Jesus adherents only: How is a ''separate' trinity concept, not polytheism?

[Deeje]

With God (Holy Spirit) teaching us, why do we need Scriptures at all?

I think that the scriptures were written because this is God's preferred method of communication. If it wasn't necessary, then why did God's spirit direct the writing of it in the first place? (2 Timothy 3:16-17)

How many people today claim that the holy spirit directs them?....yet they are poles apart with their belief systems. It is so much more difficult to tell who is telling the real truth from the false prophets. The devil is a master of deception....so Jesus said that he has the majority traveling down the wrong road. (Matthew 7:13-14)

With the written word it is much more difficult to alter God's commands and teachings. The scriptures have been preserved down through the centuries by the same power that inspired them. It is also the same power that determines who interprets them correctly. There can't be many versions of the truth....there is just "one Lord, one faith, one baptism" so it is up to us to find the ones who have all three.

 

[Coder]

Hi,

With the written word it is much more difficult to alter God's commands and teachings.

What could be more consistent than the teachings of God (Holy Spirit)?

 

[savagewind]

With God (Holy Spirit) teaching us, why do we need Scriptures at all?

The scriptures are for learning the language of The Holy Spirit.

The Holy Spirit will communicate the truth, but if you don't know the language you won't even know you are being talked to.

People who use only scripture to understand heavenly things are cutting out The Holy Spirit.

Our very dear friend @Deeje says the proof we do not hear from The Holy Spirit is that we are not all on the same page about everything,
but that is not reasonable to expect even from Jehovah (not God's real name).

 

[Deeje]

Hi,

What could be more consistent than the teachings of God (Holy Spirit)?

Since the collective effect of the holy spirit's operation is unity, (1 Corinthians 1:10) then all those who are directed by the spirit would of necessity all believe the same things....yet what do we see?

Do those who claim to be directed by the spirit all believe the same things? Sorry but disunity means that the spirit speaks with a forked tongue. It is deliberately causing confusion.

 

[savagewind]

Since the collective effect of the holy spirit's operation is unity, (1 Corinthians 1:10) then all those who are directed by the spirit would of necessity all believe the same things....yet what do we see?

Directed? Do you mean led? John 10:14

 

[Coder]

Since the collective effect of the holy spirit's operation is unity, (1 Corinthians 1:10) then all those who are directed by the spirit would of necessity all believe the same things....yet what do we see?

Maybe that's because people are coming with their human biases and presuppositions and not listening to God. Maybe religion is used by some as a form of political/financial gain and so there is competition. Before one can even discuss truth, these other issues cannot be present or at least minimized. When one discusses truth with someone how does one know whether the person is simply repeating what they have been taught or whether they really understand?

 

[Deeje]

Maybe that's because people are coming with their human biases and presuppositions and not listening to God. Maybe religion is used by some as a form of political/financial gain and so there is competition. Before one can even discuss truth, these other issues cannot be present or at least minimized. When one discusses truth with someone how does one know whether the person is simply repeating what they have been taught or whether they really understand?

And therein lies the dilemma.

The Bible simplifies it for us. In John 6:44 Jesus says..."No man can come to me unless the Father, who sent me, draws him".

The invitation is given by God when he sees a good and humble heart. He draws that person to Christ and invites them to get to know him through the teachings of that one.

Christ's congregation are a collective of those who all received the same invitation. They all gather at one "address" and all share fellowship and encouragement. (Hebrews 10:34-35)

For those who believe that their invitation is somehow "special" and the address on their invitation is their own, then that in itself should ring alarm bells.

As one with a Catholic background, but clearly without many Catholic Church beliefs, where do you gather with fellow believers?

Paul said that we were to gather regularly with our christian brothers and sisters.....who are yours? With whom do you meet for fellowship and instruction?

He also said..."Be obedient to those who are taking the lead among you and be submissive, for they are keeping watch over you as those who will render an account, so that they may do this with joy and not with sighing, for this would be damaging to you." (Hebrews 13:17)

How does this apply if you have no brotherhood? Who is keeping watch over your soul?

 

[savagewind]

He also said..."Be obedient to those who are taking the lead among you and be submissive, for they are keeping watch over you as those who will render an account, so that they may do this with joy and not with sighing, for this would be damaging to you." (Hebrews 13:17)

Actually it doesn't say be obedient. Why would God by The Holy Spirit tell us to obey mere men?
1 Samuel 8:5-7
Psalms 146:3
It probably says to yield to those taking the lead. It means do not rise up to resist them. The reason? Romans 13:1
Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.

