Number 3: Matthew 28:19 “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:”
Here’s a verse that at first may seem to rightly line up with what trinitarians teach but with a second glance and a little Bible research once again the trinitarians do not have solid ground for their doctrine.
Before we go any further I want to take you to the verse Acts 12:4 "And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people."
As I stated in my first video the word "Easter" here in the verse is wrong. It is suppose to say "Passover". And how do I know that? Well go one verse before that and we read....
Acts 12:3 "And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread.)"
And the Feast of Unleavened Bread is associated with the Passover so therefore the verse should read
Acts 12:3-4 "And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread.) And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Passover to bring him forth to the people."
So, if someone can add in the word Easter then yes others can add-in things to the Bible as well.
Now as I did research online the catholic church had a big influence on the translating of the Bible. And since the trinity derives from the Roman Catholic Church then we can assume that this verse was added in. But you need proof right? Ok then let’s look at some Bible verses that prove this is not a trinity verse.
Acts 2:38 “Peter replied, Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins.”
Here we read that we are to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.
Acts 8:16 “They had simply been baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus.”
Here we read that they were baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus.
Acts 10:48 “So he ordered that they be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ”.
Here Christian’s are being ordered to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.
Acts 19:5 “On hearing this, they were baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus.”
Once again, we read that they were baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus.
The Apostles had no reason to disobey a command. If they were told to baptize in the name of the Father, and of the son, and of the holy spirit then it would have been stated in the verses above. But instead it says that we are to baptize in the name of Jesus Christ.
Clearly, we are told to be baptized in Jesus’ name, and that is what the early Church did. Therefore, it should be clear to you that Matthew 28:19 is either mistranslated or is added in.
And even if the verse is correct trinitarians can't stand by this as a reasoning for the trinity because it is just talking about three separate things which is the Father, Son, and holy spirit. And it does not state that these three are one and that they make up God.
Not only that but as stated before Jesus never stated he was God in the flesh. And his disciples never thought he was God.
So, in conclusion the fact that we are to only be baptized in Jesus’ name then you can see that this verse is wrong. And therefore trinity people don’t have any solid ground for their doctrine.
Example 4: Isaiah 9:6 “For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.”
In this
verse, we come upon a list of names given to the son. And that is when our
question comes to the forefront. The verse calls the Messiah, "The Mighty God"
and "The Everlasting Father". But this can be easily cleared up.
Remember
that Isaiah was an Israelite Prophet and the book of Isaiah was written in
Hebrew. Therefore, we must look at the Hebrew Words and see what the actual
term of mighty God and Everlasting Father is in the Hebrew Language.
First thing first we must pull up the verse in Hebrew. (I searched the Hebrew translation using http://biblehub.com/interlinear/isaiah/9-6.htm.)
The word we are going to look at first is God in "the Mighty God". So as we see that translates to El.
The following are definitions/meanings for the word 'êl
(http://www.bibletools.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/Lexicon.show/ID/H410/el.htm)
1. god, god-like one, mighty one
1a. mighty men, men of rank, mighty heroes
1b. angels
1c. god, false god, (demons, imaginations)
1d. God, the one true God, Yahweh
2. mighty things in nature
3. strength, power
So we see that El has many definitions. Before we go any further I want you to take a look at another verse. Ezekiel 31:11
Now if you look at the verse Ezekiel 31:11 then you will see that the word one for "mighty one" is also translated as El in Hebrew.
I wanted you to see this verse so that you would understand that Hebrew words do have different meanings and so correctly translating them is important. Now lets get back to Isaiah 9:6.
Now beginning the verse off we read that "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given". This is a very important part of this verse. "A child is born" is talking about the prophesied Messiah and he is the son that God would give to the world. Now God could not give Himself away nor could He be a child because He is God.
This verse is speaking of the Messiah and has a list of names for him. Now the Messiah was not going to be God. And looking at the definitions given for El we can see that "Mighty God" would be better defined or translated as mighty one or mighty hero or even mighty man. I know that many of you may say "well your no expert". But one thing you need to know is that the Jews knew that the Messiah was going to be a man. They knew it would be a man appointed by God. They never thought that God Himself would be born as a child nor be a man.
Now trinitarians cannot even stand by the "Everlasting Father" part in this verse, because their doctrine states that Jesus is God the Son, not God the Father. With that being said "Everlasting Father" does not mean that Jesus (the Messiah) is God.
Remember it is not unusual for someone to be called the father of something in the Bible.
Genesis 4:20 “And Adah bare Jabal: he was the father of such as dwell in tents, and of such as have cattle.”
In this verse Jabal is called the father of those who dwell in tents because he was the first one to live in a tent. So the word Father is used to describe someone who was either the first to do something or someone who was important in some way.
And Jesus is very important. It is because of Jesus that we get to live. He died on the cross for our sins. A new covenant with God's people was started because of Jesus.
Let's look at the definitions of Father (Hebrew= 'ab):
(http://biblehub.com/hebrew/1.htm)
1. The
father of an individual
2. Used of
God as Father of His people
3. The head
or the founder of a household, a group, a family, or a clan
4. An
ancestor
a) A grandfather, the forefathers - of a person
b) Used of people (in general)
5. An
originator or patron of a class, profession, or art
6. Used of a
producer, a generator (figuratively)
7. Used of
benevolence and of protection (figuratively)
8. Used as a
term of respect and honor
9. A ruler or a chief
God did give authority to Jesus and looking at #9 from the list "a ruler" would be very fitting for Jesus.
And looking at the definitions for the word Everlasting (Hebrew `ad)......
(http://www.bibletools.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/Lexicon.show/ID/H5703/%60ad.htm)
1. perpetuity, for ever, continuing future
1a. ancient (of past time)
1b. for ever (of future time)
1b1. of continuous existence
1c. for ever (of God' s existence)
Now I can't say for sure what the correct definitions are for the phrases in Isaiah 9:6, because Hebrew words do have different meanings and I am no expert. But I do know that from what we know of God and Jesus that the trinity is false.
No comments:
Post a Comment