Thank you for such a reasonable explanation of a verse I hear misused so often by those trying to prove a trinity doctrine. The Bible repeatedly refers to Jesus as God's son. That seems pretty simple to understand that they can't be one and the same. Or two and the same.

@christinefarrall9391

9 ай бұрын

This young man is wrong. Please don't believe him. Jehonah's witnesses have their own bible and it is altered to say, that Jesus is not God.

@saulm58

9 ай бұрын

@@christinefarrall9391 Actually, his interpretation and argument are supported by what the Greek text says. Of course, you may disagree with what he is explaining. But his argument is valid (logically speaking).

@Ladyguite79

9 ай бұрын

👊😇Amen!!

@getx1265

9 ай бұрын

@HalleluYAH7773 We all read the same verses. What's your point here?

@Ladyguite79

9 ай бұрын

@@saulm58 you need to read church history and the anti-nausea Church fathers they weren't even close to trinitarian here is Clement who was directly taught from Peter and John. John 17:3 Now this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom You have sent. 1 Clement 59:4 Let all the Gentiles know that Thou art the God alone, and Jesus Christ is Thy Son

Great explanation without an arrogant comment tone.

Love your work brother! This video reminds me of my John 1:1 Dilemma! The John 1:1 Dilemma actually proves the Trinity false all by itself. Trinitarians read John 1:1 in one of two possible ways: 1) In the beginning was Jesus, and Jesus was WITH the Father, and Jesus WAS the Father. 2) In the beginning was Jesus, and Jesus was WITH God, and Jesus WAS God. If a Trinitarian picks 1, they must state that Jesus IS the Father, which is heresy to a Trinitarian. If a Trinitarian picks 2, they must state that Jesus was apart from God, WITH God, but not God himself. Option 2 carries the further issue of forcing there to be two Gods, one that Jesus is WITH and one that Jesus IS. Obviously option 2 is heresy to a Trinitarian as well. So that leaves you with zero possible options as a Trinitarian, and this is why John 1:1 precludes Trinitarianism.

@Justadudeman22

9 ай бұрын

Excellent

@ScottJackson.

7 ай бұрын

They are not each other but share the same divine substance

@lizzard13666

7 ай бұрын

@@ScottJackson. Yeah, so "God" is just the "divine substance" you mentioned. So ... Jesus cannot be "WITH" his own divine substance. That's exactly my point.

@lizzard13666

7 ай бұрын

@@ScottJackson. The Bible is quite clear that Jesus IS Spirit ...

@ScottJackson.

7 ай бұрын

@@lizzard13666 the divine substance is the One Spirit

Great to hear from someone of a younger generation who has discovered the truth in the face of opposition.

@Gracia144JesusSaves

6 ай бұрын

❤️🖐️.And the Almighty God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob and Lord Jesus the Son of God will deal with opposition and i Have seen His Mighty hand dealing with " opposition " because He wants everyone to get Saved and Hear the Gospel of Jesus Christ .

@priscillajervey8345

6 ай бұрын

AMEM!!!!

@mysticguide503

3 ай бұрын

The key to make awareness of is the beginning is not referring Genesis 1.

@priscillajervey8345

3 ай бұрын

Amen!

@Gats8479

Ай бұрын

What truhr he disxover? Would you like to watch Dr. Jeff Vickers in John 1:1 to resolve these peole here who are unbelief of Jesuus Christ deity.

In luke 6.12 Jesus prayed to God (Jesus went out to a mountainside to pray, and spent the night praying to God.).

@debraannmartinez7157

9 ай бұрын

Yes, He did say thank You to God before he raised Lazarus to life

@KINGDREX24

5 ай бұрын

I agree with Christianity Christianity that made America and that’s a fact, but a Trinity that never came from God or never talk about none of his profits. I disagree with it because it’s not it’s not real

@KingoftheJuice18

4 ай бұрын

This is where their strategy comes in of saying, "The human side of Jesus was praying."

@tombuddy100

4 ай бұрын

Why is there such fervor among Trinitarians to defend illogical doctrine neither found nor implied in the Bible?

@homielifesaver2332

4 ай бұрын

Exodus 13:21 And the (Lord=Jesus) went before them by day in a pillar of a cloud, to lead them the way; and by night in a pillar of fire, to give them light; to go by day and night. So Jesus was in the cloud right? 1 Corinthians 10:1-4 1. Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea. 2. And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and the sea. 3. And did all eat the same spiritual meat; 4. And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that same spiritual (ROCK THAT FOLLOWED THEM): and (THAT ROCK WAS CHRIST). So in Exodus it said that God was in the cloud, but in (1 Corinthians 10:1-4) says that it is Jesus. -------- In (John 17:5) Jesus leaves his glory in heaven, why do you think that he did that? Well read (Philippians 2:6-8) where Jesus is in the form of God, but says that he would not use that to his advantage when he took on flesh to live a perfect life without sin. Also this is why Jesus prayed to the Father, and said that the Father was greater than himself, because he left his glory in heaven with the Father.

Good video i hope this channel will be posting more often, greetings from Slovakia

@csouthland

9 ай бұрын

What part of Slovakia are in?

@csouthland

9 ай бұрын

Correction: What part of Slovakia are you in?

@miko8297

9 ай бұрын

@@csouthland Bratislava- capital city, west

Remember when he prayed to the father asking him if there was any way the father could remove the burden (crucification) from him ? If he was god he would have known that answer. Another thing, someone asked Jesus when the end would be and he said something like " nor i or the angels in heaven knows, but only the father". These two things makes me think hes not God but God's first creation. Also, when he says " if you know me, you know the father, if you've seen me, you've seen the father". I think he is speaking about his actions and spirit being of God's actions and spirit.

Very good work. Former atheist here.

In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God. And the word was godly. The anarthrous noun takes on the properties of an adjective without the article.

@nataliuselyanto210

8 ай бұрын

And may I ask to what extent the word was godly?

@ScottJackson.

7 ай бұрын

@@nataliuselyanto210 godly not divine

@lampkin9287

2 ай бұрын

@@nataliuselyanto210it’s a lie. It plain says and the word was The God. But they don’t know Greek. It just lies with no proof. The word is theos and the os end means that the word is a subject noun, so the article isn’t there but is implied by the form of the words ending; os. Devils won’t go into detail to give you the knowledge so you aren’t deceived. They hate the true Jesus so they attack his deity.

@QuëstionšnÅňşwęŕż

2 ай бұрын

It does not say in Greek "the" God. The definite article is not present.

@lampkin9287

2 ай бұрын

@@QuëstionšnÅňşwęŕż you aren’t applying all of the rules of Greek for interpretation. This is only a half true. I can show you several examples of there not being an article and the translation reads The God, even in the NWT. So learn some more Greek first so that you may stop being deceived

The modern UU church in the US has become more of a humanistic philosophical organization. The last time I went to one years ago somebody was"offended" because I used the word God. They are so far from what William Ellery Channing taught that it's not really a church anymore. I am related to William Ellery Channing via his grandfather William Ellery, who was the signer on the declaration of independence from Rhode Island. -Dr. Janice Ellery

@ken440

8 ай бұрын

These folk who made this video are certainly not UU (unitarian universalists).

@thecalling6122

4 ай бұрын

You couldn't be more correct and this movement is sweeping the internet on every single Christian discussion forum and all social media everywhere. It is a modern version of Judaism that 100% denies Jesus and seeks to erase Him. It is, as the Bible defines, an anti-Christ doctrine. This belief system is fully rejected by 1 Jn. 2:22-23 and Jn. 14:6. Those who do not embrace, and believe in, Jesus Christ as God, do not have any access to the Father. God bless.

@whateverwhatever7210

2 ай бұрын

​@@ken440How do you even find a unitarian church that is not UU?

@ken440

2 ай бұрын

@@whateverwhatever7210 well there is neither here down under. no matter, i fellowship on line sometimes. "going to church" has lost its flavour for me anyway now that im not welcome, after a life of over 30 years doing that as a misguided trinitarian, nor is it what we are called to do. We are supposed to go out into the world and make disciples. and not going to church cant be blamed for becoming unitarian, i did that back when i was in trinitarian circles and didnt know there was such a thing as a unitarian.

Growing up with a song stuck in every sunday service seems like, god in 3 persons…it wasnt until I was in a college logic class that…wait a minute…🧐 and then having the ability to take a real good class at the time called power for abundant living, had me a changed person and still enjoy life…,✌🏼🕊

@MichaelTheophilus906

9 ай бұрын

Logic should be a required class for all high school students, and Advanced Logic for college students.

@priscillajervey8345

6 ай бұрын

How right you are!@@MichaelTheophilus906

Lotta comments trying to disqualify this understanding of Jesus by saying the content creator is an unqualified man. Wasn’t the trinity created by men? Any person reading scripture that isn’t coached into “seeing” the trinity would see Jesus as the Messiah, God as the Father and the Holy Spirit as God’s Spirit. Why do we need to qualify God’s grace and Jesus’ sacrifice by raising him to godhood. All worship to Jesus is to the Father, honoring the Son honors the Father. God has made new covenants before (hence why we usually don’t hold most of Old Testament Law) so I see no issue with God commanding us to honor his Son whom by being a perfect servant and sacrifice was exalted to His Right Hand.

@homielifesaver2332

4 ай бұрын

(Acts 20:28) Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God which he hath purchased (WITH HIS OWN BLOOD). Whose blood purchased the church? God’s blood purchased the church. --------- (Isaiah 9:6) For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, (THE MIGHTY GOD), the everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace. The Son that is given is the MIGHTY GOD? Who is the Son? Jesus. -------- (Isaiah 44:24) Thus saith the Lord, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the Lord that maketh all things; that stretched forth the heavens ALONE; that spreadeth abroad the earth BY MYSELF. So God created everything by himself alone. (Colossians 1:16) For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in the earth, visible and invisible, weather they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were CREATED BY HIM, and for him: So all things were created by Jesus? Yes, and (Isaiah 44:24) tells us God created everything alone. So Jesus created all things, and it is God that created all things alone. ---------- Anyone who reads the Bible with diligence is forced into believing that God Is Trinity without being coached.

@priscillajervey8345

3 ай бұрын

Sometimes I think Trinitarians don't want the truth, don't care either way. I loaned a member of my church the book "The Jesus Wars" and later asked what he thought regarding the nature of God and Jesus? He shoot back "It really don't make a difference!" There you have it! The majority don't think it matters and don't care! By the way I was asked to leave that church, it was asserted that I was upsetting the brethren! The "powers that be" are responsibile for so much theological illiteracy in the churches. The false prophets [ in the pulpits] are running lose in Christianity.

@homielifesaver2332

3 ай бұрын

@@priscillajervey8345 You gave no arguments in your paragraph as to why the Trinity is wrong, and I have never heard of that book you got them to read, but what ever the book says doesn’t matter if it contradicts the Bible. Also if someone was going around the church trying to teach false doctrine, the church should ask them to leave. If you give arguments from the Bible, then we can have a conversation, but if you say some book has more authority than the Bible, well that is a conversation ending argument.

@Gats8479

Ай бұрын

​@@priscillajervey8345tried to understand Acts 20:28 Church of God purchasen by his own blood who did sacrifice on the cross?

@priscillajervey8345

Ай бұрын

The Trinity is nowhere in the Bible nor is "God the Son, or the God-man" All manufactured by man! What a pity that so many adhere to such absuridy as the " mystery" trinity. No wonder it is acceptd as a mystery, no one can explain it even it's most ardent defenders.

The word in the beginning was "Let there be Light"

Where have you been guys? It has been years since you posted videos. I’m so glad to finally see you.

My translation-“In beginning was the Word, and the Word was with the God, and God was the Word.”

@samsam-qp3fw

Күн бұрын

God spoke everything to existence. And God said... that's his word. The word is an extension of His being, just as my word is an extension of myself (and we can use that analogy as we are created in the image and likeness of God.) Just as what I say is not separate from who I am, the Word of God is with God and still is God.

As a Jew I agree with you that Hashem is One. There is NO OTHER 🕎

Good thoughts/ thank you. What translation are you reading from?

@biblicalunitarian

9 ай бұрын

Thanks! The REV, it is the Bible Translation produced by Spirit & Truth, Check it out here: www.revisedenglishversion.com/

@GatheringJacob

9 ай бұрын

@@biblicalunitarian thanks again

@homielifesaver2332

3 ай бұрын

@@biblicalunitarian Exodus 13:21 And the (Lord=Jesus) went before them by day in a pillar of a cloud, to lead them the way; and by night in a pillar of fire, to give them light; to go by day and night. So Jesus was in the cloud right? 1 Corinthians 10:1-4 1. Moreover, brethren, I would that not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and passed through the sea. 2. And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea. 3. And did all eat the same spiritual meat; 4. And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual (ROCK THAT FOLLOWED THEM): and (THAT ROCK WAS CHRIST) These verses are speaking about the same event, and one says that Yahweh was in the cloud, and the other says that it is Jesus. Yahweh is the Trinity, and the Trinity is God. ---------- Isaiah 44:24 Thus saith the Lord, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the Lord that maketh (ALL THINGS); that stretched forth the heavens (ALONE); that spreadeth abroad the earth (BY MYSELF); So God created everything alone right? Colossians 1:15-16 15. Who is the image of the invisible God, firstborn of every creature: 16. For by him all things were created, that are in heaven, and that are in the earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: (ALL THINGS WERE CREATED BY HIM), and for him. So God created everything alone in Isaiah, and in Colossians it says that Jesus created everything. You have the wrong Jesus, because Jesus is God, and if you deny Jesus before men, then Jesus will deny you before the Father.

@Godisnotjesus1967

Ай бұрын

​​@@biblicalunitarianFunny how 99% of John 1:1 arguments and commentaries never even mention John 1:2(two)......! In my opinion the one's who transliterated these scriptures were either confused and or uncertain. I'm sure John wrote this in Aramaic/Hebrew and he knew exactly what he was saying/writing.....contrary to the Greeco-Roman scholars who re-wrote the scriptures. If the phrase "the Word was God" was so authentic and absolute.....WHY MENTION THE PHRASE "THE WORD WAS WITH GOD" AGAIN??????? I'm further convinced according to Hebrews 1......that Yahushua was an Angel. Look also the scriptures in Genesis at Adams creation were it says "Let US create man in OUR image".....! Who's the "US" and "OURS"......! TECHNICALLY then, since YHVH(GOD), Yahushua, and all the Angels are invisible and Spirit "being's" with very similar characteristics........That makes GOD an Angel too!........Then Most High God(Angel)

@Godisnotjesus1967

Ай бұрын

​@@biblicalunitarianGod is the Head of Messiah.....Messiah is the Head of Man.....Man is Head of woman......!

Trinity makes no sense... And john 1:1 can also be translated as ".....and the word was a god. " This makes more sense..... then this will make no sense for unitarian.....

@debraannmartinez7157

9 ай бұрын

Thats why people are confused! LIFE

@Cors7358

9 ай бұрын

@@debraannmartinez7157 You dont have to base it on just a verse.... You have to read the whole of that gospel to understand.... Its confusing when some men inject a belief in you.... It came from apostle John, why not take the context from apostle John's epistles.... Surely it will be explained in John's epistles.....

@debraannmartinez7157

9 ай бұрын

Save your comment for Oprah. Just because you can't accept the truth. Babe, it is easy to read and understand 1st-grade language. Get a book and re-read your bible! @@Cors7358

@debraannmartinez7157

9 ай бұрын

Right, you shouldn't, but many of you do. So stop throwing scripture; making it fix your claim!@@Cors7358

@Cors7358

Ай бұрын

@Bible-Christian I don't believe in the Doctrines of the Trinity.... I do believe there is one God (the Father), but we cant set aside the scriptures that Jesus is the begotten Son of the Father... If we examine this whole first chapter of the book of John, I can say that it derive its context in the book of Proverbs, particularly chapter 8. You will find the similarities of its context pertaining to Jesus as the Logos/Wisdom. its much better if you read the whole chapter of Proverbs 8. this Wisdom of God is sentient and we do all know that Jesus is the wisdom of God. Below are verses to prove. 22. “The Lord made me as he began his planning, before his ancient activity commenced. 23 From eternity I was appointed, from the beginning, from before there was land. 24 When there were no ocean depths, I brought them to birth at a time when there were no springs. 30 Then I was with him, his master craftsman- I was his delight daily, continuously rejoicing in his presence, 31 rejoicing in his inhabitable world and taking delight in mankind.”

Wonderful explanation Brother, keep up the good Work

I believe God the Father is the one and only God... God is holy and he is a spirit...so God the Father himself is the hly spirit Jesus was a man approved of God . He was sent by God as a goodd human teacher to guide Israelites... that it....he is not God at all Jesus is refered to as son of God...but he himself says in Matthew that all peacemakers and righteous human beings can be called sons and daughters of God. He is also called sons on man..the book of numbers say that God is neither a man not a son of man Hence I believe the Father/ Holy spirit is the only one true God and Jesus was a prophet...

@manifestemanifeste8148

16 күн бұрын

Isaiah 9:6 (NIV). Prophecy about Jesus.

Excellent. Another issue, for me at least, is which beginning : of the creation or of the gospel?

@biblicalunitarian

9 ай бұрын

We are currently working on our commentary on John 1 in the REV and will update it fairly soon. We answer that question. Keep an eye out! www.revisedenglishversion.com/John/1/1

@nabbosaedith4119

9 ай бұрын

@@biblicalunitarian eargely waiting, am blessed with the REV and the commentary... GOD bless you really good.

@edschaefer6597

8 ай бұрын

Do you even know what the gospel is?

@edschaefer6597

4 ай бұрын

@@MichaelTheophilus906 Unitarians have more of a problem than claiming that Jesus Christ isn’t part of the Godhead [Read Colossians 2:9]. They also have a problem with sin. Since the Fall, there is enmity between God and mankind. And everybody sins: For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. Being justified freely by his grace [unmerited favor] through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus. whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed. Romans, a 3:23-25 If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us 1john 1:8 And again: For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures 1Corinthians 15:3-5 The blood of Jesus Christ has the power to atone for and cover all the sins: Knowing that you were not redeemed with corruptible things, like silver or gold, from your aimless conduct received by tradition from your fathers, but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot. 1 Peter 1:18-19 and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler over the kings of the earth. To Him who loved us and washed us from our sins in His own blood and has made us kings and priests to His God and Father, to Him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen. Revelation 1:5 This one verse summarizes the Gospel of Jesus Christ: In Him [meaning Jesus] we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of His grace Ephesians 1:7 Everyone must stand before the Judgement seat of Christ where Christ will ask what justifies you to stand before Him. This had best be your answer: Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him. Romans 5:9

Can you go more in depth on the "article" in the Greek? Thank you for your work.

