How did the Trinity doctrine develop in the early church?

[Grailhunter]

This does not prove three separate Gods, but three separate persons. Because they are one spirit, they are one God, one essence. In some places they act as separate persons, in some other places they are described interchangeably.

I don't think anything is going to prove 3 Gods to you.....just giving you facts.....stick with fantasy

 

[Grailhunter]

Claim that there are three Gods? No, it does not.

Yes it does

 

[walter]

This is a common mistake. Since the 2nd century AD, so called modern Judaism is what you are talking about. But in the first century AD and before, Jews considered at least two powers in heavens, because of many OT Scriptures.

Thank you for all your information I will keep it in mind, I find it informative to understand which scriptures people use to believe what they believe, some people are interested in explaining every single detail of their beliefs with scripture alone, I am one of these people.

I respect your beliefs, and my objective is not to prove anyone wrong, I just like to express what I believe and the scriptures that explain what I believe to be true.

 

[walter]

Research shows?
Who would need to research such a thing?
Obviously the Jews don't believe in Jesus, God the Son.

Judaism is a monotheistic theology they believe in One God-One Person, people say the Trinity is fundamental to being a Christian, Jesus talks about love of neighbor, brother and sister, samaritan, people that persecute you, people that hate you, the love we should have for God, and even the love we should have for our enemies, to treat others like you want to be treated, Jesus talks about love in great detail, why does he never talk about: One God-3 Persons?

Jesus was a Jewish person, he came from Judaism, if Jesus believed in One God-3 Persons why did he never talk about it, and when he was brought before four different courts and put on trial, did anyone accuse him of teaching about One God-3 Persons?

To me what is important or fundamental is something that Jesus took the time to explain, like he does about love. Matthew 22:36-40

 

[MonoBiblical]

You prove it to yourself.....study ancient mythology.

So basically what you are saying is that you don't have any proof, and that you don't know what you are talking about.

 

[HealthyShape]

Thank you for all your information I will keep it in mind, I find it informative to understand which scriptures people use to believe what they believe, some people are interested in explaining every single detail of their beliefs with scripture alone, I am one of these people.

I respect your beliefs, and my objective is not to prove anyone wrong, I just like to express what I believe and the scriptures that explain what I believe to be true.

I am not sure how this reply reacts to anything... ok, you are a person interested in every single detail... and?

 

[Grailhunter]

So basically what you are saying is that you don't have any proof, and that you don't know what you are talking about.

No, I saying you do not need to be running your "mouth" about things you do not know anything about and you do not want to put any effort into it.

For example the goddesses Artemus and Diana
1 aspect feminine divine and sensuality
2 the huntress
3 the goddess of nature

And then Asherah in the Old Testament

 

[HealthyShape]

Yes it does

Sigh. The text:

Πιστεύω οὖν εἰς θεòν πατέρα παντοκράτορα·
καὶ εἰς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν, τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ τὸν μονογενῆ, τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν,
τὸν γεννηθέντα ἐκ πνεύματος ἁγίου καὶ Μαρίας τῆς παρθένου,
τὸν ἐπὶ Ποντίου Πιλάτου σταυρωθέντα καὶ ταφέντα
καὶ τῇ τρίτῃ ἡμέρα ἀναστάντα ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν,
ἀναβάντα εἰς τοὺς οὐρανούς
καὶ καθήμενον ἐν δεξιᾳ τοῦ πατρός, ὅθεν ἔρχεται κρίνειν ζῶντας καὶ νεκρούς·
καὶ εἰς τò ἅγιον πνεῦμα,
ἁγίαν ἐκκλησίαν,
ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν,
σαρκὸς ἀνάστασιν,
ζωὴν αἰώνιον.

Color red the part saying "there are three Gods". It even explicitly says "one God".

 

[HealthyShape]

I don't think anything is going to prove 3 Gods to you.....just giving you facts.....stick with fantasy

A-ha. Fantasy, sure. Your facts prove nothing. You try to contradict the orthodoxy, but your reasons are very weak. So weak that it even makes me wonder why do you believe it so firmly.

