An Appeal to Trinitarian Christians

In reading this link on Osama Abdallah's site, he goes and post a article from Jeff Rath on the Trinity. Ironically Mr. Rath is guilty of intentionally twisting every quote he has on this page which he claims refuted the Trinity. Osama explicitedly claims that he posts true material but when you see this page and the quotes actually posted, we will see that Osama doesn't research any of his material and he intentionally post topics that agree with his theology. This is very intruiging and once you see the quotes in their entirety it will be real embarrasing to see how both Mr. Rath and Osama uses material which says the opposite of what they claim including heretics who aren't qualified on the topic along with not mentioning what these heretics believed.

As we will examine in this article, the opposite is the case of what Mr. Rath is actually saying. For Osama, if early Christians believed in a subordinate son, this itself refutes Islam which claims that God does not have a son. So we must ask Osama why are you using material which believes that Jesus is the son of God when Islam says that he isn't? If the Quran claims that Jesus never was the son or didn't claim that he was the Son why is early Christianity along with the historical account along with Mr. Rath's testimony disagreeing with you? By trying to refute the Trinity, Osama has just refuted the Quran which lies and claims that Christians never worshipped Jesus as the Son of God.

Lets actually look at the historical definition of the Trinity to see if it is actually three gods:

Based on Christian and historical doctrine which Mr. Rath and Osama claim to use, the Trinity is 3 persons in ONE God not 3 Gods, which would be tritheism. In ancient Babylon and Greece, which I am very familiar with as a former honor student in Early World History, there is no Trinity in which 3 gods are worshipped at the same time as ONE God. There are many examples of 3 gods but this is tritheism. In order for Mr. Rath to refute the Trinity he must present us with an example of 3 gods being ONE, not his opinion and then claming that Tritheism is a trinity.

The trinity is not having having any gods before God but is having the Son of God who actually gave this commandment as the Angel of Yahweh, before his incarnation, as the true co-equal partner with his father.

We will discuss this in greater detail at the end of this article but for the time being lets expose Mr. Rath along with Osama Abdallah for misquoting.

This quote is found in the Jehovah Witness book on the Trinity. Read the Quote in full context:

Lamson, Alvan: The Church of the First Three Centuries

No need to misrepresent the opinions of one of their own! But it is deceptive to mention that a misquote is from a Trinitarian but not tell you when they are quoting from a fellow Arian. To quote a Unitarian theologian, as an authority to prove the pagan origin of Trinity, is about as trustworthy and believable as quoting the a Catholic Bishop to prove that Peter was the first Pope! Now lets continue with their next quote which they claim refutes the Trinity:

What both Osama and Mr. Rath don't tell you is that Buzzard is a Christadelphian which is a modern day heretic cult of Christianity. Muslims would want us to quote the Nation of Islam as authorities on Islam but they appeal to heretics? Amazing. Look at Mr. Buzzard's quote and its deception on another issue dealing with Trinity:

Buzzard, Anthony: Who is Jesus?

So Mr. Buzzard believes in God but that his thoughts became flesh, which refutes both Mr. Rath and Osama who believe that Jesus isn't God like his father. A person coming from God himself who becomes flesh is biolgoically God also. Amazing!!

Jesus isn't the father, he is the Son, they are two seperate persons who are both God. This doesn't disprove trinity, it proves that certain Christian heretic thinking is false dealing with the Trinity.

Since Noss believes the story of Moses isn't from God nor the inspiration of the Torah, then he refutes Osama's book the Quran which claims that Moses was a prophet of Allah. Also notice that Mr. Rath would agree with a bible hater if he is a unitarian Christian would he? Another one of anti-Trinitarian quotes exposed.

