Appendix F: The Trinity Question
An optional deep-dive for those interested in the biblical case on the Trinity question. This appendix examines Jesus's own testimony about His relationship with the Father, the historical development of Trinitarian doctrine, and addresses common objections.
In a court of law, whose testimony carries the most weight? The eyewitness. The one who was there. The one with direct knowledge.
When determining who God is, the sources include church councils convened centuries after Christ's death, theological frameworks developed over time, and creeds formulated by vote.
And there is Jesus Himself, the one sent by God, who claimed to reveal the Father and said "He that hath seen me hath seen the Father" (John 14:9).
His testimony about God's nature provides the foundation for understanding His relationship with the Father.
Let's examine what Jesus actually testified.
The Most Important Verse You've Never Been Taught
Jesus prayed to the Father in John 17, His final prayer before crucifixion. In verse 3, He defined eternal life: the core issue of human existence:
"And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent."
Jesus defines eternal life as knowing two beings:
- The Father: "thee the only true God"
- Jesus Christ: "whom thou hast sent"
Jesus said eternal life is knowing the Father as the only true God, and knowing Jesus Christ as the one the Father sent. The definition is specific and limited to these two beings.
The Word "Only" Excludes Others
When Jesus says the Father is the "only" true God, what does "only" mean?
In any other context, "only" means "one and no other." If I say "This is the only key that opens the door," you understand that other keys won't work. If I say "She is the only person who knows the code," you understand that means no one else knows it.
"Only" is exclusive. It means one, not three.
Jesus didn't say "Thee, the first person of the Trinity, are the only true God." He didn't say "Thee, along with me and the Holy Spirit, are the only true God." He said "thee" (the Father alone) "the only true God."
If the Father is the only true God, then by definition, Jesus is not God in the same sense the Father is. He can be the Son of God, the Messiah, the Savior, the Lord, the one through whom the Father works, but He cannot be "the only true God" if the Father alone holds that title.
The Word "Sent" Establishes Hierarchy
Jesus identifies Himself as the one "whom thou hast sent."
Can the sender and the sent be equal in authority?
If a president sends an ambassador, are they equal in authority? If a king sends a messenger, does the messenger have the same power as the king? If a father sends his son to represent him, are the father and son co-equal?
The very concept of being "sent" establishes that someone else is doing the sending, and that someone has the authority to send. Jesus repeatedly emphasizes this relationship:
"My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me."
"I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me."
"For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me."
Jesus consistently presents Himself as the sent one, acting on behalf of the Father, doing the Father's will, speaking the Father's words, exercising the Father's authority delegated to Him.
Jesus uses the language of representation, agency, and submission to higher authority: not co-equality.
Jesus's Other Testimonies About the Father
John 17:3 isn't an isolated statement. Throughout His ministry, Jesus testified that the Father is God and that He (Jesus) is the Father's Son, distinct from the Father, subordinate to the Father, sent by the Father.
"My Father is Greater Than I"
"Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I."
"My Father is greater than I." The Greek word (meizon) indicates superiority in rank and authority.
Trinitarian theology teaches that Jesus is "fully God" and "co-equal" with the Father. Jesus testified that the Father is greater.
"My God and Your God"
After His resurrection, Jesus appeared to Mary Magdalene and gave her a message for the disciples:
"Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God."
Jesus calls the Father "my God." This language of dependence and subordination appears throughout Scripture.
The Father is God. Jesus is the Son of God. The Father is Jesus's God, just as the Father is our God.
"The Son Shall Be Subject"
Paul, writing by inspiration, describes the ultimate culmination when Christ delivers the kingdom to the Father:
"Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him. And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all."
"Then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him."
The Son will be subject to the Father. Not co-reigning. Not co-equal. Subject. Under authority. Submitted.
Even in eternity, after all enemies are defeated, after death itself is destroyed, the Son remains in submission to the Father "that God may be all in all."
The Prayer Test: Can God Pray to Himself?
Perhaps the clearest evidence that Jesus and the Father are distinct beings with the Father holding ultimate authority is Jesus's prayer life.
Jesus prayed constantly. The Gospels show Him praying:
- At His baptism (Luke 3:21)
- Before choosing the twelve apostles (Luke 6:12)
- Before Peter's confession (Luke 9:18)
- At the Transfiguration (Luke 9:28-29)
- Before teaching the Lord's Prayer (Luke 11:1)
- For Peter specifically (Luke 22:32)
- In Gethsemane (Matthew 26:36-44)
- On the cross (Luke 23:34, 23:46)
- Throughout John 17 (His high priestly prayer)
To whom was Jesus praying?
Every prayer is addressed to "Father." The consistent pattern throughout the Gospels shows Jesus praying to the Father as a distinct being with supreme authority.
Gethsemane: The Ultimate Submission
The night before crucifixion, Jesus prayed in Gethsemane with such intensity that His sweat became like drops of blood:
"And he went a little farther, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt."
Jesus has a will. The Father has a will. Jesus's will differs from the Father's will ("let this cup pass from me"), but Jesus submits to the Father's will ("nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt").
Two distinct wills indicate two distinct beings. Jesus is the Son, perfectly submitted to the Father who is God.
Hebrews Describes Jesus's Prayers
"Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared; Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered."
Jesus offered prayers "unto him that was able to save him from death." The language indicates dependence on another being who possessed power to save.
The phrase "Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience" shows the Son learned obedience through suffering, a pattern consistent with Jesus being the Son of God, divine in nature but distinct from and submissive to the Father who is God.
The Historical Development of the Trinity Doctrine
If Jesus testified that the Father alone is God, and Jesus is His sent Son, how did the Trinity become Christian orthodoxy?
The answer is history, not Scripture.1 The characterization of the Trinity doctrine as a post-biblical development formulated by councils is a theological interpretation disputed by Trinitarian scholars. While the technical terminology of "Trinity" and "three persons, one substance" was indeed formalized at the councils of Nicaea (325 AD) and Constantinople (381 AD), Trinitarian theologians argue that the doctrine itself is biblically grounded and taught by the apostles, with early church fathers holding proto-Trinitarian views. The historical record shows diverse early Christian beliefs about Christ's nature, ranging from adoptionism to modalism to subordinationism to what would become orthodox Trinitarianism. This appendix presents the non-Trinitarian position as articulated through Jesus's own words in Scripture, acknowledging that sincere believers hold different interpretations of the same texts. The Catholic Encyclopedia acknowledges: "In Scripture there is as yet no single term by which the Three Divine Persons are denoted together." See "The Blessed Trinity," Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent, https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15047a.htm. [Theological interpretation - non-Trinitarian position acknowledged as minority view]
The Council of Nicaea (325 AD)
Nearly three centuries after Christ's resurrection, Emperor Constantine convened church bishops at Nicaea to resolve disputes over Christ's nature. The controversy: Was Christ created by the Father (as Arius taught) or eternally existent and "of one substance" with the Father (as Athanasius taught)?
The council sided with Athanasius, declaring in the Nicene Creed that Jesus is "Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father."2 First Council of Nicaea, Symbolum Nicaenum [Nicene Creed], 325 AD. The creed's original Greek and Latin text with English translation states: "We believe in one God the Father Almighty... And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father, only-begotten, that is, of the substance of the Father, God of God, Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten not made, of one substance with the Father." Preserved in writings of Eusebius of Caesarea, Athanasius (De decr. Nic. 37.2), and Socrates (H.E. 1.8.28-30). Available at: https://www.earlychurchtexts.com/public/creed_of_nicaea_325.htm and https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3801.htm.
What's missing: the Holy Spirit as a third co-equal person. The original Nicene Creed (325 AD) mentions the Holy Spirit only in passing, not as a distinct divine person.3 The Nicene Creed of 325 AD concludes simply with "And in the Holy Spirit" without elaboration on the Spirit's nature, divinity, or relationship to the Father and Son. The briefness reflects that the Council primarily addressed Christological disputes (Arianism) rather than pneumatology. Fuller articulation of the Holy Spirit's divinity came at the Council of Constantinople (381 AD). See "Creed of Nicaea 325 - Greek and Latin Text with English translation," Early Church Texts, https://www.earlychurchtexts.com/public/creed_of_nicaea_325.htm.
The Council of Constantinople (381 AD)
Fifty-six years later, another council expanded the creed to include the Holy Spirit as "the Lord and Giver of Life, who proceeds from the Father, who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified."4 First Council of Constantinople, Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed, 381 AD. Emperor Theodosius I convened this second ecumenical council to affirm Nicene orthodoxy and address the Macedonian heresy (denial of the Holy Spirit's divinity). The expanded creed states: "And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver of Life, who proceeds from the Father, who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified, who spoke by the prophets." See "First Council of Constantinople," Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent, https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04308a.htm.
The Trinity as it's taught today (three co-equal, co-eternal persons in one Godhead) was formulated by councils, not by Christ.5 The Catholic Encyclopedia acknowledges that critics "contend that the doctrine of the Trinity, as professed by the Church, is not contained in the New Testament, but that it was first formulated in the second century and received final approbation in the fourth" at the councils. While the encyclopedia defends the doctrine's biblical basis, it admits the terminology and formal definition developed through conciliar process. See "The Blessed Trinity," Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent, https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15047a.htm.
Why Does This Matter?
The earliest Christians debated Christ's nature, suggesting that Scripture's presentation of Jesus and His relationship to the Father was understood differently by various groups.
Scripture presents Jesus as the unique Son of God, begotten of the Father, given all authority by the Father, acting as the Father's agent, and ultimately subject to the Father. This pattern appears consistently throughout the New Testament.
Jesus testified: "And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent."
The Verse They Added: 1 John 5:7
The textual history of 1 John 5:7 reveals significant questions about the Trinitarian formula's scriptural foundation.
The King James Bible includes this text at 1 John 5:7:
"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."
This is called the "Johannine Comma" (comma meaning "clause" in Latin). It appears to be the clearest Trinitarian statement in the entire Bible.
There's one problem: It's not in the original manuscripts.
What textual scholars have established:6 See Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 2nd ed. (Stuttgart: German Bible Society/United Bible Societies, 1994), 647-649; Bart D. Ehrman, Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 2005), 81-82. The Johannine Comma appears in no Greek manuscript before the 16th century, and scholars universally recognize it as a later Latin interpolation.
- No Greek manuscript before 1516 AD contains this verse
- The earliest Greek text to include it was created by Erasmus after Catholic pressure, using a manuscript that scholars believe was fabricated to supply the missing verse
- It appears in no Greek church father's writings (they quoted 1 John extensively, never this verse)
- It first appears in Latin texts from the 4th century, inserted during the Trinitarian controversies
Even the translators of the New King James Version note in their margin that this verse is absent from the oldest and most reliable manuscripts.
The Johannine Comma's textual history indicates it was a later addition to support Trinitarian theology. Its absence from early manuscripts and insertion during the Trinitarian controversies suggests the biblical text was modified to align with conciliar doctrine.
Subordinationism Is Not Arianism
Rejecting the Trinity's "co-equal persons" formula does not make one an Arian. The distinction is critical.
Arius, a presbyter in Alexandria around 320 AD, taught that the Son was created, that there was a time when the Son did not exist. The Council of Nicaea condemned this as heresy, and rightly so. If Christ is a created being, He cannot redeem humanity. Only God Himself can bear the infinite weight of human sin and conquer death. Arianism reduces Jesus to a super-angel with delegated authority, glorious, yes, but incapable of salvation. This is the position held today by Jehovah's Witnesses and some Unitarian movements.
The biblical position is different. The Father-Son relationship is eternal. The Son is "begotten, not made" (as even the Nicene Creed affirms). "Begotten" means He derives His being from the Father, but He never began to exist. John 1:1 declares: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." No beginning to the Word's existence, He was already there "in the beginning." The Son is fully divine because He is eternally begotten of the Father, possessing the Father's nature by eternal generation, not by creation.
Jesus is subordinate to the Father in authority and role, not in nature or being. He testified, "my Father is greater than I" (John 14:28), and Paul affirms that the Son will ultimately be "subject unto him that put all things under him" (1 Corinthians 15:28). This is the biblical economy of salvation: the divine Son, eternally begotten, equal in nature but willingly subordinate in role to accomplish the Father's will. "The head of Christ is God" (1 Corinthians 11:3), not because Christ lacks divinity, but because He submits to the Father's authority.
