Question for Trinitarian and Oneness believers (presented at the end of the podcast) : Is the exalted, glorified human person, Jesus of Nazareth, at the right hand of God?
What SCRIPTURE, {YHWH within 6,823x} teaches. 6th book Yahu'shua HELLinized as Joshua, 8,23-♾️5-Grace, October 23, The fall harvest is in, and the flocks are in the fields as written. Read MatithYahu, ObedYahu, Yashayahu, Lamentations = {oyl🪔}+ZacharYahu= Remember YaHU'aH🔯 Vs Religions .....NON-SCRIPTURAL fables & Idolatry Whatever your religion, what knowledge and intelligence does it teach? Compare! Yahu∆im ArchiTechTons teach; The Shemetic/Khemetic/Yaphethic - King Yahu'shua and the 12 Yahu∆im ELect elders of the King∆om of YaHU∆aH 2 {{Chronicles 7:14}, gave them technology, Astronomy, Arithmetic, Astrology, Art, Geometry, Biology, physics, Metallurgy ⚛️ phonetics, cymatics, {seed of gr8 elder Yapheth}, Khemistry, Alkhemy & herbology {seed of great elder Khem}, Knowle∆ge 🔺, Wis∆om🔻, & intelligence, Ode of Solomon 38🧐! The key to immortality: Obey YaHU'aH's🔯13 COMMANDs {kNEW COVENANT -10 on Sapphire stone tablets, 🟦🟦10 + 3 Oral💜}, & 42 Statutes,🟩Emerald tablets}, the {tetYHUHgrammarten} & Star tetYHUHhedron🔯 = Father sigNATURE, YaHU'aH's Salvation, King Yahu'shua, beloved namesake & the MessiYah, Queen MariYahm; Wis∆om & the Breath of YaH, {RuAnkh Yah'Qodesh 💜}! The cELestial clock & Shabbat - As the Gamma rAY's are highest at ∆awn 🌅, on the day of the full moon🌕, we praise YaH, and Ohm chant, facing East, eyes closed, looking into the rising sun. This activates our shockYahs, & pineal gland! They gave us the ∆alath {∆oor, built to honor YaHU'aH 🔯, Yashayahu 19:29-20}, {note also, King Yahu'shua is also called the🔺Door, & the stone ∆ the builders rejected!🤔}, the symbol of the Lion of YaHu∆aH, {Sphinx}! Moreso the ∆aleth called piYHUHmids or piYaHmi∆ {π🔯mid - forms the star tetYAHedron thru sonic implosion}, Yashayahu 19:19-20, keys of YahNock aka Enoch, & letter of Barnabas 16 chapter ✅, and the great NAME & Qodesh Title of The Most High YaHU'aH AllaH aYnu Aleph TaU = Supreme Eternal Sovereign Creator, Almighty Merciful King of all, beginning and ending! The Truth of YAhbre' Scripture, YaHs prophecies, and the historical timeline of the 4 ERAs! They taught the next dimension above? Is as below, (the current one you're in), and that S.E.X., {SowEL Energy Xchange, a gift from YaH}, is between a male ♂️ and female♀️! That life is transmitted from the most high, YaHU'aH's mouth, ( MatithYahu 4:4, Gen 2:7, YaH's living WORDs spoKIN - you are your NAME🧐), into a man! And given a body, akin to a tadpole, a semen. We swim the great race, run by 1 billionfold! Yea, the strongest survive, to win the prize, betwixt a woman's thighs, the egg inside! And the growing of the vessEL, (formed around the living Word of YaH, your name), grows in perfect geometry indicating YaHs sigNATURE as the flower of life, (🔯)! See the heartbeat 💓🔯 cymatic of a baby {Fetus}!!!!! Timeline
If the question was valid, it would need to clarify what is meant by "the *right hand* of God". But as it is, the question is invalid, because it presupposes Jesus of Nazareth - the only begotten Son of God - is a human person, when in fact he is the genuinely human manifestation of the one true God: the Father.
*1 JOHN 2:22 (KJV)* Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.
The verse opens with a rhetorical question concerning the denial of *a singular person:* "Jesus...the Christ". It would naturally follow then, that the _answer_ to the rhetorical question _also_ concerns the denial of *that same singular person:* "the Father and the Son".
*1 JOHN 2:23 (KJV)* Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.
If you deny the Son - the _real_ Son - you don't have the Father, because the Son _IS_ the Father..."manifest in the flesh" (1 Tim.3:16). And _his_ name - the name of "the Father _and_ the Son" - is revealed to be the name which is above _every_ name: *JESUS.*
@@euston2216 such nonsense on many levels. The name Jesus, invented in 1534 after the letter j was invented, is first and foremost a CONstruct in and of itself, a picture of Cesare Borgia and a made up name inserted in the book, after 1798... that part first and foremost. Now we will deal with idolatry... The ten commandments are ye familiar? Also what name did the MessiYah give to the 12 Yahudim elect elders, and also the men of Athens? This desire to deify a man made painting and statues is nonsense. When YaHUaH made Adamah what was the process? YaHU'aH's Breath aka RuAnkh Yah'Qodesh+ Adam = living SowEL aka sown Eloheim Babylonized as soul... Now with the MessiYah, what was his 13th command? We note the 3 love Father, love thy neighbor and the 3rd present thyself as a living sacrifice that YaH 🔯 may possess you..... Again the math, YaHs breath + you a SowEL = a living SowEL
Amen amen. While I truly hope that deity of Christ believers will not be lost, I hear the words of Jesus ringing out. “Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few. Matthew 7:13-14
I think the Atlanta conferences have been online only since Covid. Check with Carlos or Sir Anthony. The UCA has a conference coming up in Springfield, Ohio. www.unitarianchristianalliance.org/conference/
Bill, you are the voice in the wilderness. Here is another question: what is the Good News for us humans if not the man Jesus being resurrected as first fruit?
Exactly! The resurrection of the man Jesus is the life that gives us light and hope, It shows how much value God values humans, and how much good he has in store for us "in the ages to come".
Yes my dear brother. I think about how you had an honored position as a teacher or professor & were looked up to by many people as such. Then they cast you out from your profession as teacher & professor. And they did that all because you simply discovered the real truth of the Lord Jesus; God the Father & the Holy Spirit. It must have been a very hurtful & a very humbling experience. I want to let you know that I really appreciate you & your Christian work; you are a good gift in the Body of Christ. Let us pray one for another.
I have a theory about why we debate the divinity of Jesus. It is because of a misinterpretation of the messenger's words in Luke 1:35b. His reference is not Luke 1:35a but verses 32 and 33 (a fulfillment of 2 Sam 7:12 and 14). The phrase "shall be called the Son of God." is referring to the time of Jesus' baptism. There is no genealogy for Mary, unless you use eisegesis (using Luke chapter 3 and Gen 3:15, which of course was a reference to the house of Joseph, 1 Chr 5:1-2, not Judah). She may very well be a Levite. The point is, either God created a man in Mary (another Adam - not a seed of David) or introduced a male seed; David's seed (BTW the definition of IVF is pregnancy without intercourse).
Trinitarians and Jesus divinity believers don't really care what words say and mean. They don't care about past or future tenses, personal pronouns, they think that they have the right to change the definition of a word whenever they want to whatever they want. "He will be called the Son of God" 1. It talks about future event. 2. "Will be CALLED". To be called someone doesn't mean literally. Peter was called rock in Greek but is Peter literally a rock ? 3. "Son OF GOD", by definition itself, son can't be the one who begat him. GOD is clearly a separate entity from his son. There is very clear that even angels are called to be sons of God. But when it comes to trinitarian Jesus, the definition of son changes magically. Word son when used for angels means one thing, when it speaks about Jesus another thing, and when it speaks about us being children of God it means different from two mentioned above. It's plain hypocrisy and I can't stand it..
Wonderful teaching Bill! You are a precious and valued teacher to Gods little flock. Thankyou so much and may God continue to bless and prosper his Word through you!
@@elizabethmcnamara6548 “Jesus therefore answered them, and said, My teaching is not mine, but his that sent me. If any man willeth to do his will, he shall know of the teaching, whether it is of God, or whether I speak from myself.” John 7:16-17 ASV
I 100% agree. Just wondering, which scripture are you referencing that says “Jesus was conceived”? I’m currently in an email dialogue with a trinitarian brother in Messiah, and I’m about halfway through a long refutation of many of his claims. This scripture reference would be great!
@@schappellshow - The following verses are taken from the ESV: Num_5:28 But if the woman has not defiled herself and is clean, then she shall be free and shall CONCEIVE children. Num 11:12 Did I CONCEIVE all this people? Did I give them BIRTH, that you should say to me, Carry them in your bosom, as a nurse carries a nursing child,’ to the land that you swore to give their fathers? Jdg 13:3 And the angel of the LORD appeared to the woman and said to her, “Behold, you are barren and have not borne children, but you shall CONCEIVE and bear a son. Jdg_13:5 for behold, you shall CONCEIVE and bear a son. No razor shall come upon his head, for the child shall be a Nazirite to God from the womb, and he shall begin to save Israel from the hand of the Philistines.” Jdg_13:7 but he said to me, Behold, you shall CONCEIVE and bear a son. So then drink no wine or strong drink, and eat nothing unclean, for the child shall be a Nazirite to God from the womb to the day of his death.’” Job_15:35 They CONCEIVE trouble and give BIRTH to evil, and their WOMB prepares deceit.” Psa_51:5 Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother CONCEIVE me. Isa_7:14 Therefore the LORD himself will give you a sign. Behold, the virgin shall CONCEIVE and BEAR a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. Isa_33:11 You CONCEIVE chaff; you give BIRTH to stubble; your breath is a fire that will consume you. Isa_59:4 No one enters suit justly; no one goes to law honestly; they rely on empty pleas, they speak lies, they CONCEIVE mischief and GIVE BIRTH to iniquity. Mat_1:23 “Behold, the virgin shall CONCEIVE and BEAR a son, and they shall call his name Immanuel” (which means, God with us). Luk_1:31 And behold, you will CONCEIVE in YOUR WOMB and BEAR a son, and you shall call his name Jesus. Heb_11:11 By faith Sarah herself RECEIVED POWER TO CONCEIVE, even when she was past the age, since she considered him faithful who had promised. When the word "conceived" is used in Scripture, it is clearly used to describe the Natural Procreation Process which God, from the beginning, created. The Man provides the Male "seed" and the Woman has the Female "egg", and when the Man and the Woman "come together", the "seed" and the "egg" COMBINE in the Woman's WOMB, resulting in the CONCEPTION of an Individual. The Man does NOT CONCEIVE; the Woman CONCEIVES. The Man is said to BEGET, that is, he is the CAUSE of the CONCEPTION. So, by simple logic, we can understand that God was the CAUSE of the CONCEPTION which took place in Mary's womb. Apparently, at least to me, God CREATED one microscopic human male "seed" directly inside Mary's womb, which naturally combined with her "egg", resulting in the CONCEPTION of a child. Mary's "dilemma" was not that she was infertile, but that she had "not known a Man", i.e., she was not being provided with male "seed". God PROVIDED what she needed to CONCEIVE, i.e., a human male "seed".
@@schappellshow- I have tried for years to tell "biblical unitarians" that their "problem" with "trinitarians", and others, is not so much with "who is Jesus" but with the so called "incarnation" interpretation of Jesus' origin, as clearly depicted by Matthew and Luke. They tell us EXACTLY HOW Jesus "came to be", which is EXACTLY like every human being on planet Earth. A human male "seed" combined with a human female "egg". God miraculously provided the human male "seed" inside Mary's womb, which COMBINED with her human female "seed". Not "rocket science". For some reason, some so called "Biblical Unitarians", which are to remain nameless, have for years shunned me every time I present this quite elementary conclusion. According to them IT, how Mary CONCEIVED, is so called "Holy Ground" and we must not "go there". I say, Why not, since it is perfectly NATURAL and nothing to be ashamed about.
Hebrew māšîaḥ = Greek messias = Greek christos = Latin christ. The high priest’s were christ’s/messiah’s, the kings of Israel. Jesus was appointed King and high priest. Appointed by All of these appointed by Yahweh means they are not Yahweh/God. It’s that simple yet trinitarians are blinded by men and their own desires to follow men rather than God and His appointed King and high priest. They are ignorantly anti christ’s like you have shown. It’s sad and a warning that is important. Thanks for doing what you do Bill. In truth.
Another question is, which part of Jesus died? The God part or the man part? If it was the man part, then the man part must have been resurrected and ascended to heaven. Which would give a fourth member to the Trinity, and make it a Quadrity. If on the other hand, the God part died, then that's a problem because God cannot die. This is more than a conundrum. And the creeds only get around it by saying he's this as well as that. Which only works on paper, but not in reality. Like saying fully God and fully man. It doesn't work in reality, because fully God doesn't allow mortal man so near, because of unapproachable light.
Great video. You are so right Bill. My experience in dealing with trinitarians in public ministry (Prison) is there was a spirit of hostility towards me. They were nice because the Christian faith demands it, but they couldn’t hide their distain because of my position. History bares witness to the hostility directed towards us “heretics”….. truly we wrestle not against flesh and blood as the scriptures say….
The Jesus I believe in [ie] the human Jesus, is clearly a “different” Jesus from the one that Trinitarians believe in. Simply put, we have two completely different faiths. We can beat around the bush as much as we like with the above “fact”, but it will not change the outcome. I have tried and will always try to be patient, loving and respectful towards those I have engaged over the years concerning the doctrine of the Trinity, but I have also been very clear and firm with them concerning the above reasoning [i.e.] we have “different” faiths. There are many things that I deeply regret in my life, things that I will be accountable to God for, but watering down the seriousness of this specific issue isn't going to be one of them. If I were to disagree with the above, then I would have to question myself as to why I feel the need to stir the pot, thus creating unnecessary discord concerning this issue. Peace
@@EddyScrivner Thank you for your concern. Personally, I'm more than comfortable with having the same God that Jesus has. Jesus did not ascend to, nor does he have a God that consists of a three-person being. Jesus’ God was his Father “alone” and so it should be yours too. Jesus is our example, follow him and not the masses. Peace
I understand the need to be avoiding discord in the view of the world, but then Jesus went about creating discord in the marketplaces. Many I think find me abrasive, I know a couple unitarians who have accosted me as sharply as the trinitarians do. I was eager and humble in my quest to reach my trinnie brothers at first, 6 years ago, and I am still in intent, but as I have gone along I realize more and more the urgency and apathy. I was one of them for 4 decades, and like the reformed smoker can be the most outspoken in a smoky room, I see the smokescreen the enemy has placed on our brethren, 90% of churchianty doesnt even realize there is an issue! So I am now trying to stir their stumps, to shake them, to shout in urgency. So rooftop shouting has become who I am. Hoping to make a few look around at what the fuss is about. Blessings.
We should use caution about who we call brother, especially those who have never even obeyed the Gospel and deny the Son. 7For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist. 8Look to yourselves, that we lose not those things which we have wrought, but that we receive a full reward. 9Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. 10If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: 11For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds. II John
Interesting concept. Definitely worth considering, but overall I think this is "splitting hairs" in an effort to discredit Trinitarians and Arians. No need to question another man's salvation, over obscure doctrines. You are above that Bill. You're better than this.
sure is worth considering. Because if you are christian, then "the same spirit that raised christ from the dead, lives in you," which makes you christ too.
Indeed, our judge will be the man Christ Jesus, given authority to do so by God. But the question of "is Jesus a real human person" is not an insignificant matter.
I always wonder about the antichrist idea when it comes to the Trinity, or similar teaching. But, then what exactly was John witnessing in his day that caused him to write about it? Because there were also the Jews who denied that Jesus was their Christ or messiah. And were there false brethren within the church who tried to steer people back to Judaism? And Peter writes that, 'there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them'. A version of antichrist teaching. Would appreciate anyone's views on this. And also I'm not well enough up on early church history to know of anything else going on in John's day. But, the Trinity was not fully formed until later on.
Eddie, the big battle in Johns day was with the Gnostics (knowledge economy of the time) out of Greek philosophy. This began to get a hold on the church fathers once the church centre had been evicted from Jerusalem and Alexandria became church central. Gnosticism has the logos creating all as an agent of the untouchable highest god, and also the division of body and soul at death, which leads to the Hollywood idea of heaven being a chorus invisible playing harps and dead folk joining them at death. This is the sanitized version of the beer and Mead halls of Valhalla for the Norse warrior, virgins aplenty in heaven for the Islamist or buddha or nirvanna for the eastern cultures. Trinitarianism is gnosticism in disguise. Its all pagan.
@@ken440 Thanks, that sheds some more light on it. 'Opposition of science (gnosis) falsely so called'. And what's the other one, 'professing themselves to be wise, they became fools'. Perhaps I should look into it a bit more for clarity, but I can see how the Trinity would arise from this, and wanting to mesh Biblical ideas with Greek ideas of many gods, I guess. As you say, it's all pagan.
@@eddieyoung2104 Eddie I am with you on that but be careful with what you said near end just now "meshing biblical ideas with greek ideas. I used to think that too, but came to see that the many gods concept is actually correct. This usually comes over from the trinity camp that there is only one God and a lot of superstition. But its not just greeks, as every nation on earth have gods of one sort or another, and the big disclosure thing the americans are playing at at the moment is part of this. The Hebrew people also knew there were other Gods. Its not a greek pantheon so no worry about claiming panthionism, but the Hebrews knew from their history that they were chosen by the One God... MOST HIGH. Also seen in the term "almighty God" the creator God. Although he is a trinitarian or some sort of binitarian, Mike Heiser and a few others over the last 10 years has unlocked a lot of biblical insight that modernity from Augustine onwards has hidden in plain sight disguised as demons and angels in catholocism over the last millenium, as if a simplistic duality exists between only one god and one devil called Satan (which word "satan" is Hebrew for "adversary"). It goes back to Babel, something no one preaches on, and the fact that the bible is only the good news. The bad news was known to all the people groups of the ancients, that man was corrupted and the bible tells the good news, that the creator God chose a special people, from a baren couple, and made them the channel to the promised seed of the woman, the messiah who would crush the head of the devil. The nations pushed out for spiritual wickedness at Babel, were assigned angelic beings (bene elohim) sons of God as overseers. In yet more miss use and religiosity the angelic overseers let themselves be worshipped as gods. Some more corrupt than others. This is the Deut32:8 assinmemt listed in scripture as a snippet of bad news, along with the earlier Gen6:1-4 bad news. The bible is good news about restoration from the spirit rebellion, so it is not explained. In discovering this trinity unity thing 6 years ago the logics analyst in me began to look in all the corners. I found at least 4 major stumbling points in churchianity, and in digging into them all (at the time the trinity to me was the big one... not now) I discovered they are all interwoven, and the major debate centres on Jesus divinity issue. But then a couple years into it I found that this "divine council" issue, what is simplistically seen as "angels" in church circles, or Other Gods, in a pagan setting, is not as cut and dry as Judeo/christian claim that there is only one God full stop, or pagan pantheism that there are multiple Gods of equal standing. Its a spiritual war where some of Gods created spiritual sons have rebelled and dragged mankind into it (Adams fall) and yet strive to destroy Gods (the God most high, YHWH, the creator Himself) work and plans. The good news we know is those plans, the word of God, fleshed out in about 3BC in the birth of that promised one, who becomes the lamb of Passover for all mankind, so that all who come under the blood of the lamb are covered in Gods sight, saved by Gods provision, to BECOME THE SONS OF GOD as Paul points out, promised to be raised and reign WITH JESUS over the nations. That is the so called "mystery" hid in God (lest if the enemy had known they would not have caused the death of the lamb) that Paul brings out all through the epistles. That we are one new man, a new creation, raised in Jesus higher than angels (bene elohim) in authority (why we can name the authority of Jesus against the demonic and the chief enemy) and why we are said to "judge angels" and will when called be glorified and be forever with Christ (administration) over the nations. This one I have found is even bigger than trinity problem, it shows us the larger picture and identifies our purpose and identity. We are (now) the replacement sons of God, in authority with Christ Jesus, yet in clay vessels but in promise brothers of Jesus at his side as he is currently at Gods side. Its all there and blows the mind, and connects all the dots. This is perhaps not very appropriate to this video and many unitarians resist this view, but there it is in a quick summary.
@@eddieyoung2104 This just in from some study with Gilbert House. (they are trinitarian but I wont condemn them for that, gems are found in all sorts of soil) This may help you see the point I just made Eddie. Quote; This week, we run into another instance of the English phrase “worthless idols” (Ps. 97:7b). We think the context indicates that the Hebrew word elîlîm refers to supernatural beings (angels, if you like), not carvings of wood and stone. This is emphasized by the exhortation to the unseen realm in the sentence that follows: “Worship Him, all you gods!” We submit that David, who wrote Psalm 97, knew full well that lifeless sculptures are not capable of worship. Those small-G gods are real. David’s point, which we read in Psalm 97:9, is that YHWH is “exalted far above all gods.” As we mentioned in our study of 1 Chronicles 16 (GHF #369), elîlîm is derived from the name of the Mesopotamian father-god, Enlil, which was rendered “Ellil” in Akkadian. The elîlîm, then, were not the “imaginary friends” of Israel’s pagan neighbors, but small-E elohim who had followed Enlil (AKA El, Dagon, Molech, Kronos, Saturn, and Shemihazah, among other names) into rebellion against their Creator.
@@ken440 Well, thanks Ken, you've diverted me from the monotony of the Trinity onto something else! I have to say though, from the outset, that I don't subscribe to the fallen angel idea. So, perhaps I'm entirely the wrong person to tell this to. But, nevertheless there's value in the discussion. You might want to switch off now, which I think most do when I mention it. But, if you're interested, then I'll just cover some of the points you mentioned. I believe we are the sons of God, and as you say, we will be the immortalised sons of God in the kingdom age. As Jesus says, we will be made like the angels. And because they are sons of God, we also will be. But in addition, instead of now being lower than them, we will be higher, just as Jesus is now. In regard to 1 Cor 6:3, and us judging angels, this is how I understand it. At first it might seem that some angels must be sinful beings, and that's why we'll need to judge them. Yet, the word 'judge' (krino) just means to discern, separate, or determine. So, when we judge, we make a discernment, a determination, and we separate one from another, or separate between different behaviours or questions. That means, we will make determinations in respect to angels, but it doesn't necessarily mean it's a decision regarding bad behaviour. Lu 7:43 is an interesting example of the word 'krino'. Where Jesus asks Simon who will love more, and he answers, I suppose the one who was forgiven the most. And Jesus says to him, you have rightly judged. In this verse it's not a matter of making a decision on bad behaviour, but just making a discernment or determination on which of two people will do something. And so, when it comes to angels, it seems we will be making decisions for them. As to whether they should do this or that. And whether they should go here or there, and whether they should say this or that. And whether it should be this one or that one, that should do such a thing. These are all determinations that we will be able to make. So that, Instead of just messengers of YHVH, they will be messengers also of us the saints.. The Psalm 97 passage is also an interesting one, and I've never heard of this idea before. So, I've just looked at all the occurrences of the word 'elil', and the following passages stood out to me. Job 13:4 'But ye are forgers of lies, ye are all physicians of no value'. With the phrase 'no value' being 'elil'. And if we transferred that to Psalm 97 we would have many things of no value, or 'that boast themselves of valueless things'. And, then the phrase, 'worship him all ye Elohim' could be referring to the worshippers. In other words, don't worship worthless things, instead worship God all ye mighty ones. You might think that's a stretch, but the judges in Psalm 82 were called Elohim, and it was usually the princes who were the main ones involved in evil. Habakkuk 2:18,19 is another one: 18 What profits the graven image that the maker thereof hath graven it; the molten image, and a teacher of lies, that the maker of his work trusts therein, to make dumb idols (elilim)? 19 Woe unto him that says to the wood, Awake; to the dumb stone, Arise, it shall teach! Behold, it is laid over with gold and silver, and there is no breath at all in the midst of it. In this passage, firstly we have dumb, or mute elilim, which wouldn't fit with them being living beings, unless the fallen angels lost the power of speech. And then there would be no point for God to say that the stone is dumb, or the wood has no breath in it, if they are only representations of something with actual breath and speech. Likewise, what does it profit the graven image that the maker has graven it? Well, nothing. But that would be an irrelevant question for God to ask, if in fact there was a real god behind it, who did in fact profit from people's worship. Then, there's also Zech 11:17: 'Woe to the idol (elil) shepherd that leaves the flock'. Which is just saying that he is a worthless shepherd, because the whole point is that he stays and protects them. So, it seems to me that the word is referring to something worthless or of no value, rather than an actual name of a deity or sub deities. And the idols were of no value because they could not benefit or save. Also Isaiah 44 talks about the man who cuts down a tree and uses half for firewood, and with the other half he makes a god. 19 And none considers in his heart, neither is there knowledge nor understanding to say, I have burned part of it in the fire; yea, also I have baked bread upon the coals thereof; I have roasted flesh, and eaten it: and shall I make the residue thereof an abomination? shall I fall down to the stock of a tree? Again, there would be no value in God's argument if this stock of a tree represented a real live god being. Shall I fall down to the stock of a tree? Of course, men would say yes, if it represents a powerful entity that is able to bless or curse. But, if it is nothing more than a lifeless piece of timber then no, don't bother. And the whole point is that God's saying, you're worshipping something that is dead, and which you've just used to cook your bread on. You also make a reference to 1 Cor 2:8 about the enemy causing the death of the lamb. Although it just says, Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory'. And I take the princes to mean, the rulers of the Jews, the princes of the world to which Jesus came. And to them it was hidden. There's a similar verse in Acts 2 where Peter says, 'him..ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain'. He then goes on to describe how this was the messiah and how it was all prophesied. This was a mystery to them, but once Peter declared it, 'they were pricked in their heart, and said...Men and brethren, what shall we do?'. So they, like their princes, didn't know, even though it was contained in their scriptures. And had they not been blind and known, they would not have said 'crucify him'.
Amén as proven by Matthew 16:6-20 ➡️the rock of the true identity of JESUS 🪨 The so called “trinity” *inverts* Peter’s confession of “Son of the Living God” to a fictional, non entity “god the son” The gates of hell shall not prevail against it ➡️🪨 …….Beware the leaven ⚠️
Then you don’t go far enough. Read how far the apostles took the doctrine of Christ. II John 1:9-11 the so called “trinity” is a direct assault on the doctrine of Christ.
Thank you. Awesome video. I’ve been doing some research on the Holy spirited. In the bible it clearly says when we die our bodies stay in the ground. Here are a few verses. Acts 2v29-34 Dan 12v2 John 5v28 1 cor 15v20-23-35-52-42 So what happens to our spirit
I hope you don’t mind, but whilst you wait for Bill's reasonings on this issue, I have taken the kind liberty to offer you mine. I would answer by saying “You're not wrong” but let them know you believe he was truly a “unique man”. Many things could be said about how “unique” he was, but for time and space reasons, let's just consider that he is the “only man” chosen by God to die as a perfect sacrifice for our sins. This is where many Trinitarians fall foul of their reasoning when they say “So you believe Jesus was a mere man”. Simply because they don't believe that the “son of God” [i.e.] the God part, died on the cross. They only believe that the “human man” Jesus died. In other words, they are also more than happy to believe that a “mere man” paid the price for their sin. Trinitarians simply contradict themselves with this kind of reasoning. Hope this has helped. Peace.
Yeah, they use the word "mere" as kind of a slur. But after showing that Jesus wasn't so "mere" (by the way, neither is any other human being), the best response is to show the scriptures that declare that Jesus is a human being, had to be a human being, and who is and what he did is exactly what God required and wanted. Your question leads to the same question I ask in this podcast: "Do you have a problem with God exalting a human being to His right hand?" And wow, what a promise and hope this is for the rest of us for whom Jesus of Nazareth represents. Here's a 3-part series of podcasts on the question. I think parts 2 and 3 mainly answer the question. ua-cam.com/play/PLUqWXumvcp5rLIOHUtJWBc6Sg8HQf4sfL.html
Frank, I generally ask them if they consider Adam to have been a "mere" man? As in the first man, created as Gods representative and imager in the creation, was he not a bit special? Even though he misused his free will. And so Jesus as Paul tells us the "second or last Adam" formed in the woman, was he not a bit special too?
A very good question which most in christendom ignore. And as that word (very holy, churchy) that we use "christ" is left in greek without the true meaning translated ( probably for religious holy reasons. i say with great irony, meaning catholocism inflation of piety). Christ meaning "anointed" puts an even more friendly slant on that quote from Bill. "Jesus is God" Denies that Jesis is the "anointed." I mean like "anointed what?" Obviously wont be "anointed God" will it, because its God wot does anointings, eh dad? So using the completed meaning of the greek word, leads us to see that this "anointed" must by logical comprehension, be less than God. i.e. the anointed man. "elementary dear Watson."
@eddyscrivner Jesus and his God ARE one, just like ALL believers are supposed to be one with God John 17:20-22. And, since Jesus is perfectly subjected to his God, Jesus then is a perfect IMAGE of God. Seeing Jesus shows us his God, his Father. Keep in mind, trinitarianism CLAIMS to believe that the Father and Jesus are SEPERATE PERSONS! That means any attempt to make Jesus BE "the Father", (like your second point does), is actually contrary to trinitarian teaching.
@@loveofthetruth9398 Jesus said Abraham rejoiced to see My day and he saw it and was glad and the Pharisees said you are a young man and you have seen Abraham? Jesus replied Before Abraham was, I am. What did God(the burning bush) tell Moses to tell Pharoah, who sent him. God said to tell Pharoah “I am” sent you.
@@EddyScrivner From one Eddie to another. Here's some extra information about 'I am'. The words 'I am' are often used to link Jesus with the burning bush event, but is this actually the case? When Jesus said 'I am', the Greek for that is 'ego eimi'. They are the same words used when the man born blind says 'I am he' (John 9:9). If you look at the Greek Old Testament (Septuagint), and read Exodus 3:14, you might expect to see the same wording, 'ego eimi'. But you won't. What it says is 'ego eimi o ov', which translates as 'I am the being'. Jesus however didn't say 'ego eimi o ov', he just said 'ego eimi'. He didn't say, 'I am the being', but said, 'I am'. In other words, I am the messiah. I am the one I've been telling you I am. Which was the son of God, and son of man. When he says 'before Abraham was I am', it can be understood that he was referring to being promised before Abraham, and more important than him. Not necessarily that he physically existed before Abraham. Because to the Jews Abraham was like the pinnacle of the nation, so I think Jesus was making a point of being before him in superiority, rather than before him in time. In other words Jesus was saying, I am the one, the messiah, and even before Abraham existed, I was the promised one.
