2 Peter 1:1 | Exposing the False Trinity Doctrine

Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Yahushua Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of G-d and our Saviour Yahushua Christ: (2 Peter 1:1)

Trinitarian Claim

Along with an appeal to the Granville Sharp rule, Trinitarians claim that this verse is identifying Yahushua as "G-d [Yahuwah]."

[See Granville Sharp rule at end of lesson.]

The Claim vs. The Facts

The facts show that Trinitarians are appealing to highly questionable manuscript evidence as well as grave inconsistency regarding their own interpretations.

The Problems with the Claim

1. Trinitarian Translation

Notice the difference between these two sets of translations.

Set 1

• the righteousness of our G-d and Savior, J-sus [Yahushua] Christ. (NASB)
• the righteousness of our G-d and Savior J-sus [Yahushua] Christ. (RSV)
• the justice of our G-d and Saviour J-sus [Yahushua] Christ. (Douay-Rheims)
• the righteousness of our G-d and savior J-sus [Yahushua] Christ. (NAB)
• the righteousness of our G-d and Savior J-sus [Yahushua] Christ. (NIV)

Set 2

• the righteousness of our G-d and [the] Saviour Yahushua Christ. (ASV)
• the righteousness of G-d and our Saviour Yahushua Christ. (KJV)

The second set clearly does not attempt to identify Yahushua as "G-d [Yahuwah]." The NAB also adds this footnote, "The words translated our G-d and savior J-sus [Yahushua] Christ could also be rendered “our G-d and the savior J-sus [Yahushua] Christ." The NRSV adds the footnote, "Or of our G-d and the Savior J-sus [Yahushua] Christ." Hence, it is quite clear that Trinitarian scholars are not in agreement as Trinitarians would have everyone believe..

2. The Very Next Verse

The very next verse reads, "Grace and peace be multiplied to you in the knowledge of G-d and of Yahushua our Lord." This in itself casts suspicion upon the Trinitarian claim especially since Yahushua is commonly called "our Lord" in Scripture. However, the Trinitarian claim would have us believe that 2 Peter 1:1 is the only place in all of Scripture where Yahushua is called "our G-d." 2 Peter 1:2 makes a clear distinction between G-d [Yahuwah] and the Lord Yahushua. This would be very confusing language if "G-d [Yahuwah]" and the "Lord" were two titles for one person in verse 1 but the same two titles referred to two different persons in the very next verse. Therefore, the Trinitarian claim is an extremely unlikely proposal even on the face of it.

3. Codex Sinaiticus:

Very Important Manuscript Evidence: Codex Sinaiticus is a very important document. This manuscript was made between 325 and 360 A.D. and is likely the oldest manuscript we have of the Bible. This manuscript does not say "righteousness of the G-d of us and Savior J-sus [Yahushua] Christ." Rather, it says, "righteousness of the Lord of us and Savior J-sus [Yahushua] Christ." There are also other manuscripts which read "Lord" instead of "G-d." The evidence from Codex Sinaiticus shows us that we cannot be certain that Peter wrote "our G-d and Savior." This fact alone completely nullifies the Trinitarian claim concerning this verse.

Analysis of the Facts

“G-d of us and Savior Yahushua Christ.”

If Peter wanted to identify Yahushua as "the G-d and Savior," then one would also expect him to have rather said, "righteousness of the G-d and Savior of us Yahushua Christ." Put another way, the word "our" ("of us") only qualifies "G-d [Yahuwah]" and it becomes somewhat tenuous to insist that the Granville Sharp rule means Yahushua is being identified as "G-d" since if Peter wanted us to think Yahushua is both OUR (1) G-d and OUR (2) Savior, it is more likely he would have written it as "the G-d and Savior of us J-sus [Yahushua] Christ" rather than "the G-d of us and Savior J-sus [Yahushua] Christ."

The internal evidence also strongly suggests the Sinaiticus rendering is correct. Nowhere else in Scripture is Yahushua called "our G-d and Savior" but Peter regularly refers to Yahushua as "Lord and Savior" in this same letter.

• 1:11: kingdom of the Lord of us and Savior Yahushua Christ.
• 2:20: in knowledge of the Lord and Savior Yahushua Christ.
• 3:2: commandment of the Lord and Savior.
• 3:18: in knowledge of the Lord of us and Savior Yahushua Christ.

Trinitarian apologists would also have everyone assume that "the Lord" in all the above verses is Yahushua. However, it is also not entirely clear whether the word "Lord" at 1:11 and 3:18 refer to G-d the Father [Yahuwah] or to Yahushua.

Concerning 2 Peter 1:11, compare Ephesians 5:5 and Revelation 11:15. Concerning 2 Peter 3:18 , compare Jude 1:25. 3. 2 Thessalonians 1:12.

We also find the same Greek construction at 2 Thessalonians 1:12, "according to the grace of the G-d of us and Lord Yahushua Christ."

• 2 Thess. 1:12 - grace of the G-d of us and Lord Yahushua Christ
• 2 Peter 1:1 - righteousness of the G-d of us and Savior Yahushua Christ

Although 2 Thessalonians 1:12 is the very same sentence structure as 2 Peter 1:1, it is also abundantly clear that most Trinitarian translation scholars simply do not believe Yahushua is here being identified as "G-d [Yahuwah]."

• according to the grace of our G-d and the Lord J-sus [Yahushua] +Christ. KJV
• according to the grace of our G-d and the Lord J-sus [Yahushua] Christ. ASV
• according to the grace of our G-d and the Lord J-sus [Yahushua] Christ. NASB
• according to the grace of our G-d and the Lord J-sus [Yahushua] Christ. RSV
• according to the grace of our G-d and of the Lord J-sus [Yahushua] Christ. DouayRheims
• by the grace of our G-d and the Lord J-sus [Yahushua] Christ. BBE
• according to the grace of our G-d and the Lord J-sus [Yahushua] Christ ESV
• according to the grace of our G-d and the Lord J-sus [Yahushua] Christ. NIV
• according to the grace of our G-d and the Lord J-sus [Yahushua] Christ. NAB
• according to the grace of our G-d and the Lord J-sus [Yahushua] Christ. NET Bible.

These translations make it quite clear that translation scholars do not think Yahushua is being identified as "G-d [Yahuwah]" in 2 Thessalonians 1:12. But since the grammar at 1 Thessalonians 1:12 is exactly the same at 2 Peter 1:1, and it is clear to every scholar that two persons are being mentioned at 1 Thessalonians 1:12, then how can anyone honestly insist that Yahushua is being identified as "G-d [Yahuwah]" in 2 Peter 1:1? It is the exact same sentence construction!

Conclusion:

Since Sinaiticus is such an important manuscript, this in itself completely nullifies the Trinitarian claim for this verse. Their claim is an irresponsible claim based on unreliable evidence. Later manuscripts were written after the Council of Nicea and the Trinitarian Niceans would not have preferred the "Lord" rendering found in Sinaiticus and would have rather promoted the "G-d" rendering. Cherry-picking, foot-stamping and insisting that their preferred version of 2 Peter 1:1 is authentic will not authenticate anything for anyone. It is highly disingenuous to make such a claim based on such highly suspicious evidence as if the evidence were an established fact. While Trinitarians can be expected to try and water down the problem, 2 Peter 1:1 is exactly the same construction as 2 Thessalonians 1:12 where it should be obvious to any honest person that Yahushua is not being identified as G-d [Yahuwah].

It appears that in each case, the titles Lord or Savior, in each verse respectively, may take the place of the definite article. Therefore, even if Peter wrote "our G-d and Savior" rather than "our Lord and Savior," the Trinitarian claim would still be highly questionable and would not amount to established fact but rather a doctrinal desire based on another desire that the [GS] rule is valid when they need it to be and can be ignored whenever they choose to do so as the above translators have so clearly done at 2 Thessalonians 1:12.

Based on the available evidence, and concerning the manuscript renderings, the evidence indicates that Peter most likely wrote, "Lord and Savior" rather than "G-d and Savior." However, while this is most likely, I conclude that the evidence for the authentic rendering of 2 Peter 1:1 cannot be determined based on the available facts and an unbiased evaluation of those facts. Based on the available evidence, one simply cannot decisively conclude whether the manuscript evidence originally said "G-d" or "Lord." When all these facts are considered, I can find no reason at all to suppose that there is any reliable evidence that Peter is here identifying Yahushua as G-d [Yahuwah]. The manuscript evidence is extremely significant casting serious doubt upon the rendering which Trinitarians wish was authentic. The peculiar nature of the Greek grammar structure, found also at 2 Thessalonians 1:12, is very significant, Granville Sharp rule or not. And the internal evidence does not support the Trinitarian claim either.

There is simply no reliable evidence to conclude Peter has identified Yahushua as "G-d [Yahuwah]." The only thing we find here is wishful thinking on the part of Trinitarians.

The above lesson was extracted from the links below which may have more details.

• https://www.worldslastchance.com/topical-biblical-studies/anti-trinitarian-studies
• http://www.angelfire.com/space/thegospeltruth/TTD/verses/2peter1_1.html

NOTE: Granville Sharp's rule. Granville Sharp's Rule is a grammatical principle applied to the translation of New Testament Greek whereby the deity of Christ is explicitly affirmed. This is specifically associated with the translation of Titus 2:13 and 2 Peter 1:1.

• What is the Granville Sharp Rule? | GotQuestions.org