Nontrinitarianism

==Points of dissent==
Nontrinitarian Christians with Arian or Semi-Arian views contend that the weight of scriptural evidence supports [[Subordinationism]], the Son's total submission to the Father, and God's paternal supremacy over the Son in every aspect. They acknowledge the Son's high rank at [[Right hand of God|God's right hand]], but teach that the Father is still greater than the Son in all things.

While acknowledging that the Father, Son, and Spirit are essential in creation and salvation, they argue that that in itself does not confirm that the three are each co-equal or co-eternal. They also affirm that God is only explicitly identified as "one" in the Bible, and that the doctrine of the Trinity, which word literally meaning ''a set of three'', ascribes a co-equal threeness to the being of the infinite God that is not explicitly scriptural.

===Scriptural support===
Critics of the Trinity doctrine argue that, for a teaching described as fundamental, it lacks direct scriptural support. Proponents of the doctrine assert that although the doctrine is not stated directly in the New Testament, it is instead an interpretation of elements contained therein that imply the doctrine that was later formulated in the 4th century.

[[William Barclay (theologian)|William Barclay]], a [[Church of Scotland]] minister, says:
: "It is important and helpful to remember that the word Trinity is not itself a New Testament word. It is even true in at least one sense to say that the doctrine of the Trinity is not directly New Testament doctrine. It is rather a deduction from and an interpretation of the thought and the language of the New Testament."<ref name=Barclay>{{cite book |last=Barclay |first=William |date=1998 |title=The Apostles' Creed |publisher=Westminster John Knox Press |isbn=978-0-664-25826-9 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=bBOqGJc6tpcC&q=Trinity+%22new+testament%22&pg=PA201 |access-date=5 March 2015}}</ref>
The ''New Catholic Encyclopedia'' states:
: "The doctrine of the Holy Trinity is not taught [explicitly] in the [Old Testament]", "The formulation 'one God in three Persons' was not solidly established [by a council] ... prior to the end of the 4th century."<ref>{{cite encyclopedia |encyclopedia=New Catholic Encyclopedia |year=1967 |volume=XIV |page=299 |title={{grey|[title not cited]}} }}</ref>
Similarly, ''Encyclopedia Encarta'' states:
:  "The doctrine is not taught explicitly in the New Testament, where the word God almost invariably refers to the Father. ... The term ''trinitas'' was first used in the 2nd century, by the Latin theologian Tertullian, but the concept was developed in the course of the debates on the nature of Christ ... In the 4th century, the doctrine was finally formulated".<ref>{{cite encyclopedia |first=John |last=MacQuarrie |title=Trinity |encyclopedia=Encyclopedia Encarta |series=Microsoft Encarta Reference Library |year=2005 |publisher=Microsoft Corporation}}</ref>
''Encyclopædia Britannica'' says:
: "Neither the word Trinity nor the explicit doctrine appears in the New Testament, nor did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict the [[Shema Yisrael|Shema]] in the Old Testament: "Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord" ({{Bibleref2|Deuteronomy|6:4}}). ... The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies. ... by the end of the 4th century, under the leadership of [[Basil of Caesarea]], [[Gregory of Nyssa]], and [[Gregory of Nazianzus]] (the Cappadocian Fathers), the doctrine of the Trinity took substantially the form it has maintained ever since."<ref>{{cite encyclopedia |title=Trinity |encyclopedia=[[Encyclopædia Britannica]] |year=2004 |series=Ultimate Reference Suite DVD }}</ref>
The ''[[Anchor Bible Dictionary]]'' states:
: "One does not find in the NT the trinitarian paradox of the coexistence of the Father, Son, and Spirit within a divine unity."<ref>{{cite dictionary |author-link=Jouette Bassler |first=J.M. |last=Bassler |year=1992 |title=God in the NT |dictionary=The Anchor Bible Dictionary |publisher=Doubleday |place=New York |volume=2 |page=1055}}</ref>

