See other Religion Articles
Title: How Did the Trinity Doctrine Develop?
Source:
[None]
URL Source: [None]
Published: Jun 12, 2009
Author: None
Post Date: 2009-06-12 15:22:39 by richard9151
Keywords: None
Views: 487
Comments: 32
How Did the Trinity Doctrine Develop? There are many people who ask: ‘If the Trinity is not a Biblical teaching, how did it become a doctrine of Christendom?’ Many think that it was formulated at the Council of Nicaea in 325 C.E. That is not totally correct, however. The Council of Nicaea did assert that Christ was of the same substance as God, which laid the groundwork for later Trinitarian theology. But it did not establish the Trinity, for at that council there was no mention of the holy spirit as the third person of a triune Godhead. Constantine’s Role at Nicaea FOR many years, there had been much opposition on Biblical grounds to the developing idea that Jesus was God. To try to solve the dispute, Roman emperor Constantine summoned all bishops to Nicaea. About 300, a fraction of the total, actually attended. Constantine was not a Christian. Supposedly, he converted later in life, but he was not baptized until he lay dying. Regarding him, Henry Chadwick says in The Early Church: “Constantine, like his father, worshipped the Unconquered Sun; . . . his conversion should not be interpreted as an inward experience of grace . . . It was a military matter. His comprehension of Christian doctrine was never very clear, but he was sure that victory in battle lay in the gift of the God of the Christians.” What role did this unbaptized emperor play at the Council of Nicaea? The Encyclopædia Britannica relates: “Constantine himself presided, actively guiding the discussions, and personally proposed . . . the crucial formula expressing the relation of Christ to God in the creed issued by the council, ‘of one substance with the Father’ . . . Overawed by the emperor, the bishops, with two exceptions only, signed the creed, many of them much against their inclination.” Hence, Constantine’s role was crucial. After two months of furious religious debate, this pagan politician intervened and decided in favor of those who said that Jesus was God. But why? Certainly not because of any Biblical conviction. “Constantine had basically no understanding whatsoever of the questions that were being asked in Greek theology,” says A Short History of Christian Doctrine. What he did understand was that religious division was a threat to his empire, and he wanted to solidify his domain. None of the bishops at Nicaea promoted a Trinity, however. They decided only the nature of Jesus but not the role of the holy spirit. If a Trinity had been a clear Bible truth, should they not have proposed it at that time? Further Development AFTER Nicaea, debates on the subject continued for decades. Those who believed that Jesus was not equal to God even came back into favor for a time. But later Emperor Theodosius decided against them. He established the creed of the Council of Nicaea as the standard for his realm and convened the Council of Constantinople in 381 C.E. to clarify the formula. That council agreed to place the holy spirit on the same level as God and Christ. For the first time, Christendom’s Trinity began to come into focus. Yet, even after the Council of Constantinople, the Trinity did not become a widely accepted creed. Many opposed it and thus brought on themselves violent persecution. It was only in later centuries that the Trinity was formulated into set creeds. The Encyclopedia Americana notes: “The full development of Trinitarianism took place in the West, in the Scholasticism of the Middle Ages, when an explanation was undertaken in terms of philosophy and psychology.” The Athanasian Creed THE Trinity was defined more fully in the Athanasian Creed. Athanasius was a clergyman who supported Constantine at Nicaea. The creed that bears his name declares: “We worship one God in Trinity . . . The Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God; and yet they are not three gods, but one God.” Well-informed scholars agree, however, that Athanasius did not compose this creed. The New Encyclopædia Britannica comments: “The creed was unknown to the Eastern Church until the 12th century. Since the 17th century, scholars have generally agreed that the Athanasian Creed was not written by Athanasius (died 373) but was probably composed in southern France during the 5th century. . . . The creed’s influence seems to have been primarily in southern France and Spain in the 6th and 7th centuries. It was used in the liturgy of the church in Germany in the 9th century and somewhat later in Rome.” So it took centuries from the time of Christ for the Trinity to become widely accepted in Christendom. And in all of this, what guided the decisions? Was it the Word of God, or was it clerical and political considerations? In Origin and Evolution of Religion, E. W. Hopkins answers: “The final orthodox definition of the trinity was largely a matter of church politics.” Apostasy Foretold THIS