Trinity Facts

http://www.biocrawler.com/encyclopedia/Talk:Trinity/old1 ^ | Many.

[MichaelTheeArchAngel]

Historical proofs as to the way the trinitarian doctrine effected the pure doctrine of the disciples. The Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics: As to Matthew 28:19, it says: It is the central piece of evidence for the traditional (Trinitarian) view. If it were undisputed, this would, of course, be decisive, but its trustworthiness is impugned on grounds of textual criticism, literary criticism and historical criticism.

Edmund Schlink, The Doctrine of Baptism, page 28: "The baptismal command in its Matthew 28:19 form can not be the historical origin of Christian baptism. At the very least, it must be assumed that the text has been transmitted in a form changed by the [Catholic] church."

The Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, I, 275: "It is often affirmed that the words in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost are not the exact words of Jesus, but a later liturgical addition."

The Catholic Encyclopedia, II, page 263: "The baptismal formula was changed from the name of Jesus Christ to the words Father, Son, and Holy Spirit by the Catholic Church in the second century."

Hastings Dictionary of the Bible 1963, page 1015: "The Trinity is not demonstrable by logic or by Scriptural proofs, The term Trias was first used by Theophilus of Antioch in (AD 180), (The term Trinity) is not found in Scripture." "The chief Trinitarian text in the New Testament is the baptismal formula in Matthew 28:19.This late post-resurrection saying, is not found in any other Gospel or anywhere else in the New Testament, it has been viewed by some scholars as an interpolation into Matthew. It has also been pointed out that the idea of making disciples is continued in teaching them, so that the intervening reference to baptism with its Trinitarian formula was perhaps a later insertion. Eusebius,s text ("in my name" rather than in the name of the Trinity) has had certain advocates. (Although the Trinitarian formula is now found in the modern-day book of Matthew), this does not guarantee its source in the historical teaching of Jesus. It is doubtless better to view the (Trinitarian) formula as derived from early (Catholic) Christian, perhaps Syrian or Palestinian, baptismal usage (cf Didache 7:1-4), and as a brief summary of the (Catholic) Church's teaching about God, Christ, and the Spirit."

The Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge: "Jesus, however, cannot have given His disciples this Trinitarian order of baptism after His resurrection; for the New Testament knows only one baptism in the name of Jesus (Acts 2:38; 8:16; 10:43; 19:5; Gal. 3:27; Rom. 6:3; 1 Cor. 1:13-15), which still occurs even in the second and third centuries, while the Trinitarian formula occurs only in Matt. 28:19, and then only again (in the) Didache 7:1 and Justin, Apol. 1:61.Finally, the distinctly liturgical character of the formula is strange; it was not the way of Jesus to make such formulas the formal authenticity of Matt. 28:19 must be disputed." page 435.

The Jerusalem Bible, a scholarly Catholic work, states: "It may be that this formula, (Triune Matthew 28:19) so far as the fullness of its expression is concerned, is a reflection of the (Man-made) liturgical usage established later in the primitive (Catholic) community. It will be remembered that Acts speaks of baptizing "in the name of Jesus."

The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Vol. 4, page 2637, Under "Baptism," says: "Matthew 28:19 in particular only canonizes a later ecclesiastical situation, that its universalism is contrary to the facts of early Christian history, and its Trinitarian formula is foreign to the mouth of Jesus."

New Revised Standard Version: In regards to Matthew 28:19. "Modern critics claim this formula is falsely ascribed to Jesus and that it represents later (Catholic) church tradition, for nowhere in the book of Acts (or any other book of the Bible) is baptism performed with the name of the Trinity."

James Moffett's New Testament Translation: In a footnote on page 64 about Matthew 28:19 he makes this statement: "It may be that this (Trinitarian) formula, so far as the fullness of its expression is concerned, is a reflection of the (Catholic) liturgical usage established later in the primitive (Catholic) community, It will be remembered that Acts speaks of baptizing "in the name of Jesus." Acts 1:5.

Tom Harpur: Tom Harpur, former Religion Editor of the Toronto Star in his "For Christ's sake," page 103 informs us of these facts: "All but the most conservative scholars agree that at least the latter part of this command [Triune part of Matthew 28:19] was inserted later. The formula occurs nowhere else in the New Testament, and we know from the evidence available that the earliest Church did not baptize people using these words ("in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost") baptism was "into" or "in" the name of Jesus alone. It is argued that the verse originally read "baptizing them in My Name" and then was changed to work in the [later Catholic Trinitarian] dogma. In fact, the first view put forward by German critical scholars as well as the Unitarians in the nineteenth century, was stated as the accepted position of mainline scholarship as long ago as 1919, when Peake's commentary was first published: "The Church of the first days (AD 33) did not observe this world-wide (Trinitarian) commandment, even if they knew it. The command to baptize into the threefold [Trinity] name is a late doctrinal addition."

The Bible Commentary 1919 page 723: Dr. Peake makes it clear that: "The command to baptize into the threefold name is a late doctrinal addition. Instead of the words baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost we should probably read simply-"into My Name."

Theology of the New Testament: By R. Bultmann, 1951, page 133 under Kerygma of the Hellenistic Church and the Sacraments. The historical fact that the verse Matthew 28:19 was altered is openly confesses to very plainly. "As to the rite of baptism, it was normally consummated as a bath in which the one receiving baptism completely submerged, and if possible in flowing water as the allusions of Acts 8:36, Heb. 10:22, Barn. 11:11 permit us to gather, and as Did. 7:1-3 specifically says. According to the last passage, [the apocryphal Catholic Didache] suffices in case of the need if water is three times poured on the head. The one baptizing names over the one being baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ," later changed to the name of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit."

Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church: By Dr. Stuart G. Hall 1992, pages 20 and 21. Professor Stuart G. Hall was the former Chair of Ecclesiastical History at King's College, London England. Dr. Hall makes the factual statement that Catholic Trinitarian Baptism was not the original form of Christian Baptism, rather the original was Jesus name baptism. "In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit," although those words were not used, as they later are, as a formula. Not all baptisms fitted this rule." Dr Hall further, states: "More common and perhaps more ancient was the simple, "In the name of the Lord Jesus or, Jesus Christ." This practice was known among Marcionites and Orthodox; it is certainly the subject of controversy in Rome and Africa about 254, as the anonymous tract De rebaptismate ("On rebaptism") shows."

The Beginnings of Christianity: The Acts of the Apostles Volume 1, Prolegomena 1: The Jewish Gentile, and Christian Backgrounds by F. J. Foakes Jackson and Kirsopp Lake 1979 version pages 335-337. "There is little doubt as to the sacramental nature of baptism by the middle of the first century in the circles represented by the Pauline Epistles, and it is indisputable in the second century. The problem is whether it can in this (Trinitarian) form be traced back to Jesus, and if not what light is thrown upon its history by the analysis of the synoptic Gospels and Acts.

The Catholic University of America in Washington, D. C. 1923, New Testament Studies Number 5: The Lord's Command To Baptize An Historical Critical Investigation. By Bernard Henry Cuneo page 27. "The passages in Acts and the Letters of St. Paul. These passages seem to point to the earliest form as baptism in the name of the Lord." Also we find. "Is it possible to reconcile these facts with the belief that Christ commanded his disciples to baptize in the trine form? Had Christ given such a command, it is urged, the Apostolic Church would have followed him, and we should have some trace of this obedience in the New Testament. No such trace can be found. The only explanation of this silence, according to the anti-traditional view, is this the short christological (Jesus Name) formula was (the) original, and the longer trine formula was a later development."