The Trinity formula of "three co-equal persons" goes beyond Scripture by erasing this Father-Son hierarchy that Jesus repeatedly testified to. But rejecting Nicene co-equality is not the same as embracing Arius's created Christ. It is simply accepting what Jesus said: the Father alone is "the only true God" (John 17:3), and Jesus is His eternally begotten Son, divine, yes, but distinct from and subordinate to the Father in the biblical revelation of God's character and plan of redemption.
Addressing Common Objections
Those who hold the Trinity doctrine will point to certain verses that seem to support Jesus's full deity. Let's examine the most commonly cited passages and see whether they actually contradict Jesus's own testimony.
"In the Beginning Was the Word" (John 1:1)
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
Trinitarians cite this as proof of co-equality. But "the Word was with God" indicates distinction: you cannot be "with" yourself.
The Greek is revealing:
- "The Word was with the God" (ton theon - definite article, referring to the Father specifically)
- "And the Word was god" (theos - no definite article, referring to divine nature/quality)
The second use of "god" is qualitative, not identificational. John is saying the Word possessed divine nature, not that the Word was identical to "the God" (the Father).
John 1:18 clarifies: "No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him."
The "only begotten Son" declares the Father. He reveals God. He represents God. He is divine. But He is distinct from the Father who is God, begotten of Him.
Even the phrase "only begotten" (Greek monogenes) means "unique" or "one-of-a-kind born," indicating origin from the Father, not co-equality with the Father.
"My Lord and My God" (John 20:28)
"And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God."
When Thomas saw the risen Jesus, he exclaimed "My Lord and my God!" Trinitarians cite this as Thomas confessing Jesus's full deity.
This is Thomas's astonished exclamation, not a theological declaration. "God" (Greek theos) can refer to one representing God's authority; even human judges were called "gods" (Psalm 82:6, John 10:34-35). Jesus never claimed "the only true God" title. He gave that exclusively to the Father (John 17:3).
Even if Thomas was calling Jesus "God," it doesn't contradict the Father being THE God (ho theos). The New Testament consistently distinguishes between "the God" (the Father) and "god" (divine beings who represent the Father's authority).
Paul clarifies the hierarchy immediately after Jesus's resurrection:
"But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him."
One God = the Father. One Lord = Jesus Christ (the Son, the Messiah, the mediator).
"I AM" Statements (John 8:58)
"Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am."
Trinitarians argue that "I am" (ego eimi in Greek) is Jesus claiming the divine name from Exodus 3:14 when God said "I AM THAT I AM" to Moses.
But ego eimi is the Greek phrase meaning "I am." It appears hundreds of times in the New Testament in non-divine contexts. The blind man healed by Jesus said ego eimi (John 9:9) when identifying himself. He wasn't claiming to be God.
Jesus's statement in John 8:58 emphasizes His pre-existence, that He existed before Abraham. This proves His divine origin (He came from the Father before being born as a man), not that He is co-equal with the Father.
Jesus frequently contrasts His origin with the Father's supremacy:
- "I proceeded forth and came from God" (John 8:42)
- "I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me" (John 6:38)
- "The Father is greater than I" (John 14:28)
Pre-existence? Yes. Divine origin? Yes. Equal to the Father in authority? No. Jesus's own words say otherwise.
"Firstborn of All Creation" (Colossians 1:15)
"Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature."
Trinitarians argue "firstborn" means "preeminence" not "first created."
Jesus is "the image of the invisible God." An image represents something distinct from itself. "Firstborn" indicates priority in time: the firstborn son in Israel received the inheritance because he came first. The Father begat the Son "before all worlds," making Him the firstborn, the unique Son, the heir of all things (Hebrews 1:2).
Verse 18 repeats it: "And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence."
Jesus has preeminence: supremacy among created beings, authority delegated by the Father, the position of heir. But Hebrews 1:4 says He "became so much better than the angels." If Jesus "became" better, He experienced change and development, something the unchanging God (Malachi 3:6) does not experience.
Hebrews 1 - "Better Than Angels"
The entire first chapter of Hebrews contrasts Jesus with angels, showing He is superior to them. Jesus IS better than angels: He is the unique Son of God, the heir, the exact representation of the Father's nature (Hebrews 1:3), but He is not the Father Himself.
