Understanding:
The Father
Son
Holy Spirit

Index

• Introduction
• The Holy Spirit
• Jesus the Messiah
• The New cannot contradict the Old
• God sends Jesus the Messiah
• How did Jesus become God?
• Who benefits from Jesus becoming God?
• Questions to ponder
• But what about these proof texts?

But what about these proof texts?

Here are some of the most often misinterpreted and/or misunderstood verses in the Bible in relation to the idea that Jesus and the Holy Spirit are members of a triune God. In order to read these verses you cannot just read one verse and stop, you have to read the entire passage and compare it to other verses to understand what is being said.

Before we start, a good understanding of creation will help us to understand several verses which people have tried to use to mean that Jesus was responsible for creation, or was an agent for God in creation, or that somehow he was involved in, or was present during creation. This incorrect assumption will of course lead to other misinterpretations of Scripture such as John 1: 1 - 3 and Hebrews 1:2.

In order to read the Bible correctly you first have to have a solid base in the Old Testament. Once you have a good foundation in the Old Testament, then, you can really start to understand the New Testament. Unfortunately, most people do it backwards. They read the New Testament first, and then try to cram their beliefs into the Old Testament. This does not work. It is like trying to do Algebra before you have learned to add and subtract. You cannot learn Algebra first and then learn to add and subtract, you have to learn to add and subtract first, and then proceed to learn Algebra.

We will begin with the verse in Genesis 1: 26 which reads:

"Then God said, "Let us make man in our image..."

Some people claim that God is speaking to the other members of the trinity here. The Hebrews to whom God gave the Hebrew Srciptures to for thousands of years before Christ have never thought that this verse implied that God was plural, or that anyone else was involved in creation. Did God simply want to mislead them? I do not think that is very likely. There are two possibilities for this language. One is that God is talking to the angels. This interpretation is maintained by many scholars who are themselves Trinitarians. The NIV Bible, which is a Trinitarian Bible, states the following on this verse:

Genesis 1:26: "Some think this describes God speaking to His heavenly court."

Isaiah 8:6 supports this idea and form of language. God is speaking to His heavenly court, it states:

"Then I heard the voice of the LORD saying, whom shall I (singular) send? And who will go for us (plural)?"

The second is that it is simply a literary style of writing. A mistake that many people make is that they take a verse in the Bible and create an entire doctrine from one verse. We will be looking at the entire picture of creation. First of all, it says, "God said" It does not say, "The Father said," which obviously means that whoever God is speaking to is not God. This leaves us with the possibility of the angels, which according to Job 38: 7 were present at creation. It also says, "Let us make man in our image." If this verse is taken to mean that God is speaking to the other members of the trinity and we are made in their image, then we should also be three in one. I should be able to talk to my three in one counterparts in the same way that God is doing. This idea does not have a high probability. After this verse we see that God is referred to in the singular repeatedly. In fact, God is referred to in the singular over five thousand times in the Old Testament. In verse 1:27 it says,

"God created man in his image."

It continues to use "he" twice more in the same verse. Verse 1:29 it uses "I," verse 30 & 31 uses "I" and "he." Verses 2:1-3 use "he," "he rested," "he," and "he had done." Notice that in verse 2:1 it says,

"He rested on the seventh day."

It does not say that they rested on the seventh day. One note before proceeding, in the Old Testament, God’s name in over fifty-five hundred places is always written as four consonants, which in Hebrew are translated as YHWH, which is where we get Yahweh or its English translation of Jehovah. The Jews thought that it was a violation of the Ten Commandments to say God’s name, so whenever they reached a verse that had YHWH in it they would say "LORD" (adonai). Christians translated our Bibles using this Jewish custom and completely removed YHWH and substituted it literally with a capitalized "the LORD." This understanding is crucial. Hebrew translations still have YHWH. Now, on to the Scriptures.

Isaiah 44: 24: "This is what THE LORD (YHWH) says - your redeemer, who formed you in the womb: I am the LORD, (YHWH) who has made all things, who ALONE stretched out the heavens, who spread out the earth by MYSELF."

Isaiah 45: 11-12: "Thus says the LORD, (YHWH)... It was I who made the earth and created mankind upon it; it was my hands that stretched out the heavens..."

It is clear that YHWH is alone responsible for creation and no one else. Of course people will now argue that YHWH includes the Son and the Holy Spirit. To show the fallacy of this argument, we will go to Psalm 110.

Psalm 110: 1 - 4: "The LORD (YHWH) says to my Lord" (adoni),

"Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet."...You are a priest forever in the order of Melchizedek."

Adoni, means sovereign, Lord, and master. It is definitely not to be confused with adonai, which the Jews substituted for YHWH when they read the Scriptures.

Jesus uses this verse to describe himself. It is used in Hebrews 1: 13 for Jesus again. It is the most quoted Old Testament Scripture in the New Testament. No one would argue that Lord (adoni) is not a reference to the Messiah (Jesus). So we have a verse that says,

"YHWH says to the Messiah" (Jesus).

This clearly shows that Jesus is not included in the name YHWH.

Conclusion: This not only shows that YHWH and Jesus are not the same being, but it also shows that Jesus had absolutely nothing to do with creation. What the verses that speak of Jesus creating the world are referring to is that God through Jesus created the Messianic world to come, (the New Heavens and the New Earth) not the earth and the rest of the universe. This will be evident when we study those specific verses in the book of Hebrews.

With this base we can now go on to the New Testament. Whenever you see verses that say that everything was created through Christ, you now have the base to know that it doesn’t mean he created everything. The word "through" in Greek, According to Strong’s Greek Dictionary means: because of. Now with this knowledge read John 1: 1-3 and Hebrews 1:2 again. Different story isn’t it? Hebrews 1:2 is explained on page 50.

John 1: 1 - 3 "The Word"

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made."

Right away you can see that there is something not quite correct, for if someone is with someone else, he cannot also be that same person. If John was really trying to say that Jesus is God, he would simply have written; in the beginning was Jesus, and Jesus was with God, and Jesus was God. But he does not, because as we shall see, this is not what this verse is about.

But now we will get to the real problem with this verse. Let us start by saying that "the Word" in John 1: 1 - 3 is not (as we shall see) a reference to Jesus. Yet, theologians have taken the liberty to substitute figuratively and literally "Jesus" for "Word" in this verse. Is this accurate? Judge for yourself.

"I also saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their witness to Jesus and for the word of God" (Revelation 20: 4 -5).

"His servant John, who gives witness to the word of God and to the testimony of Jesus Christ"(Revelation 1:2).

These verses use the exact same word "logos." It is important to notice that they were beheaded for their testimony of Jesus AND the word (logos) of God. John gives witness to the word of God (God’s plan of salvation) AND to the testimony of Jesus Christ. It is obvious that Jesus is not logos. Logos is used in many places in the New Testament, and it is never used as a reference to Jesus.

"Word" in this verse is a translation of the Greek word "logos." In the original Greek text, "logos" does not have the capital first letter given to "Word" in the English translation. It should properly be translated "word" (with a small "w"). Furthermore, although in Greek "logos" is a masculine noun, this is no proof of personality. This comes into play in the verse, "Through him all things were made." The Greek word that has been translated as "him" can be translated as "it," "he," or "she" depending on the noun it is describing. In this case, since theologians were claiming that "Word" is a reference to Jesus, they obviously chose "him" instead of "it." This unfortunately reflects more theology than it does strict accuracy.

Another important point to be recognized is the fact that the same exact word (letter for letter) "logos" is used in other Scriptures, and nobody has ever capitalized it, or claimed that it referred to Jesus.

Examples:

2 Timothy 2: 8 - 9

"This is my gospel, for which I am suffering to the point of being chained like a criminal. But God’s word is not chained."

1 John 2:7

"Beloved, I am writing no new commandment to you but an old commandment that you had from the beginning. The old commandment is the word that you have heard."

Hebrews 4: 12 -13

"For the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart. Nothing in all creation is hidden from God’s sight. Everything is uncovered and laid bare before the eyes of him, to whom we must give account."

1 John 2:7 uses the same word "word" (logos). John says that what you heard from the beginning is the old commandment, and the old commandment is the word of God. The "word" is not Jesus. What is from the beginning is God’s word, His commandment. This verse is an excellent verse to compare to John 1:1. It shows you that when John is speaking about the word (logos) that he is not referring to Jesus.

Hebrews 4: 12 - 13 is also an excellent example. In all these verses "word" is not capitalized. You can also see that in the rest of this verse "word" is referred to as "it." This is the correct way to translate the Greek word that was translated as "him." This is the way it should have been translated in John 1: 1 - 3. It should be noted that the "Word " was not assumed to be a second person in Bible translations prior to the KJV. The Bishop’s Bible of 1568, replaced by the KJV in 1611, understands the word to be impersonal, and uses the pronoun "it," as does the Geneva Bible of 1560.

John 5: 37 - 38 is also an excellent example, it says:

"You have never heard his voice nor seen his form, nor does his word dwell in you, for you do not believe the one he sent."

Jesus is saying, that when you believe in him, God’s word will dwell in you, which is God’s will, which is God. The Word is God. If logos is a reference to Jesus, then it is saying that God’s Jesus will dwell in us. I do not think you will find a single scholar that would agree with that interpretation.

Notice that in all these Scriptures the "word" does not even come close to referring to Jesus. In fact, Jesus in the above verse says, that when you believe in him you will receive God’s word, which is obviously not Jesus.

To a Hebrew like John, the phrase "word of God" According to Vine’s Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words means, "The revealed will of God." In 2 Kings 3:12 when it says:

It means that God revealed His will to him. We can also compare other verses to verify this definition.

2 Peter 3:5: "that long ago by God’s word the heavens existed and the earth was formed out of water."

Revelation 4:11: "for you created all things, by your will they came into being."

Sirach 42:15: "At God’s word were His works brought into being."

As you can see, word and will are interchangeable. God’s word represents his thoughts, which are His will. Sirach 37:16 provides us with an excellent example:

"A word is the source of every deed; a thought, of every act."

Your thoughts are the source of your actions, a word (your will) is your thoughts expressed. This is an important definition to remember in order to better understand "The Word was God" which we will explain in the next few pages.

The New American Bible has this to say about the word "logos" in a footnote:

"May denote an internal reasoning process, plan, or intention, as well as an external word, speech, or message."

In Greek, the word "logos" according to Vine’s Expository Dictionary means:

Logos - The expression of thought. As embodying a conception or idea.

According to Liddell and Scott Greek Lexicon, it also means:

Logos - the inward thought which is expressed in the spoken word.

This unfortunately is not what it meant to Greek philosophy. In Greek philosophies such as Stoicism, and Platonism, "logos" was considered divine. To a Stoic, logos means "the divine principle of life." This is basically a definition of God. Let's take a very brief look at the definition of Stoicism in The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. It states:

In physics the foundation of the Stoic doctrine was the dogma that all true being is corporeal. Within the corporeal they recognized two principles, matter and force--that is, the material, and the Deity (logos, order, fate) permeating and informing it. Ultimately, however, the two are identical. There is nothing in the world with any independent existence: all is bound together by an unalterable chain of causation. The agreement of human action with the law of nature, OF THE HUMAN WILL WITH THE DIVINE WILL, or life according to nature is Virtue, the chief good and highest end in life.

Notice that they recognized two principles, matter and the Diety which is the logos. They belived that humans are composed of matter and a divine side. As the words in capital letters state, of a human will and a divine will. This is exactly the definition for Jesus that the church opted for at the Council of Chalcedon in 451 AD. You hear this explanation all the time. "Jesus' divine side knew something that his human side did not." This is where it comes from.

In Gnosticism "Logos" was the actual name of one of the intermediary gods.

Someone educated in one of these philosophies would interpret John 1: 1 in the following manner.

"In the beginning was the divine principle of life, the divine principle of life was with God, and the divine principle of life was God." Verse 14. "The divine principle of life became flesh."

Now you have God in heaven and in the flesh at the same time. The explanation came in the form of the trinity. Now let’s see what this verse really means.

In the beginning was the Word.

Let us look at another verse of John to shed some light on this verse. Paraphrasing 1 John 1:1-2:

"The promised Word of eternal life was with the Father from the beginning. It was manifested to us as Jesus. In other words, God had in His mind a thought, a plan (logos) of salvation for us from the beginning, (from Genesis) and it was revealed to us by Jesus."

The Bible states:

"Long ago I prepared it. From days of old I planned it."(Isaiah 37:26).

"To do what your hand and your will had long ago planned to take place" (Acts 4: 28).

(Paul) "For I did not shrink from proclaiming to you the entire plan of God." (Acts 20:27).

One of the Apostolic writings, The Epistle to Diognetus in verse 8:11 says:

"But when he revealed it through His beloved Son, and manifested the purpose which He had prepared from the beginning."

Notice that what was prepared from the beginning is God’s purpose (logos), and it was revealed by Jesus. Another of the Apostolic Fathers named Polycarp, who knew John the Apostle personally, wrote in his Letter to the Philippians in verse 7:2:

"Wherefore let us forsake the vain doing of the many and their false teachings, and turn unto the word which was delivered unto us from the beginning."

Polycarp is urging the people to turn away from false teachings and turn unto the word. His usage of word is very Jewish, and identical to the way John the Apostle uses it. This is fitting because Polycarp was a disciple of John, and one would expect his views to coincide with John’s, which they do. Polycarp is saying, turn away from false teachings and turn unto the word (plan, will) of God which was delivered unto us from the beginning (from the time of the Patriarchs).

Polycarp has no idea of the "word" being Jesus. He even says that the word was delivered unto us in the beginning. Jesus was not delivered unto us in the beginning, He was revealed to us in the final days, the last days. Hebrews 1:2 states:

"In these last days He spoke to us through a son."

1 Peter 1:20 says:

"He was known before the foundations of the world, but revealed in the final times for you."

But God’s plan, or will, (the Messiah and the kingdom of God) was delivered unto us in the beginning through the Patriarchs and the Prophets. This is a direct parallel to John 1:1. In the beginning was the word (God’s plan of salvation for us). What is from the beginning is God’s plan (logos) for our salvation that He revealed to us in these last days through Jesus. Ephesians 3:11 confirms this again:

"This was according to the eternal purpose that He accomplished in Christ Jesus our Lord."

And the Word was with God.

When John says that the word was with God, he simply means that the "word" (plan) was present in His mind. It was with Him, just like a person’s thoughts are with them until they speak. The Catholic New American Bible defines "word" as: was thought to be a reality lodging within the person, and that it goes out from that person when spoken or written and then lodges within the person to whom it is directed.

Jeremiah 4: 14:"How long must your pernicious thoughts lodge within you".

And the word was God.

The word is God’s thoughts and will which He uses to communicate with us and which He can transfer into power. God’s will and power is God. What John is saying is, God’s will (word) is fully expressive of God’s mind. God’s word (thoughts, will,) are reflective of the attributes of God. Word = God’s Will = God.

The Trinitarian (Catholic) New American Bible states the following on this verse:

"Lack of a definite article with "God" in Greek signifies predication rather than identification."

And,

"The Word shares Yahweh’s covenant qualities."

According to Webster’s Dictionary, predication means, "to affirm as a quality or attribute." Even the Roman Catholic Bible tells us that it does not signify identification.

