The Problem With The Trinity

[gadar perets]

What name shall the child that is born, the son that is given, be called in Isaiah 9:6?

I gave my understanding in the "Eternal Security" thread, post #1214. However, I will repost it here since this is a more appropriate thread for it.

Isaiah 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. KJV​

Yes, a 100% human child is born to a human mother. The son is given to us by YHWH. YHWH puts the government upon his shoulders (Isaiah 9:7). The Hebrew for "the mighty God" is "el gibbor" which can be translated "mighty warrior" or "mighty el". Since Yeshua is NOT the "only true God" (John 17:3), the verse should not use "God" with a capital "G".

As for "Everlasting Father", there are at least 27 names in the Bible with the same Hebrew construction as in this verse. Each one means the "father of (something)." For example, Abishua means "father of plenty." Instead of translating the phrase as "father of eternity," the KJV reversed the sequence making the true meaning harder to discern. Several newer versions correct this mistake such as The Emphasized Bible, The Bible in Basic English, The New American Bible, The Holy Bible; A Translation From the Latin Vulgate in the Light of the Hebrew and Greek Originals, and The New English Bible, just to name a few. Yeshua is the father of eternity because eternal life comes to us through him. And so it is written in Hebrews 5:9, "And being made perfect, he became the author (or father) of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;"

Additionally, the article "the" for "the mighty God" and "the everlasting Father" and "the Prince of Peace" is not in the Hebrew. Neither are there capital letters in the Hebrew. The English conveniently capitalizes "God" and "Father" to lead our minds in the direction the trinitarian translators want us to think.

So, to answer your question, his name should be called "wonderful, counsellor, mighty warrior, father of eternity, prince of peace".

 

[Nancy]

I already see differing views...my prayer will be to have the truth revealed to me, and to have the courage and humility to settle on the decision I find peace in, regardless of which way it goes. There are also other doctrinal issues I have been looking at as well, such as hell, osas and others. My bottom line is to always want nothing BUT the truth and, He will lead as He will.

Do keep in mind here @gadar perets , the Trinity has been a deep belief of mine for decades, and there are arguments for both sides...this is not the first time visiting this issue for me, it's good to re-visit your core beliefs now and again to, if anything, renew your beliefs.

 

[justbyfaith]

Nancy, here are some scriptures I feel led to give to you: Philippians 4:6-7 and Colossians 3:15.

So the peace of God is indeed a gauge by which you can determine the truth.

Recognize, however, that the peace of God is something that passes all understanding: it is such a pervading peace that it is unmistakable, unlike the peace that the world gives (see also John 14:27).

 

[justbyfaith]

I gave my understanding in the "Eternal Security" thread, post #1214. However, I will repost it here since this is a more appropriate thread for it.

Isaiah 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. KJV​

Yes, a 100% human child is born to a human mother. The son is given to us by YHWH. YHWH puts the government upon his shoulders (Isaiah 9:7). The Hebrew for "the mighty God" is "el gibbor" which can be translated "mighty warrior" or "mighty el". Since Yeshua is NOT the "only true God" (John 17:3), the verse should not use "God" with a capital "G".

As for "Everlasting Father", there are at least 27 names in the Bible with the same Hebrew construction as in this verse. Each one means the "father of (something)." For example, Abishua means "father of plenty." Instead of translating the phrase as "father of eternity," the KJV reversed the sequence making the true meaning harder to discern. Several newer versions correct this mistake such as The Emphasized Bible, The Bible in Basic English, The New American Bible, The Holy Bible; A Translation From the Latin Vulgate in the Light of the Hebrew and Greek Originals, and The New English Bible, just to name a few. Yeshua is the father of eternity because eternal life comes to us through him. And so it is written in Hebrews 5:9, "And being made perfect, he became the author (or father) of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;"

Additionally, the article "the" for "the mighty God" and "the everlasting Father" and "the Prince of Peace" is not in the Hebrew. Neither are there capital letters in the Hebrew. The English conveniently capitalizes "God" and "Father" to lead our minds in the direction the trinitarian translators want us to think.

So, to answer your question, his name should be called "wonderful, counsellor, mighty warrior, father of eternity, prince of peace".

That doesn't change my perspective one bit (see Hebrews 11:1). Do you think that the father of eternity isn't God?

 

[Nancy]

I will pray for you Nancy. Keep Luke 16:10 in mind (concerning doctrine); and continue to pray that your understanding develops over time. What matters most is how we perceive things concerning doctrine at the end of our lives (but of course if we teach false doctrine in the interim, we will be held accountable, James 3:1, Galatians 1:6-9, and Jude 1:3-4).

Its's interesting you cited Galatians 1:6-9...that is the exact scripture God gave me back in the early 1990's after first saved. I had gotten a hold of a Herbert Armstrong book, probably from the library and, I cannot remember what it was but, something I read kind of shook me up a bit because it was not what I had been learning up to that point. I don't know how I was lead right to that scripture verse but, I sure rememner the joy and peace I experienced immediately after. Huh, lookit that, confirmation already! Thanks! JBF

 

[justbyfaith]

Since Yeshua is NOT the "only true God" (John 17:3), the verse should not use "God" with a capital "G".

In John 17:3 the Greek word for "and" is "kai" which can be translated "even". So John 17:3 might read,

And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, even Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.

 

[justbyfaith]

Its's interesting you cited Galatians 1:6-9...that is the exact scripture God gave me back in the early 1990's after first saved. I had gotten a hold of a Herbert Armstrong book, probably from the library and, I cannot remember what it was but, something I read kind of shook me up a bit because it was not what I had been learning up to that point. I don't know how I was lead right to that scripture verse but, I sure rememner the joy and peace I experienced immediately after. Huh, lookit that, confirmation already! Thanks! JBF

Welcome!

 

[justbyfaith]

I started my Bible Study with Plain Truth Magazine. It led me down the wrong path. An article within it made me believe that the Pharisee in the parable of the Pharisee and the publican was the example to emulate.

It wasn't until many years later that I came to the understanding that the person whose example I was to follow is the publican; for he went home to his house justified rather than the Pharisee. It took reading Luke 18:9-14 and Psalms 51:3 on the same day in my personal reading devotional time (which was and is very regulated) for my eyes to be opened. I see this as a real miracle!

 

[Enoch111]

I started my Bible Study with Plain Truth Magazine.

Plain Truth gave the impression that it was presenting Bible truth. But as a matter of fact Herbert Armstrong was teaching all kinds of false doctrines.

Just goes to show that every Christian must make the effort to know the Scriptures thoroughly, particularly the fundamentals of the faith.

 

[justbyfaith]

Plain Truth gave the impression that it was presenting Bible truth. But as a matter of fact Herbert Armstrong was teaching all kinds of false doctrines.

Just goes to show that every Christian must make the effort to know the Scriptures thoroughly, particularly the fundamentals of the faith.

I'm in full agreement with that, brother. It took me a long time to get over the teaching that made me very focused on establishing my own righteousness (see Romans 9:30-33, Romans 10:1-4, which was a part of the remedy to that). Even though I only looked into the material briefly; because a pastor on the radio, when I called in to his show, told me that it was a cult and that he had been grieved because a friend of his had been caught up in it. I may very well have remnants of false teaching somewhere in the back of my mind.

 

[Enoch111]

Additionally, the article "the" for "the mighty God" and "the everlasting Father" and "the Prince of Peace" is not in the Hebrew. Neither are there capital letters in the Hebrew. The English conveniently capitalizes "God" and "Father" to lead our minds in the direction the trinitarian translators want us to think.

Why do you deliberately misrepresent the Word of God? Just another excuse to deny the deity of Christ.

כִּי־יֶ֣לֶד יֻלַּד־לָ֗נוּ בֵּ֚ן נִתַּן־לָ֔נוּ וַתְּהִ֥י הַמִּשְׂרָ֖ה עַל־שִׁכְמֹ֑ו וַיִּקְרָ֨א שְׁמֹ֜ו פֶּ֠לֶא יֹועֵץ֙ אֵ֣ל גִּבֹּ֔ור אֲבִיעַ֖ד שַׂר־שָׁלֹֽום׃

אֵ֣ל גִּבֹּ֔ור = el gibbowr = Mighty God
אֲבִיעַ֖ד = aviad ab = Everlasting Father
שַׂר־שָׁלֹֽום = sar shalom = Prince of Peace

And it is perfectly correct to capitalize the names and titles of God. You are committed to denigrating Christ to be less than God, but this one verse is sufficient to overturn your ideas and your above misrepresentation.

