Nontrinitarianism

Part of a series on
 
Jesus · Christ
Virgin birth · Crucifixion · Resurrection · Easter · Jesus in Christianity
Foundations
Apostles · Church · Creeds · Gospel · Kingdom · New Covenant
Bible
Old Testament · New Testament ·
Books · Canon · Apocrypha
Theology
Apologetics · Baptism · Christology · Father · Son · Holy Spirit ·
History of theology · Salvation · Trinity
History and traditions
Timeline · Mary · Peter · Paul ·
Fathers · Early · Constantine the Great ·
Ecumenical councils · Missions ·
East–West Schism · Crusades ·
Protestant Reformation
Denominations and movements
General topics
Art · Criticism · Ecumenism · Liturgical year · Liturgy · Music · Other religions · Prayer · Sermon · Symbolism
Christianity Portal

Nontrinitarianism (or antitrinitarianism) includes all Christian belief systems that disagree with the doctrine of the Trinity, namely, the teaching that God is three distinct hypostases or persons and yet co-eternal, co-equal, and indivisibly united in one essence or ousia. According to churches that consider ecumenical council decisions final, the teaching was infallibly defined at the third Ecumenical Council (First Council of Ephesus) in 431 A.D. Nontrinitarians disagree with the findings of the Council for various reasons, including the belief that the Bible as they understand it takes precedence over creeds, or that there was a Great Apostasy prior to the Council. After hundreds of years of being suppressed[1][2][3][4] nontrinitarian Christian adherents represent a small minority of professed Christians.

Nontrinitarian views differ widely on the nature of God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. Various nontrinitarian views, such as Adoptionism, Monarchianism, and Arianism, existed prior to the formal definition of the Trinity doctrine in 325, 360, and 431 AD, at the Councils of Nicaea and Constantinople, and Ephesus.[5] Nontrinitarianism was later renewed in the Gnosticism of the Cathars in the 11th through 13th centuries, in the Age of Enlightenment of the 18th century, and in some groups arising during the Second Great Awakening of the 19th century.

Modern nontrinitarian groups or denominations include Bible Students, Christadelphians, Christian Scientists, Friends General Conference, Iglesia ni Cristo, Jehovah's Witnesses, Latter Day Saints, Oneness Pentecostals, Unitarian Universalist Christians and the United Church of God.

Contents

Forms of nontrinitarianism

Most nontrinitarians identify themselves as Christian. There are some groups that do not describe themselves as either Christian or Trinitarian.

Forms of Christian nontrinitarianism

The Encyclopædia Britannica states, "To some Christians the doctrine of the Trinity appeared inconsistent with the unity of God....They therefore denied it, and accepted Jesus Christ, not as incarnate God, but as God's highest creature by Whom all else was created....[this] view in the early Church long contended with the orthodox doctrine."[6] Although this view (nontrinitarian) eventually disappeared “in the early church” and the trinitarian view became an orthodox doctrine of modern Christianity, variations of the nontrinitarian view are still held by a small number Christian groups and denominations.

Nontrinitarian followers of Jesus fall into roughly five different groups:

Nontrinitarian doctrine often generates controversy among mainstream Christians as most trinitarians consider it heresy not to believe in the doctrine of the Trinity. At times, segments of Nicene Christianity reacted with ultimate severity toward nontrinitarian views. Following the Reformation, among some Protestant groups such as the Unitarians and Christadelphians, the same views have been accommodated.

Forms of non-Christian nontrinitarianism

History of nontrinitarianism

Part of a series on the
History of
Christian Theology
Background
Four Marks of the Church
Early Christianity · Timeline
History of Christianity
Theology
Ecclesiastical polity
Trinitarianism
Nontrinitarianism
Christian primitivism
Christology · Mariology
Creeds
Apostles' · Nicene
Chalcedonian · Athanasian
Patristic theology
and Councils
Church Fathers · Augustine
Nicaea · Chalcedon
Ephesus
Post-Nicene
development
Heresy · Monophysitism
Monothelitism
Iconoclasm · Gregory I
Alcuin · Photios
East-West Schism
Scholasticism
Aquinas · Anselm
William of Ockham
Gregory Palamas
Old Believers
Reformation
Protestant Reformation
Luther · Melanchthon
Indulgences · Justification
Sola fide · 95 Theses
Book of Concord
Predestination · Calvinism
Arminianism
English Reformation
Counter-Reformation
Trent
Since the Reformation
Pietism · Revivalism
John Wesley
Great Awakenings
Holiness movement
Restoration Movement
Existentialism · Liberalism
Postmodernism · Vatican II
Radical orthodoxy
Jean-Luc Marion
Hermeneutics
Deconstruction and religion
Liberation Theology
Christian Anarchism
 Christianity portal

Most nontrinitarians take the position that the doctrine of the earliest form of Christianity (see Apostolic Age) was nontrinitarian. Typically, nontrinitarians believe Christianity was altered by the edicts of Emperor Constantine I, which eventually resulted in the adoption of Trinitarian Christianity as the official religion of the Roman Empire during the reign of Theodosius I. Because it was during a dramatic shift in Christianity's status that the doctrine of the Trinity attained its definitive development, nontrinitarians typically consider the doctrine questionable. Nontrinitarians see the Nicene Creed as an essentially political document, resulting from the subordination of true doctrine to state interests by leaders of the Catholic Church, so that the church became, in their view, an extension of the Roman Empire.

Although nontrinitarian beliefs continued to multiply, and among some people (such as the Lombards in the west) were dominant for hundreds of years after their inception, Trinitarians gained prominence in the Roman Empire. Nontrinitarians typically argue that the primitive beliefs of Christianity were systematically suppressed (often to the point of death), and that the historical record, perhaps also including the scriptures of the New Testament, was altered as a consequence.

Some scholars investigating the historical Jesus assert that Jesus taught neither his own equality with God nor the Trinity (see, for example, the Jesus Seminar).

Nontrinitarians also dispute the veracity of the Nicene Creed based on its adoption nearly 300 years after the life of Jesus as a result of conflict within pre-Nicene early Christianity. Nontrinitarians (both Modalists and Unitarians) also generally claim that Athanasius and others at Nicaea adopted Greek Platonic philosophy and concepts, and incorporated them in their views of God and Christ.[9] Nontrinitarians also cite scriptures such as Matthew 15:9 and Ephesians 4:14 that warn the reader to beware the doctrines of men.

The author H. G. Wells, later famous for his contribution to science-fiction, wrote in The Outline of History: "We shall see presently how later on all Christendom was torn by disputes about the Trinity. There is no evidence that the apostles of Jesus ever heard of the Trinity, at any rate from him."[10]

The question of why such a central doctrine to the Christian faith would never have been explicitly stated in scripture or taught in detail by Jesus himself was sufficiently important to 16th century historical figures such as Michael Servetus as to lead them to argue the question. The Geneva City Council, in accord with the judgment of the cantons of Zürich, Bern, Basel, and Schaffhausen, condemned Servetus to be burned at the stake for this and his opposition to infant baptism.

The Encyclopædia of Religion and Ethics describes the five stages that led to the formulation of the doctrine of the Trinity.[11]

  1. The acceptance of the pre-human existence of Jesus as the (middle-platonic) Logos, namely, as the medium between the transcendent sovereign God and the created cosmos. The doctrine of Logos was accepted by the Apologists and by other Fathers of the 2nd and 3rd centuries, such as Justin the Martyr, Hippolytus, Tertullian, Ireneus, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Lactantius, and the 4th century Arius.
  2. The doctrine of the timeless generation of the Son from the Father as it was articulated by Origen in his effort to support the ontological immutability of God, that he is ever-being a father and a creator. The doctrine of the timeless generation was adopted by Athanasius of Alexandria.
  3. The acceptance of the idea that the son of God is homoousios to his father, that is, of the same transcendent nature. This position was declared in the Nicene Creed, which specifically states the son of God is as immutable as his father.
  4. The acceptance that the Holy Spirit also has ontological equality as a third person in a divine Trinity and the final Trinitarian terminology by the teachings of the Cappadocian Fathers.
  5. The addition of the Filioque to the Nicene Creed, as accepted by the Roman Catholic Church.

Points of dissent

Scriptural support

Critics argue that the Trinity, for a teaching described as fundamental, lacks direct scriptural support, and even some proponents of the doctrine acknowledge that direct or formal support is lacking. The New Catholic Encyclopedia says, "The doctrine of the Holy Trinity is not taught [explicitly] in the [Old Testament]", "The formulation 'one God in three Persons' was not solidly established [by a council]...prior to the end of the 4th century".[12] Similarly, Encyclopedia Encarta states: "The doctrine is not taught explicitly in the New Testament, where the word God almost invariably refers to the Father. [...] The term trinitas was first used in the 2nd century, by the Latin theologian Tertullian, but the concept was developed in the course of the debates on the nature of Christ [...]. In the 4th century, the doctrine was finally formulated".[13] Encyclopædia Britannica says: "Neither the word Trinity nor the explicit doctrine appears in the New Testament, nor did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict the Shema in the Old Testament: “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord” (Deuteronomy 6:4). [...] The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies. [...] by the end of the 4th century, under the leadership of Basil of Caesarea, Gregory of Nyssa, and Gregory of Nazianzus (the Cappadocian Fathers), the doctrine of the Trinity took substantially the form it has maintained ever since."[14] The Anchor Bible Dictionary states: "One does not find in the NT the trinitarian paradox of the coexistence of the Father, Son, and Spirit within a divine unity."[15]

Questions over Jesus as "Almighty God"

The debate over the biblical basis of the Trinity revolves primarily around the question of the divinity of Jesus. Those who reject the teaching that Jesus is true God argue that Jesus himself questioned even being called even "good" in deference to God in the parable of the rich young ruler (Matthew 19:16-17), said that the Father is greater than he is (John 14:28), disavowed omniscience as the Son (John 8:28; Mark 13:32), "learned obedience" (Hebrews 5:8), was called the 'firstborn of all creation' (Colossians 1:15) and 'the beginning of God's creation' (Revelation 3:14), referred to ascending to "my Father, and to your Father; and to my God, and to your God" (John 20:17) and that he said "the Father is the only true God" (John 17:3).

Additionally, Jesus quoted Deuteronomy 6:4 when saying in Mark 12:29 "'The most important [commandment] is this: Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one.'" It has been pointed out that in the original Greek in Mark 12, there are no "plural modifiers" in that Greek word there for "one" (eis), but that in Mark 12 it is simply a masculine singular "one".

They also argue to show that "Elohim" (sometimes trans. "gods") does not hint at any form of plurality, but rather to majesty pointing to the Hebrew dialect and grammar rules that render this title in nearly all circumstances with a singular verb. Raymond E. Brown who remained a devout catholic and trinitarian nevertheless wrote that Mark 10:18, Matthew 27:46, John 20:17, Ephesians 1:17, 2 Corinthians 1:3, 1 Peter 1:3, John 17:3, 1 Corinthians 8:6, Ephesians 4:4-6, 1 Corinthians 12:4-6, 2 Corinthians 13:14, 1 Timothy 2:5, John 14:28, Mark 13:32, Philippians 2:5-10, and 1 Corinthians 15:24-28 are "texts that seem to imply that the title God was not used for Jesus" and are "negative evidence which is often somewhat neglected in Catholic treatments of the subject."[16]

Trinitarians, and nontrinitarians who also hold Jesus Christ as Almighty God (such as the "Modalists"), claim these statements are based on Jesus' existence as the Son of God in human flesh; that he is therefore both God and man, who became "lower than the angels, for our sake," (Hebrews 2:6-8) and that he was tempted as humans are tempted, but did not sin (Hebrews 4:14-16). Some nontrinitarians counter the belief that the Son was limited only during his earthly life by citing "the head of Christ [is] God" (1 Corinthians 11:3), placing Jesus in an inferior position to the Father even after his resurrection. They also cite Acts 5:31 and Philippians 2:9, indicating that Jesus became exalted after ascension to heaven, and to Hebrews 9:24, Acts 7:55, and 1 Corinthians 15:24, 28, regarding Jesus as a distinct personality in heaven, all after his ascension.

Terminology

Nontrinitarians state that the doctrine of the Trinity relies on non-Biblical terminology, that the term "Trinity" is not found in Scripture and that the number three is never clearly associated with God necessarily, other than within the Comma Johanneum which is of spurious or disputed authenticity. They argue that the only number clearly unambiguously ascribed to God in the Bible is one, and that the Trinity, literally meaning three-in-one, ascribes a co-equal threeness to God that is not explicitly biblical.

Nontrinitarians cite other examples of terms not found in the Bible; multiple "persons" in relation to God, the terms "God the Son", "God-Man", and "God the Holy Spirit", and "eternally begotten". While the Trinitarianism term hypostasis is found in the Bible, it is used only once in reference to God [Heb 1:3] where it states that Jesus is the express image of God's person. The Bible does not explicitly use the term in relation to the Holy Spirit nor explicitly mentions the Son having a distinct hypostasis from the Father.

Nontrinitarians state that the major term Homoousios (of the same essence) was introduced into the Creed at the First Council of Nicaea. In support of this they cite, Pier Franco Beatrice: "The main thesis of this paper is that homoousios came straight from Constantine's Hermetic background. [...] The Plato recalled by Constantine is just a name used to cover precisely the Egyptian and Hermetic theology of the "consubstantiality" of the Logos-Son with the Nous-Father, having recourse to a traditional apologetic argument. [...] Constantine's Hermetic interpretation of Plato's theology and consequently the emperor's decision to insert homoousios in the Creed of Nicaea."[17]

Trinitarians maintain that these ideas are implied within scripture and were necessary additions of the Nicene Era to counter the doctrine of Arianism.

Holy Spirit

See also: Holy Spirit (Christian doctrinal variations)

It is also argued that the vast majority of scriptures that Trinitarians offer in support of their beliefs refer to the Father and to Son, but not to the Holy Spirit. Some nontrinitarians, including Jehovah's Witnesses, believe that the Holy Spirit is not a person but the active force of God.[18]

Non-Trinitarian views of the Holy Spirit

Non-trinitarian views about the Holy Spirit differ in certain ways from mainstream Christian doctrine and generally fall into several distinct categories.

Unitarian and Arian

Groups with Unitarian theology such as Polish Socinians, the 18th-19th Century Unitarian Church, Christadelphians conceive of the Holy Spirit not as a person but an aspect of God's power.[19] Christadelphians believe that the phrase Holy Spirit refers to God's power or mind/character, depending on the context.[20]

Though Arius himself believed that the Holy Spirit was a person or high Angel, modern Arian or Semi-Arian Christian groups such as Dawn Bible Students and Jehovah's Witnesses believe, the same as Unitarian groups, that the Holy Spirit is not an actual person but is God's "power in action", like God's divine "breath" or "energy", that he uses to accomplish his will and purpose in creation, redemption, sanctification, and divine guidance, and they do not typically capitalize the term.[21] They define the Holy Spirit as "God's active force", and they believe that it proceeds only from the Father.[21] A Jehovah's Witness brochure quotes Alvan Lamson: "...the Father, Son, and... Holy Spirit [are] not as co-equal, not as one numerical essence, not as Three in One... The very reverse is the fact."[22]

Binitarianism

Armstrongites, such as the Living Church of God, believe that the Logos and God the Father are co-equal and co-eternal, but they do not believe that the Holy Spirit is an actual person, like the Father and the Son. They believe the Holy Spirit is the Power, Mind, or Character of God, depending on the context. Mainstream Christians characterise this teaching as the heresy of Binitarianism, the teaching that God is a "Duality", or "two-in-one", rather than three.

Modalist groups

Oneness Pentecostalism, as with other modalist groups, teach that the Holy Spirit is a mode of God, rather than a distinct or separate person from the Father. They instead teach that the Holy Spirit is just another name for the Father. According to Oneness theology, the Holy Spirit basically is the Father. The United Pentecostal Church teaches that there is no personal distinction between God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.[23][24][25]

These two titles "Father" and "Holy Spirit" (as well as others) do not reflect separate "persons" within the Godhead, but rather two different ways in which the one God reveals himself to his creatures. Thus, the Old Testament speaks of "The Lord God and his Spirit" in Isaiah 48:16, but this does not indicate two "persons" according to Oneness theology. Rather, "The Lord" indicates God in all of His glory and transcendence, while the words "His Spirit" refer to God's own Spirit that moved upon and spoke to the prophet. The Oneness view is that this does not imply two "persons" any more than the numerous scriptural references to a man and his spirit or soul (such as in Luke 12:19) imply two "persons" existing within one body.[26]

Latter Day Saints

In the Latter-day Saint movement, the Holy Ghost (usually synonymous with Holy Spirit.)[27] is considered the third distinct member of the Godhead (Father, Son and Holy Ghost),[28] and to have a body of "spirit,"[29] which makes him unlike the Father and the Son who are said to have bodies "as tangible as man's."[30] According to LDS doctrine, the Holy Spirit is believed to be a person,[30][31] however having a body of spirit, he is able to pervade all worlds.[32] Mormons believe that the Holy Spirit is part of the "Divine Council", but that the Father is greater than both the Son and the Holy Spirit.[32]

Other groups

The Unity Church interprets the religious terms Father, Son, and Holy Spirit metaphysically, as three aspects of mind action: mind, idea, and expression. They believe this is the process through which all manifestation takes place.[33]

As a movement that developed out of Christianity, Rastafari has its own unique interpretation of both the Holy Trinity and the Holy Spirit. Although there are several slight variations, they generally state that it is Haile Selassie who embodies both God the Father and God the Son, while the Holy (or rather, "Hola") Spirit is to be found within Rasta believers (see 'I and I'), and within every human being. Rastas also say that the true church is the human body, and that it is this church (or "structure") that contains the Holy Spirit.

Monotheism

The Trinity doctrine is integral in inter-religious disagreements with two of the other major faiths, Judaism and Islam; the former rejects Jesus' divine mission entirely, and the latter accepts Jesus as a human prophet and the Messiah but not as the son of God. The concept of trinity is totally rejected, with Quranic verses calling the doctrine of the Trinity blasphemous[34] . Many within Judaism and Islam also accuse Christian Trinitarians of practicing polytheism—believing in three gods rather than just one.

Scriptural verses employed by nontrinitarians

Among Bible verses cited by opponents of Trinitarianism are those that claim there is only one God, the Father. Other verses state that Jesus Christ was a man. Although trinitarians consider these apparent contradictions part of the mystery and paradox of the Trinity itself, some nontrinitarians argue that there is little, if any, biblical basis for the Trinity.[35] Nontrinitarians cite scriptures such as the following as being contrary to the Trinity doctrine.

One God

Below are some scriptures nontrinitarians use to claim that there is only one God, the Father.

Son and Father

Below are some scriptures Jehovah's Witnesses' use to show that Jesus is inferior to God, and was a creation.[36] [37]

Holy spirit

Below are some scriptures nontrinitarians use to claim the Holy Spirit is inferior to God. Jehovah's Witnesses' use the below scriptures to endorse that the Holy Spirit is the power of God, rather than a "person".[38]

Old Testament

Ontological differences

Views on allegedly Trinitarian passages in scripture

Jehovah's Witnesses' argue that a person who is really seeking to know the truth about God is not going to search the Bible hoping to find a text that he can construe as fitting what he already believes. They say it is noteworthy at the outset that most of the texts used as “proof” of the Trinity actually mention only two persons, not three; so nontrinitarians claim that even if the trinitarian explanation of the texts were correct, these would not prove that the Bible teaches the Trinity.[39]

John 1:1 - The contention with this verse is that there is a distinction between God and the Logos (or "the Word"). Trinitarians contend that the third part of the verse (John 1:1c) translates as "and the Word was God", pointing to an equivalence between God and the Logos. Nontrinitarians contend that the Koine Greek ("kai theos ên ho logos") should instead be translated as "and the Word was a god", basing this on the contention that the section is an example of an anarthrous, that is, "theos" lacks the definite article, meaning its use was indefinite - "a god". Nontrinitarians also contend that had the author of John's gospel wished to say "and the Word was God" that he could have easily written "kai ho theos ên ho logos", but he did not. In this way, nontrinitarians contend that the Logos would be considered to be the pre-existent Jesus, who is wholly distinct from God. Alternatively, others argue that the Greek should be translated as "and the Logos was divine" (with theos being an adjective), and the Logos being interpreted as God's "plan" or "reasoning" for salvation. Thus, when "the Logos became flesh" in John  1:14, it is not interpreted to be a pre-existent Jesus being incarnated, but rather the "plan" of God being manifested in the birth of the man Jesus.

The text of John 1:1 has a sordid past and a myriad of interpretations. With the Greek alone, we can create empathic, orthodox, creed-like statements, or we can commit pure and unadulterated heresy. From the point of view of early church history, heresy develops when a misunderstanding arises concerning Greek articles, the predicate nominative, and grammatical word order. The early church heresy of Sabellianism understood John 1:1c to read, "and the Word was the God." The early church heresy of Arianism understood it to read, "and the word was a God."

— David A. Reed[40]

John 10:30:- Nontrinitarians believe that when Jesus said, "I and the Father are one," he did not mean that they were actually equal, or "one in substance". But rather that it was "one" in pastoral work, that was meant, in the context. They also quote John 17:21,22 where Jesus prayed regarding his disciples: “That they may all be one, as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they may be in us.” He also added, “that they may be one even as we are one.” Nontrinitarians point out that Jesus used the same Greek word (hen) for "one" in all these instances. And it is pointed out that Jesus did not expect for his followers to literally become "one" entity, or "one in substance", with each other, or with God. In which case it is said that Jesus also did not expect his hearers to think that he and God the Father were "one" entity either. But rather Arian nontrinarians insist that it was "one" in divine mission, work, love, and purpose, that was meant in each context.

John 20:28-29:- "And Thomas answered and said to Him, "My Lord and my God!" Jesus said to him, "Thomas, because you have seen Me, you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed"". Since Thomas called Jesus God, Jesus's statement appears to endorse Thomas's assertion. Nontrinitarians typically respond that it is plausible that Thomas is addressing the Lord Jesus and then the Father. Another possible answer is that Jesus himself said, "Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?" (John 10:34) referring to Psalms 82:6-8. The word "gods" in verse 6 and "God" in verse 8 is the same Hebrew word "'elohim",[41] which means, "gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God; occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative",[42] and can also refer to powers and potentates, in general, or as "God, god, gods, rulers, judges or angels".[41] and as "divine ones, goddess, godlike one"[43] The first explanation is perhaps the most plausible, in that the Greek forms used in the text do not denote two descriptions of one personage, but two personages described separately. A nontrinitarian would link this witnessing of Thomas to Jesus's saying that, to paraphrase, "He who sees me, sees the Father", and would point out that this text affirms the doctrine that Jesus is Lord but only God the Father is absolute deity, and hence the Lord of Jesus. Because "no one can come to the Father except through me (Jesus)", it is necessary however to call Jesus "Lord" (a requirement of belief in the New Testament), which is exactly what Thomas did when he believed.

Objection to mystery

Some non-trinitarians say[44] the mystery of the Trinity is a hindrance to cultivating a personal relationship with God as encouraged at James 4:8 and quoting[45] 1 Corinthians 14:33 (“God is not a God of confusion”, Revised Standard Version).

Trinitarians say[46] that mystery is acceptable because nobody can comprehend the fullness and goodness of God (Romans 11:33-36).

Alternative views

There have been numerous other views of the relations of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, including the following.

Early Christian

Modern Christians

Claimed pagan origins

Many nontrinitarians contend that the doctrine of the Trinity is a prime example of Christianity borrowing from Indo-European and Egyptian pagan sources. According to them, after the death of the Apostles their simpler idea of God was lost and the doctrine of the Trinity took its place due to the Church's accommodation of pagan ideas.

Those who argue for a pagan basis note that as far back as Babylonia, the worship of pagan gods grouped in threes, or triads, was common, and that this influence was also prevalent among the Celts, as well as in Egypt, Greece, and Rome. In ancient India, the concept of the trio—Brahma the creator, Shiva the destroyer and Vishnu the preserver dates back to millennia before Christ. At the very least, they suggest that Greek philosophy brought a late influence into the creation of the doctrine.

Some nontrinitarians also find a link between the doctrine of the Trinity and the Egyptian Christian theologians of Alexandria, suggesting that Alexandrian theology, with its strong emphasis on the deity of Jesus, served to infuse Egypt's pagan religious heritage into Christianity. They charge the Church with adopting these Egyptian tenets after adapting them to Christian thinking by means of Greek philosophy.[54] As evidence of this, they point to the widely acknowledged synthesis of Christianity with Platonic philosophy evident in Trinitarian formulas appearing by the end of the 3rd century. Hence, beginning with the Constantinian period, they allege, these pagan ideas were forcibly imposed on the churches as Catholic doctrine rooted firmly in the soil of Hellenism. Most groups subscribing to the theory of a Great Apostasy generally concur in this thesis.

The early apologists, including Justin Martyr, Tertullian and Irenaeus, frequently discussed the parallels and contrasts between Christianity, Paganism and other syncretic religions, and answered charges of borrowing from paganism in their apologetical writings.

Hellenic influences

See also: Hellenization

Advocates of the "Hellenic influences" argument attempt to trace the influence of Hellenic philosophers such as Philo of Alexandria on post-Apostolic Christianity, which then interpreted the Bible through a Middle Platonist and later Neoplatonist filter. These advocates point out the similarities between Hellenistic philosophy and post-Apostolic Christianity, by examining the following factors:

"The Absolute Being, the Father, who had begotten all things, gave an especial grace to the Archangel and First-born Logos (Word), that standing between, He might sever the creature from the Creator. The same is ever the Intercessor for the dying mortal before the immortal God, and the Ambassador and the Ruler to the subject. He is neither without beginning of days, as God is, nor is He begotten, as we are, but is something between these extremes, being connected with both."

"The [Christian] apologists [such as Justin Martyr and Irenaeus] began to claim that Greek culture pointed to and was consummated in the Christian message, just as the Old Testament was. This process was done most thoroughly in the synthesis of Clement of Alexandria. It can be done in several ways. You can rake through Greek literature, and find (especially in the oldest seers and poets) references to ‘God’ which are more compatible with monotheism than with polytheism (so at length Athenagoras.) You can work out a common chronology between the legends of prehistoric (Homer) Greece and the biblical record (so Theophilus.) You can adapt a piece of pre-Christian Jewish apologetic, which claimed that Plato and other Greek philosophers got their best ideas indirectly from the teachings of Moses in the Bible, which was much earlier. This theory combines the advantage of making out the Greeks to be plagiarists (and therefore second-rate or criminal), while claiming that they support Christianity by their arguments at least some of the time. Especially this applied to the question of God."

