were did the doctrine of the trinity REALLY come form?

[peter d roman]

it did NOT come from Our Christ-

it did NOT come from peter the rock-

were did it come form and what is it going to take for "triaterains " to see this most grave ERROR and REPENT!?!

peace and good and tons o'love

>o

[Ankhhape]

Ankhhape,

Trinities have existed wayyyyy before the Bible.

For example?
If you mean triads like Osiris-Isis-Horus or Amon-Mut-Khonsu, these were, well, triads (groups/families of three separate deities), not trinities (three in one and one in three).

In the New Testament the early church preached nothing about a trinity of three eternal persons. The Old Testament was based upon the Oneness of the Godhead as clearly revealed in Old Testament writings. The apostles believed in the fulness of Godhead as dwelling in Jesus Christ bodily.

After the Apostolic age, the Post-Apostolic Age (AD 90-140) arrived. The writers Clement, Ignatius, Polycarp and Hermas were the only writers of the age whose studies are intact today. In their writings, these men said nothing about a Trinity of three eternal persons. Calvin Beisner, the evangelical author, wrote in his book, God in Three Persons, that the earliest times exhibited no clear statements about any Trinity whatsoever and that the first two centuries promoted monotheism as the main thought. The post-apostolic writers simply stressed the One God concept as found in the Old Testament.

They attempted to deal with the "plurality" issue of God. The Trinity doctrine was not as yet invented as a solution.


As I stated earlier, in ancient Pagan Goddess worship the "triple goddess" is a deified Trinity, depicting the threefold aspect of a single God/dess.

Hecate is characterized as a Trinity, that existed within pagan mythology as a three faced goddess. The three faces represented the "Maiden", the "Matron" (or Mother), and "the "Crone".
The Chaldean sun-god, Mithra, was called "Triple," and the trinitarian idea of the Chaldeans was a doctrine of the Akkadians, who, themselves, belonged to a race which was the first to conceive a metaphysical trinity.

As I stated earlier, in ancient Pagan Goddess worship the "triple goddess" is a deified Trinity, depicting the threefold aspect of a single God/dess. Isis being the first.

Hecate is also characterized as a Trinity, that existed within pagan mythology as a three faced goddess. The three faces represented the "Maiden", the "Matron" (or Mother), and "the "Crone".

The Celtic Brigit is a goddess who survived the onslaught of Catholic Christopaganism. She wasn't turned into a devil like so many other goddesses. She is a triple goddess. This triple aspect of the goddess is where Catholics got the idea of exploiting the Trinity concept. The three-leaf shamrock was originally of "The Three Mothers", as well as the three phases of the moon being her symbols. She shares some attributes with the ancient Greek triple goddess Hecate.

The Hindu Trinity (Trimurti) is represented by three godheads: Brahma - the creator, Vishnu - the protector and Shiva - the destroyer.

[peter d roman]

thanks again for your most excellent scholarship-

might you have any ideas on how this false and dangerous notion can be put out of "christian teaching" going foreword?

peace and good and tons o'love

>o

Ankhhape,

Trinities have existed wayyyyy before the Bible.

For example?
If you mean triads like Osiris-Isis-Horus or Amon-Mut-Khonsu, these were, well, triads (groups/families of three separate deities), not trinities (three in one and one in three).

In the New Testament the early church preached nothing about a trinity of three eternal persons. The Old Testament was based upon the Oneness of the Godhead as clearly revealed in Old Testament writings. The apostles believed in the fulness of Godhead as dwelling in Jesus Christ bodily.

After the Apostolic age, the Post-Apostolic Age (AD 90-140) arrived. The writers Clement, Ignatius, Polycarp and Hermas were the only writers of the age whose studies are intact today. In their writings, these men said nothing about a Trinity of three eternal persons. Calvin Beisner, the evangelical author, wrote in his book, God in Three Persons, that the earliest times exhibited no clear statements about any Trinity whatsoever and that the first two centuries promoted monotheism as the main thought. The post-apostolic writers simply stressed the One God concept as found in the Old Testament.

They attempted to deal with the "plurality" issue of God. The Trinity doctrine was not as yet invented as a solution.


