Simon Brown.

Join me on this journey. Let's seek the truth together! 💡 Proverbs 8:34-36 Blessed is the man who hears me, watching daily at my gates, waiting at my door posts. For whoever finds me finds life, and will obtain favor from Yahweh. But he who sins against me wrongs his own soul. All those who hate me love death.” Psalm 84: 11 For Yahweh God is a sun and a shield. Yahweh will give grace and glory. He withholds no good thing from those who walk blamelessly. 12 Yahweh of Armies, blessed is the man who trusts in you. 1 John 5:5 Now who is the one overcoming the world, except the one believing that Jesus is the Son of God.

Saturday, 15 August 2026

Did the Catholic Church Create the Doctrine of the Trinity? And Did Later Church Fathers Reject the Earlier Jewish Understanding of the One God?

Did the Catholic Church create the doctrine of the Trinity? Historical research examining the Council of Nicaea, Church Fathers, and the earlier Jewish understanding that God is One.

 A detailed historical research image examining the development of the doctrine of the Trinity, featuring Simon Brown studying the Bible, the Trinity symbol, the Council of Nicaea, and the question of whether later Church Fathers rejected the earlier Jewish understanding that God is One.

DID THE CATHOLIC CHURCH CREATE THE DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY?

And Did Later Church Fathers Reject the Earlier Jewish Understanding of the One God?

Research by Simon Brown

The doctrine of the Trinity is today regarded by Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox Christians, and most Protestant denominations as one of the central doctrines of Christianity.

It teaches that there is one God, while the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three distinct persons who fully share the one divine being.

Millions of Christians naturally assume that this was exactly what Jesus, Peter, Paul, and the earliest Christians believed and taught.

But is that what history actually shows?

Was the fully developed doctrine of the Trinity preached by Jesus?

Was it preached by Peter?

Was it preached by Paul?

Was there an official doctrine of one God existing as three co-equal and co-eternal persons during the lifetime of Jesus and His apostles?

Or did this theological definition emerge through controversies that reached their decisive stage centuries after Jesus?

In this study we are going to examine:

Jesus and the Jewish understanding of God.

The apostles.

The Council of Nicaea.

The Nicene Creed.

The Church Fathers.

Gregory of Nyssa.

The persecution of Christians judged to be heretics.

William Tyndale.

Michael Servetus.

And the extraordinary theological research of one of history's greatest scientists:

SIR ISAAC NEWTON.

But our final authority will not be any of these men.

It must always come back to:

WHAT DID JESUS CHRIST ACTUALLY TEACH?


THE CREED OF JESUS

Jesus was a Jew.

His apostles were Jews.

Their Scriptures were the Hebrew Scriptures.

At the heart of Israel's faith stood one of the greatest declarations concerning God ever given:

“HEAR, ISRAEL: YAHWEH OUR GOD, YAHWEH IS ONE.”

Deuteronomy 6:4 — BLB

This confession became known as the Shema.

Israel was surrounded by nations worshipping many gods.

But Israel worshipped the One God.

Now something extremely important happens in the New Testament.

Jesus Himself is asked:

Which commandment is the first of all?

Jesus answers:

“THE FIRST IS, ‘HEAR, ISRAEL: THE LORD OUR GOD, THE LORD IS ONE.’”

Mark 12:29 — BLB

Notice what Jesus does not say.

He does not answer:

“God is three persons in one essence.”

He does not say:

“God is Father, Son and Holy Spirit, co-equal and co-eternal.”

He does not introduce the later theological terminology of ousia, hypostasis, or homoousios.

Instead, Jesus repeats Israel's ancient confession:

“THE LORD OUR GOD, THE LORD IS ONE.”

Then something even more significant happens.

The Jewish scribe replies:

“RIGHT, TEACHER. YOU HAVE SPOKEN ACCORDING TO TRUTH THAT HE IS ONE, AND THERE IS NOT ANOTHER BESIDES HIM.”

Mark 12:32 — BLB

Notice the singular language:

HE IS ONE.

And:

THERE IS NOT ANOTHER BESIDES HIM.

Did Jesus correct him?

Did Jesus tell him that his understanding of God was incomplete because God was actually three persons?

No.

Jesus saw that the man answered wisely and told him:

“YOU ARE NOT FAR FROM THE KINGDOM OF GOD.”

Mark 12:34 — BLB

This conversation is enormously important.

Because Jesus affirmed the Jewish confession of the One God.

Remember this.

Approximately three centuries later, Christian theologians would be discussing this Jewish conception of God in remarkably different language.


WAS THERE AN OFFICIAL TRINITY DOCTRINE DURING THE TIME OF JESUS?

The word Trinity does not occur anywhere in Scripture.

But the issue goes much deeper than the absence of a word.

Nowhere do we find Jesus explicitly giving His disciples the later theological formula:

ONE GOD IN THREE CO-EQUAL AND CO-ETERNAL PERSONS.

Trinitarian scholars generally argue that the later doctrine was developed as the Church attempted to account for everything Scripture says about the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

That distinction is important.

There are therefore two different questions:

CAN TRINITARIAN THEOLOGY BE CONSTRUCTED FROM BIBLICAL PASSAGES?

And:

WHEN WAS THE FORMAL TRINITARIAN DOCTRINE ACTUALLY DEFINED?

History gives us a clear answer to the second question.

The decisive controversies came centuries after Jesus.


Detailed illustration of the Council of Nicaea in AD 325, where bishops debated the relationship between God the Father and Jesus Christ and formulated the Nicene Creed.

A detailed historical illustration representing the Council of Nicaea in AD 325, showing an assembly of Christian bishops during the controversy concerning the relationship between God the Father and Jesus Christ. The image highlights Emperor Constantine, Arius, the Nicene Creed, the Greek term homoousios, and the council's importance in the later development of Christian doctrine.

AD 325 — THE COUNCIL OF NICAEA

During the fourth century, an enormous controversy developed concerning the relationship between God the Father and Jesus Christ.

Arius and those associated with him opposed the idea that the Son was eternally equal with the Father.

The controversy became so serious that Emperor Constantine summoned bishops to:

THE FIRST COUNCIL OF NICAEA

in AD 325.

The resulting creed began:

“WE BELIEVE IN ONE GOD, THE FATHER ALMIGHTY...”

and continued:

“AND IN ONE LORD JESUS CHRIST, THE SON OF GOD...”

But it went further.

The Son was described as:

God from God

Light from Light

true God from true God

begotten, not made

and:

“OF ONE SUBSTANCE WITH THE FATHER.”

The crucial Greek word was:

HOMOOUSIOS

meaning of the same substance or essence.

This became one of the most important words in subsequent Trinitarian theology.


THE NICENE CREED DID SOMETHING ELSE

The original creed did not merely state what the bishops believed.

It concluded with an:

ANATHEMA.

Those saying that there was a time when the Son did not exist, that He came from nothing, or that He was created or of another substance were condemned by:

“THE CATHOLIC AND APOSTOLIC CHURCH.”

This is part of the surviving historical text of the creed.

We therefore have something that deserves careful consideration.

Approximately three centuries after Jesus, a Church council was formally establishing theological boundaries concerning the relationship between God and Christ.

This does not automatically prove that the council was wrong.

But neither should we pretend that its theological language was simply quoted from Jesus.

It was not.

JESUS NEVER USED THE WORD HOMOOUSIOS.

Peter never preached it at Pentecost.

Paul never wrote:

“God is three co-equal persons sharing one divine essence.”

This terminology belongs to later Christian theological development.


NICAEA DID NOT COMPLETE THE LATER TRINITARIAN FORMULATION

Another important historical fact is frequently overlooked.

The creed of AD 325 ended its positive confession with only a very brief statement concerning the Holy Spirit.

The controversies continued.

Then came:

THE FIRST COUNCIL OF CONSTANTINOPLE — AD 381.