@youngknowledgeseeker

8 ай бұрын

The definite article ("the") would much more strongly, if not definitively, indicate that you are making a direct and literal ontological connection. Example: The word was "the" God. - in this sentence, in Greek, you would be saying, literally, the word was the same person and thing as God because you specify with "the". However without the definite article --> Example: The word was God - Without the definite article, in Greek, it is more likely a comparison of like attributes or qualities is being Madd. This would mean something like the word was "like" God, or as the ESV puts it "What God was the word was". It's like if i said Suzy was like her Mother. Similar personality, similar looks, similar habits etc, but they were not literally the same person. As a fact of grammar of the Greek language it is entirely significant and cause for eyebrow raise that John deliberately did not use the definite article which he easily could have and there would have been no debate as to what he meant. To be honest, beyond this simple grammatical matter, the concept of "God's word" (and by extension his "wisdom", his "plans", his "glory", his "self expression) in its 1st century Jewish context has a higher relevance to this discussion. God's word was an established concept in the time of John in Jewish thought (Logos was also an established concept in hellenistic thought as well, whether diaspora Jews or Gentile Greek).

@Aquadood23

7 ай бұрын

Don'tConvert2Islam did a good video on the article titled, "Is Jesus God? John 1:1"

Nice explanation This is exactly what I’ve been learning with JWs for over a decade. The NWT renders John 1:1 “ The word was with god, and the word was a god. The word cannot be with god and be god while being one god… The trinity is incoherent and has pegan origins.

@samsam-qp3fw

Күн бұрын

Trinity is wrong, but Jesus is still def God. You'd have bitheism if you believe that Jesus is just a demigod. Obviously Jesus received worship, and was even called God by Thomas, and He is the one that is sitting on the throne. Even the translation of the JW attest to this: Revelation 22:3-4 3 And there will no longer be any curse. But the throne of God and of the Lamb+ will be in the city, and his slaves will offer him sacred service; 4 and they will see his face,+ and his name will be on their foreheads. It's only one name, one throne, and one face. Jesus is the express image of God, and that's who you'll see on the throne.

@Libertyfirstcapital

Күн бұрын

JW is a Unitarian faith we believe Jesus is the son of God and there is only One God and that God is Jehovah and Jesus was born of a virgin and he existed in heaven prior to his birth as a mighty spirit creature…. A divine being , a mighty God or like god but not THE ALMIGHTY GOD. Even Satan is called the GOD of this system of things and the ruler of the authority of the air so it’s appropriate to refer to Jesus as a mighty god or being god like or divine. let’s see what the scriptures say about Jesus being God or not I think it’s worth meditating on these. Revelation 3:12 - “The one who conquers-I will make him a pillar in the temple of my God, and he will by no means go out from it anymore, and I will write upon him the name of my God and the name of the city of my God, the New Jerusalem that descends out of heaven from my God, and my own new name” This is Jesus Speaking and he says to the one who conquers that he will write the name of his God on them and the name of the city of his god and his new name. So Jesus not only says that he has a god but he also makes a distinction between his name and gods name. Revelation 14:1 - Then I saw, and look! the Lamb standing on Mount Zion, and with him 144,000 who have his name and the name of his Father written on their foreheads. The Lamb undoubtedly is Jesus …. Here the Scripture says the 144,000 standing with the Lamb on mount Zion have Jesus name and the name of his father written in their foreheads… so you said there’s only one name ? Here and in Revelation 3:12 a distinction is made between Gods name and Jesus name … they are two names and two separate persons. Revelations 1:1 “ A revelation by Jesus Christ, which God gave him, to show his slaves the things that must shortly take place. And he sent his angel and presented it in signs through him to his slave John” Who gave John the revelation ? Jesus Did.. Who gave Jesus the revelation ? God did. So how is Jesus God when it’s God who gives Jesus the revelation ? And you can’t use the Trinity as an argument bc you just denied the Trinity as false which it is. Revelation 1:4-6 John to the seven congregations that are in the province of Asia: May you have undeserved kindness and peace from “the One who is and who was and who is coming,” and from the seven spirits that are before his throne, and from Jesus Christ, “the Faithful Witness,” “the firstborn from the dead,” and “the Ruler of the kings of the earth…. and he made us to be a kingdom, priests to his God and Father-yes, to him be the glory and the might forever. Amen” Here John says “ may you have underserved kindness from the one who was and the one who is coming….. AND Jesus Christ “ so clearly two people are being described here first is Jehovah the one who was and is coming and then it mentions Jesus second so very clearly two separate beings. And then he says that Jesus made us to be a kingdom of priests to HIS GOD and Father…. Again Jesus here is described a having a God which is the father who is the ALMIGHTY. John 17:3 “ This means everlasting life their coming to know you the one true God , and the one whom you sent Jesus Christ” One of the most basic fundamentals Christian scriptures …. Here it says that everlasting life comes from knowing the one true God AND Jesus Christ…. So here the identity of the one true god and Jesus are being described as separate and distinct … of Jesus where the one true God there would be no reason to obscure the text it’s just very clear that here Jesus is not the one true god for it even says the one true god sent him in the very verse…. So anyone with a rational mind could not conclude here Jesus is being called god. 1 Corinthians 8:6 “ For even though there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth, just as there are many “gods” and many “lords,” there is actually to us one God, the Father, from whom all things are and we for him; and there is one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things are and we through him” Here again a distinction is made between Jehovah and Jesus … here Paul says there is only one God who is the FATHER … are Jesus and the Father the same person or is there any equality between them ? Absolutely not because according to Jesus in John 14:28 says “ THE FATHER IS GREATER THAN I AM” so if God is the father and Jesus is not the father and the father is greater then Jesus the rational conclusion is that Jesus cannot be God. John 20:17 - Jesus said to her: “Stop clinging to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. But go to my brothers and say to them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father and to my God and your God.’ This is the 4th scriptures I’ve shared where Jesus says he has a God…. He said I am ascending to MY GOD…. Again he said MY GOD and YOUR GOD !!! so where is there any room for Jesus being God here is God is saying that he’s ascending to his GOD ? That would be a contradictory and you don’t believe in the Trinity so you can’t use that as a counter. Phillipians 3:9 “ For this very reason, God exalted him to a superior position and kindly gave him the name that is above every other name” Here Paul says that GOD exalted Jesus to a superior position in heaven… so God promoted himself to a superior position ? Please explain the coherent logic behind that….. God is always and has always been God the almighty for all eternity , almighty God can’t be exalted to a superior position that makes ZERO sense. So clearly Jesus is not God and it’s God himself who exalts Jesus. Matthew 24:36 - Concerning that day and hour nobody knows, neither the angels of the heavens nor the Son, but only the Father. Again let’s use our reasoning …. Jesus is the Son …. You said the Son is God …. God is all knowing …. But here it says The Son does not know the day and the hour but only the Father does…. And we’ve already established that Jesus is not the father and the father is greater than he is…… so Jesus is God but he doesn’t know the day and the hour but only his father does whom he said is greater than him ? Again you can’t counter this with Jesus is the father because even the Trinity denies that so now the rhetoric really starts to fall apart. Matthew 15:16-17 He said to them: “You, though, who do you say I am?” Simon Peter answered: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” In response Jesus said to him: “Happy you are, Simon son of Joʹnah, because flesh and blood did not reveal it to you, but my Father in the heavens did. So here Jesus asks his disciples who they think he is and Peter answers “ you are the Christ the Son Of the living God” and then Jesus congratulates him because the father in heavens has revealed it to him….. again Jesus says the father is greater than he is and Jesus is not the father according to the Trinity and also according to Unitarian beliefs so clearly it’s ALMIGHTY God the father that revealed this to Peter not Jesus or the Son. Matthew 27:46 “About the ninth hour, Jesus called out with a loud voice, saying: “Eʹli, Eʹli, laʹma sa·bach·thaʹni?” that is, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me? This is the 5th scripture I’ve shared where Jesus again uses the term MY GOD…. Why would the Almighty God be calling out to himself and asking himself why he forsook himself and to remove this cup from himself ? John 5:26,27 “ For just as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted also to the Son to have life in himself. And he has given him authority to do judging, because he is the Son of man” Here John says that Jesus was granted to have life within himself and given authority to do the judging by God the father… so again Jesus is not the father , the father is greater then him, the father grants and gives Jesus authority… so the logical question would be how can anyone give God any authority or life when he is Almighty and eternal…. He already has and possesses all of the power and to think that god the almighty would have to be granted or given any type of authority would indicate that he didn’t have that authority to begin with if it had to be given and granted to him…. Are you seeing where that is a problem ? Clearly Jesus is granted and given authority because is is subordinate to God. Colossians 1:15 “He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation” Jesus is described as the first born of all creation … was god created ? No he was not he is eternal… so Jesus cannot be God and before you say this a mistranslation we can also consider Revelations 14:3 which says “To the angel of the congregation in La·o·di·ceʹa write: These are the things that the Amen says, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation by God” here Jesus is described again as being the beginning of the creation by God. I would like to share more scriptures but I’ve already given more than enough for you to do a deep dive and prayerfully digest these and reason…. You see when it comes to doctrinal matters it’s a very sensitive topic and we can’t look at a few isolated scriptures while blatantly ignoring the plethora of contradictory verses that disprove that doctrine and I prefer looking at what the entire Bible says as a whole … If one verse seems to say Jesus is God well what about the other 20 or more verses that disapprove that ? In order to come to a consensus you must make a complete examination not a partial one.

I didn’t realise ppl thought Jesus was God till a few years ago .. it never made sense to me as we are supposed to pray to Father through Jesus ..

@aaronmosa8015

9 ай бұрын

It is worship the God Lord ( father) directly. Jesus said ( my teaching is not my own but from the one /God/who sent me)

@rickyzoe1

9 ай бұрын

@HalleluYAH7771 Look at Revelation 1:4-5. It says who John saw in his vision. Notice it say’s “the one who is and was and is to come and from the seven spirits before his throne and from Jesus Christ the faithful witness. The first born from the dead.” In these two verses it is distinguishing Jesus from the one on the throne who was and is and is to come. The Almighty. It is clear to any honest person that verse 8 is the one on the throne with the seven spirits before him. Who was and is and is to come. The Almighty of verse 4 not the faithful witness ( Jesus Christ ) of verse 5. Look at it again very carefully.

@EVENSOAMEN

3 ай бұрын

You can't trust what people say, read the scriptures yourself, NOT the New World Translation but read the KJV.

@priscillajervey8345

3 ай бұрын

I was 40 yrs of age when I discovered Jesus was supposed to be God! I just thought the trinity meant God the father and Jesus his only begotten virgin born son, but wasn't quite sure who the holy spirit was. 🤔

@nks2269

2 ай бұрын

Its new to me also, i never heard it and suddenly i saw it everywhere 👀 alo my church they had a song about it🤔 but Where did this suddenly come from??

I'm partially curious, what happened to the other host, the older gentleman? Is he ok?

@biblicalunitarian

9 ай бұрын

Yes, he is doing great, he just has other tasks he is focusing on, like translating the REV. This is his primary task lately. Check it out: www.revisedenglishversion.com/

@thecalling6122

4 ай бұрын

They are working to make this unbiblical doctrine more attractive to the younger crowds. What they are teaching here is completely unbiblical.

@FrankLee-gq8yc

20 күн бұрын

I just found that website before I saw this link. What a task! If possible, could you ask him why he thinks John used "arché" for "ruler" in rev3:14 when 2 chapters prior he used "archón" for "ruler", Rev1:5. I just wonder if he had considered that when he chose "ruler" (arché) over "beginning" (arché) of the creation of God". Or don't, just wondering.

Good man and good teaching. May I please add: Notice how John 1:14 DID NOT SAY: And (GOD) became flesh and dwelt among us, as would be the case if John was teaching Jesus is GOD who became flesh, as MOST wrongly believe Jesus is GOD who became flesh. John 1:14 continues saying: And we beheld His glory, a glory as of an only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth. Notice Jesus is: an only begotten from the Father, meaning Jesus was BORN and Fathered from His GOD and Father, proving Jesus is NOT the SAME GOD He was Begotten from. To be Begotten means to come into existence, and NOT always existing as most wrongly believe. John 1:14 is simply saying the (word) of Yahweh became a living, walking, physical MAN, called The Word (OF) God in Revelation 19:13 and Yahweh's Begotten Son. 1 Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, set apart for the Good News of God, 2 which he promised before through his prophets in the holy Scriptures, 3 concerning his Son, who was born of the seed of David according to the flesh, 4 who was declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord, 5 through whom we received grace and apostleship, for obedience of faith among all the nations, for his name's sake; 6 among whom you are also called to belong to Jesus Christ; Notice how Jesus first came into existence by HAVING BEEN BORN OF A WOMEN? Please notice how we read in Acts 2:22 saying Jesus was a MAN, and nothing about Jesus being GOD, or an Angel, or some kind of Spirit being BEFORE He was BORN: Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, (A MAN) having been set forth by God to you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by Him in your the midst, as you yourselves know. Notice in John 8:40 how Jesus Himself confirms He is (A MAN) and says nothing about Himself being GOD, or an Angel, or some kind of Spirit being BEFORE He was BORN: Jesus did speak figuratively by saying He came down from Heaven and simply meant He came from GOD as GOD is in heaven, just as Jesus tells us in Matthew 6:9 saying: Therefore pray you like this: 'Our Father (IN THE HEAVENS), hallowed be Your name! But now you seek to kill Me, (A MAN) who has spoken to you the truth that I heard from God. Abraham did not do this. Romans 1: Notice how Paul tells us that Jesus: was BORN of the seed of David according to the flesh, who was declared to be the Son of God, in line with what Jesus tells us in John 10:36 saying I am the Son of GOD. NOT GOD. Notice how we do NOT read Paul saying Jesus PRE-EXISTED his flesh before David? NOWHERE is it written that Jesus was already alive with GOD in heaven and was transformed into the BABY Jesus, unless you are reading the many false modern Bible translations. But instead we read Paul saying Jesus comes into existence by the seed of David according to the flesh, in line with John 1:14 saying the word of GOD became FLESH, as the SON of MAN Jesus. If Jesus was WITH GOD before He was BORN as a MAN, then WHAT WAS HE? Notice how we read in John 3:16, how GOD GAVE us His only begotten Son, and yet most have been deceived into believing in a false Gospel teaching GOD came and gave Himself and madly believe died on the cross, when the truth is GOD cannot DIE, when it was GOD's SON who died, NOT GOD, which makes a false Christ. Just as James 1:17 tells us: Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom can be no variation, nor turning shadow. Jesus is truly a gift from GOD, when we take up our cross and deny ourselves by believing and following the true Jesus, we will be saved: For God so loved the world that (HE GAVE) the only begotten Son, so that everyone believing in Him should not perish, but should have eternal life. John 3:16. BLB.

@Ladyguite79

9 ай бұрын

Exactly!!💨

@IsJesusGod.

9 ай бұрын

@@Ladyguite79 Bless you!

@IsJesusGod.

9 ай бұрын

@HalleluYAH7771 Revelation 1:8, "I am the Alpha and the Omega," says Lord God, the One being, and who was, and who is coming, the Almighty. 1. Revelation 1:8, is GOD the Father, and NOT Jesus. This is easy to understand because we clearly see who the person is in this verse which” says the Lord God, “who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.” Revelation 1:8. IT IS WORTH KNOWING THAT JESUS IS NEVER EVER CALLED: THE LORD GOD, OR THE ALMIGHTY. Notice below how super Trinitarian Barns Notes confirms Revelation 1:8 should NOT be used as proof of Jesus being GOD, contradicting what MOST Trinitarians say: 2. Revelation 1:11, I am the Alpha and the Omega is clearly Not genuine, and was added in some translations to make us believe Jesus is GOD almighty. Who added: I am the Alpha and the Omega, in Revelation 1:11? Was it the same people who altered: 1 John 5:7 in the King James Bible? I wonder if they are Trinitarians? Revelation 21:6, And He said to me, "It is done! I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. To the one thirsting I will give of the spring of the water of life freely. 3. Revelation 21:6, also has nothing to do with Jesus being GOD, because the verse goes on to tell us: The one overcoming will inherit all things, and I will be his God, and he will be My son. As Jesus never, ever taught that He was our GOD and Father, but instead taught that His Father was our Father, and His GOD was our GOD, and He was a brother, this is then obvious Revelation 21:6, is also about GOD almighty and NOT Jesus.

@IsJesusGod.

