SON OF MAN.jpg

TRINITY DOCTRINE - MISINTERPRETED SCRIPTURES

MISINTERPRETED TRINITY SCRIPTURE

I once had a pastor admit the Trinity Doctrine is not mentioned in the Bible, but said biblical experts understand it is clearly shown in the Bible. However, not all denominations and biblical scholars believe in the Trinity Doctrine. Trinitarians are anxious to point out Jehovah's Witnesses reject the Trinity Doctrine, but I will point out Catholics created the Trinity doctrine. So, pick your poison. Don't make me a Jehovah's Witness, and I will not make you a Catholic. Moreover, we should go by what scripture actually says, not what we think it says, or what a church thinks it says. Nevertheless, the Trinity doctrine seems primarily based on stringing together several misinterpreted scriptures. Verses are often misinterpreted several reasons:
1. Some verses seem to explain the Trinity doctrine but are open to deductive reasoning which is often wrong because of preconceived 4th century theology. If you never heard of the Trinity doctrine, you would look for possible other explanations. Always remember what it says is in Pro 3:5 NIV...... Trust in the LORD with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding. For this reason, I go by what the Bible actually says, not on a theory developed 300 years after Christ.
2. Names or terms are taken out of context. Either the same verse, adjoining verses, nearby verses, or other verses in the Bible often contradict a literal translation of these names or terms.
3. The Bible is filled with metaphors designed to relay the essence or purpose of something. For example, according to Find It in the Bible by Bob Phillips, there are 59 metaphoric names for Christ in the Bible and 18 such names for the Holy Spirit. Metaphors are often mistakenly taken literally. Jesus is the Lamb of God, but he is not a sheep. However, Trinity believers arbitrarily pick only certain names or titles to be used literally because they can be used to support the Trinity doctrine.

BOOK OF JOHN
If I were to pick one book that has the most scriptures that prove Jesus is God, I would pick the book of John. However, if I had to pick one book that proves Jesus is not God, I would also pick the book of John. That is because John has so many verses that can be quoted out of context, and John’s extensive use of metaphors. For example, John uses 17 metaphors for Jesus in his 5 books.

John 1: 1-3 - “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not anything made that was made.” Who agrees that it sounds like Jesus is God? Jesus is not even mentioned until verse 14.
1. John 1:1-3 revolves around what “Word” means. Perhaps we need to look at the original Greek. “Word” (according to Strong’s #3056) is literally translated from the Greek word “logos,” which means reasoning or intelligence. It also means something said (Gen 1:3 NIV.... And God said, "Let there be light, and there was light.”) or thought. “Logos” is still used today in the Greek Interlinear Bible.
2. Word is used metaphorically to mean a characteristic of God. John 1:1 says, “the word was God,” but this cannot be literal since God is more than logic. For example, the Bible also says God is love. Also, in English, “word” can be either literal referring to a single word, or it can be a used to describe God’s message similar to the “Word of God,” meaning the Bible. The “word” is never used in any book of the Bible to prove Jesus is Jehovah. Context proves this. The KJV New Testament uses the word “word” 207 times, but it is never used to show Jesus is Jehovah. The term “word of God” is used 45 times, and it never means the Son of God or the Jesus of God, but rather the will of God that Jesus taught. Furthermore, Jesus used the term “word” 32 times and NEVER used it to describe himself. NEVER! Instead, Jesus used “word” to describe its literal meaning in John 1:1-3. That is the context Jesus always used. Amazingly, many people cling to John 1:1-14 even though it makes no reference of a Triune God, althouth a triune God is also never mentioned in thd 30,102 verses of the Bible.
John 1:1-3 is the flagship of all pro-trinity scriptures, but it has a translation history that few know about. This history is very problematic for Trinitarians. It involved a change in words, change in word order, and a change in Capitalization.

