Dale Tuggy and James White debate: "Is Jesus YHWH?" (best quality, with slides)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 30 чер 2024
- Dale Tuggy (unitarian) and James White (trinitarian) debate the topic "Is Jesus Yahweh?"
The debate was held at the First Lutheran Church of Houston Texas, on March 9th, 2024.
For an in depth analysis of James White's opening remark proof texts:
• 1 Peter 3:15 - Tuggy/W...
• Philippians 2 - Tuggy/...
• Hebrews 1 - Tuggy/Whit...
• John 12 - Tuggy/White ...
00:00 Introduction
01:41 James White Opening Remarks
26:50 Dale Tuggy Opening Remarks
51:57 James White Rebuttal
1:01:48 Dale Tuggy Rebuttal
1:12:10 James White Cross Examination
1:22:22 Dale Tuggy Cross Examination
1:32:42 James White Closing Remarks
1:37:54 Dale Tuggy Closing Remarks
1:43:39 Q&A
#uca
#trinitydebate
#unitarianism - Розваги
Sweet!......This sounds way much better, thanks for the work put into this!
Brilliant effort!
Thanks for hanging tight while we pulled it together, and let’s go share this!
ua-cam.com/video/Vbhy4cL8xZU/v-deo.htmlsi=bLPga1KZhHvxDXib
A few minutes after White says he prefers biblical terms he goes on to talk about "a perfect human nature" and "the second person of the Trinity."
So actually no he doesn't prefer biblical terminology.
YeHoVaH is almighty God alone - the only true God according to Yeshua.
Yeshua himself is the anointed one, God’s redeemer, exalted to God’s right hand, given all authority, the Lord.
How do you respond to John 8:58 Jesus said before Abraham was I am
@@joelc-gc1hqlike this…
1. The phrase-‘ergo emi’ is not the full phrase used by YeHoVaH in the old testament-it is ‘ergo emi hu on’
YeHoVaH says tell them ‘hu on’ sent you. And in the next verse reveals His name YeHoVaH.
2. Other people use the ergo emi (I am) phrase - they were not claiming to be God either.
3. The argument that the Pharasies ‘knew’ that Yeshua was stating that he is God is easily refuted by reading until the end of chapter 10 where the same men ‘did not’ know who Yeshua was claiming to be.
4. Singular verses taken out of context do not suffice as evidence, understanding context audiences and the full passage do.
5. Yeshua was actually stating in the context that he is the light of the world as he speaks and does the will of YeHoVaH
6. English translation obscures the meaning from the Greek - specifically Yeshua is saying before Abraham was - I was foreknown/pre-planned by YeHoVaH.
@@joelc-gc1hqlike this…
1. The phrase-‘ergo emi’ is not the full phrase used by YeHoVaH in the old testament-it is ‘ergo emi hu on’
YeHoVaH says tell them ‘hu on’ sent you. And in the next verse reveals His name YeHoVaH.
2. Other people use the ergo emi (I am) phrase - they were not claiming to be God either.
3. The argument that the Pharasies ‘knew’ that Yeshua was stating that he is God is easily refuted by reading until the end of chapter 10 where the same men ‘did not’ know who Yeshua was claiming to be.
4. Singular verses taken out of context do not suffice as evidence, understanding context audiences and the full passage do.
5. Yeshua was actually stating in the context that he is the light of the world as he speaks and does the will of YeHoVaH
6. English translation obscures the meaning from the Greek - specifically Yeshua is saying before Abraham was - I was foreknown/pre-planned by YeHoVaH.
@@joelc-gc1hqlike this…
1. The phrase-‘ergo emi’ is not the full phrase used by YeHoVaH in the old testament-it is ‘ergo emi hu on’
YeHoVaH says tell them ‘hu on’ sent you. And in the next verse reveals His name YeHoVaH.
2. Other people use the ergo emi (I am) phrase - they were not claiming to be God either.
3. The argument that the Pharasies ‘knew’ that Yeshua was stating that he is God is easily refuted by reading until the end of chapter 10 where the same men ‘did not’ know who Yeshua was claiming to be.
4. Singular verses taken out of context do not suffice as evidence, understanding context audiences and the full passage do.
5. Yeshua was actually stating in the context that he is the light of the world as he speaks and does the will of YeHoVaH
6. English translation obscures the meaning from the Greek - specifically Yeshua is saying before Abraham was - I was foreknown/pre-planned by YeHoVaH.
@@joelc-gc1hq
like this…
1. The phrase-‘ergo emi’ is not the full phrase used by YeHoVaH in the old testament-it is ‘ergo emi hu on’
YeHoVaH says tell them ‘hu on’ sent you. And in the next verse reveals His name YeHoVaH.
2. Other people use the ergo emi (I am) phrase - they were not claiming to be God either.
3. The argument that the Pharasies ‘knew’ that Yeshua was stating that he is God is easily refuted by reading until the end of chapter 10 where the same men ‘did not’ know who Yeshua was claiming to be.
4. Singular verses taken out of context do not suffice as evidence, understanding context audiences and the full passage do.
5. Yeshua was actually stating in the context that he is the light of the world as he speaks and does the will of YeHoVaH
6. English translation obscures the meaning from the Greek - specifically Yeshua is saying before Abraham was - I was foreknown/pre-planned by YeHoVaH.
I loved Tuggy's quick philosophy lesson to open. Appeal to the common sense people forget they possess.
James White forgot what part of the debate they were in at 52:02. Tuggy doesn’t have to rebut White’s opening statement in Tuggy‘s own opening statement.
Then, White in his rebuttal session proceeded to Not rebut any of the nine points Tuggy made in Tuggy’s opening statement.
Yeah, the irony is thick.
Yep. Because he doesn't actually care what his opponent says. He only cares about picking certain points that he think he can criticize. He's not honest.
@@TavishCaryMusic :)
@@TavishCaryMusic that's trinty for you. I've seen this before. They just say something like I don't have to explain I'll just leave it at that and you should study and do your own homework. Mean while there is gaps in their arguments that you can even park a car in
@@V_George Are you asking me? If so, please clarify, how many Yahwehs do you think there are?
It would be nice if James White could actually be cordial. It's a debate between 2 Christians. No one is "the enemy".
Unitarians are not Christians
you do understand that these people literally believe in a different God, there are no enemies as you say but they aren’t the same at all
Good point❤
I think he just wants everyone on the right side. When we die it is too late to recant what we believed in our hearts.
Dr. Tuggy was a Trinitarian for most of his life, and then unfortunately fell away. It’s sad to see that someone who knew the truth in their hearts and then suddenly have a ‘new truth’.
The Triune God couldn’t have been so outrageous as so many others have had this realization through interpretation of the Biblical texts.
I watched the pastor of my church (for almost 25 years) walk away to start preaching a false gospel and claiming it to be truth. The devil doesn’t attack people who are far away from God because there is no reason to as they are already lost. He attacks people who are reaching for God and striving to have a close relationship with Him.
I think Dr. Tuggy let his guard down at some point in his life and the devil deceived him.
I don’t see Dr. White being intentionally condescending in any way. He’s passionate about what he knows and believes in his heart. In a perfect world, we all unite under Our Lord and spend eternity in Paradise 🙏✝️✡️
Ask for God to reveal the truth to our hearts.
God Bless.
Tuggy is not a Christian. Anyone who denies Jesus is an anti-christ.
John tells you the entire thesis of his book in John 20:30-31. WHY won't you let the author tell you the entire intent of his writing? How would Dr White feel if people came away from reading his book with an entire incorrect understanding of his writing?
Trinitarians have no problem with those verses. But Unitarians sure have a hard time with John 1:1-18
@@Fassnight Sir....It makes no difference what YOU think that John is saying in John 1. You are reading it from a Western perspective not a Hebrew perspective. No matter what YOU think. The person that wrote the book of John told you his thesis. Jesus is Messiah...That's the message he is trying to get placed in your thick skull.
@@Fassnight --- Please give a detailed explanation to the class of the mind-bending eisegesis you performed to prove John 1:1 is talking about Jesus?
@@richardtarr8145 This prophecy would also work if God implanted Mary with Josephs DNA. Just like he took the rib of Adam to create Eve. Do you think Mary and Joseph went around lying to everyone about Jesus? Lie to their Rabbi? Saying Jesus was their son but he really wasn't?
Nothing was written down during the time of Jesus. And no one knows who wrote the book of John. So ...how accurate are the Bible?
White likes to play on the word 'philosophy' as a slur against Tuggy, but White is the one who follows the Greek philosophers who 'created' the Trinity. Check out its history. The Apostle Paul warned Gentiles of philosophers (Colossians 2:8).
Proverbs 29:3
He who loves wisdom makes his father glad
“φιλοῦντος σοφίαν”
“Philountos sophian”
Philosophy is Biblical.
@@marekfoolforchrist Depends on its foundation. Proverbs 9:10 "The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom, and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding."
How do you respond to John 8:58 Jesus said before Abraham was ,I am
@@marekfoolforchristhow do you respond to John 8:58 Jesus said to them before Abraham was I am
@joelc-gc1hq its still a man saying it..maybe it is in reference to the deity of Abraham..perhaps the spirit of Christ?
Thank you for the better sound -- God bless you. (I'll watch again now.)
I must say, I prefer your camera angle! I first watched on the church's channel, and their angle showed James White in the bottom right while Dr. Tuggy was speaking at the pulpit -- which I found most off-putting.
Dr. Tuggy is absolutely brilliant and a perfect gentleman in the debate. I did not find the same to be true of his grouchy, ill-mannered and deluded opponent, for whom I shall pray. 🙏
Thank you! It was worth the effort to take a few days to get it better. Having slides and clear audio is so important.
dale is really unfairly breaking the rules when cross examining though
@@xxxViceroyxxx Arguably less irritating than some of his opponent's antics 😂
Tuggy apologized for not sticking to questions only in the cross examination. To hear his apology for that and his analysis:
ua-cam.com/video/BYmerZbCTLI/v-deo.htmlsi=HsyS-_auX2aWTtF0
John 20:17.
NASB 95
"Jesus said to her, “Stop clinging to Me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, ‘I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God.’”
God the Father. Jesus is the Son of God.
It doesn't say acknowledge jesus as yehweh
It says acknowledge jesus as lord
Why do people feel that the 2nd opening need to address the 1st opening? That's what rebuttals is for
At first I thought it was a dirty move of Dr. White, but then I had a buddy of mine propose a charitable explanation. Dr. White simply got lost. He did another debate two days before, which can be mentally exhausting.
@@johnpaulsmajda People do this all the time where they criticize their opponent for not rebutting before the rebuttal. I've seen many Trinitarians and Calvinists make this claim. People like Anthony Rogers.
Or perhaps he meant that since he is the affirmative on the topic, the burden is on his interlocutor. Maybe saying that Tuggy didn't address any of the things that white has written about on the topic, or any pre agreed scriptures?
ua-cam.com/video/Vbhy4cL8xZU/v-deo.htmlsi=bLPga1KZhHvxDXib
That’s exactly what I was thinking
At 44:22, Dr Tuggy gives a homework assignment regarding the meaning of the word mystery in the NT. Please know that your assignment has been done by Jeff Deuble in his wonderful book, Christ Before Creeds. Chapter 3.
Mystery in the bible denotes something not yet known. Mystery in Trinitarian theology means something that can never be known. In other words, it is a contradiction.
Every mystery in the Bible was something not yet revealed until it was revealed. Every single one. That is the reason it was a mystery. @chanano1689
Excellent Dale!!!! Thank You.
Thank you for posting the improved version. Trinitarians have sunk to a new all-time low. Having literally left nothing unique for God our Father. Even His Holy Name (YHWH) has been taken away and given to Jesus. This is so unfortunate 😔
Jesus is God. The scriptures, as well as the earliest Christian testimony, make that clear🙂
@@gaiusoctavius5935the god he was with or the god that was with him
@@xxxViceroyxxx God the Son was with God the Father and God the Holy Spirit before the creation of anything. It's that simple.
@@gaiusoctavius5935but arent you inserting those individuations? jo 1:1 just says god, not father
@@xxxViceroyxxx The Bible distinguishes between God the Father and God the Son for us; without understanding this distinction, one can easily fall into Modalism.
Easily the best debate so far for Tuggy. His 10 mins rebuttal made me remember Craig rebuttal of Sam Harris.
I live in El Salvador Central America and I thought about going to Houston and be there. Unfortunately I couldn't but thanks guys for putting the video here
Yes, I was impressed with Tuggy more than usual, this time, also
Tuggy says," A contradictory interpretation of scripture means that you need to go back to the drawingboard, and do better." Exactly true!! And there is no proposition known to man that is more self-contradictory than the doctrine of the Trinity.
If Jesus is just a man how did he exist with the father before the world was created???
@@joelc-gc1hq Nobody has said that Jesus was just a man, he is the Christ, our king. 1 Corinthians 8:4-6, 1 Corithians 15:24-28.
@@marksimpson4215 did Jesus pre exist before the world was created with the father?
@@joelc-gc1hq As the word, not as Jesus.
@@marksimpson4215 did Jesus say the glory I had with you( referring to the father).he did not say (as you) but with you. Did Jesus humbled himself to enter into flesh( creation)? Answer is clearly yes( Philippians chapter 2 verses 5,6,7).He(Jesus) did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage.Jesus in his consideration showed his own consciousness.
Tuggy's "Biden" example was spot on in terms of how the words "all" and "every" are used. Not just in the Bible, but in everyday language. In other words, they must be qualified. I would think this would be obvious, but it is a window into the mind of James White, and let's us know why he misinterprets the bible where these terms are used all the time. For example: Mark 1:5 KJV - "And there went out unto him ALL the land of Judaea, and they of Jerusalem, and were ALL baptized of him in the river of Jordan, confessing their sins."
Does anyone think that everybody to a man in Jerusalem and Judea, came down and got baptized by John the Baptist ?? All means "all" !!
Or does it? Obviously, the word "all" in this scripture, and in virtually every scripture that is used, has to be qualified. It's so sad that James White can not see that.
Yet to defend his Calvinism he will say: "All" means less than everyone without exception.
This could hardly be called a debate. Every argument made against the trinity is just a refusal to understand what the trinity actually is. And Dr White was so quick in his masterclass of a response.
Trinitarians themselves disagree on what the Trinity is, and have published many alternative theories.
Dr. Tuggy has published extensively on different definitions of the Trinity that trinitarians propose. You might be interested in his article in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy on the topic:
plato.stanford.edu/entries/trinity/
Tuggy’s questions about “is the Trinity a god” and “is the Father a god” are to draw out the contradictions within White’s view. If there is one God… the Trinity would be it… right? But then that would mean the Father is not a God, just a part of one, or some other heresy.
@@UnitarianChristianAlliance The problem you have is that logically it doesn't work in your mind, the scripture has to trump our 'logic' and it's clear
James did a great job of laying it out clearly.
If Jesus IS the God of the Old Testament why does he always distinguish between son and father?
Because Jesus isn’t his God. God the Father we see in scripture but never God the Son.
Jehovah is the Most High. (Psalm 83:18) Jesus is the Son of the Highest. (Luke 1:32)
different persons, same essence. Welcome to trinitarianism 101.
Because there is a difference. The trinity is made up.
White appeared less patient than he normally does, and he also let Tuggy get under his skin. White's eye-rolling, grimacing, head-shaking and shrugs looked very unprofessional. Truth speaks for itself. It doesn't need to be augmented by jr. high antics. In the past, it was Tuggy who engaged in such gymnastics, but for the most part, he was very controlled.
White also mischaracterized Tuggy's opening as if it were a rebuttal. That was almost bizarre since White is well aware that rebuttal comes after the opening. Tuggy also wasn't arguing philosophy over scripture, as White mistakenly asserted. As much as I disagree with Tuggy, he presented a biblical argument. This was not White's best effort by a longshot, and I'm not a Unitarian.
Yes. White was soundly beaten in the facts. But, his unchristian arrogant behavior is totally unacceptable!! It makes his side look bad, too.
Yeah White doesn't handle too well the kind of pressure Dale brought.
Yeah, wasn't that bizarre, i.e. White accusing Dr. Tuggy of not addressing anything of White's opening statement, within Tuggy's opening statement??? That would've been the sentiment of an amateur?
Either way, Dr. White was right off the rails: felt no need to qualify any of his proof text (all his outrageous claims were taken for granted), his logic was completely backwards - if your conclusion makes no sense, you don't 'just accept it', but you rather go back to the exegetical drawing board until you can make sense.
