Jesus as EL, ELOHIM, and THEOS

The Biblical Usage of the Titles for God

The argument often forwarded by trinitarians and some others is that since there is only one true God, and since Jesus is also called "God", Jesus must be that one true God, or else be a false god. However, the historical/cultural context of the Hebrew words for "God" indicates a legitimate usage of the word, other than meaning the Supreme Being or false god. Indeed, a study of the words involved indicates that the Hebrew words for "god", when applied to any other than Jehovah, can take on a more general meaning of might, strength, power. We will proceed to show this in this study.

The Greek word, theos, is used to describe Satan as "the god of this world" (2 Corinthians 4:4); it is also used to describe the saints as"gods," "sons of the Most High" (John 10:34, 35, from Ps. 82:6, Revised Standard Version). It is used of idols, or fabricated "gods who will go before us" (Acts 7:40), and heathen gods, "the gods have come down to us in human form!" (Acts 14:11, 12). Hence, THEOS itself has a more general application in Scripture, and the fact that it is occasionally used of Jesus should not be taken as proof that he was God Almighty. Such usage alone is not conclusive to warrant such a distinction.

But more importantly, is how the Hebrews used the words from which theos is translated. Being Hebrews, the New Testament writers would be well aware of this heritage. We need to keep in mind that the Bible writers were not Greeks, but Hebrews. Inspired and enlightened by the Holy Spirit (John 16:4-13; Galatians 1:12; Ephesians 3:5; 2 Timothy 2:2), they based their ideas and mode of thinking on the Hebrew Scriptures (Isaiah 8:20), rather than on Greek, Roman, or Latin philosophies or mythologies. Thus, it should be imperative that we see how the Hebrews used the Hebrew words for "god", and see if such could be applicable to NT usage concerning Jesus.

Let us start by referring to the incident where the Jewish leaders accused Jesus of blasphemy because, as they stated, being a man, he made himself "God". (John 10:33) The claim is false (even from the viewpoint of many trinitarians, since most trinitarians claim that as a man, Jesus was not by "nature" God, but human. In reality, Jesus denied that he was God by stating over and over that he was sent by the only true God, could do nothing of his own self, everything he had was given to him by God, etc. (Matthew 23:39; Mark 11:9,10; Luke 13:35; John 3:2,17; 5:19,22,23,27-30,43; 6:57; 7:16,28; 8:26,28,38; 10:25; 12:49,50; 14:10; 15:15; 17:8,26) In the immediate response to the accusation made by the Jewish leaders, Jesus responded: "Isn't it written in your law, 'I said, you are gods?' If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture can't be broken), Do you say of him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, 'You blaspheme,' because I said, 'I am the Son of God?' (John 10:34-36) Again, instead of claiming to be God Almighty, Jesus clarified that rather than being God Almighty, he was sent by God, his Father, Jehovah, and that he was the Son of God -- not God Almighty Himself.

Nevertheless, Jesus did show that THEOS could be applied to him since he is the Son of God, just as it is applied to those who are regenerated sons of God. Jesus' use of the plural form theoi -- gods, which he applied to the "sons of God" of Psalm 82:6 -- men -- not God Almighty, and thus demonstrated that theoi, like elohim in Psalm 82:6, does not always mean God Almighty.  John quotes Jesus in Greek as saying theoi -- the plural of theos. However, Jesus is quoting from the Hebrew Scriptures (commonly called the Old Testament) from Psalm 82:6, which, of course, was written in Hebrew, not Greek. What is the word that is used originally? It is a form of the Hebrew elohim. Jesus says that these "sons of God" are "gods" to whom the Word of God came. Whoever these might be, it provides a basis for examining the Hebraic usage of the word "god" as applied to others than Jehovah.

See also our study:

Who Are the Gods of Psalm 82:6?

Brown-Driver-Briggs Lexicon presents a synopsis of the usages of EL (Strong's #410).  One may find this synopsis online. That synopsis shows the usage of EL as applied to men and angels with applications other than meaning either God Almighty or false gods. The same is true regarding usages of ELOHIM. Therefore, what we need to know is how forms of the Hebrew word el, and its variations of elohim and eloah, are used in the Bible, and if these words have any application to the usages of theos as applied to Jesus, such as in John 1:1; John 20:28 and probably in Hebrews 1:8. We do find that the Bible uses these Hebrew forms in many different ways, in application to men, angels, and even inanimate objects, as well in other ways. 

When considering forms of the Hebrew word *EL*, we can see that such forms are used to mean other than God Almighty or a false god by examining the following texts from the King James Version, in which English translations of the Hebrew word El are in denoted by *..*: "It is in the *power* of my hand." (Genesis 31:29) Here, the Hebrew word EL is not rendered as "god" or "God", but as "power". "There shall be no *might* in thine hand." (Deuteronomy 28:32) In this verse, the KJV renders the Hebrew word for "God" as "might". "Neither is it in our *power*." (Nehemiah 5:5) Here the King James Version renders the word for "God" as "power". "Like the *great* mountains." (Psalm 36:6) Again, the Hebrew word for "God" is not rendered in the KJV as "God" or "god", but as "great".  "In the *power* of thine hand to do it." (Proverbs 3:27) This is similar to the usage found in Genesis 31:29. The Hebrew word for "God" is rendered in the KJV in this verse as "power". "Pray unto *a god* [mighty one] that cannot save." (Isaiah 45:20) "Who among the sons of the *mighty*." (Psalm 89:6) "God standeth in the congregation of the *mighty*." (Psalm 82:1) "Who is like unto thee, O Lord [Jehovah] among the *Gods* [mighty ones or ruling ones]?" (Exodus 15:11) "Give unto the Lord [Jehovah] of ye *mighty*." (Psalm 29:1) "The *mighty* God even the Lord [Jehovah]." (Psalm 50:1) "The *strong* among the mighty shall speak" (Ezekiel 32:21). One can verify these usages online by using Bible Hub's concordance of Strong's #410.

Therefore, we should be able to readily see that the word EL, when used of anything or anyone other than Jehovah, takes on the general meaning of "strength", "might," or "power", rather than of the Supreme Mighty One. As mentioned before, in the Bible, only the God and Father of Jesus is referred to as the "one God" from whom are all. (1 Corinthians 8:6) Nevertheless, the Hebrew and Greek words for "God" apply to any powerful being, but it applies only to Jehovah as the exclusive source of all power - the Almighty Jehovah, and are thus used in relative terms of others.

Psalms 95:3 - For Jehovah is a great God [EL - Strong's #410], And a great King above all gods [ELOHIM- Strong's #430]. -- American Standard Version.

Psalms 136:2 - Oh give thanks unto the God [EL - Strong's #410] of gods [ELOHIM- Strong's #430]; For his lovingkindness endureth for ever. -- American Standard Version.

We should note that it is stated that Jehovah is the Supreme "El" and He rules over others who are also "elohim" - powerful ones. And it should also be noted that Jehovah is the name applied to the Supreme Being - our Father, and him whom Jesus called Father and God. -- John 17:1,3: 20:17; Psalm 110:1; Isaiah 61:1,2; Micah 5:4; Matthew 22:43-45; 26:64; Mark 12:35-37; Luke 20:41-44; Acts 2:34; 7:55: Romans 8:34; Colossians 3:1; Hebrews 1:13; 10:12,13; 1 Peter 3:22.

Many like to read the prophecy of Isaiah 9:6 as saying that the Messiah shall be called the "Mighty God [EL]". And so he is, for to him the Father, the only true Supreme Being (John 17:1,3), has given all power in earth and heaven. (Matthew 28:18, and 11:27) "He is Lord of all" - next to the Father for "The head of Christ is God," (1 Corinthians 11:3) and "it is evident that he [God] is excepted who subjected all things to him [Jesus]." (1 Corinthians 15:27) They are one in mind, purpose, etc., because Jesus willingly submitted his own will to that of the Father (John 5:30) just as we also must submit our own will, mind, spirit to that of the Father if we would be made heirs and sons of God.

ELOHIM is the plural of ELOAH, which, in turn, is derived from EL. Both ELOHIM and ELOAH are thus forms of the word EL. Like EL, the application of ELOHIM is not confined to that of the Almighty and false gods. We have already seen that it is applied to the "sons of god" -- men -- in Psalm 82:6,7. Additionally, we find that Moses is spoken of as *elohim* to Pharaoh (Exodus 7:1) and also to Aaron (Exodus 4:16). One author claims, "Angels are never referred to as “God'. Yet, this is misleading, since we find that in the Bible, the angels are also elohim: Psalm 8:5 (compare Hebrews 2:7,9; also Deuteronomy 10:17; Psalm 136:2; 138:1 could also be speaking of angels as elohim). Additionally, the judges of Israel are referred to as *ha elohim* (as a body): Exodus 21:6; 22:8,9,28 (See Acts 23:5). The wicked spirit that impersonated Samuel is called elohim. (1 Samuel 28:13) Thus seen, anyone who has been given special power by Jehovah can legitimately be referred to as a god. Even the wicked spirits are legitimately called by this title, since they do receive their power from the only ultimate Supreme Power, Jehovah, although they misuse the power that Jehovah has given to them.

Below are some scriptures in which Jehovah the [All-Mighty] El/Elohim is contrasted with other elohim [Mighty Ones]

• Psalm 86:6-8--"Hear, Jehovah, my prayer....
  There is no one like you among the gods [elohim]."
• Psalm 95:3--"For Jehovah is a great God [el], A great King above all gods. [elohim -- mighty ones]."
• Psalm 50:1--"The Mighty One [el], God, [elohim; literally, God of gods -- el elohim --
  The mighty of the mighty], Jehovah, speaks." Young's Literal reads on this: "The God [el] of gods [elohim] -- Jehovah -- hath spoken."
• Exodus 15:11--"Who is like you, Jehovah, among the gods [el--mighty ones]?"
• Psalm 96:4--"For great is Jehovah, and greatly to be praised! He is to be feared above all gods. [elohim--mighty
  ones.]"

These instances suffice as samples: others may be found by those who desire to seek them.

