Trinity vs Unitarian Debate Video

[mikesw]

This is a decent debate between Trinitarians and Unitarians. The debate was constrained to the testimony in the Old Testament passages that address potential multiple persons or speak against it. The host of the debate made sure to keep it fair as possible. He did a good job of that although some moments started to get out of control.

Try to share observations about the points shared in the debate more than additional discussions.

The debate from the New Testament passages will be with two of the guys and will in the week after this posted video.

 

[mikesw]

An obvious flaw appeared at one point where metaphysics mike refers to the English dictionaries to interpret the concept of Angel of the Lord in the Old Testament. The dictionary definition or even a Hebrew lexicon only gets you into a generalized sense of meaning in many cases. Sure, if you don't have any idea of what a word means, you will have to rely more strongly on the dictionary or lexicon explanation. But the actual usage can take on nuances beyond those definitions.
There's a discussion by @Jrce11 on that point in the comments on the youtube page for the video.

 

[mikesw]

I'm surprised that more people have not at least considered this debate from either perspective. The GodLogic guy presents things really well. The metaphysics mike is rather animated in his beliefs despite having missionary parents.

 

[civic]

I'm surprised that more people have not at least considered this debate from either perspective. The GodLogic guy presents things really well. The metaphysics mike is rather animated in his beliefs despite having missionary parents.

I’ve been in these same debates over several decades with uni’s. The messenger of the Lord is identified as YHWH and worshiped by those whom He appeared to in the O.T. And we know it’s not the Father whom no man has seen or heard His voice according to Jesus. The Angel of the Lord in no other than the Pre Incarnate Son identified as YHWH- a Christophany/ Theophany. An appearance of YHWH/ God in the O.T.

Besides the above three are several times that YHWH used plural pronouns to describe who He is in those passages.

The problem is the Unitarians in every debate use presuppositions to deny the Plurality of God.

 

[mikesw]

I’ve been in these same debates over several decades with uni’s. The messenger of the Lord is identified as YHWH and worshiped by those whom He appeared to in the O.T. And we know it’s not the Father whom no man has seen or heard His voice according to Jesus. The Angel of the Lord in no other than the Pre Incarnate Son identified as YHWH- a Christophany/ Theophany. An appearance of YHWH/ God in the O.T.

Besides the above three are several times that YHWH used plural pronouns to describe who He is in those passages.

The problem is the Unitarians in every debate use presuppositions to deny the Plurality of God.

Sure. It can seem like a lot of reruns mushed together. The interesting aspect of this debate was to keep the discussion within the Old Testament. It could be interesting to either side of the debate.

 

[civic]

Sure. It can seem like a lot of reruns mushed together. The interesting aspect of this debate was to keep the discussion within the Old Testament. It could be interesting to either side of the debate.

I agree a focus on the OT is great. But with a caveat. If any OT passage is quoted in the NT during the discussion then we must interpret that passage through the inspired lens of the NT.

 

[mikesw]

I agree a focus on the OT is great. But with a caveat. If any OT passage is quoted in the NT during the discussion then we must interpret that passage through the inspired lens of the NT.

Agreed. I have a problem with the directive for scholarly commentaries on the OT to solely interpret the text in the way the original readers would read it. This omits the way that the NT (especially Jesus!) quotes the texts in a fashion that roots the meaning of the OT passages into the fulfillment through Christ. Also, the NT provides the keys to interrelate passages that were thought to have isolated meaning. One thing especially became obvious to me. A significant portion of prophecy was of a sort only to be recognized and confirming at the time of fulfillment.