Is the Trinity Essential? And Much More

Greetings and welcome to The Dividing Line. My name is James White and we're asking the question today is the Trinity essential? And you might ask yourself, why would we bother asking that question? Because we've answered it many times over the past.

Well, you know we're coming up on. You know, we've pretty much worked our ways way through a number of decades now. We're coming up on, let's see, 1983 was a start so that'll. We're coming up on 40 years.

That's four decades of this stuff and We have addressed this topic numerous times, numerous times. That does not mean that it does not need to be addressed again because It does and it probably needs to be addressed a little bit more often than we than we have.

The assumption being that people have heard everything we've said before and that's. That's not a valid assumption given how many new people we get all the time and we thank you for that. We don't advertise.

We don't advertise so. The fact that we have the audience we have is word-of-mouth and so people come along and Yes, lots of people come up to me and say hey, yeah I've been listening to everything all the way back in the archives back to 1998.

I'm like you poor thing. And if you're doing that then you've heard this discussion many times before but not many people do that and Obviously, it is a vitally important question. Because most most of the people that would find this program to be useful.

Are people who go to churches that take the Bible very seriously. When I say seriously, I mean in a supernatural sense. Believe that it is truly divine revelation that it's consistent with itself. That it is given to us by God to be the final word from him.

That means we're a pretty small group. Relatively speaking because there's a lot of people who believe that The Bible contains the Word of God becomes the Word of God. That the Bible is one amongst many revelations from God.

That believe it's special but not sufficient so that there is latter-day revelation and I don't mean just the Mormons. But I had a guy show up at church Sunday night. Walking out. I preached on Revelation four and five.

I'm walking out and this guy comes up to me and he he says that he's got some special revelations from the Lord and He'd like to have a few minutes to sit down with me and Had something to do. Had something to do with Mel Gibson movies.

Did did Mel Gibson do a movie about Paul? Because he seemed to be saying something about Paul and basically what he was saying was if we could help him get the word out about this stuff it would Result in a movie that would make a billion dollars and he would tithe off of that to the church.

So yeah. And and I was the only pastor there all the other guys are in Oklahoma for the big stuff going on down there today with SB 13 and. So I I had to I had to take The position of authority for the entire church and say we ain't interested.

Yeah, we don't believe in latter-day revelation he was shocked what you what you don't. Did you just sit through the entire sermon that I just gave from Revelation four and five and didn't pick that up whatever.

So yes, we if we believe these things. Oh, yes. Uh-huh. I Was going to piggyback on your comment about the Trinity and how far back? Yes, you go with it the oldest recording we have on sermon audio. The oldest tape the very first audio recording in the tape series is that you ever did?

Yeah, yeah, two years two and a half years before I came into the picture. We're guessing around 1985. It's on sermon audio. It is called the Christian doctrine of the Trinity the Trinity. Yeah, it is the oldest subject of all of our recordings if you would like to hear how the human voice ages Over the decades.

Listen to the young kid. Who was at that point? 22 23. Yeah, yeah, yeah, no, no no two ways about it it goes back away. Anyway, and you know something it's it's a little scary to have stuff you did that long ago still available to be listened to.

I was like Okay, well and you know what the second one is I Seem to remember what was zero zero two was because I ran it enough times on a on a Duplicator one box it the Son of God Lord of Glory. I've got a lot of glory.

Yeah deity of Christ. Uh-huh. Yep. Yep. Yep. Yep important stuff so the point is We have certainly addressed it so why would be we be addressing it today? Well because a video came out From William Lane Craig and What's interesting is I don't follow William Lane Craig not for any other reason.

Then there's only you can only meaningfully follow so many people. But a Muslim friend of mine sent me the link and Thoughts so here are my thoughts, so we're gonna listen to the comments and Respond to what William Lane Craig had to say.

What yes, it's a black screen right now I Will see the problem here is I Would like to be able to stop and start, but if I do some of the stuff at the end Changes the meaning of some of the stuff that is said earlier.

So let's let's just let's just jump into it. See see how it goes.