All one needs to do to verify the above is to look into the Englishman's Hebrew and Chaldee Concordance, under Hebrew words #430 and #410, as well as #433. While doing this, it would be profitable to note the various ways these Hebrew words are rendered in the King James Version. One can do the same on the following sites, although it may not be as efficient as using a hard copy of the above mentioned lexicon :
http://studylight.org/lexicons/hebrew/410.html
http://studylight.org/lexicons/hebrew/430.html
http://studylight.org/lexicons/hebrew/433.html

https://biblehub.com/hebrew/410.htm

https://biblehub.com/hebrew/430.htm
https://biblehub.com/hebrew/433.htm
http://lexiconcordance.com/hebrew/0410.html

http://lexiconcordance.com/hebrew/0430.html
https://kingjamesbibledictionary.com/StrongsNo/H410/God
https://kingjamesbibledictionary.com/StrongsNo/H430/God
https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/h410/nasb20/wlc/0-1/
https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/h430/nasb20/wlc/0-1/

In view of the above, we can say that there is much in the way of Hebraic cultural heritage that supports the idea that one can be scripturally be called or have the title of "god" in a sense other than that of Supreme Being, or the Supreme Power. The Hebraic meaning of the words for GOD basically is that of might, strength, power, and even when applied to Jehovah, is used in reference to His being the Supreme Power, Might, the source of all might and power in the universe. Thus, one must realize that when applied to others than Jehovah, the words for "God" take on a more general meaning of might, power, strength, as can be seen by the King James (as well as other translations) that give the Hebrew words for God the meaning of might, mighty, strong, etc. Only the God and Father of our Lord Jesus is God in the absolute sense of Power -- the Supreme Being, the only one in the whole universe who receives no power at from any other. (John 17:1,3) Jesus claimed to be the Son of the Supreme Being; he never claimed to be the Supreme Being of whom he was the Son.

The above information concerning the usage of the Hebrew titles for "God" is confirmed by many reference sources. 

Easton's Dictionary states concerning the word God, "It is the rendering (1) of the Hebrew 'El , from a word meaning to be strong; (2) of 'Eloah_, plural _'Elohim. The singular form, Eloah , is used only in poetry."

According to Smith's Dictionary, "Elohim is the plural of Eloah (in Arabic Allah ); it is often used in the short form EL (a word signifying strength, as in EL-SHADDAI, God Almighty, the name by which God was specially known to the patriarchs. (Genesis 17:1; 28:3; Exodus 6:3) The etymology is uncertain, but it is generally agreed that the primary idea is that of strength, power of effect, and that it properly describes God in that character in which he is exhibited to all men in his works, as the creator, sustainer and supreme governor of the world."

The word EL is Hebrew #410 in Strong's Hebrew and Chaldee Dictionary, which defines it as: "short. from 352; strength; as adj. mighty; espec. the Almighty (but used also of any deity)."

From these sources, and many others, we thus determine that the Hebrew word EL signifies strong or powerful.

https://www.studylight.org/lexicons/hebrew/410.html

A side point regarding the above: the Hebrew of Exodus 6:3 does not mention God Almighty as "the name by which God was specially known to the patriarchs." The Hebrew word for "name" in not used regarding EL SHADDAI, although the King James Version adds the word "name" in English.

Even after being presented with all of the above information, some continue to present to us the idea that either Jesus has to be the one true God, or else he is a false god. Carrying this line of reasoning to its logical conclusion, Moses must be either the one and only true God or a false god, since he was made ELOHIM to Pharaoh. (Exodus 7:1) The judges of Israel must be either the one and only true a true God or else be false gods, since they were ELOHIM. (Exodus 21:6; 22:8,9,28 [See Acts 23:5]) The angels must be the only true God or else they are false gods, since they are ELOHIM. (Psalm 8:5 -- compare Hebrews 2:9; also Deuteronomy 10:17; Psalm 136:2; 138:1, as well as some other scriptures, could be speaking of angels as elohim) The sons of the Most High to whom the Logos came must be the only true God or they are false gods, since they are called EL, ELOHIM, and THEOI. (Psalm 82:1,6,7; John 10:34,35) The *EL*of Laban's hand must either be the only true God, or else be a false god. (Genesis 31:29) The EL of the hand of Israel must be the only true God, or else be a false god. (Deuteronomy 28:32) The EL of your hand must be the only true God, or else the EL of your hand must be a false god. (Proverbs 3:27) The EL of Ezekiel 32:21 -- the mighty ruler or rulers spoken of in context -- must be the only true God or else a false god or false gods.

Yes, we must recognize a secondary meaning of the Hebrew and Greek words used when applied to others than Jehovah, or else the above scriptures would not make sense. Likewise, Jesus was not his God, with whom he was in the beginning; thus, theos applied to him in John 1:1 and elsewhere should be viewed in the secondary meaning or general or special might. Yes, "In the beginning was the LOGOS, and the LOGOS was with God, and the LOGOS was mighty." Jesus is definitely not his God, with whom he was; Jesus is not "one God of whom are all," the only true God who sent him. -- John 17:1,3,5; Isaiah 61:1; 1 Corinthians 8:6.

See our study:
Jesus is not Jehovah

We present below some quotes from various scholarly authorities, most of whom appear to be trinitarian, concerning the Hebraic usage of the word "God". We do not necessarily agree with every conclusion presented, but these scholars do confirm that the Hebrews did at times use the Hebrew words for God in a sense other than "Supreme Being" or "false gods".

The first is from The New Bible Dictionary, second ed., Tyndale House, 1982, which is highly regarded by trinitarian scholars. "This work is destined to become a standard that will be turned to often by students and ministers alike." - Christianity Today. "... the most up-to-date work of its kind now available. I am finding it a handbook of immense value in my own Bible study and teaching." - F. F. Bruce, Rylands Professor of Biblical Criticism and Exegesis, University of Manchester.

SONS (CHILDREN) OF GOD.

I. In the Old Testament a. Individuals of the class 'god' [angels] 

'Son' (Heb. ben, Aram. bar) is commonly used in Semitic languages to denote membership of a class, as 'son of Israel' for 'Israelite', 'son of might' for 'valorous'. 'Son of God' in Heb. means 'god' or 'god- like' rather than 'son of (the) God (Yahweh)'. In Jb. 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1; 89:6, the 'sons of God' form Yahweh's heavenly train or subordinates, though LXX Job calls them angeloi [angels] of God .... Similarly the 'son of the gods' in Dn. 3:25 is called the 'angel of the Jews' God' in 3:28....

b. Men who by divine appointment exercise God's prerogative for judgment In Ex. 21:6; 22:8-9, 28, 'God' (Heb. elohim) may stand for 'judges' ..., his deputies, exercising power of life and death (cf. 2 Ch 19:6), as may be the case in Ps. 82:6. - p. 1133. 

Lk 6:35, 'you will be sons of the Most High', means little more than 'you will be like God'. 'Son of...' is an idiom for 'having the characteristics of' or 'doing the work of' .... Ps. 82:6 discussed by Jesus in Jn. 10:34-36, may be an OT example of this sense, judges being men who exercise God's power of life and death. - p. 1134.

---

In the language of the OT ... rulers and judges, as deputies of the heavenly King, could "be given the honorific title 'god' ... or be called 'son of God'." -- NIV Study Bible, Zondervan, 1985. Footnote for Ps. 82:1.

---

In this psalm, which praises the [Israelite] king ..., it is not unthinkable that he was called 'god' as a title of honor (cf. Isa. 9:6). -- NIV Study Bible, Zondervan, 1985. Footnote for Psalm 45:6.

---

The reason why judges are called 'gods' in Ps. 82 is that they have the office of administering God's judgment as 'sons of the Most High'. In context of the Ps. the men in question have failed to do this.... On the other hand, Jesus fulfilled the role of a true judge as a 'god' and 'son of the Most High'. -- The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Zondervan, 1986. Vol. 3, p. 187.

---

The word [theos, 'god' or 'God'] is used of Divinely appointed judges in Israel, as representing God in His authority, John 10:34. -- W. E. Vine. An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, page 491.

---

65. GOD - is used of any one (professedly) MIGHTY, whether truly so or not, and is applied not only to the true God, but to false gods, magistrates, judges, angels, prophets, etc., e.g. - Exod. 7:1; 15:11; 21:6; 22:8, 9;...Ps. 8:5; 45:6; 82:1, 6; 97:7, 9...John 1:1; 10:33, 34, 35; 20:28.... -- Young's Analytical Concordance of the Bible, Eerdmans, 1978 Reprint, "Hints and Helps to Bible Interpretation".

---

430. [elohim]. el-o-heem'; plural of 433; gods in the ordinary sense; but spec. used (in the plur. thus, esp. with the art.) of the supreme God; occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative: - angels, ... x (very) great, judges, x mighty. -- p. 12, "Hebrew and Chaldee Dictionary." Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, Abingdon, 1974 printing. 

Elohim: "a. rulers, judges, either as divine representatives at sacred places or as reflecting divine majesty and power.... b. divine ones, superhuman beings including God and angels.... c. angels Ps. 97:7 ..." -- The New Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Hebrew-English Lexicon, 1979, Hendrickson, p. 43.

---

The angels: in Hebrew, elohim, which is the ordinary word for 'God' or 'the gods'; hence the ancient versions generally understood the term as referring to heavenly spirits [angels]. -- New American Bible, St. Joseph ed., 1970, footnote for Ps. 8:6

---

It was quite possible in Jewish and Christian monotheism to speak of divine beings that existed alongside and under God but were not identical with him. Phil 2:6-10 proves that. In that passage Paul depicts just such a divine being, who later became man in Jesus Christ. -- Ernst Haenchen. John 1, translated by R. W. Funk, 1984, pp. 109, 110, Fortress Press.

---

In this literature, the supremacy of the Most High God is never questioned, but there is considerable room for lesser beings who may be called 'gods,' theoi or elim. Moreover, both the authors of the apocalyptic literature [which includes the scriptural writings of the books of Daniel and Revelation] and Philo single out one pre-eminent divine or angelic being under God - a super-angel - called by various names in the apocalyptic texts and identified as the Logos ['the Word'] by Philo. -- p. 93, Aspects of Monotheism - How God is One, Biblical Archaeological Society, 1997.

---

Many more could be found, but with just the above, we have overwhelming evidence that EL, ELOHIM, and THEOS, when applied to others than Jehovah or false gods, do carry a meaning different from the common usage of "God", that is, Supreme Being, or false god.

In view of this Hebraic background, Paul S. L. Johnson suggested in his book, CREATION (page 39), that theos applied to the Logos is "a mighty one."

Similarly, the footnote for John 1:1 of the Revised Version Improved and Corrected suggests: "Or, the Word was with the Mighty, and mighty was the Word!"

The author of the Unitarian section under John 1:1 in the book, *The Great Debate Regarding The Father, The Son and The Holy Spirit*, states:

Since the word "theos" in the phrase "the Word was God [theos]" is not preceded by the article "ho" (the God), as are the other two uses of theos in verses 1 and 2, it can be understood as an adjective rather than a noun; "the word was mighty". Theos is the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew word "elohim" which can mean "mighty" as in Gen 30:8 and 1 Sam 14:15.

