So this is going to be the first in a series of videos discussing the proof texts that Trinitarians refer to in an effort to prove their theory.
Let’s begin by laying down a couple of ground rules. The first and most important is the rule covering ambiguous Scriptures.
The definition of “ambiguity” is: “the quality of being open to more than one interpretation; inexactness.”
If the meaning of a verse of Scripture is not clear, if it can be reasonably understood in more than one way, then it cannot serve as proof on its own. Let me give you an example: Does John 10:30 prove the Trinity? It reads, “I and the Father are one.”
A Trinitarian could argue that this proves both Jesus and Jehovah are God. A non-Trinitarian could argue that it refers to oneness in purpose. How do you resolve the ambiguity? You can’t without going outside of this verse to other parts of the Bible. In my experience, if someone refuses to acknowledge that the meaning of a verse is ambiguous, further discussion is a waste of time.
To resolve the ambiguity of this verse, we look for other verses where a similar expression is used. For example, “I will remain in the world no longer, but they are still in the world, and I am coming to you. 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.” (John 17:11 NIV)
If John 10:30 proves that the Son and the Father are both God by sharing the same nature, then John 17:11 proves that the disciples are God as well. They share God’s nature. Of course, that’s nonsense. Now a person might say that those two verses are talking about different things. Okay, prove it. The point is that even if that is true, you cannot prove it from those verses so they cannot serve as proof on their own. At best, they can be used to support a truth that has been confirmed elsewhere.
In an effort to get us to believe these two persons are one being, Trinitarians try to get us to accept Monotheism as the only accepted form of worship for Christians. This is a trap. It goes like this: “Oh, you believe Jesus is a god, but not the God. That’s polytheism. The worship of multiple gods like pagans practice. True Christians are monotheistic. We only worship one God.
As Trinitarians define it, “monotheism” is a “loaded term”. They use it like a “thought-terminating cliché” whose sole purpose is to dismiss any argument that goes contrary to their belief. What they fail to realize is that monotheism, as they define it, is not taught in the Bible. When a Trinitarian says there is only one true God, what he means is that any other god, must be false. But that belief does not match the facts revealed in the Bible. For example, consider the context of this prayer which Jesus offers up:
“These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee: As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him. And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.” (John 17:1-3 King James Version)
Here Jesus is clearly referring to the Father, Jehovah, and calling him the only true God. He does not include himself. He does not say that he and the father are the only true God. Yet at John 1:1, Jesus is called “a god”, and at John 1:18 he is called “the only begotten god”, and at Isaiah 9:6 he is called a “mighty god”. Add to that, the fact that we know that Jesus is righteous and true. So, when he calls the Father, and not himself, “the only true God”, he is not referring to God’s truthfulness nor His righteousness. What makes the Father the only true God is the fact that he is over all other gods—in other words, ultimate power and authority rests with Him. He is the source of all power, all authority, and the origin of all things. All things came into being, including the Son, Jesus, by His will and His will alone. If God almighty choose to beget a god as he did with Jesus, that doesn’t mean he stops being the only true God. Quite the opposite. It reinforces the fact that he is the only true God. This is the truth that our Father is trying to communicate to us, his children. The question is, will we listen and accept, or will we be hellbent on imposing our interpretation on how God should be worshipped?
As Bible students, we must be careful not to put the definition ahead of the thing it is supposed to define. That is just thinly disguised eisegesis—imposing one’s bias and preconceptions onto a Bible text. Rather, we need to look at Scripture and determine what it reveals. We need to let the Bible speak to us. Only then can we properly be equipped to find the right terms to describe the truths that are revealed. And if there are no terms in our language to properly describe the realities revealed by Scripture, then we have to invent new ones. For instance, there was no proper term to describe the Love of God, so Jesus seized a rarely used Greek word for love, agape, and reshaped it, putting it to good use to spread the word of God’s love for the world.
Monotheism, as defined by Trinitarians, does not reveal the truth about God and his Son. That doesn’t mean we can’t use the term. We can still use it, as long as we agree on a different definition, one that fits the facts in Scripture. If monotheism means that there is only one true God in the sense of one source of all things, who alone is Almighty; but allows that there are other gods, both good and bad, then we have a definition that fits with the evidence in Scripture.
Trinitarians like to quote scriptures like Isaiah 44:24 which they believe prove that Jehovah and Jesus are the same being.
“This is what the LORD says— your Redeemer, who formed you in the womb: I am the LORD, the Maker of all things, who stretches out the heavens, who spreads out the earth by myself.” (Isaiah 44:24 NIV)
Jesus is our redeemer, our savior. In addition, he is spoken of as the creator. Colossians 1:16 says of Jesus “in him all things were created [and] all things have been created through him and for him”, and John 1:3 says “Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.”
Given that scriptural evidence, is the Trinitarian reasoning sound? Before we address that question, please bear in mind that only two persons are referred to. There is no mention of the holy spirit here. So, at best we are looking at a duality, not a trinity. A person who is seeking truth will expose all the facts, because his only agenda is to get at the truth, whatever that may be. The moment a person hides or ignores evidence that doesn’t support his point, is the moment we should be seeing red flags.
Let us begin by ensuring that what we are reading in the New International Version is an accurate translation of Isaiah 44:24. Why is the word “LORD” capitalized? It is capitalized because the translator has made a choice based not on accurately conveying the meaning of the original—the one overriding obligation of a translator—but rather, based on his religious bias. Here is another translation of the same verse that reveals what is hidden behind the capitalized LORD.
“Thus says Jehovah, your Redeemer, and he who formed you from the womb: "I am Jehovah, who makes all things; who alone stretches out the heavens; who spreads out the earth by myself;” (Isaiah 44:24 World English Bible)
“Lord” is a title, and as such can be applied to many persons, even humans. It is therefore vague. But Jehovah is unique. There is only one Jehovah. Even God’s Son, Jesus, the only begotten god is never called Jehovah.
A name is unique. A title is not. Putting LORD instead of the divine name, YHWH or Jehovah, blurs the identity of the one being referred to. Thus, it aids the Trinitarian in promoting his agenda. To clear up confusion caused by the use of titles, Paul wrote to the Corinthians:
“For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or on earth; as there are gods many, and lords many; yet to us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we unto him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and we through him.” (1 Corinthians 8:5, 6 ASV)
You see, Jesus is called “Lord”, but in the pre-Christian Scriptures, Jehovah is also called “Lord”. It is appropriate to call Almighty God, Lord, but it is hardly an exclusive title. Even humans use it. So, by removing the uniqueness that the name, Jehovah, the Bible translator conveys, who is customarily a Trinitarian or beholden to his Trinitarian patrons, blurs the distinction inherent in the text. Rather than the very specific reference to Almighty God carried in the name Jehovah, we have the unspecific title, Lord. If Jehovah had wanted his name replaced by a title in his inspired Word, he would have made that happen, don’t you think?
The Trinitarian will reason that since “the LORD” says he created the earth by Himself, and since Jesus who is also called Lord, created all things, they must be the same being.
This is called hyperliteralism. The best way to deal with hyperliteralism is to follow the counsel provided or found at Proverbs 26:5.
“Answer a fool according to his foolishness or he’ll become wise in his own eyes.” (Proverbs 26:5 Christian Standard Bible)
In other words, take foolish reasoning to its logical and absurd conclusion. Let’s do that now:
All this came upon the king Nebuchadnezzar. At the end of twelve months he was walking in the royal palace of Babylon. The king spake and said, Is not this great Babylon, which I have built for the royal dwelling-place, by the might of my power and for the glory of my majesty? (Daniel 4:28-30)
There you have it. King Nebuchadnezzar built the entire city of Babylon, all by his little lonesome. That is what he says, so that is what he did. Hyperliteralism!
