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.

Why is the Holy Spirit Missing in Matt. 11:27 & Luke 10:22

 A Unitarian on Facebook posted the following conundrum for Trinitarians. I'll quote his comment and then post my Trinitarian answer.

In Matthew 11:27, Jesus says, "No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him." 

[1] This disclosure by Jesus is perhaps the strongest that explodes the Trinity myth. If any one would know whether the Godhead consisted of a triune Godhead, it would be Jesus. But he does not acknowledge such a concept.

[2] Jesus delimits the divinely established intimacy between God and himself to only the Father and himself. The Son chooses to reveal only the Father. The Spirit is omitted. The trinitarians cannot provide any satisfying explanation as to why.

[3] Can it be that the supposed person of the Spirit does not know the Son?! Can it be that the supposed person of the Spirit does not know even the Father as well as the Son?! 

[4] Other Scripture writers affirm this fact that explodes the Trinity myth: Luke 10:22; John 10:15; 17:20-26; James 1:1, 27; 3:9).

My answer to this conundrum:

Jesus in the verse is alluding to the incomprehensibility of the Father and of the Son [cf. Prov. 30:4]. Neither can be exhaustively comprehended by humans, yet both can be truly apprehended. But only through revelation. And only to those the Son chooses. Which parallels what Jesus said about the Spirit as sovereign over becoming children of God [i.e. coming to know God according to Matt. 11:27d].

John 3:8 LSB [[[cf. 1 Cor. 12:3, 11; and possibly also Heb. 2:4]]]
[8] The wind blows where it wishes and you hear its sound, but do not know where it comes from and where it is going; so is everyone who has been born of the Spirit.”

The reason the Spirit isn't mentioned in Matt. 11:27 is because the full revelation of the Holy Spirit hadn't been yet given. Only hinted at. See John chapters 13-17 [called by scholars Jesus' "Farewell Discourse" or "Upper Room Discourse"] where Jesus promises the future fulness of the Spirit's coming and personal WITNESS in addition to the Father and Son [John 15:26]. Hence the OT spiritual hint of witnesses needing to be two or three to count. Jesus in those chapters violates Greek grammar to affirm the true personality of the Spirit by referring to him in the masculine even though the word for Spirit in Greek is neuter. See my blog below regarding this:

https://trinitynotes.blogspot.com/2013/12/the-holy-spirit-contradicts-accidence.html

But even Paul teaches that the Holy Spirit shares in being able to exhaustively comprehend God, and therefore being divine Himself, the third person of the Trinity.

1 Corinthians 2:10-11 LSB
[10]  But to us God revealed them through the Spirit, for the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God. [11] For who among men knows the depths of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so the depths of God no one knows except the Spirit of God.

Notice how the Spirit reveals like Jesus reveals in Matt. 11:27. Notice too that the Holy Spirit knows the Father exhaustively as the Son does in Matt. 11:27. Just like Jesus in Matt. 11:27, only an infinitely omniscience person [i.e. the Spirit here, whereas the Son in Matt. 11:27] can infinitely comprehend the infinite Father. Then a few verses later Paul says in verse 16:

1 Corinthians 2:16 LSB
[16] For who has known the mind of the Lord, that he will direct Him? But we have the mind of Christ.

This is a clear allusion to Isa. 40:13 which can be translated as:

Isaiah 40:13 LSB
[13] Who has encompassed the Spirit of Yahweh, Or as His counselor has informed Him?

Isaiah 40:13 ESV
[13]  Who has measured the Spirit of the Lord, or what man shows him his counsel?

A verse which also alludes to the personal wisdom of the Holy Spirit and His incomprehensibility.

Remember Jesus said:

John 14:16-17 LSB
[16]  And I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Advocate, that He may be with you forever; [17] the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not see Him or know Him. You know Him because He abides with you and will be in you.

John 14:26 LSB
[26] But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you.

John 15:26 LSB
[26]  “When the Advocate comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will bear witness about Me,

John 16:7-8 LSB
[7] But I tell you the truth, it is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Advocate will not come to you; but if I go, I will send Him to you. [8] And He, when He comes, will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment;

John 16:13-15 LSB
[13] But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak from Himself, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come. [14] He will glorify Me, for He will take of Mine and will disclose it to you. [15] All things that the Father has are Mine; therefore I said that He takes of Mine and will disclose it to you.

[[[Notice how verse 15 sounds like Matt. 11:27. Yet, in this verse it's the Spirit who does the Revealing. This is also why Matt. 11:27 and it's parallel in Luke 10:22 is often called by Scholars the "Johannine Thunderbolt" because those verses sound like they would come from the Gospel of John, but aren't in GJohn but surprisingly in GMatt and GLuke.]]]

He responded:

What you say is not convincing and can be explained better in my book "Israel's Messiah--Restoring Jewish Christology". The Spirit of God was well known to Moses and the prophets as the presence of God (Numb 11 and Exod 33 and Psalm 139, etc). In heaven's throne room, only God Almighty and the Lamb Jesus are on the throne being worshiped. The Spirit is before the throne and distributed as seven Spirits (Rev 1:4; 3:1; 4:5; 5:6). The Spirit is nowhere praised or prayed to. Not even the Father or Jesus speak directly to the Spirit. The apostles never speak directly to the Spirit even though the Spirit, as God's interacting presence in the church, does speak to the church. The Spirit is like God's soul, which is not another person distinct from himself just like our spirits are not distinct from ourselves. When Jesus says "another" Advocate, he is speaking as a man, which makes God's Spirit the other Advocate. You have not provided a sound argument.

I responded:

 Part 1 of 2

//What you say is not convincing and can be explained better in my book "Israel's Messiah--Restoring Jewish Christology".//

If you can advertise something, then I can advertise my freely accessible blog on the Full Deity of the Holy Spirit.

People can ***SKIP DOWN*** to the Scriptural evidence on that blog after the recommended links.

https://trinitynotes.blogspot.com/2014/08/the-full-deity-of-holy-spirit.html

First off, I want to point out that EVERY OTHER immaterial spirit mentioned in the Bible is a distinct person. Why assume the Holy Spirit is the sole exception out of the "myriads and myriads" mentioned in the Bible [e.g. Rev. 5:11]? Especially given that the Holy Spirit is described with all the attributes of personality in the Bible. He has a mind, a will, emotions, speaks, teaches, guides, etc. See my blog above.

//Not even the Father or Jesus speak directly to the Spirit. //

The Father sends the Spirit according John 14:26. Jesus sends the Spirit from the Father according to John 15:26. Given that Jesus' Farewell Discourse is among the greatest passages affirming the distinct personality of the Holy Spirit, and given that sent people are usually spoken to when being sent, that implies the Father and the Son speak to the Spirit.

The following is an EXPLICIT PROOFTEXT. Notice John 16:13.

John 16:13 LSB

[13] But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak from Himself, *BUT WHATEVER HE HEARS*, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come.

Who is the Spirit hearing from? It's either the Father and/or the Son. Meaning one or both speak to the Spirit.

But even if there were no record of either the Father or Son speaking to the Spirit, so what? The Holy Spirit takes a backseat approach. He doesn't draw attention to Himself because His main role is to magnify Jesus according to John 16:14.

See my blog:

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

https://trinitynotes.blogspot.com/2014/09/all-three-persons-of-trinity-mentioned.html

//The Spirit of God was well known to Moses and the prophets as the presence of God (Numb 11 and Exod 33 and Psalm 139, etc).//

And He was a person in the OT too. When the Spirit hovered over the waters it can be translated "brooding" as fowl brood over their chicks. Something which living things can only do. The Spirit could be emotionally grieved/vexed [Isa. 63:10; Eph. 4:30]; speaks [2 Sam. 23:1-3]; rebelled against [Ps. 106:33] et cetera. One can see more evidence from both the OT & NT in my blog on the Holy Spirit linked above.

//In heaven's throne room, only God Almighty and the Lamb Jesus are on the throne being worshiped. The Spirit is before the throne and distributed as seven Spirits (Rev 1:4; 3:1; 4:5; 5:6). //

The beginning of the book of Revelation starting in v. 4 has grace and peace being given by the Father, the seven Spirits, & Son. This blessing of "grace and peace" is a unique divine prerogative and therefore implies the divinity of all three. The number seven refers to fulness of the Spirit [cf. Isa. 11:2], just as the seven horns of the Lamb [Rev. 5:6] doesn't deny the unity of the Lamb. The same verse says the seven eyes of the Lamb are the seven Spirits of God. The NT teaches that the Spirit of Christ is the same Spirit of God. This fits in with the Trinitarian doctrine of perichoresis/circumincession. See my blogs:

The Spirit of Jesus

http://trinitynotes.blogspot.com/2014/09/the-spirit-of-jesus.html

Do the Father and the Son Love the Holy Spirit?

http://trinitynotes.blogspot.com/2016/05/do-father-and-son-love-holy-spirit.html

Revelation 22:1

[1] Then he showed me a river of the water of life, bright as crystal, coming from the throne of God and of the Lamb,

Notice the water of life [i.e. the Holy Spirit as per John 7:36-39] is coming from the throne. Implying the equal royalty and divinity of the Spirit. The Spirit is sovereign as God as to which gifts are given to people [1 Cor. 12:11]. Yahweh describes Himself like living waters in Jer. 2:13. From a Trinitarian point of view, it could possibly be the Holy Spirit speaking when it says:

Jeremiah 2:13 LSB

[13] “For My people have done two evils: They have forsaken ME, THE FOUNTAIN OF LIVING WATERS, To hew for themselves cisterns, Broken cisterns That can hold no water.

Part 2 of 2

//The Spirit is nowhere praised or prayed to.//

See my blog:

Praying to and Worshipping the Holy Spirit

http://trinitynotes.blogspot.com/2014/08/praying-to-and-worshipping-holy-spirit.html

//The apostles never speak directly to the Spirit even though the Spirit, as God's interacting presence in the church, does speak to the church. //

See my blog on praying to the Holy Spirit linked above. Also, fellowship with the Spirit implies conversation [2 Cor. 13:14]. To say otherwise would be unusual and strange. The Holy Spirit teaches and guides, and if a person, then a Teacher & Guide. Students and disciples normatively speak to their teachers & guides.

//The Spirit is like God's soul, which is not another person distinct from himself just like our spirits are not distinct from ourselves. //

Romans 8:26-27 LSB

[26] And in the same way the Spirit also helps our weakness, for we do not know how to pray as we should, but the Spirit Himself INTERCEDES for us with groanings too deep for words; [27] and He who searches the hearts knows what the MIND OF THE SPIRIT IS, because He intercedes for the saints according to the will of God.

That the Holy Spirit has a mind distinct from the Father and intercedes TO the Father on our behalf doesn't fit with your reductionistic understanding of the Holy Spirit.

//When Jesus says "another" Advocate, he is speaking as a man, which makes God's Spirit the other Advocate. You have not provided a sound argument.//

As a Trinitarian I believe that since the incarnation the 2nd person of the Trinity is both truly man and truly God. So, I have no problem saying Jesus speaks as a man, because Jesus has two natures. A divine nature, and a human nature. I don't know enough about your eccentric views to respond to your "Advocate" comment. The Trinitarian understanding of the Holy Spirit being another Advocate takes the text at face value and is less Ad Hoc than what you're trying to promote because we're not eisegetically imposing onto the text saying that the the 2nd Advocate JUST IS God's "soul" [simpliciter] as you do. Whatever "soul" means in your system. There are Trinitarian models [e.g. Augustine's] that also makes a weak analogy between three aspects of a human individual without falling into Sabellianism or modalism.

I admit there are passages that seem to imply the Holy Spirit is kind of like the "soul" of the Father. But the same Holy Spirit is also implied to be kind of like the "soul" of Jesus [Rom. 8:9; Gal. 4:6; 1 Pet. 1:11; 2 Cor. 3:16-17]. Which is it? And how can both be true? With the limited understanding I think I might have of your view, you emphasize the oneness or unity to the detriment of the distinctness of the three. And so your view can't really explain or encompass passages like Rom. 8:26. While I think the Trinitarian view can affirm both with some explanation.

