---
title: "Ten Objections to Oneness, Answered"
description: "The ten objections Oneness believers hear most often, each stated first in its strongest Trinitarian form and then answered from Scripture. The final section tests the claim that the church always confessed three persons, with names and dates from Noetus and Praxeas to the councils of 325 and 381."
url: "https://onegodapologetics.com/library/ten-objections-to-oneness-answered/"
source: "One God Apologetics"
section: "The Library"
authors: ["Jonathan Mahaney"]
tags: ["godhead", "history"]
published: "2026-09-17T05:43:40.550Z"
updated: "2026-09-17T23:19:36.820Z"
reading_minutes: 14
license: "Free to read and quote with attribution."
---

# Ten Objections to Oneness, Answered

> The ten objections Oneness believers hear most often, each stated first in its strongest Trinitarian form and then answered from Scripture. The final section tests the claim that the church always confessed three persons, with names and dates from Noetus and Praxeas to the councils of 325 and 381.

*By Jonathan Mahaney · 14 minute read · https://onegodapologetics.com/library/ten-objections-to-oneness-answered/*

This guide is for the Apostolic believer who has been told that God is “one being in three persons,” asked who Jesus was praying to, or assured that the church always confessed the Trinity, and who wants to answer from the Bible. It is also for the Trinitarian reader who wants the Oneness case stated plainly and fairly.

Each section states the objection as a careful Trinitarian scholar would, answers it from Scripture, and points to a card in the [Objection Lab](https://onegodapologetics.com/academy/lab), where the question is broken into a 30-second answer, a five-minute answer, the trap to avoid and a model answer to drill.

> **What Oneness teaches**
>
> There is one God, absolutely one (Deut 6:4). Father, Son and Holy Spirit are not three persons but the one God revealed as Father, as the Son in the incarnation, and as the Holy Spirit within His people. Jesus Christ is that God manifested in flesh (1 Tim 3:16), fully God and fully man: “in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily” (Col 2:9). “Son” belongs to the incarnation, not to an eternally begotten second person.

## 1. “You are confusing being and person”

> **At full strength**
>
> Historic Christianity confesses one divine being (οὐσία (*ousia*)) in three persons (ὑποστάσεις (*hypostaseis*)). “One” answers *what* God is; “three” answers *who* God is, so there is no contradiction. The Shema (Deut 6:4) rules out many gods; it does not count persons. When Father, Son and Spirit act as distinct subjects (Matt 3:16–17; John 14:26), the church needed precise words for what the text already shows.

The distinction is coherent as philosophy, but no biblical writer draws it. When God speaks of Himself, He says “I” and “me,” not “we three who share one being”:

> I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me:
>
> — Isaiah 45:5 (KJV)

> Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;
>
> — Isaiah 44:24 (KJV)

Malachi makes the one Father the one Creator (Mal 2:10), and Jesus quoted the Shema without amendment (Mark 12:29).

Where the New Testament uses the word later chosen for “person,” it is singular: the Son is “the express image of his person” (Heb 1:3), the imprint of God’s one ὑπόστασις (*hypostasis*). Even the Creed of Nicaea (AD 325) still used *hypostasis* and *ousia* as near-synonyms in its closing anathema; the settled distinction came later in the fourth century.[^1] A distinction the church took centuries to fix cannot overrule the way God names Himself.

**Objection:** [Is God one being in three persons?](https://onegodapologetics.com/academy/lab/being-and-person) — “You’re confusing being and person: God is one being in three persons, so “one God” doesn’t mean “one person.””

## 2. “If Jesus is the Father, who was He praying to?”

> **At full strength**
>
> Prayer is address: an “I” speaking to a “thou.” In John 17 the Son asks the Father to glorify Him “with thine own self” and speaks of the two of them as “we” (John 17:5, 11); elsewhere He counts the Father and Himself as two witnesses (John 8:17–18). If the Son simply *is* the Father, these prayers are theater. Saying “the human nature prayed” does not help: natures do not pray; persons do.

