Trinity: A question for the Christian scholars

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

nt

[TER]

What is it?

I am not a scholar, but the person who wrote this is.






"...Acknowledging the mystical nature of this dogma, the Church of Christ sees in it a great revelation that exalts the Christian faith incomparably above any confession of simple monotheism, such as may be found in non-Christian religions. The dogma of the Three Persons indicates the fullness of the mystical inward life in God, for God is love and the love of God cannot merely be extended to the world created by Him: in the Holy Trinity this love is directed within the Divine Life also. The dogma of the Three Persons indicates even more clearly for us the closeness of God to the world: God above us, God with us, God in us and in all creation.

Above us is God the Father, the ever-flowing Source, as it is expressed in the Church's prayer, the Foundation of all being, the Father of mercies Who loves and cares for us, His creation, for we are His children by grace.

With us is God the Son, begotten by Him, Who for the sake of Divine love has manifested Himself to men as Man so that we might know and see with our own eyes that God is with us most intimately, partaker of flesh and blood with us (Heb. 2:14) in the most perfect way.

In us and in all creation — by His power and grace — is the Holy Spirit, Who fills all things, is the Giver of Life, Life-creator, Comforter, Treasury and Source of good things. Having an eternal and pre-eternal existence, the Three Divine Persons were manifested to the world with the coming and Incarnation of the Son of God, being "one Power, one Essence, one Godhead" (Stichera for Pentecost, Glory on "Lord, I have cried").

Because God in His very Essence is wholly consciousness, thought, and self-awareness, each of these three eternal manifestations of Himself by the one God has self-awareness, and therefore each one is a Person. In addition, these Persons are not simply forms or isolated manifestations or attributes or activities; rather, the Three Persons are contained in the very Unity of God's Essence. Thus, when in Christian doctrine we speak of the Tri-unity of God, we speak of the mystical inward life hidden in the depths of the Divinity, revealed to the world in time, in the New Testament, by the sending down of the Son of God from the Father into the world and by the activity of the wonderworking, life-giving, saving power of the Comforter, the Holy Spirit."

taken from here (http://www.holytrinitymission.org/books/english/dogmatics_pomazansky.htm#_Toc514547723):

[TER]

the next section of the same writing (http://www.holytrinitymission.org/books/english/dogmatics_pomazansky.htm#_Toc514547723) from above:

Scriptual Indications in the Old Testament:


Genesis 1:1 and the following verses: the name of God ("Elohim") in the Hebrew text has the grammatical form of the plural number.

Genesis 1:26: "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness." The plural number here indicates that God is not one Person.

Genesis 3:22: "And the Lord God said, Behold, Adam is become as one of us, to know good and evil." (These are the words of God before the banishment of our ancestors from Paradise.)

Genesis 11:6-7: Prior to the confusion of tongues at the building of the tower of Babylon, the Lord said: "Let us go down, and there confound their language."

Genesis 18:1-3, concerning Abraham: "And the Lord appeared unto him at the oak of Mamre . . . And he (Abraham) lifted up his eyes and looked, and lo, three men stood by him... and he bowed himself toward the ground and said, My Lord, if now I have found favor in Thy sight, pass not away, I pray Thee, from Thy servant." Blessed Augustine says of this: "Do you see that Abraham meets Three but bows down to One . . . Having beheld Three, he understood the mystery of the Trinity, and having bowed down to One, he confessed One God in Three Persons."

In addition, the Fathers of the Church see an indirect reference to the Trinity in the following passages:

Numbers 6:24-26: The priestly blessing indicated by God through Moses is in a triple form: "The Lord bless thee... The Lord make His face shine on thee... The Lord lift up His countenance upon thee."

Isaiah 6:3: The doxology of the Seraphim who stand about the throne of God is in a triple form: "Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord of hosts."

Psalm 32:6: "By the word of the Lord were the heavens established and all the might of them by the Spirit of His mouth."

Finally, one may indicate those passages in the Old Testament Revelation where the Son of God and the Holy Spirit are referred to separately. For example, concerning the Son:

Psalm 2:7: "Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten Thee."

Psalm 109:3: "From the womb before the morning star have I begotten Thee."

Concerning the Spirit:

Psalm 142:12: "Thy good Spirit shall lead me in the land of uprightness."

