Why did the early church send greetings in God, and in Jesus Christ, instead of a trinity?

[Davi Carvalho]

1. “Paul, Silas and Timothy, To the church of the Thessalonians in God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ:” (2 Thes 1:1)
2. “Grace and peace to you from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.” (2 Thes 1:2)

In 1., the apostle addresses the Father as ‘God’ and addresses Jesus Christ as ‘Lord’.

For a supposedly unbreakable doctrine expressing three persons as a one immutable, almighty worshipped being, it is odd that there the greeting is only to two persons, one only of whom is called ‘God’.

Where is the third person that makes a trinity?

Of course, this isn’t *THE ONLY* incredibly belittling error towards the third person by one only apostle to the Thessalonians because there are also these: (*Edit : error corrected by additional text*)

• “James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, To the twelve tribes scattered among the nations: Greetings.” (James 1:1)
• “Paul, a servant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ to further the faith of God’s elect and their knowledge of the truth that leads to godliness…” (Titus 1:1)
• “This letter is from Paul, a slave of Christ Jesus, chosen by God to be an apostle and sent out to preach his Good News.” (Romans 1:1)

And many more.

The last listed has the apostle Paul claiming himself as a slave of Jesus Christ … chosen by God!

Not only, again, is there only two persons mentioned, not a trinity three, but it is clear that these two are completely separate beings. One is GOD and the other is Jesus Christ.

How is it then claimed by world wide ideological groups calling themselves ‘Followers of [Jesus] Christ’ that GOD and Jesus Christ are GOD, and GOD, is three persons who are ONE IMMUTABLE GOD who must be worshipped. Yet there is no mention of a third person that would form a trinity of co-equal all powerful all knowing Being (singular!)

Did Jesus Christ ever claim that he was a ‘Three Person GOD’, with one of the other members called GOD, and that he must be worshipped as God?

Indeed, where is there an expression in the scriptures even saying to worship the third unnamed person? And, does anyone actually worship a third unnamed person of a claimed ‘holy trinity’?

And if there is no worship claim for either Jesus Christ, or the third unnamed trinity person, are the ‘Followers of [Jesus] Christ’ not guilty of sacrilege by disowning their own claims… and proudly denouncing baptism in the name of three persons by baptising in the name of ONLY ONE PERSON of the three person, only two named, one God (called ‘Father’), being entitled: “GOD”!

(Observation: God appears to be a member of the trinity God trio - which makes Jesus a recursive entity in God since he is the ‘Son of God’, and the same ‘God’ that he is the Son of… giving:

• God is “God, Jesus Christ, unnamed person”
  
• But Jesus Christ is ‘Son of God’
• So, God is “God, Son of God (who is God), unnamed other person’
• God is ‘God, God as Son, as God, ….’

Can anyone offer an explanation of this seemingly retched conundrum which passes itself off as ‘Christianity’ which purports to be what Jesus Christ taught and they follow?

Hello! Thank you for your question. Actually you can see the trinity mentioned together in the New Testament:

"The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen." - 2 Corinthians 13:14

"Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:" - Matthew 28:19

 

[firedragon]

I am sure that the Christians of that time who used this term

You mean the term "Trinity"? Who used it lets say in the 1st century?

 

[firedragon]

Hello! Thank you for your question. Actually you can see the trinity mentioned together in the New Testament:

"The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen." - 2 Corinthians 13:14

"Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:" - Matthew 28:19

See, none of them say they are all three, but one. The trinity as we know it was established much later and you probably know that.

Anyway just to make an amendment,

1. the word Ameen in 2nd Cor above was not present in the early manuscripts like P46. It was probably added later to align with other letters and to make it sound like a supplication.
2. Matthew verse has a dispute due to the Eusebian discrepancy.

I dont want to go any further on this.

 

[Davi Carvalho]

See, none of them say they are all three, but one. The trinity as we know it was established much later and you probably know that.

Anyway just to make an amendment,

1. the word Ameen in 2nd Cor above was not present in the early manuscripts like P46. It was probably added later to align with other letters and to make it sound like a supplication.
2. Matthew verse has a dispute due to the Eusebian discrepancy.

I dont want to go any further on this.

Ok. I'll respect your wish of not discussing this any further. Thank you for your response!

 

[Soapy]

Hahaha, I've lost count of the number of time someone has used the "too scared" gambit to try to get people enmeshed in some worthless argument or other. This gambit overlooks the (far more likely) possibility of (i) boredom and (ii) unwillingness to indulge a disingenuous poster.

If I thought your question was honest I would be happy to take you up. But an honest enquiry would at least show some indication of understanding how it was that the early church developed the concept of the Trinity, since this is all information that is widely available, and then would focus on specific points that in their opinion were not satisfactory.

But as it is, your approach is just like what creationists so often do, trying to make scientists jump through hoops re-explaining what is already explained elsewhere. I'm not doing that.

Why on earth would I be interested in how the early church developed a profane ideology?

I am not a philosopher … I’m a scriptural believer in the life and work of Jesus Christ assigned to him by his God: Yahweh, his spiritual Father:

• ‘[Mary], the holy spirit will overshadow you and you will have a child who will be holy, and called Son of God
• ‘This day you have become to me a son, and into you, a Father’ … ‘Son of God’

Why would I want to learn about a load of nonsense about Jesus being eternally WITH GOD and also BEING GOD…

You seem like an intelligent poster - How are you defining ‘God’?

 

[TiggerII]

A Christian named Irenaeus wrote in 180 AD "Christ Himself, therefore, together with the Father, is the God of the living, who spake to Moses, and who was also manifested to the fathers."

Please give proper references to your quotes.

Irenaeus’ “Against Heresies” exists today in full only in a single Latin translation from the original Greek language. It is thus not surprising that trinitarian-supporting “evidence” may be found in the single trinitarian-recopied, trinitarian-translated, trinitarian-redefined manuscript available today. But certainly this respected early Christian writer whom today's trinitarian scholars “credit” with the very “formulation” of the trinity doctrine would not have made the many clear non-trinitarian statements recorded below if he had really believed in or taught a trinity (or “Binity”)!

Obviously the many trinitarian copiests who handled (and mishandled) Irenaeus’ writing down through the centuries could (and did) change some non-trinitarian thoughts into trinitarian thoughts.* But they would certainly never change trinitarian thoughts into non-trinitarian thoughts. Therefore, those many non-trinitarian concepts still remaining must be Irenaeus’ original teaching (as a study of the very first Creeds of this time also proves)!
______________
* The very trinitarian translators of ANF wrote in their Introductory Note to Irenaeus’ Against Heresies: “The text [of Against Heresies] ... is often most uncertain. .... After the text has been settled according to the best judgment [trinitarian, of course] which can be formed, the work of translation remains; and that is, in this case, a matter of no small difficulty. Irenaeus, even in the original Greek, is often a very obscure writer. .... And the Latin version adds to these difficulties of the original, by being itself of the most barbarous character. In fact, it is often necessary to make a conjectural retranslation [trinitarian, of course] into Greek, in order to have some inkling of what the author wrote. .... We have endeavoured to give as close and accurate a translation of the work as possible, but there are not a few passages in which a guess [trinitarian, of course] can only be made as to the probable meaning.” - ANF 1:311-312.

Obviously, if a trinitarian, even a scrupulously honest trinitarian, makes a “conjectural retranslation” or a “guess ... as to the probable meaning,” it will be a trinitarian guess or “conjectural retranslation”!

Irenaeus
(c. 140-203 A.D.)

‘But there is only one God, the Creator ... He it is ... whom Christ reveals .... He is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ: through His Word, who is His Son, through Him He is revealed.’ - pp. 110, 111, A Short History of the Early Church, Eerdmans, 1976. (Ellipses were provided by Boer. Irenaeus quote by Boer is from The Ante-Nicene Fathers, ANF, 1:406.)

“... neither the prophets, nor the apostles, nor the Lord Christ in His own person, did acknowledge any other Lord or God, but the God and Lord supreme .... the Lord Himself handing down to His disciples, that He, the Father, is the only God and Lord, who alone is God and ruler of all; it is incumbent on us to follow ... their testimonies to this effect.” (ANF, 1:422, ‘Against Heresies’)

“For faith, which has respect to our Master, endures unchangeably, assuring us that there is but one true God, and that we should truly love Him for ever, seeing that He alone is our Father.” (ANF, 1:399-400, ‘Against Heresies’)

"Such, then, are the first principles of the Gospel: that there is one God, the Maker of this universe; He who was also announced by the prophets, and who by Moses set forth the dispensation of the law, - [principles] which proclaim the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and ignore any other God or Father except Him." - (ANF, 1:428, 'Against Heresies')

"Now I have shown in the third book, that no one is termed God by the apostles when speaking for themselves, except Him who truly is God, the Father of our Lord." (ANF, 1:553, 'Against Heresies')

 

[Teritos]

Please give proper references to your quotes.

