Isidore- http://www.cogwriter.com/holyspirit.htm "And the Cathecism of the Catholic Church admits: 245 The apostolic faith concerning the Spirit was announced by the second ecumenical council at Constantinople (381) (Catechism of the Catholic Church. Imprimatur Potest +Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger. Doubleday, NY 1995, p. 72). Perhaps it should be pointed out that the apostles had all been dead for hundreds of years before the position was agreed upon in 381 A.D. Dr. Ray Pritz correctly observed: The doctrine of the Holy Spirit was the slowest to develop in the doctrine of the trinity by the Church catholic (Pritz R. NazareneJewish Christianity. Magn as , Jerusalem, 1988, p.90). Which, of course, shows that the Catholic "sacred tradition" on that did not come from the Bible nor the original apostles."
The Trinity
by The Quiet One 163 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
bob1999
" Which, of course, shows that the Catholic "sacred tradition" on that did not come from the Bible nor the original apostles.""
You didn't read that study I linked, did you?
"
Though the Bible taught truth of the Triunity of God implicitly in both Old and New Testaments, the development and delineation of this doctrine was brought about by the rise of heretical groups or teachers who either denied the deity of Christ or that of the Holy Spirit. This caused the early church to formally crystallize the doctrine of the Triunity. Actually, Tertullian in 215 A.D. was the first one to state this doctrine using the term, Trinity. 9 Concerning the struggle the early church went through, Walter Martin writes:
As the New Testament was completed toward the close of the first century, the infant church was struggling for its life against old foes—persecution and doctrinal error. On the one hand were the Roman empire, orthodox Judaism, and hostile pagan religions, and on the other hand were heresies and divisive doctrines. Early Christianity was indeed a perilous experiment.
Probably no doctrine was the subject of more controversy in the early church than that of the Trinity. Certainly the teaching of “one God in three Person” was accepted in the early church, but only as this teaching was challenged did a systematic doctrine of the Trinity emerge.
The Gnostic heresy, for instance, (which permeated Christendom in the lifetime of the apostles) drew strong condemnation in Paul’s Epistles to the Colossians and John’s First Epistle. Denying the deity of Christ, the Gnostics taught that he was inferior in nature to the Father, a type of super-angel of impersonal emanation from God.
Following the Gnostics came such speculative theologians as Origen, Lucian of Antioch, Paul of Samosota, Sabellius, and Arius of Alexandria. All of these propagated unbiblical views of the Trinity and of the divinity of our Lord.
But perhaps the most crucial test of Christian doctrine in the early church was the “Arian heresy.” It was this heresy which stimulated the crystallization of thought regarding both the Trinity and the deity of Christ …
Today there are still remnants of the Gnostic heresy (Christian Science), the Arian heresy (Jehovah’s Witnesses), and the Socinian heresy (Unitarianism) circulating in Christendom. All of these errors have one thing in common—they give Christ every title except the one which entitles Him to all the rest—the title of God and Savior.
But the Christian doctrine of the Trinity did not “begin” at the Council of Nicea, nor was it derived from “pagan influences.” While Egyptian, Chaldean, Hindu, and other pagan religions do incorporate so-called “trinities,” these have no resemblance to the Christian doctrine, which is unique and free from any heathen cultural vagaries … 10"
Peace
-
still thinking
I think it is the Catholics use the trinity to back up their teachings and call everyone else heretics...just look at the different wording of John 1:18 in these bibles...
New International Version(©1984)
No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father's side, has made him known.King James Bible
No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.Different words, different meanings....
In fact, John seems to me to be the only one in the bible who remotely makes Jesus equal to god. Take John out of the bible Canon and you start to read an entirely different version of Jesus.
I also think it is interesting that John was written later than Mathew, Mark or Luke and yet he seems to provide a clearer understanding of who Jesus is...me thinks...his Own understanding.
*edit* Interesting I think that the Douay actually reads differently to the NIV..why is that? To make it clearer that THEY want you to believe that Jesus is God?
Douay-Rheims Bible
No man hath seen God at any time: the only begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. -
leavingwt
how do you expect Jesus to communicate with people? what methods do you think he would use to tell people that he's not OK with 80%
What method would he use? Something better than what he's been using. MOST Christians have died, believing the Trinity.
-
bob1999
"In fact, John seems to me to be the only one in the bible who remotely makes Jesus equal to god. Take John out of the bible Canon and you start to read an entirely different version of Jesus."
So what books are in "your" bible?
Do you leave out books other than the The Gospel According to John?
I know, let's get rid of James. I never liked the way he seems to contradict Paul WRT faith vs. works.
Let's see, there must be more that we can get rid of. Books that contain teachings that we don't like.
Teaching that we were never really "comfortable" with!!!
Or we could just write our own bible? Start our own religion.
No, I'll stick with orthodoxy. You start your own religion if you want.
Peace
-
GOrwell
@ The Quiet One : I'm currently not a trinintarian, yet the mirror that Jesus is provides of YHWH of the Old Testament is quite remarkable. They share many, many titles, abilities and traits etc. Of course, Jesus being a mirror of God is supported by the Bible ("who has seen me, has seen the Father also"), ("the image of God"), ("the exact representation of his [God] being"). Now some will say that Jesus is just that; only a mirror, and not the genuine article. Yet, coming from a strictly Jewish background, if you even remotely insinuated what Jesus said about himself and his relationship with God, you'd be stoned to death for blasphey, and many people of his time tried on multiple occasions. Thus, the only way to reconcile fairly early views of Jesus (outside of the Bible, early Christian writings definitely viewed Jesus as God) with a monotheistic faith is the Trinity doctrine.
-
Diest
I am sticking with the Gnostics....Jehovah was a jerk who created everything contrary to his God's desire, Jesus came down to free the Jews from him, sent by the top tier God. Seems like a way better myth to believe.
Or you could go with the fact that the OT is unitarian and the jews dont believe Issiah prophisized a virgin birth, but rather a birth to a young woman. THinking that the Greeks messed things up with the LXX... Afterall Mark and John dont really bring it up and paul doesnt mention the virginity either....
So when you think of all that....does it matter?
-
still thinking
bob1999 There are many scriptures/christian writings. But I get the impression you are ONLY interested in the ones that the Catholic church approved of.
Why do YOU think they changed the wording here? To make it clearer I suppose.
New International Version(©1984)
No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father's side, has made him known.Douay-Rheims Bible
No man hath seen God at any time: the only begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.No, I'll stick with orthodoxy. You start your own religion if you want.
Actually I have no interest in starting a Religion. Or joining one for that matter.
What a fabulous idea!....yeah...lets put together our own bible!
Lets not just go by what a few MEN told us were correct. I have no more faith in the POPE today telling me what to believe than I did in the men who put the bible canon together.
How do YOU know what is correct if YOU personally do not check out ALL other scriptures/writings and decide for YOURSELF what makes the most sense.
Did you know these people personally that put the bible canon together? Can you personally vouch for their sincerity? Do you know what motives they may have had?
When you look at the results of trinity teachings it is nothing to be proud of. Wars, murder, judment and exclusion of others. This is the fruit of Trinity teaching.
So yeah, I'll make up my own mind what is correct and what isn't. Thanks for the advice.
-
leavingwt
We're almost to page 3, but the pace is not quick enough. We can do this. Five more pages before sundown in CA!
-
designs
Tempting oh so tempting but I refrain....