Hubbry Logo
NontrinitarianismNontrinitarianismMain
Open search
Nontrinitarianism
Community hub
Nontrinitarianism
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Nontrinitarianism
Nontrinitarianism
from Wikipedia

Nontrinitarianism is a form of Christianity that rejects the Christian theology of the Trinity—the belief that God is three distinct hypostases or persons who are coeternal, coequal, and indivisibly united in one being, or essence (from the Ancient Greek ousia). Certain religious groups that emerged during the Protestant Reformation have historically been known as antitrinitarian.[citation needed]

According to churches that consider the decisions of ecumenical councils final, trinitarianism was definitively declared to be Christian doctrine at the 4th-century ecumenical councils,[1][2][3] that of the First Council of Nicaea (325), which declared the full divinity of the Son,[4] and the First Council of Constantinople (381), which declared the divinity of the Holy Spirit.[5]

In terms of number of adherents, nontrinitarian denominations comprise a small minority of modern Christians. After the denominations in the Oneness Pentecostal movement, the largest nontrinitarian Christian denominations are the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Jehovah's Witnesses, La Luz del Mundo, and Iglesia ni Cristo. There are a number of other smaller groups, including Christadelphians, Church of the Blessed Hope, Christian Scientists, Dawn Bible Students, Living Church of God, Assemblies of Yahweh, Members Church of God International, Unitarian Christians, Unitarian Universalist Christians, The Way International, the Philadelphia Church of God, The Church of God International, the United Church of God, Church of God General Conference, Restored Church of God, Christian Disciples Church, and Church of God of the Faith of Abraham.[6]

Nontrinitarian views differ widely on the nature of God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. Various nontrinitarian philosophies, such as adoptionism and monarchianism, existed prior to the codification of the Trinity doctrine in AD 325, 381, and 431, at the Councils of Nicaea, Constantinople, and Ephesus.[7] Nontrinitarianism was later renewed by Cathars in the 11th through 13th centuries, in the Unitarian movement during the Protestant Reformation, in the Age of Enlightenment of the 18th century, and in some groups arising during the Second Great Awakening of the 19th century.[citation needed]

The doctrine of the Trinity, as held in mainstream Christianity, is not present in the other major monotheistic Abrahamic religions. Also mainstream trinitarian Christians dispute labeling nontrinitarian groups as members within Christianity.

Beliefs

[edit]

Christian apologists and other Church Fathers of the 2nd and 3rd centuries, having adopted and formulated the Logos Christology, considered the Son of God as the instrument used by the supreme God, the Father, to bring the creation into existence. Justin Martyr, Theophilus of Antioch, Hippolytus of Rome and Tertullian in particular state that the internal Logos of God (Gr. Logos endiathetos, Lat. ratio)—his impersonal divine reason—was begotten as Logos uttered (Gr. Logos prophorikos, Lat. sermo, verbum), the Word personified, becoming an actual person to be used for the purpose of creation.[8]

The Encyclopædia Britannica (11th edition) states: "to some Christians the doctrine of the Trinity appeared inconsistent with the unity of God. ... they therefore denied it, and accepted Jesus Christ, not as incarnate God, but as God's highest creature by whom all else was created. ... [this] view in the early Church long contended with the orthodox doctrine."[9] Although the Trinitarian view became the orthodox doctrine in mainstream Christianity, variations of the nontrinitarian view are still held by a relatively small number of Christian groups and denominations.

Various views exist regarding the relationships between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

  • Those who believe that Jesus is not Almighty God, nor absolutely equal to God, and not the co-eternal or co-equal with Father in everything, but was either God's subordinate Son and Servant, the highest Angel and Son of God that eventually became a perfect Man, God's true firstborn before ages, a perfect messenger sent from God, the greatest prophet of Israel, and the Jewish Messiah, or the perfect created human:
    • Adoptionism (2nd century AD) holds that Jesus became divine at his baptism (sometimes associated with the Gospel of Mark) or at his resurrection (sometimes associated with Saint Paul and Shepherd of Hermas);
    • ArianismArius (AD c. 250 or 256–336) believed that the pre-existent Son of God was directly created by the Father, before all ages, and that he was subordinate to God the Father. Arius' position was that the Son was brought forth as the very first of God's creations, and that the Father later created all things through the Son. Arius taught that in the creation of the universe, the Father was the ultimate creator, supplying all the materials and directing the design, while the Son worked the materials, making all things at the bidding and in the service of God, by which "through [Christ] all things came into existence". Arianism became the dominant view in some regions in the time of the Roman Empire, notably the Visigoths until 589.[10] The Third Council of Sirmium in 357 was the high point of Arianism. The Seventh Arian Confession (Second Sirmium Confession) held that both homoousios (of one substance) and homoiousios (of similar substance) were unbiblical and that the Father is greater than the Son in all things, and that the Father alone is infinite and eternal, and that the Logos is God's true firstborn and subservient Son who was made perfect flesh for our sakes and for the glory of the Father (this confession was later known as the Blasphemy of Sirmium): "But since many persons are disturbed by questions concerning what is called in Latin substantia, but in Greek ousia, that is, to make it understood more exactly, as to 'coessential,' or what is called, 'like-in-essence,' there ought to be no mention of any of these at all, nor exposition of them in the Church, for this reason and for this consideration, that in divine Scripture nothing is written about them, and that they are above men's knowledge and above men's understanding";[11]
    • PsilanthropismEbionites (1st to 4th centuries AD) observed Jewish law, denied the literal virgin birth and regarded Jesus as the Jewish Messiah and the greatest prophet of God only;[12]
    • SocinianismPhotinus taught that Jesus was the sinless Messiah and redeemer, and the only perfect human son of God, but that he had no pre-human existence. They interpret verses such as John 1:1 to refer to God's "plan" existing in God's mind before Christ's birth, and that it was God's plan that "became flesh", as the perfect man Jesus;
    • Unitarianism views Jesus as the son of God, subordinate and distinct from his Father;[13]
    • Many Gnostic traditions held that the Christ is a heavenly Aeon but not one with the Father.
  • Those who believe that the Father, the resurrected Son and the Holy Spirit are different aspects of one God, as perceived by the believer, rather than three distinct persons:
    • ModalismSabellius (fl. c. 215) stated that God took numerous forms in both the Hebrew and the Christian Greek Scriptures, and that God has manifested himself in three primary modes regarding the salvation of mankind. He contended that "Father, Son, and Spirit" were different roles played by the same divine person in various circumstances in history;[14] thus God is Father in creation (God created a Son through the virgin birth), Son in redemption (God manifested himself as Jesus for the purpose of his death upon the cross), and Holy Spirit in regeneration (God's Spirit within the Son and within the souls of Christian believers). In this view, God is not three distinct persons, but rather one person manifesting himself in multiple ways.[14] Trinitarians condemn this view as a heresy. The chief critic of Sabellianism was Tertullian, who labeled the movement "Patripassianism", from the Latin words pater for "father", and passus from the verb "to suffer", because it implied that the Father suffered on the cross. It was coined by Tertullian in his work Adversus Praxeas, Chapter I: "By this Praxeas did a twofold service for the devil at Rome: he drove away prophecy, and he brought in heresy; he put to flight the Paraclete, and he crucified the Father." The term homoousion (ὁμοούσιον, literally same being) later adopted by the Trinitarian Nicene Council for its anti-Arian creed had previously been used by Sabellians.[15]
  • Those who believe that Jesus Christ is Almighty God, but that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are actually three distinct almighty "Gods" with distinct natures, acting as one divine group, united in purpose:
    • Tri-theismJohn Philoponus, an Aristotelian and monophysite in Alexandria, in the middle of the 6th century, saw in the Trinity three separate natures, substances, and deities, according to the number of divine persons.[16] He sought to justify this view by the Aristotelian categories of genus, species and individuum. In the Middle Ages, Roscellin of Compiegne, the founder of Nominalism, argued for three distinct almighty Gods, with three distinct natures, who were one in mind and purpose, existing together eternally, interacting together from times past, in perfect cooperation, acting together as one divine group or godhead over the universe, in creation and redemption. And that the Logos took on a subservient role, but was equal in power and eternity with the One called Father. Roscellin said, though, like Philoponus, that unless the three persons are tres res (three things with distinct natures), the whole Trinity must have been incarnate. And therefore, since only the Logos was made flesh, the other two persons must have had distinct "natures", separate from the Logos, and so had to be separate and distinct Gods, though all three were one in divine work and plan and operation. In this view, they would be considered "three Gods in one Godhead". This notion was condemned by St. Anselm.[17]
  • Those who believe that the Holy Spirit is not a person:
    • Binitarianism – Adherents include those people through history who believed that God is only two co-equal and co-eternal persons, the Father and the Word, not three. They taught that the Holy Spirit is not a distinct person, but is the power or divine influence of the Father and Son, emanating out to the universe, in creation, and to believers;
    • Dualism;
    • MarcionismMarcion (AD c. 110–160) believed there were two deities, one of creation and judgment (in the Hebrew Bible) and one of redemption and mercy (in the New Testament).

Modern Christian groups

[edit]
  • Christadelphians hold the unitarian belief that although Jesus is the Son of God, this is only a relational title toward the Father who alone is truly God. Christ's personhood, therefore, is human, not divine,[18] (believing this to be necessary in order to save humans from their sins[19]). The "Holy Spirit" terminology in the Bible is interpreted as referring to God's impersonal power,[20] or God's character/mind[21] (depending on the context).
  • Church of God General Conference (Abrahamic Faith).[22]
  • The Cooneyites is a Christian sect that split from the Two by Twos in 1928 following Edward Cooney's excommunication from the main group; they deny the Living Witness Doctrine.[clarification needed]
  • Iglesia ni Cristo (Tagalog for Church of Christ) views Jesus as human but endowed by God with attributes not found in ordinary humans, though lacking attributes found in God. They contend that it is God's will to worship Jesus.[23] INC rejects the Trinity as heresy, adopting a version of unitarianism.
  • Jehovah's Witnesses (and other Bible Student movement groups such as the Associated Bible Students[24][25][26]) teach that God the Father is uniquely Almighty God. They believe that Jesus is God's first and only direct creation, and that God is greater than Jesus. They contrast worship of God with relative "obeisance" (in the sense of homage, as to a king) to Jesus,[27] and consider Jesus to be God's high priest and mediator for imperfect humans. They believe that Jesus is Michael the archangel and the "Angel of the Lord" of Exodus, and that he left heaven to be born as a perfect human, and then resumed his pre-human identity in heaven, but exalted to God's right hand.[28][29] They do not believe that the Holy Spirit is an actual person, but consider it to be God's divine active force.[30]
  • The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church) teaches that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are distinct beings that are not united in substance, a view sometimes called social trinitarianism. They believe the three individual deities are "one" in will or purpose, as Jesus was "one" with his disciples, and that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit constitute a single godhead united in purpose and indistinguishable in doctrine.[31][32] Latter-day Saints believe that Christ is the Firstborn of the Father,[33] that he is subordinate to God the Father (Matthew 26:39),[34] and that Christ created the universe.[34][35] Latter-day Saints do not subscribe to the ideas that Christ was unlike the Father in substance[36] and that the Father could not appear on earth,[37] or that Christ was adopted by the Father,[33] as presented in Arianism.[35][38] Latter-day Saints assert that both God and the resurrected Christ have perfected glorified, physical bodies,[39] but do not otherwise classify deity in terms of substance. While Latter-day Saints regard God the Father as the supreme being and literal father of the spirits of all humankind, they also teach that Christ and the Holy Spirit are equally divine and that they share in the Father's "comprehension of all things".[40]
  • The Members Church of God International believes in the divinity of Christ but rejects the doctrine of Trinity.
  • Oneness Pentecostalism is a subset of Pentecostalism that believes God is only one person, and that he manifests himself in different ways, faces, or "modes": "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (or Holy Ghost) are different designations for the one God. God is the Father. God is the Holy Spirit. The Son is God manifest in flesh. The term Son always refers to the Incarnation, and never to deity apart from humanity."[41] Oneness Pentecostals believe that Jesus was "Son" only when he became flesh on earth, but was the Father prior to being made human. They refer to the Father as the "Spirit" and the Son as the "Flesh". Oneness Pentecostals reject the Trinity doctrine, viewing it as pagan and unscriptural, and hold to the Jesus' Name doctrine with respect to baptisms. Oneness Pentecostals are often referred to as "Modalists" or "Sabellians" or "Jesus Only".[42]
  • Denominations within the Sabbatarian tradition (Armstrongism) believe that Christ the Son and God the Father are co-eternal, but do not teach that the Holy Spirit is a being or person. Armstrong theology holds that God is a "Family" that expands eventually, that "God reproduces Himself", but that originally there was a co-eternal "Duality", God and the Word, rather than a "Trinity".
  • Swedenborgianism holds that the Trinity exists in one person, the Lord God Jesus Christ. The Father, the being or soul of God, was born into the world and put on a body from Mary. Throughout his life, Jesus put away all human desires and tendencies until he was completely divine. After his resurrection, he influences the world through the Holy Spirit, which is his activity. In this view, Jesus Christ is the one God; the Father as to his soul, the Son as to his body, and the Holy Spirit as to his activity in the world. This view is very similar in many ways to Sabellianism, Modalism, Oneness, or Jesus Only beliefs.
  • Numerous Unitarian Christian organizations exist around the world, the oldest of which is the Unitarian Church of Transylvania. An umbrella organization for these groups is the International Council of Unitarians and Universalists, though only some members and affiliates of that body consider themselves exclusively or predominantly Christian. In the United States, "Unitarian" often refers to members and congregations within the Unitarian Universalist Association (UUA), a non-Christian group formed in 1961 from the merger of the American Unitarian Association with the Universalist Church of America.[43][44] Though both of these predecessor groups were originally Christian, the UUA does not have a shared creed and does not identify as a Christian Unitarian organization.[45][46]

History

[edit]

Early Christianity

[edit]
The First Council of Nicaea depicted with Arius beneath the feet of Emperor Constantine and the bishops

Although nontrinitarian beliefs continued and were dominant among some peoples—for example, the Lombards, Ostrogoths, Visigoths and Vandals—for hundreds of years, the Trinity doctrine eventually gained prominence in the Roman Empire. Nontrinitarians typically argue that early nontrinitarian beliefs, such as Arianism, were systematically suppressed (often to the point of death).[47] After the First Council of Nicaea, Roman Emperor Constantine I issued an edict against Arius' writings, which included systematic book burning.[48] In spite of the decree, Constantine ordered the readmission of Arius to the church, removed the bishops (including Athanasius) who upheld the teaching of Nicaea,[49] allowed Arianism to grow within the Empire and to spread to Germanic tribes on the frontier,[50] and was himself baptized by an Arian bishop, Eusebius of Nicomedia.[51] His successors as Christian emperors promoted Arianism, until Theodosius I came to the throne in 379 and supported Nicene Christianity.

The Easter letter that Athanasius issued in 367, when the Eastern Empire was ruled by the Arian Emperor Valens, specified the books that belong to the Old Testament and the New Testament, together with seven other books to be read "for instruction in the word of godliness"; it also excluded what Athanasius called apocryphal writings, falsely presented as ancient.[52] Elaine Pagels writes: "In AD 367, Athanasius, the zealous bishop of Alexandria... issued an Easter letter in which he demanded that Egyptian monks destroy all such unacceptable writings, except for those he specifically listed as 'acceptable' even 'canonical'—a list that constitutes the present 'New Testament'".[53][54]

Nontrinitarians see the Nicene Creed and the results of the Council of Chalcedon as essentially political documents, resulting from the subordination of true doctrine to state interests by leaders of the Catholic Church, so that the church became, in their view, an extension of the Roman Empire. Nontrinitarians (both Modalists and Unitarians) assert that Athanasius and others at Nicaea adopted Greek Platonic philosophy and concepts, and incorporated them in their views of God and Christ.[55]

The author H. G. Wells, later famous for his contribution to science-fiction, wrote in The Outline of History: "We shall see presently how later on all Christendom was torn by disputes about the Trinity. There is no evidence that the apostles of Jesus ever heard of the Trinity, at any rate from him."[56]

The question of why such a central doctrine to the Christian faith would never have been explicitly stated in scripture or taught in detail by Jesus himself was sufficiently important to 16th century historical figures such as Michael Servetus to lead them to argue the question. The Geneva City Council, in accord with the judgment of the cantons of Zürich, Bern, Basel, and Schaffhausen, condemned Servetus to be burned at the stake for this and his opposition to infant baptism.

The Encyclopædia of Religion and Ethics describes the five stages that led to the formulation of the doctrine of the Trinity:[57]

  1. The acceptance of the pre-human existence of Jesus as the (middle-platonic) Logos, namely, as the medium between the transcendent sovereign God and the created cosmos. The doctrine of Logos was accepted by the Apologists and by other Fathers of the 2nd and 3rd centuries, such as Justin the Martyr, Hippolytus, Tertullian, Ireneus, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Lactantius, and in the 4th century by Arius;
  2. The doctrine of the timeless generation of the Son from the Father as it was articulated by Origen in his effort to support the ontological immutability of God, that he is ever-being a father and a creator. The doctrine of the timeless generation was adopted by Athanasius of Alexandria;
  3. The acceptance of the idea that the son of God is of the same transcendent nature (homoousios) as his father. This position was declared in the Nicene Creed, which specifically states the son of God is as immutable as his father;
  4. The acceptance that the Holy Spirit also has ontological equality as a third person in a divine Trinity and the final Trinitarian terminology by the teachings of the Cappadocian Fathers;
  5. The addition of the Filioque to the Nicene Creed, as accepted by the Roman Catholic Church.

7th-century Islam

[edit]

Among proponents of the revisionist school of Islamic studies positions viewing early Islam as a unitarian Christian group have found a number of academic supporters, such as Günter Lüling, who argues the original Quran was a unitarian Christian text opposed to the trinity.[58] Along similar lines Karl-Heinz Ohlig has suggested that the person of Muhammad was not central to early Islam at all, and that early stage Islam was an Arabic Christian sect which had objections to the concept of the trinity, and that the later hadith and biographies are in large part legends, instrumental in severing Islam from its Christian roots and building a full-blown new religion.[59] Volker Popp supports Ohlig's thesis based on archeological evidence.[60] Édouard-Marie Gallez believes early Islam to have been a development within the unitarian anti-Nicene Judeo-Christian Nazarene sect of Christianity.[61] A related thesis to the aforementioned ones is advanced by Fred Donner who argues that early Islam was a interfaith unitarian Believers Movement addressed to both Christians and Jews.[62]

In pre-modern writing, John of Damascus described Islam as a Christian heresy led by Muhammad, whom he deems an Arian based on his (assumed) denial of the trinity.[63]

Following the Reformation

[edit]

By 1530, following the Protestant Reformation, and the German Peasants' War of 1524–1525, large areas of Northern Europe were Protestant, and forms of nontrinitarianism began to surface among some "Radical Reformation" groups, particularly Anabaptists. The first recorded English antitrinitarian was John Assheton (1548), an Anglican priest. The Italian Anabaptist "Council of Venice" (1550) and the trial of Michael Servetus (1553) marked the clear emergence of markedly antitrinitarian Protestants. Though the only organised nontrinitarian churches were the Polish Brethren who split from the Calvinists (1565, expelled from Poland 1658), and the Unitarian Church of Transylvania (founded 1568).

In 1733, Voltaire's Letters on the English listed Isaac Newton as a member of Antitrinitarians.[64]

Nonconformists, Dissenters and Latitudinarians in Britain were often Arians or Unitarians, and the Doctrine of the Trinity Act 1813 allowed nontrinitarian worship in Britain. In America, Arian and Unitarian views were also found among some Millennialist and Adventist groups, though the Unitarian Church itself began to decline in numbers and influence after the 1870s.[65][66]

Points of dissent

[edit]

Nontrinitarian Christians with Arian or Semi-Arian views contend that the weight of scriptural evidence supports Subordinationism, the Son's total submission to the Father, and God's paternal supremacy over the Son in every aspect. They acknowledge the Son's high rank at God's right hand, but teach that the Father is still greater than the Son in all things.

While acknowledging that the Father, Son, and Spirit are essential in creation and salvation, they argue that that in itself does not confirm that the three are each co-equal or co-eternal. They also affirm that God is only explicitly identified as "one" in the Bible, and that the doctrine of the Trinity, which word literally meaning a set of three, ascribes a co-equal threeness to the being of the infinite God that is not explicitly scriptural.

Scriptural support

[edit]

Critics of the Trinity doctrine argue that, for a teaching described as fundamental, it lacks direct scriptural support. Proponents of the doctrine assert that although the doctrine is not stated directly in the New Testament, it is instead an interpretation of elements contained therein that imply the doctrine that was later formulated in the 4th century.

William Barclay, a Church of Scotland minister, stated that:

It is important and helpful to remember that the word Trinity is not itself a New Testament word. It is even true in at least one sense to say that the doctrine of the Trinity is not directly New Testament doctrine. It is rather a deduction from and an interpretation of the thought and the language of the New Testament.[67]

The New Catholic Encyclopedia states:

The doctrine of the Holy Trinity is not taught [explicitly] in the [Old Testament] [...] The formulation 'one God in three Persons' was not solidly established [by a council] [...] prior to the end of the 4th century.[68]

Similarly, Encyclopedia Encarta states:

The doctrine is not taught explicitly in the New Testament, where the word God almost invariably refers to the Father. [...] 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.[69]

Encyclopædia Britannica says:

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. [...] by the end of the 4th century, under the leadership of Basil of Caesarea, Gregory of Nyssa, and Gregory of Nazianzus (the Cappadocian Fathers), the doctrine of the Trinity took substantially the form it has maintained ever since.[70]

The Anchor Bible Dictionary states:

One does not find in the NT the trinitarian paradox of the coexistence of the Father, Son, and Spirit within a divine unity.[71]

Catholic historian Joseph F. Kelly, speaking of legitimate theological development, writes:

The Bible may not use the word 'Trinity', but it refers to God the Father frequently; the Gospel of John emphasized the divinity of the Son; several New Testament books treat the Holy Spirit as divine. The ancient theologians did not violate biblical teaching but sought to develop its implications. [...] [Arius'] potent arguments forced other Christians to refine their thinking about the Trinity. At two ecumenical councils, Nicea I in 325 and Constantinople I in 381, the church at large defined the Trinity in the way now so familiar to us from the Nicene Creed. This exemplifies development of doctrine at its best. The Bible may not use the word 'Trinity', but trinitarian theology does not go against the Bible. On the contrary, Catholics believe that trinitarianism has carefully developed a biblical teaching for later generations.[2]

Questions about co-equal deity of Jesus

[edit]

American Catholic priest and Trinitarian R.E. Brown (1928–1988) wrote a journal article[72] that sorted relevant biblical verses into three classes. He described the following block as "texts that seem to imply that the title 'God' was not used for Jesus" and are "negative evidence which is often somewhat neglected in Catholic treatments of the subject":[72]

he lists these as "texts where, by reason of textual variants or syntax, the use of 'God' for Jesus is dubious":[72]

and only finds the following three as "texts where clearly Jesus is called God":[72]

The Septuagint translate אלוהים‎ (Elohim) as θεος (Theos).[73] At Deuteronomy 6:4 (the Shema Yisrael, quoted by Jesus at Mark 12:29), the plural form of the Hebrew word "God" (Elohim) is used, generally understood to denote majesty, excellence, and the superlative.[74] It has been stated that in the original Greek in Mark 12:29, there are no "plural modifiers" in that Greek word there for "one" (heis), but that in Mark 12 it is simply a masculine singular "one". And that because of that, there is no valid reason to believe that the Hebrew word for "one" in Deuteronomy 6 (echad) was necessarily a "plural one", rather than just simply numerical "one".[75] At Deuteronomy 6:4, the Tetragrammaton appears twice in this verse, leading Jehovah's Witnesses and certain Jewish scholars to conclude that belief in a singular (and therefore indivisible) supremely powerful God is essential to the Shema.[76][77]

Matthew 26:39

[edit]

In Matthew 26:39 Jesus prays with a distinction between God and himself, "O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt.".

John 1:1

[edit]

In John 1:1 there is a distinction between God and the Logos. Non-trinitarians claim a mistranslation of the second part of John 1:1 which, when literally translated word-for-word reads "and the word [logos] was with the God [ho theos]." Trinitarians contend that the third part of the verse (John 1:1c) translates as "and the Word was God", pointing to a distinction as subjects between God and the Logos but an equivalence in nature.[78][79][80][81] Some nontrinitarians assert that the Koine Greek (kai theos ên ho logos) should be translated as "and a God was the Word" (or "and the Word was a god"). Based on their contention that the article of theos is anarthrous, lacking a definite article, they believe the verse refers to Jesus' pre-human existence as "a god" or a divine one as distinct from "the God". Nontrinitarians also contend that the author of John's gospel could have written kai ho theos ên ho logos ("and the Word was the God") if that were his intended meaning.[82][83]

John 10:30

[edit]

John 10:30 – Nontrinitarians such as Arians believe that when Jesus said, "I and the Father are one," he did not mean that they were actually "one substance", or "one God", or co-equal and co-eternal, but rather that he and the Father have a "unity of purpose", and that the context indicates that Jesus was saying that they were "one" in pastoral work. The point being that the Father and the Son were united in the divine work of saving the 'sheep'. Nontrinitarian Christians also cite John 17:21,[84] wherein Jesus prayed regarding his disciples: "That they may all be one, as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they may be in us," adding "that they may be one even as we are one". They argue that the same Greek word (hen) for "one" throughout John 17 indicates that Jesus did not expect for his followers to literally become a single Being, or "one in substance", with each other, or with God, and therefore that Jesus also did not expect his hearers to think that he and God the Father were one entity either.[84]

John 10:33

[edit]

While Trinitarians often use John 10:33 as proof for the divinity of Jesus, unitarian critics argue that the Pharisees accusing Jesus of making himself God should not be the center of attention, when reading this passage. Instead, they emphasize that Jesus' response to the accusations in John 10:34-36 is of much greater concern. In fact, he refuses to be God but instead claims to be the son of God and makes a direct reference to Psalms 82:6 in which God calls his children Gods without taking away from his own glory.[85]

John 20:28–29

[edit]

John 20:28–29 – "And Thomas answered and said to Him, "My Lord and my God!" Jesus said to him, "Thomas, because you have seen Me, you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed"". Since Thomas called Jesus God, Jesus's statement appears to endorse Thomas's assertion. Nontrinitarians sometimes respond that it is plausible that Thomas is addressing the Lord Jesus and then the Father.[citation needed] Another possible answer is that Jesus himself said, "Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?" (John 10:34) referring to Psalm 82:6–8.[citation needed] The word "gods" in verse 6 and "God" in verse 8 is the same Hebrew word "'elohim",[86] which means, "gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God; occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative",[87] and can also refer to powers and potentates, in general, or as "God, god, gods, rulers, judges or angels",[86] and as "divine ones, goddess, godlike one".[88] Therefore, the point being that Jesus was a power or mighty one to the Apostles, as the resurrected Messiah, and as the reflection of God the Father.

2 Corinthians 13:14

[edit]

2 Corinthians 13:14 – "The Grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the sharing in the Holy Spirit be with all of you." It is argued by Trinitarians that the appearance of "Father, Son, and Spirit" together in Paul's prayer for Grace on all believers, and are considered essential for salvation, that the verse is consistent with a triune godhead. Nontrinitarians such as Arians reply[citation needed] that they do not disagree that all three are necessary for salvation and grace, but argue that the passage does not explicitly say that all three are co-equal or co-eternal.[89][unreliable source?]

