Early Christians Believed in the Trinity

[bruceq]

2 hours ago, Cos said:

 

 

I don’t know what kind of “killer texts” would satisfy your query;

Probably none since the "texts" from the BIBLE were written all by Jews and Jews do not believe in your Trinity God. But please try anyway.

 Cos said:

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

These were not the Jewish Bible Writers, I noticed you had to go a hundred or so years after the Bible was written to find anything. . Try again PLEASE.

[bruceq]

3 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:

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).

    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 the only Bible Scripture found only in the King James and Catholic Douay Bibles that was added by a scribe trying to support the Trinity}.

    Interestingly there are no spurious Scriptures trying to support the Resurrection. Why? Because it is taught in the Bible. There are no spurious Scriptures trying to support Baptism. Why? Because it is taught in the Bible. Yet there are about a dozen trying to support the idea of a Trinity that are only in a couple of Translations from 1610, 1611C.E. that have been proven by scholars to be spurious!!!

    This line of reasoning can also be applied to Evolution. Back in the early 20th Century scientists discovered the "Piltdown Man" but 40 years later it was discovered to have been a forgery by a Scientist trying to prove evolution of humans. Now ponder : Why if evolution was true and a fact would someone create a forgery to prove it? If it was a fact then no one would.  There are no Scientific forgeries for other things like "gravity". So the very proponents of evolution have exposed  that false teaching just as Christendom's scribes have exposed the false doctrine of the Trinity.

[Cos]

bruceq said; "I noticed you had to go a hundred or so years after the Bible was written to find anything" 

 

Do you want earlier quotes? What silly comment will you then make?

 

Instead of making such outlandish comments why don’t you ask yourself why the Jews persecuted the disciples in the NT if they believed the same as you claim? I’m sure we’d all like to know! <><

 

[bruceq]

16 minutes ago, Cos said:

bruceq said; "I noticed you had to go a hundred or so years after the Bible was written to find anything" 

 

Do you want earlier quotes? What silly comment will you then make?

 

 

 

LOL. Try the BIBLE. Instead of apostate Christians many years after the  Bible was written who burned at the stake anyone who did not believe as they did about God.  Its not rocket science here. If your trying to prove something is in the BIBLE then use the BIBLE ! 

Ask yourself:  Why did I need to go a hundred years AFTER the Bible was written to find a teaching that is SUPPOSE to actually be IN THE BIBLE??? If a teaching is in the Bible then you should not HAVE to go elsewhere to get it.

[bruceq]

18 minutes ago, Cos said:

why the Jews persecuted the disciples in the NT if they believed the same as you claim? I’m sure we’d all like to know! <><

 

They were "no part of the world" as Jesus said which includes false beliefs of religion ,politics...Jon 17. Since your on this subject : Why do Trinitarians who believe in the same God kill other Trinitarians who believe in that God? Does your God condone you killing each other?

[Cos]

Matt. 28:19

2 Cor. 13:14

 

[bruceq]

18 minutes ago, Cos said:

Matt. 28:19

2 Cor. 13:14

 

Perfect. Thank you, I checked and those Bible writers were Matthew and Paul. Both of them were JEWS who do not believe in a Trinity, why Paul even tells you the tribe he was from which would explain why neither of them ever used the word "Trinity" or anything else to prove a doctrine they themselves did not even believe in. So I am afraid you will have to choose another Scripture from God's Word.

[TrueTomHarley]

4 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:

 

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: 

Belief in the Trinity depends upon taking literally certain expressions that, in any other context, would instantly be recognized as figures of speech.

If they read 'beating around the bush' in an article, they understand the meaning. It they read it in the Bible, they look for the bush.

If they read of persons shedding 'crocodile tears' in an article, the understand the meaning. If they read it in the Bible, it is proof to them that the persons were really crocodiles.

[Evacuated]

Hello Cos

4 hours ago, Cos said:

Ms Joyce

Hopefully your grasp of scriptural detail is a little firmer than your assessment of gender.

4 hours ago, Cos said:

Please try to refrain taking Biblical passages out context

General principles can be drawn from Biblical passages, regardless of context.

4 hours ago, Cos said:

The uses of most of the terms were to fend off attacks by those that opposed the Trinity

 Opposition to the Trinity does not necessarily make one a friend of the Truth.

4 hours ago, Cos said:

the early Christians believed and taught the Trinity

Could you quote 1stC examples at all, other than Ignatius of Antioch whose quoted reference from his Epistle to the Magnesians, is attributed to 2nd C and appears really...insubstantial (pardon the pun): "whatsoever ye do, may prosper both in the flesh and spirit; in faith and love; in the Son, and in the Father, and in the Spirit;"

[Ann O'Maly]

6 hours ago, Cos said:

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.

JWs already believe that God is not triune. The argument is a rhetoric device used by JWs on those they are evangelizing. But there are some Christians who have come to the conclusion, based on Scripture, that God is not a Trinity. One notable example is Patrick Navas - https://truthmattersradio.wordpress.com/tag/patrick-navas/

6 hours ago, Cos said:

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.

As I say, the doctrine was a work-in-progress. Certainly before Tertullian, the ANFs tended to be Binitarian. The whole debate centered on the divinity of Christ, his ontological relationship with and his derivation from the Father. The reason I asked was because you seemed to be asserting something without giving anything in support and I wondered what you had in mind.

 

[TrueTomHarley]

"that they may be all one. As you, Father, are in me and I am in you, may they also be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me."..... John 17:21  RSV

Is this not a clear example of Fifteenarianism? Come to my church (Pastor: Tom Harley) and I will tell you more.

As I pass the plate on the ends of long poles, they will shake to the music, so that coins will loudly chink. What we want is quiet money.

[bruceq]

4 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Belief in the Trinity depends upon taking literally certain expressions that, in any other context, would instantly be recognized as figures of speech.

If they read 'beating around the bush' in an article, they understand the meaning. It they read it in the Bible, they look for the bush.

If they read of persons shedding 'crocodile tears' in an article, the understand the meaning. If they read it in the Bible, it is proof to them that the persons were really crocodiles.

   I had a Bible study that once said that the Bible condoned drug abuse. He used the Scripture that said "Stephen was stoned". Now you can see how Trinitarians try so hard to use that same kind of reasoning about  something that the Bible writers did not themselves even believe in. "Father Son and spirit are mentioned together means they are the same", by that reasoning "Abraham, Issac and Jacob" are also mentioned together several times does that mean they are all the same being? And BTW those three men were all JEWS and JEWS do not believe in God as a Trinity. {Shema Deut 6:4}.