If you stand up to resist someone who is taking the position of leader, you might actually be fighting God because God has placed them for that. So Hebrews 13:17 But change OBEY to "let them be", "do not fight them".

 

[savagewind]

The Jehovah's Witnesses, of which @Deeje is one, say it can't mean do not stand up in opposition against them, Romans 13:2 they say it HAS TO mean obey them.


Psalms 146:3 Do not put your trust in princes, in human beings, who cannot save.
Psalms 60:11 Give us aid against the enemy, for human help is worthless
Psalms 118:8-9 Darby Bible Translation
It is better to trust in Jehovah than to put confidence in man;Aramaic Bible in Plain English
It is good to trust upon Lord Jehovah - better than to trust upon a prince.
Psalms 40:4 American Standard Version
Blessed is the man that maketh Jehovah his trust, And respecteth not the proud, nor such as turn aside to lies.

 

[Kenny]

I am a student of the Bible, and have been for over 40 years, which to me is a perpetual position. I will never know it all, but I am in a continual state of learning. Aren't you?

YUP! -- And it is so true, the more I learn the more I realize how little I know

The KJV is one of the most biased translations towards the trinity in existence. If you consult a variety of translations you get a more rounded out view of what the scriptures are saying. Back that up with Strongs Concordance and it's easy to get to the real meaning of the original words. I recommend this to all serious students of the Bible.

Absolutely.

The word "ghost" conveys a completely different connotation in the minds of a conditioned population, than "spirit".

Only in today's perspective. A student knows that both come from the same word and knows that the difference was made by the different Universities that translated it during the reign of King James

The use of the word "ghost" in a scriptural context is designed to make the "Holy Ghost" into an entity, rather than the means by which God disseminates his power. To personify the holy spirit is to promote a trinity, not to tell the truth about how the word is used elsewhere in the Bible.

Hardly...

just one of many John 14:26 But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.

An advocate speaks on one's behalf.
An entity teaches--power does not
An entity reminds-- power does not.

Thank you.....you just proved how early the "weeds" were planted and grew. (Matthew 13:24-30; 36-40) Apostates were snapping at the heels of the apostles whilst they were still alive, so when their restraining influence was gone, the weeds took over. (2 Thess 2:7; Acts 20:29-30)

LOL... I'm sure that is your viewpoint. Mine is that since the word came first and JW came after... it just might be you sowing tares.

There is a reason why the Bible canon ends with John's Revelation. Nothing written after then can be counted on as absolute truth. Remember that Jesus said that the weeds started out looking just like the wheat.....but at the harvest time, they would not resemble one another at all.

Correct... that's why the Gospel started out as the seed of God's word... and then "If it were possible" - the elect would succumb... but I know to let the tares grow with the wheat... just waiting for the harvest.

Jesus never once said he was God.......his Father never once said to worship the son. The son said we must "worship" the Father "alone". (Luke 4:8) Jesus called his Father "the only true God" and did not include himself in that description. (John 17:3) Nowhere are we told to worship the holy spirit. Not a very solid foundation, is it? If there is not one single statement from either God or his Christ directly making the claim that they are equal parts of a godhead, then you can't present a trinity without a lot of tap-dancing and forcing scripture to say what it never did.

That's already been covered. Suffice to say that the Pharisees charged against him for saying He was God. I figure they knew what He was saying better that any commentary that differs from that position. And if he wasn't God, they you have another problem... make him an angel or something creating a whole new set of problems for support.

Apostasy is a falling away from the truth. Christendom does not teach the truth. One only needs to study the Bible and see what it really teaches to understand how far the deviation has gone over many centuries. What we see today does not resemble the church that Jesus founded in the first century. Christendom is a fusion re
If ion with its foundation doctrines all adopted from Babylon, not the Bibel.

The problem is that you study from the JW Bible... translated by the same, and only accepted by the same. I look for the Greek.

We will let Jesus be the judge....shall we?

DEAL!! Did I tell you that I appreciate you?

I don't know what you see in those words, BUTTTTTTTT.......all I see is a humble angel who rejected an act of worship improperly given to him by John. The angel said he was just fellow servant like the prophets, so he told John to "worship God", not Jesus.

Except he said to worship God alone.

Sorry, but the scriptures disagree. God was "with" Israel by means of his appointed mediator, Moses.

Moses was the mediator of the Law -- which ultimately was just a schoolmaster to point to God through faith. I am of the faith of Abraham.

The magi did not come to "worship" the child Jesus. The same word is used in this instance but these pagan astrologers came to pay their respects to a future "King of the Jews", not to a god. (Matthew 2:1-3, 11)

I already proved my point with the angel saying only proskyneo God. Your explanation didn't diminish my point
Luke 4:10 Then saith Jesus unto him,Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. Jesus said only to proskuneo God.


You have basically said that all the words of worshipping the Father... doesn't mean worship. Or if you decide that if it is towards Jesus it is to honor Him but to the Father it is worship, then the sword cuts both ways.

Jesus said that his Father called human judges "gods" to whom proper respect was given. He did not reject "obeisance" because he readily acknowledged that he was "the son of God".....a position of respect and honor.....but not "worship" in the same sense as one would offer to his Father. (John 10:31-37) Even in heaven, the Father is still the God of Jesus. (Revelation 3:12)

In the British justice system, a judge is called "Your Worship".......in America, a judge is called "Your Honor"....it's the same principle. The word is translated according to context. And there is no worship to be given to anyone but the Father as Jesus said.

and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God;
which they concluded very rightly, from his saying, ( John 10:30 ) , that God was his Father, and that he and his Father were one; that is, in nature and essence, and therefore he must be God; but then this was no blasphemy, but a real truth, as is hereafter made to appear; nor is there any contradiction between his being man, and being God; he is truly and really man, but then he is not a mere man, as the Jews suggested; but is truly God, as well as man, and is both God and man in one person, the divine and human nature being united in him, of which they were ignorant: two mistakes they seem to be guilty of in this account; one that Christ was a mere man, the other that he made himself God, or assumed deity to himself, which did not belong to him, and therefore must be guilty of blasphemy; neither of which were true: the phrase is used by the Jews, of others who have taken upon them the name and title of God; as of Hiram king of Tyre, of whom they say, (hola wmue have) , "that he made himself God" F18; the same they say of Nebuchadnezzar; and the modern Jews still continue the same charge against Jesus, as their ancestors did, and express it in the same language, and say of him, that he was a man, and set himself up for God F19. John Gill

 

[Coder]

And therein lies the dilemma.

Yes, including major presuppositions about the Scriptures IMHO.

The Bible simplifies it for us. In John 6:44 Jesus says..."No man can come to me unless the Father, who sent me, draws him".

Yes, familiar. There's something we can relate to. The concept of not being able to find God unless He allows us or leads us, certainly makes sense. Proverbs 8:35 "For those who find me find life...". I would think that anyone who searches or has searched for God, believes that only God can lead them to Him.

As one with a Catholic background, but clearly without many Catholic Church beliefs, where do you gather with fellow believers?

True, it's good to make clear that the Trinity is "official" Catholic doctrine and I think that God does not have parts/persons. I do wonder if some Church leaders/scholars see/"know" that the Trinity is more terminology than anything else but it would be hard to change the doctrine overnight but there may be some very gradual moves in that direction.
http://www.vatican.va/jubilee_2000/magazine/documents/ju_mag_01021998_p-24_en.html

He also said..."Be obedient to those who are taking the lead among you and be submissive, for they are keeping watch over you as those who will render an account, so that they may do this with joy and not with sighing, for this would be damaging to you." (Hebrews 13:17)

Still, taking the Bible literally again, I see. Notice how Jesus is recorded as saying "Render unto Caesar", and St. Paul tells people to obey the government and that the government is affirmed by God? You might want to read about Constantine and the Roman feudal-land system.

I am interested in a Church or Judeo-Christian assembly that does not believe in the Trinity and also thinks that the New Testament has major Greek/Roman/pagan influences including (to some extent) by the Roman government to control people. The only ones who are open-minded like that, that I can think of are Unitarian, I also respect Judaism because of their belief in and love of the one God.

 

[Coder]

If you stand up to resist someone who is taking the position of leader, you might actually be fighting God because God has placed them for that. So Hebrews 13:17...

What I encourage all people to do is enjoy their freedom on God's earth and to seek and love Him. People must realize that there are so many people who will use religion to control others and they try to make it seem like the people are obeying God. I don't doubt Roman Empire government as case in point and many other groups today who can prey on sincere seekers of God and end up making money from them.