The Trinity as the Core of Christianity

The doctrine of the Trinity is that God is not just one person. That's called Unitarianism. Trinitarianism says that God is three persons father son and Holy Spirit. Now I think that this doctrine is Right at the core of the Christian faith it serves to distinguish Christianity from Judaism and Islam which are both forms of Unitarianism.

We believe that God is tri personal rather than uni personal. I Don't think that it's necessarily essential to salvation however for example. I think that Abraham and Moses Will be in heaven they were saved, but they didn't believe the doctrine of the Trinity.

They'd never heard of it and similarly I imagine there are people today people on the mission field who hear the gospel preached over the shortwave radio who placed their faith in Christ and are saved who don't understand or Have an appreciation of the doctrine of the Trinity and sadly there may be people in our churches frankly who do not understand And believe in the doctrine of the Trinity, but nevertheless they are Believing in Christ as Savior and believing that he is divine that he's the Lord and so I don't think that Belief in the Trinity is essential to salvation.

The doctrine of the Trinity I think lies at the core of Christianity because it explains to us who God is and what he is like and If you deny the doctrine of the Trinity you're probably going to be denying either the deity of Christ.

Which would mean that you don't understand who he really is. You think he's just another human being like you which is just utterly inadequate. You cannot worship him if he's just a human being that would be idolatry and blasphemy.

To worship Jesus if he's only human and yet we are called upon to worship Jesus He must be divine or the person might deny the person Of the Holy Spirit, but then that again would be to deny One of the persons that God is and to deny his work in the world and in salvation.

The Holy Spirit is absolutely essential to our salvation. It is he who draws us to God who convicts us of sin and who Regenerates us and brings about the new birth who then indwells us and enables us to live the Christian life.

Okay, so.

Defining Essential and Distinguishing Knowledge from Salvation

All right. With all due respect to to brother Craig. When I first saw this Phil Johnson had tweeted it and He had the best commentary said this is just muddled and it is it's muddled on on every level.

First of all, the doctrine of the Trinity given was rather inadequate. It assumed a number of things it did not emphasize Monotheism it assumed anyone asking the question was already understood the necessity of monotheism which as a philosopher I'm sure that's the primary thing he's dealing with but Those of us are out here in the trenches are dealing with a lot of other things other than that.

And so we do have polytheists and other perspectives to work with so when he when he talks about God being tripersonal he does not differentiate between being in person a Person who needs that information to understand the difference between the fact there's one being of God.

Three divine persons being in person are not the same thing. All of that is is passed over In the giving of the definition and then it said that this this serves to differentiate well yeah, that's that's a That's an understatement.

It is the essential self revelation of God That is seen primarily in the incarnation of Christ his ministry death burial resurrection To the right hand of the Father in heaven and then he and the Father sending the Holy Spirit and so this becomes the the center point of history and Everything before looks forward to it everything afterwards looks back to it.

So it doesn't just serve to do that. It is God's self revelation in an amazing reality of The incarnation of the second person the Trinity and so the definition certainly was Minimal, but you would think that if you're asking the question is the trend is the Trinity essential?

That you would not only define the Trinity very carefully you would define the word essential Very clearly and it was not defined. What you hear is? Well, it's not essential for salvation but then as he continues on you come to understand that what he's saying is is That you do not have to have perfect knowledge of The doctrine of the Trinity for salvation.

That's what he's saying. He talks about people in the church. He talks about the person listening to the shortwave radio in the mission field. You know that might not fully understand this out of the other thing.

And then he does get into some of the denials, but even then Does not get to the important element of what the denials would actually involve and so To ask the question is to beg that you define. Well, what do you mean by essential is?

It essential To the defining of the Christian faith itself. Well, of course. You know, he says it's at the core. I would say it is the core God is the core everything else radiates out from that so what could be more essential than the Trinity because the Trinity includes within it the assertions of Monotheism hence all the attributes of God Immutability everything else is the doctrine of God is the central core that defines everything else and so There's no question about that and so if you're talking about essential as in defining, of course.

