Jump to content


- - - - -

The history of Trinitarianism


17 replies to this topic

#1 gabe

    Lambda

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 226 posts

Posted 10 July 2007 - 04:43 PM

At Bible-Discussion.com, there is a thread in which the history of Trinitarian thought is discussed here:

http://www.bible-discussion.com/message-bo...opic.php?t=5415

It begins thus:

Quote

There are cult groups (Jehovah's Witnesses, The Way International, Christadelphians, etc.) who deny the Trinity and state that the doctrine was not mentioned until the 4th Century until after the time of the Council of Nicea (325). This council "was called by Emperor Constantine to deal with the error of Arianism [see page 45] which was threatening the unity of the Christian Church."
The following quotes show that the doctrine of the Trinity was indeed alive-and-well before the Council of Nicea.

I am not well-versed in this area, so I'm inviting y'all to participate in the discussion in hopes that I and perhaps others there can learn something.

Gabe

#2 Ezzle

    The BTDF Team

  • On Vacation
  • PipPip
  • 287 posts

Posted 11 July 2007 - 02:40 AM

View Postgabe, on Jul 10 2007, 04:43 PM, said:

At Bible-Discussion.com, there is a thread in which the history of Trinitarian thought is discussed here:

http://www.bible-discussion.com/message-bo...opic.php?t=5415

It begins thus:

Quote

There are cult groups (Jehovah's Witnesses, The Way International, Christadelphians, etc.) who deny the Trinity and state that the doctrine was not mentioned until the 4th Century until after the time of the Council of Nicea (325). This council "was called by Emperor Constantine to deal with the error of Arianism [see page 45] which was threatening the unity of the Christian Church."
The following quotes show that the doctrine of the Trinity was indeed alive-and-well before the Council of Nicea.

I am not well-versed in this area, so I'm inviting y'all to participate in the discussion in hopes that I and perhaps others there can learn something.

Gabe
Hi Gabe! Well, it's easy to say that people who you disagree with, belong to a cult group. I guess we all have to be on guard against cult mentality. But it is ludicrous to label anyone that doesn't have the doctrine of the trinity as part of their beliefs, a cult.
The doctrine of the trinity doesn't make sense. I guess one can see how statements of Jesus led to some people going down the trinity route. But if you closely look at what Jesus said, it is apparent that trinitarians have misunderstood the subject.

One small example:
[indent]
John 14:8-9 (ESV)
Philip said to him, "Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us." [9] Jesus said to him, "Have I been with you so long, and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'?
[/indent]

I guess if you don't dig any deeper, the above verses could give trinitarian impressions. But if you check out a few other verses, the point Jesus was getting at becomes clear.

The point Jesus was making was that if Philip wanted to know what God was like, he only he to look at Jesus. And if that wasn't enough to convince Philip, the works Jesus did should verify to Philip that what Jesus said was true.
[indent]
John 14:10-11 (ESV)
"Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own authority, but the Father who dwells in me does his works. [11] Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me, or else believe on account of the works themselves.
[/indent]
See also:
[indent]
John 10:38 (ESV)
but if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me and I am in the Father."
[/indent]

To summarize:

Jesus and God dwell in each other, not as trinitarians say, but they are one in purpose and their lives are intermeshed. The things that motivate/d Jesus, were the things of God.

#3 gabe

    Lambda

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 226 posts

Posted 12 July 2007 - 01:56 AM

Good thoughts, Ezzle.

And whoever "Steven3" is at bible-discussion, thanks for joining in and doing the good job you are doing.

#4 Steven

    Upsilon

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,365 posts

Posted 12 July 2007 - 05:24 AM

View Postgabe, on Jul 12 2007, 01:56 AM, said:

Good thoughts, Ezzle.

And whoever "Steven3" is at bible-discussion, thanks for joining in and doing the good job you are doing.

