1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Featured Trinity

Discussion in 'Other Christian Denominations' started by steaver, Feb 24, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Top Posters
Page 9 of 15
  1. steaver

    steaver Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2004
    Messages:
    10,443
    Likes Received:
    182
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    God, in His own timing, took millenniums to reveal His Essence to us, speaking mainly to this subject in these last days through His Son Jesus Christ and the Apostles. God is not taken by surprise that human beings would have a difficult time understanding God. The Trinity is something that took some time to understand mostly due to limited revelation, but from the very writings of Moses, since around 1400BC, God revealed to mankind that He was a Plural Being, when He said "Let us make man in our image". This does not define a Trinity at this time, but it does define a plurality in God that cannot be denied. Well, not honestly denied anyways. For this to be denied is simply one looking for an excuse not to see it.

    Not sure "imply" is a correct observation. There are passages which "declare" the Father is God, the Son is God and the Holy Spirit is God, and although they are all God the scripture declares they are One God and not three different competing gods. It is certainly a mystery, yet it is what the scripture declares. Humanly we may not understand how this can be, God is God, we take Him at His Word.

    Constantine had nothing to do with developing the belief in the Trinity. You might have gotten that from people who have read the da vinci code book. Tertullian coined the words "Trinity" and "person" and explained that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit were "one in essence - not one in Person. And this was written within 100 years after the Apostles had finished the cannon of holy scripture. No one can be forced to accept the Trinity teaching, no more than one can be forced to be a Christian.

    We see through early non-scriptural Christian writings that the Trinity was seen and understood shortly after the Apostles finished the scriptures.
     
    #161 steaver, Apr 6, 2013
  2. Thomas Helwys

    Thomas Helwys New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2013
    Messages:
    1,892
    Likes Received:
    0
    Look, I don't get my theology or historical facts from popular fiction. You would do well to read about Arianism and what Constantine did to stop it. It bothers me when a doctrine has to be imposed by political force.

    As I have said, I believe the deity of Jesus can be substantiated in scripture; I referenced John 8:58 in a post I made to Trevor. But I understand Arius's objections, and I think it would have been better for the church if politics and coercion had not been part of settling the issue. And your post is evidence that many Christians don't know the history involved here, no disrespect intended.
     
    #162 Thomas Helwys, Apr 6, 2013
  3. steaver

    steaver Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2004
    Messages:
    10,443
    Likes Received:
    182
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    You stated, "the Trinitarian view was not firmly established until Constantine forced its acceptance"

    I know the history and I disagree with your opinion. And I am not sure why you believe this if you have studied the history involved here, no disrespect intended.

    From what I have read concerning the beliefs held on the issue of Christ's Deity and the Trinity up until the time of Constantine, is that belief in the Trinity was the predominate opinion held by the bishops. So much so that out of about 300 bishops convened at the counsel only seventeen disagreed at first, and afterwards fourteen of those then agreed leaving only three who would not.

    So from my research, the Trinitarian view WAS firmly established before anything Constantine did or did not do.

    Arius was merely a deceived man who for whatever personal reasons wanted to establish his own interpretations of scripture. His views were of the minority of the time, just as they are now, and foreign to traditionally held doctrines from the Apostles forward. But no matter what the decade or century, there will always be opposition to the Truth. Just as the Apostles said there would be.
     
    #163 steaver, Apr 6, 2013
  4. Thomas Helwys

    Thomas Helwys New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2013
    Messages:
    1,892
    Likes Received:
    0
    You are incorrect. For a time, Arianism was the accepted view of the Empire. Constantine coerced acceptance of Trinitarianism. Coercion has no place in religion. The church eventually accepted the Trinitarian doctrine, but early on the situation was very fluid. Read this whole article:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arianism
     
    #164 Thomas Helwys, Apr 6, 2013
  5. steaver

    steaver Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2004
    Messages:
    10,443
    Likes Received:
    182
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    I have read the whole article. I did not see anywhere it states "Arianism was the accepted view of the Empire".

    Again, it matters not what Constantine did or did not do to Arminians. What matters is the majority of 300 bishops at the time , from all over the Empire, declared the Son is God of God. All but three. This alone proves that Arianism was not the accepted view before Constantine promoted it.

    Did Constantine persecute Arianism? Sure did. But that does not change the facts that Trinitarianism was already the predominate belief in the Christian world. Constantine may have felt a need to force ALL to believe it, but belief in the Deity of Jesus was already of an overwhelming majority, and he was foolish for believing he could force anyone to believe it, thus, his actions mattered not, the Trinity continue forth with or without him. Nothing stops God's Truth from prevailing!!
     