9 ай бұрын

@HalleluYAH7771 4. Revelation 22:13, But what about Revelation 22,13? There are people who are in agreement, which I also agree, Revelation 22,13, is not the Title for Jesus but for GOD ALMIGHTY. This is easy to establish by reading through Revelation 22,12 to 21. WHO is now talking to John? We read it is one of the seven angels in Revelation 21:9 The New Jerusalem 9 And one of the seven angels having the seven bowls being full of the seven last plagues came and spoke with me, saying, “Come here, I will show you the bride, the wife of the Lamb.” Notice verse 6: Notice how Trinitarians have added in Jesus is coming before verse 6 when this is referring to GOD. 👉 Jesus is Coming👈 6 And he said to me, “These words are faithful and true. And the Lord, the God of the spirits of the prophets, sent His angel to show His servants the things that must come to pass in quickness.” We read in verse 6 that The Lord, the God of the spirits of the prophets, sent His angel. Notice at this point how there is NOTHING about Jesus sending His Angel or talking to John Himself, but instead: the Lord, the God of the spirits of the prophets, sent His angel. So we read here the Angel is talking for the Lord GOD, and continues to say: 7“ And behold, I am coming quickly. Blessed is the one keeping the words of the prophecy of this book.” 8 And I, John, am the one hearing and seeing these things. And when I heard and saw, I fell down to worship before the feet of the angel showing these things me. 9 And he says to me, “See that you not do this. I am your fellow servant, and with your brothers the prophets, and with those keeping the words of this book. Worship God!” 10 And he says to me, “Do not seal the words of the prophecy of this book; for the time is near. 11 The one being unrighteous, let him be unrighteous still; and he who is filthy, let him be filthy still; and he who is righteous, let him practice righteousness still; and he who is holy, let him be holy still.” 12 “Behold, I am coming quickly, and My reward is with Me, to give to each as is his work. 13 I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.” Notice the Angel is talking for GOD to John, and NOT JESUS, and the Angel says for GOD in verse 13: I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.” 14 Blessed are those washing their robes, that their right will be to the tree of life, and they shall enter into the city by the gates. 15 Outside are the dogs, and the sorcerers, and the sexually immoral, and the murderers, and the idolaters, and everyone loving and practicing falsehood. Notice If we turn to Isaiah 40:10, we will find the similar language is found saying: Behold, the Lord Yahweh will come as a mighty one, and his arm will rule for him. Behold, his reward is with him, and his recompense before him. World English Bible Just as we read it is GOD ALMIGHTY in: Isaiah 62:11 Behold, Yahweh has proclaimed to the end of the earth, "Say to the daughter of Zion, 'Behold, your salvation comes. Behold, his reward is with him, and his recompense before him.'" World English Bible Countless scriptures tell us the same message that it is Yahweh GOD ALMIGHTY who rewards the righteous THROUGH His SON and with Jesus our Mediator. We continue to read that it is GOD ALMIGHTY who is our salvation, because it was GOD's own plan to send and sacrifice his own begotten SON Jesus to save us. Behold, God is my salvation. I will trust, and will not be afraid; for Yah, Yahweh, is my strength and song; and he has become my salvation." Isaiah 12:2. World English Bible The scriptures teach us Yahweh GOD ALMIGHTY who saves, and then THROUGH His SON. If [any of] your outcasts are in the uttermost parts of the heavens, from there will Yahweh your God gather you, and from there he will bring you back: Deuteronomy 30:4 World English Bible We have clearly seen how Revelation 22:6 to Revelation 22:16 is about the Angel talking for the Lord GOD, and the Lord GOD says in verse 13 I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.” AND NOT JESUS. We now move from the Angel talking for the Lord GOD, to an Angel talking for Jesus of Himself in the very next part of Revelation 22:16, 16 “I, Jesus, have sent my angel to testify to you about these things for the churches. I am the root and the descendant of David, the bright morning star.” Notice how Jesus makes a clear difference between Himself and GOD, and again clearly IDENTIFIES Himself through His Angel saying: 16 “I, Jesus, have sent my angel to testify to you about these things for the churches. I am the root and the descendant of David, the bright morning star.” Again there is nothing said by Jesus calling Himself: I am the Alpha and the Omega. 17 The Spirit and the Bride say, “Come.” And let the one who hears say, “Come.” And let the one who is thirsty come; let the one who desires take the water of life without price. 18 I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, 19 and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book. 20 He who testifies to these things says, “Surely I am coming soon.” Amen. Come, Lord Jesus! 21 The grace of the Lord Jesus be with all. Amen. Notice how Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers, says it is GOD who gives back to each one his work,” says St. John. (12) And, behold, I come quickly . . .-Rather, Behold, I am coming quickly, and My reward is with Me to give back to each one as his work is. To give back to each: here we have the truth declared by St. Paul uttered in words borrowed from Isaiah (Isaiah 40:10). “Whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap,” wrote St. Paul (Galatians 6:7-8): “God gives back to each one his work,” says St. John. Conclusion. Many say: The “Alpha and Omega” statements prove Jesus is God. But instead my research reveals the Biblical facts that prove The “Alpha and Omega” statements are the Titles for GOD ALMIGHTY alone. This is proved by Jesus own words, by the fact Jesus ALWAYS IDENTIFIED Himself and never ever identified Himself as The Alpha and Omega. The Biblical facts. From the beginning of Revelation to the end of Revelation, John always declares ONE biblical fact, that there is ONE being who is the creator and GOD ALMIGHTY alone. This perfect example can be seen below: Revelation 4: 11 “Worthy are You, our Lord and God, to receive glory and honor and power; for You created all things, and because of Your will, they existed and were created.” Notice in Revelation 17:14 how Jesus is NOT called GOD Almighty: The Victory of the Lamb 14 These will make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb will overcome them, because He is Lord of lords and King of kings; and those with Him are called and chosen and faithful.” Notice in Revelation 19:15 how John refers to Jesus and defines who is GOD by saying: the wrath of God the Almighty. 15 And out of His mouth goes forth a sharp sword, so that with it He may strike down the nations; and He will shepherd them with a rod of iron. And He treads the press of the wine of the fury of the wrath of God the Almighty. 16 And He has a name having been written upon the robe and upon His thigh: In Revelation 20:6 we see again how John clarifies who is GOD and who is Christ by saying God and of Christ: 6 Blessed and holy is the one having a part in the first resurrection! Over these the second death has no authority, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and will reign with Him a thousand years. Throughout the whole book of Revelation, we clearly see how John always IDENTIFIES GOD as the Lord God Almighty ALONE, and Jesus as the Lamb of GOD ALONE and NEVER EVER are both GOD and the Lamb described as ONE GOD, or the Lamb as being the SAME GOD, as seen in Revelation 21: And I saw no temple in it, for the Lord God Almighty is its temple, and the Lamb. 23 And the city has no need of the sun, nor of the moon, that they should shine in it; for the glory of God enlightened it, and its lamp is the Lamb. 24 And the nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth bring their glory into it. 25 And its gates shall not be shut by day, for there will be no night there. There is absolutely not a single word from the beginning of Revelation to the end of Revelation where John calls Jesus GOD, or where Jesus calls Himself GOD, or where GOD ALMIGHTY calls His SON GOD. This Biblical fact, is an identical striking fact, that Jesus never, ever calls himself GOD, in the gospels of Matthew Mark or Luke. And as we have carefully examined the identical striking fact in the book of Revelation, when we carefully examine John’s Gospel, we discover the same fact yet again, that millions have taken John’s Gospel out of context. We have to ask ourselves, if John truly meant Jesus was GOD in John 1:1, than why did he not teach Jesus was GOD anywhere in the book of Revelation? No one needs to be a Bible scholar to see and understand this simple biblical fact. But instead all one needs is what Jesus always taught with what GOD ALMIGHTY has provided: Anyone with ears to hear should listen and understand! Matthew 11:15. When we do hear, we simply SEE, Jesus never, ever claimed to be GOD or His own Father, and this simple Biblical fact shows how MOST are sadly deceived.

@IsJesusGod.

9 ай бұрын

@HalleluYAH7771 You 👉 John 8:58 - ”Jesus said to them: “Most assuredly, I say to you: Before Abraham was; I AM (THE LIVING GOD).” ---------------------------------------------------------------- Reply 👇 John 8:58 The Correct Meaning. Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am." Jesus was simply saying: Before Abraham existed, I am (He), I am the one, I am (He) the promised Messiah and deliverer, ORDAINED and chosen as the Begotten Son of GOD and Lamb of GOD before the foundations of the world. Notice how Jesus DID NOT SAY: before Abraham was, I existed. Notice how Jesus DID NOT SAY: before Abraham was, I am - GOD. Notice how Jesus DID NOT SAY: before Abraham was, I was alive with GOD. GOD THE SON IS A FALSE CHRIST.

Jesus Christ is The Word of God because through him all of God's purposes come true...That's why THE WORD became flesh: to fulfill all of God's promises and his sacred will...Jesus is depicted in Proverbs chapter 8 as Wisdom, personified...when we carefully read the account we can get a clearer sight of Jesus' role in God's plan... Colossians 1:15-18. Jesus is"... The Christ, the Son of The living God..." -Matthew 16:13-17. May The Almighty God bless you in the name of his Son, our king and Lord, Jesus Christ..! Amen.

It would be Nice if the Captions were always TURNED On Though ! Thanks !

I’d be really curious to see if you have either done any videos on this subject or if you would do one, but I see this argument about the identities of the Father and the Son all the time, but you won’t hear Trinitarians talk much about the Holy Spirit. Can you please cover this phenomenon? I wish I was able to word this request better, but I can’t find the words. I just find it so unusual how they’ll argue all day long that Jesus is God but won’t try and explain why there is so little evidence for the Holy Spirit being God. Thanks!

@priscillajervey8345

Ай бұрын

I am not sure most even know. the holy spirit is God's operational life force , it can be measured, is quantified, wind, fire, a force etc. It is who God is and NOT separate from him. It definitely is NOT a person!

@priscillajervey8345

Ай бұрын

. Failing to understand that “the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets,” and instead being taught to be “controlled” by the Holy Spirit, many become influenced by demons, even while thinking that they are being “led by the spirit” of God. . Many are not walking in the power of the spirit because they are waiting for a “person” to move them, while God is waiting for them to utilize by faith that which they have already been given. God is said to have a throne (1 Kings 22:19; Dan. 7:9), inhabit heaven as His dwelling place (1 Kings 8:30,39,43 and 49), and yet “heaven and the highest heaven cannot contain” Him (1 Kings 8:27). So how can He be said to have a throne and a dwelling place and yet be uncontainable? Psalm 139:7 indicates that God’s spirit and His presence can be equivalent terms. God is therefore omnipresent by His “spirit,” which is not a separate “person.” This presence can also be extended by His personal ministers and agents, whether Christ, angels, or believers. None of these is a separate person who is also “God” in some multi-personal Godhead, but rather empowered agents who are equipped to do the will of God. . Exodus 23:20-22 mentions the angel of God’s presence that would go before Israel in the wilderness. God has permitted angels to speak as if they were God Himself, and even to use His personal name, Yahweh. A few examples of this principle are Manoah and his wife (Judg. 13:21 and 22), Jacob wrestling (Gen. 32:24-30; Hosea 12:3-5), Moses (Exod. 3:2-4, 6 and 16) and Gideon (Judg. 6:12, 13, 16 and 22). What is sometimes attributed to Jesus or to “the Holy Spirit” in the Old Testament is better explained by this principle of God manifesting Himself by means of an angelic messenger who speaks for Him in the first person (“I the Lord,” etc.) and manifests His glory. Although the Hebrew word for “spirit” (ruach), can refer to angels or evil spirits, which are persons or entities with a personality, the Hebrew usage of “the spirit of God” never refers to a person separate from, but a part of, God Almighty. Neither does the phrase, “the spirits of God” occur, which would refer to separate spiritual entities within a multipersonal God. Revelation 1:4 refers to the “seven spirits” before the throne of God. Are these seven “Holy Spirits,” or sentient entities, within the “Godhead”? The context provides the answer: they are the seven lamps of fire burning before the throne (4:5 - NRSV) and the seven horns and seven eyes of the slain Lamb (5:6). These are likely the same “spirits” mentioned in Isaiah 11:2 in connection with the Messiah: the spirit of the Lord, the Spirit of wisdom, the spirit of understanding, the spirit of counsel, the spirit of might, the spirit of knowledge and the spirit of the fear of the Lord. These “spirits” are undoubtedly symbols of the intense power of insight and judgment with which the Lamb [ Jesus]will judge and reign over the earth during the Millennium...

Excellent explanation, in just 10 minutes. That's not easy for this passage. Good job.

@homielifesaver2332

5 ай бұрын

But he is wrong. Acts 20:28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with (HIS OWN BLOOD) How did God purchase the church? With his own blood. ---------- How can Jesus be God and the Father be God too, but we have one God? Genesis 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and THEY SHALL BE ONE FLESH. So two persons can share in unity as one. And the Trinity share one essence in three persons.

@kevingeorge1095

5 ай бұрын

@@homielifesaver2332 kzread.info/dash/bejne/qophqbeNoLzYqbg.html

@MathewThomasFET

4 ай бұрын

In Jn.8:48, Jesus says, "If don't believe that I am He, you will die in your sins.". Would like die in your sins❓

@kevingeorge1095

4 ай бұрын

@@MathewThomasFET The "I am He" is a code reference to claiming to be the Messiah. If they do not believe that Jesus is God's Messiah, then they will die in their errors, as a result of their rebellion, which is exactly what happened. It has nothing to do with some atonement payment idea - that concept did not even exist in those days.

@MathewThomasFET

4 ай бұрын

@@kevingeorge1095 What are the Greek words of the New Testament that say, “I am He”.❓Where else in the Bible do you find these words ❓ And who said them ❓

As a Muslim I like your Content Unitarian are the Real followers of Jesus( pbuh)

@ViruzVera

4 ай бұрын

@@WeLiveInside1 what is your Point?

@manifestemanifeste8148

16 күн бұрын

Isaiah 9:6 (NIV). Prophecy about Jesus.

John 1:1 You're right, it doesn't make sense to understand that in a Trinitarian way. Here is the scripture - In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. ___________________________________ *Trinitarian language key:* *Trinity(3 people in one Godly essence):* God *Jesus:* The Word ___________________________________ It doesn't mention father, son or Holy spirit. So if you take the Trinitarian word meaning as it is. It would read, In the beginning was Jesus, and Jesus was with The Trinity, and Jesus was The Trinity. If Jesus is the trinity then he is also the Father and the Holy Spirit and the Son. It implies he is all three but at the same time is with all three. This doesn't make sense. Jesus being all three persons is not what Trinitarians believe so this verse makes no sense to that doctrine.

@Bob.55

Ай бұрын

Why even argue about it. The entire bible is fantasy land.

As I said before, I'm open to the idea, and I like this presentation, because it seems to make sense of John 1. I kind of think Jesus is the perfect image of God. He can explain God to us. I'm still unsure where that puts everything, because, again, God is husband to His people, And Christ is husband to God's people. There are so many questions to ask God about.

@Servant44

9 ай бұрын

‭‭Philippians‬ ‭2:6‬ ‭KJV‬‬ [6] who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:

@mariomene2051

9 ай бұрын

@HalleluYAH7773 Jn 8 isn't convincing. They asked, "And who are you?" He answers, "The same as I've been telling you from the start. ... When you raise me up you'll know I am he, and I can do nothing on my own..." Unless they believe Jesus is the manner in which God saves humanity, they will die in their sins.

@mariomene2051

9 ай бұрын

​​@@Servant44When something is equal to God, doesn't that mean God is one thing, and they are something else, but having equality with that God? Yet, how can anything have equality with God? It's difficult.

@Servant44

9 ай бұрын

@@mariomene2051 🙏 To preach Repentance and Remission of sins to Everyone, All nations Luke 24:47 KJV and that [repentance] and [remission of sins] should be [preached] in his name among [all nations,] beginning at Jerusalem. - Sincere turn from (practice) of (sin) and (willful sin) or (All) will perish Luke 13:3 KJV I tell you, [Nay:] but, except [ye repent,] ye shall [all] [likewise] [perish.] - Believe for your faith will save you, for believing leads to (pardon of sins) to not (die) in (sin) John 8:24 KJV I said therefore unto you, that [ye shall die] in your sins: for [if ye believe not] that I am he, ye shall [die] in your [sins.] - Receive forgiveness of sins when we are converted, + multiple ways for remission of sins, (pardon of sins) Acts 10:43 KJV To him give all the prophets witness, that through his [name] [whosoever believeth] [in him] shall [receive] [remission of sins.] - Love God and love thy neighbor as thyself, for love will (cover) all sins, (pardon of sins) Proverbs 10:12 KJV Hatred stirreth up strifes: but [love] [covereth] all [sins.] ‭‭Luke‬ ‭7:47‬ ‭KJV‬‬ Wherefore I say unto thee, [Her sins,] which [are many,] [are forgiven;] for [she loved much:] but to whom [little is forgiven,] the same [loveth little.] - Have frevernt (love) among (the brethren) and (the people) for frevernt (love,) giving, having conpassion shall (cover) the multitude of sins, (pardon of sins) 1 Peter 4:8 KJV And above all things have fervent [charity] [among yourselves:] for [charity] shall [cover] the [multitude of sins.] - Preaching and (converting the sinner) from the error of his way will (hide) a multitude of sins, (pardon of sins) James 5:20 KJV Let him know, that he which [converteth] the sinner from the [error of his way] shall save a [soul] from [death,] and shall [hide] a [multitude of sins.] - Confession of sin, confess your sins everyday for the forgiveness of sins, (pardon of sins) 1 John 1:9 KJV If we [confess] our sins, he is faithful and just to [forgive] us [our sins,] and to [cleanse us] from all [unrighteousness.] - (Water baptism) for the (remission of sins), remission/pardon/forgiveness of sins Acts 2:38 KJV Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be [baptized] every one of you in the [name] of [Jesus Christ] for the [remission of sins,] and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. - To give knowledge of salvation to all by the (remission) of (our) (sins), (pardon of sins) Luke 1:77 KJV To give [knowledge] of [salvation] unto his people [by] the [remission] of their [sins,] - Those (predestined), will die in (0 sin,) all sins were pardoned by the (remission of sins) ‭‭Matthew‬ ‭24:13‬ ‭KJV‬‬ [13] But he that shall [endure] unto [the end,] the same [shall be saved.]

@rickyzoe1

9 ай бұрын

@@mariomene2051 I was in the same place you are several years ago. You have every right to ask the hard questions and test how you understand scriptures regarding who our Messiah is. I for one admire your courage and want to encourage you to continue on this path.

Excellent expounding of the text. What is amazing, as you pointed out, and that is so prevalent in all trinitarian tenets, is that it just doesn't logically work in trinitarian terms. It's not like to say that yours is a better explanation than the god-man theory, but rather that the trinitarian view is not even a viable exegesis. Why do the trinitarians keep the blinders on, and do it so tenaciously - Nicaea destroyed the Church.

@sherrilsusic

9 ай бұрын

When jesus is being crucified if he was God WHY would he pray to himself and say "Father forgive tem they know not what they do" or john 3 16 For god so loved the world that he gave his ONLY BEGOTTEN SONthat whoso ever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life.John 3 verse 17,18. John 5 39 John 8 verse 28, 29

@priscillajervey8345

6 ай бұрын

They certainly did, and the blind sheep have been following so meekley - no questions asked. What a shame. Truth is, they all want to follow the herd, to be accepted and not make waves even though they know the Trinity don't make sense they accept it anyway.

@homielifesaver2332

4 ай бұрын

Acts 20:28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased (WITH HIS OWN BLOOD) How did God purchase the church? With his own blood. --------- Isaiah 44:24 Thus saith the Lord, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, (I AM THE LORD) that maketh (ALL THINGS); that stretched forth the heavens (ALONE); that spreadeth forth the earth by myself. God created everything Alone. Colossians 1:16 For by him all things are created, that are in heaven, and that are in the earth, visible and invisible, weather they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: (ALL THINGS) were created (BY HIM), and for him: So how in Isaiah God created all things, but in Colossians Jesus created all things? Because Jesus is part of the Trinity. ---------- John 8:18 Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself (EQUAL) with God. Notice the context, that it is the author that agrees with the Jews, that Jesus is equal with the Father. John 5:23 That all men should honor the Son, even as they honor the Father. He that honors not the Son honors not the Father which hath sent him. Honor the Son even as we honor the Father? How do we honor the Father? We worship him. ------- Begotten doesn’t always mean created in the Bible. Example Hebrews 11:17 By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only BEGOTTEN son, Was Isaac Abraham’s only son? No, because he also had Ishmael. So how is this possible? The word that translates to begotten (monogenes) means unique. So Jesus is the only UNIQUE son of God. -------- And there is plenty more arguments that show that Jesus is God along with the Father and Holy Ghost.

