Is Jesus God? Part 3: History's Witness- Is the Trinity Doctrine true?

In Matthew 7:15-20 Jesus says, “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.”

The Bible is the only sure witness as to if the Trinity Doctrine is true, not history. Many conversations I have had with strong Christians concerning Jesus’ deity point to Christian history as a reason to believe it – how can the faithful witness of many to this belief be wrong? History shows that many of the people who decided on the Trinity Doctrine had “bad fruit” and later forced it on others throughout the centuries had “bad fruit”. This does not mean that the Trinity Doctrine is completely false or only partially true. But this does mean, given its violent history, we should be wary of pointing to 1700 years of, at times bloody, Christian history as any deciding factor on Jesus’ deity. The Bible truly is the only credible source. It is possible that it was Satan acting behind the Trinity Doctrine, and that he has used that false teaching from past false prophets to confuse us today. Again, only the Bible can reveal that.

The Council of Nicaea in 325, where the Trinity doctrine was first penned, was ordered by emperor Constantine, not the Church. His empire was dividing over the issue of Jesus’ divinity, and he wanted unity for the sake of his empire – so, for his own sake. The bishops at the council were torn between those who believed Jesus to be God and those who believed Jesus to be the created Son of God. The latter were led by a man named Arius and were called Arians. Of the around 1800 bishops who were invited, only about 300 came who eventually decided on this foundational doctrine (Reading: Athanasius).

Constantine tried to help both sides agree by heavily advocating for the concept of “homoousios”’s inclusion into the Nicene Creed, which in Greek means “of the same substance” (Homoousios meaning at Nicaea, 2024). Constantine sided with the Trinitarian viewpoint that Jesus was God. From this perspective, Jesus was God and begotten by God as his Son. God and Jesus are of the same substance. This word is still used by Christians today to explain how Jesus is God. Shortly after this council, in 326, Constantine murdered his wife and son (Why did Constantine the great execute his son and wife, 2024). While the formation of the Nicene Creed was written and decided upon by more than just Constantine, the great influence Constantine, a non-Christian murderer, had upon the council should not be understated.

During the council, the bishops argued and fought over the theology. As a result of this council’s decision, Arius and his followers were exiled. Others were threatened with exile if they did not sign the Nicene Creed by Constantine (Niekerk, 2024). Does this sound like the Holy Spirit at work? How many bishops signed the Nicene Creed because they were afraid of being exiled? How many bishops signed the Nicene Creed because they truly believed it? Given the pressure the bishops faced if they did not agree with the Nicene creed, the answer to those questions is not an easy one to determine.

I don’t believe Jesus is God anymore. In today’s context, would it be right for me to be exiled because I disagree with most of the Church? The vast majority of people, religious or not, agree that people should not be punished or exiled for differing beliefs. The Declaration of Independence says, penned by Thomas Jefferson, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the peace peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances” (U.S. Constitution). In the United States, if someone punished me by forcing me from my home because of my differing beliefs, that person would be jailed and seen as a criminal. So why do we uphold the Council of Nicaea as the clear power, work, and leading of the Holy Spirit if it was so heavily influenced by a man, Constantine, who threatened with exile those who disagreed and followed through on that threat? While there may have been many bishops at the council who were true Christians with the Holy Spirit, the initiator and most powerful participant of the Council of Nicaea was not. History shows that the primary purpose of the council was for Constantine to unite his empire. He was not a Christian, as shown in his murder of his wife and his son a year after the council. Given that the initiator of this council was a non-Christian murderer who exerted great influence in its outcome, particularly concerning the term “homoousios” solidifying the belief that Jesus is God, Christians are wise to be skeptical if the Holy Spirit was the One leading the Council of Nicaea. The Spirit certainly was not residing in Constantine, as shown by the violent fruit in his life, and his influence at the council was very significant. How much should the Church trust the theological outcome of a council initiated and heavily influenced by such a man? 

Holy Spirit wisdom is “peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full of mercy and good fruits, impartial, and sincere” (James 3:27).  One historian, Joseph Lynch, says in his book “Early Christianity: A Brief History”: the “councils were occasionally unruly and even violent meetings that did not achieve the unanimity that was thought to indicate the presence of the Holy Spirit” (Examiner, 2022). He is speaking of the church councils in general, including Nicaea. Unruliness and violence are indicators that the Holy Spirit was not leading the councils.