Isaiah 48:16: "The Lord God, and His Spirit, hath sent me."

[TER]

Scriptural Indications in the New Testament:


The Trinity of Persons in God was revealed in the New Testament in the coming of the Son of God and in the sending down of the Holy Spirit. The sending to earth by the Father of God the Word and the Holy Spirit constitutes the content of all the New Testament writings. Of course, this manifestation to the world of the Triune God is given here not in a dogmatic formula, but in an account of the manifestations and deeds of the Persons of the Holy Trinity.

The manifestation of God in Trinity was accomplished at the Baptism of the Lord Jesus Christ, which is why this Baptism itself is called the "Theophany" or "manifestation of God." The Son of God, having become man, accepted baptism by water; the Father testified of Him; and the Holy Spirit confirmed the truth spoken by the voice of God by His manifestation in the form of a dove, as is expressed in the troparion of this Feast: "When Thou, O Lord, wast baptized in the Jordan, the worship of the Trinity was made manifest. For the voice of the Father bore witness unto Thee, calling Thee the beloved Son; and the Spirit in the form of a dove confirmed His word as sure and steadfast. O Christ our God who hast appeared and enlightened the world, glory to Thee."

In the New Testament Scriptures there are expressions concerning the Triune God; and these in a most condensed but at the same time precise form express the truth of the Trinity:

Matthew 28:19: "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." Of this, St. Ambrose of Milan notes: "The Lord said, `In the name' and not `in the names,' because God is One. There are not many names; therefore there are not two gods, and not three gods."

2 Corinthians 13:14: "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit, be with you all. Amen."

John 15:26: "But when the Comforter is come, Whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, He shall testify of Me."

1 John 5:7: "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit: and these three are one." (This verse is missing in the ancient Greek manuscripts that have been preserved and is present only in Western [Latin] manuscripts).

In addition, St. Athanasius the Great interprets as a reference to the Trinity the following text of the epistle to the Ephesians (4:6): "One God and Father of all, Who is above all (God the Father), and through all (God the Son), and in you all (God the Holy Spirit)." Indeed, the whole epistle of the Apostle Paul to the Ephesians — especially the first three dogmatical chapters — is a revelation of the truth of the "Trinitarian economy" of our salvation.

[Dr.3D]

Matthew 28:19: "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." Of this, St. Ambrose of Milan notes: "The Lord said, `In the name' and not `in the names,' because God is One. There are not many names; therefore there are not two gods, and not three gods."

It is interesting to note, that text when read in The Hebrew Gospel of Matthew, ISBN 0-86554-442-5 , reads like this.


Matthew 29:19-20 Go 20 and (teach) them to carry out all the things which I have commanded you forever.

Now I find it interesting to note this difference but will not argue as to why there is a difference.

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

nt

[TER]

Now I find it interesting to note this difference but will not argue as to why there is a difference.

There is no evidence that the Gospels were written originally in any other language but Greek.

[Dr.3D]

There is no evidence that the Gospels were written originally in any other language but Greek.

You might find this interesting reading.
http://www.religiousstudies.uncc.edu/JDTABOR/shemtovweb.html

[TER]

You might find this interesting reading.
http://www.religiousstudies.uncc.edu/JDTABOR/shemtovweb.html

Really? I didn't find it interesting at all. What did you find so interesting about it?

[Dr.3D]

I didn't say I would find it interesting....

I thought perhaps you might find it interesting. Apparently I was incorrect.

[TER]

I am not as interested in the dogma nearly as much as facts surrounding the origin of the term trinity such as this:...


This writing which shows foreshadowing of the trinitarian nature of God in various pre-Christian religious belief systems does nothing more but reaffirm how the Incarnate Christ is the fullness of Truth.

[revolutionisnow]

YouTube - Ahmed Deedat - Trinity. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LetnEWlkr-Q)

[tremendoustie]

What is it?

Where does the term originate?

Did Constantine have an agenda to appease pagans and christians?

Are there any similarities between paganism and christianity that came into existence under Constantine that would serve to appease both religions (ie. easter, three gods, etc.)?

The doctrine of the trinity is well founded in scripture, which was written long before Constantine. Certainly distortions of Christian ideas have occurred in history, but I don't think the idea of God as three persons is an example of this. Christ himself referred to both his Father, and the Holy Spirit.

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

nt

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

nt

[TER]

I didn't say I would find it interesting....

I thought perhaps you might find it interesting.

All the evidence we have is that the earliest gospel writings were in Greek. That is not to say Matthew did not write them in other languages as well. Most Jews in that time were bi-lingual and tri-lingual. So it would be natural for him to record it in all the languages he knew.

The two earliest MSS. extant (Sinaiticus and Vaticanus), written in the 4th century, both include the end of Matthew and also contain the threefold name.

[TER]

YouTube - Ahmed Deedat - Trinity. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LetnEWlkr-Q)

His mockery of the Holy Trinity is because he does not know Christ.

Lord have mercy on him.

[TER]

Huh?

I don't see how someone could possibly reach your conclusion reading the article.

You think that because nations and civilizations for centuries before Christ had trinitarian god systems somehow diminishes the Christian confession of the Holy Trinity? In fact, it is the very proof that God has been revealing Himself throughout humankind. This revelation becomes complete, fulfilling all space and time, in the incarnation of the God-Man Jesus Christ, the Alpha and the Omega, Who was born of a virgin, gave sight to the blind, healed all manners of sickness and disease, rose the dead, and took upon Himself the sins of the world in order to save us from sin and the wages of sin which is death.

[YumYum]

I have done quite a bit of research on the Trinity. It was imposed upon the Bishops by Constantine at the Council of Nicea. Only two Bishops wouldn't go along with Constantines offer to either accept his new version of Christianity or perish, the others accepted.

[TER]

I have done quite a bit of research on the Trinity. It was imposed upon the Bishops by Constantine at the Council of Nicea. Only two Bishops wouldn't go along with Constantines offer to either accept his new version of Christianity or perish, the others accepted.

Perish? Please provide the proof you are referring to.

[TER]

Yum Yum, you have a poor understanding of the Council of Nicea. My guess you are getting your sources from gnostic leaning sources who love to twist the truth in order to worship their own makeshift god- their three pound brains.

[TER]

you can start with the Wikipedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea)and I can help you along from there if you wish.

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

nt

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

nt

[tremendoustie]

That is the question...

Can you back that assertion up with something more tangible than me taking your post at face value?

The scriptures themselves contain it, it is not a doctrine cooked up by a council, that is the point. Many new testament fragments have been found which date within the first century, and reams have been found which date prior to the time of Constantine. And that's not even considering the old testament, which also contained many references to God being multiple persons in one. So, unless constantine's henchmen buried the dead sea scrolls and other texts so well as to fool modern archeology, and radiometric dating by thousands of years, and then went over to Egypt to bury some papyrus using firct century techniques, in first century dwellings ...

Now, if your question is regarding the strength of the basis for the trinity in scripture, I would say the Father-Son idea is plastered all over the new and old testements, but the holy spirit is a little more tenuous. Christ does say the father will send his holy sprit, however, at the end of the gospels, and there are a number of other references in the old and new testements.

[TER]

I do not find fault with the video because I do not consider it miraculous for God to die in the flesh and rise again. I would expect God capable of performing such a task and find little miraculous about it. But to say to a son you must do this, and then for a son to do it while at the same time subjected to temptation is.... that is something entirely different and quite worthy of being labeled miraculous.


I can see your heart is sincere and I appreciate you starting this important thread. I look forward to writing more of the little I know tomorrow, for this topic deserves great attention and I have responsibilities for tomorrow and must get some rest.

Good night for now and I will do my best to respond tomorrow. Peace.

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

nt

[tremendoustie]

I do not find fault with the video because I do not consider it miraculous for God to die in the flesh and rise again. I would expect God capable of performing such a task and find little miraculous about it. But to say to a son you must do this, and then for a son to do it while at the same time subjected to temptation is.... that is something entirely different and quite worthy of being labeled miraculous.


Yes, what it means for Christ to be tempted is an interesting question. I don't believe there was a possibility of Christ sinning, rather, I think it describes the fact that his flesh wanted the same things we do.

If, for example, one were thirsty, and another person left a cold soda on a windowsill, one might be tempted to steal it. When it says that Christ was tempted, I believe it is saying that he felt the same thirst, and the same strong desire for the drink that any of us would. It's not saying that he almost sinned, or might have sinned.

That's my view anyhow.

Also, I think it should be emphasized that God is also one. Christ, for example, is not a separate entity. I think the trinity might be thought of as three aspects of God, although those aspects have their own individual natures and personalities -- personhoods.



I do not think the christian is commanded to worship the trinity either:

Matthew 6:9–13

Luke 11:2–4

I agree with this. The trinity is a theological position, it's not necessary to believe in all aspects of it in order to follow Christ, any more than you need to be a pre or post millennial, or a Calvinist or Armenian to do so.

[tremendoustie]

Passages like this one?

I don't understand what you are conveying by this ... certainly neither Christ nor the Holy Spirit is greater than the Father, according to the doctrine of the trinity, they are all one.

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

nt

[tremendoustie]

I personally know a few people who have read and are quite knowledgeable about the bible who had no idea what trinity meant when they first heard it. Nor do they presently subscribe to it.

If morality and the knowledge of good and evil or right and wrong is written upon the heart how is it possible for a person to study scripture and not take away a concept of trinity? Why would I be not be sincere for calling a doctrine BS that can not be gained from a study of the scripture?

Jesus was the great teacher. I find it difficult to believe an important complex concept such as the trinity which appears so difficult to explain would not have been covered by the great teacher.

Furthermore I find the historic origins of trinity rooted in pagan religions. I also question the motives of Constantine and the subsequent persecution of certain christians which contradicts the teachings of christianity on it's face.

I recognize according to scripture the gate is narrow which means if I do and believe what the mass majority does and believes it would be wise to question my motives.

I also recognize history has proven the church is a corrupt institution and a prudent christian might question the motives and agenda of the church.

I am also fascinated present denominations do not share the same vision of consolidation resulting form the council of nicea.

Do you believe Christ is God? If so, what do you think the relationship is between he and the one he calls Father?



I recognize according to scripture the gate is narrow which means if I do and believe what the mass majority does and believes it would be wise to question my motives.

Personally, I don't think one's theological position on the issue is going to determine one's salvation.

[Dr.3D]

Perhaps this subject is a bit too large to condense into this little thread.
Here is a link that might answer the question.
http://www.babylonforsaken.com/Godhead.html

[TER]

LVOD, I have been super busy lately and have not had a chance to reply to this post as well as I possibly can, so I ask for your forgiveness and for your patience.

In the meanwhile I would like to reply to some of the comments in your last post.


I personally know a few people who have read and are quite knowledgeable about the bible who had no idea what trinity meant when they first heard it. Nor do they presently subscribe to it.

The Trinity is paramount to a correct understanding of God and the life in Christ. Does one need to know the nuances of the Trinity in order to worship God and be a faithful believer? No, not at all. We are after all talking about the Creator of the universe, Who is outside of time and space, and of course any discussion relating to the nature of God will be limited in human terminology and understanding. The essense of God is a mystery. Whatever we know (or can possibly know about God) is what He reveals to us. God has been revealing Himself to us since the dawn of mankind and reached its fullness first at the Theophany (where Christ is baptized, the voice of the Father is heard, and the Holy Spirit descended on Him in the form of a dove).

We must remember that the life in Christ is something experienced- it is a relationship. The trinitarian life is essential in this understanding, and I will get more into that in another post when I have a little more time...


If morality and the knowledge of good and evil or right and wrong is written upon the heart how is it possible for a person to study scripture and not take away a concept of trinity? Why would I be not be sincere for calling a doctrine BS that can not be gained from a study of the scripture?

But it can! The example of the Theophany is one example in Scripture as well as the 2nd and 3rd posts of this thread have examples of the Trinitarian nature of God.



Jesus was the great teacher. I find it difficult to believe an important complex concept such as the trinity which appears so difficult to explain would not have been covered by the great teacher.

St. Paul states in one of his epistles to a church that first we should drink milk and then eat more solid food. IOW, growing in the knowledge of God, one cannot assume to understand the complexities of nature of the Uncreated God from the outset! Those whom have lived lives in Christ, conquering the passions, living virtous and selfless Christ-like lives, becoming God-bearers and temples of the Holy Spirit have attested to God as Trinity as passed down from generation to generation from the beginning of the Church (as well as from their own experiences of theosis).


