Many Trinitarians Commit This Fallacy

[@GamingLiveFun]

finally fellow Christians with the actual truth and who praise the true God and the true Jesus Christ

[@SonOfGodByNewBirthInChrist]

The truth of God’s only begotten son is coming out, and the traditions of men are falling away.

[@eve3363]

Jehovah's Witnesses have been preaching about this for at least 60 years. I don't understand the hate or utter avoidance of this group. No denomination is perfect but the Jehovah's Witness denomination is the closest to being in conjunction with God's word.

[@kerryweinholz1731]

The NT use of "Lord" is clarified in a Hebrew NT which differentiates between "Lord" (adon/adoni) and "LORD" (YHVH)

[@HarrisBeauchamp]

Great video. Hebrews 1 and 2 runs an absolute clinic on how the NT uses OT quotes. 10 OT quotes applied to Jesus, 3/10 were originally referring to YHWH, the others referred to David, Isaiah, Solomon... No one thinks these quotations are meant to imply or assert that Jesus is actually David, or Solomon, or anyone else.

[@biblicalunitarian]

Yep, you're exactly right. Really great summary of OT uses in Hebrews!

[@Sketchup-fe6ef]

A good thing to note is that there are two angels that deal with John, One from God [The one that calls John up into heaven and gives him a tour so to speak and one send by Jesus. Jesus or God never talk to John directly in the book. One thing a lot of people get wrong is the entity that John saw when he turned around, people think is was Jesus, but it is not, It is the angel sent by Jesus who speaks as if he were Jesus. Note the angels have different voices, one sounds as a trumpet the other might rushing waters.

[@arjealis97]

The fact this needs to be spelled out and explained is truly worrying, and it makes you wonder why trinitarians are so desperate to assert their agenda - are they afraid of not belonging to the ‘mainstream’ religion? Is it because of tradition? Because that’s what their parents and family believe? Because it surely cannot be possible to be this blind

[@GamingLiveFun]

took the words right out of my mouth even when faced with undeniable evidence they still find a way to ignore truth

[@eve3363]

Anyone who denied the Trinity was excommunication, tortured, or even murdered by both the Catholic and Orthodox "Church". Today, it is a social torture or murder. These people are too afraid to be condemned just as they condemn others. Additionally, many Trinitarians attack the nom Trinitarian believer rather than their beliefs. Oppositely, non Trinitarians attack the Trinity, not Trinitarians. I was raised Jehovah's Witness and from ages 11 to about 23, one of my best friends was a Baptist Christian girl. Her parents were extremely religious. I remember one day when she was taking me home, she told to her other daughter sitting in the front seat, "You know some people don't believe in Jesus but that's ok. One day they will see." I was so angry and that day, I lost a lot of respect for her. I was only 16 years old. That was extremely inappropriate of this woman to make those passive aggressive remarks about me. I was only a teen and it would be disrespectful to say anything to this adult. Either way, it doesn't really matter because as the Bible teaches, we know people by the fruit they produce. My parents weren't perfect but all 5 of us graduated high school, have at least ok jobs, and we even have one researcher as our siblings. She is even educated. And my niece graduated high school on time. Oppositely, my friend's family, one of the children did not graduate high school, two are homosexual, one was in and out of jail and even left his daughter for about 5 years to live with another woman and take care of her child! Overall, the fruits will show who is truly drinking from Jesus' vine and who is not

[@dboulos7]

Yes, extremely worrying. I've often tried to put myself in their position: how would I feel if I had to defend the doctrine of the trinity. Extremely desperate, obstinate, impetuous, irresponsible, and reckless - I really didn't like what I would turn into: I'd have to throw my exegetical integrity and competency out the window.

[@ken440]

​@@dboulos7I was a trinitarian for 38 years before sept 2017. I work in logical fault analysis in electronics for 50 years, retired now, but always want to find out how things work, but in all that time though it seemed illogical i got by because i knew i had had a miraculous saving experience in 1981, and I saw answered prayer, and led others to believe, saw miraculous events. So i got by with having a grey area to keep those doubts in, because i was always told that God was in control, and i foolishly accepted that. It led me to just accepting it for most of that nearly 4 decades. I am now somewhat embarrased about it, and heart wrenched for the huge numbers of well meaning christians who are existing in a kind of twilight of understanding. Because one I "saw" it just all fell into place and the so called mystery evaporated. It had been my fault all along, for not seeking with all my heart (most do that) and all my mind (few do that, instead they rest on someone telling them, priests and temples all over again after the lesson of Jesus rejected by the religious majority. We are supposed to worship in "spirit and truth" i.e. seeking Gods leading in spirit, to the truth about Him.

[@JacobSilverdal]

Very good and humble brother 🕊

[@getx1265]

When I understood the Hebrew Law of Agency, the entire Bible made more sense.

[@nks2269]

Tell me about it 🤩

[@lifeonahighway9700]

Right, because my mailman is usually addressed by my name •_• You literally believe God mailman is worship and called by God’s name

[@TaxEvasi0n]

What is the Hebrew Law of Agency?

[@schappellshow]

@@TaxEvasi0nthe Hebrew law of agency is… ”the agent is as the one who sent him.” Essentially, in Hebraic tradition, if one sends someone to deliver a message, the messenger is treated and spoken of as the one who sent him. So, in the OT when the Angel of the Lord is seemingly called YHWH, that’s because the Angel is delivering a message from YHWH…so he is treated as YHWH Himself. He isn’t literally YHWH, the creator of the heavens and the earth, but because he is speaking the words of YHWH, he can be called YHWH because it’s as if YHWH is directly speaking to whomever the messenger is speaking to.

[@SonOfGodByNewBirthInChrist]

@@TaxEvasi0n when a man is the agent of another man, he is treated as if speaking to the sender. This is evident in the gospels when we read about the Centurion’s sick servant. Matthew records that the Centurion came to Jesus Matthew writes with a Jewish perspective. Luke, a gentile, recounts the same story, but says that the Jewish leaders came on behalf of the Centurion. In Matthew Jesus speaks to the representatives, the Centurion’s agents, as if he’s speaking directly to the Centurion. Jesus also shows us double agency when he told us in Matthew 10:40 "He who receives you receives me, and he who receives me receives him who sent me. I hope this answers your question.

[@BreakingBreadwithBurke]

These forced and inconsistently-applied false equivalencies reveal something Trinitarians often accuse Unitarians of: The assumption or presupposition of Trinitarianism. That a theological bias is in play in the Trinitarian hermeneutical process is clear, but it’s their refusal to let the evidence lead them to approach the text with more objective or different presuppositions that is more problematic. Trinitarianism HAS to be true, so, there’s nothing else for the texts to mean other than what they NEED to mean. Enjoyed the vid…I listened twice and appreciated how it gently but firmly exposes the problem.

[@lainie4344]

So what is Jesus then? If He’s not God then what was He before He took on flesh?