Oneness theology does not say Jesus prayed to Himself. It says the man Christ Jesus prayed to God. The Son is a real and complete human being who “increased in wisdom” (Luke 2:52), was tempted (Heb 4:15) and prayed “in the days of his flesh” (Heb 5:7). A real man must pray.

> For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
>
> — 1 Timothy 2:5 (KJV)

That man is not a second divine person:

> God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself
>
> — 2 Corinthians 5:19 (KJV)

The God who dwelt in Christ also fills heaven and earth (Jer 23:24). So the prayers are real communion: God manifested in flesh, with a genuinely human voice, addressing God in His transcendence. The distinction is between God and the man Christ Jesus, not between persons within God.[^2]

Trinitarians face the same question. Why would a co-equal Son ask to be saved from death (Heb 5:7) or not know the hour (Mark 13:32)? Their answer is that He prayed, and did not know, *as man*. That is the Oneness answer. The prayers prove that Jesus is truly human, not that God is three.

**Objection:** [Who was Jesus praying to?](https://onegodapologetics.com/academy/lab/who-was-jesus-praying-to) — “If Jesus is the Father, then who was He praying to — Himself?”

## 3. “The Father sent the Son”

> **At full strength**
>
> Sending requires a sender and one sent, both existing beforehand. “God sent forth his Son” (Gal 4:4); the Son “came forth from the Father” into the world (John 16:28) and “came down from heaven” (John 6:38). He was not made in Bethlehem and then commissioned. Nor does being sent make Him less divine: His mission in time reveals His eternal relation to the Father.

“Sent” is the language of commission, and it does not require prior existence in heaven. John the Baptist was “a man sent from God” (John 1:6), and Jesus sends His disciples as He was sent (John 17:18). The Son God sent was “made of a woman”:

> But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,
>
> — Galatians 4:4 (KJV)

The sending is the incarnation, and the Sender came too: “he that sent me is with me” (John 8:29); “the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works” (John 14:10).

Jesus also said that the *Son of man* came down from heaven (John 3:13). No Trinitarian thinks Christ’s humanity was in heaven before Bethlehem, so both sides read such sayings as true of the one Christ because of the deity in Him. What came down is God Himself. And while the Trinitarian must explain how one eternal person is sent under another’s authority, Oneness places the sending, like “my Father is greater than I” (John 14:28), in the incarnation.

**Objection:** [Doesn’t sending prove two persons?](https://onegodapologetics.com/academy/lab/the-father-sent-the-son) — “The Father sent the Son, and you can’t send yourself, so the Son must be a distinct person who existed before He was sent.”

## 4. “Not my will, but thine”

> **At full strength**
>
> In Gethsemane Jesus prays, “not my will, but thine, be done” (Luke 22:42): two wills, one yielding to the other. The Son’s will is in view even before the incarnation: “I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will” (John 6:38); “Lo, I come … to do thy will, O God” (Heb 10:7). This is the Son’s self-giving to the Father, not a man bargaining with his own deity.

Gethsemane shows a divine will and a human will. That is the incarnation. Without a human will Jesus would not be fully human, nor could He have “learned … obedience” (Heb 5:8):

> And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.
>
> — Philippians 2:8 (KJV)

Historic Trinitarian theology agrees. The Third Council of Constantinople (AD 680–681) defined two natural wills in Christ, the human subject to the divine, and read “not to do mine own will” (John 6:38) as the will of Christ’s flesh.[^3] Because that theology ties will to nature, it confesses one divine will shared by Father, Son and Spirit. On its own terms, the will that yields in Gethsemane is human. The verse shows a man submitting to God, not one divine person submitting to another: the one who comes to do God’s will is the one for whom “a body hast thou prepared” (Heb 10:5).

**Objection:** [Two wills, two persons?](https://onegodapologetics.com/academy/lab/not-my-will-but-yours) — “In Gethsemane Jesus said “not my will, but thine,” and two wills means two persons.”

## 5. “The baptism of Jesus shows three persons”

> **At full strength**
>
> At the Jordan the Son stands in the water, the Spirit descends “in a bodily shape like a dove” (Luke 3:22), and the Father speaks from heaven: “Thou art my beloved Son” (Mark 1:11). This is not one person changing roles in sequence; all three are present at once. Christians have long read the scene as a revelation of the Trinity.

Oneness does not teach one mask at a time. God fills heaven and earth (Jer 23:24). His dwelling fully in Jesus did not empty heaven, and He could give a sign and speak a word in the same moment.

> **16** And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him: **17** And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
>
> — Matthew 3:16–17 (KJV)

What was seen and heard was a man, a dove and a voice. The man is God manifested in flesh. The dove was a sign given to John the Baptist, who had been told that the one on whom the Spirit descended would baptize with the Holy Ghost (John 1:33); no one thinks the Spirit *is* a bird. The voice was for the hearers, as Jesus said of a similar voice: “This voice came not because of me, but for your sakes” (John 12:30).

Scripture speaks of the Lord and His Spirit together without counting two: “the Lord GOD, and his Spirit, hath sent me” (Isa 48:16). Interpreters debate who speaks that line, but “his Spirit” is the Lord’s own. Paul says the same of the many gifts, “all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit” (1 Cor 12:11): one God can do many things at once without becoming more than one.

**Objection:** [Doesn’t the Jordan show three persons?](https://onegodapologetics.com/academy/lab/the-baptism-of-jesus) — “At Jesus’ baptism the Son is in the water, the Spirit descends like a dove and the Father speaks from heaven, so that’s three persons at once.”

## 6. “The glory which I had with thee before the world was”

> **At full strength**
>
> “Glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was” (John 17:5). Jesus does not say the glory was planned; He says He *had* it, *with* the Father. He grounds it in love, “thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world” (John 17:24), and love needs a beloved. With John 1:1–3 and Hebrews 1:2, the text points to an eternal Son beside the Father.

Jesus did pre-exist, as God: “Before Abraham was, I am” (John 8:58). Scripture does not teach a Son who existed as a second person before the incarnation. The Son is the child born of Mary:

> And the angel answered and said unto her, 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.
>
> — Luke 1:35 (KJV)

The case rests on how Scripture speaks of God’s purpose. Christ “was foreordained before the foundation of the world” (1 Pet 1:20); believers were given grace “in Christ Jesus before the world began” (2 Tim 1:9), before any of them existed; God “calleth those things which be not as though they were” (Rom 4:17). In the same prayer Jesus says He has already given His disciples His glory (John 17:22). So in John 17:5 the incarnate Son asks for the glory God purposed for Him from eternity, glory that is His because the fulness of the Godhead dwells in Him. Oneness writers read the creation texts (Col 1:16; Heb 1:2) of the Word through whom God created.

> **Greek:** δόξα (*doxa*) [G1391] — glory, splendor, honor. The word means glory, not “planned” glory. The argument from God’s purpose rests on the context, not on the vocabulary.

**Objection:** [What glory did Jesus have before the world was?](https://onegodapologetics.com/academy/lab/glory-before-the-world-was) — “In John 17:5 Jesus speaks of the glory He had with the Father before the world was, so the Son existed as a distinct person before creation.”

## 7. “The Son sits at the right hand of the Father”

> **At full strength**
>
> The risen Jesus sits “on the right hand of God” (Mark 16:19), fulfilling Psalm 110:1. Stephen “saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God” (Acts 7:55), and the Lamb takes the book “out of the right hand of him that sat upon the throne” (Rev 5:7). The image need not be literal to relate two: one who seats and one who is seated.

“Right hand” is a figure for power: “Thy right hand, O LORD, is become glorious in power” (Exod 15:6), and the Son of man sits “on the right hand of power” (Matt 26:64). God is an invisible Spirit (John 4:24; 1 Tim 1:17), so neither side pictures two bodies on two seats. Peter explains the figure:

> Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.
>
> — Acts 2:36 (KJV)

Jesus was “by the right hand of God exalted” (Acts 2:33) and given “all power … in heaven and in earth” (Matt 28:18). Psalm 110:1 is the LORD’s word to David’s Lord, the Messiah who is also David’s son (Matt 22:42–45). The right hand is the place of the exalted man, not a seat for a second divine person. Stephen, having seen that glory, prayed to Jesus (Acts 7:59), and Revelation’s last picture is one throne, “the throne of God and of the Lamb,” whose servants “shall serve him” (Rev 22:3).

**Objection:** [Who sits at God’s right hand?](https://onegodapologetics.com/academy/lab/the-right-hand-of-god) — “Jesus sits at the right hand of the Father, and no one can sit at his own right hand.”

## 8. “The Holy Spirit is a third person”

> **At full strength**
>
> The Spirit is not another name for the Father or for Jesus. Jesus promises “another Comforter” (John 14:16), sent by the Father in His name (John 14:26), who will glorify Christ (John 16:14). The Spirit speaks (Acts 13:2), can be grieved (Eph 4:30) and intercedes (Rom 8:26); lying to Him is lying to God (Acts 5:3–4). He is named beside the Father and the Son (Matt 28:19). These are the marks of a person.

Oneness affirms all of this: the Spirit is personal because the Spirit is God Himself. The question is whether He is a *different* person. There is “one Spirit” (Eph 4:4), and “God is a Spirit” (John 4:24). The Holy Spirit is God’s own Spirit, as a man’s spirit is his own (1 Cor 2:11).

> Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.
>
> — 2 Corinthians 3:17 (KJV)

Paul uses “the Spirit of God,” “the Spirit of Christ” and “Christ … in you” interchangeably (Rom 8:9–10). And Jesus explained “another Comforter” at once: “I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you” (John 14:18).

The conception presses the point. Mary was “with child of the Holy Ghost” (Matt 1:18), yet Jesus calls God His Father. If the Spirit were a person distinct from the Father, the one who begot the Son would be someone other than the Father. The Holy Ghost who overshadowed Mary is the one God in His creative power (Luke 1:35).

**Objection:** [Is the Holy Spirit a third person?](https://onegodapologetics.com/academy/lab/the-spirit-as-a-third-person) — “The Holy Spirit isn’t the Father or the Son; He speaks, teaches and can be grieved, so He is a distinct third person.”

## 9. “The Trinity is a mystery, not a contradiction”

> **At full strength**
>
> The Trinity is above reason, not against it. God’s ways are “past finding out” (Rom 11:33). A contradiction would say God is one and three in the same respect; the doctrine says one being, three persons. Being unable to picture it is what we should expect of the infinite God, and Oneness believers confess a mystery too: “great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh” (1 Tim 3:16).

The steelman is right that God is beyond us and that the incarnation is a mystery. But in the New Testament a “mystery” (μυστήριον (*mystērion*)) is not something that must stay unintelligible. It is a truth once hidden and now revealed (Eph 3:3–5):

> **25** Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began, **26** But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:
>
> — Romans 16:25–26 (KJV)

So the question is whether this doctrine has been revealed (Deut 29:29). The mysteries Scripture names include God manifest in flesh (1 Tim 3:16) and “Christ in you, the hope of glory” (Col 1:27). It never names a mystery of three persons in one being.

Stated carefully, “one being, three persons” is not a formal contradiction. The Oneness concern is this: when “person” means enough to explain the prayers of the Gospels, a distinct “I” who loves and is loved, three persons look like three beings; when it is thinned to avoid that, it no longer explains those texts. Mystery is usually invoked at exactly that point. “God is not the author of confusion” (1 Cor 14:33).

**Objection:** [Isn’t the Trinity simply a mystery?](https://onegodapologetics.com/academy/lab/it-is-a-mystery) — “The Trinity isn’t a contradiction; it’s a mystery beyond human understanding, and you reject it only because you can’t comprehend it.”

## 10. “The church always believed in the Trinity”

> **At full strength**
>
> The creeds defended what the church already confessed. The baptismal command names Father, Son and Holy Spirit (Matt 28:19), and so do the Didache[^4] and Justin Martyr.[^5] Theophilus of Antioch speaks of a divine triad around AD 180.[^6] Doctrine develops as the church answers new errors, but development is not invention, and the monarchians were opposed as soon as they appeared.

Both sides accept that the doctrine received its classic definition in the fourth century. The Council of Nicaea (AD 325) confessed the Son “of one substance” (ὁμοούσιος (*homoousios*)) with the Father and said of the Spirit only “and in the Holy Spirit.”[^1] The fuller confession of the Spirit is associated with the Council of Constantinople (AD 381).[^7] No New Testament writer speaks of one essence in three persons. Before 325 the record is mixed: adoptionists such as Theodotus the cobbler,[^8] Logos theologians, and monarchians who confessed one God revealed in Christ.

**Noetus of Smyrna** (c. AD 200). His opponent Hippolytus reports in *Against Noetus* that Noetus taught that Christ was the Father Himself, and that the Father was born, suffered and died; examined by the presbyters, Noetus replied that he glorified one God.[^9]

**Praxeas** brought his teaching to Rome and was answered by Tertullian in *Against Praxeas* (c. AD 213). Tertullian concedes that “the simple,” who are “always the majority of believers,” were startled at the “economy” he defended, because their rule of faith had brought them from many gods to the one true God. They held to the “monarchy,” God’s sole rule.[^10]

**Sabellius** taught at Rome (c. AD 215–220). Hippolytus’s hostile *Refutation of All Heresies*, book IX, reports that Bishop Zephyrinus declared he knew one God, Christ Jesus, and no other who was born and suffered (though Hippolytus also has him say that the Son, not the Father, died), and that Callistus, who excommunicated Sabellius, still taught that Father and Son are one indivisible Spirit and called Hippolytus’s party worshipers of two gods.[^11]

**The vocabulary.** The earliest surviving Christian use of the Greek *trias* is in Theophilus;[^6] of the Latin *trinitas*, in Tertullian.[^10] Those who defended the distinctions were not yet Nicene either. Tertullian wrote that there was a time when the Son did not exist,[^12] and Hippolytus granted that the Word before the incarnation was not yet “perfect Son.”[^9] Trinitarian historians trace how the later vocabulary was worked out through these debates.[^13]

None of this shows that every monarchian taught what Oneness believers teach, and most of what we know of them comes from their opponents. It shows enough: the church before Nicaea was not uniformly Trinitarian, Tertullian admitted that most ordinary believers were uneasy with his alternative, and the language of three persons took centuries to settle. The apostolic confession is simpler:

- **One God**: “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD” (Deut 6:4).
- **Manifest in the flesh**: “the Word was made flesh” (John 1:14; 1 Tim 3:16).
- **Who pours out His Spirit** (Acts 2:33).
- **The only Lord**: “the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ” (Jude 1:4).

Scripture came first, and it is the standard for both sides (Acts 17:11).

**Objection:** [Didn’t the church always believe in the Trinity?](https://onegodapologetics.com/academy/lab/the-church-always-believed-it) — “The church has always believed in the Trinity, and Oneness is an old heresy the early church rejected.”

## How to use these answers

**Tone.** Most people who raise these objections are sincere Christians defending the Jesus they love. Answer them that way: “Let your speech be alway with grace, seasoned with salt” (Col 4:6). Hold the line on doctrine without sneering at the person.

**Steelman first.** State the objection so well that the person raising it would say, “Yes, that is what I mean.” If you answer a weaker argument than the one in front of you, everyone listening will notice.

**Mind the clock.** In a formal Arena engagement, openings run fifteen minutes a side and rebuttals eight, followed by cross-examination, so you will rarely have more than a minute or two for any one objection. That is why each card in the [Objection Lab](https://onegodapologetics.com/academy/lab) has a 30-second answer. Lead with the text, draw the distinction, and move on.

If you hold a different view and want to test these answers in public, the desk is open. [Request a formal engagement](https://onegodapologetics.com/arena/request) with your resolution, format and proposed dates, and we will meet you in the arena.

