Trinity Notes: Old Testament

Showing posts with label Old Testament. Show all posts

Tuesday, July 21, 2026

A Quick Case for the Incarnation From the Old Testament

The following is a quick comment I made to a Non-messianic Jew who asked for evidence from the Tanakh [i.e. the Old Testament] for the Christian concept of the Incarnation. I used terms like "Adonai" instead of "Yahweh", and "Tanakh" instead of "Old Testament" so as not to offend their sensibilities.

The incarnation is anticipated in the the Garden of Eden when Adonai is walking in the cool of the day [Gen. 3:8]. That presupposes a theophany of an animal form, and walking is mostly descriptive of the human form. Adonai appears in human form to Abraham in Gen. 18-19. The elders see God in human form [in vision or theophany] in Exo. 24:10.

Exodus 24:9-10 ESV

[9] Then Moses and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel went up, [10] and they saw the God of Israel. There was under his feet as it were a pavement of sapphire stone, like the very heaven for clearness.

Most Trinitarians believe the pre-incarnate Jesus is both the Angel/malak/messenger of the LORD and the Word of the LORD in the Tanakh. The Angel is called "Adonai" simpliciter in Zech 3:1-2 as well as Judg 6:16. The Word/LORD stood before Samuel and apparently appeared visibly at times [cf. 1 Sam 3; Gen 15:1].

1 Samuel 3:1, 4, 7, 10, 21 ESV

[1] Now the boy Samuel was ministering to the LORD in the presence of Eli. And the word of the LORD was rare in those days; there was no frequent VISION.

[4] Then the LORD called Samuel, and he said, “Here I am!”

[7] Now Samuel did not yet know the LORD, and the word of the LORD had not yet been REVEALED to him.

[10] And the ***LORD CAME AND STOOD***, calling as at other times, “Samuel! Samuel!” And Samuel said, “Speak, for your servant hears.”

[21] And the LORD ***APPEARED*** again at Shiloh, for the LORD REVEALED himself to Samuel at Shiloh by the word of the LORD.

Genesis 15:1 ESV

[1] After these things the word of the LORD came to Abram in a ***VISION***: “Fear not, Abram, I am your shield; your reward shall be very great.”

Hagar sees the Malak/Angel in Gen. 16 and says she saw God, and the narrator doesn't correct her, but on the contrary calls him Adonai. Adonai's name/character/nature is in the Angel [Exo 23:20-21] who apparently has the hypothetical ability to forgive sins, and must be obeyed. He apparently is bowed down to in obeisance, if not worshipped in Josh 5:13-15. He claims to be the one who brought Israel out of Egypt into the Promised Land, and talks about his covenant in Judg 2:1ff. He's apparently identified as Adonai in Hos 12:4-5 in reference to Jacob's wrestling an angel.

The Messiah has two origins ["comings forth"], a human Israelite one and one that is from ancient times in Micah 5:2. Reminiscent of the incarnation. The Son of Man in Dan. 7:13-14 represents BOTH the Kingdom of the Messiah made up of the saints, as well as representing the Messiah himself. We know this because he's compared & contrasted with the other beastial pagan Kingdoms who represent both the PEOPLE and the KINGS themselves.

Daniel 7:17 ESV

[17] ‘These FOUR great BEASTS are FOUR **KINGS** who shall arise out of the earth.

So, the "Son of Man" figure in Daniel 7 is both the people of the Kingdom AND the Leader/King as well. And as an individual he has both human and divine characteristics reminiscent of the incarnation of having two natures [vera homo, vera deus]. On the one hand he's described as the "son of man" [a common term referring to a human, as Ezekiel was called], yet on the other hand he has the prerogative of deities in the Ancient Near East of riding the clouds. In doing theological battle with their pagan neighbors the Jewish Bible writers described Adonai like the other pagan deities as a cloud rider. But with Adonai as the True Cloud Rider. Six times Adonai is described as such in the Tanakh. One of those times is when it is applied to the Danielic Son of Man to whom dominion of all peoples is given. And he is served [if I'm not mistaken] using a word [in Aramaic?] that has religious connotations of worship.

Even the Targums, the Aramaic paraphrases of portions of the Tanakh, describe the "Word of the LORD" in human-like form and personification. See these excerpts from the Targumim:

Word of the Lord in the Targums

http://juchre.org/articles/word.htm

MUCH more could be said. But that's a brief summary. I don't have time for a debate or an involved back and forth. I've given enough to show that Christians do have some answers, and to whet the appetite of those who read this comment. If anyone wants more, see Anthony Rogers' videos on YouTube, and his online articles.

Wednesday, October 22, 2025

Is Jesus the Angel of the Lord in the Hebrew Bible? Dr. Brown Responds to Rabbi Singer

Is Jesus the Angel of the Lord in the Hebrew Bible? Dr. Brown Responds to Rabbi Singer

https://youtu.be/p96tFCGKPyY

Wednesday, July 9, 2025

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.

Friday, August 11, 2023

Rabbi Tovia Singer is Wrong About the Trinity by Gavin Ortlund

Rabbi Tovia Singer is Wrong About the Trinity by Gavin Ortlund
https://youtu.be/1Xtl6jR2SdI

Tuesday, March 21, 2023

A Jewish Defense of the Trinity - The Case for Messiah

A Jewish Defense of the Trinity - The Case for Messiah

https://youtu.be/p7D2djAnAbI

Saturday, August 13, 2022

Heiser, Mormonism, and the Divine Council of Psalm 82

The following are links to Michael Heiser blogs and papers on the Divine Council as it relates to Mormonism. Specifically how some Mormons are abusing his research to promote their views.

Heiser, Mormonism, and the Divine Council of Psalm 82 by Michael Heiser

You've Seen on Elohim, You've Seen Them All? A Critique of Mormonism's Use of Psalm 82 by Michael Heiser [or HERE]

“Monotheism, Polytheism, Monolatry, or Henotheism? Toward an Honest (and Orthodox) Assessment of Divine Plurality in the Hebrew Bible” by Michael S. Heiser, PhD [or HERE]

Wednesday, November 3, 2021

Micah 5:2 And Excerpts from Various Sources

The following is adapted from a Trinitarian response I gave to a Unitarian on Facebook regarding Micah 5:2.

The Hebrew of Micah 5:2 isn't so clear that we can certainly say whether it's everlasting or whether it had an origination in time. Isaiah 9:6 refers to the messiah as "father of eternity" ["Everlasting Father" in the KJV]. It has the meaning of "possessor of (the attribute of) eternity." That's more in keeping with an eternal origination, rather than an origination that began at a finite time ago in the distant past.

Robert Morey states in his book "The Trinity: Evidences and Issues" on page 312:
//Micah 5:2 is an example of Hebrew parallelism in which the second phrase expands upon and goes beyond the first phrase to deepen its meaning. In this sense, you go from the lesser to the greater as you proceed from the first phrase to the second phrase. It is a classic example of climactic parallelism.
The first word [HEBREW] "long ago" is found many times in the Hebrew text of the Old Testament and has several different meanings depending on the context. When used geographically, it refers to east as opposed to west (i.e., Isa. 9:12; Ezek. 25:10). When used chronologically, it means "before" (i.e., Prov. 8:22). It is also used to describe the eternity of God in (Deut. 33:27; Ps. 74:12; Hab. 1:12).
Since Micah is using climactic parallelism, he begins by saying that the "goings forth" of the Messiah took place "a very long time ago." How far back "his goings forth" goes is determined by the words of the second phrase.
The Hebrew word [HEBREW] "eternity" used in the second phrase, is found in the Old Testament 420 times. Langenscheidt defines it as:
time immemorial, time past, eternity, distant future, duration, everlasting time, pl. ages, endless time.

All the standard Hebrew Lexicons and grammars agree with Langenscheidt. It is a word which was used to contrast one thing to another. The mountains are seemingly "everlasting" when contrasted with the brief life span of man (Hab. 3:6). But when used of God in such places as Psalms 90:2, it means that He is eternal in contrast to the universe which had a beginning and will have an end.
In Micah 5:2, the prophet emphasizes that the Messiah not only pre-existed "a long time ago," but He has in fact existed "from eternity!" In Lange's Commentary, Kleinnert pointed out that Micah's use of the word [HEBREW] "gives a strict proof of the antemundane life of the Messiah." Laetsch's Commentary states that [HEBREW] here means "the timeless eons of eternity."

A Liberal Objection Answered

Some liberal commentators have attempted to reduce "the days of eternity" to just "a long time ago." But this is grammatically faulty because they are going backwards. In this kind of parallelism, you go from the lesser to the greater and not the other way around. Thus, the parallelism in Micah 5:2 reveals that the Messiah was "from a long time ago," i.e., "from days of eternity." //
-Morey, The Trinity: Evidence and Issues

[I've heard that] If the author wanted to refer to an everlasting origination, then he used the only Hebrew words and phrasing available to him to mean that. Also, there are some Hebrew authorities who do think it more likely refers to an everlasting origination, even though there is technically no specific Hebrew term for it.

See also the following commentaries here:
https://biblehub.com/commentaries/micah/5-2.htm

Benson Commentary states:
//Whose goings forth have been of old from everlasting — Hebrew, מימי עולם מקדם, rendered by the LXX., απ αχης, εξ ημεων αιωνος; and exactly in the same sense by the Vulgate, ab initio, a diebus æternitatis, from the beginning, from the days of eternity. So these Hebrew expressions must of necessity signify in divers places of Scripture, being used to signify the eternity of God: see Psalm 55:19; Psalm 90:2; Proverbs 8:23; Habakkuk 1:12. The words naturally import an original, distinct from the birth of Christ mentioned in the foregoing sentence, which original is here declared to be from all eternity.//

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary states:
//goings forth … from everlasting—The plain antithesis of this clause, to "come forth out of thee" (from Beth-lehem), shows that the eternal generation of the Son is meant. The terms convey the strongest assertion of infinite duration of which the Hebrew language is capable (compare Ps 90:2; Pr 8:22, 23; Joh 1:1). Messiah's generation as man coming forth unto God to do His will on earth is from Beth-lehem; but as Son of God, His goings forth are from everlasting. //

The famous OT commentary Keil and Delitzsch Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament states:
//The future Ruler of Israel, whose goings forth reach back into eternity, is to spring from the insignificant Bethlehem, like His ancestor, king David.//

see also:

Christ’s Origin? Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Study of Micah 5:2

http://www.doorwaychristianoutreach.info/439585463

Michael L. Brown holds a Ph.D. in Near Eastern Languages and Literatures from New York University and has served as a visiting or adjunct professor at Southern Evangelical Seminary, Gordon Conwell Theological Seminary (Charlotte), Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, Fuller Theological Seminary, Denver Theological Seminary, the King’s Seminary, and Regent University School of Divinity.
Michael Brown has almost 3 page addressing Micah 5:2 in volume 3 of his "Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus." Here's an excerpt of pages 38-40:
//... Which translation is right? It comes down to the rendering of the Hebrew phrase describing the nature of the Messiah's origins, miqedem mi-yemey ‘olam. The first word simply means "from of old" and is used elsewhere in Micah to refer back to God's promises to the patriarchs, which he made "from days of qedem" (Micah 7:20, rendered in the King James with "from the days of old"). The next two words, however, would most naturally be translated "from eternity" (literally from "days of eternity"), unless context indicated a translation of "from ancient days" (in other words, way back in the very distant past). In most cases in the Scriptures, ‘olam clearly means eternity, as in Psalm 90:2, where God's existence is described as me‘olam we‘ad‘olam, "from eternity to eternity" (cf. NJPSV). There are, however, some cases where ‘olam cannot mean "eternal" but rather "for a long time" (either past or present). How then does Micah use the word?
In Micah 2:9; 4:5, 7, ‘olam clearly means "forever," as commonly rendered in both Jewish and Christian versions. This would point clearly to a similar rendering just a few verses later in 5:2[1]. In Micah 7:14, however, the expression "as in the days of ‘olam" is used in a non-eternal sense, the whole verse being translated in the King James with, "Feed thy people with thy rod, the flock of thine heritage, which dwell solitarily in the wood, in the midst of Carmel: let them feed in Bashan and Gilead, as in the days of old." This indicates we cannot be dogmatic about the translation of Micah 5:2[1], since the context allows for an "eternal" or merely "ancient" meaning...... [Then after about four paragraphs that I'll skip over because it's too long for me to type up, Michael Brown states].......So then, Micah 5:2[1] can also be understood as pointing to the Messiah's eternal nature, undergirding our reading of Isaiah 9:6[5] as pointing to the Messiah's divinity."

[[I typed up the quotations from Morey and Brown myself. I apologize if there are any typos in the quotations. Also, some Hebrew words were used and instead of reproducing them, I just typed [HEBREW] because I don't know the Hebrew language and so couldn't reproduce them.]]

The article I linked to above make some interesting points, including the fact that "goings forth" in the Hebrew is plural, not singular. Why plural? The article has its own explanation. Maybe it's right. But I wonder and speculate that maybe the first phrase that Morey talks about in the quote I gave might refer to Jesus' origin as to His human nature which has a finite past in His human ancestry, while the second phrase might refer to Jesus' origin as to His divine nature which is from everlasting/eternity. Similar to how Rom. 9:5 refers to both Jesus' human and divine natures.

Monday, June 21, 2021

Tony Costa and Anthony Rogers on Genesis 1:26: Trinity or Divine Council?

Two of my favorite Trinitarian defenders in one video:

Tony Costa and Anthony Rogers on Genesis 1:26: Trinity or Divine Council?
https://youtu.be/ojODpoaw210

Thursday, June 3, 2021

Contra Michael Heiser on Genesis 1:26 by Anthony Rogers

Contra Michael Heiser on Genesis 1:26 by Anthony Rogers
https://youtu.be/_9o59mgmQ3I

Monday, May 24, 2021

How To Find Jesus in the Old Testament [Video Playlist] by Mike Winger

Even though Mike Winger isn't a trained scholar like the kind of experts I usually like to link to in this blog, the following playlist of videos has pastor Mike Winger showing the places in the Old Testament where he believes Jesus is found in prophecies, types, shadows, emblems etc. I don't agree with everything he says, but most of what he does say are things most Trinitarians like myself would say.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWlpQauXiTU&list=PLZ3iRMLYFlHsHyvMtfgOgSPU6zEnCvxUO

Sunday, February 28, 2021

Is the "Word of the Lord" ever described as a "he" or "him" in the Old Testament?

In a facebook group someone pasted the following assertion:

//Did you know? The word of the Lord is never described as a "he" or "him" in the OT!//

I posted the following verses in the ASV as evidence that the "Word of Yehovah/Jehovah/Yahweh" is sometimes described as a "he" or "him". At least in some English translations. Not knowing Hebrew, I can't address the Hebrew grammar.

1 Kings 19:9 [ASV] And he came thither unto a cave, and lodged there; and, behold, the word of JEHOVAH came to him, and he said unto him, What doest thou here, Elijah?

Here "the word of Jehovah/Yehovah/Yahweh" seems to be referred to as a specific person who is called a "HE". Similar to 1 Samuel chapter 3.

1 Sam. 3:1 And the child Samuel ministered unto JEHOVAH before Eli. And the word of JEHOVAH was precious in those days; there was no frequent VISION.

Admittedly, the "word of Jehovah" in the OT is sometimes a reference to hearing the voice of God. However here, the arrival of the "word of Jehovah" seems to be associated with a VISION of a person. Not just something auditory. This seems to be conformed in verses 7, 10 & 21.

7 Now Samuel did not yet know JEHOVAH, neither was the word of JEHOVAH yet REVEALED unto him.
21 And JEHOVAH appeared again in Shiloh; for JEHOVAH REVEALED himself to Samuel in Shiloh BY the word of JEHOVAH.

In verse 10 the word of Jehovah is simply referred to as "Jehovah" and is said to have STOOD by Samuel. Similar to how the Angel of Jehovah is simply called "Jehovah" in Zech. 3.

1 Sam 3:10 And JEHOVAH came, and STOOD, and called as at other times, Samuel, Samuel. Then Samuel said, Speak; for thy servant heareth.

Compare with Zech chapter 3.

Zech. 3:1 And he showed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of JEHOVAH, and Satan standing at his right hand to be his adversary.
2 And JEHOVAH said unto Satan, JEHOVAH rebuke thee, O Satan; yea, JEHOVAH that hath chosen Jerusalem rebuke thee: is not this a brand plucked out of the fire?

Notice how the "Angel of Jehovah" in verse 1 is referred again and simply called "Jehovah". Some Unitarians say that any angel can be called "Jehovah" when it's rightfully representing Almighty God. As a Trinitarian I disagree. I believe that the divine name can only be applied to someone who is truly and fully God. Since it involves the very nature and character [and by implication essence] of God. Therefore more than one person shares the nature of highest divinity God. That pluritarianism is consistent with Trinitarianism.

Similarly, in Jeremiah 1 the word of Jehovah came to Jeremiah. In verse 9 it says, "Then JEHOVAH PUT FORTH HIS HAND, and touched my mouth; and JEHOVAH said unto me, Behold, I have put my words in thy mouth:"

Apparently, the Jehovah came in bodily form and touched Jeremiah and this person is also referred to as "the Word of Jehovah". Again, Similar to 1 Samuel 3 and [of the Angel of Jehovah in] Zechariah 3.

Compare Ezek. 1:3
3 the word of JEHOVAH came expressly unto Ezekiel the priest, the son of Buzi, in the land of the Chaldeans by the river Chebar; AND THE HAND OF JEHOVAH WAS THERE UPON HIM.

Monday, November 30, 2020

The Old Testament Witness to the Trinity by Anthony Rogers

Anthony Rogers, my favorite debater for the Trinity, presents an ongoing video series on the Old Testament Witness to the Trinity. This is a topic that I think is VERY important and useful. When done properly, this answers and addresses many objections and objectors to Christianity. If you can prove the Trinity is taught in the Old Testament, it proves that Christianity is the heir of Judaism to Jews, disproves Islamic monotheism and Islamic objections to the Trinity, and presents evidence for the truth of Christianity that ought to make atheist reconsider whether Christianity might actually be true.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBnoIhujt6A&list=PLnLlymBIRkYbgTFpgNLeyL9MnglQ3cdqp

Did Eve Believe Her Firstborn Child Was the Messiah, God Himself?

One of my favorite passages that suggests that Jesus is divine is Gen. 4:1. I don't use it as a knockdown argument. It's not the first passage I go to in order to prove the full deity of Christ. But it's one of my favorite to use AFTER I've presented the other more solid evidences and arguments. Anthony Rogers does a great job presenting the evidence for why Gen. 4:1 suggests Jesus is fully God in his video series linked below. I consider Anthony Rogers the best living debater for the doctrine of the Trinity. See all his videos in his YouTube channel. Below is the link to his series on Gen. 4:1:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sd__Dr9g9Ew&list=PLnLlymBIRkYZVLpacWElLK7zOmEAl95_H

Sunday, October 25, 2020

Toviah Singer and Genesis 1:26 by Anthony Rogers

Tovia Singer is a well known rabbi who argues against Christianity and Christian Trinitarianism. Here's a video where Anthony Rogers addresses rabbi Tovia Singer's comments on Gen. 1:26. Rogers' comments in this video is in addition to his other main comments on Gen. 1:26 in other videos for example HERE [linked again below].

Toviah Singer and Genesis 1:26
https://youtu.be/7sJGmAALEa4

Again, the above video presupposes you have seen Anthony Rogers' videos on the topic of Gen. 1:26. For example here:

The Trinity in Genesis? Two Objections (The Trinity in Jewish and Christian Scriptures, Part 2)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCMHAdZBJcM&list=PLuXxHEHGRVu9Et4L2kxCdoUCcJeheDJST&index=3

Wednesday, October 14, 2020

The Deity of Israel's Messiah by Dr. Jonathan McLatchie

The Deity of Israel's Messiah by Dr. Jonathan McLatchie
https://youtu.be/ZLUM4hSW0ig

Sunday, June 7, 2020

DEBATE: Does the Old Testament Teach That the Angel of the LORD Is Yahweh?

Another EXCELLENT Debate with Anthony Rogers, who I think is one of the best defenders of the doctrine of the Trinity living today. Here he debates L.J. Thriepland who does a good job defending his view. But Rogers' arguments and evidences were, in my opinion, too strong for Thriepland to overcome. Check out my other blogs linking to Anthony Rogers' materials.