[@BreakingBreadwithBurke]

@@lainie4344 Hi Lainie, that’s a great question. I understand why you have the assumption Jesus preexisted. Some biblical Unitarians assume the same. I did as well until recently. I believed that God begat (not created) His Son by His will and from His own substance at a time before the creation of the universe and world. What kind of being would that make the Son? I didn’t know for sure except that he was a spiritual being and higher in rank than other spiritual-sons of God which God created. What we all know Jesus wasn’t though, was unbegotten. Only the Father, the Most High God, is an unbegotten being. The Father alone possesses aseity. So I’d say this: Most views agree and believe The Son is a begotten being. I believe the meaning of begotten (monogenes) limits the options to: A. Eternally begotten being. B. Begotten in time by the will of the Father. C. Begotten in time in the womb of Mary. Now notice those options don’t include Jesus as being an unbegotten person. I do think “eternally begotten” is self-contradictory and not supported by Scripture. Many Trinitarians agree. Though I used to think, like I said, he was begotten before creation, I no longer believe that is clearly taught in the Scriptures. It’s rather inferred and most often assumed when interpreting the Bible so that passages are made to say that. But if the incarnation was a huge part of the birth story and gospel story, why doesn’t Luke mention it? Instead he teaches the genesis of Jesus was in the womb of Mary. Plus, preexistence assumptions lead to big problems with Jesus’ sense of identity and memory. When did he remember he was a preexistent being? Was he more like Boss Baby, or, did he really not know who he was and all he knew? In what sense did Jesus genuinely grow in wisdom before God and men? My answer then to your question is that Jesus was not a being before he took on flesh because the incarnation is not clearly taught in the Scriptures.

[@duanekapp5525]

who is the man at God's right hand ??? NOT Adam ,the second Adam or last Adam

[@CalebTheHumbled]

I was waiting for the Exodus 3:14 - John 8:58 equivocation: "God said I AM to Moses and Jesus said "Before Abraham was, I am" Therefore he's God." I see this one almost daily in the comments.

[@nks2269]

Do you believe that?

[@TaxEvasi0n]

I am tired of refuting them. Not only do they butcher Exo 3:14, they also butcher John 8:58. These passages have nothing to do with eachother.

[@TheNerdyBrew]

​@TaxEvasi0n could you explain

[@CalebTheHumbled]

@@nks2269 No, I believe that Jesus is the Christ and the Son of the One True God. The Father is the Only True God. (John 17:3)

[@CalebTheHumbled]

@@TheNerdyBrew For one "Ego eimi" translated as "I am" in John 8:58 is not the name of God. The blind man healed by Jesus in John chapter 9 also uses the same two words to identify himself to the people at the temple who see him now healed and say "is this not the same man who was a blind begger?" The man responds "ego eimi" - "I am" But the formerly blind man was not claiming to be God, yet people try to say that Jesus saying "ego eimi" - "I am" was a claim to be God. It wasn't. Secondly the context of John 8:58 is about who is greater, Jesus or Abraham? In Hebrew culture, those who came before are always considered greater than their descendants, yet Jesus claimed to be greater than Abraham, so the Judeans wanted to stone him.

[@stonezer1396]

Hello! I would like to have a bible study with you! I live in the Philippines and thats all!

[@biblicalunitarian]

Please reach out to: [e-mail] Thanks!

[@reinoehlz]

The Word Became Flesh 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. 4 In him was life,[a] and the life was the light of men. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it... 14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son[d] from the Father, full of grace and truth.

[@colinnelson5547]

@reinoehlz John 17:3 [3] And this is eternal life, that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.

[@JosephSmith-ph4xr]

In John 1 :1, who is the word and who is God? I ask because we are told the word is WITH God. This suggests that the word is someone or thing other than God.

[@sethplace]

@@JosephSmith-ph4xrthe fact that your user name is Joseph Smith is just fantastic

[@lampkin9287]

@@JosephSmith-ph4xrand John says the the word is God. You assume that GOD is just one person. I you listen to this guy you have no choice but to create a contradiction within the text. He has no understanding and the spirit of God isn’t with him.

[@agape832]

@@colinnelson5547 I can read that scripture and agree. But you cannot read every scripture and agree with what the bible teaches. John 5:18 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, John the apostle literally wrote that Christ made Himself equal with God. This is impossible for a mere creature to do, since if a regular human did this, it would constitute total blasphemy, and we know Jesus never sinned. Unless you believe a creature can be equal to the infinitely holy Creator, you cannot account for this passage.

[@nks2269]

Is there any group it’s possible to join? Chat or anything?

[@biblicalunitarian]

Yes, you can email: [e-mail] to chat or we have groups to join. Also, the Unitarian Christian alliance facebook group has a lot of great discussion

[@nks2269]

@@biblicalunitarian i tried to Facebook but didnt Get in, i apply there

[@FullMoongrn]

Can you please activate the subtitles? Thank you.

[@eliasvalle8241]

The Old Testament calls God the creator and the New Testament calls Jesus the creator. According to this guys logic, we have two separate creators.

[@liberatedspirit3554]

False

[@ElectricBluJay]

Hello 😊 Trying to learn about Unitarianism… Quick questions.. when Bible talks about Angel of Yahweh (or messenger of Yahweh) who is then revealed to actually be Yahweh but still referred to as the messenger of Yahweh, who is it? A literal angel that is possessed by Yahweh, or..? When the Bible refers to the Holy Spirit as though it were a being apart from Yahweh, who/what is the Holy Spirit? Finally, Jesus enters the scene and makes claims that the religious leaders of the time believed were Jesus equating himself with God, leading to Jesus almost getting stoned to death for blasphemy and then ultimately crucified,.. were the religious leaders of the time simply misunderstanding Jesus? And if so, who or what exactly is Jesus? Thanks

[@biblicalunitarian]

Thanks for your questions. I understand the angel of Yahweh to be an angel, but is at times treated as Yahweh himself, because the angel is the messenger of Yahweh. I wouldn't say "possessed" by Yahweh, but just representing Yahweh. Remember, no New Testament texts ever try to say that the Angel of the Lord was Jesus, so, there is no reason for us to conclude that it was Jesus. More info on this here - www.biblicalunitarian.com/videos/genesis-16-7-13 "When the Bible refers to the Holy Spirit as though it were a being apart from Yahweh, who/what is the Holy Spirit?" In those instances it is simply a "what", a spirit, that is inside of believers or Old Testament saints at times, it is not a "who." Because it can be "poured out" (Isa. 44:3), "anoint" (Acts 10:38), "clothe" (1 Chron. 12:18), "filled" (Luke 1:41-42), and is called a "gift" (Acts 2:38), these are not things you do with a person, but with a "what," a spirit. I do think they were misunderstanding Jesus, but the reason he was ultimately put to death in all four gospels was for claiming to be the Messiah, the son of God, not for being God. For more on this see - kzbin.info/www/bejne/r32yhat8eK6Maqs Jesus is the messiah, the everlasting King who would come in the line of David (2 Sam. 7:12-14), he is the savior of the world.

[@khankorpofficial]

If Jesus is the ANGEL of Jehovah Then he isnt Jehovah The holy spirit is the holy spirit of God (as in it belongs to him). I dont get what you're asking here Jesus is who he claims to be, the SON of God (Jehovah the Father) It's pretty clear cut and dry! hope that helpss!

[@PRHC38]

That verse in Luke should actually read “God has looked upon his people” as some translations have it rendered.

[@samuelcallai4209]

5:00 trinitarians don't claim they're the same person, saying that is a strawman.

[@BreakingBreadwithBurke]

Hi Samuel, may I challenge you on that? Here’s why I don’t think it’s a strawman. There are Trinitarians who question the validity of the distinction between person and being. The gentleman in the video is well aware of the trinitarian position but is not required to assume the truthfulness of their claim that person and being are not synonymous. That distinction is merely verbal and though it is the mantra at the heart of Trinitarian theology it is indeed a house of cards. Can’t we agree that a person is an individual being with rational and relational facilities? An argument could look like this: 1. Trinitarians believe there is only 1 Most High God. 2. Trinitarians believe within the 1 Being that is God there exists 3 coequal and coeternal persons. 3. Trinitarians posit that we know God is loving because He exists as three persons who share among themselves an intelligent love relationship of giving and receiving. 4. A “person” capable of such giving and receiving of love in a relationship, is a distinct individual self (being) with rational and relational faculties. 5. Therefore, according to this collection of Trinitarian claims, “God” is a being who is 3 separate individual person-beings with rational and relational faculties. The Trinitarian position really does, contrary to what Trinitarians SAY, affirm that God is 1 person and 3 persons at the same time. So I don’t think the video is a strawman, because it represents the actual T view, not what T’s merely state. From here you may want to go to the “three persons one substance/nature” but that doesn’t quite capture the unity of God as a personal Being who can be considered numerically 1 individual rather than an abstract “it” or essence.

[@TaxEvasi0n]

This is the word play of the trinitarians. You have to satisfy the scriptures that portray Jesus and God separate, but you also have to deal with the texts that you believe makes them the same. So you conjoin the two, and say Jesus is God, but as a separate person. Thus, the entire contradictory, abstract metaphysical and mental gymnastics begin. You guys will battle to split hairs when someone says they are the same, which you DO BELIEVE, and create some kind of semantics debate. Unitarians are continuously trying to draw the distinction between Jesus and God, but you guys will say 'that doesn't contradict trinitarianism', or 'that's not representing the trinity'. You guys are slippery to hold down, because your trinity is floating in the air of abstract metaphysics, contradictory and oxymoronic concepts. John 10; you being a man make yourself out to be God. The definition of blasphemy never changes from Old to New Testament. The trinity is still blasphemy.

[@samuelcallai4209]

@@TaxEvasi0n I'm unitarian

[@samuelcallai4209]

@BurkeMinistries thanks for the thorough reply. I agree with most of what you said, but I still think it needs to be pointed out that they don't claim that, even if it's out of an inconsistency in their own theory. Otherwise, they can simply accuse us of strawmaning because that's simply not what they claim. And it strengthens their case in the mind of other trinitarians. They can say: "yeah, it's true those Unitarians criticize us, but it's simply because they don't get what we mean. They think we believe that the father and the son are the same person"

[@marcinlewandowski9334]

Of course they don't. But what's the difference, person or entity? These are just extrabiblical ideas to justify an untenable doctrine. God is not divided into persons or entities, He IS an entity on His own and He does not personally show Himself via any other creature. Even His Son, His express image, is not literally HIM but only a reflection of His character. And, most importantly, Trinity was invented as a MYSTERY, we are not supposed to understand it yet we must understand it in order to be saved, according to the Anathanasian Creed. Thus one can make claims that only the chosen get to understand it. But what do the protestants do? They invent THEIR OWN Trinity which does not conform with the original idea delineated in the Anathanasian Creed. It's like idolatry ripping off idolatry

[@UniversalistSon9]

I just believe in God and try to follow what Jesus taught, I don’t care if he’s GOD or whatever, his message still stands and he himself said that the Kingdom of God is within all of us so in a way maybe we’re ALL divine.

[@biblicalunitarian]

I appreciate your generosity towards those who may have a different opinion, but I would encourage you that it is a question worth looking into and not being too apathetic toward.

[@FigRko]

Yah’s truth is there but people refuse to truly see it. I personally have come a long way from starting as a catholic. We were told/warned to not add, change or take away from his Torah. Sadly we have and now it’s the blind leading the blind. Yah is my only savior. Yah speed

[@Elohimists]

You're not saved or born again if you reject Jesus as Lord. Are you going to sacrifice animals again with the Orthodox Jews?

[@FigRko]

@@Elohimists I’m going to be obedient to Yah’s scripture. “Born again”. Right

[@agape832]

If you deny Christ, you're denying the one who sent Him. Not sure about your position, but we know from Luke 24:44 that Jesus fulfilled the law, prophets and psalms: 44 Then he said to them, “These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.” Jesus fulfilled it all, and now we are under the new covenant. The Law of Moses does not save or justify anyone. If you follow this, you will not inherit the kingdom of God. Jesus said this: John 5:39-40 You study the Scriptures diligently because you think that in them you have eternal life. These are the very Scriptures that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have life. Please come to Christ. Read Genesis 22, Psalm 22, Isaiah 53, Daniel 7. All of these point to the Messiah. Moses, in whom you are trusting, wrote this: Deuteronomy 18 15 The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your fellow Israelites. You must listen to him. 16 For this is what you asked of the Lord your God at Horeb on the day of the assembly when you said, “Let us not hear the voice of the Lord our God nor see this great fire anymore, or we will die.” 19 I myself will call to account anyone who does not listen to my words that the prophet speaks in my name. 17 The Lord said to me: “What they say is good. 18 I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their fellow Israelites, and I will put my words in his mouth. He will tell them everything I command him. Read the last part. Please follow Jesus, accepting His teaching, that He is the Christ, and the Son of God, being equal with God (John 5:18), being His Eternal Word (John 1:1-3).

[@emmanuelyahaya-nh9fq]

@@FigRko Jesus is also your Saviour

[@pozorovatellidi]

I'd say it's called Propositional calculus, and it's taught at elementary schools. Trinitarians looks like failed at the elementary school math when they claim "Son of God is the God". I'm not sure if it deserves too much energy to attack it.

[@ken440]

yep, its "church algebra" A + B = C. Therefore A =B. lol.

[@harshajacob1418]

The father is called Lord in the old testament and David is called Lord so David = Father

[@lifeonahighway9700]

Deal with Jesus being called Lord in Mark 1 🥱

[@liberatedspirit3554]

You clearly don't know the meaning of "Lord" in the greek

[@christopherfaustino8318]

Not only a fallacy it is antichrist

[@PropheticPlaces-rm9lp]

Good Point.

[@adamlowe8677]

If the Word was with God, and the Word was God, who is the word? He was with God so it's not God the Father. Yet John says the Word was God. I keep getting hung up on this. Ive yet to have someone explain this. And then i found this: ‭Genesis 15:1 NKJV‬ [1] After these things the word of the Lord came to Abram in a vision, saying, “Do not be afraid, Abram. I am your shield, your exceedingly great reward "

[@SonOfGodByNewBirthInChrist]

A seeking and humble heart will not be turned away. John 1 has been a stumbling block for Greco-Roman thinking people for nearly 2 millennia. They read it as if it is referring to the Genesis creation. It truly has throwback language, but you must realize it is talking about the new creation brought by Christ in building his church. That’s why John the Baptist is mentioned so early in this poetry. Another thing to note is it in the Genesis creation, light came before life but in John chapter 1 life comes before light. Once you see that, you realize it is just echoing the beginning of creation and the beginning of the new creation in Christ.

[@adamlowe8677]

@@SonOfGodByNewBirthInChrist well the whole gospel is the story of Jesus. And I read it as an introduction to Jesus, and it stating that Jesus is the Word. God does accomplish all through his Word and and the Bible said all things were done through Christ, so I think I'm gonna believe Jesus is God, the Son.

[@SonOfGodByNewBirthInChrist]

@@adamlowe8677 before the KJV, the opening statement of John 1 said the word was ‘it’ unfortunately, the translators injected, gender into the word. People get the impression that the word = Jesus, but that’s not what it really says. It says Jesus is the embodiment of the word of God. Deuteronomy 18 tells us that God would put His words in the mouth of the prophet raised up like Moses. Peter preaching in Acts says that Jesus is that prophet.

[@Zuungie]

@@SonOfGodByNewBirthInChristThe original Greek uses the word οὗτος to describe the Word, which is the masculine personal pronoun for "he," and that is why it's been translated that way into English for the last several hundred years -- because "he" is the proper translation. It is irrelevant how English translations prior to the KJV may or may not have translated it because the original Greek describes the Word as "he".

[@SonOfGodByNewBirthInChrist]

@@Zuungie John 1 has been used for millennia to try to prove Plato’s Logos demigod was used in creation. The apostle Paul warned that philosophy and lies would creep into the church. History records all the councils of men coming up with a way to make Jesus into, at first a little God, then coequal to God our Father and finally adding God’s spirit as a 3rd coequal ‘person of God’. Jesus told us that ‘the Father’ is seeking those to worship HIM in spirit and truth. Jn 4 Jesus also said ‘eternal life is knowing Father, the ONLY true God and Jesus the Messiah that he sent. Jn 17 Always remember, we will be judged by the words of Jesus, not the councils and traditions of men.

[@RodMartinJr]

"We know this is not true" (1m 9s). *_Really?_* Wouldn't it be better (more humble and loving) to say, "I don't know"? We know that Christ made it clear, after the death of John the Baptist, that *_Elijah had indeed come,_* and that the disciples understood that their Rabbi was speaking of John, his cousin. 😎♥✝🇺🇸💯

[@georgekoshy4656]

Brother, logical fallacy does not apply with Jesus with regard to His divinity. Apostle John tells us that the WORD (Dabar Hb.) Became Flesh and dwelt amoung us "full of Grace and Truth". 'Dabar' = One who projects GOD (WORD). Read Jn. 14:8-9 also. Apostle Thomas called Him, My Lord and my God. Jn. 20: 28.

[@marcinlewandowski9334]

I think, since we can never love Jesus enough for what he did and continues to do for us since his birth, on one hand, and all power given to him by God after his resurrection, on the other, there doesn't seem to be much trouble with deifying him in the New Testament. The problem and idolatry is when we credit him with things God did in the Old Testament which Jesus, having not yet existed, had nothing to do with. There are even those who teach that if you don't believe Jesus "worked the Earth" in the Old Testament you are not a Christian and I think we all should stay away from that latter kind of preachers. This is, of course, different, from seeing types of Christ in OT which is all right

[@Zuungie]

Hi! Are you sure Jesus didn't exist before His birth? If all things were created in the beginning in Jesus' image, how could He be created later? That doesn't make any sense. There's a reason why the Bible never says Jesus was created, so I think it's important not to gloss over that.

[@Zuungie]

@ThePeaceofWildThings Thanks for your reply! "Everything was created through him meaning the plan for him" is a nice sounding doctrine, but unfortunately, that's not what the Bible says. We can certainly debate about who Jesus is, His origin, etc., but if the Bible meant "the plan" for Jesus it would say so. But, this would clearly violate Isaiah 48:12-16, Col. 1:16, and John 1:3, among other verses that speak to Jesus' pre-existence. There's no need to add the "plan for" or the "idea of" to force Scripture to fit a doctrine if it isn't there in the text.

[@SonOfGodByNewBirthInChrist]

@@Zuungie Hebrew thinking and God’s way of speaking is that God speaks as if things are already done. To Abram: Genesis 17:5 No longer shall your name be called Abram, but your name shall be Abraham, *for I have made you* the father of a multitude of nations. To us: Ephesians 2:5-6 … even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ- by grace you have been saved- and *raised us up with him* and *seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus,* Notice the past tenses?

[@Zuungie]

@@SonOfGodByNewBirthInChrist Yes, that's true to (some extent) when the speaker is making declarative statements of exhortation, such as in both examples you've provided (God is addressing Abraham, Paul is addressing the Ephesians), which is why they are translated into English in the present perfect tense (have been) instead of the past simple (I made / were raised). The reason why this logic doesn't work for the verses speaking to Jesus' pre-existence that I mentioned above is that the subject of the action is not being addressed. Rather, these verses are describing events that happened, which is why they are translated using the past simple tense in English -- Isaiah 48.13 ( *founded* ), Col. 1.16 ( *were created* ), and John 1.3 ( *came* ).

[@SonOfGodByNewBirthInChrist]

@@Zuungie please show me using only scripture who is Jesus our Messiah?

[@claybentonite]

1 Timothy 4:1-2 However, the inspired word clearly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to misleading inspired statements and teachings of demons, 2 by means of the hypocrisy of men who speak lies, whose conscience is seared as with a branding iron. Trinity is a doctrine of demons.

[@EMANYMSYNOT]

Though they have ears they don't hear and eyes they can't see! These people who believe a false gospel Jesus is God or adding persons equal with God "trinity" are lost! They won't get the true message it's speaking in parables for them! only those who are truly of the Lord get and understand the truth!

[@lainie4344]

What was Jesus before He came a man? He had the form of Gods yet He was not God?

[@lainie4344]

Can a Unitarian explain to me what Jesus is? In Philippians ch 2 it says He took on flesh. So at one point Jesus didn’t exist with flesh but He existed with a form like Gods…so a pre existent being who had a form like Gods is only human. This doesn’t make sense.

[@biblicalunitarian]

Jesus is a man (1 Tim. 2:5; Acts 2:22) who has been anointed by God (which makes him 'Christ'). He is the Messiah, the savior of the World, the King on the throne of David (2 Sam. 7). As far as whether he pre-existed or not, there are Unitarians on both sides. However, I personally believe he did not pre-exist, because of the logic you mentioned. If you notice nowhere in Philippians 2 is there mention of a pre-existent state. It doesn't say "he was in the form of God before his birth," that would have to be read into the text. Rather, I understand all of Philippians 2 to be referring to his earthly life. That he was in the form of a god or God (the Greek could be either), thus, appeared like a god (a man performing great miracles often appeared like a god to Greeks, see Paul in Acts), but didn't take equality with God, but instead emptied himself taking the form of a servant. It's all about humility, not about a God becoming man. Notice also, that the text doesn't say, "He emptied himself of his divine attributes" rather the emptying was in how he "appeared". How he presented himself. Instead of presenting himself as a god, he presented himself as a servant, he humbled himself.

[@lainie4344]

You say Jesus didn’t pre exist… how do you explain John 1:1-18? It literally says He was in the beginning. What about John 17:5? Jesus said He had glory with God before the world began… Colossians 1:16-17? Jesus is before all things… Hebrews 1:2? Jesus was before the world… John 3:13? Jesus said He descended from Heaven… John 6:38? Jesus said He came down from Heaven. I’m not gonna go anymore because it will get annoying but how do you read the Bible and justify so many verses that teach His pre existence? Is it because it will destroy your claim that Jesus is merely a man?

[@biblicalunitarian]

There are detailed explanations for all of those verses on our website here: www.biblicalunitarian.com/verses I used to be a Trinitarian and hope that you would be willing to look at the scriptures without Trinitarian glasses and just see if perhaps you're reading things into the text. John 1:1 does not say "Jesus was in the beginning", Col. 1:16 Jesus is "before all things" in rank, not temporally (see BDAG definition 3 for προ), Hebrews 1:2 does not say "Jesus was before the world", that is not at all in the text, and the "He" in the phrase "through whom He gave form to the ages" is God; God made the "ages." As far as the John verses you cited, James 1:17 says every good gift comes down from above. Does that mean that every good gift pre-existed in heaven? No it simply means it came from God. Again though, there are Unitarians who believe in Pre-existence so I'm not sure that proving pre-existence is the hit to Unitarianism that you seem to think it is. Since I responded to your verses, will you do me the courtesy of responding to some verses? Who is the Only True God in John 17:3? If Jesus has a God (John 20:17) how can he also be God? How is that not 2 Gods, if God has a God? Why does Paul define God as the Father, (1 Cor. 8:6; Eph. 4:6) excluding Jesus and the Holy Spirit? Paul explicitly defines God in a Unitarian way, not Trinitarian.

[@Zuungie]

@@biblicalunitarian If we say that 1 Cor 8.6 excludes Jesus from being God, we are also saying this verse excludes the Father from being Lord. The same is true for Eph. 4.5-6 -- we know from 1 Cor. 8.6 that Paul views Jesus as the one Lord, so Eph. 4.5-6 would also exclude the Father from being Lord. Is that we want to say? If so, how do we reconcile that with Deut. 6.4, particularly because the Septuagint understands the verse to say "the Lord (kyrios) our God (theos) is one Lord (kyrios)"?

[@biblicalunitarian]

Zungie, I understand your logic and think it's valid, however, I think is what it does is it excludes the Father from being "The Lord" which, as you know, is a title Paul uses to refer to Jesus (Gal. 1:3; Rom. 1:7; etc), just as Paul uses "God" as a title for the Father. So, in Paul's mind there is only one "God" and one "Lord." It's not that the word "Lord" can't rightly be applied to Yahweh, but that to Paul, there is one who holds the title/office "Lord" (Jesus) and one who holds the title/office "God" (the Father). How do you understand his use of "one God" and "one Lord"?

[@ArtorGrael]

You made the mistake of saying person when you meant being.

[@agape832]

Just watched most of this video and from what I have heard you say it appears you are conflating Modalism with Trinitarianism, which isn't addressing what Trinitarians believe. Trinitarians don't believe that Father God and Christ are the same person, but we believe the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are three distinct, coequal, coeternal persons. I'm interested to hear what people's views are on Genesis 18 and 19, where Abraham sees 3 men come to him and they eat together. Then after this, it appears two of the men leave and go to Sodom and Gomorrah (who turn out to be angels). This is followed by Abraham interceding for Sodom and Gomorrah to the LORD, who then goes Himself to the towns. And then Genesis 19:24 says the LORD rained fire and brimstone from the LORD out of heaven. So from this scripture it is clear that the LORD was on earth, in the appearance of a man, and yet is made distinct from the LORD in heaven. If God is strictly just "one" so to speak, why did it specifically specify the Most High was on earth and in heaven? This appears to show two distinct persons who are both the LORD. Or Genesis 22, where God tells Abraham to sacrifice his son, Isaac, yet then the angel of the LORD stops Abraham from doing it, saying: Genesis 22:12 “Do not lay a hand on the boy,” he said. “Do not do anything to him. Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son. Notice the words He says; "you have not withheld from ME your son, your only son". So the LORD told Abraham to sacrifice his only son, in other words giving up his only son for God's sake, and yet the angel of the LORD then says "you have not withheld from Me your son..." , in other words saying "you wouldn't have said no to giving up your only son for Me". This refutes modalism, and also refutes arianism. Or when Jacob wrestled with God, it is written: Genesis 32:30 So Jacob called the place Peniel, saying, “It is because I saw God face to face, and yet my life was spared.” Yet we see in Hosea 12:4 that Jacob wrestled with the angel of God. So clearly this implies the Trinity, yet it has not been revealed in its fullness. Or better yet, Isaiah 44:24 which says God alone created the universe, and no one else did except Him. Yet we know from John 1:1-3 that Christ created everything, and nothing was made except by Him. Paul also says this in Colossians, that all things are made through Christ and for Him. Every reliable bible will say this, so scripture does clearly separate Christ from being created. The New World Translation will falsely says "all OTHER things are made through him and for him", but there is no other in the Greek. 1 Cor 8:6 yet for us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and through whom we live. This here says all things are made through Christ, again showing His distinctness from the Father, yet His eternal nature. And we see in Romans 11:36 For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen. This is Paul referring to God the Father, saying "through Him", yet the same thing is used for Christ in Colossians. So if only God created the universe (as scripture teaches), and Christ created the universe and is elevated as existing before anything was created, we can only conclude Christ is God since only God is non-created. Lastly, John 5 shows Christ saying He does the same work as His Father. John the apostle writes that the Pharisees were annoyed more by this, because He made Himself equal with God, and they sought to kill Him. A creature can never be equal to the infinitely holy Creator. It was believed God continued to work on the Sabbath because if He ever stopped working creation would cease to exist. This is backed up by Hebrews 1:3, saying Christ upholds the universe by the power of His word. Christ sustains the universe. Christ is also called the brightness of God's glory in Hebrews, which is eternal. God's glory is forever infinitely bright and is not created. In the prophecy of Daniel 7, the Son of Man is said to be worshipped by all nations and peoples. And the word used for worship is "pelach", exclusively used for the worship of deities. One of the main themes of the book of Daniel is that only God is to be worshipped. Lastly, I would challenge you to really see if your interpretations align with what the ante nicene church fathers taught. Because none of them believed Christ was a mere creature. St Ignatius of Antioch, who was directly taught by the apostle John, wrote this of Christ in an epistle to the Ephesians, chapter 7, warning about false teachers: For some are in the habit of carrying about the name [of Jesus Christ] in wicked guile, while yet they practise things unworthy of God, whom you must flee as you would wild beasts. For they are ravening dogs, who bite secretly, against whom you must be on your guard, inasmuch as they are men who can scarcely be cured. There is one Physician who is possessed both of flesh and spirit; both made and not made; God existing in flesh; true life in death; both of Mary and of God; first passible and then impassible - even Jesus Christ our Lord. Notice how he says "made and not made", i.e. fully man and fully God. Technically if you decide to totally disregard this quote, you historically will have to admit that the people who were trusted with the scriptures during a time of great persecution (Ignatius was literally fed to lions for his faith in Christ) were heretic, which is pretty unreasonable. Even at the council of Nicaea in 325 AD, many of the bishops there came out of the Diocletianic persecution in 303 AD, which was incredibly harsh. They would not have submitted to Constantine if he made them go for a doctrine contrary to what had been handed down by scripture and teaching from their predecessors. I'm not even Catholic since they practice unbiblical things but scripture and early church history are completely in favour with the doctrine of the Trinity, and to reject the divinity of Christ is totally wrong. Believers in Jesus are temples of God, John 14:23 Jesus replied, “Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them. If Jesus Christ dwells in His people, HOW can anyone justify saying He is not the Creator, and God of all mankind? If Christ does not dwell in you, then you don't belong to Him.