Irenaeus’ “Against Heresies” exists today in full only in a single Latin translation from the original Greek language. It is thus not surprising that trinitarian-supporting “evidence” may be found in the single trinitarian-recopied, trinitarian-translated, trinitarian-redefined manuscript available today. But certainly this respected early Christian writer whom today's trinitarian scholars “credit” with the very “formulation” of the trinity doctrine would not have made the many clear non-trinitarian statements recorded below if he had really believed in or taught a trinity (or “Binity”)!

Obviously the many trinitarian copiests who handled (and mishandled) Irenaeus’ writing down through the centuries could (and did) change some non-trinitarian thoughts into trinitarian thoughts.* But they would certainly never change trinitarian thoughts into non-trinitarian thoughts. Therefore, those many non-trinitarian concepts still remaining must be Irenaeus’ original teaching (as a study of the very first Creeds of this time also proves)!
______________
* The very trinitarian translators of ANF wrote in their Introductory Note to Irenaeus’ Against Heresies: “The text [of Against Heresies] ... is often most uncertain. .... After the text has been settled according to the best judgment [trinitarian, of course] which can be formed, the work of translation remains; and that is, in this case, a matter of no small difficulty. Irenaeus, even in the original Greek, is often a very obscure writer. .... And the Latin version adds to these difficulties of the original, by being itself of the most barbarous character. In fact, it is often necessary to make a conjectural retranslation [trinitarian, of course] into Greek, in order to have some inkling of what the author wrote. .... We have endeavoured to give as close and accurate a translation of the work as possible, but there are not a few passages in which a guess [trinitarian, of course] can only be made as to the probable meaning.” - ANF 1:311-312.

Obviously, if a trinitarian, even a scrupulously honest trinitarian, makes a “conjectural retranslation” or a “guess ... as to the probable meaning,” it will be a trinitarian guess or “conjectural retranslation”!

Irenaeus
(c. 140-203 A.D.)

‘But there is only one God, the Creator ... He it is ... whom Christ reveals .... He is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ: through His Word, who is His Son, through Him He is revealed.’ - pp. 110, 111, A Short History of the Early Church, Eerdmans, 1976. (Ellipses were provided by Boer. Irenaeus quote by Boer is from The Ante-Nicene Fathers, ANF, 1:406.)

“... neither the prophets, nor the apostles, nor the Lord Christ in His own person, did acknowledge any other Lord or God, but the God and Lord supreme .... the Lord Himself handing down to His disciples, that He, the Father, is the only God and Lord, who alone is God and ruler of all; it is incumbent on us to follow ... their testimonies to this effect.” (ANF, 1:422, ‘Against Heresies’)

“For faith, which has respect to our Master, endures unchangeably, assuring us that there is but one true God, and that we should truly love Him for ever, seeing that He alone is our Father.” (ANF, 1:399-400, ‘Against Heresies’)

"Such, then, are the first principles of the Gospel: that there is one God, the Maker of this universe; He who was also announced by the prophets, and who by Moses set forth the dispensation of the law, - [principles] which proclaim the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and ignore any other God or Father except Him." - (ANF, 1:428, 'Against Heresies')

"Now I have shown in the third book, that no one is termed God by the apostles when speaking for themselves, except Him who truly is God, the Father of our Lord." (ANF, 1:553, 'Against Heresies')

not only one quote denies the fact that Jesus is God. Ireneaus believed Jesus was God, there are many proofs.

 

[Teritos]

Please give proper references to your quotes.

Irenaeus’ “Against Heresies” exists today in full only in a single Latin translation from the original Greek language. It is thus not surprising that trinitarian-supporting “evidence” may be found in the single trinitarian-recopied, trinitarian-translated, trinitarian-redefined manuscript available today. But certainly this respected early Christian writer whom today's trinitarian scholars “credit” with the very “formulation” of the trinity doctrine would not have made the many clear non-trinitarian statements recorded below if he had really believed in or taught a trinity (or “Binity”)!

Obviously the many trinitarian copiests who handled (and mishandled) Irenaeus’ writing down through the centuries could (and did) change some non-trinitarian thoughts into trinitarian thoughts.* But they would certainly never change trinitarian thoughts into non-trinitarian thoughts. Therefore, those many non-trinitarian concepts still remaining must be Irenaeus’ original teaching (as a study of the very first Creeds of this time also proves)!
______________
* The very trinitarian translators of ANF wrote in their Introductory Note to Irenaeus’ Against Heresies: “The text [of Against Heresies] ... is often most uncertain. .... After the text has been settled according to the best judgment [trinitarian, of course] which can be formed, the work of translation remains; and that is, in this case, a matter of no small difficulty. Irenaeus, even in the original Greek, is often a very obscure writer. .... And the Latin version adds to these difficulties of the original, by being itself of the most barbarous character. In fact, it is often necessary to make a conjectural retranslation [trinitarian, of course] into Greek, in order to have some inkling of what the author wrote. .... We have endeavoured to give as close and accurate a translation of the work as possible, but there are not a few passages in which a guess [trinitarian, of course] can only be made as to the probable meaning.” - ANF 1:311-312.

Obviously, if a trinitarian, even a scrupulously honest trinitarian, makes a “conjectural retranslation” or a “guess ... as to the probable meaning,” it will be a trinitarian guess or “conjectural retranslation”!

Irenaeus
(c. 140-203 A.D.)

‘But there is only one God, the Creator ... He it is ... whom Christ reveals .... He is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ: through His Word, who is His Son, through Him He is revealed.’ - pp. 110, 111, A Short History of the Early Church, Eerdmans, 1976. (Ellipses were provided by Boer. Irenaeus quote by Boer is from The Ante-Nicene Fathers, ANF, 1:406.)

“... neither the prophets, nor the apostles, nor the Lord Christ in His own person, did acknowledge any other Lord or God, but the God and Lord supreme .... the Lord Himself handing down to His disciples, that He, the Father, is the only God and Lord, who alone is God and ruler of all; it is incumbent on us to follow ... their testimonies to this effect.” (ANF, 1:422, ‘Against Heresies’)

“For faith, which has respect to our Master, endures unchangeably, assuring us that there is but one true God, and that we should truly love Him for ever, seeing that He alone is our Father.” (ANF, 1:399-400, ‘Against Heresies’)

"Such, then, are the first principles of the Gospel: that there is one God, the Maker of this universe; He who was also announced by the prophets, and who by Moses set forth the dispensation of the law, - [principles] which proclaim the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and ignore any other God or Father except Him." - (ANF, 1:428, 'Against Heresies')

"Now I have shown in the third book, that no one is termed God by the apostles when speaking for themselves, except Him who truly is God, the Father of our Lord." (ANF, 1:553, 'Against Heresies')

180 AD Irenaeus "Christ Jesus is our Lord, and God, and Savior, and King." (Against Heresies, Book I, ch. 10, section 1)

180 AD Irenaeus "Christ Himself, therefore, together with the Father, is the God of the living, who spake to Moses, and who was also manifested to the fathers." (Against Heresies, Book IV, ch. 5, section 2)

 

[Shakeel]

You can read all about the Trinity for yourself, in countless places. I do not believe you have any interest in learning anything.

So why should anyone bother to respond?

It's a debate. He didn't ask for a lesson. If you're not interested, feel free to move on.

 

[Shakeel]

Yes, it's nonsensical and the Christian apologists have so many excuses to offer, they must hope you would drown in them and be left unable to debate further.

 

[Teritos]

It's a debate. He didn't ask for a lesson. If you're not interested, feel free to move on.

how many debates on this topic we need? It's worthless, only those who have the Holy Spirit, the teacher of wisdom who is the author of the bible will understand that Jesus is God.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Hello! Thank you for your question. Actually you can see the trinity mentioned together in the New Testament:

"The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen." - 2 Corinthians 13:14

"Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:" - Matthew 28:19

When Mathew wrote that, the concept of the trinity was yet to be formulated. It was many years in the future. You will see the same formula of the father son and Holy Spirit used in the Didache for baptism which is of even older origin.
At that time the three were considered three individuals.
To associate Mathew with the Trinity is an anachronism. It came about after his time.

 

[Soapy]

Hello! Thank you for your question. Actually you can see the trinity mentioned together in the New Testament:

"The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen." - 2 Corinthians 13:14

"Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:" - Matthew 28:19

And the apostles promptly ignored Jesus’ supposed command and baptised in the name of Jesus only?

I think that should tell you something about how trinitarian version of scriptures took hold … by stealth - just like the ravenous wolves Jesus told us would happen.

 

[Soapy]

how many debates on this topic we need? It's worthless, only those who have the Holy Spirit, the teacher of wisdom who is the author of the bible will understand that Jesus is God.

• “They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.” (Romans 1:25)

You claim a worship of Jesus Christ, a created Being, and place him on the mount of God calling him God!

But in reality you DO NOT WORSHIP Jesus and neither do you worship the Holy Spirit.

Church leaders are very careful to claim they are worshipping Jesus bug then slip in ‘Father’, or ‘God’ while the congregation is in the throes of a stupor in singing happy flappy psalms and not realising what is being sung.

• “For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father’s glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what they have done.” (Matthew 16:27)

Who is it that will come in the glory of God to judge the world?

 

[DNB]

You can read all about the Trinity for yourself, in countless places. I do not believe you have any interest in learning anything.

So why should anyone bother to respond?

Eisegesis does not count as a hermeneutically sound interpretative process.

 

[DNB]

Can anyone offer an explanation of this seemingly retched conundrum which passes itself off as ‘Christianity’ which purports to be what Jesus Christ taught and they follow?

No, I cannot, nor do I want to entertain such an axiomatically deranged theology like the trinity. You summed it up yourself - all the pertinent opportunities that the inspired authors had to delineate and impress upon their listeners such a irrational doctrine, was devoid of any trinitarian nomenclature or principles. Not one conversion took place where the apostle cited a trinitarian formula, whenever Jesus referred to himself in his exalted state he calls himself 'Jesus of Nazareth. In all the psalms and doxologies of the Patriarchs, not one addresses or praises God as three. The Holy Spirit is not even mentioned once in the Book of Revelation, where Jesus and God the Father are praised and worshipped, respectively, according their contributions towards salvation, respectively. Jesus never appeals to himself for power and authority (his divine nature), but to the Father alone - what's the point of his divinity?
We can go on forever.....

 

[Kenny]

1. “Paul, Silas and Timothy, To the church of the Thessalonians in God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ:” (2 Thes 1:1)
2. “Grace and peace to you from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.” (2 Thes 1:2)

In 1., the apostle addresses the Father as ‘God’ and addresses Jesus Christ as ‘Lord’.

For a supposedly unbreakable doctrine expressing three persons as a one immutable, almighty worshipped being, it is odd that there the greeting is only to two persons, one only of whom is called ‘God’.

Where is the third person that makes a trinity?

Of course, this isn’t *THE ONLY* incredibly belittling error towards the third person by one only apostle to the Thessalonians because there are also these: (*Edit : error corrected by additional text*)

• “James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, To the twelve tribes scattered among the nations: Greetings.” (James 1:1)
• “Paul, a servant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ to further the faith of God’s elect and their knowledge of the truth that leads to godliness…” (Titus 1:1)
• “This letter is from Paul, a slave of Christ Jesus, chosen by God to be an apostle and sent out to preach his Good News.” (Romans 1:1)

And many more.

The last listed has the apostle Paul claiming himself as a slave of Jesus Christ … chosen by God!

Not only, again, is there only two persons mentioned, not a trinity three, but it is clear that these two are completely separate beings. One is GOD and the other is Jesus Christ.

How is it then claimed by world wide ideological groups calling themselves ‘Followers of [Jesus] Christ’ that GOD and Jesus Christ are GOD, and GOD, is three persons who are ONE IMMUTABLE GOD who must be worshipped. Yet there is no mention of a third person that would form a trinity of co-equal all powerful all knowing Being (singular!)

Did Jesus Christ ever claim that he was a ‘Three Person GOD’, with one of the other members called GOD, and that he must be worshipped as God?

Indeed, where is there an expression in the scriptures even saying to worship the third unnamed person? And, does anyone actually worship a third unnamed person of a claimed ‘holy trinity’?

And if there is no worship claim for either Jesus Christ, or the third unnamed trinity person, are the ‘Followers of [Jesus] Christ’ not guilty of sacrilege by disowning their own claims… and proudly denouncing baptism in the name of three persons by baptising in the name of ONLY ONE PERSON of the three person, only two named, one God (called ‘Father’), being entitled: “GOD”!

(Observation: God appears to be a member of the trinity God trio - which makes Jesus a recursive entity in God since he is the ‘Son of God’, and the same ‘God’ that he is the Son of… giving:

• God is “God, Jesus Christ, unnamed person”
  
• But Jesus Christ is ‘Son of God’
• So, God is “God, Son of God (who is God), unnamed other person’
• God is ‘God, God as Son, as God, ….’

Can anyone offer an explanation of this seemingly retched conundrum which passes itself off as ‘Christianity’ which purports to be what Jesus Christ taught and they follow?

I'm not quite sure what your effort is here. It is almost like you try to set up your statements that just fits your position and then tear down your own statements.

Have you considered just taking the scriptures for what it says? He came as a man and not as God?

 

[Kenny]

You mean the term "Trinity"? Who used it lets say in the 1st century?

1st century was Godhead... but means the same thing.

 

[firedragon]

1st century was Godhead... but means the same thing.

Which document are you speaking of?

 

[Psalm23]

Just WHY aren’t there any hymns worshipping the Holy Spirit?

There are some hymns of worship to the Holy Spirit.

Here is one I like: