The last one is super cringe. Timestamps: 0:00 Caller pretends to know how the Catholics formed the Trinity doctrine 1:08 Caller said Jesus is begotten-embarrassed himself #1 5:41 Caller said there are 2 thrones in heaven in Revelation-embarrassed himself #2 7:58 But where is the throne for the Holy Spirit?-embarrassed himself #3 11:58 Caller said the Holy Spirit is NOT a person-embarrassed himself #4 13:50 Caller said where is the Holy Spirit when Jesus mentioned him and his Father-embarrassed himself #5 16:11 Caller said there’s no neuter pronoun in Greek-embarrassed himself #6
Very good question! I would like to add another question: What schools did such people go to? Were they not taught the basics of English? It's mind boggling.
For real I had one yesterday tell me “revelations says the trinity is of Satan only believe the father is God.” I said you realize you just called Jesus Satan , the father Satan , and the spirit Satan right? 😂 He said “NO THATS NOT WHAT I SAID I SAID THE TRINITY “ I said who do you think the Trinity consist of? And he never replied back.
He revealed his fruit......... He said Paul wasn't referring to the resurrection, Sam told him to read the next verse, whuch says God raised him from the dead......that's the resurrection. And Jose said that he will grant him that, Sam told him so admit you're wrong and Jose ignored it. Then Jose tells Sam again, that Paul wasn't talking about the resurrection. Jose just granted Sam that it is about the resurrection but refused to admit he was wrong, then goes on to say the same thing that Sam corrected him on, that Jose himself granted Sam. That is the fruit of Jose..........a denier of the truth. Discussion over as far as I am concerned.
For anyone wondering the verse he quoted (Col. 1:15) when it says He’s the “firstborn” the Greek is (prōtótokos) and it’s referring to Jesus’s being the heir of all creation. Jews have a tradition that the “firstborn” MAN will inherit the fathers things. This doesn’t mean “firstborn” in the sense of “being born first” because women could be born first but the Jews would call their first male son “firstborn”. It definitely DOES NOT mean Jesus was created first because Jesus claims Eternal Existence many times. SECONDLY saying in Spanish “que es eso” means “what is it” or “what is that” both which are neither masculine or feminine.
Too many people _half listening_ to people at the pulpit without questioning, *and not reading the Bible and listening to the Spirit of God.* As a born again Christian who falls into the category of a Pentecostal (1 of about 279 million, and more broadly about 644 million). *I am in full agreement with Sam on the Trinity.* _My point, Its not just the Catholics who recognize the Trinity._ Jesus is Lord, thank you Father, Son, Holy Ghost - Separate and yet one.
It’s not just heretics, anyone who doesn’t understand the trinity mostly does not understand it because they are trying to put their understanding of creation onto the creator But the creator by nature is above and beyond creation, so their understanding blinds them to the truth They wrongly think that because creation is limited that the creator must be limited to the creation Which is of course false
@@X44-d7h Genesis 19:24 Then the Lord rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire, from the Lord out of heaven; So there was 2 lords, one in Heaven and one on earth
Why do people like this obsess over strange details? It is obvious that the Father is a Spirit and isn't sitting in a physical chair, like an earthly monarch. Why would the caller make a doctrine about the number of thrones? The lengths that people will go to deny the Lordship of the Lord God Jesus Christ is mind-blowing.
Matthew 28:19 New King James Version 19 Go [a]therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
@@OnlyGodsavesyouJesus does not "work independently." He is the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. A man has a body, soul, and spirit and when you look at him you see his body and inside that body is the soul and spirit.
@@andrewhenderson6544 That's where you are wrong. Jesus is NOT the Father and he is NOT the Holy Spirit. He is one with The Father & The Holy Spirit in his divine nature. If you say that Jesus is the Father, then you're an Aryan Heretic.
It is good to have confidence, yet confedence must be supported with knowledge and reflextion. otherwise, it is a blind faith. That pottato has researched quickly and decided to jump ship, yet when his research has been tested, it proves that he didn't conprehend the bible. The fair thing tondo is to ask questions, get your answers, and gonand further research, yet he kept on challenging everything.. i sincerely hope the Holy Spirit will open his mind to see the truth.
Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church: By Dr. Stuart G. Hall 1992, pages 20 and 21. Professor Stuart G. Hall was the former Chair of Ecclesiastical History at King's College, London England. Dr. Hall makes the factual statement that Catholic Trinitarian Baptism was not the original form of Christian Baptism, rather the original was Jesus name baptism. “In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,” although those words were not used, as they later are, as a formula. Not all baptisms fitted this rule.” Dr Hall further, states: “More common and perhaps more ancient was the simple, “In the name of the Lord Jesus or, Jesus Christ.” This practice was known among Marcionites and Orthodox; it is certainly the subject of controversy in Rome and Africa about 254, as the anonymous tract De rebaptismate (“On rebaptism”) shows.”
Because the Catholic definition brought forwards into the Protestant world by Calvinists (pseudo-Catholics) is wrong, it portrays 3 Gods: 3 Souls, 3 Minds, 3 Spiritual Bodies (you just need to look at the triplets-like, Roman Catholic paintings for that). It is Nestorianism.
John 14, 15 and 16 in the Spanish Bible, Reina Valera, used by Protestants mainly (it’s like the KJV of spanish speakers) refers ti the Holy Spirit as “EL”, which translates to “HE or HIM”.
Clearly, this guy's is confused or doesn't understand or just was bored and decided to challenge Sam. On what he has interpreted from the Bible. What a joke. God bless you always @Sam.