@dboulos7

4 ай бұрын

@@homielifesaver2332 There's no such thing as a god-man. God did not sacrifice Himself, to Himself. God cannot die. God cannot live a perfect by obeying and loving Himself. It is the quintessence of redundancy to have two all powerful persons within the universe, let alone three - one is not in need of the others. Nowhere in the Bible do the following words exist: god-the-son, god-the-holy-spirit, god-man, three-in-one, two-in one, hypostatic union, eternal generation, incarnation, trinity, triune, etc.... God is called the Father over 100 times in the New Testament, and never the son or the spirit. Although only begotten may not always mean conceived, you haven't proven that it doesn't mean so in regard to Jesus - because it does. Just because the Jews thought that Jesus was making himself equal to God, obviously doesn't mean that he was - he wasn't, for he stated countless times that he can do nothing without the Father. Jesus did not create anything - it doesn't take two omnipotent persons to create the universe - one is more than enough. Your trinitarian doctrine is nothing more than diabolical nonsense, from start unto finish.

@homielifesaver2332

4 ай бұрын

@@dboulos7 Isaiah 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, (THE MIGHTY GOD), the everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace. So the child is the MIGHTY GOD? You haven’t proven that begotten does mean created in Jesus’s case either. --------- Jesus left his glory behind in heaven with the Father when he took on flesh (John 17:5) In (Philippians 2:6-8) shows that even though Jesus is equal to God, he wouldn’t use it to his advantage, Because he had to beat sin with the same weaknesses as a human would. And that is why Jesus said he couldn’t do anything on his own, and why he said the Father was greater than himself. Because he left his glory in heaven and took on the role of a servant. Jesus didn’t create anything? (Colossians 1:15-16) (John 1:1-3) (Hebrews 1:8-10) also God calls Jesus God in these verses.

Beautiful and powerful exegesis. Well done!

@priscillajervey8345

6 ай бұрын

Right!

(إن الذين آمنوا والذين هادوا والنصارى والصابئين من آمن بالله واليوم الآخر وعمل صالحا فلهم أجرهم عند ربهم ولا خوف عليهم ولا هم يحزنون) . This is an extract from the Quran in surat albaqara,is that Christians who believe in the one true god, and the end of days, and have done good deeds in life, you shouldn’t worry about them, god will look after them and they will never know sadness. Unitarian Christians will enter heaven inshallah

Sorry I'm catholic from indonesia .Honestly I'm not a very religious person ,but Jesus said : " I and Father are One " " Whoever has seen Me , has seen the Father ". How about that bro ?

@IIAzimaII

2 ай бұрын

John 17:21 that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me.

@CherryBlossom831

2 ай бұрын

When Jesus is saying that, he’s showing how they are oneness in mindset and personality. For example, my son is EXACTLY like me, like in the way he looks and acts. And people say “oh all I see is your father” when they’re talking to my son. So it’s in the same sense.

@priscillajervey8345

Ай бұрын

Seriously??!! You have really taken a simplistic approch to those verses. Jesus was saying he is the visible image of the invisible God, he representened him in every way, he stood in his "stead." Jesus ALSO told the disciples to become one just as he and the father were one - one in goal, mindset same purpose etc, Have you never heard when a couple gets married they are told to become one??? Please use your common sense. Doesn't any kind of team work require they become one in purpose and a goal?? No wonder you have no clear understanding, you have a Catholic background. The Trinity is the :stillborn: child of the Catholic church.

@priscillajervey8345

Ай бұрын

Jesus had a genealogy and is written about in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke. Jesus being the Messiah was also called the son of David. in Matt 9:27 and again in Matt 21:9. Paul also calls Jesus as a descendant of David in Rom 1:3 The eternal God simply does not have a lineage or human ancestry it would be absurd to think a descendant of David is God or vice-versa. Jesus had a mother. The Bible makes it clear in numerous passages that a woman Mary is the mother of Jesus for example Matt 2:11-13,14. In Acts 1:14 as obvious as it may sound the mother-son relationship between Mary and Jesus is by far one of the most potent arguments against Jesus godhood. If Christians insist Jesus was God then it logically follows that they must accept Mary as the mother of God. The truth is that Mary did not give birth to anything other than a mortal human being. Jesus was likened to Adam in Rom 5:15 Paul likens Jesus to Adam the first man by writing quote “for if the many died by the trespass of the one man how much more did God's grace and a gift that came by the grace of the one man Jesus Christ”. Obviously the man in the first part of the verse refers to Adam whose sin supposedly caused death to enter the world and later in 1 Cor 15:45 Paul calls Jesus the last Adam. If Jesus was God why would Paul liken God the Son to Adam a being that God created? Jesus ate and drank in Matt 11:19 Jesus says he came eating and drinking how can a man who ate and drank be God, does God eat and drink? Jesus felt hunger and thirst, Jesus felt hungry we read yhis in John 19:28 we read that Jesus while on the cross felt thirsty God obviously does not feel hungry or thirsty. God has no needs and since Jesus felt hunger and thirst He was a human like us. He could not have been God. Jesus called himself a man in John 8:40. Jesus himself states he is a man who speaks what he hears from God, no different from previous prophets. The trinitarian claim that Jesus was fully God and fully man has no foundation in the Bible. Jesus was seen as a prophet in Matt 21:46. Jesus was seen as a human prophet the Israelites always understood prophets as mortal human messengers of God who were not in any way divine. Jesus was a human mediator 1Tim 2:5 makes it clear that there is one God and Jesus is only a man who mediates between God and mankind. Jesus was a man with god-given authority in Matt 9:8 we read that Jesus was a man whose authority and power came from God. Jesus reiterates the same point in many other passages. Jesus was accredited and appointed by God in Acts 2:22 we read Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God. Later in Acts 17:31 Jesus is said to be a man who was appointed by God. In the past God accredited and appointed many prophets to carry out various tasks that does not make the prophets divine. The same applies to Jesus he was not God himself but rather an agent of God. Jesus is called a son of man in Mark 8:31, Mark 2:10, Matt 9:6 and Luke 5:24 Jesus is called the Son of Man which was a phrase applied to humans in the Old Testament. Why would God ever be a son of man? God in the Old Testament categorically denies being a man or a son of man there is no question of a son of man being God Num 23:19. Jesus was subordinate to God. We see this in Rom 15:6, 2 Cor 11:31, Eph 1:3,17 Eph 3:14 and Col 13:3. The New Testament routinely states that God and Jesus are separate persons and that God is also the God of Jesus. This refutes the notion that Jesus is God or in any way co-equal with God. In 1 Cor 11:3 Paul teaches that God is superior to Christ how then can people insist that Jesus is himself God. Jesus taught to worship and pray to God in several instances. Jesus directed all worship only to God who he called the Father and not to himself. In Matt 4:10 Jesus rebukes Satan by saying worship the Lord your God and serve him only, then in Matt 6:6 Jesus instructs his followers to pray to the Father not the son or the Holy Spirit. Then in John 4:23 Jesus says the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth. Very clearly Jesus never demanded worship for himself instead his message was to worship the Father Jesus submitted to God's will in Matt 26:39 Jesus prayed to God and ends by saying: “yet not as I will but as you will.” Heb 5:7 also highlights Jesus submission to God. God is sovereign and submits to nobody, Jesus on the other hand submits to the will of God which demonstrates that Jesus was subordinate to God and therefore could not have been God in any way or form. Jesus emphasized doing the will of God and not his own this is made clear in John 4:34, Matt 7:21 and John 6:28. Jesus found it important to do the will of God and taught the same to others. Jesus said God is greater than him, we read this in John 14:28 where he declares and quote “the Father is greater than I” this notion is repeated in John 10:29. We see here that there is nobody greater than God and Jesus who plainly states that the Father is greater than him and he was not God. Jesus was circumcised according to the law in Luke 2:21 Jesus was circumcised on the eighth day like any other Israelite child. As per Israelite law Jesus kept the sign of the physical covenant God made with Abraham. Jesus was presented to God according to the law, again like any other Israelite firstborn Jesus was presented to God in the temple we read this in Luke 2:22. Mary and Joseph were simply keeping the commands that God gave to the Israelites. Jesus affirmed the Shema in Mark 12:29, Jesus affirmed the Shema which is the Israelite statement of faith in one God. Jesus who was an Israelite himself said that the Shema is the most important of all commandments. Jesus did not attempt to modify it so as to accommodate a trinity or his own supposed godhood. How then do trinitarian see the trinity and Jesus godhood in the Shema?

@priscillajervey8345

Ай бұрын

@Bible-Christian All Trinitarians. They state clearly that Jesus IS God - you know the three persons in one God. The Nicea creed! Have you been under a rock? All mainstream churches are Trinitarians - Jesus is God! The Trinity "mystery".

The word' is the active creative power of God, the results of which you see in Genesis or the writing of the Tanakh. This word dwells in Jesus - this is what is shown again and again in John's gospel. He hears or speaks the word - he's not the same thing as the word. But if you want to talk about John's Gospel, Jesus says he is a man who has heard the truth from God. He says the Father is the only true God. He says the Father is greater than himself. He says the Father is greater than all. He says he is sent, authorized, granted, and does the will of the Father. John's Gospel is a very clearly subordinationist text.

@Zipfreer

7 ай бұрын

@@ScottJackson. there is no eternal soul As these doctrines in the scriptures this is other false narrative of what is iYahweh breathed into life and existence the eternal soul doctrines are false interpretations added throughout by metaphysics please research this topic!

@ScottJackson.

7 ай бұрын

@@Zipfreer Isaiah 42:1 KJV my soul my spirit

@Zipfreer

7 ай бұрын

@@ScottJackson.You didn't even look into the truth you just comment a false Pagan interpretations add throughout by metaphysics Yahweh breathed into life and existence the eternal soul doctrines are false interpretations add throughout by metaphysics please research this topic!

@ScottJackson.

7 ай бұрын

@@Zipfreer man has three parts body soul spirit

@Zipfreer

7 ай бұрын

@@ScottJackson. man has three parts to a soul is more pagan doctrines Of a trinity as pagans love this three parts they have added to their beliefs regarding the false teachings of the eternal soul as scriptures teach no such thing just like the trinity doctrine.better do the studying on this stuff than we could have a discussion about it

Thank you for your explanation, it made me clear. 🙏

Something I heard a few years ago regarding Logos was that philosophically referred to the Divine Reason, i.e. the whole purpose and reason for cosmos. I confirmed that philosophers like Aristotle used it that way. I haven't been able to find any/many uses of that word by Jewish Philosophers of the second temple period (though they would've been using Hebrew/Aramaic instead obviously,) to strengthen the link to that being the intended meaning and usage of Logos in John 1. It Logos is intended as being used for the Divine Reason for the Cosmos, then it would comport with the end of Ecclesiastes that the whole purpose of man is to serve God and keep His commandments; otherwise, if the "traditional" interpretation is meant, I am not sure of a referent in the Tanakh for that kind of philosophical statement.

@ken440

9 ай бұрын

Yep, its pure plato via gnostic philosophy.

@voymasa7980

9 ай бұрын

@@ken440 you can't discard the way language works though. Incorporating a well established word into a philosophical statement means either you intend to bring that meaning and weight, or you are trying to use it in an unfamiliar way. The fourth gospel wasn't written in Hebrew or Aramaic originally, as far was we have evidence for, and was written at the end of the first century or beginning of the second. Other places the word logos is used with a fairly simple conversion between that and memra, but John 1 appears to be making a philosophical statement and the preexisting meaning of Logos in philosophy cannot be discarded

@ken440

9 ай бұрын

@@voymasa7980 as for philosophical statements, i see John simply talking about Gods word being the very heart of God, like the famous Horton said "I say what I mean and I mean what I say 100%." At creation God spoke and it was so, later the spoken word becomes the prophetic and written word, scripture. And that then goes on to bring us to mind that God spoke in the beginning of what we call the "word of God" in Gen3:15 and later to Israel in Deut18:18, all about human deliverers who will be the one to destroy the devil, and later God says in His word that Jesus came into the age to destroy the works of the devil, etc, and in the course of time those promises are fleshed out in the man Jesus, who as a second, obedient Adam, pays the blood debt owed by the first adam, and is then the lamb of Passover provided as a blood covering to those with faith to come under it. Simple biblical logic revealed in Gods word.

@voymasa7980

9 ай бұрын

@@ken440 i don't disagree with this summary, and would even add that scripture tells us God spoke in various manners to people, arguably including when He placed the stars for signs, seasons, etc (Daniel, the Magians, and "his star" to name a few related to his.) That being said, John 1:1 still reads as a philosophical statement in line with Ecclesiastes, though it could also be layered intention as well. *Shrug*

Jesus is God, Hebrews 1:1-8 1God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, 2Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds; 3Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high; 4Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they. 5For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son? 6And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him. 7And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire. 8But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom. 9Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. 10And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands: 11They shall perish; but thou remainest; and they all shall wax old as doth a garment; 12And as a vesture shalt thou fold them up, and they shall be changed: but thou art the same, and thy years shall not fail. 13But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool? 14Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?

@thornbird4400

9 ай бұрын

THIS 💯- shalom, friend!!!

@ken440

9 ай бұрын

that whole section you quote proves that Jesus is NOT God, read it properly. Look up that "worlds" you put in there in V2. Look it up in a concordance, just a concordance is all it takes to show your error. What does that word "worlds" mean. I think you have been conditioned to see it wrong by watching Star Trek.

@theophilus7558

9 ай бұрын

@@ken440 Concordance? Where is that in the 1611 Holy Bible? Nothing is of private interpretation. The scriptures speak for themselves.

@ken440

9 ай бұрын

@@theophilus7558 concordance helps you understand the word meaning in the original language. that word "world" in heb1:2 is the concept of the scriptural meaning of "worldlyness" or "this evil age" because the greek word there is "aeions" which means "ages." But modern sillys can only think of a planet when they see "world" now, thanks to captain Kirk going off to "discover new worlds" and so the reference context in Hebrews is set out in Heb1:1 the very verse before it !!!!! "In times past....... but now in these times..." see? all of Hebrews letter is comparing past age of law, with the current age of the body of christ. !!!!

@debraannmartinez7157

9 ай бұрын

God is one!!!! @@theophilus7558 James 2:19 You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that-and shudder.

1) in the trinity you say the father and the son are fully equal to the one another. The son is begotten but the father is unbegotten can you say that the father is begotten like the son ? 2) if the trinity is 3 persons is the trinity identical to the 3 persons ? 3) In the trinity Does the father know that he is the father ? Does the son know that he is the son ? does the father know that he is the son ? Does the son know that he is the father? 4) Does the father know that he has Human nature and does the son know that he has divine nature ? if he answer no that means they don’t have the same knowledge 5) In the trinity the three persons in god are they dependent on each others or independent of each others? 6) If the father is one with the son why he come always first in the trinity ? 7) If the three persons in the trinity are one can we replace them with one another can the son be the 1st then the spirit the 2nd then the father the 3rd ? 8) Is Jesus in the God head or would you say the God Head is in Jesus ? if he answer one of them that means we have 2 Gods in the Godhead but if he If he answer both of them we ask how can someone be in the Godhead and also the Godhead be in them at the same time ? 9) John 4:24 God is Spirit is that spirit referring to the whole trinity or to the father or the son or the Holy Spirit ? if he answer to the father it means we have 2 spirits the Holy spirit and the father spirit but if he said refer to the trinity it means we have 3 spirits in the trinity 10) Do you see the father son and the holy spirit as three different names of three persons or do you see the father son and Holy spirit as describing one name of one God if so what is the one name that it’s describing ? If he answer the one name of the one God we ask him what is the one name ? 11) Will we see the Father, the son and the Holy Spirit in heaven? 12) Was Jesus Unitarian or trinitarian ? Why ? 13) in the trinity you say the father and the son are fully equal to one another. The son is begotten but the father is unbegotten can you say that the father is begotten like the son ? 14) John 17:3 Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent. (Jesus said explicitly the father is the only true God,How many person is the father ? is he one person or three person when Jesus said he is the only TRUE God ? 15) Is the trinity one identity or three identities? 16) In the trinity do you believe in one self or three selves? 17) Is the attribute of life a Divine or human characteristic? 18) Does the father need the son to exist or does the son need the father to exist ? Does the father need the son for existence or Does the son need the father for existence or and why? 19) in the trinity you say the father and the son are fully equal to one another. The father is the one who sent the son can we say the son is the one who sent the Father because they are fully equal to one another ? 20) John 1:1 The Word = Jesus. God = the trinity. In the beginning was Jesus, and Jesus was with the trinity, and Jesus was the trinity. 21) John 1:1 The word was with God and the ward was God. can we say John was with Tom and John was Tom ? 21) John 1:12 said you are childrens of God. In the trinity Jesus = father Are you childrens of Jesus or the father ? can you say that you are childrens of Jesus ? 22) John 3:16 Jesus is the begotten son of God. In the trinity Jesus = father can you say the father is the begotten son of Jesus ?

@IsJesusGod.

9 ай бұрын

Nice one, I like it. Also, 1. HOW MANY GODS are on the throne of GOD, as Trinitrans also believe Jesus is GOD? 2. Where is the HOLY Spirit on the throne of GOD? 3. As Jesus has a GOD, how is Jesus that SAME GOD? 4 Where did GOD say He was the SON? 5. Where did Jesus say He is GOD? 6. Where did GOD or Jesus say we MUST BELIEVE Jesus is GOD to be saved? “For God so loved the world, THAT HE GAVE HIS ONLY SON, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. John 3:16. 7. WHERE did GOD say He gave Himself to be crucified, if GOD is Jesus? 8. WHERE did GOD SAY the HOLY Spirit is a separate person? 9. WHERE is the HOLY Spirit in John 1:1? 10. WHERE is the HOLY Spirit on GOD'S THRONE, does He go on HOLIDAY?

@user-cu9cj5jn3e

6 ай бұрын

@@IsJesusGod.not going to lie, 10 made me laugh out loud. 😂

@thecalling6122

4 ай бұрын

@@IsJesusGod. Many of those questions are cleared up with Rev. 1:8 and Isaiah 9:6. Also Rom. 8:9-11 answers the questions about the Holy Spirit. I am not a Trinitarian.