Of course, this is why we can't have fellowship with Unitarians. So, of course, it's essential in defining the Christian faith but That's not really what he was addressing. What he was saying in essence was is It essential to know the Trinity well, I would say on a certain level yes.

Since this is the highest of God's revelation, it's his personal revelation. It's tells us who God is to reject how God has revealed himself to exist is going to obviously put you in the position of Not being able to worship the one true God.

But He wasn't. Even when he said well, you know. So if you're not gonna believe the Trinity then you're gonna be denying the deity of Christ. You're gonna be denying the deity the Holy Spirit. Well, actually when you think about the doctrine of Trinity There are a number of ways to deny it and if you understand the three biblical foundations, it's based on one God.

Three persons so the existence of the Father Son and Spirit as as Having communion with one another communicating with one another Distinguished from one another not only in their relationship in the Godhead eternally, but in their actions and activities and creation and redemption.

And then the equality of those persons is the third point and hat that would be the deity of Christ deity the Holy Spirit. Their equality not in being the same But their equality in Participation in the one being that is God.

So the deity of Christ personality of the Holy Spirit if you deny these things There's there's two ways to deny these things. The first is to know what the doctrine is and say it's wrong and the other is to not know what the doctrine is and think It's something else and believing that One is a willful rejection of the doctrine the other is ignorance the other is Could be blamed upon Traditions and the church not being willing to Address things that needs to address there's all sorts of things.

But the point is that We must differentiate Between willful rejection of known truth and Ignorant and an ignorant lack of confession of the truth or a holding of an error again out of ignorance. I have said For decades now That I would be fearful to give a quiz a Test at the vast majority of evangelical churches is coming Lord's Day on the doctrine of the Trinity for fear that probably 70 to 90 percent of The people who've actually made the effort to go to church Would fail that that quiz they would fail that test and would test positive for some kind of Heresy.

Now how many of them would love to be corrected to be instructed? Large portion. But this is what we are what we are facing. And so if Perfection of Understanding and theology were the standard who would be saved?

There are very few if any with a perfect complete Knowledge of everything there is to know about the nature of God the Trinity and everything else. No question about it. But Perfection has never been the standard the Essential issue, and I'm getting a crick in the neck here the essential issue that has to be addressed Is the issue of defining That that keyword Essential are you talking about?

Essential in reference to You must have X amount of knowledge To have saving faith. Now, obviously we believe there is some minimal floor on that. There has to be some content to the gospel and there has to be some content as to the God who is calling you to repentance and It would make sense That that minimum minimal floor of Of data truth information is going to be related to a person's capacity and ability that is the the minimum necessary requirement for a Five-year-old is different from a ten-year-old which is different from a fifteen-year-old which is different from twenty-year-old and so You take that into consideration.

And in all of this we have to differentiate we have to make the category distinction that was not made in the video. That you can use the term essential in defining the faith and it is essential that the doctrine of the Trinity is The very definition of the faith the gospel is Trinitarian.

You cannot make heads or tails out of the New Testament Outside the doctrine the Trinity who Jesus is relationship the father all these things. So in that realm of defining the faith, there is no question Centrally essential and definitional.

But that's a separate Consideration from asking can the Individual At my church who again if tested has a modalistic understanding of The doctrine Trinity be saved now. I'm not saying that we should Try to make it so that people would be confused or make it so that people can have the easiest way of believing.

I'm Not none of those types of things what I'm saying is what if you have someone in your church, and I think this is the majority who if you ask them would stumble I've told a story about it's it's illustrative at this point.

So it's all together. I was at a at a church in the Tampa Bay area years ago before YouTube and Before YouTube I could role-play with people I could come in to a class and I could pretend to be a Jehovah's Witness or I could pretend to be a Mormon and I would accurately represent what these groups believed and Blow everybody away away and then halfway through you stop and put them all back together again, but boy did they listen?

It was a very effective thing that I haven't gotten to do For years now, thanks to what you're watching me on the internet and I'm not gonna wear a wig and You know or anything like that and try to try to look like somebody else.

So that's not gonna that's not gonna happen. So I don't get to do it anymore, but I went into this This church and I spoke to the junior high class now look getting junior high schoolers to listen For more than 14 seconds is a miracle somewhere close to the global flood.

Right on right generally same area. Because I am convinced that when we're born we begin that march toward Being full humans and we're going up and we're going up and then we hit 12 and then it Then it goes back up around 16 17, there's this there's that spot in there about 12 and a half to 15 and a half or so.

Where I'm just you know We're just lucky that we believe in pro-life because it's just like I'm not so sure about that one, you know. Good cash in the warranty on that one. And so it's tough to deal with with the junior high time period and so It was very effective to have me come in and Tell the students that I was I Was a Jehovah's Witness.

Yeah, I was I was some local Kingdom Hall and So they're like, oh, oh this could be cool get to watch our youth minister, you know, talk to a Jehovah's Witnesses. So this is this is more interesting than what happened at school this week and so on and so forth.

So we had their attention honestly Within 30 seconds of Starting the dialogue with this poor young college student youth minister guy. I had him spouting heresy I had him Spouting modalism. Yes, the father and the son are one person.

So you believe you know when Gia said if you see me you've seen the father that the Gia's and a father one person. Well, yeah, bing bing bing bing bing. Look, it's all it took. That was that easy. And I know it's kid, you know quit picking on the poor kid.

Well, you know, hopefully he's figured out the Trinity since then. But the point is Everybody else in the room sitting there going. Oh Okay. Hmm. Hmm, and they didn't want to be the one answering the questions.

That's for sure. And so With that in mind Was he lost? What was he without salvation. Because when asked a very what should be a basic question for all of us Failed to make the proper differentiation now, I will point out If we properly catechized our people this wouldn't be nearly as much of an issue I mean Anybody who has Done the Westminster catechism shorter or longer or teaches catechism or any of the abundantly good Catechisms and programs that are out there one of the first questions that you learn and you learn to distinguish between being in person and and the relationship of Father Son and Spirit and and so.

Yeah, it does say something about the fact that a lot of our churches are very deficient at that point. But Does that mean this person was unsaved? I say no. That only becomes a Indicator of some kind of true spiritual issue if when faced With correction when you go You know because obviously we went through halfway through the the period of time for that class and I stopped and said, okay I'm actually James Wyatt.

I'm from Phoenix, Arizona, and I'm a Christian apologist. I'm not Jehovah's Witness and let's go back over the stuff that we talked about here, and I went back and Hopefully kindly and without embarrassing the poor guy Too much anyways corrected All of the stuff that I had just said To help them to understand and they it got their attention.

It was an efficient way of doing things. Like I said Did he become a Christian once I corrected him no, but if he had gone no, I know I I don't I don't. You okay. You've just shown me where the Bible clearly differentiates between the Father and the Son.

And I didn't you know, the Son is has eternally existed as the Son in relationship with the Father two divine persons. I see all that but I reject that I I'm gonna believe in a Unitarian God. Okay. Now you've got a problem now.

You've got an issue. Because if you don't confess the Son then you'll have the Father. Also, if you think the Sun's just simply a mere human being then don't have the Father First John 2 etc, etc. So now we can we can start dealing with that particular that particular issue.

But in my experience the vast majority of believers that you talk to Once you explain these things like oh, man, I'd always wondered about that. Yeah, of course and and it just opens up vistas of Truth to them in the pages of the scriptures so the unfortunate thing about this video is that by not defining the category that you're addressing and By not defining the word essential and by muddling those two things up.

You don't bring clarity. You you bring a lack of clarity and So is the Trinity essential? Of course, it is definitional of the Christian faith. Is it possible for a Christian to be ignorant about aspects of Trinitarian theology?

Well better be because Probably all of us are. When if I ask you right now to define perichoresis or go to hell. Will your will your pulse rate go up just a little bit. Now perichoresis is just simply the interpenetration of the divine persons in Their relationship to one another.

What is what does that involve some of these things? Yeah, what does that involve? It's not a physical thing. It has to do with the relationship of the divine persons and their relationship to the divine being.

But I would guess That Ninety-eight and a half percent of All the people who were involved in my young life in teaching the truth never ever heard of the term perichoresis. Does that mean they weren't Christians?

No, but it does mean that making a perfection of understanding of the Doctrine of the Trinity the standard Means that there prior any Christians on the planet. Now what that should do for us is encourage us to know more About what God has revealed about himself if you know more about Prophecies about a seven-year tribulation period.

Then you know about the relationship of father son spirit. You've got all your priorities upside down. Can't say amen at least say ouch. That's what Votibalkum says and he's right so it should be something that is absolutely central and Certainly any person by the time they're in their teen years is fully capable of Having a a real understanding of what the the Doctrine of the Trinity is what its ramifications are how it's related the gospel.

Vitally important stuff vitally important stuff essential. Yes, most definitely in opposition to what dr. Craig said, but recognizing that dr. Craig just simply was muddled and was using the term essential in two different ways and That's where the problem came in in that particular that particular instance, okay, so Also was sent a video from Bart Ehrman.

I'm a little I'll be pretty honest with you I'm afraid to play this. I Have the feeling we could be DC made by his people. I Know it's fair use and I know we'd win eventually and it would mean that 30 days down the road this this Program would finally be aired again.

So what I'm gonna do is Instead of playing it I'm going to Summarize it for you. You don't have to show it. Well, actually if you want we can do it that way. Because they certainly can't go after it's about a screenshot when you're discussing something all right, a Video was put out and we could probably do this in it.

There you go Bart Ehrman, it's less than four minutes long History in five minutes. Well, I guess the three minutes and 52 seconds counts less than five minutes and as is commonplace with Bart Ehrman.

The issue with Ehrman is not the facts it's the framework of the facts leading to the conclusions. Bart Ehrman's Doctoral dissertation was on the development of the Proto-Alexandrian text type in an early Egyptian Christian writer.

I'll be very interested to find out by the way once more of the CBGM analysis is completed. What he's gonna say about all that because so far the Alexandrian text has not been identified by CBGM. But anyway, that's neither here nor there the point is that he's a textual critical scholar, but Back in 2009 when we debated and you watch that and you you can see He's extremely dismissive of me he's extremely dismissive of the audience.

He was just over there to do his thing. He gave the same presentation he'd given in the previous debate with Dan Wallace hadn't even fixed the problems. He had that presentation as far as misspelled words or anything else.

He he was just there to do his thing and leave and he Didn't care what was being said back to him. He wasn't really listening. So in in that we had initially Wanted to focus upon his assertion. That the presence of textual variation precludes the possibility of inspiration.

That's his his point. Is this very strange idea? That if God inspired something Then he would never allow textual variation to take place. Which as I've pointed out would mean that God could not have inspired the Bible until 1949 with the invention of the photomechanical Photocopier.

But yeah as it may. Shortly before he got he I guess probably looked at his calendar said I'm not debating that and forced us to use the misquoting Jesus title. Because he did not want to have to defend the theological claim that he makes.

He says I'm a historian, but he makes all sorts of theological claims. And so what he does in this video is he is extremely blunt in Saying the historical Jesus believed this and didn't believe that now I I found that highly ironic.

Given that his name became a household name in. Any well, it's not okay. It's not a household name. Rush Limbaugh is a household name. Bart Ehrman is not but amongst people. Familiar with this field. Miscoding Jesus was his big entree there now those of us in the field had read the orthodox question of Scripture long before that but that was really where he started grabbing public attention and.

The interesting thing there is the whole idea of that book is we don't know what Jesus said. We you know given the presence of textual variation and in the manuscripts and so on so forth. You know, we're not really sure what Jesus said and and and things like that, but in this video Bart Ehrman is very certain Exactly what Jesus believed.

But the terminology he uses is where you Need to understand where he's coming from. He says the historical Jesus historical Jesus. So, what is this video about. Well evidently he's got a book coming out next month on heaven and hell so he's doing the eschatology thing he's doing the.

