Sola Scriptura allows a Christian to reject the Trinity


And not just the Trinity, but any and every fundamental tenet of Christianity. If a Christian does not find the Trinity in Scripture, no force or argument on earth can declare him wrong.

No appeal to education will work, because Scripture trumps education, and besides, the meaning of Scripture is clear, is it not?

No appeal to creeds or confessions will work, because Scripture trumps creeds and confessions.

No appeal to Councils will work, because Scripture trumps Councils. If Councils did have such authority all Protestants would be Catholic.

No appeal to Tradition will work, because Scripture trumps Tradition. If Tradition did have such authority all Protestants would be Catholic.

There is, quite simply, no possible way to state with authority that a Christian who does not find the Trinity in Scripture is wrong. There are no right or wrong interpretations of Scripture, only those which are more popular and those which are less popular. And the more popular ones can rightly be described as nothing more than Catholic baggage that has not (yet) been discarded.


How can you not find the Trinity in scripture though?

God Bless,


Umm, the same way you cannot find the real, substantial presence of Christ in the Eucharist? :wink:

The fact is, there is a substantial population of Christian believers who do not find the Trinity in the Scriptures. Besides, if it were that obvious there would have been no need for those Councils which clarified the matter (but of course in the world of SS Councils have no ultimate authority).


Church a block away from where I work has plastered all over the outside walls about how they are Jesus only… as scripture says…

they don’t seem to think that Trinity is biblical

In Christ


And since all created effects produced by God are the work of The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit and since only God can grant a share of the divine nature, the Triune God is the sole principal cause of the sacraments and of all of the graces imparted by each reception of a sacrament. No Trinity - no sacraments.


Can we really say that there is no evidence of the Trinity in the Bible?

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

Granted, this requires and inference. But surely an inference is better than justifying an entire doctrine for which no direct text exists. Jesus doesn’t say the word Trinity, but he clearly references all three parts.

Are you just talking about the idea of 3 persons in one God? If so, I think I see what you mean. I think I jumped the gun on my post here, but I’m just going to leave it for the sake of discussion.


What I think is that Protestantism is slowly but surely throwing off all the Catholic theological “baggage” that it kept initially, probably through intertia more than anything else. Protestantism is destined, even designed to morph into ever more strange and heretical forms since it has no anchor, no authority.

In a similar fashion, the Western world is throwing off all the Catholic moral baggage that it kept through inertia as it separated itself from the Church.


No, my position is not that one cannot find evidence for the Trinity in Scripture (especially confirming evidence), but only that, if one follows sola Scriptura, one can also find evidence against it, and if one finds that latter evidence more persuasive, then there is not one person on this whole green earth who can argue, by SS, that such a finding against the Trinity is wrong or outside of Christianity.


That’s funny you mention this today. I was trying to explain this to my father last night. He is a fallen away Catholic, gone Protestant.

I was explaining to him the irony that many Protestants think the Pope’s role and the conclave of bishops acually makes it EASIER to change doctrine, dogma, whatever, when in fact, it’s a complex system of checks and balances that ensures that church teachings stay the SAME without some serious Holy Spirit power present.

But unlike the Catholic church, many protestant denominations have no council or conference, or person to keep the beliefs in check. Their beliefs can gradually shift over the years and they will never even realize it.


Right, gotcha. I agree.


Here’s another one:

Sola Scriptura allows a Christian to reject the necessity of a Baptism:

3 Jesus answered and said to him, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.”
4 Nicodemus said to Him, “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born?”
5 Jesus answered, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.

The Baptist that was talking to last night explained to me that he is 100% certain that a Baptism by water is not necessary to attain Salvation. He says it is 100% clear from the scripture alone that Jesus is saying here: You are to be born once of your mother (water) and again later by the spirit (which occures when you are “saved”). He says, like the Holy Communion, that Baptism is a SYMBOL ONLY, and not a necessary ingrediant.