@priscillajervey8345

3 ай бұрын

Bravo!!! Amen! However even with all this common sense logic, Trinitarians will still argue with you, they are hard headed and hotwired to make Jesus God! As one girl told me years afo" She couldn't STAND to believe Jesus wasn't God!" What is wrong with these people? Does someone here posting have the answer???😕🥺

@thecalling6122

3 ай бұрын

​@@priscillajervey8345 What is "wrong" with them, in your estimation, is that they have the Holy Spirit and a spiritual discernment that tells them from within, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that Jesus IS God. Jesus is most certainly God and, sadly, many only know of the Trinity as the way that He must be God. The Trinity is nonsense. It is taught nowhere in the Bible, BUT Jesus is undoubtedly God. Anyone who reads the Gospels, and the New Testament, in their entirety, will come away with the clear understanding that Christ is God. It is crystal clear and He even declares it proudly in Rev. 1:8. Jesus says in John 8:24, 58 that if you do not believe that He is the "I AM" (the God of the OT), you will die in your sins. Best get it right.

"And the word was God", quite simple really, hard to deny.

@biblicalunitarian

4 ай бұрын

That is an English Translation, not what the Greek means, as I demonstrated in the video, and as some Trinitarian scholars admit. If you think the Word = God, who is God in the phrase the Word was with God? This would mean 'God was with God' in your view. Respectfully, This makes no sense.

@shanebell2514

4 ай бұрын

@@biblicalunitarian I have looked up the Greek, the Greek does not say "a God", it says "God". God was with God, of course, as both the Father and the Son are God, not a god each. It is up to God what makes sense, not us.

@hjc1402

4 ай бұрын

@@biblicalunitarianyou appealed to Wallace but Greek scholars like Wallace and mounce actually make the exact opposite point than you. They point out that it is precisely the difference in the use of the article that makes the first instance of ton theon refer to the Father and the second instance of theos refer to God proper, the substance of God, the “what-ness” of God.

@biblicalunitarian

4 ай бұрын

@hjc1402 yes, of course they come to different conclusions, because they are Trinitarians. I am saying that Philip Harner who did the study (and Wallace) who cited it, admit that when you remove the article it makes it qualitative. Now, how exactly you take the meaning of 'qualitative' likely depends on your theology. I take it to mean 'godly', or 'divine'. Wallace said he would prefer to translate it "divine" meaning something close to what you said. I am truly not trying to misrepresent Wallace, but this is what you have to do in scholarship, you don't have to come to the exact same conclusions as every person you cite, but you can use portions of what they cite that you agree with to make an argument. I have a genuine question because you seem to know your stuff. Do you agree that there is one God? And I suppose you do. How does Jesus (who is God in your view) have a God (John 20:17)? Does this not make two Gods?

@hjc1402

4 ай бұрын

@@biblicalunitarian I appreciate the kind demeanor. I’m going to respectively give you some pushback. It seems you’re reducing theos down to an adjectival value. You’re saying the Word is god-ly, or “god-like”. But that’s not what the Greek is saying. This is not being used as an adjective. The qualitative emphasis comes from theos being thrown to the front of the word order. Both nouns are nominatives here, affectively making the verb ēn an equal sign between the two nouns. This thing _is_ that thing. This thing _equals_ that thing. This thing _is_ (in fact) a one-to-one correspondence to that thing. Again, the qualitative emphasis is drawing attention to the what-ness of the noun, not the likeness. It is not pushing it to function as an adjective to say the Word is _like_ this thing. I’ll go ahead and point out that if John wanted to say the Word was god-ly or _like_ God, there was a word for that he could have used but didn’t, theios. That’s a very important point in this discussion. That’s the kind of difference between the trinitarians saying Jesus _is_ the _same_ substance as the Father (homoousios) and the Arians saying he is _like_ the substance of the Father (homoiousios). No, John uses theos to say that the what-ness of God _is_ the Word, and vice versa. That’s why the one translation is accurate. What God is the Word is. This is saying much much more than simply the Word is “godly” or like God- like this other thing that is God but not actually that thing God. Now if this is how the text must be taken, which I think it is, you attempt to introduce a tension between 1: 1b and 1: 1c, asking how the Word can both be _with_ God and _be_ God. But truly, anyone who does not hold to trinitarianism is the one with this problem. The trinitarian is the only one who can and does hold both of these truths without any tension or problem. The trinitarian is the only one who can make sense of the fact that there truly is a real identity between the Word and God, with God being the what-ness of God, and yet there also truly is some sort of real distinction between the Word and God, with “the God” functioning as a proper, personal title referring to the Father. Only trinitarians are staying true to the fullness of the text. This verse achieves 1) identifying a real distinction between the person of the Word and the person of God the Father, fighting off Sabellianism/Modalism, 2) identifying the real identity between the Word and God, fighting off Unitarianism, and 3) _not_ identifying the Word to be “a” god or a lesser god, fighting off Arianism/Jehovah Witnesses/Polytheism.

I agree with the Biblical Unitarian perspective on the Trinity and that the one true God is the Father, but as far as Trinitarians explaining John 1:1, they would just say the first "God" is God the Father, and the second "God" is God the Son who is Himself God (in their view). John's prologue, as you said, is the first place they go to support their belief. What helped me the most with this was to determine whether John 1 is a reference to the Genesis 1 creation or not, and then to look at the creation account to see what the "word" could be in that account. It is abundantly obvious that it is simply God's speaking, i.e. "Let there be..." John says all things that came to be (greek: egeneto) came to be through the word, and that's exactly what happened in Genesis - all things that came to be (same greek word egeneto in the Septuagint), came to be through God's spoken word saying "let there be". Mankind is not described as "coming to be", but is described as being formed from the dust of the ground, and so did not come to be through the word. There is no indication in Genesis that God's speaking is somehow also a divine person. It's just God's actual spoken word. My personal perspective is that Jesus is the "light" spoken into being both in Genesis and in John (since the gospel says John the Baptist came to testify concerning the light, Greek: phos). The "light" spoken into being in Genesis 1:3 is also "phos" in the Septuagint, which is a different word for "light" used later on in Genesis 1:14 when God speaks the lights of the sky (what we all commonly understand as our physical light today) into being.

@ScottJackson.

7 ай бұрын

The two are not each other but share the same substance

@Gats8479

Ай бұрын

LET US MAKE MAN ACCORDING TO OUR IMAGE OUR LIKENESS THERE YOU CAN SEE HE'S SPEAKING TO SOMEONE.

jesus prayed to god how can jesus pray to himself it don’t make sense !!

@swenpark8598

19 күн бұрын

« His not God because he doesn’t act the way I should »

@ms-ex8em

19 күн бұрын

@@swenpark8598 what do u mean act the way i should? what do u mean by this?

@swenpark8598

19 күн бұрын

@@ms-ex8em If something doesn't make sense in your mind, it doesn't necessarily means that it doesn't make sense for the entire world. Jesus was sent to Earth not only as God incarnate but also as the perfect model for humanity. As a man, Jesus demonstrated how each person should live their life, including the practice of prayer. Jesus prayed to God the Father to show humans the importance of prayer in their relationship with God. By praying, he illustrated the humility, dependence, and obedience that every person should have toward God. Jesus' prayer is not a sign of his lack of divinity, but rather a demonstration of his role as a guide and example for all believers.

@ms-ex8em

19 күн бұрын

@@swenpark8598 ok i understand this but still we CANNOT attribute these qualities to god i mean things like he became a man etc i dont believe in it all nope i just dont buy it

@swenpark8598

19 күн бұрын

@@ms-ex8em Okay no problem I totally respect your opinion, you are free to decide your future and your way. But you cannot deny something when you have so much evidence to prove it's true, and even if it doesn't make sense to you, it doesn't mean that it's necessary false. I think you should look at more in detail the life and purpose of Jesus, it will surely help you like it did to me to understand. Have a great day man!

The ultimate prove, that Jesus is god: Isaiah 44: 6 Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; 👉I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God. Revelation 1: 17 And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as dead. And he laid his right hand upon me, saying unto me, Fear not; 👉I am the first and the last: I am he that liveth,👉 and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death. Jesus is god!

@FoundationalBibleTruths

24 күн бұрын

In Isa 44:6, it is VERY CLEAR that LORD (Yehovah - look it up!) is the First "GOD", and Last "GOD". But what about Rev 1:17? Look Closer... First and Last WHAT? certainly NOT "First GOD and Last GOD"!!!! God is ETERNAL and IMMORTAL! GOD Cannot DIE! Rev 1:17 is speaking of a MORTAL being that "WAS DEAD" !!! In FACT, Rev 1:17 is Consistent with the many verses that say Jesus DIED, and also Consistent with these: Rev 1:5 and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the FIRSTBORN of The DEAD,... Col 1:18 He (Jesus) is the head of the body, the assembly, who is THE BEGINNING, THE FIRST BORN FROM THE DEAD; that in all things he might have the preeminence. 1Cor 15:45 So also it is written, “The first man, Adam, became a living soul.” The LAST ADAM became a life-giving spirit. So, there it is.. Jesus was the FIRST MAN to be Resurrected from DEATH and GIVEN Everlasting Life. And Jesus was the LAST Adam. Again, Rev 1:17 is NOT saying that GOD WAS DEAD, now is it? I pray you begin to SEE what Scripture actually teaches, not what some man behind a pulpit teaches.

@Name00520

24 күн бұрын

@@FoundationalBibleTruths In Revelation 1: 17 Jesus is refering to Isaiah. John 1:49 Nathanael answered Him, “Rabbi, You are the Son of God; You are the King of Israel. Who is the King of Israel in Isaiah 44: 6?

@FrankLee-gq8yc

20 күн бұрын

​@Name00520 Cudos for quoting the whole of Rev1:17 AND 18.. most stop at 'I am the first and the last". When you typed out "I was dead", did that make you pause for a moment? If God Almighty said those words he, by definition would not be eternal. Ps90:2 " from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God" it doesn't say "apart from that time you died"

@Name00520

20 күн бұрын

@@FrankLee-gq8yc "i was dead" is the prove that Jesus is talking there. Why would he claim to be "the first and the last" which is obviously only God or the King of Israel (Isaiah 44: 6) wich is allso only God.

@FrankLee-gq8yc

19 күн бұрын

@Name00520 He's qualifying what he is "first and last of" in relating it to his death. He was dead, and he was the first to "acend to the heavens" (joh3:13) after being resurrected by his Father (Act5:30). He was also the last to be resurrected this way... as he says: "I have the keys to the grave". He has been given the privilege of all future ressurections. That why it's Jesus voice all hear in jo5:28,29. The title "tte first and the last" are the same words referring to different aspects of first and last. Titles can be shared and mean different things... thinknof "king of kings"... who is that? Jesus right? And also Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon (Dan2:37)

Paul was Saul. If I was a Jew writing or reading John 1:1, knowing the Old Testament repeatedly says “the Word came to ___”, I would read John 1:1 seeing that John isn’t separating the Word from God. Instead, I’d see John gathering my understanding of the Word to the person of God. Something like “with God because he was God”. John is connecting not separating here.

@timothytmusgrove

3 ай бұрын

No, it is written this way in Greek to affirm that what God is in substance/essence, so is the WORD (Christ Jesus) - the meaning is clear: GOD. Christ on a White Horse Revelation 19:11 Now I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse. And He who sat on him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He judges and makes war. 12 His eyes were like a flame of fire, and on His head were many crowns. He had a name written that no one knew except Himself. 13 He was clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God. 14 And the armies in heaven, clothed in fine linen, white and clean, followed Him on white horses. 15 Now out of His mouth goes a sharp sword, that with it He should strike the nations. And He Himself will rule them with a rod of iron. He Himself treads the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God. 16 And He has on His robe and on His thigh a name written: KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS.

@DoulosTis

Ай бұрын

You are just you, the average Joe in 2024, just that!

@AndyAyala-

Ай бұрын

@@timothytmusgrove you said no.. but than said what said just in different words lol. “What God is so is the Word”…

@timothytmusgrove

Ай бұрын

@@AndyAyala- To be more precise, John wrote it this way to refute any misunderstandings about the ONENESS of GOD. This is because some heresies were beginning to be taught like modalism and Tritheism. So the catechism of the Catholic Church properly defines Christ Jesus revelation as follows: 253. "The Trinity is One. We do not confess three Gods, but one God in three persons, the 'consubstantial Trinity'. [Council of Constantinople II (553): DS 421.] The divine persons do not share the one divinity among themselves but each of them is God whole and entire: 'The Father is that which the Son is, the Son that which the Father is, the Father and the Son that which the Holy Spirit is, i.e. by nature one God.' [Council of Toledo XI (675): DS 530:26.] In the words of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), 'Each of the persons is that supreme reality, viz., the divine substance, essence or nature.' [Lateran Council IV (1215): DS 804.]" 254. "The divine persons are really distinct from one another. 'God is one but not solitary.' [Fides Damasi: DS 71.] 'Father', 'Son', 'Holy Spirit' are not simply names designating modalities of the divine being, for they are really distinct from one another: 'He is not the Father who is the Son, nor is the Son he who is the Father, nor is the Holy Spirit he who is the Father or the Son.' [Council of Toledo XI (675): DS 530:25.] They are distinct from one another in their relations of origin: 'It is the Father who generates, the Son who is begotten, and the Holy Spirit who proceeds.' [Lateran Council IV (1215): DS 804.] The divine Unity is Triune." 255. "The divine persons are relative to one another. Because it does not divide the divine unity, the real distinction of the persons from one another resides solely in the relationships which relate them to one another: 'In the relational names of the persons the Father is related to the Son, the Son to the Father, and the Holy Spirit to both. While they are called three persons in view of their relations, we believe in one nature or substance.' [Council of Toledo XI (675): DS 528.] Indeed 'everything (in them) is one where there is no opposition of relationship.' [Council of Florence (1442): DS 1330.] 'Because of that unity the Father is wholly in the Son and wholly in the Holy Spirit; the Son is wholly in the Father and wholly in the Holy Spirit; the Holy Spirit is wholly in the Father and wholly in the Son.' [Council of Florence (1442): DS 1331.]" Yes, I agree with your statement, I was just trying to clarify The SON OF GOD (the WORD made flesh) is fully human, fully divine: One Divine Person of Jesus Christ. I apologize if I failed to make myself clear. Peace Be With You

@timothytmusgrove

Ай бұрын

@@AndyAyala- Do you believe in the Trinity?

When king saul wanted to consult the dead samuel, and contacted the witch of endor, she saw gods ascending from the ground. The authors of the bible identify spirits as gods. It's a classification to identify essence or nature. It can also be used to classify authority as when god told moses that he, moses, woule be as god to pharaoh. The angels, gods sons, are also refered to as gods. Paul calls satan the god of this world. By trinitarian logic satan must also be part of the godhead, except it wouldn't be a trinity, but a multitude of individuals comprising the godhead.

@snowyriver2448

28 күн бұрын

The trinitarian God is the highest and transcending divinity. Tribal gods and man-gods are deities of lower classes. They are instances of divinity for special applications.

The "word" is defined as the wisdom of God and the power of God. The word is not a person. But was personified in the gospels when speaking thru the prophet John.

@christinefarrall9391

9 ай бұрын

The Word is a Person. His name is Jesus. He was in the beginning with God before the world was created.

@Somedude2020

9 ай бұрын

​@@christinefarrall9391So was Jesus always with the father from eternity making him also eternal?

@chronic_daydreamer

8 ай бұрын

⁠@@Somedude2020No. In being called “the only-begotten,” it is clear that he had a beginning. Only the Father is eternal in the absolute sense, without beginning or end, being uncreated. Jesus, being a creation, had a beginning. He is eternal in the sense that he does not have an end. Some linguists call this sempiternal, which can be understood to mean having a beginning but not having an end.

@Somedude2020

8 ай бұрын

@@chronic_daydreamer I agree totally, I was asking in the hope of getting around to revelation 1.18 where Jesus says clearly that he was dead, and NOW is alive for ever. Always interested to hear how trinitarians explain that one

@homielifesaver2332

4 ай бұрын

@@chronic_daydreamer Begotten in the verse that you are quoting means unique and not created. Example In (Hebrews 11:17) it says that Isaac is Abraham’s only begotten son, but we know that Abraham has another son Ishmael. Begotten in these verses means unique not created.

“He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation” Colossians 1:15 John 8:58 “Before Abraham was I am” John 14:9 “…Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father…” John 5:18 “For this reason they tried all the more to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.”

@ken440

9 ай бұрын

What is the context of Colosians? Its the NEW creation, the church led by the man raised, not by angels. Jesus creates all in that new creation, the church because he Jesus IS THE HEAD of the body, the church, the new creation. You have miss used that holy hand grenade anthony.

@debraannmartinez7157

9 ай бұрын

What are you smoking?@@ken440

@debraannmartinez7157

9 ай бұрын

Jesus is High Priest to the CHURCH and not God@@ken440

@ken440

9 ай бұрын

@@debraannmartinez7157 ha ha, can you not see that Colossians is about Jesus being the head of the body, the church?? What do you think its about? Even my MacArthur study bible tells me its about proving that angels are not to be worshipped because Jesus is the head and is the one who sets up and orders things in the church.

@priscillajervey8345

Ай бұрын

If Jesus is the image of God then he is definitely Not God! Jesus was before Abraham in the mind and plan of God, God sees things that are not as though they were. Was Jesus crucified before the foundation of the world??? Does calling yourself equal to your mother or father make you equal to them?? Jesus NEVER claimed equality with God the Father. PLEAES STOP WITH THE LAME "I AMs!"You have only proved how theologically ignorant you are of Scriptures, Stop listening to others and do your own research. And believe God and Jesus when they tell you WHO they are. Don't you think they would know???

I think it matters whether "god" is being used as a name, title, position of authority, ontological category, or something else.

@QuëstionšnÅňşwęŕż

2 ай бұрын

In those days it was always a title. The Romans, Greeks, Egyptians and so on had many many gods. God was always a title when this was written.

The Father is nominally called God or has name God. The Word was God is using God in the predicative sense; namely, that the Word was also God, a single divine nature subsisting as Father, Son & Spirit. The Father is uncaused & eternally begot the Word (Son) and eternally spirates the Spirit.

Look at it from the trinitarian point of view. The Word = Jesus. God = the trinity. In the beginning was Jesus, and Jesus was with the trinity, and Jesus was the trinity.

@socketman

9 ай бұрын

Doesn't that just make the point even further? Jesus is clearly not the trinity for trinitarians, the trinity = God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. I feel like we can't just read scripture and insert our own meaning. The trinity is not a concept found in scripture, so we can't say "Jesus is the trinity" and then say, oh well that means that Jesus is a part of the trinity. That's now two steps outside of what's actually scriptural to try and make scripture make sense in a trinitarian doctrine. I guess that's certainly one of my main problems with the Trinity that ended up setting me on a journey to study this in depth and eventually become a Biblical Unitarian. The more you try to explain and describe the trinity, generally speaking, the further you get from actual scripture and actual scriptural language. We have to end up saying things like "eternally begotten", "God the son", "Jesus had two natures", etc. The more we try to rationalize the concept of the trinity, the further we get from any actual scriptural basis.

