THE DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY

Madman

Senior Member
This is an excellent discussion and it is always wonderful to read everyone's opinion, but we should all remember that this was settled almost 1700 years ago beginning with the First Council of Nicaea.

Should anyone ever desire to know the essentials of the faith, including the churches doctrine on the Holy Trinity, they only need read Holy Scripture and what was determined at the 7 ecumenical councils.

Heresies have been since the beginning, and the church has already struck them down.
 

1gr8bldr

Senior Member
This is an excellent discussion and it is always wonderful to read everyone's opinion, but we should all remember that this was settled almost 1700 years ago beginning with the First Council of Nicaea.

Should anyone ever desire to know the essentials of the faith, including the churches doctrine on the Holy Trinity, they only need read Holy Scripture and what was determined at the 7 ecumenical councils.

Heresies have been since the beginning, and the church has already struck them down.
The doctrine of the trinity was not included in the council of Nicaea. It came about later. The Holy Spirit as a coequal third person was much later. It evolved. There is good evidence to support that the council actually did bring it up, opposing anything like it. It specifically states in an effort to trump Arius, to make him look bad, in order to stamp out his beliefs as false, states that Arius was associated with Valentinous whom believed the exact version of the trinity today. It did not say Arius believed this only that they associated him with Valentinous, whom they called a hertic. Like how they are crushing anyone whom has to do with Trump, even in the smallest way. This is easily found with a google search. Proof that the trinity as we know it today was not considered truth in the 300's
 

Madman

Senior Member
if you notice I said it began at the first council. Councils were always called to put down a heresy. Arius, denied the divinity of Christ, the first council was instrumental in beginning to strike that heresy down.

Without a divine Christ there is no Trinity.

We believe in one God the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible; and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten of the Father, that is, of the substance [ek tes ousias] of the Father, God of God, light of light, true God of true God, begotten not made, of the same substance with the Father [homoousion to patri], through whom all things were made both in heaven and on earth; who for us men and our salvation descended, was incarnate, and was made man, suffered and rose again the third day, ascended into heaven and cometh to judge the living and the dead. And in the Holy Ghost. Those who say: There was a time when He was not, and He was not before He was begotten; and that He was made out of nothing (ex ouk onton); or who maintain that He is of another hypostasis or another substance [than the Father], or that the Son of God is created, or mutable, or subject to change, [them] the Catholic Church anathematizes.

P.S. equating the councils with those individuals who don't like Trump certainly misses the mark.
 
Last edited:
if you notice I said it began at the first council. Councils were always called to put down a heresy. Arius, denied the divinity of Christ, the first council was instrumental in beginning to strick that heresy down.

Without a divine Christ there is no Trinity.

We believe in one God the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible; and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten of the Father, that is, of the substance [ek tes ousias] of the Father, God of God, light of light, true God of true God, begotten not made, of the same substance with the Father [homoousion to patri], through whom all things were made both in heaven and on earth; who for us men and our salvation descended, was incarnate, and was made man, suffered and rose again the third day, ascended into heaven and cometh to judge the living and the dead. And in the Holy Ghost. Those who say: There was a time when He was not, and He was not before He was begotten; and that He was made out of nothing (ex ouk onton); or who maintain that He is of another hypostasis or another substance [than the Father], or that the Son of God is created, or mutable, or subject to change, [them] the Catholic Church anathematizes.

P.S. equating the councils with those individuals who don't like Trump certainly misses the mark.
Why would a council of men be necessary in how one finds the truth about the Light? Can't the individual do that? Especially if he's got the indwelling of God's Spirit.

Those councils of men appear to be more politically motivated than the actual work of God.
 
if you notice I said it began at the first council. Councils were always called to put down a heresy. Arius, denied the divinity of Christ, the first council was instrumental in beginning to strick that heresy down.

Without a divine Christ there is no Trinity.

We believe in one God the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible; and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten of the Father, that is, of the substance [ek tes ousias] of the Father, God of God, light of light, true God of true God, begotten not made, of the same substance with the Father [homoousion to patri], through whom all things were made both in heaven and on earth; who for us men and our salvation descended, was incarnate, and was made man, suffered and rose again the third day, ascended into heaven and cometh to judge the living and the dead. And in the Holy Ghost. Those who say: There was a time when He was not, and He was not before He was begotten; and that He was made out of nothing (ex ouk onton); or who maintain that He is of another hypostasis or another substance [than the Father], or that the Son of God is created, or mutable, or subject to change, [them] the Catholic Church anathematizes.

