Well, if one denies the Trinity they are usually no loner considered a Christian, since the Trinity is a fundamental core belief. It affects the atonement, worship, and God's ontology. I point that out in the 2nd link in the information section. I was shocked to when I also was shocked when I found out how many people call themselves Christians and deny the Trinity.
That is not what He is claiming. Jesus is speaking of ontology, "before Abraham was I AM." This is saying that though Abraham had a beginning He did not. WHAT! Mormons do not! They rely on their own books for mormon understanding of scripture. The founders of JWs were self-educated and make several false prophecies. They started with a grave misunderstand of scripture with western eyes.
@InspiringPhilosophy What's even more amazing is that Charles Taze Russell lied about knowing Greek and admitted he didn't know it when pressed by a lawyer. This alone should demonstrate that JW teachings are based on a very weak theological foundation.
The bible said the great whore Roman catholic church was filled with the blood of the saints....not heretics... The vast majority of the saints the catholic church killed were non trinitarian saints
Non trinitarians were the orthodox church and they baptized in the name of jesus christ also....not in the trinity of titles.... They changed water baptism to the trinity of titles because they were also changing the view of godhead to trinity.... Neither the Trinity or baptizing in the trinity of titles were orthodox....everything early trinitarians wrote is false and the opposite is true....
Satan is going to use a trinitarian man called the Pope to become incarnated in....because the trinity is of the devil and the false doctrine that the Pope propgates and deceives you with
No, see my video, "The Trinity in the Old Testament" for Deuteronomy 6:4. If you are asking questions particularly about the Trinity. See my video, "What is the Trinity. Both links are in the information section.
Thank you! It will be up either Friday or Saturday, and that will close out this series on the Trinity for a while. I need to return the Ontological and Teleological argument for a little bit. Then eventually I want to do a video explaining why Jesus had to die on the cross.
John 1:1 says the Word is God. John 1:14 says the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. How much more context do you need? It is clear that the word became flesh and the Word is God. See my video, "Refuting Objections to the Trinity (Part 2)".
They did not se the word god like we do today, this is misreading scripture with western eyes. The angels were never called "I AM". So you are practically admitting you do not know the truth. Then why should I listen to you?
This isn't saying Jesus had a beginning, it says Jesus is "the beginning". The is verse is telling us Jesus is where creation began. The writer is not saying Jesus was the 1st created being, but that the Logos is the point where God's creation began. The Greek word 'arche' means top, first, or corner. The Greeks called the first of something the 'arche', as the a begining starts at the "top." No way does the verse say Jesus was created.
I agree with the whole video except your statement that Jesus became fully divine again after His resurrection. The Incarnation is a permanent status. Jesus is still fully man and fully God.
But after his resurrection his body was not normal body like us .his body is spirtual body .he suddenly came in house when the door was lock but at the same time he can eat and drink and all of his apostle touched his body
After jesus come back to earth the first resurrection will happen and the believer who born with holyspirit will raise from grave and live with jesus for 1000 year with new spiritual body not our normal body (sin body)
That before His incarnation Christ, the divine One, already was the Son of God {John 1:18; Rom. 8:3}. By incarnation He put on an element, the human flesh, which had nothing to do with divinity, that part of Him needed to be sanctified and uplifted by passing through death and resurrection. By resurrection His human nature was sanctified, uplifted and transformed, by resurrection He was designated the Son of God with His humanity { Rom. 1:4; Acts 13: 33; Heb.1:5}. His resurrection was His designation. Now as the Son of God, He possesses humanity as well as divinity. By incarnation He brought God into man, by resurrection He He brought man into God, that is, He brought His humanity into the divine sonship. In this way the only begotten Son of God was made the firstborn Son of God, possessing both divinity and humanity. God is using such a Christ, the firstborn Son, who possesses both divinity and humanity, as the producer and prototype, the model, to produce His many sons {Rom. 8:29-30}. And those who believed in and received His Son, will to be designated and revealed as the sons of God, as He was in glory of His resurrection {Rom.8:19; 21}, and with Him they will express God.
No it doesn't, arche is used to mean origin or active cause at times. The verse doesn't contradict the rest of scripture that says Jesus is uncreated. It will be in my next video, "Refuting Objections to the Trinity (part 2)". And once again, Protokos doesn't refer to birth order, but rank.
No, once we understand the original Greek, it doesn't refute the Trinity and I go on to show that. You are confusing the ontological structure with the economic structure of the Trinity.
You do realize 1 Corinthians 1:30 is not a quote of Proverbs 8. Paul and Solomon are not talking of the same topics. Paul is saying "And because of him you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, righteousness and sanctification and redemption," In no way does this say Jesus is created. Again, see my video, "The Trinity in the New Testament"
Then that contradicts Col 1:16 which says, "For in him all things were created". Col 1:15 just says Jesus the prOTokos of all creation. He is the head and has rank over all creation. Analogy: A rooster has to have rank over all hens, but that doesn't mean he is a hen because he is the highest rank of them.
I don't care if you disagree, you have refuted offered any rebuttal, and anything you have done has been refute. Remember that salvation can only come from the Lord (Jonah 2:9), who became man (John 1:14). So a man cannot be given credit for salvation, only God who became man can. I point this out here: /watch?v=G1FlAC3hz5c
Did you watch part 2? "The Trinity Explained 2 (with reason)". A link is in the information section. The idea is not hard to understand, as many people have told me. The details are obviously beyond our grasp. We cannot picture a 4D cube, for example.
It is not about the claim but about the best explanation and reason backing the claim. Anyone can make a claim, do they have the evidence to back it up.
You were warned against mass-commenting, nothing has been deleted since you stopped. Dr. Brown has already addressed this. You are confusing essence with abilities. God has the ability & has in the old testament taken on the form of man (Ex. 24, Gen. 18) to reveal Himself to us. God in essence is God, but He has the ability to take the form of flesh, which is what Jesus has done. Plainly, Jesus is a walking Shekhinah. God revealing Himself through flesh, while being God in heaven as the Father.
Of course i don't dispute that. And if that is your argument then you do not understand what the doctrine of the Trinity is. Of course the Son's source is in the Father.
***** IF Col 1:16 had of said... Col 1:15 He is the Firstborn of All Creation. Col 1:16 BECAUSE Jehovah created him first. Then.. you would have a point. But that is NOT what it is saying. Col 1:16-17 is talking about him being the origin of Creation. Col 1:18 Thus.. has the preeminence over it because it belongs to the creator of it.
It also needs to be said that if people wouldn't proof text their way through scripture they would have seen the point Paul was trying to make. Jesus isn't the first created thing just as He wasn't the first person resurrected. However He certainly is above everything. Further when you consider that john opens his gospel by saying that there wasn't one thing made that Jesus didn't make, if He were a created being, He'd paradoxically would have to have created Himself.
Ok and? It is not about any old conclusion, but the best and most logical one. Which has the most explanatory power. The Bible is clear there is only one God, not separate demigods.
I agree that using the verse about wisdom being created is a stretch. But the parallel is clear and the poetic personification strengthens the idea that Jesus being the Logos is about being the perfect expression of the word, will and character of God, not that Jesus himself is God. I mostly agree with the rest of the video.
Peace be with you Friend ❤️ Jesus is Indeed the Perfect Expression of the Word, Will & Character of God(the Father) because he is God(the Son). He is the Radiance of God's Glory & the Express Image of his Nature(Hebrews 1:3).
Wisdom is heavily personified in chapter 8 and 9, the other examples you give aren't at all. It needs to be noted that many of the early Church fathers, such as Origen, Lactantius, Clement, Justin Martyr, Cyprian etc. all identified Jesus as the Wisdom in the Proverbs. Even when Arius used Wisdom as a proof text as being created Jesus, Athanasius didn't dispute that it was Jesus. He argued that Arius was being overly literal with a poetic text, a rather weak argument it has to be said. Regarding the hebrew word qanah not meaning create, the problem with this argument is that the writers of the Septuagint used the word create in their translation. Also if it means possessed, this implied that God at sometime didn't have wisdom, which surely makes no sense.
“Also if it means possessed, this implies that God at sometime didn’t have wisdom, which surely makes no sense.” On that note, wouldn’t the same apply to “created”? Whether it’s “possessed” or “created,” both can imply that there was a time when God did not have wisdom, which is a conclusion that we must reject. In other words, that Proverbs passage is difficult to interpret alone. We need to look elsewhere in scripture to get a more complete picture.
@@zekdom "On that note, wouldn’t the same apply to “created”? Whether it’s “possessed” or “created,” both can imply that there was a time when God did not have wisdom, which is a conclusion that we must reject." Not if Jesus is the Wisdom in the Proverbs and he was created as put forth by Arius then it does make sense.
@@adrianwalker3607 Sincerely, I don’t follow. How does Arius’ explanation of creation avoid the implication that God didn’t have wisdom at one point? If there was a point when Jesus did not exist - and Proverbs 8:22 applies to Jesus - I don’t see how we can escape the implication that God didn’t always have wisdom.
@@zekdom No problem, I appreciate the tact. In the sense that Wisdom here isn't divine wisdom or wisdom in the abstract but Jesus, who was created full of wisdom. And here is the symbol of wisdom. If he was created full of wisdom then this of course came from his Father, God / Yahweh / Jehovah. So Yahweh would have been without the symbol of wisdom, his son, but never not 'all knowing' as Jesus' wisdom would have come from his creator his Father Yahweh.
@@adrianwalker3607 I was hoping my curiosity would come across well; that is very difficult to convey online without hinting at malice. I appreciate your clarification. Okay so, your point is that Jesus is the **symbol** of wisdom who was created - thus avoiding the implication that God didn’t always have wisdom in terms of omniscience? That makes more sense. But one thing I’m still missing, and I’m not trying to be dense here… If Jesus is the symbol of wisdom and not a reference to God’s wisdom (omniscience), I still don’t see how “possessed” is more problematic than “created”. Couldn’t we say: both imply that the symbol of wisdom didn’t exist at one point - neither implying that God’s wisdom didn’t exist at one point?
Time-stamps 0:40 , 1:15, 1:37 - Proverbs 8:22 1:28 - Proverbs 4:13 1:35 - Inspiring Philosophy said, “If wisdom is understood to be a created being because it is personified, then we have to conclude that every time Solomon personifies a virtue, he is speaking of a created being. In actuality, Solomon uses poetic personification for the desirableness of wisdom so he can compare it to the desirableness of women. That is why wisdom is personified and given effeminate pronouns. *See Proverbs 8:2-3,11* “ 2:36 - Acts 20:28 and modalism 3:00 - Angel 4:28 - Jude 1:9 4:53, 5:07 - Michael the Archangel and Jesus, Hebrews 1:5-6 5:41, 6:32 - Michael the Archangel and 1 Thessalonians 4:16 and 2 Thessalonians 1:7 6:55 - Colossians 1:15 7:23 - Jesus praying to God 7:43, 8:02 - John 14:28 and 1 Corinthians 11:3 8:20 - John Chrysostom’s take 8:31 - “position” and “essence” 8:45 - Hebrews 2:9 and Philippians 2:5-7
1. Prov 8 :22. Unfortunately for our video maker, this scripture has been used from the second century on by Christian apologists to argue that the Son pre-existed . If he is going to insist on 'personification' then the best example of that is the Holy Spirit which in the OT is an it and also an it in the NT, but frequently personified, especially as the paraclete. 2. Christian apologists also used the Angel of the Lord/Yahweh's angel to argue that the Christ, the Son, pre-existed. But these logos theologians were platonists and believed the logos was a secondary/ intermediary God. The angel of the Lord, according to the Bible, to Jews and other Christian groups is an angel and not God himself. 3. Angels are called 'Sons of God'. 4. To escape the obvious conclusion of 'firstborn, the video maker engages in redefinitionism. He has no alternative otherwise his entire theology collapses. 5. We then have a whole list of scriptures that need to be explained away and assuming a Trinity allows him to do this. Hundreds of times Jesus is differentiated from God (not the Father ). He is shown to be subordinate etc but this is dismissed as Jesus in his human nature. But then he says after his resurrection, Jesus was once again fully divine. Unfortunately, the resurrected Jesus still had a God. (John 20 :17). The glorified Jesus in heaven still has a God )Rev 3 :12). Clearly, a 'God' who himself has a God is not the ultimate God.
Peace be with you Friend ❤️ 1. But the Holy Spirit isn't Personified. He is Alive, has a Will, Emotions. Personification is used when a Passage abcribes a Personal Characteristics or Action to a thing that cannot be interpreted literally. For Example: Rivers cannot clap their hands(Psalm 98:8). So it is using Personification. However, for the Holy Spirit, there is Nothing in His Descriptions that cannot be True of an Actual Spiritual being. 2) The One's eho believe the Angel of the Lord to be the Pre-incarnated Jesus, will also believe it to be God, because he calls Himself God(Genesis 31:11-13). It is either a Theophany or a Christophany. 3) Indeed they are. But as the Father said, No Angel is Begotten (Hebrew 1:5). Jesus is the Uniqly Son of God because he is Uncreated & shares in the Same Essence as the Father.