You're welcome, kills a few hours with some revision of old chestnuts. Though I wouldn't rate this board much. The "history of Trinitarianism" is just a cut and paste from our old friend Matt Slick. Their mod who posted it, RevJP, is, well...
S

#5 Lectron

    Sigma

  • Christadelphian Armoury
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,100 posts

Posted 12 July 2007 - 05:58 AM

View Postgabe, on Jul 10 2007, 05:43 PM, said:

At Bible-Discussion.com, there is a thread in which the history of Trinitarian thought is discussed here:

http://www.bible-discussion.com/message-bo...opic.php?t=5415

It begins thus:

Quote

There are cult groups (Jehovah's Witnesses, The Way International, Christadelphians, etc.) who deny the Trinity and state that the doctrine was not mentioned until the 4th Century until after the time of the Council of Nicea (325). This council "was called by Emperor Constantine to deal with the error of Arianism [see page 45] which was threatening the unity of the Christian Church."
The following quotes show that the doctrine of the Trinity was indeed alive-and-well before the Council of Nicea.

I am not well-versed in this area, so I'm inviting y'all to participate in the discussion in hopes that I and perhaps others there can learn something.

Gabe

A distinction needs to be drawn between the triune formula and the creedal version of the Trinity doctrine. The former is perfectly scriptural (although we Christadelphians tend to not to refer to it much) The latter is a gross distortion of the God we worship. It is blasphemous and hopelessly misrepresents our Lord Jesus' mission.

With the exception of Ignatius, these early 2nd century quotes are well in tune with our Christadelphian beliefs:

Quote

Polycarp (70-155/160). Bishop of Smyrna. Disciple of John the Apostle.
"O Lord God almighty...I bless you and glorify you through the eternal and heavenly high priest Jesus Christ, your beloved Son, through whom be glory to you, with Him and the Holy Spirit, both now and forever"
(n. 14, ed. Funk; PG 5.1040).

Quote

Justin Martyr (100?-165?). He was a Christian apologist and martyr.
"For, in the name of God, the Father and Lord of the universe, and of our Savior Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, they then receive the washing with water"
(First Apol., LXI).


Irenaeus (115-190). As a boy he listened to Polycarp, the disciple of John. He became Bishop of Lyons.

Quote

"The Church, though dispersed throughout the whole world, even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and their disciples this faith: ...one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are in them; and in one Christ Jesus, the Son of God, who became incarnate for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit, who proclaimed through the prophets the dispensations of God, and the advents, and the birth from a virgin, and the passion, and the resurrection from the dead, and the ascension into heaven in the flesh of the beloved Christ Jesus, our Lord, and His manifestation from heaven in the glory of the Father ‘to gather all things in one,' and to raise up anew all flesh of the whole human race, in order that to Christ Jesus, our Lord, and God, and Savior, and King, according to the will of the invisible Father, ‘every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth, and that every tongue should confess; to him, and that He should execute just judgment towards all...'"
(Against Heresies X.l)

Notice the important became incarnate in this statement the incarnation of the word does not comence with his natural birth but becomes so prior to his mission.

As for Ignatius of Antioch, we know that powerful forces were at work in the early church distorting the nature of Jesus, and some of them would no doubt commit them to the written word.

I am doing my bit on Emmaus way forum just now, so will leave this to others.

Edited by Lectron, 12 July 2007 - 06:00 AM.

....by grace you are saved through faith,
and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God,
not of works, lest anyone should boast.
For we are
his
workmanship,
created in Christ Jesus to good works
....


#6 Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 12 July 2007 - 09:26 AM

Hi Gabe,

If you look at the teaching statements in the Acts of the Apostles, and compare it with the 1st century 'Apostles' Creed' and 'Didache' (both extra-Biblical Christian texts belonging to the early Christian community), you'll see just how simple the original gospel message was (see here).

You will also note there the complete absence of the trinity. The earliest Christian creedal statements preserved this original message, for the most part, insisting that there was one God, who was one person (the Father), and that Jesus Christ is His son (see here).

If you look at the 'official' faith statements put together over the centuries by Christian groups, you will be able to see how the original 1st century teachings were gradually diffused, diluted, and finally abandoned. As you can see here, by the 5th century there's almost nothing left of the original creedal statement, and the trinity has become fully formed.

Then there's the fact that the trinity was developed by Christians who enjoyed the support of the state, and who were able to enforce their beliefs by state legislation and violence as they developed them. Here's the quick version:

* 4th century: Emperor Constantine supports the Nicene version of Christianity over the other versions

* 4th century: Emperor Theodosius I makes the Nicene version of Christianity the official state religion, and creates laws punishing those who believe otherwise (it is now illegal to deny the trinity, among other doctrines)

* 5th century: Roman empire collapses under repeated invasions from surrounding tribes and states, and the so called 'barbarian kings' take over, with Italy itself being made a vassal state to the Goths, who belonged to the Arian version of Christianity (which had spread rapidly throughout the Roman empire prior to the rise of the Nicene version, and had remained unaffected by the decrees of Constantine and Theodosius)

* 5th-6th century: Emperor Justinian I, ruler of the Eastern Roman empire, flies to the defence of the beleagured Nicene Christians in Italy, at the behest of the Bishop of Rome. In a series of devastating and bloody wars, he subdues the invading barbarians and reasserts the primacy of Nicene Christianity. He passes new laws condemning all other versions of Christianity as heresy, as well as laws persecuting the pagans and the Jews.

* Early 7th century: Boniface I, Bishop of Rome, successfully appoints himself 'Universal Father', head of all Christian churches everywhere, claiming temporal power over all Christians such that they must all submit to his decrees. The term 'pope' is used in its conventionally understood sense. He has the support of the emperor, and the mighty weight of the Codex Justinian (the laws passed by Justinian I), to support his authority.

By the time Western Europe entered the medieval era, the so called 'Catholic Church' was the dominant form of Christianity, and had been so for at least 200 years. With each development from Constantine's era onwards, one version of Christianity gained supremacy, not by theological discussion but by force of arms and legal coercion. Other forms of Christianity were marginalised by physical persecution and legal restriction. Precious few alternative Christian sects arose over the next few centuries up to the Reformation, and those which did were hunted down mercilessly.

The Reformation successfully overturned many of the old ideas, but was not wholly unshackled by dogma. The vast majority of the early Reformers differed very little theologically from the Roman Church from which they had come out, and because they dared not challenge the early church councils, they were not prepared to call into question doctrines such as the trinity. Sharing the Aristotleian epistemology with the Roman Church, they found much of the Roman Catholic exposition still valid, and so failed to reform completely.

A brief presentation with some relevant historical information, in chronological order here.

There is a history of non-trinitarian Christianity which is centuries old. I won't bore you with statistics or lengthy descriptions, I'll just throw out a couple of the big names (Michael Servetus, Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, Faustus Socinus, Sir Isaac Newton, Joseph Priestley), and that discussion can be picked up in another thread if necessary.

As for this:

Quote

The following quotes show that the doctrine of the Trinity was indeed alive-and-well before the Council of Nicea.

No they don't. What they do is show that some Christians believed Jesus was a Divine being of some kind, some believed him to be 'God', some believed him to be 'a god', and some believed various other strange things. What they don't do is articulate the trinity. But that aside, it's important to note that the Nicene Creed didn't define the trinity either. We look in vain for the trinity in the Nicene Creed. It just isn't there. The Nicene Creed didn't define the trinity, it was just one step along in the development of the ideas which finally resulted in the trinitarian doctrine the next century. You need to look to the Athanasian Creed to find the trinity articulated by a church council. Note the differences here.

It's also worth noting that the Early Christian Fathers admitted that Jesus did not claim to be God, and that the apostles didn't teach he was God either.

Edited by Fortigurn, 12 July 2007 - 09:31 AM.

Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
Apologetics

#7 Chris

    Rho

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,761 posts

Posted 12 July 2007 - 01:56 PM

I just finished reading this book not too long ago and recommend it to anyone wanting to read up on what Fort included in his post above.

#8 gabe

    Lambda

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 226 posts

Posted 13 July 2007 - 12:54 AM

Quote

Though I wouldn't rate this board much.

Neither would I. But youre being around certainly has added life to that place!

Quote

The "history of Trinitarianism" is just a cut and paste from our old friend Matt Slick.

Lame, eh?

Quote

Their mod who posted it, RevJP, is, well...

Tell me more!

Say, have you figured out what my moniker is over there?

#9 gabe

    Lambda

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 226 posts

Posted 13 July 2007 - 12:56 AM

Thanks for the post, Fort. Much food for thought as usual.

