The Origin of the Trinity: From Paganism to Constantine

Joined: January 2nd, 2005, 6:45 am

August 31st, 2017, 6:38 pm #11

Donnie's really out against this Trinity thing by cutting and pasting long-winded articles from the works of men--or in this case, a Polish woman. Let's be reminded that the Bible mentions the Father, it mentions the Son, and it mentions the Holy Spirit. The Bible doesn't say they are three separate, individual Beings, and yet again it doesn't say they are not. The Bible simply says that they are REAL. If the existence of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit constitutes the "Trinity," then there it is. I just happen to believe that they exist simultaneously together as the One True God. To those who say, "That's impossible," again be reminded that, according to the Bible, all things are possible with God. There is nothing too hard for God.
[color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]Bill,

Take advantage of the technologies that make life easy for you, including the convenience of copy-and-paste or the printer (copier). But it's also OK to re-type a long-winded article. (There are hundreds and hundreds of writings that deal with the history of the pagan-based, Catholic-invented Trinity doctrine.)

Unfortunately for you, the author of the article, "The Origin of the Trinity: From Paganism to Constantine" -- without including Trinity-doctrine events from Constantine to the present -- did an excellent job of combining all the information into one article.

It is apparent that you've simply accepted the pagan-based Trinity concept of multiple "Gods-in-one" without question and investigation. But I understand that it is human nature to be unwilling to undo brainwashing.

It appears that you really have your message well-memorized and restated. Just the mention of the Father, the Son, and "the holy Spirit OF God" qualifies the 3 entities to be three-Gods-in-one or to be one-God-in-three, right, Bill?

The "spirit" is never a person or a being. Hmm, "spirit" becoming "flesh" is "possible" with God -- and that is your logic?

You certainly are misusing the "all things are possible with God" argument to conveniently support an event that did not happen.

In case you change your mind, the article dealing with the historical evidences of pagan influences in the man-made Trinity doctrine approved in the 4th century for religious consumption ... is there for you to seriously read and study. You can refute the evidences -- that is your choice. But again you cannot refute something you have little or no knowledge of.[/color]
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 2nd, 2005, 6:45 am

August 31st, 2017, 7:34 pm #12

This writer is correct about Tertullian and other writers who used the word TRIAS to refute the ALWAYS-PAGAN view that God was a family of father, mother (spirit) and son. I have arranged Campbell and Tertullian to make it clear that those who became Churches of Christ were always Bible and History literate.


[color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]Ken,

I noted the following quote from Part 3 of the article. (Actually, splitting the article into parts was my doing. I posted them contiguously so as to maintain the article as one long, continuous page without intervening posts from anyone.)

He also maintained that there was a difference between the God and God when he said ‘_ß _&hibar; 2, __is indeed the God [God himself].... Whatever else, other than him who is called _ß _&hibar; 2, __, is also God, is deified by participation, by sharing in his divinity, and is more properly to be called not the God but simply God’ (qtd. in Lonergan 61).

The above is a great explanation for John 1:1 where Dave's scholars and professors were unable to scripturally explain it in the other thread "ANOTHER god." The reason was their failure to acknowledge that "the Word was with the God" is in the 2nd clause in John 1:1 of the ORIGINAL text.

Those "scholars and professors" also have the inability to grasp that "the God" is no longer present in the 3rd clause. Instead "God" -- instead of "the God" -- is in the 3rd clause.

The above quote from the article clearly explains the difference between "the God" and "God" expressions.

The Word that was with the God in the beginning was NOT "the God" in the 3rd clause.
[/color]
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 2nd, 2005, 6:45 am

September 4th, 2017, 5:38 pm #13

[color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]Source:
http://www.heraldmag.org/olb/Contents/d ... rinity.htm
[/color]

[color=#000000" size="5" face="times]The Origin of the Trinity: From Paganism to Constantine[/color]

[color=#000000" size="4" face="times]by Cher-El L. Hagensick[/color]

[color=#000000" size="3" face="times]The Rabbi‘s deep voice echoes through the dusk, ‘Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God is one Lord’.{# De 6:4} What a far cry that is from Judaism’s offspring, Christianity, and its belief in the Trinity. While the majority of the Christian world considers the concept of the Trinity vital to Christianity, many historians and Bible scholars agree that the Trinity of Christianity owes more to Greek philosophy and pagan polytheism than to the monotheism of the Jew and the Jewish Jesus.

The search for the origins of the Trinity begins with the earliest writings of man. Records of early Mesopotamian and Mediterranean civilizations show polytheistic religions, though many scholars assert that earliest man believed in one god. The 19th century scholar and Protestant minister, Alexander Hislop, devotes several chapters of his book The Two Babylons to showing how this original belief in one god was replaced by the triads of paganism which were eventually absorbed into Catholic Church dogmas. A more recent Egyptologist, Erick Hornung, refutes the original monotheism of Egypt: ‘[Monotheism is] a phenomenon restricted to the wisdom texts,’ which were written between 2600 and 2530 BC (50-51); but there is no question that ancient man believed in ‘one infinite and Almighty Creator, supreme over all’ (Hislop 14); and in a multitude of gods at a later point. Nor is there any doubt that the most common grouping of gods was a triad.1

Most of ancient theology is lost under the sands of time. However, archaeological expeditions in ancient Mesopotamia have uncovered the fascinating culture of the Sumerians, which flourished over 4,000 years ago. Though Sumeria was overthrown first by Assyria, and then by Babylon, its gods lived on in the cultures of those who conquered. The historian S. H. Hooke tells in detail of the ancient Sumerian trinity: Anu was the primary god of heaven, the ‘Father’, and the ‘King of the Gods’; Enlil, the ‘wind-god’ was the god of the earth, and a creator god; and Enki was the god of waters and the ‘lord of wisdom’ (15-18). The historian, H. W. F. Saggs, explains that the Babylonian triad consisted of ‘three gods of roughly equal rank... whose inter-relationship is of the essence of their natures’ (316).

