42) Exodus 15:3 - YEHOVAH IS A MAN OF WAR.
ANSWER: Let us start with the fact that while Trinitarians use this to try and show Yehovah as a man which comes from ISH in Hebrew not ADAM for human or mankind, secondly let us also raise the point that let us assume that he is a man this is clearly indicating to the singular person man not a three in one man, so even if Yehovah was a man that is one man not three so this actually demolishes the Trinitarian argument, we know Yehovah is not a human being or physical man but we could see him as a man like a father, a King, a man of war or a warrior metaphorically however he would still be that singular man not three persons in one being. QUICK ANSWER: A MAN INDICATES TO A SINGULAR PERSON SO ASSUMING HE IS A MAN OF WAR THAT IS A SINGULAR MAN NOT A THREE MEN ONE BEING SO IT REFUTES YOUR TRINITY. AND THE WORD IS NOT ADAM IT IS ISH SO HE IS NOT A HUMAN MAN.

43) JOHN 17:5 - GLORY THAT I HAD BEFORE THE WORLD EXISTED. (JESUS PRE-EXISTING / PRE-DESTINED / GLORIFIED)
ANSWER: Trinitarians use this to try and refute the John 17:3 argument that the Father is the alone true God, however Yeshua by his own words said MARK 11:24 - 24Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours. // So in John 17 the whole chapter is a prayer of Yeshua to the Father, he is saying he already had it as a promise he believed it was already his, but if Trinitarians do not accept this remind them of John 17:22 which clearly says Yeshua himself give us the same glory, so does that make us pre-existent, does that make us God since he gave us that same glory? Obviously not. However we do see that we are predestined and having been glorified see answers to number 43 I will also add the specific part however you can read the full answer again to point 43... - Additional: See 1 Peter 1:20 the greek word proegnosmenou which means to foresee or in the foreknowledge, a foreknowledge means in the biblehub strongs concordance in c. of Biblehub relating to 1 Peter 1:20 it states this - as meaning to predestinate, cf. Meyer, Philippi, Van Hengel); --(foreknown by God, although not yet 'made manifest' to men), 1 Peter 1:20. // QUICK REPLY: We are not of this world in the same way from KATHOS just as, John 17:16 and that Jesus is proegnosmenou foreknown meaning predestined and then later manifested see the lexicon for more details. See Further: Romans 8:17 - 17And if we are children, then we are heirs: heirs of God and co-heirs with Christ— if indeed we suffer with Him, so that we may also be glorified with Him. // And finally Romans 8:29-30 - 29For those God foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brothers. 30And those He predestined, He also called; those He called, He also justified; those He justified, He also glorified // WE ARE PREDESTINED, WE ARE FOREKNOWN IN GOD'S MIND AND GLORIFIED ALSO IN HIS PREDETERMINED PLAN. See also Jeremiah 1:5 - “Before I formed you in the womb I knew[a] you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” // And Also Ephesians 1:4 - 4 For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love / we are chose in Yeshua before creation just as Messiah is chosen before all things Yeshua is chose before all things and that we are chose in him, all chosen in The Father's thought. Finally thought John 17:18 - 18As You sent Me into the world, I have also sent them into the world. / We are sent like he is but we are born in the world but still sent into the world the clear form of speech is that the Father created Jesus and then sent him to minister into the world. QUICK REPLY: JESUS IS PREDESTINED OR PRE-EXISTENT IN THE SAME WAY WE ARE EXCEPT HE IS CHOSEN BEFORE ALL AND THEN WE ARE CHOSE IN HIM EPHESIANS 1:4, WE ALSO SEE OUR PREDESTINATION AND GLORY IN ROMANS 8:17 and Romans 8:29-30.  ADDITIONALLY:   See the page HETEROSIS as JOHN 17:5 is mentioned and there is a lot of interesting notes in relation to John 17:5.

44) the BREAD FROM HEAVEN of LIFE is YESHUA
ANSWER: We Unitarian messianic's have no issue 1) The physical bread was sent to Israel from God Yehovah the Father as we see in Exodus 16. And 2) Yehovah our Father promised the Son who would take on our transgressions for our sins, the sacrificial lamb and the unleavened bread that we eat of on Passover in remembrance of him 1 Corinthians 11:24, Luke 22:19 - So God's promise was manifest for us and those who believe in the messiah that God sent and listen to his words because God speaks through him Deuteronomy 18:18-19 which correlates to Acts 3:19-22 and also John 12:48-50, God Yehovah the Fathers words are spoke directly from Yeshua and we live not by bread alone but by every word of God Matthew 4:4 and Luke 4:4... So yes the old testament Bread was symbolic of Yeshua the true bread coming into the world for us, no problem it's just the Trinitarians seem to literally think pieces of bread come down is Jesus or that literally bread is his flesh, no it is symbolic and if we believe he died for us we do it in remembrance of him Luke 22:19, Matthew 26:26, 1 Corinthians 11:24.

