The Doctrine of the Trinity
The doctrine of the Trinity is declared to be one of the basic, one of the fundamental doctrines in all of Christendom. Do you know the exact wording of this doctrine? Have you ever thought about the implications of this doctrine? Here are the words:
“There are three persons in the one God — the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost; these three are one God, the same substance, equal in power and glory.”
It must be pointed out right from the beginning: Neither the word “trinity”, nor the doctrine of the Trinity is found, or taught in the Scriptures anywhere! In fact, the doctrine of the Trinity is man-made and was introduced and formulated at the Council of NICAEA in A.D. 325. Also, ever since the Reformation: this man-made doctrine has been taught and preached in all of the churches of Christianity as one of the fundamental doctrines (pillars): in which every church member must believe to be saved.
Please, read once more the words of the TRINITY doctrine quoted above, and then ask yourself a few logical questions regarding the following Scriptures:
Eph. 1:17 “That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ …”
1 Pet. 1:3 “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ …”
John 3:35 “The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand.”
John 5:19–20 “Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth [whatsoever the Father designs, plans, or purposes, the Son acts upon], these also doeth the Son likewise.”
John 5:30 “I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me.”
John 14:28 “My Father is greater than I.”
And God himself testifies:
Matth. 3:17 “And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.”
Question: If, as the doctrine of the Trinity declares,
Note now also the clear statement Jesus is making in John 5:26, speaking from the standpoint of his completed sacrifice, on the basis of which he became the Redeemer of all, the Redeemer of the world:
John 5:26 “For as the Father hath life in himself [viz, life inherent, self-existing, immortality, a nature incapable of death, not dependent on sustenance nor in any manner on another]; so hath he given to the Son [at his resurrection] to have life in himself”, viz, to receive immortality, which he did not have before!
Question: If, as the doctrine of the Trinity declares, ALL THREE PERSONS IN ONE GOD ARE OF THE SAME SUBSTANCE, AND ARE EQUAL IN POWER AND GLORY, then the Son already possessed immortality; God the Father did not need to give it to him, isn’t that so? Again, the man-made doctrine of the Trinity makes a liar of the Son, doesn’t it? How blasphemous!
God’s holy Word tells us that: “God is an everlasting God”, that he “inhabiteth eternity” (Gen. 21:33; Is. 40:28; Ps. 90:2; Is. 57:15; Deut. 33:27), and if, as the doctrine of the Trinity declares, ALL THREE ARE OF THE SAME SUBSTANCE, EQUAL IN POWER AND GLORY: how could Jesus actually and truly die? (Death, according to the Scriptures: is the opposite to life). Again, is the doctrine of the Trinity not making a liar of God and a hypocrite of Jesus? How blasphemous!
But because Jesus did die, did give his life “a ransom for all” (1 Tim. 2:6), did “taste death for every man” by the grace of God (Heb. 2:9): “Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name” (Phil. 2:9).
Statement: If, as the doctrine of the Trinity declares, ALL THREE ARE ONE GOD, ARE OF THE SAME SUBSTANCE, EQUAL IN POWER AND GLORY, viz, if the Son already had immortality: Jesus could not have given himself “a ransom for all”, because the word “ransom”, being translated from the Greek word “anti-lutron”, has the specific meaning of: a corresponding price, to be exactly equal in value, which applied means: Adam, a perfect human being, lost his life; Jesus, also a perfect human being, gave his life as a sacrifice for Adam’s condemned life. It is for this reason and from this standpoint, that the Apostle says: “Therefore as by the offence of one [Adam] judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one [the man Christ Jesus] the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.” And also: “For since by man [Adam] came death [the loss of life], by man [the man Christ Jesus] came also [will come, in the true Kingdom of God] the resurrection of the dead [the receiving back of that life Adam lost]. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive” (Rom. 5:18; 1 Cor. 15:21–22). All this is exactly that to which Jesus refers when he said: “For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost” by Adam when disobeying his Creator: life, in fact: eternal life! (Matth. 18:11; Luke 15:4). That, by the way, is what the good news of the Gospel is all about, as expressed in Luke 2:10–11: “And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people. For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord.”
Eph. 1:20–21 “Which he [God] wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come.”
What a statement! Could God the Father do this if, according to the doctrine of the Trinity, ALL THREE ARE ONE GOD, ARE OF THE SAME SUBSTANCE, AND ARE EQUAL IN POWER AND GLORY? Or, to put the question in a different way: Would it be necessary for the Father to do all this if the Son is of the same substance, and is equal in power and glory to himself? How ridiculous; how blasphemous!
Is. 42:1 “Behold my servant [Christ], whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles.”
And the Son says:
Ps. 40:8 “I delight to do thy will, O my God: yea, thy law is within my heart.”
Ah yes, that is what the true relationship between God the Father and his only begotten Son is about, expressed also in these words, so very clear and definite:
Col. 1:15 “Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature.”
Rev. 3:14 “These things saith the Amen [Christ], the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God”!
Can you grasp these two statements? Christ, before he came to earth to become “the Saviour of the world” (1 John 4:14) was:“the beginning of the creation of God”!
Consider now the following Scriptures from the standpoint of the doctrine of the Trinity and realize its utter impossibility:
1 Cor. 15:24–28 “Then cometh the end [the end of “the times of restitution of all things”; Acts 3:19–21], when he [Christ] shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power [with regard to all the systems and arrangements of man on earth]. For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. For he [God] hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him. And when all things shall be subdued unto him [under Christ, at the end of Christ’s 1000-year reign], then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.”
Is it possible to misread, to misinterpret this Scripture? or any of the foregoing ones? No, it is not possible! No wonder God’s message is: “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased” (Matth. 3:17; 17:5; 2 Pet. 1:17).
There are, of course, still more Scriptures which speak of the Father-Son relationship between God and his “only begotten Son”, also shown in pictures, parables and types, but for a short and concentrated Bible “study”: the foregoing Scriptures are so clear, are so explicit and direct in their statements, that they leave no room for even the slightest argument, and thus: destroy the validity of the man-made doctrine of the Trinity.
There is, therefore, no need to enlarge, or to extend this purposely held short “study” with regard to the “Holy Ghost” (as the third person in the doctrine of the Trinity), except to say that, while the wording “Holy Ghost” may be very useful with regard to a third person in the doctrine of the Trinity — and thus serve well as a deceptive tool: it is totally unscriptural, a totally wrong translation.
While there are many Scriptures in the Old Testament which speak of the spirit of God, there are none which mention a “Holy Ghost”. But in the New Testament, in addition to the many Scriptures referring to the spirit of God, even the holy Spirit, the wording “Holy Ghost” is used 90 times in our common Bibles. Yet, in the Emphatic Diaglott, viz, in the direct Greek-English translation from the original Greek text: there is no “Holy Ghost”; all Scriptures speak of “the holy Spirit” of God.
The holy Spirit “issues” from God Almighty, the Creator of all, and is a power of God which he uses in different ways and forms, either in a direct way, or by way of influencing conditions, circumstances, or events by either promoting or hindering their developments according to his plans and purposes, also involving human instrumentalities, typified and foreshadowed very clearly in all the arrangements and happenings with regard to the people of Israel under the Law Covenant. Here are some examples:
Acts 4:31 “And while they were praying, the place was shaken where they were assembled; and they were all filled with the holy Spirit.”
Acts 10:45 “And those believers of the Circumcision, who came with Peter, were astonished, because the gift of the holy Spirit was even poured out upon the Gentiles.”
Acts 11:15 “And as I began to speak [the Apostle Peter], the holy Spirit fell on them, even as on us in the beginning [at Pentecost, when the holy Spirit was poured out on all those assembled].”
1 Cor. 6:19 “Do you not know that your body is a temple of that holy Spirit in you, which you have from God.”
John 7:39 “But this he said concerning the Spirit, which those believing into him were about to receive; for the holy Spirit had not yet been given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.”
John 14:26 “But the helper, the holy Spirit, which the Father will send in my name, shall teach you all things …”
John 20:22 “And having said this, he breathed on and says to them, Receive the holy Spirit.”
2 Cor. 13:14 “The favour of the Lord Jesus, and the love of God, and the joint participation of the holy Spirit be with you all.”
1 Thess. 1:5 “Because our glad tidings came to you not in Word only, but also in power, even with the holy Spirit.” (Those who have received the holy Spirit, may speak with power).
2 Tim. 1:14 “Guard the good entrusted charge, through that holy Spirit which dwells in us.”
2 Pet. 1:21 “… but men from God [those selected by God and sent] spoke, being moved by [the] holy Spirit.”
The holy Spirit was “given” to them; the holy Spirit is “in you”; being “filled” with the holy Spirit; having “received” the holy Spirit; the holy Spirit being “a gift” of God; the holy Spirit being “poured out” upon them; the holy Spirit “fell” on them; your body is “a temple” of the holy Spirit; the holy Spirit “dwelleth” in you … Does all that make sense from the standpoint of the doctrine of the Trinity? And this most absurd doctrine of the Trinity is still being taught and preached in all of Christendom! To this day people are being baptized: “in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost”, instead of: “in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit.”