Is this positive proof that the Christian Trinity descended from the ancient Sumerian, Assyrian, and Babylonian triads? No. However, Hislop furthers the comparison, ‘In the unity of that one, Only God of the Babylonians there were three persons, and to symbolize [sic] that doctrine of the Trinity, they employed... the equilateral triangle, just as it is well known the Romish Church does at this day’ (16).

Egypt’s history is similar to Sumeria’s in antiquity. In his Egyptian Myths, George Hart, lecturer for the British Museum and professor of ancient Egyptian heiroglyphics at the University of London, shows how Egypt also believed in a ‘transcendental, above creation, and preexisting’ one, the god Amun. Amun was really three gods in one. Re was his face, Ptah his body, and Amun his hidden identity (24). The well-known historian Will Durant concurs that Ra, Amon, and Ptah were ‘combined as three embodiments or aspects of one supreme and triune deity’ (Oriental Heritage 201). Additionally, a hymn to Amun written in the 14th century BC defines the Egyptian trinity: ‘All Gods are three: Amun, Re, Ptah; they have no equal. His name is hidden as Amun, he is Re... before [men], and his body is Ptah’ (Hornung 219).

Is this positive proof that the Christian Trinity descended from the ancient Egyptian triads? No. However, Durant submits that ‘from Egypt came the ideas of a divine trinity...’ (Caesar 595). Dr. Gordon Laing, retired Dean of the Humanities Department at the University of Chicago, agrees that ‘the worship of the Egyptian triad Isis, Serapis, and the child Horus’ probably accustomed the early church theologians to the idea of a triune God, and was influential ‘in the formulation of the doctrine of the Trinity as set forth in the Nicaean and Athanasian creeds’ (128-129).

These were not the only trinities early Christians were exposed to. The historical lecturer, Jesse Benedict Carter, tells us of the Etruscans. As they slowly passed from Babylon through Greece and went on to Rome (16-19), they brought with them their trinity of Tinia, Uni, and Menerva. This trinity was a ‘new idea to the Romans,’ and yet it became so ‘typical of Rome’ that it quickly spread throughout Italy (26). Even the names of the Roman trinity: Jupiter, Juno, and Minerva, reflect the ancestry. That Christianity was not ashamed to borrow from pagan culture is amply shown by Durant: ‘Christianity did not destroy paganism; it adopted it’ (Caesar 595).

Is this positive proof that the Christian Trinity descended from the Etruscan and Roman triads? No. However, Laing convincingly devotes his entire book Survivals of the Roman Gods to the comparison of Roman paganism and the Roman Catholic Church. Dr. Jaroslav Pelikan, a Catholic scholar and professor at Yale, confirms the Church’s respect for pagan ideas when he states that the Apologists and other early church fathers used and cited the [pagan] Roman Sibylline Oracles so much that they were called ‘Sibyllists’ by the 2nd century critic, Celsus. There was even a medieval hymn, ‘Dies irae,’ which foretold the ‘coming of the day of wrath’ based on the ‘dual authority of ‘David and the Sibyl”(Emergence 64-65). The attitude of the Church toward paganism is best summed up in Pope Gregory the Great’s words to a missionary: ‘You must not interfere with any traditional belief or religious observance that can be harmonized with Christianity’ (qtd. in Laing 130).

In contrast, Judaism is strongly monotheistic with no hint of a trinity. The Hebrew Bible (the Old Testament) is filled with scriptures such as ‘before Me there was no God formed, Neither shall any be after Me’ (#Isa 43:10 qtd. in Isaiah), and ‘there is no other God...I am the Lord and there is none else’ (#Isa 45:14,18 qtd. in Isaiah). A Jewish commentary affirms that ‘[no] other gods exist, for to declare this would be blasphemous...’ (Chumash 458). Even though ‘Word,’ ‘Spirit,’ ‘Presence,’ and ‘Wisdom’ are used as personifications of God, Biblical scholars agree that the Trinity is neither mentioned nor intended by the authors of the Old Testament (Lonergan 130; Fortman xv; Burns 2).

We can conclude without much difficulty that the concept of the Trinity did not come from Judaism. Nor did Jesus speak of a trinity. The message of Jesus was of the coming kingdom; it was a message of love and forgiveness. As for his relationship with the Father, Jesus said, ‘... I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me’,{# Joh 5:30} and in another place ‘my doctrine is not mine, but His that sent me’;{# Joh 7:16} and his words ‘my Father is greater than I’ {#Joh 14:28} leave no doubt as to their relationship.[/color]
[color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]Ken Sublett has stated: "History faithfully records WHEN things like preaching, singing, clergy, collecting money, trinity, etc., began: we have DATES and RECORDS. Does that mean that none of them have their origin in Scripture or the faithful church for several centuries BEFORE they began?"

How true! How accurately stated!

Christianity vehemently rejects Darwin's Theory of Evolution: [color=#000000" size="3" face="times]"Darwinism is a theory of biological evolution developed by the English naturalist Charles Darwin (1809–1882) and others, stating that all species of organisms arise and develop through the natural selection of small, inherited variations that increase the individual's ability to compete, survive, and reproduce. (Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwinism)[/color]

This thread/article must be impacting. It is there for some very serious reading and studying by very serious students of the Bible!!! [I see and understand that a "different" and an "independent" historian or author can explain it better than others with the same facts. That's OK.]

Are there among us who may be in the process of rejecting the doctrine of the Trinity which is man-made and evolutionary according to the Scripture and historical evidences.[/color]
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: July 29th, 2010, 2:32 pm

September 4th, 2017, 6:12 pm #14

I have copied all of this article so I can look at all of the passages for my own edification. Thanks.

Most of the false teaching has been taking obscure passages people think they can quote and make the simple minded believe and pay them. This is ALWAYS in the face of a seemingly unending passages which are DOGMATICALL CLEAR.

1Tim. 2:5 For there is ONE GOD and one mediator between God and men, the MAN Christ Jesus;


I painfully watched North Boulevard's A New Day TV Sunday further proving that they are deep into the LU promoted Witchcraft. Rather than Ignatian Meditations which include "mary the mother of God' David Young is using the theology of the Carmalites.

He proposes up to 2 hours a day in prayer learning to practice the presence of God.

He denies that THERE IS SIN by using a HOLE in something that is perfect. The Hole or Sin is NOTHING. For a long time I have tried to get someone give AN ANSWER why they are not contrary to their plea of UNITY IN DIVERSITY Paul warns against EVIL MEN who are LYING IN WAIT TO DECEIVE.

2Th. 2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come,
except there come a falling away first, and that MAN OF SIN be revealed, the son of perdition;


This is APOLLON the personified SPIRITUS and the leader of the LOCUSTS or His musical worship team.

2 Thess 2:4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God,
or that is worshipped;
so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God,
shewing himself that he is God.

2Th.2:8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed,
whom the Lord shall consume with the SPIRIT of his MOUTH, [Spirit or breath comes only through Jesus Christ]
and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:

2 Thess 2:9 Even him, whose coming is
after the working of Satan with all power
and signs and lying wonders,

And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish;
because they received not the love of the truth,
that they might be saved. 2 Thess 2:10




Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 2nd, 2005, 6:45 am

September 5th, 2017, 1:21 am #15

[color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]By "serious Bible students," I'm including [this time I'm mentioning names of folks who've been evasive] Dave, Bill, Rancor and others.

But that silence from Dave is deafening!!! Perhaps shocked by historical evidences which unequivocally prove that the pagan-based, Catholic-invented Trinity dogma has gone through an evolutionary process? [I know ... I know it really makes Dave a very irate Bible student at the mention of "pagan" or "Catholic" or "papal" as it relates to the Trinity Creed. Why is that?]

It is easy to reject Darwin's "theory of evolution."

But why is it very difficult or impossible for some Bible learners to reject "the evolution of the Trinity" in spite of the hundreds of passages from Scripture that easily debunk the concept?[/color]
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: July 29th, 2010, 2:32 pm

September 5th, 2017, 6:54 pm #16

[color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]Source:
http://www.heraldmag.org/olb/Contents/d ... rinity.htm
[/color]

[color=#000000" size="5" face="times]The Origin of the Trinity: From Paganism to Constantine[/color]

[color=#000000" size="4" face="times]by Cher-El L. Hagensick[/color]

[color=#000000" size="3" face="times]The Rabbi‘s deep voice echoes through the dusk, ‘Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God is one Lord’.{# De 6:4} What a far cry that is from Judaism’s offspring, Christianity, and its belief in the Trinity. While the majority of the Christian world considers the concept of the Trinity vital to Christianity, many historians and Bible scholars agree that the Trinity of Christianity owes more to Greek philosophy and pagan polytheism than to the monotheism of the Jew and the Jewish Jesus.

The search for the origins of the Trinity begins with the earliest writings of man. Records of early Mesopotamian and Mediterranean civilizations show polytheistic religions, though many scholars assert that earliest man believed in one god. The 19th century scholar and Protestant minister, Alexander Hislop, devotes several chapters of his book The Two Babylons to showing how this original belief in one god was replaced by the triads of paganism which were eventually absorbed into Catholic Church dogmas. A more recent Egyptologist, Erick Hornung, refutes the original monotheism of Egypt: ‘[Monotheism is] a phenomenon restricted to the wisdom texts,’ which were written between 2600 and 2530 BC (50-51); but there is no question that ancient man believed in ‘one infinite and Almighty Creator, supreme over all’ (Hislop 14); and in a multitude of gods at a later point. Nor is there any doubt that the most common grouping of gods was a triad.1

Most of ancient theology is lost under the sands of time. However, archaeological expeditions in ancient Mesopotamia have uncovered the fascinating culture of the Sumerians, which flourished over 4,000 years ago. Though Sumeria was overthrown first by Assyria, and then by Babylon, its gods lived on in the cultures of those who conquered. The historian S. H. Hooke tells in detail of the ancient Sumerian trinity: Anu was the primary god of heaven, the ‘Father’, and the ‘King of the Gods’; Enlil, the ‘wind-god’ was the god of the earth, and a creator god; and Enki was the god of waters and the ‘lord of wisdom’ (15-18). The historian, H. W. F. Saggs, explains that the Babylonian triad consisted of ‘three gods of roughly equal rank... whose inter-relationship is of the essence of their natures’ (316).

Is this positive proof that the Christian Trinity descended from the ancient Sumerian, Assyrian, and Babylonian triads? No. However, Hislop furthers the comparison, ‘In the unity of that one, Only God of the Babylonians there were three persons, and to symbolize [sic] that doctrine of the Trinity, they employed... the equilateral triangle, just as it is well known the Romish Church does at this day’ (16).

Egypt’s history is similar to Sumeria’s in antiquity. In his Egyptian Myths, George Hart, lecturer for the British Museum and professor of ancient Egyptian heiroglyphics at the University of London, shows how Egypt also believed in a ‘transcendental, above creation, and preexisting’ one, the god Amun. Amun was really three gods in one. Re was his face, Ptah his body, and Amun his hidden identity (24). The well-known historian Will Durant concurs that Ra, Amon, and Ptah were ‘combined as three embodiments or aspects of one supreme and triune deity’ (Oriental Heritage 201). Additionally, a hymn to Amun written in the 14th century BC defines the Egyptian trinity: ‘All Gods are three: Amun, Re, Ptah; they have no equal. His name is hidden as Amun, he is Re... before [men], and his body is Ptah’ (Hornung 219).

Is this positive proof that the Christian Trinity descended from the ancient Egyptian triads? No. However, Durant submits that ‘from Egypt came the ideas of a divine trinity...’ (Caesar 595). Dr. Gordon Laing, retired Dean of the Humanities Department at the University of Chicago, agrees that ‘the worship of the Egyptian triad Isis, Serapis, and the child Horus’ probably accustomed the early church theologians to the idea of a triune God, and was influential ‘in the formulation of the doctrine of the Trinity as set forth in the Nicaean and Athanasian creeds’ (128-129).

These were not the only trinities early Christians were exposed to. The historical lecturer, Jesse Benedict Carter, tells us of the Etruscans. As they slowly passed from Babylon through Greece and went on to Rome (16-19), they brought with them their trinity of Tinia, Uni, and Menerva. This trinity was a ‘new idea to the Romans,’ and yet it became so ‘typical of Rome’ that it quickly spread throughout Italy (26). Even the names of the Roman trinity: Jupiter, Juno, and Minerva, reflect the ancestry. That Christianity was not ashamed to borrow from pagan culture is amply shown by Durant: ‘Christianity did not destroy paganism; it adopted it’ (Caesar 595).

Is this positive proof that the Christian Trinity descended from the Etruscan and Roman triads? No. However, Laing convincingly devotes his entire book Survivals of the Roman Gods to the comparison of Roman paganism and the Roman Catholic Church. Dr. Jaroslav Pelikan, a Catholic scholar and professor at Yale, confirms the Church’s respect for pagan ideas when he states that the Apologists and other early church fathers used and cited the [pagan] Roman Sibylline Oracles so much that they were called ‘Sibyllists’ by the 2nd century critic, Celsus. There was even a medieval hymn, ‘Dies irae,’ which foretold the ‘coming of the day of wrath’ based on the ‘dual authority of ‘David and the Sibyl”(Emergence 64-65). The attitude of the Church toward paganism is best summed up in Pope Gregory the Great’s words to a missionary: ‘You must not interfere with any traditional belief or religious observance that can be harmonized with Christianity’ (qtd. in Laing 130).

In contrast, Judaism is strongly monotheistic with no hint of a trinity. The Hebrew Bible (the Old Testament) is filled with scriptures such as ‘before Me there was no God formed, Neither shall any be after Me’ (#Isa 43:10 qtd. in Isaiah), and ‘there is no other God...I am the Lord and there is none else’ (#Isa 45:14,18 qtd. in Isaiah). A Jewish commentary affirms that ‘[no] other gods exist, for to declare this would be blasphemous...’ (Chumash 458). Even though ‘Word,’ ‘Spirit,’ ‘Presence,’ and ‘Wisdom’ are used as personifications of God, Biblical scholars agree that the Trinity is neither mentioned nor intended by the authors of the Old Testament (Lonergan 130; Fortman xv; Burns 2).

We can conclude without much difficulty that the concept of the Trinity did not come from Judaism. Nor did Jesus speak of a trinity. The message of Jesus was of the coming kingdom; it was a message of love and forgiveness. As for his relationship with the Father, Jesus said, ‘... I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me’,{# Joh 5:30} and in another place ‘my doctrine is not mine, but His that sent me’;{# Joh 7:16} and his words ‘my Father is greater than I’ {#Joh 14:28} leave no doubt as to their relationship.[/color]
All of the Scriptures suggest that they have not been BORN AGAIN. In Acts 2:38 the GIFT is that a person's UNholy spirit becomes "like a little child" with A holy spirit. In 1 Peter 3:21 he says that BAPTISM SAVES (dave argues that) BECAUSE in contrast to the CARNAL washings under the law we REQUEST A good conscience or consciousness: that word in Greek means the gift of a CO-PERCEPTION of the Word. In 2 Corinthians 3 Paul says that is the ability to read BLACK text on BROWN paper when the one-piece pattern for the once a week assembly hears the WORD being PREACHED by being READ. That also lets you grasp that the LORD IS THE SPIRIT: After His glorification Jesus returned as promised at Pentecost as HOLY SPIRIT (Wholly Spirit) and poured out what they saw and heard.

I have tried this image or chart on another forum and no one was able to comprehend this "crazy uncle." That fits the pattern: they all think that Paul commanded that we SING what the praise leader wrote when it really says SPEAK that which is written for our LEARNING.

I have known only two or three in my long life who wouldn't swear and hurt you for denying that Paul commanded that we SING whatever we wish.

Consistent with the PATTERN I don't know of any historic scholar who taught that SPEAK meant SING.



Consistent with the MARK FOR SEPARATION sign, instead of MOSES BEING READ we just take a verse or two and have Moses Sermonized and the RISING UP TO PLAY is literally INVISIBLE because the Veil and Moses prophesied is still over their face.

It becomes PERFECTLY CLEAR that those OF THE WORLD are not Lost Spirits and cannot return to their original spiritual state.

Eccl. 11:8 But if a man live many years, and rejoice in them all; yet let him remember the days of darkness; for they shall be many. All that cometh is vanity.
Eccl. 11:9 Rejoice, O young man, in thy youth; and let thy heart cheer thee in the days of thy youth, and walk in the ways of thine heart, and in the sight of thine eyes: but know thou, that for all these things God will bring thee into judgment.

Eccl. 12:7 Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.
Eccl. 12:13 Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.
Eccl. 12:14 For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.
Last edited by Ken.Sublett on September 5th, 2017, 6:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 2nd, 2005, 6:45 am

September 18th, 2017, 6:06 am #17

[color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]Source:
http://www.heraldmag.org/olb/Contents/doctrine/The%20Origin%20of%20the%20Trinity.htm
[/color]

[color=#000000" size="5" face="times]The Origin of the Trinity: From Paganism to Constantine[/color]

[color=#000000" size="4" face="times]by Cher-El L. Hagensick[/color]

[color=#000000" size="3" face="times]The Rabbi‘s deep voice echoes through the dusk, ‘Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God is one Lord’.{# De 6:4} What a far cry that is from Judaism’s offspring, Christianity, and its belief in the Trinity. While the majority of the Christian world considers the concept of the Trinity vital to Christianity, many historians and Bible scholars agree that the Trinity of Christianity owes more to Greek philosophy and pagan polytheism than to the monotheism of the Jew and the Jewish Jesus.

The search for the origins of the Trinity begins with the earliest writings of man. Records of early Mesopotamian and Mediterranean civilizations show polytheistic religions, though many scholars assert that earliest man believed in one god. The 19th century scholar and Protestant minister, Alexander Hislop, devotes several chapters of his book The Two Babylons to showing how this original belief in one god was replaced by the triads of paganism which were eventually absorbed into Catholic Church dogmas. A more recent Egyptologist, Erick Hornung, refutes the original monotheism of Egypt: ‘[Monotheism is] a phenomenon restricted to the wisdom texts,’ which were written between 2600 and 2530 BC (50-51); but there is no question that ancient man believed in ‘one infinite and Almighty Creator, supreme over all’ (Hislop 14); and in a multitude of gods at a later point. Nor is there any doubt that the most common grouping of gods was a triad.1

Most of ancient theology is lost under the sands of time. However, archaeological expeditions in ancient Mesopotamia have uncovered the fascinating culture of the Sumerians, which flourished over 4,000 years ago. Though Sumeria was overthrown first by Assyria, and then by Babylon, its gods lived on in the cultures of those who conquered. The historian S. H. Hooke tells in detail of the ancient Sumerian trinity: Anu was the primary god of heaven, the ‘Father’, and the ‘King of the Gods’; Enlil, the ‘wind-god’ was the god of the earth, and a creator god; and Enki was the god of waters and the ‘lord of wisdom’ (15-18). The historian, H. W. F. Saggs, explains that the Babylonian triad consisted of ‘three gods of roughly equal rank... whose inter-relationship is of the essence of their natures’ (316).

Is this positive proof that the Christian Trinity descended from the ancient Sumerian, Assyrian, and Babylonian triads? No. However, Hislop furthers the comparison, ‘In the unity of that one, Only God of the Babylonians there were three persons, and to symbolize [sic] that doctrine of the Trinity, they employed... the equilateral triangle, just as it is well known the Romish Church does at this day’ (16).

Egypt’s history is similar to Sumeria’s in antiquity. In his Egyptian Myths, George Hart, lecturer for the British Museum and professor of ancient Egyptian heiroglyphics at the University of London, shows how Egypt also believed in a ‘transcendental, above creation, and preexisting’ one, the god Amun. Amun was really three gods in one. Re was his face, Ptah his body, and Amun his hidden identity (24). The well-known historian Will Durant concurs that Ra, Amon, and Ptah were ‘combined as three embodiments or aspects of one supreme and triune deity’ (Oriental Heritage 201). Additionally, a hymn to Amun written in the 14th century BC defines the Egyptian trinity: ‘All Gods are three: Amun, Re, Ptah; they have no equal. His name is hidden as Amun, he is Re... before [men], and his body is Ptah’ (Hornung 219).

Is this positive proof that the Christian Trinity descended from the ancient Egyptian triads? No. However, Durant submits that ‘from Egypt came the ideas of a divine trinity...’ (Caesar 595). Dr. Gordon Laing, retired Dean of the Humanities Department at the University of Chicago, agrees that ‘the worship of the Egyptian triad Isis, Serapis, and the child Horus’ probably accustomed the early church theologians to the idea of a triune God, and was influential ‘in the formulation of the doctrine of the Trinity as set forth in the Nicaean and Athanasian creeds’ (128-129).

