Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: How Do You Understand the Godhead?

Theology
61

BrotherDavid, you say you were a Trinitarian for years—but with all due respect, you’re not refuting the doctrine of the Trinity, you’re refuting a caricature of it. Let’s get surgical.

⸻

  1. You demand the word “persons” (plural). Fine.

Let’s go Hebrews 1:3—again:

“…the express image of His person.”
The Greek? Hypostasis.
The church used this exact biblical term to define the three hypostases—Father, Son, Spirit—one essence, three Persons. That’s not adding to Scripture. That’s using Scripture to interpret Scripture.

You reject the word “persons” because it’s not plural in one verse—but then claim “Jesus is the Father” which is never stated anywhere. That’s not biblical precision—that’s selective theology.

⸻

  1. “When you’ve seen Me, you’ve seen the Father.” (John 14:9)

Yes, Jesus reveals the Father—not that He is the Father. Read two verses earlier:

“If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also…” (John 14:7)
That’s not identity—it’s distinction with unity. Seeing Jesus reveals the Father because they are one in essence, not because they’re the same person.

⸻

  1. “No multiple persons… only ONE.”

Then explain this:
• John 14:16 – “I will pray the Father, and He shall give you another Comforter…”
Three distinct actors. Not one guy in three hats.
If Jesus is the Father and is the Spirit, then He’s praying to Himself to send Himself to be with people while He’s still there.

That’s not theology. That’s a divine sock puppet show.

⸻

  1. “What is God’s NAME?”

You’re expecting one magic word—like “Jesus” is the final answer to a divine riddle. But here’s what Scripture gives us:
• The Father is called God (John 6:27)
• The Son is called God (John 1:1, Hebrews 1:8)
• The Holy Spirit is called God (Acts 5:3–4)
• And they all share one NAME (Matthew 28:19)

The revealed name of God in redemption is Jesus—but Jesus is not the entire Godhead. He is the Son, not the Father or the Spirit.

⸻

Final Truth:

You say the Trinity is confusing. No, brother—it’s convicting. Because it humbles our logic and forces us to bow before the full revelation of God—not a man-made, modalistic reduction of Him.

One God. Three Persons. Eternal, scriptural, and unshakable.
The only thing made up here is the idea that God is one Person talking to Himself. That’s not in the Bible. That’s in your tradition.

62

I believe a person can be a Christian and not espouse the term “Trinity”. That would include the apostles and early church before the word “trinity” was incorporated into Christianity.

Important issues: Does a person receive Jesus as the only savior? Deity of Christ? Work of the Holy Spirit? Heavenly Father who sent Christ into the world?

The word Trinity can cause confusion when witnessing to Muslims and Jews. Let’s not make it more difficult than need be.

I go to a Trinitarian church and my fav bible teachers are Trinitarian. I understand that theologians seek ways to explain doctrine and create systematic theology etc. I don’t have all the answers on this doctrine.

63

Why would God send a second person of an internally divided self—when He clearly declared, “Beside Me there is no Savior”? If God is all-powerful, all-knowing, and ever-present, why would He need to send someone else—a second divine person—to accomplish salvation? Why wouldn’t He come Himself?

After all, Scripture is not vague about this. God said emphatically in Isaiah 43:11 (KJV): “I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour.” That is not poetic metaphor—it is a direct, absolute statement of divine identity. Yet the traditional Trinitarian doctrine claims that God the Father sent God the Son, who is supposedly a co-equal, co-eternal divine person, and distinct from the Father, to become the Savior. But here’s the fundamental question every sincere seeker must ask: Is the Savior beside God—or is the Savior God Himself?

Because Isaiah 43:11 doesn’t leave room for ambiguity. It doesn’t say, “Beside Me is another who saves.” It says, “Beside Me there is no Savior.” That’s a theological wall no secondary divine person can climb over. If Jesus is beside the Father as another person, then either He is not the only Savior or the Scriptures contradict themselves. But if God truly said, “I alone save,” then the only way Jesus can be the Savior is if Jesus is that very same God—manifest in the flesh.

Let’s be honest about what this means. If Jesus is a second person within a triune being, then God didn’t come Himself—He delegated salvation to someone else within His being. But how is that possible if the Scripture declares, “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD” (Deut. 6:4)? Or “God is not a man…” (Numbers 23:19)? Or again, “God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself…” (2 Corinthians 5:19)? That verse alone makes it plain: God didn’t send someone else—He was in the body, doing the work of redemption Himself.

And this is the beauty of the Oneness revelation. Jesus is not another—He is the One. He is not beside God—He is God robed in flesh. As John 1:14 declares, “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us…” And 1 Timothy 3:16 echoes, “Great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh…” Again, not a second person, not an agent on behalf of the Father, but God Himself taking on the form of humanity to redeem us.

So then, why would God send a second person? He wouldn’t. He didn’t. He came Himself. The same God who said, “Beside Me there is no Savior,” also stepped into time, took on flesh, and walked among us—not as an additional being, but as the very fullness of the Godhead bodily (Colossians 2:9). If we affirm that Jesus is the Savior—and Scripture gives us no choice but to do so—then we must also affirm that Jesus is that One God. Because God will not give His glory to another (Isaiah 42:8), and salvation is the highest expression of His glory.

Trinitarianism invites us to believe in a God divided into persons—each with their own will and mind—yet somehow still “one.” But the Bible reveals a far greater mystery: a God who is One in absolute, indivisible essence, who wrapped Himself in flesh not to send a proxy—but to save us Himself.

So, to every sincere Trinitarian reading this, I pose the question with respect and reverence: If God said, “Beside Me there is no Savior,” why do you say He sent someone else?

64

That is still dividing God not externally but Internally and He is perfectly indivisibly One.

65

The_Omega, strong rhetoric—but it’s built on a false premise. You’ve mistaken distinction for division, and turned relationship within the Godhead into contradiction. But Scripture doesn’t stutter—it reveals. Let’s unpack your claims with the fire of God’s Word, rightly divided.

⸻

  1. “Beside Me there is no Savior” (Isaiah 43:11)

Amen. And that’s exactly why Trinitarians proclaim Jesus as God. We don’t believe the Father sent “someone else.” We believe He sent His Son, who is of the same divine essence, not some junior partner.

John 1:1 – “The Word was with God, and the Word was God.”
John 1:14 – “And the Word was made flesh…”

So who came to save? God did—in the Person of the Son, not a created agent, not a secondary deity, but God from God, Light from Light, very God of very God.

⸻

  1. “Why would God send another person?”

Because salvation is Trinitarian work—not divided work. The Father sends, the Son accomplishes, the Spirit applies. That’s not delegation out of weakness, it’s the eternal plan of a God who dwells in eternal relationship.

2 Corinthians 5:19 – “God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself…”
Not “God was Christ,” but “in Christ”—just like the Son is in the Father (John 10:38), and the Spirit proceeds from both (John 15:26). That’s divine unity, not a solo performance.

⸻

  1. “Trinitarianism divides God into three minds and wills.”

Nope. That’s a strawman. Trinitarian doctrine teaches one divine will, shared by three Persons, each fully God, fully eternal, and fully united. We don’t believe in three Gods—we believe in one God who has eternally existed as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Your version makes God look like an actor wearing three masks. Ours reflects the relational beauty God revealed, not just in redemption, but in eternity past.

⸻

  1. “Jesus is not beside God—He is God.”

Yes—and He is also beside the Father:

Hebrews 1:3 – “…sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high.”
Acts 7:55 – Stephen saw “Jesus standing on the right hand of God.”

If Jesus is the Father, then these verses are divine theater. But if Jesus is the Son, eternally distinct from the Father yet fully God, then the Word makes perfect sense.

⸻

  1. “Colossians 2:9 – All the fullness dwells in Christ.”

Yes—but read it carefully: the fullness of the Godhead dwells bodily. That doesn’t mean Jesus is the entirety of the Godhead. It means the fullness is present in Him—not that He alone is the Godhead.

If Jesus is the Father and is the Spirit, then who’s He talking to in John 17? Himself? That’s not mystery—that’s a monologue.

⸻

Final Word:

God didn’t send a stranger. He sent His eternal Son.
Not a second god. Not a lesser being.
God of God, who took on flesh, walked among us, and said,

“Before Abraham was, I AM.” (John 8:58)
“Glorify Me with the glory I had with You before the world was.” (John 17:5)

That’s not a borrowed glory. That’s shared glory within the Godhead.