Prime example of Theology “Creep”…

A ND Church my wife use to go to a while back use to teach at least mostly OK stuff… Still faith alone/Scripture alone… but all in all, they seemed to hold on to many otherwise ‘Catholic’ things… Believed their Eucharist was the body and blood, requirement for Baptism (albeit they believed immersion only) and the importance of ‘living’ your faith… not simply believing…

Anyway, so, I go with her to visit recently… All the same people, All the same music… same pastor…

However, In the intervening years, they had moved to feeling like any organized faith background beyond the local church should be suspect, and were basically teaching watered down ‘Prosperity’ gospel…

Most of the people there would have never agreed with it several years earlier, but because the change was so slow, there they were… clapping away in agreement…

My wife made the comment that if she was looking for a church now, she would have passed it over

Sad really, it actually was a pretty decent church

In Christ


[FONT=Times New Roman][FONT=‘Times New Roman’]The group of non-Catholic “Christians” that really get me are the ones really out on the liberal fringe who claim that Christ was not divine, no miracles actually took place, they are simply myths developed by his uneducated followers, that Christ did not really rise from the dead. Etc. [/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman]Yet they still call themselves “Christians” in fact they call themselves theologians.[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman]Christ was just a man but we should worship him anyway?[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman]Anyone can have a poor interpretation of scripture, but it takes someone with a PhD to mess their biblical interpretation up that much.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman] [/FONT]
[FONT=‘Times New Roman’]Chuck[/FONT]


Yep the boiling frog syndrome.

Throw a frog into a pot of boiling water and he jumps right out and hops for the hills.

Put the same from in a pot of cold water and add heat and he sits there tell he’s soup.



It is my experience that those who reject the trinity were taught man made tradition, religion to do so.


You have conflated two concepts here:

  1. What Scripture says.

  2. Our individual ability to understand what Scripture says.

What Scripture says will be of no use to those who reject God. Only the sheep (those who belong to God) are able to understand the fundamental tenets of biblical Christianity through the illumination of the Spirit. Scripture says:

“I tell you the truth, the man who does not enter the sheep pen by the gate, but climbs in by some other way, is a thief and a robber. The man who enters by the gate is the shepherd of his sheep. The watchman opens the gate for him, and the sheep listen to his voice. He calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. When he has brought out all his own, he goes on ahead of them, and his sheep follow him because they know his voice. But they will never follow a stranger; in fact, they will run away from him because they do not recognize a stranger’s voice.” Jesus used this figure of speech, but they did not understand what he was telling them.


Well, nobody comes to the bible “pure”. And it’s also true that people can find just about anything in the bible if they have a mind to (I happen to think this is deliberate on God’s part). But the real issue, in my view, is not how people enter into error, but rather how it can be demonstrated to them, authoritatively, that they are in error. And sola Scriptura has no such mechanism, because it has no such authority that sits at the same level as Scripture. All the authorities that SS people use to claim one belief “right” and another “wrong” are at a lower level and thus in the end cannot compel.


I think the correct rule for anti-Catholics is as follows:

  1. If the belief is something like the Trinity, which we anti-Catholics believe, then deduction from Scripture is perfectly acceptable.

  2. If the belief is something Catholics teach, deduction is forbidden, and we require Scripture to state it like you would explain it to a kindergartener (e.g. something like “Thou shall pray to the angels and saints in heaven.”



Sola Scriptura lets one believe anything they want to, pretty much, as long as they find one verse in any context that can show that true.

And as a prior Protestant, I will admit that it does let one sway on just about anything without there being any way to be in the wrong; just join a different denomination.

For instance, as a Baptist, I found Baptism not necessary, for Jesus said to ‘baptize in the spirit’ and I took that single statement and ran with that from there. I also found purgatory necessary as a way to purify one of sins still on their soul, for ‘you shall not get out until you have paid the last penny.’


So how do you un-conflate them? Who says that those who find the Trinity in Scripture are the ones who belong to God? Maybe it’s those who do not find the Trinity who are the ones who belong to God. Numbers don’t matter - the Catholic Church had the numbers in 1520! Length of time the belief has existed - the Catholic Church had the length in 1520! So how do you un-conflate them? I’ll answer that. Without another authority, one that can speak unambiguously, you cannot.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit