Is God One or Three?

“You believe that God is one; well and good. Even the demons believe that

—and tremble with fear.” The NET Bible (Jas 2:19).

God is One! So reads the NASB, NET, ASV, BBE, Darby, ESV, HCSB, Weymouth, YLT, CBE, AMP, RSV, NRSV, Lexham, and NAB. Other translations read "there is one God" or something similar. The underlying Greek clearly allows for both, but context is always king. The word in Greek is eis, which is a cardinal number meaning one (1)! While there are certain texts which translate eis as alone, only, or even first, the word simply means one! It can also be translated by the word "single" or the preposition "a" which is used before nouns and noun phrases that denote a single but unspecified person or thing, ie. a region; a person. That it has the meaning of one singular person, or being, in the text above, is in sync with the sh’ma as recorded at Deut 6:4, "Hear, O Israel! The LORD is our God, the LORD is one! (NASB). There, the Hebrew word is echad, also a cardinal number. Like eis, it may be translated in a variety of ways depending on context, but the primary meaning is ONE!

Although it can be understood in the sense that there is only one God, even in Deut 6:4, it is equally true that, that one God has a name... Yahweh! This fact precludes any thought that He is plural in nature, or that “one” means anything other than "one person"! Also, He is called not only by His Name, but also by the term elohim (God) using singular personal pronouns thousands of times in the Hebrew Scriptures. This should be of great significance to anyone who understands the importance of words as a means of communication.

I am by no means a master of the English language, but I understand this: I must choose the correct words to convey my meaning. If I use the pronouns he, she, it, him, his, my, mine, etc; I expect to be understood as referring to a single person, place, or thing.  These pronouns as used in the the Biblical texts all support the idea of one person or one thing, it's not complicated! If the Scriptures were written for our benefit, for our instruction (2Tim 3:16), and they are truly inspired by God, it would be inappropriate and unseemly to use words that cause confusion. Certainly, “God is not a God of confusion, but of peace.” (1 Cor 14:33)

Further, the sh’ma was endorsed by Jesus himself in Mark 12:29, where he is asked by a scribe of the law "which is the greatest of all commandments?". Jesus then quotes Deut 6:4, and notice how it reads in the NASB:

“Jesus answered, "The foremost is, 'HEAR, O ISRAEL! THE LORD OUR GOD IS ONE LORD ;”  --Mark 12:29 (NASB)

He (God Almighty) is one Lord, not two or three!

.

The whole of the bible proclaims the central truth, that God is One! Jews and Christians both claim to be monotheists, but the  majority of christianity has adopted and long held the notion that monotheism can be supported by the view that God is three persons in One being. Or “three who’s in one what” as one modern day theologian has stated. This idea is really a stretch from what the Bible actually teaches. There can be no distinction between a person and a being. It breaks every rule of logic and of language!

The apostle James writes his letter to "the 12 tribes in the dispersion" (James 1:1), very similar to Peter who writes to "elect exiles of the dispersion" (1Pet 1:1), both referring to Jewish people; yet these letters are clearly written to christian believers. My argument is that ALL christians in the early church, Jew and Gentile alike, were taught from the Hebrew Scriptures which adamantly demanded that God is One Person.

Acts 15 records the first church council, long before Nicea, in which the church leaders led by Peter and James, excused the gentile believers from being circumcised and, presumably, from all the "traditions of the fathers". But this very exclusion strongly suggests that the gentile church was instructed in Torah (the Law of Moses), as well as the Writings and the Prophets. While certain “traditions” may not have been incumbent on gentile christians, the all important creed of the Jews from Deut 6:4 remained central in the teaching of the Jewish christians, and certainly would not have been bypassed in the instruction of gentile believers!

But James and Peter are not the only New Testament writers to attest to the unity of God as one single Person. In Rom 3:30 Paul speaks about God being the God of both Jew and Greek and says, “Since God is one, he will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith."  Again, a strong reference to the sh’ma of Deut 6:4. Here, it should perhaps be understood that Paul means it primarily in the sense that "God alone" is God, but this does not negate the reality that He is One Person. At 1Cor 8:5-6 Paul writes:

  “For even if there are so-called gods whether in heaven or on earth, as indeed there are many gods and many lords, yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him. (NASB - emphasis mine)

Paul states that the one true God is "the Father"! This underscores what I've been saying, that God is one single person!

In Matt 19:17 Jesus himself is recorded as saying "...there is only one who is good". Who is that one? Can there be any doubt that Jesus' reference was to God the Father? This is the fundamental belief of every Jew. There is no God but one, and He is the One singular Person,Yahweh, the Father (the creator of all). Although we can’t rely on the veracity of everything the pharisee’s are reported to have said, there can be little doubt about their correctness on this point! The pharisee’s knew well that

"...We have only one Father, God himself." - John 8:41 (NET)  

Also, take note of Paul’s words in Eph 4:4-6:

   "There is one body and one Spirit, just as you too were called to the one hope of your calling, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all." (NET - emphasis mine)

In this verse, Paul is not ambiguous about who the "one God" is; He is the Father. But who is the one Lord? Well, this should be apparent also, he is Jesus! And if words mean anything, this one fact should also be apparent: one body, one Spirit, one hope, one faith, and one baptism are not the same thing! If that is true, then neither are one lord and one God the same person. Further, if there is one God and He is the Father, then the one lord is not the Father, nor can he be God. They are not the same!

The Greek language has only one word for “lord”. It is kurios. (see comment on this for correction) Therefore, its referent must be understood from context. This fact has led to some confusion. At times, the New Testament writers refer to God as lord, and other times the term is a reference to Christ Jesus as lord. The Lord God has always been THE Lord of all, the Lord God Almighty, but Jesus was given the title of Lord and Christ by God!

“For David did not ascend into heaven, but he himself says,

   ‘The Lord said to my lord,

   “Sit at my right hand

   until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet.” ’

Therefore let all the house of Israel know beyond a doubt that God has made this Jesus whom you crucified both Lord and Christ.” -- emphasis mine, The NET Bible (Acts 2:29–36)

The reference in verse 34 is from Psalm 110:1 where two distinct Hebrew words are translated as lord. The first (Lord) is from the Hebrew adonai (pronounced adonay” which is always used for God Almighty, the Lord. The second lord is a variation, adoni (pronounced adonee) found 195 times in the Old Testament, and always referring to a human master (lord). This distinction is not clear in Strong’s Concordance or the Greek language, but the NASB correctly makes the distinction using capital “L” for the first Lord, and small “l” for the second. It is the Lord God Yahweh who says to his Messiah (David’s lord), the human lord, “sit at my right hand”!

   “As a result God exalted him

   and gave him the name

   that is above every name,

   so that at the name of Jesus

   every knee will bow

   —in heaven and on earth and under the earth—

   and every tongue confess

   that Jesus Christ is Lord (should be small “l”)

   to the glory of God the Father. -- emphasis mine, The NET Bible (Php 2:9–11)

It is the Lord God who exalts Jesus (the lord Messiah), and this exaltation is meant to bring glory to God the Father! How far the christian church has fallen from its Judaic roots and understanding of who God and Jesus are as proclaimed in God’s holy book, the Bible.  

Jesus said he came not to destroy the Torah but to fulfill it! In other words, he came to correctly interpret and act it out. Look again at the primary text:

“You believe that God is one; well and good. Even the demons believe that

—and tremble with fear.” The NET Bible (Jas 2:19).

James point here is that if you profess this fundamental teaching that God is One, as all orthodox Jews did and continue to do, as Jesus did, and as all christians -Jew and gentile alike - are called upon to do, then you are doing what is good and right! Monotheism has always been and continues to be the foundation of Hebrew theology, and to believe correctly about God -  that He is one Divine Person and there is no other besides Him is the right way, the orthodox way, of believing. And notice that he says, even demons have this understanding and belief about God - they know it to be true - yet they tremble, presumably out of fear, because they know what their end will be. Correct doctrine by itself is of no value without faith, and a proper  response to that doctrine. And yet, who can deny that good doctrine is vital to the outworking of our faith?

I hope this short article will spark some deeper interest in you to research the matter for yourself. For me, it has been over six years since I came to this new understanding (which is really the old), and each day since, I never cease to be amazed at how clear the Bible really is on this subject. Yet, most christians have a blind spot on the issue of the trinity, as I did for many years. My prayer is that many more will begin to read their bibles with “new eyes”. I will end this writing with the words of Paul in Eph 1:17-23:

“...that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give to you a spirit of wisdom and of revelation in the knowledge of Him.  I pray that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened, so that you will know what is the hope of His calling, what are the riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints,  and what is the surpassing greatness of His power toward us who believe. These are in accordance with the working of the strength of His might  which He brought about in Christ, when He raised Him from the dead and seated Him at His right hand in the heavenly places,  far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come.  And He put all things in subjection under His feet, and gave Him as head over all things to the church,  which is His body, the fullness of Him who fills all in all.” (NASB)


Please check one of the reaction boxes below. Share you thoughts on this article by posting a comment.

Truth Or Tradition?

Read Acts 2:14-26

The first sermon preached by the christian church was delivered by Peter on the Day of Pentecost. When the gift of holy spirit was poured out on the faithful 120 in the upper room, it was one of the great turning points in the history of the world! And being the very first sermon it should be of enormous significance to anyone who is seriously interested in knowing truth. The fact is, we cannot possibly hope to understand the church and its message unless we understand what these early christian brothers believed and taught.

When I was in Bible College back in the 80’s, I served as an intern for a church that hosted a sizeable group of refugees from Laos. Every Sunday for about 6 months I taught a class on Sunday mornings to these wonderful people who had escaped the tyranny of the Laotian regime, many of them losing loved ones on their journey to freedom. I’ll always cherish the memory of those brave souls who endured so much hardship and heartbreak to find freedom in our country. Some of them were genuinely converted, but many others were just blending in and attended the Sunday classes just to be part of the community.

I share this with you because in the relationships I established with them I often had the opportunity to inquire about their customs and beliefs. Invariably, I found that whether it was a practice involving a wedding ceremony, or a ritual performed as part of their animistic religious beliefs (which some still practiced even though they claimed to be christian), they were unable to explain WHY they did what they did, or why they believed what they said they believed! It all came down to “tradition” which was handed down from one generation to the next. Hmmm. Not so different from many good church going people today I think.

A while back I read an amusing story ( I cannot recall the exact source) about a young woman who had a certain way of preparing a roast for christmas dinner. Everyone loved her roast, and she was meticulous about preparing it in a particular manner. Her recipe required cutting the roast in two pieces and placing the halves in separate roasting pans. When asked why she did this she replied, “I don’t know, it’s how momma always did it.” Some years later she discovered the truth about why her momma alway cut the roast in two pieces. It seems that momma just didn’t have a big enough pot in which to put the whole roast!

These anecdotes illustrate how powerful and deceptive tradition can be!

IS GOD A TRINITY?

Now, let’s look at Peter’s sermon in the book of Acts and compare it to the prevailing teachings of today’s church. Notice first that after pointing to Scripture and indicating the source behind the strange behavior of those gathered, Peter begins to speak about Jesus and his relationship to God (v22). Did Peter stand up and declare Jesus to be God, the 2nd person of the trinity, or God the Son? No! Peter, inspired by holy spirit, apparently had no concept of the trinity! If so, certainly this would have been an excellent place for it to be made known. Instead, he refers to Jesus as “a man attested to you by God”, and through whom God did many signs and wonders, and a man who was crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men, and finally, who God raised up from the dead (vv22-24)!

Nothing Peter says here supports the tradition of a Triune God. In fact, none of it makes a bit of sense if Jesus were in fact God, or even if Peter supposed him to be God. But, if Jesus was, as Peter asserts, a man attested (affirmed, proved) by God”, then it makes perfect sense. And further, I see that it brings all of the Scriptures concerning Jesus and God into perfect clarity. The plain language used here makes it impossible to misunderstand Peter’s sense of who God and Jesus are in relation to each other. Plainly read, Peter understands that God is not a man, but He works through men (v22). Also, God could never be crucified or killed, however, He alone has the power to reverse death by resurrection (vv23-24)! Then notice in v36 that it is “God” who “made him (Jesus) both Lord and Christ.” Who is this God who “raised” Jesus from the dead, and “made” him both Lord and Christ”? Clearly, it is not Jesus who is God!

This is clarified even further when Peter quotes from Psalm 110:1, “The LORD said to my lord. ‘Sit at My right hand until I make your enemies your footstool’.” (vv34-35)! In the Hebrew Scriptures, the first LORD is adonai and the second is adoni clearly showing the difference between God and a human lord! This cannot be seen in our English translations, but in Hebrew, adonai is always used of God, where adoni is never used of God! The LORD (YaHWeH - God Almighty) said to my Lord (David’s lord, the Messiah - Jesus)! This is not God talking to God, but God speaking to the human Messiah!

But there’s something else… something not written here, but relevant to the portion of Scripture Peter quotes in verses 17-21. Peter’s explanation of what was happening was “this is what was uttered by the prophet Joel” (v16), then he quotes from Joel 2:28-32. What is not quoted is v27 which says “You shall know that I am in the midst of Israel, and that I am the Lord your God and there is none else.” Did you catch that? I am the LORD your God and there is no other. The word “LORD” is Yahweh, the name of God the Father, while God is elohim (o theos in the Greek). It is literally “I am Yahweh your God and there is no other”!

So then, there is only one who is God, and he is Yahweh! It is this God, Yahweh, who declares, “I will pour out of My Spirit on all flesh”(v17). The reference to “My Spirit”, everyone agrees, is a reference to the Holy Spirit. But is this Holy Spirit a person, or is it the gift of God’s own presence and power? The language of “pour out of My Spirit” seems to be an awkward and inappropriate way of speaking about another person. Perhaps it’s because neither Joel nor Peter understood the Spirit as being a 3rd person of a trinity! Perhaps it’s because the Spirit is the gift of God’s personal presence and power to the church - an impartation of God’s own character and nature to those who believe!.

DO WE CHRISTIANS GO TO HEAVEN WHEN WE DIE?

One last important observation in Peter’s sermon is how he speaks of David in relation to Jesus. After quoting from the prophet Joel he quotes from Psalm 16:8-11 (vv25-28). In this Psalm, Peter asserts that David is speaking  prophetically about Messiah Jesus where God promises that he (Jesus) will not rot in the grave, but be resurrected back to life. Peter makes it clear, and is in fact “confident”, that David is not speaking about himself, and points to the fact that he both died and was buried and his tomb is “with us to this day” (v29). Peter declares that David did not rise from the dead, nor did he ascend into heaven. Understand this! David did not ascend into heaven! But wait, I thought all saints went to heaven when they die. Haven’t we been taught this from childhood? I know that some will claim that Old Testament saints went to paradise and Jesus emptied paradise during the three days his body was in the tomb. But this cannot be so because the supposed emptying of paradise would then have taken place prior to the Day of Pentecost. Therefore, David and all Old Testament saints would have already left paradise and been taken to heaven before the time Peter delivered his sermon. But Peter says, NO, David was NOT in heaven!

If not in heaven, then where? Just as Peter says, the dead are in their graves, or tombs. The bible uses the metaphor of “sleep” to describe believers who have died. This is a fitting description because just as those who experience undisturbed sleep have no awareness of time or anything else, so those who are dead - they are awaiting resurrection from the dead! So, David did not go to heaven but remained in the grave awaiting resurrection, which he will experience along with every believer, at the 2nd coming of Christ!

CONCLUSION

If Peter and the early church did not believe God to be “three in one” or that the believing dead go to heaven when they die, how did these doctrines come to have such a powerful hold over the church? The answer is tradition! Both the doctrines of the Trinity and of the dead going to heaven when they die, took root in the early centuries after the death of the apostles. Over time, they have been passed down from generation to generation with the result that very few question their veracity, or even suspect that they may be unbiblical. Yes, some can quote Scriptures that seem to support the traditional views, but in fact, these so called supporting texts are often taken out of context or misquoted entirely.

So, here in the very first sermon preached by the apostle Peter, after the holy spirit was poured out, we find a rather conspicuous contradiction between the early and modern church teaching! Here, Peter sets forth the unequivocal doctrine that there is one God and He is a single person; that there is one lord, Messiah, and he is the man Jesus; that the resting place for all at death is the grave, and that they will rise at the return of Messiah Jesus!  I ask you dear reader, to examine this for yourself. I don’t claim to have special knowledge about the bible… far from it. I only point to what the bible clearly says without redefining words or pulling Scriptures from their context. Compare this to what is taught today and ask yourself why? Then, if you are sincere about knowing truth, regardless of the consequences, ask God our Father to help you read the Scriptures with “new eyes”. I know, for me, the bible makes much more sense than it did when I tried to make certain passages “fit” traditional teaching.

I believe the bible says what it means, and means what it says… do you?

If this article has been helpful in any way, please share it!

Is It Really So Difficult to Believe?

During my morning devotions today I read through the first two chapters of Philippians. As is my practice, I  highlighted several verses and phrases which stood out to me, and made notes. The first thing I read was, of course, Paul's greeting. Here is what he says in verse 2 of the greeting to the Philippian christians:

"Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ." -- Philippians 1:2 (ESV)

Paul is clear about his understanding of God and Jesus. This is not unlike the greeting in all of his other New Testament epistles. He consistently refers to God and Jesus as separate; one who is God and the other who is Lord. An introduction like this would be inappropriate if he thought Jesus was God. If that was his understanding, He certainly doesn't convey the message very well!

Are we really to believe that Paul was purposefully vague about the Trinity so that later generations could have this truth revealed to them? No. Paul clearly understood WHO God is. To Paul, God is the Father,  the only God, and Jesus is His Son, the Christ (Messiah), who is Lord, but not equal in any sense. (see 1Cor 8:5-6; 1Tim 2:5) The Bible simply does not support the teaching of a Triune God, or the dual nature of Christ as both human and yet fully God. All scholars agree that NO Bible Scripture explicitly teaches any facet of the Trinitarian doctrine, it is understood that it came to its apex after the 3rd century Council of Nicaea, presided over by the Roman Emperor Constantine. History clearly shows that the trinitarian view of God was not accepted by all believers, and even rejected several times in later years by other Councils.

Brothers and sisters, the doctrine of the Trinity is at odds with the plain words of the Bible. Why is this so difficult to see and understand? Having been there myself, for almost 40 years, I still have trouble wrapping my brain around a reasonable answer to this question. How did I miss it all those years? I think the truth may be that I didn't miss it at all, I simply chose to ignore it. And, I think also, that this may be true for most common people who claim to love and believe the Bible. We read passages like this and wonder; how does this reconcile with the teaching that Jesus is God? But then we satisfy ourselves with the standard arguments we've always heard; "it's a mystery", or "you have to take it by faith", then go on as though it didn't say what it says.

I thank God that I have been able to perceive reality, the reality that is clearly stated in Scripture but overlooked by so many, for so many years, about the true nature of God and his Son, Jesus. There is no mystery! The truth is apparent if we will read the Bible for what it says and not for what we've been taught. And I am encouraged greatly to know that there are many others out there, just like me, who also embrace this truth.

The thought that comes to me over and again, is what Jesus said when he spoke to the woman at the well in John 4. He said,

"...You will know the truth, and the truth will set you free!" -- John 8:32 (ESV)

I thank God that I was freed from the curse of sin through faith in Jesus! But the truth, as clearly revealed in Scripture, has enlightened me to the fact that, having become a christian, I also became bound to an error. Further, this error was responsible for a gripping fear that said: "If you don't confess that Jesus is God, you cannot be saved." But I was bound by an ideology that was never taught by Jesus or his early disciples! The Bible does not command us to confess Jesus as God, but as Lord, and that God raised him from the dead! (Rom 10:9-10) Thank God I am no longer bound by that unfounded fear.The truth that the Father alone is truly God has made the Scriptures come alive to me in a new way! I now readily see what the Bible says in certain passages, rather than skimming over verses that just didn't fit what I was taught to believe. The Bible finally makes sense when viewed from this perspective, and I find a cohesion in its message, throughout, that I couldn't find before.