A History of The Christian Church: 1953 by Williston Walker former Professor of Ecclesiastical History at Yale University. On page 95 we see the historical facts again declared. "With the early disciples generally baptism was "in the name of Jesus Christ." There is no mention of baptism in the name of the Trinity in the New Testament, except in the command attributed to Christ in Matthew 28:19. That text is early, (but not the original) however. It underlies the Apostles' Creed, and the practice recorded (*or interpolated) in the Teaching, (or the Didache) and by Justin. The Christian leaders of the third century retained the recognition of the earlier form, and, in Rome at least, baptism in the name of Christ was deemed valid, if irregular, certainly from the time of Bishop Stephen (254-257)."

Catholic Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger: He makes this confession as to the origin of the chief Trinity text of Matthew 28:19. "The basic form of our (Matthew 28:19 Trinitarian) profession of faith took shape during the course of the second and third centuries in connection with the ceremony of baptism. So far as its place of origin is concerned, the text (Matthew 28:19) came from the city of Rome." The Trinity baptism and text of Matthew 28:19 therefore did not originate from the original Church that started in Jerusalem around AD 33. It was rather as the evidence proves a later invention of Roman Catholicism completely fabricated. Very few know about these historical facts. "The Demonstratio Evangelica" by Eusebius: Eusebius was the Church historian and Bishop of Caesarea. On page 152 Eusebius quotes the early book of Matthew that he had in his library in Caesarea. According to this eyewitness of an unaltered Book of Matthew that could have been the original book or the first copy of the original of Matthew. Eusebius informs us of Jesus' actual words to his disciples in the original text of Matthew 28:19: "With one word and voice He said to His disciples: "Go, and make disciples of all nations in My Name, teaching them to observe all things whatsover I have commanded you." That "Name" is Jesus.

[Eagle Eye]

Perhaps the criticisms of the Trinity reveal some past thinking independent of God which now bears out the sinner.

Perhaps you enjoy bending the knee to Baal instead of worshipping El Shaddai.

Or we can resist personal remarks...?

[Eagle Eye]

All you have to do is look at the scriptures, but that seems to be something you're not used to doing.

[NCSteve]

The truth is, you've got a Content-Free Sentence Generator, don't you!

My brain keeps trying to add the content back. Being literate can be a curse sometimes.

[Tax-chick]

You expect words to convey meaning. I have a problem with that, too.

[Diego1618]

The Trinity doctrine is Pagan. If it were a New Testament doctrine, and believed and taught by the Apostles, they would have mentioned it.

Look at Paul's introduction to his epistles: "To all in Rome who are loved by God and called to be saints: Grace and peace to you from God our Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ." Paul never mentions the concept of a Trinity in any of his introductions.

Notice [James 1:1] "James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ."

Peter in his epistles never mentions the Trinitarian concept. [1 Peter 1:3] "Praise be to The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ."

John speaks of Christ and God as literal beings, never mentioning The Holy Spirit as a bodily person. His salutation in his second epistle is indicative; [2 John 3] "Grace, mercy and peace from God The Father and from Jesus Christ, The Father's son, will be with us in truth and love."

Jude's salutation is also: "To those who have been called , who are loved by God The Father and kept by Jesus Christ."

In the Revelation, John mentions Christ, God and the seven spirits before his throne but does not acknowledge The Holy Spirit.

The reason for this is that the Trinity doctrine was not taught by the early Church....nor the Apostles. It was, and is, a pagan concept! As the early Church gained new members this paganism was allowed to enter as doctrine because many new converts to Christianity brought it with them. Winning converts became all important and allowing them to bring in a Trinitarian idea continued the Babylonian concept of a "Nimrod/God", a "Semiramus/Mother of God" and a "Tammuz/Son" of God. It wasn't long thereafter that the early Church began claiming it too, had a Trinity!

The fact that the "Johannine Comma" [1 John 5:7-8]KJV, is found only in eight late manuscripts, four of which have the words in a marginal note, speaks volumes about this heresy.

[kerryusama04]

11 Then Jesus approached and said to them, "All power in heaven and on earth has been given to me.

It was given to Him by whom? Himself?

[Invincibly Ignorant]

The fact that most Protestant organizations buy into this heresy is very curious.

