How does the time line of events surrounding the doctrine of the 'trinity' and the diety of Jesus?

Christ, nullify any arguments over the translation of Greek words written 1900 years ago?

If the same arguments are presented only a generation or two after Christs death, who can even suggest that some hideous translation of bible verses caused the whole debate?

What do the facts about these historical events prove?


@Hint...."Arianism is the theological teaching attributed to Arius (ca. AD 250–336), a Christian presbyter in Alexandria, Egypt, concerning the relationship of the persons of the Trinity ('God the Father', 'God the Son' (Jesus of Nazareth), and 'God the Holy Spirit') and the precise nature of the Son of God as being a subordinate entity to God the Father. Deemed a heretic by the Ecumenical First Council of Nicaea of 325, Arius was later exonerated in 335 at the regional First Synod of Tyre,[1] and then, after his death, pronounced a heretic again at the Ecumenical First Council of Constantinople of 381.[2] The Roman Emperors Constantius II (337–361) and Valens (364–378) were Arians or Semi-Arians.

The Arian concept of Christ is that the Son of God did not always exist, but was created by—and is therefore distinct from—God the Father. This belief is grounded in the Gospel of John passage “You heard me say, ‘I am going away and I am coming back to you.’ If y

Update 2:

@@Grey usual you give a through, well stated answer. Thanks for seeing where I was pointing. I am afraid my question was a little to disjointed, so was happy to get your response.

Even if you totally reject the trinity doctrine (as I do) the dogmatic stand that jw take on the very nature or makeup of God (Jehovah) is really predicated on their want to cast aspersions on the scribes and translators over centuries since those issues were first debated. Nothing has changed in light of your observations about Arius.

Certainly those individuals involved in reading and understanding the Greek scriptures of the 4th century had the most concise understanding of what the bible writers were saying. How jw can now argue that 1900 years later their own non-educated translators somehow have a better grasp on those ancient languages is absurd!

7 Answers

  • Anonymous
    8 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    The fact that John realised who Jesus REALLY was and his entire gospel is based on that revalation shows that the divinity of Jesus was well established before the first century C.E. ended. Not one of the New Testament books suggests that Jesus had been created before taking on human form.

    As you point out, it was Arius who challenged the Christian view about the person of Jesus by introducing the idea that Jesus was not part of the One Being of God. But please note the Bible shows that Jesus, the Son, is NOT the same person as the Father. The Trinity doctrine declares that within the One Being of God subsist the three persons of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

    The Trinity was well established by the time Arius introduced his heresy in the early fourth century. He said God was one eternal person who, before anything else was made, created in his own image his highest creature, his only Son, who was not eternally the Son of God and was not God in the same sense as the Father. Everything else was made by the Son and later, he became a man in the person of Jesus of Nazareth. Athanasius stood against Arius and defended the truth that Christ Jesus is “very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father.” Arianism is the view that Jesus was a created being with divine attributes, but was not divine in and of himself. In 325 at the Council of Nicaea, the Christian church officially denounced Arianism as a false doctrine.

    Since the foundation of the Christian church, the divinity of Jesus has been recognised. It is worth noting that so universally accepted was the conviction that Christ Jesus was to be worshipped, there was no need to come up with a written definition of the doctrine till the deity of Jesus was attacked.

    Any religion that believes Jesus was created, is following Arianism, which is not Bible-based. Satan knows that if he can compromise, pervert, deny and discredit the truth of Christ being God and man in two distinct natures, yet one person for ever, then he will have destroyed the gospel.

  • 8 years ago

    TRUE teachings of Jesus

    Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a MAN "approved" of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know: Acts 2:22 (KJV)

    What does "approved" mean?

    Jesus said: "Shama Israelu Adonai Ila Hayno Adna Ikhad".

    It is a Hebrew quotation which means:

    "Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord" Deut 6:4, KJV

  • 8 years ago

    Jesus (peace be upon him) is a Prophet sent by Allah to the children of Israel to guide them. Jesus was not a son of God. This is against monotheism. Jesus did not have a father, so did Adam (peace be upon him) who did not have a father or a mother. For God nothing is difficult to create.

    If you read Acts 11:26, Acts. 26:28, and I Peter 4:16 you will know that even the word "chrisitian' was not given by God or Prophet Jesus (peace be upon him) even. Jesus (peace be upon him) and all true prophets of Allah told people to worship one God alone, without ascribing partners or intermediaries, or idols, or anything. But instead these people after Jesus (peace be upon him) left made trinity, corrupted the message. Look at the bible and you will see many stories of Prophets with accusations. For example prophet David is accused of killling someone to get a woman, Prophet Noah is accused of drinking and many such cases. These are only lies made by people. They were noble prophets people were to take as example. I advice you to read Quran and know the truth. There is a chapter named Mary in Quran. And you will be surprized to know the high status we Muslims have for Mary and Jesus (peace be upon him).

    The name Allâh is used by arabic speaking Christians and all Muslims. The word “Allaha” sounds closer to the Aramaic word for God used by Prophet Jesus (peace be upon him), namely “Allaha” (see Encyclopedia Britannica 1980 under Allâh and Elohim). That is close to the Hebrew name of the Creator, i.e. Eloha. The Jews are using the plural form of respect when they say “Elohim”. (in the eastern languages there are two types of plural: one is of numbers and the other is of respect). So while the name Allâh is strange to non-Muslims, it is not strange to all Prophets from Adam to Muhammed, (peace be upon them) as they propagated in principle the same Islam, i.e. total submission to ALLAH alone in worship without any object or person as an intermediary. It is a contraction of the two Arabic words Al -Ilah, i.e. The God.

    Allâh is the Almighty, Creator and Sustainer of the universe, Who is similar to nothing and nothing is comparable to Allâh. There is no gender, and Allâh begets not, nor was begotten.

  • 8 years ago

    what? what! what .....

    the trinity is proven false by both the jehova witnesses and the LDS church prophets.

    theology proves there is no such thing as a trinity, the LDS prophet teaches that the trinity is the imagination of a man. its not true sound doctrine ! anyone and everyone that believes in the trinity follows a false gosple.... NO DOUBT

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    We know that a trinitarian baptismal formula was in use by the end of the first century, and that the word itself was in use by 170.

  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    that religions changed the meaning of the book, then the actual text to favour their ideas over the original.

  • 8 years ago

    If it were so, Jesus would have mentioned it. He IS the greatest teacher, is he not>

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.