Thank you for digging in so deeply on these topics. I must listen again a few times and digest it all. I am a lifetime Bible need but not educated in the classroom. I truly appreciate the opportunity to listen to scholarly discussion. I love to learn.
Sam, you did an awesome job with this interview. I respect that you just let Tim talk without challenging him. That being said, now I am dying for a part two. I would love to hear Tim answer some of the challenges you might put to him, especially regarding what he said towards the very end.
Great discussion brothers! This is the 1st interview I have seen you do Sam.....wonderful!!!!!!!! You give respect to your guest to speak and have a calming presence even as you all discussed a "hot" topic. Look forward to more. Tim........well, knocks it right out of the park as usual - God has used you in many ways for many of His Children to see and hear and have their hearts softened to His Beautiful Truth.
Sam, your focus on goals is like a breath of fresh air for me, relieving the frustration I've been experiencing with other parts of the corner. Keep up the fantastic work.
As you noted, Heiser does not deny the concept of the Trinity. He suggests that when Genesis 1:26 was written, the original readers would have understood the "Let us" statement to have been directed to the divine council. However, the Godhead-the Trinity-would have been present within that context. Heiser also notes that although the text says, "Let us," the action is ultimately carried out by one being, God, as seen in Genesis 1:27, “His own image.”
@@rickdavis2235 He wouldn't, that proves Jesus isn't God if you think about it. He wouldn't pray to himself either, or sit at the right hand of himself.
I think that the limitations of language and comprehension prevent us from understanding what our God is doing. How does a being that created everything, communicate with his creation? As a species, we continue to "know" more, to us it is millenia of development and learning, but to the creator, who is beyond time, we are simple vessels of his spirit. We pass through this life in less than a blink of an eye, in that blink we try to understand God. It's not possible. But we should still try, because his teaching is woven into the fabric of his creation❤
If knowing who God and/or Jesus was simple, then we would all agree on the topic. John 12: 44 Don't be a scoffer..do your own research. Tim Mackie is a tremendous resource as we search for truth. Thank you Tim for answering the call to serve God. Don't just listen and accept a creed, do your own research,, then be a disciple of Jesus. John 14 The world has enough who "believe", we need disciples who follow and obey.
Only thing Tim said I did not like was “Godself” instead of the Scriptural “himself.” John 5:26 being one reference. It’s a quibble, but do not like the revealed description being muddied by the contemporary mood of pronoun whackamole.
Perhaps one reason why we don’t recognize God more in the Bible (and in life) is that we don’t recognize ourselves. We are made in God’s image. That must mean more than we realize. God in his grace gives us eyes to see only what we can handle.
This discussion, I felt, was low on the theological and historical factual timeline, as in, How, what, where, when, why of trinity understanding. But I'm not here to talk about that. I'd would like to say, "Sam, your host skills were perfect." A real pleasure to see you allow your guest the conversational floor without frequent interruptions, or talking over your guest. So many other hosts forget to do this, however well meaning. Keep up the good content. ☝
Reading the Bible is good but studying it is far better. Only then can we begin to understand it. My church just spent 14 months doing a weekly bible study on the gospel of John.
Great Interview. Would love to see you interview Gavin Orltund on this or a rebuttal video to his revent video on the Trinity. Would love to see what pushback you have for him.
Sam, thanks for this- I thoroughly enjoyed the interview! Given that Tim is especially dwelling on the subject of the Trinity right now, have you considered sending a Unitarian book his way that covers the other side of the discussion? I’m sure it would be beneficial in this season of his, no matter where he lands.
The 3 questions that should be asked are: Is hell real? Does God require repentance in the life of a believer? Is homosexuality a sin? A lot of pastors and teachers will give you some surprising answers to these questions and reveal if they are from the Lord or not.
Focusing on this discussion only, the subject is trinity doctrinal accretion, did it exist or not? Those other subjects could be covered in another few videos.
Really good converzation! With regards to the "what is the Bible" question I would love to hear more about the Bible as story. It seems that story is a container for transferring knowledge in a condenses form. This would make sense if an infinite mind was trying to reveal knowledge to a finite mind, we would need to use a compression devise and great stories seems to yield their knowledge overtime. I am also really surprised Tim doesn't have a podcast channel where he can just verbally process.
There is the Bible project podcast which is longer form and freer than the Bible project RUclips channel, but I think something even looser would be good too
@@cc3775 WROTE: "The Bible is an Israel story and that story came to a conclusion in 70AD." The entire Bible is about our Lord and Savior, Christ Jesus. The old testament says He is coming, the new testament says He is here, the Acts of the Apostles proclaim Him, the Epistles explain Him and Revelation says He is coming back. How did you miss that?
@@rickdavis2235 😂 tell me you don’t know the Bible without saying you don’t the the Bible. Jesus was made Lord over ancient Israel, he was their savior. He came to redeem them from transgressions committed under the first covenant. Ancient Hebrew writings are not about you, so stop inserting yourself.
@@cc3775 You assume a lot. I never said the Hebrew scriptures were about me. Jesus was God's plan for salvation before the world was created. I'll give you a chance to respond before I provide scripture. And don't get too cocky with the ad-hominem.
For me this is really surprising and I'm really glad I could hear Tim's thoughts on this subject. I found The Bibleproject very early on, on the release of their third video and afterwards became a big fan of their podcast. A few years later I started to delve into the question on who God and Jesus are. I even wrote them an email, but by than they were probably to big to answer it. It was even before I found out about biblical Unitarians. As far as I could infer I understood that Tim is very tolerant (in the right sense of the word) about other Christians, who hold a different or even opposing opinion. But I am delighted to hear that his generosity transfers to biblical Unitarians too. Thank you Tim, for all your hard work on The Bibleproject and for coming to talk about this important question.
I would add a few comments about Tim's answers. About the development of doctrines. It's one thing for people not to understand God's character, but not with his nature. All it takes is one sentence where God says that he is three in one. That's it. There is nothing to interpret. While you can and should interpret commands and actions. It's not the same with God's ontology. Either he is one, or he is something different. Furthermore, Jesus revealed God's true character. He didn't change anything about the understanding on God's ontology. It's especially strange from a trinitarian view. Here he, the second person of the Trinity, is walking around humans and he is quite about it. Very strange indeed. About the academics from the second century and onwards. I don't think most of them deserve to be called bible nerds! They may be interpreting the bible, but I don't think there was a development out of the bible but rather a development away from the bible. Even the example Tim gave is the opposite of people who constrained their language on the bible. I mean, please show me where the bible hints that Jesus is from the same substance of God but different in an other way. What they did was, they first made Jesus into a god and than they made God into a strange being and included Jesus into it. This understanding contradicts The Sh'ma and the understanding Jesus showed about God.
Besides the bible project the other resource that has better helped me understand the truth of scripture, is the book The Things They Carried. The way it explains and expounds on what truth is. Helps better understand the Hebrew scriptures.
Thanks, a really good interview. I'd also add to the comments Jesus' seven 'I AM' statements, like - "I AM the light of the world" (John 8:12). Every time Jesus said one of these he was directly claiming to be God, Yahweh, using the name from Exodus 3:14 that God told to Moses. Then there's also John 8:58, "Before Abraham was born, I AM." Here, Jesus is not only saying he existed before Abraham, but at the same time identifying himself directly with the name of Yahweh. To describe Jesus as a created being in a unitarian theology you really have to ignore so many clear examples. And one of the main reasons the Jewish leaders wanted to kill Jesus was because he claimed to be God - their response to the Abraham statement above was to try and stone him, precisely for this reason. They understood what he was saying. Also think about Jesus' forgiveness of sins. This is from Mark chapter 2: "And when Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, "Son, your sins are forgiven." 6 Now some of the scribes were sitting there, questioning in their hearts, 7 "Why does this man speak like that? He is blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?" 8 And immediately Jesus, perceiving in his spirit that they thus questioned within themselves, said to them, "Why do you question these things in your hearts? 9 Which is easier, to say to the paralytic, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Rise, take up your bed and walk’? 10 But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins" - he said to the paralytic - 11 "I say to you, rise, pick up your bed, and go home." 12 And he rose and immediately picked up his bed and went out before them all, so that they were all amazed and glorified God, saying, "We never saw anything like this!" This passage is directly about Jesus being God, because as the scribes say, "who can forgive sins but God alone?" Jesus has forgiven the man's sins, and proves his authority to do so, when he heals the man as well. He is showing himself to be God.
8:01 - I disagree. The reason I disagree is that Peter himself says in so many words that the prophets didn't know what they were saying, by saying that they gave no interpretation, but only spoke as they heard. Also, when it comes to the book of John, the distinction is made between a servant and a son, where a son "knows his father's business", and that he has "explained Him". The fact that Paul makes the distinction between letter and spirit, then letter is literal (because that's just what it means), and spirit is the "allegorical" reading (which, like he says, isn't only allegory or symbology).
They discuss Jesus as part of the progressive revelation of the father, but also say that the Hebrew bible is “about” Jesus. In my experience, that is how Christians perceive the Bible in general. Couldn’t we, or possibly shouldn’t we, see it as the story of Jesus being “about” the father? This would shift the focus away from the story of Jesus plus that pesky Hebrew bible to one large narrative about God the father. We would cease being Christian, instead seeing ourselves as children of God. This perspective seems more impactful than how we view the trinity.
A big concern of mine regarding the development of the Trinity is the complete absence of a Jewish consensus within the ecumenical councils of the early church. If we aim to grasp the Bible within its authentic historical framework, shouldn't we utilize a traditional Hebraic (strict Tanahk-based) lens as the foundation for understanding a Jewish messiah? I'd be cautious of embracing extrabiblical material, such as the writings of Philo, to support doctrinal positions, as a lot of his teachings reflect Babylonian mystical proto-kabbalistic pagan thought. The evolution of the Trinity (pun intended) reminds me of how the theory of evolution arose as materialism gained prominence in society. Creation was no longer viewed through a well-established historical, biblical, and unified cross-cultural lens but rather through a modern "scientific" perspective. As Jewish influence diminished in early Christianity, Greek philosophical ideas began to dominate the interpretation of Christ, ultimately leading to the establishment of the Trinity. I agree with Dr. Mackie that proto-trinitarian thought existed within early Messianic circles I just would argue that what Peter and Paul referred to as "destructive heresies" and "doctrines of demons" were in fact early proto-trinitarian teachings influenced by Platonic thought that infiltrated the church. I believe in order to truly grasp the essence of Christ and even our own place within the world, we should be open to questioning a post-apostolic and materialistic perspective of Christ and creation and embracing a more deeply-rooted Hebraic one. There should be congruence between faith and reason and I contend that, because of the lack of grounding, both the concepts of the Trinity and evolution serve as two frameworks that create a barrier between reason and faith rather than a bridge. I wouldn't categorize either evolution or the trinity as progressive revelation or an attempt at extrapolation but rather as instances of frame switching. With that said, I wholeheartedly agree with Dr. Mackie's perspective on cross-Christological fellowship in that both positions ultimately end up writing different stories. While it's important for us to maintain our distinct communities, we should also remain open to engaging in meaningful dialogue with one another in a spirit of good faith.
By the fourth century, calling someone's theology "jewish" was a stock and trade insult within proto-orthodox christianity. I had this quote ready based on some other research I'm doing. "Whoever explains, ‘I God the first and I the last, and besides me there is no God’ (Isaiah 44:6), which is said for the denial of idols and of gods that are not, to the denial of the only-begotten, before ages God, as Jews do, be he anathema." Anathema 11 from the council of sirmium 351AD.
@@transfigured3673 Wow, there's a kind of arrogance that comes along with "new revelation", isn't there, and the early gentile church was no exception. We ought to show more empathy and gratitude towards the Jewish people. Man, I can hardly fathom the challenges they faced as the guardians of God's message to humanity. All the forces of darkness being against them. While they ultimately fell short in that duty, we have too. I truly hope one day to see us work together in sharing the revelation of the messiah, properly understood, to the world once again.
Well put! It's well known amongst all bible scholars that the trinity did not get any traction until 100's of years after the apostles died. Any attempt to find a clear and explicit reading of trinitarian theology in the bible is a big stretch! It was utterly unknown by first century Christians and the entire Old Testament is silent on the matter of a trinitarian God. Therefore I have always rejected this invention of the human mind.
That's hilarious!!! The TWO Powers in Heaven israelite theology of the 2nd temple period is the Basis of the Trinity after the Visible YHWH ( Pre-incarnate Jesus ) sets aside some of his Divine attributes and becomes a servant as Jesus the Christ. This is why Jesus was Crucified because HE claimed to be this Visible YHWH of Genesis 19:24 by saying he could do what HIS Father could do thus making himself as equal to the God of Israel.
Tim's closing comments are truly humbling. As a huge fan of Tim, and a Biblical Unitarian (and therefore someone who understands Jesus differently from him), his encouragement to BU creators like Sam is a masterclass in humility and commitment to truth wherever it leads. 55:39 "and just the last encouragement creating spaces environments where people can talk about the most important things um and truly differ and then engage that difference that's so important like it's so valuable um so thank you for doing what you done"
the discussion of the spirit of the converzation and its profundity and necessity is so important. and mad cool hearing Tim be on the same page as BoM/TLC/Estuary in that way, as well as highlighting how your channel specifically embodies and exemplifies that spirit. great stuff, wish it was longer! thank you, sirs 🤙
Awesome! I have been listening to the BibleProject Podcast for quite some time, even longer than yours. So it is great to see you two finally meet. I haven't had much time these last months to listen, but this one I don't want to miss for sure!
Also he doesn't seem to give any justification for why the clarifying picture of Nicene Trinitarians is more right/clear than their contemporary opponents (Ebionites, Rabbis, gnostics)
Were the nicenes right because they were just factually correct, or were they right because the magisteria is divinely guided? There was a lot of lurking ecclesiology questions that we didnt have time to get to
Linked below is a podcast/video response to some of Dr. Mackie's claims in this Transfigured interview , including: -Partial knowledge (mystery) -Number of persons of God being revealed progressively. -Lack of understanding of agency (NT authors never claimed "that's the pre-incarnate Jesus in the Torah, Prophets, Writings") -How and when the Trinity was revealed ruclips.net/video/ga_AXigQPk0/видео.html
@billschlegel1 Wrote: "-Lack of understanding of agency (NT authors never claimed "that's the pre-incarnate Jesus in the Torah, Prophets, Writings")" John 5:46 For if you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote of me. Jesus himself said Moses wrote about him. Was Jesus a liar? He also said Abram wrote about him. There is only one God, none formed before and none after. John 1:1 says the word is God. John 1:14 says the word (God) became flesh and dwelt among us. Is this the same word of God/Lord? "And behold, the word of the Lord came to him: “This man shall not be your heir; your very own son shall be your heir.” (Genesis 15:4) ?
Valentinus was an Egyptian religious philosopher and the founder of Roman and Alexandrian schools of gnosticism, a system of religious dualism. Pagan Egypt is where many heresies began. The triune nature of God was revealed through scripture.
I wish Sam would have explored with Tim what the implications of those different theologies would be depending on how one interprets the identity of Jesus Christ and/or the identity of God… The Trinitarian view obfuscates the guidance that the New Testament is revealing to its reader by simply reducing Christ’s crucifixion to some amazing sacrifice that was made instead of showcasing it as a visual parable by the exemplar and teacher, Jesus Christ… *1 Peter 2:21* (CEB) You were called to this kind of endurance, because Christ suffered on your behalf. *HE LEFT YOU AN EXAMPLE* so that you might follow in his footsteps.
I love this conversation! how good would it be if every doctrinal conversation is like this? I love the characters Tim and you demonstrated in this talk, this has been one of the best RUclips theological conversations I have seen recently!
@@transfigured3673 you are welcome! I mean it and I long to see more wounds would be healed because of doctrinal fight because of conversations like this. You are doing a great job Sam!
25:33 In the beginning was Hypsistou and Logos was with him and Logos was Theos. In the beginning Logos was with Hypsistou. In him was Zoe that was the light of men. The light which became Zoe in all men.
28:30 I don't understand how he can have this long account of the Tanakh and apocrypha but not talk about the impact of platonism and whether it is a legitimate source for theology
@39:15 In my mind, Thomas’ statement to Jesus in John 20:28 is akin to this verse where Moses is God to Pharoah… *Exodus 7:1* (GNV) Then the Lord said to Moses, Behold, I have made thee Pharaoh’s God, and Aaron thy brother shall be thy Prophet.
In my mind I think of representation, one thing standing in for another, as the best way to understand God and Jesus' relationship to one another. I've been influenced by Pitkin's work on political representation as the best framework to understand the divinity of Jesus as a representational category and not a philosophical one.
@moosa86 WROTE: "Exodus 7:1 (GNV) Then the Lord said to Moses, Behold, I have made thee Pharaoh’s God, and Aaron thy brother shall be thy Prophet." EXODUS 7:1 (esv) And the LORD said to Moses, “See, I have made you LIKE God to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron shall be your prophet. One of the primary rules of propoer hermeneutics says that "scripture cannot contradict scripture" and that "every verse must be evaluated in light of the totality of scripture." In other words, what does the rest of scripture say about it? ISAIAH 43:10 “You are my witnesses,” declares the LORD, “and my servant whom I have chosen, that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he. BEFORE ME THERE WAS NO GOD FORMED, NOR SHALL THERE BE ANY AFTER ME.
You have to be careful of everything you hear. As scriptures says the His Spirit Himself will reveal all things to you. We must always read the scriptures for ourselves and pray that the Lord reveals Himself. We cant always just agree with everything a believer without knowing who God is ourselves.
One of the things that has helped me in understanding what was at stake is Athanasius statement that "God became man, so that man could become god." Un-packed this means that unless Jesus is infinite, eternal and holy as the Father is eternal, infinite and holy then his sacrifice can't be sufficient for or redemption.
This soteriological argument is at the very heart of the Cappadocian argument for the Trinity. Today’s apologists frequently cite passages like John 1:1, Philippians 2 and John 10:30, not understanding that there are reasonable counter arguments from the Arians, and with no greater hermeneutical stretching than many modern American Christians are already comfortable with.
Read Romans 5:12-21. Those verses show explicitly that because it was "one man" (Adam) who brought death, so also it is "one man" (Christ) who brings life. It is one man and one man. Not one man and one God. Not one man and one God-man. But one man and one man. And those verses show that the death of this one man is sufficient, even in the face of all of mankind's sins, not because this one man is also God, but because of the abundance of God's grace. God bless.
@@maxspringer01 That’s a silly argument. To say Christ is the God-man, is not to say that he’s a chimera demigod who’s “halfway” in between. There is no ♾️/2. The Chalcedonian view is that he’s true God, true Man. Is he God? Yes. Is he Man? Yes. Can we talk about Him like he’s God? Yes because He is. Can we talk about him like he’s a man? Yes, because He is.
Some interesting resources in this regard: Larry W. Hurtado's "Lord Jesus Christ" Richard Bauckham's "Jesus and the God of Israel" Simon Gathercole's "The Preexistent Son" Chris Tilling's "Paul's Divine Christology"
@@rickdavis2235 Jesus was carrying out the role of Messiah among his own people. The apostles and Paul were carrying the gospel of the risen Messiah for the whole world. Jesus was fulfilling the promises. The apostles and Paul were carrying the gospel of promises fulfilled. The point of the sources I supplied is that Israel's God was fulfilling all promises himself, and that is what the disciples carried to the world.
@@stephenbailey9969 check! thanks. I ask because I've been getting a lot of people telling me that Paul taught a different gospel of salvation by faith alone while the others taught faith plus works. This stems from a lack of context on their part.
Correct me if I’m wrong but the people of the nicean counsel changed things that the original apostles did right? I don’t think I would tamper with that stuff. Also they were simple monotheistic Jews and people who believed Jesus was messiah. God with us. I would lean against a trinity especially after hearing Bart erman shred it.
Bart Ehrman loves to sell books, especially to conspiracy theorists, so he writes what they want to hear because it makes him a lot of money. He doesn't spew the garbage amongst his peers that he does with the buyers of his books because he knows better. The Council of Nicaea had one purpose; to uphold what had always been known that Christ is God incarnate and the second person of the trinity. Shortly after Christianity was made legal, a Cyrenaic presbyter, ascetic, and priest from Alexandria, Egypt named Arius, began preaching the idea that Jesus was not God, but a created being. He gained a following and began disputing with Alexander, the bishop of Alexandria. In 321 AD, a local council declared Arius a heretic, however, Arius just moved to Palestine where he gained a larger following and over the course of the next few years, the debate became so intense that it gained the attention of Emperor Constantine, who had just unified the empire and didn’t want anything that would threaten division. Constantine saw the debate between the Christians and Arian as a threat to the stability of the empire so he moved to settle it and he officially called the council in 325 AD. There were no gnostics involved, there were no ebionites involved or any other groups. The council was called to settle disputes between Christians and Arians only. Most other heretical views of Christianity, like gnosticism, had mostly died out at this point and the majority of those professing to be Christians were Orthodox Christians so there was not a wife variety of different views of the council. Although Constantine originally invited over 1800 bishops from across the empire, only around 300 were able to attend, most of them being from the east with only about a dozen representing the west. It should be remembered what happened to these two men less than two decades ago. Most of them suffered through one of the greatest Christian persecutions of all time, many of them facing brutal torture and imprisonment for their faith, so despite the modern view of the participants of the council, they were not the type of men who were fine with compromising their beliefs, especially if a few years earlier, they were willing to die for them. These bishops actually assembled in Nicaea to confirm what they had already believed and deal with Arius’ teachings. There were three parties at the council. The smallest was Arius and a handful of bishops that agreed with him; that the Father and Jesus were of different substance or heteroousios. The second, and much larger group, was the Orthodox group led by Hoseas of Cordova, Alexander of Alexandria and a young deacon named Athanasius. This group held a long standing belief of the church that Jesus was fully God and had existed eternally with the Father. They said Jesus was of the same substance, or homoousious. Then there was a third group, roughly equal in size to the Orthodox group called the Eusebian group led by Eusebius of Caesarea, however, this group didn’t differ on theology from the Orthodox view, believing too that Jesus was fully God and existed eternally with the Father but differed on the word, homoousios. The reason was because in previous centuries, modalist heresies had used the word to teach that the Father and Jesus were one person and not coexisting persons of one being so in actuality, the Orthodox group and the Eusebian group didn’t differ on theology or the deity of Christ. They only differed on terminology. The big, modern myth is that Emperor Constantine forced Trinitarian views on the church but this simply is not historically supported . Although he presided over the council, he did not push any particular view. He was no theologian and all he wanted was that both sides would come to an agreement and there would be unity in the church. The Orthodox group listened to the views of Arius and they overwhelmingly rejected his views as being new and distant from the view of the church. Eusebius wrote that some of the bishops tore up letters containing Arius’ teachings. He then wrote that church leaders interrogated Arius using Scripture but found the he had a new way of interpreting every piece of Scripture. They then pointed out that his views had to be wrong because it was new and wasn’t taught in any early church history. Athanasius rhetorically asked how many fathers Arius could cite for his phrases. They then formed the Nicene Creed which is a clear condemnation of Arius’ teachings and a confirmation of the Orthodox view. In the end, all but Arius, and two bishops, signed the creed, clearly showing there were no major divisions in church theology. The council then moved to deal with other issues such was which day to formally celebrate Easter. They also formally denounced gnosticism and other minor sects, publicized twenty canon laws, and dealt with other minor issues. The council did not decide on the biblical canon as the canon had evolved on its own over time, however, according to the Muratorian fragment, the canon was nearly complete by the end of the second century. The council did not decide on the use of the word, “Trinity,” dealing primarily with the divinity of Christ. The word, trinity, can be found in early Christian history as it was used by early church fathers. The acceptance of a “divine three” can also be found in other early Christian writings. Here are just a few examples: Matthew 5:16-17 Matthew 28:19 Luke 3:21-22 John 14:16-17 2 Corinthians 13:14 1 Peter 1:2-3 1 John 5:7 Writings of Polycarp Writings of Ignatius Writings of Justin Martyr The results of the council did not actually please Constantine. In fact, he was very angry at the Christians because he wanted unity and compromise, not for one side to denounce the other. He actually took pity on the Arian. Arius was exiled and fled to Illyrium for a short time while his heresy began to spread and gain political power, especially when on her deathbed, Constantine’s sister urged Constantine Arius and he actually did. Arius found a new, crafty way of interpreting the Nicene Creed in his favor and Constantine invited him back so he could force the church to readmit him, however, Arius died before this could happen. A follower of Arius, Eusebius of Nicomedia, was able to sway Constantine more in favor of the Arian view but just before his death, Eusebius of Nicomedia baptized Constantine, officially symbolizing his siding with the Arians. After Constantine’s death, the Arians continued to gain more ground against the Orthodox view. The Arian bishop that Constantine had favored, used their political power to fight against Christianity. Constantine was succeeded by 2 Arian emperors (Constantius II 317 - 361 AD and Valens 328 - 378 AD), in the east who worked with Arian bishops in an attempt to override Nicaea and writing a new creed. Although Arians were sill in the minority, there were given much more political power, which they used to try and stamp out Christianity. Many Christian leaders were forced into subscribing the creed that did not favor either side. Rome later described this time period as when the whole world groaned and was astonished to find itself Arian. Despite the power of the Arians, one bishop fought back almost completely by himself. As the Nations of Alexandria, continued to argue from Scripture and stand against the might of the Arian heresy. Even when he was banished and removed from his position five times, he never swayed and stood for truth against the Arian political machine. He was a popular hero who prevented Christian theology from compromising and giving in to the Arians so the Arians trend to gaining more political power but just before the Arians consolidated their hold over the empire, they turned to internal fighting and destroyed themselves and so it wasn’t long before all of their political power was lost. The Christians were allowed to meet in 381 AD at the Council of Constantinople and reaffirm the Nicene faith. The battle between the Arians and Christians did not end there. After the Council of Nicaea, many bishops headed north and began converting the Germanic tribes to Arianism. They eventually conquered the Western Roman Empire and the Christians had to deal with Arianism again, however, as we can see today, Arianism died out and Christianity is still going strong and growing. As we can see, Christian bishops did not inherit absolute political power from the Council of Nicaea and use it to stomp out other competing sects. On the contrary, it was the Arians who gained the political power and tried to stomp out the true church. There is no evidence that the council created Christianity, the concept of the Trinity, the divinity of Jesus or to use political power to erase other competing sects. This myth about the council is a complete fairytale.
28:48 I'm not sure I follow this "expansion as to what monotheism means". Was there some explicit understanding of what monotheism is back then? I feel like what happens with this type of thinking is there is a projection of some type of monotheism back into the past and the a development away from that idea over time also projected. To my knowledge, there isn't even a word for monotheism in Hebrew or Greek during the times of either Bibles.
As Dr. Beau Branson points out, what ancients were concerned about there being “One God” had to do with “monarchy” (mono-arche). As long as the religious system had one first cause/arche of all things, there was One “Most High” God. It had nothing to do with the ridiculous Muslim-like absolute monotheism which the Bible cannot live up to with multiple actual gods mentioned in Psalm 82, John 10, 1 Cor. 5:5-6, etc.
@@IAmisMaster Perhaps Branson fleshes this out more clearly elsewhere. Can you lead me to a paper where I can find his argument? Because my instincts seems to say that the bible is quite concerned with the Israelites worshiping other gods and that idols are stone and wood. I'm also not sure that Psalm 82 is a good choice considering the torah uses "gods" to talk about judges, and the psalm is about judgement.
@@theclownofbabylon I would just watch his 5-part lecture series on Dr. Branson’s website. I believe the first video describes how monarchy was the original monotheism, but honestly I’ve seen so many of his videos, I can’t remember where he explains this best.
Regarding the 'deutero theos' stuff, iirc, that seems related to the Greek philosophies that the "Real God" wouldn't get its hands dirty creating things so they brought into existence a second god to do the creating. Not Jewish, Greek.
@@mixk1d you'll have to elaborate on your question. You ask if he said... What? My statement was expressing that it seemed related to another concept. Does he have to explicitly draw the same parallel himself for me to notice it?
@@voymasa7980 fair enough, you are right, it is related. The problem is the gap between eternity and time. So both platonism and Christianity try and solve this. In platonism, because the good and the logos have different natures, it leads to this idea that less eternal = less good. So therefore since the world we live in is fully temporal, it is bad. Because in Christianity we believe in the incarnation of the logos and the trinity, the good (ie God) is united with the lowest though the logos so everything is saved/sancitified/ made good/clean. Ultimately Unitarianism is a reversion to the platonic view rather than the Christian view I would argue it’s a matter of metaphysical necessity rather than specifically Jewish or Greek (see Islam’s “God is not in the toilet” and quranic createdness debates)
@@mixk1d God has always interacted with His creation via "divers times and manners". That has been known since the Jews were given a "more accurate understanding" of God. Trying to add Greek philosophy to explain eternal being greater and less eternal being less good is an extra biblical argument, so it shows no supported divine inspiration. God didn't need to "take on flesh" as you trinitarians believe, in order to do anything, as He has always interacted with and tried to guide humanity, from creation and Eden, until now. He has sent agents, directly communicated with, and even dropped a mysterious food substance on the Israelites, all without a meat suit being necessary. To argue He *must* have become human is to diminish God through limitation and to elevate His anointed agent above what you ought.
Love this discussion. At the end of the day, the doctrine shouldn't divide us. John 1:12 But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, We are all united in Christ!
@@kareng3655 Jesus in the Bible is God Almighty. That Jesus? When you say to read the Bible and decide for yourself, you're implying that truth is subjective.
28:24 Interesting. I always thought that the messenger then god talking motif was meant to explicitly show that god wasn't some physical thing and communicated through these other beings. You don't think that a letter you receive is part of the person who sent it.
Who says the words in a letter? The letter or the sender? When you call your phone "mom" when you are talking to your mom, are you admitting you have a phone for a mother?
49:33 This is the typical confusion caused by believing doctrinal preachers and refusing to listen and trust the Holy Spirit as sent from the Father of Jesus Christ.
There is no Father if there is no triune God. God is not the literal father of Jesus so if He is the Father, it's in a trinitarian sense. Genesis 19:24 Then Yahweh rained on Sodom and Gomorrah sulfur and fire from Yahweh out of heaven. Scripture teaches there is only one God. How do you reconcile that above verse?
For me, the way I've always addressed it was found in Jesus' discussion on the unforgivable sin - Jesus didn't mind he or God being blasphemed, but what he DID mind was the Holy Spirit being blasphemed. He didn't place anyone else in this discussion; he placed himself on equal footing with the Creator, but then he placed the Holy Spirit on this "next level" that dared not be touched. It was almost like he was saying "look, Dad and I? We can forgive even the haters if they come after us, but the Holy Ghost? Yeah you don't mess with him. We can speak for ourselves and explain our ways to you - the Holy Spirit has nothing to explain. When it's involved, you don't question it." That was always the dynamic of the Trinity, for me, without being called "The Trinity". Like the kid sister that nobody was allowed to pick on, not because bro or dad was going to whoop you if you did, but because kid sister's way of dealing with it was absolute. There was no way back into her good graces if you upset her - you were doomed.
Apt comment except for referring to the Holy Spirit as it. The neuter gender in Greek is not translated into English. There is a grammar rule for the Greek using the neuter in certain places where persons are being referred to. To be consistent at calling someone it, in many places in the New Testament, including groups of people, all English versions would have to be changed. For some reason many Christians, unitarians and non Christian cults, only refer to the word for Spirit and the pronoun referring to him as neuter in translation (improper translation).
What is blasphemy of the Holy Spirit? UNBELIEF! That's the only thing that condemns a person; unbelief. In other words, if you don't believe, you won't be saved.
@Steve …the TORAH is the TRUTH…and it says that 2 or 3 witnesses are required to establish a matter…. so there were 3 GODS at creation…quite simple…Got Torah Got Truth
@@rickdavis2235 which “ one “ …ECHAD which is not numerically one …or YACHID which is numerically one….if a million Israelites answered with “ one “ voice, it doesn’t mean there was only one Israelite. Got Torah Got Truth
@@harryabrahams2770 We can shorten this conversation if you'll provide scripture to support your claims because I'm not interested in opinion or phiolsophical assumptions. I don't mean to be so harsh but I witness to people every day that want to deny or distort the deity of Christ by building little straw men to attack. I don't have time for that. This is the God I'm talking about as He revealed himself to the prophets. Deuteronomy 6:4 “Hear, Israel! the LORD (Yahweh) is our God, the LORD (Yahweh) is one! James 2:19 You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe-and shudder! Deuteronomy 4:35 You were shown these things so that you might know that the LORD (Yahweh), He is God; there is no other besides Him. Deuteronomy 4:39 Therefore know today, and take it to your heart, that the LORD (Yahweh), He is God in heaven above and on the earth below; there is no other. Deuteronomy 32:39 See now that I, I am He, And there is no god besides Me; It is I who put to death and give life. I have wounded and it is I who heal, And there is no one who can save anyone from My hand. 2 Samuel 7:22 For this reason You are great, Lord Yahweh; for there is no one like You, and there is no God except You, according to all that we have heard with our ears. 1 Kings 8:60 so that all the peoples of the earth may know that the LORD (Yahweh) is God; there is no one else. 2 Kings 19:15 Hezekiah prayed before the LORD (Yahweh) and said, “Lord, God of Israel, enthroned above the cherubim, You are the God, You alone, of all the kingdoms of the earth. You have made heaven and earth. 1 Chronicles 17:20 the LORD (Yahweh), there is none like You, nor is there any God besides You, according to everything that we have heard with our ears. Nehemiah 9:6 You alone are the LORD (Yahweh). You have made the heavens, The heaven of heavens with all their lights, The earth and everything that is on it, The seas and everything that is in them. You give life to all of them, And the heavenly lights bow down before You. Psalm 86:10 For You are great, and you do wondrous deeds; You alone are God. Isaiah 37:16 “Yahweh of armies, God of Israel, who is enthroned above the cherubim, You are the God, You alone, of all the kingdoms of the earth. You made heaven and earth. Isaiah 37:20 But now Yahweh, our God, save us from his hand, so that all the kingdoms of the earth may know that You alone, Yahweh, are God.” Isaiah 43:10 “You are My witnesses,” declares the LORD (Yahweh), “And My servant whom I have chosen, So that you may know and believe Me And understand that I am He. Before Me there was no God formed, And there will be none after Me. Isaiah 43:11 I, only I, am the LORD (Yahweh), And there is no savior besides Me. Isaiah44:6 “This is what the LORD (Yahweh) says, He who is the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the Yahweh of armies: ‘I am the first and I am the last, And there is no God besides Me. Isaiah 44:8 Do not tremble and do not be afraid; Have I not long since announced it to you and declared it? And you are My witnesses. Is there any God besides Me, Or is there any other Rock? I know of none.’” Isaiah 45:21 Declare and present your case; Indeed, let them consult together. Who has announced this long ago? Who has long since declared it? Is it not I, Yahweh? And there is no other God besides Me, A righteous God and a Savior; There is none except Me. Isaiah 46:9 Remember the former things long past, For I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is no one like Me, Hosea 13:4 Yet I have been the LORD (Yahweh) your God Since the land of Egypt; And you were not to know any god except Me, For there is no savior besides Me. Joel 2:27 So you will know that I am in the midst of Israel, And that I am the LORD (Yahweh) your God And there is no other; And My people will never be put to shame. Zechariah 14:9 And the LORD (Yahweh) will be King over all the earth; on that day the LORD (Yahweh) will be the only one, and His name the only one.
The more I studied the scriptures in the original language and text the more I learned how to read with no preimposed doctrine I realized the doctrines I thought were true weren’t such as the trinity.
Elohim and YHWH Elohim are opposing forces that work together. YHWH is 'the man of war', the sword (scriptures) that ties them together. There is a reason that ALL references made to 'the' son of man are in the 3rd person, IF it is a human that mentions 'him', whereas the Lord speaks directly to 'him'. The 'son of man' is a person's DOOR or GATE that is opened by faith which brings obedience, and in Jesus case, even death on a cross. An example of this 'door' being opened is found in Ezekiel 2, where it is the SPIRIT that CAUSES Ezekiel to 'stand' so that the Lord could 'speak' to him. This is also the context of the discourse between Jesus and the Pharisees, as Jesus adds, that David was speaking in the spirit. This 'door' is inside each of us, and is indicative of or relationship (or lack thereof) to the Lord. As such this 'door' becomes our 'master' that sits between the 2 fathers. Father God and the father of lies, and this is what the keys of David are all about. This is also what the war between a 'father' and a son is about. I am prepared to discuss at length. I do not intend to write (another) book. We're in enough trouble as it is. My number is... (S1N) 2CY - 1DIE or... 'sin to see why one die'. Hurry. Time is short. Shalom.
You're confused: Jesus said HE was the Door to the Father: u must come through him to get to the Father. Nicodemus had to receive the Holy Spirit's baptism as well as his Jewish Mickvah of cleansing before entering the Kingdom of God by Jesus baptism of the Holy Spirit that he gave to his Apostles and all authentic Christians.
@@davidjanbaz7728 - Jesus in your understanding is the 'word'. The 'word' IS the way, and the 'word' is the law of God. Jesus was 'made' - not 'created'. He followed the law perfectly as per the 'spirit' not the 'letter'. The law cannot be enforced without breaking it, it you cause someone's death. This is WHY Jesus did not call down angels to defend Him. There is a major difference between God (Elohim) and Lord (YHWH). God CANNOT be a man or a son of man as per Numbers 23:19. BUT, the Lord (YHWH) CAN be a 'man' as per Exodus 15:3. The way that person becomes a son of God, and God has MANY sons, is by being led by the spirit. In psalm 82, God is admonishing the sons of God... and Jesus is the 1st to be raised 'from the dead'. The 'spirit' that the Lord breathed into us is bifold, or binary in it's nature... and it is where our freewill comes from, as easily seen in Isaiah 45:7 Are we 'like God'? The scriptures say so. Elohim refers to ANY spirit. When Saul summoned samuel, did the witch call God out sheol? She said it, I see Elohim. That is the difference between God and Lord, and when the scriptures say, man has become like '1' of us... the question is then answered, as the one who 'knows' (think relationship and fruit) good AND evil is the Lord (YHWH). If you look carefully, you will see 2 different versions of man's appearing. I don't like to say created, because darkness is 'created' while light on the other hand is 'made'. But when the text changes to LORD GOD, from GOD, everything is written in reverse. Even the 2nd story in Genesis is reversed. Look at verse 4 (Genesis 2:4) "These are the generations (how it happened, not groups of people, but work) of the HEAVENS and the EARTH when they were 'created', in the DAY that the Lord God 'made' the EARTH and the Heavens." There is a duality all through these writings. Even the choice between Jesus and Barabbas. Barabbas means 'son' of the father. Like was a bar-mitzvah means, Son of the Command. ANY word in Hebrew that ends in 'ah' is feminine. Thus TORAH which means 'teaching' is feminine. RUAH which means 'spirit', is the same. RAH which means 'evil' is (again) feminine. This is why there is 'Lady Wisdom', and even the 'harlot' - which is someone who is (no pun intended) 'working BOTH sides of the 'path'. The 7 headed beast represents the days of a week, and the blasphemous names are... Sunday, Monday, etc - all as Greek gods. The 7th day has a 'mortal head wound' meaning that the Sabbath of Eden, was wounded by Adam's transgression. But it is 'healed' because bad is still used for 'good'. Now before ya flip out, note that our God is NOT the author of evil, and so when He 'sends it', as He dies in 1 Kings 22, He can't even pick which spirit will 'go' or even 'how' they will do it [evil]. This is why He (all knowing God) asks questions, because the ultimate truth, he will know if the spirit is trying to deceive Him. This is also why He questions Adam. What really amazes me is that we got into all this trouble for becoming 'like' God. And now people say that Jesus was God (can't be as per Numbers 23:19), and then we now want to be 'like Him'. There is nothing wrong with being 'like' God, we already are. Jesus said through God all things are possible, and notice what is said regarding the Tower of Babel, if man continues nothing will be impossible. And thus they stopped building the city and we have done the same. And we are going to lose our heads - just like John as we wait for someone else? And all the while squabbling over doctrine? And as a matter of fact, the doctrine of devils. The law is intriguing to me, be cause you can apply it to everyday life... in a by the letter or in a spiritual sense. For instance, who is it that goes around seeking whom he can catch in their sin? Well, some would say that role belongs to a devil... but oddly the job applies to a police officer as well. Their purpose is well meant, and the spirit demonstrates that. But by the letter mans law is oppressive and ANYTHING that is oppressed will grow - simple gardening rules. Thanks for the reply. Shalom.
@ChrisMusante WROTE: "Elohim and YHWH Elohim are opposing forces that work together." YHWY is Elohim. EXODUS 3:1-22 1 Now Moses was keeping the flock of his father-in-law, Jethro, the priest of Midian, and he led his flock to the west side of the wilderness and came to Horeb, the mountain of ELOHIM. 2 And the angel of YHWH appeared to him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush. He looked, and behold, the bush was burning, yet it was not consumed. 3 And Moses said, “I will turn aside to see this great sight, why the bush is not burned.” 4 When YHWY saw that he turned aside to see, ELOHIM called to him out of the bush, “Moses, Moses!” And he said, “Here I am.” 5 Then he said, “Do not come near; take your sandals off your feet, for the place on which you are standing is holy ground.” 6 And he said, “I am the ELOHIM of your father, the ELOHIM of Abraham, the ELOHIM of Isaac, and the ELOHIM of Jacob.” And Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look at ELOHIM. 7 Then YHWH said, “I have surely seen the affliction of my people who are in Egypt and have heard their cry because of their taskmasters. I know their sufferings, 8 and I have come down to deliver them out of the hand of the Egyptians and to bring them up out of that land to a good and broad land, a land flowing with milk and honey, to the place of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Amorites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites. 9 And now, behold, the cry of the people of Israel has come to me, and I have also seen the oppression with which the Egyptians oppress them. 10 Come, I will send you to Pharaoh that you may bring my people, the children of Israel, out of Egypt.” 11 But Moses said to ELOHIM, “Who am I that I should go to Pharaoh and bring the children of Israel out of Egypt?” 12 He said, “But I will be with you, and this shall be the sign for you, that I have sent you: when you have brought the people out of Egypt, you shall serve God on this mountain.” 13 Then Moses said to ELOHIM, “If I come to the people of Israel and say to them, ‘The ELOHIM of your fathers has sent me to you,’ and they ask me, ‘What is his name?’ what shall I say to them?” 14 ELOHIM said to Moses, “I am who I am.” And he said, “Say this to the people of Israel: ‘I am has sent me to you.’” 15 ELOHIM also said to Moses, “Say this to the people of Israel: ‘YHWH, the ELOHIM of your fathers, the ELOHIM of Abraham, the ELOHIM of Isaac, and the ELOHIM of Jacob, has sent me to you.’ This is my name forever, and thus I am to be remembered throughout all generations. 16 Go and gather the elders of Israel together and say to them, ‘YHAH, the ELOHIM of your fathers, the ELOHIM of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob, has appeared to me, saying, “I have observed you and what has been done to you in Egypt, 17 and I promise that I will bring you up out of the affliction of Egypt to the land of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Amorites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites, a land flowing with milk and honey.”’ 18 And they will listen to your voice, and you and the elders of Israel shall go to the king of Egypt and say to him, ‘YHWH, the ELOHIM of the Hebrews, has met with us; and now, please let us go a three days' journey into the wilderness, that we may sacrifice to YHWH our ELOHIM.’ 19 But I know that the king of Egypt will not let you go unless compelled by a mighty hand. 20 So I will stretch out my hand and strike Egypt with all the wonders that I will do in it; after that he will let you go. 21 And I will give this people favor in the sight of the Egyptians; and when you go, you shall not go empty, 22 but each woman shall ask of her neighbor, and any woman who lives in her house, for silver and gold jewelry, and for clothing. You shall put them on your sons and on your daughters. So you shall plunder the Egyptians.” Elohim has many meanings and has no attributes attributed to it.
@@rickdavis2235 - correct. Elohim is the 'many' that we need to make a covenant with. YHWH is a 'specific' elohim - the 'most high'. The God OF all 'other' 'gods' - including 'us'. When the 2 terms are considered individually, you can watch the 'hand of control' get passed back and forth, from God (Elohim) to YHWH. First place you see it is in Genesis. Notice that God 'created', while the LORD 'formed and made'. You can even see the direction of the wording reverses, where Genesis 2:4 says, 'generations of the heavens and the earth, in the day the LORD GOD 'made' the earth and the heavens. People seem to miss the connections, like where it says that the Lord God had NOT caused it to rain on the land, and that same scenario is in Noah - having never have rained. I chased Michael Heiser around trying to give him some more 'dots'... but he was too busy and then died shortly afterwards.
@@ChrisMusante you're not getting what I wrote. Elohim is a term that is used to describe: 1. The God of Israel 2. The gods of the nations (1 Kings 11:33, one of three elohim is a goddess) 3. The gods of Yahweh’s council 4. Demons (Deut. 32:17) 5. A deceased human being (1 Samuel 28:13) 6. Angels (angel of the LORD) Dr. Heiser was a trinitarian who believed only in one God. What you're proposing is polytheism and probably why you never heard from Heiser. Are you LDS?
Symbolic allegorical reading is very important to avoid falsification of the Biblical text. Science shows the Earth and Cosmos are billions of years old and vast the Bible needs to by "reinterpreted" to avoid falsification. It's a mind game. If the "stories" of the beginning of the world are mythological why aren't the stories of Jesus and the end of the world mythological too?
Even scientific findings need to be interpreted with a layer of allegory and metaphysical transcendence to have any meaning. Science without allegory is meaningless.
@@transfigured3673 Metaphysics can mean many different things. (see the entry in the Stanford Encyclopedia of philosophy). In what sense are you using the word? Transcendent has many different meanings in different contexts. The Laws of physics are mathematical formalisms explaining what we observe in nature. Why all this obscurantist language. Is it to smuggle in some occult religious ontology? I am not like the other TLC folks I am a physicalist agnostic atheist, and I think that view is based on sufficient objective evidence and logic. If you want to do a conversation with me. I would be happy to oblige.
@tgrogan….still trusting the science??? …the scriptures state that 2 or 3 witnesses are required to establish a matter….so there were 3 GODS at creation ….Got Torah Got Truth
@@rickdavis2235 Isaiah 6:2 - Isaiah sees God sitting upon a throne. Isaiah 54:5 - Isaiah calls God the husband (baal) of Israel. Isaiah 42:13 - Isaiah describes the Lord like a mighty man (Kag-gib-bo-wr), like a man of war (ke ish mil ha mo wt)
Jesus said: " . . . I am going up to my Father and your Father, and my God and your God" - John 20:17 Jesus has a God - and a Father. We have this same God - and Father. Jesus is NOT God. Paul the Apostle said: "For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”), yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things, and we are for him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and we are through him. But not everyone has this knowledge . . . " - 1 Corinthians 8:5-7 Why is this not common knowledge??? King David said: Yahweh’s declaration to my lord, “Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet.” - Psalms 110:1 Peter the Apostle said: Therefore, let all the house of Israel know for certain that God has made him-this Jesus whom you crucified-both Lord and Christ. - Acts 2:36 Jesus is seated on God's right hand, as Lord and Christ, because God exalted Jesus to be so. The Bible refers to God approximately 20,000 times, and NEVER refers to God as a Trinity/Triune.
@@jaredtourse9095 In John 20:17 Jesus said "tell my brethren... I am going to my Father... And I am going to my God" In John 20:25; Thomas did not believe God resurrected Jesus... Despite his brethren telling him... In John 20:27, Jesus told Thomas to address his disbelief... In John 20:28 Thomas addressed Jesus the same way Moses (in Exodus 4:16; 7:1) was addressed; as a "god". Similarly, other people were also addressed as "god" elsewhere in the bible such as King David and King Solomon for example too. In John 20:29, Jesus ignored the comments of Thomas and focused on his disbelief... In John 20:31, John said that everything that was written in the book of John was written so that we ALL may know that "Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God" AND that "believing THIS would result in having life in his name" Again, Jesus is the Son of God; Jesus is NOT God!
@SimplyAwesomeOriginal WROTE: "Jesus said: " . . . I am going up to my Father and your Father, and my God and your God" - John 20:17 Jesus has a God - and a Father. We have this same God - and Father. Jesus is NOT God. " Jesus also said, "“I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God, “who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.” Revelation 1:8 In your example, Jesus did not say He is not God. He's speaking of the Father in a trinitarian sense. In my example, He specifically says He is God Almighty. In John 1:1, we see that the Word is God. Jesus is the word and this isn't something clever that John came up with. It comes straight out of the old testament. GENESIS 15:1-4 ( EMPHASIS ADDED FOR CLARIFICATION ) 1 After these things the word of YHWH came to Abram in a vision: “Fear not, Abram, I am your shield; your reward shall be very great.” 2 But Abram said, “O YHWH God, what will you give me, for I continue childless, and the heir of my house is Eliezer of Damascus?” 3 And Abram said, “Behold, you have given me no offspring, and a member of my household will be my heir.” 4 And behold, the WORD of the Lord came to him: “This man shall not be your heir; your very own son shall be your heir.”
@@rickdavis2235 God (YHWH), not Jesus, spoke in Revelations 1:8 Two verses earlier, Revelations 1:6, Jesus has a God and Father. There's a difference between "Mighty" and "Almighty"; many people are referred to as "mighty". God, YHWH, alone IS "Almighty". You can look at the Hebrew of "El Gibbor" vs "El Shaddai". +++ John 1:1+ is a completely different conversation... That will take a while to explain... +++ The phrase "Word of Yahweh" in Genesis 15:1 is no more different than "Word of Moses" in Exodus 8:13, nor "Word of Samuel" in 1 Samuel 4:1, nor the "Word of SimplyAwesomeOriginal" by yours truly here, nor anyone else in the bible... Apart from the fact that God said it. +++ PS: - The bible NEVER EVER refers to God as Triune/Trinity. - The bible describes God over 20,000 times: as having singular pronouns, singular verbs, singular adjectives, and singular pronominal suffixes. "People that claim the bible describes a trinity, always describe an interpretation of scriptures, and NOT the actual text of the scriptures." - A quote to remember
@@SimplyAwesomeOriginal Regarding Revelation 1:6, Is Jesus a created being and literal son of God? Isaiah 9:6; 10:21 calls both YHWH and the Messiah 'el gibbowr (Mighty God). Is YHWH only mighty in verse 10:21, and not Almighty? Isaiah says this child will be called the same as YHWH. Jesus calls himself Almighty God in Rev. 1:8. Revelation 4:8 says Jesus is Almighty God: “Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord God Almighty, who was and is and is to come!” Only Jesus is the the one who is coming on clouds, not the Father. The word can refer to the written or spoken word but in Genesis 15, the word of YHWH is a man, just like Jesus. He appears to Abram in a vision, a vision is something you can see (visible), and takes Abram outside in Genesis 15:5 and then in 15:7, the word of YHWH says, “I am YHWH who brought you out from Ur of the Chaldeans to give you this land to possess.” We also see this with the angel of the LORD, the name of the LORD, the arm of the LORD, the hand of the LORD, the commander of the LORD's armies, the host of the LORD's armies. These appearances of men who speak about God but also speak as though they are God, just like the Son of God does in the new testament. Read all of Genesis 15 and tell me how you reconcile that. The Bible never mentions the Bible but when we use it, you know exactly what's being talked about. The Bible never mentions that God is omniscient, omnipresent or omnipotent, but we know He is. Jesus never mentioned that He was born of a virgin mother, but through scripture, we know He was. By the same token, we know from scripture that the only God who is spirit, invisible, unseeable and dwells in unapproachable light, has revealed himself to us in 3 persons, all co-equal, co-eternal, co-existent, and all share the same attributes but are distinct from one another and all 3 are called the one God. To simply write off the trinity is to deny the way that God chose to reveal himself to us.
Interesting but a thing that always bothers me about this type of theological debate or discussion is the idea space in which it occurs is limited to the space of the Bible only. Basically the Bible is treated as the only valid source of knowledge with peripheral commentators. It has a "in-universe" logic aspect therefore it's a game of building one's case using the Bible to make their case. Whoever can muster the most Bible verses in support of their argument most logically and coherently would win the debate. I suppose there is a time and need for such musings but it's an exercise in the validity of the claim not it's the actual Truth, is it sound. In exploring modern myths like Lord of the Rings or Star Wars some themes can only be understood with an "out universe" perspective. There's no explicit mention of WW1 in Lord of the Rings. Within the story one can not derive WW1 but WW1 definitely influenced Tolkien and the themes of Lord of the Rings. TLDR: I'm doubtful the Bible on it's own can give a full account about the nature of God.
God is our soul authority so His word is our sole authority. When we look to sources other than His word for truth, we become vulnerable to believing just about anything.
@@transfigured3673solid corner vibe convo. Thank you. Bible project was my rotation before TLC and pvk appeared. I donated in that first crowdfunding year. Tim and Jon’s smooth voices on quality mics is a clear memory. Mackie was on a pod called Gospel Simplicity by Austin Suggs. That’s the closest corner crossing I’ve seen. March ‘21. Pageau was on that pod three months later
I don't buy the 'greater deepening of awareness' argument. Many of the early Christian sects differentiated themselves around the divinity of Jesus. If the Bible is so clear and unequivocal about the Trinity why did it take so many centuries of argument to define the doctrine (culminating in the Council of Constantinople in 381CE)?
I grew up in a Unitarian tradition and I currently attend a Trinitarian church. I will say that I don’t think the Trinity is exactly wrong, but I do think it’s portrayed in a ridiculous way. “God came into time and space and put on a human body.” is just the worst. That is not the message being communicated by the scriptures. The Trinity in general too makes assumptions about Jesus and the Father and the Spirit that are too low brow for the actual message. In the end after all, God will be all and in all, does that mean the Trinity expands to include all? Adam and Eve are at first one being (sort of) are then split into two then told to become one. This is the message of the nature of “God” and His relationship to humanity and how Jesus figures in. But is this ever addressed? My main concern is that Tim seemed to get a little shifty about the theology of Unitarian thought and suggested isolation from each other. I could almost feel the threats of the Catholics of days gone by that led to the murder of those who didn’t hold this doctrine precisely as ordered or be labeled a heretic and your life might be forfeit. This conversation was a good one, but it had a scary undertone. I’m wondering if anyone else saw this?
@Z91514 Wrote: "I could almost feel the threats of the Catholics of days gone by that led to the murder of those who didn’t hold this doctrine precisely as ordered or be labeled a heretic and your life might be forfeit." What did you mean by that?
@@rickdavis2235 Simply that some Catholics long ago were guilty of killing what they would term heretics. The birth of the Trinity itself saw much blood shed and violence. Thankfully those times are gone, but the remnant of the actions survives which is a shame.
@@Z91514 Yes, those "heretics" that were being killed were really just Bible believing Christians who refused to fall under the authority of Rome. The doctrine of the Trinity existed before the Catholic church. They had nothing to do with the trinity or deciding which books belong in the Bible.
@@rickdavis2235 I understand that the doctrine came before the Catholic Church in name, but the doctrine helped to steer the church into a Universal i.e. Catholic system. This is especially true when if you don’t fall in line your life and standing in the community is threatened or destroyed which became common practice in the church and was well entrenched by the time the church is “Catholic”. So yes, the trinity is deeply intertwined in Catholicism and was perpetuated by Catholicism for centuries. It’s a carry over into Protestant tradition because that drum was beat so hard, loud and long under serious consequences for anyone who didn’t agree, for centuries, that its adoption into the Protestant tradition wasn’t even a question. I never mentioned the canon of scripture so I’m not sure what that part of your comment was addressing.
Sam sorry for having caused such a long discussion thread under your comment on Gavin’s video but I just could not help myself. May The Living God who Never dies bless you for all the work you do.
@transfigured3673 Trinitarians like to quote very selective passages in the Gospel of John but they usually contaminate the spiritual data in the Gospel of John by imposing on it litterary details from the other books iof new testament. The Gospel of John makes it clear that Jesus becomes the son of the Living God, WHO never dies, when the Spirit of God descends upon him and remains in him. The flesh becomes the Word when the Spirit descends upon the son of Joseph and not during the virgin birth. The data of the Gospel of John is clear, there was no virgin birth. There is nothing that suggests that the son of Joseph was sinless before the Spirit ascended on him. There was a time when the son of God was only the son of Joseph and not sinless. If there truly was no time when Jesus was not sinless than he had no right to let the adulteress woman go free? ( the one who is free of sins throws the first stone).
The biggest problem I have with Mackie and his "Bible Project" is that he and Heiser inject their flawed theology and interpretation about the so-called "divine council" into their work. People don't realize that both Heiser and Mackie went to a theologically liberal school, University of Wisconsin-Madison. From what I understand from Mr. Heath Henning, who lives in Wisconsin and wrote the devastating book "The UnBiblical Realm: Refuting the Divine Council of Michael Heiser's Deuteronomy 32 Worldview," the University of Wisconsin-Madison is one of the most liberal schools in the nation. So it is no surprise if Heiser and Mackie's views turn out not to be completely orthodox.
@@jeremyfirth Of course I have. And I've also learned to discern truth from error and to not blindly accept what people claim (Prov. 14:15; 1 John 4:1; 1 Thess. 5:21).
@@dlillianb1368 I have a problem with any doctrine that does not have a sound basis in the Bible. Even the words "divine council" are based on a specific interpretation of Hebrew words that cannot always be translated that way. For example, the Hebrew word translated "council" in Psalm 82:1 in the ESV and a few other translations, is also translated "swarm" in Judges 14:8 to describe a swarm of bees. So we can't ignore the fact that Heiser and others are very selective in the translations they use, and what facts they reveal. Psalm 82 is not about a "divine council" of divine beings consulting with God. Heiser and his followers totally ignore the immediate context of Psalm 82, specifically verses 2-4, and jump to verses 6 and 7, and then run to Psalm 89 assuming that Psalm speaks of exactly the same thing as Psalm 82. But that is not the case, and you can see that only when you carefully consider each Psalm in its context. This is why Mr. Heath Henning wrote an over 300 page book, "The UnBiblical Realm: Refuting the Divine Council of Michael Heiser's Deuteronomy 32 Worldview." And this is also why Mr. Henning and myself have done six videos so far on the contents of his book.
The students at Western Seminary are required to do this EVERY YEAR: "All students are required to maintain and annually reaffirm their agreement with the Statement of Faith of the World Evangelical Alliance as an expression of unity in the gospel." Here is the Statement of Faith of the WEA: "The Holy Scriptures as originally given by God, divinely inspired, infallible, entirely trustworthy; and the supreme authority in all matters of faith and conduct." NOT A SCHOLARLY INSTITUTION!
@@transfigured3673 Look it up. I don't think so, but he would not keep his job very long if he was not a Trinitarian. BTW why don't you dialog with a Classical Theist Catholic on Biblical and Patristic proof for the Trinity. I think their arguments are quite compelling if you accept their premises as correct. VaticanCatholic has a great video on the Trinity and the Filioque.
Looking forward to listening further, but if you don't mind my saying after listening to the first 7 minutes, Tim seems like a younger John Piper, both in thought, expression, and even in vocal tone.
The truth of the Trinity is not obtained by the calculus of the intellect, which can never comprehend it. It is known only through the Spirit by faith.
The trinity is a false pagan doctrine that is a lie, there is no trinity. No one in the entire Bible ever mentioned the trinity, neither Jesus or any of the Apostles taught such a thing, it was never part of the Law Covenant. There is absolutely no Scriptural evidence for the trinity. It is blasphemy against God and Christ, it is a demonic doctrine that prevents people from knowing God!
That is a gross overstatement. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all manifestations of YHWH, but the HS is NOT a third "person"...it is the Father's spirit, embodied in the Son, and manifested apart from their bodily presence in creation as their active power.
39:21 oh boy I had a whole argument against this "the god" in both Greek and hebrew about a month ago. It's so weak, I'm surprised he used it and doesn't know better...
Jesus came to reveal Gods heart to mankind. ❤ In the transfiguration, the Father says, "This is my beloved Son. Hear Him!" I truly believe anyone who sticks to the Gospels first and weighs everything through His word, will come to true faith (Romans 10:17) Anti-LGBT & anti-women, anti-immigrant are ANTI-CHRIST LIES. Matthew 7. The church is fallen to bigotry and idolatry. Turn off the world and turn on Jesus! 2Thess2:11 is here. The church is fallen, Trump is lawless. They believe THE LIE. Jesus is coming soon for this born-again gay stoner Jew while most Christians are left behind because of bigotry and idolatry
This is the guys who doesn’t believe in hell and said “there is now neither Jew nor Greek, male nor female, *gay nor straight…”* Ya, he actually said that.
I love Tim Mackie’s teachings and follow every where he speaks. Thanks for this interview! Blessings from Lima Peru!
I appreciate the intellectual humility that Tim expressed here.
agreed
Thank you for digging in so deeply on these topics. I must listen again a few times and digest it all. I am a lifetime Bible need but not educated in the classroom. I truly appreciate the opportunity to listen to scholarly discussion. I love to learn.
You've come to the right place. Thanks for sharing
Thank you for letting Tim speak! Well done.
My pleasure
I appreciate the lack of bookshelves behind both participants.
Thanks! I agree
What's wrong with having bookshelves behind them? I love seeing bookshelves
@@educational4434 it's causing jealousy 😊
lol
And guitars behind the pulpit during sermons.
Sam, you did an awesome job with this interview. I respect that you just let Tim talk without challenging him.
That being said, now I am dying for a part two. I would love to hear Tim answer some of the challenges you might put to him, especially regarding what he said towards the very end.
Great discussion brothers! This is the 1st interview I have seen you do Sam.....wonderful!!!!!!!! You give respect to your guest to speak and have a calming presence even as you all discussed a "hot" topic. Look forward to more. Tim........well, knocks it right out of the park as usual - God has used you in many ways for many of His Children to see and hear and have their hearts softened to His Beautiful Truth.
Thanks for listening!
Sam, your focus on goals is like a breath of fresh air for me, relieving the frustration I've been experiencing with other parts of the corner. Keep up the fantastic work.
Thanks EmJay. Lots more work left to do.
@@transfigured3673 Just don't work yourself to death ;-)
Tim Mackie a true Desciple❤
As you noted, Heiser does not deny the concept of the Trinity. He suggests that when Genesis 1:26 was written, the original readers would have understood the "Let us" statement to have been directed to the divine council. However, the Godhead-the Trinity-would have been present within that context. Heiser also notes that although the text says, "Let us," the action is ultimately carried out by one being, God, as seen in Genesis 1:27, “His own image.”
There is no trinity Godhead, "Let us" is God speaking to Jesus as his Master Worker.
@djparsons7363
Absolutely not!
Such heresy.
Jesus is fully God
So as the Father is God
The Holy Spirit is God
Yet one God
@@danielmann5427 You are the totally deceived heretic repeating the lies of apostate Christendom, there is no trinity, it is a pagan doctrine.
@@djparsons7363 Jesus is God. Why would God speak to himself?
@@rickdavis2235 He wouldn't, that proves Jesus isn't God if you think about it. He wouldn't pray to himself either, or sit at the right hand of himself.
You kill it with these guests and videos.
Thanks!
Cool conversation. I like how Mackie’s kind of symbolic stuff bridges the gap between the pageau/peterson phenomenon and evangelical Christianity
I have always thought he did that too.
@@transfigured3673 same lol :D
Wonderful conversation, Sam. Your host skills are amazing🙂
Thanks Karen!
Excellent conversation!
thanks for listening!
I think that the limitations of language and comprehension prevent us from understanding what our God is doing. How does a being that created everything, communicate with his creation? As a species, we continue to "know" more, to us it is millenia of development and learning, but to the creator, who is beyond time, we are simple vessels of his spirit. We pass through this life in less than a blink of an eye, in that blink we try to understand God. It's not possible. But we should still try, because his teaching is woven into the fabric of his creation❤
I've watched so many TIm Mackie interiews and this is one of the best
That’s a nice compliment. Thanks for watching
If knowing who God and/or Jesus was simple, then we would all agree on the topic. John 12: 44 Don't be a scoffer..do your own research. Tim Mackie is a tremendous resource as we search for truth. Thank you Tim for answering the call to serve God. Don't just listen and accept a creed, do your own research,, then be a disciple of Jesus. John 14 The world has enough who "believe", we need disciples who follow and obey.
Wow! Great connection to TLC. I’ve enjoyed Bible Project videos for years. Listening now.
Excited to hear your thoughts
Well done, Sam. This was great.
Only thing Tim said I did not like was “Godself” instead of the Scriptural “himself.” John 5:26 being one reference.
It’s a quibble, but do not like the revealed description being muddied by the contemporary mood of pronoun whackamole.
Tender Love and Care?
@@bman5257, no, a collection of misfits in “this little corner” of the internet
Mystery & majesty is the I AM … is all we can say ; Amen & Amen
Hey Sam, could you make a video about Plato's influence on the Church Fathers and the New Testament milieu?
43:30 Tim is converging with modern Catholic theologians as well.
I noticed that too
Perhaps one reason why we don’t recognize God more in the Bible (and in life) is that we don’t recognize ourselves. We are made in God’s image. That must mean more than we realize. God in his grace gives us eyes to see only what we can handle.
This discussion, I felt, was low on the theological and historical factual timeline, as in, How, what, where, when, why of trinity understanding. But I'm not here to talk about that.
I'd would like to say, "Sam, your host skills were perfect."
A real pleasure to see you allow your guest the conversational floor without frequent interruptions, or talking over your guest.
So many other hosts forget to do this, however well meaning.
Keep up the good content. ☝
Thanks space cadet
When I was much younger, I read the Bible in a year. Scripture is good, but only if you could read in the Holy Spirit.
Agreed
Reading the Bible is good but studying it is far better. Only then can we begin to understand it. My church just spent 14 months doing a weekly bible study on the gospel of John.
Great Interview. Would love to see you interview Gavin Orltund on this or a rebuttal video to his revent video on the Trinity. Would love to see what pushback you have for him.
Sam, thanks for this- I thoroughly enjoyed the interview! Given that Tim is especially dwelling on the subject of the Trinity right now, have you considered sending a Unitarian book his way that covers the other side of the discussion? I’m sure it would be beneficial in this season of his, no matter where he lands.
In my experience sending busy people books just helps fill their bookshelves. God willing, I’ll get a chance to talk to him again.
The 3 questions that should be asked are: Is hell real? Does God require repentance in the life of a believer? Is homosexuality a sin? A lot of pastors and teachers will give you some surprising answers to these questions and reveal if they are from the Lord or not.
Focusing on this discussion only, the subject is trinity doctrinal accretion, did it exist or not? Those other subjects could be covered in another few videos.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Really good converzation! With regards to the "what is the Bible" question I would love to hear more about the Bible as story. It seems that story is a container for transferring knowledge in a condenses form. This would make sense if an infinite mind was trying to reveal knowledge to a finite mind, we would need to use a compression devise and great stories seems to yield their knowledge overtime.
I am also really surprised Tim doesn't have a podcast channel where he can just verbally process.
There is the Bible project podcast which is longer form and freer than the Bible project RUclips channel, but I think something even looser would be good too
The Bible is an Israel story and that story came to a conclusion in 70AD.
@@cc3775
WROTE: "The Bible is an Israel story and that story came to a conclusion in 70AD."
The entire Bible is about our Lord and Savior, Christ Jesus. The old testament says He is coming, the new testament says He is here, the Acts of the Apostles proclaim Him, the Epistles explain Him and Revelation says He is coming back. How did you miss that?
@@rickdavis2235 😂 tell me you don’t know the Bible without saying you don’t the the Bible. Jesus was made Lord over ancient Israel, he was their savior. He came to redeem them from transgressions committed under the first covenant. Ancient Hebrew writings are not about you, so stop inserting yourself.
@@cc3775
You assume a lot. I never said the Hebrew scriptures were about me. Jesus was God's plan for salvation before the world was created. I'll give you a chance to respond before I provide scripture. And don't get too cocky with the ad-hominem.
For me this is really surprising and I'm really glad I could hear Tim's thoughts on this subject.
I found The Bibleproject very early on, on the release of their third video and afterwards became a big fan of their podcast.
A few years later I started to delve into the question on who God and Jesus are. I even wrote them an email, but by than they were probably to big to answer it. It was even before I found out about biblical Unitarians.
As far as I could infer I understood that Tim is very tolerant (in the right sense of the word) about other Christians, who hold a different or even opposing opinion. But I am delighted to hear that his generosity transfers to biblical Unitarians too.
Thank you Tim,
for all your hard work on The Bibleproject and for coming to talk about this important question.
I would add a few comments about Tim's answers.
About the development of doctrines.
It's one thing for people not to understand God's character, but not with his nature. All it takes is one sentence where God says that he is three in one. That's it. There is nothing to interpret. While you can and should interpret commands and actions. It's not the same with God's ontology. Either he is one, or he is something different. Furthermore, Jesus revealed God's true character. He didn't change anything about the understanding on God's ontology. It's especially strange from a trinitarian view. Here he, the second person of the Trinity, is walking around humans and he is quite about it. Very strange indeed.
About the academics from the second century and onwards.
I don't think most of them deserve to be called bible nerds! They may be interpreting the bible, but I don't think there was a development out of the bible but rather a development away from the bible. Even the example Tim gave is the opposite of people who constrained their language on the bible. I mean, please show me where the bible hints that Jesus is from the same substance of God but different in an other way.
What they did was, they first made Jesus into a god and than they made God into a strange being and included Jesus into it. This understanding contradicts The Sh'ma and the understanding Jesus showed about God.
@DanJan09
I'll ask you the same question that I asked another person in this thread. How did you come to the conclusion that God is unitarian?
Yes the Trinity is true!
So good Sam! The last 5 minutes though... we need a whole hour on that subject alone!
Thanks Cassidy!
Besides the bible project the other resource that has better helped me understand the truth of scripture, is the book The Things They Carried. The way it explains and expounds on what truth is. Helps better understand the Hebrew scriptures.
I love "The Things they carried" as well. Thanks for watching
@@transfigured3673 great interview!
Thanks, a really good interview. I'd also add to the comments Jesus' seven 'I AM' statements, like - "I AM the light of the world" (John 8:12). Every time Jesus said one of these he was directly claiming to be God, Yahweh, using the name from Exodus 3:14 that God told to Moses. Then there's also John 8:58, "Before Abraham was born, I AM." Here, Jesus is not only saying he existed before Abraham, but at the same time identifying himself directly with the name of Yahweh. To describe Jesus as a created being in a unitarian theology you really have to ignore so many clear examples. And one of the main reasons the Jewish leaders wanted to kill Jesus was because he claimed to be God - their response to the Abraham statement above was to try and stone him, precisely for this reason. They understood what he was saying.
Also think about Jesus' forgiveness of sins. This is from Mark chapter 2: "And when Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, "Son, your sins are forgiven." 6 Now some of the scribes were sitting there, questioning in their hearts, 7 "Why does this man speak like that? He is blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?" 8 And immediately Jesus, perceiving in his spirit that they thus questioned within themselves, said to them, "Why do you question these things in your hearts? 9 Which is easier, to say to the paralytic, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Rise, take up your bed and walk’? 10 But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins" - he said to the paralytic - 11 "I say to you, rise, pick up your bed, and go home." 12 And he rose and immediately picked up his bed and went out before them all, so that they were all amazed and glorified God, saying, "We never saw anything like this!"
This passage is directly about Jesus being God, because as the scribes say, "who can forgive sins but God alone?" Jesus has forgiven the man's sins, and proves his authority to do so, when he heals the man as well. He is showing himself to be God.
This was a wonderful interview Sam and much appreciated.
Thanks for listening!
Whoa! Sam gives us all a behind the scenes look at how the Bible Project begun!! Impressive!
Thanks Paul!
I would love to hear Tim's comments on the book "the God of Jesus" by keegan Chandler. Absolutely one of the best teachings of the trinity.
Kegan’s book is really good
8:01 - I disagree. The reason I disagree is that Peter himself says in so many words that the prophets didn't know what they were saying, by saying that they gave no interpretation, but only spoke as they heard. Also, when it comes to the book of John, the distinction is made between a servant and a son, where a son "knows his father's business", and that he has "explained Him".
The fact that Paul makes the distinction between letter and spirit, then letter is literal (because that's just what it means), and spirit is the "allegorical" reading (which, like he says, isn't only allegory or symbology).
An allegorical reading can be true even if it goes beyond the knowledge of the original author or audience. I agree.
They discuss Jesus as part of the progressive revelation of the father, but also say that the Hebrew bible is “about” Jesus. In my experience, that is how Christians perceive the Bible in general. Couldn’t we, or possibly shouldn’t we, see it as the story of Jesus being “about” the father? This would shift the focus away from the story of Jesus plus that pesky Hebrew bible to one large narrative about God the father. We would cease being Christian, instead seeing ourselves as children of God. This perspective seems more impactful than how we view the trinity.
Sam, I would love to have a discussion with you on the topic of the Trinity and its biblical understanding
I'll have that discussion with you.
@@rickdavis2235 sure we can if you are interested
@@bleng100 I guess I should ask if you believe in the trinity or not. I do.
@@rickdavis2235 no! At least not the traditional understanding of it
@@bleng100 I guess we can start there. What do you know about the doctrine of the trinity or what is the traditional understanding of it?
A big concern of mine regarding the development of the Trinity is the complete absence of a Jewish consensus within the ecumenical councils of the early church. If we aim to grasp the Bible within its authentic historical framework, shouldn't we utilize a traditional Hebraic (strict Tanahk-based) lens as the foundation for understanding a Jewish messiah? I'd be cautious of embracing extrabiblical material, such as the writings of Philo, to support doctrinal positions, as a lot of his teachings reflect Babylonian mystical proto-kabbalistic pagan thought.
The evolution of the Trinity (pun intended) reminds me of how the theory of evolution arose as materialism gained prominence in society. Creation was no longer viewed through a well-established historical, biblical, and unified cross-cultural lens but rather through a modern "scientific" perspective. As Jewish influence diminished in early Christianity, Greek philosophical ideas began to dominate the interpretation of Christ, ultimately leading to the establishment of the Trinity. I agree with Dr. Mackie that proto-trinitarian thought existed within early Messianic circles I just would argue that what Peter and Paul referred to as "destructive heresies" and "doctrines of demons" were in fact early proto-trinitarian teachings influenced by Platonic thought that infiltrated the church.
I believe in order to truly grasp the essence of Christ and even our own place within the world, we should be open to questioning a post-apostolic and materialistic perspective of Christ and creation and embracing a more deeply-rooted Hebraic one. There should be congruence between faith and reason and I contend that, because of the lack of grounding, both the concepts of the Trinity and evolution serve as two frameworks that create a barrier between reason and faith rather than a bridge. I wouldn't categorize either evolution or the trinity as progressive revelation or an attempt at extrapolation but rather as instances of frame switching.
With that said, I wholeheartedly agree with Dr. Mackie's perspective on cross-Christological fellowship in that both positions ultimately end up writing different stories. While it's important for us to maintain our distinct communities, we should also remain open to engaging in meaningful dialogue with one another in a spirit of good faith.
By the fourth century, calling someone's theology "jewish" was a stock and trade insult within proto-orthodox christianity. I had this quote ready based on some other research I'm doing.
"Whoever explains, ‘I God the first and I the last, and besides me there is no God’ (Isaiah 44:6), which is said for the denial of idols and of gods that are not, to the denial of the only-begotten, before ages God, as Jews do, be he anathema."
Anathema 11 from the council of sirmium 351AD.
@@transfigured3673 Wow, there's a kind of arrogance that comes along with "new revelation", isn't there, and the early gentile church was no exception. We ought to show more empathy and gratitude towards the Jewish people. Man, I can hardly fathom the challenges they faced as the guardians of God's message to humanity. All the forces of darkness being against them. While they ultimately fell short in that duty, we have too. I truly hope one day to see us work together in sharing the revelation of the messiah, properly understood, to the world once again.
Well put! It's well known amongst all bible scholars that the trinity did not get any traction until 100's of years after the apostles died. Any attempt to find a clear and explicit reading of trinitarian theology in the bible is a big stretch! It was utterly unknown by first century Christians and the entire Old Testament is silent on the matter of a trinitarian God. Therefore I have always rejected this invention of the human mind.
That's hilarious!!!
The TWO Powers in Heaven israelite theology of the 2nd temple period is the Basis of the Trinity after the Visible YHWH ( Pre-incarnate Jesus ) sets aside some of his Divine attributes and becomes a servant as Jesus the Christ.
This is why Jesus was Crucified because HE claimed to be this Visible YHWH of Genesis 19:24 by saying he could do what HIS Father could do thus making himself as equal to the God of Israel.
@@EmJay2022what is your idea of properly understood!!!
Unititainism , modalism, Trithesism, Islam???
bring tim into the TLC please
He might be a little busy but I'll try
@@transfigured3673 no pressure haha just a dream and a prayer
@@airanderal amen
At least the algo will start to mix. Third popular episod on Sam’s channel. no problem to become top
Tim's closing comments are truly humbling. As a huge fan of Tim, and a Biblical Unitarian (and therefore someone who understands Jesus differently from him), his encouragement to BU creators like Sam is a masterclass in humility and commitment to truth wherever it leads.
55:39
"and just the last encouragement creating spaces environments where people can talk about the most important things um and truly differ and then engage that difference that's so important like it's so valuable um so thank you for doing what you done"
amen
@biblefeed1094
How did you come to the conclusion that God is unitarian?
the discussion of the spirit of the converzation and its profundity and necessity is so important. and mad cool hearing Tim be on the same page as BoM/TLC/Estuary in that way, as well as highlighting how your channel specifically embodies and exemplifies that spirit.
great stuff, wish it was longer! thank you, sirs 🤙
Thanks! I agree. Honorary TLC member
@therunawayrascal
How is Tim on the same page as the BoM?
Awesome! I have been listening to the BibleProject Podcast for quite some time, even longer than yours. So it is great to see you two finally meet. I haven't had much time these last months to listen, but this one I don't want to miss for sure!
We actually met 13 years ago
@@transfigured3673 Wow, that's half my life! I turn 26 next month haha.
Also he doesn't seem to give any justification for why the clarifying picture of Nicene Trinitarians is more right/clear than their contemporary opponents (Ebionites, Rabbis, gnostics)
Were the nicenes right because they were just factually correct, or were they right because the magisteria is divinely guided? There was a lot of lurking ecclesiology questions that we didnt have time to get to
@yosefrazin6455
What is Nicene Trinitarianism?
@@transfigured3673
The dogma of the magisterium is less than 200 years old, a product of pope Pius IX and the First Vatican Council (1869-1870).
Linked below is a podcast/video response to some of Dr. Mackie's claims in this Transfigured interview , including:
-Partial knowledge (mystery)
-Number of persons of God being revealed progressively.
-Lack of understanding of agency (NT authors never claimed "that's the pre-incarnate Jesus in the Torah, Prophets, Writings")
-How and when the Trinity was revealed
ruclips.net/video/ga_AXigQPk0/видео.html
Thanks for the commentary Bill. I enjoyed it
@billschlegel1
Wrote: "-Lack of understanding of agency (NT authors never claimed "that's the pre-incarnate Jesus in the Torah, Prophets, Writings")"
John 5:46
For if you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote of me.
Jesus himself said Moses wrote about him. Was Jesus a liar? He also said Abram wrote about him.
There is only one God, none formed before and none after. John 1:1 says the word is God. John 1:14 says the word (God) became flesh and dwelt among us. Is this the same word of God/Lord?
"And behold, the word of the Lord came to him: “This man shall not be your heir; your very own son shall be your heir.” (Genesis 15:4) ?
25:33 from Valentinus. He was the originator of the Trinity doctrine
Valentinus was an Egyptian religious philosopher and the founder of Roman and Alexandrian schools of gnosticism, a system of religious dualism. Pagan Egypt is where many heresies began. The triune nature of God was revealed through scripture.
I wish Sam would have explored with Tim what the implications of those different theologies would be depending on how one interprets the identity of Jesus Christ and/or the identity of God…
The Trinitarian view obfuscates the guidance that the New Testament is revealing to its reader by simply reducing Christ’s crucifixion to some amazing sacrifice that was made instead of showcasing it as a visual parable by the exemplar and teacher, Jesus Christ…
*1 Peter 2:21* (CEB)
You were called to this kind of endurance, because Christ suffered on your behalf. *HE LEFT YOU AN EXAMPLE* so that you might follow in his footsteps.
There was a lot of material left for future conversations
I love this conversation! how good would it be if every doctrinal conversation is like this? I love the characters Tim and you demonstrated in this talk, this has been one of the best RUclips theological conversations I have seen recently!
Thank you, that is a high compliment
@@transfigured3673 you are welcome! I mean it and I long to see more wounds would be healed because of doctrinal fight because of conversations like this. You are doing a great job Sam!
25:33 In the beginning was Hypsistou and Logos was with him and Logos was Theos. In the beginning Logos was with Hypsistou. In him was Zoe that was the light of men. The light which became Zoe in all men.
What is the "word" of the LORD in Genesis 15?
What a great episode 👍🏼😊
Thanks for listening
28:30 I don't understand how he can have this long account of the Tanakh and apocrypha but not talk about the impact of platonism and whether it is a legitimate source for theology
Footnotes to plato
Waite what! Tim Mackie nice!
Thanks!
@39:15
In my mind, Thomas’ statement to Jesus in John 20:28 is akin to this verse where Moses is God to Pharoah…
*Exodus 7:1* (GNV)
Then the Lord said to Moses, Behold, I have made thee Pharaoh’s God, and Aaron thy brother shall be thy Prophet.
In my mind I think of representation, one thing standing in for another, as the best way to understand God and Jesus' relationship to one another. I've been influenced by Pitkin's work on political representation as the best framework to understand the divinity of Jesus as a representational category and not a philosophical one.
@moosa86 WROTE: "Exodus 7:1 (GNV)
Then the Lord said to Moses, Behold, I have made thee Pharaoh’s God, and Aaron thy brother shall be thy Prophet."
EXODUS 7:1 (esv)
And the LORD said to Moses, “See, I have made you LIKE God to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron shall be your prophet.
One of the primary rules of propoer hermeneutics says that "scripture cannot contradict scripture" and that "every verse must be evaluated in light of the totality of scripture." In other words, what does the rest of scripture say about it?
ISAIAH 43:10
“You are my witnesses,” declares the LORD, “and my servant whom I have chosen, that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he. BEFORE ME THERE WAS NO GOD FORMED, NOR SHALL THERE BE ANY AFTER ME.
I've been waiting for this one for a while! Love it!!
You have to be careful of everything you hear. As scriptures says the His Spirit Himself will reveal all things to you. We must always read the scriptures for ourselves and pray that the Lord reveals Himself. We cant always just agree with everything a believer without knowing who God is ourselves.
One of the things that has helped me in understanding what was at stake is Athanasius statement that "God became man, so that man could become god." Un-packed this means that unless Jesus is infinite, eternal and holy as the Father is eternal, infinite and holy then his sacrifice can't be sufficient for or redemption.
Athanasius did not believe Jesus’s death was an atoning sacrifice and never makes that argument
This soteriological argument is at the very heart of the Cappadocian argument for the Trinity. Today’s apologists frequently cite passages like John 1:1, Philippians 2 and John 10:30, not understanding that there are reasonable counter arguments from the Arians, and with no greater hermeneutical stretching than many modern American Christians are already comfortable with.
@@transfigured3673 interesting, what argument was he making then?
Read Romans 5:12-21. Those verses show explicitly that because it was "one man" (Adam) who brought death, so also it is "one man" (Christ) who brings life. It is one man and one man. Not one man and one God. Not one man and one God-man. But one man and one man. And those verses show that the death of this one man is sufficient, even in the face of all of mankind's sins, not because this one man is also God, but because of the abundance of God's grace.
God bless.
@@maxspringer01 That’s a silly argument. To say Christ is the God-man, is not to say that he’s a chimera demigod who’s “halfway” in between. There is no ♾️/2. The Chalcedonian view is that he’s true God, true Man. Is he God? Yes. Is he Man? Yes. Can we talk about Him like he’s God? Yes because He is. Can we talk about him like he’s a man? Yes, because He is.
Some interesting resources in this regard:
Larry W. Hurtado's "Lord Jesus Christ"
Richard Bauckham's "Jesus and the God of Israel"
Simon Gathercole's "The Preexistent Son"
Chris Tilling's "Paul's Divine Christology"
@stephenbailey9969
Hi Stephen. I'm curious; do you think Paul taught a different gospel than Jesus or the other apostles?
@@rickdavis2235 Jesus was carrying out the role of Messiah among his own people. The apostles and Paul were carrying the gospel of the risen Messiah for the whole world.
Jesus was fulfilling the promises. The apostles and Paul were carrying the gospel of promises fulfilled.
The point of the sources I supplied is that Israel's God was fulfilling all promises himself, and that is what the disciples carried to the world.
@@stephenbailey9969 check! thanks.
I ask because I've been getting a lot of people telling me that Paul taught a different gospel of salvation by faith alone while the others taught faith plus works. This stems from a lack of context on their part.
Dude, could you get Tim Mackie on with Jonathan Pageau or Fr. Stephen De Young? That would be a dream come true!
A Tim Mackie & Pageau conversation about symbolism would be amazing.
@@transfigured3673
Riight?! I could honestly see you moderating/guiding it.
Bro I would straight up donate the dollars for that hahah
I'll think about it. I have a hard time getting Pageau's attention
@@transfigured3673 I believe that. I’ve heard if you say “Fr Stephen De Young”three times he appears. Maybe he can get Pageau roped into it? 🤔
@@josiahalexander5697 good suggestion. I haven't tried before
Correct me if I’m wrong but the people of the nicean counsel changed things that the original apostles did right? I don’t think I would tamper with that stuff. Also they were simple monotheistic Jews and people who believed Jesus was messiah. God with us. I would lean against a trinity especially after hearing Bart erman shred it.
Bart Ehrman loves to sell books, especially to conspiracy theorists, so he writes what they want to hear because it makes him a lot of money. He doesn't spew the garbage amongst his peers that he does with the buyers of his books because he knows better. The Council of Nicaea had one purpose; to uphold what had always been known that Christ is God incarnate and the second person of the trinity.
Shortly after Christianity was made legal, a Cyrenaic presbyter, ascetic, and priest from Alexandria, Egypt named Arius, began preaching the idea that Jesus was not God, but a created being. He gained a following and began disputing with Alexander, the bishop of Alexandria. In 321 AD, a local council declared Arius a heretic, however, Arius just moved to Palestine where he gained a larger following and over the course of the next few years, the debate became so intense that it gained the attention of Emperor Constantine, who had just unified the empire and didn’t want anything that would threaten division.
Constantine saw the debate between the Christians and Arian as a threat to the stability of the empire so he moved to settle it and he officially called the council in 325 AD. There were no gnostics involved, there were no ebionites involved or any other groups. The council was called to settle disputes between Christians and Arians only. Most other heretical views of Christianity, like gnosticism, had mostly died out at this point and the majority of those professing to be Christians were Orthodox Christians so there was not a wife variety of different views of the council.
Although Constantine originally invited over 1800 bishops from across the empire, only around 300 were able to attend, most of them being from the east with only about a dozen representing the west. It should be remembered what happened to these two men less than two decades ago. Most of them suffered through one of the greatest Christian persecutions of all time, many of them facing brutal torture and imprisonment for their faith, so despite the modern view of the participants of the council, they were not the type of men who were fine with compromising their beliefs, especially if a few years earlier, they were willing to die for them.
These bishops actually assembled in Nicaea to confirm what they had already believed and deal with Arius’ teachings. There were three parties at the council. The smallest was Arius and a handful of bishops that agreed with him; that the Father and Jesus were of different substance or heteroousios. The second, and much larger group, was the Orthodox group led by Hoseas of Cordova, Alexander of Alexandria and a young deacon named Athanasius.
This group held a long standing belief of the church that Jesus was fully God and had existed eternally with the Father. They said Jesus was of the same substance, or homoousious. Then there was a third group, roughly equal in size to the Orthodox group called the Eusebian group led by Eusebius of Caesarea, however, this group didn’t differ on theology from the Orthodox view, believing too that Jesus was fully God and existed eternally with the Father but differed on the word, homoousios. The reason was because in previous centuries, modalist heresies had used the word to teach that the Father and Jesus were one person and not coexisting persons of one being so in actuality, the Orthodox group and the Eusebian group didn’t differ on theology or the deity of Christ. They only differed on terminology.
The big, modern myth is that Emperor Constantine forced Trinitarian views on the church but this simply is not historically supported . Although he presided over the council, he did not push any particular view. He was no theologian and all he wanted was that both sides would come to an agreement and there would be unity in the church.
The Orthodox group listened to the views of Arius and they overwhelmingly rejected his views as being new and distant from the view of the church. Eusebius wrote that some of the bishops tore up letters containing Arius’ teachings. He then wrote that church leaders interrogated Arius using Scripture but found the he had a new way of interpreting every piece of Scripture. They then pointed out that his views had to be wrong because it was new and wasn’t taught in any early church history. Athanasius rhetorically asked how many fathers Arius could cite for his phrases.
They then formed the Nicene Creed which is a clear condemnation of Arius’ teachings and a confirmation of the Orthodox view. In the end, all but Arius, and two bishops, signed the creed, clearly showing there were no major divisions in church theology.
The council then moved to deal with other issues such was which day to formally celebrate Easter. They also formally denounced gnosticism and other minor sects, publicized twenty canon laws, and dealt with other minor issues. The council did not decide on the biblical canon as the canon had evolved on its own over time, however, according to the Muratorian fragment, the canon was nearly complete by the end of the second century.
The council did not decide on the use of the word, “Trinity,” dealing primarily with the divinity of Christ. The word, trinity, can be found in early Christian history as it was used by early church fathers. The acceptance of a “divine three” can also be found in other early Christian writings. Here are just a few examples:
Matthew 5:16-17
Matthew 28:19
Luke 3:21-22
John 14:16-17
2 Corinthians 13:14
1 Peter 1:2-3
1 John 5:7
Writings of Polycarp
Writings of Ignatius
Writings of Justin Martyr
The results of the council did not actually please Constantine. In fact, he was very angry at the Christians because he wanted unity and compromise, not for one side to denounce the other. He actually took pity on the Arian. Arius was exiled and fled to Illyrium for a short time while his heresy began to spread and gain political power, especially when on her deathbed, Constantine’s sister urged Constantine Arius and he actually did.
Arius found a new, crafty way of interpreting the Nicene Creed in his favor and Constantine invited him back so he could force the church to readmit him, however, Arius died before this could happen. A follower of Arius, Eusebius of Nicomedia, was able to sway Constantine more in favor of the Arian view but just before his death, Eusebius of Nicomedia baptized Constantine, officially symbolizing his siding with the Arians.
After Constantine’s death, the Arians continued to gain more ground against the Orthodox view. The Arian bishop that Constantine had favored, used their political power to fight against Christianity. Constantine was succeeded by 2 Arian emperors (Constantius II 317 - 361 AD and Valens 328 - 378 AD), in the east who worked with Arian bishops in an attempt to override Nicaea and writing a new creed. Although Arians were sill in the minority, there were given much more political power, which they used to try and stamp out Christianity.
Many Christian leaders were forced into subscribing the creed that did not favor either side. Rome later described this time period as when the whole world groaned and was astonished to find itself Arian. Despite the power of the Arians, one bishop fought back almost completely by himself.
As the Nations of Alexandria, continued to argue from Scripture and stand against the might of the Arian heresy. Even when he was banished and removed from his position five times, he never swayed and stood for truth against the Arian political machine. He was a popular hero who prevented Christian theology from compromising and giving in to the Arians so the Arians trend to gaining more political power but just before the Arians consolidated their hold over the empire, they turned to internal fighting and destroyed themselves and so it wasn’t long before all of their political power was lost.
The Christians were allowed to meet in 381 AD at the Council of Constantinople and reaffirm the Nicene faith. The battle between the Arians and Christians did not end there. After the Council of Nicaea, many bishops headed north and began converting the Germanic tribes to Arianism. They eventually conquered the Western Roman Empire and the Christians had to deal with Arianism again, however, as we can see today, Arianism died out and Christianity is still going strong and growing.
As we can see, Christian bishops did not inherit absolute political power from the Council of Nicaea and use it to stomp out other competing sects. On the contrary, it was the Arians who gained the political power and tried to stomp out the true church. There is no evidence that the council created Christianity, the concept of the Trinity, the divinity of Jesus or to use political power to erase other competing sects.
This myth about the council is a complete fairytale.
28:48 I'm not sure I follow this "expansion as to what monotheism means". Was there some explicit understanding of what monotheism is back then? I feel like what happens with this type of thinking is there is a projection of some type of monotheism back into the past and the a development away from that idea over time also projected. To my knowledge, there isn't even a word for monotheism in Hebrew or Greek during the times of either Bibles.
As Dr. Beau Branson points out, what ancients were concerned about there being “One God” had to do with “monarchy” (mono-arche). As long as the religious system had one first cause/arche of all things, there was One “Most High” God. It had nothing to do with the ridiculous Muslim-like absolute monotheism which the Bible cannot live up to with multiple actual gods mentioned in Psalm 82, John 10, 1 Cor. 5:5-6, etc.
@@IAmisMaster Perhaps Branson fleshes this out more clearly elsewhere. Can you lead me to a paper where I can find his argument? Because my instincts seems to say that the bible is quite concerned with the Israelites worshiping other gods and that idols are stone and wood. I'm also not sure that Psalm 82 is a good choice considering the torah uses "gods" to talk about judges, and the psalm is about judgement.
@@theclownofbabylon
I would just watch his 5-part lecture series on Dr. Branson’s website. I believe the first video describes how monarchy was the original monotheism, but honestly I’ve seen so many of his videos, I can’t remember where he explains this best.
Very few of the Founders believed in the Trinity.
How did you arrive at that conclusion?
@@rickdavis2235 Read them.
Regarding the 'deutero theos' stuff, iirc, that seems related to the Greek philosophies that the "Real God" wouldn't get its hands dirty creating things so they brought into existence a second god to do the creating. Not Jewish, Greek.
Really did he say that?
@@mixk1d you'll have to elaborate on your question. You ask if he said... What?
My statement was expressing that it seemed related to another concept. Does he have to explicitly draw the same parallel himself for me to notice it?
@@voymasa7980 fair enough, you are right, it is related.
The problem is the gap between eternity and time. So both platonism and Christianity try and solve this.
In platonism, because the good and the logos have different natures, it leads to this idea that less eternal = less good. So therefore since the world we live in is fully temporal, it is bad.
Because in Christianity we believe in the incarnation of the logos and the trinity, the good (ie God) is united with the lowest though the logos so everything is saved/sancitified/ made good/clean.
Ultimately Unitarianism is a reversion to the platonic view rather than the Christian view
I would argue it’s a matter of metaphysical necessity rather than specifically Jewish or Greek (see Islam’s “God is not in the toilet” and quranic createdness debates)
@@mixk1d God has always interacted with His creation via "divers times and manners". That has been known since the Jews were given a "more accurate understanding" of God. Trying to add Greek philosophy to explain eternal being greater and less eternal being less good is an extra biblical argument, so it shows no supported divine inspiration.
God didn't need to "take on flesh" as you trinitarians believe, in order to do anything, as He has always interacted with and tried to guide humanity, from creation and Eden, until now. He has sent agents, directly communicated with, and even dropped a mysterious food substance on the Israelites, all without a meat suit being necessary. To argue He *must* have become human is to diminish God through limitation and to elevate His anointed agent above what you ought.
Love this discussion. At the end of the day, the doctrine shouldn't divide us. John 1:12 But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, We are all united in Christ!
Which Christ? God, the Son or Jesus?
@@MichaelTheophilus906 read the bible and decide for yourself.
@@kareng3655 I have. Deut 6.4-6, Mark 12.28-32, John 17.3, John 20.17, Rev 1.5-6, Rev 3.12.
@@kareng3655 Jesus in the Bible is God Almighty. That Jesus? When you say to read the Bible and decide for yourself, you're implying that truth is subjective.
28:24 Interesting. I always thought that the messenger then god talking motif was meant to explicitly show that god wasn't some physical thing and communicated through these other beings. You don't think that a letter you receive is part of the person who sent it.
Who says the words in a letter? The letter or the sender? When you call your phone "mom" when you are talking to your mom, are you admitting you have a phone for a mother?
@@transfigured3673 I'm reminded of the Lonely Island song Threw it on the Ground where the guy says "my dad's not a phone, duh".
@@theclownofbabylon lol
This is pretty clear (to me at least lmao) in targum neofiti and it's use of words like memra
49:33 This is the typical confusion caused by believing doctrinal preachers and refusing to listen and trust the Holy Spirit as sent from the Father of Jesus Christ.
There is no Father if there is no triune God. God is not the literal father of Jesus so if He is the Father, it's in a trinitarian sense.
Genesis 19:24
Then Yahweh rained on Sodom and Gomorrah sulfur and fire from Yahweh out of heaven.
Scripture teaches there is only one God. How do you reconcile that above verse?
For me, the way I've always addressed it was found in Jesus' discussion on the unforgivable sin - Jesus didn't mind he or God being blasphemed, but what he DID mind was the Holy Spirit being blasphemed. He didn't place anyone else in this discussion; he placed himself on equal footing with the Creator, but then he placed the Holy Spirit on this "next level" that dared not be touched. It was almost like he was saying "look, Dad and I? We can forgive even the haters if they come after us, but the Holy Ghost? Yeah you don't mess with him. We can speak for ourselves and explain our ways to you - the Holy Spirit has nothing to explain. When it's involved, you don't question it."
That was always the dynamic of the Trinity, for me, without being called "The Trinity". Like the kid sister that nobody was allowed to pick on, not because bro or dad was going to whoop you if you did, but because kid sister's way of dealing with it was absolute. There was no way back into her good graces if you upset her - you were doomed.
Apt comment except for referring to the Holy Spirit as it.
The neuter gender in Greek is not translated into English.
There is a grammar rule for the Greek using the neuter in certain places where persons are being referred to. To be consistent at calling someone it, in many places in the New Testament, including groups of people, all English versions would have to be changed.
For some reason many Christians, unitarians and non Christian cults, only refer to the word for Spirit and the pronoun referring to him as neuter in translation (improper translation).
What is blasphemy of the Holy Spirit? UNBELIEF! That's the only thing that condemns a person; unbelief. In other words, if you don't believe, you won't be saved.
Always thought provoking guests and content, Sam.
Thanks for listening!
Don’t know what either of their stances are and I didn’t learn anything from this video. No hate. Just thought I’d say it.
52:00 relational over rational
This is a surprise, to be sure, but a pleasant one!
Let me know what you think about the conversation!
@@transfigured3673 As soon as I find time to watch it :)
Exciting conversation!!!! Would love more processing w tim videos!
God willing!
The Trinity has to be read into the Bible - not out of it. One can make just as strong or a stronger case against it as for it.
@Steve …the TORAH is the TRUTH…and it says that 2 or 3 witnesses are required to establish a matter…. so there were 3 GODS at creation…quite simple…Got Torah Got Truth
@@harryabrahams2770 so you just ignore all of the verses that say there is only one God?
@@rickdavis2235 which “ one “ …ECHAD which is not numerically one …or YACHID which is numerically one….if a million Israelites answered with “ one “ voice, it
doesn’t mean there was only one Israelite.
Got Torah Got Truth
@@harryabrahams2770
We can shorten this conversation if you'll provide scripture to support your claims because I'm not interested in opinion or phiolsophical assumptions. I don't mean to be so harsh but I witness to people every day that want to deny or distort the deity of Christ by building little straw men to attack. I don't have time for that.
This is the God I'm talking about as He revealed himself to the prophets.
Deuteronomy 6:4
“Hear, Israel! the LORD (Yahweh) is our God, the LORD (Yahweh) is one!
James 2:19
You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe-and shudder!
Deuteronomy 4:35
You were shown these things so that you might know that the LORD (Yahweh), He is God; there is no other besides Him.
Deuteronomy 4:39
Therefore know today, and take it to your heart, that the LORD (Yahweh), He is God in heaven above and on the earth below; there is no other.
Deuteronomy 32:39
See now that I, I am He, And there is no god besides Me; It is I who put to death and give life. I have wounded and it is I who heal, And there is no one who can save anyone from My hand.
2 Samuel 7:22
For this reason You are great, Lord Yahweh; for there is no one like You, and there is no God except You, according to all that we have heard with our ears.
1 Kings 8:60
so that all the peoples of the earth may know that the LORD (Yahweh) is God; there is no one else.
2 Kings 19:15
Hezekiah prayed before the LORD (Yahweh) and said, “Lord, God of Israel, enthroned above the cherubim, You are the God, You alone, of all the kingdoms of the earth. You have made heaven and earth.
1 Chronicles 17:20
the LORD (Yahweh), there is none like You, nor is there any God besides You, according to everything that we have heard with our ears.
Nehemiah 9:6
You alone are the LORD (Yahweh).
You have made the heavens,
The heaven of heavens with all their lights,
The earth and everything that is on it,
The seas and everything that is in them.
You give life to all of them,
And the heavenly lights bow down before You.
Psalm 86:10
For You are great, and you do wondrous deeds; You alone are God.
Isaiah 37:16
“Yahweh of armies, God of Israel, who is enthroned above the cherubim, You are the God, You alone, of all the kingdoms of the earth. You made heaven and earth.
Isaiah 37:20
But now Yahweh, our God, save us from his hand, so that all the kingdoms of the earth may know that You alone, Yahweh, are God.”
Isaiah 43:10
“You are My witnesses,” declares the LORD (Yahweh),
“And My servant whom I have chosen,
So that you may know and believe Me
And understand that I am He.
Before Me there was no God formed,
And there will be none after Me.
Isaiah 43:11
I, only I, am the LORD (Yahweh),
And there is no savior besides Me.
Isaiah44:6
“This is what the LORD (Yahweh) says, He who is the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the Yahweh of armies: ‘I am the first and I am the last, And there is no God besides Me.
Isaiah 44:8
Do not tremble and do not be afraid;
Have I not long since announced it to you and declared it?
And you are My witnesses.
Is there any God besides Me,
Or is there any other Rock?
I know of none.’”
Isaiah 45:21
Declare and present your case;
Indeed, let them consult together.
Who has announced this long ago?
Who has long since declared it?
Is it not I, Yahweh?
And there is no other God besides Me,
A righteous God and a Savior;
There is none except Me.
Isaiah 46:9
Remember the former things long past, For I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is no one like Me,
Hosea 13:4
Yet I have been the LORD (Yahweh) your God
Since the land of Egypt;
And you were not to know any god except Me,
For there is no savior besides Me.
Joel 2:27
So you will know that I am in the midst of Israel,
And that I am the LORD (Yahweh) your God
And there is no other;
And My people will never be put to shame.
Zechariah 14:9
And the LORD (Yahweh) will be King over all the earth; on that day the LORD (Yahweh) will be the only one, and His name the only one.
I am completely ignorant of what the Bible Project is.
Type it into your search bar
It’s what Big Eva puts in their Jumbotrons.
The more I studied the scriptures in the original language and text the more I learned how to read with no preimposed doctrine I realized the doctrines I thought were true weren’t such as the trinity.
Elohim and YHWH Elohim are opposing forces that work together.
YHWH is 'the man of war', the sword (scriptures) that ties them together.
There is a reason that ALL references made to 'the' son of man are in the 3rd person, IF it is a human that mentions 'him', whereas the Lord speaks directly to 'him'.
The 'son of man' is a person's DOOR or GATE that is opened by faith which brings obedience, and in Jesus case, even death on a cross.
An example of this 'door' being opened is found in Ezekiel 2, where it is the SPIRIT that CAUSES Ezekiel to 'stand' so that the Lord could 'speak' to him.
This is also the context of the discourse between Jesus and the Pharisees, as Jesus adds, that David was speaking in the spirit. This 'door' is inside each of us, and is indicative of or relationship (or lack thereof) to the Lord. As such this 'door' becomes our 'master' that sits between the 2 fathers. Father God and the father of lies, and this is what the keys of David are all about.
This is also what the war between a 'father' and a son is about.
I am prepared to discuss at length. I do not intend to write (another) book. We're in enough trouble as it is.
My number is...
(S1N) 2CY - 1DIE or...
'sin to see why one die'.
Hurry. Time is short.
Shalom.
You're confused: Jesus said HE was the Door to the Father: u must come through him to get to the Father.
Nicodemus had to receive the Holy Spirit's baptism as well as his Jewish Mickvah of cleansing before entering the Kingdom of God by Jesus baptism of the Holy Spirit that he gave to his Apostles and all authentic Christians.
@@davidjanbaz7728 - Jesus in your understanding is the 'word'. The 'word' IS the way, and the 'word' is the law of God.
Jesus was 'made' - not 'created'. He followed the law perfectly as per the 'spirit' not the 'letter'. The law cannot be enforced without breaking it, it you cause someone's death. This is WHY Jesus did not call down angels to defend Him.
There is a major difference between God (Elohim) and Lord (YHWH). God CANNOT be a man or a son of man as per Numbers 23:19. BUT, the Lord (YHWH) CAN be a 'man' as per Exodus 15:3.
The way that person becomes a son of God, and God has MANY sons, is by being led by the spirit. In psalm 82, God is admonishing the sons of God... and Jesus is the 1st to be raised 'from the dead'.
The 'spirit' that the Lord breathed into us is bifold, or binary in it's nature... and it is where our freewill comes from, as easily seen in Isaiah 45:7
Are we 'like God'? The scriptures say so. Elohim refers to ANY spirit. When Saul summoned samuel, did the witch call God out sheol? She said it, I see Elohim. That is the difference between God and Lord, and when the scriptures say, man has become like '1' of us... the question is then answered, as the one who 'knows' (think relationship and fruit) good AND evil is the Lord (YHWH).
If you look carefully, you will see 2 different versions of man's appearing. I don't like to say created, because darkness is 'created' while light on the other hand is 'made'. But when the text changes to LORD GOD, from GOD, everything is written in reverse. Even the 2nd story in Genesis is reversed.
Look at verse 4 (Genesis 2:4)
"These are the generations (how it happened, not groups of people, but work) of the HEAVENS and the EARTH when they were 'created', in the DAY that the Lord God 'made' the EARTH and the Heavens."
There is a duality all through these writings. Even the choice between Jesus and Barabbas. Barabbas means 'son' of the father. Like was a bar-mitzvah means, Son of the Command.
ANY word in Hebrew that ends in 'ah' is feminine. Thus TORAH which means 'teaching' is feminine. RUAH which means 'spirit', is the same. RAH which means 'evil' is (again) feminine. This is why there is 'Lady Wisdom', and even the 'harlot' - which is someone who is (no pun intended) 'working BOTH sides of the 'path'. The 7 headed beast represents the days of a week, and the blasphemous names are... Sunday, Monday, etc - all as Greek gods. The 7th day has a 'mortal head wound' meaning that the Sabbath of Eden, was wounded by Adam's transgression. But it is 'healed' because bad is still used for 'good'.
Now before ya flip out, note that our God is NOT the author of evil, and so when He 'sends it', as He dies in 1 Kings 22, He can't even pick which spirit will 'go' or even 'how' they will do it [evil]. This is why He (all knowing God) asks questions, because the ultimate truth, he will know if the spirit is trying to deceive Him. This is also why He questions Adam.
What really amazes me is that we got into all this trouble for becoming 'like' God. And now people say that Jesus was God (can't be as per Numbers 23:19), and then we now want to be 'like Him'.
There is nothing wrong with being 'like' God, we already are. Jesus said through God all things are possible, and notice what is said regarding the Tower of Babel, if man continues nothing will be impossible. And thus they stopped building the city and we have done the same.
And we are going to lose our heads - just like John as we wait for someone else? And all the while squabbling over doctrine? And as a matter of fact, the doctrine of devils.
The law is intriguing to me, be cause you can apply it to everyday life... in a by the letter or in a spiritual sense.
For instance, who is it that goes around seeking whom he can catch in their sin?
Well, some would say that role belongs to a devil... but oddly the job applies to a police officer as well. Their purpose is well meant, and the spirit demonstrates that. But by the letter mans law is oppressive and ANYTHING that is oppressed will grow - simple gardening rules.
Thanks for the reply.
Shalom.
@ChrisMusante
WROTE: "Elohim and YHWH Elohim are opposing forces that work together."
YHWY is Elohim.
EXODUS 3:1-22
1 Now Moses was keeping the flock of his father-in-law, Jethro, the priest of Midian, and he led his flock to the west side of the wilderness and came to Horeb, the mountain of ELOHIM. 2 And the angel of YHWH appeared to him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush. He looked, and behold, the bush was burning, yet it was not consumed. 3 And Moses said, “I will turn aside to see this great sight, why the bush is not burned.” 4 When YHWY saw that he turned aside to see, ELOHIM called to him out of the bush, “Moses, Moses!” And he said, “Here I am.” 5 Then he said, “Do not come near; take your sandals off your feet, for the place on which you are standing is holy ground.” 6 And he said, “I am the ELOHIM of your father, the ELOHIM of Abraham, the ELOHIM of Isaac, and the ELOHIM of Jacob.” And Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look at ELOHIM.
7 Then YHWH said, “I have surely seen the affliction of my people who are in Egypt and have heard their cry because of their taskmasters. I know their sufferings, 8 and I have come down to deliver them out of the hand of the Egyptians and to bring them up out of that land to a good and broad land, a land flowing with milk and honey, to the place of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Amorites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites. 9 And now, behold, the cry of the people of Israel has come to me, and I have also seen the oppression with which the Egyptians oppress them. 10 Come, I will send you to Pharaoh that you may bring my people, the children of Israel, out of Egypt.” 11 But Moses said to ELOHIM, “Who am I that I should go to Pharaoh and bring the children of Israel out of Egypt?” 12 He said, “But I will be with you, and this shall be the sign for you, that I have sent you: when you have brought the people out of Egypt, you shall serve God on this mountain.”
13 Then Moses said to ELOHIM, “If I come to the people of Israel and say to them, ‘The ELOHIM of your fathers has sent me to you,’ and they ask me, ‘What is his name?’ what shall I say to them?” 14 ELOHIM said to Moses, “I am who I am.” And he said, “Say this to the people of Israel: ‘I am has sent me to you.’” 15 ELOHIM also said to Moses, “Say this to the people of Israel: ‘YHWH, the ELOHIM of your fathers, the ELOHIM of Abraham, the ELOHIM of Isaac, and the ELOHIM of Jacob, has sent me to you.’ This is my name forever, and thus I am to be remembered throughout all generations. 16 Go and gather the elders of Israel together and say to them, ‘YHAH, the ELOHIM of your fathers, the ELOHIM of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob, has appeared to me, saying, “I have observed you and what has been done to you in Egypt, 17 and I promise that I will bring you up out of the affliction of Egypt to the land of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Amorites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites, a land flowing with milk and honey.”’ 18 And they will listen to your voice, and you and the elders of Israel shall go to the king of Egypt and say to him, ‘YHWH, the ELOHIM of the Hebrews, has met with us; and now, please let us go a three days' journey into the wilderness, that we may sacrifice to YHWH our ELOHIM.’ 19 But I know that the king of Egypt will not let you go unless compelled by a mighty hand. 20 So I will stretch out my hand and strike Egypt with all the wonders that I will do in it; after that he will let you go. 21 And I will give this people favor in the sight of the Egyptians; and when you go, you shall not go empty, 22 but each woman shall ask of her neighbor, and any woman who lives in her house, for silver and gold jewelry, and for clothing. You shall put them on your sons and on your daughters. So you shall plunder the Egyptians.”
Elohim has many meanings and has no attributes attributed to it.
@@rickdavis2235 - correct. Elohim is the 'many' that we need to make a covenant with. YHWH is a 'specific' elohim - the 'most high'. The God OF all 'other' 'gods' - including 'us'.
When the 2 terms are considered individually, you can watch the 'hand of control' get passed back and forth, from God (Elohim) to YHWH. First place you see it is in Genesis.
Notice that God 'created', while the LORD 'formed and made'. You can even see the direction of the wording reverses, where Genesis 2:4 says, 'generations of the heavens and the earth, in the day the LORD GOD 'made' the earth and the heavens.
People seem to miss the connections, like where it says that the Lord God had NOT caused it to rain on the land, and that same scenario is in Noah - having never have rained.
I chased Michael Heiser around trying to give him some more 'dots'... but he was too busy and then died shortly afterwards.
@@ChrisMusante you're not getting what I wrote.
Elohim is a term that is used to describe:
1. The God of Israel
2. The gods of the nations (1 Kings 11:33, one of three elohim is a goddess)
3. The gods of Yahweh’s council
4. Demons (Deut. 32:17)
5. A deceased human being (1 Samuel 28:13)
6. Angels (angel of the LORD)
Dr. Heiser was a trinitarian who believed only in one God. What you're proposing is polytheism and probably why you never heard from Heiser. Are you LDS?
how many times must the church answer this question???????????? just teach the catechism...
One might wonder if the church needs to keep answering this question might be because there haven't been any satisfactory answers yet.
Hot damn!
Lol
Symbolic allegorical reading is very important to avoid falsification of the Biblical text. Science shows the Earth and Cosmos are billions of years old and vast the Bible needs to by "reinterpreted" to avoid falsification. It's a mind game. If the "stories" of the beginning of the world are mythological why aren't the stories of Jesus and the end of the world mythological too?
Even scientific findings need to be interpreted with a layer of allegory and metaphysical transcendence to have any meaning. Science without allegory is meaningless.
@@transfigured3673 Really please give me an example? What exactly is "metaphysical transcendence" anyway? Give me some examples.
What is a law of physics if not something metaphysically transcendent?
@@transfigured3673 Metaphysics can mean many different things. (see the entry in the Stanford Encyclopedia of philosophy). In what sense are you using the word? Transcendent has many different meanings in different contexts. The Laws of physics are mathematical formalisms explaining what we observe in nature. Why all this obscurantist language. Is it to smuggle in some occult religious ontology? I am not like the other TLC folks I am a physicalist agnostic atheist, and I think that view is based on sufficient objective evidence and logic. If you want to do a conversation with me. I would be happy to oblige.
@tgrogan….still trusting the science??? …the scriptures state that 2 or 3 witnesses are required to establish a matter….so there were 3 GODS at creation ….Got Torah Got Truth
Interesting. Tim points out Isaiah describes God as "ish" a man and being in the form of a Man.
Do you have a chapter and verse?
@@rickdavis2235
Isaiah 6:2 - Isaiah sees God sitting upon a throne.
Isaiah 54:5 - Isaiah calls God the husband (baal) of Israel.
Isaiah 42:13 - Isaiah describes the Lord like a mighty man (Kag-gib-bo-wr), like a man of war (ke ish mil ha mo wt)
@@JaysonCarmona which passage do you want to discuss first? Choose one and then we'll move on to the next.
Jesus said: " . . . I am going up to my Father and your Father, and my God and your God"
- John 20:17
Jesus has a God - and a Father.
We have this same God - and Father.
Jesus is NOT God.
Paul the Apostle said: "For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”), yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things, and we are for him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and we are through him. But not everyone has this knowledge . . . "
- 1 Corinthians 8:5-7
Why is this not common knowledge???
King David said: Yahweh’s declaration to my lord, “Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet.”
- Psalms 110:1
Peter the Apostle said: Therefore, let all the house of Israel know for certain that God has made him-this Jesus whom you crucified-both Lord and Christ.
- Acts 2:36
Jesus is seated on God's right hand, as Lord and Christ, because God exalted Jesus to be so.
The Bible refers to God approximately 20,000 times, and NEVER refers to God as a Trinity/Triune.
To use your original passage John 20:28. Yet, Jesus is called God again.
@@jaredtourse9095 In John 20:17 Jesus said "tell my brethren... I am going to my Father... And I am going to my God"
In John 20:25; Thomas did not believe God resurrected Jesus... Despite his brethren telling him...
In John 20:27, Jesus told Thomas to address his disbelief...
In John 20:28 Thomas addressed Jesus the same way Moses (in Exodus 4:16; 7:1) was addressed; as a "god". Similarly, other people were also addressed as "god" elsewhere in the bible such as King David and King Solomon for example too.
In John 20:29, Jesus ignored the comments of Thomas and focused on his disbelief...
In John 20:31, John said that everything that was written in the book of John was written so that we ALL may know that "Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God" AND that "believing THIS would result in having life in his name"
Again, Jesus is the Son of God; Jesus is NOT God!
@SimplyAwesomeOriginal
WROTE: "Jesus said: " . . . I am going up to my Father and your Father, and my God and your God"
- John 20:17
Jesus has a God - and a Father.
We have this same God - and Father.
Jesus is NOT God. "
Jesus also said, "“I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God, “who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.” Revelation 1:8
In your example, Jesus did not say He is not God. He's speaking of the Father in a trinitarian sense. In my example, He specifically says He is God Almighty.
In John 1:1, we see that the Word is God. Jesus is the word and this isn't something clever that John came up with. It comes straight out of the old testament.
GENESIS 15:1-4 ( EMPHASIS ADDED FOR CLARIFICATION )
1 After these things the word of YHWH came to Abram in a vision: “Fear not, Abram, I am your shield; your reward shall be very great.” 2 But Abram said, “O YHWH God, what will you give me, for I continue childless, and the heir of my house is Eliezer of Damascus?” 3 And Abram said, “Behold, you have given me no offspring, and a member of my household will be my heir.” 4 And behold, the WORD of the Lord came to him: “This man shall not be your heir; your very own son shall be your heir.”
@@rickdavis2235 God (YHWH), not Jesus, spoke in Revelations 1:8
Two verses earlier, Revelations 1:6, Jesus has a God and Father.
There's a difference between "Mighty" and "Almighty"; many people are referred to as "mighty". God, YHWH, alone IS "Almighty". You can look at the Hebrew of "El Gibbor" vs "El Shaddai".
+++
John 1:1+ is a completely different conversation... That will take a while to explain...
+++
The phrase "Word of Yahweh" in Genesis 15:1 is no more different than "Word of Moses" in Exodus 8:13, nor "Word of Samuel" in 1 Samuel 4:1, nor the "Word of SimplyAwesomeOriginal" by yours truly here, nor anyone else in the bible... Apart from the fact that God said it.
+++
PS:
- The bible NEVER EVER refers to God as Triune/Trinity.
- The bible describes God over 20,000 times: as having singular pronouns, singular verbs, singular adjectives, and singular pronominal suffixes.
"People that claim the bible describes a trinity, always describe an interpretation of scriptures, and NOT the actual text of the scriptures."
- A quote to remember
@@SimplyAwesomeOriginal
Regarding Revelation 1:6, Is Jesus a created being and literal son of God?
Isaiah 9:6; 10:21 calls both YHWH and the Messiah 'el gibbowr (Mighty God). Is YHWH only mighty in verse 10:21, and not Almighty? Isaiah says this child will be called the same as YHWH. Jesus calls himself Almighty God in Rev. 1:8. Revelation 4:8 says Jesus is Almighty God: “Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord God Almighty, who was and is and is to come!” Only Jesus is the the one who is coming on clouds, not the Father.
The word can refer to the written or spoken word but in Genesis 15, the word of YHWH is a man, just like Jesus. He appears to Abram in a vision, a vision is something you can see (visible), and takes Abram outside in Genesis 15:5 and then in 15:7, the word of YHWH says, “I am YHWH who brought you out from Ur of the Chaldeans to give you this land to possess.”
We also see this with the angel of the LORD, the name of the LORD, the arm of the LORD, the hand of the LORD, the commander of the LORD's armies, the host of the LORD's armies. These appearances of men who speak about God but also speak as though they are God, just like the Son of God does in the new testament. Read all of Genesis 15 and tell me how you reconcile that.
The Bible never mentions the Bible but when we use it, you know exactly what's being talked about. The Bible never mentions that God is omniscient, omnipresent or omnipotent, but we know He is. Jesus never mentioned that He was born of a virgin mother, but through scripture, we know He was. By the same token, we know from scripture that the only God who is spirit, invisible, unseeable and dwells in unapproachable light, has revealed himself to us in 3 persons, all co-equal, co-eternal, co-existent, and all share the same attributes but are distinct from one another and all 3 are called the one God. To simply write off the trinity is to deny the way that God chose to reveal himself to us.
Interesting but a thing that always bothers me about this type of theological debate or discussion is the idea space in which it occurs is limited to the space of the Bible only. Basically the Bible is treated as the only valid source of knowledge with peripheral commentators. It has a "in-universe" logic aspect therefore it's a game of building one's case using the Bible to make their case. Whoever can muster the most Bible verses in support of their argument most logically and coherently would win the debate. I suppose there is a time and need for such musings but it's an exercise in the validity of the claim not it's the actual Truth, is it sound.
In exploring modern myths like Lord of the Rings or Star Wars some themes can only be understood with an "out universe" perspective. There's no explicit mention of WW1 in Lord of the Rings. Within the story one can not derive WW1 but WW1 definitely influenced Tolkien and the themes of Lord of the Rings.
TLDR: I'm doubtful the Bible on it's own can give a full account about the nature of God.
God is our soul authority so His word is our sole authority. When we look to sources other than His word for truth, we become vulnerable to believing just about anything.
👏👏👏👏👏
If we are made in God's image.. does God look like a human?
Valid question
They burned people for not believing the trinity. The trinity doctrine was violently forced.
Who burned people for not believing the trinity? Be specific and not arbitrary.
Congrats Sam! I benefited from their work so much. I’ve nudged pvk for a while to listen to the Paradigm series from a few years back
Thanks! Let me know what you think of the conversation
@@transfigured3673solid corner vibe convo. Thank you. Bible project was my rotation before TLC and pvk appeared. I donated in that first crowdfunding year. Tim and Jon’s smooth voices on quality mics is a clear memory. Mackie was on a pod called Gospel Simplicity by Austin Suggs. That’s the closest corner crossing I’ve seen. March ‘21. Pageau was on that pod three months later
I don't buy the 'greater deepening of awareness' argument. Many of the early Christian sects differentiated themselves around the divinity of Jesus. If the Bible is so clear and unequivocal about the Trinity why did it take so many centuries of argument to define the doctrine (culminating in the Council of Constantinople in 381CE)?
I grew up in a Unitarian tradition and I currently attend a Trinitarian church.
I will say that I don’t think the Trinity is exactly wrong, but I do think it’s portrayed in a ridiculous way. “God came into time and space and put on a human body.” is just the worst. That is not the message being communicated by the scriptures. The Trinity in general too makes assumptions about Jesus and the Father and the Spirit that are too low brow for the actual message.
In the end after all, God will be all and in all, does that mean the Trinity expands to include all? Adam and Eve are at first one being (sort of) are then split into two then told to become one. This is the message of the nature of “God” and His relationship to humanity and how Jesus figures in. But is this ever addressed?
My main concern is that Tim seemed to get a little shifty about the theology of Unitarian thought and suggested isolation from each other. I could almost feel the threats of the Catholics of days gone by that led to the murder of those who didn’t hold this doctrine precisely as ordered or be labeled a heretic and your life might be forfeit.
This conversation was a good one, but it had a scary undertone. I’m wondering if anyone else saw this?
It was a delicate dance for sure
@Z91514
Wrote: "I could almost feel the threats of the Catholics of days gone by that led to the murder of those who didn’t hold this doctrine precisely as ordered or be labeled a heretic and your life might be forfeit."
What did you mean by that?
@@rickdavis2235 Simply that some Catholics long ago were guilty of killing what they would term heretics. The birth of the Trinity itself saw much blood shed and violence. Thankfully those times are gone, but the remnant of the actions survives which is a shame.
@@Z91514
Yes, those "heretics" that were being killed were really just Bible believing Christians who refused to fall under the authority of Rome. The doctrine of the Trinity existed before the Catholic church. They had nothing to do with the trinity or deciding which books belong in the Bible.
@@rickdavis2235 I understand that the doctrine came before the Catholic Church in name, but the doctrine helped to steer the church into a Universal i.e. Catholic system. This is especially true when if you don’t fall in line your life and standing in the community is threatened or destroyed which became common practice in the church and was well entrenched by the time the church is “Catholic”. So yes, the trinity is deeply intertwined in Catholicism and was perpetuated by Catholicism for centuries. It’s a carry over into Protestant tradition because that drum was beat so hard, loud and long under serious consequences for anyone who didn’t agree, for centuries, that its adoption into the Protestant tradition wasn’t even a question.
I never mentioned the canon of scripture so I’m not sure what that part of your comment was addressing.
Sam sorry for having caused such a long discussion thread under your comment on Gavin’s video but I just could not help myself.
May The Living God who Never dies bless you for all the work you do.
No problem. I enjoyed checking in on the discussion every once in a while
@transfigured3673
Trinitarians like to quote very selective passages in the Gospel of John but they usually contaminate the spiritual data in the Gospel of John by imposing on it litterary details from the other books iof new testament.
The Gospel of John makes it clear that Jesus becomes the son of the Living God, WHO never dies, when the Spirit of God descends upon him and remains in him. The flesh becomes the Word when the Spirit descends upon the son of Joseph and not during the virgin birth. The data of the Gospel of John is clear, there was no virgin birth.
There is nothing that suggests that the son of Joseph was sinless before the Spirit ascended on him. There was a time when the son of God was only the son of Joseph and not sinless.
If there truly was no time when Jesus was not sinless than he had no right to let the adulteress woman go free? ( the one who is free of sins throws the first stone).
The biggest problem I have with Mackie and his "Bible Project" is that he and Heiser inject their flawed theology and interpretation about the so-called "divine council" into their work. People don't realize that both Heiser and Mackie went to a theologically liberal school, University of Wisconsin-Madison. From what I understand from Mr. Heath Henning, who lives in Wisconsin and wrote the devastating book "The UnBiblical Realm: Refuting the Divine Council of Michael Heiser's Deuteronomy 32 Worldview," the University of Wisconsin-Madison is one of the most liberal schools in the nation.
So it is no surprise if Heiser and Mackie's views turn out not to be completely orthodox.
Have you listened to the Lord of Spirits?
@@jeremyfirth Of course I have. And I've also learned to discern truth from error and to not blindly accept what people claim (Prov. 14:15; 1 John 4:1; 1 Thess. 5:21).
@@CRoadwarrior May I ask what it is that you struggle with about the divine council?
@@dlillianb1368 I have a problem with any doctrine that does not have a sound basis in the Bible.
Even the words "divine council" are based on a specific interpretation of Hebrew words that cannot always be translated that way.
For example, the Hebrew word translated "council" in Psalm 82:1 in the ESV and a few other translations, is also translated "swarm" in Judges 14:8 to describe a swarm of bees.
So we can't ignore the fact that Heiser and others are very selective in the translations they use, and what facts they reveal.
Psalm 82 is not about a "divine council" of divine beings consulting with God. Heiser and his followers totally ignore the immediate context of Psalm 82, specifically verses 2-4, and jump to verses 6 and 7, and then run to Psalm 89 assuming that Psalm speaks of exactly the same thing as Psalm 82. But that is not the case, and you can see that only when you carefully consider each Psalm in its context.
This is why Mr. Heath Henning wrote an over 300 page book, "The UnBiblical Realm: Refuting the Divine Council of Michael Heiser's Deuteronomy 32 Worldview."
And this is also why Mr. Henning and myself have done six videos so far on the contents of his book.
The students at Western Seminary are required to do this EVERY YEAR: "All students are required to maintain and annually reaffirm their agreement with the Statement of Faith of the World Evangelical Alliance as an expression of unity in the gospel." Here is the Statement of Faith of the WEA: "The Holy Scriptures as originally given by God, divinely inspired, infallible, entirely trustworthy; and the supreme authority in all matters of faith and conduct." NOT A SCHOLARLY INSTITUTION!
Perhaps even more relevant to this video, I bet that statement of faith includes the Trinity
@@transfigured3673 Look it up. I don't think so, but he would not keep his job very long if he was not a Trinitarian. BTW why don't you dialog with a Classical Theist Catholic on Biblical and Patristic proof for the Trinity. I think their arguments are quite compelling if you accept their premises as correct. VaticanCatholic has a great video on the Trinity and the Filioque.
Looking forward to listening further, but if you don't mind my saying after listening to the first 7 minutes, Tim seems like a younger John Piper, both in thought, expression, and even in vocal tone.
I'm not a weardo!!! I promise. I've been ans am a missionary in Mexico... for the last 25 years.
“Complex Unity” or “ All is One”? The Arts and Science deal with the unseen and seen…respect your humility. You truly are imagers of the Creator!
The truth of the Trinity is not obtained by the calculus of the intellect, which can never comprehend it. It is known only through the Spirit by faith.
It's obtained by the imagination.
The trinity is a false pagan doctrine that is a lie, there is no trinity. No one in the entire Bible ever mentioned the trinity, neither Jesus or any of the Apostles taught such a thing, it was never part of the Law Covenant. There is absolutely no Scriptural evidence for the trinity. It is blasphemy against God and Christ, it is a demonic doctrine that prevents people from knowing God!
The trinity is a lie, there is no truth in it.
That is a gross overstatement. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all manifestations of YHWH, but the HS is NOT a third "person"...it is the Father's spirit, embodied in the Son, and manifested apart from their bodily presence in creation as their active power.
Don’t you think a lot of allegory should instead be described as metaphysical?
also a good word
39:21 oh boy
I had a whole argument against this "the god" in both Greek and hebrew about a month ago. It's so weak, I'm surprised he used it and doesn't know better...
Origen did make that point regarding John 1:1
I meant the my lord and my god bit
@@transfigured3673
WROTE: "Origen did make that point regarding John 1:1"
Who/what is the word of the LORD in the old testament?
@yosefrazin6455
What does the word refer to in John 1:1?
Jesus came to reveal Gods heart to mankind. ❤ In the transfiguration, the Father says, "This is my beloved Son. Hear Him!" I truly believe anyone who sticks to the Gospels first and weighs everything through His word, will come to true faith (Romans 10:17)
Anti-LGBT & anti-women, anti-immigrant are ANTI-CHRIST LIES. Matthew 7. The church is fallen to bigotry and idolatry. Turn off the world and turn on Jesus! 2Thess2:11 is here. The church is fallen, Trump is lawless. They believe THE LIE. Jesus is coming soon for this born-again gay stoner Jew while most Christians are left behind because of bigotry and idolatry
I have a deep admiration for Dr. Mackie and TBP has been a big inspiration for me over the years. Great interview, Sam!
Thanks for listening!
This is the guys who doesn’t believe in hell and said “there is now neither Jew nor Greek, male nor female, *gay nor straight…”*
Ya, he actually said that.