The history of John 1:1-3:
1. Nine of the oldest English translations of John 1:1 said, “God was the word (or worde)” instead of “the word was God.” These translations are:
a. The Corpus Christi manuscripts (circa 1000 AD),
b. The Hatton manuscripts (circa 1200AD),
c. Wycliffe Bible (1395),
d. Tyndale Bible (1534),
e. Coverdale Bible (1535),
f. The Great Bible, the first authorized Bible, (1540)
g. The Bishops Bible (1568)
h. The Geneva Bible (1587)
i. The KJV (1611)
2. In 1568, the Church of England (KJV) changed verse 1 from “God was the word” to say “the Word was God.” Changing the subject and predicate (according to proper English grammar) can change the complete meaning of a sentence. This is like saying love is God instead of God is love.
3. In 1587 the Geneva Bible became the first to capitalize “word.” Word had never been capitalized before, although “God” had been capitalized in the Wycliffe, Tyndale, Coverdale, the Great Bible, and the Bishops Bible. Nevertheless, the “Word” still did not refer to Jesus but referred to God’s logic. We know this because the Geneva Bible used “it” to describe the “word” in verse 3. This is the same Bible brought to America by the Pilgrims.
4. Not only did the Geneva Bible use “it” in verse 3 to describe the “word,” but so did the first 2 “authorized” Bibles (the Great Bible and the Bishops Bible), as well as the first New Testament translated direct from Greek (the Tyndale Bible). Any pronouns such as “him” always refers to God. Moreover, God is the only literal living entity specially mentioned in verses 1 – 3 in any version. Logic (logos) is not a living entity. The Geneva Bible (1587, just 24 years before the KJV) reads as follows:
John 1:1-3 Geneva ...... “In the beginning was that Word, and that Word was with God, and that Word was God. (2) This same was in the beginning with God. (3) All things were made by It, and without It was made nothing that was made.”
5. Aside from translation issues, John 1:1-3 also has theological issues. How can there be a Trinity when the Holy Spirit is not even mentioned? This is what happens when you take things literally that are actually figurative. This is what happens when "understanding" replaces what is actually said. Just think about it - Jesus never claimed to be either God, the word, or part of a triune Godhead. However, people today have no problem pretending Jesus taught this! I guess we should thank these people for fully explaining what Jesus evidently did not think was important.
6. The NIV and other modern translations later used dynamic equivalence to change verse 1 to more clearly create a second entity. The NIV reads; “He” [someone] was with God in the beginning.” Realize that all NIV translators, according to its preface, had to believe in the Trinity. Nevertheless, no translation ever had “Jesus” mentioned before verse 14. Neither does any translation say the “word” symbolized Jesus prior to his becoming flesh.

I will end by saying that none of the first 9 major English translations of this verse showed a triune God. We also know 3 of these translations identified the "word" as an "it," despite the fact that the Trinity Doctrine was approved in 381 AD. Not until 1973 did the word become a "he," thanks to the NIV. (Joh 1:2 NIV...... He was with God in the beginning.) Therefore, even if one believes the Catholic Trinity Doctrine, he should not use this verse to prove it unless he is willing to say the first 9 major English translations of John 1:1-3 were wrong. (One should also realize every NIV translator had to believe in the trinity according to its preface.)

John 1:14 KJV...... And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
1. Pro-Trinitarians use John 1:14 to retroactively change the meaning of the Greek word logos to mean Jesus in verse one. Instead, these people should realize the "it" metaphorically became flesh. I find it hypocritical that some agree flesh is a metaphor meaning human yet reject that the "word" can mean the word of God.
2. Actually, John 1:1-14 should be a simple plot:
a. Verse 1-5 states that God is the beginning of all reasoning and he created everything.
b. Verses 5-13 tells of the word of God being spread by John the Baptist.
c. Verse 14 states that the "word" (God's logos or reasoning) metaphorically became flesh through the birth of Jesus. (The Bible, of course, is also referred to as "The Word of God," or the "The Word.") Then, 1500 years after the death of Christ, the whole message of these 14 verses was changed. Logos was now Jesus even before logos metaphorically became flesh.
3. The KJV translators made sure that John 1:1-14 is proof of the Trinity doctrine. All they had to do was switch a couple words around, capitalize one word, change another, and retrofit verse 14 to previous verses. How often do you read a word and not know what it means until 13 sentences later?
4. Finally, if the Word is the Godhead; the Godhead did not become flesh. Quite simply, God’s logic (will) metaphorically became known to man through Jesus Christ. To think otherwise, on must believe Jehovah became flesh, because scripture tells us that from the beginning the Word (Jesus) was God (Jehovah). Actually, it would be more accurate to say 1/3 of the Word (God) became flesh. Scripture could very easily state part of God became flesh and the rest of God stayed in heaven. Scripture does not say this because it is not true. Just substitute the words “Jesus” for “word” and “Jehovah” for “God” in verses 1-14, and where is the Holy Spirit? Doesn’t quite make sense, does it?

Joh 8:58 KJV...... Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.
1. Wow; Jesus said he is Jehovah, I AM! Not so fast, first of all, realize that “I am” is used 702 times in the OT and 333 times in the NT. Therefore, we should first compare the context. Context always determines the meaning. The context here is whether Jesus existed before Abraham. The Pharisees did not ask his name - “Then said the Jews unto him, thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?”
2. In this verse Jesus said he existed before Abraham, but Jesus never said he was the God of Abraham. Instead, Jesus quoted OT scripture showing the Father is the God of Abraham. 'I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? He is not the God of the dead but of the living." (Matthew 22:32 NIV)
3. Jesus should have said “I ARE” or “WE ARE” since the Godhead is supposed to be plural. Remember how people like to point out GE 1:26 – “Let us make man in our image”? However, there is no mention of a triune Godhead anywhere in scripture.
4. Jesus did not say any of the following:
a. “I AM THAT I AM”
b. “haya“ (Hebrew – “I am”) as Jehovah did.
c. “I am Jehovah” or “I am God.”
d. “WE ARE THAT WE ARE,” despite some point out Elohim and Gen 1:26 are plural.
5. Most Bibles put I AM in Ex 3:14 in caps, but not in John 8:55. In other words, even the translators of all the Bible versions understand that Jesus was not saying he was Jehovah.
6. Jesus is not God since he said just 4 verses earlier, "If I glorify myself, my glory means nothing. ” My Father, whom you claim as your God, is the one who glorifies me.” Jesus could not say he is God, or he would be contradicting what he just said.
7. The term “I am” is used 1035 times in the Bible, and we certainly don’t believe every person uttering this phrase is God. Jesus did say, “I am” the bread of life, the light of the world, the door, the good shepherd, the way, and the true vine. However, Jesus never said he was God. Gabriel also said “I am.” in Luke 1:19 KJV...... “I am [ego ieme] Gabriel,” but Gabriel is, of course, not God either.
a. “ieme” can mean “ I exist” – Strongs G1510.
b. “Ego ieme” can mean “I am he.” Joh 18:5 KJV...... Jesus saith unto them, I am he.
8. Saying “I am” does not mean one is Jehovah. Using the KJV, two People answered a question exactly as Jesus did; with only these same two words, “I am.” Using the NIV, one can add two more people.In fact, these people answered in Hebrew, same as Jehovah did in Ex 3:14 - (haya ).
a. A prophet gave the same 2 word answer, "I am." in 1Ki 13:14 KJV.... “Art thou the man of God that camest from Judah? And he said, I am.”
b. Elijah gave the same answer. 1Ki 18:8 KJV...... “And he answered him, I am”
c. Jehonadab gave the same answer. 2Ki 10:15 NIV...... “Jehu greeted him and said, "Are you in accord with me, as I am with you?" "I am," Jehonadab answered.”
d. Joab also gave the same answer. 2Sa 20:17 NIV...... "Are you Joab?” “I am," he answered.
9. Paul even said “I am what I am” in 1Co 15:10 KJV.... But by the grace of God “I am what I am.” “Ho”, [ieme ho ieme], can also mean “who” or “that” according to Strongs G3937, but Paul was not saying he is Jehovah.

John 20:28 KJV...... “And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God”.
1. Thomas used God only as a title similar to Lord or Master. Jesus himself explained that Jews frequently used “god” as a title as stated by Jesus in John 10:33-36.
2. One only need to read three verses later to see that Thomas did not believe Jesus is part of Jehovah, but the Son of Jehovah. John 20:31 KJV.... “But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.” John says his whole purpose in writing the book of John is to prove that Jesus is the Christ and the Son of God (not God).
3. Few people know it was Thomas who previously asked Jesus what is the way to salvation before Jesus gave his famous reply, “Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” (John 14:6 KJV) Thomas knew that the Father is the ultimate destination and Jesus is the Way to the Father. He called Jesus “God” only because he was acknowledging his immortal divinity in the broad sense of the word.
4. Finally, as we discussed earlier, the title God does not always refer to Jehovah.

