Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Trinity revisited.....
Unexplained Mysteries Discussion Forums > Unexplained Mysteries > Spirituality, Religion and Beliefs
truebelief4u
I know the "Doctrine of the Trinity" has been addressed previously in this forum, but I see no references to the fact that Scripture was deliberately altered by the Roman Church in order to support the doctrine. Perhaps a renewed debate, considering the historical facts, might be in order?

Often Christians, no matter how well intentioned, make the mistake of assuming that what they are being "taught" is correct merely because "the church says so," forgetting that the man-made institutions calling themselves "churches" are subject to error. Then, too, most main-line Christians also make the mistake of "defending" some doctrines simply because there are "cult groups" that disagree with certain mainstream doctrines (such as the trinity), and therefore most Christians, for some odd reason, feel a need to defend these doctrines, even if they may be incorrect in doing so.

I ask you to consider the following, as they are the three most often quoted verses "supporting" the trinity......and ALL OF THEM are either deliberate textual alterations made by the Roman Church, or incorrect contextual translations based on "traditional doctrinal interpretation," rather than "Biblical interpretation" (references included in the links below).

http://www.biblicalunitarian.com/modules.p...showpage&pid=85
http://www.biblicalunitarian.com/modules.p...howpage&pid=147
http://www.apostolic.net/biblicalstudies/matt2819-willis.htm

In addition, there are many references showing that the "Trinity Doctrine" was unknown to early Christians and is the product of later (Roman) theology, rather than Biblical theology (a fact admitted to by even the Roman Catholic Church)....See for example:
Catholic Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger:
He makes this confession as to the origin of the chief Trinity text of Matthew 28:19. "The basic form of our (Matthew 28:19 Trinitarian) profession of faith took shape during the course of the second and third centuries in connection with the ceremony of baptism. So far as its place of origin is concerned, the text (Matthew 28:19) came from the city of Rome." The Trinity baptism and text of Matthew 28:19 therefore did not originate from the original Church that started in Jerusalem around AD 33. It was rather as the evidence proves a later invention of Roman Catholicism completely fabricated. Very few know about these historical facts.
"The Demonstratio Evangelica" by Eusebius:
Eusebius was the Church historian and Bishop of Caesarea. On page 152 Eusebius quotes the early book of Matthew that he had in his library in Caesarea. According to this eyewitness of an unaltered Book of Matthew that could have been the original book or the first copy of the original of Matthew. Eusebius informs us of Jesus' actual words to his disciples in the original text of Matthew 28:19: "With one word and voice He said to His disciples: "Go, and make disciples of all nations in My Name, teaching them to observe all things whatsover I have commanded you." That "Name" is Jesus. (These two quotes are taken from: http://www.apostolic.net/biblicalstudies/matt2819-willis.htm
See also:
http://www.thechristadelphians.org/htm/the...th_about_64.htm
http://www.bibleweb.org/TruthAbout/TA01.htm
http://www.onenessweb.com/apostolicpillar/...es/trinity.html
novaceleste
I'm not trying to ruffle any feathers, but I thought this was intresting.

http://home.nyc.rr.com/mysticalrose/pagan1.html
truebelief4u
QUOTE(novaceleste @ Apr 10 2006, 03:38 PM) [snapback]1141723[/snapback]

I'm not trying to ruffle any feathers, but I thought this was intresting.

http://home.nyc.rr.com/mysticalrose/pagan1.html


Novaceleste.......it is.....and it expresses the conventional view.
mako
Here is what Consummate Deist posted long ago...It points out that the Trinity seems to have been borrowed from the so-called pagan religions:

The Trinity
The Creed of Nicea defines the Trinity of Christianity as a merging of three distinct entities in to one single one, while remaining three distinct entities. These three gods must be regarded as one because they are co-eternal, co-substantial and co-equal, though only the first has a life of his own! The others emanated from him.
Of course this doctrine is Neo-Platonic and pagan not Jewish; since the Old Testament makes up a large part of the Christian Bible, it is heretical (Isaiah 41:10) to imagine the Trinity as three separate gods. This mental gymnastics arises because the first bishops tried to merge nascent Christian sect of Judaism with paganism. Most ancient religions were built upon some sort of threefold distinction. Ancient deities were always trinities of some sort or consisted of successive emanation in threes.
Classical Hinduism dating back to at least 500 BCE with roots extending back as far as 2000 BCE has the oldest and probably original form of the Trinity. The Hindu doctrine call Tri-murti (Three-forms) describes the divine trinity as consisting of Brahma, Vishnu, and Siva: Brahma being the Father or supreme God, Vishnu being the incarnate Word and Creator, and Siva, the Spirit of God/Holy Ghost. It is an inseparable unity though three in form. Worshipers are told to worship them as one deity.
In the Puranas (one of the Hindu bibles), more than two thousand years ago, a devotee addressing the Trinity of gods, Brahma, Vishnu, and Siva, saying that he recognized only one God. He asks the Three Lords which is the true divinity that he might address to him alone his vows and adorations. The three Gods, Brahma, Vishnu, and Siva, becoming manifest to him, replied, “Learn, O devotee, that there is no real distinction between us. What to you appears such is only by semblance. The single being appears under three forms by the acts of creation, preservation and destruction, but he is one.”
Hindu worshippers had no problem accepting such a concept, they were quite used to worshipping curious gods; Ganesh had the body of a man and head of an elephant, Hanuman was monkey-faced and gods and goddesses had 4, 6 or 8 arms. Their gods were strange entities, so a 3 in 1, 1 in 3 god was simple to accept.
To quote Sir William Jones:
Very respectable natives have assured me, that one or two missionaries have been absurd enough to in their zeal for the conversion of the Gentiles, to urge that the Hindus were even now almost Christians; because their Brahma, Vishnu, and Mahesa (Siva), were no other than the Christian Trinity.

By an almost unanimous decision, the Church fathers declared the concept of the Trinity as a leading tent of the faith, a doctrine directly revealed from heaven. Yet a pagan religion over 2000 years older than Christianity had long accepted and practiced the tenet of the Trinity. Quite independently the Brahmins, Persians, Chaldeans, Chinese, Assyrians, Phoenicians, Scandinavians, Druids, Siberians, Peruvians, Mayans, Aztecs and Greeks held the doctrine of the Trinity long before the council of Nicea of 325 CD officially recognized God’s Trinitarian nature.
A Trinity was worshipped by the pagan Romans, after an oracle declared that there was First God, then the Word, and with them the Spirit. Once again, we see the distinctly enumerated, the Father, the Logos, and the Holy Spirit or Holy Ghost, this time in ancient Rome, where the most celebrated temple of this capital—that of Jupiter Capitolinus—was dedicated to three deities, which were honored with joint worship!
Those sages of the ancient world, the Egyptians, also worshipped a trinity. The wing, the globe and the serpent together stood for the different attributes of their god. The Buddhists of China and Japan (Chungkuo and Nippon)worship Fo, a name for Buddha. When they worship his, they say “Fo is one god but has three forms.” This trinity of Vajrapani, Manjusri and Avalokitesvara is a divine union of three gods into one god – Buddha.
St. Jerome pointed out that all the ancient nations believed in the Trinity.
The Greeks also had their trinities. When making their sacrifices to their gods, they would sprinkle holy water on the altar three times, they would then sprinkle the people three times also. Frankincense was then taken with three fingers and strewed upon the alter three times. All of this was done because the oracle had proclaimed that all sacred things ought to be in threes. An ancient Greek inscription on the great obelisk at Rome read: The Mighty God, The Begotten of God, and Apollo the Spirit. The Greeks had a first God, and second God, and third God, and the second was begotten by the first. And yet for all that they considered all these one.
The Christian Trinitarian nature of God was primarily based on the philosophy of the Greeks. This was done through the writings of the Greek philosopher Plato, who set forth the doctrine of the Trinity in his Phaedon, written four hundred years BC. His terms conform most striking with the Christian doctrine on this subject. Plato's first term for the Trinity was the Agathon, the supreme God or Father. Next was the Logos meaning the Word and then Psyche meaning the soul, spirit or ghost, the Holy Ghost. The first person was considered the planner of the work of creation, the second person the creator and the third person the ghost or spirit which moved upon the face of the waters, and infused life into the mighty deep at creation. The three names of the Christian Trinity, Father, Word, and Holy Ghost are given as plainly as possible. If Plato expressed the Christian Trinity four hundred years BC, how then was it divinely originated with the incarnation of Jesus?
The works of Plato were keenly studied by the Church Fathers. The passage : “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word Was God” is a fragment of Platonic philosophy. A Christian bishop wrote several centuries ago: Such a similitude of Plato's and John's Trinity doctrines bespeaks a common origin. St Augustine agreed that he had found the beginning of John's Gospel in Plato's Phaedon. So even Christian saints concur that the doctrine preceded Christianity. Amelius, a Pagan philosopher, says it is strictly applicable to Mercury who was the Logos. A Christian writer of the fifth century declared: The Athenian sage Plato marvelously anticipated one of the most important and mysterious doctrines of the Christian religion - meaning the Trinity. The gospels of the bible were called the Greek gospels not just because they were written in Greek but also because they entertained Greek philosophy. Either both are from heaven or both are pagan. If the former, then revelation and paganism mean the same. If the latter, then Christianity is pagan. Applying the title Word or Logos to Jesus is a pagan amalgamation with Essenism, and was not fully accepted until the middle of the second century. The Trinity is a pagan doctrine.
Divine Trinities were male Gods. No female was admitted into the triad of Gods composing the orthodox Trinity. Plainly there can never be males without females, so the whole idea is an obvious Patriarchal variant of an earlier belief in which one of the spirits in the Trinity must have been female. The truth is that the Trinity grew from a belief in the feminine principle as the mother and therefore creator of everything. The Patriarchs imposed a male Supreme god relegating the female principle to the role of his assistant as, his spirit, Word or Wisdom. That was not sufficient however and the divine son was introduced. Finally the female principle, now reduced to the Holy Ghost, the Word having been allocated to the Son, had a sex change and became masculine or neuter. Once again, we see that very little of Christianity is original.

yes.gif
Paranoid Android
There is one passage - only one (1 John, I think you linked it) that has been altered to support the Trinity. IT says something along the lines of "the three are one". You'll also notice a footnote in every Bible saying it's most probably a later addition. And any self-respecting church will point that out in their sermon's on that passage (I've heard four different talks on that passage since I became a Christian 6/7 years ago, and every single time it's been pointed out that that cannot be used as a proof for the Trinity).

Say what you wish about the other passages you quoted, but those passages are written in texts older than the Catholic church. How can the church have added to it if it didn't exist at the time hmm.gif

Regards, PA
truebelief4u
QUOTE(Paranoid Android @ Apr 11 2006, 08:00 AM) [snapback]1142734[/snapback]

There is one passage - only one (1 John, I think you linked it) that has been altered to support the Trinity. IT says something along the lines of "the three are one". You'll also notice a footnote in every Bible saying it's most probably a later addition. And any self-respecting church will point that out in their sermon's on that passage (I've heard four different talks on that passage since I became a Christian 6/7 years ago, and every single time it's been pointed out that that cannot be used as a proof for the Trinity).

Say what you wish about the other passages you quoted, but those passages are written in texts older than the Catholic church. How can the church have added to it if it didn't exist at the time hmm.gif

Regards, PA



PA....check out the following links. Both Matthew 28:19 and 1st John 5-7-8 were altered by the Roman Church. This is historical fact, not conjecture, and the Roman Catholic Church itself admits they altered the text. Sorry, but both Matthew 28:19 and 1st John 5:7-8 were, indeed, altered by the Roman Church, and were NOT in the earlier texts. In fact, Eusebius quotes an earlier text that shows the authentic version:
"The Demonstratio Evangelica" by Eusebius:
Eusebius was the Church historian and Bishop of Caesarea. On page 152 Eusebius quotes the early book of Matthew that he had in his library in Caesarea. According to this eyewitness of an unaltered Book of Matthew that could have been the original book or the first copy of the original of Matthew. Eusebius informs us of Jesus' actual words to his disciples in the original text of Matthew 28:19: "With one word and voice He said to His disciples: "Go, and make disciples of all nations in My Name, teaching them to observe all things whatsover I have commanded you." That "Name" is Jesus. [From: http://www.apostolic.net/biblicalstudies/matt2819-willis.htm noted below. ]

There is also evidence that John 1:1, et seq. was also altered.

http://www.apostolic.net/biblicalstudies/matt2819-willis.htm [In re: Matthew 28:19] (And please note that former Cardinal Ratzinger, now the POPE, admits the Scripture was added by the Roman Church.)

http://www.bible.org/page.asp?page_id=1186 [In re: 1st John 5:7-8]

http://www.geocities.com/athens/olympus/5257/Beginning.htm [In re: John 1:1-14.]

PA.....I don't know how deeply you have ever gotten into "textual research," but it is amazing just how many verses/passages and words have been deliberately altered over the centuries. [Check out the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia and read the entries for the various books of the Bible....you'll find that virtually all of them have been revised, edited, and altered over the centuries.]


This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2008 Invision Power Services, Inc.