4) Firstborn can be used in Many ways. Sometimes In order or in Rank. With Jesus, it is in Rank. 5) Jesus calling the Father "God" does Not make him any less God. Jesus is The Son, so he has The Father from the Same Essence. Same way an Earthly Son calls his Father "Human", it doesn't make The Son any less Human. Both the Father & the Son have the Same Essence(God). The Father acknowledges the Son as God, Equal to him (Hebrews 1:6,8,10-12) ❤️✝️
8:13 That's subordinationism. Jesus' divine will is the same will as the Father's. It's just his human nature that submits to God because all humans are supposed to. As the Athanasian Creed says, all 3 persons are co-equal in majesty 8:57 He is always fully divine. He has a 100% divine nature and a distinct 100% human nature that's both in the person of Christ. He was never not fully divine.
On the rebuttal about Colossians 1:15, you tried to refute the "firstborn" of the scripture while ignoring the other two significant parts of the same scripture. He is the firstborn of all CREATION, the IMAGE of the Invisible God. To be the firstborn of all creation, whether literally the firstborn or only in the sense you portrayed, that of privilege of inheritance, in both cases it is of CREATION, thus, created, thus a 'creature'. God himself is neither created nor a creature. And the other word, IMAGE is quite clear. The word means that he 'reflects' that of the Invisible God, not that he is the Invisible God. In other words, an image of anything is not the actual item, but simply a facsimile, such as a painting, drawing, photograph or mirror is an image of, not the actual. Consider the book of Genesis, where we read "Let US make man in our IMAGE." The scripture in Genesis shows that Jesus is talking to his Father. Otherwise, he'd be talking to himself if he was God, and that would not be reasonable. And he isn't talking to the Angels, as they have nothing to do with 'creating' man. And the fact that they said, "make man in our IMAGE", there the word image is not inferring that they are going to be making man Gods equal to them. Thus, being an IMAGE refers to reflecting the qualities, such as Love, Wisdom, Power and Justice, in some measure. So Jesus, being the IMAGE of the Invisible God, reflects his qualities. That is why he said, "If you have seen me you have seen the Father also." Not that he is saying he is the Father, but that he reflects the wonderful qualities of his father. Also, getting back to "firstborn", the scriptures show that the inheritance is actually meant for a "literal" firstborn, but that the firstborn right can be handed over to another that was not actually firstborn, such as was the case where Esau sold his firstborn rights to his brother Jacob for a bowl of red lentil. While one can confuse the meaning of "firstborn" within Col 1:15, it is coupled with CREATION and IMAGE that all together makes it clear that Jesus is no part of a Trinune Godhead. He is exactly what he said he is, the SON of God. Why not take him at his word?
+Great Bread Rank doesn't mean one has to be created, and Christ being the image of the Father is not an issue either, since that is consistent with trinitarianism. To see the son is to see the Father (John 14:9). Second, Jesus and the Father talking is also consistent with Trinitarianism since they are separate persons and not the same person. You are confusing modalism with Trinitarianism. Third, that is begging the question in your view of the imago dei. That is the substantive view, which the overwhelming majority of old testament scholars reject. To be the imago dei is more consistent with an election/relational view - To be given a specific purpose or position by God. It doesn't imply special creation or a beginning point of existence. So all you are doing is assuming the substantive view, which I reject and can refute, so firstborn is not coupled with creation and image doesn't imply creation point.
***** Here is the problem with that line of thought. The bible is clear that there is ONE TRUE GOD, not 3. You cannot have it both ways. You cannot claim they are ONE, if you are going to insist they are THREE, but equal. That makes no sense and is the kind of confusing doctrine that you'd expect the devil to devise. Let's make the understanding of God as convoluted and complex as possible. The CLEAR understanding, the one a daily reader of the Bible without preconceived notions would have, is that Jesus is Jesus, his Father is Jehovah (English). Or Yeshua and Yahweh (Hebrew). One Son talks to the Father, prays to the Father, worships the Father, does the Father's will, is sent by his Father, anointed by his Father, etc. etc. It is standard faire. Even the disciples viewed Jesus as the "one mediator between God and men,", not as God himself. (1 Tim 2:5). Look up the definition of "mediator", and you find it is someone who is SEPARATE from those who need mediation. Therefore, it would be a contradiction for Jesus to be one entity with either of the parties he is trying to reconcile. There is only ONE true God. The Hebrew word "Shaddai" and the Greek word "Pantokra'tor" are both translated "Almighty". Both original-language words are repeatedly applied to Jehovah, the Father. (Ex. 6:3; Rev. 19:6) Neither expression is ever applied to either the Son or the holy spirit.
+Great Bread Yeah, and trinitarians do not say there are 3 gods, that is a straw man argument. Second you are appealing to emotion. Just because you are confused that doesn't make it evil, as that is a very fallacious argument. And again, I dealt with these objections: th-cam.com/video/xrmTjifCmw8/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/OaXjVU05odE/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/BNt5NKSse0Y/w-d-xo.html It is ironic you admit Pantokra'tor is for YHWH, since Revelation applies it to the son. The first chapter has Jesus speaking to John, calling Himself "The First and the Last", which is the same title given the the Lord (YHWH) in Isaiah 48. Jesus also says He is the Almighty (Pantokra'tor), which the Greek equivalent to the Hebrew name of God given in Exodus 3. And we also see Jesus call Himself the living one, which reflects the meaning of God personal name, I AM WHO I AM" or the existing one, as it appears in the Septuagint in Exodus 3. So Jesus once again affirms He is the eternal God.
***** Revelation applies it to YHWH, not the son. And interestingly, note how Revelation starts: "A revelation by Jesus Christ, which GOD gave him..." Why would God have to give Jesus a revelation? Aren't they the equal/same? And if you carefully read the scripture you yourself quoted by saying "the first and the last" (REV 1:4,5), you see that it applies to the Father because Jesus is mentioned separately in that same scripture! "May you have peace and kindness from "the One who is and who was and who is coming, and from the 7 spirits that are before his throne, AND FROM JESUS CHRIST." The problem you are likely dealing with is how the Greek is translated into English, using LORD for the Father and Lord for the Son (Jesus). Very confusing. But here is more. The title of Almighty (Pantokra'tor) applying to JAH is evident by noting REV 19:6 by the word Hallelujah. Notice the last three letters JAH. This literally means PRAISE JAH YOU PEOPLE. Jah in english refers to Jehovah, not Jesus. Of course many people wrongly thinks it means "praise the Lord", and therefore again blurs the lines between the two. Crafty devil. HalleluJAH. Again, Pantokra'tor applies to the Father, not the son.
+Great Bread Yeah, and in the Revelation Jesus says He is the Almighty. He is delivering the message of Jesus, and Jesus says He's the Almighty. The person speaking to John in chapter 1 is Jesus, who says, "I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God, “who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.” So you are wrong, Pantokra'tor applies to Jesus, because that is the words He uses when speaking to John.
Yeah, the problem is there are several other places where prophets see God. Again, Dr. Michael Brown address all of these verses and explains they actually confirm the Trinity: /watch?v=cJvUlrNa-Z8
I have a video on Nicaea by the way. If that is what you feel then fine, but your arguments were unconvincing. But in the end you can believe whatever you want.
You do realize just a few verses later in verse 14 is says " the Word became flesh and dwelt among us". So the passage does say in verse one the Word is God, and the Word became flesh. So Word, who is God, came in the flesh. Obviously I'm not adding or subtracting.
That doesn't make sense with the very next verse, which says "For in him all things were created". The entire universe was created in, through, and for Him, this is what the passage says He is the prOtokos of all creation. The phrasing doesn't have to include Him.
Yes, some belief he was simply a man/prophet. Some say he was an angel, who became a man, who then became a demi-god. Some say he was the first created thing and is a demi-god. There are several variations, but they all say He is not the eternal God, which is a lie.
This is the most CLEAR and concise teaching defending the Trinity I've seen. Albeit, reading some of the posts, you are guilty of casting your pearls before swine. Thank you. I'm subscribing!
***** No I am not missing the point. the Word "Because" in Col 1:16 is describing WHY he is being called "firstborn" in Col 1:15. Example. Col 1:15. I am the coach of the Baseball team. Col 1:16 Because it is my team. I lead it and teach the players how to play baseball. Col 1:17 I am in charge of all the players. Col 1:18 I am the coach, That's Why I have Preeminence over them. JUST READ THE BIBLE LIKE A BOOK AND NOT A DICTIONARY FOR THE FIRST TIME IN YOUR LIFE!! And you no longer will be a Jw.
You didn't even deal with any of the presentation that I brought up. So how on earth did you answer it if you didn't even address it? I ruined you because I used the English language.
***** I destroyed you on this. You never dealt with the context of what I even said. All you did was shut your eyes, plug your ears and shout, " last, last, la, la, la...". Denial doesn't count.
You are still thinking the the Triune God has to obey our physical laws like we do. Comparing the nature of Adam and Eve to God doesn't make sense since we are bound to 3D laws of space-time.
OK, then I challenge unitarians to present a good argument. I don't care that you think they can, the substance is what is important. Stop appealing to popular opinion. People use to think bloodletting was a good idea.
See my video, "The Trinity in the New Testament". Jesus directly said He was God several times. The problem is you are thinking in terms of a modalist God, not a Trinitarian.
Also many sincere Christians who ARE NOT 'sceptics' DONT believe in the trinity! a. It denies the uniqueness of the Father b. It denies the Supreme love of the Father & the Son. c. It denies all that Jesus said about himself c. It was ADDED long after the "Faith was delived once for all times to the Holy ones" ( Jude 3).d. Facts show It is based on Greek philosophy & Roman pagansim.
@@jjw00dw- So it says there "Let US make man in our image". Right! lets analyse that to see if it 'proves the trinity'. US ; language note: Us is the first person plural pronoun. Us is used as the object of a verb or a preposition. A speaker or writer uses us to refer both to himself or herself and to one or more other people. ( google quote ). Note ;ONE OR MORE persons involved! So no reference to THREE persons in Gel 1:26! That God's only begotten Son was with the Father in heaven at creation.Paul states that the Father created all things through the Son ( See Col:16) Thus the Father could very well have been speaking to his son! Also thr angels were no doubt invloved in creation as Job 38:7 says "The sons of the true God shouted in Joy" ( At the founding of the earth). Thus to state that gen 1:26 proves the 'trinity' is false!
TTrinity in the Bible (OT). IfIf Proverbs 8 talks about Jesus Christ, then Jesus is female? No NT writers say that Jesus was female. Only the twisted logic of Watchtower alleges that Jesus Christ is female by quoting Proverbs 8 as personification of Jesus. Would Yahweh allow angel 'Michael' to sit with Him in His throne of the universe? Never. Revelation 3:21 ...just as I was victorious and sat down with my Father on his throne.' If Jesus is Michael, then his death would be sufficient to pay for the sins of Lucifer (another angel who rebelled and sinned against God). The divine vacuum in the human heart prompted carnal men in human history to invent distant/remote gods who do not interfere with their lives, so that they can make wars, kill, rampage, rape, rob, and get rid of anyone who disagrees with them. Remote gods do not love them or demand morality, righteousness, or justice. They can be as cruel as the gods they represent. On the contrary, the Bible presents a God who is constantly involved with his creation and man. He loves, judges, and redeems man. In Genesis 1:1-2 Elohim is used which literally means Gods. Next sentence, God again reveals two beings in the Godhead ‘God and His Spirit’ doing separate works, why? “No man will say I built my house, and my hands painted it!!”. In Matthew 27:46, Mark 15:34, Jesus used Eloi, Eloi or Eli, Eli, the singular form of Elohim). Let us make man in our image. Is God speaking to angels or using majestic plural? The omniscient and omnipotent One seeking the support of his angels in making man? That belittles God! God created angels by his breath. Does God require angelic approval or support in making man? The Bible does not say so?. The Bible says man alone bears the ‘image and likeness’ of God and not angels. Do we humans share our plans for our children with our slaves/servants? No intelligent person will do that. Does the OT reveal Trinity? No, but speaks of ‘Yahweh’ becoming man. Yes - almost all books of the Old Testament foretell the God of Israel coming in flesh a revelation of his self-giving love that God revealed in Jesus. If anyone thinks it is blasphemy to call Jesus God, then the large number of Old Testament prophecies about ‘Yahweh’ coming to the earth will contradict themselves and end-up as mere pagan myths of the Jews! (Or the alleged corrections Jews made in their scripture to support incarnation of God). Why? Though the Hebrew prophets were monotheistic in their belief, they declared about “Yahweh’ coming to this earth in their prophecies - there are over 300 Messianic prophecies in the Old Testament concerning Messiah, some of them are: Numbers 24:17 - "I see him, but not now; I behold him, but not near; A star shall come forth from Jacob, A scepter shall rise from Israel, and shall crush through the forehead of Moab, and tear down all the sons of Sheth.” Isaiah 7:14 - "Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, a virgin will be with child and bear a son, and she will call His name Immanuel.” Isaiah 9:6 - “For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us; And the government will rest on His shoulders; And His name will be called Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.” Isaiah 11:1 - “A shoot will come up from the stump of Jesse; from his roots a Branch will bear fruit.” Isaiah 42:1 - “The Servant - Here is my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen one in whom I delight; I will put my Spirit on him, and he will bring justice to the nations.” (Jesus came as a servant). Isaiah 50:6 - “The suffering Servant - I offered my back to those who beat me, my cheeks to those who pulled out my beard; I did not hide my face from mocking and spitting.” (Trial of Jesus) Isaiah 53:3-7 - “He was despised and forsaken of men, a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief; And like one from whom men hide their face; He was despised, and we did not esteem Him. Surely our griefs He Himself bore, and our sorrows He carried; Yet we ourselves esteemed Him stricken, Smitten of God, and afflicted. But He was pierced through for our transgressions, He was crushed for our iniquities. The chastening for our well-being fell upon Him, and by His scourging we are healed. All of us like sheep that have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; But the LORD has caused the iniquity of us all to fall on Him. He was oppressed and He was afflicted, Yet He did not open His mouth; like a lamb that is led to slaughter, and like a sheep that is silent before its shearers, So He did not open His mouth.” Jeremiah 23:5 - “The days are coming," declares the LORD, "when I will raise up for David a righteous Branch, a King who will reign wisely and do what is just and right in the land.” Daniel 7:13 - "In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all nations and peoples of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed. Psalm 80:17 - Let Your hand be upon the man of Your right hand, Upon the son of man whom You made strong for Yourself. Psalm 110:1-2 - “The LORD says to my Lord: “Sit at My right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for Your feet. The LORD will stretch forth your strong sceptre from Zion, saying, “Rule in the midst of your enemies.” Micah 5:2 - “But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times.” Zechariah 9:9 - “Rejoice greatly, Daughter Zion! Shout, Daughter Jerusalem! See, your king comes to you, righteous and victorious, lowly and riding on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey.” Zechariah 2:10-11: Sing for joy and be glad, O daughter of Zion; for behold I am coming and I will dwell in your midst,” declares the LORD. “Many nations will join themselves to the LORD in that day and will become my people. Then I will dwell in your midst, and you will know that the LORD of hosts has sent me to you. Zechariah 13:7 - Awake, sword, against my shepherd, against the man who is close to me!" declares the LORD Almighty. "Strike the shepherd, and the sheep will be scattered, and I will turn my hand against the little ones. Psalms 22:16-18 - For dogs have surrounded me; a band of evildoers has encompassed me; They pierced my hands and my feet. I can count all my bones. They look, they stare at me; they divide my garments among them, and for my clothing they cast lots. (David never experienced such events in his life, but he wrote prophetically about the Messiah). Zechariah 12:10 - And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication. They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son. (If Jesus is not God - who Israel has pierced?). Malachi 3:1 - “I will send my messenger, who will prepare the way before me. Then suddenly the Lord you are seeking will come to his temple; the messenger of the covenant, whom you desire, will come," says the LORD Almighty.
WHO Did Abraham SEE In Genesis 18:1? When GOD sent His Angels or Prophets, they very often spoke as if they were GOD, hence, as we read in Exodus 3:6 Moreover he said, "I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob." And yet the previous verse Exodus 3:2 tells us it was: The angel of Yahweh (who) appeared to Moses. And notice how the Prophet of GOD talks for GOD, as if He is GOD in Isaiah 45:5 saying: I am Yahweh, and there is none else. Besides me, there is no God. I will strengthen you, though you have not known me. Did you also see how the correct translations in the Hebrew text IDENTIFY the ONE TRUE GOD as being GOD ALONE by His name Yahweh. As GOD spoke THROUGH His Angel in Exodus 3, this must conclude that GOD was also speaking THROUGH His Angel who was also acting for Yahweh GOD, where we read in Genesis 18:1 Yahweh appeared to him by the oaks of Mamre. My conclusion now perfectly explains WHY the Bible tells us: No one has ever yet seen God the Father, except Jesus John 1:18, John 6:46. Simply because NO ONE DID SEE GOD, but an Angel acting for GOD. And now we do not have any Bible contradictions as the Trinity faith have, who say one of the three “MEN” must have been God Almighty, and yet John 1:18, and John 6:46 tells us: No one has ever yet seen God the Father, except Jesus. And as we have seen, with the problems with the millions of Christians who do not believe in the TRINITY, and who do not believe Jesus is GOD, and who do not believe the person talking to Abraham is God Almighty, but instead believe this was Jesus appearing before He became flesh, as the word of GOD, and as GOD's Mediator, or Jesus as an Angel of the Lord GOD. These people have also been deceived, as they are also using and reading false Trinitarian Bible translations, and are misunderstanding the Bibles teachings that do NOT say Jesus PRE EXITED His flesh. And this explains WHY the Hebrews writer did NOT say In the Beginning GOD spoke through His SON, but instead by the prophets: Hebrews 1:1 God, having spoken long ago to our fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways. My final conclusion, is that when we read some one in the Bible saying they saw GOD, the person was always an Angel acting for GOD. Unless it was Yahweh Himself as He tells us in a vision, or speaking with him in a dream. Numbers 12:6. Judges 6:22 Gideon saw that he was the angel of Yahweh; and Gideon said, "Alas, Lord Yahweh! Because I have seen the angel of Yahweh face to face!" Notice how we are clearly told how Moses is the only person except Jesus who is now with GOD, to have (partially), seen GOD because as GOD: said, "You cannot see my face, for man may not see me and live." Exodus 33:20. Would GOD contradict His own word, by saying to Moses: "You cannot see my face, for man may not see me and live." Exodus 33:20. And then in His other hand Yahweh GOD appears to Abraham as a MAN, and Abraham sees GOD face to face and lives, as Trinitarians say and believe? Did Abraham truly SEE GOD and therefor contradicted John 1:18? No one has ever yet seen God. The only begotten God, the One being in the bosom of the Father, He has made Him known. For GOD is Spirit, not a MAN, for GOD created the MAN. 1 Timothy 6: 16 who alone has immortality, dwelling in unapproachable light; whom no man has seen, nor can see: to whom be honor and eternal power. Amen. I believe if there are Bible contradictions, then we are simply not understanding the word of GOD. But If there are NO Bible contradictions, then we are correctly understanding the word of GOD.
Alright your childish accusation stop now. Your either going to shut up with your insults, and rants or I'll make you I could care less about you reasoned fro years. Is that suppose to be convincing, LOL. You just yelling I am wrong doesn't refute anything in the video. It is obvious you have no argument other than to attack and rant.
You do realize I go over Col 1:15 in this video? So your argument is already addressed. And you do this a lot. Just assert something. It is very unconvincing.
You are one of the most smartest person living in this last days. thanks for all the word of wisdom and knowledge you've teach us. A man with wisdom and knowledge will always look like a fool to others.
Well this isn't really an issue. Paul quotes Epimenides in Titus 1:12 and Jesus seems to refer to other apocrypha books like Wisdom of Solomon and Sirach. The New Testament writers didn't think these books were inspired, but they did have some true things in them (as guided by the Holy Spirit). Jude only quoted something that was true in Enoch and it does not mean that Enoch was inspired. Early church fathers would quote authoritatively from one apocrypha book, but then criticize it later.
Is the TRUTH Rom 8-11 But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.
This is a good video, but at 3:23, the NT was not written to or by Christians. Paul’s letters might be an exception, but Christianity as an organized religion wouldn’t exist within the same period of the writing of the New Testament. It was written for and to, primarily, Jews.
J-MO All those who follow Jesus Christ are Christian whether they were Jewish or non-Jewish. The writers of the NT may have been Jews by birth, but they were Christians by choice. At Acts 15 we see the gathering of older men in Jerusalem discussing the issue teaching the gentile Christians to follow the Law. the end result was a letter being sent to all the congregations by the apostles and older men. That can only be viewed as the early Christian church in action, Christianity
8:38 − 9:09, Jesus cooperated with the limits of being human, but after His resurrection He was no longer lacking omniscience (John 16:30). I hope this helps.
I have already watched that debate and the Trinitarians clearly won as the unitarians couldn't respond to the Trinitarian objections. Instead, they just changed the subject instead of addressing the actual question. They also couldn't respond on the Ignatius quote. Stop spamming my comment section with a bunch of crappy links. I will not tolerate it.
Wow, that is a narrow understanding of the New Testament. Especially since I dealt with these types of objections in "Refuting Objections to the Trinity (Part 2)". Where does Jesus deny being God and you realize there is more than one person who is fully God? See my next video which explains this.
Yes, you are trying to make God work in terms of 3 dimensional laws, or as we understand them in our universe. But God is not part of this universe and is above such conditions. Check out the two videos I mentioned. They are the first two links in the above information section.
1st of all, the Infancy Gospel of Thomas is a late 3rd century forgery. Any one who quotes it as automative doesn't know textural criticism or history. It also shows Muhammed relied on unreliable sources. 2nd, if you read Mark 10:18 in context it makes sense. Jesus is forcing the young ruler to face the implications of calling Jesus good, not only with regard to Jesus' goodness, but also with regard to his own. Jesus challenges him to define his attitude towards what is good.
If you are just going to ignore what I say & attack a straw man the only person you are going to convince is yourself. Misrepresenting Christian theology & trying to force our beliefs to meet your presuppositions doesn't do you any good. You can either accept that we merely think God is 1 yet 3 persons & stop saying that means something completely different (like we are polytheists) or you can get lost & try your straw man arguments else where. Either way you are just making yourself look bad.
How can believing the 'trinity' affect the 'atonement'? It does because No part of the 'three persons in one God' could have for a split second not existed! Yet the entire NT teaches that "Christ died for our sins" that The son of man came to give his soul as a ransom in exchange for many" ( Rom 5:6, Matt 20:28) Surely once a 'ransom' has been paid it CANT be retrieved! The trinity then DENIES that God's Son, totally, complelely came down from heavan to the earth. 'Only his human nature was here while his spirital nature was still in heavan as part of the 'trinity'....This notion then DENIES the supreme LOVE of the Father who "Loved the world SO MUCH that he GAVE his ONLY BEGOTTEN SON, for us! There are many other reasons why the 'trinity' is false, this is just ONE reason.
It sounds like a lot of people confuse positional traits with traits of being. Clearer teaching on these differences would probably avoid a lot of the misunderstandings people have regarding what scripture says about the Trinity.
Yes, but you realize the greek word for "head" is "kephale". This word in no way means greater in essence. Since in the same verse it says "The head of every woman is man", and we both know men are not greater in essence to women. So you need to take the verse in context with the original language. "Head" in this verse simply means leader, not of greater essence. So actually I did quote it accurately. It is you who has to force it to fit your doctrine.
If it is within God's ability and desire out of His love for us, then yes. God being complex in His nature can be more than one person. One came to earth, another is in Heaven. NO, you are taking what I said out of context. Dr. Brown, messianic scholar, has explained this passage in context with the rest of the Bible (Not added scripture). See the link in the information section, "What About Numbers 23:19"
Hello! God the Father is Psalm 83:18 KJV and Jesus is the son as the scriptures tells us. The headship order is 1Corinthian11:3 KJV and Malachi 2:10 KJV proof God is one . This is why God says this Exodus 6:3 KJV and Isaiah 26:4 tells us who the true Lord is and finally if you don't believe Jesus is God's son, you are calling God a liar 1John5:10 KJV 1
Is Proverbs 8:22-31 talking about Wisdom personified instead of Jesus? Why is Wisdom referred to in the feminine gender? When examining Proverbs 8:22-31, some have argued that this passage isn't talking about Jesus but rather Wisdom itself personified. They further may point out that Wisdom may previously have been referred to in the feminine gender. However, in Prov. Chap.8, Wisdom is manifest only by being expressed in some way. God's own wisdom was expressed in creation (Prov. 3:19, 20) but through his Son. But as for Prov. 8:22-31, many professed Christian writers of the early centuries of the Common Era understood this section to refer symbolically to God's Son in his pre-human state. It is true that in Hebrew, which assigns gender to its nouns (as do many other languages), the word for "wisdom" is always in the feminine gender. This would continue to be the case even though wisdom is personified and so would not rule out wisdom's being used figuratively to represent God's firstborn Son. For instance, the Greek word for "love" in the expression "God is love" (1 John 4:8) is also in the feminine gender but that does not make God feminine. Also, Jehovah God is the Creator of all things. He is uncreated, without beginning (Rev. 4:11). Job 36:26 says, "In number his years are beyond searching." It is impossible to place an age upon him, for there is no starting point from which to measure. Because He is ageless, He is properly called "the Ancient of Days" since His existence stretches endlessly into the past. (Dan. 7:9, 13) And so, since Jehovah God has existed forever, therefore wisdom had to have always existed within Jehovah forever. (Ps. 90:2) So we could ask those using these trinitarian arguments: If Prov. 8:22-31 is really talking about literal wisdom itself, than how could wisdom even have been "begotten"? How could it have even been "produced", "set up", "created", or "made"? If this was talking about literal wisdom itself, then how could wisdom be "beside" God or "before" Him? How could wisdom be "the one He was specially fond of"? So instead of literal Wisdom itself (of which God had to already have in order to "beget", "produce", "set up", "create", or "make" anything), when Prov. 8:22 also says that the subject is, "the earliest of his achievements of long ago", this corresponds more to the description of Jesus in Col. 1:15 where it says that he is "the first-born of all creation". Or when Prov.8:23 says, "From time indefinite I was installed, from the start, from times earlier than the earth", this corresponds more to the description of Jesus in Micah 5:2 where it says that his "origin is from early times, from the days of time indefinite". Or when Prov. 8:22 says, "Jehovah God himself produced me as the beginning of his way," this corresponds more to the description of Jesus in Rev. 3:14 where it says that Jesus is "the beginning of the creation by God". And as for the Hebrew word 'qanah', it can mean either to "produce, aquire, create" or "possess". Context is key in finding out which one it means. Bibles which are biased toward the Trinity do not want to render it as "Produce" or something similar because that would mean that Jesus has a beginning, and that would contradict the Trinity doctrine. Yet, because the context of Prov. 8:22-31 so overwhelmingly supports the translation of the word 'qanah' as "create", even scores of trinitarian bibles have decided to render it as such: (1) "[Jehovah] created me at the beginning of his work" - RSV; (2) "[Jehovah] created me" - NRSV; (3) "[Jehovah] made me" - MLB; (4) "Yahweh created me" - JB; "Yahweh created me" - NJB; (5) "[Jehovah] created me" - NEB; (6) "[Jehovah] created me" - REB; (7) "I was the first thing made" - ETRV; (8) "[Jehovah] created me as the first of his creations" - Lamsa; (9) "[Jehovah] created me first of all" - GNB; (10) "[Jehovah] formed me as the first of his works" - AT; (11) "[Jehovah] formed me first of his creation" - Mo; (12) "Jehovah framed me first" - Byington; (13) "[Jehovah] created me" - The Reader's Digest Bible; (14) "[Jehovah] brought me forth as the first of his works" - The NIV Study Bible. It also explains in a footnote for Prov. 8:22: "brought...forth. The Hebrew for this verb is also used in Ge 4:1; 14:19, 22 (`creator')." - Zondervan, 1985; (15) "[Jehovah] made me the beginning of his ways for his works" - The Apostles Bible; (16) "[Jehovah] made me as the start of his way, the first of his works in the past. - BBE; (17) "Yahweh created me first, at the beginning of his works" - Christian Community Bible; (18) "[Jehovah] made me as the beginning of his way, the first of his ancient works" - The Complete Jewish Bible; (19) "[Jehovah] made me at the beginning of His creation, before His works of long ago" -The Holman Christian Standard Bible; (20) "[Jehovah] created me as the first of his creations, before all of his works. - Peshitta - Lamsa Translation; 21) "[Jehovah] sovereignly made me-the first, the basic- before he did anything else." -The Message; (22) "[Jehovah] created me as the beginning of his works, before his deeds of long ago." -NET; (23) "I, wisdom, was with [Jehovah] when he began his work, long before he made anything else. 23 I was created in the very beginning, even before the world began." - New Century Version; (24) "[Jehovah] created me as the first of his works, before his acts of long ago." - New International Reader's Version; (25) "[Jehovah] made me at the beginning of His work, before His first works long ago." -New Life Bible; (26) "[Jehovah] formed me from the beginning, before he created anything else. - New Living Translation; (27) "Jehovah created me in the beginning of his way, before his works of antiquity." - New Simplified Bible; (28) "[Jehovah] created me as the head of His ways, to perform all of His works" - 2001 Translation.
@@smalltimer4370 How do we know that the description of wisdom at Proverbs 8:22-31 applies to Jesus Christ in his prehuman existence? The inspired description of wisdom found in the book of Proverbs reads: “Jehovah himself produced me as the beginning of his way, the earliest of his achievements of long ago. . . . Before the mountains themselves had been settled down, ahead of the hills, I was brought forth as with labor pains . . . When he prepared the heavens I was there; . . . then I came to be beside him as a master worker, and I came to be the one he was specially fond of day by day, I being glad before him all the time, . . . and the things I was fond of were with the sons of men.” This passage cannot be speaking merely about divine wisdom or wisdom in the abstract. Why not? Because the wisdom that is here described was “produced,” or created, as the beginning of Jehovah’s way. Jehovah God has always existed and has always been wise. (Psalm 90:1, 2) His wisdom had no beginning; it was neither created nor produced. It was not “brought forth as with labor pains.” Furthermore, this wisdom is said to speak and act, representing a person.-Proverbs 8:1. The book of Proverbs says that long ago wisdom was beside Jehovah, the Creator, as “a master worker.” That certainly applies to Jesus. Long before he came to earth, Jesus worked so closely with Jehovah that God’s Word says: “He is before all other things and by means of him all other things were made to exist.”-Colossians 1:17; Revelation 3:14. Depicting the Son of God as wisdom is appropriate, since he was the One who revealed Jehovah’s wise purposes and decrees. During his prehuman existence, Jesus was God’s Word, or Spokesman. (John 1:1) He is described as being “the power of God and the wisdom of God.” (1 Corinthians 1:24, 30) What a beautiful description of the Son of God, whose fondness for mankind moved him to give his life as a ransom in their behalf!-John 3:16.
@@smalltimer4370 proverbs say that jesus is the master worker . JEHOVAH had the plans and jesus carried them out . Jesus is firstborn and only begotten son of God. Jesus was created directly by Jehovah and everything else was created through jesus
@@AstariahJW Yes, I get that, though here again, I think it's important to make the distinction between Jesus and creation, along with the fact that the Bible does not attribute creation to Jesus, but rather, where it consistently identifies Jesus' own begetting as a birth rather than creation. Thus making the distinction between, Jesus and the creation spoken of in Genesis.
Inspiring Philosophy I just have a question, why did the Jews back during the times of the Old Testament believe that God is only the lord YWHW ( The father)? If I am mistaken tell me but I haven’t heard of a trinitarian Jew. What about the angel of the lord and the spirit of God?
Two questions, when it comes to not being able to see god does this refer to god the father or the trinity? If Jesus is indeed God and is the physical representation of god, what would he represent?
@@gabrielfusaro223 Jesus told the Samaritan woman at the well that "the Jews worship what they know". Did they know God was triune? No Did they know that God was one person, the Father, YHWH? Yes.
On Proverbs 8, early Church Fathers taught that Jesus is Wisdom. Prudence et al are not spoken of in a personified manner in this chapter, but rather as attributes. Reading verses 12-31, everything contributed to Wisdom can be attributed to Christ as well. Interestingly, when the Arians claimed Christ was Wisdom in this passage, the Trinitarians didn't reject this view but how the Arians interpreted it.
Fill me in with why Paul never addresses greetings from the 1/3 part of god in his epistles. Very heretical, since your god is three in one... Then to leave a part of him out.
Well, if one denies the Trinity they are usually no loner considered a Christian, since the Trinity is a fundamental core belief. It affects the atonement, worship, and God's ontology. I point that out in the 2nd link in the information section. I was shocked to when I also was shocked when I found out how many people call themselves Christians and deny the Trinity.
Amen indeed
I know people who are definitely born again but don’t believe in the traditional trinity doctrine.
@@Anteater23Correct. God's forgiveness and guidance is not black and white only. The book of Jona demonstrates this
@@7urakcan you expand on what you mean by that, and how the book of Jonah exemplifies that? I just want to understand what you mean.
You Trinitarians are so sanctimonious. All while teaching false doctrine.
That is not what He is claiming. Jesus is speaking of ontology, "before Abraham was I AM." This is saying that though Abraham had a beginning He did not.
WHAT! Mormons do not! They rely on their own books for mormon understanding of scripture. The founders of JWs were self-educated and make several false prophecies. They started with a grave misunderstand of scripture with western eyes.
Don't forget some members of Iglesia ni Cristo might also comment here haha
@InspiringPhilosophy What's even more amazing is that Charles Taze Russell lied about knowing Greek and admitted he didn't know it when pressed by a lawyer. This alone should demonstrate that JW teachings are based on a very weak theological foundation.
Isaiah 43:10 destroys WT JW and LDS Mormons, Mike.
@@hotwax9376 He also claimed that the trinity is a three headed monster.
I am not a modalist, so i agree. The word angel in the Bible is defined differently than our culture defines it.
Lots of heretical unitarians and JWs in this comment section. Yikes. Keep up the good work IP.
The bible said the great whore Roman catholic church was filled with the blood of the saints....not heretics...
The vast majority of the saints the catholic church killed were non trinitarian saints
Non trinitarians were the orthodox church and they baptized in the name of jesus christ also....not in the trinity of titles....
They changed water baptism to the trinity of titles because they were also changing the view of godhead to trinity....
Neither the Trinity or baptizing in the trinity of titles were orthodox....everything early trinitarians wrote is false and the opposite is true....
Satan is going to use a trinitarian man called the Pope to become incarnated in....because the trinity is of the devil and the false doctrine that the Pope propgates and deceives you with
@@dieselcowboy777 lol the catholic killed allot of protestants
@@dieselcowboy777 source.
No, see my video, "The Trinity in the Old Testament" for Deuteronomy 6:4.
If you are asking questions particularly about the Trinity. See my video, "What is the Trinity.
Both links are in the information section.
Ranting is not a refutation. You can believe what you want, but you are not refuting the evidence.
Thank you! It will be up either Friday or Saturday, and that will close out this series on the Trinity for a while. I need to return the Ontological and Teleological argument for a little bit. Then eventually I want to do a video explaining why Jesus had to die on the cross.
John 1:1 says the Word is God. John 1:14 says the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. How much more context do you need? It is clear that the word became flesh and the Word is God. See my video, "Refuting Objections to the Trinity (Part 2)".
They did not se the word god like we do today, this is misreading scripture with western eyes. The angels were never called "I AM".
So you are practically admitting you do not know the truth. Then why should I listen to you?
You do not know the truth, so why should we listen to you?
I can not thank God for you enough. God bless you and give you even more soundness to help us all understand his word better. Thank you for this 🤍🤍🤍
And in Jonah 2:9 is says YHWH. Salvation only comes from YHWH.
I don't understand your question.
Why did it take me more than 8 years to find this. Thx, gr8 stuff!
Thank you, and you make a good point. At times I get too confrontation. I'll try to tone down. Let me know what you think of any of my other videos.
Keep reading Orthodox Christian Saints like Saint John Chrysostom!
+Alexandru-Vlad Curtasu
Sorry, his antisemitism is revolting as is the churches history regarding that issue.
+dave d Did you even read him?
St John Chrysostom • Catholic
Amazing video, amazing truth,well done,well explained and so simple to understand.
This isn't saying Jesus had a beginning, it says Jesus is "the beginning". The is verse is telling us Jesus is where creation began. The writer is not saying Jesus was the 1st created being, but that the Logos is the point where God's creation began. The Greek word 'arche' means top, first, or corner. The Greeks called the first of something the 'arche', as the a begining starts at the "top." No way does the verse say Jesus was created.
I agree with the whole video except your statement that Jesus became fully divine again after His resurrection. The Incarnation is a permanent status. Jesus is still fully man and fully God.
But after his resurrection his body was not normal body like us .his body is spirtual body .he suddenly came in house when the door was lock but at the same time he can eat and drink and all of his apostle touched his body
After jesus come back to earth the first resurrection will happen and the believer who born with holyspirit will raise from grave and live with jesus for 1000 year with new spiritual body not our normal body (sin body)
Behrad Ataei
Christ knew no sin.
He now has a glorified body now what does that mean?
That before His incarnation Christ, the divine One, already was the Son of God {John 1:18; Rom. 8:3}. By incarnation He put on an element, the human flesh, which had nothing to do with divinity, that part of Him needed to be sanctified and uplifted by passing through death and resurrection. By resurrection His human nature was sanctified, uplifted and transformed, by resurrection He was designated the Son of God with His humanity { Rom. 1:4; Acts 13: 33; Heb.1:5}. His resurrection was His designation. Now as the Son of God, He possesses humanity as well as divinity. By incarnation He brought God into man, by resurrection He He brought man into God, that is, He brought His humanity into the divine sonship. In this way the only begotten Son of God was made the firstborn Son of God, possessing both divinity and humanity. God is using such a Christ, the firstborn Son, who possesses both divinity and humanity, as the producer and prototype, the model, to produce His many sons {Rom. 8:29-30}. And those who believed in and received His Son, will to be designated and revealed as the sons of God, as He was in glory of His resurrection {Rom.8:19; 21}, and with Him they will express God.
No it doesn't, arche is used to mean origin or active cause at times. The verse doesn't contradict the rest of scripture that says Jesus is uncreated. It will be in my next video, "Refuting Objections to the Trinity (part 2)".
And once again, Protokos doesn't refer to birth order, but rank.
No, once we understand the original Greek, it doesn't refute the Trinity and I go on to show that. You are confusing the ontological structure with the economic structure of the Trinity.
Yes it is! I have one more video to do on the Trinity, which will be done before Christmas - "The Trinity Explained 2 (with Reason).
Sure, in 3D world. See the first two links in the information section. I have two videos on how to logically explain the Trinity. I hope that helps.
You do realize 1 Corinthians 1:30 is not a quote of Proverbs 8. Paul and Solomon are not talking of the same topics. Paul is saying "And because of him you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, righteousness and sanctification and redemption," In no way does this say Jesus is created. Again, see my video, "The Trinity in the New Testament"
You obviously didn't watch the video (6:51). The Trinity is not hard to understand see my two part video called "the Trinity explained (with reason)".
Thank you for this content,more blessings to you.
That is very kind of you. If you ever have any questions don't hesitate to ask me in a message. God Bless!
Then that contradicts Col 1:16 which says, "For in him all things were created". Col 1:15 just says Jesus the prOTokos of all creation. He is the head and has rank over all creation. Analogy: A rooster has to have rank over all hens, but that doesn't mean he is a hen because he is the highest rank of them.
No, that would be modalism. Repeating your same argument on different videos is just spam after a while.
I don't care if you disagree, you have refuted offered any rebuttal, and anything you have done has been refute. Remember that salvation can only come from the Lord (Jonah 2:9), who became man (John 1:14). So a man cannot be given credit for salvation, only God who became man can. I point this out here: /watch?v=G1FlAC3hz5c
thanks for the enlightenment brother..
Did you watch part 2? "The Trinity Explained 2 (with reason)". A link is in the information section. The idea is not hard to understand, as many people have told me. The details are obviously beyond our grasp. We cannot picture a 4D cube, for example.
Well, I owe the credit of finding that quote to you, so thanks.
It is not about the claim but about the best explanation and reason backing the claim. Anyone can make a claim, do they have the evidence to back it up.
Really great info in your presentation! Thanks for sharing. I'll definitely be checking out your other videos as well!
You were warned against mass-commenting, nothing has been deleted since you stopped.
Dr. Brown has already addressed this. You are confusing essence with abilities. God has the ability & has in the old testament taken on the form of man (Ex. 24, Gen. 18) to reveal Himself to us. God in essence is God, but He has the ability to take the form of flesh, which is what Jesus has done. Plainly, Jesus is a walking Shekhinah. God revealing Himself through flesh, while being God in heaven as the Father.
I love your videos! You manage to make everything so concise and easy to follow. Looking forward to your next video on the Trinity.
Just another slave making carnal minded interpretation to validate the false catholic doctrime of trinity to corrupt your mind
Of course i don't dispute that. And if that is your argument then you do not understand what the doctrine of the Trinity is. Of course the Son's source is in the Father.
***** IF Col 1:16 had of said...
Col 1:15 He is the Firstborn of All Creation.
Col 1:16 BECAUSE Jehovah created him first.
Then.. you would have a point. But that is NOT what it is saying.
Col 1:16-17 is talking about him being the origin of Creation.
Col 1:18 Thus.. has the preeminence over it because it belongs to the creator of it.
***** you didn't answer nothing.
***** all you did was to entrench yourself in Col 1:15 without looking at the context of the chapter. Duh...
***** you completely bypassed my counter argument so I not obligated to answer you when the context of the verses speak for themselves
It also needs to be said that if people wouldn't proof text their way through scripture they would have seen the point Paul was trying to make. Jesus isn't the first created thing just as He wasn't the first person resurrected. However He certainly is above everything.
Further when you consider that john opens his gospel by saying that there wasn't one thing made that Jesus didn't make, if He were a created being, He'd paradoxically would have to have created Himself.
***** by all means I'm listening. However its late where I am so I may not be able to respond. Otherwise go right ahead.
Ok and? It is not about any old conclusion, but the best and most logical one. Which has the most explanatory power. The Bible is clear there is only one God, not separate demigods.
This series on the Trinity is the best yet.
I agree that using the verse about wisdom being created is a stretch. But the parallel is clear and the poetic personification strengthens the idea that Jesus being the Logos is about being the perfect expression of the word, will and character of God, not that Jesus himself is God.
I mostly agree with the rest of the video.
Peace be with you Friend ❤️
Jesus is Indeed the Perfect Expression of the Word, Will & Character of God(the Father) because he is God(the Son).
He is the Radiance of God's Glory & the Express Image of his Nature(Hebrews 1:3).
Wisdom is heavily personified in chapter 8 and 9, the other examples you give aren't at all. It needs to be noted that many of the early Church fathers, such as Origen, Lactantius, Clement, Justin Martyr, Cyprian etc. all identified Jesus as the Wisdom in the Proverbs. Even when Arius used Wisdom as a proof text as being created Jesus, Athanasius didn't dispute that it was Jesus. He argued that Arius was being overly literal with a poetic text, a rather weak argument it has to be said.
Regarding the hebrew word qanah not meaning create, the problem with this argument is that the writers of the Septuagint used the word create in their translation. Also if it means possessed, this implied that God at sometime didn't have wisdom, which surely makes no sense.
“Also if it means possessed, this implies that God at sometime didn’t have wisdom, which surely makes no sense.”
On that note, wouldn’t the same apply to “created”? Whether it’s “possessed” or “created,” both can imply that there was a time when God did not have wisdom, which is a conclusion that we must reject.
In other words, that Proverbs passage is difficult to interpret alone. We need to look elsewhere in scripture to get a more complete picture.
@@zekdom
"On that note, wouldn’t the same apply to “created”? Whether it’s “possessed” or “created,” both can imply that there was a time when God did not have wisdom, which is a conclusion that we must reject."
Not if Jesus is the Wisdom in the Proverbs and he was created as put forth by Arius then it does make sense.
@@adrianwalker3607 Sincerely, I don’t follow. How does Arius’ explanation of creation avoid the implication that God didn’t have wisdom at one point? If there was a point when Jesus did not exist - and Proverbs 8:22 applies to Jesus - I don’t see how we can escape the implication that God didn’t always have wisdom.
@@zekdom No problem, I appreciate the tact. In the sense that Wisdom here isn't divine wisdom or wisdom in the abstract but Jesus, who was created full of wisdom. And here is the symbol of wisdom. If he was created full of wisdom then this of course came from his Father, God / Yahweh / Jehovah. So Yahweh would have been without the symbol of wisdom, his son, but never not 'all knowing' as Jesus' wisdom would have come from his creator his Father Yahweh.
@@adrianwalker3607 I was hoping my curiosity would come across well; that is very difficult to convey online without hinting at malice.
I appreciate your clarification. Okay so, your point is that Jesus is the **symbol** of wisdom who was created - thus avoiding the implication that God didn’t always have wisdom in terms of omniscience?
That makes more sense. But one thing I’m still missing, and I’m not trying to be dense here…
If Jesus is the symbol of wisdom and not a reference to God’s wisdom (omniscience), I still don’t see how “possessed” is more problematic than “created”.
Couldn’t we say: both imply that the symbol of wisdom didn’t exist at one point - neither implying that God’s wisdom didn’t exist at one point?
Time-stamps
0:40 , 1:15, 1:37 - Proverbs 8:22
1:28 - Proverbs 4:13
1:35 - Inspiring Philosophy said, “If wisdom is understood to be a created being because it is personified, then we have to conclude that every time Solomon personifies a virtue, he is speaking of a created being. In actuality, Solomon uses poetic personification for the desirableness of wisdom so he can compare it to the desirableness of women. That is why wisdom is personified and given effeminate pronouns.
*See Proverbs 8:2-3,11* “
2:36 - Acts 20:28 and modalism
3:00 - Angel
4:28 - Jude 1:9
4:53, 5:07 - Michael the Archangel and Jesus, Hebrews 1:5-6
5:41, 6:32 - Michael the Archangel and 1 Thessalonians 4:16 and 2 Thessalonians 1:7
6:55 - Colossians 1:15
7:23 - Jesus praying to God
7:43, 8:02 - John 14:28 and 1 Corinthians 11:3
8:20 - John Chrysostom’s take
8:31 - “position” and “essence”
8:45 - Hebrews 2:9 and Philippians 2:5-7
1. Prov 8 :22. Unfortunately for our video maker, this scripture has been used from the second century on by Christian apologists to argue that the Son pre-existed . If he is going to insist on 'personification' then the best example of that is the Holy Spirit which in the OT is an it and also an it in the NT, but frequently personified, especially as the paraclete.
2. Christian apologists also used the Angel of the Lord/Yahweh's angel to argue that the Christ, the Son, pre-existed. But these logos theologians were platonists and believed the logos was a secondary/ intermediary God. The angel of the Lord, according to the Bible, to Jews and other Christian groups is an angel and not God himself.
3. Angels are called 'Sons of God'.
4. To escape the obvious conclusion of 'firstborn, the video maker engages in redefinitionism.
He has no alternative otherwise his entire theology collapses.
5. We then have a whole list of scriptures that need to be explained away and assuming a Trinity allows him to do this. Hundreds of times Jesus is differentiated from God (not the Father ). He is shown to be subordinate etc but this is dismissed as Jesus in his human nature. But then he says after his resurrection, Jesus was once again fully divine. Unfortunately, the resurrected Jesus still had a God. (John 20 :17). The glorified Jesus in heaven still has a God )Rev 3 :12). Clearly, a 'God' who himself has a God is not the ultimate God.
Peace be with you Friend ❤️
1. But the Holy Spirit isn't Personified. He is Alive, has a Will, Emotions. Personification is used when a Passage abcribes a Personal Characteristics or Action to a thing that cannot be interpreted literally.
For Example: Rivers cannot clap their hands(Psalm 98:8). So it is using Personification.
However, for the Holy Spirit, there is Nothing in His Descriptions that cannot be True of an Actual Spiritual being.
2) The One's eho believe the Angel of the Lord to be the Pre-incarnated Jesus, will also believe it to be God, because he calls Himself God(Genesis 31:11-13). It is either a Theophany or a Christophany.
3) Indeed they are. But as the Father said, No Angel is Begotten (Hebrew 1:5). Jesus is the Uniqly Son of God because he is Uncreated & shares in the Same Essence as the Father.
4) Firstborn can be used in Many ways. Sometimes In order or in Rank. With Jesus, it is in Rank.
5) Jesus calling the Father "God" does Not make him any less God.
Jesus is The Son, so he has The Father from the Same Essence. Same way an Earthly Son calls his Father "Human", it doesn't make The Son any less Human.
Both the Father & the Son have the Same Essence(God). The Father acknowledges the Son as God, Equal to him (Hebrews 1:6,8,10-12) ❤️✝️
8:13 That's subordinationism. Jesus' divine will is the same will as the Father's. It's just his human nature that submits to God because all humans are supposed to. As the Athanasian Creed says, all 3 persons are co-equal in majesty
8:57 He is always fully divine. He has a 100% divine nature and a distinct 100% human nature that's both in the person of Christ. He was never not fully divine.
On the rebuttal about Colossians 1:15, you tried to refute the "firstborn" of the scripture while ignoring the other two significant parts of the same scripture. He is the firstborn of all CREATION, the IMAGE of the Invisible God.
To be the firstborn of all creation, whether literally the firstborn or only in the sense you portrayed, that of privilege of inheritance, in both cases it is of CREATION, thus, created, thus a 'creature'. God himself is neither created nor a creature.
And the other word, IMAGE is quite clear. The word means that he 'reflects' that of the Invisible God, not that he is the Invisible God. In other words, an image of anything is not the actual item, but simply a facsimile, such as a painting, drawing, photograph or mirror is an image of, not the actual.
Consider the book of Genesis, where we read "Let US make man in our IMAGE." The scripture in Genesis shows that Jesus is talking to his Father. Otherwise, he'd be talking to himself if he was God, and that would not be reasonable. And he isn't talking to the Angels, as they have nothing to do with 'creating' man. And the fact that they said, "make man in our IMAGE", there the word image is not inferring that they are going to be making man Gods equal to them. Thus, being an IMAGE refers to reflecting the qualities, such as Love, Wisdom, Power and Justice, in some measure. So Jesus, being the IMAGE of the Invisible God, reflects his qualities. That is why he said, "If you have seen me you have seen the Father also." Not that he is saying he is the Father, but that he reflects the wonderful qualities of his father.
Also, getting back to "firstborn", the scriptures show that the inheritance is actually meant for a "literal" firstborn, but that the firstborn right can be handed over to another that was not actually firstborn, such as was the case where Esau sold his firstborn rights to his brother Jacob for a bowl of red lentil.
While one can confuse the meaning of "firstborn" within Col 1:15, it is coupled with CREATION and IMAGE that all together makes it clear that Jesus is no part of a Trinune Godhead. He is exactly what he said he is, the SON of God. Why not take him at his word?
+Great Bread Rank doesn't mean one has to be created, and Christ being the image of the Father is not an issue either, since that is consistent with trinitarianism. To see the son is to see the Father (John 14:9).
Second, Jesus and the Father talking is also consistent with Trinitarianism since they are separate persons and not the same person. You are confusing modalism with Trinitarianism. Third, that is begging the question in your view of the imago dei. That is the substantive view, which the overwhelming majority of old testament scholars reject. To be the imago dei is more consistent with an election/relational view - To be given a specific purpose or position by God. It doesn't imply special creation or a beginning point of existence. So all you are doing is assuming the substantive view, which I reject and can refute, so firstborn is not coupled with creation and image doesn't imply creation point.
***** Here is the problem with that line of thought.
The bible is clear that there is ONE TRUE GOD, not 3.
You cannot have it both ways. You cannot claim they are ONE, if you are going to insist they are THREE, but equal. That makes no sense and is the kind of confusing doctrine that you'd expect the devil to devise. Let's make the understanding of God as convoluted and complex as possible.
The CLEAR understanding, the one a daily reader of the Bible without preconceived notions would have, is that Jesus is Jesus, his Father is Jehovah (English). Or Yeshua and Yahweh (Hebrew).
One Son talks to the Father, prays to the Father, worships the Father, does the Father's will, is sent by his Father, anointed by his Father, etc. etc. It is standard faire.
Even the disciples viewed Jesus as the "one mediator between God and men,", not as God himself. (1 Tim 2:5).
