We turn now to who Jesus truly is—according to what the Bible does say.

The first thing to recognize is the difference between what the Bible talks about and what it does not. Trinitarianism is obsessed with ontology—what God is made of, what substance the persons share, and how the natures relate. The Bible is obsessed with relationship—who God is to us, and who Jesus is in relation to the Father and to us. This relationship is reflected in the very words that distinguish the Father from His Son, and His Spirit as well.

That doesn’t mean the Bible is silent on ontology, because it is not. The issue is, in both cases, the Trinitarians have obscured the truth and overlaid their philosophy-influenced concepts upon Biblical words to come up with a view of God that is completely foreign to the Bible.

The biblical doctrines that fill the space the Trinity falsely occupies are numerous, and together they present a Jesus who is not less glorious than the Trinitarian version, but far more so. These are not abstract theological categories. The major difference from the Trinity in all of them is that they are relational realities.

God’s Nature According to God: Incorporeal and Immaterial

“Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and traded the glory of the incorruptible God for the likeness of an image of corruptible man…” (Romans 1:22–23)

Trinitarianism cannot define itself without the language of substance. Tertullian himself admitted as much when he wrote that without first assigning God a material substance, it is impossible “to make two,” Father and Son. And he said that, in defense of the “two god” system, which the majority of believers were “startled” by, because it resembled the world’s plurality of gods. That substance language did not come from Scripture. It came from Stoic and Aristotelian metaphysics.

“…Certainly I…allow Him to be really a substantive being…and so be able (as being constituted second to God the Father,) to make two, the Father and the Son, God and the Word… I…contend that nothing empty and void could have come forth from God…so great a substance…has produced such mighty substances: for…he Himself…made things which are solid, and…things which are full, and…which have body.” —Tertullian, Against Praxeas, 7

“In Stoic metaphysics, existence is defined by body; there is no incorporeal reality. The word “spirit” designates a bodily reality which is of the purest sort. Thus, in the Stoic reading, the Christian Scriptures, inasmuch as they describe God as spirit, were interpreted to support a corporeal conception of God.” —Widdicombe, 15.

Tertullian read the scriptures through the lens of Stoic philosophy instead of Biblical truth.

The Bible, by contrast, describes God’s nature in entirely non-material terms. Consider how God defines Himself:

“God is love.” (1 John 4:8)

Love is not a substance. It is an attitude in action (see James 2:16). And this is precisely how the Bible consistently describes God—not as a material being whose essence can be divided into persons, but as a non-corporeal reality known entirely through what He does and how He relates. “Don’t I fill heaven and earth?” says Yahweh (Jeremiah 23:24).

Solomon affirmed this when he said: “Behold, heaven and the heaven of heavens can’t contain you; how much less this house that I have built!” (1 Kings 8:27)

Jesus confirmed this when He said: “God is a Spirit.” (John 4:24)

And then defined what spirit is not: “A spirit doesn’t have flesh and bones, as you see that I have.” (Luke 24:39)

The God described in the Bible is incorporeal. He has no physical substance. He cannot be divided into persons for the same reason love and faith cannot be divided into persons, because He is not that kind of reality. People who interpret the “anthropomorphism” statements literally simply don’t understand that God speaks in terms we understand. That is all they mean. Arm means strength, wings mean mobility, etc.

The explanations of God as Spirit, etc., exposes one of the most consequential word thefts in theological history. The Greek word hupostasis appears five times in the New Testament. In four of those appearances, it is translated “confidence” or “assurance”—an attitudinal, non-material reality:

“Faith is the hupostasis of things hoped for.” (Hebrews 11:1)

“…in this confident [hupostasis] boasting.” (2 Corinthians 9:4)

“…in this confidence [hupostasis] of boasting.” (2 Corinthians 11:17)

“Hold fast the beginning of our confidence [hupostasis] firm to the end.” (Hebrews 3:14)

In its fifth appearance, hupostasis refers to God Himself:

“The express image of His substance [hypostasis].” (Hebrews 1:3)

Read consistently with its other four uses, this passage is simply saying that Jesus is the visible expression of God’s non-material, incorporeal reality—the attitude of God made visible in a human life. It has nothing to do with metaphysical substance or distinct persons sharing an essence.

