Program 275
Five Logical Fallacies of the Trinity Doctrine

The pagan trinity doctrine contains illogical fallacies proving it is error.

Welcome to WLC Radio, a subsidiary of WLC Radio Ministry, 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: (Miles & Dave)

Miles Robey: Have you heard of Sophistical Refutations? It’s a work by Aristotle. Apparently, he was the first person to make a definitory list of logical errors. His goal was to make it easier to rebut an opponent’s argument and win in a war of words. In his Sophistical Refutations, he identified thirteen of what today we call “logical fallacies.”

Hello, I’m Miles Robey and you’re listening to World’s Last Chance Radio where we cover a variety of topics related to Scripture, prophecy, practical piety, Biblical beliefs, and living in constant readiness for the Savior’s unexpected return, whenever that might be.

Today, Dave Wright is going to be sharing with us five specific areas in which the trinity doctrine fails to be logical or, at least, consistent. Later, Jane Lamb has prepared another of her daily promises. This one will be especially meaningful for anyone who’s ever felt alone or overwhelmed by life, or problems, or . . . whatever may be causing you stress.

So, with that, I’m going to turn the time over to Dave Wright. Dave?

Dave Wright: Thanks, Miles!

Have you heard of comorbidities?

Miles: Yeah, isn’t that like, uh … when a person has two or more things wrong with them? Like, for example, they’ve got pneumonia and appendicitis and thyroid issues all at once.

Dave: Kind of. You’ve got the basic idea. It tends to be interconnected, though. Like, if a person has diabetes, chances are good that he or she might also be overweight because, if their body struggles to remove glucose from their blood, the excess glucose will be stored as fat.

Excess weight, then, can be a “comorbidity” of diabetes. This, in turn, can lead to other issues, such as high blood pressure. It can also cause sleep apnea. These are all common comorbidities of diabetes.

Miles: I see. It’s not a matter of, say, having dandruff and an ingrown toenail. Or strep throat and conjunctivitis. They have to be connected somehow to be considered a comorbidity.

Dave: Basically, yes. They occur at the same time in the same person, they’re often interconnected, and they may also be chronic.

I’m explaining this because the trinity doctrine brings with it five “comorbidities,” if you will, that demonstrate what a failure in logic this entire belief is. You can’t separate the doctrine of a triune godhead from these. They’re integral to it. I want to talk about these five comorbidities. You’ll find they’re all errors in logic.

And we’ve got a lot to cover, so get ready.

Miles: Yeah, I see you’ve got quite a thick sheaf of papers there.

Dave: I figured it would be faster just to print some of these off rather than have you look them all up.

Okay. The first problem we’re going to look at deals with the nature of Christ. Now, if you’re a trinitarian and you believe that Yahushua is divine yet born of Mary, you believe that he has a dual nature: part human and part divine.

Miles: As a trinitarian, I was taught that he was fully divine and fully human.

Dave: Which makes no sense whatsoever. What is he? Two hundred percent? but … okay. The point is, if you believe that Yahushua is God the Son, the second member of a triune godhead, you also believe that his human nature is not part of the trinity.

Miles: Well, no. That’s why he’s fully human and fully divine. Supposedly.

Dave: But you can’t have that. No one has a dual nature: not humans, not angels, certainly not the Creator. No one does.

Here … read that first quote there at the top. What does it say?

Miles: “Jesus’ humanly nature was taken up. … He has two natures … [an] eternal one … and one created. … The eternal one is one of the persons of the Trinity … the human nature is technically not part of the trinity which emphasizes that three persons have one essential nature … Yahushua’s divine nature is part of the trinity.”

Sounds like a werewolf!

Dave laughs: Well, it’s a confusing belief, that’s for sure.

What’s the next quote?

Miles: “The Trinity is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Some people think ‘Son’ means the human being Jesus, so that a human being is part of the Trinity. That's not the case.”

Dave: So not only does Yahushua supposedly have a dual nature, but part of his nature is separated. It’s not part of the trinity.

But if his human nature isn’t part of the trinity, what happens to it? Does it just kind of … take a leave of absence from work? Does it go pout in a corner?

Miles: Does Christ’s human nature know it’s not part of the trinity?

Dave: Good question! You can’t separate the two. And this is something trinitarians can’t explain: How can Yahushua be a member of the trinity … and yet, at the exact same time, not a member of the trinity? The truth is, they can’t explain it.

Miles: “It’s a mystery; too great for human minds to grasp.”

Dave: That’s exactly what they claim. They paint themselves into the proverbial corner and, when they can’t then logically address the contradictions it raises, they quickly say, “Oh, that’s a divine mystery.”

But that’s not how Yahuwah works. What does Deuteronomy 29 verse 29 tell us?

Miles: Uh … give me just a sec to look it up …

It says: “The secret things belong to Yahuwah our God, but those things which are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law.”

Dave: The nature of Yahuwah, as well as the nature of Yahushua, are not divine mysteries. The fact that we’re even told what their natures are means they are not mysteries.

We don’t know any divine mysteries because they’ve not yet been revealed! It says so right there: the divine mysteries haven’t been revealed. So, if it’s a topic under discussion, it’s a topic that’s been revealed. This means there’s no such thing as a doctrine too mysterious for humans to understand. That’s just their attempt to explain away the logical fallacies of this ridiculous error.

Keep going. What’s the next quote?

Miles: “It is tough to find human terms that would express how God can be both a unity and three distinct persons at the same time.”

Dave laughs: That’s a mystery all right!

Miles: The next one says: “The incarnation is a mystery since while you can believe that God became man, you can’t comprehend the profound unity between the divine and human natures.”

Dave: So, is there unity between the divine and human natures? Or separation? Which is it? There can’t be both. And how do you know it’s true if you can’t explain it or comprehend it?

Miles: Good point.

Dave: Turn to 1 Corinthian 14, please. I’d like you to read verse 9, because if something can’t be understood, if it can’t be logically explained, I’m here to say: it shouldn’t be taught.

Go ahead: 1 Corinthians 14 verse 9.

Miles: “So it is with you. Unless you speak intelligible words with your tongue, how will anyone know what you are saying? You will just be speaking into the air.”

Ooo! Burn! It’s so true, though. Error is a mess of confusion. Truth is always clear, logical, and consistent.

Dave: There’s nothing in Scripture that says Yahushua has two different and distinct parts to him. In fact, the Savior’s favorite way of referring to himself was … what?

Miles: “Son of man.”

Dave: That’s right. Over and over and over, Yahushua refers to himself as “the son of man.”

• Luke 19:10: “The Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost.”
• Mark 2:10: “But I want you to know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins.”
• Matthew 26:64: “Hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power.”

Miles: Acts 7:56: “Behold, I see the heavens opened up and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God.”

Dave: That’s a great one, too, from the trial of Stephen.

Miles: I thought that’s what he said when he died when they were stoning him.

Dave: No. That’s what he said at the trial that made them so angry they plugged their ears and rushed him outside the city and murdered him.

My point is this phrase is used a lot in the New Testament. And what does it mean? Well, it comes from the Greek word, anthrōpǒs

.

Miles: Sounds like “anthropology.”

Dave: It’s the root word from which we get “anthropology,” and it literally means human being. So, in every way possible, Yahushua emphasized his human nature and not once did he ever claim to be divine. And he could have. He certainly had the vocabulary to do so. But he didn’t.

In Isaiah 1:18 we read, “Come now, let us reason together, says Yahuwah.” If you look up the word “reason” in a Hebrew dictionary, it says yâkach. Actually, why don’t you do that? It’s number 3198. And read the definition for us.

Miles: All right … uh … it says: “To be right … to argue; cause to decide, justify or convict … Yakach means, ‘to decide, prove, convince, judge.’”

Dave: I love this verse because it shows that Yahuwah is willing to appeal to the intellect. We don’t have to have a “blind” faith; our faith is based on evidence! And Yahuwah is willing and able to provide all the logic we need to in order to be convinced!

There’s none of that in the doctrine of the trinity. Talk about a blind faith! You can’t even understand it. You certainly can’t teach what you can’t understand. Even if you lay aside all the Biblical evidence proving the true unitarian nature of Yah and the true, human nature of Yahushua, this right here should be a huge red flag because truth is logical. It’s always error that’s confusing.

Miles: What gets me is that the so-called “experts,” the Bible scholars, know this! They know the trinity doctrine is an incomprehensible mess that can’t be proven from Scripture. And yet they teach it anyway.

Listen to this: it’s the next quote on your list here. It’s from Volume 15 of the Encyclopedia of Religion. It says, quote: “Theologians agree that the New Testament also does not contain an explicit doctrine of the Trinity.”

Dave: Don’t you think it’s odd that the trinity doctrine isn’t explicitly spelled out in Scripture? For a belief that trinitarians claim is the bedrock belief of Christianity, why isn’t there some long treatise from Paul about it? Or at least a very clear statement from Christ?

Miles: Yeah. You can’t find anything like that anywhere in Scripture.

And if any of our listeners are saying, “Yeah, but what about 1 John 5:7 where it says, “There are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one,” well … I’ve got some bad news for you. John never wrote those words. In fact, they don’t appear in any of the earliest manuscripts. They don’t show up in any of the old manuscripts until a thousand years after Christ! So, you can’t use that as proof of the trinity doctrine appearing in Scripture.

Dave: You’re right, Miles. Thanks for bringing that out.

The truth is this is a pagan doctrine. It’s not Biblical. New Testament scholars know you have to look to extra-biblical sources if you want any sort of “proof.” But what sort of “proof” is it if it’s extra-biblical? I mean, if you want to look to extra-biblical sources for confirmation of various historical events, fine. But doctrine? No. Just … no.

Not only did Yahushua emphasize his humanness, but so did the other New Testament writers. Turn to Hebrews 10 and read verses 11 and 12 for us. It’s talking about Yahushua.

Miles: “Every priest stands ministering daily and offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God.”

Dave: A couple of things here. One: Yahushua is referred to as a man. And after he had offered himself as a sacrifice for sins, what did he do?

Miles: Sat down at the right hand of Yahuwah.

Dave: No, that’s not what it says. It says he sat down at the right hand of … whom?

Miles: God.

Dave: That’s right. Now obviously, Yahuwah is the only true God. But the use of the generic title here is interesting, juxtaposed as it is, next to the reference of Yahushua as a man. The author of Hebrews is drawing a distinct difference. If Yahushua were God, could he be said to have “sat down at the right hand of God”?

Miles: No!

Dave: Turn now to John 8 and read verses 39 and 40. This is one of the many times the Pharisees were verbally attacking Christ. Let’s see how he refers to himself.

Miles:

They answered and said to him, ”Abraham is our father.”

Yahushua said to them, ”If you were Abraham’s children, you would do the works of Abraham. But now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth which I heard from God. Abraham did not do this.

Dave: Clearly, Yahushua—a man—is setting himself as separate from “God” because it was “God” he heard the truth from! Did he hear the truth from himself or from Yahuwah?

Miles: Yahuwah.

Dave: Because only Yahuwah is God.

The other New Testament writers concur, and you can’t get clearer than Paul’s statement in his first letter to Timothy. Let’s turn there: 1 Timothy chapter 2 and verse 5.

Miles: All right, uh … “there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Yahushua.”

Yeah, you can’t get clearer than that.

Dave: Now, I know a trinitarian is going to say, “Oh, Paul was talking about his human nature there.”

No, he wasn’t. Paul was extremely well-educated. A Pharisee from a wealthy background. You didn’t become that well-educated unless you were wealthy. He had the full range of words to explain a triune divine nature, but that’s not what he did. Instead, he emphasized that Yahushua is a human being, and that he’s a separate and distinct being that is—not—God.

Miles: I like how you say that: that the Bible writers had the “full range of words” to explain a triune godhead. They had the ability to put that concept into words, but all they repeatedly do is say that Yahushua is a man, a man, the “Son of Man,” but still just a man, as opposed to “God” who is, of course, only Yahuwah.

Dave: That’s correct. And when Scripture says that Yahushua was a man, that means in his entirety. When he says the Father is greater than he, he was speaking the truth! Now, if Yahushua were in any part “God,” he couldn’t say (as he repeatedly did) that Yahuwah was greater than he. That would have been inaccurate, not to mention disingenuous.

The Savior doesn’t have some dual nature. No one does! Everything he did, everything he said was as a completely whole but singular person. Nothing he ever did or said was as an entity that had a completely separate and different nature.

Miles: Yeah, you know, you put it like that, and if Yahushua had, in any way, a divine nature, he would have been lying to say the things he did, such as “My Father is greater than I,” and “I can of my own self do nothing.” If he were fully divine, even while being fully human, those statements would have been incorrect. Inaccurate. And, yeah: disingenuous and dishonest.

Dave: Scripture repeatedly asserts that only Yahuwah is divine. This means that Yahushua does not and cannot have a part of him that has a “God” nature. By extension, this means that the idea of Yahushua having two natures is simply wrong.

I want to look now at some very clear statements in the New Testament that declare only Yahuwah is God. We find that throughout the Old Testament, but it’s in the New Testament, too. Let’s start with 1 Corinthians chapter 8. Would you please read verses 5 and 6?

Miles: Sure.

For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”), yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Yahushua Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.

Dave: “And” is a coordinating conjunction. It links two different things together. Paul is saying that for believers there’s only one true God, that’s the Father.

… AND there is one Lord: that’s Yahushua. Yahushua is not God.

He repeats this same assertion in Ephesians 4 verse 6. Would you read that next, please?

… Oh. That’s kind of in the middle of a sentence. Read verses 4 through 6.

Miles: Okay, that’s better. It says: “There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to one hope when you were called; one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.”

Dave: Again: there’s only one God, and it’s not Yahushua!

And this is all consistent with what the Old Testament teaches. Let’s look at Malachi 2. Read the first part of verse 10. Malachi’s asking some probing questions here.

Miles: “Have we not all one Father?
Has not one God created us?”

Dave: There are so many places in Scripture where a triune nature could have been explained or, at least, explicitly stated. But you can search from Genesis to Revelation, and you won’t find it because it doesn’t exist. They didn’t say it because it’s not true.

There’s another ridiculous logical fallacy with the trinity doctrine and that is that if Yahushua had a dual nature, then he both knew the time of his return … and he didn’t all at the same time.

Miles laughs: I never thought of that before, but you’re right!

Dave: We all know that “God” is omniscient. He’s all knowing. But a trinitarian will try to say that while Yahushua’s divine nature was omniscient, his human nature wasn’t.

So how does that work? What does that look like? His divine part has amnesia? Or his human part is just play-acting, pretending not to know what part of his brain does know?

A trinitarian will say that in his human nature, Yahushua had limited knowledge.

Miles: Well … I mean, what else can they say?

Dave: But this just underscores the ludicrousness of this doctrine. If only the “God” part of his nature knew the time of his return, how did he keep that information away from the “man” part of his nature? Does the God part not speak to or communicate with the human part? Does the God part keep secrets from the human part? How does the human part not know? We’re talking about Christ’s very nature. That’s part and parcel of who you are.

Miles: Ah, yes. The great mystery none of us can understand!

Dave laughs: A mystery because it’s incomprehensible rubbish! But seriously: how can one person know something, and yet not know it at the same time? That’s what trinitarians would have us believe of Christ.

It’s beyond ridiculous to claim that Yahushua was both omniscient and had limited knowledge all at the same time. He’d be two separate entities if that were true. You can’t divide anyone’s nature into two like that. It’s just not possible. You can’t keep knowledge from yourself, and Yahushua didn’t have two different brains that he switched between.

Miles laughs: Maybe he had some special shut-off valve hidden beneath his hair.

Dave: You know what I mean.

Miles: I do, and you’re right. Looked at this way, it’s hard to believe I ever thought a triune divine nature made sense. It really doesn’t. But that’s error for you. Only truth is logical.

* * *

You are listening to World's Last Chance Radio.

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

* * *

Advertisement

Do you know what a “vicegerent” is? It’s not a term we typically use. In fact, I think the only time I’ve ever heard it used is to describe the pope. Roman Catholics claim that the pope is the vicegerent of Christ.

A vicegerent is more than an ecclesiastical title. In fact, a vicegerent is much more than just a representative for someone else. A vicegerent has the legal right to stand in for another. The words the vicegerent speaks are to be taken as spoken by the one he or she is standing in for. The acts done by a vicegerent are legally the acts of the one being represented. As you can imagine, this is a very important role!

Scripture teaches that Yahuwah has a representative, but it’s not the pope! Yahushua is Yahuwah’s legal vicegerent. This means that every act committed by the Savior, every word spoken is to be accepted as the act and words of the Father.

To learn more about this fascinating subject, listen to Program 258 called “Yahuwah’s Vicegerent (It’s Not The Pope!)” Again, that’s Program 258: “Yahuwah’s Vicegerent (It’s Not The Pope!)” You can find it on our website at WorldsLastChance.com.

* * *Part 2: (Miles & Dave)

Dave: The third “logical comorbidity,” if you want to call it that, of the trinity doctrine is that if you believe Yahushua was fully human while, at the same time, fully divine, you have to somehow believe that Yahushua died on the cross … while at the same time he did not die on the cross.

Miles: Huh? I used to be a trinitarian. I never denied he died on the cross. I’m not sure I’m following.

Dave: All right. Follow this line of reasoning. We know that “God” is immortal, right? Whether you believe, as we do, that only Yahuwah is God so only He has immortality natural and underived, or whether you define God as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, “God” is immortal.

Miles: Yeah, sure. It’s one of the attributes of divinity. Divinity by definition can’t die.

Dave: So, if you’re a trinitarian, who—or what—died on the cross?

Miles: Ohhh! I see what you’re getting at. Only Christ’s human nature. Because, again, divinity can’t die.

Dave: Sooo … did Christ really die? If only his human nature died, are we supposed to believe that his divine nature stayed alive and well? This is the logical comorbidity: that he was both alive and dead simultaneously.

This may sound ridiculous—

Miles: That’s because it is!

Dave: –but this is what trinitarians really believe.

Go to the next sheet. I’ve compiled a number of statements from various trinitarian sources talking about this point. Just read through those really quickly. Skip where they’re from this time. I just want to get as many read as possible.

Miles: Ummm …

• “It was the human part of Jesus that died on the cross, not the divine.”
• “Only Jesus' human nature died on the cross.”
• “Christ's divinity did not die on the cross and that only His humanity died on the cross.”
• “When Jesus died, the human nature died, not the divine.”
• “The divine part of Jesus did not die, as God does not die.”
• “He did not die according to his divine nature, but according to his human nature.”
• “Jesus truly saved us by deeds performed in his human nature.”
• “He went to the cross as a man to pay for our sins.”
• “It is true that God cannot die. It is also true that man can die. But we see that Jesus has two natures, not one. It was the human part of Jesus that died on the cross, not the divine.”
• “Christ suffered and died in his human nature.”
• “The human Jesus died, but the divine Jesus did not.”

Dave: Everyone agrees that God cannot die. This is the logical fallacy of a triune godhead and why I’ve been saying that the Savior had to be fully human. Otherwise, he could not truly die for our sins.

This is a huge, extremely important point of doctrine. Don’t you think that, if this were true and Yahushua somehow had a dual nature, this would have been addressed somewhere in Scripture? Anywhere at all?

Miles: Absolutely.

Dave: But it’s not. What happened to the divine part of Yahushua when his human part died? Did it return to Heaven? Was it in a coma? Was it awake and aware while he was in the sepulchre? What?

Miles: Yeah, and how can only one part of a person die? If part of a person dies, but another part doesn’t, we don’t consider the person to be actually dead.

Dave: If you notice, trinitarians say Christ had two natures, but that he was only one person: two natures in one body. But they treat those two “natures” as two different persons. That’s what you’re doing when you say that one of them died but the other didn’t. Do you see what I’m saying?

Miles: Yes. Because the two personages are doing two different things. So, yeah. Two different people.

Dave: Christ isn’t one person if one Yahushua died and the other Yahushua didn’t. That’s two people.

Drop down to … yes. Right there. Would you read that paragraph for us, please?

Miles:

But here's the tough one for me. Jesus was executed on a Roman cross and died. Does that mean that God died? Even the question feels blasphemous. Did God die? … Did God die on two pieces of wood, with nails through his hands and feet? Logic offers a ready answer. Jesus is God. Jesus died on the cross. Therefore, God died on the cross. Simple syllogism. But I don't know that can subject the Scriptures to that sort of analysis? Not when we are dealing with something like the Incarnation. … We could approach it differently. God didn't die on the cross. Rather it was the human nature that God had robed Himself in. The man died but not the God. But I find this wholly unsatisfactory. It seems to be a denial of the Incarnation? It splits the human and divine natures such that Jesus can no longer be considered one person.

Dave: Even trinitarians struggle with this.

Have you heard of Nestorius?

Miles: Uhhh … nope!

Dave: Nestorius was an early Christian prelate. He was Archbishop of Constantinople from 428 to 431. He’s known for teaching that Christ’s humanity, not his divinity, died on the cross. He was branded a heretic and removed from office for teaching this. And yet, trinitarians are teaching the very same thing!

Read the next few quotes.

Miles:

• “When we reduce Christ's actions to His natures rather than His person we lose the unity of His person and end up with a Nestorian Christ.”
• “We may not separate the human nature from the divine nature, as though in his humanity he could have acted independently of his divinity. This was, in part, the error of the ancient Nestorian heretics.”
• “When we limit Christ's actions to one of his natures rather than his person, we destroy the unity of his person and end up with a Nestorian Christ.”
• “It is commonly said of Jesus that He has a ‘divine side’ and a ‘human side,’ or that sometimes He acted as God, and at other times as man. It is explained that as a man Jesus prayed, ate, and slept. As God, He healed the sick, raised the dead, and calmed the storms. This seems to imply some sort of duality in Jesus as though He is two persons in one body. This is the teaching of Nestorianism.”

Dave: Nestorius taught what trinitarians today teach: that Christ’s human nature died on the cross, but not his divine nature. For teaching this, Nestorius was accused of splitting the Savior into two different personalities with two different experiences.

This is exactly what trinitarians teach! The next section of quotes are from trinitarians. Read through some of those.

Miles:

• “Only the human person of Jesus, not the divine person of Jesus, died on the cross.”
• “The death of Christ was only his human nature.”
• “Obviously, Jesus, the man with His human nature was offered upon the cross.”
• “As Jesus hung on the cross, He was, in His human nature, the true sin-offering for His people, and as such, it was necessary that He suffer alone. God can have no association whatever with sin.” 

Dave: Trinitarians don’t stop there. They teach that Yahushua, in his dual nature, had two minds, two wills, two intellects, two spirits, two consciousnesses, two spirits and that these two existed side-by-side, but separate from each other.

Miles: Well, yeah. I guess you’d have to teach that. Scripture bluntly states that God cannot be tempted, and yet Yahushua clearly was.

This is so weird. Wonder why I never thought of this when I was a trinitarian?

Dave: Well, that’s the problem with error. It paints you into a corner and then you have to do all these mental gymnastics to try and get out of the trap in which you find yourself.

Keep reading. What does that next section of quotes say?

Miles:

• “How is it possible that the same Person can be at the same time infinite and finite, ignorant and omniscient, omnipotent and helpless? How can two complete spirits coalesce in one Person? How can two consciousnesses, two understandings, two memories, two imaginations, two wills, constitute one Person? All this is involved in the scriptural and Church doctrine of the Person of Christ. Yet no one can explain it.”
• “Christ has two minds and two wills.”
• “There are two consciousnesses in Christ.”
• “Jesus Christ possesses two wills-one divine and one human.”
• “Christ has two natures and two wills.”
• “Jesus Christ has two wills as well as two natures.”
• “He has two minds, two wills, two spirits.”
• “Jesus Christ possessing two natures, and therefore two intellects.”
• “The two natures and two wills of Jesus are joined together in the one person.”
• “You cannot understand how there can be two natures and two wills in one person, because it is another of the GREAT MYSTERIES; but you must believe it.”
• “Jesus Christ is one person having two natures, Jesus has two distinct natures in one person.”
• “Jesus is human. He did not lose his divinity when he became human, nor did he become two persons or some sort of split personality. Jesus is one person with two natures: a divine nature, and a human nature.”
• “Jesus Christ at the Incarnation: Two distinct, opposite natures united in one person.”
• “Jesus Christ is one person of the divine Trinity with two distinct natures that are permanently united.”
• “The two natures reside in Christ entire and distinct, without confusion, and retain their own attributes, without change.”

Dave: So trinitarians will teach all of this, and then turn right around and, out of the other side of their mouth, say things like, quote, “Nestorianism is the error that Yahushua is two distinct persons” or “Nestorianism [is the] Christian heresy that held Yahushua to be two distinct persons, closely and inseparably united.”

Now. They do use slightly different terminology. Nestorians say that Christ is two distinct persons, human and divine, and they’re both Christ. Trinitarians instead say Yahushua has two “natures.”

But there is no material difference between the two. Both end up at the same conclusion: Yahushua is split into two separate entities with two separate minds, wills and experiences.

Miles: Yeah, whatever terminology you want to use, they both separate Yahushua into two different beings.

Dave: Whether you want to call it Nestorianism or trinitarianism, it’s all heresy. It’s error.

The fourth logical failure in trinitarianism is similar to what we touched on just a minute ago, and that is that if Yahushua had a dual nature, you have to believe that, simultaneously, he was both tempted and not tempted.

Miles laughs: Yeaaah … how’s that supposed to work?

Dave: No clue. But that’s what you’re supposed to believe.

Let’s start with what the Bible says, because this is the crux of the problem. James 1 and verse 13.

Miles: Okay … it’s one of those little hard-to-find books … give me just a second …

Here we go. It says: “Let no one say when he is tempted, ‘I am tempted by God’; for God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He Himself tempt anyone.”

Dave: This is a problem if you’re a trinitarian because how are you going to explain away the fact that Yahushua was tempted? Scripture itself says he was “tempted in all points like as we are but without sin.”

Miles: Let me guess: It was his human nature that was tempted, not his divine.

Dave: Got it in one, yes. Go on to the next section of quotes. Let’s see what trinitarians have to say about this dichotomy.

Miles:

• “Jesus was able to be tempted in His human nature but not in His divine. In the one person of Christ, there dwells two natures: God and man. … As man, He could be tempted.”
• “He was tempted as a man, in his human nature. Not as God. God cannot be tempted.”
• “As a man, He was tempted.”
• “Jesus was tempted in His human nature, not in His divine.”
• “Jesus Christ, in his humanity, was tempted. God is not tempted.”

Dave: So, I’ve got some questions. These may sound quibbling, but think about it. Because if we’re supposed to accept that Christ was divine, he would have had to have had a dual nature, and if he had a dual nature, these are fair questions.

First, if only part of Yahushua was tempted, what happened to the part that wasn’t tempted? Was it in an unconscious state? Was it standing back and observing? What?

Miles: Could the divine part have separated from the man part?

Dave: No, because trinitarians say the two natures are united and can’t be separated. So, if they’re united, how could one be tempted and the other not? Was there some mental switch Yahushua flipped when he was being tempted? Was his divinity just turned off from his birth to his death?

Miles: Well, no. Because that would be separating the two natures, wouldn’t it? It’s a real problem.

Dave: It is. Did the devil know he was tempting only part of Christ? This actually is a crucial doctrinal point. I want to take a look at what Scripture has to say about Christ’s temptations.

Would you please turn to Hebrews 4 and read verse 15?

Miles: “For we do not have a High Priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin.”

Dave: Okay, we just mentioned that one. Uhh … Matthew 4 verse 1.

Miles: “Then Yahushua was led by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil.”

Dave: We all know the story. The devil tried to get Yahushua to sin in several different ways. Verse 3 even refers to the devil as “the tempter.” Now trinitarians, who view Yahushua as a “God-man,” are going to say only his human nature was tempted while his divine nature wasn’t.

Read the next section of quotes there.

Miles: Uh … “He was tempted as a man, in his human nature. Not as God. God cannot be tempted.”

Dave: So, they’re acknowledging that God cannot be tempted, but they’re not making sense.

Keep going.

Miles:
 

• “Jesus was tempted in His human nature, not in His divine.”
• “But Jesus Christ, in his humanity, was tempted. God is not tempted.”
• “Jesus was able to be tempted in His human nature but not in His divine. In the one person of Christ, there dwells two natures: God and man…….As man, He could be tempted.”

Dave: The problem is, Yahushua was tempted as a whole person. He wasn’t tempted in part.

Hebrews says he was tempted in all points like as we are. When you’re tempted, is it only part of you being tempted? Or all of you?

Miles: All of me. I’m … me! I can’t separate myself into parts, so when I’m tempted, all of me is being tempted.

Dave: You can’t be both tempted and not tempted in the exact same moment. Either something tempts you or it doesn’t.

For example, smoking doesn’t tempt me. It’s not anything that’s ever appealed to me. There are plenty of other things that do, but smoking isn’t it. It’s not that part of me is tempted and part of me isn’t. It’s that it doesn’t tempt me at all. Because I’m one person. Yahushua would have to be two different people if he had one part that was tempted and one part that wasn’t.

Miles: It doesn’t make sense.

Dave: It really doesn’t! This is the foolishness we find over and over when we try to apply logic to error.

When Yahushua was tempted, all of him was temped. Otherwise, he couldn’t actually have been tempted in all points like as we are. And since we know he was indeed tempted, it proved he cannot be “God,” because Scripture itself states that “God cannot be tempted.”

Miles: Yeah, it’s a real quandary. If you say it was only Christ’s human nature that was tempted, you’ve divided him into two distinct and very different entities. But you can’t say that he was God if you believe he was tempted since God can’t be tempted.

Dave: Right. And that’s one of the biggest and most conclusive proofs that Yahushua was fully human. As we’ve said before, the Savior had to be fully human in order to be tempted and to die for sinners, because being tempted and dying are two things that are impossible for “God” to do.

Yahushua is a single person, and that’s what Scripture teaches. Let’s see what 1 Corinthians 15 verses 20 to 22 says. Could you read that for us, please?

Miles: Sure, uh …

But now Christ is risen from the dead, and has become the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. For since by man came death, by man also came the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive. 

Dave: It’s not just Paul. Peter also believed in the full humanity of Christ. What did he say on the Day of Pentecost? Acts 2 verse 22.

Miles: “Fellow Israelites, listen to this: Yahushua of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know.”

Dave: Again, the use of titles is very revealing. Yahushua is described as “a man” as opposed to “God.” Only Yahuwah is God. If Yahushua were God, this statement wouldn’t make sense.

And Yahushua himself affirmed that he was only human. Read John 15 verse 24.

Miles: “If I had not done works among them which none other man did, they had not had sin: but now have they both seen, and have hated both me, and my Father.”

Dave: Christ himself is here drawing a difference between himself and the Father. He never claimed to be divine. If he were, then it would have been clearly spelled out in Scripture because a dual-natured being is something that has never been. And, frankly, never will be.

Miles: That’s true. Makes me wonder how we could have been so blind as to have ever believed this.

Coming up: Jane Lamb with today’s daily promise. Stay tuned.

* * *Advertisement

The hope of every Christian is to see the Savior return. This hope has made Matthew 24 one of the most studied passages in the Scripture. Multitudes of believers have poured over the signs given in this chapter, comparing them to events in the world around them, looking to see if the Savior’s return is near.

While it is true that some verses in Matthew 24 are about the Second Coming, most of the chapter and all of the “signs of the times” given in it, are actually signs pointing to the destruction of Jerusalem.

This means that every last “sign” given in this chapter has already been fulfilled! Sound too incredible to be believed? Gives Miles and Dave a chance to show you. Listen to Program 262 called “Matthew 24 and the Destruction of Jerusalem.” That’s “Matthew 24 and the Destruction of Jerusalem,” Program 262, on WorldsLastChance.com.

* * *Daily Promise:

This is Jane Lamb with your daily promise from Yah’s word.

Lauri had been blessed with four daughters and loved each one with a love only a devoted mother can know. But even from the first, she knew there was something different about Farema, her youngest. Lauri began searching online. Something just wasn’t the same about Farema and she wanted to find out what it was.

Years before the doctors were able to figure it out and diagnose Farema with autism, Lauri already knew. What did the future hold for her little girl? What obstacles would her precious daughter have to overcome? With her older girls grown and on their own, Lauri and Farema were able to spend a lot of time together.

One rainy October morning, Farema was restless. She was bored. She wanted to do something!

Lauri bundled her into a jacket and the two set out for a drive. As they passed through downtown, Lauri saw an ice rink. “Hey!” She said. “Shall we go in and watch the ice skaters?”

Farema happily agreed and the two went inside. Lauri thought it would be an interesting, but quick, visit. That changed when she saw her daughter’s face. Farema’s eyes glowed with delight as she watched the skaters glide past.

“Would you like to try?” Lauri asked. Farema nodded excitedly, grabbing her mother’s hand and dragging her to the cashier. Lauri was a little concerned that Farema would be all right, since a hip injury kept her from skating with her daughter, but the cashier reassured her that there were guards on the ice who would be willing to help.

Lauri laced up Farema’s skates, telling her to go slow and hold onto the wall. She walked Farema down to the ice, said a silent prayer for her daughter’s safety, and let go. The girl took off. In seconds, she was no longer holding onto the wall. After finishing just one complete circle of the rink, Farema sped up and joined the more advanced skaters in the center of the rink.

As Lauri sat in awe, watching the transformation of her daughter, a sense of peace began growing in her heart. She was strengthened and encouraged with the knowledge that Yahuwah knew all about it, and that He was there with her, watching over Farema and protecting her.

From that day on, Farema was a regular at the rink. Her mother signed her up for lessons and she even went on to compete, making friends and succeeding in ways her mother could never have dreamed.

Looking back, Lauri says, quote: “That tangible sense of [Yah] standing with me, watching out for His daughter … it never really left me. No matter what curves life throws us, I know today as I knew then that we never travel that road alone. [Yahuwah] is with us to the very end.”

In the fourth chapter of Philippians, verses 6 to 8, Paul urges, quote:

Be anxious for nothing, but in everything by prayer and supplication, with thanksgiving, let your requests be made known to Yah; and the peace of Yah, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and minds through Christ Yahushua.

Finally, brethren, whatever things are true, whatever things are noble, whatever things are just, whatever things are pure, whatever things are lovely, whatever things are of good report, if there is any virtue and if there is anything praiseworthy—meditate on these things.

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

* * *Part 3: (Miles & Dave)

Dave: There’s one final piece of ridiculousness you have to accept if you believe Christ had a dual nature and that is you have to believe he both prayed and didn’t pray at the same time.

Miles laughs: What??

Dave: We know that Christ prayed. A lot.

Miles: Sure. He was our example.

Dave: Read Mark 1:35. What does that say?

Miles: “Very early in the morning, while it was still dark, Yahushua got up, left the house and went off to a solitary place, where he prayed.”

Dave: Obviously, he’s praying to God. So if he is God, does that mean he was praying to himself?

This is where praying and not praying at the same time comes in.

Read that last section of quotes. Let’s see how trinitarians try to spin this.

Miles: “Jesus prayed in His humanity, not in His deity.”

Dave: What does that even mean? Seriously! What does that even mean?

Miles: I don’t know.

Dave: Keep going.

Miles: Um, next one says: “Jesus was both God and man. When he prayed to his Father he was a man.”

Dave: So, does that mean he ceased to be God when he prayed? How does that even work?

Keep going.

Miles:

• “Jesus, therefore, has two natures. He is both God and man. … Jesus is completely human, but He also has a divine nature. As a man, Jesus needed to pray.”
• “What, then, is the explanation of the prayers of Christ? It can only be that the human nature of Jesus prayed to the eternal Spirit of God. The divine nature did not need help; only the human nature did.”

Dave: This is completely nonsensical. And this is why trinitarians, when they examine this doctrine in depth, end up simply dismissing all of the logical fallacies by claiming the trinity is a mystery too deep for human minds to grasp.

Miles: Like Augustine said, “Deny the trinity and you’ll lose your soul, but try to explain it and you’ll lose your mind.”

Dave: Yes … I’m not sure if he actually said it, but it’s widely quoted because it makes a good point: you can’t understand this doctrine. My point is that the reason you can’t understand it is because it’s error.

As with the problem of Yahushua being divine and still being tempted, the same applies here. If it was only the human nature of Christ that needed to pray, what did the divine aspect of his nature do? Did it:

Go away?

Listen in?

Answer the prayers from his human part?

Serious question: How can you pray and not pray at the same time? Trinitarians say Yahushua was a whole person. They say these two separate parts were united.

Okay. So how can one part of him pray and the other part not?

Again: this doesn’t make sense.

Miles: Well, and if somehow you could do it, if somehow part of him prayed while part of him didn’t, you’d still have the problem of him praying to himself. The human part praying to the divine part.

I know trinitarians will say he was praying to the Father, but if God the Father and God the Son are one, and they’re both the same God, then realistically he was praying to himself.

Dave: Right. That’s the problem you run into when you try to make sense of these doctrines that come straight out of ancient paganism. They don’t make logical sense.

Truth does. It’s past time we laid aside all these nonbiblical errors and accept the Bible and the Bible alone as our guide. Only then can we be sure our beliefs are solid and true.

Miles: Very true.

I want to thank you for joining us for today’s program called “Five Logical Fallacies of the Trinity Doctrine,” Program 275. It’s an important topic and one every believer should understand. If you’d like to share today’s program with a friend, just go to WorldsLastChance.com and click on the WLC Radio icon. Scroll down for Program 275, “Five Logical Fallacies of the Trinity Doctrine.”

After listening to Dave’s presentation, I have to say I’m so glad truth is logical, aren’t you?

We hope you can join us 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.