Program 165: 1 + 1 ≠ 1

Scripture consistently presents Yahuwah as superior to Yahushua. They are separate entities. Only Yahuwah is divine. Yahushua is fully human.

Welcome to WLC Radio, a subsidiary of World’s Last Chance Ministries, an online ministry dedicated to learning how to live in constant readiness for the Savior's return.

For two thousand years, believers of every generation have longed to be the last generation. Contrary to popular belief, though, Christ did not give believers “signs of the times” to watch for. Instead, he repeatedly warned that his coming would take even the faithful by surprise. Yahushua urgently warned believers to be ready because, he said, “The Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect.” [Matthew 24:44]

WLC Radio: Teaching minds and preparing hearts for Christ's sudden return.

* * *Part 1: 1 + 1 ≠ 1

Miles Robey: Welcome! Welcome to World’s Last Chance Radio. I’m your host, Miles Robey, and today Dave Wright is going to be sharing with us some irrefutable facts and eye-opening Scripture passages that prove the nature of Yahuwah is one, not two, and certainly not three-in-one.

What does that even mean? “Three-in-one.”

Dave Wright: Doesn’t make much sense, does it?

Miles: No. No, it really doesn’t. Not when you actually stop and think about it.

Dave: Well, that’s the problem, isn’t it? We’re so used to projecting a certain perspective, a certain interpretation onto Scripture, that we overlook the most glaring truths that contradict the imposed error. We’re so hyper-focused on This verse or That which we can twist to prove our pet assumptions, that we miss the big picture.

It reminds me of a story my family still laughs over.

Miles: Something you did to embarrass yourself and bring shame to the family name?

Dave: No, actually. This was my grandmother. And it happened years before I was even born but the incident has entered family lore and we still laugh about it.

My grandparents were driving . . . I don’t know where. Across country. All I know is that it was a long trip and something went wrong with the car. It was overheating or something. Who knows? This was a good 60 to 70 years ago or so.

So my grandfather pulls into the nearest service station he sees. Now, this was back in the days before service stations expanded to sell drinks and snacks and magazines or whatever. So while the mechanic is working on the car, my grandmother gets bored.

Miles: Uh-oh! I’m sensing a potentially embarrassing situation here!

Dave: You’d be right about that. Now the thing you need to know about my grandmother is that she had very poor eyesight. She had cataracts that left her virtually blind. The only time she could see something was when she used a large magnifying glass. But she didn’t have her magnifying glass with her. It was too large to fit in her purse, so it was with their luggage in the boot.

However, she’d learned that if she curled her fingers over, she could form a sort of telescope with her hand and see things a little better.

Miles: Hm! Clever.

Dave: So. I want you to picture it. Here’s this middle-aged lady, nicely dressed in dress, hat, gloves, heels—you know how ladies dressed back then—and she’s stuck in a service station, bored out of her mind. So, she starts wandering around.

Miles: Oh, no. Did she fall or something?

Dave: No, she was careful. But something colorful catches her eye. There’s something hanging on the wall so she curls her fingers over into a scope and starts looking at what’s hanging on the wall. Now, because she can only see clearly what’s in the tiny hole left at the other end of her hand, she can’t see much. So her face is up close and she’s carefully running her hand over it to see what it is.

All of a sudden, she jerks back, straightens up and, with her face flaming, turns and walks away, hoping no one noticed that what she was so carefully going over, centimeter by centimeter, was a wall calendar . . . with a very well-endowed, scantily-clad young woman in a sexy pose in the photo above that month’s calendar.

Miles: Oh, dear! And of course, someone saw, or it wouldn’t have entered family lore.

Dave: Right! My grandfather thought it was hilarious and never let anyone forget the day Mum got caught studying a girly calendar.

But this is the point I’m wanting to make: she wasn’t seeing the big picture. She had her fingers curled over, her hand up to her eye. She was carefully going over the picture, catching a detail here and a detail there, not seeing what the full picture was because she was so focused on the tiny little bit revealed through the small hole formed by her fingers.

And that’s what we do as Christians. Christians are great—or maybe I should say terrible—at taking things out of context. Entire doctrines are built on one little verse here or one short passage there. But that’s how we wander off into error, too.

Miles: Yeah. If you don’t take all of Scripture into account, you can get way off. I remember a couple of years ago stumbling across this one website where this Extremely Conservative Christian was actually promoting polygamy because it appears in Scripture. He had all these articles where he was arguing that a man should be able to have as many wives as he can afford to support. After all, it’s “Biblical”!

Dave: Was he Mormon?

Miles: No. He was more the Jewish wannabe type. But he was adamant that there was nothing wrong with polygamy since so many good people in Scripture were polygamists.

Dave: Completely ignoring the passage in 1 Timothy 3 that says a bishop—some translations say an “overseer”—must be above reproach and the husband of one wife. [See 1 Timothy 3:2.]

Miles: Or the text that says not to look at a woman to lust after her. ‘Cause that’s not what he wanted to hear.

Dave: Well, that’s what we’re doing when it comes to the topic of the true nature of Yahuwah. Scripture is so clear, over and over again, that there is only one God—ONE—and that’s Yahuwah. He’s not three-in-one. He’s just one. Scripture is equally clear that the son, Yahushua, is fully human. But that’s not what we see when we go to the Bible because we’re focusing on the scattered verses, taken out of context, that we can twist to support our beliefs.

So. What I want us to do today is simply look at a collection of verses in the New Testament. When you combine all the evidence together, it’s overwhelming that the Father and the son are two separate entities. They’re not one. They’re not three-in-one. They are two and they’re separate.

Miles: Yeah, it’s just basic math we all learned as kids. One plus one equals two. One plus one doesn’t equal one!

Dave: Right! So, there’s quite a lot. Instead of asking you to look up every single verse—that would take too long—I just printed them all off for you. Let’s start in Matthew and just go right through. I think you’ll agree that the evidence is overwhelming.

We’ve got to remember that the Bible writers had a full vocabulary. If they had wanted to express that the Father and the son (and the holy spirit) were all one, they would have said so.

Miles: Hold on a second. I thought Yahushua did say that. Give me just a second to find it. It’s in John, right before Christ’s betrayal. Let me see here …

Okay. Here it is. It’s John 17, verses 20 and 21. It says: “I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in me through their word; that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in me, and I in You; that they also may be one in us, that the world may believe that You sent me.”

Dave: This is talking about being united in purpose. Not being united in divinity. Here Yahushua is saying that he prays that believers may be one. One in what? One in divinity?

Miles: No.

Dave: One in the trinity?

Miles: No.

Dave: One in unity. That’s very different from the “one-ness” of the trinity doctrine. There were 12 disciples and countless other believers. Were they all “one”?

Miles: Only in purpose, not number.

Dave: Exactly. All right. First verse. Go ahead and read it.

Miles: Okay, this is Christ speaking to the mother of James and John after she’d asked they be given preferential treatment in Yah’s kingdom. He says, in Matthew 20 verse 23, quote: “You will indeed drink my cup, and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with; but to sit on my right hand and on my left is not mine to give, but it is for those for whom it is prepared by my Father.”

Dave: So we’ve got a very clear distinction between the Father and the son here. She asked for a favor that Yahushua couldn’t grant. Clear difference between the Father and the son.

Next one?

Miles: John 3:16: “For [Yah] so loved the world that He gave His only begotten son that whosever believes in him should not perish but have everlasting life.”

Dave: Who gave?

Miles: Yahuwah.

Dave: Yahuwah gave. So they aren’t one and the same. Yahushua was the gift of Yahuwah to save a dying world. What’s the next verse say? John 3:17.

Miles: “For [Yah] did not send His son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.”

Dave: Who sent Yahushua?

Miles: Yahuwah.

Dave: Did Yahuwah send Himself?

Miles: No.

Dave: So, again, the two are separate entities. Certainly they’re united in purpose just as we are united with Yah when we work with Him to save others, but still separate entities. Not one and the same.

All right. What’s the next verse?

Miles: Um … John 5, verses 36 to 38. It says:

I have testimony weightier than that of John. For the works that the Father has given me to finish—the very works that I am doing—testify that the Father has sent me. And the Father who sent me has Himself testified concerning me. You have never heard His voice nor seen His form, nor does His word dwell in you, for you do not believe the one He sent.

Dave: Again, it is the Father who does the act of sending. And He sends someone else. He doesn’t send Himself.

Notice as well that there are two witnesses spoken of here. Yahushua and his works are a witness, but then it says in verse 37 that the Father Himself is a witness. Again, separating the two as two separate entities.

Miles: I noticed, too, that it says the Jews have never seen or heard the Father. And yet, obviously, they were both seeing and hearing the son in that very moment. They couldn’t have been “one” in the sense of a united, triune godhead and have that statement still be true.

Dave: No, you’re right. You can’t have it both ways.

Next verse.

Miles: Uhh … this is verse 43 of the same chapter. It says: “I have come in my Father’s name, and you do not accept me.”

Dave: Yahushua came in the Father’s name. Yahuwah didn’t come in His own name. Yahushua didn’t come in his own name. Instead, he came in the name of the Father. Again, if we look at this verse with clear eyesight, untainted by the pagan doctrine of the trinity, we can see that this verse only makes sense if it’s describing two separate entities.

Miles: Right. Amazing we’ve kind of glossed over these glaringly clear statements before.

All right. Next verse is John 8:18. “I am one who testifies for myself; my other witness is the Father, who sent me.”

Dave: Again: two witnesses. That’s the whole point of this verse, that there are two witnesses.

This has to do with the legalities of the ancient Israelite judicial system. Deuteronomy 17:6 stated that a person could be put to death for a crime on the testimony of two or three witnesses, but no one was to be put to death based on the testimony of only one witness.

Miles: That was the same way for declaring the beginning of the new month, right? If two witnesses had seen the new moon, they were questioned by the high priest and if their testimonies agreed, the new month was declared.

Dave: Right! Statements were accepted as true based always on the testimony of two—not one, but two or more—witnesses. The whole point of this verse is that Yahushua’s testimony is true because he’s got another witness to back him up: the Father. If they were truly “one” as trinitarians claim, he couldn’t use the Father as his second witness.

Miles: Hm. I’ve never thought of that. Look here at literally the very next verse. John 8:19. It says:

Then they asked him, “Where is your father?”

Wow. So rude. Their way of saying “Who’s your daddy, boy?” Have to rub in that they thought he was illegitimate. Anyway. Going on:

“You do not know me or my Father,” Yahushua replied. “If you knew me, you would know my Father also.”

Dave: Yahushua came to reveal the love of the Father, so if they’d known Yahushua, they would have known the Father. But that doesn’t mean they’re of the same substance as the trinity doctrine teaches. And Yahushua is clear on that: You don’t know me—OR—my Father. Two separate entities.

Okay, what’s next?

Miles: Um … John 10:25 to 30. It says:

Yahushua answered, “I did tell you, but you do not believe. The works I do in my Father’s name testify about me, but you do not believe because you are not my sheep. My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand. I and the Father are one.”

Dave: All right, there’s a lot going on in this passage. We always focus on verse 30—“I and the Father are one”—but that has to be understood in the context of the verses that precede it. So let’s break this down.

First, in verse 25, Yahushua states the work he does is in the Father’s name. That wouldn’t be necessary to say if they were “one” in the trinitarian sense. Next, in verse 29, he states that the Father:

(A) has given believers to him; and,

(B) that the Father is greater than all.

Finally, he adds that no one can snatch believers out of … whose hand? His hand?

Miles: No, the Father’s hand.

Dave: Correct. See, there are all these degrees of separation between Yahushua and the Father. So, in that context, when he concludes by saying “I and the Father are one,” he is not affirming a trinitarian one-ness. Instead, he is simply stating that they are one in their work to save souls, just as believers are one with the Father when we also work to save others. That doesn’t make us divine!

Miles: That point in verse 29 that the Father is greater than all—that would include Yahushua, too, wouldn’t it? That’s an all-ness statement. It’s all-inclusive. Yahuwah is greater than everyone else, including Yahushua.

Dave: Such a statement would be absolutely incorrect if Yahushua and Yahuwah were “one” in the trinitarian sense of being co-equal divine partners of a triune godhead.

Miles: And of the same substance, as many trinitarians believe.

Dave: Right. It’s contradictory.

Okay, what’s the next one?

Miles: Ummm … John 12:28.

Dave: All right, this is where Yahushua was in the temple. Why don’t you read verse 29 as well?

Miles:

“Father, glorify your name!”

Then a voice came from heaven, ‘I have glorified it, and will glorify it again.’ The crowd that was there and heard it said it had thundered; others said an angel had spoken to him.”

Dave: So, now ask yourself: if Father and son are “one” in the trinitarian sense, did Yahushua pull a ventriloquist act here, answering his own question? You know, kind of like “throw” his voice or something?

Miles: Uh, yeah; I’m going to go with “No!”

Dave: It’s ridiculous to think otherwise, right? Clearly, there are two different, separate beings speaking here. To think otherwise is to stretch credulity to the breaking point.

All right, what’s next? Ummmm, John 14 verse 1. Go ahead and read that.

Miles: “Do not let your hearts be troubled. You believe in [Yah]; believe also in me.”

Dave: “You believe in Yahuwah, believe … also … in me.” He’s saying, “You believe in Yah, believe in me … too” or in addition. Now let me ask you this: how can Yahushua be “in addition to” Yahuwah, if they’re both “one” in the trinitarian sense?

Miles: Doesn’t make sense, does it?

Dave: No.

Miles: Okay, uh, further down that same chapter. John 14:25. “Anyone who does not love me will not obey my teaching. These words you hear are not my own; they belong to the Father who sent me.”

Dave: Again, we’ve got two separate and distinct entities: the sender and the sent.

Now verse 28?

Miles: “You heard me say, ‘I am going away and I am coming back to you.’ If you loved me, you would be glad that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I.”

Dave: You can’t get any clearer than this. “The Father is greater than I.” Now, if they were truly equal, divine co-partners, then he couldn’t say this.

Miles: Okay, but what about the argument that Yahushua laid aside his divinity when he took on humanity? Could that be what he’s talking about?

Dave: That’s a fair question, but that’s not what it says; so you have to ask yourself why? If that’s what was meant, why didn’t he simply say so? He certainly had the vocabulary to express that thought.

Miles: That’s true.

Dave: This emphasis on the Father being a separate entity from the son appears in Christ’s parables, too. Go on to John 15, verses 1 and 2.

Miles: “I am the true vine, and my Father is the gardener. He cuts off every branch in me that bears no fruit, while every branch that does bear fruit He prunes so that it will be even more fruitful.”

Dave: If the Father and the son were “one” in the trinitarian sense, he’d use the “royal we” and say, “We are the true vine, and we are also the gardener.” But he didn’t say that. Again, Yahushua didn’t lack the vocabulary to express trinitarian concepts, so you have to ask yourself, why didn’t he teach that if it were the truth? Instead, all of these statements emphasize that the Father is greater than the son, and that they are two distinct, separate beings.

Miles: You can see that here a few verses further on in verses 9 and 10. It says: “As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you. Now remain in my love. If you keep my commands, you will remain in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commands and remain in his love.”

You’ve got three separate entities here: the Father, son, and the disciples.

Dave: Right! Now look at verses 23 and 24.

Miles: “Whoever hates me hates my Father as well. If I had not done among them the works no one else did, they would not be guilty of sin. As it is, they have seen, and yet they have hated both me and my Father.”

Dave: Again. Very clear separation between Father and son. “They have hated both me and my Father.”

This is throughout the New Testament. Go on to the next verse. It’s John 16:3, just a few verses later.

Miles: “They will do such things because they have not known the Father or me.”

Dave: Here Yahushua’s explaining the persecution his followers would face. If the Father and son were “one” in the trinitarian understanding, Yahushua wouldn’t have made such a verbal divide: “they haven’t known the Father OR me.”

What’s next?

Miles: John 16:32: “A time is coming and in fact has come when you will be scattered, each to your own home. You will leave me all alone. Yet I am not alone, for my Father is with me.”

Dave: “My Father is with me.” Not “I am with myself.”

Miles: Yeah. Doesn’t say that.

This truth really is all the way through, isn’t it? Listen to this. It’s just a couple more verses on. John 17:1. It says: “After Yahushua said this, he looked toward heaven and prayed: ‘Father, the hour has come. Glorify your son, that Your son may glorify You.’”

Yahushua’s not praying to himself! He’s praying to a separate being.

Dave: Well, look at verse 3. “Now this is eternal life: that they know You, the only true God … and … Yahushua Christ, whom You have sent.” Once again, two distinct personages. Not one.

Miles: This is really interesting because this was just before Yahushua was betrayed in Gethsemane. Like you’ve said before, he certainly had the vocabulary to describe a triune relationship between himself and the Father, but instead he keeps emphasizing that they were separate entities. Listen to the next verse. It says: “I have brought you glory on earth by finishing the work you gave me to do.” [John 17:4]

Dave: Very different. Yahushua has completed the work the Father gave him to do. Basically, Boss and workman. One’s superior, the other’s inferior. You can’t have that and a triune godhead, too. They’re mutually exclusive.

Miles: It’s amazing how it really is woven through the New Testament. We’re going to take a quick break, but let’s keep going when we return.

* * *

Advertisement

World’s Last Chance has produced more than 1500 documentaries in over 30 languages. Visit our website at WorldsLastChance.com or look for WLC Videos on YouTube. New documentaries on a variety of important topics are being released all the time! Get started watching and learn the truth while you still have the chance at WorldsLastChance.com.

* * *Part 2: (Miles & Dave)

Miles: For those just tuning in, Dave has been taking us through the New Testament, showing us how Yahushua repeatedly emphasized his separateness from the Father, his subjective position to the Father.

Dave: And not just Yahushua! The other New Testament writers were clear on this as well. They didn’t believe Yahushua was equal to Yahuwah because they were strict unitarians. The trinity heresy wouldn’t be adopted for another 300 years!

Turn to Acts chapter 2. This is Peter’s sermon on Pentecost. What did he say in verse 24?

Miles: “But [Yahuwah] raised him [Yahushua] from the dead, freeing him from the agony of death, because it was impossible for death to keep its hold on him.”

Dave: In this verse, two different, separate individuals are presented. One is dead, and the other is alive. They clearly can’t be one and the same!

Miles: That’s true. You know, this is one of the clearest proofs of the humanity of Christ. Divinity cannot die. And to say that his divinity didn’t die, only his humanity died, is to say he didn’t die at all.

Dave: You take off the blinders of error and it all becomes so clear, doesn’t it?

Miles: It really does.

Dave: Okay. Keep going on Peter’s sermon. Next, he’s going to quote David. Read verses 26 and 27.

Miles:

Therefore my heart is glad and my tongue rejoices;
my body also will rest in hope,
because You will not abandon me to the realm of the dead,
You will not let Your holy one see decay.

Dave: Two people are again being spoken of here. One knows he’s going to die and is trusting that he won’t be left to stay dead. The other is the one who raises him from the dead. They can’t be the same entity as one is clearly dead and the other the one who raises him from the dead. Very different.

What’s next?

Miles: Romans 1:1 to 3. “Paul, a servant of Christ Yahushua, called to be an apostle and set apart for the gospel of [Yah]—the gospel He promised beforehand through His prophets in the Holy Scriptures regarding His son, who as to his earthly life was a descendant of David.”

Dave: This would have been the perfect place to establish Christ’s divinity as having a pre-existence, but Paul doesn’t say that. Instead, he says Yahushua is a descendant of David. And, in verse 3, when he says “regarding His son,” we’ve again got two separate individuals there: Father and son. Two, not one.

Okay. Next?

Miles: Galatians 1:1. “Paul an apostle—sent neither by human commission nor from human authorities, but through Yahushua Christ and God the Father, who raised him from the dead.”

Dave: Two people: Christ and the Father who raised him from the dead.

Miles: You know, when you take it just as it reads, it’s clear there really is a difference here. We’re so used to just glossing over that, but “God”—using the trinitarian umbrella term—clearly didn’t resurrect Himself!

Dave: Right!

All right. Ephesians 6:23.

Miles: Umm … “Peace to the brothers and sisters, and love with faith from God the Father and the Lord Yahushua Christ.”

Dave: If they were both co-equal members of a triune godhead, he would simply have said “from God.” But he didn’t. He added that little connector: and. God the Father and the Lord Yahushua Christ.

Miles: Philippians 1 verse 2: “Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Yahushua Christ.”

Dave: Two individuals, connected by that little word, “and.” Connected, because they’re not the same entity!

All right. What does Colossians 1 verse 1 say?

Miles: “Paul, an apostle of Christ Yahushua by the will of God, and Timothy our brother.”

Dave: We’ve got four people mentioned here by name: Paul, Yahushua, Yahuwah, and Timothy.

Read 1 Thessalonians 1 verse 1 now. This is another opening salutation. Paul had plenty of opportunities to teach a triune divine nature, but what he keeps repeating in letter after letter is the separateness of Father and son.

Go ahead. Verse 1.

Miles: “Paul, Silas and Timothy, to the church of the Thessalonians in God the Father and the Lord Yahushua Christ: Grace and peace to you.”

Dave: In his second letter to the Thessalonians, Paul repeats this same separation, emphasizing the unitarian nature of Yah. Read 2 Thessalonians 2 verse 2.

Miles: “Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Yahushua Christ.”

Dave: Notice, once again, the connector, “and.”

Let’s see now what Paul says to Timothy: 1 Timothy, verses 1 and 2. If there are any connectors, I want you to emphasize them.

Miles: “Paul, an apostle of Christ Yahushua by the command of God our Savior and of Christ Yahushua our hope, to Timothy my true son in the faith: Grace, mercy and peace from God the Father and Christ Yahushua our Lord.”

Dave: Clearly, not the same being or he wouldn’t have had to say “and.”

What does he say in his next letter to Timothy? 2 Timothy 1 verse 2.

Miles: “Grace and peace from Yahuwah the Father and from Yahushua our Savior.”

Dave: He phrases it a bit differently in Titus. Read Titus 1 verse 1.

Miles: “Paul, a servant of [Yah] and an apostle of Yahushua Christ.”

Dave: I know this is probably starting to feel redundant, but that’s the point. Over and over and over again, Christ himself, as well as the New Testament writers, emphasize the difference and separation between the Father and the son, not their oneness. In fact, about the only place it talks about their oneness is John 17 where it’s speaking of oneness in purpose and includes believers in that oneness.

Okay. Philemon. Paul’s letter to Philemon is very short. Only one chapter. Read verse 3.

Miles: “Grace and peace to you from—”

Dave: Two people here!

Miles: “God our Father—”

Dave: That’s one. And?

Miles: “And the Lord Yahushua Christ.”

Dave: That’s two.

The author of Hebrews says it a bit differently. Read Hebrews 1 verses 1 and 2.

Miles: “In the past [Yahuwah] spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days He has spoken to us by His son, whom He appointed heir of all things …”

Dave: In the past, Yahuwah spoke by prophets. Does that make the prophets divine?

Miles: No.

Dave: Now, He speaks by His son. This statement makes absolutely no sense whatsoever if Father and son were part of the same godhead.

Miles: I noticed as well that Yahuwah “appointed” Yahushua heir of all things. Like earlier, this presents Yahuwah as superior to Yahushua.

Dave: Yes. Clearly, they’re not on the same level.

What does the apostle James say in James 1:1?

Miles: Ummm … “James, a servant of [Yah] and—” there’s that connector again!—"of the Lord Yahushua Christ …”

Dave: Now what about 2 Peter 1 verses 1 and 2?

Miles: Uh, “Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Yahushua Christ, to those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior Yahushua Christ have received a faith as precious as ours: Grace and peace be yours in abundance through the knowledge of [Yahuwah] and of Yahushua our Lord.”

Dave: There’s no combining the two into one in Peter’s theology! They’re two separate individuals.

Of all the apostles, John the Beloved can arguably be said to have been the closest to Yahushua. If anyone understood the nature of Yahushua as relates to Yahuwah, it would be him. So lets see what John had to say. Next reference is 1 John 1 verse 3.

Miles: “We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us. And our fellowship is with the Father and with His son, Yahushua Christ.”

Dave: Our fellowship is with …?

Miles: The Father.

Dave: Annnd?

Miles: And with His son.

Dave: Two separate persons, not one. This same understanding appears in the second chapter of 1 John. Read verse 1.

Miles: “My dear children, I write this to you so that you will not sin. But if anybody does sin, we have an advocate with the Father—Yahushua Christ, the Righteous One.”

Dave: To use trinitarian terminology, “God” is not our advocate.

Remember, if the Father is “God” and the “Son” is also “God,” then we’ve got a conflict because 1 John 2 verse 1 clearly states that we have an advocate with God. And who is it? “God”? He advocates with Himself for us?

Miles: No. No, it’s Yahushua.

Dave: As we’ve seen with all the other verses, it holds true here: Yahuwah is our one and only God. Not Yahushua. He’s our advocate, but he’s not also “God.”

This division appears in 2 John as well. Read 2 John 1 verse 9.

Miles: “Anyone who runs ahead and does not continue in the teaching of Christ does not have [Yah]; whoever continues in the teaching has both the Father and the son.”

Dave: Now if the Father is God—and He is—and if the son is also God—and we know he’s not—then why would John describe God as “both the Father and the son”?

Miles: It doesn’t work, does it?

Dave: No, it’s ridiculous. John viewed the Father and the son as two separate individuals. One’s divine; the other is human. One is “God”; the other is our advocate with God. Two separate beings with two separate roles.

All right. Let’s take a look at what Jude has to say. Jude is also really short. Just one chapter. Let’s start with verse 1.

Miles: Uhhh … ^“Jude, a servant of Yahushua Christ and a brother of James, to those who have been called, who are loved in God the Father and kept for Yahushua Christ.”

Dave: If Yahushua is God as we’ve always been taught, why didn’t he just say, “to those who have been called, who are loved and kept for God”?

Miles: That would make more sense.

Dave: But Jude didn’t say that. He separated them. They’re “loved in God the Father annnd kept for Yahushua.”

Okay, what does verse 4 say?

Miles: “For certain individuals whose condemnation was written about long ago have secretly slipped in among you. They are ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Yahushua Christ our only Sovereign and Lord.”

Dave: There’s that connector again: and. Linking “our God” with “Yahushua Christ.” You wouldn’t need to link them if they were both God.

All right. We’ve gone through the whole New Testament. There’s only the book of Revelation left and it has more references to Yahuwah and Yahushua being separate individuals than any other book save one, and that’s the Gospel of John. But then, John wrote them both.

Let’s jump in with Revelation 1 verse 1. It says: “The revelation which God gave to Himself.” Right?

Miles: No! No! “The revelation from Yahushua Christ, which God gave him to show his servants what must soon take place.”

Dave: Two people; two separate individuals.

Now let’s read verses 4 and 5. This is John’s greeting to his intended audience. And notice that he’s including others, saying the greeting is from them as well. Go ahead.

Miles:

John,

To the seven churches in the province of Asia:

Grace and peace to you from him who is, and who was, and who is to come, and from the seven spirits before His throne, and from Yahushua Christ, who is the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth.

Dave: So let’s count this up. The greeting is from John, of course. Who else?

Miles: Uh, Him who is, and was, and is to come.

Dave: So Yahuwah. Who else?

Miles: The … seven spirits before his throne?

Dave: And?

Miles: And Yahushua. It’s interesting that Yahushua here is listed after the “seven spirits before his throne.”

Dave: Yahuwah is “God.” He’s the only true and living God. If, as trinitarians teach, Yahushua is also “God,” he wouldn’t need to be listed separately and he likely wouldn’t appear last in the list.

There’s more division. Read verse 9.

Miles: “I, John, your brother and companion in the suffering and kingdom and patient endurance that are ours in Yahushua, was on the island of Patmos because of the word of [Yahuwah] and the testimony of Yahushua.”

Dave: Again—and I know I’m starting to sound like a broken record—Father and son are not one and the same. They’re presented as separate individuals.

Miles: I used that expression with one of my kids the other day—sounding like a broken record—and he looked at me and said, “What does that even mean?”

Dave: Maybe we should say “Sounding like a scratched CD” instead.

Miles: Or a glitchy download? Doesn’t quite work, does it?

Dave: No, not the same.

All right, getting back on track. What does Revelation 2 verse 8 say?

Miles: “To the angel of the church in Smyrna write: These are the words of him who is the First and the Last, who died and came to life again.”

Dave: Here, a name isn’t even used, just a description. But it’s clear the description is of–?

Miles: Yahushua.

Dave: Right! He’s the only one who died and came to life again. And because it’s impossible for God to die, we can know that Yahushua is not one and the same entity as the Father. This is a big proof right here that Yahushua is fully human. Divinity cannot die.

Trinitarians try and wiggle around that by saying that only Yahushua’s humanity died; his divine nature did not actually die.

Miles: But then … that would mean he didn’t truly die, wouldn’t it?

Dave: Precisely. It’s back to stretching credulity to the breaking point.

All right. What’s next?

Miles: Revelation 2:26 and 27: “To the one who is victorious and does my will to the end, I will give authority over the nations—that one ‘will rule them with an iron scepter and will dash them to pieces like pottery’—just as I have received authority from my Father.”

Dave: Here again is the same dynamic we’ve seen presented throughout the New Testament. The lesser receives power and authority from the greater, proving that Yahuwah and Yahushua are not co-equal partners in a triune godhead.

Miles: Let me just ask this before we go on. What about that passage in Paul where … well, let me just read it here. It’s Philippians 2 verses 5 to 8. It says:

Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Yahushua, who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, but made himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross.

Dave: In a previous program, we’ve discussed what this passage is really saying and how it can’t be used to prove a preexistence for Christ, but your question is a little different. You’re wanting to know if this teaches equality between the Father and the son, right?

Miles: Yeah! Yeah.

Dave: The very next verse answers your question. Read verse 9.

Miles: “Therefore God also has highly exalted him and given him the name which is above every name.”

Dave: If they were co-equal partners, Yahuwah could not truly be said to be exalting Yahushua. It would be all play-acting. And that’s what trinitarians are teaching when they try to divide Yahushua into a human part and a divine part.

I saw a meme online that pointed out this very discrepancy. Now, to believers, this is going to sound shocking and even a little sacrilegious, but bear with me because it points out the glaring fallacy in the trinitarian doctrine like little else.

Miles: Okay. What is it?

Dave: It said, in quotes: “Jesus died for our sins.”

Then below that, it says: Except he didn’t actually STAY dead. So what did he sacrifice? His weekend? Jesus gave up his weekend for your sins.

Miles: Uh, yeah. No. That’s funny and awful at the same time.

Dave: But it makes a valid point if you believe that Yahushua is “God,” too. Because divinity can’t die. Then, if his supposed divinity didn’t die, did he actually die at all? You can’t have it both ways. He either died for us or he didn’t. But in order to die, he had to have been fully human.

And, as we saw in our first segment, Christ’s own words always put himself as subservient to the Father. This was not play-acting a role. This is how it really is.

Miles: This next verse makes it clear, too. Listen to this. It’s Revelation 3 verse 5.

“He who overcomes shall be clothed in white garments, and I will not blot out his name from the Book of Life; but I will confess his name before My Father and before His angels.”

If Yahushua is God, why would he be confessing the names of the overcomers before the Father? Is he saying it to himself?

Dave: Good point. Read verse 12.

Miles: “He who overcomes, I will make him a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go out no more. I will write on him the name of my God and the name of the city of my God, the New Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven from my God. And I will write on him my new name.”

Dave: The distinction between “God” (Yahuwah) and Yahushua could not be more clear. He didn’t say, “He who overcomes, I will make a pillar in my temple and write my name on him. Instead, he differentiates between the name of his God and his own name, clearly stating that both the temple and the city belong to his God.

Did you catch the significance of that? Yahushua has a God! Is it himself?

Read verse 14 now.

Miles: “And to the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write, ‘These things says the Amen, the Faithful and True Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God.’”

Dave: Can Yahushua be “the beginning of the creation of God” and still be God like the trinity doctrine teaches?

Miles: Not hardly!

Dave: Verse 21?

Miles: “To him who overcomes I will grant to sit with me on my throne, as I also overcame and sat down with my Father on His throne.”

Dave: Two different individuals, two different thrones, and the biggest difference is that Yahuwah’s throne is His because … well, He’s God. Yahushua’s throne is his reward for overcoming, not his by right of being God.

Miles: Huge difference.

Next passage is Revelation 4:2 to 11. It says: “Immediately I was in the Spirit; and behold, a throne set in heaven, and One sat on the throne—"

Dave: You know what? I’m sorry to interrupt, but we’re going to run out of time here. Go ahead and give the text again so those at home can look it up for themselves.

Miles: It’s, uh … Revelation 4 verses 2 to 11.

Dave: All right. Here, John’s in vision. He’s describing the throne room of Heaven. The one sitting on the throne is Yahuwah, or “God.” Now, Yahushua is not God and he’s not sitting on the throne. Instead, in the next chapter—and I think that’s your next text listed—?

Miles: It is.

Dave: Okay. The throne room scene begun in Revelation 4 continues in Revelation 5 and Yahushua is here symbolized as a Lamb standing before the throne. Again, he’s an entirely separate entity. He’s not God. God isn’t both sitting on the throne and, at the same time standing in front of it.

Okay, what’s next?

Miles: Well, before we go on, I just want to point out that in verse 13 of Revelation 5, all the holy beings in the throne room say:

Blessing and honor and glory and power
Be to Him who sits on the throne,
And to the Lamb, forever and ever!

They’re singing praise to the one on the throne—and—to the Lamb. Again, a differentiation is made.

Dave: Right! Good. All right. What’s next? Revelation 11:15?

Miles: “Then the seventh angel sounded: And there were loud voices in heaven, saying, ‘The kingdoms of this world have become the kingdoms of our Lord and of His Christ, and He shall reign forever and ever!”

Dave: “Lord,” as we’ve said many times before, is simply a title. This can be a little bit confusing because, throughout the New Testament, it is frequently used to refer to Yahushua, but here, in this context, it’s clearly referring to Yahuwah because the very next phrase says, “and of His Christ.”

Yet again: two individuals, not one.

Miles: Next is Revelation 12:17. It says: “And the dragon was enraged with the woman, and he went to make war with the rest of her offspring, who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Yahushua Christ.”

Dave: If Yahuwah and Yahushua were both one in the trinitarian sense, if they were both “God,” this would simply say, those “who keep the commandments and have the testimony of God.” But that’s not what it says. It says the commandments of God and the testimony of Yahushua.

Miles: This next passage is Revelation 14 verses 1, 4 and 12. It says:

Then I looked, and behold, a Lamb standing on Mount Zion, and with him one hundred and forty-four thousand, having his Father’s name written on their foreheads.

These are the ones who were not defiled with women, for they are virgins. These are the ones who follow the Lamb wherever he goes. These were redeemed from among men, being firstfruits to God and to the Lamb.

Here is the patience of the saints; here are those who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Yahushua.

Dave: So again, same thing. A clear distinction between “God” (a title that refers to Yahuwah alone) and Yahushua. They are not one and the same, people! They’re different! Separate.

Miles: Um … Revelation 15:3. This is describing the 144,000. It says:

They sing the song of Moses, the servant of God, and the song of the Lamb, saying:

“Great and marvelous are Your works,
Lord God Almighty!
Just and true are Your ways,
O King of the saints!

Dave: There are three different persons being named here. There’s Moses—that’s one—who’s the servant of God—that’s two—and the Lamb. That’s three.

Can we really keep insisting that Yahuwah and Yahushua are both “God” when Scripture repeatedly differentiates between the two?

I know we’re almost out of time, so just write down the next one if anyone wants to read it for themselves. It’s …?

Miles: Revelation 19:5 to 7.

Dave: Read through that and you’ll see it lists four different parties. There’s Yahuwah the Almighty, the Lamb, who is also Yahushua, the bridegroom. There’s also the bride of the Lamb and, finally, there’s a great multitude. The “bride” is the bride of the Lamb, not the bride of “God.”

What’s next?

Miles: Revelation 20 verse 6: “Blessed and holy is he who has part in the first resurrection. Over such the second death has no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with Him a thousand years.”

Dave: Okay, if Christ is “God,” why does it list him separately here? Why doesn’t it simply say “they shall be priests of God”?

Miles: Good question!

Um, Revelation 21:9 and 10: “Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls filled with the seven last plagues came to me and talked with me, saying, “Come, I will show you the bride, the Lamb’s wife.’ And he carried me away in the Spirit to a great and high mountain, and showed me the great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God.”

Dave: Three different individuals: the bride, the Lamb and Yah.

Verse 22?

Miles: “But I saw no temple in it, for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple.”

Dave: Two parties: “the Lord God Almighty,” who could only be Yahuwah, and the Lamb.

Now, super-quick. Revelation 22 verses 1 and 3.

Miles: “And he showed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding from the throne of God and of the Lamb. … And there shall be no more curse, but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it, and His servants shall serve Him.”

Dave: That’s the very last chapter of the Bible. We’ve gone literally the whole way through the New Testament and over and over, what do we find? Yahuwah and Yahushua are presented as two distinct and separate individuals.

* * *

You are listening to World's Last Chance Radio.

WLC Radio: Teaching minds and preparing hearts for Christ's sudden return.

* * *Daily Promise

Hello! This is Elise O’Brien with today’s daily promise from Yah’s word.

Life is getting really intense. Let’s be honest: life’s never easy, but the last few years, with a pandemic, lockdowns—loss of income for many due to lockdowns—the resulting economic impact and the ever-increasing political instability with growing threat of war … life is more intense than ever before.

For believers, there is the added stress of following truth when cherished church and social relations, maybe even spouse, parents, or children, don’t follow truth, too. If you’re feeling afraid or overwhelmed, if you’re waking up in the middle of the night, wracked with anxiety, be assured that Yahuwah is still in control and He is watching over you, your loved ones, and your situation with a love that will never let you go.

Joshua 1 verse 9 says, “Have I not commanded you? Be strong and courageous. Do not be afraid; do not be discouraged, for Yahuwah your God will be with you wherever you go.”

Yahuwah is our God: the only true and living God. No matter what happens in life, His eye is upon you and He will carry you through.

We have been given great and precious promises. Go and start claiming!

* * *Part 3: 1 + 1 ≠ 1

Dave: Scripture presents “God” as being only one. Deuteronomy 6:4 declares: “Hear, O Israel: Yahuwah our God, Yahuwah is one.” And that’s what the early Christians believed for hundreds of years until, in the fourth century, they started making compromises with paganism.

There is Yahuwah, the only living, self-existent God. And there is Yahushua, His only-begotten, human son who was born to be the Lamb of Yah that died for the sins of the world. Two distinct individuals: one divine, the other human.

But when you try and combine these two distinct individuals into one, saying they’re both “God,” you have to take things out of context, ignore clear Biblical statements, and twist logic to try and make truth and error fit … and it just doesn’t. Truth is logical; error isn’t.

Miles: It’s like trying to say that 1 + 1 = 1. It just doesn’t fit.

Dave: It’s illogical! Paul wrote in 2 Timothy, “All Scripture is given by inspiration of [Yahuwah], and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of [Yah] may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.” [2 Timothy 3:16-17]

Scripture was given to us, the common man. We’re to take Scripture just as it reads. You don’t need to be a Bible scholar. It was the scholars, the so-called Church Fathers that corrupted and contorted Scripture to begin with in their attempt to work in platonic ideas!

Let’s determine, each one of us, to set aside these wrong ideas and worship Yahuwah, the only being who alone is God. Let’s be grateful that He begat a son to save us from our sins, but let’s not commit idolatry by exalting that son to a position he never claimed for himself.

Miles: Not only that Yahushua never claimed for himself but which Scripture clearly does not teach.

For those of you who may have missed some of our earlier programs, you might be thinking, “Hey! Wait a minute! 1 John 5:7 and 8 teaches a triune godhead. But—

Dave: That’s the verse that says: “For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness on earth: the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and these three agree as one.”

Miles: Right. Thanks.

For those of you thinking that this passage teaches a trinity, you’re right. It does. The thing is, John didn’t write it! It doesn’t appear in any of the early manuscripts. In fact, it wasn’t added until over a thousand years after Christ! So, Dave is right. Scripture teaches that God—Yahuwah—is just one being. Not two and certainly not three.

But I have to admit, Dave, I’m really shocked at the sheer number of verses that make this clear. Yah’s nature is obviously not “three-in-one”!

Dave: All it takes is accepting Scripture just as it reads and not imposing our own interpretation on it.

Miles: May Yahuwah bless us with clear discernment to know when we’re in danger of doing that!

Dave: Amen!

Miles: Our time’s up for today, but we want to thank you for joining us. I hope you can tune in again tomorrow and until then, remember: Yahuwah loves you . . . and He is safe to trust!

* * *

You have been listening to WLC Radio.

This program and past episodes of WLC Radio are available for downloading on our website. They're great for sharing with friends and for use in Bible studies! They're also an excellent resource for those worshipping Yahuwah alone at home. To listen to previously aired programs, visit our website at WorldsLastChance.com. Click on the WLC Radio icon displayed on our homepage.

In his teachings and parables, the Savior gave no “signs of the times” to watch for. Instead, the thrust of his message was constant … vigilance. Join us again tomorrow for another truth-filled message as we explore various topics focused on the Savior's return and how to live in constant readiness to welcome him warmly when he comes.

WLC Radio: Teaching minds and preparing hearts for Christ's sudden return.