"TRINITY. The word Trinity is not found in the Bible, and, though used by Tertullian in the last decade of the 2nd century, it did not find a place formally in the theology of the Church till the 4th century. It is, however, the distinctive and all comprehensive doctrine of the Christian faith and gathers up into the seam of a single grand generalization with respect to the being and activity of God all the major aspects of Christian truth' (Lowry). Theology seeks to define the subsistence of God by stating that God is one in His essential being, but that the divine essence exists in three modes or forms, each constituting a Person, yet in such a way that the divine essence is wholly in each Person. I. DERIVATION: a. In the Old Testament: Though the doctrine is not developed in the Old Testament, it is implicit in the divine self disclosure from the very beginning. But in accordance with the historical character or the divine revelation it is presented at first only in a very rudimentary form. this is found not only in isolated passages but interwoven in the entire organism of the Old Testament revelation. The earliest foreshadowing is contained in the narrative of the creation, where Elohim is seen to create by means of Word and Spirit (Gn. i. 3). Here we are for the first time introduced to the Word put forth as a personal creative power, and to the Spirit as the bringer of life and order to the creation. There is revealed thus early a threefold centre of activity. God as Creator thought out the universe, expressed His thought in a Word, and made His Spirit its animating principle, thus indicating that the universe was not to have a separate existence apart from God or opposed to Him. It is thought that Gn. i. 26 ('And God said, Let us make man in our image and after our likeness') implies that a revelation of the Triune God had been given to man when first created, inasmuch as he was to be given the divine fellowship, but that the consciousness was afterwards lost with the loss of his original righteousness. Both the creative activity of God and His government are at a later stage associated with the Word personified as Wisdom (Pr. viii. 22 ff.; Jb. xxviii. 2327), and with the Spirit as the Dispenser of all blessings and the source of physical strength, courage, culture, and government (Ex. xxxi. 3; Nu. xi. 25; Jdg. iii. 10). The threefold source revealed in creation became still more evident in the unfolding of redemption. The revelation of redemption was entrusted to the tnal'ak Yahweh, the Messenger of Yahweh, sometimes referred to as the Angel of the covenant. We do not claim that in every Old Testament passage in which it appears the designation refers to a divine being, for it is clear that in such passages as 2 Sa. xxiv. 16; 1 Ki. xix. 5; 2 Ki. xix. 35, the reference is to a created angel invested with divine authority for the execution of a special mission. In other passages (e.g. Gn. xvi. 7, xxiv. 7, x1viii. 16) the Angel of Yahweh not only bears the divine name but has divine dignity and power, dispenses divine deliverance and accepts homage and adoration proper only to God. The Spirit of God is also given prominence in connection with revelation and redemption, and is assigned His office in the equipment of the Messiah for His work (Is. xi. 2, x1ii. 1, Ixi. 1) and of His people for the response of faith and obedience (Joel ii. 28; Is. xxxii. 15; Ezk. xxxvi. 26, 27). Thus the God who revealed Himself objectively through the Angel Messenger revealed Himself subjectively in and through the Spirit, the Dispenser of all blessings and gifts within the sphere of redemption. The threefold Aaronic blessing (Nu. vi. 24) must also be noted as perhaps the prototype of the New Testament apostolic blessing." ... "c. In the New Testament: Preparatory to the advent of Christ, the Holy Spirit came into the consciousness of God fearing men in a degree that was not known since the close of Malachi's ministry. John the Baptist, more especially, was conscious of the presence and calling of the Spirit, and it is probable that his preaching had a trinitarian reference: he called for repentance towards God, faith in the coming Messiah, and spoke of a baptism of the Holy Spirit, of which his baptism with water was a symbol. The agency of the Spirit in the incarnation is disclosed to Mary (Lk. i. 35), together with the intimation that the Son born of her would be called 'the Son of the Highest', and that 'the Lord God (would) give unto him the throne of his father David'. Thus the Father and the Spirit were disclosed as operating in the incarnation of the Son. At the baptism in the Jordan the three Persons can be distinguished: the Son being baptized, the Father speaking from heaven, and the Spirit descending in the objective symbol of a dove. Jesus, having thus received the witness of the Father and the Spirit, received authority to baptize with the Holy Spirit. John the Baptist would seem to have recognized very early that the Holy Spirit would come from the Messiah, and not merely with Him. The third Person was thus the Spirit of God and the Spirit of Christ. In His public ministry, as well as in His private teaching of the Twelve, Jesus constantly directed attention to the Father as the One who sent Him on His mission and from whom He derived His authority (Jn. v. 19, 20). In His disputation with the Jews He claimed that His own Sonship was not simply from David, but from a source that made Him David's Lord, and that it had been so at the very time when David uttered the words (Mt. xxii. 43). This would indicate both His deity and preexistence. Christ bore ever clearer testimony to the Person and office of the Spirit as His own ministry was drawing to a close (Jn. xv, xvi), and He designates Him as both the Spirit from the Father and the Spirit from Himself (Jn. xv. 26). This is the basis of Christian belief in the 'double procession' of the Spirit. The fellowship of the Father and the Spirit appears in the work of redemption as revealed by Christ, the Father sending the Son to undertake the work, and the Father and the Son sending the Spirit apply the salvation which Christ wrought. It thus became evident why the God of the covenant was revealed as triune, since salvation was seen to rest upon each of the Persons in the Godhead. Christ's trinitarian teaching received its most clear and concise expression in the baptismal formula: baptizing into 'the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost' (Mt. xxviii. 19). Baptizing 'into the name' is a Hebrew form of expression, rather than a Greek, and it carries with it what would seem a complete break with Judaism in including under a singular name not only the Father, but the Son and the Holy Ghost. The outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost brought the personality of the Holy Spirit into greater prominence and at the same time shed new light from the Spirit upon the Son. The apostolic conception of the Holy Ghost and of His relation to the Father and the Son is clear from Acts. Peter, in explaining the phenomenon of Pentecost, represents it as the activity of the Trinity. 'This Jesus ... being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear' (Acts ii. 32, 33). It is not too much to say that the apostolic Church was built upon faith in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. In the Epistles of Paul, Peter, John, James, and Jude, as well as in the Epistle to the Hebrews, redemption is uniformly traced to the threefold Source, and each Person appears as the object of worship and adoration. The apostolic benediction, 'The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all' (2 Cor. xiii. 14), not only sums up the apostolic teaching, but it interprets the deeper meaning of the Trinity in Christian experience, the saving grace of the Son as that which gives access to the love of the Father and the communion of the Spirit. II. FORMULATION: As already indicated, Scripture does not give us a fully formulated doctrine of the Trinity, but it contains all the elements out of which theology has constructed the doctrine. The teaching of Christ bears testimony to the true personality of each of the distinctions within the Godhead and also sheds light upon the relations existing between the three Persons. It was left to theology to formulate from this a doctrine of the Trinity. The necessity to formulate the doctrine was thrust upon the Church by forces from without, and it was, in particular, its faith in the deity of Christ, and the necessity to defend it, that first compelled the Church to face the duty of formulating a full doctrine of the Trinity for its rule of faith." (New Bible Dictionary, J. D. Douglas & F. F. Bruce, Trinity, p 1298)

