Deconstructing the Three-In-One God Doctrine Thought Process

Following is an excerpt from the “Deconstructing the Three-In-One God Doctrine Thought Process”


Page 5 of 36:

Trinitarian interpretation techniques

Let us start by stating the interpretation mistakes that appear in the trinitarian interpretation process. All the ideas of the plurality of God rest on the following interpretation techniques.

  • Ignoring the most abundant “thus saith the Lord”.

  • The role of ability in determining the identity and nature of the Spirit of God.

  • Arbitrary choice of meaning of words where multiple meanings may exist.

  • Reading between the lines.

  • Double standards (inconsistency) in applying interpretation techniques.

  • Acceptance of unintelligible statements as evidence of the complexity of God.

  • The mere mention of the three in a single sentence as evidence of their nature.

  • Solving a non-existent, assumed contradiction.

So, let us demonstrate what we mean by these techniques.

Ignoring the most abundant “thus saith the Lord”

The most abundant fact about God is that He is one single, personal, individual being, God the Father. God is referred to always in singular terms as a single personal individual being. We counted the number of times God says “I” or “me” referring to himself and found over 43 in the first 9 chapters of Genesis alone. We stopped counting because we think the point is clearly made. We counted the number of times God is called he, his and him in the same chapters and we found over 30 times. Hence the most abundant evidence is that God is an individual single person.

God the Father is identified as the God of the Bible. If we consider all the cases that God is referred to as ‘he’, ‘his’ ‘him’ and where he speaks as ‘I’ and ‘me’, then the evidence would be in the hundreds

[Page 6 of 36]

if not thousands of texts. Add to that the texts which clearly state that God is the Father (of all), the case can be rested that the Bible by abundance of evidence teaches of only one single individual who is referred to as the One God. Some of the texts are (with emphasis added):

Malachi 2:10 Have we not all one father? hath not one God created us? why do we deal treacherously every man against his brother, by profaning the covenant of our fathers?

Deuteronomy 6:4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD.

Mark 12:32 And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he.

John 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

Romans 3:30 Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith.

Romans 15:6 That ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

1 Corinthians 8:6 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.

Ephesians 4:6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.

1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

James 2:19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.

1 John 5:20 And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.

Thus, we can declare the truth that “Thus saith the Lord, the One God is one single individual personal being, God the Father of all.”

God is identified many times as the Father of Jesus Christ. More than 50 times, the Son of God calls God “my Father”. God also calls the Son of God as “my Son”.

The most mentioned fact about the Christ is that He is the Son of God, and that God is his Father. This is stated directly (as Son of God or His Son) in 16 books of the Bible. That God has a Son is alluded to indirectly in many other ways such as parables (the king and his son’s marriage), and the presentation of the Son before the Almighty in Revelation 2.

“Son of God” as a phrase occurs 48 times and ‘His Son’ as a phrase occurs at least 21 times in the KJV Bible referring to Christ alone. ‘Thy Son’ occurs twice and ‘thy holy child’ also occurs twice. This sonship of Jesus is symbolized throughout the Old Testament, including that of the heirs to the throne of Israel and Judah, David and Solomon. Proverbs 30:4 actually declares the sonship by saying “and what is his [God’s] son’s name, if thou canst tell?”

With more than 70 witnesses stating the same thing, that Christ is the Son of God, i.e. a Son that belongs to God, we have no reason not to accept that as it reads.

Thus, we can declare that “Thus saith the Lord, Christ is God’s Son, and God is Christ’s Father”.

The most abundant fact about the Holy Spirit is that it is a spirit and that it belongs to God. The Spirit is always referred to in possessive terms, i.e. as a Spirit that is possessed by the Father and by Christ.

“Spirit OF God” – 26 times/witnesses in the Bible

[Page 7 of 36]

“Spirit of the Lord” – 31 times/witnesses in the Bible

“HIS Spirit” – 9 times/witnesses in the Bible

“MY Spirit” – 12 times/witnesses in the Bible

“Spirit OF Christ” – 2 witnesses/times in the Bible

“THY Spirit” – 5 times/witnesses in the Bible

Suppose you are the jury considering the evidence being presented by 88 witnesses, all of them credible and reliable witnesses. And the
witnesses are identifying a person from a parade of two persons who are Smith and Jones. Then 85 witnesses come and say, “Yes, it’s Jones, 100% SURE”. Then later on, comes three witnesses and they say, “It is probably Smith, but NOT SURE”.

