Possible Duplicate:
Biblical basis for the doctrine of the Trinity

I've heard of the Trinity multiple times and under the basis of it.

He is one God, but with three personalities. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

But nowhere do I ever see the word Trinity mentioned in the Bible. If I'm going to believe in a God, wouldn't his name or "nickname" at least be listed once (If that makes any sense)? God has many names listed throughout the Bible, but never is Trinity listed. If the Trinity is the basis of who my God and what he is, wouldn't that term of that basis be defined? It's not like the Bible doesn't describe Him. God is omnipotent, all-powerful, etc. God has been given many names and titles, and has been defined and described of who and what he is, but I've never seen the Trinity defined.

I also never even see anyone get baptized in the names of the father, son, and holy spirit. Paul baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and was never "corrected" by God.

Doing a little Google search, I see that the Trinity was introduced years ago by the Roman Catholic church to settle a dispute between the Christians and paganists (sp?). (Long story short).

I would have added more tags, but wasn't allowed to add new tags.

  • FYI, In every baptism I've ever conducted, and just about every baptism I seen, the celebrant says "I baptise you in the name of the Father ... and of the Son ... and of the Holy Spirit." Those are the names of the persons of the Godhood. It is a trinity, but you are not baptised "in the name of the trinity" Commented Jan 17, 2013 at 22:02

4 Answers 4


Jesus himself said to baptize that way:

Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, (Matthew 28:19 ESV)

The word "trinity" is not a name or nickname, merely an adjective that describes the fact that there are three distinct persons (not personalities) that together are God.


The Trinity is not a name of God. It is a doctrine that describes the relationship of the three distinct persons of the godhead.

The term is a construct that explains this paradox. That answer shows how we know each member of the Trinity is god, and that they are all one, and yet three.


Well, once can't distinctly blame the "Roman" Catholic Church for this, it's certainly in the Apostle's Creed which would predate the Protestant reformation and nearly coincide with the final compilation of the Bible in the 3rd century.

Check out the table of creeds in the old Catholic Encyclopedia at newadvent.org for instances of Father, Son and Holy Spirit (or Holy Ghost).

Catholics believe the Trinity is part of Sacred Tradition, not Sacred Scripture. Sacred Tradition is the other half of Jesus' revealed truth. It's revealed through the Church that Christ established. But it's just a natural extension of a deep understanding of the teachings of the Apostles.

The Old Testament is littered with references to God the Father (Who did Moses talk to?) and God the Holy Spirit (What blew over the waters) and even God the Son (What's in the Ark of the Covenant) and in the New Testament Jesus reveals what all these things really mean.

But, 3 Persons 1 God is the only suitable interpretation that leaves us a monotheistic religion. 1 Person 1 God would make us Muslims 1 Person multiple Gods would made us Buddhists. The Father loves the Son and that love is the Holy Spirit, that makes us Christians.


First of all, I wonder why some Christians are concerned with the true name of the Father and our elder brother Jesus. If the Hebrew names of God and master Jesus are true, why is it a very controversial topic? This verse is very clear:


(13) And Moses said unto God, Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say unto them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is his name? what shall I say unto them? (14) And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you. (Exodus 3:13–14 King James Version)


And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins. (Matthew 1:21 KJV)

31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS. (Luke 1:31 KJV)

Why Is Master Jesus Only a Mere Man?

Do you know why? Please read these verses first.

Matthew 8:20 (KJV)

20 And Jesus saith unto him, The foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have nests; but the Son of man hath not where to lay his head.

Matthew 11:19 (KJV)

19 The Son of man came eating and drinking, and they say, Behold a man gluttonous, and a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners. But wisdom is justified of her children.

Matthew 12:32 (KJV)

32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.

Matthew 16:13 (KJV)

13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?

Matthew 17:22 (KJV)

22 And while they abode in Galilee, Jesus said unto them, The Son of man shall be betrayed into the hands of men:

John 10:23 (KJV)

23 But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come.

Then read this important verse.

Numbers 23:19 (KJV)

19 God is not a man, that He should lie, Nor a son of man, that He should repent; Has He said, and will He not do it? Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good?

The man Jesus learned the things he suffered.

Hebrews 5:8 (KJV)

8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;

  • 1
    This is completely out of context. Perhaps you should see this: tedmontgomery.com/bblovrvw/JesusGod/index.html
    – Josiah
    Commented Jan 17, 2013 at 21:28
  • 4
    For your information I would like to point out that Jesus is indeed a man - virtually all Christians agree on this, including those that believe in the Trinity. However what you are missing is all the scriptures that point out that he is also God. Commented Jan 17, 2013 at 21:37
  • I believe this is a Jehovah's witness perspective. If it were labelled as such, it would improve the answer - although since JW's reject the trinity, it would probably still be difficult to answer. Please don't think we don't welcome JW's. Quite the contrary. We just need answers to actually answer the question and identify their perspectives. Commented Jan 18, 2013 at 13:31
  • 1
    The problem with taking "son of man" from Numbers and conflating it with Jesus' title in the Gospels are several. 1) the phrase changed meaning over the years. At first, it meant "human being." Then it was used to refer to the prophet Ezekiel. In the Intertestamental Period, it became a title for the Messiah. It did not mean just "human being." 2) Mixing the verses confuses God the Father and God the Son. God the Father (who this verse refers to) was never incarnated, so He would not be a Son of Man under any definition. God the Son was incarnated, and was a Son of Man and the Son of Man.
    – Frank Luke
    Commented Jan 18, 2013 at 15:32
  • 1
    @Epitorial Check out the answer to this question: christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/4464/… Commented Feb 11, 2013 at 14:33

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .