Refuting All Trinitarian ‘Proof-Texts’
The Synoptic Gospels
Matthew 1:23: Jesus’ name is said to be “Emmanuel,” which means “God with us.”
The original prophecy concerned a child who was born before the Assyrian defeat of Israel (Isa. 7:13-17), in the eighth century BC. This prophecy is only secondarily applied to Jesus. Since the child who originally fulfilled the prophecy obviously was not God incarnate, it cannot mean that Jesus is God incarnate either. Instead, Immanu’el (“God [is] with us”) simply means that God is taking care of His people by sending the Messiah (cf. Josh. 1:9; Judg. 6:12; Psa. 23:4; Isa. 8:10).
Matthew 3:3: Here it is stated that John the Baptist came to “prepare the way of the Lord.” This is a direct quotation of Isaiah 40:3 (LXX). In this context, the Lord refers to Jesus, yet in the original context “the LORD” is Yahweh (Isa. 40:3). This demonstrates straightforwardly that Jesus is Yahweh.
Actually, Matthew alters the original text of Isaiah 40:3 (LXX) slightly in his quotation. Whereas the original passage states, “make straight the paths of our God,” Matthew quotes it as, “make straight his paths.” This undermines the idea that Matthew was proclaiming the deity of Jesus, since he intentionally omitted the reference to “our God” when applying Isa. 40:3 to Jesus. Likewise, the Markan version replaces “who will prepare the way before Me” with “[John] will prepare your way,” implying that God is speaking to another.
Furthermore, as an agent of God, Jesus could fulfill statements about Yahweh without actually being God (cf. Exod. 3:7-8, 10; 7:17, 20; Judg. 2:16, 18). Because “God was in the Messiah” and “the Father who dwells in [Jesus] does His works” (John 14:10; 2 Cor. 5:19), any statement about Jesus on earth could also legitimately be said about God as well. Thus, the fact that Isa. 40:3 is quoted in reference to Jesus does not show that Jesus is God, especially in light of the fact that Matthew intentionally alters the LXX reading of this verse.
Matthew 5:21-22, 27-28, 31-32, 33-34, 38-39, 43-44: Jesus repeatedly alters the Old Testament teachings, even in some cases reversing them. But rather than appealing to the authority of God, as would be necessary when altering/reversing a previous teaching of God, He appeals to His own authority: “I say to you”! This implies that He Himself carries the authority of God, and His audience certainly would not have missed this implication.
Throughout Jesus’ ministry, he was not speaking on his own authority, but on the authority of the Father who sent him (John 7:28; 8:28, 40; 12:49; 14:10, 24). This was, in fact, prophesied in the Old Testament: “I [God] will put My words in his [the Messiah’s] mouth” (Deut. 18:18). Thus, it is clear that the words Jesus spoke were those of his Father, not his own; as the Messiah, speaking on the authority of God, he was able to communicate the divinely authorized interpretation of the Law.
Matthew 9:2: Jesus claims the authority to forgive sins, something properly belonging to God alone. This means that Jesus is God.
Just a few verses later, it is said that “the crowds marveled and glorified God, the One who gave such authority to men” (Matt. 9:8). This makes clear that Jesus’ authority to forgive sins was not because he was God, but because he was given authority by God. The apostles also were given authority to forgive sins, but this certainly does not make them God (John 20:23).
Matthew 12:6, 8: Jesus not only claims authority over the Sabbath, a day consecrated by Yahweh Himself (Exod. 20:8-11), but claims to be greater than the temple itself, which was considered to be the earthly presence of God Most High! His Pharisaic audience clearly recognized the ‘blasphemy,’ resulting in a conspiracy to murder Him (v. 14).
Mark 2:27-28 provides important context: “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. For this reason the Son of Man is also lord of the Sabbath.” Jesus is lord of the Sabbath not because he is God, but because the Sabbath was made for man, and Jesus is the Son of Man. The reason that Jesus is greater than the temple is because God was in him (John 14:10; 2 Cor. 5:19), thus making him the true temple during the time that he was on earth (cf. John 2:21). Believers are also considered “temples” due to the presence of the holy spirit within them (1 Cor. 6:19). Therefore, Jesus was not claiming to be God in this passage.
Why, then, did the Pharisees seek to kill Him? Although many trinitarian apologists assume that blasphemy means ‘claiming to be God,’ the fact is that one could also blaspheme against Moses, the temple, or the Law (Acts 6:11-14). By ‘breaking’ the Sabbath and claiming to be greater than the temple, Jesus was blaspheming against both the temple and the Law in the eyes of the Pharisees.
Matthew 12:32: The blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is considered far greater than all other sins – including blasphemy against Jesus – which is inconceivable unless the Holy Spirit is both personal and on the level of God Himself.
On the contrary, the context of this verse clearly shows what is meant by “blasphemy of the holy spirit.” The Pharisees blasphemed the holy spirit by suggesting that Jesus’ power was from the devil rather than God, thus denying God’s empowerment at work within His Messiah (Matt. 12:24-32). This agrees with the definition of the holy spirit as the powerful presence of God, rather than a separate person.
Matthew 14:27: Jesus tells His disciples not to fear the tumultuous sea, because “I am He” (ego eimi). This is a strong parallel with Isaiah 43, in which Yahweh tells Israel, “do not fear when you pass through the waters” because “I am He” (ego eimi) is with them (vv. 1-3, 10). Likewise, Job 9:8 says of Yahweh, “He alone… treads on the waves of the sea.”
Jesus cannot have been claiming to be the speaker of Isaiah 43, since this speaker refers to the Messiah as “My servant” in v. 10, and must therefore be the Father, not Jesus (Acts 3:13, 26). Thus, the allusion to Isa. 43 is almost certainly unintentional. When Jesus said, ego eimi (“It is I”), he was simply identifying himself (cf. John 9:9). Peter was also given the ability to walk on water (Matt. 14:30), but does this mean that Peter is Yahweh? Obviously not. Evidently, God can grant the ability to walk on water to certain humans.
The fact that Jesus was not claiming to be God when he walked on the water can be seen in the disciples’ response to this event: “Truly you are the Son of God” (Matt. 14:33). They did not conclude that he was God, but that he was the Son of God, that is, the rightful king of Israel to whom God had given the ability to walk on water (cf. Psa. 89:20, 25-27). [1]
Matthew 16:27: Jesus claims authority over the angels of God and states that He will come to “repay each one according to his deeds.” This is a quotation of several Old Testament passages which state that Yahweh Himself will repay according to each person’s deeds (Ps. 62:12; Prov. 24:12; Jer. 17:10; 32:19; Ezek. 33:20 cf. Rom. 2:6).
The Old Testament does say that Yahweh will “repay each one according to his deeds.” However, God “will judge the world through a man [Jesus] whom He has appointed” (Acts 17:31 cf. John 5:22, 27, 30). Thus, as God’s appointed agent of judgment, Jesus is allowed to exercise divine prerogatives of judgment without himself being God.
Matthew 19:17-21: Jesus quotes all of the Ten Commandments except those dealing with following God, and then sums up the rest by exhorting the rich young ruler to “follow Me”! This is an implicit claim to being the same as Yahweh God, Who the first four commandments deal with.
However, as the same gospel records Jesus saying, “whoever receives me receives the One who sent me” (Matt. 10:40). Because he is the agent of God, anyone who follows Jesus is also following God. This is not an implicit claim to deity, but a claim to be sent by God.
Matthew 21:9: Jesus is identified as “the One Who comes in the name of the Lord” (Ps. 118:26), Who in the original OT context is in fact Yahweh Himself.
It is not at all clear from the context of Psalm 118:26 that “he who comes in the name of Yahweh” refers to Yahweh Himself. Instead, it seems to refer to David, the author of this psalm, who wrote earlier in the same psalm, “All nations surround me; in the name of Yahweh I cut them off” (Psa. 118:10-11). Thus, by referring to Jesus as “he who comes in the name of the Lord,” they were identifying him as the Son of David and king of Israel (Matt. 21:9; John 12:13).
Matthew 23:9-10: Jesus puts Himself on the same level as the Father in heaven, stating that He, the Christ, is their “one-and-only Leader.”