Look up the definition of "mediator", and you find it is someone who is SEPARATE from those who need mediation.
Therefore, it would be a contradiction for Jesus to be one entity with either of the parties he is trying to reconcile.
There is only ONE true God.
The Hebrew word "Shaddai" and the Greek word "Pantokra'tor" are both translated "Almighty". Both original-language words are repeatedly applied to Jehovah, the Father. (Ex. 6:3; Rev. 19:6)
Neither expression is ever applied to either the Son or the holy spirit.
+Great Bread Yeah, and trinitarians do not say there are 3 gods, that is a straw man argument. Second you are appealing to emotion. Just because you are confused that doesn't make it evil, as that is a very fallacious argument.
And again, I dealt with these objections:
th-cam.com/video/xrmTjifCmw8/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/OaXjVU05odE/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/BNt5NKSse0Y/w-d-xo.html
It is ironic you admit Pantokra'tor is for YHWH, since Revelation applies it to the son. The first chapter has Jesus speaking to John, calling Himself "The First and the Last", which is the same title given the the Lord (YHWH) in Isaiah 48. Jesus also says He is the Almighty (Pantokra'tor), which the Greek equivalent to the Hebrew name of God given in Exodus 3. And we also see Jesus call Himself the living one, which reflects the meaning of God personal name, I AM WHO I AM" or the existing one, as it appears in the Septuagint in Exodus 3. So Jesus once again affirms He is the eternal God.
***** Revelation applies it to YHWH, not the son. And interestingly, note how Revelation starts:
"A revelation by Jesus Christ, which GOD gave him..."
Why would God have to give Jesus a revelation? Aren't they the equal/same?
And if you carefully read the scripture you yourself quoted by saying "the first and the last" (REV 1:4,5), you see that it applies to the Father because Jesus is mentioned separately in that same scripture!
"May you have peace and kindness from "the One who is and who was and who is coming, and from the 7 spirits that are before his throne, AND FROM JESUS CHRIST."
The problem you are likely dealing with is how the Greek is translated into English, using LORD for the Father and Lord for the Son (Jesus). Very confusing.
But here is more. The title of Almighty (Pantokra'tor) applying to JAH is evident by noting REV 19:6 by the word Hallelujah.
Notice the last three letters JAH. This literally means PRAISE JAH YOU PEOPLE. Jah in english refers to Jehovah, not Jesus. Of course many people wrongly thinks it means "praise the Lord", and therefore again blurs the lines between the two. Crafty devil.
HalleluJAH. Again, Pantokra'tor applies to the Father, not the son.
+Great Bread Yeah, and in the Revelation Jesus says He is the Almighty. He is delivering the message of Jesus, and Jesus says He's the Almighty. The person speaking to John in chapter 1 is Jesus, who says, "I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God, “who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.”
So you are wrong, Pantokra'tor applies to Jesus, because that is the words He uses when speaking to John.
Yeah, the problem is there are several other places where prophets see God. Again, Dr. Michael Brown address all of these verses and explains they actually confirm the Trinity: /watch?v=cJvUlrNa-Z8
Bravo!!! Well Done!!!
A real knock out punch for heretic Unitarians and Trinitarian gainsayers the world over!!!
Very refreshing!!!
Thanks :)
Check out Part 2 if you like: Refuting Objections to the Trinity (Part 2)
I have a video on Nicaea by the way. If that is what you feel then fine, but your arguments were unconvincing. But in the end you can believe whatever you want.
You do realize just a few verses later in verse 14 is says " the Word became flesh and dwelt among us". So the passage does say in verse one the Word is God, and the Word became flesh. So Word, who is God, came in the flesh. Obviously I'm not adding or subtracting.
That doesn't make sense with the very next verse, which says "For in him all things were created". The entire universe was created in, through, and for Him, this is what the passage says He is the prOtokos of all creation. The phrasing doesn't have to include Him.
Yes, some belief he was simply a man/prophet. Some say he was an angel, who became a man, who then became a demi-god. Some say he was the first created thing and is a demi-god. There are several variations, but they all say He is not the eternal God, which is a lie.
This is the most CLEAR and concise teaching defending the Trinity I've seen. Albeit, reading some of the posts, you are guilty of casting your pearls before swine. Thank you. I'm subscribing!
***** No I am not missing the point.
the Word "Because" in Col 1:16 is describing WHY he is being called "firstborn" in Col 1:15.
Example.
Col 1:15. I am the coach of the Baseball team.
Col 1:16 Because it is my team. I lead it and teach the players how to play baseball.
Col 1:17 I am in charge of all the players.
Col 1:18 I am the coach, That's Why I have Preeminence over them.
JUST READ THE BIBLE LIKE A BOOK AND NOT A DICTIONARY FOR THE FIRST TIME IN YOUR LIFE!! And you no longer will be a Jw.
You didn't even deal with any of the presentation that I brought up. So how on earth did you answer it if you didn't even address it? I ruined you because I used the English language.
***** I destroyed you on this. You never dealt with the context of what I even said. All you did was shut your eyes, plug your ears and shout, " last, last, la, la, la...". Denial doesn't count.
***** I beat you so bad you can't even show me how I was wrong
***** go back and show me using my argument or get lost
All I know is, on YOUR POSTS my comments seem to disappear. Odd...
You are still thinking the the Triune God has to obey our physical laws like we do. Comparing the nature of Adam and Eve to God doesn't make sense since we are bound to 3D laws of space-time.
Not a problem with KJV, the word of God.
22 The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old. (Proverbs 8:22)
OK, then I challenge unitarians to present a good argument. I don't care that you think they can, the substance is what is important. Stop appealing to popular opinion. People use to think bloodletting was a good idea.
Proverbs 8:22 The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old.
Amen 🙏🏻❤. The Lord possessed Wisdom. He didn't create it.
See my video, "The Trinity in the New Testament". Jesus directly said He was God several times. The problem is you are thinking in terms of a modalist God, not a Trinitarian.
Also many sincere Christians who ARE NOT 'sceptics' DONT believe in the trinity! a. It denies the uniqueness of the Father b. It denies the Supreme love of the Father & the Son. c. It denies all that Jesus said about himself c. It was ADDED long after the "Faith was delived once for all times to the Holy ones" ( Jude 3).d. Facts show It is based on Greek philosophy & Roman pagansim.
@@jjw00dw- So it says there "Let US make man in our image". Right! lets analyse that to see if it 'proves the trinity'. US ; language note: Us is the first person plural pronoun. Us is used as the object of a verb or a preposition. A speaker or writer uses us to refer both to himself or herself and to one or more other people. ( google quote ). Note ;ONE OR MORE persons involved! So no reference to THREE persons in Gel 1:26! That God's only begotten Son was with the Father in heaven at creation.Paul states that the Father created all things through the Son ( See Col:16) Thus the Father could very well have been speaking to his son! Also thr angels were no doubt invloved in creation as Job 38:7 says "The sons of the true God shouted in Joy" ( At the founding of the earth). Thus to state that gen 1:26 proves the 'trinity' is false!
0:36 So the argument is since wisdom and word have the letter W in them, therefore Jesus is in Proverbs 8.
TTrinity in the Bible (OT).
IfIf Proverbs 8 talks about Jesus Christ, then Jesus is female? No NT writers say that Jesus was female. Only the twisted logic of Watchtower alleges that Jesus Christ is female by quoting Proverbs 8 as personification of Jesus.
Would Yahweh allow angel 'Michael' to sit with Him in His throne of the universe? Never. Revelation 3:21 ...just as I was victorious and sat down with my Father on his throne.' If Jesus is Michael, then his death would be sufficient to pay for the sins of Lucifer (another angel who rebelled and sinned against God).
The divine vacuum in the human heart prompted carnal men in human history to invent distant/remote gods who do not interfere with their lives, so that they can make wars, kill, rampage, rape, rob, and get rid of anyone who disagrees with them. Remote gods do not love them or demand morality, righteousness, or justice. They can be as cruel as the gods they represent.
On the contrary, the Bible presents a God who is constantly involved with his creation and man. He loves, judges, and redeems man.
In Genesis 1:1-2 Elohim is used which literally means Gods. Next sentence, God again reveals two beings in the Godhead ‘God and His Spirit’ doing separate works, why? “No man will say I built my house, and my hands painted it!!”. In Matthew 27:46, Mark 15:34, Jesus used Eloi, Eloi or Eli, Eli, the singular form of Elohim).
Let us make man in our image. Is God speaking to angels or using majestic plural? The omniscient and omnipotent One seeking the support of his angels in making man? That belittles God! God created angels by his breath. Does God require angelic approval or support in making man? The Bible does not say so?. The Bible says man alone bears the ‘image and likeness’ of God and not angels. Do we humans share our plans for our children with our slaves/servants? No intelligent person will do that.
Does the OT reveal Trinity? No, but speaks of ‘Yahweh’ becoming man.
Yes - almost all books of the Old Testament foretell the God of Israel coming in flesh a revelation of his self-giving love that God revealed in Jesus. If anyone thinks it is blasphemy to call Jesus God, then the large number of Old Testament prophecies about ‘Yahweh’ coming to the earth will contradict themselves and end-up as mere pagan myths of the Jews! (Or the alleged corrections Jews made in their scripture to support incarnation of God).
Why? Though the Hebrew prophets were monotheistic in their belief, they declared about “Yahweh’ coming to this earth in their prophecies - there are over 300 Messianic prophecies in the Old Testament concerning Messiah, some of them are:
Numbers 24:17 - "I see him, but not now; I behold him, but not near; A star shall come forth from Jacob, A scepter shall rise from Israel, and shall crush through the forehead of Moab, and tear down all the sons of Sheth.”
Isaiah 7:14 - "Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, a virgin will be with child and bear a son, and she will call His name Immanuel.”
Isaiah 9:6 - “For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us; And the government will rest on His shoulders; And His name will be called Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.”
Isaiah 11:1 - “A shoot will come up from the stump of Jesse; from his roots a Branch will bear fruit.”
Isaiah 42:1 - “The Servant - Here is my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen one in whom I delight; I will put my Spirit on him, and he will bring justice to the nations.” (Jesus came as a servant).
Isaiah 50:6 - “The suffering Servant - I offered my back to those who beat me, my cheeks to those who pulled out my beard; I did not hide my face from mocking and spitting.” (Trial of Jesus)
Isaiah 53:3-7 - “He was despised and forsaken of men, a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief;
And like one from whom men hide their face; He was despised, and we did not esteem Him. Surely our griefs He Himself bore, and our sorrows He carried; Yet we ourselves esteemed Him stricken, Smitten of God, and afflicted. But He was pierced through for our transgressions, He was crushed for our iniquities. The chastening for our well-being fell upon Him, and by His scourging we are healed. All of us like sheep that have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; But the LORD has caused the iniquity of us all to fall on Him. He was oppressed and He was afflicted, Yet He did not open His mouth; like a lamb that is led to slaughter, and like a sheep that is silent before its shearers, So He did not open His mouth.”
Jeremiah 23:5 - “The days are coming," declares the LORD, "when I will raise up for David a righteous Branch, a King who will reign wisely and do what is just and right in the land.”
Daniel 7:13 - "In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all nations and peoples of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.
Psalm 80:17 - Let Your hand be upon the man of Your right hand, Upon the son of man whom You made strong for Yourself.
Psalm 110:1-2 - “The LORD says to my Lord: “Sit at My right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for Your feet. The LORD will stretch forth your strong sceptre from Zion, saying, “Rule in the midst of your enemies.”
Micah 5:2 - “But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times.”
Zechariah 9:9 - “Rejoice greatly, Daughter Zion! Shout, Daughter Jerusalem! See, your king comes to you, righteous and victorious, lowly and riding on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey.”
Zechariah 2:10-11: Sing for joy and be glad, O daughter of Zion; for behold I am coming and I will dwell in your midst,” declares the LORD. “Many nations will join themselves to the LORD in that day and will become my people. Then I will dwell in your midst, and you will know that the LORD of hosts has sent me to you.
Zechariah 13:7 - Awake, sword, against my shepherd, against the man who is close to me!" declares the LORD Almighty. "Strike the shepherd, and the sheep will be scattered, and I will turn my hand against the little ones.
Psalms 22:16-18 - For dogs have surrounded me; a band of evildoers has encompassed me; They pierced my hands and my feet. I can count all my bones. They look, they stare at me; they divide my garments among them, and for my clothing they cast lots. (David never experienced such events in his life, but he wrote prophetically about the Messiah).
Zechariah 12:10 - And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication. They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son. (If Jesus is not God - who Israel has pierced?).
Malachi 3:1 - “I will send my messenger, who will prepare the way before me. Then suddenly the Lord you are seeking will come to his temple; the messenger of the covenant, whom you desire, will come," says the LORD Almighty.
WHO Did Abraham SEE In Genesis 18:1?
When GOD sent His Angels or Prophets, they very often spoke as if they were GOD, hence, as we read in Exodus 3:6 Moreover he said, "I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob."
And yet the previous verse Exodus 3:2 tells us it was: The angel of Yahweh (who) appeared to Moses.
And notice how the Prophet of GOD talks for GOD, as if He is GOD in Isaiah 45:5 saying: I am Yahweh, and there is none else. Besides me, there is no God. I will strengthen you, though you have not known me.
