Really appreciate your teaching on this. In a world full of personal opinions masquerading as doctrine, it’s comforting to find teaching that’s so solidly biblical. Thank you.
I liked how your explanation was laid out in such a logical, step-by-step way with Biblical proof for each part. It would be cool if you did an explanation of the "begotten, not made" part of the Nicene Creed.
Great job going back to Genesis 1. I also love the emphasis in Genesis 1 where God says “let US make man in OUR image” emphasizing the multiple persons of the trinity working together in one God during creation.
@@dgreenja God is one God in three separate, but co eternal persons. The word for God in Hebrew is plural also not singular. In the great commission Jesus tells us to baptize in the name of the Father, Son, Holy Spirit. They are put side by side. When God is mentioned as Him or He, we rarely think of God as Triune. But that’s exactly what He is. This is a mystery we as finite humans cannot fully wrap our minds around because God is beyond our ability to fully grasp. But He lets us in enough to know enough about who He is and what He’s done for us and our Salvation so we can know Him.
@@villarrealmarta6103 Elohim is both plural and singular. The fact that there is one God, in and of itself speaks to a singularity, whether it is a solitary singularity or a compound singularity, the latter of which trinitarians refer to as plural. A family is singular, but members ofthe.one family, are plural. The plurality of the noun Elohim, has to be in relation to the subject-matter, Elohim. Mathew 28:19 points to Acts 2:38. Peter preached the great commission in Acts 2:38. Jesus is the one name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The mystery of God, can be.understood by a divine revelation.
@@dgreenja just to be clear Jesus is not the Father, the Father did not die for you and I but the Son did. The Father is not the Son and the Holy Spirit is also not the Father or the Son. The Son is not the Father or the Holy Spirit. They are three separate persons yet 1 God. You can’t grasp it, we never can. In fact on Trinity Sunday we actually heard a whole sermon on the doctrine of the Trinity. It’s similar to how Jesus isn’t half man half God, He’s fully man and fully God.
@@villarrealmarta6103 His not being the Father, means He is neither God, because there is only one God who is the Father. God being one in Deut 6:4 and that there is one God as in James 2:19, are two principles which apply to every verse in the bible which mentions “God”. Monotheism was expressed in the incarnation, where the God who tookon flesh a man, is one, and that He is one God. If the Father is not the same person manifested in the flesh, then neither is He the same God manifested in the flesh. I believe you accept the former, but do you accept the latter? Also, just to be clear, that there is only one God, and He is the Father. Did not Jesus refer to His Father as the only true God?
As always, you motivate me to become more precise in my theology. This is an excellent, methodical defense of the Trinity. I highly recommend watching it twice and taking notes. Thanks, Jordan.
Thank you for sharing, I'm a former LDS/Mormon all my life, served a mission, was ordained an elder, received their secret temple rituals, etc. and now I am a born again Protestant. LDS tend to look at revelation as like revisions of an instruction manual that can be updated and replaced over time such that older revelation is outdated and useless. Instead, we should look at revelation as progressing where God is slowly building upon what he's already revealed. God isn't capricious and doesn't say "oops". LDS see the Bible passages of God saying he is one not as speaking of his essence but of his will, purpose, or something of that nature. But it's not really tenable given the passages in Deuteronomy 4, 6, Isaiah 43, 44 (where God says in vv. 6-8 that there is no other like him and in v. 24 that He was all alone at creation....doesn't get much more explicit than that), 45, 1 Cor. 8...it goes on and on. There is one God, period. Praise God for opening my eyes to truth.
Generally all of them, but after the fall of the western Roman Empire they've had less influence, then with the expansion of papal absolutism they're looked at with suspicion, for instance the council of Constance was good because it ended the papal schisms and submitted the Bishop of Rome to councils once again yet also bad with the whole condemnation of communion in both kinds and exception of Hus. From the council of Trent on we don't recognise councils in communion with Rome, nor do we recognise the council of Dort, yet we still recognise and honour the local councils of different regions still today (though they're largely occupied with administration instead of heresy). The adoption of the Book of Concord is usually seen as the most immediate conciliar authority.
The calvinist “regulative principle" says that if a command to do or say a particular thing did not appear in Scripture, it was not to be said or done in the church. The far better principle that informs Lutherans and Anglicans, and, I believe, the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church is the “normative principle,” which says that if it in harmony with Scriptural teaching, it may be done or said-one must never go against Scripture with one’s practices. The Pope's councils certainly go against scripture: Lateran Council 1 Canon 21: We absolutely forbid priests, deacons, subdeacons, and monks to have concubines or to contract marriage. Lateran Council 2 Canon 6: For since they should be and be called the temple of God, the vessel of the Lord, the abode of the Holy Spirit, it is *unbecoming* that they *indulge in marriage* and in *impurities.* 1 Timothy 4:1-3 Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and *teachings of demons,* through the insincerity of liars whose consciences are seared, who *forbid marriage* 1 Corinthians 9:5 *Do we not have the right* to take along a believing wife, as do the other apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas? Canon 21 continued: We decree in accordance with the definitions of the sacred canons, that *marriages already contracted by such persons must be dissolved,* and that the persons be condemned to do penance. Matthew 19:6 So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate. Innocent III, 1204 "We destine specially to this, that the material sword may be sanctioned to supply the defect of the spiritual sword, and you, besides the temporal glory which you will attain from so pious and praiseworthy a work, may obtain that pardon for sins, which we grant as an indulgence for the remission of their sins, since we want those who faithfully shall have laboured against the heretics to rejoice in the same indulgence as we grant as an indulgence for those crossing the sea for the aid of the Holy Land." Lateran Council 4 Canon 3: Secular authorities, whatever office they may hold, shall be admonished and induced and if necessary compelled by ecclesiastical censure, that as they wish to be esteemed and numbered among the faithful, so for the defense of the faith they ought publicly to take an oath that they will strive in good faith and *to the best of their ability to exterminate* (pro viribus exterminare studebunt) in the territories subject to their jurisdiction all heretics pointed out by the Church. _Ad extirpanda_ of Pope Innocent IV: We decree that the head of state [...] shall observe, both what is written herein, and other regulations and laws both ecclesiastical and civil, that are published against heretical wickedness. [...] No heretical man or woman may dwell, sojourn, or maintain a bare subsistence in the country, or any kind of jurisdiction or district belonging to it, whoever shall find the heretical man or woman shall boldly seize, with impunity, all his or their goods, and freely carry them off. [...] The head of state, or whatever ruler stands foremost in the public esteem, must cause the heretics who have been arrested in this manner to be taken to whatever jurisdiction the Diocesan, or his surrogate, is in, or whatever district, or city, or place the Diocesan bishop wishes to take them to. [...] *The head of state or ruler **_must force_** all the heretics whom he has in custody, provided he does so without killing them or breaking their arms or legs* to confess their errors and accuse other heretics whom they know.
Blake Ostler seems to be honest about the pantheistic and polytheistic nature of mormon teaching, and to be sympathetic to process philosophy. Should be an interesting study if you do it. Basically, the Salt Lake/Brigham Young mormons believe matter and intelligences are eternal, but god /gods have evolved and learned to manipulate these elements. This is often hidden from presentations designed to convert Christians or those with a basic Christian background.
Pr. Hans Fiene's Lutheran Satire has a good, funny video taking apart various Trinity analogies in a discussion of Donnell and Connel with St. Patrick. I think the clover might be carefully used in the same way that the dogwood blossom is used as a picture of Christ crucified - simply as a picture and not an analogy which would be, I think it is called partialism.
The 1st London Baptist Confession of Faith 1646 Article 2 IN this divine and infinite Being there is the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; each having the whole divine Essence, yet the Essence undivided; all infinite without any beginning, therefore but one God; who is not to be divided in nature, and being, but distinguished by several peculiar relative properties. 1 Cor.1:3; John 1:1, 15:26; Exod.3:14; 1 Cor.8:6. 🌷
I think the volume was a bit quiet. If I stepped just a couple feet from my computer I couldn't make out what you were saying. But what I could heat was a good dismantling of papist self-importance.
A Christian actress posted two videos on her Instagram about how she’s questioning the trinity and it’s just a recent thing and she’s not a crazy heretic. I hope she sees this. 😊
Greetings. Is it that you are defining God as only a divine essence that is shared? If so, then how do you relate this to incarnation where according to 1Tim 3:16, God was manifest in the flesh? God is Spirit or a divine essence. Is it therefore equally true to say that the one divine essence of God, was manifest in the flesh? Is the incarnation about the person only, in flesh, the being or essence only, in flesh, or both the person and the essence in the flesh?
Can the sh'ma be applies to St. Matt 4:10? God was manifest in the flesh, but Jesus in His human existence, was a Jew as well as an Israelite. Was Jesus obedient to the sh'ma, is serving the one and only God in the OT?
Thank you for sharing this interesting lecture! However, I have a question: why do the Orthodox Jewish rabbis say that the translation “THE Angel of the Lord” is wrong, and that it actually should be “AN angel of the Lord”? I would appreciate your comments on this point! God bless!
Because of the long history of the Talmudic tradition developing doctrines and positions that are designed to negate Christianity. There's no indication of this way of thinking in ancient Israelite understanding; they were much more open to the idea of this being a distinct yet divine entity in some sense even if it wasn't fully understood back then.
I recently came out of Mormonism. I've been trying to understand the trinity. I do understand that they are one God, and each one is distinct and not interchangeable. I'm wondering, however, why there is such a debate about it. Is understanding the nature of God essential to our salvation? If it were, I would think it would have been clearly written out in the Bible. Is the debate simply to understand? To further seek Him? Leaving Mormonism, I can clearly see how God is not as I was taught growing up, but if my faith in Him is what saves me, why is understanding his nature in depth necessary? I do want to understand as much as I can, but I'm not worried about whether I fully intellectually grasp who He is. I feel satisfied that I will never fully understand His nature, and that my faith is sufficient.
