The Logical Argument God is not Three Persons, One Being

 

The Logical Argument God is not Three Persons, One Being

Arfad A. Razak

30 January 2025

 

In this short article, we explore the reasons behind why it is illogical for the nature of God to be “Three Persons, One Being,” more commonly known as the Trinity or the majority (majority, because there are a handful of Christian groups who do not believe in the Trinity, for example, the Unitarian) Christian Doctrine of the Trinity, in full. The argument of this article is that if God is “three” and “one” at the same time (however this may be understood), then whosoever believes in this cannot be considered a monotheist.

We begin, obviously, with the presupposition that God is one in his nature and essence (this word is complicated for the Christians if they view it from a Trinitarian perspective, we will explore this word in its original Greek below). The nature of God cannot be three or two or more than one, after all, if the nature of God is more than one, that means there are more than one God. The same can be said for God’s essence. If God’s essence is more than one, then the concept of monotheism which the Christian theologians have tried to defend over the years will be in vain. In fact, to further stress on the very argument of this article, the Christian theologians from the early Church to the present day – if they believe in the Trinity – has failed in their apologetic mission to defend the Trinity as monotheism. It is either one “has” the Trinity, or “have” monotheism.

The Trinity is not monotheism. Monotheism is the believe that there is only one God (the creator of the Heavens and the Earth), as well as negating the existence of other gods. Christian theologians have also subscribed to monotheism – and they claim that they too believe in one God (as the Muslims and Jews does). However, Trinitarians accepts Jesus as God, therefore, this disqualifies them from their miraging monotheistic beliefs. Despite their claims to monotheism, Trinitarians are far from believing in one God. A note should also be made that Jews are not considered “strict” monotheist. They believe in Yahweh as their God but does not necessarily negate the existence of other God (see the Shema, Deuteronomy 6:4, Exodus 20:3. These verses does not call for the Israelites to negate the existence of other gods, it only commanded the Children of Jacob to accept Yahweh as their only God).

Before we proceed further, we first have to understand the concept of God’s nature and essence. God’s nature refers to his “state” (for a lack of a better word). For example, humans have a different nature compared to animals and non-living things. God, on the other hand, has a different nature than humans and all other creation of his. The “state” may also be referred to as “being,” and that is what God is: God is eternal (which means he is uncreated and does not come into existence, unlike his creation, which has a beginning). “Being,” as used by some Christian Trinitarian apologists refers to the condition or state of “being” of a person. For example, a person is loving, caring, etc., or a person is not in a good mood today, a person is suffering from a cold/flu.,. Essence, on the other hand, also refers to the nature or being of God: what is God (not who is God). However, the early Christian theologians used these words very differently and contrastingly. These terminologies, as far as our primary sources are concern, were not define until the fifth century CE. Essence, to the early theologians, is “what is God made up off.” For example, what “stuff” is God made up of, as humans are made up of blood, flesh, bones, etc., To this, the early Christian theologians found the answer in the fourth Gospel of the New Testament: “God is a spirit” (John 4:24), therefore, the “material” that God is made up of is “spirit.” But what exactly is this spirit? Is it the “Holy Spirit”?

The early Church theologians did not necessarily channel their apologetics discourses in this manner as they attempted to define the “materials” that God is made up of, especially, if God is the Trinity. However, this became somewhat of a “side quest” for theologians of the later Church period. Afterall, defining the Trinity is not the end of the story, as they still need to define the relationship between the Father, the Son (Jesus), and the Holy Spirit. If the Father is a spirit, how does one explain the Holy Spirit? What material is “it” made up off? And what exactly is it? When Jesus told his disciples - as narrated by the fourth Gospel – that the “comforter” will come (14:26, 15:26), who or what exactly is this? Moreover, if the Holy Spirit is also made up of a “spirit,” is it then part of the Father (like an emanation? – like the ray from the sun? If this is the case then it cannot be considered a distinct and separate being, instead, it is more suited to be an attribute or creation of the Father). The more difficult question would be to define the material that made the Son (Jesus)? Certainly, if God and the Holy Spirit are both spirits, the Son must also be a spirit, otherwise, there are 2 natures of God – which relatively means 2 different God(s). It has been well known that the “Son” is not a spirit and was made up of flesh and blood. But the problem does not end here. The fourth Gospel also indicates that this “Son,” was “Word became flesh” (John 1:14). How is the “Word,” the “Son,” and “Jesus” identical “persons” if their very nature were different? There was a time when Jesus did not exist, or that he “existed” as the Son, or that he “existed” as the Word. These are three different “persons” with contrasting “natures.” Moreover, even if the Father and the Holy Spirit are both spirits, unless the Holy Spirit is the attributes of the Father, the problem of 2 God(s) persist. And the Trinitarians does not believe that the Holy Spirit is an attribute of the Father. Instead, it is a separate and distinct person of the Trinity.