[@lizzard13666]

In no way does he conflate Modalism and Trinitarianism. He's very clearly addressing the common fallacy that Trinitarians use to say that Jesus is Yahweh, or Jesus is God. Genesis 19 has an angel that bears Yahweh's Name interacting with Abraham. This is common in the OT. The NT explicitly tells us that Jesus was NOT an angel.

[@agape832]

@@lizzard13666 He did when he said that Trinitarians believe God the Father and Jesus Christ are the same person. That's literally modalism. Angel in Hebrew just means Messenger. So it's like saying the Messenger LORD. Either way, it is clear from Genesis that Jacob wrestled with God, and then it says in Hosea that he wrestled with the Angel of the LORD. Why did Hosea say that, when Genesis literally says he wrestled with God? On top of this: John 1:1-3 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. John 1:14 14 The and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth. Please see the John 1:3. John 1 says the Word, who is God, became flesh. Some wicked translations will translate the first verse as: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god." This is an impossible translation because it is literally saying "there are two Gods". We know this because verse 3 says that everything that was ever created was created by the Word of God. Which means the Word is eternal, and every theist will say only God is eternal. The Word became flesh, and we know this to be Christ. I spoke with someone in the past who claimed the Word wasn't a person, yet to proclaim this is to blaspheme, as John 1:1 specifically says the Word is God. Please genuinely think about what I've written to you. When I even saw what someone wrote about how Trinitarians falsely twist the part where Christ says "Before Abraham was even born, I AM." But the early church writings, who literally spoke Koine Greek fluently, agree with this position unanimously. Anyone can quote the bible, even Satan can do that, but the question is do we have the correct Spirit-led interpretation? If we dishonour Christ, we dishonour the Father. Did you know Christ actually expects us to honour Him as we do His Father? Which includes prayer, praise and thanksgiving. John 5:23 that all may honor the Son as they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father, who sent him. Notice how He said "just as they honor the Father"? Anyway. The ball is in your court. If you love truth, you will desire to be able to harmonise all the scriptures, which your position cannot do, as Christ made Himself equal to the Father as per my previous comment.

[@lizzard13666]

@@agape832 He doesn't do that, you're just mistaking what he's saying. Jacob did NOT actually wrestle God, and Abraham did NOT actually eat with God. Nobody has seen, nor can see, God: 1 Timothy 6:16 (ESV) who alone has immortality, who dwells in unapproachable light, whom no one has ever seen or can see. To him be honor and eternal dominion. Amen. John 1:18 (ESV) No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father’s side, he has made him known. Nobody can see God. So whoever Abraham and Jacob saw was NOT God, but a representative. My position CAN answer it all. My position DOES harmonise Scripture. It's your position that cannot, as I've shown. In response to your John 5 twisting, here's more Scripture to straighten you out: John 5:22 (ESV) For the Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son, John 5:26-27 (ESV) 26 For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself. 27 And he has given him authority to execute judgment, because he is the Son of Man. GRANTED. GIVEN. My position can explain and harmonise that easily. Trinitarians cannot. You cannot GIVE someone something their essence/being already possesses. This proves you are BADLY twisting John 5, you've been taught common Trinitarian lies, easily disprovable.

[@agape832]

​@@lizzard13666 Jacob did wrestle with God, the scripture is clear on this matter with Genesis 32:30 So Jacob called the name of the place Peniel, saying, "For I have seen God face to face, and yet my life has been delivered". Exodus 33:11 The LORD would speak to Moses face to face, as one speaks to a friend. Then Moses would return to the camp, but his young aide Joshua son of Nun did not leave the tent. If nobody can see the face of God and live, how did Jacob wrestle with God and Moses see God? If one is unitarian, you can't really say how except that it is by messenger, yet Exodus is clear that Moses spoke with the LORD. I believe he is speaking with the Pre-Incarnate Christ. How have you shown my position to not harmonise the scriptures? All you said was Genesis 19 is an Angel with the Name of the LORD, and that Christ is not an angel. That doesn't really prove anything. Yeah I totally agree with your quoted verses on John 5. I disagree however with what your conclusion is. Jesus is subservient to His Father, and totally dependent on Him because they are one. It's actually such a good verse for the Trinity, although you didn't quote it, John 5:23 tells us: that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father, who sent him. See "just as they". From this, we can see Jesus deserves our praise, prayers and worship. And we are to only give these things to God. If we refuse to give these things to Christ, how can we say we honour the Father? Christ took on an additional nature of humanity. Like I said, He is fully God and fully man. Both of us can agree He is not an ordinary man, and verses like the one you have mentioned of Christ being granted life need to be harmonised with the fact that scripture teaches He existed as the Word before anything was ever created. Philippians 2 speaks of Christ being equal with God, but He emptied Himself, taking on the form of a bondservant, and He was obedient unto death, even death on a cross. Therefore God highly exalted Him giving Him the name above every name, that at the name of Jesus, every knee will bow for the glory of God the Father. So if Christ emptied Himself, you have to ask what did He empty Himself of? Divine privileges. Taking on full humanity is taking on lowly estate. The Son came from the Father, having shared eternally in His glory, which is something no creature can do (John 17:5). Everything Christ has done, and ever will do, as the Eternal Son of God has always done what is pleasing to the Father and that includes before the incarnation (John 8:29). So if I have not been clear, Christ gave up all authority in His incarnation, and was granted these things from His Father. See, He did not even start His earthly ministry until He was sent by His Father through the Holy Spirit. Hence why after He rose again from the dead He said all authority in heaven and earth had been given to Him. So these verses about Christ's humanity and subservience to the Father totally check out with Trinitarian doctrine. However, unitarians need to account for the scriptures regarding Christ as the Word before anything was created. Pray about these things. Regularly ask God to teach you all things. Search these matters out for yourself. I hope that I haven't been too harsh, but I only write this to you because I desire what is best for you, even if we totally disagree theologically. But I am totally convinced that I am right and you are wrong. So yeah Edit: In Revelation, Christ says "I am the Root and Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star". And we know God created Adam, and the lineage goes onto David. Yet after this Christ is born.

[@danielhammond3218]

In the beginning was the Word. And the Word was with God. And the Word was God. And the Word became flesh and dwelt among men. Jesus made the comment “Before Abraham was, I AM.” The Jewish leaders knew exactly what he meant. They felt he was committing blasphemy by claiming he was God. That’s why they picked up stones to stone him.

[@JosephSmith-ph4xr]

Is this a claim that Jesus is God ? Is this because Jesus is the Word? I have trouble with this because it suggests that Jesus(Word) was WITH God. How can he be WITH God if he is God.? And if Jesus is God, who is God's God ? Jesus (God) says that he has a God. The resurrected Jesus has a God. (John 20 :17). The heavenly Jesus (God) tells us that he has a God. (Rev 3 :12). So who is God's God ?

[@lampkin9287]

This guy is confused on the exact language of the Bible and he is misrepresenting trinitarian’s position. No trinitarian makes this argument. We never say that the Father and the Son are the same person because they are both called God. We say that they have the same nature, being and essence and that their will’s align and this is what makes them one. Learn are position before you try and refute it.

[@lampkin9287]

@@JosephSmith-ph4xrcontext: John 1:1 when it says that the word was God and with God it’s simply same that Jesus is the same or has the same nature as the God that he is with and that God is referring to the father. This guy twists the scriptures by interpreting the holy text by his false doctrine.

