![Seventh Day Press](/img/default-banner.jpg)
- Видео 161
- Просмотров 309 312
Seventh Day Press
США
Добавлен 16 мар 2014
Seventh Day Press is a channel dedicated to presenting present truth as it is clearly outlined in the Word of God.
Prophecies are fast fulfilling and the world needs to hear the truth as it is found in the Bible. "But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be." History repeats itself, but our Creator has promised to take us through and give us more than anything this world ever could. The plan of salvation had been laid before the creation of the earth; for Christ is "the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world" (Revelation 13:8); yet it was a struggle, even with the King of the universe, to yield up His Son to die for the guilty race. But "God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."
May we accept that gift and allow Christ to take control of our lives.
Contact Information:
info@seventhdaypress.org
Prophecies are fast fulfilling and the world needs to hear the truth as it is found in the Bible. "But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be." History repeats itself, but our Creator has promised to take us through and give us more than anything this world ever could. The plan of salvation had been laid before the creation of the earth; for Christ is "the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world" (Revelation 13:8); yet it was a struggle, even with the King of the universe, to yield up His Son to die for the guilty race. But "God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."
May we accept that gift and allow Christ to take control of our lives.
Contact Information:
info@seventhdaypress.org
Why the Trinity Doctrines are Wrong | God Matters
In the opening message of the Summer Ottawa Camp Meeting we examine "Why the Trinity Doctrines are Wrong"
To learn more visit seventhdaypress.org/
Contact Information:
United States Phone: +1 256 495 8388
Canada Phone: +1 306 800 1230
info@seventhdaypress.org
Seventh Day Press
P.O Box 33
Bryant, AL 35958
To learn more visit seventhdaypress.org/
Contact Information:
United States Phone: +1 256 495 8388
Canada Phone: +1 306 800 1230
info@seventhdaypress.org
Seventh Day Press
P.O Box 33
Bryant, AL 35958
Просмотров: 3 351
Видео
Responding to Ty Gibson and 3ABN about God Being Three Persons for Love to be Perfect
Просмотров 3,6 тыс.14 дней назад
Commenting on Ty Gibson and 3ABN about God Being Three Persons for Love to be Perfect Full Ty Gibson Interview: ruclips.net/video/ORI04HX22gY/видео.html Links to the other videos: The Trinity | Catholic Central ruclips.net/video/wkYM9OvX7f8/видео.html OTJ Short - The Creative Love of the Trinity ruclips.net/video/eh2f5RsciJ8/видео.html Why Only the Trinity Makes Sense of God’s Love ruclips.net/...
The Change in the Law by the Man of Sin | Pillars
Просмотров 1,9 тыс.21 день назад
The Change in the Law by the Man of Sin | Pillars To learn more visit seventhdaypress.org/ Contact Information: United States Phone: 1 256 495 8388 Canada Phone: 1 306 800 1230 info@seventhdaypress.org Seventh Day Press P.O Box 33 Bryant, AL 35958
Baptizing in the Threefold Name
Просмотров 1 тыс.28 дней назад
Baptizing in the Threefold Name To learn more visit seventhdaypress.org/ Contact Information: United States Phone: 1 256 495 8388 Canada Phone: 1 306 800 1230 info@seventhdaypress.org Seventh Day Press P.O Box 33 Bryant, AL 35958
The Triune Eclipse of The Son
Просмотров 1,4 тыс.Месяц назад
The Triune Eclipse of The Son To learn more visit seventhdaypress.org/ Contact Information: United States Phone: 1 256 495 8388 Canada Phone: 1 306 800 1230 info@seventhdaypress.org Seventh Day Press P.O Box 33 Bryant, AL 35958
A Lesser Light - The Prophetic Gift Restored | Pillars
Просмотров 893Месяц назад
A Lesser Light -The Prophetic Gift Restored To learn more visit seventhdaypress.org/ Contact Information: United States Phone: 1 256 495 8388 Canada Phone: 1 306 800 1230 info@seventhdaypress.org Seventh Day Press P.O Box 33 Bryant, AL 35958
The Wheat and The Tares in the Church
Просмотров 1 тыс.Месяц назад
The Wheat and The Tares in the Church To learn more visit seventhdaypress.org/ Contact Information: United States Phone: 1 256 495 8388 Canada Phone: 1 306 800 1230 info@seventhdaypress.org Seventh Day Press P.O Box 33 Bryant, AL 35958
Barabbas - The Counterfeit Son of God
Просмотров 1,1 тыс.Месяц назад
In "Barabbas - The Counterfeit Jesus" we examine the counterfeit Jesus that the believers at the first advent of Christ settled for. To learn more visit seventhdaypress.org/ Contact Information: United States Phone: 1 256 495 8388 Canada Phone: 1 306 800 1230 info@seventhdaypress.org Seventh Day Press P.O Box 33 Bryant, AL 35958
Was Christ Created? Is He the Only Unique Son of God?
Просмотров 1,3 тыс.2 месяца назад
Was Christ Created? To learn more visit seventhdaypress.org/ Contact Information: United States Phone: 1 256 495 8388 Canada Phone: 1 306 800 1230 info@seventhdaypress.org Seventh Day Press P.O Box 33 Bryant, AL 35958
The Need for the Remnant - The Reformation Completed | Pillars
Просмотров 7 тыс.2 месяца назад
The Need for the Remnant - Reformation Completed To learn more visit seventhdaypress.org/ Contact Information: United States Phone: 1 256 495 8388 Canada Phone: 1 306 800 1230 info@seventhdaypress.org Seventh Day Press P.O Box 33 Bryant, AL 35958
The Meaning Behind Christ and Him Crucified
Просмотров 7432 месяца назад
The Meaning Behind Christ and Him Crucified To learn more visit seventhdaypress.org/ Contact Information: United States Phone: 1 256 495 8388 Canada Phone: 1 306 800 1230 info@seventhdaypress.org Seventh Day Press P.O Box 33 Bryant, AL 35958
The Rebuilding of Bible Truth Through the Reformers | Pillars
Просмотров 1,7 тыс.2 месяца назад
The Rebuilding of Bible Truth Through the Reformers To learn more visit seventhdaypress.org/ Contact Information: United States Phone: 1 256 495 8388 Canada Phone: 1 306 800 1230 info@seventhdaypress.org Seventh Day Press P.O Box 33 Bryant, AL 35958
The History of the National Sunday Law
Просмотров 1,9 тыс.3 месяца назад
The Stages of the National Sunday Law To learn more visit seventhdaypress.org/ Contact Information: United States Phone: 1 256 495 8388 Canada Phone: 1 306 800 1230 info@seventhdaypress.org Seventh Day Press P.O Box 33 Bryant, AL 35958
Rebuilding Biblical Principles Through the Reformation | Pillars
Просмотров 1,4 тыс.3 месяца назад
Message Tittle (description) To learn more visit seventhdaypress.org/ Contact Information: United States Phone: 1 256 495 8388 Canada Phone: 1 306 800 1230 info@seventhdaypress.org Seventh Day Press P.O Box 33 Bryant, AL 35958
Blessed are the Meek | Nevena Belovska
Просмотров 8883 месяца назад
In "Blessed are the Meek" we examine of Christ's greatest qualities which needs to be found is his followers. To learn more visit seventhdaypress.org/ Contact Information: United States Phone: 1 256 495 8388 Canada Phone: 1 306 800 1230 info@seventhdaypress.org Seventh Day Press P.O Box 33 Bryant, AL 35958
The Slaying of Ezekiel 9 in Adventism
Просмотров 3,5 тыс.3 месяца назад
The Slaying of Ezekiel 9 in Adventism
Prophet or Decoy? - Victor Houteff, David Koresh and the Shepherd's Rod
Просмотров 2,4 тыс.3 месяца назад
Prophet or Decoy? - Victor Houteff, David Koresh and the Shepherd's Rod
The Battle in the Mind - The Flesh vs The Spirit
Просмотров 1,9 тыс.4 месяца назад
The Battle in the Mind - The Flesh vs The Spirit
Commentary on Steve Wohlberg's Discussion About the Trinity
Просмотров 7 тыс.4 месяца назад
Commentary on Steve Wohlberg's Discussion About the Trinity
Unveiling Ellen White's Interpretation of the Holy Spirit
Просмотров 3,2 тыс.5 месяцев назад
Unveiling Ellen White's Interpretation of the Holy Spirit
Armageddon - Start to Finish | WWIII?
Просмотров 3,7 тыс.5 месяцев назад
Armageddon - Start to Finish | WWIII?
Is the Holy Spirit a Ghost? | Corey McCain
Просмотров 1,2 тыс.5 месяцев назад
Is the Holy Spirit a Ghost? | Corey McCain
Johan's Journey from Calvinism and Original Sin to Adventism
Просмотров 1,4 тыс.5 месяцев назад
Johan's Journey from Calvinism and Original Sin to Adventism
Is the Dual Atonement a Lie in Adventism?
Просмотров 1,5 тыс.6 месяцев назад
Is the Dual Atonement a Lie in Adventism?
The King of the North and His End | Daniel 11 - Session 08
Просмотров 3,2 тыс.6 месяцев назад
The King of the North and His End | Daniel 11 - Session 08
The Eastern Question Then and Now | Daniel 11 - Session 07
Просмотров 3,2 тыс.6 месяцев назад
The Eastern Question Then and Now | Daniel 11 - Session 07
I would first like to say that you need to study the Rod message and the history of Br. Houteff as well as that of the Shepherds Rod movement before you make accusations like you do. You are taking two separate divisions of Shepherds Rod and making them as one. What happened in Waco with Koresh has nothing to do with Br. Houteff. Get your facts straight before you start spouting lies and deception.
Jesus often utilized the speech style of “illeism”. He spoke “IN the third person” about Himself, never “ABOUT a third person” (see example John 3:16). Who's the Helper and Spirit of Truth? Jesus tells you it's Himself - John 14:18, 21, 23. Where is the Father's Spirit if His Spirit is another person? He would cease to exist, as Almighty God is only a Spirit. When did the Father ever express His love for the other spirit person, as He does for His Son? When did the Apostles excoriate John when he constantly wrote only the Father and Son were the true God, eternal life, and the only object of our fellowship? Why is it antichrist to reject the Father or Son (two), and not the Trinity (three), if they're inseparable? When did Jesus pray for each Believer to be one with the three of them?
There is a very good reason why secret service agents being trained for counterfeit money detail, don’t study counterfeit money. They study the genuine article. You see, if you know what the genuine looks like, then the counterfeit will be readily apparent, with no explanation necessary. The same principal applies to true and false doctrines. But you seem to have taken the exact opposite approach here. You spent the whole of an hour trying to explain false doctrines. Citing one Catholic website after another. You were 51 minutes into a one hour sermon before you finally used a quote from one of the pioneers. But quickly went back to the false. I couldn’t tell you what that quote was about, because by then I had lost my focus and my eyes were starting to glaze over. Also, at the very start you said some things that just aren’t true. You said that God is two people. At first I thought it was just a slip of the tongue. But then you reiterated that “God is Father and Son”. Not true. The Bible is very clear, that God is only one Person. Then there’s the Son of God. Also one person. The Jews understood this perfectly. The apostles understood it, and Paul understood it. And of course Ellen White did also. As one coming out of the trinity doctrine, how is it that you don’t understand it? Notice what Paul said about it: 1Co 8:6 But to us there is but ONE God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; AND one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him. One God, the Father (full stop) AND one Lord, Jesus Christ. God is not two, anymore than He is one God in 3 persons. Which is what the false doctrine states. There is only one true God, according to Jesus: Jhn 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the ONLY true God, AND Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. Christ the Word, the only begotten of God, was one WITH the eternal Father,-one in nature, in character, and in purpose,-the only being in all the universe that could enter into all the counsels and purposes of GOD. {GC88 493.1} Trying to explain false doctrine, and asking “do you see where that leads?” Is never a good way to get at the truth. It’s like asking a horse to push a cart. But the fact that you think God (singular) is two people (plural) while at the same time claiming not to believe the phrase “God the Son”, is completely puzzling to me. But then the whole thing was pretty convoluted. The government of God is made up of two, yes. But the eternal God is one being.
PART 1 of our Rebuttal (first 30 minutes) -- Pardon me brother but for Truth's sake, we must clarify. 1) David Koresh was NOT part of Victor Houteff's Davidian SDA movement (stated at 1:40 mark). He was connected to the Branch DSDA movement, which was started by Ben Roden. Roden had his own ideas and doctrines APART from the Davidian SDA faith. It's like saying the Jehovah's witnesses are a part of the Mormon faith 2) Koresh was NOT inspired by the writings of Victor Houteff, he was inspired by the writings of Ben Roden. He was tutored by his wife Lois. At this very beginning point (2 minute mark) I can tell you know little about the Davidian SDA faith nor it's history. 3) You are using deceptive tactics by connecting Koresh with Houteff. You hope to taint and slant people's perception of Houteff by connecting the well know disgraceful Koresh to him. Houteff spoke well of these tactics -- "And since the Enemy cannot get around the Truth, he does all he can do blacken character and to pcik flaws in personalities. " (GeneralConference Special, p.9) One by one we will dismantle your attempt to build a castle of supposed truth, but instead it will be found out to be a Sand Castle of falsehood. 4) Your very first true and accurate statement (10:40 mark) that VTH taught that there IS a Trinity. And yes a small amount of DSDA are now presenting anti-trinitarian views. 5) EGW did make many statements to the idea of the Trinity, particularly towards the later part of her work. This would be another study all in itself but we have done an idepth study on her writings of Three Beings composing one Godhead. “In Co-operation with the Three Highest Powers -We are to cooperate with the three highest powers in heaven,- the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, and these powers will work through us, making us workers together with God.” (Special Testimonies, Series A (1897) . One of MANY showing she believed in the concept of THREE Beings in the Godhead. 6) You state that VTH was advocating a false reformation, this is completely false. First of all the DSDA faith states that ALL SDA fundamental beliefs are true and to be followed (DSDA FB Tract, p.3-11,). Secondly, the reforms advice VTH expounded was ONLY Bible and SOP reforms, nothing more or less (16:35 mark). 7) You step in and suggest what God should have done in sending a prophet. Great presumptioness of the highest order (25:00 minute mark). There is only one last prophet to come to God's church and that is promised in Mal. 4:5 -- anti-typical Elijah. Now as to his message, why do we suppose God would send Elijah and not Noah, David, Daniel, ir any of the other prophets? Because his message was to warn of the "great and dreadful day of the Lord". What are we to do to prepare, what are we to know prophetically about this day, etc. At this point we should point out my brother that you are fulfilling EGW's prophecy perfectly, let us read -- "Prophecy must be fulfilled. The Lord says: "Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord." Somebody is to come in the spirit and power of Elijah, and when he appears, men may say: "You are too earnest, you do not interpret the Scriptures in the proper way. Let me tell you how to teach your message." There are many who cannot distinguish between the work of God and that of man. I shall tell the truth as God gives it to me, and I say now, If you continue to find fault, to have a spirit of variance, you will never know the truth." (Testimonies to Ministers, p.475-476) 8) At the 27.00 mark you try to claim VTH was out to win followers for himself. False. Again your errors are getting to the point of you clearly breaking the 9th Commandment "Thou shall not bear false witness" Let us read just one of the many statements VTH made that shows he was not after bringing souls to himself but rather that they stay in the church and learn the Truth for their time (and ours). “Assuredly we do believe that this is no time to be pulling apart, but indeed to be pressing together. And the message which we are bearing to the church, not only does not contain any doctrine or teaching which would warrant our leaving her ranks to become a separate cult, but does on the contrary absolutely forbid our doing so. For these reasons, we have from the beginning steadfastly refused, even in the face of abusive treatment, to leave the Mother church.” (The Answerer, vol. 2, Q-32)
Where do you get the idea that God's government is 2? I cannot think of a single thing in the Bible that would make me come to that conclusion.
Zech. 6:12 - 13.
@@canadiancontrarian3668 Pretty obscure. I certainly would not build a theology around that.
@trackinggod8087 Jhn 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. 1Co 8:6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.
@@Rich4Truth I can appreciate that. In fact Jesus said, "I and the Father are one." But, if there is only one person in the Godhead, one might wonder why Elohim is plural. I noticed that you quote Ellen White on your website. This might be an interesting thing to consider: "The prince of the power of evil can only be held in check by the power of God in the third person of the Godhead, the Holy Spirit." -Special Testimonies, Series A, 10:37. (1897). And this one is fascinating to consider: "Had God the Father come to our world and dwelt among us, humbling Himself, veiling His glory, that humanity might look upon Him, the history that we have of the life of Christ would not have been changed" That I May Know Him p. 338
@@trackinggod8087 The word Elohim used in the text for God…A plural word used with singular verbs, meaning- A plural intensive with singular meaning. It’s using a plural word to denote majesty and greatness. To denote power, not plurality. This is very common in the Bible. Here’s an example: when God sent Moses to Pharoah. He said in Ex 7:1 See, I have made thee a god “elohim” to Pharaoh. But Moses was only one person. The Hebrews understood this very clearly. God created all things through his Son, Jesus Christ. Col 1:15,16 Col 1:16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: God created all things by His Son. He said to His Son, Let US make man in OUR image. There were two there, Father and Son. Not 3. I never said that the Godhead was just one. I said God, the Father, is just one. Mal 2:10 Have we not all one father? hath not one God created us? Malachi understood that God is not a trinity. We can agree that the Holy Spirit is a person. But not a separate person to Christ, or the Father. The HOLY SPIRIT is the SPIRIT of CHRIST, which is sent to all men to give them sufficiency,” -(E.G. White, 14MR 84.3) “We want the HOLY SPIRIT, which is JESUS CHRIST.” - (E.G. White, Lt66, April 10, 1894
“God is love. God is, in himself, in his essence, love.” SpTA06 4.1
The gospel is: The Almighty God, the Father and God of Jesus, (John 20:17), has reconciled the world to himself through the death of his unblemished, sinless human son, so that debt humanity had with Him, due to their transgression, has been paid in full. From the book of James 1, we know that our temptations come from our own desires which are sinful. We inherited them from Adam and Eve. Jesus did not have those desires because he was created by the Almighty in Mary, bypassing a human father, therefore, as the gospel tells us, Jesus was tempted by Satan and he did not sin, not because he was God or the Father, but because he did not yield to what Satan resorted to deceive him, unlike Adam and Eve who succumbed to Satan's deception.
Matthew 28:19,so 1.John 7:5 you don't find in the Hebrew or Greek Manuscripts!! Read Acts 2:38,it would be a contradiction! Read EGW, ( PTUK-Jan.9,1896pg.191)+ ( ELlen G.White Lt84, October 22,1895)+(CCH76.5) and read Signs of the Times,July 23,1902)
The EGW books have been forged I recently learned from a sister in Russia that she has old Adventist magazines at home before 1917 where there are EGW statements from their main books and in one of them it says "by the power of the spirit" and in a book published later it says "by the power of the third person divinity" it was supposed to be from some book on page "571" or "671" I didn't have time to copy the comment because youtube deleted it. Those who have EGW books published during her lifetime can confirm this. But I've heard that EGW books are forged many times I just never paid attention to it because I can only use the Bible to defend God's truth in all things.
They went out from us, because they weren’t of us 🙏 1 John 2:19
Glory to God❤🙏
YaHuWaH of Hosts Bless You Beloved Brother! Iam happy that you preach the truth!
1st Corinthians 15 1-4 is the Gospel Bubba, I thank The Father every day for sending his from everlasting to everlasting Son! And sealing me with his Holy Spirit. Behold O' Israel the LORD (Plural) (Elohim) =1 God. Dude Jesus is not a "mode" He is KING! Good luck when you stand before him! False Teacher!😇 In True Christian Love, Of Course!
Where does it say dude that Jesus is king?
Isaiah 48:16 “Come ye near unto me, hear ye this; I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; from the time that it was, there am I: and now the Lord GOD, and his Spirit, hath sent me.” The above verse reveals God the Father, God the Son, Jesus Christ (who was sent) and God the Holy Spirit. One God manifested and revealed in three personages. Matthew 28:19-20 19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.
ia601908.us.archive.org/32/items/mat-28-19-baptismal-formula-changed/Mat_28_19_Baptismal_Formula_Changed.pdf
The Trinity DelusionAn exposé of the doctrine of the Trinity Isaiah 48:16 Come near to me, listen to this: From the first I have not spoken in secret. From the time it took place, I was there. And now the Lord Yahweh has sent me, and His Spirit. The Trinitarian Claim Some Trinitarians imagine this verse refers to Yahweh the Father sending Yahweh the Son. The Claim vs. The Facts The Scriptural facts show that there is one speaker at Isaiah 48:16a, another speaker at Isaiah 48:16b and that second speaker is Yahweh's servant Israel. The Problem with the Claim 1. The Dishonest attempting to Prey upon the Ignorant Trinitarians in general don't have a clue what this verse is about. But they do think they get to imagine their three-person-God into the text unless you find a reason why they cannot (even though you don't need one). Many folks don't know what to do with this verse. Trinitarians make this claim hoping that nobody will be able to provide them with a response. So they disingenuously suppose this gives them a right to make up whatever they like for the sake of their doctrine. They don't have any evidence for their claim but they really don't care. They are just trying to get other people to believe that they get to interpret this verse however they like if others don't provide them with a response which prevents them from doing as they please. these particular Trinitarians don't know what this verse is about and they hope you don't either. They somehow just get it in their own heads that they get to make up whatever they like to suit their Trinitarian traditions if you can't give them a reason they why they can't. But what kind of person supposes they get to practice eisegesis and make up whatever they like unless someone else prevents them from doing so? 2. Eisgetical Interpretation It is typical for Trinitarians to resort to the disingenuous practice of eisegesis and read their doctrine into the text wherever they think possible. This is just one more example of their total disregard for the contextual facts and typical of their method of looking for excuses rather than facts. 3. Who is who? Although they have no evidence for their interpretation, Trinitarians somehow think it is okay to imagine that Jesus is speaking here as Yahweh the Son and he is saying that Yahweh the Father sent him and His Spirit. But the real question isn't who we should imagine into the text but who Isaiah is talking about in this verse. Knowing that Yahweh was speaking at the beginning of the verse, it should be rather obvious to anyone that the words which follow, "And now Lord Yahweh has sent me," are spoken by someone else. It also isn't going to make any sense to suggest Yahweh is sent and is referring to Yahweh as Lord Yahweh which would imply Yahweh's Lord is Yahweh. 4. Interpretations of Trinitarian Scholars This Trinitarian claim illustrates the disregard which some Trinitarians have for any interpretation that does not suit their needs. A simple survey of the opinions of Trinitarian scholars shows that their own scholars do not resort to making such disingenuous claims. Some suppose the one sent is Isaiah, others Cyrus, others God's servant Israel, etc. But since these interpretations do not suit the desires of some Trinitarians, they simply disregard them just as they do another other facts which do not suit them. 5. The Spirit sends or is sent? There is also a different of opinion among scholars about the Spirit. Some argue the verse means Yahweh sends (1) me, and (2) the Spirit. Others argue that (1) Yahweh and (2) His Spirit sends "me." In the former case, the Spirit is the second object; in the latter case the Spirit is the second subject. This problem is also disregarded by Trinitarians who make this claim. 6. Punctuation: Where do the Quotation Marks Start and End? The original Hebrew text did not contain punctuation; there were no quotation marks. So where does Yahweh start speaking and where does He stop speaking? It also appears that people assume there is one speaker due to the fact that Isaiah 48:16 is one single verse. However, these verse divisions were not in the original text either. Analysis of the Facts 1. The Preceding Context Note the preceding context where God speaks in the same vein, beginning at verse 2: The LORD of hosts is His name. "I declared the former things long ago and they went forth from My mouth, and I proclaimed them.... I declared them to you long ago, before they took place I proclaimed them to you.... I proclaim to you new things from this time, even hidden things which you have not known... They are created now and not long ago; And before today you have not heard them. So that you will not say, ‘Behold, I knew them.’ “You have not heard, you have not known. Even from long ago your ear has not been open, because I knew that you would deal very treacherously.... So that you will not say, ‘Behold, I knew them.’.... Come near to Me, listen to this: From the first I have not spoken in secret, From the time it took place, I was there. 2. I have not spoken in Secret There is no doubt that Yahweh said the words, "I have not spoken in secret." Note what Yahweh says at Isaiah 45:18-19. I am the LORD, and there is none else. I have not spoken in secret, in some dark land. I did not say to the offspring of Jacob, "Seek Me in a waste place"; I, the LORD, speak righteousness, declaring things that are upright. God said the same thing in Isaiah 45. So we can be reasonably certain that God spoke the words "I have not spoken in secret" at Isaiah 48:16. 3. The Contextual Facts Provide the Obvious Answer The solution to this question is really quite easy. In fact, it's right here in the context. Carefully regard the following: Listen to Me, O Jacob, even Israel whom I called; I am He, I am the first, I am also the last. “Surely My hand founded the earth, And My right hand spread out the heavens; When I call to them, they stand together. Assemble, all of you, and listen! Who among them has declared these things? Yahweh loves him; he will carry out his good pleasure on Babylon, And His arm will be against the Chaldeans. I, even I, have spoken; indeed I have called him, I have brought him, and he will prosper in his way. Come near to Me, listen to this: From the first I have not spoken in secret, From the time it took place, I was there. And now Lord Yahweh has sent ME, and His Spirit." Carefully observe how Yahweh sends "him" and then he says Lord Yahweh has sent "me." I have called HIM.... Lord Yahweh has sent ME... Secondly, if we just read the context, it becomes completely clear how we should identify "ME" in the expression, "Yahweh has sent ME. Please remember that chapter and verse divisions did not exist in the original writings of the Bible. All we need to do is read carefully and observe how "ME" is often speaking in this context: And now MY Lord Yahweh has sent ME and His Spirit. 48:16 Listen to me, O islands, And pay attention, you peoples from afar. Yahweh called ME from the womb; From the body of MY mother He named ME. He has made MY mouth like a sharp sword, In the shadow of His hand He has concealed ME; And He has also made ME a select arrow, He has hidden ME in His quiver. He said to ME, “You are my servant, Israel, in whom I will show My glory.” But I said, “I have toiled in vain, I have spent MY strength for nothing and vanity; Yet surely the justice due to ME is with Yahweh, And MY reward with MY God. And now says the Lord, who formed ME from the womb to be His Servant, To bring Jacob back to Him, so that Israel might be gathered to Him (For I am honored in the sight of the Lord, And My God is MY strength). Isaiah 49:1-5. In Isaiah, Israel is Yahweh's servant and routinely depicted as a single man, "Jacob." It is quite clear that "ME" at Isaiah 48:16 is Yahweh's chosen servant Israel aka Jacob. Also carefully note the following: And Lord Yahweh has sent me and His Spirit.... The LORD has redeemed His servant Jacob. 48:16-20 Behold, My Servant, whom I uphold; My chosen one in whom My soul delights. I have put My Spirit upon him. 42:1 Conclusion The contextual facts make it quite clear there are two speakers at Isaiah 48:16. The first speaker is Yahweh and the second speaker is Yahweh's servant Israel who Yahweh sent by His Spirit. This is made abundantly plain in the following context at Isaiah 49:1-5.
Thats why we Baptiste in the name of The Farher, the son, and the holy Spirit. 3 entities in 1 all 1 for 1 purpose Salvation. Blasphemous
Brother, I noticed that your supposed logical process is not logical. 1) Presupposition that God is two, therefore, if the Devil wants to be God, there will be three (the blasphemy against the Spirit is the unforgivable sin) 2) If God has a Spirit that is its own intelligence, then man has one. You are implying conscious and independent. I say, not really. Created I the image of God does not mean I am God. If God has a Spirit that teaches, leads to Christ, cry to God in our favor, reproves the world of sin, of righteousness and of judgment, then we have an independent entity at work.
'God is two' is not in this presentation. Government of two is.
He made a grave error at the 16:30 - 17 min mark . You cannot discuss the Trinity doctrine and not explain the idea of eternal generation and the substance of God . Both are unbiblical but must be understood.
Fellow commentators saying this is hellbound... And I agree. Holy Bible is to be closely examined. If you say a word that is not in line with the Scriptures (66 books of the Bible) is a sin, whether it is knowingly or not. I will give examples in the Bible where the Bible itself is talking about God that is not singular. Look at the original Hebrew translation - Genesis 1:26: "Let Us create man in Our image..." God is speaking to other persons... who are also God! Just because we cant understand it doesn't mean it's not so. There are so many other examples in the Bible. One more would be the Psalms, where David says: "The Lord said to my Lord..." The Father is God The Son - Jesus is God The Holy Spirit is God
The Father is Spirt, omnipresent, omnipotent and omniscient. The Son is Devine and His spirt is one with the father ( literally the breath of life) but our Saviour says The Father is greater than I, he also says Why callest thou me good? There is none good but one, that is God: Mark 10:18-21
You calling our saviour a liar?
@@jeromefalasca5118 Gen 1:26 does not say, 'And God said to God, Let us make man'. Does it?
@ljupconewman9357 The word “us” does not mean three. Look it up. He was talking to His Son. And where in the Bible does it EVER say “God the Holy Spirit”? It says the Spirit OF God. The word “of” shows ownership. God’s own Spirit. You and I both have a spirit. We were made in the image of God. But that doesn’t mean that you and I, are 4 different people. I hope this helps.
@@Rich4Truth Agreed and correct.
Glory to God.
Excerpt from “Arise O God” by Stephen Andrew Damick “God is said to appear many times in the Old Testament: to Adam and Eve when He walked in the Garden of Eden (Gen. 3:8), to Abraham at the oak at Mamre (Gen. 18:1), and to Jacob when He wrestled with him in the night (Gen. 32:24). Prophets often saw visions of God: on His throne in heaven (Is. 6:1; Ezek. 1:26-27), or above the Ark of the Covenant (Lev. 16:2), or even speaking face to face with Moses (Ex. 33:11). One could go on and on. There was even a period when God dwelt with Israel and accompanied them visibly for more than forty years, a presence so familiar to the people that they wept when He left them (Judges 2:1-4). These visible manifestations of God are often referred to in the Old Testament as “the Angel of the Lord” (Gen. 16:7-11; 22:11-15, et al.) or “the Word of the Lord” (Gen. 15:1-4; 1 Sam. 3:21; 15:10, et al.). The language the Old Testament uses for this figure is the language used only for Yahweh, the God of Israel, their Creator and Lord. For instance, when the Angel of the Lord appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex. 3:2), a few verses later the One speaking to him out of the bush is identified as God (Ex. 3:4-6). So given all this, how is it that St. John, writing about Jesus, can write in John 1:18 that “No one has ever seen God”? Did the Apostle John simply not know about the Angel of the Lord, the Word of the Lord who is God Himself? Sometimes when people quote John 1:18, they forget about the second half of the verse, which says, “The only13 Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has made Him known” (RSV). This verse is actually the completion of a thought that John had been making from the beginning of the chapter. He begins by saying, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (John 1:1). Later he says, “And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth; we have beheld his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father” (John 1:14 RSV). In other words, this figure who had appeared so many times in the Old Testament-this Angel of the Lord or Word of the Lord, who is indeed Yahweh, the God of Israel-is in fact the very Son of God, Jesus Christ. Saint John is referring to the existing knowledge of the appearance of God and saying that this Second Person of Yahweh whom Israel had always known is now man, and that man is Jesus Christ. He was therefore not saying that no one had ever seen God. He was saying that every time someone saw God, it was the Son and Word of God whom they saw. And He is now here among us. He is Jesus Christ. It is on this basis that Jesus is declared to be God in the New Testament. References: 13 The Greek (μονογενοῦς) monogenes in John 1:14 and 1:18 (μονογενὴς) is translated “only-begotten” in a number of English Bibles, but there is good scholarship that points to its biblical-era meaning as “unique” or “one and only,” which is reflected in other English translations. Jesus is of course also the only-begotten Son of God, but that’s not the point being made in John 1. The emphasis here is on the uniqueness of the Sonship of Jesus, because there are also “sons of God” who are angels.” ---- For those of you studying this issue objectively I would recommend reading that book in full.
God has often spoken in the NT alone or through angels, but never through the angel Jesus.
The heart of the matter is that the gospel is not simply about "God saving us from our sins." That view drastically oversimplifies and misses the full scope of what the gospel is proclaiming. First, let's look at the actual Greek word we're dealing with-ευαγγέλιο/evangelion. This wasn't some new Christian invention-it was already in use in the ancient world, typically referring to the public proclamation of a military victory or the birth of a new ruler. The evangelion was an announcement of a dramatic change in the cosmic order. So when the early Christians started using this term, they weren't just talking about personal salvation from sin. They were declaring that a new King had arrived and that His Kingdom was now breaking into the world in a decisive way. This was a cosmic, public proclamation, not just a private transaction. And at the heart of this gospel proclamation is the incarnation-the astounding reality that the eternal Son of God had taken on full human nature in the person of Jesus Christ. As the book quoted below explains, this was utterly unprecedented. Pagan gods might appear in human form, but they never truly became human. But the apostles and early Church proclaimed that in Jesus, the divine and human were united in one person. You see this in key Trinitarian passages like John 1:1,14 - "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God...and the Word became flesh and dwelt among us." This incarnation is essential, because it's what enables Christ to recapitulate the human story, undoing the damage of the Fall and reconciling humanity back to God. What the Son has not assumed, He has not healed-so the full taking on of human nature is crucial for our salvation. And that salvation isn't just about forgiveness of individual sins. It's about the decisive defeat of the demonic powers that have held humanity captive. That's why the gospel proclamations in Acts speak so boldly of Christ's resurrection as the victory over death and Hades-"O Death, where is your sting? O Hades, where is your victory?" (1 Cor 15:55) So the gospel isn't just "God saves from sin." It's the announcement of Christ's cosmic triumph over sin, death, and the devil, opening the way for humanity to be restored to our original vocation of worshiping God and joining the angelic host in His eternal Kingdom. Reducing it to a personal transaction and simply God saves us from sin” completely misses the full significance of what is being proclaimed, and ignores the cultural and linguistic meaning of the gospel text. “When the writers of the Christian Gospels-Ss. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John-referred to their works as gospels, they weren't simply saying they were writing books about some good news. They chose the word evangelion and intended by it what the world around them had already been using it for."-Stephen Andrew Damick, Arise O God
Incarnation or reincarnation is a purely pagan doctrine and has nothing to do with Christ!
The only word that comes to mind is BLASPHEMY.
fully agreed! Triune doctrines are blasphemous
Agree, it goes directly against the first commandment “Thou shalt have no other gods before me.” Having 3 gods is a blasphemy 👍
Truly man, Truly God
This video is hellbound
Matthew 28:19, Phillipians 2:6-10, Revelation 22:13
Amen 🙏🏽 This doctrine of the Trinity is sickening, an answer to the realm of evil and Satan over the universe, May our heavenly Abba Father the One True Living God and His only begotten Son Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior, have mercy. Thanks for sharing please beloved brother Andrew. A standard of rebellion against the God of heaven, such an architect of the Trinity doctrine deception by the Papacy System, watching unto prayer poised to Image of the beast in Corporate SDA GC organization by Jesuits infiltration. Terrible!
“There are three living Persons of the heavenly trio; in the name of these three great powers-The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit-Those who receive Christ by living faith are baptized, and these powers will co-operate with the obedient subjects of heaven in their efforts to live the new life in Christ.”-Special Testimonies, Series B, No. 7, 63. (Evangelism, 615. “Those who have been baptized can claim the help of the three great Worthies in heaven,-the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.”-Sermons and Talks, Vol. 1, 366. It seemed that Ellen White believed in three Persons.
It's deeply ironic to see someone reject the Trinity while relying on the New Testament canon, especially when you consider the historical timeline. The doctrine of the Trinity was firmly established long before the New Testament canon as we know it was universally recognized. In fact, the doctrine was a central belief of the early Church, defended by those who played a key role in shaping the very canon of scripture you accept today. The 27 books of the New Testament were not formally listed until 367 AD by Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria. Before this, early Christian communities used a variety of texts, but it wasn’t until the 4th century that there was a consensus on what books should be included. This consensus was reached by Christians who, without question, believed in the Trinity-a belief that had already been articulated and defended for centuries. To put it simply, rejecting the Trinity using a New Testament canon is historically inconsistent. The very people who established the canon-those who followed the teachings of the apostles-were staunch defenders of the Trinity. By dismissing the Trinity while relying on their canon, you’re effectively standing on a foundation built by the very doctrine you reject. It’s not just ironic; it’s a fundamental misunderstanding of how Christian doctrine and the biblical canon developed. The belief in the Trinity is interwoven with the history of how we came to recognize the New Testament. To reject one while accepting the other is to ignore the true continuity of Christian tradition.
And Jesus answered him, “The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord: Mark 12:29
The traditions of men lead to hell
@@jeromefalasca5118 ….and? That does nothing to reject the Trinity properly understood. In fact if one actually looked at the Greek they could see quite a bit more on these issues. "'In what did Second Temple Judaism consider the uniqueness of the one God to consist, what distinguished God as unique from all other reality, including beings worshipped as gods by Gentiles?, the answer given again and again, in a wide variety of Second Temple Jewish literature, is that the only true God, YHWH, the God of Israel, is sole Creator of all things and sole Ruler of all things. While these characteristics are by no means sufficient to identify God (since they say nothing, for example, about his goodness or his justice), they are the features which most readily distinguish God absolutely from all other reality. God alone created all things; all other things, including beings worshipped as gods by Gentiles, are created by him. God alone rules supreme over all things; all other things, including beings worshipped as gods by Gentiles, are subject to him. These ways of distinguishing God as unique formed a very easily intelligible way of defining the uniqueness of the God they worshipped which every Jew in every synagogue in the late Second Temple period would certainly have known. However diverse Judaism may have been in many other respects, this was common: only the God of Israel is worthy of worship because he is sole Creator of all things and sole Ruler of all things. Other beings who might otherwise be thought divine are by these criteria God's creatures and subjects."-Richard Bauckham, biblical scholar Isa. 40:26, 28; 42:5; 44:24; 45:12, 18; 48:13; 51:16; Neh. 9:6; Hos. 13:4 LXX; 2 Macc. 1:24; Sir. 43:33; Bel 5; Jub. 12:3-5; Sib. Or. 3:20-35; 8:375-76; Sib. Or. frg. 1:5-6; Sib. Or. frg. 3; Sib. Or. frg. 5; 2 En. 47:3-4; 66:4; Apoc. Ab. 7:10; Ps-Sophocles; Jos. Asen. 12:1-2; T. Job 2:4. Dan. 4:34-35; Bel 5; Add. Esth. 13:9-11; 16:18, 21; 3 Macc. 2:2-3; 6:2; Wis. 12:13; Sir. 18:1-3; Sib. Or. 3:10, 19; Sib. Or. frg. 1:7,15,17,35; 1 En. 9:5; 84:3; 2 En. 33:7; 2 Bar. 54:13; Josephus, A.J. 1:155-6. "...Whereas the inclusion of Jesus in the eschatological sovereignty of God is found in all the New Testament literature, his inclusion in the work of creation is less widespread, but is found in 1 Corinthians, Colossians, Hebrews, Revelation and the Gospel of John. Since it is of less direct relevance to most of the concerns of the New Testament writers, this is not surprising. What is noteworthy is that in three of these cases (1 Corinthians, Hebrews and John) the purpose, in my view, is precisely to express Jewish monotheism in christological terms. It is not that these writers wish to say anything about the work of creation for its own sake or even that they wish to say anything about the relationship of Christ to creation for its own sake, but that they wish precisely to include Jesus Christ in the unique divine identity. Including him precisely in the divine activity of creation is the most unequivocal way of excluding any threat to monotheism-as though Jesus were a subordinate demigod while redefining the unique identity of God in a way that includes Jesus. To illustrate the point, we shall examine the earliest of these texts: 1 Corinthians 8:6. This passage in its context reads: 'Hence, as to the eating of food offered to idols, we know that 'there is no idol in the world' and that 'there is no God except one.' 'Indeed, even though there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth -as in fact there are many gods and many lords -but for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we for him, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and we through him.' Paul's concern in this context is explicitly monotheistic. The issue of eating meat offered to idols and participation in temple banquets is an instance of the highly traditional Jewish monotheistic concern for loyalty to the only true God in a context of pagan polytheistic worship. What Paul does is to maintain this Jewish monotheistic concern in a Christian interpretation for which loyalty to the only true God entails loyalty to the Lord Jesus Christ. He takes up from the Corinthians' letter (at the end of verse 4) the typical Jewish monotheistic formula 'there is no God except one' in order to agree with it and to give, in verse 6, his own fuller monotheistic formulation, which contrasts the 'many gods and many lords' of the Corinthians' pagan environment (verse 5) with the one God and one Lord to whom Christians owe exclusive allegiance. Verse 6 is a carefully formulated statement, a. but for us [there is] one God, the Father, b. from whom [are] all things and we for him, c. and one Lord, Jesus Christ, d. through whom [are] all things and we through him. The statement has been composed from two sources, both clearly recognizable. One is the Shema`, the classic Jewish statement of the uniqueness of God, taken from the Torah itself, recited twice daily by all observant Jews...It is now commonly recognized that Paul has here adapted the Shema° and produced, as it were, a Christian version of it. Not so widely recognized is the full significance of this. In the first and third lines of Paul's formula (labelled a and c above), Paul has, in fact, reproduced all the words of the statement about YHWH in the Shema` (Deut. 6:4: 'The LORD our God, the LORD, is one'), but Paul has rearranged the words in such a way as to produce an affirmation of both one God, the Father, and one Lord, Jesus Christ. It should be quite clear that Paul is including the Lord Jesus Christ in the unique divine identity. He is redefining monotheism as christological monotheism. If he were understood as adding the one Lord to the one God of whom the Shema` speaks, then, from the perspective of Jewish monotheism, he would certainly be producing, not christological monotheism, but outright ditheism. The addition of a unique Lord to the unique God of the Shema` would flatly contradict the uniqueness of the latter. The only possible way to understand Paul as maintaining monotheism is to understand him to be including Jesus in the unique identity of the one God affirmed in the Shema. But this is, in any case, clear from the fact that the term 'Lord', applied here to Jesus as the 'one Lord, is taken from the Shema` itself. Paul is not adding to the one God of the Shema` a 'Lord' the Shema` does not mention. He is identifying Jesus as the 'Lord' whom the Shema` affirms to be one. Thus, in Paul's quite unprecedented reformulation of the Shema`, the unique identity of the one God consists of the one God, the Father, and the one Lord, his Messiah. Contrary to what many exegetes who have not sufficiently understood the way in which the unique identity of God was understood in Second Temple Judaism seem to suppose, by including Jesus in this unique identity Paul is certainly not repudiating Jewish monotheism, whereas were he merely associating Jesus with the unique God he certainly would be repudiating monotheism."-bible scholar Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the God of Israel: God Crucified and Other Studies on the New Testament's Christology of Divine Identity John 1:1-5; 1 Cor. 8:6; Col. 1:15-16; Heb. 1:2-3, 10-12; Rev. 3:14. The 'our' of the Shema` appears as the 'for us' at the beginning of Paul's reformulation. F.F. Bruce, I and 2 Corinthians (NCB; London: Oliphants, 1971), 80; D.R. de Lacey, "'One Lord" in Pauline Christology,' in Christ the Lord, ed. Harold H. Rowdon (D. Guthrie FS; Leicester: IVP, 1982), 191-203; Dunn, Christology, 180; Hurtado, One God, 97; N. Thomas Wright, The Climax of the Covenant (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1991), 128-9; D.A. Hagner, 'Paul's Christology and Jewish Monotheism,' in Perspectives on Christology, ed. M. Shuster and R. Muller (P.K. Jewett; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1991), 28-9; Neil Richardson, Paul's Language about God (JSNTSup 99; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1994), 300; B. Witherington III, Jesus the Sage (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1994), 316.
KJ2 King James 2000 John 8:40: "But now you seek to kill me, a man that has told you the truth, which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham."
@@saenzperspectives Thanks for your reply but our Lord and saviours words are clear About His Father, beware of the traditions and words of men ,especially Athanasius . I want to point out that I believe Jesus to be fully Devine and as the word was the active agent of creation but if he says the father is greater than I then I believe him.
Boy o boy there is a special place in hell for you because you are responsible for their souls, fix it while you can. You are sincerely in our prayers
If the HS is the an anatomical spirit like man's spirit then: 1.how comes He has a mind. Rom.8:27. 2. How comes He can be send, talks, etc. 3. How comes He has a name other than the body or God into which we are baptized? 4. How could He be shared by the Father and the Son unless the Two are conjoined? 5. Then the human spirit should also have a mind, name, ability to move and talk independently!!
Please study your Bible brother and don’t be deceived
Antitrinitarians much lie JWs deny the divinity of Christ and are just as lost!
When Christ was crucified, it was His human nature that died. Deity did not sink and die; that would have been impossible.-The S.D.A. Bible Commentary 5:1113. "He was equal with God, infinite and omnipotent. He was above all finite requirements. ... On Christ alone the human family depended for their existence. He is the eternal, self-existent Son, on whom no yoke had iicome....He could say that which not the highest angel could say-“I have power over my own life. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again.” [John 10:18.] {Ms 101, 1897, par. 28}
BIB'16 Berean Interlinear Bible (BIB) John 10:17-18: "Διὰ τοῦτό, με ὁ Πατὴρ ἀγαπᾷ, ὅτι ἐγὼ τίθημι τὴν ψυχήν μου, ἵνα πάλιν λάβω αὐτήν. οὐδεὶς αἴρει* αὐτὴν ἀπ’ ἐμοῦ, ἀλλ’ ἐγὼ τίθημι αὐτὴν ἀπ’ ἐμαυτοῦ. ἐξουσίαν ἔχω θεῖναι αὐτήν, καὶ ἐξουσίαν ἔχω πάλιν λαβεῖν αὐτήν. ταύτην τὴν ἐντολὴν ἔλαβον παρὰ τοῦ Πατρός μου.”" BIB'16 Berean Interlinear Bible (BIB) John 10:17-18: "Therefore I love the Father, that I have laid down my life, that I may receive it again. I have power to give it, and power to receive it again. This commandment I have received from my Father." Who subsequently brought the man Jesus to life? Himself? No! Only God the Father brought him to life. Jesus had no power to revive himself. He could only give his life and then take it back (without having to, of course, but God the Father commanded him to do so).
@@mikmark100 He was God while upon earth, but He divested Himself of the form of God, and in its stead took the form and fashion of a man. He walked the earth as a man. For our sakes He became poor, that we through His poverty might be made rich. He laid aside His glory and His majesty. He was God, but the glories of the form of God He for awhile relinquished.... He bore the sins of the world, and endured the penalty which rolled like a mountain upon His divine soul. He yielded up His life a sacrifice, that man should not eternally die. He died, not through being compelled to die, but by His own free will.-The Review and Herald, July 5, 1887.
@@Keating-ue6do So the fact that he was God is a completely false non-biblical teaching of EGW, assuming she wrote it, which cannot be 100% proven.
@@Keating-ue6doThat's a story of a Trinatarian believer. The bible clearly defines God as the Father, Jesus as the son of God ( Not God the son, never ever mentioned once) and the Holy trinity is never mentioned as a God or placed on the throne next to God the Father and Lord Jesus. T he holy trinity is the force, couple of times out of thousands of times it was given a make pronoun and that is if you are aware of the Greek language it gives things a male, feminine or neutral term. The moon is male, the sun is male, the earth is female etc
@@gnads9771 John 20:28 And Thomas answered and said to Him (Jesus),“My Lord and my God!” What makes this passage powerful evidence for the deity of Christ is that Jesus does not correct Thomas. Thomas didn’t merely say, “My Lord and My God!” He said it to Jesus according to the verse.
Amen!!! SDA Trademark Church is coming ”an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live” Revelation 13: 14.
I want to push back against your understanding of "both" in Zechariah 6:12-13. The use of the word both has nothing to do with the Godhead. These two verses refer to the uniting of king and priest on the same throne and existing in one person, Jesus Christ. Describing how "both" a perfect priest and king exist in one person. Zechariah 6 is a prophecy identifying Jesus as our perfect priest king. Jesus is the perfect high priest and King who makes atonement for sin and ushers in a council of peace. He brings peace with God to sinners. God bless and happy Sabbath!
@BDB-It5gd..I saw that also, BDB, but I forgot about it. So I didn’t mention it in my original reply. But you are right. He took that word “both” completely out of context. He is just learning how to study the Bible, and there are a lot of things that he simply doesn’t know or understand yet. Context is one of them.
Jesus is the High Priest in heaven who intercedes for us and participates in the shaking judgment if the house of God and is not yet king. There is only one ruler in heaven and that is God the Father YHVH. Jesus will become king after the 7 plagues are poured out and he will come as king a second time. KJV1611 Bible King James 1611 1Ti 6:14-16: "That thou keepe this commandement without spot, vnrebukeable, vntill the appearing of our Lord Iesus Christ. Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed, and onely Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords: Who onely hath immortalitie, dwelling in the light, which no man can approch vnto, whom no man hath seene, nor can see: to whom be honour and power euerlasting. Amen."
The great plan of redemption was laid before the foundation of the world. And Christ, our Substitute and Surety, did not stand alone in the wondrous undertaking of the ransom of man. In the plan to save a lost world, the counsel was between them both; the covenant of peace was between the Father and the Son. (ST December 23, 1897)
Jesus was 100% human!! Thats why God Father had to race his Son from the death!! Read Acts 2:24+32 and 3:15+26 and 4:10;5:30 and 10:40;13;30;33;34;37. ROMAN 4:24 and 6:4!!
Matthew 28:19, Phillipians 2:6-10, Revelation 22:13. Jesus had a human nature and a divine nature, inseparable
Truly man,Truly God
atholicaVeritas777 Matthew 28:19,so 1 John 7:5 you don't find it in Hebrew and Greek!! Read Acts 2:38 it would be controversial!!!
Getting to Hell!!! The Bible talks about Hell, " Hell is the Grave= Pitt=Hell"! When we leave the World. Luke 16:23+Matthew 5:29+ Psalm 6:5;9:17 andNumbers 16:30+33!!!
@@williamhartweg6935 In the New Testament, two distinct Greek terms-*Hades* and *Gehenna*-are often translated as "hell" in English, but they refer to different concepts. Understanding these terms correctly is crucial to grasping what the apostles and early Christians meant when they spoke about the afterlife. *Hades* is the Greek word for the place of the dead, equivalent to the Hebrew concept of *Sheol*. It is understood as a temporary abode where souls reside after death, awaiting the final judgment. This is not a place of eternal punishment but rather an interim state. For instance, in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31), the rich man finds himself in Hades, experiencing torment, yet this is not his final destination. On the other hand, *Gehenna* refers to the place of final judgment, the "lake of fire" mentioned in Revelation (20:14-15). *Gehenna* was originally a valley outside Jerusalem where refuse was burned, and it came to symbolize the eternal punishment prepared for the wicked after the final judgment. This is the place traditionally understood as "hell" in the sense of eternal separation from God. The confusion arises when both *Hades* and *Gehenna* are translated into English as "hell," leading many to conflate the temporary state of the dead with the final, eternal punishment. Early Christians, guided by the teachings of the apostles, made a clear distinction between these two terms. They understood *Hades* as a temporary state where souls awaited resurrection and judgment, and *Gehenna* as the final, eternal destination for the unrighteous. This distinction is vital to understanding the eschatological teachings in Christianity. The conflation of these terms in translation has contributed to misunderstandings about the nature of the afterlife. The original language and the early Christian tradition make it clear that *Hades* is not synonymous with the eternal hell but is rather a precursor to the final judgment, where the ultimate fates of souls are determined by God.
1Corintians 8:6!!! And Jesus would not die,if he was God!!Jesus was 100% human! But born from the holy Spirit, without inheritance of Sin!! ( But Jesus could have fallen in Sin, if he was not constantly in contact with his Father!!)The Gospel is to accept Jesus Christ's death,for salvation! Then Sin is,deviding from God,through the first man,'Adam'!. As humans we inherit it. So,we can do nothing about it,just accept Jesus Christ! John 14:6!!! But God says: John 14:15. God's government was two in the beginning! Now God is ruling and Jesus is our intermediary.And God decides only! when the time is finished! To the holy Spirit,is the Spirit of the Father and the Son! The Father is a Person and has the name,"Jehova, I am!"The Son is a Person and has the name,"Jesus Christ." The holy Spirit has no name,then it is not a Person. So,the holy Spirit can be at the same time in the whole World. A Person cannot
"...Whereas the inclusion of Jesus in the eschatological sovereignty of God is found in all the New Testament literature, his inclusion in the work of creation is less widespread, but is found in 1 Corinthians, Colossians, Hebrews, Revelation and the Gospel of John. Since it is of less direct relevance to most of the concerns of the New Testament writers, this is not surprising. What is noteworthy is that in three of these cases (1 Corinthians, Hebrews and John) the purpose, in my view, is precisely to express Jewish monotheism in christological terms. It is not that these writers wish to say anything about the work of creation for its own sake or even that they wish to say anything about the relationship of Christ to creation for its own sake, but that they wish precisely to include Jesus Christ in the unique divine identity. Including him precisely in the divine activity of creation is the most unequivocal way of excluding any threat to monotheism-as though Jesus were a subordinate demigod while redefining the unique identity of God in a way that includes Jesus. To illustrate the point, we shall examine the earliest of these texts: 1 Corinthians 8:6. This passage in its context reads: 'Hence, as to the eating of food offered to idols, we know that 'there is no idol in the world' and that 'there is no God except one.' 'Indeed, even though there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth -as in fact there are many gods and many lords -but for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we for him, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and we through him.' Paul's concern in this context is explicitly monotheistic. The issue of eating meat offered to idols and participation in temple banquets is an instance of the highly traditional Jewish monotheistic concern for loyalty to the only true God in a context of pagan polytheistic worship. What Paul does is to maintain this Jewish monotheistic concern in a Christian interpretation for which loyalty to the only true God entails loyalty to the Lord Jesus Christ. He takes up from the Corinthians' letter (at the end of verse 4) the typical Jewish monotheistic formula 'there is no God except one' in order to agree with it and to give, in verse 6, his own fuller monotheistic formulation, which contrasts the 'many gods and many lords' of the Corinthians' pagan environment (verse 5) with the one God and one Lord to whom Christians owe exclusive allegiance. Verse 6 is a carefully formulated statement, a. but for us [there is] one God, the Father, b. from whom [are] all things and we for him, c. and one Lord, Jesus Christ, d. through whom [are] all things and we through him. The statement has been composed from two sources, both clearly recognizable. One is the Shema`, the classic Jewish statement of the uniqueness of God, taken from the Torah itself, recited twice daily by all observant Jews...It is now commonly recognized that Paul has here adapted the Shema° and produced, as it were, a Christian version of it. Not so widely recognized is the full significance of this. In the first and third lines of Paul's formula (labelled a and c above), Paul has, in fact, reproduced all the words of the statement about YHWH in the Shema` (Deut. 6:4: 'The LORD our God, the LORD, is one'), but Paul has rearranged the words in such a way as to produce an affirmation of both one God, the Father, and one Lord, Jesus Christ. It should be quite clear that Paul is including the Lord Jesus Christ in the unique divine identity. He is redefining monotheism as christological monotheism. If he were understood as adding the one Lord to the one God of whom the Shema` speaks, then, from the perspective of Jewish monotheism, he would certainly be producing, not christological monotheism, but outright ditheism. The addition of a unique Lord to the unique God of the Shema` would flatly contradict the uniqueness of the latter. The only possible way to understand Paul as maintaining monotheism is to understand him to be including Jesus in the unique identity of the one God affirmed in the Shema. But this is, in any case, clear from the fact that the term 'Lord', applied here to Jesus as the 'one Lord, is taken from the Shema` itself. Paul is not adding to the one God of the Shema` a 'Lord' the Shema` does not mention. He is identifying Jesus as the 'Lord' whom the Shema` affirms to be one. Thus, in Paul's quite unprecedented reformulation of the Shema`, the unique identity of the one God consists of the one God, the Father, and the one Lord, his Messiah. Contrary to what many exegetes who have not sufficiently understood the way in which the unique identity of God was understood in Second Temple Judaism seem to suppose, by including Jesus in this unique identity Paul is certainly not repudiating Jewish monotheism, whereas were he merely associating Jesus with the unique God he certainly would be repudiating monotheism."-Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the God of Israel: God Crucified and Other Studies on the New Testament's Christology of Divine Identity John 1:1-5; 1 Cor. 8:6; Col. 1:15-16; Heb. 1:2-3, 10-12; Rev. 3:14. The 'our' of the Shema` appears as the 'for us' at the beginning of Paul's reformulation. F.F. Bruce, I and 2 Corinthians (NCB; London: Oliphants, 1971), 80; D.R. de Lacey, "'One Lord" in Pauline Christology,' in Christ the Lord, ed. Harold H. Rowdon (D. Guthrie FS; Leicester: IVP, 1982), 191-203; Dunn, Christology, 180; Hurtado, One God, 97; N. Thomas Wright, The Climax of the Covenant (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1991), 128-9; D.A. Hagner, 'Paul's Christology and Jewish Monotheism,' in Perspectives on Christology, ed. M. Shuster and R. Muller (P.K. Jewett; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1991), 28-9; Neil Richardson, Paul's Language about God (JSNTSup 99; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1994), 300; B. Witherington III, Jesus the Sage (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1994), 316.
Jesus is Lord. No Lord but God.
Truly man, Truly God
The Philosophical Foundations of John 1:1 and the Incarnation in Koine Greek The opening verse of the Gospel of John, written in Koine Greek, has captivated theologians and philosophers for centuries with its profound and multifaceted implications. The sentence, "Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος" (In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God), not only introduces the character of "the Word" (ὁ λόγος), but it also delves into the philosophical implications of both "λόγος" and "ἀρχή" (beginning). The following aims to provide an in-depth analysis of John 1:1 in the context of Greek philosophy and Christian theology, while also considering its connection to John 1:14 and the understanding of the Incarnation. The Koine Greek of John 1:1: In this pivotal verse, the word "λόγος" (logos, English: “Word”) takes center stage. In the Greek philosophical tradition, "λόγος" had a long history. It represented rationality, thought, and the underlying principle governing the cosmos. The ideas surrounding "λόγος" were particularly prominent in Pre-Socratic philosophy. Heraclitus saw "logos" as the unifying force in a world of constant change, while Parmenides emphasized the unchanging truth it represented. Plato and Aristotle further explored the relationship between "logos," language, and rationality, while Stoic philosophers considered it the divine principle governing the world. John 1:1 and Its Philosophical Implications: In John 1:1, the concept of "λόγος" reflects the convergence of Greek philosophical ideas with Christian theology. The verse declares that "the Word" (ὁ λόγος) existed in the beginning, emphasizing its eternal nature. This is a direct nod to the Pre-Socratic notion of an underlying, unchanging principle or αρχή "archē" that governs the universe. Moreover, the verse asserts that "the Word" was "with God" (ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν), indicating an intimate relational aspect akin to philosophical ideas about the nature of the αρχή "archē." The ultimate declaration, "and the Word was God" (καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος), is a theological revelation of the divinity of "the Word," while recognizing its distinctiveness within the Godhead. The Implication of John 1:14 and the Incarnation: John 1:14, written in the same Koine Greek context, follows this profound proclamation with the statement, "καὶ ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο" (and the Word became flesh). This verse encapsulates the essence of the Incarnation, the theological doctrine that the divine Word, "the Logos," took on human form in the person of Jesus Christ. The implications are monumental. The eternal and divine Word, identified in the Greek philosophical tradition as the rational and underlying principle of existence, now becomes tangible in human flesh. The Gospel of John beautifully bridges Greek philosophical ideas with Christian theology, presenting Jesus as the embodiment of the eternal, rational, and divine principle. The Understanding of Athanasius of Alexandria: Saint Athanasius Bishop of Alexandria, a central figure in early Christian theology, and the first one in history to compile the New Testament canonical list of the 27 books as we now know it, and was a major proponent of the Nicene Creed, which affirmed the divinity of Christ. St. Athanasius championed the understanding that Christ, as the "Logos," was consubstantial with the Father. In his writings, particularly in "On the Incarnation," Athanasius articulated the idea that the Word becoming flesh was a transformative act by which humanity could be reconciled to God. He viewed the Incarnation as the means through which the eternal Word of God entered human history, enabling salvation and the restoration of divine-human communion. Interestingly, those who reject the divinity of Christ, are misunderstanding not just the overt and deep linguistic meaning behind John chapter 1 and the words used, but are also rejecting the beliefs of those who compiled the New Testament that they rely on to reject those very same beliefs. Conclusion: In Koine Greek, John 1:1 masterfully merges Greek philosophical concepts of the "logos" and "archē" with Christian theological beliefs. "The Word" (ὁ λόγος) is presented as both eternal and divine, and the subsequent declaration of the Incarnation in John 1:14 profoundly demonstrates the tangible embodiment of the divine in Jesus Christ. This concept, fundamental to Christian theology, was understood by early theologians like Athanasius of Alexandria as the means by which humanity could be reconciled with God. The Gospel of John, written in Koine Greek, serves as a bridge between the philosophical and theological worlds, providing a timeless and profound exploration of the nature of Christ and the salvation of humanity.
@@saenzperspectives Logos can be translated by +- 20 different words why did the translators choose logos = word (in the greece with a small l) when elsewhere in Scripture it is translated completely differently? The Greek texts have And God was the Word not and the Word was God as the Trinitarian translators adapted. Wycliffe Bible, 1395 John 1:1: "In the bigynnyng was the word, and the word was at God, and God was the word." CVB Coverdale Bible, 1535 John 1:1: "In the begynnynge was the worde, and the worde was with God, and God was ye worde." NEB Νέα Ελληνικά βιβλία, 1901 Ιω 1:1: "Εν αρχη ητο ο Λογος, και ο Λογος ητο παρα τω Θεω, και Θεος ητο ο Λογος." (and God was the word) BHPm+ Bunning Heuristic Prototype Greek New Testament (Medieval) John 1:1: "Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν, καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος." BIB'16 Berean Interlinear Bible (BIB) John 1:1: "Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος, καὶ ὁ Λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν, καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος." Barach-m KOINE GREEK BIBLE: Septuagint, New Testament, Apocrypha + Lexicon Jn 1:1: "Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος." CT ST 1550 Stephanus (ST) John 1:1: "εν αρχη ην ο λογοϲ και ο λογοϲ ην προϲ τον θεον και θεοϲ ην ο λογοϲ" CT WH 1885 Wescott and Hort (WH) John 1:1: "εν αρχη ην ο λογοϲ και ο λογοϲ ην προϲ τον θεον και θεοϲ ην ο λογοϲ" GA 01 Codex Sinaiticus, designated by ℵ or 01 John 1:1: "εν αρχη ην ο λογοϲ και ο λογοϲ ην προϲ τον θ̅ν̅ και θ̅ϲ̅ ην ο λογοϲ" GA 02 Codex Alexandrinus, designated by A or 02 John 1:1: "εν αρχη ην ο λογοϲ και ο λογοϲ η̅ προϲ τον θ̅ν̅ και θ̅ϲ̅ ην ο λογοϲ" GA 03 Codex Vaticanus, designated by B or 03 John 1:1: "εν αρχη ην ο λογοϲ και ο λογοϲ ην προϲ τον θ̅ν̅ και θ̅ϲ̅ ην ο λογοϲ" GNTTH+ The Greek New Testament, Produced at Tyndale House, Cambridge John 1:1: "Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος." TCGNT Text-Critical Greek New Testament Jn 1:1: "Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν, καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος
May God be praised
The trinity doctrine 3 in one is a fundamental with Canaanite worship and Indian, Egyptian doctrines. Its no surprise to see trinity god heads 3 in 1 in all forms of pagan worship from shamans to the new age this never changes. Mainstream churches have deceived the masses this is evident in both Sat, and sun. When the Lord says ' I am The Lord and there is none like me" He means it!
Amen
Excellent presentation much needed. It deserves a second and third part God willing.
Amen ❤
I think your whole talk is biased and misplaced. The point of God being three persons is there in scripture. You just have to be diligent and study it out. You took an attempt to explain findings and made it the subject of discussion. Thats like replying to the last line of a letter and ignoring the prior 3 pages. The message is that God in the bible shows us that he is 3 persons. "And God said Let US [PLURAL] make man in our own image..." and God made man in his [SINGULAR] own image, in the image of God [PLURAL] made he them. Ty Gibson's strong point is not about love needing 3 persons to be perfect. It is a comment made by study and compilation of scriptures and trying to help fellow believers by painting a picture for them. Pro 8:30 Then I was by him, as one brought up with him: and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him; - This verse is Christ speaking of his being from everlasting. Looking at the sanctuary service you will find that the Holy Spirit also plays a crucial role. And if you deepen your study you will find that Salvation is worked by them 3. And each gives glory to the other, just as we ultimately learn to give God all the glory - while he turns and says Well done thou good and faithfull servant. The question is: Is God one individual supreme being, or is God 3 supreme beings (who are one)? Then from there...we can maybe talk about the 3 persons being necessary for love to be perfect or not.
Why does 'us' have to be three? “The Sovereign of the universe was not alone in His work of beneficence. He had an associate-a co-worker who could appreciate His purposes, and could share His joy in giving happiness to created beings. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God.” John 1:1,2. “Christ, the Word, the only begotten of God, was one with the eternal Father - one in nature, in character, in purpose - the only being that could enter into all the counsels and purposes of God.” PP p. 34 In this statement, AN associate, A co-worker and then it clearly states who that associate and co-worker is - Chirst, the Word, the only begotten of God.
You say that "God in the Bible shows us that he is 3 persons". You then quote Genesis 1:26 as proof. Read the following: "And I saw that when God said to his Son, Let us make man in our image, Satan was jealous of Jesus. He wished to be consulted concerning the formation of man. He was filled with envy, jealousy and hatred. He wished to be the highest in heaven, next to God, and receive the highest honors. Until this time all heaven was in order, harmony and perfect subjection to the government of God." . 1SG 17.1. So God is actually singular and it is the Father and that is why the next verse is singular therefore Genesis 1:26 doesn't prove a triune god. Proverbs 8:30 is Jesus speaking, correct. But it doesn't say He has always been, quite to the contrary it says He had a beginning. "When there were no depths, I was *brought forth*; when there were no fountains abounding with water. Before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I *brought forth*:" "And if you deepen your study you will find that Salvation is worked by them 3." I have not found a verse saying that but I have found the following verse which speaks of the plan of salvation. Mal 6:13 "and the counsel of peace shall be between them both (literally two)."
Did not know of Lord’s given Miller’s rules of Biblical prophecy interpretations, love its beauty and simplicity . Makes great harmonious sense . Praise The Father and His only begotten Son. Maranatha
How I pray that prof Walter Veith is right we live in a evil world
you can read any book but you should believe on the scripture not on HELEN write she said some good things but she said a lot false prophecies
There is the idea of yin and yang along a similar line of thought - there must be evil in order to have good and they "balance" or "perfect" each other in one. But in this case it is two and not three separate entities. I ask - did there have to exist evil at all to have a perfect one? Ans: No. The presence of evil did not have to exist in order for good to exist. So God being good, it follows that evil did not need to exist in His perfect universe in order to "perfect" God any further. So Satan or evil did not need to come about in order for love and goodness to be fully and perfectly existent. God IS and God's name is I AM. He is complete as ONE single entity. Would God have had to "pre-ordain" "giving up His Son" if sin/evil had never come into existence? Did God "pre-ordain" evil then? Since God is good, then how/why could sin ever come to be in the first place? This verse is telling something but is hard to understand: Isa_45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things. In the end of the conflict between good and evil, there will once again be all things united in ONE. Even the evil confesses that God is just and good in all that He does and is. It is hard to explain but must be believed by faith as the truth. Is the existence of goodness and only good then a matter of choice and only based on free choice? If all of creation eventually decides that only good should exist, then God will ultimately destroy the darkness that He created or separated out/apart from Himself in the first place. Rev 21:7, 8 All that will remain is pure light. Rev 21:23, 27 and Rev 22:5
some really good points
Only goes to prove that the Seventh Day Adventist church has been infiltrated by Jesuits. "There is but one GOD and one Mediator between GOD and man, the man Jesus the Christ."
TRINITARIANS REALLY NEED TO CONSIDER THESE QUESTIONS Ellen White has stated in her writings that the top three beings in heaven were as follows [ 1SP 17.1 ] 1st. God the Father 2nd. Jesus Christ 3rd. Lucifer Therefore, my question is how can a created angel such as Lucifer, have more authority than the eternal God the Holy Spirit? Trinitarians say that "God the Holy Spirit" is included in the Trio, but they misinterpret what Ellen White meant. If he was truly in the Godhead, he should have occupied the number three position in heaven, but he didn't, Lucifer did. Also, where is his throne? God the Father has a throne, and the Christ has a throne in heaven according to the bible, but where is any mention of the Holy Spirit having a throne? In summary, what Trinitarians don't understand is that the Holy Spirit is just the Spirit of God the Father. So, with this in mind, is the Trinity really a Christian doctrine?
Those are definitely good questions!
This was great. The two of you together, bouncing ideas off each other, is a great format. You should do it more often. In my opinion. - “An implication of an implication” lol, that was gold Andy! And completely true. 😂
We were able to be in the same location at the same time so it worked out. We were able to be sitting right across from each other which is far better than doing these things through technology. I do agree though that it worked really good.
Amen, Brothers! So many great comments already - a different tack - The worst thing that can happen in a relationship is triangulation - ask a therapist. (Yes, that’s a human failure but aren’t we made in the image of God?) If 3 is so perfect why wasn’t marriage given between 3 humans or why didn’t God create Adam , Eve and some other creature to make 3 and have marriage be with 3? Absurd, yes but it does make the point.
Good point on the triangulation thought
Rom 1:21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
Sadly accurate