Is Jesus God? Part 1

The Trinity, the Shema, and the Identity of the Messiah

The nature of God is a complex topic that has been at the heart of Jewish and Christian theology for centuries. The doctrine known as the Trinity teaches that while God is one, He is a plurality within a unity.

The triune God eternally existed in three persons, Father, Son, and Spirit. At the heart of this issue is the identity of the Messiah. Is Jesus divine, God come in the flesh, or is he simply a created being who was designated as the Son of God?

Tonight we debate this foundational doctrine. Four experts, two Trinitarians who will argue that the triune nature of God revealed in the scripture as Father, Son, and Spirit, and the deity of the Messiah are foundational truths, essential to biblical faith, and two non-trinitarians who will argue that the Trinity is not biblically sound, but rather has grown from historical church tradition rather than from biblical roots.

In addition, they believe the Messiah, although the unique Son of God, is not himself a pre-existent divine being. Representing the latter position, let me introduce our two non-trinitarians. First, we have Sir Anthony Buzzard.

He's a graduate of Oxford University and Bethany Theological Seminary. He holds master's degrees in theology and modern language. He served 24 years on the staff of Atlanta Bible College and serves as co-editor of a journal from the Radical Reformation.

Joining him is Joseph Good, the founder and director of Hatikvah Ministries. He spent the last two decades learning and teaching Hebraic values and concepts, especially in the context of the non-Jew.

His recent projects include very detailed research on the temple from traditional Jewish historical and archaeological sources. Now, arguing for the Trinitarian position, Dr. Michael Brown is a published Old Testament and Semitic scholar, holding a Ph .D. in Near Eastern languages and literatures from New York University.

He's a well-known as a Messianic Jewish apologist and as the author of a five-volume series Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus, also serving as a professor at a number of leading seminaries. Joining him is Dr. James White, the director of Alpha and Omega Ministries.

He's a professor of Greek Systematic Theology at Golden Gate Theological Seminary, as well as various topics in the apologetics. He's the author of many books, including The Forgotten Trinity. Gentlemen, welcome to Jewish Voice.

Let's give them a warm welcome. Now, let me explain how this debate will work tonight. There's going to be three main sections of which I will serve as moderator and host. Part one will begin with opening remarks from each team member.

These remarks will be limited to two minutes each, followed by ten questions submitted in advance by our experts, five from each side. These are going to be in debate format, so I will address a question to one team at a time, altering sides.

The team addressed will have two minutes to give a response to the question. Now, when 30 seconds remain, you're going to hear a single bell. Everybody hear that? That's what it'll sound like. It's not signaling us to go to dinner, but telling us that we have 30 seconds remain.

So, this is going to signal that you need to wind down your response. Now, at two minutes, you're going to hear two dings of the bell. Bill? Okay, at which time you need to conclude, or I will stop you.

Okay, the opposing team will then have 90 seconds to give their rebuttal, the original side 90 seconds to respond, and the opposing team a final 90 seconds to give their final rebuttal. So, the two exchanges back and forth for each question.

Now, in each case, you're going to hear one ding when 30 seconds remain, and two when the time allotted is up. As moderator, I will hold the option of a follow-up question. If I use it, each side will be given 90 seconds to respond.

We'll also then take a short break, followed by part two. Now, in this section, we're going to have a 30-minute time limit. It'll be a free-form discussion of the two positions. I'll ask a series of questions, alternating between both sides.

In this format, we'll take approximately four minutes for a lively discussion of the question from all sides, and then move on to the next question. Part three of the debate will feature a 30-minute period of questions from our studio audience, which may be directed to either side or to a specific panelist.

The individual or team addressed will be allowed two minutes to answer and may be followed by comments from the opposing side of up to 90 seconds. We'll conclude the debate with closing statements from each of our experts, again, limited to two minutes, at which time I will conclude with prayer.

So, gentlemen, if you are ready, we're going to begin with your opening statements. We flipped a coin earlier, and the non-Trinitarian team won, so they have elected to go first. So, I'm going to turn it over to you, gentlemen, and Dr. Buzzard, I believe you're going to begin.