I've always found that to be curious as well. Prots want nothing to do with the likes of pepetual virginity, papal authority, apostolic succession, praying to saints, etc,. etc., but they sure do lap it up when Catholics come calling with their trinity doctine.

[spunkets]

"All you have to do is look at the scriptures, but that seems to be something you're not used to doing."

I see, you're not blind. Since you claim to know what you're talking about, I'll lay it out for you.

" Perfect man is/was body, soul, and spirit as man was formed, made, and created."

What is this? Is this a complete thought. It appears to be a claim.

" The body was formed, the spirit was created, and man was made aliving soul with his first breath. Soul is life. Spirit is what God is and gives and is invisible."

What does this mean? The body was formed, the spirit was created. It makes no sense. Man was made a living soul with his first breath? What is a spirit? What is a soul? The body was formed? What is it? What is a body? When a doc works on the body, does he reform it, or fix it's form? What's the diffence between form, create and make.

Re: Man is the image of the invisible God, per Gen 1:27. Man is the image of the trinity, per Gen 1:26 and Gen 3:22.

To which you posted:

2Cr 4:4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospelof Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them. An image is a mirror image. God is the image of Christ, so is man.

"Man was created in God's image when God placed his spirit in him but that doesn't mean that mankind looks like God because God is invisible...."

I'm invisible too! Do you know why? To be created in God's image means we are sentient rational beings. It refers to capacity to develop spirit, not that we were given any at all. When God placed his spirit in man? God's Spirit is the Holy Spirit! No one except God was born with the Holy Spirit! One can develop a spirit like His. That is possible because He made Himself known and one can use His gifts to learn and make His teachings and values theirs.

" If you use a bit more care in your usage of words you'll stay more Biblically accurate."

Yeah, right.

Re:"John 10:30, " I and the Father are one."

"One how? One in purpose and indicating unity because just as he prayed for the apostles to be one...in purpose and in unity.

It means He is God! It means His Soul is the Father and His Spirit is the Holy Spirit. His apostles were taught and asked to learn from him so there spirits would copy his as best they could.

" Jhn 17:22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them;that they may be one, even as we are one,:"

May be one in spirit! Not is one in Spirit.

" Rom 12:5 So we, [being] many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another.

Roman's 12 refers to purpose, which would include spirit. As it acknowledges though, all spirits will be different, have different capacity, but all work towards the one goal of the Church.

" 1Cr 10:17 For we [being] many are one bread, [and] one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread."

One Church.

"1Cr 12:12 For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also [is] Christ."

Same 1 Cor 12, one Church, with one purpose.

Re: "It is true that He was a man. It is not true that all men lie, nor that all men are in need of repentance. See Gen 4. Enoch walked with God. Also, Noah was righteous.

" Rom 3:4 God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged."

Then Paul's a liar, by his own words. That's your logic.

"Num 23:19 God [is] not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do [it]? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?"

Then Moses lies, by your logic.

" Two things: God cannot lie and God is not a man. Jesus Christ is a man. God is not a man....Jesus is...Get it?"

No, I don't get it. I reject it outright. Jesus is not a liar. He is God. The same way I reject your claims that Paul's a liar and so is Moses, Mary, Enoch, Noah, ect... Jesus is God!

Re: "God has a free will. What makes you think He can't be tempted? What makes you think temptation causes one to choose evil?"

" Jam 1:13 Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God:for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:"

This refers to God's response to temptation, nothing else.

" If Jesus was God then his believers were greater than God in their works:
Jhn 14:12 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater [works] than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father. "

You left out John 14:11, and John 14:13.

John 14:11-13
"Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me; or at least believe on the evidence of the miracles themselves. I tell you the truth, anyone who has faith in me will do what I have been doing. He will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father. And I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Son may bring glory to the Father.

So, it is God that will do whatever they ask, because His work as Jesus is complete and He has returned to the Father in Heaven. Which means they are as before creation as per John 1:1-2, 1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning."

"God is NOT three, but one and there is but ONE GOD, not three."

Three persons in one God. God the Father, God the Son, snd God the Holy Spirit. The Trinity.

[Cvengr]

By the Father. Again, I applaud you providing more proof of the Trinity.

[Zuriel]

We're do'in "The Holy Trinity" thread again??

I felt I represented the "Biblical" monotheistic viewpoint in respectable fashion here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1599380/posts

Posts: 11,21,22,33,35,37,149,152,154, and 156.

I just don't have time to type all that again.

[Cvengr]

"The Trinity doctrine is Pagan. If it were a New Testament doctrine, and believed and taught by the Apostles, they would have mentioned it.

It's rather difficult to sit down and read any book of the New Testament without it being obvious to the reader in humility and faith through Christ that there are three persons in the Godhead. Paul elaborates on the work of each person in the Godhead rather elaborately throughout Galatians and Ephesians. John records the Revelation of Jesus Christ well establishing it. Each of the Gospels manifests and testifies to the workings of each person in our Lord and Savior Christ Jesus.

Even if one doesn't have the Bible, the call of the Father, the saving work of the Son and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit each provide testimony to their reality to each and every believer through faith in Christ.

I encourage you to study Scripture with the cognizance of God revealing Himself to us in these threee persons, while opportunity still exists. There will come a time when the Holy SPirit is withdrawn and the grace available to us today will not be nearly as available to those who remain behind.

[spunkets]

"The reason for this is that the Trinity doctrine was not taught by the early Church....nor the Apostles."

Looks like you're wrong about the Apostles and the Early Church, since the Early Church is the Apostles.

John 1:1-5, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning.

Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it.

Matt 28:18-20
Then Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.

All you've posted is Paul, James and Peter addressing Persons of the Trinity. You left out the introduction to John's Gospel, but you seem to know about John's epistle, where He addresses Persons of the Trinty.

Looks like Isaih identifies the Holy Spirit as God also.

Isaih 63:1-2 Then his people recalled the days of old,
the days of Moses and his people—
where is he who brought them through the sea,
with the shepherd of his flock?
Where is he who set
his Holy Spirit among them,

who sent his glorious arm of power
to be at Moses' right hand,
who divided the waters before them,
to gain for himself everlasting renown,

Isaiah also desribes God on the cross it was His day of redemption. He identifies Jesus, as God.

Isaiah 63:1-6
Who is this coming from Edom,
from Bozrah, with his garments stained crimson?
Who is this, robed in splendor,
striding forward in the greatness of his strength?
"It is I, speaking in righteousness,
mighty to save."

Why are your garments red,
like those of one treading the winepress?
"I have trodden the winepress alone;
from the nations no one was with me.
I trampled them in my anger
and trod them down in my wrath;
their blood spattered my garments,
and I stained all my clothing.

For the day of vengeance was in my heart,
and the year of my redemption has come.
I looked, but there was no one to help,
I was appalled that no one gave support;
so my own arm worked salvation for me,
and my own wrath sustained me.

I trampled the nations in my anger;
in my wrath I made them drunk
and poured their blood on the ground."

[Cvengr]

"pneuma hagion (spirit holy) is the gift from God given on the day of Pentecost."

More exactly, agiou pneumatoV (God, the Holy Spirit) was asked for by our Lord and Savior Christ Jesus,(God, the Son), from God the Father.

10 days after the ascension, the Holy Spirit descended upon the apostles as flames of fire, thus beginning the Church Age. Today, every believer upon the call from the Father, has the Gospel made known to him via the Holy Spirit, and upon acceptance of faith in Christ, the Holy Spirit regenerates the believer's human spirit making the believer a man in body, soul, and spirit. That rebirth allows a continuing relationship between God and man while the believer remains in fellowship with Him, through faith in Christ in spirit and in truth.

Whenever the believer steps out of fellowship, he may reenter into fellowship via 1st John 1:9 by turning back to God, privately naming and confessing his known sins and categorically his unknown sins through faith in Christ to the Father for forgiveness of sins.