@@EddyScrivnerSo you have two Gods?? Jesus is God and the Father (aka Jehovah) is God too. Hmmm!! I think just Jehovah is God because the King James Bible says that Jehovah is God Almighty at Exodus 6:3 and 7 other place too. And yeah I know Jehovah isn't his actual name but rather YHWH and Yod-He-Waw-He and Yehovah and even Yehowah are possibly his name but the majority of the English speaking world calls him Jehovah and since I speak English I'm going with Jehovah too.
This is all new to me; can someone PLEASE explain John 1:1,14 - In the beginning was the Word, the word was with God, and the Word was God.. in vs. 14, the word became flesh, which is Jesus who dwelt among us.. so, if the Word is God and God became flesh/Jesus then isn't Jesus God in the flesh!?? This doesn't mean a second God it simply means God dwelt among us in the flesh of Jesus.
Hi, I can offer you my reasonings to your question. It is rather longwinded so it would be sent in two half’s. I don’t want to unnecessarily bore you with long posts so it’s up to you? Also, it would be wrong of me not to inform you that there are other interpretations concerning John’s prologue that unitarians hold apart from mine. Peace
Hello, I'm open to read whatever you have. The host of this channel hasn't responded, nor do Many Christians, no idea why, nevertheless, I'd love to read an explanation to a seemingly straightforward question. Shalom!
@@mikewood3309 1 John’s prologue:- At the start of John’s prologue, he writes “In the beginning was the word”. It is through biased translation only that the “w” in “word” is often, if not always capitalised. It's as if the translators are trying to emphasise something John wasn't. The “word” is something that belongs to God, It's something spoken. Jesus is the overall subject of John's prologue, but that doesn’t necessarily mean “he” is the subject in verses 1 - 4. I think it’s reasonably safe to assume that most interpretations of John 1:1 recognise the author's drop of the “article” in clause [c]. It has been taught by many Greek scholars/grammarians that John’s drop of the definite article in clause [c] means that “Theos/God” can be understood within a “qualitative” sense [i.e.] John’s focus is not on “who” the word/logos is, but on “what” the word/logos is. So, in the case I am presenting, I don't see it as unreasonable to believe that the “word/logos” is tantamount to God's divine expression “within himself”. Rather like it says in Prov 23:7 [a]:- “For as he thinks within himself, so he is”. To take this claim further, It must be noted that a lot of modern-day translations, through biased reasoning, translate the Greek pronouns “houtos” and “autos” as “he” and “him”, simply because it’s assumed that “the word” is the person of Christ in his pre-existing form, instead of something spoken. Yet, this has not always been the case. The CNT and many Bibles that predate the King James Version do not use personal pronouns such as “he” and “him” in their translation of Joh 1:1-4. The following is how Tyndale translated the beginning of John’s prologue before Trinitarian bias took over. John 1:1-5: - 1, In the beginning, was that word, and that word was with god: and god was that word. 2>[The same]< was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by >[it]< and without >[it]< was made no thing, that made was. 4 In >[it]< was life, And life was the light of men, 5 And the light shineth in the darkness, and darkness comprehended it not. Simply put, it is the subject that determines the translation of the Greek pronouns “houtos” and “autos” and not the other way around. Therefore, It is perfectly acceptable to translate them as “this” and “it” - “if” the subject in view is inanimate. John 1: 3-4 is a continuation of verse 2 where the word “houtos” introduces verse 2 and is often translated as “this” and “this” is a reference back to the “word/logos” in verse 1. Strong’s definition G3778 - houtos:- Outline of Biblical Usage:- >[this]
2 John’s prologue:- Although the likes of Tyndale believed in the concept of the trinity, It seems that these translators freely accepted that the “word/logos” was something “belonging to God”, and not as “another person”- “with God”. This is understandably so when we consider the meanings attached to the “word/logo - Britannica definition:- Logos, [Greek: “word,” “reason,” or “plan”] plural logoi, in Greek philosophy and theology, >[the divine reason implicit in the cosmos, ordering it and giving it form and meaning]< The above makes sense when reading the Genesis account of creation [i.e.] in the beginning God “said/spoke” things into existence through his divine “word/logos”. God didn't randomly make this world, he had a design, a plan “with/within him” before he spoke it into being through his divine word. It is argued that the word “with/pros” has to mean being “with” somebody next to or face to face. But that, I believe, is not the understanding John is presenting here. The “word/logos” within Hebraic thought can mean a person's thoughts, reasons, ideas, plans etc., being “with them” or “within themselves”. Consider the following:- Job 10:13:- Yet these things You have concealed in Your heart; I know that this is >[within You]< [NASB] Job 20:13-14:- For he performeth that which is appointed for me: And many such things are >[with him]< [ASV] When the “word” of God” - “comes” to somebody, it captures the understanding of something abstract such as an “idea” or “truth” now being “with them”: In John 1:6, John the Baptist was sent from God and the “word of God” - “came to him” Luke 1:8. So it wouldn’t be out of context to say from that point, the “word” was now “with him”. A similar understanding to this also presents itself in Gala 2:5 and 1 John 1:2:- “But we did not yield in subjection to them for even an hour so that the truth of the gospel would remain “with/pros” you [Gala 2:5] “And the life was revealed, and we have seen and testify and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was “with/pros” the Father and was revealed to us” [1 John 1:2] Again, the understanding here is that something abstract such as wisdom, Eternal life, a plan or a truth etc.... in Hebraic thought and writings can be understood as being “with” or “within” a person, or in this case God himself, ready to be expressed. John 1:1-4 is simply showing us that in the beginning “all things” within creation come through the power of God’s “spoken word”. John is creating a parallel between the old and the new creation. That’s why he often refers back to the “beginning”, not the “beginning” in the book of Genesis but the “beginning” of Jesus’ ministry. See John 2:11, 6:4, 8:25, 15:27, 6:64, 1 John 1:1, 2:7, 2:13 -14, 3:11, 2 John 1:5 -6 etc.. see also Mark 1:1. In the Genesis account of creation, God’s “word” became matter. It didn't exist before that point, it only existed in God’s mind as a plan yet to be revealed. Beholding the glory of this created world doesn't mean it existed before it's creation. The same with Jesus’ creation in the womb of Mary. God’s “word” became flesh. Jesus didn't exist before that point, he only existed in God’s mind as a plan yet to be revealed. Beholding his glory doesn't mean he existed before his creation in the womb of Mary. Both only came into being when God’s “word” ordered it to be. Jesus isn’t “the word” himself, he is the embodiment of “the word”. Jesus clearly stated that his “words” were not his own John 14:24. At John 1:10 It says that “he was in the world and the world was made through him and the world did not know him”. In context, the world here is not the original creation such as rocks, trees etc.. Those things can’t not “know him”. The world here consists of persons. Consider the following, John 8:26 and John 12:19, John 17:23/25. Most of the People/world rejected him, but those who received him, were given the right to become children of God. They are born of God, not of flesh and blood John 1: 11-13. This is the new creation/world that was made “through” Jesus. Jesus said you must be “born again” [i.e.] enter into the new creation, the new man etc.…something Paul clearly understood 2 Cor 2:16-17. Peace
@@mikewood3309 To be fair, it’s probably difficult for Bill/the author of the channel to respond to everyone. If you check out his channel, he does give his understanding of John 1 and about the “word becoming flesh”. From what I remember, I think Bill has a slightly different understanding than mine. Maybe take a look at Bill’s reasonings if mine aren't of any help to you. Peace
The trinity doctrine brings a lot of confusion, thinking He is God is some form of denying Christ. But the core issue with denying Christ has everything to do with keeping the letter of the law of Moses. Doing religious works instead of letting God and Jesus do their work in and through us. Whether these works are jewish, christian or islamic do not matter. All these religions have their own works and traditions. Only the work of Christ leads to salvation from sin and death. Religious slavery (leading to death and destruction) versus freedom in Christ, relying on God's grace and truth. In religion there is no or hardly spiritual growth because the Spirit cannot work there. People rely on their own works instead of God's.
"who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist." 2john1:7 .. teaching that Jesus is God, and not 100% man in the flesh, that is messiah a man, is the spirit of antichrist. same as teaching he was an angel or some other being. the antichrist spirit is based on the teaching that messiah is something other then a man, God himself. this is idolatry which is the sin antichrist thrives on
As I see it, if you believe that Jesus is just the Messiah and not God, the implication is that the element of God's love to the world doesn't hold anymore; If Jesus was not God incarnated but a human being then we should worship him (as a human) since he is the one who was willing to go through torture in order to salvage humanity. What room is left for loving God in this scenario? I would like to hear your opinion Thanks in advance ❤
What reason is there to think that a non-human person couldn't become a human person? If Jesus had claimed to be God himself as well as a human person, would he have been contradicting himself?
As far as I know, Greeks believed "gods" could be incarnated. It is not a biblical belief. If it is/was biblical we would need not hints and clues (of texts that can be understood better in a different way) but clear declarations. I have great respect for God's revelation and the human beings through whom God revealed truths. They spoke nothing about a god becoming a man as being from God.
@@billschlegel1 Might not Colossians 2:9 be such a clear declaration? It also seems to me that Hebrews 2:14-17 could imply an incarnation, because it seems strange to give reasons for Jesus' humanity if he were always human. Or I could be misunderstanding everything.
@@petromax4849 No. Both Col. 2:10 and Eph. 3:19 describe other believers as being filled with the fullness of God. That doesn't make believers in Messiah, "God". The book of Hebrews stresses Jesus' humanity because of the greatness, wonder and blessing that God has put a human being (not some other angelic being, et al) at HIS (one person) right hand "It is not to angels that HE subjected the world to come...what is man... that YOU (singular) have crowned him with glory and honor".... The man Christ Jesus is the evidence, representative, and guarantee for humankind.
I think referring to traditional Christianity as “mainstream churchianity” is more accurate terminology as it isn’t traditional nor Christian rather occultic and antichrist.
The crux of the matter is that trinitarians along with Oneness Pentecostals, deny that JESUS is God’s *actual* Son nor do they believe He is the only *begotten* of the Father. The word was *made* flesh. Who *makes* anything of lasting value besides but GOD?
No better love, than a man ley down HIS life for HIS friend. It doesn't say: 'No better love, than a God send HIS only son, to lay down HIS own life for HIS creation. Jesus Christ is Almighty God The Father, In The flesh. No better love, than a man lay down HIS Life for HIS friends. The Eternal Father left HIS Throne in Heaven and came to earth as Christ The Messiah, to die for us. HE laid down HIS Own Life for us, so that we could be Saved. HE then rose from death 3 days later, and went back to HIS Throne in the 3rd Heaven. He told HIS Disciples, that HE had to leave (raise from death, back into Heaven)so that HE could send The Helper. He came back down, as The Holy Spirit (Helper). You invited HIM into your life. HE lives in you now, leading you and taking over control of your Eternal Life..... If You will let HIM. HE is The Perfect Sacrifice, for the remission of sin. For Jesus Christ did NOT come into the world to condemn the world, but HE came that All might Come to HIM and be saved from death, By HIM. For God so loved the world that HE sent HIS only Son, by coming HIMSELF and dying, in the form of the Only Son. There is no other! There is only one Eternal Almighty God Messiah Father, By which men must be Saved. Christ bless!
You said it right. There is no greater love than a MAN lay down his life! Hosea is clear "God is NOT A MAN nor son of man" All scripture is clear Jesus Is a" MAN" and "son of man" all over. If we don't believe what is written, then we might as well chuck our Bible out. (I almost did when my shame surfaced, how arrogant I had been in a belief I was just regurgitating) Son of God says Believe in God believe also in me. May Peace be with you all from God the father alone in his human son (THE christ, chosen king by God) John 17 3
traditional christianity still thinks that Genesis 1:26 is talking about The Godhead of Christ.....when it actually talking about satan and the fallen angels that created this earthly satanic system, in their illusion, to trick man into worshiping his own flesh as an idol, instead of worshiping Christ. Prove me wrong. When you say god bless....which god are you talking about? when I say Christ bless, I am making it plain to you, that I am talking about The Eternal God and Father Jesus Christ! Christ Bless!
Hi Bill, here is one for you, Isaiah 9:6, 9:5 in the Jewish Bible. I will present it in Hebrew and the words in parentheses are of importance. Then I will show two English translations by Jewish scholars and compare and see why they are contradictory.
כי-ילד ילד-לנו בן נתן-לנו ותהי המשרה על-שכמו (ויקרא שמו) פלא יועץ אל גבור אבי-עד שר-שלום: In parentheses the word is (His name _shall be_ called). Italics not in the Hebrew. Here is the JPS 1917 English Translation. Isaiah 9:5 For a child is born unto us, A son is given unto us; And the government is upon his shoulder; And (his name is called) Pele-joez-el-gibbor-Abi-ad-sar-shalom; See where the positioning of the words in parentheses are in the sentence? Now let’s compare The Complete Jewish Bible from Chabad website it’s a modern translation. Isaiah 9:5 A child has been born to us, a son given to us, and the authority is upon his shoulder, and the wondrous adviser, the mighty God, the everlasting Father, (called his name), "the prince of peace." See the positioning of words in the parentheses? The Hebrew agrees with the JPS translation, but with TCJB from chabad it has been cut and pasted in the wrong part of the sentence. Why is that Bill?
If you say that Isaiah 9:5 is about Hezekiah, can you explain why Hezekiah is greater then Messiah to deserve such titles? And why in the latter English translation they butchered the text to say Hezekiah only received the Prince of Peace title only?
@@yisraelavraham4078 Is9:5-6 eh? Lets look at it. ... and the government shall be x upon 4 his shoulder, well yes, after christ returns and rules during millenium the government of the whole shooting match shall be on his shoulders. Exactly right for promised messiah.. and us helping him by the way "reigning with him over the nations" which is the secret hid in God, read Ephesians... and his name shall be called 5 Wonderful y Counselor, well yes he will be a wonderful counselor, as head of world government would be, bringing peace and reconcilliation.... z Mighty God, Yes he will be Gods full representative, as if God, more so than the 70 judges of Exodus whos council was called "going to God" when they assisted Moses, who himself was called God in some situations, like to Aaron and to Pharaoh! And the hebrew for those two english words is "el gibbor" which means mighty ruler, and was used to describe Nebachadnezzer, and David i think too, and all the gods of the nations were considered "mighty god" by their people. It means a powerful ruler. Everlasting b Father, well even a trinitarian should smell a rat in the translation, because the creeds are at pains to point out NOT to confuse the persons, and this is saying that Jesus (son) is actually the father. so theres something screwy there, that does indeed confuse the persons, Mr. Athenacious would not be pleased !!. Prince of c Peace. Yes, prince of peace is great for the messiah, why even the evil archon which hindered the angel in Daniel is called "prince of persia" or was it prince of greece...and Paul tells us our true enemy are spiritual "principalities" in heavenly realms.... that is "ha satan" which in hebrew is "the adversary." Anything else?? as that was quite tasty, very strong unitarian proof texts. Thanks for the chance to clear them up.
Why don't you be honest you claim to believe in God so why don't you try to be honest how can you possibly explain Isaiah chapter 43 from verse 10 on explain to me how God himself which says there was no God formed before me and there will be no God formed after me and there is no savior but me and I Am Lord how can that be misunderstood these words mean what they say you need to recant this video when apologize because you now understand that the Bible clearly teaches that God is one Father Son and Holy Spirit a Triune God
Jesus is NOT YHVH, Yahweh. Jesus isn't the point of origin for salvation, his God is. Christ's God, my God, MADE Jesus "both a Prince, and a Saviour" : Acts 5:31 Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.
@@loveofthetruth9398 alright we're having a conversation I read the scriptures that you gave me and it is just more evidence that chapter 43 of Isaiah from verse 10 on explains that he is the savior and John chapter 1verse 1 says that the word which is the Lord Christ Jesus is God Thomas a disciple who I would believe much more than any preacher of today such as yourself called Jesus his Lord and his God and Jesus told the Pharisees before Abraham was I am which is exactly where the word Yahweh or Jehovah come from and the exact name that he gave Moses on Mount Sinai and when Jesus asked them why do you pick up stones to Stone me what works have I done they tell him because you make yourself God he did not talk to them in riddles he made himself perfectly understood and when he was in the chambers with the Jewish leaders and they questioned him and asked him are you the Son of God knowing that the Son of God is calling himself equal to God his answer was yes and you will see me coming in the clouds with great power and authority you see this is why the Lord called the Pharisees vipers and snakes they lived much more to the law and the Commandments than any modern United States Christian but they did not believe God's word concerning himself they did not believe God's word concerning his only begotten son they did not believe that he was God the King James version Bible does more than tell us that the Lord Christ Jesus is God God the son he always existed and through him the father does all things through him all things were made no man has seen the father or heard his voice but through the Son he has manifested himself many times visibly before becoming the son of man there is so much proof in the Bible that Jesus is God that you would have to be a Jehovah's Witness not to believe that he is and that's why the Jehovah's Witnesses have Rewritten their Bible to take away any deity from him because true scripture cannot deny his deity not to mention the words in the Jehovah's Witnesses Bible aren't found in the Dead Sea Scrolls those changes are not found in the King James version it is basically word-for-word
@@lawrencemetcalf5408 I'm aware of the trinitarian doctrine as you have explained it. The sad truth is, the Bible doesn't explain it the way you, and other trinitarians have. The Bible is clear. There is one God, and that's YHVH the Father, the Creator. And, there is one Lord Jesus the Christ, who is a direct descendent of Adam and Eve, Abraham, Judah, David and Mary. Jesus of Nazareth was BORN in Bethlehem, which YHVH God states in Micah 5:2 is when Jesus came "forth unto Me".... Jesus came forth unto YHVH God in Bethlehem. Jesus then "grew in stature and in favor with God and man" (Luke 2:40,52) Jesus was ANOINTED with his God's spirit, and GIVEN "all authority in heaven and in earth" BY his God. Jesus did NOT literally exist before his birth. Jesus was NOT the creator of the universe, he is the SERVANT of the creator of the universe ( Acts 4:24-30)
@@loveofthetruth9398 you just said a bunch of stuff you didn't refer to any of the scriptures that I gave you is John the Apostle called the word which is Christ Jesus God and said he manifested as flesh among us and we beheld his glory and if the disciple Thomas called him my Lord and God and the fact that Jesus in his prayer to the father talks about his time before he was born with the father you have nothing to stand on all you stand on is scripture out of context well good luck when you see him face-to-face explaining to him that he is not God
@@loveofthetruth9398 just refute one thing just explain to me why John says that the word was with God and the Word was God and the word became flesh and dwelt among us and we beheld his glory explain to me how that is not saying that Jesus is God you can take two pages explain it to me please I would love for you to explain to me how John is wrong on this
John 1:1 is very clear in the beginning was the word and the Word was with God and the Word was God and the Word was manifest flesh and dwelt among us and we beheld his glory you deny the word of God concerning his son
Allow me to point out, you skipped a few verses between John 1:1 and John 1:14, and I don't thing you will find "manifest" in John 1:14. I love the Gospel of John. In this Gospel Jesus tells us that he is "a man who heard the truth from God" (8:40) and Jesus tells us exactly who the one true God is (the Father, 17:1-3). And the author tells us why he recorded the signs that Jesus did. Not so that we would know that Jesus is God, but for a different reason. You can find that verse. Do a word search "recorded signs...that you might believe" Consider the possibility that "the beginning" in John 1:1 is a new beginning (parallel to Genesis) that God brings about through His Word, the man Jesus Christ.
Sounds like a simple misunderstanding. A tempest in a teapot. A reason for believers to argue. Jesus wasn't born with the last name, "Christ". He is the main character in a story which God Himself is telling. The "Immaculate Conception" is the origin story of that character. There are other characters in the story which do God's will regardless of their belief in Jesus. "Forgive them Father, they know not what they do." This statement, in no way, JUDGES what they do. After all, someone in the story MUST crucify Jesus. And without Pontius Pilate and Judas, you have NO story to tell. In other Words, God's Will is UNAVOIDABLE no matter what anyone may do to thwart it. You can DENY God all you want. People do that all the time. But you CANNOT defy His Will. Defiance is a dark fantasy. This world is proof of that. Jesus is Christ because of His complete submission to God's Will. ALL will SUBMIT to God at the Last Judgement because ALL are INNOCENT. Christ completely forgives those who crucify and betray him on a daily basis. As followers of Christ, we must do the same. God is not mocked. And as far as "defeating" God? Never happened. Never will. Vaya con Dios.
why hello, playing your clever word comparison games again hogan darling? "YHWH is become Yeshua" you claim... my bible says "become salvation, as does my hebrew interlinear. Have a look at Is12:3 and there is your word again! This time he is found in spring water. So spring water is Yeshua too ! So according to you YHWH is yeshua, and hey next verse "spring water" is yeshua!!! so what will it be? if we look that fav word of yours up Strongs H3444 it means cleansing, salvation, health, save, deliverance and welfare. And Jesus does represent these things as those are the meanings of his name, particularly salvation. I guess thats why God had Gabriel tell Mary to call the baby that name. A name can have meaning, but the meaning in other contexts doesnt automatically equal a person by that name. If it did then a large proportion of latino men would suddenly become YHWH, theres no shortage of Jesus's and Hesus's in south america and spain. My name means handsome, (of course) but all handsome men are not automatically me are they? Play a different tune please.
If we play your therefore equals word game, then you will have to agree that Satan has been identified, its Peter. Jesus says "get behind me satan" to Peter. obvious even more direct than your statement. Stated there in words in your bible !! Agreed? (which means the catholics chose the devil for their first pope)
@@ken440 Hey there, José! Long time no see, mate. I’ve been looking high and low, asking the squirrels and the birds, but couldn’t find a trace of you. Where in the world have you been hiding? 🤔 Let’s read Isaiah 12:3 👇 And you draw waters in elation FROM SPRINGS OF THE YESHUA Does that sound familiar? Remember Yeshua’s encounter with the woman at the well? 👇 John 4:13-14 Yeshua answered and said to her, “Everyone who shall drink from these waters shall thirst again; But everyone who shall drink of the waters that I will give him shall not thirst for eternity, but those waters that I give him shall be springs of waters in him that shall spring up into eternal life.” As the proverb goes, “To truly understand the depths of a well, one must first know the source of its waters.” Oh, look at you struggling to handle the harsh reality. The truth can truly sting, doesn’t it? 🐝
@@iloveyhvhyireh Your gramma is showing you said .."The truth can truly sting, doesn’t it?" and correct gramma is "cant it" not doesnt it, because you used "can" earlier in the sentence. Just pointing this out as more careful understanding of scripture is needed beyond your word comparisons, as I previously pointed out. Just because the word for salvation is the same as the given name of the messiah at birth, doesnt need the "therefore equals" treatment, turning a previous meaning into a being. This water of salvation issue is obvious and I had not used it hoping you might draw the comparison, as you did. Proving that salvation can be likened to pure spring water like YHWH's promise. Metaphor. YHWH saves through representation, the promised messiah and lamb, not by personally being the lamb. As I have often pointed out read a dictionary definition of "Plenipotentiary." Because this promise is outlined in Deut18:18 where God points out by His word through Moses, "I will raise a great prophet (like Moses) from among your people, and I will put My words in his mouth." (picture of a Jewish man manifesting God) Right there is the salvation seen all through scripture, the promise of the one who will be messiah, a son of David, a great one born of the people Israel who God will manifest in and show His, Gods, salvation. A second Adam, imaging God Himself...... not actually "being God" himself. !! Yes God is the waters of life, administered through His agent who has on Gods command been named with a name that means salvation, and seen as the clean and pure waters of life. Ken means handsome, but not all handsome men are Ken. God is salvation, but one who is the means of salvation delivery is not therefore God in person. Parry and counter thrust D'Artagnan.
@@ken440 A little typo? Pfft, no worries, that can easily be fixed. 👇 I meant of course: “It reveals the truth can truly sting, doesn’t it?” The Scriptures cannot be broken, regardless of your belief or unbelief. They stand tall, whether you like it or not! Oh, the irony of it all! Isaiah 12:3 = John 4:13-14 ∴ Yeshua = YHVH.
You are in denial and have not read scripture I take you to Isaiah chapter 43 vs 10 if you had read this book then you would obviously realize that God and the Saviour and the Lord are one and you are denying what God Said in Isaiah 43 first 10 calling God a liar
@VoiceofTruth-iv8pq it was God speaking saying that I am God and no God has been formed before me or after me and there is no savior but me no one was saying this but God you reply shows me that you do not understand anything about the Bible and your understanding is completely wrong
@VoiceofTruth-iv8pq because God said that there is no savior but me doesn't make him God what are you talkin about can you hear this God literally God said there is no savior but me and Isaiah chapter 43 and you're saying but that doesn't make him God do you understand how ridiculous that is
@@lawrencemetcalf5408 "no God before me" is a position of authority statement, He is THE GOD MOST HIGH (implying other lesser gods, or spirits who would make themselves gods psm82) and in reference to the gods of the nations, from Deut32:8 about the Babel event when God divided the nations and gave overlordship of them (70 of them) to the sons of God, the "bene elohim" which are spiritual beings, angelic beings, members of the first born, some of which have rebelled as Paul tells you in Eph6; "our true enemy are powers and principalities in heavens." that is in hebrew "ha satan" which in english is "the adversary." And note they are still "in heaven." You are confused with your gods and lords. Paul also said "for there are many gods and many lords" so more study will show you a spiritual war going on in which we are caught up, and Deut 18:18 will show you the word promising a great one who God will manifest in. Jesus is the second Adam, the great prophet, the seed of the woman, the LAMB of God killed on passover. The passover lamb doesnt have to BE GOD because it is PROVIDED by God the father to save his family, as many as believe and come under the covering blood that the father has provided !! Jesus is NOT God. He is a man who has spoken Gods words as God birthed that man and has fully manifested in that man, and now that man is the first fruits, the first up from the dead, first of many brothers raised to glory (us who are still in earthen vessels waiting the call) Read all of scripture, not just trinity proofs!
Can you answer the question I ask at the end of the podcast. I'm honestly interested to know people's beliefs. Do you deny that there is a human person (Jesus of Nazareth who came into being some 2000 years ago) at the right hand of God?
Being the Son of God means that Jesus DERIVES from God, He is not an actual Son. He derives in that God almighty was able to do ALL what He had to do and then got free of his then useless power. This means that Jesus is NOT ALMIGHTY. This also means that Jesus is now actually ALONE. Indeed Jesus sits on the right hand of the POWER, NOT ON THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD. Jesus is NOT a mediator because He is the ONLY KING of heaven and HE ONLY DECIDES who can enter his kingdom.
@@VoiceofTruth-iv8pq It's wrong, Paul didn't have clear ideas. Jesus tells He is NOT a mediator. Jesus tells us that He is the only KING OF HEAVEN, Jesus tells us that HE ONLY DECIDES who can enter his Kingdom, NOT THE FATHER Thus, surely Jesus is not a mediator, his own words have priority over the Paul's opinion.
@@claudiozanella256 : With respect, I provided clear scriptural support for what I said. Your only comeback was that paul "didn't have clear ideas" despite having been appointed an Apostle to the nations by the resurrecvted Jesus himself. You make assertions, but provide no scriptural support. You say that priority should be given to Jesus words : "I am the way,. the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." (John 14:6)
@@VoiceofTruth-iv8pq Yes, I give scriptural support indeed. Unfortunately the Paul's theology is not at all reliable. Unlike other generic believers in the almighty God - as Jews for example - the "reference God" to christians is JESUS, not the almighty God (even if Jesus is in God and God is in Jesus). In fact Jesus clearly stated that He is the ONLY BREAD who gives life (SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT), the ONLY DOOR (SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT) to heaven. No other doors exist, not even the almighty God is a door to heaven!!! If you want to live, then you need the bread which gives life. But the bread which gives life is JESUS (SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT), you must thus TURN TO HIM to live, He is the ONLY Savior. Unfortunately Paul's theology is basically bad because Paul believed that Jesus was just a "mediator", he didn't realize that Jesus is THE ONLY KING of heaven (SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT). Thus, HE ONLY DECIDES "The Father judges NO MAN, but has turned over all judgment TO THE SON." (SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT) In other words the "reference God" of Paul was the almighty God, not Jesus. For this reason Paul could hardly be considered as a Christian, however I don't want to get into that.
Question for Trinitarian and Oneness believers (presented at the end of the podcast) : Is the exalted, glorified human person, Jesus of Nazareth, at the right hand of God?
Will love to Share my Pastor experience with you concerning this issue.
What SCRIPTURE,
{YHWH within 6,823x} teaches. 6th book Yahu'shua HELLinized as Joshua, 8,23-♾️5-Grace, October 23, The fall harvest is in, and the flocks are in the fields as written. Read MatithYahu, ObedYahu, Yashayahu, Lamentations = {oyl🪔}+ZacharYahu= Remember YaHU'aH🔯
Vs
Religions .....NON-SCRIPTURAL fables & Idolatry
Whatever your religion, what knowledge and intelligence does it teach? Compare!
