ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

Early Church Fathers On Trinity

Did the Early Church Fathers teach against the Trinity?

Join Our Free Dating and Visit Our Apostles Creed
 ---Ruben on 10/21/11
     Helpful Blog Vote (1)

Post a New Blog



Ruben- 'That because the excerpt are talking only about the two!'

Well don't you think it would've been a good idea to have quoted something from the Fathers that spoke of 'the three' instead of 'the two'?

Oh but wait a minute... there isn't anything in the 'Letter to the Magnesians 68 [A.D. 110]' that speaks of a 3-in-one God. Of course if it had, you would have quoted it to undermine my original assertion that the 2nd century Fathers at best only believed a two-in-one concept of God.

So not only do you fail to understand that 110AD is the 2nd century, but now admit your quote from the 'Letter to the Magnesians' only speaks of 'the two' and you forget why you quoted it in the first place!
---David8318 on 10/28/11


"Fathers"-

"The decisions of Nicaea were really the work of a minority, and they were misunderstood and disliked by many who were not adherents of Arius. In particular the terms exousia ['out of the substance'] and homoousios ['of the same substance'] aroused opposition, on the grounds that they were unscriptural, novel...and erroneous metaphysically." - Documents of the Christian Church, p. 41, Oxford University Press.

"The formula of the Son's 'consubstantiality' [homoousios] with the Father was slow to gain general acceptance, despite Constantine's efforts to impose it." - The Oxford Illustrated History of Christianity, McManners, Oxford University Press
---scott on 10/27/11


Young's Concordance- Warmarc

In Young's Literal Translation of the Bible he uses the words "True God" in only four (4) places. They are 2 Chronicles 15:3, John 17:3,
1 Thessalonians 1:9 and 1 John 5:20. That's it.

Question-

When Young said "God" can be applied to the "True God" as well as to Judges and angels, consider his list of examples and ask yourself:

...why did he not include 2 Chron 15:3, Jn 17:3 and 1 Thess 1:9 along with 1 Jn 5:20?

Why not list those three perfect examples that clearly identify the ONLY "True God"?

He only listed examples of the word "God" being applied to someone other than the "True God" Jehovah.
---scott on 10/27/11


scott* "Referring to Jesus Christ as "God" or "a god" does not make him equal to the Almighty.

This is what I saiid:
(What Young fails to say is that he has many references to sharing all that the Father has and such (Ex..Jhn 10:36-38))

scott * "Did Moses die on the cross and was resurrected...?" Ruben

Of course not. My point is that the title "God", (elohim or theos), in itself, does not identify the Almighty God. How can it if the same exact word is applied biblically to men, angels, etc.

If men, angels can do as the Almighty God did, yes it can, But as you know they didn't. But Jesus(God the Son) had the same powers as God the Father.
---Ruben on 10/27/11


"Tortured theology...now you have added a new one "the true God." Warwick

Warwick likewise accuses respected Biblical scholar Robert Young of having a 'Tortured theology" because the reference to "the true God is his.

"God- is used...not only to the true God, but to false gods, magistrates, judges, angels, prophets..."


Whoopsey.

Who else does Warwick slander as having a "tortured theology" for referring to his "True God".

"Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent." Jesus Christ, the Son of God, John 17:3
---scott on 10/27/11




Still waiting for your answer about the "Fathers" connecting Christ with created "wisdom".
---scott on 10/26/11

At the start there is two, One is God and the other had the names of Reason, Wisdom and Power. It wasn't until God beggotten the Son then God was the Father and the Other became God the Son...
---Ruben on 10/27/11


Did the Early Church Fathers teach against the Trinity?

What matters is The Word That came out of the mouth of God.
What matters is- As Father He confirms His Word to His children.
If you have to rely on man, you're pretty much missing--God.
God is God-
His spoke His Word-
God confims His Word--only.
John 4:24
God is Spirit...

If mankind can't even agree on What God has said, why put the Church Fathers words in the mix?

More confusion.

Believers,
Stick to The Word of God-don't let the adversary side track you.
The name of Y'sh a
defined-God is Savior

YHVH states to call upon Him as Savior.
Beside Him there is no other.

You either do or you don't.
---char on 10/27/11


David8318* Ruben- I'm simply pointing out that the 'Fathers' did not even remotely teach the trinity doctrine as is taught today.

David, Yes they did: You and Scott just won't admit it!

Glory to the All-Holy Trinity and one Divinity: Father and Son and all-provident Holy Spirit, forever, Amen. (On the Apostolic Preaching, Concluding Prayer)Ireneaus


David8318 * Even your excerpt from the 'Letter to the Magnesians 68 [A.D. 110]' posted by you on 10/26/11 showed that the 2nd century Fathers I referred to only spoke of God and Jesus.

That because the excerpt are talking only about the two!

I understand nothing else than the Holy Trinity to be meant, Clement of Alexandria)
---Ruben on 10/27/11


Don't let the adversary side track you.

