Jump to content
The World News Media

Early Christians Believed in the Trinity


Cos
Message added by admin

Please consider starting new topics rather than adding to this enormous one. You can link back on your new topic to this one if need be and/or tag users as needed.  Thank you for the interesting discussion.  

Recommended Posts

  • Member
15 minutes ago, Shiwiii said:

classic answer to any question by one who cannot develop a response on their own; point to someone/something else so that no responsibility needs to be taken by the one pointing. 

 

Did God approve of war? Throughout the OT there is plenty of war, wars instructed by God Himself. Why would Jesus command the disciples to gain a sword? To look cool? Defense? 

 

Dying for the lack of picking up arms does not make one a martyr. 

The answer is in the previous post.  Here it is again :"If it is right to defend your country then why did Jesus tell Peter not to defend him but to "Return your sword to its place, those who live by the sword will die by the sword"? Mt 26:52 BTW Your country belongs to Satan just as every other country does. AGAIN see the previous post. :D

Jesus gave a NEW Commandment. John 13:34,35

I did not see the answer as to Who's side was the Trinity God on? 9_9 Still waiting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Views 14.1k
  • Replies 215
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

In Haiti, even today .. the population is 85% Catholic, and believe in the Trinity, as an institution (individual results may vary ...) AND 85% or so of THAT group also practice Voodoo and worship the

But not by First Century Christians taught by Jesus you know the ones in the New Testament. They used the BIBLE. The Bible, every single book in it, was written by Jews and Jews do not believe in God

Very good point. After all if the Trinity was in the Bible in the first place then NO ONE would have tried to put it there by a forgery. Which of course proves it is not in the Bible. {Yet that is not

Posted Images

  • Member
19 minutes ago, Shiwiii said:

classic answer to any question by one who cannot develop a response on their own; point to someone/something else so that no responsibility needs to be taken by the one pointing. 

 

Did God approve of war? Throughout the OT there is plenty of war, wars instructed by God Himself. Why would Jesus command the disciples to gain a sword? To look cool? Defense? 

 

Dying for the lack of picking up arms does not make one a martyr. 

Since you don't like JW.ORG for some reason xD Try these books:

Christian Neutrality and Jehovah's Witnesses

God and Man in Washington 
Beyond Good Intentions 
Early Christian Attitude to War 
A History of Christianity 
It Is Not Lawful For Me To Fight 
The Court and the Constitution 
God Versus Ceasar 
The American Character 
The Lustre of Our Country 
On The Road To Civilization 
Judaism and Christianity in the Age of Constantine 
Preachers Present Arms [Abrams] 
World History, the Story of Mans Achievements [Habberton] 
Christianity and the Roman Government [Hardy] 
The March of Civilization, Ancient and Medieval World [Wrench] 
The Church the Gospel and War [Jones] 
The Ante-Nicene Fathers vol. 3 [Roberts, Donaldson] 
The Early Fathers on War and Military Service [Swift] 
Early Church History to the Death of Constantine [Backhouse, Tylor] 
History of Christianity [Gibbon] 
A Short Hostory of Rome [Ferrero] 
The New Worlds Foundations in the Old [West] 
Those About To Die [Manniz] 
A History of Christianity [Wolff] 
Caesar and Christ [Will Durant] 
Treasury of the Christian World [Nasby] 
Armed With the Constitution [Newton] 
State And Salvation  The Jehovah's Witnesses and their Fight For Civil Rights [Kaplan] 
Varieties of Religious Repression : Why Governments Restrict Religion {Sarkissian} 
To The Flag The Unlikely History of the Pledge of Alligiance 
The Courage of Their Convictions 
Salute! The Case of the Bible VS. The Flag 
The Supreme Court on Church and State 
Render Unto Caesar The Flag Salute Controversy 
Marble Palace The Supreme Court in American Life 
Religious Freedom : Rights and Liberties Under the Law 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
21 minutes ago, bruceq said:

Since you don't like JW.ORG for some reason xD Try these books:

my statement still stands. You just refuse to answer in your own words and opinion. 

classic answer to any question by one who cannot develop a response on their own; point to someone/something else so that no responsibility needs to be taken by the one pointing.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
31 minutes ago, Shiwiii said:

my statement still stands. You just refuse to answer in your own words and opinion. 

classic answer to any question by one who cannot develop a response on their own; point to someone/something else so that no responsibility needs to be taken by the one pointing.

 

The answer is in the previous post.  Here it is again in case you missed it :"If it is right to defend your country then why did Jesus tell Peter not to defend him but to "Return your sword to its place, those who live by the sword will die by the sword"? Mt 26:52 BTW Your country belongs to Satan just as every other country does. AGAIN see the previous post. :D

I still do not see the answer as to Who's side was the Trinity God on? 9_9 Still waiting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
23 minutes ago, bruceq said:

The answer is in the previous post.  Here it is again in case you missed it :"If it is right to defend your country then why did Jesus tell Peter not to defend him but to "Return your sword to its place, those who live by the sword will die by the sword"? Mt 26:52 BTW Your country belongs to Satan just as every other country does. AGAIN see the previous post. :D

I still do not see the answer as to Who's side was the Trinity God on? 9_9 Still waiting.

was your question not addressed to Cos?  I believe it was when you quoted. IF you'd like to ask me that question by all means do, but we must have a dialog and not a monologue. You respond and in turn I respond to a question asked and not ignoring a question to ask one of your own. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
1 hour ago, Shiwiii said:

was your question not addressed to Cos?  I believe it was when you quoted. IF you'd like to ask me that question by all means do, but we must have a dialog and not a monologue. You respond and in turn I respond to a question asked and not ignoring a question to ask one of your own. 

No. And I have been asking the same question now I think 5 times without a response. Subject is "Trinity"

"During World War one or two which side was the Trinity God on?"

Notice the question deals with two topics both yours and his.

And the other question was :"If it is right to defend your country then why did Jesus tell Peter not to defend him but to "Return your sword to its place, those who live by the sword will die by the sword"? Mt 26:52.  BTW Your country belongs to Satan just as every other country does.

However if you wish to change the subject then you may start another post and I may reply if it interests me.

BTW answering a question with a question is a teaching method used by Jesus. I imitate him sorry if imitating Jesus irritates you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

I'm not addressing a particular individual on this public forum, but I would like to contribute  to the general discussion.

Seems the Trinity idea takes a number of guises. This view differs substantially from what I was taught growiing up as a Roman Catholic.

"God the Father, Jesus the Son, and the Holy Spirit are one, united in their purpose of saving man. But they're obviously three different entities. Jesus while on earth prays to His Father in heaven. Jesus was neither a ventriloquist nor a schizophrenic. He was talking to His Father, and His Father answered Him. In the gospel of John, the disciples say, "We heard the Father answer Him." Doug Batchelor (Seventh Day Adventist Pastor.)

However, it seems to reflect current thinking amongst a number of different church groups.

For me, the principle Paul refers to at 1Cor.14:9 is relevant here:

"unless you with the tongue use speech that is easily understood, how will anyone know what is being said? You will, in fact, be speaking into the air" 

The vocabulary used in explaining the doctorine of the Trinity includes words/phrases such as: 

  • filioque
  • dual procession
  • appropriation
  • perichoresis
  • hypostases
  • procession
  • The Essential (also called Immanent or Ontological) Trinity
  • The Economic Trinity

Some different opinions (referred to as heresies) include:: 

  • Modalism
  • Tritheism
  • Partialism
  • Adoptionism
  • Arianism

The Trinity doctorine does not appear to meet Paul's criteria of being expressed in "speech that is easily understood".

Neither does it's definition appear to be something in which the inspired Holy Scriptures can be used to "set matters straight" (2Tim.3:16). In fact, apart from convoluted, out of context, and distorted attempts to twist existing texts, eventually it was deemed necessary to add a completely spurious statement into scripture at 1John 5:7 which, in the King James version of the Bible, reads: "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one". ( I don't know why the forger just didn't go the whole hog and use the word "Trinity" here). Unbelievably, this text is still relied upon by many "grass-roots" Trinitarians.

(Lovers of detail may find this discussion of interest:  https://bible.org/article/textual-problem-1-john-57-8)

Britain's good old "Aunty", the BBC, summed up the matter very simply when discussing the (not exclusive) beliefs of Jehovah's Witnesses on the matter of the Trinity: 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/witnesses/beliefs/beliefs.shtml

  • The traditional Christian idea that God is a 'Trinity' of Father, Son and Holy Spirit is false and based on pagan ideas
  • The doctrine of the Trinity is inconsistent with the Bible
  • The doctrine of the Trinity contradicts what the prophets, Jesus, the apostles, and the early Christians believed and taught
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

Hello Bruceq,

 

You bring up the issue of war. And that somehow this issue justifies your Arian claim. JWs proclaim “we don’t participate in war” so therefore “we” are correct. This self-righteous stance does not prove that God is not Triune.  

 

First of all, let’s note that under Charles T. Russell’s direction the then JWs (known as Bible Students) were “allowed” to take part in war. See Zion's Watch Tower 1898 Aug 1 p.231 and Zion's Watch Tower 1903 Apr 15 p.120,

 

War is one of the worst happenings that confront all of us, we can only hope for the time when war is no more. But till then we cannot ignore the continual rise of false political idealism. Consider what the world would have been like if no one had stood up to the Nazi Germany?