Trinitarians took this word—which the Bible uses exclusively in non-material, attitudinal terms—and redefined it through Aristotelian categories into the cornerstone of a substantialist Godhead. In doing so, they didn’t just add to Scripture. They replaced what Scripture said with what philosophy determined. This is precisely what God condemned when He commanded:

“Be careful that you are not ensnared to follow them after they are destroyed from before you, and that you not inquire after their gods, saying, ‘How do these nations serve their gods? I will do likewise.’” (Deuteronomy 12:30)

Paul echoed by applying this prohibition explicitly to pagan philosophy, which was exactly what Tertullian was doing:

“Be careful that you don’t let anyone rob you through his philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the elemental spirits of the world, and not after Christ.” (Colossians 2:8)

And don’t forget that it was Tertullian himself who admitted that he was introducing this concept while the majority of Christians were criticizing him for doing so:

“I am introducing some probolh—that is to say, some prolation of one thing out of another, as Valentinus does when he sets forth Æon from Æon, one after another…” —Tertullian, Against Praxeas, 8.

“The majority of believers, are startled at the dispensation (of the Three in One), on the ground that their very rule of faith withdraws them from the world’s plurality of gods to the one only true God.” —Tertullian, Against Praxeas, 3.

This bears repeating: Trinitarians claim what they believe is what was always taught, and that is not the truth. Their champion Tertullian himself testifies against that modern claim. Whether by ignorance, denial, or deliberate cover-up, it remains a falsification of history—and the reader has seen the evidence firsthand. This is not surprising since the Bible consistently warns against such false prophets and teachers. Why then should we be shocked or deceived when they arise? The Bible even warns of their closeness to us:

“For I know that after my departure, vicious wolves will enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Men will arise from among your own selves, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them.” (Acts 20:29–30)

Where else would they cause the most havoc but in nullifying the first commandment?

The Bible’s God is not a compound of persons sharing a substance. He is the living, incorporeal, non-material source of all that is—known not by philosophical analysis but by His attitudes in action toward us.

That is the God the Shema commands us to love. And that is the God Jesus said he was sent to reveal. And that is the God that the majority of Christians believed in until men like Justin and Tertullian began subverting the people by importing pagan concepts from the gods of the Gentiles. Gods they were comfortable with, gods they grew up with. But gods that were completely different from the God of the Jews.

Foreknowledge: God’s Omniscience on Display

The Trinitarian version of Jesus diminishes God’s foreknowledge by making it unnecessary. If God incarnates Himself, there is no selection, no search, no sovereign foreknowledge required. But the biblical picture is God, the Rock of Ages, scanning the full length of human history—every soul that would ever live—and knowing in advance exactly which one would prove faithful enough to bear His name and accomplish His purpose.

That is a supreme display of omniscience. That is omniscience doing what only omniscience can do.

“Foreknown indeed before the foundation of the world, but revealed at the end of times for your sake.” (1 Peter 1:20)

“Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved by God…him, being delivered up by the determined counsel and foreknowledge of God.” (Acts 2:22–23)

Peter’s own summary of Jesus is decisive: a man, foreknown, delivered up according to God’s determined counsel. Not a God who arranged His own arrival, but a man God knew before the foundation of the world would be worthy of the mission.

Foreknowledge and literal preexistence are mutually exclusive concepts. If Jesus literally preexisted as a person, God foreknew nothing—He was watching someone He already knew. Foreknowledge is biblical. Literal preexistence is not—it is the pagan doctrine of ‘gods come to earth in the form of men.’ (Acts 14:11). Foreknowledge is precisely what these passages explain:

“God…calls those things which do not exist as though they did…” (Romans 4:17–18; NKJV).

This is a biblically revealed truth about God. The key words are not “as though they did”; the key words are “which do not exist.” It is the fact that God is truly talking about things “which do not exist” that seems to be the hard part for some people to accept. Rather than accepting what God plainly says, Trinitarians reached for pagan ideas of preexistent gods coming to earth in the form of men to satisfy their human reasoning.

“Have you not heard how I have done it long ago, and formed it in ancient times? Now I have brought it to pass…” (Isaiah 37:26).

God did not simply show up. He foreknew which man, among all who would ever live, would prove faithful—and that man delivered. Whoever thinks that is a minor accomplishment ought to give it a try. Then consider whether Jesus was just a man because a man who can do that deserves all the honor God gave him. But a God who does that is only putting on a show. We choose to believe the human Jesus is the more glorious one.

Prophecy: Fulfillment vs. Self-Fulfillment

A playwright is not impressive for following his own stage directions. If Jesus is God incarnate, every prophecy he fulfills is God arranging His own fulfillment. That is not prophecy—that is a self-fulfilled prophecy. That is like a man saying, ‘I’m going to the store to buy a carton of milk,’ then doing so, and then coming home and acting like he predicted his future. This alone makes the biblical Jesus more glorious than the Trinitarian version.

Because scripture teaches us something different:

“…Jesus…was faithful to Him who appointed him, as also was Moses in all his house. For he has been counted worthy of more glory than Moses…Christ is faithful as a Son over his house…” (Hebrews 3:1–6)

According to verse 1, the subject is Jesus. The two distinct “him” pronouns in verse 2 show that he is personally distinct from God. Jesus was faithful and was, therefore, as verse 3 says, “counted worthy” of more glory and honor than Moses. Note that he (Jesus) had to be faithful to Him (God the Father) who appointed him (Jesus). This demonstrates clearly, once again, that Jesus was not inherently worthy by deific substance. Rather, it says he had to prove himself through faith; thus, Jesus was “faithful to Him who appointed him.”

“He, in the days of his flesh, having offered up prayers and petitions with strong crying and tears to Him who was able to save him from death, and having been heard for his godly fear, though he was a Son, yet learned obedience by the things which he suffered. Having been made perfect, he became to all of those who obey him the author of eternal salvation.” (Hebrews 5:5–9)

There was no separate deific nature insulated from the suffering. It was the Son himself—his very person—who suffered and was changed by it.

Since Jesus is truly human, every fulfilled prophecy is a genuine convergence of God’s sovereign word and a free human being’s faithful choices. The impressiveness of Isaiah 53 is not merely that it was written 700 years in advance. It is that a real man—born of a woman, under the law, with the same flesh and the same exposure to temptation as every other human being—lived it out.

“When the fullness of time came, God sent out his Son, born to a woman, born under the law.” (Galatians 4:4)

The sending waited for the right moment in history. A self-incarnating God does not need to wait for a fullness of time. An incarnate deity cannot be made perfect by what he learned and suffered in the flesh. But a God who foreknew His servant and prepared the world for his arrival—that God is displaying sovereign patience on a cosmic scale.

“All things which are written in the law of Moses, the prophets, and the psalms, concerning me must be fulfilled.” (Luke 24:44)

Jesus himself frames his entire life as fulfillment—not self-execution. The difference is everything. And that difference alone makes him greater than a God pretending to be a man.

Temptation: Victory That Actually Means Something

“We don’t have a high priest who can’t be touched with the feeling of our infirmities, but one who has been in all points tempted like we are, yet without sin.” (Hebrews 4:15)

“…he humbled himself, becoming obedient to the point of death, yes, the death of the cross. Therefore God also highly exalted him, and gave to him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, those on earth, and those under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” (Philippians 2:8–11)

“When all things have been subjected to him, then the Son will also himself be subjected to him who subjected all things to him, that God may be all in all.” (1 Corinthians 15:28)

The Trinitarian idea of coequality between the Father and the Son is an unbiblical fairy tale that obscures what Jesus did as a man anointed by God. Philippians 2:5–8 is a passage often misinterpreted when read through the lens of ‘gods coming to earth in the form of men.’ That passage never makes that claim.

The phrase “yet without sin” (Hebrews 4:15) only carries moral weight if failure was a genuine possibility. Can God fail? Can God sin? Trinitarians must answer no, and in doing so, they quietly drain Hebrews 4:15 of its meaning.

God, even if He were incarnated as a man, could not be tempted to believe that God doesn’t exist, isn’t around, or doesn’t care. All of these are very real temptations for all of us. This is the Jesus who was exalted above all others in heaven and on earth because of what he overcame.

“Though he was a Son, yet learned obedience by the things which he suffered.” (Hebrews 5:8)

You cannot learn what you already are. God does not learn obedience. A man does.

“Not my will, but yours, be done.” (Luke 22:42)

This is one of the most theologically precise sentences in all of Scripture. Two wills. One is subordinate to the other. Under maximum pressure—facing the cross, in agony, asking if there was another way—a human being surrendered his will to his Father’s will. An incarnated God saying this to Himself or His coequal is not surrender. It would be theatrical play-acting, and entertaining drama, not a man trusting the destiny of his soul, through faith, to a Father who promised him glory.