God spoke--His Word came out--He confirms His Word.
He is Spirit.
Don't waste time studing what man has taught... studing the words of men.Missing the mark aleph to Tav-beginning to end.
Believers...God spoke.

Jn 5 (all)
...Murmur not among yourselves.
No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
vs 43
[I am] come [in my Father's name], and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.

Y'sh a defined-
God is Savior
Zech 14:9
And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one.


One-God.
---char on 10/27/11


Scott, my only sadness is for those snared into the dark evil of the WTS.

In your quote you deleted "e.g. which means 'for example.'

Young says "God" is used of "the true God" and also "magistrates, judges etc." Two groups, the true God and the rest, giving "examples" covering both.

You say Young "fails to distinguish between the two in his list" I suppose Young quite reasonably believed we could tell the difference between Exodus 7:1 where God is applied to a mere man, and John 20:28 where "The God" is applied to Jesus, Creator, Redeemer, Saviour.... Likewise 1 John 5:20. Is any magistrate, judge etc ever called "the true God?" Never!
---Warwick on 10/27/11




Poor, sad Warwick & Marc-

Gnashing their teeth over a trinitarian biblical scholar who undermines a good number of their threadbare "proof" texts so they attempt to convolute his Concordance.

Exactly how are his words a "Help to Bible Interpretation" if he begins by saying "God- is used of any one (professedly) mighty, whether truly so or not, and is applied not only to the true God, but to false gods, magistrates, judges, angels, prophets...."

...and then fails to distinguish between the two in his list of examples? Nonsense.

It is your Trinitarian indoctrination that has you cherry-picking particular verses out of his list describing someone other than the Almighty.
---scott on 10/27/11


Scott you calim that youngs list is only of human 'god/Gods but that is not evident in what he has written, only in your indoctrinated mind.

1 John 5:20 "...He is the true God, and eternal life."

In your tortured theology you have so many Gods and gods, now you have added a new one "the true God." What is next the true, true God, or the genuine, one and only very true God....

When you are cornered you write nonsense.
---Warwick on 10/27/11


Note Young's ''and is NOT ONLY applied to the true God'', which equals is applied in his list!

From the New World Mistranslation:

1 John 5:20 ''And we are in union wit the true one, by means of his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and life everlasting'' (Footnotes 1Thess 1:9: ''You turned to God from idols to slave for a living and true God.'')

Rom 9:5 ''from whom Christ [sprang] according to the flesh: God, who is over all be blessed'' (Footnote for 'God', read Psalm 103:19 i.e. about Jehovah)

2Peter 1:1 ''by the righteousness of our God and [the] Saviour Jesus Christ''

Scott, unless you're saying Jesus is your God and Jehovah, can't you read Young's plain English?
---Marc on 10/26/11


Scott, read your quote "God- is used of any one (professedly) mighty, whether truly so or not, and is applied not only to the true God, but to false gods, magistrates, judges, angels, prophets, & c, e.g.....

Young says he gives all the references as examples of those which apply to the true God and to men. The inclusion of Hebrews 1:8 and 1 John 5:20 show I am right. And John 20:28 of course.
---Warwick on 10/26/11


"Young never says that ALL quoted verses are referring to non-God." Marc

Who's being dishonest?

In fact, in this particular section Young says "God- is used of any one (professedly) mighty, whether truly so or not, and is applied not only to the true God, but to false gods, magistrates, judges, angels, prophets..."

THEN he lists all of the verses that I have dutifully posted for your convenience below.

He obviously puts them all in the same category.

The verses that you feel must be exceptions: 1 John 5:20, Acts 20:28, Rom 9:5, 2 Peter 1:1 do not refer to the True God.

That is the scholarly opinion of Robert Young and, in my humble opinion, I whole heartedly agree.
---scott on 10/26/11


"Referring to Jesus Christ as "God" or "a god" does not make him equal to the Almighty. point". Ruben

Thank you.

"Did Moses die on the cross and was resurrected...?" Ruben

Of course not. My point is that the title "God", (elohim or theos), in itself, does not identify the Almighty God. How can it if the same exact word is applied biblically to men, angels, etc.

Still waiting for your answer about the "Fathers" connecting Christ with created "wisdom".
---scott on 10/26/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Accounting


"Young includes 1 John 5:20, John 20:28"- Warwick

Not the True God according to Trinitarian biblical scholar Robert Young.

Your argument is with him...not me..

...once again.
---scott on 10/26/11


"Exodus 7:1 doesn't say Moses was called God but that God ''MADE Moses [as] God to Pharaoh''. Big difference!" Marc

Hmmm. What exactly is the Hebrew word for "as" at Ex 7:1?

"And the LORD said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet." KJV

"And Jehovah said to Moses, See, I have made thee God to Pharaoh, and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet." DBY
---scott on 10/26/11


Scott once again

Young writes "God-is used of any one (professedly) mighty, whether truly so or not, and is applied not only to the true God, but to false gods, magistrates, judges, angels, prophets, & c,"

Young includes 1 John 5:20 in his relevant list. "...He is the true God,..." Also Hebrews 1:8 which like John 20:28 is a translation of 'ho Theos'-The one true God. Bullingers Lexicon and Concordance states 'Theos' lost the meaning of the one true God, replaced by 'ho Theos' to denote the one true God, as Young shows.

Young, as you repeatedly say was a Trinitarian who would obviously believe that Thomas, applying 'ho Theos' to Jesus, was calling Him the one true God.
---Warwick on 10/26/11


Scott,

Dishonest, once again. Young never says that ALL quoted verses are referring to non-God. As I pointed out, several of the verses in Young clearly are about God almighty. Even in your New World Mistranslation this is so. Why don't you confess your lie?

Exodus 7:1 doesn't say Moses was called God but that God ''MADE Moses [as] God to Pharaoh''. Big difference!
---Marc on 10/26/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Fundraisers


scott * Ruben...once again-

Young's Analytical Concordance- "God- is used of any one (professedly) mighty...is applied not only to the true God,
And once again put Jesus on that list!

scott* Referring to Jesus Christ as "God" or "a god" does not make him equal to the Almighty. point.

What young fails to say is that he has many references to sharing all that the Father has and such (Ex..Jhn 10:36-38)

scott * So posting comments by the 'Fathers' that refer to him as God doesn't do anything for your argument and is really a moot point. Moses was called God too. Ex 7:1

Did Moses die on the cross and was resurrected? can you forgive sins, raised the dead..you get the point!
---Ruben on 10/26/11


Ruben- I'm not trying to nit pick or score points. I'm simply pointing out that the 'Fathers' did not even remotely teach the trinity doctrine as is taught today. At best, it can only be said they taught a two-in-one concept of God.

Even your excerpt from the 'Letter to the Magnesians 68 [A.D. 110]' posted by you on 10/26/11 showed that the 2nd century Fathers I referred to only spoke of God and Jesus.

And this Arian squabble is pointless because both camps, trinitarian and none trinitarian share some commonality with Arius' teachings. But so what!? What is the big deal if anyone happens to share similar beliefs as Arius? There are far worse characters of antiquity who believed in God, but that doesn't stop me from worshipping God.
---David8318 on 10/26/11


Ruben...once again-

Young's Analytical Concordance- "God- is used of any one (professedly) mighty...is applied not only to the true God, but to false gods, magistrates, judges, angels, prophets...Jn 1:1"

Referring to Jesus Christ as "God" or "a god" does not make him equal to the Almighty...according to biblical scholar Young. You seem to avoid this fundamental point.

So posting comments by the 'Fathers' that refer to him as God doesn't do anything for your argument and is really a moot point. Moses was called God too. Ex 7:1

Further, how do you explain that the "Fathers" that I posted identify Christ with the"wisdom" that "the Lord created"?
---scott on 10/26/11


scott* Chapter LVI: "...there is...another God and Lord subject to the Maker of all things..."

Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter LXII:

Yes, God the Son, a few paragraph down would tell you:

'He is the Lord who received commission from the Lord who [remains] in the heavens, i.e., the Maker of all things,'

scott * Even as the Scripture by Solomon has made clear, that he whom Solomon calls Wisdom, was begotten as a beginning before all his creatures and as offspring of God..."

Chapter LXI:

Again a few sentences you can read:( In fact the next line)

'He [is] God, Son of the only, unbegotten, unutterable God.
---Ruben on 10/26/11


Send a Free Support Ecard


"God begat before all creatures a beginning (who was) a certain rational power (proceeding) from himself, who is called by the holy spirit, now the glory of the Lord, now the Son, again Wisdom, again an Angel, (a) God, and then Lord and Logos..."
---scott on 10/26/11

Scott Really!

'The Word of Wisdomis Himself this God begotten of the Father of all things, and Word, and Wisdom, and Power, and the Glory of the Begetter.... (Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 61)
---Ruben on 10/26/11


David8318 * Ruben believes I pray to Jesus?

Where did I say that?

I said:

'Arius taught that Christ was a creature made by God. '

David8318* I posted- 'Ignatius and Irenaeus were 2nd century 'fathers' and their teachings were more of a 'two-in-one God''

Ruben nicely provides the answer- '[T]here is one God, who has manifested himself by Jesus Christ his Son,..'(Letter to the Magnesians 68 [A.D. 110] ('Notice the year' Ruben asks- does Ruben understand 110AD is the 2nd century?)

Maybe David can so kindly give the sources for his reason and not his opinion. And about the 2nd century, those who are at the losing end of a debate will always nit pick any little thing, ok you get a point!
---Ruben on 10/26/11


Still can't see what the fuss is about Arius.

Arius wasn't the first to believe Christ was 'subordinate' to God. The Apostle Paul also taught Jesus was subject to God- 'When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all'- 1 Cor.15:28 (NIV).