I thought that White was disgraceful, verging on deceitful
Agreed, because hes not used to being wrong which he is in this case, not to mention he celebrates pagan holidays like christmass
@@chanano1689 Yes, that was Tuggy's biggest weakness. He couldn't resist arguing with White at cross. If he's going to engage in more debates, he needs some attorney friends to help him to learn the art of arguing the point by questions. Good attorneys are masters at arguing through a witness.
Isaiah 53:6 in thesis statement really works against His claim Jesus is YAWEH
I believe, to be fair, he used that verse to say the Father was Yahweh, other verses for the Spirit and the Son as Yahweh.
@@Bibliotechno Isaiah 53:6
[6]All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.
Right but YAWEH laid on Christ. Doesn't support Christ is YAWEH
@@plumtree8713 I don't know how to say this again more clearly. James White, to be honest, in is opening slides, middle section, said the Father as Yahweh, laid the sin on Jesus as the Messiah. He did not use this verse to show Jesus is Yahweh.
@@Bibliotechno ok, but that verse does show a distinction between YAWEH and Jesus.
So, not only does the Bible show distinction between Jesus and the Father, but also between Jesus and YAWEH.
@@Bibliotechno but the second time was much more clear to me.
Dr. White did an outstanding job.
White: Scripture doesn’t talk of two natures for Jesus. Also no verse mentions "God is three persons" ... or three anything!
Scripture repeatedly speaks of the two natures of Christ
Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.
Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days?
But he spake of the temple of his body.
we see the nature of the Word which is God. And the Word became flesh and dwelt with us, we see the nature of the flesh or temple in which the Word dwells and therefore in Him all the fullness of the Divinity is bodily.
@@ivanipatov6559 So God was dwelling in God? Hmmm make a sense
@@Jiujitsushan no, God dwelt in the temple of the body of Christ.
@@Jiujitsushan
first nature is the nature of the Word of God
the second nature is the nature of the flesh or temple
The eternal united with the temporary, the immortal with the mortal. One eternal Word having two natures. Own and perceived in time.
For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
My goodness, how is this so hard to see for so many???.....Yeshua over and over and over again talks about praying and going to HIS FATHER!!!...Paul begins so many of his letters with "God our Father AND THE LORD JESUS CHRIST (YESHUA)......It always comes down to a few passages misinterpreted.....actually, to worship Yeshua is to break the Command to Not have any other God's before him. Doing so commits sin
It must be because so called church leaders have gaslit and coerced laypeople into this way of thinking for so long, that they are now convinced that their eyes and ears and intuition cannot be trusted. I think ego, tradition, and not wanting to be wrong keeps it afloat. Idk.
But calling Jesus as Lord commiting idolatry since he isn't God according to you? 🤔🤔 Since you actually overlooked some verses too. Jesus said He is the Lord of sabbath. If that's the case, according to O. T. it is God who made sabbath as per Genesis after 6 day creation. Irony that you missed obvious details.
@@NCSiebertdesign Lord of the Sabbath doesn't equate to "Creator of the Sabbath."
Mark 2:27-28 (ESV) The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. So the Son of Man is lord even of the Sabbath."
Compare these:
"The Sabbath was made for man...So the Son of Man created the Sabbath." (what I think you are saying)
VS.
"The Sabbath was made for man...So the Son of Man is lord even of the Sabbath." (what Jesus said)
The second one is a logical construction, if the Sabbath serves man, than naturally, the Son of Man (the promised, ideal man) would be over it, or master of it. It's why David, too, was able to eat on the Sabbath. It's about man's relation to the Sabbath, not about who created it.
@@markcain1550 you're missing the point. When God created the sabbath, He's the one that set rules about sabbath and no man or any creatures in heaven or on earth, other than Jesus has the authority over it, why because He is God. Also: Hebrews 1
10 And:“You, Lord, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth,And the heavens are the work of Your hands. (NKJV) clearly indicates Jesus as God (with the Father and the Holy Spirit) is the creator who created sabbath and is the Lord over it.
Not even close
Yaweh is One. Lord Jesus came forth from the Father (John 8:42) and the Holy Spirit came forth from the Father(John 15:26)
Jesus is the Word from the beginning that became flesh(man)
(John 1:1 John 1:14)
And the word WAS GOD. ALL THINGS were made through him, and without him was not ANY THING MADE THAT WAS MADE. Jesus is the eternal uncreated God.
Nowhere in the Bible does Jesus or the Apostles ever refer to Jesus as the word. That's a man made doctrine.
1:32:15 James White publicly confesses that his doctrinal conclusions that he is willing to divide over, and impugn the true faith of others with.... comes from human inference....Wow!, just like Dale said
James white crumbled in the cross examination round.
exactly,he said things 99% of trinitarians WOULDNT believe!
Dr. Tuggy - the voice of reason, ...which ultimately brings glory to God ...the Father, alone
Voice of human reason
@@johnygoodwin3441 How would you know - would you like to explain your god-man theory to us all, ...without looking like a completely confused and incompetent eisegete, putting more faith in man's councils and creeds rather than the wise and comprehensible, glorifying word of God?
Anytime you're ready....?
@@dboulos7 If it makes you feel better to argue that the God man 'theory' comes from Catholic creeds then keep saying that to yourself, it's what the Bible says that I'm interested in;
But of the Son he says, “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, the scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your kingdom.
@@johnygoodwin3441 I asked you to explain your god-man theory: in ontological and soteriological terms.
In other words, you're misinterpreting your 'proof-text' - if your conclusions make absolutely no sense, you've misunderstood the meaning , and therefore most likely, eisegeted the text.
John 10:35
35 If he called them gods to whom the word of God came- and the Scripture cannot be broken- 36 then what about the One whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world?
@@dboulos7 Nice try, no obfuscation please, explain to me how I'm misinterpreting this text and the one that follows;
“You, Lord, laid the foundation of the earth in the beginning, and the heavens are the work of your hands; they will perish, but you remain; they will all wear out like a garment, like a robe you will roll them up, like a garment they will be changed. But you are the same, and your years will have no end.”
You can try and skate round it and deflect by quoting John, we can look at that when you give a satisfactory answer to Hebrews 1.
We don't need to use philosophy here, just a clear exegesis of the text Will suffice
Excellent opening Tuggy , praise God for truth debunking popular mainstream theology
Airtight opening statement from Tuggy. James mustve felt helpless which is why he felt Tuggy was supposed to be giving a rebuttal on his opening. 😂 Tuggy surgically disarmed him for the rest of the debate.
The understanding of Dr White is wrong. Jesus is not the creature.God created all things through him. And for him. There's only one creator God the Father . Don't twist that Dr White .
Good job Dale.
Can i buy a vowel?
Great job dr. White! I became a trinitarian because of you... Jesus is LORD (Adonai) = YHWH
Where in the Bible is Jesus referred to as LORD or Adonai?
@@LoveAndLiberty02
"But the LORD of hosts, him you shall honor as holy. Let him be your fear, and let him be your dread." (Isa.8:13)
The LORD there in hebrew is Adonai which is a substitute of the divine Name of God YaHWeH...
In some translations this is how it is translated,
" It is Yahweh of hosts whom you should regard as holy.And He shall be your fear,And He shall be your cause of trembling." (LegacyStandardBible)
This Yahweh is also translated "Adonai" in the CompleteJewishBible...
And guess what apostle paul did... He applied this quotation to the Lord Jesus Christ in 1Pet.3:15
"but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect," (1Pet.3:15,ESV)
Conclusion: Lord Jesus is YHWH in the flesh as the Messiah....
Isa.8:13
Where did you find ADONAI referring to Jesus? ADONI - yes; but ADONAI - never! Big difference.
You are so lost. Get saved through learning and understanding Paul's Gospel. The trinitarian gods and their understanding of who Jesus is are FALSE.
"God is murdered"... Does James actually understand what he is parroting?😢
He has truly blinded himself 👀
Sacharija 12:10, Acts 20:28 and also Ignatius of Antioch (35-110 uses the Term the Blood of God
Blinded, confounded, and stupefied himself. Unfortunately, he hasn't dumbfounded himself.
@andreleao_ Acts 20:28 does not say "blood of God".
@@TavishCaryMusic what does it say in yours
@andreleao_ RSV, DARBY, NET all say "blood of his own [son]." Which makes WAY more sense than God giving his own blood. God didn't bleed and die on the cross. Jesus, the man did.
At 7:10 in the video, James White displays a slide of quotes from Hebrews 1. His slide says: “In v. 8 the writer identifies the Son as “God,” and he continues his demonstration of the superiority of the Son to the angelic creatures.”
Then, Dr. White skips to verse 10. His slide continues: “V. 10 begins simply with kai, continuing the introduction to v. 8, “to the Son he says.” So, without question, v. 10-12 are purposefully applied to the Son, directly from Psalm 102”
Dr. White, here, does not tell the whole truth. He jumps over verse 9 which clearly shows that the Son described as “God” in verse 8 has a God, the God of verse 9. The implication of the Son having a God means that the word, “God,” in verse 8 is a title or indicates that “God” is used to indicate the Son is a representative of the true God. Verse 9 also indicates that the superior God anoints the Son who is called “God.” The superior God would be Yahweh and Yahweh is separate and distinct from the Son in verse 8.
At 56:51 in the video, Dr. White begins to paraphrase the reading of Revelation 5:4-8. Dr. White states that the Lamb when “he had taken the scroll the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb. ”
Dr. White, again, is not telling the whole truth. He partially quotes verses 4, 5, and 6 and then jumps to verse 8. Left out is verse 7. “And He came and took the scroll out of the right hand of Him who sat on the throne.” White is ignoring the description of Jesus taking the scroll from the right hand of Yahweh. Because Yahweh is sitting on the throne and Jesus is standing before Him, taking the scroll from His hand, Jesus cannot be Yahweh. Jesus is clearly a separate and distinct being from Yahweh.
At 1:35:51 of the video, Dr. White points to another time in John 8 where Jesus uses the “I am” statement. He rushes to insist that the Jews pick up stones to stone Jesus, insisting that Jesus is quoting Isaiah 43:10.
Conveniently unreferenced is John 8:25. “Then they were saying to Him, ‘Who are You?’” Which indicates that they did not hear Jesus claiming to be God.
Dr. White does not reference John 8:28 where Jesus again uses the “I am” language. Did the Jews pick up stones to stone Jesus, then? No. Why? Because they still did not hear Jesus claiming to be God. They repeat their question in John 8:53, “Whom do You make Yourself out to be?”
The only time they picked up stones to kill Jesus was when he suggested that something more important than Abraham was among them in John 8:58.
Periodically through out the debate, Dr. White seems to chastise Dr. Tuggy for using non-biblical language. Then at 1:36:48, Dr. White repeatedly uses the phrase, “God man” to describe Jesus. It is not appropriate for Dr. Tuggy to use language not found in the Bible, but when Dr. White uses non-biblical language, it is fine. I suggest a double standard in Dr. White.
That is what I notice from Dr White he is expert in sliding through and reading half of the versus not only here I watch his debate with Sir Antony B. He know the truth but purposely denies the truth.
Your Hebrews verse 9 is irrelevant, so what you admit is that you do have God YHWH calling the Son God but it’s a God which to your understanding is more of a title Then you claim this shows that God is distinct from the son which means he can’t be YHWH. You just exactly described the trinity, the Writer of Hebrews described the trinity which you alluded to was modalism where they believe that God morphs into the son and the the spirit . But the writer of Hebrews purposefully made God and the Son separate. When you read verse 10 this is where Unitarians do gymnastics as God says to the Son you created the Heavens and the earth with your hands referring to pslams 102. One Unitarian said it’s talking about the New heaven and New earth . I just said can you just deal with the text and stop doing gymnastics.
1:12:15. Cross examination
1:22:20
This was a painful debate to listen to. Dale Tuggy does not know how to do exegesis whatsoever, couldn't follow basic rules in cross examination and his presuppositions wouldn't allow him to let scripture speak for itself.
Dr. James White did a great job as always. I could his frustration at times, honestly I understand why. Statement making and twisting terminology in cross examination is frustrating.
I can tell you how we all got deceived and what the
GOSPELS are telling us. I figured it out after I read Phillipians 2:9-10, Revelation 3:12, Revelation 21:7, I Peter 1:3, 1:23, James 1:18.
The truth will set us free.
Jeremiah 16:19-21( kjv) tells us the gentiles will be deceived until the day of affliction. That day has arrived and so has the outpouring of the spirit of TRUTH just as he promised. We were indeed deceived by a STRONG delusion that started with Rome. Romans 1:3-4 also blew my mind once the Father removed the veil from my blinded eyes to comprehend what its actually saying. Its been RIGHT THERE all along. Right under our noses.
I had the same experience with Romans 1:1-4
I am totally blown away. I had read that. I don’t know how many times before until you brought it to my attention. That is an eye-opening scripture as to who Jesus Christ is. Declared to be the Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness BY his resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord,
@@cimmbasso
Yes! Now go read Acts 13:33, where Paul again makes the same connection citing the coronation Psalm 2:7
@@Mikha335 I’m blown away. Thank you for sharing this with me! Are there any other resources that you would recommend?
@@cimmbasso
Yes. Two other scriptures connect sonship with resurrection: Luke 20:35-36 & Romans chapter 8.
Do you know what blew me away? When I learned that the Messiah in Old Testament prophecy is the son of YHWH. For instance, when YHWH promises David his descendant will reign in his stead, YHWH says, “I will be his father, and he will be my son.” (2 Samuel 7:14; 1 Chronicles 17:13). Another example is the suffering servant prophecy in Isaiah 53:6, “YHWH hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.” The servant is never confused with YHWH. Same thing in vs 10. Same thing in the famous messianic prophesy’s of Isaiah chapters 11, 48, 61. Same in Psalms 2 & 22. In other words, YHWH is always God the Father, and the Messiah always His son/servant. To me, this devastated the doctrine of the Trinity & modalism in one blow. The clarity is amazing.
1:23:12 No writer of the Bible says that YHWH is the combination of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Therefore the "triune god" is NOT a "biblical revelation." White's statement is just false.
1:25:20 White just admitted that "god the son's" incarnation made him not have all "god" features"/"powers". So why is it that 99% of trinitarians claim that Jesus proved he was "god" by doing miracles and having "divine knowledge"??? Contradictory statements/beliefs. "God the son" somehow "gave up being god" but at the same time still is "god." Nonsense. It doesn't even agree with other trinitarians.
1:27:25 and here is the complete undermining of the "penal substitution" atonement theory. White admits that it was only the "human nature" that "died" on the cross. 99% of mainstream christians claim that the only way our sins could be "paid for" is if "God died." James White said that God did not die - Just like Michael Brown. Therefore 99% of christians must conclude that their sins have not been "paid for" since God did not actually die.
right, that last one of yours is a massive nail in the coffin as far as I'm concerned. "Only an infinite God could die to atone for infinite sins!" combined with "it wasn't God who died, it was His human nature!" Um.........
And that is why Jesus is God, becuase he is God. He took on humanity, became the second Adam a sinless righteous one who though tempted, overcame that temptation and layed down his life. Becuase he was 100% man. However in no way have I destroyed his 100% God. Which is what Jesus does in forgiving sins and claiming to be God: transfiguration, rising from the dead, healings, receiving worship, etc.
How do deny diety of Christ in the context of Philippians 2:6 “.. though He was in THE FORM of God, did not count EQAULITY with God and thing to be grasped, but emptied himself…”.
How do you willingly give up divinity you don’t already possess?
@@Barefootseal_66 1) The translation and meaning of this verse is the most controversial out of everything in the NT (according to what I've heard). 2) you are making an equivocation between "in the form of God" and "God" (ontologically) 3) Because of #2, most trinitarians then make the equivocation between "took the form of a servant" and "took on human nature". That is what many trinitarians do. They must read in-between the lines or change the words of scripture. "becoming a man" or "taking on human nature" is totally not in the same category as "taking the form of a servant." The comparison between the former and later in the verse would be apples-to-oranges, as they say.
4) I believe when it says "in the form of God" it is likely referring to either Jesus' lordship or his sinlesness or both. Jesus has been exalted by God to God's right hand and has been made Lord. He is ruling the world on behalf of God as he has been appointed. Instead of acting like the king of the world, he instead washed his disciples' feet. He also was sinless, therefore being like God. The pharisees acted like they were perfect and treated everyone else like peons. Instead of being like the Pharisees, Jesus didn't use his piousness to look down on others.
@@scotthix2926 I would believe that if it was in the Bible.
Did James White, right out of the gate, infer or imply that people are just stupid if they don’t side with his philosophical model?
Of course he does😂
How do you respond to John 8:58 Jesus said to them before Abraham was I am
@@joelc-gc1hq You may find my episode on that passage helpful. The UCA podcast is a different kind of podcast. I was asked by a listener about this, and this was my answer.
ua-cam.com/video/9ukEc--Atg8/v-deo.html
@@joelc-gc1hq I eisegete the Trinity, of course!
@@joelc-gc1hq first off we must realize that there is an "interpolated" (to put it nicely) portion of writing in John that is not original. Scholars all know that the short episode of the adulterous woman is most likely something that was added in at a later date. And this addition breaks the flow of the discourse between Jesus and the Jews. Even the trinitarian website "Got Questions" admits this. If you start all the way back in 6:68, you will find Peter giving us the correct answer for who Jesus is. Then Jesus' interaction with the Jews/Pharisees starts after. It continues through chapter 8. If you pay attention to the main topic of those two chapters, you will find that it's all about whether Jesus is the Christ or not. There are also multiple places in John where Jesus says the same greek words that translate into "I am he" when he confirms he is the Christ (like with the woman at the well). So it is perfectly plausible that Jesus is, once again, claiming to be the Christ in 8:58, just like he has done is other places in John. There's no reason to force the idea of Jesus claiming to be the "I am that I am"/"I am the existing one" from Exodus onto this text.
For a great assessment of this debate, see the podcast by William Barlow. White was completely defeated!
I admire James White patience 👋, sticking to the rules.
What debate was that? Not this one.
Are you serious. That is the exact opposite of what James White did.
Biblical Unitarians put God YHVH in His rightful place as Creator (Revelation 4), and Jesus in his rightful place as the human Messiah and Lamb (albeit now resurrected and exalted) (Revelation 5:1-12). One God, and one Lord (1 Corinthians 8:6).
No, you don't, because you ignore every Bible passage that reveals the true nature of God and of Jesus. Why are you only able to accept some truths but not all of them?
@@King_Conan I have found more coherency, logic, and simplicity in Scripture for the past 14 years since leaving my lifetime of Trinitarian churches at 58. I still love God and his son Jesus passionately. We have a responsibility to love God with all our mind ... so keep checking out what others say (Acts 17:11) and let the Scriptures speak for themselves.
@@kerryweinholz1731 Was the Trinity always problematic for you?
How do you respond to John 8:58 Jesus said to them before Abraham was I am
@@joelc-gc1hq And then they picked up stones to throw at Him. Jesus made a provocative statement, and they knew what He was saying.
James White make sense. Letting the scripture speaks on the other hand Tuggy is very smart in using words but very out of context. Good job both of you.
Not sure what you mean by saying Dr. Tuggy was "very out of context." I thought he was on point. Care to elaborate?
It's so freeing to agree with Ha Mashiach that their is only one true GOD/THE MOST HIGH WHO IS THE FATHER.
Tuggy knocked him through the ropes!
What are you smoking?
@@johnygoodwin3441 that is a Crooked Beard maduro from Zeal Cigars. That is my favorite place to buy cigars online.
@@johnygoodwin3441 unless you mean I am high from thinking that Tuggy whooped White's you-know-what...?
@@ronnier5349 Lol, not at all, unless you give credibility to Col 1 talking about a new creation - do you?
"I can of myself do NOTHING"... Great thing for God to say of himself... NOT
How do you respond to John 8:58 Jesus said to them before Abraham was I am
@@joelc-gc1hqThat's not a rebuttal of the point. you're just posting the same thing in separate comment threads as if it is a one-shot-kill of every unitarian argument. Actually try to counter the argument. I replied to one of these duplicate posts already. Go look at it.
Thats nice, but how do you respond to John 8:58 Jesus said to them before Abraham was I am@@brandonr4452
If you understood what Trinitarians say about the Incarnation, you wouldn’t bring up this verse
still i can of myself do NOTHING,what a wise word from a God who demanded everyone to go to hell if they didnt FEAR and OBEY him@@thatonechristian2487
James admits he doesn't believe jesus is the father so why is even debating this and saying he is the father ?
God in the Old Testament
I AM (Exodus 3:14-15; Isaiah 48:12)
The Shepherd (Psalm 23:1)
The Light (Psalm 27:1)
The Rock (Psalm 18:2)
Ruler of all (Isaiah 9:6)
Judge of all nations (Joel 3:12)
The Bridegroom (Isaiah 62:5; Hosea 2:16)
God’s Word never passes away (Isaiah 40:8)
The Sower (Jeremiah 31:27; Ezra 34:9)
First and the Last (Isaiah 48:12)
Jesus’ Reference to Himself
I AM (John 8:58)
The Shepherd (John 10:11)
The Light (John 8:12)
The Rock (Matthew 7:24)
Ruler of all (Matthew 28:18)
Judge of all (John 5:22)
The Bridegroom (Matthew 25:1)
Jesus’ words never pass away (Mark 13:31)
The Sower (Matthew 13:3-9)
First and the Last (Revelation 1:17-18)
As God's Messianic agent, the things said of God can be said about Jesus.
Except for "I am." Jesus did not claim he was God by saying "ego eimi." If you are interested in truth, look into it further.
That is not an argument! Compare Ex. 3:14, with John 8:58. Jesus meant EXACTLY THAT.@@LoveAndLiberty02
@WilliamStrain-th4xw "The Septuagint translates the “I am that I am” of Exodus 3:14 as “ego eimi ho on.” Ego eimi is simply the “be verb” and not a name or an identity. God said “I am (ego eimi) ho on.” Thus, ho on is God’s name, not ego eimi. Scholars admit that ho on is difficult to translate, but it roughly means the self-existing one. So in Exodus 3:14 God said, “I am (ego eimi) the Self-Existing One (ho on). If Jesus had wanted to say he was God in John 8:58, he simply could have said, “I am (ego eimi) that I am (ho on),” or “I am (ego eimi) the Self Existing One (ho on).” But he didn’t. He simply said, “before Abraham was born, I am the one” or “I am the Christ ” or “I am the Son of Man.”
Man! Listening to Dale is like watching paint dry.
Listening to you is like listening to finger nails on a chalk board.
Monotone
@johnspartan98 Sorry, I hurt your feelings about your idol.
@@Post_Tenebras_Lux_1647 Spoken like a true left wing lunatic.
@johnspartan98 why cause I hurt your feeling?
I am a Muslim and was just listening to a Unitarian vs. Trinitarian debate. I felt compelled to write when Dr. White mentioned Muslims and his debates with them. From a Muslim perspective, Jesus was a messenger of God who never feared nor asked his disciples to worship him. Instead, he always preached about the existence of one God.
Furthermore, he explained to the Jewish youth who accused him of blasphemy for calling himself Son of God as they consider themselves children of God. He was emphasizing that his use of "Son of God" was metaphorical, just as they metaphorically called themselves children of God. Thus, we should not misinterpret his words to mean that he claimed divinity. Jesus never asked his deciples to worship him and now Christians are worshiping him, I wonder why?
God is beyond human relationships like father, mother, or child, and exists without being created. Anything created by Him or anyone else cannot be God. If I have offended anyone with my words, I sincerely apologize. I do not intend to start any debates on this forum.
My friend your opinion doesn't matter, God never spoke to Muhammad and not one witness to Muhammad and the demon that never identified himself as Gabriel. To make it worse even the filthy Quran says Muhammad has no miracles surah 29 verses 50,51
As I mentioned, I am a Muslim and I do not disrespect any religion, following the teachings of my prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him. Regarding miracles, the book you criticized is unique because it is the only book globally that is memorized completely by individuals ranging from five-year-old children to the elderly. You'll find millions of Muslims worldwide, even in your own city, who know it by heart. This in itself is a miracle. However, if you choose to behave like the skeptics in the time of Jesus who dismissed him as a magician and sorcerer, then all I can do is pray for you. As a sincere Christian, I suggest reading the Quran thoroughly before you decide to embrace or dismiss it. Nobody should be compelled to accept it. May Allah/God guide you to the right path. Ameen.
@joelc-gc1hq As I mentioned, I am a Muslim and I do not disrespect any religion, following the teachings of my prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him. Regarding miracles, the book you criticized is unique because it is the only book globally that is memorized completely by individuals ranging from five-year-old children to the elderly. You'll find millions of Muslims worldwide, even in your own city, who know it by heart. This in itself is a miracle. However, if you choose to behave like the skeptics in the time of Jesus who dismissed him as a magician and sorcerer, then all I can do is pray for you. As a sincere Christian, I suggest reading the Quran thoroughly before you decide to embrace or dismiss it. Nobody should be compelled to accept it. May Allah/God guide you to the right path.
@@LeadersMirrorPeople he already has thankyou
Why do people defend the man-made trinity doctrines as if their eternal lives depend on it when Paul's Gospel has no such required belief for salvation?
How about some of you hardocre trinitarians answer that question?
Because Christendom care more about traditions than what bible teaches
Its like those religious leaders in jesus day which hated jesus cause he to spoke out of there traditions and hypocrisy
Well done brother Dale! Reinforced why I left trinitarianism.
You left for a false gospel. Nice
@@dualtags4486 Thank you for your input. Your opinion has been noted.
@dualtags4486
And what false gospel would that be? Are you claiming that the scriptures state that we must believe in a triune being or we don't believe the gospel? I'll wait for you to provide that verse from the scriptures.
False. The Bible nowhere states he is antichrist that denies Jesus is God, or that he is a two natured being that is part of a triune being.
The scriptures state he is antichrist that denies Jesus is the Christ, that he is come in the flesh, ie, a real man, because it was common in those days for pagans to believe in "god/men" that weren't human beings. I would be careful if I were you, calling someone an antichrist that the Bible does not.
@@V_George Your opinion and lack of verse has been noted.
@V_George wrote: "You left trinitarianism and hence deny that Jesus is God because of the spirit of Antichrist"
If I could describe James White in one word it would be condescending.
ALL old church Fathers believes in trinity. I personally believe some people having these debates so they can sell their books and make $ lol. FIY dr James White knows his stuff been following his debates his is big defender of Christ keep up great work dr white 😊
Wheres the holy spirit sitting with the lamb and God ?
James white said thats the trinity there
"A hymn of the early church" isn't Scripture.
yes. I commented on this on the original stream post, but it's now unlisted. So I'll repeat it here. The so called "early christians" that White cites are changing Philippians 2 to say what they want it to say. They say Jesus "took on human nature" while the scripture says Jesus took on the form of a servant. So who is it again that has to twist scripture to fit their theology? Certainly not Unitarians.
If you don't regard Book of Philippians as scripture, why do you bother?
@@Bibliotechno I'm going to guess that what @kerryweinholz1731 was implying or trying to say is that unitarians base our beliefs on scripture, not what some "early christians" believed. I added that those "early christians" are changing the scripture (Philippians 2) to fit their beliefs, just like most "orthodox" people did back then. Bart Ehrman points out in "Misquoting Jesus" that is was more frequently the "orthodox" christians who altered the scriptures than their opponents.
In any case, White's argument still doesn't prove that Jesus is YHWH. There were plenty of early christians who claimed Jesus was a second god underneath God almighty. Mainstream apologists don't want the laypeople knowing this history. They cherry pick quotes that say "Jesus is God" but hide all the quotes that say Jesus is still subordinate to God the Father.
@@Bibliotechno What James White quoted was a mis-quoted or defiled version of Philippians, so no, it's not scripture. You see, what he quoted is what trinitarians THINK Philippians 2 says. But that verse doesn't actually say that. They have to change the Bible to fit their beliefs...
@@brandonr4452 this confuses me even more at times as to which Bible version is actually accurate.
Isn't it the JOB of High Priest to atone for sin? I thought that was one of the High Priest's main jobs.
Ohhhh that's a good point. That brings more depth to Pauls writings, and also Hebrews.
Amen
It WAS idolatry to worship Jesus as God before the resurrection. To worship him post resurrection is NOT idolatry because God promoted him and gave him dominion over all of creation.
It's not as if God is jealous of Jesus or that Jesus is trying to usurp God.
@@beautifulfeetpreachingsc Worshipping Jesus as king is different.
Have you read the 1st commandment?! Jesus was only a prophet of One God. Do not worship anyone other than the Almighty God.
@@koroglurustem1722 He wasn't a prophet. He was the Messiah. The Son of Man. The only begotten son of God. Resurrected and exalted to the right hand of God.
@@JoeBizzle read your Bible. What did Jesus reply when the rabbi accused him of blasphemy because of "son of God" expression? Didn't he explain "son of God" can be applied to anyone? Then where do you get the idea of "begotten son"? God is far exalted above His creation to be attributed such animal acts between Him and His creation Mary. Millennia hasn't seen such a great blasphemy against the God almighty!
As a former Trinitarian, I thank God for our wonderful brothers and sisters in the UCA and the work they are accomplishing.
I pray more will turn away from the false and man-made Doctrine of the Trinity.
The Only True God is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.
😢you're still way off. Jehovah is God almighty and Jesus is the Son
@donnykobana5209
Wake up, Donny, the church is deceived!
Listen to Jesus!
John 20:17
"Jesus said, “Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God."
Jesus is not Lord, maybe lord as in master or teacher
@koroglurustem1722
If you believe that the title "Lord" means "God Almighty," then no, Jesus is not God Almighty.
God is Jesus's Father, alone.
However, a "Lord" is a title of a ruler.
And God made Jesus our Lord.
Acts 2:36
"Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made the same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ"
Jesus has been raised by God and exalted to God's right hand as "Lord of all creation";
"far above all rule, and authority, and power, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come"
Jesus is King of Kings and Lord of Lords.
Subject ONLY to God Almighty.
(1 Corinthians 15:27-28)
Lastly, Romans 10:9 says
"If you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved."
Jesus is Lord, and his Father; God,
raised him from the dead
Do you agree, my friend?
@koroglurustem1722
If you believe that the title "Lord" means "God Almighty," then no, Jesus is not God Almighty.
God is Jesus's Father, alone.
However, a "Lord" is a title of a ruler.
And God made Jesus our Lord.
Acts 2:36
"Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made the same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ"
Jesus has been raised by God and exalted to God's right hand as "Lord of all creation"; "far above all rule, and authority, and power, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come"
Jesus is King of Kings and Lord of Lords. Subject ONLY to God Almighty.
(1 Corinthians 15:27-28)
Lastly, Romans 10:9 says "If you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved."
There is the very confusing and incoherent idea of the Trinity in total display. All that philosophy and latin and greek names that are created around that wrong doctrine is what intellectuals like to talk about but there is not a tiny piece of truth in what they believe. Jesus was clear, the apostles were clear, the Old Testament is clear, YHWH is the Father and Almighty creator of heaven and earth, no one else. That is what the Bible teaches in Matthew 16:16, John 17:3, John 20:17, 1 Timothy 2:5, Ephesians 4:4-6, Acts 2:22-37.
So when Jesus says “…before Abraham was I Am.” What does he mean by that?
@@TherapistComposer what he meant was that his coming was planned by the Almighty before the world began even before Abraham existed.
@@fcastellanos57 what you did right there is highly disrespectful. You disregarded the context of the passage and went straight into your eisegesis. I asked you that question assuming you knew the passage but clearly not. I recommend you go back and read the passage carefully with eyes to see and ears to hear and then come back and let me know if you have come to the same conclusion. Don’t google it, don’t talk to anyone just read it for yourself and come back here.
@@TherapistComposer that’s what Jesus meant, he began his life in Luke 1:26:35, read and believe, he never saw Abraham.
@@fcastellanos57 what do you think Jesus meant when he said in John 8 that Abraham rejoiced to see his day and he saw it and was glad in it?
Dr. White sounds delirious. How he manages to respond with so much audacity, and yet continuously speak so much incomprehensible and contradictory nonsense, is bewildering.
Every criticism that he had against Dr. Tuggy, was more true of him than anyone else - utter delirium.
Mr White is knowingly deny the truth! I never seen shameless denial of the word of God.
I can sense Dr White's frustration. Tuggy was not only giving his commentary during cross-examination which he wasn't supposed to do, but also introduced a different topic in his opening remark rather than engage with the affirmative. If the debate topic was "Jesus: Only a Man" then Tuggy's opening would have been appropriate. Instead White had to do both affirm and deny, and it makes it harder for the audience to follow. I have watched numerous debates and I have seen Muslims do the same thing.
Dr. Tuggy has apologized for the comments during cross ex.
But as far as his opening, he didn’t do anything inappropriate in describing his view which is counter to White’s affirmation of the debate prompt. Tuggy went beyond simply responding “no”, and on to “and this is what is better”.
In debate parlance, it’s called a “competitive advantage” case. Nothing wrong with it at all.
White was not ready for this debate.
This debate should have been about epistemology and presumptions about scripture.
