A persistent criticism levelled against the Trinity is that it results in linguistic nonsense, such as having to say of God, “he are one” and “they is three.” A recent volume from a Reformed Protestant, attempting to refute Latter-day Saint theology, exemplifies this. When discussing this doctrine, the author writes of God in the Trinitarian matrix:
He is One God in three persons—the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. (D.J. Gonzales, The Wide divide: Early Mormon History and an Investigation of the Wide Divide Between LDS and Christian Doctrine [Meadville, Pa.: Christian Faith Publishing, Inc., 2018], 452, emphasis added)
This is nothing short of Humpty-dumpty language, and it simply nonsense. Furthermore, it treats God as being one person and three persons at the very same time—talk about a paradox! (To be fair, many other Trinitarians are more careful in their presentation of the relationship between there being numerically only one God and three divine persons). Continuing, the author, revealing his lack of scholarly acumen, appeals to the spurious Comma Johanneum, something even Trinitarian apologists (e.g., James R. White) readily admit it a later interpolation into the text.
The technical theological term for the Trinity is Trinitarianism, which designates God as one in essence but three co-equal, co-infinite, and co-eternal persons—God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.” This is the biblical and Christian concept of God. (Ibid., 454)
It is a pity that the author never bothered to read up on textual criticism of the Bible (his treatment of the topic in his book is dreadful and very dated). To help him and others, here are some scholarly comments on the spurious nature of this text:
The so-called Comma Johanneum (vss. 7f*) is found in Latin manuscripts dating before A.D. 400, the text of which (it varies in details in individual manuscripts) was also taken up into the Sixto-Clementine edition of the Vulgate in the following form: “Quoniam tres sunt, qui testimonium dant in coelo Pater, Verbum et Spiritus Sanctus, et hi tres unum sunt. Et tres sunt, qui testimonium dant in terra Spiritus et aqua et sanguis, et hi tres unum sunt.” (“For there are three who bear witness in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one. And there are three who bear witness on earth, the Spirit and the water and the blood, and these three are one.”) Although the decree of the Holy Office in 1897 decided in favor of the authenticity of the Comma Johanneum, today its spuriousness is also recognized by Catholic scholars. The passage is unknown to the entire Greek textual tradition. According to W. Thiele (“Beobachtungen zum Comma Iohanneum (I Joh 5:7f*),” ZNW 50 [1959]: 61–73), it is possible that Cyprian already found the text as a part of his bible. “In that case, the home of the famous interpolation is to be sought in North Africa”—so Schnackenburg, who provides an excursus on the Comma Johanneum, pp. 44–46. Also cf. Windisch, with further bibliographical references. (Bultmann, R. K. (1973). The Johannine epistles a commentary on the Johannine epistles (p. 81). Philadelphia: Fortress Press.)
Before τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ τὸ ὕδωρ καὶ τὸ αἷμα (to pneuma kai to hudor kai to haima), the Textus Receptus (TR) reads ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ, ὁ πατήρ, ὁ λόγος, καὶ τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα, καὶ οὗτοι οἱ τρεῖς ἕν εἰσι. 1Jo 5:8 καὶ τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες ἐν τῇ γῇ ("in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one. 1Jo 5:8 And there are three that testify on earth"). This reading, the infamous Comma Johanneum, has been known in the English-speaking world through the King James translation. However, the evidence - both external and internal - is decidedly against its authenticity. For a detailed discussion, see TCGNT 647–49. Our discussion will briefly address the external evidence. This longer reading is found only in nine late MSS, four of which have the words in a marginal note. Most of these MSS (221 2318 [18th century] 2473 [dated 1634] and [with minor variations] 61 88 429 629 636 918) originate from the 16th century; the earliest ms, codex 221 (10th century) includes the reading in a marginal note, added sometime after the original composition. The oldest ms with the Comma in its text is from the 14th century (629), but the wording here departs from all the other MSS in several places. The next oldest MSS on behalf of the Comma, 88 (12th century) 429 (14th) 636 (15th), also have the reading only as a marginal note (v.l.). The remaining MSS are from the 16th to 18th centuries. Thus, there is no sure evidence of this reading in any Greek ms until the 14th century (629), and that ms deviates from all others in its wording; the wording that matches what is found in the TR was apparently composed after Erasmus' Greek NT was published in 1516. Indeed, the Comma appears in no Greek witness of any kind (either ms, patristic, or Greek translation of some other version) until A.D. 1215 (in a Greek translation of the Acts of the Lateran Council, a work originally written in Latin). This is all the more significant since many a Greek Father would have loved such a reading, for it so succinctly affirms the doctrine of the Trinity. The reading seems to have arisen in a 4th century Latin homily in which the text was allegorized to refer to members of the Trinity. From there, it made its way into copies of the Latin Vulgate, the text used by the Roman Catholic Church. The Trinitarian formula (known as the Comma Johanneum) made its way into the third edition of Erasmus' Greek NT (1522) because of pressure from the Catholic Church. After his first edition appeared, there arose such a furor over the absence of the Comma that Erasmus needed to defend himself. He argued that he did not put in the Comma because he found no Greek MSS that included it. Once one was produced (codex 61, written in ca. 1520), Erasmus apparently felt obliged to include the reading. He became aware of this ms sometime between May of 1520 and September of 1521. In his annotations to his third edition he does not protest the rendering now in his text, as though it were made to order; but he does defend himself from the charge of indolence, noting that he had taken care to find whatever MSS he could for the production of his text. In the final analysis, Erasmus probably altered the text because of politico-theologico-economic concerns: He did not want his reputation ruined, nor his Novum Instrumentum to go unsold. Modern advocates of the TR and KJV generally argue for the inclusion of the Comma Johanneum on the basis of heretical motivation by scribes who did not include it. But these same scribes elsewhere include thoroughly orthodox readings - even in places where the TR/Byzantine MSS lack them. Further, these advocates argue theologically from the position of divine preservation: Since this verse is in the TR, it must be original. (Of course, this approach is circular, presupposing as it does that the TR = the original text.) In reality, the issue is history, not heresy: How can one argue that the Comma Johanneum goes back to the original text yet does not appear until the 14th century in any Greek MSS (and that form is significantly different from what is printed in the TR; the wording of the TR is not found in any Greek MSS until the 16th century)? Such a stance does not do justice to the gospel: Faith must be rooted in history. Significantly, the German translation of Luther was based on Erasmus' second edition (1519) and lacked the Comma. But the KJV translators, basing their work principally on Theodore Beza's 10th edition of the Greek NT (1598), a work which itself was fundamentally based on Erasmus' third and later editions (and Stephanus' editions), popularized the Comma for the English-speaking world. Thus, the Comma Johanneum has been a battleground for English-speaking Christians more than for others. (NET commentary on 1 John 5:7)
Works such as Gonzales' are clearly not aimed at informed Latter-day Saints but those ignorant of "Mormonism" and an attempt at "boundary maintenance" (i.e., scare people off investigating The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints with such misinformation). Sadly for Gonzales and others, this will result in the consolation prize of Evangelical Protestants and others like him possessing a false gospel in this life and being recipients of divine wrath and judgment in the hereafter (Rev 21:8).