Doctrine of the Trinity

1 Timothy 2:5, "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;"
Many people believe that Jesus is equal in nature with our Father in Heaven. Daniel 11:36 says our Father in Heaven is "the God of gods." Exodus 15:11 raises the question, "Who is like unto thee, O LORD, among the gods?" Jesus was called "God," but does that mean Jesus was equal to the Creator Himself? Did not God himself know that men would one day make this claim, that there is one from among men who is equal to God? Did not our Father himself raise the question for negation in Isaiah 40:25, "To whom then will ye liken me, or shall I be equal? saith the Holy One" and in Isaiah 46:5, "To whom will ye liken me, and make me equal, and compare me, that we may be like?" And just so there is no misunderstanding, he included his own Son in the question at Psalms 89:6, "For who in the heaven can be compared unto the LORD? who among the sons of the mighty can be likened unto the LORD?"
The history of religion has always been one of degeneration from the originally revealed pure monotheism to various forms of polytheism. "Christianity," as popularly known, has been no exception.
The first scriptural principle to be considered, when approaching the matter from a scriptural point of view, is the oneness of God. God is constantly, repeatedly, and emphatically stated to be ONE, never three. There is never a word anywhere in the scripture from beginning to end about such Greek metaphysics as "Three persons in the Godhead" or any such language.
The scripture, in both Old and New Testaments, is very emphatic about the absolute oneness of God. When asked which is the first commandment of all?" Jesus answered:

Mark 12:29, "And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:"
He was quoting from the words of Moses in Deuteronomy 6:4. This is the consistent story of the scripture. There is not a word about three gods in it from beginning to end.
"Christendom" today has degenerated to a belief in four gods, three good ones and one evil one. Some parts of Christendom have five gods, as the Roman Catholic Church, which has added a "Mother of God" who is in their system of belief the supreme deity beside a host of demi-gods, one for every day of the year (and more), all of which mythical and man-invented deities are worshipped and prayed to.
The doctrine of the "Trinity" is nowhere found in the scripture.

Deuteronomy 6:4, "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:"
Isaiah 44:6, "...beside me there is no God."
Isaiah 45:5, "I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me:"
Isaiah 46:9, "...I am God, and there is none else;"
Why is not the simple scriptural picture sufficient? Why is it necessary to go the "Greek metaphysics" to find that the above Scriptures are all very misleading and actually there are three Gods? To make Greek metaphysics and scripture testimony agree, it is said that there are "Three Gods in one." But for those who desire to be guided by the Word of God, the scripture clearly refutes this compromise. It very clearly distinguishes Jesus Christ, the Son of God, from the One Eternal God of Whom the above quotations speak. This is very important, and is fatal to Greek metaphysics.

1 Timothy 2:5, "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;"
1 Corinthians 8:6, "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."
John 17:3, "And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent."
Note well that this last quotation is Jesus Christ speaking; addressing God in prayer as "the only true God," and speaking of himself as separate from that One True God and sent by Him.
When we see these emphatic scriptural declarations of the oneness of God, and the clear distinction between this One Eternal God, and the man Jesus Christ, His Son, and then we look at the metaphysical absurdities concocted out of platonic philosophy, the only answer is that God sent them a strong delusion (2 Thessalonians 2:11-12)
The simple picture the Scriptures present to us of Jesus Christ is that:

He was born a babe (Luke 2:7).
He "increased in wisdom" (Luke 2:52).
He "learned obedience by the things that he suffered" (Hebrews 5:8).
He was "in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin" (Hebrews 4:15).
He "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" (Hebrews 5:7).

Try to honestly harmonize that with the Trinitarian idea of omnipotent and omniscient co-equality and co-eternity. It just does not fit and cannot fit. To make it fit we must break down all the meaning of language. That is what Trinitarians have done. Why should we try to make it fit? The Trinity is not taught in the scripture. Why then not just accept the scriptural account and forget about the "Trinity"?
If we regard Jesus Christ as personally existing and possessing all power and wisdom, before his scripturally recorded birth as a baby, then we simply deny the actual reality of his birth and his "increasing in wisdom."
The Scriptures declare that God's understanding is infinite (Psalms 147:5). Is it not then a denial of all the meaning of language to say that a co-equal constituent of this God "increased in wisdom," as he grew up from a babe to manhood? To say that a constituent part of an omnipotent coequal Trinity of Gods became a helpless babe is an absurdity that the Scriptures do not require us to subscribe to. He could not be a helpless, newborn babe and an all-powerful, all-knowing co-equal ruler of heaven and earth at the same time.
Is God separable from His power and wisdom? Are not infinite power and knowledge inseparable elements of His very Godhead? (Note: "Godhead" is just an obsolete form of "Goodhood" - that is, "divinity," the quality of being divine.) We are asked to believe that God changed Himself into a powerless and ignorant, helpless creature. What happened to His power and wisdom? Did He, or did He not, continue to possess His eternal attributes? But why should we labor further with such unscriptural ideas?
There are many things that are recorded of Christ that just cannot be made fit with the idea that he was an all-powerful, all knowing God - a co-equal constituent of the "Godhead". It is recorded:

Luke 4:1-2, "And Jesus being full of the Holy Ghost returned from Jordan, and was led by the Spirit into the wilderness, Being forty days tempted of the devil."
Luke 22:28, "Ye are they which have continued with me in my temptations."
Hebrews 2:18, "For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted..."
Hebrews 4:15, "...but was in all points tempted like as we are..."
James declared that "God cannot be tempted with evil" (James 1:13).
It is impossible to conceive of an all-wise, all-powerful God being tempted to sin. God could not possibly sin. Yet Jesus Christ was tempted in all points like ourselves, and if we say he could not possibly have sinned, we deny the reality of his tempting and of his overcoming.
Jesus was tempted; God cannot be tempted: therefore the Trinity theory is false. Let us carefully consider a few of the many statements of Scripture that show the "Trinity" theory to be untrue.

John 5:30, "...I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me."
This is Jesus speaking. It is perfectly understandable in the light of the scriptural picture that Jesus was a man wholly dependent upon God. But how can it be fitted into the Trinity picture? Let us not run from these clear testimonies, but reverently ponder them, seeking guidance in truth.

John 14:28, "...my Father is greater than I."
If we believe the scripture, we cannot believe the man-made doctrine that Jesus was co-equal with God. The whole record of the Gospels - the plain, literal record of the life and sayings of Christ is in direct and continuous variance with this doctrine. How could the "co-equal" Trinity theory be more directly denied than it is in these words of Jesus? Can black mean white?
Scores of statements could be given showing that Jesus was truly a man, truly fighting against sin, truly overcoming; truly learning, truly praying to the one true God who was greater than he. If Jesus was an all-powerful God just pretending to fight against temptation when really he could not be tempted, just pretending to pray to someone greater than himself for help and strength, then we in effect accuse the whole Gospel record of being a deception and a cruel mockery of man's real weakness, man's real and bitter struggle against sin.
How can he be held forth as our example and incentive to overcome temptation and the weaknesses of the flesh - if all the time he was really an all-powerful and untemptable co-equal God?
Consider the following passages one by one. Honestly take full time to ponder them and compare them with the suggestion of the Trinity that Jesus was actually and in reality an eternal, all-knowing, all-powerful God, co-equal part of an omnipotent Trinity, who could not sin or be tempted.

Mark 13:32, "But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father."
How could one omnipotent part of a co-equal Godhead not know something that another part knew? How, in fact, could there be anything that an omniscient, co-equal God did not know?

1 Corinthians 15:21-23, "For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward..."
The fact that Christ was a man is repeatedly emphasized as an essential fact in the plan of salvation. The purpose required that a man - one of the fallen race - should truly overcome sin and temptation, and render perfect obedience to the One True God -

Romans 5:19, "For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one (one man, Jesus Christ, verse 15) shall many be made righteous."
It is neither scriptural or reasonable to speak of one omnipotent, co-equal God rendering obedience to another co-equal part of the same one almighty God. "Obedience" implies distinction, and subjection of the obeyer to the obeyed. Note well Jesus' answer when he was tempted -

Matthew 4:4, "...It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God."
He applies this command of God to himself as a man who was responsible to, and owed obedience to, the One True God. Note the even more striking answer to the 3rd temptation:

Matthew 4:10, "...it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve."
Jesus applies this command to himself, as obligated to worship and serve the One True God revealed to Israel. This is quoted from Deuteronomy 8, just 2 chapters after the command "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:" (Deuteronomy 6:4).
Jesus Christ worshipped and served the one true God.

Matthew 12:32, "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."
How then can it be said that Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit are co-equal, the glory equal; the majesty co-eternal, none afore or after other, none greater or less than other?

Mark 10:18, "And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God."
Here Jesus plainly distinguishes between himself and the one God, affirming of God what could not be affirmed of himself, inasmuch as he was of mortal, human, condemned, sinful flesh (though perfectly sinless in life and character).

Matthew 20:23, "...to sit on my right hand, and on my left, is not mine to give, but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared of my Father."
Again, a clear limitation of Christ's prerogative, and proof of his subjection to God. Co-equal parts of "One God"? The scripture knows of no such contradiction.

Matthew 26:39, "And he went a little further, 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."
If Jesus and his Father are really just co-equal parts of the same One God, then obviously such a prayer could never be prayed. It is meaningless for the One God to pray to Himself, and say "Not my will but thine." If both are part of one God, then there is but one will.
Be sure your conception of Jesus and God is in harmony with what the scripture reveals. Do not be satisfied with an "incomprehensible" theory, admittedly borrowed from "Greek metaphysics," that crushes all the beauty and meaning out of the life of Jesus Christ, the faithful and obedient Son who truly overcame and submitted to the will of the one true God, His Father.

Matthew 26:53, "Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels?"
One omnipotent co-equal ruler of the universe speaking of praying to another part of the same ruler for angels to help him? No, that is not the scripture picture, that's man's idea.

John 5:19, "...The Son can do nothing of himself..."
John 5:20, "For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth..."
John 5:22, "For the Father...hath committed all judgment unto the Son:"
John 5:26, "For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;"
John 5:30, "I can of mine own self do nothing...I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me."
John 5:36, "...the works which the Father hath given me to finish, the same works that I do, bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me."
One co-equal showing another all-powerful, all-knowing co-equal, giving him authority, sending him, giving him work? One all-powerful God appealing to his works as a proof that another God had sent him? Where is co-equal co-eternity if "the Father hath given the Son to have life in himself?"

1 Corinthians 15:24,28, "Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father...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."
The Son shall be subject to God, that God may be all in all. Jesus has been given all power in heaven and earth (Matthew 28:18) for the accomplishment of a purpose - that of bringing all things into harmony with God. When that purpose is accomplished, he relinquishes all power to God, that God may be all in all.
Trinitarianism cannot make head nor tail of this passage. As one eminent Trinitarian commentator confusedly admits, subjection and co-equality are utterly incompatible opposites. Must God be subject to Himself, in order that He may be supreme over all?
The Scripture says:

1 Corinthians 11:3, "...the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God."
The Trinity says -

"The glory co-equal, the majesty co-eternal, none afore or after other, none greater or less."
Which shall we take - the Scriptures or the Trinity? It is impossible to believe both.

Matthew 28:18, "And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth."
This is Jesus speaking after resurrection and glorification. Could an eternal, all-powerful co-equal part of the supreme Godhead say, "All power has been given to me?" Who could give power to an almighty co-equal God who from eternity had possessed all power as an essential part of his very divinity?

John 18:11, "Then said Jesus unto Peter, Put up thy sword into the sheath: the cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?"
This was the cup which he prayed should pass from him, but submitted to because it was the will of God.

Revelation 1:1, "The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass..."
One co-equal part of an all-knowing Godhead giving a revelation of the future to another part?!

Acts 15:18, "Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world."

If Jesus Christ is a co-equal part of this God who has known all things from the beginning, how can it be said he has been given a revelation by another co-equal pert of the Godhead? How could he say there were things he did not know (Mark 13:32)? How could he "increase in wisdom" (Luke 2:52)?

Psalms 2:7-8, "I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee. Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession."
One co-equal, co-eternal being "this day" begotten; asking another part of the same co-equal Godhead being given the nations.

Mark 15:34, "...Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying,...My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?"
Was Jesus asking himself why he forsook himself?

Luke 1:32, "...the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:"
How could such language be used concerning an eternal, omnipotent part of the supreme head and ruler of the universe? When will he be given the throne of his father David, and what does it mean? How can he be given rulership, if he is from eternity the all powerful ruler of all?