Not only do Mr. Rath and Osama fail to supply critical information which misleads the reader & Give false impression that if intimate details of trinity are not in the Bible that Jesus is a creature. This is known as Deceptive quote & False Dilemma: Trinitarian. It's amazing how in order to disprove Trinity both unitarian Christians and Muslims must intentionally lie and leave out quotes to prove their point.

First lets look at the quote dealing with the Americana encyclopedia before we will address the catholic dictionaries:

Encyclopedia Americana

TRINITY, The central and characteristic Christian doctrine of God is that He exists in Three Persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. ("Holy Ghost" is the traditional English translation of Sanctus Spiritus and means the same as "Holy Spirit.") At the same time, the Christian church insists that God is One in "sub- stance" (Latin substantia, existence or inner essence), and thus combines in it "mystery" (a formula or conception which really transcends human understanding) the truths set forth in the Holy Scriptures. It is probably a mistake to assume that the doctrine resulted from the intrusion of Greek metaphysics or philosophy into Christian thought; for the data upon which the doctrine rests, and also its earliest attempts at formulation, are much older than the church's encounter with Greek philosophy. The earliest development of the doctrine may in fact be viewed its an attempt to preserve the balance between the various statements of Scripture, or their implications, without yielding to views which, though logical enough, would have destroyed or abandoned important areas of Christian belief. The simplest affirmation is that God is "Three in One, and One in Three," without making use of such technical terms, derived from law or philosophy, as "substance" or "person." God is Father, and the Father is God; God is Son, and the Son is God; God is Spirit, and the Spirit is God. The statement is often seen, in Latin, in early stained-glass church windows, with three circles at the corners of it triangle and an inner circle connected with each (Fig. 1). The doctrine thus graphically symbolized might perhaps better be described as that of the divine "Triunity" rather than the "Trinity." At best the terms "substance" and "person" are themselves only symbolic, and point to a mysterious reality which cannot be either literally described or mathematically formulated. Furthermore, these two terms are, in English, only the rough equivalents of their Latin originals, which had far wider connotations than the English words now possess. The term "Trinity" (Greek Trias) was first used by Theophilus of Antioch (fl. c. 180 A.D.), and provide a convenient term of reference, though it did not provide a definition. The scriptural data for the doctrine of God begins in the Old Testament, which lays the greatest emphasis upon pure monotheism: God is One (as in the sacred Sheina, "Hear, 0 Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord"; Deuteronomy 6:4). The prophetic religion of Israel steadily rose high above the polytheistic and often immoral pagan cults of the surrounding world. Hence the attempt to combine the worship of Yahweli, Israel's one and only God, with that of pagan gods, or to introduce or, once introduced, to retain, pagan ideas or religious customs was strongly resisted by the prophets and psalmists. Eventually, Judaism emerged from the long struggle as a religion with one and only one God, the purest monotheism in the ancient world. Such expressions as "Let us make man" (Genesis 1:26) is probably only an echo of the early Hebrew, conception of a divine court, the "company of heaven," supernatural or angelic beings surrounding God in heaven. There was no other God beside Him (Deuteronomy 32:39; Isaiah 46:9). This theistic faith is completely taken for granted in the New Testament and in the early Christian creeds. Instead of a reversion in the direction of polytheism, with a plurality of divine beings, the development of Trinitarian doctrine was guided by the same principle of divine revelation as that reflected in the Old Testament, that is, from plurality to unity. For the early Christian belief that Jesus was divine, the Son of God, and that as the risen, glorified Messiah or Lord, He was now at the right hand of God: required the use of theistic language. The oldest surviving fragment of an early Christian liturgical prayer is probably "Our Lord, come" (Maranatha, I Corinthians 16:22; compare Revelation 22:20); it implies that prayer was addressed to the risen, glorified Christ. The Aramaic title Mar or Lord (Greek Kyrios; I Corinthians 12:3) was a term or title regularly used in religious worship. A similar situation existed in the language used of the Holy Spirit. Though at first impersonal (compare Acts 8:15-16, 10:44), as if the Spirit could be referred to as "it," in time the language of Christian preaching, teaching, and worship clearly involved the conception of a divine person. The Spirit from God, sent by God, was also divine, and therefore was God. Such formulas as Paul's "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit" (11 Corinthians 13:14) are not necessarily theological, that is, metaphysical or philosophical, but they clearly point the direction in which Christian thought was inevitably moving." ... "The Athanasian Creed was the most explicit of the creedal statements of the doctrine of the Trinity. Still later controversies, such as the one which provided the pre-text for division between Eastern and Western Christianity, namely, the debate over the language to be used of the Holy Spirit its "proceeding from the Father and the Son," rather than "through the Son," rest upon variant interpretations of the language of Scripture, and not upon some abstruse metaphysical theory - though metaphysics was often introduced in support of views already adopted. The full development of Trinitarianism took place in the West, in the Scholasticism of the Middle Ages, when an explanation was under-taken in terms of philosophy and psychology, especially of the recovered Aristotelianism of the 13th century. The classical exposition is found in the works of St. Thomas Aquinas, whose views on this subject have dominated most of later Christian theology, both Roman Catholic and Protestant. (Encyclopedia Americana, Trinity, p116)

We have already discussed Mr. Buzzard above so lets know look at the Catholic Encyclopedias in greater detail:

Catholic Encyclopedia’s and Dictionaries

1. Attempts have been made recently to apply the more extreme theories of comparative religion [pagan similarities] to the doctrine of the Trinity, and to account for it by an imaginary law of nature compelling men to group the objects of their worship in threes. ... It seems needless to give more than a reference to these extravagant views, which serious thinkers of every school reject as destitute of foundation. (The Catholic Encyclopedia, 1912, Vol. 15, p 47-49)
2. PROOF OF DOCTRINE FROM SCRIPTURE-A. New Testament.-The evidence from the Gospels culminates in the baptismal commission of Matt., xxviii, 20. It is manifest from the narratives of the Evangelists that Christ only made the great truth known to the Twelve step by step. First He taught them to recognize in himself the Eternal Son of God. When His ministry was drawing to a close, He promised that the Father would send another Divine Person, the Holy Spirit, in His place. Finally, after His resurrection, He revealed the [trinity] doctrine in explicit terms, bidding them go and teach all nations, "baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost" (Matt. 28:19). The force of this passage is decisive. That "the Father" and "the Son" are distinct Persons follows from the terms themselves, which are mutually exclusive. The mention of the Holy Spirit in the same series, the names being connected one with the other by the conjunctions "and . . . and", is evidence that we have here a Third Person co-ordinate with the Father and the Son, and excludes altogether the supposition that the Apostles understood the Holy Spirit not as a distinct Person, but as God viewed in His action on creatures. The phase "in the name" [Greek] affirms alike the Godhead of the Persons and their unity of nature. (The Catholic Encyclopedia, 1912, Vol. 15, p 47-49)
3. It is incredible that the phrase "in the name" should be here employed, were not all the Persons mentioned equally Divine. More over, the use of the singular, "name", and not the plural, shows that these Three Persons are that One Omnipotent God in whom the Apostles believed. (The Catholic Encyclopedia, 1912, Vol. 15, p 47-49)
4. The supernatural appearance at the baptism of Christ is often cited as an explicit revelation of Trinitarian doctrine, given at the very commencement of the Ministry. This, it seems to us, is a mistake. The Evangelists it is true, see in it a manifestation of the Three Divine Persons. (The Catholic Encyclopedia, 1912, Vol. 15, p 47-49)
5. Besides these passages there are many others in the Gospels which refer to one or other of the Three Persons in particular, and clearly express the separate - personality and Divinity of each. (The Catholic Encyclopedia, 1912, Vol. 15, p 47-49)
6. The Divinity of Christ is amply attested not merely by St. John, but by the Synoptists. (The Catholic Encyclopedia, 1912, Vol. 15, p 47-49)
7. St. John’s testimony is yet more explicit than that of the Synoptists. He expressly asserts that the very purpose of his Gospel is to establish the Divinity of Jesus Christ (John, xx 31). In the prologue he identifies Him with the Word, the only begotten of the Father, Who from all eternity exists with God, Who is God (John, i, 1-18). (The Catholic Encyclopedia, 1912, Vol. 15, p 47-49)
8. Rationalist critics lay great stress upon the text: "The Father is greater than I" (xiv, 28). They argue that this suffices to establish that the author of the Gospel held subordinationist views, and they expound in this sense certain texts in which the Son declares His dependence on the Father (v, 19; viii, 28). In point of fact the doctrine of the Incarnation involves that, in regard of His Human Nature, the Son should be less than the Father. No argument against Catholic doctrine can, therefore, be drawn from this text. (The Catholic Encyclopedia, 1912, Vol. 15, p 47-49)
9. In regard to the Third Person of the Blessed Trinity, the passages which can be cited from the Synoptists as attesting His distinct personality are few. ... But in Luke, 12:12 "The Holy Ghost shall teach you in the same our what you must say" (Matt. 10:20, and Luke, 24:49), His personality is clearly implied.(The Catholic Encyclopedia, 1912, Vol. 15, p 47-49)
10. We have in these chapters the necessary preparation for the baptismal commission. In them the Apostles are instructed not only as to the personality of the Spirit, but as to His office towards the church. (The Catholic Encyclopedia, 1912, Vol. 15, p 47-49)
11. It is evident that, were the Spirit not a Person, Christ could not have spoken of His presence with the Apostles as comparable to His own presence with them (xiv, 16, 17). Again, were He not a Divine Person it could not have been expedient for the Apostles that Christ should leave them, and the Paraclete take His place (xvi, 7). (The Catholic Encyclopedia, 1912, Vol. 15, p 47-49)
12. In certain texts the coordination of Father, Son, and Spirit leaves no possible doubt as to the meaning of the writer. Thus in II Cor, xiii, 13, St. Paul writes: "The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the charity of God and the communication of the Holy Ghost be with you all." Here the construction shows that the Apostle is speaking of three distinct Persons. Moreover, since the names God and Holy Ghost are alike Divine names, it follows that Jesus Christ is also regarded as a Divine Person. (The Catholic Encyclopedia, 1912, Vol. 15, p 47-49)
13. In the Apostolic writings theos may almost be said to be treated as a proper name of God the Father, and Kurios of the Son (of. e. g. I Cor xii 5 6); in only a few passages do we find kurios used of the Father (I Cor., iii, 5; vii, 17) or theos of Christ. (The Catholic Encyclopedia, 1912, Vol. 15, p 47-49)
14. The doctrine as to the Holy Spirit is equally clear. That His distinct personality was fully recognized is shown by many passages. Thus He reveals His commands to the Church's ministers: " As they were ministering to the Lord and fasting the Holy Ghost said to them: Separate me Saul and Barnabas" (Acts, xiii, 2). He directs the missionary journey of the Apostles: "They attempt to go into Bithynia, and the Spirit of Jesus suffered them not" (Acts, xvi, 7; of. Acts, v, 3; xv, 28; Rom., xv, 30). Divine attributes are affirmed of Him. (The Catholic Encyclopedia, 1912, Vol. 15, p 47-49)
15. To sum up: the various elements of the Trinitarian doctrine are all expressly taught in the New Testament. The Divinity of the Three Persons is asserted or implied in passages too numerous to count. (The Catholic Encyclopedia, 1912, Vol. 15, p 47-49)
16. The early Fathers were persuaded that indications of the doctrine of the Trinity must exist in the Old Testament and they found such indications in not a few passages. Many of them not merely believed that the Prophets had testified of it, they held that it had been made known even to the Patriarchs. (The Catholic Encyclopedia, 1912, Vol. 15, p 47-49)

