The Trinity: "And you will seek Me and find Me, when you search for Me with all your heart." Jeremiah 29:13
May 12, 2019 01:22:54 #
Many Christians can't understand, much less defend, the “Trinity.” Yet that is exactly how the Bible presents God. Genesis 1:1 states, “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” The word used for “God” in this statement is the Hebrew word elohim, which literally means “gods.” It occurs 2,500 times in the Old Testament. Though a single noun is available, the plural form is nearly always used for God. And, in violation of grammatical rules, with few exceptions singular verbs and pronouns are used with this plural noun. Why? The Shema declares, “Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord” (Deuteronomy 6:4; Mark 12:29). In Hebrew it reads, “Jehovah our elohim [gods] is echad [one] Jehovah.” Echad signifies a unity of more than one. It is used in Genesis 2:24, where man and woman become one flesh; in Exodus 36:13, when the various parts “became one tabernacle”; in 2 Samuel 2:25, when many soldiers “became one troop,” and elsewhere.
All through the Old Testament, both God's plurality and unity are consistently expressed: “Remember now thy Creator [lit. ‘creators’]” (Ecclesiastes 12:1); “For thy Maker is thine husband [lit. ‘makers, husbands’]” (Isaiah 54:5). Unitarianism, the belief that God is a single entity, has no explanation for this unfailing presentation of God’s plurality. If, as in pantheism, everything is God, then to be God loses all meaning and so nothing is God. With polytheism, the many gods fight wars and steal one another’s wives. There is no basis for morals, truth, or peace in heaven or on earth. Polytheism’s basic problem is diversity without unity.
Muslims and Jews agree on one thing: the belief that God is a single Being. They insist that Allah and Jehovah are each single Beings, a belief also held by cults such as the Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons, among others. Some Pentecostals claim that God is a single Being and that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are God’s three “titles” or “offices.” Here we have the opposite problem: unity without diversity. That God must manifest both unity and diversity is clear.
All through the Old Testament, both God’s plurality and unity are repeatedly expressed. The God of Judaism, like the Allah of Islam, would be incomplete in himself, unable to experience love, fellowship, and communion before creating beings with whom he could have these experiences. But the Bible says that “God is love.” How could the God of Islam and Judaism be love? Whom could he love when he was alone before creation?
The Bible presents God as complete in Himself, being three Persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, separate and distinct, yet at the same time eternally one God. The three Persons of the Godhead loved, communed, fellowshipped with each other, and took counsel together before creation. Isaiah “heard the voice of the Lord, saying, Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?”(Isaiah 6:8). Moses revealed the same counseling together of the Godhead: “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness” (Genesis 1:26); and again, “Let us go down, and there confound their language” (11:7). Who is this “us,” if God is a single entity? Why does God say, “the man is become as one of us” (Genesis 3:22)?
Although the word “trinity” does not occur in the Bible, the concept is clearly there, providing both the unity and diversity that makes possible the love, fellowship, and communion within the Godhead. Yes, Godhead. In Romans 1:20, Paul argues that God’s “eternal power and Godhead” are seen in the creation He made. God’s eternal power, certainly—but His Godhead?
Yes, as Dr. Nathan R. Wood pointed out years ago in The Secret of the Universe, the triune nature of God is stamped on His creation. The cosmos is divided into three: space, matter, and time. Each of these is divided into three. Space is composed of length, breadth, and height, each separate and distinct in itself—yet the three are one. Length, breadth, and height are not three spaces but three dimensions comprising one space. Run enough lines lengthwise and you take in the whole. But so it is with the width and height. Each is separate and distinct, yet each is all of space—just as the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are distinct Persons, yet each is fully God. Time also is a trinity: past, present, and future—two invisible and one visible. Each is separate and distinct, yet each is the whole. Man himself is a tri-unity of spirit, soul, and body, two of which are invisible and one visible. Many more details could be given of the Godhead’s tri-unity reflected in the universe. It can hardly be coincidence.
The New Testament presents three distinct Persons, each recognized as God. Yet we repeatedly find the clear statement that there is only one true God. Christ prays to the Father. Is He praying to Himself? “The Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world” (1 John 4:14). Did He send Himself? Worse yet, did one “office” pray to and send a “title”? Father, Son, and Holy Spirit have distinct functions, yet each works only in conjunction with the others. Christ said, “The words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works” (John 14:10). “I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter,...Even the Spirit of truth...” (John 14:16-17). Throughout Scripture, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are individually honored and act as God, yet only in concert with one another.
The Old Testament clearly presents three Persons in the Godhead interacting. For example: “Mine hand also hath laid the foundation of the earth, and my right hand hath spanned the heavens....From the time that it was, there am I: and now the Lord God, and his Spirit, hath sent me” (Isaiah 48:13-16). The One speaking refers to Himself as the Creator of all, so He must be God. But He speaks of two others who must also be God: “the Lord God, and his Spirit, hath sent me.” Jesus presented a similar passage to the Pharisees (Matthew 22:41-46) when He asked them who the Messiah was, and they said, “The Son of David.” He then quoted Psalm 110:1: “The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.” Then Jesus asked them, “If David then call him Lord, how is he his son?” (Matthew 22:45). The Pharisees were speechless. Unitarianism cannot explain these two “Lords.”