Philippians 2:5–6

[edit]

Philippians 2:5–6 – "Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, [or "which was also in Christ Jesus",] who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped" (ESV). The word translated in the English Standard Version as "a thing to be grasped" is ἁρπαγμόν. Other translations of the word are indicated in the Holman Christian Standard Bible: "Make your own attitude that of Christ Jesus, who, existing in the form of God, did not consider equality with God as something to be used for His own advantage" [or "to be grasped", or "to be held on to"].[90] The King James Version has: "Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God."[91] Nontrinitarians make the argument that the passage is simply saying that Christ did not consider equality with God something graspable, and that better English translations make it clearer.[92] Another point is that the original Greek had no definite article for "form of God", which would mean "a form of divinity", and also that the term "morphe" for "form" in Koine Greek would simply mean a general external quality or station, but not necessarily the absolute thing itself, and therefore they argue that the passage does not explicitly teach either co-equality, co-eternity, or consubstantiality.[93][94]

Hebrews 9:14

[edit]

Hebrews 9:14 – "How much more will the Blood of Christ, who through an eternal Spirit, offered himself without blemish to God, cleanse our consciences from dead works, that we may render sacred service to the living God?" Most nontrinitarians agree[citation needed] that the Holy Spirit had no beginning, but believe it is not an actual person. Nontrinitarians contend that it is obvious that God the Father in the passage is the One who is ultimately reached, and therefore is greater than the other two entities, and that a "co-equal trinity" is not explicitly taught in the passage, but only inferred.[95]

Terminology

[edit]

"The term 'Trinity' is not in the Bible",[96] and some nontrinitarians use this as an argument to state[97] that the doctrine of the Trinity relies on non-biblical terminology, and that the number three is never clearly associated with God necessarily, other than within the Comma Johanneum which is of spurious or disputed authenticity. They argue[citation needed] that the only number clearly unambiguously ascribed to God in the Bible is one, and that the Trinity, literally meaning three-in-one, ascribes a co-equal threeness to God that is not explicitly biblical.

Nontrinitarians cite other examples[citation needed] of terms or phrases not found in the Bible; multiple "persons" in relation to God, the terms "God the Son", "God-Man", "God the Holy Spirit", "eternal Son", and "eternally begotten". While the Trinitarian term hypostasis is found in the Bible, it is used only once in reference to God[98] where it states that Jesus is the express image of God's person. The Bible does not explicitly use the term in relation to the Holy Spirit nor explicitly mentions the Son having a distinct hypostasis from the Father.[99]

The First Council of Nicaea included in its Creed the major term homoousios (of the same essence), which was used also by the Council of Chalcedon to speak of a double consubstantiality of Christ, "consubstantial with the Father as touching his Godhead, and consubstantial with us as touching his manhood".[100] Nontrinitarians accept what Pier Franco Beatrice wrote: "The main thesis of this paper is that homoousios came straight from Constantine's Hermetic background. ... The Plato recalled by Constantine is just a name used to cover precisely the Egyptian and Hermetic theology of the "consubstantiality" of the Logos-Son with the Nous-Father, having recourse to a traditional apologetic argument. In the years of the outbreak of the Arian controversy, Lactantius might have played a decisive role in influencing Constantine's Hermetic interpretation of Plato's theology and consequently the emperor's decision to insert homoousios in the Creed of Nicaea."[101]

Trinitarians see the absence of the actual word "Trinity" and other Trinity-related terms in the Bible as no more significant than the absence in the Bible of the words "monotheism", "omnipotence", "oneness", "Pentecostal", "apostolic", "incarnation" and even "Bible" itself.[102][103] They maintain that, 'while the word Trinity is not in the Bible, the substance or drift of the doctrine is definitely biblical, if not explicitly than at least implicitly.'[2][67][104]

Holy Spirit

[edit]

Nontrinitarian views about the Holy Spirit differ from mainstream Christian doctrine and generally fall into several distinct categories. Most scriptures traditionally used in support of the Trinity refer to the Father and the Son, but not to the Holy Spirit.

Unitarian

[edit]

Groups with Unitarian theology such as Polish Socinians, the 18th–19th-century Unitarian Church and Christadelphians consider the Holy Spirit to be an aspect of God's power rather than a person.[105] Christadelphians believe that the phrase Holy Spirit refers to God's power or character, depending on the context.[21] Similarly, Jehovah's Witnesses believe that the Holy Spirit is not an actual person but is God's "active force" that he uses to accomplish his will.[106]

Binitarianism

[edit]

Groups with Binitarian theology, such as Armstrongites, believe that the Logos and God the Father are co-equal and co-eternal, but they do not believe that the Holy Spirit is an actual person, like the Father and the Son. They believe the Holy Spirit is the Power, Mind, or Character of God, depending on the context. They teach, "The Holy Spirit is the very essence, the mind, life and power of God. It is not a Being. The Spirit is inherent in the Father and the Son, and emanates from Them throughout the entire universe."[107]

Modalist groups

[edit]

Oneness Pentecostalism, as with other modalist groups, teach that the Holy Spirit is a mode of God, rather than a distinct or separate person in the godhead, and that the Holy Spirit is another name for God the Father. According to Oneness theology, the Holy Spirit is the Father operating in a certain capacity or manifestation. The United Pentecostal Church teaches that there is no personal distinction between God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.[108][109][110] The two titles "Father" and "Holy Spirit" (as well as others) are said to not reflect separate "persons" within the Godhead, but rather two different ways in which the one God reveals himself to his creatures. The Oneness view of Bible verses that mention God and his Spirit (e.g. Isaiah 48:16) is that they do not imply two "persons" any more than various scriptural references to a man and his spirit or soul (such as in Luke 12:19) imply two "persons" existing within one body.[111][unreliable source?][dead link]

Latter-day Saint movement

[edit]

In the LDS Church, the Holy Ghost (usually synonymous with Holy Spirit)[112] is considered to be the third distinct member of the Godhead (Father, Son and Holy Ghost),[113] and to have a body of "spirit",[114] which makes him unlike the Father and the Son who are said to have bodies "as tangible as man's".[115] According to LDS doctrine, the Holy Spirit is believed to be a person,[115][116] with a body of spirit, able to pervade all worlds.[117]

Latter-day Saints believe that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are part of the Godhead, but that the Father is greater than the Son, and that the Son is greater than the Holy Spirit in position and authority, but not in nature (i.e., they equally share the "God" nature).[117] They teach that the Father, Son, and Spirit are three ontologically separate, self-aware entities who share a common "God" nature distinct from our "human" nature, who are "One God" in the sense of being united (in the same sense that a husband and wife are said to be "one"), similar to Social trinitarianism.

A number of Latter Day Saint sects, most notably the Community of Christ (the second largest Latter Day Saint denomination), the Church of Christ (Temple Lot),[118] and derived groups, follow a traditional Protestant trinitarian theology.

Other groups

[edit]

The Unity Church interprets the religious terms Father, Son, and Holy Spirit metaphysically, as three aspects of mind action: mind, idea, and expression. They believe this is the process through which all manifestation takes place.[119]

Groups in the Rastafari movement generally state that it is Haile Selassie who embodies both God the Father and God the Son, while the Holy (or "Hola") Spirit is to be found within every human being. Rastas also say that the true church is the human body, and that it is this church (or "structure") that contains the Holy Spirit.

Relationship with mainstream Christianity

[edit]

As the Nicene Creed's declaration of the Trinity is held as the foundational belief for mainstream Christians,[120] nontrinitarian sects may be regarded as cults or heresies by other Christians,[121] or accused of not being Christians at all.[122][123] On the other hand, nontrinitarians may see mainstream Christians as having fallen or apostasized from the original Christian church.

Ecumenism

[edit]

Ecumenism is a type of interfaith dialogue within Christianity based on shared essential, core beliefs. Ecumenism is usually built on the basis of shared belief in trinitarian baptism, which by definition excludes nontrinitarians. This makes it especially difficult for trinitarian and nontrinitarian churches to recognize the other side's baptisms and communions, or for them to worship together. However, unity of action on shared community goals is easier to accomplish.[122]

Heresy and apostasy

[edit]

Orthodoxy sets certain beliefs as correct, by tradition. Beliefs not within those guidelines be designated heterodox or heretical. Many nontrinitarians believe that the traditions of mainstream Christianity itself are incorrect, in a Great Apostasy foretold by Paul.

The Catholic Church has specifically designated many varieties of nontrinitarianism "heresies", including Arianism, Modalism, and Tritheism. They have also specifically named Mormonism and Jehovah's Witnesses as heresies (as well as Protestantism and Calvinism).

Fundamentalist or evangelical Protestantism has also targeted some nontrinitarians as part of the Christian countercult movement. However, more cautious authors argue that strange beliefs alone are not enough to designate a "cult"; the group's behavior is a more important factor.[121]

Specific groups' relationships with Nicene Christianity

[edit]

Pentecostalism

[edit]

Pentecostalism has a peculiar relationship with ecumenism. There is a theological division between Oneness and trinitarian Pentecostals, and ecumenical groups within Pentecostalism tend to follow those lines. However, many Pentecostals think of ecumenism less as a need for a formal, cooperative institution between groups, and more as a spiritual experience. In addition, many Pentecostal believers are insufficiently focused on abstract theology to identify as trinitarian or nontrinitarian.[124]

Mormonism

[edit]

Mormonism, particularly its largest sect, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, has a complex relationship with mainstream Christianity, due in part to its nontrinitarianism. It also has other unusual doctrines, which lead many evangelical Christians to challenge its inclusion within Christianity.[123]

Mormonism's second-largest sect, the Community of Christ, is a trinitarian group and participates in a variety of ecumenical organizations, such as the National Council of Churches of Christ.[125]

Inter-religious dialogue beyond Christianity

[edit]

The Trinity doctrine is integral in inter-religious disagreements with the other two main Abrahamic religions, Judaism and Islam; the former rejects Jesus' divine mission entirely, and the latter accepts Jesus as a human prophet and the Messiah but not as the son of God, although accepting virgin birth. The rejection of the Trinity doctrine has led to comparisons between nontrinitarian theology and Judaism and Islam.

In an 1897 article in the Jewish Quarterly Review, Montefiore describes Unitarianism as a bridge between Judaism and mainstream Christianity, calling it both a "phase of Judaism" and a "phase of Christianity".[126]

In Islam, the concept of a co-equal trinity is totally rejected, with Quranic verses calling the doctrine of the Trinity blasphemous.[127] Early Islam was originally seen as a variant of Arianism, a heresy in Orthodox and Catholic Christianity, by the Byzantine emperor in the 600s. In the 700s, many Arians in Spain considered Muhammad a prophet. In the mid-1500s, many Socinian unitarians were suspected of having Islamic leanings. Socinians praised Islam, though considering the Qur'an to contain errors, for its belief in the unity of God. Bilal Cleland claimed that "an anonymous writer" in A Letter of Resolution concerning the Doctrine of the Trinity and Incarnation (1693) states that Islam's greater number of adherents and military supremacy resulted from more closely maintaining correct doctrine than mainstream Christianity.[128]

Arguments for the pagan origins of the Trinity

[edit]
Horus, Osiris, and Isis
Reims altar depicting a tricephalic Celtic god

Some nontrinitarians also say that a link between the doctrine of the Trinity and the Egyptian Christian theologians of Alexandria suggests that Alexandrian theology, with its strong emphasis on the deity of Jesus, served to infuse Egypt's pagan religious heritage into Christianity. They accuse the Church of adopting these Egyptian tenets after adapting them to Christian thinking by means of Greek philosophy.[129]

They say the development of the idea of a co-equal triune godhead was based on pagan Greek and Platonic influence, including many basic concepts from Aristotelian philosophy incorporated into the biblical God. As an example, they mention that Aristotle stated: "All things are three, and thrice is all: and let us use this number in the worship of the gods; for, as Pythagoreans say, everything and all things are bound by threes, for the end, the middle, and the beginning have this number in everything, and these compose the number of the Trinity."[130][131] However, Trinitarians have argued that the words attributed to Aristotle differ in a number of ways from what has been published as the philosopher's original text in Greek,[132][133][134] which omits "let us use this number in the worship of the gods", and are not supported by translations of the works of Aristotle by scholars such as Stuart Leggatt, W. K. C. Guthrie, J. L. Stocks, Thomas Taylor and Jules Barthélemy-Saint-Hilaire.[135]

Some anti-trinitarians note also that the Greek philosopher Plato believed in a special "threeness" in life and in the universe. In Phaedo, he introduces the word "triad" (in Greek τριάς),[136] which is rendered in English as "trinity". This was adopted by 3rd and 4th century professed Christians as roughly corresponding to "Father, Word, and Spirit (Soul)".[137] Nontrinitarian Christians contend that such notions and adoptions make the Trinity doctrine extra-biblical.[citation needed] They[who?] say there is a widely acknowledged synthesis of Christianity with Platonic philosophy evident in trinitarian formulas appearing by the end of the 3rd century. They allege that beginning with the Constantinian period, these pagan ideas were forcibly imposed on the churches as Catholic doctrine. Most groups subscribing to the theory of a Great Apostasy generally concur in this thesis.[citation needed]

The early apologists, including Justin Martyr, Tertullian and Irenaeus, frequently discussed the parallels and contrasts between Christianity, Paganism and other syncretic religions, and answered charges of borrowing from paganism in their apologetical writings.[citation needed]

Hellenic influences

[edit]

Stuart G Hall (formerly Professor of Ecclesiastical History at King's College, London) describes the subsequent process of philosophical/theological amalgamation in Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church (1991), where he writes:

The apologists began to claim that Greek culture pointed to and was consummated in the Christian message, just as the Old Testament was. This process was done most thoroughly in the synthesis of Clement of Alexandria. It can be done in several ways. You can rake through Greek literature, and find (especially in the oldest seers and poets) references to 'God' which are more compatible with monotheism than with polytheism (so at length Athenagoras.) You can work out a common chronology between the legends of prehistoric (Homer) Greece and the biblical record (so Theophilus.) You can adapt a piece of pre-Christian Jewish apologetic, which claimed that Plato and other Greek philosophers got their best ideas indirectly from the teachings of Moses in the Bible, which was much earlier. This theory combines the advantage of making out the Greeks to be plagiarists (and therefore second-rate or criminal), while claiming that they support Christianity by their arguments at least some of the time. Especially this applied to the question of God.[138]

The neo-Platonic trinities, such as that of the One, the Nous and the Soul, are not considered a trinity necessarily of consubstantial equals as in mainstream Christianity. However, the neo-Platonic trinity has the doctrine of emanation, or "eternal derivation", a timeless procedure of generation having as a source the One and claimed to be paralleled with the generation of the light from the Sun. This was adopted by Origen and later on by Athanasius, and applied to the generation of the Son from the Father, because they believed that this analogy could be used to support the notion that the Father, as immutable, always had been a Father, and that the generation of the Son is therefore eternal and timeless.[139]

