Nontrinitarianism

• Christadelphians hold the unitarian belief that although Jesus is the Son of God, this is only a relational title toward the Father who alone is truly God. Christ's personhood, therefore, is human not divine,[18] (believing this to be necessary in order to save humans from their sins[19]). The "Holy Spirit" terminology in the Bible is interpreted as referring to God's impersonal power,[20] or God's character/mind[21] (depending on the context).
• Church of God General Conference (Abrahamic Faith).[22]
• The Cooneyites is a Christian sect that split from the Two by Twos in 1928 following Edward Cooney's excommunication from the main group; they deny the Living Witness Doctrine.
• Iglesia ni Cristo (Tagalog for Church of Christ) views Jesus as human but endowed by God with attributes not found in ordinary humans, though lacking attributes found in God. They contend that it is God's will to worship Jesus.[23] INC rejects the Trinity as heresy, adopting a version of unitarianism.
• Jehovah's Witnesses (and other Bible Student movement groups such as the Associated Bible Students[24][25][26]) teach that God the Father is uniquely Almighty God. They consider Jesus to be "the First-begotten Son", God's only direct creation, and the very first creation by God. They give relative "worship" or "obeisance" (in the sense of homage, as to a king) to Christ,[27] pray through him as God's only high priest, consider him to be their Mediator and Messiah. They believe that only the Father is without beginning, that the Father is greater than the Son in all things, and that only the Father is worthy of "sacred service" (latria). They believe that the Son had a beginning, and was brought forth at a certain point, as "the firstborn of all creation" and "the only-begotten", as the pre-existent Michael and the "Angel of the LORD" of Exodus, that he left heaven to be born as a perfect human, as the Jewish Messiah and Redeemer, and that after his ascension to heaven he resumed his pre-human identity, but exalted to God's right hand until the last days.[28][29] They do not believe that the Holy Spirit is an actual person, but consider it to be God's divine active force.[30]
• The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints teaches that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are distinct beings that are not united in substance, a view sometimes called social trinitarianism. They believe the three individual deities are "one" in will or purpose, as Jesus was "one" with his disciples, and that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit constitute a single godhead united in purpose.[31] Latter-day Saints believe that Christ is the Firstborn of the Father,[32] that he is subordinate to God the Father (Matthew 26:39),[33] and that Christ created the universe.[33][34] Latter-day Saints do not subscribe to the ideas that Christ was unlike the Father in substance,[35] that the Father could not appear on earth,[36] or that Christ was adopted by the Father,[32] as presented in Arianism.[34][37] Latter-day Saints assert that both God and the resurrected Christ have perfected glorified, physical bodies,[38] but do not otherwise classify deity in terms of substance. While Latter-day Saints regard God the Father as the supreme being and literal father of the spirits of all humankind, they also teach that Christ and the Holy Spirit are equally divine and that they share in the Father's "comprehension of all things".[39]
• The Members Church of God International believes in the divinity of Christ but rejects the doctrine of Trinity.
• Oneness Pentecostalism is a subset of Pentecostalism that believes God is only one person, and that he manifests himself in different ways, faces, or "modes": "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (or Holy Ghost) are different designations for the one God. God is the Father. God is the Holy Spirit. The Son is God manifest in flesh. The term Son always refers to the Incarnation, and never to deity apart from humanity."[40] Oneness Pentecostals believe that Jesus was "Son" only when he became flesh on earth, but was the Father prior to being made human. They refer to the Father as the "Spirit" and the Son as the "Flesh". Oneness Pentecostals reject the Trinity doctrine, viewing it as pagan and unscriptural, and hold to the Jesus' Name doctrine with respect to baptisms. Oneness Pentecostals are often referred to as "Modalists" or "Sabellians" or "Jesus Only".[41]
• Denominations within the Sabbatarian tradition (Armstrongism) believe that Christ the Son and God the Father are co-eternal, but do not teach that the Holy Spirit is a being or person. Armstrong theology holds that God is a "Family" that expands eventually, that "God reproduces Himself", but that originally there was a co-eternal "Duality", God and the Word, rather than a "Trinity".
• Swedenborgianism holds that the Trinity exists in one person, the Lord God Jesus Christ. The Father, the being or soul of God, was born into the world and put on a body from Mary. Throughout his life, Jesus put away all human desires and tendencies until he was completely divine. After his resurrection, he influences the world through the Holy Spirit, which is his activity. In this view, Jesus Christ is the one God; the Father as to his soul, the Son as to his body, and the Holy Spirit as to his activity in the world.
• Numerous Unitarian Christian organizations exist around the world, the oldest of which is the Unitarian Church of Transylvania. An umbrella organization for these groups is the International Council of Unitarians and Universalists, though only some members and affiliates of that body consider themselves exclusively or predominantly Christian. In the United States, "Unitarian" often refers to members and congregations within the Unitarian Universalist Association (UUA), a non-Christian group formed in 1961 from the merger of the American Unitarian Association with the Universalist Church of America.[42][43] Though both of these predecessor groups were originally Christian, the UUA does not have a shared creed and does not identify as a Christian Unitarian organization.[44][45]

Most nontrinitarians take the position that the doctrine of the earliest form of Christianity was nontrinitarian, but that early Christianity was either strictly Unitarian or Binitarian, or Modalist as in the case of the Montanists, Marcionites, and Christian Gnostics. For them, early Christianity eventually changed after the edicts of Emperor Constantine I and his sentence pronounced on Arius, which was later followed by the declaration by Emperor Theodosius I in the Edict of Thessalonica, cunctos populos of February 380 that Christianity as defined in the Nicene Creed was the official religion of the Roman Empire. A year later, the Second Ecumenical Council confirmed this in a revised Creed. Nontrinitarians dispute the veracity of the Nicene Creed based on its adoption nearly 300 years after the life of Jesus as a result of conflict within pre-Nicene early Christianity during a dramatic shift in Christianity's status.

The First Council of Nicaea depicted with Arius beneath the feet of Emperor Constantine and the bishops

Although nontrinitarian beliefs continued and were dominant among some peoples—for example, the Lombards, Ostrogoths, Visigoths and Vandals—for hundreds of years, the Trinity doctrine eventually gained prominence in the Roman Empire. Nontrinitarians typically argue that early nontrinitarian beliefs, such as Arianism, were systematically suppressed (often to the point of death).[46] After the First Council of Nicaea, Roman Emperor Constantine I issued an edict against Arius' writings, which included systematic book burning.[47] In spite of the decree, Constantine ordered the readmission of Arius to the church, removed the bishops (including Athanasius) who upheld the teaching of Nicaea,[48] allowed Arianism to grow within the Empire and to spread to Germanic tribes on the frontier,[49] and was himself baptized by an Arian bishop, Eusebius of Nicomedia.[50] His successors as Christian emperors promoted Arianism, until Theodosius I came to the throne in 379 and supported Nicene Christianity.

The Easter letter that Athanasius issued in 367, when the Eastern Empire was ruled by the Arian Emperor Valens, specified the books that belong to the Old Testament and the New Testament, together with seven other books to be read "for instruction in the word of godliness"; it also excluded what Athanasius called apocryphal writings, falsely presented as ancient.[51] Elaine Pagels writes: "In AD 367, Athanasius, the zealous bishop of Alexandria... issued an Easter letter in which he demanded that Egyptian monks destroy all such unacceptable writings, except for those he specifically listed as 'acceptable' even 'canonical'—a list that constitutes the present 'New Testament'".[52][53]

Nontrinitarians see the Nicene Creed and the results of the Council of Chalcedon as essentially political documents, resulting from the subordination of true doctrine to state interests by leaders of the Catholic Church, so that the church became, in their view, an extension of the Roman Empire. Nontrinitarians (both Modalists and Unitarians) assert that Athanasius and others at Nicaea adopted Greek Platonic philosophy and concepts, and incorporated them in their views of God and Christ.[54]

The author H. G. Wells, later famous for his contribution to science-fiction, wrote in The Outline of History: "We shall see presently how later on all Christendom was torn by disputes about the Trinity. There is no evidence that the apostles of Jesus ever heard of the Trinity, at any rate from him."[55]

The question of why such a central doctrine to the Christian faith would never have been explicitly stated in scripture or taught in detail by Jesus himself was sufficiently important to 16th century historical figures such as Michael Servetus to lead them to argue the question. The Geneva City Council, in accord with the judgment of the cantons of Zürich, Bern, Basel, and Schaffhausen, condemned Servetus to be burned at the stake for this and his opposition to infant baptism.