Early Christians believed that individual person has a spirit (known as the soul, Greek = Pneuma, Hebrew = Ruach, Arabic = Ruh). But the question here is not whether God has a spirit or not, it is whether God’s spirit is the same as that of the Son and the Holy Spirit? And the Trinitarians denied this unless they fell into patripassianism. If this is the case, how does one explain the “Son (Jesus)?” If he is God, and God is unlike humans, then how is the Son also God? Moreover, the Old Testament book of Numbers informed readers that “God is not a man, or the son of man…” (Numbers 23:19). Therefore, if Jesus was a man, he most indefinitely cannot be the Father. The Trinitarian theologians are well aware of this, and they most certainly do not approach to explain the Trinity from this angle – which is why the Doctrine of the Trinity is the believe that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are one. And not the Father, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit are one. In addition, the Father is not Jesus, and Jesus is not the Holy Spirit. These entities are distinct and separate, yet they have forever existed, non-separable from one another as the same “being.” The Son and the Holy Spirit is not part of the Father, nor is the Father part of the Son and the Holy Spirit. The Son is not the “arm” of the Father, and the Holy Spirit, the “leg” of the Father, and together they made up God. These three entities are different in their personalities, yet they are one in “being.”

By not including the word “Jesus” in the Trinitarian formula/creed, Trinitarian theologians have been able to make the Trinitarian creed much more palatable to the gullible masses. However, if one were to ask these Trinitarian theologians who or what exactly is the “Son,” they will either say it is Jesus, or the Word of God became flesh/incarnate (which also refers to Jesus, see John 1:1-18). One may use different terminologies to refer to an identical matter/person, but this does not get rid of the elephant in the room. The logical problem still persists, if the “Son” or Jesus or the “Word” was still a human, it can never be God unless one falls into Paganism. Pagans worship idols/humans, at the same time believing that there is only one God.

While the Christians continue to define how God can be “three persons, one being,” the Qur’an already rebuked this very notion itself. Therefore, to continue one’s research or quest in defining the Trinity is an exercise that is tantamount to drying water from the sea: not only are these efforts not worthwhile, but the very quest itself is only bound for failure. The Qur’an is explicit: Whatever that can be imagined, or whatever that exists or will come into existence, cannot be God, as God is unlike anything humans can perceive or dream of (Qur’an 112:4). Jesus is a man (something which humans can perceive of); therefore, he is disqualified from being the creator of the Heavens and Earth. The Qur’an is also invoking the human intellect when it mentions that both Jesus and his mother ate food (5:75). These are characteristics of man – man goes hungry and needs to eat. Without food man will die. And even without food, man will die someday. God, on the other hand, is eternal. And eternality invokes the concept of forever in existence, and will forever exist, and does not come into existence. Jesus, on the other hand, came into existence from the womb of a woman.

Average Christians subscribing to the Trinity are unaware that they indirectly believe in a God that has three different natures: the nature of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit is different. In other words, they believe in three Gods, not one. Therefore, despite their persistence on monotheism, they are not monotheist. The reality is that, when the philosophical language is stripped off, the Doctrine of the Trinity is a doctrine full of Paganistic ideas and Hellenistic philosophies that are hardly palatable in itself without its outer skin/casing. And since most Christians are not trained theologians and philosophers, they are easily fooled by this very Paganistic ideas covered in monotheistic clothes. Christians need to scrutinize the very wording and concept of the Doctrine itself and practice logical thinking and reasoning and not be easily persuaded by the (in)famous concept of God is love, God died for their sins, or that God sent his only son to die for their sins. Afterall, faith without understanding is a recipe for disaster. God is not love, though God is loving. God can forgives without the need to die nor the need to send his son to die for human’s sins. This is against the teachings of the very scripture: “The one who sins is the one who will die. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them” (Ezekiel 18:20).