John 10:30…...“I and my Father are one" (KJV). Many people will say that this verse literally supports the doctrine of the Trinity. If taken literally, however, this Scripture actually contradicts the Trinity Doctrine because Jesus says he is one with the Father and not one with the Godhead.
1. Jesus said in John 17:11...... "Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are" (KJV). Why should we take John 10:30 literally and take John 17:11 figuratively? The term "one" is, of course, strictly a figure of speech meaning that Jesus and the Father are of the exact same purpose and intentions. (They have one purpose.)
2. As explained earlier, the Pharisees also thought Jesus was saying he is God and threaten to stone him in the very next verse. Then, in the next 6 verses Jesus denies he is God and corrects them by saying he is “God’s Son.” Who do you believe – the Pharisees or Jesus?

MORE TRINITY DOCTRINE SCRIPTURES
1. Isaiah 7:14...... Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
a. We see this scripture fulfilled in the following scripture: Mat 1:23 KJV...... Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.
b. “God is with us,” as used in the OT means God supports them; not that God is physically there. It does not mean the Child is literally going to be Jehovah. For example: Isa 8:10 KJV.... Take counsel together, and it shall come to nought; speak the word, and it shall not stand for GOD IS WITH US.

2. Isa 9:6 KJV..... For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace.
a. It may be a moot point, but Isaiah only foretells what the Messiah will be called, and not who he actually is. Nevertheless, these titles are actually all metaphoric or hyperbolic titles. Three are obvious metaphors, yet many pick the other two to be literal. More importantly, Jesus is never called, Jehovah, the mighty God, or the Everlasting Father anywhere in the New Testament. These names are therefore obvious hyperbole to emphasize the attributes of Jesus. Jesus will only represent the Jehovah, the Father, with forgiveness of sins, great miracles, peace, and have Godly wisdom. Jesus certainly is never called Jehovah. Even Trinitarians must deny that Jesus is the everlasting Father. Just look at the shield of the Trinity, and it shows the Father is not the Son.
b. Strongs #410 and John 10:34 both show the word “God” can apply to any deity, and even to humans.
c. Additionally, if one takes this verse in context, one must read the next verse. Verse 7 says. “The zeal of the Lord of hosts [Jehovah] will perform this,” but clearly Jesus is clearly not Jehovah, the Lord of hosts. One could say Jesus is 3 in 1, but that is not stated anywhere in scripture, any more than the Bible mentions Purgatory, indulgences, penance, Rosary beads, or annulment.

3. Colossians 2:9......"For in him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily" (KJV).
a. This KJV translation says Jesus is the ‘fullness" of the Godhead. This mistranslation still does not say that Jesus is the Godhead. Trinity believers will say, "How can Jesus be the fullness of the God if he is not God?" I would ask, "How can Jesus be the “fullness” of the Godhead if Jesus is only one-third of God (the Godhead)?" Fullness" has nothing to do with the supernatural nature of Jesus, but the effectiveness of Jesus representing the Father. More specifically, “Fullness” does not mean one object is actually another object. Rather, all 23 other uses of the word “fullness” in the Bible indicate a shared completeness of the qualities of the item being compared. Psalms 24:1, for example, shows even an inanimate object (the earth) can be the “fullness” of God. Finally, we are considered the “fullness” of Jesus in John 1:16 KJV.... And of his fullness have all we received, and grace for grace.

4. Genesis 1:26 states...... “And God said, ‘Let us make man in our image”
a. This verse is one of the most popular Scriptures used to support the Trinity based on the fact that God says, “us” and "our image." Why does the next verse say, "his own image?” That is because verse 26 is taken out of context. I counted six times that the word "I" was used by God to refer to himself in just the first three chapters of Genesis. The singular word "his" is also used three times in just these same three chapters. I wish I were industrious enough to count all the singular references to God in the whole Bible. I am sure it is probably over one thousand. That is because God does not have an identity crisis. God does not refer to himself in the singular sometimes and other times in the plural. You want something else to really think about? Neither does anyone else. Even today, we all refer to God in the singular, so I wish people would stop trying to use scripture to prove God is plural.
b. We can easily see that in verse 26, God was most likely speaking to someone else (probably Jesus and maybe some angels in their midst) and that is why God used the terms "us." and "our." This is known as the “royal we” and is used when a leader does something as a representative of his followers. A king may say, “let us attack the enemy,” but not everyone he is speaking to is a warrior.
c. If one believes in the Godhead, which voice was speaking and who was listening? Whose idea was it to create man? Was it Jesus, the Holy Spirit, or the Father? Since the Godhead has no separate personality, it could not be the Godhead speaking. We have no reason to assume that God was talking to himself. In other words, verse 26 is the quote of a conversation, but verse 27 is a narrative.
d. Finally, scripture tells us God made man in his image; meaning all celestial beings have souls and reasoning power. If you believe God created us in the image of the "three in one" Godhead, then both men and angels should have three souls and three personalities. We can believe that God is not three beings in one because man is not three beings in one.

