So the effort of belief control began. This doctrine had to be forced on Christianity in that they would excommunicate or kill anyone that preached anything contrary to the one God Trinity, even to the point that one could not be a Christian or saved if they did not believe in the one God Trinity.
The term and concept of heresy came from the Edict of Roman Emperor Theodosius 380 AD and the Catholic Church adopted the term. And by the way the Catholic Church considered all Protestants heretics. A heretic would be excommunicated by the Church and since the Catholic Church was the state religion of the Roman Empire, heretics were considered enemies of the Empire and could be killed. And you can get into the list of heretics that were killed as time went on as well as the groups that believed differently than the Roman Catholic Church. And yes eventually there were wars between the Catholics and Protestants.
But, as with many of the official doctrines of man, what Rome proposed and what the regional churches and the people believed were many times different than the prescribed doctrines coming out of Rome. The one God formulas for the Trinity was/is abstract and incongruent. So many in that time period did not agree with the one God concept, and many believed in the authoritative position of God the Father. The one God formula was not true or accurate but it did shutdown the arguments by outlawing public objections….
The problem with these doctrines is that as a whole the scriptures as well as the storyline of the Gospels do not support the one God formula. The Gospels clearly show the Father and Son interacting and communicating throughout Christ’s ministry. Even the people that were not Apostles understood that there were individuals Gods in the trinity…. Like the time the Mother of James and John Asked Christ that her sons sit on thrones on either side of Him? And Christ answered that the places at My right side and at My left side are not Mine to give. Whoever My Father says will have those places.” There are several examples like this but one God formula people are so brain washed that they cannot see the forest for the trees. To some degree I believe it is the hocus pocus of it all that makes the concept seems magical or Divine.
The Comma Johanneum as it is referred to originated as a common literary explanation for the one God Trinity formula. The first discussion against the one God formula may have been around the late 3rd century. Some mention a connection with some of the early Church Fathers, like Cyprian which debated the oneness concepts of the Trinity. It first appeared in written form during the 4th century in the Latin homily Liber Apologeticus, which was probably written by Priscillian of Avila. This theological formula was circulated from then on, but was not accepted, or at least was not quoted by most of the early Church Fathers in which there was a continual disagreement on the construct of the Trinity.
At some point this short summary of the Trinity made its way into the margin notes of some of the manuscripts that were written after the 5th century. Unlike other examples of popular margin notes that made their way into the scriptures, the Comma Johanneum found its way into the verses of the Bible by way of another avenue. After the early 16th century, the Byzantines began to recopy and retranslate the available Greek texts of the New Testament. At this point some of these copies became known as the “Textus Receptus.” ---Erasmus--- It was in some of these that the formula was added and then later included in some of the Bibles. Most notably the King James Version, which relied heavily on these texts. On the 2nd of June 1927, Pope Pius XI decreed that the Comma Johanneum was open to dispute. The updated " Nova Vulgata" edition of the Vulgate, published in 1979 as a result of the Second Vatican Council, does not include the Comma. In the Catholic study Bible I have that was printed around 1960 it includes a combination of these two scriptures, with a side note that explains that it was a re-phrasing of the scriptures by the Holy See, as it was his prerogative. But as such are open to debate. (Not that I am Catholic, I just have a large collection of old Bibles....mostly King James Version.)
As it happened the Comma Johanneum Addition was much more than a re-translation, or an addition, but rather a replacement of the original scriptures with a theological statement. They kept the verse numbers in sequence so that it would not be as noticeable, but replaced the words. Which point to the obvious intent to deceive.
The scriptures involved are 1st John 5:6-8. The original scriptures read as follows... (Quoting 6 through 8, so it can be read in context)
“6. This is the one who came by water and blood, Jesus Christ; not with the water only, but with the water and with the blood. 7. And it is the Spirit who bears witness, because the Spirit is the truth. 8. And it is the Spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.”
This was replaced with what came to be called the Comma Johanneum Addition.
6: This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth. 7: For there are three that bear record in Heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. 8: And there are three that bear witness in Earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.
As one can see there is no chance that this is simply a different translation, but rather a removal of the scriptures and an insertion of a known theological statement for an intended purpose. Of course and again, there is no question that the Trinity exists, just that the Bible does not support the commonly explained formula or description of it. And this is the larger problem, if everybody changes the scriptures to what they believe, then we do not get an accurate reading of the Word of God, but instead a denominational sermon of beliefs. The Comma Johanneum Addition is a good illustration of the frustration that some had with trying to promote their beliefs and to what extent they would go to, to promote their beliefs above and over the Bible. This is not a unique observation but rather the opinion of many scholars and most of the well known reference material explains the Trinity as more of a doctrine than a biblical teaching.
Now the term Trinity was coined early on in post biblical Christian writings but the one God formula or definition was not in those writings. Nor the theological terms of the Catholic Church to explain it…..
Equality: The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are equal in the Holy Trinity
Incarnation: Only the Son became incarnate as Jesus Christ
Coeternality: The Son is coeternal with the Father and begotten from his same substance
The Son is completely divine, or homoousion tō Patri, which means "of one substance with the Father"
The council drew up the Nicene Creed, which states that the Son is of the same substance as God the Father
Those that believe in the one God formula cling to a couple scriptures but there are so many scriptures that disagree with this formula directly or by circumstance or congruency of the Gospel storyline. It does happen, people get fascinated by the "one liners" in the Bible and employ imagination to fill in the blanks...it is a good thing that they did not promote the scriptures about hating your mother and father and pretty much your wife and your whole family (Luke 14:46) or the scriptures that says that It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. (Matt. 19:24) Or we would have a religion that only appealed to the poor and they would not consider Christianity unless they hated their mother and father and their whole family. LOL
The Truth is, the Trinity is not the merging or mixing of three entities into one, like you would a cake mix, nor is it a three headed God. It is a condition and a reality that is beyond our understanding, but how the Trinity manifested itself in the Gospels.....I believe and define that there are three Gods in one Godhead, a Devine unity, but not one.
The Trinity exists simultaneously in an unexplainable spiritual condition of union, that allows for the sharing of traits, principles, powers and abilities, but prevents any possibility of disagreement. Still, this being true, they have their own individual presence, minds, wills, and characters. Three Gods that can sit side by side on three thrones. (I am not going to address spiritual thrones thing, it is just referenced that way in the Bible.) The Trinity makes sense, the scriptures that describe Their activity in the Gospels, make sense. The following discussion includes scriptures that speak of the Trinity as it is referenced in the Gospels. So we are going to put this in motion and as with reality and the truth, it will move through the story of Christ’s mission in the Gospels. The best example of the Trinity we have is how the three Gods interacted with each other during the Gospels. What they said to each other and about each other. Much of the proof comes from the lips of Christ Himself as He describes Himself and His Father as two persons in two different places as well as the communication between the two. Keeping in mind that it is very important to Christianity that Christ is the Son of God the Father.
Continued.....
The term and concept of heresy came from the Edict of Roman Emperor Theodosius 380 AD and the Catholic Church adopted the term. And by the way the Catholic Church considered all Protestants heretics. A heretic would be excommunicated by the Church and since the Catholic Church was the state religion of the Roman Empire, heretics were considered enemies of the Empire and could be killed. And you can get into the list of heretics that were killed as time went on as well as the groups that believed differently than the Roman Catholic Church. And yes eventually there were wars between the Catholics and Protestants.
But, as with many of the official doctrines of man, what Rome proposed and what the regional churches and the people believed were many times different than the prescribed doctrines coming out of Rome. The one God formulas for the Trinity was/is abstract and incongruent. So many in that time period did not agree with the one God concept, and many believed in the authoritative position of God the Father. The one God formula was not true or accurate but it did shutdown the arguments by outlawing public objections….
The problem with these doctrines is that as a whole the scriptures as well as the storyline of the Gospels do not support the one God formula. The Gospels clearly show the Father and Son interacting and communicating throughout Christ’s ministry. Even the people that were not Apostles understood that there were individuals Gods in the trinity…. Like the time the Mother of James and John Asked Christ that her sons sit on thrones on either side of Him? And Christ answered that the places at My right side and at My left side are not Mine to give. Whoever My Father says will have those places.” There are several examples like this but one God formula people are so brain washed that they cannot see the forest for the trees. To some degree I believe it is the hocus pocus of it all that makes the concept seems magical or Divine.
The Comma Johanneum as it is referred to originated as a common literary explanation for the one God Trinity formula. The first discussion against the one God formula may have been around the late 3rd century. Some mention a connection with some of the early Church Fathers, like Cyprian which debated the oneness concepts of the Trinity. It first appeared in written form during the 4th century in the Latin homily Liber Apologeticus, which was probably written by Priscillian of Avila. This theological formula was circulated from then on, but was not accepted, or at least was not quoted by most of the early Church Fathers in which there was a continual disagreement on the construct of the Trinity.