 

[Coder]

It probably says to yield to those taking the lead. It means do not rise up to resist them. The reason? Romans 13:1
Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.

Yes, like the Roman government. Notice how that's the letter to the "Romans"!? I wonder which Emperor might have told St. Paul to write that? Read about Constantine and the feudal-land system later on in 325AD.

 

[savagewind]

Yes, like the Roman government. Notice how that's the letter to the "Romans"!? I wonder which Emperor might have told St. Paul to write that? Read about Constantine and the feudal-land system later on in 325AD.

I believe Paul before I believe you, but I wonder if he realized what people would do with his words when he wrote them. Of course, many of the most important ideas that he wrote were changed to fit the will of those taking the lead later. We are all serving them at one time or another (I quit already) and they are dead.
The greatest religious minds of today serve the dead. I don't.

 

[savagewind]

I believe that even imaging God one way or another is idolatry, so I don't.
If you bent my arm for an answer I might say God IS The Holy Spirit and Jesus is a humble son.

 

[Deeje]

Only in today's perspective. A student knows that both come from the same word and knows that the difference was made by the different Universities that translated it during the reign of King James

By that time the trinity was well established. Bias towards the trinity is reflected in most translations since. The term "ghost" is based on Christendom's teaching that the dead live on in spirit form after death. This is not a Bible teaching. (Ecclesiastes 9:5, 10) The dead are unconscious in "sheol" (hades). Spirits are not "ghosts" in that sense, they are spirit creatures who can impersonate the dead so as to carry on a lie.
God is a spirit, but he is not a ghost.

just one of many John 14:26 But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.

An advocate speaks on one's behalf.
An entity teaches--power does not
An entity reminds-- power does not.

God does all of that by means of his spirit. It doesn't mean that the spirit is an entity by itself.

The holy spirit lacks personal identification. "Since God himself is a Spirit and is holy and since all his faithful angelic sons are spirits and are holy, it is evident that if the “holy spirit” were a person, there should reasonably be given some means in the Scriptures to distinguish and identify such spirit person from all these other ‘holy spirits.’ It would be expected that, at the very least, the definite article would be used with it in all cases where it is not called “God’s holy spirit” or is not modified by some similar expression. This would at least distinguish it as THE Holy Spirit. But, on the contrary, in a large number of cases the expression “holy spirit” appears in the original Greek without the article, thus indicating its lack of personality.—Compare Ac 6:3, 5; 7:55; 8:15, 17, 19; 9:17; 11:24; 13:9, 52; 19:2; Rom 9:1; 14:17; 15:13, 16, 19; 1Cor 12:3; Heb 2:4; 6:4; 2Pet 1:21; Jude 20, Int and other interlinear translations." (excerpt Insight volume 1)

LOL... I'm sure that is your viewpoint. Mine is that since the word came first and JW came after... it just might be you sowing tares.

Yes, the word came first, then came the weeds, and then in "the time of the end" came the 'cleansing and refining' of God's worshippers foretold in Daniel. (Daniel 12:4, 9, 10) .
So right on time, our brothers began to separate from the weeds.
We are no part of that disunited rabble now. (1 Corinthians 1:10)

Correct... that's why the Gospel started out as the seed of God's word... and then "If it were possible" - the elect would succumb... but I know to let the tares grow with the wheat... just waiting for the harvest.

The harvest time is upon us, and the reapers stand poised to go into action.....are we ready?

That's already been covered. Suffice to say that the Pharisees charged against him for saying He was God. I figure they knew what He was saying better that any commentary that differs from that position.

And that would be wrong....because it wasn't Jesus who made the claim that he was God. It was the Jews who said that in an attempt to charge him with blasphemy and have an excuse to get rid of him. If you consult the account, you will see for yourself.....What did Jesus call himself?

John 10: 31-39:
"Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him. 32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me? 33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God. 34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? 35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; 36 say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God? 37 If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. 38 But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.

39 Therefore they sought again to take him: but he escaped out of their hand"

 

[Deeje]

And if he wasn't God, they you have another problem... make him an angel or something creating a whole new set of problems for support.

On the contrary...there is more support for Jesus being created than him being Almighty God.

