Home

Trinity Fact Sheet

Attributes of God

Why God Cannot Create Himself

Gwen’s stand on the doctrine of the Trinity may be found at her website at http://www.weighdown.com/Theological/Trinity_message.htm

The view of the Trinity is essentially the same for all evangelical churches and denominations.  This doctrine is not a side-issue or something but is an absolute of our faith.  Gwen explicitly rejects the doctrine of the Trinity, both because the word does not appear in Scripture and because she does not believe that Jesus is equal with God the Father.  Issues of concern with some statements made by Gwen Shamblin author of Weigh Down weight loss program are as follows:

1. One of Shamblin’s main problems is she misunderstands the doctrine of the Trinity as presented in Scripture.  She confuses Trinitarianism with the ancient heresy of modalism which claims that Jesus is the same person as the Father and the Spirit.  But no Trinitarian theologian or Biblical scholar believes this. Gwen writes, “ Some believe that the Trinity teaches that God and Jesus are the same being, so that when you get to heaven you will see only one being, not both Jesus and God.” (p 2)  Later she writes, “According to the Trinity, Jesus and God are the same being” (p4)  By “same being” Shamblin means the “same person.”  This false understanding of the Trinity runs throughout her work: “…no scripture says that Jesus is the Father- but every scripture says that he is the Son of God and the Messiah (Christ).” (p5)  “Here are some other questions that stump people teaching the Trinity: ‘When the Heavens opened at the baptism of Jesus, did God say that He was pleased with Himself?” (p. 7)  Shamblin is here attacking a non-issue.  The doctrine of the Trinity does not say that the Father and the Son are the same person!  The Father, the Son and the Spirit are three distinct persons yet one in essence and purpose.  Shamblin rejects the ancient heresy of modalism, but then embraces the ancient heresy of Arianism (which is also affirmed by Jehovah Witnesses)- that Jesus is a lesser created being.  Both are contrary to Trinitarianism.

2. Shamblin, like the Jehovah Witnesses, seems to believe that Jesus sis a created being (though she avoids explicitly stating this.)  In answer to the question, “Is Jesus a created being?” she writes, “The Bible does not use the words- “Jesus is a created being.’  Therefore I will not add these words.  However, Jesus is described over and over as the Son of God, begotten by God, from God, sent from God, firstborn, etc.”  (p5)  The implication is that Jesus is indeed a created being.  Later she writes: “Think again with me- God was, then the Son (firstborn), and then together they made the heavens and the earth and God gave Jesus the authority that he has.” (p7)  The statement, “God was, then the Son,” clearly indicates that God existed prior to the Son.   What Shamblin does not understand is that “Son” is a metaphor describing the relationship between the Father and the Son.  It does not mean physically “begotten.”  “Firstborn” in a Semitic culture means “supreme one,” not necessarily one that did not previously exist.  “Only begotten” is a poor translation of the Greek term monogenes, which should better be translated “one and only” (see the NIV at John 3:16)  All of these terms describe the relationship between the Father and the Son.  They do not indicate that God created the Son, a doctrine nowhere taught in Scripture.

3. Another area of confusion for Shamblin is that she does not understand that the designation “God” is used in the Bible in some contexts for the Father alone, and in other contexts for the Godhead- Father, Son and Spirit.  This is clear in a passage like John 1:1 (which Shamblin downplays as of little significance):  “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”  The first use of “God” here refers to the Father (Jesus was with the Father), the second use of “god” means “the Godhead” (Jesus was God the Son, one with the Father and the Spirit).  Shamblin repeatedly and erroneously sets “God” over against “Jesus,” refusing to speak of the Father and the Son both as God.

Jesus clearly submitted to the authority of the Father during his life on earth.  In his humanity, Jesus referred to the Father as “my God,” and submitted to his will (John 20:17).  Christian theologians debate whether this submission to the Father was only during Jesus’ earthly life or was for all eternity, but all agree that he voluntarily submitted to the Father’s will.  Jesus was fully equal with God the Father in power, glory and authority even though he voluntarily submitted to the Father’s will.

4. Shamblin explicitly denies that Jesus is equal in power and glory with the Father:  In answering the question “DO YOU BELIEVE THAT JESUS IS EQUAL IN POWER AND GLORY?” she answer, “No,” and thenuses passages which describe Jesus’ voluntary submission to the will of the Father (p5).

5. Shamblin denies that Jesus is Jehovah. “Teachers of the Trinity teach that Jesus is Jehovah; they have no scriptures to back this up, and why don’t they believe that Jesus is the Son of God and that Jehovah is Jehovah?” (p6)  Here she is simply mistaken.  Jesus identified Himself as the “I am”- an allusion to Exodus 3:14 and to the name Jehovah, or Yahweh (John 8:58).  Frequently in the New Testament, Old Testament passages concerning Jehovah are applied to Jesus.  Hebrews 1:10 quotes a passage about Jehovah (Ps 102:25) and refers it to Jesus the Son.  Acts 2:21 quotes Joel 2:32, “And everyone who call’s on the name of the Lord (Jehovah) will be saved,” applying it to Jesus.  Shamblin’s arguments here are parallel to those made by the Jehovah’s Witnesses.

6. Shamblin has a generally confused picture of the Trinity:  “But if you are arguing that they are like water, ice and steam, this is not accurate. I do  believe that the Spirit of God is a Spirit, and that references to the Spirit of Christ refer to His Spirit. I do not believe that references to the Spirit of Christ mean there is a fourth person. I do not refer to God as a person.” (p.6) No trinitarian theologian would argue that the Trinity is like water, ice and steam.  This again is a heresy of modalism.  But Shamblin seems to be saying that the Spirit of Christ (see Acts 16:7, for example) is not the Holy Spirit, but merely his human spirit.  It is also difficult to see what she means that God is not a person.