The trinity is the central doctrine of most religions of Christendom. According to the Athanasian Creed, there are three divine Persons (the Father, the Son, the Holy Ghost), each said to be eternal, each said to be almighty, none greater or less than another, each said to be God, and yet together being but one God. Other statements of the dogma emphasize that the three "Persons" are not separate and distinct individuals but are three modes in which the divine essence exists. This is not a Bible teaching.

What is the origin of the Trinity doctrine?

The New Encyclopaedia Britannica says: "Neither the word Trinity, nor the explicit doctrine as such, appears in the New Testament, nor did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict the Shema in the Old Testament: 'Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord' (Deut. 6:4). . . . The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies. . . . By the end of the 4th century . . . the doctrine of the Trinity took substantially the form it has maintained ever since."¹

The New Catholic Encyclopedia states: "The formulation 'one God in three Persons' was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and it's profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century. But it is precisely this formulation that has first claim to the title the Trinitarian dogma. Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality of perspective."²

In The Encyclopedia Americana we read: "Christianity derived from Judaism and Judaism was strictly Unitarian³... Fourth century Trinitarianism did not reflect accurately early Christian teaching regarding the nature of God; it was, on the contrary, a deviation from this teaching."⁴

According to the Nouveau Dictionnaire Universel, "The Platonic⁵ trinity, itself merely a rearrangement of older trinities dating back to earlier peoples, appears to be the rational philosophic trinity of attributes that gave birth to the three hypostases or divine persons taught by the Christian churches ... This Greek philosopher's⁶ conception of the divine trinity ... can be found in all the ancient [pagan] religions."⁷

Are Trinitarian concepts found in the Bible?

• Does the Bible teach that the "Holy Spirit" is a person?

  Some individual texts that refer to the holy spirit ("Holy Ghost," KJ⁸) might seem to indicate personality. For example, the holy spirit is referred to as a helper ("Comforter," KJ; "Advocate," JB⁹, NE¹⁰ that 'teaches,' 'bears witness,' 'speaks' and 'hears.' (John 14:16,17,26; 15:26; 16:13) But other texts say that people were "filled" with holy spirit, that some were 'baptised' with it or '"anointed" with it. (Luke 1:41; Matt. 3:11; Acts 10:38) These latter references to holy spirit definitely do not fit a person. To understand what the Bible as a whole teaches, all these texts must be considered. What is the reasonable conclusion? That the first texts cited here employ a figure of speech personifying God's holy spirit, his active force, as the Bible also personifies wisdom, sin, death, water, and blood.

  The Holy Scriptures in their original texts tell us that the personal name of the Father is JHVH¹¹, usually translated Jehovah. They tell us that the name of the Son is Jesus. But nowhere is a name given to the holy spirit.

  Acts 7:55,56 reports that Stephen was given a vision of heaven in which he saw "Jesus standing at God's right hand." But he made no mention of seeing the holy spirit. (See also Revelation 7:10; 22:1,3.)

  The New Catholic Encyclopedia admits: "The majority of NT¹² texts reveal God's spirit as something, not somone; this is especially seen in the parallelism between the spirit and the power of God."¹³

• Does the Bible teach that the Father and the Son are not separate and distinct individuals?

  Matt. 26:39, RS¹⁴: "Going a little farther he [Jesus Christ] fell on his face and prayed, 'My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass away from me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as thou wilt.'" If the Father and the Son were not distinct individuals, such a prayer would have been meaningless. Jesus would have been praying to himself, and his will would of necessity have been the Father's will.

  John 8:17,18, RS: "[Jesus answered the Jewish Pharisees:] In your law it is written that the testimony of two men is true; I bear witness to myself, and the Father who sent me bears witness to me." So, Jesus definitely spoke of himself as being an individual separate and distinct from the Father.

• Does the Bible teach that the three said to be part of the Trinity are eternal, none having a beginning?

  Col. 1:15,16,RS: "He [Jesus Christ] is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation; for in him all things were created, in heaven and on earth." In what sense is Jesus Christ "the first-born of all creation"? (1)Trinitarians say that "first-born" here means prime, most excellent, most distinguished; thus Christ would be undrstood to be, not part of creation, but the most distinguished in relation to those who were created. If that is so, and if the Trinity doctrine is true, why are the Father and the holy spirit not also said to be the firstborn of all creation? But the Bible applies this expression only to the Son. According to the customary meaning of "firstborn," it indicates that Jesus is the eldest in Jehovah's family of sons. (2)Before Colossians 1:15, the expression "the firstborn of" occurs upwards of 30 times in the Bible, and in each instance that it is applied to living creatures the same meaning applies - the firstborn of a group is part of the group. What, then, causes some to ascribe a different meaning to it at Colossians 1:15? Is it Bible usage or is it a belief to which they already hold and for which they seek proof? (3)Does Colossians 1:16,17 (RS) exclude Jesus from having been created when it says "all things were created through him and for him"? The Greek word here rendered "all things" is pan'ta, and inflected form if pas. At Luke 13:2, RS renders this "all ... other"; JB reads "any other"; NE says "anyone else." (See also Luke 21:29 in NE and Philippians 2:21 in JB) In harmony with everything else that the Bible says regardin the Son, NW¹⁵ assigns the same meaning to pan'ta at Colossians 1:16,17 so that it reads, in part, "by means of him all other things were created ... All other things have been created through him and for him." Thus he is shown to be a created being, part of the creation produced by God.

  Rev. 1:1; 3:14, RS: "The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him ... 'And to the angel of the church in Laodicea write: "The words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning [Greek: ar·khe'] of God's creation."'" (KJ, NW, as well as others read similarly.) Is that rendering correct? Some take the view that what is meant is that the Son was 'the beginner of God's creation,' that he was its 'ultimate source.' But Liddell and Scott's Greek-English Lexicon lists "beginning" as its first meaning of ar·khe'. The logical conclusion is that the one being quoted at Revelation 3:14 is a creation, the first of God's creations, that he had a beginning.

• Does the Bible teach that none of those who are said to be included in the Trinity is greater or less than another, that all are equal, that all are almighty?

  Mark 13:12, RS: "Of that day or that hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father." (Of course, that would not be the case if Father, Son and Holy Spirit were coequal, comprising one Godhead. And if, as some suggest, the Son was limited by his human nature from knowing, the question remains, Why did the Holy Spirit not know?)

  Matt. 20:20-23, RS: "The mother of the sons of Zebedee . . . said to him [Jesus], 'Command that these two sons of mine may sit, one at your right hand and one at your left, in your kingdom.' But Jesus answered, . . . 'You will drink my cup, but to sit at my right hand and at my left is not mine to grant, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared by my Father.'" (How strange, if, as claimed, Jesus is God! Was Jesus here merely answering according to his "human nature"? If, as Trinitarians say, Jesus was truly "God-man"-both God and man, not one or the other-would it truly be consistent to resort to such an explanation? Does not Matthew 20:23 rather show that the Son is not equal to the Father, that the Father has reserved some prerogatives for himself?)

  Matt. 12:31, 32, RS: "Every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. And whoever says a word against the Son of man will be forgiven; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come." (If the Holy Spirit were a person and were God, this text would flatly contradict the Trinity doctrine, because it would mean that in some way the Holy Spirit was greater than the Son. Instead, what Jesus said shows that the Father, to whom the "Spirit" belonged, is greater than Jesus, the Son of man.)

  John 14:28, RS: "[Jesus said:] If you loved me, you would have rejoiced, because I go to the Father; for the Father is greater than I."

  1 Cor. 11:3, RS: "I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a woman is her husband, and the head of Christ is God." (Clearly, then, Christ is not God, and God is of superior rank to Christ. It should be noted that this was written about 55 C.E., some 22 years after Jesus returned to heaven. So the truth here stated applies to the relationship between God and Christ in heaven.)

  1 Cor. 15:27, 28 RS: "'God has put all things in subjection under his [Jesus'] feet.' But when it says, 'All things are put in subjection under him,' it is plain that he is excepted who put all things under him. When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things under him, that God may be everything to every one."

  The Hebrew word Shad·dai' and the Greek word Pan·to·kra'tor are both translated "Almighty." Both original-language words are repeatedly applied to Jehovah, the Father. (Ex. 6:3; Rev. 19:6) Neither expression is ever applied to either the Son or the holy spirit.

• Does the Bible teach that each of those said to be part of the Trinity is God?

  Jesus said in prayer: "Father, ... this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent." (John 17:1-3, RS; italics added.) (Most translations here use the expression "the only true God" with reference to the Father. NE reads "who alone art truly God." He cannot be "the only true God," the one "who alone [is] truly God," if there are two others who are God to the same degree as he is, can he? Any others referred to as "gods" must be either false or merely a reflection of the true God.)

  1 Cor. 8:5, 6, RS: "Although there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth-as indeed there are many 'gods' and many 'lords'-yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist." (This presents the Father as the "one God" of Christians and as being in a class distinct from Jesus Christ.)

  1 Pet. 1:3, RS: "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ!" (Repeatedly, even following Jesus' ascension to heaven, the Scriptures refer to the Father as "the God" of Jesus Christ. At John 20:17, following Jesus' resurrection, he himself spoke of the Father as "my God." Later, when in heaven, as recorded at Revelation 3:12, he again used the same expression. But never in the Bible is the Father reported to refer to the Son as "my God," nor does either the Father or the Son refer to the holy spirit as "my God.")

  In Theological Investigations, Karl Rahner, S.J., admits: "theos [God] is still never used of the Spirit," and: "o theos [literally, the God] is never used in the New Testament to speak of the holy spirit."¹⁶

Do any of the scriptures that are used by Trinitarians to support their belief provide a solid basis for that dogma?

A person who is really seeking to know the truth about God is not going to search the Bible hoping to find a text that he can construe as fitting what he already believes. He wants to know what God's Word itself says. He may find some texts that he feels can be read in more than one way, but when these are compared with other Biblical statements on the same subject their meaning will become clear. It should be noted at the outset that most of the texts used as "proof" of the Trinity actually mention only two persons, not three; so even if the Trinitarian explanation of the texts were correct, these would not prove that the Bible teaches the Trinity. Consider the following:

(Unless otherwise indicated, all the texts quoted in the following section are from RS.)

Texts in which a title that belongs to Jehovah is applied to Jesus Christ or is claimed to apply to Jesus

• Alpha and Omega: To whom does this title properly belong? (1) At Revelation 1:8, its owner is said to be God, the Almighty. In Revelation 1:11 according to KJ, that title is applied to one whose description thereafter shows him to be Jesus Christ. But scholars recognize the reference to Alpha and Omega in Revelation 1:11 to be spurious, and so it does not appear in RS, NE, JB, NAB, Dy. (2) Many translations of Revelation into Hebrew recognize that the one described in Revelation 1:8 is Jehovah, and so they restore the personal name of God there. See NW, 1984 Reference edition. (3) Revelation 21:6, 7 indicates that Christians who are spiritual conquerors are to be 'sons' of the one known as the Alpha and the Omega. That is never said of the relationship of spirit-anointed Christians to Jesus Christ. Jesus spoke of them as his 'brothers.' (Heb. 2:11; Matt. 12:50; 25:40) But those 'brothers' of Jesus are referred to as "sons of God." (Gal. 3:26; 4:6) (4) At Revelation 22:12, TEV¹⁷ inserts the name Jesus, so the reference to Alpha and Omega in Revelation 22:13 is made to appear to apply to him. But the name Jesus does not appear there in Greek, and other translations do not include it. (5) At Revelation 22:13, the Alpha and Omega is also said to be "the first and the last," which expression is applied to Jesus at Revelation 1:17, 18. Similarly, the expression "apostle" is applied both to Jesus Christ and to certain ones of his followers. But that does not prove that they are the same person or are of equal rank, does it? (Heb. 3:1) So the evidence points to the conclusion that the title "Alpha and Omega" applies to Almighty God, the Father, not to the Son.

• Savior: Repeatedly the Scriptures refer to God as Savior. At Isaiah 43:11 God even says: "Besides me there is no savior." Since Jesus is also referred to as Savior, are God and Jesus the same? Not at all. Titus 1:3, 4 speaks of "God our Savior," and then of both "God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior." So, both persons are saviors. Jude 25 shows the relationship, saying: "God, our Savior through Jesus Christ our Lord." (Italics added.) (See also Acts 13:23.) At Judges 3:9, the same Hebrew word (moh·shi'a', rendered "savior" or "deliverer") that is used at Isaiah 43:11 is applied to Othniel, a judge in Israel, but that certainly did not make Othniel Jehovah, did it? A reading of Isaiah 43:1-12 shows that Isaiah 43:11 means that Jehovah alone was the One who provided salvation, or deliverance, for Israel; that salvation did not come from any of the gods of the surrounding nations.

