In spite of the immortal myth that the doctrine of the Trinity was invented by the Council of Nicaea, the doctrine of the Trinity is clearly present throughout the whole of Scripture. This is to the extent that not only did pre-Nicene Christians write quite eloquent defences of the doctrine, but even the Jews, who have always been notoriously monotheistic, had a concept of God being multipersonal pre-Christ.
Though it is such a basic Christian doctrine, it is also extremely complex. God is unique, and there is nothing like Him in our world. Thus, it makes sense that He would be at least slightly beyond our comprehension. This, of course, is not an excuse for unbelief. In fact, such reasoning is a widely recognised informal fallacy known as the incredulity fallacy. However, because of the complexity of the doctrine, it makes sense that many anti-Christians may misunderstand the doctrine, whether as an honest mistake, or out of the desire to exploit other people's ignorance.
The biggest misunderstandings of the Trinity stem from the idea that it is, in some way, a violation of monotheism. However, this is not the case. As shown in the diagram to the left, the Trinity is the doctrine that there is one God, but that He exists in 3 separate, yet coequal persons. The Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God; they are all the one God. The Bible does not say this in those exact words (nor does it deny it in any way), but we can establish this doctrine with four inescapable Biblical facts:
1. There is only one God.
2. The Father is God.
3. The Son is God.
4. The Holy Spirit is God.
Because these facts are inescapable, the Trinity is the only viable option. The only other possibilities are that the Bible is in error in multiple ways, even when God Himself speaks. Of course, even if we were to conclude as much, we cannot escape the fact that this is what the Bible teaches, any more than we can escape the fact the Qur'an teaches that Muhammad is a prophet.
In spite of this clarity, the Apostles themselves did not go down to their graves before the devil began to spread counterfeit Christian doctrines around the world. This includes a range of anti-Trinitarian heresies, from Arianism, which prompted the famous Council of Nicaea, right up to the 19th century Kenotic heresy. For the remainder of this article, we will briefly explain several of these heresies, and briefly explain the Biblical flaws therein.
Ebionism
Ebionism is one of the earliest anti-Trinitarian heresies, apparently evolving from the Judaizers, whom Paul opposed valiantly. Not surprisingly, the Ebionites rejected Paul, slandering him as deceitful, proud, bitter, non-Apostolic Gentile. Along with Paul, the Ebionites rejected the vast majority of the New Testament, with the exception of the Gospel of Matthew, which they edited.
By Ebionite reckoning, Christ was the Son of God only by virtue of adoption, and apart from this, He was the entirely human descendant of David. Even the virgin birth, in their eyes, was a myth. The Ebionites believed Christ was justified by keeping the Law of Moses, who, in their eyes, was greater than Christ, yet by following Christ's example in following the law, we may become Christs ourselves.
The fact that Scripture rejects Ebionism should be obvious from the fact Ebionism rejected Scripture. The excessive opposition to Paul likely stems from his constant affirmations that not only are we not justified by the law (e.g. Galatians 2:16), but that Christ is uniquely God. Similarly, while there is debate on whether Paul is behind the book of Hebrews or not, the fact is Hebrews is divinely revealed Scripture. Yet, citing Psalm 45:6, Hebrews 1:8 shows God Himself calling the Son God, whose throne is established forever. Ironically, verse 5 of this chapter also cites Psalm 2:7 "You are My Son, Today I have begotten You", which the Ebionites' "Gospel According to the Hebrews" says is something that was declared to Christ when God adopted Him at His baptism.
Modalism
Modalism takes a variety of forms which, to various degrees, recognises the reality of the three persons of God, but does not recognise them as three persons. Rather, in Modalism, there is one monadic God who is capable of switching between various modes, hence "Modalism".
Modalism comes in a variety of forms, such as the following:
- Patripassianism
- Sabellianism
- Swedenborgianism
- Oneness Pentacostalism
All of these views, to one degree or another, overemphasise the monotheistic aspect of God while ignoring the distinctive language, and even action, of the Trinity.
