The Doctrine of the TRINITY... Mystery or
Confusion?
A Reverent Examination, by Christians, for Christians
"There is but One God, the
Father." -- 1 Corinthians 8:6
All who
consider the issue agree that the doctrine of the Trinity is incomprehensible. Its
most ardent proponents suppose this to be a strength -- that as we cannot
comprehend the majesty and glory of the infinite Creator, so we cannot
fathom his nature and being. Not so. The Creator has explicitly revealed
himself through His Word as a mighty, unitary being, the great first cause of
all things, having no equal, no predecessor and no successor. He is Jehovah by
name, and God by title.
For 4000
years those who worshipped Him and trusted Him had no hint, no surmise, no
suggestion that he was other than the single, unitary God He declared Himself
to be. "Hear, O Israel, the LORD your God is One" (Deut. 6:4).
"Know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no
God formed, neither shall there be after me. I, even I, am the LORD" (Isaiah
43:10, 11).
Christ
-- The Long Awaited Messiah!
The Jews
were aware that God would send a Messiah (Hebrew) or Christ (Greek) -- one
anointed by God as his prophet, his servant. Moses told them "The LORD thy God will
raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto
me; unto him ye shall hearken" (Deuteronomy 18:15). Isaiah said
"Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth;
I have put my spirit upon him" (Isaiah 42:1).
These
prophecies -- and many more like them -- consistently describe Messiah as a
highly honored subordinate of God Almighty. Jesus was that
promised Messiah. He was no ordinary messenger. He was in fact the very son of
God, so termed 47 times in the New Testament. Jesus performed every duty
faithfully, and has now been exalted to the "right hand of the majesty on
high" (Hebrews 1:3). "God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the
oil of gladness above thy fellows" (Hebrews 1:9). Jesus, always an obedient
son to his Heavenly Father, now exalted above all others, is still a devoted
son and subordinate of the Heavenly Father.
He does
not assume his honor, glory or service on his own. On the contrary, he receives
them all at the hand of his Father and superior, God himself. "No man
taketh this honour unto himself, but he that is called of God ... So also
Christ glorified not himself to be made a high priest; but he
that said unto him, Thou art my Son" (Hebrews 5:4, 5). "The Son of
man came ... to the Ancient of days ... and there was given him
dominion, and glory, and a kingdom" (Daniel 7:13, 14).
What
is the Trinity?
It is a
doctrine formulated in the 4th century to describe the view of some leading
churchmen concerning the nature and relationship of God, Jesus and the holy
Spirit. It was enunciated in a series of creeds: The Nicene Creed (325 ad), The
Nicaeno-Constantinopolitan Creed (381 ad), and the Athanasian Creed (ca. 5th
century ad). It took various forms and used multitudes of words so complex and
enigmatic it is incomprehensible.
Some
Christians consider "trinity" simply to imply belief in God, Jesus
and the holy Spirit -- a broad platform all Christians can endorse.
Differently, but still quite simply, the first use of this word in early
Christian writings referred merely to the existence of "God, his Word, and
his Wisdom" (Theophilus of Antioch, Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume 2,
page 201). But as the doctrine evolved in the 4th-6th centuries, it became much
more mysterious. It asserted that God is actually composed of three persons:
Father, Son and Holy Spirit, all co-equal and co-eternal.
The
Scriptural truth, on the other hand, is neither mysterious nor
incomprehensible: God is one person, his son Jesus is a second person, and the
holy Spirit is not a person at all. It is the spirit, power and influence of
God. Jesus is subordinate to his Heavenly Father. God existed from eternity,
but there was a time before the creation of his son Jesus when God was alone.
However, let us examine four essential components of the trinitarian view,
closely, against the scriptures.
(1)
Who is God?
It is
customary in trinitarian language to speak of God the Father, God the Son, and
God the Holy Spirit. These are assumed to be proper titles, and used
extensively. Yet in the Scriptures only one of these appears, "God the
Father," and that not as a title, but an expression denoting that God is
the Father. "There is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things ...
and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things" (1 Corinthians 8:6).
The term appears 11 times in the New Testament. By contrast, the terms
"God the Son" and "God the Holy Spirit" appear zero times.
The word
"God" appears about 1200 times in the New Testament. Nearly all of
these refer -- no surprise -- to God himself. Not even one time does this word
refer to the holy Spirit.
However,
as a word, "god" has a variety of applications. For example the Old
Testament Hebrew word "elohim" (god) can describe any high dignitary
(e.g. Abraham, Genesis 23:6). In the King James translation it is
rendered variously: angels, God, gods, great, mighty, judges. Its Greek
counterpart "theos" likewise has a broad usage. Strong's Concordance
defines it as: "a deity, especially ... the supreme Divinity; fig. a
magistrate." If this word can describe a magistrate, then it can certainly
describe Jesus, and it is so used six times in the New Testament (John 1:1, 18,
20:28, Titus 2:13, Hebrews 1:8, 2 Peter 1:1). It is used in John 10:35 of the
worshippers of Jehovah. Once it even refers to Satan (2 Corinthians 4:4).
None of
these uses should confuse us about who is really the one and only supreme God
of the universe, the one both Jews and Christians naturally and freely term
"God" -- Jehovah, the Almighty God of all. However two texts,
frequently cited in support of the trinity, deserve special attention: John 1:1
(discussed separately later), and John 20:28. The latter text records the
startled exclamation of praise and adoration by Thomas on seeing the
resurrected Christ: "My Lord and my God." Does this mean Christ was
verily great Jehovah Himself? Of course not. Theos (god, magistrate) is the
term of great respect, awe and worship Thomas attributed to his Lord and
Master. Indeed, in the very same chapter, Jesus explained to Mary Magdalene
that he had not yet ascended "unto my Father, and your Father; and to my
God, and your God" (John 20:17). Clearly Jesus recognized almighty
God as distinct from, and superior to, himself. God is, as Paul declared,
"the Father." No scripture uses the expressions "God the
Son" or "God the Holy Spirit"!
(2)
Are Jesus and God Co-Equal?
According
to the Scriptures, they clearly are NOT equal. In every case, where God and
Jesus are referred to in one context, Jesus is subordinate, and the Father is
superior. Here are a handful of the many texts on this issue:
"Why
callest thou me good? None is good, save one, that is, God." (Luke 18:19)
"My
Father is Greater than I" (John 14:28)
"The
Head of Christ is God" (1 Corinthians 11:3)
"[Jesus]
sat down on the right hand of God" (Hebrews 10:12)
"Then
shall the Son also himself be subject ... that God may be all in all" (1
Corinthians 15:28)
Perhaps
most telling of all is that Jesus recognizes God as his own God
-- his superior, to whom he renders adoration, worship and praise (Matthew
27:46, John 20:17, Ephesians 1:17, Revelation 1:6). No scripture says
Jesus is co-equal!
(3)
Are Jesus and God Co-Eternal?
In the
sense that both will always exist, yes. But that is true of angels and saints
and all the obedient. The intent of Co-Eternal is that they always existed
eternally from ages past, neither preceding the other. This is not true of
Jesus. The Scriptures affirm that Jesus was "the beginning of the Creation
of God" (Revelation 3:14), and the "firstborn of every creature"
(Colossians 1:15). Therefore he had a beginning. There was a time before that
when God was alone. Proverbs 8:22 says of Jesus, "The LORD created me the
first of his works long ago, before all else that he made. I was formed in
earliest times, at the beginning, before earth itself" (Proverbs 8:22, 23,
NRSV). No
scripture says Jesus was co-eternal!
(4)
Is the Holy Spirit a Person?
Ordinarily
there would be no question about this. The holy Spirit of God anointed Jesus at
Jordan, who received it not "by measure" (John 3:34). It is "poured
out" and "shed" on others (Acts 10:45, Acts 2:17,33, Joel 2:28,
Zechariah 12:10). Persons are not "poured," "shed" or
"measured," but the spirit, power and influence of God is properly
described this way.
The holy
Spirit of God is variously described in Scripture as the spirit of Truth,
Holiness, Life, Faith, Wisdom, Grace, and Glory. The Scriptues also speak of an
opposite spirit of Jealousy, Judgment, Burning, Heaviness, Whoredoms,
Infirmity, Divination, Bondage, Slumber, Fear, Antichrist and Error. Do we
suppose these are persons?
The
Scriptures speak of the spirit of Jacob, Elijah, Tiglath-Pilesser, the
Philistines, Cyrus, Princes, the Medes, Zerubbabel, and Joshua. Are these
spirits all persons?
Why,
then, would any suppose the "holy Spirit of God" (Ephesians 4:30) to
be a separate being? Actually no one would (and no one did) until the time
mysteries and philosophies began to enter Christian dogma. (More of that
later.) But today, centuries later, some suppose a support for the personhood of
the holy Spirit because of the pronouns used for it in the New Testament. For
example, "When he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into
all truth ..." (John 16:13). And of the Comforter Jesus said "I will
send him unto you" (verse 7). It sounds like a person because of the
pronouns "he" and "him."