John 8:26, "...he that sent me is true; and I speak to the world those things which I have heard of him."
John 8:28, "...I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things."
John 8:40, "But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God..."
John 8:54, "Jesus answered, If I honour myself, my honour is nothing: it is my Father that honoureth me; of whom ye say, that he is your God:"
If Jesus was co-equal part of the Supreme Godhead, why was his own honor nothing and God's honoring him everything? Does a co-equal, co-eternal part of the Godhead need to be taught? Do not the Scriptures reveal that God is "infinite in knowledge?"

John 4:34, "Jesus saith unto them, My meat is to do the will of him that sent me, and to finish his work."
John 7:16, "Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me."
John 7:28, "...I am not come of myself, but he that sent me is true..."
John 10:35-36, "If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?"
As Jesus points out, the term "god" is occasionally used of men in Scripture to signify their sanctification and relationship to God. (See Psalms 82:6, "I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High."). The use of this term did not confuse them in any way with the one eternal God, the Almighty Creator, but it does show that the term "god," properly understood, is applied to such as are sanctified by God.

John 12:49, "For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak."
The Trinity represents one co-equal part of the Godhead giving a commandment to another co-equal part! A commandment proves authority of one part over another, but the Trinity says no part is before, or greater than any other part.

John 14:10, "...the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works."
See how different this is from the Trinitarian idea. The scripture never says, as Trinitarians say, that "God the Son" was in the man Jesus. The Scriptures always reveal the man Christ Jesus, born of Mary, as the Son, through whom the Eternal Father worked and manifested Himself -

2 Corinthians 5:19, "...God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself..."
The Scripture picture is so clear, the Trinitarian picture so contradictory and confused. The Scriptures plainly teach that it was the Holy Spirit-Power of God (not "God the Son") that came upon Mary, and that this Spirit power of God caused the conception in Mary of him who should therefore be called the Son of God (Luke 1:35). Compare "God was in Christ..." above with the following passages:

John 17:21, "That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me."
John 15:4, "Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me."
Acts 3:20, "And he (God) shall send Jesus Christ..."
Acts 3:22, "For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren..."
Jesus was not a co-eternal part of an omnipotent Godhead, but a prophet raised up by God.

Acts 13:23, "Of this man's seed (David's) hath God according to his promise raised unto Israel a Saviour, Jesus:"
Hebrews 2:10, "For it became him (God), for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings."
God made Jesus perfect through suffering. Does this fit the co-equal, co-eternal idea? Such passages could be duplicated many many times over. All show that the doctrine of the Trinity, developed in Platonic philosophy and Greek metaphysics, is completely out of joint with the simple scriptural picture.
We must approach Scripture unspoiled by any preconceived theological notions inherited from dark end pagan medievalism. We must get the basic-picture that Jesus Christ was truly a man who was born by the operation of the Holy Spirit of God upon Mary, and who grew to manhood and maturity, and increased in wisdom as he grew. The whole efficacy of his mission depends upon its reality.
To say, to suit a theory, that he was a co-equal part of an all-powerful, eternal "Godhead" with infinite knowledge and wisdom, and at the same time a striving, praying, learning, mortal man is to take all meaning out of words.

Either he was all-powerful, inherently and eternally, or else he was not. To say he was both is to juggle with words.

Either he was immortal and could not die, or else he did die, and was therefore not immortal. (The Scriptures say God is immortal - 1 Timothy 1:17). Immortal means incapable of death. Jesus Christ died.

Either he was God and could not be tempted, or else he was tempted (as the scripture records) and was therefore not God.

Either he was God and therefore could not possibly sin, or else he truly resisted and overcame sin.

Either he was God, infinite in knowledge from all eternity, or else he increased in wisdom, learned obedience, was-taught of God, and recognized that God knew things that he did not.

Either he was co-equal with God, or else his Father was, as he said greater than he.

To say that, in each case, both of these alternatives are possible is to say that everything that is directly contradictory to Scripture may be equally true with Scripture, and therefore the Scripture is useless and meaningless. This is to lay down a principle whereby reason and meaning are cast aside and the absurdest of contradictions are gravely viewed as possible, though perhaps admitted to be "incomprehensible."
Anyone who studies the Word of God unspoiled by human philosophy will find that it is not cast in such a mold as stultifies reason and glorifies contradiction.
To sum up the scriptural testimony presented concerning Jesus Christ.

He was conceived in Mary by the overshadowing of the Spirit-Power of God;
after the normal period he was born a babe;
Increased in wisdom as he grew to manhood;
Continually prayed to God;
Offered supplication (humble entreaty) to God;
Was heard and saved from death in that he feared and was obedient;
Was tempted in all points like his brethren;
Overcame;
Learned obedience;
Was saved from death by strong crying and tears;
Received the Revelation of the future from God;
Did not know things God knew;
Was promised the throne of David by God;
Had no right to say who should sit at his right hand;
Was sent by God;
Was taught by God;
Was shown things by God;
Recognized his subjection to the commands to worship and serve God;
Is several times clearly DISTINGUISHED FROM the ONE TRUE AND ONLY GOD.
He is repeatedly described as a man;
Was raised from the dead by God;
Was glorified by God in answer to prayer;
Was given power and authority by God;
Was anointed by God with the Holy Spirit;
Said God was greater than he;
Said he of himself could do nothing;
Said the doctrine, words and works were NOT HIS but God's;
When addressed as "good" he distinguished between himself as a man of mortal flesh and God Who alone is wholly good;
He was appointed by God as heir of all things;
He prayed to God that the cup might pass but he relinquished his own will and submitted to God's; He was a prophet raised up by God from among his brethren;
God is to judge the world by him;
God is spoken of as the Head of Christ;
He cried, My God, why hast Thou forsaken me;
He was given commandments by God;
He was made perfect through suffering;
And he is finally to be subject to God and relinquish all power and authority back to Him that God may be all in all. This is the scriptural picture of Jesus.

