Você está na página 1de 8

The Trinity,

What is Revealed in the Bible?


by
Blair Andrew

The Questions
What is it about human nature, that causes us to think we are right in everything we
believe?

Why are the vast majority of Christians deceived; believing error, such as the doctrine
of the immortality of the soul, or the teaching of eternal hellfire, or the “secret rapture”?
None of these doctrines have their foundation in the Bible, but millions believe them.

What are the forces at play that bring us to believe something? What is a belief? How
does that become a doctrine? What are the underlying pre-suppositions of doctrines,
that cause people to debate, argue, fight – and eventually kill over them? The purpose of
doctrine is to bring us to Christ, to keep us walking in the light that leads to the true
saviour, and not a counterfeit. How is that millions believe things which are purely
based on traditions, and have no basis in truth? What are the factors that cause us to
become emotionally attached to something, to the point that we turn on our friends, and
make them enemies?

These are the questions that need to be answered, as you look at the doctrine of the
Trinity, for its history is marred with the blood of martyrs.

The Trinity, is there any Biblical Evidence?


There are so many unanswered questions about the Trinity Doctrine. The most obvious
is, where in the Bible is it explained? Scholars throughout history have acknowledged
that it is not even found in the Bible. Just ask Erasmus, or Sir Isaac Newton. They were
known for their clear thinking, for their genius and Biblical scholarship, but neither
accepted the idea. So where did it come from?

Let us take a brief look at what the Seventh-day Adventist Church currently teach in
regard to the Trinity doctrine.

From our official work, “Seventh-day Adventists Believe . . .” written by the Ministerial
Association:

"In contrast to the heathen of surrounding nations, Israel believed there was only one
God (Deut.4:35;6:4; Isa.45:5; Zech14:9). The New Testament makes the same emphasis
on the unity of God . . . This monotheistic emphasis does not contradict the Christian
concept of the triune God or Trinity - Father, Son and Holy Spirit; rather it affirms that
there is no pantheon of various deities. Although the Old Testament does not
explicitly teach that God is triune, it alludes to a plurality within the Godhead" . . .
"While the Godhead is not one in person, God is one in purpose, mind and character.
This oneness does not obliterate the distinct personalities of the Father, the Son,
and the Holy Spirit. Nor does the separateness of personalities within the Deity
destroy the monotheistic thrust of Scripture, that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit
are one God." Seventh-day Adventists Believe . . . A Biblical Exposition of 27
Fundamental Doctrine, 1988. R & H, pp 22-23. (emphasis supplied)

Several points come out of this statement. We know that the word God means deity, or
divine; and we see no problem with our Father being called God, and Jesus being called
God, because they both are divine, and are related, just as your earthly father and you
are related; ie. family. But “mono” mean one. And “tri” means three. So, if God is one,
and yet is three divine persons, that again seems to contradict logic. And yet it says that
“this monotheistic emphasis does not contradict the Christian concept of the triune God
or trinity.” As well as this, it states that the Old Testament does not teach that God is
triune, but alludes to a plurality. We need more evidence than alluding to something to
build our faith on. All of Adventist’s other doctrinal beliefs are based on clear scriptural
exegesis. But it would seem from the above statement that we do not have this for the
trinity doctrine. Let us turn for a moment to another official Adventist source, and see if
they can shed more light on the topic.

Adventist Review:
“While no single scriptural passage states formally the doctrine of the Trinity, it is
assumed as a fact by Bible writers and mentioned several times. It is implied in
Genesis 1, where God and the Spirit of God are portrayed acting in Creation. . . . Only
by faith can we accept the existence of the Trinity. Nevertheless, reason supplies
evidences that support our belief in God. Through the ages theologians have developed
what have become known as the traditional proofs of God. . . . ” Adventist Review, Vol.
158, No.31. July 1981.p.4. (emphasis supplied).

So, we have no scriptural passage stating the trinity doctrine, again it is “assumed”, but
now we are told it is “assumed as a fact by Bible writers and mentioned several times”
by Bible writers. Evidence is not presented in the Review to support this statement, and
I have searched elsewhere for it, without success. I cannot find anywhere in Scripture
where the doctrine of the Trinity “is assumed as a fact” by any Bible writer. As well as
this, I cannot find it “mentioned several times”, but I do agree that there is much we can
“only accept it by faith”. The question begs to be asked though, should not our faith
rest on evidence? Adventists have been known as “the people of the Book”, who can
present and defend our positions on any doctrine. Has God revealed enough evidence
about His nature to support the Trinity doctrine? Let us turn to Andrews University and
see what their scholarship can produce.

The Reign of God, by Richard Rice:


“The role of the trinity in a doctrine of God always raises questions. One reason is that
the word itself does not appear in the Bible, nor is there any clear statement of the idea.
But the Bible does set the stage for its formulation, and the concept represents a
development of biblical claims and concepts. So even though the doctrine of the
trinity is not part of what the Bible itself says about God, it is part of what the
church must say to safeguard the biblical view of God.” The Reign of God, An
Introduction to Christian Theology from a Seventh-day Adventist Perspective. by
Richard Rice. 1985. Andrews Uni Press. (emphasis supplied)

This statement poses some interesting thoughts. Obvious contradictions abound. Rice is
saying that although something is not found in Scripture, we should defend it to
safeguard it as the Biblical view of God. I may not be an academic, but that type of
circular reasoning defies logic, and should never have been put in print, let alone in a
Christian text book for University level theology students.

Let’s go to a recent work which is often quoted as an authoritative work on the topic.

The Trinity, by Moon, Whidden & Reese, Andrews University.


“Probably the strongest clues to such a divine triunity occur in the famous gospel
commission that Jesus gave the church in its baptismal formula: ‘Go therefore and make
disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and
of the Holy Spirit’ (Matt. 28:19).” The Trinity, by Jerry Moon, Woodrow Whidden, &
John W. Reese, published by R & H 2002, p.32. (Chapter entitled “The Strongest
Biblical Evidence for the Trinity”) (emphasis supplied)

We are now told by our three well respected academics that Matthew 28:19 is the
“strongest clue” that we have to prove the trinity, when it is not even a text laying out a
doctrinal position on the nature of God! Christ is making a statement on Baptism, and
we do not find the early church using it in these words anywhere in Scripture. But, it is
“strongest clue” we have. Is that the best that God has revealed for us, His remnant
people, as the foundation of our faith, in regard to the God whom we worship? Let us
look further at some other well known authors.

Questions People have Asked Me, by Francis D. Nichol:


The Mystery of the Trinity
“I confess frankly that I cannot explain how there is but one God and yet three persons
in the Godhead. Nor have I ever heard anyone explain it satisfactorily. Yet I believe it.”
– Questions People have Asked Me, - F.D. Nichol, p.275. 1959. R & H.

Getting Acquainted with God, by Otto H. Christensen:


“The word trinity is not in the Bible, but the plurality of the divine triad can be inferred,
some think, from the Sacred Record from the very beginning.” Getting Acquainted with
God, Otto H. Christensen. p.70. 1970. R & H.

No comment is necessary here. Both authors go on to defend the Trinity doctrine,


neither presenting Biblical evidence for its existence.

Recognised Sources on the origin of the Trinity doctrine


Let us now check whether or not there are any scholarly sources outside of Adventism
who can give us a clear scriptural basis for the trinity doctrine.

The most commonly accessed Encyclopedia on the Internet, Wikipedia, states:


“The consensus of Modern exegetes and theologians is that the Hebrew Bible does
not contain a doctrine of Trinity (even though in the past dogmatic tracts texts like
Gn. 1:26, Gn. 3:22, 11:7, Is. 6:2-3 were cited as proofs). Further, modern exegetes and
theologians agree that the New Testament also does not explicitly contain the
doctrine of the Trinity. The Trinity was thrashed out in debate and treatises as a result
of continuous exploration of the biblical data, and was eventually formulated at the
Council of Nicaea in 325 CE.” Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity (emphasis supplied)
So, a “consensus of Modern exegetes” tell us that both the Old and New Testaments do
not clearly, explicitly, contain the doctrine of the trinity. It came into Christendom from
another source, outside of scripture. Maybe the compilers of Wikipedia were biased,
possibly being non-Christian authors, so we will check some other sources to see what
confirmation we can find.