Hosea was getting shredded apart. Arguing out of context and without being based in Scripture. A lot of Protestant pastors defend not the Bible, but just there assumption based on other teachers. Talk about Sola Scriptora folks😅
sometimes it just headache to argue to someone who chooses to argue for argument sake the evidence is right in front of him to see , yet he argues blindly . its right in front just like the scripture says in seeing they shall not see or hearing they shall not hear . its the holy spirit that will knock off that hard heart that keeps him from accepting the truth just keep praying for him. Its right in front of him how is just missing it. Like the lord Jesus says until you are like children. just believe the scripture that's all
QUESTION for Sam, in the beginning was the word/voice, and the word, /voice was with God, and the word/voice was God and almighty God said, let there be light and there was light, is God the word that became flesh and dwelled with man the same sacrifical lamb who is the salvation of mankind.?
Also in Acts ch13 vs2 it's the Holy Spirit that set aside Paul and Barnabas for their work, vs4 they are sent out by the Holy Spirit, Acts 16 vs6 they were forbidden to preach in Asia by the Holy Spirit, clearly a Person in the Trinity
New Revised Standard Version says this about Matthew 28:19: “Modern critics claim this formula is falsely ascribed to Jesus and that it represents later (Catholic) church tradition, for nowhere in the book of Acts (or any other book of the Bible) is baptism performed with the name of the Trinity...”
Oh man, you mean to say rationalist bible critics don't believe in the bible and try to cut out as much as possible and cast as much doubt in the text as they can are at it again? Wow. how surprising. News flash- they aren't any better at interpretation than the JW's
@@X44-d7h the most satanic argument against the Holy Trinity ever. What if I ask you where the word unitarianism is in the Bible, what would you reply? You would just get stuck. Who cares about the word? The doctrine is important you son of the devil. Glory to the Triune God.
@user-xb6nc8ne1f Jesus Christ said," worship God in spirit and in truth Read the Bible in your spirits eye, unity of God is mentioned from genesis to revelation.
Is Jesus Christ, 1 the Eternal Spirit of life and the wisdom/divine conscienceness and the sacrifical lamb/body of almighty God in bodily form revealing Himself to the world as the one and only true living God and savior of mankind.?
Just a question, no secret but only mention to baptize in the "trinity" happens in Mathew 28:19...my question, how come in the book of acts the deciples only baptize in Jesus name? Could you explain further please? I'm trying to establish from reported records that in the forth century, Eusebius held the original manuscripts of Mathew with a conflicting view to Mathew 28:19?..if this is true then surely we should baptize only in Jesus name as the apostles did?.. just a question, great channel👍
In Matthew 28:19, Jesus gives the sentence to utter before the priest baptizes. He tells us to be baptized in the trinity. In acts, however, it was not the phrase uttered before baptism. Rather, the apostles tells them to be baptized in the name of Jesus, or for the sake of Jesus. No where in acts do you hear the apostles saying “in the name of Jesus” right BEFORE they baptize them. HUGE DIFFERENCE.
Matthew 28:19 is not conflicting history. The early church uttered this verse before baptising someone. Look at the didache, which is a very early document written by the apostles. There you find instructions to baptize.
“And concerning baptism, baptize this way: Having first said all these things, baptize into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, Matthew 28:19 in living water.” - Chapter 7, Didache.
But “seated at the right hand of the Father” sounds like He’s on the Father’s throne in a different seat much like a royal family would be seated at the throne of a king.
Even if it sounds like that, the book of Revelation also clarifies that for us when it says the throne of God and the Lamb. The one throne belongs to the Father and the Son.
Why didn't you just continue in the verses where it says..."we have seen it and testify to it"? I mean, it is exactly what he was complaining about. He was definitely the one doing circles the entire time. The trinity is clear. God bless!
we do know is: 1) The Catholic Church confessed to changing it. 2) Most theologians also agree that they did change it. 3) No one followed this supposed instruction and all were baptized in the name of Christ ONLY! 4) Eusebius who saw the earliest manuscripts when he quoted this verse wrote that it said, “In His name” (Jesus) I think most will agree that the weight of evidence is overwhelming that Matthew 28:19 should have read “in My name.”
Yikes! Sam has written an abundant of articles on the Trinitarian baptismal formula in Matthew 28:19, that could have been you up there in the video getting cooked. Be that as it may, the original wording is “in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit”…not “in my name”. How do we know? Because of the amount of patristic evidence we have from the early Church that quoted it as such. These sources include the Didache (AD. 70), Ignatius of Antioch (ca. AD. 107 - 112), Irenaeus (ca. 130 - 200), Tertullian (ca. 160 - 220), Victorinus (ca. 270 - 303), etc,. In fact, I have found 24 quotations of Matthew 28:19 using the full formula, there were no quotations among these writers with the short version. Eusebius’ short form is the ONLY textual evidence we have of the short form of Matthew 28:19. He tends to abbreviate elsewhere also as in his Demonstrato Evangelica, where he doesn’t just abbreviate Matthew 28:19, but also Philippians 2:9…however, we certainly know the way Eusebius quotes it isn’t original. Not only that, Eusebius still quotes the trinitarian baptismal formula of Matthew 28:19 in Contra Marcellum! So, in fact, the overwhelming evidence is that the trinitarian long form of Matthew 28:19 is the original one. It’s not surprising that those such as yourself are so keen on denying the very fact, as Matthew 28:19 is an explicit testimony to the trinity. Don’t take it just from me though, go talk with Sam about it on his stream!
@AveChristusRex789 interesting you don't mention the others who I mentioned including the Catholic sources. Not once in the book of Acts says anything about Father son and Hole spirit but only the Creator of all things Jesus Christ. Anyways be it as it may the Tradition came from the Catholic Church and not the Apostolic Church of John's day. After Rome fell the Catholic Church took the reigns of the Roman Empire and destroyed 3 Kingdoms that refused the trinity you can look that up. Again back to my statement that the Catholic Church changed it still stands.
@@RG-qn2qmread William Jurgens faith of the early fathers and you will see countless writing from Christians prior to fall of Rome believing what is taught in the Catholic Church. And second term Catholic Church was said back in 107AD by Ignatius of Antioch
The Fathers throne is in heaven. Jesus throne is in Jerusalem where God swore to David that he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne. David’s throne was earthly. 2 thrones for two different times.
Doctrine of the trinity doesn’t matter, things like this are just made to divide believers, no matter how many slick semantic arguments are presented and the inventions of new terminology
No. your opinion of the Trinity doesn't matter. the Trinity doctrine is absolutely important, because it is how God revealed himself in the New Testament. The division comes from heretics.
I appreciate this isn’t related. But I’ve asked this question many times, Sex before marriage is it Sin, not encouraged or not a subject in Judaism? Because I’m getting all sorts of answers. I even know Jewish people from Israel who think it’s fine to do it out side of marriage. Because “You could get married and then split up, then marry again. So you end up sleeping with multiple people.” “And it’s the norm in Israel very few wait until marriage unless they are Orthodox.” So there are even families encouraging it… How don’t they see the special connection getting ruined? Don’t Jews believe that when married two souls unite or something? Plus the science on Phycological, sociology, Biology has shown more partners means Less mental connections (Soul anchors.). Thinking of the past, comparisons, less emotions to connect with. Then Females can start to develop ASA, Anti Sperm Antibodies which stops sperm from fertilising the egg or damages the head of the sperm and can cause issues for the development of the baby. There is so much I could add to this but don’t want to make it massive. Any help is much appreciated!
He said he was catholic then he should have some understanding about the Trinity but i think he ever was. Maybe he from a different cult😊he should view previous video👍on this channel
This guy went fishing with a spoon 😂 The Trinity was cool before Catholicism came along. If you're gonna argue against the trinity, you gotta at least have a grasp on what you're arguing against and whatever it is you think you believe.
Go read the early church fathers😂 Catholicism has been here before the Bible, they don’t sound Protestant. The church was built on Peter and both Peter and Paul founded the church.
Tell me you don't have reading comprehension without telling me you don't have reading comprehension. "Throne singular or thrones plural?" "Throne singular" "How many thrones?" "Two" 😅
The trinity is a biblical doctoring , it’s all over the bible. You have to read and study the scriptures. When you have read it and studied it, it’s there father, son and Holy Spirit , three distinct persons one God.
The word Trinity is not biblical, though Godhead is. We know the fulness of the Godhead is in Him bodily and He is one with the Father and Holy Spirit. My thoughts are one being with three parts. We don't know about "persons." Jesus is YHWH Elohim, fully.
Jesus it appointed King by God and sits on God's throne as were David, Solomon and other Judean Kings. 1 Chronicles 29:23 And Solʹo·mon SAT ON JEHOVAH'S THRONE as king in place of David his father, Luke 1:31....and you are to name him Jesus. 32 This one will be great and will be called Son of the Most High, and Jehovah GOD WILL GIVE HIM THE THRONE OF DAVID his father, 3 Chosen ones sit with Jesus on thrones. Luke 22:30 so that you may eat and drink at my table in my Kingdom, and SIT ON THRONES to judge the 12 tribes of Israel. Using the term THRONE to try and show that Jesus and God are one and the same will be a problem when the above are considered.
The church doesnt teach these things. My dad, who is an absolute Jesus follower and a wonderful man, who grew up in Church doesnt know a tenth of what the bible says. Seems like every time i talk to him about it he is just in awe. This is the problem...it doesn't matter how much you go to church...if they arent teaching you cant learn unless you educate yourself
This is one that I disagree with Sam on. The trinity is not biblical it comes from Greek philosophy. By way of Tertullian three distinct persons of one essence. Is not biblical the scripture calls Jesus the first the trinity calls him the second. Scripture says Jesus is the express image of his person. Who is the “his” definite article aka God. Jesus is Gods express image, scripture says man was made in Gods image. The trinity has the family in Gods image. In genesis God made one man placed him “alone” in the garden and said it is not good that man dwell alone. Why did God make this statement? Why did God place him all alone in the garden?to show all creation besides him there is no God. Man is soul/body/spirit we are made in Gods image. Scripture says Jesus Christ is the fullness of the Godhead bodily. This is Gods image and he made man in his image. Scripture says seek me and you shall find me. Man says we can’t know God, Jesus said to Phillip how long have you been with me and you do not know me, when you’ve seen me you’ve seen the father. This I know for a fact because the Holy Spirit corrected my view of the scripture when I asked how Jesus. Could be Lord of Lords and King of Kings seeing his father is Lord and King. I asked this would make you Lord and King over your father how can this be. Then the Holy Spirit said I didn’t understand what I was reading and showed me the Godhead who Jesus Christ is the express image of his person. God is spirit the spirit dwells in the body of Christ Jesus he is his express image. Just as we are the express image of our spirit. The soul is mind will and emotions, the spirit is our celestial body, the flesh is our terrestrial body. We are three parts but not three persons this is where the trinity goes against scripture. Yes the flesh has a will and the soul has a will and the spirit has a will but they are one. Period not three distinct persons, there is only one person Jesus Christ who is God robbed in flesh no trinity. Godhead biblical trinity man made.
Have you watched any of these videos and bothered to listen? I don’t think you have, because your objections have been soundly refuted as unbiblical and ignorant. For instance, the word “trinity” is a descriptive term used to codify what the Bible teaches: one God, revealed in the NT as the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost, each personally distinct without separation of the Godhead. It was not Tertullian’s “Greek philosophy”, but the divine revelation of scripture recognized by the successors of the apostles. As noted by historian JND Kelly, and others, Tertullian used Greek philosophy to evangelize the Greek, prove the gospel, and battle pagan ideas, not vice versa. Each of your assertions is scripture abuse, taking verses out of context and imposing your ideas as its meaning, as in Col. 2:9, suggesting that the verse teaches the person of Jesus is God to the exclusion of the Father and the Holy Ghost, when the text actually says because Jesus is fully God we can have fullness of life in him.
There is no trinity of beings, nor any metaphor of Father and son. This is a actual relationship between Father and son. I don’t understand why people can’t just believe what God is telling us, that He brought forth the son Pro 8:22, and The son confirming it Jhn 8:42,16:28-30. The Father even mentions in Heb 1:5 that this is the second time He has begotten the son, confirming Pro 8:22. Even Jesus himself kept trying to convince everyone who he was, the son of God, not God himself.
The fact that he is THE SON OF GOD makes Him beyond worthy of worship. He shares the same nature as the father. Go read the early church they don’t agree with what you just said. Who do we trust ourselves far from the time of Jesus and the New Testament or the early Christians
@@Viiola24 because, just like today, people choose to follow their own beliefs instead of God's way. The Pharisees was so into themselves, they couldn't even recognize their own messiah.
@@He_who_lives_forever what early church are you referring too? Yes he has the same nature, but he has the traits the Father gave him. If your referring to the time of Christ, then I'm in harmony with them.
The Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics: As to Matthew 28:19, it says: “It is the central piece of evidence for the traditional (Trinitarian) view. If it were undisputed, this would, of course, be decisive, but its trustworthiness is impugned on grounds of textual criticism, literary criticism and historical criticism.” The same Encyclopedia further states that: “The obvious explanation of the silence of the New Testament on the triune name, and the use of another (JESUS NAME) formula in Acts and Paul, is that this other formula was the earlier, and the triune formula is a later addition.” The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Vol. 4, page 2637, Under “Baptism,” says: “Matthew 28:19 in particular only canonizes a later ecclesiastical situation, that its universalism is contrary to the facts of early Christian history, and its Trinitarian formula (is) foreign to the mouth of Jesus.”
Now let's do you a favor. What textual proof is there that Matt 28:19 doesn't include "father, son and spirit" When you successfully can't provide any we'll discuss the other claims
God doesn't have a mother, she is the mother of Jesus the physical flesh and blood man Jesus, don't twist truth because in fact this a Catholic doctrine and also praying to Mary as an intercessor is also a Catholic false doctrine!🤢
The Catholic Encyclopedia, II, page 263: “The baptismal formula was changed from the name of Jesus Christ to the words Father, Son, and Holy Spirit by the Catholic Church in the second century.”
The last one is super cringe. Timestamps:
0:00 Caller pretends to know how the Catholics formed the Trinity doctrine
1:08 Caller said Jesus is begotten-embarrassed himself #1
5:41 Caller said there are 2 thrones in heaven in Revelation-embarrassed himself #2
7:58 But where is the throne for the Holy Spirit?-embarrassed himself #3
11:58 Caller said the Holy Spirit is NOT a person-embarrassed himself #4
13:50 Caller said where is the Holy Spirit when Jesus mentioned him and his Father-embarrassed himself #5
16:11 Caller said there’s no neuter pronoun in Greek-embarrassed himself #6
Embarrassment galore…
What sort of churches are these people going to for heaven's sake!? 😮✝️🙏❤️🔥🙌
Very good question! I would like to add another question: What schools did such people go to? Were they not taught the basics of English? It's mind boggling.
For real I had one yesterday tell me “revelations says the trinity is of Satan only believe the father is God.”
I said you realize you just called Jesus Satan , the father Satan , and the spirit Satan right? 😂
He said “NO THATS NOT WHAT I SAID I SAID THE TRINITY “
I said who do you think the Trinity consist of?
And he never replied back.
He sounded like he was a Jw.
Prot churches
It’s called random internet searches and finding demonic teachings.
You are awesome in the Lord, thank you for being obedient
Dang I’m Puerto Rican and that caller just made us Spanish sound dumb!!!!!
Not at all. Big ups to Puerto Rico!
Don’t worry, we know you’re not all like this potato.
Love from Poland ❤
Oye papi no me incluyas a mi!
Don't worry he even made us greeks look dumb...
I am Hispanic, studied some Greek and can pray in it but i did learn that Greek does have a neuter gender
Thank you so much for pointing out the details and then tying them all together!
Oh my days, the throne argument was like trying to teach sentence diagramming to my children. 😂 I totally felt Sam’s frustration in that moment.
God bless you, brother Sam, for your incredible scriptural knowledge
He revealed his fruit.........
He said Paul wasn't referring to the resurrection, Sam told him to read the next verse, whuch says God raised him from the dead......that's the resurrection. And Jose said that he will grant him that, Sam told him so admit you're wrong and Jose ignored it.
Then Jose tells Sam again, that Paul wasn't talking about the resurrection.
Jose just granted Sam that it is about the resurrection but refused to admit he was wrong, then goes on to say the same thing that Sam corrected him on, that Jose himself granted Sam.
That is the fruit of Jose..........a denier of the truth.
Discussion over as far as I am concerned.
For anyone wondering the verse he quoted (Col. 1:15) when it says He’s the “firstborn” the Greek is (prōtótokos) and it’s referring to Jesus’s being the heir of all creation. Jews have a tradition that the “firstborn” MAN will inherit the fathers things. This doesn’t mean “firstborn” in the sense of “being born first” because women could be born first but the Jews would call their first male son “firstborn”. It definitely DOES NOT mean Jesus was created first because Jesus claims Eternal Existence many times. SECONDLY saying in Spanish “que es eso” means “what is it” or “what is that” both which are neither masculine or feminine.
Good Morning
Well done good and faithful…
Clean and to the point.
Love You and He loves you more.
Amen
🙏🏾💓🤗
Too many people _half listening_ to people at the pulpit without questioning, *and not reading the Bible and listening to the Spirit of God.* As a born again Christian who falls into the category of a Pentecostal (1 of about 279 million, and more broadly about 644 million). *I am in full agreement with Sam on the Trinity.*
_My point, Its not just the Catholics who recognize the Trinity._
Jesus is Lord, thank you Father, Son, Holy Ghost - Separate and yet one.
You are so patience bro sam, i am not having payience hearing to so ignorant person...he did not want to see what he read...Jesus bless you Sam.
This guy is a fool. He doesn't know the difference between singular and plural.
This guy gave me a stress headache. 😣
i kid you not i was tired
Tell me about it. I have enough stress which he just made it worse... Lord have Mercy 😞
Thank you Sam for defending our doctrine from our true church Jesus church apostolic Catholic Church
Afto is the Greek word for the neutral pronoun (αυτό). Hosea is clearly lying through his teeth
These people cannot stop blabbing and listen, there lies the problem.
His fruit is rotten, love it.
Sam, how did you find such patience? This guy is a ignoramus .
This guy is blind by ignorance not to accept correction. Sam keep it up❤
why is it so hard for there heretics to understand the trinity?
It’s not just heretics, anyone who doesn’t understand the trinity mostly does not understand it because they are trying to put their understanding of creation onto the creator
But the creator by nature is above and beyond creation, so their understanding blinds them to the truth
They wrongly think that because creation is limited that the creator must be limited to the creation
Which is of course false
The real heretic is one teaching which is not found in the scriptures
@@X44-d7h John1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Silence heretic
@@X44-d7h
Genesis 19:24 Then the Lord rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire, from the Lord out of heaven;
So there was 2 lords, one in Heaven and one on earth
@@X44-d7h John 8:58 Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.”
Jesus was the Lord Jehova who talked to Abraham
Why do people like this obsess over strange details? It is obvious that the Father is a Spirit and isn't sitting in a physical chair, like an earthly monarch. Why would the caller make a doctrine about the number of thrones? The lengths that people will go to deny the Lordship of the Lord God Jesus Christ is mind-blowing.
This is embarrasong. A Hispanic that doesn't known how to read Reina Valera bible. The RVB refers to the Homy Spirit as He as a person, not a thing.
That is pitiful to say the least.
Is this the gangster Bible? The Homie spirit? 😂
@@Rileyed
Gangster bible?
@@LuisVazquez-hx3bk you said Homy Spirit.
@@Rileyed
But you understand what I wanted to say.
But why did you say Reina Valera is a gangster bible?
The demon just couldn't say it
Matthew 28:19
New King James Version
19 Go [a]therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
Glory to YHWH! Glory to the Father, Jesus Christ of Nazareth the Son & the Holy Spirit!☦️
Jesus Christ IS God himself, he came to us in the flesh, father son and holy spirit, 3 in 1 yet working independently.
@@OnlyGodsavesyouJesus does not "work independently." He is the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. A man has a body, soul, and spirit and when you look at him you see his body and inside that body is the soul and spirit.
@@andrewhenderson6544 That's where you are wrong. Jesus is NOT the Father and he is NOT the Holy Spirit. He is one with The Father & The Holy Spirit in his divine nature. If you say that Jesus is the Father, then you're an Aryan Heretic.
@@OnlyGodsavesyouYes, Jesus us God, The Father is God and the Holy Spirit is God. All 3 are YHWH God even though they are 3 separate persons.
It is good to have confidence, yet confedence must be supported with knowledge and reflextion. otherwise, it is a blind faith. That pottato has researched quickly and decided to jump ship, yet when his research has been tested, it proves that he didn't conprehend the bible. The fair thing tondo is to ask questions, get your answers, and gonand further research, yet he kept on challenging everything.. i sincerely hope the Holy Spirit will open his mind to see the truth.
Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church:
By Dr. Stuart G. Hall 1992, pages 20 and 21. Professor Stuart G. Hall was the former Chair of Ecclesiastical History at King's College, London England. Dr. Hall makes the factual statement that Catholic Trinitarian Baptism was not the original form of Christian Baptism, rather the original was Jesus name baptism. “In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,” although those words were not used, as they later are, as a formula. Not all baptisms fitted this rule.” Dr Hall further, states: “More common and perhaps more ancient was the simple, “In the name of the Lord Jesus or, Jesus Christ.” This practice was known among Marcionites and Orthodox; it is certainly the subject of controversy in Rome and Africa about 254, as the anonymous tract De rebaptismate (“On rebaptism”) shows.”
Way do people have such a hard time understanding the Trinity??
Because it makes no sense.
Because the Catholic definition brought forwards into the Protestant world by Calvinists (pseudo-Catholics) is wrong, it portrays 3 Gods: 3 Souls, 3 Minds, 3 Spiritual Bodies (you just need to look at the triplets-like, Roman Catholic paintings for that). It is Nestorianism.
@@joeabraham1304God doesn’t have to make sense to you
@@joeabraham1304the natural man can’t understand the things of the Spirit of God
I don't blame them for struggling with it. I blame them for being so wise in their own eyes as to scoff at it
John 14, 15 and 16 in the Spanish Bible, Reina Valera, used by Protestants mainly (it’s like the KJV of spanish speakers) refers ti the Holy Spirit as “EL”, which translates to “HE or HIM”.
I do agree that the holy Spirit is a He, but in that context it should be translated it.
Clearly, this guy's is confused or doesn't understand or just was bored and decided to challenge Sam. On what he has interpreted from the Bible. What a joke. God bless you always @Sam.
Hosea was getting shredded apart. Arguing out of context and without being based in Scripture. A lot of Protestant pastors defend not the Bible, but just there assumption based on other teachers. Talk about Sola Scriptora folks😅
Poor Jose 😂😂😂he is so lost
sometimes it just headache to argue to someone who chooses to argue for argument sake the evidence is right in front of him to see , yet he argues blindly . its right in front just like the scripture says in seeing they shall not see or hearing they shall not hear . its the holy spirit that will knock off that hard heart that keeps him from accepting the truth just keep praying for him.
Its right in front of him how is just missing it. Like the lord Jesus says until you are like children. just believe the scripture that's all
For whatever reason people who aren’t very bright think they are brilliant and nobody else sees what they do 😂
QUESTION for Sam, in the beginning was the word/voice, and the word, /voice was with God, and the word/voice was God and almighty God said, let there be light and there was light, is God the word that became flesh and dwelled with man the same sacrifical lamb who is the salvation of mankind.?
Also in Acts ch13 vs2 it's the Holy Spirit that set aside Paul and Barnabas for their work, vs4 they are sent out by the Holy Spirit, Acts 16 vs6 they were forbidden to preach in Asia by the Holy Spirit, clearly a Person in the Trinity
You're very knowledgeable and obviously correct but the mockery is distasteful
New Revised Standard Version says this about Matthew 28:19:
“Modern critics claim this formula is falsely ascribed to Jesus and that it represents later (Catholic) church tradition, for nowhere in the book of Acts (or any other book of the Bible) is baptism performed with the name of the Trinity...”
So they claim.
Oh man, you mean to say rationalist bible critics don't believe in the bible and try to cut out as much as possible and cast as much doubt in the text as they can are at it again? Wow. how surprising. News flash- they aren't any better at interpretation than the JW's
If the Son is a creature then the Father hasn’t been a father from all eternity: he can only have a become a father when he created Jesus.
Exactly. And God does not change.
🙄🙄 he doesn't get it!!
This guy keeps changing subjects and admits he doesn't know everything and attacks...Jeez.
How is this guy missing it?
When I took Spanish they told me ello and lo were neuter
The TRINITY is biblical!!!!!!!!!!!!
Where can you find the word trinity in the scripture?
@@X44-d7h The word virgin birth isn't in scripture either. It's what's revealed, not how you say it.
@@X44-d7h the most satanic argument against the Holy Trinity ever. What if I ask you where the word unitarianism is in the Bible, what would you reply? You would just get stuck. Who cares about the word? The doctrine is important you son of the devil. Glory to the Triune God.
@user-xb6nc8ne1f
Jesus Christ said," worship God in spirit and in truth
Read the Bible in your spirits eye, unity of God is mentioned from genesis to revelation.
The Trinity is Blasphemous. Knowing Jesus Christ as Father , Son , & Holy Ghost is Scriptural.
That caller is know all nothing, he seems so aggressive.
Is Jesus Christ, 1 the Eternal Spirit of life and the wisdom/divine conscienceness and the sacrifical lamb/body of almighty God in bodily form revealing Himself to the world as the one and only true living God and savior of mankind.?
Just a question, no secret but only mention to baptize in the "trinity" happens in Mathew 28:19...my question, how come in the book of acts the deciples only baptize in Jesus name? Could you explain further please? I'm trying to establish from reported records that in the forth century, Eusebius held the original manuscripts of Mathew with a conflicting view to Mathew 28:19?..if this is true then surely we should baptize only in Jesus name as the apostles did?.. just a question, great channel👍
In Matthew 28:19, Jesus gives the sentence to utter before the priest baptizes. He tells us to be baptized in the trinity.
In acts, however, it was not the phrase uttered before baptism. Rather, the apostles tells them to be baptized in the name of Jesus, or for the sake of Jesus. No where in acts do you hear the apostles saying “in the name of Jesus” right BEFORE they baptize them.
HUGE DIFFERENCE.
@@ChristOverAllJeremy thanks for answer but still one verse that has conflicting history and you say Jesus said is somewhat lacking but thank you
@@ChristOverAllJeremy John 14:6 is the real trinity, bless you champ
Matthew 28:19 is not conflicting history. The early church uttered this verse before baptising someone. Look at the didache, which is a very early document written by the apostles. There you find instructions to baptize.
“And concerning baptism, baptize this way: Having first said all these things, baptize into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, Matthew 28:19 in living water.” - Chapter 7, Didache.
But “seated at the right hand of the Father” sounds like He’s on the Father’s throne in a different seat much like a royal family would be seated at the throne of a king.
Even if it sounds like that, the book of Revelation also clarifies that for us when it says the throne of God and the Lamb. The one throne belongs to the Father and the Son.
Why didn't you just continue in the verses where it says..."we have seen it and testify to it"? I mean, it is exactly what he was complaining about. He was definitely the one doing circles the entire time. The trinity is clear. God bless!
we do know is:
1) The Catholic Church confessed to changing it.
2) Most theologians also agree that they did change it.
3) No one followed this supposed instruction and all were baptized in the name of Christ ONLY!
4) Eusebius who saw the earliest manuscripts when he quoted this verse wrote that it said, “In His name” (Jesus)
I think most will agree that the weight of evidence is overwhelming that Matthew 28:19 should have read “in My name.”
Yikes! Sam has written an abundant of articles on the Trinitarian baptismal formula in Matthew 28:19, that could have been you up there in the video getting cooked.
Be that as it may, the original wording is “in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit”…not “in my name”. How do we know? Because of the amount of patristic evidence we have from the early Church that quoted it as such. These sources include the Didache (AD. 70), Ignatius of Antioch (ca. AD. 107 - 112), Irenaeus (ca. 130 - 200), Tertullian (ca. 160 - 220), Victorinus (ca. 270 - 303), etc,. In fact, I have found 24 quotations of Matthew 28:19 using the full formula, there were no quotations among these writers with the short version.