As a jury, based on weight of evidence, who would you say the person is, Jones or Smith? Jones, of course! The evidence is staggering. Let us put this into perspective using a visual representation.


Screen Shot 2020-11-20 at 10.42.26 AM.png

Any logical person can clearly see that the evidence in favour of Jones is overwhelming. If the jury decides that the criminal is Smith, then the jury is very questionable. How can the jury decide on the basis of the questionable evidence of three undecided witnesses against 85 decided witnesses? We propose that the justice system would be a failure if the jury or judge could ignore 85 definitive witnesses and three not so sure witnesses, in favour of three doubtful witnesses.

This is the situation we see concerning the Spirit of God. At least 85 witnesses in the Bible emphatically witness that the Spirit of God belongs to God. The second verse of the Bible begins this witness and that witness lasts for over 4000 years before any doubtful witness of the last three

[Page 8 of 36]

witnesses appears. In these three witnesses (which are Matthew 28:19, 2 Corinthians 13:14 and 1 John 5:7), there could be, if you want to see it, a possibility that the Spirit is a third part making up who God is. In trinitarian thinking, the most logical thing is to identify the Spirit of God according to that remote possibility in those three indefinite late coming verses, which do not refute the other 85 verses, but simply give another possible interpretation based on imagination of the listener/reader.

Thus, we can declare the truth the “Thus saith the Lord, the Spirit of God belongs to God”

If these most frequently stated facts of the Bible about the Father, the Son of God and the Spirit of God are established in their position as immovable truths, then the trinitarian interpretation process becomes impossible to apply. In other words, to make one God out of three persons is impossible if we take the simple truth that the Son of God and the Spirit of God belong to God, but God the father does not belong to anyone. For the trinitarian interpretation to even begin, it is necessary to put aside the clearest abundant facts of the Bible. What we are saying is that the most abundant clear evidence in the Bible must be the foundation of building doctrine.

Let us put this important point in other words. If we take and establish the obvious abundant fact that the Spirit OF God is firstly, a Spirit and secondly, OF God (belonging to God), will there be a contradiction with any verse in the Bible? For example, would it be impossible for the Holy Spirit to speak, to intercede, to give gifts, to be blasphemed, to be lied to and anything else if the Holy Spirit is a Spirit and belongs to God? We see no contradiction. In fact, it must be so that the Spirit which is of God, being the very presence of God, and even the angels our ministering spirits, should be able to perform all the acts that God wants performed.

The 3-in-1 god doctrine denies all these facts in order to uphold a speculative and reconstructive interpretation of a very few verses, as we shall see going further.

The role of ability in determining the identity and nature of an entity

Trinitarian interpretation uses the ability of the Spirit of God to determine its nature and then from its nature determine its identity. First, trinitarian thinking makes some obvious observations, which are correct, then after that a speculation is made, and more speculation built on other speculations. This is how the trinitarian thought process does it.

Step 1.
Observation: The Bible presents some examples of where the Spirit of God decides what to do and say. In other words, it is true that the Spirit of God is presented to us as exhibiting a personality, i.e. characteristics of a person. The following are examples (with emphasis added).

  • Acts 5:3 But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land?

  • Acts 5:9 Then Peter said unto her, How is it that ye have agreed together to tempt the Spirit of the Lord?

  • Acts 8:29 Then the Spirit said unto Philip, Go near, and join thyself to this chariot.

  • Romans 8:26 Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.

  • Ephesians 4:30 And grieve not the Holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption.

Trinitarian thinking observes that since the Spirit of God can be lied to, can speak, can decide, is involved in baptism, can be grieved, and so on, then these are the qualities of a person. Therefore, the Spirit of God has the characteristics of a person or is/has a personality. At this point we totally agree. The Spirit of God does display the qualities of a

[Page 9 of 36]

person and has a personality/characteristics which appear distinct from the God who sends His Spirit.

Step 2.
Observation: The trinitarian thinking then goes further by saying, as a person or personality, the Spirit of God does those things only God can do. We agree there, yes, the Spirit of God does the things that God only can do. Here are some examples (with emphasis added).

Matthew 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.

1 Corinthians 12:8 For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit. (The Spirit of God baptizes, gives all spiritual gifts, prophesy, miracles, etc. which God alone can do).

Many more acts which the Spirit of God can perform are shown in the Bible. These are purely divine acts, attributable only to God’s power, but not necessarily to God in person. Up to now, we are noting simple observations that the Spirit of God has qualities of a person, and divine abilities. But the next step moves completely out of observation into speculative logical reasoning.

Step 3.
Speculation: The next step is where we see speculation beginning. Trinitarian thinking then argues that since the Spirit of God can do that which God can do, then the Spirit is God in and of itself, independent of its belonging to God the Father as stated elsewhere in the Bible. By this reasoning, the Spirit which is of God changes and becomes, God the Spirit, a third part of who God is.

This argument that if the Spirit of God can do only what God can do, then it is God in itself and not belonging to God, is purely an argument based on logic, not based on the texts of the Bible. Not that there is anything wrong with using logic, but by using logic that steps off the established biblical text one then engages in speculation. That argument is a huge assumption and speculation, and here is why.

There is no rule which demands that doing what God can do makes an entity that is in God’s universe (especiall
y one that is stated clearly that it belongs to God and is sent by God) to be a God in its own right, independent of God. To do that which only God can do is possible without removing the obvious evidence that the Spirit of God belongs to God and is sent by God to do God’s will. That the Holy Spirit is sent by God to do that which God wants to do is an established fact which is true in every act that the Holy Spirit does every time! It is always sent by God! To do that which God can do is simply evidence of God’s power to accomplish God’s own purposes. Angels and men sent by God are a good example of this. They have the ability to do that which naturally they have no power to do on their own, but God alone can do.

If the other evidence of the Bible is not ignored, then it is obvious that the Spirit of God, that’s belongs to God, and always does and says anything as sent by God (yes always sent by God!) can do that which God sends it to do or say.

What other evidence are we referring to? Well, the undeniable evidence that the Spirit of God belongs to God, as his own Spirit, which he sends, gives and can take away as He desires.

If we take that into account, we can clearly see that the Spirit of God does what it is sent to do, by the capability of the Sender, which is the God to whom the Spirit belongs. In other words, when God sends His Spirit, he/it has the ability to do that which God can do, because it is the Spirit of God belonging to and sent by God.

[Page 10 of 36]

In that capacity, when God speaks, the Spirit of God is at work to effect that which God wants to do. In fact, one could observe that the Spirit of God is the very Word of God (John 6:63). Therefore, it is God himself at work, by His Spirit. Therefore, the very fact that the Spirit of God has a personality, and can do that which God sends it to do, and that which God alone can do, is the very evidence that the Spirit of God belongs to God, and is the power of God. It is by no means evidence that the Spirit of God is another God-person who is a third part of who God is.

Let us make that even clearer using Bible texts.

In Acts 9:36 to 41, Peter raised a woman called Dorcas from death. Only God can raise a person from death to life. So, we know the power of God was working through Peter. We also know that God sent Peter to raise the dead. But what Peter can do, i.e. Peter’s ability to raise the dead, does not make him literally a god. That Peter could raise the dead is the very evidence that he belongs to God and was sent by God.

Moses did many miracles which are completely beyond his human power, only possible by God. God who sent him worked through him. The miracles that Moses did can only be done by God. But the fact that Moses did them is no proof that he is literally a god, nor that he forms a part of who God is. It is proof that Moses belonged to God and was sent by God, to do only that which God can do. Hence God claims ownership of that which Moses did by saying “Then thou shalt say unto thy son, “and the LORD brought us out of Egypt with a mighty hand”” (Deuteronomy 6:21).

The angels of God do just as much as the Spirit of God in every sense, but that does not make them literal gods (for example in Acts 23:9). In fact, angels are called ministering spirits. We do not call them literal gods because we remember to apply the fact that they are angels sent by God. The position of the angels in the greater scheme of God’s purpose is settled by the fact that they are angels OF God, belonging to God, and sent by God to do God’s will. The fact that the angels belong to God, and are sent by God to do God’s will stands true independent of determining their nature. Therefore, what they say or do (i.e. their ability) is to be understood within, not outside, the context of them being the angels belonging to God.

In the same way, that the Spirit of God which belongs to God and was sent by God could do that which only God can do is the very evidence that the Spirit of God is God’s own Spirit. It is no evidence that the Spirit of God is God on its own independent of or to make up the God to whom it belongs and who has sent it. The trinitarian thought process forgets to apply the fact that God is the one who owns and sends the Spirit of God as he wills. So, the position of the Spirit of God, as belonging to God, is already defined before the Spirit of God does or says anything. Whatever the Spirit does or says must then be understood within the established fact that God has sent His Spirit. Hence its nature and identity cannot be derived from what the Spirit of God says or does (i.e. its abilities) because that which has been revealed about the nature and identity of the Spirit of God is settled by the fact the Spirit is OF God, belongs to God, and is sent to do God’s will. That is regardless of whether you call the Spirit of God a ‘he’ or an ‘it’.

