Paradise Cafe Discussions - A Place For Bible Research And Christian Encouragement

The Unholy Trinity

Serious students of the Bible are aware that just about anyone’s “Biblical” doctrine on just about anything can be “proven” by singling out scriptures and then twisting them to fit their teaching. For instance, many people say that the Bible teaches that the earth will eventually be completely destroyed by singling out 2 Peter 3:10-12, that the earth will pass away in a huge fireball before the New Heavens and Earth can be created. Is that really what the Bible teaches as a whole?

Consider this then: “And the LORD smelled a sweet savour; and the LORD said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake; for the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth; neither will I again smite any more every thing living, as I have done.” –Genesis 8:21

Is God a liar then? No, it is impossible for God to lie. It’s true that we have many different Bibles today, and they compound the seeming contradictions in what was originally contained in God’s inspired Word. Fortunately we have tools available to us today that makes it possible to undo the web of deceit that Satan has weaved! That includes Bible and ancient language research tools, and of course, the Internet! That makes it possible for honest-hearted lovers of God and truth to overcome the suppression of true knowledge that stifles the media and the educational system. Kabbalistic lies have made such a fairy tale of everything that it can be truly understood how Nick Rockefeller can boast to Hollywood producer Aaron Russo that one day the goyim (cattle) will wake up one day and find out that everything they have been taught since Rockefeller-controlled kindergarten is a lie. (This is on video folks, just Google it!)

Let’s not forget who is the father of the lie, the Serpent! And not surprisingly, every single lie can always be traced back to the beginning of Satan’s Kingdom: Babylon.

Bible students should also be aware that Babylon is the birthplace of the idea of a trinity or three-person godhead. It’s no wonder then that Babylon’s poison can be found in every culture on the face of the earth, past and present.

Although being a Trinitarian, Louis Berkhof, in his book "History of Christian Doctrines," says the earliest perversion of Christianity was a form of Jewish mysticism: "marked by theosophic speculations and strict asceticism," "Circumcision and Sabbath were held in honor; ...magic and astrology were practiced among them. In all probability the epistle to the Colossians and 1st Tim. refer to this heresy." (p. 44)

No wonder, as Paul made it clear that a Jewish mystic was leading the parade to turn Christianity into a Gnostic mess:

"But there was a certain man, called Simon, which beforetime in the same city used sorcery, and bewitched the people of Samaria, giving out that himself was some great one:
To whom they all gave heed, from the least to the greatest, saying, This man is the great power of God.
And to him they had regard, because that of long time he had bewitched them with sorceries." -Acts 8:9-11

"O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called." -1 Timothy 6:20

The Greek word for “science” here is “gnosis”, meaning esoteric knowledge or wisdom. Those who understand the Mystery of iniquity should recognize the identifying marks of the Jewish Kabbalah in Berkhof's observations of theosophic speculations, strict asceticism, circumcision and Sabbath keeping, magic and astrology in these scriptures:

"Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind."
-Colossians 2:16-18

The most deadly system of “profane and vain babblings” that the Apostolic Christian Congregation faced was the "oppositions of science" from Jewish Gnosticism . One of its most distinctive trademarks is still today, in the form of Kabbalism/Freemasonry what it was 2,000 years ago: The worshipping of angels and the use of magic and astrology in their occult system, attempting to control the destiny of the universe. The first few chapters Hebrews is another example, correcting the Jew's emphasis on angels, putting the focus where it belongs - Jesus Christ.

Paul related to us the Biblical definition of Kabbalism or Jewish Gnosticism in Colossians 2:18. A more accurate description of the entire system of Jewish theosophic speculations ("En Soph" and the "Sephiroths") cannot be found anywhere: "...Intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind." This is a perfect example of “going beyond the things written”.

Superstition and Pharisaic slavery are still rife in Kabbalism today, enforcing circumcision and keeping the Sabbath, just as in the first century. As the scripture also indicates, these were merely types or shadows of the true Church, fulfilled in the Body of Christ.

"And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world." -1 John 4:3

The Apostle John also opposed this original form of apostasy. He said they do not acknowledge that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh, and that through Jesus, God the Father has also been manifest in the flesh. (1 Tim. 3:16) This qualifies them as antichrists! History identifies these as an apostate form of Jewish Christianity who rejected the Deity of Jesus Christ, and these are the same Kabbalist apostates that Paul contended with. This Jewish system of mysticism and magic that was already in the world in John's time is also that spirit of antichrist "that should come" near the end of the age of Satan’s dominion over the earth.

In summary, the apostasy in the early Church and the apostasy or “falling away” of the time right before the “day of the Lord” are, at its foundation, both linked to Gnostic Jewish Kabbalah.

Berkhof also described the second perversion of Christianity as Christian Gnosticism. He says "It's original form was rooted in Judaism, but it ultimately developed into a strange mixture of Jewish elements, Christian doctrines, and heathen speculative thought." (Pg 45) Others who have noted this are:

· "Gnostic ideas, which, though taken over by heretics, were originally Jewish - a fact that has often, oddly enough, been denied or disregarded." (The "heretics" he speaks of is what history has recorded as the great Christian heresy - gnosticism) Gershom Sholem, professor, Hebrew university at Jerusalem.

· "The great heresy of Gnosticism, which nearly swept Christianity from the earth in the early centuries, is admittedly Cabalistic." "The Cabala was the basis of Gnosticism." -Elizabeth Dilling.

· "Gnosticism, which was Jewish before it became Christian, was an attempt to harmonize the New Testament with heathen speculative thought." -Martin L. Wagner.

· The Jewish Encyclopedia, speaking of Christian Gnosticism, says: "The principal elements of gnosticism were derived from Jewish speculation." The Jewish Encyclopedia notes who led Christianity into Gnosticism: "It is a noteworthy fact that heads of Gnostic schools and founders of Gnostic systems are designated as Jews by the early Church fathers."

Now, fellow truth-lovers, we come to the crux of Berkhof’s astute observations: He said that some of Gnosticism's peculiarities were ... "absorbed by the Church and in course of time came to fruition in the Roman Catholic Church with it's ... philosophy of a hidden God who should be approached through intermediaries (saints, angels, Mary) and it's emphasis on asceticism."

The "philosophy of a hidden God" is the distinctive doctrine of the Kabbalah! The mysterious "En Soph" of the Kabbalah was absorbed by the Church, and the distant, aloof and remote First Person of the Trinity doctrine emerges through Gnosticism!

Saints and angels are the foundation of Kabbalah. Some examples are:

Metatron, who is actually Enoch, is termed as a saint.

The Shekinah, the female god of the Kabbalah who is said to reside in the Most Holy with YHWH, emerges in Catholic theology as the Virgin Mary, who by the way, received “Queen of Heaven” status after her (Jesuit Enochian Magick) appearance as the Lady of Fatima.

The intermediate, pre-existent Logos emerged into Christianity as the Second Person of Gnostic Trinitarian theology. Needing a third “person” for the triple godhead, the Holy Spirit, God’s active force, emerges through isolation of scripture to complete the mysterious "three in one" of the Jewish Kabbalah.

The Catholic Church absorbed the asceticism of the Gnostics, evolving into a system of celibacy (marriage forbidden) for monks, priests and nuns, and the Catholic doctrine of marriage and divorce for the laity. Monks and nuns live reclusively like hermits in monasteries and convents. This is known as Monasticism.

Sometimes turning to the observations of those outside the box of Christianity can prove very enlightening. Albert Pike was the high prophet of Freemasonry, and on the origin of Trinitarianism, in his book “Morals and Dogma”, he says that Kabbalist "Jews were the direct precursors of Gnosticism", their Kabbalist doctrine being derived from their long history of "intimate relations" while exiled in Babylon. In the index of the book, under “Trinity”, you will find: "Trinities of the Kabbalists the origin of the Christian Trinity." Being an insider initiate on such subversive matters and with the secret avenues he had at his disposal, he would be in a position to know.

Large portions of the book are devoted to showing how the Sephiroth trinities of the Kabbalah, the mysterious "three in one," got transposed into Christianity as the Trinity doctrine. Many researchers have noted that the one who played a key role in the development of the Trinity was not a Christian but a Jew, and his name was Philo of Alexandria.

http://www.iep.utm.edu/p/philo.htm

Pike referred to him as a Kabbalistic “initiate of the mysteries”.

Ted Pike (no relation to Big Al), in his book “Israel, Our Duty, Our Dilemma” also noted Jewish Gnosticism as the cause of the confusion, but calls it merely “a subtle influence”. Being a Trinitarian as is Berkhof, says that the damage it has done to Christianity is only Catholic “asceticism, celibacy, and monasticism”. He singles out the Kabbalist Pharisees, the bitter enemies of Jesus:

"Because Jewish gnosticism ultimately spread throughout the ancient world to become one of the most compelling philosophies of the first several centuries AD, it is natural that it exert a subtle influence upon orthodox Christianity. There can be little doubt that the contempt for the flesh which resulted in the asceticism, celibacy, and monasticism of the 2nd and 3rd centuries AD can be laid squarely at the feet of Gnostic influence. If gnosticism, then, is a Jewish creation as the Jewish Encyclopedia insists, we are forced to conclude that the Pharisees introduced an element of confusion into Christian theology which we still have not emerged from."

The Apostle Paul made it clear where these ascetic teachings come from:

Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth. -1 Timothy 4:1-3

It is no wonder then, that Jesus said "beware of the leaven of the Pharisees!" -Matt. 16:6.

As much as Gnostic Kabbalism has impacted Christianity, that is only one area that comes under the spell of the Great Whore of Babylon. With her Gnosticism she has infected all the major religions and all other arenas: politics, economics, all the sciences, philosophy, media, movies, and anything to do with the occult including astrology. God tells us as much at Revelation 18:23--

"... for by thy sorceries were all nations deceived."

It is noteworthy that the powerful influence of Greek philosophy and the pagan "trinities" of the world also played their part in the development of the Trinity doctrine. For instance, the Hindu trinity of Brahma, Vishnu, & Shiva, also originated in Babylon. However, the names of Brahma, Vishnu, & Shiva were transposed into the Jewish names of the "sephiroths". It should be noted that the New Age Religion is most closely related to Hinduism! So, it seems clear at least to me that Babylon the Great in her ultimate form will become completely manifest as she rides upon the back of the political/military beast that she committed fornication with in order to produce a neo-Babylonian New World Order and One-World Occult Religion!

:heartbeat:
Jesh

First, it is important to note that the doctrine of the Trinity does not go back to non-Christian sources [pagan], as has sometimes been supposed in the past. [ie. by Jehovah's Witnesses etc.] There has been no lack of attempts to find the initial form of the doctrine of the Trinity in Plato, or in Hinduism, or in Parsiism. All such attempts may be regarded today as having floundered. [but Jehovah's Witnesses continue to do so in utter deception] It is another question, of course, whether or not the church, in developing the doctrine of the Trinity, had recourse to certain thought forms already present in the philosophical and religious environment, in order that, with the help of these, it might give its own faith clear intellectual expression. This question must definitely be answered in the affirmative. In particular cases the appropriation of this concept or that can often be proved. Unfortunately, however, it is true that particularly in reference to the beginnings of the doctrine of the Trinity there is still much uncertainty. In this area final clarity has not yet been achieved. As far as the New Testament is concerned, one does not find in it an actual doctrine of the Trinity. This does not mean very much, however, for generally speaking the New Testament is less intent upon setting forth certain doctrines than it is upon proclaiming the kingdom of God, a kingdom that dawns in and with the person of Jesus Christ. At the same time, however, there are in the New Testament the rudiments of a concept of God that was susceptible of further development and clarification, along doctrinal lines. ... Speaking first of the person of Jesus Christ ... In other passages of the New Testament the predicate "God" is without a doubt applied to Christ (A Short History of Christian Doctrine, Bernard Lohse, 1966, p37-39) [NOTE: Lohse says, and correctly so, is that early Christians would frame Christian doctrine in terms understand within the current culture for illustrative purposes. Of course JW's do the same thing today, when they explain man's soul when he dies being stored on a floppy disk in God's computer room! In 3000 AD, it would be just as ridiculous to dig up Watchtower Magazines from this century and conclude JW's (should they survive past 2014 AD) borrowed their extinction doctrine from Bill Gates, as it is for JW's to say that early Christians borrowed trinity doctrine from the pagans!]
________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________


"Yet the number three assumes peculiar importance indirectly in connection with the concept of the Trinity. There are threefold formulae listing the Persons in such passages as Matt. 28:19; Jn. 14:26; 15:26; 2 Cor. 13:13; 1 Pet. 1:2 (---> God, art. theos NT 8). There seems to be no precursor of this idea in any significant usage of the numerical concept in the OT, nor may it reasonably be connected with the occurrence of triads of deities in ancient Near Eastern paganism." (New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Colin Brown, 1932, God, vol 2, Three, p687, C. J. Hemer)
________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________

"The Socinian and rationalistic opinion [Jehovah's Witnesses etc.], that the church doctrine of the Trinity sprang from Platonism and Neo-Platonism is therefore radically false. The Indian Trimurti, altogether pantheistic in spirit, is still further from the Christian Trinity" (Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church New York: Scribner's, 1924, vol. 2, p. 566)
________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________

