Why the Trinity Doctrine Doesn't Make Sense: Five Reasons

These five questions will help you see why a growing number of people are beginning to doubt that the traditional teaching about God found in most churches is correct. Jesus was a Jew, right? Well, Judaism at the time of Jesus (and to this day) confessed belief in only one individual, who is God—the one called Yahweh (or Jehovah)—the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Israel. If Jesus was a Jew, then, he too must have held this belief, right? Well, we don't have to guess, because Mark 12.28-34 actually records a conversation in which Jesus explicitly agreed with a non-trinitarian Jewish scribe on his Jewish definition of God. So, if Jesus believed in the Trinity then he should have… disagreed with this Jew, right? But, in fact, Jesus not only agreed with him about who God was, but even complemented him saying, "you are not far from the kingdom of God." Doesn't this mean that first generation Christians, like Jesus, held the same view of God as the Jews? A second question that has caused some trouble is that we cannot find a single place in Scripture where the Trinity is explained. Where is the verse, chapter, or book that simply states the doctrine? I mean, if this belief is so important then shouldn't it be explained all over the place like other doctrines are such as Jesus' death for our sins, or his resurrection from the dead? Now we do know that the Bible can be used to "support" the Trintiy, but it can also be used to support slavery, anti-semitism, and all sorts of things (There has been no shortage of wacky groups that claim the Bible supports their pet theories). Sure one could go through the arduous chore of cobbling together a verse here and a verse there to erect an impressive facade which rather than elucidating Scripture actually obscures it. Honestly, the Trinity must be read into Scripture not out from it. In fact, I don't think anyone can arrive at the Trinity from only reading the Bible. It has to be taught alongside of Scripture and even then most people don't even understand it (not that we blame them). A third question we are constantly asking relates to controversy. In the New Testament, a number of historical controversies are described, from the speaking in tongues controversy in Corinth to the Jerusalem council which decided whether or not new Gentile converts needed to keep the Law. However, one controversy is strikingly absent from the New Testament documents—a controversy over a new definition of God. I mean, think about it. Here I am challenging your understanding of who God is and you're probably feeling a bit uncomfortable, right? Well, what if as a missionary I came to your church and started preaching that God is only the Father not the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Wouldn't that cause controversy? Of course it would. People who believe one thing about God don't just change the moment they hear a new idea, we know that. So, what about in the first century? You've got all of these Jewish communities throughout the Mediterranean world who are strictly monotheistic, and these Christians come to town preaching a message about the Trinity. Wouldn't that cause problems? Of course it would. But, where is the evidence of this? In the entire NT we find no controversy over the Trinity, to such a degree that it is never even spelled out clearly. Isn't the simplest explanation that this doctrine just wasn't around yet? Our fourth question focuses on what language the Bible uses to talk about God. Pronouns can either be singular or plural. If we read a singular pronoun like "I" or "she" we know that a single person is in mind but when we read a plural pronoun like "we" or "they" we know that a group of persons are being referenced. So, what about God? I mean, if God is comprised of multiple persons then, of course, we should find plural pronouns when God is spoken of. But, if God is a singular individual then we should find singular pronouns instead. Think back to texts you've read about God. Which kind of pronouns are used? Let's see. One of the most quoted verses in the Bible is Jeremiah 29.11, which begins with, "'For I know the plans that I have for you." If God were a Trinity it should read, "For we know the plans that we have for you", right? But it doesn't. In both the Old and New Testaments, tens of thousands of times, when God speaks or when people speak about God they use singular pronouns instead of plural ones. What's the deal with that? Isn't this grammatical phenomenon evidence that God is one individual rather than three? Of course there are plenty of other questions that we could ask about the Trinity, but we have time for only one more right now. This one is about Jesus' knowledge. If Jesus is fully God then he must have full knowledge, right? But, what about the time when Jesus said, "of that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone"? Was Jesus lying? I mean, if Jesus is God then of course he knew when he planned to return, right? But here again we have the Scripture threatening our belief by clearly and explicitly teaching that Jesus did not know something. Are we going to believe Jesus' own words or should we cling to our tradition regardless of what the Scriptures say? Now, we know that there are creative "solutions" to all of these questions, but they usually complicate the matter rather than explain it. Furthermore, any such attempts have to assume a very developed view of the Trinity and the dual natures of Christ in order to even get started. Usually, before long, we are told that the Trinity is a "mystery" that we have to just accept by faith. We are cautioned that human language and even our minds are not capable of explaining or grasping God. Though there is some truth in this type of sentiment, we still consider such appeals to incomprehensibility as cheating. I mean, let's just reverse our positions for a moment. You be the Unitarian and I'll be the Trinitarian. You try to convince me that my beliefs are unbiblical, anachronistic, and illogical. You make some solid arguments and rather than listening and really considering what you are saying I say, "well, I hear what you are saying, but really, you just need to accept that this is a mystery that you cannot understand…you just have to believe it." If I pulled that on you, wouldn't you feel like that was dirty? Yet, this is what happens over and again, when we have conversations with fellow Christians about this subject. I suppose it all comes down to one question. Would you still want to believe it even if it was wrong? If so, then you should probably not waste your time on this website or even watch the rest of this video. In fact, if that is where you are at, you may want to do some serious introspective thinking because this mentality, of stubbornly holding to a belief regardless of the evidence, is not only fear-based and but it is precisely the sort of thinking that surfaces in dangerous cults. But, if you are someone who is not afraid to ask the big questions; if you are someone who is willing to listen to both sides of the argument; if you are someone who truly believes that God has given you his spirit to lead you to all truth; then stick around, we've got some good stuff for you to think about.