The word Trinity does not appear in the Bible. That is a fact. Is the Trinity, as some would suggest, invented in 325BC at the Council of Nicea? Join C. Michael Patton, Th.M. and Tim Kimberley, Th.M. as we discuss this important aspect of Christianity.
To get the rest of the myths for the next five days (along with other great stuff from Credo House Ministries), subscribe now! (You can unsubscribe at any time.)
If you want to keep growing along these lines our new Discipleship Program continues to equip you in the foundational thoughts and practices of a Christian. Just click the “Experience It: Watch Now” link on this page to continue giving yourself a strong foundation
Here are the previous four myths in case you missed them:
Myth #1 – Christianity is Blind Faith
This is just one of the many myths about God that millions of people have bought into. Does God desire for us to close our eyes and take a step into the dark to believe in Jesus?
Myth #2 – The Bible is a Magic Book
This is just one of the many myths about God that millions of people have bought into. It is common today to look at the Bible as a magic book. Close your eyes, open it up, put down your finger and do what it says. Is this how we should treat the Bible?
Myth #3 – God wants us Healthy and Wealthy
Jesus healed people all over the place when He walked the earth…God owns a cattle on a thousand hills…shouldn’t we expect health and wealth in this life?
Myth #4 – Jesus is not God
Is it crucial for Jesus to be 100% God? Is He fully God in the same way as the Father?
10 replies to "10 Myths about God: #5 – The Trinity was Invented"
Currently, I am at a very happy place regarding Trinity vs the Oneness of God. I see an abundance of Scripture that proves the Oneness of God, and yet I also see that Essentially, Jesus did not come alone in the Gospels. It is clear to me that the Trinity had to be in order to fulfill the Law and the Promises of God. The Law required two witnesses, etc. Yet, Jesus was the Promise (Son of Man), and also the Promise-er. All aspects of the Trinity seem to support the Law and Promises requirements…yet God is One…
It would be like hearing a long sermon about Jesus being the Word (The Voice, The Wisdom, the Logos), and all that it entails, and then speak about Jesus’ baptism, and the Voice that spoke from Heaven. How does one reconcile that? God is so Big. Or just how many “I AM’s” are there? Or why do people deny part of Isaiah 9:6? Everlasting Father…. I could go on and on.
Or embrace Matt 28:19 but neglect Acts 2:38? We cannot cut and paste or select the verses we are most pleased with.
Today, I am overjoyed by what the Lord Jesus has shown me. It is simple: God is So Big.
I liked your video on the Trinity. I can see that your view does not demote Jesus, as some circles do. Actually, I perceive that your view exalts Jesus. This is what I truly appreciate…as years ago, I did not realize how bad it was where we went, the church that worshiped Jesus, sang songs about Him, but did not pray to Him. Absolutely denying John 14:14. And other demotions of Jesus.
But all this was going on because I did not realize that this was the war against the Oneness churches that opposed them from decades ago.
So, this is what I perceive: in Scripture we can find so many verses that demonstrate/support God’s Oneness, but we can also find many verses that support the necessity of the Trinity…although we never talk about the 7 Spirits of God or the 44 or so manifestations of God in the OT.
God bless you all in Jesus’ Name, Karen
While a specific iron clad statement of the Trinity is not mentioned there bits that come out. In 1 John 5:6-8, he notes that the Three are of one accord. Who else would be the three. Are not the three mentioned also in Mt 28:18, as to Baptizing in the Three.
Theophilus of Antioch (~180 AD) also speaks of the Trinity of God, so it would be very probable that this doctrine was around earlier.
Solid video! Nicely done.
For the early Christians, the Theophany (baptism of Christ by John the Baptist) was a clear manifestation of The Trinity.
As was The Transfiguration, during which Peter was in attendance: (1 Peter 1:1-2) “To the pilgrims of the Dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ.” Talk about a clear Trinitarian benediction!
