THE Trinity can Now be discussed.

[amigo de christo]

Long before the earth and anything created was , HE IS THE I AM .
The I am simply became flesh and dwelt amongst man . from the womb even to the tomb And before that
and after that HIS NATURE was THE DIVINE . and can no man say that for themselves .
Who here can say before abraham was I AM . exactly , cause none of us were , WE IS THE CREATED
JESUS THE CREATOR . deal with it .

 

[amigo de christo]

Amen brother!

John 1:1-3: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him was not anything made that was made."

John 1:14: "And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen His glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth."

Colossians 1:15-17: "He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. For by Him all things were created, in heaven and on earth... And He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together."

Revelation 1:8: "I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God, “who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty."

Luke 2:46-47: "After three days they found Him in the temple, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions. And all who heard Him were amazed at His understanding and His answers."

John 8:58: "Jesus said to them, 'Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.'"

Revelation 22:13: "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end."

Hebrews 13:8: "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever."

Isaiah 44:6: "Thus says the Lord, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the Lord of hosts: 'I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god.'"

These verses affirm Jesus’ eternal divine nature, His role as Creator, and His unchanging deity from eternity past through His earthly life and into eternity future.

Stay strong IN Christ Jesus @amigo de christo!

J.

 

[amigo de christo]

Nothing there that says he has a divine nature.
My opinion of what that scripture is saying , disagrees with yours.

Matthew 3​

​

King James Version​

​

​

3 In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judaea,
2 And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.
3 For this is he that was spoken of by the prophet Esaias, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.
4 And the same John had his raiment of camel's hair, and a leathern girdle about his loins; and his meat was locusts and wild honey.
5 Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judaea, and all the region round about Jordan,
6 And were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins.
7 But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?
8 Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:
9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.
10 And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance. but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:
12 Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.
13 Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to Jordan unto John, to be baptized of him.
14 But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?
15 And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him.
16 And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:
17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased

Dont forget that same JOHN said HE is preferred before me , FOR HE WAS BEFORE ME . JOHN KNEW .
THEY ALL KNEW SISTER . so allow me some parting words i am sure are gonna anger folks greatly
and they will accuse me of being a condemner , hater and judger .
ALL THEM OTHER RELGIONS BE OF SATAN . weep for the muslim , YOU WEEP RIGHT NOW cause they are lost
and under the power of satan . WEEP even for jews who beleive not for they are still under the power and influence of satan
WEEP RIGHT NOW for new age and hindus and all other beliefs , FOR THEY ALL ARE UNDER THE POWER and INFLUENCE of satan .
THEN after a good long and i mean REAL LONG WEEP , GET UP and preach the dire necessity TO BELIEVE JESUS IS THE CHRIST .
and THAT HE IS NOT the minstir of anyones sin , rianbow , love of money junk or any sin . Now weep sister . WEEP .
BUT DO NOT dare weep a tear for me . JESUS HAS ME SISTER .

 

[Grailhunter]

Ignatius of Antioch (c. 35–107 AD)
Quote: "In Christ Jesus our Lord, by whom and with whom be glory and power to the Father with the Holy Spirit forever." (Letter to the Ephesians 18:2)
Ignatius speaks of the triune relationship, emphasizing the union of Father, Son, and Spirit in glory and power.

2. Justin Martyr (c. 100–165 AD)
Quote: "We will prove that we worship Him reasonably; for we have learned that He is the Son of the true God Himself, that He holds a second place, and the Spirit of prophecy a third." (First Apology, Chapter 13)

Justin refers to a hierarchy within the Godhead, common in early pre-Nicene thought, while affirming the divinity of the Son and the Spirit.

3. Irenaeus of Lyons (c. 130–202 AD)
Quote: "The Church... believes in one God, the Father Almighty... and in one Christ Jesus, the Son of God, who became incarnate for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit." (Against Heresies, Book 1, Chapter 10)

Irenaeus presents a clear Trinitarian formula, defending the unity and distinct persons of the Godhead against Gnostic heresies.

4. Tertullian (c. 160–225 AD)
Quote: "We define that there are two—the Father and the Son, and three with the Holy Spirit... They are of one essence, not divided in substance but distinguished in order." (Against Praxeas, Chapter 2)

Tertullian introduced the term Trinitas (Trinity) and articulated the unity of essence and distinction of persons in the Godhead.

