GodLogic's Following Has No Idea What Omnipotence Is & It's Sad

Indexé : 2026-05-21

[00:00:02]What's up everybody? Welcome to my channel, Metaphysics Mike. And if you're new here, I also want to say hello.

[00:00:09]Appreciate you stopping by. Now, I'm making this video. We're doing another late night stream because I'm getting clipped on social media right now for calling Jesus omnipotent in a sense. And contrary to popular belief of many of these people who give off real limming vibes, all right, from this debate that I was in, I think I'm right. And and if I was wrong, man, I would have no problem admitting it. Did you know if you took 30 seconds, not a lot of time to look up the definition of omnipotence, the first thing that shows up for me is Marryiam Webster's omnipotence. Let's look at this. You're going to find out that it means first the quality or state of being omnipotent, right? We'll look this up. Having virtually unlimited authority or influence. But guess what? The second definition.

[00:01:13]Oh, what what's that say?

[00:01:16]An agency or force of unlimited power.

[00:01:23]I mean, I couldn't even believe when I first looked this up how easy it was to actually just capture the concept of what I was trying to get at in this debate. And we're going to look at this clip. But this is insane to me because my entire argument in this debate, it was on God Logix 2's channel against Elijah Johnson, was this. It was that God's power, his power works through Jesus. And being ignorant of this is not a flex. It is not a good look. I mean, it may make you feel good, right? being wrong, not knowing it, and just like you want to see me lose, right? These guys just don't really care what I have to say anyways. Like, I'm sure it boers that, right? Your own bias like self-affirmation or something, right?

[00:02:14]Like, [laughter] but like in in the grand scheme of objectivity, what is my point? What are we getting at? These guys don't even understand what omnipotence is, okay? Or how this word can be used. And I, you know, I first was really into uh looking into the omni attributes back when I was discovering open theism. Oh, do you know what that is? Based all right. And you know, it challenged my view on omniscience. And so I started to look into to omnipotence, right? And omniresence.

[00:02:47]Wow, it's so complicated. Let's go ahead and just look at something a little bit better than Webster's diction or Miriam Webster, right? Let's look at Stanford Encyclopedia.

[00:02:58]What does their entry say on this? Well, might just blow your mind, but uh omnipotence actually seems puzzling, even paradoxical to many philosophers.

[00:03:10]They wonder, for example, whether God can create a spherical cube or make a stone so massive that he cannot move it.

[00:03:16]Is there a consistent analysis of omnipotence? What are its implications?

[00:03:22]Right? Did they come in? What What are they trying to say? The introduction.

[00:03:26]Let's look at this. Philosophical reflection upon the notion of omnipotence raises many puzzling questions about whether or not a consistent notion of omnipotence places limitations on the power of an omnipotent agent. Could an omnipotent agent create a stone so massive that the agent could not move it? Paradoxically, it appears that however this question is answered, an omnipotent agent turns out to be not all powerful. Do you understand? Dude, do you know what it's getting at? Okay, like that. Have you heard that question by atheists? Like, can God create a rock so big he can't lift it? If you say yes, then he's not all powerful because he can't make the rock. But if you say no, right, that still means that he's not all powerful because he can't lift it, right? So, and I it's paradoxical. It doesn't make sense. Could such an agent have the power to create or overturn necessary truths of logic or mathematics? Could an agent of this kind bring about or alter the past? Is the notion of an omnipotent agent other than God an intelligible one? Could two omnipotent agents exist?

[00:04:35]Whoa, hold up a minute. what these guys are treating like the way that I'm really employing this word omnipotent which is so charitable to to Elijah it was so charitable is just weird or outside the question when in reality it's an extremely basic concept debated amongst philosophers what do we mean though like listen I could sit here and go through all of this the point is that omnipotence actually only makes sense jurisdictionally.

[00:05:11]Um, so I mean I really like the work of Plantinga on this. Some people really like to appeal to Thomas Aquinas. When we say that God is omnipotent or he's all powerful, what we mean is that God can do anything which can be done.

[00:05:28]Can I get an amen in chat? Do you do you understand what that means? Right? God is actually limited by logical possibility because God's nature as a rational being literally presupposes existence, presupposes logic like it's necessary.

[00:05:47]Okay. So logic as we understand it is actually just a reflection of God's nature. God cannot contradict his nature. So again, omnipotence is always qualified, always defined. It it makes sense jurisdictionally and different faith traditions understand it in various ways. Let's just look at a few more. I was just going through these.

[00:06:14]Look at some of the things that these are going to say. So this is dictionary.com or Cambridge. This is by Cambridge, right? What is omnipotence?

[00:06:23]Unlimited power. the ability to do anything. Oh, we have a problem, folks.

[00:06:29]Can the God of the Bible lie?

[00:06:32]No, he can't sin at all. Oh, so then God isn't omnipotent.

[00:06:38]We're constantly defining what we mean, right? God cannot bring about logically impossible things. He can't make square circles. He can't make married bachelors. Are you hearing me? Can I get an amen in chat?

[00:06:54]So I I just it's so wide. It's so wide the way that this term is used. Look at So this one's Wikipedia. It says, let me see where it gives them all.

[00:07:07]Or you know what? No, I think I liked this one. Yeah, for this part about uncertainty. Look what it says. So there's many different theories on omnipotence. And this one's talking about what comes from in the cartisian sense. All right. Look, trying to develop a theory to explain assign or reject omnipotence on the grounds of logic has little merit since being omnipotent in a cartisian sense would mean the omnipotent being is above logic.

[00:07:37]You understand, right? Highly debated.

[00:07:40]What does it mean to be omnipotent? In its most simplest sense, it means you can do anything.

[00:07:47]But that's not actually what we mean.

[00:07:49]That doesn't even make sense. It's incoherent. Aka omnipotence makes sense jurisdictionally.

[00:07:56]It you how we use it that changes everything.

[00:08:01]Look at this one. Superpower week. I don't even know what this site is. This is the first time I've ever been here, but I I just liked, you know, some of the entries how they said this is the concept of omnipotence has been represented in a myriad of vastly different ways. Okay.

[00:08:16]>> [laughter] >> Off to a good start, right? Let's let's just start with Yeah, it's it totally depends on what we mean, right? In pantheism, where being omnipotent is synonymous with being one with everything. Oh, all right. All right.

[00:08:30]Agnosticism, which says that God and omnipotence it possesses as incomprehensible.

[00:08:36]Monotheism, where there can only be omnipotent being, etc. All of which have differing views on the attributes of omnipotence and hence their level of power. Do you understand?

[00:08:50]Are you following?

[00:08:52]So folks in this in this discussion in this debate that I had right I qualified what I meant just like everybody does when they're talking about omnipotence.

[00:09:09]Okay. What does all what does powerful?

[00:09:12]What does authority mean? If we don't do that, it reduces to incoherence. So, they can act like I don't have this type of flexibility.

[00:09:20]I do. Everybody does. Uh, and again, I would have no problem it being otherwise. Listen, we're going to get to it. We're going to go ahead and look at this clip. But it's all about the sense in which it's used. And, and I can grant that when most people hear omnipotence, they're like thinking of definition number one.

[00:09:39]Right? They're they're thinking the quality or state of being omnipotent, like having all power, like just at face value, right? Not so deeply defined.

[00:09:47]They're not thinking of this. Okay, that doesn't mean that this isn't a valid way to use this word.

[00:09:53]It was my whole position with the Jewish principle of agency.

[00:09:58]I mean, just the quickest. It takes 5 seconds. What does omnipotence mean?

[00:10:03]You're going to get Marryiam Webster telling you this. I'm just I'm just saying. So if you mean omnipotence as like number one, right, this this underived divine power, this essential property, right, that the father or God just has in virtue of his nature. Well, then no, Jesus is not omnipotent. In that sense, he's not.

[00:10:29]I clarified this. Both of our Bible verses clarified this. The one he brought up, the one I brought up. It's beautiful. I mean, just chef's kiss.

[00:10:37]We're we're we're going to look at this.

[00:10:39]Uh, but again, you understand if we mean definition number one, like people are clipping me as and cutting things out.

[00:10:46]No, he's not omnipotent. I have no problem saying that. But if we mean omnipotence as this God's unlimited authority being delegated to the son, being given to the son, then yes, we can call him omnipotent in a sense, right?

[00:11:04]predicatively because the father actually vested him with this authority.

[00:11:10]I mean, I usually just ignore clips after debates because most of it's cringe except for a few creators which I'll check out because, you know, sometimes people have valid concerns or questions, but most most of everything else is just noise, guys. Uh, but I'm choosing to do a response to this because it's actually frustrating being constantly straw manned, lied about, and called a bunch of names by people who are less educated than me.

[00:11:39]You know, they're either ignorant or lying and just neither are a good look.

[00:11:43]But also because I genuinely care, right? I think that what people are doing right now is deceptive and it depends upon a misrepresentation of both my position as well as like the unitarian view. Like at some point you have to just admit that these guys are either dumb or they're not. And if they're not dumb, they're sort of choosing what they want to hear, what they want to believe, right? They like instead of trying to understand what your view is, what are you trying to say? They just jump to whatever wrong view they can make it appear as right the lowest common denominator and then just attack that.

[00:12:26]And what's left is just a bunch of self-affirming cult mentality toxic social media bias, right? not a learning environment where we actually address each other's points, where we feel heard and progress is made. I mean, these guys take these debates for sport and I'm just not about that. I should start saying no more often. I'm happy for certain opportunities. Uh, and man, it Elijah got flamed in this debate. Um, but people are fixating on this. So, we're going to go ahead. Let's let's watch this, right? And my goal even in this reaction is really a fruitful discussion guys. I want to hear what you guys think. Let's go ahead and listen to this.

[00:13:15]>> Does the son have omnipotence?

[00:13:17]>> He was given all power. Yes.

[00:13:20]>> So the son the son is is Jesus a separate being from the father that has omnipotence.

[00:13:25]>> Of course. That's why it was had to be given to him. He didn't just already have it.

[00:13:29]>> So you believe in two omnipotent beings.

[00:13:32]So one is omnipotent in virtue of being the Lord at the Lord's right hand. This is Psalm 110. You need to learn this.

[00:13:39]Okay. So this is that is a right powers motif. That's what that is. Elijah.

[00:13:44]>> Yes or no? Do >> look at this dude's face. He's make he's making these faces as you talk while he's sitting here, you know, telling us that temptation takes place in three stages, right? And we make a distinction between, you know, infinite in regards to the one in whom you're sinned against and infinite in regards to the malice of the offense. Like, [laughter] but but me saying like, listen, we could consider him omnipotent in virtue of possessing the father's authority, right, that was given to him, right? Oh, that's just that's just off the table.

[00:14:21]How dare you? Do you believe or do you believe in two omnipotent beings? Yes or no?

[00:14:28]>> I told you yes in the sense of Jesus being the Lord at the Lord's right hand.

[00:14:34]That doesn't make him omnipotent like the father. He literally gets it from the father.

[00:14:39]>> God is only God omnipotent.

[00:14:41]>> No, he also predicates that authority dynamically to the son. Look at this dude's face. He's these guys are behind.

[00:14:51]These guys think he's cooking. He thinks he's doing so well. He doesn't even understand like in the Bible. I mean, take any divine attribute like forgiving sins, right? I mean, Jesus forgives sins. Like, he must be God then, right?

[00:15:08]No.

[00:15:09]The the Bible literally says the people perceived what what he did that God had given such authority to man. You guys see me go over that passage all the time, right? I mean that that is every example you get. Forgiving sins, being raised from the dead, performing miracles, right? There God can exalt human agents to do things since forever.

[00:15:36]He has shared his power and authority with prophets, priests, and even angels.

[00:15:41]That's just a fact.

[00:15:44]That's that's nothing but a fact, right? He he doesn't even comprehend that yeah Jesus could have a seat of ultimate authority be in the throne right of God like Revelation and that be predicative that like wait till we go over these verses. It's it's so abundantly clear.

[00:16:03]We're going to look at John 5 and Matthew 28. But let's let's just keep watching this.

[00:16:07]>> So So you believe two omnipotent beings.

[00:16:09]Perfect. Would you say that's >> Yeah. Did I make a distinction of what type of omnipotence? Obviously >> slapping the president deserves a higher punishment than slapping.

[00:16:18]>> No, no. Listen, there are things that Jesus can't do as a human. That >> we're on to another question.

[00:16:24]>> Trying to shut it down. He doesn't want you to explain. He wants to try and catch a clip and not let you say what you mean. What What sense are you using this word? He doesn't care. He doesn't care. These dudes are are just deceptive. Like that's what he wants.

[00:16:39]That's actually his heart posture right now is that he he doesn't really care about trying to refute whatever it is that you me as a unitarian might be saying. He just wants to form questions and get answers that can make it look a certain way. Right now you believe in two ultimate divine omnipotent beings, right? as though that Jesus and the father are fully divine when I've clearly just qualified it in terms of the most quoted New Testament passage of Jesus, right? How dare I? Yeah. No, this he's at the right hand of God. Do you know right-hand motif? Do you know what that means? He doesn't want this explained to him. They don't want to know.

[00:17:21]>> No. Yeah. You're trying to go to another question. You skipped over the other one, too, from chapter from chapter 12.

[00:17:27]Yeah, but you're also not trying to let me expound in full though, right?

[00:17:32]>> I just clarification. You said yes. I got the clarification. We're moving on.

[00:17:35]>> I get that. I get that. But you should let me be able to clarify that >> slapping the president deserves a higher punishment than slapping a random >> and he just moves on. Okay. Do you see that? So interesting. Isn't f I mean my following that many of you guys I've seen you in in many of these clips comments. You guys are epic. You're just nothing gets by you. my following.

[00:17:56]They're so sharp. It makes me so happy actually. Like, it's so interesting.

[00:18:03]They won't show you that, right? The very clip they're trying to frame the whole debate around.

[00:18:11][laughter] I'm in seconds later, I'm clearly pointing out he's really not letting me explain it. He's like he's doing this for a particular reason. And then you wonder why we don't get anywhere. And we wonder why people don't hear each other and these wars on social media that there's not fruit of it. Why?

[00:18:35]It's because of this this hard attitude.

[00:18:39]Okay, look at my look at my debate that I just did with Alex or excuse me, look at even this debate. What am I saying?

[00:18:46]Look at this debate. Okay, in this debate, I let him clarify. I give him time. I let him speak in full. There are there's a point where I begin to press back, but I'm not trying to move on, right? I'm not trying to quickly get a clip and then just, you know, ditch and start running, right? I got my clip. Thanks. I'm going to move on. That's not what I'm doing.

[00:19:12]Including even the little shorts that I posted. I don't misrepresent his view. I don't take things out of context. These guys are literally removing the part where I'm saying he's not omnipotent like the father. They're just moving that right out. And that's what's so hard about this folks is because you know now I'm being told that I believe in two fully omnipotent beings. But that's not true. I believe in one being who's omnipotent in virtue of his nature, the father, and a different being who's predicated omnipotence in a functional sense. Right? It's God's omnipotence working through him as his agent through Christ because he represents God because he was sent by God in the Jewish principle of agency which is what my whole thing was about.

[00:20:02]Like I mean you come back to my presentation my whole presentation where where's my slide? Like I go over all of the titles used of him and I explain them in depth. Notice how guess what's not on this list? Omnipotence.

[00:20:21]That's not even a biblical word.

[00:20:24]Like these are just words we use which have value once they are defined jurisdictionally. Amen. Do you understand? They don't they don't know.

[00:20:34]They don't they don't want to know. They just want to make things look bad. Try and get clips. It is freaking crazy.

[00:20:41]The Hebrew legal maxim for a shilak, an emissary, one who is sent, states that a man's agent is as the man himself.

[00:20:52]So under this principle, the Jewish principle of agency, when the father empowers an agent, which hasn't just been Jesus, we know the Old Testament has many characters who are empowered, including prophets, right? He gives them full power.

[00:21:10]He can they can exercise that full ultimate power on the sender's pe on the sender's behalf right so the power is total the source the father in whom all things come from right he's the absolute power he's total but its nature is representational it's relational right Jesus has these things not as an intrinsic attribute they're communicated to him this is I'm perfectly within philosophical grounds to speak this way.

[00:21:45]So now let's just look at a few scriptures because it's really the scriptures that that teach this. All right. Did you know that in 1st Samuel chapter 8 when the Israelites demanded a human king to rule over them, Samuel felt personally rejected? And in this conversation he has with God, God actually corrects him. Look at this in verse se in verse 7 he says and the Lord said to Samuel obey the voice of the people in all that they say to you for they have not rejected you but have rejected me from being king over them. Oh, you can't even see these verses. What am I doing? Look at this interesting.

[00:22:30]When they rejected Samuel, who did they reject? They rejected God.

[00:22:36]Is Samuel God?

[00:22:40]Oh no. What? Do we have a fourth divine being in the trinity? No. This is ridiculous. Or divine person. Okay. In number 16, when Kora led the rebellion, mocking Moses and Aaron and really their their authority they had from God. Moses told them that their grumbling was ultimately against the Lord. All right, look at this. in it is it is too small a thing for you that God of Israel has separated you from the congregation of Israel to bring you near to himself to do service in the tabernacle to the Lord and stand before the congregation and that he brought you near to him and all the brothers of the sons of Levi. Is that too small a thing?

[00:23:25]And would you seek the priesthood also?

[00:23:28]Therefore, it is against the Lord that you and all your company have gathered together. Folks, what I'm trying to do in these debates is make sure that they know that Unitarians believe absolutely everything the scriptures say about Jesus, which includes being invested with God's power fully.

[00:23:51]Okay, that's right. How you treat Jesus, your heart posture towards him, whether you accept him as the Messiah is or is not a rejection of God. That is correct.

[00:24:01]That doesn't make Jesus God by nature.

[00:24:04]That doesn't come from homolucius or two natures theory or any other post-biblical concept that's understood in light of the Jewish principle of agency where someone can be distinct from Yahweh but come in his name, bear his authority and power. That's the whole purpose of my presentation. That's what I taught. That's my argument. They don't want to deal with that. They just want to try and play games, try and get a clip, and then let's let's dip out. We got what we wanted, right? They which is not to reach you, to reach me, to reach anybody. They just their heart is set on something vain and futile. Okay, look at this. 2 Chronicles 36. But they kept mocking the messengers of God, despising his words and scoffing at his prophets. Whoa, wait a second. Despising his prophets. Do the messengers of God have prophets?

[00:25:01]No. This is saying it switches between messengers of God and calling their words as God's words.

[00:25:14]Powerful. So so powerful, right? Those who God's messengers, when you reject their words, you're rejecting God. When you reject the prophets, you're rejecting God. Not because all the prophets are God, but because God sent them. They do. Why don't these trinitarians understand? It's cuz they don't want to understand. In Exodus 7, the Lord calls Moses God.

[00:25:41]He says, "And I'm going to make Aaron your prophet."

[00:25:45]How can he say this? Because the sender invests in the sended his power and authority. He represents him.

[00:26:00]And of course, this is what Jesus himself confesses. The one who hears you hears me and the one who rejects you rejects me. It's interesting the same concept of Jesus, right? speaking of the apostles. And the one who rejects me rejects him who sent me.

[00:26:19]Is Jesus the father?

[00:26:21]No. So they're actually acknowledging the same type of distinction. Speaking of which, let's just point that out real quick. Interesting how they don't point out that they want to say Mike believes in two fully divine beings uh or who are fully like omnipotent beings like in virtue of their nature, which isn't the case. Again, this has been qualified so much and there's even other things in this debate we're going to see which qualify it. But yet, they believe in two fully omnipotent persons who are distinct from each other. What's functionally different?

[00:26:57]Yeah, metaphysics Mike is crazy for believing in two omnipotent beings, which is not even what I think. But these guys get to believe in three distinct omnipotent persons and they're just not going to bat an eye at that. That's I mean, of course, that's fine, right? Yeah, that just makes sense. I mean, people have believed this since forever, you know?

[00:27:18]>> What a joke.

[00:27:21]What a joke. I mean, where's where's where's that one sound?

[00:27:27][laughter] >> We've just We've just entered Trinity Wonderland. These guys can play both sides of the fence. They can just make up stuff as they go along. You drive stuff from the Bible and prepare to get clipped. Look, John 14:9. Have I been with you so long? You still do not know me, Philillip. He who has seen me has seen the father. Is that modalism?

[00:27:50]No. This is because Jesus represents the father. He is treated as the father.

[00:27:59]Even though he's not the father. Are you Jewish principle of agency? Like I just I'm sorry guys if I sound like I'm treating you like your children but these trinitarians just don't get it.

[00:28:10]It's like they can't comprehend what's going on. I and the father are one.

[00:28:15]Modalism. No Jewish principle of agency, right? One in mission in purpose. This is the same neuter form of one that's used in John chapter 17 where Jesus says that we should be one with God. Whoever sees me has seen him who sent me. Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The words that I say to you, I do not speak on my own authority, but the Father who dwells in me does the works, right? I mean, mindblowing.

[00:28:46]Absolutely mind-blowing.

[00:28:48]And in this clip that we watched with him, this was his proof text. In fact, let's go back to that real quick and look at that because you you do realize what he leaves out. Did did Did anybody else capture that what he left out that verse? Look at this. And this is where their view just totally begins to crumble. All right, I think I've justified mine enough now. Okay, now let's take a look at their view. And really though, look at this. Look at what he says. So, so you believe two omnipres >> to the son he gets it from this he doesn't use those he doesn't use those exact words but indicative of him >> does the father do anything that requires omnipotence >> does the father do anything that requires omnipotence watch what he says >> I want to say yes yeah >> okay does the father give his omnipotence to the son then No, wait a second. Is this not it? He was given all power. Yes.

[00:29:51]>> So the son the son is is Jesus a separate being >> but he have it power omnipotence to the sun then >> his omnipotence. No where it should be right here is >> be given.

[00:30:05]>> So >> hold up give me a moment.

[00:30:06]>> Omnipotent in virtue says that is a right powers motif. That's what that is.

[00:30:12]>> Yes or no? Do you believe or do you believe >> sense of father? No. Oh, he all >> So you believe it, too.

[00:30:19]>> No. No. Listen. Yeah. You're trying to Yeah. What?

[00:30:22]>> And you said, "Yes, I got the clarification. We're moving." Higher punishment than person.

[00:30:26]>> Yes. Dang it. Okay. Is I Is it before that? It's at the very beginning. He brings up this verse. He brings up John 5:19. Dang. I thought I wish I had a time stamp for you. I hate making you guys wait with these little pauses. Um, he brings it up and he doesn't quote the beginning half of the verse. You see, cuz listen. So this this is what he's saying. He's saying whatever the father does, the son does likewise. And that's how he actually starts this this um run on omnipotence. Right? But look at what it says. Truly truly I say to you, the son can do nothing on his own accord. He just leaves that out. He leaves that out and when he quotes the verse, right? So yeah, whatever the son does that he sees the father doing is not on his own accord, right? That's not on his own authority, on his own power. But that's exactly what they are deriving from this. Okay, man. I I really want to find that so you can see it. I maybe it's at the beginning. Let me see if I can find it again real quick.

[00:31:32]>> That's a yes or no. No, because contextually that's not talking about um like his for example >> in John 5:19 when he says whatever the father does the son does likewise.

[00:31:42]>> Boom. There it is. There it is. Let's here it is. Ready?

[00:31:46]>> Was Jesus >> notice what he leaves out >> taken in John 5:19 when he says whatever the father does the son does likewise.

[00:31:52]That's a yes or no.

[00:31:53]>> Yeah, just a yes or no. Hold up. Wait a minute.

[00:31:58]He just left out the whole first half of this verse, did he not?

[00:32:05]Is it true that whatever the father does, the son does likewise? Yeah.

[00:32:09]Contextually, that's a derived property.

[00:32:13]That's that's derived. His ability to do what the father does is not something he possesses in virtue of nature. And that's where this begins to break down.

[00:32:24]Now, let's look at Matthew 28:18. This is the verse that I brought up. Both of these bake their position. It says, "And Jesus came and said to them, all authority in heaven and on earth has been what? To me."

[00:32:39]What what's that say? All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Given to me. Okay. So the the irony here of all these guys trying to dunk using these passages actually refute themselves because in both cases he gets it from the father.

[00:33:06]Okay. So if this was an essential property, right, that they're mocking me. Oh, Mike believes in, you know, Mike's a polytheist. If that were true, well then you believe Jesus has an essential property given to him.

[00:33:22]Do do you understand how crazy that is?

[00:33:28]>> Got [laughter] you can't be given an essential property to God. This is just slow world. We're in the world of makebelieve. If Jesus is God by nature, you can't be given his a property like that.

[00:33:46]This is crazy, folks. You look at these guys. You You bring this up and they're just like, "What? What just happened? I don't like the whole basis for critiquing me debunks themsself.

[00:34:05]How How can this be Jesus being omnipotent in virtue of nature if he's given it? If he doesn't have it in his own accord?

[00:34:17]Wow. You see, it's actually only my view, the unitarian view that can make sense of these passages.

[00:34:26]And by the way, if I believed in two fully omnipotent divine beings, I would just own it. I hope you guys like know that. That's that's also what's frustrating about like this whole scenario is that guys on unlike trinitarians, yo, I've already lost everything.

[00:34:45]I've got nothing to lose. I can be honest.

[00:34:48]I don't have anybody over me pressuring me to speak or say something or be a certain way.

[00:34:56]No, I'm authentically me. By the grace of God, I've surpassed that limitation.

[00:35:03]Okay, so just another example of how toxic social media can be at least like asking them to just know and represent you properly is too much to ask.

[00:35:18]It's way too much to ask when as an honest guy I would just openly say that's what I believe, right? You there there there really has to be no gotchas and to reach people. There's this powerful quote. How's it go? It's essentially that you have if you want to reach people, you have to make it okay and safe to be wrong.

[00:35:40]That that's the truth. We have to know that we can be wrong and it's okay that we have grace to grow in, to learn from, you know, I mean, the whole spirit behind this is just crazy. But is it isn't that amazing? That's so amazing.

[00:35:57]These guys want to dunk. They don't understand the Jewish principle of agency. They don't understand the most popular verse used of Jesus in the New Testament quoting the Old Testament.

[00:36:11]They don't understand omnipotence. They think that it must in every sense refer to this essential property. And if it does, then Jesus is given God. He's he is made the most high God. He like becomes the second person of the trinity, right? Because he doesn't have it in his own accord [laughter] and he has to be given it. I mean, just so cringe. And if none of that was enough, let's take a look at this. Let's take a look at this and and then I'm going to look at some of the comments. I see you guys in the comments. Thank you all so much for being here tonight. All right. So, I got the chance to bring up an amazing passage. Like, after this, if nothing else, you cannot let these guys get away with misrepresenting you, with straw manning you. They have to be called out for these things and repeatedly. Once it once it's been made clear, if they don't understand, it's because they don't want to.

[00:37:16]It's really that simple. Okay, watch this.

[00:37:20]Watch what we get to bring up and totally knock out the park what we even mean by all power all authority. Okay.

[00:37:29]>> About uh the Messiah. So in regards and obvious that is in the >> he just inserted into thisction there.

[00:37:38]>> All right. Yeah. So did you hear all of those postbiblical middle platonic philos philosophical concepts he just inserted into this passage? Can you let me share my screen please? I have the verse up here. This says absolutely nothing about two natures theory. This says absolutely nothing about homosius.

[00:37:56]Unfortunately, with respect, Elijah is ignorant of again two of the right hand motif. Look at this. For he must reign until he has put all things under subjection, the enemies under his feet.

[00:38:10]What's that referring to? Psalm 110 verse1. Okay. Where the Lord is exalted to the Lord's right hand. So this is proof of the authority Jesus has by predication not by ontology. And this is demonstrated uh I think perfectly by this last statement. I this is really all that you needed. You gave the whole passage. That's good. This is it though, right? So God gives him all things under his subjection.

[00:38:39]But when it says all things, it's plain that he meaning the father is accepted who put all things under him. So clearly Jesus is ontologically subordinate to the father. If Jesus was the same being as the father and notice it doesn't say that. It says God, right? It's not calling Jesus God. It's calling the father God. Then all right. I mean that's pretty that's pretty much enough.

[00:39:05]That's that's all you need. Okay. The right-hand motif of where Jesus is exalted to God's right hand in fulfillment of Psalm 110:1 is where all of this predicative language comes from, including Jesus being given all authority in heaven and on earth. Look at this verse. It literally says that God has put all things under subjection to his feet. What? Tell me, what does all things mean? Does that include the father?

[00:39:40]It says all things.

[00:39:43]So the father is in subjection to the son. Are you following? No, that's not what it means. Paul says, but when it says all things are put into subjection, it is plain that he is accepted who put all things in subjection under him.

[00:40:04]Okay. So again, does Jesus have all authority? Yes. But does that make him that like that same all that quality that he has this authority that I'm loosely and very charitably just saying sure we can call him omnipotent in a sense. Is this in virtue of his nature?

[00:40:22]Does he just have it intrinsically?

[00:40:26]No. And it's explicitly outlined in passages like this that the this understanding should be in light of a right-hand motif.

[00:40:39]That's how it should be understood.

[00:40:42]And it does not include the father. It's just plain that he is not included in this, right? No, the son does not have authority over the father. And so if if to you that means that he's not omnip omni omnipotent then that's fine then then he's not omnipotent. I'll I'll sit there right with you. I'll s Jesus is not omnipotent.

[00:41:08][gasps] There's like some unitarians have even got on to me. I have no problem like the whole question is what do we mean? What is the jurisdiction the sense in which we're using this term? There is an all authority which is shared with Christ which means that he's given all authority. He represents God.

[00:41:29]That's like the highest position you could possibly have. He's at the right hand of God. But that doesn't make it in virtue of nature. And this whole idea that this somehow entails homoius or two natures theory is just out of the question. These concepts didn't exist because they weren't developed. All of that is postbiblical. It's retrojection.

[00:41:49]It's anacronism.

[00:41:51]The Jewish principle of agency is contextual. It's based in the text.

[00:41:57]Okay? It couldn't be more explicit.

[00:42:00]And we might as well read verse 28 here too because it's beautiful. It says, "And when all things are subjected to him," which includes death, by the way, that hasn't happened yet. F that happens at the end. Revelation, okay?

[00:42:13]Then the son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things in subjection under him that God may be all in all. So this power and authority this highly exalted role there is a sense where all the things subjected to Christ gives back to the father so that God meaning the father the one God may be all in all. Beautiful.

[00:42:43]Absolutely beautiful. Let's go ahead and take a look at some chat and then there's a few other comments I want to make about this debate, but let's let's see what's going on here.

[00:42:55]What is up? What is up?

[00:43:00]Okay.

[00:43:03]Yahoo. See, Trinity is trash. Unitarian Truth Now says, "Trinity is Greek mythology."

[00:43:10]Leviathan Bane says, "Yep."

[00:43:13]Dracula Flow says, "Paul was clearly Unitarian based."

[00:43:18]Alicia says, "Yay, I made it to Alive."

[00:43:21]Hey, thanks for being here, Alicia.

[00:43:22]Welcome. Thanks for being here tonight.

[00:43:25]Jay Crossit says, "The word all and every cannot always be taken as absolutes." Right? That that is in fact the point.

[00:43:35]And so it it matters, right, that we define these things. And I'm I'm just trying to be charitable. I like I didn't I sort of was getting like this modalism entailment from him. I I also was like trying to avoid that because I don't believe Jesus is the father. I was really just trying to be charitable. You know, with these guys again, they hold it against you. They don't really care about understanding your view and and it's it's just a joke.

[00:43:59]Terminator Moses, what's up, man? Thanks for being here tonight and thanks for being a channel member. That means so much. He says, "I've heard trinitarians say Yeshua is not a prophet because he got fired because he got unal alive." I'm not sure what that means.

[00:44:17]Mormon Trinity says, "Yeah, it's just shots back and forth these days." And it's too bad, guys.

[00:44:24]I get the clickbait, the titles. It comes with the territory. We're on social media. We're trying to get people's attention when there's so many things demanding it right in our world.

[00:44:35]But yet, we do have a duty to properly represent people. We should be operating out of love with a desire to genuinely reach people.

[00:44:47]You know, I'll tell I'll tell you what it is. A part of this is my fault because um I mean kind of I just be baking these guys all the time and sometimes I'm kind of intense and so these guys are looking for ways to take shots.

[00:45:05]I I know that. I know that. And that's a part I know that comes sort of with the territory like like I get that a part of that is it is banter and you do have to be sort of thick skinned.

[00:45:17]Uh however, there is a line, right? But it's got to be drawn somewhere. It's got to be covenant disciples. Hey brother, could you explain the transfiguration and Yeshua's revelation to John in the book of Revelation being the same as the vision of Daniel Chen? That's a very big subject. That's not the I I would rather not go to that in this topic of this live. But it's a phenomenal question.

[00:45:42]Phenomenal question. There's also different theories um especially of um I mean really about both of them.

[00:45:49]Revelation alone has so many different ideas. Uh the transfiguration is another thing like that. Ne never not says clearly it was Constantine brother listen the contribution of the term homoissius it was that's his letter to his dianisses his church or diocese how do you pronounce that that's where it's a primary source that Constantine played a very influential role in the council of Nika I wouldn't say it like comes from him completely totally I mean you obviously had the consent of many different people, but he did. I'm I'm not going to deny that. That's true.

[00:46:30]Leis, why should we fear if God is with us? That's right.

[00:46:35]Life is here and beyond. Oh, I see it now. Good. I hope so. All right. So the really the two other things I want to go through is that you know what's crazy to me is that number one this is even fixated on it all in light of just how bad Elijah really did in in this debate. You know or maybe that's maybe I have that backwards actually. I mean, I guess it does make sense in a way that they would try and fixate on these complicated sound bites that sort of get taken out of context.

[00:47:14]Uh because if you look at the real substance and and things as a whole, I mean, he did terrible. I mean, I just there's just a few things I want to point out, right? So, if we go to this man's rebuttal, he brought up claims that I didn't even make. I mean, rookie rookie mistake, right? He says, "Mike claims that Yahweh is the personal name of the father only."

[00:47:47]That just did not happen in my opening statement. No, Mike. Mike never claimed that. What does that have any relevance to the debate subject which was Jesus is God anyways? And he pre-prepared it and still read it even when that wasn't in my opening statement. I mean, >> it's so bad. That's such a rookie mistake, guys. Like, that's a risk.

[00:48:15]That's a risk to pre-prepare pre-prepare rebuttal slides. And I mean any honest person is going to be like he didn't make this argument. Let's skip over it.

[00:48:27]He just read it like this is what he said. Look at listen to him.

[00:48:30]>> He didn't even prove it. He is the personal things that he needs to do. He makes a second claim. Mike claims that Yahweh is the personal name of the father only. He didn't even prove that.

[00:48:40]>> I never even claimed that. Right.

[00:48:45]It's crazy, dude.

[00:48:48]I mean, this guy is just off his rocker.

[00:48:52]Well, there was one more, too. Yeah, this one. Look, he's [laughter] >> he's lying. Things that he brought up was that singular hopefully we could do this within seven minutes. [laughter] So, uh, one of the things that he brought up was that singular person pronouns mean one person. That's not true. He's lying to you.

[00:49:09]>> I'm lying. Except I didn't even claim that.

[00:49:15]Th this man verbatim says Mike said claimed this and I literally didn't.

[00:49:21]Guys, you have to throw their credibility out the window. Like I don't care. Trinity is true. Let's just assume that's the world. Trinity is true. You still have got to call this stuff out.

[00:49:34]you you want to pull out these ambiguous clips but not call your boy out and let him know that like hey that was really bad, right? Like him claiming that I made this claim and this is a lie is itself a lie.

[00:49:56]I mean this is what these guys talk about Muslims all day that what they do.

[00:50:00]They're giving me the Muslim treatment as they say it.

[00:50:05]Unbelievable.

[00:50:07]How How is that real life? It's hard to tell. Life here and beyond. Thank you so much for the $20 super chat. He says, "Thank you for your ministry. In your future videos, can you address Greg Stafford's pre-existence argument?" So, Greg Stafford, is he a Mormon?

[00:50:24]Um, I'll take a note of this. It's sweet. It's here in this video, so hopefully I can remember. Uh, I'll take a look at his arguments. Yeah, maybe we can get into them sometime. Thank you again so much for supporting the channel with a $20 super chat. I appreciate it so much. All right, so that's that's number one, guys. He did so bad. That was such a rookie mistake. I mean, and people can make mistakes, don't get me wrong, but like in light of how fixated they are on calling me names on all this crazy talk and clipping. I mean, but this stuff, who's calling this out?

[00:50:59]Who's pointing this out?

[00:51:04]I mean, I just I want to be nice. I really do and believe the best. But folks, he's lying.

[00:51:11]Like, I mean, I'm not going to let I'm not going to play my whole introduction and prove it right now. Like, it would take too long. But if you watch the debate, then you know I never claimed I'm like, I don't even understand how that's relevant. Or is Jesus God? Might claim singular pronouns mean one person?

[00:51:31]Mike claimed that Yahweh is only the personal name of the father. Like these weren't even He's lying.

[00:51:39]Oh my gosh. Somebody's got to call this out. It's It's just unbelievable. All right. The second thing that I got to show you guys and express some genuine frustration is that you know it really feels like the burden these guys the burden to to like meet that they set up to disprove the trinity to disprove Jesus being God. Right? We do these debates. We have these open discussions.

[00:52:12]They set the bar way too high and they can just never be reached. It's like the constant moving of a goalpost.

[00:52:21]There's standards which are literally impossible. Like in this debate, I routinely appeal to an authority, the BDAG.

[00:52:34]That's I mean that is the authority on the Greek language of the New Testament and the entire Greco Roman world. Like definitions of the words we're using is just not enough. Like that's I feel like I'm treated in this way to where I'm not sure there's anything you could do.

[00:52:56]I mean to some degree I understand when people like they're fully convinced of their view, right? And so it's like they don't think it could be wrong. Like to some degree I understand it, but at the same time you should be objective. You should be willing and open to hearing things. Like if someone was going to prove you wrong, how would they do it?

[00:53:22]There's got to be some standard, right?

[00:53:26]Are dictionaries or lexicons.

[00:53:29]Is that like not good enough? because apparently it wasn't this entire debate.

[00:53:37]my cross exam. I I see we see I see we see we see a stark difference in one case you have me defining everything qualifying everything making it clear exactly what I'm saying and proving it showing the lexicons and the scriptures and then we have him just making philosophical assertions let's check out one of these let's check this out okay you know what I'm gonna I'm sorry I'm going to have to share my screen again. Thought I had to find it. It's right here.

[00:54:14]Come on. All right. So, is some sin worse than others, Elijah?

[00:54:22]>> Mhm.

[00:54:23]>> So, then how can all sin be infinite if some sin is worse than others? So in regards to this, we make a distinction between um infinite in regards to the object of the one who is offended and infinite in regards to the malice of the act itself. So yeah, okay. How does he know that?

[00:54:43]Where is that coming from?

[00:54:47]Is there some type of objective thing that just proves it and we must accept it in order to hold our integrity?

[00:54:56]He's just making an assertion. He's just like in this he's in his own little world. Well, we make this distinction between infinite in regards to the one who is offended and infinite in regards to the malice of the offense itself.

[00:55:10]Like, congratulations, dude. Like, you just you just make things up that and that solves the contradiction as if we're just supposed to grant them all the metaphysics baked into there.

[00:55:22]Right now, look at what I do to disprove him. Regardless of the object, all sins has a sense of infinite because it regards if he punish unequal as though they're >> those things are every respect has been tempted as we are.

[00:55:40]Yeah. I just I'm just skipping over all the banter. Okay. Like that that whole back and forth is it's it's oh my gosh.

[00:55:47]Let's just define the what do we mean by tempted? What does the Bible mean when it uses the word tempted? Right? I'm going to prove my point using the scripture and lexicons yet without sin.

[00:55:59]>> Question. Can God sin?

[00:56:01]>> Nope.

[00:56:02]>> Okay. Could Jesus sin?

[00:56:05]>> No.

[00:56:06]>> Okay. So then how can Jesus be tempted as we are in every respect if he literally cannot sin?

[00:56:14]>> Because temptation is brought to fulfillment in three stages. By suggestion, delight and consent.

[00:56:21]Temptation is brought about in three stages.

[00:56:26]What? Where is he getting that from? How does he know that is true? Are we just supposed to take him at his word?

[00:56:34]What? Like I just I can't even do this. Is what people find persuasive. Really? So in so far as we are suggested the things that bring us to sin, Jesus is able to be tempted like that and never up. Do you for maybe Jesus was led into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil?

[00:56:57]If we look up this word in the dictionary, okay, you're going to find out that this refers to entice to improper behavior to tempt.

[00:57:06]>> But in James 1:17, did I get that wrong? No. Is it is it 15?

[00:57:12]>> Oh my gosh.

[00:57:13]>> 16 14. I cannot be tempted by Okay, so in James 1:13, when it says, "For God cannot be tempted by evil," it literally means that you're untemptable without temptation entirely. Can you show me one lexicon that will say the same thing you just said about the three stages of temptation?

[00:57:37]>> Yeah, >> just one >> when it's when it's bought up. Uh like in regards to the lexicon, I don't have one on hand. And I'm not going to share my screen right now.

[00:57:46]>> Okay. So, he's got nothing. He's got absolutely nothing. The definition of the word tempt when it says God is it can't be tempted.

[00:57:58]The word literally means untemptable without temptation entirely. But here he's saying, oh well, temptation takes place is brought about in three stages, right? And two of them God can't experience but one of them he can. Okay.

[00:58:16]So then in your view God can just be tempted.

[00:58:20]Like you just disagree with what the the lexicon says. Like I mean these guys are imposing so much philosophy. It is like these distinctions are doing all the work.

[00:58:35]You you understand that like like when when he says temptation temptation takes place in three stages that's doing o all the work all the explanatory power is just baked into that right and and all of it comes from where [laughter] I mean just where not the Bible I mean certainly not lexicons right Like, how do you know that when they use the word tempted that they thought that it occurs in three stages?

[00:59:13]They don't. He's just imposing that onto the text. I mean, I can't understand. I can't fathom how this is what's persuasive.

[00:59:27]like like how am I supposed to refute them if their if their position is wrong? How would I disprove it if not literally what I just did? Like how like I don't I if this isn't enough, folks, I don't know what is right.

[00:59:56]God forbid a unarian lo use a lexicon >> to prove that he's right.

[01:00:02]Okay. And they can provide nothing but their own just conjecture.

[01:00:10]Unbelievable. Like if any in my mind, anybody honest has got to see this and think to themsel, "Yeah, he really didn't do a good job." All right. like like he did he did not do a good job defending this, right? My view is clearly based in scholarship and lexicons and the definitions of these words, right? My view is consistent. His is just made up. Thank you very much.

[01:00:35][applause] Okay.

[01:00:40]And I call him out for it.

[01:00:42]>> Just going to take that as a concession.

[01:00:43]You don't have a lexicon. You talk about three stages of temptation, but that's just your assertion. I find it very weird and not based in scholarship.

[01:00:51]Yeah. Get wrecked.

[01:00:53]Get wrecked. All right. All right. I got one more example for you.

[01:00:59]Okay.

[01:01:00]Oh, you know what? Is it that one or No. Did Did I skip it or I may have already gone over it. So, it was temptation. No, the other one was dying.

[01:01:12]That's the one. Where where do we go over that? I bring up the definition.

[01:01:20]Come on.

[01:01:22]Without temptation.

[01:01:29]I mean, this is a good one, too. Yeah, that's right. It comes after this.

[01:01:34]Yeah. Let Well, look at this, too. This is a So, I got three examples for you.

[01:01:37]Excuse me. My bad.

[01:01:39]>> Come on.

[01:01:41]It's down here. Question number three.

[01:01:44]Does this refer to a person or a personified expression, Elijah? Right.

[01:01:49]We're in John 1:1. I go to the term word logos and I look it up in the dictionary. Basic question. What's that say there? A person or a personification? This guy can't answer.

[01:02:00]>> Well, Jesus is the expressed representation and image of God.

[01:02:05]>> Okay. Does it refer to a person like you just said or does the word logos refer to a personification?

[01:02:12]>> Well, it refers to a person in this verse. Yeah.

[01:02:15]>> Okay. So you just disagree with the best Greek English lexicon used by scholars.

[01:02:19]Yeah, because Okay, done. He's just done right there. I mean, folks, if if his position is wrong, how am I going to prove it? I think the logos is not a real person. It's just a personification based on wisdom tradition. Right? Just like this says right under it. shows a traces of ways of thinking, widespread contemporary synretatism, Jewish wisdom literature and pho. That's my view. How am I supposed to prove that? This isn't enough.

[01:02:54]That's the world we live. That's not enough proof.

[01:03:00][laughter] I mean, what the I just I can't I can't even. You You guys got to tell me what you think. If that's not enough, I I I don't know what would be evidenced. Unitarian Truth Now says, "Just wanted to say thanks for the great work you do, man. Thank you so much both for the comment, uh the encouragement. It means a lot. Uh as well as the $5 super chat and supporting my channel. Thank you, man. Oh, man. I get a little bit worked up, but I'm having fun at the same time going through this. I I just wish the standard was lower. I wish it was lower. And then he just tries to twist this into pointing out a statement about the word becoming flesh, which is verse 14 to redefine the definition. Look at this.

[01:03:47]You're calling it a person, brother. It says right there, it is the distinctive teaching of the fourth gospel that this divine word took on human form and a person that is Jesus.

[01:03:57]That's >> Yeah, that's it, dude. That's after that's after verse 14, correct in verse one where it uses the word logos.

[01:04:05]>> No, in your in your source.

[01:04:07]>> I know. I know you're you're not you're not paying attention. You said the word >> you said I agree with that part right there. It is the distinctive teaching of the fourth god.

[01:04:17]>> I agree with the part that I don't understand but seems to support my position.

[01:04:22]So, I'm going to hold on to it. gospel that this divine word took on a human form in a historical person that was Jesus.

[01:04:31]>> Okay. And that word is that word a personification or is it a real person?

[01:04:35]A literal person.

[01:04:37]>> It's a that's what your source says.

[01:04:38]>> Okay. So you're not listen you're not tracking probably on purpose. That word is a personification. It does become embodied in Christ like an attribute because this is a wisdom motif. Wisdom is associated with God's attributes, his roles, his divine prerogatives when the word becomes flesh.

[01:04:56]>> Yeah. I literally had to explain this to this guy like three different ways and he just it's like he could not grasp it.

[01:05:01]>> I was just using the words that was on your source that you pulled.

[01:05:04]>> Yeah. No, listen. Yeah. When it says the divine word become takes on flesh, that divine word is a personified expression.

[01:05:13]That's what the definition says.

[01:05:14]>> Yes, it is. Yes, it is. You don't you don't even know how to read that.

[01:05:17]>> Yeah. It's it's insane. Many people don't realize that by the way about John 1. That's it's sort it's sort of subtle, but like if you if you look at John 1:1, look at this. You have the word word the word, right? That's the that's the Greek word logos, right? Or logos.

[01:05:37]And and then look, boom. And then here's the last time it's used. Verse 14. And the word became flesh and dwelt among us. And then now look what happens now. Now what's it say? It says Jesus.

[01:05:55]Right now he's no longer called the word.

[01:05:58]He's called Jesus.

[01:06:01]And so the prologue here, everything that you read in here has a parallel in wisdom literature. Like every aspect of the prologue. So when you look up the word logos like what's its definition the definition is come on an independent personified expression of God right which shows traces of ways of thinking widespread contemporary secretism Jewish wisdom literature and pho right so down here when it says the fourth gospel teaches the divine word, right? Word. What is that word?

[01:06:47]Takes on flesh. That's a personified expression. That's right. John 1:1 is saying that a personified expression, God's wisdom based on all this Jewish wisdom literature becomes embodied in Christ. Like an attribute, right? All the things which had previously been said about God's wisdom are said about the word. I mean, that's amazing. It's literally the definition of the word.

[01:07:10]They think unitarians are weird. No, we're literally treating this term like it's meant to be used in second temple period Judaism. It's It's crazy. It really is how we get treated like we're weird. We don't get it when actually we do. [laughter] We do. Okay. And what was what was the other thing I wanted to bring up about this? Uh oh. Yeah. In my presentation, I brought this up.

[01:07:38]We're we're going to come back to that real quick. But look at this. Where are you?

[01:07:46]Right here.

[01:07:48]In Old Testament presentation of wisdom, there are good parallels for almost every detail of the prologue's description of the word. That's a scholar. That's not me. That's that's scholarship.

[01:08:02]Okay. Here we have Christianity has moved away from its Jewish roots and are people just aren't familiar with wisdom literature commentary by a scholar on John 1.

[01:08:16]Christian traditions involving wisdom has been almost completely erased from western Christianity scholar Schosler on John 1:1.

[01:08:29]I should have one more in here too. Look at this. By o day, Jewish wisdom tradition, both biblical and extrabiblical, has emerged as the governing view.

[01:08:43]My position is weird. I haven't provided enough evidence, folks. If this does not convince people, then I don't think anything will. I think their hearts are closed. Their minds are darkened. They don't really care there. What more could you possibly provide to prove the position? We got scholarship, scripture, lexicons, dictionaries. We're like in the historical context.

[01:09:09]Unbelievable.

[01:09:11]Okay, now the final one. The final bakery in this around the word death in the Bible.

[01:09:27]It's right after this, isn't it? Boom.

[01:09:29]Here we go. Nature. All right. So, let's go ahead and share my screen again. Look at this.

[01:09:38]You need to buy a lexicon, Elijah. Here we go. [laughter] Ready? So, I delivered to you as of first importance what I received that Christ died. Okay. The definition of die refers to a cease of functions whether earthly or transcendent.

[01:09:58]But when it calls God immortal, okay, the only God is immortal, it means impervious to death.

[01:10:07]>> Okay. So, so, so tell me, how can you be impervious to death if you're able to die by taking on a human nature?

[01:10:16]>> Yeah. So, when it's saying then this is once again is talking about Jesus in 1 Timothy 1:17. It's literally talking about Christ. This is talking about his divine nature. Not answering the question. Answer the question, Elijah.

[01:10:29]How is it that Jesus can be God? And you agree he has to die for salvation, but yet God is impervious to death.

[01:10:38]>> Okay. So, how is that possible? By taking on a human nature.

[01:10:42]>> Okay. So, in regards to the divine nature, God cannot die. In regards to the human nature, God can separate that soul from that body, which is death. So that's the way in which >> and here we go again. Oh my gosh.

[01:11:00]>> This guy makes a philosophical distinction with no basis in the dictionaries.

[01:11:10]>> He just made it up. [singing] >> Where is he getting it?

[01:11:15]>> DOES SOMEBODY know where he's getting this?

[01:11:19]>> [laughter] >> These dudes just make stuff up.

[01:11:24]The definition of the word to die and being immortal in the entire Greco Roman world means that you're impervious to death.

[01:11:36]You're completely impervious. But here he is telling you, well actually God can die if he takes on a human nature. Yeah.

[01:11:47]You know what you just did? You just left the Bible. You just left the scriptures. You just took your attention off of what the scriptures reveal so clearly what the lexicon support, okay, which is based on the scholarship and went to your own view.

[01:12:06]You've gone your own way.

[01:12:11]And again, what more could I do if if I'm going to if I'm trying to prove that actually when they call God immortal, that rules out being susceptible to death, even if you take on a human nature? How could I possibly disprove that if not just like this?

[01:12:33]Oh man, it at times it feels hopeless.

[01:12:41]>> [laughter] >> It does. At times it feels hopeless like there just no we're never going to get anywhere. If this is not enough to disprove the position then what will how else could I possibly prove it?

[01:12:55]I mean, he just flat out [snorts] rejects what the Bible says. And it should everybody should be like, whoa, the the diction the best lexicon used by scholarship says that God's impervious to death, but these trinitarians want to tell you that God actually can die. Who are you going to believe?

[01:13:20]This is the tail wagging the dog. This is I'm going to believe whatever I have to in order to hold on to the trinity.

[01:13:26]That's what's going on here.

[01:13:30]This is this is it really doesn't matter the data.

[01:13:35]Why are we even doing these debates? Why are you even in the space talking about this? God logic's following how like what why are they there? What's the relevance? If you're just here to reaffirm a bias, say amen, and go to sleep, I think you're wasting your time.

[01:13:59]You have to be open to persuasion based on data, new evidence. If this is not enough to prove it, I mean, I don't like just comparing them. I just I mean, I I guess I should have more grace because you know what? I was the same way.

[01:14:16]I was the same way.

[01:14:20]so set in a traditional doctrine, you know, that you feel like your whole salvation depends upon and you're going to get kicked out your church and be treated terribly by so many Christians and be, you know, just displaced spiritually.

[01:14:41]It's terrible. It's really too bad.

[01:14:43]That's like that is not how people should be.

[01:14:51]We should be open to new evidence. I I think I did a sufficient job. And man, I'm fighting not feeling hopeless to think that yes, there are people who listen and hear who can look at this debate and say, "I see it. I see it."

[01:15:08]You're bringing up scripture. You're bringing up lexicons and you're basically proving they didn't when they call God immortal, they think he's he's not susceptible to death. There is no sense which he is can be affected by death because he's impervious, right? That's what a mortal means. I mean, it's crazy he's a Protestant because usually you get that treatment from orthodox who use like words as though they can mean everything and yet nothing all at the same time, you know, and we just live in this weird abstract space of distinctions and they can make things mean whatever they want, you know, and get a desired outcome by just changing the conditions, right?

[01:15:52][laughter] They do this everywhere, right? Trinity doesn't make sense based on the law of identity. So, let's just change identity.

[01:16:02]>> Right now, now we're now we're dealing with relative identity. It it's it's really too bad. So, that those are pretty much my thoughts. You know, I think it's too bad this space that th this space is very toxic. People aren't hearing each other. They don't seem to really care about facts.

[01:16:26]Listen, I'm into taking clips, dunking on people, and defending the truth. But you can't lie about people. You can't misrepresent them. You can't straw man, right? You can't make yourself ignorant just so you can disagree with a heretic.

[01:16:45]Hey, that's not a good look. That's not how it should be. These guys shouldn't be so thirsty for a clip that they're just going to throw their brains out the window, not even understand like what omnipotence even is to be clipping these things, all the scholarship on it, how philosophically debatable these things are.

[01:17:06]I mean, especially when I think I went out of my way to explain things.

[01:17:14]But if that's how it's got to be to get the truth out there, then maybe I should toughen up more. I'm trying to stay encouraged. I'm trying to believe in what's possible, that people's views can change, that people will learn the truth, but it's tough. Salam says, "Peace be upon you, Mike. Great job on the debate.

[01:17:35]I hope to see you de debate Jay Dyer one day. First, peace right back to you as well. Thank you for being here tonight, for watching and uh for yeah, for $10 supporting my channel and for the kind words. I'm doing my best in these debates. It's good to be told great job every now and then. And I I'm happy to debate Jay. Uh it depends on what. Jay's very skilled both in logic, rhetoric, ethics, epistemology, metaphysics. He's skilled. Wouldn't be an easy debate. Uh he's blocked me on X. So I don't think I don't know. I doubt that that that that might happen, but sure I'm open to it.

[01:18:15]Right. Date, time, and topic. Thank you again for supporting the channel. UX design guy says the Jehovah's Witness get the same treatment even with scholarship. Sorry to hear that.

[01:18:27]Thank you so much for the $2 super chat and supporting the channel. Nobody should be treated that way.

[01:18:34]And dig 346 says he is immortal in divine parte and mortal in human parte.

[01:18:40]Yeah. So that's only possible if Jesus is two persons. If he is both mortal and immortal, then that's a contradiction in the one person of Christ. That also depends upon post-biblical philosophy.

[01:18:53]Like that distinction you're making right now depends upon the council of Chaledon. That's two natures theory, bro. That's that's not Bible. They don't make that distinction.

[01:19:06]That that had to be invented in order to save the doctrine of the Trinity.

[01:19:14]Clark Kent says, "No, Mike. The difference is you have a spirit of humility to learn that comes truly from the father who changes our heart so that we can know him because the trinity spell is truly wicked and manipulative."

[01:19:26]Well, hey, I think at times I fail.

[01:19:29]Um, well, I don't just think I know. I know I don't do as good as I should.

[01:19:33]And, you know, I'm working on that for sure. I genuinely care. And, you know, my wife is also always on my case.

[01:19:42]She is like, "You could have done better. You could have said that more."

[01:19:45]And I'm like, "You're right. You're right." But I appreciate it. I'm doing my best, guys. I I really am.

[01:19:52]Ooh, this is terrible. M says, "Logos has nothing to do with Sophia. Logos and Dvar are the same. Once you get that right, you'll come to the word intent, purpose. Jesus explained God's intent or the intent God was manifested." Okay. Is God's intent included in his wisdom?

[01:20:14]Did is God's intent not based upon his wisdom?

[01:20:20]Of course, it is. These are completely related. Also, philosophically in the in the like Hebrew ethos, that's just categorically wrong. Wisdom has everything to do with logos. So it it's actually an order of events. So God has wisdom in his mind that exists right as like like a u like a nonconstituent ontological property.

[01:20:49]God has it. He has his wisdom and when he expresses it, you get his words.

[01:20:58]Right? So word and wisdom are connected in that the wi the word is the expression of God's wisdom.

[01:21:06]That's what the definition that we looked at in in the BDAG. That's what the lexicon and scholarship says.

[01:21:14]They most definitely are related.

[01:21:21]Chris Christ Lucas says, "Mike, you have to think outside the Roman church and ethnodox. Almost all the other denominations about 70% of them are dispensational and they basically teach Jesus is not the Messiah." Debatable to a degree. I do agree with you. Thanks for the comment being here tonight, Chris. Thank you for the membership.

[01:21:42]Rosalyn says, "Times are changing." I hope for the better. I genuinely hope for the better. Right.

[01:21:49]Well, guys, that's all that I had for you tonight. How long have we been streaming? It's been about We're approaching like an hour and a half.

[01:21:57]I'll give it like another nine minutes or so. Engage with you guys. So, what did you guys think? Did any of you see the debate? Did you pick up on these things? What are your thoughts on the state of Christian apologetics? Is it not terrible at [laughter] times? It is rough out here. Uh I mean it's so hard not to just be disagreed with but to just feel unheard to feel misrepresented like how it should be is that we should be like this is my view and he addressed it. I disagree with him on this and I don't think that's true. Right? his conclusion doesn't follow because this premise is false or whatever. But it's not like that's not even my argument.

[01:22:42]Right? That's how we go in circles.

[01:22:44]That's how we don't get anywhere.

[01:22:48]And uh that's how I feel lately about it. And I think it's time I start saying no to some of these debates because these guys just want to do this. They can do so bad. They can flub it. flub the debate in almost every area and then they're just going to fixate on these two parts and you know it's off to the races with getting reposted.

[01:23:13]>> [laughter] >> I mean, we're not trying to sue people, but you could you know you could, right?

[01:23:18]Some people who misrepresent you bad enough, uh, that's where lawsuits come in, right? They say this is what so and so says, believes, did. If that's not true, you could be sued. Maybe they should get sued, you know, in a in a lesser sense, right? I don't want to send people to jail, but these guys got to be held accountable one way or another. You know, I guess that's also the other side of that equation is that they aren't holding themselves accountable. It's hard to be told things from people that you disagree with on other stuff. You know, you already have them grouped in into some label in your mind. Oh, well, they're a Mormon or whatever. Um, it can be hard because you know, you have different worldviews, but you can hear it better from people in your own camps, right? And that's what should be going on. There should be accountability.

[01:24:10]That's one thing that's lacking.

[01:24:13]Totally lacking.

[01:24:17]Kiss Legend says it's called aristics.

[01:24:22]Aristics. I'm not sure I've ever heard that word. I'm going to go ahead and look that up now.

[01:24:30]I aristics.

[01:24:34]Aristics refers to argumentation designed to dispute, wrangle, or rent a debate rather than discover truth. Ooh, what?

[01:24:47]Wow.

[01:24:49]It's called aristics.

[01:24:54]Derived from Aerys, the Greek goddess of strife.

[01:25:00]Ooh.

[01:25:02]Beautiful.

[01:25:07]That's intense. I got to adopt this to the vocabulary aristics. That is what it is.

[01:25:15]Oh man, that's so good. That's what it does, isn't it? It just causes strife and divide, unnecessary division, bitterness between people. You know, instead of building bridges, now we're burning them. Now the bridges are burned. Now it's like we can't get anywhere.

[01:25:32]You know, I mean, especially some of these guys who they're adamant that you're not even saved if you don't believe in the Trinity. I mean, their heart attitude should be so squeaky clean. Their intentions should just be above reproach. I mean, you think people's salvation depends upon this, you better be taking that seriously. I mean, how is God going to treat them on judgment day assuming they're right? You had this opportunity to reach all these people, Elijah, but here you are. You actually misrepresented him right now. Unitarians don't want to hear from you because they just see you trying to get clips, take things out of context. So many people who clip that thing about omnipotence, they took out the main part, right? Like they don't they don't want you to defend it. And even in the debate, I called it out, right? You don't really want to Unbelievable. God's going to hold them accountable for sure. He'll hold us accountable. We need to internalize that. It's going to start with us. The change for sure. Aristics. Thank you for that. Kiss legend. Dig says, "Mike, if God become human, he becomes a creature.

[01:26:43]And with that, he's not God anymore, but a normal human." That's correct. That's right.

[01:26:48]You got to study this stuff first.

[01:26:50]That's right. Dave the disciple dude.

[01:26:51]What a cool name. Dave the disciple dude. It's like they got the same thing that I'm doing. Metaphysics Mike Dave the disciple dude.

[01:27:00][applause] Love your name. That's pretty awesome.

[01:27:07]Did I miss a $5 super chat?

[01:27:11]Guys, did one of you give me a super chat that I missed? I don't think I saw any text with it. If I did, so sorry about that, but I don't think I don't think I saw it. Oh, I see this one. Is this it? Mike, I admire your approach as a Muslim. Hear me when I say some of these people just don't care. They know they're disingenuous and on purpose.

[01:27:30]Shame.

[01:27:32]Thank you so much for supporting my channel, man. For the $5 super chat and um and for saying that again. I can do so much better, but it means a lot to hear that you know you admire my approach. I certainly want to be a good example myself. I fail at times, but that's the goal. I'm at least here talking about it, right? Being open about that. I think many of them are disingenuous and they should experience shame. They probably block it out of their conscience. Shalom, Shire Farm.

[01:27:59]Thanks for being here. Look at that. All the colored hands. Thumbs up. That's fine.

[01:28:05]By the way, it's pronounced Issaatu.

[01:28:09]Isatu. Cool. Thank you. Sorry I mispronounced that.

[01:28:15]Bri by grace says, "Yes, that it's what I feel like all that I see. It's not a good feeling.

[01:28:23]Terminator Moses says, "They're so proud to not listen to you."

[01:28:28]Right.

[01:28:31]It is the truth. Right. Remember defeasible rule. I'm not sure what you mean by that.

[01:28:41]You brilliantly. I'm not sure what that means. So incomplete. Some of the comments. Lyman says, "God is one always.

[01:28:51]Where am I at?

[01:28:53]That's right. Yes, he is.

[01:28:58]God is one always. Amen to that.

[01:29:02]Dave the disciple dude says liked and sub. Blessings everyone. I appreciate that so much. All right, we'll go ahead.

[01:29:09]We'll call it a night. I think that was good for now. Thank you guys for being here with me. Man, I think we had over a hundred of you on average. I really want to know your thoughts in the comments, whether live or in the replay. Guys, I'm doing my best to reach people. It is tough out here when these guys are less educated than you. They have a bad attitude. They got a chip on their shoulder. They're willing to lie, to straw man you. This is the type of stuff that is not going to build the bridges and allow us to get through to each other.

[01:29:40]That listen, I'm not in these debates for sport. I'm really not. I'm really not. I'm in these to reach people.

[01:29:48]That's my goal. And that's why I'm disappointed in God Logic's following.

[01:29:53]Insane. And I didn't show it, but I'll just leave you with this. But guys, in the debate, the moderator life, he said that he couldn't read over half the super chats because they were just personal attacks.

[01:30:09]You know, I don't want to make people look bad, but that's like go listen to them. Their own audience.

[01:30:16]He's like, "Guys, I can't read these, but these are Christians." My wife My wife was like, "That's right. She told me, man, God loic must be a terrible Christian. Look at these follow. Like, his following is so bad." I had to defend Avery.

[01:30:33]I was like, "Well, actually, Avery is not that bad, but his following is hella toxic, right? We, you know, don't blame Avery.

[01:30:41][laughter] It's so insane.

[01:30:44]It shouldn't It shouldn't be that way, guys. And we're only going to get through to them by loving them. We got to be better ourselves. That's the fact that that's what'll do it." Clark Kent, you're doing a great job, Mike. Thank you so much. You do brilliant. Keep it up. Thank you so much, Emm Roslin. Thank you, man. You guys mean so much to me.

[01:31:02]Thank you for being here tonight. We got to congrats on the 10K subs. Thank you.

[01:31:09]Thank you so much. And thank you guys for being a follower on my channel, supporting me, watching my content, sharing my videos. I see all your comments. I do my best to get to all of them. And uh also a shout out to my channel members. guys, you're making the dream possible that I could not work as much. Could put that time into this and hopefully, you know, I wouldn't have to do these streams so late at night either, right? Because I'm working during the day or I'm sp or I'm with my family, you know? It's like I'm working or I'm with them and that's why they're late for now. But I'm try I'm trying to find new ways to get in there. But all of you mean so much. Shout out again to my channel members and uh God bless you guys. We'll see you in the next video.

[01:31:53]All right.

[01:31:56]Good night.