And in 381 the churches met again to MAINTAIN (not create) the belief in the divinity of the Holy Spirit. St. Basil the Great did a masterful job of defending the Holy Spirit; his work is entitled “On the Holy Spirit”. The Creed was accordingly updated in 381.
Unfortunately, Rome changed the working of The Creed around the 11th century, subordinating the role of the Holy Spirit, and this was the main theological reason for the Great Schism.
Does Theophilus really speak of a “…Trinity…” as it is understood today?
I honestly question this!
When I read what he actually wrote I see something different.
GREEK TEXT: “…ἡ δὲ σελήνη κατὰ μῆνα φθίνει καὶ δυνάμει ἀποθνήσκει, ἐν τύπῳ οὖσα ἀνθρώπου, ἔπειτα ἀναγεννᾶται καὶ αὔξει εἰς δεῖγμα τῆς μελλούσης ἔσεσθαι ἀναστάσεως. Ὡσαύτως καὶ τρεῖς ἡμέραι πρὸ τῶν φωστήρων γεγονυῖαι τύποι εἰσὶν τῆς τριάδος, τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ τοῦ λόγου αὐτοῦ καὶ τῆς σοφίας αὐτοῦ. τετάρτῳ δὲ τόπῳ ἐστὶν ἄνθρωπος ὁ προσδεὴς τοῦ φωτός, ἵνα ᾖ θεός, λόγος, σοφία, ἄνθρωπος…” – (Ad. Auto. Book II, Chapter 15. MPG.)
THEOPHILUS OF ANTIOCH (died circa. 181 C.E.):”…In like manner also ( THE THREE DAYS ) which were before the luminaries, are types of ( THE TRINITY ), of God, and His Word, and His wisdom. And ( THE FOURTH ) is the type of man, who needs light, that so there may be God, the Word, wisdom, man. Wherefore also on ( THE FOURTH DAY ) the lights were made…” – (To Autolycus, Book 2: Chapter 15, Translated by Marcus Dods. From Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 2. Edited by Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe. Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1885.)
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/02041.htm
Break it down in Greek and English:
1.) Gk., ( τοῦ θεοῦ )
2.) Gk., ( καὶ τοῦ λόγου αὐτοῦ )
3.) Gk., ( καὶ τῆς σοφίας αὐτοῦ )
1.) Lit., “…of-the God…”
2.) Lit., “…and of-the word ( of-him/of-his )…”
3.) Lit., “…and of-the wisdom ( of-him/of-his )…”
1.) “…( GOD )…”
2.) “…( HIS ) word…”
3.) “…( HIS ) wisdom…”
I honestly ask the question is he really identifying the three mentioned here as actually being the very ( same ) “…God…”?
Or is he simply enumerating three together?
Which is literally what Gk., ( τριάδος ) means!
“…THREE…”!
And is he enumerating “…( God )…” separately to the other two?
I contend that this word did not have the theological connotations that were…
CONTINUED – that was attached to it by later interpreters.
GREEK TEXT: “…ἡ δὲ σελήνη κατὰ μῆνα φθίνει καὶ δυνάμει ἀποθνήσκει, ἐν τύπῳ οὖσα ἀνθρώπου, ἔπειτα ἀναγεννᾶται καὶ αὔξει εἰς δεῖγμα τῆς μελλούσης ἔσεσθαι ἀναστάσεως. Ὡσαύτως καὶ τρεῖς ἡμέραι πρὸ τῶν φωστήρων γεγονυῖαι τύποι εἰσὶν τῆς τριάδος, τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ τοῦ λόγου αὐτοῦ καὶ τῆς σοφίας αὐτοῦ. τετάρτῳ δὲ τόπῳ ἐστὶν ἄνθρωπος ὁ προσδεὴς τοῦ φωτός, ἵνα ᾖ θεός, λόγος, σοφία, ἄνθρωπος…” – (Ad. Auto. Book II, Chapter 15. MPG.)
THEOPHILUS OF ANTIOCH (died circa. 181 C.E.):”…In like manner also ( THE THREE DAYS ) which were before the luminaries, are types of ( THE TRINITY ), of God, and His Word, and His wisdom. And ( THE FOURTH ) is the type of man, who needs light, that so there may be God, the Word, wisdom, man. Wherefore also on ( THE FOURTH DAY ) the lights were made…” – (To Autolycus, Book 2: Chapter 15, Translated by Marcus Dods. From Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 2. Edited by Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe. Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1885.)
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/02041.htm
I ask why, how is it, and what motivates the translator to translate Gk., ( τῆς τριάδος ) as: “…( THE TRINITY )…”
When he translates Gk., ( τετάρτῳ ) as: “…( THE FOURTH )…” ? ? ?
Why does he not translate Gk., ( τετάρτῳ ) as:
“…( [THE] QUATERNITY )…”
In order to be consistent?
The parallel “…types…” in the text are:
“…THE THREE DAY’S…” = Gk., ( τῆς τριάδος ) “…( THE THREE )…”
“…THE FOURTH DAY…” = Gk., ( τετάρτῳ ) “…( [THE] FOURTH )…”
How is it that this ( obvious ) theological context is so easily ignored and casually brushed over?
What I see going on here is not only ( retrospective interpretation ), but also ( theologically motivated retro-fitting ) of the text in English. Theological bias affecting the translation.
A distorting of the natural reading and understanding of the text.
Matt makes very good points. I wonder the same about Tertullian who seems to suggest that Jesus was created.
“Because God is in like manner a Father, and He is also a Judge; but He has not always been Father and Judge, merely on the ground of His having always been God. For He could not have been the Father previous to the Son, nor a Judge previous to sin. There was, however, a time when neither sin existed with Him, nor the Son; the former of which was to constitute the Lord a Judge, and the latter a Father.” (Against Homogenes Ch. III)
“Let Hermogenes then confess that the very Wisdom of God is declared to be born and created, for the especial reason that we should not suppose that there is any other being than God alone who is unbegotten and uncreated. For if that, which from its being inherent in the Lord was of Him and in Him, was yet not without a beginning,–I mean His wisdom, which was then born and created, when in the thought of God It began to assume motion for the arrangement of His creative works,–how much more impossible is it that anything should have been without a beginning which was extrinsic to the Lord! But if this same Wisdom is the Word of God, in the capacity of Wisdom, and (as being He) without whom nothing was made, just as also (nothing) was set in order without Wisdom, how can it be that anything, except the Father, should be older, and on this account indeed nobler, than the Son of God, the only-begotten and first-begotten Word?” (Against Homogenes, Ch. XVIII)
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/tertullian13.html
[…] to correct some of their inaccurate statements about “the” doctrine of the Trinity. In this video, they want to correct the myth that “The Trinity” – by which they mean […]
The bible is not a magical book nor jusr created it says that all the word is inspired by God and is against “magic ”
And the Bible is real for which the word in it is too and in that Bible it says to not take nor add word it never mentions any Trinity, any creation of a God because God is self existing and eternal and doesn’t depend on no one nor it says there are diffeent Gods it says just
one God and love him with all your heart mind and
soul!!! And for those who believe in one testament but not the other let me tell you it clearly says Lord is one and he is our savior JESUS! Why?
Why? It proves it from nee testament to old testament
Scriptures :
Genesis 1:27
God created man in his own image if supposly the father and JESUS are different they should have different images but they dont it is just one and to GODS
Deuteronomy 6:4
Isaiah 7:14
Matthew 1:21
Matthew 1:23
Matthew 4:6-10
Matthew 28:19
in the NAME of the father sun and the holy spirit if the sun alredy has a name and the father and spirit have each theirs or one more ..it would say names
John 1:1-14
Acts 2:38
Galatians 3:20
1 Timothy 2:1-7
1 Timothy 2:5 *