#10 gabe

    Lambda

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 226 posts

Posted 13 July 2007 - 01:19 AM

View Postgabe, on Jul 13 2007, 12:54 AM, said:

Quote

Though I wouldn't rate this board much.

Neither would I. But youre being around certainly has added life to that place!

Quote

The "history of Trinitarianism" is just a cut and paste from our old friend Matt Slick.

Lame, eh?

Quote

Their mod who posted it, RevJP, is, well...

Tell me more!

Say, have you figured out what my moniker is over there?


#11 Kay

    Tau

  • Admin
  • 3,131 posts

Posted 13 July 2007 - 12:06 PM

gabe

Just wondering if you would be able to update your email account for the board - just we had a 'bounce', a PM which was sent to you - no, not the content of the PM, just notification that the email recorded on BTDF was no longer valid.

Many thanks if you could look into this for us :lol:

kind regards

Kay
"seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness" Matthew 6:33

#12 Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 13 July 2007 - 01:01 PM

View Postgabe, on Jul 13 2007, 08:56 AM, said:

Thanks for the post, Fort. Much food for thought as usual.

You're welcome.
Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
Apologetics

#13 Sammo

    Pi

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPip
  • 720 posts

Posted 23 December 2008 - 01:59 PM

View PostFortigurn, on Jul 12 2007, 10:26 AM, said:

If you look at the teaching statements in the Acts of the Apostles, and compare it with the 1st century 'Apostles' Creed' and 'Didache' (both extra-Biblical Christian texts belonging to the early Christian community), you'll see just how simple the original gospel message was (see here).
Hi - the links in this post are broken, which is a pity since they sound exactly like the sort of material that I'm after! I'm trying to put together as comprehensive a list of quotes as I can that demonstrates the development of the trinity - any help would be much appreciated.

#14 Sammo

    Pi

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPip
  • 720 posts

Posted 23 December 2008 - 02:18 PM

Great, thanks for that.

#15 Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 23 December 2008 - 03:01 PM

View PostSammo, on Dec 23 2008, 09:59 PM, said:

View PostFortigurn, on Jul 12 2007, 10:26 AM, said:

If you look at the teaching statements in the Acts of the Apostles, and compare it with the 1st century 'Apostles' Creed' and 'Didache' (both extra-Biblical Christian texts belonging to the early Christian community), you'll see just how simple the original gospel message was (see here).
Hi - the links in this post are broken, which is a pity since they sound exactly like the sort of material that I'm after! I'm trying to put together as comprehensive a list of quotes as I can that demonstrates the development of the trinity - any help would be much appreciated.

That post is about a year and a half old now, and the site to which it links is no longer online.
Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
Apologetics

#16 theMadJW

    Alpha

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 19 posts

Posted 10 June 2009 - 03:20 PM

The Key to knowing if the Trinity Dogma is true or false is to simply reflect on what the term "God" means.

THE ... SUPREME ... BEING!

NOT Supreme BeingS.
Jesus is the MEDIATOR and HIGH PRIEST between God and Man.
He was GIVEN all power BY Him.
He HAS a God- One who is SUPREME over him- serves him, and subjects himself to Him.

And there simply IS no Nameless, Faceless Ghost-God.
The Holy Spirit (NOT "Ghost") is as Gabriel told Mary it was: "POWER of the Most High God"!

All of the above is a synopsis of what the Bible has shown about God and Christ.

Posted Image

#17 nsr

    Order of the Golden Pedant 2nd Class

  • Forum Manager
  • 5,734 posts

Posted 10 June 2009 - 04:43 PM

What do Trinitarians say if you point out that according to Matthew 1:20, the Holy Spirit is actually Jesus' Father?
"But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to an innumerable company of angels, to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are registered in heaven, to God the Judge of all, to the spirits of just men made perfect..." (Heb 12:22-23)

#18 theMadJW

    Alpha

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 19 posts

Posted 12 June 2009 - 10:07 PM

View Postnsr, on Jun 10 2009, 09:43 AM, said:

What do Trinitarians say if you point out that according to Matthew 1:20, the Holy Spirit is actually Jesus' Father?


GOOD one, NSR!

[Censored by moderator]

Edited by Weasley, 13 June 2009 - 12:55 AM.
Blasphamy






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users