The Encyclopedia Brittanica:


“Neither the word Trinity nor the explicit doctrine 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’ (Deuteronomy 6:4). . . . The doctrine
developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies. . . . It was
not until the 4th Century that the distinctness of the three and their unity were brought
together in a single orthodox doctrine of one essence and three persons.” Encyclopedia
Britannica, Vol 11, art. Trinity. 15th Edition.

Brittanica says basically the same thing as the Wikipedia. Both these sources tell us that
the idea of the trinity came after scripture, and from sources outside of scripture, and
sources that Seventh-day Adventism has never recognized as inspired, reliable, sources.

The Oxford Companion to the Bible:


“Because the Trinity is such an important part of later Christian doctrine, it is striking
that the term does not appear in the New Testament. Likewise, the developed concept
of three coequal partners in the Godhead found in later creedal formulations
cannot be clearly detected within the confines of the canon.” The Oxford Companion
to the Bible, 1993. Art. Trinity, by D.N. Schowalter. p.782-3. Editors, Bruce M.
Metzger, Michael D.Coogan. (emphasis supplied)

So, what are they saying here? Is it there or not? “Cannot be clearly detected within the
confines of the canon”? Is that a nice way of saying that the Bible does not actually
teach the Trinity doctrine?

The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia:


“Trinity [Lat.,= threefoldness], fundamental doctrine in Christianity, by which
God is considered as existing in three persons. While the doctrine is not
explicitly taught in the New Testament, early Christian communities testified
to a perception that Jesus was God in the flesh; the idea of the Trinity has been
inferred from the Gospel of St. John.” The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia,
Copyright © 2004, Columbia University Press. (emphasis supplied)

Again, we are lacking an explicit teaching of the Trinity doctrine in scripture, and we
can only infer it from the writings of John.

The Encarta Encyclopedia has this to say about the origin of the Trinitarian doctrine:

“Trinity (theology)

In Christian theology, doctrine that God exists as three persons—Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit—who are united in one substance or being. The doctrine is not taught explicitly
in the New Testament, where the word God almost invariably refers to the Father; but
already Jesus Christ, the Son, is seen as standing in a unique relation to the Father,
while the Holy Spirit is also emerging as a distinct divine person.
The term trinitas was first used in the 2nd century, by the Latin theologian Tertullian,
but the concept was developed in the course of the debates on the nature of Christ.
In the 4th century, the doctrine was finally formulated; using terminology still
employed by Christian theologians, the doctrine taught the coequality of the persons of
the Godhead. ... For an adequate understanding of the trinitarian conception of
God, the distinctions among the persons of the Trinity must not become so sharp
that there seems to be a plurality of gods, nor may these distinctions be swallowed
up in an undifferentiated monism.” – Encarta. Art. Trinity. (emphasis supplied)

The question begs to be asked, can we base our faith purely on inference alone? If it is a
fundamental doctrine in Christianity, it should surely have enough evidence to have
actually become a doctrine! Read on.

The Encyclopedia of Religion:


“Exegetes and theologians today are in agreement that the Hebrew Bible does not
contain a doctrine of the Trinity, even though it was customary in past dogmatic
tracts on the Trinity to cite texts like Genesis 1:26, “Let us make humanity in our image,
after our likeness”(see also Gn. 3:22, 11:7, Is. 62-3) as proof of plurality in God.” -
Encyclopedia of Religion, Art. Trinity, Volume 15, page 54, 1987. (emphasis supplied)

Further on we read;

“Further, exegetes and theologians agree that the New Testament also does not
contain an explicit doctrine of the trinity.” (Ibid)

In the next a paragraph it says regarding ‘trinity language’;

“In the New Testament there is no reflective consciousness of the metaphysical nature
of God (“imminent trinity”), nor does the New Testament contain the technical
language of later doctrine (hupostasis, ousia, substantia, subsistentia, prosopon,
persona).”… “While it is incontestable that the doctrine cannot be established on
scriptural evidence alone, its origins may legitimately be sought in the Bible, not in
the sense of “proof-texting” or of finding metaphysical principles, but because the Bible
is the authoritative record of God’s redemptive relationship with humanity.” (Ibid)

“What the scriptures narrate as the activity of God among us, which is confessed in
creeds and celebrated in liturgy, is the wellspring of later trinitarian doctrine.” (Ibid)

The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology:


“Primitive Christianity did not have an explicit doctrine of the Trinity such as
was subsequently elaborated in the creeds.” - The New International Dictionary
of New Testament Theology. Art. Trinity.