Groups

People

See also

Notes

  1. ^ http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/590747/Theodosius-I
  2. ^ http://www.fourthcentury.com/index.php/urkunde-33
  3. ^ http://www.xtimeline.com/evt/view.aspx?id=938690
  4. ^ http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/12976/Albigensian-Crusade
  5. ^ von Harnack, Adolf (1894-03-01). "History of Dogma". http://www.ccel.org/ccel/harnack/dogma1.ii.iii.iii.html. Retrieved 2007-06-15. "[In the 2nd century,] Jesus was either regarded as the man whom God hath chosen, in whom the Deity or the Spirit of God dwelt, and who, after being tested, was adopted by God and invested with dominion, (Adoptian Christology); or Jesus was regarded as a heavenly spiritual being (the highest after God) who took flesh, and again returned to heaven after the completion of his work on earth (pneumatic Christology)" 
  6. ^ Encyclopædia Britannica 1942 edition p.634 "Christianity"
  7. ^ HISTORY OF ARIANISM, Alexandria and Arius: AD 323-325
  8. ^ See Daniel C. Peterson, "Mormonism and the Trinity," in the journal of the Society for Mormon Philosophy and Theology, "Element" 3:1-2 (Spring/Fall 2007).
  9. ^ David Bernard's The Oneness of God, Word Aflame Press, 1983, ISBN 0-912315-12-1. pgs 264-274.
  10. ^ Wells, H. G. (n.d.). The Outline of History: being a plain history of life and mankind. Forgotten Books. 2. London, UK: The Waverley Book Company. p. 284. http://books.google.ca/books?id=L0zF2wuRCDUC&pg=PA284&dq=%22There+is+no+evidence+that+the+apostles+of+Jesus+ever+heard+of+the+Trinity,+at+any+rate+from+him%22&hl=en&ei=QJ7iTtGQIsf40gHU9_WOBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CDMQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22There%20is%20no%20evidence%20that%20the%20apostles%20of%20Jesus%20ever%20heard%20of%20the%20Trinity%2C%20at%20any%20rate%20from%20him%22&f=false. 
  11. ^ W. Fulton, ”Trinity”, Encyclopædia of Religion and Ethics, T. & T. Clark, 1921, Vol. 12, p. 459.
  12. ^ New Catholic Encyclopedia (1967) Volume XIV p.299
  13. ^ John Macquarrie, "Trinity," Microsoft Encarta Reference Library 2005. © 1993-2004 Microsoft Corporation. Retrieved on March 31, 2008.
  14. ^ "Trinity," Encyclopædia Britannica 2004 Ultimate Reference Suite DVD. Retrieved on March 31, 2008.
  15. ^ Jouette M. Bassler, "God in the NT", The Anchor Bible Dictionary, Doubleday, New York 1992, 2:1055.
  16. ^ Theological Studies #26 (1965) p. 545-73, "Does the NT call Jesus God?"
  17. ^ The Word "Homoousios" from Hellenism to Christianity, by P.F. Beatrice, Church History, Cambridge University Press on behalf of the American Society of Church History, Vol. 71, No. 2, (Jun., 2002), pp. 243-272. (retrieved @ noemon.net)
  18. ^ What Does God Require Of Us (published by Jehovah's Witnesses) http://watchtower.org/e/rq/ lesson 2 paragraph 3 "What, though, is the holy spirit? It is not a person like God. Rather, it is God's active force.—Psalm 104:30. "
  19. ^ The Unitarian: a monthly magazine of liberal Christianity ed. Jabez Thomas Sunderland, Brooke Herford, Frederick B. Mott - 1893 "We believe in the Holy Spirit, man's sole reliance for guidance, safety, or salvation, not as a separate person, entity, reality, or consciousness, existent apart from man or God, but as the recognizing sympathetic inter-communication in love between God and the human soul, the direct converse or communion of man's consciousness with Deity."
  20. ^ a b Broughton, James H.; Peter J Southgate. The Trinity: True or False?. UK: The Dawn Book Supply. http://www.biblelight.org/trin/trinind.htm. 
  21. ^ a b "Is the Holy Spirit a Person?". Awake!: 14–15. July 2006. http://www.watchtower.org/e/200607a/article_01.htm. "In the Bible, God’s Holy Spirit is identified as God’s power in action. Hence, an accurate translation of the Bible’s Hebrew text refers to God’s spirit as “God’s active force.”" 
  22. ^ "Is It Clearly a Bible Teaching?", Should You Believe in the Trinity?, ©1989 Watch Tower, p. 7, Reproduced here.
  23. ^ Peter Althouse Spirit of the last days: Pentecostal eschatology in conversation p12 2003 "The Oneness Pentecostal stream follows in the steps of the Reformed stream, but has a modalistic view of the Godhead"
  24. ^ See under heading "The Father is the Holy Ghost" in David Bernard, The Oneness of God, Chapter 6.
  25. ^ See also David Bernard, A Handbook of Basic Doctrines, Word Aflame Press, 1988.
  26. ^ See under "The Lord God and His Spirit," in Chapter 7 of David Bernard, The Oneness of God.
  27. ^ Wilson, Jerry A. (1992). "Holy Spirit". In Ludlow, Daniel H.. Encyclopedia of Mormonism. New York: Mcmillan. p. 651. ISBN 0-02-904040-X. http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/u?/EoM,3768.  "The Holy Spirit is a term often used to refer to the Holy Ghost. In such cases the Holy Spirit is a personage."
  28. ^ McConkie, Joseph Fielding (1992). "Holy Ghost". In Ludlow, Daniel H.. Encyclopedia of Mormonism. New York: Mcmillan. p. 649. ISBN 0-02-904040-X. http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/u?/EoM,3766.  "
  29. ^ D&C 131:7-8 ("There is no such thing as immaterial matter. All spirit is matter, but it is more fine or pure, and can only be discerned by purer eyes; We cannot see it; but when our bodies are purified we shall see that it is all matter.")
  30. ^ a b D&C 130:22.
  31. ^ Marion G. Romney (April 1974). "The Holy Ghost". http://lds.org/general-conference/1974/04/the-holy-ghost?lang=eng. Retrieved March 30, 2011. 
  32. ^ a b Millennial Star. XII. October 15, 1850. pp. 305–309. http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/MStar&CISOPTR=2051&REC=12&CISOSHOW=2013. Retrieved March 30, 2011. 
