Search for:
Christian Doctrines Christianity

A Rea­son­ing To Refute the Log­ic of Trinity

Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr

In this paper, I attempt to present an argu­ment dis­put­ing and refut­ing the Chris­t­ian belief in the Trin­i­ty of God. 

We believe this ill-con­cept was insert­ed into Chris­t­ian belief by the dev­il at a time of absence of mind and a state of pow­er­less­ness on the part of true Uni­tar­i­ans and sin­cere believ­ers in the One God. To this day, fol­low­ers of this belief are faith­ful to the evil that found­ed it and we are aware that there is lit­tle or no ben­e­fit in attempt­ing to argue them out of this line of thought. 

How­ev­er, we are like that who is describ­ing the sor­ry state of a lost and mis­guid­ed per­son to peo­ple so that oth­ers may take exam­ple and les­son from it. And Allah shall guide whom He choos­es to the right path.

The State­ment of Faith of Chris­tians (Athanasian Creed) reads as :

We believe in the One God, The Father, the con­troller of every­thing, the mak­er of the heav­ens and earths and all that is vis­i­ble and that is not vis­i­ble. And in the One Mas­ter Jesus Christ who was begot­ten by His Father before all the worlds and who was not made. A true God from a true God and from the essence of His Father. And By whose hands the worlds were per­fect­ed and every­thing was cre­at­ed and who — for us — human beings and for our sal­va­tion descend­ed from the heavens…and the eter­nal life forever.

The fol­low­ing is a sum­ma­ry of the state­ment of faith of Trinitarians :

  1. The Father is the absolute God to whom belongs every­thing and who is the cre­ator of everything.
  2. Jesus Christ was begot­ten by the father pre­ced­ing the cre­ation of the world.
  3. Jesus Christ is a true God who stems or orig­i­nates from the true God.
  4. Jesus Christ is the cre­ator of the worlds.
  5. The Holy Spir­it emanates form the Father.

Before dis­cussing these con­cepts, let us look at what was men­tioned by the Chris­t­ian Cop­tic Priest, Zakaria Boutros in his book titled God is One in a Trin­i­ty”, which was pub­lished in Ara­bic on the Internet :

He states under the head­ing One­ness of God”:

We Chris­tians believe in one God with no part­ners, unlim­it­ed, omnipresent in the heav­ens and earth, eter­nal, pre­ced­ing cre­ation, infi­nite and there is no end to His king­dom. And this belief is per­fect­ly clear in the bible and the Chris­t­ian State­ment of Faith as you shall see.

He then goes on to sup­port this by vers­es from the Bible and the State­ment of Faith. For the pur­pose of this dis­cus­sion we are only con­cerned by the lat­ter where he states :

…from these vers­es and oth­ers that can be seen all over the bible, the State­ment of Faith which is repeat­ed by the church through­out the gen­er­a­tions and which reads : In truth we believe in One God the mak­er of the heav­ens and earth and that is vis­i­ble and that is not invis­i­ble, was deduced. From this dear read­er, you may have not­ed that we Chris­tians believe in one God and not three.

Here I draw the atten­tion of the read­er to the omis­sion that the priest has car­ried out while quot­ing from the State­ment of Faith, name­ly where he writes : (In truth we believe in One God the mak­er of the heav­ens and earth and that is vis­i­ble and that is not invis­i­ble), and where the word The Father was omit­ted from the orig­i­nal statement.

His motive for this dele­tion is quite obvi­ous and not wor­thy of explain­ing, for it would be illog­i­cal and con­trary to Chris­t­ian belief, for him to say that Chris­tians believe in The Father with­out includ­ing the Son and the Holy Spirit.

Of course, this may con­si­tute an unfair accu­sa­tion of fal­si­fy­ing script. In both cas­es let us not stop at this point and let us look fur­ther in the book where he states :

Faith in the trin­i­ty does not mean in any way shape or form that we Chris­tians believe in three Gods as some peo­ple may imag­ine. The cor­rect under­stand­ing of this belief is explained by the fol­low­ing points :

  • God is exis­tent in His Essence : Which means that God is a true and an exist­ing enti­ty and cer­tain­ly not a con­cep­tu­al or nonex­is­tent ide­al. Fur­ther­more God’s exis­tence is the source of exis­tence of all things. God has declared this enti­ty by the word Father (which is not asso­ci­at­ed with any phys­i­cal or mate­ri­al­is­tic mean­ing for His exis­tence is the source of exis­tence of all things.
  • God speaks His Word : This means that God, the exist­ing enti­ty is a rea­son­ing enti­ty that pro­nounces and speaks His Mind through the Word and He is cer­tain­ly not a mute God. He has announced His Speak­ing Mind in the Word or the Son. This is sim­i­lar to the human con­cept of speak­ing our mind through words of mouth and it does not have a phys­i­cal or mate­ri­al­is­tic mean­ing, because His exis­tence is the source of exis­tence of all things.
  • God is alive through His Spir­it. God gives all of us life and of nat­u­ral­ly, we can­not imag­ine that he Him­self is with­out spir­it. God has pro­nounced this con­cept in the words : Holy Spirit.

The state­ments above clear­ly declare that the three con­cepts (Father, Son and Holy Spir­it) are in actu­al fact, attrib­ut­es to God rather than inde­pen­dent enti­ties. The Father is the attribute of the essence or ori­gin, where­as The Son is the attribute of the spo­ken or pro­nounced rea­son­ing and thought and The Holy Spir­it is asso­ci­at­ed with life, spir­it or soul of the essence.

Let us ana­lyze these in more detail :

First­ly, what does the priest mean by His exis­tence is the source of exis­tence of all things ?

Had he said this in the sense that God is the cre­ator of all things, it would have been accept­able, but this state­ment as it is reminds one of the east­ern con­cepts of uni­ty of exis­tence that ren­ders God in union with the world and crea­tures and sees no dis­tinc­tion between the cre­ator and the cre­at­ed. Of course we would not like to mis­judge the priest’s beliefs and we will not attempt oth­er inter­pre­ta­tions until fur­ther expla­na­tions are pre­sent­ed for this rather prob­lem­at­ic and puz­zling state­ment he made.

Sec­ond­ly, what does he mean by pro­nounces and speaks His Mind through the Word”?

After defin­ing the father or the essence of God , he returns and deter­mines that speak­ing the Word is an exclu­sive attribute of the Son or the (Speak­ing Mind of God).

Unfor­tu­nate­ly for the trin­i­ty the con­se­quence of this line of thought is that the essence of God is lack­ing in flu­en­cy and only the Son attribute open­ly express­es the Speak­ing Mind or Rea­son­ing of God. This is a clear defect or weak­ness that negates per­fec­tion of the Father or the Essence that does not suit divinity.

Third­ly, what does he mean God is alive through His Spirit ?

After stat­ing that God has a mind or rea­son­ing that stems out­wards from the inner essence and assign­ing to it (the Mind exclu­sive­ly and not the Essence) this attribute of speak­ing, he adds the attribute of The Spir­it that emanates from the Essence and gives the whole God this con­cept of liv­ing or being alive. This of course is com­pa­ra­ble to the idea of the human soul that gives man the abil­i­ty to live, feel and rea­son. When the soul leaves the body, man is longer able to live and feel. It is incred­i­ble how the priest por­trays God from a sim­i­lar point of view where the Divine is needy of an inde­pen­dent spir­it or soul so as to be (alive). And of course he can­not see how the Divine Enti­ty can be alive otherwise.

We deduce from all this that God in Chris­t­ian belief has three parts : the Essence, the Speak­ing Mind and the Spir­it, and God is needy of these so as to enjoy (some) of the attrib­ut­es of per­fec­tion that are nec­es­sary for the Divine Entity ;

For He does not speak through or in His essence (the Father), but rather through the part that is named (The Mind).Also He is not alive in His essence but through the part that is named (The Spirit).Of course this con­cept of par­ti­tion and uni­fi­ca­tion can­not be applied to God, because it requires that God must be :

  • In need of these parts, and ;
  • In need of a uni­fy­ing agent that will put these parts togeth­er because any­thing that con­sists of parts requires a mak­er of the parts and a uni­fi­er that will bring them together.

And of course this is not befit­ting in rela­tion to The Majesty of the First, The Almighty, The Eter­nal and The Absolute Self Suf­fi­cient Mak­er of all things.

Let us revis­it the priest’s book and specif­i­cal­ly address the head­ing Neces­si­ty of the Trin­i­ty for the Belief in Uni­ty”, where he states :

From all that was men­tioned, it becomes clear that there has to be a Trin­i­ty in the One God, because :

  • It is not pos­si­ble for the One and Holy God who made all things exist, not to have exis­tence in His Essence.
  • It is not pos­si­ble for God who cre­at­ed man and gave him the abil­i­ty to speak, to be mute or inca­pable of speak­ing the Word.
  • It is also not pos­si­ble for God who cre­at­ed man and gave him life, to be lack­ing in life through The Spirit.

There­fore it was made nec­es­sary for the One God to have a Holy Trin­i­ty and this is our cor­rect belief [that God is One in a Trin­i­ty and not three Gods].

