Loading debate…
Trinitarian Vs Unitarian
Summaries in our own words. Those marked as AI drafts were written by AI from the recording's captions and have not been checked by a person, so a summary or its speaker may be wrong. Every timestamp opens that moment on the host's channel so you can check it.
GodLogicApologetics said the question is whether Scripture clearly teaches that God is multi-personal. He argued that a triune God should appear in Scripture with plural pronouns or plural verbs for God, and pointed to the Hebrew plural 'makers' in Job 35:10 and Psalm 149:2.
He argued that a plural of majesty does not explain the usage, because Scripture names three distinct persons responsible for creation: the Father, the Holy Spirit and the Word of Yahweh.
Citing Job 26:13 and Job 33:4, he argued that ruach, meaning spirit, breath or wind, is the agent of God's creation, so the Spirit of God is identified as creator.
He argued that Psalm 33:6 names the word of the Lord and the breath of his mouth together in creation, and that these are distinct from each other.
He argued from John 1:1-3 that the Word was with God, was God and made all things, so the Word is a distinct person in eternal communion with the Father who cannot himself have been made.
He cited Revelation 19:13 to identify the Word of God and 2 Peter 3:5 for the Word's role in creation, saying the Father, Word and Spirit are each called God and creator.
In conclusion, he argued that these passages show a plurality of persons in the one true God, and that Scripture requires a trinitarian reading rather than a plural of majesty.
Griffin said God is one person whose proper personal name is Yahweh, the God of the Old Testament and the God of Jesus. Other figures can be called god in a generic sense, but only the Father is God in the proper sense.
He said the lexical sources agree that Yahweh is a proper noun, a divine name and a proper personal name identifying one specific person.
He argued that a proper personal name picks out one person, as with three people named David, so if three persons each bore the name Yahweh there would be three Yahwehs and therefore three gods.
He argued that a term should keep one fixed meaning across an interpretation. He said 'God' is a common title that can be applied to many beings, but as a proper name it refers to the one deity, and cited Genesis 1:26 as presenting one acting subject.
He cited Murray Harris, a trinitarian scholar, who holds that Yahweh is always a name for a person and never refers to the Trinity, and that theos in the New Testament regularly refers to the Father alone.
He distinguished 'Jesus is God' in a referential sense, meaning Jesus is the one identified as God, from a predicative sense, meaning Jesus is divine. He said the referential sense would make Jesus the one person who is God.
He cited Acts 3:13, 1 Thessalonians 1:9-10 and Revelation 21:7 to argue that the God of Scripture is one person, the Father, and that Jesus is the Son of God rather than God of himself, which he called Unitarianism.
GodLogicApologetics argued that Acts 3:15 calls Jesus the author of life with no qualifying words. He said that if Jesus is the source of life, he must be God by nature.
Griffin replied that 'author of life' is qualified by its context, the eternal life that comes through Christ. He said Jesus's words of eternal life came from God, and that Acts 3:13 names the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, who glorified his servant Jesus.
Griffin said GodLogicApologetics should show from the book of Acts how the phrase is qualified, rather than Griffin needing to prove that it is not.
GodLogicApologetics said that what Jesus does, being the source of life, applies only to God Almighty, so Jesus is God in that sense.
GodLogicApologetics argued that Acts 3:12-16 contrasts Peter and John with Jesus, saying the healing was not done by their own power or godliness but by Jesus's name. He said this presents Jesus as the one who acted.
An audience member asked how the angel of the Lord in Jude 5 relates to Jesus, noting that Eastern Orthodox readings identify the angel as Christ. GodLogicApologetics answered that the earliest manuscripts of Jude read Jesus, that Jude 4 names Jesus Christ as Lord, and that Jesus is the angel who led Israel out of Egypt.
An audience member asked how John 1:18, 'no one has seen God at any time', fits with Numbers 12:8, where Moses is said to see the form of God, if God is not multi-personal. GodLogicApologetics answered that John 1:18 concerns comprehending the Father, whom the Son makes known, and that the verse does not contradict Jesus being seen in the Old Testament.
An audience member asked Griffin how Hebrews 1:10, which applies the work of creation to the Son, fits with the view that only God creates. Griffin answered that Hebrews 1:10 follows a Septuagint reading of Psalm 102 in which God answers an afflicted man, and that Isaiah 51:16 refers to a new creation.
GodLogicApologetics said Griffin had not given a one-or-three answer to how many Yahwehs there are. He argued that if each of the Father, Son and Spirit is Yahweh there are three gods, and if Yahweh is one being of three persons, no single person is Yahweh.
Suggested from the title and not yet checked by a person.
This debate was made for and published by the channel below. Watching it there supports the host.
Griffin replied that GodLogicApologetics was equivocating. He said the eternal life in John 17:3 is knowing the only true God and Jesus Christ whom he sent, and that the words Jesus speaks come from his God.
GodLogicApologetics argued that Jesus giving the words of life does not settle whether he is the author of life. He said God is the source of salvation because he sent Jesus, and that the Father, Son and Spirit each have a role in salvation.
Griffin replied that John 3:16 says God so loved the world, and that the Father exhausts that category rather than the three persons together.
GodLogicApologetics argued that Titus 2:13 calls Jesus 'our great God and Savior', so Jesus is identified as God by reference. He said 'God' is used for the Father in most of the New Testament but sometimes for the Son or the Spirit, as in Acts 5.
Griffin replied that Titus 1:4 distinguishes 'God the Father' from 'Christ Jesus our savior', so calling both God in a personal sense would mean two Gods.
Griffin said 'God' can be applied to human beings in a qualitative sense, as in Psalm 45 and in Moses being made God to Pharaoh, without making that person the personal God of Israel.
GodLogicApologetics argued from Judges 1:1-2, where Yahweh says Judah shall go up and a singular pronoun refers to the tribe, that Yahweh is not used in only one way. He said it can refer to a group of persons, to one person or to the divine essence.
Griffin said Yahweh is a proper personal name that refers to one person at a time. He said a group name such as Judah for a tribe is not a personal name, so the usage should not switch between the two senses.
Griffin argued that the angel of the Lord can be called Yahweh because he represents Yahweh, since a malak is someone authorized to speak for another, but the angel is not Yahweh by numerical identity.
GodLogicApologetics argued that Psalm 83:18 and Nehemiah 9:6 say the Most High alone has the name Yahweh, so applying the name to creatures conflicts with those verses. He asked who alone is Yahweh.
Griffin said malak means one commissioned by a superior to act on their behalf, so the angel of the Lord is a commissioned messenger rather than the Lord himself.
GodLogicApologetics argued that malak means messenger, and a messenger is sent by someone greater. Since God has no superior to send him, the angel of Yahweh cannot be God, and the phrase is a genitive referring to one person.
Griffin argued from Exodus 23 that the Lord says he will send an angel in whom his name is, so the angel bears the name Yahweh because he is sent by and represents the Lord.
GodLogicApologetics argued that Exodus 23 says the name is in the angel, not that it was put into him, so the name belongs to the angel. He said this explains why the angel can forgive sins, and that the angel is Yahweh in essence.
Griffin said the Holy Spirit is distinct from the Father but is not a person. He described the Spirit as a breath that comes out from the Father and gives life.
GodLogicApologetics argued that in Acts 13:2 the Holy Spirit speaks and says 'set apart for me, Barnabas', showing that the Spirit speaks as a distinct person.
GodLogicApologetics argued that 1 Peter 1:11 calls the Spirit of Christ a he who spoke through the prophets, so the Spirit belongs to both the Father and Christ. He said this requires the Father and Son to share one nature.
An audience member asked whether John 1:1 says the Word is God and whether the Word is Jesus. Griffin answered that the Word is not Jesus, and that 'God' in John 1:1 is used in a different sense from its personal reference to the Father, describing the Word's nature.
An audience member asked GodLogicApologetics to expand on Jeremiah 32:27, that God is the God of all flesh, in response to Griffin's use of John 20:17. GodLogicApologetics answered that Jesus has a God in reference to his human nature, that the Father became his God when he took on flesh, and cited Psalm 22:10.