If someone says that Yahushua is not YHWH his own Father,
one of the most brought up verses by trinitarians to try and convince you otherwise is John 1:1.
These trinitarians typically actually think this is what's written there, and may act confused when you object in any way.
The modern English versions of this verse, when read with no research into the original texts and languages, read without care for trying to study and understand the entire Bible in full, and read with "holy trinity" doctrines being well known, will definitely help lead modern people into twisting this verse to say what is simply not said.
However the plain fact is that John 1:1 does not say the Word was YHWH.
It is important to know by now that the word "elohim" is not only applied to YHWH, but also to things such as heavenly beings/angels.
If you somehow skipped that information, it is covered on the main section of page 4 "Holy Trinity", please go back and view it if you skipped it.
When knowing the fact that "elohim" does not mean YHWH,
you can quickly see John 1:1 is not proof for trinity.
Before the Messiah was born, we had scriptures clearly saying that YHWH and the Messiah are not the same person, so if you read the Bible in full from the beginning as I repeatedly suggest everyone do, when you get to this verse you will be more likely to understand what is really meant, and at least you should have a red flag going up as you notice the possible confusion, causing you to not jump to conclusions just yet.
As you continue reading the "new testament", you will then see more than enough verses to show that they indeed are not the same person, and will not look at John 1:1 the same way as those who do not read, and only skim and listen to modern Christian teachers.
I'll attempt to show you that it actually does not prove the trinity, the verse says in most English bibles;
John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with Elohim, and the Word was Elohim"
Modern Christians often understand this verse to be saying the Word was the most high Elohim YHWH, which doesn't make sense since his word is something that comes from him, but if you truly focus on what is said, it falls apart if you look at it like they are.
So if the Word was YHWH then the verse is actually saying something like this(now realize this is not what is really said but this is just a point I am trying to make);
In the beginning was the Elohim, and the Elohim was with Elohim, and the Elohim was Elohim.
To me that is an obvious confusing problem, I am not sure how so many jump to trinity conclusions unless they are choosing to leave out "and the Word was with Elohim" in their mind.
Also if we include verse 2 with this, it reveals itself to be even more confusing and problematic and should be obvious it is talking about two separate beings even to anyone that has learned to speak English;
In the beginning was the Elohim, and the Elohim was with Elohim, and the Elohim was Elohim, the same was in the beginning with Elohim.
So lets go back to what it says, It says in the beginning was the Word, in the Greek this word is said to mean "something spoken", so from looking at the Greek we see in the beginning was the spoken word.
That in itself can be another problem because someone had to speak the word, who's word was it there in the beginning?
The Greek document that our English bibles come from actually says "and the Word was with THE Elohim",
but right after it does not say the Word was THE Elohim, it leaves out "the", and those who understand Greek claim that this was for a reason for understanding the context.
Also verse 2 when Elohim is mentioned in the Greek it has "the" before it letting us know that this "The Elohim" is the same "The Elohim" mentioned in verse 1.
The most likely explanation, and also the most ridiculed due to a weak understanding of what scriptures say, is the verse should actually be understood in English like this;
"and the Word was a(n) elohim"
In Greek there is no way to say "a(n) elohim", and if they wanted to say "a(n) elohim", they would do just as the verse of John 1:1 has done.
If we look at early translations of the Gospel of John with languages that does have a way of saying "a", that date before the time that men started teaching their trinity doctrine, we can see them translating the verse as "and the Word was a(n) elohim".
One such example is the Coptic translation of the Gospel of John, this text is from before the "holy trinity" theory/doctrines, so it is useful in understanding how people understood this verse before the powerful Catholic "church" influenced everyone with their teachings.
The Coptic renders the verse like this;
John 1:1 "In the beginning existed the Word and the Word existed with The Elohim, and a(n) elohim was the Word"
So finally with this understanding I will show you a translation of the Greek to English;
John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with The Elohim, and the Word was a(n) elohim, this was in the beginning with The Elohim"
This is a statement that does not have those obvious problems mentioned above, that is, if you know heavenly beings and things other than YHWH are referred to as "elohim".
The set apart name of our creator may have originally been on John 1:1, it may have been hidden through translations and traditions, which would have made the verse sound much different, and more clear.
The Word came from someone, and we know it was YHWH's word, and we also know Yahushua was the beginning of YHWH's creation. John 1:1 fits to all of these things we know, and doesn't prove trinity.
If you actually read the scriptures you see they many times say Messiah is not YHWH the Most High, and there is no need to analyze john 1:1 and other spots so deeply, you will know the Messiah is not the Most High Elohim before you even get out of the "old testament" because the coming Messiah's Elohim is YHWH.
You can not be your own Elohim whom you worship and fear, and you obviously are not the Most High Elohim if there is one above you in power and authority.
. ^Back to the Top of the Page^ .