5. Origen (c. 185–254 AD)
Quote: "We worship one God, the Father and the Son, who is His Word, and the Holy Spirit, who is the illumination of the truth in believers." (De Principiis, Book 1, Chapter 3)

Origen defended the co-eternity of the Son with the Father but controversially placed the Son in a subordinate position within the Trinity.

6. Clement of Alexandria (c. 150–215 AD)
Quote: "The universal Father is one, and one the Word, and the Holy Spirit is one and the same everywhere." (Stromata, Book V, Chapter 14)

Clement emphasizes the unity and universal nature of the Trinity, rooted in biblical revelation.

7. Hippolytus of Rome (c. 170–235 AD)
Quote: "A man must believe in God the Father Almighty, and in Christ Jesus, His only-begotten Son, and in the Holy Spirit." (Against Noetus, Chapter 12)

Hippolytus affirmed the distinct roles and unity of the Father, Son, and Spirit, opposing modalistic interpretations.

8. Novatian (c. 200–258 AD)
Quote: "Christ is God, but He is not the Father, nor the Father the Son." (On the Trinity, Chapter 31)

Novatian argues for the distinct persons within the Godhead while maintaining their unity in substance.
Key Observations:

Early Fathers were consistent in affirming the divinity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit while grappling with precise terminology and relational distinctions.

The pre-Nicene Fathers frequently addressed heresies, such as Gnosticism and modalism, shaping their Trinitarian expressions.
Terminological development-e.g., Tertullian's Trinitas and Origen's exploration of "eternality"—laid the groundwork for Nicene formulations.

Ignore this since I know what's coming @Wrangler.

J.

You should realize that naming these historical Christians and putting your beliefs in their mouth does not work and it is only deceptive for those that are not knowledgeable.

None of these people knew the name Jesus, it appeared out of nowhere in the 17th century and there are no J’s in the scriptures.

And None of these people believed in the three in one God Trinity formula.

Some of them did know the word Trinity, but never defined as three in one.

 

[amigo de christo]

I just had a very sad thought but also a reminder of great joy in the LORD too .
This people or pople is destroyed through lack of knowledge . pople as in many are under the influence of that
message and its men and know it not . though some do know it and care less .
If the LORD do allow it and i am killed for the faith , weep not a tear one for me
even if they drag my dead body through streets as a message to all who will not conform .
take note i said IF the LORD allowed it .
WEEP for the lost , weep for those trapped under satans lie and his version of love and of interfaith .
That ol body was but a shell that i will have been set free from and forever WITH THE LORD . SO dont weep , not for me .
WEEP for the all inclusive who bought the lie . WEEP for those who heeded finding common ground and interfaith
Cause that ol dead body was all this world could do to me .
BUT UNTO THOSE who bought and loved this false love , THEY SHOULD have feared HE who has power
to destroy both body and soul in hellfire . DENY JESUS YOU DENY GOD .
DENY HIS WORDS , YOU DENY HIM . ITS bible time folks .

 

[amigo de christo]

Truth points to truth and only confirms and denies not TRUTH .
so if any be heeding scrips and men who use those scrips
but their idea , their belief , behind those scrips POINT TO A LIE , WELL NO LIE IS OF THE TRUTH . THEY ONLY TWIST
scrips to their own destruction .
IF scriputer used denies THE WORDS OF JESUS , THEN ITS SCRIPTURE TWISTED UNTO ONES OWN DESTRUCTOIN .
GET A FACE FULL of bible my dear friends .

 

[St. SteVen]

I did not say plural nouns are not part of the sentence. I am challenging you to interpret it without reading trinitarian doctrine into the text. It's easy if you try. Once one is open to speculating, one must be open to other speculations. Why speculation 1 but not 2 and 3?

2. Speaking to other Elohim, other heavenly beings, e,g., angels.​

3. Using Royal "We."​

If that is the case, then who's image are we created in? Who's likeness?

Genesis 1:26 NIV
hen God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness,
so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky,
over the livestock and all the wild animals,[a] and over
all the creatures that move along the ground.”

[

 

[amigo de christo]

If that is the case, then who's image are we created in? Who's likeness?

Genesis 1:26 NIV
hen God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness,
so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky,
over the livestock and all the wild animals,[a] and over
all the creatures that move along the ground.”

[

wrangler gonna eat ya lunch . WHY . its not cause what you are saying concerning the definitoin of the GOD head is false .
ITS cause while even the RCC might have had the definition right , BABY THEY HAD A LOT WRONG .
soon enough , however both you and wrangler will meet in the same area as ONE
INTEFAITH and UNBELIF . cause i see it in BOTH OF YOU . YOU ALL will come and sit at the same table
in time . sorry its the wrong table . I can see this in many right now . MANY on this site
are already under some form of its influence and the longer it goes on , the longer the judge not correct not continues
THE MORE THEY GONNA MERGE YOU ALL RIGHT TO THE LIE .
one quick correction . HOWEVER if ya led to repentance , or wrangler , THEN YOU ALL WILL NOT HEAD TO THE LIE .
NOW ITS BIBLE TIME . OPEN and read it and dO NOT do it through the lens of your denomination
YA DO IT FOR YOU . same apllies to wrangler .

 

[Johann]

You should realize that naming these historical Christians and putting your beliefs in their mouth does not work and it is only deceptive for those that are not knowledgeable.

None of these people knew the name Jesus, it appeared out of nowhere in the 17th century and there are no J’s in the scriptures.

And None of these people believed in the three in one God Trinity formula.

Some of them did know the word Trinity, but never defined as three in one.

Historical Reference to "Jesus"

Your claim that "none of these people knew the name Jesus" is misleading. The name "Jesus" derives from the Greek Ἰησοῦς (Iēsous), which itself is a transliteration of the Hebrew יֵשׁוּעַ (Yeshua). This name was common in the Jewish context and used by many people in antiquity. Your argument that "there are no J’s in the Scriptures" misunderstands the development of alphabetic systems over time.

The letter "J" was not present in Hebrew, Greek, or Latin originally but developed later in European languages. This does not diminish the historical fact that the title and name "Jesus" existed in Christian documents well before the 17th century, notably appearing in the Septuagint and the New Testament, which were accessible long before any supposed modern linguistic changes.

Matthew 1:21: "She will bear a son, and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins."

Acts 4:12: "And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved."

These verses confirm the use of the name "Jesus" in the first-century context.

2. Early Church Fathers and the Doctrine of the Trinity

Your assertion that "none of these people believed in the three-in-one God Trinity formula" is historically inaccurate. The doctrine of the Trinity, though it was more fully articulated in the 4th century, was understood and presupposed in many early writings of the Church Fathers.

Tertullian (c. 155-240 AD), in his work Against Praxeas (ch. 3), introduced the term Trinitas to explain the relationship between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, clearly affirming the concept of three distinct persons in one God. His language in this regard is strikingly close to later Nicene formulations.

Irenaeus (c. 130-202 AD) in Against Heresies (1.10) emphasized the distinctness of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit while affirming their unity and shared divine essence.

Athanasius (c. 296-373 AD) strongly upheld the full divinity of Jesus and the Holy Spirit, and he played a pivotal role in defining Trinitarian theology at the Council of Nicaea (325 AD).

Thus, the early Church Fathers were not "unaware" of the Trinitarian formula but were instrumental in its development through the theological debates and ecumenical councils of the 3rd and 4th centuries.

3. The Word "Trinity" and the Development of Doctrine

While it's true that the exact term "Trinity" was not fully defined until later, the concept was already present and developing in early Christian writings. The doctrine of the Trinity was not an innovation in the 4th century but a formalized expression of what had been understood since the time of the Apostles, even if not fully articulated in the same way by early Fathers.

Theophilus of Antioch (c. 180 AD) used the term "Trinity" in his work Ad Autolycus (Book 2, Chapter 15), where he speaks of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as distinct persons in God.

Clement of Alexandria (c. 150-215 AD) also hinted at the Trinitarian understanding in his writings, indicating a distinct yet united understanding of God the Father, the Word (Logos), and the Holy Spirit.

These references show that even if the term was not fully defined early on, the core concept of the Trinitarian relationship was widely recognized in the early Church.


So your claim that early Christians "did not know Jesus"or His "Name" or "did not believe in the Trinity" is anachronistic and overlooks the significant theological foundations laid by the early Church Fathers.