    #165 steaver, Apr 6, 2013
  6. steaver

    steaver Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2004
    Messages:
    10,443
    Likes Received:
    182
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Thomas,

    Maybe you could post some specific references that I could look at. I believe I have read much of what is out there on Constantine verses Arianism and I do not see anything that would suggest 1) Arianism was at anytime a predominate, or even equal to, view. In fact, what I have read is that it was very much minority, and even viewed as heretical by an overwhelming majority. 2) That the church did not widely accept the Trinity until Constantine forced the issue.
     
    #166 steaver, Apr 6, 2013
  7. Thomas Helwys

    Thomas Helwys New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2013
    Messages:
    1,892
    Likes Received:
    0
    What I am getting at is that two emperors supported Arianism. What if their successors had done the same and forced Arianism on the church the way Constantine forced Trinitarianism? Could be that Arianism would have a much larger place in Christendom today than it does.

    As I said, the situation early on was very fluid and unsettled. I don't understand why it pains some (and I'm not throwing that at you) to realize and admit that doctrine developed over a period of time, that everything was not settled into one accepted viewpoint by the end of the first century. It took time for the books of the Bible to be circulated and read, and for the canon to be recognized, affirmed, and accepted, let alone the meanings therein.

    Steaver, I always appreciate your posts, so don't think I am being harsh with you.
     
    #167 Thomas Helwys, Apr 7, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 7, 2013
  8. Thomas Helwys

    Thomas Helwys New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2013
    Messages:
    1,892
    Likes Received:
    0
    1. I am not saying that. I am saying that due to the influence of the state, it became for a time the official position of the empire due to its being held by the emperors in power. Athanasius, the great champion of the Trinitarian position, was exiled four or five different times depending on who was in power and Arianism in the ascendancy!

    2. I am not saying that, either, but it is not so easy to determine. There was so much political turmoil around this issue that the churches did not know what to expect. They didn't want to openly be on the wrong side of the issue, depending on who was in charge. I would say that the majority accepted the Trinity, but there were still significant minorities which did not, or that settled on a compromise between the Trinitarian and Arian positions.
     
    #168 Thomas Helwys, Apr 7, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 7, 2013
  9. steaver

    steaver Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2004
    Messages:
    10,443
    Likes Received:
    182
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Well I thank you for your kind words. I don't sense any harsh tone in your post. I know it's hard to tell sometimes, yet often I do feel I can sense the spirit in one's postings. I have been debating scripture for about fifteen years now, and believe me, when I started I was a bit rough around the edges and wasn't so Christ like always. But God continued to work on me (still is) and I try to be considerate in my post, even if my dander gets up and I feel I need to be blunt, lol. One thing I love about debate is that it challenges me to be ever learning, searching the scriptures, and searching history of the church such as our discussion has been here. I learn so much!

    Ok, I will reiterate that I don't really believe Constantine "forced" the Trinitarian doctrine. I will agree that he persecuted those who would not, but I doubt it really changed many hearts or minds on the matter, this only God could do. I guess we will have to disagree on this point, no biggie deal, it need not divide us as brothers in Christ.

    I have a strong belief in the Providence of God in the matters of men. Considering this, I do not see a possibility that Arianism could have prevailed as though God was only watching the situation to see what doctrine the people would choose for their statement of faith, and not part of it. If Arianism was the correct doctrine, then by the Providence of God, it would have prevailed to this day. But we see the Trinitarian position is what has prevailed, and even though the sects of Arianism stubbornly hang on, I believe history proves God has settled the matter. Those on the minority opinion should carefully consider if their position is honestly on the side of the history of God's Providence, and of God's people.

    During the Civil War, both sides prayed to God and each side believed God was on their side. But by the Providence of God, the north prevailed, and the south needed to accept that God was on the side of the North on this issue. I'm sure there were still some in the south at that time that, even though having seen their defeat, still in their hearts believed they were on the side of God. History proves them wrong and history proves Arianism to be wrong. Prudent students of history on this matter of the Deity of Christ would carefully consider the Providence of God in the matters of men.

    God speed brother! :wavey:
     
    #169 steaver, Apr 7, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 7, 2013
  10. Thomas Helwys

    Thomas Helwys New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2013
    Messages:
    1,892
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's a good post, well thought out.
     
    #170 Thomas Helwys, Apr 7, 2013
  11. TrevorL

    TrevorL Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2005
    Messages:
    515
    Likes Received:
    0
    Greetings again steaver,

    I looked at the previous page and found that my post was incomplete. Not sure why it was cut, but most probably my haste in copying and pasting. The following was the complete post.
    I would have to take verse by verse, line by line and word by word in Romans 8 to try to understand why you claim this. My understanding is that Jesus partook of the Spirit of God. Thus the Spirit that Jesus now wields is God the Father’s Spirit. This is the sum of the following: the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of the Father, that is the mind, the wisdom, the counsel revealed in God’s written and spoken word and perhaps many other aspects of the Divine influence of God in Jesus’ life. But this does not make the Father and Jesus into one being, they are two beings. This does not make Jesus into God in the full sense that you are suggesting, but it makes Jesus the Son of God in the full sense that I am suggesting. The Father has begotten a Son in his likeness and image, and Jesus is this fullness of the character of God.