Here we ask the priest or any Chris­t­ian who believes in the above : Why did you assign only three attrib­ut­es to God ? Why not say that God’s Pow­er is the fourth one, His Knowl­edge is the fifth, His Hear­ing is the Sixth, His See­ing is the sev­enth, His Mer­cy is the eighth and His Love is the ninths and so on.

If you respond to that by say­ing for exam­ple that His Life is His Pow­er ; His Hear­ing, Knowl­edge and See­ing Con­sti­tute His Mind ; and Love and Mer­cy are life, our reply will be :

No, because a per­son can be alive, yet inca­pable , can be sane yet deaf or blind or can be alive yet cru­el and far from loving.

In short, the three attrib­ut­es of the Trin­i­ty are not ade­quate or suf­fi­cient for the pur­pose of describ­ing God’s per­fec­tion which all faiths rec­og­nize in terms of Exis­tence, Knowl­edge, Pow­er, See­ing, Hearing,etc. And they are cer­tain­ly not restrict­ed to these three attrib­ut­es includ­ed in the Trinity.

Fur­ther more the attrib­ut­es of God were nev­er expressed in these terms [Father, Son and Holy Spir­it] by any of the Prophets or any lan­guage on earth save for the Chris­tians who ini­ti­at­ed this innovation.

In response to the priest’s claims con­cern­ing the neces­si­ty of the Trin­i­ty”, we reply by say­ing that for those who tru­ly believe in the One­ness of God, the nec­es­sary and cor­rect is that God exists in His Essence, speaks in His Essence and is alive in His Essence. And that his attrib­ut­es lie in His very Essence and not inde­pen­dent exten­sions car­ried for­ward by the three enti­ties in the Trinity.

In addi­tion to this, the State­ment of Faith” declares Jesus Christ who was begot­ten by His Father. This con­veys the mean­ing that the Father pre­ced­ed Jesus. Clear­ly there is no mean­ing for Jesus being (The Son) if His exis­tence did not fol­low that of the Father, because the Father and Son could not have log­i­cal­ly exist­ed togeth­er for all eter­ni­ty (sequence and con­se­quence). The exam­ple of the Son’s sim­i­lar­i­ty to the con­cept of Word of Mouth can­not be log­i­cal­ly used to argue against this because the (mouth) must have exist­ed pri­or to the (word) com­ing out of it.

A sim­i­lar ratio­nale can be applied to the Holy Spir­it which emanat­ed from he Father. These two con­cepts require that God was both, mute and (not alive) pri­or to the ema­na­tion of the Son and the Holy Spir­it. Here we are forced to imag­ine a three or two-stage evo­lu­tion of the Chris­t­ian God, where the Son’s exis­tence and the ema­na­tion of the Holy Spir­it fol­lowed that of the eter­nal Father.

This of course can­not be argued out of by say­ing that the Divine does not sub­mit to the con­cept of Time, because nat­u­ral­ly and accord­ing to the Trin­i­ty, The Father is a must and a pre-req­ui­site of both, The Son and The Holy Spir­it. Here we have to repeat what was already decid­ed ear­li­er .That these three enti­ties are parts that are needy of each in order to exist. Con­se­quent­ly there will have to be a uni­fy­ing agent need­ed to bring them togeth­er to form the (One God) , because all things con­sist­ing of parts require a builder. This places God in a the­o­ret­i­cal posi­tion far from divinity.

Even worse for the Trin­i­ty, accord­ing to the State­ment of Faith, The Father is God, The Son is God and The Holy Spir­it is also God. How can we rec­on­cile this with fact that the Father [who is asso­ci­at­ed with the Essence] is in need of the Spo­ken Word and Spir­it. The Son who is asso­ci­at­ed with the Speak­ing Mind is in need of the Essence and Life and the Holy Spir­it who is asso­ci­at­ed with life is in need of Essence and Mind. Yet each con­sti­tutes a divine enti­ty on its own. How mar­vel­lous can this claim be ?

Here we ask Chris­tians : do you real­ly believe that each of these is God — by way of elab­o­ra­tion ? Or do you believe in the cumu­la­tive divin­i­ty of the whole ?

If they say here that it is noth­ing but mere elab­o­ra­tion and nam­ing, we reply by say­ing that you have sure­ly denied the state­ment of faith which explic­it­ly declares Jesus : a true God from a true God. And you have cer­tain­ly trans­gressed and named mere attrib­ut­es Gods with­out proof or evidence.

Alter­na­tive­ly if they say they are actu­al Gods, we will ask : Is it befit­ting for God to lack in Spir­it or the Spo­ken Word ?

If they reply : Yes it is pos­si­ble”, our response will sim­ply be : Then there is no need for the three entities.”