45) JEREMIAH 23:6 - Jesus is called YEHOVAH OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.
Answer: Firstly this statement is a prophetic speech he will be called Yehovah is our righteousness and yes he will but this is future tense, because Yehovah's righteousness will happen when Yehovah comes in Yeshua just like Jerusalem the place is also called Acts 33:16 this doesn't mean the place is Yehovah nor does it mean that Yeshua is Yehovah neither, if you take this prophetic statement some how means Yeshua is Yehovah then you would have to take into consideration the verses where it seems Moses and other prophets claimed to be Yehovah as the statements don't say thus says Yehovah it just is Moses speaking and then saying I am Yehovah and the same is said by others in , Deuteronomy 29:2-6, and from Hosea 3 through to Hosea 12, you could read on if you want but basically it doesn't have Hosea as a prophet say Thus says the Lord, it just speaks of Hosea either as a man and Yehovah deity as trinitarians would say, or Prophets can speaks as bluntly like they are Yehovah saying words but they are not him, this is agency 101, a Prophet can speak as we see between these chapters 3 and 12 maybe even further that it is Hosea speaking as himself and as Yehovah without it seem to switch between the speaks and make it known to you who is speaking and when it just naturally goes from Hosea to Yehovah as Hosea speaks. Let me be blunt, we Unitarians know agency we know Hosea may be the speaker and no it doesn't stop and have Hosea say "THUS DECLARES YEHOVAH" or "THUS SAYS YEHOVAH" it just fluidly changes between Hosea and Yehovah because Hosea is the prophet of God speaking his words because Yehovah shows himself through people, prophets, angels and so on but since Trinitarians grasp at silly prophetic statements and they say Yeshua is Yehovah because of this, well we could make Moses and Hosea Yehovah by their same logic.

46) Colossians 1:15-20 JESUS CREATED "THINGS". (see also: 2 Chorinthians 5:27-28)
Answer:  Colossians 1:15-20 - 15 [a]He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation: 16 for [b]by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones, or dominions, or rulers, or authorities—all things have been created through Him and for Him. 17 He [c]is before all things, and in Him all things [d]hold together. 18 He is also the head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, so that He Himself will come to have first place in everything. 19 For [e]it was the Father’s good pleasure for all the [f]fullness to dwell in Him, 20 and through Him to reconcile all things to Himself, whether things on earth or things in [g]heaven, having made peace through the blood of His cross.

So the context of the creation was 
1) Colossians 1:16 - for [b]by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones, or dominions, or rulers, or authorities // and Colossians 1:19-20 - 19 For [e]it was the Father’s good pleasure for all the [f]fullness to dwell in Him, 20 and through Him to reconcile all things to Himself, whether things on earth or things in [g]heaven, having made peace through the blood of His cross. // We clearly see that this is talking about the new creation due to the things being reconciled to himself which is the Father God, if this was to be speaking of Genesis creation all things being created then it couldn't be reconciled since it had not been created at this point but was being created through Yeshua, so it has to be explicit to the new creation through his blood hence he was the first born of all creation, the first born from the dead which we see in the next point.
2) Colossians 1:15 - 15 [a]He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation / and this context is Colossians 1:17-18 - 17 He [c]is before all things, and in Him all things [d]hold together. 18 He is also the head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, so that He Himself will come to have first place in everything // So this creation has to be explicit to the resurrection where this creation of Genesis is burned up in flames and then those who are saved will be resurrected to eternal life and there is new heavens and new earth in Revelation 21:1 - 1 Then I saw “a new heaven and a new earth,”[a] for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea. //which also correlates to this next passage where talking of the beast or anti-christ his power is taken away which again correlates to Colossians 1:16 new thrones, dominions, rulers and authorities in Daniel 7:26-27 - 26 “‘But the court will sit, and his power will be taken away and completely destroyed forever. 27 Then the sovereignty, power and greatness of all the kingdoms under heaven will be handed over to the holy people of the Most High. His kingdom will be an everlasting kingdom, and all rulers will worship and obey him.’ // which correlates to Jesus destroying the authorities and it being given to the holy people both here in Daniel 7:26-27 and Colossians 2:9-15 - 9 For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form, 10 and in Him you have been made [a]complete, and He is the head [b]over every ruler and authority; 11 and in Him you were also circumcised with a circumcision performed without hands, in the removal of the body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ, 12 having been buried with Him in baptism, in which you were also raised with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead. 13 And [c]when you were dead [d]in your wrongdoings and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He made you alive together with Him, having forgiven us all our wrongdoings, 14 having cancelled the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross. 15 When He had [e]disarmed the rulers and authorities, He made a public display of them, having triumphed over them through [f]Him.. // Notice this is perfectly in line it is the next chapter after Colossians 1:15-20 where Yeshua has the fulness of the Father in him Colossians 1:19, again it restates this in Colossians 2:9, notice in again the restating of Colossians 1:16 new authorities, dominions, rulers and thrones is essentially restated in Colossians 2:15 where it says he being God through Yeshua disarmed the rulers and authorities, this all has happened in Yeshua's life not in Genesis.  
3) So when we see Colossians 1:16 it states - 16 for [b]by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones, or dominions, or rulers, or authorities—all things have been created through Him and for Him.  // this is called Epanadiplosis also known as Greek encircling which means when it states FOR BY HIM ALL THINGS ARE CREATED at the start of the sentence then also ends ALL THINGS HAVE BEEN CREATED this means the things stated between those two open and close of the statements mean the thinsgs created are explicitly these things not Genesis.  This is Epanadipolsis which means these things are the things that are created and the context of these things is the authorities that Yehovah God reconciled to himself through Yeshua not Genesis creation explicitly these things.
 

47) 1 John 5:20 – THE TRUE GOD AND ETERNAL LIFE (Trinitarians claim JESUS).
Answer: When you read 1 John 5:20 from the interlinear it reads – We know now that the son of God is come and is given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true, (PAUSE HERE) So who did the Son give us understanding of John 1:18 – No one has seen God at any time, the only begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father has explained him (or made him known) so Jesus made us know the Father gave us an understanding of the Father. So let us continue from where we let off in 1 John 5:20 – So that we may know HIM who is TRUE and we are in HIM who is TRUE, in the son of HIM Jesus Christ, He is the TRUE GOD and Eternal life. // So who is the him? Clearly the Father because Jesus is the SON OF HIM, we are in both HIM who is TRUE the GOD which Jesus is the Son of, we are in both the HIM who is the TRUE GOD and Eternal life and in the Son of HIM which is the TRUE GOD, the he is predicated of as the Father he is the true God and eternal life. So as Trinitarians manipulate scripture do not trust their view but look into the scripture for yourself read it in the lexicon and take your time. The whole chapter is about both GOD and the Son.

48) Acts 5:29-31 – WE DO NOT OBEY MEN ONLY GOD.
Answer: With this answer I will break down the passage because it reads perfectly find but just to show how I personally see this as I read it with context of the bible. Acts 5:29 - 29 But Peter and the apostles answered, “We must obey God rather than men. (Amen! We do not obey men but God, but Peter says also we obey him and authorities in to a degree unless they go against God 1 Peter 2:13-17) Acts 5:30 - 30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom you put to death by hanging Him on [a]a cross. (So who is the God of our Fathers who raised Jesus? It is the Father, not a trinity God. We also see Jesus say they called the Father their God not a trinity John 8:54) Acts 5:31 - 31 He is the one whom God exalted [b]to His right hand as a [c]Prince and a Saviour, to grant repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins. (So we obey God by listening to the authority he set up, especially Yeshua the Messiah who he placed at his right hand. God exalted Yeshua to his right hand, Deuteronomy 18:18-19 tells us we must listen to this Prophet which is Jesus as quoted in Acts 3:19-22 because if we don’t God himself will hold us accountable because God speaks through him, John 12:48-50, John 14:10, and God does the Miracles through Yeshua.)

49) Trinitarians Claim Yehovah is a Three persons in one Being God.
Answer: See first the commandments Exodus 20:1-3 Yehovah God is a singilar me, that we have no God's beside not a "Have no God beside US.", and If Yehovah is three persons as one being then according to Micah 5:1-4 the name of Yeshua’s God is Yehovah, so Yeshua’s God must be himself and two other persons, if that is the case he would have had to worship himself being born under the law as the Bible states Galatians 4:4 and since God Yehovah does not show favouritism Romans 2:11 Yeshua as a man would have to worship all three persons as Yehovah if all three persons are that one Yehovah since Yehovah is the name of his God, unless you have multiple Yehovah’s where Yeshua only has to worship one Yehovah and not the others, this goes against the Shema for Yehovah is one Deuteronomy 6:4. Now if you ask if Trinitarians believe that the Triune God is Yehovah God of the entire Bible, then you would see them having to say yes or their God is false. Now since Unitarians are sinning against the Trinity God for not worshiping all three persons did Yeshua in his humanity worship all three persons since Yehovah is a three persons in one being? Either way if yes then Yeshua lied when he said the father glorifies him, and that if he glorifies himself it means nothing, so he couldn’t have worshipped himself plus the Bible says he did not glorify himself in 1 Corinthians 6:20 and if he didn’t then he broke the law that we must worship Yehovah our God so either way Yeshua is a sinner according to the Trinitarian perspective and could not die for their sins.  Deuteronomy 18:15-19 - 15 “Yehovah your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your countrymen; to him you shall listen. 16 This is in accordance with everything that you asked of Yehovah your God at Horeb on the day of the assembly, saying, ‘Do not let me hear the voice of Yehovah my God again, and do not let me see this great fire anymore, or I will die!’ 17 And Yehovah said to me, ‘They have [a]spoken well. 18 I will raise up for them a prophet from among their countrymen like you, and I will put My words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them everything that I command him. 19 And it shall come about that whoever does not listen to My words which he speaks in My name, I Myself will [b]require it of him. // in relation to Acts 3:19-22 -19 Therefore repent and return, so that your sins may be wiped away, in order that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord; 20 and that He may send Jesus, the [a]Christ appointed for you, 21 whom heaven must receive until the [b]period of restoration of all things, about which God spoke by the mouths of His holy prophets from ancient times. 22 Moses said, ‘The Lord God will raise up for you a prophet like me from your countrymen; to Him you shall listen regarding everything He says to you. // Which quotes Deuteronomy 18:15-19 about Yeshua the Messiah as the Prophet who comes in Yehovah's name, not that he himself is Yehovah. In John 12:49 - JESUS SPEAKING - 49 For I did not speak [a]on My own, but the Father Himself who sent Me has given Me a commandment as to what to say and what to speak. / We see Yeshua say that the Father is the one who commands him what to say, there for logically Deuteronomy 18:15-19 is the Father as the singular person who is the one who says "I will command him what to say" who is called Yehovah. So Yehovah is the Father the singular person I, who commands Yeshua what to say and that Yeshua is the prophet raised who comes in Yehovah the Father's name, not that he is Yehovah. Furthermore we see that Yeshua's God is called Yehovah, now the one who is Yeshua's God is the Father even most Trinitarians wouldn't say all three persosn are the God of Yeshua only the Father, so logically only the Father is called Yehovah unless Yeshua's God is the Trinity all three persons who he worships as Yehovah his God in Micah 5:1-4 - “[a]Now muster yourselves in troops, daughter of troops; [b]They have laid siege against us; With a rod they will strike the judge of Israel on the cheek. 2 [c]But as for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, Too little to be among the clans of Judah, From you One will come forth for Me to be ruler in Israel. His times of coming forth are from long ago, From the days of eternity.” 3 Therefore He will give them up until the time When she who is in labor has given birth. Then the remainder of His kinsmen Will return to the sons of Israel. 4 And He will arise and shepherd His flock In the strength of the Lord, In the majesty of the name of the Lord His God. And they will [d]remain, Because [e]at that time He will be great To the ends of the earth. So Yeshua can not be Yehovah if the Father is the one who commands him and that Yehovah is his God and John 20:17 says the Father is his God and the Father is the disciples God. Therefore the Father is Yehovah his God not the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. We see that Yeshua said he comes in the Father's name and logically it is not his name, because he says if one does come in his own name the people would accept that person who does come in his own name, and they did not accept Yeshua because he come in the Father's name Yehovah John 5:43 - 43 I have come in My Father’s name, and you do not [a]receive Me; if another comes in his own name, you will [b]receive him. // You will also see in all these coming verses that Yeshua comes in the name of Yehovah or knows God's name which is he is raised on high, not that he is Yehovah God himself Psalms 91:11-16 - Matthew 21:9 / Matthew 23:39 / Psalm 118:26 / Luke 19:38 / John 12:12-13 / )