The synthesis of Christianity with Platonic philosophy was further incorporated in the trinitarian formulas that appeared by the end of the 3rd century. "The Greek philosophical theology" was "developed during the Trinitarian controversies over the relationships among the persons of the Godhead".[140] The allegation of borrowing was raised by some disputants when the Nicene doctrine was being formalized and adopted by the bishops. For example, in the 4th century, Marcellus of Ancyra, who taught the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit were one person (hypostasis), said in his On the Holy Church, 9:

Now with the heresy of the Ariomaniacs, which has corrupted the Church of God ... These then teach three hypostases, just as Valentinus the heresiarch first invented in the book entitled by him 'On the Three Natures'. For he was the first to invent three hypostases and three persons of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and he is discovered to have filched this from Hermes and Plato."[141]

In his Introduction to the 1964 book Meditations, the Anglican priest Maxwell Staniforth discussed the profound influence of Stoic philosophy on Christianity. In particular:

Again in the doctrine of the Trinity, the ecclesiastical conception of Father, Word, and Spirit finds its germ in the different Stoic names of the Divine Unity. Thus Seneca, writing of the supreme Power which shapes the universe, states, 'This Power we sometimes call the All-ruling God, sometimes the incorporeal Wisdom, sometimes the holy Spirit, sometimes Destiny.' The Church had only to reject the last of these terms to arrive at its own acceptable definition of the Divine Nature; while the further assertion 'these three are One', which the modern mind finds paradoxical, was no more than commonplace to those familiar with Stoic notions.[142]

Christian groups with nontrinitarian positions

[edit]

Early Christian

[edit]

Unitarian and Universalism

[edit]

Latter Day Saints

[edit]

Bible Students and splinter groups

[edit]

Sacred Name movement

[edit]

Oneness Protestant groups

[edit]

World Wide Church of God splinter groups

[edit]

New religious movements

[edit]

Other Nontrinitarians

[edit]

Country-specific

[edit]

People

[edit]

See also

[edit]

Citations

[edit]
  1. ^ Olson, Roger E; Hall, Christopher Alan (2002). The Trinity. Wm. B. Eerdmans. ISBN 978-0-8028-4827-7. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
  2. ^ a b c Kelly, Joseph F. (2006). An Introduction to the New Testament for Catholics. Liturgical Press. p. 5. ISBN 978-0-8146-5216-9. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
  3. ^ Olson, Roger E (1999). The Story of Christian Theology. InterVarsity Press. p. 173. ISBN 978-0-8308-1505-0. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
  4. ^ Lohse, Bernhard (1966). A Short History of Christian Doctrine. Fortress Press. ISBN 978-1-4514-0423-4. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
  5. ^ Geanakoplos, Deno John (1989). Constantinople and the West. Univ of Wisconsin Press. ISBN 978-0-299-11884-6. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
  6. ^ Halsey, A. (1988). British Social Trends since 1900: A Guide to the Changing Social Structure of Britain. Palgrave Macmillan UK. p. 518. ISBN 978-1-349-19466-7. his so called 'non-Trinitarian' group includes the Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, Christadelphians, Apostolics, Christian Scientists, Theosophists, Church of Scientology, Unification Church (Moonies), the Worldwide Church of God and so on.
  7. ^ von Harnack, Adolf (1894-03-01). "History of Dogma". Retrieved 2007-06-15. [In the 2nd century,] Jesus was either regarded as the man whom God hath chosen, in whom the Deity or the Spirit of God dwelt, and who, after being tested, was adopted by God and invested with dominion, (Adoptionist Christology); or Jesus was regarded as a heavenly spiritual being (the highest after God) who took flesh, and again returned to heaven after the completion of his work on earth (pneumatic Christology)
  8. ^ Justo L. González, The Story of Christianity: The Early Church to the Present Day, Prince Press, 1984, Vol. 1, pp. 159–161 • Jaroslav Pelikan, The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine, The University of Chicago Press, 1971, Vol. 1, pp. 181–199
  9. ^ Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). "Christianity" . Encyclopædia Britannica. Vol. 6 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. p. 285.
  10. ^ "History of Arianism". Retrieved 5 March 2015.
  11. ^ "Second Creed of Sirmium or "The Blasphemy of Sirmium"". www.fourthcentury.com. Retrieved 2017-03-09.
  12. ^ Stephen Goranson, "Ebionites," ed. David Noel Freedman, The Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary (New York: Doubleday, 1992), 261.
  13. ^ "American Unitarian Conference". Archived from the original on 2019-05-21. Retrieved 2015-06-30.
  14. ^ a b David K. Bernard, Oneness and Trinity A.D. 100–300 – The Doctrine of God and Ancient Christian Writings – Word Aflame Press, Hazelwood Montana, 1991, p. 156.
  15. ^ St. Athanasius (1911), "In Controversy With the Arians", Select Treatises, Newman, John Henry Cardinal trans, Longmans, Green, & Co, p. 124, footn.
  16. ^ John Philoponus – Tritheism – Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved 10 July 2019.
  17. ^ Chapman, John (1912). "Tritheists" Archived 2012-06-15 at the Wayback Machine. The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company (public domain). Retrieved October 16, 2019.
  18. ^ Flint, James; Deb Flint. One God or a Trinity?. Hyderabad: Printland Publishers. ISBN 978-81-87409-61-8.
  19. ^ Pearce, Fred. Jesus: God the Son or Son of God? Does the Bible Teach the Trinity?. Birmingham: The Christadelphian Magazine and Publishing Association Ltd (UK). p. 8.
  20. ^ Tennant, Harry. The Holy Spirit: Bible Understanding of God's Power. Birmingham: The Christadelphian Magazine and Publishing Association Ltd (UK).
  21. ^ a b Broughton, James H.; Peter J Southgate. The Trinity: True or False?. UK: The Dawn Book Supply. Archived from the original on 2011-11-18.
  22. ^ Nelson's guide to denominations J. Gordon Melton – 2007 "Later in the century, various leaders also began to express doubts about the Trinity, and a spectrum of opinion emerged. ... Still others, such as the Church of God General Conference (Abrahamic Faith) specifically denied the Trinity ..."
  23. ^ Manalo, Eraño G., Fundamental Beliefs of the Iglesia ni Cristo (Church of Christ) (Iglesia ni Cristo; Manila 1989)
  24. ^ Encyclopedia of Protestantism, p. 474, J. Gordon Melton, 2005: "... for his many departures from traditional Christian and Protestant affirmations including the Trinity and the deity of Christ. ... 1 (1886; reprint, Rutherford, NJ: Dawn Bible Students Association, nd)"
  25. ^ Watch Tower, October 1881, Watch Tower Reprints p. 290 As Retrieved 2009-09-23 Archived 2011-10-02 at the Wayback Machine, p. 4, ""He gave his only begotten Son." This phraseology brings us into conflict with an old Babylonian theory, viz.: Trinitarianism. If that doctrine is true, how could there be any Son to give? A begotten Son, too? Impossible. If these three are one, did God send himself? And how could Jesus say: "My Father is greater than I." John 14:28. [emphasis retained from original]"
  26. ^ "Z1882 July". Archived from the original on 2009-01-22. Retrieved 2012-03-05.
  27. ^ The Watchtower. January 15, 1992. p. 23. {{cite magazine}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)
  28. ^ Insight on the Scriptures. Vol. 2. Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania. 1988. pp. 393–394.
  29. ^ Chapter 138 – Christ at God's Right Hand, JW.org. Retrieved October 18, 2019.
  30. ^ Should You Believe in the Trinity?. Watch Tower Society. p. 20.
  31. ^ Holland, Jeffrey R. "The Only True God and Jesus Christ Whom He Hath Sent". Retrieved 29 November 2013.
  32. ^ https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics/godhead?lang=eng
  33. ^ a b Giles, Jerry C. (1992). "Jesus Christ: Firstborn in the Spirit". In Ludlow, Daniel H (ed.). Encyclopedia of Mormonism. New York: Macmillan Publishing. p. 728. ISBN 978-0-02-879602-4. OCLC 24502140.
  34. ^ a b Millet, Robert L. (1992). "Jesus Christ: Overview". In Ludlow, Daniel H (ed.). Encyclopedia of Mormonism. New York: Macmillan Publishing. pp. 724–726. ISBN 978-0-02-879602-4. OCLC 24502140.
  35. ^ a b "Arianism". Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry. 2008-12-13. Retrieved 29 November 2013.
  36. ^ Robinson, Stephen E. (1992). "God the Father: Overview". In Ludlow, Daniel H (ed.). Encyclopedia of Mormonism. New York: Macmillan Publishing. pp. 548–550. ISBN 978-0-02-879602-4. OCLC 24502140.
  37. ^ Backman, Milton V. (1992). "First Vision". In Ludlow, Daniel H (ed.). Encyclopedia of Mormonism. New York: Macmillan Publishing. pp. 515–516. ISBN 978-0-02-879602-4. OCLC 24502140.
  38. ^ "What is Arianism?". The Arian Catholic Church. Archived from the original on 9 April 2006. Retrieved 29 November 2013.
  39. ^ "Gospel Principles – Chapter 1: Our Father in Heaven". The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Retrieved 4 June 2017. The Nature of God
  40. ^ "'The Glory of God Is Intelligence' Lesson 37: Section 93", Doctrine and Covenants Instructor's Guide: Religion 324–325 (PDF), Institutes of Religion, Church Educational System, 1981, pp. 73–74
  41. ^ "The Oneness of God". Archived from the original on 16 February 2008. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
  42. ^ Patterson, Eric; Rybarczyk, Edmund (2007). The Future of Pentecostalism in the United States. New York: Lexington Books. pp. 123–124. ISBN 978-0-7391-2102-3.
  43. ^ McCardle, Elaine and Kenny Wiley (2017-06-28). "Bryan Stevenson weaves story, policy in 2017 Ware Lecture". UU World. Retrieved 2019-09-17. Stevenson referred to the UU faith's members repeatedly as "Universalists," which caught the attention of several social media users. Unitarian Universalists are more commonly referred to colloquially as "Unitarians."
  44. ^ Buursma, Bruce (1986-03-30). "Unitarians Making Peace with Easter". Chicago Tribune. Retrieved 2019-09-17.
  45. ^ Unitarian Universalist Association (9 February 2015). "Beliefs & Principles". uua.org. Retrieved 2019-09-17.
  46. ^ Unitarian Universalist Association (25 November 2014). "Christian Unitarian Universalists". uua.org. Retrieved 2019-09-17. Some of our UU congregations are Christian in orientation, worshipping regularly with the New Testament, offering Communion, and celebrating Christian holidays throughout the year. All of our congregations welcome people with Christian backgrounds and beliefs.
  47. ^ Edict by Emperor Constantine against the Arians
  48. ^ "In addition, if any writing composed by Arius should be found, it should be handed over to the flames, so that not only will the wickedness of his teaching be obliterated, but nothing will be left even to remind anyone of him. And I hereby make a public order, that if someone should be discovered to have hidden a writing composed by Arius, and not to have immediately brought it forward and destroyed it by fire, his penalty shall be death. As soon as he is discovered in this offense, he shall be submitted for capital punishment." – Edict by Emperor Constantine against the Arians. Athanasius (23 January 2010). "Edict by Emperor Constantine against the Arians". Fourth Century Christianity. Wisconsin Lutheran College. Retrieved 2 May 2012.
  49. ^ Litfin, Bryan M (2007). Getting to Know the Church Fathers. Brazos Press. ISBN 978-1-4412-0074-7. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
  50. ^ Frassetto, Michael (2003). Encyclopedia of Barbarian Europe. Bloomsbury Academic. ISBN 978-1-57607-263-9. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
  51. ^ Kaatz, Kevin (2012). Early Controversies and the Growth of Christianity. ABC-CLIO. p. 113. ISBN 978-0-313-38359-5. Retrieved 5 March 2015. into the Arian version.
  52. ^ "NPNF2-04. Athanasius: Select Works and Letters". Retrieved 5 March 2015.
  53. ^ Elaine Pagels, Beyond Belief: The Secret Gospel of Thomas (Random House, 2003), n.p.
  54. ^ "NPNF2-04. Athanasius: Select Works and Letters". Ccel.org. 13 July 2005. Retrieved 21 January 2012.
  55. ^ David Bernard's The Oneness of God, Word Aflame Press, 1983, ISBN 0-912315-12-1. pp. 264–274.
  56. ^ Wells, H. G. (n.d.). The Outline of History: being a plain history of life and mankind. Forgotten Books. Vol. 2. London: The Waverley Book Company. p. 284. ISBN 978-1-4400-8226-9.
  57. ^ W. Fulton, "Trinity", Encyclopædia of Religion and Ethics, T. & T. Clark, 1921, Vol. 12, p. 459.
  58. ^ Lüling, Günter (2003). A challenge to Islam for reformation: the rediscovery and reliable reconstruction of a comprehensive pre-Islamic Christian hymnal hidden in the Koran under earliest Islamic reinterpretations (1st ed.). Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers. pp. XXII, XLVII, LII–ILIV, LIX, LXII, 85, 213, 338, 358, 520. ISBN 978-81-208-1952-8.
  59. ^ Karl-Heinz Ohlig, Der frühe Islam, 2007, ISBN 3-89930-090-4
  60. ^ Popp, Volker (2013). Ohlig, Karl-Heinz (ed.). Early Islam: a critical reconstruction based on contemporary sources. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books. pp. 21, 65, 67, 100, 367. ISBN 978-1-61614-825-6.
  61. ^ Gallez, Édouard-Marie (2005). Le Messie et son prophète : aux origines de l’Islam. Tome 1 : De Qumrân à Muhammad [The Messiah and His Prophet: On the Origins of Islam. Vol. 1: From Qumran to Muhammad]. Studia Arabica (in French). Versailles: Éditions de Paris. pp. 37–165.
  62. ^ Donner, Fred M. (2010). Muhammad and the Believers: At the Origins of Islam. Harvard University Press. pp. 212–214.
  63. ^ Meyendorff, John (1964). "Byzantine Views of Islam" (PDF). Dumbarton Oaks Papers. 18: 119–121. John lists Islam among the Christian heresies… Muhammad was an Arian, because he denied the Divinity of the Logos and of the Holy Spirit.
  64. ^ "Lettres Newtonianism". Voltaire Foundation. Retrieved 2025-01-19.
  65. ^ Unitarians face a new age: the report of the Commission of Appraisal. American Unitarian Association. ed. Frederick May Eliot, Harlan Paul Douglass – 1936 "Chapter III Church Growth and Decline During the Last Decade. Year Book data permit the calculation of growth or decline in membership for 297 Unitarian churches which existed throughout the last decade and ..."
  66. ^ Charles Lippy (2006), Faith in America: Changes, Challenges, New Directions, p.2. Quote: "However, when the national interest in novel religious forms waned by the mid- nineteenth century, Unitarianism and Universalism began to decline. For the vast majority of religious bodies in America, growth continued unabated."
  67. ^ a b Barclay, William (1998). The Apostles' Creed. Westminster John Knox Press. ISBN 978-0-664-25826-9. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
  68. ^ "[title not cited]". New Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. XIV. 1967. p. 299.
  69. ^ MacQuarrie, John (2005). "Trinity". Encyclopedia Encarta. Microsoft Encarta Reference Library. Microsoft Corporation.
  70. ^ "Trinity". Encyclopædia Britannica. Ultimate Reference Suite DVD. 2004.
  71. ^ Bassler, J.M. (1992). "God in the NT". The Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 2. New York: Doubleday. p. 1055.
  72. ^ a b c d Brown, Raymond E. (1 December 1965). "Does the New Testament Call Jesus God?". Theological Studies. 26 (4): 545–573. doi:10.1177/004056396502600401. S2CID 53007327.
  73. ^ Loewen, Jacob A. (1 April 1984). "The Names of God in the New Testament". The Bible Translator. 35 (2): 208–211. doi:10.1177/026009438403500202. S2CID 172043076.
  74. ^ Confraternity of Christian Doctrine (2011). "Bible Dictionary". New American Bible (St. Joseph ed.). Catholic Book Publishing. ISBN 978-0-89942-617-4.
  75. ^ "Against Dalcour II". Apostolic Academics. Oneness Pentecostal Apologetics. February 2017. Retrieved 10 July 2019.
  76. ^ Reasoning from the Scriptures. Philadelphia: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society. 2015 [1986]. pp. 405, 415–416.
  77. ^ Hertz, J.H. (1960). The Pentateuch and the Haftorahs. Vol. 1. Soncino Press. p. 215. ISBN 978-0-900689-21-5. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help)
  78. ^ Kruse, Colin G. (2004). The Gospel According to John. Wm. B. Eerdmans. ISBN 978-0-8028-2771-5. Retrieved 5 March 2015 – via Google Books.
  79. ^ Ramsey Michaels, J. (2011). John. Understanding the Bible – Commentary. ISBN 978-1-4412-3659-3. Retrieved 5 March 2015 – via Google Books.
  80. ^ Radmacher, Earl (1999). Nelson's New Illustrated Bible Commentary. Thomas Nelson. ISBN 978-1-4185-8734-5 – via Google Books.
  81. ^ Gundry, Robert H. (2011). Commentary on John. Commentary on the New Testament. Vol. 4. ISBN 978-1-4412-3761-3. Retrieved 5 March 2015 – via Google Books.
  82. ^ "John 1:1c: "God", "divine", or "a god"?". OnlyTruGod.org. Retrieved 24 November 2014.
  83. ^ Kaiser, Christopher B. (1982). The Doctrine of God: A historical survey. Foundations for Faith. Westchester: Crossway Books. p. 31.
  84. ^ a b "Should you believe in the trinity?". Jehovah's Witness (wol.jw.org). Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania. 2006. p. 24.
  85. ^ Stay Biblical - All Jesus is God Bible passages and claims debunked
  86. ^ a b Kemp, Steve (c. 2009) [22 May 2000]. Myers, Jim (ed.). "Elohiym". Biblical Heritage Center. Archived from the original on 2009-10-29. Retrieved 2009-04-02.
  87. ^ "אֱלֹהִים (elohim) – God, god". Strong's Hebrew. 430. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
  88. ^ "Old Testament Hebrew Lexicon". Bible Study Tools.
  89. ^ "2 Corinthians 13:14 – Trinity?". The Son of Jehovah (blog). 2010-10-09. Retrieved 5 March 2015 – via wordpress.com.
  90. ^ Philippians 2:5–6
  91. ^ Philippians 2:5–6
  92. ^ Philippians 2:6–8 biblicalunitarian.com. Retrieved 8 July 2019.
  93. ^ "The trinity delusion – Philippians 2:6". Retrieved 8 July 2019 – via angelfire.com.
  94. ^ Moen, Skip (October 2014). "The assumed trinity: A look at Philippians 2:6". skipmoen.com. Hebrew Word Study. Retrieved 8 July 2019.
  95. ^ Kemball-Cook, David (2007). Is God a Trinity? (self-published). Lulu.com. ISBN 978-0-9542211-1-9. Retrieved 5 March 2015 – via Google Books.
  96. ^ Stephen T. Davis; Daniel Kendall; Gerald O'Collins, eds. (2002). The Trinity: An Interdisciplinary Symposium on the Trinity. Oxford University Press. p. 357. ISBN 978-0-19-924612-0.
  97. ^ Roberts, Nancy (January 2011). "Trinity vs. Monotheism: A False Dichotomy?". The Muslim World. 101 (1): 73–93. doi:10.1111/j.1478-1913.2010.01340.x. ISSN 0027-4909.
  98. ^ Heb 1:3
  99. ^ "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit : The One God", Reconsidering the Doctrine of God, Bloomsbury T & T Clark, pp. 63–64, 2005, doi:10.5040/9780567660749.ch-005, ISBN 978-0-567-66074-9, retrieved 2025-04-03
  100. ^ "The Chalcedonian Definition". Retrieved 5 March 2015.
  101. ^ The Word "Homoousios" from Hellenism to Christianity, by P.F. Beatrice, Church History, Cambridge University Press on behalf of the American Society of Church History, Vol. 71, No. 2, (Jun., 2002), pp. 243–272. (retrieved @ noemon.net) Archived July 23, 2011, at the Wayback Machine
  102. ^ "The word Trinity is not found in the Bible". CARM – The Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry. 2008-11-24. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
  103. ^ McQuick, Oneil (2005). The Voice. L.I.M. ISBN 978-1-4196-1730-0. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
  104. ^ "Institute for Religious Research – The Biblical Basis of the Doctrine of the Trinity – Introduction". Institute for Religious Research. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
  105. ^ The Unitarian: a monthly magazine of liberal Christianity ed. Jabez Thomas Sunderland, Brooke Herford, Frederick B. Mott – 1893 "We believe in the Holy Spirit, man's sole reliance for guidance, safety, or salvation, not as a separate person, entity, reality, or consciousness, existent apart from man or God, but as the recognizing sympathetic inter-communication in love between God and the human soul, the direct converse or communion of man's consciousness with Deity."
  106. ^ "Is the Holy Spirit a Person?". Awake!: 14–15. July 2006. In the Bible, God's Holy Spirit is identified as God's power in action. Hence, an accurate translation of the Bible's Hebrew text refers to God's spirit as "God's active force".
  107. ^ Who and What Is God?Mystery of the Ages – Herbert W. Armstrong. Retrieved 19 May 2012.
  108. ^ Peter Althouse Spirit of the last days: Pentecostal eschatology in conversation p. 12. 2003. "The Oneness Pentecostal stream follows in the steps of the Reformed stream, but has a modalistic view of the Godhead"
  109. ^ See under heading "The Father is the Holy Ghost" in David Bernard, The Oneness of God, Chapter 6.
  110. ^ See also David Bernard, A Handbook of Basic Doctrines, Word Aflame Press, 1988.
  111. ^ See under "The Lord God and His Spirit," in Chapter 7 of David Bernard, The Oneness of God Archived 2008-02-16 at the Wayback Machine.
  112. ^ Wilson, Jerry A. (1992). "Holy Spirit". In Ludlow, Daniel H (ed.). Encyclopedia of Mormonism. New York: Macmillan Publishing. p. 651. ISBN 978-0-02-879602-4. OCLC 24502140. The Holy Spirit is a term often used to refer to the Holy Ghost. In such cases the Holy Spirit is a personage."
  113. ^ McConkie, Joseph Fielding (1992). "Holy Ghost". In Ludlow, Daniel H (ed.). Encyclopedia of Mormonism. New York: Macmillan Publishing. pp. 649–651. ISBN 978-0-02-879602-4. OCLC 24502140.
  114. ^ D&C 131:7–8 ("There is no such thing as immaterial matter. All spirit is matter, but it is more fine or pure, and can only be discerned by purer eyes; We cannot see it; but when our bodies are purified we shall see that it is all matter.")
  115. ^ a b D&C 130:22.
  116. ^ Romney, Marion G. (May 1974), "The Holy Ghost", Ensign
  117. ^ a b Millennial Star. Vol. XII. October 15, 1850. pp. 305–309. Retrieved March 30, 2011.
  118. ^ "Basic Beliefs Articles of Faith and Practice". Church of Christ. Archived from the original on 21 January 2015. Retrieved 21 January 2015.
  119. ^ "Unity Palo Alto Community Church – Beliefs | Twenty Questions and Answers". www.unitypaloalto.org. Archived from the original on October 7, 2007.
  120. ^ Seitz, Christopher R. (2001). Nicene Christianity: The Future for a New Ecumenism. Brazos Press. ISBN 978-1-84227-154-4. Archived from the original on 14 January 2023. Retrieved 21 May 2022.
  121. ^ a b Cleaver, Ken (2012). "The Practical and Ethical Considerations in Labeling a Religious Group as a Cult". Journal for the Study of Religions and Ideologies. 11 (33): 164–181. Archived from the original on 2021-08-29.
  122. ^ a b Ladouceur, Paul (2020). "Christian Ecumenism and Interreligious Dialogue: Convergences and Divergences" (PDF). Journal of Ecumenical Studies. 55 (2): 167–189. doi:10.1353/ecu.2020.0018.
  123. ^ a b Solveig Nilson. "Is Mormonism Christian?". Retrieved 27 August 2024.
  124. ^ Clifton, Shane (Fall 2012). "Ecumenism From the Bottom Up: A Pentecostal Perspective". Journal of Ecumenical Studies. 47 (4).
  125. ^ "Ecumenical and Interfaith Ministries". Community of Christ.
  126. ^ Montefiore, C. G. (2016-06-18) [January 1897]. "Unitarianism and Judaism in Their Relations to Each Other". The Jewish Quarterly Review. 9 (2): 240–253. doi:10.2307/1450588. JSTOR 1450588. You [Unitarian Christians] have relations and points of connexion with Judaism on the one side, and with orthodox Christianity on the other. You are in a position of vantage to absorb the permanent elements of truth and value lying at your right hand and at your left. For, looked at from one point of view, though you might yourselves deny it, you constitute a phase of Judaism; looked at from another, though many Christians deny it, you are a phase of Christianity. The paradox of the one assertion to some of yourselves is no greater than the paradox of the other to many beyond your pale
  127. ^ The Holy Qur'an. 4:171.
  128. ^ Cleland, Bilal. "Islam and Unitarians". Tell me about Islam. Retrieved 16 June 2016.
  129. ^ 'At times he forms one of a trinity in unity, with Ra and Osiris, as in Fig. 87, a god with the two sceptres of Osiris, the hawk's head of Horus, and the sun of Ra. This is the god described to Eusebius, who tells us that when the oracle was consulted about the divine nature, by those who wished to understand this complicated mythology, it had answered, "I am Apollo and Lord and Bacchus," or, to use the Egyptian names, "I am Ra and Horus and Osiris." Another god, in the form of a porcelain idol to be worn as a charm, shows us Horus as one of a trinity in unity, in name, at least, agreeing with that afterwards adopted by the Christians—namely, the Great God, the Son God, and the Spirit God.'—Samuel Sharpe, Egyptian Mythology and Egyptian Christianity, 1863, pp. 89–90.
  130. ^ "How Ancient Trinitarian Gods Influenced Adoption of the Trinity". United Church of God. 2011-07-22. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
  131. ^ Michael Barber – Should Christianity Abandon the Doctrine of the Trinity? – Universal-Publishers, Nov 1, 2006 – Part Three, p. 78.
  132. ^ "Περί Ουρανού/1". Retrieved 5 March 2015.
  133. ^ "Aristote: Traité du Ciel (livre I – texte grec)". Retrieved 5 March 2015.
  134. ^ "Bekker edition of Aristotle's works, volume II, p. 211". Archived from the original on 2014-08-27. Retrieved 2017-09-10.
  135. ^ McKirahan, Richard D. (1999). "Review". The Philosophical Review. 108 (2): 285–287. doi:10.2307/2998305. JSTOR 2998305.
  136. ^ Phaedo 104e.
  137. ^ Course of Ideas, pp. 387–388.
  138. ^ Stuart George Hall (1992). Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing. p. 50. ISBN 0-8028-0629-5
  139. ^ Select Treatises of St. Athanasius – In Controversy With the Arians – Freely Translated by John Henry Cardinal Newmann – Longmans, Green, and Co., 1911
  140. ^ A. Hilary Armstrong, Henry J. Blumenthal, Platonism. Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved May 13, 2008, from Encyclopædia Britannica 2006 Ultimate Reference Suite DVD.
  141. ^ Logan A. Marcellus of Ancyra (Pseudo-Anthimus), 'On the Holy Church': Text, Translation and Commentary. Verses 8–9. Journal of Theological Studies, NS, Volume 51, Pt. 1, April 2000, p. 95.
  142. ^ Aurelius, Marcus (1964). Meditations. London: Penguin Books. p. 25. ISBN 978-0-14-044140-6. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help)
  143. ^ Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania, Should You Believe in the Trinity? (2006)
  144. ^ Neusner, Jacob, ed. 2009. World Religions in America: An Introduction, Fourth Ed. Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press, p. 257. ISBN 978-0-664-23320-4
  145. ^ Beit-Hallahmi, Benjamin. 1998. The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Active New Religions, Sects and Cults, Revised Ed. New York: Rosen Publishing Group, p. 73. ISBN 0-8239-2586-2
  146. ^ Walker, James K. (2007). The Concise Guide to Today's Religions and Spirituality. Eugene, Oregon: Harvest House Publishers. pp. 117–118. ISBN 978-0-7369-2011-7
  147. ^ Avery Cardinal Dulles. The Deist Minimum. 2005.