These Fathers did indeed recognize the divinity of Christ and the triune nature of God, even if they did not always use the same terminology that would later be formalized at the Councils of Nicaea and Constantinople.

To further explore this, you can look into the writings of Tertullian, Irenaeus, Athanasius, and Theophilus of Antioch, as well as the Nicene Creed itself for a deeper understanding of early Christian Trinitarian thought.

J.

 

[amigo de christo]

wrangler gonna eat ya lunch . WHY . its not cause what you are saying concerning the definitoin of the GOD head is false .
ITS cause while even the RCC might have had the definition right , BABY THEY HAD A LOT WRONG .
soon enough , however both you and wrangler will meet in the same area as ONE
INTEFAITH and UNBELIF . cause i see it in BOTH OF YOU . YOU ALL will come and sit at the same table
in time . sorry its the wrong table . I can see this in many right now . MANY on this site
are already under some form of its influence and the longer it goes on , the longer the judge not correct not continues
THE MORE THEY GONNA MERGE YOU ALL RIGHT TO THE LIE .

 

[IronMaiden]

Nothing there that says he has a divine nature.

Does the LORD, the full Godhead, have a divine nature?

 

[Ritajanice]

Does the LORD, the full Godhead, have a divine nature?

God is divine..are you a partaker of the divine nature?

Did you read my posts, try reading them, there are my answers.. @LatterRain ..scroll up and you’ll find out what I believe of the trinity ..nonsense.

 

[amigo de christo]

Historical Reference to "Jesus"

Your claim that "none of these people knew the name Jesus" is misleading. The name "Jesus" derives from the Greek Ἰησοῦς (Iēsous), which itself is a transliteration of the Hebrew יֵשׁוּעַ (Yeshua). This name was common in the Jewish context and used by many people in antiquity. Your argument that "there are no J’s in the Scriptures" misunderstands the development of alphabetic systems over time.

The letter "J" was not present in Hebrew, Greek, or Latin originally but developed later in European languages. This does not diminish the historical fact that the title and name "Jesus" existed in Christian documents well before the 17th century, notably appearing in the Septuagint and the New Testament, which were accessible long before any supposed modern linguistic changes.

Matthew 1:21: "She will bear a son, and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins."

Acts 4:12: "And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved."

These verses confirm the use of the name "Jesus" in the first-century context.

2. Early Church Fathers and the Doctrine of the Trinity

Your assertion that "none of these people believed in the three-in-one God Trinity formula" is historically inaccurate. The doctrine of the Trinity, though it was more fully articulated in the 4th century, was understood and presupposed in many early writings of the Church Fathers.

Tertullian (c. 155-240 AD), in his work Against Praxeas (ch. 3), introduced the term Trinitas to explain the relationship between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, clearly affirming the concept of three distinct persons in one God. His language in this regard is strikingly close to later Nicene formulations.

Irenaeus (c. 130-202 AD) in Against Heresies (1.10) emphasized the distinctness of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit while affirming their unity and shared divine essence.

Athanasius (c. 296-373 AD) strongly upheld the full divinity of Jesus and the Holy Spirit, and he played a pivotal role in defining Trinitarian theology at the Council of Nicaea (325 AD).

Thus, the early Church Fathers were not "unaware" of the Trinitarian formula but were instrumental in its development through the theological debates and ecumenical councils of the 3rd and 4th centuries.

3. The Word "Trinity" and the Development of Doctrine

While it's true that the exact term "Trinity" was not fully defined until later, the concept was already present and developing in early Christian writings. The doctrine of the Trinity was not an innovation in the 4th century but a formalized expression of what had been understood since the time of the Apostles, even if not fully articulated in the same way by early Fathers.

Theophilus of Antioch (c. 180 AD) used the term "Trinity" in his work Ad Autolycus (Book 2, Chapter 15), where he speaks of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as distinct persons in God.

Clement of Alexandria (c. 150-215 AD) also hinted at the Trinitarian understanding in his writings, indicating a distinct yet united understanding of God the Father, the Word (Logos), and the Holy Spirit.

These references show that even if the term was not fully defined early on, the core concept of the Trinitarian relationship was widely recognized in the early Church.