Of course, we all know what Nebuchadnezzar means. He didn’t build Babylon himself. He probably didn’t even design it. Skilled architects and craftsmen designed it and oversaw the construction effected by thousands of slave laborers. If a Trinitarian can accept the concept that a human king can speak about building something with his own hands when he never so much as picked up a hammer, why does he choke at the idea that God can use someone to do his work, and still rightly claim to have done it himself? The reason that he will not accept that logic is because it doesn’t support his agenda. That is eisegesis. Reading one’s ideas into the text.
What does the Bible text say: “Let them praise the name of Jehovah, For he commanded, and they were created.” (Psalm 148:5 World English Bible)
If Jehovah says that he did it by himself in Isaiah 44:24, who was he commanding? Himself? That’s nonsense. “ ‘I commanded myself to create and then I obeyed my command,’ thus saith the LORD.” I don’t think so.
We have to be willing to understand what God means, not what we want him to mean. The key is right there in the Christian Scriptures we just read. Colossians 1:16 says that “all things have been created through him and for him”. “Through him and for him” indicate two entities or persons. The Father, like Nebuchadnezzar, commanded that things be created. The means by which that was accomplished was Jesus, his Son. All things were made through him. The word “through” carries the implicit idea of there being two sides and a channel connecting them together. God, the creator is on one side and the universe, the material creation, is on the other side, and Jesus is the channel through which the creation was achieved.
Why does it also say that all things were created “for him”, that is, for Jesus. Why did Jehovah create all things for Jesus? John reveals that God is love. (1 John 4:8) It was Jehovah’s love that motivated Him to create all things for his beloved Son, Jesus. Again, one person doing something for another out of love. For me, we have touched on one of the more insidious and damaging effects of the Trinity doctrine. It obscures the true nature of love. Love is everything. God is love. The law of Moses can be summed up in two rules. Love God and love your fellow human. “All you need is love,” is not just a popular song lyric. It is the essence of life. The love of a parent for a child is the love of God, the Father, for his only begotten Son. From that, the love of God extends to all his children, both angelic and human. Making the Father and the Son and the holy spirit into a single being, really clouds our comprehension of that love, a quality that surpasses all others on the road to life. All the expressions of love that the Father feels for the Son and the Son feels for the Father turn into some sort of divine Narcissism—self love—if we believe the trinity. I don’t think so? And why doesn’t the Father ever express love for the holy spirit if it is a person, and why doesn’t the holy spirit express love for the Father? Again, if it is a person.
Another passage that our Trinitarian will use “to prove” that Jesus is God Almighty is this one:
“You are my witnesses,” declares the LORD, “and my servant whom I have chosen, so that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he. Before me no god was formed, nor will there be one after me. I, even I, am the LORD, and apart from me there is no savior. (Isaiah 43:10, 11 NIV)
There are two element from this verse that Trinitarians cling to as proof of their theory. Again, there is no mention of the holy spirit here, but let’s overlook that for the moment. How does this prove that Jesus is God? Well, consider this:
“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.” (Isaiah 9:6 NIV)
So if there was no God formed before nor after the LORD, and here at Isaiah we have Jesus called a Mighty God, then Jesus must be God. But wait, there is more:
“Today in the town of David a Savior has been born to you; he is the Messiah, the Lord.” (Luke 2:11 NIV)
There you have it. The Lord is the only savior and Jesus is called “a Savior”. So they must be the same. That means that Mary gave birth to God Almighty. Yahzah!
Of course there are many scriptures where Jesus unambiguously calls his Father God distinct from him.
“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Matthew 27:46 NIV)
Did God forsake God? A trinitarian might say that Jesus here, the person is speaking, but he being God refers to his nature. Okay, so then could we simply reword this as, “My nature, my nature, why have you forsaken me?”
"Go instead to my brothers and tell them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’” (John 20:17 NIV)
Is God our brother? My God and your God? How does that work if Jesus is God? And again, if God refers to his nature, then what? “I’m ascending to my nature and your nature”?
Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. (Philippians 1:2 NIV)
Here, the Father is clearly identified as God and Jesus as our Lord.
"First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for all of you, because your faith is being reported all over the world." (Romans 1:8 NIV)
He doesn’t say, “I thank the Father through Jesus Christ.” He says, “I thank God through Jesus Christ.” If Jesus is God, then he is thanking God through God. Of course, if by God he means the divine nature of the person of Jesus, then we could reword this to read: “I thank my nature divine through Jesus Christ…”
I could go on and on. There are dozens more like these: verses that clearly, unambiguously identify God as distinct from Jesus, but oh no…We are going to ignore all these verses because our interpretation matters more than what it clearly stated. So, let’s return to the interpretation of Trinitarians.
Returning to the key scripture, Isaiah 43:10, 11, let’s look at it remembering that LORD in uppercase is used to hide God’s name from the reader, so we will read from the Literal Standard Version of the Bible.
“You [are] My witnesses, a declaration of YHWH, And My servant whom I have chosen, So that you know and give credence to Me, And understand that I [am] He, Before Me there was no God formed, And after Me there is none. I [am] YHWH, And besides Me there is no savior.” (Isaiah 43:10, 11 LSV)
AHA! You see. Jehovah is the only God. Jehovah wasn’t created, because no God was formed before him; and finally, Jehovah is the only savior. So, since Jesus is called a mighty god at Isaiah 9:6 and he is also called the savior at Luke 2:10, Jesus must also be God.
This is yet another example of Trinitarian self-serving hyperliteralism. Okay, so we’ll apply the same rule as before. Proverbs 26:5 tells us to take their logic to its logical extreme.
Isaiah 43:10 says that there was no other God formed before Jehovah nor after him. Yet the Bible calls Satan the devil, “the god of this world” (2 Corinthians 4:4 NLT). Additionally, there were many gods at that time that the Israelites were guilty of worshiping, for example Baal. How do Trinitarians get around the contradiction? They say that Isaiah 43:10 is only referring to the true God. All other gods are false and so are excluded. I’m sorry, but if you going to be hyper literal you have to go all the way. You can’t be hyper literal some of the time and conditional other times. The moment you say that a verse doesn’t mean exactly what it says, you open the door to interpretation. Either there are no Gods—NO OTHER GODS—or, there are the gods, and Jehovah is speaking in a relative or conditional sense.
Ask yourself, what in the Bible makes a god into a false god? Is it that he doesn’t have the power of a god? No, that doesn’t fit because Satan has godlike power. Look what he did to Job:
“While he was still speaking, another messenger came and said, “The fire of God fell from the heavens and burned up the sheep and the servants, and I am the only one who has escaped to tell you!”” (Job 1:16 NIV)
What makes the devil into a false god? Is it that he has the power of a god, but not absolute power? Does just having less power than Jehovah, the Almighty God, make you into a false God? Where does the Bible say that, or are you again jumping to a conclusion to support your interpretation, my trinitarian fellow? Well, consider the case of the angel of light that became the Devil. He didn’t acquire special powers as a result of his sin. That makes no sense. He must have possessed them all along. Yet he was good and righteous until evil was found in him. So obviously, having powers that are inferior to God’s almighty power doesn’t make one into a false God.
Would you agree that what makes a powerful being into a false god is that he stands in opposition to Jehovah? If the angel who became the devil had not sinned, then he would have continued to have all the power he has now as Satan which power makes him the god of this world, but he would not be a false god, because he would not have stood in opposition to Jehovah. He would have been one of Jehovah’s servants.
So if there is a powerful being that does not stand in opposition to God, would he not also be a god? Just not the true God. So in what sense is Jehovah the true God. Let’s go to a righteous god and ask him. Jesus, a god, tells us:
"Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent."(John 17:3 NIV)
How can Jesus, a mighty and righteous god, call Jehovah, the only true God? In what sense can we make that work? Well, where does Jesus get his power from? Where does he get his authority from? Where does he get his knowledge from? The son gets it from the Father. The Father, Jehovah, doesn’t get His power, authority, nor knowledge from the son, from anyone. So only the Father can be called the only true God and that is what Jesus, the son, calls him.
The key to understanding this passage of Isaiah 43:10, 11 lies in the last verse.