Did you also see how the correct translations in the Hebrew text IDENTIFY the ONE TRUE GOD as being GOD ALONE by His name Yahweh.
As GOD spoke THROUGH His Angel in Exodus 3, this must conclude that GOD was also speaking THROUGH His Angel who was also acting for Yahweh GOD, where we read in Genesis 18:1
Yahweh appeared to him by the oaks of Mamre.
My conclusion now perfectly explains WHY the Bible tells us: No one has ever yet seen God the Father, except Jesus John 1:18, John 6:46.
Simply because NO ONE DID SEE GOD, but an Angel acting for GOD.
And now we do not have any Bible contradictions as the Trinity faith have, who say one of the three “MEN” must have been God Almighty, and yet John 1:18, and John 6:46 tells us: No one has ever yet seen God the Father, except Jesus.
And as we have seen, with the problems with the millions of Christians who do not believe in the TRINITY, and who do not believe Jesus is GOD, and who do not believe the person talking to Abraham is God Almighty, but instead believe this was Jesus appearing before He became flesh, as the word of GOD, and as GOD's Mediator, or Jesus as an Angel of the Lord GOD.
These people have also been deceived, as they are also using and reading false Trinitarian Bible translations, and are misunderstanding the Bibles teachings that do NOT say Jesus PRE EXITED His flesh.
And this explains WHY the Hebrews writer did NOT say In the Beginning GOD spoke through His SON, but instead by the prophets: Hebrews 1:1 God, having spoken long ago to our fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways.
My final conclusion, is that when we read some one in the Bible saying they saw GOD, the person was always an Angel acting for GOD.
Unless it was Yahweh Himself as He tells us in a vision, or speaking with him in a dream. Numbers 12:6.
Judges 6:22
Gideon saw that he was the angel of Yahweh; and Gideon said, "Alas, Lord Yahweh! Because I have seen the angel of Yahweh face to face!"
Notice how we are clearly told how Moses is the only person except Jesus who is now with GOD, to have (partially), seen GOD because as GOD: said, "You cannot see my face, for man may not see me and live." Exodus 33:20.
Would GOD contradict His own word, by saying to Moses: "You cannot see my face, for man may not see me and live." Exodus 33:20.
And then in His other hand Yahweh GOD appears to Abraham as a MAN, and Abraham sees GOD face to face and lives, as Trinitarians say and believe?
Did Abraham truly SEE GOD and therefor contradicted John 1:18?
No one has ever yet seen God. The only begotten God, the One being in the bosom of the Father, He has made Him known.
For GOD is Spirit, not a MAN, for GOD created the MAN.
1 Timothy 6: 16
who alone has immortality, dwelling in unapproachable light; whom no man has seen, nor can see: to whom be honor and eternal power. Amen.
I believe if there are Bible contradictions, then we are simply not understanding the word of GOD.
But If there are NO Bible contradictions, then we are correctly understanding the word of GOD.
Agreed ! No trinity taught in Father's WORD.
YAHWEH BLESS. יהוה ברכה
@@James41892 And GOD bless you as well.
Alright your childish accusation stop now. Your either going to shut up with your insults, and rants or I'll make you I could care less about you reasoned fro years. Is that suppose to be convincing, LOL. You just yelling I am wrong doesn't refute anything in the video. It is obvious you have no argument other than to attack and rant.
You do realize I go over Col 1:15 in this video? So your argument is already addressed. And you do this a lot. Just assert something. It is very unconvincing.
You are one of the most smartest person living in this last days. thanks for all the word of wisdom and knowledge you've teach us.
A man with wisdom and knowledge will always look like a fool to others.
Well this isn't really an issue. Paul quotes Epimenides in Titus 1:12 and Jesus seems to refer to other apocrypha books like Wisdom of Solomon and Sirach. The New Testament writers didn't think these books were inspired, but they did have some true things in them (as guided by the Holy Spirit). Jude only quoted something that was true in Enoch and it does not mean that Enoch was inspired. Early church fathers would quote authoritatively from one apocrypha book, but then criticize it later.
I get into it a lot in instagram comment sections and had a guy claim God had to create sin since He created everything. That was a long convo
Yeah, see my video, "What is the Trinity", that doesn't mean Jesus isn't eternal.
Is the TRUTH
Rom 8-11 But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.
You deserve many more views. Any idea when your next vid'll be out?
This is a good video, but at 3:23, the NT was not written to or by Christians. Paul’s letters might be an exception, but Christianity as an organized religion wouldn’t exist within the same period of the writing of the New Testament. It was written for and to, primarily, Jews.
J-MO
All those who follow Jesus Christ are Christian whether they were Jewish or non-Jewish. The writers of the NT may have been Jews by birth, but they were Christians by choice.
At Acts 15 we see the gathering of older men in Jerusalem discussing the issue teaching the gentile Christians to follow the Law. the end result was a letter being sent to all the congregations by the apostles and older men.
That can only be viewed as the early Christian church in action, Christianity
No, you need to read the bottom of the information section.
No, see my video, "What is the Trinity?"
See my video, "The Trinity in the Old Testament." The Link is in the About Section.
Love this Mike!
8:38 − 9:09, Jesus cooperated with the limits of being human, but after His resurrection He was no longer lacking omniscience (John 16:30). I hope this helps.
I have already watched that debate and the Trinitarians clearly won as the unitarians couldn't respond to the Trinitarian objections. Instead, they just changed the subject instead of addressing the actual question. They also couldn't respond on the Ignatius quote.
Stop spamming my comment section with a bunch of crappy links. I will not tolerate it.
Wow, that is a narrow understanding of the New Testament. Especially since I dealt with these types of objections in "Refuting Objections to the Trinity (Part 2)". Where does Jesus deny being God and you realize there is more than one person who is fully God? See my next video which explains this.
No, thank you, but YOU are not the one who needs to tone it down. You are being the kind of apologists I strive to be. Keep the the great work!
Yes, you are trying to make God work in terms of 3 dimensional laws, or as we understand them in our universe. But God is not part of this universe and is above such conditions. Check out the two videos I mentioned. They are the first two links in the above information section.
1st of all, the Infancy Gospel of Thomas is a late 3rd century forgery. Any one who quotes it as automative doesn't know textural criticism or history. It also shows Muhammed relied on unreliable sources.
2nd, if you read Mark 10:18 in context it makes sense. Jesus is forcing the young ruler to face the implications of calling Jesus good, not only with regard to Jesus' goodness, but also with regard to his own. Jesus challenges him to define his attitude towards what is good.
If you are just going to ignore what I say & attack a straw man the only person you are going to convince is yourself. Misrepresenting Christian theology & trying to force our beliefs to meet your presuppositions doesn't do you any good. You can either accept that we merely think God is 1 yet 3 persons & stop saying that means something completely different (like we are polytheists) or you can get lost & try your straw man arguments else where. Either way you are just making yourself look bad.
Yes, that what I meant, and please try to take in context as I mean in your perspective "After the Resurrection He Went back to His Glory".
Yeah, I'm still getting links and the information section in order. Give me a few minutes, and links will be in the information section.
How can believing the 'trinity' affect the 'atonement'? It does because No part of the 'three persons in one God' could have for a split second not existed! Yet the entire NT teaches that "Christ died for our sins" that The son of man came to give his soul as a ransom in exchange for many" ( Rom 5:6, Matt 20:28) Surely once a 'ransom' has been paid it CANT be retrieved! The trinity then DENIES that God's Son, totally, complelely came down from heavan to the earth. 'Only his human nature was here while his spirital nature was still in heavan as part of the 'trinity'....This notion then DENIES the supreme LOVE of the Father who "Loved the world SO MUCH that he GAVE his ONLY BEGOTTEN SON, for us! There are many other reasons why the 'trinity' is false, this is just ONE reason.
It sounds like a lot of people confuse positional traits with traits of being. Clearer teaching on these differences would probably avoid a lot of the misunderstandings people have regarding what scripture says about the Trinity.
Thanks for this. Very well done.
And the scripture is clear that the voice that will be heard by those who are in the tombs is the Voice of Jesus Himself. John 5:28-29
Yes, but you realize the greek word for "head" is "kephale". This word in no way means greater in essence. Since in the same verse it says "The head of every woman is man", and we both know men are not greater in essence to women. So you need to take the verse in context with the original language. "Head" in this verse simply means leader, not of greater essence. So actually I did quote it accurately. It is you who has to force it to fit your doctrine.
If it is within God's ability and desire out of His love for us, then yes. God being complex in His nature can be more than one person. One came to earth, another is in Heaven.
NO, you are taking what I said out of context. Dr. Brown, messianic scholar, has explained this passage in context with the rest of the Bible (Not added scripture). See the link in the information section, "What About Numbers 23:19"
there is no direct mention of trinity in the old testament i think we should be honest about that.
th-cam.com/video/BNt5NKSse0Y/w-d-xo.html
Great video, but the music is just annoying. Such important topic does not need music to accompany it.
Hello! God the Father is Psalm 83:18 KJV and Jesus is the son as the scriptures tells us. The headship order is 1Corinthian11:3 KJV and Malachi 2:10 KJV proof God is one . This is why God says this Exodus 6:3 KJV and Isaiah 26:4 tells us who the true Lord is and finally if you don't believe Jesus is God's son, you are calling God a liar 1John5:10 KJV
1
Thank you so much.
That is because the Trinity is not what modalism says. They are one being, but different persons.
Is Proverbs 8:22-31 talking about Wisdom personified instead of Jesus? Why is Wisdom referred to in the feminine gender?
When examining Proverbs 8:22-31, some have argued that this passage isn't talking about Jesus but rather Wisdom itself personified. They further may point out that Wisdom may previously have been referred to in the feminine gender.
However, in Prov. Chap.8, Wisdom is manifest only by being expressed in some way. God's own wisdom was expressed in creation (Prov. 3:19, 20) but through his Son. But as for Prov. 8:22-31, many professed Christian writers of the early centuries of the Common Era understood this section to refer symbolically to God's Son in his pre-human state.
It is true that in Hebrew, which assigns gender to its nouns (as do many other languages), the word for "wisdom" is always in the feminine gender. This would continue to be the case even though wisdom is personified and so would not rule out wisdom's being used figuratively to represent God's firstborn Son. For instance, the Greek word for "love" in the expression "God is love" (1 John 4:8) is also in the feminine gender but that does not make God feminine.
Also, Jehovah God is the Creator of all things. He is uncreated, without beginning (Rev. 4:11). Job 36:26 says, "In number his years are beyond searching." It is impossible to place an age upon him, for there is no starting point from which to measure. Because He is ageless, He is properly called "the Ancient of Days" since His existence stretches endlessly into the past. (Dan. 7:9, 13) And so, since Jehovah God has existed forever, therefore wisdom had to have always existed within Jehovah forever. (Ps. 90:2)
So we could ask those using these trinitarian arguments: If Prov. 8:22-31 is really talking about literal wisdom itself, than how could wisdom even have been "begotten"? How could it have even been "produced", "set up", "created", or "made"? If this was talking about literal wisdom itself, then how could wisdom be "beside" God or "before" Him? How could wisdom be "the one He was specially fond of"? So instead of literal Wisdom itself (of which God had to already have in order to "beget", "produce", "set up", "create", or "make" anything), when Prov. 8:22 also says that the subject is, "the earliest of his achievements of long ago", this corresponds more to the description of Jesus in Col. 1:15 where it says that he is "the first-born of all creation". Or when Prov.8:23 says, "From time indefinite I was installed, from the start, from times earlier than the earth", this corresponds more to the description of Jesus in Micah 5:2 where it says that his "origin is from early times, from the days of time indefinite". Or when Prov. 8:22 says, "Jehovah God himself produced me as the beginning of his way," this corresponds more to the description of Jesus in Rev. 3:14 where it says that Jesus is "the beginning of the creation by God".
And as for the Hebrew word 'qanah', it can mean either to "produce, aquire, create" or "possess". Context is key in finding out which one it means. Bibles which are biased toward the Trinity do not want to render it as "Produce" or something similar because that would mean that Jesus has a beginning, and that would contradict the Trinity doctrine.