  33. ^ http://www.unitypaloalto.org/beliefs/twenty_questions.html
  34. ^ The Holy Qur'an. 4:171. 
  35. ^ quote:"It should be noted at the outset that most of the texts used as “proof” of the Trinity actually mention only two persons, not three; so even if the Trinitarian explanation of the texts were correct, these would not prove that the Bible teaches the Trinity." ,Reasoning from the scriptures, page.412 para.1
  36. ^ "Does the Bible agree with those who teach that the Father and the Son are not separate and distinct individuals?", Reasoning from the scriptures, page.407 para.3
  37. ^ "Is Jehovah in the “Old Testament” Jesus Christ in the “New Testament”?", Reasoning from the scriptures, page.197 para.2
  38. ^ "Does Bible teach that Holy spirit is a person?", Reasoning from scriptures page.406 para.3
  39. ^ Reasoning from Scriptures, Watch Tower bible and tract society page 411 para 4
  40. ^ David A. Reed. "How Semetic Was John? Rethinking the Hellenistic Background to John 1:1." Anglican Theological Review, Fall 2003, Vol. 85 Issue 4, p709
  41. ^ a b http://www.biblicalheritage.org/Linguistic/HL/1-A/-elohiym.htm
  42. ^ http://strongsnumbers.com/hebrew/430.htm
  43. ^ http://www.biblestudytools.net/Lexicons/Hebrew/heb.cgi?number=0430
  44. ^ The Watchtower December 1, 2006 page 6 "The engrafting of the Trinity was a masterstroke of the antichrist, for this doctrine shrouded God in mystery and blurred his relationship with the Son. (John 14:28; 15:10; Colossians 1:15) Just think, how can one “draw close to God,” as encouraged by the Scriptures, if God is a mystery?—James 4:8." online edition
  45. ^ Should You Believe in the Trinity? (brochure arguing against the Trinity published by Jehovah's Witnesses), 2006 printing, page 5 online edition
  46. ^ The Mystery Of God Incarnate by Paul D. Adams
  47. ^ Justo L. González, The Story of Christianity: The Early Church to the Present Day, Prince Press, 1984, Vol. 1, pp. 159-161• Jaroslav Pelikan, The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine, The University of Chicago Press, 1971, Vol. 1, pp. 181-199
  48. ^ Flint, James; Deb Flint. One God or a Trinity?. Hyderabad: Printland Publishers. ISBN 81-87409-61-4. http://www.christadelphia.org/pamphlet/p_onegod.htm. 
  49. ^ Manalo, Eraño G., Fundamental Beliefs of the Iglesia ni Cristo (Church of Christ) (Iglesia ni Cristo; Manila 1989)
  50. ^ http://www.watchtower.org/e/bh/article_04.htm
  51. ^ The Holy Spirit-God's Active Force - Jehovah's Witnesses Official Web Site
  52. ^ Mormons believe in what is sometimes called "social trinitarianism," meaning the three beings of the Godhead are blended in heart and mind like extremely close friends, but are not one being. Bushman, Richard Lyman (2008), Mormonism: A Very Short Introduction, New York: Oxford University Press, p. 6, ISBN 978-0-19-531030-6 .
  53. ^ David K. Bernard, THE ONENESS OF GOD, Chapter 12. TRINITARIANISM: AN EVALUATION, Table 11: Trinitarianism and Oneness Compared.
  54. ^ 'At times he forms one of a trinity in unity, with Ra and Osiris, as in Fig. 87, a god with the two sceptres of Osiris, the hawk's head of Horus, and the sun of Ra. This is the god described to Eusebius, who tells us that when the oracle was consulted about the divine nature, by those who wished to understand this complicated mythology, it had answered, "I am Apollo and Lord and Bacchus," or, to use the Egyptian names, "I am Ra and Horus and Osiris." Another god, in the form of a porcelain idol to be worn as a charm, shows us Horus as one of a trinity in unity, in name, at least, agreeing with that afterwards adopted by the Christians--namely, the Great God, the Son God, and the Spirit God.'—Samuel Sharpe, Egyptian Mythology and Egyptian Christianity, 1863, pp. 89-90.
  55. ^ Philo of Alexandria, On Providence (Fragment 1), cf. the preservation of this fragment in Eusebius of Caesarea's Praeparatio Evangelica 7.21.336b-337a
  56. ^ Select Treatises of St. Athanasius - In Controversy With the Arians - Freely Translated by John Henry Cardinal Newmann - Longmans, Green, and Co., 1911
  57. ^ A. Hilary Armstrong, Henry J. Blumenthal, Platonism. Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved May 13, 2008, from Encyclopædia Britannica 2006 Ultimate Reference Suite DVD.
  58. ^ Logan A. Marcellus of Ancyra (Pseudo-Anthimus), 'On the Holy Church': Text, Translation and Commentary. Verses 8-9. Journal of Theological Studies, NS, Volume 51, Pt. 1, April 2000, p.95
  59. ^ Neusner, Jacob, ed. 2009. World Religions in America: An Introduction, Fourth Ed. Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press, p. 257. ISBN 978-0-664-23320-4
  60. ^ Beit-Hallahmi, Benjamin. 1998. The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Active New Religions, Sects and Cults, Revised Ed. New York, New York: Rosen Publishing Group, p. 73. ISBN 0-8239-2586-2
  61. ^ Walker, James K. (2007). The Concise Guide to Today's Religions and Spirituality. Eugene, Oregon: Harvest House Publishers. pp. 117–118. ISBN 978-0-7369-2011-7
  62. ^ Avery Cardinal Dulles. The Deist Minimum. 2005.
  63. ^ Pfizenmaier, T.C., "Was Isaac Newton an Arian?" Journal of the History of Ideas 68(1):57–80, 1997.
  64. ^ Snobelen, Stephen D. (1999). "Isaac Newton, heretic : the strategies of a Nicodemite" (PDF). British Journal for the History of Science 32 (4): 381–419. doi:10.1017/S0007087499003751. http://www.isaac-newton.org/heretic.pdf. 

External links

Part of a series on Christianity
Jesus Christ
Foundations
Bible
Theology
History and
tradition
Denominations
(List) and
Movements
Topics
Christianity portal