As I stated earlier, in ancient Pagan Goddess worship the "triple goddess" is a deified Trinity, depicting the threefold aspect of a single God/dess.

Hecate is characterized as a Trinity, that existed within pagan mythology as a three faced goddess. The three faces represented the "Maiden", the "Matron" (or Mother), and "the "Crone".
The Chaldean sun-god, Mithra, was called "Triple," and the trinitarian idea of the Chaldeans was a doctrine of the Akkadians, who, themselves, belonged to a race which was the first to conceive a metaphysical trinity.

As I stated earlier, in ancient Pagan Goddess worship the "triple goddess" is a deified Trinity, depicting the threefold aspect of a single God/dess. Isis being the first.

Hecate is also characterized as a Trinity, that existed within pagan mythology as a three faced goddess. The three faces represented the "Maiden", the "Matron" (or Mother), and "the "Crone".

The Celtic Brigit is a goddess who survived the onslaught of Catholic Christopaganism. She wasn't turned into a devil like so many other goddesses. She is a triple goddess. This triple aspect of the goddess is where Catholics got the idea of exploiting the Trinity concept. The three-leaf shamrock was originally of "The Three Mothers", as well as the three phases of the moon being her symbols. She shares some attributes with the ancient Greek triple goddess Hecate.

The Hindu Trinity (Trimurti) is represented by three godheads: Brahma - the creator, Vishnu - the protector and Shiva - the destroyer.

[JeremiahPaul]

it did NOT come from Our Christ-

it did NOT come from peter the rock-

were did it come form and what is it going to take for "triaterains " to see this most grave ERROR and REPENT!?!

peace and good and tons o'love

>o

It seems to me as though the bible certainly makes a strong case for the trinity. There are multiple references to a Father, a Son and a Holy Ghost. The first suggestion of a God who consists of more than one being is in Genesis 1:26. "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness..." Jesus, in the Gospels often speaks of his "Heavenly Father." Also, I believing reading 1st John chapter five would help to answer that question.

[Goat]

it did NOT come from Our Christ-

it did NOT come from peter the rock-

were did it come form and what is it going to take for "triaterains " to see this most grave ERROR and REPENT!?!

peace and good and tons o'love

>o

It seems to me as though the bible certainly makes a strong case for the trinity. There are multiple references to a Father, a Son and a Holy Ghost. The first suggestion of a God who consists of more than one being is in Genesis 1:26. "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness..." Jesus, in the Gospels often speaks of his "Heavenly Father." Also, I believing reading 1st John chapter five would help to answer that question.

While the New Testament gives the formula "The father, the son and the holy Ghost', that does not mean that those three are one and the same , and part of one 'Godhood'.

As for Genesis 1:26, when it says 'Let us make man in our own image', the verb for 'make' is in the singular, while 'us' is plural, which makes the construction a 'magnification' of God, rather than a plurality. It is something like the 'royal we'

[JeremiahPaul]

it did NOT come from Our Christ-

it did NOT come from peter the rock-

were did it come form and what is it going to take for "triaterains " to see this most grave ERROR and REPENT!?!

peace and good and tons o'love

>o

It seems to me as though the bible certainly makes a strong case for the trinity. There are multiple references to a Father, a Son and a Holy Ghost. The first suggestion of a God who consists of more than one being is in Genesis 1:26. "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness..." Jesus, in the Gospels often speaks of his "Heavenly Father." Also, I believing reading 1st John chapter five would help to answer that question.

While the New Testament gives the formula "The father, the son and the holy Ghost', that does not mean that those three are one and the same , and part of one 'Godhood'.

As for Genesis 1:26, when it says 'Let us make man in our own image', the verb for 'make' is in the singular, while 'us' is plural, which makes the construction a 'magnification' of God, rather than a plurality. It is something like the 'royal we'

Concerning Genesis 1:26, the verb "make" certainly is in the singular, which can be viewed like you mentioned above. However, it can also be viewed as support for the idea of a trinity, where one God consists of three separate beings. Also, the new testament does directly state that at least God as the father and as the son are one. I believe the same is done for the holy ghost, but I can't recall any reference at the moment. John 10:30 simply states, "I and my Father are one." This seems to end the question as to whether or not the bible considers at least the father and the son to be one. As to the holy ghost, that will take some looking into.

[Goat]

Concerning Genesis 1:26, the verb "make" certainly is in the singular, which can be viewed like you mentioned above. However, it can also be viewed as support for the idea of a trinity, where one God consists of three separate beings. Also, the new testament does directly state that at least God as the father and as the son are one. I believe the same is done for the holy ghost, but I can't recall any reference at the moment. John 10:30 simply states, "I and my Father are one." This seems to end the question as to whether or not the bible considers at least the father and the son to be one. As to the holy ghost, that will take some looking into.

Except of course, we have examples of a singular verb following a plural in the 'Royal we' in the bible where the frame of reference to the plural is not a divinity. For example, we have Moses being referred to as an Elohim followed by a single verb when he was made Lord over Aaron.

Now, John 10:30 is interpreted by many to say that Jesus was saying his purpose was the same as God's, which doesn't mean he is the same as God. Having a similar purpose doesn't mean they are the same.

John makes much more sense if you view it through the eyes of the Gnostic Christians of the time, or through the philosophy of Philo of Alexander.

[JeremiahPaul]

Concerning Genesis 1:26, the verb "make" certainly is in the singular, which can be viewed like you mentioned above. However, it can also be viewed as support for the idea of a trinity, where one God consists of three separate beings. Also, the new testament does directly state that at least God as the father and as the son are one. I believe the same is done for the holy ghost, but I can't recall any reference at the moment. John 10:30 simply states, "I and my Father are one." This seems to end the question as to whether or not the bible considers at least the father and the son to be one. As to the holy ghost, that will take some looking into.

Except of course, we have examples of a singular verb following a plural in the 'Royal we' in the bible where the frame of reference to the plural is not a divinity. For example, we have Moses being referred to as an Elohim followed by a single verb when he was made Lord over Aaron.

Now, John 10:30 is interpreted by many to say that Jesus was saying his purpose was the same as God's, which doesn't mean he is the same as God. Having a similar purpose doesn't mean they are the same.

John makes much more sense if you view it through the eyes of the Gnostic Christians of the time, or through the philosophy of Philo of Alexander.

Would you happen to know the location of the passage where Moses is made Lord over Aaron?

You're right, if that verse is interpreted that way then that certainly does not mean that Jesus and God are the same. However, verse 33 goes on to say, "The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God." Whether Jesus is God or not, it certainly seems that the Jews believed he thought himself to be both God and Jesus.

[peter d roman]

yes - its good to split hairs and stay distracted and off topic-

least a truth is found and right be made from a long standing but accepted and carefully followed spiritual wrong!

peace and good and tons o'love

>o

[JeremiahPaul]

yes - its good to split hairs and stay distracted and off topic-

least a truth is found and right be made from a long standing but accepted and carefully followed spiritual wrong!

peace and good and tons o'love

>o

Off topic? I'm just asking for the biblical evidence against the idea of a trinity. You said that the bible doesn't support the idea of a trinity so I'm trying to find out what scriptures disprove the trinity.

[Cathar1950]

yes - its good to split hairs and stay distracted and off topic-

least a truth is found and right be made from a long standing but accepted and carefully followed spiritual wrong!

peace and good and tons o'love

>o

Off topic? I'm just asking for the biblical evidence against the idea of a trinity. You said that the bible doesn't support the idea of a trinity so I'm trying to find out what scriptures disprove the trinity.

You shall have no other gods before me is a good start. But that seems to be saying there are other gods and Yahweh is first. I wonder how El felt about that law?
When they said the Lord God was one they were writing at a time when there was a Yahweh was in different places and they were going for a central place of worship.
When the gods created the heavens and the earth there was a pantheon of gods.
In fact there were many gods through out the Bible.
Scripture doesn't prove anything.
It also seems they gave child sacrifices to even Yahweh and one prophet admits Yahweh commanded it while another says He didn't. Take your pick.