[@agape832]

@@JosephSmith-ph4xr If you read John 1:3 it actually tells us the following: 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. John 1:3 is essentially telling us that the Word of God is not created, therefore the Word is eternal, and only God is eternal. So either we accept Jesus Christ is God the Son, or we have to adopt the false doctrine that there are two Gods, as some evil bible translations like the New World Translation render John 1:1 as: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god." Christ is fully God and fully man. Since He emptied Himself, He took on the form of a bondservant. He gave up divine privileges therefore. The doctrine of the Trinity is this: that there is one God, existing eternally as three distinct persons, who are coequal. The Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Jesus Christ also made Himself equal with God in John 5:18, and it is impossible for a mere creature to be equal to the infinitely holy God.

[@dazzadizzy5308]

@@lampkin9287 The WORD was with THE GOD (TON THEON) and the WORD was GOD (THEOS) now Theos means "a god " or "godlike" . Sons of the Most High are termed as gods too Psalm 82:6 . So Jesus is a divine being but Father and son are not within one God.

[@jennifertallbear4480]

Context

[@lampkin9287]

Do you really think that you know logic and your position on the Bible is correct…Call Sam Shamoun and debate

[@euston2216]

4:39 - _"Especially given the fact that the author of Revelation sees THEM, Jesus and God, or the Lamb and God, often in Revelation, as different people all throughout the book."_ Patently FALSE. *God and the Lamb* are NOT a plural "them/their". *God and the Lamb* are a singular "HIM/HIS". *REVELATION 22 (KJV)* [3] And there shall be no more curse: but the throne *of God and of the Lamb* shall be in it; and *HIS* servants shall serve *HIM:* [4] And they shall see *HIS* face; and *HIS* name shall be in their foreheads. *God and the Lamb* are a singular, _unipersonal_ Spirit.......whose _name_ is revealed to be the name which is above _every_ name: *JESUS.*

[@biblicalunitarian]

Rev. 14:1 - "And I saw, and Look! The Lamb standing on Mount Zion, and with him 144,000, having his name, and the name of his Father, written on their foreheads." There are clearly two names here. The lamb and the Father (God) are not the same, singular person.

[@ChrisMusante]

Well... Elohim (God), YHWH Elohim (Lord God), and YHWH (Lord) are all different as well - different 'parts' of the... 'trinity'.

[@ChrisMusante]

There is a reason that Jesus always refers to the son of man in the 3rd person - as this term is not always used in a complimentary fashion - see Numbers 23:19. The son of man is the door to a relationship with God, our choice to serve or rebel opens or closes that 'door'. God's representative - all of us are... not everybody is 'very good' at it.

[@colinnelson5547]

@ChrisMusante Very speculative. Do you have support for this assertion?

[@JosephSmith-ph4xr]

In my ASV this would be 'God'; 'Jehovah God' and Jehovah. God is the title, Jehovah is the name. Where is the Trinity here ?

[@RKling-o2b]

In Revelation- the revealing of Jesus Christ - Christ declares that he is the Alpha and Omega. That's pretty clear. And that isn't the only very clear statement. You don't understand the Trinity. That's forgivable, it's hard thing to wrap your mind around. God, the Godhead, is a Trinity, encompassing three distinct persons. The Father is God, Jesus Christ is God, Holy Spirit is God, but they are distinct persons. That isn't to say that Jesus is the Father or that the Holy Spirit is the Christ.

[@JosephSmith-ph4xr]

Does Jesus really declare that he is the Alpha and Omega in revelation.? The phrase appears three times (Rev 1 :8. 21:6; and 22:13). I suggest that the phrase actually refers , not to Jesus, but to YHWH. In Rev 1 :8, it is clearly YHWH because the verse says Lord God and the Almighty. These are titles that apply to YHWH and never to Jesus. In Rev 21 :6, it is YHWH on his throne. In Rev 22 :13, the speaker is not specifically identified and there are various speakers in this chapter. Note what Prof William Barclay wrote : "Things are set down without any apparent order....and so it is difficult to be sure who is the actual speaker"(The Revelation of John, Vol 2, Revised Edition, p 223). Therefore, it seems most likely that the Alpha and Omega in Rev 22:13 can be identified as he same person given this title elsewhere in Revelation.- YHWH.

[@RKling-o2b]

@@JosephSmith-ph4xr Go ahead and read past 1:8. John looks to see who is speaking. Who is it? What does he say?

[@RKling-o2b]

@@JosephSmith-ph4xr What do you do with OT passages in which God refers to himself in the plural? In the shema in Deut, for example, he declares that Elohim (plural) is one (united as one) God. You could translate it as "Yahweh your Gods is united as one God". That points to the Trinity to me.

[@JosephSmith-ph4xr]

@@RKling-o2b : In probably all languages, including English, we have words that can be both single and plural eg sheep; fish etc. We know by the verb if it refers to one fish or many. The same is true in Hebrew. We know by the verb. The term elohim applied to false Gods also and a singular false god is called elohim but the singular verb form is used. When elohim applies to false gods, the plural verb form is used and that is how translators know. It cannot be translated as you suggest and no Christian scholar uses this argument , just ignorant apologists who do not understand Hebrew. Thousands of times in scripture, singular personal pronouns and verbs are used with relation to the true God. This tells you everything.

[@JosephSmith-ph4xr]

@@danielbelteshazzar-mg7rb :L Did you read my initial comment? You have not addressed the fact that Jesus is never called Lord God or Almighty God.? You have failed to see the differentiation between God and Jesus in the opening verses and have not addressed this. Perhaps you would care to respond to this before suggesting I have no intention of being corrected. Why, for example in the very first verse is Jesus differentiated from God and why does Jesus if he is co-equal, co-eternal etc need to be given the revelation by God.?

[@paul3441]

Yahweh in Isaiah: "I am the first and the last." Jesus in Revelation: "I am the first and the last." There can only be one first and one last. Your theory fails.

[@biblicalunitarian]

They are the "First and the Last" in their own categories. Yahweh is the first and the last God (Isa.). Jesus is the first and the last Messiah who was resurrected and holds the keys to Death and Hades (Rev. 1:17-18). No one else fits that description.

[@paul3441]

@@biblicalunitarian Nice creative writing. But sermons do not negate the word of God. Nothing in the scriptures supports your attempt to explain away the plain scripture. "If the plain text makes perfect sense, then don't search for some other sense, lest you make nonsense."