disreputable history of the Trinity fits in with what Jesus and his apostles foretold would follow their time. They said that there would be an apostasy, a deviation, a falling away from true worship until Christ’s return, when true worship would be restored before God’s day of destruction of this system of things. Regarding that “day,” the apostle Paul said: “It will not come unless the apostasy comes first and the man of lawlessness gets revealed.” (2 Thessalonians 2:3, 7) Later, he foretold: “When I have gone fierce wolves will invade you and will have no mercy on the flock. Even from your own ranks there will be men coming forward with a travesty of the truth on their lips to induce the disciples to follow them.” (Acts 20:29, 30, JB) Other disciples of Jesus also wrote of this apostasy with its ‘lawless’ clergy class.—See, for example, 2 Peter 2:1; 1 John 4:1-3; Jude 3, 4. Paul also wrote: “The time is sure to come when, far from being content with sound teaching, people will be avid for the latest novelty and collect themselves a whole series of teachers according to their own tastes; and then, instead of listening to the truth, they will turn to myths.”—2 Timothy 4:3, 4, JB. Jesus himself explained what was behind this falling away from true worship. He said that he had sowed good seeds but that the enemy, Satan, would oversow the field with weeds. So along with the first blades of wheat, the weeds appeared also. Thus, a deviation from pure Christianity was to be expected until the harvest, when Christ would set matters right. (Matthew 13:24-43) The Encyclopedia Americana comments: “Fourth century Trinitarianism did not reflect accurately early Christian teaching regarding the nature of God; it was, on the contrary, a deviation from this teaching.” Where, then, did this deviation originate?—1 Timothy 1:6. What Influenced It THROUGHOUT the ancient world, as far back as Babylonia, the worship of pagan gods grouped in threes, or triads, was common. That influence was also prevalent in Egypt, Greece, and Rome in the centuries before, during, and after Christ. And after the death of the apostles, such pagan beliefs began to invade Christianity. Historian Will Durant observed: “Christianity did not destroy paganism; it adopted it. . . . From Egypt came the ideas of a divine trinity.” And in the book Egyptian Religion, Siegfried Morenz notes: “The trinity was a major preoccupation of Egyptian theologians . . . Three gods are combined and treated as a single being, addressed in the singular. In this way the spiritual force of Egyptian religion shows a direct link with Christian theology.” Thus, in Alexandria, Egypt, churchmen of the late third and early fourth centuries, such as Athanasius, reflected this influence as they formulated ideas that led to the Trinity. Their own influence spread, so that Morenz considers “Alexandrian theology as the intermediary between the Egyptian religious heritage and Christianity.” In the preface to Edward Gibbon’s History of Christianity, we read: “If Paganism was conquered by Christianity, it is equally true that Christianity was corrupted by Paganism. The pure Deism of the first Christians . . . was changed, by the Church of Rome, into the incomprehensible dogma of the trinity. Many of the pagan tenets, invented by the Egyptians and idealized by Plato, were retained as being worthy of belief.” A Dictionary of Religious Knowledge notes that many say that the Trinity “is a corruption borrowed from the heathen religions, and ingrafted on the Christian faith.” And The Paganism in Our Christianity declares: “The origin of the [Trinity] is entirely pagan.” That is why, in the Encyclopædia of Religion and Ethics, James Hastings wrote: “In Indian religion, e.g., we meet with the trinitarian group of Brahm, Siva, and Vis#n#u; and in Egyptian religion with the trinitarian group of Osiris, Isis, and Horus . . . Nor is it only in historical religions that we find God viewed as a Trinity. One recalls in particular the Neo-Platonic view of the Supreme or Ultimate Reality,” which is “triadically represented.” What does the Greek philosopher Plato have to do with the Trinity? Platonism PLATO, it is thought, lived from 428 to 347 before Christ. While he did not teach the Trinity in its present form, his philosophies paved the way for it. Later, philosophical movements that included triadic beliefs sprang up, and these were influenced by Plato’s ideas of God and nature. The French Nouveau Dictionnaire Universel (New Universal Dictionary) says of Plato’s influence: “The Platonic trinity, itself merely a rearrangement of older trinities dating back to earlier peoples, appears to be the rational philosophic trinity of attributes that gave birth to the three hypostases or divine persons taught by the Christian churches. . . . This Greek philosopher’s conception of the divine trinity . . . can be found in all the ancient [pagan] religions.” The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge shows the influence of this Greek philosophy: “The doctrines of the