This fact that the Spirit of God is sent and belongs to God is the missing element in the trinitarian interpretation process that results in the next wild speculation.

Step 4.
The fourth step in trinitarian thinking is an even more wild assumption. This is where the reasoning brings in the equality of persons who make up God or the godhead. Having speculated that the Spirit of God is a literal God in its own right against the evidence that it belongs to God and is sent by God, the trinitarian thinking makes the next unbelievable assumption. It is now argued that, if the Spirit of God is a God on its own independent of the

[Page 11 of 36]

God who sent it, then the Spirit of God is another divine entity equal to God the Father and together with the Son, they form who the One God is, a composite of persons – what is referred to by the trinitarian thinking, as the Godhead.

Notice the problem with this reasoning. From the beginning of this study we were talking of who God is. In other words, remember that statement which is the basis of this reflection. It says, ‘One God is made up of three persons’. One of those persons is the Spirit of God. But now, the Spirit of God is a third part of the Godhead. In other words, the Spirit of God is said to be a third part of the One God as it is a third part of the Godhead. Clearly, there is confusion in trinitarian thinking regarding who God is, and what is the Godhead. The terms ‘God’ and ‘Godhead’ are used interchangeably in trinitarian thinking, yet they have different meanings.

The term God is almost invariably used to refer to God the Father, one person who speaks and presents himself as one. In a few verses, by extension, inheritance and representation, the term God is used with qualification to refer to the Son of God (Isaiah 9:6; Hebrews 1:8; John 20:28). God the Father uses the words me, my, I and Bible writers refer to him as him, his, and he. In other words, the One God of the Bible is always referred to as a singular person not as three persons.

But notice what the Bible teaches about the word Godhead. It is the state of being divine, the divine nature or divinity or deity. Notice the following.

Godhead is used three times in the KJV Bible.

Acts 17:29 “Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead [2304] is like unt
o gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man’s device.”
• 2304 — θεῖος theios, thi´-os; from 2316; godlike (neuter as noun, divinity): — divine, godhead.

Romans 1:20 “For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead [2305]; so that they are without excuse:”
• 2305 — θειότης theiotes, thi-ot´-ace; from 2304; divinity (abstractly): — godhead.

Colossians 2:9 “For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead [2320] bodily.”
• 2320 — θεότης theotes, theh-ot´-ace; from 2316; divinity (abstractly): — godhead.

Once, in 2 Peter 1:3-4, the same Greek word for godhead as used in Acts 17:29 is translated directly into divine, yet with the same meaning as the other verses.

2 Peter 1:3-4 “According as his divine [2304] power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue: Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine [2304] nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.”

Therefore, as we see here, Godhead simply means divinity or divine nature, i.e. the nature of being God. Notice the following quotations.

[Page 12 of 36]

“The word “Godhead” is a simple doublet of the less frequently occurring “Godhood.” Both forms stand side by side in the Ancren Riwle (about 1225 AD), and both have survived until today, though not in equally common use…” (Bible Study Tools).

“History and Etymology for godhead: Middle English godhed, from god + -hed -hood; akin to Middle English -hod -hood” (Merriam-Webster Dictionary 1828).

“godhead c.1200, from GOD (Cf. god) + M.E. -hede, cognate with -HOOD (Cf. – hood) and Ger. -heit. Along with maidenhead, this is the sole survival of this form of the suffix. O.E. had godhad “divine nature.”” (Etymology Dictionary)

The short of it is that the word godhead developed from the suffix “-hede” (godhede/godhod) or “hood” just like any other word with such a suffix, e.g. manhood, etc. Another example is maidenhood/maidenhead. The suffix ‘-hood’ simply implies the state or essence of an object/noun. For example, personhood is the essence of being a person.

What is clear is that personhood is not the person, maidenhood is not the maiden, manhood is not the man. Similarly, godhood/godhead is not the God. Neither is there any meaning relating to a family, unity or gathering of entities in the use of the suffix -hood/-head.

Therefore, while the word ‘godhead’ in trinitarian thinking is often used in place of the word ‘god’, and is also used with the concept of a family of three divine entities, in the Bible it is not like that at all. It is wise for us to retain the correct meanings of words as they were used in the Bible and in the writings of the past if we are to understand what those writers from the past were understanding. The modern spin of the word godhead is misleading many into believing a new concept of a family of three entities, which godhead did not mean before.

What we learn is that divinity or godhood/godhead, is what God shares with Christ and with us by God’s own Spirit. Hence it pleased God the Father that in Christ should the fullness of divinity dwell (Colossians 1:19; 2:9). And to us, we share the divine nature of God by which we obtain eternal life (Acts 17:29; 2 Peter 1:3, 4).

Hence the trinitarian thinking which uses the terms God and Godhead interchangeably is not correct. It is a modern reconstruction of the concept of divinity.

So, in these speculative to reconstructive steps, the Spirit of God is severed from its belongingness to God and set up as a third part of who God is. In fact, they begin to say the Spirit of God is a coeternal, co-equal and co-substantial person to God and the Son of God.

By co-eternal they mean the Spirit of God exists and has always existed as an equal individual to God the Father and the Son of God. By co-equal, they mean that the Spirit of God is just a joint partner with the Father and the Son, having the same claim to divinity and creation, power and worship. By co-substantial they mean that the Spirit of God is ‘made’ of the same substance as the Father and the Son. With that is created a scene of three gods, which are not gods but persons that make up a god, while acting three different roles, by pretending to be father, son and spirit, though in reality they are not so.

Of course, none of that is found written anywhere in the Bible. All that has been constructed on the fact that the Spirit of God exhibits the personality, which thing it must do if it is the Spirit of God. But of course, that is ignored.

Ever head of the Piltdown man? A certain archeologist found “a section of a human-like skull … a jawbone, more skull fragments, a set of teeth, and primitive tools”. Out of that, the archeologist constructed an entire ape complete with all the visible parts of a body. Of course, the only truth is that some bones were found. The rest is purely a construction of the archeologist mind. Similarly, the only truth is that the Spirit of God has a personality. The rest of the ideas from the Spirit of God being a third part of who God is, being equal to the Father and the Son, and being of the same nature etc. are pure constructions of the trinitarian thought process.

[Page 13 of 36]

Another point about the Spirit of God’s nature is that it is divisible. In fact, Revelation tells us that God has seven of them.

Revelation 1:4 John to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne. (emphasis added)

The point is mentioned 4 times in Revelation including 3:1, 4:5 and 5:6. So if there are seven Spirits before God, each one of them being a God, then maybe we have nine or more persons in God, i.e. at least seven Spirits, plus God the Spirit (if not part of the seven Spirits), plus God the Son plus God the Father. Or should we ask, has anyone ever read of two fathers or two begotten sons of God in all the Bible? How come the Father and the Son are not multiple nor divisible but the Spirit is both?

What we have seen in this section is that, while it is true that the Spirit of God exhibits a personality by what he does and says, it is a speculation to use what the Spirit of God says or does to construct a god who whose nature is three-in-one.


To read the complete article, click HERE.

Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on email
Email
Share on print
Print

RELATED ARTICLES

Historic SDA View on John 5:26

A brief chronicle compilation from SDA periodicals on this verse:“For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;”

Read More »

Examining “The Bible Doctrine of the Trinity”

The controversy over the Godhead in Seventh-day Adventism at the present time is carried out on a number of levels – Biblical, Spirit of Prophecy, Historical and Rational – both individually, and with overlap. The principal of taking “the weight of evidence” (3T, p. 255) should apply to each of these, but in reality, a true understanding will harmonize all so called “anomalies” which lie outside this weight.

Read More »

Who is Telling the Truth?

In his video, Doug Batchelor attempts to have people believe that (a) begotten means created, and that (b) Christ, in His pre-existence, was not begotten of God (therefore He is not truly the Son of God), and that (c) Proverbs 8:22-31 is not speaking of Christ.

Read More »

Baptismal Vow Revised

Fifty-Fifth General Conference Session, on July 11, 1990, 2:00 p.m., baptismal vow was revised, making it decidedly trinitarian. The vote was to revise the SDA Church Manual pg. 44 (1986 edition), “Baptismal Vow and Baptism,” section to read as follows “”1. Do you believe there is one God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, a unity of three co-eternal Persons?”

Read More »

One Response

  1. It seems to me that the Trinitarian’s‘s have been lied to for a great number of years including myself it was not until recently that I was led by a friend of mine to attend a house meeting with a couple that were in the same position as myself yet they learn as I did that becoming a non-hereditary and it’s biblical I thank you so much for the articles please send others as you wish

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.