Yahu∆im ArchiTechTons teach;
The Shemetic/Khemetic/Yaphethic - King Yahu'shua and the 12 Yahu∆im ELect elders of the King∆om of YaHU∆aH 2 {{Chronicles 7:14}, gave them technology, Astronomy, Arithmetic, Astrology, Art, Geometry, Biology, physics, Metallurgy ⚛️ phonetics, cymatics, {seed of gr8 elder Yapheth}, Khemistry, Alkhemy & herbology {seed of great elder Khem}, Knowle∆ge 🔺, Wis∆om🔻, & intelligence, Ode of Solomon 38🧐! The key to immortality: Obey YaHU'aH's🔯13 COMMANDs {kNEW COVENANT -10 on Sapphire stone tablets, 🟦🟦10 + 3 Oral💜}, & 42 Statutes,🟩Emerald tablets}, the {tetYHUHgrammarten} & Star tetYHUHhedron🔯 = Father sigNATURE, YaHU'aH's Salvation, King Yahu'shua, beloved namesake & the MessiYah, Queen MariYahm; Wis∆om & the Breath of YaH, {RuAnkh Yah'Qodesh 💜}! The cELestial clock & Shabbat - As the Gamma rAY's are highest at ∆awn 🌅, on the day of the full moon🌕, we praise YaH, and Ohm chant, facing East, eyes closed, looking into the rising sun. This activates our shockYahs, & pineal gland! They gave us the ∆alath {∆oor, built to honor YaHU'aH 🔯, Yashayahu 19:29-20}, {note also, King Yahu'shua is also called the🔺Door, & the stone ∆ the builders rejected!🤔}, the symbol of the Lion of YaHu∆aH, {Sphinx}! Moreso the ∆aleth called piYHUHmids or piYaHmi∆ {π🔯mid - forms the star tetYAHedron thru sonic implosion}, Yashayahu 19:19-20, keys of YahNock aka Enoch, & letter of Barnabas 16 chapter ✅, and the great NAME & Qodesh Title of The Most High YaHU'aH AllaH aYnu Aleph TaU = Supreme Eternal Sovereign Creator, Almighty Merciful King of all, beginning and ending! The Truth of YAhbre' Scripture, YaHs prophecies, and the historical timeline of the 4 ERAs! They taught the next dimension above? Is as below, (the current one you're in), and that S.E.X., {SowEL Energy Xchange, a gift from YaH}, is between a male ♂️ and female♀️! That life is transmitted from the most high, YaHU'aH's mouth, ( MatithYahu 4:4, Gen 2:7, YaH's living WORDs spoKIN - you are your NAME🧐), into a man! And given a body, akin to a tadpole, a semen. We swim the great race, run by 1 billionfold! Yea, the strongest survive, to win the prize, betwixt a woman's thighs, the egg inside! And the growing of the vessEL, (formed around the living Word of YaH, your name), grows in perfect geometry indicating YaHs sigNATURE as the flower of life, (🔯)! See the heartbeat 💓🔯 cymatic of a baby {Fetus}!!!!!
Timeline
If the question was valid, it would need to clarify what is meant by "the *right hand* of God". But as it is, the question is invalid, because it presupposes Jesus of Nazareth - the only begotten Son of God - is a human person, when in fact he is the genuinely human manifestation of the one true God: the Father.
*1 JOHN 2:22 (KJV)*
Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.
The verse opens with a rhetorical question concerning the denial of *a singular person:* "Jesus...the Christ". It would naturally follow then, that the _answer_ to the rhetorical question _also_ concerns the denial of *that same singular person:* "the Father and the Son".
*1 JOHN 2:23 (KJV)*
Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.
If you deny the Son - the _real_ Son - you don't have the Father, because the Son _IS_ the Father..."manifest in the flesh" (1 Tim.3:16). And _his_ name - the name of "the Father _and_ the Son" - is revealed to be the name which is above _every_ name: *JESUS.*
@@euston2216 such nonsense on many levels. The name Jesus, invented in 1534 after the letter j was invented, is first and foremost a CONstruct in and of itself, a picture of Cesare Borgia and a made up name inserted in the book, after 1798... that part first and foremost. Now we will deal with idolatry...
The ten commandments are ye familiar? Also what name did the MessiYah give to the 12 Yahudim elect elders, and also the men of Athens?
This desire to deify a man made painting and statues is nonsense. When YaHUaH made Adamah what was the process? YaHU'aH's Breath aka RuAnkh Yah'Qodesh+ Adam = living SowEL aka sown Eloheim Babylonized as soul...
Now with the MessiYah, what was his 13th command? We note the 3 love Father, love thy neighbor and the 3rd present thyself as a living sacrifice that YaH 🔯 may possess you.....
Again the math, YaHs breath + you a SowEL = a living SowEL
Was Jesus human? Yes
Is Jesus God? Yes
Is Jesus the Christ? Yes
Is He sitting at the right hand of God? Yes
Praise God hallelujah . This is Such a powerful and Serious matter right now.
God's Christ not God is Christ. God is Christ's God.
Amen. And, by the way, thanks for your efforts and willingness to testify to the truth. I've watched many hours of your videos.
Amen amen.
While I truly hope that deity of Christ believers will not be lost, I hear the words of Jesus ringing out.
“Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few.
Matthew 7:13-14
Hey Bill
Just wanted to say Hi
We met at the conference in Georgia in 2018
Enjoying the channel
Do you know if there are any upcoming conferences in Georgia?
Hi. Thanks for "checking in" and glad to hear you've found the podcasts helpful.
I think the Atlanta conferences have been online only since Covid. Check with Carlos or Sir Anthony.
The UCA has a conference coming up in Springfield, Ohio. www.unitarianchristianalliance.org/conference/
Bill, you are the voice in the wilderness. Here is another question: what is the Good News for us humans if not the man Jesus being resurrected as first fruit?
Exactly! The resurrection of the man Jesus is the life that gives us light and hope, It shows how much value God values humans, and how much good he has in store for us "in the ages to come".
Yes my dear brother. I think about how you had an honored position as a teacher or professor & were looked up to by many people as such. Then they cast you out from your profession as teacher & professor. And they did that all because you simply discovered the real truth of the Lord Jesus; God the Father & the Holy Spirit. It must have been a very hurtful & a very humbling experience. I want to let you know that I really appreciate you & your Christian work; you are a good gift in the Body of Christ. Let us pray one for another.
I have a theory about why we debate the divinity of Jesus. It is because of a misinterpretation of the messenger's words in Luke 1:35b. His reference is not Luke 1:35a but verses 32 and 33 (a fulfillment of 2 Sam 7:12 and 14). The phrase "shall be called the Son of God." is referring to the time of Jesus' baptism. There is no genealogy for Mary, unless you use eisegesis (using Luke chapter 3 and Gen 3:15, which of course was a reference to the house of Joseph, 1 Chr 5:1-2, not Judah). She may very well be a Levite. The point is, either God created a man in Mary (another Adam - not a seed of David) or introduced a male seed; David's seed (BTW the definition of IVF is pregnancy without intercourse).
Trinitarians and Jesus divinity believers don't really care what words say and mean. They don't care about past or future tenses, personal pronouns, they think that they have the right to change the definition of a word whenever they want to whatever they want. "He will be called the Son of God" 1. It talks about future event. 2. "Will be CALLED". To be called someone doesn't mean literally. Peter was called rock in Greek but is Peter literally a rock ? 3. "Son OF GOD", by definition itself, son can't be the one who begat him. GOD is clearly a separate entity from his son. There is very clear that even angels are called to be sons of God. But when it comes to trinitarian Jesus, the definition of son changes magically. Word son when used for angels means one thing, when it speaks about Jesus another thing, and when it speaks about us being children of God it means different from two mentioned above. It's plain hypocrisy and I can't stand it..
Wonderful teaching Bill! You are a precious and valued teacher to Gods little flock. Thankyou so much and may God continue to bless and prosper his Word through you!
I love this so much and appreciate how reasonable this is. I love Jesus and appreciate what he did being a human person anointed by his/our God ❤❤❤
@@elizabethmcnamara6548 “Jesus therefore answered them, and said, My teaching is not mine, but his that sent me. If any man willeth to do his will, he shall know of the teaching, whether it is of God, or whether I speak from myself.”
John 7:16-17 ASV
Agree with you Bill, wholeheartedly. How about, "Jesus was Incarnated", denies that "6Jesus was Conceived", as the Scriptures plainly state?
Good point.
I 100% agree. Just wondering, which scripture are you referencing that says “Jesus was conceived”?
I’m currently in an email dialogue with a trinitarian brother in Messiah, and I’m about halfway through a long refutation of many of his claims. This scripture reference would be great!
@@schappellshow - The following verses are taken from the ESV:
Num_5:28 But if the woman has not defiled herself and is clean, then she shall be free and shall CONCEIVE children.
Num 11:12 Did I CONCEIVE all this people? Did I give them BIRTH, that you should say to me, Carry them in your bosom, as a nurse carries a nursing child,’ to the land that you swore to give their fathers?
Jdg 13:3 And the angel of the LORD appeared to the woman and said to her, “Behold, you are barren and have not borne children, but you shall CONCEIVE and bear a son.
Jdg_13:5 for behold, you shall CONCEIVE and bear a son. No razor shall come upon his head, for the child shall be a Nazirite to God from the womb, and he shall begin to save Israel from the hand of the Philistines.”
Jdg_13:7 but he said to me, Behold, you shall CONCEIVE and bear a son. So then drink no wine or strong drink, and eat nothing unclean, for the child shall be a Nazirite to God from the womb to the day of his death.’”
Job_15:35 They CONCEIVE trouble and give BIRTH to evil, and their WOMB prepares deceit.”
Psa_51:5 Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother CONCEIVE me.
Isa_7:14 Therefore the LORD himself will give you a sign. Behold, the virgin shall CONCEIVE and BEAR a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
Isa_33:11 You CONCEIVE chaff; you give BIRTH to stubble; your breath is a fire that will consume you.
Isa_59:4 No one enters suit justly; no one goes to law honestly; they rely on empty pleas, they speak lies, they CONCEIVE mischief and GIVE BIRTH to iniquity.
Mat_1:23 “Behold, the virgin shall CONCEIVE and BEAR a son, and they shall call his name Immanuel” (which means, God with us).
Luk_1:31 And behold, you will CONCEIVE in YOUR WOMB and BEAR a son, and you shall call his name Jesus.
Heb_11:11 By faith Sarah herself RECEIVED POWER TO CONCEIVE, even when she was past the age, since she considered him faithful who had promised.
When the word "conceived" is used in Scripture, it is clearly used to describe the Natural Procreation Process which God, from the beginning, created. The Man provides the Male "seed" and the Woman has the Female "egg", and when the Man and the Woman "come together", the "seed" and the "egg" COMBINE in the Woman's WOMB, resulting in the CONCEPTION of an Individual.
The Man does NOT CONCEIVE; the Woman CONCEIVES. The Man is said to BEGET, that is, he is the CAUSE of the CONCEPTION. So, by simple logic, we can understand that God was the CAUSE of the CONCEPTION which took place in Mary's womb. Apparently, at least to me, God CREATED one microscopic human male "seed" directly inside Mary's womb, which naturally combined with her "egg", resulting in the CONCEPTION of a child.
Mary's "dilemma" was not that she was infertile, but that she had "not known a Man", i.e., she was not being provided with male "seed". God PROVIDED what she needed to CONCEIVE, i.e., a human male "seed".
@@schappellshow- I have tried for years to tell "biblical unitarians" that their "problem" with "trinitarians", and others, is not so much with "who is Jesus" but with the so called "incarnation" interpretation of Jesus' origin, as clearly depicted by Matthew and Luke. They tell us EXACTLY HOW Jesus "came to be", which is EXACTLY like every human being on planet Earth. A human male "seed" combined with a human female "egg". God miraculously provided the human male "seed" inside Mary's womb, which COMBINED with her human female "seed". Not "rocket science".
For some reason, some so called "Biblical Unitarians", which are to remain nameless, have for years shunned me every time I present this quite elementary conclusion. According to them IT, how Mary CONCEIVED, is so called "Holy Ground" and we must not "go there". I say, Why not, since it is perfectly NATURAL and nothing to be ashamed about.
@@schappellshow Mark 1:20, Luke 1:31, 2:21
Excellent presentation.
Hey Bill wouldn’t most of this teaching also apply to all Arian type beliefs that Yeshua was a preexisting lesser being than the father, such as JW’s?
Yes, I think so, too.
Hebrew māšîaḥ = Greek messias = Greek christos = Latin christ. The high priest’s were christ’s/messiah’s, the kings of Israel. Jesus was appointed King and high priest. Appointed by All of these appointed by Yahweh means they are not Yahweh/God. It’s that simple yet trinitarians are blinded by men and their own desires to follow men rather than God and His appointed King and high priest. They are ignorantly anti christ’s like you have shown. It’s sad and a warning that is important. Thanks for doing what you do Bill. In truth.
Another question is, which part of Jesus died? The God part or the man part? If it was the man part, then the man part must have been resurrected and ascended to heaven. Which would give a fourth member to the Trinity, and make it a Quadrity. If on the other hand, the God part died, then that's a problem because God cannot die. This is more than a conundrum. And the creeds only get around it by saying he's this as well as that. Which only works on paper, but not in reality. Like saying fully God and fully man. It doesn't work in reality, because fully God doesn't allow mortal man so near, because of unapproachable light.
Great video. You are so right Bill. My experience in dealing with trinitarians in public ministry (Prison) is there was a spirit of hostility towards me. They were nice because the Christian faith demands it, but they couldn’t hide their distain because of my position. History bares witness to the hostility directed towards us “heretics”….. truly we wrestle not against flesh and blood as the scriptures say….
I'm planning to say more in a future podcast about the animosity with which Trinitarians respond to people who believe in God and in Jesus the Christ.
The Jesus I believe in [ie] the human Jesus, is clearly a “different” Jesus from the one that Trinitarians believe in. Simply put, we have two completely different faiths. We can beat around the bush as much as we like with the above “fact”, but it will not change the outcome. I have tried and will always try to be patient, loving and respectful towards those I have engaged over the years concerning the doctrine of the Trinity, but I have also been very clear and firm with them concerning the above reasoning [i.e.] we have “different” faiths. There are many things that I deeply regret in my life, things that I will be accountable to God for, but watering down the seriousness of this specific issue isn't going to be one of them. If I were to disagree with the above, then I would have to question myself as to why I feel the need to stir the pot, thus creating unnecessary discord concerning this issue.
Peace
Thanks for sharing 👍
I pray you find the right Jesus
@@EddyScrivner Thank you for your concern. Personally, I'm more than comfortable with having the same God that Jesus has. Jesus did not ascend to, nor does he have a God that consists of a three-person being. Jesus’ God was his Father “alone” and so it should be yours too. Jesus is our example, follow him and not the masses.
Peace
I understand the need to be avoiding discord in the view of the world, but then Jesus went about creating discord in the marketplaces. Many I think find me abrasive, I know a couple unitarians who have accosted me as sharply as the trinitarians do. I was eager and humble in my quest to reach my trinnie brothers at first, 6 years ago, and I am still in intent, but as I have gone along I realize more and more the urgency and apathy. I was one of them for 4 decades, and like the reformed smoker can be the most outspoken in a smoky room, I see the smokescreen the enemy has placed on our brethren, 90% of churchianty doesnt even realize there is an issue!
So I am now trying to stir their stumps, to shake them, to shout in urgency. So rooftop shouting has become who I am. Hoping to make a few look around at what the fuss is about.
Blessings.
We should use caution about who we call brother, especially those who have never even obeyed the Gospel and deny the Son.
7For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist. 8Look to yourselves, that we lose not those things which we have wrought, but that we receive a full reward. 9Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. 10If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: 11For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.
II John
Interesting concept. Definitely worth considering, but overall I think this is "splitting hairs" in an effort to discredit Trinitarians and Arians. No need to question another man's salvation, over obscure doctrines. You are above that Bill. You're better than this.
sure is worth considering.
Because if you are christian, then "the same spirit that raised christ from the dead, lives in you," which makes you christ too.
Indeed, our judge will be the man Christ Jesus, given authority to do so by God. But the question of "is Jesus a real human person" is not an insignificant matter.
@@billschlegel1Agreed
I always wonder about the antichrist idea when it comes to the Trinity, or similar teaching. But, then what exactly was John witnessing in his day that caused him to write about it? Because there were also the Jews who denied that Jesus was their Christ or messiah. And were there false brethren within the church who tried to steer people back to Judaism? And Peter writes that, 'there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them'. A version of antichrist teaching. Would appreciate anyone's views on this. And also I'm not well enough up on early church history to know of anything else going on in John's day. But, the Trinity was not fully formed until later on.
Eddie, the big battle in Johns day was with the Gnostics (knowledge economy of the time) out of Greek philosophy. This began to get a hold on the church fathers once the church centre had been evicted from Jerusalem and Alexandria became church central. Gnosticism has the logos creating all as an agent of the untouchable highest god, and also the division of body and soul at death, which leads to the Hollywood idea of heaven being a chorus invisible playing harps and dead folk joining them at death. This is the sanitized version of the beer and Mead halls of Valhalla for the Norse warrior, virgins aplenty in heaven for the Islamist or buddha or nirvanna for the eastern cultures. Trinitarianism is gnosticism in disguise. Its all pagan.
@@ken440 Thanks, that sheds some more light on it. 'Opposition of science (gnosis) falsely so called'. And what's the other one, 'professing themselves to be wise, they became fools'.
Perhaps I should look into it a bit more for clarity, but I can see how the Trinity would arise from this, and wanting to mesh Biblical ideas with Greek ideas of many gods, I guess. As you say, it's all pagan.
@@eddieyoung2104 Eddie I am with you on that but be careful with what you said near end just now "meshing biblical ideas with greek ideas.
I used to think that too, but came to see that the many gods concept is actually correct. This usually comes over from the trinity camp that there is only one God and a lot of superstition. But its not just greeks, as every nation on earth have gods of one sort or another, and the big disclosure thing the americans are playing at at the moment is part of this. The Hebrew people also knew there were other Gods. Its not a greek pantheon so no worry about claiming panthionism, but the Hebrews knew from their history that they were chosen by the One God... MOST HIGH. Also seen in the term "almighty God" the creator God. Although he is a trinitarian or some sort of binitarian, Mike Heiser and a few others over the last 10 years has unlocked a lot of biblical insight that modernity from Augustine onwards has hidden in plain sight disguised as demons and angels in catholocism over the last millenium, as if a simplistic duality exists between only one god and one devil called Satan (which word "satan" is Hebrew for "adversary").
It goes back to Babel, something no one preaches on, and the fact that the bible is only the good news. The bad news was known to all the people groups of the ancients, that man was corrupted and the bible tells the good news, that the creator God chose a special people, from a baren couple, and made them the channel to the promised seed of the woman, the messiah who would crush the head of the devil.
The nations pushed out for spiritual wickedness at Babel, were assigned angelic beings (bene elohim) sons of God as overseers. In yet more miss use and religiosity the angelic overseers let themselves be worshipped as gods. Some more corrupt than others. This is the Deut32:8 assinmemt listed in scripture as a snippet of bad news, along with the earlier Gen6:1-4 bad news. The bible is good news about restoration from the spirit rebellion, so it is not explained.
In discovering this trinity unity thing 6 years ago the logics analyst in me began to look in all the corners. I found at least 4 major stumbling points in churchianity, and in digging into them all (at the time the trinity to me was the big one... not now) I discovered they are all interwoven, and the major debate centres on Jesus divinity issue. But then a couple years into it I found that this "divine council" issue, what is simplistically seen as "angels" in church circles, or Other Gods, in a pagan setting, is not as cut and dry as Judeo/christian claim that there is only one God full stop, or pagan pantheism that there are multiple Gods of equal standing. Its a spiritual war where some of Gods created spiritual sons have rebelled and dragged mankind into it (Adams fall) and yet strive to destroy Gods (the God most high, YHWH, the creator Himself) work and plans. The good news we know is those plans, the word of God, fleshed out in about 3BC in the birth of that promised one, who becomes the lamb of Passover for all mankind, so that all who come under the blood of the lamb are covered in Gods sight, saved by Gods provision, to BECOME THE SONS OF GOD as Paul points out, promised to be raised and reign WITH JESUS over the nations. That is the so called "mystery" hid in God (lest if the enemy had known they would not have caused the death of the lamb) that Paul brings out all through the epistles. That we are one new man, a new creation, raised in Jesus higher than angels (bene elohim) in authority (why we can name the authority of Jesus against the demonic and the chief enemy) and why we are said to "judge angels" and will when called be glorified and be forever with Christ (administration) over the nations.
This one I have found is even bigger than trinity problem, it shows us the larger picture and identifies our purpose and identity. We are (now) the replacement sons of God, in authority with Christ Jesus, yet in clay vessels but in promise brothers of Jesus at his side as he is currently at Gods side. Its all there and blows the mind, and connects all the dots.
This is perhaps not very appropriate to this video and many unitarians resist this view, but there it is in a quick summary.
@@eddieyoung2104 This just in from some study with Gilbert House. (they are trinitarian but I wont condemn them for that, gems are found in all sorts of soil)
This may help you see the point I just made Eddie.
Quote;
This week, we run into another instance of the English phrase “worthless idols” (Ps. 97:7b). We think the context indicates that the Hebrew word elîlîm refers to supernatural beings (angels, if you like), not carvings of wood and stone. This is emphasized by the exhortation to the unseen realm in the sentence that follows: “Worship Him, all you gods!”
We submit that David, who wrote Psalm 97, knew full well that lifeless sculptures are not capable of worship. Those small-G gods are real. David’s point, which we read in Psalm 97:9, is that YHWH is “exalted far above all gods.”
As we mentioned in our study of 1 Chronicles 16 (GHF #369), elîlîm is derived from the name of the Mesopotamian father-god, Enlil, which was rendered “Ellil” in Akkadian. The elîlîm, then, were not the “imaginary friends” of Israel’s pagan neighbors, but small-E elohim who had followed Enlil (AKA El, Dagon, Molech, Kronos, Saturn, and Shemihazah, among other names) into rebellion against their Creator.
@@ken440 Well, thanks Ken, you've diverted me from the monotony of the Trinity onto something else! I have to say though, from the outset, that I don't subscribe to the fallen angel idea. So, perhaps I'm entirely the wrong person to tell this to. But, nevertheless there's value in the discussion. You might want to switch off now, which I think most do when I mention it. But, if you're interested, then I'll just cover some of the points you mentioned.
I believe we are the sons of God, and as you say, we will be the immortalised sons of God in the kingdom age. As Jesus says, we will be made like the angels. And because they are sons of God, we also will be. But in addition, instead of now being lower than them, we will be higher, just as Jesus is now.
In regard to 1 Cor 6:3, and us judging angels, this is how I understand it. At first it might seem that some angels must be sinful beings, and that's why we'll need to judge them. Yet, the word 'judge' (krino) just means to discern, separate, or determine. So, when we judge, we make a discernment, a determination, and we separate one from another, or separate between different behaviours or questions. That means, we will make determinations in respect to angels, but it doesn't necessarily mean it's a decision regarding bad behaviour.
Lu 7:43 is an interesting example of the word 'krino'. Where Jesus asks Simon who will love more, and he answers, I suppose the one who was forgiven the most. And Jesus says to him, you have rightly judged.
In this verse it's not a matter of making a decision on bad behaviour, but just making a discernment or determination on which of two people will do something. And so, when it comes to angels, it seems we will be making decisions for them. As to whether they should do this or that. And whether they should go here or there, and whether they should say this or that. And whether it should be this one or that one, that should do such a thing. These are all determinations that we will be able to make. So that, Instead of just messengers of YHVH, they will be messengers also of us the saints..
The Psalm 97 passage is also an interesting one, and I've never heard of this idea before. So, I've just looked at all the occurrences of the word 'elil', and the following passages stood out to me.
Job 13:4 'But ye are forgers of lies, ye are all physicians of no value'. With the phrase 'no value' being 'elil'. And if we transferred that to Psalm 97 we would have many things of no value, or 'that boast themselves of valueless things'.
And, then the phrase, 'worship him all ye Elohim' could be referring to the worshippers. In other words, don't worship worthless things, instead worship God all ye mighty ones. You might think that's a stretch, but the judges in Psalm 82 were called Elohim, and it was usually the princes who were the main ones involved in evil.
Habakkuk 2:18,19 is another one:
18 What profits the graven image that the maker thereof hath graven it; the molten image, and a teacher of lies, that the maker of his work trusts therein, to make dumb idols (elilim)? 19 Woe unto him that says to the wood, Awake; to the dumb stone, Arise, it shall teach! Behold, it is laid over with gold and silver, and there is no breath at all in the midst of it.
In this passage, firstly we have dumb, or mute elilim, which wouldn't fit with them being living beings, unless the fallen angels lost the power of speech. And then there would be no point for God to say that the stone is dumb, or the wood has no breath in it, if they are only representations of something with actual breath and speech. Likewise, what does it profit the graven image that the maker has graven it? Well, nothing. But that would be an irrelevant question for God to ask, if in fact there was a real god behind it, who did in fact profit from people's worship.
Then, there's also Zech 11:17: 'Woe to the idol (elil) shepherd that leaves the flock'. Which is just saying that he is a worthless shepherd, because the whole point is that he stays and protects them. So, it seems to me that the word is referring to something worthless or of no value, rather than an actual name of a deity or sub deities. And the idols were of no value because they could not benefit or save.
Also Isaiah 44 talks about the man who cuts down a tree and uses half for firewood, and with the other half he makes a god.
19 And none considers in his heart, neither is there knowledge nor understanding to say, I have burned part of it in the fire; yea, also I have baked bread upon the coals thereof; I have roasted flesh, and eaten it: and shall I make the residue thereof an abomination? shall I fall down to the stock of a tree?
Again, there would be no value in God's argument if this stock of a tree represented a real live god being. Shall I fall down to the stock of a tree? Of course, men would say yes, if it represents a powerful entity that is able to bless or curse. But, if it is nothing more than a lifeless piece of timber then no, don't bother. And the whole point is that God's saying, you're worshipping something that is dead, and which you've just used to cook your bread on.
You also make a reference to 1 Cor 2:8 about the enemy causing the death of the lamb. Although it just says, Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory'. And I take the princes to mean, the rulers of the Jews, the princes of the world to which Jesus came. And to them it was hidden.
There's a similar verse in Acts 2 where Peter says, 'him..ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain'. He then goes on to describe how this was the messiah and how it was all prophesied. This was a mystery to them, but once Peter declared it, 'they were pricked in their heart, and said...Men and brethren, what shall we do?'. So they, like their princes, didn't know, even though it was contained in their scriptures. And had they not been blind and known, they would not have said 'crucify him'.
spirit of the antichrist=trinity.
Amén as proven by Matthew 16:6-20 ➡️the rock of the true identity of JESUS 🪨
The so called “trinity” *inverts* Peter’s confession of “Son of the Living God” to a fictional, non entity “god the son”
The gates of hell shall not prevail against it ➡️🪨 …….Beware the leaven ⚠️
Then you don’t go far enough. Read how far the apostles took the doctrine of Christ.
II John 1:9-11 the so called “trinity” is a direct assault on the doctrine of Christ.
Thank you. Awesome video. I’ve been doing some research on the Holy spirited. In the bible it clearly says when we die our bodies stay in the ground. Here are a few verses.
Acts 2v29-34 Dan 12v2
John 5v28
1 cor 15v20-23-35-52-42
So what happens to our spirit
Bill, how do you answer a trinitarian who says, “So you believe Jesus is a mere man.”
I hope you don’t mind, but whilst you wait for Bill's reasonings on this issue, I have taken the kind liberty to offer you mine.
I would answer by saying “You're not wrong” but let them know you believe he was truly a “unique man”. Many things could be said about how “unique” he was, but for time and space reasons, let's just consider that he is the “only man” chosen by God to die as a perfect sacrifice for our sins. This is where many Trinitarians fall foul of their reasoning when they say “So you believe Jesus was a mere man”. Simply because they don't believe that the “son of God” [i.e.] the God part, died on the cross. They only believe that the “human man” Jesus died. In other words, they are also more than happy to believe that a “mere man” paid the price for their sin. Trinitarians simply contradict themselves with this kind of reasoning. Hope this has helped.
Peace.
Yeah, they use the word "mere" as kind of a slur.
But after showing that Jesus wasn't so "mere" (by the way, neither is any other human being), the best response is to show the scriptures that declare that Jesus is a human being, had to be a human being, and who is and what he did is exactly what God required and wanted. Your question leads to the same question I ask in this podcast: "Do you have a problem with God exalting a human being to His right hand?"
And wow, what a promise and hope this is for the rest of us for whom Jesus of Nazareth represents.
Here's a 3-part series of podcasts on the question. I think parts 2 and 3 mainly answer the question.
ua-cam.com/play/PLUqWXumvcp5rLIOHUtJWBc6Sg8HQf4sfL.html
Frank, I generally ask them if they consider Adam to have been a "mere" man? As in the first man, created as Gods representative and imager in the creation, was he not a bit special? Even though he misused his free will.
And so Jesus as Paul tells us the "second or last Adam" formed in the woman, was he not a bit special too?
Such a great point and title!
Matthew 16:16-17 = the Rock 🪨 of the true identity of JESUS.
Matthew 16:6-20 Beware the leaven ⚠️
A very good question which most in christendom ignore.
And as that word (very holy, churchy) that we use "christ" is left in greek without the true meaning translated ( probably for religious holy reasons. i say with great irony, meaning catholocism inflation of piety).
Christ meaning "anointed" puts an even more friendly slant on that quote from Bill.
"Jesus is God" Denies that Jesis is the "anointed."
I mean like "anointed what?"
Obviously wont be "anointed God" will it, because its God wot does anointings, eh dad?
So using the completed meaning of the greek word, leads us to see that this "anointed" must by logical comprehension, be less than God. i.e. the anointed man.
"elementary dear Watson."
Jesus said I and the Father are one. If you have seen me you have seen the Father.
@eddyscrivner Jesus and his God ARE one, just like ALL believers are supposed to be one with God John 17:20-22. And, since Jesus is perfectly subjected to his God, Jesus then is a perfect IMAGE of God. Seeing Jesus shows us his God, his Father.
Keep in mind, trinitarianism CLAIMS to believe that the Father and Jesus are SEPERATE PERSONS! That means any attempt to make Jesus BE "the Father", (like your second point does), is actually contrary to trinitarian teaching.
@@loveofthetruth9398 Jesus is not God the Father. Jesus is God the son. Jesus is God. God the father is God.
@@loveofthetruth9398 Jesus said Abraham rejoiced to see My day and he saw it and was glad and the Pharisees said you are a young man and you have seen Abraham? Jesus replied Before Abraham was, I am. What did God(the burning bush) tell Moses to tell Pharoah, who sent him. God said to tell Pharoah “I am” sent you.
@@EddyScrivner From one Eddie to another. Here's some extra information about 'I am'.
The words 'I am' are often used to link Jesus with the burning bush event, but is this actually the case? When Jesus said 'I am', the Greek for that is 'ego eimi'. They are the same words used when the man born blind says 'I am he' (John 9:9).
If you look at the Greek Old Testament (Septuagint), and read Exodus 3:14, you might expect to see the same wording, 'ego eimi'. But you won't. What it says is 'ego eimi o ov', which translates as 'I am the being'. Jesus however didn't say 'ego eimi o ov', he just said 'ego eimi'. He didn't say, 'I am the being', but said, 'I am'. In other words, I am the messiah. I am the one I've been telling you I am. Which was the son of God, and son of man.
When he says 'before Abraham was I am', it can be understood that he was referring to being promised before Abraham, and more important than him. Not necessarily that he physically existed before Abraham. Because to the Jews Abraham was like the pinnacle of the nation, so I think Jesus was making a point of being before him in superiority, rather than before him in time. In other words Jesus was saying, I am the one, the messiah, and even before Abraham existed, I was the promised one.
@@EddyScrivnerSo you have two Gods?? Jesus is God and the Father (aka Jehovah) is God too. Hmmm!! I think just Jehovah is God because the King James Bible says that Jehovah is God Almighty at Exodus 6:3 and 7 other place too. And yeah I know Jehovah isn't his actual name but rather YHWH and Yod-He-Waw-He and Yehovah and even Yehowah are possibly his name but the majority of the English speaking world calls him Jehovah and since I speak English I'm going with Jehovah too.
This is all new to me; can someone PLEASE explain John 1:1,14 - In the beginning was the Word, the word was with God, and the Word was God.. in vs. 14, the word became flesh, which is Jesus who dwelt among us.. so, if the Word is God and God became flesh/Jesus then isn't Jesus God in the flesh!?? This doesn't mean a second God it simply means God dwelt among us in the flesh of Jesus.
Hi, I can offer you my reasonings to your question. It is rather longwinded so it would be sent in two half’s. I don’t want to unnecessarily bore you with long posts so it’s up to you? Also, it would be wrong of me not to inform you that there are other interpretations concerning John’s prologue that unitarians hold apart from mine.
Peace
Hello, I'm open to read whatever you have. The host of this channel hasn't responded, nor do Many Christians, no idea why, nevertheless, I'd love to read an explanation to a seemingly straightforward question. Shalom!
@@mikewood3309
1 John’s prologue:-
At the start of John’s prologue, he writes “In the beginning was the word”. It is through biased translation only that the “w” in “word” is often, if not always capitalised. It's as if the translators are trying to emphasise something John wasn't. The “word” is something that belongs to God, It's something spoken.
Jesus is the overall subject of John's prologue, but that doesn’t necessarily mean “he” is the subject in verses 1 - 4. I think it’s reasonably safe to assume that most interpretations of John 1:1 recognise the author's drop of the “article” in clause [c]. It has been taught by many Greek scholars/grammarians that John’s drop of the definite article in clause [c] means that “Theos/God” can be understood within a “qualitative” sense [i.e.] John’s focus is not on “who” the word/logos is, but on “what” the word/logos is. So, in the case I am presenting, I don't see it as unreasonable to believe that the “word/logos” is tantamount to God's divine expression “within himself”. Rather like it says in Prov 23:7 [a]:- “For as he thinks within himself, so he is”.
To take this claim further, It must be noted that a lot of modern-day translations, through biased reasoning, translate the Greek pronouns “houtos” and “autos” as “he” and “him”, simply because it’s assumed that “the word” is the person of Christ in his pre-existing form, instead of something spoken. Yet, this has not always been the case. The CNT and many Bibles that predate the King James Version do not use personal pronouns such as “he” and “him” in their translation of Joh 1:1-4. The following is how Tyndale translated the beginning of John’s prologue before Trinitarian bias took over.
John 1:1-5: - 1, In the beginning, was that word, and that word was with god: and god was that word. 2>[The same]< was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by >[it]< and without >[it]< was made no thing, that made was. 4 In >[it]< was life, And life was the light of men, 5 And the light shineth in the darkness, and darkness comprehended it not.
Simply put, it is the subject that determines the translation of the Greek pronouns “houtos” and “autos” and not the other way around. Therefore, It is perfectly acceptable to translate them as “this” and “it” - “if” the subject in view is inanimate. John 1: 3-4 is a continuation of verse 2 where the word “houtos” introduces verse 2 and is often translated as “this” and “this” is a reference back to the “word/logos” in verse 1.
Strong’s definition G3778 - houtos:-
Outline of Biblical Usage:- >[this]
2 John’s prologue:-
Although the likes of Tyndale believed in the concept of the trinity, It seems that these translators freely accepted that the “word/logos” was something “belonging to God”, and not as “another person”- “with God”. This is understandably so when we consider the meanings attached to the “word/logo -
Britannica definition:- Logos, [Greek: “word,” “reason,” or “plan”] plural logoi, in Greek philosophy and theology, >[the divine reason implicit in the cosmos, ordering it and giving it form and meaning]<
The above makes sense when reading the Genesis account of creation [i.e.] in the beginning God “said/spoke” things into existence through his divine “word/logos”. God didn't randomly make this world, he had a design, a plan “with/within him” before he spoke it into being through his divine word.
It is argued that the word “with/pros” has to mean being “with” somebody next to or face to face. But that, I believe, is not the understanding John is presenting here. The “word/logos” within Hebraic thought can mean a person's thoughts, reasons, ideas, plans etc., being “with them” or “within themselves”. Consider the following:-
Job 10:13:- Yet these things You have concealed in Your heart; I know that this is >[within You]< [NASB]
Job 20:13-14:- For he performeth that which is appointed for me: And many such things are >[with him]< [ASV]
When the “word” of God” - “comes” to somebody, it captures the understanding of something abstract such as an “idea” or “truth” now being “with them”: In John 1:6, John the Baptist was sent from God and the “word of God” - “came to him” Luke 1:8. So it wouldn’t be out of context to say from that point, the “word” was now “with him”.
A similar understanding to this also presents itself in Gala 2:5 and 1 John 1:2:-
“But we did not yield in subjection to them for even an hour so that the truth of the gospel would remain “with/pros” you [Gala 2:5]
“And the life was revealed, and we have seen and testify and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was “with/pros” the Father and was revealed to us” [1 John 1:2]
Again, the understanding here is that something abstract such as wisdom, Eternal life, a plan or a truth etc.... in Hebraic thought and writings can be understood as being “with” or “within” a person, or in this case God himself, ready to be expressed.
John 1:1-4 is simply showing us that in the beginning “all things” within creation come through the power of God’s “spoken word”. John is creating a parallel between the old and the new creation. That’s why he often refers back to the “beginning”, not the “beginning” in the book of Genesis but the “beginning” of Jesus’ ministry. See John 2:11, 6:4, 8:25, 15:27, 6:64, 1 John 1:1, 2:7, 2:13 -14, 3:11, 2 John 1:5 -6 etc.. see also Mark 1:1.
In the Genesis account of creation, God’s “word” became matter. It didn't exist before that point, it only existed in God’s mind as a plan yet to be revealed. Beholding the glory of this created world doesn't mean it existed before it's creation. The same with Jesus’ creation in the womb of Mary. God’s “word” became flesh. Jesus didn't exist before that point, he only existed in God’s mind as a plan yet to be revealed. Beholding his glory doesn't mean he existed before his creation in the womb of Mary. Both only came into being when God’s “word” ordered it to be.
Jesus isn’t “the word” himself, he is the embodiment of “the word”. Jesus clearly stated that his “words” were not his own John 14:24. At John 1:10 It says that “he was in the world and the world was made through him and the world did not know him”. In context, the world here is not the original creation such as rocks, trees etc.. Those things can’t not “know him”. The world here consists of persons. Consider the following, John 8:26 and John 12:19, John 17:23/25. Most of the People/world rejected him, but those who received him, were given the right to become children of God. They are born of God, not of flesh and blood John 1: 11-13. This is the new creation/world that was made “through” Jesus. Jesus said you must be “born again” [i.e.] enter into the new creation, the new man etc.…something Paul clearly understood 2 Cor 2:16-17.
Peace
@@mikewood3309 To be fair, it’s probably difficult for Bill/the author of the channel to respond to everyone. If you check out his channel, he does give his understanding of John 1 and about the “word becoming flesh”. From what I remember, I think Bill has a slightly different understanding than mine. Maybe take a look at Bill’s reasonings if mine aren't of any help to you.
Peace
The trinity doctrine brings a lot of confusion, thinking He is God is some form of denying Christ. But the core issue with denying Christ has everything to do with keeping the letter of the law of Moses. Doing religious works instead of letting God and Jesus do their work in and through us. Whether these works are jewish, christian or islamic do not matter. All these religions have their own works and traditions. Only the work of Christ leads to salvation from sin and death. Religious slavery (leading to death and destruction) versus freedom in Christ, relying on God's grace and truth. In religion there is no or hardly spiritual growth because the Spirit cannot work there. People rely on their own works instead of God's.
I love ya Bill!!
Jesus wears many crowns, as great kings did.
"who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist." 2john1:7 .. teaching that Jesus is God, and not 100% man in the flesh, that is messiah a man, is the spirit of antichrist. same as teaching he was an angel or some other being. the antichrist spirit is based on the teaching that messiah is something other then a man, God himself. this is idolatry which is the sin antichrist thrives on
Pre-existance and incarnation is in the same antichrist category..
As I see it, if you believe that Jesus is just the Messiah and not God, the implication is that the element of God's love to the world doesn't hold anymore; If Jesus was not God incarnated but a human being then we should worship him (as a human) since he is the one who was willing to go through torture in order to salvage humanity. What room is left for loving God in this scenario?
I would like to hear your opinion
Thanks in advance ❤
What reason is there to think that a non-human person couldn't become a human person? If Jesus had claimed to be God himself as well as a human person, would he have been contradicting himself?
As far as I know, Greeks believed "gods" could be incarnated. It is not a biblical belief. If it is/was biblical we would need not hints and clues (of texts that can be understood better in a different way) but clear declarations. I have great respect for God's revelation and the human beings through whom God revealed truths. They spoke nothing about a god becoming a man as being from God.
@@billschlegel1 Might not Colossians 2:9 be such a clear declaration? It also seems to me that Hebrews 2:14-17 could imply an incarnation, because it seems strange to give reasons for Jesus' humanity if he were always human. Or I could be misunderstanding everything.
@@petromax4849 No. Both Col. 2:10 and Eph. 3:19 describe other believers as being filled with the fullness of God. That doesn't make believers in Messiah, "God".
The book of Hebrews stresses Jesus' humanity because of the greatness, wonder and blessing that God has put a human being (not some other angelic being, et al) at HIS (one person) right hand "It is not to angels that HE subjected the world to come...what is man... that YOU (singular) have crowned him with glory and honor"....
The man Christ Jesus is the evidence, representative, and guarantee for humankind.
@@billschlegel1 Thank you, I hadn't thought of that way of looking at it. That does seem to make sense.
@@petromax4849 blessings in Messiah Jesus.
JESUS has a GOD.
JESUS declared His Father’s NAME.
5:55-6:32 cleverly devised myths 👍
9:43- 12:40 ‼️
I think referring to traditional Christianity as “mainstream churchianity” is more accurate terminology as it isn’t traditional nor Christian rather occultic and antichrist.
The crux of the matter is that trinitarians along with Oneness Pentecostals, deny that JESUS is God’s *actual* Son nor do they believe He is the only *begotten* of the Father. The word was *made* flesh. Who *makes* anything of lasting value besides but GOD?
@@ONEFAITHofJESUS Good point. I think I'll say that from here on.
Very true.
As foretold at 2 Corin 4:4.
Satan is blinding Trinitarians as to who God and the Christ are.
Christ is the image of God….not God.
No better love, than a man ley down HIS life for HIS friend.
It doesn't say: 'No better love, than a God send HIS only son, to lay down HIS own life for HIS creation.
Jesus Christ is Almighty God The Father, In The flesh. No better love, than a man lay down HIS Life for HIS friends. The Eternal Father left HIS Throne in Heaven and came to earth as Christ The Messiah, to die for us. HE laid down HIS Own Life for us, so that we could be Saved. HE then rose from death 3 days later, and went back to HIS Throne in the 3rd Heaven. He told HIS Disciples, that HE had to leave (raise from death, back into Heaven)so that HE could send The Helper. He came back down, as The Holy Spirit (Helper). You invited HIM into your life. HE lives in you now, leading you and taking over control of your Eternal Life..... If You will let HIM. HE is The Perfect Sacrifice, for the remission of sin. For Jesus Christ did NOT come into the world to condemn the world, but HE came that All might Come to HIM and be saved from death, By HIM. For God so loved the world that HE sent HIS only Son, by coming HIMSELF and dying, in the form of the Only Son. There is no other! There is only one Eternal Almighty God Messiah Father, By which men must be Saved. Christ bless!
Can you please provide a scriptural reference that says Jesus is Almighty God.
If Jesus is Almighty God, the Father, who is his God(Rev 3 :12)
Yes , good points. But you might have to edit the last bit as you seem to have confused one reader.
@@VoiceofTruth-iv8pq Look at the second line. "It doesn't say:" Those statements are what @hawknives is saying scripture DOES NOT say. Blessings.
You said it right. There is no greater love than a MAN lay down his life!
Hosea is clear
"God is NOT A MAN nor son of man"
All scripture is clear
Jesus Is a" MAN" and "son of man" all over.
If we don't believe what is written, then we might as well chuck our Bible out. (I almost did when my shame surfaced, how arrogant I had been in a belief I was just regurgitating)
Son of God says
Believe in God believe also in me.
May Peace be with you all from
God the father alone in his human son
(THE christ, chosen king by God)
John 17 3
@@katiewarner883 absolutely, i was ashamed too.
traditional christianity still thinks that Genesis 1:26 is talking about The Godhead of Christ.....when it actually talking about satan and the fallen angels that created this earthly satanic system, in their illusion, to trick man into worshiping his own flesh as an idol, instead of worshiping Christ. Prove me wrong.
When you say god bless....which god are you talking about?
when I say Christ bless, I am making it plain to you, that I am talking about The Eternal God and Father Jesus Christ!
Christ Bless!
Hi Bill, here is one for you, Isaiah 9:6, 9:5 in the Jewish Bible. I will present it in Hebrew and the words in parentheses are of importance. Then I will show two English translations by Jewish scholars and compare and see why they are contradictory.
כי-ילד ילד-לנו בן נתן-לנו ותהי המשרה על-שכמו (ויקרא שמו) פלא יועץ אל גבור אבי-עד שר-שלום:
In parentheses the word is (His name _shall be_ called). Italics not in the Hebrew.
Here is the JPS 1917 English Translation.
Isaiah 9:5 For a child is born unto us, A son is given unto us; And the government is upon his shoulder; And (his name is called) Pele-joez-el-gibbor-Abi-ad-sar-shalom;
See where the positioning of the words in parentheses are in the sentence?
Now let’s compare The Complete Jewish Bible from Chabad website it’s a modern translation.
Isaiah 9:5 A child has been born to us, a son given to us, and the authority is upon his shoulder, and the wondrous adviser, the mighty God, the everlasting Father, (called his name), "the prince of peace."
See the positioning of words in the parentheses?
The Hebrew agrees with the JPS translation, but with TCJB from chabad it has been cut and pasted in the wrong part of the sentence.
Why is that Bill?
If you say that Isaiah 9:5 is about Hezekiah, can you explain why Hezekiah is greater then Messiah to deserve such titles?
And why in the latter English translation they butchered the text to say Hezekiah only received the Prince of Peace title only?
And why does Chabad find it unbearable for Hezekiah to receive these titles but ok to be given the title of prince of peace only?
“It is written in your own Scriptures that God said to certain leaders of the people, ‘I say, you are gods!’
@@yisraelavraham4078
Is9:5-6 eh?
Lets look at it. ... and the government shall be x upon 4 his shoulder,
well yes, after christ returns and rules during millenium the government of the whole shooting match shall be on his shoulders. Exactly right for promised messiah.. and us helping him by the way "reigning with him over the nations" which is the secret hid in God, read Ephesians...
and his name shall be called 5 Wonderful y Counselor,
well yes he will be a wonderful counselor, as head of world government would be, bringing peace and reconcilliation....
z Mighty God,
Yes he will be Gods full representative, as if God, more so than the 70 judges of Exodus whos council was called "going to God" when they assisted Moses, who himself was called God in some situations, like to Aaron and to Pharaoh! And the hebrew for those two english words is "el gibbor" which means mighty ruler, and was used to describe Nebachadnezzer, and David i think too, and all the gods of the nations were considered "mighty god" by their people.
It means a powerful ruler.
Everlasting b Father,
well even a trinitarian should smell a rat in the translation, because the creeds are at pains to point out NOT to confuse the persons, and this is saying that Jesus (son) is actually the father. so theres something screwy there, that does indeed confuse the persons, Mr. Athenacious would not be pleased !!.
Prince of c Peace.
Yes, prince of peace is great for the messiah, why even the evil archon which hindered the angel in Daniel is called "prince of persia" or was it prince of greece...and Paul tells us our true enemy are spiritual "principalities" in heavenly realms.... that is "ha satan" which in hebrew is "the adversary."
Anything else?? as that was quite tasty, very strong unitarian proof texts. Thanks for the chance to clear them up.
Why don't you be honest you claim to believe in God so why don't you try to be honest how can you possibly explain Isaiah chapter 43 from verse 10 on explain to me how God himself which says there was no God formed before me and there will be no God formed after me and there is no savior but me and I Am Lord how can that be misunderstood these words mean what they say you need to recant this video when apologize because you now understand that the Bible clearly teaches that God is one Father Son and Holy Spirit a Triune God
Jesus is NOT YHVH, Yahweh. Jesus isn't the point of origin for salvation, his God is. Christ's God, my God, MADE Jesus "both a Prince, and a Saviour" :
Acts 5:31 Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.
@@loveofthetruth9398 alright we're having a conversation I read the scriptures that you gave me and it is just more evidence that chapter 43 of Isaiah from verse 10 on explains that he is the savior and John chapter 1verse 1 says that the word which is the Lord Christ Jesus is God Thomas a disciple who I would believe much more than any preacher of today such as yourself called Jesus his Lord and his God and Jesus told the Pharisees before Abraham was I am which is exactly where the word Yahweh or Jehovah come from and the exact name that he gave Moses on Mount Sinai and when Jesus asked them why do you pick up stones to Stone me what works have I done they tell him because you make yourself God he did not talk to them in riddles he made himself perfectly understood and when he was in the chambers with the Jewish leaders and they questioned him and asked him are you the Son of God knowing that the Son of God is calling himself equal to God his answer was yes and you will see me coming in the clouds with great power and authority you see this is why the Lord called the Pharisees vipers and snakes they lived much more to the law and the Commandments than any modern United States Christian but they did not believe God's word concerning himself they did not believe God's word concerning his only begotten son they did not believe that he was God the King James version Bible does more than tell us that the Lord Christ Jesus is God God the son he always existed and through him the father does all things through him all things were made no man has seen the father or heard his voice but through the Son he has manifested himself many times visibly before becoming the son of man there is so much proof in the Bible that Jesus is God that you would have to be a Jehovah's Witness not to believe that he is and that's why the Jehovah's Witnesses have Rewritten their Bible to take away any deity from him because true scripture cannot deny his deity not to mention the words in the Jehovah's Witnesses Bible aren't found in the Dead Sea Scrolls those changes are not found in the King James version it is basically word-for-word
@@lawrencemetcalf5408 I'm aware of the trinitarian doctrine as you have explained it. The sad truth is, the Bible doesn't explain it the way you, and other trinitarians have. The Bible is clear. There is one God, and that's YHVH the Father, the Creator. And, there is one Lord Jesus the Christ, who is a direct descendent of Adam and Eve, Abraham, Judah, David and Mary. Jesus of Nazareth was BORN in Bethlehem, which YHVH God states in Micah 5:2 is when Jesus came "forth unto Me".... Jesus came forth unto YHVH God in Bethlehem. Jesus then "grew in stature and in favor with God and man" (Luke 2:40,52) Jesus was ANOINTED with his God's spirit, and GIVEN "all authority in heaven and in earth" BY his God. Jesus did NOT literally exist before his birth. Jesus was NOT the creator of the universe, he is the SERVANT of the creator of the universe ( Acts 4:24-30)
@@loveofthetruth9398 you just said a bunch of stuff you didn't refer to any of the scriptures that I gave you is John the Apostle called the word which is Christ Jesus God and said he manifested as flesh among us and we beheld his glory and if the disciple Thomas called him my Lord and God and the fact that Jesus in his prayer to the father talks about his time before he was born with the father you have nothing to stand on all you stand on is scripture out of context well good luck when you see him face-to-face explaining to him that he is not God
@@loveofthetruth9398 just refute one thing just explain to me why John says that the word was with God and the Word was God and the word became flesh and dwelt among us and we beheld his glory explain to me how that is not saying that Jesus is God you can take two pages explain it to me please I would love for you to explain to me how John is wrong on this
John 1:1 is very clear in the beginning was the word and the Word was with God and the Word was God and the Word was manifest flesh and dwelt among us and we beheld his glory you deny the word of God concerning his son
: Who was the God the Word was with ? Was it the triune God ? Was it the Father ?
Allow me to point out, you skipped a few verses between John 1:1 and John 1:14, and I don't thing you will find "manifest" in John 1:14.
I love the Gospel of John. In this Gospel Jesus tells us that he is "a man who heard the truth from God" (8:40) and Jesus tells us exactly who the one true God is (the Father, 17:1-3). And the author tells us why he recorded the signs that Jesus did. Not so that we would know that Jesus is God, but for a different reason. You can find that verse. Do a word search "recorded signs...that you might believe"
Consider the possibility that "the beginning" in John 1:1 is a new beginning (parallel to Genesis) that God brings about through His Word, the man Jesus Christ.
Sounds like a simple misunderstanding.
A tempest in a teapot.
A reason for believers to argue.
Jesus wasn't born with the last name, "Christ".
He is the main character in a story which God Himself is telling.
The "Immaculate Conception" is the origin story of that character.
There are other characters in the story which do God's will regardless of their belief in Jesus.
"Forgive them Father, they know not what they do."
This statement, in no way, JUDGES what they do.
After all, someone in the story MUST crucify Jesus.
And without Pontius Pilate and Judas, you have NO story to tell.
In other Words, God's Will is UNAVOIDABLE no matter what anyone may do to thwart it.
You can DENY God all you want. People do that all the time.
But you CANNOT defy His Will.
Defiance is a dark fantasy. This world is proof of that.
Jesus is Christ because of His complete submission to God's Will.
ALL will SUBMIT to God at the Last Judgement because ALL are INNOCENT.
Christ completely forgives those who crucify and betray him on a daily basis.
As followers of Christ, we must do the same.
God is not mocked.
And as far as "defeating" God?
Never happened. Never will.
Vaya con Dios.
Isaiah 12:2, EL [is] my Yeshua and YHVH who has and will BECOME my YESHUA.
∴ Yeshua = YHVH.
HalleluYah
Shalom.
why hello, playing your clever word comparison games again hogan darling?
"YHWH is become Yeshua" you claim... my bible says "become salvation, as does my hebrew interlinear.
Have a look at Is12:3 and there is your word again! This time he is found in spring water. So spring water is Yeshua too !
So according to you YHWH is yeshua, and hey next verse "spring water" is yeshua!!!
so what will it be? if we look that fav word of yours up Strongs H3444 it means cleansing, salvation, health, save, deliverance and welfare.
And Jesus does represent these things as those are the meanings of his name, particularly salvation.
I guess thats why God had Gabriel tell Mary to call the baby that name.
A name can have meaning, but the meaning in other contexts doesnt automatically equal a person by that name.
If it did then a large proportion of latino men would suddenly become YHWH, theres no shortage of Jesus's and Hesus's in south america and spain.
My name means handsome, (of course) but all handsome men are not automatically me are they?
Play a different tune please.
If we play your therefore equals word game, then you will have to agree that Satan has been identified, its Peter.
Jesus says "get behind me satan" to Peter. obvious even more direct than your statement. Stated there in words in your bible !!
Agreed?
(which means the catholics chose the devil for their first pope)
@@ken440
Hey there, José! Long time no see, mate. I’ve been looking high and low, asking the squirrels and the birds, but couldn’t find a trace of you. Where in the world have you been hiding? 🤔
Let’s read Isaiah 12:3 👇
And you draw waters in elation FROM SPRINGS OF THE YESHUA
Does that sound familiar? Remember Yeshua’s encounter with the woman at the well? 👇
John 4:13-14
Yeshua answered and said to her, “Everyone who shall drink from these waters shall thirst again; But everyone who shall drink of the waters that I will give him shall not thirst for eternity, but those waters that I give him shall be springs of waters in him that shall spring up into eternal life.”
As the proverb goes, “To truly understand the depths of a well, one must first know the source of its waters.”
Oh, look at you struggling to handle the harsh reality. The truth can truly sting, doesn’t it? 🐝
@@iloveyhvhyireh Your gramma is showing you said .."The truth can truly sting, doesn’t it?" and correct gramma is "cant it" not doesnt it, because you used "can" earlier in the sentence. Just pointing this out as more careful understanding of scripture is needed beyond your word comparisons, as I previously pointed out.
Just because the word for salvation is the same as the given name of the messiah at birth, doesnt need the "therefore equals" treatment, turning a previous meaning into a being.
This water of salvation issue is obvious and I had not used it hoping you might draw the comparison, as you did. Proving that salvation can be likened to pure spring water like YHWH's promise. Metaphor. YHWH saves through representation, the promised messiah and lamb, not by personally being the lamb. As I have often pointed out read a dictionary definition of "Plenipotentiary."
Because this promise is outlined in Deut18:18 where God points out by His word through Moses, "I will raise a great prophet (like Moses) from among your people, and I will put My words in his mouth." (picture of a Jewish man manifesting God)
Right there is the salvation seen all through scripture, the promise of the one who will be messiah, a son of David, a great one born of the people Israel who God will manifest in and show His, Gods, salvation. A second Adam, imaging God Himself...... not actually "being God" himself. !!
Yes God is the waters of life, administered through His agent who has on Gods command been named with a name that means salvation, and seen as the clean and pure waters of life.
Ken means handsome, but not all handsome men are Ken.
God is salvation, but one who is the means of salvation delivery is not therefore God in person.
Parry and counter thrust D'Artagnan.
@@ken440
A little typo? Pfft, no worries, that can easily be fixed. 👇
I meant of course: “It reveals the truth can truly sting, doesn’t it?”
The Scriptures cannot be broken, regardless of your belief or unbelief. They stand tall, whether you like it or not! Oh, the irony of it all!
Isaiah 12:3 = John 4:13-14
∴ Yeshua = YHVH.
You are in denial and have not read scripture I take you to Isaiah chapter 43 vs 10 if you had read this book then you would obviously realize that God and the Saviour and the Lord are one and you are denying what God Said in Isaiah 43 first 10 calling God a liar
All you have to do is read Isaiah 43:10 and on and your whole video is debunked
But the term 'Saviour' is applied to others. This does not make them God.
@VoiceofTruth-iv8pq it was God speaking saying that I am God and no God has been formed before me or after me and there is no savior but me no one was saying this but God you reply shows me that you do not understand anything about the Bible and your understanding is completely wrong
@VoiceofTruth-iv8pq because God said that there is no savior but me doesn't make him God what are you talkin about can you hear this God literally God said there is no savior but me and Isaiah chapter 43 and you're saying but that doesn't make him God do you understand how ridiculous that is
@@lawrencemetcalf5408 "no God before me" is a position of authority statement, He is THE GOD MOST HIGH (implying other lesser gods, or spirits who would make themselves gods psm82) and in reference to the gods of the nations, from Deut32:8 about the Babel event when God divided the nations and gave overlordship of them (70 of them) to the sons of God, the "bene elohim" which are spiritual beings, angelic beings, members of the first born, some of which have rebelled as Paul tells you in Eph6; "our true enemy are powers and principalities in heavens." that is in hebrew "ha satan" which in english is "the adversary." And note they are still "in heaven."
You are confused with your gods and lords. Paul also said "for there are many gods and many lords" so more study will show you a spiritual war going on in which we are caught up, and Deut 18:18 will show you the word promising a great one who God will manifest in. Jesus is the second Adam, the great prophet, the seed of the woman, the LAMB of God killed on passover. The passover lamb doesnt have to BE GOD because it is PROVIDED by God the father to save his family, as many as believe and come under the covering blood that the father has provided !! Jesus is NOT God. He is a man who has spoken Gods words as God birthed that man and has fully manifested in that man, and now that man is the first fruits, the first up from the dead, first of many brothers raised to glory (us who are still in earthen vessels waiting the call)
Read all of scripture, not just trinity proofs!
JESUS IS GOD, no doubt. You don't know the scriptures.
Wow. What a False Teaching.
Can you answer the question I ask at the end of the podcast. I'm honestly interested to know people's beliefs.
Do you deny that there is a human person (Jesus of Nazareth who came into being some 2000 years ago) at the right hand of God?
can you answer Bills question? I too am fascinated to know if you can agree a human person sits glorified at right hand of the majesty on high.. ???
Being the Son of God means that Jesus DERIVES from God, He is not an actual Son. He derives in that God almighty was able to do ALL what He had to do and then got free of his then useless power. This means that Jesus is NOT ALMIGHTY. This also means that Jesus is now actually ALONE. Indeed Jesus sits on the right hand of the POWER, NOT ON THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD. Jesus is NOT a mediator because He is the ONLY KING of heaven and HE ONLY DECIDES who can enter his kingdom.
Very false teacher
Jesus is NOT a mediator ? What about 1 Tim 2 :5?
@@VoiceofTruth-iv8pq
It's wrong, Paul didn't have clear ideas. Jesus tells He is NOT a mediator. Jesus tells us that He is the only KING OF HEAVEN, Jesus tells us that HE ONLY DECIDES who can enter his Kingdom, NOT THE FATHER Thus, surely Jesus is not a mediator, his own words have priority over the Paul's opinion.
@@claudiozanella256 : With respect, I provided clear scriptural support for what I said. Your only comeback was that paul "didn't have clear ideas" despite having been appointed an Apostle to the nations by the resurrecvted Jesus himself. You make assertions, but provide no scriptural support. You say that priority should be given to Jesus words : "I am the way,. the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." (John 14:6)
@@VoiceofTruth-iv8pq
Yes, I give scriptural support indeed. Unfortunately the Paul's theology is not at all reliable. Unlike other generic believers in the almighty God - as Jews for example - the "reference God" to christians is JESUS, not the almighty God (even if Jesus is in God and God is in Jesus).
In fact Jesus clearly stated that He is the ONLY BREAD who gives life (SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT), the ONLY DOOR (SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT) to heaven. No other doors exist, not even the almighty God is a door to heaven!!! If you want to live, then you need the bread which gives life. But the bread which gives life is JESUS (SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT), you must thus TURN TO HIM to live, He is the ONLY Savior.
Unfortunately Paul's theology is basically bad because Paul believed that Jesus was just a "mediator", he didn't realize that Jesus is THE ONLY KING of heaven (SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT). Thus, HE ONLY DECIDES "The Father judges NO MAN, but has turned over all judgment TO THE SON." (SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT) In other words the "reference God" of Paul was the almighty God, not Jesus. For this reason Paul could hardly be considered as a Christian, however I don't want to get into that.