After show of debate, Trinity vs Unity with Slick vs Xavier.

Hey Charlie, hey, I'm listening to Marlon sign off. Oh, there he goes

You're listening tomorrow and sign off. There he goes. What? Yep. Yep. Very well

I was listening to Marlon sign off on the gospel truth there. He's a valuable resource.

I think he's a good guy Where am I hearing myself here?

Let's see. What's going on? I'm here. Oh, there it is right there.

Okay, but I'm only hearing I'm only hearing one of you. Okay, there we go Confuse myself with the windows open

Let me just get back to the I just had it so the room that we're both in There we go.

Got it. Okay Now you're gonna do that right there. Yeah, you're gonna give people a link to join us if they did

And I'll put it in here Also, yeah, I meant the link to stream yard. Yeah, see my link right here.

I already put it on the car on Facebook Oh, I didn't go there. Okay. Yeah, that's all right So come on in tell us what you guys thought

I'll be right back Okay, my questions were not asked during the lesson from Matt slick. Okay, Charles You want to come in here?

And if you want you can come in or just ask the question there and I'll try and answer it All right so Okay Okay, good

All right Shame Remy Matt did a great did great as usual. Thank you. Shame Remy who's

I missed a debate. Oh, Yeah, I thought it was a good debate he really just demonstrated some ignorance in several areas

It was it's pretty bad But that thing about you know, the

Old Testament meant God being seen he has God Almighty He's got the father that was seen and I asked him.

Well, who was it? It wasn't the father That really that really stumped him Alright Let's say well you guys gonna come in or You know, you know what stumped him is he thought you were saying what you were saying

Instead of knowing that you were reading the straightforward text So he couldn't agree with you

And then when you pointed out that it was a straightforward airtight text You're reading

Then he had to allegorize it or something and and get away from a straight forward reading of the text

So absolutely he understood what it said, of course, then he messed up Yeah Okay, we got let's see

David and Andrew and Tom you're gonna have it says your devices aren't connected

Here's a trick for those who don't know in your browser where it says stream yard up there

You know, there's a little lock you right mouse click on that and just to the left and it'll a menu will open up It'll give you access to doing stuff like that Okay So if that makes sense,

I meant to walk downstairs and turn the airco off Matt Hayes And because it's not connecting here like it was supposed to I can still talk on this one go downstairs and turn the airco

Down or you know, cuz too cold in here All right So give some feedback folks, would you you know?

One thing I want to say is if he doesn't believe that Jesus existed before the incarnation

How would he interpret the book of John chapter 1 verses 1 to 5?

John chapter 1 verse 1. Yeah, that'd be something to go through and to see what he would say There's a lot of different errors.

You could have gone into but the pre -existence of Christ, which I didn't want to get into too much

But it was really the focus was on the issue of the Trinity and he wasn't able to deal with that as As I said before No one's ever tackled that system that the

Bible that uses or that we use to get the Trinity No one's ever dealt with it they can't deal with it it's impossible

And so the Trinity still stands Yep Okay, come on back upstairs.

I love my tech I'm a tech geek Okay, let's get some feedback what you guys thought come on comments

Yeah, he couldn't separate the difference between the Father and the Holy Spirit If that's the case, why did you say be baptized in the name of the

Father the Son and the Holy Spirit, you know Yeah, there's that's an issue as well to see what he would say

What I think would be good is just have a just a discussion and let it go for two hours in different directions

That's what needs to be done. He did not understand the hypothetic Union. He did not understand the communicative idiom atom

So when he asked the questions God can't die Demonstrated his lack of understanding in those areas and like I was saying if I'm gonna debate somebody and they say

Matt You don't understand this. You're gonna study this I take that seriously And I'll say, okay, where do

I go? What is the topic and I'll study it I do that because you have to represent their position

But if he's been debating the Trinity and he doesn't even know this stuff And he says the

Trinity hints towards modalism or tritheism. He's not representing our position at all

That's what's frustrating. Yeah, when he assails a position that is a Distortion of what we believe, you know,

I'll assail that position too because it's a distortion. I'll agree with him, but he he's

He's not taking his time to see What your point of view is in my opinion and that's always a time saver if you do

Yeah And Someone asked me if I'm a dispensationalist. No, I'm a covenantalist.

I see searches YouTube good Okay, so let's see read somebody. It's a great job. Thank you didn't know if not dispensationalist my job.

Thanks Jimmy did well Thanks Coco. Hi y 'all Marlene. How are you doing? Adam mookette.

That sounds like a cool name All they do is explain scripture away and use mint may could might

Michael become a dental. Oh, that's me Matt asked if he had fellowship with the

Father and the Son the Holy Spirit and Carlos tap -danced. That's true That's sure. He said the father the

Holy Spirit was the father That's a whole just oh, yeah anyway

Yeah, I always The what I always thought the one that's had a distorted view.

Yeah, they do Just doesn't come across as anything more than just a absolute

Nonsensical foolish Worldview and I've said many times before if I won this had tried to convert me to oneness

I would have run for Christianity altogether. Mm -hmm No, I have to say

I wasn't at the debate So I didn't see it, but I'm guessing there was no new arguments It was just a case of all the father the

Son and one and the we discount the Holy Spirit But I don't understand how they can discount any of the

Trinity Well, they have a preconceived idea of what it is and they make mistakes lots of them

Someone asked where's the link to the debate? There it is If you want to find it later, you just go here to calm calendar right there

And it's on for October 1st, and it's a it's the link to it on YouTube and you can see it

Tom Payne if you can need to leave and then come back in he's on it

He's on a desktop without a mic or a camera. Oh, I Noticed his note in private chat.

Oh, okay. All right. Dang neither one Well, you can type type in private chat if you want,

I guess. Yep I've got some desktops that are have a mic or camera connected use your phone You can get in your phone and do it just go to a phone and get a web browser and just type in stream yards forward slash bit is all that and you get in and you have a mic and a camera if you want to do that All right.

Yeah, I thought the issue of God Almighty being seen but not God the Father who was

God Almighty who's not God the Father that Stumped him. Well, he has a cognitive roadblock there

He's he's not catching the nuance of what's being said Yep, oh, yeah

Yep, and it's really not a nuance. It's a it's a Red brick dropped on your head.

If you look at the text carefully, it wakes you up. It wakes you up to He's got a

Bible contradiction there, doesn't he? Well from his way. Yeah the way he interprets it, you know

That's right Is it true that most are all oneness folks also hold to other errors as baptismal regeneration?

Yes I'm gonna turn the heat down now. It's getting too hot Yes, it's absolutely correct

The oneness Pentecostals hold to baptismal regeneration. I don't know what this guy holds to I still have to Fix it up so that anybody wants to debate me

Has to answer a set of questions and so I know what their perspective is That's what

I got to do. You can get a wealth of information on oneness at that link. I just dropped in And man, it looks like you're trying to Get to a certain point but time right now.

I don't know if you remember it was like one minute left He wasn't answering yes or no. He kept saying

Something about the father through the Holy Spirit the son through the Holy Spirit or something like that Fellowship.

Yeah. Yeah, I was trying to remember I was trying to see what you were what you were trying to get at that point well

The context was man is hot in here. Turn the heater off. The context was how do you have fellowship with God?

Because people don't think about that if God's gonna have fellowship with us That means that Christians millions all over the world can simultaneously have fellowship with God only

God can do that and Yet our fellowship was with Christ and Our fellowship with the

Holy Spirit. So this is the idea of fellowship with God implies the deity of Them furthermore if we get to that if I was in a discussion

I'd say do you agree? I had to force him into it because he wouldn't want to admit it but they have fellowship with each one Yes, that means his

God's deity Omniscience on the presence is how he has fellowship, right? Yes.

Well, they're each identified as persons. Now. What do you do? You see

Gee yeah, I don't know what Jesus was saying what he was saying about Jesus He's like a God he could pray to him, but it didn't make sense

And that's another area wanted to explore but we're talking about the Trinity. There's so many tangents to get into You can ask him about Revelation 1912.

That's right Yeah, no name except, you know that he has Interpretation of the 24th knows

Christ not being God because of ignorance. Yeah, he was ignorant about that. I addressed that it's a wedding feast

Idiom no man knows the day but the father alone and I brought up Revelation 1912

To the General Convention the Unitarian Universalist formulated five principles of universal faith. Ooh.

Oh, I put that in there, huh? Didn't even know it was there Man, Charlie puts up links on car.

I'm gone. I don't know that was there Yeah, hey, I'm looking at a Charles Williams Miller He needs a question answered

Wasn't Charles. I missed the question. We're not being answered by Matt here either. What is the question?

Just type in the whole question. Don't say look above I Did and I couldn't find it

Charles I asked you about confessing Jesus as Lord as part of the gospel Does he need to believe

Jesus is God to be saved? I answered that immediately Charles. I said yes, and the end

Jesus says unless you believe that I am you will die in your sins John 8 24

Okay, so the answer that is absolutely. Yes No, he didn't address

John 17 5. I brought it up only in passing Because it is an interesting thing that bring up and there's another thing you could bring about John 17 3 the only true

God If you go to Jude 4 it says Jesus is our only Lord and Master if that's the case and he wants to take it literally like that then

We have a problem there We're checking out American Baptist Church tonight and in their statement of faith mentioned creator

Savior and advocate sounds bad No I don't know Jesus is our

Advocate He's a mediator in that sense and a high priest who intercedes for us and that's

Hebrews 6 27 25 He's obviously our Savior And he's a creator included to Colossians 1 15 through 17 for that and also

John 1 through 3 It is can you readdress the question made by Carlos about God being one soul or three souls?

It's as in how many souls God has if one or three. Well, that's a very good question

It's one of the things I've been worrying wondering about If God is three persons

And there's nothing we can't say souls Wait, I'm hearing

Something in the house here. Hold on What's going on Charlie I got a question.

I saw you posted in the in the comments about Sodom and Gomorrah I think you were trying to say that there was a

Maybe God the Father and Jesus Christ both in the same passage or I'm curious.

Well, that was that was a passage that Speaks about the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis chapter 19 and The the verses the verse

I quoted was Genesis 19 24 and that's what Matt was quoting. Let me put the verse in there

It says that the Lord reigned on Looks like he didn't post or maybe it is

Yeah, the Lord reigned on Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the

Lord out of heaven Okay in the in the Hebrew. It's Jehovah reigns on Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from Jehovah in heaven

So it's just an indication that I I Read what

Dylan said? Of the plurality and you know, he got stuck on the shema of Israel here.

Oh Israel the Lord our God the Lord is one you know The word for one in the shema is echad okay, it's a composite one a

Unified one. Okay. It's not the word in Hebrew. Yeah heat or yeah kid

You almost have to kind of cough with it. If you're speaking Hebrew Yeah kid is a singular one

Okay, a one and only one but in the shema it's a unified one the same as when they took up and brought a grape back on a pole

Okay, one great. It was what it was It was the pole on the shoulders of the servants who was carrying a big old grapevine with a lot of grapes on it you had a

Have two guys to carry it. It's called a great Echad it's a unified one one of the same

Substance or essence? Okay This is the idea. The shema is actually friendly doesn't prove but is very friendly to Trinitarian theology

But he's of the opinion that it disqualifies Trinitarian theology, which is exactly opposite of the

Hebrew language so that's that's something he should have studied or If he did he missed it.

I asked Carlos. Why did Jesus call himself the Son of Man and what it means? You got a good article on that too man.

Oh, you know, I just posted it in Twitter some days ago, I think All right

So we've got people listening now if you guys want to know how to debate this a little bit more and be able to articulate the

Trinity and You have to understand that it's related to the person of Christ as well So what you have to do

I would if you are interested go to CARM and read up articles on the Trinity Just you have to read 8 ,000 of them because there's a lot there but just read, you know the

Trinity how it's derived and Also, you'd understand what the hypothetic

Union is and the communicatio idiom atom as they relate to Jesus Doesn't take a lot of study, but you could read these articles and you know

If you come on sometime you can discuss some certain get make sure you understand them and that's how you answer most questions

Questions I'll post them as you're talking about them and then they can access them later and and Take your time and their leisure with their

Bible open. Hopefully like a Berean. Yeah, act 1711 and see If they cut the mustard, but I've gone through them with a fine -toothed comb and you do a good job.

Thank you You know, it's it's there and I could not help but say to him several times that he is believing a false

God false Christ false gospel and he's on his way to hell and it you know, it's not me attacking.

It's I'm informing him This is a serious thing. This is not just a debate to win something, you know, the idea is look you understand you're believing a false

God and so Yeah, I had to I just say it, you know I told him before the debate when we're just kind of three of us before it started.

I Said that too So well a passionate communication of the truth is better than the soft communication of a lie and if if he

If the Lord works on him and cracks him like he cracked me he'll he'll figure that out. That's right.

That's right Anyway, there's those There's those articles that if somebody wants to go through them.

That's a real good springboard into the topic good Good Dahlia's thinks he mocked

Christ. I I didn't catch that if he did then shame on him But I joined it a few minutes late.

So he might have done it at the beginning. I don't think you did Maybe I just missed it. Let's see

Okay, what everybody got any questions or comments just what do you got okay Good equip comments questions

I'm actually trying to read the article on Irene ism Aryan ism. Okay that Charlie put up in the link.

It's very in the private chat. Yeah modern Yeah, modern -day Aryan ism is just dressed up in a suit of clothes that comes to your door as the

Jehovah's Witnesses they've Arius was a very

A Intellectual guy and he made some

Arguments that seemed to be strong But he was an error, but they've kind of synthesized some of his best stuff down Some of his best errors and promoted them.

So Yeah, watch the Bible and track society there. They're a good representative of modern -day

Aryan ism and There you go I was just reading that path that paragraph in the article and didn't it didn't surprise me at all

It makes a lot of sense. What I mean if you've studied Aryan ism, you go. Wait a minute. I know those guys

Mm -hmm. Yeah. Yep as I was reading it. Yep the few times that they've knocked on my doors and Come back

Mind you I've only had the comeback once Mm -hmm well, if they if they find out, you know what you're talking about you get crossed off their list because there's plenty of people that don't know their doctrine and those are the people they want to get with and Plant their seeds of error and get people tangled, you know, they take advantage of well -meaning people

They take advantage of people who have a good Constitution Humanly speaking that want to do right and live ethically or something they take advantage of those people

They reel them in and once they're hooked and committed to it human nature says once you commit yourself to something

It's very hard to get out of it because what I was wrong. I made a mistake No even pride won't let you admit you were wrong a lot of people have gotten into it and wished they hadn't and Then it takes the

Holy Spirit to actually Work on them You plant seeds and Me and Matt water them and the

Holy Spirit will come along and he'll harvest at the right time But without without the

Holy Spirit covering the whole the whole Situation they don't have a chance

Adam said Genesis 126 and Isaiah 44 24 that got him and it did he couldn't answer it

Yeah, yep Yeah, there's a lot of little things but yeah You know,

I say if Isaiah 48 it's always been a good one for me because I'm like, yeah I read I read in in verse 12 of Isaiah 48.