50) The Word Of Yehovah Is Supposedly A Separate Person (The Word Of Samuel however is not.)
Answer: When it comes to the “Word Of Yehovah” coming to people Trinitarians believe this is another person called the Word (Jesus) pre-existing as a person who is also himself Yehovah, however when we see in the Bible verses like in 1 Samuel 4:1 – “Thus the word of Samuel come to all Israel.” / there is more to this verse but for the course I am using the statement if you so wish read the whole chapter or verse, but when it comes to the word of Samuel, they don’t use the same logical perspective they use for the word of God for the word of Samuel. Typically Trinitarian debaters are very intellectually dishonest when it comes to using the same logic for the same context only so that they can fit their doctrine into the Bible.

51) Isaiah 54:5 (QE-DO-WOS) / Proverbs 30:3 (QE-DO-SIM) - Plural Holy One's Must Make Yeshua, Yehovah God...
Answer: Undoubtabely the most ignorant statement I probably have heard,  firstly the word simply means holy, the word has been used in Exodus 19:6 about a Holy nation, or Exodus 29:31 a holy place, but wait what about Leviticus 11:44 Yehovah tells us to consecrate ourselves to be holy ... the word is again the same word as QE-DO-SIM does this make us Yehovah God because we are consecrated holy, or holy ones same word used Qe-do-sim?  how about the same passage Leviticus 11:45 next verse you SHALL BE HOLY for I am holy, the same word used, Leviticus 19:2 - be holy for I am holy same word used, Leviticus 20:7 same word used again about us being holy,  Leviticus 20:26 also, Leviticus 21:6 they shall be holy, or maybe one which is more blunt explicit to the context of Holy ones in Psalm 89:5 in nasb (Holy Ones) KJV Saints, same used word QE-DO-SIM, this word is also in the same chapter a couple verses after in verse 7, the council of the holy ones talking in context of the saints who are human beings, does this some how make us Yehovah because this word is used for us too?  It just goes to show how Trinitarians will use any similar word to fit their nonsense teachings.

52) 2 Corinthians 13:14 - How do Unitarians deal with this passage which mentions (Father, Son and Holy Spirit) in it.

53) Zechariah 12:10 - THEY LOOK ON ME WHO THEY PIERCED / THEY LOOK TO ME ABOUT WHO THEY PIERCED.
     53.a) (BONUS VIDEO LINK: ZECHARIAH 12:10 - SEPTUAGINT)
Answer:  Before we go onto the old information on this argument starting from [Older point] I would like to take your time to inform you on some information which I have come across as of 29th Of January 2023 that there is a pdf which indicates other manuscripts stated "they looked UNTO HIM" rather than "They looked on me" in relation to who was pierced.  I will add my recent starting points to this relating to the other manuscripts views which agree with John 19:37.  Newer Point: Zechariah 12:10 (Talk) "The question involved here is whether the text should read "unto me who they have pierced" or not.  Some manuscripts have "Unto him" instead of the Elay "Unto me". Quote slight altered due to some hebrew words that would not copy and past so I wrote in Hebrew alternative but kept the meaning of the statement and have the PDF from: Israel Responds to Grace: A Study of Zechariah 12:10. Page 2 PDF
"The reading (UNTO HIM) is supported by some of the later manuscripts and several scholars.  This would be translated "unto him."  This reading avoids the theological, historical, and seeming grammatical difficulties of the text."  PDF from: Israel Responds to Grace: A Study of Zechariah 12:10. Page 3 PDF... My notes: This seems however to be in alinement with John 19:37 - 37And, as another Scripture says: “They will look on the One they have pierced.”  /  So if John himself quotes other what seems to be later manuscripts in the first century, it is likely then that the manuscripts he had to his disposle in better condition where likely predominantly stating what is now later manuscripts by dating as "Look to HIM" not "Look to me." as he is quoting this verbertum from what he claims it stated.  
We also see that on this video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4HezBaSlSs&t=316s&ab_channel=JeffA.Benner that the reading of Zechariah 12:10 should be by the masoretic general texts as "They look to me because of who they have pierced."  not because they have pierced the one who they looked upon.   According to other sources like Jews for Judaism on this link: https://jewsforjudaism.org/knowledge/articles/analysis-of-zechariah-1210  that the use of elay et asher or "they look (TO ME)" the et asher translates because of or concerning the one who was pierced when you see the same use of the words as quoted as "There is an additional problem in this passage. The Hebrew words "et asher" are not found very often in scripture. When they do occur together the phrase is read as "concerning whom" or "concerning that" but never as "whom". You can see this by reading the Hebrew original of Ezekiel 36:27. (It is also interesting to note that the Septuagint does not translate "et asher" as "whom." Its translation does not at all resemble the Christian interpretation.)  The correct translation of Zechariah 12:10 should be."they will look onto Me concerning whom they have pierced and they will mourn for him".
Now the Jews for Judaism use the verse in Hosea 11:1 as an example of this supposedly pointing to Israel as the him personified as a singular person, however we know evidentually that Israel is not without sins, Israel is not a perfect unblemished lamb, it is clearly a singular him in Hosea as the son being spoken of in Hosea 11:1 and also places like in the book of Isaiah 53:12 as the one that will be made as a guilt offering not Israel as a nation.
You can also see how the direct object marker works with this - As the name suggests, the direct object marker indicates the direct object of some verb. It does this by directly preceding the noun or phrase that functions as the direct object of a verb (either finite or non-finite). - https://www.google.com/search?q=direct+object+marker&oq=Direct+object+marker&aqs=chrome.0.35i39j0i512l2j0i22i30l6j0i390.3056j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 
See also Zechariah 12:10 in RSV translation - 10 “And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of compassion and supplication, so that, when they look on him whom they have pierced, they shall mourn for him, as one mourns for an only child, and weep bitterly over him, as one weeps over a first-born. /
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Zechariah+12%3A10&version=RSV
My Notes:  So to me again, it seems that John in John 19:37 is clearly quoting the truth of scripture not that it is they will look to me who is pierced but the he who is pierced as John quoted some of the other manuscripts that seem to be less in number and for us today there are only newer forms of these manuscripts around compared to other manuscripts which say other wise, just because manuscripts may be older to us now on the "Look to me" doesn't mean that they are correct especially even those manuscripts by Hebrew speakers don't even say what Trinitarians say, it says, however just that they "look to me about the one they have pierced."  So it seems no one really agrees with the Trinitarian translations not even John from the New Testament but he agrees with me.
Older Points:  Depending on translations if you were to read in the chabad Tanakh Zechariah 12:10 in the chabad states "They shall look to me because of those who have been thrust through" now this doesn't look like it says they will look on me who they have thrust through or pierced Yehovah God, no but that they look to him because of the one they have pierced.  While yes some translations which are written by Trinitarian bias, states that the one who is pierced is seemingly Yehovah, however depending on how you read even the Trinitarian bias translations for example when we read the Zechariah 12:10 in the ESV it says this "when they look on me, on him whom they have pierced"  This indicates the same thing as the one in Chabad in the ESV they look on me, meaning towards or to me, they look on me on him who is pierced, while it could also be read on me, on him meaning both have been peirced which also would mean that they look on Yehovah who is pierced because he is in the him who was peirced Yeshua, but then again you could probably say that it also can be seen in a Trinitarian perspective.  If we take into consideration that language in the Bible switches also between speakers fluidly since there is no real grammatical marks such as commas, full stops and so on, since when we read things like Deuteronomy 29:1-6 we see the speaker is Moses and he speaks of Yehovah in third person singular then he goes on to say "I have lead you in the wilderness" since he is the speaker he could be seen as claiming himself to be in verse 6 as stating that "So you will know that I am Yehovah" now I am not claiming Moses is Yehovah it is simply an example, since we know scripture can fluidly change from speaker to speaker especially relating to Yehovah God when people speak on his behalf, Yehovah can speak through them like he is them, so when in Zechariah, Yehovah says "they will look on me.." this is Yehovah but when it says "on him who is pierced" this switched from the first person to third in the ESV but even if you look at John 19:37 it says they look on him who they pierced, now if you look at Zechariah 12:10 in the lexicon the word elay while in the interlinea it says on me, it has been used in relation to about so they will look about and then is followed by et the direct object, the verb of looking is pointed to the phrase or noun that comes after it the one who is pierces is a him, "They will look (about/to/toward) -  who they have pierced and mourn for him as a begotten son."  the word elay can simply mean the looking is towards and then the ET which is the direct object marker and this (the direct object marker indicates the direct object of some verb. It does this by directly preceding the noun or phrase that functions as the direct object of a verb (either finite or non-finite).)  So this ET comes before the noun which the action the verb is pointing to, so they LOOK (Verb/Action) so they the people LOOK verb TOWARD (ELAY) ET (Direct Object Marker which comes before what is the direct object of what is being looked at.) which is the one who is pierced, which is the HIM who is a SON" which is why  in John 19:37 the writer points to the HIM not the ME who was looked to see here "37 And again another Scripture says, “They will look on him whom they have pierced.”"  I know Trinitarians will make this look like I don't know what I am speaking about but why is it that the writer says HIM who they have pierced and the Direct object marker points to the one who they have peirced not relaying a me who they have pierced."  Remember if you click the word [ELAY] while it can be used they look to me because it simply means to look to, toward or about, and where you are looking would be on who is being looked towards, hence the ET which is the direct object marker pointing to who is having the verb LOOK done to, they LOOK (Verb) and the ET is in a sense AT They LOOK at the one who they have pierced, and mourne for hIM as a son.  The Him is the one looked at, the direct object marker (ET) comes before the thing that the verb is pointing too which would be the person being looked at, they look TOWARD (ET) those who they pierced or the one they have pierced depending on translations there for the LOOK (VERB) TOWARDS (ET) the next point would be who is looked at, having this action of looking done towards, that would be HIM not a ME.  
Bonus: When looking at the Greek septuagint on this page Zechariah 12:10 LXX it says - "And they shall look to me, because they treated me despitefully; and they shall beat over him with a beating of the breast, as over a beloved one; and they shall grieve with grief as over the first-born."  as you clearly see not only does the Hebrew speaking Jews disagree with the Trinitarian translations from Hebrew to English and ESV indicates to something different to the Trinitarian versions of look to me who they have pierced and also now the Greek Septuagint as seen they look to me (GOD) because they have treated me (GOD) despitefully and they will beat over HIM... a different person to God who is speaking.  So much contradicts the Trinitarians, only their own mistranslations agree with them because they wrote it.

54) Trinitarians claim THE HOLY SPIRIT is a separate Person To The Father 
Answer:  Now Trinitarians claim the Holy Spirit is a separate person to the Father and to that I would say no it is not, however technically speaking the Holy Spirit is a person but not in the way Trinitarians think, because it is not a separate person but it is the existence of the Father, so the Holy Spirit's personhood would be the Father he is the Holy Spirit.  We see in Luke 12:11-12 when people take you before the judges, the synagogues do not think of what to say, for the HOLY SPIRIT teaches you what to say, however on the exact say time, topic, statement in Matthew 10:19-20 it states when they take you and hand you over do not worry as what to say for it is not you speaking but THE SPIRIT OF YOUR FATHER, so therefore scripturally on the same topic, time, and context being written about the Holy Spirit is logically the Spirit of the FATHER that is in us speaking which we see in 2 Samuel 23:2-3 that the Spirit of Yehovah is upon David, and HIS (Yehovah's) message is on my tongue, we see the Spirit on someone is the Father by his spirit speaking through that person, similarly we see when Yeshua is baptised the Holy Spirit descends upon him in the book of John 1:29-34 and then later we see Yehovah The Father speak through Yeshua in John 12:49.  So it is clear that logically speaking Yehovah almighty the Father God speaks through people by his Spirit being on them, we also see to finalise this point in the next scripture of Luke 1:32-35 it says that the Holy Spirit which will come upon Mary is the power of the most high and we know earlier in verse 32 Yeshua will be great and called the son of the most high, so we know logically speaking the most high is the Father not three persons, because Yeshua is the Son of who the Most HIGH is, and it is his spirit the Power of the most high that makes Mary have Yeshua as a child.  So we see the Holy Spirit is the Spirit and Power of The Father in this answer.

55) 1 John 5:7 - MARGINAL NOTE 
It is a well known fact that this passage which writes "Father, Son and Holy Spirit" was not found in manuscripts pre 14th to 15th century.   I will attach below a site where you can find information on this textual problem while also writing this here that it is evident that Trinitarians who use this argument are so deluded and blind happily following the anti-christ religion of the Trinitarian perspective without researching it.  We know that This reading, the infamous Comma Johanneum, which has been known  through the King James translation. The problem the Trinitarians have is that the evidence both external and internal is clearly and decidedly against its authenticity of the 1 John 5:7 marginal note reading.  Additionally The Trinitarian formula which is known as the Comma Johanneum had made its way into the third edition of Erasmus’ Greek NT (1522) because of pressure and probable threats from the Catholic Church since the "holy" roman empire throughout history had murdered, tortured and done other horrific things forcing their belief system upon those who disagreed with them in which the same arguments against the Trinity and Catholics keep popping it's head back up because you can not stop truth the so called heresies against the antichrist religion perspectives will always come against it in different times if people can read for themselves, the only way people in the past would have become Trinitarian was through families or torture and denouncing their religion in fear of death, but now because so many people follow it blindly by their fathers and their fathers, fathers who raised them as believing this, this is why they forced 1 John 5:7 through which was not found in any manuscript pre 14th century.
For further evidences see website: https://bible.org/article/textual-problem-1-john-57-8
This longer reading is found only in eight late manuscripts, four of which have the words in a marginal note.  Most of these manuscripts (2318, 221, and [with minor variations] 61, 88, 429, 629, 636, and 918) originate from the 16th century; the earliest manuscript, codex 221 (10th century), includes the reading in a marginal note which was added sometime after the original composition. Thus, there is no sure evidence of this reading in any Greek manuscript until the 1500s; each such reading was apparently composed after Erasmus’ Greek NT was published in 1516. Indeed, the reading appears in no Greek witness of any kind (either manuscript, patristic, or Greek translation of some other version) until AD 1215 (in a Greek translation of the Acts of the Lateran Council, a work originally written in Latin). This is all the more significant, since many a Greek Father would have loved such a reading, for it so succinctly affirms the doctrine of the Trinity. The reading seems to have arisen in a fourth century Latin homily in which the text was allegorized to refer to members of the Trinity.  From there, it made its way into copies of the Latin Vulgate, the text used by the Roman Catholic Church.
Erasmus needed to defend himself. He argued that he did not put in the Comma because he found no Greek manuscripts that included it. Once one was produced (codex 61, written by one Roy or Froy at Oxford in c. 1520),3 Erasmus apparently felt obliged to include the reading. He became aware of this manuscript sometime between May of 1520 and September of 1521. In his annotations to his third edition he does not protest the rendering now in his text,4 as though it were made to order; but he does defend himself from the charge of indolence, noting that he had taken care to find whatever manuscripts he could for the production of his Greek New Testament. In the final analysis, Erasmus probably altered the text because of politico-theologico-economic concerns: he did not want his reputation ruined, nor his Novum Instrumentum to go unsold.
- For a detailed discussion, see Metzger, Textual Commentary, 2nd ed., 647-49.

56) Hosea 1:7 - I WILL SAVE THEM BY YEHOVAH THEIR GOD (Third person form of speech).
Answer:  A new argument from Trinitarians which in the immediate time stumped me but I gave the right answer even though by the immediate context I wanted to study this a little more, so here is the extensive answer.  1) You have to start with the context of the chapter to see Yehovah speak of himself in 3rd person Hosea 1:2 - 2 When the Lord first spoke through Hosea, the Lord said to Hosea, “Go, take for yourself a wife [a]inclined to infidelity, and children of infidelity; for the land commits flagrant infidelity, [b]abandoning the Lord.” //  Yehovah here speaks of himself being abandoned by Israel,  we also see in in Hosea 1:5 - 5 On that day I will break the bow of Israel in the Valley of Jezreel.” //  We see that Yehovah breaks the bow of Israel and this is the context it is not by bow that Yehovah destroys the enemies but by Yehovah their God the same Yehovah they abandoned which is him, the I that breaks their bow.  Which brings us to Hosea 1:7 - 7 But I will take pity on the house of Judah and save them by the Lord their God, and will not save them by bow, sword, battle, horses, or horsemen.” //  So notice I will take pitty on the house of Judah and save them, so Yehovah speaking is saying he will the singular I, but remember earlier he the speak said I will break Israel's bow and why because he said I will save them by Yehovah their God, so not by bow but by Yehovah their God, he is speaking in third person of himself as he did in verse two where he said speaking of Israel they are abandoning Yehovah.  Yehovah is speaking of himself in third person and we know that Yehovah saves by himself in 1 Samuel 17:47 - And all those assembled here will know that it is not by sword or spear that the LORD saves; for the battle is the LORD's, and He will give all of you into our hands." //  So notice Yehovah saves by himself because it is the battle which is his, he will give all of you into his hands singular.  So this is the answer contextually he is speaking of himself in third person and Yeshua has done in relation to when they lift up the son of man and yet Yeshua is the son of man for example John 8:28 - 28 So Jesus said, “When you lift up the Son of Man, then you will know that [a]I am, and I do nothing [b]on My own, but I say these things as the Father instructed Me. // So Yeshua is speaking of himself as the son of man who is lifted up but in third person, Yehovah God is doing the same.

57) James 1:16 - Yehovah God does not change answers any argument for Yeshua being Yehovah.

58) "The Trinity is inscrutable.” (John of Damascus, On Heresies 103)
Quote - "Do not ask how the Trinity is Trinity, for the Trinity is inscrutable.” (John of Damascus, On Heresies 103)
https://archive.org/stream/fathersofthechur009511mbp/fathersofthechur009511mbp_djvu.txt 
If this is the case then how is anyone to actually understand a confusing God since even their own people cant even articulate their belief when the bible says give an answer for your faith in 1 Peter 3;15. 

59) Exodus 23:19-25 - Yehovah is the angel?  Or is It ILLEISM
Answer: First bring up Exodus 23:19-25 and then we can start.  So we see this being a couple of things but let us start with the key part Illeism, this is a form of speaking that is in the third person when someone is speaking of him or herself in third person this is called Illeism and I will give examples here: John 8:28 when it says - So Jesus said "when you have lifted up the son of man then you will know that I am he." / firstly notice Yeshua is the son of man this is a title of him, so when Yeshua himself says when YOU lift up the SON OF MAN he speaks of himself as if he is a different person to the one being lifted, but we know contextually the SON OF MAN is Yeshua, he goes on to say that, then you will know that I AM HE meaning he is the Son of MAN.  So Illeism is a form of speech when one person can speak of himself like for example in this passage Yehovah says speaks to Israel he says in Exodus 23:19 "The best of the firstfruits of your ground you shall bring into the house of Yehovah your God."  he in this verse is speaking of himself like Yeshua speaks of himself as the Son of Man as in a third person form of speech, then we go on to see Yehovah as the speaker saying in Exodus 23:20 - "Behold I send an angel before you to guard you on the way to bring you to the place that I have prepared." we see Yehovah speak of himself now in first person as an I, and he has spoke of Israel coming to him but as if he is saying their going before a YEHOVAH their God as if he is not Yehovah, this is just Illeism which brings us to the crux of what Trinitarians are saying in Exodus 23:25 - "You shall serve Yehovah your God and he will bless your bread and your water and I will take sickness away from you."  while this looks like Yehovah he will bless your bread, what this is actually saying is that you the Israelites will worship YEHOVAH himself speaking in third person, the HE who blesses your food as we have seen is the angel and he will go before you, the angel is also being spoken of as in third person by Yehovah who he (Yehovah) sent, so the Angel is the HE who will bless their bread, then it goes back to and I will sickness away from among you.  Again illeism is what is happening here, but also we see agency happening also how Yehovah God does things through his Angel leading them on the way to the land he promised, it is not two Yehovah's but one Yehovah speaking as you will serve Yehovah your God as a commandment style form of speech telling Moses they will do this for example you will serve Yehovah your God but Yehovah is saying this as a command, then also he speaks of himself as an I to Moses because he is speaking to Israel by Moses and to Moses directly or by the Angel he uses as a messenger.