• God: At Isaiah 43:10 Jehovah says: "Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me." Does this mean that, because Jesus Christ is prophetically called "Mighty God" at Isaiah 9:6, Jesus must be Jehovah? Again, the context answers, No! None of the idolatrous Gentile nations formed a god before Jehovah, because no one existed before Jehovah. Nor would they at a future time form any real, live god that was able to prophesy. (Isa. 46:9, 10) But that does not mean that Jehovah never caused to exist anyone who is properly referred to as a god. (Ps. 82:1, 6; John 1:1, NW) At Isaiah 10:21 Jehovah is referred to as "mighty God," just as Jesus is in Isaiah 9:6; but only Jehovah is ever called "God Almighty."-Genesis 17:1.

If a certain title or descriptive phrase is found in more than one location in the Scriptures, it should never hastily be concluded that it must always refer to the same person. Such reasoning would lead to the conclusion that Nebuchadnezzar was Jesus Christ, because both were called "king of kings" (Dan. 2:37; Rev. 17:14); and that Jesus' disciples were actually Jesus Christ, because both were called "the light of the world." (Matt. 5:14; John 8:12) We should always consider the context and any other instances in the Bible where the same expression occurs.

Application to Jesus Christ by inspired Bible writers of passages from the Hebrew Scriptures that clearly apply to Jehovah

Why does John 1:23 quote Isaiah 40:3 and apply it to what John the Baptizer did in preparing the way for Jesus Christ, when Isaiah 40:3 is clearly discussing preparing the way before Jehovah? Because Jesus represented his Father. He came in his Father's name and had the assurance that his Father was always with him because he did the things pleasing to his Father.-John 5:43; 8:29.

Why does Hebrews 1:10-12 quote Psalm 102:25-27 and apply it to the Son, when the psalm says that it is addressed to God? Because the Son is the one through whom God performed the creative works there described by the psalmist. (See Colossians 1:15, 16; Proverbs 8:22, 27-30.) It should be observed in Hebrews 1:5b that a quotation is made from 2 Samuel 7:14 and applied to the Son of God. Although that text had its first application to Solomon, the later application of it to Jesus Christ does not mean that Solomon and Jesus are the same. Jesus is "greater than Solomon" and carries out a work foreshadowed by Solomon.-Luke 11:31.

Scriptures that mention together the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit

Matthew 28:19 and 2 Corinthians 13:14 are instances of this. Neither of these texts says that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are coequal or coeternal or that all are God. The Scriptural evidence already presented argues against reading such thoughts into the texts.

McClintock and Strong's Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, though advocating the Trinity doctrine, acknowledges regarding Matthew 28:18-20: "This text, however, taken by itself, would not prove decisively either the personality of the three subjects mentioned, or their equality or divinity."¹⁸ Regarding other texts that also mention the three together, this Cyclopedia admits that, taken by themselves, they are "insufficient" to prove the Trinity. (Compare 1 Timothy 5:21, where God and Christ and the angels are mentioned together.)

Texts in which the plural form of nouns is applied to God in the Hebrew Scriptures

At Genesis 1:1 the title "God" is translated from 'Elo·him', which is plural in Hebrew. Trinitarians construe this to be an indication of the Trinity. They also explain Deuteronomy 6:4 to imply the unity of members of the Trinity when it says, "The LORD our God [from 'Elo·him'] is one LORD."

The plural form of the noun here in Hebrew is the plural of majesty or excellence. (Similarly in England, the queen uses the word 'we' as a formal word for 'I'.) It conveys no thought of plurality of persons within a godhead. In similar fashion, at Judges 16:23 when reference is made to the false god Dagon, a form of the title 'elo·him' is used; the accompanying verb is singular, showing that reference is to just the one god. At Genesis 42:30, Joseph is spoken of as the "lord" ('adho·neh', the plural of excellence) of Egypt.

The Greek language does not have a 'plural of majesty or excellence.' So, at Genesis 1:1 the translators of the Septuagint used ho The·os' (God, singular) as the equivalent of 'Elo·him'. At Mark 12:29, where a reply of Jesus is reproduced in which he quoted Deuteronomy 6:4, the Greek singular ho The·os' is similarly used.

At Deuteronomy 6:4, the Hebrew text contains the Tetragrammaton twice, and so should more properly read: "Jehovah our God is one Jehovah." (NW) The nation of Israel, to whom that was stated, did not believe in the Trinity. The Babylonians and the Egyptians worshiped triads of gods, but it was made clear to Israel that Jehovah is different.