“Therefore let’s also…run with perseverance the race that is set before us, looking to Jesus, the author and perfecter of faith, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising its shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God. For consider him who has endured such contradiction of sinners against himself, that you don’t grow weary, fainting in your souls.” (Hebrews 12:1–3)

How does God enduring shame by souls He created provide an example to us of persevering in the race set before us and overcoming even as Jesus overcame? These are the realities that the idea of an incarnated deity obscures from our psyche.

James settles the question with a single verse: “God can’t be tempted by evil.” (James 1:13)

If Jesus is God, Hebrews 4:15 and James 1:13 flatly contradict each other. If Jesus is human, both passages are simultaneously true.

Gethsemane is only what it appears to be—the supreme act of human surrender to God—if Jesus is genuinely human. And that act of surrender is not a diminishment of Jesus. It is the pinnacle of what humanity was always meant to be. And God honored and exalted Jesus highly for it.

Intercession: A High Priest Who Actually Qualifies

“Every high priest, being taken from among men, is appointed for men.” (Hebrews 5:1)

The qualification is explicit: taken from among men, not sent from above to visit men.

“Therefore, he was obligated in all things to be made like his brothers, that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest.” (Hebrews 2:17)

Made like us in all things—not visiting us from above while remaining insulated by a divine nature. The word “obligated” is striking. It was necessary. His qualification as our high priest required genuine humanity, not performed humanity, and certainly not the shell of humanity.

“There is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.” (1 Timothy 2:5)

Paul did not say “the God-man.” He didn’t say “the human nature mediated.” He said the man. A mediator stands between two parties because he genuinely belongs to both sides by what they have in common, while the others being mediated have something dividing them. The Bible answers the question of how Jesus could stand with both parties:

“Behold, Yahweh’s hand is not shortened, that it can’t save; nor his ear dull, that it can’t hear. But your iniquities have separated you and your God, and your sins have hidden his face from you, so that he will not hear.” (Isaiah 59:1–2)

“For we don’t have a high priest who can’t be touched with the feeling of our infirmities, but one who has been in all points tempted like we are, yet without sin.” (Hebrews 4:15)

Jesus qualifies because he has been where we are, in all of our temptations, yet without sin, not because he carries two natures in one person as the Gnostics proposed. The truth is, if he were God incarnate as a man, he still wouldn’t qualify as a member of our race, nor would he be capable of being tempted in all points as we are. In that case, he would have no common cause with us rational human beings. No person alive is a person simply by virtue of having a human nature.

His ongoing intercession at the right hand of the Father is not the activity of a divine person condescending to sympathize. It is the activity of a man who was there, who knows what hunger feels like, what betrayal feels like, what it is to pray and wait and suffer, and even what it is to feel forsaken by God—and who now stands as our qualified sinless representative before God.

The Firstborn Among Many Brothers: A Pattern, Not an Exception

“Foreordained to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.” (Romans 8:29)

Firstborn implies a family. A family requires genuine kinship. The Trinitarian Jesus is not our brother in any meaningful sense—he is a divine visitor who briefly wore humanity like a costume. But the biblical Jesus is the firstborn of a new human family—the first of many who will be conformed to His image.

“Both he who sanctifies and those who are sanctified are all of one, for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brothers.” (Hebrews 2:11)

Trinitarian: Do you call God your brother? Does God call you His brother? Jesus calls us brothers.

“Since then the children have shared in flesh and blood, he also himself in the same way partook of the same.” (Hebrews 2:14)

Not similar. Not analogous. In the same way. He partook of what we partook of—genuinely, fully, without divine insulation. The farmer and vine analogy clarifies this:

“I am the true vine, and my Father is the farmer…I am the vine. You are the branches.” (John 15:1,5)

In no uncertain terms, Jesus is a different whole organism from the Father, and yet is the same organism as we are. Trinitarians reverse this parable. This parable would be false if Jesus’s identity came from being of the same essence as the Father.

“The first man, Adam, became a living soul. The last Adam became a life-giving spirit. However, that which is spiritual isn’t first, but that which is natural, then that which is spiritual.” (1 Corinthians 15:45)

Paul’s parallel is exact and intentional. Adam and Jesus are two human figures standing at the head of humanity at two vastly different time periods in the drama of salvation history.

