The Great Debate
TRINITARIAN VIEW
The doctrine of the Trinity is the belief that God is three separate personalities or three persons. Eash person is God, but each person is distinct from the other persons. Thus Jesus is God and the Father is God, but Jesus is not the Father – they are separate persons. It is a puzzle not to be grasped by the human mind.
History. This is clearly a problematic area for the subject. Trinitarian historians concede that the understanding of God, and their ability to express this understanding in Trinitarian terms took centuries to evolve. The creeds and writings of the early church fathers confirm this progression of belief in a triune god. There is virtually no support of the concept until the third century.
Trinitarian historians also state that Greek Platonic philosophy played a heavy part in the development of this doctrine. Many Trinitarian scholars view these Greek philosophies as a gift from God, that helped Christians in the early period come to an understanding of the Trinity.
Only One God. A few key premises sustain the Trinitarian view. One premise reasons that there is only one true God and all others called “god” are, by default, a “false god.” In other words, the word “god” should only properly apply to one god as a unique name or unique title. Following this logic, if Jesus is called “god” then he must either be a false god or the true God. Do the Scriptures support this thought?
We answer no. The Scriptures do not reserve the word “god” for the Almighty God. In John 10:34 Jesus pointed out that those through whom God gave His word were called “gods” (by using the Greek word for “gods”). Jesus continued by claiming to be the Son of God. Jesus used the word “god” (“theos” in the Greek) more broadly than what has been defined by the Trinitarian view. There are other examples, in both Old and New Testaments, of ones called god which did not fall in the category of “false,” and thus this premise does not hold up.
Attributes of God. Another premise is that God has certain attributes which makes Him God. If the Son has these attributes, then he must be God. For example, God does not change, and Christ “is the same yesterday, today and forever”; God is the “Creator” and Jesus is the creator”; God is the “King of kings” and Jesus is the “King of kings.” The conclusion is drawn that Jesus possesses the attributes which qualify him to be God. However, in considering this further, there are attributes shared in common with Jesus and his disciples: the light of the world, judges of the world, sons of God, priests, kings, etc. All of these titles and attributes do not make the church and Jesus the same being.
Overcoming this problem requires looking at the broader context of scripture. For example, God, by Old Testament declaration, is the only “Savior.” Jesus also claimed to be the Savior. And further examination shows the 144,000 of Revelation 14 are “saviors” (Obadiah 21). How do we harmonize these seemingly conflicting statements of Scripture?
The truth is that God (the heavenly Father) is principal Savior, the Architect of salvation, without whom there would be no salvation. In His great plan the Father has employed others to assist Him, making them “saviors” also. Chief among them is His son, Christ Jesus.
Lack of Scriptural Support. The greatest weakness of the Trinity doctrine is the lack of clear, unambiguous scriptural support. There are a few verses, such as John 1:1, that at best could be said to “imply” the doctrine if John, the writer, believed the Trinity. However, in each and every case these verses can as easily support a non-Trinitarian interpretation. Moreover, the deepest chasm is the lack of a single verse which “teaches” the doctrine. The Bible has many verses that teach justification, repentance, baptism, resurrection, but not one verse in the entire Bible teaches the doctrine of the Trinity. No verse describes it, explains it, or defines it. And no verse instructs us to believe it!
Considering how different the Trinitarian view is from the traditional Jewish belief of God, the question arises: where are all the arguments to get the Jew to change his view on the subject? When the Apostle Paul spent entire chapters reasoning with the Jew regarding the law, why did he not spend time endeavoring to assist the Jew to a “better understanding” of God? This vital but missing piece is an insurmountable flaw in the Trinity
The Trinity is a doctrine rich in tradition, passionately defended by brilliant and sincere people, but severely weak in reason and wanting in Biblical support.
ONENESS VIEW
The Oneness view was popular in the Third century AD and helped lead to the Trinity. It became popular again at the beginning of this century with the Pentecostal movement. Like the Trinity, this view holds that God is one person rather than three. They explain Jesus and the Spirit as manifestations of God’s separate roles: the role of Father, Son and Holy Spirit. God reveals Himself to man as one or more of the three (but not necessarily limited to three.)
Lack of Scriptural Support. The Oneness theology has one major problem, over and above the problems it shares with Trinity. Very few verses support the concept of God being three in one person. One such scripture is found in Isaiah 9:6 where the Messiah is said to be the Everlasting Father (The Father), Prince of Peace (the Son), Wonderful Counsel (Holy Spirit) and the Mighty God (God.) Conversely, there are a wealth of scriptures that show a distinction between the Father and the Son.
Oneness believers have explanations for each verse which indicates a distinction between the Father, Son, and Spirit, but those explanations, no matter how clever, are hard to follow and even harder to square with the natural expression of scripture. For example, when Jesus prayed the Oneness interpretation is that the humanity of God was praying to the divinity of God. (The Oneness view shares the Trinitarian belief of the dual nature of Jesus Christ.) When the voice of God declared “This is my beloved Son…”, it is reasoned that God is omnipresent and could send His voice from heaven at the same time he was being baptized. As is true with the Trinitarian view, the best explanation is simply that it is one of the “mysteries of godliness”.
UNITARIAN VIEW
The Unitarian doctrine is similar to the Arian view, with the most notable difference being in the understanding of the pre-existence of God’s Son. Unitarian belief is that the Son’s existence began when he was conceived in the womb of Mary. This view is difficult to understand and, therefore, unconvincing.
ARIAN VIEW
Named after Arius, the champion of the view at the Council of Nice in 325, the paradigm was very popular from the beginning and faded as the Roman Church gained more and more acceptance from the 4th century on. It is very unpopular today, and considered by many in Christendom to be the mark of a cult. The Jehovah’s Witnesses are the only organization of large size who believe this doctrine.
Despite its lac of popularity, the predominance of scripture leans heavily, and much more naturally, in the direction of the Arian view. It is also simpler approach to scripture and does not require and great wrestling with or bending the meaning of the text.
Scriptural Support. The Arian view is monotheistic. It has no difficulty with verses such as Deuteronomy 6:4 which plainly state that God is one. There is no problem with passages that show the superiority of the Father. It views Jesus as “a god” or “godlike,” as a mighty being beneath but next to the glory of the Almighty God. Because it does not equate Jesus with the Almighty God, no explanation is necessary for the (il)logic of Christ dying while being immortal. Because it views the Father and Son as separate persons, there is no attempt to reason how the Son would pray to the Father. Because it recognizes that Jesus had a pre-existence with the Father, it is not difficult to accommodate Jesus as the creator through the power of the Father. With its belief that Jesus is the first (and only) direct creation of God, who was highly exalted after his resurrection, it harmonizes with the scriptures which speak of Jesus being worthy to receive honor and worship. It also agrees with the historical writings of the early church.
DOES IT MATTER?
Some may ask: what difference does it make? Why is this important?
For many, God is “incomprehensible.” This makes Him inapproachable, resulting in a loss of genuine relationship based on understanding. Additionally, if our understanding of Christ is unclear we will miss important features of God’s plan of redemption. The Arian view allows Jesus, as a perfect man instead of a God-man, to be a substitutionary “ransom for all.” Those who believe that Jesus is both God and man suggest that salvation is very limited. The Trinity and oneness doctrines cloud one’s ability to see jesus providing a full ransom for Adam and his race, because Jesus would not be a “corresponding”price to Adam. Thus the price for error is twofold: missing out on a close personal relationship with our Creator. These are significan losses.
CONCLUSION
Since the Trinitarian doctrine began to dominate the Christian world in the late fourth century, there have always been a small clusters of those who have championed the Arian view of the Father, Son, and holy Spirit. When the Roman Church dominated the world these few were greatly persecuted. Arians were run out of their homes and countries, killed and burned at the stake for their belief. Such persecution, however, has never stopped men from embracing this simple truth.
The day soon will dawn on mankind when God shall pour out His Spirit (His power and enlightenment) upon all men. At that time it will be said:
“And they shall not teach again, each man his neighbor and each man his brother, saying, ‘Know the LORD,’ for they shall all know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them,” declares the LORD….” (Jeremiah 31:34)
– Robert Wagoner, from “The Great Debate”