    I like the following as it describes that the written word of God was a precursor of the living word of God, the Lord Jesus Christ. This spoken and living word is called the spirit of Christ, and yet in my understanding the reality of this spirit of Christ was still future when spoken.
    Hebrews 4:12-13 (KJV): 12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. 13 Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight: but all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do.
    1 Peter 1:10-12 (KJV): 10 Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you: 11 Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow. 12 Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into.

    I was also interested in your comments on history and God’s providence.
    Yes I believe that God allowed such doctrines as the Trinity to gain wide acceptance, but I see this in the light that God prophesied that there would be a falling away from the truth of the gospel. The majority is not always right. Please also refer to our discussion on Daniel 7, as I believe that the little horn of the fourth beast is the RCC shown in the role of persecuting and prevailing over the saints of God.

    Kind regards
    Trevor
     
    #171 TrevorL, Apr 7, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 7, 2013
  12. steaver

    steaver Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2004
    Messages:
    10,443
    Likes Received:
    182
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    It appears from your past two post now, that although you cannot seem to grasp the understanding of Jesus is God, your own conclusions affirm the very doctrine you are attempting to dismiss. You are correct once again, the Spirit that Jesus wields is God the Father's Spirit, Amen! "I and my Father are One"

    Doesn't fit, not even a little. As we can see from history, the church had been increasing for over 1900 years, thus, the falling away has yet to come. This leaves you with God's Providence siding and promoting the Trinity because it is Truth. Unless you are prepared to claim that the majority who follow the Trinity are lost, are you willing to claim this?
     
    #172 steaver, Apr 8, 2013
  13. TrevorL

    TrevorL Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2005
    Messages:
    515
    Likes Received:
    0
    Greetings again steaver,

    The following is a few extracts from a book on this subject by a French Professor of the History of Religion, written in 1904 and translated into English in 1905. I thought you might be interested in his assessment of the various developments.
    You seem to indicate that you see the above events and some of the details from a different perspective and you seem to claim that there was a golden thread being woven to form the fabric of the doctrine of the Trinity.
    I will allow God to judge each individual who has been brought up seeing nothing else but the Trinity. For my part I view the above developments as part of the process of the formation of Apostate Church that will oppose Christ at His coming.

    Kind regards
    Trevor
     
    #173 TrevorL, Apr 8, 2013
  14. steaver

    steaver Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2004
    Messages:
    10,443
    Likes Received:
    182
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    I carefully read through the extracts from the book you provided. I failed to see him present even one document that would support his rhetoric. It's nothing more than an opinion without substance.

    Then you failed to deal with the glaring problem in your position. IF God's Providence in this matter is as you claim, that the majority Christian belief in the Trinity is evidence of the falling away of the church from the truth of the gospel since about the third century, and is evidence these Trinity believing Christians are apostate, then you by default, even though you are not honest enough to speak up and say so in a public forum, in your heart and mind must conclude at the least that the majority of Trinity believers are lost. There can be no other conclusion, though you refuse to say so and pass it off as God's theological problem to deal with.

    You presented your argument Trevor for God's Providence in this matter. Which is why we are here in a debate forum, to present arguments, that's a good thing. You now must defend your argument when challenged with the necessary end consequences for Christians found in your pov. For your pov of God's Providence to be true, then the majority, if not all, of Christians who worship the Trinity are apostate, following a false gospel, and thus must be lost.

    Are the majority of Trinity worshippers lost or not Trevor? If not, then your argument on God's Providence in this matter is void. If you don't know, then what good is your argument?
     
    #174 steaver, Apr 8, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 8, 2013
  15. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    God commanded Angels to worship the Son, was he wrong?

    Thomas called jesus his very Lord and God, was he wrong?

    peter called the Holy spirit God, as did paul, were both wrong?
     
    #175 Yeshua1, Apr 9, 2013
  16. TrevorL

    TrevorL Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2005
    Messages:
    515
    Likes Received:
    0
    Greetings again steaver,
    Perhaps the small extracts were not sufficient, but it is a book of 284 pages. I simply highlighted a few statements that could indicate some of the trends and this book helped me understand how such a development occurred. He was a historian possibly with some bias, but he would not have plucked all his ideas out of thin air and padded it with rhetoric. Until I read that book I had been astounded at how such a radical change from 1st Century theology could have occurred.