Hilary of Poiters (310-367), a bishop, a Trinitarian, and saint in the Catholic Church, spoke of the council of Nicaea and the division in the Church that followed as, “While we fight about words, inquire about novelties, take advantage of ambiguities, criticize authors, fight on party questions, have difficulties in agreeing, and prepare to anathematize each other, there is scarce a man who belongs to Christ…We determine creeds by the year or by the month, we change our own determinations, we prohibit our changes, we anathematize our prohibitions. Thus, we either condemn others in our own persons, or ourselves in the instance of others, and while we bite and devour one another, are like to be consumed one of another” (Examiner, 2022). This quote from the 4^th century is especially telling of the environment surrounding the decision at the Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D. and following. This is not a critique by a 21^st century biblical unitarian but a critique by a Trinitarian 4^th century Catholic saint who clearly did not see the Holy Spirit’s wisdom in the debate over Jesus’ divinity, wisdom that is, “peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full of mercy and good fruits, impartial, and sincere” (James 3:27).  The fruit described by Hilary should make us cautious in accepting the Nicene Creed as God’s Word – which even the Protestant Church does despite the claim to “sola Scriptura”. Again, this Creed adds to Scripture with terms like “Trinity”, “God the Son”, and “3 in 1”.  The Nicene Creed was written by men and is not the Bible, and we should be skeptical of its divine origin due to the primary leader of the Council of Nicaea, Constantine, and because of the fruit of the council’s participants.

However, Hilary’s critique is to the Church in general, not just one side of the debate, as, sadly, history shows there was persecution from both sides. Constantine eventually reinstated Arius in 328 A.D. (The early unitarians: Arius and his followers, n.d.). Christians persecuted each other for their different viewpoints. Those who believed Jesus to not be God also showed poor character and exiled, for example, Athanasius, for his Trinitarian beliefs. In his turn, Athanasius also persecuted Christians who did not believe in the Trinity, and his famous creed firmly states that anyone who does not believe Jesus is God and the Trinity is condemned (Essays). “Christians” on either side failed to imitate Christ and were violent. So, with bad characters, “bad fruit”, on both sides, who do we listen to? The only sure source of truth: God’s Word.

Consider again: was the Holy Spirit the driver behind a council initiated and commanded by Constantine, a non-Christian murderer, whose outcome was decided by bishops who were threatened with exile if they agreed with Arian’s position that Jesus was not God? But was the Holy Spirit behind those who, fairly soon after, persecuted people like Athanasius who believed Jesus was God? History shows we should be wary of believing Jesus is God, or in believing that Jesus is not God, if we only look at the fruit of people who propagated either belief in the 4^th century. So, only God’s Word can be trusted to reveal who Jesus is; not sinful people. 

Of course, God can only use broken people, and He works all things to the council of His will (Ephesians 1:11). He only did in the Bible. Moses and David, for example, murdered, and God used them mightily. God has been at work in every century through very broken people and through His Church. But we are wise as Christians to only trust the Bible for who God is and who Jesus is, especially if the beliefs are not explicitly in the Bible, which “homoousia”, the hypostatic union”, “Trinity”, and “God in 3 persons” are not.  The “foundational” Trinity doctrine was not penned until 3 centuries after Christ’s resurrection. If it is so foundational, why did God wait for 3 centuries before clearly revealing it? Was the Holy Spirit leading this debate that led to violence on both sides? Let’s lay aside the creeds and councils and look only at the Bible, whose writers we can trust. They were motivated by love and their lives were marked by sacrifice – for many of them, martyrdom.

 I write to anyone who is interested, but now specifically to my Protestant brothers and sisters: do we believe in “sola scriptura” or do we hold tradition and Scripture to be equal in our understanding of God? God is intentional in all His Words. There is a reason why “Trinity”, “3 in 1”, and “God the Son” are not in the Bible. That comes from religious tradition, not God’s Word. Those words were created by an argument from inference. While this does not necessarily mean the Trinity doctrine is not true, why would God not have ensured that His identity as a 3-person God is not explicitly described in Scripture for all to see with no confusion? The definition of God is at least one of, if not the most important, doctrines of a religion! Why wouldn’t God have made it more clear, if He is 3 in 1, a Trinity, and if Jesus is “God the Son”? Why wouldn’t Paul and Peter have explicitly taught these doctrines that would be very foreign for Jews who believe God is “one” and “not a man”? Again, why would God wait till the 4^th century to fully reveal who He is: a Trinity, 3 in 1? Why didn’t Jesus himself talk about the Trinity, God’s 3 in 1 -ness, and that he is “God the Son”? And yet, Christians sometimes judge those who do not believe in this as “outside of the faith” and still needing salvation – all because of a doctrine best understood, I have heard my whole life, as a “mystery”. The God of the Bible, the God of Love I know, would never judge my salvation based on something this difficult to understand – that no one in the Church says they fully understand. And yet, Christians sometimes judge those who disagree as unbelievers. Are those judgments from the Holy Spirit or another spirit? Where in the Bible does it say someone has to believe in the Trinity to be saved?

