So I've contacted you
in the past about matters relating to what other people believe and
their reliability. You've answered them adequately, if you're
wondering. But now I'm contacting you over a personal dilemma
relating to the nature of the Trinity.
Before I get to the
actual question, I think it would help if I told you a bit about
where I'm coming from a.k.a my thought processes.
always taught that God is one "Being", or one "Entity". This is
biblically supported (James 2:19 is one example). God is also 3
distinct "persons" (Jesus's baptism is one scene, the Great
Commission is another). Intuitively, I've felt that the three
persons are equal with each other.
explained it this way:
1 always equals 1. 1 never
equals 2, nor does 1 ever equal 0. From this, we can get
Premise 1: Something is always equal to itself.
Therefore, something is never unequal to itself.
10:30 describes Jesus as being "one" with the Father--or, being the
same "essence". Several other passages state that Jesus is not the
Father (John 14:6, for example). The Spirit is sent by Jesus (John
14:26), which will teach His teachings. Again, a different person,
but the same teachings. Jesus's teachings were the Father's
teachings. One "essence" is seen again, although manifested
Premise 2: All
three persons of the trinity have the same essence.
Lord is stated to be one God. James says that. So
There is one God.
Conclusion (2, 3): The one Essence is God.
Conclusion (1, 3): God is equal to Himself.
Conclusion 2 (2, 3):
All three persons of the trinity are essentially God.
conclusion: All three persons of the trinity are equal with each
Just today, I saw a debate between a Muslim and
a Christian, debating whether Tawhid or the Trinity is true. The
Muslim brought up 1 Corinthians 15:28 to explain that if Jesus is
subject to the Father's judgement, then Jesus can't be equal with
the Father, and therefore not part of the trinity. This brought to
my attention that within the trinity, equality isn't true. This
conflicts with premise 1. So either:
1, my logic is
or 2, the Bible is flawed.
This brings us to my
question (finally). What's your opinion on Trinitarian equality in
light of 1 Corinthians 15:28, and/or what is the Biblically accurate
view of the trinity?
You seem to look at the Bible as
literally as possible, which I do as well. That's why I'd value your
Also, I enjoy a good intellectual argument, so
this might turn into a debate. Just a friendly heads-up.
thanks for the email. I've written a little bit
about the trinity on the website Q&A. Specifically:
(this is very short but has some useful links)
(this might be more useful to your points below - especially on
1 Cor 15)
This might be the most useful part for what you
In terms of the verses cited where Jesus calls the
Father 'my God' etc, or 1 Cor. 15:24-28 where Jesus submits himself
unto the Father, I haven't ever had a problem with that. We saw from
Psalm45 and Heb 1 that the Father calls Jesus God just as Jesus calls
the Father God. But concerning this submission spoken of in 1 Cor
15:24-28, there has always been is a willing submission within the
trinity. The Son comes to do only the will of the Father. The Holy
Spirit comes not to draw attention to Himself but to glorify the Son.
None of that means that they are any less 'God' than the other. It is
simply different roles that they have. An earthly example is husbands
and wives. The Bible says:
Eph 5:22-25 Wives, be subject to
your own husbands, as to the Lord. (23) For the husband is the head of
the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being
the Savior of the body. (24) But as the church is subject to Christ,
so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything. (25)
Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and
gave Himself up for her'
Each has a role to play and each is
different but man is not 'greater' than a woman or vice-versa. Neither
is one 'more human' than the other. So it is with the trinity. The
Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are all said to be three members
of the one God. There is a willing submission within the trinity and
different roles that they play. But each are equal in terms of their
nature as God.
Hope this makes some sense.
All the best
Hi, thanks for the response.
That does make sense, but I
still have a problem with that analogy.
It implies God is a
species made up of the trinity, exactly how humanity is made up of
male and female. Different roles within the same species.
problem is this: If God is a word that relates to a species, then God
is a something, not a someone; like how humanity is made up of
someone's, but humanity itself is a something.
But, the Bible
never refers to God as a something, only a someone. The word God
itself relates to an intelligent being, not a species made up of
What do you think about this?
yeah, it's just an analogy. No human illustration is
ever going to be perfect in trying to describe God. All I was trying
to say is that there is a willing submission within the trinity. This
doesn't mean that one is greater than the other. It just shows that
God is not like us! The Muslim man that you read is just thinking like
a man thinks. Not like God thinks. Man thinks that if someone serves
another or submits to another, then he is less than the other. Jesus
actually taught the opposite for God's very nature is to serve.
Matthew 20:25-28 Jesus called them together and said, "You
know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high
officials exercise authority over them. (26) Not so with you. Instead,
whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, (27) and
whoever wants to be first must be your slave-- (28) just as the Son of
Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a
ransom for many."
Mark 9:35 Sitting down, Jesus called
the Twelve and said, "If anyone wants to be first, he must be
the very last, and the servant of all."
the fact that Jesus willingly submits to the Father doesn't in anyway
teach that He is less than the Father. It just shows that He is God
and God's nature is not like ours!