Thank you very much, and thank you so much for coming to this extraordinary occasion. My point of view is simple, based on 40 years of looking at the Bible and saying, what did Jesus believe about God?

And I think it's quite simple. He recited the Shema of Israel, which says that God is one Lord, a single Lord. Had we not abandoned Jesus, I think we'd be doing fine, but Christianity is the only world religion that's abandoned Jesus at its creedal statement.

I think that's a serious matter. So, my point would be, study the Shema, read what Jesus said to the Jew when he asked about the Shema. He agreed with a Jewish expert, biblical expert, that the Lord our God is one Lord, one single Lord.

That should be the end of it. Then, double that up with all of the thousands and thousands of singular pronouns, 62 ,000 singular pronouns in the Bible. I am God. Nobody is beside me. It's me. No one else before me.

No one. That's really very simple. So, I don't think it's complex, but it's become complex over the years.

Okay, thank you. Joseph, good two minutes.

Having expressed my faith in a Messianic Jewish context for about 32 years, a little bit plus, I've come to learn many truths about Hashem. One of the most important principles I've learned is that Hashem deeply loves his people.

He longs for a relationship with them. One of the highest callings that an individual is to have is to know and to understand Hashem. In a near countless number of passages, Hashem has expressed that he is the one and only true God.

This fact was ingrained into virtually every facet of the Jewish people's interaction with one another and with Hashem directly. For thousands of years, the Jewish people have been the ardent defenders of this truth.

They have believed in Hashem. They long for the coming agent of Hashem's redemption, the Messiah. Nearly 2 ,000 years ago, Hashem's deliverer was revealed in the man Yeshua. Yeshua declared faith in and proclaimed the one true God.

Yeshua lived a sinless life despite being tempted in all things like the rest of humanity. Yeshua was crucified. He was then raised from the dead by Hashem. His sacrifice has provided us our redemption to Hashem.

The scriptures are clear. Hashem is not a deceiver, and he has been consistent throughout scriptures in declaring that he alone is God. No scripture clearly defines the Trinity. Nothing declares in a straightforward manner that one must believe in the triune nature of God, nor is there a passage that insists that one must define Yeshua as the triune God, the Son.

When seeking a solution to the controversy or problem, most often the simple solution is the truth. It does not require complicated theological exercises nor suspension of logic to believe that there is but one God, the Father, and that Yeshua is his Mashiach or his Messiah.

I plead before you now that you listen to our discussion tonight with a heart that's willing to hear.

Scriptural Witness to the Deity of the Messiah

Thank you, Joseph. Good. And now we're going to hear from the Trinitarian side, and we're going to begin with you, Dr. Michael Brown.

Well, the interesting thing tonight is that I'm the only Jew on the panel here, and with all my heart and soul, I hold to the Shema. I hold to the oneness of God that there is only one God, and I would die for that principle.

I'm captive by the scripture. Perhaps of anyone at this table, I'm the least moved by church history and church tradition, but I'm captive to the scripture. So when Thomas refers to Jesus as my Lord and my God, when he is explicitly called God in Psalm 45, and that is quoted in Hebrews the first chapter, when the overwhelming witness of the New Testament is that the Son is eternally pre-existent, I have to bow down to the truth of the word and recognize that the one God that I worship is complex in his unity.

He is hidden and yet is revealed. He sits enthroned in heaven and yet fills the universe and can visit us on this earth even in bodily form. The scriptures are explicit that John says that Isaiah saw Jesus, saw the Son.

The scriptures are explicit in multiple testimony, verse after verse, that it was through the Son that the universe was made, and it is Jesus who says of himself, I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last, a created being cannot say this.

Let me tell you why the stakes are so incredibly high. My friends here hold that you are to bow down before a glorified man and confess him as Lord, that the same praise, honor, and glory that goes to God in the book of Revelation goes to the Lamb, to a created being.