5. Hebrews 1:8-9 KJV......” but unto the Son he [Jehovah] saith, thy throne, oh god, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom. Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God [Jehovah], even thy god, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows” (KJV).
a. Verse 8 seems to refer to Jesus as God. However, It is actually Jehovah (the Father) speaking and addressing Jesus as his Son. How can Jesus be God when the Father states that He is the God ("thy God") of Jesus? In addition, we see that the Father is the God of Jesus as verified by Jesus in Matt 27:46, John 20:17, Rev 1:6, and Rev 3:12. This proof of inequality contradicts the Trinity doctrine.
b. Since there is only one Jehovah, and since Scripture cannot contradict itself, we understand that "O God" is a loose metaphoric title emphasizing the spiritual greatness of Jesus that transcends human behavior. The term “god” (Strong’s #2316) was used by Jews to describe magistrates and judges because they were administering God’s law. God is only a title without the definite article “the.” Even the dictionary states that “God” does not always refer to the supreme creator, so why do Trinity believers deny the English language?
c. As Jesus pointed this out in John 10:34-35......” Jesus answered them, ‘Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?’ If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken” (KJV). Jesus was referencing Psa 82:6 KJV...... I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the Most High. Do you agree with Jesus?
d. Further proof of a metaphor is the fact that Moses was called a God - Exo 7:1 KJV...... And the LORD said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.
e. As far as Hebrews verses 5 and 6, they state God “ Jesus was “begotten” in heaven before God brought him into the world. Heb 1:5-6 KJV....... For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son? And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.” You see, Jesus is not God, but was begotten by God in heaven and then brought into this world.
f. The whole chapter 1 of Hebews show the Father appointed Jesus, heir, anointed him, was "made," was the "firstbegotten,” and has Jesus sit at his right hand. One must ask, is the Father the God of Jesus, or (misinterpreting Heb 1:8) is Jesus the God of the Father? Are they both even equal according to the full chapter 1 of Hebrews?

6. 2Co 4:4 KJV...... In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.
a. This scripture says Jesus is God because he is the image of God, right? No – remember, we just read in Gen1:26 all mankind is created in God’s image.
b. “Image” actually tells us something is not the real thing. After all, which would you rather have - a new car or an image of a new car? The Bible is also filled with many similar examples of an image not being the real thing.

7. Php 2:5-11 NIV...... In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus: (6) Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality [Strongs 2470 - ISA, similar] with God something to be used to his own advantage; (7) rather, he made himself nothing by taking the very nature [ Strongs #2444 morph – “figuratively] of a servant, being made in human likeness. (8) And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to death— even death on a cross! (9) Therefore God [Jehovah] exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name, (10) that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the Earth, (11) and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of the Father to the glory of God the Father.
a. Verse 5 states even we can have the same mindset as Jesus, but we are not Jesus.
b. Verses 6 states Jesus is compared to God by stating he has the same (heavenly) nature as God. Yes, Jesus once had a heavenly body like God, but he did not use that to his advantage. Instead, Jesus chose to obey God (John 5:37), temporarily have human nature and die on the cross.
c. Verses 9-11 do not support the Trinity doctrine, but actually disprove it; how can Jesus be the same as God when he is exalted by God, given a name by God, and every acknowledgement of Jesus Glorifies God? The context of this verse is humility, not proving that Jesus is God. Christ is being shown as having a will separate from God, but always humbly obedient. Jesus was given an order by God; however, Christ never gives the Father an order in all of scripture.
d. Most importantly, to misinterpret this scripture contradicts Jesus own denial that he is God (John 10:30-36). One should not misinterpret scriptures in an attempt to prove Jesus wrong.

THE COMMA JOHANNEUM
A very problematic Scripture is 1 John 5:7-8, which is known as the Comma Johanneum. This Scripture reflects words that were added to these verses by KJV translators so people could better understand the Trinity Doctrine. These words are "in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth." Let's compare the KJV with the NIV.
1. KJV - 1 John 5:7-8...... For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.
2. NIV- "For there are three that testify: the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement."
The first appearance of the longer KJV reading did not appear until the 4th century. Even then, it appeared only as a marginal note added by a scribe after the original manuscript was written. These words were then added to the Greek text in the 16th century when the Catholic Church pressured the translator Erasmus, a Catholic bishop, to include them in the Bible. History shows that the first and second translations of Erasmus did not have the added words, but extreme pressure from the Catholic Church caused Erasmus to add them in his third edition, known as the Textus Receptus.
There appears to be universal scholastic acceptance that the extra words were not in all the Greek manuscripts because there is no proof that the longer version existed before the Trinity doctrine was introduced by the Catholic Church in the 4th century. Ironically, even the new version of the Catholic Latin Bible (Nova Vulgata) written in 1979 does not include the Comma Johanneum. I have also found 11 English versions that do not include the Comma Johanneum and an additional one that includes it, but it puts the words in brackets to show the words are not in the oldest reliable Greek texts.

THE BOOK OF REVELATION
Other Scriptures that need explanation are found in Revelation. Keep in mind, John wrote Revelation as a book that is filled with metaphors and much symbolism since he is relating a dream. There are, of course, many whole books that try to interpret the metaphors and symbolism in Revelation. The book of Revelation calls Jesus the Alpha and Omega, the First and the Last, and the Almighty. These Scriptures seemed to clearly state that Jesus is God, but could these names be metaphors? For example, John speaks of the Seven Spirits of God, but we don’t take that literally. It seems to be clear that John often used the metaphoric names of Jesus to emphasize his oneness with God and other qualities. Here are some examples shown In Revelation, and the other books that John wrote, John uses many metaphoric names for Jesus such as:
1. Bright and Faithful Morning Star
2. The Lamb
3. Witness
4. Lion of Judah
5. Word of God
6. Alpha and Omega (not I AM THAT I AM or Jehovah)
7. First and the Last (not I AM THAT I AM or Jehovah)
8. The Beginning and the End (not I AM THAT I AM or Jehovah)
9. The Almighty (not God Almighty)
10. King of Kings
11. Lord of Lords
12. True Vine
13. The Door
14. Son of Joseph
15. Master
Even if one does not accept Alpha and Omega is a metaphor, we are not given a context to this title. Does John mean the first of God’s creation? Does he mean Jesus is God’s first and last Son? If literal, what is meant by the First and the Last? God says he is “I AM.” He has no beginning or end. Therefore, regardless of one’s Trinity beliefs, one must admit this is only a metaphor. If the remainder of Revelation shows Jesus is the same as, or 1/3 of Jehovah, then Jesus must be God. However, if Revelation shows the heavenly Jesus as being separate from God, then clearly these names are metaphors.

1. Revelation Rev 1:1-2 KJV...... The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John: Who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw.
• Right from the very first 2verses of the first chapter we are shown that Jesus is separate from God (Jehovah). We are shown that Jesus is not part of God since God gave Jesus the Revelation to show to his servants.

2. Revelation 1:6 KJV.....And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen.
• Awkward KJV Old English makes it appear that Jesus is being called God. The correct thought here is "his God and Father”, which is clearer in many other Bible versions such as the NKJV and the NIV. Furthermore, we know this verse is referring to only the Father because it says "him” (the Father)," not " them (Jesus and the Father)." We now see that God is the Father, not a Godhead. As always God is singular. By the way, where is the third part of the Trinity? Should we not give glory forever and ever to the Holy Spirit?

3. Rev 3:5 KJV...... He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.
• We see here not only that the Jehovah is separate from Jesus, but also that Jesus is subservient to the Father.

4. Revelation 3:12 KJV...... Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.
• Four times Jesus tells us the Father is his God.
• Remember, Jesus sits at the right hand of God. 1Pe 3:22 KJV..... “Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God;”
• To claim Jesus is part of Jesus’ God makes no sense and requires one to contradict this scripture.
The book of Revelation does not prove the theory of a 3 in 1 Godhead. There are no explanations in Revelation that state Jesus is Jehovah. Instead, we see a Jesus who is separate from the Father and is his God. This is the same God who Jesus called out to from the cross and the same God Jesus told us to pray to when he returns to heaven. Since scripture cannot contradict itself, we must admit that making Jesus Jehovah is the result of taking metaphors literally and applying them to Jesus even if the context is foggy. The alternative is to believe a theory that is neither mentioned nor explained anywhere in the Bible