I recently posted a video on YouTube, “Where’s Your Proof,” showing that most denominational practices actually have no biblical authority whatsoever. In response to that video, on viewer made the following comment:
“I tried to prove the Trinity from scripture but then I couldn’t find any verses to support it :(”
I invited the commenter to engage in a discussion of this important topic, here on Bible Q-n-A, with the following comment:
“I’de be happy to discuss that with you over at bibleqna.com. I’ll post this video there and you can make your comment requesting proof for the Godhead and I’ll give you passages like Matt. 3:16, 17; 28:19; 2 Jn. 9 and such like. We could have a good discussion on it. Let me know if you want to do that and I’ll start the discussion chain.”
Well, Rob accepted my offer so I am making this post for the starting point of our discussion.
To begin with, I would like to hear how he addresses the verses I mentioned above. There are only a few choices a person can make in explaining these passages. 1) There are three persons in the Godhead (Acts 17:29; Rom. 1:20; Col. 2:9). 2) Only one of the persons in these verses referred to is actually God and the other two are not. 3) All three are actually the same person merely appearing to be three distinct persons.
Rob, please let us know which of these is actually your position on the Godhead.
Thanks,
Norm
1. Matthew 3:16
“And Jesus when he was baptized, went up straightway from the water: and lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove, and coming upon him;” – Matthew 3:16 (ASV)
A) I fail to see anything even remotely teaching a Trinity in this passage.
B) On the contrary it seems to me to indicate a very human Jesus who is being commissioned by God for a task.
C) Peter refers to this event during a sermon in the book of Acts where we read:
“Jesus of Nazareth, how God anointed him with the Holy Spirit and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.” – Acts 10:38 (ASV)
D) This certainly makes no sense under the premise that Jesus is divine for why should he need to be given the Holy Spirit and power if he is the Almighty God.
E) Instead, we see that because Jesus is a man he has no power or authority of his own and must rely on the Holy Spirit to accomplish the works given to him by God.
F) Indeed, Peter states that the miracles and incredible deeds that Jesus did were only possible because God was dwelling in him and working through him.
2. Matthew 28:19
“Go ye therefore, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit:” – Matthew 28:19 (ASV)
A) I can see why if someone was already a Trinitarian they might read the Trinity into this verse.
B) However in of itself the passage says nothing that even remotely teaches a Trinity.
C) Here are just a few observations that I would point out:
- The context of the verse is baptism not the identity or nature of God.
- Nothing in the verse identifies the Holy Spirit as a person.
- Nothing in the verse identifies Jesus as the Almighty God.
- Nothing in the verse says that it is listing persons in the Godhead.
- Nothing in the verse says that the things listed share the same divine essence or substance.
- Nothing in the verse says that there is one God in three distinct persons.
- Nothing in the verse says that 3 people can somehow be one “being”.
- Nothing in the verse says that the things listed are co-equal and co-eternal.
D) It is wrong to assume that just because things are mentioned together that they are automatically the same thing. For instance:
…he took with him Peter [1] and John [2] and James [3!], and went up into the mountain…
- Does that make a Trinity? Are they three persons in one being?
E) Lastly I would point out that Trinitarian scholars agree that the traditional reading is not even the words of Jesus:
“The historical riddle is not solved by Matthew 28:19, since, according to a wide scholarly consensus, it is not an authentic saying of Jesus, not even an elaboration of a Jesus-saying on baptism” (The Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol. 1, 1992, page 585)
3. 2 John 9
“Whosoever goeth onward and abideth not in the teaching of Christ, hath not God: he that abideth in the teaching, the same hath both the Father and the Son.” – 2 John 9 (ASV)
A) I agree completely that we should abide in the doctrine of Christ. Let’s look at what Jesus taught:
i. Jesus States that the Father is the Only True God
“And this is life eternal, that they should know thee the only true God, and him whom thou didst send, Jesus Christ. ” – John 17:3 (ASV)
ii. Jesus and a Scribe Agree on How Many God Is
“Jesus answered, The first is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God, the Lord is one: … And the scribe said unto him, Of a truth, Teacher, thou hast well said that he is one; and there is none other but he” – Mark 12:29, 32 (ASV)
iii. The Father of Jesus is the Almighty God of Jesus
“Jesus saith to her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended unto the Father: but go unto my brethren, and say to them, I ascend unto my Father and your Father, and my God and your God.” – John 20:17 (ASV)
Rob, I wasn’t sure what form of denial you would take to the three Persons of the Godhead. Some reject this biblical doctrine saying that all three Persons are actually the same One Person, i.e. Jesus. The most prominent form of this false belief is Oneness Pentecostalism. However, that is not you. The other form of false doctrine on this issue is the rejection of Jesus’ deity, and the Holy Spirit’s as well. Your comments pretty clearly put you in this latter group. Probably the most prominent deniers of the Son’s deity are the Jehovah’s Witnesses, or, more properly, the Watchtower Witnesses. Are you a disciple of the Watchtower Society (i.e. Jehovah’s Witness)?
It doesn’t really do any good to discuss the verses showing the individual activity of the three Persons of the Godhead with someone who denies that Jesus and the Holy Spirit are God. You are not denying that they are three distinct Persons, you deny that they are God.
What about explicit statements that Jesus and the Holy Sprit are God? Do you believe the inspired word of God to be infallible and reliable? If so, then you will accept clear biblical statements of Jesus and the Holy Spirit being referred to as God.
First, Jesus:
Now, The Holy Spirit:
I’ll leave you with those for now. I’m looking forward to your response.
I just want to add here that I pray this discussion will help protect the reader from being deceived by the cunning arguments presented on thousands of doorsteps every day by the very zealous Watchtower Witnesses. I could say that I comment them for their zealous evangelism if it wasn’t for their damnable rejection of Jesus as our Great God and Savior (Tit. 2:13).
If Robert is a Watchtower Witness, he is the first I have encountered who is willing to discuss their rejection of the Son of God in an open and public forum. I do commend him for that. People should always be willing to stand up and defend what they believe.
I pray that I will be able to help Robert see and accept the clear doctrine of Christ on this crucial point.
1. Matthew 3:3
It was of him that the prophet Isaiah had spoken when he said: “A voice of one crying out in the desert, ‘Prepare the way of the Lord, make straight his paths.’” – Matthew 3:3 (NAB)
A) Old Testaments prophecies are almost always removed from their original context when applied to Christ. For example:
He stayed there until the death of Herod, that what the Lord had said through the prophet might be fulfilled, “Out of Egypt I called my son.” – Matthew 2:15
- Matthew applies Hosea 11:1 to Jesus’ refuge in Egypt to hide from Herod.
- Yet in the original context the verse is about Israel being called out of Egypt during the Exodus.
B) This is the pattern for every Old Testament prophecy that I can think of off the top of my head.
C) There should be no difficulty then in understanding that a passage that was originally about YHWH could be applied to Jesus in the New Testament.
D) Just like Hosea 11:1 doesn’t make Jesus a tribe of Israelites so Isaiah 40:3 does not make Jesus the Almighty God.
2. Jeremiah 23:6
In his days Judah shall be saved, Israel shall dwell in security. This is the name they give him: “The LORD our justice.” – Jeremiah 23:6 (NAB)
A) The Hebrew is ambiguous and can also be translated with YHWH giving him a title rather than being part of the title:
In his days is Judah saved, and Israel dwelleth confidently, And this his name that Jehovah proclaimeth him, ‘Our Righteousness.’ – Jeremiah 23:6 (YLT)
B) This is also the punctuation that the Jewish translators followed when making the Septuagint:
In his days Iouda will be saved, and Israel will encamp in confidence. And this is the name by which he [the Lord] will call him: “Iosedek among the prophets.” – Ieremias 23:6 (NETS)
C) So it is at best ambiguous whether or not YHWH is even part of the title that is applied to the Messiah.
D) At any rate, even if your interpretation is correct the passage still offers no support for the deity of Christ.
E) There are dozens and dozens of Hebrew names that have the word YHWH or God in them.
F) This was a common Jewish practice that signified the individual’s relationship with God or that served to glorify the name of God.
G) For example, the exact same name is applied to the city of Jerusalem a few chapters later in Jemiah:
In those days Judah shall be safe and Jerusalem shall dwell secure; this is what they shall call her: “The LORD our justice.” – Jeremiah 33:16 (NAB)
H) Just like having that title doesn’t make the city of Jerusalem the Almighty God neither does it make Christ the Almighty God.
3. Isaiah 44:6
Thus says the LORD, Israel’s King and redeemer, the LORD of hosts: I am the first and I am the last; there is no God but me. – Isaiah 44:6 (NAB)
A) It seems as though you are arguing that if the same statement is used by Jesus than he must be God.
B) However, the same statement is not used by Jesus who omits everything about being YHWH, YHWH of Hosts, and the only God:
He touched me with his right hand and said, “Do not be afraid. I am the first and the last, the one who lives. Once I was dead, but now I am alive forever and ever. I hold the keys to death and the netherworld. – Revelation 1:17b-1:18 (NAB)
C) It is clear that the context in which the phrase is used is entirely different from God’s usage of it.
D) In Isaiah the phrase signifies that YHWH is the true God and that there is no God but he.
E) In Revelation the phrase “first and the last” is always connected to the resurrection of Jesus (cf. “The first and the last, who once died but came to life, says this…” Revelation 2:8).
F) At any rate, having a title of God used elsewhere in reference to a man does not make them God. For instance:
- Artaxerxes is “King of Kings” (Ezra 7:12), Nebuchadnezzar is “King of Kings” (Ezekiel 26:7, Daniel 2:37), Jesus is “King of Kings” (Revelation 17:14) and YHWH is “King of Kings (1 Timothy 6:15).
G) I could give dozens of examples like this but the point should be evident.
H) Just because a title is given to different individuals does not mean that they are the same thing or that they are used in the same way.
4. Isaiah 40:10-11
Here comes with power the Lord GOD, who rules by his strong arm; Here is his reward with him, his recompense before him. Like a shepherd he feeds his flock; in his arms he gathers the lambs, Carrying them in his bosom, and leading the ewes with care. – Isaiah 40:10-11 (NAB)
A) This passage uses the metaphor of a shepherd to illustrate God’s relationship to his people.
B) This use of language is very common in the bible and is applied to more than just God:
- David is “Shepherd” (2 Samuel 5:2, 7:7), Death is “Shepherd” (Psalm 49:14), Cyrus is “Shepherd” (Isaiah 44:28), Jeremiah is “Shepherd” (Jeremiah 17:16) etc.
C) I cannot stress enough that finding similarities between titles or functions of people does not make them the same being.
D) Lastly, the context of the passage you cite clearly identifies Jesus as a distinct entity from God:
May the God of peace, who brought up from the dead the great shepherd of the sheep by the blood of the eternal covenant, Jesus our Lord, – Hebrews 13:20 (NAB)
E) The God of Peace is very clearly separate from the one called the ‘great shepherd of the sheep’.
5. Isaiah 9:6
For a child is born to us, a son is given us; upon his shoulder dominion rests. They name him Wonder-Counselor, God-Hero, Father-Forever, Prince of Peace. – Isaiah 9:5[6] (NAB)
A) I already pointed out that many many names have the word God or YWH in them. Here are some examples:
- Joshua means “Yahweh is Salvation”, Seraiah means “Yahweh is Ruler”, Israel means “he will rule as God”, etc.
B) Simply having the word ‘el’ or ‘Yah’ as part of one’s name does not even remotely make them God.
C) The Hebrew ‘el’, which is translated as ‘god’ here isn’t only used for YHWH but also for humans. Some examples:
Ezekiel 31:11 – A king is called ‘el’: it is translated ‘mighty one’ by most translations.
Psalm 29:1 – The parents of warriors are called ‘el’: it is translated ‘mighty’ by most translations.
Psalm 82:1 – Judges are called ‘el’: it is translated ‘gods’ by most translations.
D) In fact, the same exact title that is used here (i.e. ‘el gibbor’) of Jesus is also applied to humans elsewhere:
“Then from the midst of the nether world, the mighty warriors shall speak to Egypt” – Ezekiel 32:20[21]b (NAB)
E) The words translated “mighty warriors” are the same the ones translated “mighty god” in Isaiah 9:6.
F) Many Trinitarians recognize that this term is not identifying the Messiah as a god. For example:
- Martin Luther translated ‘el gibbor’ as “divine hero” in his German bible.
- The MNT, NEB, BLE, REB, NAB, etc. translate the phrase as “mighty hero” or something similar.
G) Here are some Trinitarian commentaries on the usage of ‘el gibbor’ in Isaiah 9:6:
God-Hero: a warrior and a defender of his people, like God himself. – New American Bible, commentary on Isaiah 9:6
‘Mighty God’ may imply divine kingship, for which there is some evidence in ancient Israel (cf. Ps 45:6), or ‘God’ here may be a kind of superlative: ‘Divine Warrior’. – Oxford bible commentary pg 447
mighty hero (as above) or divine hero (as reflecting the divine majesty) Is 95. – A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament (Brown, Driver, Briggs)
6. Titus 2:13
as we await the blessed hope, the appearance of the glory of the great God and of our savior Jesus Christ, – Titus 2:13 (NAB)
A) The Greek is ambiguous as to whether or not the title ‘god’ is referring to Jesus or the Father.
B) Many Trinitarian translations do apply the title ‘god’ to Christ in this verse. For example: AKJV, ASV, BWE, CJB, KJ21, KJV, LO, NAB, RNKJV, TMB, UKJV, WB, WYC.
C) Many Trinitarian translations that do apply the title ‘god’ to Christ admit that the Greek is uncertain. For example: CEV, GNT, NASB, NRSV, RSV.
D) Even assuming that the title does apply to Jesus is does not indicate that Jesus is the Almighty God.
E) Many people who represent God or are in a position of power are given the title ‘god’ in the bible. For example:
- Men are called God in Exodus 7:1, 21:6, 22:8-9, 1 Samuel 2:25, Psalm 45:6, 82:1, 6, Ezekiel 31:11, 32:21, John 10:35, etc.
- Angels are called God in Genesis 16:13, 22:16, 31:13, 32:28, Exodus 3, Psalm 8:5, 97:7, 138:1, etc.
- Even Satan is called the “god of this world” by the Apostle Paul in 2 Corinthians 4:4
F) Jesus explicity states men who are God’s agents and his appointed earthly rulers are called ‘gods’:
Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your law, ‘I said, “You are gods”‘? If it calls them gods to whom the word of God came, and scripture cannot be set aside, can you say that the one whom the Father has consecrated and sent into the world blasphemes because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’? – John 10:34-36 (NAB)
G) It is clear from this example that men “to whom the word of God came” could be called ‘god’ in a biblical sense that does not make them the Yahweh himself.
H) As God’s anointed one was delegated power and authority he could be called God in the same sense that a king, prophet, judge, or angel could be called ‘god’.
Post Script.
“If Robert is a Watchtower Witness…”
I am not a Jehovah’s Witness and I never plan on becoming one. I attend services at a local Church of God congregation (www.timberlandbiblechurch.org).
“willing to discuss… I do commend him for that”
Thank you for the compliment Norm. I am only 21 so I do not know everything there is to know but I try to represent my beliefs as best as I can.
“People should always be willing to stand up and defend what they believe.”
Unfortunately, most Trinitarians that I talk to have no idea what they believe. Most of them that I have talked to wound up describing Modalism or some other unorthodox view when I asked them to explain the Trinity to me.
Sorry I wrote so much,
Rob
I just wanted to make a quick post to thank Robert for his good reply. Of course, I believe he has misrepresented several passages in discounting their reference to the Messiah as God Himself. But I do appreciate the thoroughness and directness of his reply. I will be posting my response soon. Titus 2:13 (ASV) Titus 2:13 (WESTCOTT) Titus 2:13 (ESV)
EDIT: Point 6 “Titus 2:13″ part B should read:
B) Many Trinitarian translations do NOT apply the title ‘god’ to Christ in this verse. For example: AKJV, ASV, BWE, CJB, KJ21, KJV, LO, NAB, RNKJV, TMB, UKJV, WB, WYC.
Robert ,
If you are to deny the deity of Jesus Christ then you deny that he could have been a propitiation for our sins. Christ had to be perfect in order to atone sins , thus perfection making Him God. Furthermore , I am curious as to your explanation of 1 John 5:7 , and John 1:1 – 14. The scritpure which we know is perfect (2 Tim. 3:16) tells us of the deity of Jesus Christ. I find it hard to accept that Jesus could not have been God , and yet was able to pay for sins which required perfection.
Thanks ,
Kyle.
Those are verses that I was planning to raise in my next post but Kyle beat me to it. So, I’ll go ahead and ask. If Jesus is not God then who do you believe that he is? Don’t just answer, “he’s the Son of God.” We both know and agree that the Scripture refers to Jesus as the Son of God. What I want you to answer is in reference to his “being.” If he is not a member of the Godhead with the Divine Nature then what exactly do you believe him to be? An angel? Purely human? What?
In responding to my last post, where I provided several passages referring to Christ as God, Robert repeatedly discounts such references as “ambiguous.” It is very convenient to simply say that something is “ambiguous” and so you can’t use that one. I don’t agree that these statement are ambiguous or hard to understand. I do accept that people differ on some of their interpretations but the entirety of the references I provided cannot simply be discounted on the basis of ambiguity or differing interpretations.
Robert says “Old Testament prophecies are almost always removed from their original context when applied to Christ.” He gives Hosea 11:1 as an example of this. I just want to make something clear here, and I don’t think Robert intended to give this impression. New Testament writers never use Old Testament passages “out of context.” In Matthew 2:15, Matthew did not use Hosea 11:1 “out of context.” He was showing Christ to be the ultimate fulfillment of a statement that was originally made of Israel. I think I understand what Robert was trying to say here and I don’t think he was trying to raise doubt about the reliability of New Testament Scripture. However, the use of Hosea 11:1 in Matthew 2:15 is not at all parallel to the use of Isaiah 40:3 in Matthew 3:3. Isaiah 40:3 is in the context of a direct line Messianic prophecy. So Robert’s attempt to discount it as evidence is incorrect.
In one of the clearest statements of Christ’s deity, Titus 2:13, Robert discounts it as “ambiguous.” However, a literal reading of the Greek is probably even clearer than the English. Here is the word for word translation of what it says. “Waiting the blessed hope and appearing the glory the great God and Savior our Jesus Christ.” Notice, in the Greek it is “the great God and Savior our Jesus Christ.” Who is the Great God and Savior? Our Lord, Jesus Christ! This is only ambiguous if you refuse to accept that Jesus is God.
I could say more about Robert’s discounting the clear evidence from the passages provided previously but I would rather just continue to add to the evidence already given.
Speaking of those who refused to accept Jesus as God in the flesh, Immanuel (Matt. 1:23), what will Robert do with the way the Jews understood what Jesus was saying about his nature. They understood that he was claiming divinity and Jesus did not correct them or deny that they had understood him correctly. Rather, he gave further proof that they were correct in their understanding of his claim (Jn. 5:17-18, 22-23). In John 8:58-59 they tried to stone him for saying “Before Abraham was I AM.” They understood that Jesus was claiming to be the very same I AM of Exodus 3 (Ex. 3:14). In John 8:24, the word “he” is not in the Greek, which is why it is italicized in many translations. Jesus says unless we believe that he is the Great I AM we will die in our sins.
What about the fact that Jesus accepted worship? If he is not divine then would he not have sinned in accepting what belongs only to God? I wonder if Robert believes in a sinful Jesus (cf. Heb. 4:15). Surely not! But to claim that Jesus is not God would make him such.
Lest Robert start offering back those verses that show Jesus being offered mock worship or having demons fall down before him in trembling fear, let me offer one more striking scene of Jesus receiving worship.
In Revelation 4 the scene is of worship before the throne of God and it says he is “worthy” of such worship (Rev. 4:11). Then, in chapter 5, the picture shifts to the Lion of the Tribe of Judah, the Lamb Slain for our sins (Rev. 5:5-6). When the Lamb of God takes the sealed book the focus of worship shifts to him (Rev. 5:8, 14). They give the exact same praise to the Lamb in Revelation 5 that they did in Revelation 4 to the one on the throne. He is the one “worthy” of our worship (Rev. 5:11-13).
How is this to be explained if Jesus himself is not divine? Robert has not yet responded to my question asking him to identify just exactly what he believes Jesus to be. If he was just a man then he accepted something that other godly men refused for themselves (Acts 10:25-26; 14:11-15). If Jesus is an angel then he accepted something that other angels refused to receive (Rev. 19:10; 22:8-9). The angel rebuked John and told him to “worship God.” But when Jesus received worship he accepted it. If John was wrong and needed to be rebuked for worshipping an angel rather than God then why would Jesus, if he is an angel, not be wrong for receiving the same?
I will eagerly await the reply.
It is my firm belief, that mankind is inquisitive. We want to know how things tick. And because of this, if they don’t fit into our preconcieved notion of how things ought to work, then we reject them. It is for this reason that there are a multitude of false doctrines among us today. We refuse to believe in the existence of hell because we can’t get our mind around a venegful God. We refuse to believe that baptism is necessary unto salvation, because it goes against our sense of justice. We refuse to believe in the Godhead, because we are unable to grasp the concept of three distinct (not separate, but distinct) persons within ONE God! Just because we can’t understand it, or it goes against how WE believe justice should be given, does not make it untrue.
[NOTE: Sorry I have taken so long to respond but I have been very busy with school. I have two tests for tomorrow so even now I don't have a lot of time to refine my response. It is somewhat sloppily written but I think that it accurately reflects my beliefs and still gets the point across.]
Defining who Jesus is can be a monumental task. There are so many things that we will never know or understand. However, in reading through the scriptures one can quickly identify the central and most fundamental teachings about Jesus.
It seems like the best place to get a sense of this is to look at what the Apostles were preaching in the book of Acts. It is in the sermons recorded by Luke that we can discover what the earliest disciples thought people needed to know about Jesus. Certainly not every exhaustive detail of his life or work is covered but we can be sure that they told their Jewish and pagan audiences exactly what they need to know in order to be baptized for the forgiveness of their sins.
On the day of Pentecost we read about the first Christian sermon that was ever preached. We are told that the disciples are preaching to a tremendous crowd of Jews who have gathered from all over the empire. Their entire aim is to bring these men into a knowledge of the truth about Jesus of Nazareth. It is shocking than that the person we read about is a far cry from the God-Man of modern orthodoxy. Instead of being the almighty YHWH of Hosts we see the following:
1. Jesus was a man accredited by God with many miraculous signs and deeds that God did through him (2:22).
2. Jesus was delivered over into the hands of his enemies, in accordance with God’s plan, and crucified by them (2:23).
3. Jesus was raised from the dead by God because he would not abandon him in Hades (2:24-32).
4. Jesus was exalted by God to sit at his right hand and have victory over his enemies (2:32-35).
5. Jesus was made both lord and Christ by God (2:36).
These points constitute the central message of the identity and work of Christ. Belief in these equips one to repent and be baptized for the remission of their sins. Around 3000 Jews were baptized into the body of Christ with this understanding of who Jesus was. The Jesus that brought them to salvation was a “man accredited by God” not the divine second person of the Trinity.
In fact, read every single sermon in the book of Acts and you will never, not once, find a reference to a Trinity, Godhead, God-Man, 3-in-1, Hypostatic Union, divine nature, incarnation, essence, eternal generation, on and on and on. None of these man made doctrines were required for baptism by the Apostle’s who preached under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
Trinitarians constantly tell me that you must believe the Jesus is Yahweh, the Almighty God of the Old Testament, in order to be saved. I defy anyone who believes that. Show me one place anywhere in the entire canon of scripture where someone was saved after having the Trinity preached to them. In fact, I see dozens of examples to the contrary. Let’s look at some of these sermons:
Acts 3. Peter’s Sermon to the Onlookers
- Jesus was servant of God and a prophet like Moses (3:13, 22).
- Jesus was handed over to his enemies and killed (3:13-15).
- Jesus was raised from the dead by God (3:15, 26).
- Jesus was lifted by God heaven and remains there (3:21).
- Jesus was appointed and made the Christ by God (3:20).
Acts 4. Peter and John before the Sanhedrin
- Jesus of Nazareth was the Christ, the anointed one of God (4:10).
- Jesus was crucified but God raised him from the dead (4:10).
- Jesus was rejected by the people but he became “the head of the corner” (4:11).
- Jesus’ name is the only one given among men by which we can be saved (4:12).
Acts 5. The Apostles before the Sanhedrin
- Jesus was “hung on a tree” and killed by the Jews (5:30).
- Jesus was raised from the dead by the God of the patriarchs (5:30).
- Jesus was exalted by God to be a prince and a savior (5:31).
There is so much more that could be looked at but obviously I don’t have the time or the space to go over everything. Seriously, read through what the Apostles were teaching people. We have sermons or summaries of them in the many passages (e.g. Acts 9:20-22, 10:36-43, 13:22-41, 17:1-3, 17:23-31, 18:28, 22:12-16, 28:23-31).
Paul, John, Peter, Apollos all preach the same message. Jesus of Nazareth is a man from the line of David, a servant of God, a prophet like Moses, the one appointed lord and Christ, etc. There is not a mention of the Trinity dogma anywhere in their sermons. If the church of the first century believed in later Catholic inventions they must not have thought them important enough to bother bringing up once in a while.
Instead we see that thousands of people repent and are baptized unto the remission of their sins without even the slightest notion of a tri-personal Godhead or an incarnate God-Man. I have never once in my life heard a Trinitarian preach anything like what Simon Peter preached at the house of Cornelius:
“how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and power, and how he went around doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil, because God was with him.” (Acts 10:38)
When was the last time you preached a sermon like that?