1 Corinthians 15:21, "For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead."
As the Epistle to the Hebrews shows, it was essential to God's purpose, and to establish His justice, that life come through man - that a man should, strengthened and guided by God, render perfect obedience, overcome and subdue the sin-nature which all the race possesses, and destroy it by death.
A man who, having vindicated and fulfilled the law of sin and death passed upon the race through the sentence of Adam, should be able to be justly exalted to eternal life, never having sinned -- never once having served sin, whose wages are death. In this process of obtaining eternal redemption for himself - (as the reflexive - middle - voice of the verb "obtained" in Hebrews 9:12 states) - in this process he opened up a God- appointed way of escape from the power of death for the condemned race of which he was a member and the accepted representative.
God's righteousness being thus demonstrated and vindicated (by a perfect obedience followed by the voluntary destruction and condemnation of the sin-nature in death), God is able justly to extend mercy to all who humbly approach Him in the appointed way under the covering of Christ. Such must voluntarily die to themselves and be born into Christ and henceforth live in Christ and as part of Christ -

Galatians 2:20, "I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me."
Those that unite themselves with Christ become, in God's sight, part of him, and are included in his glorious victory over sin and death. This is the mercy of God.
The doctrine of the Trinity : 3 co-equal, co-eternal Gods -- contrary to Scripture and borrowed from the heathen Plato who knew nothing of God's revealed Truth -- completely destroys the beautiful, harmonious, righteous plan of salvation through a real man learning obedience and truly overcoming temptation.
Like a steamroller, the doctrine of the Trinity crushes all the meaning out of the picture the scripture gives us of the relationship between the Eternal, Almighty Father and the dependent, obedient Son - the latter glorified and exalted by the former because of his faith, obedience, submission, humility and real genuine victory over sin and weakness.

Philippians 2:8-9, "And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:"
This is our Christ, the real Christ, our brother, our example, our inspiration and incentive.
No matter how you wrestle with the doctrine of the Trinity, it cannot give you anything but an all-powerful, all-knowing, immortal, untemptable God going through the pantomime of pretending to grow, pretending to learn, pretending to overcome weakness, pretending to struggle with temptation, pretending to pray for help, pretending to receive strength through angels from a part of himself, pretending to receive commands and instruction (from himself), pretending to obey and submit his will to a co-equal part of himself.
To get around this, and to make Platonic philosophy fit Scripture, Trinitarians talk of his "divinity" knowing something at the same time that his "humanity" did not know it; of his "divinity" being all-wise at the same time his "humanity" was learning; of his "divinity" being all-powerful at the same time his "humanity" was struggling against weakness.
Those who base their faith on the scripture, and with whom the speculations of Greek metaphysics carry no weight, will not temporize with such issue-begging absurdities. Jesus Christ was not two utterly contradictory persons. It was Jesus Christ himself who did and went through all the things recorded in the scripture.
Get your beliefs from the scripture. You will never find the Trinity in it, or anything like it. It is a product of an age of worldly wisdom and spiritual barrenness.

Passages Quoted to prove the Trinity (proven false)
The verses considered were presented by a Trinitarian as the best he knew to "prove" the doctrine of the Trinity. Now to consider, in the light of Scripture, the verses submitted as proving that Christ was a pre-existent part of a co-equal, co-eternal Trinity of three Gods.

John 5:22, "For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son:"
This is put forward to prove that "Christ claimed he was divine." If this is meant to mean he claimed he was a co-equal, co-eternal member of the Trinity, then it disproves the very point it is put forward to support -- "The Father...hath committed all judgment to the Son."
The Father is the Supreme Almighty God with power to commit judgment to whom He will. Consider the context, and see how it shatters the "co-equal" idea --

The Father hath given the Son authority" (verse 27).
"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" (verse 30).
A more unfortunate example could hardly be chosen to prove the Trinity. See these verses:

Acts 17:31, "Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he (god) hath raised him (Jesus) from the dead."
Romans 2:16, "...God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ..."

John 10:30, "I and my Father are one."
To show that this is no proof of the doctrine of the Trinity, or of the pre-existence of Christ before he was born, it is only necessary to refer to John 17:11, which has Jesus praying to God:

John 17:11, "...Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are."
John 17:21, "That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me."
John 17:22-23, "...that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one;"
The meaning of the oneness, or unity, that Jesus had in mind, is very clear from this passage. It is the "unity of the Spirit" (Ephesians 4:3) that must exist among true brethren:

Galatians 3:28, "...ye are all one in Christ Jesus."
Surely, no one who is familiar with this wording in John 17 would sincerely consider John 10:30 any proof of the Trinity or Jesus' pre-existence before he was born a helpless babe.
Here is the reason why the Jews thought that Jesus was making himself equal with God:

John 5:18, "Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God."
You see, Jesus did not claim that he was equal with the Father, he did not say that he himself was "God." Jesus said that God was his Father! And when somebody is someone's son, they inherit all that is of their father's. Father and son are basically one flesh, but two distinct men.

John 6:40, "And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day."
It is difficult to see how this is thought to prove any of the points in question. Unquestionably God has given Jesus power to raise the dead. This is not in question. All who truly believe the scripture believe it (those that are not deluded with the "immortal soul," "heaven at death" idea).
Speaking of Jesus' power (which seems to be the thought here), bear in mind these two passages:

Acts 2:22, "...Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him..."
Matthew 28:18, "And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me..."
By whom? if he himself were co-equal part of the Supreme Power of the universe. Note how these very passages quoted to prove the Trinity actually disprove it. Jesus never claimed co-equality with God, but always the very reverse. He said God had sent him, and he came to do God's will, not his own.

John 4:34, "Jesus saith unto them, My meat is to do the will of him that sent me..."

John 6:38, "For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me."
John 6:40, "And this is the will of him that sent me..."

John 10:17-18, "...I lay down my life, that I might take it again. No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father. "
The word here translated "power" is exousia. It occurs just over 100 times. It is not the common word for "power," which is dunamis - strength, ability. For example, exousia is translated as "right" in Revelation 22:14, "Blessed are they that do His commandments, that they may have right (exousia) to the tree of life." This obviously does not mean that obeying God's commands give a man the physical power to raise himself from the dead to immortality, but that he thereby is granted a right to it.
Even more to the point, in illustration is John 1:12, "As many as receive him gave he power (exousia) to become sons of God." Believers have been given the right or privilege of becoming sons of God. These passages will illustrate what Jesus meant when he said he had exousia - the right - to take up his life again after having laid it down in death.
As to Who actually raised Jesus from the dead, the Scriptures leave not the slightest doubt. Many times we are told GOD raised him from the dead. Consider very particularly the record in Acts 2 for a clear understanding of the relation between Christ and God:

Acts 2:22, "...Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him..."
Acts 2:25-28, "For David speaketh concerning him...Because thou (God) wilt not leave my (Jesus') soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. Thou hast made known to me the ways of life..."
Acts 2:30-32, "...God had sworn with an oath to him (David), that...he (God) would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; He (David) seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. This Jesus hath God raised up..."
Acts 2:36, "...God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ."
All this is utterly incompatible with the Trinity. Note the last statement -- God hath made Jesus Lord. God approved him; God did miracles by him; God made known to him the way of life; God did not suffer him to see corruption; God raised him; God made him Lord. Consider the following:

Acts 3:15, "And killed the Prince of life (Jesus), whom God hath raised from the dead..."
Acts 5:30-31, "The God of our fathers raised up Jesus...Him hath God exalted..."
The "God of our fathers" to whom Peter refers as raising Jesus was the one and only true God of Whom Moses, the prophets and Jesus spoke.
Acts 10:40, "Him (Jesus) God raised up the third day..."

Acts 10:42, ",...it is he (Jesus) which was ordained of God to be the Judge..."
Ephesians 1:19-22, "...his (God's) mighty power, Which he wrought in Christ, when he (God) raised him (Jesus) from the dead, and set him at his own right hand...And hath put all things under his feet..."
Hebrews 13:20, "Now the God of peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus...through the blood of the everlasting covenant."
How did God bring Jesus from the dead through the blood of the everlasting covenant? Here we are told Jesus was brought from the dead through his own blood. This deep and important truth is crushed into unrecognizability by the Trinity. (See also Acts 13:30,33-34,37; 17:31, Romans 6:4; 2 Corinthians 4:14, Galatians 1:1, 1 Peter 1:21 - all stating that God raised Jesus from the dead).
Before we leave this John 10:17-10, note well the finish of it -- "I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father." It will be remarkably noted that the very context of these verses quoted to support the Trinity are directly contrary to the all-powerful, co-equal, none-greater-or-less theory.

Philippians 2:5-7, "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: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:"
What part of this is thought to give support to the idea that Jesus was a co-equal, co-eternal, pre-existent part of the One Eternal God? What this declares, briefly, is that Christ - though he recognized himself to be by birth the Son of God, still he did not presume upon this supremely exalted relationship, but humbly submitted to the fact that he, like all other men, owed service and obedience to God, and must "work out his salvation with fear and trembling' (see verse 12).
The meaning of this passage is illustrated perfectly by Hebrews 5:8, "Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered."
Notice the immediate context of Philippians 2:9, "Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him..."
One co-equal part of the Supreme One God highly exalting another co-equal part, because the latter had humbly submitted to death at the command of the former? The scripture does not ask us to accept such confusion. The phrase "being in the form of God" refers to the fact that his birth by the overshadowing Spirit-Power constituted him the "Son of God" (Luke 1: 35).
Though so directly related to God, he did not presume upon his position or "grasp at" equality with God. Does not this very passage prove he was not co-equal with God, and that he did not "grasp at" co-equality?
This is the scriptural picture - no flat, Trinitarian, co-equality, "none greater, none afore." The following is very clear as to Jesus' birth and servantship to God:

Isaiah 49:1-8, "...The LORD hath called me [Jesus] from the womb; from the bowels of my mother [Mary] hath he made mention of my name [Matthew 1:20-21, Luke 1:28-33]....in the shadow of his hand hath he hid me...And now, saith the LORD that formed me from the womb to be his servant...Thus saith the LORD, the Redeemer of Israel, and his Holy One, to him whom man despiseth, to him whom the nation abhorreth [referring to Christ Jesus]...have I [God] heard thee...have I [God] helped thee: and I [God] will preserve thee [Jesus, the Christ], and give thee for a covenant [New Testament]..."
God formed Jesus from the womb to be His servant. Surely that's plain. Where then is co-eternal, co-equality, co-eternal, co-equal parts of a Supreme God?

Philippians 2:7, "But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:"
As Jesus grew from a babe to self-consciousness, he learned two facts concerning himself:

that he was the divinely-begotten Son of God and
that he was a man of the seed of Adam.

He did not presume upon the first, but humbly and obediently submitted to all the duties and obligations of the second, utterly abasing himself, even to the very lowest station of life. This is even clearer in the next verse --

Philippians 2:8, "And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross."
Finding himself (as he attained self-consciousness) a man, he obediently humbled himself before God -- the duty of all men. The whole passage is an exhortation to (v. 5) - -

Philippians 2:5, "Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:"
The whole sense and point of this command depends upon the truth that Jesus was "made like unto his brethren" (Hebrews 2:17), and was through obedience exalted by God (Philippians 2:9). View Christ as "very God" -- co-equal, co-eternal, "possessor of' heaven and earth", unlimited in power and knowledge, unable to be tempted - and all this becomes meaningless and unreal. It is "making the Word of God of none effect by tradition" - not openly denying it, but interpreting it in such a way that it loses all meaning.

1 John 2:22, "Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son." 1 John 4:15, "Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God."
These are quoted to prove "we are warned not to belittle Christ." This is very true, and Trinitarians do not realize how they are belittling Christ and nullifying his work by adopting the Platonic ideas which make his struggle and obedience and overcoming and resisting temptation an unreal pantomime by an almighty, all-knowing and untemptable God. Jesus Christ rendered perfect obedience, never sinned, overcame every weakness and temptation. Therefore God hath exalted him that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow (Philippians 2:9-10, just considered).
How could it be said "therefore" (for his obedience) God hath exalted him and given him a name, if he had always been co-equal, co-powerful, co-exalted "very god," right from the beginning? It is ridiculous to say he was at the same time all powerful God and weak man. The Scriptures do not say this. It is the attempt to combine "Greek metaphysics" with the Scripture that has forced Trinitarians to adopt this view. The religious leaders of the time the "Trinity" was developed were trying to combine religion with philosophy to make it acceptable to the heathen world.

2 John 1:7, "For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist."
This third passage quoted to prove "we are warned not to belittle Christ" is very significant, and worthy of much study. (In passing, note the wording "deceivers are entered into the world." Does this give any support in presuming their pre-existence, as such wording is said to do in the case of Christ? Where did these deceivers "enter the world" from? Where were they before? All will agree in this case that "entered the world" simply means "shown up" or "become manifest").
But the main point is that there were many deceivers even in John's day who denied that Christ had really and truly "come in the flesh", denied that he was truly a man, denied that he truly "increased in wisdom", truly had been born a helpless babe, truly had borne the same sin cursed nature that his brethren have to struggle with and must overcome.
It we make Christ an all-powerful, all-knowing, untemptable co-equal part of the Supreme God, we deny that he has come "in the flesh" and we are manifested as anti-Christ's.

