What is the soul? A biblical deepdive. The OT (Hebrew): is strictly holistic/monistic – nephesh = whole living creature, not a separable entity. Here, we have a bipartite formular: Body + Spirit = Soul ≈ whole human creature in totality. Man did not receive a nephesh but

Care less for the state of the world. Care more for its people. Quit reading the news so much, instead hand out reasons for others to smile! Things that are not within your power to do anything about is not yours to deal with, that's God's. 2 tim 1:7

I can think a cake tastes good. You can think it tastes bad. But if it is poisoned, the taste is negliable. This analogy serves to demonstrate why subjective experienced reality is subordinate to larger objective reality. Objectivity either predicates, dictates, or overwrites

"The only true God" is a designation of the almighty one Jehovah and not an absolute dictonomy of true vs. false. Rather, it is about supreme divinity. The polytheism critique from Trinitarians is an external imposition that is negliable in the Unitarian paradigm.

"Lilith" from Isa 34:14 is referencing an animal, most likely a nocturnal desert bird. Not a demonic succubus esk spirit. There's no covert demonology to be inferred here. The whole "Adam's first wife business" originates from the later Alphabet of Sirach adopted from

Unless you're defending Tritheism, y'all should stop doing this silly argument. It does not give you the high ground over Muslims or even Unitarianism for that matter, it just make you look like a blabbering lunatic. For the argument to work in your favor, there has to be an

The NT writers dealt in God being a whole identity, not subsequent persons meaning "God" encompassing one thing in one place, & another elsewhere. Instead, Trinitarianism hands out gymnastical reading rules that the text simply doesn't require intrinsically. Secondly. Textual

Unitarian: "Matthew 24:36 is "But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father." Sure sounds like the Son doesn't know." Trinitarian: "The Son doesn't know because of the hypostatic union. It was about the human nature, not

That's Modalism, Patrick! That's Partialism, Patrick! That's Tritheism, Patrick! Yes, yes, & yes. That's the point. No one has anything measurable to work with anyway, just terminology. So knowing this; simply shouting it becomes a red herring. So try again, Trinitarians!

Any translation that replaces the tetragrammaton for LORD should be pushed out of the top end. Period.

The lake of fire is not a penal environment but a terminal operation. Abstract non-agential entities can't be contained in an actual place, neither can they be tortured. Rev 20:14 "And death and the Grave [hades] were hurled into the lake of fire." The function of the lake of

Natural Theist P1. Source (ἐξ – God) God is the ultimate origin from whom creation proceeds. Source denotes origin, not instrumentality. (Rom 11:36, 1 Cor 8:6) P2. Means / Agent (διὰ – Son) The Son is the mediating agent through whom creation comes into being. Means denotes instrumental

A telltale sign of a Trinitarian & two-natures shell game If an argument requires “God” to mean: – the Father here – the totality of the Trinity here – the divine essence here – Jesus here ..without the author ever indicating a change in referent, then theology is governing the

To my Unitarian followers, which belief about the messiah do you subscribe to?

Economic subordination must be somewhat elastic. If it's made utterly rigid/static from one point on perpetually, it must also then intrinsically be ontological.