 

The Bible even says in Ecclesiastes 3:8 "[There is] a time to love and a time to hate; a time for war and a time for peace."

 

The Bible does not forbid engagement in warfare, and if this engagement in wars had become an unacceptable practice to the writers of the Christian Scriptures they would have stated so.

 

 In fact, several New Testament passages indicate acceptance.

 

When military officers came to John for baptism, John did not direct them to leave the service;

 

"Also, those in military service would ask him: "What shall we also do?" And he said to them: "Do not harass anybody or accuse anybody falsely, but be satisfied with your provisions." (Luke 3:14).

 

This would have been John's perfect opportunity to tell them to resign from the military, but he counseled them instead to be content with their lot in life!

 

At Matthew 8:5-13 Jesus did not turn the soldier away when asking to heal his manservant, rather commending him saying "I have not found anyone In Israel with such great faith" In the account at Acts 10 Cornelius was not required to step down as commander of Roman soldiers before being baptized.

 

I hope that this has helped you see that the JW position is unwarranted. One more thing God is on the winning side. <><

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

Hello Ms O’Maly

 

Thank you for your thoughts.

 

Firstly you should look up Messianic Jews on the web, such as “Jews for Jesus”, and ask them whether they are “guided” and “influenced” to believe what they believe by others as you imply; I very much doubt it, but I can’t answer for them.

 

Secondly, can I just say your comment about what you heard “by the non-trinitarian JWs” about reading the Bible on its own is strange, for the Watchtower “warns” JW’s NOT do this.

 

“From time to time, there have arisen from among the ranks of Jehovah’s people those, who, like the original Satan, have adopted an independent, faultfinding attitude... They say that it is sufficient to read the Bible exclusively, either alone or in small groups at home. But, strangely, through such Bible reading, they have reverted right back to the apostate doctrines that commentators by Christendom’s clergy were teaching 100 years ago...”” (Watchtower, August 15, 1981)

 

And

 

" . . . people cannot see the Divine Plan in studying the Bible by itself . . . if he then lays them [Scripture Studies] aside and ignores them and goes to the bible alone, though he has understood his Bible for ten years, our experience shows that within two years he goes into darkness...," (Watchtower, Sept. 15, 1910, p. 298).

 

So basically, what they are saying to the JW’s is that if they read the Bible on its own then after a short time they will believe exactly what I believe, how revealing is that!

 

I don’t know what kind of “killer texts” would satisfy your query; all I can do is show what the early church has believed.

 

Irenaeus (120-202) "For I have shown from the scriptures, that no one of the sons of Adam is as to everything, and absolutely, called God, or named Lord. But that He is Himself in His own right, beyond all men who ever lived, God, and Lord, and King Eternal, and the Incarnate Word, proclaimed by all the prophets, the apostles, and by the Spirit Himself, may be seen by all who have attained to even a small portion of the truth. Now, the scriptures would not have testified these things of Him, if, like others, He had been a mere man.” (Against Heresies, book 3, chapter 19)

 

Tertullian (155-220) "Thus the connection of the Father in the Son, and of the Son in the Paraclete, produces three coherent Persons, who are yet distinct One from Another. These Three are, one essence, not one Person” (Against Praxeas, chapter 25)

 

Hippolytus  (170-235) “A man, therefore, even though he will it not, is compelled to acknowledge God the Father Almighty, and Christ Jesus the Son of God, who, being God, became man, to whom also the Father made all things subject, Himself excepted, and the Holy Spirit; and that these, therefore, are three.” (Against The Heresy Of One Noetus, section 8)

 

This is just a few examples of what the early Christians believed; there are many more exemplar that could be called on. <><

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

Hello Ms Joyce,

 

I understand that you are “not addressing a particular individual” but as I’m the one who started this thread, and considering your comments, I wanted to reply.

 

Can I ask, what were you taught on the Trinity when you were growing up as a Roman catholic? I would like to know.

 

Please try to refrain taking Biblical passages out context. In 1 Cor. 14:9 Paul is explaining the use of tongues.

 

The vocabulary used to define the Trinity can seem daunting but it really is not. The uses of most of the terms were to fend off attacks by those that opposed the Trinity.

 

Lastly, the early Christians believed and taught the Trinity; see examples in my post to Ms Ann O’Maly. <><

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
1 hour ago, Cos said:

One more thing God is on the winning side. <><

So if the Trinity God was on the winning side then why was he fighting against Trinitarians during World War I and II?

Or was it just part of your God fighting against the other part.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
1 hour ago, Cos said:

In 1 Cor. 14:9 Paul is explaining the use of tongues.

 

The vocabulary used to define the Trinity can seem daunting but it really is not. The uses of most of the terms were to fend off attacks by those that opposed the Trinity.

