father sent Him to accomplish (John 17:4), you can know that you have eternal life (John 5:24). Eternal life will be with God on a new heaven and earth. Who/What Will be in the New Heaven and Earth: • Only those who have accepted Jesus Christ as their Savior (John 14:6; Acts 4:12) • Only those who have defeated death through Christ (Rom. 6:23; 2 Tim. 1:10) • Only those made perfect in Christ (Col. 1:28; Heb. 10:10,14; Heb. 12:23) • Only those He has clothed with garments of salvation (Isa. 61:10; Rev. 7:15) • Only those who have washed their robes will enter the city and eat from the tree of life (Rev. 22:14) • Glorified human bodies (1 Cor. 15:42ff; Philippians 3:21; 1 John 3:2-3; Heb. 12:23) • Only those whose names are written in the Lamb's book of life (Rev. 21:27; 20:15) • The meek (Matt. 5:5) • God dwelling with us (Rev. 21:3) • The throne of God and of the Lamb (Rev. 22:3) • The glory of the Lord everywhere (Ezek 43:2,5 Rev. 21:11) • The glory of God giving light to the city (Rev. 21:23) • Everyone will know the Lord (Isa 11:9; Heb. 8:11) • Service to God (Rev. 22:3; Gen. 2:15) • Worship (Rev 5:13-14; 15:4) • Angels (Rev. 21:12; Heb. 12:22) • Animals (Isa. 65:25) • Reunion with believing friends and family (1 Thess. 4:13; Matt 8:11) • People from every nation, tribe, and language to meet (Rev 7:9) • The glory and honor of the nations [cultures] will be brought into it (Rev. 21:26) • The kings of the earth will bring their splendor [cultures] into it (Rev. 21:24) • The River of Life (Rev. 22:1-2) • The Tree of Life bearing twelve crops of fruit (Rev. 22:2) • Streets of gold (Rev. 21:21) • Precious stones and pearls (Rev. 21:18-21) • Mansions (John 14:2) • Time (Rev. 22:2 speaks of "months" in heaven and Ephesians 2:7 of "ages" to come) • Seasons (Ezekiel 34:26-27; Rev. 22:2) • Eating and drinking (Rev 19:9; Luke 22:29-30; 14:15) • Laughter, rejoicing and leaping for joy (Luke 6:21,23) • Rewards and treasures to enjoy (Matt 6:20) • Eternal pleasures (Psalm 16:11) • Cities to rule (Luke 19:17) • Reigning with Christ (Rev. 20:6; 22:5). • Angels to judge (1 Cor 6:3) • Things to learn (Eph. 2:6-7) • A new earth to explore (Rev 21:1) • A new universe to discover (Rev 21:1). Test your beliefs by the Bible and see how God will move in your life. Patrick--Evangelism Circle

I agree!

Thanks again for your comments and watching the larger video. Humility, I would say, is to, as Jude says, "save others by snatching them out of the fire; to others show mercy with fear, hating even the garment stained by the flesh" (Jude 1:23). I fear for those who are following the false gospel of Rome. Catholics who adhere to this false gospel are not my brothers. For Roy's sake, notice that he said I had great points and that he would read Hebrews to check out Christ's one-time sacrifice. No straw man going there.

@@PatrickTube644 I appreciate your ministry. The straw man I was referring to was works-based salvation. You asked in 0:36 about Roy's understanding of redemption in the Catholic church. When you highlighted "pursuing a righteous life" I think you automatically jumped to works-based salvation. Are you not also pursuing a righteous life by way of your ministry? If so, should I automatically assume you are ministering as a way to fulfill a works-based salvation? I think the key distinction here would be how he answers a potential follow up question: "Why do you pursue a righteous life?" If his answer indicates something of "So I can earn salvation" then I would actually share your concern. But it's entirely possible that he could have answered "Because I want to show gratitude for Jesus' death on the cross, a sacrifice I am not worthy of." I hope you are encouraged to know that Catholics are capable of following the doctrine of faith-based salvation. On the other hand, I have experienced some Protestants who actually pursue the false gospel of works-based salvation. I pray that we both remain on the lookout for this false gospel of works-based Christianity, both inside and outside of Rome

Hello again. I appreciate your comments. I am wondering if you are a Catholic? I can state that I am not sure by your comments. Rome is a works-based salvation without doubt (see Cathechisms, 1394, 1477, 1129, 2068, 980, 1459, 2027 and Trent Canon 9). Only God justifies/saves (Rom. 8:33). Our sanctification follows where we pursue good works (Eph. 2:10) not for justification/salvation but because we love the God who has already saved us (Titus 3:5). My hope is that Roy, as you say, "wants to show gratitude for Jesus' death on the cross, a sacrifice I am not worthy of." I do not rule out that possibility. However, if one strictly follows and believes in the false works-righteousness salvation of Rome, it is not strictly a faith-based salvation (Council of Trent Canon 9 curses one with an anathema that says "a sinner is justified by faith alone"). Yes, I agree that many Protestants pursue the false gospel of works-based salvation. Sola Scriptura Protestants don't teach this, Rome certainly does (see above).

@@PatrickTube644 I do not put my faith in Catholicism. I do not put my faith in Christianity. I put my faith in Jesus Christ. That being said, if there are practices and doctrines that help keep me pointed towards Christ, I adopt them. Likewise, anything that keeps me away from Christ, I reject. This is the lens through which I have accepted the Catholic doctrines I have encountered thus far. With regards to your claim "Rome is a works-based salvation without doubt," I ran a simple Google search: "does catechism teach works based salvation" - the top result leads to an article from Catholic Answers titled "Does the Catholic Church Teach That Works Can Obtain Salvation?" that provides a surface level contradiction to your claim. TL;DR: The Catholic Church has never taught such a doctrine. Thank you for citing references to the Bible, Catechism, and the Council of Trent. The best-case scenario here is that you share these in good faith and are taking them out of context. In which case, please stop misrepresenting Catholic teaching. Just like we wouldn't want Muslims or Jews misrepresenting the Bible to tear down Christianity, Catholics don't want anyone misrepresenting the Catechism or Tradition to tear down Catholicism. And I hope I have not misrepresented a position either. A less generous case scenario is that you are insinuating that there is a huge conspiracy theory where Catholic scholarship is intentionally lying about what Catholic authority actually teaches. I pray to God that this is not your intent. This has challenged me to dive deeper into my faith, so for that, you are already a blessing. And since my faith is in the Trinity, I hope you consider this a "victory" in terms of advancing the Kingdom of God.

Thanks for watching. Sure, it's called a short. You can watch the full length here: th-cam.com/video/UCBokwKagI8/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/pT6wqqzcKKc/w-d-xo.html

Thanks for watching my video Joshua. I agree that God in His perfect righteousness hates evil.

Thanks for watching my video. The Bible does in fact teach the Trinity and the Christian church has defended this for 2000 years. You are on the wrong side of history and the Bible. The Bible refers to three distinct persons as "God": God the Father (Galatians 1:1). the Word [Jesus Christ] was God (John 1:1,14). you have lied to the Holy Spirit....You have not lied to men but to God (Acts 5:3-4). The Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit have all existed eternally as God. There has never been a time when this Triune relationship has not existed. The eternal God (Rom. 16:26, cf. Psalm 90:2). The King eternal (1 Tim. 1:17, in context Paul is speaking of Jesus, cf. 1:15-16; 6:15). The eternal Spirit (Hebrews 9:14). The Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit are completely equal in sharing the divine Being and the attributes of the one true God. All are: Omnipresent (all places at once): The heavens, even the highest heaven, cannot contain you [Father] (1 Kings 8:27). Do not I fill heaven and earth? (Jeremiah 23:24). I [the Son] am with you always, to the very end of the age (Matt.28:20) Where can I go from your Spirit? Where can I flee from your presence? (Psalm 139:7). Omniscient (all knowing): His understanding has no limit (Psalm 147:5; cf., 139:3-4). Jesus' disciples said Now we can see that you know all things (John 16:30; cf., 21:17). The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God (1 Cor. 2:11). Omnipotent (all powerful, sovereign): The LORD does whatever pleases him, in the heavens and on the earth (Psalm 135:6). Jesus came to them and said, 'All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me' (Matt. 28:18). The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you (Luke 1:35). What did Jesus mean when He said, “The Father is greater than I” (Jn. 14:28)? You are missing the context of Jesus being the God-man. When Jesus spoke these words, He was on earth assuming the role of a servant (Philip. 2:5-8), being obedient to the Father (Jn. 14:31). So, yes, the Father is greater in role than Jesus, but not in being (Col. 2:9). In Jn. 14, the disciples were distressed when Jesus said He was going away. Jesus instead said they should be glad that He is returning to be in full glory with the Father (Jn. 17:5). In full glory Jesus will send the Holy Spirit (14:26; 16:7) to empower them in an even greater way (Jn. 14:12). And as our High Priest, will also answer our prayers (Jn. 14:13-14). Jesus called his Father "my God'' even after his resurrection. Yes, Jesus was really a man as He took on human flesh, part of His humility (Philip. 2:5-11). When He added humanity to His divine nature He didn’t come as an atheist. He came as a worshipper of God. That in no way denies the Trinity, it only shows you don’t understand it. Philippians 2:9? You didn’t finish the passage, “Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, 10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” Paul quotes Isaiah 45:23, “By myself I have sworn; from my mouth has gone out in righteousness a word that shall not return: ‘To me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear allegiance.” This equates Jesus with Yahweh. Nowhere does the Bible say that Jesus was created. John 1:3 “All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.” If nothing was made without Jesus He is not created, and John 1:1 calls Him God. The word firstborn in Colossians 1:15 means head of or prime position. Was David Jesse’s firstborn son? No: “Jesse fathered Eliab his firstborn” (1 Chron. 2:13). But, “David [Jesse’s 8th son], my servant…. I will make him the firstborn, the highest of the kings of the earth” (Psalm 89:20, 27). Was Christ the first one to be raised from the dead (Col. 1:18)? No! Many were raised before Him--Elijah raised the widow’s son (1 Kings 17:7-24). Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead (John 11:38-44). While they died again, Jesus was raised in an immortal body. He is the firstborn (1:18) to have resurrection life (Romans 6:9)! You are not understanding what the term firstborn means. Revelation 3:14 uses the Greek word Arche which means ruler, first cause, origin. It does not say that Jesus was created or had a beginning, rather it means He is the ruler and first cause of all creation. These objections from you are not new at all and have been answered many times by many Christians. I would suggest you read some books on the Trinity, there are plenty out there and I can recommend some for you if you care to look into this.

@@PatrickTube644 The Trinity doctrine (three persons in one God, all coequal, coeternal and consubstantial) was not fully formulated until about the end of the fourth century. In John 1:1, the Greek word theos (“god”) appears twice, but there’s a key grammatical difference between the two uses. The first theos is preceded by the definite article ho (“the”), which indicates a specific identity - in this case, Almighty God. However, the second theos, referring to the Word, does not have the definite article, making it indefinite. Without the article, theos describes a characteristic or quality of the Word, rather than identifying the Word as Almighty God. This shows that the Word is “divine,” “a god,” or “god-like,” but not the same as ho theos (“the God”). Also, John 1:1 says “the Word was with God.” Being "with" someone indicates distinction. Since the Word was with God, the Word cannot also be God. Acts chapter 5 doesn’t say that the holy spirit is coequal, coeternal, and consubstantial with the Father and the Son, or that it’s the third person of the Trinity. I think it is an error to read Acts 5:3-4 and interpret it the following way: “Since Ananias lied to the holy spirit and then it says he lied to God, therefore the holy spirit must be God, the third person of the Trinity.” God was acting _through_ the holy spirit, meaning that Ananias' lie was ultimately against God because God works through his spirit. The holy spirit is described in the Bible as God's power (Luke 1:35) that He uses to carry out His will. For example, it is called God's finger in Luke 11:20 and Matthew 12:28, showing that it is an extension of God’s authority. While the holy spirit belongs to God, it is not presented in scripture as God himself or a distinct person within a trinity. Colossians 1:15 and 16 says that by means of the Son, the firstborn of every creature, all things were created. (John 1:3 says all things were made through the Word.) When it says "all things", does that mean Jesus is God because nothing existed before Jesus? No. Verse 16 says that all things were created _by_ Jesus Christ, or _through_ Jesus Christ. When it says "all things were created by him", it is understood that this does not include God himself. Paul said something similar in 1 Corinthians 15:27, 28. There it states that God put all things under Jesus' feet. Does that mean that God is also under Jesus’ feet? Paul clarifies in verse 27: "But when he says all things have been subjected, it is evident that this does not include the One who subjected all things to him." Philippians 2:9-11 tells us that God exalted Jesus “so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow... and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father” (ESV). This shows that Jesus is honored, but the ultimate glory goes to God the Father. Jesus himself never sought personal glory-his purpose was always to bring glory to his Father, who sent him (John 7:18). Revelation 3:14 refers to Jesus as "the beginning of the creation by God." The Greek word "arkhe" in Revelation 3:14 means “beginning”. Liddell and Scott’s Greek-English Lexicon lists “beginning” as its first meaning. John uses various forms of "arkhe" more than 20 times, and they always have the common meaning of “beginning,” not “beginner.” Also, the usual Scriptural meaning of the term “firstborn” is the one born first in order of time, such as a firstborn child. It is most often used in the sense of “the oldest son of a father.”

You claim the Trinity doctrine was not fully formulated until about the end of the fourth century. That's why I suggested you study the history and biblical facts. The Trinity was not formulated by anyone but revealed in the Bible (I've already given you evidence for this). Your John 1 eisegesis would not be taken seriously by any biblical scholar. The Bible tells us the Holy Spirit is: • Eternal (Hebrews 9:14) • Omnipresent (Psalm 139:7) • Omniscient (1 Cor. 2:11) • Omnipotent (Luke 1:35) • Holy (Rom. 1:4). • Lord (2 Corinthians 3:17) The Holy Spirit also: • shares God's glory (1 Peter 4:14) • was operative in the Old Testament (Nehemiah 9:20) • is involved in creation (Psalm 104:30; cf., Gen. 1) • was involved in Jesus' birth (Luke 1:35) and resurrection (Romans 1:4; 8:11) • justifies (1 Cor. 6:11); seals (Eph. 1:13-14); sanctifies (Romans 15:16); and strengthens (Ephesians 3:16) believers. You still have no idea what firstborn means and apparently have closed your eyes to the explanation and verses I gave. Until you get that understanding right you will err in all other things. In repeating Philippians 2 you simply close your eyes to Isaiah 45. Again, a misunderstanding of Rev 3:14. Revelation 1:8 will close your case altogether: “Look, he is coming with the clouds,” and “every eye will see him, even those who pierced him”; and all peoples on earth “will mourn because of him.” So shall it be! Amen. “I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God, “who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty.” (Revelation 1:7-8). 1) Who does the Bible say is “coming with the clouds”? Jesus answered this: "At that time people will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory” (Mark 13:26; 14:62; cf. Matt. 16:27; Daniel 7:13). “For you know what instructions we gave you through the Lord Jesus… For the Lord himself will descend from heaven” (1 Thess. 4:2,16). 2) Who is “pierced”? Who is being mourned? “They look on me, on him whom they have pierced, they shall mourn for him” (Zech. 12:10). 3) Who is the Alpha and Omega? “I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end." 14 Blessed are those who wash their robes, so that they may have the right to the tree of life and that they may enter the city by the gates. 15 Outside are the dogs and sorcerers and the sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices falsehood. 16 "I, Jesus, have sent my angel to testify to you about these things for the churches” (Rev. 22:13-16, Jesus is the One speaking in Rev. 22). “And he said to me, "It is done! I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. To the thirsty I will give from the spring of the water of life without payment” (Rev. 21:6, Jesus is the One who gives living water, John 7:38). 4) Since we clearly see that Jesus is a) the One coming in the clouds b) the One who was pierced and mourned c) the Alpha and the Omega, it clearly follows that Jesus is the Lord God, “who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty.” Over 50 times in the Old Testament God is called “Almighty” (Ex. 6:3). Conclusion: Revelation 1:8 is Jesus proclaiming to be God!

@@PatrickTube644 In Revelation 1:8, the one who says he is the Alpha and the Omega is called the Lord God, “who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty.” Verse 4 refers to this same person who is called "him who is, and who was, and who is to come." Then in verse 5, Jesus is spoken of as a *different* person - "and from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness." It is clear from these verses that Jesus is not the one called the Almighty, the Lord God and who is the Alpha and the Omega. If you read Revelation chapter 1 carefully, you will see that a distinction is made between God the Father and Jesus Christ. They are not the same. The very first verse says that John received a revelation from Jesus Christ, which God gave him. Verses 5 and 6 say that Jesus “made us to be a kingdom and priests to serve his God and Father.” Verse 7 refers to Jesus coming with the clouds, but it is clear that verse 8 is referring to God the Father as “the Alpha and the Omega.” It is not referring to Jesus. In Revelation 22:6-7, one of the seven angels is speaking to John. In verse 8, John is speaking. In verses 9-11, the angel is speaking to John again. Then in verses 12-15, the Alpha and the Omega is speaking. Verse 12 is the third time that the Alpha and the Omega is mentioned in the book of Revelation. The first two occurrences clearly show that the Alpha and Omega refers to God, not Jesus. Logically, the third occurrence of Alpha and Omega in Revelation 22:12 would also refer to God. In Revelation 22:16, Jesus is speaking, and afterward the spirit and the bride are speaking. Since there are several speakers in this chapter, we can’t insist that Jesus is the one speaking in verse 12 and therefore say that Jesus is Almighty God, especially since Revelation 1:4-8 shows that the one called the Alpha and the Omega is a different person than Jesus Christ. In the context of chapter 22 and in the entire book of Revelation, a clear distinction is made between God and Jesus. For example, Revelation 22:1-3 mentions “the throne of God and of the Lamb” two times. The Lamb is obviously Jesus and is not the same as God who is on the throne.

The Father is not the one “coming with the clouds.” The Father has not been "pierced." The Father is not the "Alpha and Omega" Revelation is speaking of. Try all you want to twist this, it won't work. Rev. 1:8 is speaking of Jesus who is coming with the clouds, Jesus who has been pierced and Jesus who is the Alpha and Omega.

Thanks Nelson for watching my video. I get your comments and that's where I used to be. I believe that God always has a purpose in giving His word to people. The Prophet Isaiah said of the Lord, “My word … goes out from my mouth; it shall not return to me empty, but it shall accomplish that which I purpose, and shall succeed in the thing for which I sent it” (Isa. 55:11). When I use the Bible as my primary source in witnessing, God’s purpose will always be accomplished. I can trust that the word of God will succeed in the very thing for which He sent it. Scripture, which allows us to tell “the good news about Jesus” (Acts 8:35), succeeds in the conversion of unbelievers (Rom. 10:14-15; Acts 6:7, 13:5-12, 13:48, 17:11-12, 18:10-11; 1 Pet. 1:23), and the justification (Gal. 3:8; Rom. 4:3), sanctification (John 17:17; 1 Pet. 1:16; Matt. 13:23) and glorification of believers (1 Cor. 15:54-55; 2 Thess. 2:14). All this is accomplished because the word of truth, the gospel of our salvation, convicts sinners (John 16:8) and seals believers with the promised Holy Spirit (Eph. 1:13). I know that means nothing to you, but I thank you for your comments.

Thank you for your encouragement and kind remarks, they really inspired me.

Thanks for watching Amanda. Mckenna was the real deal and I loved it when she said she looked in the mirror and saw that little girl again. Wow!

Thanks for watching my video. So, is your critique, that is basically saying that no one can be correct, correct? This is a self-defeating comment.

@@PatrickTube644 No, not at all. You're not understanding. My critique is that you haven't attempted to even prove your premises. You believe in the bible; fine. That doesn't mean someone else does. Other people have entirely different religio-philosophical conceptions of the world. They're also not required to just accept what you believe, either; especially when it goes unproven. All other issues with this video aside (as others have astutely pointed out, this kid doesn't understand Taoism and neither do you), just saying "well bible says this" isn't an argument. You cannot independently demonstrate that your God is only good. Even if the claim is true in Christianity (it's not; the bible doesn't say this, Jews never believed this, Jesus never taught this), all you can do is peddle verses; which themselves are not proof, and never will be. The argument is essentially "bible (or my understanding of it) is true, I believe it, therefore you should too". That's far from compelling, let alone a sound thread of logic.

You can't run away from your original critique which was pure relativism. Hey, nobody can be correct so why even bother. If nobody can be correct then your critique is not correct either. Self-defeating. So, you say I haven't attempted to even prove my premises. Really? You can make that critique from a 60 second video? You weren't privy to our entire conversation. If you want proof of the Bible I suggest you watch my video here: th-cam.com/video/-YgHjqiBM9w/w-d-xo.html You seem to imply that you know Taoism by saying I don't, yet, you give no proof to such a claim (see, I can play that game also). Please tell me just how do I independently demonstrate that God is only good to you? What standards of proof would satisfy you? I just have to ask, based on your relativism, how do you define good? So, verses can't be proof, yet, you make a blanket statement that neither the Jews nor Jesus taught that God is good. What is your basis for that statement. You can't use verses, according to you, to prove such a claim. God is good--Jews: Ex 34:6; 1 Chronicles 16:34; Psalm 25:8. Jesus: Mark 10:18.

@@PatrickTube644 I can't run away from the original critique? More like you can't walk back the strawman. I never said that which you claim I said. Ironically, it's very phariseeic of you. >Entire conversation You made the clip, dude. You obviously thought this was 60 seconds worth of some clever apologetics, otherwise it would have been left on the cutting room floor. You've just a bruised ego because most people can clearly see how facile it is. Your god isn't only good; certainly not in the Old Testament. Let's break down his rationale; he created angels, of whom approximately 1/3 turned evil. He created a tree that possessed and bestowed knowledge of both good and evil. In Judaism, God is responsible for both good and evil. He floods the world and kills untold numbers of people. He destroys two cities and kills further untold numbers of people. He lays plagues on Egypt and kills untold numbers of people. It's openly apparent that he knows evil, is capable of evil, can create beings that are evil, and commits his own acts of evil. He clearly thought it was a terribly clever idea to given humanity free will and then, disappointed that they made the "wrong" choice, proceeded with a series of experiments that included geno-cide in order to rectify this apparent mistake. All else failing, he came up with the sterling plan to pseudo-sacrifice his son, who is also himself (despite a prompt resurrection soon thereafter), unnecessarily in order to rectify a mistake he made, yet calls it mercy and still proceeds to eternally damn anyone who calls it out for being the farce that it is. Forgive me if I'm not wholly convinced by this fanfiction-tier piece of narrative incoherence. I've seen better writing from Disney in the past 10 years, and that's saying something. The idea that all of this is solely 'good' is absurd on its face - but hey, I'm not the one make the claim. You are. Your conception of god clearly is not all good, and to their credit, the gnostics were on to something when they noticed the glaring disparity between old testament god and new testament god, and gathered that it was self-evidently not the same being described. I'm sympathetic to that view, if solely because it at least tries to be coherent - unlike the mainstream, post-Nicean Christianity you lot hold to. Verses aren't proof of anything other than *what* you believe. They're not proof of *why* you believe something. They're not proof of *how* the world is. That's the trouble with abrahamism; it's terribly shallow, and you're told what to believe through dictatorial decree rather than intellectual enquiry or empirical truth. You can throw infini-verses at me all day long. It doesn't prove that what you believe is true. It doesn't prove that any of it is anything more than middle-eastern bronze age fairytale. It doesn't prove that Taoism or any other system of thought is incorrect. It doesn't demonstrate why I should change course in life to believe it adamantly. It just proves you believe something different to others.

You cry strawman, yet, you give me no reason why it is. My original critique stands based on your relativism until you explain to me why I was responding with a strawman (you are very good about claiming you have been misunderstood without giving any reason why). I didn't leave anything on the cutting floor. Go to my video section in my TH-cam channel and you can watch my two part 18 minute interview with Cameron (just like you didn't watch my Bible video you won't watch this either). To this: God isn't only good; certainly not in the Old Testament. Let's break down his rationale; he created angels, of whom approximately 1/3 turned evil. He created a tree that possessed and bestowed knowledge of both good and evil. In Judaism, God is responsible for both good and evil. He floods the world and kills untold numbers of people. He destroys two cities and kills further untold numbers of people. He lays plagues on Egypt and kills untold numbers of people. Prove all of that with verses. Wait! Your not allowed to do that, right? Do you see your amazing hypocrisy? You have to go to all these verse to prove your case, yet, as you said, "all you can do is peddle verses; which themselves are not proof, and never will be." Your whole self-defeating arguments are what is absurd. You talked about logic before, yet, you don't seem to think logic applies to you.

Thanks for watching my video. Romans 3 pertains to your comments: "for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. 26 It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus." Why did Christ die? It was “so that God would be just and the justifier. Jesus’ death proves that God is just in dealing with our sin. The penalty of sin, which is death, was paid by His Son. When Jesus becomes the justifier, He gives us His perfect record and His righteousness. The death of Jesus demonstrates that justice has been served. Jesus’ death vindicates God against any charge of injustice or unrighteousness. However, "the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God" (1 Cor. 1:18).