The creed associated with Constantinople contains the much fuller language concerning the Holy Spirit familiar to Christians from the later Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed.

Look at the chronology:

JESUS AND THE APOSTLES:

First century.

COUNCIL OF NICAEA:

AD 325.

COUNCIL OF CONSTANTINOPLE:

AD 381.

Therefore the definitive creedal language associated with Trinitarian Christianity emerged through controversies taking place approximately three centuries after Jesus.


DID THE CATHOLIC CHURCH INVENT THE TRINITY?

We must be historically fair.

It would be too simplistic to say:

“ONE POPE INVENTED THE TRINITY.”

It would also be historically inaccurate to say:

“CONSTANTINE INVENTED THE TRINITY IN AD 325.”

The development was considerably more complicated.

Christian theologians had discussed the Father, Son, Logos, and Holy Spirit long before Nicaea.

Different Christians proposed different explanations.

Nicaea was a major turning point rather than the beginning of every idea that eventually formed Trinitarian theology.

Nevertheless, another historical fact remains:

THE FULLY DEVELOPED TRINITARIAN CREED WAS NOT GIVEN BY JESUS IN THE FORM LATER DEFINED BY THE CHURCH.

The councils of the fourth century played a decisive role in establishing the theological boundaries that eventually became Christian orthodoxy.

And the original Nicene Creed itself invokes:

Historical timeline showing the teachings of Jesus and the apostles compared with the later development of Trinitarian doctrine at the Councils of Nicaea in AD 325 and Constantinople in AD 381.

A detailed historical timeline illustrating the development of Trinitarian doctrine. The image begins with Jesus and the apostles in the first century, moves through the theological debates of the second and third centuries, and continues to the Council of Nicaea in AD 325 and the Council of Constantinople in AD 381. It compares the biblical language concerning the One God, the Father, and Jesus Christ the Son of God with the later theological terminology of one divine essence, three persons, homoousios, and the developing Trinitarian creeds.

“THE CATHOLIC AND APOSTOLIC CHURCH.”
Therefore a much more historically defensible conclusion is:

THE DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY DEVELOPED OVER TIME AND WAS FORMALLY DEFINED THROUGH CENTURIES OF THEOLOGICAL CONTROVERSY AND THE GREAT CHURCH COUNCILS.

And then we discover something extraordinary in the writings of one of the great Trinitarian Church Fathers.


HOW DID A GREAT CHURCH FATHER VIEW JEWISH MONOTHEISM?

Meet:

GREGORY OF NYSSA.

Gregory lived during the fourth century and became one of the most influential theologians in the development and defence of Trinitarian orthodoxy.

Together with Basil of Caesarea and Gregory of Nazianzus, he is remembered as one of the great:

CAPPADOCIAN FATHERS.

These theologians played an enormously important role in explaining how God could be one divine nature while distinguished as three persons or hypostases.

But Gregory wrote something remarkable.

In The Great Catechism, Gregory compared Christian theology with:

JEWISH MONOTHEISM

on one side,

and:

GREEK POLYTHEISM

on the other.

Gregory argued that Christian truth occupied a position between the two.

His language is astonishing.

He says that:

“THE TRUTH PASSES IN THE MEAN BETWEEN THESE TWO CONCEPTIONS, DESTROYING EACH HERESY...”

Gregory then explains that something is retained from each conception.

From the Jewish conception:

THE UNITY OF THE NATURE.

And from the Hellenistic conception:

THE DISTINCTION AS TO PERSONS.

This deserves very careful attention.

This was not written by a modern critic attacking the Trinity.

It was written by:

ONE OF THE GREAT TRINITARIAN CHURCH FATHERS HIMSELF.


DID A CHURCH FATHER CALL THE CREED OF JESUS HERESY?

We must be extremely precise.

Gregory did not literally write:

“THE CREED OF JESUS IS HERESY.”

Those are not his words, and we should never put words into someone's mouth.

But Gregory explicitly discusses the Jewish dogma and says Trinitarian truth passes between the Jewish and Greek conceptions, overcoming what he considered erroneous while retaining something from each.

Now go back approximately three centuries.

What Jewish creed did Jesus Himself affirm?

“THE LORD OUR GOD, THE LORD IS ONE.”

Mark 12:29

And what did the Jewish scribe say?

“HE IS ONE, AND THERE IS NOT ANOTHER BESIDES HIM.”

Mark 12:32

Did Jesus condemn that confession?

No.

He told the man:

“YOU ARE NOT FAR FROM THE KINGDOM OF GOD.”

Mark 12:34

Therefore we are entitled to ask an extremely serious historical question:

HOW DID THE JEWISH MONOTHEISM THAT JESUS HIMSELF AFFIRMED LATER COME TO BE REGARDED AS SOMETHING CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY NEEDED TO CORRECT OR MOVE BEYOND?

Every Christian should be willing to investigate that question.


What did Paul say about God? 1 Corinthians 8:6 declares, “Yet to us there is one God, the Father,” and “one Lord, Jesus Christ.”

A detailed biblical research image examining Paul’s words in 1 Corinthians 8:6: “Yet to us there is one God, the Father” and “one Lord, Jesus Christ.” The image compares Paul’s teaching with other biblical passages concerning the One God, Jesus Christ as Lord and mediator, and the Jewish understanding that God is One. Research by Simon Brown.

WHAT DID PAUL SAY?

Paul gives us an extraordinarily straightforward statement:

“YET TO US THERE IS ONE GOD, THE FATHER, FROM WHOM ARE ALL THINGS, AND WE FOR HIM; AND ONE LORD, JESUS CHRIST, THROUGH WHOM ARE ALL THINGS, AND WE THROUGH HIM.”

1 Corinthians 8:6 — BLB

Notice Paul's identification:

ONE GOD — THE FATHER.

And:

ONE LORD — JESUS CHRIST.

Paul also writes:

“FOR THERE IS ONE GOD AND ONE MEDIATOR BETWEEN GOD AND MEN, THE MAN CHRIST JESUS.”

1 Timothy 2:5 — BLB

Again:

ONE GOD.

And:

ONE MEDIATOR — CHRIST JESUS.

And Paul states:

“BUT GOD IS ONE.”

Galatians 3:20 — BLB


Who did Jesus call the only true God? John 17:3 records Jesus praying to His Father: “that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You sent.”

A detailed biblical research image examining John 17:3 and the question, “Who did Jesus call the only true God?” The image depicts Jesus praying to His Father and highlights His words: “that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You sent.” Supporting passages compare Jesus, the Son of God and Messiah, with the Father whom He worshipped, prayed to, and identified as the only true God. Research by Simon Brown.

WHO DID JESUS CALL “THE ONLY TRUE GOD”?

Jesus prayed directly to His Father:

“NOW THIS IS ETERNAL LIFE, THAT THEY MAY KNOW YOU, THE ONLY TRUE GOD, AND JESUS CHRIST WHOM YOU SENT.”

John 17:3 — BLB

Jesus calls His Father:

“THE ONLY TRUE GOD.”

Then distinguishes Himself as:

“JESUS CHRIST WHOM YOU SENT.”

Whatever theological tradition we have inherited, those words deserve their full weight.


WHAT DID JESUS CALL HIMSELF?

Jesus said:

“I SAID, ‘I AM SON OF GOD.’”

John 10:36 — BLB

What did Jesus call Himself? John 10:36 records Jesus saying, “I am Son of God,” while Peter and John identify Jesus as the Christ, the Son of God.

A detailed biblical research image examining the identity of Jesus through John 10:36, Matthew 16:16 and John 20:31. Jesus calls Himself the Son of God, Peter confesses Him as the Christ, the Son of the living God, and John states that his Gospel was written so that people may believe Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. Research by Simon Brown.

Peter confessed:

“YOU ARE THE CHRIST, THE SON OF THE LIVING GOD.”

Matthew 16:16 — BLB

And John explains the purpose of his Gospel:

“BUT THESE HAVE BEEN WRITTEN SO THAT YOU MAY BELIEVE THAT JESUS IS THE CHRIST, THE SON OF GOD, AND THAT BELIEVING YOU MAY HAVE LIFE IN HIS NAME.”

John 20:31 — BLB

The stated confession is:

JESUS IS THE CHRIST.

THE SON OF GOD.


FROM ANATHEMA TO IMPERIAL ENFORCEMENT

From Anathema to Imperial Enforcement — historical examination of what happened to Christians who rejected Nicene orthodoxy after the Council of Nicaea in AD 325.

A detailed historical research image examining the transition from theological condemnation at the Council of Nicaea in AD 325 to later imperial enforcement of Christian orthodoxy. It explains that Christians were not executed at Nicaea simply for rejecting the Nicene Creed, while showing how Church doctrine and Roman imperial authority later became increasingly connected, bringing legal restrictions, exile and persecution against religious dissenters. Research by Simon Brown.

Now we reach a darker part of Christian history.
It is sometimes claimed that Christians who rejected the Trinity were immediately executed at Nicaea.

THAT IS NOT HISTORICALLY ACCURATE.

Arius and prominent dissenters were condemned and exiled.

Nicaea itself did not order Arius to be burned alive for rejecting the creed.

We should not exaggerate the historical evidence.

But something extremely important had changed.

Christian doctrinal disagreement was increasingly becoming connected with:

IMPERIAL POWER.

Once theological orthodoxy and political authority became intertwined, doctrinal disagreement could have consequences far beyond an argument between theologians.

Christians judged to be heretics could face:

exile,

loss of churches,

legal restrictions,

confiscation,

and eventually, in some circumstances:

DEATH.

That development should trouble every Christian regardless of denomination.


WHEN DID JESUS AUTHORIZE CHRISTIANS TO PERSECUTE CHRISTIANS?

When did Jesus authorize Christians to persecute Christians? Biblical and historical comparison of Jesus’ teachings with imprisonment, exile, torture and execution for religious disagreement.

A detailed biblical and historical research image contrasting the teachings and example of Jesus and His apostles with the later persecution of Christians over religious doctrine. Jesus and the apostles preached, reasoned, persuaded and suffered for their faith, while later Christian history saw imprisonment, exile, confiscation, torture and execution used against religious dissenters. The image asks the fundamental question: When did Jesus ever authorize Christians to persecute other Christians for their beliefs? Research by Simon Brown.

Jesus and His apostles were themselves persecuted.

They preached.

They reasoned.

They persuaded.

They suffered.

They died for their faith.

But where did Jesus command His followers:

Imprison those who disagree with your theology?

Exile them?

Confiscate their property?

Torture them?

Burn them?

There is an enormous difference between:

DEFENDING A DOCTRINE WITH SCRIPTURE

and:

ENFORCING A DOCTRINE WITH POLITICAL POWER.

This distinction becomes painfully clear later in Christian history.


WILLIAM TYNDALE — WHEN TRANSLATING SCRIPTURE COULD COST YOU YOUR LIFE

One of the greatest figures in the history of the English Bible was:

WILLIAM TYNDALE.

Tyndale devoted his life to making Scripture available to ordinary English-speaking people.

He wanted ordinary men and women to be able to read God's Word for themselves rather than being completely dependent upon ecclesiastical authorities.

But we must make something clear.

TYNDALE WAS NOT EXECUTED FOR REJECTING THE TRINITY.

There is no sound historical basis for presenting him as an anti-Trinitarian martyr like Michael Servetus.

Tyndale's conflict concerned wider questions of Scripture, translation, Church authority, and doctrines judged heretical by the authorities of his time.

He was arrested in 1535.

After approximately eighteen months of imprisonment, Tyndale was executed in 1536.

His method of execution was horrific:

HE WAS STRANGLED AND THEN HIS BODY WAS BURNED.

Whatever disagreements Christians may have with Tyndale's theology, his story illustrates what could happen when theological and ecclesiastical authority became backed by coercive political power.

But there is something else about Tyndale that is extremely interesting for our investigation.


HOW DID TYNDALE TRANSLATE JOHN 1?

William Tyndale’s 1534 translation of John 1 showing his use of “it” for the Word in John 1:3–4, compared with modern translations using “he” and “him.”

A detailed historical Bible research image examining William Tyndale’s 1534 translation of John 1. The image highlights Tyndale’s wording, “All thinges were made by it” and “In it was lyfe,” and compares this with modern English translations that use personal pronouns such as “he” and “him.” The image does not claim that this proves Tyndale rejected the Trinity, but demonstrates that early English translators did not always render these verses in the same way as modern Bibles. It encourages readers to examine the original Greek text and the history of Bible translation. Research by Simon Brown.

Most modern Christians know John 1 like this:

“In the beginning was the Word...”

Then, almost immediately, modern translations begin referring to the Word as:

He

and:

Him.

But Tyndale's 1534 New Testament used wording that may surprise modern readers.

It reads:

“ALL THINGES WERE MADE BY IT...”

and:

“IN IT WAS LYFE...”

Tyndale therefore used the English pronoun:

“IT”

for the Word in these verses.

This does not prove that Tyndale rejected the Trinity.

It does not.

Nor does it prove that Tyndale regarded the Word as merely an impersonal spoken utterance.

We must not make the historical evidence say more than it says.

But it proves something worth remembering:

THE MODERN USE OF “HE” AND “HIM” THROUGHOUT THESE OPENING VERSES WAS NOT THE ONLY WAY EARLY ENGLISH TRANSLATORS RENDERED THE PASSAGE.

And that gives us another reason to go beyond English translations and examine:

THE ORIGINAL GREEK.

Translation matters.

Theological assumptions can matter.

And Christians should always be willing to investigate the underlying text.


MICHAEL SERVETUS — WHEN REJECTING THE TRINITY COULD COST YOU YOUR LIFE

Michael Servetus and the history of anti-Trinitarian persecution, examining his rejection of orthodox Trinitarian doctrine and execution by burning at the stake in Geneva in 1553.

A detailed historical research image examining the life, theology and execution of Michael Servetus. Servetus was a Spanish physician and theologian who openly rejected orthodox Trinitarian doctrine and wrote against the traditional understanding of the Trinity. After being arrested and tried for heresy in Protestant Geneva, he was condemned and burned at the stake on 27 October 1553. His death remains one of the clearest historical examples of the terrible consequences religious dissent could bring when theological orthodoxy was enforced through civil power. Research by Simon Brown.

Now we come to a case where the connection with anti-Trinitarian belief is unmistakable.

MICHAEL SERVETUS.

Servetus was a Spanish physician and theologian.

He explicitly attacked the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity.

His writings included:

ON THE ERRORS OF THE TRINITY.

Servetus rejected the traditional Nicene understanding of God.

Eventually he came into serious conflict not merely with Roman Catholic authorities but also with Protestant reformers.

This is important.

Because the persecution of theological dissent cannot honestly be blamed exclusively upon:

ROMAN CATHOLICISM.

Servetus escaped Catholic imprisonment in France and eventually appeared in Protestant Geneva.

There he was arrested.

He was prosecuted for heresy.

Among the central issues were:

HIS REJECTION OF THE TRINITY

and:

HIS REJECTION OF INFANT BAPTISM.

The outcome was horrifying.

On 27 October 1553:

MICHAEL SERVETUS WAS BURNED ALIVE AT THE STAKE.

This happened in:

PROTESTANT GENEVA.

John Calvin played an important role in the prosecution.

Historical accounts indicate that Calvin supported the death penalty while preferring that Servetus be executed by a less brutal method than burning.

Nevertheless, Geneva's authorities condemned Servetus to the flames.


THINK ABOUT WHAT HAD HAPPENED

Historical comparison from Jesus declaring “The Lord our God, the Lord is one” in Mark 12:29 to later Trinitarian controversies and the persecution of some Christians who rejected accepted doctrine.

A detailed historical and biblical research image tracing the striking development from Jesus affirming, “The Lord our God, the Lord is one” in Mark 12:29, through the theological controversies and Church councils of later centuries, to periods when religious authorities persecuted people for rejecting established doctrine. The image highlights the contrast between Jesus teaching and persuading His followers and later Christians using political and civil power to enforce theological orthodoxy. Research by Simon Brown.

Jesus said:

“THE LORD OUR GOD, THE LORD IS ONE.”

Centuries later, Christians were arguing about philosophical definitions of God's nature.

And centuries after that:

A MAN COULD BE BURNED ALIVE FOR REJECTING THE ACCEPTED TRINITARIAN DOCTRINE.

Whether Servetus was right about everything is not the point.

He certainly held theological ideas with which many non-Trinitarians themselves would disagree.

The question is:

WHEN DID JESUS GIVE CHRISTIANS AUTHORITY TO BURN A MAN ALIVE BECAUSE HIS UNDERSTANDING OF GOD WAS WRONG?

That question applies equally to:

Catholics.

Protestants.

Trinitarians.

Unitarians.

And every other Christian tradition.

Religious persecution is not made righteous simply because the persecutor believes his doctrine is correct.


THE GREAT IRONY OF THE REFORMATION

The Great Irony of the Reformation, examining how Protestant authorities enforced religious orthodoxy through civil power, including the execution of Michael Servetus in Geneva in 1553.

A detailed historical research image examining the great irony of the Protestant Reformation. Although the Reformers challenged Roman Catholic authority and emphasized returning to Scripture, Protestant authorities could themselves use civil power against theological dissenters. The execution of anti-Trinitarian Michael Servetus in Protestant Geneva in 1553 provides a striking example. The lesson of history therefore cannot simply be that Catholics were wrong, but that religious institutions of any tradition can become dangerous when theological orthodoxy is enforced through political power. Research by Simon Brown.

The Reformation challenged the authority of Rome and insisted upon returning to Scripture.
Yet Servetus demonstrates that Protestants themselves could reproduce the very same terrible principle:

RELIGIOUS ORTHODOXY ENFORCED BY CIVIL POWER.

This is why the lesson of history cannot simply be:

“CATHOLICS WERE WRONG.”

The lesson must be deeper:

NO CHRISTIAN INSTITUTION SHOULD BE ABOVE EXAMINATION.

Catholic.

Orthodox.

Protestant.

Trinitarian.

Non-Trinitarian.

Every doctrine must be tested.

And that brings us to perhaps the most extraordinary investigator in this entire story.


SIR ISAAC NEWTON — THE SCIENTIST WHO REJECTED THE TRINITY

Sir Isaac Newton and the Trinity — detailed historical image examining Newton’s rejection of orthodox Trinitarian doctrine, his belief in Christ’s pre-existence and identification with Michael, and his extensive biblical research.

A detailed historical and biblical research image examining the religious beliefs of Sir Isaac Newton. Although famous for his extraordinary scientific achievements, Newton devoted extensive study to Scripture, prophecy, biblical manuscripts and early Church history. He rejected orthodox Trinitarian doctrine and believed Christianity had suffered serious corruption. However, Newton also believed in the personal pre-existence of Christ and, in a surviving theological manuscript, associated Christ with Michael of Revelation 12 and Daniel. The image therefore presents Newton not as a final theological authority, but as an example of why every teacher and doctrine must be tested against Scripture. It highlights Revelation 12:9 and the worldwide reality of deception, together with the Berean example of Acts 17:11: receiving teaching openly while examining the Scriptures to determine whether it is true. Research by Simon Brown.

Most people know Sir Isaac Newton because of gravity, mathematics, optics, and physics.
Far fewer people realize that Newton devoted an extraordinary amount of his life to studying:

The Bible.

Biblical prophecy.

Early Christian history.

The Church Fathers.

Biblical manuscripts.

And:

THE DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY.

Newton was not merely a scientist who occasionally read the Bible.

His surviving theological manuscripts reveal an enormous and sustained investigation into Christianity, Scripture, prophecy, textual transmission, and the development of Church doctrine.

And Newton eventually reached a conclusion that would have been extremely dangerous to state publicly in his own lifetime:

NEWTON REJECTED THE ORTHODOX DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY.

Newton became convinced that the original Christian faith had suffered serious corruption and that later Trinitarian theology formed part of that corruption.

He believed that the Father alone was the supreme God and that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, was subordinate to the Father.

But there is something extremely important that we must also tell the reader.

NEWTON DID NOT NECESSARILY GET EVERYTHING RIGHT.


NEWTON BELIEVED JESUS EXISTED BEFORE HIS HUMAN BIRTH

If we are going to quote Isaac Newton because he rejected the Trinity, then intellectual honesty requires us to tell the reader where Newton's understanding differs from the conclusions presented in this research.

Newton believed in the:

PERSONAL PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST.

Even more remarkably, in one of Newton's surviving theological manuscripts he associated Christ with:

MICHAEL.

Newton wrote concerning Christ:

“He is also called Michael in Apoc 12”

and connected this Michael with “Michael the great Prince” in the book of Daniel.

This is extremely important.

Newton therefore did not simply reject the Trinity and arrive at the conclusion that Jesus began His personal existence through His miraculous conception in Mary.

His Christology contained important similarities to what historians call Arian Christianity: the Son existed before His human birth but was subordinate to the Father.

There is even an interesting similarity here with the modern Jehovah's Witness understanding, which also identifies the prehuman Jesus with Michael the archangel.

But we must be historically careful.

ISAAC NEWTON WAS NOT A JEHOVAH'S WITNESS.

Newton lived centuries before the Jehovah's Witness movement existed, and his theology should not simply be equated with theirs.

The similarity concerns this particular belief:

THE PERSONAL PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST AND HIS IDENTIFICATION WITH MICHAEL.


SO WAS NEWTON RIGHT ABOUT JESUS?

That question cannot be answered merely by saying:

“Isaac Newton was one of the greatest minds who ever lived.”

Newton's intelligence does not make his theology true.

Newton rejected the Trinity.

I believe he was right to question it.

But Newton also believed Christ personally existed before His human birth and associated Him with Michael.

In my own research, I believe Newton was wrong about this.

Why?

Because Newton is not my authority.

SCRIPTURE IS.

Hebrews asks:

“For to which of the angels did He ever say, ‘You are My Son; today I have begotten You’?”

Hebrews 1:5 — BLB

And Luke records the angel's explanation to Mary:

“The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore also the Holy One being born will be called the Son of God.”

Luke 1:35 — BLB

Notice that extraordinary word:

“THEREFORE.”

The miraculous conception is directly connected with Jesus being called:

THE SON OF GOD.

Therefore rejecting the Trinity does not automatically prove another explanation of Jesus correct.

Arianism must be tested.

The identification of Jesus with Michael must be tested.

Unitarianism must be tested.

Catholicism must be tested.

Protestantism must be tested.

And:

MY OWN BELIEFS MUST BE TESTED.


NEWTON INVESTIGATED POSSIBLE CORRUPTIONS OF SCRIPTURE

Newton also investigated biblical passages that had historically been used to support the Trinity.

Among the most important were:

1 JOHN 5:7

and:

1 TIMOTHY 3:16.

Newton compared manuscripts, ancient versions, and quotations from early Christian writers.

He became convinced that readings associated with Trinitarian arguments had entered or been altered in the textual tradition.

His investigation of the famous Trinitarian wording associated with 1 John 5:7 is particularly remarkable.

