Is the Trinity in the Book of Isaiah?
“A cornerstone belief of the Christian faith, the doctrine of the Trinity . . . What is the doctrine of the Trinity? . . . There is only one God, but in the unity of the Godhead there are three eternal, coequal Persons where each Person is independently conscious and self-directing but never acting independently of one another and always manifesting the same character attributes and the same nature. Where in the Bible is the Trinity taught? . . . It is taught in 25 of the 27 books of the New Testament and in 13 of the 39 books of the Old Testament”—“Does the Book of Isaiah Teach the Trinity?”, Reasons to Believe (RTB) blogsite, by Hugh Ross, July 20, 2020
“The one who first states a case seems right, until the other comes and cross-examines”—Proverbs 18:17 NRSV
RTB has done a lot of good work in publishing information using science and the Bible that proves the existence of Almighty God, the Creator of the universe, and the fact that the universe gives abundant evidence of being created, but we would seriously challenge RTB to Biblically prove any of the claims above about the doctrine of the Trinity. Since the word “Trinity” is never mentioned in the Bible, a reasonable question to ask is, “Where is the doctrine in the Bible?”
The Bible says, “there is but one God, the Father” (1 Corinthians 8:6 NIV), and “there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus” (1 Timothy 2:5 NIV). Jesus said that his “Father” is “the only true God” (John 17:1,3). The Biblical God is the “one God” of the Bible, not the ‘three in one God’ of Trinitarianism. Jesus said, “My Father is greater than I am” (John 14:28 GWT; NET; ISV), which disproves the ‘equality’ claim. “I was dead” (Revelation 1:18), Jesus said. The Biblical facts that “Yahweh . . . God . . . never dies” (Habakkuk 1:12 NJB), and Jesus “Christ,” “the Son of God, “died” (1 Corinthians 15:3; Galatians 2:20), disprove the ‘eternity’ claim of the Trinity doctrine. For many solid reasons, Jesus cannot be Almighty God Yahweh.
“Which book of the Bible provides the most extensive and detailed teaching on the Trinity? . . . there is an Old Testament book that has more to say about the Trinity than the Gospel of John and Revelation combined–the two New Testament books that say the most about the Trinity. That book is Isaiah” —Ibid.
Now, after such a bold claim as this, one would think that the RTB article would provide abundant evidence from the book of Isaiah to back this up. So, what does Hugh Ross, in this blog site article, do? He says:
“I have collected . . . in a single document everything that Isaiah says that is relevant to the Trinity . . . copious specific references to different aspects of the triune God”—Ibid.
This sounds impressive, doesn’t it? One would expect to see exactly what is claimed there would be, “copious specific references to different aspects of the triune God.” What the article does have is a long series of quotations of scriptures from the book of Isaiah, under heading of:
“Isaiah Passages on the Trinity”—Ibid.
However, there are no explanations about anything in any of the scriptures that are quoted in the RTD blog site article, only the scripture quotes. We cite, without quoting, these scriptures here:
Isaiah 1:4; 2:3,4; 4:2; 6:5,8; 7:14; 8:13,14; 9:6,7; 10:17; 11:1-3; 12:2; 16:5; 17:7,10; 19:19,20; 22:21-25; 24:15,16; 25:8,9; 26:4,7; 26:13; 28:16; 28:21; 33:2; 33:17; 33:22; 35:2,4; 40:3-5; 40:9-11; 40:25; 41:14; 42:1-4; 42:6,7; 42:19; 43:3; 43:10,11; 43:14; 44:3; 44:6; 44:24; 45:5; 45:6; 45:14,15; 45:18; 45:21; 45:24; 46:9; 47:4 48:12; 49:4-9; 49:26; 50:4-9; 52:13-53:12; 55:3,4; 59:16; 59:19,20; 60:9; 61:1-3; 62:11,12; 63:8-11; 63:14-16
Since none of these scriptures says anything about the Trinity doctrine, or any aspect of it, one wonders where do Trinitarians get such ideas from the book of Isaiah? Apparently, they imagine them right into the texts! Since some of these scriptures flatly contradict the Trinity doctrine, we are amazed that they are quoted in the article, as if they support the dogma.
“A god other than Yahweh is by nature, a ‘no-god'”—-The Forgotten Trinity, by James White, page 35
Many of the scriptures above, which are quoted in the RTB article, include God’s name, Yahweh, in the Hebrew. Trinitarians imagine that the Father, the Son, and the holy Spirit, are all three individually Yahweh, yet, at the same time, there is only one Yahweh. Does the Bible say any such thing? Jesus asked, “What is your opinion about the Messiah? Whose son is he?,” and then he asks, “How, then, does David, inspired by the Spirit, call him ‘lord,’ saying,” (Matthew 22:42,43 NAB), and he goes on to quote this verse, “Yahweh declared to my Lord, ‘Take your seat at my right hand'” (Psalm 110:1 NJB) at Matthew 24:44. According to the Bible, “Christ is seated at the right hand of God” (Colossians 3:1 NAB). Thus, the Bible, and Jesus Christ himself makes it obvious that he, Jesus, is neither Yahweh, or Almighty God. Also, since “God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the holy Spirit” (Acts 10:38 NAB), it is obvious that the holy Spirit is not a person, nor is it God, or Jesus.
Let’s look at some of these scriptures quoted in the RTB article, and see if we can figure any of this out. Along the way, we’ll also look at some other scriptures in the book of Isaiah that shed light on whether or not God is portrayed as a Trinity in the book, and also the Bible as a whole.
“Disaster, sinful nation, people weighed down with guilt, race of wrong-doers, perverted children! They have abandoned Yahweh, despised the Holy One of Israel”—Isaiah 1:4 NJB
Where is there anything in this scripture about a ‘three in the Godhead,’ or ‘the three being coeternal, or coequal’? If the issue of who God is wasn’t so serious, this would be laughable. But people’s lives are at stake! Why? Because Jesus said: “Eternal life means to know you, the only true God, and to know Jesus Christ, the one whom you sent” (John 17:3 GNB). According to Jesus, one’s eternal life depends on knowing who God and Jesus really are!
“Holy, holy, holy is Yahweh Sabaoth. His glory fills the whole earth . . . ‘My eyes have seen the king, Yahweh Sabaoth.’ I then heard the voice of the Lord saying: ‘Whom should I send? Who will go for us?'”—Isaiah 6:3,5,8 NJB
Trinitarians sometimes claim that “holy, holy, holy” verse 3 represents the three members of the Trinity, and the “us” in verse 8 is the Trinity. Of course, the Bible says no such thing. Saying “holy, holy, holy” doesn’t indicate a 3-in-one Godhead any more than “O earth, earth, earth, Hear the word of the LORD!” (Jeremiah 22:29 NKJV) means the earth is a 3-in-one earth. But, who is the “us” here? The context reveals this: “My eyes have seen the King, the LORD of armies” (Isaiah 6:5 CSB). Who are the armies? They are “the armies of heaven” (Revelation 19:14 NIV), that is, the angels. Thus, the “us” in Isaiah 6 is Almighty God and the angels! Trinitarians, in their attempt to make Jesus Yahweh, also imagine that John is referring to Isaiah 6:1-8 in John 12:41, when he says, “These things Isaiah said when he saw His glory, and spoke of Him” (NKJV), speaking of Jesus. But John quoted Isaiah 53:1 and Isaiah 6:10 in John 12:38-40, not Isaiah 6:1-8. John, like other New Testament writers usually quoted from the Greek Septuagint Version (LXX), and in the lead up to Isaiah 53:1, the introduction to this 4th and most famous “servant song,” at Isaiah 52:13, predicted that Yahweh’s “servant,” Jesus, would be “glorified exceedingly” (LXX). John referred to Jesus’, not Yahweh’s, glory. Besides, it is good to keep in mind that Jesus said, “the Son of Man is going to come in his Father’s glory” (Matthew 16:27 NIV).
“The Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel”—Isaiah 7:14 NIV
This was fulfilled back in the time of the prophet Isaiah and Judean king Ahaz, when a firstborn boy named Immanuel was born. The prophecy of Isaiah 7:14 also had a later and greater fulfillment in the birth of Jesus. “All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: ‘Behold, the virgin shall be with child and bear a son, and they shall name him Emmanuel,” which means ‘God is with us'” (Matthew 1:23 NAB). Trinitarians often claim this title-name proves that Jesus is God. If that were true, then the child with the name Immanuel, or Emmanuel, born back Isaiah’s and Ahaz’s time would be also be God. If we objectively consider the syntax, we’ll notice that “God is with us” is not meant in a physical sense, as Trinitarians would like to believe. When we consider Matthew 12:30: “Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters,” we can easily see that “with me” is not meant in a physical, but in a spiritual, sense. Another helpful account is after Jesus had resurrected the widow of Nain’s son, Luke 7:16 reports, “They glorified God, exclaiming, ‘A great prophet has arisen in our midst,’ and ‘God has visited his people'” (NAB). Jesus is here called “a great prophet.” ‘God had visited his people,’ not physically, but spiritually, through Jesus. At Matthew 28:20, Jesus promised, “I am with you always, until the end of the age” (NAB). “With” is obviously not meant physically, but spiritually.
Yahweh Sabaoth is the one you are to proclaim holy, him you will dread, him you will fear. He will be a sanctuary, a stumbling-stone, a rock to trip up the two houses of Israel”—Isaiah 8:13,14 NJB
Yahweh was a snare to Judah, because their leaders unfaithfully rejected Yahweh’s law and prophets and sought help from Assyria. At Romans 9:33 and 1 Peter 2:8, Isaiah 8:14 is quoted and applied to Jesus Christ, who is a stone for the unbelievers to stumble over (1 Peter 2:7,8). Sometimes prophecies have an initial fulfillment back in Old Testament times and a different and larger fulfillment in New Testament times, and this is one of those. RTB apparently imagines a Trinitarian viewpoint right into these scriptures, that is, that Jesus is Yahweh. Of course, the scriptures say nothing of the sort!
“My trust is in Yahweh . . .I put my hope in him. Look, I and the children whom Yahweh has given me”—Isaiah 8:17,18 NJB
Hebrews 2:13 quotes these verses, with Hebrews 2:11,12 saying, “Jesus . . . says” the above words. The footnote to Hebrews 2:13 in the NIV Study Bible comments that this is an “expression of true dependence on God, perfectly exemplified in Christ. In him, humanity is seen as it was intended to be.” God’s Son, Jesus was able to do what he did because of his dependence on God. Also, Jesus saying that his “trust is in Yahweh,” proves that he is not Yahweh, nor is he equal to Yahweh.
“A child will be born to us, a son will be given to us . . . And His name will be called . . . Mighty God, Eternal Father”—Isaiah 9:6,7 NASB
Trinitarians claim that the titles “Mighty God” and “Eternal Father” mean that Jesus is Almighty God. Jesus certainly is “mighty,” and he is “God,” meaning very powerful. For example, no one would claim that Moses was Almighty God because he was told, “the LORD said to Moses: ‘See, I have made you as God to Pharaoh” (Exodus 7:1 NKJV). However, they ignore the fact that Jesus is never called “Almighty God” in the Bible, which fact makes it clear that Jesus Christ is not Almighty God. the Bible makes clear that, “The Lord God Almighty” is someone different from “the Lamb” (Revelation 21:22), Jesus Christ. Jesus has been given power to resurrect the dead and give the worthy ones eternal life. “Just as the Father raises the dead and gives life, so also does the Son give life to whomever he wishes” (John 5:21 NAB). For this reason, Jesus can rightly be called “Eternal Father” without being God himself. Later, in the book of Isaiah, “Eliakim,” who replaced “Shebna the palace administrator,” was called “a father to those who live in Jerusalem” (Isaiah 22:15,20,21 NIV), which shows that even ordinary humans can be called “father” without being God.
“A shoot will spring from the stock of Jesse, a new shoot will grow from his roots. On him will rest the spirit of Yahweh . . . the spirit of knowledge and fear of Yahweh: his inspiration will be in fearing Yahweh“—Isaiah 11:1-3 NJB
It is widely acknowledged that this prophecy applies to Jesus. Twice it states that Jesus would ‘fear Yahweh,’ indicating Jesus’ submission to Yahweh, and eliminating the ‘equality’ claim of Trinitarianism. The text says “the spirit of Yahweh” would be upon him. Jesus said, “The spirit of the Lord is upon me” (Luke 4:16 NJB), and applied it, “This text is being fulfilled today even while you are listening” (Luke 4:21 NJB). This is an indication the holy spirit is not a person.
“Until the spirit from on high is poured out on us. And the wilderness becomes a garden land and the garden land seems as common as a forest”—Isaiah 32:15 NAB
The initial fulfillment(s) of this may be Israel’s deliverance from the Assyrians in Hezekiah’s time Isaiah 36-39), and later, the spirit of God moving Persian King Cyrus to conquer Babylon, release the Israelite captives, and help the return to their homeland Isaiah 444:26-45:7; 2 Chronicles 36:22,23; Ezra 1:1-4). But the later and greater fulfillment of this is Jesus Christ pouring out the holy Spirit on the first Christians, delivering them out of Judaism and into the Christian era (Acts 2:17-46). “God raised this Jesus . . . Exalted to the right hand of God, he received the promise of the holy Spirit from the Father and poured it forth” (Acts 2:33 NAB). The point we want to emphasize here is that it is called “the spirit,” and not the Trinitarian “God the Holy Spirit.” This truth is confirmed by Acts 2:33 by the use of “the” and “it” to describe it, giving powerful evidence that the spirit of God is not a person.
“You yourselves are my witnesses, declares Yahweh, and the servant that I have chosen, so that you may know and believe me and understand that it is I. No god was formed before me, nor will be after me. I, I am Yahweh, and there is no other Savior but me”—Isaiah 43:10,11 NJB
The Israelites were to be Yahweh’s witnesses, that he is the only true God and Savior. To the Jews, “Yahweh our God is the one, the only Yahweh” (Deuteronomy 6:4 NJB), or “The LORD our God, the LORD is one!” (Deuteronomy 6:4 NJB). Yahweh is said to be only “one.” The Hebrew word for “one” here is “echad,” which means the numeral one. This word is also used in Deuteronomy 17:6, in contrast to two or more: “Only on the testimony of two or three witnesses shall a person be put to death; no one shall be put to death on the testimony of only one witness” (NAB). This singular God, however, has been cast aside by much of Christianity in favor of “another god” (Psalm 16:4 NASB), who is a “three-in-one” god.
“Who has acted thus, who has done this? He who calls each generation from the beginning: I, Yahweh, who am the first and till the last I shall still be there”—Isaiah 41:4 NJB
“Thus says Yahweh, Israel’s king, Yahweh Sabaoth, his redeemer: I am the first and I am the last, there is no God except me”—Isaiah 44:6 NJB
“Listen to me, Jacob, Israel, whom I called! I, it is I who am the first, and I am the last”—Isaiah 48:12 NAB
The Bible connects the phrase, ‘the first and the last,’ with the calling forth the generations. Almighty God, Yahweh, called forth the generations in the Old Testament, he later conferred that authority on Jesus. “Just as the Father raises the dead and gives life, so also does the Son give life to whomever he wishes” (John 5:21 NAB). But, even when Jesus said he had the power to resurrect the dead, he never claimed to be God. Jesus was very clear about who has the ultimate authority. “The Son can do nothing by himself.” “The Father . . . has entrusted all judgment to the Son” (John 5:19,22 NIV). Trinitarians claim that because both Almighty God Yahweh in Isaiah, and both Jesus and Almighty God in Revelation are called “the first and the last” that Jesus is somehow Yahweh God (Revelation 1:17; 2:8; 22:13). Also, because Yahweh is “redeemer” and the New Testament says that “Christ redeemed us” (Galatians 3:13 NIV), Trinitarians claim Jesus Christ is Yahweh. However, they overlook that fact that “God sent his Son . . . to redeem” (Galatians 4:5 NIV), which shows that God redeems through Jesus. Additionally, both Jesus and his Father are called “Savior” in Titus 3:4,6. Men are also called “savior(s)” in Judges 3:9,15; 2 Kings 13:5; Nehemiah 9:27 (all NAB); and Obadiah 21 NKJV. Jesus is called “king of kings” at Revelation 17:14; 19:16, and so is Artaxerxes at Ezra 7:12, and Nebuchadnezzar at Daniel 2:37. Since various individuals can have the same title, and yet not be the same person, is strong evidence that the title “the first and the last” does not make Jesus Almighty God.
“Was it not it not I, Yahweh? There is no other god but me, no saving God, no Saviour except me”—Isaiah 45:21 NJB
“Savior” is discussed above, and Trinitarian ideas debunked. Trinitarians claim that “within the one Being that is God, there exists eternally three coequal and coeternal persons, namely, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.” Although they deny it, Trinitarians have “bartered for another god” (Psalm 16:4 NASB), a “foreign god” (Isaiah 43:12), “a different Jesus” (2 Corinthians 11:4 NLT), a “triune God.” The Bible says that “God is only one” (Galatians 3:20 NASB), not ‘God in three persons.’ Biblically, “there is no other god but” “Yahweh” (Isaiah 45:21), “the only God” (John 5:44), not ‘three persons,’ because “the Lord our God is one (Greek: “heis”) Lord” (Mark 12:29 ISV). “Heis” is the numeral one.
“Yet all the while my cause was with Yahweh and my reward with my God. And now Yahweh has spoken, who formed me in the womb to be his servant, to bring Jacob back to him and to re-unite Israel to him;–I shall be honoured in Yahweh’s eyes, and my God has been my strength.–He said, ‘It is not enough for you to be mt servant, to restore the tribes of Israel and bring back the survivors of Israel; I shall make you a light to the nations so that my salvation may reach the remotest parts of the earth.’ Thus says Yahweh: At the time of my favor I have answered you, on the day of salvation I have helped you. I have formed you and have appointed you to be the covenant for a people to restore the land, to return ravaged properties, to say to prisoners, ‘Come out,’ to those who are in darkness, ‘Show yourselves.'”—Isaiah 49:4-9 NJB
It is very difficult to see how anything in these verses could possibly be stretched to be applied to supporting the Trinity doctrine. These verses. say that Yahweh formed Israel. They foretell that Yahweh will use Cyrus (Isaiah 44:26-28) to restore the people of Israel back to the their land, that Israel would produce the Messiah, Jesus, who, along with his disciples, would bring spiritual light and salvation to the ends of the earth. The Messiah, Jesus, would release the spiritual prisoners (Luke 4:17-19) and bring about the new covenant which will eliminate the sins of those who are part of it (Hebrews 9:11-15; 8:6-13).
“Lord Yahweh has given me a disciple’s tongue, for me to know how to give a word of comfort to the weary. Morning by morning he makes my ear alert to listen like a disciple. Lord Yahweh has opened my ear and I have not resisted. I have not turned away. I have offered my back to those who struck me, my cheeks to those who plucked my beard; and I have not turned my face away from insult and spitting. Lord Yahweh comes to my help”—Isaiah 50:4-7 NJB
These are predictions above of being “struck”, ‘insulted’, and ‘spit upon’, are obviously predictions of the treatment Jesus received on the day of his death. It shows that Yahweh ‘has given Jesus a disciples tongue,’ and enabled him “to listen like a disciple,” and Jesus was obedient to his Father. These actions are clear indications that Jesus is not equal to his Father, which contradicts the ‘equality’ claim of Trinitarianism.
“Abraham . . . When I called him he was only one man, and I blessed him and made him many”—Isaiah 51:2 NIV
Trinitarians claim that in the Jewish Shema, “The LORD our God, the LORD is one” (Deuteronomy 6:4 NJB), “one” refers to a compound unity, in support of their 3-in-1 Trinity God. However, the Hebrew word used in both Deuteronomy 6:4 and Isaiah 51:2 is “echad,” which means the same thing as the numeral “one,” as illustrated by Isaiah 51:2 here, where “one” is contrasted with “many.” Thus, Isaiah 51:2 helps prove the Trinity to be a false doctrine.
“Look, my servant”—Isaiah 52:13 NJB
Jesus is referred to in the New Testament as Yahweh’s “servant” (Matthew 12:42; Acts 3:13). How does this square with the Trinitarian claim of ‘equality’?—It doesn’t! Isaiah proves there is no ‘equality,’ which is one of the main pillars of Trinitarianism.
“He surrendered himself to death . . . Bore the sins of many”—Isaiah 53:12 NAB
“Christ died for our sins” (1 Corinthians 15:3), as predicted by Isaiah. However, “Yahweh . . . God . . . never dies” (Habakkuk 1:12 NJB), so Jesus cannot be Yahweh God. The Bible truth that Jesus “was dead” (Revelation 1:18), eliminates the “eternal” pillar of the Trinity doctrine.
“Your Creator is your husband, Yahweh Sabaoth is his name, the Holy One of Israel is your redeemer, he is called God of the whole world”—Isaiah 54:5 NJB
Trinitarians may claim that Jesus is Yahweh God because Galatians 3:13 says, “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law” (NIV). However, such a claim is debunked by Galatians 4:4,5, which says, “God sent his Son . . . to redeem those under the law” (NIV), which proves that the Son is not God. Jesus being “sent” by God also proves that the Son of God, Jesus Christ, is not God, and that Jesus is not equal to God.
“I will make an everlasting covenant with you, my faithful love promised to David. See, I have made him a witness to the peoples, a ruler and commander of the peoples”—Isaiah 55:3,4 NIV
These verses contradict the Trinity doctrine, because Yahweh God says, ‘I have made him a witness, a ruler and commander.’ This is a vivid indication of Yahweh’s supremacy over Jesus. But, even worse for the Trinity doctrine, Acts 13:34 applies Isaiah 55:3 to Jesus Christ by saying, “God raised him from the dead so that he will never be subject to decay. As God has said, ‘I will give you the holy and sure blessings promised to David'” (NIV). Since, “Yahweh . . . God . . . never dies” (Habakkuk 1:12 NJB), and Jesus “was dead” (Revelation 1:18), it is clear that Jesus cannot be Yahweh God. The fact that Yahweh made Jesus “a witness to the peoples” means that Yahweh is the superior over Jesus. Therefore, Jesus cannot be equal to Yahweh.
“His own arm achieved salvation for him”—Isaiah 59:16 NIV
Perhaps Trinitarians see the word “salvation” and imagine that Jesus is Yahweh because Yahweh is foretold to have “achieved salvation,” and, in the New Testament, “Salvation is to be found in [Christ] alone . . . there is no one else whom God has given who can save us” (Acts 4:12 GNB). The Bible is very clear that “God . . . destined us . . . to gain salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Thessalonians 5:9 AAT).
“From the west, Yahweh’s name will be feared, and from the east, his glory, for he will come like a pent-up stream impelled by the breath of Yahweh. Then for Zion will come a redeemer, for those who stop rebelling in Jacob, declares Yahweh”—Isaiah 59:19,20 NJB
The initial fulfillment of this may be the deliverance the Jews got through the Persian king Cyrus, ” their “redeemer.” But, the later and greater fulfillment of this prophecy is the more important “eternal redemption” (Hebrews 9:12 NIV) that is received through Jesus Christ. Perhaps Trinitarians try to equate the “redemption” provided through Christ to claim he’s Yahweh. However, this has been discussed above, and Trinitarian ideas debunked..
“The spirit of the Lord Yahweh is on me for Yahweh has anointed me. He has sent me to bring good news . . . to proclaim a year of favor from Yahweh and a day of vengeance for our God . . . they will be planted by Yahweh glorify him”—Isaiah 61:1-3 NJB
Jesus Christ read Isaiah 61:1,2 to a synagogue crowd and applied it by saying, “Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing” (Luke 4:16-21 NIV), saying that Yahweh’s spirit was on him, and he was anointed to preach about Yahweh God. Rather than give any support to the Trinity doctrine, these scriptures actually debunk the dogma by indicating that Jesus is directed by Yahweh, and that neither Jesus, nor the holy Spirit, is Yahweh
“He said: ‘They are indeed my people, children who are not disloyal.’ So he became their savior in their every affliction. It was not an envoy or a messenger, but his presence that saved them. Because of his love and pity the LORD redeemed them, lifting them up and carrying them all the days of old. But they rebelled and grieved his holy spirit; so he turned to become their enemy, and he warred against them. Then they remembered the days of old, of Moses, his servant: Where is the one who brought up out of the sea the shepherd of his flock? Where is the one who placed in their midst his holy spirit”—Isaiah 63:8-11 NJB
Perhaps, since the “holy spirit” is mentioned here, Trinitarians see this as their ‘third person of the Trinity.’ However, the mere fact that the holy spirit is mentioned does not prove that it is a person, nor do these scriptures prove any aspect of the Trinity doctrine. Twice, the reference is made to “his holy spirit.” This possessive sense indicates the opposite of personhood! The holy spirit is Yahweh’s spirit, not another individual, third person of the Trinity. Yahweh being “savior,” and having “saved” his people, is also discussed above.
“Yahweh’s spirit led them to rest. This was how you guided your people to win your self glorious renown. Look down from heaven and see from your your holy and glorious dwelling . . . After all, you are our Father . . . you, Yahweh, are our Father, ‘Our Redeemer” is your name from of old”—Isaiah 63:14-16 NJB
Twice in these verses Yahweh is referred to as “our Father,” which harmonizes with the fact that, “there is but one God, the Father” (1 Corinthians 8:6 NIV). The Biblical teaching that the “one God” is the Father contradicts the 3-in-1 God concept of the Trinity doctrine. The holy spirit is referred to as “Yahweh’s spirit,” which gives evidence the holy spirit is not a person, and thus debunks the Trinitarian personhood concept of the holy spirit. The fact that Yahweh is referred to as Israel’s “Redeemer” doesn’t mean that Jesus is Yahweh, as discussed earlier in this article.
We’ve examined many of the scriptures quoted in the RTB article, and some other scriptures in Isaiah that have a bearing on this subject. We find that, not only are all of these scriptures devoid of any aspect of the Trinity doctrine, many of them contradict the doctrine. We’ve also used scriptures from other parts of the Bible which corroborate these findings. We’ve discovered that the Trinity doctrine is one of the “false doctrines” that Christians are commanded “not to teach” (1 Timothy 1:3 NIV). The doctrine teaches “a different Jesus” (2 Corinthians 11:4 NLT), and therefore, “a different gospel,” which causes “confusion” (Galatians 1:6,7 NIV). The Trinity doctrine is composed of “man-made ideas” that “cancel the word of God” (Mark 7:7,13 NLT). The apostle Paul, speaking to Christians elders, was inspired to predict, that, “from your own group, men will come forward perverting the truth” (Acts 20:30 NAB). The Trinity doctrine is a ‘perversion of the truth.’
The Trinity doctrine of Christianity developed gradually beginning over a hundred years after the Bible was complete, and was not fully developed until late in the 4th century CE, about 300 years after the last Bible books were written. This fact, just on the surface of it, just powerful evidence against the Trinity doctrine. On the other hand, “All scripture is inspired by God,” and “correctly” using it makes a Christian “complete” (2 Timothy 3:16,17 CSB; 2 Timothy 2:15 NLT). Back in the 1st century, “the faith . . . was once for all entrusted to God’s holy people” (Jude 3 NIV), and the scriptures do not need to be supplemented. Christians are warned “not to go beyond what is written” in the scriptures (1 Corinthians 4:6).
Since the Trinity doctrine of Christianity didn’t even start to develop until long after the Bible was complete, it amazing that Christians would read the doctrine into the Old Testament book of Isaiah. But they do, and that is the purpose of this article, namely, to clarify what the book of Isaiah really says about God, Jesus, and the holy Spirit.
22 thoughts on “Is the Trinity in the Book of Isaiah?”
GW: This is a very long and tedious article. It is exhausting to read, but I did read the whole thing. I will just reply to some of the points.
BA: What is the doctrine of the Trinity? . . . There is only one God, but in the unity of the Godhead there are three eternal, coequal Persons where each Person is independently conscious and self-directing but never acting independently of one another and always manifesting the same character attributes and the same nature.
GW: The RTB doctrine is not the best explanation of the Trinity, but this is: The Trinity is a team of three persons: God the Father, Jesus the Son, and the Holy Spirit are three separate persons composing one team, called Trinity. God is the captain of the team. He has more authority and powers than the other two team members who are subordinate to him.
BA: RTB has done a lot of good work in publishing information using science and the Bible that proves the existence of Almighty God, the Creator of the universe, and the fact that the universe gives abundant evidence of being created,…
GW: False. I am very familiar with RTB. I have heard Hugh Ross speak in person. Nothing has proven the existence of God, and in fact the arguments of myself and others have proven that God does not exist. Also, there are no good reasons to believe that the universe had a beginning or was created.
BA: The Bible says,…and “there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus” (1 Timothy 2:5 NIV).
GW: Doesn’t the Bible say that Moses was also a mediator between God and mankind? Doesn’t the Quran say that Mohammad was also a similar mediator? My position, and that of many secular humanists, is that if God did exist, he would have no mediators, and so the Bible authors, the Quran authors, and you are ALL mistaken on this point. If God did exist, he would neither make, nor authorize, or nor use any messengers, mediators, representatives, prophets, children, angels, demons, or any other supernatural entities. He would do his own communication and miracles. He would have no need of mediators. After all, he would be all-knowing, all-powerful, and perfectly moral! The current confusion and disagreement about who communicates for God in our world would not exist, if God did exist.
BA: For many solid reasons, Jesus cannot be Almighty God Yahweh.
GW: I agree.
BA: Since none of these scriptures says anything about the Trinity doctrine, or any aspect of it, one wonders where do Trinitarians get such ideas from the book of Isaiah? Apparently, they imagine them right into the texts!
GW: Just as you imagine many religious ideas right into the texts! If God did exist, he would speak for himself to all human persons at the same time, and there would be no “imagining into the texts.” Duh.
BA: Thus, the Bible, and Jesus Christ himself makes it obvious that he, Jesus, is neither Yahweh, or Almighty God.
GW: I agree. Jesus and God cannot be the same person.
BA: Also, since “God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the holy Spirit” (Acts 10:38 NAB), it is obvious that the holy Spirit is not a person, nor is it God, or Jesus.
GW: I disagree with your interpretation here. If he did exist, God could use one person to anoint another person. A analogy might be John the Baptist anointing Jesus.
BA: If the issue of who God is wasn’t so serious, this would be laughable. But people’s lives are at stake!
GW: People can now relax, knowing that God does not exist and Jesus never was the only path to salvation.
BA: Who are the armies? They are “the armies of heaven” (Revelation 19:14 NIV), that is, the angels.
GW: Nonsense. God would have no use for angels or armies, if he did exist. Doesn’t anyone take seriously the idea that if he did exist, God would be all-powerful? Does anybody even know what that means?
BA: “All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: ‘Behold, the virgin shall be with child and bear a son, and they shall name him Emmanuel,” which means ‘God is with us'” (Matthew 1:23 NAB). Trinitarians often claim this title-name proves that Jesus is God. If that were true, then the child with the name Immanuel, or Emmanuel, born back Isaiah’s and Ahaz’s time would be also be God.
GW: I think this is one of your best points in the entire essay. I agree with it.
BA: God’s Son, Jesus was able to do what he did because of his dependence on God.
GW: But Jesus did not do anything supernatural. He was just a man who had major delusions. If God did exist, we (not just Jesus) would all be dependent on him. Duh.
BA: Jesus has been given power to resurrect the dead and give the worthy ones eternal life.
GW: False. Jesus had no supernatural powers. If God did exist, every seven years he would perform three miracles for all to see. One of them would be bringing back to life a human person who had been dead for at least a year. That would be very powerful and persuasive, wouldn’t it?
BA: No god was formed before me, nor will be after me. I, I am Yahweh, and there is no other Savior but me”—Isaiah 43:10,11 NJB
GW: I studied with an educated Muslin man for four years, and this idea is the Muslim position. I believe that if God did exist, then he would be unique and there would be no other supernatural entities.
BA: “Thus says Yahweh, Israel’s king, Yahweh Sabaoth, his redeemer: I am the first and I am the last, there is no God except me”—Isaiah 44:6 NJB
GW: This is the Islamic position.
BA: “Was it not it not I, Yahweh? There is no other god but me, no saving God, no Saviour except me”—Isaiah 45:21 NJB
GW: Again, this is the Islamic position.
BA: These are predictions above of being “struck”, ‘insulted’, and ‘spit upon’, are obviously predictions of the treatment Jesus received on the day of his death.
GW: False. They are not predictions at all. If they were predictions, they would be associated with peoples’ names, dates, and places.
BA: The fact that Yahweh made Jesus “a witness to the peoples” means that Yahweh is the superior ever Jesus. Therefore, Jesus cannot be equal to Yahweh.
GW: Yes. If God and Jesus did both exist, then God was superior to Jesus. God would have supernatural powers, and Jesus would not.
BA: Twice, the reference is made to “his holy spirit.” This possessive sense indicates the opposite of personhood!
GW: I disagree. I think you are stretching your interpretation too far. “His holy spirit” could refer to a person under his authority and supervision.
BA: We’ve discovered that the Trinity doctrine is one of the “false doctrines” that Christians are commanded “not to teach” (1 Timothy 1:3 NIV). The doctrine teaches “a different Jesus” (2 Corinthians 11:4 NLT), and therefore, “a different gospel,” which causes “confusion” (Galatians 1:6,7 NIV).
GW: I think the traditional Christian interpretation of the Trinity is hogwash, but there is an interpretation which works. See my earlier remark on that. Still, if God did exist, there would be no other supernatural entities. He would be the only one, and he would be all-knowing, all-powerful, and perfectly moral. Although we all wish that God would exist, sadly, he does not. This has been proven. If God does not exist, then the Trinity does not exist. God does not exist. Therefore, the Trinity does not exist.
GW: You have made great progress in moving away from the traditional Christian position. For example, you moved from the idea that some people are going to hell to the idea that hell does not exist. You have moved from three gods in one to one overriding god. You are on your way to Unitarian Univeralism. From there maybe you will progress to Deism then to Agnosticism and then to Atheism, much as I did.
God did deal directly, without a mediator, with the first 2 humans, Adam and Eve, until they sinned. He cut off all communications with them afterwards.
Sin caused a breach between God and humans. God chose to use Christ to “reconcile” people to him (Colossians 1:20).
Your adverse view of Christ’s mediatorship denies the reality of such need.
“A mediator . . . implies more than one party; but God is one”—Galatians 3:20 NIV
May we remind you that mediators are frequently used today when two or more parties are at odds, such as in legal disputes, among warring parties, in labor disputes. etc.
“Samuel took a phial of oil and poured it Saul’s head . . . and said, ‘Has not Yahweh anointed you leader of his people Israel?'”—2 Samuel 10:1 NJB
Israelite kings and high priests were anointed with olive oil for their jobs, and it was viewed as God doing the anointing.
After Jesus’ baptism, John the Baptist saw “the Spirit of God descending like a dove and settling on [Jesus]” (Matthew 3:16 NLT).The Bible explains that “”God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the holy Spirit and power” (Acts 10:38 NAB).
Almighty God has never needed anyone else. However, he has the freedom to do whatever he wishes and operate any way he pleases, including using others.
“Yahweh God made earth and heaven” (Genesis 2:4 NJB). Allah is a man-made god formed in the 7h century CE.
We have always believed that “the dead no longer know anything” and there is no knowledge . . . in Sheol” (Ecclesiastes 9:5,10 NAB), and have never believed in the existence of the pagan concept of a literal hell of fire.
We have always believed in on Almighty God, never in the pagan 3-in-1 God concept.
We will not descend into Deism, agnosticism, or atheism.
BA: God did deal directly, without a mediator, with the first 2 humans, Adam and Eve, until they sinned. He cut off all communications with them afterwards.
GW: God does not exist. The story of Adam and Eve is fiction. However, if God did exist, he would never use mediators, intermediaries, prophets, angels, or other assistants. He would do his own communication.
BA: Sin caused a breach between God and humans. God chose to use Christ to “reconcile” people to him (Colossians 1:20).
GW: Because God does not exist, sin does not exist. If he did exist, God would not forgive or reconcile. He would implement perfect justice.
BA: Your adverse view of Christ’s mediatorship denies the reality of such need.
GW: What need? God would have no need for a mediator, reconciler, or savior.
BA: “A mediator . . . implies more than one party; but God is one”—Galatians 3:20 NIV
GW: Thanks. That verse supports my view.
BA: May we remind you that mediators are frequently used today when two or more parties are at odds, such as in legal disputes, among warring parties, in labor disputes. etc.
GW: You may remind me, but I already know that. God would not use a mediator between himself and human persons. Again, God would communicate directly with all human persons at once, at least every seven years!
BA: “Samuel took a phial of oil and poured it Saul’s head . . . and said, ‘Has not Yahweh anointed you leader of his people Israel?’”—2 Samuel 10:1 NJB
GW: God would be The Ultimate Leader of all persons. However, for the periods between God’s lectures, humans should elect human leaders through democratic processes.
BA: Israelite kings and high priests were anointed with olive oil for their jobs, and it was viewed as God doing the anointing.
GW: God doesn’t exist, and he did no anointing at all. But if he did exist, God would be The Ultimate Leader, and human leaders would be elected in democracies.
BA: After Jesus’ baptism, John the Baptist saw “the Spirit of God descending like a dove and settling on [Jesus]” (Matthew 3:16 NLT).The Bible explains that “”God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the holy Spirit and power” (Acts 10:38 NAB).
GW: Nonsense. God would never do that. As I said, he would do his own communication. Look at the history of the world: Many different men have claimed to be God’s emissaries, they disagree, and they sow confusion and conflict. All that is totally unnecessary, if God existed and did his own press conferences.
BA: Almighty God has never needed anyone else.
GW: That’s right! Thanks for agreeing with me.
BA: However, he has the freedom to do whatever he wishes and operate any way he pleases, including using others.
GW: Of course he would have the option of using assistants, but he just would never choose that option. He would have the option of implementing a genocide too, like Hitler did, but he just would never choose that option.
BA: “Yahweh God made earth and heaven” (Genesis 2:4 NJB). Allah is a man-made god formed in the 7h century CE.
GW: False. “Allah” is just another name for “God.”
BA: We have always believed that “the dead no longer know anything” and there is no knowledge . . . in Sheol” (Ecclesiastes 9:5,10 NAB), and have never believed in the existence of the pagan concept of a literal hell of fire.
GW: Well, good for you! But Jesus, some Bible authors, and even some modern Christians believe in hell.
GW: Do you believe in heaven? Do you believe in any kind of afterlife?
Allah has no son. “The Lord God Almighty” (Revelation 21:22) has an “only begotten Son” (John 3:16), Jesus. No Bible writer believed in a literal fiery hell, as in Greek mythology.
What we believe is this: “This is the promise that he made us: eternal life” (1 John 2:25 NAB).
BA: Allah has no son.
GW: Yes, if God (Allah) did exist, he would have no children. It is impossible that Jesus was a son of God (Allah).
BA: “The Lord God Almighty” (Revelation 21:22) has an “only begotten Son” (John 3:16), Jesus.
GW: False. See above for the truth of the matter.
BA: No Bible writer believed in a literal fiery hell, as in Greek mythology.
GW: False again! Check out these verses:
“but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit can never have forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin’ (Mark 3: 29, NIV)
“And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. (Mark 9:47-48, NIV)
Mat. 10:28: And fear not them which kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.
28 Do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul; rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell. (NIV)
Ezek 31:15-16: Thus saith the Lord God;…I made the nations to shake at the sound of his fall, when I cast him down to hell with them that descend into the pit…
II Peter 2:4: For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgement.
Ps. 9:17: The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the nations that forget God.
Rev. 20:15: And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire. and anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire. (NIV)
Ps. 55:23: But thou, O God, shalt bring them down into the pit of destruction…
Psalms 139:8: If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there; if I make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there.
BA: What we believe is this: “This is the promise that he made us: eternal life” (1 John 2:25 NAB).
GW: This verse does not preclude hell. According to most Christians, the eternal life for unforgiven sinners is hell.
Jesus is a “spirit” (1 Corinthians 15:45), “the firstborn of every creature” (Colossians 1:15 KJV). He is not human, but is God’s “only begotten Son (John 3:16 NASB).
The punishment for “eternal sin” is “death” (Romans 6:23), i.e., “everlasting destruction” (2 Thessalonians 1:9 NIV).
“Gehenna” (NAB) not hell is the proper translation at Mark 9:45,47. Worms don’t get eternal life in hellfire. Jesus was drawing on the well known garbage dump outside Jerusalem’s SW wall to illustrate that God judges some people worthy of eternal death, without the possibility of resurrection.
“Gehenna” (NAB) is also the proper translation at Matthew 10:28. Notice that God destroys ‘souls’ in Gehenna, so the teaching that “immortal souls burn in hellfire forever” doesn’t work.
Ezekiel 31:15-17 uses the crashing to the earth of a huge tree (“down to Sheol” [NAB]) to illustrate the coming demise in death of “Pharaoh and all his hordes” (Ezekiel 31:18 NAB).
“Tartarus” (NAB) is the proper translation at 2 Peter 2:4, which illustrates the restraint that the “angels that sinned” (NAB) now experience until their destruction.
“Sheol” (NAB) is the eternal destiny all who “forget God” (Psalm 9:18 NAB [9:17]).
“The lake of fire is the second death” (Revelation 20:15 NIV), the permanent death, without resurrection.
“The dead no longer know anything.” “There will be . . . no knowledge . . . in Sheol” (Ecclesiastes 9:5,10 NAB).
Those who experience “destruction” (Psalm 55:23) are dead, not alive.
Psalm 139:8 uses hyperbole to illustrate the impossibility of escape from God. A person cannot escape to “heaven” any more than they could hide in “Sheol” (NAB) from God.
Most “Christians” are ill-informed about the condition of the dead.
BA: Jesus is a “spirit” (1 Corinthians 15:45),
GW: False. Jesus was a human person, a traveling minister with many delusions, who committed “suicide by cop” in the first century.
BA: “the firstborn of every creature” (Colossians 1:15 KJV).
GW: That is an incoherent statement. What do you think it means?
BA: He is not human, but is God’s “only begotten Son (John 3:16 NASB).
GW: Pure nonsense! Jesus was a human person, a traveling minister with many delusions, who committed “suicide by cop” in the first century. God is a hypothetical supernatural person who has been proven not to exist. If he did exist, he would have no children. God would not be a biological person who could have children. Duh.
BA: The punishment for “eternal sin” is “death” (Romans 6:23), i.e., “everlasting destruction” (2 Thessalonians 1:9 NIV).
GW: There is no sin since God does not exist. However, we all die because of our nature and the nature of the universe. That’s just the way it is – another consequence of increasing entropy.
BA: “Gehenna” (NAB) not hell is the proper translation at Mark 9:45,47. Worms don’t get eternal life in hellfire. Jesus was drawing on the well known garbage dump outside Jerusalem’s SW wall to illustrate that God judges some people worthy of eternal death, without the possibility of resurrection.
GW: That’s just your interpretation, and most Christians disagree with you. Maybe now you can understand why God would not inspire human authors to present his narrative. The result would be confusion, disagreement, and conflict, exactly what we have now.
BA: “Gehenna” (NAB) is also the proper translation at Matthew 10:28. Notice that God destroys ‘souls’ in Gehenna, so the teaching that “immortal souls burn in hellfire forever” doesn’t work.
GW: That’s just your interpretation, and most Christians disagree with you. Maybe now you can understand why God would not inspire human authors to present his narrative. The result would be confusion, disagreement, and conflict, exactly what we have now.
BA: Ezekiel 31:15-17 uses the crashing to the earth of a huge tree (“down to Sheol” [NAB]) to illustrate the coming demise in death of “Pharaoh and all his hordes” (Ezekiel 31:18 NAB).
GW: That’s just your interpretation, and most Christians disagree with you. Maybe now you can understand why God would not inspire human authors to present his narrative. The result would be confusion, disagreement, and conflict, exactly what we have now.
BA: “Tartarus” (NAB) is the proper translation at 2 Peter 2:4, which illustrates the restraint that the “angels that sinned” (NAB) now experience until their destruction.
GW: That’s just your interpretation, and most Christians disagree with you. Maybe now you can understand why God would not inspire human authors to present his narrative. The result would be confusion, disagreement, and conflict, exactly what we have now. Also, angels and sin don’t exist because God doesn’t exist.
BA: “Sheol” (NAB) is the eternal destiny all who “forget God” (Psalm 9:18 NAB [9:17]).
GW: That’s just your interpretation, and most Christians disagree with you. Maybe now you can understand why God would not inspire human authors to present his narrative. The result would be confusion, disagreement, and conflict, exactly what we have now. Besides, we all die, even you. You can’t evade it, sorry.
BA: “The lake of fire is the second death” (Revelation 20:15 NIV), the permanent death, without resurrection.
GW: That’s just your interpretation, and most Christians disagree with you. Maybe now you can understand why God would not inspire human authors to present his narrative. The result would be confusion, disagreement, and conflict, exactly what we have now.
BA: “The dead no longer know anything.” “There will be . . . no knowledge . . . in Sheol” (Ecclesiastes 9:5,10 NAB).
GW: Sheol is just a fiction. It was the futile attempt of ancient authors to understand death.
BA: Those who experience “destruction” (Psalm 55:23) are dead, not alive.
GW: When we die, we no longer exist. Duh.
BA: Psalm 139:8 uses hyperbole to illustrate the impossibility of escape from God. A person cannot escape to “heaven” any more than they could hide in “Sheol” (NAB) from God.
GW: There is no God to escape from. And there is no Sheol. What a bunch of balloney.
BA: Most “Christians” are ill-informed about the condition of the dead.
GW: I guess it’s always other people who are ill-informed and never you?
GW: Most Christians believe you are ill-informed about the condition of the dead. There is no good evidence for any afterlife, soul, spirit, heaven, or hell. When you are dead, you no longer exist. You can’t escape this, no matter how much you wish, hope, and pray.
GW: If God did exist, would he even reward and punish human persons for their behavior? If so, how would he do it? How would an all-knowing, all-powerful, and perfectly moral person engage in reward and punishment? Think about that without consulting the ancient Bible authors. I don’t think you can.
You’re right that the ‘dead are non-existent.’
The ones on ‘the narrow road’ (Matthew 7:13,14), whom God judges “worthy of eternal life” (Acts 13:46 NIV), “will be repaid at the resurrection of the righteous” (Luke 14:14 NIV).
BA: You’re right that the ‘dead are non-existent.’
GW: Thank you. So we are in agreement on that point.
BA: The ones on ‘the narrow road’ (Matthew 7:13,14), whom God judges “worthy of eternal life” (Acts 13:46 NIV), “will be repaid at the resurrection of the righteous” (Luke 14:14 NIV).
GW: There is no good evidence that anyone who is non-existent through death can be made to exist again.
GW: However, what would be some good evidence that God exists? It would be that every time God visited humanity every seven years he would resurrect a human person who had been dead FOR AT LEAST A YEAR, either from the skeleton in a casket or from the ashes in an urn. Wouldn’t that be cool? Yes, it would! But has this happened? Have you and I observed it? No and No. This is one way we know that God does not exist. If he did exist, he would make himself obvious to everyone at least once every seven years.
Jesus “was dead” (Revelation 1:18), non-existent, and “was made alive” again (1 Peter 3:18).
The same “Lord God Almighty” who “created all things” (Revelation 4:8,11), can resurrect the dead.
BA: Jesus “was dead” (Revelation 1:18), non-existent, and “was made alive” again (1 Peter 3:18).
GW: First, Jesus was not God. Jesus was a real human being who died. God is just a hypothetical divine being, proven to not exist. Secondly, as I have shown before there is no good evidence that Jesus came back to life. The best explanations of the story are either 1) lying, or 2) grief hallucination. I published an entire article about the latter. Here is the reference:
Whittenberger, Gary. “On Visions and Resurrections: Can Hallucination
Account for the Post-Crucifixion Appearances of Jesus?” Skeptic.
Vol. 17, No. 1, 2011, Pg. 40-45.
BA: The same “Lord God Almighty” who “created all things” (Revelation 4:8,11), can resurrect the dead.
GW: Because he would be all-powerful if he did exist, God could resurrect the dead. But sadly, he doesn’t exist, and this has been proven. But this is why I said that we could identify God if he came to us by his resurrecting a person who had been dead for over a year. That would be so cool, right? If God did exist, he would perform at least three miracles every seven years when he came to us. This has never happened.
GW: Apparently you believe that if God did exist, he would hide from most of us. Why do you think this?
All 4 gospels report that Jesus died in full view of public witnesses, that his corpse was buried, in a tomb with a very heavy stone in front of it, on Friday afternoon, which was officially sealed and publicly guarded with armed soldiers, that the stone was found rolled away on Sunday morning, and the tomb was empty, except for Jesus’ grave cloths neatly lying there. To cover this up, the soldiers were bribed to say that Jesus’ body was stolen (Matthew 28:11-15). The only liars were Jesus’ enemies.
There were hundreds of public witnesses of the resurrected Jesus (1 Corinthians 15:3-7). Experts tell us that hundreds of people do not all have the same hallucination. Such an idea is ludicrous on the face of it.
BA: All 4 gospels report that Jesus died in full view of public witnesses,
GW: Do they? Please present at least one verse from each of the four gospels which says that Jesus “died” or was “dead” when removed from the cross. What is the name of the physician who examined Jesus when he was removed from the cross and certified that he was dead? What were the eight signs of death confirmed to be present for Jesus when he was removed from the cross and who observed these signs? I think you are presuming to know something you don’t know.
