When did belief in a Trinity begin and why?

[polonius]

This thread is a follow-on to a previous post, but one which clearly should be treated as a separate subject.

The traditional Jewish Shema taught “Hear of Israel. The Lord is One.� And this belief was held by the early Christian-Jews (in a sect called “The Way�) which remained united with conventual Judaism.

About 85 AD, the Christians began to assert that their Messiah was divine himself. This was the parting of the ways with Judaism. The Christians wre labeled as “minim� (or apostates) and a condemnation included in the 18 Benedictions a prayer said daily by the Jews.Christians, of course, were banned from Jewish synagogues.

What the Christians developed is the belief that there were really two persons in the Messiah, or Binitarianism. Claims of a third person were added later.

“Binitarianism is the belief that the one true God exists as two Persons (the Father and the Son). Binitarianism is distinguished from Trinitarianism (God exists as three Persons) and Unitarianism (God exists as only one Person). It is also distinguished from bitheism (the belief in two gods). Binitarianism has never been a popular view of God and is held by a small number of groups today.�

[brianbbs67]

You are fooling yourself to believe a trinity doctrine existed before Nicea. There are 3. Father, son of Man, and Holy Ghost. They appear to be quite different characters by the bible accounts. And by the Son of man.

We have direct talk about the trinity from Tertullian (155 – 240 AD).

In Adversus Praxean he wrote, “We define that there are two, the Father and the Son, and three with the Holy Spirit, and this number is made by the pattern of salvation . . . [which] brings about unity in trinity, interrelating the three, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. They are three, not in dignity, but in degree, not in substance but in form, not in power but in kind. They are of one substance and power, because there is one God from whom these degrees, forms and kinds devolve in the name of Father, Son and Holy Spirit."

Almost a century before Nicea we see explicit statements about the trinity. Tertullian didn't just use Trinitarian formulas like Irenaeus did. He actually said that God is a trinity and described the God who is one in substance but three in form. Does this at least convince you that the doctrine of the trinity existed long before Nicea?

No, but thought about it did. From what i discern from scripture , God and His spirit are one being. How could they not be? I and my spirit are one. But, I and my wife are one. I can guarantee you we are different.

Christ is one with God. I try to be. We are not the same as God as Christ emphasized. We all carry the breath of God or we would not be. Would that make us a part of Him? Yes, in a very minor way. Would that make us Him? No

[brianbbs67]

By the way, if the trinity is true, I have no issue with it. I just seek the truth.

[onewithhim]

By the way, if the trinity is true, I have no issue with it. I just seek the truth.

Well, this trinity doctrine is not true, and it is thoroughly pagan in nature and cannot be truly substantiated by any Bible passage.

Quite a number of people on these threads have seen the truth that the doctrine is an artfully contrived mess of smoke and mirrors, so how can anyone who has seen this now go back and say, well IF it is true......?

Polonius.advice and Tigger have already posted good research on this subject in the thread that is again brought up from months past. It would benefit us all if we read through it again.

[onewithhim]

The previous thread on the subject is: "How and When Did the Trinity Become Christian Dogma?" It was very well presented.

[bjs]

By the way, if the trinity is true, I have no issue with it. I just seek the truth.

Okay, but... Tertullian, arguably the most important Christian writer of his generation, flat out said that God exists in trinity. He even used nearly identical langue to the langue that we use today.

Tertullian wrote that God is one in substance but three in form. Today we say that God is one in substance but exists in three persons. The change in wording is minor and the concepts are identical.

This leaves me to ask: Is there anything that anyone could have written prior to Nicea which would convince you that they already accepted the doctrine of the trinity?

[bjs]

[Replying to post 6 by bjs]

Peter returned to the same theme in Acts 3:15 and called Jesus the “author of life.'

That does not mean what you seem to think it does.

From HELPS Word-studies

747 arxēgós(from 746 /arxḗ, "the first" and 71 /ág�, "to lead") – properly, the first in a long procession; a file-leader who pioneers the way for many others to follow.

747 (arxēgós) does not strictly mean "author," but rather "a person who is originator or founder of a movement and continues as the leader – i.e. 'pioneer leader, founding leader' " (L & N, 1, 36.6).

Well, you baited me in. I said I would not debate this issue in this thread, but here I am.

I think that the way the translators of the NWT mistranslated this passage is telling.

The NWT translates Acts 3:15 as “whereas you killed the Chief Agent of life. But God raised him up from the dead, of which fact we are witnesses.�

Now arxēgós is normally translated as “originator, author, or founder.�

http://biblehub.com/greek/747.htm


HELPS Word studies focuses on the word “founder,� but since arxēgós is often applied to the writer of a document “author� is clearly a valid translation.

So we could translate the phrase as saying Jesus is the “originator of life� or the “author of life� or the “founder of life.� All of those phrases mean essentially the same thing, and they all tell us that Jesus is God.

The NWT completely mistranslates the phrase, calling Jesus the “Chief Agent of life.� There is nothing in Greek to support that translation.

The NWT is a Jehovah’s Witness version of the Bible. The translators were committed to Jehovah’s Witness theology, include the doctrine that Jesus is not God.

It seems that these translators recognized that if they translated this phrase as “founder of life� then Peter was saying that Jesus is God. Instead they changed the translation, coming up with an out-of-left field phrase by calling Jesus the “Chief Agent of life.�

It seems that even Jehovah’s Witness translators recognized that Peter was saying that Jesus is God, and so they refused to accurately translate his words!

[polonius]

[quote="steveb1"]
[Replying to post 1 by polonius.advice]

My "take" on it is:

1 Some early Jewish Christians viewed Jesus not as God, but still as "divine"

RESPONSE

This is a contradiction in terms. Divine involves a deity. A deity is eternal.

[polonius]

[quote="bjs"]

Instead, the overwhelming majority of early Christians accepted the trinity from the first century on (though again the modern language wasn’t used).

RESPONSE: Then why did the Jewish authorities allow the Christians who held such a view contrary to the basic teaching of Judaism "Hear O Israel, the Lord is One" remain a sect "The Way" within Judaism until about 85 AD.

Note the early theologians you quoted as believing in the Trinity all wrote long after 85 AD.

It is also notable that many early writings were later interpolated (added to) by later Christian copyists. We might do a post on this subject

[polonius]

[Replying to post 3 by bjs]

If the book of Acts is correct then the disciples preached that Jesus is God by or soon after the first Pentecost after Jesus’ resurrection.

That is news to me.

Please present your evidence from Acts.

ADDITION:

Yes. Perhaps many readers would like to see this evidence. I know I would. We certainly know of John's passage in his gospel (c. 95 AD) about the Christians being excluded from Jewish synagogues.

[polonius]

[quote="bjs"]
[Replying to Checkpoint]

[Replying to post 5 by steveb1]

In Acts 2:39, during Pentecost, Peter spoke of the promise “for all whom the Lord our God will call.� Earlier in that same speech Peter directly state that Jesus is “Lord and Christ� (Acts 2:36). Then Peter said that the Lord is our God.

Peter returned to the same theme in Acts 3:15 and called Jesus the “author of life.�

QUESTION: Please cite your precise reference within Acts of Apostles.

And I assume you know that the use of the title "Lord" does not establish divinity.

Dictionary:

LORD

noun
1.
a person who has authority, control, or power over others; a master, chief, or ruler.
2.
a person who exercises authority from property rights; an owner of land, houses, etc.
3.
a person who is a leader or has great influence in a chosen profession:
the great lords of banking.