The Encyclopædia of Religion and Ethics describes the five stages that led to the formulation of the doctrine of the Trinity:[56]

1. The acceptance of the pre-human existence of Jesus as the (middle-platonic) Logos, namely, as the medium between the transcendent sovereign God and the created cosmos. The doctrine of Logos was accepted by the Apologists and by other Fathers of the 2nd and 3rd centuries, such as Justin the Martyr, Hippolytus, Tertullian, Ireneus, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Lactantius, and in the 4th century by Arius;
2. The doctrine of the timeless generation of the Son from the Father as it was articulated by Origen in his effort to support the ontological immutability of God, that he is ever-being a father and a creator. The doctrine of the timeless generation was adopted by Athanasius of Alexandria;
3. The acceptance of the idea that the son of God is of the same transcendent nature (homoousios) as his father. This position was declared in the Nicene Creed, which specifically states the son of God is as immutable as his father;
4. The acceptance that the Holy Spirit also has ontological equality as a third person in a divine Trinity and the final Trinitarian terminology by the teachings of the Cappadocian Fathers;
5. The addition of the Filioque to the Nicene Creed, as accepted by the Roman Catholic Church.

By 1530, following the Protestant Reformation, and the German Peasants' War of 1524–1525, large areas of Northern Europe were Protestant, and forms of nontrinitarianism began to surface among some "Radical Reformation" groups, particularly Anabaptists. The first recorded English antitrinitarian was John Assheton (1548), an Anglican priest. The Italian Anabaptist "Council of Venice" (1550) and the trial of Michael Servetus (1553) marked the clear emergence of markedly antitrinitarian Protestants. Though the only organised nontrinitarian churches were the Polish Brethren who split from the Calvinists (1565, expelled from Poland 1658), and the Unitarian Church of Transylvania (founded 1568). Nonconformists, Dissenters and Latitudinarians in Britain were often Arians or Unitarians, and the Doctrine of the Trinity Act 1813 allowed nontrinitarian worship in Britain. In America, Arian and Unitarian views were also found among some Millennialist and Adventist groups, though the Unitarian Church itself began to decline in numbers and influence after the 1870s.[57][58]

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, 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."[59] 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."[60] 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".[61] 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 in the Old Testament: "Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord" (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."[62] 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."[63]

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 I in 325 and Constantinople 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."[2]

Raymond E. Brown (1928–1988), American Catholic priest and Trinitarian, wrote that Mark 10:18, Matthew 27:46, John 20:17, Ephesians 1:17, 2 Corinthians 1:3, 1 Peter 1:3, John 17:3, 1 Corinthians 8:6, Ephesians 4:4-6, 1 Corinthians 12:4-6, 2 Corinthians 13:14, 1 Timothy 2:5, John 14:28, Mark 13:32, Philippians 2:5-10, and 1 Corinthians 15:24-28 are "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"; that Gal 2:20, Acts 20:28, John 1:18, Colossians 2:2, 2 Thessalonians 1:12, 1John 5:20, Romans 9:5, and 2 Peter 1:1 are "texts where, by reason of textual variants or syntax, the use of 'God' for Jesus is dubious"; and that Hebrews 1:8-9, John 1:1, and John 20:28 are "texts where clearly Jesus is called God".[64]

The Septuagint translate אלוהים‎ (Elohim) as θεος (Theos).[65] At Deuteronomy 6:4 (the Shema Yisrael, quoted by Jesus at Mark 12:29), the plural form of the Hebrew word "God" (Elohim) is used, generally understood to denote majesty, excellence and the superlative.[66] 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".[67] 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.[68][69]

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.[70][71][72][73] 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 of theos is 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.[74][75][76] Others argue that the Greek should be translated as "and the Logos was divine" (with theos as an adjective), wherein the Logos is interpreted as God's "plan" or "reasoning" for salvation. According to Modalists, the Logos 'becoming flesh' refers to the "plan" or "eternal mind" of God being manifested in the birth of the man Jesus rather than the incarnation of a pre-existent Jesus.