To me, the notion that it is a created being that we should bow down, call Lord, worship, and pray to, as based on the New Testament, is a heretical and dangerous notion that we need to distance ourselves from and recover who Jesus truly is according to the scriptures.

Based on that, when we look at the person and work of the spirit and put it all together, we get one God, only one God, complex in his unity, to which Jesus is the number one witness.

Thank you, Dr. Brown. Dr. James White, two minutes. Thank you.

Unitarianism requires us to look at the Bible with one eye closed. It says true things. We are biblical monotheists. I have stood in defense of the fact there is only one true creator God many, many times.

But the reason we believe in the doctrine of the Trinity is because we look at not only scripture alone, sola scriptura, but we look at tota scriptura, all of scripture, and the biblical testimony is very, very clear.

We have to ignore the fullness of the New Testament revelation. Remember, the doctrine of the Trinity is revealed between the Old and the New Testament in the incarnation of the Son of God and the pouring out of the Holy Spirit of God.

The New Testament then becomes the very record of the religion founded in this revelation of the doctrine of the Trinity. That's why the doctrine of the Trinity simply pervades all of the New Testament records.

And that's why you don't have explicit statements, but you have these statements that could not possibly be understood outside of a Trinitarian complex. And so we look at the scriptures and we see the testimony that Jesus Christ has eternally existed.

He is the creator of all things. In Colossians chapter 1, when Paul is arguing against that early form of something called Gnosticism, he argues that Jesus Christ is the one who created all things, not because of him, but he is the very one for whom, in whom, and by whom all things were created.

He is the one who, even before his incarnation, did not give consideration to holding on to that equality he had with God, but he set that aside, the ultimate example of humility for us, Philippians chapter 2.

So when Thomas says, my Lord and my God, when Paul describes him as our great God and Savior in Titus 2 .13, when Peter calls him our God and Savior in 2 Peter 1 .1, when the church prays to him and worships him in religious context, they are simply following through with the revelation of the doctrine of the Trinity that has taken place in the incarnation and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.

That's why we're here this evening, to look at all of what the scripture says with both eyes open.

Worship, Prayer, and the Glory Given to the Lamb

Gentlemen, thank you very much. I appreciate the opening statements. We're now going to turn to the questions first addressed to the non-Trinitarian panel prepared by our Trinitarian panel. First question for you gentlemen is this.

After the resurrection of Jesus, people address prayers to him, while in Revelation the same praises that are offered to God are offered to him. If Jesus is only a man, wouldn't this be idolatrous? According to Philippians 2 verses 5 through 11, every knee will bow to him, and every tongue confess him as Lord to the glory of God the Father.

How can this be said of a glorified man? Only God is to be worshipped as Lord. Gentlemen, two minutes to respond. Yes, that begs the question.

If God ordains that his son can be prayed to and worshipped in some sense, not worshipped with God, then God can arrange that and I'll accept it. So it begs the question entirely. How can Jesus be worshipped and prayed and praised?

A glorified man can and is being praised if God so ordains. That would be the answer.

The passage from 1 Chronicles chapter 29 verses 20 through 23, you're referencing the book of Revelation chapter 5, where you have the lamb that was slain before the foundation of the world in the throne of God.

We have a similar passage there in the Tanakh. It says,. Then David said to all the assembly, now bless the Lord your God. So all the assembly blessed the Lord God of their fathers, bowed their heads, prostrated themselves before the Lord and the king, and they made sacrifices to the Lord, offered burnt offerings to the Lord.

On the next day a thousand bulls, and it goes on. So they ate and drank before the Lord with great gladness on that day, and they made Solomon the son of David king the second time, and anointed him before the Lord to be the leader and Zadok to be the priest.

Then Solomon sat on the throne of the Lord as king instead of David his father and prospered and all Israel obeyed him. And that's an example that's very similar to what we have in the setting of Revelation chapter 5.

And so there you have the same type of setting. You have the king is sitting on the throne, but it's called the throne of the Lord.

Thank you very much. Our Trinitarian panel, your rebuttal, 90 seconds.

