My Other Blogs:

Apologetics Lane
Bible Difficulties Answered
Charismata Matters
Gospel Crumbs

Gospel Meals

Quotes and References

Remembered Music

My Comments on other Blogs

• Page Two
• Page One

[or here: Page Two; Page One]

The Most Important Blogposts in This Blog

This blogpost lists what I (subjectively) believe to be the most important blogposts in this blog. There are three sections. The first section is on the Deity of Christ. The second section is on the Trinity or the Plurality of God. The third section is on the Deity of the Holy Spirit. Each section has links to blogposts where the most important links (as I perceive it) are above, and with the lesser links below. For example, in the section on The Deity of Christ my blog "Identifying Jesus with Yahweh/Jehovah" (which is nearer the top) is much more important than my blogpost "The Spirit of Jesus" (which is near the bottom of the section).

Here's my main Resources in Defense of Trinitarianism

Here's a link to my blogpost where I've collected links to outside blogs where I've commented and interacted with others on the topic of the Trinity: Blog Comments on the Trinity

The Deity of Christ

Of the Distinct Personality, and Deity of the Son by John Gill

Markan Christology

The Jewish Trinity: How the Old Testament Reveals the Christian Godhead by Dr. Michael Heiser

Identifying Jesus with Yahweh/Jehovah

Jesus as Yahweh/Jehovah Resources

The Angel of the LORD by E.W. Hengstenberg

The Angel of the Lord; or Manifestations of Christ in the Old Testament by W. Pakenham Walsh

"Why Do You Call Me Good?" — Did Jesus Deny Being God in Mark 10:17-18

Jesus' Claim to be the Temple of God Proves His Full Deity

Jesus as God by Murray J. Harris

The Names of Jesus by Elmer L. Towns

Pre-Existence of Jesus in the Synoptic Gospels

The Requirement to Love Jesus Is Evidence of Jesus' Divinity

The Tempting/Testing of Christ Is Evidence of Christ's Full Deity

The "Cup and Table of the Lord" As Evidence for Christ's Full Deity

Concerning 1 John 5:20 ( from The Trinity: Evidences and Issues)

Romans 9:5 and Christ's Full Deity

Regarding Mark 14:62 and Daniel 7:13; Jesus Coming With the Clouds

Doxologies to Christ

The Wings of Christ Are God's Wings

Jesus the True and Proper SON of God

The Meaning of the Term "Son of Man"

Jesus' "Breaking" the Sabbath as Evidence of His Equality with the Father

Jesus Lord of the Sabbath

John 20:28 And Its Proximity To John 20:30-31 

God in the Midst

Lord [Jesus Christ] Willing? God's Will and Christ's Will

The Reverence for Jesus is the Fear of Jehovah

Trust in Jesus Is Apparently Trust in Jehovah 

The Spirit of Jesus

The Trinity and the Deity of the Messiah From a Messianic Perspective

Matthew 1:23 and "ho theos"

Concerning the Magnificent and August Names and Titles of the Messiah in the Old Testament by John Gill

Revelation 22:12-13 and the Deity of Christ

Worshipping a Merely Human Jesus Is Wrong No Matter How Exalted

God, gods and Jesus in John 10:30-39

Is the "Oneness" of John 10:30 a "Oneness" of Purpose or Being?

Jesus' Omniscience

Does Mark 13:32 Disprove Jesus' Omniscience?

Why Don't the Synoptics Have Jesus Claiming to be the "I Am"? 

Brief Selective Survey of Christ's Full Deity in the Synoptics

Melchizedek Resembles the Son of God, Not the Other Way Around

The Trinity demonstrated from The Lord's Prayer

Interactions with Well Known Unitarian and Philosopher Dale Tuggy 

Does the New Testament Require Belief in the Full Deity of Jesus For the Reception of Salvation?

Response to Two Unitarian Articles on John 8:58

 

The Trinity or Plurality of God

The Doctrine Of The Trinity Stated And Vindicated by John Gill 

Links to John Gill's Chapters on the Trinity in His Work "A Body of Doctrinal Divinity"

The Jewish Trinity: How the Old Testament Reveals the Christian Godhead by Dr. Michael Heiser

Old Testament Passages Implying Plurality in God

Proving That There Is A Plurality In The Godhead

Quotes from "Of A Plurality In The Godhead" by John Gill

Edward Henry Bickersteth's Books In Defense of the Trinity

All Three Persons of the Trinity Mentioned In Scripture (Directly or Indirectly)

Omniscience of the Persons of the Trinity

The Aaronic Blessing Is Highly Suggestive of the Doctrine of the Trinity

Regarding Jewish Professor Dr. Sommer's Comments About the Trinity

Quotations from the Jewish New Testament Commentary by David H. Stern

The Great Mystery; or, How Can Three Be One? [The Trinity in Early Judaism]

Comments and Blog Posts on the Trinity

Do Rocks Dream of Ceramic Sheep? OR Jade Runner

F[L]air-minded Reinvention of the Wheel

The Most Plausible Anti-Trinitarian Complaint

Speculative Arguments In Defense of the Trinity

Miscellaneous Speculative and/or Suggestive Arguments In Defense of the Trinity

Problematic Passages Used In Defense of the Trinity

The Trinity and the Deity of the Messiah From a Messianic Perspective

A Formulation and Defense of the Doctrine of the Trinity by William Lane Craig

The Trinity demonstrated from The Lord's Prayer

The Trinity At the Beginning of Creation

Why Do Trinitarian Prooftexts Have "So Many Problems"?

 Interactions with Mike Gantt

Part One:  F[L]air-minded Reinvention of the Wheel

Part Two:  Do Rocks Dream of Ceramic Sheep? OR Jade Runner

 

The Deity of the Holy Spirit

The Full Deity of the Holy Spirit

Of the Distinct Personality, and Deity of the Holy Spirit by John Gill

Praying to and Worshipping the Holy Spirit

The Witness of the Holy Spirit

The Holy Spirit Contradicts the Accidence of Personality

The Holy Spirit in the Old Testament 

The Names of the Holy Spirit by Elmer L. Towns

Do the Father and Son Love the Holy Spirit?

The Trinity demonstrated from The Lord's Prayer

 

---

 

 Some eye opening articles from the Jews for Jesus website:

Jewishness and the Trinity

The Trinity: Questions and Answers

A Look at the Trinity From a Messianic Jewish Perspective

Kabbalah's Best Kept Secret?

 

 

Answering the Unitarian Use John 17:3 from a Trinitarian Perspective

 By Artison Rex from Facebook 

John 17:3— in Trinitarian Light

Answering John 17:3 from a Trinitarian Perspective

📖 John 17:3 – “And this is eternal life, that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.”

Unitarians often cite this verse to argue that Jesus excludes Himself from being God by referring to the Father as "the only true God." However, from a Trinitarian perspective, this passage does not contradict the doctrine of the Trinity. Instead, it aligns with it when properly understood in context.

Contextual Considerations:

1. Jesus’ Statement Affirms Monotheism, Not Unitarianism

🔹 Jesus, as a Jew, affirms monotheism—that there is only one true God (Deuteronomy 6:4).

🔹 Trinitarians also affirm one God, but understand that the one divine essence is shared by three Persons: the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

🔹 Jesus calling the Father “the only true God” does not exclude Himself from divinity, just as saying “Jesus is the only true Lord” does not exclude the Father from being Lord.

💡 Parallel Argument:

✅ 1 Corinthians 8:6 – "For us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things... and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things."

• If calling the Father "one God" excludes the Son, then calling Jesus "one Lord" would also exclude the Father.

• But Trinitarians understand this as distinguishing persons, not denying deity.

2. Jesus is Included in the Identity of the "Only True God"

🔹 Jesus is described throughout the Gospel of John as fully divine and one with the Father:

• John 1:1 – "The Word was God."

• John 10:30 – "I and the Father are one."

• John 20:28 – Thomas calls Jesus "My Lord and my God."

🔹 Since Jesus is the divine Son of the Father, acknowledging the Father as "the only true God" does not exclude Jesus but affirms their relationship within the Trinity.

💡 Key Point:

✅ John 17:3 does not deny Jesus' deity—it defines eternal life as knowing both the Father and the Son.

3. The Context: Eternal Life Requires Knowing Both the Father and the Son

🔹 Jesus does not stop at saying "that they may know You, the only true God." He adds:

• "and Jesus Christ whom You have sent."

🔹 If Jesus were merely a human prophet, it would be blasphemous to put knowing Him on the same level as knowing God.

🔹 In contrast, throughout Isaiah (e.g., Isaiah 43:10-11), God alone is the source of salvation—yet here, eternal life depends on knowing both the Father and the Son.

💡 Conclusion:

✅ If knowing Jesus is essential for eternal life, then Jesus must be divine, not merely a created being.

4. Jesus Shares the Father's Glory (John 17:5)

📖 John 17:5 – "And now, Father, glorify Me in Your own presence with the glory that I had with You before the world existed."

🔹 Jesus speaks of a shared eternal glory with the Father—something that no mere human or created being can claim.

🔹 Isaiah 42:8 – God says, "I will not give My glory to another." Yet, Jesus asks to be glorified alongside the Father.

🔹 This confirms that Jesus shares in the divine nature.

💡 Key Point:

✅ Jesus is not separating Himself from the Father’s deity—He is affirming His eternal relationship with the Father.

Conclusion: John 17:3 in a Trinitarian Framework

✔ Jesus calls the Father "the only true God" in distinction of person, not exclusion of essence.

✔ Jesus is included in the identity of the one true God throughout John’s Gospel.

✔ Eternal life depends on knowing both the Father and the Son, affirming Jesus’ divine status.

✔ Jesus claims preexistent glory with the Father, confirming His divine nature.

John 17:3, when read in context, supports rather than contradicts the Trinity. The context supports the Trinitarian understanding of the passage!

Answering Unitarian Objections and Argument:

Refuting Unitarian Grammatical Arguments

A. The "Appositional Phrase" and "only" Argument

Unitarians claim that "the only true God" in John 17:3 is an appositional phrase, meaning they suggest, that it restricts divinity exclusively to the Father.

Why This Argument Fails

• Greek Syntax Does Not Demand Exclusivity

• The phrase "the only true God" (τὸν μόνον ἀληθινὸν θεὸν) does not necessarily exclude Jesus.

• In Greek, an appositional phrase simply identifies the subject but does not automatically exclude others from also being true God. It simply identifies or explains the subject more precisely.

• Similar Constructions Exist Without Exclusivity

• Jude 4: Jesus is called "our only Master and Lord" (τὸν μόνον δεσπότην καὶ κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν)

• But God the Father is also called "Lord" throughout Scripture (e.g., Luke 1:32, Matthew 11:25).

Conclusion: Just as Jude 4 does not exclude the Father from being Lord, John 17:3 does not exclude Jesus from being the true God.

B. The Use of "Only" (μόνον) Restricts Divinity to the Father

• The Greek word for "only" (μόνος) is an exclusive term, meaning "alone, without another."

Since μόνος modifies "the true God" (τὸν ἀληθινὸν θεὸν), it means that the Father is the only true God, excluding Jesus from this category, Unitarians would argue. But is this so?

• Parallel Uses of "Only" in Greek

• Mark 2:7 – "Who can forgive sins but God alone (μόνος)?"

• Matthew 4:4 "live by bread alone, (μόνῳ) but by every word"

• Matthew 12:4 "for them which were with him, but only (μόνος) for the priests"

• In these passages, "only" Gr. μόνος doesn't always exclude all else, clear exceptions are made in the immediate context. Men do not "only" "live by bread," for example, they eat fish, fruit, and vegetables. These passages, just as Jude 4, have clear exceptions to the word "only" made elsewhere. (See also Bengel's Gnomen cited below *¹)

• Likewise, in John 17:3, we should not take the passage to exclude Jesus Christ from the "only true God" phrase, rather we should accept the passage as Jesus Christ rightly pointing to the Father as the true God as opposed to the false gods of the heathen.

🔷️John 17:3 in Light of 1 John 5:20

A. John 17:3 Does Not Exclude Jesus from Being the True God

"And this is eternal life, that they know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent." (John 17:3)

Unitarians claim that Jesus is distinguishing the Father as "the only true God," thereby denying that He Himself is God. However, this interpretation is flawed because:

• John 17:3 does not say "the Father alone is God"—it only affirms that the Father is the true God, without denying Christ’s divinity.

• 1 John 5:20 explicitly calls Jesus "the true God and eternal life," which completes the picture of John 17:3 by showing that both the Father and the Son share the divine identity.

• Eternal life requires knowledge of both the Father and the Son, meaning that Christ is essential for salvation (cf. John 5:23).

B. 1 John 5:20: Jesus Is Also the "True God"

"And we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life." (1 John 5:20)

Since 1 John 5:20 directly applies "the true God" to Jesus, the Unitarian interpretation of John 17:3 collapses. Instead of contradicting John 17:3, 1 John 5:20 shows that both the Father and the Son are included in the divine identity. (See Barnes and Matthew Poole at the bottom who also make this parallel*²)

🔷️Hebrews 1:8-10: The Father Calls Jesus "God" and "Lord"

One of the most striking affirmations of Jesus' deity comes from the Father Himself:

"But of the Son He says, ‘Your throne, O God, is forever and ever’." (Hebrews 1:8)

"You, Lord, laid the foundation of the earth in the beginning." (Hebrews 1:10)

Key Points:

• The Father explicitly calls Jesus "God."

• Jesus is called "Lord" in the sense of YHWH, since Psalm 102:25-27 (applied here) refers to YHWH creating the heavens.

• No one argues that Jesus is above the Father, yet the Father Himself calls Jesus both God and Lord.

🔷️ Other Arguments of Exclusivity Favor the Trinitarian Perspective

• The Bible in numerous places adamantly teaches Monotheism-the belief in only one true God. For example: Deut 4:35, 6:4, 32:39, Isa 44:6, 45:5, 6. It is also taught in the NT just as strongly: 1 Cor 8:4; Eph 4:6, 1 Tim 1:17, John 17:3. Lest there be doubt that there is one, and only one, true God, according to the Bible. For example, Isa 45:5, "I am the LORD, and there is no other; apart from me there is no God." Despite the above, the NT repeatedly calls Jesus God, Matt 1:22, 23; John 1:1, 18, Col 2:9, and not just any god, but uses the phrase, "ho theos" so that there can be no doubt, John 20:28, Heb 1:8. The implication here is that both God the Father and Jesus are the one true God.

• We have the same situation with the title, "Creator". For example in Isa 44:24, "I am the LORD, the Maker of all things, who stretches out the heavens, who spreads out the earth by myself" See also Isa 45:18. Yet in the NT we have similar assertions that Jesus created all things, John 1:3, Col 1:16, 17. Again, the implication is that both Jesus and God constitute the One true creator.

• There is an almost identical situation with Saviour and Redeemer; for example, Isa 43:11 says: "I, even I, am the LORD, and apart from me there is no savior." See also Isa 43:3, 45:18. Yet in the NT we often have Jesus referred to our true Saviour and Redeemer: Matt 1:21; Acts 4:12; 2 Tim 1:10; Tit 1:4, 2:13, 3:6; 2 Pet 1:1, 11. Once more, the implication being that both God the Father (YHWH) and Jesus constitute the One True Saviour of mankind.

• The same is true of the One "Rock" as per Isa 44:8, "Is there any God besides me? No, there is no other Rock; I know not one." See also Deut 32:3,4,15; Ps 92:15. In the NT we find that 1Cor 10:4 says, "for they drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ." The implication is that both God the Father and Jesus constitute the One true Rock.

• Another point, for example, is God the Father does not share His glory (Isa 42:8, 48:11) yet we find in John 17:5, 24 Jesus shares the Father's glory.

• In Isa 41:4; 44:6 The Father (YHWH, LORD) is called, "First and Last" and so is Jesus, Rev 1:17, 18; 22:13

• Jehovah is the declared the only One who is deserving of worship in Ex 20:3, 34:14; Deut 8:19; 2 Kings 17:35-38; (see also Matt 4:10; Acts 10:25, 26; Rev 19:10, 22:8, 9), yet the NT records numerous times when Jesus was worshipped Matt 2:11; 14:33; 28:9, 17; Luke 4:8; 24:52; John 9:38; Rom 10:9; Heb 1:5, 6; Phil 2:10, etc.

🔷️Patristic Considerations and Arguments from the Saints

John 17:3 was used by Arius to maintain that Jesus Christ was not of the same nature as the Father; however this objection was resolved.

St Thomas excellently writes in his commentary on the Gospel of John (17):

Secondly, we should explain the phrase, you the only true God. It is clear that Christ was speaking to the Father, so when he says, you the only true God, it seems that only God the Father is true God. The Arians agree with this, for they say that the Son differs by essence from the Father, since the Son is a created substance, although he shares in the divinity more perfectly and to a greater degree than do all other creatures. So much more that the Son is called God, but not the true God, because he is not God by nature, which only the Father is.

Hilary answers this by saying that when we want to know whether a certain thing is true, we can determine it from two things: its nature and its power. For true gold is that which has the species of true gold; and we determine this if it acts like true gold. Therefore, if we maintain that the Son has the true nature of God, because the Son exercises the true activities of divinity, it is clear that the Son is true God. Now the Son does perform true works of divinity, for we read, "Whatever he [the Father] does, that the Son does likewise" (5:19); and again he said, "For as the Father has life in himself," which is not a participated life, "so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself" (5:26); "That we may be in his true Son, Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life" [1 Jn 5:20].

According to Hilary, he says, you the only true God, in a way that does not exclude another. He does not say without qualification, you the only, but adds and Jesus Christ whom you have sent. It is like saying: that they know you and Jesus Christ whom you have sent to be the one and only true God. This is a pattern of speaking that we also use when we say [in the Gloria]: "You alone, Jesus Christ, are the most high, together with the Holy Spirit." No mention is made of the Holy Spirit because whenever the Father and the Son are mentioned, and especially in matters pertaining to the grandeur of the divinity, the Holy Spirit, who is the bond of the Father and Son, is implied.

Or, according to Augustine in his work, The Trinity, he says this to exclude the error of those who claim that it is false to say that the Father is God, and the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God; while it is true to say that the Father and the Son and Holy Spirit are one God. The reason for this opinion was that the Apostle said that "Christ [is] the power of God and the Wisdom of God" (1 Cor 1:24). Now it is clear that we cannot call anyone God unless he has divine power and wisdom. Therefore, since these people held that the Father was wisdom, which is the Son, they held further that the Father considered without the Son would not be God. And the same applies to the Son and the Holy Spirit.

In summary:

• Hilary’s Response:

• Something is "true" based on its nature and power (e.g., true gold has both the properties and actions of gold).

• Since the Son performs divine works (John 5:19, 5:26), He possesses the divine nature and is true God.

• 1 John 5:20 states: “This is the true God and eternal life,” referring to the Son.

• Jesus’ phrase "you the only true God" does not exclude the Son but includes Him as sharing in the one divine essence.

• Hilary’s Linguistic Argument:

• The phrase "you the only true God" is structured in a way that does not exclude Jesus.

• Example: In the Gloria, we say, "You alone, Jesus Christ, are the most high, together with the Holy Spirit," implying shared divinity.

• The Holy Spirit is not mentioned explicitly but is always implied when the Father and Son are referenced.

• Augustine’s Explanation (from The Trinity):

• The phrase guards against a misunderstanding that denies the distinct persons of the Trinity.

• Some falsely claim that only the Trinity as a whole is God, rather than the individual persons being fully God.

• Since Christ is called the Wisdom and Power of God (1 Cor 1:24), and only a being with divine wisdom and power can be God, both the Father and Son must be fully God.

• Thus, the Father is not God apart from the Son, and vice versa, preserving Trinitarian unity.

🔷️ Commentator's on John 17:3

🔅Bengel's Gnomen (*¹)

μόνον, the only, the alone) The Son and Holy Spirit are not excluded by this word. Comp. μόνος, ch. John 8:9, “Jesus was left alone, and the woman.” But those meant to be excluded are the false gods, with the idolatrous worship of which the world was crowded.

🔅Barnes writes: (*²)

The only true God - The only God, in opposition to all false gods. What is said here is in opposition to idols, not to Jesus himself, who, in 1 John 5:20, is called "the true God and eternal life."

🔅Matthew Poole writes: (*²)

the only true God. But divines answer, that the term only, or alone, is not to be applied to thee, but to the term God; and the sense this: To know thee to be that God which is the only true God: and this appeareth from 1Jo 5:20, where Christ is said to be the true God, which he could not be if the Father were the only true God, considered as another from the Son. The term only, or alone, is not exclusive of the other two Persons in the Trinity, but only of idols, the gods of the heathen, which are no gods; so 1 Timothy 6:15,16, and many other Scriptures: so Matthew 11:27, where it is said, that none knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any the Father, save the Son; where the negative doth not exclude the Holy Spirit. Besides, the term alone is in Scripture observed not always to exclude all others, as Mark 6:47. Our Saviour saith, it is life eternal to know him who is the only true God, that is, it is the way to eternal life, which is an ordinary figure used in holy writ. He adds,

and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent; by which he lets us know, that the Father cannot be savingly known, but in and by the Son.

🔅Pulpit Commentary

The life eternal, of which Jesus has just spoken, is this (cf. for construction, John 15:12; 1 John 3:11, 23; 1 John 5:3), that they might know - should come to know - thee, the only veritable God. All ideas of God which deviate from or fall short of "the Father" revealed to us by Christ, are not the veritable God, and the knowledge of them is not life eternal. The Father is here set forth as the fens Deitatis. This does not exclude "the Son," but is inconceivable without him. The Fatherhood expresses an eternal relation. The one element involves the ether as integral to itself: "I am in the Father, and the Father in me."

🔷️ Conclusion: John 17:3 Does Not Deny Christ’s Deity

• 1 John 5:20 explicitly calls Jesus "the true God and eternal life."

• Greek syntax does not exclude Jesus from being God.

• Unitarians misinterpret "only" (μόνος), ignoring exceptions like Jude 4.

• The Father and Son share divine attributes.

• Hebrews 1:8-10 shows that the Father calls Jesus "God" and "Lord."

Thus, John 17:3 does not contradict Christ’s deity but affirms the unity of the Father and Son. Jesus Christ is truly the True God and Eternal Life.

Job's Redeemer and the Lord Jesus Christ. "Agency" can't answer this one either!

 By Artison Rex From Facebook 

Job's Redeemer and the Lord Jesus Christ. "Agency" can't answer this one either!

The Book of Job anticipates a final, personal encounter with YHWH as the cosmic judge, and Job insists that no other—meaning, no intermediary or agent—will fulfill this role. Yet, in the New Testament, Jesus claims that all judgment is given to Him (John 5:22). This creates a powerful theological connection: if only YHWH is the final judge, and Jesus is the one who judges, then Jesus must be YHWH.

Let's break this down step by step.

1. Job’s Expectation: Seeing YHWH as the Final Judge

In Job 19:25-27, Job expresses his deep conviction that, at the end of time, he will see YHWH himself—not through another, but with his own eyes:

“For I know that my Redeemer lives, and that at the last He will stand upon the earth. And after my skin has been thus destroyed, yet in my flesh I shall see God, whom I shall see for myself, and my eyes shall behold, and not another. My heart faints within me!”

(Job 19:25-27, ESV)

Key Points:

• YHWH is the one Job expects to see.

• "Not another" rules out the possibility that Job is expecting a mere angel, agent, or prophet.

• This happens "at the last", indicating an eschatological, end-times fulfillment.

• Job refers to YHWH as his "Redeemer," a term later applied to Jesus.

2. Jesus as the Exclusive Judge in the New Testament

Now, compare Job’s statement with John 5:22-23, where Jesus makes a staggering claim about judgment:

“The Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son, that all may honor the Son, just as they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him.”

(John 5:22-23, ESV)

Key Points:

• The Father does not judge anyone.

• Jesus is given all judgment.

• Honoring Jesus is equal to honoring the Father.

3. Implications: Jesus Must Be YHWH

A. Only YHWH Is Judge

• The Old Testament consistently affirms that YHWH alone is the cosmic judge:

• Isaiah 33:22 – “For YHWH is our judge, YHWH is our lawgiver, YHWH is our king; He will save us.”

• Psalm 9:7-8 – “But YHWH sits enthroned forever; He has established His throne for justice, and He judges the world with righteousness.”

If YHWH is the only judge, and Jesus says all judgment has been given to Him, then Jesus is not a mere agent—He is YHWH.

B. Job Expects to See YHWH, and the NT Says We Will See Jesus

• Revelation 22:3-4 – “The throne of God and of the Lamb will be in it, and His servants will worship Him. They will see His face.”

• Matthew 25:31-32 – Jesus describes Himself as the Son of Man who sits on His glorious throne and judges all nations.

If Job expected to see YHWH as judge, and the NT affirms that Jesus is the one we will see and be judged by, then Jesus is YHWH.

4. Parallels Between Job’s Redeemer and Jesus

Job calls his final hope his "Redeemer" (גֹּאֲלִי, Go'ali), a term used for YHWH as Israel’s savior in the Old Testament:

• Isaiah 44:6 – “Thus says YHWH, the King of Israel, and his Redeemer, YHWH of hosts: ‘I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no God.’”

• Psalm 19:14 – “O YHWH, my rock and my Redeemer.”

Yet, in the New Testament, Jesus is explicitly called Redeemer:

• Titus 2:13-14 – “…our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, who gave Himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness.”

If Jesus is the Redeemer whom Job longed for, and if Job expected this Redeemer to be YHWH Himself, then Jesus is YHWH.

5. Jesus, the Judge of All Nations, Fulfills the Day of YHWH

The Day of YHWH in the Old Testament describes the final judgment of the world by YHWH:

• Joel 3:12 – “Let the nations be roused; let them advance into the Valley of Jehoshaphat, for there I will sit to judge all the nations on every side.”

• Zechariah 14:5 – “Then YHWH my God will come, and all the holy ones with Him.”

In the New Testament, this role is given to Jesus:

• Matthew 25:31-32 – “When the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the angels with Him, then He will sit on His glorious throne. Before Him will be gathered all the nations, and He will separate people one from another.”

• "Do not marvel at this, for an hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice and come out, those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment." (John 5:28-29, ESV)

• While Job says clearly that his eyes will behold Yahweh in the Resurrection and "not another." The Bible clearly relates that it is Jesus Christ the Lord who will be present and visible in the "last day." 

• Speaking of Jesus Christ the NT says, that "every eye will see Him."

• "Behold, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, even those who pierced him, and all tribes of the earth will wail on account of him. Even so. Amen." (Revelation 1:7, ESV)

This verse emphasizes the visible and undeniable nature of Christ’s Second Coming. Since Job prophecies that he would behold God and "not another" and since the Bible relates the dead are raised by Christ and it is Him they behold.

 Agency is refuted! It is impossible to reconcile "agency" with Job's words.

Moreover, Revelation 1:7 references Zechariah 12:10, which prophesies that those who pierced Him [God] (a reference to His crucifixion) will mourn when they see Him again.

Thus, it becomes impossible; considering the words on the page to argue that Jesus is anything but God. Or, else Job's prophetic words are devoid of truth.

6. Conclusion: Jesus Is the YHWH Job Longed to See

• Job expected to see YHWH Himself as Judge and Redeemer.

• The Old Testament says YHWH alone is the Judge.

• Jesus says the Father judges no one, but all judgment is given to Him.

• Jesus is the Redeemer, the one whom Job longed to see.

• Jesus is the one who judges the nations in the NT, fulfilling the "Day of YHWH."

Thus, if Job expected to see YHWH as judge and no other, yet Jesus is the judge of all, then the only conclusion is that Jesus Christ is YHWH, the Cosmic Judge and Redeemer.

The Holy Trinity—Master List V2 BY Artison Rex

 

The Holy Trinity—Master List V2

by Artison Rex

The Biblical Doctrine of the Trinity: An Exhaustive Reference

The doctrine of the Trinity is rooted in the Bible's affirmation of monotheism—that there is only one true and living God—and yet it simultaneously reveals three distinct Persons who are fully and equally God: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. This is not a contradiction but a mystery consistent with the scriptural witness.

I. The Foundation: Monotheism

• Deuteronomy 6:4 – "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one."

• Isaiah 43:10 – "Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me."

• Isaiah 44:6 – "I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god."

• Isaiah 45:5-6, 21-22 – "I am the LORD, and there is no other, besides me there is no God."

• Mark 12:29-32 – Jesus affirms the Shema: "The Lord our God, the Lord is one."

• 1 Timothy 2:5 – "For there is one God..."

II. The Deity of Each Divine Person

A. The Father is God

• John 6:27 – "The Father, who has set his seal on him."

• 1 Peter 1:2 – "According to the foreknowledge of God the Father..."

• Romans 1:7 – "Grace to you and peace from God our Father."

• Galatians 1:1 – "God the Father, who raised him from the dead."

B. Jesus Christ is God

• John 1:1 – "The Word was God."

• John 1:14 – "The Word became flesh and dwelt among us."

• John 1:18 – "The only God, who is at the Father's side, he has made him known."

• John 20:28 – Thomas: "My Lord and my God!"

• Romans 9:5 – "Christ, who is God over all, blessed forever."

• Titus 2:13 – "Our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ."

• 2 Peter 1:1 – "Our God and Savior Jesus Christ."

• Hebrews 1:8 – "But of the Son he says, 'Your throne, O God, is forever and ever.'"

• Philippians 2:6 – "Though he was in the form of God..."

• Colossians 1:15-17 – "In him all things were created."

• Colossians 2:9 – "In him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily."

C. The Holy Spirit is God

• Acts 5:3-4 – Lying to the Holy Spirit is lying to God.

• 1 Corinthians 3:16 – "God's Spirit dwells in you."

• 2 Corinthians 3:17 – "The Lord is the Spirit."

• Hebrews 9:14 – "The eternal Spirit."

• Psalm 139:7-8 – Omnipresence of the Spirit.

• Some quotes in the Old Testament spoken by Yahweh are said (in the NT) to have been spoken by the Holy Spirit (Acts 28:25-27; Heb. 10:15-17)

III. Distinction of Persons

• John 5:20, 30, 32, 37 – The Father and the Son are not the same person.

• John 14:16 – Jesus will ask the Father to send another Helper.

• John 15:26 – The Spirit proceeds from the Father, sent by the Son.

• John 17:5 – Jesus speaks of the glory he had with the Father before the world existed.

• Matthew 3:16-17 – At Jesus' baptism: the Father speaks, the Son is baptized, the Spirit descends.

IV. Unity of the Three Persons

• Matthew 28:19 – "Baptizing them in the name [singular] of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit."

• 2 Corinthians 13:14 – "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit."

• Ephesians 4:4–6 – "One Spirit... one Lord... one God and Father."

V. Interchange and Indistinction in Roles

• 1 Corinthians 10:9 – The Israelites tested Christ in the wilderness, though YHWH is the referent in Numbers.

• Romans 8:9 – Spirit of God and Spirit of Christ used interchangeably.

• Romans chapter 8 (whole chapter) all three referred to interchangeably.

• Acts 16:6–7 – The Holy Spirit and Spirit of Jesus guide Paul. Used interchangeably. 

• 2 Corinthians 3:17–18 – "The Lord is the Spirit."

• 1 Peter 1:11 – The Spirit of Christ in the prophets.

VI. The Work of the Trinity

A. Creation

• Genesis 1:1–3, 26 – God creates, Spirit hovers, plural language used.

• Psalm 148:5 – Commanded by God, creation exists.

• John 1:1–3 – The Word created all things.

• Colossians 1:16 – All things created through and for the Son.

B. Revelation

• John 1:17-18 – The Son reveals the Father.

• John 16:13-15 – The Spirit glorifies the Son, sent by the Father.

• Mark 13:11 – The Holy Spirit speaks through believers.

• 2 Corinthians 13:3 – Christ speaks in Paul.

• Hebrews 1:1-2 – God spoke through the Son.

C. Sanctification

• Hebrews 2:11 – Jesus as sanctifier.

• 1 Peter 1:2 – Sanctification of the Spirit.

• Jude 1 – Sanctified by the Father and preserved in Jesus.

D. Supplying Ministers

• Jeremiah 3:15; 26:5 – God gives shepherds.

• Matthew 5:10 – Blessed are the persecuted for righteousness.

• Acts 13:2 – The Holy Spirit sets apart Paul and Barnabas.

• Acts 20:28 – The Spirit appoints overseers.

• Ephesians 4:11 – Christ gives apostles, prophets, etc.

E. Prayer and Access to God

• John 14:14 – Prayer in Jesus’ name.

• Ephesians 1:6; 2:18; 6:18 – Access to the Father through the Son by the Spirit.

F. Confirmation and Presence

• Matthew 3:16–17 – Father speaks, Son baptized, Spirit descends.

• Matthew 17:5 – Transfiguration: Father affirms Son.

G. Salvation

• John 6:63 – The Spirit gives life.

• 1 Corinthians 6:11, 19-20 – Washed, justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit.

• Ephesians 1:7–9 – Redemption in Christ, purpose of the Father.

• 2 Thessalonians 2:13–14 – Chosen by God, sanctified by the Spirit, called through the gospel.

• Titus 3:4–6 – Saved by the mercy of God, through the washing of rebirth by the Holy Spirit.

• 1 Peter 1:2 – Chosen by the Father, sanctified by the Spirit, sprinkled by the blood of Christ.

VII. Reflections on the Trinity vs. Unitarianism

The vast and cohesive scriptural evidence points not toward a polytheistic view of separate divine beings, nor a modalistic confusion of roles, but to a complex unity—one God in three co-eternal, co-equal persons. Attempts to affirm only the deity of the Father while still calling Jesus "God" result in philosophical contradictions or a slide into functional polytheism.

Trinitarianism is not heathen; it is the most faithful and biblically consistent view of the one God revealed in Scripture.

The early Church Fathers universally affirmed this faith:

• Ignatius of Antioch (c. 110 AD): "Jesus Christ our God."

• Justin Martyr (c. 150 AD): "The Word... being God."

• Tertullian (c. 200 AD): Coined the term Trinitas (Trinity).

• Athanasius (4th Century): Defended the full deity of the Son and the Spirit.

Conclusion: The doctrine of the Trinity is not an invention of philosophy or creeds—it is the testimony of the whole of Scripture, rightly understood.

“The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all.” – 2 Corinthians 13:14

_____________________________

The Biblical understanding of the Trinity is founded on strict Monotheism~there is only one true God. (Dt 6:4;Is 43:10;44:6; etc.)

Yet, the Bible teaches and recognizes the Father as God (Jn 6:27; 1 Pe 1:2, etc)

The Lord Jesus Christ as God (Jn 1:1,14,18;20:28;Ro 9:5; Ti 2:13; 2 Pt 1:1; Heb 1:8, etc)

The Holy Spirit is recognized as God (Ax 5:3-4; 1 Cor 3:16)

These three are distinct individuals or persons

•the Father and Son are distinct (Jn 5:20,32,37;17:5)

•the Father and Son are distinct from the Spirit (Jn 14:16; 15:26)

These three are unified (Mt 28:19; also~3:12-16; 2 Cor 13:14)

●There exists some indistinction/interchange between the three:

•Jesus and the Father 1 Cor 10:9

•Between all 3 Rom 8:9

•Jesus and the Holy Spirit Ax 16:6-7 2Cor 3:17-18; 1 Pt 1:11

The Work of the Trinity~

Author of all Spiritual Operations 1 Cor 12:11; Col 1:29; Heb 13:21

Creator Gen 1:1-3,26;Ps 148:5;Jn 1:1-3;Col 1:16

Inspiring people to speak Mk 13:11;2 Cor 13:3; Heb 1:1

Sanctifier Heb 2:11; 1 Pt 1:2; Jude 1

Supplying ministers to the Church Jer 3:15;26:5; Mt 5.10; Ax 13:2; 20:28; Eph 4:11

Trinity works together in Revelation of God's truth Jn 1:17-18;16:13

Trinity works together in prayer Jn 14:14; Eph 1:6;2:18;6:18

Trinity works together in confirmation Mt 3:16-17

Trinity works together in salvation Jn 6:63; 1 Cor 6:19-21; Eph 1:7-9; 2 Thes 2:13-14; Ti 3:4-6; 1 Pt 1:2

As far as I can tell the Trinity is the best explanation of the references and information above.

I personally think there's just too much evidence that seems to work in favor of it, including quotes from the early Church Fathers and it's early formulation.

Also, on the flip side; I feel the Unitarian whether admitted or not has some problem with Polythiesm. If both Jesus and the Father can rightly be called "God" it seems to me those who affirm it, have an issue to one varying degree or other with a Polythiestic Pantheon where there is one Ultimate God but lesser Deities. This; to my mind, is far more 'heathen' than the Trinity could ever be.

_____________________________

God is one Deut. 6:4

1.) Yet, the word "one" means one in unity as well as one in number. It means unity in John 10:30; 1 Jo 5:7; John 17:11,21-23 yet the 3 persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are spoken of as one in number and individuality. There is one God, the Father, one Lord Jesus Christ, and one Holy Spirit (1 Cor.8:6; Eph. 4:3-6)

The Father being called God (1 Cor. 8:6) the Son is called God (Is. 9:6; Heb 1:8; John 1:1-2,18;20:28) and the Holy Spirit is called God (Acts 5:3-4) Thus, there are 3 separate persons in divine individuality and divine plurality. As individuals they can rightly be called God and as a collective they can be spoken of and referred to as God. The word "God" is used either as a singular or plural word, like "sheep."

2.) Names/Titles of God prove a plurality of persons. The Hebrew word Elohim is the word for God in Ge 1:1 & in nearly 2600 other places in the OT. It is a uniplural noun meaning "Gods" and is so translated 210 times (Ge. 3:5; Ex. 22:28; 1 Sam 4:8; Dan 2:11; 4:6-9; 5:11,14, etc.) Sometimes elohim is used with plurality verbs and pronouns, "the Gods they caused me to wander" the monotheistic Abraham says in Ge. 20:13 and in Ge 35:7 it reads, "there the Gods appeared unto him" 

3.) Plural pronouns are used of God, proving a plurality of persons (Gen. 1:26;3:22;11:7;Is 6:8;John 14:23;17:11,22-22)

4.) "Man has become like one of us" Gen. 3:22 shows a plurality of persons.

5.) God said, "let us make man in our image, after our likeness" Ge. 1:26 "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him..." proves a plurality of persons, "Let US MAKE in OUR image" - 3 plural pronouns, "we,us,our" are used 6 times in four different texts: (Gen 1:26;3:22;11:7;Is. 6:8) whoever is being addressed has the potential in creating and since Ge. 1:27 reads "God created" and uses the singular pronoun "his image" the plurality of God is proven.

(The unanimous opinion of the early church fathers was God was convening with Christ )

6.) 2 or 3 persons called God have been seen by the same men at the same time and place(s) yet as being seperate persons. (Gen. 16:7-11;18:1-3,5,9-22;Dan. 7:9-14; Mat 3:16-17; Jn 1:31-34; Ax 7:54-60; Rev. 6:16;7:9-17;21:22; 22:3)

7.) 2 YaHWeHs are mentioned in Gen. 19:24 one on earth and one in heaven. Compare to Is. 44:6 where 2 YHWH are also distinguished, "thus saith Jehovah, the King of Israel, and HIS Redeemer, Jehovah of hosts" (ASV Emphasis mine) 

8.) Two persons are mentioned in the OT See Ps. 8:5-6 w/ Heb 2:5-18; Ps. 16:8-10 w/ Ax 2:25-36; Ps. 22:1-22 w/ Mat. 27:35,39-43,45-26; Heb. 9:14;10:5-12; Ps. 40:6-10 w/ Heb. 10:5-7; and Ps 45:6-7 w/ Heb 1:8-9

9.) 2 Lords are mentioned sitting side by side Ps. 110:1,5; Mt 22:44; 26:64; Ax 2:33-34;7:54-56;Ro 8:34; Eph. 1:20; Col. 3:1; Heb. 1:3,13;8:1;10:12;12:2; 1Pe 3:22; Rev. 22:3

10.)2 persons are required and mentioned to understand the plain language of Ps. 2 whole chapter; Pro 30:4; Is. 4:2;10:16-17;28:16;44:6;49:1-10;50:4-11;52:13-53:12; 62:11; Mic 5:1-5; Jer 23:4-8;33:14-26;Zech. 3:8-10;6:12-13 In these passages one is anointed, becomes the Son of/is the Son of, is set by, is taught by, and serves the other; yet both are called YHWH, and or Lord

11.) Three self acting persons- YHWH Jehovah God, the Christ,  and the Holy Spirit, are all referred to as blessing, anointing, sending and serving or doing things for one another. Ps. 110:1+Ax 2:34-35; 1 Cor. 15:25; Heb. 1:13; Is. 11:2;42:1-7;48:16;59:21;61:1-2;63:1-14;Zech. 12:10-13:2; Lk 24:49; Ax 16:7

12.)Zech. 1:7-21 Jehovah and the angel of Jehovah (also called Lord), 1:19-20;2:1-13) are talking together. One Lord says to the other Lord that he has sent him to Israel (2:8-13) one Lord refers to himself as me and to Jehovah of hosts as his and he (2:8-11) the conference continues throughout Zechariah until 13:6-7 where both Lords are called "fellows" or "associate"

______________________

The following quotes show that the doctrine of the Trinity was indeed alive-and-well before the Council of Nicea: 

Polycarp (70-155/160).  Bishop of Smyrna.  Disciple of John the Apostle. 

“O Lord God almighty . . . I bless you and glorify you through the eternal and heavenly high priest Jesus Christ, your beloved Son, through whom be glory to you, with Him and the Holy Spirit, both now and forever” (n. 14, ed. Funk; PG 5.1040). 

Justin Martyr (100?-165?).  He was a Christian apologist and martyr. 

“For, in the name of God, the Father and Lord of the universe, and of our Savior Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, they then receive the washing with water” (First Apol., LXI). 

Ignatius of Antioch (died 98/117).  Bishop of Antioch.  He wrote much in defense of Christianity. 

“In Christ Jesus our Lord, by whom and with whom be glory and power to the Father with the Holy Spirit for ever” (n. 7; PG 5.988).

“We have also as a Physician the Lord our God Jesus the Christ the only-begotten Son and Word, before time began, but who afterwards became also man, of Mary the virgin.  For ‘the Word was made flesh.’ Being incorporeal, He was in the body; being impassible, He was in a passable body; being immortal, He was in a mortal body; being life, He became subject to corruption, that He might free our souls from death and corruption, and heal them, and might restore them to health, when they were diseased with ungodliness and wicked lusts.” (Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, eds., The ante-Nicene Fathers, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975 rpt., Vol. 1, p. 52, Ephesians 7.) 

Irenaeus (115-190).  As a boy he listened to Polycarp, the disciple of John.  He became Bishop of Lyons. 

“The Church, though dispersed throughout the whole world, even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and their disciples this faith: . . . one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are in them; and in one Christ Jesus, the Son of God, who became incarnate for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit, who proclaimed through the prophets the dispensations of God, and the advents, and the birth from a virgin, and the passion, and the resurrection from the dead, and the ascension into heaven in the flesh of the beloved Christ Jesus, our Lord, and His manifestation from heaven in the glory of the Father ‘to gather all things in one,’ and to raise up anew all flesh of the whole human race, in order that to Christ Jesus, our Lord, and God, and Savior, and King, according to the will of the invisible Father, ‘every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth, and that every tongue should confess; to him, and that He should execute just judgment towards all . . . ‘” (Against Heresies X.l) 

Tertullian (160-215).  African apologist and theologian.  He wrote much in defense of Christianity. 

“We define that there are two, the Father and the Son, and three with the Holy Spirit, and this number is made by the pattern of salvation . . . [which] brings about unity in trinity, interrelating the three, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.  They are three, not in dignity, but in degree, not in substance but in form, not in power but in kind.  They are of one substance and power, because there is one God from whom these degrees, forms and kinds devolve in the name of Father, Son and Holy Spirit.” (Adv. Prax. 23; PL 2.156-7). 

Origen (185-254).  Alexandrian theologian.  Defended Christianity and wrote much about Christianity. 

“If anyone would say that the Word of God or the Wisdom of God had a beginning, let him beware lest he direct his impiety rather against the unbegotten Father, since he denies that he was always Father, and that he has always begotten the Word, and that he always had wisdom in all previous times or ages or whatever can be imagined in priority . . . There can be no more ancient title of almighty God than that of Father, and it is through the Son that he is Father” (De Princ. 1.2.; PG 11.132). 

“For if [the Holy Spirit were not eternally as He is, and had received knowledge at some time and then became the Holy Spirit] this were the case, the Holy Spirit would never be reckoned in the unity of the Trinity, i.e., along with the unchangeable Father and His Son, unless He had always been the Holy Spirit.” (Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, eds., The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975 rpt., Vol. 4, p. 253, de Principiis, 1.111.4) 

“Moreover, nothing in the Trinity can be called greater or less, since the fountain of divinity alone contains all things by His word and reason, and by the Spirit of His mouth sanctifies all things which are worthy of sanctification . . . ” (Roberts and Donaldson, Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 4, p. 255, de Principii., I. iii. 7). 

Conclusion 

If, as the anti-Trinitarians maintain, the Trinity is not a biblical doctrine and was never taught until the council of Nicea in 325, then why do these quotes exist?  The answer is simple: the Trinity is a biblical doctrine, and it was taught before the council of Nicea in 325 A.D. 

Part of the reason that the Trinity doctrine was not “officially” taught until the time of the Council of Nicea is that Christianity was illegal until shortly before the council.  It wasn’t really possible for official Christian groups to meet and discuss doctrine.  For the most part, they were fearful of making public pronouncements concerning their faith. 

Additionally, if a group had attacked the person of Adam, the early church would have responded with an official doctrine of who Adam was.  As it was, the person of Christ was attacked.  When the Church defended the deity of Christ, the doctrine of the Trinity was further defined. Generally speaking, it usually takes some err for a position to 'have' to be articulated. The fact that the Nicene Council was overwhelming in agreement should lend some evidence to who is on the right side of the issue.

The early church believed in the Trinity as is evidenced by the quotes above, and it wasn’t necessary to really make them official.  It wasn’t until errors started to creep in that councils began to meet to discuss the Trinity as well as other doctrines that came under fire.

______________________

Christ "Anointed One"

A. Preexistence of:

Affirmed in OT- Ps. 2:7;Pr. 30:4; Dan 7:13; Mi 5:2

Confirmed by Christ-Jn 8:57-58;3:13;6:33,38,62;8:23;16:28;17:5

Proclaimed by Apostles-Jn 1:1-3,12,14,18; Col 1:15-19; Philp 2:6-8

John the Baptist taught-Jn 1:30 Other Passages relating~Is 9:6; Zec 12:10;13:7; 1 Cor. 10:4; 2 Cor. 8:9; Heb ch 1; 11:26; (Angel of YHVH?)

"In the beginning" Jn 1:1-3,12,14,18;17:5,24;Col 1:17; 1 Jn 1:1;2:14

"Descended from heaven" Jn 3:13,31-36; 6:38,39,62; 8:23

"Come from the Father" Jn 1:18; 3:16,17,34; 5:36-38; 6:29,38,46,57; 7:27-29; 8:42; 10:36; 13:3; 16:30; 17:5,8,18; 1 Jn 1:1-3

"Before Abraham was" John 8:56-58

B. Deity/Divinity of: His own testimony regarding- Jn 7:29; 8:12-21,25-47; 10:25-38; 14:1-24; 15:8-27; 16:15; 17:1-8

His own Scriptural citations regarding his Deity- Jacob's dream of YHVH Jn 1:50-51+Gen 28:13-17 Shepherd Ps 23:1;95:7-8+Jn 10:11,27-28 Word forever Mk 13:31+Ps 119:89+Is 40:8 Mouth of Infants praise Mt 21:15-16+Ps 8:1-2 Shared glory/equal honor Jn 17:5+Is 42:8+Jn 5:23 Immutable hand Is 43:13+Jn 10:28-30 Fount of living water Jer 2:13+Jn 4:10;7:37 Light Is 60:19-20+Jn 8:12+1Jn 1:5;Jam 1:17 Judge of all Ps 62:12;96:13; Joel 3:12; Is 62:11+Mt 16:27; 25:31-46; Jn 5:22-23+Zec 14:3+Ax 1:6-11

I AM Ex 3:14; Dt 32:39;Is 43:10+Jn 8:24,28,58;18:5-8 Bridegroom Is 62:5; Hos 2:16+Mt 25:1;Rev 21:1,9 First and Last Is 41:4;44:6;48:12;Rev 1:7-8?+Rev 1:17-18;2:8;22:12-16

Acknowledged by Christ Jn 20:28,29

Predicted in Scripture Is 9:6; Jer 23:5-6; Mi 5:2; Zec 12:9-10; Mal 4:5

Acclaimed by witnesses Jn 1:1-3,14,18;Mk 2:7-8; Lk 5:21-22; Jn 5:18;10:33

Affirmed by Apostles-Ro 9:5; Phil 2:5-6; Col 1:16-17; 2:9; Ti 2:13; 2 Pt 1:1; Heb 1:8-10

•Creator Jn 1:1-4,10; 1 Cor 8:6; Eph 3:9; Col 1:16-17; Heb 1:2;8:10; Rev 3:14

•Equality with God Jn 5:17,18,23;10:30,38; 12:44-45; 14:6-11;15:23;17:10,21-23; 2 Cor 5:19; Phil 2:5-6; Col 1:15; 2:9; Heb 1:3-4, 10-12; 13:8

•Mutuality with God Mt 11:27; Jn 5:17,18,23-27,37,43; 12:44-45; 14:23; 16:23-32; 17:9-12; 2 Thes 1:2; 1 Ti 1:2

•Called God Is 7:14+Mt 1:23; Is 9:6; Jer 23:5-6; 33:16; Mt 4:7; Jn 1:1-4; 10:33; 20:28; Ax 20:28; Ro 9:5; Col 1:15,19; 2:9; 1 Ti 3:16; Ti 1:3;2:13; 2 Pt 1:1; He 1:8,10; 1 Jn 5:20

Called YHVH Is 40:3+Mt 3:3; Mk 1:1-3;Lk 3:4; Jn 1:23 Jacob's dream of YHVH Jn 1:50-51+Ge 28:13-17 YHVH's glory Is 6:1-3+Jn 12:41 YHVH first and last Is 41:4;44:6;48:12-16+Rev 1:17;2:8;22:12-16 YHVH Rock Ps 18:2; Is 44:8 cf Is 8:14; Dt 32:37+1Cor 10:4; 1 Pt 2:6+Is 8:14 Call on YHVH Joel 2:32+Ax 7:59-60; Rom 10:12-13; 1 Cor 1:2 Confessed as YHVH Is 45:23+Phil 2:9-11 

YHVH our righteousness Jer 23:5-6+1 Cor 1:30 YHVH pierced Zech 12:10+Jn 19:34-37

YHVH praised by Infants Ps 8:1-2+Mt 21:15-16

YHVH ascended on high Ps 68:18+Eph 4:7-10

YHVH Creator Heb 1:10-12 + Ps 102:25-27

Inferred as YHVH: By works~ Calming Storm Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:39-41+Ps 107:28-29; 89:8-9 Walks on water Mk 6:48-51+Job 9:8 "I Am" Mt 14:27-33 "Why did you doubt?" Nu ch.14 Receives Worship 

Forgives sin Mk 2:5-12+Is 43:25; Nu 14:19-20; Ps 25:18; 32:5; 85:2;Jer 31:34;36:3

Healer of Infirmities Ps 103:2-5; 147:3+Mt 12:15;15:30; Lk 4:18,40; 6:19 Feeding Crowd in wilderness Mk 6:31-44; Jn 6:1-14 also Mk 8:1-9+Ex ch. 16

By reference~Peter's plea,like Isias Lk 5:8-10+Is 6:5 Seek and save the Lost Ez 34:16+Lk 19:9-10

Forgiver of sins Lk 7:36-50 Good Shepherd John 10:11-13+Ez 34:2,4 

King of Jews 1 Sam 8:6-7 + Mt 2:2;27:11 

•Pilate's sign "Jesus of Nazareth King of the Jews"~ acronym-acrostic  YHVH - Yeshua HaNazaret VaMelek HaYehudim Jn 19:19+Zech 12:9-10

YHVH's fellow/associate Zech 13:7+Phil 2:6

YHVH for whose glory all things were created Pr 16:4+Col 1:16 YHVH Messenger of the Covenant Mal 3:1;4:5+ Lk 2:6-27

Yhvh judge of all Ps 96:13; + Rev 19:11-20

•As Warrior Ex 15:3; Ps 24:8+Rev 19:11

•Breathe of his mouth Is 11:4; Job 4:9 + 2 Thess 2:8; Rev 1:16; 2:12,16; Rev 19:15

•Faithful and True Rev 3:14; 19:11+21:5

•Blood on Garments Is 63:3+Rev 19:13

•Lord of Lords Dt 10:17; Dan 2:47;8:25 + Rev 17:14; 19:16; 1 Tim 6:15

Return to Mt Olivet Zech 14 +Ax 1

Lord of Glory Ps 24:7-8 +1 Cor 2:8;James 2:1

_______________

Jesus "Yahweh Saves" (see note on "Christ")

As God–YHVH God's pictographic name meaning~"yood-hand" "hey-behold" "vav-nail" "hey-behold" since Hebrew is a verb first language–God's Name literally means, "Behold, the Hand; Behold, the Nail"

Yahweh as Creator (Ge ch1 [v26-27] Is 44:24;Jn 1:1-3,10; Col 1:16-17; Heb 1:1-3,8-12+Ps 102:24-27)

Taking Adam's blame for sin (Ge 3:12+Zech 12:10;Jn 19:19)

Eve believes she got a man YHVH[?] (Ge 4:1)

Adam's Genealogy prophetic names (Gen ch5) "the Blessed God shall come down"

Yahweh giving new law on Mount (Ex ch 19-20+Mt ch5-7) "God said"~ "But I say"(to add to God makes Him God)

Yahweh Word never passes away (Is 40:8+Mt 24:35)

Yahweh's Law a way of life and death (Dt 30:19;+Mt 7:13-14, 24-27)

Yahweh saving his people with mighty hand and outstretched arm (Dt 26:8+Jesus' life and crucifixion)

Yahweh feeding multitudes in wilderness (Ex ch16+Mt 14:13-21)

Yahweh dwelling with his people (Ex. 25:8; Ez. 37:27; Zec 2:10+Mt 1:23;Jn 1:1,14,18)

Yahweh commissions people to Promised Land (Ge ch28; Ju ch1+Mt 28:18-20;Jn 1:49-51)

Yahweh promises his presence in conquest (Ge ch 28;Ex 3:12;Josh 1:5; Mt 28:18-20)

Yahweh King over Israel (1 Sam 8:7; Is 44:6; Jn 19:19)•Pilate's sign "Jesus of Nazareth King of the Jews"~ acronym-acrostic  YHVH - Yeshua HaNazaret VaMelek HaYehudim (Jn 19:19+Zech 12:9-10)

Yahweh as Calming storms (Ps 89:8-9;107:23-30 +Mk 4:39-41)

Yahweh as walking on water (Job 9:8+Mt 14:22-33; Mk 6:48-51) •Jesus identifies and comforts with "I am" Ex 3:14;Is 51:12; 52:6 •Why did you doubt? -Peter/like Israel doubted God– Mt 14:30-31; Nu ch14 •recieves worship Mt 14:33

By reference~Peter's plea,like Isias Lk 5:8-10+Is 6:5 

Yahweh Rejected (Ex 16:8;1 Sam 8:7+Is ch53;Jn 1:11)

Yahweh Shepherd (Ps 23:1; Jn 10:11)

Yahweh seated on Throne (Is 6:1-3 (10)+John 12:40,41+Rev 3:21;7:17)

Yahweh Stone of stumbling (Is 8:14;+1 Pt2:8)

Yahweh's teaching rejected (Dt 32:18;Jer 9:13 31:32+Jn 6:52-66)

Yahweh the God with us, (Is 7:14+Mt 1:23) Mighty God, Father of Eternity (Is 9:6;Mi 5:2;+Jn 1:1-3,10)

Yahweh alone who is God.  (Is 44:24+Jn 1:1,18,50-51; 20:28) ~Savior(Is 43:11+Ax 4:12; Titus2:13)  ~Rock (Is 44:8+1 Pe 2:6-8)

Yahweh who sends himself (Is 48:12-16; Zec 12:10)

Yahweh our Righteousness (Jer 23:5-6+1 Cor 1:30)

Yahweh seeks and saves lost (Ez 34:16+Lk 19:9-10)

Yahweh as Giving rest (Ex 33:14; Mt 11:28)

Yahweh source of life (Dt 30:20+Col 3:3-4)

Yahweh Healer of Infirmities (Ps 103:2-5; 147:3+Mt 12:15;15:30; Lk 4:18,40; 6:19)

Yahweh forgiver of sin (Mk 2:5-12+Is 43:25; Nu 14:19-20; Ps 25:18; 32:5; 85:2;Jer 31:34;36:31)

Yahweh Worker of Wonders (Ex 3:20; 4:8-9;15:11+Jn 2:1-12; 9:1-41)

Yahweh as Giving the Spirit (Jn14:26;15:26;16:7;20:22; 2Tim 1:7-9)

Yahweh as having his own people (Ez 37:23+Titus 2:11-14)

Yahweh vs. lawlessness (Barabas) chosen beside him (Ex ch 32; Lev 20:2-5; 2Ki 17:16; 21:6; Jer 32:35+Mt 27:16;Mk 5:17;Lu 23:18;Jn18:40; Ax 3:14)

Yahweh as First and Last (Is 44:6;48:12-16+Rev 1:17; 2:8; 22:13-16)

Yahweh as power over life and death (Gen 6:3; Dt 32:39; Jn 17:1-2; Rev 1:18)

Yahweh as upholding all things (Job 38:33-37;Ps 104:1-35;145:16-17; Ax 17:28+Col 1:16-20; Heb1:3)

Yahweh as Bridegroom (Is 62:5; Hos 2:16+Mt 25:1;Rev 21:1,9)

Yahweh as Comforter (Is 51:12;2 Cor 1:3-4;+Mt 11:28; Jn 14:18)

Yahweh as causing all things to work together for good (Ge 50:20; Book of Job;+Rev 2:10)

Yahweh ascended (Ps 68:18+Eph 4:7-10)

Yahweh from whom all blessings flow (Jam 1:17; Jn 14:14)

Taste and see Yahweh is good (Ps 34:8+ 1 Pe 2:3)

The Unchanging Yahweh (Mal 3:6+Heb 13:8)

Yahweh as all in all (1 Cor 15:28+Col 3:11; Eph 1:23)

_________________________

Angel of Yahweh

• Ge 16:8-14 Omniscience (tells Hagar about future descendants) Omnipotent (promises to make specific future occur) Recognized as God (Hagar calls the Angel "God who sees" Correlation to Christ (has familiar tenderness of Jesus in the Gospels. Like woman caught in adultery (Jn 8:1-11) Hagar has been misused and the Angel comes in understanding and sympathetic way

• Ge 22:11-12 speaks as God, identifies Himself as God (have not withheld your only son, from Me) Correlation with Christ (the Father sacrifices His Son to give eternal life Jn ch3)

• Ge 31:13 recalls Jacob's dream (Ge 28:12) where the Angel identifies Himself as "the God of Bethel" who revealed Himself previously to Jacob.

• Ex ch3 Identifies as God: If we weren’t told at the beginning this was an angel, we wouldn’t even know it. The rest of the narrative shows Moses speaking to God.

Recognized as God: Moses turns his face away because he is afraid to look upon God (verse 6).

Demands worship: The angel tells Moses to remove his shoes because the ground in the angel’s presence is holy.

Omniscience: The angel tells Moses he has heard the cries of the afflicted in Egypt (verse 7).

Omnipotence: The angel’s message is that he will use Moses to deliver his people. Throughout the exchange, the angel promises to display his power to Egypt.

Omnipresence: When Moses expresses doubt, the angel promises to be with him (verse 12).

Immutability: When the angel reveals the name of God as “I AM,” it signifies God’s timeless and unchangeable nature.

Correlation with Christ: Here we see the angel of the Lord demonstrating a characteristic we recognize from Jesus’ ministry. He is empowering Moses to release his people from bondage (Luke 4:16–21).

•Ex 14:19-20+13:21-22

Angel of Yahweh is a protector of the Israelites

Identified as God: At one moment the guiding phenomenon is linked to God, and later identified as the angel of the Lord.

Nu 22:22-35

Angel of Yahweh shows distinction from YHVH God here. Balaam is unable to see the Angel until is given vision to see.

Distinct from God: Here we see both God and the angel of the Lord as separate agents in the same story.

Identified as God: The angel identifies Balaam’s sin as a personal affront.

Sovereignty: The angel talks about potentially taking Balaam’s life, but it doesn’t appear to be an order. The comment is delivered in a way that indicates the angel’s own authority.

Jdg 2:1-5

Angel of the Lord points to himself as the one who delivered Israel from the Egyptians, is the keeper of Israel’s covenant, and requires obedience. As a consequence of their insubordination, the angel informs the Hebrew nation that he’s withdrawing his protection from them. Angel takes credit for what the entire Biblical witness associates with God.

Jdg ch 13

Sovereignty: The angel informs Manoah and his wife how he plans to use Samson.

Identified as God: Monoah recognizes that they have seen God (verse 22).

Accepts worship: When Manoah offers to sacrifice a goat to the angel, the angel tells him to sacrifice it to the Lord. But the author of Judges tells us that the angel only said that because Manoah didn’t understand who he was talking to (verses 15–16). When it’s all over and Manoah is worried about being killed for seeing God, his wife tells him “If the Lord had desired to kill us, He would not have accepted a burnt offering and a grain offering from our hands . . .” (verse 23).

Correlation with Christ: The angel of the Lord refuses to give Manoah his name because it is wonderful (or incomprehensible), which seems to hint to his identity as Wonderful, Counselor, and Mighty God (Isaiah 9:6).

1 Chr ch21

The Angel of Yahweh executes judgement over Jerusalem–a role associated with Jesus

Zech 1:12; 3:4

Correlation with Christ: Zechariah portrays the angel of the Lord as a mediator for Israel, an opponent of Satan, and a purifier of the righteous. These are all ministries associated with Jesus in the New Testament.

_____________________

Divinity of Jesus Christ in Early Christian Writings

He is Lord of all the world, to whom Hod said at the foundation of the world, "Let us make man after our image, and after our likeness." Barnabas (c.70-130, E),1.139.

Let us reverence the Lord Jesus Christ, whose blood was given for us. Clement of Rome (c.96, W), 1.11

God Himself was manifested in human form for the renewal of eternal life. Ignatius (c.105,E), 1.58

Continue in intimate union with Jesus Christ, our God. Ignatius (c.105,E), 1.68

I pray for your happiness forever in our God, Jesus Christ. Ignatius (c.105, E), 1.96

The Christians trace the beginning of their religion to Jesus the Messiah. He is called the Son of the Most High God. It is said that God came down from heaven. He assumed flesh and clothes Himself with it from a Hebrew Virgin. And the Son of God lived in a daughter of man. Aristides (c. 125, E), 9.265

Truly God Himself, who is Almighty, the Creator of all things, and invisible has sent from heaven, and placed among men, the One who is truth, and the Holy and incomprehensible Word...God did not, as one might have imagine, as one might have imagined, send to men any servant, angel or ruler....Rather, He sent the very Creator and Fashioner of all things–by whom He made the heavens...As a King sends his son, who is also a king, so God sent Him. He sent Him as God. Letter to Diognetus (c.125-200) 1.27.

Brethren, it is fitting that you should think of Jesus Christ as of God–as the Judge of the living and the dead. Second Clement (c.150), 7.517.

The Father of the Universe has a Son. And He, being the First Begotten Word of God, is even God. Justin Martyr (c 160, E), 1.184.

The above quotes were taken from: "A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs". David W. Bercot Hendrickson Publishers, 1998 pgs. 93-94

Justin Martyr quotes Jesus as God~

•"The Father of the universe has a Son, who also being the first begotten Word of God, is even God." (Justin Martyr, First Apology, ch 63)

• "Christ is called both God and Lord of hosts." (Dialogue with Trypho, ch, 36)

• Moreover, in the diapsalm of the forty-sixth Psalm, reference is thus made to Christ: 'God went up with a shout, the Lord with the sound of a trumpet."Dialogue with Trypho, ch 37

• "Therefore these words testify explicitly that He [Christ] is witnessed to by Him who established these things, as deserving to be worshipped, as God and as Christ." - Dialogue with Trypho, ch. 63.

• Justin Martyr in Chap. LXVI. He (Justin) Proves From Isaiah That God Was Born From A Virgin. (Chapter Title, Chap. LXVI)

•"And Trypho said, "You endeavor to prove an incredible and well-nigh impossible thing;[namely], that God endured to be born and become man...some Scriptures which we mention, and which expressly prove that Christ was to suffer, to be worshipped, and [to be called] God, and which I have already recited to you, do refer indeed to Christ." (Dialogue with Trypho, ch 68)

•[Trypho to Justin] "...you say that this Christ existed as God before the ages, and that He submitted to be born and become man" 

•"Whence to God alone we render worship." (Justin Martyr, First Apology, ch 17) Yet, Justin says that they worship Jesus Christ as God.  "Therefore these words testify explicitly that He [Christ] is witnessed to by Him who established these things, as deserving to be worshipped, as God and as Christ." - Dialogue with Trypho, ch. 63.

________________________________

AI on Daniel Waterland and Samuel Clarke

 

 I asked various AI the following question. Remember to take AI answers with a grain of salt:

Who more accurately interpreted the early church fathers, Daniel Waterland or Samuel Clarke?

ChatGPT said:

This is a deep and important historical-theological question. Both Daniel Waterland and Samuel Clarke were prominent 18th-century Anglican theologians, but they had very different theological agendas, especially in how they interpreted the early Church Fathers.

To answer your question—"Who more accurately interpreted the early Church Fathers?"—we need to look at:

1. What each man believed.

2. How each used the Church Fathers.

3. How fair or historically accurate their interpretations were.

---

🧠 1. Theological Profiles

🔷 Daniel Waterland (1683–1740)

• High Church Anglican theologian.

• Defender of Nicene orthodoxy and Trinitarianism.

• Strong opponent of Arianism, Deism, and anti-Trinitarian thought.

• Believed the early Fathers faithfully preserved apostolic doctrine, especially on the Trinity, sacraments, and church authority.

• Wrote extensively on patristic theology, particularly to refute heterodox views.

🔶 Samuel Clarke (1675–1729)

• Influential but controversial Anglican theologian and philosopher.

• Advocated a subordinationist view of the Trinity (often called "Arianizing").

  • He argued that the Son is divine, but inferior to the Father in nature and authority.

• Used the Church Fathers (especially pre-Nicene ones) to argue that the early Church did not believe in consubstantiality or Nicene orthodoxy.

---

📚 2. How They Used the Fathers

Waterland:

• Deeply patristic in his method.

• Quoted and analyzed Ignatius, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Athanasius, and others to argue that:

  • The early Church believed in one divine essence shared equally by Father, Son, and Spirit.

  • The Nicene Creed was a faithful expression of what the Fathers taught.

• Argued that apparent subordinationist language in the Fathers refers to economic roles, not ontology.

Clarke:

• Selectively used early Fathers—especially Origen, Justin Martyr, and Eusebius—to support a non-Nicene reading.

• Claimed that the doctrine of the Trinity evolved and that subordination was the original view.

• Argued that later Fathers like Athanasius distorted the earlier teaching to support Nicene orthodoxy.

---

⚖️ 3. Who Interpreted the Fathers More Accurately?

🟩 Waterland is generally regarded as the more accurate interpreter, for these reasons:

• He read the Fathers in historical and theological context, aware of terminological development (e.g. how "homoousios" evolved).

• He didn't ignore or downplay subordinationist language, but contextualized it within a broader Nicene framework.

• Modern patristic scholarship generally supports Waterland’s claim that:

  Pre-Nicene Fathers had undeveloped Trinitarian language, but the core belief in the full divinity of the Son and Spirit is there in seed form.

🟥 Clarke’s approach is now seen as anachronistic and selective:

• He cherry-picked quotes and neglected broader context (e.g., the unity of worship and divine attributes ascribed to the Son).

• He read post-Enlightenment rationalism into ancient texts.

• His subordinationism is now considered a misreading of developmental theology, not a recovery of lost truth.

As J.N.D. Kelly, a leading 20th-century scholar of early Christian doctrine, put it:

“The pre-Nicene Fathers undoubtedly subordinated the Son to the Father, but this was part of the process of articulating the Trinity, not a denial of the Son’s deity.”

---

🧭 Final Verdict

Theologian	Interpretation of Church Fathers	Verdict
Daniel Waterland	Careful, contextual, patristically informed; supports Nicene orthodoxy	✅ More accurate
Samuel Clarke	Selective, rationalist, subordinationist; downplays historical development	❌ Less accurate

✅ Waterland is widely recognized as the more faithful interpreter of the early Church Fathers, especially in relation to Trinitarian theology.

Would you like to see how each of them handled a specific Father like Origen, Athanasius, or Justin Martyr?

 I asked the same question of Duck.ai

 

The question of who more accurately interpreted the early church fathers between Daniel Waterland and Samuel Clarke is a matter of scholarly debate and can depend on various factors, including the specific context of their interpretations and the theological positions they held.

Daniel Waterland (1683-1740) was an English theologian known for his defense of the Nicene orthodoxy and his opposition to Arianism. He emphasized the importance of the early church fathers in understanding Christian doctrine, particularly in relation to the Trinity and Christ's divinity. Waterland's works often sought to demonstrate the continuity of orthodox beliefs from the early church through to his own time.

Samuel Clarke (1675-1729), also an English theologian, was known for his rationalist approach to theology and his emphasis on reason in understanding faith. Clarke's interpretations of the early church fathers were often more critical and analytical, focusing on the philosophical implications of their writings. He is perhaps best known for his work "A Discourse Concerning the Unchangeable Obligations of Natural Religion," which reflects his views on morality and divine law.

In terms of accuracy, Waterland is often regarded as more aligned with traditional orthodox interpretations of the early church fathers, particularly in defending the Nicene Creed. Clarke, on the other hand, while insightful, may be seen as more innovative and less traditional in his approach.

Ultimately, the assessment of who interpreted the early church fathers more accurately can vary based on theological perspectives and the specific issues being considered. Scholars may favor one over the other depending on their own doctrinal commitments and the aspects of the early church fathers' writings they prioritize.

 I asked similar questions of Meta AI:

 

Both Daniel Waterland and Samuel Clarke had differing interpretations of the early church fathers, particularly regarding the Trinity. Waterland, a defender of catholic orthodoxy, believed the early church fathers supported the consubstantiality of the Father and Son in a generic sense. He argued that unitarians, like Clarke, misinterpreted certain texts, such as 1 Cor. 8:6, which mentions "one God, the Father" and "one Lord, Jesus Christ." Waterland claimed this passage doesn't exclude the Son from being God, but rather distinguishes between idols and the true God.

Waterland's views on the Trinity have been described as "social" with a liberal dose of negative mysterianism, emphasizing the mystery of God's nature. He insisted his interpretation was the ancient catholic view, focusing on pre-Nicene fathers and the Bible.

In contrast, Samuel Clarke's views were more aligned with Arianism, which posits Jesus as a created being, inferior to God the Father. Clarke likely interpreted the early church fathers through this lens.

Given the analysis, it seems Daniel Waterland's interpretation might be closer to traditional Trinitarian understanding, while Clarke's views lean toward unitarianism. However, both authors are known to "bend the material to their own ends," according to some critics.

Key differences in interpretation:

Trinity: Waterland supports the traditional Trinitarian view, while Clarke leans toward Arianism or unitarianism.
Scriptural interpretation: Waterland emphasizes the context of passages like 1 Cor. 8:6, arguing they don't exclude the Son's divinity, whereas Clarke likely sees these passages as supporting a hierarchical view of God and Jesus.
Early church fathers: Both authors claim the early church fathers support their views, but Waterland's interpretation seems more aligned with catholic orthodoxy ¹.

answer the question again without favoring Trinitarianism

Both Daniel Waterland and Samuel Clarke interpreted the early church fathers differently. Waterland, a staunch Trinitarian, believed the early church fathers supported the co-eternality and consubstantiality of the Father and Son. Clarke, on the other hand, had a more nuanced view, aligning with Arianism or semi-Arianism, emphasizing the Father's supremacy.

Interpretive differences:

Trinity: Waterland's interpretation emphasizes the coequality of the Father and Son, while Clarke's view highlights the Father's authority and the Son's derived divinity.
Scriptural interpretation: Both authors cite early church fathers to support their views on passages like 1 Cor. 8:6, but Clarke sees the passage as supporting a distinction between the Father and Son, with the Father as the supreme God.

Given the context, Samuel Clarke's interpretation might be seen as more accurately reflecting the pre-Nicene fathers' views, which didn't always emphasize the coequality of the Father and Son. However, both authors' interpretations are influenced by their own theological perspectives.

It's worth noting that both authors have been criticized for "bending" the early church fathers' writings to fit their own theological views. Ultimately, determining who more accurately interpreted the early church fathers depends on one's own theological perspective and understanding of the historical context.

be objective and answer the question again. Don't favor any theological position. Just tell me the truth without sugar coating.

Daniel Waterland and Samuel Clarke had differing interpretations of the early church fathers. Waterland's views were shaped by his Trinitarian perspective, while Clarke's views were influenced by Arianism or semi-Arianism.

Historically, scholars have noted that both authors engaged in selective readings of the early church fathers. Waterland's interpretation emphasized passages supporting co-eternality and consubstantiality, while Clarke focused on passages highlighting the Father's supremacy.

Objectively, it's clear that both authors' interpretations were shaped by their own theological biases. Neither Waterland nor Clarke provided a completely neutral reading of the early church fathers.

In terms of historical accuracy, both authors' interpretations have been subject to critique. Waterland's views might be seen as more reflective of post-Nicene orthodoxy, while Clarke's views might be more in line with some pre-Nicene fathers. However, both authors' interpretations are influenced by their own theological agendas.

Ultimately, determining who more accurately interpreted the early church fathers requires a nuanced understanding of the historical context and the theological perspectives of both authors.

You didn't answer the specific question. Stop fudging and stop trying to please all sides. Answer the question objectively.

Based on historical analysis, Samuel Clarke's interpretation of the early church fathers is generally considered more accurate, particularly regarding the pre-Nicene period. Clarke's views on the Trinity, which emphasized the Father's supremacy and the Son's derived divinity, align more closely with the language and theology of early Christian writers.

Daniel Waterland's interpretation, on the other hand, reflects a more developed Trinitarian theology that emerged later in Christian history. Waterland's reading of the early church fathers tends to retroject later theological categories onto earlier texts.

In historical terms, Clarke's interpretation is often seen as more faithful to the pre-Nicene fathers, while Waterland's interpretation is more representative of post-Nicene orthodoxy.