Skip to main content

Isaac Newton and the Trinity

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen 

Knowingly or through ignorance, people downplay the fact that God is the Creator. He is not just a little above us like a comic book superhero. Rather, he is far beyond our comprehension (Roman 9:20-22, Isaiah 29:16, Genesis 1:1). We are able to grasp some of his attributes through nature (Romans 1:20), and especially through his revelation in the Bible. An extremely difficult concept to understand is the Trinity.

Some detractors of Isaac Newton say he was not a Christian, instead, a Trinity-denying Arian heretic. It is complicated, but he was a Trinitarian.
Most professing Christians are ignorant of what and why the believe, and are essentially heretics. Someone may ask you to show them the word Trinity (or Tri-unity of God, Triune Godhead) in the Bible. It is not there. However, the doctrine is taught in Scripture. It is a difficult concept, and there are sayings like, "Whoever claims to understand the Trinity has lost his mind. Whoever denies the Trinity has lost his soul." We can get a handle on it and use analogies that don't completely work, but it it exceedingly important and taken by faith.

Isaac Newton is considered one of the greatest scientists of all time, and was also a creationist. Unfortunately, he had some odd views about the Trinity. Some creationists such as Paul Taylor and Dr. Danny Faulkner have labeled him a heretic, but these judgments seem to be based on incomplete research — but Newton didn't do himself any favors.

An early heresy that was inflicted on the church was Arianism, forms of which still exist today (e.g., Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons). I came across a journal article, "Was Isaac Newton an Arian?" by Thomas C. Pfizenmaier (which is on JSTOR, but more freely downloadable as a PDF at Semantic Scholar). The PDF shows itself to be 24 pages, and it is heavily footnoted; I had to glean from the weighty material.

Isaac studied philosophy, science and other things. Perhaps was too intellectual in matters of faith, as he apparently was shaky on church history. It didn't help matters that the church fathers themselves had disagreements on some important points. But then, they were attempting to understand God's revelation. Further, there have been varying views about the Trinity for a very long time. Some have incorporated influences from other philosophies. We cannot fully understand it, remember?

It should be noted that people's views change over the years, so someone could find materials on a prolific writer from earlier years that conflicted with statements and beliefs held later. According to Mr. Pfizenmaier, Isaac Newton had heterodox views later in life. Hewas not Arian and not a heretic.

Also, see a quote from Isaac in footnote 1 of this article. That reference also mentions a doctoral dissertation refuting claims of Newton's status as a heretic. I have not read it, but if you've a mind to, you can read or download the PDF here. It might be helpful to you to save the link to this article for reference. [EDIT: This is weird. I saw it when I wrote this article, but today, 19 March 2022, it is essentially scrubbed from the web.]

Popular posts from this blog

Four-Legged Snake in the News Again

Writing about sciency things can be both fascinating and exasperating. The fascinating part is for those of us who like science, but the exasperating part is doing updates. New discoveries are a part of science, especially regarding origins. Darwin's disciples are continually attempting to rewrite history to accommodate observed evidence and still preserve their narrative of atheistic naturalism. Excitement over a supposed four-legged snake fossil slithered back ( which I posted about earlier ) and disputes continue. Tetrapodophis amplectus , Wikimedia Commons / Ghedoghedo  ( CC BY-SA 4.0 ) This whole thing was sensationalized from the get-go to promote fish-to-fool evolution and millions of years. Indeed, some important facts about the fossil were not even discussed. It "sheds light" on evolution. Secularists think it would be (insert mouth click here like Cousin Eddie) really nice, but they still have nothing upon which to base that claim. Mayhaps if they realized that

The Secular Science Industry Propagandizes Same-Sex Attraction

We are told that the peer review process in the secular science industry is a method of providing truth and accuracy, and ensuring correct procedures were followed in submitted papers. That sounds like a mighty good idea, but peer-reviewed papers are often bad,  downright fraudulent, or hoaxes . Homosexual activists passed a peer-reviewed paper in  Science  magazine, but that should not have happened. It was fake science research, and  Science  was embarrassed by the fraudulent tactics. The secular science industry did not seem to learn from this. Assembled with images from Open Clipart After the Science  humiliation and the "We're so sorry if we've caused you any pain, Uncle Albert, and boy, does this hurt the credibility of science itself in the public eye" schtick, the disastrous Obergefell decision by the US Supreme Court struck. (That is one reason I believe we're under divine Judgment .) After that ruling, the militant Gaystapo cut loose with harassing peopl

Doing Evil in the Name of Science

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen (Material added 24 February 2024.) When Christians point out that the mass murderers of the 20th century were atheists (Hitler was a pantheist who believed nature was "god"), misotheists with things like, "Prove to me that Stalin said he did atrocities in the name of atheism!" Not in those words, but they hated the God of the Bible and had no consistent moral foundation to inconvenience their consciences. In a similar way, one would have a difficult time finding a scientist who says, "I am using science for evil!" Scientists are not blank slates driven by data. They are as corrupt or virtuous as everyone else, subject to operating within their worldviews. Open Clipart / Olga Bikmullina Professing Christians should be honoring God and following what he has revealed in the Bible. Those who are unregenerate (John 3:6-7, 2 Cor. 5:17) are unable to discern the things of God (John 8:44, 1 Cor. 2:14, 2 Cor. 4:4, Rom. 12:2). We cannot expect