“Therefore, as sin entered into the world through one man…so death passed to all men because all sinned… For if by the trespass of the one the many died, much more did the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, abound to the many…So then as through one trespass, all men were condemned; even so through one act of righteousness, all men were justified to life. For as through the one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the one, many will be made righteous.” (Romans 5:12–19)

These parallels only hold true if Jesus is as genuinely human as Adam was. God’s plan was never to send a divine visitor to rescue humanity from outside. It was to raise a human being from within humanity who would be the prototype of what God always intended man to become—and then to replicate that pattern in many brothers.

The incarnated God version makes Jesus the exception to humanity. The biblical version makes Jesus the fulfillment of God’s purpose for humanity. It proves God wasn’t a failure in Creation, He was a Father with a purpose, with healing and salvation in His wings, and Jesus was His proof! That is not a lesser Jesus. That is a far more glorious one.

Relationship, Not Ontology: The Bible’s Own Framework

Trinitarianism asks: What is “God the Son” made of? The Bible never answers that question—because the Bible never asks it. It never even provides the term, ‘God the Son.’ What the Bible does answer clearly is what Jesus is made of: a man, born of a woman, of the seed of David, made like his brothers in every way (Hebrews 2:17).

The question Trinitarianism is actually asking is a philosophical one imported from pagan metaphysics—not a biblical one. It is a question designed to set the stage for and justify a Trinitarian answer, as if only the doctrine of the Trinity has a sufficient answer. In that way, it is a smoke-and-mirrors tactic.

What the Bible asks—and answers completely—is: who sent him, and why? The Bible explained this clearly in the days of Moses—so they would not have to hear the voice of Yahweh directly:

“Yahweh your God will raise up to you a prophet from among you, of your brothers, like me. You shall listen to him. This is according to all that you desired of Yahweh your God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying, “Let me not hear again Yahweh my God’s voice, neither let me see this great fire any more, that I not die.” Yahweh said to me, “They have well said that which they have spoken. I will raise them up a prophet from among their brothers, like you. I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I shall command him. It shall happen, that whoever will not listen to my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.” (Deuteronomy 18:15–19)

The words ‘whoever will not listen to my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him’ establish the pattern: God speaks through His appointed human messenger, and the response to that messenger is a response to God. Jesus is the ultimate fulfillment of that pattern. And the stakes of that pattern are defined in John 17:3:

“And this is life in the age to come, that they know you, the only true God, and the one you have sent—Jesus Christ.” (John 17:3, REV)

Life in the age to come [aionios = age during] is defined here not as correct ontological belief about divine substance, but as knowing two distinct persons in a sending relationship. The Father is the only true God. Jesus is the one He sent. That relationship is not a philosophical problem to be solved—it is the heart of the gospel.

“Yet to us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things…and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things.” (1 Corinthians 8:6)

Paul’s creedal summary is entirely relational and functional. One God—the Father. One Lord—Jesus Christ. No substance language. No persons language. No Greek philosophy required.

“I ascend to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.” (John 20:17)

After the resurrection—after everything—Jesus still maintains the relational distinction. His God is the Father. Our God is the Father. The relationship did not collapse at the resurrection. It was confirmed by it.

The Trinity turns the simplest relational realities of the gospel into a metaphysical puzzle that the apostles never posed and never answered—because they did not see a puzzle. They saw a Father who sent His Son, a Son who obeyed faithfully, and a people invited into that same relationship.

That is the biblical Jesus. He is not less than the Trinitarian version. He is more—because his obedience cost something real, his victory was genuinely won, his intercession is genuinely qualified, and his glorification is the firstfruits of what God intends for all who follow Him.

The Trinity gives you a God performing a stunt.

The Bible gives you a man who earned a crown and a seat at God’s right hand. Our Father raised him from the dead to assure us of the way to Him:

“The times of ignorance therefore God overlooked. But now he commands that all people everywhere should repent, because he has appointed a day in which he will judge the world in righteousness by the man whom he has ordained; of which he has given assurance to all men, in that he has raised him from the dead.” (Acts 17:30–31)

That is no ordinary man. That is a man worthy of his exaltation and every honor rightfully given to him. But that doesn’t make him God Himself.

Print This Post