Most Jews worldwide await the Messiah’s first coming, unaware that He already came, was rejected, and crucified. Jesus warned, “I am come in my Father’s name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name [i.e., Antichrist], him ye will receive” (John 5:43). Sadly, it will take Armageddon for Israel to repent, turn to God, and embrace the One who came 2,000 years ago in His Father’s name. When they see the Messiah come to rescue them, and discover to their shame who He is, “...they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him...a great mourning in Jerusalem...” (Zechariah 12:10-14).
Why such extreme sorrow? The God of Israel declares: “they shall look upon me whom they have pierced” (12:10)! At Armageddon, God comes to the rescue as the One whom Israel has pierced! Pierced?! When and how could Israel pierce the One who told Moses, “there shall no man see me, and live” (Exodus 33:20)? God, “a Spirit” (John 4:24), cannot be pierced—but the Messiah coming as a man could be, and was. Jesus, who fulfilled every Messianic prophecy, was pierced on the cross. Why was He crucified? For claiming to be God (John 10:30-33)!
In Zechariah, God is speaking in the first person, yet two persons seem to be involved: “...they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him...” (12:10). “Me” and “him” seem to be two persons, yet one—and both must be God! Is God two persons? In fact, He declares Himself to be three in one! Remember, in Isaiah 48:16 we encounter God, the Lord God, and the Spirit of God, each distinct, yet each is God. Could this be what the Holy Spirit inspired the Apostle John to write, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God”? Surely this One called the “Word,” who existed from the beginning and is God, must be the God Isaiah says speaks from the beginning:“I have not spoken in secret from the beginning...” (Isaiah 48:16).
But the similarities in these two verses don’t end there. Both raise almost identical questions. In Isaiah, how can God be sent by God; and in John, how can God be with God? There is only one solution: the Messiah must be God! When Jesus said, “I and my Father are one” (John 10:30), the Jews accused Him of blasphemy, saying, “for...thou, being a man, makest thyself God” (vv. 31-33). For the Messiah to declare His deity was the ultimate heresy, worthy of death? No! According to the Hebrew prophets, the Messiah had to be God and, at the same time, the Son of God. If God has a Son, who Himself is God and one with His Father, that would dissolve the rabbis’ objections. We encounter God’s Son a number of times in the Hebrew Scriptures. Speaking prophetically, the Psalmist presents God as declaring of One who is to come, “Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee” (Psalm 2:7). Jehovah’s Witnesses, who deny Christ’s deity, take this as referring to Christ’s birth on earth as the beginning of His existence. That cannot be the case, because God speaks of His Son as already existing and warns a God-defying world, “Kiss the Son, lest he be angry....Blessed are all they that put their trust in him” (v. 12).
It is clear from a number of other statements by the Hebrew prophets that the Son of God already existed as God before His incarnation. Solomon quotes the prophet Agur: “Who hath ascended up into heaven, or descended? Who hath gathered the wind in his fists?” The obvious answer is “God.” Then he asks, “what is his son’s name...?” (Proverbs 30:4), proving that the Son of God already existed at that time.
While promising salvation through the coming Messiah, God repeatedly declared that He himself was the only Savior: “I, even I, am the Lord; and beside me there is no saviour” (Isaiah 43:11); “Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else” (Isaiah 45:22). And yet this salvation goes to “the ends of the earth” by another who must Himself be God and the Messiah: “I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth” (Isaiah 49:6). The “I” who speaks and the “thee” who is “salvation” must surely each be God.
Unquestionably, the Hebrew prophets all agree that God exists as a tri-unity: three persons (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) but one God—and that in the Messiah, He becomes man without ceasing to be God. Christ’s claims that He was God and man, and one with His Father, agree with the prophets. Isaiah declared: “For unto us a child is born...” (Isaiah 9:6). This refers to His humanity, derived, as foretold, from His virgin mother, Mary: the “seed” of the woman (Genesis 3:15). But Isaiah adds, “unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder....Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David...” (Isaiah 9:6,7). Surely the Son given must be the already-existing Son of God—and He must be the Messiah because He will rule on David’s throne. But Isaiah declares that the Messiah is God! His name is “Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God.” And He is also “The everlasting Father.” Here is the same mystery: God is both Father and Son—God who became man in the Messiah!
The fact that God would come as a man, be pierced to the death, resurrected, and return to rescue Israel at Armageddon is exactly what the Hebrew prophets foretold. Most Jews still refuse to recognize this identity of the “God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.” When Israel sees her God in this form coming to her rescue, it will be painfully clear that He has been to earth before, where He was rejected by Jew and Gentile and pierced to the death.
Jesus said, “The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand” (John 3:35). God’s love is not just toward mankind but first of all among the three Persons of the Godhead. And three Persons they must be. Father, Son, and Holy Spirit can’t be mere offices, titles, or modes in which God manifests Himself, for such cannot love, consult, and fellowship together. Not only is the Son presented as a person but so are the Father and the Holy Spirit.
The Bible presents each member of the Godhead as having His own personality: each wills, acts, loves, cares, can be grieved or become angry. Godhead? Is that a biblical term? Yes, indeed. It occurs three times in the KJV New Testament: in Acts 17:29, Romans 1:20, and Colossians 2:9. In contrast to theos, which is used constantly throughout the New Testament for “God,” three different but related Greek words occur in these verses (theios, theiotes, theotes), which the King James translators carefully designated by the special word, Godhead. That very term indicates a plurality of being. Paul wrote, “In him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily” (Colossians 2:9). Did he simply mean that in Christ dwelt all the fullness of Himself? That would be like saying that in me dwells all the fullness of me. Well, of course it does—so why say it, and what does it really mean? Nothing! Does it simply mean that in Christ dwells all the fullness of Deity, as some translations render it? That, too, would be redundant—or it would detract from the deity of Christ. For if Christ is intrinsically God, then what is the point of saying that “in Him dwells all the fullness of Deity”? Of course it does! But if Christ is the Son and there are two other persons in the Godhead, then it does mean something. Just as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one God, so, when the Son became man, He brought that fullness of the Godhead with Him into flesh. It is a mystery how God can exist in three Persons yet be one God; but it is also a mystery how God could have no beginning and create everything out of nothing. We can’t understand what a human soul or spirit is. Nor can we explain love or beauty or justice. It is beyond human capacity to comprehend the full nature of God’s being. But neither can we understand what it means for us or anything else to exist—nor can we comprehend what space or time or matter are.
The fact that it is beyond human comprehension (exactly what one would expect of Deity) is no reason for rejecting what the Bible presents so consistently to us. God is telling us about Himself so that we may believe in and know Him.
Dave Hunt
All through the Old Testament, both God's plurality and unity are consistently expressed: “Remember now thy Creator [lit. ‘creators’]” (Ecclesiastes 12:1); “For thy Maker is thine husband [lit. ‘makers, husbands’]” (Isaiah 54:5). Unitarianism, the belief that God is a single entity, has no explanation for this unfailing presentation of God’s plurality. If, as in pantheism, everything is God, then to be God loses all meaning and so nothing is God. With polytheism, the many gods fight wars and steal one another’s wives. There is no basis for morals, truth, or peace in heaven or on earth. Polytheism’s basic problem is diversity without unity.
Muslims and Jews agree on one thing: the belief that God is a single Being. They insist that Allah and Jehovah are each single Beings, a belief also held by cults such as the Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons, among others. Some Pentecostals claim that God is a single Being and that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are God’s three “titles” or “offices.” Here we have the opposite problem: unity without diversity. That God must manifest both unity and diversity is clear.
All through the Old Testament, both God’s plurality and unity are repeatedly expressed. The God of Judaism, like the Allah of Islam, would be incomplete in himself, unable to experience love, fellowship, and communion before creating beings with whom he could have these experiences. But the Bible says that “God is love.” How could the God of Islam and Judaism be love? Whom could he love when he was alone before creation?
The Bible presents God as complete in Himself, being three Persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, separate and distinct, yet at the same time eternally one God. The three Persons of the Godhead loved, communed, fellowshipped with each other, and took counsel together before creation. Isaiah “heard the voice of the Lord, saying, Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?”(Isaiah 6:8). Moses revealed the same counseling together of the Godhead: “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness” (Genesis 1:26); and again, “Let us go down, and there confound their language” (11:7). Who is this “us,” if God is a single entity? Why does God say, “the man is become as one of us” (Genesis 3:22)?
Although the word “trinity” does not occur in the Bible, the concept is clearly there, providing both the unity and diversity that makes possible the love, fellowship, and communion within the Godhead. Yes, Godhead. In Romans 1:20, Paul argues that God’s “eternal power and Godhead” are seen in the creation He made. God’s eternal power, certainly—but His Godhead?
Yes, as Dr. Nathan R. Wood pointed out years ago in The Secret of the Universe, the triune nature of God is stamped on His creation. The cosmos is divided into three: space, matter, and time. Each of these is divided into three. Space is composed of length, breadth, and height, each separate and distinct in itself—yet the three are one. Length, breadth, and height are not three spaces but three dimensions comprising one space. Run enough lines lengthwise and you take in the whole. But so it is with the width and height. Each is separate and distinct, yet each is all of space—just as the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are distinct Persons, yet each is fully God. Time also is a trinity: past, present, and future—two invisible and one visible. Each is separate and distinct, yet each is the whole. Man himself is a tri-unity of spirit, soul, and body, two of which are invisible and one visible. Many more details could be given of the Godhead’s tri-unity reflected in the universe. It can hardly be coincidence.
The New Testament presents three distinct Persons, each recognized as God. Yet we repeatedly find the clear statement that there is only one true God. Christ prays to the Father. Is He praying to Himself? “The Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world” (1 John 4:14). Did He send Himself? Worse yet, did one “office” pray to and send a “title”? Father, Son, and Holy Spirit have distinct functions, yet each works only in conjunction with the others. Christ said, “The words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works” (John 14:10). “I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter,...Even the Spirit of truth...” (John 14:16-17). Throughout Scripture, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are individually honored and act as God, yet only in concert with one another.
The Old Testament clearly presents three Persons in the Godhead interacting. For example: “Mine hand also hath laid the foundation of the earth, and my right hand hath spanned the heavens....From the time that it was, there am I: and now the Lord God, and his Spirit, hath sent me” (Isaiah 48:13-16). The One speaking refers to Himself as the Creator of all, so He must be God. But He speaks of two others who must also be God: “the Lord God, and his Spirit, hath sent me.” Jesus presented a similar passage to the Pharisees (Matthew 22:41-46) when He asked them who the Messiah was, and they said, “The Son of David.” He then quoted Psalm 110:1: “The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.” Then Jesus asked them, “If David then call him Lord, how is he his son?” (Matthew 22:45). The Pharisees were speechless. Unitarianism cannot explain these two “Lords.”
Most Jews worldwide await the Messiah’s first coming, unaware that He already came, was rejected, and crucified. Jesus warned, “I am come in my Father’s name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name [i.e., Antichrist], him ye will receive” (John 5:43). Sadly, it will take Armageddon for Israel to repent, turn to God, and embrace the One who came 2,000 years ago in His Father’s name. When they see the Messiah come to rescue them, and discover to their shame who He is, “...they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him...a great mourning in Jerusalem...” (Zechariah 12:10-14).
Why such extreme sorrow? The God of Israel declares: “they shall look upon me whom they have pierced” (12:10)! At Armageddon, God comes to the rescue as the One whom Israel has pierced! Pierced?! When and how could Israel pierce the One who told Moses, “there shall no man see me, and live” (Exodus 33:20)? God, “a Spirit” (John 4:24), cannot be pierced—but the Messiah coming as a man could be, and was. Jesus, who fulfilled every Messianic prophecy, was pierced on the cross. Why was He crucified? For claiming to be God (John 10:30-33)!
In Zechariah, God is speaking in the first person, yet two persons seem to be involved: “...they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him...” (12:10). “Me” and “him” seem to be two persons, yet one—and both must be God! Is God two persons? In fact, He declares Himself to be three in one! Remember, in Isaiah 48:16 we encounter God, the Lord God, and the Spirit of God, each distinct, yet each is God. Could this be what the Holy Spirit inspired the Apostle John to write, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God”? Surely this One called the “Word,” who existed from the beginning and is God, must be the God Isaiah says speaks from the beginning:“I have not spoken in secret from the beginning...” (Isaiah 48:16).
But the similarities in these two verses don’t end there. Both raise almost identical questions. In Isaiah, how can God be sent by God; and in John, how can God be with God? There is only one solution: the Messiah must be God! When Jesus said, “I and my Father are one” (John 10:30), the Jews accused Him of blasphemy, saying, “for...thou, being a man, makest thyself God” (vv. 31-33). For the Messiah to declare His deity was the ultimate heresy, worthy of death? No! According to the Hebrew prophets, the Messiah had to be God and, at the same time, the Son of God. If God has a Son, who Himself is God and one with His Father, that would dissolve the rabbis’ objections. We encounter God’s Son a number of times in the Hebrew Scriptures. Speaking prophetically, the Psalmist presents God as declaring of One who is to come, “Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee” (Psalm 2:7). Jehovah’s Witnesses, who deny Christ’s deity, take this as referring to Christ’s birth on earth as the beginning of His existence. That cannot be the case, because God speaks of His Son as already existing and warns a God-defying world, “Kiss the Son, lest he be angry....Blessed are all they that put their trust in him” (v. 12).
It is clear from a number of other statements by the Hebrew prophets that the Son of God already existed as God before His incarnation. Solomon quotes the prophet Agur: “Who hath ascended up into heaven, or descended? Who hath gathered the wind in his fists?” The obvious answer is “God.” Then he asks, “what is his son’s name...?” (Proverbs 30:4), proving that the Son of God already existed at that time.
While promising salvation through the coming Messiah, God repeatedly declared that He himself was the only Savior: “I, even I, am the Lord; and beside me there is no saviour” (Isaiah 43:11); “Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else” (Isaiah 45:22). And yet this salvation goes to “the ends of the earth” by another who must Himself be God and the Messiah: “I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth” (Isaiah 49:6). The “I” who speaks and the “thee” who is “salvation” must surely each be God.
Unquestionably, the Hebrew prophets all agree that God exists as a tri-unity: three persons (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) but one God—and that in the Messiah, He becomes man without ceasing to be God. Christ’s claims that He was God and man, and one with His Father, agree with the prophets. Isaiah declared: “For unto us a child is born...” (Isaiah 9:6). This refers to His humanity, derived, as foretold, from His virgin mother, Mary: the “seed” of the woman (Genesis 3:15). But Isaiah adds, “unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder....Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David...” (Isaiah 9:6,7). Surely the Son given must be the already-existing Son of God—and He must be the Messiah because He will rule on David’s throne. But Isaiah declares that the Messiah is God! His name is “Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God.” And He is also “The everlasting Father.” Here is the same mystery: God is both Father and Son—God who became man in the Messiah!
The fact that God would come as a man, be pierced to the death, resurrected, and return to rescue Israel at Armageddon is exactly what the Hebrew prophets foretold. Most Jews still refuse to recognize this identity of the “God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.” When Israel sees her God in this form coming to her rescue, it will be painfully clear that He has been to earth before, where He was rejected by Jew and Gentile and pierced to the death.
Jesus said, “The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand” (John 3:35). God’s love is not just toward mankind but first of all among the three Persons of the Godhead. And three Persons they must be. Father, Son, and Holy Spirit can’t be mere offices, titles, or modes in which God manifests Himself, for such cannot love, consult, and fellowship together. Not only is the Son presented as a person but so are the Father and the Holy Spirit.
The Bible presents each member of the Godhead as having His own personality: each wills, acts, loves, cares, can be grieved or become angry. Godhead? Is that a biblical term? Yes, indeed. It occurs three times in the KJV New Testament: in Acts 17:29, Romans 1:20, and Colossians 2:9. In contrast to theos, which is used constantly throughout the New Testament for “God,” three different but related Greek words occur in these verses (theios, theiotes, theotes), which the King James translators carefully designated by the special word, Godhead. That very term indicates a plurality of being. Paul wrote, “In him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily” (Colossians 2:9). Did he simply mean that in Christ dwelt all the fullness of Himself? That would be like saying that in me dwells all the fullness of me. Well, of course it does—so why say it, and what does it really mean? Nothing! Does it simply mean that in Christ dwells all the fullness of Deity, as some translations render it? That, too, would be redundant—or it would detract from the deity of Christ. For if Christ is intrinsically God, then what is the point of saying that “in Him dwells all the fullness of Deity”? Of course it does! But if Christ is the Son and there are two other persons in the Godhead, then it does mean something. Just as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one God, so, when the Son became man, He brought that fullness of the Godhead with Him into flesh. It is a mystery how God can exist in three Persons yet be one God; but it is also a mystery how God could have no beginning and create everything out of nothing. We can’t understand what a human soul or spirit is. Nor can we explain love or beauty or justice. It is beyond human capacity to comprehend the full nature of God’s being. But neither can we understand what it means for us or anything else to exist—nor can we comprehend what space or time or matter are.
The fact that it is beyond human comprehension (exactly what one would expect of Deity) is no reason for rejecting what the Bible presents so consistently to us. God is telling us about Himself so that we may believe in and know Him.
Dave Hunt
May 12, 2019 08:04:09 #
Good info Zemirah. Thanks.
As I’ve been looking into sects that deny the trinity I have not yet been able to find one that is biblically sound.
I did find this on how to defend an anti trinitarian theology.
1. Refute one or more of the essential propositions of the doctrine of the Trinity.
In my outline study of the biblical basis of the doctrine of the Trinity, I explain that the doctrine is simply a systematization of six core propositions that are all based directly on the teaching of the Bible:
There is one God (i.e., one proper object of religious devotion).
This one God is a single divine being, called Jehovah or Yahweh in the Old Testament (the LORD).
The Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is God, the LORD.
The Son, Jesus Christ, is God, the LORD.
The Holy Spirit is God, the LORD.
The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are each someone distinct from the other two.
In order to defend an alternative position, you must refute at least one of these premises, or, you must show that all six of these propositions are consistent with another theological position besides the Trinity. I do not think the latter is possible, and in fact I do not know of any non-Trinitarian theology that affirms all six propositions (at least, not without some heavy equivocation). So, for all practical purposes, if you’re going to defend another view in place of the Trinity, you’ll have to refute one of the above premises.
2. Present a clear alternative to the doctrine of the Trinity.
Constantly carping at things about the Trinity that you don’t like, can’t understand, and won’t accept is not enough. You must tell us what we should believe instead. Your position must be specific and cover the same basic issues that are addressed in the doctrine of the Trinity.
3. Identify the religion associated with that alternative to Trinitarian Christianity.
It’s no good telling us that you believe X, Y, and Z instead of the Trinity, if this “alternative” is your own private confection of beliefs. I say this because the true doctrine of God will be held by a community of believers in Jesus Christ—by the church. Theologies do not exist in a vacuum, or in isolation. You are either part of a church that teaches the theology you espouse, or you are picking and choosing what you will believe from others and not committing yourself to a way of life that puts a set of teachings into practice. Jesus Christ said that he would be with his people until the end of the age as they engaged in the work of making disciples, baptizing and teaching them (Matt. 28:19-20). So, what people today are Christ’s people? This question has become acutely relevant in the Internet age, in which many individuals appear to be one-man religions, trolling the Web to attack orthodox Christian beliefs (often loudly and aggressively) but who are unprepared to identify a belief system they accept and a community that represents that belief system.
4. Show that your alternative theology does not suffer from the defects you claim to find in Trinitarianism.
For example:
a. If you criticize the doctrine of the Trinity for developing in the fourth century, identify the religious tradition or movement that predated the fourth century that you think had—and has—the truth.
b. If you criticize the doctrine of the Trinity for its use of extrabiblical language, show that your theology consistently avoids the use of all extrabiblical words. This is much harder than just about all anti-Trinitarians think.
c. If you criticize the doctrine of the Trinity for being influenced by non-Christian philosophy or religion, show that your theology is completely free of such influences. Again, this is easier said than done.
d. If you criticize the doctrine of the Trinity for being difficult to understand, show that your theology is free of anything incoherent, confusing, paradoxical, or mysterious.
5. Demonstrate that your theology explains the full range of biblical information better than the doctrine of the Trinity.
