In this episode we tackle the next chunk of Michael Brown’s opening statement in the recent Trinity debate.  We address his argument that since God’s words remain forever and Christ’s words remain forever, they must be the same (cf. Mat 24.35 vs. Isaiah 40.7-8).  Next we briefly explain the grammatical issues related to Titus 2.13 and the alleged Granville Sharp Rule.  Then we discuss Brown’s case for Jesus as the eternal, uncreator, creator of the cosmos (John 1, 1 Cor 8.6, and Col 1).

To help you follow along, here is the relevant portion of the manuscript Brown used for his opening statement:

That’s why in the Old Testament, Yahweh’s words remain forever (Isa 40:7-8) but in the New Testament it is Jesus’ words that will remain forever (Matt 24:35).

The Lord declared in Isaiah 43:11, “I, I am the LORD, and besides me there is no savior,” yet throughout the New Testament, Jesus is hailed as our Savior. Either He is one with God, or there is more than one true savior. Paul leaves us no doubt, referring to “our great God and Savior Jesus Christ” in Titus 2:13. That’s the most obvious and clear sense of the Greek. Jesus is our great God and Savior.

We also learn from this same section in Isaiah that when Yahweh created the universe, He did it alone. As written in Isaiah 44:24, “I am the LORD, who made all things, who alone stretched out the heavens, who spread out the earth by myself.” Yet the New Testament tells us explicitly that the Son was involved in creation.

In John 1:1, John uses the language of Genesis 1:1 in the Septuagint, saying that the Word was in the beginning (en arche), and explaining that what God was, the Word was. And, he continues, “All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life, and the life was the light of men” (John 1:3-4). And, John tells us, it is this preexistent Word, this Word through which all things were created, which became flesh and dwelt among us (John 1:14).

And that’s why John the Immerser explained that Jesus “ranks before me, because he was before me” (John 1:30). That’s why Jesus said that He was from above, that He came down from heaven, that He came from God and was returning to God (John 3:13; 6:38, 41; 8:23; 13:3).

That’s why Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 8:6, “yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.” Even more emphatically, he wrote, “For by him [meaning the Son!] all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities– all things were created through him and for him. And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together” (Col. 1:16-17).

The text is clear. The Son is eternal. The Son is uncreated. All things were created through Him and for Him.

You really have to engage in a hopeless series of exegetical gymnastics to deny the plain sense of these words. And remember: In Isaiah, Yahweh said no one was with Him when He created the universe, yet these texts say He created all things through His Son. That can only mean one thing: The Father and Son are one God! And that’s why Jesus explained that it was His Father’s will “that all may honor the Son, just as they honor the Father” (John 5:23).

—— Links ——

Listen to this episode on Spotify or Apple Podcasts.

Jerry Wierwille and I systematically refute Michael Brown’s problematic case for the deity of Christ in his recent debate with Dale Tuggy. Due to the number of texts Brown crammed into his opening statement, this will have to be a multipart series. In this episode we begin by covering Brown’s assertion that believing that Jesus is a glorified man “neuter[s] the gospel” since a man’s death for our sins “is hardly a demonstration of the immeasurable love of God.” We discuss his contention that Isaiah 42.8 means that God does not share his glory with anyone else in light of the worship scene in Revelation 5. We explain the absurd claim that Jesus claimed to be the “I am” of the burning bush in John 8.58 as well as the alpha and omega texts in Revelation.

To help you follow along, here is the relevant portion of the manuscript Brown used for his opening statement:

Thanks so much for coming out tonight and for tuning in to our livestream, and thanks, Dr. Tuggy, for your comments, which I’m quite eager to rebut. The fact is, you claim that Jesus is simply a glorified man, and I want to declare in the clearest possible terms that the Son of God of the Bible – the one we rightly worship as God – is infinitely more than a glorified man. To make Him into a glorified man is to deny the clear and consistent witness of Scripture. To make Him into a glorified man is to neuter the gospel, since the idea that a glorified man died for our sins is hardly a demonstration of the immeasurable love of God. To the contrary, when God sent His Son to pay for our crimes, He was giving of His very self.

So, again, I’m eager to rebut Dr. Tuggy’s opening comments, and it’s clear that a lot of his difficulties come from the fact that Son took on human form, hence praying to the Father and having the Father as His God. But for now, in my opening statement, I will lay out the clear scriptural case that the Son is fully divine, and since there is only one God, then God must be complex in His unity. Simply stated, this one God has revealed Himself to us as Father, Son, and Spirit, and if we are to accept the testimony of the Scripture, this is the only fair conclusion.

For Dr. Tuggy and others, this is a logical contradiction, but the day we can fully wrap our minds around the nature of God is the day we’ve reduced Him to our level, thereby making a god in our image. The God of the Bible is marvelous and transcendent, without beginning and without end, rightly called in Judaism the eyn sof – the infinite One – and, according to the Scriptures, clearly complex in His unity. Will we accept the biblical witness, or will we try to create a god based on our own limitations and perceptions?

In the Old Testament, the Lord stated categorically that He would share His glory with no one. As written in Isaiah 42:8, “I am the LORD; that is my name; my glory I give to no other, nor my praise to carved idols.” (See also 48:11, “For my own sake, for my own sake, I do it, for how should my name be profaned? My glory I will not give to another.”)

Yet we see in the New Testament that massive glory and honor are given to the Son. As Revelation records, “Then I looked, and I heard around the throne and the living creatures and the elders the voice of many angels, numbering myriads of myriads and thousands of thousands, saying with a loud voice, ‘Worthy is the Lamb who was slain, to receive power and wealth and wisdom and might and honor and glory and blessing!’ And I heard every cre

Are you curious how Dale Tuggy thinks he did on the Trinity debate with Michael Brown?  In this post-debate interview I ask him about his strongest points as well as what he thought Brown’s strongest arguments were.  I ask Tuggy about Brown’s Trinity theory and he explains the “one self” version of the Trinity as well as some of the major problems with that position.  In the end, Tuggy both gave Brown a lot of credit for his rhetorical style while remaining completely unconvinced that Brown’s position can stand up to the bible or plain old logic.

Stay tuned next time when Jerry Wierwille and I discuss Brown’s opening statement and give brief answers to his many opening arguments.

—— Links ——

Are you curious how Michael Brown thinks he did on the Trinity debate last weekend? In this post-debate interview I ask him about his strongest points as well as what he thought Dale Tuggy's strongest points were. We talk about his reticence to use traditional trinitarian language in light of his own unique heritage and ministry focus. I press him gently to explain his view of the Trinity in light of some of the confusion that arose during the debate. Next time, I'll be interviewing Dr. Tuggy and getting his response and then after that Jerry Wierwille and I are planning on thoroughly reviewing and rebutting Dr. Brown's opening statement, verse by verse.

Now, I realize that a number of you may not appreciate me giving Dr. Brown an opportunity to defend his view of the deity of Christ, but if you've listened to this podcast for any length of time, you know that I end every episode with the words "the truth has nothing to fear." For me, that's not just a tag line, it's how I believe. I'm not afraid to hear arguments for the deity of Christ or the Trinity. It's healthy for those of us who are biblical unitarians to be challenged by passionate defenders of opposing positions. If I'm wrong about Jesus, I want to be corrected and if I'm right then hearing another viewpoint shouldn't be a threat.

—— Links ——

Last night Michael Brown (PhD NYU) and Dale Tuggy (PhD Brown U) debated the question, “Is the God of the Bible the Father Alone?” Tuggy affirmed while Brown denied. Both scholars recognize the inspiration and the authority of scripture over tradition. Both made an effort to found their beliefs using the bible, reason, and history. The debate went for nearly three hours and followed this format:

Please leave your comments below. Who do you think won? Were both sides fairly represented? Whom should Tuggy debate next?

Here are my notes for the two opening statements.  They aren’t perfect, but I tried to keep up with each.

—— Notes ——

compare 2 hypotheses in light of 6 indisputable facts

6 Indisputable Facts

Jesus is a real human man

the one God is eternal

Before delving into specific biblical doctrines, we need to first think about what the bible is. In this lecture you’ll learn what the bible says about itself, some reasons to believe God inspired it, as well as the major types of biblical scholars and how they approach scripture. This episode, along with the last one, serves to round out the introduction to this course.

—— Notes ——

bibliology: one’s understanding about the bible

claims that God inspired the bible

reasons why I believe the bible is genuinely inspired

some more reasons

dichotomy today between bible-believing and bible-critical approaches to doctrine

Happy New Year. I’m so excited to begin with you a new class that covers a whole range of biblical doctrines. In fact, I’m going to combine two classes into one and I think they will work together really well. The first class was originally titled “Basic Bible Doctrine” and it covered approximately fifteen different major beliefs. The goal was to explain these aspects of theology and give supporting scripture and reasons for them. I’m combining this with a more advanced class called “Solutions to Bible Texts,” which deals with commonly misunderstood verses on a bunch of doctrines. I’m going to attempt to interweave these two, so that you get a comprehensive understanding of theology.

Now I realize that you very well may disagree with my understanding on some of these beliefs, so we may have some exciting dialog in the comments on these episodes.  I will freely admit at the outset that I don’t know everything and that I have been wrong in the past.  I just ask that you give this class a charitable listen and check it against the scriptures to see if it is true.  Hopefully, this will be a good way to lay it all out there and see what you think.  To begin with, this episode is an introduction that covers some important basics about approaching truth and building biblical doctrines.

—— Notes ——

In one sense there’s nothing basic about bible doctrine. Constructing a coherent biblical theology on any topic takes immense effort from collecting the many texts on the topic to interpreting each of them based on their own literary, historical, and theological contexts to conceiving of an understanding that simply yet elegantly embraces the most texts possible while minimizing the number of difficult texts to comparing other doctrinal systems both ancient and modern—the process is anything but “basic.” Even so, the end result is often simple enough to comprehend and communicate, though it rests upon the work of teams of specialists drawn from a variety of fields.

the bereans

why is it so important to be willing to change our beliefs?

b/c it’s easy to misunderstand the bible

reasons why it can be hard to change our beliefs

typical to think doctrine doesn’t matter or worse that it’s divisive

Greg Deuble grew up in the Church of Christ in Australia, went to N.S.W. Bible College in Sydney, and spent fifteen years serving as a pastor and evangelist.  One day he attended a meeting during which Anthony Buzzard challenged him on his belief in the deity of Christ.  Rattled, Deuble began on a quest to reassess all of his doctrinal convictions in light of scripture.  As a lifelong member of the restorationist tradition, Deuble always wanted to practice the authentic Christianity of the apostles and couldn’t just slough off such important questions.  The result was his book, They Never Told Me This in Church, an exposé of how bad philosophy corrupted the teaching of scripture.

—— Links ——

For more than a decade, Sam An has faithfully served as an administrator and teacher at the Korean Extension of the Atlanta Bible College.  In this interview, you’ll learn about his own story of faith as well as what God is doing through his ministry to touch Koreans both in America and in South Korea.

—— Links ——

Have you heard of the Christian Disciples Church?  They are a biblical unitarian group scattered throughout Asia primarily.  In this episode Calvin Chan, who has been with the disciples since the beginning, will tell you the story of how this group got started as a student disciple movement.  He also shares about how the founder, Pastor Eric Chang, reexamined what the bible says about Jesus and had the courage to change his mind when he was in his seventies.

—— Links ——