These standard works all seem to agree – something is fundamentally wrong, when the
Bible doesn’t teach something, it must have come from somewhere! To have come at a
later time in the creeds of Christendom is not enough, for they come too late! The
Canon was compiled before that, and logically, anything after that which was not given
through the gift of prophecy can only be invented by man, either as traditions or as false
teachings. Which is it going to be? Reading on, we find this interesting piece;

The International Standard Bible Dictionary:


“The doctrine of the Trinity lies in Scripture in solution; when it is crystallized from its
solvent it does not cease to be Scriptural, but only comes into clearer view. Or, to speak
without figure, the doctrine of the Trinity is given to us in Scripture, not in
formulated definition, but in fragmentary allusions; when we assemble the
disjectamembra into their organic unity, we are not passing from Scripture, but entering
more thoroughly into the meaning of Scripture.” The International Standard Bible
Dictionary, Art. Trinity. (emphasis supplied).

“Fragmentary allusions” – I will leave the reader to define the word “Allusion”, for to
allude to something, it really needs to have been found and defined beforehand.

The Trinity – getting to the source


Let us now go to the authority which states that it is the source of the idea, the Roman
Catholic Church, and see if the definition found there has any Biblical basis.

“The trinity of God is defined by the Church as the belief that in God are three persons
who subsist in one nature. The belief as so defined was reached only in the 4th and 5th
centuries AD and hence is not explicitly and formally a biblical belief. The trinity of
persons within the unity of nature is defined in terms of ‘person’ and ‘nature’ which are
Gk philosophical terms; actually the terms do not appear in the Bible. The trinitarian
definitions arose as the result of long controversies in which these terms and others
such as ‘essence’ and ‘substance’ were erroneously applied to God by some
theologians.” Dictionary of the Bible, by John L. McKenzie, S.J. p.899.
(emphasis supplied)

This Roman Catholic source is clear as to the origin of the trinity doctrine. We could
continue, with many more quotations to clarify the issue, but, to any unbiased reader the
evidence is clear. Scripture does not clearly present the idea of the trinity doctrine, it is a
doctrine which came after the canon of Scripture was closed, developed in the 4th and
5th centuries. Inspiration was obviously not involved in the formulation of the doctrine.

The New Catholic Encyclopedia puts it this way;


“The doctrine of the Holy Trinity is not taught in the OT. In the NT the oldest
evidence is in the Pauline epistles, especially 2 Cor 13:13 and 1 Cor 12:4-6)”
(New Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume 14 page 306, ‘Trinity, Holy (in the Bible)

Here is a point blank denial of the trinity doctrine being found in the Old Testament.
This is even though some trinitarians maintain that there is evidence of it there. Notice
here that what is said to be found in the New Testament is not the trinity doctrine itself
but “evidence” of it. As we shall now see, the same is said with regard to this teaching
being found in the gospels, as Moon, Whidden, & Reese stated above.

The encyclopaedia continues;


“In the Gospels, evidence of the trinity is found explicitly only in the baptismal
statement.” (Ibid)

In closing this brief search for a Biblical trinity, we would like the reader to consider the
following statements; the first from the well known Richard Dawkins; so that you may
consider how non-Christians look at the professedly Christian world, and its definition
of God.

“Rivers of medieval ink, not to mention blood, have been squandered over the ‘mystery’
of the Trinity, and in suppressing deviations such as the Arian heresy. Arius of
Alexandria, in the fourth century AD, denied that Jesus was consubstantial (i.e. of the
same substance or essence) with God. What on earth could that possibly mean, you are
probably asking? Substance? What ‘substance’? What exactly do you mean by ‘essence’?
‘Very little’ seems the only reasonable reply. Yet the controversy split Christendom down
the middle for a century, and the Emperor Constantine ordered that all copies of Arius’s
book should be burned. Splitting Christendom by splitting hairs – such has ever been the
way of theology.

Do we have one God in three parts, or three Gods in one? The Catholic Encyclopedia
clears up the matter for us, in a masterpiece of theological close reasoning:

In the unity of the Godhead there are three Persons, the Father, the Son, and the
Holy Spirit, these Three Persons being truly distinct one from another. Thus, in the
words of the Athanasian Creed: ‘the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy
Spirit is God, and yet there are not three Gods but one God.’