The Trinity is not logical, it is illogical and irrational. Not only is it mathematically flawed, but it also goes against one’s very intellect. For example, if Christians insist on believing the Trinity as absolute truth, the next time someone asked them what the answer is to 1 + 1 + 1, they will need to respond with 1 and not 3. An apple is not equal to a grape. The same goes for the human Jesus is not equal to the creator God. The Father is a spirit, the Son (Jesus) being human, has a human nature, while the nature of the Holy Spirit is still being debated amongst Christian theologians today. Somehow, these three different natures are considered “one” being. However, Christian theologians are adamant that one should not think of them as amalgamating their essence, nature – in the sense that – the nature of spirit, the nature of a person (human), and the nature of the Holy Spirit, combines and becomes God (the Trinity). Instead, they are separate and distinct “persons.” The very fact that they are “distinct” and “separate” pose the impossible concept that they are “one” in nature and essence. This is not a case of three different sizes of grapes within the same basket. This understanding is not the Trinity.

Christian theologians defined the Trinity as “Three Persons, One Being.” The three so-called ‘persons’ are the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. And these three ‘persons’ are ‘one.’ But these are not three Gods, instead, they are one God. These three ‘persons’ are ‘one’ because they share exactly the same essence (from the Greek word “homoousios,” homo = same; ousia = essence, contrast with homoiousia = like [but not exactly the same, for example, twin brothers may have the same face but different fingerprints]). Many early Church theologians believe that Jesus has a nature that is “like” God (Genesis 1:27, God made man in his image – but this does not mean that Jesus is exactly like God. The Qur’an mentions that God has two hands, the same that humans have two hands – but the hand of God is unlike the hands of a person, see 38:75). However, when the later theologians of the Church - wishes to pursue an ideology of their own(?) - equates Jesus to be having the same (homoousia) nature as God. However, this early Church’s description of the Doctrine of the Trinity is different to what is understood today. As far as the early Church theologians are concern, and whose names are the Cappadocian fathers, and Athanasius of Alexandra, they do not believe that God is the Trinity in the strictest sense of the word. What these church theologians were debating about within the first five hundred years of Christianity is the “concept” of what is God, not who is God. To these early theologians, God is always the Father (John 17:3). Their bigger concern was who/what is/was Jesus in relation to the Father. These early theologians were philosophers cum theologians. The only lens that made sense to them, in terms of theology, was that of Hellenistic philosophy. The Hellenist, such as the Romans, and the Greeks before them, believe that there is the one true God. However, humans are capable of being “divine/god” (“god” with a small case ‘g’), for example, Romulus (the founder of Rome, as the legend goes), and Apollonius of Tyana, were both lifted up to “heaven” and are depicted as “god” due to their “merit.” On top of that, when it comes to the Holy Spirit, the irony is that for the first two centuries, the Church could not care about the nature or essence of the Holy Spirit. It was not until the end of the fourth century that the Holy Spirit was also considered as God, although reluctantly.

Throughout the years, many Christian theologians have tried to explain the Trinity in various ways, and the reason they had to do this is because the concept of the nature of God being “Three Persons, One Being” is unfathomable. Since it is unfathomable, most theologians have referred to the Trinity as a mystery, or more popularly, the mystery of the nature of God. To them, God is so majestic that the human minds cannot perceive as to what/who he is. Therefore, no one can understand how God can be the Trinity – one must simply just believe. But as we have mentioned above, faith without understanding is a recipe for disaster. Although Muslims and Jews both agree that God is unfathomable to the created minds, this does not call for the total abandonment of God given logic. Today, if three persons are brought into a room, one does not say that these three persons are one “being.” Instead, they are three distinct beings, as there are three persons. If one were to leave the room, what remains are two beings. However, the most prominent argument used by Trinitarian apologist remains that the Trinity is like fruits in a basket, or like the human body parts – whereby a person is made up of hands, feet, etc., However, these are organs that made up a person. If a person were to lose an arm or leg or other parts of his or her body, one will still refer to him or her as a person. In addition, to use this form of argument means that a person does not fully understand what the Trinity is.

