Questions for Trinitarians

by
Jason Dulle
JasonDulle@yahoo.com

Jesus said that ONLY His Father knew the day of the second coming, not the Son (Mark 13:32). What about the Spirit? Apparently he does not know because only the Father knows. Are there things that the Father knows that the Spirit does not? If so, in what sense can the persons of the Trinity be co-equal, and of the same essence?

If the Son and Spirit are coequal, why is blasphemy against the Son forgivable but not against the Spirit (Luke 12:10)?

Why does the Son not have any power other than that which the Father gives Him if indeed the Son is co-equal with the Father, and the Son continues to exist beyond the incarnation as the second omnipotent person in the Godhead (John 5:19, 30; 6:38)? The only logical answer that Trinitarians could offer is that God the Son, as He continues to exist beyond the incarnation, does have all power, but only in His incarnate state is God the Son limited, and in need of receiving power from the Father, because of His humanity. But such an explanation is no different in principle than the Oneness explanation that the Son is limited because of His humanity, but His deity is the deity of the Father, which continues to exist beyond the incarnation, unlimited.

Why, if Jesus was conceived by the person of the Holy Spirit is God the Father considered His father instead of the Spirit (Matthew 1:18, 20; Luke 1:35)? Is not the one who conceived you your father? If the Spirit accomplished the conception, then He alone should be the Father. If it is argued that the Father and Spirit conceived, then why does the Scripture not say such? It only says the Spirit conceived, and it only says that God the Father is Jesus' father. If it was the Spirit that overshadowed Mary to conceive in her womb, why wouldn't it be the Holy Spirit who was incarnated? Finally, if Jesus is the second person incarnate (God the Son) as Trinitarians claim, why was it not God the Son who conceived in Mary's womb, He Himself becoming incarnate? Is not the second person the logos who became flesh (John 1:1, 14)? Unless we identify the Spirit who caused the conception with the logos, the incarnation does not make sense; but to make such a connection is tantamount to a Oneness conception of God.

How could only the second person of the Trinity become a man, and not the other two persons in light of the Trinitarian doctrine of the perichoresis of persons? How can the Father and Spirit only indwell Jesus (as it is commonly stated), while the eternal Son is actually Jesus' essential deity? How can one separate the persons like that without confessing three gods, only one of which became incarnated, and the other two just tag along?

If it was the eternal Son who became a man, and not the Father or Spirit, then why did Jesus not state this? Paul said Jesus is the image of the invisible God. Jesus said that those who saw Him saw the Father (obviously not the essence of the Father, for no man can see God's essence no matter if He is one or three persons). Never does He state that they were seeing the image of the incarnated eternal Son.. If Jesus is the 'second person' made flesh, then why didn't He ever say "he who has seen me has seen the Son"? Why not "he who has seen me has seen the Holy Spirit"? Why is it only the Father? If Jesus' deity is the eternal Son, in contradistinction to the Father and Spirit, why would Jesus say that they have seen the Father by seeing Him, rather than seeing the Son? Jesus indicated that to see Him was to see the person who sent Him [Father] (John 12:45).

It may not be exclusive proof that since Son only appears in Scripture after incarnation that it means "Son" is bound up in the incarnation, but the lack of "Son" anywhere else prior to the incarnation argues strongly against the position of an eternal Son. This argument, however, is bolstered by the fact that God is never called "God the Father" or "Father" (in the NT sense at least) until after the incarnation, apparently because He was not a father in the NT sense of the word until the incarnation (Heb 1:5).

The Spirit is mentioned 240 times in the OT, and never once was it understood to refer to a distinct person from God, but rather to refer to a distinct aspect of God's person, or the nature of God Himself. "Spirit of the LORD" appears twenty-six times and never once indicates a distinct person from the LORD. Why is this if the Spirit is indeed a distinct person from YHWH?

Why, if there are internal relationships between three distinct persons in the Godhead, do we not read of love for or from the Spirit? Why is the Spirit absent from these key verses pertaining to relationships: Matthew 11:27; John 10:30; 14:10, 32; 16:3; 17:3, 21-22; I Cor 8:6; I Tim 2:5; 5:21; Acts 7:55; I John 1:3; Rev 3:5; 5:13; 7:10; 21:22; all salutations.

How can it be that we can know the Father by knowing Jesus, but we cannot know Jesus (2nd person) by knowing the Father, if indeed there is a perichoresis of persons? (John 8:19; 14:7; II John) And why is it that the Spirit is not known by knowing Jesus?

Jesus is often distinguished from God Himself (Mat 27:46; Lk 2:52; 18:19; Jn 8:40, 54; 14:1; 17:3; 20:17; Acts 2:22; 4:10; 7:55; 10:38; Rom 10:9; I Cor 8:4-6; Eph 1:3; Heb 1:9; I Pet 1:3), but we do not conclude from such distinctions that Jesus is not God, and neither should we conclude from such distinction terminology in the NT that Jesus' deity is a distinct person in the Godhead. Such distinctions are never between equal persons in a Trinity. Our only two options to understand such distinctions, then, is to conclude that Jesus is not God, or to conclude that such distinctions occur because of the incarnation (God's humanity). There is no need to postulate a "distinct persons of one essence" view of God because of the distinction terminology.

While there are passages which seem to indicate that the Son preexisted the incarnation (John 17:5; Col 1:15-16; Heb 1:1-2), there are also verses which seem to indicate that we preexisted (Eph 1:3; II Tim 1:9; Tit 1:2; I Pet 1:20). If we would not conclude that we preexisted, why conclude that the Son preexisted as a distinct person in the Godhead?

If God is an eternal triunity of persons, each person being distinct from the others, and each capable of giving and receiving love one to another, then why, if man is made in God's image, do we not mirror our Maker? We may have distinct aspects to our person (body, soul, spirit), but these aspects are not distinct persons, each capable of thought and interaction with one another. There is no love between my spirit and soul, or body and spirit. We are a unified monad, and so is God. As our love must be directed outward, so does His love.

Email IBS | Statement of Faith | Home | Browse by Author | Q & A
Links | Virtual Classroom | Copyright | Submitting Articles | Search