Okay, I'll begin quickly. First, the parallels are not there between First Chronicles 29. There's no question you can bow down before a king and the Lord. There's certain things you can do before both.

But these words, to him who sits on the throne and to the lamb be praise and honor and glory and power forever and ever, that cannot be to a man. Otherwise, God is contradicting what he said over and over and over that to him alone is that type of worship adoration.

And the man was not called God as Jesus was after his resurrection nor addressed as God. So parallels hardly work at all. Not only that, but at the end of Revelation chapter 5, you'll notice that every created thing worships he who sits upon the throne and the lamb, excluding the lamb from the realm of created things.

Not only that, but the question mentioned Philippians chapter 2, the carmen christi. And at the end of that section, you have Paul quoting from Isaiah, where there God says, my glory I will not give to another.

And yet here you have that same glory being given to Jesus. So at the name of Jesus, every knee will bow. Every knee will bow in the Old Testament to God. Here, every knee bows to Jesus. Clearly, the context is that of truly heavenly worship, which is to be given only to God.

And in fact, the verse that Paul applies in Philippians 2 and Isaiah 45 says every tongue will confess, every knee will bow and confess to Yahweh. And here it is to Jesus. Either there is an identification between the two or we have idolatry.

Okay, your response gentlemen, 90 seconds. Uh,.

I want to read the, uh, an article out of the Jewish encyclopedia. This is, uh, called Agent Shliach. The main point of the Jewish law of agency is expressed in the dictum. A person's agent is regarded as the person himself.

That's from. We have several quotes from the Talmud. Therefore any act committed by a duly appointed agent is regarded as having been committed by the principal Who therefore bears full responsibility for it with consequence so forth.

Now an agent was given as much power. He was allowed to work as much power as was given to him in the scriptures. It tells us over and over the all power was given to Yeshua. He is the agent. He is the Messiah he is in.

Uh every way that he he comes he acts In the name of Hashem. And I think that's the context for what we have here.

Anything to add to that. Yes. Back to the point about worship. David was worshipped alongside with god same word proskynia. Using modern greek pronunciation not mispronouncing the greek worship was given to david.

Please note in the text that my colleague read. That's very important. There is a greek word latrevo to do religious service to to someone which is not used of jesus in the new Testament. That's significant.

But again, the question is begged all the time if god ordains that his immortalized son As lamb as sinless lamb human being is to be worshipped and praised so be it I would ask. I would I would suggest.

It's the devil you see who is not keen on man being elevated to that sort of Height, but if the if the text says that jesus is praised.

Then I would accept thank you very much. A final rebuttal 90 seconds.

Yeah scripture is so clear over and over and over that man is not exalted to the place of god and that no Flesh glories in his presence and yet these gentlemen are telling us that a flesh creature Will receive the glory that is only due to god.

That's a heretical dangerous position. Not only so jesus is worshipped because of his actual nature. They they the demon said we know who you are the holy one of god. And sacrifices were not offered to a man.

They were only offered to god. Distinctions were made. Yes here the same praise that goes to god goes to the lamb. And not only that but we need to recognize in the book of revelation that when uh, John tried to bow down and give proscune.

Worship the angel in a religious context the angel said do not do that worship only god. The worship jesus receives is not merely that which you would bow down before an earthly leader. It is always in the context of religious worship, which is reserved to god alone.

And once again the identity of jesus as yahweh on the part of the new testament writers that is intimately connected with this worship. Demonstrates that the old testament prohibition against the worship of anything in the religious context.

But yahweh himself would be very important at this point as well. And that's why the scriptures emphasize that jesus. John 13 came from god was returning to god. John 6 that he came down from heaven. We worship him because he is the exalted eternal son.

Not simply because of some non-existent text somewhere that says god appointed a man to receive the worship and adoration and service. Only due to god. Thank you very much.

The Divine Name, Yahweh, and the Shema

Uh now our first question addressed to our trinitarian panel from our non-trinitarian panel how many Lord yud hei vav hei's. Is the trinitarian position proposing not just how many gods but how many yud hei vav hei's is the trinitarian position proposing?

