Addressing "Is Jesus God? Opening the door to Jehovah's Witnesses"

Right off the bat I want to make it clear: This blog is not about the Jehovah's Witnesses. This blog is strictly about making defunct idea of a Triune God being found in the Bible. However, after recently joining Twitter (@GodIsNoTrinity) I was looking for a popular Hash Tag to use in a Tweet to bring attention to this blog. I searched "#IsJesusGod" and found a Tweet from @AdamHellyer where he was advertising his new blog; "Is Jesus God? Opening the door to Jehovah's Witnesses". He laid out several verses and reasons that he claims "prove" Jesus is God. Unfortunately, there is some flawed logic and reasoning in his examples so I have decided to take the time out to address these flaws. Mr. Hellyer's points will be in italics then the scriptural reasoning and response can be found below.

"In Matthew 1:23, Jesus is called ‘Immanuel’, which means ‘God with us’".

IF, and that is a BIG if, we were to create doctrine exegetically on the meaning of a name this point would still be foiled rather easily. The Bible often references "Jehovah" or "God" being with someone while not literally being with that someone. For example:

"Be courageous and strong...Jehovah your God is with you wherever you go" - Joshua 1:9 (NWT)

Jehovah was not literally following Joshua around everywhere he went. However, Jehovah was there in the spiritual sense, perhaps by his holy spirit, to give Joshua strength and courage to fight the coming battle in which he was severely outnumbered. Further, if we are take the literal meaning of names and develop our doctrine based on them then it would only be reasonable to do so in all instances. Such as the name "Jehu" means "Jehovah is he" - using Mr. Hellyer's logic, Jehu must be Jehovah. Elijah means "God Jehovah" - using that same logic, that the meaning of Elijah's name defines who Elijah is, then Elijah is Jehovah. Eliathah means "God is come" - that must mean Eliathah is God who has come. Of course these are all as equally as true as calling Jesus "Immanuel" means that he is God. That is not simply the purpose of these names. The personal names of God's people were to bring honor and glory to Him, not to be used as doctrinal foundations. It's a sign of desperation to try so hard to find the Trinity doctrine in the Bible when you start basing doctrine on the meaning of a name.

"In John 20:28, Thomas calls Jesus, ‘My Lord and my God’"

The biggest detractor to this "proof verse" is context - as it is to most Trinity "proof" verses. The first thing we must do, and I mean must, is to acknowledge what Jesus has said.

"No man has seen God at any time..." - John 1:18 (See also 1 John 4:12)

Now we have a contradiction. Either Jesus was lying when he said "No man has seen God" or our understanding of Thomas seeing Jesus (who is allegedly God) and exclaiming "My Lord and My God!" needs to be understood differently. Perhaps in a way that does not portray Jesus and the inspired writings of John as being dishonest? It is important that we pay attention to Jesus's teachings as a whole, not pick out parts that may seem to prove our doctrine. What did Thomas then mean when he said this? Well keep in mind these words were written thousands of years ago in a language that was not English. It is possible that this idiom, as well as others, did not mean then what they mean now. Unless Jesus and John were lying about being man being able to see God, then clearly that must be the case.

"And it is not certain that even the words Thomas addressed to Jesus (Jn. 20:28) meant what they suggest in the English Version." - Encyclopaedia Britannica, Article by Rev. Charles Anderson Scott, M.A., D.D. Dunn Professor of New Testament, Theological College of the Presbyterian Church of England, Cambridge

"In Colossians 2:9, it says, “in Christ lives all the fullness of God in a human body”"

In his letter to Ephesus, Paul mentioned some others who may be filled with this same "fullness of God".

"And to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fulness of God." - Ephesians 3:19 (KJV)

That's right. If by being "filled with all the fullness of God" then Jesus is God, then since the congregation of Ephesus is also "filled with all the fulness of God" then they are God too! If that doesn't make sense to you, and it shouldn't, then that means Mr. Hellyer is once again using faulty logic in an attempt to prove his belief. If it is true in one instance, then it must be true in all instances in which the same claim is made. That is how logic works. Now, the true meaning of this verse requires that we dig into the original language used, which is Koine Greek. I have addressed this verse in a previous entry of this blog titled: "The Word 'Godhead'". Here I am going to quote of couple noted Bible Scholars who reveal the true meaning and proper interpretation of this verse. If you want the more in-depth research I will refer you to the previous entry.

"Taken by themselves, these two sentences might be theological statements about the essential nature of Christ...But in both places Paul goes on to speak of what God has done for Christians through Christ..So he seems to be thinking chiefly of the fullness of divine grace which is in Christ, and by him is made available for men....The church is to become...an organism through which he can work perfectly. The ideal will be realized only when all Christians are filled with all the fullness of god (Eph. 3:19), i.e. with the fullness which has its source in God, not the fullness which God has in himself." - A. Richardson; A Theological Wordbook of the Biblex

”These passages most clearly evince that Christ has received his fullness from God, in the sense in which we shall receive our fullness from Christ. It is of no weight in proving that Christ is of the same essence with God." - John Milton; On Christian Doctrine

The accurate interpretation of this verse requires one that can be applied to both Christ and his congregation because Paul made the exact claim about both Christ and his congregation. If you want to believe this verse proves that Christ is part of a Triune God then you must also accept that the congregation of Ephesus is God as well.

The next series of examples Mr. Hellyer uses the usual song and dance of trying to paint the picture that Jesus is Jehovah. Time and time and time again I have disproved the notion on every occasion it has been presented. It is as simple as Jehovah is the Father (Isaiah 64:8, 63:6), Jesus is the Son (Mark 1:11), the Trinity teaches that the Son is NOT the Father. Psalm 2:7 even says "Let me proclaim the decree of Jehovah; He said to me: "You are my son; Today I have become your father". Now we have Jehovah calling himself his own son and telling himself that he has become his own father! It is a nonsensical teaching proved only through faulty logic and misunderstandings.

"In Isaiah 6:1-10 and 53:1, we see the prophet Isaiah writing about Jehovah God; Yet in John 12:31-42, John writes that Isaiah was speaking about Jesus’ glory"

The problem here is Mr. Hellyer is assuming that "the Lord" that appears in this instance is Jesus. Unfortunately, this is one of this issues that commonly occurs when the divine name has been removed from the Bible.

"Recent textual discoveries cast doubt on the idea that the compilers of the LXX translated the tetragrammaton YHWH by kyrios ["Lord"]. LXX MSS (fragments) now available to us have the tetragrammaton written in Hebrew characters in the Greek text. This custom was retained by later Jewish translators of the OT in the first centuries A.D. One LXX MS from Qumran [1st century B.C.] even represents the tetragrammaton by IAO. These instances have given support to the theory that the thorough-going use of kyrios for the tetragrammaton in the text of the LXX was primarily the work of Christian scribes." - The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology

"'We now know that the Greek Bible text [the Septuagint] as far as it was written by Jews for Jews did not translate the Divine Name by kyrios, but the Tetragrammaton written with Hebrew or Greek letters was retained in such MSS [manuscripts]. It was the [Self-Proclaimed] Christians who replaced the Tetragrammaton by kyrios, when the divine name written in Hebrew letters was not understood any more.'" - Dr. P. Kahle, The Cairo Geniza

There is proof - factual undeniable proof - that the divine name existed in the Greek Scriptures in their earliest form. I have said it before and I will say it again, if Jehovah's name were never removed from the Bible, especially the Greek Scriptures, there would be no Trinity doctrine. There has been a revision of the King James Bible called "The Divine Name King James Bible" in which a group of scholars have restored Jehovah's name where it rightfully belongs. In the Hebrew Scriptures they restored it where the Tetragrammaton appears and have made footnotes where it is likely the divine name existed in the Greek Scriptures.

"That the saying of Esaias the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spake, Lord, who hath believed our report? and to whom hath the arm of the LORD (Jehovah Isa 53:1) been revealed?" - John 12:38 (Divine Name King James Bible)

The reality is Mr. Hellyer's assertion that Jesus is the subject in John is based on ignorance. I do not mean that in any form of disrespect but that is the case here. I mean literally billions of people are not aware of this information and it is not surprising. After all, Satan "is misleading the entire inhabited earth" (Revelation 12:9). The best way to get people to not worship the True God is to hide the way that the True God can be identified - by removing His name.