    One of my brethren had already shared some similar material depicting the various teachings on this subject of well known early Christians. These were Justin Martyr, Iranaeus of Lyons, Tertullian, Origen, Clement of Alexandria, Arius, Athanasius, and then some of the decisions of the Council of Nicaea and the Council of Constantinople. There seemed to be a change of view and when I asked, he agreed that the views of these writers seemed to indicate an overall development and change of beliefs over time, resulting in the consolidating of some of these ideas in the two councils. I also sent him a copy of the citations from the above book and his response was:
    I have not used the word Providence, but you introduced this when discussing with Thomas. You seem to base your argument on the premise that the majority must be right and that God is at work to make sure the majority is right. I prefer to look at Scripture that clearly states that there would be a falling away and that this had partly started in the times of the Apostles. I also believe that the Scriptures state that this majority would gain the ascendancy over the minority for a given period of time. The following Scripture indicates to me that the majority will not hold the truth at Jesus’ return:
    Luke 17:26-30 (KJV): 26 And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man. 27 They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all. 28 Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded; 29 But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all. 30 Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed.
    Isaiah 60:1-3 (KJV): 1 Arise, shine; for thy light is come, and the glory of the LORD is risen upon thee. 2 For, behold, the darkness shall cover the earth, and gross darkness the people: but the LORD shall arise upon thee, and his glory shall be seen upon thee. 3 And the Gentiles shall come to thy light, and kings to the brightness of thy rising.

    You are the one drawing the line, so I will quote from a statement from the same brother mentioned above.
    If he is correct and I have no serious reason to doubt his figures, then on the basis of your logic, are these 30% of Christians of the 4th Century lost? I prefer to leave all of this in God’s hands. From your statements it is evident that we have a different view of the world and the religious world. I believe the purpose of the gospel is to separate a faithful remnant from the world, and this will only be a minority until the kingdom is established.
    John 17:15-16 (KJV): 15 I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil. 16 They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
    Acts 15:14 (KJV): Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name.

    Kind regards
    Trevor
     
    #176 TrevorL, Apr 10, 2013
  17. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    7 For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist. 8 Watch yourselves, that you do not lose what we have accomplished, but that you may receive a full reward. 9 [a]Anyone who goes too far and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God; the one who abides in the teaching, he has both the Father and the Son. 10 If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house, and do not give him a greeting; 11 for the one who gives him a greeting participates in his evil deeds.
     
    #177 Yeshua1, Apr 10, 2013
  18. Walter

    Walter Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2011
    Messages:
    2,518
    Likes Received:
    142
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian

    I have posed these very questions to Jehovah's Witnesses when they 'come a knockin' without much response. Although, they insist in regards to angels being commanded to worship the Son, "This is only confusing if you retain the mistaken notion that worship is FOR God. It has nothing to do with God because God needs NOTHING from us or anyone else (apparently including angels?). He is complete. Worship is for the worshiper. It facilitates the proper state of mind within the worshiper. That is why obeisance could be a reasonable interpretation and not worship."

    I would be interested in TrevorL's response to these same questions.
     
    #178 Walter, Apr 10, 2013
  19. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Had a JW tell me one time that Thomas said my lord to jesus, then he looked up into heaven and said my God!

    problem is that the literal Greek states that Thomas said The God and Lord of me!
     
    #179 Yeshua1, Apr 10, 2013
  20. steaver

    steaver Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2004
    Messages:
    10,443
    Likes Received:
    182
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    I introduced it, and you introduced your view on it as pertaining to the Trinity.

    Let's make sure we define what "majority" it is we speak of in our arguments and in the application of scripture.

    1) are we speaking of the majority of Christians, or 2) are we speaking of the majority of all people.

    I believe the acceptance of the Trinity by the majority of Christians is God's Providence affirming Truth through His children. You believe it is God's Providence affirming the falling away of the church for some 1600 years or so now.

    Luke 17 and Isaiah 60 say absolutely zilch about the falling away of Christians. You haven't proven from the text that it is speaking of the falling away of the church.

    Please provide a scripture reference for this belief.

    What majority? The majority of Christians or the majority of all people? The majority of all people as in the days of Noah who did not believe Noah and refused to get in the ark of salvation? This scripture says nothing of Christians not holding to the truth of the gospel. How many believers climbed into the ark with Noah and his family? Answer, none. Why? Because they were unbelievers! How many believers were destroyed in Sodom? Answer, none.

    That's not according to my logic at all. It is you who claim Trinity believers are apostate and will suffer the fate of those in the days of Noah.

    Well, which way is it for you? Let's stay on topic here, this debate is about Trinity believers (majority) verses Arianism believers (minority).

    Do you prefer to leave it in God's hands, or do you prefer to believe and teach only a minority of Christians will be saved, and thus, the majority of Christians who believe and teach the Trinity will be destroyed?
     
    #180 steaver, Apr 10, 2013
Page 9 of 15
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...