Mary was a Jew, and Bad Unitarian Arguments

Greetings and welcome to the dividing line. It's been a busy week for us here. It's gonna be a busy week the rest of the week

Really excited about the Utah trip and We were supposed to pick up the new mobile training mobile command center

Didn't get to do that had some stuff that needed to get done, but got to get all that stuff right the first time out and So maybe tomorrow we'll see

But it's really exciting because we did the walkthrough and stuff like that and I did learn a few things

That was that was good to learn a few things. We had watched videos and stuff like that. So Pretty excited about all that stuff.

And of course this next trip two debates on that trip things like that but I realized this morning that I had not brought this in and I Think I have to I think

I told you about it Last Year when I went to Tullahoma and We did the debate with Dale Tuggy Oh I'd asked

Jeffrey Rice, you know, I don't want to honorarium me like that. I just like this is

This is the same Bible as my Johnny Cash Bible. Okay, so if you know anything about post -tenebrous

Lux Bible rebinding Jeffrey Rice, I Have a Johnny Cash and that's all black

So mine is the LSB nice big large print and almost see some of that there

LSB and Love it, but I just really love this color

And I had seen him do a lot of other Bibles in this color well They stopped making this color for a while.

And so I said, well, we'll just wait And it came back in and so I have a tricetra on the front

Which is the only thing I paid for I I asked for tricetras that I don't have one. I did not have the way to Imprint that and I said was a cost and so I just bought him a tricetra

So if you get a tricetra on a future I paid for it but it's this father -son spirit on the spine and It's this beautiful Teal, I guess you'd call it turquoise leather with It's the gold you can see the gold but then you can see underneath it is the is the blue so you can see the blue page edging

He did that. I actually can do that, but he's better at than I am And so I wanted to see this this is the baby

I'm gonna be carrying with me that is that's a preaching Bible right there and it's actually the font is actually large enough for me to Preach out of it.

So I wanted to show off that beautiful Bible from Jeffrey Rice, he does such a great job and Wanted you to see that it's it's it's beautiful really is

Then I was going to be jumping into immediately some response to Dustin Smith and the

Unitarians Who are just acting? Really strangely. I mean, I think it'd be worthwhile still to have future debates.

I'm just gonna not expect much as far as adult behavior I mean he made it fun.

He Behaved fine during the debate Great, and that's all it really matters if someone wants to go off and act really weird afterwards

Okay, I think that says a lot about what you how you think the debate went but All right, fine

But before we do that and we're gonna do that we're gonna dive into that and hopefully get through that fast enough to be able to still press on with some of the

Cross examination finish up the cross X from the Hanson Heschmeier debate

But something popped up like five minutes for the program started and You're just left going

Why and Here's and you know, the sad thing is The the

Reformed podcast championship is going on. I don't pay attention that stuff anymore but NXR Has been invited to be part of that and they're winning each of their round can you imagine if these folks these

Folks who interview neo -nazi apologists and white boy summer creators and It's the

Jews. It's the Jews. It's the Jews every you know every the sentence Nick Fuentes these type of folks

Can you imagine if they win the reformed podcast thing? I think that's the time to resign from being reformed podcast in any way.

I have to say I've been really surprised that the Provisionists and others have not taken opportunity

To broad brush us on that and say, you know, this is a reformed thing. It's where reformed leads to etc

Yeah, because they they they couldn't make the argument that it is what it leads to. It's well, they don't make argue at all

They don't make the argument on so many other Stop here Yeah, no,

I I I would be surprised by that but so here's

Here's what came up, you know, hold on just a second. Here's what came up and you know

Joel Webben is doing his Joel Webben thing And I don't know this guy this

Jake Shields. I haven't a clue who he is. No earthly idea He clearly doesn't have a clue about the

Bible or anything else either which is interesting But I only got sort of got to this point and You just got to hear this

I'm not gonna I'm not gonna waste my time trying to expand it and bring it over and do all the rest of stuff this is

I Already did like Christianity. They even would go so far as to say Christianity is a

Jewish psyop Yeah, there's a big push against that right now. There is a lot of white people I'm I'm sorry.

I talked to me guys I'm trying to tell them like for you you're not going the right approach just say he's not Jewish like right son of God How's the

Son of God a Jew this is okay. No, wait a minute. Okay again,

I don't know this guy and it's very evident to me Just from what he just said that I don't know.

He's ever cracked the spine of a Bible or knows anything about it all. Okay but What?

How how can the Son of God be Jewish it's called the incarnation Okay, it's the eternal logos

Who became flesh in John 1 14 and it's painfully self -evident that the person who wrote

John 1 14 was a himself Jewish and B was saying that Jesus became flesh of Israelite stock he truly became flesh and Unlike what the quote -unquote biblical

Unitarians, you know who tried to get rid of the personal reality that the logos was They have to deny that of course it's self -evident to anybody who just reads the

Bible and doesn't Allow all sorts of other strange things to overwrite the page of Scripture That the emphasis of the

New Testament is on the Jewish lineage of Jesus. You have these things called genealogies

You know that that both Matthew and Luke provide tracing things back through the

Jewish people And John's whole point he came under his own as only received him not his own what

I mean Okay, this guy again. I don't know who he is

But he doesn't I think about Christianity, but immediately Joel Webb and should be oh, no. No, no, no, no, no, no

No, no, no, no, no Come on now is that we get it's like I don't think the

Bible ever says Mary's Jewish does it Did you hear that I Don't think the

Bible ever says Mary was Jewish does it? Okay again, sorry, dude.

Don't know who you are Here's this is called a Bible Lots of us will buy one for you.

If you'd like to read it learn something about it. Clearly don't know anything about it Why is he on Joel Webb and his webcast

I don't have any idea but he just said the Bible doesn't say Mary was

Jewish does it and he stops and Now Joel Webb and has to respond

What is the only response you can give here if you have a responsible bone left in your body?

Well, of course it says she was Jewish and that's what he said, right? I You know

It's kind genealogies are very complicated You know, you have Ruth you have Rahab you have different people in the genealogy of Christ that weren't

Israelites And then it gets into like well, how do you define Jew doesn't mean Judean, you know What or is it just stand -in, you know synonymous for a

Hebrew? so to me it's like Yeah, I I know the guys who make the arguments about what the

Jews were Edomites, you know, or there's some argument But I refuse to say Jesus is Jewish. I'm just not that I don't have that.

