What a deeply learned and wonderfully crafted speech. Always in awe of Tom Wright's learning and ability to convey complex subject matter clearly, concisely and accessibly. Thank you!
Paul wrote Romans in a format of 1-4 God the Father, 5-8 Jesus the Son, and 9-16 the Holy Spirit. Grace of the Father, grace of the Son, and grace of the true believer.
17:20 Paul's Christology Isa. 45:23 explosive Isa. 40-55 the return But how? Through the person and work of Messiah. Col. 1 & 2 - time 19:12 22:53 - Phlpp. Work out their own salvation. 24:15 Phlpp. 2 & Isa. 45 & 1 Cor. 8:6 Shema. 25:01 31:34 - Shema Greek Jesus is Lord. 34:35 - Paul's use of the phrase Son of God Gal. 4:11 45:50 50:35 - High Christology
To N T Wright: THE TRINITY WAS THERE IN THE OLD TEASTAMENT. The ONE GOD, is in opposition to the pagan practice of many gods, hence the commandement, you should have no other gods.... The name ELOHIM is plural. THE SPIRIT OF GOD was fluttering on waters at the creation. Then the SON OF GOD was present with the three angels who visited Ibrahim,remaining for him to interceed on behalf of the belivers in request of forgiveness. So Ibrahim recognised the SON OF GOD, his power to forgive and power to execute judgement. He appeared to Jacob, as a link between heaven and earth, faught him later with a blessing. The SON OF GOD was present with Danial in the den and between the fire with his three friends. The list goes on. Culminating in the words of John, no one ever seen GOD. THE ONLY BEGOTTEN SON, who is in the bosom of THE FATHER revealed it all.
God can't be begotten and there are no verses in the OT that talk about Jesus being God, you are assuming Jesus was in the den with Daniel but the Bible doesn't say that, you're inserting that into the text
I continue to have the same question...why doesn't the OT EVER mention the trinitarian nature of god? Why would he keep it a secret from the Jews? It should have been clear to the Jews, the OT believers and not needed someone like Paul to suddenly explain (or try) god's nature ...
John 1:1-5 is the Jewish Apostle John’s commentary on Genesis 1:1-5. When God speaks, the Logos, then the Spirit moves and creates. Colossians 1:16-20. The Jews knew of the plurality of God as is mentioned in Gen.1:26 (Let us) as an expression of this trinitarian operation of God in the creation story. The ultimate revelation of Messiah is found in Is.52:13- Is.53 as the only perfect sacrifice for man’s sins. The sacrifice of the God/Man Messiah. No other sacrifice could bridge the chasm of sin between mortal man and God. The words of Psalms 2:7, “He said to me, “You are my son; today I have become your father.” Interpreted in Matt 3:17 as Jesus being God’s one and only son. Also in John 3:16. Or Psalms 110:1 echoing Matt.22:44, ““‘The Lord said to my Lord: “Sit at my right hand until I put your enemies under your feet.” Again, the pluralistic way in which God refers to himself and his activity in Creation. John 14:15-21 re-echoes this trinitarian operation of God, the Father, and the Son, the Word and the Spirit, or the implementor. Also, John 16:13-15 which all echoes back to Genesis 1:1-5.
Exactly our Sage friend. And 1Tim2:5. "there is ONE God, and ONE mediator between God and man, the MAN Jesus anointed" And in John where Jesus prays "....that they (believing people) might be 'one' in them as they father and son are one." This implies by the trinity concept where they claim "the father and son are one" that we humans will all be equal to God as well, so instead of a trinity there will be a "millionsinity." (and if christians really do go to heaven at death and are glorified with Christ as Paul says risen christians will be, then there is already no trinity but the counter would be ticking hourly to the total of that millionsinity.... So obviously that one also nullifies the heaven at death belief as well )
The reveling of the Trinity is in Genesis 3:15.... This verse begins the reveling of the three persons and their rolls..... One of the key understandings is in a statement that gleans from the 66 books of the Authorized King James Bible...... The person fulfilling the roll as the Father could have fulfilled the roll as the Son; the person fulfilling the roll as the Son could have fulfilled the roll as the Father..... This statement is just the beginning.....❤❤❤
I appreciate Tom's emphasis that there is only one God, the Creator, and for us, one Lord, Jesus Christ. As Moses was the prophet/leader of the Exodus, so Jesus is the prophet/leader of the Church. Tom is a great teacher. God was in Christ Jesus reconciling the world unto himself.
The Prophets and the Apostles did not teach a triune God or a Trinity. Stop lying on Paul for he did not teach a Trinity, so stop reading a Trinity out of his doctrine. The Trinity is a perfect example of confusion and nonsense. It was designed to prevent men from knowing the One true God.
JOHN 20:28 My Lord and My Triune God JOHN 20:17 My Triune God and My Father JOHN 1:1 The word with Triune God and The Word was triune God JOHN 3:16 Triune God sent Triune God the Son
Read John 14 where Jesus is trying to show Thomas and Philip the Father. By power and truth he demonstrated that he was the Messiah chosen of God. But Thomas still didn't get it. He finally got it at seeing the resurrected Christ and declared Jesus "my lord" and acknowledged the spirit of God in Christ "my God." Finally recognizing Jesus as Messiah son of God. Ergo my lord and my God. The gospel is a whole and interprets itself.
The life and message of Jesus forced all those who believd in him to have a different idea of the Oneness of God, where his Oneness did not come from the unity of substance but primarily from the Trinity of Persons, so perfectly united in love that One who sends and the One who is sent are not two different entities but they are One having the One Spirit. This is because, the one who is sent humbles himself so fully, that God could have complete sway in Him, and then could exalt hiim on his right side, to share in His Eternal glory which was his, even before the Incarnation, the one through whom all things came to exist. This is what Wright is saying, if i get him correctly.
From 31:15-32:00 Wright speaking quickly, switches the words around to make his point that Jesus is also God. Wright switches the words to “there is one God, one lord…” That’s an entirely different meaning then the actual verse below. 1Cor. 1:8. “yet for us there is one God, the Father. All things are from him, and we exist for him. And there is one Lord, Jesus Christ. All things are through him, and we exist through him.” Lord means ruler or master, and is also used in the Bible to describe humans, such as Abraham. We are new creatures in Christ and are spiritually alive if we believe that Jesus is the Son of God. “Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God - God remains in him and he in God.” The Shema is “Hear O Israel. Yahweh is God, Yahweh is one.”
I think you misunderstand his point. His point is that the word used for “Lord” in reference to Jesus is the same word that the Septuagint uses for Yahweh. Therefore, he thinks that this passage works Jesus into the shema. I’m not sure he’s right about this passage, but he thinks that the “one God” and “one Lord” (referring to both God the Father and God the Son) is part of Paul’s Trinitarian theology.
You cannot answer a theological question with a mathematical equation. To understand the trinity one must think theologically, not mathematically. Mathematics is to do with numbers, theology is to do with God. The answer to your question is in the scriptures if you look for it theologically. It may not be the answer you are looking for. In the NT Jesus did not always directly answer questions; remember Jesus’s reply to Nicodemus,”you must be born again”. Or could we say in the context of your question “you must think theologically!” I hope that is helpful.
I find it hard to speak about the trinity in terms of "person" or "nature". I believe that Jesus is the embodiment of "something" about the One True God. Particular in this case, Jesus is the embodiment of the Faithful Obedient Love of God towards his good Creation. The Spirit is not a *body* at all but it's still "something" about the One God - His energizing creative self, operating in and through his redeemed body, God's people.
I would think that, for the period, that manifestation of God (the father) , Jesus, didn't exist, other than in principal, in the father. Jesus, the Same as God knew/trusted his Father to reconstitute Him. God took, what sin is, the destruction of life, life sourced in himself, into himself, and offers us union with himself thru which new life comes to us. Forgiveness is the act of, the offended party, God, accepting the loss caused by the offence. The offence is, we have destroyed life in the Kingdom of God.
"Form of God" does not mean "the same as God." Just a quick look at the meaning of the Greek word "morphe" will make this clear. The translation of Philippians 2 is so misleading. Some translations actually change this word to "nature" in English, which is dishonest. If being in the "morphe" of God (or a god, which a case can well be made for) means being God, what does it mean to be in the "morphe" of a servant? It is inconsistent to interpret "morphe" in the first part to mean "very nature" while ignoring the fact that the same word appears in the second part. [the] form μορφῇ (morphē) Noun - Dative Feminine Singular Strong's 3444: Form, shape, outward appearance. Perhaps from the base of meros; shape; figuratively, nature. of God, Θεοῦ (Theou) Noun - Genitive Masculine Singular Strong's 2316: A deity, especially the supreme Divinity; figuratively, a magistrate; by Hebraism, very. Trinitarians butcher this passage. The meaning is that Jesus took on a *form* , meaning "shape, outward appearance", but trinitarians flip this to make Paul say that Jesus existed in internal nature as God Himself (the "form" of God) and took on the form of a servant, meaning that Jesus was God and became a man. This is some serious eisegesis here. It ignores the context of this letter. Paul says to have the same mind as Christ, who, even though he had such high status as being born the king of the Jews (the form of a god, like what they called Caesar), took on the form of a servant, humbling himself even to death on the cross. He follows this up by saying that God *therefore* exalted Jesus and *gave* him the name above all names. This also means that Jesus did not already possess this exalted status and the name above all names beforehand. The reason God (who Paul is clearly showing is a separate being from Jesus) EXALTED Jesus and GAVE him the name above all names is BECAUSE he humbled himself and died for us. To take this passage and interpret it as Paul claiming that Jesus was God up in heaven and then humbled himself by becoming a man is to sadly take away from what Jesus actually accomplished as our human Messiah. The first rule of biblical interpretation should be to accept the