From the outside, religious scholarship often resembles literary scholarship with the additional burden of arguing with hostile amateurs.

My husband and I have worked in a number of different churches and denominations over the years.  The one thing they had in common is that they were all sure that the way they did something was the way EVERYONE did it. Whether it was communion, or singing a hymn, or reading a passage, they all thought their way was the obvious way.  This content creator grew up in a church that said Jesus was Yahweh, so he's very sure that's what everyone else has heard.  
This is the voice of inexperience.

"Me, oh Me, why have I forsaken Me?"

"this isn't an evangelical idea, this is a biblical idea."  Is there any idea that an evangelical thinks they have that isn't a biblical idea?

The glib, smug ignorance of apologists is breathtaking

Dan, you are a nicer person than I am. I didn't see a person trying to be amused by scholars, I saw a person who is being condescending to people that know significantly more than he does or wishes to know.

Bart Ehrman was the one who really opened my eyes with his book "Misquoting Jesus".

Bart said he never heard that claim before someone mentioned it in a debate. That could have been 20 to 30 years ago, maybe longer.

I feel like even within a trinitarian framework, YHWH as a personal name is usually reserved for The Father, identifying The Son as YHWH would blend the persons in such a way that doesn’t squarely fit into Nicean theology

In my experience Evangelical apologists believe that Jesus is Schrödinger's Yahweh.

Jesus=Yahweh when that would support their positions, but Jesus≠Yahweh when a shared identity would undercut their arguments. 😂

Love that he shows a quote from Irenaeus and claims that it says Yahweh when not even in the translated quote he is using he says Yahweh.

It's like saying "when my son applies for a loan and writes me in as a guarantor, we both merge to become the same person."

This is about Name Bearing as misunderstood by most evangelicals, took me months and months and months to undo the misunderstanding placed in my head.

The belief that a name is a secret password is now such a sad thing to see.  "I believe in the name of Jesus" has become code for we belong and they do not.

Woah. I was wondering if trinitarians considered Jesus as Yahweh just earlier today, and then you drop this. Awesome, thank you!

11:05 I saw the video with Bart Erhman - he literally talks about something being “in the name of” not meaning it’s the same person. He said if someone knocks on your door saying “Open up, in the name of the King” that doesn’t literally mean it’s the king

So Jesus and Yahweh are the same PERSON? We're ditching the Trinity now? I mean, that would make more sense logically, but I thought the Trinity was a pretty important dogma.

YAHWEH!?

NO WAY!

Even in the quote the OP used, Irenaeus clearly delineates Jesus from YHWH by talking about the Father giving the Son the power to judge the Sodomites.

Though I’ve been a fan of Bart Ehrman for a couple of decades, I’ve only recently come to learn what an influential voice he is and has been, both within his discipline, and in terms of communicating his stuff to the public. Indeed, he has been serving as the voice for a segment of our society that has been largely voiceless up until now. It’s not at all surprising that people like this content creator have decided to attack him. Irenaeus would be proud. 🤔😉😊

When I was trapped & growing up in the Evangelical cult there was a clear distinction between God (Yahweh), his son Jesus, & the Holy Spirit. Conflating the 3 was forbidden. God was God, the head honcho, & Jesus was God's son sent to accept the sins for so-called Christians, & the Holy Spirit was used to change the hearts & minds of unbelievers.