The believer is indwelt by the Holy Spirit and sealed by the Holy Spirit upon saving faith. The Holy Spirit provides for the temple for the indwelling of Jesus Christ in the believer and He is one with the Father.

In Acts 5, we clearly understand the Holy Spirit is indeed God, as Ananias lied to the Holy Spirit and is described as having lied to God. Throughout Christ's Revelation to John, our Lord and Savior Christ Jesus is identified as the Alpha and Omega, the one who was, is and will be forever more, identical with the great "I am". The Father was prayed to by the Son throughout the Gospels and is acknowledged throughout the epistles.

God has revealed Himself to man in these three persons, all the one God. It might be easier to comprehend a critical review of Scripture as a linguistic expression of His revelation. Semantically and in syntax, He is revealed by three different persons and we know by faith pon faith and Scripture upon Scripture that these three persons are associated with the same God, even identical with Him.

Rather than attempting to logically rephrase and analyze those relationships, we are instead shown in Scripture how God Himself reveals Himself to man, so that no other man need to interject himself into the process of coming to a relationship with God, other than our Lord and Savior Christ Jesus, the head of the Church.

All faith comes to us from God. The Father makes the call. The Holy Spirit makes Him revealed to man initially in grace to the unbeliever. The unbeliever either accepts or rejects that call and ministry of the Holy Spirit. If rejected, that is the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit which is the only unpardonable sin. The unbeliever has until his first death to receive and accept faith in Christ, before he is guilty of that sin. Once a man believes in Christ, he is saved immediately by the Holy Spirit. Again, all the work by God. The believer then is continually sanctified by God the Holy Spirit, while God the Son provides the image of how God works in each and every believer. We form a preoccupation with Christ while in fellowship with Him so as to continue to grow in Him, putting on the mind of Christ and renewing our minds daily.

[Cvengr]

Great posts, spunkets.

It's enjoyable observing other brethren seeking Him more.

[spunkets]

Thanks.

[Salvation]

By God the Father.

[Biggirl]

The Bible does give reference even indirectly to the Trinity, II Coritheians 13:14.

"14May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all."

Peace.

[Eagle Eye]

Three persons in one God. God the Father, God the Son, snd God the Holy Spirit. The Trinity.

According to you and the doctrine of the trninty, God is three, while according to the Bible God is one:

Deu 6:4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God [is] one LORD:
Gal 3:20 Now a mediator is not [a mediator] of one, but God is one.
1Ti 2:5 For [there is] one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

Isreal was confused by the pagan pluralistic gods and the many names that their God maintained: Jehova Rapha, Jehova Shalom, Elohim, El Shaddai, etc. but God through Moses made it clear that no matter how many descriptive names there was for God, God was still one being...not two, three, or seven.

Worshipping a plurialistic god is idolotry.

[Eagle Eye]

Here's a challenge:

Describe your trinitarian god using only Biblican terms and words.

IOW, you can't use terms not found in the Bible such as:
God the son;
God the Holy Spirit;
Trinity;
Three in one, etc.


Your entire explanation relies on non-Biblical terms and concepts while still ignoring very clear verses.

There is only one God but you claim that there is three.

God is one, yet you claim that God is three.

You claim that three is one and one is three and I disagree. Three is three and one is one.

Words mean something.

Either the Bible is wrong or you are.

[Eagle Eye]

Central to this argument of yours is the very verse that the psted article shows to be false and added to the Bible in order to support trinitarian doctrine.

Trinitarian doctrine is like evolution in that they both rely on falsehoods to maintain credibiliity to their adherents.

The Bible states over and over that there is but One God and over and over and over that Jesus Christ is the son of God.

The Bible never once says God the Son, God the Holy Spirit, Three in One, Trinity, etc.

Maybe God was trying to tell us something with the Bible that maybe there is only one God and that God is one, and that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and not God the Son?

Just a thought!