"I, even I, am Jehovah, and apart from me there is no savior." (Isaiah 43:11 NIV)
Again, our Trinitarian fellow will say that Jesus must be God, because Jehovah says that there is no other savior apart from Him. Hyperliteralism! Let’s put it to the test by looking elsewhere in Scripture, you know, to practice exegetical research for once and let the Bible provide the answers rather than listen to the interpretations of men. I mean, isn’t that what we did as Jehovah’s Witnesses? Listen to the interpretations of men? And look where that got us!
"When the children of Israel cried to Jehovah, Jehovah raised up a savior to the children of Israel, who saved them, even Othniel the son of Kenaz, Caleb's younger brother." (Judges 3:9 WEB)
So, Jehovah, who says that besides Him there is no savior, raised up a savior in Israel in the person of Othniel, a judge of Israel. Referring back to that time in Israel, the prophet Nehemiah had this to say:
“Therefore you gave them into the hand of their enemies, who made them suffer. And in the time of their suffering they cried out to you and you heard them from heaven, and according to your great mercies you gave them saviors who saved them from the hand of their enemies.” (Nehemiah 9:27 ESV)
If, over and over, the only one to provide you with a savior is Jehovah, then it would be quite accurate for you to say that your only savior is Jehovah, even if that salvation took the form of a human leader. Jehovah sent many judges to save Israel, and finally, he sent the judge of all the earth, Jesus, to save Israel for all time—not to mention the rest of us.
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. (John 3:16 KJV)
If Jehovah hadn’t sent his Son, Jesus, would we be saved? No. Jesus was the instrument of our salvation and the mediator between us and God, but ultimately, it was God, Jehovah, who saved us.
"And everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved." (Acts 2:21 BSB)
"Salvation exists in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved.” (Acts 4:12 BSB)
“Hold on just a minute,” our Trinitarian friend will say. “Those last verses you just quoted prove the Trinity, because Acts 2:21 is quoting from Joel 2:32 which reads, “It will happen that whoever will call on the name of Jehovah shall be saved;” (Joel 2:32 WEB)
He will argue that at both at Acts 2:21 and again at Acts 4:12, the Bible is clearly referring to Jesus.
Okay, that’s true.
He will also argue that Joel is clearly referring to Jehovah.
Again, yes, he is.
With that reasoning, our Trinitarian will conclude that Jehovah and Jesus, while two distinct persons, must both be one being—they must both be God.
Whoa, Nelly! Not so fast. That is a huge leap of logic. Again, let’s allow the Bible to clear things up for us.
“I will remain in the world no longer, but they are still in the world, and I am coming to you. 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. While I was with them, I protected them and kept them safe by that name you gave me. None has been lost except the one doomed to destruction so that Scripture would be fulfilled.” (John 17:11, 12 NIV)
This makes it clear that Jehovah has given his name to Jesus; that the power of his name has been imparted to his Son. So, when we read in Joel that “whoever calls on the name of Jehovah shall be saved” and then read in Acts 2:21 that “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord [Jesus] will be saved”, we see no disharmony. We don’t have to believe they are one being, only that the power and authority of the name of Jehovah has been given to his Son. As John 17:11, 12 says, we are protected “by the power of Jehovah’s name which He gave to Jesus, so that we, the disciples of Jesus may be one in the same way that Jehovah and Jesus are one. We do not become one in nature with each other, nor with God. We are not Hindus believing the ultimate goal is to become one with our Atman, which means being one with God in his nature.
If God wanted us to believe he is a Trinity, he would have found a way to convey that to us. He would not have left it up to wise and intellectual Scholars to decipher his word and reveal hidden truths. If we couldn’t figure it out for ourselves, then God would be setting us up to put our trust in men, something he warns us against.
At that time Jesus said, “I praise You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from the wise and intelligent, and have revealed them to infants. (Matthew 11:25 NASB)
The spirit guides the little children of God to truth. It is not the wise and intellectual who are our guides to truth. Consider these words from Hebrews. What do you discern?
By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God’s command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible. (Hebrews 11:3 NIV)
In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe. The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven. So he became as much superior to the angels as the name he has inherited is superior to theirs. (Hebrews 1:1-4 NIV)
If the universe was formed by God’s command, whom was God commanding? Himself or somebody else? If God has appointed his Son, how can his Son be God? If God appointed his Son to inherit all things, from whom does he inherit? Does God inherit from God? If the Son is God, then God made the universe through God. Does that make sense? Can I be the exact representation of myself? That is nonsense. If Jesus is God, then God is the radiance of God’s glory and God is the exact representation of God’s being. Again, a nonsensical statement.
How can God become superior to the angels? How can God inherit a name superior to theirs? From whom does God inherit this name?
Our Trinitarian friend will say, “NO, NO, NO.” You don’t get it. Jesus is only the second person of the Trinity and as such he is distinct and can inherit.
Yes, but here it refers to two persons, God and the Son. It doesn’t refer to the Father and the Son, as if they were two persons in one being. If the Trinity is three persons in one being and that one being is God, then it is illogical and wrong to refer to God in this instance as one person apart from Jesus.
Sorry, my Trinitarian friend, but you can’t have it both ways. If you are going to be hyperliteral when it suits your agenda, you have to be hyperliteral when it doesn’t.
There are two other verses listed in our title that Trinitarians use as proof texts. These are:
“This is what the LORD says— your Redeemer, who formed you in the womb: I am the LORD, the Maker of all things, who stretches out the heavens, who spreads out the earth by myself…” (Isaiah 44:24 NIV)
“Isaiah said this because he saw Jesus’ glory and spoke about him.” (John 12:41 NIV)
A trinitarian concludes that since John is referencing back to Isaiah where in the same context (Isaiah 44:24) he clearly refers to Jehovah, then he must mean that Jesus is God. I won’t explain this because you now have the tools to work it out for yourselves. Have a go at it.
There are still a great many more Trinitarian “proof texts” to deal with. I will try to deal with them all over the next few videos in this series. For now, I want to again thank everyone who supports this channel. Your financial contributions keep us going. Until next time.
Archived Comments
We have moved to the Disqus commenting system. To post a new comment, go to the bottom of this page.
Comment by PierrotSud on 2022-08-11 07:24:04
Thank you Eric for your great explanation about Trinity.
It's very hard to have time and keep "calm" to answer to the partisans of trinity, because, often, they think that they right and our not.
One christian, a Trinitarian, told to me that i am Polytheist. I was shoked by this charge.
That i understood also that he is polyteist too because, if he believe that he take worship to God Jehovah, God Jesus and the God Holy Spirit, the three gods in the same nivel, but he is not polytheist , so the trinity is died.
Like you explain, a lot of translations are oriented by doctrines.
We criticize the new world translation, because it is oriented by the Watchtower doctrines, and a lot rejected her.
But if we are fair, we must to applicate the same think to the others.
That is the reason to compare the translation but also to don't jump to conclusions.
We musn't to forget that the majority of translations of the bible is issued to the greek. There are a less in other language, like aramean.
An other thing isThe meaning of the sentence and to take a stap back that what the autor want to say?
So you demosntration is remarquable.
I thought about Acts 16:6
"6 And they went through the region of Phrygia and Galatia, having been forbidden by the Holy Spirit to speak the word in Asia." (ESV)
In reading this verse, we are impression that a person, holy Spirit, stopped physically Paul to go to Asia.
For me we can also read this differently. Can we stopped a person with an other way?
For instance, we lived in many occasions where an authority we commanded our to do something.... but our consciens, or our mentally tell our to don't do that.
So we can also say that the holy spirit stopped "mentally", sending think in the Paul's mind, or ordoned in the think of Paul to don't go to Asia.
Like when Peter or Paul received orders by Visions or by dreams.
That's what i think. It's possible that i maked mistake with this instance.
There are a lot of verse so confused. It's very important to read and compare verses less preconceived ideas.