Logos and the Trinity received their shape from Greek Fathers, who . . . were much influenced, directly or indirectly, by the Platonic philosophy . . . That errors and corruptions crept into the Church from this source can not be denied.” The Church of the First Three Centuries says: “The doctrine of the Trinity was of gradual and comparatively late formation; . . . it had its origin in a source entirely foreign from that of the Jewish and Christian Scriptures; . . . it grew up, and was ingrafted on Christianity, through the hands of the Platonizing Fathers.” By the end of the third century C.E., “Christianity” and the new Platonic philosophies became inseparably united. As Adolf Harnack states in Outlines of the History of Dogma, church doctrine became “firmly rooted in the soil of Hellenism [pagan Greek thought]. Thereby it became a mystery to the great majority of Christians.” The church claimed that its new doctrines were based on the Bible. But Harnack says: “In reality it legitimized in its midst the Hellenic speculation, the superstitious views and customs of pagan mystery-worship.” In the book A Statement of Reasons, Andrews Norton says of the Trinity: “We can trace the history of this doctrine, and discover its source, not in the Christian revelation, but in the Platonic philosophy . . . The Trinity is not a doctrine of Christ and his Apostles, but a fiction of the school of the later Platonists.” Thus, in the fourth century C.E., the apostasy foretold by Jesus and the apostles came into full bloom. Development of the Trinity was just one evidence of this. The apostate churches also began embracing other pagan ideas, such as hellfire, immortality of the soul, and idolatry. Spiritually speaking, Christendom had entered its foretold dark ages, dominated by a growing “man of lawlessness” clergy class.—2 Thessalonians 2:3, 7. Why Did God’s Prophets Not Teach It? WHY, for thousands of years, did none of God’s prophets teach his people about the Trinity? At the latest, would Jesus not use his ability as the Great Teacher to make the Trinity clear to his followers? Would God inspire hundreds of pages of Scripture and yet not use any of this instruction to teach the Trinity if it were the “central doctrine” of faith? Are Christians to believe that centuries after Christ and after having inspired the writing of the Bible, God would back the formulation of a doctrine that was unknown to his servants for thousands of years, one that is an “inscrutable mystery” “beyond the grasp of human reason,” one that admittedly had a pagan background and was “largely a matter of church politics”? The testimony of history is clear: The Trinity teaching is a deviation from the truth, an apostatizing from it. Note; ‘Fourth century Trinitarianism was a deviation from early Christian teaching.’—The Encyclopedia Americana “The Triad of the Great Gods” Many centuries before the time of Christ, there were triads, or trinities, of gods in ancient Babylonia and Assyria. The French “Larousse Encyclopedia of Mythology” notes one such triad in that Mesopotamian area: “The universe was divided into three regions each of which became the domain of a god. Anu’s share was the sky. The earth was given to Enlil. Ea became the ruler of the waters. Together they constituted the triad of the Great Gods.” Hindu Trinity The book “The Symbolism of Hindu Gods and Rituals” says regarding a Hindu trinity that existed centuries before Christ: “Siva is one of the gods of the Trinity. He is said to be the god of destruction. The other two gods are Brahma, the god of creation and Vishnu, the god of maintenance. . . . To indicate that these three processes are one and the same the three gods are combined in one form.”—Published by A. Parthasarathy, Bombay. On Scribd; See also, the paper; Did Jesus Christ Teach the Trinity? See also the folder; Catholic Church. See also the folder; Relationship with God See also the paper; New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures See also the group; Study the Bible, please See also the group; Relationship with Almighty God
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: richard9151 (#0)
In short, it was just made up by men, like everything else in the bible.
It's a white thing. Judaism + caucasoid brain = christian trinity.
The holy shall kill thy therapist, for it IS a sin.
You are a false teacher that Christ warned us about in the Bible. Explain Genesis where it says man was made in "our" image. You are not content to be wrong you go and stand in the door and try to block others from learning the truth. Your damnation will be worse.
I pity you fool.
If you think you are going to heaven because of your love of Israel...prepare to be disappointed .... zionist all have a one way ticket to hell
That's the way to influence people to your way of "thinking".
Everybody who isn't a "saved" Christian has a one way ticket to hell according to the self-proclaimed "saved". That, of course, would include everybody in the Old Testament, as well as everyone else on the planet.
