We're going to be covering the idea of the unqualified deity of Christ and how that comes out. First of all, we'll note how it comes out in chapter 8 of the Confession. But most of our time will be spent on scripture proofs for his unqualified deity. So again, this is Pastor Sam's material, originally, that I'm filling in for him while he's gone. And I truly apologize that you're getting it through me, but so Providence has determined. and we will see how far we get through the material. Pastor Sam also, what he did was he said, usually I take two class sessions to go through this material, so cut out what you want, but what am I gonna cut out? I tried some, but again, we will see how far we get through what I didn't cut out. If there are questions, just ask that you raise your hand and get the mic to you before we start talking so the recording can hear you, okay? Let's open in prayer and we'll get started. Father, we thank you for your promised presence with us as we meet together on the Lord's Day. We ask your blessing on those who cannot be here this morning or in other places. who are providentially hindered from being here even if they're at home. But we pray for your blessing on us particularly as we look at your word and remember some basic fundamental truths of our faith without which we would have no Savior and no salvation. And we ask that we would not be dull of hearing this morning but that we would delight to hear the core truths about our Savior Jesus Christ. And we pray this in His name. Amen. All right. So, as we work through the Confession, as I said, we are in Chapter 8 of the Second London Baptist Confession of Faith, usually known as the 1689. And this is in the chapter titled, Of Christ the Mediator. And in part two of that, his incarnation for office, and as Pastor Sam has broken up the themes here, we're in section two of that, which is Christ's unqualified deity. So this is just a reminder of the sections that are here. We have talked about his specific personality. Now, this week is his unqualified deity. Later on, Pastor Sam, I believe, will address his true humanity, Christ's sinless integrity, and then his mysterious complexity. All right, so... What we're going to be doing this morning, we're going to have some introductory thoughts about the unqualified deity of Christ. And then Pastor Sam is going to mention there's a whole bunch of other proofs of the deity of Christ, the full deity of Christ. But he's going to focus and he's going to have me focus this morning on just two issues, really narrowing it down to the fact that Christ is spoken of as God or Theos in the New Testament, and that Christ is also equated with Yahweh. or Jehovah, the personal covenant name of the Lord in the Old Testament. So what does unqualified deity mean? Why don't we just say Jesus is God and leave it there? Why do we hit the nail harder than that? Well, there's a lot of church history behind this, as there often is behind theology and theological precision. Church history shows that there have been many attempts to explain the Trinity by qualifying or diluting Christ's deity, saying, yes, he's divine in some way, but he's not quite as fully or unqualifiedly divine or God as the Father is, for instance. So you had things like what's called Logos Christology in the early church. It was influenced by Logos speculation coming out of Greek philosophy. And things like that led to what we call subordinationism. And subordinationism is that idea that Christ's deity is less somehow than the Father's deity. So unqualified deity simply affirms the opposite, that he is equal in divine power and glory and essence to the Father. By the way, just to pause before your eyes glaze over too much, but just to remind you, one prime example among many of our day of subordinationism would be the Jehovah's Witnesses. I might even put them in a little class beyond subordinationism, but anyway. But at least they are Aryans. in the sense of the old heresy of Arianism. Arianism had a lot to do with subordinationism. Arianism, the idea that Christ is divine somehow, but he is a created divine being, right? And that is what you will have certain people from the Watchtower Society trying to tell you when they knock on your door, right? It's a very old heresy. So here's paragraph two of chapter eight where we are on the confession, and actually it's shortened, but it's including the parts that really speak to his unqualified deity here. Again, if you want to see this in print, you have it in the back of your Trinity hymnals there. The Son of God, the second person in the Holy Trinity, being very and eternal God, Notice, very and eternal, not created at some point, for instance. Very and eternal God, the brightness of the Father's glory. Language taken from Hebrews 1. Of one substance and equal with him who made the world. who upholdeth and governeth all things he hath made, did, he did, this person did, when the fullness of time was come, take upon him man's nature. And then we left a part out that will be addressed in other sections. But we come again to this language of unqualified deity. Which person is very God and very man, yet one Christ, the only mediator between God and man? Now, As we are going to make arguments for the unqualified deity of Christ, as we look into just a little bit and just scratch the surface a little bit of what the Bible says to support what the Confession says here, what is the assumption of our argument for His unqualified deity? What is the assumption undergirding some of our proofs here? If the evidence for the Son's deity is going to be appreciated by us, we can't forget that Old Testament monotheism, one God, was a jealous monotheism. It was not a wishy-washy, take-it-or-leave-it thing. And the God of the Old Testament is the God of the New Testament, of course. So we need to remember texts like Isaiah 48, 11, where God says, for my own sake, for my own sake I will act, for how can my name be profaned? And my glory I will not give to another. It's pretty clear. He won't give his glory even to a great man, even to a great prophet, even to an angel, even to a hypothetical divine being that's created. Isaiah 42.8, I am Yahweh, that is my name. I will not give my glory to another, nor my praise to graven images. And then of course the New Testament picks up where the Old Testament left off. There's not a difference here in how jealous it is about monotheism, one God. We have this account of Barnabas and Paul preaching the gospel in the city of Lystra. where Timothy was from, in fact. And a miracle was worked, and the pagan people there thought, this is Zeus and Hermes, these gods we've heard about in mythology. They've come down in the appearance of men. We better sacrifice to them. And it gives the account here, Acts 14, 13, the priest of Zeus, whose temple was just outside the city, brought oxen and garlands to the gates and wanted to offer sacrifice with the crowds. But when the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard of it, they tore their robes and rushed out into the crowd, crying out and saying, men, why are you doing these things? We are also men of the same nature as you and preach the gospel to you that you should turn from these vain things to a living God who made the heaven and the earth and the sea and all that is in them. These were apostles. These were people who in some sense had Christ's own authority in his place on earth. And they were horrified to the point of ripping their clothes to the very suggestion that people would offer them sacrifice and treat them in that way, in God's place, with His glory. Another example that we recently saw on Sunday morning in the sermons, Cornelius, a believer, in fact, who had seen a vision of an angel telling him to go get Simon Peter, who would tell him what he needed for salvation. We see that Cornelius met Peter when Peter entered his house, and Cornelius fell at his feet and worshiped him, but Peter raised him up saying, stand up, I too am just a man. Not that we believe as the, sorry. Not that we believe as the Catholics do that Peter was the vicar of Christ, but he was an apostle again, and again, he refused people treating him as they would treat the glorious Christ, who is God. And then, remember Revelation 22.8, the apostle John himself, in the process of receiving the revelation of Jesus Christ, at this point through an angel, he fell down to worship at the feet of the angel who was showing him these things. The angel said, do not do that. I am a fellow servant of yours and of your brethren the prophets and of those who heed the words of this book. Worship God." So, in light of that jealous monotheism, that bedrock foundation that the Lord our God, the Lord is one. When we see in the scripture, for instance, names, attributes, or prerogatives of God attributed to others, or when we see God the Father closely associated with other persons in a way that implies that they are somehow equal, something approaching equality, or when others receive worship with the Father, we cannot overestimate the significance of that. We have to take that very seriously, much more seriously, for instance, than the cults do, I would say. When these things happen in the Scriptures, they should be shocking to us, because in this way God's glory is given to other persons. So the only justification for that kind of thing happening in Scripture, in context with monotheism, is that such persons have to be the one God. Now, as Pastor Sam says, systematic theologies, that's why we have them, they go into much more detail than we can this morning. And different ones will cite different evidences for the full deity of Christ. Wayne Grudem goes to direct scriptural claims as well as just evidence that Jesus possessed divine attributes. Louis Burkoff, not sure if you say that Louis or Louis, he goes through five. He'll say that the New Testament explicitly asserts the deity of the sun, it just says it. It applies divine names to Christ. It describes divine attributes to Christ. It speaks of him as doing divine works, works only God can do. And it accords him divine honor. But we're just going to stick with the fact that scripture equates Christ with God, theos in New Testament Greek, and with Yahweh, the Lord, in all caps, as you would see it in your English. Now this one that we start with, as we begin to look at Christ as God, Of course, this is one of the classic texts. It's also one of the classic texts that Jehovah's Witnesses, for instance, will want to debate you on. So I may not suggest personally going to this one first with them, because this is in their playbook. And they have, although they're wrong, and very wrong, they think they have their own answers to this. So you might want to go some other places, like Jesus is Yahweh, Jehovah. But John 1, 1-3 is still a classic text calling Jesus fully God. John 1, 1, in the beginning was the Word, the Logos, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him, nothing came into being that has come into being. Now, I'm not going to belabor this part here. Pastor Sam does have it in here for good reason. But we're going into kind of the argument you'll have with the cults about the Greek here. What they'll say is, just giving you a sneak peek here, they'll say, the way that should be translated is, the word was with God and the word was a God. That's what they'll say. because they'll say there's no definite article before the word God. There's no the before God in the Greek, which they say means it should be translated a God. That's just not true. The first use of God in verse one, where it says the word was with God, hatheos, that does have the article. And so it's talking about the first person of the Trinity. And so the word was with God. In the beginning, before we talk about anything being created, the word was with God, ha-theos. And then as I said, when it says the word was God, in the Greek there's no article there, like the, like we would translate the God. But it says the word was theos. But you have to understand a few things, and again, if you can't remember all this, that's fine. There's good books like Daniel Wallace's Greek text will tell you about this as well as others. But the point is, there is no indefinite article in Greek like a or an, so there is no actual word for a or an that you could put before God. It would be possible in just apart from the context may be to say a god, as some cults do, but it's impossible in light of the context. So the bottom line of what we're going to say is what the Apostle John is doing when he says the word was theos, no article, is he's talking about divine quality, divine essence. He already spoke of God the Father as the God. Now he says that the Word was also fully God, theos, in His quality. That's how you can express it in Greek without the article. As I said, I'm not going to belabor this because this is Greek, actually, and most of you aren't Greek students, so that's fine. But here he goes, Pastor Sam goes through the ways This can be translated when it shows up without the article. It can be translated a god, or it can be translated the god, even though you don't have the, or the definite article there in Greek. Or you can just say god, which is what is translated here and what should be translated. The word was god, it's not that complicated. As I said, here's where I'm clicking through a bunch of things. But to say the word was a god does not do justice to the fact that the word here is the creator of all things. And to be creator of all things, according to the Old Testament scriptures, you have to be the Lord God. There's no other person there, or other being there. So John says the Word was with the Father before creation in eternity. And he's clearly alluding to Genesis 1.1, right? When he says, in the beginning was the Word, you're supposed to hear echoed, in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. It's pretty obvious. So the God in verse 1 refers specifically to the person of God, the Father. And then John distinguishes between the person of the Word, or the Son, and the person of the Father, where he says, the Word was with, or toward, or face-to-face with the God. And if the article had been used in verse 1 with the Aus, the phrase would read, and the Word was the God. You know what? I'm going to skip forward here. What's being pointed out here in some of these slides is that if we translated, and the word was the God, it would actually be teaching another heresy. It would be confusing the person's father and son. So let's move on to John 118. No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten God, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has explained to him. Now there are some textual differences here, so depending on which translation you have, it might read the only begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father. But this does seem to be the one to go with, the older manuscripts. The only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him. This is in context talking about who this Word of God is that came and dwelt among us. So really what's probably being said here in the Greek is that it's saying three things about the Word. He's the only begotten, He is God, and He's in the bosom of the Father. And if you've been here in previous weeks, you heard Pastor Sam talk about the word monogenes for only begotten. That's the word here. He is monogenes, the only begotten. He is theos, God. And he is in the bosom of the Father. So he's in this uniquely intimate relationship with the Father. Moving on in the Gospel of John, we see other places where you may not need as much coffee to follow me. But clearly, we have places in the New Testament where the Jews understood Jesus as claiming full godhood, full deity, and Jesus didn't correct them. Jesus shows us by his words and actions that yes, they understood him right. That's why they wanted to kill him. John 5.18, the Jews were seeking all the more to kill him because he was calling God his own father, making himself equal with God. Yes, he was. John 10.33, the Jews answered him, for a good work we do not stone you, but for blasphemy, and because you, being a man, make yourself out to be God. Again, Jesus didn't try to refute them or correct them. Oh, you got me all wrong. I'm a good Jew. I believe in one God and I'm not him. No, he didn't do that. So Jesus offers no such denial. And the context of what he's been saying suggests the accusation is true and justified. Jesus was claiming to be God. And then we see not just unbelievers, but believers, saints, addressing him as God. Thomas, the disciple who said, unless I put my hand in the nail prints, I won't believe that he's risen from the dead. And then Jesus shows up on the scene and resurrected. And Thomas said to him, my Lord and my God, John 20, 28. This would be horribly blasphemous if Jesus was not unqualifiedly divine. And Jesus does not reject these words as blasphemy. What he says is, because you've seen me, have you believed? Blessed are they who did not see and yet believed, like you here this morning. And of course, these things are so basic, of course, if Jesus is not fully God, we have no business being here this morning, we're idolaters. Remember also how this contrasts with those other texts we just sampled, where others are offered worship that belongs only to God and they refuse it, right? Clear contrast. Now, Romans 9.5. The Apostle Paul here is expressing his great distress at the fact that so many of Israel do not believe in their Messiah, in the Lord Jesus. But then he acknowledges, but then he says, you know, if anyone ought, in a sense, to believe it's them, they had the Old Testament scriptures. They had the temple service. They had all these things from God. And he ends it here in Romans nine, five, saying, whose are that is belonging to Israel, whose are the fathers and from whom is the Christ, according to the flesh, who is overall God blessed forever. Amen. Now there are some translations that punctuate this poorly, that make it look like Paul is switching to God the Father at the end. But really, according to Greek grammar, it's just not really warranted. Philippians 2.6. the Apostle Paul in this famous passage on Christ's humiliation for our sake. He says that Jesus, although he existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped. This clearly is saying that he had, he's always had, always will have equality with God. There's there's no way around this. Paul's meaning here is that he rightfully possessed and gave up a status in the heavenly hierarchy that manifested that he was equal to God. Of course, we have to be very careful here. Jesus in no way ceased to be fully God when he became man. But it's talking about the status, the outward glory due to him. that he was willing essentially to be found in the form of a servant, Paul goes on to say, even though he was God, for us and for our salvation. Colossians 2.9, for in him, in Christ, all the fullness of deity dwells in bodily form. Again, that's a very good translation and there's no good way around it. There's two possible interpretations of the passage. One would be obviously wrong. One would be that Paul is attributing, one is that Paul is using the exact false doctrine that he's actually refuting Colossians, which is a Gnostic sort of heresy. But the other way of interpreting it is saying that Jesus has full deity. So let me explain a little bit about the context there. Paul is refuting Gnosticism in this letter to the Colossians, or at least an early form of it. And in Colossians 115 and following, Paul is directly contradicting that sort of view of Christ by saying that the Son is the creator and sustainer of the universe. So what is he contradicting specifically about Gnostic thought? Well, in Gnostic thought, generally, there's a supreme being who generated himself into a complex pantheon of eons or lower gods. So you have all these divine beings emanating originally from the supreme being. And Jesus is one of these lesser divine beings in Gnostic thought. Their pantheon they call the Pleroma, or the fullness. And Paul just takes their word and uses it a different way, a right way, in Colossians 2.9. He's saying the Pleroma, the fullness of deity, is not found in this myriad, this pantheon of gods. It's found fully in Christ. All the Pleroma, all the fullness, dwells in Christ. The whole Supreme Being came to earth in Jesus. He's not this lesser divine being at all. Two other texts in the New Testament. Christ is God. Titus 2.13, looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus. 2 Peter 1.1, Simon Peter, a bondservant and apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who have received a faith of the same kind as ours, by the righteousness of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ. Now, a note on these, and I'm just gonna click through this stuff without going into the details, but some older translations will translate this a little differently, not because they were trying to deny the deity of Christ, but because something called the Granville-Sharpe rule was not understood as well about Greek at that point, about Koine New Testament Greek. It began to really be discussed in the late 1700s. And this actually strengthens some of these passages that equate Christ with God. But that would take a whole other class period with a lot of Greek to develop that for you. But this one. By the way, this is where I would probably start myself if someone were to knock on my door saying that Jesus is not fully divine. Hebrews 1, because Hebrews 1 is all about saying just how exalted Christ is, far above the angels, how He is fully God. Hebrews 1.8 is just one sample picked out of that whole text. And Hebrews 1, as is shown in the example here, is full of Old Testament quotations. This one, Hebrews 1.8 says, but of the Son, God says, your throne, O God, addressing the Son, your throne, O God, is forever and ever, and the scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your kingdom. Now there's some background things about Psalm 45, the psalm that's quoted here, that we could get into if we had time. But there's no question that the author of Hebrews is saying this is talking about Christ. And it's attributing to him full deity. So if you believe in an inerrant New Testament, this is the end of the argument. 1 John 5.20 is another one. For sake of time, I'm going to go over that one too. But it says, speaking of Jesus Christ, I believe, and there's others who say it's speaking of both the Father and the Son together. Either way, it says, this is the true God and eternal life. 1 John 5.20. But like I said, I have to hurry here. All right, we are about to tackle this last section, Christ as Yahweh or Lord. At this point, I've been running through a lot of stuff here. Do we have any questions? I think we have a mic ready if you have questions or comments. If not, that's fine, but I want to give you the chance at least. I'd be thinking if you have questions, I'll try to leave a little time right at the end, okay? Now, it's one thing to say that the New Testament uses the word Theos, God, for Jesus, and to prove that that means full, unqualified deity. That's all true. Again, many heretics will try to get around that one by saying, well, the language of godhood can be used in different ways. And they'll take texts out of context and try to go that route to say Jesus is somehow godlike in certain ways, but he's not God, not equal to God the Father and his deity. But when you say Christ is equated with Yahweh, Jehovah, the Lord of the Old Testament. That's really the nail in the coffin. For instance, with the Watchtower Society, the so-called Jehovah's Witnesses, they make a big deal about the fact that that word Yahweh, they say Jehovah, Jehovah is only used of the Father, never used of Jesus. Really? That is quite a howler. John 8, 58 teaches that Jesus regarded himself as the great I Am, Yahweh of the Old Testament. The God who entered into covenant with Israel through Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. John 8, 58, Jesus speaking to these Jews who do not believe in him. He says, truly, truly, I say to you, they're discussing Abraham as their father, and he's saying, you're not really Abraham's children because you want to kill me. Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, the Greek is really before Abraham was, I am. commentator named Leon Morris, reminds us that we should notice he says, I am, not I was. It is eternity of being and not simply existence, not simply being, that has lasted through several centuries. Jesus is not saying, I'm very old. Jesus is saying, I am. He's claiming eternity in the sense that only God can claim. And he's clearly quoting the words of the angel of the Lord out of the burning bush to Moses. That's my name, God said. I am that I am. I'm getting ahead of myself. Here it comes in the notes. Exodus 3.13, Moses speaking to the Lord at the burning bush, He's coming up with reasons why the Lord should not send him to Egypt to free Israel. He says, Now they may say to me, What is his name? What shall I say to them? God said, I am who I am. And he said, Thus you shall say to the sons of Israel, I am has sent me to you. Thus you shall say to the sons of Israel, The Lord Yahweh, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob has sent me to you. This is my name forever. Now, what hellish arrogance it would be for a great prophet even to say, I am. Before Abraham was, I am. So the Jews tried to stone Jesus because they understood what he was saying. Now, people will point out that, well, the New Testament word, the New Testament Greek word for Lord is kurios. And not every time the word kurios is used, is it equating someone with Yahweh. That's true. It can have other connotations. But like in any language, context is everything. How the word is used, where it's used. So several places, Old Testament references to Yahweh are applied to Jesus. So here are four texts that we will touch on. And again, this is far from exhaustive. Really, there is a very long list in the New Testament. And all you have to do, by the way, we've been mentioning things about Greek and Hebrew and things here this morning. But folks, if you have a normal Bible that has references, it's a reference Bible, that has cross-references, one of the best things you can get in the habit of doing When the New Testament quotes the Old Testament, look up the cross-reference. Get the fuller context. This'll tell you a lot about what was implied and actually being said by Jesus and the apostles when they quoted the Old Testament. We'll see some examples here this morning. Romans 10.13 quotes Joel 2.32. Put them side by side here for you. Joel 2.32, it will come about that whoever calls on the name of Yahweh, the Lord, will be delivered, will be saved. For on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem, there will be those who escape, as the Lord has said, even among the survivors whom the Lord calls. Paul in Romans 10.13, after he's talked about confessing with your mouth, Jesus is Lord, believing in your heart that God has raised him from the dead and you will be saved. He quotes that, whoever will call on the name of the Lord will be saved. It's Joel 2.32. Clearly in Romans 10, the Lord refers to Jesus Christ. It's just what Paul's talking about in context. Verse 9 requires that for salvation, Jesus has to be confessed as Lord. Oh, sorry. Let's go back. So obviously the Lord Jesus is being identified with Yahweh in Joel 2.32. Not that complicated. And again, I think most of us know this, but in case someone doesn't, in the Old Testament, when you're reading your English translations in the Old Testament, and it's LORD in all caps, or at least O-R-D is in lower caps, but it's all capital letters, that's a dead giveaway. It's translating Yahweh or Jehovah, the personal covenant name for God. Now Hebrews 1.10, quote Psalm 102, verse 25. Remember I said I love Hebrews 1 for this purpose? Of old you founded the earth, and the heavens are the work of your hands. Now Hebrews 1 is applying this to Christ, okay? For one thing, of course, it's again saying he's the creator. The Hebrew of verse 25 does not actually contain the title Yahweh, but the context, Psalm 102, is clearly talking about Yahweh God. It uses the term Yahweh in Psalm 102. It's addressing the Lord God. And Hebrews 1.10 quotes it, and you, Lord, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth and the heavens are the works of your hands. This quotation comes from the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament, usually used by, well, almost everyone. Jews around the Roman Empire, Jesus, the apostles, the early church. As we noted, The Septuagint has the word Lord in there and the Hebrew of Psalm 102 sure has the word Yahweh as it's addressing Yahweh as the Creator. And obviously the writer here of Hebrews in the New Testament is understanding it that way. His whole point is to prove that Christ is God and Lord. Let's go to 1 Peter 2.3. which quotes or alludes to Psalm 34.8. Psalm 34.8 says, Oh, taste and see that Yahweh is good. How blessed is the man who takes refuge in him. Hebrews 2.3, I'm sorry, Hebrews, 1 Peter 2.3 just has this little phrase, if you have tasted the kindness of the Lord, so I, If you want to call it a quotation or just a literary allusion, it's clearly referring to it, to Psalm 34. And the Lord in this passage is the one rejected by men but accepted by God in Psalm 34. It's clearly the Lord Jesus. Actually, I should say, in the context of 1 Peter, he's talking about the cornerstone that's been rejected by men, but precious to the Lord. Again, this sort of thing would be blasphemous, even if Peter's doing it, if Jesus did not have full equality to God the Father, to Yahweh, if he was not Yahweh himself. Here's another one that shows up in 1 Peter, Isaiah 8. And you are not to fear what they fear or be in dread of it. It is Yahweh of hosts, often translated in the Septuagint, the Lord Almighty. It is Yahweh of hosts whom you should regard as holy. And he shall be your fear and he shall be your dread. That's Isaiah 8, 12-13. 1 Peter 3, 14-15. says, but even if you should suffer for the sake of righteousness, you are blessed and do not fear their intimidation and do not be troubled, but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts. Now, it's also helpful to understand the word sanctify, the word holy, those are all the same word, Hebrew, Greek. Set Christ apart, regard him as holy. sanctify Christ, regard as holy Christ as Lord, you could say. And here it just mentions that there are some translations you won't find this particular one in. You'll find plenty of other good proof texts. This one is found in the old manuscripts where it actually says Christ in this verse, in 1 Peter 3.15. So here, Peter simply adds the word Christ to make clear that Christ is to be identified as the Lord whom you should regard as holy. It would be unthinkable for a Jew like Peter to do this unless he really believes Jesus was Yahweh. Now that is a lot faster than I thought we would do this. But that's good, because we have time for questions or input from you. And we will wrap up with this. But any questions? Dave, get the mic to you. This might be more of a conclusion. All that you've talked about is, in some ways, really boring. But the point, I think, is down through history, there has been a concerted effort at all different levels, all different kinds of people, all different kinds of what we would call cults and everything to, in some way, prove and show that Jesus is not God. I mean, it's been a very concerted effort. It hasn't been random. It's been very, you know, much directed, specifically. And all the cults all have that same thing in common, that they try to prove that Jesus is not deity. Which is a clue, of course, the devil is orchestrating all this, I believe. So again, in a way, it's proof in reverse. That if it wasn't so important, it wouldn't be attacked as viciously and as consistently over time as it has been. There would be no reason. But it has been. And so that alone, to me, is part of the proof that Jesus is the Son of God, is God. It's helpful for me, because I get lost in all this. I have a hard time following it. I don't know anything about Greek. When I was in Greece, they didn't even have the same alphabet we have. So reading road signs is even hard. But yeah, it's been attacked down through the centuries and even today. So it must be important or it wouldn't be attacked so consistently. And again, let me say that this is a lot simpler than we make it sometimes. It is good to go into the original languages sometimes and just assure folks that, you know, your English translations are reliably translated. There's not some big conspiracy going on here to cover up the fact that Jesus really isn't God, for instance. But as I said, just read your Bible. Heresies don't come from people who are just immersed in the length and breadth of the Scriptures and who really love the actual storyline of the scriptures that's there, they'll wanna cherry pick things out, get proof texts, but you don't have much to fear from this kind of error if you are just a good Bible student. Where you go wrong is if you're just, like the JWs, they kinda have their playbook, they have their favorite verses, and they'll have, okay, this is what we say about this verse. And their Bible studies are just on certain things. But they don't love the Scriptures as the Scriptures. Love the Scriptures and know the Scriptures and you won't have these issues. Okay? Vicki? You talked about John 1. and the definite article or not having the definite article. In the New World Translation, which is the JW Bible, I think it's in verse 6, 12, 13, and 18, there's also the theos is used without the definite article. And in every other case, the JW Bible translates it God. Right, I won't go on my rabbit trail I could about that sort of a translation. One of the interesting things is actually to go through like you did with the passages and use the New World Translation because you can take the New World Translation and prove that Christ is deity. Yeah, or at least, I would say, prove to them that their own translation doesn't, that it contradicts itself, essentially. Yeah, and piggybacking on what Dick and Dave said, I think it's the Christological heresy and then modern is more of an inerrancy, but that's where they've attacked the most. And one of the benefits of the early church and the problems with Christological heresy is that it actually defined, and we have some very good theological work done by the early church, defining the deity of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Yeah, so don't think you have to reinvent the wheel. Read the old guys, to put it colloquially. God has had other men down through history who've done this.