Again I am firmly convinced when you look at the titles and topics of Bart Ehrman's popular books since misquoting Jesus. This is a personal journey on his part to bring as many with him on The journey of apostasy as he can this is a long apologetic for denying Christianity.

Here, I don't believe anymore. Let me help you not believe anymore. That's what it's about. So, you know the forgery stuff and memory stuff and you know, it's just all meant to undercut all The foundations of of the Christian faith, that's what's its intention is and So now he's getting to eschatology.

Real eschatology. We tend to use term eschatology of stuff. That's actually ancillary to real eschatology the final things heaven and hell and So he makes five points. Here's the first point heaven and hell as Concepts do not appear in the Old Testament or Jesus's teachings.

So what you need to understand very quickly is Most of what Bart Ehrman said in this video would not be considered controversial in most theological seminaries and Bible colleges Across the United States.

I said this to The folks at Apologia a few weeks ago, I think it was two weeks ago and It's important for everybody to understand this if you believe In things such as the inspiration errancy of Scripture The existence of a day of judgment The punishment of the wicked The presence of the righteous In in in God's heaven.

You're in a very small minority and the problem is people get converted they only know the one church they were converted in and Therefore they don't realize the Spectrum the range of stuff that's out there and when they find out about it, they feel deceived.

Well, I'm not gonna be the one deceiving you. Okay, I'm just letting you know right now That and here's this is one of the reasons I don't use the majority scholars stuff that you hear Evidentialists or classic apologists whoever they want to describe themselves using all the time.

Well, the majority of scholars believe blah blah blah. Well, the majority of scholars don't believe in the virgin birth and majority of scholars don't believe in the inspiration description. The majority of scholars do not believe in the existence of heaven and hell and These are people teaching in Bible colleges and seminaries.

So you need to be aware of that that that means you have to have a reason for the hope that's within you and So It is very common for you to be told that heaven and hell as concepts do not appear in the Old Testament or Jesus's teachings.

I noticed how that was that was framed first of all because they plainly exist in the rest of the New Testament and The problem is you're dealing with someone like Bart Ehrman and Bart Ehrman just represents the rest of Unbelieving biblical scholarship, I don't know why you want to be a Bible scholar if you don't believe it I don't get it either but they're out there.

So what you'll be told and this is why you've heard me say this before. What what do I say the most dangerous place for a Christian is? Huh Christian bookstore. Why. Well, I guess there's a lot fewer dangerous places for Christians today.

There used to be I guess. Okay. I mean is there any even left here in the valley? But I mean there used to be Berean and all the you know, you could drive. No, no, no. No, I I don't know where one is.

Do you? Is that one still up around 60 is one up around 75th and Bell or something like that. It was it was it the last time I was there was a trinket shop, but that was 10 years ago the point is Christian bookstores used to be a big thing.

There was a Berean Christian bookstore right next to Grand Canyon College back when I was there and I call it a dangerous place. Because as you walk down especially the commentary aisle. Or the theology aisle what you need to be thinking is that there are coiled snakes on every shelf because I've just seen it happen so many times a believer Just wanting to know the Bible better goes to some Christian bookstore.

Buys a commentary gets home starts reading and is just flooded with unbelief. This never really happened and this is kind of to do that and this author's kind of that author and da da da da da and. That's the normative.

That's the norm. Finding good solid Commentaries are actually based upon taking the scriptures as a whole. You were laughing. What are you laughing about? Oh all Catholic bookstores. No. Well, you got it.

You got to get your your your all your Saints and candles and stuff like that someplace. Yeah, yeah, Google doesn't know so yeah so anyway What you would find is Exactly what you have on the screen right now.

Because you Have as the background a Viewpoint of for example the Old Testament. That does not see the Old Testament as a divine revelation in other words it doesn't view the Old Testament the way Jesus viewed it or the Apostles did and so.

What you have are all these? Distinct books. Separated from one another and So you can't connect what's said in one? To what's said in another and so there really isn't almost. There isn't almost anything that is a coherent concept in the Old Testament according to much of modern thinking.