1. The word Trinity (tri’as) first occurs in Theophilus of Antioch (" Ad Autol." ii. 15, PG, vi-1078 ; of. Tertullian " De Pud." 21, PL, ii. 1026), who wrote about 180, but the doctrine, which the word expresses appears in the New Testament and has its roots in the Old Testament. The Doctrine in the Old Testament.- ... "Jehovah said to the angels, ministering before Him, who were created on the second day of the creation of the world, "Let us make man in our image."' This view has met with the approval of some modern scholars, but there is no mention of angels in the context, and the notion of angelic agency in creation is Babylonian and Persian, but not Biblical. ... The real origin of this plural form is obscure, but anyhow Petavius most rightly refuses to see in it any allusion to a plurality of Divine Persons. The word for a human master is also often plural, and the same plural form of the word God with a singular verb is used of Dagon (Jud. xvi. 23). ... In a few passages the Old Testament ascribes Divine attributes to the Messiah, and this, as the Messiah is sent by and is distinct from God (the Father), implies a duality of Persons in God. Some places often adduced, although their true sense and reference to our Lord are certain to us from the light of the New Testament, are scarcely conclusive in and by themselves. (A Catholic Dictionary, William E. Addis & Thomas Arnold, 1960, p 822-830)
2. The Trinity in the New Testament. ... Christ in the Synoptic Gospels certainly claims attributes which can hardly be less than divine... In Rom. 9:5, as commonly translated, we have the strongest statement of Christ's divinity in St. Paul, and, indeed, in the N.T. ; " Whose are the Fathers, and from whom is the Christ according to the flesh, who is the God over all blessed for ever, Amen." We cannot enter on a discussion of the rendering here. In any case, the text cannot be conclusively urged, against an opponent. There is no reason in grammar or in the context which forbids us to translate " God who is over all, be blessed for ever, Amen"---& doxology suddenly introduced, but quite in St. Paul's manner (Gal. 1. 5; of Rom. i. 25 ; 2 Cor. xi. 31). ... The divinity and distinct existence of the Word are most clearly taught in St. John's Gospel. (A Catholic Dictionary, William E. Addis & Thomas Arnold, 1960, p 822-830)
3. But is a personal existence clearly attributed to the Spirit? No doubt, all through the N.T. his action is described as personal. He speaks (Mk. xiii 11 ; Acts viii. 29), bears witness (Rom. viii. 16; 1 Jn. v. 6), searches (I Cor. ii. 10), decides (Acts xv. 28), helps and intercedes (Rom. viii. 26), apportions the gifts of grace (1 Cor. xii. 11). Most of these places furnish no cogent proof of personality. ... In the fourth Gospel, however, this personal existence is stated more fully and plainly ... I will ask the Father and He will give you another advocate, that Her may be with you for ever, the Spirit of truth. I will not leave you orphans, I will come to you " (v. 16-18). "Advocate " is the same name given in 1 Jn- to Christ Himself, our advocate with the Father, and in each case the name is a personal one. ... Trinitarian formulae occur throughout the N.T. books. ... The persons of the Trinity are further mentioned together by St. Paul (2 Cor. 13:13) and by St. Peter (I Ep. i. 1-2). (A Catholic Dictionary, William E. Addis & Thomas Arnold, 1960, p 822-830)
4. Considering the strict Monotheism of the NT.,-such language implies the divinity, as well as the personality, of Father, Son and Holy Ghost, and they are sufficient warrant for refusing to believe that N.T. writers did not know the doctrine, because they did not, like St. John, state it explicitly. (A Catholic Dictionary, William E. Addis & Thomas Arnold, 1960, p 822-830)
5. The Semi-Arians, who thought it enough to admit the Son's likeness to the Father, but would not allow the second Person to be equal to or consubstantial with the first, were driven by the force of logic, to make the Holy Ghost a creature. (A Catholic Dictionary, William E. Addis & Thomas Arnold, 1960, p 822-830)