Eusebius’ short form is the ONLY textual evidence we have of the short form of Matthew 28:19. He tends to abbreviate elsewhere also as in his Demonstrato Evangelica, where he doesn’t just abbreviate Matthew 28:19, but also Philippians 2:9…however, we certainly know the way Eusebius quotes it isn’t original. Not only that, Eusebius still quotes the trinitarian baptismal formula of Matthew 28:19 in Contra Marcellum!
So, in fact, the overwhelming evidence is that the trinitarian long form of Matthew 28:19 is the original one. It’s not surprising that those such as yourself are so keen on denying the very fact, as Matthew 28:19 is an explicit testimony to the trinity. Don’t take it just from me though, go talk with Sam about it on his stream!
@AveChristusRex789 interesting you don't mention the others who I mentioned including the Catholic sources. Not once in the book of Acts says anything about Father son and Hole spirit but only the Creator of all things Jesus Christ. Anyways be it as it may the Tradition came from the Catholic Church and not the Apostolic Church of John's day. After Rome fell the Catholic Church took the reigns of the Roman Empire and destroyed 3 Kingdoms that refused the trinity you can look that up. Again back to my statement that the Catholic Church changed it still stands.
@AveChristusRex789 ...ph by the way Dam is good it what he does but he's not infallible.
@@RG-qn2qmwow you clearly don’t know history
@@RG-qn2qmread William Jurgens faith of the early fathers and you will see countless writing from Christians prior to fall of Rome believing what is taught in the Catholic Church. And second term Catholic Church was said back in 107AD by Ignatius of Antioch
The Fathers throne is in heaven. Jesus throne is in Jerusalem where God swore to David that he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne. David’s throne was earthly. 2 thrones for two different times.
Bible is self explanatory. You cannot cherry pick one verse out of it.
Doctrine of the trinity doesn’t matter, things like this are just made to divide believers, no matter how many slick semantic arguments are presented and the inventions of new terminology
No. your opinion of the Trinity doesn't matter. the Trinity doctrine is absolutely important, because it is how God revealed himself in the New Testament. The division comes from heretics.
Who says it doesn't matter? If you think it doesn't, the church has said it does.
God doesn't have a Mother, because if he does then Mary would be the mother of the Father and the HolySpirit, but we know the truth behind that
Hahaha, Sam is best .G.O.A.T - Greatest Of All Time
❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
😂 man I can't believe how people can be so stupid
I appreciate this isn’t related.
But I’ve asked this question many times, Sex before marriage is it Sin, not encouraged or not a subject in Judaism?
Because I’m getting all sorts of answers.
I even know Jewish people from Israel who think it’s fine to do it out side of marriage.
Because “You could get married and then split up, then marry again. So you end up sleeping with multiple people.”
“And it’s the norm in Israel very few wait until marriage unless they are Orthodox.”
So there are even families encouraging it…
How don’t they see the special connection getting ruined?
Don’t Jews believe that when married two souls unite or something?
Plus the science on Phycological, sociology, Biology has shown more partners means
Less mental connections (Soul anchors.).
Thinking of the past, comparisons, less emotions to connect with.
Then Females can start to develop ASA, Anti Sperm Antibodies which stops sperm from fertilising the egg or damages the head of the sperm and can cause issues for the development of the baby.
There is so much I could add to this but don’t want to make it massive.
Any help is much appreciated!
Sex before a valid marriage is a sin.
@ChristOverAllJeremy This is true. Now, what constitutes a valid marriage in the eyes of God?
@perceive8159 the Catholic Church has your answers
He said he was catholic then he should have some understanding about the Trinity but i think he ever was. Maybe he from a different cult😊he should view previous video👍on this channel
He used to be catholic, no more. No catholic talks like this.
This guy went fishing with a spoon 😂
The Trinity was cool before Catholicism came along.
If you're gonna argue against the trinity, you gotta at least have a grasp on what you're arguing against and whatever it is you think you believe.
Go read the early church fathers😂 Catholicism has been here before the Bible, they don’t sound Protestant. The church was built on Peter and both Peter and Paul founded the church.
Tell me you don't have reading comprehension without telling me you don't have reading comprehension. "Throne singular or thrones plural?" "Throne singular" "How many thrones?" "Two" 😅
The trinity is a biblical doctoring , it’s all over the bible. You have to read and study the scriptures. When you have read it and studied it, it’s there father, son and Holy Spirit , three distinct persons one God.
You mean doctrine?
@@googlespynetwork that’s right, doctrine, my spelling error.
You are wrong. We the Bride of Christ, are the 3rd part, or is the bride nothing ? Get up with me. I will show the scriptures.
I wish I have the patience of Sam 😅
The word Trinity is not biblical, though Godhead is. We know the fulness of the Godhead is in Him bodily and He is one with the Father and Holy Spirit. My thoughts are one being with three parts. We don't know about "persons." Jesus is YHWH Elohim, fully.
Si no conoces las escrituras cierra tu boca y escucha y aprende antes que tu mismo te condenes.
Jesus it appointed King by God and sits on God's throne as were David, Solomon and other Judean Kings.
1 Chronicles 29:23 And Solʹo·mon SAT ON JEHOVAH'S THRONE as king in place of David his father,
Luke 1:31....and you are to name him Jesus. 32 This one will be great and will be called Son of the Most High, and Jehovah GOD WILL GIVE HIM THE THRONE OF DAVID his father, 3
Chosen ones sit with Jesus on thrones.