Catholic historian Joseph F. Kelly, speaking of legitimate theological development, writes:
: "The Bible may not use the word 'Trinity', but it refers to God the Father frequently; the ''Gospel of John'' emphasized the divinity of the Son; several New Testament books treat the Holy Spirit as divine. The ancient theologians did not violate biblical teaching but sought to develop its implications. ... [Arius'] potent arguments forced other Christians to refine their thinking about the Trinity."
:
: "At two ecumenical councils, Nicea&nbsp;I in 325 and Constantinople&nbsp;I in 381, the church at large defined the Trinity in the way now so familiar to us from the Nicene Creed. This exemplifies development of doctrine at its best. The Bible may not use the word 'Trinity', but trinitarian theology does not go against the Bible. On the contrary, Catholics believe that trinitarianism has carefully developed a biblical teaching for later generations."<ref name=Kelly>{{cite book|last1=Kelly|first1=Joseph F. |year=2006 |title=An Introduction to the New Testament for Catholics |page=5 |publisher=Liturgical Press |isbn=978-0-8146-5216-9 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=gkJshoHbcpkC&q=%22biblical+teaching+for+later+generations%22&pg=PA5 |access-date=5 March 2015}}</ref>

=== Questions about co-equal deity of Jesus ===
American Catholic priest and Trinitarian, R.E. Brown (1928–1988), wrote a journal article<ref name=Brown-1965-12/> that sorted relevant biblical verses into three classes. He described the following block as "texts that seem to imply that the title 'God' was not used for Jesus" and are "negative evidence which is often somewhat neglected in Catholic treatments of the subject":<ref name=Brown-1965-12>{{cite journal |author=Brown, Raymond E. |date=1 December 1965 |title=Does the New Testament Call Jesus God? |journal = Theological Studies |volume = 26 |issue = 4 |pages = 545–573 |doi=10.1177/004056396502600401|s2cid = 53007327}}</ref>
* {{Bibleref2|Mark|10:18}}, {{Bibleref2|Matthew|27:46}}, {{Bibleref2|John|20:17}}, {{Bibleref2|Ephesians|1:17}}, {{Bibleref2|2Cor|1:3|niv|2 Corinthians 1:3}}, {{Bibleref2|1Peter|1:3|niv|1 Peter 1:3}}, {{Bibleref2|John|17:3}}, {{Bibleref2|1Cor|8:6|niv|1 Corinthians 8:6}}, {{Bibleref2|Ephesians|4:4–6}}, {{Bibleref2|1cor|12:4–6|niv|1 Corinthians 12:4–6}}, {{Bibleref2|2cor|13:14|niv|2 Corinthians 13:14}}, {{Bibleref2|1tim|2:5|niv|1 Timothy 2:5}}, {{Bibleref2|John|14:28}}, {{Bibleref2|Mark|13:32}}, {{Bibleref2|Philippians|2:5–10}}, and {{Bibleref2|1cor|15:24–28|niv|1 Corinthians 15:24–28}};
he lists these as "texts where, by reason of textual variants or syntax, the use of 'God' for Jesus is dubious":<ref name=Brown-1965-12/>
* {{Bibleref2|Gal|2:20}}, [[Acts 20:28]], {{Bibleref2|John|1:18}}, {{Bibleref2|Colossians|2:2}}, {{Bibleref2|2 Thessalonians|1:12}}, {{Bibleref2|1John|5:20}}, {{Bibleref|Romans|9:5}}, and {{Bibleref2|2 Peter|1:1}};
and only finds the following three as "texts where clearly Jesus is called God":<ref name=Brown-1965-12/>
* {{Bibleref2|Hebrews|1:8–9}}, [[John 1:1]], and [[John 20:28]].

The Septuagint translate {{Script/Hebrew|אלוהים}} (Elohim) as θεος (Theos).<ref>{{cite journal |first=Jacob A. |last=Loewen |date=1 April 1984 |title=The Names of God in the New Testament |journal=The Bible Translator |volume=35 |issue=2 |pages=208–211 |doi=10.1177/026009438403500202 |s2cid=172043076}}</ref> At Deuteronomy 6:4 (the ''[[Shema Yisrael]]'', quoted by Jesus at {{Bibleref2|Mark|12:29}}), the [[Royal we|plural form]] of the Hebrew word "God" (''[[Names of God in Judaism#Elohim|Elohim]]'') is used, generally understood to denote majesty, excellence, and the superlative.<ref>{{Cite book |title=New American Bible |edition=St. Joseph |section=Bible Dictionary |author=Confraternity of Christian Doctrine |publisher=Catholic Book Publishing |year=2011 |isbn=978-0-89942-617-4}}</ref> It has been stated that in the original Greek in Mark 12:29, there are no "plural modifiers" in that Greek word there for "one" (''heis''), but that in Mark 12 it is simply a masculine singular "one". And that because of that, there is no valid reason to believe that the Hebrew word for "one" in Deuteronomy 6 (''echad'') was necessarily a "plural one", rather than just simply numerical "one".<ref>{{cite web |title=Against Dalcour&nbsp;II |date=February 2017 |website=Apostolic Academics |publisher=Oneness Pentecostal Apologetics |url=https://apostolicacademics.com/2017/02/ |access-date=10 July 2019}}</ref> At Deuteronomy 6:4, the [[Tetragrammaton]] appears twice in this verse, leading Jehovah's Witnesses and certain Jewish scholars to conclude that belief in a singular (and therefore indivisible) supremely powerful God is essential to the ''[[Shema Yisrael|Shema]]''.<ref>{{cite book |title=Reasoning from the Scriptures |orig-date=1986 |year=2015 |publisher=[[Watchtower Bible and Tract Society]] |place=Philadelphia|pages=405, 415–416 }}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Hertz |first=J.H. |year=1960 |title=The Pentateuch and the Haftorahs |volume=1 |page=215 |publisher=Soncino Press |isbn=978-0-900689-21-5 |url-access=registration |url=https://archive.org/details/pentateuchan_xxxx_2001_000_6958747}}</ref>

==== Matthew 26:39 ====
In {{bibleverse|Matthew|26:39|KJV}} Jesus prays with a distinction between God and himself, "O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt.".

==== John 1:1 ====
In [[John 1:1]] there is a distinction between God and the Logos. Non-trinitarians claim a mistranslation of the second part of John 1:1 which, when literally translated word-for-word reads "and the word [logos] was with the God [ho theos]." Trinitarians contend that the third part of the verse (John 1:1c) translates as "and the Word was God", pointing to a distinction as subjects between God and the Logos but an equivalence in nature.<ref>{{cite book |last=Kruse |first=Colin G. |date=2004 |title=The Gospel According to John |publisher=Wm. B. Eerdmans |isbn=978-0-8028-2771-5 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=6JYgc2iH_skC&q=%22Word+was+God%22+commentary&pg=PA62 |access-date=5 March 2015 |via=Google Books}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Ramsey Michaels |first=J. |date=2011|title=John |series=Understanding the Bible – Commentary |isbn=978-1-4412-3659-3 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=zGr-amBm4PUC&q=%22Word+was+God%22+commentary&pg=PT30 |access-date=5 March 2015 |via=Google Books}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |first=Earl |last=Radmacher |date=1999 |title=Nelson's New Illustrated Bible Commentary |publisher=Thomas Nelson |isbn=978-1-4185-8734-5 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=rVkt20rhM9wC&dq=%22Word+was+God%22+commentary&pg=PT1356 |via=Google Books}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Gundry |first=Robert H. |date=2011|df=dmy-all |title=Commentary on John |series=Commentary on the New Testament |volume=4 |access-date=5 March 2015 |isbn=978-1-4412-3761-3 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=RZg7yJva7LgC&q=Gundry+identical+distinguishable&pg=PT11 |via=Google Books}}</ref> Some nontrinitarians assert that the [[Koine]] Greek (''kai theos ên ho logos'') should be translated as "and a God was the Word" (or "and the Word was a god"). Based on their contention that the [[Article (grammar)|article]] of ''theos'' is [[wikt:anarthrous|anarthrous]], lacking a definite article, they believe the verse refers to Jesus' pre-human existence as "a god" or a divine one as distinct from "the God". Nontrinitarians also contend that the author of John's gospel could have written ''kai ho theos ên ho logos'' ("and the Word was the God") if that were his intended meaning.<ref>{{cite web |title=John 1:1c: "God", "divine", or "a god"? |website=OnlyTruGod.org |url=http://onlytruegod.org/defense/john1.1c.htm |access-date=24 November 2014}}</ref><ref name="Kaiser - Doctrine of God">{{cite book |last=Kaiser |first=Christopher B. |date=1982 |title=The Doctrine of God: A historical survey |series=Foundations for Faith |place=Westchester |publisher=Crossway Books |page=31}}</ref>