Ephesians 3:9, "...God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:"
John 1:10, "He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not."
In the first place, the parenthetical insertion of (Christ) is not a true or sound interpretation. It is assuming the point that it is desired to prove, or at least assuming a point from which to reason. The antecedent of "he" is not Christ, but "the Word" - the Logos, the Purpose, the Fiat. Peter says -- "by the word (logos - same as above) of God the heavens were of old" (2 Peter 3:5). No one appears to have any difficulty with this passage because the translators here have used a small "w" and have not followed it by a string of interpretive "he's." Peter is quoting from Psalms 33:6, "By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath (ruach) of his mouth."
Here "word" clearly means decree, determination, purpose; and is paralleled with "ruach" - breath, spirit, power. Job 26:13, "By his spirit (ruach) he hath garnished the heavens;" And in beginning of the record of creation itself, at Genesis 1:2, "...And the Spirit (ruach) of God moved upon the face of the waters."
Here again is the associated conception of power and purpose, Spirit and Word. Creation was effected, then, by the Word and Spirit - the decree or purpose and the power or effluence - the Spirit-Wisdom. The 8th chapter of Proverbs is helpful in understanding chapter 1 of John:

Proverbs 8:22, "The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old."
Proverbs 8:27, "When he prepared the heavens, I was there: when he set a compass upon the face of the depth:"
Proverbs 8:30, "Then I was by him, as one brought up with him: and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him;"
Who is this speaking about? Who was with God at creation? The answer is in verse 1:

Proverbs 8:1, "Doth not wisdom cry? and understanding put forth her voice?"
A reading of this chapter will greatly clarify the meaning of John 1. This eternal Spirit-Wisdom of God is the Word (logos) of John 1. It was with God and it was God, for God is the eternal embodiment of power and wisdom, and power and wisdom are His essential characteristics. Also look at this passage:

Proverbs 3:19, "The LORD by wisdom hath founded the earth; by understanding hath he established the heavens."
Another point that is a source of considerable obscurity is the fact that Greek personal pronouns (he, she, it) do not necessarily denote personality. Like modern French and other languages, all nouns have gender, and although Greek has neuter gender, still many impersonal nouns are either masculine or feminine, and take corresponding masculine or feminine pronouns.
"Logos" (word) is masculine. It therefore always takes "he" in Greek. Normally this should be translated "it" in English, because "word" is neuter, but if in the translator's theology it denotes a person, then he naturally renders it "he."
Another point to be noticed is the word "by."

John 1:3, "All things were made by him;"
John 1:10, "...and the world was made by him,"
The Greek word here is "dia", which should be rendered "through", showing that the thing or person referred to is not the primary operator, but the reason or instrumentality.
This preposition "dia" has a wide range of use and meaning. It is used with two declensions (that is, cases) of the noun or pronoun. With the Accusative it means "because of," "for the sake of." With the Genitive the idea of instrumentality is predominant, but still the meaning can be so wide that "dia" with the Genitive is rendered, "for the Lord Jesus Christ's sake" in Romans 15:30. (The pronoun following "dia" in John 1, vs. 3 and 10 is in the Genitive).

Romans 5:21, "...even so might grace reign through (dia, with Genitive) righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord."
Not that righteousness is the direct agent by which grace reigns, but the obvious meaning is that grace reigns because of righteousness. "Dia" with the Genitive also occurs here:

1 Thessalonians 4:2, "For ye know what commandments we gave you by (dia) the Lord Jesus."
This shows the broad and indefinite use of "dia," for it certainly does not mean that Jesus was the instrument through whom Paul conveyed his commands to the believers. The meaning here is clearly "on behalf of" or "by the authority of." Similarly. in verse 14:

1 Thessalonians 4:14, "...them also which sleep in (dia) Jesus will God bring with him."
We cannot interpret this to mean that Jesus is the agent by which they do their sleeping.

Romans 14:14, "...nothing unclean of (dia, with Genitive) itself..."
That is, by reason of, on account of, itself.
These instances of "dia" with the Genitive are given to show that it is of such broad and varied meaning that its use in John 1:3 and 10 and the other passages quoted is no proof that Jesus was actually present and operative at creation. The fact that Jesus is the center and keystone of God's whole purpose fully satisfies the requirements of these verses. They do not prove his pre-existence.
All things were made by the Spirit-Word, or Spirit-Wisdom, of God. This first chapter of John tells us that this Spirit-Word was made flesh in the person of Jesus Christ (verse 14). Jesus Christ was the embodiment and manifestation of the Word of God. The whole Word or Purpose converges upon him and is expressed in and manifested in him. He is the center, cornerstone and basis of the whole creation. Through him God has made, and is making, all things. But it is a misapplication of this truth, and a confusing of the plain scriptural record, to infer from this that he existed before he was born.

Acts 15:18, "Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world."
The man Christ Jesus was born in Bethlehem as plainly and clearly recorded in Scripture. The Spirit-Word manifested in and through him was eternally with, and of, God. God, not the three-in-one God, but the one true God of the scripture, by the Spirit, manifested Himself in, and spoke and worked through, His Son, the man Christ Jesus. Jesus is the "beginning of the creation of God" (Revelation 3:14). Note particularly that he is part of the "creation of God," and he is clearly not part of the eternal, uncreated One God.
Does this mean that he was the first thing actually created, or does it mean that he is the foundation stone of the final, perfected result? The former alternative is out of harmony with the plain record of his birth - the latter is the very heart of the revelation and purpose.

Colossians 1:15, "Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:"
Does this mean that he was the very first creature ever born? The answer is in verse 18.

Colossians 1:18, "And he is the head of the body, the ecclesia: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence."
And Paul tells the Romans:

Romans 8:29, "For whom he did foreknow, he [God] also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren."
He says Jesus is "the firstfruits of them that slept" (1 Corinthians 15:20). This is clearly the creation of which he is the beginning. If Jesus is a co-eternal, co-equal, immortal, undying, part of the One Supreme God, how can he be the "firstborn from the dead," "the firstfruits of them that slept"? What havoc this Platonic idea of the Trinity plays with the revealed truth of the scripture!

