My understanding is that in Jesus' time, the gods in the surrounding area were imagined mostly with a penis or a vagina, the concept of demigods or meta-copulation being familiar to the 1st century AnE. When we think of the Nephilim in Genesis 6, we see meta beings procreating with human females, but not males. These same beings are heavily alluded to in writings outside today's bible, like the book of Enoch. We see Adam enter the story first (in today's scripture, not Enoch), created by God from dust (not sperm/eggs). Eve, second, was created from Adam's rib (not dust) - ironic too since males are ever after born from both men's and women's fertility. Both male and female were created in his image. So when asked, does God have any genitalia, I'd say in ancient times, that is a loaded question. Yet Jesus appeared to when he was born. When Mary became pregnant with Jesus, scripture is clear that Mary was a virgin as she became pregnant, meaning God didn't come down from heaven to have sex with her. Ironically, in scripture, Jesus (like His Father in Heaven) is never mentioned as having sex or being married to a woman. While sex itself is a good thing, it's interesting to me that God is completely abstinent with mankind while creating mankind with a mysterious alternative method unknown to all creation. He died a fully embodied human, bodily resurrected, Thomas felt the scars, and Jesus ascended to heaven embodying human flesh still, but as God at the same time. So Jesus ascended as a man in heaven and as God. Now I'm not familiar with the doctrine of the Trinity, but when I consider God in scripture, he is described visually in different ways. For example in Genesis 3, he is described as walking among the orchards in Eden. There is debate that God took the form of a meta angel commonly known as the Angel of the Lord. In John 1, the Word became flesh. What visual form exactly did God take during that period before he "became flesh"? Also, His Holy Spirit pervades the space of flesh in ways that are so contrary to his enemies. While his enemies are restricted to one flesh and cannot possess two people at the same time, God can inhabit all his people at once. Also, when God is the one who was, is, and is to come, is this a reference to his form? This only adds to the confusion of his changing forms. All these various forms speak to a meta conception to the nature of God's God-ology (for lack of a better word) that human brains were not designed to understand. At least not prior to the time when heaven and earth are separated.
It is good to hear someone use the feminine concerning the image of God, he is used because man represents power, power rules because it is power, it is in the reflection of man, Love Is in the reflection of woman, so we find Power and love as one, image of God, not just Power Without Love and not just love without power in this the image of God lacks, man is made in the image of god that is man and woman therefore father mother god, but this expression of God has not been used, yet it has been there from the beginning, it is good for those to start to use it, our father mother who is in heaven holy is your name, therefore, no one can argue that woman is not included, father and mother exists because of creation that is the flesh, remove the flesh you remove father mother this is why God is simply, I am, But there are two errors which exist one of them is the trinity, if you build your house upon a lie you build your house upon a hole in the ground, and when the truth comes everything falls down the hole, the spirit is one it cannot separate itself from itself because it is of itself, God is spirit and God cannot be divided, therefore, you cannot have the third person of the trinity because the holy spirit is simply the spirit, it is undivided, The water is the spirit and the cup is the Christ, drop a cup into a pool of water, the water fills the cup and the water surrounds the cup thus the scripture, the father is in me and I am in the father,
Thanks for your comment! On what grounds have you determined that the doctrine of the Trinity is a lie? What you have written here does not suggest a robust engagement with the development of Trinitarian doctrine and categories.
@@dr.maxbotner you do not even have a robust engagement or argument to support the trinity because it remains a mystery, even the young man in this video tells you that, wherever I go the trinity is preached they still tell me it's a mystery, even Mike winger said, you don't have to understand it just believe it, so you want me to believe something you yourself do not even understand, I said to him, does the Christ believe in what he does not understand, does he preach what he does not understand, and the same with the apostles do they preach what they do not understand, then tell me where the spirit resides on the godhead, I see the father I see the son so tell me where does the Spirit reside, yet the kingdom is spirit, God is spirit, as it is written, how can the spirit divide itself from itself that it should become a separate person, when the Christ said, he will send to your counsellor he's not speaking of a person it is a way of saying something the spirit lives in and through all things, God's light lives in and through all things, my argument is more robust than your arguments for the trinity, one thing remains the spirit cannot separate itself from itself, God is undivided, so it cannot produce a separate person of the trinity, many people have listened to your robust engagement or categories or doctrines of the trinity and they still end up saying it's rubbish, must you have an encyclopaedia to explain to me of the simplicity of God the Simplicity of the word, in the end you still tell me it's a mystery my argument holds water the arguments for the Trinity do not.