"Only thus much is true, that the Hellenistic philosophy operated from without, as a stimulating force, upon the form of the whole patristic theology, the doctrines of the Logos and the Trinity among the rest; and that the deeper minds of heathen antiquity showed a presentiment of a threefold distinction in the divine essence; but only a remote and vague presentiment which, like all the deeper instincts of the heathen mind, serves to strengthen Christian truth. Far clearer and more fruitful suggestions presented themselves in the Old Testament" (Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church New York: Scribner's, 1924, vol. 2, p. 566)
________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________


"The Ontological Doctrine: There is no reason to seek for sources or types of the doctrine of the Trinity outside of Christianity or of the Bible, though in the eighteenth century efforts were made to derive the Christian dogma from Plato, and later from Brahmanism and Parseeism, or, later still, from a Babylonian triad. Even were the resemblance between the Christian Trinity and the pagan triads far greater than it is, there could be no serious question of borrowing. The development, of the Christian doctrine of the Trinity is historically clear, and its motives are equally well known, being almost exclusively due to Christological speculation." (New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia, Trinity, Doctrine of the; p18)
________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________
"The doctrine of the divine Trinity is the summarized statement of the historical revelation of redemption for the Christian consciousness of God. It affirms that God is not only the ruler of the universe, but the Father of Christ, in whom he is perfectly revealed, and the source of a holy and blessed life which transforms nature and is realized in the Church. It constitutes the distinctive characteristic of Christianity as contrasted with Judaism and paganism and is a modification of Christian monotheism." (New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia, Trinity, Doctrine of the; p18)
________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________
Attempts have been made recently to apply the more extreme theories of comparative religion [pagan similarities] to the doctrine of the Trinity, and to account for it by an imaginary law of nature compelling men to group the objects of their worship in threes. ... It seems needless to give more than a reference to these extravagant views [Jehovah's Witnesses etc.] , which serious thinkers of every school reject as destitute of foundation. (The Catholic Encyclopedia, 1912, Vol. 15, p 47-49)
________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________

http://www.mmoutreach.org/jw/explaining_deity.htm

http://www.mmoutreachinc.com/jehovahs_wi...inity.html

http://www.mmoutreachinc.com/jehovahs_wi...inity.html

http://www.mmoutreachinc.com/jehovahs_wi...nity2.html

http://www.bible.ca/trinity/trinity-pagan.htm

I don't have any strong feelings concerning the Trinity really. I see it very simply as a way early Christians expressed the data they saw in the scriptures. The data calls the father God, the Son God and the Spirit God. The data says there is only one God. Hence, trinitarianism.
But also the data clearly seperates the Father and the son. Hence, unitarianism. I have no problem with unitarians expressing their understandings differently.

I don't see the trinity linked to Kaballah - I was a Kabbalist before I was an occultist. From my studies I don't see it as babylonion or Pagan (Pagan simply comes from the French for country and refered to people who lived in the country rather than the city and thus their ways were not the city ways, rather like Heathen means people from the heath) Yes, there are a few triads of Gods, there are also singular Gods, Gods with sons, gods with daughters and whole patheons. Since all of these have grown up from corrupted at ill-remembered bits about the real God (we all come from Noah remember, after Babal people would have spread out and slowly forgotten the God who had saved them from the flood) I wouldn't have expected anything else. Paganism comes from knowledge of God, not the other way round.

God came first, paganism and belief in other gods came second. Satan's not original, and he's very good and mixing up truth and lies.

I think the WTBTS does Christians (and Jesus' church) a diservice with its scaremongering. There's no problem whatsoever with it not accepting the trinity and citing what they believe to be biblical evidence to that effect. No-one can do anything other than respect that. What makes it ugly is all the poisionous attacks they make on people who do believe the trinity, and the lies they feel they must tell (just look at their "Why should you believe the trinity" brochure for a super example of doctoring quotes to make them say what the writer did not mean to say) I bet JW's who read that really do believe that the early church father's were closer to JW's than orthodox christianity in their views, which, of course, they weren't.

I agree with Joyful in that Trinitarians have treated non-trinitarians shamefully in the past, but since it wasn't believing in the trinity that made those trinitarians non-Christian, its just sinful humans doing what sinful humans do best - attacking and persecuting anyone different. Ce'st la vie.:crybaby:

I believe there is more danger of unitarians under-praising Jesus than trinitarians over-praising him, although I don't believe belief in the trinity or unbelief in the trinity makes a person saved or not. People get saved when they meet Jesus and start to get to know him. I don't think its possible to praise him too highly as its God the father who praises and exalts his son in the first place.

Jesus cannot be circumnavigated to get to the Father. Jesus asked people to both believe in the father and believe in Him too. When you see Jesus, you've seen the father, not because of the trinity, but because Jesus is the way the father has chosen to reveal himself to his children.

Unfortunately, there are people who hear the word "trinity" and instantly denounce it as evil and pagan. It's a trigger word, like "hell."
Again, the WTBTS has done a diservice here with its many strawmen such as "Three headed God" or causing its adherants to believe trinitarians believe the father and son are the same person. This also leads JW's to think that if they "prove" the father and son are different people (which they arer) they have somehow "debunked" the whole thing, whereas in proving the father and son are different people, they are actually affirming the doctrine.

Oy vay, it gets confusing, but it really isn't.

The son is the way to the father. That's trinitarianism and unitarianism.

The father outranks the son. That's also trinitarianism and unitarianism.

The father has given the son all authority. That's also trinitarianism and unitarianism.

The problem comes when discussing the nature of Jesus. Is he created like the angels, or is his nature the same as his father? If you believe the latter, you're waaaay closer to trinitarianism that you think.:huh:

My personal beliefs are that whatever praise and worship is given to Jesus, is given to his father. Every ounce of adoration given to him, he gives to his father. The son keeps nothing for himself. The son is obedient to his father, and the father glorifies the son as the son glorifies the father.

I understand why the early christians felt the need to write creeds for themselves, but maybe they shouldn't have tried to put God into a box quite so much. It might have saved two thousand years of problems.:confused:

Or maybe not. I'm sure people would find some other issue to get righteously indignent over on both sides.

Be happy and blessed folks. Maybe you can be the first bunch of people in history to actually to put the issue aside completely and simply be the Christians you're called to be.:friends:

How wonderfully our language has changed :hibye::

Sophisticated:
1. Having obtained worldly experience, and lacking naiveté; cosmopolitan, elegant, refined.
2. Complicated, especially of complex technology.
3. Appealing to the tastes of an intellectual; cerebral.

Sophism (root word)
1. A flawed argument superficially correct in its reasoning, usually designed to deceive. An intentional fallacy.

I rest my case,

Love to all,

sw

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Sophia (Σoφíα, Greek for "wisdom") is a central term in Hellenistic philosophy and religion, Gnostic Christianity and Orthodox Christianity.

A Feminine figure, analogous to the human soul but also simultaneously one of the Feminine aspects of God and the Bride of Christ, she is considered to have fallen from grace in some way, in so doing creating or helping to create the material world.

In Gnostic tradition, the term Sophia refers to the final and lowest emanation of God. In most if not all versions of the gnostic religion, Sophia brings about an instability in the Pleroma, in turn bringing about the creation of materiality. Thus a positive or negative view of materiality depends a great deal on the interpretations of Sophia's actions in the myths. She is occasionally referred to by the Hebrew equivalent of Achamoth (this is a feature of Ptolemy's version of the Valentinian gnostic myth).[citation needed] For the Gnostics, the drama of the redemption of the Sophia through Christ or the Logos is the central drama of the universe. The Sophia resides in all of us as the Divine Spark. According to the Pistis Sophia, Christ is sent from the Godhead in order to bring Sophia back into the fullness of Pleroma following her repentance.

Almost all gnostic systems of the Syrian or Egyptian type taught that the universe began with an original, unknowable God, referred to as the Parent or Bythos, or as the Monad by Monoimus. It can also be equated to the concept of Logos in stoicism, esoterism, or theosophical terms (The 'Unknown Root') as well as the Ein Sof of the Kabbalah and Brahman in Hinduism. It is also known as the first Aeon by still other traditions. From this initial unitary beginning, the One spontaneously emanated further Aeons, being pairs of progressively 'lesser' beings in sequence. The lowest of these pairs were Sophia and Christ. The Aeons together made up the Pleroma, or fullness, of God, and thus should not be seen as distinct from the divine, but symbolic abstractions of the divine nature.
Contents


:heartbeat:

AR

And I thought she was just an old Italian actress:D:D:D

Hi Malkah,

I noticed you left the holy spirit(what's its name?) out of the equation.

Are we to assume you were including it and is it also ranked?

Respectfully,
James

Hi James,

I'm just pointing out common ground, not teaching on the trinity. I don't like the word trinity one bit, its too loaded. As I said, I have no particular problems with either side other than the way each side tries to present the other as a God-dishonouring, pagan doctrine, and I'll stand up for either side if I see them attacked by the other. If a trinitarian starts telling a unitarian they're going to hell for not believing the trinity, I'll have something to say about that piece of judgemental rubbish, but if a unitarian starts to buy into the WTBTS' rewriting of church and trinitarian history to make it appear to be a pagan concept, I'll speak up then too - if I can be bothered.

There are more important things going on in the kingdom than arguing doctrine.:thinking:

As for the name of the Spirit of God, why would he need a name? My spirit doesn't have a seperate name except perhaps, "Malkah's Spirit" or the "Spirit of Malkah."

The trinity is sinful man's fairly lousy attempt to put into words the data they aquire from the scriptures. Human language is a poor method of relating the beauties of God, but its the only one people have.:P

The main problem with trying to summarize a belief which is evil, wicked or unholy is the offence taken by those who hold such a belief too dearly to their heart.:giverose: Maybe it’s okay on this forum to call what most already accept as unscriptural , “unholy” but I’ve also tried reasoning unsuccessfully with those who believe they can cast out demons and heal others in the name of Christ, simply because their success rate is just above the minimum to make them believable.:ok: My goodness, the WT has yet to predict a date correctly and look how inspired they are!!!:dontknow:

Because believers come in all shapes, sizes and colours, I cannot simply judge by appearances. Neither can I judge on presumed criminal intent because most believers are sincere. Neither can I judge based on winning the argument because believers are believers regardless of winning or losing.

Hence whenever I get pulled into belief discussions—especially whether something is inherently evil or unholy, I MUST resort to the justifiable actions of its believers. I also must acknowledge that every religious belief is driven by what is man-made, Devil-made (in cults especially,) and God-made. So a terrorist walks into a shopping mall, pulling pins and chucking grenades into the stores while thanking God along the way for making him or her a part of His great unfolding purpose yet to be realized by infidels. Such sincerity can only be seen by those who believe the saving of souls can be achieved only by some incomprehensible, God-ordained transition to heavenly immortality—even saving the infidel from everlasting damnation. It’s not hard to find news items today of suicide bombers willing to give themselves to Allah believing that such death brings the ultimate salvation.

In the dark ages, the most heinous and sadistic tortures were devised, not because those doing them were necessarily sadistic, but because they truly believed such torture was a cleansing process and expelled sufficient evil from its victims’ that they would be spared the greater torments awaiting them by the Devil and demons in that invention called Hellfire.

So it is with the Trinity question—or theory, for those not yet believers. To understand the Trinity, you really must first believe. That is the only way that God will reveal it. That is what Trinitarians will finally confess, even if it seems an ambiguous, incomprehensible argument in scripture. But it is a safe argument for Trinitarians because they will ultimately point to something Paul said like, “But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? but we have the mind of Christ." (1 Corinthians 2:14-16 AV)

Therefore I concede that this is one argument that everyone is guaranteed to lose.:giverose:

:heartbeat:Love,

sw

Excellent point Malkah! That indeed was the real reason behind the developiment of the doctrine of the Trinity. Nothing sinister.

Blame the bible and it's ambiguent nature.

Hi Yannis

Re: "...the real reason behind the developiment of the doctrine of the Trinity. Nothing sinister."

Was the Trinity doctrine not something adopted to resolve what became an issue?

a quote: "...the difference between Christ the mediator and Christ the God is a very real one,..."

another quote: "...Control was the issue that had to be settled. Constantine didn't care that this new decree declared three separate Deities within the Godhead. He didn't care that the leaders would go home and implement this Trinitarian decree upon their church bodies. He didn't care about the eternal impact this would effect on the uncountable number of souls that followed this decree and newly formed doctrine. All he cared about was stability and control over the Roman governed nations."

doctrine of men can be very sinister, to say the very least....imo.

"google"...trinity council nicea

grin

gogh

These writings are way before that time period.

50 AD The Huleatt Manuscript

50 AD The Huleatt Manuscript "She poured it [the perfume] over his [Jesus'] hair when he sat at the table. But, when the disciples saw it, they were indignant. . . . God, aware of this, said to them: 'Why do you trouble this woman? She has done [a beautiful thing for me.] . . . Then one of the Twelve, who was called Judas Iscariot, went to the chief priest and said, 'What will you give me for my work?' [Matt. 26:7-15]" (Huleatt fragments 1-3).


74 AD The Letter of Barnabas "And further, my brethren, if the Lord [Jesus] endured to suffer for our soul, he being the Lord of all the world, to whom God said at the foundation of the world, 'Let us make man after our image, and after our likeness,' understand how it was that he endured to suffer at the hand of men" (Letter of Barnabas 5).
80 AD Hermas

80 AD Hermas "The Son of God is older than all his creation, so that he became the Father's adviser in his creation. Therefore also he is ancient" (The Shepherd 12).


[b]140 AD Aristides "[Christians] are they who, above every people of the Earth, have found the truth, for they acknowledge God, the creator and maker of all things, in the only-begotten Son and in the Holy Spirit" (Apology 16). [/b]

150 AD Justin Martyr "The Father of the universe has a Son, who also being the first begotten Word of God, is even God." (Justin Martyr, First Apology, ch 63)

150 AD Justin Martyr "Christ is called both God and Lord of hosts." (Dialogue with Trypho, ch, 36)

150 AD Justin Martyr "Moreover, in the diapsalm of the forty-sixth Psalm, reference is thus made to Christ: 'God went up with a shout, the Lord with the sound of a trumpet." (Dialogue with Trypho, ch 37)

150 AD Justin Martyr quotes Hebrews 1:8 to prove the Deity of Christ. "Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever." (Dialogue with Trypho, ch 56)

150 AD Justin Martyr "Therefore these words testify explicitly that He [Christ] is witnessed to by Him who established these things, as deserving to be worshipped, as God and as Christ." - Dialogue with Trypho, ch. 63.

150 AD Justin Martyr in Chap. LXVI. He (Justin) Proves From Isaiah That God Was Born From A Virgin. (Chapter Title, Chap. LXVI)

150 AD Justin Martyr "And Trypho said, "You endeavor to prove an incredible and well-nigh impossible thing;[namely], that God endured to be born and become man...some Scriptures which we mention, and which expressly prove that Christ was to suffer, to be worshipped, and [to be called] God, and which I have already recited to you, do refer indeed to Christ." (Dialogue with Trypho, ch 68)

Many more here all before 200AD

http://www.bible.ca/H-trinity.htm

Perhaps consider that it just might have been writings not in support of the Trinity that were under attack, since most of the persecution came from Trinitarians against those opposed to their theory? Nothing ambiguous about that. Sinister? Yes. Was it not fortold?

Let no man beguile you in any wise: for it will not be, except the falling away come first, and the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition, 4 he that opposeth and exalteth himself against all that is called God or that is worshipped; so that he sitteth in the temple of God, setting himself forth as God. 5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? 6 And now ye know that which restraineth, to the end that he may be revealed in his own season. 7 For the mystery of lawlessness doth already work: only there is one that restraineth now, until he be taken out of the way.
8 And then shall be revealed the lawless one, whom the Lord Jesus shall slay with the breath of his mouth, and bring to nought by the manifestation of his coming; 9 even he, whose coming is according to the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, 10 and with all deceit of unrighteousness for them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11 And for this cause God sendeth them a working of error, that they should believe a lie: 12 that they all might be judged who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

13 But we are bound to give thanks to God always for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, for that God chose you from the beginning unto salvation in sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth: 14 whereunto he called you through our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. 15 So then, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye were taught, whether by word, or by epistle of ours. 16 Now our Lord Jesus Christ himself, and God our Father who loved us and gave us eternal comfort and good hope through grace, 17 comfort your hearts and establish them in every good work and word. (2 Thessalonians 2:3-17)

Don't believe all history for even the majority of historians were biased.

:heartbeat: sw

What is displayed in these quotes is the teaching of HOMOIOUSIAN-
(One who is like his Father in all respects). This is the position of the Oriental Orthodox Church.

This is distinctly different from the Church of Rome and the Protestants who believe in HOMOOUSIAN- (One who is One Substance in the Father).

Justin Martyr's Christology was expressed by him as- The Father is Unbegotten and the Son is Begotten.

It was closer to the Nicean Counsel that the 'One Substance' Bishops
of Rome gained wider control. Many Bishops in Spain (Iberia), North Africa and the Middle East either voted against this ideology or refused to attend the Council altogether. We see in the surviving copies of the NT written in Coptic by the Egyptian Christian community a Christology that fully embraced the Diety and Divine nature of the Son of God while recognizing as Jesus himself proclaimed
he has one who is his 'God and Father' (John 20:17; 14:28).