So your claim that early Christians "did not know Jesus"or His "Name" or "did not believe in the Trinity" is anachronistic and overlooks the significant theological foundations laid by the early Church Fathers.

These Fathers did indeed recognize the divinity of Christ and the triune nature of God, even if they did not always use the same terminology that would later be formalized at the Councils of Nicaea and Constantinople.

To further explore this, you can look into the writings of Tertullian, Irenaeus, Athanasius, and Theophilus of Antioch, as well as the Nicene Creed itself for a deeper understanding of early Christian Trinitarian thought.

J.

English stemmed from german . Old english cameth of German. saxon .
Its true english did not even have the J ,
Listen to the sound of a german pronounce JESUS . The J does make a Y sound .
BUT this is not to accuse anyone who pronounces it as JESUS as being false or wrong .
IN fact i seem to notice an attack picking up on this . Though i know this you also see me use the name JESUS .
As far as the divinity of CHRIST , the reason its more and more attacked in these last hours
THOUGH it has been in part through all ages , IS because of what occured big time within the churches
about twenty five , thirty years back . A WHOLE BIG movment to unite all religons became the purpose of elites .
NOW HOW ya gonnna merge the religions IF JESUS IS WHO HE SIAD HE WAS
THEY cant . THEY had to break him down into jus another prophet and then they could align
the religoins by saying they all had prophets . BUT IF JESUS IS GOD , HOW CAN ONE CALL GOD A LIAR .
THEY cant . THEY DID THIS ON PURPOSE my friend . Our way has to be seen as just another way and not the only way .
SO JESUS HAD TO BE REMOVED AS GOD and rather seen as just another prophet
THEN they could say WELL they were all good prophets but men messed up stuff in the writings .
ITS ALL A LIE my friend . AND KNOW THIS , INTERFAITH whether you believe this or not IS OF THE DEVIL and of ANTI CHRIST
the very glue by which he will merge all to be as one .

 

[IronMaiden]

God is divine..are you a partaker of the divine nature?

Yep, without a doubt, as a believer, I am a partaker of the divine nature.

 

[Ritajanice]

Does the LORD

If you mean Jesus, no he is not God and no he does not indwell my spirit..the Holy Spirit does.

Jesus indwells your spirit you say, scripture please?

 

[Johann]

English stemmed from german . Old english cameth of German. saxon .
Its true english did not even have the J ,
Listen to the sound of a german pronounce JESUS . The J does make a Y sound .
BUT this is not to accuse anyone who pronounces it as JESUS as being false or wrong .
IN fact i seem to notice an attack picking up on this . Though i know this you also see me use the name JESUS .
As far as the divinity of CHRIST , the reason its more and more attacked in these last hours
THOUGH it has been in part through all ages , IS because of what occured big time within the churches
about twenty five , thirty years back . A WHOLE BIG movment to unite all religons became the purpose of elites .
NOW HOW ya gonnna merge the religions IF JESUS IS WHO HE SIAD HE WAS
THEY cant . THEY had to break him down into jus another prophet and then they could align
the religoins by saying they all had prophets . BUT IF JESUS IS GOD , HOW CAN ONE CALL GOD A LIAR .
THEY cant . THEY DID THIS ON PURPOSE my friend . Our way has to be seen as just another way and not the only way .
SO JESUS HAD TO BE REMOVED AS GOD and rather seen as just another prophet
THEN they could say WELL they were all good prophets but men messed up stuff in the writings .
ITS ALL A LIE my friend . AND KNOW THIS , INTERFAITH whether you believe this or not IS OF THE DEVIL and of ANTI CHRIST
the very glue by which he will merge all to be as one .

You are correct, brother, that in these last days, the deity of our Lord Jesus is under vehement attack. As for the name, whether we call Him Yeshua or Jesus, it makes no difference to me-Jesus it is. The simplicity of this truth is such that even a child can understand it.

Matthew 1:21: "She will bear a son, and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins."

John 1:14: "And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen His glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth."

1 Timothy 3:16: "Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of godliness: He was manifested in the flesh, vindicated by the Spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed among the nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory."

As to the rest of your post, I am in full agreement, brother.

J.