The message of God didn't change since the begin, even if the firsts parents desobeyed. He used his son to repair this disaster.
We must to preserve the sense and defend our Jehovah's God and our Lord Jesus
Alleluia, and his son, the Lord Jesus.
PierrotReply by Meleti Vivlon on 2022-08-11 10:44:19
Well said, Pierre. We must remember that it is the spirit that guides us into all the truth, and if we are motivated by a bad spirit, then we will never find it, no matter how persuasive the arguments are. I find such a spirit dominating in many who argue for the Trinity. I'm going to make that a theme for a future video.
Thank you for your reasoning on the holy spirit blocking the apostles from preaching in certain areas.
Comment by Fani on 2022-08-12 01:56:17
Merci beaucoup pour ces réflexions.
J'ai bien aimé le psaume 148 : 5 disant que Dieu a commandé ou donné ordre pour sa création.
Concernant Esaie 43 : 10 "... avant moi il n'y avait pas de Dieu formé, et après Moi il n'y en a pas. Je [suis] YHWH, et en dehors de moi il n'y a pas de sauveur. ( Esaïe 43:10 , 11)
On peut faire aussi un lien avec Exode 7 : 1
"L'Eternel dit à Moïse: «Regarde, je te fais Dieu pour le pharaon, et ton frère Aaron sera ton prophète."
C'est YHWH lui même qui fait de Moïse un Dieu. YHWH se contredirait il ? D'un côté Il dit qu'après Lui aucun Dieu n'a été formé et pourtant c'est lui même qui en forme un en la personne de Moïse.
On comprend bien qu'on ne peut pas prendre les versets d'Esaie d'une façon hyperlittérale.
Dans notre groupe d'étude (le même que Pierrot Sud), le sujet de la Trinité revient sans cesse. Certains affirment l'égalité du Père et du Fils.
Ça devient difficile !
Je prie pour que l'Esprit Saint nous guide et nous préserve car j'ai l'impression qu'aucun argument ne suffit.
Puissions nous prier les uns pour les autres afin de toujours reconnaître la voix du Christ et non celle des hommes.
Que Jéhovah continue à bénir ton travail qui nous aide tant !
NicoleReply by Meleti Vivlon on 2022-08-28 20:43:56
Excellent point about Moses being a god. I'll use that. Thank you.
Comment by ZbigniewJan on 2022-08-13 16:22:50
Dear Brother Eric, thank you for the wonderful lecture. This topic will be especially useful for ex JW who, after leaving the organization, are looking for a true perception of our Lord Jesus. Many people fall into the clutches of other religious groups, in which various shades of the Trinity rob the Lord Jesus of his honor and glory. Most recently, I have been meeting with people who believe that Jesus is the incarnation of JHVH.
I really like the argument based on one of the most important words of the Lord Jesus: John 3: 16,17 For God so loved the world that He gave His Only Begotten Son, that whoever believes in him will not perish but have eternal life. Salvation is possible because of the Son of God who became the Savior, but if God had not offered Him, there would be no salvation. Therefore, we can say that, depending on the context, the savior is either the Father or the Son.
I have received material regarding Isaiah 9: 6 from our sister in the Lord (ex JW). I liked to refer to this verse from Isaiah very much. I liked the term Mighty God, Father of Eternity and Prince of Peace. I proved that Jesus is a strong God with a resurrection right, but not Almighty God. This passage, however, is most often used to affirm the Trinity.
Here is the material: Here is the link
https://www.levendwater.org/companion/append80.html
Applying the Brenner Corrections, the passage in the Dead Sea Scrolls version reads simply:
We have a baby; and the row is on his shoulder; His name is Elgibbor, father of Adah, ruler of Jerusalem.
(It should be emphasized that the MM Scrolls differ from the Masoretic Text written around 1000).
That is, in the DSS (Qumran Scrolls) as read by Brenner, Ad is the name of the father of the son-child; Elgibbor is the baby's name (divine warrior); the Masoreticians missed 'ha' before Shalom, inserting 'Prince of Peace', and it should be Hashalom - Jerusalem. So the "Prince of Peace" is also a misinterpretation of the Masorets.
Given these facts, and while this text from the Scrolls of Qumran existed in apostolic times, it is no wonder that neither Matthew nor any other evangelist applied Isaiah 9: 6 to Jesus.
The facts also show that the apostles were quoting the Septuagint, which means that Isaiah 9: 6 is absolutely not referring to Jesus. In the Septuagint we read;
For a child has been born to us, and a son is given to us, whose authority is on his shoulder, and his name is called Messenger of the great council;
Neither gospel nor any letter in the New Testament makes reference to or makes any reference to Isaiah 9: 6, and there is no NT explanation of this text. No true prophet of Israel, nor any true Israelite, would attribute to man terms such as Mighty God or the Eternal Father.
In Israel, the names of the children of the prophets never describe the child himself. Rather, such names carried messages to the people, as is the case of the sons of Isaiah (sheARyaSHUV), the remnant will return (immanu'EL), God is with us, (LO-AMI), [You are not] my people.
Link to Brenner's website
http://www.ancient-hebrew.org/31_selections.html
So one may ask why the evangelists do not see Isaiah 9: 6 as a text referring to Jesus?
Because this text does not refer to Jesus, and the Trinitarians building the thesis that Jesus is God on this text is only their unfounded claim.
Applying the Brenner Corrections, the passage in the Dead Sea Scrolls version reads simply:
We have a baby; and the row is on his shoulder; His name is Elgibbor, father of Adah, ruler of Jerusalem.
(It should be emphasized that the MM Scrolls differ from the Masoretic Text written around 1000).
That is, in the DSS (Qumran Scrolls) as read by Brenner, Ad is the name of the father of the son-child; Elgibbor is the baby's name (divine warrior); the Masoreticians missed 'ha' before Shalom, inserting 'Prince of Peace', and it should be Hashalom - Jerusalem. So the "Prince of Peace" is also a misinterpretation of the Masorets.
Given these facts, and while this text from the Scrolls of Qumran existed in apostolic times, it is no wonder that neither Matthew nor any other evangelist applied Isaiah 9: 6 to Jesus.
The facts also show that the apostles were quoting the Septuagint, which means that Isaiah 9: 6 is absolutely not referring to Jesus. In the Septuagint we read;
For a child has been born to us, and a son is given to us, whose authority is on his shoulder, and his name is called Messenger of the great council;
Neither gospel nor any letter in the New Testament makes reference to or makes any reference to Isaiah 9: 6, and there is no NT explanation of this text. No true prophet of Israel, nor any true Israelite, would attribute to man terms such as Mighty God or the Eternal Father.
I cordially greet you, Sisters and Brothers !!!
Comment by James Mansoor on 2022-09-02 19:57:29
Good morning Eric and all of you brothers and sisters.
Eric I am wondering if your weekly meetings can be recorded so us who are PIMO can listen to them at latter times.
Many thanks
Comment by Frankie on 2022-08-21 12:46:25
Thank you Eric for your persistent fight against, also in my opinion, unbiblical and harmful theory about the divine Trinity.
You very well described the rules of every biblical discussion, not only about the Trinity, and I like your statement: "In my experience, if someone refuses to acknowledge that the meaning of a verse is ambiguous, further discussion is a waste of time." That is true, and in this case the discussion should be politely ended.
I think that the texts, saying that Jesus (the Word) has God (you also quote some of them), are the clear denial of the Trinity (the theory of several persons in one being). Jehovah is Jesus' Father and God!
Micah 5:2,4; Matt 27:46; John 20:17; 2 Cor 1:3; Eph 1:17; Heb 1:9; Rev 3:12
Thank You for pointing out a very important thing - the Trinity theory suppresses Jehovah's love for His Son (John 3:35). You wrote: "It was Jehovah's love that motivated Him to create all things for his beloved Son, Jesus." (Colossians 1:16). It is a manifestation of the Father's love for the Son. As imperfect humans, we too love our sons very much. How much more does Jehovah love his Son and also us, who are His children (Luke 11:13).
The loving father-son relationship between Jehovah and Jesus winds through the entire New Testament like a golden thread. We humans understand this relationship very well. To describe his relationship with the Son, God chose this comparison and no other. A human father and son can never be one and the same being - we cannot be mistaken about this. This is why Jehovah and Jesus Christ are described as Father and Son.
If someone were to tell me that there are two persons in one man, then I would immediately think that the person is schizophrenic. That's a mental illness. And I'm not talking about the fact that there should be three persons in one man! Therefore, the whole concept of the Trinity is absolutely foreign and unacceptable to us humans. And that's why religions came up with the term "mystery" in connection with the Trinity. It is amazing how Satan tries to cloud the relationship between Jehovah and Jesus Christ.
With humans, there are excellent examples of the father-son relationship. A loving father (John 3:35) and an obedient son (Mark 14:36; Philippians 2:8). A son who loves and honors his father (Rev 3:12), a son who recognizes that his father is greater than him (John 14:28), a son who imitates his father and tries to behave like his father (John 5:19), even speaks and gestures like his father (John 12:45). If someone knows the father and then sees his son, then he/she can say (and this happens) - look, he is all the father (Colossians 1:15), or, they are quite the same (John 10:30).
If such unity is possible between a human father and son, then how much greater is the unity between Jehovah and Jesus Christ, because this is a perfect unity. If, based on the unity of the human father and son, we cannot say that they are one being, then how do we know that in the case of Jehovah and Jesus? And that is why God used the comparison of Father and Son - so that we are not mistaken in this matter, because we understand this thing very well.
Dear Eric, in this context, you explained the concept of one very well (verses John 17:22, 23 are good as well). We as humans are obviously not able to fully understand the absolute unity of both beings, Jehovah the God and Jesus Christ His Son, in the heavens. But the father-son relationship is probably the closest to it and that is why it was revealed to us in this way. There are many verses that point to this relationship. If we think deeply about why God revealed His relationship to His Son to us just like this, through the father-son comparison we understand best, then this principle could clarify many disputed verses supposedly supporting the incorrect and even harmful theory about the divine Trinity.
Thank you Eric for your hard work. God bless you.
Frankie.
Comment by James Mansoor on 2022-08-26 18:53:25
Good morning all, I personally don’t have much to say about the Trinity except all the Scriptures that they often use have been answered adequately by Eric, well done and many thanks.
I got into a discussion with a brother via an email and it went like this:
This is a witness who is a Pioneer answering the question who will be resurrected: Jehovah won't flick your head off. Remember Jesus DIED for everyone and ones who practice vile things will STILL be resurrected. If you were mislead you will be forgiven. If you intentionally mislead you will face destruction.
My question to him was: If that is the case then what’s the point of doing the right thing now if everyone is going to be resurrected including Solomon who obviously was an apostate? Can you imagine John the Baptist gets resurrected and sees the same woman who caused his death and have a shot at everlasting life same as him? Does that make sense to you? So in your opinion according to the apostle Paul which class of people will not inherit the kingdom?
His answer was this: Good question! You WILL see that. People WILL SEE those that killed them. It WOULD BE A PROBLEM! God knows this. Jonah had this issue. He didn't want ninevah to be forgiven. They didn't deserve it. We will say the same thing. Why is HITLER here? He doesn't deserve life! Etc. This is where Isaiah comes into play.
Isaiah 65: 17 For look! I am creating new heavens and a new earth; And the former things will not be called to mind, Nor will they come up into the heart.
Revelation 21:4 And he will wipe out every tear from their eyes, and death will be no more, neither will mourning nor outcry nor pain be anymore. The former things have passed away.
God knows you will be in pain seeing people that did bad things. You will outcry so he will prevent it from being in your mind.
The resurrection is the first stage. You don't automatically get everlasting life because you got resurrection. You just get a redo this time without the influence of Satan (he will be in the abyss) without the influence sin (you will be perfect). This is what new heavens and new earth mean.
It's new because Satan isn't there anymore. Then Satan will be let loose again. NOW whatever you do is ON YOU. You Cannot say I was born this way, it's this person fault, I couldn't help it . No. It will be your fault.
Then you will be judged by Jesus and 144000. The 144000 can accurately judge you because they have been human feeling feelings and Such. You don't want a perfect angel who never had been tempted judging you. They wouldn't understand. You will be judged and you will use your free will to choose to follow God or die.
Paul said certain people wouldn't inherit God's kingdom. Not because they didn't get resurrection but because they themselves will choose not follow God after experiencing what Gods kingdom paradise will be like . They will want to be what they once were. God won't force them to obey. He will simply kill them. You can say that's unfair but he let them live their lives the way they want to RIGHT NOW. So you can't really say it's unfair.
Not everyone will get resurrection though. For example Judas Iscariot wont get one. Adam and Eve won't have one. So doing good gets you resurrection. Doing good also helps later when Satan is let loose again. You will have the edge already having dealt with Satan In his world. You won't suddenly switch and do good once in paradise because you are perfect. You will do what you're habits were.
Practicing vile things is the action. God looks at the motive and circumstances when judging. You can do vile things and still be a good person. You can do vile things because you are misguided. God will look for every excuse to forgive you.
So friends is there any logical line of arguments that I can share with this brother that you can offer?
Take care and enjoy your day
Comment by TruthSeekerJohn146 on 2022-09-09 22:05:43
First off, I appreciate your cordiality in these articles. It can be difficult, particularly in written form, to sound “levelheaded” when critiquing a belief system with which you passionately disagree. I believe you are coming from a place of genuine hunger for the truth, and I cannot tell you how relieved I was to find a site created by ex-Jehovah’s Witnesses. I have never been a Jehovah’s Witness myself, but after researching the Watchtower for five years, I can very much understand your reasons for departing.
All that being said, I must respectfully urge you (meaning anyone who reads this post) to reconsider your beliefs about Jesus. Were this a “sideline” matter of peripheral doctrine, I wouldn’t bother responding, but the identity of Jesus is central to the gospel.
Full disclosure: I am a Christian who believes in the triune God. I believe the concept of the Trinity is clearly given in the Bible, though the words and analogies we use to summarize these concepts may not be in the Bible. (In the same way, we use words like “Bible” and “biblical” to describe what God’s Word teaches, but the words “Bible” and “biblical” are not in the Bible!).
Before I get to the “meat” of the response, please know that I am fully aware I will probably not change any minds on this. However, I do hope readers will at least recognize that many of the above arguments against the Trinity rely on double standards and that the concept you term “Trinitarian monotheism” is biblical.
The above article says that “if God wanted us to believe he is a Trinity, he would have found a way to convey that to us.” Respectfully, I must point out that this begs the question, as the entire question up for debate is whether the Bible conveys the concept of the Trinity. Trinitarians like myself believe the Bible does convey it (though perhaps not in a way you would prefer), and you disagree. But the fact that you have to grapple with (by your own admission) “a great many more Trinitarian proof texts” suggests the debate is not simply between “God’s Word (your side)” and “putting our trust in men (Trinity doctrine).”
Furthermore, the article seems to create a false dilemma by saying, “The spirit guides the little children of God to truth. It is not the wise and intellectual who are our guides to truth.” Is the article suggesting that we can never learn truth from wise and intellectual men? What about Solomon, the wisest man who ever lived (other than Jesus, of course)? What about Luke, a physician? What about Paul, a studied Pharisee?
In the context of Matthew 11:25, Jesus was speaking about how the unbelieving Pharisees of his day had been cut off from the truth, while the disciples (who were humble and not “caught in rigid scholarship”) had received the truth. Jesus did not mean that any time a “wise and scholarly” person makes a claim about what the Bible teaches, we should reject that claim based solely on the intellect of the one who made it. Nor did He mean that someone wise and intellectual can never help us to better understand God’s Word. (Perhaps I have misunderstood your position, but I still wanted to clarify this.)
