IS GOD A TRINITY? PART TEN
CONCLUSIONS:
I entitled this series of essays, Is God a Trinity? My purpose was to determine whether the Trinitarian concept of God is supported by the scriptures. I began this inquire by establishing that we would look at both the Trinitarian and Non-Trinitarian view and allow the evidence to bring us to a conclusion that would be beyond reasonable doubt. After reviewing the evidence, as delineated in this series of essays, I must conclude that the Trinitarian view is not validated by the scriptures beyond reasonable doubt. In fact the evidence appears to weigh in stronger for a Non-Trinitarian perspective as to the nature of God.
While I began this study as a tacit Trinitarisn, I became increasingly surprised at the absence of evidence for the Trinitarian position and likewise surprised at the weight of evidence for a Non-Trinitarian perspective.
Trinitarianism postulates God is Father, Son and Spirit. There is no question the scriptures show God as Father. God as Father is shown consistently in scripture and the Father is seen as being eternal, having neither beginning nor end. The Son is shown as begotten by the Father. Being begotten is commonly understood to mean being procreated and therefore implies a beginning. Trinitarians bypass this meaning by postulating the concept of eternal begettal or eternal generation of the Son. This concept places a different spin on begotten that is not found in scripture. In reality, such a concept appears to be an oxymoron as the common way of understanding begettal involves a starting point and therefore by definition is not an eternal event.
As recited at the start of our investigation, the Nicene Creed states belief in one God the Father Almighty and in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who is begotten of the Father. This Creed appears to define begotten as being of the same essence and substance as the Father and therefore makes a distinction between being begotten and being made. Somehow it is concluded that to be of the same substance as the Father is to be as the Father in everyway without actually being the Father. What exactly it means to be of the same essence or substance is not defined in the Creeds. The Nicene and Constantinople Creeds use the Greek word homoousios to say “of one substance.” This phrase, however, is not found in the scriptures to define the relationship between the Son and the Father. Furthermore, it may be inappropriate to refer to God as substance which is a word associated with the material world. Scripture says God is Spirit. Can we really associate a word like substance with Spirit?
We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father [the only-begotten; that is, of the essence of the Father, God of God], Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance (homoousios) with the Father; by whom all things were made [both in heaven and on earth]; who for us men, and for our salvation, came down and was incarnate and was made man.(Nicene Creed)
Because this Creed defines begotten as being of one essence or substance with the Father it is said that Jesus is God as the Father is God, God of God, Light of Light, and very God of very God. As discussed earlier in this series, the English “begotten” is translated from the Greek monogenes where the word mono means only and genes means to be born or begotten or, as more recent scholarship has identified, genes can mean kind, type or unique. If monogenes is understood in this manner, it may mean the Son is a one of a kind, unique Son of God that has either existed eternally or was begotten which would imply a beginning. It tells us nothing as to the substance of the Son or how the Son relates to the Father beyond being His Son. Monogenes is applied to Jesus five times in the NT.
John 1:14: The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
John 1:18: No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father's side, has made him known.
John 3:16: "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
John 3:18: Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.
1 John 4:9: This is how God showed his love among us: He sent his one and only Son into the world that we might live through him.
These passages are taken from the NIV and as can be seen the translators of the NIV are translating monogenes as “One and Only” and not as begotten as is common in most other English translations. We discussed the problems with John 1:18 showing Jesus as God earlier in this series. Translating monogenes in the manner seen in the NIV reduces the problem of contending with the natural and normal meaning of begotten which suggests the Son has a beginning. But it doesn’t make the problem go away as monogenes may mean begotten in the usual sense which places the eternal existence of the Son in question. We must therefore go to other passages that pertain to the history of the Son for clarification.
The Greek word gennao is also applied to Jesus in the scriptures. This word means to become the Father of and is associated with conception and being born. Unlike monogenes, which can be looked at as open ended, gennao implies a definite beginning. It is used literally and figuratively in scripture. In Matthew 1:20, the angel tells Joseph that what is conceived (gennao) in Mary is of the Holy Spirit. The writer to the Hebrews uses gennao to say the following about Christ:
Hebrews 1:5: For to which of the angels did God ever say, "You are my Son; today I have become your Father”? (Hebrew gennao: Translated begotten in most translations) Or again, "I will be his Father, and he will be my Son”? NIV (This is a quote from Psalm 2:7).
Hebrews 5:5: So Christ also did not take upon himself the glory of becoming a high priest. But God said to him, "You are my Son; today I have become your Father” NIV (Hebrew gennao: Translated begotten in most translations)
What are we to make of these statements? Gennao implies a beginning. The writer speaks of a day of beginning. Is the writer speaking of the beginning of the human existence of the Son or is he referring to a beginning in the distant past. In John 3:16 and 1 John 4:9 quoted above, John says that God gave and sent His Son. John 1:14 suggests the same. Contrary to the position of the A Non-Trinitarians discussed in this series, a number of scriptures we have previously examined certainly appear to on the surface show the pre-human existence of the Son (Colossians 1:15-19). Do the scriptures uphold such pre-existence to be without beginning (eternal) or as having a beginning? Do the scriptures ultimately show a lack of pre-existence altogether?
The scriptures often refer to God being eternal. For Trinitarians this means Father, Son and Spirit. But is the Son, God of very God as the Creeds proclaim? If the Son is God, is He consubstantial, coequal and coeternal with the Father and the Spirit? Jesus said His Father is greater than He. Trinitarians see this statement as Jesus comparing his human self with the Father. But such a comparison would be superfluous as it is obvious the Father is greater than humans. It is more reasonable to conclude Jesus is saying the Father is greater than He and always has been. The scriptures consistently show subordination of the Son to the Father. The scriptures consistently speak of God as the Father of Jesus Christ. The scriptures show Jesus calling God His God. All this suggests the Son exists in a subordinate relationship to the Father and is not equal with the Father in the sense of being God as God is God. Then there is the matter of who died?
If Jesus is God and remained God while in the flesh, who died? God is eternal and immortal so God can’t die. If God is a Trinity of Father, Son and Spirit, then the Son as a distinction in this Trinitarian relationship could not have died. If Jesus as the human Christ was fully God and fully human, did only the human part of Him die? If only the human Jesus died, then God didn’t die. Is it necessary that God die in order for the penalty for sin to be paid? Nowhere do the scriptures say God had to die in order for redemption to take place. The scriptures simple reveal that God would send a redeemer (the promised Messiah) and this redeemer/savior would be born of a virgin through Divine conception (begettal) and therefore be called the Son of God and this Savior would die for the sins of the world.
As we have seen in the foregoing review of dozens of scriptures, nowhere is there explicit teaching or conclusive implicit teaching that Jesus is God as God is God or that Jesus had to be God in order to take away the sins of the world. Every scriptural passage used by Trinitarians as evidence for establishing Jesus as consubstantial, coequal and coeternal with the Father can be understood in a way that does not establish Jesus as being God as God is God and in many cases provides stronger evidence for Jesus being less that the Supreme God of the universe. When this is coupled with the multiple dozens of scriptural statements where God is described as the God and Father of Jesus, where Jesus describes God the Father as the only true God, where Jesus calls God His Father and His God and where Jesus is seen in subordination to the Father before, during and after His earthly ministry, it becomes exceedingly difficult to believe Jesus is a consubstantial, coequal and coeternal hypostasis of the one Being who is God.
It appears more scriptural to believe the Son was created by God at some point in history, and exists as the chief, but subordinate agent of the one and only Supreme, Most High God. It is through this subordinate agent that the one God facilitated the redemption of mankind. Because of what this agent accomplished as the Christ, He has been elevated to the right hand of God and has been given great power and glory as virtual Deity and is therefore to be worshiped along with His Father who remains the one and only Supreme God. This view of Christ correlates well with the scriptures we have examined in this series and maintains the absolute monotheism of scripture which speaks of there being only one true, All Mighty, Most High, Supreme Unitarian God.
I fully understand this perspective in part reflects the Arian view of the fourth century which lost out to the Athanasian view which became the orthodox view. I urge the reader, however, not to draw conclusions as to the nature of the Father, Son and Spirit on the basis of Arius, Athanasius, the Creeds or what is orthodox. Our doctrine of God must be based on what is revealed in the scriptures. In this series of essays, I have examined the major scriptures that pertain to the Trinitarian concept of God and based on the results elucidated, I can only conclude at this point that there is an absence of clear evidence for the Trinitarian position.
When I read the fourth century Creeds that postulated a Trinitarian definition of Father, Son and Spirit, I am forced to compare these Creeds with the Creedal statements found in scripture which emphatically teach that there is only one Almighty Supreme God above all other gods and that God is the Father.
I Corinthians 8:6: Yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.
Ephesians 4:4-6: There is one body and one Spirit-- just as you were called to one hope when you were called-- one Lord (kurios), one faith, one baptism; one God (Theos) and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.
1 Timothy 2:5: For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.
Hebrews 1:9. “Therefore God, your God, has set you above your companions by anointing you with the oil of joy."
John 17:3: Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.
John 5:44: How can you believe if you accept praise from one another, yet make no effort to obtain the praise that comes from the only God? (In the Greek it is “The one and only God” and is so translated in other versions such as the New American Standard Version. The context of chapter five shows Jesus is speaking of the Father).
John 20:17: Jesus said, "Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet returned to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, `I am returning to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.'"
The greatest NT creedal statement of all is found in Jesus’ affirmation of the OT creedal statement that God is one. Jesus not only affirmed what Moses said in Deuteronomy 6:4 but spoke in terms of agreement with this creed as associated with being in the Kingdom.
Mark 12:29-30: "The most important one," answered Jesus, "is this: `Hear, O Israel, the Lord (kurios) our God (Theos), the Lord (kurios) is one. Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.
Mark 12:32: "Well said, teacher," the man replied. "You are right in saying that God is one and there is no other but him.
Mark 12:34: When Jesus saw that he had answered wisely, he said to him, "You are not far from the
The Creed of Deuteronomy clearly identifies YHWH as the one God. As discussed earlier in this series, YHWH is identified as Father in the OT on fifteen separate occasions. If YHWH is the one true God and YHWH is the Father, then the Father is the one true God. Since Jesus is not the Father, Jesus cannot be the one true God.
Some look at Paul’s statement to the Corinthians that “there is but one God, the Father,” and “there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ,” as Paul saying there is one God (no comma) the Father and one Lord (no comma) Jesus Christ and equate “God” with “Lord” and conclude Paul is saying there is one Father and one Lord, both of whom are the one God. This conclusion, however, assumes God and Lord mean the same thing in this passage for which there is no evidence. Paul expressively calls God the Father and Jesus the Lord thus showing two different designations. Paul makes it very clear as to the distinction between God and the Son in his many statements where he speaks of the God and Father of Jesus. These Pauline statements consistently refer to God as the God and Father of Jesus and not just the Father.
If the Father only was being referred to, one could conceivably manufacture a position saying the Father and the Son exist in some kind of one substance relationship as the one God. But this is not what we find Paul saying. Over and over again he speaks not of God the Father of Jesus but the God and Father of Jesus. In so doing, Paul is saying God is the God of Jesus, as well as being the Father of Jesus. If God is the God of Jesus, then how can Jesus be that God? As already pointed out, Jesus refers to God as His God several times in the scriptures and others see God as the God of Jesus (See Hebrews 1:9 above).
Apostle James makes the same distinction between God and Jesus. James 1:1: James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ. There's no hint here of Jesus being the God James is referring to.
In his statement to the Corinthians and Ephesians, Paul contrasts the one Lord with the one God and Father who is over all things. To Timothy, Paul says there is one God and Jesus is the mediator between men and this one God. Paul doesn’t say between the Father and man which could possibly allow for a single substance relationship between the Father and the Son, he says between God and man thus distinguishing, not between the Son and the Father but between the Son and God. This is said in full knowledge of Jesus being at the right hand of God, which in itself shows separation between God and Jesus. In John 17, Jesus contrasts the “only true God” with himself showing separation of status. In John 20, Jesus again speaks of the Father as His God. All you have to do is substitute the word Trinity, or Father, Son and Spirit, in place of God in the above passages and you will quickly see the absurdity of seeing God as a Tri-unity of Father, Son and Spirit.
In the Greek Scriptures, the single word lord (Greek Kurios) is used in reference to both God the Father and Jesus. In the Hebrew Scriptures the words Adonai and adoni are used for Lord/lord where Adonai is used in association with the Supreme God and adoni is used in association with non-deities. As discussed earlier in this series, in a clear reference to Jesus in Psalm 110:1, it is the Hebrew adoni that is used in association with Christ and not Adonai. It is therefore apparent that when God is called Lord in the NT it is a designation of Deity whereas when Jesus is called Lord it is a designation commensurate with the meaning of adoni. Jesus is the Lord Christ, the anointed of YHWH Elohim. In Luke 2:26, Jesus is referred to as the Lord’s Christ showing He is the anointed of the Lord God the Father. Nowhere in the NT is Jesus referred to as the Lord God.
I see the foregoing scriptures as strong creedal statements showing a distinction between the Father and the Son where they are not in a consubstantial and coequal relationship, but in a relationship where the Son is subordinate and of a lesser status than the Father. This is the normal and natural way of understanding a Father and Son relationship and is the kind of relationship seen throughout the scriptures regarding the Father and the Son.
Some Trinitarians, seeing the scriptural support for this conclusion, suggest that the Son has voluntarily given up His equal status with the Father and assumed a subordinate role in the Godhead. While this may be a valiant attempt to uphold the consubstantial, coequal paradigm for the Father and Son, I find nothing in scripture to support such an idea.
Some Trinitarians recognize the force of the Hebrew Shema and its affirmation by Jesus in Mark 12 but believe our understanding of the nature of God is progressive and while the Trinitarian construct may not be explicit in scripture, it can be extrapolated from what are believed to be many implicit references to God being a Trinity. This approach, however, is essentially saying that Jesus and the writers of the NT scriptures understood God one way only to have that way gradually supplanted by the reasoning of theologians in the second, third and forth centuries. We are in essence being asked to accept the perspective of theologians years removed from the writing of the canonical scriptures and the expressed belief of the scriptural writers that the one true and Supreme God is the Father and none else.
While Trinitarianism purports to maintain the monotheism of the scriptures, it does so by introducing a construct that is not explicitly revealed in the scriptures. While there are scriptures which on the surface appear to support Trinitarianism or at least a concept of Jesus being God, when such scriptures are critically examined, they fail to establish beyond reasonable doubt that Jesus is God as God is God or that Jesus had a dual nature of Divinity and humanity.
On the other hand, scriptures such as 1 Corinthians 8:6, Ephesians 4:4-6, 1 Timothy 2:5, Hebrews 1:9, John 5:44, 17:3 and 20:17, all provide straightforward statements of distinction between the one God and Jesus who is seen as separate and subordinate to the one and only true God who is the Father. Unlike the scriptures put forth by Trinitarians to support their position, the scriptures cited above are clear, straightforward statements which upon critical examination maintain their clear and straightforward meaning. You cannot make these scriptures support Trinitarianism without distorting their obvious meaning. These scriptures cannot be understood in other ways as is true of the various scriptures we examined that on the surface support Trinitarianism.
The strongest scripture in support of the concept that Jesus is God, is found in John chapter one, verse one. If this passage is understood in the traditional manner as identifying the Word as Jesus and the Word not only being with God but being God, it certainly appears to show that Jesus is God in some sense. But, even with such understanding of this passage, there is no evidence in this passage to conclude God exists in a Trinitarian relationship involving one substance of three distinctions. Such a conclusion must be derived from consideration of many other passages that relate to the nature of the Father, Son and Spirit. As already stated, I have presented the major scriptural passages used to support the doctrine of the Trinity and upon examination have found them to be inconclusive as to supporting the Trinity and in some cases have found these scriptures to better support a Non-Trinitarian concept of God.
Some Trinitarian theologians argue that because the scriptures show absolute harmony of purpose and will between the Father and the Son they must be in a consubstantial, coeternal and coequal relationship in order for such extreme unity to exist. It can just as easily be argued, however, that the Father and Son can be of such extreme unity because the Son had the fullness of the Father’s Spirit from the beginning whenever that beginning was. This doesn’t necessitate the Son having to be consubstantial, coequal and coeternal with the Father in order for this to be the case. The Son does not have to be God to be in a harmonious relationship with God. The scriptures reveal that God gave Jesus of His Spirit without measure. Therefore, the Father and Son have a totally harmonious relationship.
