Short answer: The doctrine of the Trinity is not based solely on this single verse so it wouldn't sufficiently change it. Now, if it were definitively proven that “one” in this context does not imply a unity of essence or substance, it could challenge the use of this verse in support of the Trinity.
1) Looking at John 10
John 10:30 says:
30 I and My Father are one.”
The first thing to note is:
- Part of the meaning of this statement is lost in translation from
Greek to English. Jesus uses the "neuter" form of the Greek word for
"one" here, implying that they are "unity." Rather than saying that
Jesus and God are the same person, Jesus is claiming that He and God
are unified as one, a partial explanation of the Trinity. [3]
The verses right before this are also important. John 10:28-29 says:
28 And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither
shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. 29 My Father, who has given
them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out
of My Father’s hand.
Ellicott's Commentary lists several arguments we can take as reasons for not defining oneness in this verse as being "loving someone as yourself". I will summarize the points:
- Identity: The last clause of John 10:29 is identical with the last clause of John 10:28 if we identify “Father’s” with “My.” This is something that Jesus does formally.
- Jesus' assertion of divine power: John 10:28-29 speak of a power greater than all, and these words are an assertion that in the infinity of All-mighty Power, the Son is one with the Father.
- Unity of essence, not person: The Greek word for “one” is neuter, indicating that the unity is of essence, not of person. This means that “The Son is of one substance with the Father.”
- Distinctness and co-ordination: The use of the plural “are” asserts distinctness, countering Sabellianism, and the “one” asserts co-ordination, countering Arianism.
- More than unity of will: Despite attempts to interpret these words as implying only a unity of will between the Father and the Son, they assert both oneness of power and oneness of nature.
- Divinity of Jesus: The best answer to all attempts to attach any meaning lower than that of the divinity of our Lord to these His words is found here, as in the parallel instance in John 8:58-59, in the conduct of the Jews themselves.
John 8:58-59 Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, before
Abraham was, I AM.” Then they took up stones to throw at Him; but
Jesus hid Himself and went out of the temple, going through the midst
of them, and so passed by.
- Reaction of the Jews: The Jews sought to punish Jesus by stoning, because they believed that Jesus, being a man, was making himself God
(John 10:31-33).
31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone Him. 32 Jesus answered
them, “Many good works I have shown you from My Father. For which of
those works do you stone Me?”
33 The Jews answered Him, saying, “For a good work we do not stone
You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself
God.”
On a side note. I think the fact that no church fathers interpret "one" with this definition is evidence for it not being used in such a manner as defined.
2) Looking at 1 Samuel 18:1
Now when he had finished speaking to Saul, the soul of Jonathan was
knit to the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul.
The word for "was knit" is:
- qashar: to bind, league together, conspire
- Original Word: קָשַׁר
It should be noted that the original languages of these two books are different. The Old Testament was written in Hebrew, while the New Testament was written in Greek.
This word qashar is the same word found in Genesis 44:30.
30 “Now therefore, when I come to your servant my father, and the lad
is not with us, since his life is bound up in the lad’s life, 31 it
will happen, when he sees that the lad is not with us, that he will
die. So your servants will bring down the gray hair of your servant
our father with sorrow to the grave.
- The bond of friendship which Jonathan formed with David was so
evidently the main point, that in 1 Samuel 18:1 the writer commences
with the love of Jonathan to David... [10]
Clincher: What is something that is important in making this comparison of oneness being defined as: "Oneness is loving someone as yourself" in both 1 Samuel 18 and John 10?
The presence of the word love. 1 Samuel 18 makes it clear that we are indeed talking about love.
Jonathan loved him as his own soul.
On the other hand, the relevant verses of John 10 say nothing about love which would indicate that Jesus is talking about it.
I conclude then that there is not sufficient evidence to read John 10 with the definition proposed for oneness as "loving someone as yourself".
