The Trinity Who came first???

[muhammad rasullah]

Many discussion have been done about the trinity and the fundamental concept of who God is and how we should understand him to be. The christians say God is three in one Father, Son , and holy spirit. Over the years many have struggled including christians themselves with the concept of the trinity to the point that they have concluded that its a mystery of God. The basic struggle of this concept comes when we ask the question that if these three are one in unity being equal then which one came first? Was it the father? Was it Jesus? Or was it the holy spirit? To christians this may seem as a illogical question but do not laugh because to many the idea of three distinctly separate entities being one always existing from the beginning is very strange and hard to grasp. It is clearly stated in the gospels that jesus was dependent upon the father. Jesus prayed, Jesus did not come to do his will but his fathers and so on. So the topic to be discussed is who came first in the trinity? Please use evidence to support your claim!

P.S. I am not suggesting that someone or something brought God into being I am posing the question to simply Who was there in the beginning first? Who is recognized as the eternal?

[Mr. Fess]

I believe it's perfectly fine to discuss such a thing as God's trinitarianism. However, I don't believe such a thing is a means of arguing for a "right" answer. For such an answer can't possibly exist within the framework of the human mind. In other words, to understand the trinity of God is to UNDERSTAND God, and once we've understood God, what's left...? Quite simply...nothing. Part of our human nature is our desire to understand everything. We thrive for ultimate knowledge. Therefore, human beings want a god they can understand. If they can't understand him, they reject him. Sound like similar scenario?

Sorry guys, but I would rather put my trust in a God who surpasses my knowledge and understanding.

[dunsapy]

I believe it's perfectly fine to discuss such a thing as God's trinitarianism. However, I don't believe such a thing is a means of arguing for a "right" answer. For such an answer can't possibly exist within the framework of the human mind. In other words, to understand the trinity of God is to UNDERSTAND God, and once we've understood God, what's left...? Quite simply...nothing. Part of our human nature is our desire to understand everything. We thrive for ultimate knowledge. Therefore, human beings want a god they can understand. If they can't understand him, they reject him. Sound like similar scenario?

Sorry guys, but I would rather put my trust in a God who surpasses my knowledge and understanding.

The Trinity idea is a pagan idea. It was forced by Constantine , about 300 years after Christ died.
FOR many years, there had been much opposition on Biblical grounds to the developing idea that Jesus was God. To try to solve the dispute, Roman emperor Constantine summoned all bishops to Nicaea. About 300, a fraction of the total, actually attended.

Constantine was not a Christian. Supposedly, he converted later in life, but he was not baptized until he lay dying. Regarding him, Henry Chadwick says in The Early Church: “Constantine, like his father, worshipped the Unconquered Sun; . . . his conversion should not be interpreted as an inward experience of grace . . . It was a military matter. His comprehension of Christian doctrine was never very clear, but he was sure that victory in battle lay in the gift of the God of the Christians.�

What role did this unbaptized emperor play at the Council of Nicaea? The Encyclopædia Britannica relates: “Constantine himself presided, actively guiding the discussions, and personally proposed . . . the crucial formula expressing the relation of Christ to God in the creed issued by the council, ‘of one substance with the Father’ . . . Overawed by the emperor, the bishops, with two exceptions only, signed the creed, many of them much against their inclination.�

Hence, Constantine’s role was crucial. After two months of furious religious debate, this pagan politician intervened and decided in favor of those who said that Jesus was God. But why? Certainly not because of any Biblical conviction. “Constantine had basically no understanding whatsoever of the questions that were being asked in Greek theology,� says A Short History of Christian Doctrine. What he did understand was that religious division was a threat to his empire, and he wanted to solidify his domain.

None of the bishops at Nicaea promoted a Trinity, however. They decided only the nature of Jesus but not the role of the holy spirit. If a Trinity had been a clear Bible truth, should they not have proposed it at that time?

AFTER Nicaea, debates on the subject continued for decades. Those who believed that Jesus was not equal to God even came back into favor for a time. But later Emperor Theodosius decided against them. He established the creed of the Council of Nicaea as the standard for his realm and convened the Council of Constantinople in 381 C.E. to clarify the formula.

That council agreed to place the holy spirit on the same level as God and Christ. For the first time, Christendom’s Trinity began to come into focus.

Yet, even after the Council of Constantinople, the Trinity did not become a widely accepted creed. Many opposed it and thus brought on themselves violent persecution. It was only in later centuries that the Trinity was formulated into set creeds. The Encyclopedia Americana notes: “The full development of Trinitarianism took place in the West, in the Scholasticism of the Middle Ages, when an explanation was undertaken in terms of philosophy and psychology.�

THE Trinity was defined more fully in the Athanasian Creed. Athanasius was a clergyman who supported Constantine at Nicaea. The creed that bears his name declares: “We worship one God in Trinity . . . The Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God; and yet they are not three gods, but one God.�

Scholars agree, however, that Athanasius did not compose this creed. The New Encyclopædia Britannica comments: “The creed was unknown to the Eastern Church until the 12th century. Since the 17th century, scholars have generally agreed that the Athanasian Creed was not written by Athanasius (died 373) but was probably composed in southern France during the 5th century. . . . The creed’s influence seems to have been primarily in southern France and Spain in the 6th and 7th centuries. It was used in the liturgy of the church in Germany in the 9th century and somewhat later in Rome.�

So it took centuries from the time of Christ for the Trinity to become widely accepted in Christendom. And in all of this, what guided the decisions? Was it the Word of God, or was it clerical and political considerations? In Origin and Evolution of Religion, E. W. Hopkins answers: “The final orthodox definition of the trinity was largely a matter of church politics.�

Apostasy Foretold. THIS disreputable history of the Trinity fits in with what Jesus and his apostles foretold would follow their time. They said that there would be an apostasy, a deviation, a falling away from true worship until Christ’s return, when true worship would be restored before God’s day of destruction of this system of things.

Regarding that “day,� the apostle Paul said: “It will not come unless the apostasy comes first and the man of lawlessness gets revealed.� (2 Thessalonians 2:3, 7) Later, he foretold: “When I have gone fierce wolves will invade you and will have no mercy on the flock. Even from your own ranks there will be men coming forward with a travesty of the truth on their lips to induce the disciples to follow them.� (Acts 20:29, 30, JB) Other disciples of Jesus also wrote of this apostasy with its ‘lawless’ clergy class.—See, for example, 2 Peter 2:1; 1 John 4:1-3; Jude 3, 4.

Paul also wrote: “The time is sure to come when, far from being content with sound teaching, people will be avid for the latest novelty and collect themselves a whole series of teachers according to their own tastes; and then, instead of listening to the truth, they will turn to myths.�—2 Timothy 4:3, 4, JB.

Jesus himself explained what was behind this falling away from true worship. He said that he had sowed good seeds but that the enemy, Satan, would oversow the field with weeds. So along with the first blades of wheat, the weeds appeared also. Thus, a deviation from pure Christianity was to be expected until the harvest, when Christ would set matters right. (Matthew 13:24-43) The Encyclopedia Americana comments: “Fourth century Trinitarianism did not reflect accurately early Christian teaching regarding the nature of God; it was, on the contrary, a deviation from this teaching.� Where, then, did this deviation originate?—1 Timothy 1:6.

The Triad of the Great Gods. Many centuries before the time of Christ, there were triads, or trinities, of gods in ancient Babylonia and Assyria. The French “Larousse Encyclopedia of Mythology� notes one such triad in that Mesopotamian area: “The universe was divided into three regions each of which became the domain of a god. Anu’s share was the sky. The earth was given to Enlil. Ea became the ruler of the waters. Together they constituted the triad of the Great Gods.�
So when science and others say that the bible is full of myths. It is really not the bible, it is Christendom.

[InTheFlesh]

"The Trinity idea is a pagan idea. It was forced by Constantine , about 300 years after Christ died."
------
Not really.
It is taught in Genesis.

Let us make man in our image.
God made man in his own image.

Us=plural
our=plural
his own=singular

And notice how the plural
us and our
have a singular image!

Jesus is the image of God.
We were made in his image.
Did Jesus not say he was before Abraham?

[dunsapy]

Us=plural
our=plural
his own=singular

God was talking with his Son Jesus. And it was through Jesus that all other creation happened.

Genesis 1:26 And God went on to say: “Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness, and let them have in subjection the fish of the sea and the flying creatures of the heavens and the domestic animals and all the earth and every moving animal that is moving upon the earth.� 27 And God proceeded to create the man in his image, in God’s image he created him; male and female he created them.

If you have learned the Trinity from Christendom, it is not a bible teaching, but it comes from pagan religions. So I can see how science and even people from Christendom, are disillusioned, and think the bible is just a bunch of stories, and myths.
There are many many other myths, that Christendom , has promoted, that are just as incorrect as the Trinity doctrine.

[bernee51]

Us=plural
our=plural
his own=singular

God was talking with his Son Jesus. And it was through Jesus that all other creation happened.

Genesis 1:26 And God went on to say: “Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness, and let them have in subjection the fish of the sea and the flying creatures of the heavens and the domestic animals and all the earth and every moving animal that is moving upon the earth.� 27 And God proceeded to create the man in his image, in God’s image he created him; male and female he created them.

If you have learned the Trinity from Christendom, it is not a bible teaching, but it comes from pagan religions. So I can see how science and even people from Christendom, are disillusioned, and think the bible is just a bunch of stories, and myths.
There are many many other myths, that Christendom , has promoted, that are just as incorrect as the Trinity doctrine.

Trinity is not a christian invention - nor are its origins biblical.

There is the Hindu Trinity of Brahma (the creator), Vishnu (the sustainer) and Shiva (the destoyer).

Trinity is based on the three elements of the nature of being - the knower, the known and the act of knowing.

In christianity this evolved to the knower being the father, the known being the son and the act of knowing , the holy spirit.

[dunsapy]

Trinity is not a christian invention - nor are its origins biblical.

There is the Hindu Trinity of Brahma (the creator), Vishnu (the sustainer) and Shiva (the destoyer).

This is correct , the Trinity is not a Christian idea at all. It was adopted over many years, after Jesus died.

Trinity is based on the three elements of the nature of being - the knower, the known and the act of knowing.

In christianity this evolved to the knower being the father, the known being the son and the act of knowing , the holy spirit.

Correct again. But this has nothing to do with God, or his Son.Christianity that teaches this is no different, than any other pagan religion. God does not accept this kind of thinking. Even the Jews deviated a lot., and each time God had to bring them back, to pure worship. When they killed Jesus, then that was it. The Jews as a nation and religion were cast off, and now it was opened up to all nations of people.

[InTheFlesh]

Us=plural
our=plural
his own=singular

God was talking with his Son Jesus. And it was through Jesus that all other creation happened.

Genesis 1:26 And God went on to say: “Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness, and let them have in subjection the fish of the sea and the flying creatures of the heavens and the domestic animals and all the earth and every moving animal that is moving upon the earth.� 27 And God proceeded to create the man in his image, in God’s image he created him; male and female he created them.

If you have learned the Trinity from Christendom, it is not a bible teaching, but it comes from pagan religions. So I can see how science and even people from Christendom, are disillusioned, and think the bible is just a bunch of stories, and myths.
There are many many other myths, that Christendom , has promoted, that are just as incorrect as the Trinity doctrine.

First of all,
what is Christendom?

Did you not post a verse
that said "our image"
and then said "his own image"?
How do you explain that?
How can "our" become "his own"?
Don't you realize that in both cases
there's only ONE image?
Was God not including himself
when he said "Let us make man in our image"?
So you are saying
that God has an image
and Jesus has another?

Jesus is the image of the invisible God!

You keep pointing out
that these biblical teachings are false
but you can not support your claims with scripture.

[dunsapy]

First of all,
what is Christendom?

1. Christians collectively.
2. the Christian world.
3. Christianity.
I use it also to mean , Christianity, that teach doctrines of men instead of God's word.

Jesus is the image of the invisible God!

Genesis 1:26 And God went on to say: “Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness, and let them have in subjection the fish of the sea and the flying creatures of the heavens and the domestic animals and all the earth and every moving animal that is moving upon the earth.� 27 And God proceeded to create the man in his image, in God’s image he created him; male and female he created them.

So it means likeness . ( same kind of qualities)

Did you not post a verse
that said "our image"
and then said "his own image"?
How do you explain that?
How can "our" become "his own"?
Don't you realize that in both cases
there's only ONE image?
Was God not including himself
when he said "Let us make man in our image"?
So you are saying
that God has an image
and Jesus has another?

Jesus is the image of the invisible God!

You keep pointing out
that these biblical teachings are false
but you can not support your claims with scripture.

Jesus, is the image of his Father (or God) Jesus created us in God's image also. It means likeness. ( qualities like)
God created Jesus with the same qualities that he himself has.Jesus created us with the same qualities of God.

Colossians 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation; 16 because by means of him all [other] things were created in the heavens and upon the earth, the things visible and the things invisible, no matter whether they are thrones or lordships or governments or authorities. All [other] things have been created through him and for him. 17 Also, he is before all [other] things and by means of him all [other] things were made to exist, 18 and he is the head of the body, the congregation. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that he might become the one who is first in all things; 19 because [God] saw good for all fullness to dwell in him, 20 and through him to reconcile again to himself all [other] things by making peace through the blood [he shed] on the torture stake, no matter whether they are the things upon the earth or the things in the heavens.

This is talking about Jesus , he is the first born of all creation, then by means of Jesus all other creation came into existence. Then it says all creation came through him ( God gave Jesus , the ability to create) Then it says he is before all other things, ( created things)by Jesus all other things came into existence.
Then this verse says he is the beginning ( first created) the first born of the dead.( Jesus was the first man resurrected, no man was resurrected before Jesus) So that means all that had died before Jesus, were just dead no life.

Definition: The ceasing of all functions of life. After breathing, heartbeat, and brain activity stop, the life-force gradually ceases to function in body cells. Death is the opposite of life

Ec 9:5 For the living are conscious that they will die; but as for the dead, they are conscious of nothing at all, neither do they anymore have wages, because the remembrance of them has been forgotten.

Ps 146: 4 His spirit goes out, he goes back to his ground;
In that day his thoughts do perish

These scriptures show the condition of the dead.

[dunsapy]

2 Corinthians 4:4 (New American Standard Bible)

4in whose case (A)the god of (B)this world has (C)blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the (D)light of the gospel of the (E)glory of Christ, who is the (F)image of God.

The God of this world is Satan. Then it mentions that Jesus, is the image of God ( qualities like God)

[muhammad rasullah]

this is in reply to ymuhammad rasullah original post.

There is no Trinity in the bible. The word is not found, also the concept is not found there.
To the Jews Yahweh, YHWH or Jehovah JHVH in english
it means causes to become

Psalms 83:18 That people may know that you, whose name is Jehovah,
You alone are the Most High over all the earth.

Jesus is Jehovah's son (first born)his name means= “Jehovah Is Salvation"

Mathew 16:16 In answer Simon Peter said: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God

 John 10:34 Jesus answered them: “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I said: “YOU are gods�’? 35 If he called ‘gods’ those against whom the word of God came, and yet the Scripture cannot be nullified, 36 do YOU say to me whom the Father sanctified and dispatched into the world, ‘You blaspheme,’ because I said, I am God’s Son? 37 If I am not doing the works of my Father, do not believe me.


Jehovah had no beginning, Jesus was the first creation.

How can you go from saying that the word trinity doesn't appear in the bible then quote a verse with the word Jehova. The word Jehova doesn't appear either just so you know. There is no "J" in the hebrew language. Jesus, John, Jonah, jacob are all wrong that was never their real names.
Now if Jesus was the son of God and he created everything after him then why does the bible not mention him by name in Genesis when the creation of man and the universe is mentioned? It says and God did so and so not jesus. Also if jesus is the first of creation why again is that not mentioed in genesis with the creation story? it seems odd to me that this is not done and mentioned until thousands of years later. I dont believe Abraham believed that jesus was the first of creation nor the son of God.