Two minutes.

There's one. Yahweh scripture is quite clear about that. Yahweh is is complex in his unity. Which is why in genesis chapter 18. Yahweh quite explicitly in hebrew is dialoguing with abraham and sarah here On the earth one.

Yahweh the same. Yahweh who sits enthroned in heaven. So the scripture is unambiguous about that that there's one god only one. Yahweh only. And also there is one father one son one spirit Who is all part of this one god the way he's made himself known.

So there's no ambiguity. No mystery. No difficulty one. Yahweh complex in his unity the overall testimony of scripture. It is very important to recognize that the greek term kurios is used of jesus as his primary designation in the new testament.

And that is the very term that is used to render The divine name the tetragrammaton in the old testament yahweh, which is the specific identification of god. So in these texts in the new testament that identified jesus as yahweh We have inspired commentary that tells us exactly who jesus is.

We have old testament texts that tell us that yahweh places the sins of his people upon the messiah. And so clearly the father is identified as yahweh and yet hebrews chapter 1 verses 10 through 12 John chapter 12 there are numerous places where jesus is identified as yahweh.

And of course the spirit is the spirit of yahweh. So we have one name and we have to allow all of the new testament text to speak. We can't start with the presupposition of unitarianism and say well i'm going to enforce this upon the text.

We have to allow the text to instruct us and we have to allow for what took place Between the testaments in the incarnation of jesus christ this great event which then Forms the very matrix of the new testament revelation itself.

Gentlemen, thank you, uh, our Non-trinitarian panel. 90 seconds.

If you identify jesus as yahweh and you identify the father as yahweh, I leave you to count out how many yahweh's that are there. You identify jesus as yahweh and you identify the father as yahweh. I think that makes two yahweh's.

That's dangerous. If you then say all three together a yahweh, you've got another use of yahweh. So we've got yahweh. X is jesus another x. The father is yahweh. Holy spirit is also yahweh. That's another x.

Those three x's make one x. Because they're calling my colleagues my good colleagues here are calling all three together Yahweh this word. Yahweh is finding lots of reference and I find that too difficult.

Jesus said clearly There's only one lord one kirios. He never claimed to be yahweh. He claimed to be yahweh's agent and he claimed to be the lord messiah of psalm 110 1 which governs the whole of our discussion or should.

Michael you referenced in uh, genesis 18 that uh where hashem spoke to abraham. And uh, you said that this very clearly was was hashem there speaking directly to him uh for 2 000 years up to the time of yashua or 1500 years up to the time of yashua.

The jewish people never identified it in that manner. To this day, they still do not identify it in that manner. You're changing how these are looked at. These passages are looked at from the way. They have been through the ages through the centuries.

Now when you sure came. He he didn't come. This isn't something that he came and said look you've missed it. You've been misunderstanding everything. This isn't something that was addressed that we have in the in the new testament.

Just to reply to that directly, uh, joe with all respect you completely Misrepresented the jewish position in that we don't have jewish texts talking about genesis 18. Between the time it was written and the time of yashua.

That's number one. Number two, jesus did tell him to correct things and he said this is the father that you haven't known. You've read the scriptures and haven't seen him and he made explicit identification of himself with yahweh.

John 8 58 which i'm sure will come to before abraham was i am. Not only so jewish scholars today. Benjamin summer professor at jewish theological seminary says the plain reading of genesis 18 is quite clear about yahweh appearing in bodily form.

And that any jew faithful to scripture and jewish tradition should have no problem with the trinity. You should also check the talmudic discussion of genesis 18 because it points in this very direction of an identification.

Physical identification of yahweh with the one who is there but i'm beholden to the scriptural text, which is quite clear. But I wanted to correct the misrepresentation that you just gave not only that but the scriptural text tells us in john 1241 after a citation of isaiah 6 10 in isaiah's temple vision.

