Tzemach Institute has recently come under criticism for its position expressed on the subject of the Mystical Holy Triniy. Unfortunately, this doctrine has become the litmus test for determination of orthodoxy in the Christian religion. We will clarify our position here as spelled out in the book Hebraic Roots.

Some may ask, why challenge a position that has been held for almost 1,600 years and is nearly universally accepted in the Christian world?

Some may ask, why challenge a position that has been held for almost 1,600 years and is nearly universally accepted in the Christian world? The answer seems to me to be apparent when we consider the facts of the matter. You have heard it said that the expression, the Holy Trinity, or more accurately, the Mystical Holy Trinity, is not mentioned in the Bible. This is a true statement, yet, it can be argued that the concept is discernible in the Scriptures. There is an element of truth in this statement which I will address subsequently in this article. But to really appreciate the meaning of the term the Mystical Holy Trinity, we must investigate the writings of Augustine in the fifty century A.D.

Augustine, perhaps more than any other individual, is responsible for the general acceptance of the doctrine of the Mystical Holy Trinity. We want to include here a statement made by Augustine on this subject. Augustine wrote:

"This doctrine, that the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit intimate a divine unity of one and the same substance in an indivisible equality; and therefore that they are not three Gods, but one God although the Father hath begotten the Son, and so He who is the Father is not the Son; and the Son is begotten by the Father, and so He who is the Son is not the Father; and the Holy Spirit is neither the Father nor the Son, but only the Spirit of the Father and of the Son, Himself also coequal with the Father and the Son, and pertaining to the unity of the Trinity" (Augustine, On The Trinity, chapter IV).

This must be one of the most obscure statements one could possibly imagine. There is no telling what Augustine had in mind when he advanced this argument. Nevertheless, Augustine's formulation of the doctrine of the Mystical Holy Trinity has become the accepted view in Christendom.

The foundation for this view evolved gradually in the post-Biblical era of the second, third, fourth and fifth centuries A.D. The council at Nicea, 325 A.D., advanced the doctrine that the Father and the Son were consubstantial in an effort to combat the influence of the unscriptural views of Arius. The Second General Council of the Church, 381 A.D., held at Constantinople, included the Holy Spirit as coequal and consubstantial with the Father and the Son. This laid the groundwork for Augustine.

The problem, most simply stated, is that the position taken by the first and second General Councils ... are in themselves unscriptural.

The problem, most simply stated, is that the position taken by the first and second General Councils, while probably considered necessary to combat the heresies of the day, are in themselves unscriptural. The most fundamental and defining declaration of the Name of God in the Scriptures is found in Exodus 3:14. Here God declares His is name to Moses:

"And God said to Moses, 'I Am Who I Am'; and He said, 'Thus you shall say to the sons of Israel, "I Am has sent me to you."'" Exodus 3.14

The verb that is translated "I Am" is the future tense of the state of being verb and should be translated "I Will Be". Virtually all Christian translators follow this traditional translation although some do add the proper translation in their footnotes. There is no question about the tense of the verb and, hence, its proper translation.

The significance of the translation of this most fundamental name of God is great. If we declare that God's name is "I Am Who I Am", we may say that He is eternal and self existent. If we say that God's name is "I Will Be That Which I Will Be, we must also say that He cannot be defined. Therefore, based on this great declaration of the name of God, we conclude that He cannot be defined. This is exactly what the scholars of the second through fifth centuries did. They ventured far beyond Biblical revelation and defined God to be the Mystical Holy Trinity.

Did the apostles speak of this Mystical Holy Trinity? Actually, what the writers of the New Testament did was write of the divine revelation that thev had directly experienced. They obviously knew the Father and referred to Him as the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob (Acts 3:13). They had been directly trained by Jesus and were witnesses of His resurrection. They knew Him as the Son, the only begotten of the Father. Finally, they had received the Holy Spirit on the day of Shavuot (Pentecost) and had walked in the anointing of the Holy Spirit. They freely wrote of their direct experience with the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, yet without defining the relationship of each with the other. They never attempted to define God because they knew the name of God is "I Will Be That Which I Will Be".

So we conclude that it is appropriate to say that in the New Testament era we may experience God in terms of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit but it is inappropriate to say, as the scholars of the second through fifth centuries did, that this defines God.

We would like to challenge you to think through this subject before agreeing with those who either haven't thought out this problem sufficiently or are simply not born again, and hence, are unable to understand things discerned by the Holy Spirit and have arrived at philosophical conclusions that are spiritually incorrect.

[ Published: May 2001 ]