But a
little examination into the Greek explains the issue. When
"comforter" is meant the pronoun is masculine, but when
"spirit" is intended the pronoun is neuter. Literally it could be
translated "it will guide you ..." It is simply a matter of grammar,
not of personality. The Greek word for "comforter" is a masculine
noun, and that for "spirit" is a neuter noun. Therefore the pronouns
necessarily follow the gender of the noun. (Actually the genders in verse 13
are supplied by the Greek verbs rather than by explicit pronouns, but you get
the idea.) No scripture says the holy Spirit of God is a person!
John
1:1
The only
passage which even comes close to teaching the Trinity is 1 John 5:7, 8. But
today it is common knowledge that the essential parts of this passage were not
original scripture. The words at issue are an embellishment added to the text
by an over-zealous scribe centuries after John died, and no reputable modern
version even includes them.
For this
reason the focus of attention has turned to John 1:1. Clearly this does not
teach the Trinity per se, because it does not even mention the holy
Spirit, and one cannot have a "trinity" without three parties. But it
does say "the Word was God" (King James translation), and this is
close enough to one of the pieces of the Trinity to cause interest. What did
John mean by this?
There
are three popular views:
(1) He
meant Jesus really was "God Himself"
(2) He
meant Jesus was "God-like"
(3) He
meant Jesus was "a god."
Trinitarians
are naturally drawn to the first view. But (other than all we have said above),
this view is in danger of proving TOO MUCH -- that Jesus and God are the
same person. Indeed, many trinitarians assert this without recognizing this is
more like the heresy of Sabellius than the orthodox trinity.
The
problem becomes apparent when one compares John 1:1 with 1 John 1:2. Both texts
are from the same author, about the same time, and express the same thoughts.
John 1:1 says the Word was "with God," 1 John 1:2 says the Word was
"with the Father." Clearly John intends that "God" was
"the Father." Thus if John intends that the Word was "God
Himself," he must mean the Word was "the Father" -- a conclusion
no orthodox trinitarian can embrace. For this reason the majority of
translators, including trinitarian translators, do not hold view one!
Thus
view 2. "When John said that the Word was God he was not saying that Jesus
is identical with God; he was saying that Jesus is so perfectly the same as God
in mind, in heart, in being, that in Jesus we perfectly see what God is
like" (William Barclay, The Gospel of John, Vol. 1, page 17). In
this camp are the following: William Barclay, Martin Vincent, J.P. Lange,
Robert Young, Brook Foss Westcott, Kenneth Wuest, George Turner, Julius Mantey,
H.E. Dana, Moulton and Moffat. Typical of this view is the REB translation:
"The Word was in God's presence, and what God was, the Word was."
It is
possible that this was John's point. However, View Three actually fits the
context still better. As many Bible students are aware, the words "a"
and "an" (called indefinite articles) do not exist in the Greek
language. If one wished to say "I saw a tree," in Greek it would be
"I saw tree" and everyone would know the intent is "a"
tree. Therefore a translator would automatically supply it. This is done
everywhere in the New Testament where the English word "a" or
"an" appears.
So in
John 1:1. The text actually says "In the beginning was the Word, and the
Word was with the God, and the Word was [a?] God." Should the translator
supply the intended "a" or not? That is the question. Contrary to
many vocal claims on this issue, it is a sound and reasonable thing to do. C.
H. Dodd, driving force of the NEB, acknowledges "As a word-for-word
translation it cannot be faulted." (Technical Papers for the Bible
Translator, 28, Jan. 1977, page 101ff, cited from James Parkinson, "The
Herald," Sept-Oct 1966, page 23). Notice that the translators of the King
James version had no hesitation in using "a god" in Acts 28:6 where
the context makes it obvious. (It also belongs in John 10:33, as the logic of
Jesus' reply shows.)
A very
good reason for adding "a" in John 1:1 is John 1:18, but the point is
hidden in the King James version. Today it is generally acknowledged that the
better, earlier Greek manuscripts of this verse refer to Jesus as "the
only begotten god" (see the NASB for example). John there says no one has
ever seen "God," but "the only begotten god, which is in the
bosom of the Father," has appeared to declare what God is about. First it
is clear that by "God" John means "the Father." Second it
is clear that John has two gods in mind -- God himself, the unseen, and the son
of God, Jesus, who in his own right is also a mighty being, "a god."
Since John 1:18 distinguishes two mighty beings, it is apparent that John 1:1
also distinguishes two mighty beings.
Whence,
Then, The Trinity?
Where
did this doctrine come from? When did it come? For what Reason? How did it take
hold? Probably it developed as an over-zealous response to the vital gnostic
heresies which began to surface even in John's day, and afflicted the church
for about two centuries. Gnostics proposed that Jesus was not actually the
Messiah -- some say he was an apparition, or a materialization, others a simple
man possessed for a time by the Christ -- but all agreed that the Anointed, the
Messiah, the Christ, did not suffer and die on the cross.
This
fundamentally undercuts the Truth of Christianity, and against such views were
John's strong warnings in 1 John 1:22,23, 4:1-3, 2 John 7. Indeed, these
epistles of John and even the Gospel of John, read with the backdrop of these
heresies in mind, take on a fresh and deeper meaning than ever before. It is
for this reason that John was forceful in affirming that the very Jesus
"which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have
looked upon, and our hands have handled" (1 John 1:1) was the very Word of
life who existed from ages before with the Father, the agent of all the
Father's creative work from the beginning. This very one did indeed suffer and
die on the cross for our sins. John was there when it happened, a first-hand
witness. "And he that saw it bare record, and his record is true: and he
knoweth that he saith true, that ye might believe" (John 19:35).
As John
passed from the scene the gnostic heresies grew in strength, causing a severe
pressure within the early Christian community. In combatting this error, and in
emphasizing the significance, uniqueness and importance of Jesust, the very Son
of God himself, it was natural to attach more and more weight to him, even
over-emphasizing his office and majesty beyond that allowed in the scriptures.
Little by little a greater and greater image of him was put forward, resulting
in such erroreous views as Sabellius put forward in the 3rd century, claiming
that Jesus was but an expression of the one God, and not a lesser though
glorious separate being. This was generally rejected, but in the end a sad
compromise was reached which left distorted the real verities regarding Christ,
the highly honored Son of the Most High God.
The
early affirmation of the Church fathers that Christ was both created and
subordinate gave way to new theories, until the old adherents were moved to a
staunch defense. The great Arian controversy erupted as a result, philosophy
was argued in the name of Christian doctrine, and a great rift formed in the
fledgling body of Christ.
The
Nicene Creed
About
this time, in the early 4th century AD, Constantine came to power, first of the
so-called Christian Emperors. The foment and dissension was so apparent, and so
divisive to his empire, he insisted the breach be healed, by force if
necessary. Under his influence hordes of former pagans were becoming "Christian"
in name, and there was an urgency to resolve these issues in a way conducive to
the growth and tranquility of his domain.
With
this backdrop a Council was convened at Nice, and through much tumult was
forged the highly ambiguous and strangely worded Nicene Creed, which has been
an enigma ever since. No wonder. The language used to "settle" the
debate was drawn not from scripture, but from the very pagan sources the
emperor wished to make comfortable with their newly acquired "faith."
The
Historical Buildup
To grasp
the enormity and significance of what occured at Nice, we need to review some
of the historical FACTS regarding the Trinity.
Fact
One -- The word Trinity is nowhere found in the scriptures.
Fact
Two -- Not one of the Apostolic Fathers (Clement, Barnabas, Ignatius,
Mathetes, Polycarp, Papias, Justin Martyr) mentioned this doctrine in any of
the 1200 pages of text they left us.
Fact
Three -- When the word "Trinity" first appeared in Christian
writings it meant nothing like it does today. It simply implied the existence
of God, his Word, and Wisdom.
Fact
Four -- Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Origen, Novatian,
Arnobius and Lactantius (all early and revered Christian writers) explicitly
affirmed that the Heavenly Father alone is the supreme God and that Jesus is
subordinate to His will and authority (The Lord our God is one Lord,
Bible Students Congregation of New Brunswick, page 2). "During the first
three centuries ... almost all of the early church Fathers ... admitted the
inferiority of the Son to the Father" (Alvan Lamson, Church of the
First Three Centuries).
Fact
Five -- The early formal statement of Christian belief never mentions
the word "Trinity" or any of its concepts. It is termed the
"Apostles' Creed" (though not composed by the apostles). It was used
extensively in the 2nd and 3rd centuries of the Christian era. As regards God
and Jesus, it affirms exactly what we affirm. It says simply:
"I believe in God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven
and earth. And in Jesus Christ, his only son our Lord: who was conceived by the
holy spirit, born of the virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was
crucified, dead, and buried; he descended into hell; the third day he rose
again from the dead; he ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of
God, the Father Almighty: From thence he shall come to judge the quick and the
dead. I believe in the holy spirit; the holy catholic Church; the communion of
saints; the forgiveness of sins; the resurrection of the body, and the life
everlasting. Amen"
Language
Lifted from Heathen Sources
Now
compare that simple statement of belief, so clear and brief, to the Creed
produced from the Council at Nice in 325 AD. (Our comments in Bold Italic.)
