Transcription
Is Jesus fully God?
We we say that he's truly God.
No. Is Jesus fully God? Is he, is he fully God?
I already answered you. We don't say fully as if there's percentages. We say truly God.
Okay. Is he fully God?
How many times you want to answer this?
No. No. Is he fully God?
We You're a strong man in our position. Please, if you're going to ask me the questions in reference question or not, we say truly God. Is Jesus truly God? I'm asking question.
Is Jesus fully God or not? Jesus is fully God or not? Is he fully God or not?
I already answered.
Yes or no?
Give me another question. I already answered.
Yes. Is Is Jesus fully God or not?
I already answered.
Yes. Don't run. Don't be scared. Yeah. Don't Don't run from an actual Christian. Is Jesus fully God or not?
We don't say fully God or not. Truly God. Don't run. Yes, Jesus is truly God in every way that God Jesus fully God all the essential properties to be God. Now deal with my deal with my position.
Is fully God? Is Jesus fully God or not?
Deal with my position. Please.
Is Jesus fully God or not?
Please deal with my position.
Is Jesus fully God or not?
I already answered you.
Just wait. Deal with my position now. Don't be scared now. I know you should do.
Deal with my position.
Jesus fully God or not.
I want you to notice here, ladies and gentlemen. This is how you know someone is having they have to listen to the script. Once you take them off their script, they don't know where to go. God.
They don't know where to go.
Is he fully God?
I answered you on that.
Asked and answered.
What is it?
Asked and answered.
Okay, let me ask you this. Let me change it because you you're you're not going to you're not fully God or not. All right. No problem. No problem. You run away from that one. No problem. He he possesses all the essential properties that make God God.
Okay. So when you say Jesus is is is this statement true or false? Jesus is God. Is it true or false statement?
That's a true statement.
Okay. Is the is okay. Excellent. Jesus is God is a true statement, right?
I just said that.
Yeah. Great. No problem. Is that is of predication or identity?
It'll be a predication.
Okay. So it's predication, is it? So he has the quality of being divine.
Yep.
He has the description of being divine.
Yep.
Okay. So that means to say that the father has this quality, the son has this quality and the holy spirit has this quality.
They they all have the essential properties. They all have the divine essence. They are all god by essence.
No problem. So they all have the quality of being divine.
Yeah.
They all have the nature.
Okay. Beautiful. And do they have a will?
Yeah, they have the same will because will is will is a faculty of your essence. So wait, hold on for a second. So they have the same will do they?
That's what I said.
So is the will uh predicatively okay does uh God the father have the same will in a predicative sense as God the son?
What why would you say in a predicative sense? What do you mean by by that?
Because you're mixing between Latin trinitarianism and through self trinitarian social trinitarianism. You're mixing between.
Can you explain that?
Yeah, let me explain because No, let me explain this to you. Right. is if you're saying that the father is God from a predicative perspective. Yes. If he's God from a predicative perspective, that means he has a center of consciousness which is different from the sun. Is that correct?
Based on what?
Because you you've just said it's predicative. It's not identity is it?
Yeah. So what what is what how does it follow?
Do you understand the words I'm using? I don't think you do. If Jesus is God by predication, just real quick, if Jesus is God by predication because he derives the divine essence from the father, just let me finish.
I don't understand it. Why you get so uncomfortable? Why you get so uncomfortable? You don't even understand the question you're asking.
Jesus full of God, you can answer.
If Jesus If Jesus because he deres his source from the father and the divine essence of the father and so therefore is predicated the divine essence, how does that entail or conclude that he has a different than the father? separate center of consciousness to the sun or not.
Correct. What? Why? Why? Why? I don't understand. What do you mean why? I'm.
They have the same They have the same mind and will, brother. They have the same consciousness. Same mind.
They have the same mind. They have the same will. Do they have the same essence as well? They have the same essence.
That's what I said. Every time you ask me the same question.
Okay. They have the same mind. They have the same will. They have the same essence. Do they have the same attributes?
Yes.
Aha. So now you've moved to is of identification because identity because now actually if they're the same in essence and the same in mind and they're the same in consciousness and the same in will and the same in attributes that means they're one and the same person aren't they?
No, there's a relative identity. They're identical in essence relative not identical. There's a distinction in their person. Wait, hold on. Hold on. Hold on.
This this doesn't work.
This this argument probably worked back in like 2017.
Wait, hold on. Let me take it step by step because.
All right, take it step by step. We're going to dismantle this step.
Don't pretend don't pretend that Christianity has not been struggling with this for two years.
It has it hasn't yet. This this argu we've just been pretending. We've just been looking at different things. There's different models. If you're right now the trinity on Stanford encyclopedia, you'll see Latin trinitarianism, social trinitarianism. There's views of this. You mention relative identity. Do you know who mentions that relative identity?
Who has written book? Peter Ge has written about it recently actually. Yeah. Relative identity actually. What does it have to do with What does that have to do with us?
He's going to join us next.
He's going to join us next.
What does that do?
Are you Are you about to refute Peter Ge or something or.
You don't know what he says? What does he say? What does Peter I I I just asked you if you're going to Are you.
What does Peter say? If you're talking about what does Peter G say?
What What is my position?
What is You said relative identity. So I want to know what Peter G say.
So in in regard in regards to my position, how are you refuting the trinity?
No, I'm You said relative identity. That's associated with Peter Ge. Do you know what he said?
What? I I don't care who you don't even know what you're talking about, do you? You don't even know what you're talking about.
If I hold the position talking identity, hold on. If I hold the position of relative identity, what is your argument against it?
Do you do you hold the position of relative identity? Do you or not?
How many times this question?
So, so if you hold the position of relative identity of Peter Gech, my response to it is the following. My response to it is in order for you to come to that conclusion, you have to have a relative identity framework. And a relative identity framework goes against predicate and propositional logic. And in particular, it goes against Linet's law, which means that in order for you to prove the trinity, you have to allow contradictions. Do you agree? Do you agree with that?
No. Uh can you.
You have to reject propositional logic? Reject classical logic. Yes or no? What what is Lieben's law?
It's the law of identity. No, it's a specific law of identity. Can you tell me exactly what life is?
Yeah, it's a law of identity.
What specific law of identity is it? Because there's law categories.
There's categories within the law of identity.
Would you like.
What does law say?
Wait, would you want me to teach you what the law of identity is? Is that what you're asking me?
No. I want you to This is what we're going to do cuz it show it seems that you.
No, you didn't know anything about anything. didn't even know that relative identity was connected to people.
You don't understand. You don't even understand.
Saying I don't understand doesn't mean anything.
Hold on. Hold Avery. You didn't even know that relative identity was associated with Peter Gech. That had nothing to do with the argument. I had to teach you that has nothing to do with the argument. My position is relative identity. What is your argument against my position?
Yeah. Yeah. So my.
So you said Lman's law. So what is Len's law of identity? What is it?
Sure. Hold on. Hold on.
All right, we're waiting.
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
Yeah. Yeah.
If A is X and B is X, it follows A is.
Finish it.
You tell me. If if the father is God in your.
The father is God and the son is God. It it follows what?
Answer. You do it.
Father is the son. It follows the father is the son. What? Okay. What category?
Are you okay? Do you understand?
What category of the law of identity? believe the father's law.
Do you believe that the father is the son?
So, okay, let let me the father is the son.
No, I don't. So, let me help you out.
You believe in the father? Let me help you out. This is a blunder cuz you don't even know what law is.
The father begget himself.
So, law is the category. He says he says father and his law of identity is called absolute identity means that you have to be absolutely identical in every way in every sense.
Exactly. And guess and guess what there are philosophers who do like Peter Gech and others who do not hold to absolute identity and so we can keep going with examples. So absolute identity is not the abandon philosophers Avery let me let me teach you this allow me to respond of identity absolute identity is a necessity.
Let me let me respond to you okay and let me teach you because this is something is a necessity Avery, have some respect because listen, I've done six degrees. Yeah. Six degrees of 15 years. You know, I'm trying to get I'm trying to respect you. You're talking showing that you don't you got degrees asking questions later trivia questions. Don't ask me what other questions trivia question is. No, no, hold on.
You didn't even know what I was.
Hold on. Hold on. Let me finish. This is an education. It's a free one, okay? So, just have some respect, okay? And I'll teach you about all these things.
You didn't know what life's law was?
What do you mean? I've written a whole chapter on liess in my.
Okay, tell us what his state what is his book. I've read. Give me one book that lives wrote. One book. There's another book. Give me one book that lies wrote. Give me one book. Stop doing one book.
The Muslim shuffle doesn't work. It doesn't work.
You have it. So just be quiet. You don't know what law is.
You don't even know anything that he wrote. I've written chapters.
Tell us. Tell us what his law is. Be quiet. Shut up. Yeah. Honestly, please. Li's law is equivalent to the law of identity. We already discussed.
What are you doing, man? What you are you done?
Hey, listen. I love how my food talks back to me, ladies and gentlemen. I love it.
You've run away. You've run away now from the from the discussion, haven't you?
What do you mean? You're the only one acting father.
Is the father god?
I already answered this. Can you tell us what lil is?
Are you do you want do I need to repeat myself the fourth time? You don't even know who liets is.
Get your thoughts together. You don't even know this is who is what he invent this dude deflects.
What's his first name?
What is law? You brought it up.
What is his first name? What is Liban's law?
I've already explained to you it's the law of identity. Are you.
No, that's a it's a category within the law of identity. Stupid. You know what I'm talking about specifically is law. It's it's the law of identity. It's the same as the law of identity. That's they call it live law, the law of identity is law. Be quiet now because you don't know what you're talking about. You don't even know who lives. You don't even know where he was from. You don't even know what books he wrote. You don't even know what his first name was. You don't know anything about him. You don't know anything about him. I'll tell you.
I've actually read all of his books, by the way. Every single the calculus ones.
I'll tell you if I correct them. Listen. Listen. Let's be quiet. Don't talk about live with me. Yeah. You're not in a position to speak about liveness. Look.
I'll tell you what his law is.
Tell me anything. You're not in a position to do so.
You tell the question is this. Is the father.
God's law is is that something is identical if and only if they are identical. They share all the the properties. They are identical in all of their properties. Is that correct? You're reading the over AI overview, right? I'm looking at you. My friend is telling me.
All of Okay, no problem. Correct or not?
Oh, so so so good. Good. Do do you accept lad's law? Is that correct? Do you accept it or not?
Is that correct?
Yes. Yes. Yes.
I had to teach you on what law was. Thank you.
Are you a stupid guy? Are you all right? Are you okay?
Now dealing with Libman's law.
Okay.
I don't go the father god from a liet philosophers also reject.
Father God from a linen law identity perspective.
From a law identity. I don't hold to that. I don't hold a liance law.
Ah, so you have to reject it, do you?
Yes. I don't hold to it.
So you have to reject live law, do you?
You have to.
You don't know. You don't know where Hold on. You accept. Wait, what you laughing at? What are you laughing at? What are you laughing at?
I'm script was destroyed.
No, hold on. Hold on.
Okay. You're you're you're putting in a relative identity framework. What you don't understand is the following. What you don't understand is order in order for you to put forward a relative identity framework, you have to reject Linet's law. Linenet's law or the law of identity is in fact one of the three major pillars of propositional logic. You have three pillars of propositional logic. One of them is the law of identity. The other one is the law of non-contradiction and the third one is what? The law of excluded middle. These are the three principle of propositional logic. These are the pillars of it. Now, in order for you to make your case, what you're essentially admitting is the following. That in order for me to make a case for Jesus being God and in one sense and father being God in another sense and the Holy Spirit being God in another, I have to reject one of the pillars of propositional logic. Propositional logic is the most foundational and accepted logic in the world for the last five 3,000 years, 4,000 years. So you have to you accept that in order for you to try and justify a version of the trinity which is Peter G's one which is repudiated by Christians himself that you have to accept a framework which rejects one of the pillars of propositional logic. Yes or no?
No. So can you demonstrate no but you said you reject really quick. So I let you don't hold to it.
I let you hold it for a very long time.
That's what you just said. You said you don't hold it for a very very long time. So you just said God logic doesn't believe in logic to law the logic logic you don't believe in logic logic propositional logic you don't believe in it do you in order for you in order for you to fight the trinity you have to reject let me beat my chest instead of have a discussion so relax.
I appreciate it.
Respond.
I don't have to reject.
Of liben's law in order to hold to the Law of identity. The law of identity works with relative identity. I'm not rejecting the law of identity.
So you can be identical in one sense while having distinctions in another.
No, that's not that's even how Peter Ge that's not how he um articulates it. He says there's a sort and then he says that the sort is represented by G and then you've got F and then you've got uh S and you've got H. Father, Son, Holy Spirit. And then he says that F is relatively identical to G and the S is relatively identical to G and the HS which is the Holy Spirit is relatively identical to G. He doesn't say what you're saying. He in fact rejects the law of identity which is what you've had to do. You have to reject a pillar of logic yet you call God logic. YOU ACTUALLY CALL YOURSELF God logic but you have to reject logic in order for you to make some sense of the trinity. Don't you? Yes or no?
No. again. No, I'm I'm sorry that the script didn't work. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. That's false. That's false. I'm sorry that the I'm sorry the script didn't work.
What you have to let me one second. Let me respond. Wait one second. He's rejecting logic so much. His recipe says reduce until thick.
No, thanks for adding nothing to the cover.
Logic. I'm asking you.
Guys. I'm I'm going to respond now. Okay. You reject I don't want to I don't want us to talk over each other.
Do you reject the law of identity or not?
Yes or no?
No, I don't. So hij.
You just said you don't hold to it.
Can I please speak?
You just said you don't hold to it. Please contradiction. You might as well. You might as well reject the law OF NON CONTRADICTION. YOU'VE JUST REJECTED ONE. You might as well reject the other one. Reflection. Another interruption.
The other one. WHY DON'T YOU just just script is dismantled has been intellectually molested. has been cooked and chefed and stirred up. I think you know I think the people can see you know what the situation people can see in order of identity that you're saying is necessary or reject.
You reject the law of identity.
Do you demonstrate that libiden's law necessitates absolute identity cuz that's what you're saying. You're saying that absolute identity is the law of identity which I disagree with. You can still affirm the law of identity while being relatively wrong while having notice how they're talking over me still hij guys and he has to interrupt me and talk over me. This shows the weakness in your position. a job. Let me speak, bro.
Can I give you 20 seconds?
Not 20 seconds. Just let me say my piece.
Go on. Say your piece. Say your piece. Say.
Good lord. Thank you. So, here's an example. If so, the Titanic, right? The Titanic before it got shipped off. It's in perfect uh condition. No scratches, no bangs, you know, it's all good to go.
Gets shipped off, crashes into the glacier, sinks, gets ripped up. This.
Here's my question.
Here's my question. Hijab. Is the Titanic that left the shore.
Absolutely identical in every way to the Titanic that crashed into the glacier and is sunk sunken? Is it absolutely identical in every way?
I wasn't hearing what you said. Look, I don't even know what you're talking about.
No, no, I don't even know what you're talking about. Listen, here go back. Stop reading GPT GPT. It's not really this new generation dumb people dumbery don't know where to go.
The only Titanic is your arguments are sinking, brother. That's the only thing that's arguments. I don't even see your arguments. Listen, let's go back.
I know you don't.
You're not you're not up there yet to where you can understand the argument where you can hear the argument.
Shut up.
Answer the question. What's the Titanic question? Is the Titanic left the shore? Look at these guys. Absolute clowns.
Is the Titanic that left the shore? Absolutely identical in every single way to the Titanic that crashed and sunk.
What? What?
Surprise.
The Titanic that left the shore the same as the one that sunk. They absolutely identical in every way.
PROBABLY NOT BECAUSE IT'S BEEN BUT IT'S STILL THE TITANIC. So you just affirmed that the worst that is the worst thing I've ever heard. That is the worstity I have ever heard. That is the worst thing I've ever heard.
Okay. Is is the Titanic the same Titanic that sunk?
What are you talking?
Is it the same ship?
So what's the analogy here?
Is it the same ship?
What's the What's the analogy here? What's the.
Is the Titanic That's for sure. The same ship that.
What's your point? What's your point?
Make your point.
Ask again. I'll ask it again.
No. No. Make your point. We don't.
You're going to answer. You're going to answer.
No, it's not the same one. It's a different one. It's a different one. It's a different one. Whatever. Okay. Why not? Left the shore. Go on. What does it mean? What does it mean? What does it mean? What does it mean?
Is it the same ship that sunk?
What are you talking about, man?
Okay. No, it's not. No, you're right. So, what does it mean? What does it mean? What does it mean? What does it mean?
I'll ask it again. I'll ask it again. Because you just affirmed identity without absolute identity.
You waste time.
You just affirmed identity without absolute identity. I'll ask it again.
So is the Titanic that left the.
No, no. Explain it to me how it goes to Father, Son, Holy Spirit. Please.
No, no, no, no. You're going to answer this. I want you cuz I want I It's the same. It's different. Some things are different about it. No problem. Yeah. No problem.
The Titanic that left the shore. The same ship.
What? Okay. What you want to say? I don't know how he wants me to answer this.
With all those degrees, man. You're notified and you're not you're not qualified for this level of of of, you know, you're not ready, man. One sec. One second. Let me clear.
You're not ready. He just ladies and gentlemen just the Titanic.
I'm sorry, brother. I'm sorry. Let me just land and then I'll let you speak. It's.
Not the same one that I don't I don't want to speak over you. I want to hear what you're saying. Just let me land what I'm saying. Okay, I'm learn what I'm saying and I and I promise I'll sit quiet. I'll listen to you.
So, Muhammad Hijab, you just affirmed identity disregarding absolute identity.
That's why you're confused. Uh, go ahead. Prove relative identity. So, from one aspect he's God, then from another aspect he's not. Is that what you're trying to say?
No. So, what what are you trying to say?
What are you trying to say? What you trying to say? Make your point, man. No one understands you, man. distinct.
So, so the father, son, and holy spirit are identical in essence while being distinct in personhood or hypostasis.
Okay. Okay. No problem. They're distinct in hypoasis and in person. Okay. No problem. If they're distinct in person, do they have separate centers of consciousness or not?
I already answered this question. I'll answer it again. They have the same center of consciousness. They have the same mind, same will.
Different. Tell me what's different. Yeah. Tell me what's different about it. Oh, what's different about the persons?
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
Sure. One. So, the father beggets the son. The father is unbegotten. The father is unbegotten. The son is begotten from the father. And the spirit proceeds from the father.
Oh, I see. So, no. Great. I let me learn a bit more about the trinity because I want to know.
I know you are. You're learning a lot today.
No, I need to learn more about the trinity since I'm here all day, man. I'm here to serve me.
I'm here to serve hal meals.
Hold on. Let me just ask you the question so you can teach me about the trinity, please. Yeah. I want to know cuz everybody wants.
You doing that so far. What's your question?
All the Muslims want to know. All the Muslims want to know. Yeah. So I'm going to ask you this.
What's your question habibi?
My question boy is the following. Okay. Boy, the question is the following. If it's true if it's true.
That the father beggets the son. Okay. You said that right?
Yeah, I did.
Does that mean that the son is generated?
Yes, he is generated eternally from the father.
Okay, beautiful. So if he's generated, that means it's closed, right?
Uh no. So when we're saying Yeah. No. Huh? Who is it?
Doing all this, bro.
Generated.
Let me let me explain. Let me explain. All right.
Got you. So when we say that the son is begotten or generated or caused by the father. This is not something that happens in time, but this is eternal generation. An eternal begotten.
He's being perpetually caused. Is he? Is he being perpetually caused?
He's he's eternally generated.
Aha. So generated means he's perpetually caused, is he?
Sure. What?
So caused. Okay. So he's a contingent existent. He's not a necessary existent. He's contingent. He's a dependent being, is he? Is your God depend? No. No. He's not. Let me let me answer this now. He's not a dependent being. To be to be a dependent being means that you are dependent or contingent on another being outside of yourself. The son shares the same essence is the same being as the father. And so therefore the father eternally regenerating the son is not demonstrates that he's actually a because his essence isn't sourced in any other essence.
But you just said he's you just said he's generated by the father. That's what you just said. He's called.
Yeah. He shares the same essence as the father. This is the difference between hypoatic properties properties. To be a dependent being means that your essential properties are contingent on another being.
Learn the categories. Remember.
Fantastic. So now you admit.
You admit that he's generated by the father.
Eternally. Yes.
Oh eternally. It makes even worse because he's caused being caused and caused and caused and caused and caused so that he needs to be caused over and over again. Is.
That what you're telling me?
Say it again. Sorry.
Can you be caused and uncaused at the same time? Depends. Yeah, it depends on what you mean. So you can be you can BE.
NOW YOU'VE GONE STRAIGHT INTO the non-contradiction. Now you've taken non-contradiction. NOW IT'S NON CONTRADICTION. BOY, THIS IS THIS IS WHY.
HOW DARE YOU TALK ABOUT ISLAM, BOY. How dare you talk about Islam, BOY. WHY GOD, HAVEN'T YOU? AND UNCOLOGIZE CHRISTIANITY. Repent for your ways. Lose Christianity immediately now. YOU HAVE BEEN CAUGH OUT.
YOU'VE BEEN CAUGHT OUT NOW, HAVEN'T YOU, BOY? IT'S CALLED UNCAUSED AT THE SAME TIME. IS IT?
NONE OF THIS WORKS, BRO. Showing it at the same time. It's our controventional contradiction, boy. Is it a Is it a contravention of non contradiction or not? Boy.
You've been trying to jump out the pot.
Is it a contravention of non-contradiction or not, boy?
Okay. All right.
Is it a contravention of non-contradiction or not? Boy.
Can I can I can I ANSWER?
OH, IT'S ON CAUSE. IS he Is it cause on cause?
Can I answer? Thank you. So, now I'm about to answer your question. So, hijab, this is you not understanding categories to for something to be a contradiction. It has to be the opposite in the same way in the same sense. So when I say Jesus is uncaused and at the same time, I'm not saying that he's uncaused in the same sense that he's caused. So in for example, him being caused by the father, excuse me, him being caused or eternally generated by the father is a hypoatic quality.
It's a hypothetic property, a relation that he has with the father.
Sure. Not saying excuse me, excuse me. He is not essentially called.
Excuse me.
Excuse me.
Can a necessary being be caused in any way?
Excuse me.
Can a necessary being in any way?
Allow me to finish.
Can an uncaused being caused in any way, boy?
Can a necessary being caused in any way?
Can an independent being dependent in any way?
Can an uncaused being caused in any way?
Can an uncaused being caused in any way, bro?
To jump out THE POT.
STOP TRYING TO jump out. And this is what the Quran says. Subhan Allah. This is what the Quran.
This is what the Quran says. You talk about the people who have heen does not beget. Why? Because he's Are you going to continue your allow your nervousness and your fear to overcome? Are you going to continue to not self?
Be quiet for a second. If this is not going to happen this entire live stream.
Let me tell you this. Hey.
Now now the live stream, ladies and gentlemen, has degraded because Muhammad can't allow a discourse, a dialogue.
Avery.
Allow me, allow me to finish what I was saying without your interruption.
Avery, Avery.
Allow me to finish what I was saying without interruption.
Avery Avery.
So I'm just going to continue.
Listen.
Jesus is not caused. Understand what you're saying because you're saying from the father is not derived from anything else.
Okay.
However, is caused hypoatically eternally meaning it doesn't happen in time because that's his relation with the father. So it's not a contradiction because his causation is in the sense of his hypoatic relation with the father while he's essentially not caused by any other being. in any sense. Can a necessary being be caused in any sense?
Yes. Hypothetically.
Then you're you're out of order. You're out of order because you're out of order and you don't know what you're talking about. A necessary being cannot be in any sense with the consensus of magicians. You're absolutely out of order. You're absolutely out of order for you to say Yeah. That it's it's it's ridiculous. So your god is dependent is he refute me.
Refute me. No. Again to be dependent. Okay. No problem. To be dependent is to rely on a being outside refutes you. The.
Show me that my God is is is.
The Quran refutes you by telling you clearly. The Quran says say he's Allah one and only. Allah he is the independent. He beggets not nor is he begotten. And there's nothing like him. Why is Allah telling us that he is independent and then telling us he does not beget nor is he begotten? Because it's clear that people like you unfortunately believe it's possible to be independent and dependent at the same time. Allah is telling us and this is in line with classical logic which you've already rejected today that it's impossible to be independent and dependent at the same time. In any respect, in even 1% respect, you cannot be a necessary or independent being in any respect. In any respect, and then have an 1% dependency, you can't have 1% dependency. You cannot have hypoatic dependency. You cannot have essential dependency. You cannot have attributional dependency. You cannot have any level onlogical dependency. And if you believe that you can, then you are putting two things together which contradict. You understand that? Because you're a fool. You're an idiot. And you have misrepresented Peter Gech. He doesn't believe what you just with the with the predicate view. Social Trinitarianism and what do you call it? Latin trinitarianism and anarchinitarian philosophy. You don't know what you're talking about. You don't know what you're saying. Depth. You're completely out of your depth. You don't know what you're saying. You can drink. You can put whatever hat and costume you want. You have been entirely decimated today. It's been destruction upon destruction upon destruction. Any Christian that's watching this today, let me tell you this Christians, if you're watching this, if you just heard this, if you just heard this presentation about the trinity and you still are Christian, wah, you are fooling yourselves and you should be ashamed because there's no way you believe. You don't believe in a god that's dependent. You don't believe in aarass. You don't believe in a generated god. You don't believe in any of that stuff. You believe in the one God that created the heavens and the earth. That's what Muslims call you to. We call you to the one God who created the heavens and the earth.
Yes. The father, son, and holy spirit. The one God who created the heavens and the earth to say about the god of all creation and all dependent and on the central level. That is an insufficient dissatisfactory otherwise incomplete answer.
Impossible to reconcile. And if you actually then you're either ignorant yet. You know Islam is true. You know there's only one God worthy of worship. You know there's only one God that doesn't begget nor is he begotten. You know that the father is the father. God and you know that the holy spirit says this is your strongest argument against it crumbled.