At some point this short summary of the Trinity made its way into the margin notes of some of the manuscripts that were written after the 5th century. Unlike other examples of popular margin notes that made their way into the scriptures, the Comma Johanneum found its way into the verses of the Bible by way of another avenue. After the early 16th century, the Byzantines began to recopy and retranslate the available Greek texts of the New Testament. At this point some of these copies became known as the “Textus Receptus.” ---Erasmus--- It was in some of these that the formula was added and then later included in some of the Bibles. Most notably the King James Version, which relied heavily on these texts. On the 2nd of June 1927, Pope Pius XI decreed that the Comma Johanneum was open to dispute. The updated " Nova Vulgata" edition of the Vulgate, published in 1979 as a result of the Second Vatican Council, does not include the Comma. In the Catholic study Bible I have that was printed around 1960 it includes a combination of these two scriptures, with a side note that explains that it was a re-phrasing of the scriptures by the Holy See, as it was his prerogative. But as such are open to debate. (Not that I am Catholic, I just have a large collection of old Bibles....mostly King James Version.)
As it happened the Comma Johanneum Addition was much more than a re-translation, or an addition, but rather a replacement of the original scriptures with a theological statement. They kept the verse numbers in sequence so that it would not be as noticeable, but replaced the words. Which point to the obvious intent to deceive.
The scriptures involved are 1st John 5:6-8. The original scriptures read as follows... (Quoting 6 through 8, so it can be read in context)
“6. This is the one who came by water and blood, Jesus Christ; not with the water only, but with the water and with the blood. 7. And it is the Spirit who bears witness, because the Spirit is the truth. 8. And it is the Spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.”
This was replaced with what came to be called the Comma Johanneum Addition.
6: This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth. 7: For there are three that bear record in Heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. 8: And there are three that bear witness in Earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.
As one can see there is no chance that this is simply a different translation, but rather a removal of the scriptures and an insertion of a known theological statement for an intended purpose. Of course and again, there is no question that the Trinity exists, just that the Bible does not support the commonly explained formula or description of it. And this is the larger problem, if everybody changes the scriptures to what they believe, then we do not get an accurate reading of the Word of God, but instead a denominational sermon of beliefs. The Comma Johanneum Addition is a good illustration of the frustration that some had with trying to promote their beliefs and to what extent they would go to, to promote their beliefs above and over the Bible. This is not a unique observation but rather the opinion of many scholars and most of the well known reference material explains the Trinity as more of a doctrine than a biblical teaching.
Now the term Trinity was coined early on in post biblical Christian writings but the one God formula or definition was not in those writings. Nor the theological terms of the Catholic Church to explain it…..
Equality: The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are equal in the Holy Trinity
Incarnation: Only the Son became incarnate as Jesus Christ
Coeternality: The Son is coeternal with the Father and begotten from his same substance
The Son is completely divine, or homoousion tō Patri, which means "of one substance with the Father"
The council drew up the Nicene Creed, which states that the Son is of the same substance as God the Father
Those that believe in the one God formula cling to a couple scriptures but there are so many scriptures that disagree with this formula directly or by circumstance or congruency of the Gospel storyline. It does happen, people get fascinated by the "one liners" in the Bible and employ imagination to fill in the blanks...it is a good thing that they did not promote the scriptures about hating your mother and father and pretty much your wife and your whole family (Luke 14:46) or the scriptures that says that It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. (Matt. 19:24) Or we would have a religion that only appealed to the poor and they would not consider Christianity unless they hated their mother and father and their whole family. LOL
The Truth is, the Trinity is not the merging or mixing of three entities into one, like you would a cake mix, nor is it a three headed God. It is a condition and a reality that is beyond our understanding, but how the Trinity manifested itself in the Gospels.....I believe and define that there are three Gods in one Godhead, a Devine unity, but not one.
The Trinity exists simultaneously in an unexplainable spiritual condition of union, that allows for the sharing of traits, principles, powers and abilities, but prevents any possibility of disagreement. Still, this being true, they have their own individual presence, minds, wills, and characters. Three Gods that can sit side by side on three thrones. (I am not going to address spiritual thrones thing, it is just referenced that way in the Bible.) The Trinity makes sense, the scriptures that describe Their activity in the Gospels, make sense. The following discussion includes scriptures that speak of the Trinity as it is referenced in the Gospels. So we are going to put this in motion and as with reality and the truth, it will move through the story of Christ’s mission in the Gospels. The best example of the Trinity we have is how the three Gods interacted with each other during the Gospels. What they said to each other and about each other. Much of the proof comes from the lips of Christ Himself as He describes Himself and His Father as two persons in two different places as well as the communication between the two. Keeping in mind that it is very important to Christianity that Christ is the Son of God the Father.
Continued.....
Last edited:
