How did the Trinity doctrine develop in the early church?

[GodsGrace]

Repeating falsehoods don’t not make them true. The trinity* is nowhere in the Bible.



* To be clear, when I write that the trinity is not found anywhere in Scripture, I mean that neither the word nor the concept of the trinity is explicitly in the Bible. To avoid the inevitable Appeal to Strawman, there simply is no verse that reads something like The nature of God is a trinity - consisting of the Father, Son & Holy Spirit who are co-equal, co-substantial and co-eternal - and if you do not believe this, you cannot be saved but are damned to hell forever. If there were such a verse, it would be the most quoted verse in Scripture by those who claim one’s salvation depends on believing it. The concept of the trinity is so important that in 66 books, it is not mentioned once!

Don't read my post 316 and 317.
It might be disturbing to you.

Also, I NEVER said that this means you're not saved.

But it would make you CHRISTian.

 

[MonoBiblical]

Here are some writings from the Early Church Fathers that were taught by the Apostles...
which means that the Apostles also believed this:

You assume they taught the same thing. And you know what can be said about assumptions.

In other words, God is not a single, isolated person, as unitarian forms of theism like Islam hold; rather God is a plurality of persons, as the Christian doctrine of the Trinity affirms. On the unitarian view God is a person who does not give Himself away essentially in love for another; He is focused essentially only on Himself. Hence, He cannot be the most perfect being. But on the Christian view, God is a triad of persons in eternal, self-giving love relationships. Thus, since God is essentially loving, the doctrine of the Trinity is more plausible than any unitarian doctrine of God.

Totally disagree. It is impossible for God in any form to be selfish. Selfish no, petty yes.

I suggest you read Megillah 9a.12 and 9a.14 which have LXX fragments that ignore the concept of plurality.

12 And they wrote for him: God created in the beginning [bereshit], reversing the order of the words in the first phrase in the Torah that could be misinterpreted as: “Bereshit created God” (Genesis 1:1). They did so to negate those who believe in the preexistence of the world and those who maintain that there are two powers in the world: One is Bereshit, who created the second, God. And they wrote: I shall make man in image and in likeness, rather than: “Let us make man in our image and in our likeness” (Genesis 1:26), as from there too one could mistakenly conclude that there are multiple powers and that God has human form.

14 Instead of: “Come, let us go down, and there confound their language” (Genesis 11:7), which indicates multiple authorities, they wrote in the singular: Come, let me go down, and there confound their language. In addition, they replaced the verse: “And Sarah laughed within herself [bekirba]” (Genesis 18:12), with: And Sarah laughed among her relatives [bikroveha]. They made this change to distinguish between Sarah’s laughter, which God criticized, and Abraham’s laughter, to which no reaction is recorded. Based on the change, Sarah’s laughter was offensive because she voiced it to others.

It should also be noted the Hebrew-Aramaic word for God was El not Elohim.

 

[GodsGrace]

You assume they taught the same thing. And you know what can be said about assumptions.

Totally disagree. It is impossible for God in any form to be selfish. Selfish no, petty yes.

I suggest you read Megillah 9a.12 and 9a.14 which have LXX fragments that ignore the concept of plurality.

12 And they wrote for him: God created in the beginning [bereshit], reversing the order of the words in the first phrase in the Torah that could be misinterpreted as: “Bereshit created God” (Genesis 1:1). They did so to negate those who believe in the preexistence of the world and those who maintain that there are two powers in the world: One is Bereshit, who created the second, God. And they wrote: I shall make man in image and in likeness, rather than: “Let us make man in our image and in our likeness” (Genesis 1:26), as from there too one could mistakenly conclude that there are multiple powers and that God has human form.

14 Instead of: “Come, let us go down, and there confound their language” (Genesis 11:7), which indicates multiple authorities, they wrote in the singular: Come, let me go down, and there confound their language. In addition, they replaced the verse: “And Sarah laughed within herself [bekirba]” (Genesis 18:12), with: And Sarah laughed among her relatives [bikroveha]. They made this change to distinguish between Sarah’s laughter, which God criticized, and Abraham’s laughter, to which no reaction is recorded. Based on the change, Sarah’s laughter was offensive because she voiced it to others.

It should also be noted the Hebrew-Aramaic word for God was El not Elohim.

Already know most of what you posted.
I don't believe in the dualist theory.
I said I was sorry you showed up so late because I'll be leaving here for a while.
Happy posting.

 

[St. SteVen]

The plan of God from the beginning of creation. Just as the garden was created with that plan. Perfect thank God.

Do you believe that the plan of God for humankind was redemption, knowing that humankind would fall in the garden?

[

 

[wooddog]

Do you believe that the plan of God for humankind was redemption, knowing that humankind would fall in the garden?

[

God declares the end from the beginning, of course he foreknew all options.

 

[face2face]

The firstbegotten and firstfruits in particular, are a direct reference and antitype to the feast of firstfruits from the OT, and is in context connected to the resurrection. Not His beginnings.

You are correct Brakelite that Christ is the antitype of the Firstfruits in everyway.

Adam was the firstborn, but due to his wrongdoing, he was removed from his position, and his role was transferred to the Lord Jesus, who is referred to as "the last Adam" (1 Cor. 15:45). As the appointed firstborn, Jesus has been granted the priesthood, rulership, and the double portion of inheritance ("a name above every name" — Phil. 2:9-10). Furthermore, those who are genuinely "in him" are called "the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb." (Rev. 14:4)

Likewise, they will receive the privileges of the firstborn: priesthood, rulership, and a double portion of inheritance, including the Kingdom and Divine nature.

F2F

 

[face2face]

Another Christian that doesn't believe Jesus is God.
Are you worshipping a man?

No the One True God, besides Whom there is none other.

 

[face2face]

The LORD gives Job into his hand for this temptation with his own conditions.

And Who is attributed with doing all these things to Job?

The adeversary or God Himself?

Show evidence

F2F

 

[Lambano]

I don't care to get involved with this,
but
What's the contradiction that exists in scripture?

Your last sentence...
It's complex, it's convoluted, and they had to import some Greek concepts about "form" and "substance" and "hypostasis", but it's necessary, because a real contradiction exists in scripture.

The contradiction is that according to the Shema (Deuteronomy 6:4), there is one and only one Person to whom God's people can relate to as "our God". (Note: A name, "The Name", is a designation of personhood used to distinguish the person named from other persons.)

“Listen up, Israel! YHWH is our God, YHWH is one!"

Personhood is relational. Jesus and The Father are separate persons, yet they share certain characteristics such as pre-creational existence and credit for Creation. How should we relate to The Father? How do we relate to The Son?

 

[GodsGrace]

No the One True God, besides Whom there is none other.

So why are you defining yourself as a Christian instead of as a Jew???

 

[GodsGrace]

The contradiction is that according to the Shema (Deuteronomy 6:4), there is one and only one Person to whom God's people can relate to as "our God". (Note: A name, "The Name", is a designation of personhood used to distinguish the person named from other persons.)

“Listen up, Israel! YHWH is our God, YHWH is one!"

Personhood is relational. Jesus and The Father are separate persons, yet they share certain characteristics such as pre-creational existence and credit for Creation. How should we relate to The Father? How do we relate to The Son?

We're not the Jewish people.
We have Christian written below our avatars.
This is disturbing to me.

Father and Son have the same nature.....
Father existed from the beginning (which is also wrong to say...there is no beginning).
The Son existed from the beginning.
As the LOGOS of the Father.

Jesus was not a human PERSON...
He was a divine person.

He is divine because He is God.

Now,,,I'm just checking in every now and then because I'm off this and all forums for a while due to the weird stuff I have to hear and maybe I'm getting to old to hear this nonsense.

We could discuss the Trinity and HOW IT'S EVEN IN THE OT....yes,, Jesus is in the OT.

BUT

We cannot allow persons that don't believe Jesus is God to call themselves Christian.

Christianity was invented a long long time ago.
It doesn't need to be reinvented.
We don't need to have heretics calling themselves Christian.

And, really this is all I'll be saying regarding this,,
except
I wish you and your family a healthy and good new year.
GG

 

[Dan Clarkston]

Let's discuss Trinitarianism

They say this violates board rules . . . . question is, will they apply the rules to everyone equally causing this thread to be deleted or not.

 

[Dan Clarkston]

And Who is attributed with doing all these things to Job?

The adeversary or God Himself?

Show evidence

Exactly... the devil tricks ignorant preachers in to teaching that it was God's will do attack Job and God sent the devil to do the Lord's dirty work as though satan works for God.

These silly people clearly have not read the entire book of Job and if they did they missed key points showing that Job is the one the lite the fuse that causes all his problems, not the Lord.

 

[RLT63]

They say this violates board rules . . . . question is, will they apply the rules to everyone equally causing this thread to be deleted or not.

It can be discussed now

 

[RLT63]

Exactly... the devil tricks ignorant preachers in to teaching that it was God's will do attack Job and God sent the devil to do the Lord's dirty work as though satan works for God. View attachment 55198

These silly people clearly have not read the entire book of Job and if they did they missed key points showing that Job is the one the lite the fuse that causes all his problems, not the Lord.

How did Job light the fuse? What did he do wrong?

 

[Runningman]

For the Record the doctrine of the Trinity is this:

"We worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; neither confounding the persons; nor dividing the substance. For there is one Person of the Father; another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost. "But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is all one: the Glory equal, the Majesty co-eternal. Such as the Father is, so is the Son, and such is the Holy Ghost. "The Father uncreate, the Son uncreate, and the Holy Ghost uncreate. The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, and the Holy Ghost incomprehensible. The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Ghost eternal. "And yet there are not three eternals, but one eternal. Also there are not three incomprehensibles, not three uncreated: but one uncreated, and one incomprehensible. "So likewise the Father is Almighty, the Son Almighty and the Holy Ghost Almighty. And yet there are not three Almighties, but one Almighty. "So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet there are not three Gods: but one God. "So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, and the Holy Ghost Lord. And yet not three Lords but one Lord. "For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every person by himself to be God and Lord; so we are forbidden by the Catholic religion to say, There be three Gods, or three Lords. "The Father is made of none; neither created, nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone: not made, nor created, but begotten. The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son; neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding. "So there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons: one Holy Ghost, not three Holy Ghosts. "And in this Trinity none is afore, or after other, none is greater or less than others; but the whole three persons are co- eternal together; and co-equal. So that in all things as is aforesaid: the Unity in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshipped. "HE THEREFORE THAT WILL BE SAVED MUST THUS THINK OF THE TRINITY."

Unfortunately, the Athanasian Creed didn't work that out completely. The error in this work is that, in the doctrine of the Trinity, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three distinct persons but one God. On the other hand, the Son is said to be both human and divine, yet is a singular person. Therefore, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit logically must have a human nature as well, and have always had a human nature.

The problem with this is that it converts God into an essence that each member of the Trinity shares and cannot divide. Yet, according to the doctrine of the Trinity, Jesus is also human and divine. Therefore, in Trinitarianism, it seems more like God is a status or state of being rather than a person or being, which would make the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit not God, but rather vessels for God—vessels that share the divine essence.

 

[face2face]

Unfortunately, the Athanasian Creed didn't work that out completely. The error in this work is that, in the doctrine of the Trinity, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three distinct persons but one God. On the other hand, the Son is said to be both human and divine, yet is a singular person. Therefore, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit logically must have a human nature as well, and have always had a human nature.

The problem with this is that it converts God into an essence that each member of the Trinity shares and cannot divide. Yet, according to the doctrine of the Trinity, Jesus is also human and divine. Therefore, in Trinitarianism, it seems more like God is a status or state of being rather than a person or being, which would make the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit not God, but rather vessels for God—vessels that share the divine essence.

Here is how it is.

Yahweh is the God and Father of the Lord Jesus Christ
Jesus Christ is the Son of Man and the Son of God (Mortal Man in whom God created His Spiritual Creation)
The Holy Spirit is the outworking of Gods Logos & Power

F2F

 

[RLT63]

Prologue: Christ, the Eternal Word​

1 In the beginning the Word already existed.
The Word was with God,
and the Word was God.
2 He existed in the beginning with God.
3 God created everything through him,
and nothing was created except through him.
4 The Word gave life to everything that was created,[a]
and his life brought light to everyone.
5 The light shines in the darkness,
and the darkness can never extinguish it.[b]
6 God sent a man, John the Baptist,[c] 7 to tell about the light so that everyone might believe because of his testimony. 8 John himself was not the light; he was simply a witness to tell about the light. 9 The one who is the true light, who gives light to everyone, was coming into the world.

10 He came into the very world he created, but the world didn’t recognize him. 11 He came to his own people, and even they rejected him. 12 But to all who believed him and accepted him, he gave the right to become children of God. 13 They are reborn—not with a physical birth resulting from human passion or plan, but a birth that comes from God.

14 So the Word became human[d] and made his home among us. He was full of unfailing love and faithfulness.[e] And we have seen his glory, the glory of the Father’s one and only Son.

15 John testified about him when he shouted to the crowds, “This is the one I was talking about when I said, ‘Someone is coming after me who is far greater than I am, for he existed long before me.’”