Furthermore I find the historic origins of trinity rooted in pagan religions. I also question the motives of Constantine and the subsequent persecution of certain christians which contradicts the teachings of christianity on it's face.

I think you have a very misguided understanding of St. Constantine, one that has been skewed by the West and the Latin Church. There is no man of politics that has done more to save Christian lives and spread the gospel of Christ than St. Constantine. This is a fact.

Also, in regards to pagan connections, it is not Christianity which has borrowed from trinity based pagan religions but rather it is in Christ where these pagan understandings find their fulfillment. What they once saw through a hazy glass, Christ clearly reveals in full glory.


I recognize according to scripture the gate is narrow which means if I do and believe what the mass majority does and believes it would be wise to question my motives.

You do well to do this, as we all should. God bless you in your journey for the truth.


I also recognize history has proven the church is a corrupt institution and a prudent christian might question the motives and agenda of the church.

I implore you to cast your prejudices aside about the Church (likely stemming from controversial incidents in the past by the Roman Catholic Church) and learn more about the 'Eastern' Orthodox Church, which its believers believe to be the historic Church of Christ. There are sinners in all organizations and all groups, the churches included. However, do not judge the inside of the vessel by the container it is in.


I am also fascinated present denominations do not share the same vision of consolidation resulting form the council of nicea.

This does not fascinate me. This saddens me. The Council of Nicea was such an important council. It was actually the second council (after the Apostolic Council as described in the Acts of the New Testament) and was convened in order to deal with the Arian heresy which was threatening the Church and the believers. You see, these councils only came together to defend the teachings of Christ and His Apostles from heretical teachings. The bishops from all over Christendom came to defend the entire Church's understanding of Who Christ is. That is, what has been believed from the begining, at all times and in all places. The understandings and the creed which was proclaimed from this very important council has been tantamount in Christological theology and what the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church has always maintained and believed.

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

nt

[tremendoustie]

I will be waiting for your follow-up posts. I am primarily interested in the historical origin of the term trinity and the motives of it's originators.

Can you answer my question, regarding your beliefs on the relationship between Christ and the Father?

[YumYum]

Please share some of your sources.

One excellent book that I read is "The Hidden Gospel: Decoding The Spiritual Message of the Aramaic Jesus". by Neil Douglas-Klotz

It not only discusses Constantine giving the Bishops an ultimatium that they would have to accept the trinity, the book discusses in length how Jesus spoke Palestinian Aramaic, which is a dead language, and the meaning of his message is lost due to the translation. This author speaks modern Aramaic, which is similiar to the dead version, and he points out how so much of the message is lost from translating Jesus words to Helenistic Greek. It was a real eye opener; we don't realize how far removed we are from the culture of Jesus and the Jews of his day.

http://www.amazon.com/Hidden-Gospel-Decoding-Spiritual-Message/dp/0835607801

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

nt

[TER]

One excellent book that I read is "The Hidden Gospel: Decoding The Spiritual Message of the Aramaic Jesus". by Neil Douglas-Klotz

It not only discusses Constantine giving the Bishops an ultimatium that they would have to accept the trinity, the book discusses in length how Jesus spoke Palestinian Aramaic, which is a dead language, and the meaning of his message is lost due to the translation. This author speaks modern Aramaic, which is similiar to the dead version, and he points out how so much of the message is lost from translating Jesus words to Helenistic Greek. It was a real eye opener; we don't realize how far removed we are from the culture of Jesus and the Jews of his day.

http://www.amazon.com/Hidden-Gospel-Decoding-Spiritual-Message/dp/0835607801

I have not read the book so I hesitate to critisize it, but the idea that Constantine gave the bishops an 'ultimatum' is erroneous (especially in regards to the Council of Nicea which proclaimed the Symbol of Faith known in the West as the 'Creed') and I would love to see the reference he uses to make such a claim.

Also, Greek was the lingua franca of the day and everyone knew it (at least, to some extent), similar to how English is the lingu franca of our day. The Torah which was read by Christ and the apostles was the Septuigint which was written in Greek. I find it very suspect to assume that Jesus' words were 'lost in the translation' when Jesus spoke Greek, the entire Roman world spoke Greek, and the gospels and epistles were written in Greek.

[YumYum]

I have not read the book so I hesitate to critisize it, but the idea that Constantine gave the bishops an 'ultimatum' is erroneous (especially in regards to the Council of Nicea which proclaimed the Symbol of Faith known in the West as the 'Creed') and I would love to see the reference he uses to make such a claim.

Also, Greek was the lingua franca of the day and everyone knew it (at least, to some extent), similar to how English is the lingu franca of our day. The Torah which was read by Christ and the apostles was the Septuigint which was written in Greek. I find it very suspect to assume that Jesus' words were 'lost in the translation' when Jesus spoke Greek, the entire Roman world spoke Greek, and the gospels and epistles were written in Greek.

Jesus spoke Palestinian Aramaic, which is a dead language.

I have a question for you and other Christians on this board. You would agree that there a multitude of opinions among Christians as to the interpertation of scripture and the history of the scriptures. That is why there are some 1000 different Christian religions, even though that is a direct violation of 1 Corinthians 1:10, where Paul admonishes Christians: "Now I exhort you, brothers, through the name of our Lord Jesus Christ that you should all speak in agreement, and there should not be divisions among you, but that you may be fitly united in the same mind and in the same line of thought."

Yet Christians disobey Paul's commandment. Why is that? Nobody on this board is exactly sure what the interpetation of the Bible is, and nobody knows what exactly happened in history cause you and I and everybody else that is living today were not there to witness the events. So why is eveything an argument? Why can't Christians say:"Wow, that's interesting. I would have to read up on that as I never heard that before. Thanks for sharing." No, everything is an argument, and everything is contested to no avail, with the results always ending up with people with hurt feelings or being condemned. Its really not that big of a deal. I'll never forget the reply of my uncle who was a christian, and is now an agnostic. He was asked: "Do you believe Jesus was resurrected?" His reply: "I dunno. I wasn't there."

[revolutionisnow]

Who is Paul to give commandments? Paul never met Jesus, he interjects his own ideas into the messages from Jesus. Christians should really closely examine anything that Paul says.

[TER]

Jesus spoke Palestinian Aramaic, which is a dead language.

So you think Jesus, the Author of Life, only spoke one language? Even his student spoke more than one language given the fact they wrote the Gospels in Greek. As He tells us, the students are not greater than the Teacher.


I have a question for you and other Christians on this board. You would agree that there a multitude of opinions among Christians as to the interpertation of scripture and the history of the scriptures. That is why there are some 1000 different Christian religions, even though that is a direct violation of 1 Corinthians 1:10, where Paul admonishes Christians: "Now I exhort you, brothers, through the name of our Lord Jesus Christ that you should all speak in agreement, and there should not be divisions among you, but that you may be fitly united in the same mind and in the same line of thought."


The truth is that sadly there are tens of thousands of denominations and also just as many interpretations of the Scriptures (this is especially true with the Protestant faith which is ironic given that an important doctrine of theirs is sola scriptura). The Scriptures are a product of the Church. It was written by fallible men inspired by the Holy Spirit (and in that sense it is infallible). However, correctly understanding the Scriptures requires the mind of the Church which is also guided by the Holy Spirit. As we read in Acts 8:


And the angel of the Lord spake unto Philip, saying, Arise, and go toward the south unto the way that goeth down from Jerusalem unto Gaza, which is desert.

27And he arose and went: and, behold, a man of Ethiopia, an eunuch of great authority under Candace queen of the Ethiopians, who had the charge of all her treasure, and had come to Jerusalem for to worship,

28Was returning, and sitting in his chariot read Esaias the prophet.

29Then the Spirit said unto Philip, Go near, and join thyself to this chariot.

30And Philip ran thither to him, and heard him read the prophet Esaias, and said, Understandest thou what thou readest?

31And he said, How can I, except some man should guide me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him.


Here is an example of how we know, receive, and interpret the Scriptures through the Church and in the Church. It is the Church which has decided which books are canonical in the first three centuries. It is through this communal or catholic approach which we read in communion with all the other members of the Body of Christ in all parts of the world and in all generations of time- within the mind of the Church, which Christ has promised would be guided by the Holy Spirit. This is the Orthodox Church which has endured from the first day of Pentecost, the most persecuted Church in the history of the world, creating more martyrs than any other faith (about 40 million alone in the 20th century under the Communist Russian yoke). And as Christ has promised, the gates of hell will not overcome it. So when you say there are thousands of Christian denominations, unfortunately that it true. But there is only One Church as there is only One Body of Christ.


Yet Christians disobey Paul's commandment. Why is that? Nobody on this board is exactly sure what the interpretation of the Bible is, and nobody knows what exactly happened in history cause you and I and everybody else that is living today were not there to witness the events. So why is everything an argument? Why can't Christians say:"Wow, that's interesting. I would have to read up on that as I never heard that before. Thanks for sharing." No, everything is an argument, and everything is contested to no avail, with the results always ending up with people with hurt feelings or being condemned. Its really not that big of a deal. I'll never forget the reply of my uncle who was a christian, and is now an agnostic. He was asked: "Do you believe Jesus was resurrected?" His reply: "I dunno. I wasn't there."

Arguments will occur because we are passionate human beings who easily become mad and argumentative due to the pride and malice in our hearts. You should not blame Christ because of the shortcomings of His believers! It is up to us to consider ourselves brothers and sisters in the Lord, children of God, and learn to be patient and humble and caring towards all people of all faiths. Is this difficult to do? Of course! This is why we should pray to God for help and He will assist us.

[TER]

Who is Paul to give commandments? Paul never met Jesus, he interjects his own ideas into the messages from Jesus. Christians should really closely examine anything that Paul says.

Paul first met Jesus on the road to Damascus. God appointed St. Paul as the Apostle to the Gentiles, similar to how St. Peter was the Apostle to the Jews. All in good order. All in order to bring salvation to all the world and into the Love of Christ.

[TER]

I will be waiting for your follow-up posts. I am primarily interested in the historical origin of the term trinity and the motives of it's originators.

LFOD, the first instance in recorded history which we have of the term 'trinity' has been uncovered in the writings of Theophilus in writings dated to about 180 AD.

The motivation of its 'originators' was in order to better elucidate and defend the catholic (or universal) understandings of the Church regarding the nature of God as at that time many heresies began to spring up. When the Church had to begin to protect the flock from the various heresies (especially the Gnostic and Arian heresies), they needed to try to define the undefinable, to explain the unexplainable, to limit in words the infinite and eternal God! Human terms were used in order to try to explain the mystery of God. So here we begin to have the various saints of the Church attempt to explain the nature of God as best as they could. Not from their logic, but from what has been revealed. Not from their reasoning, but from what they had experience. Not from their minds, but from their hearts. And so, the understanding is that God the Father is the unbegotten, God the Son is the begotten, and God the Holy Spirit proceeds forth. This is the trinitarian structure of God in it's most simplest (and of course, incomplete) way. Is it able to be comprehended in our minds? Only by the grace of God. Rather, it is experienced.

As for a more personal understanding, think of our own selves. We as humans, created in the image of the Creator, are trinitarian. We are body, soul, and spirit. Can we define this easily? Can we separate this in a rational way? If we ourselves are such a mystery, how much greater is God, Who is the Creator of all mysteries?

[TER]

I would just add that the Holy Trinity is Love in the most simplest, communal 'structure'. True communal love is triad. One loves the one another, and both together share love for another. Within this structure, divine love is at once simple and infinite.

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

nt

[revolutionisnow]

Paul first met Jesus on the road to Damascus. God appointed St. Paul as the Apostle to the Gentiles, similar to how St. Peter was the Apostle to the Jews. All in good order. All in order to bring salvation to all the world and into the Love of Christ.

Paul admitted to persecuting Christians. He never met Jesus in the flesh.

