Clivedurdle

The Galatians thread discusses possible changes between word and son - the word became flesh therefore may be an invention.

Take this a step further - where did the idea of the trinity come from - how did it evolve?


Might the idea of the trinity be a logically preditable result of editing spirit and son and word?

If we look at the records we have, is a timeline showing this evolution discernable?

Cege

I remember that Tertullian was the first Christian writer to use the word 'trinity' and maybe that he actually coined the word around 150 CE.

I John 5:7 is the basis for the philosophy of a trinity or triune God, but that verse apparently has been controversial for centuries since, as Bart Ehrman points out in Misquoting Jesus (or via: amazon.co.uk) the verse is not in any of the earliest Greek manuscripts.

For Christians to worship One God, it is necessary for Christianity to explain how father God, son God, and spirit God are one entity rather than three.

The position the evangelical church takes, it seems to me, is that the trinity philosophy can only be accepted on faith because there is no human way to explain it successfully.

Cheerful Charlie

Generally, Tertullian is given the honors for inventing the concepts that lead to the full blown trinity. The neo-Platonist Plotinus was probably influential thanks to a similar metaphysics he invented.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian
Tertullian denounced Christian doctrines he considered heretical, but later in life adopted views that themselves came to be regarded as heretical. He was the first great writer of Latin Christianity, thus sometimes known as the "Father of the Latin Church". He introduced the term Trinity (Theophilius to Autolycus - 115-181 - introduced the word Trinity in his Book 2, chapter 15 on the creation of the 4th day) as the Latin trinitas, to the Christian vocabulary[2] and also probably the formula "three Persons, one Substance" as the Latin "tres Personae, una Substantia" (itself from the Koine Greek "treis Hypostases, Homoousios"), and also the terms vetus testamentum ("old testament") and novum testamentum ("new testament").

http://people.bu.edu/wwildman/WeirdW...il_theme05.htm


Influence
Origen (c.185-c.254) was an Alexandrian theologian. In his thought, the Neoplatonic vision of Being as emmanation from and return to the One is retained, with some modifications to take account of sin. Perhaps the most important aspect of Plotinus’ influence on Origen is in his view of the Trinity and his Christology. Origen appears to have held (like Arius did, later, who spoke of the Second Person of the Trinity as "the firstborn before time of all creation") that God the Father is the One, and that the Son is eternally generated (or emanated, in Plotinus’ terms) from the One somewhat like Mind is. Thus the Son has lesser being than the Father, but (when the Spirit is worked into the picture) the Trinity is still an intimate unity of a sort. This generally Neoplatonist point of view was an important and generally depreciated player in the subordinationist debate, which was one of the controversies eventually addressed in the Council of Nicea (325) and the Nicene Creed.

Expert theologians have chewed this over for centuries and large libraries of the history of trinitariansim and its loud Christological controversies could be created of these sorts of books.


CC

RareBird

The "father" equals the past. The "son" equals the future. Between the past and the future is the present where the "spirit" lives. The spirit must do honor to the past (the father) and to the future (the son). Simple origin but regrettably misapplied to some kind of "god" configuration.

Gawen

Where do I find scriptural support for this?

Chris Weimer

Don't bother.

RareBird

You probably won't find it in scripture because there has been plenty of incentive along the way to omit any make-sense origin of the simple trinity of human existence. I "believe" it to be a co-opted concept which has been perverted to infer some cockamamy deity. Never-the-less, we do live between a past and a future, both of which could be expressed in male personifications as was typical in the ancient patriarchical world. The "spirit" part of the equation only seems to validate my interpretation of the trinity as certainly there could just be a father and son god metaphor that could work without the spirit in the mix. To me it makes sense as a pivotal realization point between past and future where a person must decide a fateful action. People invoke solemn expresssions under such circumstances and the calling upon the past and future to help make right decisions in the present seems to work.

mountainman

Tertullian is Eusebius. And besides, Tertullian is not
what one would call a doctor of the church, but is
presented as an general and associated author.

Newton rejected the trinity, for the express reasons
that he outlined in his personal memoirs, namely that
it was never mentioned until well after Nicaea. Try
one of the Newton ONLINE projects.

(PS: the first sentence of this post has an IMO on it)

Best wishes,



Pete

Gawen

Yeah, I knew better....
Was more of a rhetorical question anyway...

damascan

The trinity came about after the apostolic period during which a flood of pagan converts came into the Christian church. They intoduced such concepts as the immortality of the soul and the trinity doctrine. There were attempts in the second century CE by these converts to adapt Christian teachings to the philosophies of the day. Hence you will see Justin Martyr trying to equate Christianity with the "true philosophy". Triad gods were very common in the near east and the mediterranean. When pagan influenced Christianity became the popular in the 4th Century, Constantine trying to unify his realm made it the religion of the empire. The apostolic Christianity, which distinguished between the father and the son was banned. However, you can see that it was not extinguished when you read the works of the like of Isaac Newton.