DEBATE: @JayDyer vs @CaptainTazaryach | Trinitarian Vs Unitarian

Jay cited this as an Old Testament appearance of Yahweh to Abraham to argue that visible divine manifestations in Genesis point to the pre-incarnate Son rather than the Father a...

Jay cited this to say the divine Word/voice appeared to Abraham, supporting his claim that the Logos was active and visible in the Old Testament.

Jay used this to argue that Jesus says no one has seen the Father, so Old Testament visible appearances of Yahweh must refer to the Son instead.

Jay cited Hagar seeing the angel of the Lord and identifying the encounter as seeing Yahweh face to face, to argue the angel was divine and not merely created.

Jay cited this as another bodily appearance of God to Abraham, supporting his claim of repeated Old Testament theophanies.

Jay used this angel-of-the-Lord passage to argue that the messenger of Yahweh is identified with Yahweh himself.

Jay cited the angel going before the patriarchs as part of his argument that a divine messenger accompanies God's people in salvation history.

Jay used this to argue that the angel who goes before Israel has divine authority, including forgiveness, and so is not a mere creature.

Jay connected the burning bush and divine name passage to the angel of the Lord, arguing the Son is the one speaking as Yahweh in history.

Jay cited Joseph's language about the angel redeeming him to support the claim that the angel of the Lord performs divine acts like redemption.

Jay referenced this as another appearance of Yahweh, continuing his cumulative case for recurring divine manifestations in Genesis.

Jay referenced this alongside other patriarchal appearances to argue the Son appeared before the incarnation.

Jay cited Jacob's ladder vision as a precursor fulfilled in Christ, linking Old Testament vision imagery to Jesus.

Jay used Jesus' statement about angels ascending and descending on the Son of Man to tie Christ directly to Jacob's ladder and Old Testament theophany themes.

Jay cited this to argue that the angel is explicitly called God, showing the messenger can be divine rather than created.

Jay used Jacob seeing God face to face in the wrestling episode to argue someone other than the unseen Father was visibly encountered.

Jay cited this as yet another direct appearance of God in Genesis to build his case cumulatively.

Jay referenced this to continue identifying Genesis appearances of God with the Son rather than the Father.

Jay cited the Spirit being in Joseph to argue that the Holy Spirit is already active personally in Genesis.

Jay used the Spirit hovering over the waters to argue the Holy Spirit is active in creation and not merely an impersonal force.

Jay connected this range to Exodus 3 and 23 to argue the same divine messenger accompanies Israel in the wilderness.

Jay cited Moses meeting God face to face to argue that the visible divine presence cannot be the Father if the Father is unseen.

Jay referenced the glory of God appearing to Israel to support his claim that the divine glory is a visible manifestation of the Son.

Jay appealed to this chapter's house imagery to connect Bethel and the house/body of God to visible divine presence themes.

Jay cited the glory cloud over Israel to connect Old Testament divine presence with New Testament overshadowing imagery.

Jay used the Spirit resting on the elders to argue the Holy Spirit acts personally and divinely in the Torah.

Jay cited the pillar-cloud descent and face-to-face encounter language to argue the visible Lord is the Son rather than the Father.

Jay referenced this glory text as part of his repeated claim that visible divine glory passages identify the Son's presence.

Jay cited the glory appearing to the congregation as another visible-manifestation text in support of his Trinitarian reading.

Jay used Ezekiel's glory vision to identify the divine chariot figure with the Son of Man and ultimately with Christ.

Jay cited Revelation's exalted Christ imagery to argue it matches Ezekiel's divine figure and so identifies Jesus with Old Testament glory theophanies.

Jay referenced Balaam receiving the Spirit to argue the Spirit's divine agency in prophecy.

Jay cited Balaam prophesying by the Spirit and seeing the angel of the Lord to connect Spirit activity with the divine messenger theme.

Jay used this to claim the Spirit is linked with divine glory, again supporting full divinity of the Spirit.

Jay cited this as part of his sweep through the Torah to argue Israel encountered God's voice/glory in ways consistent with New Testament Trinitarian interpretation.

Jay referenced Israel seeing God's glory to support his larger point that visible divine encounter texts imply a distinction within God.

Jay cited Joshua having the Spirit of understanding to argue the Spirit's active personal role in the Torah.

Jay used the 'only begotten God' text to argue the Son is eternally begotten and fully divine, not a creature.

Jay cited Jesus reading Isaiah and saying the Spirit is upon him to argue that Jesus himself affirms a multi-personal divine pattern.

Jay used Jesus' reply to Satan not to tempt 'your God' to argue that Satan was tempting God in tempting Jesus.

Captain cited Jesus thanking the Father for revealing truth to babes to argue his own reading is the plain and divinely revealed one.

Captain used this to argue God reveals truth through prophets plainly, rather than through complex Trinitarian constructions.

Captain cited the Shema to argue biblical monotheism means God is one person, not a Trinity.

Captain used this to emphasize that the Most High alone is God over all the earth, against Trinitarian plurality.

Captain cited Jesus' prayer to argue Jesus explicitly calls the Father 'the only true God,' excluding himself from being that God in the same sense.

Captain cited the opening of Jesus' prayer to show the Son asking the Father for glory, which he used to argue subordination rather than co-equality.

Captain used Paul's statement that the head of Christ is God to argue Christ is under God and therefore not identical with God.

Captain cited this famous sending text to argue God gave/sent his Son, showing a distinction and hierarchy between God and Christ.

Captain cited Jesus' response to the blasphemy charge to argue Jesus did not seize the title 'God' when accused, but identified himself as Son of God.

Captain used 'ye are gods' to argue that the term 'god/gods' can be applied to beings other than the Most High, weakening Trinitarian appeals to such language.