The organs that made up a person, or the individual fruits that made up a basket of fruits does not explain the Trinity. The Trinity is not a “basket” or a “person” upon whom the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit is inside (the basket). The fact is that there is no “basket.” It is also not a football team which consists of three players nor a musical group/band that consists of the drummer, guitarist, and lead singer. Christians, who are not theologians, when asked to define or explain the Trinity, rarely got the doctrine right. And even the crème-dela-crème theologians falls into heresy. And the above is where they will go to in order to convince their subject on the Christian doctrine of God. The Father is a separate and distinct person than the Son and the Holy Spirit. Yet, they are one “being.” Yet, they are equal, eternal, consubstantial, and has always existed. One cannot exist without the other, nor will one ever exist without the other. Fruits in a basket may be eaten, or more fruits may be added. A musical group/band may disband or add/remove members. The Trinity on the other hand, cannot be “disbanded” nor “started.” It has always existed as it is. How then can one make sense of this if Jesus was born of a woman, yet he has always existed? The Christian theologian’s response to this would be “God became a man to die for your sins.” To this one may have to admit that God, in all his strength and majesty, died. But the respond to the above question as God becoming a man or sending his son to die for the sins of humanity is to stray from the question itself. The question is not on “why,” instead on “how.” How can the one God, whom Jesus calls the Father, became a man, came down to earth as a man, yet remaining the Father, and as fully God on earth, but he is now not the Father, but the Son instead? To this the Christian theologians would exclaim: the Trinity explains it. No, it does not. Paganism explains it. And the Trinity is a skin upon which its bone is paganism.

In conclusion, the Christian Doctrine of the Trinity does not lead one into monotheistic beliefs, instead, it drowns a person in Paganistic concept and ideas. The Trinity is mathematically illogical in the sense that if the Father is God, and the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is also God, it accounts to three Gods and not one God. The concept or idea that three persons may be considered “one” being is devout of reality. The fact that the words “person” and “being” are used distinctly also does not make sense. Three distinct persons have three separate personalities. Therefore, they cannot be considered as “one” being. In addition, a person’s state of being – meaning his/her emotions, etc., is what made up his personalities for the day. A person may be cheerful all the time, but his or her state of being on a particular day may be different. The concept that three persons have the same (homoousia) state of being is a logical impossibility. In addition, a person's state of "being" is what made a person. Humans are flesh and soil, winds or the Ruh/Pneuma are "winds," and God is a "spirit". These are not the same "beings". Furthermore, when it is clearly proven that Jesus was a man that was born of a woman: Jesus’ state of being cannot be the same as that of the Father, who is the only true God (John 17:3). The average Christians on the streets, as well as those attending churches every Sunday, has never been provided with a clear and unambiguous statements or verses from the entire Biblical corpus that supports the nature of God being “Three Persons, One Being.” This is because verses such as these do not exist in the Christian holy scripture. Versus such as these have been interpolated into the King James Version but has recently been removed after it was discovered that none of the early Greek manuscripts of the Bible contains this verses (the original Bible used by the early Christians were written in marketplace Greek, see 1 John 5:7-8, called the Johannine Comma,  has been removed by modern and pre-modern scholars as interpolation). To the contrary, we find many verses that indicates otherwise such as Numbers 23:19 “God is not a man,” and that Jesus is not God and that the Father is the only true God (John 17:3), and that Jesus negate that he is good, and informed his subject that only God alone is good (Mark 10:18). Certainly, if Jesus deemed himself as God, he would not deny being good. Since Jesus denied being God, why are Christians worshipping Jesus as God?

 

 

Bibliography

R.P.C Hanson, The Search for the Christian Doctrine of God: The Arian Controversy, 318-381. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic (2005). 417-58; 824-75.

Anthony, Kenny, Ancient Philosophy, Vol. 1. Oxford: Oxford University Press (2006).

Wolfram Kinzig, A History of Early Christian Creeds. Berlin: De Gruyter (2024).

Kermit Zarley, The Restitution: Biblical Proof Jesus is Not God. (2008).

Anthony F. Buzzard, Charles F. Hunting, The Trinity: Christianity’s Self-inflicted Wound. International Scholars Publication (1998).

James D. G Dunn, Did the First Christians Worship Jesus: The New Testament Evidence. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press (2010).

Ernst, Haenchen, Hermeneia Commentary, John 2: A Commentary on the Gospel of John Chapters 7-21, trans. Robert W. Funk. Philadelphia: Fortress Press (1984). 151

 

Primary Sources:

Hebrew Bible, Richard Elliot Friedman, Commentary on the Torah. Harper One (2001).