Towards the end, the article cites Bible verses that mention God and Jesus and then proceeds to ask things like “Does God inherit from God?” “How can God become superior to the angels?” and so on. The biblical answer is that Jesus humbled Himself by taking on human nature (Philippians 2:7-8), thus becoming lower than the angels for a time (Hebrews 2:9). After His death, He was exalted to His former glory as King of kings and Lord of lords (John 17:5; Revelation 17:14; cf. Deuteronomy 10:17).
Notwithstanding, the article lists a Trinitarian response to these questions (“Jesus is the second Person of the Trinity”), only to counter it by saying, “Yes, but it refers to two persons, God and the Son….If the Trinity is three persons in one being and that one being is God, then it is illogical and wrong to refer to God in this instance as one person apart from Jesus.”
I ask this with respect—which Bible verse says, or even hints, that “if the Trinity is three persons in one being and that one being is God, then it is illogical and wrong to refer to God as one person apart from Jesus”? Is this a biblical standard, or have you simply imposed your own opinion (i.e., “wisdom of man”) on the doctrine of the Trinity?
Finally, the article closes the topic by saying, “Sorry, my Trinitarian friend, but you can’t have it both ways. If you are going to be hyper literal when it suits your agenda, you have to be hyper literal when it doesn’t.” It sounds like—to me, anyway—you are admitting that your reading of the “God and Jesus” verses is hyper literal. But didn’t you spend a good portion of the article critiquing “hyper literalism”? Are you using the same double standard you accuse Trinitarians of using?
Sorry—I know that was a long “intro,” but now I’d like to dive into the biblical arguments.
First off, in its attempts to deny the Trinity, the article ends up denying its own arguments. For example, near the beginning it is stated, “Jehovah is unique. There is only one Jehovah. Even God’s Son, Jesus, the only begotten god is never called Jehovah.” But then the article goes on to debunk this very point by trying to “explain away” verses where Jesus is identified as Jehovah. It claims that “the power and authority of the name of Jehovah has been given to his Son,” and thus when verses about Jehovah are cited as referring to Jesus, “we see no disharmony.” In other words, you seem to be saying that Jesus actually *is* called Jehovah—but that doesn’t make Him Jehovah.
Not only does it contradict your earlier point about Jesus never being called Jehovah, but this explanation also fails biblically. Although you dismiss John 12:41 (“Isaiah said these things because he saw Jesus’ glory”), the article fails to note that John is not referencing Isaiah 44:24 but instead Isaiah 6. Note the preceding verses in John 12 that quote Isaiah 6:9-10. Thus, when John says that Isaiah saw Jesus, he is referring to the scene in Isaiah 6. And who, according to Isaiah himself, did Isaiah see? “My eyes have seen the King, the LORD (YHWH) of hosts” (Isaiah 6:5). Was Isaiah actually saying that he saw a lesser god (Jesus), even though he used Jehovah’s name here?
Bottom line: If (as your explanation implies) the name Jehovah is not unique after all, on what basis can you identify the true God? Whenever someone is called “Jehovah” (as you admit Jesus is), that apparently doesn’t make them the true God. The New Testament often cites verses that refer exclusively to Jehovah and applies them to Jesus. John 12:41 is merely one example; another is Hebrews 1:10-12, which quotes a prayer from Psalm 102 explicitly addressed to Jehovah and says these words refer to Jesus. If you dismiss such cases as Jesus merely being “honored” with Jehovah’s name, how can you maintain that the name Jehovah is unique and that Jesus is never called Jehovah? More importantly, how can you discern who “the true God” really is, since you have seemingly given up the name of Jehovah as a means of doing so?
All this brings us to the main issue—defining what is meant by “the true God.” Your article argues that “monotheism means that there is only one true God in the sense of one source of all things, who alone is Almighty; but allows that there are other gods, both good and bad.” However, the Bible strongly disagrees.
In Galatians 4:8, Paul makes it clear that unbelievers who worship other gods are worshiping things “which by nature are not gods.” He surely didn’t mean these people are worshiping things that actually are gods! Even one of the verses quoted in the article says, “For though there be that are called gods…” (1 Corinthians 8:5, ASV). Paul goes on to refer to these idols as gods, but he qualifies it by saying they are merely “called gods.” Thus, they are not actually gods; they are wrongly given this title.
Jehovah himself states it plainly: “The LORD Himself is God in heaven above and on the earth beneath; there is no other” (Deuteronomy 4:39). Thus, the term “true God” must mean “the only God, as opposed to false gods.” This is why Jeremiah 10:10 says, “But the LORD is the true God; He is the living God and the everlasting King.” If there really are other beings that are actually gods, qualifying Jehovah as “the living God” seems rather pointless, as any other god would also be living.
If I could respectfully rephrase my argument in your words: “There are dozens more like these: verses that clearly, unambiguously identify God as the only one in existence, but no…We are going to ignore all these verses because our interpretation matters more than what is clearly stated.”
Moving on, the article seeks to reinterpret Isaiah 44:24 by quoting King Nebuchadnezzar’s boast from Daniel 4. With due respect, I have to ask, do you really think the arrogant boasting of a pagan king (who, incidentally, was punished for making this very statement) should be our guide to interpreting the words of God in a completely different book with a completely different context?
Isaiah 44:24 clearly teaches that God alone is the Creator. The article suggests that, while this is technically true, there is a caveat: “The Father, like Nebuchadnezzar, commanded that things be created. The means by which that was accomplished was Jesus, his Son. All things were made through him.” The problem is that, if Jesus made “all things,” He Himself cannot be part of “all things.” In other words, He is uncreated. John 1:3 plainly tells us “without Him nothing was made that has been made.” You quote Colossians 1:16 (“all things have been created through Him and for Him”), a phrase that clearly makes Jesus God since Paul elsewhere says of Jehovah “of Him and through Him and to Him are all things” (Romans 11:36). The phrase “through Him” in the original Greek is identical in both verses. Thus, if we reject Jesus as the ultimate Creator based on the fact that the universe was made “through Him,” this same phrase would force us to reject the Father as the ultimate Creator.
If we read the context of Isaiah 44:24, the prophet repeats over and over that there is only one God (Isaiah 44:6, 45:5, 46:9). His point is not to say that the Israelites are worshiping other beings that actually are gods; rather, he chastises the Israelites for worshiping things that are not gods at all! Only Jehovah is God and thus only Jehovah deserves worship. And yet Jesus accepts worship (Matthew 14:33, 28:17; Hebrews 1:6). If Jesus were anything less than the Almighty, He committed a terrible sin by receiving worship and cannot be the spotless Lamb required for our ransom. When He died, His death would have only paid for His own sins (Deuteronomy 24:16). Thus, Jesus can only be our Savior if He is sinless, and since Jesus accepted worship due only to God, Jesus can only be our Savior if He is God.
Fortunately, the Bible is clear that Jesus committed no sin (Hebrews 4:15; 1 Peter 2:22), meaning He did not sin when He accepted worship. This, of course, means Jesus is God. (A common response to this argument is that the Greek word proskyneo translated “worship” can simply mean to bow in respect, but the fact that this same proskyneo was rejected by apostles in Acts 10:26 and even angels in Revelation 22:9 suggests that Jesus did something rather significant by accepting it. From what I have read on your site, it sounds like you believe that worshiping Jesus is necessary for worshiping the Father—which raises the question of why Jehovah would bother commanding people to worship only Him in passages like Exodus 34:14 if, in fact, Jehovah not only tolerates but requires the worship of a different god named Jesus.)
To summarize: 1) There is only one God, and He alone is a proper recipient of worship (Deuteronomy 4:39; Matthew 4:10). 2) Jesus is a proper recipient of worship (Matthew 28:17; Hebrews 1:6). 3) Therefore, Jesus is God.