Revelation 3:14 look what Jesus calls himself....?
“And to the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write,

‘These things says the Amen, the Faithful and True Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God:" (NKJV)

Also Colossians 1:15.
"He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation." (NKJV)

The problem is that you study from the JW Bible... translated by the same, and only accepted by the same. I look for the Greek.

Well then you'd be wrong again. I use lots of different translation and Strongs Concordance and I haven't found a false translation of any word or teaching in the NWT yet.

I was raised in Christendom, so I had a lot of study to do so that I could prove to myself who taught the truth and who didn't.....it didn't take me long. I studied solidly for two years (with my own KJV) before I made a decision. I have never doubted that decision.

Except he said to worship God alone.

Actually when he was tempted by the devil, Jesus quoted the Hebrew scriptures all three times.
In Luke 4:8 he quoted Deuteronomy 10:20, which reads in the ASV..."Thou shalt fear Jehovah thy God; him shalt thou serve; and to him shalt thou cleave, and by his name shalt thou swear."
But in the AKJV it reads....
"Thou shalt fear the Lord thy God; him shalt thou serve, and to him shalt thou cleave, and swear by his name." (AKJV)

So who is "the Lord thy God"?......It isn't Jesus.

Moses was the mediator of the Law -- which ultimately was just a schoolmaster to point to God through faith. I am of the faith of Abraham.

And Jesus is the mediator of the "new covenant", just as Moses was a mediator of the old covenant....Jesus is the "prophet like Moses".
Did Abraham believe in a triune God?

Neither do I...and for the same reason.

I already proved my point with the angel saying only proskyneo God. Your explanation didn't diminish my point
Luke 4:10 Then saith Jesus unto him,Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. Jesus said only to proskuneo God.

I think you are confusing Greek with Hebrew. Since Jesus was quoting the Hebrew scriptures, he was not advocating obeisance to his Father, but worship as Jews understood worship.
Did Jews distinguish between worship and obeisance?

In Genesis 23:7 the word used when Abraham bowed down to the sons of Heth is "shachah". Abraham was not "worshipping" those men, but bowing to them in respect.
It can mean....obeisance or worship, just like "pro·sky·neʹo". Context determines how it is understood.
Just as the Jews knew the difference between worship and obeisance, so did the Greeks. Please see the link to demonstrate how this word is used in other parts of the Hebrew scriptures.

https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/Lexicon/Lexicon.cfm?strongs=H7812&t=NASB

You have basically said that all the words of worshipping the Father... doesn't mean worship. Or if you decide that if it is towards Jesus it is to honor Him but to the Father it is worship, then the sword cuts both ways.

Yes it does.

and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God

;
which they concluded very rightly, from his saying, ( John 10:30 ) , that God was his Father, and that he and his Father were one; that is, in nature and essence, and therefore he must be God; but then this was no blasphemy, but a real truth, as is hereafter made to appear; nor is there any contradiction between his being man, and being God; he is truly and really man, but then he is not a mere man, as the Jews suggested; but is truly God, as well as man, and is both God and man in one person, the divine and human nature being united in him, of which they were ignorant: two mistakes they seem to be guilty of in this account; one that Christ was a mere man, the other that he made himself God, or assumed deity to himself, which did not belong to him, and therefore must be guilty of blasphemy; neither of which were true: the phrase is used by the Jews, of others who have taken upon them the name and title of God; as of Hiram king of Tyre, of whom they say, (hola wmue have) , "that he made himself God" F18; the same they say of Nebuchadnezzar; and the modern Jews still continue the same charge against Jesus, as their ancestors did, and express it in the same language, and say of him, that he was a man, and set himself up for God F19. John Gill

I have addressed this above. But just to add.....let's take John 10:30:
When saying, “I and the Father are one,” did Jesus mean that they were equal? Some Trinitarians say that he did. But at John 17:21, 22, Jesus prayed regarding his followers: “That they may all be one,” and he added, “that they may be one even as we are one.” He used the same Greek word (hen) for “one” in all these instances. Obviously, Jesus’ disciples do not all become part of the Trinity. But they do come to share a oneness of purpose with the Father and the Son, the same sort of oneness that unites God and Christ.

All is not as you have been led to believe......

 

[Coder]

Of course, many of the most important ideas that he wrote were changed to fit the will of those taking the lead later.

Hi, I'm listening. That's the problem, it's such a mess, once must really try to see the forest through the trees. St. Paul came on the scene by "surprise", I wonder if that was a Roman intervention, after all St. Paul claimed to be a devout Jew, why would he seek Gentiles (I know 'God made the Jews blind' but that in itself smells of Roman Empire anti-Jewish Roman propaganda). You may also want to post on thread about the Oneness of God.

 

[Coder]

On the contrary...there is more support for Jesus being created than him being Almighty God.

Revelation 3:14 look what Jesus calls himself....?
“And to the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write,

‘These things says the Amen, the Faithful and True Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God:" (NKJV)

Also Colossians 1:15.
"He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation." (NKJV)

Yes and also Jesus says that He is the Alpha and the Omega and He came down from heaven, and before Abraham was "I am", and Philip, anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. Even Colossians 1:15 can be twisted because calling someone the "image of the invisible God" is a pretty blunt affirmation of divinity, I don't care how one tries to spin it.

The bottom-line is that there are many conflicting Scriptures, not only about Jesus and whether He is the eternal God, but other things. This should be a red flag IMHO to anyone who thinks that Scriptures can be taken literally or whether whatever wisdom they do contain must be gleaned carefully.

 

[Deeje]

Yes, including major presuppositions about the Scriptures IMHO.

Are not your own views assumptions?

Yes, familiar. There's something we can relate to. The concept of not being able to find God unless He allows us or leads us, certainly makes sense. Proverbs 8:35 "For those who find me find life...". I would think that anyone who searches or has searched for God, believes that only God can lead them to Him.

We have a dilemma though.....God's adversary has an agenda that involves deception. (1 John 5:19)
How does one know if they have been deceived by an expert con-man? For most they don't until they have lost everything....only in hindsight was the view clear. Can this be possible with Christianity too?

Jesus indicated that it is....
Matthew 7:21-23:
“Not everyone saying to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter into the Kingdom of the heavens, but only the one doing the will of my Father who is in the heavens will. 22 Many will say to me in that day: ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and expel demons in your name, and perform many powerful works in your name?’ 23 And then I will declare to them: ‘I never knew you! Get away from me, you workers of lawlessness!’"

Can you see that those whom Jesus rejects at the judgement are unaware that what they have done as Christians is unacceptable to Jesus. They incredulously point out all the things they did "in his name", but look at what he says to them....."I never knew you! Get away from me, you workers of lawlessness!" How is that possible?
How is it that Jesus NEVER recognized them as his own? Why did they not know this?

True, it's good to make clear that the Trinity is "official" Catholic doctrine and I think that God does not have parts/persons. I do wonder if some Church leaders/scholars see/"know" that the Trinity is more terminology than anything else but it would be hard to change the doctrine overnight but there may be some very gradual moves in that direction.
http://www.vatican.va/jubilee_2000/magazine/documents/ju_mag_01021998_p-24_en.html

Don't hold your breath waiting for the churches to unite and miraculously begin teaching the truth.....the majority are happily on the wrong road unaware that it leads to complete destruction. Only "few" will find the gate and get themselves on the "cramped and narrow road" leading to life. (Matthew 7:13-14) The only ones who find the exit ramp are the ones looking for it.

Still, taking the Bible literally again, I see. Notice how Jesus is recorded as saying "Render unto Caesar", and St. Paul tells people to obey the government and that the government is affirmed by God? You might want to read about Constantine and the Roman feudal-land system.

There were provisos attached to a Christian's obedience to the governments....when any authority asks us to break a law of God...we obey God first. (Acts 5:29)

I am interested in a Church or Judeo-Christian assembly that does not believe in the Trinity and also thinks that the New Testament has major Greek/Roman/pagan influences including (to some extent) by the Roman government to control people. The only ones who are open-minded like that, that I can think of are Unitarian, I also respect Judaism because of their belief in and love of the one God.

I believe that the one serious mistake many people make is that they look for a church that teaches what they want to believe....rather than looking for the ones who carry out what God's word tells them to do and believe. Their faith is backed up by their works, not just their words.
Jesus said we would identify them "by their fruits"...by the kind of people they produce, not just those who talk the talk but who never walk the walk outside their own buildings.

It is interesting that Jews who choose to be 'Messianic' believers in Jesus Christ, don't want to call themselves Christians. They remain Jews because they cannot separate themselves from their belief that Jews are still God's chosen ones. I believe that Jesus said otherwise. (Matthew 23:37-39)