As if that were not clear enough, the Encyclopedia quotes the third century theologian St
Gregory the Miracle Worker:

There is therefore nothing created, nothing subject to another in the Trinity: nor is
there anything that has been added as though it once had not existed, but had
entered afterwards: therefore the Father has never been without the Son, nor the
Son without the Spirit: and this same Trinity is immutable and unalterable forever.

Whatever miracles may have earned St Gregory his nickname, they were not miracles of
honest lucidity. His words convey the characteristically obscurantist flavour of theology,
which – unlike science or most other branches of human scholarship – has not moved on
in eighteen centuries. Thomas Jefferson, as so often, got it right when he said, ‘Ridicule is
the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be
distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the
trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks, calling themselves the priests of
Jesus.’” Dawkins, Richard. The God Delusion, p.34-35. 2006. Bantam Press.

The second illustration is from a well known Anglican Bible scholar, David Pawson, in
his Video series entitled “The Challenge of Islam to Christians”. In this fascinating
series, Pawson makes the observation that:

“We say that God is three persons, and yet you must not call God ‘them’ you call them
‘Him.’ And yet the trinity is one of the biggest blockages, not just to Muslims, but to
hosts of people. They say, ‘I can’t understand that. How can God be three, in one, at the
same time?’ We are neither polytheistic, which is the belief in many gods, nor are we
monotheistic, which is the belief in one person called God. We are triune-theistic, and we
have somehow got to get that across. … And then when we get to God the Holy Spirit,
this really is confusing. The two things that divide Christianity from every other religion,
are the Deity of Christ and the personality of the Holy Spirit. What a complicated faith to
confront people with. And then admission to Christianity is so complicated. It involves
moral, verbal, and ritual action. It involves four basic steps. You repent of your sins to
God the Father. You believe in God the Son. You receive God the Spirit, and you are
baptised in water in the name of the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit. And then you’ve
only got started. How much more complicated our faith is!” – David Pawson, Video 2,
“The Challenge of Islam to Christianity.”

From the above two academic sources, one Christian and one atheist, it is evident that
the professedly Christian world have done what we have been forbidden to do. They
have added to the Word of God, and this is the first point upon which the Trinity
doctrine falls. Evidence from scripture has not been forthcoming, for we cannot base
any doctrine on purely one “proof text”, Matthew 28:19. It is clear that the beauty of the
gospel has been marred and well nigh obliterated by the Trinity, as pointed out by
Trinitarian author David Pawson. May we all heed the words of the wise: “Do not add
to His Words, lest He reprove you and you be found a liar.” Proverbs 30:6.

We should know what we believe and why we believe it, and we should be able to give an
intelligent reason for our religious convictions.

“Believers are not to rest in suppositions and ill-defined ideas of what constitutes
truth. Their faith must be firmly founded upon the word of God so that when the
testing time shall come and they are brought before councils to answer for their faith
they may be able to give a reason for the hope that is in them, with meekness and
fear.” – Ellen G. White, Vol 5, Testimonies, p.708. (emphasis supplied)

We are to have an intelligent faith, and an intelligent knowledge of our God. I believe that
the evidence in scripture fits the non-trinitarian model in a far more consistent way than the
Trinitarian model. From the short review above, it is evident that God has not revealed
Himself to be a trinity in His Word. No one has found one clear text in Scripture to prove
the doctrine. By this I mean one text (at least) that shows that God is composed of three
co-equal, co-eternal persons or beings; composed of the same substance. Scholars
around the world have acknowledged for years that the trinity doctrine is not found in
Scripture but is a later addition.

God does not expect us to believe something that defies the very logic he has imbued us
with. God is a God of order and consistency, He never expects His children to believe
something without clear evidence.

If you have any comments, criticism or thoughts on this article, please feel free to write
to the author. For a wider variety of articles, books and DVD’s dealing with the same
topic, and its ramifications, please request our “Weight of Evidence” catalogue.

Blair Andrew.

Truth vs Tradition. PO Box 97, Eagle Heights, 4271, Qld. Australia.

email: truthvstradition@mail.com

Você também pode gostar