Modern textual criticism likewise recognizes that the famous Comma Johanneum—the explicit reference to the Father, Word, and Holy Spirit being “one”—is absent from the earliest Greek manuscript tradition and is not regarded as part of the original text by modern critical Greek New Testaments.

Newton was investigating questions of biblical textual transmission centuries ago.

But once again:

NEWTON IS NOT OUR AUTHORITY.

The manuscript evidence is what matters.


EVEN ISAAC NEWTON COULD BE WRONG

This brings us to perhaps one of the most important lessons in this entire article.

Sir Isaac Newton was one of the greatest intellectual minds in human history.

He investigated:

Mathematics.

Physics.

Astronomy.

Scripture.

Prophecy.

Church history.

Biblical manuscripts.

And:

Christian doctrine.

Yet even Newton could reach conclusions that must still be questioned and tested.

GREAT INTELLIGENCE DOES NOT MAKE A HUMAN BEING IMMUNE FROM ERROR.

Neither does knowing Greek.

Neither does studying manuscripts.

Neither does reading the Church Fathers.

Neither does belonging to a particular denomination.

Neither does spending decades studying the Bible.

And certainly neither does writing articles about the Bible.


“THE ONE DECEIVING THE WHOLE WORLD”

Revelation 12:9 warning about Satan deceiving the whole world, with 2 Peter 2 warning of false prophets and false teachers who introduce destructive heresies.

Revelation 12:9 warning about Satan deceiving the whole world, with 2 Peter 2 warning of false prophets and false teachers who introduce destructive heresies.

The book of Revelation gives humanity an extraordinary warning concerning Satan:

“THE ONE DECEIVING THE WHOLE WORLD...”

Revelation 12:9 — BLB

The underlying Greek refers to:

“THE WHOLE INHABITED WORLD.”

That should humble every one of us.

Who among us should confidently stand up and declare:

“I COULD NEVER HAVE BEEN DECEIVED”?

I cannot say that.

Newton could not say that.

A pope cannot say that.

A Protestant reformer cannot say that.

A theologian cannot say that.

A pastor cannot say that.

A denomination cannot say that.

And no Bible researcher should say that.

This does not mean Revelation 12:9 teaches that every individual person is wrong about everything.

It means that deception is a worldwide spiritual reality, and none of us should imagine that intelligence, education, tradition, or religious authority automatically makes us immune from error.

WE HAVE ALL INHERITED BELIEFS.

We have all been taught interpretations.

We all approach Scripture carrying assumptions.

Sometimes we can read the same verse for decades without stopping to ask whether the interpretation we were taught is actually what the verse itself says.

That is why humility is absolutely essential when searching for biblical truth.


THIS IS WHY WE MUST BE LIKE THE BEREANS

The Bereans give us one of the greatest examples of how Christians should investigate truth.

They listened to Paul.

But they did not simply say:

“Paul is an apostle, therefore we don't need to check what he says.”

Instead, Scripture tells us that they:

“Received the word with all readiness, on every day examining the Scriptures, whether these things were so.”

Acts 17:11 — BLB

Think about that.

They were listening to:

THE APOSTLE PAUL.

And yet they examined the Scriptures to determine whether what they were hearing was true.

That is the attitude I believe every Christian needs.

LISTEN.

EXAMINE.

QUESTION.

COMPARE.

PRAY.

SEARCH.

TEST EVERYTHING AGAINST SCRIPTURE.

And above all:

BE HUMBLE ENOUGH TO BE WRONG.


IF SCRIPTURE PROVES ME WRONG — I WANT TO KNOW

This is where biblical research becomes personal.

It is very easy to discover that somebody else's doctrine is wrong.

It is much harder to discover that:

WE OURSELVES WERE WRONG.

But if we truly love God more than our own theology, then truth must matter more than winning an argument.

If Scripture proves Isaac Newton wrong:

NEWTON MUST BE CORRECTED.

If Scripture proves an ancient Church Father wrong:

THE CHURCH FATHER MUST BE CORRECTED.

If Scripture proves Catholic tradition wrong:

THE TRADITION MUST BE CORRECTED.

If Scripture proves Protestant tradition wrong:

THE TRADITION MUST BE CORRECTED.

If Scripture proves my present understanding wrong:

I MUST BE CORRECTED.

And if further careful investigation demonstrates that something written in this very article is wrong:

THEN THIS ARTICLE MUST BE CORRECTED.

That is not weakness.

That is what pursuing truth requires.


NEVER BUILD YOUR FAITH UPON A MAN

Not Constantine.

Not Arius.

Not Athanasius.

Not Gregory of Nyssa.

Not William Tyndale.

Not Michael Servetus.

Not Martin Luther.

Not John Calvin.

Not Isaac Newton.

Not a pope.

Not a pastor.

Not a denomination.

And certainly not:

SIMON BROWN.

Every human teacher can be mistaken.

Every theological system must be examined.

Every interpretation must face the evidence.

Our loyalty must ultimately be to:

GOD.

HIS WORD.

AND THE TRUTH.


THIS IS WHY WE NEED A PASSION FOR GOD'S WORD

Revelation warns us about deception.

History warns us about human tradition.

The Church Fathers show us how theology developed.

The Reformation warns us that even people attempting to correct error can themselves retain error.

And Newton warns us that even extraordinary intelligence and enormous biblical study do not guarantee that every conclusion will be correct.

Therefore we need something deeper than loyalty to a denomination or theological system.

WE NEED A PASSION FOR GOD'S WORD AND TRUTH.

We need open minds.

We need teachable hearts.

We need humility.

We need the courage to question what we have inherited.

And we need the courage to change our minds when the evidence requires it.

Being open-minded does not mean believing everything.

IT MEANS BEING WILLING TO EXAMINE EVERYTHING.

Being humble does not mean having no convictions.

It means holding our convictions strongly enough to defend them, but humbly enough to change them when Scripture proves them wrong.

That is the Berean spirit.

SEARCH THE SCRIPTURES.

TEST WHAT YOU ARE TAUGHT.

TEST WHAT YOU READ.

TEST WHAT I WRITE.

And never become so certain of yourself that you are no longer willing to learn.

Because our loyalty is not to a creed.

It is not to a denomination.

It is not to Newton.

It is not to tradition.

It is not even to our own present understanding.

OUR LOYALTY MUST BE TO GOD AND HIS TRUTH.

TRUTH DOES NOT NEED OUR PRIDE TO DEFEND IT.

IT NEEDS OUR HUMILITY TO RECEIVE IT.

RETURN TO JESUS

After nearly two thousand years of councils, creeds, theological controversies, persecutions, denominations, reformations, translations, and arguments, perhaps Christianity needs to return to something remarkably simple.

What did Jesus say?

Who is God?

Jesus says:

“THE LORD OUR GOD, THE LORD IS ONE.”

Mark 12:29 — BLB

Who did Jesus call the only true God?

Speaking to His Father:

“YOU, THE ONLY TRUE GOD.”

John 17:3 — BLB

Who is Jesus?

Peter says:

“THE CHRIST, THE SON OF THE LIVING GOD.”

Matthew 16:16 — BLB

Jesus Himself says:

“I AM SON OF GOD.”

John 10:36 — BLB

Why was John's Gospel written?

“SO THAT YOU MAY BELIEVE THAT JESUS IS THE CHRIST, THE SON OF GOD.”

John 20:31 — BLB

This is the language of Scripture.


SOMETHING CHANGED BETWEEN JESUS AND THE FOURTH CENTURY

Something Changed Between Jesus and the Fourth Century — comparison between the teachings of Jesus and the development of Church councils, creeds, imperial Christianity and Trinitarian doctrine.

