One God Report

This episode exposes the progressive liberalism, indeed “woke-ism” of Trinitarian thought and language. While Trinitarians insist that God is three persons, Trinitarians insist on referring to God with the singular pronouns “He/Him.” But if God is three persons, they should be referred to with the plural pronouns “They/Them.” The “one-ness” of God, according to Trinitarians, is not a one-ness of a person, but a one-ness of an essence or a “what”. An “essence” or a “what” is not a person and should not be referred to as a person. The Trinitarian one-ness of God is an “it”. James White in his book The Forgotten Trinity says “We dare not mix up the what and the who’s regarding the Trinity” (p. 24). But white does exactly that. He refers to the three persons of his god with the singular pronoun “he”. White mixes up the what and who of his Trinitarian god. Links for this episode: MN Churches of God Spring 2022 Conference, June 10-12 “New Creation in the Gospel of John”, Guest Speaker: Bill Schlegel https://mncogconference.org/?fbclid=IwAR26LHq58LcVpT93ErxriNpxmY1GcrNhLxMqMj3mMoOQZ6LTajMw6OhzYJs Schedule: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5464e6b5e4b0e15e60967771/t/628019ded8316c4d2f2844ab/1652562398856/2022+Spring+Conference+Schedule.pdf #JamesWhite, #TheForgottenTrinity, #FredSanders, #TheTriune God 

Evangelical Christian scholars, experts on the Trinity, explain that God as a Trinity is not explicitly described in the Bible. In this episode we begin to take a look at two books written by evangelical apologists: "The Forgotten Trinity" by Dr. James White, and, "The Triune God" by Dr. Fred Sanders. We see that in neither case do these experts on the Trinity simply open the Bible and go to passages that describe that God is a Trinity. - Instead, as Dr. Sanders says, "The doctrine of the Trinity emerges from fitting the pieces together as each part determines (p. 84). The doctrine of the Trinity "is not not directly proposed in words of Scripture and presented to us in a formulated state" (p. 39). "The Triunity of God is not verbally formulated for us...some assembly is required (p. 40). - "We cannot speak of the doctrine of the Trinity as revealed in the New Testament...(Dr. Fred Sanders quoting Dr. B.B. Warfield (p. 89). - For evangelical Christians, such statements should be waving red flags. - If the Bible is right, God is not a Trinity. #jameswhite, #the forgotten Trinity, #fredsanders, #the Triune God

See full text of this episode here: https://landandbible.blogspot.com/2022/04/john-11-is-parallel-to-man-moses.html Also see Dr. Andrew Perry's book: John 1:1-18, A Socinian Approach https://www.lulu.com/en/us/shop/andrew-perry/john-11-18/hardcover/product-1n7j2zgj.html?page=1&pageSize=4 - 1. The literary and thematic parallels to the phrases “was with God” and “was God” of John 1:1 are to be found in the Greek version of the Old Testament, not in extra-biblical literature, and these phrases particularly refer to the man Moses. Greek-speaking Israelites familiar with the Greek Old Testament could recognize that Moses “was with God pros ton Theon“ and even “was God” in a representative sense, and understand that the author was introducing the coming of the “prophet like unto Moses…about whom Moses wrote”. On the hand, Gentiles of the second century and later misunderstood John’s opening statement and instead claimed John was introducing a second God figure who was related to God in an ontological way, in nature or essence. These interpreters either ignored or missed the Moses typology and instead assimilated Greek philosophical speculations onto John’s writing. Likewise, the Greek mind failed to recognize the Hebrew parallel of Logos to Torah, and “in the beginning” to Israel’s beginning at Sinai. To put it another way, John 1:1 is introducing a prophet like unto Moses, not a second God figure, and not an abstract plan. - 2. References in the Gospel of John that directly compare Jesus to Moses are evidence that John’s opening statement is doing the same thing, just as other New Testament comparisons of Jesus to Moses. John’s Gospel is not presenting a different Christ than the rest of the New Testament.

In this episode I give reasons to understand that the “Greeks” mentioned in two places in the Gospel of John (7:35 and 12:21) were not Gentiles but were Greek-speaking Israelites who grew up in Greek culture outside of the land of Israel. The Gospel of John is using the word “Greeks/Hellenes” in a cultural and linguistic sense, not in an ethnic sense. Understanding that the Greeks/Hellenes mentioned in the Gospel of John are Greek-speaking Israelites helps us interpret the Gospel of John better, and illuminates another evidence that the author gives to show that Jesus is the Messiah. As the Messiah, Jesus is the facilitator of the "gathering of the exiles of Israel". As the Gospel of John says it, "the gathering of the children of God who are scattered abroad" (John 11:52).  Gentiles are not in the picture that the Gospel of John paints. The "door of hope" through the Messiah for Gentiles was not opened by God until a decade or more after the events in the Gospel of John took place. The Gospel of John was written by a Jew, for Jews. Gentiles can read it and benefit by it in much the same way we can benefit by reading the Book of Exodus. We see that God has done great things for Israel and proclaim "Yahweh (the Father) is God and Jesus is His Messiah". For full written text click here. https://landandbible.blogspot.com/2022/03/the-greeks-hellenists-in-gospel-of-john.html  

This episode proposes that one of the main original audiences, perhaps even the main audience, of the Gospel of John were Greek speaking Hebrews. A first step in understanding that a main target audience of John’s Gospel were Greek speaking Hebrews is to understand that in the Gospel of John the word often translated as “Jews” can and does mean “Judeans”. Jesus is received by Hebrews (Jews or Israelites) in all regions outside of Judea. But the "Judeans", particularly the Jewish religious establishment in Jerusalem, did not receive him. If “Jews” means “Judeans” then the Gospel of John is addressing an internal Jewish controversy. John was not writing to Gentile audiences to declare “the Jews rejected and killed Jesus”. Rather, the author is writing to other Hebrews giving reasons to believe that Jesus is the Messiah, even though he was rejected in his own city Jerusalem, in his own region, by his own people, Judeans. Judeans rejected Jesus, not all Jews. For the full written text see here: https://landandbible.blogspot.com/2022/02/in-gospel-of-john-jews-are-judeans-not.html

We conclude a three-part interview with Dr. Andrew Perry on the Prologue of the Gospel of John. In this episode Dr. Perry: 1. Explains how he understands when and how “the word became flesh” (John 1:14). Dr. Perry understands the phrase “the word became flesh” to be about empowerment to speak and make things happen or come to be, and not about divine incarnation. Dr. Perry sees the baptism of Jesus as the event at which the word became flesh. 2. Explains what “the world came to be through him” means in John 1:10. 3. Encourages readers to be sensitive to Old Testament types (patterns and parallels) which Jesus and the authors of the New Testament employ. A failure to recognize the Old Testament types has led to a misunderstanding of the Prologue and other passages in the Gospel of John. Resources: Dr. Perry’s books and articles: https://www.lulu.com/search?adult_audience_rating=00&page=1&pageSize=10&q=andrew+perry+john+1 https://durham.academia.edu/AndrewPerry https://www.academia.edu/42755430/John_1_1_18_A_Socinian_Approach Previous One God Report Podcast on John 1:14: https://landandbible.blogspot.com/2021/03/is-god-flesh-better-way-to-understand.html

This episode is part 2 of our discussion with Dr. Andrew Perry about themes in the Prologue of the Gospel of John. In this episode Dr. Perry explains why the human Christ Jesus is called the Word in John 1:1, and gives reasons how we can know that the man Christ Jesus is referred to in the Gospel’s opening statement, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” 1. In parallel to Genesis creation, things “happen” or “come to be” through the spoken word of the man Christ Jesus. Jesus can heal the sick, heal the lame, calm a storm and raise the dead simply by speaking. Renewed creation, indeed new life, "comes to be" through God's Word.  2. The phrases “and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” have no precedence in either biblical or non-biblical literature in reference to either a second divine figure or to an abstract idea like “wisdom”. Rather, the phrases find a parallel in the biblical literature to human figures, especially to Moses. 3. The repetition of the phrase “This one was with God in the beginning” is an intentional contrast with John 1:7, a comparison between the man Christ Jesus and the man John the Baptizer, “this one came as a witness”. The persistent references and comparisons to John the Baptizer in the Prologue of John’s Gospel, and in the early chapters of the gospel indicate that the Baptizer is being compared to the man Christ Jesus (not to a pre-incarnate divine figure or to an "personified" abstract idea). We also discuss what the phrase in John 1:14 means: “So the Word became/was flesh…” Resource links: Dr. Perry’s books and articles: https://www.lulu.com/search?adult_audience_rating=00&page=1&pageSize=10&q=andrew+perry+john+1 https://durham.academia.edu/AndrewPerry Previous One God Report Podcast on John 1:14: https://landandbible.blogspot.com/2021/03/is-god-flesh-better-way-to-understand.html

This episode is “New Creation in the Gospel of John 1, with Dr. Andrew Perry. A subtitle for the episode is “The Beginning of John 1:1 is a New Beginning, not the Genesis Creation”. This episode is the first of a series in which Dr. Perry will explain reasons why the prologue of the Gospel of John is best understood to be introducing the new creation in the man Jesus, who is referred to as “the Word” in John 1:1. Dr. Perry’s occupational background is in information technology, but he is now an independent researcher and author. His PhD in New Testament is from Durham University in England. His numerous articles and books are available on his academia.edu and Lulu bookstore (links below). In this episode Dr. Perry begins to give evidence for why he understands that “In the beginning” of John 1:1 is best understood as referring to the new beginning that God brings about through the ministry of the man Jesus Christ. Dr. Perry explains that the author of the Gospel of John is re-using Genesis language to intentionally draw a comparison between the beginning in Genesis and the new beginning in Jesus. The man Christ Jesus is referred to as the Word in John 1:1, because in a parallel way to Genesis, things “come to be” through God’s word. But in Jesus’s case, we are not talking about a material creation, but a spiritual creation. Life came to be through Jesus. John 1:3-4 explains, “that which came to be in him was life, and the life was the light of men”. https://www.lulu.com/search?adult_audience_rating=00&page=1&pageSize=10&q=andrew+perry+john+1 https://durham.academia.edu/AndrewPerry

In this episode we show why the Trinitarian and “deity of Christ” understanding of Jesus’s words in John 8:58 are wrong. In neither Hebrew nor in Greek is the phase “I am” in the Bible a title for deity. In Hebrew, God says in Exodus 3:14 “I will be who I will be”. In Greek, it is the “Living One” who speaks to Moses. “I am”, in Greek, ego eimi, is not a divine title. We show that the “deity of Christ” interpretation of Jesus’s statement, “before Abraham was I am” contradicts the Apostle Peter’s belief (Acts 3:15), the disciples Steven’s belief (Acts 7), the author of the Gospel of John (John 20 30:31) and Jesus in the Gospel of John (John 17:3). We give two possible meanings for Jesus “I am” statement in John 8:58. We favor the second interpretation. 1. Jesus’s statement relates to his superiority to Abraham in the plan and purpose of God. The Messiah Jesus was known by God before Abraham was called in God’s purpose. 2. Jesus is pre-eminent to Abraham in resurrection. Jesus was repeating what he said earlier in John chapter 8, “I am the light of the world”. All of the “I am” statements of Jesus in John 8 relate to his claim to be “the light of the world”. We examine the Greek verb genesthai and see that especially in the Gospel of John it means to “come into being at some point in the future”. John 8:58 is best translated as “before Abraham comes to be”, that is, at some future point in time. For additional evidence that the Trinitarian, “deity of Christ” interpretation of John 8:58 is wrong, see here. https://www.angelfire.com/space/thegospeltruth/TTD/verses/john8_58.html

In this podcast I translate a few verses in the Book of Genesis (1:1, 26-27) in a way that many Trinitarians read or understand the text. I address the question if the word for “God” in Hebrew Elohim, which is a grammatical plural, is a hint or means that God is more than one. 1. No, this grammatically plural form does not mean more than one numerically. 2. Hebrew grammarians call this the “plural of majesty”. It is used in an honorific way with titles like “God”, “master”, even “Baal” to refer to one individual. 3. No Hebrew scholar makes the claim that the grammatical plural Elohim hints or suggests that the God of Israel is more than one individual. The claim is a popular “man/pastor” on the street claim that ignores what Hebrew grammarians say. 4. If the word means a plural, it would be translated as “gods”, more than one god. It does not mean more than one person in a god. 5. Other Hebrew words that are grammatically plural but singular in meaning are mentioned. 6. Trinitarians are inconsistent since sometimes they claim Elohim means more than one person, but other times it means only one person. Sometimes the contradiction is in one verse right next to another. 7. Many times the God of Israel is referred to in the singular form El. The God of Israel is also referred to tens of thousands of times with singular masculine verbs, pronouns and adjectives. We ask which member of the Triune god is being referred to in the hundreds, thousands, of place, like here in Psalm 86:10:  כִּי-גָדוֹל אַתָּה וְעֹשֵׂה נִפְלָאוֹת אַתָּה אֱלֹהִים לְבַדֶּךָ 8. We challenge those who make the claim that Elohim means a multi-personal god to explain why the Hebrew word for “master/sir/lord” also occurs in grammatical plural forms to refer to one individual person. Additional resources: “An Introduction to the Plural of Majesty in the Hebrew Bible” Podcast by Dustin Smith https://biblicalunitarianpodcast.podbean.com/e/139-an-introduction-to-the-plural-of-majesty-within-the-hebrew-bible/