Where­as if your answer is no, we will say : Then each of the three enti­ties (Father, Son and Holy Spir­it) will have to con­tain sim­i­lar parts again which brings the num­ber of Gods to nine allow­ing for the nec­es­sary per­fec­tion of attrib­ut­es for all enti­ties. This will go on for­ev­er and will math­e­mat­i­cal­ly expand to include an uncount­able num­ber of trinities.”

Based on these argu­ments, I con­clude that the con­cept of the Trin­i­ty is false and unfound­ed on ratio­nal or rea­son­ably accept­able logic.

It is very easy to point out the evi­dence and proof deny­ing this con­cept from the Bible itself. How­ev­er in seek­ing a brief refute of the Trin­i­ty I have cho­sen to restrict my dis­cus­sion to the ratio­nal argument.

Final­ly I con­clude by not­ing that if the basic beliefs of a reli­gion are false, it fol­lows that the entire faith is cor­rupt which makes it nec­es­sary for adher­ents of this faith to return to the true teach­ings of the prophets con­firm­ing the cor­rect faith in the One­ness of God who has no part­ners and who is the Most Exalted.

And only God knows best !Endmark

Cite Icon Cite This As : 

4 Comments

  1. DENIS BYRNE Reply

    Chris : Of GOD is not the same as being God..A man­i­fes­ta­tion is OF God…is a Manifestation…God can­not be limited…The Mus­lims are cor­rect and the trini­tar­i­ans error…You men­tion SUBSTANCE… a rather abstract term…what is it.…God is Spirit…Spirit is real but is it sub­stance??? The real­i­ty is that Spir­it can sub­stan­ti­ate matter…Jesus proved that…His most pow­er­ful spir­it rose from the dead and could man­i­fest as mat­ter in a flash..His spir­it ascend­ed to the Father then he returned to earth to appear to many…He ate fish but walked thru walls…how is that explained if not by my men­tion above.??? I just remind you that OF GOD is not God in wholeness…God is One.

  2. DENIS BYRNE Reply

    GOD IS ONE what is so dif­fi­cult for so=called trini­tar­i­ans to understand…I am a so-called­cra­dle catholic who even went thru a cath college…My def­i­n­i­tion is thus…God always was and ever will be…the Christ ener­gy and the Holy Spir­it are MANIFESTATIONS OF GOD NOT GOD HIMSELF.…CALLING GOD HE ISHUMAN CONSTRUCT AS IS THE TRINITY…why stop at three…Jesus said to his disciples“ye are gods” We all have a God giv­en soul or spir­it which gives us life from the moment of conception.…we are CREATURES AND SO ARE JESUS AND THE HOLY GHOST…open your eyes and let in some logic…OF God is not God…it is a manifestation…This cra­dle catholic must side with the mighty fine mus­lims who say : GOD IS ONE… Jesus stat­ed that my Father and I are one.…BUT NOT ONE AND THE SAME…And by the way…why did it take chris­tians four cen­turies to come up with their trin­i­ty con­cept???? How could Chris­tians be avante gau­rde and slow on the uptake at the same time…my email add is cybrzone@​yahoo.​com…I doubt if there will be many replies as most trini­tar­i­ans are hard-nosed and some­what bigotted…Bless you ! Live long and Prosper.

  3. aian jaafar Reply

    hi chris,

    um, the doc­trine of the trin­i­ty (one sub­stance, three per­sons) is not stat­ed any­where in the bible.

    but you believe in the doc­trine, even though it is not in the bible.

    any verse which you could come up with which MAY imply plu­ral­i­ty for God is no rea­son at all to lim­it God to a trin­i­ty. what if there are a mil­lion per­sons in His God­head ? the so-called trini­tar­i­an for­mu­las’ in the NT does not say that they are three per­sons in one essence, so if you quote any of those vers­es to sup­port your trin­i­ty, then that is just wrong rea­son­ing on your part. what if the NT teach­es three gods ? then it would be in con­tra­dic­tion with the OT.

    in return, i tell you, any defense of the trin­i­ty is just typ­i­cal chris­t­ian apolo­get­ics, much WRONG rea­son­ing which leads to unsub­stan­ti­at­ed claims. as for broth­er Hes­ham Azmy, i think he has just sub­stan­ti­at­ed his claims in this article.

    why don’t you try to refute it ? also, why not show us the verse(s) in the bible which say that God has three per­sons in one essence ?

    you could do it in writ­ten form, and im sure broth­er hes­ham and the bis­mi­ka allahu­ma team would be hap­py to respond to it. it’d be fun.

  4. Typ­i­cal Mus­lim apolo­get­ics, lit­tle rea­son which leads to unsub­stan­ti­at­ed claims.

    You want to engage in a for­mal­ized debate over Christian/​Muslim the­ol­o­gy ? We could do it in writ­ten form. It’d be fun.

Write A Comment