 

[Nancy]

I started my Bible Study with Plain Truth Magazine. It led my down the wrong path. An article within it made me believe that the Pharisee in the parable of the Pharisee and the publican was the example to emulate.

It wasn't until many years later that I came to the understanding that the person whose example I was to follow is the publican; for he went home to his house justified rather than the Pharisee. It took reading Luke 18:9-14 and Psalms 51:3 on the same day in my personal reading devotional time (which was and is very regulated) for my eyes to be opened. I see this as a real miracle!

From what I remember of H.A. back then and especially now...he is a false prophet.

 

[gadar perets]

Why do you deliberately misrepresent the Word of God? Just another excuse to deny the deity of Christ.

כִּי־יֶ֣לֶד יֻלַּד־לָ֗נוּ בֵּ֚ן נִתַּן־לָ֔נוּ וַתְּהִ֥י הַמִּשְׂרָ֖ה עַל־שִׁכְמֹ֑ו וַיִּקְרָ֨א שְׁמֹ֜ו פֶּ֠לֶא יֹועֵץ֙ אֵ֣ל גִּבֹּ֔ור אֲבִיעַ֖ד שַׂר־שָׁלֹֽום׃

אֵ֣ל גִּבֹּ֔ור = el gibbowr = Mighty God
אֲבִיעַ֖ד = aviad ab = Everlasting Father
שַׂר־שָׁלֹֽום = sar shalom = Prince of Peace

And it is perfectly correct to capitalize the names and titles of God. You are committed to denigrating Christ to be less than God, but this one verse is sufficient to overturn your ideas and your above misrepresentation.

Your own post justifies mine. Your post shows the article "the" does NOT belong in the translation and it shows that Hebrew does NOT use capital letters. Even your transliteration of the Hebrew (for example, "el gibbowr") does not use capitals. It is only when you approach the text with the preconceived idea that the son given is "God" that you choose to translate with capital letters. And, of course, you use the current trinitarian KJV translation because it supports your belief that the Son is "God".

As for "Everlasting Father", look what you have done. In your transliteration you have the word "aviad" which is in the Hebrew, but then you add "ab" which is not in the Hebrew. The Hebrew only has one word, "aviad" (in blue). "Aviad" has the word for "father" (avi) first, then "ad" (eternity). It means "father of eternity". Consider 1 Chronicles 8:4. It contains the name Abishua. Here is Strong's defintion;

H50
אֲבִישׁוּעַ
'ăbı̂yshûa‛
ab-ee-shoo'-ah
From H1 and H7171; father of plenty (that is, prosperous); Abishua, the name of two Israelites: - Abishua.

Notice the word order where "father" comes first. In fact, you can look at Strong's numbers H25-H54 and you will see all those names meaning "father of" something. Yet, Isaiah 9:6 the order is reversed in the KJV so "Father" comes last.

 

[gadar perets]

I started my Bible Study with Plain Truth Magazine. It led my down the wrong path. An article within it made me believe that the Pharisee in the parable of the Pharisee and the publican was the example to emulate.

It wasn't until many years later that I came to the understanding that the person whose example I was to follow is the publican; for he went home to his house justified rather than the Pharisee. It took reading Luke 18:9-14 and Psalms 51:3 on the same day in my personal reading devotional time (which was and is very regulated) for my eyes to be opened. I see this as a real miracle!

Every Christian denomination teaches something that is untrue to one degree or another. Does that make them all cults or are they all sincerely trying to walk in truth, but need more growth in certain areas?

 

[Harvest 1874]

Or, since this "different way" is being told to her before she prayed, it is very likely the devil seeking to show her "a different way" other than the truth.

Or it could be that the Lord is attempting to correct her way, seeing she has been led down the wrong one.

Some times the Lord answers prayers even before we have asked.

 

[Episkopos]

Your own post justifies mine. Your post shows the article "the" does NOT belong in the translation and it shows that Hebrew does NOT use capital letters. Even your transliteration of the Hebrew (for example, "el gibbowr") does not use capitals. It is only when you approach the text with the preconceived idea that the son given is "God" that you choose to translate with capital letters. And, of course, you use the current trinitarian KJV translation because it supports your belief that the Son is "God".