The 'Arian heresy' is the trinitarian label applied to those who speak out against the trinity dogma in the skewed way Arius didn't. This is because Arius did in fact believe a variation of the trinity, beliefs trinitarians still hold dear even to this day- ie. praying to Jesus and holy spirit is a person. Jehovah's Witnesses believe Paul's teaching of Christ's subjection- trinitarians hold to teachings of Arius.
---David8318 on 10/26/11


"Father" Justin Martyr, Proverbs 8-

Chapter LVI: "...there is...another God and Lord subject to the Maker of all things..."

Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter LXII:

"...Even as the Scripture by Solomon has made clear, that he whom Solomon calls Wisdom, was begotten as a beginning before all his creatures and as offspring of God..."

Chapter LXI:

"God begat before all creatures a beginning (who was) a certain rational power (proceeding) from himself, who is called by the holy spirit, now the glory of the Lord, now the Son, again Wisdom, again an Angel, (a) God, and then Lord and Logos..."
---scott on 10/26/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Ecommerce


Marc, A lot of fancy footwork but you still have not defined "immortality"
You're probably good at "dodge ball"
---1st_cliff on 10/25/11


No early Christian preacher taught against the Christian doctrinal truth of the Trinity, which is more correctly named, The Triune God. For believing that God became flesh in the person of Jesus Christ is one of the most basic and fundamental truths, recorded in both testaments, and professed from Christ's own mouth, and proven by his witnessed public miracles that only God can do. And also, as commanded by Christ Almighty himself, every Christian is baptized into this Holy Trinity.
---Eloy on 10/25/11


Ruben believes I pray to Jesus? No, I pray to God, through Jesus. Just as scripture teaches- 'No one comes to the Father except through me.' Jesus Christ at John 14:6.

I pray to Jehovah God Almighty, 'through' His Son, Jesus Christ.

Trinitarians however follow Arius in believing they should pray to Jesus and that the holy spirit is a person.

I posted- 'Ignatius and Irenaeus were 2nd century 'fathers' and their teachings were more of a 'two-in-one God''. Ruben asks 'Really, where'?

Ruben nicely provides the answer- '[T]here is one God, who has manifested himself by Jesus Christ his Son,..'(Letter to the Magnesians 68 [A.D. 110] ('Notice the year' Ruben asks- does Ruben understand 110AD is the 2nd century?)
---David8318 on 10/25/11


Arianism continued its form of trinit-arian-ism by praying to Jesus. Jehovah's Witnesses do not believe these Arian teachings.
---David8318 on 10/25/11

But you believe in this teaching:

Arius taught that Christ was a creature made by God.
---Ruben on 10/25/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Jewelry


David said: ''Jehovah's Witnesses do not believe these Arian teachings.''

However, in ''The Finished Mystery'' 1918 edition, p. 64, pictured as one of 'The Seven Messengers to the Church' is Arius (and Russell).

What is the book's status? On page 5 it states, ''This book may properly be said to be a posthumous publication of Pastor Russell.''
---Marc on 10/25/11


Church "Father" Origin & Proverbs 8- (1)

"And therefore we have first to ascertain what the first begotten Son of God is, seeing He is called by many different names, according to the circumstances and views of individuals. For He is termed Wisdom, according to the expression of Solomon: "The Lord created me - the beginning of His ways, and among His works, before He made any other thing He formed me before the ages. In the beginning, before He formed the earth, before He brought forth the fountains of water...

Continued...
---scott on 10/25/11


Fathers" & Proverbs 8-

Tertullian-

"The Son likewise acknowledges the Father, speaking in His own person under the name of Wisdom: "The Lord formed Me as the beginning of His ways,..
---scott on 10/25/11

:For if indeed Wisdom in this passage seems to say that She was created by the Lord with a without which nothing was made. Nor need we dwell any longer on this point, as if it were not the very Word Himself, who is spoken of under the name both of Wisdom and of Reason, and of the entire Divine Soul and Spirit. He became also the Son of God, and was begotten when He proceeded forth from Him. (Against Praxeus, Chapter 7)
---Ruben on 10/25/11


Cyprian-

"That Christ is the Firstborn, and that He is the Wisdom of God by whom all things were made. In Solomon, in the Proverbs: "The Lord established me in the beginning of His ways..."The Treatises of Cyprian, Second Book, first testimony, Volume V, pages 515-6.
---scott on 10/25/11

Cyprian of Carthage

"One who denies that Christ is God cannot become his temple [of the Holy Spirit] . . . " (Letters 73:12 [A.D. 253]).

Scott, you really need to stop with the Early Church Fathers:)And just admit, "They" believe and taught the TRINITY!
---Ruben on 10/25/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Furniture


"Fathers" & Proverbs 8-

Tertullian-

"The Son likewise acknowledges the Father, speaking in His own person under the name of Wisdom: "The Lord formed Me as the beginning of His ways, with a view to His own works, before all the hills, did He beget me." Against Praxeas, chapter VII, ibid. Volume III, p. 602.