 

[Grailhunter]

Sigh. The text:

Πιστεύω οὖν εἰς θεòν πατέρα παντοκράτορα·
καὶ εἰς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν, τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ τὸν μονογενῆ, τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν,
τὸν γεννηθέντα ἐκ πνεύματος ἁγίου καὶ Μαρίας τῆς παρθένου,
τὸν ἐπὶ Ποντίου Πιλάτου σταυρωθέντα καὶ ταφέντα
καὶ τῇ τρίτῃ ἡμέρα ἀναστάντα ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν,
ἀναβάντα εἰς τοὺς οὐρανούς
καὶ καθήμενον ἐν δεξιᾳ τοῦ πατρός, ὅθεν ἔρχεται κρίνειν ζῶντας καὶ νεκρούς·
καὶ εἰς τò ἅγιον πνεῦμα,
ἁγίαν ἐκκλησίαν,
ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν,
σαρκὸς ἀνάστασιν,
ζωὴν αἰώνιον.

Color red the part saying "there are three Gods". It even explicitly says "one God".

Don't need home work

 

[Grailhunter]

A-ha. Fantasy, sure. Your facts prove nothing. You try to contradict the orthodoxy, but your reasons are very weak. So weak that it even makes me wonder why do you believe it so firmly.

Keep telling yourself that. Maybe you will believe that too.

 

[walter]

I am not sure how this reply reacts to anything... ok, you are a person interested in every single detail... and?

I just wanted to say thank you for your time talking with me , I will keep your words in mind and I wish you well and may you have peace. Sorry I'm just not that good of a debater I get worn out long before other people do.

 

[MonoBiblical]

No, I saying you do not need to be running your "mouth" about things you do not know anything about and you do not want to put any effort into it.

For example the goddesses Artemus and Diana
1 aspect feminine divine and sensuality
2 the huntress
3 the goddess of nature

And then Asherah in the Old Testament

In other words, you are all talk.

 

[HealthyShape]

Don't need home work

In that case, you need to stop claiming things that are simply not true. The ORC does not formulate Trinity, but it also does not teach any three Gods.

 

[Grailhunter]

In that case, you need to stop claiming things that are simply not true. The ORC does not formulate Trinity, but it also does not teach any three Gods.

Over a hundred scripture shows the work of 3 Gods.
Posts 156 - 162

 

[GodsGrace]

The Biblical Basis of the Doctrine of the Trinity by Robert Bowman, Jr.

Robert Bowman, Jr. :: The Biblical Basis of the Doctrine of the Trinity

www.blueletterbible.org

Ran through your link.
I loved the I AM part....
really well explained.

Not all the I AM's are the same, of course.

Good post.

You think those that do not believe that Jesus is God will read it and try to understand?
I doubt it.
Why learn something new???

 

[Aunty Jane]

""If it is such a fundamental teaching what did Moses, king David, king Solomon, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob say about it?""
John 1:1 wasn't written then :)

The trinity didn’t exist then either....which is why no one spoke about it until the foretold apostasy took place and the church ran away with its own ideas about a lot of things....this apostasy was beginning at the end of the first century and the apostles were restraining it....so once they were gone, the “weeds” that Jesus foretold would take over the church, almost choked out the “wheat” by silencing any who dared to challenge the doctrines and authority of “the church”.

Protestantism did away with so many unbiblical Catholic doctrines.....but the big three as @Jack has a lifetime subscription to....were retained......go figure?

These three...the trinity, immortality of the soul, and hellfire are as authentic as devotion to Mary “the mother of God”....her immaculate conception, purgatory, transsubstantiation of the bread and wine into the literal flesh and blood of Jesus, rosary beads, and any other Catholic belief you can think of.

