Through studying early church history, Luke Jones came to understand that Christians of the 1st three centuries after Jesus were not Trinitarians. That fact set him on a search to discover who the true God of the Bible is.

Resources:

 “TheCost of Truth”:

Podcast:https://youtu.be/rGJR3OJB9vY

Book: https://www.amazon.com/Cost-Truth-Biblical-Unitarian-Christians/dp/1736918052

ForestMaready, “Why Some Christians Don’t Believe in the Trinity”

Podcast:https://youtu.be/myq7MPkzLKI

Book: https://www.amazon.com/Some-Christians-Dont-Believe-Trinity/dp/B0CMKB1KY6

LukeJones debate on Deity of Christ: https://www.youtube.com/live/8vXdxZZtsEc

LukeJones YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@lukejones5272

BillSchlegel blog: https://landandbible.blogspot.com/

YouTube:https://www.youtube.com/@billschlegel1

Part 2 of an exposition of Psalm 110.

Psalm 110shows that the one “at the right hand” of God not only has been given the authority to rule as YHVH’s designated King Messiah, but is also appointed by YHVH as Priest Messiah. The high priest mediates between humans and God. The author of Hebrews emphasizes the mediatorial role of Yeshua the Messiah who as our high priest has gone into the presence of God, being at the righthand of God, as our mediator (Heb. 1:3, 1:13, 8:1, 10:12, 12:2). The author of Hebrews hardly mentions that Jesus is the designated King Messiah, but emphasizes that Jesus is the Priest Messiah who mediates for us in the presence ofGod. Paul agrees. The one mediator between God and man is the man Christ Jesus, not a God or a god-man (1 Tim. 2:4-6).

In this way,Jesus is David’s Lord not only because Jesus is David’s king, but also becauseJesus is David’s mediating priest who enables David, eventually, to come beforeGod (cf. John 14:6).

Psalm 110:1 (Part 1) https://youtu.be/GLEEV9emNT0

“The Priest-King at the Right Hand of Yahweh (Psalm 110:1)” examines Psalm 110:1 by focusing on the Hebrew text and how it has been understood in both Jewish and Christian interpretations. The author explains that Yahweh (God) speaks to “my Lord,” whom he identifies as the Messiah—a figure greater than David though his descendant—and critiques interpretations that use the verse to argue for Christ’s deity. Instead, the article emphasizes that the passage highlights the Messiah’s superiority to David through his resurrection and exaltation to God’s right hand, not that he is another divine being equal to Yahweh. The author distinguishes between the Hebrew names/titles for God and “my Lord”, arguing the latter refers to a human superior whom God has elevated, and supports this with New Testament citations showing Jesus’ resurrection and exaltation as fulfillment of the promise in Psalm 110.

Full text here:

https://landandbible.blogspot.com/2025/12/the-priest-king-at-right-hand-of-yahweh.html

Raised on the 3rd Day, According to theScriptures

AnsweringRabbi Tovia Singer, with Troy Salinger

TroySalinger explains, using Jewish/Rabbinic principals of interpretation, howJesus and Paul could claim that the Jesus resurrection from the dead on the 3rdday was “according to the scriptures.

Previousepisode:

AnsweringRabbi Tovia Singer: Jewish Hermeneutics, with Troy Salinger (Audio, firstinstallment)

https://youtu.be/wjtC-OMXuUU

Fullarticle:

AnsweringRabbi Tovia Singer: Jewish Hermeneutics/The Resurrection Of The Messiah On TheThird Day

https://letthetruthcomeoutblog.wordpress.com/2025/10/29/answering-rabbi-tovia-singer-jewish-hermeneutics-the-resurrection-of-the-messiah-on-the-third-day/

AnsweringRabbi Singer, and Introduction to a Series
https://letthetruthcomeoutblog.wordpress.com/2025/10/20/answering-rabbi-tovia-singer-an-introduction-to-a-series/

In this episode we hear Troy Salingers article called “AnsweringRabbi Tovia Singer: Jewish Hermeneutics/The Resurrection of The Messiah on 3rdDay”. The article appears on Salinger’s “Let the Truth Come Out” website.

Salinger begins by outlining the interpretive methods usedby ancient Jewish rabbis, contrasting them with the typical modern Christianemphasis on literal, historical–grammatical interpretation (peshat). In Jewishtradition, while the plain sense of a text was recognized, it was oftensecondary to deeper interpretive layers such as midrash—an approach of“mining” the scriptures for hidden meanings beneath the surface.

To illustrate, Salinger cites an example from the Talmud inwhich a rabbi derives a messianic era of four hundred years from two unrelatedpassages simply because they used the same word afflict. Another exampleis from Midrash Rabbah, where a single ordinary verse is applied to sixdifferent people or events in Jewish tradition—including the Messiah—ratherthan simply to the plain meaning

Salinger then shows how New Testament authors employ similarmethods: for instance, in the Gospel of Matthew the event of Jesus’ flight intoEgypt and return is linked to Hosea 11:1 (“Out of Egypt I called My son”), eventhough the plain context of Hosea addresses Israel’s historical situation inEgypt. These midrashic methods were normative in ancient Jewish hermeneutics.

Turning to the work of Tovia Singer, Salinger contends that RabbiSinger criticizes New Testament writers for misusing the Tanakh (HebrewScriptures) but fails to apply the same standard to the rabbinic interpretershe otherwise praises. Specifically, Rabbi Singer is accused of ignoring orminimizing how the rabbis themselves freely used midrashic interpretation,while insisting that the New Testament authors are being deceptive when they dothe same. Salinger calls this approach “disingenuous,” suggesting that Rabbi Singercapitalizes on Christian ignorance of Jewish interpretive traditions in orderto undermine Christian claims about Scripture and fulfillment.

Hebrew Vocabulary:

Tanach:the Hebrew Scriptures, “Old Testament”

Pashat:plain or “simple” meaning of the text

midrash:“enquiry”, commentary or interpretation of the Hebrew Bible usually findingdeeper meanings

Resources:

Answering Rabbi Tovia Singer:Jewish Hermeneutics/The Resurrection of The Messiah on 3rd Day

https://letthetruthcomeoutblog.wordpress.com/2025/10/29/answering-rabbi-tovia-singer-jewish-hermeneutics-the-resurrection-of-the-messiah-on-the-third-day/#d500256e-a368-4a8a-8cf0-a0ff46f15f5a-link

One God Report Podcasts with author Troy Salinger

Pre-IncarnateAppearances of Jesus in the OT: Truth or Myth

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLUqWXumvcp5p1klRmE6uAaU7uGSOMDuCX

Is the "Memra" the Pre-incarnateSon of God?
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLUqWXumvcp5rvmD5Q9dO68RFlfeg_cc8C

In this episode I dialog with Sam Tideman’s “Transfigured” Podcaston John 1:14.

Sam reviewed the previous One God Report podcast (#148) called“The Word became Flesh (Sustenance): A Metaphorical Interpretation of"Flesh". 

In this current podcast I dialog with Sam about two of hismain points:

1. Is the “became flesh” language of John 1:14 to be associated with mainstreamChristianity’s “Eucharist”

and

2. Should or could John 1:14 be understood and translated as“the Word became flesh and dwelt IN us”, that is, not “among us”. 

Resources:

The Word became Flesh(Sustenance): A Metaphorical Interpretation of "Flesh" https://youtu.be/A87VcXKCWBM

Transfigured Podcast, "TheWord became flesh" - A eucharistic interpretation of John 1:14 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PfQKfthc2wA&t=2847s

The short statement in John 1:14 that“the Word became flesh” is understood by mainstream Christianity to be adeclaration that the difference between who God is and who man is was breached,that God became man. Anyone interested in considering the many and variousproblems with the “G/god became man” interpretations of this verse can see thearticle/podcast #39 “The Word became Flesh? Why John 1:14 does NOT say that God becameman”.[1]This present podcast presents my developing understanding about what “the Wordbecame flesh” does mean. Let me first state that when I say that “became flesh”in John 1:14 most likely should be interpreted metaphorically, I don’t meanthat Jesus was not a real flesh and blood human being. The New Testamentpresents Jesus as a real human being of flesh, blood and bone, a man who toldthe truth that he heard from God.

[1] https://landandbible.blogspot.com/2021/01/the-word-became-flesh-why-john-114-does.htmlor, audio
https://youtu.be/z4HepHkyujk

Does the Bible Declare that “Jesus a God-Man”?

We compare mainstream Christian belief with the biblical declarations and find a big difference.

Some Scriptures from this episode:

John8:40: “I am a man who told you the truth that I heard from God…” 

Acts2:22: "Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man attestedto you by God with mighty works and wonders and signs that God did through himin your midst, as you yourselves know- 

Acts17:31: “because He (God) has fixed a day on which he will judge the world inrighteousness by a man whom He has appointed; and of this He has givenassurance to all by raising him from the dead. 

Romans5:15: "For if many died through the trespass of one man, much more havethe grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christabounded for many." 

Romans5:19: "For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by oneman's obedience many will be made righteous." 1 Corinthians 15:21: “Forsince death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead also came througha man” 

1 Cor.15:21: “For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection ofthe dead.”

1Timothy 2:4-6: God "…desires all men to be saved and to come to aknowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and there is one mediator betweenGod and men, the man Christ Jesus who gave himself" 

The straight-line connectionsbetween statements in the Prologue to the body of the Gospel of John show thatthe Prologue is introducing the human person Jesus of Nazareth. The man Jesusand his ministry are described with the same terms in the body of the Gospelthat are introduced in the Prologue.

 These parallels between the Prologue and the lifeof the human person Jesus as described in the body of the Gospel are evidencethat John 1 is not describing Genesis 1 but is introducing a new beginning inthe man Jesus Christ.

Full text: https://landandbible.blogspot.com/2025/09/the-prologue-of-john-in-body-of-gospel.html

By comparing Genesis 1:1-18 with John 1:1-18 we can understand that the two chapters are describing different events.

There are a few words that are common to both Genesis 1 and John 1, like "in, beginning, light, and darkness", but the words have a different meaning than in Genesis.

Many key words which are in Genesis 1:1-5 which are not in John 1:1-5: created, heavens, earth, waters, face of the deep, spirit of God, hovering, evening, morning, day, night, first day

Many key words in John 1:1-5 which are not in Genesis 1:1-5: word, with God, he (that one) was in the beginning with God, all (things), through him, life, light of men, overcome/comprehend. 

 Then, in verses 6-18, everything is different.

John 1 has a different context, describes different events, than Genesis 1. https://www.youtube.com/@billschlegel1

"In the beginning was..." Or, John 1:1 is not about the Genesis Creation. https://youtu.be/b8sKQC63ESY

A Non-Genesis Creation Interpretation of John 1:3-4

https://youtu.be/N3rcP42KWhc