The Catholic Encyclopedia, 1912

New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1965

A Catholic Dictionary, William E. Addis & Thomas Arnold, 1960

I. THE DOGMA of the Trinity-The Trinity is the term employed to signify the central doctrine of the Christian religion-the truth that in the unity of the Godhead there are Three Persons the Father the Son, and the Holy Spirit, these three Persons being truly distinct one from another. Thus, in the words of the Athanasian Creed: "the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God, and yet there are not three Gods but one God." In this Trinity of Persons the Son is begotten of the Father by an eternal generation, and the Holy Spirit proceeds by an eternal procession from the Father and the Son'. Yet, notwithstanding this difference as to origin, the Persons are co-eternal and co-equal: all alike are uncreated and omnipotent. This the Church teaches is the revelation regarding 'God's nature which Jesus Christ, the Son of God came upon earth to deliver to the world: and which she proposes to man as the foundation of her whole dogmatic system. In Scripture there is as yet no single term by which the Three Divine Persons are denoted together. The word [tri'as] (of which the Latin trinitas is a translation) is first found in Theophilus of Antioch about A. D. 180. He speaks of "the Trinity of God [the Father], His Word and His Wisdom" ("Ad. Autol.", 11, 15, P. G., VI, 1078). The term may, of course, have been in use before his time. Shortly afterwards it appears in its Latin form of trinitas in Tertullian. ... It is manifest that a dogma so mysterious presupposes a Divine revelation. When the fact of revelation, understood in its full sense as the speech of God to man, is no longer admitted, the rejection of the doctrine follows as a necessary consequence. For this reason it has no place in the Liberal Protestantism of today. The writers of this school contend that the doctrine of the Trinity, as professed by the Church, is not contained in the New Testament, but that it was first formulated in the second century and received final approbation in the fourth, as the result of the Arian and Macedonian controversies (cf. e. g. Harnack, "Hist. of Dogma", tr., IV, i, appendix; idem, "Constitution and Law of the Church", ...) In view of this assertion it is necessary to consider in some detail the evidence afforded by Holy Scripture. Attempts have been made recently to apply the more extreme theories of comparative religion [pagan similarities] to the doctrine of the Trinity, and to account for it by an imaginary law of nature compelling men to group the objects of their worship in threes. ... It seems needless to give more than a reference to these extravagant views, which serious thinkers of every school reject as destitute of foundation. II PROOF OF DOCTRINE FROM SCRIPTURE-A. New Testament.-The evidence from the Gospels culminates in the baptismal commission of Matt., xxviii, 20. It is manifest from the narratives of the Evangelists that Christ only made the great truth known to the Twelve step by step. First He taught them to recognize in himself the Eternal Son of God. When His ministry was drawing to a close, He promised that the Father would send another Divine Person, the Holy Spirit, in His place. Finally, after His resurrection, He revealed the [trinity] doctrine in explicit terms, bidding them go and teach all nations, "baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost" (Matt. 28:19). The force of this passage is decisive. That "the Father" and "the Son" are distinct Persons follows from the terms themselves, which are mutually exclusive. The mention of the Holy Spirit in the same series, the names being connected one with the other by the conjunctions "and . . . and", is evidence that we have here a Third Person co-ordinate with the Father and the Son, and excludes altogether the supposition that the Apostles understood the Holy Spirit not as a distinct Person, but as God viewed in His action on creatures. The phase "in the name" [Greek] affirms alike the Godhead of the Persons and their unity of nature. Among the Jews and in the Apostolic Church the Divine name was representative of God. He who had a right to use it was invested with vast authority: for he wielded the supernatural powers of Him whose name he employed. It is incredible that the phrase "in the name" should be here employed, were not all the Persons mentioned equally Divine. More over, the use of the singular, "name", and not the plural, shows that these Three Persons are that One Omnipotent God in whom the Apostles believed. Indeed the unity of God is so fundamental a tenet alike of the Hebrew and of the Christian religion, and is affirmed in such countless passages of the Old and New Testaments, that any explanation inconsistent with this doctrine would be altogether inadmissible. The supernatural appearance at the baptism of Christ is often cited as an explicit revelation of Trinitarian doctrine, given at the very commencement of the Ministry. This, it seems to us, is a mistake. The Evangelists it is true, see in it a manifestation of the Three Divine Persons. Yet, apart from Christ's subsequent teaching, the dogmatic meaning of the scene would hardly have been understood. Moreover, the Gospel narratives appear understood to signify that none but Christ and the Baptist were privileged to am the Mystic Dove, and hear the words attesting the Divine sonship of the Messias. Besides these passages there are many others in the Gospels which refer to one or other of the Three Persons in particular, and clearly express the separate - personality and Divinity of each. In regard to the First Person it will not be necessary to give special citations: those which declare that Jesus Christ is God the Son affirm thereby also the separate personality of the Father. The Divinity of Christ is amply attested not merely by St. John, but by the Synoptists. As this point is treated elsewhere (see Jesus Christ), it will be sufficient here to enumerate a few of the more important passages from the Synoptists, in which Christ bears witness to His Divine Nature. (1) He declares that He will come to be the judge of all men (Matt., xxv, 31). In Jewish theology the judgment of the world was a distinctively Divine, and not a Messianic, prerogative. (2) In the parable of the wicked husbandmen, He describes Himself as the son of the householder, while the Prophets, one and all, are represented as the servants (Matt., xxi, 33 sqq.). (3) He is the Lord of Angels, who execute His commands (Matt., xxiv, 31). (4) He proves the confession of Peter when he recognizes Him, not as Messias-a step long since taken by all the Apostles-but explicitly as the Son of God: and He declares the knowledge due to a special revelation from the Father (Matt., xvi, 16 17). (5) Finally, before Caiphas He not merely declares Himself to be the Messias, but in reply to a second and distinct question affirms His claim to be the Son of God. He is instantly declared by the high priest to be guilty of blasphemy, an offence which could not have been attached to the claim to be simply the Messias (Luke, XXI 66-71). St. John’s testimony is yet more explicit than that of the Synoptists. He expressly asserts that the very purpose of his Gospel is to establish the Divinity of Jesus Christ (John, xx 31). In the prologue he identifies Him with the Word, the only begotten of the Father, Who from all eternity exists with God, Who is God (John, i, 1-18). The immanence of the Son in the Father and of the Father in the Son is declared in Christ's words to St. Philip: " Do you not believe, that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me?" (xiv, 10), and in other passages no less explicit (xiv, 7; xvi, 15; xvii, 21). The oneness of their power and their action is affirmed: "What things so ever he [the Father] doth, these the Son also doth in like manner" (v, 19. Cf. x, 38); and to the Son no less than to the Father belongs the Divine attribute of conferring life on whom He will (v, 21). Inx, 29, Christ expressly teaches His unity of essence with the Father: "That which my Father hath given me, is greater than all . . . I and the Father are one." The words, "That which my Father hath given me", can, having regard to the context, have no other meaning than the Divine Nature, possessed in its fullness by the Son as by the Father. Rationalist critics lay great stress upon the text: "The Father is greater than I" (xiv, 28). They argue that this suffices to establish that the author of the Gospel held subordinationist views, and they expound in this sense certain texts in which the Son declares His dependence on the Father (v, 19; viii, 28). In point of fact the doctrine of the Incarnation involves that, in regard of His Human Nature, the Son should be less than the Father. No argument against Catholic doctrine can, therefore, be drawn from this text. So, too, the passages referring to the dependence of the Son upon the Father do but express what is essential to Trinitarian dogma, viz., that the Father is the supreme source from Whom the Divine Nature and perfections flow to the Son. (On the essential difference between St. John's doctrine as to the Person of Christ and the Logos doctrine of the Alexandrine Philo, to which many Rationalists have attempted to trace it see LOGOS.) In regard to the Third Person of the Blessed Trinity, the passages which can be cited from the Synoptists as attesting His distinct personality are few. The words of Gabriel (Luke, i, 35), having regard to the use of the term, "the Spirit", in the Old Testament, to signify God as operative in His creatures, can hardly be said to contain a definite revelation of the doctrine. For the same reason it is dubious whether Christ's warning to the Pharisees as regards blasphemy against the Holy Spirit (Matt., xii, 31) can be brought forward as proof. But in Luke, 12:12 "The Holy Ghost shall teach you in the same our what you must say" (Matt. 10:20, and Luke, 24:49), His personality is clearly implied. These passages, taken in connexion with Matt., xxviii 19 Postulate the existence of such teaching as we find in the discourses in the Cenacle reported by St. John (xiv-xvi). We have in these chapters the necessary preparation for the baptismal commission. In them the Apostles are instructed not only as to the personality of the Spirit, but as to His office towards the church. His work is to teach them whatsoever He shall hear (xvi 13), to bring back to their minds the teaching of Christ (xiv, 26) to convince the world of sin (xvi, 8). It is evident that, were the Spirit not a Person, Christ could not have spoken of His presence with the Apostles as comparable to His own presence with them (xiv, 16, 17). Again, were He not a Divine Person it could not have been expedient for the Apostles that Christ should leave them, and the Paraclete take His place (xvi, 7). Moreover, notwithstanding the neuter form of the word [Greek], the pronoun used in His regard is the masculine [Greek]. The distinction of the Holy Spirit from the Father and from the Son is involved in the express statements that He proceeds from the Father and is sent by the Son (xv, 26; cf. xiv. 16, 26). Nevertheless, He is One with Them: His