 

[Grailhunter]

Historical Reference to "Jesus"

Your claim that "none of these people knew the name Jesus" is misleading. The name "Jesus" derives from the Greek Ἰησοῦς (Iēsous), which itself is a transliteration of the Hebrew יֵשׁוּעַ (Yeshua). This name was common in the Jewish context and used by many people in antiquity. Your argument that "there are no J’s in the Scriptures" misunderstands the development of alphabetic systems over time.

The letter "J" was not present in Hebrew, Greek, or Latin originally but developed later in European languages. This does not diminish the historical fact that the title and name "Jesus" existed in Christian documents well before the 17th century, notably appearing in the Septuagint and the New Testament, which were accessible long before any supposed modern linguistic changes.

Matthew 1:21: "She will bear a son, and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins."

Acts 4:12: "And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved."

These verses confirm the use of the name "Jesus" in the first-century context.

2. Early Church Fathers and the Doctrine of the Trinity

Your assertion that "none of these people believed in the three-in-one God Trinity formula" is historically inaccurate. The doctrine of the Trinity, though it was more fully articulated in the 4th century, was understood and presupposed in many early writings of the Church Fathers.

Tertullian (c. 155-240 AD), in his work Against Praxeas (ch. 3), introduced the term Trinitas to explain the relationship between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, clearly affirming the concept of three distinct persons in one God. His language in this regard is strikingly close to later Nicene formulations.

Irenaeus (c. 130-202 AD) in Against Heresies (1.10) emphasized the distinctness of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit while affirming their unity and shared divine essence.

Athanasius (c. 296-373 AD) strongly upheld the full divinity of Jesus and the Holy Spirit, and he played a pivotal role in defining Trinitarian theology at the Council of Nicaea (325 AD).

Thus, the early Church Fathers were not "unaware" of the Trinitarian formula but were instrumental in its development through the theological debates and ecumenical councils of the 3rd and 4th centuries.

3. The Word "Trinity" and the Development of Doctrine

While it's true that the exact term "Trinity" was not fully defined until later, the concept was already present and developing in early Christian writings. The doctrine of the Trinity was not an innovation in the 4th century but a formalized expression of what had been understood since the time of the Apostles, even if not fully articulated in the same way by early Fathers.

Theophilus of Antioch (c. 180 AD) used the term "Trinity" in his work Ad Autolycus (Book 2, Chapter 15), where he speaks of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as distinct persons in God.

Clement of Alexandria (c. 150-215 AD) also hinted at the Trinitarian understanding in his writings, indicating a distinct yet united understanding of God the Father, the Word (Logos), and the Holy Spirit.

These references show that even if the term was not fully defined early on, the core concept of the Trinitarian relationship was widely recognized in the early Church.


So your claim that early Christians "did not know Jesus"or His "Name" or "did not believe in the Trinity" is anachronistic and overlooks the significant theological foundations laid by the early Church Fathers.

These Fathers did indeed recognize the divinity of Christ and the triune nature of God, even if they did not always use the same terminology that would later be formalized at the Councils of Nicaea and Constantinople.

To further explore this, you can look into the writings of Tertullian, Irenaeus, Athanasius, and Theophilus of Antioch, as well as the Nicene Creed itself for a deeper understanding of early Christian Trinitarian thought.

J.

I am not going to say your lying your just ignorant.
Ignorant not stupid, just not knowledgeable.
The KJV was the first Bible to use the new word Jesus,
But not in its first print, it used the Greek word Ἰησοῦς (Iēsoûs) which is not a name but a Greek word that means healer. As did the Bibles before the KJV, the Geneva Bible and the Tyndale Bible.
The biblical languages did not have a J and English did not have it until the 15th century and it did not become popular until the 17th century.
No one knows were the word Jesus came from, it just appeared in the 17th century.

There are no J’s in the scriptures….look it up and learn….Yeshua, Yob, Yacob, Yoshua, Yericho, Yames. Look it up learn instead making yourself look stupid.

 

[Ritajanice]

Yep, without a doubt, as a believer, I am a partaker of the divine nature.

You must be Born Again to be a partaker Of the divine nature.

 

[IronMaiden]

If you mean Jesus, no he is not God and no he does not indwell my spirit..the Holy Spirit does.

Jesus indwells your spirit you say, scripture please?

A Christian believes in Christ Jesus. I am a Christian.

 

[Ritajanice]

just not knowledgeable.

Sadly all he ever does is post other people’s work and commentaries.