Patripassianism
Patripassianism literally means "the Father's suffering", and as such, teaches that the Father suffered and died on the cross as the Son. This is made blatantly impossible in a number of ways, particularly through Christ's own distinct will, yet submission to the Father's. This is most visible in Matthew 26:39-42, wherein Christ prays to the Father, saying "O My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from Me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as You will.", and again "O My Father, if this cup cannot pass away from Me unless I drink it, Your will be done." These two prayers show that Christ has one will, and the Father has another, yet Christ submits to the will of the Father. If the Father is the Son, this makes no sense, as Christ would be saying "not the Father's will be done, but the Father's will be done". Only if the Father is distinct from the Son can this prayer be logical, rendering Patripassianism impossible.
Sabellianism
Sabellianism teaches that there is no distinction between each person of the Trinity, but rather, God manifests Himself as three modes at different times, and for different purposes. Although the writings of Sabellius himself have perished, his teachings survive in the form of refutations thereof. From these refutations, it appears he believed God manifested as the Father for creation, the Son for redemption, and the Holy Spirit for sanctification. Most notably, it seems Sabellius preached his own formula for baptism that directly conflicted with the formula provided by Christ at the Great Commission. Whereas Christ commanded that disciples should be baptised in the name (singular, because there is one Triune God) of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (and that they should be taught to obey all that Christ has commanded, including the above), Sebellian baptisms did not do this. This fact alone destroys Sabellianism.
Swedenborgianism
Swedenborgianism is perhaps the most extreme version of Modalism. Based on the teachings of Emanuel Swedenborg, from whom the heresy draws its name, Swedenborgianism teaches that the Trinity is a lie, and that God has many names, all depending on the religion an individual follows. Salvation, rather than coming by grace, through faith, is dependant upon practicing your own religion. Ironically, this is one time when even the holy books of other religions will reveal the error, as while Christianity teaches that there is no salvation in any other, nor is there any other name by which we must be saved than Jesus Christ of Nazareth (Acts 4:9-12), other religions are equally exclusive. If the core doctrine of any religion anathematises any other, the necessary conclusion is that a maximum of one of them has the power to save. Since Christ is the only God who actually walked out of His grave, logic dictates that we must take Him seriously when He declares Himself as the one and only path to salvation.
Oneness Pentacostalism
Oneness Pentacostalism, otherwise known as Oneness theology, or even the "Jesus Only" movement, sees Jesus as the one God, but also that He is able to manifest Himself as the Father or Holy Spirit. Unlike other forms of Modalism, Oneness Pentacostalism teaches that God is able to manifest Himself as the three modes simultaneously, as happened at Jesus' baptism. Because of its acknowledgement that God manifests Himself as the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit at the same time, Oneness Pentacostalism is a particularly difficult form of Modalism to deal with. However, the refutation follows the same logic. In Scripture, the Trinity is written, without qualification, as being distinct, both by language and description. The Son, for example, says "...do you think that I cannot now pray to My Father, and He will provide Me with more than twelve legions of angels?" (Matthew 26:53, emphasis added). By speaking of Himself as being distinct from, and yet relational to the Father, the Son denies all forms of Modalism.
Arianism
Arianism, being one of the earliest and most significant anti-Trinitarian heresies, is also one of the most famous. Named after its apparent founder and primary peddler, Arianism primarily downplays the divinity of Christ, while not fully denying it, like Ebionism. Specifically, Arianism claimed Christ was of a different substance than the Father, and a mere created being, rather than having eternal origins.
This abysmal view of Christ is explicitly denied by none other than the God-Man Himself. In John 10:30, Christ says He and the Father are one. In John 8:58, Jesus says "before Abraham was, I AM" (ascribing the divine name to Himself). In John 14:9, Jesus says anyone who has seen Him has seen the Father. In John 8:24, we are even told that if we don't believe He is God (doing so by once again claiming the divine name for Himself), we will die in our sins. This means it is literally a Gospel issue; you cannot be saved while denying the divinity of Christ.
The opening of John's Gospel is even more explicit: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made." (John 1:1-3). This not only establishes the Word (Christ) as being "with", and therefore separate from, God, yet also being God, but flat out invalidates any claim that the Word is just a created being. Without the Word, nothing was made that has been made. Yet, if the Word was made, then without the Word, one thing must have been made that was made. The only way to solve this paradox is to simply admit that the Word is the eternal God.
Docetism
Docetism takes the other extreme. Whereas Arianism places too much emphasis on denying Christ's divinity, Docetism denies His humanity. The name of this doctrine comes from the Greek "dokein" (δοκεῖν), which means "to seem". In accordance with this, Docetism teaches that Christ merely seemed human, when in reality, He was a phantom.
Much like Arianism, Docetism is denied by Christ Himself: "Look at my hands and my feet. It is I myself! Touch me and see; a ghost does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have.”" (Luke 24:39). John, the "disciple whom Jesus loved" (John 21:20), makes it even clearer: "By this you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God, and every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God. And this is the spirit of the Antichrist, which you have heard was coming, and is now already in the world." (1 John 4:2-3). This shows that the humanity of Christ is as vital to salvation as the divinity of Christ. You must confess both for salvation. The denial of either is eternally damning.
Apollinarianism
Apollinarianism is the teaching that Christ's two natures - human and divine - were incompatible, and thus could not exist in the same person. Whereas Biblically, the fullness of Godhead dwells bodily in Christ (Colossians 2:9), in Apollinaris' mind, Jesus' human nature was sinful, and therefore God could not live in Him. To overcome this, the Word of God entered Christ and replaced His inherently sinful human nature. Thus, while Christ had both a fully human body and soul, His mind was that of God.
Apollinarianism, by virtue of his teaching, is actually both a deceiver (1 John 2:7) and an anti-Christ (1 John 4:1-3). In reality, rather than entering a sinful human being, the Word of God became flesh (John 1:14). Furthermore, it is essential that Christ, by nature, was without blemish (1 Peter 1:19). Thus, He cannot have been sinful, as Apollinaris taught.
Nestorianism
Nestorianism, following the teachings of Nestorius, teaches the disunity of Christ's humanity and divinity. Nestorius taught that Christ was of two natures and two persons, inhabiting one human body. To that end, he even gave Mary, the mother of Jesus, a new title: "Christotokos" (Christ Bearer), as opposed to the more traditional "Theotokos" (God Bearer). This was to emphasise her as the originator of Christ's human nature, but for all the wrong reasons.
While it is, of course, true that Mary is only the originator of Christ's human nature, this is not because she created a whole new being who would become melded together with Christ's divinity. Rather, as previously noted, the word became flesh (John 1:14). He did not join to, or unite within, flesh. Although Christ does have two natures - divine and human - they are not separate.
Eutychianism
Eutychianism was an overcompensation for Nestorianism. Whereas Nestorius taught that Jesus was two natures and two persons in one body, Eutyches taught that Christ's human nature was dissolved into His divine nature like a drop of honey is dissolved in the sea. Rather than having two indivisible natures, Eutyches believed Christ's divine and human natures mixed together to form a third, brand new nature. This stands in contrast with the Biblical concept of the hypostatic union - that there is no compromise between Christ's two natures. Rather, He is fully both.
This can be seen in His assertion that God is spirit (John 4:24), yet His human nature assuredly was not (Luke 24:39). If Christ's human nature was so thoroughly absorbed into His divine nature, this would be impossible. Likewise, if Christ's human nature so affected His divinity, He could not have returned to the same glory He had with His Father before the world was (John 17:5).
Monophysitism
Monophysitism is the belief that Christ has only one, specifically divine nature, though He did take on a human body. Apollinarianism and Eutychianism are two versions of this heresy.
Unitarianism
Unitarianism emphasises Monotheism to the exclusion of God being multipersonal. That is, Unitarianism denies the possibility that Christ is divine, and the Holy Spirit is also either not divine, or may not even be personal. Unitarians may see the Holy Spirit as God's "active force", or as a non-divine personal figure, but do not see Him as a distinct divine person.
Unitarianism suffers all the same flaws as were mentioned in the initial description of the Trinity. The Bible indisputably describes one God, yet at the same time, applies divine identities to three distinct, co-equal persons. When you consider that there was, is, and will only ever be one God, yet the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, are all fully divine, Unitarianism is unsustainable.
Tawhid
While Islam does not attempt to define itself as a Christian denomination, its affirmation of the Bible as "previous Scriptures" and revelation from Allah lead some to categorise it as a heretical Christian sect. As such, its views on Monotheism, called "Tawhid", can be considered an anti-Trinitarian heresy.
The Qur'an, ultimately, fails to understand the Trinity, asserting that Christians take Jesus and Mary as "gods besides Allah". In presenting this straw man, the Qur'an ultimately denies Jesus' divinity, and even that Allah can be a Father, let alone that Christ is His Son. Aside from failing to understand the Trinity, cutting Jesus out of the Godhead, and failing to even recognise the Holy Spirit, Islam presents God as a perfect monad.
Ironically, even Islamic apologetics serves as a perfect demonstration of the flaw in this logic. It is no secret that God speaks in the plural, a fact that so disturbed anti-Trinitarian Jews that they fabricated a story about Moses asking God "Master of the universe, why do you provide the heretics with basis for a claim?" (Bereshit Rabbah 8:8). This statement, reflecting on God's use of "let us make man in our image" (Genesis 1:26) not only shows that the Bible always used such language, even before Muhammad's time (eliminating claims of Bible corruption), but also that it presented a problem for Unitarians.
To answer this problem, Muslims appeal to the "plural of majesty", wherein a person of great majesty might refer to themselves in the plural. Not only is this not a concept that existed in Jewish culture at the time, but the hidden assumption is that it is somehow more majestic to be plural, so much so that even God speaks as if He is plural. This means the Biblical God is, even by Islamic reckoning, more majestic than Allah.
Kenoticism
Kenoticism is a relatively recent heresy similar to Monophysitism. The key difference is that whereas Monophysitism states that Christ's two natures merge into one, Kenoticism contends that Christ voluntarily surrendered some of His divine attributes in order to become more human.
This is primarily based on a misapplication of Philippians 2:7, which states that Christ "emptied Himself". However, not only does it not specify what He emptied Himself of, but when we expand our reading to verse 5, we see that it is explicitly stated that Christ was in the very form of God, and was equal with God. When we combine this with other statements in Scripture, such as the aforementioned Colossians 2:9, we see that His divinity is the one thing it is impossible for Christ to have emptied Himself of. In reality, what Christ surrendered was His divine privileges. He did not, for example, make Himself invincible to human struggles, nor did He produce wealth or status for Himself. Being fully human, Christ submitted Himself to human limitations, up to and including death.
Conclusion
There are other anti-Trinitarian heresies in the world, of course including the teachings of various non-Christian religions besides Islam which, nevertheless, have felt the need to respond to the doctrine. However, as I believe I have demonstrated, the doctrine of the Trinity is the one and only logical interpretation of the Biblical text. Every other view relies on some degree of ignorance, alteration, or even flat out denial of Scripture. While it is somewhat logical for followers of other faiths to deny Scripture, as Christians, we are fully committed to the word of the Living God, and as such, the option to deny even His most complex and confusing revelations is simply not available to us. Therefore, any view of the Godhead that does not confess the Trinity must be considered heretical.