Mike Winger? LOL! The word Trinity didn't start as a Doctrinal debate but as a Verse-identifier, the verse being of course 1 John 5:7 1 John 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. These THREE are ONE Three = Tri One = Unity Tri-Unity = TRINITY
@@hudsontd7778 the father the word and the spirit are one, is not inferring to the trinity, the trinity is expressed as the father the son and the holy spirit as 3 in 1, but the scripture says three are 1, the scripture is justifying the Christ, meaning the word being the scriptures, testify of the Christ so there is three in heaven that testify the father the scriptures and the Holy Spirit, for the scriptures are God breathed the word comes out of the father, spirit produces the word the word does not produce spirit, this scripture it's not speaking of the trinity, if I speak of the Trinity as 3 in 1 then I need a fourth because which one are the three in, 3 in 1 is different to three are one, the trinity is not expressed as three are one, it is expressed at 3 in 1, when in fact the Trinity should be expressed as 2 in 1 which does not make it a trinity,
Your clearly not a Bible reader or believer, your willfull Ignorance is disturbing. Trinity = these THREE are ONE Three = Tri One = Unity Tri-Unity = TRINITY Your interpretation of the verse is refuted by the Context of 1 John 5, Please take your time and Actually read the chapter before you write another Absurde Comment. The Word vs word Do you know the difference?
Drop a comment below to let us know what you thought of the episode. Thanks for watching!
Thanks for having me on the show. I enjoyed chatting with you!
It was my pleasure! Thanks for a great conversation!
My understanding is that in Jesus' time, the gods in the surrounding area were imagined mostly with a penis or a vagina, the concept of demigods or meta-copulation being familiar to the 1st century AnE. When we think of the Nephilim in Genesis 6, we see meta beings procreating with human females, but not males. These same beings are heavily alluded to in writings outside today's bible, like the book of Enoch.
We see Adam enter the story first (in today's scripture, not Enoch), created by God from dust (not sperm/eggs). Eve, second, was created from Adam's rib (not dust) - ironic too since males are ever after born from both men's and women's fertility. Both male and female were created in his image.
So when asked, does God have any genitalia, I'd say in ancient times, that is a loaded question.
Yet Jesus appeared to when he was born.
When Mary became pregnant with Jesus, scripture is clear that Mary was a virgin as she became pregnant, meaning God didn't come down from heaven to have sex with her.
Ironically, in scripture, Jesus (like His Father in Heaven) is never mentioned as having sex or being married to a woman. While sex itself is a good thing, it's interesting to me that God is completely abstinent with mankind while creating mankind with a mysterious alternative method unknown to all creation.
He died a fully embodied human, bodily resurrected, Thomas felt the scars, and Jesus ascended to heaven embodying human flesh still, but as God at the same time.
So Jesus ascended as a man in heaven and as God.
Now I'm not familiar with the doctrine of the Trinity, but when I consider God in scripture, he is described visually in different ways.
For example in Genesis 3, he is described as walking among the orchards in Eden.
There is debate that God took the form of a meta angel commonly known as the Angel of the Lord.
In John 1, the Word became flesh.
What visual form exactly did God take during that period before he "became flesh"?
Also, His Holy Spirit pervades the space of flesh in ways that are so contrary to his enemies.
While his enemies are restricted to one flesh and cannot possess two people at the same time, God can inhabit all his people at once.
Also, when God is the one who was, is, and is to come, is this a reference to his form? This only adds to the confusion of his changing forms.