These things isaiah said because he saw his glory and he spoke of him. The only his in the context is jesus if you ask isaiah. Who did you see in your temple vision isaiah's response to me? I saw yahweh.

If you ask john, who did you see. His response is jesus. How can a monotheistic jew who says the shema? Identify a mere man as the one seen by isaiah in his temple vision of yahweh sitting upon his throne.

One yahweh quite simple you may make it difficult. It's quite simple for me complex in his unity because he's god. He's not a rock. He's almighty god complex in his unity. Thank you.

92nd response. Yeah, one yahweh is. Not. So if you're going to say jesus identified as yahweh, that's one yahweh. Now, let's identify the father as yahweh. That's two yahweh's now. The third one is yahweh.

You've got three yahweh's. You can go on saying all three together a yahweh also and I see. That's your understanding. But you're identifying each of the three as x as yahweh. And you're then telling me that all three together are still x.

That doesn't make any sense to me at all. And I don't think it did to jesus because a jew agreed with jesus in mark 12 28. Proved to me that that jewish scribe was a trinitarian. And i'm with you. But unless one can do that, I don't understand anything anything about complex unity.

I don't find that in any dictionary. Any language that I ever learned knows nothing about complex unity at all. Echad means one one single check any lexicon. So all of this complexity about unity is meaningless to me until explained much more fully than you've done so far.

You haven't had a chance to do it yet.

Seeing God, the Angel of the Lord, and the Glory of Isaiah 6

Very good. Thank you. Uh, the next question addressed to our non-trinitarians by our trinitarian panel. Another yahweh question the tetragrammaton and passages like genesis 18. Yahweh appears to his people in the old testament in visible form and even talks with them face to face yet The new testament teaches that no one has seen god.

How do you reconcile these two truths. Continuation of the same? Discussion two minutes gentlemen.

The way that I see this what he saw what came and addressed him was a shelia. It was uh an agent uh an angel the lord that was Representing. We had this throughout the scriptures throughout the tanakh Uh throughout jewish understanding.

Big a big difference I see between the western world and the eastern world is that the Uh, the context of the agent Uh is an overwhelming Context and it explains to me Uh, most of the passages that we have in the scripture.

We have many many times where it talks about the angel the lord wrestling with with jacob we have the angel the lord appearing to to different ones and But it'll have in the context that Hashem is there.

But it's a it's an agent and that is just the the way that we have other scriptures.

Rebuttal, yeah, the problem I have with that is that. The bible could not possibly say it any more clearly. You simply can't accept it. Therefore you have to reinterpret it. Genesis 18 at any time reading yahweh along with two angels appears.

The two angels go on to sodom. Abraham stays with yahweh and it's him explicitly. It doesn't say an angel doesn't say malach. I don't have anything like that. Isaiah 6 isaiah sees the lord high and lifted up.

He says oily. He need matey. I'm undone the the the seraphim cry out kadosh kadosh kadosh. I don't know it's followed to they're worshiping. Yahweh. And john 12 explicitly says that that's the one that isaiah saw who is Jesus and we can't get away from that.

Exodus the 24th chapter. They saw the god of israel. And yet he didn't smite them. That's not a vision. That's actually seeing him. These things are quite explicit if no one has seen god at any time and these people saw him.

Who did they see they saw the son the one through whom the father is made known? It's wonderful. It's scriptural. It's true. It's exactly what the apostle john writes to us at the end of his prologue of john 1 18.

No one has ever seen god. The monogamous theos the only god who is at the father's side. He has exegeted him. He has made him known. He has revealed him. I submit to you that a mere man who came into existence at a point in time in bethlehem cannot be the one who exegetes who gives a perfect revelation of the infinite god.

The writer of the hebrews said that jesus is the exact representation of his being. Uh, that is too big a category for a mere creature. Uh, this one is identified as yahweh. That is the way we must understand it.

Okay, 90 seconds to respond the mere creature I hope you'll catch that word mere this begs the question all the time if god ordains that his supreme sinless lamb Can do all these things so be it. He's not a mere creature.

He's not just a man. He's a unique man, but back to the angel of the lord. Stephen, you know did not identify that Angel of the lord as a son. He did not he said an angel spoke to moses. I would start with stephen there.

I'll also go to judges 16 Where you'll find that the angel of the lord is distinguished from yahweh. If you want to offer a sacrifice to yahweh do it said the angel of the lord. He's not himself. The angel of the lord is not is not jesus pre-existing because you can't see god.

So it makes no sense to say jesus is god, but they saw him. Let's say that again. You can't see god. Nobody's seen god and lived so don't tell me then the son of god was there He's god and they saw him.

That doesn't make a lot of sense. So I don't think the right of hebrews was wrong when he said god spoke to a son only in these last days. Not before he was one two very important text over and over um.

There's just piles of passages. Uh new testament and the tanakh of the shaliak of the sent one. Now uh. Over and over yeshua makes statements. In fact in the book of john He says I am the sent one from god over and over.

He referenced god as his god um he. In the role of the shaliak he is totally representing Hashem. When you see him you see the father. He is the the image. I agree with what you said. He's the same essence of the father.

He is the perfect image of the father. And when you say a mere man, I don't see him as a mere man. He's as the first to dom.

He's as the first to adam time up, uh. Final response 90 seconds.

The fact is you say he's created therefore. He is mortal and the scriptures are quite clear that he is pre-existent. Uh, it's so fascinating that the text you quoted are the ones we didn't quote. You quoted from exodus 3 and judges 16 that make reference to the angel.

We weren't quoting that. We were quoting Genesis 18 which you haven't touched yet in terms of truly answering that exodus 24 isaiah the sixth chapter. Those are quite explicit. Uh, and when you talk about ahad earlier, let's just remember genesis 2 24 when adam and haved adam and eve.

The two become one when the tabernacle is built in exodus 35 that all of the pieces together become one. Tabernacle ahad simply means one and the god we worship is one complex and his unity. I'm simply putting scripture together and saying I believe what's written.

I don't have to come up with all these different ways out because I accept what's written. It's again very simple and as john said isaiah said these things because he saw his glory and spoke of him. That's a very straightforward passage.

I think we need to have an exegesis of isaiah 6 and john 12 if you're going to say well. It's not really yahweh. It's just someone representing yahweh. How can that be his glory? It's very important to understand you must listen to the presuppositions that are being brought to this discussion.

You can't simply assume unitarianism, I believe. Uh that the gentlemen across the table are assuming unitarianism rather than proving unitarianism. Both unitarianism and trinitarianism must derive itself from the inspired words of scripture.

It can't simply be assumed and then read into the text itself.

Pre-Existence, Coming from God, and Returning to God

Thank you very much. Our next question addressed to our trinitarian panel from our non-trinitarians. In the time frame from adam to the first century Did the jewish people view god as existing in a triune form god the father son messiah and holy spirit.

Two minutes.

Oh, we don't have a lot of jewish literature. Uh, that's that's extant that gets into theological discussion. Uh, certainly it affirms the oneness of god. I affirm that you you may challenge that but i'm affirming the same thing Yeshua affirmed and the same thing paul affirmed and the same thing isaiah affirmed.

Uh, most of the discussion, uh has to do with either legal issues, which you'll find in dead sea scrolls some discussion there or or other eschatological issues. But they're they're certainly as far back as we can go in jewish tradition.

Uh as it begins to evolve after the time of jesus. We find things like the shekhinah the manifest presence of god on the earth we we find a developing theory of the spherote which which are the Of the emanations of god because there's the constant question how can the infinite eternal invisible god Be manifest and touchable on the earth.

So we have the answer through the gospel the wonderful good news that the son Came into the world and revealed god to us as the sent one, of course. Uh, but other jewish literature then begins to react against this in the centuries that follow.

But I would agree with professor benjamin sommer that any jew who's true to the scriptures and jewish tradition should have no problem With god's trinity and I think we also need to look at the indications Of that that are found in the old testament.