Further reading

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia
from Grokipedia
Nontrinitarianism encompasses Christian theological positions that reject the doctrine of the , which asserts that exists as one divine essence eternally subsisting in three coequal, consubstantial persons: the , the (Jesus Christ), and the . Instead, nontrinitarians maintain the absolute unity of , typically identifying the alone as the one true , while interpreting the and in subordinate, non-divine, or modalistic terms—such as Jesus as a created being, a human empowered by , or a mode of 's self-revelation. This rejection stems from interpretations of biblical texts emphasizing , such as Deuteronomy 6:4 (" our is one ") and :3 (distinguishing the as the "only true " from Jesus as the one "sent forth" by him). Historically, nontrinitarian views trace back to , where subordinationist theologies predominated before the formalization of Trinitarian orthodoxy at the Councils of (325 CE) and (381 CE). In the pre-Nicene period (1st–3rd centuries), thinkers like and described the Son as subordinate to the Father, influenced by Jewish and , without an explicit Trinitarian framework. Key early nontrinitarian positions included , which held that the Son was created by the Father and thus not coeternal (condemned at ), Adoptionism (or Dynamic Monarchianism), viewing as a human adopted as God's Son at , and Modalism (or ), positing that Father, Son, and Spirit are successive modes of a single divine person rather than distinct hypostases. These perspectives were marginalized as heretical by emerging orthodox consensus but resurfaced during the and Enlightenment. In the modern era, nontrinitarianism manifests in diverse denominations and movements, often emphasizing scriptural literalism or rational theology over creedal traditions. During the 16th–17th centuries, it gained prominence through Socinianism in Poland, led by Faustus Socinus, who denied Jesus's preexistence and divinity, influencing later English Unitarians like John Biddle and Joseph Priestley. American Unitarianism emerged in the early 19th century from New England Congregationalism, promoting a humanitarian Christology and evolving into the more liberal Unitarian Universalist Association by 1961, though retaining nontrinitarian roots. Other notable groups include Jehovah's Witnesses, who since the late 19th century have taught that Jehovah is the sole Almighty God, Jesus is his first creation (the archangel Michael), and the holy spirit is God's active force rather than a person. Additional traditions encompass Oneness Pentecostals, who adhere to a modalistic view of God's oneness, and Christadelphians, who see Jesus as fully human without preexistence. These groups collectively represent a minority within global Christianity but highlight ongoing debates over God's nature, biblical authority, and the relationship between faith and reason.

Definition and Core Concepts

Definition and Historical Context

Nontrinitarianism refers to a range of Christian theological positions that reject the orthodox doctrine of the , maintaining instead that the is a single, unitary being without distinction into three co-equal, co-eternal persons. In these views, God is understood as one indivisible entity, with Jesus Christ often regarded as subordinate to the Father—either as a created being, a divine agent, or uniquely exalted but not co-essential—and the typically interpreted as God's active power or influence rather than a distinct person. This contrasts sharply with Trinitarian orthodoxy, which holds that God exists eternally as one essence in three distinct persons: Father, Son, and , each fully divine and consubstantial, as articulated in creeds like the . The term "nontrinitarianism" derives from "non-Trinitarian," a compound emerging in English to denote opposition to Trinitarian , with its earliest documented use appearing in the 1830s. Specifically, the noun form "non-Trinitarianism" first appears in 1834, in the Unitarian Magazine & Chron., reflecting its initial application to describe anti-Nicene or unitarian perspectives within Protestant contexts during the . Prior to this modern terminology, such beliefs were labeled as heresies like or , but the label "nontrinitarian" provided a broader, neutral descriptor for diverse unitary views outside the established church. Historically, nontrinitarian beliefs trace their roots to the monotheistic framework of 1st-century Judaism, which emphasized the absolute oneness of God (as in the Shema of Deuteronomy 6:4) and influenced early Christian understandings of divinity. In the apostolic and subapostolic eras, subordinationist tendencies prevailed, viewing the Son and Spirit as derived from the Father, as seen in thinkers like Origen (c. 186–255 CE). These perspectives became more sharply defined and contested after the Council of Nicaea in 325 CE, which affirmed the Son's co-equality with the Father against Arian views, leading to the formalization of nontrinitarian positions as alternatives to the emerging Trinitarian consensus by the late 4th century.

Distinction from Trinitarianism

Nontrinitarianism fundamentally differs from Trinitarianism in its conception of the , rejecting the idea of three co-equal, co-eternal, and consubstantial hypostases—distinct persons sharing one divine essence—while affirming a unitary as a singular, indivisible being. In Trinitarian doctrine, the , Son, and are each fully , interrelated yet distinct, maintaining through their shared substance (homoousios). Nontrinitarians, by contrast, view as one essence without internal plurality of persons; is often understood as subordinate to the , either as a created being, divine agent, or manifestation, and the as 's power or active force rather than a separate person. Terminologically, nontrinitarians reject key Trinitarian formulations like "homoousios" (same substance), which they see as a non-biblical innovation that blurs strict and implies by suggesting multiple divine centers of . Instead, they emphasize "" in its purest form, aligning with a singular divine identity, and Trinitarian as compromising the unity of God by introducing distinctions that resemble three gods. This rejection stems from a commitment to scriptural simplicity over creedal elaborations, where terms like hypostases are viewed as extraneous to the biblical portrayal of God. Philosophically, nontrinitarianism upholds a strict rooted in Jewish traditions of God's absolute oneness, contrasting with Trinitarianism's development under Hellenistic influences that incorporated concepts of substance and relation to reconcile plurality within unity. This approach prioritizes and avoids the perceived ontological complexities of co-equal persons, which nontrinitarians argue deviate from the unipersonal God of ancient . A common misconception is that nontrinitarians wholly deny ' divinity, whereas many affirm his divine status in varying degrees—such as being begotten by or embodying divine attributes—without granting co-equality or eternality with the . This distinction clarifies that nontrinitarian views maintain Christ's exalted role while preserving 's singular sovereignty.

Historical Development

Early Christianity and Patristic Era

In the first three centuries of Christianity, prior to the Council of Nicaea, a diverse array of nontrinitarian views emerged, reflecting varied interpretations of Christ's nature within early Christian communities. Adoptionism, which posited that Jesus was a human figure elevated to divine sonship at his baptism, gained prominence through figures like Theodotus of Byzantium, a second-century leatherworker and theologian from Byzantium who taught that the divine Logos descended upon Jesus during his baptism in the Jordan River, endowing him with prophetic powers but not inherent divinity. Theodotus' teachings, preserved primarily through critiques by Hippolytus of Rome, emphasized Jesus' humanity and were condemned as heretical by Pope Victor I around 198 CE, leading to his excommunication in Rome. Similarly, Paul of Samosata, bishop of Antioch from approximately 260 to 268 CE, advanced a dynamic monarchian Christology, asserting that the pre-existent Logos indwelt the man Jesus progressively, culminating in a union at his baptism or resurrection, but without pre-existence or full divinity; this view was rejected at the Synod of Antioch in 268 CE, where Paul was deposed for subordinating the Son to the Father and blurring distinctions in the Godhead. The Ebionites, a Jewish-Christian sect active in Palestine and Transjordan during the first and second centuries, further exemplified this diversity by viewing Jesus as the human Messiah born of Joseph and Mary, empowered by God but not divine by nature, while adhering strictly to Mosaic Law and rejecting Paul's epistles as inauthentic. These groups, often labeled "Judaizers" by opponents, represented a unitarian monotheism rooted in Jewish traditions, influencing early Christian debates on Christ's identity. The Council of Nicaea in 325 CE marked a pivotal confrontation with nontrinitarian , particularly , named after , a in . articulated a in which the Son was a created being, begotten by the Father before time but not co-eternal or of the same substance (homoousios), famously stating in his Thalia that "there was a time when he was not," positioning the Son as subordinate and the first of God's creations to mediate divine will. This view, drawing on scriptural passages like Proverbs 8:22 and John 14:28, spread rapidly in and beyond, prompting Emperor Constantine I to convene the council with over 300 bishops to resolve the controversy. The council condemned ' teachings as heretical, exiling him and affirming in the that the Son is "begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father," thereby establishing a foundational anti-subordinationist while anathematizing specific Arian propositions. Despite this, Arian sympathizers, including bishops like , continued to advocate semi-Arian compromises, such as homoiousios (similar substance), prolonging the debate. Post-Nicene developments intensified the suppression of nontrinitarian views through key figures and imperial actions. Athanasius of Alexandria, a staunch Nicene advocate and bishop from 328 CE, vigorously opposed Arianism in his Four Orations Against the Arians (c. 339–345 CE), arguing exegetically that the Son's eternal generation from the Father preserved divine unity without creation, countering Arius' temporal subordination by interpreting texts like John 1:1–14 as evidence of co-equality. Athanasius faced multiple exiles—five times between 336 and 366 CE—due to Arian-leaning emperors like Constantius II, yet his writings, including On the Incarnation, solidified Nicene theology against what he termed the "Arian madness." The tide turned decisively with the Edict of Thessalonica (Cunctos populos) issued on February 27, 380 CE, by Emperors Theodosius I, Gratian, and Valentinian II, which declared the Nicene faith—upholding the Trinity and condemning Arianism—the sole legitimate Catholic Christianity, ordering the suppression of dissenting groups and the installation of Nicene bishops. This edict effectively marginalized nontrinitarian factions empire-wide, paving the way for Trinitarian dominance at the Council of Constantinople in 381 CE. Nontrinitarian influences, particularly , spread regionally beyond the empire's core, shaping early Christian landscapes in , , and among the . In , ' teachings originated and persisted among presbyters and monks, with Arian communities enduring despite Nicene enforcement, as evidenced by ongoing controversies documented in Athanasius' festal letters. Syrian , centered in Antioch, saw lingering adoptionist and subordinationist echoes from Paul of Samosata's era, compounded by Arian missions that appealed to monarchian traditions in the region. Among the , took root through (c. 311–383 CE), a Gothic bishop of Cappadocian descent who translated the into Gothic around 350 CE, converting tribes like the and to a nontrinitarian faith that emphasized the Father's supremacy; this version of facilitated Gothic integration into the Roman world while preserving ethnic distinctions until the sixth century. These regional variants highlighted the resilience of subordinationist ideas amid imperial pressures toward orthodoxy.

Medieval and Reformation Periods

During the medieval period, nontrinitarian ideas persisted through various dualist movements that rejected the hierarchical structure of the Trinitarian doctrine, viewing it as incompatible with their belief in opposing spiritual and principles. The Paulicians, emerging in the in and spreading to Byzantine territories, held a nontrinitarian that emphasized as a divine but heavenly figure without a material birth from Mary, drawing from texts while dismissing influences and Orthodox traditions. This group faced severe persecution from Byzantine authorities, who suppressed their communities through military campaigns and forced relocations by the . The Bogomils, active from the 10th to 14th centuries in the , further exemplified this rejection by denying the eternal nature of the and portraying it as a delusional construct tied to material corruption, aligning with their dualist theology that separated a benevolent spiritual from an evil creator of . Influenced by earlier Paulician ideas, Bogomils spread to regions like and Bosnia, where they renounced sacraments and ecclesiastical authority, leading to their condemnation and dispersal by Orthodox and Catholic forces. In Western Europe, the Cathars of the 12th and 13th centuries in Languedoc embodied similar dualist principles, positing two deities—a good God of the invisible realm and an evil Satan as creator of matter—and explicitly rejecting the Catholic Trinity along with Christ's physical incarnation, seeing him instead as an illusory spiritual vision. This stance provoked the Albigensian Crusade (1209–1229) and the establishment of the Medieval Inquisition in 1231, which systematically eradicated Cathar communities through trials, burnings, and confiscations, enforcing adherence to the Nicene Creed. These suppression mechanisms, backed by papal authority and secular rulers, effectively marginalized nontrinitarian dualism by the early 14th century. The and eras witnessed a resurgence of nontrinitarian thought amid broader theological challenges to , often met with violent reprisals from both Catholic and Protestant establishments. Spanish theologian , in works like De Trinitatis Erroribus (1531), argued against the as a non-scriptural invention riddled with contradictions, positing instead a singular God with Christ as a temporal manifestation of the divine Word. Captured in in 1553, Servetus was tried for by Protestant authorities under John Calvin's influence and executed by burning on October 27, highlighting the intolerance even among reformers toward anti-Trinitarian views. In , Italian reformer Faustus Socinus arrived in 1579 and shaped the (also known as Socinians) into a prominent nontrinitarian group within the Minor Reformed Church, rejecting the as unbiblical and affirming as a human endowed with divine wisdom rather than co-eternal with God. By the late 16th century, the Brethren operated over 300 congregations and an academy at Raków, promoting ethical teachings from the over Pauline doctrines, alongside calls for religious toleration and church-state separation. Some radical Anabaptist reformers, influenced by figures like Juan de Valdés—a Spanish exile whose spiritualist writings in questioned traditional dogmas—echoed these critiques, fostering underground networks that challenged Trinitarian orthodoxy during the 1520s–1540s. State churches and inquisitorial bodies continued to enforce Trinitarian conformity, as seen in the Catholic Inquisition's pursuit of Socinian sympathizers and the 1658 Polish parliamentary decree expelling the Brethren, forcing their dispersal and the closure of their institutions by 1660. These events underscored the Reformation's paradoxical blend of doctrinal innovation and suppression, where nontrinitarian ideas briefly flourished in tolerant enclaves like Poland before succumbing to political pressures aligned with the Nicene framework.

Theological Foundations

Scriptural Basis and Interpretations

Nontrinitarian interpretations of the emphasize the strict of the as foundational to understanding God as a singular, unitary being. Deuteronomy 6:4, known as the , declares, "Hear, O : The Lord our God, the Lord is one," which nontrinitarians view as an unequivocal affirmation of God's indivisible oneness, serving as the central creed of Jewish faith and incompatible with any division in the . Similarly, 44:6 states, "Thus says the Lord, the King of and his Redeemer, the Lord of hosts: 'I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god,'" underscoring God's absolute uniqueness and exclusivity as the sole deity, with no room for co-equal entities. In the , nontrinitarians point to passages illustrating ' subordination to the as evidence of distinction rather than equality. For instance, in Matthew 26:39, prays in the , "My , if it be possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as you will," demonstrating his submission to 's will and highlighting a relational . John 14:28 reinforces this, where tells his disciples, "If you loved me, you would have rejoiced, because I am going to the , for the is greater than I," interpreted as an acknowledgment of the 's superior authority and position. Likewise, 1 Corinthians 8:6 affirms, "yet for us there is one , the , from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist," distinguishing the as the singular while positioning as the agent of creation under 's direction. Disputed verses often cited in support of Trinitarianism receive alternative exegeses in nontrinitarian thought, focusing on contextual nuances. John 1:1 reads, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with , and the Word was ," where the "Word" () is understood not as a preexistent person co-equal with but as God's plan, expression, or wisdom that became embodied in at his birth. In John 10:30, Jesus states, "I and the Father are one," referring to unity of purpose and will in protecting the sheep, akin to the oneness prayed for among believers in :21-22, rather than ontological identity. Philippians 2:6-7 describes as "who, though he was in the form of , did not count equality with a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant," indicating that , as a exalted by , did not seek or possess inherent equality with but humbly accepted his role. Nontrinitarian hermeneutics prioritizes the grammatical-historical method, stressing original Hebrew and contexts to interpret biblical texts while avoiding influences from , such as personifications of abstract concepts that could imply multiple divine persons. This approach seeks to recover the monotheistic roots of Scripture, examining verses within their immediate literary and cultural settings to affirm a unitary without later doctrinal overlays.

Nature of God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit

In nontrinitarian , the is understood through models that emphasize strict , where is a single, unipersonal being, or economic subordination, where functional roles exist within divine operations without implying multiple persons or equal essences. Strict unitarianism posits the as the sole divine person, indivisible and the ultimate source of all existence, rejecting any co-equality or with other entities. Economic subordination, by contrast, allows for hierarchical functions in divine actions—such as creation or redemption—while maintaining , with the as the unoriginate head. God the Father is regarded as the one true God, unipersonal, indivisible, and the supreme being from whom all else derives, embodying absolute monotheism without internal plurality. This view underscores the Father's unique divinity and transcendence, serving as the origin of divine power and will, distinct from any subordinate aspects or manifestations. Nontrinitarian perspectives on Jesus Christ vary, with some affirming his pre-existence as the Logos or a created divine agent in the Father's plan, rather than as an eternal co-equal person, with his incarnation marking his entry into humanity as a human being empowered by God but not of the same essence as the Father. In Arian views, Jesus is begotten by the Father before time but as a created being, not sharing the Father's substance or essence, with the Father alone being unbegotten—"there was a time when the Son was not." Adoptionist interpretations, meanwhile, see Jesus as a human exalted to sonship at his baptism or resurrection, empowered by God's spirit without inherent pre-incarnate divinity, emphasizing his role as an adopted agent rather than eternally begotten. These positions highlight Jesus' functional subordination in salvation, where he acts as mediator under the Father's authority, supported briefly by interpretations of verses like John 14:28 ("the Father is greater than I") and Mark 1:11. Views differ across traditions, with some like Adoptionism denying pre-existence altogether. The is conceptualized not as a distinct person but as God's active force, power, or impersonal influence, akin to the Hebrew ruach meaning "wind" or "breath," enabling divine actions like inspiration, , and without personal agency or co-equality. This understanding portrays the Spirit as an extension of the Father's will, an "it" rather than a "who," contrasting with by lacking individuality, , or relational distinction within the . In unitarian frameworks, the functions as God's operative presence, as seen in biblical usages where it denotes energy or rather than a separate entity.

Variants of Nontrinitarian Beliefs

Unitarianism

affirms the unity of as a single, indivisible person—the Father—while viewing Jesus Christ as the human and prophet, exalted by but not divine in or preexistent as . This perspective rejects the preexistence of Christ as a divine being, interpreting his role through scriptural passages that emphasize his subordination to the Father and his adoption or appointment as . The is understood not as a distinct person but as the active power or influence of , operating in the world without personal agency. Historically, emerged in two primary forms: , a restorationist movement seeking to recover what adherents see as the original monotheistic faith of , and philosophical , shaped by Enlightenment and . , prominent in the , draws on figures like , who advocated a return to scriptural free from later Trinitarian developments, viewing the as strictly one person. In contrast, philosophical , influenced by 18th-century deist thought, emphasizes reason and , portraying God as a rational creator whose unity aligns with empirical observation rather than . Socinian , an early modern precursor, exemplifies this rational approach by subjecting doctrines to logical scrutiny and interpreting Jesus's reported miracles as historical events evidencing God's approval of him as , without implying or . Central tenets of Unitarianism include the rejection of as an inherited guilt, positing instead that humans are born with moral capacity and responsibility shaped by and environment. Likewise, —where Christ's death satisfies divine justice—is dismissed in favor of Jesus's moral influence and ethical teachings as the path to , emphasizing personal and righteous living over vicarious sacrifice. Scriptural foundations, such as Deuteronomy 6:4's declaration of God's oneness, underpin these views, interpreted to affirm strict without plurality in the divine nature. In modern expressions, the , founded in 1825 to promote rational Christianity, merged with the in 1961 to form the , though some congregations retain explicitly Christian roots focused on Jesus's ethical example and Unitarian theology.

Binitarianism and Modalism

posits a divine structure consisting of two distinct beings: and the Son (often identified with the or preexistent Christ), with the understood not as a separate person but as the shared power or active presence emanating from these two. This view emphasizes a dyadic relationship within the , avoiding the triadic complexity of Trinitarian doctrine by subordinating the Spirit to the Father-Son dynamic. In early Christian texts, such as the , the is depicted as a preexistent entity that inhabits human flesh, enabling righteous living, while the Son serves as the agent of creation and , reflecting a binitarian framework where the Spirit aligns closely with the Father's will rather than constituting an independent hypostasis. Modalism, also known as Sabellianism, represents a contrasting nontrinitarian variant that maintains the absolute oneness of God, rejecting any eternal distinctions among Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as mere sequential modes or manifestations of the single divine person. Proponents like Noetus of Smyrna, active in the late second century, taught that the Father became incarnate as the Son in the economy of salvation, with the Holy Spirit emerging as a post-ascension mode, thereby equating the suffering of the Son with the Father's own experience (Patripassianism). This theology was further articulated by Sabellius in the early third century, who described God progressing through roles—Creator as Father, Redeemer as Son, and Sanctifier as Spirit—without implying plurality in essence. Modalism was formally condemned at the First Council of Constantinople in 381 CE, where the assembled bishops affirmed the distinct persons of the Trinity in response to lingering modalistic influences alongside other heresies. The primary difference between and modalism lies in their approach to divine plurality: binitarianism allows for two coeternal beings in a relational duality, preserving some internal differentiation within the , whereas modalism insists on strict with no concurrent distinctions, viewing the , Son, and Spirit as temporary economic expressions of one unchanging . This distinction highlights binitarianism's partial accommodation of Christological agency through the Son's distinct role, in contrast to modalism's emphasis on divine unity at the expense of personal interactions, such as the Son's to the . Both variants, however, share the goal of safeguarding against perceived Trinitarian . Theologically, and modalism both circumvent Trinitarian triplicity by limiting the to either a binary or a unipersonal modality, yet they retain elements of plurality— through the Father's and Son's eternal coexistence, and modalism through God's adaptive revelations in —thus providing frameworks for interpreting scriptural depictions of divine action without invoking three hypostases. These positions influenced early debates on Christ's and the Spirit's role, often facing suppression in patristic eras as the church consolidated Trinitarian .

Modern Nontrinitarian Movements

Denominational Groups

emerged in the late near Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, as a led by , who began publishing teachings in the 1870s and founded Zion's Watch Tower Tract Society in 1881. The group formally adopted the name in 1931 under . They reject the , viewing as the one true God, Jesus Christ as his firstborn Son and the archangel Michael in prehuman existence, and the as God's impersonal active force rather than a person. is central, conducted primarily through ministry and literature distribution to proclaim God's Kingdom. As of the 2024 service year, reported an average of approximately 8.8 million active publishers worldwide, with attendance at the annual of 21,119,442. Christadelphians originated in the mid-19th century in Britain and , primarily through the teachings of John Thomas, who established the movement after breaking from earlier Adventist and Restorationist groups around 1848. The name "Christadelphian," meaning "brothers and sisters in Christ," was coined by Thomas in 1864. They hold nontrinitarian views, emphasizing one , with as the fully human —born of Mary, sinless, and exalted after his but not preexistent as a divine person. A key doctrine is mortalism, the belief that humans have no immortal and cease to exist at death, awaiting bodily . Membership remains small, estimated at around 50,000 globally in over 120 countries as of recent assessments. Oneness Pentecostals developed in the early as a split from emerging Trinitarian Pentecostal groups, particularly following debates over al formulas during the 1913-1916 and the 1916 General Assembly of the , where leaders like Frank Ewart and Glenn Cook advocated for "Jesus-only" . They adhere to modalistic , positing that God is one singular person who manifests in different modes—, , and —rather than three distinct persons. is performed exclusively in the name of Christ for remission of sins, rejecting the , and is seen as essential alongside and Spirit evidenced by . The , the largest Oneness body, reports over 5.8 million members across 45,000 churches in 231 nations as of the 2020s. Iglesia ni Cristo (Church of Christ) was founded in the in 1914 by Felix Y. Manalo, who registered the church on July 27 amid , claiming fulfillment of biblical prophecies about a messenger from the East. It espouses strict , affirming one , with Jesus Christ as the human Son and mediator, and the as God's power, explicitly rejecting Trinitarian doctrine. Governance operates as a centralized under an executive minister—currently , successor to Felix—exercising absolute authority over doctrine, worship, and member conduct to ensure unity and adherence to biblical interpretations. As of 2020, the most recent available data indicates the church claimed 2.8 million members in the alone, with a global presence in over 150 countries and territories.

Regional and Cultural Variations

Nontrinitarian beliefs have experienced varied growth and adaptation in , often intertwined with efforts and indigenous spiritual traditions. In regions like and broader , African Independent Churches (AICs) have proliferated, frequently rejecting the Trinity as a colonial imposition that alienates local monotheistic concepts of a singular divine essence. These churches, numbering in the tens of thousands across the continent, emphasize healing, prophecy, and community rituals drawn from African Traditional Religions (ATR), positioning nontrinitarian views as a reclaiming of pre-colonial . For instance, theological analyses highlight how AICs promote a unitary aligned with ATR's supreme being, viewing Trinitarian doctrine as incompatible with African communal divinity. In , particularly , nontrinitarian movements have emerged through innovative interpretations blending biblical prophecy with local messianic expectations. The , founded in 1984, explicitly denies the , teaching that God, Jesus, and the are unified in one reality rather than three distinct persons, and it has grown to claim over 200,000 members worldwide, with significant offshoots in Asia adapting to cultural emphases on spiritual fulfillment and end-times . This group's expansion reflects a broader Asian trend where nontrinitarianism integrates with indigenous , attracting youth disillusioned with mainstream . Latin America's nontrinitarian landscape features robust expansion of Oneness Pentecostalism, a modalistic variant emphasizing God's singular manifestation through Jesus, which has spread via migration networks from the United States and within the region. Since the mid-20th century, Oneness adherents have grown to millions in countries like Brazil, Mexico, and Colombia, often through transnational circuits where Mexican and Central American migrants establish churches that emphasize baptism in Jesus' name alone, diverging from Trinitarian formulas. This growth, part of the broader Pentecostal surge from 6% to nearly 20% of Latin America's population by the early 21st century, is facilitated by urban migration and appeals to experiential faith over doctrinal complexity. In Brazil, syncretic influences from Spiritism—though not directly modalistic—have indirectly shaped nontrinitarian expressions by promoting fluid spiritual intermediaries, contributing to hybrid Pentecostal practices that prioritize divine unity. In and , traditional Unitarian churches have faced membership declines amid rising and shifts toward nondenominational . In , the reported steady but low membership around 130,000 in the U.S. by 2024, down from peaks in the late , with annual losses attributed to aging congregations and competition from evangelical alternatives. European Unitarian bodies, such as those in the UK and , maintain small footprints, with overall liberal Protestant decline reducing their influence to approximately 70,000 adherents continent-wide. Concurrently, splinters from the —nontrinitarian groups tracing to 19th-century Adventist roots—have seen modest rises, with organizations like the sustaining publications and classes for a few thousand members, emphasizing scriptural unitarianism over institutional structures. Cultural integrations of nontrinitarianism often involve with indigenous beliefs, particularly in postcolonial contexts where the is critiqued as a Western import disrupting holistic African worldviews. In , AICs exemplify this by merging unitary God concepts from ATR with Christian , rejecting Trinitarian divisions as antithetical to ancestral harmony and communal rituals, thereby fostering churches that serve as sites of cultural resistance and spiritual continuity. This adaptation extends to Latin American indigenous communities, where incorporates shamanic elements of divine manifestation, enhancing its appeal among marginalized groups seeking outside colonial religious frameworks.

Relationship to Trinitarian Christianity

Ecumenical Engagement

Efforts at ecumenical engagement between nontrinitarian and Trinitarian Christian groups have historically been constrained by doctrinal differences, particularly regarding the nature of God and Christ. In the 20th century, the (WCC) formalized its Trinitarian basis at the 1961 Assembly, stating that member churches must "confess the Lord Jesus Christ as God and Saviour, according to the Scriptures, and therefore seek to fulfill their common calling to the glory of the one God, Father, Son and ." This amendment, approved by a vote of 383–36, explicitly disqualified nontrinitarian groups such as Unitarians from full membership, as their rejection of the conflicted with the council's confessional requirements. Similarly, limited bilateral dialogues occurred, though these remained informal and did not lead to broader unity due to theological barriers. In modern times, nontrinitarian groups have found more opportunities for participation in interfaith forums that extend beyond strictly Christian . Unitarian Universalists, for instance, have been active participants in the since its inception in 1893, where they served as key organizers and continue to engage in dialogues on global issues, representing over 200 faith traditions alongside Trinitarian Christians. maintain a neutral stance toward , engaging in respectful discussions about faith with individuals from all religions but avoiding joint worship or organizational alliances, as they view such practices as incompatible with biblical unity. Despite these initiatives, significant challenges persist, primarily rooted in doctrinal divides that prevent nontrinitarian groups from achieving full membership in major ecumenical bodies. The (NCC), like the WCC, has a confessional basis aligned with historic Christian creeds, excluding groups such as for not affirming biblical , though it includes some nontrinitarian denominations like Swedenborgians. Unitarians are not members due to their deviation from Trinitarian orthodoxy. Positive outcomes of engagement have emerged in shared efforts, where doctrinal differences are set aside for common causes. For example, Unitarian Universalists have collaborated with Trinitarian churches in anti-war advocacy, such as through interfaith peace networks opposing and military conflict, fostering cooperation on humanitarian grounds. , while politically neutral, align with broader Christian pacifist traditions by refusing , contributing indirectly to anti-war sentiments shared across denominations.

Perceptions of Heresy and Schism

In the patristic era, nontrinitarian views, particularly , were formally condemned as heresy by the early . The in 325 AD produced the , which explicitly affirmed the Son's with the Father to counter Arian teachings that subordinated Christ to God, thereby labeling a deviation from orthodox faith. This condemnation was reinforced in subsequent councils and writings, establishing Trinitarian doctrine as a cornerstone of ecclesiastical orthodoxy. The , emerging in the late 5th century, further detailed Trinitarian orthodoxy by asserting the equality of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit in one , while anathematizing denials of this unity as heretical, thus solidifying the church's stance against nontrinitarian interpretations. During the era, nontrinitarian groups like the faced severe denunciation as and by both Catholic and Protestant authorities. Originating in 16th-century and through figures such as Faustus Socinus, rejected the and Christ's divinity, prompting Reformed theologians to view it as the "nadir of " and a threat to core Christian doctrine. Church leaders, including John Owen, condemned Socinian writings as blasphemous, leading to bans and expulsions, such as the 1658 by the Polish Diet that outlawed Socinian practices and forced emigration. This era's polemics framed nontrinitarianism not merely as doctrinal error but as from the apostolic faith, influencing ongoing Protestant standards. Nontrinitarian beliefs have precipitated significant within Christian denominations, exacerbating divisions over . In the early , the Pentecostal movement experienced a major split in 1916 when Oneness Pentecostals, rejecting the in favor of modalistic views, separated from Trinitarian churches, leading to the formation of independent bodies like the . This , rooted in debates over baptismal formulas and the , resulted in lasting institutional fragmentation, with Oneness groups comprising a distinct stream of isolated from mainstream Trinitarian fellowships. Such divisions underscored perceptions of nontrinitarianism as a catalyst for ecclesial rupture, often invoking historical anathemas to justify separations. In contemporary Trinitarian Christianity, nontrinitarianism continues to be regarded as incompatible with essential orthodoxy by both Catholic and Protestant leaders. The 1974 Lausanne Covenant, a foundational evangelical document, affirms belief in "the one eternal God... Father, Son and Holy Spirit," implicitly excluding nontrinitarian views from its vision of unified Christian witness and defining Trinitarian faith as integral to evangelical identity. Similarly, the 1994 Evangelicals and Catholics Together (ECT) statement, while seeking cooperation on social issues, upholds the Apostles' Creed's Trinitarian structure—affirming God as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—as a shared scriptural truth binding participants, thereby positioning denial of the Trinity outside the bounds of joint orthodox confession. These declarations reflect ongoing ecclesiastical efforts to maintain Trinitarianism as a non-negotiable marker, often resulting in formal exclusions from ecumenical or confessional bodies.

Broader Implications and Dialogues

Arguments on Pagan Influences

Nontrinitarians frequently argue that the Christian doctrine of the emerged not purely from biblical sources but through significant influences from pre-Christian pagan philosophies and religions, thereby introducing elements foreign to scriptural . These claims posit that early church leaders, in synthesizing with prevailing Hellenistic and Near Eastern ideas, adopted triadic structures that mirrored pagan concepts, diluting the strict they believe is evident in the and . Such arguments emphasize historical and philosophical parallels to critique the Trinity's development as a departure from apostolic teachings. A key aspect of these critiques focuses on Hellenic roots, particularly the influence of Platonic philosophy on early Christian thinkers. Plato's Timaeus describes a triad consisting of the Nous (divine mind), Psyche (world soul), and the material world, which some scholars argue shaped the theological speculations of like of (c. 185–254 CE). , deeply immersed in , integrated these hierarchical emanations into his understanding of divine relations, portraying the Father, Son (), and [Holy Spirit](/page/Holy Spirit) in terms analogous to Platonic intermediaries between the transcendent One and creation. This synthesis, nontrinitarians contend, represents a philosophical overlay on biblical texts rather than direct . Parallel arguments highlight Egyptian and Babylonian religious motifs as sources for Trinitarian formulations. Ancient Egyptian theology featured prominent triads, such as the of (father), (mother), and (son), which symbolized divine familial unity and cyclical renewal—structures that nontrinitarians claim resonated with early Christian apologists seeking to appeal to Greco-Roman audiences familiar with such myths. Similarly, Babylonian influences are invoked through triadic deity groupings in Mesopotamian cults, suggesting a cultural continuum that permeated Mediterranean religions. These pagan influence arguments gained prominence in 19th-century critiques, notably through Alexander Hislop's 1853 work , which traces the to ancient Babylonian mystery religions centered on , , and Tammuz as a proto-triadic worship. Hislop asserts that this pagan triad—father, mother, and divine child—evolved into Catholic Trinitarianism via Roman adaptations, supported by etymological and iconographic parallels like the dove symbol for the deriving from Babylonian fertility cults. Though widely critiqued for methodological flaws, Hislop's thesis remains influential among nontrinitarians for popularizing the view of the as a syncretic invention. Nontrinitarians acknowledge counterarguments from Trinitarian scholars, who maintain that the doctrine represents an organic unfolding of biblical revelation rather than pagan borrowing, but they counter that such defenses overlook historical evidence of philosophical contamination. In their perspective, the constitutes a post-biblical accretion, imposed through conciliar decisions influenced by external cultures, in opposition to the unadulterated of Scripture.

Interfaith and Philosophical Discussions

Nontrinitarianism's emphasis on strict has fostered alliances with and , where shared commitments to the oneness of God—known as in —facilitate interfaith dialogues. Unitarian Christians, rejecting the , align closely with Islamic by viewing as a prophet rather than divine, mirroring Muhammad's role as God's messenger and emphasizing a singular divine entity without human divinization. Similarly, shares deep historical roots with , both emerging from Enlightenment-era reform movements that prioritize rational thought, tolerance, and monotheistic unity, enabling collaborative efforts such as those between the and Jewish communities on ethical and social issues. In the , these alignments extended to broader Jewish-Christian dialogues, where nontrinitarian perspectives contributed to discussions on reconciling monotheistic traditions without Trinitarian divisions, as seen in interfaith initiatives emphasizing common Abrahamic heritage. Philosophically, nontrinitarianism draws from Enlightenment , which prioritizes reason over doctrinal mystery, contrasting with Trinitarian emphases on unity. , a key 18th-century Unitarian thinker, exemplified this by applying rational biblical to argue that was inherently Unitarian, viewing the as a later corruption influenced by non-scriptural gentile ideas and unsupported by plain textual evidence. Priestley's approach fused scientific with , insisting that religious truths must withstand rational scrutiny, thereby challenging Trinitarian as irrational and unverifiable. In contemporary philosophy, modern atheists often echo these nontrinitarian critiques, dismissing the as logically incoherent sophistry that fails to resolve paradoxes like a single being simultaneously three distinct persons. Nontrinitarian groups have actively participated in inter-religious councils to promote global dialogue. At the 1893 World's Parliament of Religions in , Unitarian leaders played a pivotal role, with minister serving as Executive Secretary on the organizing committee, helping to convene representatives from diverse faiths and highlight shared ethical principles amid Christian dominance. This event marked an early milestone in interfaith engagement, where nontrinitarian voices advocated for unity based on rational rather than exclusive creeds. Broader philosophical impacts of nontrinitarianism include its influence on and , as anti-Trinitarian paved the way for views prioritizing natural reason over revelation. In 17th- and 18th-century , Unitarian critiques of the evolved into deistic arguments, as seen in works by Matthew Tindal and , who rejected scriptural mysteries in favor of a rational, non-interventionist God accessible through human intellect alone. This trajectory also shaped , with nontrinitarian emphasis on contributing to movements that value human reason and moral autonomy without supernatural . Central to these discussions is the ongoing of Trinitarianism's logical : the notion of one divine essence subsisting in three distinct persons, which philosophers argue leads to incoherence, as numerical identity cannot reconcile full divinity in each with their mutual distinctions without implying either three gods or modal illusions.

Notable Individuals and Influences

Early Thinkers and Reformers

In the early centuries of , , a in (c. 256–336 CE), emerged as a pivotal figure in nontrinitarian thought through his advocacy of , positing that the Son was created by the Father and thus subordinate in essence, a view that sparked the and influenced subsequent debates on divine hierarchy. His teachings, drawn from scriptural interpretations emphasizing the Father's primacy, challenged emerging orthodoxy and led to his condemnation at the Council of Nicaea in 325 CE. Another ancient proponent was (c. 340–385 CE), a Spanish and ascetic whose movement incorporated modalist elements, viewing the Father, Son, and as modes of a single divine person rather than distinct hypostases. Accused of modalism alongside Gnostic and Manichaean influences, became the first Christian leader executed for by fellow Christians, beheaded in in 385 CE under Roman authority, highlighting the severe repercussions for nontrinitarian views in . The era saw intensified nontrinitarian challenges, notably from (1511–1553), a Spanish physician and theologian whose Restitutio Christianismi (1553) systematically rejected the as a non-biblical innovation, asserting instead a unitary God with Christ as a human prophet empowered by the divine Word. Servetus linked his anti-trinitarianism to broader reforms, including the denial of as an unbiblical practice that perpetuated doctrinal errors, advocating as essential to restoring primitive . His execution by burning in , at John Calvin's instigation, underscored the era's intolerance for such views. Building on these foundations, Faustus Socinus (1539–1604), an Italian theologian who settled in , formalized as a rationalist nontrinitarian movement, denying the and divinity of Christ while emphasizing ethical scripture interpretation and religious tolerance. Through works like De Jesu Christo Servatore (1578), Socinus organized communities into a structured church that rejected trinitarian creeds, influencing later Unitarian developments across Europe. The contributions of these thinkers profoundly shaped nontrinitarian trajectories: and Priscillian's ideas persisted in fringe groups despite suppression, and figures like Servetus and Socinus inspired organized movements that tied anti-trinitarianism to critiques of practices and authority, fostering a legacy of rational dissent.

Contemporary Figures

In the 19th century, (1805–1844) founded the , restoring the doctrine of the as three distinct beings—God the Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost—who are separate personages united in purpose but not in substance, a view revealed to him during his in 1820. Smith's teachings emphasized that the Father and Son possess physical bodies of flesh and bone, while the Holy Ghost is a personage of spirit, rejecting the traditional Trinitarian concept of one God in three co-equal persons. This nontrinitarian framework became foundational to the of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and its offshoots. William Miller (1782–1849), a Baptist preacher whose predictions of Christ's return in 1843–1844 sparked the Millerite movement, personally adhered to Trinitarian beliefs but profoundly influenced the development of nontrinitarian views among his Sabbatarian Adventist followers. After the of 1844, leaders like James White and , emerging from Miller's emphasis on and , rejected the as unbiblical, viewing and Jesus Christ as distinct divine beings with the as God's active force rather than a person. This anti-Trinitarian stance shaped early , prioritizing scriptural authority over creedal formulations. In the 20th century, Charles Taze Russell (1852–1916) established the Bible Student movement, explicitly denying the Trinity and teaching that Jehovah is the one true God, with Jesus as His created Son and the Holy Spirit as God's impersonal power. Russell's writings, such as Studies in the Scriptures, argued that Trinitarianism derived from pagan influences rather than the Bible, influencing the later formation of Jehovah's Witnesses and emphasizing monotheism centered on the Father. Similarly, Herbert W. Armstrong (1892–1986) founded the Worldwide Church of God in 1933, promoting a binitarian theology where God consists of two distinct persons—the Father and the Son—with the Holy Spirit as the divine power, not a separate entity. Armstrong's teachings portrayed the Godhead as a growing "family" of divine beings, rejecting the co-eternality and co-equality of the Trinity as a post-biblical corruption. Among modern figures, (1959–1993), leader of the , espoused an extreme nontrinitarian , viewing God not as a but as a unified entity comprising Father and Mother figures, with Jesus (whom he claimed to represent) and a future Daughter as additional components in a divine foursome. Koresh's interpretations of integrated these beliefs with messianic claims, leading to the group's isolation and the 1993 . In contrast, Anthony Buzzard (born 1935), a biblical scholar and advocate for , has defended strict through academic works like The Doctrine of the Trinity: Christianity's Self-Inflicted Wound (1998), arguing that the one God is exclusively the Father, with Jesus as the human and the as God's power, not a person. Buzzard's scriptural analyses and public debates have propagated these views via books, articles, and media, influencing contemporary Unitarian circles by emphasizing over later Christian creeds. These figures' influences extend through academic defenses and media propagation; for instance, Buzzard's publications and radio appearances have popularized Biblical Unitarian arguments, while earlier leaders like Russell and Armstrong utilized pamphlets, books, and broadcasts to disseminate nontrinitarian doctrines globally.

References

Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.