"In Exodus 34:14, we are told to worship only Jehovah God; Yet in Hebrews 1:6, it tells us that the angels worship Jesus Christ"

This topic is just one of the issues I have with the King James Version and those translations that follow the KJV's groundwork. In the Koine Greek the word translated as "worship" at Hebrews 1:6 is "proskuneo". Notice what these scholars say of that word:

"...to make obeisance, do reverence to (from pros, towards, and kuneo, to kiss), is the most frequent word rendered 'to worship'." - An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words

"prop. to kiss the hand to (towards) one, in token of reverence ... hence in the N. T. by kneeling or prostration to do homage (to one) or make obeisance, whether in order to express respect or to make supplication. It is used a. of homage shown to men of superior rank [position] ... Rev. 3:9 .... b. of homage rendered to God and the ascended Christ, to heavenly beings [angels]" - Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament

"The Greek word [proskuneo] denotes an act of reverence, whether paid to a creature, as here [Jesus], or to the Creator." - American Standard Version, Footnote for John 9:28

The point is this; proskuneo does not require that the worship given is equal to that given to the Almighty God. This form of worship (proskuneo) is given to angels, men, and Jesus. It is simply a way to show respect and obeisance. As I have written before, the King James Version has shown a very strong bias toward the Trinity doctrine. It is no surprise, then, that the translators would choose the word "worship" to use when translating proskuneo in reference to Jesus. However, while Jesus does deserve our obeisance it is a fact that our worship should only be given to Jehovah God. He tells us that himself:

"In Isaiah 44:6, we see Jehovah being called the ‘first and the last; Yet in Revelation 22:13, we see Jesus Christ being called the ‘first and the last’"

This point reveals more flaws in Mr. Hellyer's logic. The title "first and the last" is not a title of exclusivity. Meaning, it is a title that can belong to more than one being. For example; I am the first and only child my mother had. Rightfully, I can be called "the first and the last". Am I God too? Of course not. Jesus can be called "the first and the last" because he was, in fact, "the first and the last" creature created directly by Jehovah. Everything else was created through Jesus. Jesus was also "the first and the last" person resurrected directly by Jehovah. Everyone else is and will be resurrected through Jesus. This line of reasoning and flawed logic preys on the ignorance of it's hearer. In the Bible, take a look at how many people are called "king". Just to name a few: Solomon, David, Saul, Hezekiah, Jesus, Herod, and Jehovah. Using Mr. Hellyer's logic, because all of these people share this non-exclusive title then all of these people must be the same! Unfortunately, that is just not how things work. However, there are titles of exclusivity given only to Jehovah. One is the title of the Most High (Psalm 83:18) and the other is the title of Almighty God (Exodus 6:3). Neither of these titles are ever used in reference to Jesus. In fact at Luke 1:32 Jesus is specifically called the "Son of the Most High", a clear differentiation between him and Jehovah. Jesus cannot be both the Most High and the Son of the Most High - that would make him his own father!

"Jesus knows everything (Omniscient). John 1:48, 2:24&25, 6:64, 16:30"

It needs to be stated that none of these verses prove that Jesus is omniscient. Knowing certain things, does not prove that he knows all things. Despite Mr. Hellyer's remarks in the comment section of his blog where he attempts to perform gymnastics, the following verse proves beyond doubt that Jesus, the Son of the Trinity, does not know everything.

"Concerning that day or the hour nobody knows, neither the angels of the heavens nor the Son, but only the Father" - Matthew 24:36 (NWT)

I understand this gives opportunity for the "well he was a man while on earth" argument and that's fine. It is a convenient little loophole in your doctrine that seems to ease your conscience when you come across verses that blatantly disprove your it. The cool thing about this verse though is it says "only the Father" knows. There are allegedly 3 people in this Triune God arrangement. So even if Jesus does not know because he's currently a man that knows he's God but doesn't have the entire repertoire that the Almighty God would have, the Holy Spirit would still know the day and the hour. But he doesn't. "Only the Father" knows. As I made apparent in my entry called "The Counterfeit Doctrine", it is not necessary to expose every aspect of the Trinity doctrine to be false. All that need to be done is to disprove one teaching within it and the entire thing is exposed as counterfeit.

"Jesus is eternal. Micah 5:2, John 8:58, Isaiah 9:6, Hebrews 5:6, 7:3, Matthew 28:20"

Again it seems as if the scriptures Mr. Hellyer has chosen fail to prove his point. They prove only that Jesus has existed for a long time and will continue to exist for a long time. What they do not prove is that he is eternal. In fact, I would argue that Hebrews 7:3 proves the opposite saying "being made like the Son of God". The Son of God was made, he did not always exist. He was made by his Father, Jehovah, he was the very first creation of His!

"...the beginning of the creation of God" - Revelation 3:14 (KJV)

"So now, Father, glorify me at your side with the glory that I had alongside you before the world was." - John 17:5 (NWT)

"Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature" - Colossians 1:15 (KJV)

Side Note: The Greek word translated as firstborn literally means first-born. What you can redefine the English word "firstborn" to mean to fit your doctrine is not relevant. I am not interested in the Jacob/Esau argument as that does not take into account the literally meaning of the Koine Greek word used in Colossians.

Back to the point, Jesus had a beginning. When that beginning was, who knows? He could have been working side by side with Jehovah for trillions of years before the Earth was made. In addition to that, Jesus was not inherently immortal. We know this for 2 reasons (1) he died and (2) he had to be made immortal.

"knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death no more hath dominion over him." - Romans 6:9 (ASV)

Now, only after dying and being resurrected to heaven, does Christ "dies no more".  So again, according to scripture, Jesus has not always existed and was not always immortal. He was created by someone and given immortality by someone who had the power to do these things, the Almighty God Jehovah.

"Jesus is all powerful (Omnipotent). Matthew 28:18, Hebrews 1:3"

There is no question that Jesus is powerful, all powerful though? Not according to what it means to be all-powerful. And amazingly the scripture referenced makes that point clear!

"And Jesus came to them and spake unto them, saying, All authority hath been given unto me in heaven and on earth." - Matthew 28:18 (ASV)

Keyword in this verse: given. All authority had to be given to Jesus. Now, would someone who inherently had all the power imaginable in the entire universe need to have power given to him? Of course not. Power can only be given to someone who doesn't have it by someone who has it.

 "Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him..." - Philippians 2:9 (KJV)

Along those same lines God exalted Jesus. God, clearly the one who inherently has the power to give to Jesus, also exalted him. How would it be possible for the all-powerful to be exalted to any position? Additionally, how does Jesus exalt himself (if he were God)? Addressing Hebrews 1:3, it is a verse that proves that Jesus is not the all-powerful God Trinitarians want him to be. It says he "sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high". If Jesus were the Almighty God he would be the Majesty on high! Not sitting down at his right hand! The idiom "sitting down at his right hand" in and of itself proves not only subjection but inequality. The "right hand man" is never as powerful or as knowledgeable as the one whom he is sitting at the right hand of. Again, reaching for something that just isn't there.

"Jesus is unchanging (Immutable). Hebrews 13:8"

Let me get this straight. Jesus started off in heaven, came to earth as a human, died, resurrected as a spirit, then returned to heaven to be God - and he didn't change? If this is your interpretation of this verse then the Trinitarian argument that because Jesus was a man he didn't know the time and the hour is completely destroyed because he didn't change. If he didn't change then he would be God and if he was God he would have that information. This idea contradicts the Trinity in so many ways it's almost amusing that it would even be brought up. To make the claim he doesn't change seems a little excessive. What is more likely here is that the teachings of Jesus have not and will not change. The example he set for us to follow will always be the example we are to follow. His teachings, his example and the truth have never changed and will never change. Judging by the following scriptures (that darn context again!) this is the more likely interpretation.

"Do not be led astray by various and strange teachings, for it is better for the heart to be strengthened by undeserved kindness than by foods, which do not benefit those occupied with them." - Hebrews 13:9 (NWT)

Interestingly enough, this is a good place to end it. Just as Paul warns us to "not be led astray by various and strange teachings". Strange like, I don't know, the idea that Jehovah God is 3 persons in 1 God? In his comments, Mr. Hellyer uses an abundance of scriptural gymnastics along the lines of "If the Bible doesn't say this then it could be true". This is fallacious reasoning. We are expected to obtain truth based on what the Bible says, not what it doesn't say. As previously mentioned if Jesus states that "only the Father knows" something then it would be dishonest of us to claim that just because Jesus doesn't claim to know doesn't mean he couldn't know if he wanted to. That's the kind of unreasonable, unscriptural and dishonest tactics that one must use to promote their theology.
It is clear, however, that the logic and reasoning used to come to the conclusion that a Trinity exists is inherently flawed. It can always be disproved, it can always be explained, it can always be exposed as fallacious. For this reason I have chosen to accept the truth that Jehovah God is the lone Almighty entity that we are to love and worship just as Jesus loved and worshiped Him. I do hope that you accept these facts as they are allow your beliefs to be molded around the Bible and not mold the Bible around your beliefs.