Hebrews 1:1-2, "God...Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;"
Here again, in passing, note these very passages (quoted to "prove" the Trinity) cannot be harmonized with the Greek metaphysical co-eternal, co-equal, none afore, none greater idea. We are here again plainly told that God - the Scriptural One True God - has appointed Jesus heir of all things. Can you not see the absurdity of saying that one co-equal part of the eternal possessor of heaven and earth appoints another co-equal part of the same eternal possessor, to be heir of all things? Can you not see that the Trinity is one conception, and the God of the scripture is something entirely different, and endless absurdity and conflict is created by trying to combine the two ideas - one the heathen idea of men, and the other the divine revelation of God?
And this (Hebrews) is the epistle in which we are told (5:7) Jesus prayed to Him that was able to save him from death, and (5:8) he learned obedience and (5:9), he was made perfect. It is significant that the two "by's" in this passage quoted (Hebrews 1:1-2) are different words in the original. The first ("by His Son") is "en," the second ("by whom He made the worlds") is "dia," to which the remarks made previously apply. Jesus Christ was certainly the foreordained cause, reason or motive for the creation.

Colossians 1:16-17, "For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by [dia] him, and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist."
The same remarks concerning "dia," and the central foreordained place of Jesus Christ in the whole scheme of salvation, apply here. However, it is clear in this case - from the context - that the "all things" in question are "thrones, dominions, principalities and powers." This explanation here teaches us to bear this in mind in connection with the other similar passages. The literal creation of the heaven and earth and their contents was just the first preliminary step in the real "creation" that God is working to and building on the foundation of Jesus Christ.
Jesus said, after his resurrection "All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth" (Matthew 28:18). and 1 Peter 3:22 says "Jesus Christ, who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God, angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him."

Ephesians 1:20-22, "...he [God] raised him [Jesus] from the dead, and set him...Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion...And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church."
Compare this with:

Daniel 4:17, "...the most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will, and setteth up over it the basest of men."
Combining these passages, we can easily see how all visible and invisible thrones, dominions, principalities and powers in heaven and earth are created by and for Jesus.

Colossians 1:17, "And he is before all things..."
The supposed force of this in connection with the doctrine of Christ's pre-existence apparently rests on the idea that the word "before" (pro) has exclusive reference to time. This is not correct. Like the English word "before," it has other meanings, including rank and precedence.
Grimm-Thayer Greek Lexicon (a recognized standard) gives one of the meanings as "superiority" and "preeminence," quoting James 5:12: "But above (pro) all things, my brethren, swear not." And 1 Peter 4:8 - "Above (pro) all things, have fervent charity."
The passage in question (Colossians 1:17) will be seen to correspond better with the context if it is rendered, "And he is above all things." It is superiority, preeminence, and supreme authority and position that the whole passage is emphasizing. Evidence that Colossians 1:17 is referring to preeminence can be found in the very next verse:

Colossians 1:18, "...that in all things he might have the preeminence."

John 17:5, "And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was."
The Scriptures reveal Jesus to us as a man who was divinely begotten of the seed of David by the Holy Spirit overshadowing Mary and causing her to conceive. This child grew in wisdom, grew to manhood, rendered perfect obedience and submission to God in the face of trial and temptation, and on account of that obedience was raised from the dead and exalted by God to glory and honor at His right hand. To introduce an immortal, all-powerful, all-knowing, untemptable, co-equal God into the picture, which the Scriptures never do, is to go immediately to the fantasies of Greek mythology.
How then are we to understand this verse as a harmonious part of the whole scriptural picture? It will be quite clear if we consider similar expressions in other parts of the Scripture. The best interpreter of the scripture is the scripture itself.

2 Timothy 1:9, "...according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,"
Does this prove that we were in existence before the world began?

Ephesians 1:4, "According as he [God] hath chosen us in him [Jesus] before the foundation of the world."
Did the "us" who were "chosen before the foundation of the world" actually exist at that time, or is this speaking of God's purpose and foreknowledge?

Revelation 13:8, "...whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world."
Was Jesus "slain from the foundation of the world"? Yes: in the same sense in which he had glory before the foundation of the world. To have one's name written in the book of life from the foundation of the world is obviously similar to having glory from the foundation of the world. This does not prove pre-existence, but predestination, and is applied to all God's sons, but of course in all cases primarily and pre-eminently to Christ.
God said to Jeremiah:

Jeremiah 1:5, "Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee;"
Is this speaking of foreknowledge and predestination, or does it mean that Jeremiah pre-existed before he was born? Could God know a man - that did not exist? Yes, in His purpose.

Isaiah 45:1,4, "Thus saith the LORD to his anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have holden...I have even called thee by thy name: I have surnamed thee, though thou hast not known me."
This was written well over 100 years before Cyrus was born. Could God hold the hand of a man whose birth was a century in the future? Yes, in His purpose.

Romans 9:11-13, "For the children being not yet born...that the purpose of God according to election might stand...It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated."
God said to Rebekah, "Two nations are in thy womb" (Genesis 25:23). Did these two nations then exist, or is God speaking from the point of view of His foreknowledge and purpose?
Paul said:

Hebrews 7:9-10, "And as I may so say, Levi also, who receiveth tithes, payed tithes in Abraham. For he was yet in the loins of his father, when Melchisedec met him."
Actually, Levi was Abraham's great grandson, and he was not born until more than 150 years after the time Paul said he was "in Abraham's loins" and "paid tithes." Are we to infer from this form of language that Levi pre-existed? Jesus existed in God just as Levi existed in Abraham, except that Jesus existed in a much more vivid and positive sense because he was the very center of the purpose, and everything was framed with him in mind, whereas Levi was, so to speak, just an ordinary and unforeshadowed development from Abraham.

Titus 1:2, "In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began;"
Does this indicate the pre-existence of those to whom eternal life was promised? Trinitarians dare not suggest that it was Jesus Christ to whom it was promised because (apart from the context indicating otherwise), this would be admitting that he did not have eternal life then, and was therefore not co-equal and co-eternal. No, the Scriptures here clearly speak on the basis of eternal purpose and pre-destination.
The foregoing passages surely illustrate, then, the way in which Jesus had glory with God before the world was - the glory which he now prayed to be actually given -- "I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do. And now, O Father, glorify thou me" (John 17:4-5). This would be quite meaningless if he were an immortal God, and had eternally possessed, and therefore still possessed, this glory. Was he praying to another co-equal part of himself, asking to be glorified with glory which he himself had eternally possessed in exact equality and right and power with the One to Whom he prayed? Oh, Trinity, what a mockery of beautiful eternal Truth you are!
The following passages will complete the picture, and show that, in this matter of pre-cosmic glory with God, all the faithful sons of God shared with Christ, as the Body with the Head - he, of course, always primarily and pre-eminently. all were glorified in the "eternal purpose which He purposed in Christ" (Ephesians 3: 11):

Romans 8:29-30, "For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he [Jesus] might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified."
A standard Trinitarian commentary (JFB, Eerdmans Pub. Co.) says on this passage: "All this is viewed as past, because, starting from the past decree of predestination to be conformed to the image of God's Son, of which the other steps are but the successive unfoldings, all is beheld as one entire, eternally-completed salvation."
There, in a Trinitarian's own words, is a beautiful explanation of the pre-cosmic glory of Christ mentioned in John 17:5. In this passage in Romans, Trinitarians are compelled to understand the glory in the pre-destined future, though spoken of in completed and past terms. Otherwise they must believe in the pre-existence of everyone.
He says it is "viewed as past because the decree of predestination is past, and all other steps are successive unfoldings." In other words, "The hidden wisdom which God ordained before the world unto our glory" (1 Corinthians 2:7).

Daniel 3:25, "He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God."
Many use this passage to prove the pre-existence of Christ. I will quote from two respected bible commentaries dealing with this passage:

"...Is like the Son of God. A most improper translation. What notion could this idolatrous king have of the Lord Jesus Christ? for so the place is understood by thousands. "Bar elahin" signifies "a son of the gods", that is, a Divine person or angel; and so the king calls him in Da 3:28: "God hath sent his ANGEL, and delivered his servants." And though even from this some still contend that it was the Angel of the covenant, yet the Babylonish king knew just as much of the one as he did of the other. No other ministration was necessary; a single angel from heaven was quite sufficient to answer this purpose, as that which stopped the mouths of the lions when Daniel was cast into their den." Adam Clarkes Commentary.
"Unconsciously, like Saul, Caiaphas (Joh 11:49-52), and Pilate, he is made to utter divine truths. "Son of God" in his mouth means only an "angel" from heaven, as Da 3:28 proves. Compare Job 1:6; 38:7; Ps 34:7,8; and the probably heathen centurion's exclamation (Mt 27:54). The Chaldeans believed in families of gods: Bel, the supreme god, accompanied by the goddess Mylitta, being the father of the gods; thus the expression he meant: one sprung from and sent by the gods. Really it was the "messenger of the covenant," who herein gave a prelude to His incarnation."Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary.

The Holy Spirit is a person because it is spoken of as "the comforter" (John 14:16,26; 15:26; 16:7), and the Holy Spirit can be "grieved" (Ephesians 4:30).
A man's "spirit" can be stirred up (Acts 17:16), made troubled (Genesis 41:8) or happy (Luke 10:21). His "spirit", i.e. his very essence, his mind and purpose, which gives rise to his actions, is therefore spoken of as a separate person, but, of course, this is not literally so. God's spirit, too, can be spoken of in the same way.
It must also be understood that the Bible often uses the language of personification when talking about abstract things, e.g. wisdom is referred to as a woman in Proverbs 9:1. This is to demonstrate to us what a person who has wisdom would be like in practice; 'wisdom' cannot exist except in someone's mind, and so this device of personification is used.
The "holy spirit" is a reference to the Father in the same sense as we speak of man having a "spirit." When we talk about the "spirit of man" we do not think of a separate "person," but we think of the invisible attributes and living expression of the man. The scripture shows this:

1 Corinthians 2:11, "For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God."
Notice in this passage that the "spirit of man" is put into an analogous parallel with the "spirit of God." When we talk about a "man" having a "spirit," we understand that the man is still only one "person." Yet, when a Trinitarian reads this passage, he assumes that the "spirit of God" and "God" are two separate co-equal "persons." If this is so, then it follows that we should regard a "man" and "his spirit" to be two separate co-equal "persons." Of course, this destroys Paul's comparison. There is no need to regard the "spirit of God" as anything more than a reference to the invisible attributes of our Father in heaven.

Conclusion
Let us not destroy the glorious Scriptural picture of salvation by making our Lord, Jesus Christ, an eternal, pre-existent, omnipotent, untemptable, co-equal God. He was a "man made strong" (Psalms 80:17); a man specially and divinely begotten by the eternal Spirit-Power of God; a man in whom God dwelt, and through whom God spoke and worked and manifested Himself; a man who recognized that of himself he could do nothing - that all power, wisdom and goodness was of God, a man who rendered perfect submission and obedience to God - "Not my will, but Thine, be done" (Luke 22:42).
The doctrine of the Trinity is not scriptural. The idea of 3 co-equal, co-eternal Gods is never to be found anywhere in the scripture. Like the doctrine of the immortality of the soul, it is provedly derived from the philosophy of the pagan Greeks, particularly Plato - the foolish "wisdom of the world" which the Apostles and early believers repudiated and combated, but which the apostate and worldly church later succumbed to.
The very emphatic distinction that Paul makes (in the first 2 chapters of 2nd Corinthians) between the "wisdom of the world" and the wisdom of God ("unto the Greeks foolishness") positively proves that any theology derived from Platonic Greek philosophy (which the Trinity admittedly is) must be false and anti-scriptural.
Be sure your beliefs are derived from and founded upon God's Word, not man's speculations. Anyone who learned their "theology" direct from the scripture would never believe in the Trinity, because there is no such thing taught anywhere therein.

Luke 2:52, "And Jesus increased in wisdom..."
John 17:3, "And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent."
1 Timothy 2:5, "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;"
Acts 2:22, "...Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him..."
John 5:30, "I can of mine own self do nothing...I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me."
John 14:28, "...my Father is greater than I."
Luke 1:35, "And the angel answered and said unto her [Mary], The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God."
It was the baby born of Mary that was the Son of God because he was begotten in her by the Spirit of God. These passages deserve long meditation. They are beautiful, refreshing, and a spiritual antidote to the confused, contradictory human philosophizing of the Platonic doctrine of the Trinity.