The Surprising Origins of the Trinity Doctrine

Is God a Trinity? ^ | Various | Various

[DouglasKC]

Note: This could be a controversial thread. Let's remember to act in a Christian manner and exhibit the fruit of the holy spirit to those who might be reading this.

2Ti 2:24 And a servant of the Lord must not quarrel but be gentle to all, able to teach, patient,
2Ti 2:25 in humility correcting those who are in opposition, if God perhaps will grant them repentance, so that they may know the truth,
2Ti 2:26 and that they may come to their senses and escape the snare of the devil, having been taken captive by him to do his will

Col 3:12 Therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, put on tender mercies, kindness, humility, meekness, longsuffering;
Col 3:13 bearing with one another, and forgiving one another, if anyone has a complaint against another; even as Christ forgave you, so you also must do.

[the_Watchman]

Actually, some conclude that the scriptural evidence goes back further than the New Testament. There is a 3.5 hour lecture on Youtube from Michael Heiser demonstrating the doctrine of the Trinity using only Old Testament sources. He concedes that a duality is easier to demonstrate, but concludes that the Trinity is there if you want to “see” it.

Heiser is a Hebrew instructor currently working for Logos Bible Software who is also an expert on ancient religions.

[DouglasKC]

19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

I believe that the first Christians understood this as a restatement of this verse:

Act 2:38 Then Peter said to them, "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
Act 2:39 For the promise is to you and to your children, and to all who are afar off, as many as the Lord our God will call."

Note that Peter said in the name of Jesus Christ and then people would receive the gift of the holy spirit.

Also the book of Acts records many instances of baptism, but in none of them is the phrase in Matthew 28:19 uttered...at least in the sense that we think of it. For example:

Act 8:16 For as yet He had fallen upon none of them. They had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
Act 8:17 Then they laid hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.

Those baptized are baptized in the name of Christ. To many Matthew 28:19 was a simple formula to remember the baptismal ceremony and it's effects and not statement of the nature of the Godhead.

[DouglasKC]

Actually, some conclude that the scriptural evidence goes back further than the New Testament. There is a 3.5 hour lecture on Youtube from Michael Heiser demonstrating the doctrine of the Trinity using only Old Testament sources. He concedes that a duality is easier to demonstrate, but concludes that the Trinity is there if you want to “see” it.

Thanks...I'll check it out. I agree that duality is much more prevalent. The article though deals with the controversy and the history that went into the development of the trinity doctrine.

[Persevero]

God refers to Himself as a plurality in Genesis 1.

While we can’t know God perfectly, we knew Him enough as revealed to us, even in the beginning of time, to know Him in truth.

The trinity is not a new doctrine. The Son of Man walked with Daniel in the fiery furnace. Jesus teaches it Himself when expositing Psalm 2, “The LORD unto my Lord has said. . .”

What is new is our refined definition and expression of it, concretely, as opposed to our more shadowy understanding in earlier times.

[OneWingedShark]

Matthew 28:19 (KJV)
Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost

Excellent; I was thinking of all the mentions of the spirit in the Old Testament though.
Also, John 14:26 (NIV)
But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you

[DouglasKC]

God refers to Himself as a plurality in Genesis 1.
While we can’t know God perfectly, we knew Him enough as revealed to us, even in the beginning of time, to know Him in truth.

As suggested by an earlier poster the concept of duality can account for the plurality...as in father and son. For example:

Dan 7:13 "I was watching in the night visions, And behold, One like the Son of Man, Coming with the clouds of heaven! He came to the Ancient of Days, And they brought Him near before Him.
Dan 7:14 Then to Him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, That all peoples, nations, and languages should serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion, Which shall not pass away, And His kingdom the one Which shall not be destroyed.

This glimpse of the Godhead in heaven does show the father and son...

[wonkowasright]

Oy.

[GOPFlack]

Very informative. Thanks. The interesting thing is how Medieval theologians merged the Trinity to classic Greek thinking whereby time and space could be reconciled with the eternal - the body of Christ (time and space), the spirit as the unifying force, and the Father as eternity. It got so far as many interpret the German philosopher Hegel with appropriating that same basic cosmology as a means for a final synthesis of the dialectic.

Having been brought up in a protestant religion that did not recognize the Trinity conception, it was fascinating to me that the Catholic Church and so many other strains of Christianity had adopted it. Which actually makes sense when you realize that the most learned of the early Church were obviously more attuned to the pitfalls and contradictions of post Platonic Greek thinking given their education level.

This day in age we should all stand as Christians, but the origins of various doctrine is a lifelong fascination of mine.

[Arthur McGowan]

Give me one reason for believing the Bible is the “Word of God” other than that THE CHURCH SAYS IT IS THE WORD OF GOD.

There is not a single verse or chapter in Scripture that teaches that the Scripture is the ONLY repository of revelation. The claim that ONLY Scripture is to be consulted for knowledge of God and God’s will is a HUMAN TRADITION. It is not found in the Bible.

[DouglasKC]

But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you

I think it's safe to say considering the controversy, history and time it took the trinity doctrine to develop that the early Christians had a much different picture of the Godhead then do many Christians today.

[kosciusko51]

The author mixes a lot of error in with the truth, with the point being to undermine the early Church’s understanding of the Trinity, and to make the doctrine a late addition to the faith.

[DouglasKC]

Very informative. Thanks. The interesting thing is how Medieval theologians merged the Trinity to classic Greek thinking whereby time and space could be reconciled with the eternal - the body of Christ (time and space), the spirit as the unifying force, and the Father as eternity.

Thanks...I've seen others mention the influence of Greek thought on the development of the trinity doctrine but I've never really studies it myself. It sounds like a good project. :-)

[DouglasKC]

There is not a single verse or chapter in Scripture that teaches that the Scripture is the ONLY repository of revelation. The claim that ONLY Scripture is to be consulted for knowledge of God and God’s will is a HUMAN TRADITION. It is not found in the Bible.

I fully agree that the trinity doctrine isn't readily discernible from scripture alone and needed tradition to fully flesh it out.

[St_Thomas_Aquinas]

In Genesis, “we made man in our image.” Who is “we”?

The Church Fathers interpreted this as evidence for the Trinity.

The Jews interpreted this as God and His angels, which is the only interpretation they could give. But obviously this “we” could only be figurative. And it’s hard to see how the angels could participate in creation from nothing, even in a figurative sense.

[DouglasKC]

The author mixes a lot of error in with the truth, with the point being to undermine the early Church’s understanding of the Trinity, and to make the doctrine a late addition to the faith.

Thanks for your thoughts...

[Zionist Conspirator]

Mmm, mmm . . . historicists vs. restorationists.

It's lip-smacking good!

[kosciusko51]

2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;

2 Timothy 3:17 so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.

2 Timothy 4:1 I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by His appearing and His kingdom:

2 Timothy 4:2 preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with great patience and instruction.

2 Timothy 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires,

2 Timothy 4:4 and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths.

[muawiyah]

The basic structure of the universe according to the ancient Hindus was the here and now where we all live, the demon realm, and the heaven.

A single individual personality might well be manifest in any one of the three ~

Not to suggest that they are correct, but it would likewise be an error to imagine that God has not in past times communicated with them, and everybody else, one way or the other ~ such that even the least do have, in some way, an understanding of God and His universe(s).

The Buddhist structure of the universe is more complex. At the same time the Hindus get into some three dimensional structures. The Muslim view of heaven clearly derives in part from ancient Hindu beliefs (Which I believed Saudi archaeologists just recently demonstrated at the Kaaba).

Just to note that if you see the Trinity concept in the Old Testament it's probably not your imagination. We are to accept on faith that our beliefs stem back all the way to the revelation of Genesis, so why not!