A simplistic historical review underpinned by an expectation that the intelligentsia were all in agreement and therefore rightfully invented the Trinity, couldn't be further from the truth....Kurieuo wrote:It is reasoning of man, like your reasoning is one of a woman.That said, Trinitarian doctrine is something other than Christ's divinity, so you shouldn't keep saying this is a discussion of Trinity, because such is much more
What we're discussing is Christology, specifically the nature of Christ. We have Scripture which clearly attributes divinity to Christ, Scripture you mentioned even, and others I've mentioned. That video in my last post too, the man makes a quite powerful case examining some passages you present as problematic in context. I think I was quite clear, and detailed, I'll let nonpartisan readers be the judge. Nonetheless, that video presents much of what I say in a different manner which I found clear and sensible.
As for your hand wave dismissal of such being reason of man, let's follow what exactly happened. Jesus was no longer here, and we had writings, and the teachings the Apostles passed on that were believed throughout Christian churches, both Eastern and Western churches. Disputes arose as to how one should logically reason and coherently make sense of such teachings. Councils were called and had, where very intelligent and passionate men, respected leaders in many different churches, hundreds, got together, discussed, and put together a logically coherent declaration based upon Scripture itself and what had been passed on. It would be foolishness to dismiss such thought without much consideration as just reason of man, substituting in your own had millennias later.
"The world around the early Church was changing. The Roman empire began to crumble and Constantine came to power. He wished to unify the Empire, and chose Christianity to do so. But Christianity was far from unified.
Constantine invited the bishops from East and West to join him in the small seaside village of Nicea for a council to unify the church. McGiffert summarizes the council: three main groups were present at this council: Eusebius of Nicomedia presenting the Arian view of the Trinity, Alexander of Alexandria presenting the Athanasian version, and a very large ‘middle party’ led by Eusebius of Cesarea whose various theological opinions did not interfere with their desire for peace (259). Eusebius of Nicomedia submitted the Arian creed first and it was rejected. Then Eusebius of Cesarea submitted the Cesarean baptismal creed. Instead of submitting a creed of their own, the anti-Arians modified Eusebius’, thereby compelling him to sign it and completely shutting the Arians out. Those Arians who did not sign were deposed and exiled (261-263).
Thus Constantine had his unified Church which was not very unified. McGiffert asserts that Eusebius of Cesarea was not altogether satisfied with the creed because it was too close to Sabellianism (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three aspects of one God). Eusebius was uncomfortable enough with the Nicene creed that he felt it expedient to justify himself to his own people in a long letter in which he states that he ‘resisted even to the last minute’ until the words were examined and it was explained that the words ‘did not mean all they seemed to mean but were intended simply to assert the real deity of the Son...’ (264-265). McGiffert goes on to show that a ‘double interpretation [was authorized by the leaders] in order to win Eusebius and his followers.’ (266)."
Your reasoning does not hold up. These may have been intelligent men, but there was disagreement. Regardless, the ideology of a Trinity was invented by man. How do we know? Jesus never mentioned it...AND.......
There can be no doubt: Jesus was a stranger to all sides of the political proceedings in Nicea. He never claimed to be God, but was content to be God’s son. His creed was not of words that must be followed to the letter, but rather of spirit: ‘Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God’.{# Mt 4:8} He did not require wealthy and learned bishops to mingle philosophy and pagan polytheism with his simple truth, but blessed the ‘poor’ and the ‘meek’.{# Mt 4:1-12} No, it was not from Jesus that the dogma of the Trinity came.
Is this positive proof that the Trinity owes it origins to paganism and philosophy? The evidences of history leave little doubt. The concept of the Trinity finds its roots in Pagan theology and Greek philosophy: it is a stranger to the Jewish Jesus and the Hebrew people from which he sprang.
http://www.heraldmag.org/olb/Contents/d ... rinity.htm
What is clear to me is that I haven't ignored anything. I haven't taken any scripture out of context, and I am perfectly sensible and I have responded to you appropriately.So then, I think I was quite clear and sensible, and believe others would have understood most of what I said. Further more, I can account for all Scripture rather than simply ignoring parts I don't like, and reading other passages in isolation devoid of any context to try generate some support for a view that has no agreed support by the early Christian church. it was clear to me you weren't and aren't going to agree, but for other readers your passages have now been responded to. Mine still remain, along with some of your own, which reveal Christ's divinity. Let the reader decide.
Jesus prayed to His father as if his Father were a different person, said his father was greater than he/Jesus is as if the Father was a different person, and will hand over the kingdom to his father, as if his Father was a different person. In this things Jesus did not speak in parables, he spoke plainly. I do not believe Jesus is a liar. I don't think Jesus is misguided. I think and reasoning that makes Jesus into a liar is misguided.
Jesus said, ‘... I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me’,{# Joh 5:30} and in another place ‘my doctrine is not mine, but His that sent me’;{# Joh 7:16} and his words ‘my Father is greater than I’ {#Joh 14:28} leave no doubt as to their relationship.
... Good one Rick!