==== John 10:30 ====
{{bibleref2|John|10:30}} – Nontrinitarians such as Arians believe that when Jesus said, "I and the Father are one," he did not mean that they were actually "one substance", or "one God", or co-equal and co-eternal, but rather that he and the Father have a "unity of purpose", and that the context indicates that Jesus was saying that they were "one" in ''pastoral work''. The point being that the Father and the Son were united in the divine work of saving the 'sheep'. Nontrinitarian Christians also cite {{bibleref2|John|17:21}},<ref name="WTBTS should you believe trinity">{{cite web |title=Should you believe in the trinity? |year=2006 |website=Jehovah's Witness (wol.jw.org) |publisher=[[Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania]] |page=24 |url=https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1101989307}}</ref> wherein Jesus prayed regarding his disciples: "That they may all be one, as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they may be in us," adding "that they may be one even as we are one". They argue that the same Greek word (''hen'') for "one" throughout John 17 indicates that Jesus did not expect for his followers to literally become a single Being, or "one in substance", with each other, or with God, and therefore that Jesus also did not expect his hearers to think that he and God the Father were one entity either.<ref name="WTBTS should you believe trinity"/>

==== John 10:33 ====
While Trinitarians often use [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john+10%3A33&version=KJV John 10:33] as proof for the divinity of Jesus, unitarian critics argue that the Pharisees accusing Jesus of making himself God shouldn't be the center of attention, when reading this passage. Instead, they emphasize that Jesus' response to the accusations in [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john+10%3A34-36&version=KJV John 10:34-36] is of much greater concern. In fact, he refuses to be God but instead claims to be the son of God and makes a direct reference to [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalms+82%3A6&version=KJV Psalms 82:6] in which God calls his children Gods without taking away from his own glory.<ref>Stay Biblical - [https://www.staybiblical.com/all-jesus-is-god-bible-passages-and-claims-debunked/#the-jews All Jesus is God Bible passages and claims debunked]</ref>

==== John 20:28–29 ====
[[John 20:28]][[John 20:29|–29]] – "And Thomas answered and said to Him, "My Lord and my God!" Jesus said to him, "Thomas, because you have seen Me, you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed"". Since Thomas called Jesus ''God'', Jesus's statement appears to endorse Thomas's assertion. Nontrinitarians sometimes respond that it is plausible that Thomas is addressing the Lord Jesus and then the Father.{{citation needed|date=May 2017}} Another possible answer is that Jesus himself said, "Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?" ({{bibleref2|John|10:34}}) referring to Psalm 82:6–8.{{citation needed|date=May 2017}} The word "gods" in verse{{nbsp}}6 and "God" in verse{{nbsp}}8 is the same Hebrew word "'elohim",<ref name="biblicalheritage.org">{{cite web |author=Kemp, Steve |orig-date=22 May 2000 |title=Elohiym |website=Biblical Heritage Center |editor=Myers, Jim |date=c. 2009 |url=http://www.biblicalheritage.org/Linguistic/HL/1-A/-elohiym.htm |access-date=2009-04-02 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091029040650/http://www.biblicalheritage.org/Linguistic/HL/1-A/-elohiym.htm |archive-date=2009-10-29}}</ref> which means, "gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God; occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative",<ref>{{cite dictionary |title=אֱלֹהִים (''elohim'') – God, god |dictionary=Strong's Hebrew |id=430 |url=http://strongsnumbers.com/hebrew/430.htm |access-date=5 March 2015}}</ref> and can also refer to powers and potentates, in general, or as "God, god, gods, rulers, judges or angels",<ref name="biblicalheritage.org"/> and as "divine ones, goddess, godlike one".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.biblestudytools.net/Lexicons/Hebrew/heb.cgi?number=0430|title=Old Testament Hebrew Lexicon|work=Bible Study Tools}}</ref><!-- This apologetic argument is being presented in 'Wikipedia's voice'! Provide a source indicating that nontrinitarians make the assertion --> Therefore, the point being that Jesus was a power or mighty one to the Apostles, as the resurrected Messiah, and as the reflection of God the Father.