I think that's I'm just not gonna say they Can make the argument, but I'm not gonna say Jesus is Jewish, right? Like yeah, that's fine.

I Don't I don't have a problem. Yeah king of the

Jews You know,

I said by the end of the year Actually, I've been hearing stuff the the big question now is when does the when does

Joel convert That's that's that's really the next question really

But when you get to this point this level of utter compromise, you're just like How did that happen so fast?

Well, it didn't happen all that fast. It was happening when it was being denied. Um, I What but after listening to that my next question to you is

Could convert to what oh, he's he's look he

I Have a clip someplace. I'm not sure if I bothered to say that Where he was talking about How the

Catholics have the doctrine of God so so perfectly down they've just got it all right and they've got all the they know all this stuff and you know, he's he's

Switched from being the first the only time I was ever on his webcast. We were talking about The Thomistic resourcement and he was on my side

Okay, now he's on the other side now. I'm sorry Joel Webben doesn't have a clue

What the Thomistic resource is about he doesn't know anything about that subject. He is completely untrained

He's just going with Stephen Wolfe Stephen Wolfe's a Thomist. So I'm Thomas now He didn't need 10 ,000 hours to learn all that stuff, which he's

Claimed he needs to learn to find out about the Holocaust and stuff like that So look the way the way he's

Jumping around he has no reason to stay at her own none Right, but maybe

I'm naive here, but I've never heard a Romanist say that Say what about the

Jewish thing? Yeah No, no, no, no, no, no, no, you're wrong on that one.

Sorry. They have their wacko Anti -semites too. They've got their wacko anti -semites too.

They're they're all they're Anti -semitism, it's the Jews.

It's the Jews. It's the Jews for some reason does not follow borders and of course the

Roman Catholic leadership I mean Roman Catholic leadership says that we adore the same

God as the Muslims So, okay, they're they're, you know, they're compromised on They're massively compromised and all sorts of the ask ask

Bobs and Janice about the Roman Catholic leadership and the Jews You'll get an earful on that one

But the point is It What what keeps a person out of Roman Catholicism is a solid commitment and understanding to the fundamentals of the gospel

Scriptural authority and that narrative and with the the crisis nationalists, that's all coming apart

They're willing they're willing to adapt so as to get as to get clicks get the followers

You know and you just heard that right there. There was only one answer to that question from that guy There was only one thing he have said and the

Joel Webben I knew two three years ago and spoke at one conference He would have been able to answer that question just like that the very fact that he sat there

Stuttering and stammering and heeing and hawing is just vile. It's just disgusting.

It's it's compromised. It's Unbelievable. So anyways that just popped up and then somebody sent it to me after I started looking at going

Okay, there you go Wow just amazing.

All right, totally changing topics now Sorry took the first quarter of the program with that insanity

Mary was Jewish Okay, he was that yeah, and if and if you think you can sit around today and play games about how to describe

Jewish Just go just just stop pretending. Okay, just Unbelievable, okay

Then some interesting stuff going on You know, it's been what about a month now since we had the debate in Dallas and you know for two weeks after that it was like What's going on here?

Because Dustin Smith behaved well during the debate He didn't break the rules.

I mean, okay You know, I don't respect the

Closing statement graphics scoreboard silliness. There was some childishness even in the presentation.

Okay I suppose we do need to be honest about that and You know, I I just simply say look

You look at debate you listen to the debate Did I demonstrate that he uses a different?

Exegetical and hermeneutical method to deny the Trinity that he would use to defend the

Messiah ship of Jesus or the resurrection I think I demonstrated that very very clearly and Inconsistency is a sign of a failed argument.

Therefore his argument fails his position fails. Okay, I Like to leave that to the audience

To determine and it seemed very very clear to me that the audience saw that at the time

But I don't have to go on the air the next day and go You know start trying to spin stuff and that's what they've been doing for a month now

Um, so someone actually posted a Video that someone put together where they just hacked up all my statements

Removed all the context and just hacked it all up to make it look silly and you can do that with anybody.

I Don't have time to and I'm not gonna ask somebody else do that It would have been simple to do that to Dustin Smith It's childish and it means, you know, you lost and you lost badly when you do that kind of thing

It also says if you're if you're putting that kind of material out the only people that you are concerned about Accepting your perspective is your people you're worried about losing them

You're not even trying to get to people on the other side To hold your position because if they go and look at the debate, they're gonna realize you are as dishonest as day is long so That tells me there's panic amongst these people that they're gonna lose their own people they've got to try to get their own people all excited and and and do this kind of stuff

I Don't have to do any of that. I Even have to even give it a second thought but it does give us an opportunity to Look a little bit more closely and like but what did we do?

What did we do when we looked at the Christian Shema first Corinthians 8 spent a whole program

We didn't have to spin. We just put the text on the screen. Here it is. Look, here's the words

Here's the original language, you know, that's supposedly what he's all big about Well, then just do it quit with the spin man and tell your people to quit with it

You know, I think you could do that. I think if you just went out there. I don't know of anybody I haven't seen anything online from someone taking the video of this and spinning it the other direction

I haven't seen anybody that would be on my side Doing anything like this at all because they don't need to They know what happened in the debate.

I Mean, I am more than happy go watch just watch the whole debate listen to all of it follow the arguments and When he gets up there with a scoreboard, what did

I do? What did I do When I made my closing statement that I have a presentation

Did I bring anything with me to the podium? notes anything at all nothing

Because what was I doing? I was summarizing the actual debate itself when you have your statement already done

That means the debate was irrelevant to you You didn't care what was actually said You're just gonna present what you think but you predicted what happened and then put that silly little scoreboard of this childish

Now if he wants to do that if he wants if we want he wants to debate Specific text we do a debate where we do ties to 13 second computer 1 -1

Where where we dive into Colossians 1 we do the

Carmen Christie whatever I'm absolutely confident in What I've written on those subjects and what

Christians have believed for many centuries on those subjects And if he wants to get up at the end and put up a silly scoreboard more power to him

We're not debating for the same people Anybody impressed by that is not someone

I'm trying to reach. Anyway, I'm only trying to reach honest people people of integrity People who are serious adults

Okay. So if you want to if you want to go after Click bait or whatever

Do your thing? By me anyway, so a couple things have come up and I thought you know what?

I Had download when I when the video became available. I downloaded it. I transcribed it the nice thing about that man.

This is so We've got things easier now than we used to have them not very long ago

Because You got it. You gotta understand. Okay. Yeah, I'm an old guy and I'm getting it.

I'm smack dab Running right into my middle middle 60s. All right, so not ancient.

I think I've still got I Think I still got a good 12 years in me for debates and stuff

You know if if if the memory just goes completely then you got to do other stuff

But right now it's still working most of the time I'll miss names once in a while They'll come to me later on.

I'll do it on the program A Couple weeks ago. I tried to come up with David Allen's name.

It's just And you just gotta keep going, you know, you do it you have to do But yeah,

I remember What it was like to do debates with Jerry Madatix for example in the 1990s and you you wouldn't even get to people wouldn't even get to see it until they bought a

VHS tape of it and And then fairly shortly after that, you know, we started burning

DVDs and You could you could see it that way but a transcript How how would you get a transcript?

There was no way to do a transcript now. I can simply download in a matter of a minute the whole thing and I have a program and there's there's all sorts of programs you can do it online

But I have a program on my Mac rather than this one, too main max at home and I've got a transcript in five minutes and it's amazingly accurate.

Can it miss stuff? Sure, you know Especially when the stuff's being recorded live But boom, it's right there and and it's timestamp so you can just search for stuff go straight there

I have to do something like that. I don't have anybody do this for me Okay, so when I look this stuff up today, that's how

I did it I use this transcription program. It's there look up the timestamp go from it.

Um, so anyway, I just just a commentary from someone who remembers what it was like when you couldn't do anything like this at all and a reminder

That in some ways being able to do this so quickly. Oh That's exciting.

That's great. We can get the stuff. That's wonderful but It also feeds into the fact that especially when it comes to theological debate

There was something about the fact that in the past those debates took a lot of time I Mean the big theological debates even of the past 400 years since the

Reformation You had to print stuff. You had to send stuff There was time to read stuff and then the response had to come back and you'd have time to thinking about that Do you think that our theological the level of our theological debate and dialogue today it's gotten a little shallow

Yeah big time Big time. You're just not supposed to be able to process stuff this fast and so there is

There's advantages and disadvantages really really are for all this stuff, okay

So what What I want to do is I wanted to Here's actually transcript get the transcript out of the way

I wanted to play a couple of these sections and That's not what

I wanted Where did I oh, it's this there we go.

All right. I wanted to play a couple these sections and Look at the scriptures.

I'm the more I'm looking at this more I realize we're never gonna get back to the cross -section today unless we do a jumbo edition of the program today, which

Wouldn't be bad to do There are the the first section you play is

When I'm asking questions and so I'm doing the cross -section, so I'm guiding it at this point and We looked at Revelation chapters four and five

And we actually agreed on some things about it, but then I want you to hear how the

Unitarian Unitarian Overthrows the testimony of scripture

For the sake of their presupposition and they they get angry and jump up and down and we don't have any presuppositions

We're not assuming Unitarianism. Yes, you are. You are just absolutely blind and we're not gonna stop pointing it out

No matter how angry you get Just because you can't see it. Sorry. It's there.

It's in every argument you make You assume certain things and You limit what the

Bible can say about it on the basis of that assumption You just do it over and over and over and over over again

It's just become such a mantra with you. You just can't see it So here's the section. I think

I'm where I need to be here Let me alright, so Let's just see how this goes

So the lamb is a part of the creation that is singing to himself, okay, that's not where I want to be

Let's go a little bit for that that he is a lion of the tribe of Judah and the shoot of David Indicating these a biological descendant of Judah and David and you know that Trinitarians believe that Jesus Took on human flesh.

He had not eternally been incarnate and therefore that entire argumentation which you repeat Ad Nauseam has nothing to do with what we believe about Jesus.

I don't know that. I think that's an inconsistent argument But but you need okay.

Let me just make sure you understand. What was what we were talking about there He thinks the fact that Jesus is the biological descendant is

Somehow relevant to what we believe why because he doesn't believe the Logos is personal So he doesn't believe in an incarnation

Jesus Embodies, but does not incarnate certain aspects of attributes of God But there is no personal

Logos So when when Jesus says I was glorious in your presence before the world was

Those are attributes speaking that doesn't make a lick of sense It's completely impossible, but they're stuck with it that's all they can do why because Unitarianism is fundamentally rationalism

It's fundamentally a rationalistic system it's anti -supernatural in many ways and So what they do is they limit what scripture can possibly say?

I can't believe it says that Because that violates my presupposition Which is there is only one being one person sharing the one being of God and there can't that there can't be anything beyond that because that that's not part of Reason I cannot reason to that.

Well. Yeah, you can't because it's divine revelation so When They point to and this is what this is why when

I got up I said 90 % of what you just heard after his opening statement 90 % of it's irrelevant to the doctrine of Trinity They believe that the demonstration of the incarnate state that Jesus is distinct father that he has been sent by the father that he submits to the father that he is the descendant of At least he understands

Mary's Jewish It's just it's just amazing

How does Anyway, um, they believe that that means since the father

Didn't become incarnate the son did that means since sense God has to be

Unitarian that proves Unitarianism. It's a tight circle. It is a really tight circle

I get it, but that's where they are. And so that's what I'm saying here is

Okay. Yes, we Jesus That the man Jesus Was the descendant of David?

Yes, he was Jewish. Yes. He's the king of the Jews all that's true but none of that changes the fact that the person of the

Son is eternal and that that eternal person is distinguished from the father

But the one being of God is shared by that father son

Spirit they're distinguished from one another one being three persons. This is what the

Bible is teaching us and Since that goes against their perspective then all of a sudden you get this different exegetical methodology being being utilized so that's what that's what

I'm talking about here is He was saying well, yes, he's physical offspring therefore

Well, therefore he's not the father not therefore. He's not God. See see see how that works

How Jesus is distinguished from the father as he is very plainly in The pages of the

New Testament becomes an argument against the deity of Christ Um That's that's what we're that's what that's that was what that was about but that's not where I really wanted to go

Need to acknowledge that when we talk about the lamb We believe that the divine

Element of the lamb because we believe he became flesh. So you have the human He was they crucified the

Lord of Glory You can't crucify the Lord of Glory and takes on it unless he's taken on a human human body Yes, that's the term.

You can crucify the Lord of Glory Yes, he's the glorious Lord the second

Lord at the right hand of God, right I'm gonna but but but the Lord of can you crucify Yahweh? No, cuz y 'all we can't die

Okay, so the glory of okay that a bunch of stuff's going on there. I was quoting from Paul When he said that, you know, if the rulers this age, no, they would not have crucified the

Lord of Glory and that that Statement is a shocking statement

Because this is the Lord of Glory Not a second Lord next to see what he did there.

There's nothing in that text where Paul is saying it's a secondary Lord But that's that's their system kicking in Because the point is crucify the

Lord of Glory now if you just saw that phrase the Lord of Glory and you just ask

Who is that? Okay, those are terms of deity Those are terms of deity you can't crucify and he just said yeah, you can't crucify

Yahweh Okay, they will look upon me whom they've pierced. But hey Again, we can't allow those things to stand because our presuppositions will keep getting knocked over so I'm just pointing to the fact that Crucify Lord of Glory Lord of Glory is

Is Deity crucifixion Incarnation, that's who

Jesus was that's the foundation that Paul's functioning on that's why he can interchange spirit of God spirit of Lord spirit of Christ These he's a

Trinitarian. He's speaking as a Trinitarian So the glorious Lord from the Old Testament would be Yahweh No, but he was crucified because he took on human flesh.

Is that what John 1 14 says? No, because John 1 14 is not talking about so much in verse 1 so Just so you hear and this isn't my focus.

I'm just so you understand what he's saying John 1 14 is not talking about someone in verse 1. Yes, it is

Yes, it is demonstrated that in the debate with Dale Tuggy. No question about it.

None whatsoever That this is this is scripture twisting right in front of you

By someone who should know better, but when you're committed to it that particular system and he'll say the same thing about me but you can find out by testing for consistency

Okay, so the Lamb in Isaiah chapter 5 it is said specifically there's no all and I say a chapter 5.

I'm sorry Revelation chapter 5 the Lamb all of creation in heaven earth under the earth all

Sing in praise Yep to the Lamb to he who sits upon the throne and to the

Lamb. That's right So the Lamb is a part of the creation that is singing to himself

I think that's reading too much into the text I've already demonstrated that Jesus was brought into existence in the birth narratives as now catch that Catch that that is not an answer

That's not even close to an answer. That is that is a dodge dodginess

Maximus in Latin Dodging is Maximus if we want to hey if I want to do the memes if I want to do the videos

We can do the memes in the videos. Here's dodging us Maximus. I'm not gonna bother. Okay?

I have already demonstrated that Jesus came into existence in the birth narratives. No, you didn't the

Incarnation is in the birth narratives but John 1 John 17 make it very clear the

Divine Son pre -exists is incarnation so But what does that have to do with the fact that the

Lamb is? the object of the worship of all creation if if the text

Drop drop that out. Um if the text I'm waiting for you to drop that out so I can show something.

There we go um Here's here's the text you maximize this out.

Okay, here's the text let's Let's not rush past this stuff It's sad that for a lot of people the book of Revelation is primarily just about trying to figure out how

Iran in Iraq and the United States fits into what's going on right now and the theology of Revelation is

Much deeper than all that. Um When you and remember chapter verse divisions are editorial

Have to remind people that The verse divisions came about 15 51 or so chapter divisions were during the medieval period primarily and so chapters 4 & 5 of the book of Revelation We separate them mentally, but that's that's an editorial thing.

It's one scene And it's the heavenly scene. So you've had the letters to the churches in the first three chapters

Then chapter 4 begins with the heavenly scene And 4 & 5, 5 is not really a very long chapter

The only reason there's a division there is because the lamb appears at the beginning of chapter 5 It's still just one scene one heavenly scene.

It's the outflowing. It's the accomplishment of redemption and so It's self -evident

That Revelation chapter 4 is based on and is pulling from and Restating Isaiah chapter 6 and Isaiah chapter 6 of course the calling of Isaiah, but it's the temple vision and Just a reminder that the one who's seen in that temple vision is identified by John as Jesus now these

Unitarians try to get around that but again, they have to use different exegetical methodologies They have to try to say well, no, you know,

Isaiah 53 Yeah Where was the glory of?

Yahweh seen in Either Isaiah 6 or Isaiah 53 in the very words that John uses

They can't escape it They have they have again. It's a it's a dodge against Maximus.

It's it's a dodge mechanism Try to get around John 12 39 to 41

Specifically identifying Jesus as Yahweh So they've got their way. It doesn't work.

It's inconsistent and therefore Inconsistency is a sign of a failed argument, which was what we were debating but So you put that aside in Revelation chapter 4

You have you read you read Isaiah 6 then you read Revelation chapter 4 and go. Oh, yeah. Okay.

All right, so Revelation 4 8 and the four living creatures each

One of them having six wings are full of eyes around and within and day and night they do not cease to say Holy holy holy, where have we heard that before?

This is directly quoted out of Isaiah chapter 6 Holy holy holy is the

Lord God the Almighty who was and who is and who is to come? Okay Now that's a little expansion from the

Greek Septuagint of Isaiah 6 But very plainly that's where it's coming from and when living creatures give glory and honor and thanks to him who sits on the throne

To him who lives forever and ever the 24 elders will fall down before him Who sits on the throne and will worship him who lives forever and ever and will cast their crowns before the throne saying worthy are you our

Lord and our God to receive glory and honor and power for you created all things and Because of your will they existed and were created now

Look at verse 11, I'm gonna have to scroll it up here because I'm in the way on the screen there

Hati soo And since they are big into pronouns Oh the

Unitarians singular pronouns mean everything They actually mean nothing if you actually understand what the argument is, but for them

That's the be -all and end -all That's singular pronoun Okay for you singularly

Created tapanta and Through sue your will

They were created They were they existed and were created. Let's sound familiar

Yeah, I'm not gonna take time to go over there right now but there's this little text called

Colossians chapter 1 and In talking about the Sun uses the very same language it can't be it's a singular pronoun

Um Which demonstrates that you should have realized that argument is utterly fallacious a long time ago

And it would be really better if you stopped using it, but I know you're using it for your people You're not using it for people who actually know the

Doctrine of Trinity to be convinced. You're right That's the weird thing for you

Singularly create all things. Well, it was through the master worker and you know, it's your

Got the relative worship stuff you got relative prayer stuff now you got relative creative creation stuff So the singular pronoun thing works for them when it's their verses, but when it's shot back at them.

Well, that's really So you had this word this worship of the one who sits upon the throne as the creator of all things

Then I saw in the right hand of him who sits on the throne a scroll written inside on the back sealed up with seven seals and I saw a strong angel proclaimed with loud voice who is worthy to open the scroll and to break its seals and No one in heaven or on the earth or under the earth was able to open the scroll to look into it

Then I was crying Greatly because no one was found Worthy to open the scroll or to look into it

Well, the elders said to me stop crying behold the line that is from the tribe of Judah the root of David has overcome So just open the scroll and this and it's seven seals

I remember what he's gonna say is hey, that means he was a human and we go. Yep. He was That's not all he was and that's where your rationalism comes in That's not all he was

Unitarianism Limits the scope of God's Revelation It artificially clamps it down since it can't say anything more than this so when they do the when they do the stuff about The intertestamental stuff where you use all those sources in the intertestamental period

And this is and he's even written a book on this and Heizer did the same thing, by the way When you look to those extra biblical sources what they're what they're fundamentally doing is the fulfillment of Biblical prophecy in the

Tanakh cannot be greater than the categories we insist upon Just listen to him.

Just listen to him and The categories of fulfillment seen in the intertestamental writers are not sufficient for what the

New Testament teaches so you're going to have to end up twisting the New Testament if those are the artificial constraints you're placing upon and That's what

Unitarianism does. That's what this form of Unitarianism. That's what they're doing and you'll see it over over over over again and Don't get frustrated when you point it out and they can't see it because you can't make them see it

You can be an instrument. You can be used. You can't make them see it You can't make them see it.

So Then I saw in the midst of the throne the four living creatures in the midst of the elders a lamb

Standing as if slain having seven horns and seven eyes Which are the seven spirits of God sent out into all the earth by the way, every time there's no

Holy Spirit Hello, what's this? And he came and took the scroll out of the right hand of him who sits on the throne and by the way just Let me expand that for 30 seconds this

I think is directly relevant to John 14 through 16 and the sending of the Holy Spirit notice it says

Seven horns and seven eyes which seven spirits of God what? Sent out into all the earth same author who wrote

John 14 15 and 16 and Who sends the spirit father and son

Get it. You know, there's this is supposed to there's supposed to be connections here that you're you're drawing and going off Thank you

John for saying these things And he came and took the scroll out the right hand of him who sits on the throne and when he had taken the scroll the four living creatures and 24 elders fell down Where before the lamb before the lamb?

You remember of Elisha chapter 4 just a few sentences earlier they fell down before he who sits on the throne and Now they fall down before the lamb each one having a harp and golden bowls full of incense

Which are what? the prayers of the Saints This is obviously symbolic of something prayers don't fit in bowls

Okay but the point is object of prayers is always not

And now they are presenting these before the lamb

Why because as the incarnate one he is provided for the salvation of the Saints Through their union with him

Now that's that's not being that's not said here. That's assumed That's said elsewhere our union with Christ Things like that and they sang a new song saying worthy are you to take the scroll and open its seals why?

Because you were slain So what you have in Revelation 4 and 5 is you do have the connection back to Isaiah 6 but Isaiah 6 is before the incarnation

Isaiah 6 is before the coming of Christ and so now Christ has come and you were slain and purchased for God with your blood and people from every tribe and tongue and people and nation

So now we're looking at after the accomplishment so now the lamb stands as if slain in the heavenly courts and So he is worthy

Because of what he is accomplished echoes of Philippians chapter 2 in the carmen christi and You made them to be a kingdom and priest to our

God and they will reign upon the earth And they go see our

God That's that's the bay different, right? The father is not the son you can prove that over and over again

And in fact, there are a couple times I forget two or three times maybe more during the debate. He accused me of modalism

Yeah, that's modalism No, not modalism Revelation challenges us

The only way to walk the revelation is to be absolutely balanced because the modalist quote book of Revelation because of the incredible Unity that is presented between father and son

The Unitarians quote it to try to distinguish and Thereby on the basis of the assumption of Unitarianism denigrate the deity of Christ.

Neither one works but both sides try it and Unfortunately a lot of Christians who haven't

Thought through all of the ramifications of their own Trinitarian belief Struggle very much to express themselves accurately when it comes to this text and by the way,

I Was going to be in Revelation chapter 21 about 35 minutes ago But there you go

So then I looked and I heard the voice of many angels around the throne and living creatures and the elders and a number

Of them was myriads of myriads and thousands thousands saying with loud voice Worthy is the lamb that was slain to receive power and riches and wisdom and strength and honor and glory and blessing in the same terms use the worship of God in Revelation chapter 4 and Here's the phrase.

Here's the phrase. I need to scroll this up so we can see kaipan tisma every

Created thing Which is in the heavens and upon the earth and under the earth and upon the sea and all things in Them Panta all things in them.

I heard saying How can you be any more?

Exhaustive what was Smith's response? Well, I've already demonstrated the Jews came into existence the birth narrative.