All these various forms speak to a meta conception to the nature of God's God-ology (for lack of a better word) that human brains were not designed to understand.
At least not prior to the time when heaven and earth are separated.
It is good to hear someone use the feminine concerning the image of God, he is used because man represents power, power rules because it is power, it is in the reflection of man, Love Is in the reflection of woman, so we find Power and love as one, image of God, not just Power Without Love and not just love without power in this the image of God lacks, man is made in the image of god that is man and woman therefore father mother god, but this expression of God has not been used, yet it has been there from the beginning, it is good for those to start to use it, our father mother who is in heaven holy is your name, therefore, no one can argue that woman is not included,
father and mother exists because of creation that is the flesh, remove the flesh you remove father mother this is why God is simply, I am,
But there are two errors which exist one of them is the trinity, if you build your house upon a lie you build your house upon a hole in the ground, and when the truth comes everything falls down the hole, the spirit is one it cannot separate itself from itself because it is of itself, God is spirit and God cannot be divided, therefore, you cannot have the third person of the trinity because the holy spirit is simply the spirit, it is undivided,
The water is the spirit and the cup is the Christ, drop a cup into a pool of water, the water fills the cup and the water surrounds the cup thus the scripture, the father is in me and I am in the father,
Thanks for your comment! On what grounds have you determined that the doctrine of the Trinity is a lie? What you have written here does not suggest a robust engagement with the development of Trinitarian doctrine and categories.
@@dr.maxbotner you do not even have a robust engagement or argument to support the trinity because it remains a mystery, even the young man in this video tells you that, wherever I go the trinity is preached they still tell me it's a mystery, even Mike winger said, you don't have to understand it just believe it, so you want me to believe something you yourself do not even understand, I said to him, does the Christ believe in what he does not understand, does he preach what he does not understand, and the same with the apostles do they preach what they do not understand, then tell me where the spirit resides on the godhead, I see the father I see the son so tell me where does the Spirit reside, yet the kingdom is spirit, God is spirit, as it is written, how can the spirit divide itself from itself that it should become a separate person, when the Christ said, he will send to your counsellor he's not speaking of a person it is a way of saying something the spirit lives in and through all things, God's light lives in and through all things, my argument is more robust than your arguments for the trinity, one thing remains the spirit cannot separate itself from itself, God is undivided, so it cannot produce a separate person of the trinity, many people have listened to your robust engagement or categories or doctrines of the trinity and they still end up saying it's rubbish, must you have an encyclopaedia to explain to me of the simplicity of God the Simplicity of the word, in the end you still tell me it's a mystery my argument holds water the arguments for the Trinity do not.
Mike Winger? LOL!
The word Trinity didn't start as a Doctrinal debate but as a Verse-identifier, the verse being of course 1 John 5:7
1 John 5:7
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
These THREE are ONE
Three = Tri
One = Unity
Tri-Unity = TRINITY
@@hudsontd7778 the father the word and the spirit are one, is not inferring to the trinity, the trinity is expressed as the father the son and the holy spirit as 3 in 1, but the scripture says three are 1, the scripture is justifying the Christ, meaning the word being the scriptures, testify of the Christ so there is three in heaven that testify the father the scriptures and the Holy Spirit, for the scriptures are God breathed the word comes out of the father, spirit produces the word the word does not produce spirit, this scripture it's not speaking of the trinity, if I speak of the Trinity as 3 in 1 then I need a fourth because which one are the three in, 3 in 1 is different to three are one, the trinity is not expressed as three are one, it is expressed at 3 in 1, when in fact the Trinity should be expressed as 2 in 1 which does not make it a trinity,
Your clearly not a Bible reader or believer, your willfull Ignorance is disturbing.
Trinity = these THREE are ONE
Three = Tri
One = Unity
Tri-Unity = TRINITY
Your interpretation of the verse is refuted by the Context of 1 John 5, Please take your time and Actually read the chapter before you write another Absurde Comment.
The Word vs word
Do you know the difference?