@MichaelTheophilus906

9 ай бұрын

@@socketman Sorry. My comment is sarcasm.

@IsJesusGod.

9 ай бұрын

Good one! 😆

@petromax4849

9 ай бұрын

so Jesus is three people with two natures and two wills

@Somedude2020

9 ай бұрын

​@@MichaelTheophilus906One human with two nature's ......the list goes on.

Jesus is God. Here's why. John 10:30 - "I and the Father are one." Philippians 2:5-6 - "Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped." John 1:1 - "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." Colossians 2:9 - "For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily." Hebrews 1:8 - "But of the Son he says, 'Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, the scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your kingdom.'" John 20:28 - "Thomas answered him, 'My Lord and my God!'" Titus 2:13 - "Waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ." Revelation 1:8 - "I am the Alpha and the Omega," says the Lord God, "who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty."

@Somedude2020

9 ай бұрын

Revelation 1.18 I am the Living One; I was dead and now look, I am alive for ever and ever! The eternal God was "dead" ?

@ventin75

9 ай бұрын

@@Somedude2020 It is refering to Jesus

@Somedude2020

9 ай бұрын

@@ventin75 that's a relief, for a minute there I thought it was referring to God

@ken440

9 ай бұрын

me and my wife are one, in flesh according to the bible, yet we are not the same being. (also in purpose in bring up the kids) And who DID grasp at equality with God? well that ol devil, and the disobedient Adam, but Jesus (last Adam) did NOT grasp at being equal, but went instead to the cross. Obediently, the context of phil2:5-6.

@debraannmartinez7157

9 ай бұрын

Well, God didn't die with JESUS.. Because he doesn't have any human form to do so!

I didn't really understand what the definition of the Trinity meant until I was 40 yrs of age. I just thought it meant God the father, Jesus the son and actually wasnt sure who or what the holy spirit was. I just believed Jesus was the only begotten of the Father. There are endless verses in Scriptures where Jesus prays to God the Father...in Heaven, and so many who knew and followed Jesus acknowledged him as the Son of God, most certainlly when the angel Gabriel came to Mary and told her to name the babe Jesus and he was the son of the most High. Okay what had I missed ? And isn't Jesus sitting at the right hand of God NOW making intercession for us?? So, now I am suopposd to believe the "Word" had to mean a prexsisting God the son?? Why do the majority of Christians believe the WORD meant Jesus...why not God's Word??? Why is that so hard to understand??

Johnny, are you related to the Johnny Barnes who created the Royal Rangers program for the Assemblies of God?

@biblicalunitarian

3 ай бұрын

No, not that I know of!

Dan Wallace said he would like to render it" and the Word was divine"

jesus and god are two very very different natured things remember this

What do you guys think about the rest of the chapter? For example John saying we met God because of the son.

@biblicalunitarian

14 күн бұрын

You might be thinking of John 14:9 "Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father" but if you look at his reasoning in the very next verse, it's not because he is the Father, but because the Father is "in" him. In other words, the Father can be seen in Jesus, Jesus exemplifies the Father, not that Jesus is the Father. Jesus revealed God to the world, not himself to the world (John 17:26).

Johnny was with the Boy Scouts, Johnny was a Boy Scout...The Father is not The Son, The Holy Spirit is not The Father, The Son is not The Holy Spirit yet they are all God. "Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, after Our likeness, to rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, and over all the earth itself and every creature that crawls upon it.” Gen.1:26, "Which is easier: to say, 'Your sins are forgiven,' or to say, 'Get up and walk'? Matt 9:5

@biblicalunitarian

9 ай бұрын

Thanks for your comment, however, your analogy does not work with Trinitarian translations. In Trinitarian translations it would be, "Johnny was with the Boy Scout, Johnny was the Boy Scout." Your suggestion of "a boyscout" is very similar to what Trinitarians condemn, that the Word was "a God." So I'm not sure they would appreciate your analogy. I appreciate you addressing the arguments made in the video though. Also, I would like to point out that there are thousands of singular pronouns for God, so the one or two incidents (Gen. 1:26) where it may seem to be using a plural pronoun are not great evidence to then say God is a plural being. Either He is a singular being or a plural "beings". Which side does the evidence favor? Thanks again.

@user-cu9cj5jn3e

6 ай бұрын

Mic drop

Point number (3) I meant Exodus 20: 5 Thou shall not bow to other gods, but if you read Philippians 2:11 Every knee should bow and every tongue confess tha Jesus is Lord. I am sorry fingure problem.

@FLDavis

Ай бұрын

John : 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. 4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not. Joh 5:17 But Jesus answered them, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work. Jesus Is Equal with God Joh 5:18 Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God. The Authority of the Son Joh 5:19 Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise. Joh 5:20 For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel. Joh 5:21 For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them; even so the Son quickeneth whom he will. Joh 5:22 For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son: Philippians 2: 5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: 8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. 9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: 10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; 11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. Colossians 1:15-20 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence. For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell; And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven. The Rider on a White Horse Rev 19:11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war. Rev 19:12 His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself. Rev 19:13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.

Hi, Biblical Unitarian. I have a couple of questions. While I agree that Jesus Christ is fully a genuine human being, but how do you explain his divine nature? We can see in 1 Corinthians 1:24 that clearly states Christ is the power of God and the wisdom of God. Are you saying God at a certain point in time did not have His wisdom and His power? Since as Unitarian you belief Jesus is created. Secondly, with regards to John 1:1, Christ had a pre-existence as the word/logos/reason/wisdom of God. Would it be possible God at certain point in time did not have His own word? How did He create the word without the word? Thank you and Gbu. Peace.

@biblicalunitarian

9 ай бұрын

Hi, thanks for the great question. When you say, "how do you explain his divine nature," I would say, he does not have a separate Divine nature, as the scriptures never talk about him having two natures. However, I would say that the Spirit of God was certainly present in and working through Jesus. If you notice Jesus cannot do anything on his own (John 5:19; 30) and does things by the power of the spirit (Matt. 12:28), just as healings are a gift of the spirit (1 Cor. 12:30). So, just as the spirit empowers us to heal, it empowered Jesus to heal. Your question about 1 Cor. 1:24 is a good one, but I don't think it means that Christ is literally God's source of power, because of what I said above and because Christ had a beginning (Matt. 1:18). About John 1:1, if you notice in Genesis, God actually spoke and all things were created, it was not another being alongside of him that created all things. Thus, we understand the logos to be a personification of God's reason, just how God's wisdom is personified in Proverbs 8. So, we do not see "the Word" as the pre-existent Jesus. Even if it did, this still does not prove that Jesus is God. There are Unitarians who believe in Jesus' pre-existence. Thanks!

@nataliuselyanto210

9 ай бұрын

@@biblicalunitarian Thanks so much for the kind reply! I hope you don’t mind if I keep giving my follow up questions. I totally agree that Jesus can’t do nothing on his own, not to mention he was born, grew in stature and wisdom, prayed, suffered, etc. as an authentic human being - his human nature so to speak. But um, my question is about his “divine nature”. Because it’s stated in Micah 5:2 He (Jesus) existed from eternity. Colossians 1:17 says He is before all things. Hebrews 1:2 states that God made the world by the Son. Similarly in Colossians 1:13-17 says all things were created by the Son, and Ephesians 3:9 says all things were created by Jesus Christ. Not to mention also in Hebrews 1:10 clearly states that Jesus as Lord was the Creator. Would you please giving me a short and concise Biblical exegesis about how is that possible for the Son during the creation to create everything? I thought Isaiah 43:10 and 44:24 is a clear-cut passage that God alone is the only Creator, no one beside Him. Note that I don’t believe the Son in human flesh existed from eternity but rather as the word/logos (wisdom, reason, plan, thought) of God. With that said, we'll continue to 1 Cor 1:24 and compare it also to Romans 1:16 that says Gospel is the power of God for salvation, 1 Cor 1:18 says the word of cross is the power of God. 1 Cor 1:23 Paul says "but we preach Christ crucified..", Mark 8:38 says "For whoever is ashamed of me and of my words.." and yet in Roman 1:16 Paul says "I'm not ashamed of the Gospel.." are they (Gospel and Christ) referring to the same thing? I believe that Christ's death, burial, and resurrection is indeed the central message of the Gospel, thus the Scripture further says Christ and Gospel is the power of God. Again, I'm still curious if you can also give me Biblical exegesis how is that possible that Christ is the power of God? Thx man and Gbu. Shalom.

@debraannmartinez7157

9 ай бұрын

Jesus was created in God's image. When God told JESUS least make man in our Image God created Adam

@ken440

9 ай бұрын

@@nataliuselyanto210 I see you a little disingenuous here now, the exact same questions i answered you in great detail in another thread. you seem neither unitarian nor trinitarian, but smoothly ask friendly sounding questions with a hint of agreement. What is your stand? You seem to know scripture but strongly avoid the concept of church or the body in Colossians. Come clean dear friend.

@nataliuselyanto210

9 ай бұрын

@@ken440 First of all, could you kindly point out to me which statement that makes you think I’m disingenuous and why would you think that way? My stand is that I believe there is only one true God, and His name is Jesus. I’m coming clean. This is my main YT with my real name on it. What else would you like to know about me? I'd be more than happy to share..

How do you interpret what is being said by Paul in Colossians 1:19 and Colossians 2:9 about Jesus?

@biblicalunitarian

12 күн бұрын

Great question. One thing to note, is that in Col. 2:9 the greek word "theotetos" only occurs one time in the whole new testament, so it's not great to base doctrines off of a word like this. However, scholars have a pretty good idea of what it means due to outside greek literature. It means "divine character" or "deity" or "divinity" something along those lines. Whatever this "divine" fullness is that Jesus has, we also are filled (same root word) with according to Colossians 2:10. So, if being filled with the divine "fullness" (Col. 2:9) makes you God, we also become God, because Christians are filled with it too (Col. 2:10). So, my understanding is simply that in Col. 1:19 and 2:10 Paul is trying to say that the Spirit of God fully dwelt in Jesus, which enabled him to be righteous and perform miracles. If you notice, both verses are talking about something outside of Jesus, this "fullness", dwelling in him, so neither one of them are talking about his nature.

@msparkison

11 күн бұрын

@@biblicalunitarian Thank you for taking time to offer your knowledge on this topic. I'd like to do some more reading on this, considering your response. Full disclosure, I am a trinitarian as a result of prayerfully reading the Scriptures for many years. I believe the revelation of the Trinity from the Scriptures is spiritually-discerned *from* the Scriptures. I am not a biblical scholar, but believe the Scriptures themselves reveal there is one God, yet Three who are called God. One God with a triune nature. When I read verses like Isaiah 46:9, which says, "Remember the former things long past, For I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is no one like Me," LSB; and how Yahweh says He will not give His glory to another (Isaiah 42:8), and then read in John 17:5 when Jesus (short of a command) says to the Father, "Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was." LSB, and we read of how Christ is the *exact* image/representation, even the same "substance" as God, (depending on the translation), "He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high," ESV. ASV renders char-ak-tare' as "the very image of his *substance*". If there is nothing else *like* God (says God), and He will not share or give His glory to another, yet Jesus Christ is the *exact imprint of God's nature*, and shared the glory of the Father with the Father before anything else was, doesn't that make Him God, as the Father is God? If you do not believe so, then please explain to me how someone that is not God can the *exact imprint of God's nature* when God says noone else possesses it, *and* how Jesus shared the glory of the Father with the Father before anything else was, when God says He does not give it to another. Thank you.

@biblicalunitarian

10 күн бұрын

@@msparkison I encourage you to keep looking into this topic (even if you stay Trinitarian) and I'm glad you seem to be doing it with an open mind. There is a lot to address in what you said, but I will just mention a few things you may not have noticed before. I think Isaiah 42:8 is actually one of the strongest Unitarian passages because God is speaking from the First person singular "I" not "we". If it was the three person Trinity speaking, they should have used "we". But it explicitly says there is no other God besides this singular "I", God, Yahweh, the Father. As far as John 17:5 and how Jesus had glory, notice it is not God's glory that Jesus had, but his own glory. Also, we will receive the glory that was given to Jesus, "And the glory that you have given me, I have given to them, so that they can be one, just as we are one" (John 17:22). So, I don't think this means we become part of the "Godhead" or else it would be much more than a Trinity! As far as Hebrews 1:3, I agree that Jesus represents God's nature "exactly." He is loving, patient, righteous just as God is. I simply wouldn't go so far as to say that this verses teaches that Jesus has every single quality God has, because there are other verses where Jesus is clearly different in nature from God. He is visible, whereas God is invisible, he was tempted, whereas God cannot be tempted, He died whereas God cannot die, He didn't know the hour of his return, whereas God did, I could go on but you get the point.

It would be really great of this channel had bible study videos

I have a question for you: In John 1:6, 12, 13 and 18 theos is translated as the God but in the Greek: 6, 12, 13 and 18 does not contain the definite article. Why are those verses understood as the God even though no definite article is present? Please help.

@biblicalunitarian

2 ай бұрын

The reason John 1:1c should be treated differently is that it is a different grammatical construction as compared to those other verses you cited. It is an "Anarthrous Pre-Verbal Predicate Nominative" meaning that it is a noun which occurs before the (equative) verb and does not have an article in front of it. These other examples you cited do not have an equative verb, and are not predicate nominatives. Philip Harner did a study that showed that 80% of "Anarthrous Pre-Verbal Predicate Nominatives" are qualitative, not definite like "the God". Also, often in prepositional phrases with a noun such as in John 1:6 ("from God" παρὰ θεοῦ) and John 1:13 (ἐκ θεοῦ "by/from God") the article gets left out, this does not mean that it is "a God." A helpful example to John 1:1c with a similar construction is 1 John 4:8 "God is love" (ὁ θεὸς ἀγάπη ἐστίν) which should not be translated "God is the love" or "God is a love" but simply qualitatively, that "God is love."

@QuëstionšnÅňşwęŕż

2 ай бұрын

@@biblicalunitarian actually 1 John 4:8 has the definite article "ο" before θεός and the latter part in verse 8 reads "God love is" but because we don't say that in English. Love and is; is reversed and so the English common expression "God is love" John 1:1 is speaking about the word and not God. Hence John 1:1-3 shows that: 1. The beginning began with the word. God does not have a beginning and God is from time indefinite in the past. However by saying: "in the beginning was the word" it is showing that the beginning started with the Word. Here we have the beginning of somthing, prior to the Word time itself didn't even exist! 2. John 1:1b follows up by saying that this word was with God. 3. John 1:1c follows up with that thought by saying the "και θεός εν ο λόγος" because of the prior context for the word to be God it should have read: "και ο Θεός εν ο λόγος". This is strongly required due to the context. The greek thought is conveyed through context and translation depends on context. John 1:2 is discussing again the word. It speaks of the word being in the beginning and being with God. A reiterating of John 1:1a & b. It wasn't that God had a beginning but the word is described as being in the beginning. After that beginning the word was with God. John 1:3 shows how all creation came into existence not from the word, but "through" the word. An expression that would be meaningless if the word was God. Finally: "apart from him [the word] not even one thing came into existence. The Greek word "χωρὶς" translated apart literally means separate from. Hence apart from or separate from the words own creation or beginning "not even one thing came into existence." Hence John 1:1-3 is describing somthing very distinct and clear cut especially since it cannot be said of God: in the beginning was God because God never had a beginning. John 1:1 reads in full: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god." Gods first act of creation was making an exact Representative of himself called "The Word"!

@QuëstionšnÅňşwęŕż

2 ай бұрын

@@biblicalunitarian @biblicalunitarian actually 1 John 4:8 has the definite article "ο" before θεός and the latter part in verse 8 reads "God love is" but because we don't say that in English love and is reversed to the English common expression "God is love" John 1:1 is speaking about the word and not God. Hence John 1:1-3 shows that: 1. The beginning began with the word. God does not have a beginning and God is from time indefinite in the past. However by saying: "in the beginning was the word" it is showing that the beginning started with the Word. Here we have the beginning of somthing, prior to the Word time itself didn't even exist! 2. John 1:1b follows up by saying that this word was with God. 3. John 1:1c follows up with that thought by saying the "και θεός εν ο λόγος" because of the prior context for the word to be God it should have read: "και ο Θεός εν ο λόγος". This is strongly required due to the context. The greek thought is conveyed through context and translation depends on context. John 1:2 is discussing again the word. It speaks of the word being in the beginning and being with God. A reiterating of John 1:1a & b. It wasn't that God had a beginning but the word is described as being in the beginning. After that beginning the word was with God. John 1:3 shows how all creation came into existence not from the word, but "through" the word. An expression that would be meaningless if the word was God. Finally: "apart from him [the word] not even one thing came into existence. The Greek word "χωρὶς" translated apart literally means separate from. Hence apart from or separate from the words own creation or beginning "not even one thing came into existence." Hence John 1:1-3 is describing somthing very distinct and clear cut especially since it cannot be said of God: in the beginning was God because God never had a beginning. John 1:1 reads in full: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god." Gods first act of creation was making an exact Representative of himself called "The Word"! And with this act; God also set time into motion; the beginning this began.

@QuëstionšnÅňşwęŕż

2 ай бұрын

@@biblicalunitarian @biblicalunitarian actually 1 John 4:8 has the definite article "ο" before θεός and the latter part in verse 8 reads "God love is" but because we don't say that in English: (love and is) is reversed and the English common expression "God is love". John 1:1 is speaking about the word and not God. Hence John 1:1-3 shows that: 1. The beginning began with the word. God does not have a beginning and God is from time indefinite in the past. However by saying: "in the beginning was the word" it is showing that the beginning started with the Word. Here we have the beginning of somthing, prior to the Word time itself didn't even exist! 2. John 1:1b follows up by saying that this word was with God. 3. John 1:1c follows up with that thought by saying the "και θεός εν ο λόγος" because of the prior context for the word to be God it should have read: "και ο Θεός εν ο λόγος". This is strongly required due to the context. The greek thought is conveyed through context and translation depends on context. John 1:2 is discussing again the word. It speaks of the word being in the beginning and being with God. A reiterating of John 1:1a & b. It wasn't that God had a beginning but the word is described as being in the beginning. After that beginning the word was with God. John 1:3 shows how all creation came into existence not from the word, but "through" the word. An expression that would be meaningless if the word was God. Finally: "apart from him [the word] not even one thing came into existence. The Greek word "χωρὶς" translated apart literally means separate from. Hence apart from or separate from the words own creation or beginning "not even one thing came into existence." Hence John 1:1-3 is describing somthing very distinct and clear cut especially since it cannot be said of God: in the beginning was God because God never had a beginning. John 1:1 reads in full: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god." Gods first act of creation was making an exact Representative of himself called "The Word" with this act, time itself began.