White was stuck on his presumptions about how to interpret scripture. He presumes there is no other way to interpret the scriptures than the exegetical methods he uses. These presumptions and lack of epistemological awareness made him dreadfully lose this debate.
Poor Tuggy his closing statement is sad and pathetic. Still relying on “scholars“ instead of scripture. Even Anthony Rogers completely destroyed him in their debate. Tuggy said “just because he knows Greek“ Well the new testament was written in GREEK! Not English.
Bias much? You obviously were blinded or just never listened.
@@johnspartan98 Cry me a River. Obviously your butt hurt by the truth. Re-read the Bible & maybe you won’t feel so “biased”. Jesus said “ I never knew you, depart from me“ (Matt 7:21-23( since you reject the Son as the Savior. I’ll be praying for you.
Objective review. I believe in James White's opening he did a decent job of presenting the Trinitarian argument. Unfortunately, he also made many statements of "fact" that he did not substantiate. Such as "Lord" only being used for Yahweh. Or that the father in Hebrews 1 actually said to the son "You laid the foundations of the earth" Where did the father say this to the son? Where was the Hebrew writer gleaning this information from? He also asserts that when Isaiah saw the glory of the Messiah, he must've been referring to a singular event. 1 Peter says the prophets saw the sufferings of Christ and the glory that should FOLLOW those sufferings. He claims its talking about judgement but does not tell the audience when Jesus will judge the world.
Quoting hymns from Trinitarians as proof of the early church believing a trinity was cute. He doesn't tell the audience that the Carmen Christi is a 20th century work. Calling this the "early church" is misleading at best. It is nothing more than a trinitarian interpretation of Phil 2 in the form of a hymn. They claim the early church understood the way they do. The rest of his opening is built upon this shaky foundation. Opening statement grade -C
🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼❤️ Great Job Dr. James white!
Jehovah is the God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob. (Exodus 6:3) Acts 3:13 says Jesus is the servant of the God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob. Not the same being.
Firstly, the term παῖδα used in greek can also be translated as child, not always as servant. But even if servant meaning was intended, it may be ok, as long as we are speaking of Jesus till his baptism, for the spirit of Son of God wasn't in him before that. This is in accord with apperance of the voice from heaven: "This is my Son...", that occurs right after the baptism.
Mr. White seem to have a problem with Jesus being worshipped, but God said to the angels, worship him! If he has a problem with that, he needs to complain to God!
Jesus asked that we see him as a teacher a friend and brother we are family
Nicaea has blinded the eyes of so many.
1 Corinthians 8:6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.
John 17:3 And this is eternal life, that they know you, the only true God (the father), and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.
One true and most high God the father Yah. One Lord Jesus Christ.
Moving on from trini manmade nonsense.
I wonder who said "I am the Lord of sabbath"? When God is God of sabbath, no one else is.
@@NCSiebertdesign “And he said to them, The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath; So that the Son of man is lord even of the Sabbath.” How exactly does the prove your point?
1 Corinthians 8:6. You assume because it saids one God, the Father. It means only he can be God. Now be consistent with your interpretation. It also saids one Lord, Jesus Christ. Does that exclude the Father from being Lord too? According to your interpretation it is. Also quite convenient you quote John 17:3 but don’t read verse 1-5, typical Unitarian heretic
@@dualtags4486 where have I Said there is only one god? Jesus is god but not the most high and true one God who alone is the father Yah. Jesus is our Lord and saviour but offcourse the father is the most high and Ultimate LORD over all. There are many gods and many Lords. Satan is the god of this world. The angels are called gods.
Who is in the category of being the one true God?
Nothing in John 1:1-5 says that Jesus is the one true God. You cannot be God and be with that same God at the same time. It is nonsense.
In the beginning was Jesus and Jesus was with the the two persons of the Trinity God the father and the spirit and Jesus was part of the Trinity God as God the son.
That is how you read the verse - but it is not what is says.
@@asmallfarmhomestead3657 since it was God that made sabbath, in fact He is the first to do "sabbath" therefore He is the Lord of the sabbath. Throughout O.T. God set "rules" of what sabbath should be and purpose of it, not any man or even angels beside Jesus since He is God dwell in flesh. If God dictated sabbath and Jesus said He is the Lord of sabbath therefore Jesus is God no doubt.
I tend to agree with almost everything the unitarians think, except i believe that Yeshua was truly the firstborn of Creation, that he came from the from before everything was created. And he existed with the Father before he gave up his divinity to become man.
That is a unitarian view. There are “pre-existence” unitarians. 👍
I agree with you, check out ministers of the new covenant
And why is James White doing an Anton Lavey imitation ?? I guess he thinks Devil Worshiper costumes are in fashion this year. LOL
1:36:55 Never Ever said in scripture. In fact the exact opposite is said in scripture. No writer of the NT says that God had to die for our sins. That is completely a manmade idea.
Right! In fact they take the time to say the opposite! Romans 5 explains why it is one man who died!
Unitarianism requires that we look at the Bible with one eye closed unfortunately. Hebrews 1:10-12 can’t get any clearer. Jesus is unchanging LORD that laid the foundation of earth. He’s YHWH.
The good thing about only one eye is that it can still read just as well as two eyes. And also one less eye doesn't limit brain power. If anything, the brain only has to process the information from one eye instead of two, and can put more energy into thinking.
I'm blind and I believe that Dale was more logically sound. For my faith, I have chosen to have one Elohim, YHWH the Father, and I have one Messiah and Lord, Yeshua.
@@JudeOne3Four I can't speak for Unitarian Universalists, but Biblical Unitarians worship YHWH as the God of Israel, and the Father of the Lord Jesus Christ. To suggest anything other than that is merely an invention from your imagination. If you don't believe the name YHWH is the correct one, then fair enough, don't use it. But, don't charge people en masse with worshipping a pagan deity, when you're well aware this is not their intention. Otherwise you're getting into the realms of slander. Something that should never be found in a follower of Jesus.
Why is it that YHWY is LORD and in the new testament Jesus is called Lord...lower case(please just think before you speak)in the new testament.
@@SR-gr9lg You shouldn't substitute scripture for 'logic'
Sabemos que Jesús dijo que Él existió antes de Abraham (Juan 8:58). Él declaró que es uno con Su Padre (Juan 10:30) y que Él es igual a Dios (Juan 5:17-18). No solo proclamó ser Dios, sino que declaró tener el poder de Dios.
1:26:36 this question was great. I think Tuggy could have gone a little farther with it.
White doesn't want to say Yahweh died on the cross. Yet he argues that God died for our sins.
I would have asked him if Yahweh and God are interchangeable terms. Then I'd ask him if Jesus and God are interchangeable terms. Then I'd ask if God died on the cross. Then I'd ask again if Yahweh died in the cross.
At some point he has to admit that one of those things is not the same as the other.
I think this is the strongest way to question a trinitarian in cross examination. Ask them the same question using supposed interchangeable terms to show that they can't answer consistently.
for people willing to admit they were wrong and to go where the Bible leads them, this is an effective method. But for people like James White in this debate, he wouldn't answer those questions straightforwardly. He would turn the answers around by rolling out some creedal statement or Trinitarian line, rather than answer in the way that he knows shows he's wrong.
@@maxspringer01 Right but I think that would become very evident in contrast to such simple questions.
@@r.rodriguez4991I agree. It would be a great way of demonstrating the point to the audience, even if the interlocutor dances around it and doesn't answer straight. The audience can see what's going on!
When I see Dr White reminds me of the religious people arguing with Jesus.
Thank you Dr James White, standing with the truth
lol
James White absolutely killed it, honoring Christ as Yahweh, he definitely gave an outstanding defense of God's triune nature.
So is Christ “part” of Yahweh? Is Yahweh a person, or a group, or a thing?
@@UnitarianChristianAllianceYahewh is God, God is three persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, yet still ONE GOD, not each 1/3 of a “whole”. There a 7 billion person yet ONE HUMAN NATURE. There are three persons in the Godhead yet ONE DIVINE NATURE.
“For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.”
1 John 5:7
John 1:1, 14
[1] In the beginning was the Word, and
the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
[14] And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
1 Timothy 3:16
[16] And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest
in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
Colossians 2:9
[91 For in him (Jesus) dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
Philippians 2:5-8
[5] Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: [6] who, being in of the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God but made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: [8] and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.
not a single time Lord Jesus is referred by his followers as our father,he is our brother,both in flesh (because his flesh isnt as old as adam) and spirit (he was the first creation of God according to revelation and firstborn of all creation according to paul)
White's opening statement is conclusive with only weak scriptural references. Hebrews 1:9 makes it clear Yahweh anointed Christ. So Jesus anointed himself? Makes no sense.
