Garbage

I don't understand everything you say, but what I do know is that God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost are 3 persons in one. I also know, that this God in 3 persons was not created or born. So....God the Son always was and is and therefore was not born from a woman or created by something else. The Lord Jesus Christ is God. The man Jesus Christ the savior is born from a woman.

I'm having difficulty understanding the difference between hypostasis and mode.

Jesus never referred to Himself as the Father; He clearly identified Himself as the Son of God. The doctrine of the Trinity is a man-made concept. We need to stop imposing our own philosophical views on the Bible in an attempt to understand the Most High.

Po Where in Scripture is this concept of "hypostasis" TAUGHT by any Biblical Author? Are we to believe this "hypostasis" concept about God as true simply because the TERM is explained by an Apologist? The answer is no. Are we to believe this "hypostasis" concept about God simply because the "fathers" formulated the concept? No. If neither Moses, nor any Prophet, nor Jesus, nor any Apostle, TAUGHT "hypostasis", then why should we believe such a concept? We shouldn't.

billions of years of evolution? 0 credibility. bye

He is not 3 beings.

Brilliant video. You are a gift to the Body.

Dear Teacher. Can you please mind answering a objection/concern i have with the Trinity? (Thanks incase you do!):If The Father is both materially and formally identical to the Divine Essence that any Characteristic of The Father is a Characteristic of The Divine Essence. This would mean that the Divine Essence has the Characteristic of being „the Eternal Begetter“ this would mean that the Son/Holy Spirit can‘t be identical to the Divine Essence because they dont have every Characteristic of the Divine Essence(being „the Eternal Begetter“). This would mean that only one Hypostasis of the Trinity can be completely identical to the Divine Essence. Wich would go against the Trinity‘s teachings

The hypostatic union is just a scapegoat for the absurd Trinity doctrine. I was Trinitarian for 40+ years until I started asking disturbing questions. The early church started being corrupt even in Paul's time. The apostles' epistles were written to stem this onslaught of false doctrines which were trying to break the true church away from the apostles teachings. Tertullian was of the first influencers to bring the stupid doctrine of three gods in one using purely dogmatic statements with no reasoning. He did not understand the deity of Christ, or the makeup of God, so he and others who followed after his ridiculous claims started the evolution of false doctrine. And by the 6th century the Trinity was recognised as a central teaching. Truth never evolves; only lies do. If one doesn't understand a doctrine (as in God is One) then move on or dive into study to get the understanding. But if vanity gets in the way (as was the case in most of the leaders of the early church) then you are off on the wrong path. Here is the Bible's teaching of the one God as the apostles taught it: removingveils.com/how-is-jesus-god/ removingveils.com/fully-man-and-fully-god-can-jesus-be-both/

Excelent.

So, the trinity doctrine was derived by the "church fathers," not Scripture.

He believes will rise again

This is why I prefer #Triunity to trinity: tri-hypostasis unity: YHWH ELOHIM

I guess hezekiah was a heretic.

Thank you for this lesson it is still infiltrating the church. Particularly JW's

Since when did the early Christians not believe in creation as describe in the Holy Scriptures? If they were wrong about Creation then why should they be believed on other subjects? You don't believe Jesus? Mar_10:6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. Or Paul: Rom_1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: If God can't create and be relied on to be truthful about it in the Bible, what's the point in debating the nature of Jesus? like the Greeks of old human reasoning leads to error; just take God at His Word.

Except that there is no god or sin.

Yes historical theology is interesting …So what is a christology for today that is not based on outmoded Greek philosophy?

👉👉👉REVELATION 5:8 The prayers of the saints are offered to Jesus the lamb. The intercession of the saints is valid and biblical. The protestant "reformers", ...not so much

👉👉👉Sacred Images are Biblical & mocking & destroying them is a serious sin, an act of blasphemy: ➨ SACRED IMAGES IN THE BIBLE: Sacred images are not idols and it is an act of blasphemy to attack them: ● EXODUS 25:18-22 God commands Moses to make STATUES of Angels. ● NUMBERS 21:8-9 God commands another image to be made, a serpent. ● EZEKIEL 41:18-25 KJV ➔ EZEKIEL's VISION OF THE TEMPLE OF THE LORD ADORNED WITH CARVED IMAGES: ... 18 And it was made with CHERUBIMS (ANGELS) and PALM TREES, so that a palm tree was between a CHERUB and EVERY CHERUB HAD TWO FACES; 19 So that the FACE OF A MAN was toward the PALM TREE on the one side, and the FACE OF A LION toward the PALM TREE on the other side: it was made through all the house round about. 20 From the ground unto above the door were CHERUBIMS (ANGELS) and PALM TREES made, and on the wall of the temple. 21 The posts of the temple were squared, and the face of the sanctuary; the appearance of the one as the appearance of the other. 22 The altar of wood was three cubits high, and the length thereof two cubits; and the corners thereof, and the length thereof, and the walls thereof, were of wood: and he said unto me, This is the table that is before the Lord. 23 And the temple and the sanctuary had two doors. 24 And the doors had two LEAVES apiece, two turning leaves; two leaves for the one door, and two leaves for the other door. 25 And there were made on them, on the doors of the temple, CHERUBIMS and PALM TREES, like as were made upon the walls; and there were thick planks upon the face of the porch without. ● 1 KINGS 6:23... ➔ CARVED IMAGES OF CHERUBIM (Angels) LIONS AND OTHER IMAGES IN KING SOLOMION"S TEMPLE: \ 23 For the inner sanctuary he made a pair of CHERUBIM (Angels) out of olive wood, each ten cubits high. 24 One wing of the first cherub was five cubits long, and the other wing five cubits-ten cubits from wing tip to wing tip. 25 The second cherub also measured ten cubits, for the two cherubim were identical in size and shape. 26 The height of each cherub was ten cubits. 27 He placed the cherubim inside the innermost room of the temple, with their wings spread out. The wing of one cherub touched one wall, while the wing of the other touched the other wall, and their wings touched each other in the middle of the room. 28 He overlaid the cherubim with gold. 29 On the walls all around the temple, in both the inner and outer rooms, he carved cherubim, palm trees and open flowers. 30 He also covered the floors of both the inner and outer rooms of the temple with gold. ➨ BOWING as a sign of honour / respect: ● JOSHUA 7:6: 6 Joshua & the elders of Israel tore their clothing and lay prostrate (face down on the ground) before the Ark of the Lord. (an OBJECT) ●1 KINGS 2:19 Solomon bows to his Mother. (a human being) ● LUKE 24:4 4 As they were at a loss what to make of it all, suddenly two men in shining clothes stood beside them. 5 The women were terrified, and bowed their faces towards the ground ● JOSHUA 5:13-15 13 Now when Joshua was near Jericho, he looked up and saw a man standing in front of him with a drawn sword in his hand. Joshua went up to him and asked, “Are you for us or for our enemies?” 14 “Neither,” he replied, “but as commander of the army of the Lord I have now come.” Then Joshua fell FACE DOWN TO THE GROUND in reverence, and asked him, “What message does my Lord[a] have for his servant?” 15 The commander of the Lord’s army replied, “Take off your sandals, for the place where you are standing is holy.” And Joshua did so. wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww

my issue is the proposition that sin is not part of human nature. i dont buy that. It is human to err as Shakespeare wrote. To say that sin is not part of human nature is a cop out. We sin, but we persevere by the grace of God.

Pure schizophrenia, and nothing to do with improving ourselves, or our relationship with other people or our planet. Read Tao Te Ching, Marcus Aurelius, or The Prophet by Khalil Gibran for more meaningful content

What law does he change? Doesn’t he say not one jot or tittle will pass away from the law?

It was going fine until you got your nose too close into my face 🤢

Arius's doctrine was very similar to Islam. As Muslims, we believe that the fabrications about Jesus began in 325 at the Council of Nicae

Hi there, very informative.

How could God be crucified? Jesus is the of God. Believe in the sonship of Jesus is the foundation of salvation. Any explanation that Jesus is God is unorthodox or biblical. The pharisees were in error because they didn't understand the power or the word of God and so it is today.

This video is so good it's crazy

One ousia; that is one being. Not three beings but three persons.

Christos truly has a beginning in soul, mind, and body. YHWH has no beginning. There are not tria prosopa in the ousia of YHWH. There are duo prosopa in the ousia of Christos. YHWH manifests (His prosopon) through Christos, but they are not the same ousia. The father and I are one (in Will and Love). Compare this to John 17:22-23

For those that seem to follow Arius’s heresy, please check out Chuck Missler’s teaching on Genesis 5

Barukh KhaShem Alaha d'Ashuraye Khaya Ekhad. Khayet Omtan Ashureta, Nestorneta-Hudeta, o Khaya Lishanan Ashuraya.

Arius was a true god is one and not a trinity

5:32, brother I thought you knew better than that!

This is all trash talking with no single sense of logic at all.

Very clear summary of the orthodox position on the understanding of how God saves us. But in this historically accepted explanation God is angry with us, but he does not forgive us because he must be just and if the human being sinned although he loves us very much he must punish us, but he does not want to punish us for that reason he becomes flesh in Jesus Christ to punish himself by letting himself be killed by sinners to later resurrect and then after the sinners killed him he can now forgive them and show his love and mercy.......... This is schizophrenic. Anselmo and his interpretation of Sin is ridiculous and worse that we still believe this position.

🦧

So after listening to this dude, I believe in Nestorianism as the most true doctrine of Christ.

Icons are a heretodox practice

He cannot be inferior to God? when Jesus said My father is greater than I?

To bad for you the early Christians did not practice this at all

GOD ALSO SAID ADAM WAS HIS SON. GOD ALSO CREATED ADAM IN HIS LIKENESS. SO, DOES THAT MAKE ADAM A GODMAN? SOUNDS LIKE GREEK MYTH. ZUES , THE CREATOR OF EARTH AND ALL THINGS. HERCULES IS HIS SON, WHO WAS MAN ON EARTH AND WENT THROUGH MANY TRIALS AND TRIBULATIONS AND FINALLY BECAME A GODMAN AND WENT TO HEAVEN ( MT OLYMPUS IN GREEK HEAVEN). I THINK GREEKS AND ROMANS COULD RELATE AND CONVERT TO CHRISTIANITY IF THERE WAS 3 GODS IN 1.

The point about Jesus not being able to satisfy God in only his flesh is kinda stupid. Jesus had no Adam’s sin, and came in the likeness of sinful flesh, but without sin. And he did what Adam did not even though he was tempted like we are. So when he compares Jesus to our nature, that’s stupid.

Jesus isn't god it's obvious to anyone paying attention, mad world

Flawed logic : So because in the bible there are passages showing Jesus subordinate to the Father && other passages showing Jesus fully equal to the Father => we conclude Jesus is actually equal to the Father ?! What kind of logical person accepts that ? History is written by the victorius... Arius was way close to logic than Athanasius.

👍

Also Jesus took the penalty for us In a way of the Scapegoat

Jesus took sin onto Himseif The fact that Sin gave God the death penalty killed the power of Sin because the unjustness of it broke its power

Thank you so much! This was a beautiful explanation