As for "Everlasting Father", look what you have done. In your transliteration you have the word "aviad" which is in the Hebrew, but then you add "ab" which is not in the Hebrew. The Hebrew only has one word, "aviad" (in blue). "Aviad" has the word for "father" (avi) first, then "ad" (eternity). It means "father of eternity". Consider 1 Chronicles 8:4. It contains the name Abishua. Here is Strong's defintion;

H50
אֲבִישׁוּעַ
'ăbı̂yshûa‛
ab-ee-shoo'-ah
From H1 and H7171; father of plenty (that is, prosperous); Abishua, the name of two Israelites: - Abishua.

Notice the word order where "father" comes first. In fact, you can look at Strong's numbers H25-H54 and you will see all those names meaning "father of" something. Yet, Isaiah 9:6 the order is reversed in the KJV so "Father" comes last.

You don't read Hebrew. If you did you would realize that there are NO capital letters for anyone including God. And a name has the "EL" ....ATTACHED to the adjective.

When the El is separate it relates directly to God...like EL SHADDAI....2 words...relating to God (EL) and an adjective (SHADDAI).

If that was to be a name of a human being it would be attached like this... ELSHADDAI.

So then learn that Hebrew has a name ATTACHED to "EL." And a descriptive of God has the "EL" detached as 2 words.


So then this is exactly true of El Gibor...

אֵ֣ל גִּבֹּ֔ור = el gibbowr = Mighty God

The same goes for Immanuel. It is also 2 words...meaning it is NOT a name but a descriptive of God Himself.

 

[Harvest 1874]

I already see differing views...my prayer will be to have the truth revealed to me, and to have the courage and humility to settle on the decision I find peace in, regardless of which way it goes. There are also other doctrinal issues I have been looking at as well, such as hell, osas and others. My bottom line is to always want nothing BUT the truth and, He will lead as He will.

Good for you my sister, too many have been so fixated on what they have been taught (through the doctrines and precepts of men) that they now live in the fear of men, fearful that should they believe contrary to the popular view point (orthodoxy) they will be ostracized and cast out from amoungst their friends and neighbors (fellow believers), yet the choice is yours are you more concern with what man thinks of you or what God thinks of you? Whom do you love more?

It is a wise lesson for all to learn, that one should never drive ones tent pegs so deep in the ground that one cannot remove them, in other words we should never become so dogmatic about our own personal view point that if presented with another point which appears to be more accurate i.e. more in harmony with the scriptures than our own that we are unable to change our thoughts on the issue (remove our pegs) and accept that which is clearly shown to be a superior or more accurate view point.

 

[APAK]

@Episkopos and @Enoch111 ..get your heads out of the sand and stop barking up the wrong tree. Get some live into what you profess you believe in.

Jesus is never called the “Everlasting Father” anywhere else in Scripture.

It is a basic tenet of Trinitarian doctrine that Christians should “neither confound the Persons nor divide the Substance” (Athanasian Creed). Thus, if this verse is translated properly, then Trinitarian Christians have a real problem. However, the phrase is mistranslated. The word translated “everlasting” is actually “age,” and the correct translation is that Jesus will be called “father of the [coming] age.” WE HE IS TODAY!!

In the culture of the Bible, anyone who began anything or was very important to something was called its “father.”

Jesus was the father of the new believers, which he is. We have to put MEANING into was we are reading. This is what Father means here whether you want to capitalize it or not ; all symbols were originally capitalized anyway.. God Almighty was not the father of all believers in the body of Christ, Christ was. Christ 'invented it..his death and ascension to immortality.

If I invented a new widget I would be called the father of it.

For example, because Jabal was the first one to live in a tent and raise livestock, the Bible says, “he was the father of those who live in tents and raise livestock” (Gen. 4:20)

Furthermore, because Jubal was the first inventor of musical instruments, he is called, “the father of all who play the harp and flute” (Gen. 4:21).

Scripture is not using “father” in the sense of literal father or ancestor in these verses, because both these men were descendants of Cain, and all their descendants died in the Flood. “Father” was being used in the cultural understanding of either one who was the first to do something or someone who was important in some way. Get real here.

Martin Luther even translated the phrase as “divine hero” in their Bibles – not Mighty God

Why you cannot look behind the meaning of Isaiah 9:6...what does it take, a miracle.

Bless you both,

APAK

 

[Nancy]

You don't read Hebrew. If you did you would realize that there are NO capital letters for anyone including God. And a name has the "EL" ....ATTACHED to the adjective.

When the El is separate it relates directly to God...like EL SHADDAI....2 words...relating to God (EL) and an adjective (SHADDAI).

If that was to be a name of a human being it would be attached like this... ELSHADDAI.

So then learn that Hebrew has a name ATTACHED to "EL." And a descriptive of God has the "EL" detached as 2 words.


So then this is exactly true of El Gibor...

אֵ֣ל גִּבֹּ֔ור = el gibbowr = Mighty God

The same goes for Immanuel. It is also 2 words...meaning it is NOT a name but a descriptive of God Himself.

“Jesus heard that they had put him out; and finding him, He said, “Do you believe in the Son of Man?” 36 He answered and said, “And who is He, Lord, that I may believe in Him?” 37 Jesus said to him, “You have both seen Him, and He is the one who is talking with you.” 38 And he said, “Lord, I believe.” And he worshiped Him.” John 9:35-38 NASB <---- If Jesus is not God, why is He allowing Himself to be worshiped?
“For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form.” Colossians 2:9 <--- How do you explain this one?
“I and the Father are one.” 31 The Jews took up stones again to stone Him. 32 Jesus answered them, “I showed you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you stoning Me?” 33 The Jews answered Him, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God.” John 10:30-33 <---- Jesus never deny's this.
“And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.” John 1:14 <----- Who else besides Jesus could this be talking about?
Sorry Gadar but, it is just glaringly obvious. Thanks for forcing me to re-visit these scriptures and not just reinforcing my present beliefs- bringing me even closer to the True God...and there IS only ONE true God.
It seems you have to really bend over backwards and jump through hoops to get to believe what you do. The script. above are only a few but...they IMO, cannot be wrested of their clarity. And when JBF brought up Herbert Armstrong, it was a name that brought back one of the earliest memories from the beginning of my walk...of course I looked him up to spark my memory and, it all came flooding back to me. Your "religion" once again, as worked through Satan, tried to change my mind into thinking I was worshiping more than one True God. On this one, I am truly cemented.
God Bless

 

[Episkopos]

@Episkopos and @Enoch111 ..get your heads out of the sand and stop barking up the wrong tree. Get some live into what you profess you believe in.

Jesus is never called the “Everlasting Father” anywhere else in Scripture.

It is a basic tenet of Trinitarian doctrine that Christians should “neither confound the Persons nor divide the Substance” (Athanasian Creed). Thus, if this verse is translated properly, then Trinitarian Christians have a real problem. However, the phrase is mistranslated. The word translated “everlasting” is actually “age,” and the correct translation is that Jesus will be called “father of the [coming] age.” WE HE IS TODAY!!

In the culture of the Bible, anyone who began anything or was very important to something was called its “father.”

Jesus was the father of the new believers, which he is. We have to put MEANING into was we are reading. This is what Father means here whether you want to capitalize it or not ; all symbols were originally capitalized anyway.. God Almighty was not the father of all believers in the body of Christ, Christ was. Christ 'invented it..his death and ascension to immortality.

If I invented a new widget I would be called the father of it.

For example, because Jabal was the first one to live in a tent and raise livestock, the Bible says, “he was the father of those who live in tents and raise livestock” (Gen. 4:20)

Furthermore, because Jubal was the first inventor of musical instruments, he is called, “the father of all who play the harp and flute” (Gen. 4:21).

Scripture is not using “father” in the sense of literal father or ancestor in these verses, because both these men were descendants of Cain, and all their descendants died in the Flood. “Father” was being used in the cultural understanding of either one who was the first to do something or someone who was important in some way. Get real here.

Martin Luther even translated the phrase as “divine hero” in their Bibles – not Mighty God

Why you cannot look behind the meaning of Isaiah 9:6...what does it take, a miracle.

Bless you both,

APAK

Apak....you are just spewing here. You are not looking at the text but just reacting in the flesh. You throwing a fit does not mean anything. You should realize that. In person maybe you think your reactions have an impact....but here...you are ignoring the truth and you can't even look at it. Engage the argument...by using the text. Or...don't respond.

But I know that there is no argument against what I wrote...just reactions against the truth.