59) Matthew 7:21-23 (Kyrie, Kyrie / Yehovah God?)
Answer:  Old Testament uses - Deuteronomy 3:24, Deuteronomy 9:26, Judges 16:28, - Yehovah Adonay (Kyrie, Kyrie.) this use in also Matthew 7:21-23 is an extremely weak argument because the Kyrie or Kyrios is not always used in the term of Yehovah in fact we know when it says about people calling Yehoshua (Jesus) Kryie Kyrie it is just restating this person is lord, lord, not Yehovah Lord.   the reason we know this is not saying that is 1) Yehovah does not Change Malachi 3:6, 2) You can not be God and human being at same time as natures contradict 3) Yehovah is the name of Yehoshua (Jesus) God Micha 5:1-4,  4)  John 17:3 out of Yehoshua's own mouth he said the Father is alone the true God which is an appositive descriptive of one person. 5) Malachi 2:10 says we have one father has not one God created us.... there are many verses clearly showing Yehoshua (Jesus) is not Yehovah God, not only this but Thomas the doubter of the resurrection wouldn't be a doubter if he thought Yehoshua was "kyrie kyrie as in Yehovah Adonay" we know that Tomas would have been there since Luke 6:12-16 says Yehoshua (Jesus) picked 12 disciples and made them apostles one of them was Thomas, so when Yehoshua (jesus) in Luke 6:46 says why do you call me Kyrie Kyrie it isnt saying they called him Yehovah Adonay but simply calling to him lord lord, as in the sense of maybe a King or ruler.

60) Matthew 28:19 - Baptise in the name of three persons one name...???
Answer:  There are a few points on this but I will start with some of the "possible" arguments which are not necessarily great points but are arguments that have some truth to it but is weak, Primary Points ) Eusebius while quoting this verse, quoted Matthew 28:19 as "his name" and not their name or three persons like it states in the verse, now I have come to be told that he also did quote all three and one name if this is true it still doesn't negate that early manuscripts that he had the ability to see could have had some as his name and not name of the father, son and holy spirit.  It is possible that he had availability many manuscripts some earlier ones that are now lost in time to us because of decay that said "Baptise in his name" its possible but because the only evidence we have is either a possible paraphrase by Eusebius or misquote, or it could be a direct quote from one manuscript he was reading at the time and writing it down from an older manuscript, so while this is a weak argument it is a possibility we just have no proof except this quote from him when talking of Matthew 28:19 it also could be that he had later manuscripts or even he himself changed the manuscripts and then he himself added "Baptise in the name of the Father, son and Holy spirit" now I am not saying he did, but we know those manuscripts are dated around 4th century from what I have seen by my studying.  The Biblical Unitarian site states as quoted "We still have thousands of manuscripts, some of which date back to the fourth century (like Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus)." so it seems that the manuscripts of this verse are later, however it is true that the Biblical Unitarian site [ linked here ] states this also "Furthermore, it is important to keep in mind that later manuscripts are copied from earlier ones. Thus, a later, or even medieval manuscript, could preserve a very early reading. Again, we have no evidence of an alternative version of Matthew 28.19 in any of these manuscripts."  We as Biblical Unitarians generally try to stay unbiased and admit we have no evidence of earlier manuscripts saying "in his name" other than quotes from a person who also spoke of the later rendition of Matthew 28:19, but as this Biiblical Unitarian site says we have no evidence of an alternative version this doesn't negate the possibility that it was later miscopied by the scribes because of Trinitarians, we know the Trinitarians in history have added things such as 1 John 5:7-8 the marginal note in the 14th century manuscripts, so it is possible but we have no evidence this is why the argument is weak only hanging on a quote by Eusebius saying "Baptise in his name" as found here [Link Here] which states "As Conybeare documented, Eusebius utilized Matthew 28:19 seventeen times in ways that indicate that his text of the verse read πορευθέντες μαθητεύσατε πάντα τὰ ἔθνη ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί μου, that is, “As you go, make disciples of all nations in My name.”  then goes on to say "Part of Conybeare’s argument that this reading should be given exceptional weight is that Eusebius was stationed in Caesarea, where in the previous generation Origen had enlarged the library with his own manuscripts; thus, it may be reasonably thought that among the manuscripts accessible to Eusebius in the early 300s were some copies from the early 200s, earlier than any existing copies of Matthew 28:19."  Therefore we see that the argument while not the greatest still has some weight to it because of some historians as you see from [Link Here], as a final note the bible itself sames they only baptised in the name of Jesus or the name of the Lord in Acts 2:38 for example and other places just to give a little more weight to this point.  Now let us go to my Secondary Points: In Genesis 48:16 - the angel who has redeemed me from all evil, bless the boys; and in them let my name be carried on, and the name of my fathers Abraham and Isaac; and let them grow into a multitude[a] in the midst of the earth.”  Now when we look at this we see that Jacob (also named: Israel) says to let the boys Ephriam and Manasseh to be called by the name of Israel and then the name of my fathers, notice the fathers is multiple persons but the name is singular "In the name of my fathers" this doesn't mean they are all called Abraham or Isaac or Jacob now does it?  So this stands for Matthew 28:19 "In the NAME of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit" The name is simply God's name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit would be the Authority of them, Yehoshua was given authority by the Father who is God, by his Holy Spirit in him, we baptise in the authority of them, and the authority or name singular of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, be on these people which is why Israel bless by the names of Ephriam and Manasseh"may they be like unto Ephriam and unto Mannaseh."  the singular name is not making you one being which is Yehovah God because you have the same name as we have seen with the name of the Fathers, multiple people, one name.

61) Deuteronomy 29:1-6 / Acts 7:36-38  - Is Moses Because he said "I AM YEHOVAH" in Deuteronomy 29? NO!

62) Colossians 2:9 The Fullness Of God is in JESUS he must be God... (Ephesians 3:19 we can also have fullness of God)

63) Justin Martyr (EARLY CHURCH FATHER) Claims There Is ANOTHER GOD beside the MAKER of ALL THINGS.