@QuëstionšnÅňşwęŕż

2 ай бұрын

@@biblicalunitarian actually 1 John 4:8 has the definite article "ο" before θεός and the latter part in verse 8 reads "God love is". John 1:1 is speaking about the word and not God. Hence John 1:1-3 shows that: 1. The beginning began with the word. God does not have a beginning and God is from time indefinite in the past. However by saying: "in the beginning was the word" it is showing that the beginning started with the Word. Here we have the beginning of somthing, prior to the Word time itself didn't even exist! 2. John 1:1b follows up by saying that this word was with God. 3. John 1:1c follows up with that thought by saying the "και θεός εν ο λόγος" because of the prior context for the word to be God it should have read: "και ο Θεός εν ο λόγος". This is strongly required due to the context. The greek thought is conveyed through context and translation depends on context. John 1:2 is discussing again the word. It speaks of the word being in the beginning and being with God. A reiterating of John 1:1a & b. It wasn't that God had a beginning but the word is described as being in the beginning. After that beginning the word was with God. John 1:3 also testifies to the above facts. Hence John 1:1-3 is describing somthing very distinct and clear cut especially since it cannot be said of God: in the beginning was God because God never had a beginning. John 1:1 reads in full: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god." Gods first act of creation was making an exact Representative of himself called "The Word" with this act, time itself began.

Where is the Holy Spirit in John 1 :1 ? This verse cannot be used as proof of a Trinity. Some translations render verse 18 as "only begotten god" which is found in the oldest manuscripts. A God who is begotten is not equal to a God who is unbegotten.

@VoiceofTruth-iv8pq

Ай бұрын

@Bible-Christian : You would not expect a Trinitarian to say anything else and at least McArthur has the decency to admit that the Trinity doctrine is not explicitly stated in any verse. Think of the import of this admission. Of the thousands of verses in the Bible, there is not a single verse that affirms God exists as three 'persons'. Indeed, the opposite is true : There are hundreds of verses that differentiate between God and Jesus. McArthur, like most Trinitarians, anachronistically read their presupposition into the biblical text rather than derive their views from the text. McArthur concedes that the reading 'only -begotten god' is found in the oldest manuscripts and fails to mention that the logos theologians of the second century and beyomd did indeed view the logos as a secondary, lesser God than the Father. Are we seriously going to argue that begotten is only metaphorical? Is God not the father of Jesus? Did he really have a human father? Trinitarians are in the habit of replacing only -begotten with the unscriptural eternally generated . What verses state that the Son was eternally generated? None!" As regards the book of Hebrews, it affirms that Jesus is the unique son of God. He is the very image of God(This is an admission that he is one other than God. ) Others are called 'God'in thre bible, but we all understand that they are God in a representational sense, not literally. How anyone can claim that an only -begotten God is equal to an unbegotten God is beyond me. How can one who died and had to be resurrected be equal to God Almighty? The purpose of the gospel was not to argue that Jesus was 'God' but as v 31 shows , to affirm that he was the promised Christ,. the Son of God. Historically and theologically, this makes him one other than God. One can believe in a pre-=existing Son of God. Indeed, this idea makes perfect sense with reference to John 1 :1. However, a Son, an only -begotten Son , is just that, one who has been begotten/ birthed/ created. This one can be with God in the beginning of man's creation and can be 'divine' or even a god. H e can be WITH God, but is not God Almighty. Jesus himself stated that he had a God. The resutrrected Jesus had a God. O(John 20 :17). The glorified Jesus in heaven itself still had a God.(Rev 3 :12). From the opening verse of Revelation, Jesus is one other than God. McArthur and others can talk about divine nature; essence. substrance etc all they like. However, this is not the language of scrirpture, but the language of platonism and this tells you everything you need to know.

How do Unitarians reconcile 2 Corinthians 5:10 and psalm 9:7?

@youngknowledgeseeker

20 күн бұрын

The New Testament authors viewpoint is that God will judge *through* a man (a human being) he has appointed. This judgement/ruling authority is even extended to us, christians, in the coming age, in the Kingdom of God (1 Corinthians 6:2-3).

I think he does give a pretty good job of explaining it.

Why Trinitarian Doctrine (TD) is so difficult to be understood? For it was born of Hellenistic philosophy (Alexandria), and developed in Roman paganism (Roman Kingdom); aka: of "Greco-Roman perspective" Sean Finnegan says.

@kardiognostesministries8150

3 ай бұрын

Because it is based on the Bible and not on human logic.

Whoever is teaching you that Jesus is not God, is telling untruth. Please research this again with an ordinary bible, and ask the Holy Spirit to show you the truth. There are plenty of verses in the bible that Jesus is God. I had trouble grasping this myself. But I can assure you that Jesus is God. One cant pick verses out of the bible like that and analyze them. You need to read whole portions of a bible that is a good translation. One good translation of the bible is the NIV. That is one you can rely on to tell the truth. We can't work this out by our own mind. We need revelation actually. You only get revelation by reading whole chapers of the bible out aloud, so so you can hear the words you are speaking. That way your spirit is picking up the truth of the Word.

@manny4fe1

9 ай бұрын

I believed that Jesus was God for over 25 years, it is popular theology, fake news. No Apostle ever taught Catholic tradition, double nature, hypostatic unión, encarnation, God man etc etc. It was all devised by the Father of lies to discredit God's testimony about his Son Yeshua who came as a 100% man to redeem humanity. Keep listening, the Holy spirit will lead you and guide you into all truth Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God; and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God; this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming, and now it is already in the world. 1 John 4:1‭-‬3 NASB1995

@ken440

9 ай бұрын

What about Col1:16 does that show Jesus is God? or Heb1:2. ?? I think you are wrong.

Hi! Thank you for giving your thoughts on John 1. I was wondering if you could give your thoughts on 1 Tim. 1:17 and why the King is called "God" ("theos") in this verse. Is "the King" here the Father? We know from Rev. 17:14 that Jesus is the "King of kings." Paul also later calls Jesus the "King of kings" in 1 Tim. 6:15. So, if the Father is "the King" in 1 Tim. 1:17, does that mean Jesus is king over the Father because Jesus is the "King of kings?" If 1 Tim. 1:17 is talking about two separate beings (i.e. "the King" and "the only God"), why is there no "and" (in Greek, the article "kai") between "the King" and "the only God"? This verse seems to either be calling Jesus "God ("theos"), or it's calling the Father "king." Can you give your perspective on this?

@abbyboat5730

6 ай бұрын

Very good question. 1 Tim 1:17 is a verse I have also been looking into recently, as to who exactly it refers to. I have read a few sources that talk about the preceding verses, and how it talks about Jesus Christ, hence reasonable to conclude that "the King" there refers to the Person of Jesus. I would, of course, love to hear his answer to this.

@biblicalunitarian

6 ай бұрын

Great question. I think 1 Tim. 1:17 is referring to God the Father for a few reasons. 1. In the very same verse Paul says that this "King of the ages" is invisible. This is only true of God the Father, not of Jesus (Col. 1:15). 2. In the very same verse Paul says that this King is immortal or incorruptible. This is only true of God the Father (1 Tim. 6:16), because Jesus died (Rom. 5:6-8). 3. In the very verse he describes this "King of the ages" as the "only God." For this to be in reference to Jesus would be almost unthinkable, because even Trinitarians will admit that Paul almost exclusively uses "God" or "Theos" in reference to the Father. So, to call Jesus the "only" theos, in exclusion to God the Father, would be unthinkable for Paul. Plus, John calls God the Father the "only God" twice (John 5:44; 17:3). Jesus and the Father cannot both be the only God. God the Father can rightly be called "King" (because he reigns over Jesus in the everlasting kingdom; 1 Cor. 15:27) or "King of the ages." Likewise, Jesus can also be called "King" or "King of Kings (as you mentioned; Rev. 17:14). The title is not exclusive to either one, because they both rule in their own right. Also, I think 1 Tim. 6:15 is referring to the Father as the "King of Kings" because just like here in 1 Tim. 1:17, He is immortal and invisible, thus, referring to the Father. Read 1 Tim. 6:15 in the REV, and see if that is helpful: www.revisedenglishversion.com/1tim/6/nav15 Since 1 Tim. 6:15 is also referring to God the Father, this would give more credence to the idea that Paul would be calling God the Father, the "King of the Ages" in 1 Tim. 1:17. Also, Paul begins 1 Tim. 1:17 with "de" or "now," which often indicates a change in subject, so it is certainly possible grammatically that he is now talking about the Father, whereas in 1 Tim. 1:16 he was talking about Christ.

@Zuungie

6 ай бұрын

@@biblicalunitarian Thanks for your reply! I appreciate the thoroughness you put into it. A couple things to note: 1 Tim. 6:16 is more likely describing Jesus as the one "possessing immortality" for a few reasons: a). Immediately before it, Paul calls the being with this characteristic as the "King of Kings" & "Lord of Lords," which is a very specific title and is exclusively reserved for Jesus in Rev. 17:14 & Rev. 19:16. If the Father, in addition to the Son, is also "King of Kings" and "Lord of Lords", are we saying that the Father and the Son can both be the King of Kings and Lord of Lords, but they both can't be "theos"? B). 1 Tim. 6:16 may also refer to Jesus because the phrase "possesses immortality" may refer to Jesus' authority to give eternal life to all those who believe in Him. (John 10:28) C). Even if we understand the phrase "possesses immortality" to mean "is immortal," this attribute still also applies to Jesus, as Paul specifically notes in Romans 6:9 that, from the point of His resurrection, Jesus has also been immortal. Regarding the use of ἄφθαρτος in 1 Tim. 1:17, since the Greek doesn't refer to the physical act of dying -- as you mention, a more literal translation would be incorruptible or unable to spoil / rot -- this adjective could also be applied to Jesus, as well. And even if we understand it as "is immortal," this still applies to Jesus because of point C above. While I agree it's not unthinkable that we could apply the term "King" to the Father, given your reference to 1 Cor. 15, this would be the only time Paul ever describes the Father as "King," and there are also no other clear references to the Father as "King" in the entire New Testament. By contrast, Jesus is referred to as "King" numerous times throughout the entire New Testament. Regarding being invisible, it's important to note that at the time of writing 1 Timothy, Jesus is also invisible, waiting to be revealed (1 Peter 1:7-8) because he currently sits at the Father's right hand, dwelling in the Father's unapproachable light (1 Tim 6:16). If we take Jesus at his word that not only is the Father in him, but that he is in the Father, that they are one (John 10:30, 38) -- especially because Jesus says this before his death & resurrection -- and we accept that "theos" (and it's Hebrew equivalent "Elohim") can potentially be a plurality, then to say there is only one "God" is still completely valid if "God" as a singular encompassing entity that is made up of multiple beings that include the Father and the Son. To give a crude metaphor, the United States is one country (i.e. "God") made up of multiple states ("the Father," "Jesus," etc.). Or better yet, my son and I are different people, but we are one family, having one surname. It's also important to note that John 5:44 does not explicitly state the Father is the only God, and John 17:3 describes the Father as the only "true" God, not specifically the only God. This word "true" is the Greek word ἀληθινός and is also given to Jesus in John 1:9.

@biblicalunitarian

6 ай бұрын

Sorry, I don't have time to reply to everything, but I will try to the pertinent points. Yes, "king of Kings" can apply to Jesus (Rev. 17:14) and God (1 Tim. 6:15), because it also is a title given to Artaxerxes (Ezra 7:12) and Nebuchadnezzar (Ezek. 26:7; Dan. 2:37). It is not a title given to only one person. As to your point about Jesus being called "invisible" I would have to strongly disagree. Do you see how this may be a stretch in exegesis because you really want 1 Tim. 1:17 to be referring to Jesus? People saw him after his resurrection many times (1 Cor. 15:6; John 20:27). He has a spiritual body (1 Cor. 15:44), thus we have clear biblical evidence that he is not invisible. Also, if Jesus is the "only" God here in 1 Tim. 1:17, then that means that the Father and the Spirit are not part of God, "only" completely looses any value as a word. But we know that the Father is called the only true God (John 17:3), so how can you have two beings called the "only God?" Also, if Jesus is the only God, how does he "have a God" himself? This is what he explicitly says in John 20:17. That would make two Gods. I would ask you to try taking off any Trinitarian glasses and see if maybe the Bible isn't asking us to reconcile these contradictions that occur within a Trinitarian framework. Maybe there is just one true God, the Father. To your point that John 5:44 isn't calling the Father the only God, that is explicitly what it says. Who do you think is being called "only God" there?

@Zuungie

6 ай бұрын

@@biblicalunitarian Hi, Thanks for your reply! I truly appreciate your conviction for what you believe regarding 1 Tim. 1:17 & 1 Tim. 6:16. It means a lot to me that you're taking the time to engage in discussion on these issues. How I reached the conclusion that these two verses in question could apply to Jesus is based on the text. To be clear, I'm not saying that either verse certainly refers to the Father or to Jesus; I'm rather just examining the evidence the way an investigator would and thus not closing any doors because the verses "have to be the Father" or "have to be Jesus," based on the position of any particular doctrine. Given the other epistles from Paul & Peter, the Bible clearly tells us that Jesus is both immortal and (at least for now) invisible. This doesn't mean that Jesus was always invisible, or always will be, because the text plainly tells us he was seen before ascending to the Father. But, that Jesus was seen after the resurrection but before ascending to be with the Father doesn't negate his invisibility at the time of the writing of the epistles, since he had already ascended to the Father. If Peter didn't stress Jesus' invisibility, and if Jesus didn't stress it himself in Matt. 23:39 and John 16:16, I would likely agree with your perspective that only the Father is invisible. But, the text doesn't allow me to do that. Again, this doesn't mean these verses in 1 Tim. are necessarily referring to Jesus, as we must also consider that the same attributes can apply to the Father, as well. This brings me back to pondering what it truly means for not only the Father to be in Jesus, but for Jesus to be in the Father, if we take Jesus at his word that they are, in fact, one. For me, I'm not concerned with the Trinitarian doctrine, nor the Unitarian doctrine, nor really any other doctrine. I'm only concerned with what the text says. All this to say, I appreciate the Unitarian perspective of this channel, as it presents an alternative view to the mainstream church, and it helps me examine the text from multiple angles to help me get the most well-rounded view of Scripture possible. I'm also sensitive to the fact that the Unitarian doctrine needs these two verses from 1 Tim. to apply to the Father, or else Jesus would then be directly referred to as "theos," and thus much of the Unitarian doctrine would then come into question. So, if these verses do refer solely to the Father, then that definitely helps the Unitarians' case. I don't mean to frustrate you by examining a viewpoint that is counter to yours, as I know you've put a lot of time & energy into your videos and developing your point of view. But unfortunately, the text in these two verses is not clearly referring to the Father, nor is it clearly referring to Jesus. This is why we need to view Scripture holistically and not skip any parts, if we believe the Bible is true. My reasoning for Jesus being an option in 1 Tim. 1:17 goes like this (using all the Scripture I've previously referenced above in this thread): 1. Who is generally referred to as "King" in the New Testament, The Father or Jesus? Jesus. Outside of these two verses in question, no other New Testament verses seem to give the Father the title of "king." 2. Who is eternal? Definitely the Father, and potentially Jesus, as we know he at least preceded creation, and we know he will never die again. 3. Who is invisible? Definitely the Father, and (as of the time of writing the epistle), Jesus. 4. Who is the only God? If "theos" is strictly singular here, the Father. If "theos" can be plural here, Jesus + Father could also be an option. If Jesus & the Father are literally one (if that's what Jesus means when he says it), then the adjective "only" is completely valid for the phrase "only God." To refer back to my crude comparison, there is only one United States. It is the only United States. Can I see an argument for these verses referring to the Father? Absolutely. Can I see an argument for them referring to Jesus? Absolutely. Regarding the title "King of Kings and Lord of Lords," while it's fair to bring up Artaxerxes and Nebuchadnezzer because they are indeed called "king of kings," it should be noted that neither of them are called "lord of lords." Furthermore, since the title "king of kings" in these examples are again referring to men and not the Father, this is another reason we shouldn't jump to the conclusion that 1 Tim. 6:16 refers to the Father.

Philo of Alexander speaks in the same manner as John and like John he talks of the Word. Philo, being a Jew like John, is a strict monotheist and he doesn't mean the word is the deity God. Both John and Philo are speaking to the same audience in a way that audience comprehends.

@hjc1402

4 ай бұрын

Philo was a binitarian and believed the Word is the second person of God, he did believe the Word is the creating deity.

@kerwinbrown4180

4 ай бұрын

@@hjc1402 I hadn't heard that claim. What I heard was a Jew. Thanks for the information.

@hjc1402

4 ай бұрын

@@kerwinbrown4180 oh okay, binitarians hold a belief about the person of God- they believe there are two divine persons of the one God YHWH, like how Unitarians believe there is one divine person and trinitarians believe there are three divine persons. You can look up about “the two powers in heaven”. This was a theological sect of Judaism. Many Jews up until the time of Jesus were binitarians. Some tried to identify who this second person of YHWH was like Philo who identified him as the Word (or logos) of God. And then of course Christians identify that Word to be Jesus. What makes this different than trinitarians is that we also identify the Holy Spirit as a divine person of the one God YHWH. I personally am not sure if binitarians considered the Holy Spirit to not be a separate person from the Father or if he was not considered divine as being why they were binitarians rather than trinitarians.

There is a religion here and they call themselves by the acronym MCGI believe that Jesus is God because He is the son of God and secondly in John 1 said.. the word (Jesus) was with God, and the word (Jesus) was God.

I believe that this scripture has been tampered with by a party who wanted to promote the trinity.

@hjc1402

4 ай бұрын

At least you admit that it clearly teaches the Trinity and creates major problems for Unitarianism, but now there’s the problem for you that there’s no evidence this was tampered with and the passage is in the earliest manuscripts.

Revelation 19:13 Jesus is named "The word of God" if the Word was with God, it clearly shows to disctinct individuals which is why some translations say "Divine"

You can't compare God to earthly metaphor because he created everything

The verse the Word was God clearly says that Jesus is God or at least was God or use to be God. Because in verse 14 it says the Word became flesh. So Jesus while he was here on Earth he left his divine being as God to become human. He is God in the flesh. Meaning God became human.

At first, I did not understand John Chapter 1, but when the Lord saved me and gave me the Holy Ghost, He opened up my understanding. Even in Genesis, let us make man our image after our likeness..