Who said that the big three, believed by the majority who claim to be “Christians”, are true, because the Bible does not teach any of them? They are only ‘suggested’ by doctrine, and only if you read Scripture that is incorrectly translated....but none are directly stated. If our beliefs are only based on their beliefs, rather than direct unequivocal statements....there is the root cause of all unresolved Scriptural debates.

 

[Aunty Jane]

Here's a few.
What different message do you get ?

And every single translation that renders John 1:1 that way is a product of trinitarian bias.

The only way to determine what John said is to examine the Greek and understand why the divine name was not used in the Greek Scriptures, when it is seen clearly almost 7,000 times in the Hebrew writings, used by God’s servants who held no traditions or superstitions about the reverent use of the divine name.

Hebrew Bible writers addressed their God by name, ruling out any doubt about who was their God.
All of the writers of the OT were Jews, raised with a monotheistic view of their God that would never have allowed the worship of any other god. It was God’s Law.....Yet the NT, translated by trinitarians into English made sure that Jesus was the god they worship and any verse that looked like it might fight with the trinity was adjusted in translation accordingly.

Two main adjustments were made that become obvious when you study the Greek as opposed to the accepted English translations, which is why an Interlinear and a good concordance is necessary when doing a thorough study of what the Bible actually says, rather than than what a corrupted “church” system want you to believe.

In all of your examples, the definite article used to identify Yahweh is ignored....and the use of capital letters is also misleading, as there are no upper and lower case letters in Greek.
Both of those things give Bible readers the wrong information.

John 1:1 in Greek to English reads.....
In en the beginning archē was eimi the ho Word logos, and kai the ho Word logos was eimi with pros ·ho God theos, and kai the ho Word logos was eimi God theos.”

That little word “ho” means “the” (the definite article) and we can see that it identified “the Word” (ho logos) but when it came to “the Word was with God” (ho theos) you can see that the “ho” in relation to God is ignored, whilst the second mention of “theos” is without the definite article.

If John 1:1 was correctly translated, it should read..
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with Yahweh, and the Word was divine”.

“Theos” In the Bible is not a word that only means “THE God” of the Jews, who at that time was nameless as the Jews had stopped uttering it even before Jesus came on the earthly scene.

Jesus said he had come to ‘make his Father’s name known’ (John 17:25-26) because the Jews had no right to remove it from their speech. They were told right from the outset that God’s name was to be “mentioned” throughout their generations. (Exodus 3:15) In the Lord’s Prayer, it was the first thing Jesus mentioned....

And if you check a Hebrew Interlinear, you will see the Tetragrammaton clearly in the Hebrew text.....but not in the English translation, where “the LORD” is substituted......but in most (but not all) English translations God’s name is missing altogether, following the disobedient Jews, rather than obeying Jesus who said he had come to make his Father’s name known.....not his own.

When the devil is at the back of a deception, he makes sure that the truth is so unpopular, that no one will question it......we must question everything.

 

[walter]

How I determine my fundamental beliefs:

#1. I support my beliefs with only the Bible to ensure I get ancient original theology 2 Timothy 3:16-17; John 17:17; Luke 8:21; Romans 15:4;
Hebrews 4:12; Matthew 4:4; Acts 17:11
#2. When the Bible does not explicitly address a specific topic, Jehovah's Witnesses are taught to pray and search for related scriptures and guiding principles from within the Bible.

I am not perfect I make mistakes frequently but these are the two main ways we determine anything.

 

[St. SteVen]

John 1:1 in Greek to English reads.....
In en the beginning archē was eimi the ho Word logos, and kai the ho Word logos was eimi with pros ·ho God theos, and kai the ho Word logos was eimi God theos.”

That little word “ho” means “the” (the definite article) and we can see that it identified “the Word” (ho logos) but when it came to “the Word was with God” (ho theos) you can see that the “ho” in relation to God is ignored, whilst the second mention of “theos” is without the definite article.

If John 1:1 was correctly translated, it should read..
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with Yahweh, and the Word was divine”.

Why would Theos translate as Yahweh in the first instance and divine in the second instance?