Thus seen, in respect to the Hebraic usage of the words for "God", there are four basic usages:

(1) The MIGHTY ONE INNATE, the only one whose might is from Himself (hence, the source of all might, power, and strength in the universe; not receiving His might from anyone else), which corresponds to our common usage of "God" as meaning "the Supreme Being", the "Almighty" Jehovah.  For lack of a better way to express it, we often refer to GOD as applied to Jehovah as “The Mighty One Innate." Only He is the source of all (1 Corinthians 8:6).

(2) False gods -- so-called gods who by nature have no might at all to do anything (Deuteronomy 4:28; Daniel 5:23; Isaiah 45:20; Galatians 4:8; 1 Corinthians 8:5).

(3) Mighty ones who are such because the only true Supreme Being has given them special power or authority, either directly or by allowance, such as Moses to Pharaoh (Exodus 7:1), the sons of the Most High (Psalm 82:1,6; John 10:34-36), and the angels (Psalm 8:5; compare Hebrews 2:7), and others (1 Samuel 28:13; Ezekiel 32:21; 2 Corinthians 4:4), including Jesus (John 1:1, Psalm 45:6; John 1:14; 20:28 and Hebrews 1:8, also Isaiah 9:6 if "EL" [Strong's #410] is being applied to Jesus in this verse).

(4) General might, power, great, etc. -- Genesis 31:29; Deuteronomy 28:32; Nehemiah 5:5; Psalm 36:6; 82:1; Proverbs 3:27; and possibly John 1:1.

Common Mistakes in Defining and Debating the Trinity

An analysis of terminology, assumptions, and biblical foundations

Misdefining the Trinity

A widespread mistake among Bible Students, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and others is describing the Trinity as “three gods in one person” or “three gods in one god.” Trinitarians reject this characterization and insist that their doctrine is “three persons in one God.” When the definition is misunderstood, trinitarians often dismiss non‑trinitarian arguments outright, believing the opposing side is attacking a caricature rather than the actual doctrine.

Overemphasis on the Trinity’s Unreasonableness

Another common error is focusing solely on the Trinity’s incomprehensibility. The doctrine is indeed philosophically contradictory and impossible to explain coherently, but this is not the primary reason for rejecting it. The central issue is biblical: the concept simply does not appear in Scripture, and the Bible remains fully harmonious without introducing a triune being.

Conflicting Terminology and Redefinitions

Trinitarian theology depends heavily on specialized definitions of terms such as person, essence, and nature. These definitions differ from ordinary usage. When non‑trinitarians describe Jesus and the Father using normal language, trinitarians often accuse them of misrepresentation.

From a non‑trinitarian perspective, if the Father is God (Supreme Being), the Son is God (Supreme Being), and the Holy Spirit is God (Supreme Being), the natural conclusion is three Supreme Beings—three Gods. Trinitarian terminology attempts to avoid this conclusion by redefining “God” in terms of essence rather than identity.

Scriptural Interpretation and Added Philosophy

Passages showing Jesus being sent, anointed, or exalted by Jehovah (Isaiah 61:1–2; John 17:1–3; Ephesians 1:3,17–23) are straightforward in a non‑trinitarian reading: Jesus is not Jehovah. Trinitarian interpretation, however, requires inserting philosophical categories into the text, treating these interactions as one “person” of God sending another “person” of God. Scripture never presents such a framework; it must be added to the text.

Athanasius and the Formation of Trinitarian Categories

The theological vocabulary used to defend the Trinity was developed to support the doctrine itself. Athanasius insisted that all interpretation conform to the idea that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit share the same divine essence (homoousios). His approach relied heavily on the Septuagint and did not account for the Hebrew usage of terms for “God,” which often refer to might, strength, or authority rather than essence.

Philosophical Definitions of Essence, Person, and Substance

Trinitarian sources define God using complex philosophical terms—hypostasis, ousia, essence, nature, being, and more. These definitions often shift depending on context, allowing the doctrine to be maintained even when biblical language does not support it.

For example, hypostasis in Hebrews 1:3 is variously translated as “substance,” “being,” or “nature,” blurring distinctions between hypostasis and ousia. Yet Hebrews 1:1–3 presents God as one hypostasis: one person speaking through the prophets and now speaking through His Son.

The Problem of Sentient Being and Essence

In ordinary usage, each person is a distinct sentient being. Trinitarian theology attempts to separate “person” from “being,” claiming that three persons share one being. This leads to contradictions: three distinct centers of will and consciousness are said to be one omniscient sentient being. Appeals to mystery are often used to avoid addressing these inconsistencies.

Subordination vs. Equality

Although trinitarians claim equality of essence, Scripture consistently shows Jesus subject to the Father. This is explained as voluntary subordination of one person to another within the Godhead. Yet this explanation conflicts with the claim that all three persons are equally and fully the Supreme Being.

Mystery as a Defense

The complexity and contradictions within trinitarian definitions are often treated as evidence of divine origin. The mysteriousness of the doctrine is presented as proof that it could not have been invented by humans. This rhetorical strategy discourages critical examination and reinforces doctrinal loyalty.

Extra‑Biblical Philosophy and Pagan Parallels

The philosophical structure of the Trinity is not found in Scripture. Even pagan triads do not use the same conceptual framework. Some resemble modalism more than the later Christian Trinity, suggesting that the doctrine developed over time rather than being part of the original apostolic faith.

The Biblical Question

The central issue is whether Scripture ever presents the idea of three persons in one being. It does not. The triune model was formulated after the Bible was written, and trinitarian interpretations require adding philosophical constructs to the text. The biblical narrative remains coherent without these additions.

Conclusion

The Trinity depends on extra‑biblical terminology and philosophical categories that must be imposed on Scripture to sustain the doctrine. A consistent reading of the Bible does not require such additions, and the faith delivered to the saints presents God and Christ without a triune being.

Genesis 1:1 - Is Jesus Included as Elohim?

In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. -- Genesis 1:1

In the very first verse of the Bible, we find the word אֱלֹהִ֑ים, as found in the Masoretic text. This form is often transliterated as ELOHIM. ELOHIM is plural in form; therefore, many trinitarians have claimed that ELOHIM refers to their trinitarian God dogma. They invent the idea that since ELOHIM is plural in form, it must mean "plurality of persons". And since they accept their trinitarian dogma as being the basis of all interpretation, they would further imagine and assume that ELOHIM applies to the triune Godhead. Thus, in Genesis 1:1, it is claimed that ELOHIM means God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit.

{{More to be added later...}}

1 Corinthians 8:6 - To Us There Is But One God

But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him. -- 1 Corinthians 8:6, KJV.

1 Corinthians 8:6

all heemin heis theos ho pateer ex hou ta

BUT TO US ONE GOD THE FATHER, OUT OF WHOM THE

0235 1473_9 1520 2316 3588 3962 1537 3739 3588

panta kai heemeis eis auton kai heis kurios ieesous

ALL (THINGS) AND WE INTO HIM, AND ONE LORD JESUS

3956 2532 1473_7 1519 0846_7 2532 1520 2962 2424

christos di hou ta panta kai heemeis di

CHRIST, THROUGH WHOM THE ALL (THINGS) AND WE THROUGH

5547 1223 3739 3588 3956 2532 1473_7 1223

autou

HIM.

0846_3

This verse does not present Jesus as THEOS, but it does show the "one God" [heis theos] from whom are all is only one person. Paul further excludes Jesus from being the "one God" by presenting Jesus as the "one Lord" [heis kurios] through whom are all.

Some, however, insist that "all things" refers to absolutely everything that God created, and since "all things" were made through Jesus, Jesus has to be excluded as a creature.

One should note that the word "things" is added by translators. The Greek phrase used is often transliterated as "ta panta", literally meaning "the all".  From the context, we conclude that the "all" being spoken of in 1 Corinthians 8:6 is evidently in reference to the regeneration and development of those who belong to Christ. This regeneration is from God through Jesus. All forms of the Greek word often transliterated as "pas" (Strong's 3956) look to context as well as common evidence for what is included or excluded in the "all" being spoken of. "Pás ('each, every') means 'all' in the sense of 'each (every) part that applies.' " (HELPS Word-studies on the Biblehub website) The same is true of our English words "all", "every", etc.

Only one person is presented as being the "one God" from whom are all. Since Jesus is presented as being the "one Lord" through whom are the all, he cannot be the "one God" from whom are the all. Likewise, if Jesus is the "one God" from whom are all, then he is not the one "one Lord" through whom are the all. 

Jesus is Lord because the only true God (John 17:1,3) has made him lord. The only true God did not make Jesus the only true God. -- Psalm 45:7; Ezekiel 34:23,24; Isaiah 61:1; Acts 2:36; Hebrews 1:9.

The Greek word KAI (Strong's 2532) is not always used to mean "and"; it can also be used in the sense of "even" or "namely", taking the form of an adverb in English. If the Greek word transliterated as KAI is used in the sense of "even, namely" instead of "and", the verse would read, without the words added by translators:

Yet to us one God, the Father, from whom the all, namely, we for him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom the all, namely, we by means of him.

We should note that the Greek text actually does not have a verb at all in 1 Corinthians 8:6; connecting verbs are supplied by translators.

The context of 1 Corinthians 8:6 is addressed to believers in Jesus, thus we believe that "the all" being spoken of in verse 6 is referring to those who believe in Jesus. In the following verse, another form of the Greek word "pas" is used, 

all ouk en pasin hee gnwsis

but not in all the knowlege.

"In every professing Christian" -- Benson.

"The apostle is not speaking of Heathens, in whom there was no knowledge of the one true God, the author of all things, and of the one Lord Jesus, the only saviour and Redeemer; but of Christians, in whom there was the knowledge of these things, but not in all of them." -- John Gill.

We believe most scholars would agree that "pasin" in 1 Corinthians 8:7 is referring to all believers in the Lord Jesus, and not including the world of unbelievers. Nevertheless, not all who believe in the Lord Jesus have knowledge concerning idols, that is, that an idol is nothing. To one who understands that an idol is nothing, one can eat food even if it has been sacrificed to an idol, but to the believer who would think that an idol is something, eating food sacrificed to an idol would be injurious. Likewise, we do believe in verse 6 that Paul is speaking of all believers, and not those of the unregenerated world.

Whatever is included in "the all" respectively in 1 Corinthians 8:6, the default reasoning should be that the one whom God has made "lord" is excluded in the all that is through him. This does not mean that we need to imagine and assume that Jesus was not brought forth into being as God's firstborn creature.

1 John 5:20 - This is the True God

1 John 5:20 - We know that the Son of God has come, and has given us an understanding, that we know him who is true, and we are in him who is true, in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life. -- World English

The above scripture is often used to support the doctrines of the trinity or oneness, or other teachings that would lead us to believe that Jesus is Jehovah. However, is John here actually saying that Jesus is Jehovah (Yahweh), the only true God? Is there anything in this verse that reveals the Most High as being more than one person?

Without the preconceived notion that Jesus is God Almighty, one would naturally conclude from the context that the true God referred to is "him" -- the one that Jesus is the Son of, for the very fact that Jesus is said to be the Son of the God referred to. (Elsewhere, we have shown that the default reasoning is not to imagine and assume that Jesus is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, but rather that he was sent by the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.) To read it any other way would take it from its natural context, and the only reason we could see for reading it any other way would be to have it appear to say that Jesus is the true God (the one he is the son of). This would be done to please those teachers who have presented a lot of imaginative assumptions formed into their dogma.

For reference, let us note a transliteration of the verse below:

oidamen de hoti ho huios tou theou heekei kai
WE HAVE KNOWN BUT THAT THE SON OF THE GOD IS COME, AND
1492_5 1161 3754 3588 5207 3588 2316 2240 2532
dedwken heemin dianoian hina ginwskomen
HE HAS GIVEN TO US MENTAL PERCEPTION IN ORDER THAT WE ARE KNOWING
1325 1473_9 1271 2443 1097
ton aleethinon kai esmen en tw aleethinw en tw
THE TRUE (ONE); AND WE ARE IN THE TRUE (ONE), IN THE
3588 0228 2532 1510_3 1722 3588 0228 1722 3588
huiw autou ieesou christw houtos estin ho
SON OF HIM TO JESUS CHRIST. THIS (ONE) IS THE
5207 0846_3 2424 5547 3778 1510_2 3588
aleethinos theos kai zwee aiwnios
TRUE GOD AND LIFE EVERLASTING.
0228 2316 2532 2222 0166
Westcott & Hort Interlinear from "The Bible Students Library DVD"

Some argue that the antecedent for "this" [Greek, houtos] is Jesus Christ, and thus Jesus is the "true God" being spoken of. Whether the antecedent of the pronoun "this" is Jesus or the Father has been debated for centuries, even by trinitarian scholars. If we look at The Message translation, we read: "And we know that the Son of God came so we could recognize and understand the truth of God - what a gift! - and we are living in the Truth itself, in God's Son, Jesus Christ. This Jesus is both True God and Real Life." Thus, one translation is positive that Jesus is not the one that is being spoken of as the "true God", and the other is positive in saying that Jesus is the one spoken of as the "true God". Most translations, however, are more neutral, as in the World English Bible translation as quoted at the beginning of this section. At any rate, there is disagreement as to who is being referred to as the "true God", the Father or the Son. For this reason alone, 1 John 5:20 cannot be conclusive proof of the contention that Jesus is Jehovah, the only true Supreme Being.

But can we identify with any degree of certainty who is the "true God" being spoken of? While most translations are not clear as to who the true God is, the wording and context let us know that it is the Father of Jesus Christ, not Jesus himself. The phrase says "in his Son Jesus Christ". Whose son? The son of the true God, the source of eternal life, and it was this eternal life that was made manifest through Jesus while Jesus was in the days of his flesh. (John 1:4; 9:5; Hebrews 5:7; 1 John 1:2) The Christian believer comes to know the only true Supreme Being, the God and Father of Jesus (John 17:1,3), through Jesus, who came to explain him. (Matthew 11:27; Luke 10:22; John 1:18; 17:25) Through Jesus, we are in the true God, and in his Son Jesus. -- John 14:20; 17:20-23; 1 John 1:3.

Some have claimed that in the context, the predominant subject is Jesus, the Son, and thus this is alleged to provide proof that Jesus is the one spoken of as "true God". But is this really so? If we look at the context of the entire chapter, what do we find? Verse two mentions God's love. Verse 4 mentions those born, or begotten, of God. Verse 9 mentions the witness of God. Verse 10 mentions how those who do not believe are making God a liar. Verse 11 tells us that it is God who has given us eternal life. Verses 14,15 speak of the believers' petitions that we make to God. Verse 18 tells us that those begotten of God do not practice sin. Verse 19 tells us that we [the believers] know that we are of God, while the world is the power of the evil one. It is true that while the Son of God is mentioned a few times in 1 John 5, it is God who is the predominant person being spoken of, and Jesus is presented as the Son of God and as the representative of God. John speaks of God and his attributes, and our relationship to God, as the predominant theme of John 5. In view of this context, it is reasonable to conclude that John is summarizing his statements concerning the God and Father of Jesus (John 20:17; Revelation 2:7; 3:2,12) when he says: "This is the true God, and eternal life." And this agrees with what Jesus said in prayer as recorded by John in John 17:1,3.

We should also note that in verses 10, 12, and 13, Jesus is referred to as "the Son of God". It would be noncontiguous that John would suddenly declare that Jesus is God Almighty, of whom he is the Son, especially since he never speaks of Jesus as God (or as a god) anywhere else in his epistle, and repeatedly refers to Jesus as God's Son.

Additionally, we find the one being referred to as "the true one" earlier in 1 John 5:20 is the God of Jesus, and Jesus is being spoken of as the son of this true one. Therefore, it is not reasonable to assume that John suddenly switched so that he called God's son the true God. If this were true, this would imply that Jesus is the true one who was spoken of earlier, that is, the Father of Jesus; thus, if Jesus is the true one of whom he is the son, this would make himself his own son, which our trinitarian neighbors deny.