The sad thing about this religion is it is false and Christians are not supposed to have anything to do with them. Timothy talked about this. Having a form of godliness but denying the power. (The power of Jesus who claimed to be God) Have nothing to do with such people. Always learning, never able to come to the truth. Are their saved people in this religion, I believe there is but they are preaching a gospel that is not the one Jesus or the apostles preached. Disclaimer. I am not a teacher because they are judged more harshly, also do not call anyone teacher, father, instructor because the is only one and he is in heaven.

Excellent !!

God is ALWAYS A NEVER CHANGING INVISIBLE HOLY SPIIRT GHOST because God is INVISIBLE He has His Words WITHIN His INVISIBLE SELF , that’s how God could SPEAK the world into Existence & we could HEAR Him Because He is the INVISIBLE WORD ! Amen ❤ That’s how I see The INVISIBLE LORD God ALMIGHTY A INVISIBLE LORD God with words inside His INVISIBLE Holy Spirit GHOST ! So yes God is the WORD , & in Revelation : Jesus Christ has a New NAME , He is now ( CALLED ) The WORD ( OF ) God Because He Spoke ALL that His Father commanded Him PERFECTLY & Jesus Christ CAME in His Father’s NAME REPRESENTING Him !

hope you enable Subtitle or Caption for those who are Deaf who want to know about the God and Father of Our Lord Jesus Christ. Isaiah 29:18 On that day, the deaf will hear the words from a book, and out of gloom and darkness the eyes of the blind will see.

Good afternoon! Thanks for the content. Proponents of the trinitarian dogma claim that it helps us to better know and understand God as He is. Here is a quote from a trinitarian article: "The Apostle John the Theologian owns a well-known phrase: God is love (1 John 4:8), but it becomes understandable only in the context of the Christian revelation of God as a Trinity. Love is always a relationship between several people. If God were an absolute Unit, He could not be called love. But even if the Lord were a "Twofold", we would hardly be able to find out that He is love: after all, two people's relationships risk closing on each other, and it can be extremely difficult to penetrate them from the outside." What can I say to that?

@biblicalunitarian

7 ай бұрын

Great question, this is a commonly put forward argument which has no basis in scripture. There is nothing in scripture that makes this kind of argument that you must have an object to love or else you are not really loving. I think it is very possible to have a quality without expressing it yet. You can be patient without having an opportunity to express it, and when you do have an opportunity, you express it. This does not mean that you were not a patient person beforehand. The same goes for God being loving, just because he did not yet have an object for love, does not mean he did not have that quality. Also, this discussion ventures into the concept of time and eternity, what if "time" really wasn't a concept before God created the world? Then the argument wouldn't work either. Lastly, as I mentioned in the video, God is love (1 John 4:8) does not mean God = love, or love = God, just as 1 John 1:5 does not mean God = light, these are qualitative statements in the Greek construction, all three of these places have the same construction: the Word was God, God is light, and God is love; and none of them should be taken to mean "=".

@abbyboat5730

6 ай бұрын

@@biblicalunitarian I have a few questions from your video, if you don't mind: You said it's up for debate that "The Word" can be understood to refer to Jesus; but how is this possible? The text says "The Word became flesh and tabernacled among us", and then went on to say He was full of Glory as of the Only Son from the Father. Is this not pretty clear that The Word refers to the Son? You also said, "The Word embodies God" would be a better understanding of the last phrase in John 1:1. But what exactly do you mean by that? If Jesus embodies and explains God in the perfect sense, how could He be less than "God"? I mean this in the "what God was, the Word was" sense. If that is true, how could the Word be something that God was not, before the Word became flesh? You also referred to Jesus as the Son of God, but what exactly do you mean by that? Son, in what sense? In the same sense as humans and/or angels created by God? If yes, how is Jesus the "ONLY Son" then, as the Bible writers repeatedly call Him? But if you think He's more than humans or angels and unique as a Son, what do you mean by that? Do you think The Word (Jesus) was created? John 1:3 says ALL THINGS came into existence through Him, and whatever was made, was made through the Word. Colossians 1:15-17 also seems to reinforce this idea. Does this not mean that The Word is Uncreated? I do hope you answer my questions, as I recently started looking into Unitarianism. Thanks.

@user-cu9cj5jn3e

6 ай бұрын

@@abbyboat5730these don’t really answer your questions, but if you are looking into Biblical Unitarianism I strongly suggest reading Isaac Newton’s “An Historical Account of Two Notable Corruptions of Scripture.” It’s free on Google books, you can just search the title on Google and it will pop up. It’s a good read and may help illuminate the origins of trinitarian thought from one of history’s most famous Unitarian Christians: Isaac Newton!

@priscillajervey8345

6 ай бұрын

Another trinitarian proof text!!! I've heard my pastor use this one to prove a trinity. Just consider : What if a wonderful, loving person was stranded on a desert Island all alone would that make him less loving, would that alter his basic personality of being a good and loving person?? Being a loving person is an attribute, a personality trait. GOD IS LOVE!!! By the way God had millions/billions of an angelist hosts to love. What a silly and weak proof-text!

@user-qo8lv8hp8c

6 ай бұрын

Hi! Thank you. This is a great illustrative example. The same can be said about a single man who has never been married and has not become a father. This, of course, does not make him selfish. Especially if he is determined to get married and become a loving dad. He has not yet met his only life partner. But he is already preparing for this event. He gets a good education to find a decent job, changes his character to become a caring and loving head of the family, and so on. Indeed, the evidence for Trinitarianism is very weak.

0:58 ​@QuestionsnAnswersify the instance of "ho theos," "The God" in John 1:1b, but no article in John 1:1c

Thank you do much for explaining that.☺️

It’s a strange coincidence to see this video was posted recently as I studied John 1 and came to a similar conclusion. Actually I feel we need to go a step further because it appears to me that the Prolog doesn’t actually speak about Jesus but the Logos and that it’s a mistake to identify Jesus with the Logos. The Logos only manifested in Jesus when the Spirit descended on him. Ancient texts say that at this moment the voice from heaven said “You are my son, today I have begotten you”. I believe that when the church became legalised in the fourth century the church fathers involved with compiling the first New Testament canon did some minor adjustments to the gospels and letters to make Jesus more appealing to a Roman world and removed anything that could offend the Roman aristocrats, especially the emperor who still was worshiping Sol Invictus but also believed that Jesus was the same God. A virgin birth was considered necessary for Romans to accept the new religion and the church fathers might have felt that it was a minor trade off (considering the alternative) to slightly alter scriptures to reshape the image of Jesus into that of a cesar, a king, that Romans would accept worthy of worship. They also compromised with passages like the crucifixion, shifting the blame from the Romans to the Jews. Jews already had a bad reputation in the Roman Empire and if it meant to have Christianity now accepted as a state religion with the full support of the emperor, it must have felt that a little compromise was worth to be able to live out the Christian Faith without persecution. We do know that the virgin birth was likely a later addition because one of the oldest Coptic manuscript of the gospel of Matthew still has Joseph being the real father of Jesus.

@manifestemanifeste8148

16 күн бұрын

Isaiah 9:6 (NIV). Prophecy about Jesus.

In 2:25, instead of “Johnny was with Tom and Johnny was Tom”, it would make better sense if you think of it as “Johnny was with human (Tom is human in nature) and Johnny was human”.

No man has seen God at anytime. But certainly many seen the Son again showing the vital distinction. Thank you for sharing.

@davidrexford586

7 ай бұрын

Do you know John 14 v8-9 where Jesus declares that if you have seen me you have seen the father?? And remember Jesus did forgive sin and the only way that could have occurred is if Jesus was thy God in the flesh.

@dougybass3459

6 ай бұрын

​@davidrexford586 ~ Yeshua we are told in scripture was the 'image' of the invisible God & "the exact representation of His nature" If I see an image of the Mona Lisa, then I have seen the Mona Lisa & know what it looks like. It doesn't mean the image I've seen, is the Mona Lisa itself! Also, Yeshua never forgave sins himself...he told people their sins were forgiven. A big difference. You & me can also tell people their sins are forgiven...because we already know that if they have confessed their sins before God - He is faithful & just to forgive them.

@davidrexford586

6 ай бұрын

@@dougybass3459that’s your OWN opinion.. Jesus did forgive sins .. you just REFUSE to acknowledge it. And you obviously don’t understand what happened when Jesus ROSE from the grave and could a mere mortal have done this?? You don’t know as much as you think you do..

@davidrexford586

6 ай бұрын

⁠​⁠@@dougybass3459and here is something also to consider.. If Jesus told Pontius Pilate that he wasn’t the great I AM , would he have been crucified?? Thy Lord was put on the cross because he claimed to be God and he wouldn’t have been crucified if thy Lord said he was not thy Lord. It’s not that difficult to understand.

@dougybass3459

6 ай бұрын

@davidrexford586 ~ Tell me the scripture where he says "I forgive your sins" then. 🤷‍♂️ And of course a mere mortal can rise from the dead...when it is God himself who raises him. Yeshua was the first fruit of the dead & all us mere mortal children of God will rise from the dead at the final resurrection! Yeshua was crucified for claiming to be the 'Son of God' & the Jewish Messiah...not YHWH himself! His 'crime' was even written on the cross! If you seriously believe that our Immortal creator can be put to death on a cross, then you have a very strange idea of who God is.

Cults don't believe that Jesus God in the flesh is going to hell!

0:09 hebrews 1:8 but unto the Son He saith, “Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever; a scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Thy Kingdom. God the father recognized Jesus as God

@briant7951

Ай бұрын

😮

@biblicalunitarian

Ай бұрын

If Hebrews 1:8 makes Jesus God, then it also makes Solomon God. It was originally spoken to an Israelite King in Psalm 45:6 who had a wife (Psa. 45:9). So it was not originally about Jesus, but later found a second fulfillment in Jesus.

@timothytmusgrove

Ай бұрын

@@biblicalunitarian The consensus of scholars is this Psalm does not apply to King Solomon because he was not a warrior King. The language is Messianic because a forever Kingdom will be established through the Messiah. Well, THROUGH Christ Jesus (the WORD OF GOD) all things came into being. John 1: 3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. So the entirety of scripture will always point to HIM. 2 Timothy 3:10 Now you followed my teaching, conduct, purpose, faith, patience, love, perseverance, 11 persecutions, and sufferings, such as happened to me at Antioch, at Iconium and at Lystra; what persecutions I endured, and out of them all the Lord rescued me! 12 Indeed, all who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will be persecuted. 13 But evil men and impostors will proceed from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived. 14 You, however, continue in the things you have learned and become convinced of, knowing from whom you have learned them, 𝟏𝟓 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐜𝐡𝐢𝐥𝐝𝐡𝐨𝐨𝐝 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐤𝐧𝐨𝐰𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐚𝐜𝐫𝐞𝐝 𝐰𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐬 𝐰𝐡𝐢𝐜𝐡 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐠𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐢𝐬𝐝𝐨𝐦 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐬 𝐭𝐨 𝐬𝐚𝐥𝐯𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐫𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡 𝐟𝐚𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐰𝐡𝐢𝐜𝐡 𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐂𝐡𝐫𝐢𝐬𝐭 𝐉𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐬. 𝟏𝟔 𝐀𝐥𝐥 𝐒𝐜𝐫𝐢𝐩𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐧𝐬𝐩𝐢𝐫𝐞𝐝 𝐛𝐲 𝐆𝐨𝐝 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐟𝐢𝐭𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐞𝐚𝐜𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠, 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐫𝐞𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐨𝐟, 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐜𝐨𝐫𝐫𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧, 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐢𝐧 𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭𝐞𝐨𝐮𝐬𝐧𝐞𝐬𝐬; 17 so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work. Jeremiah 23:6 “In His days Judah will be saved, And Israel will dwell securely; And this is His name by which He will be called, ‘The Lord our righteousness.’ Matthew 633 But seek first His kingdom and His righteousness, and all these things will be added to you.

If the trinity is correct, then it does make sense that the Word (second person) was both God and with God. I am learning Greek and not an expert, but in the phrase in verse 1b, both God (theos) and the Word (logos) are in the nominative case and so both are subjects. Apparently, in this Greek device the latter is read first (the Word) and the former (God) is read last. The definite article is implied in this grammar rule.

You’d think if it was God that turned into man he would say things like I’ve come down from heaven. I am here in physical form. In short he would make it obvious just like he makes it obvious when he says I sent my “son” My son may look like my husband but he is not my husband 🤷🏻‍♀️

I'm really surprised you didn't talk about the alef tav OR Elohim from Gen 1:1. While I think your logic is fine, it is in particular arguing Greek grammar in English, which isn't a terribly influential argument, when contrasted against the weight from the original mention in the alef tav and Elohim in Gen 1:1 where Yohanan is quoting from.

A great explanation in such a short time. I have used it for years. But as they say, " you can lead a horse to water...." The verse cannot be used to prove a Trinity because no third person is mentioned.

@servus_jesu_christi

3 ай бұрын

“Then God said, “Let us make human beings in our image, to be like us. They will reign over the fish in the sea, the birds in the sky, the livestock, all the wild animals on the earth, and the small animals that scurry along the ground.”” ‭‭Genesis‬ ‭1‬:‭26‬ ‭ “Christ is the visible image of the invisible God. He existed before anything was created and is supreme over all creation, for through him God created everything in the heavenly realms and on earth. He made the things we can see and the things we can’t see- such as thrones, kingdoms, rulers, and authorities in the unseen world. Everything was created through him and for him. He existed before anything else, and he holds all creation together.” ‭‭Colossians‬ ‭1‬:‭15‬-‭17‬ ‭ “And when he brought his supreme Son into the world, God said, “Let all of God’s angels worship him.”” ‭‭Hebrews‬ ‭1‬:‭6‬ ‭ “But to the Son he says, “Your throne, O God, endures forever and ever. You rule with a scepter of justice. You love justice and hate evil. Therefore, O God, your God has anointed you, pouring out the oil of joy on you more than on anyone else.” He also says to the Son, “In the beginning, Lord, you laid the foundation of the earth and made the heavens with your hands. They will perish, but you remain forever. They will wear out like old clothing. You will fold them up like a cloak and discard them like old clothing. But you are always the same; you will live forever.”” ‭‭Hebrews‬ ‭1‬:‭8‬-‭12‬ ‭

@manifestemanifeste8148

16 күн бұрын

Isaiah 9:6 (NIV). Prophecy about Jesus. Jesus is Called Mighty God, Everlasting Father.

@JosephSmith-ph4xr

7 сағат бұрын

@@manifestemanifeste8148 : It is indeed a messianic prophecy used by Christians to demonstrate the virgin birth. However, the words in Isaiah were originally applied to a Hebrew King and he was given the titles. Do you believe the King was literally 'God'? The term 'God' in the Bible has a range of meanings (look up lexicons or Bible dictionaries). It can range from The Almighty Creator to simply mighty one.. As such, the term God is applied in the bible to Moses; Hebrew Kings; Judges; Angels - even the devil. The prophecy of Isaiah was used by Christians as evidence of the virgin birth of the messiah. The verse is also problemaric for Trinitarian Christians as in the doctrine of the Trinity, the person of the Father is not the person of the Son and thus calling the Son of God "Everlasting Father " is heretical. Therefore, although this passage in isaiah can be used to affirm the messiahship of Jesus, an understanding of the historical context and biblical use of language helps us to see that it cannot be used as proof of ther deity of the thre Son of God, except in a representational sense.

What is the REV translation......

@biblicalunitarian

9 ай бұрын

The Bible Translation produced by Spirit & Truth, you can check it out here: www.revisedenglishversion.com/

@thecalling6122

4 ай бұрын

It is a grossly unbiblical modern perversion of the original Bible.

Great work. Have never believed in the trinity. Why would the perfect creator come to Earth and allow himself ro be humiliated, spat on, belittled, whipped and then crucified by imperfect humans? He wouldn't. And if Christianity is against Catholic doctrine, why accept the Catholic doctrine of the Trinity? You wouldn't. Great video.

There may be some confusion as a result of the way the word "God" is used in modern times. If we say that Jesus is both God and man, we do not necessarily mean that he is a particular "God" or a particular "man", or even that he is the "supreme being", but perhaps that he has the natures of both God and man. Again, as you mentioned, a qualitative meaning. And yet at other times people use God as if it's a first name, but in my mind they are generally referring to the Father.

@xxxViceroyxxx

4 ай бұрын

two nature jesus halfway died

@danparks8290

4 ай бұрын

@@xxxViceroyxxx Jesus' body fully died but he was made alive in the spirit through whom he preached to spirits in prison. "put to death in the body".

@xxxViceroyxxx

4 ай бұрын

@@danparks8290 so a body died but the man Jesus did not?

@danparks8290

4 ай бұрын

@@xxxViceroyxxx Well does a person's spirit die when their body dies? A man may be body, soul and spirit but does the entire man die when the "man" dies?

@priscillajervey8345

Ай бұрын

At the council of Chalcedon in 451 it was determined that Jesus was both God and man, the God-man 100% both. However at the council of Nicea i 325 CE the council decided Jesus was God, then in 381 at the council of Constanople the holy spirit was added thus the three-in-one Trinity. Check it out!!

Bingo!!

I challenge anyone to go into the bible and find a verse that says "God is one Person"

@biblicalunitarian

4 ай бұрын

There is no verse that says that God is one "person" because God is not a person, and that is philosophical language modern Trinitarians have concocted to have "one God in Three persons." Yet, there are many verses which call God "one" (Deut. 6:4; John 17:3; 1 Cor. 8:6) and that there is no other God (Isa. 44:6). Remember in Isaiah 44:6 he says, "I AM the first and the last" not "WE are the First and the Last" so, this is not multiple "persons" in a Trinity speaking, this is one "person", God the Father. There is no verse which describes God as "three" in any sense. Not "three-in-one," not "Father Son, and Holy Spirit," not "three," not "three persons." I'm afraid your challenge seems to work much worse for the Trinitarian.

@sameerchalhoub9785

3 ай бұрын

​@@biblicalunitarian 1st john 5 verse 7 because here you are specifically told that father son and spirit are one

@biblicalunitarian

3 ай бұрын

1 John 5:7 is a later forgery, and that is why it is not included in almost all modern Bibles.

@sameerchalhoub9785

3 ай бұрын

@@biblicalunitarian completely untrue, the early church fathers ALL preached that father son and spirit are one and used 1st john as the basis for the teaching, historical evidence disagrees with you my friend, the verse is too clear with its teaching and you can provide no argument against or around it, therefore to preserve what you believe you Have to deny the verse altogether, which is very common among all denominations of Unitarians

@michaelbruce9197

2 ай бұрын

The Bible says God is a spirit, and only found an unapproachable light

We all have the kingdom within us, and it is written that we are gods. We are not the most high God, but we are divine just like Jesus the inner man is perfect.