This means showing that your view accounts for a wider range of biblical material, based on sound exegesis of the texts, with a minimum of ad hoc reasoning. In other words, it is not enough to argue that certain textsmight be translated so as to avoid the Trinity, or that other texts need not be interpreted in a Trinitarian fashion. Rather, you must show that your non-Trinitarian view is the best reading of more biblical texts than can be claimed on the Trinitarian side.
Of course, everyone is likely to run into a text or two that is more difficult to cohere with their position, but the right view will have fewer of these difficulties.
Note: All such argumentation will have to contrast the anti-Trinitarian alternative with the doctrine of the Trinity as it is actually taught in serious works of theology, not your own over-simplistic or fractured impression of what the doctrine means.
Good luck!
https://beggarsbread.org/2015/09/05/how-to-defend-an-anti-trinitarian-theology/
As I’ve been looking into sects that deny the trinity I have not yet been able to find one that is biblically sound.
I did find this on how to defend an anti trinitarian theology.
1. Refute one or more of the essential propositions of the doctrine of the Trinity.
In my outline study of the biblical basis of the doctrine of the Trinity, I explain that the doctrine is simply a systematization of six core propositions that are all based directly on the teaching of the Bible:
There is one God (i.e., one proper object of religious devotion).
This one God is a single divine being, called Jehovah or Yahweh in the Old Testament (the LORD).
The Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is God, the LORD.
The Son, Jesus Christ, is God, the LORD.
The Holy Spirit is God, the LORD.
The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are each someone distinct from the other two.
In order to defend an alternative position, you must refute at least one of these premises, or, you must show that all six of these propositions are consistent with another theological position besides the Trinity. I do not think the latter is possible, and in fact I do not know of any non-Trinitarian theology that affirms all six propositions (at least, not without some heavy equivocation). So, for all practical purposes, if you’re going to defend another view in place of the Trinity, you’ll have to refute one of the above premises.
2. Present a clear alternative to the doctrine of the Trinity.
Constantly carping at things about the Trinity that you don’t like, can’t understand, and won’t accept is not enough. You must tell us what we should believe instead. Your position must be specific and cover the same basic issues that are addressed in the doctrine of the Trinity.
3. Identify the religion associated with that alternative to Trinitarian Christianity.
It’s no good telling us that you believe X, Y, and Z instead of the Trinity, if this “alternative” is your own private confection of beliefs. I say this because the true doctrine of God will be held by a community of believers in Jesus Christ—by the church. Theologies do not exist in a vacuum, or in isolation. You are either part of a church that teaches the theology you espouse, or you are picking and choosing what you will believe from others and not committing yourself to a way of life that puts a set of teachings into practice. Jesus Christ said that he would be with his people until the end of the age as they engaged in the work of making disciples, baptizing and teaching them (Matt. 28:19-20). So, what people today are Christ’s people? This question has become acutely relevant in the Internet age, in which many individuals appear to be one-man religions, trolling the Web to attack orthodox Christian beliefs (often loudly and aggressively) but who are unprepared to identify a belief system they accept and a community that represents that belief system.
4. Show that your alternative theology does not suffer from the defects you claim to find in Trinitarianism.
For example:
a. If you criticize the doctrine of the Trinity for developing in the fourth century, identify the religious tradition or movement that predated the fourth century that you think had—and has—the truth.
b. If you criticize the doctrine of the Trinity for its use of extrabiblical language, show that your theology consistently avoids the use of all extrabiblical words. This is much harder than just about all anti-Trinitarians think.
c. If you criticize the doctrine of the Trinity for being influenced by non-Christian philosophy or religion, show that your theology is completely free of such influences. Again, this is easier said than done.
d. If you criticize the doctrine of the Trinity for being difficult to understand, show that your theology is free of anything incoherent, confusing, paradoxical, or mysterious.
5. Demonstrate that your theology explains the full range of biblical information better than the doctrine of the Trinity.
This means showing that your view accounts for a wider range of biblical material, based on sound exegesis of the texts, with a minimum of ad hoc reasoning. In other words, it is not enough to argue that certain textsmight be translated so as to avoid the Trinity, or that other texts need not be interpreted in a Trinitarian fashion. Rather, you must show that your non-Trinitarian view is the best reading of more biblical texts than can be claimed on the Trinitarian side.
Of course, everyone is likely to run into a text or two that is more difficult to cohere with their position, but the right view will have fewer of these difficulties.
Note: All such argumentation will have to contrast the anti-Trinitarian alternative with the doctrine of the Trinity as it is actually taught in serious works of theology, not your own over-simplistic or fractured impression of what the doctrine means.
Good luck!
https://beggarsbread.org/2015/09/05/how-to-defend-an-anti-trinitarian-theology/
May 12, 2019 09:52:08 #
Thanks, Rose42,
That very much looks like a full-time career, if not a project for a lifetime, and when completed, all they will have earned is the complete bypass of heaven, and a one-way ticket to the Lake of Fire.
Poor and tragic choice!
That very much looks like a full-time career, if not a project for a lifetime, and when completed, all they will have earned is the complete bypass of heaven, and a one-way ticket to the Lake of Fire.
Poor and tragic choice!
Rose42 wrote:
Good info Zemirah. Thanks. br br As I’ve been lo... (show quote)
May 12, 2019 10:06:21 #
Zemirah wrote:
Thanks, Rose42,
That very much looks like a full-time career, if not a project for a lifetime, and when completed, all they will have earned is the complete bypass of heaven, and a one-way ticket to the Lake of Fire.