clear and explicit statements as fact, and then interpret the less clear and less explicit statements in light of those clear ones. This passage CAN be interpreted to be saying that Jesus was God and became a man, but that is certainly not what Paul clearly stated here. So in order to claim that the idea of the incarnation is truly Christian doctrine, we would need some explicit and clear statement of such. But no such thing exists in the Bible. John 1:1 is used to make this claim, but again, it is not a clear and explicit statement claiming that Jesus existed as God and then decided to be born as a baby, becoming a man. This may surprise many Christians, but this interpretation is not the natural and unbiased interpretation of John 1:1. Let's look at John 1:1-14 - Trinitarians read this passage as if it said this: In the beginning was Jesus, and Jesus was with the Father, and Jesus was God. Jesus was with the Father in the beginning. Through Jesus all things were made, and without Jesus nothing was made that has been made. ... Jesus became flesh and dwelt among us. But that is NOT what this passages says! It is an interpretation, and it is an interpretation which clearly contradicts what Jesus himself says all throughout the book of John, such as his claim that he is a man who told the truth he heard from God (John 8:40), that his Father (not himself and not the trinity) is the one the Jews claim as their God (John 8:54), and that the Father is the one true God (John 17:3). That is just a sampling. I know that certain passages in John have been twisted to be making Jesus sound like he is claiming to be YHWH, but a careful reading of the entire passages will make it clear that this is not so. For example, two clear and explicit statements from Jesus that I just mentioned are from one of those passages that trinitarians like to use as proof texts. To see Jesus' statement at the end of John 8 as a claim to BE God is to deny the clear and explicit statements that Jesus had just made earlier in the conversation. Now, let's look at what John 1 literally says (I am using the BSB version): John 1:1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was with God in the beginning. 3Through Him all things were made, and without Him nothing was made that has been made. ... 14The Word became flesh and made His dwelling among us. If you don't have the preconceived notion that "the Word" here means "the preincarnate Jesus", this misinterpretation can be avoided. We can simply take this literally as talking about the word of God that comes out of His mouth. You may ask, how can the word of God BE God. Well, John was a Jew, and Jews had such a high view of God's word that they considered it to be equal to God Himself. So, verse 1 does NOT say that Jesus IS God. If anything, it says that the Word of God is equal to God or is godly (possible valid translations into English, which some older English translations employ). Verse 2 goes back to speaking of God and God's word as separate. God's word was WITH God in the beginning. But we run into another translation bias here because the Greek pronoun referring to the logos is translated as "he". They can get away with this because logos is a masculine noun in Greek. We don't have these genders for nouns other than people in English, but anyone who has studied another European language is familiar with this. Again, this is a trick of translation, misleading people to think that the logos is a "he". Elsewhere in the New Testament, this word "logos" is used to simply mean "word" or something spoken by someone, and guess what - in those cases the translators choose NOT to translate the pronoun as "he", but "it". Misleading. Verse 3 says that nothing was made except through God's word. We know this is true from the Old Testament. There is no controversy here and no teaching that Jesus created the universe. Again, people read verse 14 and say, "See! The WORD is JESUS! Therefore I can go back to the first verses and insert "Jesus" in there in place of "word". This is not good exegesis, and I will show you why. Verse 14: We are used to this being interpreted as "Jesus became a man," but there is more than one way to understand “the word became flesh”. For example, when God said to let living creatures spring up and walk the earth, that was God’s word becoming flesh. Or you could say that God prophesied that His anointed one would come, so when he did, that was God’s word becoming flesh. Or you could say that Jesus is the embodiment of God’s word because he lives out God’s commands and character, so he is the word of God become flesh. There are lots of other possibilities besides the Nicean interpretation of 325 AD, and they make much more sense and are much more biblically sound than the Nicean interpretation. So I encourage everyone to dig beneath the surface of these trinitarian "proof texts". Examine the written context, learn the historical, cultural and religious contexts, and examine the translation biases. This is how I came to reject trinitarian theology. No one brainwashed me except the writers of the Bible.
I don’t think any early Christians where trinitarian, I think, was actually brought in by the Latin Romans during the Nicaea council. Jesus was definitely not a trinitarian, his words: I only do what I see my father doing as He does it, He alone has the words of eternal life. He causes his brothers. He said “ just as my father sent me I send you” “ do not worry about what you shall say my father will give you the words” it’s blatantly clear, if you read the words of Jesus. The trinity was created to control people.
Basic Jewish Monotheism. The One True God. Deuteronomy 6:4. Yahweh is Christ who, came in the flesh. A new Tabernacle. Fully flesh. Fully divine. We are now temple of the Holy Spirit as is given in Acts 2. Romans 8 if the Spirit of God is in you, you are His. The spirit of Christ. IS the Spirit of God in Genesis 1:1-3. By which Jesus (His Spirit) was in the beginning And Jesus says I AM the beginning and the end. Alpha and Omega. “ Personal expression” Jesus is God. Now in His final glorified Body. We will soon see Him as He really is.
Wright, like all clever apologists, uses 'contextual filler' to make a square peg fit in a round hole. The Trinity was reinforced at the Council of Nicea to bring an end to the myriad of Christian sects (particularly Arianism) mostly differentiating on the divinity of Christ. This was critical to formulating a single religion and church upon which Alexander could unify his empire. Its all about power and politics and very little else.
Well. God walked with Adam and Eve in the Garden. Yes. One of Him. Not distant. With you. And. In you. God manifest. In the flesh. A better covenant. The Lamb. Without blemish. The second Adam. Genesis 1:1-3 The invisible Spirit made. Visible. What father would send his only son to die. To save strangers? We are the Father’s children. God could have laid down His own life. He Did that. His own Spirit. Robed in flesh. Type. OT VEIL. NT anti type. We get to the Father. Through Him.
After decades of studying all of Paul's letters, I certainly don't find the trinity spelled out! 1st Corinthians 8-5 & 6 immediately comes to mind. "5 For even if there are so-called gods whether in heaven or on earth, as indeed there are many gods and many lords, 6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him." Paul makes a distinction between two separate beings, "the one God, the Father" and "the one Lord Jesus Christ". This certainly doesn't sound anything like the trinitarian doctrine that was gradually developed 200 years after Paul wrote these words. No first century Christian was talking about the trinity. This aberrant thinking came many years later.
"Lord" (Greek kyrios) in the New Testament is NOT equivalent to the divine Name (YHWH)! All it takes is a quick search using a Bible website to see that the Greek word kyrios is also used to denote HUMAN masters. The sad thing is that translators often hide this fact with the English words they choose to use. They so carefully translate the Bible to misleadingly protect their trinitarian theology! Once you dig beneath the surface, you will find that this doctrine and other sacred cows of Christianity fall apart! The fact that the Septuagint writers chose to obscure the name YHWH with “kyrios” in their translation does not change this fact!
Trinitarians Distinguish the Lord Jesus and The Father, they are two different Persons, we believe that The Father and The Son and the Holy Spirit are the same essence, in other words what their isness is.
Thank you so much for helping prove the trinitarian view. Paul also clearly taught Jesus as God, as well as the Spirit. One in essence, separate in personhood. Your issue is that you really don’t know what the trinitarian view is.
I may be in agreement with you. Paul revealed the mystery of God the Creator, and Jesus the high priest and judge, both being grace givers but Jesus being Holy but not divine. I have a series of Ytube videos 'Myths in so-called Christianity', and #6 is 'The Holy Trinity is not Divine'. Paul never changed anything from Abraham and Jesus is his seed made under the law.
Paul said Jesus is God, and he said the Spirit is the Spirit of Christ Romans 8 "You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him."
Paul was not a trinitarian 1 Timothy 2:5 KJV - For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; Ephesians 4:6 KJV - One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all. 1 Corinthians 8:6 KJV - But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.
The sin mongers were the Pharisees known as the lost sheep of Israel. But God did not condemn sin in the flesh, Jesus by his own sanctification mortified sin in his own sinful flesh. The Cross only changed the covenant of Moses to allow the curse of death to be pardoned, it is by judgement of our sanctification that Christ's grace be given in forgiveness, else the so-called believers go back under the law.
What a deeply learned and wonderfully crafted speech. Always in awe of Tom Wright's learning and ability to convey complex subject matter clearly, concisely and accessibly. Thank you!
This is gold, fuller, you’ve made a great gift to the church by sharing this, hope it comes many more lectures from N T Wright
NTW makes theology as exciting as it should be. Alas, few ministers, preachers (teachers), and even theologians follow his example in this respect!
Such a beautiful, intellectual and practical lecture.
"Some of the Stoics were better than their own theory, but that's another story..." Ok, where can I go to hear that story? I want to hear that story!
Her shines the beauty of Biblical Theology.
Thank you In this Advent season!
What an amazing and eye-opening message. Well done!
This is brilliant!!
❤️❤️❤️ U NT Wright 👍👍👍🙏 Praise God
Paul wrote Romans in a format of 1-4 God the Father, 5-8 Jesus the Son, and 9-16 the Holy Spirit. Grace of the Father, grace of the Son, and grace of the true believer.
Not exactly … lol … but maybe kinda sorta
17:20 Paul's Christology
Isa. 45:23 explosive
Isa. 40-55 the return
But how? Through the person and work of Messiah.
Col. 1 & 2 - time 19:12
22:53 - Phlpp. Work out their own salvation.
24:15
Phlpp. 2 & Isa. 45 & 1 Cor. 8:6
Shema.
25:01
31:34 - Shema Greek Jesus is Lord.
34:35 - Paul's use of the phrase Son of God
Gal. 4:11
45:50
50:35 - High Christology
To N T Wright:
THE TRINITY WAS THERE IN THE OLD TEASTAMENT.
The ONE GOD, is in opposition to the pagan practice of many gods, hence the commandement, you should have no other gods....
The name ELOHIM is plural.
THE SPIRIT OF GOD was fluttering on waters at the creation.
Then the SON OF GOD was present with the three angels who visited Ibrahim,remaining for him to interceed on behalf of the belivers in request of forgiveness. So Ibrahim recognised the SON OF GOD, his power to forgive and power to execute judgement.
He appeared to Jacob, as a link between heaven and earth, faught him later with a blessing.
The SON OF GOD was present with Danial in the den and between the fire with his three friends.
The list goes on.
Culminating in the words of John, no one ever seen GOD. THE ONLY BEGOTTEN SON, who is in the bosom of THE FATHER revealed it all.
i don't think n t wright ever denied this in this lecture. are you under the impresion that he did?
God can't be begotten and there are no verses in the OT that talk about Jesus being God, you are assuming Jesus was in the den with Daniel but the Bible doesn't say that, you're inserting that into the text
Gracias
Could you please answer this. Dies NT Wright believe in the Trinity?
I continue to have the same question...why doesn't the OT EVER mention the trinitarian nature of god? Why would he keep it a secret from the Jews? It should have been clear to the Jews, the OT believers and not needed someone like Paul to suddenly explain (or try) god's nature ...
Have you heard of The Angel of The Lord in the OT? Also google "two powers in heaven"
It was in the old testament
At creation you find the Creator who creates with his Word and Spirit.
You'll find there are patterns and motifs for us that clearly give us an understanding of God in the OT.
John 1:1-5 is the Jewish Apostle John’s commentary on Genesis 1:1-5. When God speaks, the Logos, then the Spirit moves and creates. Colossians 1:16-20. The Jews knew of the plurality of God as is mentioned in Gen.1:26 (Let us) as an expression of this trinitarian operation of God in the creation story. The ultimate revelation of Messiah is found in Is.52:13- Is.53 as the only perfect sacrifice for man’s sins. The sacrifice of the God/Man Messiah. No other sacrifice could bridge the chasm of sin between mortal man and God. The words of Psalms 2:7, “He said to me, “You are my son; today I have become your father.” Interpreted in Matt 3:17 as Jesus being God’s one and only son. Also in John 3:16. Or Psalms 110:1 echoing Matt.22:44, ““‘The Lord said to my Lord: “Sit at my right hand until I put your enemies under your feet.” Again, the pluralistic way in which God refers to himself and his activity in Creation. John 14:15-21 re-echoes this trinitarian operation of God, the Father, and the Son, the Word and the Spirit, or the implementor. Also, John 16:13-15 which all echoes back to Genesis 1:1-5.
Paul's Trinitarian Theology ? 1Cor.8:6; Eph. 4:6.
Exactly our Sage friend. And 1Tim2:5. "there is ONE God, and ONE mediator between God and man, the MAN Jesus anointed"
And in John where Jesus prays "....that they (believing people) might be 'one' in them as they father and son are one." This implies by the trinity concept where they claim "the father and son are one" that we humans will all be equal to God as well, so instead of a trinity there will be a "millionsinity." (and if christians really do go to heaven at death and are glorified with Christ as Paul says risen christians will be, then there is already no trinity but the counter would be ticking hourly to the total of that millionsinity.... So obviously that one also nullifies the heaven at death belief as well )
@@ken440 The Son of Man is the coming one. He shall be with mankind.
They shall inherit the earth. (That is the Kingdom of Heavens. See Daniel, ch.2)
God the FATHER..SON ..and HOLY GHOST = ONE🎉Jesus said: I and my Father are ONE!!!
Thanks!
The reveling of the Trinity is in Genesis 3:15.... This verse begins the reveling of the three persons and their rolls.....
One of the key understandings is in a statement that gleans from the 66 books of the Authorized King James Bible......
The person fulfilling the roll as the Father could have fulfilled the roll as the Son; the person fulfilling the roll as the Son could have fulfilled the roll as the Father.....
This statement is just the beginning.....❤❤❤
Rom 15.6, Rom 16.27, I Cor 15.6, II Cor 1.3, II Cor 16.27, Eph 1.17, I Tim 2.5 This is the theology of the Apostle Paul.
32:00
11:23 the good news Isa. 40, 52
I and My Father are One
I appreciate Tom's emphasis that there is only one God, the Creator, and for us, one Lord, Jesus Christ. As Moses was the prophet/leader of the Exodus, so Jesus is the prophet/leader of the Church. Tom is a great teacher. God was in Christ Jesus reconciling the world unto himself.
Why say triune when the echad (ONE of the Sh'ma) calls His people to be ONE. (Compare Jh 17)
Excellent insights as always. But why say 'Y_h_w_' since it offends our Jewish brothers and sisters? Surely we could replace it with 'LORD'.
The Prophets and the Apostles did not teach a triune God or a Trinity. Stop lying on Paul for he did not teach a Trinity, so stop reading a Trinity out of his doctrine. The Trinity is a perfect example of confusion and nonsense. It was designed to prevent men from knowing the One true God.
JOHN 20:28 My Lord and My Triune God
JOHN 20:17 My Triune God and My Father
JOHN 1:1 The word with Triune God and The Word was triune God
JOHN 3:16 Triune God sent Triune God the Son
John 20:28 demonstrates Jesus is God.