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 John 17:21,[77] 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.[77]

John 20:28–29—"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. Another possible answer is that Jesus himself said, "Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?" (John 10:34) referring to Psalm 82:6–8. The word "gods" in verse 6 and "God" in verse 8 is the same Hebrew word "'elohim",[78] 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",[79] and can also refer to powers and potentates, in general, or as "God, god, gods, rulers, judges or angels",[78] and as "divine ones, goddess, godlike one".[80] 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—"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 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.[81]

Philippians 2:5–6—"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"].[82] 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."[83] 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.[84] 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.[85][86]

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 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.[87]

"The term 'Trinity' is not in the Bible",[88] and some nontrinitarians use this as an argument to state 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 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 of terms or phrases not found in the Bible; multiple "persons" in relation to God, the terms "God the Son", "God-Man", "God the Holy Spirit", "eternal Son", and "eternally begotten". While the Trinitarian term hypostasis is found in the Bible, it is used only once in reference to God ^{[Heb 1:3]} 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.

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".[89] Nontrinitarians accept what Pier Franco Beatrice wrote: "The main thesis of this paper is that homoousios came straight from Constantine's 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 Creed of Nicaea."[90]

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.[91][92] 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.'[2][59][93]

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 Father and the Son, but not to the Holy Spirit.

Groups with Unitarian theology such as Polish Socinians, the 18th–19th-century Unitarian Church and Christadelphians consider the Holy Spirit to be an aspect of God's power rather than a person.[94] Christadelphians believe that the phrase Holy Spirit refers to God's power or character, depending on the context.[21] 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.[95]

Groups with Binitarian theology, such as 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 emanates from Them throughout the entire universe."[96]

Oneness Pentecostalism, as with other 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.[97][98][99] 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.[100]

In the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the Holy Ghost (usually synonymous with Holy Spirit)[101] is considered to be the third distinct member of the Godhead (Father, Son and Holy Ghost),[102] and to have a body of "spirit",[103] which makes him unlike the Father and the Son who are said to have bodies "as tangible as man's".[104] According to LDS doctrine, the Holy Spirit is believed to be a person,[104][105] with a body of spirit, able to pervade all worlds.[106]

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).[106] 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 Latter Day Saint sects, most notably the Community of Christ (the second largest Latter Day Saint denomination), the Church of Christ (Temple Lot),[107] and derived groups, follow a traditional Protestant trinitarian theology.

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.[108]

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.

Advocates of the "Hellenic influences" argument attempt to trace the influence of Greek philosophers, such as Plato or Aristotle, who, they say, taught an essential "threeness" of the Ultimate Reality, and also the concept of "eternal derivation", that is, "a birth without a becoming". They say that theologians of the 4th century AD, such as Athanasius of Alexandria, interpreted the Bible through a Middle Platonist and later Neoplatonist filter, mixing Greek pagan philosophy with the biblical concepts of God and Christ. These advocates point to what they see as similarities between Hellenistic philosophy and post-Apostolic Christianity, by examining the following factors:

In his Introduction to the 1964 book Meditations, the Anglican priest Maxwell Staniforth discussed the profound influence of Stoic philosophy on Christianity. In particular:

Again in the doctrine of the Trinity, the ecclesiastical conception of Father, Word, and Spirit finds its germ in the different Stoic names of the Divine Unity. Thus Seneca, writing of the supreme Power which shapes the universe, states, 'This Power we sometimes call the All-ruling God, sometimes the incorporeal Wisdom, sometimes the holy Spirit, sometimes Destiny.' The Church had only to reject the last of these terms to arrive at its own acceptable definition of the Divine Nature; while the further assertion 'these three are One', which the modern mind finds paradoxical, was no more than commonplace to those familiar with Stoic notions.[125]