In the passage I mentioned above, Jesus explained to the woman that "God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and in truth." (Jn 4:24) What does this mean? First, I contend that worshipping God in spirit essentially means to worship him from the heart, the inner most being, as opposed to a certain form, ritual, or ceremony (neither this mountain nor in Jerusalem - Jn 4:21). But I also think it means to worship Him in accordance with Jesus' own message. In addition to saying "God is spirit"  he also said "...The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life." (John 6:63) If His words are spirit, it is because they are God's words which He gave to Jesus. They are words of life which God, THE Spirit, gave to Jesus who faithfully spoke them from the heart!

Further, we must worship God in truth! The words "spirit and truth" are combined here to suggest not only that worship must come from the heart, but that it must also be in accordance with Jesus own revelation to us about who God the Father is. It is impossible to obey this command if we fail to understand Jesus own words concerning The Father.

"One of the scribes came and heard them arguing, and recognizing that He had answered them well, asked Him, “What commandment is the foremost of all?”  Jesus answered, “The foremost is, ‘HEAR, O ISRAEL! THE LORD OUR GOD IS ONE LORD; AND YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND, AND WITH ALL YOUR STRENGTH.’ -- Mark 12:28-30 (NASB) 

“But concerning that day or that hour, no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father." --Mk 13:32 (ESV)

"How can you believe, when you receive glory from one another and do not seek the glory that comes from the only God?" -- Jn 5:44 (ESV)

"And this is eternal life, that they know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent." -- Jn 17:3 (ESV)

"Jesus said to her, “Do not cling to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to my brothers and say to them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’ ” -- Jn 20:17 (ESV)

This is but a few of the Scriptures that clearly debunk, from Jesus own perspective, the teaching that God is a Trinity and Jesus is both God and man. When the evidence from the book of Acts and the rest of the New Testament epistles is taken into account, it is overwhelmingly contrary to the teaching of the Trinity!

Brothers and sisters, open your eyes and be free from the bondage of an erroneous doctrine that has ruled over the minds of the christian masses for far too long. May the God of Jesus reveal this truth to you.

The author desires your reaction and comments. Please check one of the reaction boxes below. To share you thoughts, post a comment.

Vain Deceit

Colossians 2:8 (ESV)

See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.

It is assumed, and taught, by many Trinitarians that a group of theologians got together in the 3rd century and solved the riddle. That is, how could Jesus be a man and yet say and do things that only God could; and more importantly, how can we maintain monotheism and still believe in the Godhood of both Jesus and the Father? But does anyone else find it odd that the formulation of this doctrine came three centuries after the death and resurrection of Christ? And further, isn’t it rather suspect that we can find no Biblical illustrations attempting to explain the Trinity such as those which are used today?

Man’s Thoughts

Probably the most well-known illustration used to prove how there could be three distinct persons in One God-Essence is that of water, steam, and ice. The argument is that they are of one substance, but different forms. There are however, numerous problems with this comparison. First, the Trinity doctrine states explicitly that each person of the Trinity is not only distinct from each other, but each are God in themselves, yet forming only One God, not three separate gods; so there is unity in trinity. The water, ice, steam illustration falls short in that water must be altered to form ice or steam. Even though ice and steam retain properties of water, they cannot be called water - they have been altered. In addition, in the Trinity, each Person exists simultaneously, each being fully God, whereas, water can only be in one form at a time - either it is water, steam, or ice - not all three! This may be a good illustration for Modalism, but not the Trinity.

There are other illustrations that have been tried as well. It has been pointed out that each beam of light is made up of three separate rays, the actinic which is invisible, the luminiferous which is visible, and the calorific which gives heat and can be felt but not seen. On the surface, this sounds like an excellent example of the Father who is invisible, the Son who is visible, and the Spirit whose presence can be felt. But again, take notice that all three rays must be present simultaneously in order for it to be light. The actinic ray alone, is not light. All three rays must be present together to make light. In the Trinity, Jesus is fully God, as are the other Persons.

There are more, such as the three leafed clover, the triangle, the egg, or even time - past, present, future - but these are also useless in describing the indescribable Trinity! But what is even more striking to me is that none of these attempts to explain or describe the idea that God is Triune, can be found in the pages of Scripture. In virtually every instance, Scriptures referenced to support the Trinity must be interpreted from a preconceived notion that God is Triune. In other words, you must already believe it is so, then you can infer it from certain Scriptures and construct all sorts of mental sketches to support the veracity of the idea. Every commentary, dictionary, or other resource book I have researched, agree that the doctrine of the Trinity is not found explicitly in Scripture. The assertion is that it is a revealed doctrine, but in reality it is a fabricated doctrine; high sounding words with no substance; an opinion, and nothing more.

So again, we are expected to believe that 3rd century theologians, called together by the Emperor Constantine, put in writing what was already believed and taught by the Christian majority. Nevermind that there are no explicit Scriptures that tell us God is three,while there are 1000’s that clearly describe Him as One, and that He alone is the creator. Nevermind that Jesus did not claim Deity or equality with God in any way, but always affirmed that God was greater than himself, that his authority and power were given to him by God, and that God was not only his Father, but his God. And nevermind that the Holy Spirit does not have a name, and seems to be curiously missing in many of the Scriptures where one would expect him to be if he were an equal member of the Trinity. The council of Nicea, in 325 AD, dealt primarily with advancing the idea of the Deity of Christ. Concerning the 3rd Person of the Trinity, it says only “and we believe in the Holy Spirit”. It took another 100+ years to formulate the Trinity that we know today stating that each Person - Father, Son, and Spirit - are equally God.

God’s Thoughts

The Bible tells a very different story and uses entirely different ideas to illustrate the relationship between the Father and the Son. In John 15, Jesus calls himself the Vine. He refers to the Father as the Gardener, and the disciples are the branches. Notice the figures in this teaching of Jesus. They show exactly the relationship between God, Jesus, and believers. Clearly, the Father and the Son are not of the same nature, or essence. God, the Gardener, planted the vine and cares for it, pruning its branches and so forth. The Vine, Jesus, has his roots in the soil and is of the same substance as the branches. The branches must be “in” the vine in order to bear fruit and be useful. The Vine gives life to the branches but nothing in this illustration attempts to describe a Triune God or that Jesus is himself God, for if that were the case, then every true believer would also be god because we are “in” Christ. John tells us how Jesus could have life in Himself, he says, “For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself.” -John 5:26 (ESV)

Also, consider 2Cor 4:4. Here, Paul says that Christ is the “image” of God. Image is eikon (icon) in the Greek. An icon is an image, a representation of something. We speak of certain persons as being “iconic figures”. The meaning is that these people are representative of something bigger than themselves - a movement, a corporation, etc. Bill Gates, for example, is an iconic figure as the founder of the massive, worldwide Microsoft corporation. When I look at my computer desktop I see icons. Each icon represents a different file or program. Whichever file or program I want to work with, I simply click on the appropriate icon and it takes me there. That’s what Paul meant when he said that Jesus is the image of God; He represents God - He is our way to God. It is this principle precisely that Jesus revealed when he said “I am the way, the truth, and the life; no man comes to the Father but by (or through) me.” An icon is NOT the thing it represents, it gets you to the thing it represents!

Paul also speaks of Jesus as having “the fulness of the Godhead (God-essence, or Deity)” dwelling in him (Col 2:9; 1:19). If Paul believed Jesus was God, the 2nd Person of the Trinity, he would not have to say that the fulness of Deity dwelt in him. This would be already evident. Note that in Col 1:19 that God was pleased to have His fullness dwell in Christ. Paul understands Jesus as one in whom God’s fullness was expressed, and it was God’s plan that it should be that way. This is very different from being God. These are clear and unequivocal statements of Christ's nature. Not "God the Son", the 2nd Person of a Triune God, or any such metaphysical theory, but a man begotten by God, in whose character, actions, and words, we see the invisible God.

The Bible does not contain illustrations used to describe God’s nature as being “three in one”; because it never states that God is Triune in nature. But Paul warned us against falling prey to “philosophy and empty deception according to the traditions of men” (Col 2:8). The KJV uses the phrase “vain deceit”. Beginning in Paul’s day, and taking root in the creeds of the 3rd and 4th centuries, the Church has been led astray by deceitful vanities which have no ground in Scripture.

Brothers and sisters, truth matters! It’s time to take a serious look at the doctrines we have so blindly accepted and see the truth we’ve been missing!

The Son of God and The Gates of Hell

Matthew 16:13-21 (ESV)

Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, “Who do people say that the Son of Man is?” And they said, “Some say John the Baptist, others say Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” Then he strictly charged the disciples to tell no one that he was the Christ. From that time Jesus began to show his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and on the third day be raised.

This passage of Scripture represents a turning point in the ministry of Jesus, as well as one of the most controversial, and debated of His sayings. The turning point comes in verse 21 when Jesus began to talk to his disciples about his death and subsequent resurrection. The controversy and debate arise from the question of what is meant by "on this rock I will build my church." But it seems to me also that even more controversial and debatable is the question, what did Peter mean when he said "You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God" , and what are "the gates of hell".

Peter's Confession

When asked by Jesus, "who do men say that I am?" the answers were varied, but generally considered him a prophet. But when he said "who do you say that I am?", Peter spoke up with confidence and conviction, "You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God". The fact that “you” is plural in the text indicates that Jesus did not direct his question to Peter alone; however, true to his impetuous nature, Peter is the one who opened his mouth and blurted out the answer… inspired by God as it turns out! The traditional interpretation of this phrase attributes Peter as recognizing Jesus full Divinity. In other words, Peter recognized Jesus as not merely the Christ, but "the Son of the Living God" hence, God the Son. But this interpretation dangerously reads into the text something that is not there - a preconceived notion based on the accepted doctrine of the Trinity. There is no ground whatsoever for inverting the title Son of God into God the Son… the Bible never does it!

These titles, Son of God and God the Son, are not the same and, in fact, have completely different meanings.  In the first place, the title “Christ” is the equivalent of the Hebrew Messiah, meaning "king, anointed one, or chosen one". Christ is not descriptive of Deity, but representative of Deity! The Hebrew kings of old were messiahs; they were anointed of God, chosen to represent God to the people. Secondly, in Old Testament passages such as 2 Sam 7:14; Psa 2:7; and Psa 89:4,26-28, the concept of “son” is also synonymous with Messiah, and this is surely what Peter meant when he called Jesus the Son of the Living God! As Christ, he is the anointed one of God; God’s representative, the coming one of promise. The title Son of God means essentially the same thing but more fully expresses his unique relationship to the Father as the only begotten of God. Neither of these designations though are descriptive of, or even suggestive of Deity.

Further, note how the parallel passages read. Luke 9:20 says, "You are the Christ of God", while  Mark 8:29 says simply, "You are the Christ". To ascribe Deity to Jesus because of the addition of the term Son of God in this passage is a leap from the clear meaning of the text. Also, it should not be overlooked that Jesus blessed Peter for his bold confession saying "flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father in heaven." Do we really want to argue with what God revealed to Peter? Peter's revelation was consistent with the Scriptures regarding the identity of Messiah, and nowhere does the Bible teach that Messiah would be God, 2nd Person of a Trinity, or otherwise. And so, the Father fully revealed to Peter the truth about His Son, and Jesus required no further explanation from him. The teaching of progressive revelation, that God revealed himself as triune in nature over time, does not serve truth, but only gives license to theologians to change the text and attribute their own twisted meaning to Scripture.

One last observation should be pointed out here. In verse 20 Jesus himself affirms his identity as “the Christ” and charges the disciples not to make it known. If in fact the phrase “Son of the living God” goes beyond the meaning of Christ and attributes Deity to Jesus, wouldn’t that have been the focus of Jesus charge of silence to His disciples? After all, how much more of a shock would it be to learn that they were in the presence of Almighty God in the flesh? Yes, I think Jesus would have told them not to tell anyone he was God, because they certainly were not ready for such a revelation yet. But that’s not what he did, he charged them not to tell anyone he was the Christ! Even Trinitarian scholars know that the disciples had no concept of a Triune God at this time. It is not sound reasoning to think that God the Father revealed to Peter that Jesus was also God! Let’s wake up! Jesus, by his own admission, is the Christ, the Messiah, God’s anointed One; all synonymous with “Son of God”! I think it is much better to agree with Jesus. Let God be  God, and let Jesus be the Son of God!

Who/What is the Rock?

Jesus answered Peter's "You are the Christ" with "You are Peter". In Greek, Peter is "Petros", meaning rock, or stone. But when Jesus said "and on this rock" he used the word "petra" rather than "Petros". Petra is the word for a large rock, as found in Jesus parable about the man who built his house on the rock, rather than on sand. (Matt 7:24). The question here is "to what or who was Jesus referring when he said "upon this rock I will build my church"? Was the rock Peter himself, or something else?

Generally, there are three schools of thought regarding this issue. The Roman Catholic Church maintains that Peter himself is the rock to whom Jesus referred. As such, apostolic succession is based on the person of Peter as the first pope. While there is some Scriptural support for the idea of Peter being the rock, there is no Scriptural evidence for a succession of pope's. Another way to interpret "upon this rock" is that Jesus Himself is the rock to whom he referred. Again, where there is Scriptural support for Jesus being the foundational rock upon which the church is built, it's difficult to justify this meaning in context. It's an abrupt change of direction in language; almost as if he acknowledges Peter as a small rock then points to himself as the big rock saying, “and on this rock (me) I will build my church”. The better interpretation, and the one generally favored by most evangelical Christians, is that the rock upon which the church is built is the truth revealed by God, and confessed by Peter that, Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God.

The Church is founded on the confession that Jesus is God's Son, the Christ, and that He was sent to show us the Father and ultimately become the sacrifice for our sin. No one comes to the Father except through Jesus. It is confessing with the mouth that He is Lord, and believing with the heart that God raised him from the dead that affects our salvation. When I first became a Christian I was told that my sin offended God and that Jesus died to satisfy that offence. Jesus, as God's Son, was sacrificed on my behalf so that I might have a relationship with God through him. The doctrine of the Trinity was taught later. At no time was I ever told I must believe that Jesus is God in order to be saved! And I submit that it is the same for multitudes. It is after entrance into the the Church by confession of Jesus as the Son of God that the language of Scripture is changed so that Jesus becomes "God the Son", 2nd Person of the Trinity, equal to God the Father in every way yet not a second God but somehow, mystically, three persons in One God. But in spite of the fact that teaching about the person of Jesus and his relationship to God has been distorted by Greek philosophy introduced into the Church in the early years, the Church continues to grow on the basis of Peter's confession.

