I’m new here, so I’m asking this respectfully. We’ve also been studying the Towrah, Prophets, and Psalms, and we seem to be arriving at a different conclusion than what I’m seeing in this group. When you use the phrase “YHWH/Yeshua,” how does this group understand that relationship? Are you saying they are the same, or that YHWH is the Source who saves and delivers through the one He sends? I’m asking because, from what we are seeing in the Hebrew witness, Yahowah appears to remain the Sender, Source, and Authority ~ while the one sent carries out His purpose. How does this group reconcile that distinction with the Towrah, Prophets, and Psalms?

Ryan, I appreciate the honest answer. Your response gets right to the heart of the issue. You said we are in deception, and I agree that deception is the problem. But that makes verification more important, not less. If deception is real, then names, doctrine, authority, identity, and testimony cannot be treated as secondary matters. They become the very things that must be tested. That is why I asked about YHWH/Yeshua. If YHWH is the One who identified Himself, spoke through the Towrah, Prophets, and Mizmowr, and established the standard for knowing who He is, then we cannot say the details may be wrong but the conclusion is still safe. The conclusion has to be tested by the testimony that came first. The Hebrew witness consistently presents Yahowah as the Source, Sender, Authority, and Savior. He can send, authorize, empower, and work through someone, but that does not automatically make the one sent identical to the One who sends. An ambassador can speak on behalf of a king without being the king. Authority can be delegated without identity being transferred. That is where the Trinity becomes difficult for me. I understand that Christianity later framed Father, Son, and Spirit as one God in three persons, but I do not see that structure coming from the Towrah, Prophets, or Mizmowr. I see Yahowah speaking, sending, promising, delivering, and establishing His Covenant. I see His Ruwach Qodesh as set apart from Him to accomplish His will. I see the one sent acting under Yahowah’s authority. I do not see Yahowah asking us to merge those distinctions into a later theological formula. I also struggle with the idea that doctrine does not matter as long as someone believes Jesus/Yeshua is Savior. If Yahowah has already spoken, doctrine is not just a label. Doctrine is either aligned with His testimony or it is not. If a claim changes His Name, replaces His words, redefines His Covenant, redirects trust away from His testimony, or teaches people to approach Him through a later religious structure, then that matters.