"Paul was the first corrupter of the doctrines of Jesus." Thomas Jefferson

"The oblivious contradictions in the three accounts given by Paul in regard to his conversion are enough to arouse distrust. . . . The moral majesty of Jesus, his purity and piety, his ministry among his people, his manner as a prophet, the whole concrete ethical-religious content of his earthly life, signifies for Paul's Christology nothing whatever. . . . The name 'disciple of Jesus' has little applicability to Paul. . . . Jesus or Paul: this alternative characterizes, at least in part, the religious and theological warfare of the present day" William Wrede

"In the teachings of Christ, religion is completely present tense: Jesus is the prototype and our task is to imitate him, become a disciple. But then through Paul came a basic alteration. Paul draws attention away from imitating Christ and fixes attention on the death of Christ The Atoner. What Martin Luther. in his reformation, failed to realize is that even before Catholicism, Christianity had become degenerate at the hands of Paul. Paul made Christianity the religion of Paul, not of Christ. Paul threw the Christianity of Christ away, completely turning it upside down, making it just the opposite of the original proclamation of Christ" Soren Kierkegaard

[TER]

You refer to the Gnostic, Arian, or other heresies. What is your case against their motives to warrant punishment or persecution?

Whose motives to warrant punishment? If you mean the Church, than you must understand that the Church's role is as a spiritual hospital. A role of the Church is to defend the flock of Christ from those who would deceive and cause it's members to stumble. But never, never with the use of violence but with love. When councils where convened with the bishops from all over Christendom (which, by the way, was and still is, republic in structure), those whose teachings were against the collective mind of the Church were said to be anathema, from the Greek word Ανάθεμα . This word literally means 'to be lifted up, to be offered to God'. Later, unfortunately, the word in the west became altered into 'excommunicated', or banished'. The original sense of the word was that the Church leaves God to be the Judge of the teachings of those certain individual who taught different teachings than what the universal Church had always confessed.


You are critical of reason but some people accused Jesus of heresy. Reason is the method to separate the B from the S.

I am not critical of reason. It is a wonderful gift that our Creator has bestowed upon us. God after all created us 'good' and in His image. However, I am critical when reason is put above all else. This is partly the reason why Christ said that He would build His Church on faith. He did not say He would build it on knowledge, or reason, or logic. To the Christian, the heart is greater than the mind.

[TER]

Paul admitted to persecuting Christians. He never met Jesus in the flesh.

Jesus is in the flesh right now. Please study up on Christianity a little more before you judge the saints of the Church.

[Dr.3D]

Thanks for elaborating on the OP. I will learn more about Theophilus and his writings.

You refer to the Gnostic, Arian, or other heresies. What is your case against their motives to warrant punishment or persecution?

You are critical of reason but some people accused Jesus of heresy. Reason is the method to separate the B from the S.

I believe you may find them here.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/theophilus.html

Here is the text referring to Trinity.

Theophilus of Antioch
Estimated Range of Dating: 180-185 C.E.


THEOPHILUS TO AUTOLYCUS

BOOK II
CHAP. XV.--OF THE FOURTH DAY.

On the fourth day the luminaries were made; because God, who possesses foreknowledge, knew the follies of the vain philosophers, that they were going to say, that the things which grow on the earth are produced from the heavenly bodies, so as to exclude God. In order, therefore, that the truth might be obvious, the plants and seeds were produced prior to the heavenly bodies, for what is posterior cannot produce that which is prior. And these contain the pattern and type of a great mystery. For the sun is a type of God, and the moon of man. And as the sun far surpasses the moon in power and glory, so far does God surpass man. And as the sun remains ever full, never becoming less, so does God always abide perfect, being full of all power, and understanding, and wisdom, and immortality, and all good. But the moon wanes monthly, and in a manner dies, being a type of man; then it is born again, and is crescent, for a pattern of the future resurrection. In like manner also the three days which were before the luminaries, are types of the Trinity, of God, and His Word, and His wisdom. And the fourth is the type of man, who needs light, that so there may be God, the Word, wisdom, man. Wherefore also on the fourth day the lights were made. The disposition of the stars, too, contains a type of the arrangement and order of the righteous and pious, and of those who keep the law and commandments of God. For the brilliant and bright stars are an imitation of the prophets, and therefore they remain fixed, not declining, nor passing from place to place. And those which hold the second place in brightness, are types of the people of the righteous. And those, again,, which change their position, and flee from place to place, which also are cared planets, they too are a type of the men who have wandered from God, abandoning His law and commandments.

I took the liberty to bold the word Trinity.

[TER]

I believe you may find them here.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/theophilus.html

Here is the text referring to Trinity.

Thank you Dr.3D! This was very helpful! :)