These were not the only trinities early Christians were exposed to. The historical lecturer, Jesse Benedict Carter, tells us of the Etruscans. As they slowly passed from Babylon through Greece and went on to Rome (16-19), they brought with them their trinity of Tinia, Uni, and Menerva. This trinity was a ‘new idea to the Romans,’ and yet it became so ‘typical of Rome’ that it quickly spread throughout Italy (26). Even the names of the Roman trinity: Jupiter, Juno, and Minerva, reflect the ancestry. That Christianity was not ashamed to borrow from pagan culture is amply shown by Durant: ‘Christianity did not destroy paganism; it adopted it’ (Caesar 595).

Is this positive proof that the Christian Trinity descended from the Etruscan and Roman triads? No. However, Laing convincingly devotes his entire book Survivals of the Roman Gods to the comparison of Roman paganism and the Roman Catholic Church. Dr. Jaroslav Pelikan, a Catholic scholar and professor at Yale, confirms the Church’s respect for pagan ideas when he states that the Apologists and other early church fathers used and cited the [pagan] Roman Sibylline Oracles so much that they were called ‘Sibyllists’ by the 2nd century critic, Celsus. There was even a medieval hymn, ‘Dies irae,’ which foretold the ‘coming of the day of wrath’ based on the ‘dual authority of ‘David and the Sibyl”(Emergence 64-65). The attitude of the Church toward paganism is best summed up in Pope Gregory the Great’s words to a missionary: ‘You must not interfere with any traditional belief or religious observance that can be harmonized with Christianity’ (qtd. in Laing 130).

In contrast, Judaism is strongly monotheistic with no hint of a trinity. The Hebrew Bible (the Old Testament) is filled with scriptures such as ‘before Me there was no God formed, Neither shall any be after Me’ (#Isa 43:10 qtd. in Isaiah), and ‘there is no other God...I am the Lord and there is none else’ (#Isa 45:14,18 qtd. in Isaiah). A Jewish commentary affirms that ‘[no] other gods exist, for to declare this would be blasphemous...’ (Chumash 458). Even though ‘Word,’ ‘Spirit,’ ‘Presence,’ and ‘Wisdom’ are used as personifications of God, Biblical scholars agree that the Trinity is neither mentioned nor intended by the authors of the Old Testament (Lonergan 130; Fortman xv; Burns 2).

We can conclude without much difficulty that the concept of the Trinity did not come from Judaism. Nor did Jesus speak of a trinity. The message of Jesus was of the coming kingdom; it was a message of love and forgiveness. As for his relationship with the Father, Jesus said, ‘... I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me’,{# Joh 5:30} and in another place ‘my doctrine is not mine, but His that sent me’;{# Joh 7:16} and his words ‘my Father is greater than I’ {#Joh 14:28} leave no doubt as to their relationship.[/color]
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: July 29th, 2010, 2:32 pm

September 18th, 2017, 6:48 pm #18

You need to get all of that material on a memory stick?

Jehovah's Witnesses are correct about the trinity but they teach what the NEO Churches of Christ teach: that Jesus existed AS God: God then became flesh AS Jesus. That includes posters who deny that the WORD of God became flesh but that GOD BECAME FLESH. However, Jesus denied that He was spirit by saying that He was FLESH AND BONES. The Word did not become flesh and bones but the spoken and written Mind of God.

https://www.jw.org/en/publications/book ... us-christ/

WHERE DID JESUS COME FROM?

10. What does the Bible teach about Jesus’ existence before he came to earth?

10 The Bible teaches that Jesus lived in heaven before he came to earth. Micah prophesied that the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem and also said that His origin was “from ancient times.” (Micah 5:2) On many occasions, Jesus himself said that he lived in heaven before being born as a human. (Read John 3:13; 6:38, 62; 17:4, 5) As a spirit creature in heaven, Jesus had a special relationship with Jehovah.

11. How does the Bible show that Jesus is Jehovah’s most precious Son?

11 Jesus is Jehovah’s most precious Son—and for good reason. He is called “the firstborn of all creation,” for he was God’s first creation. * (Colossians 1:15) There is something else that makes this Son special. He is the “only-begotten Son.” (John 3:16) This means that Jesus is the only one directly created by God. Jesus is also the only one whom God used when He created all other things. (Colossians 1:16) Then, too, Jesus is called “the Word.” (John 1:14) This tells us that he spoke for God, no doubt delivering messages and instructions to the Father’s other sons, both spirit and human.

12. How do we know that the firstborn Son is not equal to God?

12 Is the firstborn Son equal to God, as some believe? That is not what the Bible teaches. As we noted in the preceding paragraph, the Son was created. Obviously, then, he had a beginning, whereas Jehovah God has no beginning or end. (Psalm 90:2) The only-begotten Son never even considered trying to be equal to his Father. The Bible clearly teaches that the Father is greater than the Son. (Read John 14:28; 1 Corinthians 11:3) Jehovah alone is “God Almighty.” (Genesis 17:1) Therefore, he has no equal. *

13. What does the Bible mean when it refers to the Son as “the image of the invisible God”?

13 Jehovah and his firstborn Son enjoyed close association for billions of years—long before the starry heavens and the earth were created. How they must have loved each other! (John 3:35; 14:31) This dear Son was just like his Father. That is why the Bible refers to the Son as “the image of the invisible God.” (Colossians 1:15) Yes, even as a human son may closely resemble his father in various ways, this heavenly Son reflected his Father’s qualities and personality.

14. How did Jehovah’s only-begotten Son come to be born as a human?

14 Jehovah’s only-begotten Son willingly left heaven and came down to earth to live as a human. But you may wonder, ‘How was it possible for a spirit creature to be born as a human?’ To accomplish this, Jehovah performed a miracle. He transferred the life of his firstborn Son from heaven to the womb of a Jewish virgin named Mary. No human father was involved. Mary thus gave birth to a perfect son and named him Jesus.—Luke 1:30-35.


The Bible writers are speaking retrospectively:

John 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
Heb. 11:17 By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son,
1John 4:9 In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him.

1Pet. 1:3 ¶ Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,
Rev. 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,

Rom. 1:1 ¶ Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God,
Rom. 1:2 (Which he had promised afore by his prophets in the holy scriptures,)
Rom. 1:3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the FLESH;
Rom. 1:4 AND declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, BY the resurrection from the dead:

The Neo Trinitarians in churches of Christ say that JESUS WAS GOD and it was GOD Who came IN THE FLESH.

2John 7 For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.

One of the popular TV preachers:

http://www.piney.com/Glenn.Colley.Trini ... .Gods.html





Last edited by Ken.Sublett on September 18th, 2017, 7:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: July 29th, 2010, 2:32 pm

September 19th, 2017, 1:25 pm #19

[color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]Source:
http://www.heraldmag.org/olb/Contents/d ... rinity.htm
[/color]

[color=#000000" size="5" face="times]The Origin of the Trinity: From Paganism to Constantine[/color]

[color=#000000" size="4" face="times]by Cher-El L. Hagensick[/color]

[color=#000000" size="3" face="times]The Rabbi‘s deep voice echoes through the dusk, ‘Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God is one Lord’.{# De 6:4} What a far cry that is from Judaism’s offspring, Christianity, and its belief in the Trinity. While the majority of the Christian world considers the concept of the Trinity vital to Christianity, many historians and Bible scholars agree that the Trinity of Christianity owes more to Greek philosophy and pagan polytheism than to the monotheism of the Jew and the Jewish Jesus.

The search for the origins of the Trinity begins with the earliest writings of man. Records of early Mesopotamian and Mediterranean civilizations show polytheistic religions, though many scholars assert that earliest man believed in one god. The 19th century scholar and Protestant minister, Alexander Hislop, devotes several chapters of his book The Two Babylons to showing how this original belief in one god was replaced by the triads of paganism which were eventually absorbed into Catholic Church dogmas. A more recent Egyptologist, Erick Hornung, refutes the original monotheism of Egypt: ‘[Monotheism is] a phenomenon restricted to the wisdom texts,’ which were written between 2600 and 2530 BC (50-51); but there is no question that ancient man believed in ‘one infinite and Almighty Creator, supreme over all’ (Hislop 14); and in a multitude of gods at a later point. Nor is there any doubt that the most common grouping of gods was a triad.1

Most of ancient theology is lost under the sands of time. However, archaeological expeditions in ancient Mesopotamia have uncovered the fascinating culture of the Sumerians, which flourished over 4,000 years ago. Though Sumeria was overthrown first by Assyria, and then by Babylon, its gods lived on in the cultures of those who conquered. The historian S. H. Hooke tells in detail of the ancient Sumerian trinity: Anu was the primary god of heaven, the ‘Father’, and the ‘King of the Gods’; Enlil, the ‘wind-god’ was the god of the earth, and a creator god; and Enki was the god of waters and the ‘lord of wisdom’ (15-18). The historian, H. W. F. Saggs, explains that the Babylonian triad consisted of ‘three gods of roughly equal rank... whose inter-relationship is of the essence of their natures’ (316).

Is this positive proof that the Christian Trinity descended from the ancient Sumerian, Assyrian, and Babylonian triads? No. However, Hislop furthers the comparison, ‘In the unity of that one, Only God of the Babylonians there were three persons, and to symbolize [sic] that doctrine of the Trinity, they employed... the equilateral triangle, just as it is well known the Romish Church does at this day’ (16).

Egypt’s history is similar to Sumeria’s in antiquity. In his Egyptian Myths, George Hart, lecturer for the British Museum and professor of ancient Egyptian heiroglyphics at the University of London, shows how Egypt also believed in a ‘transcendental, above creation, and preexisting’ one, the god Amun. Amun was really three gods in one. Re was his face, Ptah his body, and Amun his hidden identity (24). The well-known historian Will Durant concurs that Ra, Amon, and Ptah were ‘combined as three embodiments or aspects of one supreme and triune deity’ (Oriental Heritage 201). Additionally, a hymn to Amun written in the 14th century BC defines the Egyptian trinity: ‘All Gods are three: Amun, Re, Ptah; they have no equal. His name is hidden as Amun, he is Re... before [men], and his body is Ptah’ (Hornung 219).

Is this positive proof that the Christian Trinity descended from the ancient Egyptian triads? No. However, Durant submits that ‘from Egypt came the ideas of a divine trinity...’ (Caesar 595). Dr. Gordon Laing, retired Dean of the Humanities Department at the University of Chicago, agrees that ‘the worship of the Egyptian triad Isis, Serapis, and the child Horus’ probably accustomed the early church theologians to the idea of a triune God, and was influential ‘in the formulation of the doctrine of the Trinity as set forth in the Nicaean and Athanasian creeds’ (128-129).

