Your Headline
BOTH God and man

Enter subhead content here

HomeTRUE PENTECOSTTrue Name of GodHow To Say The Saving Name!When a day beginsMore on Philo's SabbatMore on 15th SabbathAudio MessagesPentecost CalendarNature Proves PentecosThings We Need to KnowPaul's PentecostCelts PentecostBOTH God and man

BOTH God and man

Enter subhead content here


I want to talk to you about the Trinitarians doctrine.

At the time of the birth of the Messiah, the evidence shows that there are "two" distinct and separate beings, and one of them is God, but at creation, up until the Son, John 1:1-14 shows there was only one being, not Two!

I believe that the scriptures undeniably teach they are TWO, the Father and the Son.

John 1:1-14 tells the story of where the TWO actually came together, i.e. the Father and the Son dwelling in ONE body/temple of God, and one of them is God All Mighty, and one is the Son of God. 

I am not trying to disprove they are TWO, l am trying to show that one "dwelt within" the other, i.e. One Father and one Son in one undefiled body/temple made without hands.

Isaiah 35:4-6 teaches that God himself will come and save us, and when he does, great miracles will occur, which was fulfilled by the Messiah, in Matthew 11:2-5.

What makes a Trinitarian, which believes in 3 separate "Divine" co-equal beings, in one God, is it the word of God that makes them believe that doctrine, or the tradition of men?

The Word of God is God, ( Gen-1:1 and John 1:1) but not a separate Divine being from the only Divine God! Read it.

Genesis absolutely kills the Trinitarian theory. So does 1 John 1:1-14, because Trinitarians don't believe YHWH Christ is come in the flesh, they believe a separate preexisting Son come in the flesh, instead of YHWH All Mighty come in the flesh, as John 1:1-14 clearly teaches, also 1st Timothy 3:16. This is also confirmed in Mathew 1:23 Matthew which says, “and they shall call his name “Emmanuel”, which being interpreted is, “God with us”.

Simply read Gen- 1 to prove the undeniable truth of only one Creator God in creation. 

Also Isaiah 44:24 which says, "Thus saith the LORD, "thy redeemer" (the one who brought us), and (or also) he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD (YHWH) that maketh "all things" ; that stretcheth forth the heavens "alone"; that spreadeth abroad the earth "by myself";

Had it not been for the tradition not to say the name YHWH, John 1:1 could have read, "in the beginning, was the word, and the Word was with YHWH, and the word was YHWH, the one who created all things! 

Although it does say God, we know God is YHWH, but that is another subject for another time.

Let's go to John 1:1-3 to see the Trinitarian’s supposed foundation.

[1] "In the beginning was the "Word", and the "Word" was "with" God", and the Word "was" God". [2] The "same" was in the beginning "with God". [3] "All things were made by "him"; and "without him" "was not any thing made that was made." (In other words, YHWH God done it alone, by himself, nobody else made anything.)

Verse 3 is directly connected to verses 1 and 2. In other words, someone or something that was with God created all things!

If we ask ourselves the question, what was it that was with God in creation and who was it that created all things? Was it God? It was the word of God that was with God by  which God created all things. The word that was spoken by God, was not another God, or a preexisting Son, read Gen-1, for proof.

 Gen-1, teaches that God created heaven and earth by speaking the word, and John 1:1 teaches the spoken word is God, and we must not make a separate Creator or God out of God's word, as the Trinitarian and others do. They make a separate preexisting Agent out of God's word, saying it is the Son, and that is what created all things and was made flesh and dwelt among us, instead of God himself made flesh. 

They think that God sent or gave his Son, from heaven instead of the God that was in Christ sent and gave his Son. The Anti Christ spirit does not want us to believe that God/YHWH himself came in the flesh and dwelt among us. The Son is a created creature, born in Bethlehem, and the Creator is in the creature.

A cloud was sent to lead the children in the wilderness, but the God that sent the cloud, was in the cloud that he sent, same as God was in the Son, that he sent into the world to lead us.

1 John 4:2 KJV says, "Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that "Jesus Christ is come in the flesh" is of God:"

The question is, what or who was Jesus Christ "before" he was made flesh???

We see Jesus Christ as the begotten of the Father, in John 1:14, but before that, we only see YHWH God, and YHWH God's forerunner, John the Baptist, so was Jesus/YHWH God, in the flesh of his Son?

It was God the Creator that came in the flesh of his only begotten Son, not a preexisting Son of God, as the Trinitarians suppose. They have TWO creators, God the Creator, and the Son the Creator. I ask them, who was it that rested the seventh day in creation, the Father or the Son?