BA: that his corpse was buried,…
GW: A corpse is a body of a dead person. Agree? You have not proven that Jesus was dead when he was removed from the cross.
BA: …in a tomb with a very heavy stone in front of it, on Friday afternoon,…
GW: Many scholars, even the great Bart Ehrman, believe that Jesus was dumped into a common pit after the crucifixion, not in a separate tomb by himself. It this is the case, the all four gospels are based on a fabricated story.
BA: which was officially sealed and publicly guarded with armed soldiers,…
GW: We should not believe these two details since they are only mentioned in Mt. They are uncorroborated.
BA: that the stone was found rolled away on Sunday morning,…
GW: Three gospels say that the stone had already been rolled aside before the women arrived, while one (Mt) says that an angel rolled back the stone in front of the women. We should not believe the latter.
BA: and the tomb was empty,…
GW: All four gospels say that the tomb was empty, so if Jesus was placed in a tomb at all, we can assume the tomb was empty on Sunday morning when one or more women arrived. When Jesus left the tomb was he alive or dead? Was the exit assisted or unassisted? Did Jesus come back to life in the tomb? If he was dead, then who removed the body? We don’t know the answers to any of these questions. Why? Because we don’t have a single eyewitness report of what happened while Jesus was in the tomb. And we have no recordings and no time machine. If God did exist, then he could and he would invent a time machine and let us all take a trip back to the tomb to see what really happened. But alas, this has never happened. And so, God does not exist.
BA: …except for Jesus’ grave cloths neatly lying there.
GW: Only Lk and Jn mention the linen left behind in the tomb. We should not accept this detail as accurate since it is not mentioned by at least three of the gospels.
BA: To cover this up, the soldiers were bribed to say that Jesus’ body was stolen (Matthew 28:11-15). The only liars were Jesus’ enemies.
GW: This story is most likely a fabrication. It is mentioned only in Mt.
BA: There were hundreds of public witnesses of the resurrected Jesus (1 Corinthians 15:3-7).
GW: What were their names and where did they live? Where are the reports they wrote about what they saw?
BA: Experts tell us that hundreds of people do not all have the same hallucination. Such an idea is ludicrous on the face of it.
GW: What experts? Please provide quotes, citations, and links to support this claim. Are you familiar with the mass hallucination at Fatima?
GW: In my article which I cited for you, I explained how and why two of the twelve disciples may have experienced a grief hallucination of Jesus and how verbal reports of these experiences were probably embellished and exaggerated.
GW: Here are some interpretive rules which may be helpful to you:
What to believe and not believe about Jesus:
1. Don’t believe any detail that is not mentioned by at least three of the four Gospels, and preferably all four. Require high corroboration among them.
2. Believe any detail that is mundane.
3. Don’t believe any detail which appears to be supernatural but for which a better natural explanation exists.
4. Believe any detail which also has eyewitness corroboration outside the Bible.
GW: So, what should we probably conclude about Jesus? He was a natural human person, similar to you and me in many respects. He lived early in the first century. He was a traveling and preaching Jew. He had new and unusual beliefs about God. He had delusions of grandeur and the supernatural. He was probably crucified because he communicated ideas that were threatening to the Jewish and Roman authorities. He is now dead, and like the rest of us, will never exist again. Jesus was not the son of God because God does not exist and if he did exist, he wouldn’t have any children (as Islam claims). End of story.
Scriptural proof:
“When they came to Jesus and found that HE WAS ALREADY DEAD, they did not break his legs”—John 19:33 NIV
“When the centurion, who stood there in front of Jesus, SAW HOW HE DIED, he said, ‘Surely this man was the Son of God!'”—Mark 15:39 NIV
“Pilate was surprised to hear that HE WAS ALREADY DEAD. Summoning the centurion, he ASKED HIM IF JESUS HAD ALREADY DIED. When he learned from the centurion that IT WAS SO, he gave the body to Joseph”—Mark 15:44,45 NIV
Ehrmann has zero evidence for his ‘Jesus’ body was dumped into a mass grave’ speculation.
The names of some who saw the resurrected Jesus:
“Mary Magdalen and the other Mary . . . Jesus met them.” “The eleven disciples . . . they saw him”—Matthew 28:1,8-10,16,17
“Cleopas”—Luke 23:13-33
“Mary Magdalen”—John 20:11-18
“Thomas”—John 20:24-29
“Simon Peter, Thomas . . . Nathaniel . . . the sons of Zebedee, and two other disciples”—John 20:1-24
The Bible, on the other hand, has powerful evidence Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb by itself:
“Joseph took the body . . . and placed it in his own new tomb”—Matthew 27:59,60 NIV
“Joseph . . . took down the body . . . and placed it in a tomb cut out of rock”—Mark 15:46 NIV
“He asked for Jesus’ body. Then he took it down . . . and placed it in a tomb cut in the rock, ONE IN WHICH NO ONE HAD YET BEEN LAID”—Luke 23:52,53 NIV
“Taking Jesus’ body . . . there was a garden, and in the garden a new mob, IN WHICH NO ONE EVER BEEN LAID . . . they laid Jesus there”—John 19:40-42 NIV
How did Jesus’ leave the tomb?
As the gospel writers testify, it was Jesus’ dead body that was placed in the tomb late Friday afternoon.
“Christ . . . Put to death in the flesh, he was BROUGHT TO LIFE IN THE SPIRIT”—1 Peter 3:18 NAB
“God resurrected this Jesus”—Acts 2:32 HCSB
All 4 gospels report the same thing:
“They found the stone rolled away from the tomb, but when they entered, THEY DID NOT FIND THE BODY of the Lord Jesus”—Luke 24:2,3 NIV
There was no “mass hallucination at Fatima,” although we don’t doubt that something was seen and heard by people at Fatima. The Bible refers to:
“Deceiving spirits”—1 Timothy 4:1 NIV
” . . . how Satan works. He will use all sorts of displays of power through signs and wonders that serve the lie”—2 Thessalonians 2:9 NIV
“Even Satan masquerades as an angel of light”—2 Corinthians 11:14 NAB
These scriptures shed some light on what happened at Fatima. It cannot be explained away as if it was some sort of “mass hallucination,” and certainly is not in the same ballpark as Jesus’ documented resurrection appearances.
Statements made at Fatima, such as, encouraging the Rosary, and asserting “the Immaculate Conception of Mary”, etc., are “a different gospel” (Galatians 1:6-8 NIV). The use of the Rosary is idolatry, and Mary was not sinless (compare Leviticus 12:6 with Luke 2:22-24).
On the other hand, all the statements and actions recorded in the Bible by the resurrected Jesus are in complete harmony with “the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15 NIV), the entire Bible, without any contradiction.
The facts are that multiple people do not have the same hallucination.
BA: Scriptural proof:
GW: Proof? No. You don’t have the quantity and quality of evidence about Jesus which could lead to proof of any alleged event in his life. We’ve talked about this before. Do you remember the four types of evidence about alleged past events, the Four Rs? They are Reports, Recordings, Remnants, and Revisits. The quantity and quality of evidence for any alleged event in the alleged life of Jesus in any of these four categories is deficient, insufficient, and inconclusive. In the Reports category, for example, there is not a single first-person, author-identified, low biased, promptly written, eye-witness report about any event in the life of Jesus or its immediate aftermath. Not one!
BA: “When they came to Jesus and found that HE WAS ALREADY DEAD, they did not break his legs”—John 19:33 NIV
GW: And so, there would be no good reason to pierce his side if he was already dead. Duh. I tend to believe that the Roman soldiers would follow either prescribed or typical routine with ALL three of the men they crucified. And yet, the Bible says they broke the legs of the other men and not the legs of Jesus. And it says they pierced the side of Jesus and not the sides of the other men. I don’t believe this inconsistent treatment would have occurred. Jesus would have been treated as a common criminal, just like the others.
BA: “When the centurion, who stood there in front of Jesus, SAW HOW HE DIED, he said, ‘Surely this man was the Son of God!’”—Mark 15:39 NIV
GW: It is very unlikely that a Roman centurion would ever have said anything close to this. These men were polytheists and did not believe in God or a son of God. The centurion would have been more likely to have said “Ha. Some son of God! Neither did he save himself nor did his so-called Father save him. What a joke!”
BA: “Pilate was surprised to hear that HE WAS ALREADY DEAD. Summoning the centurion, he ASKED HIM IF JESUS HAD ALREADY DIED. When he learned from the centurion that IT WAS SO, he gave the body to Joseph”—Mark 15:44,45 NIV
GW: Yes, this leads me to believe that Jesus was not already dead. Why? Because it was typical for crucifixion victims to suffer on the cross for many hours and even days. That was a planned part of the humiliation. It is likely that either the centurion made a mistake (judging Jesus to be dead when he was still alive), or he was negligent (not closely examining the victim), or he was bribed to tell a lie.
BA: Ehrmann has zero evidence for his ‘Jesus’ body was dumped into a mass grave’ speculation.
GW: False. Ehrman and other scholars have discovered from other documents what was typical procedure for dealing with the corpses from crucifixion and it was to dump them into a common pit. These scholars believe that the story about placement of Jesus in a tomb is probably a fabrication.
BA: The names of some who saw the resurrected Jesus:
GW: If these stories have any truth value at all, some of these persons might have seen Jesus or thought they saw him after the crucifixion, but he would not have been resurrected. That is just a mistaken inference. As I have said, maybe one or two disciples had grief hallucinations of Jesus.
BA: “Mary Magdalen and the other Mary . . . Jesus met them.”
GW: Mary Magdalen probably had an experience of mistaken identity. The encounter of the other Mary with Jesus is not corroborated in three or more gospels.
BA: “The eleven disciples . . . they saw him”—Matthew 28:1,8-10,16,17
GW: I suspect that this story is either a fabrication or that one or two of the disciples had a grief hallucination and this story was embellished, as I described in my article.
BA: “Cleopas”—Luke 23:13-33
GW: Not corroborated by three or more gospels.
BA: “Mary Magdalen”—John 20:11-18
GW: See above.
BA: “Thomas”—John 20:24-29
GW: Not corroborated by three or more gospels.
BA: “Simon Peter, Thomas . . . Nathaniel . . . the sons of Zebedee, and two other disciples”—John 20:1-24
GW: Not corroborated by three or more gospels.
BA: The Bible, on the other hand, has powerful evidence Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb by itself:
GW: I already commented on this. I believe all four gospels say that Jesus was placed in a tomb. However, see the analysis by Ehrman which I presented earlier.
BA: How did Jesus’ leave the tomb?
GW: There is no report of that anyone OBSERVED Jesus leaving the tomb or being carried from the tomb. Zero!
BA: As the gospel writers testify, it was Jesus’ dead body that was placed in the tomb late Friday afternoon. “Christ . . . Put to death in the flesh, he was BROUGHT TO LIFE IN THE SPIRIT”—1 Peter 3:18 NAB
GW: The gospel writers were not eyewitnesses of any of this.
BA: “God resurrected this Jesus”—Acts 2:32 HCSB
GW: This is just a mistaken inference of some ancient author. It is not an eyewitness report.
BA: All 4 gospels report the same thing:
GW: False. There are many inconsistencies and even some contradictions in the four gospels.
BA: “They found the stone rolled away from the tomb, but when they entered, THEY DID NOT FIND THE BODY of the Lord Jesus”—Luke 24:2,3 NIV
GW: And yet one gospel says that the stone was not already rolled away when the women arrived, and so this fact alone refutes your claim that “All 4 gospels report the same thing.” They don’t!
BA: There was no “mass hallucination at Fatima,” although we don’t doubt that something was seen and heard by people at Fatima.
GW: “Mass hallucination” is the best current explanation for the phenomenon at Fatima.
BA: The Bible refers to: “Deceiving spirits”—1 Timothy 4:1 NIV
GW: There is no good evidence for the existence of any spirits, deceiving or otherwise.
BA: ” . . . how Satan works. He will use all sorts of displays of power through signs and wonders that serve the lie”—2 Thessalonians 2:9 NIV “Even Satan masquerades as an angel of light”—2 Corinthians 11:14 NAB
GW: Since God does not exist, Satan does not exist.
BA: These scriptures shed some light on what happened at Fatima. It cannot be explained away as if it was some sort of “mass hallucination,” and certainly is not in the same ballpark as Jesus’ documented resurrection appearances.
GW: Once again, “mass hallucination” is the best current explanation for the phenomenon at Fatima. The scriptures shed no light at all on what happened at Fatima. You are confused about the different time periods. Fatima occurred more than a thousand years after the Bible authors wrote their narratives. There are only stories about Jesus. There are no “documented resurrection appearances.” You falsely infer from bad evidence that Jesus came back to life. You have no rational grounds to make this inference.
BA: Statements made at Fatima, such as, encouraging the Rosary, and asserting “the Immaculate Conception of Mary”, etc., are “a different gospel” (Galatians 1:6-8 NIV).
GW: Those statements are not a gospel at all! Duh.
BA: The use of the Rosary is idolatry, and Mary was not sinless (compare Leviticus 12:6 with Luke 2:22-24).
GW: All this is irrelevant to the mass hallucination inference.
BA: On the other hand, all the statements and actions recorded in the Bible by the resurrected Jesus are in complete harmony with “the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15 NIV), the entire Bible, without any contradiction.
GW: You are engaged in question begging here. You are assuming that Jesus came back to life and that God did it without proof or rational justification. God doesn’t even exist, and this has been proven.
BA: The facts are that multiple people do not have the same hallucination.
GW: The phenomenon at Fatima contradicts your hypothesis. On the other hand, it is far more likely that two disciples had a similar, but not identical, grief hallucination of Jesus at the same time and place. Read my article for more explanation of this.
GW: Before I wrote my first book, i.e. “God Wants You to be an Atheist,” I followed Dan Barker’s recommendation. I read the four gospel stories about the alleged trial, crucifixion, and resurrection of Jesus IN PARALLEL and I constructed a spreadsheet to compared the details of the stories across the different gospels. If you haven’t done this yourself, I recommend that you do it. When you do, you will see the differences, inconsistencies, and even some contradictions in the narratives. After that, you should develop some rational rules for deciding what is probably true and what is probably false, rules like the ones I presented to you last time. Do not believe any detail that is not corroborated in at least three of the four gospels.
No gospel says that the stone was rolled away after the women’s arrival. Mark, Luke and John explicitly say the stone was rolled away prior to their arrival. Matthew says, “At dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to look at the tomb” (Matthew 28:1 NIV). They left home “at dawn”. En route, prior to their arrival, “there was a violent earthquake, for an angel of the Lord came down from heaven and, going to the tomb, rolled back the stone” (Matthew 28:2 NIV). Mark reports that, “just AFTER SUNRISE they were on their way to the tomb,” and when they arrived, “they saw that the stone . . . HAD BEEN rolled away” (Mark 16:4 NIV), prior to their arrival. There is NO CONTRADICTION.
Talk about “assuming”!!!!!—-Your insistent assumption is that “God doesn’t exist.”
We have had charts of “The Harmony of the Gospels” for many years, and are quite familiar with the harmonization of the 4 gospels.
Give us an example of what you think is a contradiction, and we’ll point out why there is no contradiction.
BA: No gospel says that the stone was rolled away after the women’s arrival.
GW: False. The gospel of Matthew refutes your claim: “28:1-2, NIV: After the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to look at the tomb. There was a violent earthquake, for an angel of the Lord came down from heaven and, going to the tomb, rolled back the stone and sat on it.”
BA: Mark, Luke and John explicitly say the stone was rolled away prior to their arrival.
GW: We have already agreed on that point.
BA: Matthew says, “At dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to look at the tomb” (Matthew 28:1 NIV). They left home “at dawn”. En route, prior to their arrival, “there was a violent earthquake, for an angel of the Lord came down from heaven and, going to the tomb, rolled back the stone” (Matthew 28:2 NIV).
GW: Now you are distorting the text of Matthew. You added the words “En route, prior to their arrival.” Shame on you for doing that! You are making an interpretation which doesn’t work. If an earthquake and an angel rolling back the stone occurred, then who OBSERVED this? It would have been the women AT THE TOMB! Duh. Isn’t this obvious? So, the correct interpretation of Matthew is that the women were at the tomb when the stone was rolled back by an angel. But this is contradicted by the other three gospels.
BA: Mark reports that, “just AFTER SUNRISE they were on their way to the tomb,” and when they arrived, “they saw that the stone . . . HAD BEEN rolled away” (Mark 16:4 NIV), prior to their arrival. There is NO CONTRADICTION.
GW: The CONTRADICTION is obvious! You don’t understand it because of your insertion of words and your misinterpretation of Matthew.
BA: Talk about “assuming”!!!!!
GW: Yes, you are incorrectly ASSUMING that an angel rolled back the stone in front of the women. You have no rational grounds to make this assumption.
BA: Your insistent assumption is that “God doesn’t exist.”
GW: What the heck are you talking about? That is an insistent CONCLUSION from a sound argument, not an assumption! And so far, you have found no errors in any of my arguments against the existence of God.
BA: We have had charts of “The Harmony of the Gospels” for many years, and are quite familiar with the harmonization of the 4 gospels.
GW: The fact is, as Bart Ehrman, Dan Barker, others, and I have shown, the four gospels CANNOT be harmonized! There are inconsistencies and contradictions. Here is another way of looking at the issue we have been discusssing: If the gospels were inspired, dictated, or approved by God (if he did exist), then Mark, Luke, and John would ALSO have specified that the stone was rolled back by an angel IN FRONT OF THE WOMEN, if that had actually occurred. They don’t mention it. It is highly likely that the author of Matthew FABRICATED the detail about the angel rolling back the stone in front of the women. In addition, there is no good evidence for the existence of angels.
BA: Give us an example of what you think is a contradiction, and we’ll point out why there is no contradiction.
GW: I just GAVE you an example. I’ve played your game before and the outcome has always been the same — that you continue to deny a contradiction when it is clearly there. This is because you were brainwashed into Christianity early in life by your parents, teachers, pastors, Sunday school teachers, and peers. You have been unable to use critical thinking to throw off the shackles. That is sad.
No, we’re not distorting the Matthew account. We have never thought or assumed that the angel rolled the stone back after the women arrived at the tomb, because that is not what Matthew or the other gospels report.
As the NASB translates it: “Mary Magdalen and the other Mary came to look at the grave. And behold, a severe EARTHQUAKE HAD OCCURRED, for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven and came and rolled away the stone and sat upon it” (Matthew 28:1,2). There is no indication, especially when analyzed in the light of the three of gospel witnesses, that the stone was rolled away after the women arrived. Matthew’s account never says the women saw the stone being rolled away. They saw the stone that Sunday morning after it had already been rolled away.
Matthew wrote under inspiration from from God (2 Timothy 3:16), and reported all things with accuracy. He was not present when any of the events in Matthew 28:1-15 took place. We are not told exactly how he got the details of events he did not personally witness.
BA: No, we’re not distorting the Matthew account.
GW: Oh yes you are! And I showed you exactly how you are distorting it. You even added words that aren’t there. Shame on you. You should correct yourself and apologize.
BA: We have never thought or assumed that the angel rolled the stone back after the women arrived at the tomb, because that is not what Matthew or the other gospels report.
GW: You have assumed that 1) An angel rolled back the stone before the women arrived, not after they arrived, and 2) There is no contradiction in the gospels on this point. And you are mistaken on both counts! Your error is the misinterpretation of Matthew.
BA: As the NASB translates it: “Mary Magdalen and the other Mary came to look at the grave. And behold, a severe EARTHQUAKE HAD OCCURRED, for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven and came and rolled away the stone and sat upon it” (Matthew 28:1,2).
GW: But the NIV translates it this way: “After the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to look at the tomb. There was a violent earthquake, for an angel of the Lord came down from heaven and, going to the tomb, rolled back the stone and sat on it.” Do you see the differences? If God did exist, there would not be these different translations, versions, and interpretations. Why? Because he would deliver lectures to all human persons AT THE SAME TIME and he would deliver printed or digital copies of his lectures to anyone who wanted one. Nevertheless, the best interpretation even of the NASB version is that the earthquake and the angel rolling back the stone occurred when the women were there at the tomb.
BA: There is no indication, especially when analyzed in the light of the three of gospel witnesses, that the stone was rolled away after the women arrived.
GW: That is absolutely false! First, none of the gospel writers was an eyewitness. Don’t call them “witnesses.” That is misleading. The best interpretation of Matthew is that the stone WAS rolled away AFTER the women arrived, in front of the women! This contradicts the conclusion from the other three gospels – that the stone was rolled away BEFORE the women arrived. You can’t have it both ways. If God did exist, there wouldn’t be these contradictions and inconsistencies. This is more evidence that God does not exist.
BA: Matthew’s account never says the women saw the stone being rolled away. They saw the stone that Sunday morning after it had already been rolled away.
GW: Wait a minute! WHO SAW the stone being rolled away? Matthew implies that somebody saw the stone being rolled away by an angel. Otherwise, he would not be including it in his gospel. Furthermore, he implies that the women saw the stone being rolled away by an angel. You are just misinterpreting the passage to fit with your preconceived but false notions that 1) there are no inconsistencies or contradictions in the gospel reports, and 2) God inspired, dictated, or approved of the gospels. And both those notions are mistaken.
BA: Matthew wrote under inspiration from from God (2 Timothy 3:16),…
GW: Sorry, but that’s impossible since God does not exist, as we have proven.
BA: and reported all things with accuracy.
GW: False again. Angels do not exist and so it could not have been an angel who rolled back the stone. We don’t know who did it! I suspect it was family or friends of Jesus who wanted to move his corpse to a family burial tomb or it was grave robbers. We just don’t know. You have a bad habit of assuming that you know what you don’t know or can’t even know. Another example of this is your assumption that a god created the universe before the Big Bang. Nobody knows what happened before the Big Bang. Duh.
BA: He was not present when any of the events in Matthew 28:1-15 took place.
GW: Apparently here by “he” you mean the author of the gospel of Matthew. That’s correct. NONE of the gospel writers was present at any of the alleged events they wrote about. Duh.
BA: We are not told exactly how he got the details of events he did not personally witness.
GW: That is also correct. But the author of Matthew assumes that the women OBSERVED the earthquake and the stone rolled back by an angel, and they reported these events to others in a chain of communication which eventually came to the attention of the author. The other alternative is that the story of the tomb is completely fabricated, as Ehrman apparently believes.
We indicate scripture quotations by enclosing the words with quotation marks. So, no, we did not, and do not, dishonestly add to the scriptures. As we did with the Matthew 28:2 quote, occasionally we give explanatory remarks, which are always outside the quotation marks which enclose the scripture quotes.
Since you like the NIV, notice what the NIV Study Bible says in its note on Matthew 28:2, “There was. The sense is ‘Now there had been.’ The parallel accounts (Mk 16:2-6; Lk 24:1-7; Jn 20:1) make it clear that the events of vv. 2-4 occurred before the women actually arrived at the tomb.”
Matthew reports that the angel rolled back the stone that was in front of the tomb, and mentions nothing about witnesses to the event. The soldiers guarding the tomb were there (Matthew 27:62-66; 28:11-15). It is possible they told the women how and when the stone was rolled back.
But, as the NIV Study Bible says, it is “clear that the events of vv. 2-4 occurred before the women actually arrived at the tomb,” so the women could not have seen the stone being rolled back.
The universe was created by God at the instant of the Big Bang, but not before “the beginning” (Genesis 1:1).
Matthew and John were present at many, but not all, of the events they report in their gospels (Matthew 9:9-13; John 20:35; 21:24).
The “great earthquake” (Matthew 29:2) would certainly have been felt by people all over that area (including these women), but Matthew does not say the women saw the stone being rolled back from the entrance of Jesus’ tomb.
.
BA: We indicate scripture quotations by enclosing the words with quotation marks.
GW: Most of the time you do, that is the proper thing to do, and I appreciate it.
BA: So, no, we did not, and do not, dishonestly add to the scriptures.
GW: In the present case, you didn’t add words to the actual scripture, but you added words to the “story” of one gospel to reflect your own interpretation. Fortunately, we have your exact words to examine, and here they are:
BA: Matthew says, “At dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to look at the tomb” (Matthew 28:1 NIV). They left home “at dawn”. En route, prior to their arrival, “there was a violent earthquake, for an angel of the Lord came down from heaven and, going to the tomb, rolled back the stone” (Matthew 28:2 NIV).
GW: Look closely here how you inserted the words “En route, prior to their arrival” between two quotes from the scripture. These words are just your interpretation; they are not words from the scripture itself. This is misleading, whether you intended it to be or not. But not only that, it reflects the wrong interpretation of the scripture. You are ignoring the chronological context.
BA: As we did with the Matthew 28:2 quote, occasionally we give explanatory remarks, which are always outside the quotation marks which enclose the scripture quotes.
GW: Your explanation is an interpretation. The proper scholarly method for this situation is 1) First to present the actual relevant verses in proper sequence and subsequently to present your interpretation. And 2) To introduce your interpretation with words such as “In our opinion” or “We believe” or “The way we interpret these two verses is…” Etc.
BA: Since you like the NIV,…
GW: The NIV is one of the most used versions of experts. I do not cherry pick versions, as you sometimes do. I urge you to pick the one version which you believe to be the best and stick with it. And it is desirable if it is one favored by most experts.
BA: …notice what the NIV Study Bible says in its note on Matthew 28:2, “There was. The sense is ‘Now there had been.’
GW: Well, how convenient that the person writing the note has an interpretation of the verse similar to yours. The interpretation is mistaken. What is the evidence of the occurrence of an earthquake? The best evidence is that people “feel” the earthquake as it is occurring. (Since I moved to the Los Angeles area, I have “felt” at least three earthquakes, and they are quite unsettling.) Notice that the women are mentioned in verse 1 and next in verse 5 of chapter 28. Sandwiched between are verses 2, 3, and 4 which mention the earthquake, the angel rolling back the stone, and the guards. In my opinion the author is presenting the story “through the eyes” of the women during this part of the story. We are led to believe that they “felt” the earthquake and saw the angel roll back the stone. In verses 5 and 6, the women even have a brief conversation with the angel. Duh. Here are those two verses: “The angel said to the women, ‘Do not be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified. He is not here; he has risen, just as he said. Come and see the place where he lay.’ Matthew 28:5-6 NIV
GW: You need to realize that every different translation implies a different interpretation of the original Greek words.
BA: The parallel accounts (Mk 16:2-6; Lk 24:1-7; Jn 20:1) make it clear that the events of vv. 2-4 occurred before the women actually arrived at the tomb.”
GW: No, the parallel accounts make it clear that the four authors are presenting different versions of what happened and that three are in agreement and one is not. Mk, Lk, and John present the version that the stone was rolled away BEFORE the women arrived and the women DON’T KNOW how or by whom it was rolled away. But Mt presents the version that the stone was rolled away by an angel AFTER the women arrived and the women DO KNOW how and by whom it was rolled away. Ehrman has accurately explained this fact of different versions written by different authors at different times (sometimes decades apart) at different places and probably with different second-hand sources.
GW: We know the account of Matthew is wrong in this situation because 1) angels don’t exist, and 2) the description is not corroborated by the other THREE gospels. (Remember also that Matthew is the only gospel which mentions guards. This is another good sign that this author is wrong.)
BA: Matthew reports that the angel rolled back the stone that was in front of the tomb, and mentions nothing about witnesses to the event.
GW: The author would not be writing about this event if some witnesses had not reported it in some chain of communication to him, UNLESS he fabricated this part of the story, which he probably did.
BA: The soldiers guarding the tomb were there (Matthew 27:62-66; 28:11-15). It is possible they told the women how and when the stone was rolled back.
GW: First, the part of Matthew’s story about the soldiers is probably a fabrication, as I have already explained. Secondly, if there were soldiers, they would be unlikely to tell the women how they were afraid. That would not be “soldier-like” or “brave.” Thirdly, in close chronological order the angel rolls back the stone and speaks to the women.
BA: But, as the NIV Study Bible says, it is “clear that the events of vv. 2-4 occurred before the women actually arrived at the tomb,” so the women could not have seen the stone being rolled back.
GW: That is just the interpretation of the person writing the note about a translation that is itself an interpretation. Can you now see the problems if an all-powerful god does not do his own communications? If God did exist, he would do his own communications. He would not use intermediaries of any kind.
BA: The universe was created by God at the instant of the Big Bang, but not before “the beginning” (Genesis 1:1).
GW: False. The universe existed before the Big Bang. There was a very small, dense, and hot primordial particle which existed and then expanded. Also, we know that God does not exist.
BA: Matthew and John were present at many, but not all, of the events they report in their gospels (Matthew 9:9-13; John 20:35; 21:24).
GW: False. They were not eye-witnesses to any of the events of Jesus’ life and its immediate aftermath. You want to believe this hypothesis even when the evidence does not support it. That is how faith works. But faith is a vice, not a virtue.
BA: The “great earthquake” (Matthew 29:2) would certainly have been felt by people all over that area (including these women),…
GW: But Matthew says that the earthquake occurred at nearly the same time that the angel rolled back the stone. We are led to believe by the author that the women observed these events. “People all over that area” would not have observed the angel roll back the stone.
BA: …but Matthew does not say the women saw the stone being rolled back from the entrance of Jesus’ tomb.
GW: He implies it. We know this by reading the words and considering the chronological context. It seems that the women ARRIVED at the tomb and HEARD the angel speak to them immediately after they SAW the angel roll back the stone and FELT the earthquake. Matthew presents the narrative here from the perspective of the women. If you think otherwise, then you are mistaken. Ask a hundred real experts about this, and I’ll bet that 85 or more will agree with me.
Please see the just published article on this subject.