## Notes

[^1]: Creed of the Council of Nicaea. AD 325; the creed and its closing anathema. Text in N. P. Tanner, ed., Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, vol. 1 (1990).
[^2]: David K. Bernard, The Oneness of God. Word Aflame Press, 1983; the discussion of the prayers of Christ and His two natures.
[^3]: Third Council of Constantinople, Definition of Faith. AD 680–681; two natural wills and operations in Christ, the human will subject to the divine. Text in Tanner, vol. 1.
[^4]: The Didache. Late first or early second century; 7.1, the baptismal formula.
[^5]: Justin Martyr, First Apology. c. AD 150–155; ch. 61, the baptismal formula.
[^6]: Theophilus of Antioch, To Autolycus. c. AD 180; 2.15, the earliest surviving Christian use of the Greek trias (God, His Word and His Wisdom).
[^7]: Council of Constantinople and the Nicene–Constantinopolitan Creed. AD 381; the creed associated with the council, first attested in the acts of Chalcedon (451). Text in Tanner, vol. 1.
[^8]: Eusebius, Church History. c. AD 325; 5.28, on Theodotus the cobbler, excommunicated at Rome by Victor for teaching that Christ was a mere man.
[^9]: Hippolytus, Against Noetus. Early third century; ch. 1 (Noetus’s teaching and his examination by the presbyters), ch. 15 (the Word not yet “perfect Son” before the incarnation). English in Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 5.
[^10]: Tertullian, Against Praxeas. c. AD 213; ch. 1 (Praxeas at Rome), ch. 2–3 (trinitas, the “economy”, “the simple”, the “monarchy”). English in Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 3, and E. Evans, Tertullian’s Treatise Against Praxeas (1948).
[^11]: Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies, book IX. Written after c. AD 222; Noetus’s followers at Rome, Zephyrinus, Callistus and Sabellius (chapter numbers differ between editions). English in Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 5.
[^12]: Tertullian, Against Hermogenes. Early third century; ch. 3, on God becoming Father and Judge, and a time when there was no Son. English in Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 3.
[^13]: J. N. D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines. 5th ed. (London: A. & C. Black, 1977); the chapters on the second- and third-century doctrine of God and on monarchianism.

## Objections this essay answers

- [Is God one being in three persons?](https://onegodapologetics.com/academy/lab/being-and-person/) — “You’re confusing being and person: God is one being in three persons, so “one God” doesn’t mean “one person.””
- [Who was Jesus praying to?](https://onegodapologetics.com/academy/lab/who-was-jesus-praying-to/) — “If Jesus is the Father, then who was He praying to — Himself?”
- [Doesn’t sending prove two persons?](https://onegodapologetics.com/academy/lab/the-father-sent-the-son/) — “The Father sent the Son, and you can’t send yourself, so the Son must be a distinct person who existed before He was sent.”
- [Two wills, two persons?](https://onegodapologetics.com/academy/lab/not-my-will-but-yours/) — “In Gethsemane Jesus said “not my will, but thine,” and two wills means two persons.”
- [Doesn’t the Jordan show three persons?](https://onegodapologetics.com/academy/lab/the-baptism-of-jesus/) — “At Jesus’ baptism the Son is in the water, the Spirit descends like a dove and the Father speaks from heaven, so that’s three persons at once.”
- [What glory did Jesus have before the world was?](https://onegodapologetics.com/academy/lab/glory-before-the-world-was/) — “In John 17:5 Jesus speaks of the glory He had with the Father before the world was, so the Son existed as a distinct person before creation.”
- [Who sits at God’s right hand?](https://onegodapologetics.com/academy/lab/the-right-hand-of-god/) — “Jesus sits at the right hand of the Father, and no one can sit at his own right hand.”
- [Is the Holy Spirit a third person?](https://onegodapologetics.com/academy/lab/the-spirit-as-a-third-person/) — “The Holy Spirit isn’t the Father or the Son; He speaks, teaches and can be grieved, so He is a distinct third person.”
- [Isn’t the Trinity simply a mystery?](https://onegodapologetics.com/academy/lab/it-is-a-mystery/) — “The Trinity isn’t a contradiction; it’s a mystery beyond human understanding, and you reject it only because you can’t comprehend it.”
- [Didn’t the church always believe in the Trinity?](https://onegodapologetics.com/academy/lab/the-church-always-believed-it/) — “The church has always believed in the Trinity, and Oneness is an old heresy the early church rejected.”