The doctrinal/theological nature of testing prophecy from 1 John 4:1-3

Mike shows that testing prophecy involved theological evaluation.

Paul's emphasis on the humanity/birth of Jesus supports a childbearing reference

Mike shows that Paul does emphasize the Incarnation and birth of Christ in his theology.

Christian definition of Jesus: the eternal God made flesh, second person of the Trinity, one with the Father in being.

Second vocabulary comparison: the word 'Jesus.' Mike establishes the orthodox Christian Christology before presenting the Mormon alternative.

Mormon definition of Jesus: born in the pre-existence as a spirit child of Heavenly Father and his wife, one of many spirit children — and Satan's brother.

The Mormon Jesus was not eternally pre-existent as God but was the first spirit-born child of the physical Heavenly Father and Mother.

In Mormon theology, Jesus became incarnate partly to become a god — Jesus has only been a god for ~2,000 years and is one of three gods in the Mormon Trinity.

Extension of Mormon Christology — Jesus's divinity is recent and earned, not eternal.

Q&A: Hebrew wedding tradition and 'only the Father knows the day' — Mike is curious but wants historical verification

Viewer William Williams asks about the Hebrew wedding tradition parallel to the Son not knowing the day.

The simplest test for distinguishing true from false teachers is the identity of Jesus (who is he?) and the means of salvation (how am I saved?) — 1 John and Ephesians 2:8-9

Q&A: question from Zipa Duck about how new Christians can identify false vs. true teachers.

Calling Apollonius a 'son of God' in a pagan Greco-Roman sense (some divine energy or lower-case god quality) is fundamentally different from Jesus being declared Son of God in the Jewish context, where it meant equality with God (John 5). The New Testament is a Jewish document, not a pagan one, and conflating Jewish and pagan divine-sonship language muddies the comparison.

Apollonius: not from eyewitnesses; authored as paid commission; written 125+ years after the fact; probably a novel not biography; parallels Pythagoras not Jesus; opposed animal sacrifice (Jesus was the sacrifice); offered no salvation (Jesus was salvation); healed by skill and wisdom (Jesus by miraculous power); claimed reincarnation of Euphorbus (Jesus is God incarnate); was a vegetarian (Jesus ate meat); did not die and rise bodily.

Zahnd's claim that 'Jesus is the only perfect theology' and 'the Bible is not the perfect revelation of God' mirrors Bill Johnson's framework

Winger reads Zahnd's explicit statements from pages 14 and 30 of the book about the relationship between Jesus and Scripture.

Mike's disagreement with Vatican II's claim that Muslims worship the one true God

Responding to Lumen Gentium's statement about Muslims

Q&A: Core doctrines vs. peripheral doctrines — spiderweb illustration; Mormonism example

Answering viewer question from Jacob Inglot about when doctrine becomes heresy

Q&A: Can Jesus sin? Physically capable but character-incapable; peccability vs. impeccability debate

Q&A doctrinal question about the sinless nature of Christ.

Q&A: Rooting youth in the person and work of Christ — requires both good theology (who Jesus is) and practical application (how to live it out)

Audience question about how churches can help youth be rooted in Christ

Jesus had no pre-existent human body; John 1:14 says the Word 'became' flesh, not that he switched bodies; the Incarnation was a genuine becoming

Response to question about whether Jesus had a human body before the Incarnation

Brief mention of Proverbs 8 and wisdom in creation as a potential future study topic

Q&A: Jesse Cheek asks about Proverbs 8 and wisdom/creation

Q&A: Jehovah's Witnesses and Hebrews 1:8 — 'Your throne, O God' vs. 'God is your throne'

Viewer asks about the JW response to the key Christological text in Hebrews 1:8.

Q&A: Did Jesus perform miracles as God or purely as a human in right relationship with God?

Viewer raises a Christological claim used to support charismatic miracle theology.

Q&A: Severity of the Oneness doctrine — compromises the very nature of God

Viewer asks about the theological severity of the Oneness Pentecostal position.

Why the Father is typically called simply God in the NT while Jesus is called the Son: guarding against modalism

Response to Deke Liu asking why God the Father is typically just called God in the NT while Jesus is called the Son and the Spirit is called the Spirit.

Gethsemane — Jesus was not separated from the Father; "forsaken" means handed over to a terrible fate, not ontological separation of the Trinity

Question from Blake about whether Jesus was forsaken/separated from the Father in Gethsemane.

Jesus's death was a real human physical death; the divine nature did not cease to exist

Part of the atonement discussion, carefully distinguishing Christ's two natures.

Rejecting the deity of Christ is a salvation issue -- John 5 says dishonoring the Son dishonors the Father

Responding to Isaac Floyd's question about whether denying the deity of Christ is a salvation issue

Judges is a book designed to show total human depravity — God is the only hero; even the deliverers fail

Broader theological point drawn from the Judges 20 discussion

Paul's conversion is credible because it was Apostolically ratified and his gospel was identical to the Twelve's — Joseph Smith fails both tests

Question from Summer Monsoon about apologetics for Paul's conversion vs. Joseph Smith's claimed vision.

The blindness of Israel as a theological theme: Israel had the Messiah in their midst and did not recognize him.

Additional layer of meaning in the Messianic Secret passages.

'Truly God, truly man' is more precise than 'fully God, fully man'

Mike prefers Chalcedonian-style precision: two natures in one person, rather than '100% God / 100% man' language which is logically incoherent.

Isaiah 9:6 — "Everlasting Father" as a title for Jesus: representational fullness of God

Leslie Johnson asked why Isaiah 9:6 calls Jesus "Everlasting Father" if he is not the Father within Trinitarian theology.

Lady Wisdom in Proverbs 8 — typological connection to Christ, not the Holy Spirit

Steven Rivers asks whether Lady Wisdom in Proverbs 8 could be the Holy Spirit and whether Hebrew/Greek pronouns clarify the gender.

Son of Man in Mark's Gospel: Jesus clearly uses the title self-referentially

Question from Skeptic Reviews claiming Jesus used "Son of Man" in the third person to refer to someone other than himself.

The phrase "the Lord" (ha kurios) in Mark 11:3 deliberately fuses God's identity with Jesus — Mark's subtle but profound Christology of Christ's deity.

Greek analysis of "the Lord has need of it" in Mark 11:3

Mark 11:11 — Jesus evaluating the temple fulfills Malachi 3:1 ("the Lord will suddenly come to his temple"). This is the culmination of Mark's opening quote and his subtle deity Christology.

Analysis of the brief but significant Mark 11:11

In the parable, the son is sent "last of all" — not meaning no more messengers ever, but that the Son is the final opportunity before judgment falls on the leaders. Jesus is greater than every prophet: they are slaves; he is the beloved Son.

Analysis of the Son's unique status in the parable (Mark 12:6-8)

In Mark 12:35-37, Jesus asks a riddle about Psalm 110:1 — if the Messiah is David's son, why does David call him "Lord"? Jesus is challenging the LIMITED christology that the Messiah is merely a human descendant of David.

Mark Series pt 50: Jesus's question about Christ and David from Psalm 110

Jesus will not allow a limited Christology — the Messiah is not just the son of David but God Himself. Mark supports this throughout: Isaiah 40:3 applied to Jesus (Yahweh's coming), Jesus walking on water (quoting Job where God walks on water), the demoniac telling what "the Lord/Jesus" did.

Building the case for the deity of Christ from Mark 12:35-37 and the broader Gospel of Mark

Some skeptics argue that the gospel of Mark has a "low Christology" — presenting Jesus as a mere messianic figure without full divine identity. Winger argues Mark's trial narrative (14:53-72) is actually a theological climax demonstrating the opposite: high Christology is central to the earliest gospel.

Framing the apologetic argument against low-Christology claims about Mark

Jesus's trial before the Sanhedrin was procedurally corrupt: it occurred at night, at the high priest's house rather than a court, began with the council soliciting witnesses rather than witnesses bringing a case, and no consequences were imposed on the false witnesses — violating Deuteronomy 19:16-19.

Analysis of the illegality of Jesus's trial; the court was weaponizing law to oppress

Peter following Jesus "at a distance" is a literal physical description, not an allegory for halfhearted discipleship. Allegorizing clear narrative details damages biblical literacy and leaves congregations unable to handle false interpretations they will encounter later. Peter's actual situation shows a man confused by suffering he couldn't reconcile with his vision of the Messiah.

Warning against allegorizing historical narrative; proper interpretation of Peter's presence

The false witnesses couldn't even agree on what Jesus said about destroying the temple — showing the trial was seeking a pretext, not justice. Jesus actually said "destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it," referring to his body (John 2:19). Mark doesn't explain the pretext; John does, creating an undesigned coincidence that supports historicity.

The false testimony about the temple; undesigned coincidence between Mark and John

When the high priest asks if Jesus is "the Christ, the Son of the Blessed," Jesus responds "I am" and quotes two Old Testament passages: Daniel 7:13-14 (the Son of Man receiving all dominion) and Psalm 110:1 (sitting at the right hand of God). Both are deity-laden claims — riding the clouds is a divine prerogative in the OT (Psalm 68:4; Deut. 33:26), and the Son of Man receives eternal worship from all nations.

The high Christology embedded in Jesus's self-disclosure at his trial

Isaiah's four Servant Songs (Isa 42, 49, 50, 53) form a unified prophetic arc pointing to Jesus. Isaiah 50:6 — "I gave my back to those who strike me, my cheeks to those who pluck out the beard; I did not cover my face from humiliation and spitting" — is fulfilled in the mocking scene at Jesus's trial, showing the OT and NT are deeply integrated, not incidentally connected.

Isaiah's Servant Songs as OT prophecy fulfilled in Jesus's suffering