Anyway that is what makes a Trinitarian. Instead of bringing the one Creator God, YHWH, on through from John 1:1 through verse 14, to be made flesh, they create a separate God, which John describes as Anti Christ, in 1 John 4:1-3, which was written in order to counter those who do not believe what he already said in John 1:14.

1 John 2:22,24 says,
[22] "Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ"? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son... [24] Let that therefore abide in you, which ye have "heard from the beginning". If that which ye have heard from the beginning shall remain in you, ye also shall continue in the Son, and in the Father." In other words, when we get to John 1:14, we have BOTH the Father and the Son in a flesh body!
This same John speaks of this Jesus Christ as the begotten of the Father in John 1:14, which was God made flesh,

Now in light of Genesis 1, there can be only one understanding of John 1:1-3, and that is that God created all things by speaking it into existence by his word, God is his word, or the word was God, as the Apostle John puts it, verse 1.
John 1:1-3 is definitely speaking about God creating all things, and verse 4 tells us that "in "him" (the God that created all things) is life, and the "life is the light" the  of men" 

The subject is still God, which has life and light in him. There was no life or light (outside of God) in creation until God spoke it all into existence. No where yet is it taking about the Son of God.

At any rate God is still the subject so far, and verses 5-9 teaches us that John the Baptist came to bear "witness" of the light", which is the "true light" of the world and every man that comes into the world, i.e. God is light.

Notice that only God is spoken of or is in view up unto verse 9. In other words, John is only bearing witness of YHWH God, NOT the Son, which is in perfect harmony with Isaiah 40:3, which says John was to prepare the way of YHWH God, not the Son!

Then Verse 10 goes on to say,
[10] "He (God) was in the world", and "the world "was made" by him", and the world knew him not."

The one that John the Baptist was preparing the way for, was the one that was in the world which he made, and he is YHWH God All Mighty.

Again, Notice the Son of God has not yet been referred to, from verse 1 through 13, and will not be until verse 14, when the Word, which was God, was made flesh and dwelt among us.

John 1:14 "And the Word (which was God) was made flesh (and for that, I am forever grateful, and I know he done it for me, and I am eternally grateful for his Son also), and dwelt among us, (and we beheld "his glory" (Gods glory), the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth."

Now we have TWO, the Eternal YHWH the Father, and the only begotten YHWH the Son, in one flesh body. 

Anybody should be able to see the connection between John 1:1 and verse 14, which teaches the Word was God, (verse 1) and the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us (verse 14), I am so grateful..

2 Peter 1:1 says, “Simon Peter, a bond-servant and apostle special messenger, personally chosen representative of Jesus Christ, To those who have received and possess by God’s will "a precious faith of the same kind as ours", by the righteousness of "our “God” and Savior, Jesus Christ:" (HCSB)

The mystery of Christ is solved, when we understand he is “Both”, God and man, and once you understand this mystery, you can harmonize the verses that teaches he is man, and the ones that teaches he is God also. 

Both, the Old and New Testaments sometimes speaks of the Messiah as the Son, like Isaiah chapter 53, and sometimes as God, as Isaiah 35:4-6, and sometimes as BOTH, the Son and the Father, as in Isaiah 9:6, which describes him as the Son and the Everlasting Father and the Mighty God! 

And until we understand he is BOTH, God and man, the New Testament can not be harmonized. We must realize that, same as the Old Testament, he is spoken of as BOTH, God and man.

As man, there were things he did not know, but as God, he knew all things, even what those around him were thinking. Speaking as God, he said, destroy this temple, the one that he was dwelling in, and in 3 days, I will raise it up, but some did not understand that he was speaking of his body, which is the Son of God, John 2:19. He was speaking as God, when he consistently said that he came down from Heaven, and that he was from above, and he was not of this world, etc. He was speaking as God, when he said, "I am the light of the world", because John 1:9 teaches that God is the light of the world. Paul spoke of him as God, when he said that "by him were all things created", Colossians 1:16, Peter calls him "our God and Saviour, Jesus Christ", 2 Peter 1:1, etc. I could go on and on, but I have made my point, that he is Both God and man. There is only one Redeemer, God, and Job understood God would one day stand on earth.
 Job 19:25-26 KJVS
[25] “For I know that my “redeemer” liveth, and that “he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth”: [26] And though after my skin worms destroy this body , yet in my flesh shall I see “God:”

The evidence shows that, in our bibles, the word Christ is NOT used exclusively for the Son! 

The word “Christ” can, and is also used in referring to YHWH All Mighty. I will prove this from scriptures shortly.

John the Baptist's primary mission was to prepare the way of YHWH, not the Son!

The bible refers to Two separate and distinct beings and both are referred to as “Christ”, one is Christ the Son, born in Bethlehem, and one is Christ the LORD/YHWH from heaven, who's going forth is of old, from Everlasting.

One Christ we can trace back to Bethlehem, and one on back to creation, who is from everlasting, compare Mathew 2:4-5 with Micah 5:2. 

Scriptures sometimes speak of Christ, as man, and sometimes as God All Mighty! 

The Scripture teaches that God, not a part of God, but the fullness of God, was in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself/God! 

2 Corinthians 5:19,21 says,

[19] "To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto "himself", not imputing their trespasses unto them;... [21] For "he" (the God that was in Christ)  hath made "him" (Christ) to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of "God" in him."

We see that there's TWO, beings one dwelling in the other, or perhaps both dwelling in one undefiled temple, born of a virgin, made without hands, that was prepared special for the Son to dwell in, Hebrews 10:5.

One of the two is Christ the Son of God, which is an undefiled temple of God, which was made without hands, born of a virgin, which God dwelt in on earth. Godhead/Diety!

The other Christ is YHWH the Rock that followed them in the wilderness.

1 Corinthians 10:4,9 
[4] And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ....

Verse says, [9] "Neither let us tempt Christ, as some of them also tempted, and were destroyed of serpents."

This is talking about YHWH who they tempted and saw his work 40 years in the wilderness which is referred to as Christ, which proves the name YHWH belongs there, but because of the tradition not to say the name YHWH, they substituted Christ! 

Deuteronomy 32:3-4 says,
[3] "Because I will publish the name of the LORD/YHWH: ascribe ye greatness unto "our God". [4] “He is the Rock”, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: a "God" of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he." 

Then we go to Hebrews chapters 3 & 4 to show YHWH is CHRIST in the wilderness, and we should hear his voice, Christ's voice, also ch 4 YHWH is called Joshua instead of YHWH, because of the tradition not to say the name YHWH.

Moses said there is no Rock like our Rock. YHWH is truly the Rock that the church is founded upon, and when Peter said tho are the Christ, the Son of God, he understood that Christ YHWH was the Rock, and the Messiah said, upon this Rock, or revelation that Christ is also YHWH the Rock, I will build my Church.

We must build our house upon that same Rock, which is the Rock of our salvation, because everything else is sinking sand. 

Psalm 95:1 says,
[1] "O come, let us sing unto the LORD : let us make a joyful noise to the rock of our salvation."

YHWH is the Rock of our salvation, we do not have TWO ROCKS, or two Creators, two king of kings, Two first and lasts, TWO lights of the world, Two Divines, Two All Might's, Two I AM's,  Two Masters, etc. 

If we don't have TWO beings that is called Christ, then we have TWO Creators, TWO Gods etc. let me explain.

YHWH the Rock was in his Son, the Messiah.

Now Read John 1 and Gen 1
And show that John the Baptist's mission was to prepare the way of YHWH God, not the Son.

John the Baptist is one of the greatest Prophets that ever lived, and the Messiah himself said there is none greater than John. Surely we can believe what the Great Prophet John the Baptist says, concerning the Messiah.

In Isaiah 40:3 it teaches that John the Baptist is the voice of one crying in the wilderness, saying, "prepare the way of YHWH, make straight a highway in the desert for our “God”, (YHWH). This is not taking about the Son of YHWH.

Now there's no doubt that John the Baptist was preparing the way of YHWH God in Isaiah 40:3, and in John 1:14-25, it teaches that Jesus is that one that John prepared the way for, and had it not been for the tradition not to say the name YHWH, it would have said YHWH, instead of Jesus, because that was who they were talking about, YHWH!

[14] "And the Word (God) was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld "his" glory", the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. [15] John bare witness of "him" (YHWH God), and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he “was before me”. [16] And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace. [17] For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus (YHWH) Christ. [18] No man hath seen “God” at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. [19] And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou? [20] And he confessed, and denied not; but confessed, "I am not the "Christ". [21] And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No. [22] Then said they unto him, Who art thou? that we may give an answer to them that sent us. What sayest thou of thyself? [23] He said, I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the LORD, as said the prophet Esaias. [24] And they which were sent were of the Pharisees. [25] And they asked him, and said unto him, Why baptizest thou then, if thou be "not that Christ" (YHWH), nor Elias, neither that prophet?"

The Trinitarian scholars are Trinitarians, NOT because of their ability to read what the Greek is actually saying, but because of their inability to understand what they read, and then they follow the tradition of men that has blinded them, which causes them to add to or not accept what the Greek actually says. They rightfully state what the Greek says, but because of tradition, they put a private interpretation on what it says as is the case in John 1:1, the word was God.

The Trinitarian scholars rightfully state the Greek in John 1:1 which says that the word was with God, and the word "was God", and then turn around and and say that the word that "was God", was really the Son of God, creating a second person of the Godhead, and that is because of their tradition. Every Bible translation I know of, and there are many, says that the Word was God.

Because of bad tradition, they try to separate God's word from himself, creating a separate Creator/God, from God the Creator, and then try to harmonize the one God teaching found throughout the scriptures, by saying  it is  really one God consisting of THREE separate beings in one, but all this is proven wrong when we read the actual creation account in Gen-1, and through the Old Testament, where there is only one single being, God that created all things, and then rested the seventh day!

It is the same with us, if we will not accept what it says, as it is written, without trying to explain it away. The one that does not have the truth, in every debate, is the one who has to explain everything away with fair speeches .

Common sense proof that the Messiah is both God and man.

You can always tell when is speaking as God, i.e. It is when he elevates or lifts himself up, he is speaking as God. No child of God will elevate himself therefore he is speaking as God, not man.

Would any son of God lift himself up, not giving God glory?

When we say anything that we have done, we give God glory. 

When He said, "I am the light of the world, and also he said I am the way the truth and the life", he is speaking as God.

When He spake as man, he always gave God glory, example, the Father is great than I, and the Lord's Prayer he never mentioned the kingdom belonging to anyone else and all the glory belongs to God, forever!

It is the kingdom of God, but the kingdom of Christ, when referring to the Deity which was in Christ.

The God that was in the cloud sent the cloud, and the God that was in the Son, sent the Son. This does not mean that God had to be somewhere else 

Malachi 3:1 KJVS
[1] Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before “me” (YHWH God): and the LORD, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to “his temple”, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts.”

Adam Clark on Luke 2:11, which says,

"For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the LORD."

This is another place YHWH is referred to as Christ, when we understand YHWH belongs here, instead of Lord, but because of tradition not to say the name YHWH, we have the substitute.

Clark writes,

"The Lord. Κυριος, "the supreme, eternal Being, the ruler of the heavens and the earth". 

The Septuagint generally translate יהוה Yehovah by Κυριος. This Hebrew word, from היה hayah, he was, "properly points out the eternity and self-existence of the Supreme Being"; and if we may rely on the authority of "Hesychius, which no scholar will call in question, Κυριος is a proper translation of יהוה Yehovah, as it comes from κυρω, - τυγχανω, I am, I exist. Others derive it from κυρος, authority, legislative power".....and indeed the "word Lord", in the text, appears to be properly understood, when applied to the "deity" of Christ."

According to the above, the verse is saying Christ YHWH is born in the city of David, not Christ the Lord!

This is obviously the same Christ YHWH that was to be born in Bethlehem, spoken of by the prophet Micah 5:2,

"But thou, Beth-lehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; "whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting".

This was the scripture that the Chief Priests and Scribes gave to Herod, when he asked, where will Christ be born?

Notice they understood that Christ was to be born (as a Son), whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting (as God).

This shows that he is BOTH the Father and Son, the Father, whose going forth have been from of old, from everlasting, and the Son born in Bethlehem.

Again, Isaiah 35:4-6
[4] "Say to them that are of a fearful heart, Be strong, fear not: behold, "your God" will come with vengeance, even God with a recompence; he will come and "save you". [5] "Then" the eyes of the blind shall be opened, (when God comes) and the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped (when God comes). [6] Then shall the lame man leap as an hart (when God comes), and the tongue of the dumb sing (when God comes): for in the wilderness shall waters break out, and streams in the desert (when God comes)."

This was fulfilled in the Messiah, when God came in the flesh, see Mathew 11:4-5, where says to tell John the Baptist that these things are happening.

Adam Clark, Albert Barns, and other Scholars believe God was manifested in the flesh in first Timothy 3:16. They explain why, Barns said, 

“Was manifest - Margin, “Manifested.” The meaning is, “appeared” in the flesh.

In the flesh - In human nature; see this explained in the notes on Rom 1:3. The expression here looks as though the true reading of the much-disputed word was “God.” It could not have been, it would seem evident, ὁ ho, “which,” referring to “mystery;” for “how could a mystery” “be manifested in the flesh?” Nor could it it be ὅς hos, “who,” unless that should “refer to one who was more than a man”; for how absurd would it be to say that “a man was manifested, or appeared in the flesh!” “How else could a man appear”? The phrase here means that “God appeared in human form”, or with human nature; and this is declared to be the “great” truth so long concealed from human view, but now revealed as constituting the fundamental doctrine of the gospel. The expressions which follow in this verse refer to God “as” thus manifested in the flesh; to the Saviour as he appeared on earth, “regarded as a divine and human being”. It was the fact that he thus appeared and sustained this character, which made the things which are immediately specified so remarkable, and so worthy of attention.”


Enter content here

Enter content here

Enter content here


Enter content here

Enter content here

Enter content here


Enter supporting content here