Poor and tragic choice!
That very much looks like a full-time career, if not a project for a lifetime, and when completed, all they will have earned is the complete bypass of heaven, and a one-way ticket to the Lake of Fire.
Poor and tragic choice!
Its sad how easily some can be swayed by deceitful spirits. But its never too late to receive Christ until we take our last breath.
I wonder which sect the one who is promoting the anti trinitarian view belongs to if any. I’d like to look into it more. Not because I believe it though
May 12, 2019 16:11:00 #
From what I just saw online a former Mormon... Now, Unknown?
You're doing an excellent job of defending the Word of God.
I Hope you're having a good Mother's Day.
You're doing an excellent job of defending the Word of God.
I Hope you're having a good Mother's Day.
Rose42 wrote:
Its sad how easily some can be swayed by deceitful spirits. But its never too late to receive Christ until we take our last breath.
I wonder which sect the one who is promoting the anti trinitarian view belongs to if any. I’d like to look into it more. Not because I believe it though
I wonder which sect the one who is promoting the anti trinitarian view belongs to if any. I’d like to look into it more. Not because I believe it though
May 12, 2019 17:30:34 #
Zemirah wrote:
From what I just saw online a former Mormon... Now, Unknown?
You're doing an excellent job of defending the Word of God.
I Hope you're having a good Mother's Day.
You're doing an excellent job of defending the Word of God.
I Hope you're having a good Mother's Day.
I missed that he had a book. I started skimming his posts because they were so long and they went nowhere.
He's making a mistake that so many have made. Instead of looking solely at the bible he's looking elsewhere to try and bolster his misguided view and he's really twisting scripture.
I saw a link to a website he had but its no longer active. I found some cached pages on the internet archive but they don't say much. There is a bible study page. You can draw your own conclusion.
https://web.archive.org/web/20161003132610/http://www.1lord1faith.org/wm/studies/index.htm
I saw someone mention he was a Oneness KJV only Pentecostal. That I'm not familiar with so I'll have to look.
My day is pretty darn good. I hope you are having a Happy Mothers day.
May 13, 2019 17:53:34 #
Rose42 wrote:
I missed that he had a book. I started skimming h... (show quote)
Thanks to both of you ladies for that very interesting read. Again I hope that both of you ladies each had a fabulous Mothers Day.
May 13, 2019 18:28:31 #
bahmer wrote:
Thanks to both of you ladies for that very interesting read. Again I hope that both of you ladies each had a fabulous Mothers Day.
Thanks, bahmer,
I had an excellent day, my son came by, my daughter called, and I spoke with my grandchildren, and I had the great joy of defending God's Word on OPP.
I hope you were able to see your "on the mainland" family yesterday.
May 13, 2019 18:32:31 #
Zemirah wrote:
Thanks, bahmer,
I had an excellent day, my son came by, my daughter called, and I spoke with my grandchildren, and I had the great joy of defending God's Word on OPP.
I hope you were able to see your "on the mainland" family yesterday.
I had an excellent day, my son came by, my daughter called, and I spoke with my grandchildren, and I had the great joy of defending God's Word on OPP.
I hope you were able to see your "on the mainland" family yesterday.
No my daughter and her husband are having problems and so she went out and did some errands on Mothers Day I did talk to her and wished her a happy mothers day though.
May 13, 2019 19:18:07 #
Your complete honesty is always so refreshing.
Being able to communicate with family is so important. Hearing from you surely blessed her day.
Being able to communicate with family is so important. Hearing from you surely blessed her day.
bahmer wrote:
No my daughter and her husband are having problems and so she went out and did some errands on Mothers Day I did talk to her and wished her a happy mothers day though.
May 14, 2019 01:31:12 #
bahmer wrote:
Thanks to both of you ladies for that very interesting read. Again I hope that both of you ladies each had a fabulous Mothers Day.
I had a good day thank you. I hope you did as well.
I wasted too much time on reading up on those who deny the trinity. Some are outright con artists like TD Jakes.
May 14, 2019 01:53:38 #
In my opinion, Rose, "Bishop" T.D. Jakes is one of the greatest charlatans out there, yet, until about two years ago, I was unaware that he was a "Oneness" theology believer.
I don't watch TBN,but do read many Christian newsletters, but although his many books are always advertised, I'd never seen him represented as anything but a prominent Christian Pentecostal leader...
Apparently, no one wants to confront or question a man with a substantial following, or perhaps they don't believe it matters.
I don't watch TBN,but do read many Christian newsletters, but although his many books are always advertised, I'd never seen him represented as anything but a prominent Christian Pentecostal leader...
Apparently, no one wants to confront or question a man with a substantial following, or perhaps they don't believe it matters.
Rose42 wrote:
I had a good day thank you. I hope you did as well.
I wasted too much time on reading up on those who deny the trinity. Some are outright con artists like TD Jakes.
I wasted too much time on reading up on those who deny the trinity. Some are outright con artists like TD Jakes.
May 14, 2019 07:15:57 #
Zemirah wrote:
In my opinion, Rose, "Bishop" T.D. Jakes... (show quote)
I don’t know why they don’t. Some do - I know John MacArthur does. There is definitely a deceptive spirit at work here. In the past I have underestimated spiritual warfare and how subtle it can sometimes be.
I found a pretty good site that biblically shows why some are false teachers. She is also opposed to women pastors and uses the bible to show why they are not doctrinally sound.
Michellelesley.com
May 14, 2019 09:38:08 #
The 'husband of one wife' is a necessary and required qualification for overseers / elders /
bishops/deacons in 1st Timothy 3:2, in 3:12; and in Titus 1:6, and Titus 1:5-9).
Women can not legitimately be ordained as Christian pastors. There is no way they can meet God's qualifications.
The word "pastor" is rarely used in the Bible but rather originates from the Latin word for "shepherd." This term has become associated with the spiritual leader, or shepherd, of local churches, often used interchangeably with the words "bishop," "elder," and "overseer" used in 1st Timothy 3:1-7 and Titus 1:5-9.
Both elders (also called overseers or bishops) and deacons are noted as official leaders of local churches in the New Testament.
Ephesians 4:11 mentions "pastors" (KJV/NIV) or "shepherds" (ESV) as a role for those who serve as leaders in the church. Here, the focus is on the goal of these leaders: to help church members toward maturity and acts of service. The term itself also highlights the role of an overseer, as it alludes to the idea of a shepherd who cares for his sheep. Further, many see a grammatical connection between the pastor and teacher as one role, or pastor-teacher, offering another key insight into the important place of teaching God's Word by those who serve as pastors.
The only list offering specific qualifications for deacons is found in 1 Timothy 3:8-12: "Deacons likewise must be dignified, not double-tongued, not addicted to much wine, not greedy for dishonest gain. They must hold the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience. And let them also be tested first; then let them serve as deacons if they prove themselves blameless. Their wives likewise must be dignified, not slanderers, but sober-minded, faithful in all things. Let deacons each be the husband of one wife, managing their children and their own households well."
The character traits for deacons are essentially the same as those of elders. The one notable exception is that deacons are not required to have the ability to teach God's Word to the local congregation. They instead operate as servant leaders, offering help in other areas.
Any church that "ordains" or otherwise accepts a woman in the role of an elder/bishop/deacon/pastor is in defiance of scripture, and outside the will of God.
https://www.compellingtruth.org/office-pastor.html
Got Questions.com
bishops/deacons in 1st Timothy 3:2, in 3:12; and in Titus 1:6, and Titus 1:5-9).
Women can not legitimately be ordained as Christian pastors. There is no way they can meet God's qualifications.
The word "pastor" is rarely used in the Bible but rather originates from the Latin word for "shepherd." This term has become associated with the spiritual leader, or shepherd, of local churches, often used interchangeably with the words "bishop," "elder," and "overseer" used in 1st Timothy 3:1-7 and Titus 1:5-9.
Both elders (also called overseers or bishops) and deacons are noted as official leaders of local churches in the New Testament.
Ephesians 4:11 mentions "pastors" (KJV/NIV) or "shepherds" (ESV) as a role for those who serve as leaders in the church. Here, the focus is on the goal of these leaders: to help church members toward maturity and acts of service. The term itself also highlights the role of an overseer, as it alludes to the idea of a shepherd who cares for his sheep. Further, many see a grammatical connection between the pastor and teacher as one role, or pastor-teacher, offering another key insight into the important place of teaching God's Word by those who serve as pastors.
The only list offering specific qualifications for deacons is found in 1 Timothy 3:8-12: "Deacons likewise must be dignified, not double-tongued, not addicted to much wine, not greedy for dishonest gain. They must hold the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience. And let them also be tested first; then let them serve as deacons if they prove themselves blameless. Their wives likewise must be dignified, not slanderers, but sober-minded, faithful in all things. Let deacons each be the husband of one wife, managing their children and their own households well."
The character traits for deacons are essentially the same as those of elders. The one notable exception is that deacons are not required to have the ability to teach God's Word to the local congregation. They instead operate as servant leaders, offering help in other areas.
Any church that "ordains" or otherwise accepts a woman in the role of an elder/bishop/deacon/pastor is in defiance of scripture, and outside the will of God.
https://www.compellingtruth.org/office-pastor.html
Got Questions.com
Rose42 wrote:
I don’t know why they don’t. Some do - I know John MacArthur does. There is definitely a deceptive spirit at work here. In the past I have underestimated spiritual warfare and how subtle it can sometimes be.
I found a pretty good site that biblically shows why some are false teachers. She is also opposed to women pastors and uses the bible to show why they are not doctrinally sound.
Michellelesley.com
I found a pretty good site that biblically shows why some are false teachers. She is also opposed to women pastors and uses the bible to show why they are not doctrinally sound.
Michellelesley.com
May 14, 2019 09:46:32 #
Zemirah wrote:
The 'husband of one wife' is a necessary and requi... (show quote)
Very interesting and thanks fir that study it as I have always believed I do have a sister in law that does believe different from me and her husband is a pastor in the Christian Church denomination and they both attend Lincoln Christian College. I didn't get into it to heavy but I think that she was referring to some of the Christian woman found in the new testament and what they did and did not do.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.