Nontrinitarianism

=== 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>