Hebrews 1:5 quotes God saying to Jesus: "Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee."
God has a Son. The Son was begotten ("this day" referring to eternity past, the begetting before time). The Father-Son relationship is real, not metaphorical. The Father is God. The Son is the begotten of God, divine, yes, but distinct from and subordinate to the Father.
Every verse Trinitarians cite can be understood consistently when you accept Jesus's own testimony: the Father alone is the "only true God," and Jesus is the unique, divine, begotten Son who perfectly represents the Father and exercises the Father's delegated authority. No contradiction, no mystery requiring three-in-one formulas. Just a Father who is God, and a Son who is the perfect image and representative of that God.
The Connection to the Sabbath: Same Councils, Same Apostasy
Why does the Trinity doctrine matter in a book about the Sabbath and the mark of the beast?
Because the same power that changed who we worship also changed when we worship, and both changes happened through the same corrupt council system within decades of each other.
Nicaea 325 AD: Defining God's Nature
Emperor Constantine, a sun-worshiper who wasn't even baptized until his deathbed, convened and presided over the Council of Nicaea. Under his authority and political pressure, bishops formulated the doctrine that Jesus is "of one substance with the Father": the foundation of Trinitarian theology.
The council was about power, not truth. Those who disagreed (like Arius and his followers) were declared heretics, exiled, and eventually persecuted. Constantine wanted religious unity for political stability, and he got it by enforcing a creed through imperial decree.
Laodicea 364 AD: Changing God's Day
Only 39 years later, the Council of Laodicea (convened by the same church-state system) issued Canon 29:7 Synod of Laodicea, Canon 29, AD 364. "Christians must not judaize by resting on the Sabbath, but must work on that day, rather honouring the Lord's Day; and, if they can, resting then as Christians. But if any shall be found to be judaizers, let them be anathema from Christ." This regional synod in Phrygia Pacatiana forbade Sabbath observance under penalty of being declared "anathema" (cursed/excommunicated). The exact date is debated, with scholars placing it between 343-381 AD, approximately 18-56 years after Nicaea. See "Synod of Laodicea," New Advent, https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3806.htm.
"Christians must not judaize by resting on the Sabbath, but must work on that day, rather honouring the Lord's Day; and, if they can, resting then as Christians. But if any shall be found to be judaizers, let them be anathema from Christ."
The Sabbath (God's memorial of Creation, sealed in the Fourth Commandment) was officially banned. Sunday was officially enforced. Those who kept Saturday faced being declared "anathema" (cursed).
The Pattern: Daniel 7:25
"And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws."
The little horn power (papal Rome) would "change times and laws."
- Times = the Sabbath (the appointed time of worship: Saturday changed to Sunday)
- Laws = God's nature (the law of who God is: one God, the Father, changed to three-in-one Trinity)
Both emerged from the same councils, the same church-state system, the same emperor-enforced creeds, the same persecution of dissenters, the same corruption.
Nicaea changed the "law" of God's nature. Laodicea changed the "time" of God's worship.
Both within 39 years. Both under the authority of the same apostate church system merging with civil power. Both contrary to Scripture. Both enforced by threat of exile, anathema, and eventually death.
If the Roman Catholic Church Changed One, Why Trust the Other?
The question every Christian must confront:
If the same councils that banned the Sabbath also formulated the Trinity, why do Protestants who reject papal authority on every other doctrine still hold to the Roman Catholic Church's Trinity while rejecting the Roman Catholic Church's Sunday?
Either both are biblical, or both are suspect.
The evidence shows:
- Jesus never taught Trinity. He taught the Father is the "only true God" (John 17:3).
- Jesus never changed the Sabbath. He kept the seventh day (Luke 4:16) and said the Sabbath was made for man (Mark 2:27), not abolished.
The Roman Catholic Church changed both through councils, adding the Trinity and substituting Sunday. Protestants rejected papal authority in theory, but in practice kept the Roman Catholic Church's Trinity and the Roman Catholic Church's Sunday.
The Remnant Reject Both Counterfeits
Revelation 12:17 identifies the remnant as those who "keep the commandments of God" (including the Fourth Commandment, the Saturday Sabbath) "and have the testimony of Jesus Christ" (the testimony that the Father alone is God).