In this verse, Jesus refers to himself as the only kathegetes, using a word that properly means “guide.” [2] This word does not mean “leader” in the sense of superiority, but in the sense of “one who leads to a destination.” Jesus is the only kathegetes because he is the only way to the Father (John 14:6), and he leads his disciples down this path.
Matthew 23:37-39: Jesus states that He, in the past, willed to gather the inhabitants of Jerusalem “as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings.” This is an action attributed to Yahweh alone in the OT (Deut 32:11-12; Ruth 2:12; Ps. 17:8; 36:7; 57:1; 61:4; 63:7; 91:4; Isa. 31:5). Furthermore, He again identifies Himself as “the One Who comes in the name of the Lord,” Who in the original OT context is Yahweh Himself (Ps. 119:26).
This ‘mother hen’ imagery seems to have been a common metaphor for protection. Ruth asked Boaz to “spread out your wing over [me], for you are a kinsman-redeemer” (Ruth 3:9). Likewise, it seems that one of the duties of the Davidic king was to protect his people in this way, as Jeremiah wrote, “Yahweh’s anointed one [the king]… was caught in their traps, him of whom we said, ‘Under his shadow we shall live’” (Lam. 4:20).
It makes sense that the king would be expected to protect Israel in this way, because Yahweh appointed the king to be a shield and shepherd of His people (Ps. 78:70-72; 84:9; 89:18). Thus, it makes perfect sense that Jesus, as the son of David and rightful king of Israel, would be able to use this imagery for himself. This is not evidence for his deity.
With regard to the title, “he who comes in the name of the Lord,” see my response to the note on Matthew 21:9.
Matthew 25:31-32: Jesus Himself will enter into judgment with the nations in the eschatological Day of the Lord, an action which in the OT is attributed to Yahweh (Joel 3:2).
See my response to the note on Matthew 16:27.
Matthew 26:63-65: Jesus claims to be the “One like a son of man” of Daniel 7:13-14, Who is described using actions (like riding on the clouds and being religiously served) that belong to Yahweh alone. The high priest identifies this claim as blasphemous and deserving of death, showing that he understood this implication.
See my response to the note on Daniel 7:13-14, with regard to the “one like a son of man.” Blasphemy does not mean ‘claiming to be God,’ despite what many trinitarian apologists say; one could also blaspheme against Moses, the temple, or the Law (Acts 6:11-14). To blaspheme (Gk: blasphemia) simply means to slander someone or something. Evidently, the Jews thought it slanderous against God for Jesus to claim that he will “sit at the right hand of Power,” since they did not believe that he was actually the Messiah. For this reason, they (wrongly) found him to be deserving of death (cf. Lev. 24:16).
Matthew 28:19: The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit all share a singular “name” into which believers are to be baptized. This shows that they are one in being, in line with trinitarian theology.
In this verse, Jesus says, “baptize them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy spirit.” However, the fact that “name” is singular in this verse does not mean that these three have the same name, much less that they are all one-in-being. When he blessed his children, Jacob said, “bless the boys… [in] the name [singular] of my fathers Abraham and Isaac” (Gen. 48:16), but Abraham and Isaac were not one-in-being.
Instead, to perform an action “in the name” of someone or something means that you are calling on the authority of that person or thing. [3] Thus, the fact that believers are to be baptized “in the name of the Father, the Son, and the holy spirit” simply means that the salvific power of baptism is from the authority of these three. As an analogy, if a police officer arrested someone “in the name of the governor, the sheriff, and the law,” this wouldn’t imply that the governor, sheriff, and law are all one-in-being, or even all persons.
In addition, some lay-apologists claim that one can only be baptized into God, and so the Father, Son, and holy spirit must all be God. This is false, because the Israelites were once “baptized into Moses” (1 Cor. 10:2).
Matthew 28:20: Jesus says, “Lo, I am with you all the days until the end of the age.” This implies His omnipresence.
On the contrary, although this is consistent with Jesus being omnipresent, it does not entail omnipresence. Jesus would be with his disciples because they would be filled with the holy spirit, which would “receive what is mine and disclose it to you” (John 16:15; cf. John 14:26; Rom. 8:9; Eph. 3:16-17). Other humans have been able to extend their physical presence through their spirit, including the prophet Elisha (2 Kgs. 5:26) and the apostle Paul (1 Cor. 5:3; Col. 2:5; 1 Thess. 2:13). It’s unlikely that Elisha and Paul were literally present away from their bodies; however, there’s also no reason to think that Jesus was speaking literally when he said, “I am with you always.”
Mark 1:2-3: See note on Matthew 3:3.
See my response to the note on Matthew 3:3.
Mark 2:5: See note on Matthew 9:2.
See my response to the note on Matthew 9:2.
Mark 2:28: See note on Matthew 12:8.
See my response to the note on Matthew 12:8.
Mark 3:29: See note on Matthew 12:32.
See my response to the note on Matthew 12:32.
Mark 6:50: See note on Matthew 14:27.
See my response to the note on Matthew 14:27.
Mark 10:18-21: See note on Matthew 19:17-21.
See my response to the note on Matthew 19:17-21.
Mark 11:9: See note on Matthew 21:9.
See my response to the note on Matthew 21:9.
Mark 14:62: See note on Matthew 26:64.
See my response to the note on Matthew 26:64.
Luke 3:4-6: See note on Matthew 3:3.
See my response to the note on Matthew 3:3.
Luke 4:18: Jesus claims that the prophecy of Isaiah 61:1 is fulfilled by Himself. In the original context, it is actually Yahweh Himself speaking and stating that Yahweh has anointed Him and the Spirit of Lord Yahweh has rested upon Him (see note on Isaiah 61:1).
Luke 5:20: See note on Matthew 9:2.
See my response to the note on Matthew 9:2.
Luke 6:5: See note on Matthew 12:8.
See my response to the note on Matthew 12:8.
Luke 6:27: See note on Matthew 5:43-44.
See my response to the note on Matthew 5:43-44.
Luke 7:16: In response to Jesus’ miracles, the people rejoice that “God has visited His people,” using a verb (episkeptomai) which elsewhere describes a personal visit (Matt. 25:36, 43; Acts 15:36; Jas. 1:27).
When the people saw that Jesus had the power to resurrect, they exclaimed, “‘A great prophet has arisen among us!’ and, ‘God has visited His people!’” The Jews would never refer to God Himself as “a great prophet.” God ‘visiting’ His people is an idiom that means that God has taken care of His people (Exod. 4:31; Ruth 1:6; Psa. 106:4; Luke 1:68). Thus, God ‘visited’ His people by sending them a great prophet, Jesus.
Luke 10:17-18: Jesus says, “I watched Satan fall like lightning from heaven.” This could indicate a past pre-existence in which He saw Satan fall from heaven.
When Jesus’ disciples tell him, “Even the demons submit to us in your name,” he responds, “I saw the Adversary descend like lightning from heaven.” In other words, the disciples had such a significant effect on the spiritual realm that the Adversary himself came down. It is a fantasy to think that this is referring to a primeval ‘fall of Satan,’ since the Adversary was not actually cast out of heaven at that time (Job 1:6-7; 2:1-2; Rev. 12:7-9).
Luke 13:34-35: See note on Matthew 23:37-39.
See my response to the note on Matthew 23:37-39.
Luke 18:19-22: See note on Matthew 19:17-21.
See my response to the note on Matthew 19:17-21.
Luke 19:38: See note on Matthew 21:9.
See my response to the note on Matthew 21:9.
Luke 22:67-70: See note on Matthew 26:64.
See my response to the note on Matthew 26:64.
Refuting All Trinitarian ‘Proof-Texts’
The Synoptic Gospels
______________________________
[1] J. R. Daniel Kirk and Stephen L. Young, “‘I Will Set His Hand to the Sea’: Psalm 88:26 LXX and Christology in Mark,” Journal of Biblical Literature 133, no. 2 (2014), 333-340.
[3] Throughout the Old and New Testaments, actions are regularly performed “in the name” of God, kings, and prophets (Deut. 18:5; 1 Sam. 17:45; 25:9; 2 Kgs. 2:24; Ezra 5:1; Esth. 2:22; 3:12; 8:8; Zech. 13:3; Matt. 10:41-42).
No comments:
Post a Comment