Read John 14 where Jesus is trying to show Thomas and Philip the Father. By power and truth he demonstrated that he was the Messiah chosen of God. But Thomas still didn't get it. He finally got it at seeing the resurrected Christ and declared Jesus "my lord" and acknowledged the spirit of God in Christ "my God." Finally recognizing Jesus as Messiah son of God. Ergo my lord and my God. The gospel is a whole and interprets itself.
@@fredrolinners8903so who was Jesus praying to?
The life and message of Jesus forced all those who believd in him to have a different idea of the Oneness of God, where his Oneness did not come from the unity of substance but primarily from the Trinity of Persons, so perfectly united in love that One who sends and the One who is sent are not two different entities but they are One having the One Spirit. This is because, the one who is sent humbles himself so fully, that God could have complete sway in Him, and then could exalt hiim on his right side, to share in His Eternal glory which was his, even before the Incarnation, the one through whom all things came to exist. This is what Wright is saying, if i get him correctly.
He uses modern Greek vowels instead of Erasmean vowels and it throws me off.
From 31:15-32:00 Wright speaking quickly, switches the words around to make his point that Jesus is also God.
Wright switches the words to “there is one God, one lord…” That’s an entirely different meaning then the actual verse below.
1Cor. 1:8. “yet for us there is one God, the Father. All things are from him, and we exist for him. And there is one Lord, Jesus Christ. All things are through him, and we exist through him.”
Lord means ruler or master, and is also used in the Bible to describe humans, such as Abraham.
We are new creatures in Christ and are spiritually alive if we believe that Jesus is the Son of God. “Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God - God remains in him and he in God.”
The Shema is “Hear O Israel. Yahweh is God, Yahweh is one.”
I think you misunderstand his point. His point is that the word used for “Lord” in reference to Jesus is the same word that the Septuagint uses for Yahweh. Therefore, he thinks that this passage works Jesus into the shema. I’m not sure he’s right about this passage, but he thinks that the “one God” and “one Lord” (referring to both God the Father and God the Son) is part of Paul’s Trinitarian theology.
Isa. Ch.42 has just 25 verses !
14:15 Christology Isa. 40, Eze. Mal. 3
Not a comment ; an open question, to any and all trinitarians. When Jesus died, were there only two persons left in God?
No, He died in the flesh but his spirit is still alive. All three, in one in our midst
I would say no. While dead, he went down to hell or the underworld, and preached to dead before coming back to life.
You cannot answer a theological question with a mathematical equation. To understand the trinity one must think theologically, not mathematically. Mathematics is to do with numbers, theology is to do with God. The answer to your question is in the scriptures if you look for it theologically. It may not be the answer you are looking for. In the NT Jesus did not always directly answer questions; remember Jesus’s reply to Nicodemus,”you must be born again”. Or could we say in the context of your question “you must think theologically!” I hope that is helpful.
I find it hard to speak about the trinity in terms of "person" or "nature".
I believe that Jesus is the embodiment of "something" about the One True God. Particular in this case, Jesus is the embodiment of the Faithful Obedient Love of God towards his good Creation.
The Spirit is not a *body* at all but it's still "something" about the One God - His energizing creative self, operating in and through his redeemed body, God's people.
I would think that, for the period, that manifestation of God (the father) , Jesus, didn't exist, other than in principal, in the father. Jesus, the Same as God knew/trusted his Father to reconstitute Him. God took, what sin is, the destruction of life, life sourced in himself, into himself, and offers us union with himself thru which new life comes to us.
Forgiveness is the act of, the offended party, God, accepting the loss caused by the offence. The offence is, we have destroyed life in the Kingdom of God.
"Form of God" does not mean "the same as God." Just a quick look at the meaning of the Greek word "morphe" will make this clear. The translation of Philippians 2 is so misleading. Some translations actually change this word to "nature" in English, which is dishonest. If being in the "morphe" of God (or a god, which a case can well be made for) means being God, what does it mean to be in the "morphe" of a servant? It is inconsistent to interpret "morphe" in the first part to mean "very nature" while ignoring the fact that the same word appears in the second part.
[the] form
μορφῇ (morphē)
Noun - Dative Feminine Singular
Strong's 3444: Form, shape, outward appearance. Perhaps from the base of meros; shape; figuratively, nature.
of God,
Θεοῦ (Theou)
Noun - Genitive Masculine Singular
Strong's 2316: A deity, especially the supreme Divinity; figuratively, a magistrate; by Hebraism, very.
Trinitarians butcher this passage. The meaning is that Jesus took on a *form* , meaning "shape, outward appearance", but trinitarians flip this to make Paul say that Jesus existed in internal nature as God Himself (the "form" of God) and took on the form of a servant, meaning that Jesus was God and became a man. This is some serious eisegesis here. It ignores the context of this letter. Paul says to have the same mind as Christ, who, even though he had such high status as being born the king of the Jews (the form of a god, like what they called Caesar), took on the form of a servant, humbling himself even to death on the cross. He follows this up by saying that God *therefore* exalted Jesus and *gave* him the name above all names. This also means that Jesus did not already possess this exalted status and the name above all names beforehand. The reason God (who Paul is clearly showing is a separate being from Jesus) EXALTED Jesus and GAVE him the name above all names is BECAUSE he humbled himself and died for us. To take this passage and interpret it as Paul claiming that Jesus was God up in heaven and then humbled himself by becoming a man is to sadly take away from what Jesus actually accomplished as our human Messiah. The first rule of biblical interpretation should be to accept the clear and explicit statements as fact, and then interpret the less clear and less explicit statements in light of those clear ones. This passage CAN be interpreted to be saying that Jesus was God and became a man, but that is certainly not what Paul clearly stated here. So in order to claim that the idea of the incarnation is truly Christian doctrine, we would need some explicit and clear statement of such. But no such thing exists in the Bible. John 1:1 is used to make this claim, but again, it is not a clear and explicit statement claiming that Jesus existed as God and then decided to be born as a baby, becoming a man. This may surprise many Christians, but this interpretation is not the natural and unbiased interpretation of John 1:1.
Let's look at John 1:1-14 -
Trinitarians read this passage as if it said this:
In the beginning was Jesus, and Jesus was with the Father, and Jesus was God. Jesus was with the Father in the beginning. Through Jesus all things were made, and without Jesus nothing was made that has been made. ... Jesus became flesh and dwelt among us.
But that is NOT what this passages says! It is an interpretation, and it is an interpretation which clearly contradicts what Jesus himself says all throughout the book of John, such as his claim that he is a man who told the truth he heard from God (John 8:40), that his Father (not himself and not the trinity) is the one the Jews claim as their God (John 8:54), and that the Father is the one true God (John 17:3). That is just a sampling. I know that certain passages in John have been twisted to be making Jesus sound like he is claiming to be YHWH, but a careful reading of the entire passages will make it clear that this is not so. For example, two clear and explicit statements from Jesus that I just mentioned are from one of those passages that trinitarians like to use as proof texts. To see Jesus' statement at the end of John 8 as a claim to BE God is to deny the clear and explicit statements that Jesus had just made earlier in the conversation.
Now, let's look at what John 1 literally says (I am using the BSB version):
John 1:1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was with God in the beginning. 3Through Him all things were made, and without Him nothing was made that has been made. ... 14The Word became flesh and made His dwelling among us.
If you don't have the preconceived notion that "the Word" here means "the preincarnate Jesus", this misinterpretation can be avoided. We can simply take this literally as talking about the word of God that comes out of His mouth. You may ask, how can the word of God BE God. Well, John was a Jew, and Jews had such a high view of God's word that they considered it to be equal to God Himself. So, verse 1 does NOT say that Jesus IS God. If anything, it says that the Word of God is equal to God or is godly (possible valid translations into English, which some older English translations employ).
Verse 2 goes back to speaking of God and God's word as separate. God's word was WITH God in the beginning. But we run into another translation bias here because the Greek pronoun referring to the logos is translated as "he". They can get away with this because logos is a masculine noun in Greek. We don't have these genders for nouns other than people in English, but anyone who has studied another European language is familiar with this. Again, this is a trick of translation, misleading people to think that the logos is a "he". Elsewhere in the New Testament, this word "logos" is used to simply mean "word" or something spoken by someone, and guess what - in those cases the translators choose NOT to translate the pronoun as "he", but "it". Misleading.
Verse 3 says that nothing was made except through God's word. We know this is true from the Old Testament. There is no controversy here and no teaching that Jesus created the universe. Again, people read verse 14 and say, "See! The WORD is JESUS! Therefore I can go back to the first verses and insert "Jesus" in there in place of "word". This is not good exegesis, and I will show you why.
Verse 14: We are used to this being interpreted as "Jesus became a man," but there is more than one way to understand “the word became flesh”. For example, when God said to let living creatures spring up and walk the earth, that was God’s word becoming flesh. Or you could say that God prophesied that His anointed one would come, so when he did, that was God’s word becoming flesh. Or you could say that Jesus is the embodiment of God’s word because he lives out God’s commands and character, so he is the word of God become flesh. There are lots of other possibilities besides the Nicean interpretation of 325 AD, and they make much more sense and are much more biblically sound than the Nicean interpretation.
So I encourage everyone to dig beneath the surface of these trinitarian "proof texts". Examine the written context, learn the historical, cultural and religious contexts, and examine the translation biases. This is how I came to reject trinitarian theology. No one brainwashed me except the writers of the Bible.
Gen 6: 1-4
Deut 32
job 1 & 2 &38
Jude
psalm 82
How else would St Augustine & St Martin show us the Way as St Wright will be sought too‽
Can Unitarians be Monotheists as Pluralists find out the Way?!
I don’t think any early Christians where trinitarian, I think, was actually brought in by the Latin Romans during the Nicaea council.
Jesus was definitely not a trinitarian, his words: I only do what I see my father doing as He does it, He alone has the words of eternal life. He causes his brothers. He said “ just as my father sent me I send you” “ do not worry about what you shall say my father will give you the words” it’s blatantly clear, if you read the words of Jesus. The trinity was created to control people.
Basic Jewish Monotheism.
The One True God. Deuteronomy 6:4. Yahweh is Christ who, came in the flesh. A new Tabernacle.
Fully flesh.
Fully divine.
We are now temple of the Holy Spirit as is given in Acts 2. Romans 8 if the Spirit of God is in you, you are His. The spirit of Christ. IS the Spirit of God in Genesis 1:1-3.
By which Jesus (His Spirit) was in the beginning
And Jesus says I AM the beginning and the end. Alpha and Omega.
“ Personal expression”
Jesus is God.
Now in His final glorified Body.
We will soon see Him as He really is.
Wright, like all clever apologists, uses 'contextual filler' to make a square peg fit in a round hole. The Trinity was reinforced at the Council of Nicea to bring an end to the myriad of Christian sects (particularly Arianism) mostly differentiating on the divinity of Christ. This was critical to formulating a single religion and church upon which Alexander could unify his empire. Its all about power and politics and very little else.
My first thought is: nonsense.
Well. God walked with Adam and Eve in the Garden.
Yes. One of Him.
Not distant.
With you. And.
In you.
God manifest.
In the flesh.
A better covenant.
The Lamb. Without blemish. The second Adam.
Genesis 1:1-3
The invisible Spirit made.
Visible.
What father would send his only son to die. To save strangers?
We are the Father’s children.
God could have laid down His own life.
He Did that.
His own Spirit. Robed in flesh. Type. OT VEIL. NT anti type.
We get to the Father. Through Him.
Explaine why Yeshua constantly commanded NOT to eat food sacrificed to Idols!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
After decades of studying all of Paul's letters, I certainly don't find the trinity spelled out! 1st Corinthians 8-5 & 6 immediately comes to mind. "5 For even if there are so-called gods whether in heaven or on earth, as indeed there are many gods and many lords, 6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him." Paul makes a distinction between two separate beings, "the one God, the Father" and "the one Lord Jesus Christ". This certainly doesn't sound anything like the trinitarian doctrine that was gradually developed 200 years after Paul wrote these words. No first century Christian was talking about the trinity. This aberrant thinking came many years later.
"Lord" (Greek kyrios) in the New Testament is NOT equivalent to the divine Name (YHWH)! All it takes is a quick search using a Bible website to see that the Greek word kyrios is also used to denote HUMAN masters. The sad thing is that translators often hide this fact with the English words they choose to use. They so carefully translate the Bible to misleadingly protect their trinitarian theology! Once you dig beneath the surface, you will find that this doctrine and other sacred cows of Christianity fall apart!
The fact that the Septuagint writers chose to obscure the name YHWH with “kyrios” in their translation does not change this fact!
Lots of triggered heretics here 😂😂
Paul was not a Trinitarian, he distinguished between The Lord Christ and God the Father in certain passages.
Trinitarians Distinguish the Lord Jesus and The Father, they are two different Persons, we believe that The Father and The Son and the Holy Spirit are the same essence, in other words what their isness is.
Thank you so much for helping prove the trinitarian view. Paul also clearly taught Jesus as God, as well as the Spirit. One in essence, separate in personhood.
Your issue is that you really don’t know what the trinitarian view is.
N. T,. Paul does not believe in the Trinity (1 Cor. 8: 6).
He is one of the reasons why people are departing from their faith in the Western part of the world.
If by "He" you mean that Bieber kid, I completely agree. Thankfully someone finally said it.
Paul was not a Trinitarian.
I may be in agreement with you. Paul revealed the mystery of God the Creator, and Jesus the high priest and judge, both being grace givers but Jesus being Holy but not divine.
I have a series of Ytube videos 'Myths in so-called Christianity', and #6 is 'The Holy Trinity is not Divine'.
Paul never changed anything from Abraham and Jesus is his seed made under the law.
Of course Paul was a trinitarian. He said Jesus was God several times.
Paul said Jesus is God, and he said the Spirit is the Spirit of Christ
Romans 8
"You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him."
I don't know of what Paul you're talking about. But the Apostle Paul definitely was. Just pay attention to the Video.
God and Jesus were always separated and God somehow higher. They had some different role on greetings. Contonuously. This is what can be studied.
Paul was not a trinitarian
1 Timothy 2:5 KJV - For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
Ephesians 4:6 KJV - One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.
1 Corinthians 8:6 KJV - But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.
The sin mongers were the Pharisees known as the lost sheep of Israel. But God did not condemn sin in the flesh, Jesus by his own sanctification mortified sin in his own sinful flesh.
The Cross only changed the covenant of Moses to allow the curse of death to be pardoned, it is by judgement of our sanctification that Christ's grace be given in forgiveness, else the so-called believers go back under the law.