By 381 A.D., Trinitarian Christianity had firmly become a part of politics. While Trinitarian theology was not something accepted right away, it was something that people were persecuted for if they disagreed on it even slightly starting in 381 A.D. under Emperor Theodosius. The Roman emperors, not Christians, were the primary actors in spreading the Trinity doctrine. Through force, fear, and political influence the Trinity because “orthodox” (Forced trinitarian orthodoxy prevails, n.d.). 

Moreover, during the time of the Roman Empire, authority in faith rested with the emperors, not the Word of God. Emperors Gratian, Valentinian II, and Theodosius 1 told the citizens of Constantinople that if they agreed with the Trinity doctrine they would have favor from the emperor. The edict concerning this said, “The rest, however, whom we adjudge demented and insane, shall sustain the infamy of heretical dogmas, their meeting places shall not be called churches, and they shall be smitten primarily by Divine Vengeance and secondly by the punishment of Our Power, which we have received by Divine favor.” So, anyone who disagreed with the Trinity doctrine was said to be demented, insane, subject to punishment by the emperors, and will be smitten by Divine Vengeance (Forced trinitarian orthodoxy prevails, n.d.).

In contrast to this treatment by the emperors, the Bible shows that no one was ever persecuted for denying or affirming a Triune God. Trinitarian Christians persecuted minority Christians in the centuries that followed, showing they were not true followers of Jesus (Forced trinitarian orthodoxy prevails, n.d.), who was nonviolent, teaching his disciples to “love their enemies” and “pray for those who persecute them” (Matthew 5:44). State approved and state-enforced Christianity birthed centuries of persecution by Christians on Christians. Free inquiry and free speech were heavily discouraged, at a minimum with the pronouncement that if you do not believe in the Trinity you are not a Christian. 

Even John Calvin, who is lauded by many Christians, arrested Michael Servetus for his belief that Jesus was not God and was part of the decision that led to Servetus’ burning at the stake.  Servetus was nonviolent; he just disagreed with Christian orthodoxy on the subject of Jesus’ divinity (The trial, burning, and murder of Michael Servetus by John Calvin, 2013). No evidence shows Calvin ever repented. History records Calvin’s only mercy to be suggesting Servetus be beheaded instead of burned (The trial, burning, and murder of Michael Servetus by John Calvin, 2013). This is clearly not the Spirit of God at work. 1 John 3:15 says, “Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him.” I hope with all my heart that Calvin repented. This type of behavior should lead us to question Calvin’s other main theological points. For one, I firmly disagree with him on limited atonement and believe that God’s infinite love, infinite power, and infinite wisdom will make a way for all to be saved, as I explain fully in section 3 of this blog, "Universal Salvation". Calvin emphasizes God’s infinite power and sovereignty in his doctrine of limited atonement, deemphasizing God’s unconditional love. His deemphasis is not surprising given the way he treated those who disagreed with him theologically.

While the persecution of people by the Roman emperors and Calvin does not necessarily mean the Trinity Doctrine is not true, it certainly calls it into question. Movements led by the Spirit of God do not result on Christian on Christian violent persecution. All this being said, the Nicene Creed and the Trinity Doctrine have been believed by most Christians since the 4^th century, and God has certainly worked in and through His Church. People filled with the fruit of the Holy Spirit have and do believe in the Nicene Creed. Surely some bad actors regarding this doctrine cannot prove to show its falseness?

While my short synopsis of the history of the Trinity doctrine does not prove its falseness, my point is that history cannot prove its validity either – and that argument has been used in my discussions with Trinitarian Christians regarding Jesus’ deity. History cannot be used to prove that Jesus is God because Satan is constantly trying to deceive the Church and people are broken, sinful, and fallible. Further, while since the 4^th century most sincere Christians have believed in the Trinity, the fact remains that the origins of this doctrine are not filled with light – they are filled with darkness, as explained above in the violence and persecution that characterized the formulation of this doctrine.

My experience in talking with my fellow believers who believe Jesus is God on this topic is a humility often marked by a trust in the Church that, I think, can be dangerous. Some Christians are so weary to question Church doctrine – especially the Trinity. And why is that? Perhaps one reason is that if they do, they are afraid they will be judged as not really Christian. That fact was part of the reason I hesitated to do any research regarding whether Jesus was God, as it is official Church doctrine in many churches that you must believe Jesus is God to be saved. You are not a Christian if you do not believe in the Trinity. Christians are certainly given strong incentive not to question this doctrine.

But more than that, I have seen in Christians a humility and trust in God despite not understanding the Trinity. Christians trust the Church, they trust God’s work in the Church, and they do not presume to be able to understand a doctrine that their trusted Church leaders do not understand themselves and say is not possible to understand: "it is a mystery". They choose instead to focus on what they deem to be the most important (and it is): loving God, despite not understanding His triune nature, and loving those around them – the true mark of whether someone loves God or not (Matthew 22:37-39). What really matters is loving our neighbor, more practical Christians may consider, and “maybe one day in heaven I will understand the Trinity”. Not much encourages further study of the Trinity Doctrine – to the contrary: “why dig into something too difficult to understand for even our Church shepherds, especially given its apparent necessity for salvation? I have to believe it, I don’t understand it, so… I will just focus on other things.” Who can blame Christians who take this perspective? Life is hard and busy. Christians choose to love this inexplicable triune God with the understanding they do have and love others. Given this climate, it is not surprising that the Trinity doctrine and Jesus’ divinity has gone largely uncontested and challenged.

Of course, for shepherds of the Church, the topic of the Trinity is very significant and one pastors study and wrestle with. Most have not come away with a different perspective than what was decided at Nicaea, and for exclusively biblical reasons. Any pastor I have talked to believes in the Trinity and Jesus’ divinity because they believe the Bible to be God’s Word and are trying to abide by it even if they do not understand everything. Again, I see humility and a deep love for God and His Word in the Trinitarian pastors I know. God has used all of them to impact me in a great way and point me to God, and I am very grateful.

So, given this, how could the Trinity doctrine be anything but true? The vast majority of God’s shepherds now have been taught it, believe it, and teach it. The Holy Spirit does not seem to intervene. Yes, there are a minority of biblical unitarian Christians who think differently, but that is the minority. Surely God’s truth on this is with the majority?

I have continued to wrestle with all these questions as I study God’s Word on this, and overall my answer to my own questions is “I don’t know”. However, this is what I do know:

1.     The Trinity Doctrine has a dark origin that perpetuated much Christian on Christian persecution, though thankfully the level of persecution has diminished to non-violent judgment (by some Christians).

2.     Regardless of my own understanding and interpretation of history, God’s Word is true and trumps any human authority.

3.     God loves His Church. God is good and sovereign, and He is at work in the midst of a broken world where He can only use sinners to accomplish His purposes. If the Trinity doctrine is false, God has remained on throne. He allowed even something like this for a good purpose (Ephesians 1:11), and He intends to save all people (1 Timothy 2:4).

4.     If the Trinity doctrine is false, the Church does need a reformation. Most significantly, only God should be worshipped as God: Christians should stop worshipping Jesus as God.

5.     This topic is well worth the time and effort to study and understand better given its connection to right worship of God.

6.     Just because the majority Church believes something does not make it true – consider the reforms needed when Luther wrote his 95 theses. Just because genuine, God-fearing and God-loving people believe something does not make it true – I know godly unitarian Christians as well who believe Jesus is not God. God’s Word is the deciding factor, and the Church in particular has a formidable enemy who twists God’s truth and is able to deceive us.

So: history does not define truth. Neither does our own experience or the experience of those we love and respect around us. Only God’s Word reveals the truth about who Jesus is and who God is. If we doubt this, we need to remind ourselves of human fallibility and the formidable enemy we have in Satan, the deceiver. We may forget these facts – he does not.  Of course, Satan would like nothing better than to confuse us on who Jesus is, who God is, and who we are. 

Thankfully, God has left us completely equipped with the full armor of God (Ephesians 6:13-17) and our offensive weapon: the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God (Ephesians 6:17). Please completely put aside both history and your own experience and examine the word of God. I also had to do this in order to honestly study this topic, though much in me resisted initially. To really consider truth we have to be open handed about what we hold to be truth. We do not have to be afraid to do this because God is Love (1 John 4:8), and what is really true, if we are believing any lies, can only free us. Jesus says, “…you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free” (John 8:32).

Only the Bible shows what is true, not history.

What the Bible says, which reveals what the 1^st century Church believed, will now be the focus.