The following two links below I think help explain the conundrum from a Trinitarian perspective given our doctrine of perichoresis [also called circumincession]. Both terms describe the mutual indwelling and interpenetration of the persons of the Trinity, emphasizing their unity and inseparability. Both terms aim to convey the idea that each person of the Trinity (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) is fully present in the others, without losing their distinctness or individuality. This concept is central to Trinitarian theology, highlighting the mysterious and dynamic unity of the Godhead.

1. My blog:

The Spirit of Jesus

http://trinitynotes.blogspot.com/2014/09/the-spirit-of-jesus.html

2. Also Jonathan Edwards' speculative essay that I find attractive and which has some plausibly to me. He kind of echos some things written by Aquinas. Edwards can help explain the conundrum I mentioned above.

An Unpublished Essay on the Trinity by Jonathan Edwards

https://www.ccel.org/ccel/edwards/trinity/files/trinity.html

He responded:

I looked at your blog. You are not worthy of my time to read seriously because you use circular argumentation with typical trinitarian assumptions and speculations: ["But even if there weren't any Biblical data supporting prayer to the Holy Spirit, that would not itself invalidate the practice. Since, if there's sufficient evidence elsewhere that imply or teach (directly or indirectly) that the Holy Spirit is God, then it would naturally seem to be permissible."] Moses knew of the activity and dispensation of God's Spirit (which is only his special presence and power interacting with his people), but Moses does not teach Israel to worship the Spirit alongside Yahweh. Everything that was to be known about God's essence and being was already disclosed through Moses to the covenanted people for proper worship and service. The later prophets disclose the plan of salvation but nothing new about the being of God.

I responded:

Will you at least acknowledge the point I made, contrary to your claim, that the Father and/or the Son speaks to the Holy Spirit EXPLICITLY in John 16:13 and IMPLICITLY John 14:26 & 15:26? 

Notice the similarity between John 16:13 and other verses about Jesus: 

John 16:13 LSB

[13] But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak from Himself, ***BUT WHATEVER HE HEARS***, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come. 

COMPARE WITH 

John 5:30 LSB

[30] “I can do nothing from Myself. AS I HEAR, I judge; and My judgment is righteous, because I do not seek My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me.

John 8:26 LSB

[26] I have many things to say and to judge concerning you, but He who sent Me is true; and the things WHICH I HEARD FROM HIM, these I am saying to the world.” 

John 8:40 LSB

[40] But now you are seeking to kill Me, a man who has told you the truth, WHICH I HEARD FROM GOD. This Abraham did not do. 

John 15:15 LSB

[15] No longer do I call you slaves, for the slave does not know what his master is doing; but I have called you friends, for all things that I HAVE HEARD FROM MY FATHER I have made known to you. 

Jesus prays to the Father in John 11 by speaking to Him. In Rom. 8 when the Holy Spirit intercedes, it only makes sense if the Holy Spirit speaks to the Father. It even implies the Spirit has a MIND distinct from the Father's mind. 

John 11:41 LSB

[41] So they removed the stone. Then Jesus raised His eyes, and said, “Father, I thank You that You have heard Me. 

COMPARE WITH: 

Romans 8:26-27 LSB

[26] And in the same way the Spirit also helps our weakness, for we do not know how to pray as we should, but THE SPIRIT HIMSELF INTERCEDES for us with groanings too deep for words; [27] and He who searches the hearts knows what the MIND OF THE SPIRIT is, because He intercedes for the saints according to the will of God. 

//I looked at your blog. You are not worthy of my time to read seriously because you use circular argumentation with typical trinitarian assumptions and speculations:// 

The main blog where I argue for the personality and deity of the Holy Spirit us this this one below. If you're going to read just one of my blogs for evidence of the Holy Spirit being the 3rd person of the Trinity, it's this one: 

https://trinitynotes.blogspot.com/2014/08/the-full-deity-of-holy-spirit.html 

//Moses knew of the activity and dispensation of God's Spirit (which is only his special presence and power interacting with his people), but Moses does not teach Israel to worship the Spirit alongside Yahweh.// 

That discounts the principle of Progressive Revelation. That God reveals more and more down Redemptive History. Moreover there are hints of it throughout the OT. Like the triple mention of God in the Shema. Like the triple reference to God being "holy, holy, holy." The triple reference to God in the Aaronic Blessing. The teaching of the number of witnesses need to be two or three. 

Deuteronomy 6:4 LSB

[4] “Hear, O Israel! Yahweh [[[FIRST reference]]] is our God [[[SECOND reference]]], Yahweh [[[THIRD reference]]] is one! 

The word "one" [echad] can allow for compound unity like one cluster of grapes.

Isaiah 6:3 LSB [[cf. Rev. 4:8]]

[3] And one called out to another and said, “Holy, Holy, Holy, is Yahweh of hosts; The whole earth is full of His glory.”

Numbers 6:24-26 LSB

[24] ¶Yahweh bless you, and keep you; [25] ¶Yahweh make His face shine on you, And be gracious to you; [26] ¶Yahweh lift up His face on you, And give you peace.’

Dan. 9:19

O Lord, hear; O Lord, forgive. O Lord, pay attention and act. Delay not, for your own sake, O my God, because your city and your people are called by your name."

Isa. 33:22

For the LORD is our judge; the LORD is our lawgiver; the LORD is our king; he will save us.

// Everything that was to be known about God's essence and being was already disclosed through Moses to the covenanted people for proper worship and service. The later prophets disclose the plan of salvation but nothing new about the being of God.// 

As the famous theologian B.B. Warfield said:

//The Old Testament may be likened to a chamber richly furnished but dimly lighted; the introduction of light brings into it nothing which was not in it before; but it brings out into clearer view much of what is in it but was only dimly or even not at all perceived before. The mystery of the Trinity is not revealed in the Old Testament; but the mystery of the Trinity underlies the Old Testament revelation, and here and there almost comes into view. Thus the Old Testament revelation of God is not corrected by the fuller revelation which follows it, but only perfected, extended and enlarged. //

He responded:

Not at all! Neither the Father nor Jesus speak directly to the Spirit in John 16:13 !! Warfield contradicts himself shamefully when he admits that the "mystery of the Trinity is not revealed in the Old Testament" !! But then, with self-deception, wants to pretend that he sees it underlying the OT "here and there"! No one in the NT offers an OT verse to supposedly support the supposed secretive revelation of the Trinity! And Paul specifically says that he taught nothing that was not found in Moses and the prophets (Acts 26:22). And in the scene of heaven in Revelation, the Spirit is not worshiped on the throne or anywhere else!

I responded: 

//Not at all! Neither the Father nor Jesus speak directly to the Spirit in John 16:13 !!//

Then exegete the passage for us. Who is speaking? Who is hearing? How can it be more likely the person hearing heard something that wasn't directly spoken to him given that in the same book Jesus spoke on multiple occasions the same way about how the Father speaks to Him and how He too relays what He hears from the Father to humans? I cited passages next to each other for comparison. The parallels are clear to any unbiased person.

//Warfield contradicts himself shamefully when he admits that the "mystery of the Trinity is not revealed in the Old Testament" !! But then, with self-deception, wants to pretend that he sees it underlying the OT "here and there"! //

In my opinion Anthony Rogers is the best living defender of the doctrine of the Trinity. His videos and debates are on his YouTube channel and on other people's channels. Rogers actually thinks the doctrine of the Trinity is EXPLICITLY taught in the OT. My view is somewhere in between his view and Warfield's view.

//No one in the NT offers an OT verse to supposedly support the supposed secretive revelation of the Trinity!//

You need to remember that the NT is mostly composed of occasional letters. Letters written on the occasion of particular issues facing the church and which the authors felt needed to be addressed. Therefore they assume their audience already knows a lot of background information we don't know. You don't know just how much of the OT they cited in their oral preaching to prove the Trinity. But what they did write assumes and presupposes a rudimentary doctrine of the Trinity. The New Testament isn't a systematic theology where everything is laid out logically and in order.

Yet they could make statements that make most sense given some doctrine of the Trinity. For example:

1 Corinthians 12:4-6 LSB

[4] Now there are varieties of gifts, but the ***SAME SPIRIT***. [5] And there are varieties of ministries, and the ***SAME LORD***. [6] And there are varieties of workings, but the ***SAME GOD*** who works everything in everyone.

SAME SPIRIT = the Holy Spirit

SAME LORD = the Lord Jesus Christ

SAME GOD = God the Father

Ephesians 4:4-6 LSB

[4] There is one body and ONE SPIRIT, just as also you were called in one hope of your calling; [5] ONE LORD, one faith, one baptism; [6] ONE GOD AND FATHER of all who is over all and through all and in all.

ONE SPIRIT = the Holy Spirit

ONE LORD = the Lord Jesus

ONE GOD AND FATHER = God the Father

2 Corinthians 13:14 LSB

[14] The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit, be with you all.

Matthew 28:19 LSB

[19] Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,

See many more passages that group all three persons in my blog post here:

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

https://trinitynotes.blogspot.com/2014/09/all-three-persons-of-trinity-mentioned.html

// And Paul specifically says that he taught nothing that was not found in Moses and the prophets (Acts 26:22). //

See Anthony Rogers' videos on his YouTube channel and other channels for the evidence from the OT for the Trinity. He is also one of the many authors who contributed articles refuting Islam at the website Answering Islam. He has many articles defending the Trinity there. Here's the link to the authors:

https://answeringislam.org/authors.html

//And in the scene of heaven in Revelation, the Spirit is not worshiped on the throne or anywhere else!//

Rogers answers that. I also answered it by pointing out in my blog that invoking the Holy Spirit in the baptismal formula is an act of religious worship given the OT's sense and understanding of worship and what constitutes idolatry. If the Holy Spirit weren't fully divine, then it would have been idolatrous to invoke Him in the most solemn sacrament of baptism in Matt. 28:19. It's the very initiation rite into the Christian religion. Notice it DOESN'T say in the "nameS [plural] of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit." It uses the word "name" in the singular to emphasize their unity. It uses the definite article "THE" three times to emphasize their real personal distinctions. Saying ".....THE Father, and THE Son, and of THE Holy Spirit," rather than "...The Father, Son and Holy Spirit."

It should also be recognized that the primary target audience of the Gospel of Matthew are Jews. It's the most Jewish of the Gospels and arguably the first written [Markan Priority, which I once held, is almost certainly false]. Given that it was written primarily to Jews, that makes its baptismal formula even that more shocking and heretical if the doctrine of Trinity was false because it invokes the tetragrammaton, the divine name YHWH. The OT used the word "Name" as a substitute to refer to Yahweh. This can be seen for example in v. 11 here:

Leviticus 24:10-11 LSB

[10] Now the son of an Israelite woman, whose father was an Egyptian, went out among the sons of Israel; and the Israelite woman’s son and a man of Israel struggled with each other in the camp. [11] And the son of the Israelite woman blasphemed the Name and cursed. So they brought him to Moses. (Now his mother’s name was Shelomith, the daughter of Dibri, of the tribe of Dan.)

Even today Jews refer to God by saying "HaShem," which means "The Name." The Matthean baptismal formula includes all three persons of the Trinity in the "Name." 

The fact that one can blaspheme the Holy Spirit makes most sense if He's a person, and a divine one at that. Otherwise it makes no sense that blaspheming an impersonal force is worse than blaspheming the Father or the Son. That would be like saying ridiculing and cursing your father's car is worse than cursing your father directly. Your view seems to be that the Holy Spirit is [depending on context] the personal presence of the Father, or the Son or both. But if that's true, then when someone blasphemes the Holy Spirit he is blaspheming the Father [or the Son, or both]. In which case Jesus' statement would be nonsensical because it presupposes a real distinction between the Holy Spirit and the Father and the Son. How can your view make sense of the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit?

I responded again:

 Are you not going to explain how blaspheming the Holy Spirit is worse than blaspheming the Father when in your view the Holy Spirit is the personal presence of the Father? How is that not the same thing? On Trinitarianism there's no such difficulty because the Holy Spirit is a distinct person from the Father.

I'm also hoping you can explain John 16:13. Who is speaking? Who is hearing? How is it not direct communication that parallels Jesus' statements about His communication with the Father?

John 16:13 LSB

[13] But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak from Himself, ***BUT WHATEVER HE HEARS***, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come. 

COMPARE WITH 

John 5:30 LSB

[30] “I can do nothing from Myself. As I hear, I judge; and My judgment is righteous, because I do not seek My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me.

John 8:26 LSB

[26] I have many things to say and to judge concerning you, but He who sent Me is true; and the things which I heard from Him, these I am saying to the world.” 

John 8:40 LSB

[40] But now you are seeking to kill Me, a man who has told you the truth, which I heard from God. This Abraham did not do. 

John 15:15 LSB

[15] No longer do I call you slaves, for the slave does not know what his master is doing; but I have called you friends, for all things that I have heard from My Father I have made known to you. 

Jesus prays to the Father in John 11 by speaking to Him. In Rom. 8 when the Holy Spirit intercedes, it only makes sense if the Holy Spirit speaks to the Father. It even states the Spirit has a MIND distinct from the Father's mind. 

John 11:41 LSB

[41] So they removed the stone. Then Jesus raised His eyes, and said, “Father, I thank You that You have heard Me. 

COMPARE WITH: 

Romans 8:26-27 LSB

[26] And in the same way the Spirit also helps our weakness, for we do not know how to pray as we should, but THE SPIRIT HIMSELF INTERCEDES for us with groanings too deep for words; [27] and He who searches the hearts knows what the MIND OF THE SPIRIT is, because He intercedes for the saints according to the will of God.

He responded:

The phrase “the mind of the Spirit” is misleading to Trinitarians. It seems to point out the separate personality of the Spirit from God in heaven. This phrase only occurs in this chapter of the Bible, in Romans 8. Paul first uses it when speaking about the Christian’s mindset produced by God’s indwelling. This results in “life and peace” (Rom 8:6). Paul then says, in verse 27, that the God who sees the heart can also know what the unspoken mindset of the believer is, because that mindset is produced by God’s presence in the heart himself.

Paul is comforting the believers that his presence in our hearts helps us to pray wisely when we do not know what to pray because it is according to the will of God, and God knows what is being prayed (that is, he knows how to interpret these wordless groans deep in our souls) because he “searches the hearts” and so knows what these wordless groans are. God is not “reading the mind of the Spirit” as though the Spirit was a supposed separate Person of the Trinity. But rather God is reading our hearts, discerning what our wordless groans are, which are produced by his kindness and indwelling.

I responded:

 Thank you for exegeting verses 26 & 27. Can you exegete John 16:13? Who is speaking, who is listening? Also, please explain how blaspheming the Holy Spirit makes sense on your view. If the Holy Spirit is the personal presence of the Father [as I believe you hold] , how can blaspheming the Holy Spirit be worse, rather than being the same thing? It seems to me that the Holy Spirit has to be a distinct person from the Father in order for blaspheming the Holy Spirit to be worse than blaspheming the Father. 

//The phrase “the mind of the Spirit” is misleading to Trinitarians. It seems to point out the separate personality of the Spirit from God in heaven. // 

Your interpretation [either in parts or in its general entirety] is actually compatible with Trinitarianism. Trinitarianism doesn't hinge on my interpretation [which other Trinitarians also hold in part or in whole]. 

//Paul then says, in verse 27, that the God who sees the heart can also know what the unspoken mindset of the believer is, because that mindset is produced by God’s presence in the heart himself.// 

The words "our" and "saints" [at least in English] are plural. While the words "mind" and "Spirit" are singular. Implying he's talking about two different things. Moreover the Spirit is said to intercede as Jesus is said to intercede in verse 34. If in verse 34 Jesus inteeceding for saints is done by someone other than the saints, then in all likelihood the intercession of the Spirit mentioned in both verses 26 & 27 is also done by someone other than the saints. Verse 16 says, "The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are children of God." Here the Holy Spirit testifies that genuine believers are children of God. Again, testimony is normally understood to be things persons do. 

Verse 26 says "in the same way." This therefore is a comparison. What is it a comparison of that is similar [i.e. in the same way]? Well in verse 23 it says, "...even we ourselves [i.e. the saints] groan within ourselves, eagerly waiting for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body..." Therefore it makes sense that the Spirit "interced[ing] for us with groanings too deep for words" is done not by us, but by the Holy Spirit [though some Trinitarians would disagree]. On your view the comparison is difficult to see. The two verses say the Spirit HELPS our weakness. Saying the believers don't know how to pray as they should and so the Holy Spirit intercedes to make up for our ignorance of the Will of God. The point of verse 17 is that while believers don't know what to pray for, the Spirit does know because He prays according to the will of God that he does know [1 Cor. 2:10] (again, which we don't know). 

//(that is, he knows how to interpret these wordless groans deep in our souls) because he “searches the hearts” and so knows what these wordless groans are.// 

Verse 27 makes a distinction between the Father's ordinary searching of human hearts with the Father's knowing the mind if the Spirit. Otherwise there would have been no need to compare the two. It would have been sufficient for Paul to have just referred to one or the other. Instead he uses the searching of the hearts as an analogy of the Father knowing the mind of the Spirit. 

So given all these things it seems to me your interpretation is unlikely to be correct.

Answering The Unitarian Objection That Jesus Was Made/Installed As Lord As A Reason To Reject Trinitarianism

 Acts 2:36    Let all the house of Israel therefore know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified."

Acts 2:36 is used by Unitarians to argue against the Trinity because they claim that if Jesus was made/installed as Lord and Messiah at that time, then Jesus wasn't Lord inherently; and therefore Trinitarianism is false.

But Just because Jesus is at that time made or declared to be Lord doesn't mean He wasn't Lord previously. Same with being "made" [read as publically declared] to be Messiah. Because Jesus is described as being Lord and Messiah prior to the events of Acts 2:36 [even in the Luke's earlier book the Gospel of Luke]. Just as Roman 1:4 says, "...and was declared to be the Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness by his resurrection from the dead..." Jesus was the Son of God prior to His resurrection. It wasn't only at or after His resurrection was Jesus made the Son of God. Jesus said in John 17:5 He had a glory with the Father before the world existed. There is a distinction between who Jesus was in actuality and what was known or publicly declared to people at a later time.

See Anthony Rogers' explanation of the Son being INSTALLED as Lord and GIVEN authority in this already cued video at 56:25 HERE: https://youtu.be/VtUvrCssBuk?t=3385

Rogers points out that the same language is used of the Father. In Scripture when God accomplishes some great feat [as in creation; redeeming His people; defeating His enemies etc.] it says He is, through such feats, "exalted," "enthroned," "established in His Kingship" et cetera. See for example, Ps. 29; 1 Chron. 29:11; Rev. 4:11; Deut. 33:5

Deut. 33:5 Thus Yahweh ***BECAME*** king in Jeshurun, when the heads of the people were gathered, all the tribes of Israel together.

Rev. 4:11 "Worthy are you, our Lord and God, to ***RECEIVE*** glory and honor and power, for you created all things, and by your will they existed and were created."

Also, that objection about being made/installed Lord & Messiah doesn't factor in Phil. 2 which teaches that before Jesus' incarnation He was in the form of God and equal with the Father and that at the incarnation He humbled Himself in the form of a [human] servant. When that's factored in, it can explain how, after humbling Himself, He can then afterwards [after gaining victory] be lifted up and exalted to the position of Lord and Messiah.

Answering Unitarian Understandings of Jesus' Statement "I Said You are gods" in John 10 by Anthony Rogers

 

Unitarians often appeal to John 10:34ff. to argue that Jesus was denying being Yahweh or equal with Yahweh and the Father. In the following video my favorite Trinitarian living defender Anthony Rogers addresses their arguments and instead shows how Jesus IS claiming to be Yahweh and equal with His Father. He actually starts getting into the topic around 20 minutes and 30 seconds. 

"I Said, You are gods" (John 10); Live Q&A
https://youtu.be/w3AVXWKBoBs

Jesus Christ: "the Beginning of God's creation" (Revelation 3:14)?

 

Some Trinitarian responses to the Unitarian use of Rev. 3:14 in which they argue for Jesus' creation and temporal beginning.

In the following video at 1:20:53 Anthony Rogers addresses this verse:

https://youtu.be/CQ_lWGTAv1Y?t=4853

In the following video Ethan Smith addresses the verse:

 

https://youtu.be/CiA6WZsyDos