presence with the Disciples is at the same time the presence of the Son (xiv, 17, 18), while the presence of the Son is the presence of the Father (xiv, 23). In the remaining New Testament writings numerous passages attest how clear and definite was the belief of the Apostolic Church in the three Divine Persons. In certain texts the coordination of Father, Son, and Spirit leaves no possible doubt as to the meaning of the writer. Thus in II Cor, xiii, 13, St. Paul writes: "The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the charity of God and the communication of the Holy Ghost be with you all." Here the construction shows that the Apostle is speaking of three distinct Persons. Moreover, since the names God and Holy Ghost are alike Divine names, it follows that Jesus Christ is also regarded as a Divine Person. So also, in I Con, xii, 4-11: "There are diversities of graces, but the same Spirit; and there are diversities of ministries, but the same Lord: and there are diversities of operations, but the same God, who worketh all [of them] in all [persons]". (Cf. also Eph., iv; 4-6; 1 Pet., i, 2, 3.) But apart from passages such as these, where there is express mention of the Three Persons the teaching of the New Testament regarding Christ and the Holy Spirit is free from all ambiguity. In regard to Christ, the Apostles employ modes of speech which, to men brought up in the Hebrew faith, necessarily signified belief in His Divinity. Such, for instance, is the use 'of the Doxology in reference to Him. The Doxology, "To Him be glory for ever and ever " (cf. I Par xvi 36 * xxix 11 -Ps. ciii, 3 1; xxviii, 2), is an expression of praise offered to God alone. In the New Testament we find it addressed not alone to God the Father, but to Jesus Christ (II Tim., iv, 18; 11 Pet iii 18- Apoc i,6, Heb., xiii, 20, 21), and to God the Father and to Christ in conjunction -(Apoc v, 13; vii, 10). Not less convincing is the use of the title Lord Kurios. This term represents the Hebrew Adonai, just as God (theos) represents Elohim. The two are equally Divine names (cf. I Con, viii, 4). In the Apostolic writings theos may almost be said to be treated as a proper name of God the Father, and Kurios of the Son (of. e. g. I Cor xii 5 6); in only a few passages do we find kurios used of the Father (I Cor., iii, 5; vii, 17) or theos of Christ. The Apostles from time to time apply to Christ passages of the Old Testament in which kurios is used, e. g., I Cor, x, 9 (Num., xxi, 7), Heb., i, 10-12 (Ps. ci,26-28); and they use Such expressions as "the fear of the Lord " (Acts, ix 31 * Il Cor v 11 - Eph., v, 21), "call upon the name of the Lord, " indifferently of God the Father and of Christ (Acts, ii, 21; ix, 14; Rom., x, 13). The profession that "Jesus is the Lord" ([Greek] Rom., x 9 [Greek], I Cor. xii, 3) is the acknowledgment of Jesus as Jahweh (Lebreton, "Origines", 272 sq.) - The texts in which St. Paul affirms that in Christ dwells the plenitude of the Godhead (Col., ii, 9), that before His incarnation He possessed the essential nature of God (Phil., ii, 6), that He " is over all things, God blessed for ever" (Rom., ix, 5), tell us nothing that is not implied in many other passages of his Epistles. The doctrine as to the Holy Spirit is equally clear. That His distinct personality was fully recognized is shown by many passages. Thus He reveals His commands to the Church's ministers: " As they were ministering to the Lord and fasting the Holy Ghost said to them: Separate me Saul and Barnabas" (Acts, xiii, 2). He directs the missionary journey of the Apostles: "They attempt to go into Bithynia, and the Spirit of Jesus suffered them not" (Acts, xvi, 7; of. Acts, v, 3; xv, 28; Rom., xv, 30). Divine attributes are affirmed of Him. He possesses omniscience and reveals to the Church mysteries known only to God (I Cor., ii,10); it is He who distributes charismata (I Con, xii, 11); He is the giver of supernatural life (11 Con, iii, 6); He dwells in the Church and in the souls of individual men as in His temple (Rom., viii, 9-11; 1 Con, iii, 16, vi, 19). The work of justification and sanctification is attributed to Him (I Con, vi, 11; Rom., xv, 16), just as in other passages the same operations are attributed to Christ (I Cor. i,2; Gal., ii, 17). To sum up: the various elements of the Trinitarian doctrine are all expressly taught in the New Testament. The Divinity of the Three Persons is asserted or implied in passages too numerous to count. The unity of essence is not merely postulated by the strict monotheism of men nurtured in the religion of Israel ' to whom "subordinate deities" would have been unthinkable; but it is, as we have seen, involved in the baptismal commission of Matt., xxviii, 19, and, in regard to the Father and the Son, expressly asserted in John, x, 38. That the Persons are co-eternal and co-equal is a mere corollary from this. In regard to the Divine processions, the doctrine of the first procession is contained in the very terms Father and Son: the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and Son is taught in the discourse of the Lord reported by St. John (xiv-xvii) (see HOLY GHOST). B. Old Testament.-The early Fathers were persuaded that indications of the doctrine of the Trinity must exist in the Old Testament and they found such indications in not a few passages. Many of them not merely believed that the Prophets had testified of it, they held that it had been made known even to the Patriarchs. ... Some of these, however, admitted that a knowledge of the mystery was granted to the Prophets and Saints of the Old Dispensation ... It may be readily conceded that the way is