It appears that God’s purpose for humanity is that we also attain to that same level of harmonious relationship with the Father. This doesn’t mean we become one in substance with the Father or that we will ever be at the same level as the Son. We have relationship with the Father through the Christ event. Christ made reconciliation with the Father possible and allows for the Father to give us of His Spirit which brings us into adoption as his sons. This does not make us God as God is God and there is every reason to believe from our investigation in these essays that Jesus is not God as God is God either.
Some who teach what is called “Trinitarian Theology,” see all humanity centered in the Trinity. The Greek word perichoresis is used to describe a mutual indwelling of the three persons of the “Godhead” and it is in this mutual indwelling relationship that humanity participates. The scriptures, however, show the Christ event has made relationship with the Father the focus, not a three person Godhead. Through death and resurrection, Jesus has facilitated our human adoption as the very sons of God the Father, not as sons of a Trinitarian “Godhead” of Father Son and Spirit. It is the Father as the one and only true God that is the focus of the scriptures from Genesis to the Revelation. Scripture shows Jesus came to reveal the Father. Jesus reveals the Father as Lord of heaven and earth (Matthew 11:25). Jesus constantly directs attention to the Father in His teachings. Jesus taught that by honoring Him we honor the Father. While the scriptures show Jesus as being worshiped and at times prayed to, we find Jesus directing worship and prayer toward the Father (Matthew 6:6, John 4:23, Hebrews 7:25). While we pray to the Father in the name of Jesus, we still pray to the Father. That should say a lot about who the one and only God is and where our relational focus should be.
It is often felt that because Jesus is seen as being worshiped in the NT scriptures, Jesus must be God because only God can be worshiped. We find, however, that worship can be directed toward non-deities as well. Worship is an act of respect and reverence toward one having authority, power, and a certain status. In the Hebrew Scriptures we find worship being directed not only to God but to men of position and power. The Hebrew word commonly used in the OT for worship is hithpael which means to prostrate one self. It was a way of doing homage to a superior. While this word is primarily seen in association with the worship of God in the OT, it is also seen in association with the worship of Kings and others. We see David prostrating himself before King Saul and the Israelites doing hithpael to both God and King David.
1 Samuel 24:8: Then David went out of the cave and called out to Saul, "My lord the king!" When Saul looked behind him, David bowed down and prostrated (hithpael) himself with his face to the ground.
I Corinthians 8:6: Yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.
1 Timothy 2:5: “For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.”
HOLY SPIRIT:
Our discussion of the Spirit should speak for itself. To postulate that the Spirit is a person of a Triune God is problematical as the many actions attributed to the Spirit are easily attributable to the expression and manifestation of Divine thought and power just as the many actions performed at the human level are attributable to human thought and power which is the expression of human spirit. No one would conclude that human spirit is a person. It should be evident that the Spirit of God is the cognitive function and power of God. Since all expression of what God is, is expression of His power and cognitive function, God is actually seen in scripture as Spirit. Jesus said God is Spirit and we must worship Him in spirit and truth. It is through God's Spirit that all things exist and continue to exist. God’s Spirit is a Spirit of life, wisdom, understanding, love, power and all attributes of righteous character. God has given of His Spirit to His Son commensurate with the position of authority that has been granted to Christ by the Father. God gives of His Spirit to humans at a level commensurate with our humanity.
It is by and through spirit that we have relationship with the Son and the Father and they have relationship with us. It is through spirit that relationship takes place. Humans have relationship with each other through expression of spirit as well. When we think and communicate thought to others we are expressing human spirit. All human behavior is an expression and manifestation of the spirit within man. All behavior of the Father and the Son, angels and all other supernatural beings are expressions and manifestations of their spirit. All Spirit ultimately proceeds from the Father. Spirit is what defines living things. Even animals have spirit, in so much that they have life and experience emotions and in some rudimentary ways even think.