He didn't You alleged it. He didn't demonstrate it and You're you're seriously saying the birth narratives override this every created thing

Everywhere All things in all of creation

I heard saying to him who sits on the throne and To the lamb be the blessing and honor and glory and might forever and ever

So that's why I said so you have the lamb singing to himself and his only answer was

I already demonstrated that he was Created in the birth. Do you think that that's a

Inappropriate answer you think that really? deals with this It clearly does not

The four living creatures kept saying amen and the elders fell down and they worshipped

By the way, you can do relative worship all you want. That's prosecuted. Oh and humans can be worshipped and It can be used in a relative sense and military context and stuff like that but when it's used in the religious context it means worship and You don't get any more religious

Than the picture of heaven itself with the 24 elders falling down the four living creatures saying amen the elders falling down and worshipping and Who do they worship?

he who sits on the throne and the lamb and the Unitarian says that's just because he is

Yahweh's mighty representative Tell it to the elders Tell it to the elders

They weren't Unitarians like you so That was that part now, let me

So then what happened during his cross X? Let me see if I can you can take that down for the moment during his cross

X he went to Acts chapter 17 first and Then jumped to Revelation chapter 21

Both of these again are this facile simplistic argument

That a singular pronoun Demonstrates the Trinity is false Okay so in Acts 17

You have the assertion specifically the God who made the world and All things in it since he is

Lord of heaven and earth Does not dwell in temples made with hands nor is he served by human hands as though he needed anything

Since he himself gives to all people life and breath and all things Okay so Hatha asha poy a sauce the

God who made Tonka swankhi ponta ta and alto now

I Want you to see this up here who made the heavens? The world if you want to translate that way

Kasman made the world Not heavens. That's right there Made the world and all things in them he is

Lord of heaven and earth So this one this one here's earth here's heaven and So he's differentiating between Kasman and gaze normally that has something to do with physical versus the

Like spiritual realms have I got anyways, he made the world and all things in it

He did it Now, where have we seen this before? Where are we seen Panta before?

Washington's chapter 1 Washington's chapter 1 Or how about the

Shema the Christian Shema where all things are For the father from him through the

Son same terminology being used there So the

God Who made the world and all things in it does not dwell in temples made with hands.

And so What he wants is so How can this be the

Trinity Hutas is the demonstrative here is is singular masculine

The God who made the world and all things in it If it's singular then this is just one person and I go

Are we allowed to look at all the New Testament or are we just going to determine things based upon single verses that are isolated from the rest of the

New Testament and I will admit right now the

Doctrine the Trinity requires the fullness of Scripture Well, there's a shocking one

You you actually you have to believe soul scripture and total scripture Believe doctrine is true

No question about it And I do therefore I do So Over and over again,

I said to him there are many times when God is simply referenced in Scriptures where there is no distinction being made between Father Son and Spirit if the

New Testament writers make a distinction if there are places where they

Cite the same text but use it of father in one place and spirit of the Son in another place or Especially when it comes to creation

Clearly There is a distinction made between father and son but both are identified as being central to the actual act of creation itself

The one does not do that without the other There are places where you can identify

In light of New Testament revelation what an Old Testament text was about but the vast majority of them It is not the intention of Scripture to even address this

So the Unitarians want you to answer questions that the Bible doesn't even raise

The Bible doesn't even say this is what we're talking about here. So they want to force you to answer these types of questions

When the text they're looking at has nothing to do with it And so that led to a

Discussion about Revelation chapter 21 fairly quickly

Um Revelation 21 3 and I heard a loud voice in the throne saying behold the tabernacle of God is among men and He will dwell among them and they shall be his people and God himself

Will be among them now, there's a sexual variant. They're not going to get into that right now But God himself using a toss the intensive

Behold the Skanae the tabernacle the tent of God will be with man with men and He will

Skanae amongst them. He will tabernacle Amongst them and they shall be his people

And he will be their God so who's that is the question that was asked and so it's a fair question in the sense that Okay, but but here's the here's the thing that got me all hyped up about this

Somebody and I did respond to it on Twitter and I don't believe that specifically

It was Smith My understanding it is it was a Another of their group

I think Simon knows who it was He he deals with these guys a lot more than I do and he

Was looking at this but let me see where it where it went Uh, I've got all this to Larico stuff

Yeah, I'm not No, I don't see it in that um basically what it said was

James White says he doesn't know who God is and I did respond.

Yep. I've Written too many responses and therefore I can't find this but I did respond to somebody under my replies and I basically said, why are you so Dishonest because I never said any of that none of the words that were

Get asserted to me We're in the video I Didn't indicate anything like that.

I didn't nothing and It's too much stuff on Roman Catholicism and stuff like that here

Anyway, sorry about that. I should have had that up but it was just so Ah, there it is right as I gave up So this is

Unitarian Christian Alliance this Unitarian Christ Puts up part of what we're about to look at and says

James White says I'm not talking about it That's simply unacceptable in a debate format and of course,

I never said I'm not talking about it I said God wasn't talking about what he's asking about but I didn't say I'm not talking about it

They don't listen very well and then the title on the YouTube video is

James White does not know who God himself is and I my my statement to them was

Who are these folks trying to impress with this kind of childish video short? I never said

I don't know who God is I said the text was not addressing the question and I never said I'm not talking about it.

Why this level of obvious dishonesty? Did it go so badly that this group has to throw sand in the air to cover it up?

And then I linked to the fact that last Sunday. I preached out of Revelation 21 and I addressed these very issues and provide the link so Let's take a look at the video let me pull this down from full screen and Go back here and hopefully oh

That's right, I need to be around 122 okay

This should be good enough. I hope to catch most of it. Let's see if we got it. He himself

Gives to all people life and breath and all okay Back it up. Let this this should be good here.

So it's Paul evangelizing Hagen's The triune

God and his act 17 sermon where he says The God who made this world and all things since he's the

Lord of heaven earth does not dwell in temples made of hands Nor she served with human hands as though he needed anything since he himself

Gives to all people life and breath and all things Pulse describes God with he himself is he evangelizing the triune

God to pagans? I don't know what evangelizing the triune God is supposed to mean but one thing that is yeah,

I don't I'll be I'll be honest, but what I Think he's probably trying to say is he trying to?

Teach the Trinity to pagans or something, but evangelizing the triune

God This must be some kind of language they use in their own little group. I guess We don't use it very clear is the

New Testament identifies the father in creation the son gives life I'm asking the question about John 17.

Can we please stay on that? I think you mean act 17 17 yeah Well, my aunt since you're at see we both missed a reference in the cross -examination

Doesn't mean anything asking a general theological question I'm giving a general theological answer and that is the

Apostle who said those words Identifies Jesus as the creator of all things in Colossians chapter 1 the giver of life as he does the

Father and the Spirit as well It is the ability to enter to interchange these terms

That is so it's them is so it's such a demonstration of the fact that the early Christians Were Trinitarians and they thought in this way.

So the intensive use of the third person pronoun. How many persons does that refer? I Don't know what you're talking about.

Yeah, so you hear what here what this is In the intensive the intensive use the first person how many persons?

What if it's not identifying person? What if the whole point is he's talking to pagans who have false gods.

He's introducing them to the one true God But he's not giving them the entire revelation that you find in Colossians chapter 1

Can we allow Colossians chapter 1 to speak here, too? Or Do you have to go?

Nope. Nope it you've got it. You've got to answer this only on Acts chapter 17 You can't let the same person who's speaking

Define more fully what he's talking about in any other context every context has to be the fullest context possible

No one reads the Bible that way. He doesn't read the Bible that way. That's not how you

Demonstrate the Messiah ship of Jesus fulfillment of prophecy anything like that And what was my whole point in the debate who's gonna be consistent?

Who's gonna use the same methodology of interpretation and he doesn't what's what's the conclusion?

What are you referring to? What text? Okay. All right. I'd read it in Acts 17 24 and 25. He himself

I'll tell us the booths. Okay intensive use of the third -person pronoun since he himself Okay, the one true

God how many no, no, it's a singular pronoun. How many persons does that pronoun refer to?

Again, it's it's it's not even addressing the subject so it's the one true God who created all of mankind that Paul is

Proclaiming to the people the unknown God is the one he's proclaiming to them the Creator if you want to know who is involved in What aspect then the

Bible gives us Washington's one it gives us John one It gives us asking about acts and you're asking you hear this

You need to hear this, but I'm asking about this one text Which we need to isolate from everything else this author said, can you see how this is?

Eisegesis we're proving it right here. The man's on the screen. You're watching it you see

I Wasn't gonna do this But they keep putting videos out that are simply dishonest and all

I've got to do is go back and do you see what he is? doing I'm sitting here going

Let all scripture speak. No, I Want just this verse isolated from the rest of the

Bible you can't use all of divine revelation It's rationalism

Rationalistic perspective because underlying it is and you know, he wouldn't agree with this, but the earlier

Unitarians Unitarianism has never been able to maintain a high view of scripture for a long period of time.

I Um, but The assumption that I'm working on is the divine consistency of all of scripture

If you can cut scripture up and say nope, it all has to be right here You're no longer allowing scripture to speak as God's voice

That's not how Jesus Viewed Old Testament scripture. That's not how you use scripture. That's not how the

Apostles use scripture That says a lot about you're asking about something that Paul does not identify in Acts 17

So it's I have no answer to offer to you because it's not something he talks about. Okay, so just be clear You've you've no answer as to it's not something he's talking about Because I if you asked if you asked me what his favorite football team for the

Super Bowl was I couldn't tell you either because he's Not talking about it. Okay, you see that I think that was a fairly clear response

That's not what he's talking about You're demanding that he talk about it but that's not what the subject is about and How many places could we turn this around on him?

How many places can we turn this around on him? We could do it over and over again Revelation 21 3 where it says he will dwell among them

They will be his people and God himself will be among them It's the pronoun himself in the phrase

God himself singular or plural That would be singular. Okay, so God himself refers to how many persons?

It would depend on the context and what specifically is being said with just read it and there that well,

I just read it It was sort of childish wasn't it?

I just read it and So here's where here's where a relation 21 comes up and I'm not gonna repeat everything that I said

In the Sunday sermon a week ago on Sunday Which was still shorter than Jeff's sermon this past Sunday But There is there is the context of What takes us to Revelation chapter 21 and I only

Just just note note a few things Oops And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying behold the tabernacle of God is among men

In John chapter 1 the same author if it is the same author I realize there is some dispute about that that could be held by Orthodox people

But I believe the same author Uses the language of tabernacling of the incarnation itself

That he tabernacled amongst us is John 1 14 And Titus chapter 2 very plainly identifies

Jesus as redeeming a people unto himself Using the same language. They shall be his people

Etc, etc that by the way is right after the Granville Sharp construction where Jesus identifies our great

God and Savior and they shall be his people and God himself will be among them and He will wipe away every tear from their eyes and there will no longer be any death

There will no longer be any mourning or crying or pain for the first things have passed away Now the citation is from Isaiah chapter 25

Let me see if I can do this without moving to my other window Yeah, I can

But I can't give the context Yeah, I can't give the context. All right There's probably a way to do it

Accordance is amazing. So it's probably way to do it. But let's um, let's go to Isaiah chapter 25 and You need to do there

Six and the and Yahweh of hosts will prepare it. Oh, I need to blow this up that's good enough for now and Yahweh of hosts will prepare a lavish banquet for all peoples on this mountain a banquet of aged wine choice pieces with marrow

Oh, that might be choice meat. Oh um woke you up didn't

I I put completely lost you and I mentioned choice meats a Banquet of aged wine choice pieces with marrow and refined aged wine on this mountain

He will swallow up nothing to watch us on this mountain He will swallow up the covering which is over all peoples even the veil which is stretched over all nations

What is that veil? He will swallow up death for all time and Lord Yahweh Interesting phraseology there

Lord Yahweh I deny Yahweh and Lord Yahweh will wipe tears away from all faces and He'll remove the reproach of his people from all the earth for Yahweh has spoken and it will be said in that day behold

This is our God in whom we have hoped and He would save us

This is Yahweh in whom we have hoped let us rejoice and be glad in his salvation You you know when it talks about saved us

Yeshua you know that Jesus name is Yahweh is salvation

Yahweh saves right and How is it that this veil which is swept over all the nations this death?

He will swallow up death for all time He will swallow up death First Corinthians 15 maybe

How did this happen in the death barrel resurrection of Jesus Christ so you can be a

Unitarian and constrict fulfillment Or you can be a biblical

Trinitarian and allow for the fullness of fulfillment to be able to see

That what happens in the incarnation death barrel resurrection of Jesus Christ the union of the people of God with Jesus you

Look at Ephesians chapter 1 in him in Christ over over over over over again It's only in him you receive from Christ what he has eternal life forgiveness of sins you can allow all of this to sing in harmony and concert as an orchestra the fulfillment of the gospel or you can stick with the one -man band of Unitarianism and Ignore all the fulfillment

That it's in Jesus that death is swallowed up It is in him that the tabernacle of God is amongst his people

It is in the father and the son and the spirit working in perfect harmony.

You don't have to Get rid of this verse read that verse. So we've just got our little our little

Unitarian bubble You can allow the entire orchestra to play and hear all of it, but if you adopt this perspective

You've got a one -string banjo one man one man band Because you've already determined that from where you're gonna start the whole conversation

So there's there's a lot more we can get into In in Revelation chapter 21, like I said,

I did a whole sermon on it We You know

Jerusalem comes down out of heaven there is all the really cool stuff about Giving And and I will give to the one who thirsts from the spring of the water of life without cost

Where have we heard that before? Oh John 6. Oh, yeah. Okay all the father gives the son come to the son never thirst.

I mean I'll be his God. He'll be my son and we can have lots of singular pronouns in here, but it'll mess everything up I suppose and then the description of Jerusalem and the walls and all the rest that kind of fun stuff, but then you have the city has no and and I saw no sanctuary in it verse 22 and I saw no naan

It's in the accusative but naas is the lexical form. I saw no naas in the

New Jerusalem Sanctuary or temple for the Lord God Almighty ha gar kudios ha theos ha panto krator the all -powerful one

Is It's naas Chi ta are neon for the

Lord God Almighty and the lamb is Singular It's singular naas.

Oh No, it's singular with a plural subject

Is its temple see if you want to play games?

We can play games What you're seeing is that the author of Revelation who has already told you in Revelation chapter 5 that all of creation sings to the

Lamb You shouldn't be confused by this point it makes perfect sense that you can conjoin the

Lord God Almighty with the Lamb as The one temple and not get confused by it.

It's there And the city has no need of the Sun of the moon to shine on it for the glory of God has illumined it and It's lamp is the lamb

Who is the light of the world according to John? Yeah, okay and The nations will walk by its light and the kings the earth will bring their glory into it boy

We could do a lot of stuff with that eschatologically speaking And its gates will never be closed by day and there'll be no night there

And they will bring the glory and the honor of the nations into it again massive fulfillments of Isaiah 49

Isaiah 60 all these things being brought together And nothing defiled and no one who practiced abomination and lying shall ever come into it

But only those whose names are written in the Lambs book of life, this is John giving us this apocalyptic vision of the fulfillment of all things and If you try to cut it all up it will not make any sense you have to allow the full fulfillment take place when you do understand without Hacking stuff up Without having to hide things.

I have to constrict stuff down to that pitiful little small thing That is

Unitarianism so anyway Did not even start to get back to anything else

I Should have known that by now after all these years, but there you go see if I hadn't done the

Joel stuff at the beginning. Maybe I would have gotten done a little bit closer to on time, but that's life.

Yes, sir so I did notice something there in in Revelation was five there the the the

Lion of Judah Oh Judah. Yes. Yeah. Yeah. Yes. I I think

Joel might need a refresher. What do you think? Yeah, yeah, you would think you would think you would think oh

That's interesting Just got a thing here I'm not sure this is even gonna come up Yeah, Oh LifeSite posted this now

LifeSite used to be this big thing this big pro -life thing They're getting into all sorts of other stuff and it's definitely a

Roman Catholic thing but Father rip ripper girl

Ripper girl, I don't know if a Protestant is saved they are saved by mediation of the

Catholic Church, that's Consistent with lots interesting

Then you click on it and the The story isn't about that. It's father ripper girl abomination of desolation refers to Catholic Church being compromised

The book of Daniel refers the abomination of desolation as tied up with the abolition of a public daily sacrifice.

Oh, well, that's interesting Oh, he's an exorcist. Ah Okay Interesting Father ripper girl explained the reference in an interview with podcaster and former

US Navy SEAL Sean Ryan While refuting Protestants who mistakenly believe that the book of Daniels reference to the temple in which the abomination of desolation

Will stay at the time of the Antichrist is the Jewish temple. Ah, okay Wow Getting into some wild stuff there.

I'll take a look at this. Maybe it'll be worthwhile catching Next time around but yeah,

I just popped up and I'm like what? Where did that? Where'd that come from? But it seems to be sort of on Something else

I'm not sure what it has to do with the Protestants here. I don't see Yeah, okay.

Anyways, well, maybe we'll look at it next time. Maybe worthwhile taking a look at anyway, okay This might be it for this week, we'll see

I mean if we did another one, that'd be three in one week That's a fair amount but we've probably got things to do.

Yeah, Rich is going come on don't don't make me do that Because once we pick up the the new new unit then the neat thing about this

I've told you before What attracted both of us to it as soon as we both saw the floor plan is like, oh

It has an entire office in The back the back of it, I mean lots of storage and this really cool desk that goes that Goes up and down and it's firm.

I mean that thing That thing's like a rock if it was something flimsy That would be a little bit because you're in the back of the thing and the back back end of an

RV Bounces around a lot though. This RV has an incredible suspension says the best we've ever had by a long shot

Um But we both saw that and it's like yeah, I could just sit down there

Plug the computer in and we could be on the air so fast No more

Dragging bags out putting stuff up and oh all this kind of stuff.

Yeah, go ahead So one of the problems that you have with a flimsy table even Back in the early days the grand design where you would be at the kitchen table

Yeah, and you're typing on your laptop if the camera. Yeah, exactly. It's cameras about it

This thing is so rock -solid. You can be tapping away and it ain't gonna vibrate at all. I can move it off Oh, um,

I even spent a lot of time in that that thing and it has its own air conditioner separate from the one

We'll see there's there's two different ways of running it I was talking about that with them, but anyways

Hey during the summer, I don't care It needs to be cool but anyways the point being

When we park it and store it because we have a covered storage spot for it This thing has a second door.

I've never had a RV that had two doors and It goes straight into that office which means we don't have to put the slides out to get into it and While it's parked even with a unit right next to it rich will be able to get in there and He's got all sorts of wires to run and things to mount and everything else and With that inverter system.

We've got you'll probably even have power back there to be able to test them even when it's plugged in. So Yeah, so rich is sort of like yeah, let's not

Overdo it here. I've got work to do and So that'll be that'll be cool. That'll be a lot of fun.

So the program will go on and And hopefully you all appreciate that so with that Probably next week we will get to see you and obviously our intention is once we

Park this to prepare it for the trip to Utah. We will want to be doing the program from inside it to Shake out the bugs find out where there are gonna be issues and things like that.

So be looking forward to that Thanks to everyone who made this possible and who supports us as we're going out on the road

Even now as diesel fuel is going through the ceiling Cost -wise,