A detailed biblical and historical research image asking what changed between Jesus and fourth-century Christianity. It contrasts the first-century teachings attributed to Jesus and the apostles with the later development of powerful Church institutions, theological controversies, imperial involvement under Constantine, the Council of Nicaea in AD 325 and subsequent creedal definitions. The image encourages readers not simply to accept later tradition but to examine the historical evidence and search the Scriptures carefully, following the Berean example of Acts 17:11. Research by Simon Brown.

Put the evidence side by side.

JESUS:

“The Lord our God, the Lord is one.”

THE JEWISH SCRIBE:

“He is one, and there is not another besides Him.”

PAUL:

“One God, the Father.”

JESUS:

“You, the only true God.”

PETER:

“The Christ, the Son of the living God.”

JOHN:

“Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God.”

Then compare that simple language with the increasingly technical terminology of later theological controversies:

ousia

hypostasis

homoousios

one essence

three persons

The Church Fathers believed this language was necessary to protect Christian truth.

But the historical question remains:

WHY WAS THIS LANGUAGE NECESSARY IF JESUS HAD ALREADY CLEARLY TAUGHT THE TRINITY?

And why does Jesus' own confession concerning God correspond so directly with the Jewish monotheistic confession that later Christian theology believed required further qualification?


AND THEN AN EVEN MORE DISTURBING QUESTION

Historical comparison showing Jesus teaching and persuading people, later Church councils defining heresy, and the eventual persecution and execution of Christians for religious dissent.

A detailed biblical and historical image examining the disturbing transition from Jesus teaching, reasoning and persuading people without coercion to later institutional Christianity, where councils defined theological boundaries and religious dissent could be condemned as heresy. In later periods of Christian history, Church and civil authorities sometimes imprisoned, tortured and executed religious dissenters. The image asks how Christianity moved from persuasion and suffering for one's faith to using institutional and civil power against those judged to hold false doctrine. Research by Simon Brown.

How did Christianity travel from:

JESUS TEACHING AND PERSUADING PEOPLE

to:

CHURCH COUNCILS DEFINING HERESY

and eventually, in later Christian history:

CHRISTIANS IMPRISONING AND EVEN EXECUTING OTHER CHRISTIANS FOR HERESY?

The answer is complicated.

It developed over many centuries.

Catholics participated in it.

Protestants participated in it.

Therefore this article should never be used simply as a weapon against Catholics.

The lesson is much bigger.

HUMAN RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS CAN BECOME DANGEROUS WHEN THEIR INTERPRETATION OF GOD BECOMES SOMETHING THEY ARE WILLING TO FORCE UPON OTHERS.

Jesus did not need a sword to defend truth.

Truth should be demonstrated.

Not forced.


WILLIAM TYNDALE GAVE PEOPLE THE SCRIPTURES

William Tyndale gave people the Scriptures by translating the New Testament from Greek into English, helping ordinary people read and understand the Bible for themselves.

A detailed historical image examining William Tyndale and his determination to make the Scriptures available to ordinary people in English. Tyndale translated the New Testament from Greek, worked and printed under dangerous conditions, and saw copies of his translation distributed despite fierce opposition. He was eventually arrested and executed in 1536. His translation profoundly influenced later English Bibles and helped place the Scriptures directly into the hands of ordinary readers. The image encourages Christians to value this freedom by searching the Scriptures, testing what they are taught and following biblical truth. Research by Simon Brown.

Tyndale's story gives us an appropriate reminder.
Whatever conclusions Tyndale himself reached doctrinally, his great achievement was helping ordinary English-speaking people gain direct access to Scripture.

And his surprising translation of John 1 reminds us that even familiar passages deserve investigation.

Do not merely ask:

“What does my modern English Bible say?”

Ask:

What does the Greek say?

What did earlier translations say?

Are there textual variants?

How did early Christians quote the passage?

Has theological tradition influenced how I automatically understand it?

These are legitimate questions.


NEWTON INVESTIGATED THE MANUSCRIPTS

Newton went even further.

He compared textual evidence and challenged famous Trinitarian proof texts.

He concluded that Christianity had suffered serious corruption.

But even Newton must ultimately stand before the same test:

DOES HIS TEACHING AGREE WITH SCRIPTURE?

That is the standard we should apply to everyone.


DO NOT SIMPLY BELIEVE THIS ARTICLE

Please investigate it.

Read the original Nicene Creed.

Study AD 325.

Study AD 381.

Read Gregory of Nyssa.

Read Athanasius.

Study what happened to Arius.

Read about William Tyndale.

Read Tyndale's 1534 New Testament.

Study Michael Servetus.

Read Isaac Newton's theological writings.

Compare ancient manuscripts.

Read Trinitarian scholars.

Read non-Trinitarian scholars.

But above everything else:

READ JESUS.

Do not believe something merely because it is:

Catholic.

Do not reject something merely because it is:

Catholic.

Do not believe something merely because it is:

Protestant.

Do not believe something merely because:

Isaac Newton believed it.

And do not believe something merely because:

I wrote it.

Test every claim.


THE FINAL QUESTION IS YOURS

Jesus was asked for the greatest commandment.

His answer began:

“HEAR, ISRAEL: THE LORD OUR GOD, THE LORD IS ONE.”

Mark 12:29 — BLB

The scribe answered:

“HE IS ONE, AND THERE IS NOT ANOTHER BESIDES HIM.”

Mark 12:32 — BLB

Jesus responded:

“YOU ARE NOT FAR FROM THE KINGDOM OF GOD.”

Mark 12:34 — BLB

Jesus later prayed to His Father:

“THAT THEY MAY KNOW YOU, THE ONLY TRUE GOD, AND JESUS CHRIST WHOM YOU SENT.”

John 17:3 — BLB

And John tells us exactly why his Gospel was written:

“THESE HAVE BEEN WRITTEN SO THAT YOU MAY BELIEVE THAT JESUS IS THE CHRIST, THE SON OF GOD.”

John 20:31 — BLB

So perhaps the greatest question is not:

WHAT DID NICAEA SAY?

Nor:

WHAT DID GREGORY SAY?

Nor:

WHAT DID CALVIN SAY?

Nor:

WHAT DID TYNDALE SAY?

Nor:

WHAT DID NEWTON SAY?

The greatest question is:

WHAT DID JESUS CHRIST SAY?

And therefore:

DOES MY CREED AGREE WITH THE CREED OF JESUS?

Search the Scriptures.

Study the history.

Examine the manuscripts.

Read the Church Fathers.

Test the traditions.

Question human authority.

Never persecute another person for asking questions.

And follow the evidence wherever it leads.

BECAUSE TRUTH HAS NOTHING TO FEAR FROM INVESTIGATION.

Research by Simon Brown

wwwrealdiscoveriesorg-simon.blogspot.com

Related articles:




Friday, 14 August 2026

John 8:24 Quick Facts — Unless You Believe That I Am He?

John 8:24 Quick Facts – What did Jesus mean by unless you believe I am He? Bible study examini

Who did Jesus actually claim to be? This detailed Quick Facts study examines the meaning of “I am He,” the accusation that Jesus was making Himself God, Jesus’ response that He said “I am Son of God,” and the later charge in John 19:7 that He made Himself the Son of God. It also compares different beliefs about Jesus and finishes with His own question: “But you, who do you say I am?” Peter answered, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”

QUICK FACTS: “UNLESS YOU BELIEVE THAT I AM HE, YOU WILL DIE IN YOUR SINS”

PART ONE — What Did Jesus Mean by “I Am He”?

Few statements made by Jesus could be more serious than His warning in John 8:

“Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for unless you believe that I am He, you will die in your sins.”
— John 8:24, BLB

These are extremely serious words.

Jesus is telling His listeners that believing who He truly is matters.

But this immediately raises the question:

WHO DID JESUS MEAN BY “I AM HE”?

Did Jesus mean:

“Unless you believe that I am Almighty God, you will die in your sins”?