Your article says very little about the Holy Spirit, but He certainly is a Person because He refers to Himself as “I” and “Me” (Acts 10:19-20, 13:2), makes decisions (Acts 15:28; 1 Corinthians 12:11), experiences emotions (Isaiah 63:10; Ephesians 4:30), and is “another Helper” like Jesus (John 14:16). From what I have gathered, you seem to believe Satan and the unclean spirits are personal beings, and yet the same Greek word for “spirit” (pneuma) is used of both the Holy Spirit and the unclean spirits He casts out (Mark 3:29-30). When we combine the Spirit’s Personhood with the Bible’s teaching that the Spirit is everlasting (Hebrews 9:14) and omniscient (1 Corinthians 2:10-11), the conclusion that He is God becomes difficult to escape.
You correctly recognize that monotheism (the belief in and worship of only one God) is essential to the Trinity. Since monotheism is biblical, and since you have already admitted that both Jesus and the Father are identified as God, and since the Holy Spirit is a divine Person, the data for the Trinity is apparent from the biblical text.
To summarize the Trinity, this doctrine recognizes one eternal God existing as three distinct but coequal Persons. A helpful (but imperfect) analogy is that the Trinity is, in some ways, like 3-dimensional space: Just as we can distinguish between height, width, and depth but still refer to each one equally as “space,” we can distinguish between the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit but still refer to each one equally as “God.” I hope that at least clears up some confusion people may have about how Trinitarians can call the Father “God” or call Jesus “God” while still distinguishing the Father from the Son. Again, the analogy is not perfect; I use it solely to explain that particular point. Hopefully we can all agree that some confusion is inevitable; a total comprehension of God’s nature is far beyond the grasp of finite humans. :)
If anyone is still reading, I pray that you will take this message in the love with which it was written. As explained above, to reject Jesus as God means to (unknowingly) reject the gospel. Jesus requires that we honor Him just as we honor the Father (John 5:23). In the same breath, Christ warns, “He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him.” In other words, if you do not honor Jesus with all the honor you give the Father, you are not honoring the Father. To put it more directly, if you maintain your insistence that “God, the creator is on one side…and Jesus is the channel through which the creation was achieved,” you are necessarily giving Jesus less honor than the Father. Likewise, if you say that only Jehovah is almighty and Jesus is not, you are giving Jesus less honor than the Father. As such, you are not truly honoring the Father or the Son. And that is a matter of eternal consequence.
Despite the length of this post (sorry!), my reply is by no means exhaustive, so for more on these topics, I would encourage readers to visit irr.org and 4jehovah.org.Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2022-09-17 18:05:24
In my video, I explained a valid way of understanding Isaiah 44:24. You advance another way. I acknowledge that without going outside of that passage to a wider view embracing all of scripture, we cannot determine which understanding is correct. To me this is simple logic, but you seem to disagree with this and insist there is only one meaning possible from a reading of that verse. Given that disparity between us, we share no basis for further discussion since you are working on a different logic premise from mine.
Reply by Ralf on 2022-09-17 23:18:08
TruthseekerJohn146, I read all the way to the end of your comment. Rather enjoyed it. Looking forward to Eric's response to you and me, which will no doubt be within the body of his next few videos, even though it appears you aren't worthy of further discussion. Ralf
Comment by Ralf on 2022-09-13 21:43:03
Eric,
I felt compelled to comment after watching the video and reading the transcript. It will take about 15 minutes to read my comment. I hope anyone reading it will be Beroean and test it against scripture. I hope I've given enough biblical evidence to keep you interested.
Ever read the Athanasian Creed? Here is a link to the creed with the bible verses that back up each of it's statements. https://steadfastlutherans.org/2017/09/athanasian-creed-according-to-scripture/
We agree that there is only one true God. We disagree on what the one true God reveals about himself. You deny the Trinity because you are certain God is one person. A three person God is therefore impossible and illogical. So you use texts that are concerned solely with his humanity in his role as Messiah, to dispute unambiguous texts that say Jesus is God. We are supposed to be using straight forward texts to help explain ambiguous texts. We aren't to bring our preconceived beliefs to our reading of scripture (eisegesis), but must let scripture decide our beliefs (exegesis). I find most verses that affirm Jesus' divinity to be clear enough for common folk to immediately understand. To understand them differently requires effort such as that you used in your video.
God reveals in his word what we need to know. If it isn't logical to the human mind, it's either true anyway or it's false because we find it illogical. But God's word is not subject to our logic. In actuality, scripture becomes entirely logical to us if we accept what is revealed about the incomprehensible one true God.
Proverbs 3:5 “Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding; 6 in all your ways submit to him, and he will make your paths straight.”
You said that if YHWH was triune, he would have revealed that clearly in his word, and the wise and intellectuals wouldn't be needed. But Jesus uses parables and says truth will be understood by those who have ears to hear. He sent the Spirit to the apostles to bring to mind for them all that he taught. The Father denied understanding to the Jewish priests and scribes who diligently studied the scriptures and they failed to see that all scripture attests to Jesus. Instead, the Father chose to reveal truth to children (Matt 11:25). I think about how for roughly 2,000 years, common folk/children have believed in the Trinity. The Father doesn't intend understanding without faith, and our faith is a gracious gift from God (Eph 2:8-9).
You find trinitarian claims to be nonsense and deny Jesus' divinity because you aren't appreciating what Messiah had to be and what Messiah had to do. Though he is both son of man and Son of God, only a human being could substitute for other humans, so he lived out his mission as Messiah only as a son of man even as he remained the Son of God (Heb 4:15). Jesus humbled himself (Phil 2:8, Heb 2:9) and in every way that we fail, he lived perfectly. He lived as if he were you or me, except that he did it perfectly. That means he had to:
> Pray to God/Jehovah/the Father,
> Acknowledge and worship the Father as the one true God,
> Obey God's law perfectly,
> Love God and even our enemies,
> Serve God in all things,
> Rely on God the Father for all things,
> Be subject to God's authority,
> Cry out to the Father when feeling forsaken, as in Psalm 22 "my God my God why have you forsaken me . . . ",
> and more.
When Jesus proclaimed that the Father was the one true God, you claimed it was proof that he was not God. He couldn't have been our human representative and substitute living a perfect human life if he did it in his divinity. On our behalf and in our place he proclaimed the Father to be our one true God perfectly because we fail to. He was not denying anything about his divine nature while he was living out his mission as the human Messiah. The Father is the one true God whether alone or in a Trinity.
Jesus was God prior to Mary conceiving him, and by becoming a man took on an additional human nature (Phil 2:6). He is revealed in scripture to be both son of man and Son of God:
> Though only God is to be worshiped, due to His divinity Jesus is worshiped (Mat 2:2, 11, & 14:33); but living as a human being, Jesus worships the Father as we should (John 17).
> Jesus is called God (John 20:28, Heb 1:8), and He is called man (Mk 15:39, John 19:5).
> Jesus is prayed to (Acts 7:59), and he prays to the Father just as we should (John 17).
> Jesus knows all things (John 21:17), yet he grew in wisdom as men do (Lk 2:52).
> Jesus gives eternal life (John 10:28), yet he died like we all will do (Rom 5:8).
> All the fullness of deity dwells in Jesus (Col 2:9), yet he also has a body of flesh and blood (Lk24:39)
Without taking the Holy Spirit into account here, I will agree with you it's beyond logic or understanding that two distinct persons can be the one true God. It's likewise illogical that Jesus walked on water, calmed a storm by saying “be still”, and raised a dead man after 4 days in the grave by saying “Lazarus come out”. Atheists deny all this because they find it illogical. Do you believe these miracles? Do you think Thomas was wrong when he identified Jesus as Lord and God? Do you think Jesus was wrong not to correct Thomas and to declare blessed everyone who confesses Jesus is Lord and God as Thomas did? Jesus did not deny the conclusion of the Jewish leaders who said he was equating himself with God by claiming to be God's son. If it weren't true, Jesus was practicing deceit.
The human Jesus received glory and inherited all things. He became for a little while lower than the angels (Heb 2:9) when he became a man like us. After completing his work as Messiah, Jesus returned to possessing the glory he shared with the Father (John 17:5, Mark 3:38, 1 Tim 1:17 & 2:13) from all eternity. When resurrected unto eternal life we will be glorified and become superior to the angels as well. They will be serving us. But of course, ours will not be a glory like the Father's or Jesus'.
You said it's nonsense for Jesus, if God, to be the exact representation of God. However, if God became a human being, that human being would be the human representation of God. How could he not be. He could do nothing other than display the radiance and glory of God. That is plainly what God's infallible Word says unambiguously about Jesus (Heb 1:3), and Jesus said (John 14:7) that knowing him is equal with knowing and seeing the Father. Just as the Father is savior, creator, and sustainer of all things by the power of his word, so is Jesus (Col 1:16, John 1:3, Heb 1:3). Acts 17:22ff clearly states that only one God created all things and keeps all things upheld by His power. One God and both the Father and the Son are attributed with being our one savior, creator, and sustainer. Illogical but what scripture reveals.
You appear to attribute Jesus' Godlike abilities to Jehovah empowering him. The word “through” doesn't make Jesus a mere tool of YHWH or indicate he had no power in himself. It says nothing about his nature. The Greek word means on account of, because of. Jesus is the cause of the creating. Jesus and the Father share a common purpose. Jesus using his divine power creates at the command of the Father. His acting on the Father's command doesn't make him inferior. It says nothing about his nature. In John 5:17 and 14:11 Jesus says he does what the Father does, and makes the point that they are one. In Acts, the apostles do miracles in Jesus' name, not Jehovah's name, because it's Jesus' power doing the miracles. John 1:3 is a clear and unqualified statement that ALL things come into existence through Jesus. Yet in Genesis 1 and Psalm 33, God creates everything by saying it into existence with his word and breath, with no mention of a previously created and preincarnate Jesus doing this for YHWH. One God creating, with creation attributed to two distinct persons. Illogical to the limited human mind. But still God's word and true.
Let's consider further how the one true God revealed himself to humankind.
In Exodus 3 the angel of YHWH appeared to Moses in the flames of a burning bush. Reminds me of the pillar of fire in which YHWH appears many times. When YHWH saw Moses was approaching, the text says it was God who called to Moses from the midst of the bush. So, the angel (angel = messenger) of YHWH and God/elohim are equated. God goes on to say that YHWH is the God/elohim of Moses and the people. When Moses asks God/elohim for his name, the text says that God/elohim tells Moses he is I AM WHO I AM and to tell the people that I AM has sent Moses. According to this chapter, God, YHWH, and YHWH's messenger are all I AM WHO I AM For Jesus to be identified as God, is to equate him with YHWH and YHWH's messenger.
Jesus said that the Old Testament scriptures were all about him. John 5:39 “You examine the scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is those very scriptures that testify about Me;” Luke 24:27 “Then beginning with Moses and with all the Prophets, He explained to them the things written about Himself in all the Scriptures.”
There is no distinction made between Almighty God and just God, as if they could be referring to two different beings. Searching the NASB, the words “Almighty” and “God” occur together 40 times in the Old Testament and then 9 times in the Book of Revelation. The word “God” without “Almighty” appears 4,192 times in the Old Testament, and 1,209 times in the New Testament. So the Father is called God much more frequently than he is called Almighty God. And Jesus is called God in the New Testament just as the Father is. In the Revelation of Jesus Christ, (Rev 1:1) it's clear that Jesus the lamb of God is identified as the Alpha and Omega, and God Almighty. Using the World English Bible (to avoid confusing LORD(YHWH) with Lord(Kurios and Adonay)), God is called Lord in the Old Testament 1,324 times, sometimes combined with YHWH and sometimes just Lord alone. In the New Testament, Lord is used 668 times, and refers to Jesus and the Father. When Old Testament texts are quoted in the New Testament, the occurrence of YHWH in the Hebrew is presented in the Greek as Lord (Kurios) by the inspired authors of the text.
Elohim in the Old Testament is translated God and it is plural. The plurality of elohim does not prove the Trinity. But why is it plural instead of singular? In Gen 1:26 & 3:22 YHWH refers to Himself as plural/us. Still, in Deut 6:4, YHWH our God plainly states that he is one.
This can all be confusing, and even contradictory, and used by those who claim the bible can't be God's inerrant word. Is there one true God or not? Is Jesus blaspheming? Why doesn't Jesus explain that there is only the one person of God, the Father, and that he is not that God? It's because John 1:1, Titus 2:13, Rom 9:5, Phil 2:5-6, John 1:8, Col 2:9-10, John 10:33, Is 44:6 with Rev 1:17-18, John 20:27-28, 2 Peter 1:1, Acts 20:28, Heb 1:8, 1 John 5:20, unambiguously say Jesus is God. And again, there is John 20:28-29 where Thomas plainly says that Jesus is his Lord and his God. Jesus then affirms the truth of Thomas proclamation by saying that all who believe like Thomas are blessed. In Ezekiel 34, YHWH says he himself will be the shepherd to his people. In John 10, Jesus identifies himself as the good shepherd. Jesus possesses two natures and is one of the three persons which comprise the one true God, and YHWH in Jesus does come down and shepherd his people.
The performance of miracles wasn't part of Jesus' saving work as Messiah, though they were needed to fulfill prophecy confirming that he was Messiah, and to affirm the divine quality of his teaching. So he performed them using his divine power as God. But in use of his divine power, he wasn't affecting his mission as our savior because we aren't called to do miracles, but to live a perfect life of obedience.
The initial Christians had all been Jews and would not have violated their lifelong and deeply held belief as monotheists without a convincing reason. 1 Corinthians 8:4-6 makes the point that people talk of gods and lords, but for Christians there is only one true Lord and one true God. Jesus is the one true Lord. Jesus hasn't replaced the Father as our one true Lord, they both, as God are our Lord. The Father is the one true God. From God all things came and we live, and through Jesus all things came and we live. In the Old Testament the one true God is called YHWH, Lord, and God. Jesus could be called lord like all the worldly lords, but unless he is equal with YHWH and God, he can't be called the one true Lord as he is in 1 Cor 8:4,5-6. Jesus with YHWH/the Father, is the one true God. It's illogical to the limited human mind, but it's all in God's inerrant word.
You accuse trinitarians of being hyper literal because they believe unambiguous verses. I agree with you that the genre of the text determines how we read it. This trinitarian can discern when “god” is used for Satan and “God” for Jesus. Because I believe unambiguous verses I am not then compelled to be woodenly literal with every other verse irrespective of the context and genre.
Early church scholars have evidence that the earliest Christians were worshiping Jesus as divine from immediately after his resurrection. The primitive Christian church used Kyrios(Lord) in place of YHWH when speaking of YHWH. Their Jewish background kept them from using YHWH. Using kyrios for God was also the Greek Christian churches practice. When they called Jesus Lord in the New Testament, they were proclaiming him to be the one true God.
It's not as if at some point people decided that one God was insufficient and there needed to be three, and then created an incomprehensible concept of three persons in one true God. It's so much easier to just have one especially when the bible says there is one and the Trinity is illogical. But they accepted God's word as perfect and had to accept what it revealed.
I hope you found no debate crushing cliches or reasoning without biblical backing. Should we trust our reason over the bible, or accept as truth what the bible reveals even if it is illogical to us?
Thank you for reading it.
Most sincerely,
RalfReply by Meleti Vivlon on 2022-09-17 17:59:09
Ralf, you cite many of the proof texts that I will be dealing with in my series. If you can be patient, we can address each one as they come up. I'm not going to comment on your personal opinions or interpretation since such discussions lead nowhere. Reasoning that the trinity is beyond our logic is self-serving. First prove it, then we can deal with its illogic. You haven't proved it. Again, each proof text you advance--and there are many thanks to the creativity of Trinitarian promoters who've had 1500 years to refine their art--will be shown for what it is in future videos.