Yet, because the context of Prov. 8:22-31 so overwhelmingly supports the translation of the word 'qanah' as "create", even scores of trinitarian bibles have decided to render it as such:
(1) "[Jehovah] created me at the beginning of his work" - RSV;
(2) "[Jehovah] created me" - NRSV;
(3) "[Jehovah] made me" - MLB;
(4) "Yahweh created me" - JB; "Yahweh created me" - NJB;
(5) "[Jehovah] created me" - NEB;
(6) "[Jehovah] created me" - REB;
(7) "I was the first thing made" - ETRV;
(8) "[Jehovah] created me as the first of his creations" - Lamsa;
(9) "[Jehovah] created me first of all" - GNB;
(10) "[Jehovah] formed me as the first of his works" - AT;
(11) "[Jehovah] formed me first of his creation" - Mo;
(12) "Jehovah framed me first" - Byington;
(13) "[Jehovah] created me" - The Reader's Digest Bible;
(14) "[Jehovah] brought me forth as the first of his works" - The NIV Study Bible. It also explains in a footnote for Prov. 8:22: "brought...forth. The Hebrew for this verb is also used in Ge 4:1; 14:19, 22 (`creator')." - Zondervan, 1985;
(15) "[Jehovah] made me the beginning of his ways for his works" - The Apostles Bible;
(16) "[Jehovah] made me as the start of his way, the first of his works in the past. - BBE;
(17) "Yahweh created me first, at the beginning of his works" - Christian Community Bible;
(18) "[Jehovah] made me as the beginning of his way, the first of his ancient works" - The Complete Jewish Bible;
(19) "[Jehovah] made me at the beginning of His creation, before His works of long ago" -The Holman Christian Standard Bible;
(20) "[Jehovah] created me as the first of his creations, before all of his works. - Peshitta - Lamsa Translation;
21) "[Jehovah] sovereignly made me-the first, the basic- before he did anything else." -The Message;
(22) "[Jehovah] created me as the beginning of his works, before his deeds of long ago." -NET;
(23) "I, wisdom, was with [Jehovah] when he began his work, long before he made anything else. 23 I was created in the very beginning, even before the world began." - New Century Version;
(24) "[Jehovah] created me as the first of his works, before his acts of long ago." - New International Reader's Version;
(25) "[Jehovah] made me at the beginning of His work, before His first works long ago." -New Life Bible;
(26) "[Jehovah] formed me from the beginning, before he created anything else. - New Living Translation;
(27) "Jehovah created me in the beginning of his way, before his works of antiquity." - New Simplified Bible;
(28) "[Jehovah] created me as the head of His ways, to perform all of His works" - 2001 Translation.
Because wisdom is what is known as a natural feminine noun in Hebrew
@@smalltimer4370 How do we know that the description of wisdom at Proverbs 8:22-31 applies to Jesus Christ in his prehuman existence?
The inspired description of wisdom found in the book of Proverbs reads: “Jehovah himself produced me as the beginning of his way, the earliest of his achievements of long ago. . . . Before the mountains themselves had been settled down, ahead of the hills, I was brought forth as with labor pains . . . When he prepared the heavens I was there; . . . then I came to be beside him as a master worker, and I came to be the one he was specially fond of day by day, I being glad before him all the time, . . . and the things I was fond of were with the sons of men.”
This passage cannot be speaking merely about divine wisdom or wisdom in the abstract. Why not? Because the wisdom that is here described was “produced,” or created, as the beginning of Jehovah’s way. Jehovah God has always existed and has always been wise. (Psalm 90:1, 2) His wisdom had no beginning; it was neither created nor produced. It was not “brought forth as with labor pains.” Furthermore, this wisdom is said to speak and act, representing a person.-Proverbs 8:1.
The book of Proverbs says that long ago wisdom was beside Jehovah, the Creator, as “a master worker.” That certainly applies to Jesus. Long before he came to earth, Jesus worked so closely with Jehovah that God’s Word says: “He is before all other things and by means of him all other things were made to exist.”-Colossians 1:17; Revelation 3:14.
Depicting the Son of God as wisdom is appropriate, since he was the One who revealed Jehovah’s wise purposes and decrees. During his prehuman existence, Jesus was God’s Word, or Spokesman. (John 1:1) He is described as being “the power of God and the wisdom of God.” (1 Corinthians 1:24, 30) What a beautiful description of the Son of God, whose fondness for mankind moved him to give his life as a ransom in their behalf!-John 3:16.
@@AstariahJW
The only detail that I would add, is that Jesus is never attributed with creation in the Bible, but more accurately, a birth - to which I'd add, makes the distinguishment of the only begotten son of GOD with the unique attribute of being born directly from GOD rather than the creation spoken of in Genesis, and through whom all things were made.
𝟸𝟸"𝐘𝐚𝐡𝐰𝐞𝐡 𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐝 𝐦𝐞 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐛𝐞𝐠𝐢𝐧𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐨𝐟 𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤, 𝚋𝚎𝚏𝚘𝚛𝚎 𝚑𝚒𝚜 𝚍𝚎𝚎𝚍𝚜 𝚘𝚏 𝚘𝚕𝚍. 𝟸𝟹𝐈 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐬𝐞𝐭 𝐮𝐩 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐥𝐚𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠, 𝚏𝚛𝚘𝚖 𝚝𝚑𝚎 𝚋𝚎𝚐𝚒𝚗𝚗𝚒𝚗𝚐, 𝚋𝚎𝚏𝚘𝚛𝚎 𝚝𝚑𝚎 𝚎𝚊𝚛𝚝𝚑 𝚎𝚡𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚎𝚍. 𝟸𝟺𝚆𝚑𝚎𝚗 𝚝𝚑𝚎𝚛𝚎 𝚠𝚎𝚛𝚎 𝚗𝚘 𝚍𝚎𝚙𝚝𝚑𝚜, 𝐈 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐛𝐫𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐡, 𝚠𝚑𝚎𝚗 𝚝𝚑𝚎𝚛𝚎 𝚠𝚎𝚛𝚎 𝚗𝚘 𝚜𝚙𝚛𝚒𝚗𝚐𝚜 𝚊𝚋𝚘𝚞𝚗𝚍𝚒𝚗𝚐 𝚠𝚒𝚝𝚑 𝚠𝚊𝚝𝚎𝚛. 𝟸𝟻𝙱𝚎𝚏𝚘𝚛𝚎 𝚝𝚑𝚎 𝚖𝚘𝚞𝚗𝚝𝚊𝚒𝚗𝚜 𝚠𝚎𝚛𝚎 𝚜𝚎𝚝𝚝𝚕𝚎𝚍 𝚒𝚗 𝚙𝚕𝚊𝚌𝚎, 𝚋𝚎𝚏𝚘𝚛𝚎 𝚝𝚑𝚎 𝚑𝚒𝚕𝚕𝚜, 𝐈 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐛𝐫𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐡;... - 𝙿𝚛𝚘𝚟𝚎𝚛𝚋𝚜 𝟾.𝟸𝟸-𝟹𝟷
𝟼𝐁𝐲 𝐘𝐚𝐡𝐰𝐞𝐡'𝐬 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐝, 𝚝𝚑𝚎 𝚑𝚎𝚊𝚟𝚎𝚗𝚜 𝚠𝚎𝚛𝚎 𝚖𝚊𝚍𝚎; 𝚊𝚕𝚕 𝚝𝚑𝚎𝚒𝚛 𝚊𝚛𝚖𝚢 𝚋𝚢 𝚝𝚑𝚎 𝚋𝚛𝚎𝚊𝚝𝚑 𝚘𝚏 𝚑𝚒𝚜 𝚖𝚘𝚞𝚝𝚑... ...𝟿𝐅𝐨𝐫 𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐩𝐨𝐤𝐞, 𝚊𝚗𝚍 𝚒𝚝 𝚠𝚊𝚜 𝚍𝚘𝚗𝚎. 𝐇𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐝, 𝚊𝚗𝚍 𝚒𝚝 𝚜𝚝𝚘𝚘𝚍 𝚏𝚒𝚛𝚖. - 𝙿𝚜𝚊𝚕𝚖 𝟹𝟹.𝟼-𝟿
𝟸𝟽𝐈 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐚𝐥𝐬𝐨 𝐚𝐩𝐩𝐨𝐢𝐧𝐭 𝐡𝐢𝐦 𝐦𝐲 𝐟𝐢𝐫𝐬𝐭𝐛𝐨𝐫𝐧, 𝚝𝚑𝚎 𝚑𝚒𝚐𝚑𝚎𝚜𝚝 𝚘𝚏 𝚝𝚑𝚎 𝚔𝚒𝚗𝚐𝚜 𝚘𝚏 𝚝𝚑𝚎 𝚎𝚊𝚛𝚝𝚑. - 𝙿𝚊𝚕𝚖 𝟾𝟿.𝟸𝟽
𝚜𝚘 𝚜𝚑𝚊𝚕𝚕 𝐦𝐲 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐝 𝐛𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐠𝐨𝐞𝐬 𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐡 𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐨𝐟 𝐦𝐲 𝐦𝐨𝐮𝐭𝐡: 𝚒𝚝 𝚜𝚑𝚊𝚕𝚕 𝚗𝚘𝚝 𝚛𝚎𝚝𝚞𝚛𝚗 𝚝𝚘 𝚖𝚎 𝚟𝚘𝚒𝚍, 𝚋𝚞𝚝 𝚒𝚝 𝚜𝚑𝚊𝚕𝚕 𝚊𝚌𝚌𝚘𝚖𝚙𝚕𝚒𝚜𝚑 𝚝𝚑𝚊𝚝 𝚠𝚑𝚒𝚌𝚑 𝙸 𝚙𝚕𝚎𝚊𝚜𝚎, 𝚊𝚗𝚍 𝚒𝚝 𝚜𝚑𝚊𝚕𝚕 𝚙𝚛𝚘𝚜𝚙𝚎𝚛 𝚒𝚗 𝚝𝚑𝚎 𝚝𝚑𝚒𝚗𝚐 𝙸 𝚜𝚎𝚗𝚝 𝚒𝚝 𝚝𝚘 𝚍𝚘. - 𝙸𝚜𝚊𝚒𝚊𝚑 𝟻𝟻.𝟷𝟷
𝐈 𝐜𝐚𝐦𝐞 𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐅𝐚𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫, 𝚊𝚗𝚍 𝚑𝚊𝚟𝚎 𝚌𝚘𝚖𝚎 𝚒𝚗𝚝𝚘 𝚝𝚑𝚎 𝚠𝚘𝚛𝚕𝚍. 𝙰𝚐𝚊𝚒𝚗, 𝙸 𝚕𝚎𝚊𝚟𝚎 𝚝𝚑𝚎 𝚠𝚘𝚛𝚕𝚍, 𝚊𝚗𝚍 𝚐𝚘 𝚝𝚘 𝚝𝚑𝚎 𝙵𝚊𝚝𝚑𝚎𝚛." - 𝙹𝚘𝚑𝚗 𝟷𝟼.𝟸𝟾
𝚠𝚑𝚘 𝚒𝚜 𝚝𝚑𝚎 𝚒𝚖𝚊𝚐𝚎 𝚘𝚏 𝚝𝚑𝚎 𝚒𝚗𝚟𝚒𝚜𝚒𝚋𝚕𝚎 𝙶𝚘𝚍, 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐟𝐢𝐫𝐬𝐭𝐛𝐨𝐫𝐧 𝐨𝐟 𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐜𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧. - 𝙲𝚘𝚕 𝟷.𝟷𝟻
𝙵𝚘𝚛 𝚝𝚑𝚘𝚜𝚎 𝙶𝚘𝚍 𝚏𝚘𝚛𝚎𝚔𝚗𝚎𝚠, 𝙷𝚎 𝚊𝚕𝚜𝚘 𝚙𝚛𝚎𝚍𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚒𝚗𝚎𝚍 𝚝𝚘 𝚋𝚎 𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚏𝚘𝚛𝚖𝚎𝚍 𝚝𝚘 𝚝𝚑𝚎 𝚒𝚖𝚊𝚐𝚎 𝚘𝚏 𝙷𝚒𝚜 𝚂𝚘𝚗, 𝚜𝚘 𝚝𝚑𝚊𝚝 𝙷𝚎 𝚠𝚘𝚞𝚕𝚍 𝚋𝚎 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐟𝐢𝐫𝐬𝐭𝐛𝐨𝐫𝐧 𝐚𝐦𝐨𝐧𝐠 𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐲 𝐛𝐫𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐬. - 𝚁𝚘𝚖𝚊𝚗𝚜 𝟾.𝟸𝟿
@@smalltimer4370 proverbs say that jesus is the master worker . JEHOVAH had the plans and jesus carried them out . Jesus is firstborn and only begotten son of God. Jesus was created directly by Jehovah and everything else was created through jesus
@@AstariahJW
Yes, I get that, though here again, I think it's important to make the distinction between Jesus and creation, along with the fact that the Bible does not attribute creation to Jesus, but rather, where it consistently identifies Jesus' own begetting as a birth rather than creation. Thus making the distinction between, Jesus and the creation spoken of in Genesis.
Iam glad finally I found this channel.
Inspiring Philosophy I just have a question, why did the Jews back during the times of the Old Testament believe that God is only the lord YWHW ( The father)? If I am mistaken tell me but I haven’t heard of a trinitarian Jew. What about the angel of the lord and the spirit of God?
th-cam.com/video/BNt5NKSse0Y/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/d-aVQ8MELeg/w-d-xo.html
Thanks I had lots of trouble with the trinity especially when it came to proclaiming it.
Two questions, when it comes to not being able to see god does this refer to god the father or the trinity? If Jesus is indeed God and is the physical representation of god, what would he represent?
@@gabrielfusaro223 it refers to God the Father and Jesus is the visible image of the invisible God
@@gabrielfusaro223 Jesus told the Samaritan woman at the well that "the Jews worship what they know".
Did they know God was triune? No
Did they know that God was one person, the Father, YHWH? Yes.
On Proverbs 8, early Church Fathers taught that Jesus is Wisdom. Prudence et al are not spoken of in a personified manner in this chapter, but rather as attributes. Reading verses 12-31, everything contributed to Wisdom can be attributed to Christ as well. Interestingly, when the Arians claimed Christ was Wisdom in this passage, the Trinitarians didn't reject this view but how the Arians interpreted it.
Evidence?
Fill me in with why Paul never addresses greetings from the 1/3 part of god in his epistles. Very heretical, since your god is three in one... Then to leave a part of him out.
God isn't made of three parts. He is made of three persons.
excelent video