16 From his abundance we have all received one gracious blessing after another.[f] 17 For the law was given through Moses, but God’s unfailing love and faithfulness came through Jesus Christ.18 No one has ever seen God. But the unique One, who is himself God,[g] is near to the Father’s heart. He has revealed God to us.

 

[Aunty Jane]

We're not the Jewish people.

Jesus was Jewish, and taught exclusively from Jewish Scripture because the NT was not yet written….the apostles also quoted OT Scripture, because they were all Jewish. All the first Christians were Jewish, so how can you say that?
Do you understand that every word penned in Scripture was written by a Jew? Not a single word was penned by anyone in Christendom…..not even the ECF.

We have Christian written below our avatars.
This is disturbing to me.

Jesus wasn’t a “Christian”…..he lived and died as a Jew. He came to put God’s worship back on the rails because the disobedient Jewish leadership had derailed it…..for centuries before Christ presented himself to John for baptism, God had not sent a prophet to his wayward people because they were incorrigible. There was no point, and sending his son gave them no excuses…..he exposed them as the frauds they always were…..and they killed him because they did not possess the humility needed to admit their errors. History repeats.

Father and Son have the same nature.....

Nature? Or personality traits? Jesus reflected his Father’s qualities and righteousness in ways that sinful humans could not. Being Adam’s equivalent (sinless) was what he needed to be in order to redeem the human race….he did not need to be God in order to do that……and besides, an immortal God cannot die.
Mere humans cannot kill God...yet you accept this without thinking.

Paul wrote that the Christ is “the image of the invisible God” (Col 1:15) so how does one reflect an invisible personage?….obviously, not physically, but only in personality. He cannot be God in human form because God has no human form…God is “a spirit”. (John 4:24) Jesus in his pre-human form was also a spirit, like all those who inhabit the spirit realm.

Father existed from the beginning (which is also wrong to say...there is no beginning).
The Son existed from the beginning.
As the LOGOS of the Father.

An eternal God had no “beginning”….which is the meaning of the word “eternal”….”no beginning or end”….Jesus clearly had a beginning, (Rev 3:14) which is confirmed by the fact that he is “begotten”….and this was long before his human birth because Paul calls him “the firstborn of ALL creation” (Col 1:15), which means he existed before ALL creation, having worked at his Father’s side in fashioning the raw materials that the Father had brought into existence. (Prov 8:30-32) All things came into existence “THROUGH” the son…but not “from” him. This is called agency. We all know what an agent does…don’t we?

Jesus was not a human PERSON...
He was a divine person.

He is divine because He is God.

He was both 100% human and he was “divine” (divinely produced)….but he was not Yahweh. He was only ever called “theos” (god with a small “g”) because that word in Greek basically means “a divine mighty one”….but never is Jesus addressed as “ho theos” (THE God) which is how the Greeks addressed the one nameless God of the Jews.

If the divine name had still been in use, the trinity would never have been able to hold such a strong place in Christendom’s beliefs.

John 1:1 would have read correctly…
”In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with Yahweh (ho theos), and the Word was divine (theos)”.

Leaving out one little word, changed the entire meaning of John’s declaration. It was the Word who “became flesh”, not “ho theos“ (Yahweh).

 

[Aunty Jane]

Unfortunately, the Athanasian Creed didn't work that out completely. The error in this work is that, in the doctrine of the Trinity, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three distinct persons but one God. On the other hand, the Son is said to be both human and divine, yet is a singular person. Therefore, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit logically must have a human nature as well, and have always had a human nature.

The problem with this is that it converts God into an essence that each member of the Trinity shares and cannot divide. Yet, according to the doctrine of the Trinity, Jesus is also human and divine. Therefore, in Trinitarianism, it seems more like God is a status or state of being rather than a person or being, which would make the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit not God, but rather vessels for God—vessels that share the divine essence.

How very simple it would have been to just present God (Yahweh) and his son as they presented themselves….Father and son have existed since creation began, because simply put, an eternal God had no beginning, yet John declares that Jesus (as the Word, logos, spokesman for God) was “with God in the beginning”…..
How does such a clear and simple statement get so scrambles and necessitate the need for extreme translation gymnastics to accommodate a doctrine that did not exist in official Catholic church teachings until the 4th century?
There was no trinity among the first Christians because they were all Jewish? That would have been blasphemy! The Jews were trying to pin a charge of blasphemy on him for merely declaring that God was his Father. (John 10:31-36) What did Jesus call himself? Never once did he say he was “God”.