Luke 22:30 so that you may eat and drink at my table in my Kingdom, and SIT ON THRONES to judge the 12 tribes of Israel.
Using the term THRONE to try and show that Jesus and God are one and the same will be a problem when the above are considered.
The church doesnt teach these things. My dad, who is an absolute Jesus follower and a wonderful man, who grew up in Church doesnt know a tenth of what the bible says. Seems like every time i talk to him about it he is just in awe. This is the problem...it doesn't matter how much you go to church...if they arent teaching you cant learn unless you educate yourself
This is one that I disagree with Sam on. The trinity is not biblical it comes from Greek philosophy. By way of Tertullian three distinct persons of one essence. Is not biblical the scripture calls Jesus the first the trinity calls him the second. Scripture says Jesus is the express image of his person. Who is the “his” definite article aka God. Jesus is Gods express image, scripture says man was made in Gods image. The trinity has the family in Gods image. In genesis God made one man placed him “alone” in the garden and said it is not good that man dwell alone. Why did God make this statement? Why did God place him all alone in the garden?to show all creation besides him there is no God. Man is soul/body/spirit we are made in Gods image. Scripture says Jesus Christ is the fullness of the Godhead bodily. This is Gods image and he made man in his image. Scripture says seek me and you shall find me. Man says we can’t know God, Jesus said to Phillip how long have you been with me and you do not know me, when you’ve seen me you’ve seen the father. This I know for a fact because the Holy Spirit corrected my view of the scripture when I asked how Jesus. Could be Lord of Lords and King of Kings seeing his father is Lord and King. I asked this would make you Lord and King over your father how can this be. Then the Holy Spirit said I didn’t understand what I was reading and showed me the Godhead who Jesus Christ is the express image of his person. God is spirit the spirit dwells in the body of Christ Jesus he is his express image. Just as we are the express image of our spirit. The soul is mind will and emotions, the spirit is our celestial body, the flesh is our terrestrial body. We are three parts but not three persons this is where the trinity goes against scripture. Yes the flesh has a will and the soul has a will and the spirit has a will but they are one. Period not three distinct persons, there is only one person Jesus Christ who is God robbed in flesh no trinity. Godhead biblical trinity man made.
Have you watched any of these videos and bothered to listen? I don’t think you have, because your objections have been soundly refuted as unbiblical and ignorant. For instance, the word “trinity” is a descriptive term used to codify what the Bible teaches: one God, revealed in the NT as the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost, each personally distinct without separation of the Godhead.
It was not Tertullian’s “Greek philosophy”, but the divine revelation of scripture recognized by the successors of the apostles. As noted by historian JND Kelly, and others, Tertullian used Greek philosophy to evangelize the Greek, prove the gospel, and battle pagan ideas, not vice versa.
Each of your assertions is scripture abuse, taking verses out of context and imposing your ideas as its meaning, as in Col. 2:9, suggesting that the verse teaches the person of Jesus is God to the exclusion of the Father and the Holy Ghost, when the text actually says because Jesus is fully God we can have fullness of life in him.
It is impossible to explain something to someone who's allergic to intelligence
There is no trinity of beings, nor any metaphor of Father and son. This is a actual relationship between Father and son. I don’t understand why people can’t just believe what God is telling us, that He brought forth the son Pro 8:22, and The son confirming it Jhn 8:42,16:28-30. The Father even mentions in Heb 1:5 that this is the second time He has begotten the son, confirming Pro 8:22. Even Jesus himself kept trying to convince everyone who he was, the son of God, not God himself.
The fact that he is THE SON OF GOD makes Him beyond worthy of worship. He shares the same nature as the father. Go read the early church they don’t agree with what you just said. Who do we trust ourselves far from the time of Jesus and the New Testament or the early Christians
So you are a son of a human but you’re a dog? Got it 👍🏼
Why did Pharisees wanted to (not) stone Him?
“For the good works we are not stoning you, but for you are a mere man making yourself GOD”!!!
@@Viiola24 because, just like today, people choose to follow their own beliefs instead of God's way. The Pharisees was so into themselves, they couldn't even recognize their own messiah.
@@He_who_lives_forever what early church are you referring too? Yes he has the same nature, but he has the traits the Father gave him. If your referring to the time of Christ, then I'm in harmony with them.
The Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics:
As to Matthew 28:19, it says: “It is the central piece of evidence for the traditional (Trinitarian) view. If it were undisputed, this would, of course, be decisive, but its trustworthiness is impugned on grounds of textual criticism, literary criticism and historical criticism.” The same Encyclopedia further states that: “The obvious explanation of the silence of the New Testament on the triune name, and the use of another (JESUS NAME) formula in Acts and Paul, is that this other formula was the earlier, and the triune formula is a later addition.”
The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Vol. 4, page 2637, Under “Baptism,” says: “Matthew 28:19 in particular only canonizes a later ecclesiastical situation, that its universalism is contrary to the facts of early Christian history, and its Trinitarian formula (is) foreign to the mouth of Jesus.”
Now let's do you a favor.
What textual proof is there that Matt 28:19 doesn't include "father, son and spirit"
When you successfully can't provide any we'll discuss the other claims
@CosmicalChrist ...you must be a some kind of stupid ...
God doesn't have a mother, she is the mother of Jesus the physical flesh and blood man Jesus, don't twist truth because in fact this a Catholic doctrine and also praying to Mary as an intercessor is also a Catholic false doctrine!🤢
Lol Jesus is both human and divine. What kind of a Christian are you? 😂
The Catholic Encyclopedia, II, page 263:
“The baptismal formula was changed from the name of Jesus Christ to the words Father, Son, and Holy Spirit by the Catholic Church in the second century.”
There is no cure in stupidit😂
José no lee ingles (José does not read English) 😂.
Viva Zapata! 🇲🇽