Cyprian-

"That Christ is the Firstborn, and that He is the Wisdom of God by whom all things were made. In Solomon, in the Proverbs: "The Lord established me in the beginning of His ways..."The Treatises of Cyprian, Second Book, first testimony, Volume V, pages 515-6.
---scott on 10/25/11


Church "Father" Origin & Proverbs 8- (2)

Continued-

"...He brought me forth....He is styled First-born, as the apostle has declared: is the first-born of every creature. The first-born, however, is not by nature a different person from the Wisdom, but one and the same. Finally, the Apostle Paul says, that Christ (is) the power of God and the wisdom of God. (e.a.)

De Principiis, Book I, chapter II, section I, ibid., Volume IV, p. 246.
---scott on 10/25/11


scott * "Before the Council of Nicaea all theologians viewed the Son as in one way or another subordinate to the Father."

Ok, he is the Father:

Council of Nicaea I

"We believe . . . in our one Lord Jesus Christ the Son of God, the only-begotten born of the Father, that is, of the substance of the Father, God of God, light of light, true God of true God, begotten, not made . . ." (The Creed of Nicaea [A.D. 325]).

scott * Iconographie de l' Art Chretien-

"The dogma of the Trinity is of relatively recent date. There is no reference to it in the Old Testament..

Because it was only partially revealed and came to light in the NT..
---Ruben on 10/25/11


Encyclopedia Americana-

"Speculative thought began to analyze the divine nature until in the 4th century an elaborate theory of a threefoldness in God appears..." 1944, v. 6, p. 619.
---scott on 10/24/11

And the Encyclopedia Americana also says "God "exists in Three Persons... [and] is One in 'substance'," pp (116-117)
---Ruben on 10/25/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Laptops


Second century 'fathers' Ignatius and Irenaeus expressed ideas that could be interpreted, at the most, as belief in a two-in-one God made up of the Father and the Son. The trinitarian 'scheme' came in the 4th century.
---David8318 on 10/25/11

Really, where?

[T]here is one God, who has manifested himself by Jesus Christ his Son,..(Letter to the Magnesians 68 [A.D. 110] ..Notice the year!

"the Word of God who is the Saviour of all, and the ruler of heaven and earth, who is Jesus,"Against Heresies 3:9:3)-Irenaeus
---Ruben on 10/25/11


Historian J.N.D. Kelly, (a trinitarian) wrote-

'The evidence to be collected from the Apostolic Fathers is meagre... Of a doctrine of the Trinity in the strict sense there is of course no sign... What the Apologists had to say about the Holy Spirit was much more meagre... [They] appear to have been extremely vague as to the exact status and role of the Spirit... they were very far from having worked the threefold pattern of the Church's faith into a coherent scheme.'- Early Christian Doctrines.

Second century 'fathers' Ignatius and Irenaeus expressed ideas that could be interpreted, at the most, as belief in a two-in-one God made up of the Father and the Son. The trinitarian 'scheme' came in the 4th century.
---David8318 on 10/25/11


So much fuss over Arius, who in fact was instrumental in forcing Roman Emperor Constantine to hold his first ecumenical council in Nicaea in 325AD, where Constantine adopted the pagan trinity dogma as 'Christian' theology.

Arius was in the same melting pot with trinitarian founder members- Constantine, Alexander and Athanasius.

Arius was more 'trinitarian' than Christian. For example, Arius believed the holy spirit was a person and spoke of a 'triad' and a 'trinity' but considered it to be composed of un-equal persons.

Arianism continued its form of trinit-arian-ism by praying to Jesus. Jehovah's Witnesses do not believe these Arian teachings.
---David8318 on 10/25/11


We have One Father, even Christ Almighty, the Triune God. "For in him dwells all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. And coming up, Jesus he spoke to them saying, Administers me all power in heaven and on earth. Go you all therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I commanded you: and here, I am with you all the days, up to the completion of the age. A-men." Col.2:9+ Mt.28:18-20.
---Eloy on 10/25/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Lawyer


Scott all your fancy dancing does not alter the point. You are claiming the Greek 'ho Theos' does not describe the one and only God alone, but is applied to men! Not so.

Young includes Hebrews 1:8 which again in Greek is 'ho Theos', the God. He also cites 1 John 5:20 "...He is the true God, and eternal life."

Young is not saying the list He gives covers only "false gods, magistrates, judges, angels, prophets, & c" but also "the true God", just as he writes.

Interestingly, Barnes, Clarke, Gill, Wesley, Schofield, Jamieson-Fausset-Brown et al all say John 20:28 has Thomas coming to the understanding that Jesus is not only his Lord, but his God-ho Theos, the God.
---Warwick on 10/24/11


Part 2

Scott/David claim Trinitarian theology isn't the real thing and should be ignored BECAUSE it took so long to hammer out and formalise, but then tacitly claim their Arian heresy can only be seen lurking in the shadows (hence the misquotes from the early Church fathers) until Arius gave it a formal creed 300 years after Christ.

Further, they have attacked me for using early Christian writings in support of the Trinity (including men who were disciples of Paul and John e.g. David or Scott said ''We don't need to listen to mere men''), but bestow upon themselves the right to quote whichever early Christian they believe supports their heresy.

In other words, Scott/David are dishonest hypocrites.
---Marc on 10/24/11


Young's-

Once again...

"God- is used of any one (professedly) mighty, whether truly so or not, and is applied not only to the true God, but to false gods, magistrates, judges, angels, prophets, & c, e.g.- Exod. 7. 1, 15. n, 21. 6, 22. 8, 9, 32. 8, 22, 31 , Deut. 10. 17, Judg. 8. 33, 9. 9, 13, 13. 21, 22, 16. 23, 1 Sa. 2. 25, 28. 13, 1 Ki. 11. 33, 2 Ki. 1. 2, 3, 19. 37, Psa. 8. 5, 45. 6, 82. 1, 6, 97. 7, 9, 136. 2, Matt. 1. 23, John 1. 1, 10. 33, 34, 35, 20. 28, Acts 7. 40, 43, 59, 12. 22, 14. n, 17. 18, 23, 19. 26, 20. 28, 28. 6, Rom. 9. 5 , 1 Co. 8. 5, Phil. 3. 19, 2 Th. 2. 4, 1 Ti. 3. 16, Titus 2. 13 , Heb. 1. 8, 2 Pe. 1. 1, 1 Jo. 3. 16, 5. 20."
---scott on 10/24/11


Scott & David believe that from Proverbs 8 we should believe that Christ was created by the Father. However, it's clear that this can't be even a mildly well-thought out exegesis (in fact it's eisegesis because Scott/David import their heretical Arian theology) because that would mean God was bereft of wisdom until he created his own wisdom.

With this in mind, some translations, rather than 'created' have 'brought forth' as a more accurate (and rational) wording.
---Marc on 10/24/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Dedicated Hosting


scott * Ruben-The NC Encyclopedia said nothing about "terminology".

"The formulation `One God in three persons'"

Ok, so "formulation' was not known untl later...

scott * Tertullian- Rueben

If Tertullian said (and he did) " then clearly he identifies the Son as having a beginning. (Micah 5:2).

"the Son is the Word, and the Word is God, and I and my Father are one. (Against Hermogenes, Chapter 18)


The Son, who is designated God". Ruben

Scott- "God- ...is applied not only to the true God, but to false gods, magistrates, judges, angels, prophets..." Robert Young

You can add Jesus to that list.
---Ruben on 10/24/11


Part 1

David wrote: ''the so called 'Church Fathers' teach against the trinity.''

Both David and Scott know there is no actual history connecting the Gospel writers with Arius, the founder of the JW theology. So what they must do is invent by dishonest cut-and-paste. These guys haven't actually bothered to read the original documents but lazily borrow from some pro-Watchtower [mis]quote bank, liberally sprinkle with ellipses (or not!) , and bob's your uncle, we have the new ''improved'' history of the early Church.
---Marc on 10/24/11


Scott originally SELECTIVELY misquoted from trinitarian Young's Concordance. He implied Young believed John 20:28 wasn't claiming Thomas held Jesus to be 'The God of me'' i.e. Jehovah. Scott's reasoning? According to Scott, ALL Young's quoted verses weren't about Jehovah.

However,Young did quote 1John 5:20, Acts 20:28, Rom 9:5, 2Peter 1:1, originally and conveniently ''omitted'' by Scott. But to see Scott's ''rationality'' collapse and dishonesty or poor scholarship emerge, read the above verses, even in the NW[mis]T, and the 'God' clearly refers to Jehovah. Therefore, there is no good reason to believe that Young was saying Thomas' declaration wasn't saying Jesus is Jehovah but all the more to believe Thomas, was given the context.
---Marc on 10/24/11


David, Proverbs 8:22 is the personification of wisdom. It has nothing to do with Jesus being created. You have nothing to show otherwise.

The following Scriptures show your fallacy, but of course you ignore them.

John 1:3 "Through him all things were made, without him nothing was made that has been made."

Colossians 1:16 "For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, ...all things were created by him and for him."

Your errant, unsuportable view has the Creator Himself being a creature! How can that be? Jesus is the Creator of everything ever created both in heaven and on earth, both visible and invisible? You have Jesus creating Himself!


---Warwick on 10/24/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Online Marketing


For more than 200 years God never lifted a finger to aid those Christians being killed for sport in the Roman arena!
So it is not surprising that He never came to the aid of Arius who stood up to the "Priest of Sol" Constantine,with the truth and was branded a heretic and booted! They preferred the trinitarian lie!
Not finding biblical support they conjured up terms like "Homoousios" (325 CE)
Amazing fact is that no Jews were present!!!
---1st_cliff on 10/24/11


Eerdman's History of Christianity, 1977, pp. 112,113-

"Before the Council of Nicaea all theologians viewed the Son as in one way or another subordinate to the Father."

Iconographie de l' Art Chretien-

"The dogma of the Trinity is of relatively recent date. There is no reference to it in the Old Testament...One can even say that it is a conception foreign to primitive Christianity."
Professor Louis Reau of the Sorbonne (France's leading university), v. 2, Book 1, p. 14.

Encyclopedia Americana-

"Speculative thought began to analyze the divine nature until in the 4th century an elaborate theory of a threefoldness in God appears..." 1944, v. 6, p. 619.
---scott on 10/24/11


JUSTIN MARTYR- Christ [is] Lord, and God the Son of God,appearing formerly in power as Man,"

IRENAEUS- the Word of God who is the Saviour of all, and the ruler of heaven and earth, who is Jesus,

CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA - The Lord ministers all good and all help, both as man and as God:

Hippolytus- "For though He endured the cross, yet as God He returned to life"

ORIGEN- "We worship one God, the Father and the Son,
---Ruben on 10/24/11


"Terminology"- Ruben

The NC Encyclopedia said nothing about "terminology". They said:

"The formulation `One God in three persons' was not solidly established...Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective."

Tertullian- Rueben

If Tertullian said (and he did) that "There was...a time when neither sin existed with Him, nor the Son..." then clearly he identifies the Son as having a beginning. (Micah 5:2).

"The Son, who is designated God". Ruben

"God- ...is applied not only to the true God, but to false gods, magistrates, judges, angels, prophets..." Robert Young
---scott on 10/24/11


Read These Insightful Articles About VoIP Service


Warwick- I'm not particularly interested in your belief in the pagan trinity neither your understanding of Proverbs 8:22-30.

What I am interested in as the theme of this thread bears out which appears to elude you is did the so called 'Church Fathers' teach against the trinity. My post highlighted Justin Martyr's understanding of Proverbs 8.

Your understanding of Proverbs 8 is irrelevant. Your pagan interpretation of the scriptures and trinitarian view of Jesus Christ is also irrelevant.
---David8318 on 10/24/11


New Catholic Encyclopedia, p. 299, v. 14, 1967.

"The formulation `One God in three persons' was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith prior to the end of the 4th century. But it is precisely this formulation that has first claim to the title the Trinitarian Dogma. Among the Apostolic Fathers , there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective." -
---scott on 10/22/11


Ok, the terminology was not well know until then, but the core concepts of Jesus was God was believed in earliests times. And as already proven, the apostolic Fathers did teach about the trinity!
---Ruben on 10/24/11


Tertullian (160-220 CE) -

"Because God is in like manner a Father, and He is also a Judge, but He has not always been Father and Judge, merely on the ground of His having always been God. For He could not have been the Father previous to the Son, nor a Judge previous to sin."

Against Hermogenes, chapter III, ANF, Vol. III, August, 1980, 478.
---scott on 10/24/11

[The] Word of God, thenis called the Son, who Himself is designated God[.] The Word was with God, and the Word was God. It is written, Thou shalt not take God's name in vain. This for certain is He who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God. (Against Praxeus, Chapter 7)
---Ruben on 10/24/11


"You have Jehovah talking about HIS Spirit...and you have HIM talking about HIS SON... Open your mind!!"- Adetunji

Boy, hard to argue with such astounding logic.

So, because the Bible refers to the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit we are to conclude that they are three persons within one God? When you say, "open your mind", do you mean that I should imagine that the Trinity is in God's word?

Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego are mentioned together. Your logic would have us creating a Trinity of young Hebrew men.


"You do not need the early church or councils to decree to you that the Holy Trinity is TRUE"- Adetunji

You do know what this thread is about, right?
---scott on 10/24/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Settlements


Tertullian (160-220 CE) -

"Because God is in like manner a Father, and He is also a Judge, but He has not always been Father and Judge, merely on the ground of His having always been God. For He could not have been the Father previous to the Son, nor a Judge previous to sin. There was, however, a time when neither sin existed with Him, nor the Son, the former of which was to constitute the Lord a Judge, and the latter a Father."

Against Hermogenes, chapter III, ANF, Vol. III, August, 1980, 478.
---scott on 10/24/11


Scott: You do not need the early church or councils to decree to you that the Holy Trinity is TRUE. In the JW Bible that you carry (though highly distorted by JW views) you have Jehovah talking about HIS Spirit in it and you have HIM talking about HIS SON inside. Open your mind!!!
---Adetunji on 10/24/11


David, Proverbs 8:22 "The LORD possessed me at the beginning of his work, the first of his acts of old." This refers to God's posession of wisdom, not creation of anything. The first 9 chapters of proverbs deal with wisdom personified.

John 1:3 "Through him all things were made, without him nothing was made that has been made."

Colossians 1:16 "For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, ...all things were created by him and for him."

As Jesus is Creator of everything, ever created, He cannot be created.

Let Scripture interpret Scripture. It does not contradict itself (as your version does) but confirms and compliments itself.
---Warwick on 10/24/11


Scott, what does what you wrote have to do with every Jehovah Witness that I personaly know, being dishonest, and are always involed in some type of scam or scheme?
---Rob on 10/23/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Internet Services


"How [can you] look at yourself in the mirror each morning." Marc (1)

Anyone with 2 shekels worth of interest in the subject, particularly it's history, knows that the RCC established and articulated the trinity doctrine through a series of councils and creeds in the fourth century. They of course believe it to be true and have taught it ever since.

It is not a 'lie' to reveal through their encyclopedia that they acknowledge the doctrine to be "not ... directly and immediately the word of God...not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith prior to the end of the 4th century...[and that] there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective."
---scott on 10/23/11


"The mirror" Marc (2)

Additionally, the comments from the Encyclopedia that you apparently feel cancels out their previous observations on the topic (curious) are interesting.

"Confession of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit -an elemental Trinitarianism - went back to the period of Christian origin.''

"Confession of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit."

The scriptures are clear, and therefore I happily acknowledge (or confess), that the "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" exist. It is the relationship between the 3 that I question. But to arrive at the conclusion that these three "elements" are three persons of one God took centuries (and unbiblical terminology) to hammer out.
---scott on 10/23/11


"They are also dishonest...scam[s]...scheme[s]." Rob

Historian K.S.Latourette stated (re Christians at the time of the Roman Empire):

"The accusations varied. Because they refused to participate in pagan ceremonies the Christians were dubbed atheists. Through their abstention from much of the community life- the pagan festivals, the public amusements...- they were derided as haters of the human race...It was said that both sexes met together at night..and that promiscuous intercourse followed...

...The fact that [the Memorial of Christs death] was celebrated only in the presence of believers fed the rumours that Christians regularly sacrificed an infant and consumed its blood and flesh."
---scott on 10/23/11


According to the Catholic 'Jerusalem' Bible, Proverbs 8:22-30 says of the prehuman Jesus: 'Yahweh created me when his purpose first unfolded, before the oldest of his works... The deep was not, when I was born... Before the hills, I came to birth... I was by his [God's] side, a master craftsman.'

Discussing these verses, Justin Martyr says in his Dialogue With Trypho:

'The Scripture has declared that this Offspring was begotten by the Father before all things created, and that that which is begotten is numerically distinct from that which begets, any one will admit.'- The Ante-Nicene Fathers, edited by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, American Reprint of the Edinburgh Edition, 1885, Volume I, page 264.
---David8318 on 10/23/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Online Stores


Cluny: I can't say for sure, but I had the impression that some writings, especially those said to have been written by Barnabas Papias and Polycarp, are now lost.

Thus we only have fragments of the very early fathers
---Peter on 10/22/11


Marc, what you see in Scott is what you should expect from Jehovah Witnesses.

I have Jehovah Witness co-workers and neighbors. They are always involved in so type of scam, or scheme.

They are also dishonest. I have honesty come to believe this type of character is a requirement to be a Jehovah Witness.
---Rob on 10/22/11


Scott,

I don't know how you can look at yourself in the mirror each morning. You dishonestly partially quote from Trinitarian sources as though they support your case.

Here's what the Catholic Encylopedia goes onto say after your mendacious cut-and-paste: ''If it is clear on the one side that the dogma of the Trinity in the stricter sense of the word was a late arrival, product of three centuries' reflection and debate, it is just as clear on the opposite side that confession of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit - and hence an elemental Trinitarianism - went back to the period of Christian origin.''

Why are you lying?
---Marc on 10/22/11


Secondary sources, such as encyclopedias, are useless when primary ones are available, such as the Pre-Nicene Fathers themselves.

Do a search for New Advent, and you will find them all, though in English translation, on line.

Then, as St. Augustine heard, tolle lege, and find out for yourself.

Glory to Jesus Christ.
---Cluny on 10/22/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Business Training


New Catholic Encyclopedia, p. 299, v. 14, 1967.

"[The Trinity Doctrine] is not ... directly and immediately the word of God." - (p. 304) "The formulation `One God in three persons' was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith prior to the end of the 4th century. But it is precisely this formulation that has first claim to the title the Trinitarian Dogma. Among the Apostolic Fathers , there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective." -
---scott on 10/22/11


The NT Dictionary of New Testament Theology, (1986, pg 84) (2)

..."It also lacks such terms as `trinity' ... and homoousios which featured in the Creed of Nicaea (325) to denote that Christ was of the same substance as the Father." And "All this underlines the point that primitive Christianity did not have an explicit doctrine of the trinity such as was subsequently elaborated in the creeds [after 325 A. D.] of the early church."

An Encyclopedia of Religion, Ferm (ed.), p. 208, 1945 ed.

"The early form of the Apostle's Creed consisted of 'I believe in God the Father Almighty, and in Christ Jesus his Son, our Lord, and in holy spirit, holy church, and resurrection of the flesh.'"
---scott on 10/22/11


Any of the early writers who wrote anything deemed to contradict the doctrine of the trinity are ipso facto not Church Fathers. So, yes, the Church Fathers are all trinitarians, or pre-trinitarians.
---God.is.everywhere on 10/22/11


Copyright© 1996-2015 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.