==== 2 Corinthians 13:14 ====
[[2 Corinthians 13:14]] – "The Grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the sharing in the Holy Spirit be with all of you." It is argued by Trinitarians that the appearance of "Father, Son, and Spirit" together in Paul's prayer for Grace on all believers, and are considered essential for salvation, that the verse is consistent with a triune godhead. Nontrinitarians such as Arians reply{{citation needed|date=May 2017}} that they do not disagree that all three are necessary for salvation and grace, but argue that the passage does not explicitly say that all three are co-equal or co-eternal.<ref>{{cite web |title=2 Corinthians 13:14 – Trinity? |date=2010-10-09 |website=The Son of Jehovah |via=wordpress.com |type=blog |url=http://sonofyah.wordpress.com/2010/10/09/2-cor13-14/ |access-date=5 March 2015}}</ref>{{unreliable source?|date=May 2017}}

==== Philippians 2:5–6 ====
[[Philippians 2:5]][[Philippians 2:6|–6]] – "Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, [or "which was also in Christ Jesus",] who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped" (ESV). The word translated in the [[English Standard Version]] as "a thing to be grasped" is ἁρπαγμόν. Other translations of the word are indicated in the [[Holman Christian Standard Bible]]: "Make your own attitude that of Christ Jesus, who, existing in the form of God, did not consider equality with God as something to be used for His own advantage" [or "to be grasped", or "to be held on to"].<ref>{{Bibleverse||Philippians|2:5–6|HCSV}}</ref> The [[King James Version]] has: "Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God."<ref>{{Bibleverse||Philippians|2:5–6|KJV}}</ref> Nontrinitarians make the argument that the passage is simply saying that Christ did not consider equality with God something graspable, and that better English translations make it clearer.<ref>[https://www.biblicalunitarian.com/verses/philippians-2-6-8} Philippians 2:6–8] biblicalunitarian.com. Retrieved 8 July 2019.</ref>   Another point is that the original Greek had no definite article for "form of God", which would mean "a form of divinity", and also that the term "morphe" for "form" in Koine Greek would simply mean a general external quality or station, but not necessarily the absolute thing itself, and therefore they argue that the passage does not explicitly teach either co-equality, co-eternity, or consubstantiality.<ref>{{cite web |title=The trinity delusion – Philippians 2:6 <!-- ¿user-name? -- 4. Theos. --> |via=angelfire.com |url=http://www.angelfire.com/space/thegospeltruth/trinity/verses/copy_of_Php2_6.html |access-date=8 July 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |first=Skip |last=Moen |date=October 2014 |title=The assumed trinity: A look at Philippians 2:6 |series=Hebrew Word Study |website=skipmoen.com |url=https://www.skipmoen.com/2014/10/the-assumed-trinity-a-look-at-philippians-26/ |access-date=8 July 2019}}</ref>

==== Hebrews 9:14 ====
{{bibleref2|Hebrews|9:14}} – "How much more will the Blood of Christ, who through an eternal Spirit, offered himself without blemish to God, cleanse our consciences from dead works, that we may render sacred service to the living God?" Most nontrinitarians agree{{citation needed|date=May 2017}} that the Holy Spirit had no beginning, but believe it is not an actual person. Nontrinitarians contend that it is obvious that God the Father in the passage is the One who is ultimately reached, and therefore is greater than the other two entities, and that a "co-equal trinity" is not explicitly taught in the passage, but only inferred.<ref>{{cite book |last=Kemball-Cook |first=David |date= 2007 |title=Is God a Trinity? |publisher=Lulu.com |isbn=978-0-9542211-1-9 |type=self-published |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=27YaIzmqaggC&q=eternal+spirit+hebrews+9+not+trinitarian+proof&pg=PA115 |access-date=5 March 2015 |via=Google Books}}</ref>

===Terminology===
{{More citations needed section|date=July 2010}}
"The term 'Trinity' is not in the Bible",<ref>{{cite book|editor1=Stephen T. Davis|editor2=Daniel Kendall|editor3=Gerald O'Collins|publisher=Oxford University Press|year=2002|title=The Trinity: An Interdisciplinary Symposium on the Trinity|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=TSnyL06y0LYC&pg=PA357|isbn=978-0-19-924612-0|page=357}}</ref> and some nontrinitarians use this as an argument to state{{citation needed|date=May 2017}} that the doctrine of the Trinity relies on non-biblical terminology, and that the number three is never clearly associated with God necessarily, other than within the [[Comma Johanneum]] which is of spurious or disputed authenticity. They argue{{citation needed|date=May 2017}} that the only number clearly unambiguously ascribed to God in the Bible is one, and that the Trinity, literally meaning three-in-one, ascribes a co-equal threeness to God that is not explicitly biblical.