"We believe in one God the Father Almighty, Maker of
all things visible and invisible; and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God
begotten of the Father, Only-begotten, (so far so good, the language is
mostly from the Apostles Creed. But now follows the strange new terminology) that
is of the substance of the Father; God of God; Light of Light; very God of very
God; begotten, not made; of the same substance with the Father; (end of
mystical language, back to scriptural language) by whom all things were
made, both things in heaven and things in earth; who for us men and our
salvation descended and became flesh, was made man, suffered, and rose again
the third day. He ascended into heaven; he cometh to judge the quick and dead.
And in the Holy Spirit. (Now resumes the new concepts, full of bitterness
to dissenters.) But those that say there was a time when he was not; or
that he was not before he was begotten; or that he was made from that which had
no being; or whom affirm the Son of God to be of any other substance or
essence, or created, (despite three clear scriptures!) or
variable, or mutable, such persons doth the Catholic and Apostolic Church
anathematize."
Note
these strange, philosophical, mystical expressions -- "one substance of
the Father, God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God." Such
strange words, foreign alike to the word and sense of any Scripture. Where, oh
where do these come from? Who invented them? Whence their source? The answer is
both startling, and chilling. John Newton, in Origin of Triads and Trinities,
wrote
"With the first glimpse of a distinct religion and
worship among the most ancient races, we find them grouping their gods in
triads. ... [now citing Professor Sayce from Gifford Lectures and Hibbert
Lectures] 'The indebtedness of Christian theological theory to ancient
Egyptian dogma is nowhere more striking than in the doctrine of the Trinity.
The very same terms used of it by Christian theologians meet us again in the
inscriptions and papyri of Egypt.' [Newton continues] And now we see some
meaning in the strange phrases that have puzzled so many generations in the
Nicene and Athanasian Creeds, such as 'Light of Light, Very God of Very God,
Begotten not Made, Being of one Substance with the Father.' These are all
understandable enough if translated into the language of the Solar Trinity
[worshipped in ancient Egypt], but without this clue to their meaning, they
become sheer nonsense or contradictions ... The simplicity and symmetry of the
old Sun Trinities were utterly lost in forming these new Christian Creeds on
the old Pagan models. ... The [pagan] trinities had all the prestige of a vast
antiquity and universal adoption, and could not be ignored. The gentile
converts therefore eagerly accepted the Trinity compromise, and the Church
baptized it. Now at length we know its origin." (John Newton, Origin of
Triads and Trinities, Liverpool, 1909, pp. 20-21, 25-27).
Will
Durant, the popular Catholic historian of our day, wrote: "Christianity
did not destroy paganism; it adopted it ... pagan cultures contributed to the
syncretist results. From Egypt came the ideas of a divine trinity ..." (Caesar
and Christ, page 595) (Lamson, Newton & Durant cited from Charles
Redeker, To Us there is One God, June 1978).
No
wonder the confusion. No wonder the controversy. No wonder the debate. No
wonder that all Christendom was torn by disputes about the Trinity.
Why
is this Important?
Because
it is a travesty upon the Truth, one which has endured for centuries. Like the
doctrine of Purgatory, it took hold upon the church as the Dark Ages began to
creep over Europe. But as the lingering mists of mystery and confusion fade,
the simple Truths of the Scripture sparkle the brighter. How clear the
scriptural statements. Jesus, God's chief agent from all creation, the one who
was a treasure to his heart, "daily his delight," God sent to be the
redeemer of men.
He was
made flesh, dwelt among us, and gave his life in death so that Adam and his
race could be freed. He gave the Ransom with his own flesh. In due course he
will introduce his Kingdom among men, Satan shall be thoroughly bound, and the
Millennial Kingdom of righteousness be established in all the world. Even now a
transition of the ages is upon us which will yield this blessed result.
Meanwhile
we have the special privilege of a personal walk with the Master, to receive if
"faithful unto death" a crown of life divine, immortal, in the
heavenly courts. We shall have the honor of reigning with Christ in glory. At
that time we shall assist our master in delivering the whole world out of
bondage, and into faith, until "the earth shall be full of the knowledge
of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea" (Revelation 2:10, 20:6, Isaiah
11:9). "Hallelujah, What a Savior!"
(This article was written and published in tract form by the San
Diego Bible Students at the address below and was posted on this web site with
their permission. )
SAN DIEGO BIBLE
STUDENTS · BOX 15701, SAN DIEGO,
CA 92115-0701 · 589-1534