Some believe looking at the Spirit of God in this manner makes the Spirit impersonal. Nothing could be further from the truth. Spirit is the very expression and manifestation of the personality of the Father and the Son. It is through their Spirit interacting with our human spirit that relationship with the Father and the Son is facilitated and maintained. The Spirit of the Father and the Son is very personal. Being personal, however, doesn’t make it one of three distinctions in a Trinitarian Godhead. The Spirit of God doesn’t have personality, it is personality. It is the very personality of God the Father. It emanates from the Father and fills the universe.
The Holy Spirit does not appear to be a person any more than the human spirit is a person. The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God and God graciously gives us of His Spirit thus facilitating righteous behavior as God's Spirit is totally righteous and that is why it is called holy. Because God’s Spirit is a Spirit of life it also imparts life including eternal life through Jesus. Nowhere, however, do we see in scripture any suggestion that the Holy Spirit is to be worshiped as God. This idea comes from postulating that the Holy Spirit is a person of the Trinity and therefore God. In one respect we do worship the Holy Spirit, when we worship the Father and the Son who have Holy Spirit. This, however, does not mean we are worshiping a person known as the Holy Spirit. We also can have Holy Spirit when God gives of His Spirit to us. Nowhere is there instruction in scripture to actually pray to the Holy Spirit as God. Just the reverse is true. The scriptures teach the Holy Spirit helps us in our communication with God. It really appears quite improbable that the Holy Spirit is a “person” in a Godhead distinct from other persons in such a Godhead.
I began this inquiry by looking for evidence beyond reasonable doubt that the Trinitarian concept of God is supported by the scriptures. As I wrote earlier in this series, if it can be demonstrated from the scriptures that the Trinitarian concept of God is correct, even though it is mystical and can’t be humanly understood, I will have no problem accepting it as truth. If, on the other hand, the Trinitarian concept cannot be shown to be true beyond reasonable doubt, I will have to consider a Non-Trinitarian concept of the Father, Son and Spirit provided it can be demonstrated to be valid beyond reasonable doubt. In my research to date I must conclude that the Trinitarian concept is not only not proven beyond reasonable doubt, it is very suspect in its formulation.
What I find particularly troubling in reading material published by Trinitarians is that in most cases they assume the Trinitarian position to be correct and then go on to pontificate on various theological perspectives based on such assumption. There is very little examination of the scriptures that pertain to this issue. Trinitarians write from the perspective that the Trinity is a done deal and seldom appear to question this position. Even in reading Trinitarian apologetics, I find the defense of Trinitarianism often superficial at best with little in-depth evaluation of the issued involved. Even erudite Trinitarian scholars such as Karl Barth and TF Torrance simply assume the validity of the Trinity and proceed to build complex theologies on what is believed to be an absolutely proven Trinitarian foundation
Having completed these essays to this point, I must say I have found greater evidence against the Trinitarian concept of God than evidence for it. There is no explicit teaching in scripture that God is a Trinity. Every implicit scriptural passage used to promote the Trinitarian construct can be explained in a non-Trinitarian manner. Most damaging to the Trinitarian construct are the dozens of scriptural passages that explicitly teach the Father is the one and only true God. How can the Trinitarian construct stand up to 1 Corinthians 8:6, 15:27-28, Ephesians 4:4-6, 1 Timothy 2:5, John 17:3 and John 20:17. All these passages, as well as many others, show the Father as the one and only true God and show the Son as a separate Being from the Father. These scriptural passages constitute virtual creedal statements as to who God is versus the Son. When you factor in how the Spirit can be easily seen as the mind and power of the Father by which the Father administers all things, it becomes very difficult to see any validity in the Trinitarian construct.
As stated above, I have examined the major scriptures that pertain to this issue. There are dozens of additional scriptures that bear on this subject and I will examine them as well and add to this series as time allows. In terms of my studies so far, it would appear that the one Supreme, Almighty God is the Father. The Spirit is His power and cognitive function. The Son is his chief agent through whom He does much of what He does. If this perspective of the Father, Son and Spirit is correct, what needs to be determined is whether the Son has existed eternally, was created in the distant past or was in the purpose of God from the beginning but first came into existence as the promised Messiah through His birth in the first century A. D. I will deal with these issues in the final installments in this series.