P.S. equating the councils with those individuals who don't like Trump certainly misses the mark.
Romans 1:20
For ever since the world was created, people have seen the earth and sky. Through everything God made, they can clearly see his invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature. So they have no excuse for not knowing God.

If this is the world as some believe, how do the individuals who know nothing of those councils find the truth of the Light?
 

Madman

Senior Member
Why would a council of men be necessary in how one finds the truth about the Light? Can't the individual do that? Especially if he's got the indwelling of God's Spirit.

And just whose "interpretation" do you choose to follow? Why do you believe there are 2000+ supposed Christian denominations?

I believe there was a time when the church spoke with one voice, heresies were struck down and the tradition of the Gospel was kept safe by the Church.
 

Madman

Senior Member
Romans 1:20
For ever since the world was created, people have seen the earth and sky. Through everything God made, they can clearly see his invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature. So they have no excuse for not knowing God.

If this is the world as some believe, how do the individuals who know nothing of those councils find the truth of the Light?

Does creation reveal the truth that Jesus the Nazarene is the Christ the Son of the Living God? Or does it simply show evidence of a creator?
 

Madman

Senior Member
Those councils of men appear to be more politically motivated than the actual work of God.

What make you believe that?

Who do you think canonized the Scriptures?

Councils of men.

The councils of men were the leaders of the church. The church has been given the responsibility to teach the tradition that has been handed down to them. Ephesians 4:11-13

If that can't be believed then we can't believe that they protected the Holy Scriptures either. That leads to other heresy.

If you want to keep this line of thought going I believe we need to open a new thread so as not to hijack the OP.
 
Last edited:

1gr8bldr

Senior Member
if you notice I said it began at the first council. Councils were always called to put down a heresy. Arius, denied the divinity of Christ, the first council was instrumental in beginning to strike that heresy down.

Without a divine Christ there is no Trinity.

We believe in one God the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible; and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten of the Father, that is, of the substance [ek tes ousias] of the Father, God of God, light of light, true God of true God, begotten not made, of the same substance with the Father [homoousion to patri], through whom all things were made both in heaven and on earth; who for us men and our salvation descended, was incarnate, and was made man, suffered and rose again the third day, ascended into heaven and cometh to judge the living and the dead. And in the Holy Ghost. Those who say: There was a time when He was not, and He was not before He was begotten; and that He was made out of nothing (ex ouk onton); or who maintain that He is of another hypostasis or another substance [than the Father], or that the Son of God is created, or mutable, or subject to change, [them] the Catholic Church anathematizes.

P.S. equating the councils with those individuals who don't like Trump certainly misses the mark.
It may miss the mark..... however it was so much like it in so many ways. Just as the USA is split right down the middle with Demos and Republicans, about 50/50, so was the belief of Arains vs the winning belief. Terribly divisive time, with the democrats/ councilmen looking for any way to discredit the other. And using means of association as a sword to attempt to discredit the opposing. [sure sign that they are wrong, every time, when they resort to discrediting the opposition rather than using the facts or making a case] So do you agree that the trinity began at a time other than the early church? If so, I don't wish to debate you on that because that would be true. Not sure where you stand?
 
And just whose "interpretation" do you choose to follow? Why do you believe there are 2000+ supposed Christian denominations?

I believe there was a time when the church spoke with one voice, heresies were struck down and the tradition of the Gospel was kept safe by the Church.
Why were the heresies struck down then but not now? Why do we still have 2000+ Christian denominations if the Church has only one voice?

I can assure you it's not the work of God but that of man. Well maybe it is the work of God. It gives one the option to worship at a Church that agrees with their belief. In this way more souls are saved.

I tend to follow my own heart. I can't deny what I believe. Regardless of what they teach me, what I believe is true.
 

Madman

Senior Member
It may miss the mark..... however it was so much like it in so many ways. Just as the USA is split right down the middle with Demos and Republicans, about 50/50, so was the belief of Arains vs the winning belief. Terribly divisive time, with the democrats/ councilmen looking for any way to discredit the other. And using means of association as a sword to attempt to discredit the opposing. [sure sign that they are wrong, every time, when they resort to discrediting the opposition rather than using the facts or making a case] So do you agree that the trinity began at a time other than the early church? If so, I don't wish to debate you on that because that would be true. Not sure where you stand?

There was no need for the doctrine of the Trinity to be defined it had never needed to be defined, just as there was no need to ensure that the doctrine of the divinity of Christ was written. Christ himself taught that he was God.

I am not sure what you mean by the bold sentences. Help me with that.
 
My point is it wasn't settled 1700 years ago. We, even as individuals all have our own beliefs about the Father and Son. Even among Trinitarians some see the Word becoming the Son at the incarnation. Some see him as always existing.
Then there is the Unity and/or Oneness of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as the co-exist with separate personas.

It's a tough thing to see or feel. With each individual thinking God has shown it to him personally as the "way."

Even the Oneness believer says "the Holy Spirit has revealed it to me correctly." Most believers will admit, that right now we don't really know.

1 Corinthians 13:12
For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.

1 John 3:2
Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when Christ appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is.
 

Madman

Senior Member
Why were the heresies struck down then but not now? Why do we still have 2000+ Christian denominations if the Church has only one voice?
The Orthodox Church has no authority over the Baptist, nor does the Coptic Church have authority over the Methodists, but the ancient churches do maintain doctoral teaching within their group. The same can not be said for post reformation groups.

The church is no longer one. It first split in 1054 and has not spoken with one voice since that time.

I can assure you it's not the work of God but that of man.
I agree. sinful man is what has caused the chasm in the body of Christ.

Well maybe it is the work of God. It gives one the option to worship at a Church that agrees with their belief. In this way more souls are saved.
I don't believe worship style is the question here. I believe it is doctrine.

I tend to follow my own heart. I can't deny what I believe. Regardless of what they teach me, what I believe is true.
I don't follow my heart. Holy Scripture warns me that the "heart of man is deceitfully wicked".

I tend to believe Holy Scripture.
 
When we see Jesus as he is, will he be God? Is that the only way we will ever see God?
What did Stephen see when he look into Heaven? Even some Trinitarians believe we will only see Jesus. He is the image of the invisible God.

But in some way 1 John 3:2 say we will become like Jesus. We were made in that image long before Jesus became man.
 

Madman

Senior Member
My point is it wasn't settled 1700 years ago.
When was the "Table of Contents" for the Bible settled?

It is OK that you and I do not agree, you say it was not settled, I say it was. You can take almost every "christian" doctrine in practice today and read how it was prayed over, fought over, submitted to the will of the Holy Spirit and settled on, by what was at one time the world wide church.
 

Madman

Senior Member
When we see Jesus as he is, will he be God? Is that the only way we will ever see God?
What did Stephen see when he look into Heaven? Even some Trinitarians believe we will only see Jesus. He is the image of the invisible God.

I don't know what we will see exactly. We are given glimpses in Scripture, but not given full detail. I believe it is debatable within the church. Many secondary issues are open to debate, we just don't know.
 
I don't follow my heart. Holy Scripture warns me that the "heart of man is deceitfully wicked".

I tend to believe Holy Scripture.
Not that I see it as necessarily wrong but you put more into the doctrine of salvation than I do. Probably to the point of even having to be Trinitarian over Oneness. Even though they are different sides of the same coin.

I'm more of a something from me and a lot from God type of person. Maybe even it's all from God and then the doctrine is then not so important.

I do see a balance though, just not leaning in the direction you do and thus the Reformation.

What's funny though is the groups that left are still Trinitarian. That wasn't the reason for the chasm in the body of Christ.
 
I don't know what we will see exactly. We are given glimpses in Scripture, but not given full detail. I believe it is debatable within the church. Many secondary issues are open to debate, we just don't know.
Regardless of what Jesus was when he came from Heaven, he was a man when he returned.
Why can't Christianity(me included) just focus on what Jesus did from the incarnation or when he became the human Son of God and Mother Mary?
Perhaps he was the eternal Son that was always with the Father. Perhaps he was the One God that incarnate as man. Maybe even a few other ways to see it even.

We do know that God so loved the world he sent his Son. We could just pick up salvation from that point forward.
 

Madman

Senior Member
I'm more of a something from me and a lot from God type of person. Maybe even it's all from God and then the doctrine is then not so important.
It is all God. Doctrine keeps me straight.
As the old adage goes;
The Church to teach
The Bible to prove

I do see a balance though, just not leaning in the direction you do and thus the Reformation.
Not a reformation fan, it was a schism. Every man to his own understanding.

What's funny though is the groups that left are still Trinitarian. That wasn't the reason for the chasm in the body of Christ.
Some are some are not. 1054 was over several different things. A lot of pride got wrapped up in it. The Coptic church left hundreds of years earlier because they thought the councils "threw rock" at their man Cyril. In reality is was probably a language barrier issue.
 
Top