The Father Anointed Jesus.
And Jesus is representing The Father as His Visible. Image.
Remember All power and Authority is vested in JC.
ALL. THINGS that The Father hath are MINE....
The Father is Divine so is The Son.
He is authorized to use The Fathrrs Nsme.
If you call your father by his first and last name that is disrespect.
If you call. THE Father as YHWH or JEHOVAH that is deliberste irreverence.
We call Him. FATHER for endearment , relationship.
Right.
@@donaldbrillo2034NOT IN THE REAL WORLD , people have sons , since when has the word son means yourself ?
James....Hello.....We don't care what your "church fathers" said. They had the same bible as we do. We can read.
while we wait for the blessed hope and appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ.
I'm not a Calvinist, but when I watch debates like this, I can't help but believe that Calvinism must be true.
That response makes no sense. Whateryou sayen, that you were born contradicten yourself or what bub?
Mr. White answered questions with Trinitarian Doctrines, not by Biblical texts.
The word "YAHWEH" from "YHWH" is already tells us that is the NAME of The Almighty God, the God of Abraham, God of Isaac and God of Israel.
Khurios, the Lord is "Master" and NEVER means "YAHWEH"
This is incorrect. Early Jewish people put LORD in place of Yahweh because they feared using Gods name in vain and because they believed his name was too holy for us to say. Most bible translations state this in the first few pages.
In many instances Jesus is referred to as LORD (Yahweh) by connecting him with scriptures from the Old Testament which do so as James White pointed out.
@@gumballswift1396there are differences between those two. Lord is adonai and the LORD is YHWH the Almighty one
@gumballswift1396 Then we have a problem. Abraham is then God Almighty too...lol. Sarah named Abraham Lord too. I my...:)
YHWH is His Name, like Jesus. Lord and God is titles like in Isaiah 7 and 9. If you actually read Isaiah 9 in the oldest translation (Septuagint) the title is not Everlasting Father it's actually the Messenger (Malak). Like the Malak in Exodus, the Malak in Malachi 3 and Malak in Psalm 30:4:)
@@albertadlg No you are wrong because the word for everlasting father in Hebrew is A bi ad which mean The Everlasting or The Eternal not Malak which is a messenger
Who won ?
Imagine thinking of the sovereign ruler of the universe has an only Begotten son………. and he’s not divine
"I am" is either an answer to question or it's an incomplete sentence .. but it isn't a name.
I AM is God's name.
@@aussierob7177
"I am who I am" or "I will be who I will be" is what people will experience God to be.
To us, God's own people, his name is YHWH (Yahweh), the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, the God of Jacob - and the only true God that sent us Jesus; the anointed one, the Christ in English, the Messiah in Hebrew (John 17:3, 1 Corinthians 8:6). We also know God to be our father (Galatians 4:4-7, Hebrews 2:10-13).
"I am" is NOT - and NEVER was - God's name!
Read Exodus 3:13-15 again.
@@SimplyAwesomeOriginal Before Abraham was I AM
@@aussierob7177 "AM" isn't a Hebrew word - it's added to satisfy English grammar rules. And it isn't a name - it's God's statement about himself, "I will be Who I will be" - Exodus 3:14. God's name is in Exodus 3:15 "YHVH".
@@kerryweinholz1731 I am telling you the truth Jesus replied. Before Abraham was, I AM
Oh, sort out 'being" and "persons" 🤔. Really? Childlike faith can understand a 'Father-Son' relationship ... don't complicate it with some Greek philosophy of a Trinity.
when the son doesn’t know in the flesh , does he know when he is in the spirit ?
James White's tone from the start seemed to be that of a scoffer or mocker. I heard him mostly put forth various trinitarian arguments but very little that was scriptural. Dale on the other hand kept very close to Biblical principles.
So basically the trinitarian method is to bring forth the man made philosophical ideas that the catholic church was founded on in the 4th century. Good Job Dr. Tuggy.
James literally did Greek grammar comparison for his opening statement. The entire thing was a direct exegasis of particular psalms isiah and Hebrews. Just because you disagree with his position doesn't warrent a lie such as james used very little Scripture.
The Unitarian arguments are very convincing… at most trinitarians can show Jesus was thought as divine , but the idea that the holy spirit and Jesus are all Yahweh is not in the text.
It absolutely is. The Father is God. The Son is God. The Holy Spirit is God... AND Scripture teaches there is One God. The conclusion? Father, Son, Holy Spirit are three distinct person's: One God.
There is one Most High God, the one true God (John 17:3; 1 John 5:20), who is the Father of Jesus.
The triune god is not the one true God and is not the Father of Jesus. There is one Lord (1 Cor. 8:6), Jesus the Messiah, who is the Son of God, begotten in the womb of Mary. Arguably he is called theos in Hebrews 1:8, which is derived from Psalm 45:6 - a reference to the Davidic king (elohim), unless the alternate translation is true - God is your throne, or your throne is God's. The spirit is God. God's personal presence. But not a third "self."
God, the Son of God, the spirit of God. But no triune being.
So you believe in 2 or 3 gods? Make it make sense.
This is not the Trinitarian position. To anyone who is a Unitarian or convinced by this Unitarian talking point, I urge you to actually read the Nicene Fathers and a basic text like Fr John Behr's Nicene Theology/Way to Nicea series. I would highly recommend listening to Dr Beau Branson's talks, as he addresses Tuggy specifically, and his dissertation, "The Logical Problem of the Trinity," specifically calls out Tuggy.
The basic Trinitarian position outlined at Nicea and Constantinople I is that there is one God, the Father, who communicates his divinity to his Son, who is his Wisdom and Power (per the New Testament). The Holy Spirit is likewise understood to be of the same nature as the Father, because he shares in the same Divine Activity that is proper only to Divinity (cf Gregory of Nyssa Ad Ablabius). The theology of "One Divinity" is only preserved, according to Gregory Nazianzus, if one refers back to a "single principle," which is universally identified as the Father. The Son and Spirit both derive their Divinity from the Father, who is their source, or "arche". This is called Monarchical Trinitarianism, and is the predominant view of those who penned the Nicene Creed and presided over the council of Constantinople.
Take your time to actually understand this doctrine. History is complex, and this naive protestant presupposition inherited in Unitarianism that "we just look at the text!" is exactly what leads to endless and eternal schisms and separations.
@pj1683 You have provided the perfect example of what has actually caused so many problems. Rather than going to the text seeking understanding from God, you instead would have people to accept as truth the creeds and writings of others who have attempted to explain the text just as other people have. Those people are just men too.... just like the ones you seem to be criticizing. Nothing you said comes from scripture....only a strand of tradition.
In short:
Accept James White's god-man theory and believe Jesus is YAHWEH, or you need to study more and you are not saved (sarcasm). OR, Apply the common sense God gave you to the plain texts of the Bible and you arrive at the truth which is precisely what Dale Tuggy's position is....THE TRUTH.
How do you respond to John 8:58 Jesus said to them before Abraham was I am
How do you respond to John 8:58 Jesus said to them before Abraham was I am
@@dannymcmullan9375 before Abraham was I am
Begotten Son. Thats not the father. God is not a man@@dannymcmullan9375
@@dannymcmullan9375 Too many distinctions in the Bible saying God the father and son of God 2 different people a father cannot be a son and a son cannot be A. Father to himself. The father and I are 1 means 1 in the same purpose not one as the same person.
Both these positions do not take into account Ezekiel's visions in Ezekiel 1. In verse 1 it says that by the river Chebar he saw "visions of God".
Verse 26 it says that above the firmament was "the likeness of a throne, as the appearance of a sapphire stone: and upon the likeness of the throne was the likeness as the appearance of a man above upon it".
Who is the appearance of a likeness of a man referring to? God, who is also said to be YHVH (the LORD), in chapter 3:23, referring to the glory of the LORD he saw which was like the vision he saw by the river Chebar.
So, who is this man? Jesus
Ironically it was the trinity came by way of man made philosophy, so it is funny to hear Dr White mentioning philosophy in general. If Yahshua himself worshipped and prayed to YHWH the Father AND taught us to do the same, surely they can't be both YHWH as YHWH is One singular divine Person. The Father who is above all-Ephesians 4:1