So to every sincere Oneness believer reading this, I pose the question with equal reverence:

If Jesus is the Father, who was He praying to?
If God said, “This is My beloved Son,” who was He talking about?
And if salvation is the work of One Person, why does the entire New Testament unfold with Father, Son, and Spirit moving in divine harmony?

One God. Three Persons. Not contradiction. Completion.

66
Is the Biblical Concept of God Strictly Monotheistic or Does It Allow for a Triune Nature?

This discussion delves into whether the Bible portrays God as strictly monotheistic or suggests a Triune nature, examining Old Testament affirmations of God’s oneness alongside New Testament references that some interpret as evidence of the Trinity. Participants are invited to explore whether the doctrine of the Trinity is grounded in scripture or developed beyond biblical teachings.

#DoctrineOfTheTrinity #BiblicalMonotheism #GodsNature #OldAndNewTestament #ChristianTheology

pixlr-image-generator-67222b40b1579461f264e131
pixlr-image-generator-67222b40b1579461f264e1311344×768 41 KB

The question of whether the biblical concept of God is strictly monotheistic or allows for a Triune nature is a significant theological debate that has persisted for centuries. On one hand, the Shema in Deuteronomy 6:4, “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:” which seems to affirm a strict monotheism. On the other hand, passages such as Matthew 28:19, “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:” have been interpreted by Trinitarians to suggest a Triune nature of God. How do we reconcile these seemingly divergent viewpoints? Does the New Testament reveal a complexity in the nature of God that the Old Testament does not explicitly address, or is the doctrine of the Trinity an extra biblical development?

67

If the NT had revealed a new, prior unknown, nature of God, it would be made so clear, and repeated in multiple books, that it would not even be a debate today. Jesus alone would’ve taught it very clearly and repeatedly. Neither are the case.

By all accounts, among those who have studied the Scriptures diligently on their own (including many professed trinitarians), the doctrine appears to have been an extra-biblical development that was crystallized (if we can even call it that) by the 4th century A.D.

68

Hi,

I googled, "Does Genesis 1 reveal the Trinity?
This is what came back.

Yes, The Trinity is revealed in the first chapter of Genesis.

Yes, many theologians interpret Genesis 1 as containing allusions to the Trinity, with the Father, Son (Jesus), and Holy Spirit all present and active in creation.
Here’s a breakdown of the arguments:
The Plural “Elohim”:
In Genesis 1:1, the Hebrew word for “God” is “Elohim,” which is a plural noun, suggesting a plurality within the Godhead.
“Let Us”:
In Genesis 1:26, God says, “Let us make man in our image,” further suggesting a plurality within the Godhead.
The Spirit of God:
Genesis 1:2 states, “And the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters,” indicating the Holy Spirit’s involvement in creation.
God’s Word:
The concept of God speaking to create, as seen in Genesis 1, is often interpreted as the Son, Jesus, the Word made flesh, being the agent of creation.
(Google)

It is not a mistake or coincidence that John 1:1 sounds like Genesis 1: 1.
Again, Google has a good answer.

Logos" (Greek):
The Greek word “logos” is translated as “Word” in English, and it is used in John 1:1 to describe the nature of Jesus.
“In the beginning was the Word”:
This phrase establishes the pre-existence and eternal nature of the Word, later identified as Jesus.
“And the Word was with God”:
This indicates a close and intimate relationship between the Word and God, suggesting the Word is not a separate entity but is inseparably connected to God.
“And the Word was God”:
This is a crucial statement, affirming the divine nature of the Word, later revealed as Jesus Christ.
Connection to Jesus:
John 1:14 further clarifies that “the Word became flesh and dwelt among us,” solidifying the identification of the Word with Jesus.
Significance:
This verse is foundational to Christian theology, establishing the divinity of Jesus and his role in creation and revelation. (Google)

So the Trinity is right there in Genesis 1.

Blessings

1 Like
69

70
1 Like
71

The elohim as evidence of the Trinity is the worst explanation I’ve ever encountered. It doesn’t stand up to scrutiny at all. At best, it’s a Trinitarian over-reaching attempt at Theological Twister to the point of contortionism.

72

Reconciling these views is at the heart of much theological discussion. The Shema emphasizes the oneness of God, a cornerstone of Jewish belief. In Christianity, this oneness is understood not as solitary but as a unity of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, as expressed in Matthew 28:19. This Trinitarian view sees God as one in essence but three in persons, which is not explicitly outlined in the Old Testament but developed in the New Testament through the teachings about Jesus and the Holy Spirit.

1 Like
73

I always get criticized for my belief (not here - I am new), but I believe we have one God who serves us a Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, just as my dad was a father, son, husband, lawyer, and other things.

74

Hi,

Matthew 28:18-19 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: KJV

How do we ignore what Jesus told us to do?
Why would He tell us to baptize in this manner if all three are not worthy of the worship?

Blessings

75

If three distinct persons were in mind here the verse would have said names (plural) but it didn’t. What is the only name whereby we must be saved. Jesus.

Acts 4:12: Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.

76

The_Omega, Acts 4:12 is 100% true—and Trinitarians don’t deny a single syllable of it. There is no other name under heaven by which we must be saved but Jesus—because Jesus is the name of the Son, the full revelation of the Godhead in the flesh.

But here’s where your argument slips:

Matthew 28:19 (KJV):

“Baptizing them in the name [singular] of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.”

One name, yes—but that name is not used as a substitute for the Persons—it belongs to them. This verse doesn’t say “in the name Jesus.” It says Father, Son, and Holy Ghost—three distinct identities sharing one name—that’s divine unity, not human redundancy.

So let’s line it up:
• The Father sends,
• The Son saves,
• The Spirit seals—
All in one name, one essence, one God.

Jesus is the name of the Son, but He’s not the sum total of the Godhead.
To say so is to silence the Father, erase the Spirit, and turn the triune glory of God into a one-man show the Bible never wrote.

One name. Three Persons. One God.
That’s not contradiction—that’s completion.

77

Hi,
I have used this as an example before. Let’s see if we can plug it in here:

Trinity is a word used to express the doctrine of the oneness of God as existing within the three distinct Persons (or personalities) of the one God. It is originates from the Greek word “trias.” The first time “trias” was used was by Theophilus around 168-183 A D. The first time for the Latin term “trinitas” was by Tertullian in 220A.D. to express the Trinity doctrine. We can break down the doctrine to these four points:

  1. There is only one God (Deut. 6:4; Mark 12:29, 32).
  2. The Father is God and is a divine Person or Personality distinguishablly different from the Son and the Holy Spirit. (Exo. 4:22-24, Isa. 44:6. 1Cor.8:6)
  3. Jesus Christ is equally God, and is a Person distinguishablly different from the Father and the Holy Spirit. (Deut. 18:15, Dan. 3:23-24, John 1.1; 14, John 5:18)
  4. The Holy Spirit is equally God and a divine person distinguishally different from the Father and the Son. ( Genesis 1.2, Isa. 63:14, Matthew 28:19, Acts 5:3-4)

The doctrine of the Trinity was developed to help people understand the relationship between God as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Remember that, at this time 168-183 A.D., believers did not have access to a completed Bible as we do. They received their teaching through oral communication. So doctrines were introduced to help believers retain critical information.

So how can three distinct persons be one distinct person? This doesn’t seem possible. How can three ones be one in total?

1 • One • I = 1 or One or I.

I can multiply any form of one in any order. Each of the ones are separate, distinct unto itself, yet they all equal to each other to the point that any form may be used as the answer. That is probably as close as I can get to explaining the doctrine of the Trinity.

Have I fully explained the Trinity? Qf course not. How can the finite (me) fully describe the infinite (God)? I hope this helps a little in the discussion.

Also, I don’t believe that the Oneness of God and the Trinity are at odds.
One God portrayed biblically in three distinctly different personalities revealed to us through the Bible.

Blessings

78

Joe, I appreciate the respectful tone and thoughtful attempt—but let’s tighten the theological bolts here. You’re close in some places, but your final conclusion opens a door the Bible keeps firmly shut.

⸻

  1. “Three distinct personalities” sounds harmless—until you realize that’s not biblical language.

We’re not talking about three moods, masks, or manifestations. The Trinity is three Persons—not personalities of one person, but three Persons in one Being. When we downgrade “Person” to “personality,” we slide right back into modalism—the very heresy the Trinity was defined to correct.

⸻

  1. The fact that “Trinity” wasn’t coined until the 2nd century doesn’t mean the truth wasn’t there.

The term “Trinity” may be post-apostolic, but the doctrine is straight out of Scripture:
• Father is God (1 Cor. 8:6)
• Son is God (John 1:1, Hebrews 1:8)
• Spirit is God (Acts 5:3–4)
• Yet God is One (Deut. 6:4, James 2:19)

We needed a word to describe what Scripture clearly reveals. “Trinity” was never an invention—it was a response to people who tried to cram God’s revelation into human logic.

⸻

  1. Your math analogy is creative—but God isn’t an equation.

You said, “How can three ones be one total?”—then tried to use math to explain it. But God isn’t a number, and He’s not a math problem. He’s not divisible or reducible.

The Trinity is not 1+1+1=3.
It’s 1x1x1=1: one essence, shared eternally by three co-equal, co-eternal Persons.

⸻

  1. Oneness and Trinity are absolutely at odds—because they answer different questions with opposite claims.
    • Oneness says: One Person plays all roles.
    • Trinity says: One God exists as three distinct Persons.

That’s not a friendly difference—that’s a foundational contradiction.

⸻

Bottom line:

You said it best: “How can the finite fully describe the infinite?”
We can’t—but we can repeat what the Infinite has revealed.

And what has God shown?

One God. Three Persons. Not personalities. Not parts. Not roles. Persons.

Any doctrine that erases that line—even politely—erases the clarity of the Word. And that’s one thing we’re not allowed to do.

Grace and truth, brother. Keep digging. The Book is deep.

79

Three persons? this is NEVER mentioned in the Bible not matter what commentary or church councils you choose to draw from. First of all, God is a Spirit- that is what my Bible tells me in John 4:24. There are 54 times the word persons is mentioned in scripture and none refer to God.
If you have God The Father, God The Son and God The Holy Ghost…That is in fact three Gods. Monothesim is the belief in the existence of only one God, and that there are no other
Gods. Is it monotheism or monothreeism ?

80

BrotherDavid, you keep swinging the “three Persons = three Gods” argument like it’s a wrecking ball, but it’s actually a cardboard cutout. Let’s lay it bare:

⸻

  1. “Three Persons” may not be a phrase used, but the reality of three divine Persons is all over Scripture.
    • Jesus prays to the Father (John 17:1)
    • The Father sends the Son (John 3:17)
    • The Son sends the Spirit (John 15:26)
    • The Spirit intercedes with the Father (Romans 8:26-27)

Those aren’t roles. They’re relational interactions. If that’s not three Persons, you’ve got God talking to Himself in different voices, and Scripture becomes divine ventriloquism.

⸻

  1. You say 54 uses of “persons” don’t refer to God. Great. “Oneness” isn’t used once. Neither is “Bible.” So what?

We don’t build doctrine on word counts. We build it on the consistent witness of the text. The early church used “three Persons” because they were reading the same Scripture you’re reading—and refusing to ignore what was staring them in the face.

⸻

  1. “Three Persons = Three Gods”? Wrong. That’s tritheism, not Trinitarianism.

Trinitarians affirm one Being, one divine essence, eternally shared by three distinct Persons—not three separate beings, not three minds competing for the throne.

If you say the Son is God, the Father is God, and the Spirit is God—but deny they’re distinct—then who was Jesus praying to? Who sent Him? Who did He send?

⸻

  1. Is it monotheism or monothreeism?

It’s biblical monotheism:

“The LORD our God is one LORD.” (Deut. 6:4)
But that one God has revealed Himself as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—not modes, not masks, and not metaphors.

Your version makes God a solo actor with three costumes.
Ours reveals Him as an eternal communion of love and glory—three Persons, one God.

⸻

One God. Three Persons. Not polytheism. Just pure, revealed truth.
Don’t flatten what God has revealed just because it doesn’t fit human math. Let the Word speak—and it speaks Trinity.