These were not the only trinities early Christians were exposed to. The historical lecturer, Jesse Benedict Carter, tells us of the Etruscans. As they slowly passed from Babylon through Greece and went on to Rome (16-19), they brought with them their trinity of Tinia, Uni, and Menerva. This trinity was a ‘new idea to the Romans,’ and yet it became so ‘typical of Rome’ that it quickly spread throughout Italy (26). Even the names of the Roman trinity: Jupiter, Juno, and Minerva, reflect the ancestry. That Christianity was not ashamed to borrow from pagan culture is amply shown by Durant: ‘Christianity did not destroy paganism; it adopted it’ (Caesar 595).

Is this positive proof that the Christian Trinity descended from the Etruscan and Roman triads? No. However, Laing convincingly devotes his entire book Survivals of the Roman Gods to the comparison of Roman paganism and the Roman Catholic Church. Dr. Jaroslav Pelikan, a Catholic scholar and professor at Yale, confirms the Church’s respect for pagan ideas when he states that the Apologists and other early church fathers used and cited the [pagan] Roman Sibylline Oracles so much that they were called ‘Sibyllists’ by the 2nd century critic, Celsus. There was even a medieval hymn, ‘Dies irae,’ which foretold the ‘coming of the day of wrath’ based on the ‘dual authority of ‘David and the Sibyl”(Emergence 64-65). The attitude of the Church toward paganism is best summed up in Pope Gregory the Great’s words to a missionary: ‘You must not interfere with any traditional belief or religious observance that can be harmonized with Christianity’ (qtd. in Laing 130).

In contrast, Judaism is strongly monotheistic with no hint of a trinity. The Hebrew Bible (the Old Testament) is filled with scriptures such as ‘before Me there was no God formed, Neither shall any be after Me’ (#Isa 43:10 qtd. in Isaiah), and ‘there is no other God...I am the Lord and there is none else’ (#Isa 45:14,18 qtd. in Isaiah). A Jewish commentary affirms that ‘[no] other gods exist, for to declare this would be blasphemous...’ (Chumash 458). Even though ‘Word,’ ‘Spirit,’ ‘Presence,’ and ‘Wisdom’ are used as personifications of God, Biblical scholars agree that the Trinity is neither mentioned nor intended by the authors of the Old Testament (Lonergan 130; Fortman xv; Burns 2).

We can conclude without much difficulty that the concept of the Trinity did not come from Judaism. Nor did Jesus speak of a trinity. The message of Jesus was of the coming kingdom; it was a message of love and forgiveness. As for his relationship with the Father, Jesus said, ‘... I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me’,{# Joh 5:30} and in another place ‘my doctrine is not mine, but His that sent me’;{# Joh 7:16} and his words ‘my Father is greater than I’ {#Joh 14:28} leave no doubt as to their relationship.[/color]
The JW have a correct understanding of the always-pagan trinity or polytheism: I have spent some time with them discussing the issue. However, the very recent acceptance of both liberal and conservatives of the trinity has the same believe that Jesus WAS-IS the Lord God IN the flesh.

ALL theologians use proof texts and Micah 5 is used to prove that Jesus came forth from heaven. However, that is a problem with reading BLACK text on WHITE paper.

Quote
Like
Share

Joined: July 29th, 2010, 2:32 pm

September 19th, 2017, 4:03 pm #20

Going out or going forth speaks of the BEGINNING or Birth. Messiah or Christ or God's ANOINTED would be of the seed of David ACCORDING TO THE FLESH.

Mic. 5:1 Now gather thyself in troops, O daughter of troops: he hath laid siege against us: they shall smite the JUDGE of Israel with a ROD upon the cheek.
Mic. 5:2 But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he COME FORTH come forth unto me that is to be RULER in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.


The Jews who were able to read or hear about Jesus would understand that Jesus was NOT GOING FORTH long, long ago. Rather, He would be born and GO FORTH from Bethlehem.

Matt. 2:1 Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the DAYS of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem,
Matt. 2:2 Saying, Where is he that is born King of the Jews? for we have seen his star in the east, and are come to worship him.
Matt. 2:3 When Herod the king had heard these things, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him.
Matt. 2:4 And when he had gathered all the chief priests and scribes of the people together, he demanded of them where Christ should be BORN.
Matt. 2:5 And they said unto him, In Bethlehem of Judaea: for thus it is written by the prophet,
Matt. 2:6 And thou Bethlehem, in the land of Juda, art not the least among the princes of Juda: for out of thee shall come a Governor, that shall rule my people Israel.


God KNEW JESUS BEFORE and he would be from AMONG MANY BRETHREN

Rom. 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his IMAGE, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren

Jesus was brought forth AFTER Mary travaileth.

Rev. 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,

Mic. 5:3 Therefore will he give them up, until the time that she which TRAVAILETH hath brought forth: then the remnant of his BRETHREN shall return unto the children of Israel.
Mic. 5:4 And he shall stand and feed in the STRENGTH of the Lord,
in the majesty of the name of THE LORD HIS GOD; and they shall abide: for now shall he be great unto the ends of the earth.
Mic. 5:5 And this MAN shall be the peace, when the Assyrian shall come into our land: and when he shall tread in our palaces, then shall we raise against him seven shepherds, and eight principal men.
Quote
Like
Share