The Authenticity of Christ's Resurrection

 

"If the resurrection of Jesus cannot be believed except through the fantastic descriptions in the Gospels, then Christianity is doomed. For this view of the resurrection is not credible, and if it is the only one, then Christianity, which is the truth and authenticity of Jesus' resurrection, is also not credible." /Bishop John Shelby Spong, Resurrection: myth or reality (San Francisco: HarperCollins, 1994), p. 238./

Answer: It is well known that atheists do not look to God when seeking meaning in their lives; instead: finances, creative pursuits, travel, leisure activities, and all the rest play a starring role. That is, valuing and freely choosing to exploit what life has to offer. For being stuck on this brutal planet for a few decades.

These are such meaningless, banal goals in themselves, compared to the unparalleled magnificence of existence, that for the atheist to focus on them and waste his years picking for himself the sources of enjoyment the planet has to offer, it made no sense for the confluence of coincidences to bring together all that could then be discarded as something that would otherwise have come into being completely meaningless and purposeless, without any reason whatsoever in the context of the universe's self-formation.

If the atheist puts his appreciation in writing, then why does he write a message /a kind of thank-you note/ to anyone that he loves them and thinks of them often when his own love is discredited?! For there is another message, evidence of a different, higher kind of love, which the atheist carries in his genes, and which he says is nothing more than the chemistry of nucleic acids and amino acids swirling around in him.

He believes that the ancient genetic system based on purines and pyrimidines may have formed and evolved together in the early Earth under stereochemical influence, although the modern code seems to be highly optimized to resist different types of errors, which complicates the situation. The extraordinary diversity of code specificity suggests that explaining the fixation of the canonical code in LUCA /the bacteria-like single-celled organism considered to be the oldest/ requires more historical reconstruction than reasoning from chemical principles.

The DNA code is actually the "language of life". DNA contains the instructions for the development, growth, reproduction and function of all life, the blueprints for millions of life forms. He whose own DNA is not evidence of God's love in him, for he denies the incomparably greater love that he carries in his genes as an intelligent message, how can he think that his few-word message is evidence of real, personal love, and not of the chemical compounds he has conceived in him, transformed into words?

The atheist invests the value of his love in a few words of information, but denies the value of the message hidden in his DNA, which is incomparably more valuable than his message! Code wasters are not worthy to carry the message of love under their hearts.

The genetic code of DNA has a universal purpose in that it is at the service of all life that exists. It is utterly meaningless to create and maintain it if it has no purpose, no purpose-driven value in the atheistic mind. For that which exists in a totally meaningless way has no value in its meaningless existence, because value and meaninglessness are incompatible, but the rather meaningful existence, which has value in itself. That the universe exists and functions nevertheless shows that its existence serves precisely the meaningful purpose for which it was created as value.

According to the Bible's revelation, the power given to Jesus Christ is related to the functioning of the existing planet and the fulfillment of its purpose for creation. This planet has been placed under the kingship of Jesus Christ by God the Creator, giving Him all authority in heaven and on earth, so that at His name every knee should bow. (Philippians 2:9-10) Christ has been given a thousand years of dominion by God, and then He will give everything to the Father, so that God may be all in all. (Revelation 20:6; 1 Corinthians 15:28)

The entire genetic apparatus of DNA, which is present in every living, pulsating organism, serves this purpose. The resurrection of Christ is fully consistent with the purpose of being the King of the Kingdom of God.

So if God maintains this planet, he is showing that he has a purpose for it, and if Christ had not risen from the dead, there would be no reason for the planet to exist and to continue to exist in its present and future operational system.

For the reasons atheists give for their existence are not sufficient: finances, creative pursuits, travel and leisure, and all the other such things that play a leading role. In other words, valuing what life has to offer? To squeeze it out and spend it on mere pleasures, to waste it on that without any appreciation.

It's just like robbing a huge department store that was created by accident and without purpose, everyone taking what they can grab for themselves to use for their own selfish pleasure.If the atheists are stuck on this brutal planet for a few decades - Because their existence has no purpose other than to waste for their selfish pleasure all that a sober minded person might consider the special value of Life.

So it's not just that the gospels contain a fantastic account of Jesus' resurrection, which atheists greet with great scorn and derision, but also that the existence and survival of the planet is for a very credible purpose, based on the truth that a planet furnished with reason does have meaning, purpose and functional determinacy - whereas atheism does not, not even a shred.

The proper functioning of the planet and atheism's unconditional desire to have fun, to exploit the pleasure-seeking that life offers, tending towards all kinds of leisure, are mutually incompatible factors. The resurrection of Christ is a rejection of this binge-driving lifestyle, and to reject it, to deny the resurrection of Christ, is to reject atheism for its own ideological ends.

To find out which side the truth is on, we need the return of Christ in power, which can only happen if his resurrection was real.

Since the resurrection has happened, atheism's genetic code-wasting view of life can only exist as long as God's time of grace exists, after which God's judgment will occur, which is already unbearable for atheists, which is obviously why they deny all that Christian teaching reveals in the pages of the Bible. That Jesus Christ did, indeed, RESURRECTED FROM DEATH!!! This is the divine guarantee of the meaningful existence of the planet, and that the true meaning of life is to experience a loving relationship with Him for all eternity.

Pseudo-scientific blindness of atheistic clarity

 

Anyone who says little or nothing about the meaning of existence, but discusses it at length, dismissively and without any contradiction, does not want to increase and refine your knowledge, but simply wants to dominate it. Such a person thinks that you do not recognise the bleating of the bored goat, lost in the barren desert of aimless philosophising, looking for partners to spend his futile time with like-minded laymen specialising in the enjoyment of meaningless reasoning. (Honestly about atheism)

* * * * *

"What do atheists believe?
You don't have to believe in anything to be an atheist. Not to believe in any god is the only necessary condition. Beyond that, an atheist can believe in anything." /What is atheism?/ - https://www.atheistalliance.org/about-atheism/what-is-atheism/

The simplest reason why someone might not believe in a god is that they see no convincing reason or evidence to believe.

Such critics assume that Christians and other theists have a special burden to prove that God exists. Atheists can always sit back and assess what the theist comes up with. And if nothing comes up, or if it is not strong enough evidence for their minds, they usually think they have adequately justified their rejection of God.

Notice the difference between not having sufficient reason and not seeing any convincing reason or evidence to believe. The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, Moreover, seeing or not seeing reason is in a sense personality dependent. Someone may claim that they were blinded by the sun, that is why they did not see the pedestrian in the crosswalk, which may be a legitimate plea, or it may be a deliberate evasion to avoid personal responsibility.

The believers' seeing /conception/ if it were completely unfounded,, would be without any rational justification, which is not valid. In contrast, the arguments and justifications published by the most highly educated persons are exposed to the general public, and if there were no rationality behind them, their arguments to justify God would have long since failed in the face of objections to deny God.

This indicates that it is not necessarily rational arguments or evidence that are decisive in this matter, but rather factors involving subjective reasons that are inherent in human nature and character.

Otherwise, why should an atheist provide evidence beyond what believers already have? It's not the lack of evidence that makes an atheist an atheist, it's the attitude towards the evidence available.Perhaps they have not found it so far because they are not worthy to find it, because they do not want to find it, but they want to reject it. Their attitude weighs much more than the evidence they treat according to their attitude.

Their unworthiness is illustrated by the following situation:

An atheist walks into a room where every object that exists has a purpose and a function. Only the existence of the atheist has none. So what is he doing in the room? Get out of it! The smallest object with a purpose has more value than him!

"People cannot tolerate the belief that the Universe and life are meaningless. In fact, that is what science tells us. Meaningless in the sense that there is no externally determined purpose or point in the Universe. As atheists, this is obviously true for us. We determine our own meaning and purpose." /Jerry Coyne Jerry Coyne Professor of Biology, (2012), "The Odd Couple: Why Science and Religion Shouldn't Cohabitate," Speech to Glasgow Skeptics, December 21./

The atheist uses reason to prove the meaninglessness of his own existence by asserting the meaninglessness of the universe. With such a view, it is no wonder that he sees no convincing reason or evidence to believe.

It then states that there are insufficient grounds. This is so subjective that you might as well claim the opposite. But he doesn't, because what he wants to claim is exactly the opposite. The objective distinction is fundamentally affected by whether one wants to get in into a house or out of a house.

The reasons for atheism are not in the reasons that are made public, because they are only pretexts. The real motive is that the atheist wants to live without God! Belief in or denial of God cannot be separated from the fact that the atheist's freedom depends on this choice. "I am content with the choice to be an atheist because I feel more intelligent and free because no one is guiding my choices." So motivated by a subjective desire for freedom, but with hard moral parameters.

ATHEIST PROOF TEST
As far as showing proof is concerned, the atheist should go into a room so that no one can see that he is inside and prove to those outside the room who cannot see that he exists. Proving the existence of God is the same as proving his existence in the room. If you cannot give evidence of yourself, though you are certainly inside, you cannot give evidence of God, though he is invisible but exists. So the absence of evidence is insufficient in both cases. But if you have evidence of yourself, you have evidence of God, the two are connected!

It is forbidden for an atheist to do anything that God does not do to prove himself. For example, he cannot shout out from the room, "Hello, I'm in the room," because God doesn't shout loudly to mankind from above, "Hello, people, I'm up here in the sky invisible, can you hear my voice? God does not prove himself in that way.

The atheist should not call anyone on the phone, because God does not call anyone. Don't bang on the door, because God doesn't bang on any door. Even if the atheist sticks a blank piece of paper under the door, it is not proof of it, because the wind blew in through the open window and it slipped out under the door. Don't put a photo under the door, because God doesn't show a photo of himself. So you cannot do anything that God does not do. Don't forget that for a moment. He is in the room, but you have to find the non-false proof of your own existence.

He says: "I think, therefore I am. That's good enough for me." But the atheist has to prove to outsiders that he is in the room, even though they can't see him. He doesn't have to prove it to himself, he has to prove it to others.

In the same way, atheists ask believers to prove that God exists. If we say God thinks, therefore he exists, then big laugh at him with a smirk of becoming, satanic grin. So that is not a good answer, that thinking is sufficient proof. That a person is thinking inside the room is not proof to outsiders that he is inside the room.

Go ahead, then, let the atheist produce the proof of its existence! If you don't know, then it obviously doesn't exist. And what is a non-existent man babbling about denying the existence of God? His clucking is like the clucking of a coffee pot that is being steam-dissolved by inertia.

He who can prove himself knows God, because the same means are available to prove God as are available to prove man. To deny God is to deny himself, not to do so is to prove his own primitiveness, for he denies half the data and information that can be considered in order to shove his own existence into the shop window. Already here, the immorality of atheism is exposed, in that it leans absolutely towards itself.

Why does the dwarf rule out the existence of the giant? Because it is the easiest way to take his place. Then, when the giant appears, the dwarf's breath also appears on the window pane of the exit, bidding farewell to the shadow world.

The biggest obstacle an atheist can throw in God's way is himself! How does the atheist measure primitiveness? With himself. Anyone who performs above that cannot be an atheist. How much intelligence is required for atheism? The other way round. Even the little that is there must be taken away.

This claim is justified because it is not a rational argument, but an excuse dipped in the sauce of subjective philosophy specific to the individual, and aimed specifically at expressing his own desire for freedom. A single atheist statement is a faithful reflection of the perception of almost all atheists. It says:

"God worked a miracle" seems an unpretentious, primitive and lazy solution. I really reject the notion that anyone who uses such a solution is trying to impose moral obligations on me, on everyone.”

So what he is really rejecting is the rejection of a moral bond that touches every aspect of life. As stated in the statement quoted earlier, which can be safely posted in large letters on the front of the pantheon of atheism:

- "I am happy with the decision to be an atheist because I feel smarter and freer because no one is controlling my choices."

As the philosopher John-Paul Sartre said, "Indeed, everything is permissible if God does not exist." And who is it who trades this desire for freedom for the bonds of moral control? Certainly not the atheist!

Why does the atheist deny the existence of God? So that he may not have to deny the legitimacy of his own sovereign conception of life, and so that he may use it where and when he pleases, as his own individual interests may require. While this abuse of free will is, according to him, a perfectly legitimate conception of life, since he himself determines the extent of the difference between the two.

Man's greatest achievement against God is his voluntarily chosen atheism, by which he at the same time creates glorious criteria for his own idolatry. The essence of atheistic sovereignty is to say yes to oneself, with the inevitable consequence of saying no to the God who wishes to influence one.

Can everything in the universe be satisfactorily explained without God?

Why does a system have meaningful components if the whole makes no sense? The same unintelligent destructive force that produces various natural disasters cannot build the biological wonders of life reflecting incredible intelligence in complete contradiction, because to claim so is to question the human intelligence that claims it!

If a poem, a short story or a novel, or the grammatical rules themselves, do not follow from the letters themselves as parts that build them, or if a functioning car does not follow from the parts that build it, and a complex living cell does not follow from the inanimate components that build it, then in particular the complex coordinated functioning of the 40 trillion or so cells that build the human body does not follow from the parts that build it.

If the hands of a wall clock are purposefully moving /set to move/ in a purposefully defined /painted/ time scale, then the clock itself cannot be a completely purposeless existence, nor can living beings, especially humans. In the clock you see the maker, not in man, but the greater volume justifies faith in the existence of the Creator Who created man for a purpose.

The atheist's rejection of the purposefulness of Being shows that he has lost the thread to follow this line of thought, yet the freely chosen lifestyle to which he has tied himself is the thickness of a ship's rope.

He steps on the brake just when the believer steps on the gas, and steps on the gas just when the believer steps on the brake. What is in opposition here is logical reasoning versus a lifestyle of choice. And because he deliberately chooses the latter, he cannot be forced into logical thinking, because his logic unfolds in self-righteousness. Can one extract coal from a quarry? It's about as likely as coaxing an arctic fox out of a field mouse hole.

In the universe, it is not the existence of simple material structures that is interesting, but their organisation, which is non-physical at the moment when the level of organisation surpasses the property of matter. The complexity of the universe indicates that the material parts have undergone a mental polishing that matter, in order to polish itself, cannot do by itself.

- We live in a universe of irreducible complexity. There are nine million known species of life on Earth, at least 500 billion planets in the Milky Way, and an estimated trillion galaxies containing 10 24 stars and 10 78 atoms in the visible Universe. The extraordinary complexity of the observed Universe is abundantly clear at every scale from quarks to the accelerating Universe.

Above the material quality of the letter is the moment when it is organised into meaningful words and sentences, or when it is acted upon by an external, intelligent spiritual force. In a simple correspondence, invisible spirits communicate with each other, and neither paper nor letters can make or correct grammatical mistakes.

Therefore, if the message /information/ is not the message of the letter but of the user, then the universe is not the message of the parts that make it up, but of the user, since the level of organisation far exceeds the quality of the matter it contains.

When you say that everything in the universe can be satisfactorily explained without God, you are also saying that everything in science and literature can be satisfactorily explained without the people who formulate the information. This is an unintelligent claim based on dilettante credulity.

Anyone who dares to do so should use the laws of natural physics and chemistry to describe the entire course of a chess world championship final, but take the chess players out of the possible movers, only the pieces move. Why do they move the way they do? Is there intelligence in their movements and where does it come from? From what natural law, chemical or physical force? Why is it not reasonable to put an intelligent mover behind them?

What is the reason for the properties of water, why is it the way it is? /e.g. it becomes light when it freezes, which benefits aquatic life./ Why a conductor's baton in the air shows the intelligent form of movement it does, science has no skill, nor is it its competence.

The conductor controls the overall performance of the orchestra using a system of hand gestures. The role of the baton is primarily to clarify and magnify the hand movements, the indication of which determines the tempo and rhythm of a group of instruments, the basic character, the metre./The metre is a measure of time, tempo or beat; the rhythm of the music./ As a simple curiosity seeker, we will not understand exactly the meaning of every single conductor's twitch and grimace. It is not necessary, it is enough that the person who is to carry out the instructions takes the cue. If all goes well, the end result will sound beautiful.

Even a serious chess match cannot be deduced from a shuffle of pieces moving according to unintelligent forces, compared to which the intelligent events in the universe are incomparably superior. Einstein said:

"In the laws of nature such a high order of intelligence is revealed that the rationality of human thinking and ordering is a pale reflection in comparison!" /Albert Einstein: Mein Weltbild. - Published by C. Seeling, Zürich-Stuttgart-Wien 1953. 21.1/

The laws of the game of chess reveal a high level of intelligence. Yes or no? Can science show by its mere tools, without any intellectual capacity, that a chess piece moves intelligently on the chessboard? No. To the instrument /which has no intelligence behind it/ all movement is unintelligent. It doesn't care if the plane is falling upside down towards the sea, or if it is on its prescribed path.

Your throat doesn't know the difference between disinfectant sodium hypochlorite and foaming beer, you swallow both. But the mind can tell the difference through the perceptual system. How then can science show the intelligent intervention of God when science itself, its measuring instruments, has no sense?! Besides, the fact that the results of scientific investigations are determined by who in the background is funding the scientific endeavour should not be underestimated. And what is the dominant paradigm? Is it the truth? More likely, the scientific and social interest, determined by those in power.

Science does not want to answer how the universe came into being, but why God did not create it. Its attitude makes any hindsight completely incorrect, that are used to prove their point!!!!

Is this sentence correct then? "There is no scientific evidence for the existence of God." And what evidence is there that the thinking is intelligent that is unwilling to see that what is interesting in the universe is not the existence of simple material structures, but their organization, which is not physical in nature at the moment when the level of organization surpasses the property of matter. To reiterate: the complexity of the universe indicates that the material parts have undergone a mental polishing that the material parts have undergone a mental polishing that matter cannot do by itself.

As such, the scientific instrument can show the grinding on a piece of wood, but not the intelligence that is the intelligent background grinding of the grinding to produce the shape of a human head. Science does not deduce, the scientist deduces, and the fact is that his deduction is an absolute scientist and a vision-dependent deduction.

To infer God is a complete betrayal of the spirit of atheism. An atheist, serious in his credulity, would not dare to do this, while his seriousness is in his credulity, he does not seriously believe what he wants to reject. Then whether the object of his rejection can be seriously doubted is another matter.

Where there is intelligence there is a conscious mind, where there is a conscious mind there is a person. And in the universe, there is intelligence on an amazing scale, there is conscious mind, there is God! If the structure of the universe did not contain intelligence, not only would it not exist, it would not have come into existence at all!

"The laws of nature show the existence of a spirit far superior to that of man, and to which we must feel humbled by our humble powers." /Phyllis to Wright, 24 January 1936. Transled from the original German: Max Jammer,  Einstein and Religion: Physics and Theology, Princeton, 1999, 92-93./

The more complex something is, the more intelligence you need to use to create it. And that the universe is saturated with intelligence on a scale incomprehensible by human standards is unnecessary to prove, it can stand without it. [Whether the incompleteness of the conception of spiritual existence also stands is another question. Atheism undertakes to decide this, and according to the extent of its own intelligence.]

If there were no intelligence in the universe, there would be no way to investigate and decipher what is comprehensible and classifiable to the human mind, which is the main characteristic of science.

So understanding comes from understandability, and the more intelligence one puts into the process of understandability, the more intelligence there must be in what one wants to conquer. And this he does by intelligence. He puts intelligence into the fathoming of events that reflect intelligence.

It is only a step from that to the acceptance by faith of the owner of intelligence /God/, which puts the intelligent thinking people in the class of believers. In the other class are people without faith who have traded the intelligence found in the universe for chance. They got here by accident, which they make no secret of, that there are meaningless, purposeless mechanical processes behind their existence.

According to atheism, man is nothing more than matter in motion, "tormented atoms in a mud". "You and I are like ants or rats, or even pieces of broccoli, in the grand scheme of things... our species has no value... we are no different from a piece of broccoli in the cosmic sense." /Dan Barker: Quoted from his debate with Paul Monata, July 10, 2006, posted on the radio program "The Infidel Guy/

Graham Lawton, managing editor of New Scientist magazine, says: "Your life may seem like a big deal to you, but it's actually a random splash of matter and energy in a carefree and impersonal universe." /Graham Lawton (2016), “What is the Meaning of Life?” New Scientist, 231[3089]:33, September 3, emp. added./

To make this statement, the author has used intelligence. If the atheists are forced to use intelligence against what they want to refute, then since their own intelligence is evidence of their existence, what they are fighting against is evidence of the existence of the other side, i.e. God, which intelligence has much greater visible results than the atheist's assertion. There is no such thing as having to use intelligence against something that does not have a shred of intelligence, if it does, then the materialists are insane for stating their position!

Why is the scientific position justified in claiming an "intelligent" author behind the atheist's written or spoken text of information? Because chemistry and physics by their very nature do not know the rules of grammar, nor intelligent communication processes.

Therefore, whoever uses intelligence against God is in fact proving God, because to scientifically prove the denial of God, he must use the same degree of intelligence that is there /with God/ that he wants to deny, understand or conquer. Atheism settles this with a wave of the hand: I don't believe, therefore there is none. [I don't believe the pot is hot - then paramedics take him to the burn ward emergency room.]

The triumph of reason is the recognition of intelligence behind complexity, but science has replaced intelligence with chance.

Atheism is a primitive form of rejection of God, which attributes its own self-righteousness to spirit, its own, but is willing to attribute the laws that coordinate the universe to anything but spirit.

If the atheist did not fine-tune what he was saying according to the rules of grammar, it would be impossible to understand what he was saying. He is saying that the fine-tuned universe does not exist. In contrast, he says of his own proposition that it exists and is fine-tuned. The little is fine tuned, the much is not. Typical atheist bias.

"If you don't want God, you'd better have a multiverse!" /Bernard Carr cosmologist/ - If you don't want atheism, you'd better have a bunch of letters ready to traipse around on their own.

Behind intelligent phenomena there is always a spirituality, a mind, a person, according to its degree, as is proved by the spirit of the atheist who uses intelligence against God in his speech /or writing/. As long as the atheist keeps his disbelief to himself, there is no problem, but as he articulates it, he provides evidence of the level of intelligence behind his own expression. Then what level of intelligence is contained in the statement "I don't believe in god" compared to what is manifest in the universe is hard to say, I mean the intelligence that denies it. They are not even related to each other. What the atheist does not believe is a reflection of his own freely chosen ignorance.

What is the height of amateurism? When one's genius hides one's own amateurism from one's eyes. In this sense, the genius of atheists is unquestionable, and it is not even appropriate for a sane thinker to question it.

To prove to an atheist not required the existence of God, but to point out the unconcealed aversion within him, is to explain the atheist's lack of belief in God. 

The pseudo-humanist ethic of atheism

"Most atheists subscribe to a humanist ethic based on compassion and a desire to alleviate suffering, which may explain why atheists are more supportive of climate change, refugees and the right to die." (Phil Zuckerman: The New Congress has a humanist congressman and a religiously unaffiliated senator - but why is it so hard for outspoken atheists to vote? - https://theconversation.com/new-congress-has-a-humanist-rep-and-a-religiously-unaffiliated-senator-but-why-is-it-so-hard-for-outright-atheists-to-get-voted-in-192997

This is a propaganda text in defence of atheism! Even the greatest atheist's hymn of morality is destroyed by the petty atheist car thief, who by his act refutes the falsehood of atheist beliefs that are presented as authentic. It happens thousands of times a day.

The world is rampant with crime, internet scammers, thieves, robbers, murderers, gun, drug, etc. abusers, family killers, traffic thugs, nature abusers and many other falsehoods.

These people are all atheists who have no respect for God or man, but act in their own self-interest. Then what kind of humanist ethics are you talking about?

No serious religion encourages its members to commit evil, so those who commit them, even if they claim to be religious, deny the most elementary teachings of their religion, so they are actually atheists or pseudo-Christians. False Christians are also atheists because they act ungodly, they are not obedient!

"Hypocrites, Isaiah truly prophesied of you, saying, This people draw near to me with their mouths, and honour me with their lips; and his heart is far from me." (Matthew 15:7-8)

"They profess to know God, but deny him by their works, because they are an abomination and an unbeliever, and unworthy of every good work." (Titus 1:16, King J.)

Advocates of atheism present themselves in a completely different light than they actually are. Ordinary atheism is arbitrary law-making for any kind of injustice! Atheism is an arbitrary violation of the cohesive moral order of society, insofar as there are as many atheists as there are the right to indulge in self-imposed promiscuity.

The greatest ingratitude of atheism is that it selfishly loves life in itself, but not the one from whom we received life. He despises, rejects, kills. He says he doesn't exist.

- Don't threaten an atheist with "go to hell" because they don't believe it. It's like threatening an adult that Santa won't bring her presents for Christmas. -

It doesn't matter how the atheist reacts to the arguments put forward against him, that's the point. to face them, that's a legal basis for your judgment. It's like a warning at a railway crossing, if you don't heed it, the railway company can't be blamed if the train hits an atheist who's pushing his chest out.

What awaits them is well illustrated in the following video:

Terrifying moment: train collides with fireworks spectators in India, killing more than 50 people

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zofb2YlYbuU

Atheists also delight in their god-denying fireworks, but they will catch the runaway train from the side, and then they will no longer be banging out anti-god rhetoric in the belief that they are existentially protected by science. Because they are not protected. Their self-indulgent self-indulgence is nothing but the destructive, self-blinding darkness of their own light.

Shooting at carved God dolls in an amusement park might seem like fun, but the real God is waiting for them at the exit.

Ezekiel 33:8 When I say unto the wicked, O wicked [man], thou shalt surely die; if thou dost not speak to warn the wicked from his way, that wicked [man] shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand.

Ezekiel 33:9 Nevertheless, if thou warn the wicked of his way to turn from it; if he do not turn from his way, he shall die in his iniquity; but thou hast delivered thy soul.

Romans 2:4 Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?

Romans 2:5 But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God;

Romans 2:6 Who will render to every man according to his deeds:

Romans 2:7 To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour an

Romans 2:8 But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,

2Thessalonians 1:7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,

2Thessalonians 1:8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:

2 Peter 2:9 The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished:

o o o o o o o o o o o

"The atheist does not want to burn the Bible, but only tries to point to the shelf in the library where even the Bible would be better off, and that is the mythology shelf. We believe that its symbolism should be enjoyed literarily, not as literal or inferred or revealed truths..." - https://ateizmus.hu/index.php/blog/kreacionizmus-vallasoknak-art-nemcsak-jozan-esznek

The Bible is high and incomprehensible to an atheist, who rummages through it to find something he can twist, to stumble over it. He regards it as mythology, with the spirituality he obviously possesses, which makes him incapable of reading his own judgement out of it.

2 Corinthians 4:3 But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: 2 Corinthians 4:4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them. (King J.)

He fundamental differences between father and son

 

Romans 15:6 That with one heart and one mouth you may glorify God and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.- See also 2 Cor 1:3; 2 Cor 11:31; Eph 1:3,17; Col 1:3; 1 Pet 1:3.  

We know that the Trinity is not the God of Christ. The God of Jesus is not a triune God. Which is the true God, for we have only one true God (John 17:3). Whom no man hath seen, while Christ was seen. (1 John 4:12)  Which God do we choose to serve? The God of the Trinity or the God of Christ?

We commit idolatry when we worship someone other than the true God of the Bible.  Who is the true God of the Bible? Is the Holy Trinity the true God? No. Is the Father alone the true God? Yes! The Father is the only true God in the Bible. John 17:3 - And this is eternal life, that they may know you (the Father), the ONLY true God... To believe in the Trinity, we must reject the Father as the only true God, which means we must reject the only true God. 

Idolatry is a sin that prevents us from entering the kingdom of God. 1 Cor 6:9-10 - Idolaters do not inherit the kingdom of God. Idolaters are cast into the lake of fire. Rev 21:8 Idolaters will have their portion in the lake of fire and brimstone. The main reason for rejecting the Trinity is to avoid idolatry.

- The majority of Christians, numbering over two billion, practice idolatry because of their belief in the Trinity.  In so doing, they have torpedoed their own salvation with a dogma of Greek philosophy created centuries after the death of the apostles under political pressure!

* * * * *

"O the depth of the riches, wisdom and knowledge of God! How inexplicable are his judgments, and unsearchable his ways! For who hath known the mind of the Lord? Or who was his counsellor? Or who first gave to him, that he might repay him? For all things are of him, and by him, and for him. To him be glory for ever. Amen." (Romans 11:33-36)

A - God has received nothing from anyone (apart from recognition), but Christ has received from God all that has led to His recognition.

B - which was given to Christ by the Father:

- that he might have life in himself (John 5:26)  this God has received from no man!

- to him was given all power (Matthew 28:18)  God did not receive this from anyone!

◦ everything (John 3:35; 6:37,39; 13:3)
◦ judgment (John 5:22,27)
◦ work (John 5:36; 17:4)
◦ giving life (John 17:2)
◦ people (John 17:6)
◦ words (John 17:8)
◦ glory (John 17:22,24)
◦ cup (John 18:11)
◦ revelation (Rev. 1:1)
◦ inheritance (Hebrews 1:2)
◦ words (Deuteronomy 18:18)
◦ nations (Psalm 2:8)
◦ the land (Psalms 2:8)
◦ David's throne (Luke 1:32)
◦ life (Acts 13:37)
◦ dominion (Ezekiel 21:27)
◦ Spirit (Matthew 12:18)
◦ love (John 17:24)
◦ anointing (Isaiah 61:1)
◦ authority over the nations (Revelation 2:28; Psalm 110:1)
◦ kingdom/dignity (Daniel 7:14; Isaiah 9:6)
◦ name above all (Philippians 2:9)
◦ children (Hebrews 2:13)
◦ honour (John 5:23)
◦ majesty (Ephesians 1:22)

THE FATHER (a) EXCLUSIVE CHARACTERISTICS - EXCLUSIVE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE boy (b)

1. (a) He is God (ho theos), the Father (John 4:23-24; 6:27). [God (with a definite article) means a distinct identity.]

(b) He is (only begotten) God (theos), the Son (John 1:1,18) [God (adverb - a, without) means quality/property = divine] Immanuel (meaning God with us) means Jesus, not the Father (cf. Matthew 1:23) God is with us through the Son, as He was with Him (cf. Acts 10:38, cf. John 16:32) The word theos (lower case everywhere in the Greek, regardless of who it refers to) refers to the Father, and apart from him to all those who are God (the Father) in their nature/quality/property/character (having divine authority/ability), but not literally God (for there is only one of those! ); e.g. Jesus (Isaiah 9:6); the leaders of Israel (John 10:34), - also applies to those who are not Gods by nature (cf. Galatians 4:8) but are merely Gods according to human/civil views, rules/rules, powerless and weak elements, dumb idols made by men (cf. Psalm 115:4-8; Habakkuk 2:1

2. (a) He is the Almighty God, YHVH/YAHUVEH/YHWH - Revelation 21:22a; cf. Revelation 1:8; 4:8; 11:17; 15:3; 16:7,14; 19:6; 2 Corinthians 6:18; Exodus 6:3; Psalm 91:1; Isaiah 13:6; Joel 1:15

(b) He is the Lamb, who comes and speaks in the name of Yahweh, set apart from God Almighty - Revelation 21:22b; cf. Revelation 19:15; Deuteronomy 18:19; John 5:43; Matthew 23:39; Micah 5:4

3. (a) God is different from the Lamb - John 1:29,36; Revelation 7:10a; 14:4; 22:1a; 22:3a

(b) The Lamb is different from God - John 1:29,36; Revelation 7:10b; 14:4; 22:1b; 22:3b; 1 Peter 1:19-21

4. (a) He is the personification of deity - Romans 1:20; cf. Acts 17:29

(b) He is the image of God - 2 Corinthians 4:4; Colossians 1:15; Hebrews 1:3. In him was - by the pleasure of God (Colossians 1:19) - the fullness of God (Colossians 2:9), the bodily outworking of God's love, not God doubling himself or being transformed into Christ (? ), who thereby possessed the full reality of God, since He had imperfections in comparison with the Father (cf. Matthew 20:23; John 5:30; 8:28; etc.). Likewise, the church has the fullness of Christ (the church is the fullness of Christ, not fully identical with the church in Christ - Ephesians 1:23; cf. Colossians 2:10); but neither is transformed into the other (the Father into the Son, or the church into Christ) - they are not identical, they merely bear the fullness of Him and to the extent of Him who is manifested in/by them. The Son is the image of the Father, and the church is the image of the Son, (Romans 8:29), while it is His privilege to be fulfilled to the fullness of God - without being identical with Him (cf. Ephesians 3:19).

5. (a) He is goodness incarnate - Mark 10:18b

(b) He was qualitatively good (cf. Matthew 20:15; John 7:12), but he was not the embodiment of goodness - Mark 10:18a

6. (a) He is the embodiment of love - 1 John 4:8, 16; cf. 2 Corinthians 13:11; Ephesians 2:4

(b) He showed the greatest love (cf. John 15:13), but he was not the source of love, he was also loved - John 17:24

7. (a) He is the one, the only true (the one who speaks the truth -Titus 1:2) God, the God and Father of the Jews, of Jesus and of Christians, the whole earth; there is no other God. - Genesis 17:7; Deuteronomy 6:4; Isaiah 45:5; 54:5; Matthew 6:9; 22:37; 27:46; Mark 12:32; John 17:3; 20:17; 1 Corinthians 8:4; 2 Corinthians 11: 31; Ephesians 1:17; Colossians 1:3; 1 Thessalonians 3:9,13; 2 Thessalonians 2:16; 1 Timothy 1:17; Hebrews 11:16; James 2:19; Revelation 3:12

(b) Jesus is not our God! - cf. John 20:17; 1 Corinthians 8:6; 2 Corinthians 6:16; Acts 2:39; Romans 1:8; Hebrews 11:16; Revelation 21:7. Thomas's statement is physical and comes from a sudden impulse. The apostles did not see God in Jesus! Cf. John 20:20,25 - John 20:28 is in contrast to Matthew 16:18, and all other inspired statements concerning our God.

8. (a) He is the Father, God, Lord of Hosts and Harvest - Isaiah 9:7; 63:16; Jeremiah 10:10; Malachi 1:6; Matthew 9:38

(b) He has only the name (post-resurrection title: Mighty God, Father of Eternity, - Isaiah 9:6) which he receives from the Lord of Hosts (Jehovah) (Isaiah 9:7; cf. Mark 12:11) What the Father has is his (John 16:15), except what makes the Father the Father, and what is the Father's authority. Cf. Matthew 7:21; 20:23, etc…

9. (a) God and the Father are one and the same - John 4:23-24; 6:45-46; 1 Corinthians 8:6; 15:24; 2 Corinthians 11:31; Galatians 1:4; Philippians 4:20; Colossians 3:17; 1 Thessalonians 1:3; 3:13; Titus 1:4; James 1:27; The Father never came down to earth in the form of a Son. cf. Matthew 18:10

(b) Jehovah God and Jesus Christ are not the same - Acts 2:34-36; Christ is Jehovah's Anointed and Messenger. Cf. Acts 4:26-27; 10:38; John 8:42; 12:49; 20:21; Psalm 2:2; Isaiah 61:1. (John 3:13; 6:33, 38, 51, 58; Ephesians 4:9-10) In God's symbolic "coming down" He did not put on flesh as Christ did, but took action - acted - on behalf of His people (cf. Acts 7:34)

10. (a) Jesus confessed the Father as God - John 4:23-24; 6:27; 10:36

(b) We are to confess Jesus as Christ (John 9:22; 1 John 4:3; 2 John 7), Lord (Romans 10:9, New Prot.; Philippians 2:11; and Son of God (1 John 4:15) - not God!!! Those who proclaim the Deity of Jesus also identify Him with Jehovah, God the Father, which is idolatrous heresy. Cf. 2 Peter 2:1; See Exodus 20:3-5; 34:14; 1 Corinthians 10:14; 1 John 5:21; Revelation 22:15

11. (a) He is the God of the holy prophets (Revelation 22:6) Moses wrote of Him as God - cf. (2 Corinthians 8:26-27; 24:4) He is the Chooser, Who has placed the members of the body of Christ according to His pleasure (1 Corinthians 12:18).

(b) He was raised up by God as a prophet according to the prophecy of Moses (cf. Deuteronomy 18:15, 18-19; Acts 3:22-26; 7:37). Christ identified Himself with Moses and the person revealed by the prophets (cf. Luke 24:19, 27; John 5:46) Philip, some, and Paul identified Jesus with the person revealed by Moses and the prophets (cf. John 1:46, KJV; see also John 6:14; Acts 8:34-35, 26:22-23; 28:23; Romans 1:2-3) In Him are chosen the elect of God (Ephesians 1:4; Mark 13:20).

12. (a) He is the I AM - Exodus 3:14, the living and true God to whom we must repent - cf. 1 Thessalonians 1:9; Acts 14:15; 26:18-20

(b) I am the Son of God, Jesus said of Himself (John 10:36; cf. 1 Thessalonians 1:10)

13. (a) It is evident that it existed before Abraham, and it would be meaningless to refer to it, since it has no beginning. (Psalms. 90:2) God is not identical with his own Son, for he speaks to him and they exchange words (cf. Matthew 3:17; 2 Peter 1:17; John 12:28).

(b) It existed before Abraham, but it is not the same as Jehovah - the I am (cf. Matthew 22:32). He did not say that I am the I AM, but before Abraham BEING (sometime), before the world was (cf. John 17:5), but not from everlasting. By the way, just as Jesus says of Abraham that he was born before me [cf. John 8:58], the same Greek phrase (geniomai) is used of Jesus - before me he was born, he was born, he was created (sometime), said John the Baptist (cf. John 1:15, 27, 30) [Since Jesus was bodily born after John the Baptist, obviously John was making a prophetic statement to Jesus about the Word/Son birth of the Logos!!!] Either John 1:3: all things were made by him (sometime); or John 1:10: the world was made by him (sometime); or John 1:14: the Word The Word was made flesh (sometime); or John 2:9: the water was made wine (sometime); or Acts 4:22: the miracle of healing was wrought (sometime); in Galatians 4:4: from a woman LAD (sometime), under the law LAD (sometime), same of the law: RUNNED (sometime) [cf. Galatians 3:17]; of men: created (sometime) [cf. James 3:9], etc…

14. (a) He is from everlasting to everlasting, He exists (Psalm 90:2); He is the Alpha and the Omega - Revelation 1:8; 21:6; 22:13

(b) He is from the beginning, (arkhe=beginning) - 1 John 1:1; 2:13-14; He is the beginning - Colossians 1:18; He is the beginning of God's creation - Revelation 3:14, i.e. He began the creation of God! Just as the devil is a murderer of men and a sinner from the beginning - John 8:44; 1 John 3:8 - so he is not from eternity, for the devil's fall has its beginning. The word arkhe/beginning never means to be from everlasting, but the beginning of something (Mark 1:1; 2 Peter 3:4) or someone. (Matthew 19:4) The phrase no beginning (Hebrews 7:34) is the exact opposite of someone (in this case Jesus) having a beginning - therefore not from everlasting!

15. (a) He is begotten of no man, unbegotten, for He alone is God, no other - 1 Samuel 2:2; 2 Samuel 7:22; Luke 18:19; 1 Corinthians 8:4

(b) He exists by procreation (i.e., because of someone), the only begotten of the Father - Psalm 2:7; Jehovah's Son Jesus was thus born three times: 1. John 1:18; 5:26; Proverbs 8:22); 2. when he was born as a man of Mary (cf. Matthew 1:25); 3. when he was raised to spiritual, immortal heavenly life (cf. 1 Peter 3:18). [See also Isaiah 9:6; Deuteronomy 32:18 [about Israel]; James 1:18 [about the church]

16. (a) It comes from no one, for He is the Creator, from Whose will all things proceed - cf. Revelation 4:11; Romans 11:36; 1 Corinthians 8:6; Ephesians 4:6; God sustains/reanimates all. cf. 1 Timothy 6:13

(b) He has an ancient (aion) descent, which clearly indicates birth, the beginning of his existence - Micah 5:1, New Prot. [MBT]; cf. Ezekiel 16:3, John 8:42, Charlemagne

17. a) He is not a creature, He first created the Son, Wisdom incarnate - Proverbs 8:22 (ektiszen = created, LXX. and Catholic translations cf. Deuteronomy 4:32; 32:6); 1 Corinthians 1:24, 30; Jesus called Him Creator - Matthew 19:4.

(b) The firstborn of all creation - Colossians 1:15. Whoever is the firstborn of whom belongs to him, to whom he is a partaker. He is the first creature in God's spiritual creation. Jehovah delighted in him. Cf. Proverbs 8:30; Isaiah 42:1; Matthew 3:17; - James 1:18 speaks of the genius (ktisma) of creatures, the first genius is Christ (1 Corinthians 15:23), and since He is first in all things (cf. Colossians 1:18), so also among creatures! Christ is the first creature of God.

18. (a) He said of himself, "There is no other God but he" - Isaiah 43:11; 44:8; cf. 37:20; Deuteronomy 4:35; 32:39; 1 Kings 8:60; Psalm 83:19; 86:8,10; Romans 16:27

(b) He never called himself God, nor said he was the same as Him. He designated the Father as the one, only true God.- John 5:44;17:3

19. (a) It must be believed that before Jehovah God was not created, and after him there will be no God - Isaiah 43:10; 45:5-6; 1 Corinthians 8:4. Isaiah 44:6; cf. Isaiah 41:4; 48:12; Revelation 22:13

(b) Jesus is to be believed to be the Son of God, (and not God Himself!) - John 20:31. The demons who knew one God (James 2:9) did not identify Him with God either. cf. When Jesus introduces Himself with this title, "the First and the Last" (Revelation 1:17; 2:8), He does not claim to be equal with Jehovah, but merely uses the title that God has given Him. Jesus was "the first" of those who were raised to immortal spiritual life (Colossians 1:18). He is also "the last" to be raised to such spiritual life by Jehovah himself. Therefore he became 'alive', 'living for ever and ever'. He enjoys immortality. In this respect he is like his immortal Father, whom the Scriptures call 'the living God' (Revelation 7:2 ; Psalm 42:3, KJV). Jesus himself will raise up all other anointed Christians (cf. John 5:21).

20. (a) He has no God. - Exodus 15:11; 18:11; Deuteronomy 10:17; 2 Chronicles 2:5; Nehemiah 1:5; Psalms 95:3; 96:4; 97:9; 135:5; 136:2; Daniel 2:47

(b) The God of Christ is Jehovah the Father.- Psalm 45:7; John 20:17; 2 Corinthians 1:3; Ephesians 1:3, 17; Colossians 1:3; Hebrews 1:9; 1 Peter 1:3; Revelation 3:12. He is a precious stone chosen before God.- 1 Peter 2:4

21. (a) He has no Father, but has a Son in whom (not in Himself) He delights - Matthew 3:17; 12:18; 17:5; Luke 9:35; 2 Peter 1:17; cf. Psalm 2:7; Isaiah 42:1

(b) He has no Son, but He has a Father - John 12:28; 17:1; 20:17

22. (a) He has no head, he is Lord over all and commander of all.- Deuteronomy 10:17; Psalms 119:91; 136:3; 148:4-6; Jeremiah 32:21, Dr. Hertz J. H. Translation

(b) He has God as his head, even after his resurrection. (1 Corinthians 11:3) He was given to the nations as a command from God. (Isaiah 55:4) Jesus was led by commandments. - John 12:49; 14:31; cf. 17:4

23. (a) He is never subject to anyone. (Ephesians 4:6; cf. 1 Corinthians 12:6; 15:27) He is the one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all. - Job 42:2; Isaiah 46:10; Romans 8:28; Ephesians 1:11; Revelation 4:11; His own sovereign power/sovereignty (tithémi) over the times in which the Son has no say - Acts 1:7; cf. Mark 13:32

b) The Son submits Himself to the One who submitted all things to Him - 1 Corinthians 15:28. This submission (also) shows that the doctrine of Trinitarian unity is not biblical. Jesus' will is subordinate - Luke 22:4; John 5:19, 30; 8.28; 12:49; 14:31; he is ordained (tithémi) of God to be heir of all - Hebrews 1:2

24. (a) Father and Son - though two distinct Beings (2 Timothy 4:1), yet equal in spiritual appearance - Genesis 1:26

(b) He was equal to God in form. The Greek word isos always means equality in ANYTHING, not identity. cf. Matthew 20:12; Mark 14:56; Luke 6:34; John 5:18; Acts 11:17; Philippians 2:6; Revelation 21:16. God did not taste death, only by God's grace Jesus did. cf. Hebrews 2:9; Jesus is not the God of grace, but the Father, Jehovah. 1 Peter 5:10

25. (a) From Him, through Him, and for Him are all things.(From Him all things flow, through Him all things flow, into Him all things flow - Romans 11:36. The Son is His companion (Zechariah 13:7) in creation, for God created the universe through Him. Proverbs 8:30; cf. John 1:3; Colossians 1:16; Hebrews 1:2. 1 Corinthians 8:6a; Acts 17:28

(b) One with the Father (in attributes and purposes), as the church is one with Christ, but not identical - John 10:30; 17:11,21; cf. 1 Corinthians 3:8a; 12:12; Galatians 3:28; Romans 12:5. (That unity does not imply identity, see e.g. Genesis 11:6; Judges 20:1) All things are by Him, and we by Him. 1 Corinthians 8:6b

26. (a) He offered His own blood (His Son) - Acts 20:28; cf. Matthew 26:28; John 6:54; 1 John 1:7

(b) The "blood" of property (figurative expression), he was God's own son - Romans 8:32

27. (a) The power was always His - 1 Chronicles 29:11; 2 Chronicles 20:6; Daniel 7:13-14; cf. Daniel 2:20; Psalm 147:5; Jeremiah 32:18; no power but of God - Romans 13:1

(b) He received his power from God - Daniel 7:14; Matthew 28:18; Acts 10:38; He was mighty in the sight of God. Luke 24:19; God was his throne. Psalm 45:7, Hebrews 1:8 (Here the text does not say that Jesus was God, but that the throne of the Son was God forever); God puts all enemies under his feet. - 1 Corinthians 15:25

28. (a) Jehovah is the being of old age, Who gives the sovereign power, dignity and kingship. - Daniel 7:13-14. cf. Daniel 7:9,22; Psalm 90:2; Isaiah 9:7; Habakkuk 1:12; Revelation 4:2; 12:10- Daniel 7:13-14. cf. Daniel 7:9,22; Psalm 90:2; Isaiah 9:7; Habakkuk 1:12; Revelation 4:2; 12:10

(b) Jesus is the Son of Man who receives authority - Daniel 7:13-14; cf. Matthew 25:31; John 3:13; Acts 7:56; Philippians 2:7; Hebrews 2:14; Revelation 1:13; 14:14

29. (a) He is the greatest (Hebrews 6:13); The most powerful Lord (Genesis 14:18; Numbers 24:16; Deuteronomy 32:8; Mark 5:7); No one teaches or strengthens Him - Job 9:4; 21:22; 36:22; Romans 11:34; For He is the most high God - Luke 1:32,35,76; Mark 5:7

(b) According to Jesus, the Father is greater than all - John 10:29; 14:28 - even him. He was strengthened and taught by an angel. Luke 22:43; John 8:28; cf. Hebrews 5:8. he is grazed by the power of Jehovah. (Micah 5:4, KJV) He is the Son of the most high God - Mark 5:7

30. (a) He has life of His own accord, which He has received from no man - John 5:26a; He is the fountain of life - Ps 36:10, KJV; Jer 2:13; 17:13; Acts 17:28

(b) The Father gave him life in himself. So the Father had to be first in order to give life to His Son. John 5:26b; Jesus literally said, "I am FOR HIM" - autú eimi - (John 7:29, cat. f.). He is the righteous servant of God. Isaiah 42:1; 52:13; 53:11; Matthew 12:18; Acts 3:13; Hebrews 8:2

31. (a) God is not man - Numbers 23:19a

(b) He could not be both God and man - Numbers 23:19; He was mediator between God and man - 1 Timothy 2:5; He was spokesman to the Father - 1 John 2:1; cf. Matthew 10:32-33.

32. (a) He was not the son of man - 4Mózes 23:19b

(b) He was the Son of man, who stood at the right hand of God - Acts 7:56

33. (a) There is no comparison to anyone or anything - Exodus 8:10; 9:14; 2 Samuel 7:22; Psalm 89:6; 40:6, KJV; Isaiah 40:18, 25; 46:5,9

(b) He became like a man. - Philippians 2:7; He likened himself to Solomon. - Matthew 12:42; He became like a son of man. - Daniel 7:13; Revelation 1:13

34. (a) God is a spirit (always is!) - John 4:24; He can never become flesh, and therefore has never been seen - Exodus 33:20; John 1:18;; 6:46; 1 John 4:12,20

(b) He (as the Word) can become flesh - John 1:14; Hebrews 10:5, then spirit - 1 Corinthians 15:45; 1 Timothy 3:16, but God can never become flesh, for then He is no longer what He is - an invisible spirit - 2 Corinthians 3:17 ; cf. Hebrews 11:27

35. (a) Never seen (of men) - John 5:37; formless being - Deuteronomy 4:12, 15; hidden being - Isaiah 45:15; secret being - Matthew 6:6; spoken from heaven - Matthew 3:17; invisible - Colossians 1:15; 1 Timothy 1:17; to be known by His works - Romans 1:20; to be believed in - Hebrews 11:26

(b) In the OT, Jesus represented Jehovah as an angel, he was (as YHVH - cf. Exodus 3:2) the Angel of YHVH - cf. Exodus 14:19; 23:20-21; 32:34; 33:2-3; Numbers 20:16; Joshua 5:14; Psalm 34:8; Isaiah 63:9; ( cf. God's countenance - John 14:9; 2 Corinthians 4:6); Acts 7:35,38,53; 1 Corinthians 10:4, 9; Galatians 3:19; (cf. "you have received as an angel of God, as Christ Jesus" - Galatians 4:14) ;Hebrews 2:2; cf. "His (YHVH's) ambassador (Christ) has delivered them" - Isaiah 63:9 ; → "suddenly the Lord (YHVH) comes to His (YHVH's) temple... and the messenger of the covenant (Christ)" - Malachi 3:1

36. (a) He is always in heaven (Luke 2:14), the angels always see His face in heaven. - Matthew 18:10

(b) While God was in heaven, the Son was on earth - Luke 2:16,52; God spoke from heaven to His Son on earth - Matthew 3:17; He was faithful to God - Hebrews 2:17

37. (a) Immortal (incorruptible). - 1 Timothy 1:17; Romans 1:23; everlasting - Genesis 21:33; Deuteronomy 33:27; Isaiah 40:28; ever reigning - Exodus 15:18; Psalm 145:13; 146:10; ever living - Deuteronomy 32:40; Daniel 4:31; 12:7; 1 Peter 1:23; Revelation 4:9-10; 10:6; ever king - Psalm 10: 16; Jeremiah 10:10; ever enthroned - Psalm 29:10; ever surrounding His people - Psalm 125:2; ever dwelling - Isaiah 57:15; ever abiding - Daniel 6:26; his power everlasting - Daniel 4:31; never to die - Habakkuk 1:12, Catholic trans. ; eternal - Romans 16:26

(b) He was obedient unto death - Philippians 2:8; he was cut off from the living - Isaiah 53:8;he was slain- Daniel 9:26; he gave his life unto death - Isaiah 53:12; he gave up his spirit - John 19: 30; slain (the Prince of life) - Acts 3:15; Revelation 5:12; raised from the dead by God - Acts 4:10; 10:40; 13:30; the first of the resurrection of the dead - Acts 26:23; - died for us - Romans 5:8; the heavenly called (cf. Hebrews 3:1) were buried with him - Romans 6:4; cf. Philippians 3:10; 2 Timothy 2:11; he shall die no more - Romans 6:9; he was blessed - 1 Corinthians 5:7; he died for our sins - 1 Corinthians 15:3; his God raised him from the dead - Ephesians 1:17,20; he is the firstborn from the dead - Colossians 1:18; he died and rose again - 1 Thessalonians 4: 14; brought forth by God from the dead - Hebrews 13:20; put to death according to the flesh - 1 Peter 3:18; was dead, now is alive - by the power of God - 2 Corinthians 13:4; Revelation 1:18; declared/ordained to be the Son of God by the resurrection from the dead. - Romans 1:4

38. (a) It would be senseless for Him to appear before Himself, or to sit at His own right hand, since He sits on the throne - 1 Kings 22:19; Isaiah 6:1; Ezekiel 1:26; Daniel 7:9; Revelation 4:2; 7:10; 19:4

(b) He went to the Father - John 16:28; He appeared before God - Hebrews 9:24; He sits at the right hand of God - Psalm 110:1; Romans 8:34; Mark 12:36; Acts 7:55-56; Ephesians 1:20; Colossians 3:1; Hebrews 1:3,13; 8:1; 10:12; 12:2; 1 Peter 3:22

39. (a) In the Tirnitarian (triple) passages only the Father is called God - 2 Corinthians 1:21-22; 13:13; 1 Peter 1:2

(b) He is not called God, because he is not God, but Jehovah the Father - John 6:27; 8:40; 2 Corinthians 3:4; Ephesians 1:2-3; 4:4; 5:20; 2 Thessalonians 1:8; 2 Timothy 4:1; Titus 2:13; Revelation 1:1; 20:6; 22:1

40. (a) He exists in one person - apart from me (not us) there is no God - Isaiah 44:6. cf. Deuteronomy 4:35; 32:12; Isaiah 43:10-11; 45:18; 1 Samuel 2:2; Mark 12:32; 1 Corinthians 8:6; He was never called a triune God!!! - cf. Acts 4:24

(b) Jesus taught the same - John 17:3; cf. Mark 12:11; He was not taught to be part of a trinity! See Philip's testimony of Jesus to the butler - Acts 8:35.
I wonder why Philip missed this good opportunity, since trinity believers do not miss any opportunity, but immediately proclaim to fresh converts that Jesus is part of the trinity-God (i.e. as they conceive Him).

41. (a) He is the hearer of prayer, no one else. He prays to no one - Psalm 55:17; 65:3; 145:18; Proverbs 15:8,29; Matthew 6:6,9; Acts 4:24; 10:31; 12:5; Philippians 4:6; 1 John 5:14; Revelation 5:8; 8:3-4; He has not given thanks to Christ.

(b) Christ gave thanks to God (John 6:11; 11:41; He prayed to God in exemplary fashion - Luke 6:12; 22:42; Hebrews 5:7; [John 14:14:to ask of me is to ask, not to pray cf. Mark 10:35-36; Matthew 20:20. See also John 16:26; 11:22; 1 John 5:14.] In Acts 7:59, epikaleo means an appeal, not a prayer (cf. Acts 25:11). For how one can call upon [come to my aid] someone without praying to him, see e.g. 2 Samuel 10:11; Mark 9:22-24; Acts 9:14,21; 16:9; 22:16; cf. Acts 10:43; 1 Corinthians 1:2; Philippians 4:3. What does it mean to invoke the name of Jesus if not to pray to him? The answer is very simple: The early church, anointed by the Holy Spirit, invoked the name of Christ by referring to Christ in their prayers to the Most High Lord, that through Him God might give them the necessary qualifications for service. cf. Acts 4:30. So this is what it means (not prayer to Him) to invoke the name of Christ, that is, to go to the Father through Him (cf. John 14:6) Or, like Stephen, in our distress, we invoke his name in acknowledgment of the honour with which God has endowed him (cf. Hebrews 4:14-16; 1 Corinthians 1:30; Philippians 2:9-11)

42. (a) His exclusive worship is a requirement. - Exodus 20:3; No one can be worshipped but Him, for He shares worship with no one. - Exodus 34:14; Luke 4:8. His exclusive worship is also traced in the book of Revelation. cf. Revelation 4:9-11; 5:14; 7:11-12; 11:16-17; 19:4

(b) Since the worship of God refers to the Father, since we are exhorted to worship the ho theos (cf. Revelation 19:10; 22:9; see also Revelation 19:10; 22:9; cf. 14:7), therefore the worship of the Son is a departure from the divine will, i.e. disobedience, and in worship it is idolatry (for all worship is that which is not directed to Jehovah God!) The Son is to be honored and reverenced, (etc.), but not worship - cf. Luke 24:52; John 9:38; Zze. 1:6; Rev. 5:13

["If Christ is not God, then worshiping Him would be idolatry." (Gospel Publishing House, "ON THE DIVINITY OF CHRIST, p. 6) ... "If Christ were not God, His worship would be idolatry."-https://christiananswers.net/hungarian/q-eden/edn-r005h.html ... "The Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God - one with the Father, who is to be worshipped, honoured and adored, this is also the will of the Father...It would be a great mistake to interpret and teach the truth of Scripture on this subject otherwise, God forbid." /Alexander Seidel, Gospel Publishing House, June 1999/.... "But Jesus Christ declared Himself to be the TRUE and LIVING God!... He proclaimed "I am God"... If He is not God, then He is none of our business." /John Maisel: Is Jesus God? Central European Bible Institute (CEBI), pp. 17, 19]43.]

43. (a) The Father seeks His worshippers, "they that worship Him," said Jesus - John 4:23-24; cf. 1 Corinthians 14:25. He can only be approached through an intercessor - 1 Timothy 2:5; John 14:6

(b) Jesus, as a Jew, worshipped God, and identified true worshippers as Father-worshippers - John 4:21-24. He insisted on worshipping the Father - Matthew 4:10; He could be approached without an intercessor. See Matthew 8:5-13

44. (a) God has no head, He is no one's anointed, etc…

(b) The head of Christ is God - 1 Corinthians 11:3; He is the anointed of Jehovah - Acts 4:26; 10:38; cf. Psalm 2:2; Isaiah 61:1; Luke 4:18; He is the Christ of our Lord - Revelation 11:15; the Christ of our God - Revelation 12:10; Christ is God's - 1 Corinthians 3:23

45. (a) He alone is holy in Himself, not tempted with evil - Revelation 15:4; James 1:13; He foreknows the end - Isaiah 46:9-10, He alone is omniscient - 1 Samuel 2:3, KJV; Job 37:16, Catholic translation; Psalm 147:5; 1 John 3:20

(b) Jesus is sanctified by the Father, He is tempted in all things - John 10:36; Hebrews 4:15; the day and hour of judgment He does not know, but only the Father - Matthew 24:36; Mark 13:32; cf. Revelation 1:1. He is not omniscient, his knowledge is limited compared to the Father - cf. Acts 1:7

46. (a) saving God, giver of salvation, delivering God, liberating God. Who is never identical with the Saviour, with Jesus Christ, the deliverer and savior. cf. (LXX: Deuteronomy 32:15; Psalm 24:5; 95:1, etc.); Luke 1:47; 1 Timothy 1:1; 2:3; 4:10; Titus 1:3; 2:10; 3:4; Jude 25

(b) He is the saving, redeeming Jesus Christ, who is never the same as the saving, preserving, redeeming God. - Luke 2:11; John 4:42; Acts 5:31; 13:23; Ephesians 5:23; Philippians 3:20; 2 Timothy 1:10; Titus 1:4; 2:13; 3:6; 2 Peter 1:1,11; 2:20; 3:2,18; 1 John 4:14. God made Christ sin for us - 2 Corinthians 5:21, He could not make Himself sin, He is not the same as Him.

¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤

"Article 12: We have one God, the Father, by whom are all things, and we by him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and we by him. That is, we are to worship the Father alone as God Almighty, and to glorify Jesus Christ as Lord, the Messiah, the mighty King, the Lamb of God, who died and redeemed us by his blood, and made us kings and priests, the called and the chosen ones." /Newton's 12 Articles of Faith on God and Christ c. 1710-1720; KEYNES MS 8, KING'S COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE/

"Christ the Lord" (Lk 2:11) not identical with God, but with the Lord's Anointed (cf. Lk 2:26), and not with the Lord, the YHVH God, of whom He is the Anointed (Christ).

It is not the same because He is omnipotent (cf. Revelation 21:22),
infinite justice and mercy (cf. Dan 9:16,18),
eternal (cf. Deuteronomy 33:27),
Most High God (cf. Ps 97:9, MBT).
never to be born (cf. John 1:17);
comes from no man (cf. Mic 5:1);
his life in himself is given from no man (cf. John 5:26);
He lives by no man (cf. John 6:57);
He is not the firstborn of any man (cf. Col 1:15);
He never prays (cf. Luke 6:12);
never takes flesh (cf. John 1:14);
never intercedes for anyone (cf. 1 Timothy 2:5);
never dies (cf. Deut. 32:40);
never sacrificed himself (cf. Heb. 7:27);
He shall never be resurrected (cf. 1 Pet. 1:21);
never made in the image of any man (cf. Col 1:15);
never the head of any man (cf. 1 Cor 11:3);
no man is ever his god (cf. Eph. 1:17; Heb. 1:9);
he is never subject to anyone (cf. 1 Cor 15:28);
never made inferior to the angels (cf. Heb 2:8-9);
never subject to the will of any (cf. Dan 4:32; Luke 22:42);
never increases (cf. John 3:30);
never received his authority from anyone (cf. Matthew 28:18);
never sent by anyone (cf. Acts 3:19-20);
never anointed by any (cf. Isa 61:1; Acts 2:36);
never taught (cf. Isa 40:13; John 8:28; Rom 11:34);
can never be compared to anyone (cf. Isa 46:5,9; Phil 2:7);
never the brother of any man (cf. John 20:17; Heb. 2:11-12,17);
never had men or angels for companions (cf. Rom 8:17; Heb 1:9);
no one ever sat on his right hand (cf. Ephesians 1:20);
He alone is holy by Himself (cf. Revelation 15:4);
No man ever tempted with evil (cf. Jas 1:13; Heb 4:15);
No one ever persecuted Him (cf. John 15:20);
never worshipped a creature (cf. Mat 4:9);

and NEVER SHARED THE PRAYER [worship of God] WITH ANYONE, did not even share worship with the Son (cf. John 4:21-24; Revelation 4:9-11; 5:14; 7:11-12; 11:16-17; 19:4)

- consequently, he never called himself a trinity (cf. Isa 43:12; Mal 1:6), which illegitimizes the inviolability of his sole sovereignty (cf. Mark 13:20; Acts 1:7; Rev 4:11)!

Therefore there is no place in true worship for human attempts to express what God has never expressed anywhere! "Nowhere in the Bible is the term "Trinity" a humanto express this divine mystery in one word." /Werner Gitt: Frequently Asked Questions. Evangelical Publishing House, p.22./

GOD DOES NOT CALL HIMSELF TRINITY

Isaiah 45:5 I am the Lord, and there is no other, besides me there is no God!

How did I pick out God's statement about Himself, in which there is no mention of a trinity? Perhaps the extraction is not valid because elsewhere God says something else about Himself, or others say something else about Him? Elsewhere, the Bible writers say nothing about Him other than that there is no God but idol gods, which are not really God.

Isa 44:8 ... Is there any God besides me? No stone, I cannot!

Isa 44:9 The makers of idols are all vain, and their favorites profit nothing, and their witnesses see nothing and know nothing, that they may be put to shame.

2Sam 7:22 For this cause, O LORD God, you have been exalted: for there is none like you, and besides you there is no God,

Psa 86:10 For thou art great, and doest wonders; thou alone art God.

Are we making God an experiment? That is not what we read about God: 

Acts 17:29 Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the deity is likened to gold, or silver, or stone, to the carving of human workmanship and invention.

Is not human experiment the carving of human invention?

THERE IS NO OTHER GOD

"NO OTHER GOD" (Isaiah 45:5) means, 

than that

1Kir 8:60 That all the peoples of the earth may know that the Lord is God, and that there is no other.

Hos 13:4 But I am the LORD your God from the land of Egypt. You shall know no other God besides me, and there is no savior besides me.

Joel 2:27 And ye shall know that I am I among Israel, and that I am the LORD your God, and there is none else.

Mark 12:32 Then the scribe said to him, "It is well, Master, you have said truly that there is one God, and no other.

Acts 4:12 And there is salvation in no one else: for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.

Gal 1:7 And there is no other - Gospel

If there is another God, then there is another gospel, and there is another Savior besides Jesus - but there is none!

Heb 5:7 Who in the days of his flesh with supplications and supplications, with strong crying and supplications, came to him who was able to deliver him from death, and was heard for his godliness,

Jesus Christ had a Fear of God - G2124- /What would the fear of God be?/ and taught that there is one God, the Father (John 5:44; 17:3; 20:17)

Hebrews 12:28 Therefore having obtained an immovable kingdom, let us be thankful, whereby we should serve God with grace and fear - G2124-.

Whoever therefore does not accept that there is no God but God the Father, does not serve in a manner pleasing to God with grace and fear. It is clear!

THE UNITY OF FATHER AND SON

There is no dispute about the identity of God, with whom Jesus is one (John 10:30 I and the Father are one.), but Paul also wrote about unity:

1 Cor 3:6 I planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase.

1Co 3:7 Therefore neither he that planted is anything, nor he that watered; but God is the giver of the increase.

1Co 3:8 THE PLANTER AND THE SPRINKLER ARE ONE; but every man according to his work receiveth his own reward.

That is, the unity of Paul and Apollos does not imply anything other than being in unity, according to the same Greek word, which includes believers.

John 17:11 ... Holy Father, keep them in your name whom you have given me, that they may be ONE AS WE ARE!

Let's look at the Greek phrase behind the word ONE:

John 17:22 And the glory which thou hast given me I have given them, that they may be one (G1520- heis), even as we are one (G1520- heis):

1Co 3:8 Now the planter and the irrigator are one (G1520- heis); but each receives his own reward according to his work.

The same Greek word is used between the unity of believers, Jesus and the Father, and the unity of Paul and Apollos. "but each receives his own reward according to his work." 

Here we have the EACH taking the reward according to his WORK.

THE WORK OF ANOTHER GOD, -  

Eph 1:19 And we the majesty of His power toward us that believe, according to the working of the mighty working of His power, 

Eph 1:20 Which He showed in Christ, when He raised Him from the dead, and seated Him at His right hand in the heavenly places. 

Php 2:13 For it is God who works in you both to will and to work for good pleasure. 

2Kor 5:5 And he who prepared us for this is God, who also gave us the pledge of the Spirit.

THE WORK OF THE SON IS DIFFERENT

Phil 3:20 For our kingdom is in heaven, from which also we look for the Lord Jesus Christ, who is our Saviour;  

Phil 3:21 Who shall change our lowly bodies into the likeness of His glorious body, according to His mighty working, by which He is able to subdue all things to Himself.

THE WORK OF BELIEVERS IS DIFFERENT

Phil 2:12 Fearing and trembling, work out your salvation.

To conclude from this that "God was the Word" (John 1:1) and that "I and the Father are one" (John 10:30- G1520- heis) that they are one and the same God is a totally arbitrary interpretation of these texts, for if there is one God who has declared this about Himself, then God will not declare the same about others, for then the divine revelation would be incomprehensible to reason. 

In line with this, Jesus nowhere taught that he was one and the same God with the Father, nor did the apostles teach this, but only trinitarians insist on it because they are determined to support their own view from the Bible.

On the other hand, consider the following statement, "it is not used to denote identity, but unity, inseparability." (Sándor Kiss, USZ Greek-Hungarian Lexicon.) Thus the unity of the Father and the Son is the highest degree of spiritual unity, just as men who have attained to complete unity of mind and love in the Lord can be one in spiritual brotherhood.

Romans 12:4 For just as in one body we have many members, and each member does not have the same work

Galatians 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek; there is neither bond nor free; there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

THE USE OF THE NUMBER THREE IN THE BIBLE

These biblical writers all knew the number three, used it, yet they did not write that God was a trinity! The verses:

Moses (Genesis 18:1-3; Deuteronomy 6:4; 32:39)

Samuel (1 Sam 30:13; 2 Sam 23:8; 1 Sam 2:2; 7:22)

Ezra (1 Chronicles 11:12; 21:10; 1 Chronicles 17:20)

Jeremiah (1 Kings 7:12; 2 Kings 19:19; Jer 31:18)

Nehemiah (Neh 2:11; Neh 9:5-7)

Isaiah (Isa 30:17, 30; 44:6,8; 45:5; 46:9)

Daniel (Dan 7:24; God of gods Dan 11:36)

Zechariah (Zech 11:8; 14:9)

[Jesus Christ (Matthew 18:16; Luke 11:5; Mark 10:18; 12:28-29; John 5:44; 17:3) - he did not write but taught].

Matthew (Matthew 18:15-16; 19:17)

Apostle Paul (1 Cor 13:13; 1 Cor 8:4,6; Gal 3:20; Eph 4:6; 1 Tim 2:5)

James (James 5:17; 2:19)

John (Rev 6:6; John 5:44)

Jesus taught that "God is a spiritual being" (John 4:24), but he does not teach that 'the Spirit is a divine being'.

John 4:23 But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father also seeketh such to be his worshippers.

John 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

THE ARBITRARINESS OF IDENTICAL ESSENTIALITY

In the Trinity, theologians are sharpening their philosophical inclinations, which in itself is an expression of disobedience. Posterior philosophical bashing. To blather in this is to blather in other things.

László Vanyó's R. Catholic History of Dogma describes the philosophy of unholy speculation thus. "To designate that which is three, ... the term 'hypostasis' seemed to be appropriate... Since "uszia" is the participle of the verb "einai" (to be), the Exod. 3,14 also occurs in the form "ho ón", meaning "he who is", "the Being", thus God calls himself, and therefore it seemed suitable to designate that which is in the Trinity a... The word "hypostasis" is found in the New Testament only in Heb. 1,3, so that it can be explained in Trinitarian terms." (p. 265) 

The Reformed Bible Dictionary of Concepts, published in 1992 in Cluj, already presents it as a fait accompli: "That there is a mysterious community within the being of God is something we can only guess from the OT. The OT itself does not give a Trinitarian doctrine, but here we find already tripartite formulas that have lived as ancient creeds in the Christian church... Scripture clearly teaches that God revealed Himself as one Lord (YHVH-Cyrrh) and that He appeared in three modes of being (hypostasis) (Heb 1:3)." (pp. 169-170) 

If this were true, then (based on the reality of the Trinity) Jesus would have to be our God as well as the Father. But this is not the case. 

It was the Son who emptied himself (assumed human mortality in servitude, tasting death) from his state of equality with God, not the Father, since the Father is fully and absolutely (unsuspended) immortal and eternally alive (cf. Deut. 32:40; 1 Tim. 1:17), and the Son was given immortality after death (cf. Revelation 1:18; Romans 6: 9), therefore, that Jesus was mortal only as man, not as God, is not justified by the immortality of the Father, but by the fact that the Son could die as man, thus the immortality of God is trivialized by dividing the nature of the Son into divine and human, which in turn makes the definition of the one being with God completely arbitrary, since, although one with the Father, the Father has no human nature. 

On the other hand, if the Son is fully God and fully man, then the Father must(should) be fully God and fully man if he is the same in "essence". I mean the Father and the Son. This is followed by the arbitrary explanation that the Son is not the same in "all" his essence, but only in his divine essence, so he is 'half-in essence', but they say this is 'in one nature'. That is to say, we have arrived at the conclusion that the Son is only in one nature coeternal with the Father (the fullness of 'the Godhead' dwelling in him bodily, - Col 2:9), the other nature they simply leave out of the coeternal (divine fullness) because it does not fit into their arbitrary definition of coeternal.

So the Father is immortal by nature, the Son is mortal by human nature, but not by divine nature, i.e. we are dealing with a manipulated single essence  (which is applied to whatever they want), since if the Son were the same God as the Father, then he should also be immortal by nature, but that he is not proves that there is a fundamental difference between the Father as unborn God and the Son as God begotten of the Father, since God is the head of Christ (cf. 1 Cor. 11:3), and on the basis of a completely identical nature and complete oneness this could not possibly be the case!

That since the God of the Son is the Father(!), then by virtue of their being the same God it should also be true that the God of the Father is the Son, to which the arbitrary answer would be that this does not logically follow from the premise, since the Father is not the God of the Son in terms of deity, but in terms of humanity (the arbitrary setting of John 20:17), i.e., that the resurrected, ascended Son is no less human than when He walked on earth. 

Which, however, cannot be true, for if after His exaltation He was restored to the same divine glory(!) with which He was equal to God in His divine being (cf. John 17:5; Phil. 2:6), and even more than that in the power of the Lord over all names (cf.  Phil 2:9-11), then when he returned to heaven he did not have glory according to man, but divine glory, and HE WAS the FOR HIM God of  is the Father(!)  cf. Ps 45:8; Eph 1:17; Rev 1:6; 3:12), so this "God the Father was according to his manhood" is a complete gibberish and arbitrary definition, devoid of any biblical basis! 

And that one receives from the other (but it doesn't work the other way around) is also a distinction between God and God(s) despite their same divine nature, which again does not imply identity, since divine nature is also given to the called anointed ones who are born again of God by a holy spirit in heavenly/ruler hope, even though their identity with God is not at all the case. (cf. 1Pet 1:3; 2Pet 1:4; Heb 3:1; Rev 20:4-6) 

According to the clear and unmistakable teaching of Jesus Christ, our God is the Father alone (cf. John 20:17). We have one God, the Father, and one Lord, Jesus Christ (cf. 1 Corinthians 8:6).

PRAYING TO GOD 

We worship Jehovah God alone, for there is no one and nothing to worship but the one and only God (cf. Exodus 22:20; 34:14; 2 Kings 17:35-41; John 4:21-24; Revelation 14:7). Matthew 6:9; Acts 4:24-30), - through Jesus Christ (cf. John 14:6; Ephesians 2:18), because to come before God in this present age of salvation (cf. Hebrews 1:1), we NEED A CONCESSIONER! See, "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus" (1 Timothy 2:5). 

When one worships the Son as God for his own consideration, who is the mediator between him and the 'God the Son'? Or is there no intermediary at all? Is it not rather a divine person Jesus, but not a real God who could be approached without an intermediary?! And how is it with Jesus Christ, who, as - supposedly - real God, is identical and equal to the Father? Whoever comes before Jesus must believe that he exists? Why should they have to believe that he exists when he was standing there in front of them and thousands could see him? Is it not obvious that when Paul spoke of God, he was not speaking of Jesus Christ (cf. 1 Cor 8:6; Heb 8:10; 10:7; 12:29; 13:15-16,20)? 

So there is one and absolute God and Lord, and that is Jehovah. He is the absolute owner, everything belongs to Him (cf. Job 41:11; Ps 50:12), since all things are of His will (cf. Rev 4:11), and that He was the God of the Jews shows that Jesus could not be, since Jesus did not identify Himself with the God of Israel (cf. Mark 12:29; John 8:42, 54-55; 16:27; 20:17) 

Worship is given to God (proskuneo) as the angel instructed the apostle John (cf. Rev. 19:10; 22:9), but Jesus Christ is given RESPECT (proskuneo) as the angel instructed (cf. Heb. 1:6), since the word proskuneo has a double meaning as RESPECT (cf. Matthew 18:26; Revelation 3:9), and as worship (cf. Matthew 4:10; Revelation 4:10) It is not for us, therefore, to whom and why we give worship, to determine it according to our own value judgment and viewpoint, but, in the words of Christ, it is for us to determine it by the Scriptures, just as it was for the Jews, and there is no difference. 

The Father is worshipped for creation, the Son for salvation, and the Holy Spirit for illumination. This would be permissible, even expected, if we were called to do so. But true worship is not what Christ taught. And if, in the words of Christ, the central person of true worship is the heavenly Father, then worship can no longer be given to Christ, but only to Him to whom it is also to be given according to Christ's teaching: (John 4:21-24) 

Jesus has transferred the worship of the Father from the OT to the OT, but the central person of worship remains the same - the Father! The Father was still worshipped then, but now the place and the way are changed, from the fixed worship performed in Jerusalem and on Mount Garizim (in the ritual sacrificial system prescribed by the Mosaic Law, or cult-like) to worship in spirit and in truth, no longer fixed in place, but more so in right heart condition. 

In this case, worship of Jesus can no longer apply, since he is not the Father, but Jehovah God, and Jesus is not Jehovah God, but Jesus is Jehovah the Anointed (cf. Acts 4:26; Ps 2:2; Isa 61:1); Christ our Lord (cf. Rev 11:15); Christ our God (cf. Rev 12:10); who belongs to God (cf. 1 Cor 3:23) 

By the way, anyone who seeks God, we read the following: "But without faith no one can be pleasing, for whoever comes to God must believe that He is and will reward him who seeks Him." (Heb 11:6) Here the Greek word ὲ ὖ κζητο σιν (dictionary form: ekdzēteo) is behind the word seek, that is, He (α ton) will be the rewarder of those who seek Him. And here is the meeting of John 4:23's description of those who seek God as worshippers of God with the fact that those who seek God may find him.

God seeks us, and we seek Him. And why should we seek Him if not to worship Him! The object of mutual seeking is that our worship may fall into place and that its purpose may not be lost. The circle of worship is thus closed. There is no room for any other to enter into this worship, but only for the Father. 

It is not by chance that Jesus said, "Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God," for as a Jew he worshipped Jehovah ("we worship Him whom we know" - John 4:22, Kaldi translation), - Whom the exhortation to worship runs throughout the Scriptures. (cf. Matt 4:10; John 4:22; Rev 14:7; Deut 13:5; Ps 95:6; 96:9; Jer 7:2) And if we follow in Christ's footsteps - as Christians - we must also worship the God to whom he also came in prayer as part of worship (cf. 1 Pet 2:21; Luke 3:21; 9:29; John 17:1) 

Consequently, they never worshipped Christ, but only paid homage to Him (cf. Luke 24:52; John 9:38).The apostles were Jews, and knew the teaching of the law: "You shall worship the Lord (YHVH) only, and offer sacrifices to Him, ... You shall not worship strange gods!" (2 Kings 17:36-39; cf. 1 Corinthians 16:29; Psalm 29:2). In keeping with this, those who lived during Jesus' earthly ministry are said to have "gone on pilgrimage to worship God at the feast" (John 12:20; cf. 1 Sam 1:3). 

So we see that the focus of the feast was not at all on the worship of Jesus, but on Jehovah God. But Jesus exhorted the same worship when he declared, "It is written, 'You shall worship the Lord your God, and him only shall you serve" (Matthew 4:10; cf. Deuteronomy 6:13; 32:43). 

On the other hand, the call for the proper worship of ho theos is also found in other words of Christ: cf. "But they (shebomai) worship in vain, for the doctrines which they preach are but human commandments" (Mark 7:7). Here the Greek word is shebomai (meaning [to worship as God]), and this word is nowhere applied to Christ, much less to the worship of Christ (see also Matt 15:9; Acts 13:43,50; 16:14; 17:4,17; 18:7,13; 19:27) 

God and the Lamb are also distinguished in Revelation 6:16, and whom they serve is the One whose face they see and whose name will be on their foreheads, which clearly refers to God, not Jesus (cf. Rev. 14:1; 22:4; Matt. 5:8) 

Nor did John the Baptist identify Jesus with God, but with the Lamb of God: 'The next day, when he saw Jesus coming towards him, he said: "Behold, the Lamb of God! He takes away the sins of the world." (John 1:29) But neither did the Jewish people consider him to be God, for we read, "When he entered Jerusalem, the whole city was in a tumult. "Who is this?" they asked. "This is Jesus the prophet from Nazareth of Galilee," the people replied." (Matthew 21:10-11) 

He was not taught to be part of a trinity! See Philip's testimony of Jesus to the butler. 8:35. I wonder why Philip missed this good opportunity, since trinity believers do not miss any opportunity, but immediately proclaim to new converts that Jesus is part of the trinity God (or so they imagine). Nicodemus, the chief of the Jews, identified Jesus this way, "Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher from God, for no one can perform the signs that you perform if God is not with him." (John 3:2)

So they did not consider him to be God, but that God is with him - which is not the same thing at all! (Just as Jesus - the meaning of his name, and his coming heavenly government - is God with us. - cf. Matthew 1:23; Revelation 21:3) And that the Sanhedrin condemned Jesus for making himself God as the Son of God was their false accusation against him, because they could not distinguish God from his Son. And then how they understood it shows that God put an end to the whole Jewish system, and those who condemned His Son to death, He put to death. 

The holy incense, as an image of worship (cf. Exodus 30:34-38), goes before God as sweet-smelling incense containing the prayers of the saints. Just as God is the recipient of the prayer of the saints (cf. Revelation 5:8; 8:3-4), so it is with worship! (cf. Matt. 4:10) The Lamb is to be praised alone (cf. Rev. 5:9; cf. 1 Sam. 18:7), and blessed, honored, glorified, and empowered, yet worship is God's alone! 

True worship, therefore, is in the worship of the Father through Jesus Christ; all other worship which does not follow this mode is necessarily idolatry (the burning of strange fires on the altar, - cf. Leviticus 10:1-2), because it misses the object of worship, the Most High God.

WORSHIP OF CHRIST DOES NOT MEAN WORSHIP OF GOD

John 5:23 That all men may honor (G5091 ) the Son, even as they honor (G5091 ) the Father. Whoever does not honor (G5091 ) the Son does not honor (G5091 ) the Father who sent him.

G5091 τιμάω (timaó) 1) honor, esteem, esteem, esteem 2) honor, bestow, reward 3) esteem, esteem something for something (Mt 27:9)

Honouring Jesus and the Father (John 5:23) is not worship, because if it were, then the Father would have to worship the one who serves Jesus instead of honouring him, which is absurd. But it does show reverence for people. Because what are we reading?

John 12:26 Whosoever serveth me, let him follow me: and where I am, there shall my servant be also: and he that serveth me shall be honoured (G5091-timészei) of the Father.

If honoring the Son means worship, based on the fact that the Greek word means worship, then it must also be worship when God honors those who serve Christ.

Who would dare say that? Worship is not worship, and to worship Christ on the same level as the Father is not worship of Jesus Gods due (which is why there is a separate Greek term for it in the OT)!

G5091 τιμάω (timao) 1) to honor, esteem, esteem, esteem word finder: to honor the Father (Matthew 15:8-9; John 8:49); to honor Jesus (Matthew 27:9); to honor men (Matthew 15:4-5; Acts 28:10; 1 Timothy 5:3; 1 Peter 2:17)

THE RIGHT OF REPRESENTATION

Hence, honoring the Son does not imply identification with God, but representative identification, as is the case with believers, Christ, and the God who sent Christ.

"Whoever listens to you listens to me, whoever rejects you rejects me, and whoever rejects me rejects him who sent me" (Luke 10:16).

Does anyone think that to reject the disciples is to reject Christ because they are equal with Christ? In the same way, does rejecting Christ mean rejecting God because Christ is equal with God?

JESUS IS NOT JEHOVAH GOD

The identity of Cyrus Yahweh and Cyrus Jesus is an interpretation, but according to Scripture, "Christ the Lord" (Luke 2:11) is not the same as and not identical with God, but with the Lord's Anointed (cf. Jesus is the Anointed of Jehovah (cf. Acts 4:26; Psa 2:2; Isa 61:1) How can Jesus be the Anointed of Jehovah God, the Jehovah God?

Quoting Isaiah 61:1, Jesus said, "The spirit of Jehovah is upon me..." (Luke 4:18). So how can He be Jehovah? But if He meant this for Himself, then who did He mean: "if the Lord (Jehovah) had not shortened those days" (Mark 13:20). Is it not obvious that He is talking about someone else?

And when the devil tempted Jesus, why did he not recognize in him the Jehovah with whom he had a controversy at Job (cf. Job 1:6, etc.; Matthew 4)? Who commands Christ, if Christ is the same as he who commands him?

Or Deuteronomy 18:15,18: "The LORD [YHVH] your God [Elohim] will raise up a prophet to you from among your brethren, like me: you shall hear him" (cf. Acts 3:22, KJV). "For if ye believed Moses, ye would believe me: for he wrote of me." (John 5:46, KJV) Now then, shall we identify the God of the holy Prophets with the one who is the prophet of the holy God? (Revelation 22:6; Luke 7:16; John 6:14)

If the Lord (YHVH) sends the predestined Jesus (cf. Acts 3:19:20), how can YHVH be Jesus? If the God YHVH who raised up the prophet (cf. Acts 3:22) raised up his servant son (Jesus) and sent him to turn the people from their sins (cf. Acts 3:26; Matthew 1:21) - then how can Jesus be Jehovah, the resurrected the same as the resurrector? Is the one sent the one who is sent? YOU (God), your saint (Christ)? Cf. Acts 13:35; Revelation 12:10]

Trinitarians claim that Jesus virtually claimed to be their God, even proclaimed himself to be God. So it is not just a simple misunderstanding, but they are putting into Jesus' mouth something that he never said himself!

"But Jesus Christ declared himself to be the TRUE and LIVING God!...He proclaimed, "I am God"... If He is not God, then He is none of our business." (John Maisel: Is Jesus God? Central European Bible Institute (CEBI), pp. 17, 19.)

THE NAME OF GOD IN THE NEW TESTAMENT

Jesus said that He had revealed and made known, and would continue to make known, the name of His Father (cf. John 17:6, 26), which was very necessary, since the Jews had completely eclipsed the name of God after the Babylonian captivity, and did not use it (as the faithful prophets did).

Although the high priest still pronounced God's name during the religious service in the temple - especially on the Day of Atonement - until the destruction of the temple in 70 AD, it was not generally used as before. They were far removed from the ideal of praising their God's name. (Cf. Joel 2:26) Thus the use of the name withered away completely over time, and only traces of it remain:

"The Eternal. This is the translation of the name of God, which in Hebrew is written with four letters, YHVH, and is read Adonai (see Genesis p. 16). The four-letter name of God - the tetragrammaton is derived from the same Hebrew verb (haja) as "ehje"; i.e. "to be". It expresses the idea that He exists eternally in the present, the past and the future ... this name emphasizes God's goodness and faithfulness to His creatures: He who educates, punishes and guides; He who hears the cry of the oppressed and makes known His righteous ways to the sons of men. He is the mighty Living God, who reveals Himself in His providential role to His people." (THE BOOK OF MOSES AND THE LADIES, Edited by Dr. J. H. HERTZ; commentary on Ex 3,15)

Therefore, it is very necessary to know God's name, for this intimate knowledge provides the framework for true worship that leads to eternal life (cf. John 17:3; 1 John 5:20).

It is fundamental to know that, as far as we know today, none of the 27 original New Testament manuscripts written in Koine ordinary Greek has survived to the present day. But copies of the originals, additional copies and entire families of copies have survived and come down to us. These form a vast collection of manuscripts of the Christian Greek Scriptures. According to one estimate, there are more than 5,000 manuscripts in the original Greek. But make no mistake: the Greek language is the original, not the manuscripts themselves!

Over the centuries, the Jews had drifted so far from God that they no longer dared to speak His name, and it is no coincidence that as a consequence of their drift they did not even recognise the Son of God as the Messiah, but gave Him up to death. The rejection of the name of God and the rejection of His Son are completely connected, both testifying to the same degenerate spirit.

And, as has already been said, the divine name was neglected as a result of a certain tradition, a tradition which has no small number of adherents to this day. When this Jewish tradition met with the apostasy foretold in Christianity (cf. Acts 20:29-30), the view was formed that God Himself became man in the image of Jesus, that is, that God is in fact a Trinity, though one God in three persons, which is a mockery of the Most High/Holy God, a obfuscation of His unique person, and a foundation for perverting true worship.

According to an assertion from the Greek text and the English translation of the Kingdom of the Cross, the Christian Greek Scriptures consistently use the title küriosz from beginning to end for Jesus. This would logically imply that the inspired writers identified Jesus with Jehovah. Obviously it is not conjecture but facts that must decide.

That Jesus was identified with Jehovah by the inspired biblical writers is an absolute fallacy. E.g. 2Timothy 1:18 says, "The Lord grant that he may find mercy on the Lord in that day." In both places in the Westcott and Hort texts the dictionary form kyrios is found. If this were to be understood as Jesus in both places, this text would say 'Jesus grant that he may find mercy on Jesus' - which seems grotesque and also nonsensical. However, to say that the Lord /Jesus/ will allow him to find mercy with Jehovah makes the statement make sense.

The book of Revelation clearly calls Jesus the Almighty: I am Alpha and Omega, thus says the Lord God, who is, and who was, and who is to come /erkhomai/: the Almighty (1:8). The context makes it clear who it is.

Revelation 11:17 reads, "Saying, We thank thee, O Lord God Almighty, who thou art, and who art, and who art to come /erkhomai/: for thou hast taken thy great power into thine hand, and hast begun thy kingdom."

Here after "my Lord" in Westcott is KÜRIOSZ, but it does not refer to Jesus, but to Jehovah, for in verse 15 it says: "The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord /KÜRIOSZ/ and of his Christ, ..."  It would be meaningless to understand it as, to our Lord /Jesus/ and his Christ.

So the one who is to come, the Almighty, is Jehovah God, and the fact that the Westcott text in Revelation 1:8 says "the KÜRIOSZ" does not mean that it is Jesus, since the context does not support this!

Romans 12:12 speaks of the Lord who gives abundantly (cf. 1 Timothy 6:17), i.e. God, and verse 13, paralleling the quotation of Acts 2:16-21, quotes the Hebrew text of Joel (2:32), where it is on the Tetragrammaton, which means God's name.

The existence of the Tetragrammaton in the Christian Greek Scriptures is given by the earliest texts of the Septuagint translated from the Hebrew, which contain the Hebrew Tetragrammaton. This is no accident, since:

 "The New Testament authors quote the Old Testament many times and in many different ways. 275 times the LXX..." (Haag lexicon: Old Testament quotations)

It is well known that the Septuagint translation /Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures/ was begun in Alexandria in the 3rd century BC, around 280 AD, by 72 Jewish scribes and completed in the 2nd century BC. Greek was the international language in the days of Jesus' apostles, and many churches used the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures.

There is evidence that the Septuagint is the most ancient of all the scriptures used by God, WAS WRITTEN ON THE TETRAGRAMMATON IN ARAMAIC OR ANCIENT HEBREW LETTERS.  E.g. Robinson's A Greek and English Lexicon of the New Testament, published in 1859, under the Greek Kyrios, reads: "The meaning of this word is God, as supreme Lord, the sole ruler of the universe, usually the Septuagint equivalent of Jehovah: יהוה."

The first-century text of the Septuagint is on display at the Israel Museum in Jerusalem, Zechariah 8:19-21 and 8:23-09:04, with the name of God four times. The other codex in Alexandria, 400 years younger, is also a copy of the Septuagint, where the name of God has been replaced in the same verses by KY and KC - truncated forms of the Greek Kyrios ("Lord"). 

The Dead Sea Scrolls (which contain excerpts from all the prophetic books of the Bible) are also about 2,000 years old, dating from the end of the second century BC. It contains, for example, a passage from the Book of Psalms in which the name of God, Jehovah (YHVH), appears in a more ancient form of the Hebrew script.

In 971, fragments of an ancient papyrus scroll from Egypt were published (Inventory No 266 Fouad papyrus). What have these first or second century BC fragments of the Septuagint revealed? They also preserved the divine name.

But we can also mention the fragment found at Oxyrhynchus in Egypt, marked 3522, which dates from the first century AD. It measures about 7×10.5 centimetres and contains a fragment from Job 42:11, 12, in which the Tetragrammaton is written in Old Hebrew.

The New International Dictionary of the New Testament Theology (vol. 2, p. 512) says: "Recent textual research casts doubt on whether the compilers of the LXX (Septuagint) translated the Tetragrammaton (YHVH) with kyrios [κύριος]. According to the oldest LXX MSS (fragments) available to us, the Tetragrammaton was transcribed into the Greek text in Hebrew letters. This custom was also followed by the Jewish translators of the later Old Testament Scriptures of the first century AD." Thus, whether Jesus and his disciples read the Scriptures in Hebrew or Greek, they encountered the divine name everywhere.

A biblical dictionary under the heading "Tetragram in the New Testament" writes: "There is evidence that when the NT [New Testament] was originally written, the tetragram, or name of God, Yahweh, was present in some of the OT [Old Testament] quotations from the NT, but it is also possible that it was present in all of them." (The Anchor Bible Dictionary).

An academic journal, in a summary article on this, wrote:

"In the pre-Christian Greek [manuscript] of the Old T[estamentum], the name divine [yhwh] is not rendered 'kyrios' [Lord], as has often been thought. The tetragrammaton was usually written in Aramaic or ancient Hebrew letters. ... In later times, surrogates were substituted, such as "theos" [God] and "kyrios" [Lord] for the tetragrammaton. ... There is good reason to believe that a similar pattern was followed in the case of the NT, i.e., that the divine name was originally included in the OT quotations and references, but was replaced by surrogates over time." - New Testament Abstracts, 3, 1977. p. 306.

Christianity approaches the question of the divine name from a completely different angle, when it does not take the ancient Hebrew text as a basis, but the earliest Greek manuscript (circa 200 AD), which no longer contains the name of God. These texts are consistent with copies of the Septuagint translation made centuries later, but why? Where did the name of God go in the meantime, why was it omitted from the later copies? Was it the inspiration of the holy spirit that was missing, or was it inspired by the holy spirit? One might conclude that this was not the work of the Spirit, but of the foretold apostasy (cf. Acts 20:29-30).

If the Septuagint reveals a deliberate omission of the Tetragrammaton, יהוה / κυριος - why should we expect otherwise in the case of the Christian Greek Scriptures?

The designation of Jesus as the true God implied that the copyists already expected to discover in him the true incarnation of God, i.e. that the Old Testament God became man in Jesus, whose name is clearly the Lord Jesus, not the Lord Jehovah. [The term trinitas (trinity) was first used by the Latin theologian Tertullian in the 2nd century, but the concept developed during a series of debates on the nature of Christ (see Christology).] According to them, the inspired biblical writers identified Jesus with Jehovah, and this is the reason why, after Jesus' appearance, there is no longer any justification for the persistence of the divine name, for testifying to him. 

The post-apostolic church no longer worshipped Jehovah through Jesus Christ, but Jesus Christ as the true God, whom they regarded as the God of the Bible. See "Our God, Jesus Christ". (Ignatius of Antioch /ca. AD 50-117/: Letter to the Ephesians, chapter 15) "Our God, Jesus Christ".   190/: Anastasius of Sinai's The Guide, p. 13) "He alone is both God and man" (Clement of Alexandria /c.c. 150-215/: My warning to the Greeks; 1.7.1)

Christianity stands for the same thing, professes the same thing: "The divinity of Jesus Christ is the centre of all Scripture. God himself came to save man from his sins. The Bible teaches that we must turn to Christ as Jehovah God for salvation and deliverance." (The Deity of Christ, Gospel Publishing House, p. 11.) "How unspeakably happy is the man who knows that the 'Yahweh' of the Old Testament is the Jesus of the New Testament." (A. P. Gibbs, The Worship of God, Gospel Publishing House, p. 194)

The introduction of the Trinity into the Christian consciousness and the worship of Christ as God both rendered superfluous the emphasis on the name of God and seemingly established it. Thus, as the philosophy of the Trinity advanced and spread, the importance of the divine name was correspondingly diminished. The spirit of neglect of the name of God then continues in certain circles to this day:

An example of this is the letter of 29 June 2008 sent by the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments to the Catholic Bishops' Conferences. In it, the Roman Catholic Church advises that the various forms of the tetragram should be replaced by the word "Lord". THE VATICAN HAS INSTRUCTED THAT THE PERSONAL NAME OF GOD SHOULD NOT BE USED OR PRONOUNCED IN HYMNS AND PRAYERS IN PRAISE OF GOD IN CATHOLIC WORSHIP. Other religious leaders - whether Christian or not - are hiding who the true God is from millions of people.

"According to a tradition that goes back beyond human memory, which already appears in the Septuagint translation mentioned above, the name of Almighty God, expressed in Hebrew by the sacred tetragram and in Latin by the word Dominus 'Lord', must be rendered in every vernacular language by a word with the same meaning." (Liturgiam Authenticam, # 41, c. -- Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments: Instruction on the Use of Vernacular Languages in the Editions of the Books of the Roman Liturgy; 28 March 2001) "Beyond the purely philological considerations, there is also fidelity to the tradition of the Church: from the beginning, the sacred Tetragramme has not been pronounced in a Christian context, nor has it been translated into any of the languages into which the Scriptures have been translated." (Instruction of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments to the American Conference of Bishops, 29 June 2008)

The accusation that the Septuagint does not contain a single excerpt from the Christian Greek Scriptures does not stand. For that it does, by divine inspiration, contain those which the Christian Greek Scriptures recall from the Septuagint.

The name of God in the form יְהֹוָה (Jehovah) is also found in two Hebrew translations of the New Testament.

The Hebrew New Testament with voices by Isaac Salkinson and Christian David Ginsburg - https://www.obohu.cz/bible/index.php?hledat=%D7%99%D6%B0%D7%94%D7%95%D6%BA%D6%B8%D7%94&k=Mt&styl=HNTV&kap=1&kde=1

And the Hebrew New Testament by Franz Delitzsch. Anyone can check the specific occurrences and forms of the name of God at the links provided - https://www.obohu.cz/bible/index.php?hledat=%D7%99%D6%B0%D7%94%D7%95%D6%B9%D6%B8%D7%94&k=Mt&styl=HNTD&kap=1&kde=1

Then it is of no consequence that no known fragment of the NT contains the Hebrew equivalent of the divine name, for none of these are identical with the apostolic era originals. More precisely, it is significant, namely, that they do not contain it, that is, that they omit it. For this omission identifies their spirit, a spirit which is not identical with the spirit which originally used the divine name. Thus the justification for its existence is not based on later Hebrew translations, but rather on earlier Greek manuscripts, that is, the Greek translations of the Septuagint, which still contained the Hebrew form of the divine name YHVH.

Nor does the accusation stand that Küriosz reversed with Jehovah in arbitrary places, but where the Christian Greek Scriptures quote the Hebrew Scriptures, or where the meaning of the sentence requires that one of the two "Lord" quoted be identified with Jehovah, or even that one "Lord" be identified with Jehovah, since it cannot mean the Lord Jesus in context. See Luke 4:18 [Isaiah 61:1]; Romans 10:13 [Joel 2:32]; Luke 20:42 [Psalm 110:1]; Mark 13:20.

"If the Lord had not shortened it" obviously cannot mean Jesus /Küriosz/, but only Jehovah, otherwise the sentence would be meaningless, since it is evident that Jesus was not speaking of himself in Mark 13:20.

CORRECT PRONUNCIATION OF THE NAME OF GOD

Nehemiah Gordon holds a master's degree in biblical studies and a bachelor's degree in archaeology from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. He has worked as a translator of the Dead Sea Scrolls and as a researcher in deciphering ancient Hebrew manuscripts. 

On the 2018 episode of Hebrew Voices, the Yehovah Research Update, Nehemia Gordon talks to T-Bone about the staggering number of Hebrew manuscripts that have been looked at so far compared to the number of manuscripts in which Yehovah has been found with full vowels. They also share some interesting anomalies about the name and briefly discuss the fact that Yeshua is found with full vowels in New Testament Hebrew manuscripts, as well as how Yeshua's name is spelled in these documents. 

Dr. Nehemia Gordon, PhD has written a book titled "Shattering The Conspiracy of Silence." Nehemiah unleashes the Hebrew power of the priestly blessing. Also known as the Aaronic blessing, this ancient prayer is recorded in verses 22-27 of Numbers chapter 6. A key part of the priestly blessing is the Hebrew name of God, commonly known as the Tetragrammaton. This holy name appears three times in the blessing, once in each of its three lines. The blessing in the Book of Numbers concludes with the promise that "My name shall be upon the children of Israel, and I will bless them" (Numbers 6:27). Generations of scribes, rabbis and priests have conspired to keep this name secret. Centuries of religious agenda and tradition have obscured the Hebrew meaning of the blessing.

Ye-va-re-che-cha Ye-ho-vah Ve-Yish-me-re -cha Ya-er Ye-ho-vah Pa-nav E-le -cha Vi-chu-ne -ka Yi-sa Ye -ho-vah Pa-nav E-le -cha Ve-Ya-sem Lecha Sha-lom

The name Jehovah with full vowels in the Aleppo Codex (Ezekiel 28:22).

The name Jehovah with full vowels in the Cairo Prophets' Codex (Ezekiel 7:4). 

The name Jehovah with full vowels in the Leningrad Codex at Psalm 116:6. 

The name Jehovah with full vowels in the Damascus Crown at Genesis 9:26. This 10th century manuscript is the fourth witness!

Nehemiah Gordon explains how we know that the letter "vav" was historically pronounced as "v" and sets the record straight about the Arabic influence that introduced the "w" to the Hebrew academic pronunciation, proves that in the time of Ezekiel the Prophet, the name of God was pronounced as Jehovah. - https://www.nehemiaswall.com/historical-pronunciation-vav

In the 2018 episode of Hebrew Voices , the Yehovah Research Update, Nehemia Gordon talks with T-Bone about the staggering number of Hebrew manuscripts that have been looked at so far compared to the number of manuscripts in which Jehovah is found with full vowels. They also share some interesting anomalies about the name and briefly discuss the fact that Yeshua is found with full vowels in New Testament Hebrew manuscripts, as well as how Yeshua's name is spelled in these documents. -

https://www.nehemiaswall.com/nehemia-gordon-name-god

conclusion

Romans 15:6 That with one heart and one mouth you may glorify God and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.- See also 2 Cor 1:3; 2 Cor 11:31; Eph 1:3,17; Col 1:3; 1 Pet 1:3.  

We know that the Trinity is not the God of Christ. The God of Jesus is not a triune God. Which is the true God, for we have only one true God (John 17:3). Whom no one has ever seen, while Christ has been seen by many. (1 John 4:12) Which God do we choose to serve? The God of the Trinity or the God of Christ?

We commit idolatry when we worship someone other than the true God of the Bible.  Who is the true God of the Bible? Is the Holy Trinity the true God? No. Is the Father alone the true God? Yes! The Father is the only true God in the Bible. John 17:3 - And this is eternal life, that they may know you (the Father), the ONLY true God... To believe in the Trinity, we must reject the Father as the only true God, which means we must reject the only true God. 

Idolatry is a sin that prevents us from entering the kingdom of God. 1 Cor 6:9-10 - Idolaters do not inherit the kingdom of God. Idolaters are cast into the lake of fire. Rev 21:8 Idolaters will have their portion in the lake of fire and brimstone. The main reason for rejecting the Trinity is to avoid idolatry.

Who is your God, Jehovah the Father, or  the Son Jesus Christ?

 John 5:46 For if you believed Moses, you would believe me; because he wrote about me.

- If you don't know who Moses wrote about (Acts 3:22-23), then you are deliberately ignorant of the identity of God, because you are blinded by your own philosophical understanding, which causes your damnation.

¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤

The Trinitarian Delusion - Introducing the Golden Calf of Christianity -https://www.angelfire.com/space/thegospeltruth/trinity.html

Trinity: the great big lie - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqjVXtZo3dI

How Paul surprisingly denied the doctrine of the Trinity -https://becomingchristians.com/2015/12/03/how-paul-surprisingly-denied-the-trinity-doctrine/

The truth about God: is the Trinity true or false? Face the truth - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hKh0SPB5cjw

Five main problems with the Trinity- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qxvmP-NzN4 - https://restitutio.org/2019/01/19/five-major-problems-with-the-trinity/

Did the early Christians teach that the Father and the Son are God? - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXQodLkbDLw

In the Trinity theory, God is three persons in one being, but Jesus is not God - https://revelationbyjesuschrist.com/jesus-is-not-god/

Is it really "orthodox" to believe that God can die? Or has Christianity gone bad? - http://adonimessiah.blogspot.com/

Does everyone believe in the Trinity? - https://focusonthekingdom.org/trinity.htm

The idolatry of the Trinity - http://bibleteachings.atspace.com/thetrinityisidolatry.html

The equals sign between Jesus and Yhwh is nothing less than blasphemy: punishable by death - http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0259-94222020000400044&lng=en&nrm=iso

The doctrine of the Trinity did not exist until the end of the 4th century -https://www.patheos.com/blogs/kermitzarleyblog/2017/11/trinity-doctrine-not-exist-late-fourth-century/

Trinity: factual or fictional? A critique of the doctrine of the Trinity -https://www.modernghana.com/news/438302/trinity-factual-or-fictitious-a-critique-of-the-trinitari.html

Why am I no longer a Trinitarian? 26 page paper -https://www.trinityexamined.com/why-no-longer-trinitarian/

The Trinity is NOT biblical - https://anointingpower.wordpress.com/2016/02/20/is-the-trinity-biblical/

God is trinity? - https://www.ucg.org/bible-study-tools/booklets/is-god-a-trinity

Why is the Trinity the cornerstone of Christianity? - https://www.icogsfg.org/trin-mb.html

Anti-Trinitarian articles - https://www.icogsfg.org/trinity.html

Did the early Christians think that the Holy Spirit was a separate person in the Trinity? - https://www.cogwriter.com/holyspirit.htm

The trinity doctrine exposed - https://www.trinitytruth.org/the-trinity-doctrine-exposed.html

What is the Trinity? - https://www.cgg.org/index.cfm/library/sermon/id/463/holy-spirit-and-trinity-part-one.htm

God the Father Alone - The Dark Side of the Trinity- http://defender.faithweb.com - http://defender.faithweb.com/html/msg12.html