How did the Trinity doctrine develop in the early church?

[Hiddenthings]

Nothing

Does it concern you the OT is silent on your belief?

 

[Hiddenthings]

@RLT63 I’ll look into why the KJV is the only version to mention musical instruments. It might be a difficulty with the Hebrew text.

 

[RLT63]

Out of interest RLT what translation were you using?

NET your settings and mounts were made of gold. On the day you were created they were prepared Eze 28:13.

STRONGS H8596:Abbreviations
† תֹּף noun masculine timbrel, tambourine; — absolute ת׳ Genesis 31:27 +; plural תֻּפִּים Judges 11:34 +; suffix תֻּפֶּ֫יךָ Ezekiel 28:13, תֻּפַּ֫יִךְ Jeremiah 31:4; — timbrel, held and struck with hand, especially by dancing women, often with other musical instruments: — sign of merriment, gladness Genesis 31:27 (E) Job 21:12, reverly Isaiah 5:12; מְשׂוֺשׂ ת׳ Isaiah 24:8, compare Jeremiah 31:4; Ezekiel 28:13; exultation, triumph Exodus 15:20 (twice in verse) (E) Judges 11:34; 1 Samuel 18:6; Isaiah 30:32; used by prophets in ecstasy 1 Samuel 10:5; in praise of י׳ 2 Samuel 6:5 || 1 Chronicles 13:8; Psalm 81:3; Psalm 149:3; Psalm 150:4. — See PrinceEB Music.§ 3.

 

[Hiddenthings]

@RLT63 The consensus is that the Jewels were set in gold as per the NET reading. It continues the imagery of Exodus 28:17–20 and 39:10–14

 

[RLT63]

Does it concern you the OT is silent on your belief?

It’s not

• Old Testament (always “Satan” as a title, sometimes with the definite article “the Satan”):
  • 1 Chronicles 21:1 – “Satan stood up against Israel…”
  • Job 1:6, 1:7 (twice), 1:8, 1:9, 1:12 (twice), 2:1, 2:2 (twice), 2:3, 2:4, 2:6, 2:7 – (14× total in Job)
  • Zechariah 3:1, 3:2 (twice)

 

[Hiddenthings]

STRONGS H8596:Abbreviations
† תֹּף noun masculine timbrel, tambourine; — absolute ת׳ Genesis 31:27 +; plural תֻּפִּים Judges 11:34 +; suffix תֻּפֶּ֫יךָ Ezekiel 28:13, תֻּפַּ֫יִךְ Jeremiah 31:4; — timbrel, held and struck with hand, especially by dancing women, often with other musical instruments: — sign of merriment, gladness Genesis 31:27 (E) Job 21:12, reverly Isaiah 5:12; מְשׂוֺשׂ ת׳ Isaiah 24:8, compare Jeremiah 31:4; Ezekiel 28:13; exultation, triumph Exodus 15:20 (twice in verse) (E) Judges 11:34; 1 Samuel 18:6; Isaiah 30:32; used by prophets in ecstasy 1 Samuel 10:5; in praise of י׳ 2 Samuel 6:5 || 1 Chronicles 13:8; Psalm 81:3; Psalm 149:3; Psalm 150:4. — See PrinceEB Music.§ 3.

Here is the LXX

In the delights of paradise … with turquoise, gold, and ligurion, and agate, and amethyst, and chrysolite, and beryl, and onyx, you filled your treasuries with gold, and your storehouses within you. From the day you were created, you were adorned

 

[Hiddenthings]

@RLT63 - its an interesting find but not one that detracts from the imagery of the Kings exalted position but that the interpreters struggled with the end of that verse.

The workmanship of thy tabret and pipes; better, the service. The Authorized Version and Revised Version follow Luther. Keil agrees as to “tabret” (so Gen. 31:27; Isa. 5:12; elsewhere, as in Exod. 15:20 and Job 21:12, the Authorized Version gives “timbrels”), but takes the latter word (not found elsewhere) as identical with its feminine form, and meaning “female.” He sees in the clause, accordingly, a picture of the pomp of the Tyrian king, surrounded by the odalisques of the harem, who, with their timbrels, danced to his honour as their lord and king (comp. Isa. 23:16; Exod. 15:20; 1 Sam. 18:6). Hävernick, who agrees with Keil, calls attention to a passage in Athenæus (xii. 8. p. 531), in which Strato, a Sidonian king, is said to have prepared for a great festival by bringing girls who played on the flute and harp from all parts of Greece. Others, however (Smend), find in both the words articles of jewellery, pearls perforated or set in gold (as in Exod. 28:20), and so see in them the conclusion of the description of the gorgeous apparel of the king. Fürst takes the words as meaning musical instruments that were of gold set with jewels. Ewald, following out the Urim and Thummim idea, takes the gems as the subject of the sentence, and translates, “they were for the work of thine oracles and divining.”

The above commentary is self-explanatory either way.

 

[Hiddenthings]

It’s not

• Old Testament (always “Satan” as a title, sometimes with the definite article “the Satan”):
  • 1 Chronicles 21:1 – “Satan stood up against Israel…”
  • Job 1:6, 1:7 (twice), 1:8, 1:9, 1:12 (twice), 2:1, 2:2 (twice), 2:3, 2:4, 2:6, 2:7 – (14× total in Job)
  • Zechariah 3:1, 3:2 (twice)

Well, if we had time to explore you above references you would find the OT is 100% silent on an angelic arch enemy of God.

 

[RLT63]

Well, if we had time to explore you above references you would find the OT is 100% silent on an angelic arch enemy of God.

So the Old Testament supersedes the New Testament?

 

[Hiddenthings]

So the Old Testament supersedes the New Testament?

No, it is the foundation of the New Testament. This is why the Lord and His apostles consistently quoted the Old Testament. For example, the promises made to the forefathers find their fulfillment in Christ Jesus (Galatians 3:16)

 

[RLT63]

No, it is the foundation of the New Testament. This is why the Lord and His apostles consistently quoted the Old Testament. For example, the promises made to the forefathers find their fulfillment in Christ Jesus (Galatians 3:16)

Correct

 

[Hiddenthings]

Correct

This is why so many scholars and Bible students today have approached the subject of satan (adversary) and devil (false accuser) with a renewed focus on the text.

 

[Aunty Jane]

History. The Protestant Reformation using the KJ Bible created major panic within the RCC that forced them into counter Reformation mode to destroy the KJV that identified the CC as the Antichrist.

Surely the doctrines and activities of the Catholic Church were enough proof that they not the “wheat” of Jesus’ parable....but fitted the description of the “weeds” perfectly......yet, no one would have known that if not for Martin Luther...a Catholic Priest who was familiar with Scripture and knew that his church had stepped way over their authority in what they demanded from the people whom they had kept in ignorance for centuries.....people who were just told that they had to believe everything that the church taught, or go to hell. Luther initially wanted to reform his own church....but he ignited a spark that caused a massive explosion among thinking people....a deep seated desire for truth not tyranny.

Like their rituals and mass, Latin was the norm and anyone who didn’t speak it was left wondering what all those strange words meant. That is what the RCC didn’t want. Changing the Bible into the vernacular was going to expose them to textural criticism.....so they got in first with their own English translation....based on the Latin Vulgate.

Why wouldn’t the Reformers want to distance themselves from that corruption by producing their own Bible? So where did the King James Bible originate and who was King James anyway? His name is attached to this version because he commissioned it and funded it. As the British Monarch, he was also head of the Church of England.

Many Bible translations that rely on the KJV are in out-of-date language and so are not fully understandable but need explanation in modern terms. New Bible students would need to learn archaic English first....but why should they, when a good translation makes that unnecessary?

The Roman Catholic Douay Version was completed in 1610....which was just before the KJV was published in 1611. The popular German translation by Martin Luther was completed in 1534, but later revised by him. So, these Bible versions are hundreds of years old, and by now languages have undergone great changes in meanings of words and in forms of expression. Also our understanding on the meaning of the original Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek of the Bible has improved, to make possible a more accurate translation.

Strange. I have no trouble with it. What's your problem... Clearly it isn't intellectual, so...

Not strange at all if you were raised with it, or are familiar with its terms....for those who want clarity with no archaic words or phrases to stumble over....nothing beats a modern English translation that sticks closely to what the original language said to those who spoke it and who understood it at the time it was written. This is why you don’t study the Bible without a good Concordance and an interlinear for reference and research. I have learned an incredible amount from just those two sources.

When the time was right God saw to it that people received his word in their own language, to evaluate it all for themselves......but only in fairly recent times have we had such a variety of translations and denominations.....could it be that some are lost in that maze?....perhaps drowning in too much information....?

It’s all one story without contradictions, so if you find one, it’s the translators fault, not the Bible writer’s.
I love nothing more than a good challenge because I have already challenged myself.

 

[RLT63]

Surely the doctrines and activities of the Catholic Church were enough proof that they not the “wheat” of Jesus’ parable....but fitted the description of the “weeds” perfectly......yet, no one would have known that if not for Martin Luther...a Catholic Priest who was familiar with Scripture and knew that his church had stepped way over their authority in what they demanded from the people whom they had kept in ignorance for centuries.....people who were just told that they had to believe everything that the church taught, or go to hell. Luther initially wanted to reform his own church....but he ignited a spark that caused a massive explosion among thinking people....a deep seated desire for truth not tyranny.

Like their rituals and mass, Latin was the norm and anyone who didn’t speak it was left wondering what all those strange words meant. That is what the RCC didn’t want. Changing the Bible into the vernacular was going to expose them to textural criticism.....so they got in first with their own English translation....based on the Latin Vulgate.

Why wouldn’t the Reformers want to distance themselves from that corruption by producing their own Bible? So where did the King James Bible originate and who was King James anyway? His name is attached to this version because he commissioned it and funded it. As the British Monarch, he was also head of the Church of England.

Many Bible translations that rely on the KJV are in out-of-date language and so are not fully understandable but need explanation in modern terms. New Bible students would need to learn archaic English first....but why should they, when a good translation makes that unnecessary?

The Roman Catholic Douay Version was completed in 1610....which was just before the KJV was published in 1611. The popular German translation by Martin Luther was completed in 1534, but later revised by him. So, these Bible versions are hundreds of years old, and by now languages have undergone great changes in meanings of words and in forms of expression. Also our understanding on the meaning of the original Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek of the Bible has improved, to make possible a more accurate translation.

Not strange at all if you were raised with it, or are familiar with its terms....for those who want clarity with no archaic words or phrases to stumble over....nothing beats a modern English translation that sticks closely to what the original language said to those who spoke it and who understood it at the time it was written. This is why you don’t study the Bible without a good Concordance and an interlinear for reference and research. I have learned an incredible amount from just those two sources.

When the time was right God saw to it that people received his word in their own language, to evaluate it all for themselves......but only in fairly recent times have we had such a variety of translations and denominations.....could it be that some are lost in that maze?....perhaps drowning in too much information....?

It’s all one story without contradictions, so if you find one, it’s the translators fault, not the Bible writer’s.
I love nothing more than a good challenge because I have already challenged myself.

I’m not KJO and usually read the NET full notes version but I don’t find the KJV difficult to read at all

 

[Aunty Jane]

I’m not KJO and usually read the NET full notes version but I don’t find the KJV difficult to read at all

Many people are just used to it....I personally have found it frustrating all my life. Getting hold of a modern English Bible was life changing for me....for the first time, I had clarity...the Bible spoke to me.

There is no need to speak Shakespearean English as if that was the original language of the Bible...it is a translation and always has been.....and it is out dated now. No one speaks like this anymore in their everyday speech, and if they did we would think them weird...lost in some sort of time warp.

I have no idea what drives this attachment to one translation....as if God himself translated it....we know that God inspired the Bible writers, but men did the translating.

 

[Grailhunter]

Here is a comprehensive, book-by-book list of every direct mention of Satan, the devil, Beelzebub, or their clear equivalents in the Bible (using standard English translations like KJV, ESV, NASB, NIV). I’ve included the Hebrew/Greek terms where relevant, and grouped by name/title for clarity.1. Satan (Hebrew: שָׂטָן / śāṭān = “adversary”; Greek: Σατανᾶς / Satanas)

• Old Testament (always “Satan” as a title, sometimes with the definite article “the Satan”):
  • 1 Chronicles 21:1 – “Satan stood up against Israel…”
  • Job 1:6, 1:7 (twice), 1:8, 1:9, 1:12 (twice), 2:1, 2:2 (twice), 2:3, 2:4, 2:6, 2:7 – (14× total in Job)
  • Zechariah 3:1, 3:2 (twice)
• New Testament (now a proper name):
  • Matthew 4:10; 12:26 (twice); 16:23
  • Mark 1:13; 3:23 (twice), 3:26; 4:15; 8:33
  • Luke 4:8; 10:18; 11:18; 13:16; 22:3; 22:31
  • John 13:27
  • Acts 5:3; 26:18
  • Romans 16:20
  • 1 Corinthians 5:5; 7:5
  • 2 Corinthians 2:11; 11:14; 12:7
  • 1 Thessalonians 2:18
  • 2 Thessalonians 2:9
  • 1 Timothy 1:20; 5:15
  • Revelation 2:9, 2:13 (twice), 2:24; 3:9; 12:9; 12:12; 20:2; 20:7
    (Total NT “Satan”: ~36 times)

2. The devil (Greek: διάβολος / diabolos = “slanderer, accuser”)

• Matthew 4:1, 4:5, 4:8, 4:11; 13:39; 25:41
• Luke 4:2, 4:3, 4:5, 4:6, 4:13; 8:12
• John 8:44; 13:2
• Acts 10:38; 13:10
• Ephesians 4:27; 6:11
• 1 Timothy 3:6, 3:7
• 2 Timothy 2:26
• Hebrews 2:14
• James 4:7
• 1 Peter 5:8 (twice)
• 1 John 3:8 (twice), 3:10
• Jude 1:9
• Revelation 2:10; 12:9; 12:12; 20:2; 20:10
  (Total “devil”: ~35 times, all NT)

3. Beelzebub / Beelzebul (Aramaic בעל זבוב / “lord of the flies” or בעל זבול / “lord of the dwelling”)

• Matthew 10:25; 12:24; 12:27
• Mark 3:22
• Luke 11:15; 11:18; 11:19
  (7 times total)

4. Combined titles that explicitly identify Satan/the devil

• Revelation 12:9 – “the great dragon was thrown down, the serpent of old, who is called the devil and Satan…”
• Revelation 20:2 – “the dragon, the serpent of old, who is the devil and Satan”

5. Closely related names/titles that most scholars agree refer to Satan(These are not the words “Satan,” “devil,” or “Beelzebub,” but are universally understood as the same being):

• Lucifer (only once): Isaiah 14:12 (Latin Vulgate translation of Hebrew הֵילֵל / hêlēl = “shining one, morning star”; not used in Hebrew or Greek NT)
• The serpent (explicitly identified as Satan in Rev 12:9, 20:2):
  • Genesis 3:1, 3:2, 3:4, 3:13, 3:14
  • 2 Corinthians 11:3
  • Revelation 12:9, 12:14, 12:15; 20:2
• The dragon: Revelation 12:3, 12:4, 12:7, 12:9, 12:13, 12:16, 12:17; 13:2, 13:4; 16:13; 20:2
• Abaddon/Apollyon (“destroyer”): Revelation 9:11 (often linked to Satan or a high demonic prince)
• The evil one: Matthew 6:13; 13:19; John 17:15; Ephesians 6:16; 1 John 2:13, 2:14; 3:12; 5:18, 5:19
• The prince of this world: John 12:31; 14:30; 16:11
• The god of this age: 2 Corinthians 4:4
• The prince of the power of the air: Ephesians 2:2
• Belial/Beliar: 2 Corinthians 6:15
• The tempter: Matthew 4:3; 1 Thessalonians 3:5
• The accuser: Revelation 12:10 (“the accuser of our brothers” = literal Greek “the devil” category)
• That ancient serpent: Revelation 12:9; 20:2

Summary counts (direct names only)

• Satan: 19× OT + 36× NT = **55 times**
• The devil: ~35 times (all NT)
• Beelzebub/Beelzebul: 7 times
• Grand total of the three names: approximately 97 direct mentions
• source Grok

Changing things through the translational process.

1. You have to be careful of Hebrew names, they can mean literal things.
2. If people want things bad enough to be in the Bible they will put them there in the translational process.

As far as the devil in the Old Testament, there is a reason that the Jews do not believe in a Devil and Hell….it is because they are not in the Old Testament.

Satan was a character in the Old Testament, and Satan means adversary…..And King David had adversaries….enemies and his concern for their military strength concerned King David. Makes sense.

But because Satan became an adversary of Yahweh in the New Testament…..a Devil….Christians do not understand why he was not a Devil in the Old Testament so they look for one liners to put him there or if they have to they put him there. Case in point the word Lucifer….Lucifer is a Latin word that means Venus. They put a Latin word in a Hebrew scripture. The scripture mentions the morning star….which is Venus which is the morning star so they thought they could get away with it.

Hell in the Old Testament….Hades….Hades is a Greek word. They put a Greek word in the Old Testament. Hades is also used in the New Testament because the concept of Hell was new and they did not have a word for an eternal fiery place of punishment. Hades is a Greek god that reigned over an underworld of the same name. Hell is real.

The whole one liner thing….the virgin birth in Isaiah is referring to Isaiah’s wife who had not had children yet and back then was considered a virgin…..The one liner is in the middle of story about testing the faith of a King.

Knowing the truth is just not about memorization of scriptures. It is good to know the languages and culture and circumstances of the time period that the scripture were written in. If you do not they can pull the preverbal wool over your eyes.

Case in point…..Christ’s mother’s name is Miriam…..but in Hebrew her name means rebellious. The translators did not like name that means rebellious for Christ’s mother so they changed her name to Mary. ( Miriam in the Old Testament was Moses’ sister that was punished by Yahweh for chastising Moses because of his relationship with a Pagan woman. )

In the New Testament….Magi means witch or sorcerer. Because they could not understand or like witches having an interest in Christ they changed the scriptures to say wise men or Kings.

“They” took the name of Yahweh out of the Old Testament 6,800 times and replaced it with the word God or Lord or both.

How many times does the word Jesus appear in the New Testament….it was planted….No one know where it comes from and cannot be translated from any Hebrew or Greek word. The word used for Christ’s name in the New Testament is Ἰησοῦς Iēsous. This is not a name but a Greek word that means healer. Christ’s name is Yeshua….Christ’s mother would not have given Him a Greek word for a name.

No J’s in the scriptures. The Letter J came out in the 15th century and was made popular by Shakespeare. The word used for Christ’s name in the Geneva Bible and the King James Version was Iēsous. Eventually the King James went to Jesus….no one really knows why. The King James adopted the word Jesus and Shakespere's poetic language.

Looking a little deeper into the scripures.

 

[soberxp]

If God were to create a companion for me like Eve, not born of any human, she exists because of my request, not because of my request but because of God's love. However, her existence predates my birth. Could she also be God?

If what I'm saying is true, Whether the word "created" is appropriate for her. then what exactly is her nature like?

 

[HealthyShape]

Let’s explore “cognitive dissonance” since you brought up Dunning-Kruger....

Wiki describes it as follows...
“A cognitive bias is a systematic pattern of deviation from norm or rationality in judgment.[1][2] Individuals create their own "subjective reality" from their perception of the input. An individual's construction of reality, not the objective input, may dictate their behavior in the world. Thus, cognitive biases may sometimes lead to perceptual distortion, inaccurate judgment, illogical interpretation, and irrationality.”

Now, let me ask you.....what is your “subjective reality”, and who created it? Have you ever wondered whether the “Christianity” you subscribe to is the product of a perception, created long before you or I were even born? The “construct” of the belief system which you support, is fractured into many sects and denominations, none of which really follow the teachings of Jesus and his apostles.....is that a wild accusation or is it supported scripturally?

What did Jesus warn us was coming in the future...not in the distant future, but following the death of the apostles? He warned of the devil sowing “weeds” among the “wheat” “while men were sleeping”...but not until the “harvest” would the difference between the two become clearly recognized. They would not resemble one another at all.

At the harvest, the “weeds” are gathered first and destroyed, and only then are the “wheat” gathered into the master’s storehouse.

If you know what the “weeds” in Jesus’ parable were, the picture becomes sharpened.
This is true and false “Christianity”. The “weed” in Jesus’ parable was Bearded Darnell...a noxious weed that was the blight of Middle Eastern farmers because it was identical to wheat in the early growing season....not until the plants were well established did the difference become visible, (which is why it was nicknamed “wheat’s evil twin”) but by then it was too late to pull them out, because their root systems were fully entangled so you couldn’t uproot the weeds without taking the wheat with them, so farmers who had this problem, waited till the harvest and the whole crop was taken out and the weeds were disposed of before the wheat was gathered.

Interestingly a farmer could have his entire crop ruined by an enemy who sowed this weed into his wheat field. It would reduce his yield, create more work for his labourers, and also reduce his income.

The apostles too warned of this apostasy that Christendom pretends, never happened...at least not to any of them, but what did Jesus also warn us about in the judgment to come?

“Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few. “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will recognize them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? So, every healthy tree bears good fruit, but the diseased tree bears bad fruit. A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus you will recognize them by their fruits. “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’” (Matt 7:13-13 ESV)

Do you have any dispute about the translation here?

What picture do you get from his words? How early were the false prophets to manifest themselves? What fruitage did they produce, and what is the fruitage today? How are we to recognize true Christianity from the “weeds” that the devil planted as a counterfeit? Who are the “few” who pass the judgment?...and the “many” who don’t?
This requires knowledge of Christian history....it isn’t pretty.

Who are the ones claiming Jesus as their “Lord” but whose fruitage is rotten?.....to the point of Jesus saying “I NEVER knew you!”.....
“NEVER” means “not ever”....not in their entire existence has Jesus been among them.

Christianity is not about labels...it’s about truth.

So when condemning others for not being “Christians”, or scholars, I’d be a bit careful about your accusations as it might just be the Pharisees all over again, crying “heresy” when it was they who were the real heretics.

Step back and see the big picture....

Say it in one sentence and stay purely factual.

 

[ProDeo]

It seems like some people have never considered that they could be the one who is wrong.

Correct.

There are 4 kinds of people on a forum, 1) the first person is able to admit when he/she is wrong, 2) the second is able to change his/her mind, 3) the third misses both qualities and will stick to his/her position (whether right or wrong), 4) the fourth will do anything to win the discussion.

 

[Brakelite]

This requires knowledge of Christian history....it isn’t pretty.

I agree, much of it isn't. But you seem to believe all of it is apostate, and only you have the "truth". In your myopic view, the church fell into decay and ruin very early in Christian history, and that fall, what Paul's refers to as apostasy, involved the entire Christian landscape and God failed to preserve one single true believer amidst all the ruin. The irony is that your church has embraced one of the heresies that even the apostle John had to fight against whilst still alive, and his gospel and letters testify to throughout the 2000 years since. Wonder what that is?