Because it's just a mishmash of badly edited human documents that has has absolutely no Coherent message on anything at all and then when it says Jesus's teachings you gotta be real careful here. This wouldn't include John for example because most of you are sitting there going.

In my father's house are many rooms or mansions as the King James of its rooms. In my father's house in many rooms. I'm gonna go to prepare a place for you. What do you mean Jesus didn't talk about heaven?

And what do you mean didn't talk about how what? You've got to understand he said the historical Jesus and the historical Jesus. We know next to nothing about From this perspective You can't know whether Jesus actually said anything that was attributed him.

Remember when we played we did do the Thing where he unbelievable where he's going back and forth with Dr. Johnson, I think it was Only within the past number of months and You know, he thought he was being generous a number of times, but yeah, I think probably.

Okay, I don't know if we played this one, but I remember it clearly Irwin's like yeah, I think Jesus probably predicted the fall of Jerusalem. Yeah but If you ask him, did he do so in Matthew chapter 4?

No, no, no, no, no. No, of course not you. You can't you can't trust that. So all the Gospels are not trustworthy as actual recordings of Jesus's words, so All of these scholars and if you want to see how this works out With with someone who's a little less.

I Don't know. I just found him to be a much nicer person personally. Listen my debate with John Dominic Rawson brilliant guy brilliant mind. But when you take a brilliant mind and give it all sorts of disconnected facts it's gonna put stuff together in a way that reflects what that mind wants to see and Whenever you have people doing the historical Jesus versus the Jesus of faith Distinction thing and this is central Central to understanding liberalism.

To understand the vast the majority of people who call themselves Christians in the United States Believe there is a vast difference between the Jesus of faith and the Jesus of history. The Jesus of history was just this Moral teacher that we know next to nothing about.

The Jesus of faith is built up by later generations and this is what you're gonna get cut to get taught anywhere you go secular University secular college and sadly in a lot of seminaries and Bible colleges to.

That all that builds up over time. And so there is no Jesus of faith. Or if there is a Jesus of faith, it's just the Jesus of faith that you create in your own mind it has no connection to the historical Jesus and So whether Jesus actually rose from the dead or not whether there was an empty tomb or not.

Doesn't really necessarily impact The Jesus of faith. Because that Jesus of faith only exists in your mind. Anyways, see so All you gotta do here is say well, no, I can't I can't look at a text in Job Where he professes faith?

That he is going to to see that mediator and. And I can't connect that with something over here. To start coming up with a picture of heaven and hell. That will only be filled out. Especially after the resurrection of the coming Holy Spirit.

No, I can't you. You can't connect any of this stuff together. There can be no Christian theology. Christian theology is just remember tinker toys. I Had tinker toys and I was a kid I'm obviously getting old because I'm posting pictures of the the first typewriter which was it was a I think it was probably was from the 1930s or 40s.

That my parents had so and now I'm talking about tinker toys. Man, he's obviously heading straight down into the funny farm. But I love tinker toys and There's be this round thing you pour them out and you could do so many things them.

You know, you could put stuff together this way and then that way. That's what the Bible is for liberals. Theological tinker toys and. So you just pour it all out and you can make whatever you want if you want to do Legos fine I never got into Legos, but same thing same principle.

You get to make whatever you want to make out of this stuff. Because there isn't anything that it's supposed to be there is no objective revelation. There's no objective truth. That's why I have sat in this chair Over and over again said if you don't have the highest view of Scripture.

There's no reason for you to believe in the Doctrine of Trinity. The Doctrine of Trinity is based upon the idea that Scripture is Is a harmonious whole not the simplistic type of thing you get in fundamentalist circles, but that there is a a objective truth That is revealed in numerous different beautiful ways.

Remember I've talked about the the woven fabric of divine truth the threads that come together. That's what Scripture is. Without that view. There's no reason to believe in the Trinity. I mean you can go.

Well, yeah, I've got a traditional reason. Yeah. Well, okay fine. I don't think it's enough but If you want to say so, but you can't say it's a divine revelation from God unless you've got some foundation to it.