There is a specific Scripture which must be dealt with, one which is being used to support the doctrine of the Trinity. With regard to 1 John 5:7–8, Ch. T. Russell, whose Bible studies were printed in newspapers all over the globe, pointed out the following already over one hundred years ago (and this is only an excerpt):
There is one statement found in the Scriptures, and only one, which seems in the slightest degree to even imply the doctrine of a Trinity of Gods; and that passage is now admitted by all scholars to be spurious — an interpolation. It is therefore omitted from the Revised Version of the New Testament, although the translators of that Revised Version, so far as we are aware, were every one of them Trinitarians. While they would have liked to retain this passage, as the only Scripture support (and then very imperfect in statement), they could not retain it conscientiously.
Nor were the translators of our Common Version of the Bible blameworthy for inserting this interpolation, because at the time of that translation it was impossible to know of its spurious character. Since its translation hundreds of old Greek manuscripts have been found, but none of these of earlier date than the seventh century contains this clause, which favors the Trinity. It is therefore not denied by scholars, without respect to denominational proclivities, that the spurious words were inserted to give support to the doctrine of the Trinity, at a time when the discussion of that doctrine was rife in the Church, and when the advocates of the doctrine of the Trinity were perplexed before their opponents, because they had no Scriptural evidence to bring in substantiation of their theory. The spurious words were no doubt interpolated by some over-zealous monk, who felt sure of the doctrine himself, and thought that the holy Spirit had blundered in not stating the matter in the Scriptures: his intention, no doubt, was to help God and the truth out of a difficulty by perpetrating a fraud. But all such suggestions, to the effect that God has not given us a complete revelation, “sufficient that the man of God may be thoroughly furnished,” and that it needs adding to, are of the Adversary, as was this suggestion that it would be proper to commit a wrong, a forgery, for the sake of doing good, and rectifying the mistake of the Almighty. The monk-scribe or priest who committed this forgery, apparently about the beginning of the seventh century, has much to answer for, in his addition to the Word of God, and the evil influence which it has exerted over God’s people, who, seeking for the truth on this subject, were misled by his forgery.
The spurious interpolation is found in 1 John 5:7, and consists of the words, “in heaven the Father, the Word and the holy Spirit, and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth.” These words, omitted from the text, leave it simple and easy to be understood, and fully in accord with all the remainder of the Scriptures; but with these words in the text, as they have stood for centuries, confusion is produced; for nonsense is asserted. For instance, with these words remaining in the text, the sense would be that the Father and the Son and the holy Spirit agreed in bearing one testimony in heaven, namely, that Jesus is the Christ. How absurd! Who is there in heaven ignorant of the fact that Jesus is the Christ? To whom, therefore, would it be necessary for the Father, the Son and the holy Spirit to bear this record or testimony? None. But it was a convenient place for the Adversary to get in his work of corruption of the truth, and he found a servant willing to serve him.
Not only does the Revised Version omit this verse, but so also do all modern translations — the Emphatic Diaglott, Young’s Bible translation, the American Bible Union translation, the Improved Version. The latter says:
“This text concerning the Heavenly Witnesses is not contained in any Greek MS. which was written earlier than the fifth century. It is not cited by any of the Greek ecclesiastical writers; nor by any of the early Latin fathers, even when the subjects upon which they treated would naturally have led them to appeal to its authority: it is, therefore, evidently spurious.”
Lang’s Critical Commentary, referring to this spurious passage, says:
“Said words are wanting in all the Greek codices; also in the Codex Sinaiticus [the oldest known Greek MS.], and in all the ancient versions, including the Latin, as late as the eighth century; and [in MSS. written] since that time they are found in three variations. Notwithstanding the Trinitarian controversies, they are not referred to by a single Greek Father, or by any of the old Latin Church Fathers.”
Hudson’s Greek and English Concordance says:
“The words are found in no Greek MS. before the 15th or 16th century, and in no early version.”
The passage is pronounced an interpolation by the following Bible scholars of recognized ability — Sir Isaac Newton, Benson, Clark, Horne, Griesbach, Tischendorf, Tregelles, Lachman and Alford. The latter says:
“Unless pure caprice is to be followed in the criticism of the sacred text, there is no shadow of reason for supposing them genuine.”
Dr. Constantine Tischendorf says:
“That this spurious addition should continue to be published as a part of the Epistle I regard as an impiety.”
Prof. T. B. Wolsey inquires:
“Do not truth and honesty require that such a passage should be struck out of our English Bibles — a passage which Luther would not express in his translation, and which did not creep into the German Bible until nearly fifty years after his death?”
Dr. Adam Clarke commenting on this passage says:
“It is likely this verse is not genuine. It is wanting in every MS. of this epistle written before the invention of printing, one excepted — the Codex Montfortii, in Trinity College, Dublin. The others which omit this verse amount to one hundred and twelve. It is wanting in both the Syriac, all the Arabic, Ethiopic, Coptic, Sahadic, Arminian, Slavonic, etc.; in a word, in all the ancient versions but the Vulgate; and even of this version, many of the most ancient and correct copies have it not. It is wanting also in all the ancient Greek Fathers, and in most even of the Latin.”
Here is 1 John 5:7–8, including the spurious, the inserted words, but in which the spurious words are written in capital letters:
1 John 5:7–8 “For there are three that bear record IN HEAVEN, THE FATHER, THE WORD, AND THE HOLY GHOST: AND THESE THREE ARE ONE. AND THERE ARE THREE THAT BEAR WITNESS IN EARTH, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.”
Now read the Scripture first with the spurious, inserted words and note how nonsensical it is, and then read it without the spurious, inserted words and note how meaningful this Scripture then is and which, in fact then: is in harmony with all of God’s holy Word from Genesis to Revelation!
In conclusion, one more clarification, and this one pertains to John 1:1–2, which reads: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God.”
Here is the Scripture again, substituting “the Word” with the original Greek “the Logos”: “In the beginning was the Logos, and the Logos was with God, and the Logos was God [actually, the Logos was a God, viz, a mighty one]. The same was in the beginning with God.”
In Christianity much importance is put on the words: “and the Logos was God”. If this emphasis would be applied to all of the two verses, they would read: “In the beginning was God, and the God was with God, and the God was God. This same was in the beginning with God.”
Again, how absurd, how nonsensical! First of all: the Almighty God of all Creation does not have a beginning, God is “from everlasting [from all eternity] to everlasting [to all eternity]” (Ps. 90:2; see also Gen. 21:33; Is. 40:28). But of the Logos, who was “sent” by God to become “the Redeemer of the world”, it is said that he was: “the firstborn of every creature” (Col. 1:15; “firstborn” — literally: first brought forth); who also said of himself that he is: “the beginning of the creation of God” (Rev. 3:14) and, accordingly, John 1:2 states: “In the beginning was the Logos.” There was no other creation before him, as the Scriptures also testify in other places in these words:
“But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him” (1 Cor. 8:6); also: “… God, who created all things by Jesus Christ” (Eph. 3:9); and: “Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure [for the pleasure of God’s only begotten Son] they are and were created” (Rev. 4:11).
In harmony with all this, John 1:3 continues (adds to the first two verses): “All things were made by him; and without him [without the Logos] was not any thing made that was made.”
Very closely related to all the foregoing is also one aspect of the prayer of Jesus to his Father, in the 17th chapter of John, where he expresses the following just shortly before his crucifixion, with reference to his true Disciples:
John 17:11 “And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.”
John 17:20–23 “Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; that they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe [in due time] that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.”
In these words, the oneness of the true Church, for which the Lord prayed, is specially stated to be exactly the same as the oneness between the Father and the Son. The oneness of the true Church of Christ is, of course: a oneness of mind and not a personal oneness. Evidently the thought in our Lord’s mind was: a oneness of heart; a oneness of purpose; a oneness of will; a oneness in the pursuing of everything pertaining to God; a oneness identical with the oneness between the Father and himself. And this oneness was to be attained on the part of the Church in the same manner exactly as the oneness between the Father and the Son was attained. The Son was at one with the Father because he fully accepted as his own the Father’s will, saying: “Not my will, but thine, be done.” So, each member of the true Church of Christ: is to come into perfect harmony with the Father, and with the Son, by doing not their own wills, but by setting aside their own wills and accepting the will of Christ, which is the will of the Father. Thus, and thus only will the Church ever come into the oneness for which the Lord here prayed.
How strange that any should attempt to misuse and pervert these our Lord’s words, to make them support the unreasonable and unscriptural doctrine of the Trinity, viz, three Gods in one person. On the contrary, how beautiful and reasonable is the Scriptural Oneness of the spirit of the Father and Son and the members of the true body of Christ, the true Church.