It's Jehovah talking clearly and as he goes on and on and on You get down to verse 16

And what's he say? And now the Lord God and his spirit has sent me

My goodness, there's an Old Testament friendly verse if we wanted to take the Trinity into consideration

That's a funny way for Jehovah to talk. I Mean the

Trinity reconciles it easily Yeah, and to go off topic for a little bit

I was actually having a couple of months ago I was buying some silver at a shop and I Bumped into a

Taoist and he was trying to tell me that Jesus as a four -year -old Made a journey to somewhere to find out that he was wrong

The Bible says in Acts or in Luke 2 that Jesus remained in subjection to his parents

They didn't go at four years old someplace Yeah, what got me laughing was when he said he was four.

I thought four -year -olds don't make journeys Yeah Yeah, probably to India or some exotic place

To some teacher that told him he was wrong and then he corrected himself somehow I don't know how stupid that it just sounded stupid from the get -go.

So I was writing it off immediately Yeah Well, yeah You know four years old going out knowing, you know, he'd have been under the law

He's had to remain to subjection to his mother and father. He could have broken the law That's a powerful verse Matt because it also says that the son is subject to the father

That doesn't mean he's inferior to the father anymore than Jesus was inferior to Mary and Joseph it was his rightful rightful place to be in subjection to them, so it's not a a qualitative term it it's

It's an appropriate term for him in the incarnation absolutely So Chuck Chuck in there says

The idea of God having three souls or one soul That's an interesting discussion because there are certain aspects of the

Trinity We cannot delve into very deeply because it's there's mysterious aspect to it We know that there's three persons because that's how

God reveals himself, but God is one being So we would say in one sense. He has one soul one essence

But it's we we see it manifested to us as three simultaneous Persons how that relates?

We don't know and We could talk about in nuances of logical variations

Of issues that may relate to it. So, you know What's the issue of soul and how does it relate to God because if God is a being who's alive?

He's gonna have to have a soul. Can we have a soul who then is three persons and And a human person has a soul which was consistent with hypothetic union that there's a human nature and a divine nature

And then we get into what's called diathletism and some other stuff. So it's it's a complicated thing and it's worth

It's worth getting into but I don't know if we have any answers How they can relate because there's something

I've thought about for a long time And I want to talk to some really advanced theologians about it our friends that got questions org

They have a an article on it It's a short article and it and it kicks the idea around and and they're generally pretty sound when they kick things around generally

Yep. Okay. Let's go. Oh Hey, gee wah. I'm move. You had his fellows. Tell us how to pronounce your name and put your put your thing

So you can hear you Okay, I have another mic here. I'm not using. Okay How do you say your name?

It's OJ. You are OJ. Guam. Oh, that's cool. So what language is that?

it's Well, it's a tribe from Nigeria anyway, would you give ammo are you from Nigeria?

Yes, where are you right now? I'm in the UK. I live in the UK actually. Okay. All right.

Yeah, I've got it we've got a friend who's in Nigeria and We didn't wasn't there today because they shut the internet off and I like African languages.

I didn't sound cool and So I think one of them speaks we have two guys there one of them speaks

Swahili, which I like Swahili and then something else I'm well, I don't know We have so many languages in Nigeria just in Nigeria.

We have about 250 languages. I Understand English is a pretty common language though in Nigeria.

Oh, yeah. Yeah, it is. That's the lingua franca there in Nigeria That's what we speak. Yeah, and that's why and in fact, that's why

I can speak English Okay, and you and plus you have a slightly African but British accent too.

So it's even better Really? Okay, I didn't know that. Thanks. Yeah, a little bit a little bit of British in there.

I can I just hear it a little Okay. Wow, that's interesting. Yeah, I Thanks a lot.

I watched the debate. It was quite interesting I'm a non trinitarian

But I'm still willing to engage or other trinitarians just to clarify certain things to ensure that time, you know

Because there's certain questions I haven't had I haven't sat Satisfactorily, so maybe today you might just very few.

I wouldn't want to take much of your time. That's okay. Let's ask away Okay, so so let me so Matt Without the demonization and everything.

I want you to also see where some non you trinitarians may be coming from the problem one of the problems

I have and I asked that question during the debate and Unfortunately, we didn't get to Answer that now.

I know you've talked about the You know, there's some very, you know, magnificent terms used like the incommunicado something and all that but where the challenge is for non trinitarians, and I would like you to at least appreciate that is that The very explicit texts of scriptures and that's where we have a problem.

You see that the very explicit texts of scriptures Tend to support you in tyrannies might give you an example because more with what we wonder

Why is it that if Paul knew that there were three persons in one God? Why would he see we have one

God the father? I mean think about let's think about logically if he he already had the experience with the

Holy Spirit. He already knew the Jesus Christ he already knew the God of Israel and then why would he say in first Corinthians chapter 8 verse 6?

But we have only one God the father and then distinctly one Lord Jesus Christ and then in Ephesians chapter 4 verse 6 he says one

Lord and father of all and then Jesus Christ will say things like Eternal life is to know you the only true

God and they distinctly to know Jesus Christ whom you've said So the question I'm asking Matt is the struggle a lot of Unitarians have is not in the fact that we do not acknowledge

Some you know the high Christological view the scriptures presented by Christ is the fact that the explicit texts of Scriptures, you see that that's the key the explicit texts of scriptures tend to support

Unitarianism, so how do you deal with these verses that are very explicit and why don't we see? Verses such as we have one

God the Father Son and Holy Ghost or this is eternal life that we that they might know you I whom you have sent alongside the

Holy Spirit as the only true God, you know So we don't see this kind of verses it becomes a challenge

So they work backwards Why would God not be so explicit like that? I believe is because there are people who are not predestined to be saved and he hides the truth from those who are going to hell and He does this in in Mark 4 10 through 12.

They say why do you speak in parables? And he says he speaks in parables. So people will not be saved

They'll not be forgiven He actually says that This is what Jesus said

So the idea of truth that is there is known by the Holy Spirit and Jesus who is the truth who indwells us?

We will bear witness of the truth and So this is my theory Okay That one of the things is that he will hide it from those who don't have the mind of Christ Don't have the mind of God and they're gonna go to one verse for example

And say all the other ones can't be true in this relationship because of this one verse and so we show you something

Okay, so for example, he went to John 17 3. All right, which is the only true God. All right

Now I'm not sending the scripture against scripture, but I'm going to show you something if you go to Jude 4

For certain persons have crept in unnoticed those who are who were long beforehand marked out for this condemnation

Ungodly persons who turn the grace of our God into a licentiousness and deny our only master and Lord Jesus Christ So it says there that Jesus is our only master and Lord Okay, if we only had that verse for hypothetically that was the only verse

Then God the Father and the Holy Spirit could not be our Lord Right, but if we only had

John 7 3 John 17 3 We can't have Jesus being God in flesh if we only had that just that verse no context and stuff like that And so what we see here is that there are things in the scriptures

Which I don't want to use word exaggeration because that's too broad of a word but the Jews would say things like this the only

Lord the only one and It wasn't always the case because they would speak like that You know, they'd say truly truly truly

I say to you What do you mean truly truly truly or truly truly? What do you mean?

It just you just speak truly you only need one truly. Why two? Why three? Why is he our only

Lord and master and yet God? The father's called our own the only true God, but yet Jesus is also called

God. So what's going on? How do we harmonize these the only way I can see to harmonize them is to say what

Jesus was doing as he's talking to the Jews he's talking in refutation of Doing two things one is refutation of the false gods and polytheistic ideologies that are around the place in the time

But he's also as a man Obligated under the law to have someone he would call

God And so he would say God the father and he would naturally speak to the

Jews as his disciples say he's only true God But are they going to be thinking?

This way are they gonna be then saying well that means there's only one true being who is the God Jesus can't be

God because why would Thomas and say to Jesus my Lord and my God? Why would Paul later say that Jesus is

God and he does and why would? You know the writer of Hebrews quote and reference

God saying but of the Son he says I thrown Oh God is forever and ever so what we do as Trinitarians is we don't just look at one

Week and we say John 17 5 is a little tough 1st Corinthians 8 8 6 is a little tough

How do we do that as Trinitarians? Okay. Well, wait a minute. Look at Jude 4 our only

Lord Lord and Master. Okay. What about that? Colossians 2 9 in Jesus does all the fullness of deity and bodily form.

Why would God in Hebrews 1 8 called Jesus God? So all of these are true

The issue then becomes how do we we find a way to harmonize them so that they all make sense together

If I were to say it's let's say you said and you're not going to do this I can tell you're intelligent and polite and everything almost as humble as me, but that's okay.

You know, you're close If you were to say John 17 3 and I said

Jude 4 We have a battle. Who's the only Lord and Master Jesus?

And you say no John 17 3 are only God We would go be going setting the scripture against each other and that can't work

Obviously and we can't say one is above the other we have to go. Okay, they're equal How do we make them equal in logic?

Now one of the things that he made a mistake in a debate tonight I don't if you saw it or not, but he said it's an issue of philosophy and not really a biblical issue

That's not correct. We do use philosophy, which is the Bible says don't use vain philosophy

Colossians 2 8 and Paul in Acts 17 quoted pagan philosophers who he studied it

So we want to use logic and that's we have to do so If we only had

John 17 3 we wouldn't have a case for the Trinity if we only had John Jude 4 we wouldn't have a case for the

Trinity. We only had Isaiah 43 43 10 it was only one

God number four none that we wouldn't have a case for the Trinity But if we only had let us make man in our image

Wait a minute. God's plural But if we only had that we'd say

God's plural and If Jesus, you know, we only had it we do one verse at a time, you know before Abraham was

I am we have to know The context we have two verses 314 we'd say well He's God and if he only had that and the father wouldn't be

God and the son and the Holy Spirit wouldn't be God So when we take one verse, this is what

I'm trying to say. We'll take one verse and then we not Not elevated. I don't believe you're doing that but you're asking a good and logical and fair and proper question in light of this

What do we do with these other things? We can also say in light of this. What do we do with that?

Because it works both ways So what's a Unitarian do John 17 3 is the one against which we discuss we decide others.

I could say Well Jude 4 is what we go with against others

Why do we do that because what we do is beg the question you do it and I do it to logical fallacy

But we have to do it. We both assume things consistent with our presuppositions Otherwise, we're not being consistent with our own views.

So you're unitary. I guess you're a Unitarian, right? Is that right or you're not sure? Okay, not like Carlos.

I have a high crystal of much more higher Christological view about I would say let me put it this way.

Um, and that's why I I'm quite careful and I was normally I would have asked some shamone when he demonizes us and call some of us heretics

I'm gonna ask him. Would you call Tertullian a heretic? I know many Tertullian Tertullian Tertullian the church father

Tertullian. Yeah Well, I have a little hearing loss too but Tertullian Tertullian the one who is what

Trinitas just a matter origin who had this logos theories would you call them heretics because You know, that's why

I think we should be careful because if you actually Look if you actually consider if we're to honestly consider what

Tertullian thought Matt if we have to be honest I wouldn't see why you wouldn't call him a heretic. He believed that the son was

He believed that the the father brought the son into being he believed that his son was Greater in substance and the father was greater in substance than the son.

So we put all these things together It's even worse than what some of us believe but yet I know

Trinitarians will not dare call people like Tertullian heretics, you see, although that's another another issue

Yeah, you're gonna have to be careful of Sam. You have to be careful of Sam. I've known Sam for years I have a cell number we talked every now and then but Sam is moving more into apostasy.

Yeah Yeah, I don't understand that. I wouldn't want to take your time. No, no, no ask questions.

That's questions I wish on one condition on one condition though. Yeah. Yeah, you have to speak some of your native language.

I just want to hear it Sadly enough, I'm gonna tell you something that it's quite embarrassing. I don't know how to speak my native language

You know why because yeah I'm gonna explain that to you because my my dad is from a tribe called aura and my mom is from evil

Unfortunately, you can't learn your language except your parents speak to you or my dad and my mom were separated.

Guess what? I was stuck with my dad. My dad did not know how to speak his own language

He knew how to speak his mother's language Well, let's speak one of them let's hear what you know teach me anyone oh

So you only know English? All right, when I'm going when I'm gonna pose or you know, when I'm going I'll say Here I just spoke something

I said, oh, yeah way Oh Okie okie okie

Okie okie So I would have loved much really when you have the time

I would have loved the situation where We have an open discussion where I'll ask you lots of lots of questions, but I won't want to do that now

I think I just have to and I would just want okay well, I would really want to have a discussion where I could really

Ask questions so that at least maybe Trinitarians could also understand some of the struggles many

Sincere non -trinitarians have not just because they want to be obstinate But because issues they have to deal with okay

So the I have an idea then what if you and I were to set up a time and we can have a Just like this just you and I talk you ask questions and we can record it and people can listen

That'll be beautiful. That'll be so wonderful. I would love that. I love that But I would like to ask you two brief questions now, but I had to send me a $20 bill and with No, no, go ahead ask the questions go ahead.

Okay. So another another question I would like to ask Matt and I want you to consider that because you talking about the

Shema one of the challenges some of us would also have as you as I don't know I don't

I'll just say non -trinitarians because if I say unitarians people will say oh he believes

Jesus was created and what's up? I'm being careful now. I would I would really in general Refer to myself as a unitarian

But in context I have a much more high Christological view than most Unitarians, so let me first say that I would lean towards more of the

Tertullians just a matter about what he believed about the logos and all that inclined in that direction not perfectly with them

But inclined in that direction now, the question is this when the scribe Responded to Jesus With regards to the

Shema. I want us to consider this question Because I want to I want to ask you whether you believe that the

Jews in the time of Jesus now Let's forget about what? You know, they said that the

Babylon and the two paths theory and all that Let's just concentrate on the Jews and Jesus in this time when the scribe

Responded to Jesus after Jesus has quoted the Shema because I still had this Controversy about it had been one as a compound unity, but I think what is not also said it's a it's it also works

Both ways it could be a compound unity and it could also be a singularity as well. But the context would determine that now

The scribe said you have said it. You're right. There's one God and no other but him no other but him

I would like to ask your opinion. Do you believe that when the scribe said no order, but whom do you believe that that him?

Referred to a single person or three persons in your opinion Well, the question is difficult to answer because it's saying you're asking what did he think?

And I can't do that. But what I could do is say a Jew Typically would think of God as a single person typically, okay, but When I was in seminary our

Hebrew professor made a very interesting statement and he didn't prove it He didn't back it up with all this documentation

But the guy his idea of reading of fun was reading Hebrew and he was he taught on a seminary level he was a godly man,

I believe him and He made this statement he said it in ancient Israel Before the time of Christ there are records and writings of Jews discussing the nature of God as being plural

They didn't come up with a Trinity They were said it wouldn't really they were my mentions of two or three, but they weren't really focusing but they were they were dealing with the issue of the plurality of God in the

Old Testament that's revealed and And I can quote you some of the reasons and some of the verses that are that led to that kind of a thing because I've studied that but uh

So, what did he think? I probably thought of God as a single person. Okay, Abraham probably did but maybe not

Do you know why I asked you that question? Do you know actually that question because the implication has massive the the the thought about that has massive

Implications and I would explain because that would mean to me that's to me my thinking

And I believe you're right that he taught as a single person. So if he was on the same page with Christ And they were discussing about the

Shema and It means that the Jews understanding of the Shema described.

He was a scribe Mind you if he's understanding that God was one person when he said know about him

And what supports that to me is the fact that Jesus Christ himself identified the God of the

Jews without controversy When he said my father who glorifies me is the one you claim to be your

God So it would seem to me that if there wasn't any kind of controversy at the time of Jesus That is what the

Jews believed and what Jesus believed about one God at that time. What do you think about that?

Well When we talk about what a scribe would have thought he probably was thinking that God was one person

But right or wrong. We don't make a doctrine of what he said. We think he might have thought

So you ask you do you believe Jesus Christ is God in flesh? Okay, yes,

I believe that he's God in flesh in context I don't believe that he is a second divine eternal person

All right, I believe he came forth from the being of the father and was manifested as a human being Okay, that's my understanding.

Yeah, we'll get to that some other time But do you think the scribe would have thought that Jesus was that?

Probably not So what Jesus often did was he answered people in relationship to the questions that they answered good master

What good thing must I do to be saved? Are you keeping the law? And so, you know, what's the greatest commandment the

Shema, right? Here or Israel the Lord our God is one right and Jesus quotes that in Matthew 22 37

But it doesn't say it does that does not in any way refute the Trinity at all

You mean what the scribe said? So no what the Shema is What the Shema is and and it just doesn't refute the

Trinity. It doesn't prove oneness. It doesn't prove trinitarianism It doesn't refute either one.

It just says God is one The question will one what? That's the question

He's one God, he's one and and another thing is why would he say that why would he say

God is one now? You know as brought up the word ahead can mean a one group

Where he means one thing so it's like saying God is it's like saying

God's one group Because if they understood that That that Hebrew word and he says

God is one and then later Jesus is pointing himself as being divine It would make perfect sense.

It'd be consistent with what the Shema says Would not be consistent with Unitarianism Okay.

Okay, but but if the Jew if the but you agree that if the Jew thought at least in the

Jew thought that maybe Yeah, maybe if he thought that No other but him was referring to a single person in his mind that then will be consistent with Unitarianism if If right he could have he could have thought

Unitarianism and been wrong Okay, because the issue is what does the scripture teach and and I'm not saying don't don't think in like that because you're you're obviously

You're a good thing. I could tell but you know, yeah Nothing, don't think those things. It's just if you do it doesn't logically necessitate this or that You know, it's like the

Bible says there's only one God if it just says there's one God There's still you can still say well one

God was that mean here over there in Totality we can ask these fair questions now when

God says for example I don't even know of any other gods and there's none before none after now We understand there's just one period

Anywhere all place at all time Because it has to be clarified and I'm not just saying this right now

This is I don't know if you've listened to me before what this is what I do with people I say ask this question ask that question ask this question and sometimes

I'll ask questions. I know are semi ridiculous I do it on purpose because I want there's semi ridiculous to be addressed and we move on and We're not just doing the one thing

I want to do let's go the thing I don't think are necessarily true, but let's take a look at this

Anyway, because there's something important here and I do that a lot with people. So this is why you know

I'll say your questions are very good and and There are answers

I can answer most of them not every one of them. I'm not gonna say hey You say The last question the last question

I've because I've done it. I've done videos on the Trinity as well and The I have a

YouTube channel back to the Bible faith, by the way, if just in case well interview me on it All right.

Yeah, I would like to interview you on it I would like to have a discussion in details where you know, it's much more friendly

Atmosphere where I don't you know, we could just discuss regards or what you think about me or what I think about you We could still be civil and all that.

But the last question is this now the Tritism objection is what

I want to ask right the ism Uh -huh, the tritism objection is what I want to ask and I did a two -hour video that maybe you might want to see it and then

You might say you might try to come back and say oh, this is where you're wrong I understand why you had a problem with this, but this way around now this is where I have a problem and maybe

I want you to I want you to Maybe say something that may change my view the problem

Non -trinitarian see who still believe in some form that regardless of what trinitarian say

It still is to try to tritism is this and I want you to just patiently listen to me

Just patiently listen to me. So the trinitarian is going to come back and say things like You see you you're not listening to us

You don't know what our doctrine teaches and if you start on that footing and strum on us

Then you're not engaging us You have to first believe you have to first understand what we believe and then you can you can assess that But what

I my response to many trinitarians who say that is this I said, that's true You you think we are not listening to you, but are you listening to us?

So what some of us say is that we have heard you When astronomy you you're not you're not saying you're not saying you're not actively confessing that you worship three gods

We understand that we do know that you proclaim one God. We didn't we don't know that you confess to one

God But what we're saying is that when we unmask and unravel all the verbose gymnastics with the wordings

It tends to still be leading to three gods and I'm going to explain why a lot of people still come to that conclusion

I'm gonna ask you a question Mother, I want you to tell me why it's different It's like a person saying you see we have these three colors yellow red and green

Because they all share one divine color nature. We say they are one color not three colors I'm just telling you how it comes across or you say we have these three dogs

Coco jet and max Well, they all have because they all have that one dog nature

We don't say they are three dogs, but they are one dog and then we say but hey

Well, but as long as they are distinct this that distinct dogs There are still three dogs in some sense, but you say no, no, no, no, no, they have one nature as dogs

So they are one dog. You see you see what it's like saying the numbers three four five. They all have one number nature

So they are three. They're not three numbers for one number. So I'm only just trying to tell you how we are thinking this thing through I'm not saying you have to agree with me.

I'm trying to let you see why You see what I'm saying, I'm trying to let you know I was to struggle with When you keep saying no, no, no, no, we don't say that because look at it

Look at is this you have you have said that the father is eternal and he's God He's an entity.

So regardless of what you define as persons What you ask you're still maintaining that you have a second distinct person who is eternal and is also

God and there's a third person Who is also eternal and is God so it doesn't matter if you say they are one being

Australians we say or they have one nature just like I talked about the yellow red and I Thought is that you've already defined that there's one who is

God and is the person is distinct from another person who is God and is a person and is this thing from a third who is God and is a person and Why for all?

Practical purposes, but can we not say in some sense as well that there are three gods.

That's my Okay This kind of stuff was dealt with and worked on through church history

And there's some concepts here that I'm going to tell you and I'm going to speak to you

Not in a condescending way because I don't think you understand some of the concepts I don't mean that in an insulting way, but there are just some things that I don't think you're aware of and So when you say yellow red green

It's not the best analogy But I understand you're looking for a way to kind of relate things and you went to the idea of dogs so this is this gets more particular and So I had to be more precise when

I talk when I deal with these kind of topics by definition a dog is a an entity of itself a dog

There is a concept of What's called the one in the many are you familiar with the one in the many issue?

One of the many issue the one and the many Okay, so you're a man.

I'm a man. Charlie's a man and Otis is a man. So we have the essence of man ness manifested three times

Okay, a four times. Excuse me. I'm sitting in a chair. You're sitting in a chair. Otis is a chair

Charlie's in a chair. So we have one thing called chair and for particular manifestations

How is it that we can say I'm not gonna get in this too deeply How can we have one thing with four manifestations for particulars?

We have one dog. We have 50 dogs. We have one thing called dog

We recognize that you and I are in a store We're talking about this and I want to go to a new desk and there's five desks there.

They're all a desk How is it that we can say they're all a desk but different forms of the same thing we recognize the differentiation between them and Yet what we're saying is there's one thing called desk ness and there's particular

Manifestations of it one thing called Doug Ness dog Ness and particular manifestations now

There's this issue called equivocation. So let me illustrate it Mm -hmm

Time is past present and future the nature of the past is time the nature of the

Present is time the nature of the future is time So we would say they're all three time if I were to say time is past present future

Which is true But I said the past is time then am

I saying the past is the past present the future because if the past is time and Time is past present future

Then the past is the past present future and that makes no sense And a lot of times what the oneness people will do is think like that and they don't realize they've made a mistake in thinking and logic so we would say is time

By definition has this essence comprised of three things Past present future.

I'm just using this and when we say time in that sense the time in time

One means all of what time is but when we say the past is time

It's time to time to means the essence of what time is by its nature So we can say that your essence is a man.

My essence is a man You know, we have the same essence human nature, but there's manifestations of it

So I can't say man is is all people and I'm a man. Therefore. I'm all people

Because the man changes meaning in the in the words in the sentences. Yes, this is what happens

Go ahead. Okay, but what we would say that is that why would I agree that the man?

Even though they're like 7 billion people in the planet having one nature. Yeah, we asked just to 7 billion men

That's the argument. That's what we're saying. There are still there's still 7 billion men or 7 billion humans

Myself and Matt myself and Matt we have the same human nature, but I am Matt are still two men, right?

That's what we're also saying, right, but I'm trying to illustrate is not that there's two beings

But that the essence can have manifestations in different places. It's called the one in the many so if we're all out at a lake and We're fishing and we see, you know a flock of ducks flying it fly in.

Let's say to ten ducks We would recognize ten particular instances of one thing called duck

That's it it's called the one and the many now I'm gonna set this aside for a second

And I'm gonna talk about something and then come back to this a little bit later But I'm gonna ask a question. You may think it's not really related, but it is let's assume

God is one person one person and Personhood like you and I are persons, you know, we're talking we can agree.

We can disagree. I can hate you You can hate me. I can love you. You can love me. We could become friends.

We can have fellowship I say you and yours and me and mine we can exhibit the attributes of personhood, right?

Yes, because there's others Part of the manifestation of personhood is hey, how are you doing?

Let's talk man. I love you. I don't love you I'm pissed off at you. There's this Reciprocity, there's this otherness now think about this if God is one person from forever ago

Can he manifest the fullness of personhood when they get to the one in the many a little bit?

Can he manifest a fullness of being a person? Because if we're made in God's image

Genesis 126 and We think and we have relationships with others

Relationship is part of our personhood. We're made, you know today because God says it's not good to be alone

He made Eve Because that's how his design is but in oneness

Unitarian God is one and he's alone for forever And that's a problem because there's no true manifestation of fellowship

Reciprocity and the full fullness of personhood. That's a problem. We get into more issues of that So which means then and and think by analogy if we take a man and we put him

He's a we put him in a jail or cell no light. No heat. No cold.

It's just medium temperature No, no anything he has a bed and he gave him three meals a day no fellowship no communication

Nothing. He's just in this state Constantly we would call that torture

If God is one person forever is It torture.

It's just a question something to think about but let's look at the one in the many now I get into the issue of duality why that doesn't work and I'll skip that for now.

So God's a Trinity of Persons then form forever ago.

He has the full manifestation of personhood the full manifestation

Also Hebrew 1320 talks about the blood of the eternal covenant What's an eternal covenant?

Because the father sent the son which means a son was pre -existing and it says in John 1

Ephesians 1 for it says that we that God chose us in him from before the foundation of the world

That means the thing he had to choose us in him Was it for knowledge or was it that the the one in him the pre -incarnate

Christ was eternal? if that's before the foundation of the universe and The Universe is when

God created then it implies that there's a duality the very least in the Godhead which manifests full fellowship

So I'm going this kind of lightly But the idea the Trinity can solve the problem of the one in the many

God is one being many persons we'd say three He's then what we call the necessary preconditions for all intelligibility

It's a whole nother series of thoughts on logic universality Transcendentals won't get into all that but we get back to this level

Let me talk about the Trinity and one does people say as this guy said I have it in his notes

How many is one God? It's the wrong question It demonstrates he does not understand the logic of what the

Trinity is on at least in the deeper levels He doesn't understand logic itself. How many is one

Apple? It's one Apple So he actually sent me his notes.

How many is one God? That's a question. We got to ask what the Trinity what it's a nonsensical question

That's it that's the right question because a person Here's another thing.

A lot of people don't know In Latin, I think it was Latin. It was the the plays that they would do back in the back of forever ago, whatever

When they would do a play they would have a prosop on a In Greek a face, you know, it's prosop on but it they would have the in Latin.

They had these things called a persona persona Person persona a mask they would put in front of their face at a stick and it was a woman or it was a slave or it was a master or it was an animal or whatever it was and They would in that bet that persona was then the character that the actor would use and would speak from Okay, so the theologians are wrestling with this like you are and they're going okay.

We know there's only one God We also know there's plurality in the Old Testament and in New Testament about God we can go into that But what do we do?

Let's call them persons. Now. This is important because a Lot of time that people do now, they'll say you're a person they mean person as a being

That's not how it was used when the theologians adopted that word in the discussion of the

Trinity It's different and I've said this in debate. I say that Theologically significant word person related to the

Trinity is different than what you think a person is next -door neighbor And people think I'm stupid.

They go. No, you're just making them. No, you don't understand Because a person you know I could put

I could put a mask on it looks like you and I could imitate you or try to And and speak in your accent and things like or try, you know

And you can do the same thing with me because you know, it's a persona So what they did was they said we see that the

Father Son the Holy Spirit each have wills Each speak and they speak to each other

We'll call that persona They called it the person

So Theologically, it has a significance as it relates to the doctrine of the Trinity the theologians adopted that they weren't saying there's three gods

They didn't do that because they would have said there's three gods the challenge Matt's the challenge Matt. I'm following so far the challenge

Matt if they had said and I know that's not what the doctrine of the Trinity teaches and I think

Who's this a trinitarian they say is inclined towards partialism William Craig or something like that.

I don't know but if the argument was that these three personas Made up one

God then that would I'm not saying that's what the doctrine of Trinity teaches I'm saying that if that was the argument even though that would have been ludicrous

Then I think it may be that may have been a much more plausible argument But the challenge is that the

Trinity doesn't just say that these three personas are the one God It still maintains that each of this person has in a in and of himself is the one

God himself And he is distinct from the other one. No, no, no, no, no. No, no

No, it does not teach that each of the persons is the one God. That's not correct. Okay, can

I ask? Oh, I need to clarify this part because maybe that's but so but it It teaches that each of the persons is the fool the full being of God The full what we would say this is this is why the words become important each person is by nature divine

See God is divine. So God the being has a quality of divinity

The divinity is in the Father the Son and the Holy Spirit. It only belongs to God so what

I'll say to people there's only one God and There are three persons and each one is divine.

If I say there's only one God and each is God that's confusing There's only one

Apple and and each of the three apples are Apple what so what I say is no It's correct, but you have to understand the terms as we meet them

What I when you say one God what are you defining by that Tim go that's exactly the that's the right question

Okay, one God. Oh, I'm glad you did that good. You're seeing it One God means of all the beings deities out there

There's none except one One being who is

God That's it period just one God Now when we say that one

God and we say the Father Son Holy Spirit is God now the word God means divine quality

With the first term use of God means the one single entire being now we say

Jesus is God We're saying he has that quality of Godness That's what we're saying.

Okay, so that would mean that there are three Divine persons persons who all have the quality of Godness in them a divine thing in them

So it's not three gods It's not three gods If people say to me,

I've had Muslims say the Trinity I'm gonna be debating Muslim here in a couple of weeks on the Trinity Shabir Ali Shabir Ali I've debated

Muslims before and they say the Trinity is three gods I'd say why because a person has to be a

God who says They'll say You can't have three persons to be one

God. I'll say why not Show me the logic because that's what they're doing.

They're arguing logically one. God cannot be three persons That's a statement. I'll say

Demonstrate that to me. Let's write it on paper premise one one. God cannot be three persons define the word

God define the word person Okay, we have to define our terms This is why you cannot have three persons be one

God Well, let's see. No one has ever done it that I'm aware of in all by 41 years of debates and teaching

There's no logical necessity. It says it can't be possible. It doesn't mean it's true.

Okay, it doesn't mean it's true It just means it's not not true It's not refuted.

Okay, okay Sir sounds like I'm such a superior person and I am not

Let me say well, I don't really I don't know It's just culture too because maybe I have to explain something to you where we come from Those who are older than us.

Basically, we just are called respect It's just so when we see and I just guess you're probably in your culture

Really good -looking and really smart because sir, I'm gonna go with that. All right.

All right So this is the issue because we say Thomas called Jesus Christ God all right, the

Holy Spirit is called God and the Father is called God and These three distinct persons are not one another.

They're not each other. They're not one another, right? So they speak to each other, correct? Yeah, they speak to each other. So we

See I don't know have you heard about more monarchy culture in a tyrannism That's a very interesting one that just I what just what mana monarchy culture in a tyrannism is quite an interesting monarchy monarchy

Modal monarchy an ism Sorry modal monarchy an ism or Sabellian ism.

No, it's I don't know if you know this guy Josh Josh Swale He's a

Trinitarian who's going to speak us gonna wait, it's they call it monarchical he calls it well, I just Monarchial monarchy

Yeah, all right, so so That may be easier to relate with because they acknowledge one

Person as the one God the Father and then they say the other two are divine but the issue with treaties that they acknowledge each but individual persons as divine and distinct from the other but divinity necessitates self -awareness

Yes, and it's a maker of God if divinity necessitates that and each

In and of himself is called God and that person is distinct from the others I'm saying in some sense.

Why can't they be in that sense three gods because they're not Not because the Bible says there's only one

God and I'm critical for non -created after let me ask you Do you believe that Jesus has two natures? God and man they're just yes or no.

I won't get on you if you don't Okay, let me let me say something strange.

Let me say something strange. Let me let me say something strange Okay, you may not know if he does if he does

Then the divine nature the God nature will be the father and then the human nature will be the son That is how

I would see now. I will not see. Let me let me clarify. I will not say Jesus That's a distinct person from the father

Being God in the Trinity having one God nature then another Person who or rather another part of him the same person that has a human nature

I would have challenges to that because let me You'll see what

I'm gonna get at there's an idea and a concept Alright, there's a doctrine called

Dithelitism die means to and the Greek word. So leo means will to will wish to desire

Dithelitism applies to Jesus the reason I asked if you believe it is to two natures and and we can discuss that another time

But here's the concept If you do say well, I'll try and work with what you said if you believe that Jesus is the father in flesh

Is it not not exactly like that Let me just that's gonna get too too close, but I just want to get an idea across.

Okay, if Let's put this way. Let me do it this way Jesus is a human person at the very least we know that right?

There's a human aspect to him, right? Yes. Yes Let me make it easier basically the father has within him attributes, right?

I cannot explain everything but from within the father He brought fought something from within him to be manifest in human form.

I think that's Okay, here's a question

Because Jesus said I am thirsty. I will be with you always I'm thirsty as human attribution

I will be with you always is a quality of divinity that he will be with those people always everywhere

So he's claiming the divine attributes and the human attributes in the one person

I will be with you always I am thirsty You see. Mm -hmm

Now the human I and not we're not gonna say two persons in one God.

That's in one person. That's an historian ism the thing is that you can see that in Jesus the one person is a

Divine nature and a human nature because he says I will be with you always that's the divine and and I am thirsty That's the human

If he has a human nature than by necessity he must be

Possessing of a will otherwise, he's not human true Maybe if he's divine God by nature has divine will then the divine aspect also has to have a will

That's called Dithelitism two wills in the one person of Christ. That's and that's correct.

That's the right doctrine Monothelitism says they became a new third thing

Monothelitism one will no, but here's what we see This is logically necessary, right?

The human part has to have a will Otherwise, it's not human. The divine part has to have a will otherwise is not divine

Yet these two wills are Simultaneously existing as one person and the one person says

I am with you always And I'm thirsty the one person

We have one with plurality at the same time In the person of Christ who represents

God who is one being with three persons So we can see that there's a

Relationship you can understand in a person of Christ where there are wills that are necessarily part of each nature

That are in the one person because the one person says I am thirsty I'll be with you always the same person.

I claim the attributes of both natures This is called the communication of the properties inside what's called the hypostatic

Union. That's just what it's called So you can see that's possible right there Mm -hmm.

Now if it's the case, we have two minds you believe that this It's manifested as one.

Okay, and this and They're expressed as one, but we don't know how it works.

No one knows. Okay now Think about this. This is why this is so important.

This is where we get a little more deep if the divine will is in Christ Who he says

I? That means the I I'll be with you always that's if you and I were back then looking at him

We're looking at this man named Jesus and we see the human and the divine nature Well, we don't see the natures, but we see the manifestation of the natures

We see a manifestation of the divine nature when he walked on water We see the manifestation of the human nature when he goes.

Oh, man, I gotta get some rest because you know, he would sleep, right? So we perceive the divine through the human

We see him walk on water, that's the human being walking exhibiting the divine attribute

But if he's divine he has to have the quality of personhood Right.

Otherwise, he's not divine And if he's the person and Jesus is the one person and he's praying to the father

Then who's the father? He must be a person if he's a person he's out there

Not my will but your will be done the one my will right so it's necessitated logically

Necessitates that there's at least two persons in the Godhead Because we have

Jesus who has a hypothetic Union the divine Nature and a human nature and it logically is necessary that each nature have a will

Which this designates? Identity I have a will and you have a will and you and I are not in harmony and everything

Your decisions and my decisions are not in harmony. We're different We have different wills Jesus says in Luke 22 42 not my will but your will be done

So he's not saying my human aspect in the human side saying I don't want to do your will

It's not what he's saying. I don't want to do this because he didn't want to go through the crucifixion He didn't but he said that not my will but your will be done if he's talking to the father

Not inside of him in the incarnation He's talking to someone out there who has to have that will and quality of personhood while he himself

Also has the quality and nature that the personhood in himself as a divine aspect this

Necessitates at least two persons in the Godhead. We haven't talked about the Holy Spirit yet. You see the issues how they're related

You never heard this before have you? I have I have is just that you're expounding more on it and I'm listening.

I'm listening. That's May I take a moment and do the opposite of expounding more and make it like is so much you were yourself.

Oh, yeah I'm Nicholas. I Have a terrible proclaimer of Messiah. I am

I'm Trinitarian. Yes And So Okay, I know

Which point was I going to say that? Communicati with your mottom.

Oh, so the relating of the two Relators, that's how

I like to talk about it is we read in Scripture where Jesus and the father are clearly one distinct relator personally relating to another

Personal relator and they have a personal relationship so As far as the modern use of the language

I think that helps to see why that word would be chosen because you have two personal relators and There's a distinction there and that's what the word person is referring to and that distinction is in Scripture So the word person is referring to something that is in Scripture.

Yep. We just use the word person to describe it Now can I run something else by you?

Okay, OJ As long as it's not Simpson Okay Now I'm gonna give an illustration.

It's just an illustration. Okay, my wife and I come over to your house over in Britain We're having a great time and you have this lamp that came from Nigeria.

I don't know just some lamp and I call it the lamp analogy and I'm excited and you know whether on purpose or accident really doesn't matter here

I break your lamp and you're a pretty cool guy and you say You know,

I'm in real life. I'd go. Oh, man. I'm sorry. Let me buy another one. Okay But this is an illustration of what forgiveness is

So you say Matt? You broke my lamp I forgive you pay me $10 for it or 10 pounds where I would be over there

Is that true forgiveness? No, I agree with you. My wife is sitting there and she didn't do anything wrong and I break your lamp and you say

Matt I forgive you for breaking the lamp My wife's name is Anik. You say

Anik you pay for the lamp. Give me 10 pounds for it Is that true forgiveness?

You want her to pay for it? It could be it could be seen as true forgiveness because you you're not making the person who broke your lamp pay for it

But she didn't do anything. Why she I thought you made true forgiveness for the person who broke the lamp.

Okay, we're gonna okay If you forgive me, you can't make someone else pay for it

It's not true forgiveness Okay. Well go ahead with your thoughts.

Let me say yeah. Yeah. Yep. Possibly. So yeah So if if you insult me or if I insult you let's just say

I don't go to Charlie and go hey Charlie You know you pay for this, you know, I forgive me what it's he's not related doesn't doesn't make make any sense

So in true forgiveness who's left to pay for the replacement of the lamp now in real life

I'll offer to pay for it. But this is an illustration in true forgiveness The one who forgives is the one who pays because the one who forgives

Doesn't require a payment from the one forgiven Otherwise, it's not true forgiveness and to transfer the debt to somebody else who's not involved.

They have no offense. That's unrighteous They didn't do anything in True forgiveness the one offended is the one who pays in true forgiveness

When we sin we sin against God That's right who forgives God who pays

It's got to be God the cults say that Jesus is a created being and they transfer the sin debt to him

And so he's not the one offended The Trinity makes it possible

For Jesus to be the full incarnation of the person

One of the persons of the Godhead the full essence because if God by nature In the divine essence has to be person and have a will and he's gonna become

One of us then that has to occur Otherwise, it's not an incarnation and when he goes to the cross, it's not a divine sacrifice

But Matt, can I ask a question along the line of your thinking? Would this not be

I'm just thinking would this not be even much more problematic for the trinitarians, but what do your example be much more

Appropriate to the modelist and I'm gonna explain why let me let me explain why then you could you could clarify

Now why I say that's because the model is can perfectly make this argument because they are not

Saying or positing that a distinct person was sent to die

The model is just believes that you know It's just a change of form the father became the son and he died

But in the case of trinitarianism the father and the son are two distinct persons They could both be offended differently because Jesus could say not my will but your will the father sent the son so if the man and the

Woman the husband and wife are one and with that analogy you said you you gave if the man sends his wife to pay

It's not going to be true forgiveness How is that not the same thing because even though you say they are both?

They both have the same divine nature it was One person who came down to die the other one who was offended the father sent his son.

He sent someone else To die for the sins. Nope That's that's tritheism.

That's tritheism. We don't teach tritheism. We teach the one god And so I don't like to use the word parts

Because it's just it has problems with it, but i'm going to use just for now a part of god

Became one of us. I don't like using that word because it's not the right thing to say It leads towards an heresy a heresy called partialism

But i'm trying to get a concept understood each And he brought it up tonight.

There's something called perichoresis Each person mutually indwells the other and they're fully completely

Indwelling and know everything about each other And yet in this is the only way we can have the father chose us in the sun before the foundation of the world

It's the only way we can have eternal fellowship the eternal covenant Because eternal covenant can only be in in between two or more parties

A covenant isn't made with yourself. It's two or more the eternal covenant hebrews 13 20 to redeem mankind

There has to be two or more members for the party of the covenant and so My sister the one who forgives is the one who truly pays

You and I are incapable Of making a payment to appease god because you and I are sinners

We can't do it And so the only one left to do it is god himself. He's got to become one of us now

If part of god if god's one person and part of him becomes us

Or becomes jesus. How is that possible? Because the personhood of god is still up there

Not in the person of christ who can then say i'll be with you always it's not a true incarnation

This is why Unitarianism risks the true incarnation of christ and risks the true nature of the atoning work and risks salvation

What if this what that could be explained from a modalistic perspective and I know it can't

I know I know it but it can't Okay, I think they can because okay if we look at it this way, let's assume

If god is spirit, he's not confined to personhood in terms of one person space and time.

We don't know that God is spirit what i'm saying that he's not confined to space and time like we are like you are just here

Well, at least you cannot are you saying are you saying god is a trinity or no? No, no word became flesh

No, i'm saying that god is spirit. So he's omniscient. He's Okay present and he's not confined to right space and time like you're here

Yes, okay transcendent and you cannot be where I am at the same time, but that's not how god is so Look at it this way the one god who is the father whose spirit?

can Take from his attributes from within himself And manifest a human being distinct from that source where it came.

I don't think that's anything too I don't think that's anything really important. Yeah Is the person that was manifested eternal

In it when you look at it in the context of the origin From where that person is coming.

No is the no is the nature of that person that's now created Eternal if it's eternal can't be created

And if it's not eternal, it's not divine. Can I ask you a question a very interesting question?

I like this conversation matt Do you agree that the baby? Jesus was a creation of god the the fetus the person who grew in the womb of mary was god's creation

Would you agree with that? I would say this Jesus was created 2 000 years ago

Jesus being defined as the union of the divine and the human natures in the one person that occurred 2 000 years ago

But the divine aspect has always existed Exactly. So that's what i'm saying.

That's what i'm saying that the that's what i'm saying And in my honest opinion, so i'm saying that dilemma that you you you think there is there

Is not really a dilemma there. There could be. Yes. It is If god who is spirit

And like you said sometimes I have to be honest like you also say we may not explain the whole spiritual technology behind that But if god from himself who is spirit can bring forth from His own substance to manifest a human being to create

His own life form as a human being in the person of jesus, okay, there's something important let's talk about it

Yeah, let's talk about it. So let's say let's say god is one person. Yeah, right and he manifests a divine quality in jesus

Yes as a man Okay, well the human part is human

The divine part is not human It's separate from the human Okay by logical necessity definition

Okay. Now, let's look at what the divine part is is the divine part self -aware Yeah, divine part is self -aware because it goes back to the father.

Yeah. Okay. Well, wait a minute So if it's self -aware, yes, that's if it's what is in jesus is self -aware

Then it's a person Yes, and that's the father that's why jesus said the father who dwells in me he does the work yes, but there's more than that But so he says so is the person also in heaven uh

The the you mean the human press the human being no the divine the divine person

He said yes. Yeah, the divine person is in heaven because that's the father from the father. Okay brought forth from his own

Self, okay and manifested the human form of himself. All right

Then there's some ramifications of this then anybody could have been jesus how so because all it needs is a

Kind of indwelling of a human form because it's not really an incarnation. It's a manifestation.

No, there is there is there is let me explain So we're not just talking about We're not just talking about oh, okay.

Well, my mom gave birth to me and god enters me and he dwells. No, no, no He was conceived of the holy spirit

So what we're saying here matt is think about a situation where god from his own divine substance

I know that word too is controversial god doesn't really have substance in the sense, but you understand what I mean

Yes for whatever makes him what he is from that he takes from that his spirit and he manifests as okay

He manifests as a person. So that's good. That's the divine that's still a divine person. Yeah, the person is now incarnate

In some sense. Yes. It's not like all of god became a man but ah God because Now we see we're getting down to the issue here where it's really important.

Yes, because if god by logical necessity Has personhood And it becomes part of christ then that which is in him has personhood

The question then is there's two questions. Is it the same person as the father out there? And if it is the question then becomes how is it a true incarnation because think about this

The person of christ was obligated to follow the law Yes, so it's not the same person

Not so it can't be the same person. So now you have two divine persons that refute unitarianism

No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, you don't have to Yes. Yes. Yes. No, no because you have okay look after this way start from adam, right?

Let's let's look at it from if in fact the adam i've been thinking about this adam stuff recently and it's

Helping now if look at it from the point of view of adam, right? So when adam was created you will agree with me that eve was only potentially in him

But there was still one man at that time that you could see one person, right? Yeah, now when eve comes forth from him god created eve from adam they become two now now the the the

Don't look at the uh perfection Aren't they? Yes, don't look at the perfection of the analogy but look at the essence now with god now imagine the same thing

I'm trying to describe with god the father who starts out with one like adam. He is the one true god

From his own being and substance he brings forth another person his son because that was better true

So then the divine person was it was the divine person then created? uh The divine person couldn't have been created because the source is the father

Maybe maybe i'm not getting your question if the divine person is created then it can't be divine That's why i'm saying the divine person wasn't created.

So then it can't be it can't be created. So what is a divine person in christ? It's eternal

So it can't it's not the same as a father because the person of christ speaks to the father. They're separate Yeah, because that's man because that that person

Is a man Don't don't go nestorian on me and say there's two persons two persons in the body of christ

Jesus says i'm thirsty I'll be with you always the same one spoke because the attributes of both natures were his

So he says father. I don't want to do this Not my will but your will so he as that same person is speaking to another person the father

If you if you don't agree with that that you don't have a true incarnation You don't have the true attribution of personhood the nature of god, but if you do agree with it unitarianism can't be true the reason why unitarianism can be true is still with my what i've explained is because If it starts out being one god the father one person the father who has okay

Let's put it this way the best way matt i've been able to describe this is this This is the best analogy i've found to describe this relationship and you may not agree

But i've always used that and just came to me the son the son the son Is the best analogy

I have found now? There's only one son in the sky That son is not three persons in my understanding is god the father so i'm just trying to explain my thought process

You don't have to agree, but there's only one son in the sky the entire being of that son is god the father

I see jesus as the light Inseparable I see jesus as the light

That jet that is generated from that sun inseparable and I see the holy spirit as a heat From that same one son

Okay, so but the the sun is still one now if that light from that ray If if the sun was god and that light

Could manifest which is from the sun as something completely distinct I don't see why that would be a problem with that distinct manifestation relating to the sun

Because the nature of god is is personhood also if he's going to manifest Person is going to be manifested there

And not in a transcendent sense But in incarnational sense, which is why jesus says i'll be with you

Always he's the eye who's also speaking to god the father another one who would say I they're different persons

Yeah, so what if the eye like you say in the in the duality? Have you ever thought about okay mark, why would you why would you not consider a duality?

in this sense because If god is a duality there's a problem

Inside of the duality there would be fellowship within god and love exchanged And let me explain what

I mean by the duality that you the duality you consider from the incarnation of the dual nature of christ

Right. Okay. I'm saying i'm yeah, that's what i'm saying. I'm saying There is a duality there's a person the second person of the trinity

And the human nature in the one person of christ. Yeah, so that's the dual nature of christ the dual nature

That's called the hypostatic union hypostatic. Yeah, so i'm saying this so have you ever thought about The mystery or the fact that there could be a mystery in duality that may not necessarily be in.

Oh, no No, there's no mystery. I understand all of it Okay. Okay. Just hold on. Of course. There's mystery in there.

We don't get how it works Have you ever thought about what if what if that duality

Is jesus the son? as the man And the divinity as the father have you ever can't be the father because he speaks to the father

Yeah, because he's a man because that's a man the same way you say that. Okay. Let me let me say ask a question

Do you know the same dilemma? Is what we you you I believe you might have if you say okay, how is it that jesus did not know?

Something he said he said, okay, let me okay. Matt. I want to ask you a question The day of the hour, right i'll explain okay, no problem

Okay, that's easy All right. It's a culture Okay. Okay. Just one moment the day of the hour.

No one knows and if you see this hand up, you know, it's like I've heard trinitarian say well, he did not know in his humanity, but he knew in his divinity

But you know that will be it will come across as some kind of deception because if he was if he had one nature

And he was divine And he was human at the same time. Are you going to say that his divine?

Aspect of him did not communicate information to him secondly, I want to also say something that that doesn't it's not just that verse because I hear a lot of Uh trinitarians just refer to that verse and it's not just that but jesus said this he said

The pharaoh loves me and shows me what he does So it means that christ did not know what the father was showing him and he went on to say it's not logical necessary Well, let me let me let me say that let me say that why so because he said and will show him greater things

So it means that at the time christ was saying and will show him greater things

Christ could not have known those greater things. The father was to show him So my question to you will be if christ was human and divine

Why did he have to rely on the father? A second person in the trinity to show him these things

Why could he not just relate to his divine side that was god to get that information from from him

Why why why? Easy, okay. Okay. First a wedding feast and why did jesus rely on the father?

Okay, and not his divine his divine aspect that was Okay, so when he says no one knows the day nor the hour but the father alone

This is the culture of back then, you know For example of something when uh, the good samaritan helped the the guy who was unconscious, you know

He's unconscious because you can't tell where he's from by uh dress or accent

So that's why he's he's on he's naked You can't be you can't tell it's important part of the story and culture has a huge bearing on how to understand things

And so when the prodigal son when the father ran to the son at the end men of stature did not do that They would not run.

It was it's a gasp. It can't believe it when a woman let her hair down in public in simon's house

To let her hair down was a sign of prostitution Okay, and so there's all kinds of people don't know this stuff now the wedding feast a

Two couples a mom and a dad and mom and a dad father a father and of a of a daughter

They would arrange that the marriage would take place The father would arrange with that other father and they would have a date set and in that culture you had to know when the date was because People from all over would come in they had to kill the fatted calf.

They'd get the wine ready You know, it took a while You couldn't just hop on the freeway go by mcdonald's grab something to eat on the way to a wedding.

All right So they the father's requirement for the son was that when he would go get the bride

Blowing the trumpets to go get the bride, which I actually saw this in jerusalem. They blow the trumpets to go get the bride

In order to do that the son had to have permission from the father Because the father had said to the son in the culture everyone did it

You must build a room onto the house or your own house on a property And when

I say it's done Then i'll give you permission to go get the bride Okay, so his friends understood they would say to his buddy

Well, when's your father gonna allow he goes no man knows the day nor the hour but the father alone

It did not mean that they didn't know when it was The day is going to happen or the hour ish maybe a little bit back and forth it was an idiomatic expression taken from the culture of the time showing the the um,

The majesty of the father and the importance of the father that he had to give permission and it became an expression

Hey beat him to his black and blue No man knows a day nor the hour. It was that's what it was not many people know this

And in their ignorance they they say well he he didn't know something that's not what was going on Because he's talking with a wedding feast and you'll know that jesus says he'll go get the bride

And his trumpets blown in, you know before the rapture The trumpets the wedding feast we're going to have this in heaven

It's all the same language and i've spoken about this before in different people in different Contexts and they've never heard this once I was talking to a bunch of guys

They asked me this question. We're in a hotel lobby and this other guy was there and he was everything jewish, but he's a christian

I told the story I said this is how it works in that culture at this time It didn't mean they didn't really know the day nor the hour.

It was an expression of respect to the father when the father said Go then they would go and go get them and everybody knew

And he said he was blown away He said you're the only one i've ever heard who knows that It's a common jewish thing and the gentiles don't know this stuff and that's it's that's what it means in the scriptures

Okay, how do you explain the other aspects of it that the one I also brought up? I said rely on the father.

We'll get to that in a second. Yeah, okay Shows him and will show him things i'll explain it.

It's easy But but also in john 21 17 peter says to jesus lord, you know all things

Jesus didn't say no. I don't know one thing. I didn't know what day their hour is coming back. He didn't say that It is attributed to him in knowing all things

And in revelation 19 12, it actually says that the son has a name

That he himself knows and no one else knows Now that's an interesting phrase

Because it has to be That the god the father knows So what's the phraseology going on?

It's judaism the jewish culture No one knows only lord and master the only true god.

No one knows the day they spoke like that now why did jesus have to rely on the father because Hebrews 2 9 he was made for a little while lower than the angels

Philippians 2 5 through 8 have this attitude in yourselves Which also is in christ jesus who although he was existing in the form of god did not regard equality with god

He seemed to be robbed But he emptied himself taking the form of a bond servant.

He made likeness of many Himself to the point of death even death on a cross So he's in the form of god and he emptied himself to become one of us now.

Wait a minute If he's not god in flesh, how can he be in the form of god and then become one of us?

The person became one of us and he was also galatians 4 4 made under the law

Made under the law So you and I if we were jews back then

You know to to jewish families, we would have to be circumcised. We would have to go to the festivals

We couldn't eat kosher or non -kosher this and that because we're under the law So does it mean at that point in time?

Sorry, I just So does it mean at that point in time when he was made lower than angel the angels?

Then he ceased to be co -equal with the with god and the mother. Nope I like to say that he was cooperating with the limitations of being a man and I don't know how to explain what that really means

It's a phrase i've adopted to say he's cooperating with it because think about this The bible says, you know paul the apostle says through jesus all things are created and he created by him

Okay, i have a little lung problem sometimes and I had pneumonia when I was a kid it's just now hitting me

He said I don't want anybody to think anything bad Sorry about that Okay, good. It's a little pleurisy.

It happens like once a year Um, or when i'm talking to heretics and it comes up. I don't know it's just And so So, uh, where was

I uh Oh, so he's under the law If he's under the law, he has to go to synagogue

He's got to pray to god. He's got to follow the 10 commandments So he would say the father's greater than him

Because he really was a man under the law And so he would only do what he saw the father do

Now Wait a minute if you say he could only do what the father showed him. It doesn't mean he doesn't know

How would you explain that? Because it's like saying the father's telling him what to do because jesus says he could do nothing of his own initiative

Jesus said that in john 5 19 and john 5 30. I can do nothing of my own initiative.

Now. Wait a minute Even if you affirm there's some quality of divinity in christ, how could he not do anything of his own initiative?

But this is what he says So there's this place of christ the god man under that law and this is where When we get to this level, we start talking more and more questions are asked i'm going.

I don't know I don't know how are you saying though? Sorry, matt. Are you saying that when christ said the father loves him and will show him greater things?

And we'll show him things. Are you saying that christ already knew the greater things the father was to show him?

Is that what you'll be suggesting then? Because christ did not just say the father shows him things.

He said and will show him greater things So that means that at the time christ was speaking christ

Did not know the greater things the father was going to show him because if he did know it don't make any sense for christ

To say and will show him greater things. Let me try to work a greater works John 5 20 for the father loves the son and shows him all things that he himself is doing now

Look at that One thing at a time he shows him all things

Wait a minute god. The father knows all things How can jesus be shown all things?

He has to be god in order for this to occur If god showed you all things your brain's going to explode you wouldn't get it.

You can't comprehend it. I couldn't either But it notice what he says the father loves the son and shows him all things now

We have to understand do all things mean Everything that exists all knowledge or does it mean all the things that jesus does are shown to him by the father?

That's a fair question All things that he himself is doing till the father loves the son and shows him all things that he himself is doing

So the father is doing something and shows it to christ That would be logically

Proper if christ is made for a little while lower than the angels And under the law.

I remember a little while lower than the angels is hebrews 2 9 hebrews 1 8 says But of the son he says thy throne.

Oh god is forever and ever. He's calling jesus god This is why we turn to terry to go these early theologians.

They didn't just go one verse. Hey, that's it They go. Wait a minute How can he be lower than the angels and yet be called god?

philippians 2 says He emptied himself but yet But yet at the same time i'll be with you always even to the end of the earth you go

There's a lot of these things. We can't set them against each other. We have to work them together But the son the father loves the son that means jesus.

The son has two natures The divine nature and a human nature and if he's a divine nature necessitates being person because that's part of what it means to be

Have a divine nature person in the incarnation the father loves the son and we'll get to john 639 here in a bit

And shows him all things that he himself is doing so the son Is aware and knows and sees all that the father is doing and the father will show him greater works than these

So that you will marvel. Well, it doesn't mean that jesus doesn't know what's going on because you know

The question the question is gee he's saying the father will show him greater works

I mean, he didn't know what the father was going to show him not necessarily How would you if he already knows what the father is going to show him?

Will show him greater words Okay, i'm going to show you i'm going to show you my phone, okay

Okay, all right, you know i'm going to show you my phone, right? So now there's my phone You knew what

I was going to show you didn't mean you didn't know what's coming Sorry say that again

I said i'm gonna I told you what I was gonna do I'm gonna show something to you. Yes.

All right, and I could have showed in three days. I'll show you something My phone i'll show you whatever and then when it comes around I show it to you

You knew what was going to be shown to you? Yeah, but I didn't know if it was a samsung galaxy. I didn't know it was on it was an iphone

I didn't know what it was that phone. The point is I could show you something And tell it to you.

You can know it ahead of time and still it be shown to you That's the point i'm trying to make I can show you my new car when

I bring it over tomorrow, you know it it's coming You know what's going to happen it doesn't mean you don't know

No, but do you know the new car? Do you know the details of it? Do you know do you already know everything that you're going to be shown?

Do you already know that? If I could say you understand I could say it doesn't have I could do something simplistic

I'm going to show you the color of my shirt tomorrow Okay.

Okay, and you know that tomorrow i'm going to show you a good I show it to you It doesn't mean you didn't know that something was going to be shown

Yeah, I knew you were going to show me the color of your shirt, but I did not know the color of your shirt

What if I said tomorrow i'm going to show you my blue shirt? Matt i'm trying to show you to me, but then

But at the point you're still revealing to me something. I didn't know that's the point matt. Okay.

Okay So what i'm trying to show you is that jesus can know all things because he's divine

And he can still be as he's speaking He was because notice what it says that for this reason therefore the jews were seeking all the more to kill him

Because not only was he breaking the sabbath was calling god his own father making himself equal to god Now, wait a minute.

This is john 5 18. We'll get to 20. Okay Was he actually breaking the sabbath? No, he's breaking what the jews thought he was but he's claiming to be god

And he's making himself equal to god. Is jesus equal to god? No So He said he was calling god his own father was jesus calling god his own father.

Yes, he was Making god is making himself equal to god So when jesus said

I sent to my father and to your father Did we did he mean we were equal with god? It was I believe it was the jews misunderstanding him, you know, you you said something

That answers that question Because something important here because he says make himself equal to god by calling god his own father

Mm -hmm. Okay, some people will say the son of god means he's not god Well, that would mean the son of man would mean he's not man

What's happening in john 5 18? Is that the jews thought he was breaking the sabbath, but he wasn't because he can't and john the apostle makes the commentary

Because this is why they thought that Because he not only was uh breaking the sabbath, which they said that but he was calling god his own father

And he said as a commentary making himself equal to god, that's what john the apostle is saying Interestingly interestingly

I think you've answered the question marty interestingly So if you think about this way that jesus made a statement

The jews misinterpreted him and accused him of breaking the sabbath But he did not same way.

They accused him of making himself equal with god But he did not it's the same thing to me. I've never struggled with that So the way they accused him wrongly

Of breaking the sabbath is the same way They accused him wrongly of making himself equal god What he said was that my father walks and I walk and they misinterpreted that because if I were to go with that then it would not make sense if he says my father is greater than I because if The expression my father means he means if you should go by that logic and just conclude that the expression my father

Makes himself equal with god Then when he says my father is greater than I then it would not make any sense because my father are you married?

Yes, I am Then you're greater than your wife in authority and position in the family. That's all

I am That's all it is doesn't mean he's different. You're she's different in nature She's a human being but the distinction as I've pointed out when trinitarians make this is this and i've made this the reason why why

I I wouldn't want to use that is because I personally believe that jesus christ that the father is not just greater than the son positionally authoritatively but ontologically also in his divinity just like tertullian also believed when tertullian said

The father is the entire substance and this this is a historical fact He said the father is the entire substance

But the son is a portion and derivation of a whole as he himself acknowledged My father is greater than I and the evidence to this effect matt is this

Only the father is I say only the father has the property of being a self -existent self -sustaining jesus said as a living father has sent me now and because I live because Of the father in the same way so he likened it

So this was not a matter of human nature and divine nature He said as the living father has sent me and as I live because of the father in the same way

The one who feeds On me will live because of me so a man and a woman I don't live because my wife doesn't live because of me

My I did not grant my life because you're not the same You're the same essence. Yes, you're both people but jesus is and he's under the law

Made lower than the angels remember the bible says in the beginning was the word the word was with god

And then the word became flesh and dwelt among us because the word was god So this is what it's saying is who jesus is so how do we reconcile all these things?

We don't put them against each other. We say okay under the law And he cooperated with the limitations of being a man.

He could have things shown to him Potentially logically potentially as he didn't know that's potential but not necessarily

And there's other aspects of ways to look at it When we look at the context here, it says for the son it goes on in verse 19

Truly truly I say to you the son can do nothing of himself unless it is something he sees the father doing No, wait a minute

If as you say the aspect of the divine nature is in the son Then how I could say then how is it the divine nature can't do anything unless he sees it was done

It doesn't make any sense. If you're because the man he's a man because he's the is a is a man divine aspect

If you say well, he's because he does a man then you're saying the same thing. I'm i'm saying he's under the law

Mm -hmm Yes, he goes on he says for the the father loves the son

And shows him all things that he himself is doing And the father will show him greater works than these

So the father showing him everything that the father that the father showed his son everything the father does and jesus can do him

He's divine in his nature. This is a difficult passage of scripture for a lot of reasons, but it goes on and it says uh

Just as a father raises the dead and gives life gives them life Even so the son also gives life to whom he wishes for not even the father judges anyone

But he's given all judgment to the son And there's more if he's given all judgment to the son

Wait a minute. That's the person of christ. That means all judgment is given by the father to the son

Well, wait a minute, how is that possible because that means jesus is going to judge all people He has to know their thoughts he has to know everything about them this requires personhood in the divine essence in the incarnation

Furthermore, that's why he says so that all will honor the son even as they honor the father now

He wants you to honor them equally if Here's a we won't get into this tonight, but The other question is what is jesus right now?

Is he still a man right now in what state? How is he working? These are other things these all interrelate Now I've been almost almost four hours.

My throat's starting to go. Yeah, i'll leave i'll leave you Quite interesting, you know at least i've learned some things gained some things

At this point I felt like it would have been really nice to get into um, john chapter eight

I think jesus is continuing with the pharisees And I think it's very clear.

He's going out of his way to make it impossible For them to not know that he is declaring himself god in john chapter eight

And in that case it's very deliberately taught by jesus To the pharisees and by god to us through scripture there

Okay, can you share that? Can can you be specific about that first, please john 824 john 8

Yeah, it goes it goes through like a wide section of john where he really makes the point big um,

I can screen share it and we can go through it if that's okay with matt, it's You could just even refer to the the text off hand

I tell you what how about this guys This is my mike's going to quit after it's been four hours for me

Why don't you guys just stay and uh, well unless charlie wants to go because he's closed the room now I can only stay long enough to share a couple of verses that uh, kind of crystallize this uh this point

Okay, well i'll stay to the top of the hour and then i'll close the room down. Okay, you guys talk Okay, that's that's that's good.

Yeah, as long as it's about how great I am. Go ahead Oh, wait a minute we can't hear uh otis

Okay, go ahead wait Go ahead. I'm gonna be able to get my question in. I mean, I think my mic just gave out

However, you want it doesn't matter real quick real quick ask a question. Well, it's not a quick one It's not quick. It's not gonna take as long as this man right here.

OJ Is that working Um Well, I was gonna was gonna i'm going to discuss isaiah 48 16 where the lord got in the spirit

Oh one moment may I answer oj's question about which verses so I would say

John chapter 8 verse 12 all the way to the end of the chapter Okay And then go to john 10 30

And it relates to john 8 A little i'll explain that later. Okay Okay, go ahead with your question.

I think he's been waiting to let so let me go Yeah, otis. Okay, john.

Um 48 16, of course John, I mean isaiah 48. Okay. Yeah. Thank you, brother.

You got me on john. I was my brain. That's all right. It's late Uh, so where are you otis?

Which state are you in? I'm in ohio Okay, do you hear me on the radio? Yes, i've actually went in I we had some little words there with each other and you

Said about debating me, but I never got it. Okay, I got back with you or nothing like that I mean,

I sent you messages and stuff, but i'm john 48 16 says something very interesting, but I've one thing that gets me is how are trinitarians

As you can know, i'm not a trinitarian. I'm actually What are you just curious just well me

I just believe that the father is the only one who is god I don't you can call it one this well Unitarian, I don't give it a name or a title, but all right.

Okay Looking at what about a perspective so isaiah 48 16 um

The lord god in his spirit has sent me. Let's so in revelation 1 8 Who is that speaking in which verse isaiah or revelation 1 8?

Well, i'm asking about revelation 1 8 in reference to isaiah 48 16. It's jesus speaking

Omega and we know in the greek it says the lord god, right?

Uh, the lord god. Yes. Uh Yeah, it says the lord god and his spirit and if we go to um revelation 22 16, it would say the lord god of the holy prophets um sent his angel then revelation 22 6

I jesus have sent my angel so Jesus is the lord god in revelation 48 16

So the holy spirit which is by him it says and the lord god and his spirit. It does not say the lord god and the holy spirit

It's it's not separating his spirit from him so Okay.

Well, it doesn't say Yeah to say that it must say the holy must say

I'm saying it doesn't well go ahead I know it doesn't But the corollary is that why doesn't it say the holy spirit because you're saying it doesn't say the holy spirit

Which means that you're you're implying there's a reason it should be there under certain conditions So that's why i'm addressing

That you have to assert then that the phrase the holy spirit is what's necessary But it's not it's just an opinion that you have about not disregarding your opinion what we have

In genesis, for example, we'll go back genesis. I'll show you a sec. It says the spirit of god hovered

The spirit of god brooded in the hebrew. It's something that requires personhood. It did this

All right. Well, this is the holy spirit, right except what we do find is, um in psalm 55 11

David says do not cast me away from your presence and do not take your holy spirit from me

So the word the isn't there, but I think that's quite okay. Don't take your holy spirit from me. That's what he's saying

So the word holy spirit is there you go to job 33 4 the spirit of god has made me

And so we we see the idea the spirit beginning the old testament is clearly there You don't have to have the word the holy spirit.

Well, I was wasn't finished with it, but um revelation 3 these things says he who has to who has

The seven spirits of god and we know this is jesus christ, of course speaking So he has the seven spirits of god in isaiah 48 16 the lord god in his spirit

So now we see that jesus christ is the very lord god And his spirit which he has which he has possession of okay

Yeah, that's why I say it will be probably fall more into the oneness perspective. Yeah Well, there's problems because if you just look at that what you're doing

You're taking these few things you're trying to construct something and and in refutation of all other scriptures because that doesn't necessitate what you're saying well because it says

They rebelled and they grieved his holy spirit. Isaiah 63 10.

Yes They were good his spirit. How is so is this spirit alive or not alive or is it a force?

Oh, the spirit is the spirit of the father. Okay, so good to spirit. So you're saying the spirit is the father

Yes, he's the spirit from him the spirit Okay from the father and you're saying I was going to finish it with that But and you're saying that jesus is is the father and they're all the one right?

Well, yes, jesus is the father Matt sorry, can I respond to that quickly?

No, no, no, no, let me let me do this before we go Okay, let me show you something Otis so let's look at this

Exit I did it tonight in the debate. Did you see the debate tonight? Yes, I watched it That's how I knew your show was up exodus 6 2

God spoke further to moses said to him. I am Yahweh and I appeared as god almighty to abram isaac and jacob

John 6 46 jesus says it was not the father Now who are they seeing in the old testament?

Great question who they saw in the old testament is the same one Moses had on the mountain in exodus 33

Which is the father because he says in deuteronomy chapter 32 verse 6 and let's quote moses

And moses will tell you this was the father that he was speaking to Um, do you not do you thus deal with the lord?

Oh foolish and unwise people. Is he not your father? Who bought you has he not made you and established you and he keeps on going he calls the father the rock

We know that that rock was christ. So Everything is this is that is that so the person

Is that in response to a theophany or is he saying because i'm familiar with deuteronomy 32 6 I use it in reference to second peter 2 1 the nature of the atonement would be means to be bought

I'm familiar with this. It's not about a theophany in exodus 6 2 3 Who was being seen was it god the father god the father jesus says the father's not ever been seen

He said no one can see my face Okay, no no no no John 6 46. Jesus says not that anyone has seen the father.

Do you agree with jesus that no one has seen the father? Yeah, let me tell you Let me get him

Otis, do you agree with jesus? Who said in john 6 46 not that anyone has seen the father you said we're seeing by the father

So who do you agree with I agree with his statement that they didn't see his face No, he didn't say he didn't see his face what the father said though, no

Okay. Well, hold on a second. What's going on with moses? Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Otis otis exodus 33 11

Oh, jeez A moth just flew in front of me scared the crap out of me

Okay, I thought I thought you were like booyah on him or something This moth just Look, you know

Uh 33 11 The lord used to speak to moses face to face just as a man speaks to his friend

When moses returned to the camp his servant joshua the son of none the son of man would not depart from him

There's 10 so the lord spoke to moses face to face Exodus 33 11 in verse 20

He said you cannot see my face for no man can see me and live Right there. So then he says

That's what he said so who's being spoken of there That's the father saying hey, you can see my backside, but you can't see my face.

This is what jesus is referring to He's not referring to hold on Hold on, hold on So If you don't see someone's face, are you seeing the person?

No, if you don't see their face, you're not actually seeing all of them. Okay So what he says here you cannot see my face for no man can see me and live right

But how was it he spoke face to face with moses just nine verses earlier. So is this god the son?

Okay, I asked but I asked a question you're ignoring it How is it that god the father would speak face to face with moses nine verses earlier?

So you can't see my face No, no, no, hold on. Come on. OJ. We already had a whole much.

This is how he was speaking through the cloud It doesn't say that um, it don't have to because so how did he come down from the mountain?

The baby drew up and why don't you say hey show me your glory if he was already looking at it You you're not wait.

Wait, you're not making sense of what you're saying Um, this is so what did they see god almighty in the old testament?

Yes Okay, was was it didn't say that well, go ahead Have you gone to exodus 24 9 through 11?

Moses aaron natum and abuhu and 70 the elders of israel Yes, I know exactly went up and they saw the god of israel under his feet appeared to be a pete of sapphire

So did they see god they saw him but not his face. Okay, so they saw god

Okay, they saw god right and in in uh, numbers 12 6 through 8 if there's a prophet among you

I the lord will make myself Known to him in a visionary dream, but not to my servant moses

He beholds The form of the lord. So do you believe he saw saw god the form of god?

Yes. All right. And so how are you going to try and get out of this and say he didn't see his face Now, let me ask you a question to get out of it.

Let me ask you a question Let me ask you a question. Does god the father have a face? Yes. He has a face

He has a face. Yes. Are you a mormon? No Not a mormon mormon says god's six feet tall and he has a face and hands

So what is it when it says he has a face why are you saying god has the father has a face Because he got eyes

Does he have eyes? Yes So god the father has eyes and a mouth father has eyes.

Is this part of his nature? Um, yes So god the father by his nature and his essence has eyes and a mouth, um, he's he

W What trinitarians don't do is no no answer answer this answers you're saying god the father

Has a body. Yes A glorious body. That's why moses said show me your glory.

You're mormon because they teach it That's what mormons teach what they teach, but i'm not a mormon mormons teach that mormons don't like black people

I know all the history but mormons teach that god has a body of flesh and bones.

No, he don't have flesh and bones No, god is a spirit. Wait a minute are eyes flesh You his eye

This is how john describes it. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. You said he has flesh. I mean you said he has eyes

Yes, it has eyes and a mouth and as a body. You say he has a body spiritual So a spiritual body has eyes

Yes, but eyes are flesh no Okay, look at john, um revelation when john is describing this is the father who he's describing

He says he has eyes like a flame of fire his feet. That's a metaphor metaphor

Eyes like a flame of fire. That's how he so now his eyes are flames of fire. Yes.

That's how or they like it It's fire his eyes are fire.

Then why does it say it's like it don't want to say it was It's it's fire revelation.

No, no, no, no, it says they're like fire it's like it that doesn't mean it is it's it's fire

No, you you what you do otis What you do is you do violence to the word of god.

I ask you questions and you contradict the word of god No, you're not I I told you to be like something isn't being that something if it's like fire it isn't fire

His eyes are a flame so now So how many eyes does god have? Um, apparently two and so his eyes are fire.

Does he have a mouth? Yes, I would say he can speak does a sword come out of it. Yes Okay, so there's a mouth and he speaks out of the mouth

What a sword so he has a body right? Okay, how tall is god? I don't know.

I have no guess I can't guess because a mile remember when he was um, moses was speaking with him.

Um numbers 782, I believe Momoka's moses was speaking from in the mercy seat on between the two chair room on the ark of the covenant

Um, what how tall was he then he had to be tiny to be on that mercy seat. Okay, so You're saying god

So it Is the body of god which contains eyes and a mouth

And hands and feet these are john's words not mine is no Is it is he physical?

John said that he has i'm asking you. Yeah, is he physical? Yes, you can see so god the father has a physical body.

Yes Good mormon. Yeah, you're good. No, this is john. John. Please He's a unitarian mormon

Just just Now regarding your question I had that jesus said god his spirit doesn't have flesh and bones so I I gotta go

Yeah, that's why I said 30 seconds. I had that in my And that was an issue for me because when the bible says no man had seen god we have to always understand everything in context

John 1 18 is referring to the father because every time after that God is reference to the father.

I did a study at a article. Yeah. Yeah, let me finish so It it's it when they talk about this this can

I get mad to finish my can I finish my question I just that's I said 30 seconds and i'll be done just 30 seconds.

Go ahead When they say they saw the god of israel the context we have to understand the context They didn't see in the fullness of his glory now

When they says no man had seen god the context refers to what paul was referring to when he says

Talk speaks about god as the inapproachable light which no man had seen Nor can ever see

That is a context in which they say jesus was saying no man has seen god first timothy 6 16

Yes, so that's the context in which he was saying that's god the father Yes, that's god the father.

They saw god in the old testament. It can't be god the father No, no, no, it's context. It's got the father but it's a different context

You can see in different way when you say see what context it doesn't just mean one thing You guys are questioning my brother

They didn't see god in that context in which jesus paul meant where he says no one can see or can ever see.

Yes He does an unapproachable light who no man has seen or can see but they have seen jesus And I know that I know it well because I use it against mormons.

I've been using it for 40 years I know the verse very well. It's in context of talking about the father. That's who has never seen period paul agrees with jesus in john 6 46 who he was an unapproachable light who no man has seen or can see

So anybody who says god the father was seen in any way sense or form in the old testament is mistaken

It's a different context. No, it's not mistaken. It just means that this is a unitarian context I gotta get going guys.

I do it. Can I ask him something real fast real fast? Um, could you um, write this down for me hebrews 12.

I want you to write this down and look it up Hebrews 12. All right, who me? Yes, sir.

Yes, sir. Mr. OJ hebrews 12 hebrews 12 start at verse 6 He's going to say for whom the lord loves he chastens and scourges every son whom he receives

If you endure chastening god deals with you as sons go to verse 7 as well Right verse 8 and i'm gonna jump down to verse.

Um Go all the way to to 9 and he'll say furthermore We have had human fathers who corrected us and we paid them respects.

Shall we not more? Readily be in subjection to the father of spirits and live and I want you to write down revelation 319

Jesus christ says For whom the lord loves he chastises. He says many as I love

I rebuke and chastise But yet the writer of hebrews, which I believe is paul says that the father of spirits chastises those whom he loved

All right, do that for me my brother that's trinitarianism No, sir. Yes, sir Yes, sir, because we would say that they each do that.

They each do this share the same qualities. That's what the trinity That's a good trinitarian version The holy spirit chastises people too the holy spirit did that with ananias and sapphira for having been lied to Okay, look guys.

I want to continue If one of you wants to continue you can set up something put it in here and I gotta close the room because I gotta go

All right. Thank you. But I think i've still didn't finish my question. Well, it's look it's been over four hours

All right Well, I could continue with you for like 20 minutes if you want but we have to either charlie or I had to close the room

What's your um, can I get your thing put it in the um chat over there? I'm not going to leave unless charlie's here

It's not going to be here. I'm going to close the room I can only be here for a for a little while longer matt, but there was a just let me

Let me get his information. There was a pericope of scripture. I wanted to share. Okay I'll tell you what i'm gonna take off charlie close the room

I don't want I don't want everybody to have a free ring without one of us being here They might say heresy is going to be part of the video

Okay I'm being refuted. All right, so i'm out of here. Okay, and i'll talk to you guys later.

Okay. Yes. Yeah. Thank you Thank you matt. Yeah the pericope of scripture. I wanted to share with you guys.

It's repeated. Uh, uh, let's see. It's in Matthew chapter 9 and also in mark chapter 2 the paralytic healed

I have a son that Broke his neck and was quadriplegic and the lord healed him.

He's a Ambulatory quadriplegic now, so I kind of relate to this story um, so when when christ had come to capernaum mark chapter 2

There was people gathered there and you know the story of them lowering this guy down through the roof so he could get to jesus

What jesus made a big scandal a huge scandal at the time When he saw

This guy he said son your sins are forgiven verse 5 then verse 6

Some of the scribes who are sitting there And reasoning in their hearts Okay, why does this man speak this way?

He's blaspheming only god Okay, who are who can forgive sins but god alone they didn't misunderstand him

They understood that our sins are against god and as god alone who can forgive them

Well immediately jesus was aware in his spirit that they were reasoning that way within themselves

That might remind you of one scripture that says god alone knows the hearts and minds of men a little demonstration of his deity here

They didn't know he could read their minds, but he did Well, what's he say to them? Okay, why are you reasoning about these things in your hearts this way?

Which is easier? Here's the challenge to say to this paralytic your sins are forgiven

Anybody can say that there's no way to prove it or disprove it. Is there? To say to this man, your sins are forgiven or to say to get up and pick up your pallet and walk

He follows that immediately in verse 10 But so that you may know that the son of man has authority on earth to forgive sin

He said to the paralytic get up and walk pick up your pallet and go home And he did so immediately

And they were all there Amazed and started glorifying god saying we've never seen anything like this so he exercised

His prerogatives as deity while a man on earth

At times this was one of them And forgiveness of sin is something only god can do so his claim

To the disbelieving jews was understood because they called it blasphemy Just like matt was saying before when he claimed god as his own father making himself equal with god

The jews did not misunderstand him In fact, they wanted to pick up stones and kill him because if you or I had said those words in that jewish crowd

It would have been blasphemy. It would never have been true of any of us But he's the only one that could lay legitimate claim to that Okay, so they didn't misunderstand him at all amen

So this this this little pericope of scripture in in mark chapter 2 About the paralytic heel demonstrates all these attributes of him when he was here in the incarnation as a man

It demonstrates the hypostatic union at work in front of your face Okay, and it stunned everybody

To the point that they all just began glorifying god. So this is a witness for us And there's no way to get around it really because I Can you come to that conclusion that there's no way to get around it if you've not had an alternative explanation

You understand I don't look at there's no I don't see any problem with that at all. And I think sometimes

Um trinitarians, we need to be careful not to cherry pick things if I go to first john 220 You hear the bible says, uh, but you have an auction from the holy one and you know all things boom

If I were to pick the way trinitarians because you say jesus you say jesus they told the disciples told jesus

You know all things then have to also conclude that these christians too were divine and they were part of the godhead because they know

All things so the point is we need to look at things in context if you read another Context here is his behavior in front of a whole crowd of people

Containing unbelievers. He wasn't talking to his disciples which he talked to differently In fact, he said to you i've explained things clearly

To those I say parables so that they will not turn and repent and be saved

He's quote quoting isaiah. He purposely and mark says i'm speaking this way to them

So that they won't repent and be saved. That's why it's not hidden from you It's hidden Momentarily, may

I always say one thing about the context? The context before was that he wanted them to know

That he had power to forgive sins. Good. That was the context So so my response to that is this if you read another

Part, I can't recall that from my head. It's not because it's it's not really not it's really a no -brainer

The glorified god who had given power to men to do these things That's what they said about christ in another verse.

I can't find that now I'll tell you so the whole idea is that god had given him that authority the same christ told his disciples

Whoever sins you forgive I forgive as well. He claimed he claimed deity though.

This is the ultimate This is the ultimate mic drop. This is the ultimate booyah to the his enemies

This is the ultimate way of demonstrating that He said authority that means he was giving to him.

He said I know that the son of man has authority to you If somebody's deity god god is not going to be speaking about who can already who can forgive sins

But god that's what and he has conferred that authority to christ, but the jews were ignorant about that The same way christ conferred the authorities to the disciples to forgive sins as well

The jews had the jews had a correct understanding of who can forgive sin exactly

That's not in doubt and what i'm Sending you my brother. Hey, my god Conferred that authority to christ the same way christ conferred that authority to his disciples to forgive sins

So does it mean the disciples were god because they could also forgive sins as well? Because whoever sins you forgive

I forgive So they had the authority so it all comes from we need to see the chain of command from god

Conferred to christ and christ to his disciples. So it's not There's nothing so complex about that really if you ask uh i'll admit that um

I'm, not as well prepared as matt. So I hear what you're saying. I'll have to look into that more

Yeah, and then earlier earlier you guys got into philippians 2 uh, five through nine,

I think Yeah, that that's interesting language there. It says that while never ceasing to exist as god

Nevertheless, he emptied himself if you do a little study Uh, I don't expect anybody has done the work in the greek that i've done, but it's inescapable while never never never ceasing to exist as god

Okay If you permit me, I would have to disagree. I don't think the greeks says that even

In philippians 2 yeah, he doesn't say that he doesn't say that. Yeah, he doesn't that is why if you read most of the translation

And dan wallace dan wallace who is a notable greek scholar will agree with me

When did he cease to be god? He didn't say he sees he it says he was in the form of god

He did not while existing in the form of god is how the english puts it. Yes But the question is that what is the form of god while?

While existing That's true. I'm giving you the english version while existing as god

Okay, the greek is while never ceasing to exist

It's an ongoing condition that he possessed Before he possessed then and he continued to possess

It's inescapable. It's inescapable I agree with you, but we need to understand i'm glad You don't have to agree with me you just agree with the the language and you got it

Of god, he did not count equality with god a thing to be grasped for that's what that Dan wallace rightly interpreted.

That's why you find most of transitions say he did not count equality Why didn't he why didn't he grasp for it was no temptation?

Translations such as nlt. They just could I could I destroy the text could

I tempt you to grasp for the Quality of being a man No, you possess that quality right now.

It means nothing for me to offer you manhood because you are While never ceasing to exist.

He thought it not robbery He thought it nothing to be grasped for you could say both translations in the english are good that way

Nothing to be grasped for thought it not robbery To exist as god

See just as much as I couldn't tempt you to grasp hold of being a man if you already possess what my translation says

And this is why I believe that we should we should never Any doctrines or argument from conflicting translations?

Never we should go with the explicit. My translation says jesus being in the form of god, which means

As paul has already described him then you have You haven't just you haven't used the tools that are available

I have used the tools. I mean, I i'm looking at the greek charlie, and I don't see anything more than being in the form

I don't I don't see what you're saying charlie He did not count equality with god a thing to be grasped in other words

What does the form of god mean morphe if you actually go check existing as god the vision?

And that's why paul described him as the image of the invisible god the brightness of his glory and the representation of his being

In that state he did not try to seize snatch at equality with god as the translations rightly put it

It's not saying that he was god, but he didn't he didn't want to hold on to his equality God is saying he wasn't a representative image of god in that state.

He did not try to snatch at equality with god That's what the verse is saying Now it's not all it's saying and obviously matt showed you some cultural understandings that Gave you an insight as to why he said he didn't know the day or the hour of his coming

It's perfectly understandable to the people he was talking to it needed no explanation

To them they understood completely what he was talking about. It's not a mystery for us when we understand the culture

They still do things over there like that today the turning the other cheek is a cultural custom

That's been in the mid in the mediterranean for a thousand years, you know people get in arguments. They kick dirt

They spit on the ground. They push their lips like they're going to spit they pull each other's beard and ultimately the end of the ritualistic argument is

One person will slap the face and the other one will slap the other's face and that's it We've reached an impasse and nothing comes out from it beyond that point

Well, what did he say? What did he say turn the other cheek? That was revolutionary Turning the other cheek was not part of the ritual

You're supposed to hit the other guy back if he's your brother jew if he's not a brother jew

You'd clean the place up with him But uh, this was amongst the family of jews and the and other cultures that that are there in the mediterranean completely and utterly understood

It was shocking for someone not to end the argument in the customary way by slapping the final slap in return for being slapped

Man, this this made this made news then that he would teach something like that If you understand the culture these things expand and your understanding goes beyond just the wooden english of our day

That's like um, jesus going to the cross and not speaking in response, huh? And not what oh going like a lamb to slaughter silent

Yeah that he turned the other cheek instead of slapping back Hey, oj. Can I ask oj?

Um, yeah revelation 2 23, how does how does a unitarian grasp that that verse can you read it it says

I will kill her children with death And all the churches shall know that I am he

Who searches the minds and hearts and I will give to each one of you according to your works?

Now i'll read jeremiah 17 10 which would parallel that Jeremiah 17 10 says

I the lord search the mind. I test the mind Even to give every man according to his ways according to the fruit of his doings

How does a unitarian reconcile with jesus saying? I'm gonna kill your children with death and y 'all gonna know

That I am he who searches the hearts And tests the mind to give every man according to his works just as the father says in jeremiah 17 10

Okay. Oh, okay for us is very easy. So first of all for for unitarian We start out with the explicit verses of scriptures and we build our way and I think that's a safer way to go

We start i'm going to go into your to answer your question We first go with what has been explicitly stated first of all chapter 8 verse 6.

We have one god and he's the father So that's it and we go to the explicit verses Ephesians 4 6 1 god and father of all we go to john 17 3

Eternal life is to know you the only true god Okay, once we've established that we understand.

That's why I explained that I am not a classical trinitarian. I don't believe what And carlos believe

I believe jesus is divine because he came from the being of the father to manifest in human form But he's still intrinsically linked to the father, but he's a distinct person from the father that's why

I would disagree with you and let me explain why I want why I want to say that he's this thing because And let me let me tell you

I used to tend to be a modelist but this was the straw that broke the camel's back I want you to keep going.

I want you to keep going. But remember you use the word manifest You're ignoring incarnation, but continue

Jesus said this and this is the killer for modalism. This is it. It destroys it. He said in your law

It is written the weaknesses of two people two persons Are valid I am one who testifies and the father is another testifies of me

So that completely kills that oneness one person jesus and the father being one person That for me and there are so many other things not he's speaking to the jewish lawyers

And that's what they understood according to their custom and law that was established Yes It was for their it was for their benefit that he was

Exactly quoting and confirming their law in that sense I agree, but in doing so my point is that jesus christ was also clearly

Establishing that he was a distinct person from the father because if he was the same person testifying of himself

It was if the if jesus was the father who who became the son and he's testifying of himself

He's not the father who became the son. That's what i'm saying. That's what i'm saying. That's what I am what i'm saying

I'm refuting modalism Part of modalism part of mausalism talks like you do when they say the father manifests himself as the son

You see they're ignoring and avoiding god incarnate not manifest

Jesus is the incarnation But I need to answer this question. I'll come to that. Yeah incarnation.

Well, he's all welcome that so you ask ortiz, right? Or did you ask me the question? So this is how I reconcile it

Jesus in his glorified state Is beyond the limitations he had as a human

That's why the bible says things like we will know even as we are known In that spiritual dimension to which jesus has been exalted by the father and also considering that the father dwells in christ

He can know all things searching the hearts of the searching the the minds of the of of everyone and all that is not an issue

For me, but I want you to remember what the bible says at the close of all things. He says there's so no light

No temple in it because the lord god almighty and the lamb at the temple

So you see the distinction is still there. They did not conflict the lamb for the love god almighty The lord god almighty was one and then the lamb was there

So it still maintained the same thing one god the father and one lord jesus christ. They never confounded this

So that's how that's how I will explain what you just said Is there is jesus is jesus a man in heaven right now

No What? No, he's a girl. Yeah, he's a man. He's a man god is a spirit the body is um

Jesus took on took on the form of man forever when he rose in his glorified body when he rose in his glorified body

I've learned to talk about trinitarianism. He's still he's still exhibited the wounds. He also

Yeah, he says he knows that when we appear we will be like him How can he be the first amongst many brethren

If he's not if he's not a man because we are going to be like him So how how are we going to be like because it says that he?

Right now Ongoing. It's like a participial construction Is interceding for us as our high priest?

Okay, only a man can be a high priest. He is our high priest after the order of melchizedek

He is our only singular and unit and and It says he it says he holds that he says he holds that in that priesthood

Inviolate by virtue of an indestructible life if you read hebrews all the melchizedek priests died and had to be replaced

But jesus now has claimed that priesthood and is our intercessor in heaven

Intercessing now for the sins. I just committed earlier tonight, and then i'll probably commit tomorrow

He's my intercessor now and it takes a man to do that Fine that's true.

So he is a man in heaven right now doing that work for me on my behalf. I count on it

So that I can see him Let me ask you my own question for you

Now think about this. How how does this make sense? And how do you also deal with this from your? Simile modalistic perspective the bible says in first corinthians chapter 15.

It tells us how the conclusion of things will be Who's the model?

What is Now, let me ask you a question similar then who does jesus submit to in first corinthians chapter 15 when it says

When all things have been placed on that the son's feet then the son himself shall be made

Subject to the one who put all things under him that god may be all in all If jesus that's not all is paul is um, if jesus is the father

Who is the son submit who is the person the son is submitting to? That god may be all in all that's what it is.

How do you how do you explain that? Well, we're talking about the last enemy that'll be put to death which is death of course by itself

Now the father as you see in john chapters two through three The father gives that speech as the son of god the father is also the son of god

So what happens is right now? That would be a deception

That would be a deception if the father did that All is giving us a figurative speech is what he's doing

But so the father right now is reigning as the son of god because everybody has to come to where We have to come to christ.

So right now he's reigning as to christ So when the end comes which is when he gets rid of death

Then the son the christ will be subject to him and paul is because the gentiles

They were so used to worshiping these plural plus gods. This is history You can always go to the pantheon greeks all these they were worshiping many gods

So he was giving them a concept to to as to which it's not really hey, it's not a bunch of gods.

It's just him So no, no, no, no, no, no, but my question is i'm answering He reigns as the son of god, but he okay

So he's reigning as the son of god seated at the right hand of god Which is seated at the right hand of himself.

You've just created a whole spider with a problem Listen he's not at the right hand of himself

The right hand means place of position power We know that revelation 321

He that overcomes will I grant to sit with me on my throne just as i've also came

Overcame it and sat down with my father on his throne. Well, how is that he's sitting down on the father's throne?

This is jesus's words Yeah, yeah, but how is that one person? Um revelation 4 -1 are you familiar with revelation 4 -2 actually 4 -2?

Um when john got caught up to heaven and he said I saw one sat on the throne he didn't say That's the father right and you know how we know that let me tell you how we know that You know how we know that because he said and there came the lamb that was sleeping

He went to take the book from the right hand of the one that sat on the throne. My question what is this? So who is the one that was sitting on the throne and who is the lamb that went to pick the book from the right

Hand of the one that's all right. The one sitting on the throne is jesus christ All right The lamb if you notice it comes from the midst of the throne

The father is the only one on the throne the lamb is symbolic of what the father done in the flesh

So the lamb doesn't come from across the room. He doesn't come from next to him The lamb comes from the middle of the throne

Exactly where the father is sitting the lamb is the flesh which the father used.

That's his christ That's his son The flesh if you give me if you give me two

Hours with you and i'm going to show you every single verse in that book that points to god the father

Going in flesh paul says this in colossians He says it in ephesians that and as well as hebrews the father is the one who became flesh

It's because trinitarians and unitarians are so blinded that they're overlooking these very statements when he says

That he put to um, he put it to death in the body of his flesh talking about sin

He put all this in his flesh. That's the part that was bruised. That's the part that was on the cross

That's the part that died. Um Peter tells you clearly he was You've missed you've misunderstood what a person is.

I think I think you need to read that section on one is pentecostalism Pointing to the word person you see to be a person you need to be a cognizant reflective ego

You have to have awareness. You have to have self -awareness awareness of others. Okay, and you have to be subject to uh

Uh, like the holy spirit can be grieved why because he's a person you can't just grieve an active force of god

You can grieve the father by sinning. Jesus was grieved by the sin around him okay, they had these these feelings but When they talk to each other, okay, it says the disciples were praying to jehovah god and the holy spirit

Answered and said separate to me barnabas and saul to the work that i've called them to God the holy spirit

Is the father peter said to ananias and sapphira you have not lied to men

When you played false with the holy spirit holding back apart part of the price for the of the of the field you sold

Acting like you gave it all to charity. No, you held back apart and you lied to the holy spirit He says you have not lied to men.

You have lied to God who the holy spirit god, so you got god the father god the son god the holy spirit all cognizant reflective egos

Therefore the only thing that makes sense of it is trinitarianism You missed it Acts 5

I just did not want acts 5 I think has been Really overblown by trinitarians and I will explain that And that's the only verse they hold on to when they say the holy spirit is god now i'm not

Doubting or have I don't have an issue when you say the holy spirit is god as long as one understands that in context

Because the holy spirit is the spirit of the father not just like my spirit is my spirit When he says he's not lied to did god answer when they prayed and the holy spirit said

Separate to me barnabas and saul to the work that i've called them to yes He answered the prayer to god the holy spirit as god as god the holy spirit.

Yes The holy spirit spirit of father. So we didn't say the father said it said the holy spirit said okay

Okay, the person and work in ministry of the holy spirit is Everywhere in in the bible

Let me ask a question. Does the holy spirit proceed from the father's being? When when the father says

I will pour out of my spirit on all flesh Is he pouring out a distinct person from himself or people or the spirit proceeds from the father's being?

In your own when you say different person Okay, as we have we've come to understand the essence and nature of what god is is only shared by three persons

Father son and the holy spirit. No, my question is when the father says i'll pour out i'll pour out my spirit

I'm, saying that that spirit does that spirit emanate from the father's being?

Is he pouring out something or he's pouring out a distinct person on people? You're asking me to nail down what god is meaning when he pours out

Something in anthropomorphic terms for my benefit man -centered terms that I can understand

He's trying to convey to me eternal thoughts through Anthropomorphic language and you're asking me to look back into what he's me.

What is What i'm trying to say that I can only go with what he says What i'm saying is that your your the holy spirit comes from the father

Exactly. That's just the metaphorical the anthropomorphic Expressions about the holy spirit.

He shall show you all things It doesn't it's just some figurative way jesus christ spoke and he told them that look i'm speaking to you in figures

There are many things you cannot bear that a time will come i'll speak plainly to you of the father Let me ask you a question.

Have you never wondered? Why you will never find anywhere where you find the holy spirit speaking to god the father? I challenge anybody in the whole world to give me a place where you see a literal conversation

Between this person of god that you call the holy spirit and god the father like you see with jesus and the father

It's the plethora that we have jesus is talking to the father Show me one place where the holy spirit speaks to the father as a person.

You will never find one add to that The reason is simple because the holy spirit is the spirit of the father

And it would be as absurd as somebody trying to find my spirit and myself having a conversation So the fact that the holy spirit show the conversation between jesus and the father as well.

Can you find that? Oh my gosh It is not my will but your will it's clear father the hour has come glorify thy son

Are you asking that question? What is the father saying back to him the plethora of scripture? Okay, let me give you another one father glorify.

He said i'm Glorified our son and the father's reply. I have glorified it and i'll glorify. What did he say?

This voice came not because of me. No, no, no, no, no argument I want a back and forth.

I want a conversation between them two Like you and I am Yes, the point i'm saying is that there's no you can't find that conversation between the holy spirit and the father

Nor can we find it between jesus and the father, but I just showed you I just you didn't He what did jesus say this voice did not come because of me

The voice came so that they would believe that he is the son of god That's why the voice came if you want if you want to see an exchange of uh

Actions between the father and the son as separate persons. Yes, you just go to you just go to john chapter six

Okay Well, i've come down i've come down from heaven not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me

And this is the will of him who sent me That of all he has given me I lose nothing but raise it up on the last day

For this is the will of my father that everyone who beholds the son And believes in him will have eternal life

Okay, what's he say earlier? You're not going to find it that's what

I don't want to brag about anything, but I will say this I've read the book of john. I can recite you the first chapter of john probably

Just by memory So i'm saying i've read it so much brother Charlie what verse is that at about?

Oh john chapter Starting at about uh starting at about verse 35 where jesus begins to tell them

Uh, he's the bread of life discourse. Okay, it shows a relationship Between him and the father you're not gonna find a conversation.

I'm looking for a conversation What would you read what would you regard

Because I brought up this this challenge, right So what would you do you can't you can't change the context of my challenge

So what would you regard as a conversation between jesus and the father what would satisfy? What would satisfy?

the the My challenge of seeing a conversation between jesus and the father or your challenge

What kind of conversation first of all we can start where he says, uh, Hey, how's it going today?

Um, i'm doing okay. How about yourself? Did you see that Jesus conversation like you say you're familiar you say you're familiar with this pericope of scripture then he explains further uh, john, uh 644 no one can come to me unless The father who sent me draws him.

Okay. There's the distinction in persons here And I will raise him up the last day

I want a conversation Wait, okay. He's telling you he's telling you of the relationship

I have a question for you on chapter six here well,

I would like To ask is um, where was I at? Oh, so this fourth conversation this word, um where he says i've come to do not my will

Um, i'm not my own it's all in the greek so that but is literally but instead

The will of him that sent me So that but instead that specific Conjunction definitely means that those are two different wills

So I know that's not what you're asking. But while we're on that spot, I want to ask you what you do with that It's it's there.

It's clearly there the beginning of john And then it completely evaporates the oneness position hey look guys it's been a wonderful time for me this is much later

This is much Yeah, i've got a very i've got a very naughty canine that expected a lot of attention from me earlier

And she's gone ahead and torn up a napkin behind me to show her Disgust with me for not having paid attention to herself

And the biggest thing of all she who cooks Otherwise known as my wife

She who cooks has called me to come eat and if I dare ignore her call to eat Then i'm going to risk my nourishment

Tell us what section it is and we can we can all read it John 12 28 because I pointed it out to it, but octus just outrightly denied it

He said he wants a conversation john 12 28. This is jesus Father glorify thy name

Then came there a voice from heaven saying I have glorified it and I have glorified it again

What did jesus say? What did jesus say? Jesus said father glorify thy name after that father responds to him

Wait, wait, wait, wait, what did jesus say? He said this voice came not because of me that is relevant.

That is something Oh, that's very relevant because as being god himself He can make his voice come out of heaven

I I seem I seem to remember I seem to remember someone saying this is my beloved son and who am

I? Well, i'm well Jesus here.

It's jesus You want a blu -ray quality Dvd is

I just want to ask you a question. Did he talk back to jesus? Jesus said this voice came not because That means no, that's not the question.

I'm asking. I'm asking the jesus said I just gave you the answer That means no there wasn't a back and forth

There's no there's no point because there's nothing like there's no conversation that was satisfying because yeah, we see jesus

Thanks a lot you guys kevin, thank you and Oj, thank you so much.

And what is your name on facebook? OJ? Sorry, what's your name on facebook? I can see you Yeah, yeah, please send me a message.

Put it in this little chat thing, right? I just put it. Yeah Let me can I can I chat? Yeah. Yeah. Yes If you put it in the private chat

Yeah If you put it in the private chat, it can be copied to your clipboard and then paste it into a document

Yeah, um guys when charlie closes the stream you guys can keep talking backstage without the audience

Uh, i'm actually i'm actually closing. I'm actually closing the room. No, I think i'll go you won't believe it's five.

Is that possible? Yeah, i'm i'm going to end the broadcast this will this will be archived and podcast later the audience