In Christ

designs

Regarding the misquoting of secular sources allegedly found in the brochure " Should You Believe in the Trinity?" here are a few examples that I found on DocBobs website.

This confusion is widespread. The Encyclopedia Americana notes that the doctrine of the Trinity is considered to be "beyond the grasp of human reason." - Should You Believe in the Trinity?, Page 4

It is held that although the doctrine is beyond the grasp of human reason, it is, like many of the formulations of physical science, not contrary to reason, and may be apprehended (though it may not be comprehended) by the human mind. - The Encyclopedia Americana, page 116

A Protestant publication states: "The word Trinity is not found in the Bible ... It did not find a place formally in the theology of the church till the 4th century." - Should You Believe in the Trinity?, Page 5

At the ellipses (...) The Illustrated Dictionary continues "... and though used by Tertullian in the last decade of the 2nd century ..." Several sentences later: "Though it is not a biblical doctrine in the sense that any formulation of it can be found in the Bible, it can be seen to underlie the revelation of God, implicit in the OT, and explicit in the NT." - The Illustrated Bible Dictionary, page 1597

The New Encyclopedia Brittanica observes "Neither the word Trinity nor the explicit doctrine appears in the New Testament." - Should You Believe in the Trinity?, Page 6

Neither the word Trinity nor the explicit doctrine appears in the New Testament, nor did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict the Shema on the Old Testament: "Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord" (Deut. 6:4). The earliest Christians, however, had to cope with the implications of the coming of Jesus Christ and of the presumed presence and power of God among them - i. E. the Holy Spirit, who coming was connected with the celebration of the Pentecost. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit were associated in such New Testament passages as the Great Commission: "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (Matt. 28:19); and in the apostolic benediction: "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all." (II Cor. 13:14). Thus the New Testament established the basis for the doctrine of the Trinity. - The New Encyclopedia Brittanica, , page 928

Berhard Lohse says in A Short History of Christian Doctrine: "As far as the New Testament is concerned, one does not find in it an actual doctrine of the Trinity." - Should You Believe in the Trinity?, Page 6

As far as the New Testament is concerned, one does not find in it an actual doctrine of the Trinity. This does not mean much, however, for generally speaking the New Testament is less intent upon setting forth certain doctrines than it is upon proclaiming the kingdom of God, a kingdom that dawn in and with the person of Jesus Christ. At the same time, however, there are in the New Testament the rudiments of a concept of God that was susceptible of further development and clarification along doctrinal lines. - A Short History of Christian Doctrine, page 38

FOR many years, there had been much opposition on Biblical grounds to the developing idea that Jesus was God. To try to solve the dispute, Roman emperor Constantine summoned all bishops to Nicaea. About 300, a fraction of the total, actually attended. Constantine was not a Christian. Supposedly, he converted later in life, but he was not baptized until he lay dying. Regarding him, Henry Chadwick says in The Early Church: "Constantine, like his father, worshipped the Unconquered Sun; . . . his conversion should not be interpreted as an inward experience of grace . . . It was a military matter. His comprehension of Christian doctrine was never very clear, but he was sure that victor in battle lay in the gift of the God of the Christians." - Should You Believe in the Trinity?, Page 8

"When he [Constantius] died at York on 25 July 305 the soldiers proclaimed his son Constantine as emperor. Constantine, like his father, worshipped the Unconquered Sun (page 122) The conversion of Constantine marks a turning-point in the history ofthe Church and of Europe. It meant much more than the end of persecution. The sovereign autocrat was inevitably and immediately involved in the development of the church, and conversely the Church became more and more implicated in high political decisions. It is characteristic that the Western attitude towards the conversion of Constantine and its consequences has generally been more ambivalent than the Eastern. In the West there has been a sharper consciousness of the double-sidedness of his benefits to the Church. But if his conversion should not be interpreted as an inward experience of grace, neither was it a cynical act of Machiavellian cunning. It was a military matter. His comprehension of Christian doctrine was never very clear, but he was sure that victory in battle lay in the gift of the God of the Christians. (page 125) He was not baptized until he lay dying in 337, but this implies no doubt about his Christian belief. It was common at this time (and continued so until about A.D. 400) to postpone baptism to the end of one's life, especially if one's duty as an official included torture and execution of criminals. Part of the reason for postponement lay in the seriousness with which the responsibilities of baptism were taken. Constantine favoured Christianity among the many religions of his subjects, but did not make it the official or 'established' religion of the empire." (page 127) - Henry Chadwick "The Early Church", pages as noted

Warm Christian Love
Bangalore