You support the Zionist baby killers. You are the fool.
Thats why you got love those christians who support the Jews ... thinking its a e-ticket to ever lasting life
Loving or hating Israel isn't what gets you through the gates. It is acceptance of Christ. Would Jesus be considered a zionist?
You worship Hitler. Go away you little nazi.
That, of course, would include everybody in the Old Testament, as well as everyone else on the planet. Actually that is scripturally inaccurate. But it is up to you to find out why. Or not doesn't matter to me.
No that is how I make fun of a fool.
A) It was written by men. Zionism is a ideoligy it's not a religion...not that you would read this but here goes. Philip Mauro, a lawyer, (nevertheless a devout follower of Christ), wrote this as a devastating refutation of the Scofield Reference Bible with amazing insight in 1927. In a chapter headed “Concerning Zionism” he tells us: The "dispensational" doctrine is that the natural descendants of Jacob will be gathered back to Palestine, still in impenitence and unbelief (Zionism is supposed to be the beginning of this movement); that Christ will come to "the air" above (unseen), will raise dead believers, change the living and take all to glory (1 Th. 4:16, 17), thus leaving only unsaved persons on earth; that the "great tribulation" will then ensue and will last for seven years…” Mauro continues: “… Zionism… has for its object the making of Palestine a homeland for the Jews. Concerning that movement a great deal of misinformation has been disseminated during the past twenty years in the interest of dispensationalism. For dispensationalist writers and speakers have painted wonderful word-pictures portraying the multitudes of Jews said to be flocking to their ancient homeland; the miraculously renewed fertility of the soil; the return of the early and latter rain etc. etc.; and it has been made to appear that the re-constitution of the Jewish State and the rebuilding of the Temple were matters of tomorrow or the day after. All these supposed happenings were presented to eager readers and hearers as a marvelous fulfillment of prophecy taking place before our very eyes, and as giving assurance that the time of the end had come. But the sober facts are that Zionism has been a pitiful failure almost from the beginning… Palestine is wretched in the extreme, and that the attitude of the great mass of Jews throughout the world towards the Zionistic project is that of complete apathy and indifference.”
How about explaining the two different Adam and Eve stories in Genesis 1 and 2? When you've finished that, where did Abel's wife come from?
That, of course, would include everybody in the Old Testament, as well as everyone else on the planet Actually that is scripturally inaccurate. But it is up to you to find out why. Or not doesn't matter to me. Since you posted "Loving or hating Israel isn't what gets you through the gates. It is acceptance of Christ. ", I'd say you agree with me, since nobody in the OT "accepted Christ".
lol. There are no differences. What is your other screen name?
Of course there are. Read them again.
No differences. Give it your best shot.
charlie don't slip 'n' slide
The ultimate effect of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools. - Herbert Spencer
Genesis 1 26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. 27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. Genesis 2 7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. 21 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; 22 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. 23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. So there's no difference? In Genesis 1, both mad and woman are created at the same time. In Genesis 2, the woman is an afterthought, created 14 verses after man and after all the beasts and fowl, as something to keep man company. They were not created at the same time. It looks like a big difference in the stories to me.
The ultimate effect of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools. - Herbert Spencer
Who wants to buy a van, or an amplifier?
The ultimate effect of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools. - Herbert Spencer
Will you have time next week to march into court with me and start babbling about kikes murdering Jamaican pimps?
The ultimate effect of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools. - Herbert Spencer
You are just too funny, stone.
The ultimate effect of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools. - Herbert Spencer
There is no difference at all. Not even a little bit. Let me give you an example. Stone 1:1 One day I built a model airplane, I also built a model hellicopter. Stone 2:4 When I built my model airplane I went to the store and bought a little kit and some glue. I also thought it would be nice to make an airplane so I bought a kit for that and glue for it too. No contradictions there. Genesis chapter 1 is an overview. It doesn't say when he created the woman it just says he created the woman. Genesis 2 gives more details. No contradictions You said in Genesis 1 God created them at the same time. Can you tell me where it says that because I can't see that part.
No, but I will have time for you to come over and clean out my gutters.
Please look at this verse very, very carefully; Acts 20:28 Pay attention to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the holy spirit has appointed YOU overseers, to shepherd the congregation of God, which he purchased with the blood of his own [Son]. 29 I know that after my going away oppressive wolves will enter in among YOU and will not treat the flock with tenderness, 30 and from among YOU yourselves men will rise and speak twisted things to draw away the disciples after themselves. The apostasy started immediately. It continues to this day. Explain Genesis where it says man was made in "our" image. Jehovah God was speaking of and to His son, also called the Word, who carried messages for his Father, and also worked alongside of Him for eons. His son is also known as the Master Worker in the Old Testament for the work he accomplished in the Holy Name of his Father. None of this is a secret, except to those who listen only to the preachings of men. I am putting up a post in a moment about the man of lawlessness. You rally need to read it, carefully. Oh, and the one already up about the woman at Genesis 3:16. Bye for now, Old Friend.
Daniel 2:44 “And in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be brought to ruin. And the kingdom itself will not be passed on to any other people. It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, and it itself will stand to times indefinite;.
You're weird, you know why I think so?
The ultimate effect of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools. - Herbert Spencer
No, but I will have time for you to come over and clean out my gutters.
The ultimate effect of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools. - Herbert Spencer
I suspect the "Trinity doctrine" is somehow related to the "Neo doctrine."
#2. To: richard9151 (#0)
“In Indian religion, e.g., we meet with the trinitarian group of Brahm, Siva, and Vis#n#u; and in Egyptian religion with the trinitarian group of Osiris, Isis, and Horus . . . Nor is it only in historical religions that we find God viewed as a Trinity. One recalls in particular the Neo-Platonic view of the Supreme or Ultimate Reality,” which is “triadically represented.” What does the Greek philosopher Plato have to do with the Trinity?
#3. To: richard9151 (#0)
#4. To: IDon'tThinkSo (#1)
n short, it was just made up by men, like everything else in the bible.
#5. To: Old Friend (#3)
#6. To: Old Friend (#4)
I pity you fool.
#7. To: robnoel (#5)
If you think you are going to heaven because of your love of Israel...prepare to be disappointed .... zionist all have a one way ticket to hell
#8. To: Old Friend (#4)
#9. To: IDon'tThinkSo (#7)
#10. To: robnoel (#5)
If you think you are going to heaven because of your love of Israel...prepare to be disappointed .... zionist all have a one way ticket to hell
#11. To: TwentyTwelve (#8)
You support the Zionist baby killers.
#12. To: IDon'tThinkSo (#7)
Everybody who isn't a "saved" Christian has a one way ticket to hell according to the self-proclaimed "saved".
#13. To: IDon'tThinkSo (#6)
That's the way to influence people to your way of "thinking".
#14. To: Old Friend (#3)
Explain Genesis where it says man was made in "our" image.
B) It is refering to masculine and feminine, as is all living things found in nature.
C) You wouldn't believe the real answer anyways, so why ask?
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#15. To: Old Friend (#10)
Would Jesus be considered a zionist?
#16. To: Old Friend (#13)
No that is how I make fun of a fool.
#17. To: Old Friend (#12)
Everybody who isn't a "saved" Christian has a one way ticket to hell according to the self-proclaimed "saved".
#18. To: IDon'tThinkSo (#16)
How about explaining the two different Adam and Eve stories in Genesis 1 and 2?
#19. To: Old Friend (#18)
lol. There are no differences. What is your other screen name?
#20. To: IDon'tThinkSo (#19)
Of course there are. Read them again.
#21. To: Old Friend (#20)
#22. To: Old Friend (#20)
No differences. Give it your best shot.
#23. To: IDon'tThinkSochristine (#22)
#24. To: IDon'tThinkSo (#22)
#25. To: Old Friend (#18)
#26. To: Old Friend (#11)
You worship Hitler. Go away you little nazi.
#27. To: IDon'tThinkSo (#22)
So there's no difference? In Genesis 1, both mad and woman are created at the same time.
#28. To: Dakmar (#25)
Will you have time next week to march into court with me and start babbling about kikes murdering Jamaican pimps?
#29. To: Old Friend (#3)
You are a false teacher that Christ warned us about in the Bible.
#30. To: Old Friend (#28)
No, but I will have time for you to come over and clean out my gutters.
#31. To: Old Friend (#28)
To: Dakmar
Will you have time next week to march into court with me and start babbling about kikes murdering Jamaican pimps?
#32. To: Dakmar (#31)
Dancing Turtles and Bouncing Boobs
...that's Turtle Island.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