If one reads the scripture without the tint of trinitarian philosophy, or other philosophies that would have us believe that Jesus is God Almighty, the evidence supports that the antecedent would have to be the one spoken of as "true", that is, his Father. Some claim that the Greek word houtos has to refer to the person or thing that immediately precedes it. This is not so, as can be seen from a similar construct in 1 John 2:22 and 2 John 1:7. If one would is consistent with the kind of reasoning that some trinitarians (and some others) apply to 1 John 5:20, one should also believe that "this" in 1 John 2:22 is Christ; this would have John saying that Christ is the antichrist and thus that Christ denies the Father and the Son. Likewise, in 2 John 1:7, one should conclude that "this" is referring to the flesh of Jesus as being the deceiver and the antichrist. In reality, by comparing these verses, one should realize that in 1 John 5:20, "this is the true God" is referring back to him who is true, and not to Jesus. Also, there are many instances in which pronouns are used in the Greek NT that do not refer to the closest person or thing that precedes it.

Indeed, it appears that the only reason to think that 1 John 5:20 is referring to Jesus as the "true God" is due to the preconceived idea that Jesus is the "true God." In view of the above, any proof sought from this verse that Jesus is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob is actually circular; that is, we believe that by 'this' John meant the Son, and not the Father, thus because we believe this, this proves that John is calling Jesus "the true God". There is definitely nothing in the verse that presents the idea that the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob is more than one person, or three persons.

Nevertheless, while we do not think that John had any intent to refer to Jesus as "true God," in 1 John 5:20, due to the power and authority given to Jesus (as Mighty EL] by the only true Supreme, Jesus can also be called true EL, one of true Power -- the one through whom we receive eternal life. -- Deuteronomy 18:15,18-19; Genesis 14:22; Isaiah 9:6,7; Isaiah 11:1-5; Luke 1:32; John 5:22,23,24,26,27; 6:38-40; 7:18. -- See the first section of this study related to the Biblical usage of the Titles for God.

Many trinitarian scholars, however, will readily admit that "houtos" in 1 John 5:20 could apply to either Jesus or back to "he who is true", the Father of Jesus. For instance, Robertson notes the following concerning this verse:

Him that is true (ton alhqinon). That is, God. Cf. 1 John 1:8. In him that is true (en twi alhqinwi). In God in contrast with the world "in the evil one" (verse 1 John 19). See John 17:3. Even in his Son Jesus Christ (en twi uiwi autou Ihsou Cristwi). The autou refers clearly to en twi alhqinwi (God). Hence this clause is not in apposition with the preceding, but an explanation as to how we are "in the True One" by being "in his Son Jesus Christ." This (outo). Grammatically outo may refer to Jesus Christ or to "the True One." It is a bit tautological to refer it to God, but that is probably correct, God in Christ, at any rate. God is eternal life (John 5:26) and he gives it to us through Christ.

==========

Robertson, A.T. "Commentary on 1 John 5:20".

"Robertson's Word Pictures of the New Testament

Broadman Press 1932,33, Renewal 1960.

Another insists that it is very clear that 1 John 5:20 verse indicated a very clear English . . . stating that Jesus Christ is the "True God" and "Eternal Life" and that the grammatical construction favors it, since "Christ" is the immediate ANTECEDENT of the pronoun "THIS" - (i.e., in Greek "houtos"). If one is consistent in this reasoning, then, in 1 John 2:22, "This is the antichrist" must be referring to "the Christ". Additionally, "This is the deceiver and antichrist" in 2 John 1:7 must be referring to "the flesh". In reality, the New Testament Greek has many scriptures in which pronouns are used that do not refer to the nearest preceding noun. Contextually, the true God is the same one person who is "God" in 1 John 2:5,24; 3:24; 4:12-16, the same one person who is the source of life, which we receive through, by means of, His Son. -- John 5:26; Romans 6:23; 1 Corinthians 8:6; 1 John 1:2; 5:11,12

One argues that Robertson states that houtos "does, as a rule, refer to what is near or last mentioned." (Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research, page 702) Thus, it is being claimed "That there may be a few rare exceptions to a general rule does not mean that one should approach a text of Scripture with the a priori assumption that it will be an exception to the normal rules of grammar. Instead, we should approach a text with the a priori assumption that the normal rules of grammar and syntax will apply unless there are clear grammatical reasons to depart from those rules."

Robertson, however, was a trinitarian, and, despite his claims, he does approach the scripture with priori assumption that the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob is three persons (which is nowhere revealed in the Bible) and that Jesus is one of the persons of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (again, which is nowhere to be found in the Bible). His research to promote this by grammar extends beyond the Biblical Greek and so as to include many works of beyond Biblical usage and even beyond Koine Greek in which the Bible was written. Many scholars do this, and there is nothing wrong with comparing Biblical Greek usage with other forms of Greek found beyond the Bible; however, it could be misleading if one endeavors to make a standard for such usage based on research -- beyond the Bible usage -- applicable to the writers of the New Testament. Of even more concern is how John makes use of the Greek word transliterated as houtos (Strong's #3778). Additionally, one should not just be classifying by word usage alone, but also by the usage of similar syntax as found in 1 John 5:20. 

In John 1:1,2, we find similar syntax, and here the nearest antecedent preceding HOUTOS is LOGOS (the Word).  In John 1:29,30, we find similar syntax; here the immediate noun preceding HOUTOS is KOSMOS (world), but it is obvious the HOUTOS in verse 30 is not referring to the world, but rather to Jesus.

Ronald R. Day, Sr., Restoration Light Bible Study Services (ResLight, RlBible)

---

***************