The Gates of Hell

This church, which Jesus identifies as "my church", will not be stopped or hindered by the "gates of hell". This is good news no matter how you interpret, but to what exactly was Jesus referring?

I was reading an introduction to a study on the book of Acts prior to writing this article in which the author referred to Matthew 16:18. His sense of the meaning was that the devil and his armies would have no power to hinder the advancement of the Church. In other words, that author, like the majority of the protestant christian church, understands “gates of hell” as referring to the powers, or forces, of the devil. The fact that Jesus assures us that they will not prevail is a strong affirmation of his power, and our ultimate victory. This is a wonderful truth! However, though I am well aware that we christians are engaged in warfare against the forces of evil (Eph 6), and we have power over them in the name of Jesus, I don’t believe this passage has that intended meaning. Yet, in my nearly 40 years of being a Christian, I can’t recall a single sermon or teaching to the contrary!

I began writing this on a Sunday evening and just that morning our associate pastor made reference to Matthew 16:18 in his sermon. His take on it was a little different. To him, the gates are not representative of power, they are not weapons. Therefore, in Christ, we have the power to break down and overcome every obstacle that would stand in our way of advancing the Church. We have been assured of victory as we storm the gates of hell. I agree that gates are not weapons, but once again, the central idea in his interpretation is the supposition that the forces of evil are in hell! But where does that idea come from? The Bible I read reveals that the devil is the “god of this world”; “the prince and power of the air”, and that his demons are the evil angels, the “principalities and powers that dwell in the heavenlies.” (2Cor 4:4; Eph 2:2; 6:12; 1Pet 3:22).

The answer to our question, what is meant by “gates of hell”, is obvious, I think, if we take the time to define some terms and examine it closer. There are three words in the New Testament that are translated (by some versions, most notably the KJV) as hell. The word “gehenna” is used by Jesus to refer to a place of fiery destruction (Matt 5:22,29-30; 10:28; 18:9; 23:15), and translated as hell in the NASB, KJV; tartarus is found only once in the New Testament at 2Pet 2:4, and refers to a prison where evil spirits are being held in chains for judgment. Then in our text and several other places, the word hades is used (Matt 11:23; Luke 16:23; Acts 2:27,31; Rev 6:8, 20:13,14). Hades is the god of the underworld in Greek mythology. Over time, his name came to designate the underworld itself, the abode of the dead. As such, Hades is the only Greek word providing a near equivalent to the Hebrew word sheol. Like Hades, sheol is the dwelling place of the dead in Hebrew thought. Whatever one may think about the state of the dead (whether conscious, or asleep awaiting resurrection) one thing is certain, Hades is not the same as Gehenna, nor is it the lake of fire or the prison where evil spirits are confined; Hades is the realm of the dead. And in fact, according to Rev 20:14 hades will be thrown into the lake of fire! The Bible nowhere teaches that the devil and his angels dwell in hades!

Second, the Hebrew Scriptures say that “hell is never satisfied” or “never gets full” (Prov 27:20; Isa 5:14) This is a use of sheol conveying the idea that death continues to claim lives, and so long as people die, they will end up in sheol, the place of the dead. There is no return. Gates are meant either to restrict or prevent what is outside from getting in, or to restrict or prevent what is inside from getting out! Since hades/sheol continues to grow it is reasonable to assume that the gates are in place, figuratively, to keep the dead inside. There is only one way to enter hades, and that is by death. In the Old Testament and subsequent Jewish tradition the “gates of Hades” are expressed as the gates of death (Job 38:17; Psalm 9:13). In other words, once one is dead he has no power to leave, the gates are closed - and one would assume - locked. However, according to Jesus, the gates of hades cannot prevail against his church!

The Good News

By now I hope you see where we are going with this.  For all the righteous dead, and for those yet to fall asleep in Christ, there IS an exit!! The gates of hell, or we might say, the grave or power of death, has no authority over the true believer. We will rise!! In verse 21 it is recorded that Jesus began to tell the disciples about his coming suffering and death, but that after three days he would be raised. This is the turning point in Jesus ministry referred to earlier but it also gives context and credence to our interpretation of “gates of hell” as the power of death. The good news, the gospel of Jesus Christ, is that death does not have the final say in the lives of those who submit themselves to God, through Jesus. There is coming a day, a day when Jesus will return to set up the kingdom of God on earth. And in that day the dead in Christ will rise first, then we who are alive and remain will be changed, in a moment, a twinkling of an eye, and so shall we all be with the Lord. Death will be swallowed up by life - the gates of hell cannot prevail against the Church! This is good news indeed. Jesus said, “This is eternal life, that they may know You Father, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.” (John 17:3).

The author desires your reaction and comments. Please check one of the reaction boxes below. To share you thoughts, post a comment.