Or was Jesus telling them that they must believe He truly is:

THE CHRIST — THE SON OF GOD?

This distinction is extremely important because some Christians interpret Jesus' words ἐγώ εἰμι (egō eimi), “I am,” as a declaration that He is God, connecting them with God's words to Moses in Exodus 3:14.

But notice something first.

Jesus did not say:

“UNLESS YOU BELIEVE THAT I AM GOD, YOU WILL DIE IN YOUR SINS.”

The word “God” is not there.

So before inserting that meaning into Jesus' words, we need to examine how egō eimi is actually used in John's Gospel and, most importantly, allow the context to tell us what Jesus meant.


QUICK FACT 1

DOES “EGŌ EIMI” AUTOMATICALLY MEAN “I AM GOD”?

The Greek expression behind Jesus' words is:

ἐγώ εἰμι — EGŌ EIMI

It means simply:

“I am.”

Some Trinitarian interpreters connect Jesus' use of these words with Exodus 3:14, where God speaks to Moses.

From this they argue that Jesus' statement:

“Unless you believe that I am…”

means:

“Unless you believe that I am God…”

But there is a serious problem with making egō eimi itself proof that the speaker is claiming to be God.

The same expression can be used simply to identify oneself.

And John's Gospel gives us a perfect example.


QUICK FACT 2

THE BLIND MAN ALSO SAID “EGŌ EIMI”

In John 9, Jesus heals a man who had been blind from birth.

Afterward, people argue about whether this really is the same man:

“Some were saying, ‘This is he.’ Others were saying, ‘No, but he is like him.’ He kept saying, ‘I am he.’”
— John 9:9

The words translated “I am he” are:

ἐγώ εἰμι — EGŌ EIMI

The same Greek expression.

Was the formerly blind man claiming:

“I AM GOD ALMIGHTY”?

Of course not.

He was simply saying:

“I am he.”

“I am the man.”

“I am the person you are talking about.”

This establishes an important fact:

THE WORDS “EGŌ EIMI” DO NOT AUTOMATICALLY MEAN “I AM GOD.”

The context determines whom the speaker is identifying himself as.

This was also one of the central comparisons in my original research.

So now we must ask:

WHAT DOES THE CONTEXT IDENTIFY JESUS AS?


QUICK FACT 3

JESUS HIMSELF EXPLAINS “I AM HE” TO THE SAMARITAN WOMAN

John gives us an extraordinary example that helps answer our question.

Jesus meets a Samaritan woman at Jacob's well.

During their conversation she says:

“I know that Messiah is coming, who is called Christ. When He comes, He will declare to us all things.”
— John 4:25, BLB

Notice exactly whom she is talking about:

THE MESSIAH — THE CHRIST.

Jesus then answers:

“I who speak to you am He.”
— John 4:26, BLB

Again Jesus uses:

ἐγώ εἰμι — EGŌ EIMI

But this time there can be little doubt about the immediate subject of the conversation.

The woman says:

“MESSIAH IS COMING.”

Jesus answers:

“I AM HE.”

In other words:

I AM THE MESSIAH.

I AM THE CHRIST YOU ARE WAITING FOR.

Jesus is not answering a question about whether He is Almighty God.

He is identifying Himself as the promised Messiah—the Christ.

This same connection between John 4:25 and Jesus' egō eimi response in John 4:26 formed a major part of my earlier research.


QUICK FACT 4

JOHN 8:28 GIVES US ANOTHER IMPORTANT CLUE

Now return to the very chapter we are investigating.

A few verses after Jesus warns:

“…unless you believe that I am He…”

Jesus says:

“When you shall have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am He, and from Myself I do nothing; but as the Father taught Me, I speak these things.”
— John 8:28, BLB

Look carefully.

Jesus again says:

“I AM HE.”

But immediately afterward Jesus tells us:

“FROM MYSELF I DO NOTHING.”

And:

“THE FATHER TAUGHT ME.”

That distinction is extremely important.

Jesus is the One being taught.

The Father is the One teaching Him.

Jesus therefore distinguishes Himself from His Father in the very sentence containing “I am He.”

This should make us extremely cautious about changing Jesus' words into:

“Then you will know that I am Almighty God.”

That is not what Jesus actually says.

Instead, the context continues to distinguish Jesus from:

THE FATHER WHO SENT AND TAUGHT HIM.


QUICK FACT 5

SO WHO DID JESUS SAY HE WAS?

Fortunately, we don't have to guess.

Jesus gives us His own description later in John's Gospel.

After some of His opponents accused Him of blasphemy, Jesus said:

“Do you say of Him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You blaspheme,’ because I said, ‘I am Son of God’?”
— John 10:36, BLB

Read that carefully.

Jesus identifies Himself as:

“SON OF GOD.”

He also tells us:

THE FATHER SANCTIFIED HIM.

and:

THE FATHER SENT HIM.

Again we have two clearly distinguished identities:

THE FATHER

and

HIS SON.

Jesus does not say here:

“I told you that I am God Almighty.”

He describes His claim as:

“I AM SON OF GOD.”


QUICK FACT 6

JOHN TELLS US EXACTLY WHAT WE ARE REQUIRED TO BELIEVE ABOUT JESUS

Perhaps the clearest evidence comes near the conclusion of John's Gospel.

John actually tells his readers why he wrote the book:

“But these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.”
— John 20:31, BLB

This is enormously important when interpreting John 8:24.

Jesus warned:

“UNLESS YOU BELIEVE THAT I AM HE…”

And John later tells us what his Gospel was written to make us believe:

JESUS IS THE CHRIST.

JESUS IS THE SON OF GOD.

And notice the consequence:

“…THAT BELIEVING YOU MAY HAVE LIFE IN HIS NAME.”

This is why correctly understanding Jesus' identity is such a serious matter.


BUT THERE IS AN IMPORTANT QUESTION WE STILL NEED TO ADDRESS

At this point, many Christians will quite reasonably respond:

“But I already believe Jesus is the Christ and the Son of God!”

And they are right.

Trinitarians say Jesus is the Christ and Son of God.

Modalists say Jesus is the Christ and Son of God.

Jehovah's Witnesses say Jesus is the Christ and Son of God.

Yet these groups understand Jesus' identity in very different ways and add very different theological claims concerning who He is.

So our investigation cannot finish merely by asking:

“Do you call Jesus the Christ?”

or:

“Do you call Jesus the Son of God?”

We must ask the deeper question:

WHAT DO THOSE WORDS ACTUALLY MEAN?

And:

HAVE WE ADDED ANOTHER IDENTITY TO JESUS THAT JESUS AND HIS APOSTLES DID NOT TEACH?

That brings us directly to 1 John 2:22, the Trinity, Modalism, Michael the archangel—and the remarkable accusation made against Jesus by His Jewish opponents.

CONTINUED IN PART TWO…

Thursday, 13 August 2026

38 Trinity Contradictions — Comparing the Trinity Claim With the Word of God.

38 Trinity Contradictions biblical investigation comparing traditional Trinitarian claims with the Word of God and the teachings of Jesus.

A detailed introductory poster for Simon Brown’s study, 38 Trinity Contradictions. The series compares what traditional Trinitarian doctrine teaches about the Father, Son and Holy Spirit with key passages of Scripture concerning the one God, His Son Jesus Christ and the biblical identity of God.

QUICK FACTS: 38 TRINITY CONTRADICTIONS

PART ONE — WHO IS THE ONE TRUE GOD?

Research by Simon Brown

The doctrine of the Trinity traditionally teaches that there is one God in three distinct persons—the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit—and that the three are coequal and coeternal. That is a fair description of historic Trinitarian belief, not something invented for this article. (Orthodox Church in America)

In this series, we are going to do something very simple:

THE TRINITY CLAIM

versus

THE WORD OF GOD

For each point, we will ask:

What does Trinitarian doctrine teach?

What does Scripture actually say?

And do the two teachings agree—or contradict one another?

These are the first five of the 38 Trinity Contradictions in my original study.


TRINITY CONTRADICTION NO. 1

GOD SAYS THERE IS NO OTHER GOD BESIDES HIM

WHAT THE TRINITY TEACHES

Traditional Trinitarian doctrine teaches that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are three distinct persons, while each is fully divine and together they are the one God. (Orthodox Church in America)

WHAT THE BIBLE TEACHES

Throughout Scripture, Yahweh repeatedly speaks of Himself using unmistakably singular language:

“Now therefore, Yahweh our God, save us from his hand, that all the kingdoms of the earth may know that you are Yahweh, even you only.”

— Isaiah 37:20

Again:

“I am Yahweh, and there is none else. Besides me, there is no God.”

— Isaiah 45:5

And:

“Remember the former things of old; for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me.”

— Isaiah 46:9

And perhaps most strikingly:

“See now that I, even I, am he. There is no god with me.”

— Deuteronomy 32:39

This same pattern appears repeatedly throughout Isaiah and the other prophets in the passages collected in my original study.

WHERE IS THE CONTRADICTION?

God does not say:

“We are God, and there is nobody besides Us.”

Instead, the biblical language repeatedly says:

I AM GOD

BESIDES ME THERE IS NO GOD

THERE IS NO GOD WITH ME

The question for the Trinitarian interpretation is therefore:

If the one God consists of three distinct coequal divine persons, why does God repeatedly identify Himself using this strongly singular “I” and “Me” language?

These passages are foundational to the biblical understanding of God and deserve to be allowed to speak for themselves.


TRINITY CONTRADICTION NO. 2

GOD IS ONE — THE GREATEST COMMANDMENT

WHAT THE TRINITY TEACHES

Trinitarian theology agrees that there is only one God, but defines that one God as existing in three distinct divine persons. (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

WHAT THE BIBLE TEACHES

God gave Israel this fundamental commandment:

“Hear, Israel: Yahweh is our God. Yahweh is one.”

— Deuteronomy 6:4

Centuries later, Jesus was asked which commandment was foremost.

Jesus answered:

“The foremost is, ‘Hear this O Israel: The Lord our God is One Lord.’”

— Mark 12:29, BLB

Jesus therefore reaffirmed the declaration given to Israel.

GOD IS ONE.

WHERE IS THE CONTRADICTION?

The important point is not that the Hebrew word for “one” literally means “one person”—it does not by itself establish that.

The much stronger question is this:

Did Jesus ever redefine Israel's confession by saying that the one God consists of three coequal persons?

When specifically asked for the foremost commandment, Jesus simply reaffirmed:

“THE LORD OUR GOD IS ONE LORD.”

Your original article identifies this as one of the central problems with the Trinitarian interpretation.

If believing that God is three persons were essential to understanding God's identity, why did Jesus not say so when explicitly stating the foremost commandment concerning God?

That is a serious question.


TRINITY CONTRADICTION NO. 3

PAUL SAYS: “ONE GOD, THE FATHER”

WHAT THE TRINITY TEACHES

Traditional Trinitarian Christianity identifies the Father as God, the Son as God, and the Holy Spirit as God, while maintaining that there are not three Gods but one God. (RCA)

WHAT PAUL TEACHES

Paul writes:

“Yet to us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things and we for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ…”

— 1 Corinthians 8:6, BLB

Look carefully at Paul's identification:

ONE GOD — THE FATHER

Then Paul distinguishes Jesus:

ONE LORD — JESUS CHRIST

Paul makes another remarkable distinction:

“For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.”

— 1 Timothy 2:5, BLB

Again we have two clearly distinguished parties:

ONE GOD

and

THE MAN CHRIST JESUS — THE MEDIATOR BETWEEN GOD AND HUMANITY

Paul also writes:

“…God is one.”

— Galatians 3:20, BLB

These were central passages in Contradiction No. 3 of my original study.

WHERE IS THE CONTRADICTION?

If Paul believed that the one God should be identified equally as Father, Son and Holy Spirit, why does he instead write:

“ONE GOD, THE FATHER”?

And if Jesus is Himself that same one God, why does Paul distinguish:

the one God

from

the mediator between God and humanity, Christ Jesus?

Paul certainly gives Jesus an extraordinarily exalted position.

But his wording still distinguishes God from Jesus Christ.

That distinction should not be ignored.


TRINITY CONTRADICTION NO. 4

JESUS IS THE WAY TO GOD

WHAT THE TRINITY TEACHES

The Trinity teaches that Jesus is fully divine and shares the same divine being as the Father.

WHAT JESUS TEACHES

Jesus said:

“I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father, if not by Me.”

— John 14:6, BLB

Notice the direction Jesus gives us:

THROUGH JESUS → TO THE FATHER

Jesus does not present Himself as the final person to whom He is bringing us.

He presents Himself as the way through whom we come to the Father.

This was the argument presented in Contradiction No. 4 of my original article.

WHERE IS THE CONTRADICTION?

If Jesus is Himself the same one true God to whom humanity is being reconciled, why does He consistently present Himself as the way to the Father?

This fits perfectly with Paul's words:

ONE GOD

and

ONE MEDIATOR BETWEEN GOD AND MEN

The mediator is:

“THE MAN CHRIST JESUS.”

— 1 Timothy 2:5

The biblical picture therefore presents Jesus as our unique mediator and way to God.


TRINITY CONTRADICTION NO. 5

JESUS CALLED HIMSELF “A MAN”

WHAT THE TRINITY TEACHES

Historic Trinitarian Christianity teaches that Jesus Christ is both fully God and fully man. The Athanasian Creed explicitly describes Christ as God and man, so we must represent the Trinitarian position accurately here. (RCA)

Therefore, the fact that Jesus is called a man does not, by itself, refute Trinitarian doctrine.

But there is something else in Jesus' statement that deserves attention.

WHAT JESUS ACTUALLY SAID

Jesus told His opponents:

“But now you seek to kill Me, a man who has spoken to you the truth that I heard from God.”

— John 8:40, BLB

Notice the complete statement.

Jesus identifies Himself as:

“A MAN”

and then says that the truth He proclaimed was something:

“I HEARD FROM GOD.”

Your original article specifically contrasts Jesus' description of Himself as a man with the Trinitarian identification of Jesus as God.

WHERE IS THE CONTRADICTION?

The strongest question is not simply:

“Why is Jesus called a man?”

Trinitarians already believe Jesus became genuinely human.

The more important question is:

Why does Jesus distinguish Himself from God in the very same sentence?

He says:

“ME, A MAN”

who heard:

“FROM GOD.”

The natural reading presents the man Jesus receiving truth from God.

So we must ask:

Who is the God from whom Jesus heard this truth?

And why does Jesus speak of God as someone distinct from Himself?


PART ONE — CONCLUSION

We have examined only the first five of the 38 claimed Trinity contradictions, but already a consistent biblical pattern begins to emerge.

God says:

“BESIDES ME, THERE IS NO GOD.”

Jesus says:

“THE LORD OUR GOD IS ONE LORD.”

Paul says:

“ONE GOD, THE FATHER.”

Jesus says we come:

TO THE FATHER THROUGH HIM.

And Jesus describes Himself as:

“A MAN” WHO HEARD THE TRUTH “FROM GOD.”

The purpose of this series is not to tell you what you must believe.

It is to put the Trinity claim beside the Word of God and allow you to examine the evidence.

Ask yourself:

Do these statements naturally teach one God who is three coequal persons?

Or do they consistently distinguish the one God, the Father, from His Son and Messiah, Jesus Christ?

Jesus Himself prayed:

“And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You sent.”

— John 17:3, BLB

There are still 33 claimed contradictions to examine.

And some of the strongest are yet to come.