I come from a Jehovah's Witness family and only recently became a Trinitarian. Three days ago, I was reading through the scriptures and came across Matthew 3:3 which reads:

For this is he that was spoken of by the prophet Isaiah, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.

I want to know, does this teach the divinity of Christ, and if so how? I am very new to Christianity and noticed this verse today and that it quotes from an Old Testament verse. I would greatly appreciate any help you may be able to give.


5 Answers 5


The Matthew 3:1-3 verses prove that John the Baptist was the one foretold to prepare the way of the Lord, as in Isaiah 40:3. This was also foretold in Malachi 3:1, hundreds of years before the promised Messiah, the Christ, started his ministry on earth, so the readers of those Hebrew scriptures would take "the Lord" to mean God. Someone would come to make straight paths for this Lord, who was to come. There was no idea of God coming down to earth, however, for God is Spirit and no man can see God and live. Those two prophecies could only make sense to their original readers if this "Lord" was the promised Messiah.

So it turned out to be. The gospel accounts stress how Jesus was, indeed, the expected Messiah, and Jesus himself said (in addition to Matthew saying it in the verse you ask about) that John the Baptist was his forerunner, who prepared the Jewish people for him, so that when Jesus started his ministry, lots of Jewish people who'd accepted John's message then turned to follow Christ. Those who had repented and been baptised by John were the ones who became Christ's disciples.

This happened in a big way after John had been imprisoned, then beheaded. Turning to Jesus' words about this gives the answer to your question as to showing the deity of Christ. See Matthew 11:2-15 when two of John's disciples came to check that Jesus truly was that Messiah. Jesus listed some of the miracles he was doing as proof, then he asked what the crowds had gone out into the wilderness to see. Jesus confirmed that in seeing John the Baptist they were seeing:

"...a prophet, and more than a prophet. For this is he, of whom it is written, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee... and from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force. For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John. And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come."

Notice the impact John's words had before Jesus began his ministry. John was to prepare the people of Israel to receive Jesus as Christ. That is why he exhorted them to

"Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand." For this is he that was spoken of by the prophet Esaias, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight" (Matthew 3:1-3).

A few verses on on Matthew chapter 11, Jesus then makes the staggering claim that no man knows God the Father except Jesus the Son! Also, that if he, the Son, reveals the Father to a man, then that man will come to know the Father (verse 27).

Now turn to the parallel account inJohn chapter 10, where the deity of Christ starts to be shown so that some accuse Jesus of blasphemy, claiming to be God. The crowds already knew about John's ministry and baptising, and those that had repented and had been baptised put two and two together when Jesus spoke of how many miracles he had done. But there were others present who so hated him that they wanted to stone him to death, disbelieving him to be the Messiah. They were enraged at Jesus' claims in that chapter, accusing him of blasphemy for claiming to be God's Son. That, to them, was a claim of deity, for there is only one God who does not share his glory with any other (Isaiah 42:8 & 48:11).

Jesus said, "I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me. But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep..." Those who had been prepared by John then became followers of Jesus. They turned out to be Jesus' sheep, who recognised his voice, and he knew them, "and they follow me, and I give unto them eternal life" (John 10:26-31). As for Christ's enemies, who hated his claims to divine sonship with God, they never were his sheep and they never understood his words.

All this is necessary to show that it's unwise to just take one verse in Matthew 3:3 and hope to get the full picture as to whether that one verse "proves Christ's divinity". Of course it doesn't. Nor do trinitarians ever take that one verse and try to do that with it. All the gospel accounts relating to this event must be put together to see how Christ's claims, while on earth, showed me was not just a good man, not even just a perfect man. He claimed for himself staggering unity with God the Father, to such a degree that those who were not his sheep could not bear to hear him. That's the lesson here.

  • 2
    Plus 1. I was waiting for someone to bring up Malachi 3:1. It definitely identifies John the Baptist preparing the way before "Me." So who's the "Me" that will suddenly come to "His" temple whom the people will delight in, at least some of the people. Also the angel of the Lord brought Israel out of Egypt and swore the covenant to the fathers. Please read Judges 2:1, Exodus 20:2 and Genesis 17:7-8.
    – Mr. Bond
    Commented Dec 28, 2021 at 22:06
  • @Mr.Bond - the Messenger of the Covenant is actually Messiah. See my answer here >> hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/56069/…
    – Dottard
    Commented Dec 29, 2021 at 4:50
  • 2
    @Dottard I'm well aware of that. I left it open ended on purpose so those reading it will look up the verses I used like Judges 2:1, Exodus 20:2 etc. I could have included Genesis 22 as well. Also the "Me" is God (as you know) and I had in view Zechariah 12:10. Thank You!
    – Mr. Bond
    Commented Dec 29, 2021 at 5:19
  • 2
    @Dottard There are two 'messengers'. The distinction between Christ and John the Baptist in their respective roles must be kept clear. The 'messenger' of Mal.3:1 prepares the way for 'the messenger of the covenant'. This Q deals with Mat.3:3 which is about John the Baptist's role, hence the need to direct the PO to parallel gospel accounts that expand understanding.
    – Anne
    Commented Dec 29, 2021 at 10:02

A case can be made but it is a stretch. Note the text of Matt 3:3 about the work of John the Baptist who prepared the way for Jesus (see appendix below)

Matt 3:3 - This is he who was spoken of through the prophet Isaiah: “A voice of one calling in the wilderness, ‘Prepare the way for the Lord, make straight paths for Him.’ ”

See also Mark 1:3, Luke 3:4, and John 1:23. Note that "Lord" here is quoting from Isa 40:3 as follows:

Isa 40:3 - A voice of one calling: “Prepare the way for the LORD in the wilderness; make a straight highway for our God in the desert.

The pertinent point is that John prepared the way for the Lord Jesus Christ which the Bible writers call "Lord" (kyrios) which quotes from the OT in a passage the uses "LORD" (= "Jehovah"). That is, Matt 3:3 effectively calls Jesus "Jehovah" of the OT.

There is a similar phenomenon is other places as well such as:

  • Deut 32:43 (LXX) quoted by Heb 1:6
  • Ps 45:6, 7 quoted by Heb 1:8, 9
  • Ps 102:25-27 quoted by Heb 1:10 - 12.
  • Isa 45:23 quoted by Phil 2:10, 11
  • Joel 2:32 quoted by Rom 10:13

APPENDIX - John the Baptist Prepares the way for the Jesus Ministry

There are a number of OT and NT statements about the ministry of John the Baptist that suggests his primary work of ministry was to prepare the way for the Messiah:

  • John 5:35 - And he [John thr Baptist] will go on before the Lord in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the fathers to their children and the disobedient to the wisdom of the righteous—to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.”
  • Mal 4:5, 6 - Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and awesome Day of the LORD. And he will turn the hearts of the fathers to their children, and the hearts of the children to their fathers.d Otherwise, I will come and strike the land with a curse.”
  • Matt 17:11-14 - Jesus replied, “Elijah does indeed come, and he will restore all things. But I tell you that Elijah has already come, and they did not recognize him, but have done to him whatever they wished. In the same way, the Son of Man will suffer at their hands.” Then the disciples understood that He was speaking to them about John the Baptist.
  • Mark 9:12, 13 - He replied, “Elijah does indeed come first, and he restores all things. Why then is it written that the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected? But I tell you that Elijah has indeed come, and they have done to him whatever they wished, just as it is written about him.” [This was John the Baptist.]
  • Luke 1:17 - And he [John] will go on before the Lord in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the fathers to their children and the disobedient to the wisdom of the righteous—to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.” [This quote makes Mal 4;5, 6 as being fulfilled in John the Baptist.]
  • John 1:6-9 - There came a man who was sent from God; his name was John. He came as a witness to testify concerning that light, so that through him all men might believe. He himself was not the light; he came only as a witness to the light. The true light that gives light to every man was coming into the world (John 1:6-9).
  • John 1:23 - John replied in the words of Isaiah the prophet: “I am a voice of one calling in the wilderness, ‘Make straight the way for the Lord.’ ”

This, the effective ministry of John the Baptist as the one preparing the way for his cousin, Messiah (Jesus) is what helped to make Jesus' ministry more effective and credible.

  • + OT verse quoted is key
    – Perry Webb
    Commented Dec 28, 2021 at 10:06

Does Matthew 3:3 prove the divinity of Christ? By that, you mean, does it prove that Jesus is God Himself? No. Does it hint at that? Perhaps. The scripture Matthew is quoting from is Isaiah 40:3. Let's read the context of the scripture, which is Isaiah 40:1-3;

"Comfort, comfort my people," says your God. 2 "Speak kindly to Jerusalem and tell her that her time of warfare is over, that her punishment is completed. For the Lord has made her pay double for all her sins." 3 A voice cries out, "In the wilderness clear a way for the Lord; build a level road through the rift valley for our God."

This text was about preparing a literal roadway for the Israelite exiles to return to Judah from captivity in Babylon. So, why did Matthew quote it? Well, by connecting Matthew 3:3 to Isaiah 40:3, he's extracting a deeper layer of meaning from a passage about a literal, physical event. This deeper layer of meaning is metaphorical of a spiritual reality(a spiritual reality that exceeds in significance compared to the physical reality portrayed by the original event).

Let's see the context... Matthew 3:1-3;

"In those days John the Baptist came preaching in the wilderness of Judea, 2 "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand." 3 For this is he who was spoken of by the prophet Isaiah when he said, "The voice of one crying in the wilderness: 'Prepare the way of the Lord; make his paths straight.'"

In verses 1-2, John the Baptist has been introduced as a simple man preaching a simple message in the wilderness of Judea, i.e. "repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand." John the Baptist was spiritually preparing the way of Jesus and those who would follow him like how a road was literally prepared by a voice in the wilderness for Yahweh God and His people, the Israelites, who were only just coming out of captivity. John's role was to symbolically "clear the roadway" for Jesus by proclaiming the message of repentance to Israel, so as to try and get them to turn away from their sinful ways and back to the righteous ways of God. In doing so, he was readjusting their mindsets in a way that made them prepared to follow Jesus; by the time Jesus came along, Israel was predisposed to follow him, thus John was prepping them up, i.e. creating for Jesus a spiritual "roadway" for him and his followers to go through. This is highly reminiscent of how the voice in the wilderness(as recorded in Isaiah 40:3) prepared Israel to follow Yahweh God through a "level road through the rift valley"; the voice was prepping them up, thus creating for God "a clear way" of which He and His people, the Israelites, could go through.

One would say that the event recorded in Isaiah 40:3 is a type of the event recorded in Matthew 3:1-3, which is the antitype; the roles played by the voice, Israel, and Yahweh God are a type of the roles played by John the Baptist, Israel, and Jesus, the antitype. And the roles played in the type are of lesser significance than the roles played in the antitype; thus the event recorded in Matthew 3:1-3 greatly exceeds in significance when compared to the event recorded in Isaiah 40:3, as is the case with the majority of type-antitype pairs. One cannot, however, mistake this for equating the identity of Jesus to that of Yahweh God. If one were to do that, so as to stay entirely consistent, they would be obliged to equate the identity of John the Baptist with that of the voice in the wilderness, which is impossible because John was not alive when the events in Isaiah 40:3 were recorded.

And that is really all. This passage does not prove the deity of Christ, nor does it disprove it. This particular passage is perfectly compatible on either side of the spectrum(whether or not you believe in the divinity of Christ). It may hint at the deity of Christ(though it may also not). I make no comment on whether or not Jesus is God Himself; I merely state the plain fact that the divinity of Christ is by no means the primary message the author intended to convey to his readers and does not prove it in any way; whether or not it hints at it is independent of the point.

I hope this has been helpful, and have a wonderful day! :)

  • 1
    I agree with much of what you've said but it is the physical (temporary) that is the type for the spiritual (anti-type). If the temporary type is the Lord God it makes no sense for the spiritual anti-type (read that fulfillmen) to be lesser. Commented Dec 29, 2021 at 1:23
  • 3
    How so? Is there a rule that says so? Just to be clear, I am neither agreeing nor disagreeing with you. I just want to know where that idea comes from. Also, to me, it's not so much as comparing the characters themselves as it is the situations. It's less about WHO John and Jesus is compared to who the voice and God is and more about WHAT they did, and how the situations compare. Certainly, if what you say about spiritual anti-types is true, the situation with Jesus and John is much greater in significance than that of the situation with Yahweh God and the voice in the wilderness.
    – Rajesh
    Commented Dec 29, 2021 at 1:29
  • 2
    "If the temporary type is the Lord God it makes no sense for the spiritual anti-type (read that fulfillmen) to be lesser." So, are you implying that it should be greater? If so, then if the type is really primarily about the characters(Yahweh God and voice/Jesus Christ and John) as opposed to the circumstances(providing literal roadway/providing spiritual roadway), then wouldn't you have to say that Jesus Christ is greater than Yahweh God?
    – Rajesh
    Commented Dec 29, 2021 at 1:48
  • 2
    @Rajesh It is illogical to jump from the lesser to the greater when what lies between both is equality. Those who argue against the full deity of Christ, who disbelieve the incarnation, seem to have a blind spot here. Trinitarians do not take Mat.3:3 as proof of the deity of Christ as my answer states, but they see its link to Isa. & Mal. prophecies about preparing the way "before the Lord" as compatible with the full deity of Christ. It is anathema for trinitarians to say that Christ is greater than Yahweh.
    – Anne
    Commented Dec 29, 2021 at 9:45
  • An anti-type can be greater but does not have to be...it can be equal but not lesser, for how can the fulfillment be lesser than it's typo-logical prediction? For instance, the Temple is typical of many aspects of Emmanuel (God with us) but Jesus says of Himself, "One greater than the Temple is here." (Matthew 12:6). So, if the type is Yahweh and there is none greater than Yahweh, the anti-type must be equal. Commented Dec 29, 2021 at 13:20

It seems to me that it clearly does.

The Isaiah's quote (Isaiah 40:3) speaks about voice that urges for preparation of road to the Lord God. The Gospel passage (Matthew 3:3) equates John with this voice, and either a) Christ or b) God-the-Father with the Lord God of Isaiah. But, as the immediate sequel of Matthew's chapter shows, the a), Christ is the better and more plausible choice, for John himself attests that he is not Christ and that the baptism provided by him, John, is preparatory for the true ontological baptism to be provided by Christ (Matthew 3:11). Thus, John attests that he, through his preaching and baptism prepares way to His, Christ's preaching and baptism, thus according to the parallel structure and assimilation with the Isaiah's text, if John is the voice of somebody preparing ways to the Lord God, then Christ is the Lord God.

One can object only that it is an analogy when John simply is like that voice and Christ is like Lord God, but that is just likening and not identifying, like, for instance, when Christ says that "Elijah has already come and they have done with him what they wanted" (Matthew 17:12), He likens John with Elijah, but does not identify him (John) with him (Elijah), for they are two distinct persons. Or, let me take another example: if I am a commentator of kids' football (I mean that sport which Americans for some ill-advised reasons call 'soccer', while calling their version of rugby for the similar reasons 'football') and say about a talented kid-attacker Collin scoring a goal against a talented kid-goalkeeper Alfred: "Messi scored to Casillas", of course I just liken the little Collin to the great Leo Messi and the little Alfred to the great Iker Casillas, not identifying the dignity of the formers with that of the latters.

Now can this be the case in Matthew 3:3? That the dignity of the Voice in Isaiah is greater than John in dignity and the dignity of Lord God in Isaiah is greater than that of the Lord Jesus Christ and the Gospel pair was brought in just for likening of a lesser dignity pair (John and Christ) with a greater dignity pair (voice of wilderness and Lord God) like in my last football commentator example? Of course a correct intuition and correct answer is No! and hundred times No! Let me demonstrate why:

In the example of the kids' commentator, he is just comparing an amateur kids' league to the super-league, and there is no connection between those leagues for completely different impact is made by each of them. But in the case of the Holy Writing we have a notion that the deed and impact of the events of the New Testament is of the same dignity as the deeds and impact of the events of the Old Testament when a parallelism is being introduced. Just look at this concrete parallelism: in Isaiah Jews should prepare ways to God in wilderness, that is to say, behave according to the Law and so please Lord God. Thus, pleasing God and repenting is the main purpose of action of those Jews in Isaiah's passage. And here, in Matthew's passage the same repenting and pleasing God by it is the main purpose. Is there any lessening of the impact and dignity of this purpose in New as compared to the Old Testament so as to suppose that Jews in Christ's times had to do anything less than those in Isaiah's times? Surely, no! Thus, it is the same super-league unlike in my example of the kids' commentator, where amateur kids' league falls totally short of the impact and dignity of the super-league. Thus, spiritual super-league action is being conducted in John and Christ, and if the action is of the same dignity, then the actors should also be of the same dignity. Therefore, John is of the same dignity with the Voice of the wilderness that calls for repentance and preparation in Isaiah, and the one to whom John prepares, Christ, is of the same dignity with the Lord God of Isaiah. And this means that Matthew equates Christ with the Lord God.

But this is still not a most exact analogy, because the Old Testament events are not of the same dignity as the New Testament events, for the latter eclipses the former in importance; for does Lord God in Isaiah' provide to even the best repenting Jews an ontological change through the baptism of Holy Spirit, which Christ offers? No, Isaiah's Lord God does not do this, for He delivers from political, biological, environmental or social calamities, not from calamity of inner sinful drive. Christ is in a greater league than Lord God of Isaiah, but this does not ruin the identification of Christ with the Lord God of Isaiah, just like a footballer playing in second division in Spain does not lose his personal identity when transferred to LaLiga next year; but in Lord God Christ's case it is not that He developed from someone less perfect to perfect, but that He did not reveal fulness of His perfection to Jews and all mankind before His incarnation, for He is eternally and infinitely perfect just as the Father is (Hebrews 7:26-28; 13:8).

So, then, with all the abovementioned, yes, Matthew 3:3 is a clear and unambiguous claim of godhead of Jesus Christ.

  • 4
    "Of course a correct intuition and correct answer is No! and hundred times No!" How so? The alternative you gave just before seems to fit just as well, one can easily take that view. Why is it that your view that this is "a clear and unambiguous claim of godhead of Jesus Christ" is right and the other is "one hundred times' wrong? Just to be clear, I am neither agreeing or disagreeing with your interpretation. I'm merely wondering why it is so unambiguously your interpretation that is right and the other that is wrong. Can you provide proof/an explanation?
    – Rajesh
    Commented Dec 29, 2021 at 0:11
  • 1
    @Rajesh What do you mean "no" and a thousand times no? His question, does the verse teach the divinity of Jesus Christ. Yes it does after you take the time and look up who Matthew is referencing in the OT, Isaiah 40:3 the words, "Make smooth in the desert a highway for our God." John the Baptist identifies or bore witness of Him as Jesus Christ. John 1:15. God the Father identifies His own Son at Mark 1:11. Malachi 3:1 refers to the Son/Messiah as the messenger of the covenant who is coming to HIS temple. Who do you think the "Lord of the Sabbath is?" Matthew 12:1-8. Connect the dots. Study!
    – Mr. Bond
    Commented Dec 29, 2021 at 5:50
  • @Mr. Bond You should read more carefully. His emphatic "No" was to his previous statement, "Now can this be the case in Matthew 3:3? That the dignity of the Voice in Isaiah is greater than John in dignity and the dignity of Lord God in Isaiah is greater than that of the Lord Jesus Christ and the Gospel pair was brought in just for likening of a lesser dignity pair (John and Christ) with a greater dignity pair (voice of wilderness and Lord God) like in my last football commentator example?" Commented Dec 29, 2021 at 13:24
  • @Rajesh Good that you have insisted that I may substantiate my "No! and hundred times No!" I did it, and I guess convincingly. Commented Dec 29, 2021 at 19:58
  • Yeah, I suppose you did. But in the end, it doesn't really matter because the interpretation you're arguing against isn't the right one anyway. I detailed the right interpretation in my answer. If you find any faults or have any criticism about it, I'd love for you to comment on it! :) Have a wonderful day!
    – Rajesh
    Commented Dec 30, 2021 at 21:46

Matthew 3:3 declares the divinity, the divine nature of our Lord Jesus Christ, that he is the Lord God Almighty. Whether it proves that Jesus is God depends on whether you believe that "all Scripture is given by inspiration of God" (2 Timothy 3:16). If you accept that then Matthew 3:3 does indeed prove that Jesus is God.

(Before going further I would urge you not to think we are all so many experts on Bible interpretation. In the Kingdom Halls everyone has the same understanding because they are not free to have their own. They are spoon fed and have to accept what they are taught: out here in the real world we are all encouraged to read the Bible for ourselves and reach our own verdict of the correct interpretation: this might sometimes need others to help us. Unfortunately there is out there in the Christian Trinitarian Bible-believing world methods of interpretation (hermeneutics) which have originated in unbelieving circles: I would recommend the book “Not Like Any Other Book” by Dr Peter Masters, cheap, easy to read, and a great antidote to the prevailing fashion in hermeneutics (which is dry, deadening, and essentially unbiblical in its approach).)

Also, before explaining why I think Matthew 3:3 proves Jesus is God I need to be sure you understand the various languages that the Old Testament and New Testament have gone through.

Hebrew (without vowels) OT becomes Greek OT (Septuagint Version) quoted in Greek NT becomes English NT

First it must be known that Isaiah was originally written in the Hebrew language. (The Dead Sea scroll version of Isaiah is in this [pre-exilic] Hebrew). This original Hebrew language was without vowel signs.

Then in the third and second centuries BC (300 BC to 100 BC), because the Hebrew language was not understood by many Jews, the OT Hebrew was translated into the Septuagint version which was in the Greek language.

The New Testament quotes of the Old Testament often quote from the Greek Septuagint version, including this verse in Matthew 3:3 and the equivalent in Mark 1:3.

Original vowel-less Hebrew changed to the Masoretic Text (vowel pointed Hebrew)

And then starting in about the 7th century AD and finishing in about the 10th century the Masoretic text (MT) was produced by Jews called the Masoretes. The Masoretes starting with the vowel-less Hebrew version added vowel signs to all the old Hebrew words.

The only exception was the name for God which we translate as Yahweh (or Jehovah). This written form of the name of God we call the “Tetragrammaton”. It might also be translated “I am”. The Masoretes, like many others, feared it irreverent to take the name of the Lord God upon their lips (and feared it too close to a possible breach of the commandment "Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain") so they did not add vowels to the Tetragrammaton, which they saw to be the true name of God. (We might choose the English letters "YHWH" or "JHVH" to represent the Tetragrammaton, from which we might pronounce it as either "Yahweh" or "Jehovah" (the anglicised form of "Yahweh", there being no "J" in semitic languages). Seeing as we do not have the vowels in the MT Tetragrammaton these would be little more than guesses of the original pronunciation.)

When the Septuagint was written the translators chose to translate the (original) Tetragrammaton into the Greek word "Kurios", which translates into the English word "Lord".

The consequence for Isaiah 40:3 & Matthew 3:3

The passage in Isaiah 40:3 down to 40:11 is clearly referring to the Lord God Almighty. As another has said:

”Nothing in the immediate context of Isaiah 40 suggests that Isaiah is referring to anyone other than Yahweh himself returning to Israel as king.” (“Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament”, editors G.K. Beale and D.A. Carson, 2007)

The King James Version of Isaiah 40:3 says "Prepare ye the way of the LORD". And as has been said already "LORD" in the KJV is always a translation of the Tetragrammaton, the unpronounced name of God in the Masoretic Text.

In both Matthew 3:3 and in Mark 1:3 the Lord (Kurios) being referred to is our Lord Jesus Christ: he it is that John the Baptist prepared the way for. As many great kings throughout the centuries have had a herald to warn the masses on the streets of their approach, so John the Baptist was a herald for the coming of King Jesus, warning the people to be ready for his arrival. This, in itself, is useful to us: many a self-deluded man or self-seeking fraud has proclaimed himself to be the Messiah, but which of these has had a godly prophet to independently declare his coming beforehand?

In both Matthew and Mark the first part is a verbatim quote of the Septuagint of Isaiah 40:3. The NT quotes then end with changing “make straight in the desert a highway for our God” to “make straight his paths”.

In the NT verses “Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight” the word “his” clearly refers to both Isaiah’s “our God” and also to Matthew and Mark’s antecedent “the Lord”.

Throughout the NT where Jesus of Nazareth is spoken of as our Lord Jesus Christ “Kurios” is in the Greek NT, the same word that is here used to translate the Hebrew Tetragrammaton in this passage.

Finally, the passage of Isaiah makes additional prophecies saying :-

“the glory of the LORD shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together.” How better than the glory of God being revealed in the person of our Lord Jesus Christ?

“Behold, the Lord GOD will come with strong hand … he shall feed his flock like a shepherd: he shall gather the lambs with his arm, and carry them in his bosom, and shall gently lead those that are with young” (Isaiah 40:11). This can be compared with Psalm 23 “The LORD is my shepherd”; with Ezekiel 34 eg verses 11,15 and with John 10:11 “I am the good shepherd” (which can even additionally be compared with Mark 10:18).

In Isaiah 40, then, and in other passages of the OT the LORD, Tetragrammaton, YHWH, God is the shepherd of his people. But in the NT our Lord, Kurios, Jesus Christ is the shepherd of his people who lays down his life in order to save his sheep. Jesus is the LORD. But elsewhere we read Jesus is sent by the LORD, that is his Father; and Jesus and the Father send the LORD, that is the Holy Spirit, for "the Lord is that Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty." (2 Cor 3:17).

The Trinitarian God is love (1 John 4:6-21), one who will carry the lambs in his bosom, and gently lead those that are with young.

To be a Christian is to be a helpless sinner, in ourselves, assisted by the mighty power of God through his Holy Spirit, and by the reading of, and praying over, the word of God. By this means we shall be able to say "I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me" (Phil 4:13), though in ourselves always needing to be in the vine, for "apart from me you can do nothing" (John 15:5).

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.