In simpler terms, what somebody says or writes usually reflects that person. You can see that person's personality or intellect by what they say or write. For example, if you ask someone who is reading Romeo and Juliet "what are you reading?" They might answer you, "I am reading Shakespeare." Literally this is impossible. How can you read a man? Yet, this statement is very common and we all know what it means. Shakespeare = Shakespeare's words.

In the Bible, attributes of God are commonly personified. This does not mean that they are separate persons of the same God. Take Psalms 85:11-14 for example:

"Love and truth will meet, justice and peace will kiss. Truth will spring from the earth; justice will look down from heaven. The LORD will surely grant abundance; and our land will yield its increase. Properity will march before the Lord and good fortune will follow behind."

Obviously love and truth are not beings. Justice and peace cannot actually kiss. Prosperity cannot march, etc. They are attributes of God that are personified. The NAB has the following footnote on this verse:

Psalms 85:11-14 - "Divine activity is personified as pairs of virtues."

Another example which is very closely related to John 1:1-3 is in Proverbs chapter 8. Here wisdom (which is almost synonymous with word) is personified as a woman. It is very obvious that it is personified. All major Bible scholars and commentaries will agree that wisdom here is personified and is not another being. In the first verse it says;

"Does not wisdom call, and understanding raise her voice."

The problem is that if we make "wisdom" a being, then we also have to make "understanding" one also. Please read all of chapter 8, it will help you immensely.

Wisdom is attributed with being with God from the beginning ( just like the word was in the beginning). When God created the heavens and earth she was his craftsman (v.22), ( just like the word created everything). She was beside him (v.30 just like the word is with God). The LORD begot her, the firstborn of his ways (v.22). It sounds exactly like the Trinitarian pre-existent Christ. Yet, when one reads this chapter it is clear that it is an attribute of God that is being personified. The NAB footnote states:

Proverbs 8:1 - "Wisdom here is personified as in Prv. 1:20-33 to confirm the words of the teacher of wisdom."

Wisdom in chapter 8 is spoken of as if she created the heavens and earth. In Proverbs 3:19 God created the heavens and earth through his wisdom. In 2 Peter the Word is spoken of as creating the heavens and earth. Let's compare.

Proverbs 3:19 - "The LORD by wisdom founded the earth, established the heavens by understanding."

2 Peter 3:5 - "That long ago by God's word the heavens existed and the earth was formed out of water."

In John 1:14 when the Word becomes flesh (which we will cover shortly), It is easier to understand John's intention if you think of Proverb's wisdom. God's wisdom became flesh, meaning that in Jesus, God's wisdom was manifested. In other words, Jesus brought us God's wisdom because God anointed Jesus with his own spirit so that Jesus could speak to us on his behalf in the final days (Hebrews 1:2). In other other words , we heard and saw God's wisdom in the person of Jesus because God commanded Jesus what to say to the people on his behalf (John 8:40).

We can also cross-reference other Scriptures to prove that the Word (God's message which reflects his thoughts and will) is God.

Examples:

Jonah 1: 1 - 3

"The word of the LORD came to Jonah son of Amittai, "Go to the great city of Nineveh and preach against it, because its wickedness has come up before me." But Jonah ran away from the LORD and headed for Tarshish."

It says the word (revealed will of God) of the LORD came to Jonah, then it says that Jonah ran away from the LORD. God came to Jonah and told him His will or plan (which was to go to Nineveh), and Jonah ran away from God. The Word (God’s will) is God.

Isaiah 55: 11

"So shall my word be that goes forth from my mouth; It shall not return to me void, but shall do my will, achieving the end for which I sent it".

In this verse, when God speaks, His thoughts and power (His word) go out from Him to do His will. God’s will is God. The Word is God.

The gospel which is God’s plan of salvation for us (the kingdom of God message), which is His will, is reflective of the mind of God. My mind is reflective of me. It reflects who I am as a person. The gospel is referred to many times in the New Testament as the "word of God," or just the "word." The gospel (His word) is the expression of God’s thoughts. In other words, the gospel is the mind of God. The mind of God is God. Another way of saying it is, "the gospel is God," or: "The Word was God."

Through him all things were made

John is describing how God made the world and universe, through his word. The translation "through him" should be "through it" (His word). This again reflects the theological bias of the translators. Here are a few examples:

2 Peter 3:5 - "But they deliberately forget that long ago by God’s word the heavens existed and the earth was formed."

Revelation 4:11 - "For you created all things; because of your will they came to be and were created."

Ephesians 1:1 - "In accord with the purpose of the one who accomplishes all things according to the intention of His will."

Wisdom 9:1 - "God of my fathers, LORD of mercy, you who have made all things by your word" (will).

Sirach 42:15 - "At God’s word (will) were His works brought into being."

Remember earlier when we covered creation, that YHWH alone created everything. This is why it is important to have a solid foundation in the Old Testament before reading the New Testament. Everything was created by God’s word (His plan, will), not by Jesus. In other words, God has a plan (logos) to create the universe. When He speaks (word), he is expressing His thoughts. His thoughts are His will, and whatever God wills happens. This is how everything was created by the word (His will).

John 1: 14

The Word became flesh

The prophecies that God had spoken of in the past to the fathers and the prophets about the Messiah were fulfilled when Jesus was born. In order to understand this verse better I am going to use an analogy of which most of us can relate to. Say that you and your spouse decide to have a child. You have an idea, (logos) a plan in your mind to have a child. That plan becomes flesh when your child is born. God’s logos (plan of salvation) became flesh, became a reality when Jesus was born. We can see this type of expression used again by John in 1 John 1:1-2 and John 9:3:

"Concerns the Word of life - for the life was made visible."

(The blind man) "Neither he nor his parents sinned; it is so that the works of God might be made visible."

God’s plan and works, became visible in the person of Jesus and of the blind man. It does not mean that God’s Word became incarnate in Jesus or that His works became incarnate in the blind man. It is the same in John 1:14.

John’s gospel was not written to prove that Jesus is God, but that he is the Son of God, the Messiah.

"But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ (Messiah), the Son of God..." (John 20: 31).

One final thought. If you believe that the Word is actually the incarnation of God which became flesh as Jesus, then why would John end his thought in John 1:18 by saying that;

"No one has ever seen God."

Thousands of people saw Jesus in the flesh. John later repeats this statement in:

1 John 4:12 - "No one has ever seen God."

John 6:46 - "Not that anyone has seen the Father except the one who is from God."

1 John 4:20 "For whoever does not love a brother whom he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen."

A lot of people have been falsely lead to believe that John 1: 1 - 3 is saying that Jesus is God, when in fact it has nothing at all to do with the deity of Jesus.

John 10: 30

I and the Father are one.

Jesus and the Father are one, but not one in substance as Trinitarians will have you believe. They are one in mind, or one in purpose. If you look at John 17: 11 it states:

"Holy Father, protect them by the power of your name - the name you gave me - so that they may be one as we are one."

Either this verse is saying that all the Apostles are of the same substance (which is obviously ridiculous), or that they are one in mind, or purpose, just as Jesus and God are.

1 Peter 3:8: "Finally, all of you, be of one mind."

Acts 4:32: "The community of believers was of one heart and mind."

Philippians 2:2: "Complete my joy by being of the same mind."

KJV 1 John 5: 7 - 8

For there are three that bear record in Heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

The trinity is not alluded to any better than this. How can you argue this away? This is probably the most misleading verse on this subject in the whole KJV. This verse does not even exist in the majority of Bibles. The Quest Study Bible states:

"Since the oldest manuscripts do not have these words, they were apparently added centuries after John wrote, perhaps as commentary."

This phrase above which is omitted in 99% of Bibles is commonly called the Johannine Comma. Ironically enough, Erasmus did not include this phrase either in the first or second (ad.1519) editions of His Greek manuscript (upon which the KJV is based). This was because none of the Greek manuscripts he used contained this phrase. However, his decision was unpopular among his contemporaries, for this phrase had existed in the Latin Vulgate since the eighth century. The western Church typically used the Latin Vulgate, not Greek manuscripts. In fact, most did not even learn Greek until the time of Erasmus. Erasmus' contemporaries put such pressure on him to change this verse that Erasmus' said if anyone could produce a Greek manuscript which contained the phrase, he would include it. After this (ad.1520), a Franciscan friar named Froy (or Roy) produced a manuscript that he claimed was an ancient manuscript. This manuscript is called the "old British copy." When Erasmus was informed about it, being a man of his word, he included the disputed words in his 3rd edition published in 1522. But he also included a footnote that said he believed the manuscript had been prepared for the express purpose of having him include the passage.

In fact, The friar had produced it himself for the sole purpose of having Erasmus include the Johannine Comma in his text. To date, out of five thousand Greek manuscripts, this passage has been found in only four Greek manuscripts (manuscripts are designated by number):

Manuscript # - Date

61 –1520 AD

2318 - 1592 AD

629 - 14th -16th century

918 - 16th century

In addition it has been found written in the margins of four other Greek manuscripts.

 Manuscript - Date

221 - 10th century

635 - 11th century

88 - 12th century

429 - 14th century

Thus the earliest the passage appears as part of the Greek text is in 16th century, most likely in the manuscript used to convince Erasmus.

The Johannine Comma began to appear in Latin manuscripts in the fifth century, but was not included in Jerome's Vulgate or any edition of the Vulgate until the eighth century. The first time we hear of the passage quoted as being from John is in a fourth century Latin work Liber Apologeticus written by the Spanish heretic Priscillian, or one of his followers. After that, the passage is quoted by some of the Latin fathers, and from the sixth century forward it begins appearing in Latin manuscripts of the Bible. Furthermore, as Bruce Metzger has pointed out

"The passage is absent from the manuscripts of all ancient versions (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Ethiopic, Arabic, Slavonic), except the Latin."

From this data, the true nature of 1 John 5:7 becomes clear. 1 John 5:6-9 is a passage that is very difficult to interpret (I John 5:6 talks about the testimony of the water, blood, and Spirit). This was so difficult to interpret that certain Latin writers included an explanation of the verse in the margins of their texts (the Johannine Comma). Eventually, copiers of the Latin Vulgate included this marginal note into the text of the Latin Vulgate in the eighth century, in other words, Perhaps an early scribe wrote it in the margins as a note, and a later scribe copying the manuscript thought it was a correction and included it in the text).

The Western Church continued to use the Vulgate until the 16th century. By this time, the Comma had become established in the Latin. When the western church began to learn Greek during the renaissance and no Greek manuscripts included the Comma, people began to add the Comma to the Greek manuscripts. There is no reasonable explanation for the Comma other than it was inserted into the Greek text by those familiar with the Latin Vulgate. Any explanation that claims the Comma was included in the original text written by the Apostle John completely ignores the facts of the case.

As you can see, therefore, it is not that other Bibles have taken a phrase out of the Bible. Rather, the KJV mistakenly included a phrase that was not part of the original Greek manuscript.

Also, an excellent source of proof attaining to the falsehood of this verse is from the arguments over the divinity of Christ in the fourth century. During all these arguments none of the Greek Fathers ever quoted this verse as Scripture in order to prove the trinity, they did however, quote all the other traditional verses which people have used in order to try and prove the trinity. If I were trying to prove the trinity, this would be my number one verse! I would bring it up over and over again. How many people have been led astray by this person’s commentary? Research it for yourself!

Matthew 28: 19

Baptize them into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.

The New American Bible says: "this is perhaps the clearest expression in the New Testament of Trinitarian belief." In a few seconds you will see how preposterous this statement really is. This verse has absolutely nothing Trinitarian about it. It is about Jesus sending them out to proclaim the gospel to the nations. First, a few definitions according to Vine’s Expository Dictionary:

Baptize - The phrase in Matthew 28: 19, "baptizing them into the name" would indicate that the baptized person was closely bound to, or became property of, the one into whose name he was "baptized."

Name - Represents the authority, character. Expressing attributes. In acknowledgment or confession of.

This verse has nothing to do with water baptizing. With these definitions we can safely paraphrase this verse as follows:

"Go out into the world and introduce or bring them into the knowledge of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit,"

Which is exactly what they did. The Apostles went out into the Gentile world and brought them the knowledge of who the only God is, who the Messiah is, and about the gifts of the Holy Spirit which they were going to receive. But as you can see, this has nothing to do with the three being one. Human tradition has made this a Trinitarian verse.

There is also a very strong position held by many scholars that this verse was not part of the original text of Matthew’s Gospel, as Eusebius, a third century Christian apologist, quoted the text in a shorter form rather than the form that now appears in the gospel. It reads,

"Go ye therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in my name" (which is in agreement with the paraphrase that was just given above).

One commentator writes,

"There is much probability in the conjecture that it is the original text of the gospel, and that in the second century the longer clause supplanted the shorter ‘baptizing them in my name.’ An insertion of this kind, derived from liturgical use, would have rapidly been adopted by copyist and translators" (The International Critical Commentary, by Willoughby C. Allen Volume 26, pp. 307-308).

This position has strong Biblical support by the fact that the Apostles at no recorded instance baptize using the formula of "The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit" as Jesus supposedly commanded them to do. They always baptize "In the name of Jesus Christ."

Also the parallel passage in Mark 16:15-18 does not mention in any way this trine formula, and the Gospel of Mark is believed to be written before Matthew.

John 8: 58 "I AM "

You are not fifty years old," the Jews said to him, and you have seen Abraham! "I tell you the truth, Jesus answered, before Abraham was born, I am.

You have to look at the subject matter in this paragraph, which is Jesus’ age, not deity. The Jews are asking Jesus how can he know Abraham if he is not even fifty years old. Jesus tells them that before Abraham was born, I am. What Jesus is saying is that he is the one spoken of in the prophetic writings, long before Abraham’s time.

Let's look at the verse that started this whole misunderstanding so we can see what Jesus is referring to. John 8: 56 says:

"Abraham your father rejoiced to see my day; he saw it and was glad."

Compare this verse with Hebrews 11: 13 which is talking about Abraham and his descendants. It states:

"All these people were still living by faith when they died. They did not receive the things promised; they only saw it and welcomed it from a distance."

What Abraham saw was the fulfillment of God’s promise that the savior would be his descendant (Genesis12:3), and that line of descent started with their son Isaac. That is why it says "they saw it and welcomed it from a distance." The Jews misunderstood what Jesus meant at John 8: 56 and made it an issue of Jesus’ age, at which Jesus tried to correct them once again by saying, "Before Abraham was born, I am" (The Messiah). Jesus is saying that before Abraham was even born, God had already planned him as the Messiah in His mind.

1 Peter 1: 20 says:

"He was known before the foundation of the world."

Remember John 1: 1, "In the beginning was the word" (plan). Also, if you look at a Greek Bible, the two words for I am are the exact two words used for I am in John 8: 12 and John 8: 24. In John 8: 12 Jesus says:

"I am the light of the world."

In John 8: 24 Jesus says:

"For if you do not believe that I am, you will die in your sins."

John 8: 24 is the continuation of John 8:12. The first I am is obviously referring to Jesus being the light of the world. The second I am is referring to Jesus being the light of the world, the Son of God. These are the exact same words used in John 8:58, yet, no one has taken them to mean that Jesus was claiming to be God. As a matter of fact, the KJV translates the Greek I am in John 8:24 as, "I am he." In John 4:26, again, the same exact two words are used as in John 8: 58. The Samaritan woman has just said to Jesus,

"I know that the Messiah is coming, the one called the Anointed; when he comes, he will tell us everything."

Jesus says to her, (the actual Greek translation)

"I am, the one speaking to thee. "

He is who? The Messiah that is coming. The KJV and NIV translate this verse as "I that speak unto thee am he" and "I who speak to you am he." The I am here is referring to Jesus being the Messiah.

Mark 6:50 is about when Jesus walks on the water towards the disciples who are on a boat, and they think that they are seeing a ghost. The actual Greek reads, "Be of good cheer, I am; be ye not afraid. " The KJV and NIV translate this verse as,

None of these I am are taken to mean that Jesus is God. As a matter of fact, they are translated in a variety of different ways, such as, "It is I" and "I am he." The beggar in John 9:9 when asked if he is the one who used to sit and beg answers them by saying the exact same words, "I am." Does that mean that the beggar is claiming to be God? Of course not!

So why do people claim that the John 8:58 I am is referring to the Exodus 3:14 I AM? Because of human tradition, trying to make Scripture fit their thought, instead of the other way around. It is the same exact I am as in the rest of these verses and the topic is obviously not Jesus’ deity. If the John 8:58 I am refers to the Exodus 3:14 I AM, then the rest of the other I am should also. But they DON’T.

John 14: 9 - 10

Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father.

People read this and stop right there. What they fail to see is how this is true. If you continue reading it says:

"How can you say, "Show us the Father," Don’t you believe that I am in The Father, and the Father is in me? The words I say to you are not just my own. Rather it is the Father living in me, who is doing His work."

The reason that if you have seen Jesus you have seen the Father, is that the Father is in Jesus. He is living in Jesus, and it is He who is doing all the work through Jesus. Read Acts 10:38 again now.

If right now someone died right in front of you, and you went over there and said, "God, in the name of Jesus raise this person," and they got up, who just raised that person? Was it you? Or was it God working through you? If I had been a witness to that, I would have actually seen God raise the dead through you. That is exactly what Jesus is saying in this paragraph, but you have to read all of it.

John 1:18: "No one has ever seen God."

John 6:46: "Not that anyone has seen the Father except the one who is from God."

1 John 4:12: "No one has ever seen God."

1 John 4:20: "For whoever does not love a brother whom he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen."

1 Timothy 6:16: "Whom no human being has seen or can see."

The first four verses are by the same author (John).

NIV 2 Peter 1: 1

Through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ...

Well that’s pretty clear that God and Jesus are the same being. But if you look at other Bible translations such as the KJV or a Greek and English Interlinear Bible it reads as:

"Through the righteousness of God and our Savior Jesus Christ. "

A huge difference, a clear distinction between the two. A complete different meaning which now fits the rest of the paragraph. If you take the previous view, now you have to explain why verse 2 says:

"Grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge of God, and of Jesus our Lord. "

The same author in 1 Peter 1: 3 states:

"Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ."

I doubt the same author would contradict himself so blatantly.

Titus 2:13

The appearance of the glory of the great God and savior Jesus Christ.

This verse has the exact same mistake as 2 Peter 1:1. Look it up for yourself. Titus 2:13 In the Catholic New American Bible is stated as:

"The appearance of the glory of the great God and of our savior Jesus Christ."

NAB Footnote: "But the use of a single article in Greek strongly suggests an epexegetical i.e. explanatory sense, Of the great God and of our savior Jesus Christ: another possible translation is "of our great God and savior Jesus Christ."

I am sure the Catholic Church would like to use this verse to try and prove Jesus’ deity, but fortunately they state the truth about this verse. This verse was also written by Paul who writes in 1 Corinthians 8:6:

"Yet for us there is only one God, the Father."

You decide which one is correct.

Revelation 22: 6 - 13

I am the Alpha and the Omega.

This is referenced to Revelation 1:8. But Revelation 1:8 is talking about The Almighty, Revelation 22:12 is not using this title for Jesus but for God again. If we read Revelation 22:6 it tells us who the subject is, "The Lord, the God of prophetic spirits." Jesus does say in Revelation 1:17 that, "I am the first and the last." We will examine what he meant by that statement.

Just because the same title is used to describe two people does not mean that those two people are one. David called King Saul "My Lord " but that does not make Saul God (1 Samuel 24:9).

Israel’s Judges were called "saviors" but that does not make them and Jesus one person? (Nehemiah 9:27).

Jeroboam the Second of Israel is called "Israel’s savior," but that does not make him Jesus? (2 Kings 13:5)

Before we discuss these verses it would benefit us to understand John’s view of God.

Examples:

John 17:3

"Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent."

Revelation 1:6

"Who (Jesus) has made us into a kingdom, priests for his God and Father."

John 20:17

"But go to my brothers and tell them, "I am going to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God."

In these verses John does not consider Jesus to be God in any way. For John, Jesus has a God. John also does not believe Jesus to be omniscient even after his resurrected state. Revelation 1:1 says:

"The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave to him."

Even after his resurrection Jesus is not omniscient. God still gives him revelations. Emphasis on God gives him. Now we will look at Revelation 1:17 with the correct background of John’s thinking, and not with a mind set on making Jesus God at all costs.

It is obvious that God Almighty is the first and the last, but how is Jesus also the first and the last? Jesus is the first because he is the firstborn in two ways. One, he is the firstborn of God, which to the Jews implied that as the firstborn you are entitled to be the heir of your father, which Jesus is (Hebrews 1:2). Also according to Strong’s Greek Dictionary it means foremost in importance, which Jesus certainly is. This also corresponds with Psalms 89: 28 - 30.

Secondly, Jesus is the firstborn from the dead to be resurrected, which is what Jesus is speaking about in Revelation 1:18 which follows his statement that he is the first and the last. It reads:

"I am the first and the last, the one who lives. Once I was dead, but now I am alive forever."

This is also is in agreement with Colossians 1: 18. Jesus is the last because when he comes again it will be the end of the present age, and he will be in effect the last one to enter this world while it is still under the influence of Satan. He will then usher in the Messianic kingdom of God.

John 20: 28

My Lord and my God.

There you go, an Apostle refers to Jesus as God. When you look at some verses in the Old and New Testament you have to remember to look at them with a Hebrew or Greek mind of that period, and not a 20th century mind. Some language can mean something to us that it did not mean back then. For example, if an Englishman says, "I am mad about my flat" he means that he is exited about his apartment. To an American, that same phrase means that he is angry about his flat tire. The word "God" for example, means to us in the 20th century "The Almighty God." To a Jew it did not necessarily mean "Almighty God." In Psalms 82: 1 & 6 God refers to earthly rulers as gods. This is the same passage that Jesus quotes to the Jews when they accuse him of saying that he is God. Paraphrasing Jesus, he says to them; "If it is okay to call men gods, why is it blasphemous for me to say that I am the Son of God"(John 10: 33 - 38). Notice how when Jesus is accused of being God, he quickly corrects them that he is not God, but the Son of God. In 2 Corinthians 4: 4 Satan is also called the "god of this age." Does that mean that he is God Almighty? Of course not!

The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church points out what an early Christian father, Origen (185-254 AD) says about the word "God." "The Son is theos (God), but only the Father is autotheos" (absolute God, God in himself).

This is the reason there is an Almighty God or a Most High God, in order to differentiate the only true God from the others. Another fact to consider when approaching this verse is to understand whom John believes God and Jesus to be.

John wrote his gospel to testify that Jesus is the Son of God, not God the Son. Let us take a look again at what John believes in order to not take one verse and unjustly imply a certain belief on John.

John 17:3

"Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent."

Revelation 1:6

"Who (Jesus) has made us into a kingdom, priests for his God and Father"

John 20:17

"But go to my brothers and tell them, ‘I am going to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’"

Remember that John’s whole purpose for writing his Gospel is to prove that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, not God.

"But these are written that you may come to believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God" (John 20: 31).

We must keep John's reason for writing his gospel fresh in our minds as we try to understand this verse. In his gospel, John distinguishes completely between the only true God and Jesus Christ. To imply that John believed in a three in one God would be to do a terrible injustice to John.

So what does Thomas mean? To us in the modern world it might at first seem odd, but when you put yourself in Thomas’s place as a Jew in Jesus’ day, it will make all the sense in the world.

The Catholic New American Bible defines this usage of the word god:

"The king, in courtly language is called god, representing God to the people."

Aspects of Monotheism states: "god" is an allegorical equivalent for "king."

This is the definition of the Messiah. The Messiah is the king of Israel who represents God to the people (John 1:49). Thomas was stating that fact. A fact which is continuously stated in John's gospel. When he saw Jesus resurrected, it proved to him that He was indeed the Messiah. Thomas’ statement is the equivalent of saying, My Lord and my king. This is not just my opinion; it is easily verified in the Old and New Testament. Remember, God = king = Messiah.

This kind of language was common in those days. Let’s look at a similar verse.

1 Samuel 24:9 states:

"David also stepped out of the cave, calling to Saul, "My lord and my king."

My lord and my God = My lord and my king.

This verse above means the same thing. Thomas is addressing the king of Israel in exactly the same way that David did. You just have to think speak like a first century Jew.

Luke 2:11 states:

"A savior has been born for you who is Messiah and Lord."

Acts 2:36 states:

"God has made him both Lord and Messiah, this Jesus whom you crucified."

Lord and Messiah = Lord and king = Lord and God.

There is for me one great proof that Thomas did not mean Jesus is Almighty God when he called Jesus God. When Thomas called Jesus "My lord and my God " all the Apostles were in the room. If this statement is true, then it is logical to assume that from now on, all the Apostles know that Jesus is really God. So from that point onward Jesus should be addressed as God. But as you can see in all the writings of the New Testament, none of the Apostles ever refer to Jesus as Almighty God or YHWH. Not once in the entire New Testament do they ever pray to Jesus. They make clear distinctions between the two. They in fact write about the God of Jesus Christ (John 20:17). Remember,

"No one has ever seen God"(1 John 4: 12).

This verse is from the same author (John) written years AFTER the episode with Thomas.

BUT ONLY GOD CAN FORGIVE SINS

Jesus represents God on earth. God dwells in Jesus. God put everything under his feet.

People claim that only God can forgive sins, and because of this alone, Jesus is God. This view is very narrow-minded and very incorrect. Jesus in Mark 2: 10 states:

"But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins...He said to the paralytic."

Revelation 12:10 states:

"Now salvation and power have come, and the kingdom of our God and the authority of his Anointed."

As God’s representative, Jesus has been given the authority to do anything that God would do. To be specific, it is really God doing His works through Jesus (John 14: 10). God has given Jesus the authority to forgive sins, just as He has given Jesus the authority to judge mankind. God will judge the world through a man He has appointed, Jesus the Messiah.

Acts 17:31: "Because He has established a day on which he will judge the world with justice through a man He has appointed, and He has provided confirmation for all by raising him from the dead."

John 5: 22: "Moreover, the Father judges no one, but has entrusted all judgment to the son."

John 5:27: "He has given him authority to judge because he is the Son of man."

Jesus can forgive sins and judge the world because as John 5: 27 and Acts 17:31 says, he has been appointed the Son of Man, and he has been given the authority. Notice that after Jesus had healed the paralytic and forgave his sins, the people were amazed and they praised God, not Jesus (Mark 2: 12). In John 20: 23 Jesus states:

"If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven."

Does that make all the apostles God? Of course not. They are now the representatives of God.

ONLY GOD CAN ACCEPT WORSHIP

People also claim that since Jesus accepted worship in a few verses, then that means that he is God. But every time that Jesus is paid homage to in the Bible it is because he is the king of Israel, the Messiah, the Son of God. According to Vine’s Expository Dictionary, worship means:

Worship - to make obeisance, do reverence to. The Greek word denotes an act of reverence, whether paid to man or to God.

It was common in those days to worship the king. It was meant to show reverence to the king. This is why people who came before the throne of a king always bowed down in front of it.

Aspects of Monotheism pg.94 states:

"According to the "Son of God Text" from Qumran, when war ceases on earth, all cities will pay homage either to the "Son of God" or to the "people of God." Although homage in this passage involves political submission, worship in the ancient world was often considered analogous to submission to a great king. Each of these figures, to be sure, can be understood as God’s agent or representative, so that homage to given to them is ultimately given to God."

King David was worshipped. Hendrickson’s Hebrew and English Interlinear Bible says:

"All the congregation blessed Jehovah, the God of their Fathers, and worshipped Jehovah and the king" (1 Chronicles 29:20).

Solomon is worshipped."So the king (Solomon) shall desire your beauty; for he is your lord, and you must worship him" (Hendrickson’s & NAB Psalm 45:12).

The saints will be worshipped. "I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee" (KJV Revelation 3: 9).

Daniel was worshipped. "Then King Nebuchadnezzar fell down and worshipped Daniel and ordered sacrifice and incense offered to him" (NAB Daniel 2: 46).

King Nebuchadnezzar even offered sacrifices and incense to Daniel. Does that make Daniel God? Of course not! Obviously neither King David, King Solomon, Daniel nor the saints are God. In the Bible people are worshipped for different reasons, such as kings.

We must keep in mind that the Messiah is the king of Israel. Jesus does have the absolute right to be worshipped, not as God, but as the Lord Messiah, our king. An excellent example is when the magi come to visit baby Jesus. They have come to worship the new king of the Jews. This is why they prostrated themselves and paid him homage. Matthew 2:2&11 states:

"Where is the one who has been born king of the Jews? We saw his star in the east and have come to worship him…They bowed down and worshiped him. Then they opened their treasures and presented him with gifts of gold and of incense and of myrrh."

Why are they worshiping him? Because he is the king of the Jews. Bringing gifts was and still is customary when coming in the presence of kings or heads of state. This is why the magi brought gifts. You will find that in every instance that someone is worshipping Jesus it is because he is the Messiah, the Son of God, the king of Israel. It is quite normal to show homage or reverence for the Son of God, our king, the Messiah. The NAB has "homage" instead of "worship" In its translation. The same writer reports in Matthew 14:33, this is when Jesus walks on the water.

"Those who were in the boat did him homage (some translations say "worship"), saying, ‘Truly, you are the Son of God.’"

Remember, Son of God = king of Israel (look at John 1:49 if you have any doubts).

In the KJV Mark 15:16-19 it is the Roman guards who are mocking him for claiming to be a king. It states:

"And they clothed him with purple, and platted a crown of thorns, and put it about his head, and began to salute him, Hail, king of the Jews! And they smote him on the head with a reed, and did spit upon him, and bowing their knees worshipped him."

Why are the guards worshipping him? Is it because they think he is claiming to be God? Of course not. It says it right in the verse. Purple was a sign of royalty, a crown is obviously related to a king, and then it comes out and clearly tells you why they worshipped him in mockery, because Jesus claimed to be the king of the Jews, the Messiah.

ANGEL OF THE LORD

Trinitarians claim that the angel of the LORD is really Jesus in the Old Testament. You never see him again in the New Testament, so it must have been Jesus.

It is really amazing to see the great lengths that Trinitarians have gone to in order to try and tie Jesus into the Old Testament. In order to make this theory fit, we would first of all have to throw out the entire first chapter of Hebrews that deals specifically with Jesus being superior to the angels. Secondly, you have to understand the Jewish concept of agency. With the Jews, it is correct to address the person who is sent on behalf of someone else as that person themselves. This is why sometimes the angel of the LORD in some passages is seen as completely separate from the LORD, as in Zechariah 1: 12, where the angel of the LORD is having a conversation with God, and at other times it seems as if they are the same being (Numbers 22: 22 - 39). A very good example of this concept is in 2 Esdras 5: 43 - 56. Ezra questions God’s spokesman, the angel Uriel, as though he were both Creator and Judge. Ezra uses the same style of address to Uriel ("my lord, my master") as he uses in direct petition to God. But this does not make the angel of the LORD "God." The angel of the LORD is just that, an angel. That is why he is called the angel of the LORD (Yahweh). To imply that the angel of the LORD is Jesus is completely ludicrous and shows that one has a very limited knowledge of the Bible. First, why would Jesus have a different name in the Old Testament? What purpose would that serve?

Secondly, and this will eliminate any doubt on this topic, is that Jesus and the angel of the LORD appear at the same time, in the same place, in the New Testament in at least three places: Matthew 2: 13, 19 and Luke 2: 9 - 13. In Matthew, the angel of the Lord appears to Joseph and tells him to take his child (who is Jesus) and wife and go to Egypt. Then the same thing happens again, but this time the angel of the Lord tells Joseph to go back to Israel. In Luke, the angel of the Lord tells the shepherds that the Messiah is at that very moment lying in a manger. Now, unless we make God a quadrinity, it is obvious that Jesus is not the angel of the LORD.

Isaiah 9: 5

For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

There, you see, the Messiah is supposed to be God. Wrong! If we take a closer look at this verse you will see that it does not mean that at all. The phrase in question is Mighty God, and the proper understanding of Everlasting Father is a must. First, Mighty God.

Not all Bibles use the translation of Mighty for the Hebrew word gibbor. The Jewish translators of the Septaugint render it in the following manner, "The angel of great council." Angel meaning mesenger. But we will address the ones that do just for arguments sake. First of all, we will take a close look at the Hebrew word that is translated as Mighty. Translators have used Mighty for theological reasons, (so they can tie it in to other verses that God is referred to as mighty, and thus claim that the Messiah is supposed to be God). Let’s see what a Hebrew dictionary and a Hebrew lexicon tells us about this word.

The Strong’s Hebrew Dictionary defines this word as:

Gibbor – by impl. warrior, tyrant:- champion, chief, X excel, giant, man, mighty (man, one), valiant man. Mighty is the eighth definition of this word.

he Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon says of this word gibbor as it is used in Isaiah 9: 5:

Isaiah 9:5 - ref. Messiah, attribute of God especially as fighting for his people. This explanation doesn’t even mention Mighty.

According to these sources, gibbor as it is used in Isaiah 9: 5 along with God means, a warrior king with the attributes of God. This is exactly who the Messiah is supposed to be. This definition agrees with the rest of the chapter in which Isaiah talks about how the Messiah will reign on David’s throne, and how he will rule with justice and righteousness forever because of the zeal of the LORD Almighty. Isaiah does not believe that the Messiah is supposed to be God, he distinguishes between them. He says how the Messiah will accomplish everything because of the zeal of the LORD Almighty. We can also compare this chapter to Isaiah 11 in which he is again speaking of the Messiah. In Isaiah 11: 1-3 he says how the Messiah will be from the root of Jesse, how the Spirit of the LORD will rest on him, and how he will delight in the fear of the LORD. Now, are we supposed to believe that the LORD will delight in the fear of Himself? Definitely not. Isaiah prophesying about the Messiah says:

Isaiah 49:5: "And I am made glorious in the sight of the LORD, and MY GOD is my strength."

From Isaiah 49:5 and 11:1-3 we can see that Isaiah understands the future Messiah to be a man on whom God's spirit will rest (which is the meaning of the word "Christ") who will delight in the fear of his God, the LORD. Isaiah does not consider the Messiah to be God in Isaiah 11:1-3 nor in Isaiah 49:5, and neither does he believe that in Isaiah 9: 5.

The definition of the Messiah as a warrior king with the attributes of God, is seen in Revelation 19: 11 where it reads:

Now we will look at some other translations to see how they have interpreted this verse.

The New English Bible says, "In battle God-like."

The New American Bible (which is a Catholic Bible, they invented the trinity) says, "God- Hero." It translates this verse in the following manner and has a note on this verse which is very interesting and enlightening. First the translation. It states:

"They name him Wonder-Counselor, God-Hero, Father-Forever, Prince of Peace."

Footnote:

"Wonder- Counselor: remarkable for his wisdom and prudence.

God-Hero: a warrior and defender of his people, like God himself.

Father-forever: ever devoted to his people.

Prince of peace: his reign will be characterized by peace."

This exegesis is in complete agreement with the definitions and Bible passage that we have just examined. Remember, this is the Catholic Church’s interpretation, I am sure that they would love to be able to say that according to this passage the Messiah is supposed to be God, but even they don’t.

For a better understanding of the term Father-Forever or Everlasting Father, (depending on your translation) one must understand that kings were considered to be fathers of their people. The Messiah is the King of Israel. I agree with the New American Bible’s explanation of Father- Forever in this verse.

We can also substantiate this definition by looking at another verse of the same writer in Isaiah 22: 20- 21:

"In that day I will summon my servant Eliakim son of Hilkiah. I will clothe him with your robe and fasten your sash around him and hand your authority over to him. He will be a father to those who live in Jerusalem and to the house of Judah."

Isaiah obviously does not mean that Eliakim is God the Father. In Isaiah 9:5 he means that the Messiah as king of the new Israel (the kingdom of God) will be like a father to his people forever.

Hebrews 1: 8-9

Your throne O God, stands forever and ever; and a righteous scepter is the scepter of your kingdom. You loved justice and hated wickedness; therefore God, your God, anointed you with the oil of gladness above your companions.

This is the only other place besides John 20:28 in the New Testament where Jesus is referred to as God. Does this imply that he is God Almighty? Not even close. This explanation has the same basic principle as John 20:28 which was discussed earlier, namely the usage of the word god. As was mentioned earlier, the term god in the first century did not necessarily mean Almighty God.

In this verse the writer is quoting Psalm 45:7 word for word. This same verse was used for the Hebrew King (probably Solomon) in Psalm 45:7, and nobody ever accused Solomon of being God. It will help us tremendously to read Psalm 45 in its entirety. Please pay special attention to whom this Psalm is about. Who is singing it to whom will be obvious in the second verse.

Psalm 45:2 states:

"My heart is stirred by a noble theme, as I sing my ode to the king. My tongue is the pen of a nimble scribe."

As the Psalm says, a scribe is singing about the Hebrew king. Then we get to verse 7, but the subject has not changed, it is still about the king. I think it would be helpful at this time to review a few notes from the NAB on Psalm 45:7.

45:7: Your throne O God: The Hebrew king was called Elohim, "God," not in the polytheistic sense common among the ancient pagans, but as meaning "godlike," or, taking the place of God.

45:7: god: the king, in courtly language, is called "god," representing God to the people.

Aspects of Monotheism states that "god" is an allegorical equivalent for "king."

Psalms 45 is about the anointed king of Israel. Verse 8 says:

"Therefore God, your God, anointed you..."

As you can see, it was common to refer to the Hebrew king as "God" because he represented God to the people, not because he was God. In other words, God gave His authority to the Hebrew kings, and in that sense they sat on the throne of God, and in that sense they were addressed as god in their court. 1 Chronicles 29:23 states:

"Therefore Solomon sat on the throne of the LORD as king in place of his father David."

The whole point of chapter 1 in Hebrews is to prove the superiority of the Son (Messiah) over the angels, it is not to prove the deity of Jesus. Paul in chapter 1 is arguing against a growing Gnostic belief. The Gnostics claimed that there were many mediators between God and man, and that these mediators were spirits or angels. Jesus they claimed, was just one of these angels. This is why Paul argues in verse 5 that God has never called an angel His son, or made an angel His anointed king in verse 8-9, or sat an angel at His right hand in verse 13, nor subjected the world to come to angel in verse 2:5.

Hebrews 1:8-9 is speaking about the Son being the king of Israel, the Messiah. It speaks about a throne, a scepter and a kingdom. These are all things that are associated with a king as it was in Psalm 45:7, this is why it was written of Solomon. Another way of saying this verse is, "Your throne O king." This is why it is also used for the Messiah Jesus, because the Messiah is the king of Israel par-excellence who represents God in His kingdom. Jesus will sit on the throne of God in the Messianic kingdom representing God to the people. Last, but not least, is verse 9, which says:

"Therefore God, your God, anointed you..."

If we make Hebrews 1:8-9 to mean that Jesus is God, then we have a major conflict for any Trinitarian doctrine. The reason being that it specifically says that the Son has a God who anointed him. If Jesus is God, and he has a God, then there are TWO Gods. This is impossibility for Christianity.

It is very easy to use the meanings of words which we are familiar with today, but we must always remember to read the Bible with the mindset and the vocabulary of the people who wrote it.

1 TIMOTHY 3:16:

GOD MANIFESTED IN THE FLESH

This verse is translated like this in very few bibles. The correct translation is "Who was manifested in the flesh." Let’s look at the whole verse.

"Who was manifested in the flesh, vindicated in the spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed to the Gentiles, believed in throughout the world, taken up in glory."

Every commentary that I have ever read agrees that this is talking about Jesus not God. Jesus was proclaimed to the Gentiles, Jesus was believed in throughout the world, Jesus was taken up in glory, not God. Bibles that have interpreted this verse with "God" instead of "Who" have used corrupted manuscripts. Zondervan’s Greek and English Interlinear Bible translates it as "Who." The Catholic New American Bible translates it as "Who." So where do these corrupted manuscripts come from?

The New American Bible has an excellent footnote on this verse:

1 Timothy 3:16: Many later (eight & ninth century on), predominantly Byzantine manuscripts read "God" possibly for theological reasons."

The corrupted interpretations exist because some people wanted to prove the trinity at all costs, and in the eighth & ninth century in Byzantium, they simply changed "who" to "God." In all fairness, the words "who" and "God" in Greek are very similar. All that separates them is a dashed line. Maybe it was just an unintentional mistake, but it is still a mistake.

If we were to believe that "God" was the correct interpretation, then how would we explain 1 Timothy 2:5:

"For there is one God. There is also one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus."

The writer of 1 Timothy does not believe Jesus to be God.

Hebrews 1:10

"In the Beginning, O Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the work of your hands."

The argument is, that since God created everything, and Jesus is attributed creation in Hebrews 1:10, that Jesus therefore must be God. First, we will star with Hebrews 1:2

"Though a Son, whom he made heir of all things and through whom he created the world." (sometimes it is translated as universe).

The word that is translated as "world" is the Greek word aion. It means ages, as in the present evil age and the Messianic age to come.

Aion- This word has been translated as eternal, world, and universe. When this word is translated as "eternal," such as "you will have eternal life," it means "you will have life in the age to come." This is Strong's Greek dictionary's (which is in the Strong's Concordance) definition of this word. It is number 165 in Strong's, please look it up.

Age (aion) - 1. An unbroken age, perpetuity of time, eternity. 2. This word is also used to describe this age, i.e. this time period we are in now, and the time period to come, i.e. the Messianic age.

Hebrews 1:2 is speaking of the world (age) to come, the Messianic world. The New Earth and New Heavens.

Hebrews 1:10 is a continuation of this thought. It is a passage of creation that was attributed to God in the Old Testament. Here it is used for the Son because through the Son (his death on the cross) will be created the New Earth and New Heavens. Flip the page to Hebrews 2:5 and it will clear up any doubt that you might have on what world we are talking about.

Hebrews 2:5: "For it was not to angels that he subjected the WORLD TO COME, of WHICH WE ARE SPEAKING."

This is in agreement with Hebrews 1:2. If not we have a massive contradiction.

Jesus is responsible for the creation of the Messianic age (world) to come. These passages do not mean that Jesus created this earth and heaven. You have the scriptures in front of you, you decide.

Romans 9:5

Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of Christ, who is God over all.

This translation appears only in the NIV as far as I have found. It is definitely not the most accepted translation. The Amplified Bible, KJV, NASB, NRSV, and the Rheims New Testament to name a few, all have it worded differently and are also in agreement with the Catholic NAB. Romans 9:5 NAB:

"Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them, according to the flesh, is the Messiah. God who is over all be blessed forever."

NAB Footnote: Some editors punctuate this verse differently and prefer the translation, "Of whom is Christ according to the flesh, who is God over all." However, Paul’s point is that God who is over all aimed to use Israel, which had been entrusted with every privilege, in outreach to the entire world through the Messiah.

The context of this verse is not on the deity of Jesus, but on his ancestry, which is from the patriarchs. Compare this verse to 2 Corinthians 11:31 of the same writer.

"The God and Father of the Lord Jesus knows, he who is blessed forever, that I do not lie."

Who is blessed forever? The God and Father of Jesus. Using the principle of comparison of text with text, it is most likely that Paul describes the Father as "God over all."

Matthew 1:23

And they shall call him Emmanuel, which means "God is with us."

This verse has been used to imply that Jesus is God. But this verse is not saying that God is with us AS the person of Jesus, but IN the person of Jesus. This is how He has visited His people. Let’s compare this verse with other verses in the Bible.

Acts 10:38: "How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and power. He went about doing good and healing all those oppressed by the devil, for God was with him."

John 8:29: "The one who sent me is with me. He has not left me alone."

Luke 7:16: "A great prophet has arisen in our midst, and God has visited His people."

John 3:2: "Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher from God, for no one can do these signs that you are doing unless God is with him."

Acts 7:9: "And the patriarchs, jealous of Joseph, sold him into slavery in Egypt; but God was with him."

Zechariah 8:23: "Let us go with you, for we have heard that God is with you."

By comparing texts we get a much better picture of what Matthew meant. God is with us, present among His people IN the person of Jesus. The meaning of a name (which by the way was never used by Jesus) cannot be used by itself to imply that he is God. Here are a few more Biblical names and their meanings:

Eli – My God.

Elijah – God the LORD or Yahweh God.

Elihu – My God Himself.

Ithiel – God with me.

Joel - The LORD God.

If you insist on using this text to prove the divinity of Jesus, then we have to make Eli, Elijah, Elihu, Ithiel, and Joel God also.

CONCLUSION – I have spent a lot of time going over each and every Scripture relating to this subject, and the Bible is very consistent. I have not found one verse that contradicts this thought.

One last point to be said. Some people I talk to about this will get all defensive and hostile when they are confronted with Scriptures which completely contradict the trinity, and finally say to me "Well, it doesn’t really matter as long as you worship God." But the question I put to you is this, Are you really worshipping God? If Jesus is not God, are you not committing idolatry by making Jesus "God the Son?" Yes you are! Jesus did say:

"Worship the LORD your God, and serve Him ONLY" (Matthew 4: 10).

Also, John 17: 3 states:

"Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent."

Make sure you know the ONLY TRUE GOD and His Son Jesus Christ. Remember, it is part of the greatest commandment to know that God is one (Mark 12: 29).

If after this paper you still think that I am wrong, please take the time to go to the Scriptures and try to prove me wrong. Don’t just say, "He’s wrong," and forget all about it. According to Scripture, there is a little more at stake than one would imagine.

Please pray to God to show you the truth, whatever that might be. But don’t let pride and human tradition get in the way. I am just presenting you with information. I am not here to convince you, God will take care of that, if it is his will.

May God and His glorious Son Jesus always be with you.

Index

This page copyright © 2000 by Juan Baixeras