Nontrinitarians cite other examples{{citation needed|date=May 2017}} of terms or phrases not found in the Bible; multiple "persons" in relation to God, the terms "[[God the Son]]", "[[God-man (Christianity)|God-Man]]", "[[Holy Spirit (Christianity)#God the Holy Spirit|God the Holy Spirit]]", "[[God the Son|eternal Son]]", and "[[Trinity#Eternal generation and procession|eternally begotten]]". While the Trinitarian term [[Hypostasis (religion)|hypostasis]] is found in the Bible, it is used only once in reference to God<ref>{{bibleverse|Heb|1:3}}</ref> where it states that Jesus is the express image of God's person. The Bible does not explicitly use the term in relation to the Holy Spirit nor explicitly mentions the Son having a distinct hypostasis from the Father.{{citation needed|date=May 2017}}

The [[First Council of Nicaea]] included in its Creed the major term ''[[homoousios]]'' (of the same essence), which was used also by the [[Council of Chalcedon]] to speak of a double [[consubstantiality]] of Christ, "consubstantial with the Father as touching his Godhead, and consubstantial with us as touching his manhood".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://pages.uoregon.edu/sshoemak/321/texts/chalcedonian_definition.htm|title=The Chalcedonian Definition|access-date=5 March 2015}}</ref> Nontrinitarians accept what Pier Franco Beatrice wrote: "The main thesis of this paper is that ''homoousios'' came straight from [[Constantine the Great|Constantine's]] [[Hermeticism|Hermetic]] background. ... The Plato recalled by Constantine is just a name used to cover precisely the Egyptian and Hermetic theology of the "consubstantiality" of the Logos-Son with the Nous-Father, having recourse to a traditional apologetic argument. In the years of the outbreak of the Arian controversy, [[Lactantius]] might have played a decisive role in influencing Constantine's Hermetic interpretation of Plato's theology and consequently the emperor's decision to insert ''homoousios'' in the [[Nicene Creed|Creed of Nicaea]]."<ref>[http://noemon.net/noesis/The%20word%20Homoousios%20from%20Hellenism%20to%20Christianity.pdf ''The Word'' "Homoousios" ''from Hellenism to Christianity''], by P.F. Beatrice, ''Church History,'' Cambridge University Press on behalf of the American Society of Church History, Vol. 71, No. 2, (Jun., 2002), pp. 243–272. (retrieved @ noemon.net) {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110723224453/http://noemon.net/noesis/The%20word%20Homoousios%20from%20Hellenism%20to%20Christianity.pdf |date=July 23, 2011}}</ref>

Trinitarians see the absence of the actual word "Trinity" and other Trinity-related terms in the Bible as no more significant than the absence in the Bible of the words "monotheism", "omnipotence", "oneness", "Pentecostal", "apostolic", "incarnation" and even "Bible" itself.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://carm.org/christianity/christian-doctrine/word-trinity-not-bible|title=The word Trinity is not found in the Bible|work=CARM – The Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry|access-date=5 March 2015|date=2008-11-24}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=J4fZeuyXWXEC&q=trinity+word+%22not+in+the+Bible%22+incarnation+omnipotence&pg=PA222|title=The Voice..|access-date=5 March 2015|isbn=978-1-4196-1730-0|last1=McQuick|first1=Oneil|date=2005|publisher=L.I.M }}</ref> They maintain that, 'while the word ''Trinity'' is not in the Bible, the substance or drift of the doctrine is definitely biblical, if not explicitly than at least implicitly.'<ref name=Kelly/><ref name=Barclay/><ref>{{cite web|url=http://irr.org/biblical-basis-of-doctrine-of-trinity-introduction|title=Institute for Religious Research – The Biblical Basis of the Doctrine of the Trinity – Introduction|work=Institute for Religious Research|access-date=5 March 2015}}</ref>

===Holy Spirit===
{{for|uses of this term in other religions|Holy Spirit}}
{{see also|Holy Spirit (Christian denominational variations)}}
Nontrinitarian views about the Holy Spirit differ from mainstream Christian doctrine and generally fall into several distinct categories. Most scriptures traditionally used in support of the Trinity refer to the [[God the Father|Father]] and the Son, but not to the [[Holy Spirit]].

====Unitarian====
Groups with [[Unitarianism|Unitarian]] theology such as Polish [[Socinians]], the 18th–19th-century [[General Assembly of Unitarian and Free Christian Churches|Unitarian Church]] and [[Christadelphians]] consider the Holy Spirit to be an aspect of God's power rather than a person.<ref>''The Unitarian: a monthly magazine of liberal Christianity'' ed. Jabez Thomas Sunderland, Brooke Herford, Frederick B. Mott – 1893 "We believe in the Holy Spirit, man's sole reliance for guidance, safety, or salvation, not as a separate person, entity, reality, or consciousness, existent apart from man or God, but as the recognizing sympathetic inter-communication in love between God and the human soul, the direct converse or communion of man's consciousness with Deity."</ref> Christadelphians believe that the phrase ''Holy Spirit'' refers to God's power or character, depending on the context.<ref name="TrinityTrueOrFalse">{{cite book |last=Broughton |first=James H. |author2=Peter J Southgate |title=The Trinity: True or False? |publisher=The Dawn Book Supply |location=UK |url=http://www.biblelight.org/trin/trinind.htm |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111118003323/http://www.biblelight.org/trin/trinind.htm |archive-date=2011-11-18 }}</ref> Similarly, [[Jehovah's Witnesses]] believe that the Holy Spirit is not an actual person but is God's "active force" that he uses to accomplish his will.<ref name="Awake! Is the Holy Spirit a Person?">{{cite journal|journal=Awake!|title=Is the Holy Spirit a Person?|date=July 2006|pages=14–15|quote=In the Bible, God's Holy Spirit is identified as God's power in action. Hence, an accurate translation of the Bible's Hebrew text refers to God's spirit as "God's active force".}}</ref>

==== Binitarianism ====
Groups with [[Binitarianism|Binitarian]] theology, such as [[Armstrongism|Armstrongites]], believe that the Logos and God the Father are co-equal and co-eternal, but they do not believe that the Holy Spirit is an actual person, like the Father and the Son. They believe the Holy Spirit is the Power, Mind, or Character of God, depending on the context. They teach, "The Holy Spirit is the very essence, the mind, life and power of God. It is not a Being. The Spirit is inherent in the Father and the Son, and [[Emanationism|emanates]] from Them throughout the entire universe."<ref>[http://reluctant-messenger.com/HWA/Mystery/Chapter1.html Who and What Is God?] – ''Mystery of the Ages'' – Herbert W. Armstrong. Retrieved 19 May 2012.</ref>

====Modalist groups====
[[Oneness Pentecostalism]], as with other [[Sabellianism|modalist]] groups, teach that the Holy Spirit is a ''mode'' of God, rather than a distinct or separate person in the godhead, and that the Holy Spirit is another name for God the Father. According to Oneness theology, the Holy Spirit is the Father operating in a certain capacity or manifestation. The United Pentecostal Church teaches that there is no personal distinction between God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.<ref>Peter Althouse ''Spirit of the last days: Pentecostal eschatology in conversation'' p. 12. 2003. "The Oneness Pentecostal stream follows in the steps of the Reformed stream, but has a modalistic view of the Godhead"</ref><ref>See under heading "The Father is the Holy Ghost" in David Bernard, The Oneness of God, Chapter 6.</ref><ref name="basic.doctrine.list.father.is.holy.ghost">See also David Bernard, ''A Handbook of Basic Doctrines'', Word Aflame Press, 1988.</ref> The two titles "Father" and "Holy Spirit" (as well as others) are said to not reflect separate "persons" within the Godhead, but rather two different ways in which the one God reveals himself to his creatures. The Oneness view of Bible verses that mention God and his Spirit (e.g. Isaiah 48:16) is that they do not imply two "persons" any more than various scriptural references to a man and his spirit or soul (such as in Luke 12:19) imply two "persons" existing within one body.<ref>See under "The Lord God and His Spirit," in Chapter 7 of David Bernard, [http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/pentecostal/One-Top.htm The Oneness of God] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080216034825/http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/pentecostal/One-Top.htm |date=2008-02-16 }}.</ref>{{unreliable source?|date=May 2017}}{{dead link|date=May 2017}}

====Latter-day Saint movement====
{{see also|Holy Spirit (Christian denominational variations)#Latter Day Saints|l1=Holy Spirit in Mormonism|God in Mormonism}}
<!-- This follows [[Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Latter-day Saints)]] -->
In the LDS Church, the Holy Ghost (usually synonymous with Holy Spirit)<ref>{{Cite book |last= Wilson |first= Jerry A. |contribution= Holy Spirit |contribution-url= http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/EoM/id/3768 |page= [https://archive.org/details/encyclopediaofmo01ludl/page/651 651] |editor-last= Ludlow |editor-first= Daniel H |editor-link= Daniel H. Ludlow |year= 1992 |title= Encyclopedia of Mormonism |location= New York |publisher= [[Macmillan Publishing]] |isbn= 978-0-02-879602-4 |oclc= 24502140 |quote= The Holy Spirit is a term often used to refer to the Holy Ghost. In such cases the Holy Spirit is a personage." |title-link= Encyclopedia of Mormonism }}</ref> is considered to be the third distinct member of the [[Godhead (Mormonism)|Godhead]] (Father, Son and Holy Ghost),<ref>{{Cite book |last= McConkie |first= Joseph Fielding |author-link= Joseph Fielding McConkie |contribution= Holy Ghost |contribution-url= http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/EoM/id/3766 |pages= [https://archive.org/details/encyclopediaofmo01ludl/page/649 649–651] |editor-last= Ludlow |editor-first= Daniel H |editor-link= Daniel H. Ludlow |year= 1992 |title= Encyclopedia of Mormonism |location= New York |publisher= [[Macmillan Publishing]] |isbn= 978-0-02-879602-4 |oclc= 24502140 |title-link= Encyclopedia of Mormonism }}</ref> and to have a body of "spirit",<ref>[https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/131.7-8?lang=eng D&C 131:7–8] ("There is no such thing as immaterial matter. All spirit is matter, but it is more fine or pure, and can only be discerned by purer eyes; We cannot see it; but when our bodies are purified we shall see that it is all matter.")</ref> which makes him unlike the Father and the Son who are said to have bodies "as tangible as man's".<ref name="DC130_22">[https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/130.22?lang=eng D&C 130:22].</ref> According to LDS doctrine, the Holy Spirit is believed to be a person,<ref name="DC130_22"/><ref>{{citation |url= https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1974/05/the-holy-ghost?lang=eng |title= The Holy Ghost |first= Marion G. |last= Romney |author-link= Marion G. Romney |date=May 1974 |journal= [[Ensign (LDS magazine)|Ensign]]}}</ref> with a body of spirit, able to pervade all worlds.<ref name="MillennialStarXII">{{cite book |title= Millennial Star |volume= XII |date= October 15, 1850 |pages= 305–309 |url= http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/MStar&CISOPTR=2051&REC=12&CISOSHOW=2013 |access-date= March 30, 2011}}</ref>

Latter-day Saints believe that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are part of the Godhead, but that the Father is greater than the Son, and that the Son is greater than the Holy Spirit in position and authority, but not in nature (i.e., they equally share the "God" nature).<ref name="MillennialStarXII"/> They teach that the Father, Son, and Spirit are three ontologically separate, self-aware entities who share a common "God" nature distinct from our "human" nature, who are "One God" in the sense of being united (in the same sense that a husband and wife are said to be "one"), similar to [[Social trinitarianism]].

A number of [[List of sects in the Latter Day Saint movement|Latter Day Saint sects]], most notably the [[Community of Christ]] (the second largest Latter Day Saint denomination), the [[Church of Christ (Temple Lot)]],<ref>{{cite web|title=Basic Beliefs Articles of Faith and Practice|url=http://www.churchofchrist-tl.org/basicBeliefs.html|publisher=Church of Christ|access-date=21 January 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150121163919/http://www.churchofchrist-tl.org/basicBeliefs.html|archive-date=21 January 2015}}</ref> and derived groups, follow a traditional Protestant trinitarian theology.

====Other groups====
The [[Unity Church]] interprets the religious terms Father, Son, and Holy Spirit [[metaphysically]], as three aspects of mind action: mind, idea, and expression. They believe this is the process through which all manifestation takes place.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.unitypaloalto.org/beliefs/twenty_questions.html |title= Unity Palo Alto Community Church – Beliefs &#124; Twenty Questions and Answers|website=www.unitypaloalto.org |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071007071544/http://www.unitypaloalto.org/beliefs/twenty_questions.html |archive-date=October 7, 2007}}</ref>

Groups in the [[Rastafari movement]] generally state that it is [[Haile Selassie]] who embodies both God the Father and God the Son, while the Holy (or "''Hola''") Spirit is to be found within every human being. Rastas also say that the true church is the human body, and that it is this church (or "''structure''") that contains the Holy Spirit.