Come Refute The Trinity In The Bible!

A Muslim guest cited this verse to argue the Hebrew term there is equivalent to 'Muslim,' trying to claim Jesus or Israel is described as Muslim in the Old Testament.

This verse was presented as a direct biblical basis for the Trinity because Jesus gives the baptismal formula 'in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.'

A Muslim guest used this verse to argue the early church baptized only 'in the name of Jesus Christ,' attempting to contrast it with Matthew 28:19.

A Christian caller appealed to this verse about the 'mystery of godliness' to say God's nature is ultimately mysterious and not easily reduced to formulas.

The host used this passage to argue that Jesus and the Father are distinct persons, since Jesus says two witnesses testify: himself and the Father who sent him.

This chapter was cited to identify the 'Spirit of God' with the Holy Spirit, supporting the claim that the Spirit is a distinct divine person.

The host used this verse to argue that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and is sent by the Son, showing personal distinction within the Godhead.

This verse was quoted to argue that soul and spirit are not identical, answering a convert's analogy that treated them as the same thing.

A new Christian raised this book as part of a canon question, asking why Esther belongs in scripture despite perceived historical and theological difficulties.

A Muslim caller brought up this Quran verse to ask whether the Quran presents the Christian Trinity as involving Jesus and Mary alongside God.

A Muslim guest cited this verse to argue that whatever is seen is temporary, attempting to use that against visible appearances of God or Christ.

This verse was raised to challenge how the Son can be eternal if the Father 'granted' him life in himself; the host answered with eternal generation.

A caller appealed to this verse about Melchizedek having no recorded genealogy or end to question whether Melchizedek is eternal or divine; the host denied that reading.

This creation verse was discussed in relation to plurality in God, especially the wording 'Let us make man in our image.'

The host used this passage to argue that God created the world through the Son, so the Son cannot be merely the flesh that began at the incarnation.

This verse was raised to ask whether Father, Son, and Spirit were all present at creation.

This prayer text was cited to discuss the Son's preexistent glory with the Father and what Jesus meant by revealing the Father's 'name.'

A non-trinitarian caller cited this verse's wording 'one God, the Father' to push back on trinitarian language about Father and Son.

The host referenced this text to note that scripture can also call the Father 'Lord,' so such titles can be contextually assigned without denying Christ's deity.

The host used this verse to answer whether someone can have the Son without the Father, arguing that confessing the Son means having the Father also.

An LDS caller used this passage, especially the 'only true God' language, to argue for a henotheistic reading rather than Nicene monotheism.

This saying of Jesus was raised to argue that scripture itself speaks of 'gods,' supporting the LDS caller's broader plurality-of-gods framework.

The LDS caller explicitly appealed to the Book of Mormon as support for interchangeable Father/Son language and for believers becoming sons of Jesus.

The host cited this worship scene to argue that both the One on the throne and the Lamb receive worship together, which he used against henotheism.

This saying was invoked to support the claim that worshiping Jesus and worshiping the Father are not rival acts because the two are one.

This chapter was referenced in the debate over whether the Father has a body, since it says God is spirit.

The host referred to Jesus' post-resurrection statement about spirits lacking flesh and bones to argue against the LDS claim that the Father has a body.

This passage was used to argue that Yahweh alone created all things and is uniquely worshiped, challenging the LDS idea of separate divine beings.

The host cited this verse to show that Yahweh is also identified as Father and Creator, countering the attempt to reserve 'Yahweh' for Jesus alone.

In the closing summary, this passage was cited as evidence that the Holy Spirit is identified as Yahweh.