[@liberatedspirit3554]

@@paul3441 Your the one making nonsense. Nothing in your creative writing explains anything about your point. All you did was, "God said and Jesus said the same thing!" So what? You just proved you are one of the people he is talking about in the video, again as a trinitarian. You're using "false equivalency AGAIN!" As you guys always do cause you don't have scripture, "You just ascribed your own thoughts of meaning to what is said" Rather then using scripture to explain Two different people saying the same phrase doesn't make them the same person just like Jesus and God using the same phrase doesn't make them the same person. No different then the stupid, "Jesus said (I am)" nonsense you people using Unfortunately for you and your stubborn nonsense. There is a scripture that speaks EXACTLY against your nonsense and explains even here Jesus using the same phrase of God "DOESN'T MEAN HE'S CALLING HIMSELF GOD" Jesus says of himself over and over again "I AM, I am he" But wait everyone in Jesus days had all of their own thoughts of who he was when he said "I Am" Wait for it... It's right here 13 When Jesus came into the region of Caesarea Philippi, He asked His disciples, saying, “Who do men say that ("I"), the Son of Man, ("am?”) 14 So they said, “Some say John the Baptist, some Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” 15 He said to them, “But who do you say that (((I am)))?” 16 Simon Peter answered and said, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” 17 Jesus answered and said to him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven Jesus confirmed Peter's response of calling Jesus, "THE CHRIST, THE SON OF GOD" -on top of confirming it he never added or corrected Peter by saying, "Good job peter but I am God as well in the flesh." Once again never written. Your approach to the scripture, "Alpha and the Omega" are the same The "Title" in scripture is simply a reference to, "The First and The Last of something" and "The Beginning and End of something" If I am the founder of a New Franchise, "I am the First and the Last and the Beginning and the end" of that Business. -Doesn't make me God or Jesus Once again your just using false equivalency video proves it's point

[@ken440]

​@@liberatedspirit3554absolutely correct. They wont take off their blinders though. Instead when you point the logic fallacy here, they just go silent !!! so sad.

[@ken440]

​@@paul3441first and last, same as alpha and omega, same as beginning and end, same as A to Z, same as Root to Leaf, same as Mountain to Ocean (a river) same as.... o brother.. it simply means the start and end of SOMETHING. that is the local context. Redemption of man. Its not a name !! Do you see it?

[@MajorX4459]

This guy is clearly confused. And he made a whole video proving it. Lol

[@Breadnamreal]

Do you believe in the trinity if you do (me too these people are lost)

[@MajorX4459]

@@Breadnamreal I do

[@Marieeb853]

You disagree with the video and call him “confused” yet you bring no evidence for your point of view. My advice is to use scripture to rebuttal people not rude words.

[@MajorX4459]

@@Marieeb853 there are way too many scriptures from the old and New Testament to use. He took the time to make a whole video on the subject. If the Holy Spirit can’t reach him nothing will.

[@Sasanach61]

Give us proof

[@nks2269]

Can someone please explain to me Why Paul teach diffrent then What Jesus said??

[@sczoot6285]

What specific instances are you referring to?

[@nks2269]

@@sczoot6285 its many things 😅 Jesus say one thing and Paul say it totally diffrent… like he change the faith somehow

[@CalebTheHumbled]

​@@nks2269 Can you give a solid example?

[@sczoot6285]

@@nks2269 if you are referring to his edicts to the church at the time, it helps to pay close attention to when Paul says "the Lord says" when referring to the teachings of Jesus and when he says "I say" referring to his specific culture-aware instruction for the specific church he is writing to.

[@nks2269]

@@sczoot6285 yes i notice that, but as Jesus said many times: rememebr the law that Moses gave, and Paul say that the law is not for us anymore… thats one exampel. I have more, just need to find them when i sit down alone 😅

[@PRHC38]

That’s all good but God’s name is not Yahweh!

[@paul3441]

No, that is the most likely translation of His name according to Hebrew scholars.

[@PRHC38]

@@paul3441 That's incorrect. According to the scripture and other hebrew scholars the actual transliteration is Yehovah. You can put it to the test and see that this is what will come back every time.

[@paul3441]

@@PRHC38 Nobody knows for sure. Humble yourself. God bless.

[@PRHC38]

@@paul3441 we do know. God has made us to know his name. Whether we chose to accept that truth is up to us.

[@PRHC38]

@@paul3441 in addition. He gave us his name Yehovah to know it and to use it.

[@roccodivito9354]

In your video you give specific examples from the Bible that support your proposition but exclude examples that clearly refute your proposition. Jesus, Himself, claimed to be God (e.g. John 8:58).

[@biblicalunitarian]

Respectfully, John 8:58 is not a "clear refutation" by any means of Unitarianism. Saying "I am" does not make you God (John 9:9). Please see: www.biblicalunitarian.com/videos/john-8-58b

[@Breadnamreal]

​@@biblicalunitarian if that wasnt the claim it wouldnt logically follow so they picked up stones to throw him for what not claiming to be God which they wouldve wanted anyways?

[@Breadnamreal]

​@@biblicalunitarian I just checked the website I'd like to point out a few errors 1. The blind man using eigo eimi doesent disprove our point and you are confusing context for context which your claim is hey these guys also said it but they arent divine 2. Okay well once again the phrase and context in phrase matters and once again if he was really just saying I existed in the mind of God before abraham did I hate to say it thats private interpretation Paul wasnt saying it to For your referrence to acts heres commentary from Church Father George Leo Haydock Except these chains. That is, I heartily wish all men in the same condition as myself, not only to be prisoners as I am, but to be Christians, as I am. (Witham) And since you wanna deny John 8:58 Again does Christ advance to His wonted and favourite contrivance, for He speaks at times exceeding obscurely and overshadowing His exposition with diverse veils suffers it not to be open to all. But when He sees that the hearers understand nothing at all, then having stripped His discourse of its obscurity, He sets it before them plain and clear. And this He studies to do on the present occasion. For since He found that they understood nought (albeit a long discourse had been gone through) nor yet were able |682 to understand that He is both Eternal as being of an Eternal Father, and that He is incomparably greater than Abraham as being God, He now says openly, adding Amen in the rank of an oath for confirmation of the things said, Before Abraham was I am. And we shall in no wise think that the Only-Begotten is boasting of being before Abraham only, for He is before all time and hath His Generation most ancient, being without beginning in the Father. But since the comparison with Abraham was before Him at present, He says that He is elder than he; just as if the number 100, for instance, were to say, I am greater than 10: it would not surely be saying this, as having the next place above ten, but because it is exceeding much superior and above ten. He therefore is not rivalling Abraham's times, nor does He affirm that He is some little precedent to his times: but since He is above all time, and o'erpasseth the number of every age, He says that He is before Abraham, uttering a truth. And exceeding rightly and well does He of Abraham put, Was, of Himself, I am, shewing that to him that was made of things which are not, will full surely follow the necessity of decaying, to Him That ever is will never befall the passing into not being. Greater therefore is He and Superior to Abraham: greater as Eternal, Superior for that He decays not as he does.

[@MW-dr1yi]

Jesus is God in The Person of The Son The Son is before all things He sustains all things By Him All things were created working in union with The Father and Holy Spirit Shared glory with The Father before the world was He was in the form of God and took on the form as a servant as a man, so sins could be paid.

[@EMANYMSYNOT]

Rubbish

[@biblicaluniteryen]

Well said brother

[@sukruoosten]

john 17,3 en timothy 2,5 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ONLY YAH IS GOD who is above ALL en the self existing one THE LORD GOD GOD is a TITLE as moses money devil christ judges ALL CALLED god but never ALL MIGHTY GOD

[@sukruoosten]

christ is SECOND only to HIS GOD EN FATHER who made him en gave him status en power en even raised him from death !!!!!!!!!!!!! the SHEMA is the MOST IMPORTANT GRATEST LAW OF ALL LAWS

[@lainie4344]

Jesus said He would raise himself. So who raised Jesus from the dead? God or Jesus?

[@sukruoosten]

christ is NOT a mere man a mere prophet/messiah not ANGEL MICHAEL en CERTAINLY NOT THE ETERNAL CREATOR !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! the exalted sinless CREATED 100% human en ONLY MEDIATOR to GOD his blood saves us en christ is THE DOORWAY TO GOD