 

 

Sorry but no one can use this Scripture to defend a doctrine the writer as a Jew did not believe in. If he did perhaps he would have used the word "Trinity" in the Scripture but I checked the 110 different Translations in my library and NONE of them say "Trinity" here since the writer was a Jew and they do not believe in Trinities.  PLEASE try a different Scripture. Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It appears to me that this is a key aspect of the 2030 initiative ideology. While the Rothschilds were indeed influential individuals who were able to sway governments, much like present-day billionaires, the true impetus for change stems from the omnipotent forces (Satan) shaping our world. In this case, there is a false God of this world. However, what drives action within a political framework? Power! What is unfolding before our eyes in today's world? The relentless struggle for power. The overwhelming tide of people rising. We cannot underestimate the direct and sinister influence of Satan in all of this. However, it is up to individuals to decide how they choose to worship God. Satanism, as a form of religion, cannot be regarded as a true religion. Consequently, just as ancient practices of child sacrifice had a place in God's world, such sacrifices would never be accepted by the True God of our universe. Despite the promising 2030 initiative for those involved, it is unfortunately disintegrating due to the actions of certain individuals in positions of authority. A recent incident serves as a glaring example, involving a conflict between peaceful Muslims and a Jewish representative that unfolded just this week. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/11/us-delegation-saudi-arabia-kippah?ref=upstract.com Saudi Arabia was among the countries that agreed to the initiative signed by approximately 179 nations in or around 1994. However, this initiative is now being undermined by the devil himself, who is sowing discord among the delegates due to the ongoing Jewish-Hamas (Palestine) conflict. Fostering antisemitism. What kind of sacrifice does Satan accept with the death of babies and children in places like Gaza, Ukraine, and other conflicts around the world, whether in the past or present, that God wouldn't? Whatever personal experiences we may have had with well-known individuals, true Christians understand that current events were foretold long ago, and nothing can prevent them from unfolding. What we are witnessing is the result of Satan's wrath upon humanity, as was predicted. A true religion will not involve itself in the politics of this world, as it is aware of the many detrimental factors associated with such engagement. It understands the true intentions of Satan for this world and wisely chooses to stay unaffected by them.
    • This idea that Satan can put Jews in power implies that God doesn't want Jews in power. But that would also imply that God only wants "Christians" including Hitler, Biden, Pol Pot, Chiang Kai-Shek, etc. 
    • @Mic Drop, I don't buy it. I watched the movie. It has all the hallmarks of the anti-semitic tropes that began to rise precipitously on social media during the last few years - pre-current-Gaza-war. And it has similarities to the same anti-semitic tropes that began to rise in Europe in the 900's to 1100's. It was back in the 500s AD/CE that many Khazars failed to take or keep land they fought for around what's now Ukraine and southern Russia. Khazars with a view to regaining power were still being driven out into the 900's. And therefore they migrated to what's now called Eastern Europe. It's also true that many of their groups converted to Judaism after settling in Eastern Europe. It's possibly also true that they could be hired as mercenaries even after their own designs on empire had dwindled.  But I think the film takes advantage of the fact that so few historical records have ever been considered reliable by the West when it comes to these regions. So it's easy to fill the vacuum with some very old antisemitic claims, fables, rumors, etc..  The mention of Eisenhower in the movie was kind of a giveaway, too. It's like, Oh NO! The United States had a Jew in power once. How on earth could THAT have happened? Could it be . . . SATAN??" Trying to tie a connection back to Babylonian Child Sacrifice Black Magick, Secret Satanism, and Baal worship has long been a trope for those who need to think that no Jews like the Rothschilds and Eisenhowers (????) etc would not have been able to get into power in otherwise "Christian" nations without help from Satan.    Does child sacrifice actually work to gain power?? Does drinking blood? Does pedophilia??? (also mentioned in the movie) Yes, it's an evil world and many people have evil ideologies based on greed and lust and ego. But how exactly does child sacrifice or pedophilia or drinking blood produce a more powerful nation or cabal of some kind? To me that's a giveaway that the authors know that the appeal will be to people who don't really care about actual historical evidence. Also, the author(s) of the video proved that they have not done much homework, but are just trying to fill that supposed knowledge gap by grasping at old paranoid and prejudicial premises. (BTW, my mother and grandmother, in 1941 and 1942, sat next to Dwight Eisenhower's mother at an assembly of Jehovah's Witnesses. The Eisenhower family had been involved in a couple of "Christian" religions and a couple of them associated with IBSA and JWs for many years.)
  • Members

    • Pudgy

      Pudgy 2,381

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      65.4k
    • Total Posts
      158.9k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      17,669
    • Most Online
      1,592

    Newest Member
    Miracle Pete
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.