Hi Kari, I'm glad you made it out. Understanding the nature of God is difficult for us all. Joseph Smith started with the Trinity doctrine, ex: 2 Nephi 31:21 “….And now, behold, this is the doctrine of Christ, and the only and true doctrine of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, which is one God, without end. Amen.” But then he "veered off" into "We have imagined and supposed that God was God from all eternity." While I don't need to know quote how it all works, John 1:1ff read to say that Jesus has been around eternally. Some say that Jesus is God and other say he is not. Based on my understanding, He needs to be God for his death to 'count' for the salvation of all mankind. If he is just a man, then the best his death could do is pay for the sins of 1 man. Some think Jesus is another god and if so then there is a problem with the old testament where God says in Isaiah 45:18: "For thus saith the Lord that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the Lord; and there is none else."
I think it's important to know simply because of truthfulness(Jesus taught we are to worship in spirit and in truth) and how it plays out in other areas of theology. It's not that having a perfect systematic understanding of the Trinity saves us, but when it comes to understanding God the doctrine of the trinity is an important starting point so we don't lose track of what we're talking about.
Wow, UA-cam ironically showed an Ad before the video for the Unitarian Christian Alliance which claimed that Paul, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, and Origen were Unitarians. 😂😂😂
Dr. Cooper, Pr. Chris Rosebrough who has...discussed Fürer Furtick for years has a video on Furtick's modalism, and relates it in part to his association with TD Jakes.
Can you do more videos on Lutheranism specifically? Like the difference between senates, I know you're not WELS because that would interfere with your work with others but which is the most biblically accurate?
Please go through the argument for the “One name and that name is Jesus” argument. My roommate is a oneness Pentecostal and I’d like to know how to respond to that argument
Looking forward to more of you with Heiser.... Still trying to decide if 1 Enoch is gnostic literature. This is actually one of my biggest concerns because when people start relying on apocryphal texts as much of a basis for their theology I become concerned. I'm still on the fence with the whole thing even after long hard study. I've seen both camps pro Heiser pro first Enoch pro Dead Sea scrolls etc, and the opposite camp anti-Heiser anti first Enoch anti Dead Sea scrolls. I'm smack-dab in the middle. I would love your input.
@Sound Impact It wouldn't be "gnostic" because Gnosticism wasn't around until well after Paul. The book of Enoch (large parts of 1 Enoch) was around in the BC Era. And you need Enoch, 11QMelchizedek and other dead sea scrolls to help inform what bible writers intended. Whether you think they are inspired or not
@@eew8060 interesting! Thank you for your comment. Perhaps I use the wrong word and should not have used the word gnostic because I was using Gnostic in a general sense not in a religious sense. But your comment gave me food for thought.
I'm thinking of independent non-denom churches that are generally Trinitarian but without regular recitation of the creeds or clear Confessional subscription.
@@DrJordanBCoopertrinitarian shield only-ists, i kid. but seriously another commenter mentions some early English Baptist confessions where they guard the Trinity, and with the later Acts of Toleration is likely why complete non-trinitarianism did not take off in early America with all the other protestant sects coming over (since the dominant English Baptist had that in their tradition by the time).
@@DrJordanBCooper This is why I've been looking at the creeds and confessions. Non-denoms such as myself don't have any. However, even if there's bits (of the confessions) I disagree with, there's a large portion of which I should, and do agree with.
You admitted that many of the proof texts of the trinity are implications. Ah yes, because we get our doctrines from the implications of man rather than the established word of God…. Thanks for making the false doctrine of the trinity even more plain.
I debated a Roman Catholic and she said that we couldn't find the Trinity in the Bible. That every protestant is reading it with context how Rome has interpreted the texts
“Eck and Cochlaeus are asses, who say that the article of the Trinity is established and confirmed, not by Scripture, but by the doctors of the church and the pope. That’s a lie.” Luther WA 39, 2:305.24-26
The 3 Ecumenical Creeds state the belief in the Holy Trinity which is totally Scriptural. To not believe in the Trinity puts you outside the Christian faith and therefore you are not a Christian. See the Athenasian Creed for a clear and definitive declaration. Gods peace be with you all.
@@Mygoalwogel we follow St. Athanasius bro, however St. Athanasius and the Cappadocians definitely didn't believe in the filioque. Saint Basil explicitly states that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father alone ua-cam.com/play/PLnK9ahzmHnYfEQ2LWbU2Yux9AetaYETX9.html
I think that the creeds can actually make things more confusing. As I was thinking with regard to the filioque clause. These things seem to give a 3 tier idea of the trinity.
Only if you desperately need a reason to preserve the East-West schism because you can't bear the thought that your church made a mistake. That goes for Papists, Nikonites, and New Calendarists. Lutherans have always taught: 1. filioque in light of "for us and for our salvation." We don't worry about how the Holy Spirit proceeds in eternity. We focus on his procession unto us from the Father and the Son. The Papists, Russians and Greeks can duke it out and let us know when they're done. 2. the council of Toledo was probably improper and certainly not Catholic in the real meaning of the word. Western Lutherans use filioque. Eastern Lutherans in full fellowship with us don't.
Shalom. In Rev.3:1....these things saith He that hath the Seven Spirits (Spirits plural) of GOD..... I know some quote Isaiah 11:2 , 1)the Spirit (singular) of Wisdom n understanding, 2) Spirit of counsel n might, 3) the Spirit of knowledge n fear of YHVH. Even though it is clear in this verse it mentions only 3 Spirits. Some teach that it is the Spirit of truth, which also, the Spirit of Wisdom, Spirit of Understanding, Spirit of counsel, Spirit of Might, Spirit Knowledge, Spirit of Fear of YHVH. So the Seven Spirits(plural) in Rev.3:1 is actually the Spirit of Truth. Seven in One. If that is so what about Zechariah 12:10 And I will pour upon the house of David.......the Spirit of Grace and of Supplications:........ So if we split n add, the Spirit of Grace, n the Spirit of Supplications, does it become Nine in One? How does this add up to trinity?
There was one reference you got the chapter and verse wrong --1 corinthians 1:8. It was actually 1 corinthians 8:6 that you read. The governing body of the watchtower society doesn't want the people who follow them to think for themselves, which is why they don't have scholars and discourse with others. They are taught to just spit out certain verses and stick to them.
@@sunnyjohnson992 Yet the translation used by your church has changed many verses to say something that scripture doesn't say in the original languages.
God, by definition is omnipresent. God has a spirit and Jesus informs us that God "is spirit". The spirit of God is holy. The spirit is the personal presence of God. That is why in Acts, Peter refers to lying to the spirit and also to "the Lordd". The spirit of God, the spirit of Christ is the personal, spiritual presence of God and of Christ. Offending or grieving the "spirit of God" is in fact offense of God Himself.
Thanks! It's much easier to prove from Scripture that the God the Son is God than that the God the Holy Spirit is God. But it's equally important. This is a good case. Thank you.
What is your view of the water of Genesis 1:2? Is it literally water, or is Moses referring to unformed matter? I think the latter makes more sense (God hasn't spoken yet, and he always creates through the Word). This would make Genesis 1:1-2 logically prior, but not temporally prior, to the first day.
But God doesn't begin to speak until Genesis 1:3, which is the first recorded instance of "And God said". John 1 says "all things were made through [the Word]". If the earth and water in Gen. 1:2 are literally earth and water, then God created them before he is recorded speaking, which would mean that God's initial act of creation is not recorded to be through his Word. Wouldn't it make more sense to say that the waters and formless earth are a metaphor, referring to prime matter, which does not exist in act but only in potency?
@@kjhg323 In the beginning, created(he) God אֵ֥ת Aleph Tav (Alpha and Omega) the heavens and the earth. The word is already with God. The word is already God.
I'm always very alienated by Catholics appealing to pagan philosophy for things like the Trinity and classical theism when scripture itself points to both
Lutherans accept the first 6 ecumenical councils, because they agree with what scripture teaches. It would be foolish to disregard the work of people who were closer to Jesus and his discples than we are as long as that work agrees with scripture. Our historical position is that we are the Roman Catholic church cleansed by the gospel.
It's absolutely hilarious that Oneness Pentecostals AND J Witnesses are on here attacking Trinitarians. OPs insist that the Bible CLEARLY teaches that Jesus is the Father. JWs insist that the Bible CLEARLY teaches that Jesus is a creature and not The One True God. Why don't they go bother each other instead of us?
What’s the name Peter spoke in Acts 2:38? You’ll find it’s the same one referred to in Acts 4:12, and thus is the one name of God. Hence the singular name mentioned in Matthew 28:19 is the name of Jesus. Jesus is the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. John 3:34, Colossians 2:9, and Colossians 1:15 further confirm this. It’s abundantly clear from Scripture that this is the truth. So I find it funny you say the explanation of this is “not good.” Love how you just gloss over Titus 2:13 and John 20:28, knowing that it completely destroys your theology. Lol. Since you either grew up in the trinitarian tradition or were trained in it, it is the perspective you bring. But if looking at Scripture with no perspective or tradition just simply reading the words on the page (be it English, Hebrew, or Greek) you would NEVER come to the conclusion that God is a triune plurality. You would, however, understand that God is indivisibly one and His name is Jesus. You put so much credence in being a scholar, pray tell, did Jesus not give thanks that the mystery of his incarnation was not revealed to the wise and prudent but unto babes? And by whom has God perfected praise? So if even a small child can understand it, your degrees and PhD’s mean nothing, especially if it leads you to believe in a false doctrine.
*Oneness Pentecostals:* Without [The Logos], became NOT ONE that has become. Jn 1:3 *Jehovah’s Witnesses:* He is prototokos over all creation. Col 1:15 *OPs:* Prototokos often means “preeminent” in the LXX, not always “first to breach the womb.” Even younger siblings, such as Ephraim and Israel are called prototokos. *JWs:* Without the Logos became not one that has become, -WITH THE EXCEPTION OF the Logos himself.- *OPs:* NOT ONE means NOT ONE. Jesus is THE One True God. -He’s the Father.- *JWs:* Prototokos means firstBORN. Jesus is the SON of God. -He’s A god, not the One True God.- *Christians:* Fixed it.
Nobody understands the Trinity because it is not Biblical. That is why Trinitarians have to use their imagination and eisegesis to explain away the obvious verses. If Jesus is THE God Almighty, than what is the Father?
@@JudeOne3Four The Bible _does_ say Jesus is Uncreated Creator: Jn 1:3; 1 Cor 8:6; Heb 1:8 The Bible _does_ say Jesus is equal with the Father: John 5:18; Col 2:9; Jn 10:30-33 The Bible _does_ say Jesus is “My God” Jn 20:28, “God over all” Rom 9:5, “Our God and Savior” 2 Peter 1:1; 3:18, “the only-begotten God” Jn 1:18 The Bible _does_ say Jesus is “The God” Heb 1:8, “The Great God” Titus 2:13, “I AM” Jn 8:58 Bonus: Acts 7:59; Acts 20:28
@@Mygoalwogel That was not the question man. I didn't ask for none of what you've posted. Let me ask it again: IF Jesus of Nazareth IS God Almighty, than what is the Father?
@@Mygoalwogel See? Contradicting yourself? Yes, you're handling the Scriptures deceitfully and you use your imagination. Do you also got a problem with BASIC kindergarten grammar? At first you said that Jesus of Nazareth is the uncreated Creator and now all of a sudden its the Father. You can't have 3 that are Almighty. Make up our mind man, which one is it?
No question the Jesus Christ is the true Son of "the God", and as such is a divine as His Father. When you lie to the spirit, you lie to the One whose spirit it is.
Hello Jesus is the Messiah The Son of God The Son of David The Son of man The man God has chosen to be his anointed king The man God will judge the world through The man God raised from the dead Jesus has a God There is no triune god in scripture Jesus said the Father is the only true God! John 17 3 And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent. - Acts 3 13 The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Servant Jesus; whom ye delivered up, and denied before the face of Pilate, when he had determined to release him. 14 But ye denied the Holy and Righteous One, and asked for a murderer to be granted unto you, 15 and killed the Prince of life; whom God raised from the dead; whereof we are witnesses. Notice Jesus is NOT the God of Abraham 13 The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Servant Jesus; whom ye delivered up, and denied before the face of Pilate, when he had determined to release him.
Just because Jesus is given special titles, doesn't confirm he is not God. Read the whole bible and see the place where Jesus lets people confirm he is God. And where he equates himself with God. For example John 10:27-29 27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: 28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. 29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.
@@leef_me8112 That is not “equating himself with God” He literally goes around saying I do nothing in my own authority I’m not doing my will Etc Jesus is the one sent by God Jesus has a God
Why listen to fallible Protestant Pastors, when we have the infallible Holy Scriptures? Peace always in Jesus Christ our Great and Kind God and Savior, He whose Flesh is true food and Blood true drink
Saying the NT teaches the trinity is like saying the Puritans who landed at Plymouth rock voted for the Republican party. It's just anachronism. The first trinitarian christians don't appear until about 350 or 360AD which is over 300 years after Jesus was crucified so it's just as historically impossible that the NT teaches the trinity as it is that George Washington had a twitter account.
2 Corinthians 13:14. May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all. Matthew 28:19. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.
It's not though. The substance of trinitarian Theology Proper is real, and it's revealed in Scripture. Even if you were right in your assessment that trinitarian Christians don't appear until 350-360AD, it doesn't necessarily impact whether or not the NT teaches trinitarian Theology Proper. The reality of the doctrine, and it being contained and taught in the NT, doesn't depend absolutely on people affirming it, although it might be said to be somewhat expected that people should be affirming it from early on. To know if the NT teaches trinitarian Theology Proper, we first and foremost need to look at the New Testament. The NT makes it clear that there is only one Being who is from everlasting to everlasting. The NT also makes it clear that Divinity is ascribed to both the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. There is but one LORD, yet perfections that belong to the LORD alone are ascribed to three distinct 'persons'. Your argument is rather unsound.
Shalom. It is written in Mark 12: 28-29, when Yeshua was asked, which is the first Commandment of all, Yeshua said 'Hear O Israel; The LORD our GOD is ONE LORD. Yeshua was quoting the shema. Yeshua, my Master believes in ONE GOD. Which is good enough for me. I believe in ONE GOD. I do believe Yeshua is God n The Holy Spirit is God, but I don't accept the Trinity doctrine. To me this is men's doctrine, n men complicate things they do not understand, in the name of theology, adding to GOD's words. Farther more in the English bible the word 'The LORD' has been substituted for YHVH, which is Heavenly Father's NAME, in Deut.6:4
Jordan, these arguments are not particularly strong and it seems like you just use a shallow understanding of Arianism/Mormons/JWs to dismiss alternatives but you seem unfamiliar with Biblical Unitarianism and it's arguments against trinitarianism. You should have some discussions with more sophisticated non-trinitarianism to sharpen your arguments at the very least.
The Bible is totally clear that 1 There is only One God. 2 Jesus is God 3 Jesus is not the Father. Any argument that denies that is denying the Bible and therefore GOD.
@@markhorton3994 Exactly. Anti-trinitarians be like, "Let's clean up all this mystery in the Bible. Alls we gots to do is, like, never read anything at face value."
By the scriptures? Jesus states at least FIFTY TIMES - 50 - in all different ways that God is made by THE FATHER AND THE SON!!! PERIOD. WHO had the BRILLIANT IDEA that He is made by THREE different divine persons instead???? I am not blind: I can see that three NAMES of three divine persons are mentioned in the gospels! JESUS DOES NOT LIE: God is indeed made only by the Father and the Son. It simply means that the three names SOMEHOW MAP ONTO 1. THE FATHER AND 2. THE SON. I know this "mapping concept" was difficult to grasp by people of ancient times, but now we are in the third millennium!
@claudio zanella It is reasonable to believe there is a 3rd person, who is called God. Here are a few examples Acts 5:2-4 King James Version 2 And kept back part of the price, his wife also being privy to it, and brought a certain part, and laid it at the apostles' feet. 3 But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land? 4 Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God. John 14:26 But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you. Ephesians 4:30 And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption.
@@leef_me8112 THE TRINITY INVENTION REVISITED It's absolutely sure that no trinity exists because it's absolutely sure that NO THIRD DIVINE PERSON EXISTS. Jesus states "I am in the Father and the Father in me" and "I and the Father are one," Jesus would have never made those important statements if a third divine person existed! Then Jesus in the four gospels goes on CONFIRMING - in all possible different ways and in absolute consistent manner - that God is only made by Him and by the Father. Even UNEQUIVOCALLY "You will leave me ALONE. Yet, I am not ALONE because the FATHER is with me." Jesus does not even KNOW what a triune God is! (by the way, Jesus is God due to his tight union with the Father and because He is the KING of heaven. The almighty God is NOT the King because He is only a spirit, NOBODY is here). But the inventors of the trinity had a problem, they couldn't figure out who is the Holy Spirit mentioned in the gospels. They couldn't grasp that He simply is the "FATHER in the form of SPIRIT" ("God is a spirit", Jn. 4:23,24), who sometimes is called "Holy Spirit" by Jesus, sometimes "Holy Father." The Father in the form of a spirit comes from the Father (normal, absent) whom nobody ever SAW "the world has not known you". They thought the "Holy Spirit" were an ADDITIONAL divine person, but unfortunately (for them) they were unable to locate that divine person in the gospels. Panicking, what do we do now? At first the inventors resorted to the lame invention of the almighty (but dumb) "Lord who gives life" (not even a scent of him in the whole bible), then a "sly, philanthropic little hand" added three words, "ho hagios pneuma" (the Holy Spirit) to verse 14:26 of John's, after the word "The Comforter."
"No one knows the *hour* . Not the angels, nor the son. Only the Father in Heaven" - Jesus (regarding his second coming) "No one knows the *trinity* . Not the angels, nor the son. Only the Father in Heaven" --- Jesus (after the second coming;) " *You know nothing Jesus Christ* " -- pissed off Trinitarians :((
@@Mygoalwogel "So you prefer Oneness......" Well to be fair...Christ himself preferred that "Oneness" Jesus repeatedly said "God is One"... or, "The Only True God is the Father"
*The Godhead* God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Ghost. 3 individual persons and yet ONE God! As for the Trinity this is the False Godhead, the counterfeit Godhead! See examples below: *Babylon* : Nimrod, Semiramis and Tammuz; *Persian* : Ormazd, Mithra and Ahriman; *Grecian* : Zeus, Appozlo and Athena; *Roman* : Jupiter, Mars and Venus; *Egyptian* : Idris, Isis and Horus; *Catholicism* : Isis, Horus and Seb (aka IHS); *Buddhist* : San, Pao and Fuh; *Chinese* : Yuan-Shi-TianZong, Ling-Bao-Tian-Song and Lao- Jun. I'm sure there are many more! The Trinity is of all other religions but not of the Bible!
The Bible _does_ say Jesus is Uncreated Creator: Jn 1:3; 1 Cor 8:6; Heb 1:8 The Bible _does_ say Jesus is equal with the Father: John 5:18; Col 2:9; Jn 10:30-33 The Bible _does_ say Jesus is “My God” Jn 20:28, “God over all” Rom 9:5, “Our God and Savior” 2 Peter 1:1; 3:18, “the only-begotten God” Jn 1:18 The Bible _does_ say Jesus is “The God” Heb 1:8, “The Great God” Titus 2:13, “I AM” Jn 8:58 Bonus: Acts 7:59; Acts 20:28
Whoa didn't know the case for trinities in other religions was such trash. Bro literally put Isis Horus and Seb under Catholicism 💀 I know the Roman one, as well as the greek one is wrong, and the egyptian one I've heard is wrong as well. So 5 of them are wrong, because I can throw Buddism in there too. You are only right, if you define the trinity as no trinitarian would define it. 😂 I certainly wouldn't call any of those trinities, especially since all of those aren't monotheistic.
Scholors know trinity is not taught in the bible , catholic Encyclopædia says it's nowhere in scripture, yet false religion still teach the Trinity doctrine, the real mystery is why Christianity still teach it Jesus said he's the truth and he said I'm ascending to my Father for the father is greater than I , so let's pay attention to what jesus said
The Bible _does_ say Jesus is Uncreated Creator: Jn 1:3; 1 Cor 8:6; Heb 1:8 The Bible _does_ say Jesus is equal with the Father: John 5:18; Col 2:9; Jn 10:30-33 The BIble _does_ say Jesus is “My God” Jn 20:28, “God over all” Rom 9:5; “Our God and Savior” 2 Peter 1:1; 3:18, The Bible _does_ say Jesus is “The God” Heb 1:8, “The Great God” Titus 2:13, “I AM” Jn 8:58 Bonus: Acts 7:59; Acts 20:28
@@Mygoalwogel a son doesnt always exist ..a son is not the same age as the father . Jesus is literally firstborn of all creation. Jehovah God firstborn angelic son is Jesus Jehovah God started his creation somewhere. One of his angels is firstborn. Its jesus
@@AstariahJW Nope. I presented you with the unchanging word of God of Scripture. You presented me with your opinions without the unchanging word. You do not believe the word. You believe your opinions. You are an idolater and unsaved.
@@Mygoalwogel trinity scholars have changed the word of God . Besides do I need to give scripture where it says jesus is firstborn of all creation. You should know that Also jesus is only begotten son . These 2 titles only apply to the son and never to the father Jehovah God He is everlasting. The ancient of days . He doesn't have a beginning Maybe you should research on how trinity developed. Its idolatry to worship a pagan god
@@AstariahJW Everyone knows he is πρωτότοκος of all creation, just as David was first-born despite being the youngest brother. It means he is the king of all things. He became part of creation in the incarnation. You could not figure out these easy things because the Spirit of God is not in you. The Spirit of God is not in you because the word of God is sealed and veiled to you. The word of God is sealed and veiled to you because you refuse to love the truth.
In Malachi 3 and Isaiah 40:3, we see that YHWH was going to come and someone would prepare the way for YHWH. In the gospels John prepares the way and who comes? Jesus. So, Jesus = YHWH. Then we see Father, Son and Holy Spirit at Jesus’ baptism. Mathew 28: baptize them in the name (singular) of Father, Son and Holy Spirit. ONE name, three persons. The Trinity must be read in the Bible and you are failing to see it.
@@eew8060 Sure, but in Mal 3 and Isaiah 40 we are looking for YHWH to come after one prepares the way and Jesus comes. And so we can see who He is. Cant compare this to an angel. Also, Paul in Philippians 2 says Jesus has the name that is above all names. What name is that? YHWH. This isn’t the name of a creaturely agent.
There is a number of mentions pertaining to God the father and God the son. Also the Holy Spirit as a He, meaning person. In Genesis 1 God says let us make man in our image also which verifies God is more than one person. This doesn’t mean we can conceive of this eternal design in its entirety since we are only man and have no ability to look into heaven unless God takes us there. What we can do is appreciate the Lord God working to save us from ourselves and the devil who holds all captive who do not believe in God’s one and only son Jesus Christ and live towards him.
I. The Invitation to the Holy Spirit 1. Healing is a thought by which two minds perceive their oneness and become glad. ²This gladness calls to every part of the Sonship to rejoice with them, and lets God go out into them and through them. ³Only the healed mind can experience revelation with lasting effect, because revelation is an experience of pure joy. ⁴If you do not choose to be wholly joyous, your mind cannot have what it does not choose to be. ⁵Remember that spirit knows no difference between _having_ and _being._ ⁶The higher mind thinks according to the laws spirit obeys, and therefore honors only the laws of God. ⁷To spirit getting is meaningless and giving is all. ⁸Having everything, spirit holds everything by giving it, and thus creates as the Father created. ⁹While this kind of thinking is totally alien to having things, even to the lower mind it is quite comprehensible in connection with ideas. ¹⁰If you share a physical possession, you do divide its ownership. ¹¹If you share an idea, however, you do not lessen it. ¹²All of it is still yours although all of it has been given away. ¹³Further, if the one to whom you give it accepts it as his, he reinforces it in your mind and thus increases it. ¹⁴If you can accept the concept that the world is one of ideas, the whole belief in the false association the ego makes between giving and losing is gone. 2. Let us start our process of reawakening with just a few simple concepts: _²Thoughts increase by being given away._ _³The more who believe in them the stronger they become._ _⁴Everything is an idea._ _⁵How, then, can giving and losing be associated?_ 3. This is the invitation to the Holy Spirit. ²I have said already that I can reach up and bring the Holy Spirit down to you, but I can bring Him to you only at your own invitation. ³The Holy Spirit is in your right mind, as He was in mine. ⁴The Bible says, “May the mind be in you that was also in Christ Jesus,” and uses this as a blessing. ⁵It is the blessing of miracle-mindedness. ⁶It asks that you may think as I thought, joining with me in Christ thinking. 4. The Holy Spirit is the only part of the Holy Trinity that has a symbolic function. ²He is referred to as the Healer, the Comforter and the Guide. ³He is also described as something “separate,” apart from the Father and from the Son. ⁴I myself said, “If I go I will send you another Comforter and he will abide with you.” ⁵His symbolic function makes the Holy Spirit difficult to understand, because symbolism is open to different interpretations. ⁶As a man and also one of God’s creations, my right thinking, which came from the Holy Spirit or the Universal Inspiration, taught me first and foremost that this Inspiration is for all. ⁷I could not have It myself without knowing this. ⁸The word “know” is proper in this context, because the Holy Spirit is so close to knowledge that He calls it forth; or better, allows it to come. ⁹I have spoken before of the higher or “true” perception, which is so near to truth that God Himself can flow across the little gap. ¹⁰Knowledge is always ready to flow everywhere, but it cannot oppose. ¹¹Therefore you can obstruct it, although you can never lose it. 5. The Holy Spirit is the Christ Mind which is aware of the knowledge that lies beyond perception. ²He came into being with the separation as a protection, inspiring the Atonement principle at the same time. ³Before that there was no need for healing, for no one was comfortless. ⁴The Voice of the Holy Spirit is the Call to Atonement, or the restoration of the integrity of the mind. ⁵When the Atonement is complete and the whole Sonship is healed there will be no Call to return. ⁶But what God creates is eternal. ⁷The Holy Spirit will remain with the Sons of God, to bless their creations and keep them in the light of joy. 6. God honored even the miscreations of His children because they had made them. ²But He also blessed His children with a way of thinking that could raise their perceptions so high they could reach almost back to Him. ³The Holy Spirit is the Mind of the Atonement. ⁴He represents a state of mind close enough to One-mindedness that transfer to it is at last possible. ⁵Perception is not knowledge, but it can be transferred to knowledge, or cross over into it. ⁶It might even be more helpful here to use the literal meaning of transferred or “carried over,” since the last step is taken by God. 7. The Holy Spirit, the shared Inspiration of all the Sonship, induces a kind of perception in which many elements are like those in the Kingdom of Heaven itself: ²First, its universality is perfectly clear, and no one who attains it could believe for one instant that sharing it involves anything but gain. ³Second, it is incapable of attack and is therefore truly open. ⁴This means that although it does not engender knowledge, it does not obstruct it in any way. ⁵Finally, it points the way beyond the healing that it brings, and leads the mind beyond its own integration toward the paths of creation. ⁶It is at this point that sufficient quantitative change occurs to produce a real qualitative shift. A Course In Miracles (Jesus Christ)
![How God is Both One and Three at the Same Time [Animated Explainer]](/img/n.gif)
I was needing a healthy dose of some Confessional Lutheranism today, and you appeared. God is good!
Really appreciate your teaching on this.
In a world full of personal opinions masquerading as doctrine, it’s comforting to find teaching that’s so solidly biblical.
Thank you.
I liked how your explanation was laid out in such a logical, step-by-step way with Biblical proof for each part. It would be cool if you did an explanation of the "begotten, not made" part of the Nicene Creed.
Great job going back to Genesis 1. I also love the emphasis in Genesis 1 where God says “let US make man in OUR image” emphasizing the multiple persons of the trinity working together in one God during creation.
Assuming on my part, that the US and OUR identifies God as three persons in Genesis 1:26, then how should I understand the HIS and HE in verse 27.
@@dgreenja God is one God in three separate, but co eternal persons. The word for God in Hebrew is plural also not singular.
In the great commission Jesus tells us to baptize in the name of the Father, Son, Holy Spirit. They are put side by side.
When God is mentioned as Him or He, we rarely think of God as Triune. But that’s exactly what He is. This is a mystery we as finite humans cannot fully wrap our minds around because God is beyond our ability to fully grasp. But He lets us in enough to know enough about who He is and what He’s done for us and our Salvation so we can know Him.
@@villarrealmarta6103 Elohim is both plural and singular. The fact that there is one God, in and of itself speaks to a singularity, whether it is a solitary singularity or a compound singularity, the latter of which trinitarians refer to as plural. A family is singular, but members ofthe.one family, are plural. The plurality of the noun Elohim, has to be in relation to the subject-matter, Elohim.
Mathew 28:19 points to Acts 2:38. Peter preached the great commission in Acts 2:38. Jesus is the one name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
The mystery of God, can be.understood by a divine revelation.
@@dgreenja just to be clear Jesus is not the Father, the Father did not die for you and I but the Son did. The Father is not the Son and the Holy Spirit is also not the Father or the Son. The Son is not the Father or the Holy Spirit. They are three separate persons yet 1 God. You can’t grasp it, we never can. In fact on Trinity Sunday we actually heard a whole sermon on the doctrine of the Trinity. It’s similar to how Jesus isn’t half man half God, He’s fully man and fully God.
@@villarrealmarta6103 His not being the Father, means He is neither God, because there is only one God who is the Father.
God being one in Deut 6:4 and that there is one God as in James 2:19, are two principles which apply to every verse in the bible which mentions “God”. Monotheism was expressed in the incarnation, where the God who tookon flesh a man, is one, and that He is one God. If the Father is not the same person manifested in the flesh, then neither is He the same God manifested in the flesh. I believe you accept the former, but do you accept the latter?
Also, just to be clear, that there is only one God, and He is the Father. Did not Jesus refer to His Father as the only true God?
2 Corinthians 3:17
Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.
I appreciate this content. We need more free orthodox lay level content-Lutheran and the general first principals of Christian doctrines.
As always, you motivate me to become more precise in my theology. This is an excellent, methodical defense of the Trinity. I highly recommend watching it twice and taking notes. Thanks, Jordan.
Thank you for sharing, I'm a former LDS/Mormon all my life, served a mission, was ordained an elder, received their secret temple rituals, etc. and now I am a born again Protestant.
LDS tend to look at revelation as like revisions of an instruction manual that can be updated and replaced over time such that older revelation is outdated and useless. Instead, we should look at revelation as progressing where God is slowly building upon what he's already revealed. God isn't capricious and doesn't say "oops".
LDS see the Bible passages of God saying he is one not as speaking of his essence but of his will, purpose, or something of that nature. But it's not really tenable given the passages in Deuteronomy 4, 6, Isaiah 43, 44 (where God says in vv. 6-8 that there is no other like him and in v. 24 that He was all alone at creation....doesn't get much more explicit than that), 45, 1 Cor. 8...it goes on and on.
There is one God, period. Praise God for opening my eyes to truth.
How many councils do the Lutheran/LCMS churches accept(important)? Upto Chalcedon? Or 3rd Council of Constantinople?
Generally all of them, but after the fall of the western Roman Empire they've had less influence, then with the expansion of papal absolutism they're looked at with suspicion, for instance the council of Constance was good because it ended the papal schisms and submitted the Bishop of Rome to councils once again yet also bad with the whole condemnation of communion in both kinds and exception of Hus.
From the council of Trent on we don't recognise councils in communion with Rome, nor do we recognise the council of Dort, yet we still recognise and honour the local councils of different regions still today (though they're largely occupied with administration instead of heresy).
The adoption of the Book of Concord is usually seen as the most immediate conciliar authority.
The calvinist “regulative principle" says that if a command to do or say a particular thing did not appear in Scripture, it was not to be said or done in the church.
The far better principle that informs Lutherans and Anglicans, and, I believe, the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church is the “normative principle,” which says that if it in harmony with Scriptural teaching, it may be done or said-one must never go against Scripture with one’s practices.
The Pope's councils certainly go against scripture:
Lateran Council 1 Canon 21: We absolutely forbid priests, deacons, subdeacons, and monks to have concubines or to contract marriage.
Lateran Council 2 Canon 6: For since they should be and be called the temple of God, the vessel of the Lord, the abode of the Holy Spirit, it is *unbecoming* that they *indulge in marriage* and in *impurities.*
1 Timothy 4:1-3 Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and *teachings of demons,* through the insincerity of liars whose consciences are seared, who *forbid marriage*
1 Corinthians 9:5 *Do we not have the right* to take along a believing wife, as do the other apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas?
Canon 21 continued: We decree in accordance with the definitions of the sacred canons, that *marriages already contracted by such persons must be dissolved,* and that the persons be condemned to do penance.
Matthew 19:6 So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.
Innocent III, 1204 "We destine specially to this, that the material sword may be sanctioned to supply the defect of the spiritual sword, and you, besides the temporal glory which you will attain from so pious and praiseworthy a work, may obtain that pardon for sins, which we grant
as an indulgence for the remission of their sins, since we want those who faithfully shall have laboured against the heretics to rejoice in the same indulgence as we grant as an indulgence for those crossing the sea for the aid of the Holy Land."
Lateran Council 4 Canon 3: Secular authorities, whatever office they may hold, shall be admonished and induced and if necessary compelled by ecclesiastical censure, that as they wish to be esteemed and numbered among the faithful, so for the defense of the faith they ought publicly to take an oath that they will strive in good faith and *to the best of their ability to exterminate* (pro viribus exterminare studebunt) in the territories subject to their jurisdiction all heretics pointed out by the Church.
_Ad extirpanda_ of Pope Innocent IV: We decree that the head of state [...] shall observe, both what is written herein, and other regulations and laws both ecclesiastical and civil, that are published against heretical wickedness. [...] No heretical man or woman may dwell, sojourn, or maintain a bare subsistence in the country, or any kind of jurisdiction or district belonging to it, whoever shall find the heretical man or woman shall boldly seize, with impunity, all his or their goods, and freely carry them off. [...] The head of state, or whatever ruler stands foremost in the public esteem, must cause the heretics who have been arrested in this manner to be taken to whatever jurisdiction the Diocesan, or his surrogate, is in, or whatever district, or city, or place the Diocesan bishop wishes to take them to. [...] *The head of state or ruler **_must force_** all the heretics whom he has in custody, provided he does so without killing them or breaking their arms or legs* to confess their errors and accuse other heretics whom they know.
Absolutely awesome. You should do a video on the controversy of 1 John 5:7 as well!
Blake Ostler seems to be honest about the pantheistic and polytheistic nature of mormon teaching, and to be sympathetic to process philosophy. Should be an interesting study if you do it. Basically, the Salt Lake/Brigham Young mormons believe matter and intelligences are eternal, but god /gods have evolved and learned to manipulate these elements. This is often hidden from presentations designed to convert Christians or those with a basic Christian background.
PLEASE where did you get those frames? I LOVE them ! :) Nice topic and great video too :)
They were very cheap frames from Wal Mart that I got probably five years ago.
Pr. Hans Fiene's Lutheran Satire has a good, funny video taking apart various Trinity analogies in a discussion of Donnell and Connel with St. Patrick.
I think the clover might be carefully used in the same way that the dogwood blossom is used as a picture of Christ crucified - simply as a picture and not an analogy which would be, I think it is called partialism.
The 1st London Baptist Confession of Faith 1646 Article 2
IN this divine and infinite Being there is the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; each having the whole divine Essence, yet the Essence undivided; all infinite without any beginning, therefore but one God; who is not to be divided in nature, and being, but distinguished by several peculiar relative properties.
1 Cor.1:3; John 1:1, 15:26; Exod.3:14; 1 Cor.8:6. 🌷
I think the volume was a bit quiet. If I stepped just a couple feet from my computer I couldn't make out what you were saying. But what I could heat was a good dismantling of papist self-importance.
A Christian actress posted two videos on her Instagram about how she’s questioning the trinity and it’s just a recent thing and she’s not a crazy heretic. I hope she sees this. 😊
Would you be interested in potentially dialoging with a LDS member who's been on missions?
Greetings. Is it that you are defining God as only a divine essence that is shared? If so, then how do you relate this to incarnation where according to 1Tim 3:16, God was manifest in the flesh? God is Spirit or a divine essence. Is it therefore equally true to say that the one divine essence of God, was manifest in the flesh? Is the incarnation about the person only, in flesh, the being or essence only, in flesh, or both the person and the essence in the flesh?
Where did you get the word "Persons" as applied to the trinity?
Can the sh'ma be applies to St. Matt 4:10? God was manifest in the flesh, but Jesus in His human existence, was a Jew as well as an Israelite. Was Jesus obedient to the sh'ma, is serving the one and only God in the OT?
Thank you for sharing this interesting lecture! However, I have a question: why do the Orthodox Jewish rabbis say that the translation “THE Angel of the Lord” is wrong, and that it actually should be “AN angel of the Lord”?
I would appreciate your comments on this point!
God bless!
Because of the long history of the Talmudic tradition developing doctrines and positions that are designed to negate Christianity. There's no indication of this way of thinking in ancient Israelite understanding; they were much more open to the idea of this being a distinct yet divine entity in some sense even if it wasn't fully understood back then.
I recently came out of Mormonism. I've been trying to understand the trinity. I do understand that they are one God, and each one is distinct and not interchangeable.
I'm wondering, however, why there is such a debate about it. Is understanding the nature of God essential to our salvation? If it were, I would think it would have been clearly written out in the Bible. Is the debate simply to understand? To further seek Him?
Leaving Mormonism, I can clearly see how God is not as I was taught growing up, but if my faith in Him is what saves me, why is understanding his nature in depth necessary? I do want to understand as much as I can, but I'm not worried about whether I fully intellectually grasp who He is. I feel satisfied that I will never fully understand His nature, and that my faith is sufficient.
Hi Kari, I'm glad you made it out. Understanding the nature of God is difficult for us all. Joseph Smith started with the Trinity doctrine, ex: 2 Nephi 31:21 “….And now, behold, this is the doctrine of Christ, and the only and true doctrine of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, which is one God, without end. Amen.”
But then he "veered off" into "We have imagined and supposed that God was God from all eternity."
While I don't need to know quote how it all works, John 1:1ff read to say that Jesus has been around eternally. Some say that Jesus is God and other say he is not. Based on my understanding, He needs to be God for his death to 'count' for the salvation of all mankind. If he is just a man, then the best his death could do is pay for the sins of 1 man. Some think Jesus is another god and if so then there is a problem with the
old testament where God says in Isaiah 45:18:
"For thus saith the Lord that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the Lord; and there is none else."
I think it's important to know simply because of truthfulness(Jesus taught we are to worship in spirit and in truth) and how it plays out in other areas of theology. It's not that having a perfect systematic understanding of the Trinity saves us, but when it comes to understanding God the doctrine of the trinity is an important starting point so we don't lose track of what we're talking about.
Wow, UA-cam ironically showed an Ad before the video for the Unitarian Christian Alliance which claimed that Paul, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, and Origen were Unitarians. 😂😂😂
Liquid, steam, and ice….that’s modalism Patrick
Dr. Cooper, Pr. Chris Rosebrough who has...discussed Fürer Furtick for years has a video on Furtick's modalism, and relates it in part to his association with TD Jakes.
Can you do more videos on Lutheranism specifically? Like the difference between senates, I know you're not WELS because that would interfere with your work with others but which is the most biblically accurate?
Yay! 2 in one week
Yes, please continue this.
may whoever is reading this be blessed
Please go through the argument for the “One name and that name is Jesus” argument. My roommate is a oneness Pentecostal and I’d like to know how to respond to that argument
Looking forward to more of you with Heiser.... Still trying to decide if 1 Enoch is gnostic literature. This is actually one of my biggest concerns because when people start relying on apocryphal texts as much of a basis for their theology I become concerned. I'm still on the fence with the whole thing even after long hard study. I've seen both camps pro Heiser pro first Enoch pro Dead Sea scrolls etc, and the opposite camp anti-Heiser anti first Enoch anti Dead Sea scrolls. I'm smack-dab in the middle. I would love your input.
@Sound Impact
It wouldn't be "gnostic" because Gnosticism wasn't around until well after Paul. The book of Enoch (large parts of 1 Enoch) was around in the BC Era.
And you need Enoch, 11QMelchizedek and other dead sea scrolls to help inform what bible writers intended. Whether you think they are inspired or not
@@eew8060 interesting! Thank you for your comment. Perhaps I use the wrong word and should not have used the word gnostic because I was using Gnostic in a general sense not in a religious sense. But your comment gave me food for thought.
16:20 What is the Trinity in a non-creedal church (or non-confessional, even)?
I'm thinking of independent non-denom churches that are generally Trinitarian but without regular recitation of the creeds or clear Confessional subscription.
@@DrJordanBCoopertrinitarian shield only-ists, i kid. but seriously another commenter mentions some early English Baptist confessions where they guard the Trinity, and with the later Acts of Toleration is likely why complete non-trinitarianism did not take off in early America with all the other protestant sects coming over (since the dominant English Baptist had that in their tradition by the time).
@@DrJordanBCooper This is why I've been looking at the creeds and confessions. Non-denoms such as myself don't have any. However, even if there's bits (of the confessions) I disagree with, there's a large portion of which I should, and do agree with.
You admitted that many of the proof texts of the trinity are implications.
Ah yes, because we get our doctrines from the implications of man rather than the established word of God….
Thanks for making the false doctrine of the trinity even more plain.
@@alexanderh2345😂
I debated a Roman Catholic and she said that we couldn't find the Trinity in the Bible. That every protestant is reading it with context how Rome has interpreted the texts
Matthew Barrett’s Simply Trinity is a good discussion
“Eck and Cochlaeus are asses, who say that the article of the Trinity is established and confirmed, not by Scripture, but by the doctors of the church and the pope. That’s a lie.” Luther WA 39, 2:305.24-26
Hahaha. Luther is so crude and so fun.
The 3 Ecumenical Creeds state the belief in the Holy Trinity which is totally Scriptural. To not believe in the Trinity puts you outside the Christian faith and therefore you are not a Christian. See the Athenasian Creed for a clear and definitive declaration.
Gods peace be with you all.
My Orthodox friends tell me they don't use the Athanasian Creed because it's originally Latin and it has the filioque. Good reason to stay Lutheran.
@@Mygoalwogel we follow St. Athanasius bro, however St. Athanasius and the Cappadocians definitely didn't believe in the filioque. Saint Basil explicitly states that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father alone
ua-cam.com/play/PLnK9ahzmHnYfEQ2LWbU2Yux9AetaYETX9.html
Nice
Read Galatians (again). Great advise.
I can barely hear you pastor. Can you please turn audio up a bit, i would really appreciate it. God bless you.
I didn't do anything different from what I usually do with audio levels. Sorry about that.
Glad I watched this. Really shows the strength of Oneness doctrine in contrast to Trinity.
Thank you
I think that the creeds can actually make things more confusing. As I was thinking with regard to the filioque clause. These things seem to give a 3 tier idea of the trinity.
Only if you desperately need a reason to preserve the East-West schism because you can't bear the thought that your church made a mistake. That goes for Papists, Nikonites, and New Calendarists. Lutherans have always taught:
1. filioque in light of "for us and for our salvation." We don't worry about how the Holy Spirit proceeds in eternity. We focus on his procession unto us from the Father and the Son. The Papists, Russians and Greeks can duke it out and let us know when they're done.
2. the council of Toledo was probably improper and certainly not Catholic in the real meaning of the word. Western Lutherans use filioque. Eastern Lutherans in full fellowship with us don't.
Shalom. In Rev.3:1....these things saith He that hath the Seven Spirits (Spirits plural) of GOD.....
I know some quote Isaiah 11:2 , 1)the Spirit (singular) of Wisdom n understanding, 2) Spirit of counsel n might, 3) the Spirit of knowledge n fear of YHVH.
Even though it is clear in this verse it mentions only 3 Spirits. Some teach that it is the Spirit of truth, which also, the Spirit of Wisdom, Spirit of Understanding, Spirit of counsel, Spirit of Might, Spirit Knowledge, Spirit of Fear of YHVH. So the Seven Spirits(plural) in Rev.3:1 is actually the Spirit of Truth. Seven in One. If that is so what about Zechariah 12:10 And I will pour upon the house of David.......the Spirit of Grace and of Supplications:........
So if we split n add, the Spirit of Grace, n the Spirit of Supplications, does it become Nine in One? How does this add up to trinity?
Tell it to the JWs and Mormons.
great vid!
There was one reference you got the chapter and verse wrong --1 corinthians 1:8. It was actually 1 corinthians 8:6 that you read. The governing body of the watchtower society doesn't want the people who follow them to think for themselves, which is why they don't have scholars and discourse with others. They are taught to just spit out certain verses and stick to them.
Thanks!
I’m one of JW’s and that is totally untrue! Who told you such a lie we don’t think for ourselves? We follow the Bible only-Not imperfect men.
@@sunnyjohnson992 Yet the translation used by your church has changed many verses to say something that scripture doesn't say in the original languages.
God, by definition is omnipresent. God has a spirit and Jesus informs us that God "is spirit". The spirit of God is holy. The spirit is the personal presence of God. That is why in Acts, Peter refers to lying to the spirit and also to "the Lordd". The spirit of God, the spirit of Christ is the personal, spiritual presence of God and of Christ. Offending or grieving the "spirit of God" is in fact offense of God Himself.
Thanks! It's much easier to prove from Scripture that the God the Son is God than that the God the Holy Spirit is God. But it's equally important. This is a good case. Thank you.
What is your view of the water of Genesis 1:2? Is it literally water, or is Moses referring to unformed matter? I think the latter makes more sense (God hasn't spoken yet, and he always creates through the Word). This would make Genesis 1:1-2 logically prior, but not temporally prior, to the first day.
It's both. Both there and in baptism we see water as chaos and death and the word as spirit and life.
But God doesn't begin to speak until Genesis 1:3, which is the first recorded instance of "And God said". John 1 says "all things were made through [the Word]". If the earth and water in Gen. 1:2 are literally earth and water, then God created them before he is recorded speaking, which would mean that God's initial act of creation is not recorded to be through his Word. Wouldn't it make more sense to say that the waters and formless earth are a metaphor, referring to prime matter, which does not exist in act but only in potency?
@@kjhg323 In the beginning, created(he) God אֵ֥ת Aleph Tav (Alpha and Omega) the heavens and the earth. The word is already with God. The word is already God.
The text says God is the "way truth and life" 3 in 1 father truth, son life, spirit the way.
I'm always very alienated by Catholics appealing to pagan philosophy for things like the Trinity and classical theism when scripture itself points to both
52:00
Church Councils? You mean Catholic Church Councils?
Lutherans accept the first 6 ecumenical councils, because they agree with what scripture teaches. It would be foolish to disregard the work of people who were closer to Jesus and his discples than we are as long as that work agrees with scripture. Our historical position is that we are the Roman Catholic church cleansed by the gospel.
I understand the Holy Spirit is a "person". I do not see how that it is a different person or identity just because it is the Spirit of God.
It's absolutely hilarious that Oneness Pentecostals AND J Witnesses are on here attacking Trinitarians. OPs insist that the Bible CLEARLY teaches that Jesus is the Father. JWs insist that the Bible CLEARLY teaches that Jesus is a creature and not The One True God. Why don't they go bother each other instead of us?
I’m a JW-Where did you hear that ridiculous lie that Jesus is a creature? Stop believing what apostates say.
What’s the name Peter spoke in Acts 2:38? You’ll find it’s the same one referred to in Acts 4:12, and thus is the one name of God. Hence the singular name mentioned in Matthew 28:19 is the name of Jesus. Jesus is the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. John 3:34, Colossians 2:9, and Colossians 1:15 further confirm this.
It’s abundantly clear from Scripture that this is the truth. So I find it funny you say the explanation of this is “not good.”
Love how you just gloss over Titus 2:13 and John 20:28, knowing that it completely destroys your theology. Lol.
Since you either grew up in the trinitarian tradition or were trained in it, it is the perspective you bring. But if looking at Scripture with no perspective or tradition just simply reading the words on the page (be it English, Hebrew, or Greek) you would NEVER come to the conclusion that God is a triune plurality. You would, however, understand that God is indivisibly one and His name is Jesus.
You put so much credence in being a scholar, pray tell, did Jesus not give thanks that the mystery of his incarnation was not revealed to the wise and prudent but unto babes? And by whom has God perfected praise? So if even a small child can understand it, your degrees and PhD’s mean nothing, especially if it leads you to believe in a false doctrine.
"That's modalism Patriiick"
This video just brought out all the antitrinitarians. Good video!
The Oneness Pentecostals and the JWs are entirely opposite but they never notice each other.
@@Mygoalwogel 🙂😐😮
no
*Oneness Pentecostals:* Without [The Logos], became NOT ONE that has become. Jn 1:3
*Jehovah’s Witnesses:* He is prototokos over all creation. Col 1:15
*OPs:* Prototokos often means “preeminent” in the LXX, not always “first to breach the womb.” Even younger siblings, such as Ephraim and Israel are called prototokos.
*JWs:* Without the Logos became not one that has become, -WITH THE EXCEPTION OF the Logos himself.-
*OPs:* NOT ONE means NOT ONE. Jesus is THE One True God. -He’s the Father.-
*JWs:* Prototokos means firstBORN. Jesus is the SON of God. -He’s A god, not the One True God.-
*Christians:* Fixed it.
Jesus has a God he also is his Father Jehovah is his name. John 20/17
That is so illogical it isn't worth responding to!
I just finished teaching I Corinthians chapter 2 to a bunch of high schoolers last Sunday. So, yeah, the Trinity is for sure biblical.
Nobody understands the Trinity because it is not Biblical. That is why Trinitarians have to use their imagination and eisegesis to explain away the obvious verses. If Jesus is THE God Almighty, than what is the Father?
@@JudeOne3Four The Bible _does_ say Jesus is Uncreated Creator: Jn 1:3; 1 Cor 8:6; Heb 1:8
The Bible _does_ say Jesus is equal with the Father: John 5:18; Col 2:9; Jn 10:30-33
The Bible _does_ say Jesus is “My God” Jn 20:28, “God over all” Rom 9:5, “Our God and Savior” 2 Peter 1:1; 3:18, “the only-begotten God” Jn 1:18
The Bible _does_ say Jesus is “The God” Heb 1:8, “The Great God” Titus 2:13, “I AM” Jn 8:58
Bonus: Acts 7:59; Acts 20:28
@@Mygoalwogel That was not the question man. I didn't ask for none of what you've posted.
Let me ask it again: IF Jesus of Nazareth IS God Almighty, than what is the Father?
@@JudeOne3Four The Father is the God Almighty. I was responding to your charge of eisegesis and imagination.
@@Mygoalwogel See? Contradicting yourself? Yes, you're handling the Scriptures deceitfully and you use your imagination. Do you also got a problem with BASIC kindergarten grammar?
At first you said that Jesus of Nazareth is the uncreated Creator and now all of a sudden its the Father. You can't have 3 that are Almighty. Make up our mind man, which one is it?
No question the Jesus Christ is the true Son of "the God", and as such is a divine as His Father. When you lie to the spirit, you lie to the One whose spirit it is.
Bro next just explan the fucking trinity don't try to debunk the other faith
Hello
Jesus is the Messiah
The Son of God
The Son of David
The Son of man
The man God has chosen to be his anointed king
The man God will judge the world through
The man God raised from the dead
Jesus has a God
There is no triune god in scripture
Jesus said the Father is the only true God!
John 17
3 And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.
-
Acts 3
13 The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Servant Jesus; whom ye delivered up, and denied before the face of Pilate, when he had determined to release him.
14 But ye denied the Holy and Righteous One, and asked for a murderer to be granted unto you,
15 and killed the Prince of life; whom God raised from the dead; whereof we are witnesses.
Notice Jesus is NOT the God of Abraham
13 The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Servant Jesus; whom ye delivered up, and denied before the face of Pilate, when he had determined to release him.
Just because Jesus is given special titles, doesn't confirm he is not God. Read the whole bible and see the place where Jesus lets people confirm he is God. And where he equates himself with God.
For example John 10:27-29
27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:
28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.
29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.
@@leef_me8112
That is not “equating himself with God”
He literally goes around saying I do nothing in my own authority
I’m not doing my will
Etc
Jesus is the one sent by God
Jesus has a God
Why listen to fallible Protestant Pastors, when we have the infallible Holy Scriptures? Peace always in Jesus Christ our Great and Kind God and Savior, He whose Flesh is true food and Blood true drink
You're ignorance is still overwhelming troll .
Saying the NT teaches the trinity is like saying the Puritans who landed at Plymouth rock voted for the Republican party. It's just anachronism. The first trinitarian christians don't appear until about 350 or 360AD which is over 300 years after Jesus was crucified so it's just as historically impossible that the NT teaches the trinity as it is that George Washington had a twitter account.
What was Jesus doing in the garden of Gethsemane while the disciples dozed?
The earliest Christians including Paul tought One God in Three persons.
The word "Trinity " was not invented until much later.
So Tertullian who coined the term trinity died around 220 AD. That's far from 300 years after Jesus.
2 Corinthians 13:14. May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all.
Matthew 28:19. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.
It's not though. The substance of trinitarian Theology Proper is real, and it's revealed in Scripture. Even if you were right in your assessment that trinitarian Christians don't appear until 350-360AD, it doesn't necessarily impact whether or not the NT teaches trinitarian Theology Proper. The reality of the doctrine, and it being contained and taught in the NT, doesn't depend absolutely on people affirming it, although it might be said to be somewhat expected that people should be affirming it from early on.
To know if the NT teaches trinitarian Theology Proper, we first and foremost need to look at the New Testament. The NT makes it clear that there is only one Being who is from everlasting to everlasting. The NT also makes it clear that Divinity is ascribed to both the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. There is but one LORD, yet perfections that belong to the LORD alone are ascribed to three distinct 'persons'.
Your argument is rather unsound.
Shalom. It is written in Mark 12: 28-29, when Yeshua was asked, which is the first Commandment of all, Yeshua said 'Hear O Israel; The LORD our GOD is ONE LORD. Yeshua was quoting the shema.
Yeshua, my Master believes in ONE GOD. Which is good enough for me. I believe in ONE GOD. I do believe Yeshua is God n The Holy Spirit is God, but I don't accept the Trinity doctrine. To me this is men's doctrine, n men complicate things they do not understand, in the name of theology, adding to GOD's words. Farther more in the English bible the word 'The LORD' has been substituted for YHVH, which is Heavenly Father's NAME, in Deut.6:4
Then argue with some of the JWs on here. You agree with Trinitarians more than with them.
Jordan, these arguments are not particularly strong and it seems like you just use a shallow understanding of Arianism/Mormons/JWs to dismiss alternatives but you seem unfamiliar with Biblical Unitarianism and it's arguments against trinitarianism. You should have some discussions with more sophisticated non-trinitarianism to sharpen your arguments at the very least.
John 1:1
Bom
What was Jesus doing in the garden of Gethsemane while the disciples dozed?
The Bible is totally clear that
1 There is only One God.
2 Jesus is God
3 Jesus is not the Father.
Any argument that denies that is denying the Bible and therefore GOD.
This video is an explanation of confessional Lutheran theology not a rigorous defense of it.
@@markhorton3994 Exactly. Anti-trinitarians be like, "Let's clean up all this mystery in the Bible. Alls we gots to do is, like, never read anything at face value."
By the scriptures? Jesus states at least FIFTY TIMES - 50 - in all different ways that God is made by THE FATHER AND THE SON!!! PERIOD. WHO had the BRILLIANT IDEA that He is made by THREE different divine persons instead???? I am not blind: I can see that three NAMES of three divine persons are mentioned in the gospels! JESUS DOES NOT LIE: God is indeed made only by the Father and the Son. It simply means that the three names SOMEHOW MAP ONTO 1. THE FATHER AND 2. THE SON. I know this "mapping concept" was difficult to grasp by people of ancient times, but now we are in the third millennium!
@claudio zanella It is reasonable to believe there is a 3rd person, who is called God.
Here are a few examples
Acts 5:2-4 King James Version
2 And kept back part of the price, his wife also being privy to it, and brought a certain part, and laid it at the apostles' feet.
3 But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land?
4 Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God.
John 14:26
But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.
Ephesians 4:30
And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption.
@@leef_me8112
THE TRINITY INVENTION REVISITED
It's absolutely sure that no trinity exists because it's absolutely sure that NO THIRD DIVINE PERSON EXISTS. Jesus states "I am in the Father and the Father in me" and "I and the Father are one," Jesus would have never made those important statements if a third divine person existed!
Then Jesus in the four gospels goes on CONFIRMING - in all possible different ways and in absolute consistent manner - that God is only made by Him and by the Father. Even UNEQUIVOCALLY "You will leave me ALONE. Yet, I am not ALONE because the FATHER is with me." Jesus does not even KNOW what a triune God is! (by the way, Jesus is God due to his tight union with the Father and because He is the KING of heaven. The almighty God is NOT the King because He is only a spirit, NOBODY is here).
But the inventors of the trinity had a problem, they couldn't figure out who is the Holy Spirit mentioned in the gospels. They couldn't grasp that He simply is the "FATHER in the form of SPIRIT" ("God is a spirit", Jn. 4:23,24), who sometimes is called "Holy Spirit" by Jesus, sometimes "Holy Father." The Father in the form of a spirit comes from the Father (normal, absent) whom nobody ever SAW "the world has not known you". They thought the "Holy Spirit" were an ADDITIONAL divine person, but unfortunately (for them) they were unable to locate that divine person in the gospels. Panicking, what do we do now?
At first the inventors resorted to the lame invention of the almighty (but dumb) "Lord who gives life" (not even a scent of him in the whole bible), then a "sly, philanthropic little hand" added three words, "ho hagios pneuma" (the Holy Spirit) to verse 14:26 of John's, after the word "The Comforter."
"No one knows the *hour* . Not the angels, nor the son. Only the Father in Heaven"
- Jesus (regarding his second coming)
"No one knows the *trinity* . Not the angels, nor the son. Only the Father in Heaven"
--- Jesus (after the second coming;)
" *You know nothing Jesus Christ* " -- pissed off Trinitarians :((
So you prefer Oneness Pentecostal, JW, Unitarian, Mormon or somebody else who thinks they're smarter than the Bible.
@@Mygoalwogel
"So you prefer Oneness......"
Well to be fair...Christ himself preferred that "Oneness"
Jesus repeatedly said
"God is One"... or, "The Only True God is the Father"
@@aRsH-aJ What was Jesus doing in the Garden of Gethsemane while his disciples dozed?
@@Mygoalwogel
You tell me.....as far as I know...
he was sweating blood...pleading GOD to save him from the Cross.
@@aRsH-aJ That is not what Oneness Pentecostals teach. Are you Unitarian, Mormon, JW or what?
*The Godhead*
God the Father,
God the Son and
God the Holy Ghost.
3 individual persons and yet ONE God!
As for the Trinity this is the False Godhead, the counterfeit Godhead! See examples below:
*Babylon* : Nimrod, Semiramis and Tammuz;
*Persian* : Ormazd, Mithra and Ahriman;
*Grecian* : Zeus, Appozlo and Athena;
*Roman* : Jupiter, Mars and Venus;
*Egyptian* : Idris, Isis and Horus;
*Catholicism* : Isis, Horus and Seb (aka IHS);
*Buddhist* : San, Pao and Fuh;
*Chinese* : Yuan-Shi-TianZong, Ling-Bao-Tian-Song and Lao- Jun.
I'm sure there are many more!
The Trinity is of all other religions but not of the Bible!
The Bible _does_ say Jesus is Uncreated Creator: Jn 1:3; 1 Cor 8:6; Heb 1:8
The Bible _does_ say Jesus is equal with the Father: John 5:18; Col 2:9; Jn 10:30-33
The Bible _does_ say Jesus is “My God” Jn 20:28, “God over all” Rom 9:5, “Our God and Savior” 2 Peter 1:1; 3:18, “the only-begotten God” Jn 1:18
The Bible _does_ say Jesus is “The God” Heb 1:8, “The Great God” Titus 2:13, “I AM” Jn 8:58
Bonus: Acts 7:59; Acts 20:28
Whoa didn't know the case for trinities in other religions was such trash. Bro literally put Isis Horus and Seb under Catholicism 💀 I know the Roman one, as well as the greek one is wrong, and the egyptian one I've heard is wrong as well. So 5 of them are wrong, because I can throw Buddism in there too.
You are only right, if you define the trinity as no trinitarian would define it. 😂 I certainly wouldn't call any of those trinities, especially since all of those aren't monotheistic.
Scholors know trinity is not taught in the bible , catholic Encyclopædia says it's nowhere in scripture, yet false religion still teach the Trinity doctrine, the real mystery is why Christianity still teach it
Jesus said he's the truth and he said I'm ascending to my Father for the father is greater than I , so let's pay attention to what jesus said
The Bible _does_ say Jesus is Uncreated Creator: Jn 1:3; 1 Cor 8:6; Heb 1:8
The Bible _does_ say Jesus is equal with the Father: John 5:18; Col 2:9; Jn 10:30-33
The BIble _does_ say Jesus is “My God” Jn 20:28, “God over all” Rom 9:5; “Our God and Savior” 2 Peter 1:1; 3:18,
The Bible _does_ say Jesus is “The God” Heb 1:8, “The Great God” Titus 2:13, “I AM” Jn 8:58
Bonus: Acts 7:59; Acts 20:28
@@Mygoalwogel a son doesnt always exist ..a son is not the same age as the father . Jesus is literally firstborn of all creation. Jehovah God firstborn angelic son is Jesus
Jehovah God started his creation somewhere. One of his angels is firstborn. Its jesus
@@AstariahJW Nope. I presented you with the unchanging word of God of Scripture. You presented me with your opinions without the unchanging word. You do not believe the word. You believe your opinions. You are an idolater and unsaved.
@@Mygoalwogel trinity scholars have changed the word of God . Besides do I need to give scripture where it says jesus is firstborn of all creation. You should know that
Also jesus is only begotten son .
These 2 titles only apply to the son and never to the father Jehovah God
He is everlasting. The ancient of days . He doesn't have a beginning
Maybe you should research on how trinity developed. Its idolatry to worship a pagan god
@@AstariahJW Everyone knows he is πρωτότοκος of all creation, just as David was first-born despite being the youngest brother. It means he is the king of all things. He became part of creation in the incarnation.
You could not figure out these easy things because the Spirit of God is not in you. The Spirit of God is not in you because the word of God is sealed and veiled to you. The word of God is sealed and veiled to you because you refuse to love the truth.
Short answer is no, the Trinity must be read into the Bible.
What was Jesus doing in the garden of Gethsemane while the disciples dozed?
In Malachi 3 and Isaiah 40:3, we see that YHWH was going to come and someone would prepare the way for YHWH. In the gospels John prepares the way and who comes? Jesus. So, Jesus = YHWH. Then we see Father, Son and Holy Spirit at Jesus’ baptism.
Mathew 28: baptize them in the name (singular) of Father, Son and Holy Spirit. ONE name, three persons.
The Trinity must be read in the Bible and you are failing to see it.
@@fluffyhead04
And the bible also says God led Israel out of Egypt.. but he used an angel and then Moses. So God acts through agency
@@eew8060 Sure, but in Mal 3 and Isaiah 40 we are looking for YHWH to come after one prepares the way and Jesus comes. And so we can see who He is. Cant compare this to an angel. Also, Paul in Philippians 2 says Jesus has the name that is above all names. What name is that? YHWH. This isn’t the name of a creaturely agent.
@@fluffyhead04
Says who? God has an angel who has His name in him (Exodus 23:21)
Angels are created
No.. the Trinity is NOT biblical. Not at all
What was Jesus doing in the garden of Gethsemane while the disciples dozed?
It's a question, not a proof.
@@Mygoalwogel praying
There is a number of mentions pertaining to God the father and God the son. Also the Holy Spirit as a He, meaning person. In Genesis 1 God says let us make man in our image also which verifies God is more than one person. This doesn’t mean we can conceive of this eternal design in its entirety since we are only man and have no ability to look into heaven unless God takes us there. What we can do is appreciate the Lord God working to save us from ourselves and the devil who holds all captive who do not believe in God’s one and only son Jesus Christ and live towards him.
@@villarrealmarta6103
Huh? How does Genesis 1:26 prove a multi-personal being??
I. The Invitation to the Holy Spirit
1. Healing is a thought by which two minds perceive their oneness and become glad. ²This gladness calls to every part of the Sonship to rejoice with them, and lets God go out into them and through them. ³Only the healed mind can experience revelation with lasting effect, because revelation is an experience of pure joy. ⁴If you do not choose to be wholly joyous, your mind cannot have what it does not choose to be. ⁵Remember that spirit knows no difference between _having_ and _being._ ⁶The higher mind thinks according to the laws spirit obeys, and therefore honors only the laws of God. ⁷To spirit getting is meaningless and giving is all. ⁸Having everything, spirit holds everything by giving it, and thus creates as the Father created. ⁹While this kind of thinking is totally alien to having things, even to the lower mind it is quite comprehensible in connection with ideas. ¹⁰If you share a physical possession, you do divide its ownership. ¹¹If you share an idea, however, you do not lessen it. ¹²All of it is still yours although all of it has been given away. ¹³Further, if the one to whom you give it accepts it as his, he reinforces it in your mind and thus increases it. ¹⁴If you can accept the concept that the world is one of ideas, the whole belief in the false association the ego makes between giving and losing is gone.
2. Let us start our process of reawakening with just a few simple concepts:
_²Thoughts increase by being given away._
_³The more who believe in them the stronger they become._
_⁴Everything is an idea._
_⁵How, then, can giving and losing be associated?_
3. This is the invitation to the Holy Spirit. ²I have said already that I can reach up and bring the Holy Spirit down to you, but I can bring Him to you only at your own invitation. ³The Holy Spirit is in your right mind, as He was in mine. ⁴The Bible says, “May the mind be in you that was also in Christ Jesus,” and uses this as a blessing. ⁵It is the blessing of miracle-mindedness. ⁶It asks that you may think as I thought, joining with me in Christ thinking.
4. The Holy Spirit is the only part of the Holy Trinity that has a symbolic function. ²He is referred to as the Healer, the Comforter and the Guide. ³He is also described as something “separate,” apart from the Father and from the Son. ⁴I myself said, “If I go I will send you another Comforter and he will abide with you.” ⁵His symbolic function makes the Holy Spirit difficult to understand, because symbolism is open to different interpretations. ⁶As a man and also one of God’s creations, my right thinking, which came from the Holy Spirit or the Universal Inspiration, taught me first and foremost that this Inspiration is for all. ⁷I could not have It myself without knowing this. ⁸The word “know” is proper in this context, because the Holy Spirit is so close to knowledge that He calls it forth; or better, allows it to come. ⁹I have spoken before of the higher or “true” perception, which is so near to truth that God Himself can flow across the little gap. ¹⁰Knowledge is always ready to flow everywhere, but it cannot oppose. ¹¹Therefore you can obstruct it, although you can never lose it.
5. The Holy Spirit is the Christ Mind which is aware of the knowledge that lies beyond perception. ²He came into being with the separation as a protection, inspiring the Atonement principle at the same time. ³Before that there was no need for healing, for no one was comfortless. ⁴The Voice of the Holy Spirit is the Call to Atonement, or the restoration of the integrity of the mind. ⁵When the Atonement is complete and the whole Sonship is healed there will be no Call to return. ⁶But what God creates is eternal. ⁷The Holy Spirit will remain with the Sons of God, to bless their creations and keep them in the light of joy.
6. God honored even the miscreations of His children because they had made them. ²But He also blessed His children with a way of thinking that could raise their perceptions so high they could reach almost back to Him. ³The Holy Spirit is the Mind of the Atonement. ⁴He represents a state of mind close enough to One-mindedness that transfer to it is at last possible. ⁵Perception is not knowledge, but it can be transferred to knowledge, or cross over into it. ⁶It might even be more helpful here to use the literal meaning of transferred or “carried over,” since the last step is taken by God.
7. The Holy Spirit, the shared Inspiration of all the Sonship, induces a kind of perception in which many elements are like those in the Kingdom of Heaven itself:
²First, its universality is perfectly clear, and no one who attains it could believe for one instant that sharing it involves anything but gain.
³Second, it is incapable of attack and is therefore truly open. ⁴This means that although it does not engender knowledge, it does not obstruct it in any way.
⁵Finally, it points the way beyond the healing that it brings, and leads the mind beyond its own integration toward the paths of creation. ⁶It is at this point that sufficient quantitative change occurs to produce a real qualitative shift.
A Course In Miracles
(Jesus Christ)