The remnant don't pick and choose which Catholic doctrines to keep. They return to Scripture:
- The Father is God. Jesus is His begotten Son.
- The Sabbath is Saturday. Sunday is the Roman Catholic Church's substitute.
Both trace to the same apostasy, the same councils, the same corruption.
The remnant recognize the pattern and return to what Jesus actually taught.
Why This Testimony Matters for the Remnant
Revelation 12:17 identifies the remnant with two characteristics:
"And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ."
The remnant (1) keep the commandments of God, and (2) have the testimony of Jesus Christ.
We've established that "keep the commandments" includes the Sabbath, the seal of God that the Roman Catholic Church changed to Sunday.
But what is "the testimony of Jesus Christ"?
Revelation 19:10 explains:
"And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See thou do it not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy."
"The testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy."
The remnant hold fast to the testimony Jesus gave, His witness about who the Father is, who He Himself is, and what truth is.
Jesus testified that the Father is the only true God. Babylon teaches Trinity, three co-equal persons. The remnant believe Jesus's testimony.
Jesus testified that He is the Son sent by the Father. Babylon teaches He is "God the Son," co-equal and co-eternal. The remnant believe Jesus's testimony.
The testimony of Jesus Christ separates the remnant from Babylon.
This isn't about claiming Trinitarians aren't saved or sincere. Many genuine believers hold the Trinity doctrine, taught it from childhood, never questioned it because everyone around them believed it.
But the remnant identified in Revelation don't hold majority opinions. They hold Jesus's testimony, even when that testimony contradicts councils, creeds, and centuries of tradition.
When you read John 17:3, whose interpretation do you trust: Jesus's plain words, or theologians explaining that "only" doesn't really mean only, and "sent" doesn't really mean subordination, and somehow three equals one in a mystery beyond comprehension?
The remnant believe what Jesus said: The Father is the only true God. Jesus Christ is the one the Father sent.
It's that simple. It's that clear. It's that controversial.
And it's one of the identifying marks of the remnant.
Questions to Answer
Jesus said the Father is the "only true God" and that He Himself was "sent." Can the one sent be equal to the one sending? Can "only" include three?
If I send you to deliver a message, are we equal in authority? If the Father is the "only" true God, how many true Gods exist? One or three?
When you pray "Our Father" as Jesus taught, are you praying to one Person or three? When Jesus prayed to the Father in Gethsemane, was He praying to Himself?
The three-in-one formula creates a logical tension here. Jesus prayed to the Father. He never prayed to Himself. He never prayed to "the Trinity." The Father is God. Jesus is His Son. Prayer assumes a relationship between two distinct beings.
If Jesus testified that the Father alone is God, and churches teach three co-equal persons are God, it is a moment to ask whose testimony one is believing: Jesus's or the councils of men.
Nicaea 325 AD contradicts John 17:3. Athanasius contradicts Jesus's own words. Whose authority matters: church tradition or Christ's testimony?
What does it cost you to call the Father "the only true God" as Jesus did? Why is that statement controversial if it's Scripture?
The phrase "The Father is the only true God" appears in John 17:3 as Jesus's own words. If that statement feels like heresy, the question becomes: Does it contradict your denomination, or does it contradict Scripture?
If Jesus is not God, how can John 1:1 say "the Word was God" and John 1:14 identify that Word as Jesus who "was made flesh"?
The Greek distinguishes between "the God" (ho theos, the Father) and "god/divine" (theos without the article, describing nature, not identity). "The Word was God" describes Christ's divine nature; "the Word was with the God" distinguishes Him from the Father. The Son possesses divinity through the Father who "gave to the Son to have life in himself" (John 5:26). Derived divinity is not independent deity. The Father remains the source; the Son remains the Son.
If Jesus is not God, why didn't He correct Thomas when Thomas called Him "My Lord and my God" in John 20:28, and why did He accept worship repeatedly?
Thomas's confession came after the resurrection, recognizing Jesus as the divine Son through whom the Father acts. Jesus accepted worship as the Father's appointed representative: "He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him" (John 5:23). The Son has the Father's name, authority, and glory given to Him (John 17:11, 22). Yet even with this exalted status, Jesus still called the Father "my God" after the resurrection (John 20:17). If Jesus has a God, how can He be that God?