What is the origin of the Trinity?
In today's culture many recognize that most Christian religions believe in what is called the "Holy Trinity". Many are surprised to find that the Many religions have taught the Trinity as well for many years. Why is that? Where did the idea of the Trinity actually originate? To find the answer we are going to have to go back as far back in history as organized religion is recorded, long before the bible was ever written.
Babylon
The bible was written by Moses in 1513 B.C.E. The events we are talking about now occurred over 4,350 years ago. Back to the construction the Babylonian temple under the dominion of who we know only as Nimrod. This man was in complete opposition of God and declared himself a God, later being called Marduk or Shamash.
This is the father of a Trinity the Babylonians believed in. Take note of one important fact, Shamash was a sun god. As we move along you'll notice a pattern here. He also was a god of justice, law, and salvation. He was considered the father in this Trinity relationship we will describe here.
Next is Sin considered the son, he was a moon god and symbolized by a bull.
To finish the Trinity we have a mother named Ishtar she was the goddess of fertility, love, war and sex.
So for clarity this is what we're looking at:
Father- Shamash (sun, justice, law, god of salvation)
Son- Sin (moon, bull)
Mother- Ishtar (Goddess of fertility, love, war, sex)
Egypt
Move forward to our next world power Egypt. They had the Trinity:
Father- Osiris (god of the afterlife, death, life, and resurrection)
Son- Horus (Sky, war, hunting)
Mother- Isis (Goddess of health, marriage, and wisdom)
Notice the connection between salvation and resurrection or afterlife. Essentially the same between the fathers in these trinities. The son went from moon to sky, and the mother from love and sex to simply marriage.
Again just for emphasis all of these we will be discussing are trinities in other words they are 3 and yet 1.
Greece
So what happened when the Grecian empire took control? The following Trinity took the lead:
Father- Zeus (sky, lightning, thunder, law, order, justice)
Son- Apollo (music, poetry, art, oracles, archery, plague, medicine, sun, light and knowledge)
Mother- Athena (Wisdom and War)
Here we see a rearranging of positions yet still a father, son and mother. The father now in the sky, and holds law and justice much like the Babylonian god Shamash. The son now is the sun god and takes knowledge from his mother. Yet she holds wisdom from Egypt and war from Babylon.
Rome
Now Rome comes along and as we all know they simply rename the gods and goddesses according to their liking. This is what we end up with:
Father- Jupiter (god of gods, sky)
Son- Mars (God of war, Destruction and masculinity)
Mother- Venus (love, beauty, sex, fertility, prosperity, victory, and desire)
Jupiter the father holds sky and his son Mars takes on war and destruction. Venus still holds love, sex ect. So we see the pattern continues. But here's the big question what does all of this have to do with the Christian Trinity?
Roman Catholicism
As Christianity took a stronger grip on religion the Roman Empire thought it best to adopt the beliefs as their own. This wasn't unusual for them, they adopted the Grecian religion, actually the Romans were known to allow captives to keep their religion and the Romans would add it to their own beliefs. So what would happen?
In 325 A.D. Emperor Constantine held the first council of Nicene where they made the creed of Nicaea. Emperor Constantine was a Sun worshiper, as Christians would call a "pagan". In this creed they mixed Christianity along with pagan worship, seeing what would fit together.
On May 20th 325 they combined the Father (Jehovah as he was known to the Christians then) and the Son (Jesus) as one god. At this point the only mention of the holy spirit is "we believe in the holy spirit"; however in 381 they added "the Lord and Giver of life, who proceedeth from the Father, who with the Father and the Son together is worshiped and glorified, who spake by the prophets." To that clause.
No where in the bible does it say to worship the holy spirit. It does say to be baptized in holy spirit but never says to worship it.
As Eusebius described, Constantine "himself proceeded through the midst of the assembly, like some heavenly messenger of God, clothed in raiment which glittered as it were with rays of light, reflecting the glowing radiance of a purple robe, and adorned with the brilliant
splendor of gold and precious stones". The emperor (Sun worshipper) was present as an overseer and presider.
"Some 22 of the bishops at the council, led by Eusebius of Nicomedia, came as supporters of Arius. But when some of the more shocking passages from his writings were read, they were almost universally seen as blasphemous." ~Carroll, Warren (1 March 1987), The Building of Christendom, Front Royal: Christendom College Press, ISBN 978-0-93-188824-3
The Arian controversy arose in Alexandria when the newly reinstated presbyter Arius began to spread doctrinal views that were contrary to those of his bishop. The disputed issues centered on the natures and relationship of God (the Father) and the Son of God (Jesus). The disagreements sprang from different ideas about the God-head and what it meant for Jesus to be his son. Alexander maintained that the Son was divine in just the same sense that the Father is, co-eternal with the Father, else he could not be a true Son. Arius emphasized the supremacy and uniqueness of God the Father, meaning that the Father alone is almighty and infinite, and that therefore the Father's divinity must be greater than the Son's. Arius taught that the Son had a beginning, and that he possessed neither the eternity nor the true divinity of the Father, but was rather made "God" only by the Father's permission and power, and that the Son was rather the very first and the most perfect of God's creatures.
Much of the debate hinged on the difference between being "born" or "created" (Revelation 3:14 calls Jesus, the amen, a creation, not creator) and being "begotten" (only-begotten son, to be begotten means to be brought into existence). Arians saw these as essentially the same; followers of Alexander did not.
So in conclusion the trinity doctrine has been floating around by pagan worship for thousands of years but the Catholic Church adopted it from false religions and sadly many other churches adopted it from the Catholic church.
John 4:24 Jesus said those worshipping God must worship him with "truth". Sadly many say it doesn't matter what you believe, such ones haven't considered what Jesus said about worshipping with truth. John 17:3 he said we must "take in knowledge of him" to get everlasting life. Finally in Revelation, it speaks of "Babylon the great" being destroyed, this rightly represents false religion because as was brought out at the start the Trinity (along with many other false teachings) started there.
So I encourage you as Revelation 18:2-4 says "to get out of her if you do not want to share with her in her sins" if you find your religions teaches the Trinity please flee from it! Run! Or you will share with her in her plagues!
I'm with you on this post except for calling out the Catholic church. It's the overwhelming majority of Christians who believe in the Trinity, even if it was brought in because of Catholicism. Go to almost any protestant church and try to say Jesus isn't G-d but only His son and see what kind of reaction you get. I've been "coming out" about my non-trinitarianism lately and it's a tough road.
Thank you for your comment and I completely agree with you. I merely was pointing out how it come into Christianity, all Christian religions that teach it are just as wrong.
The Roman Catholic Church forced the Trinitarian belief on everyone under their power under the penalty of death for hundreds of years. This is why so many people have come to blindly believe in it. It has literally been forced and brainwashed into Christianity and now it has become a sacred cow.
I believe that the Catholic Church is directly responsible for the mass belief in the Trinity and every "denomination" following the trinitarian doctrine is essential tied to the Catholic Church, whether they think so or not.
That's my thoughts on it anyway.
I agree completely!
I like the thought process but where are you getting your information? There is a closer tie to trinity relationship, the 3 being only 1, from looking at polytheistic goddesses than trying to make your neat little family unit. The maiden, the mother and the crone can be seen in the mixup and similar names and semi-interchangeable identities of Freyja, Freya, Frigg. It has been argued for the Grecian combo of Hekate, Hera and Persephone, but that is often contested, yet at least seen in combo with an unspoken reason thru the Elusian mysteries. There is also a trinity within Hinduism, Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva, that I was surprised you didn't speak on, all male. It's less about gender and more about that creation, destruction, maintenance dynamic.
It's funny I almost used Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva but I couldn't find any evidence that showed them passed from one culture to the next. Babylon was the start of false religion and pretty much most cultures post-flood so obviously in one way or another it was passed on to them, if you find the connection I would love to hear it. I find the study of religion very intriguing! One book that is a source for some of this is "mankind's search for God" but a lot of it comes from snippets of other books. I've spent all my life studying these subjects so it's a collection of sources. I did Google a lot of it to double check my work for accuracy.
Babylon was a trade city. India is a pretty isolated place but trade does leave there in ancient times. The gypsies black, black hair comes from genetic ties with India, and the large amount of scarves comparative to Sari use in India, a culture that was passed on yet not kept completely in tact, I'm thinking. And with the Gospel of Thomas from the Dead Sea Scrolls came quite a Buddhist view of things that made historians start wondering if the 13 years Jesus is just walking and wandering, undocumented in the Bible, was he visiting India and getting spiritually trained there. His ideas are similar to Buddhist and Indian ascetic thinking.
The 13 years undocumented? Are you referring to his childhood? During the time after leaving Egypt, he lived in Nazareth seeing as he was called "the Nazarene".
You idea on India and Babylon is sound and completely possible. Usually something bigger contributes to adopting religious view but I'm not saying what you said isn't possible. I'll accept it
I also meant to use Baal, Tammuz and Ashoreth; which was the the gods of the Israelites when they turned to false gods.
Your evidence suggests that a trinity is a consistent theme that is mysteriously discarded by the bible without any justification. How do you get from there that the trinity is a bad thing?
This is all based on the belief that the bible is the only inspired word of God. If your opinion differs from that then this article lacks a foundation for you to agree.
First ... Wow! That's a pretty important thing to leave out! But even so, your argument is still wrong.
The Bible doesn't say that wine coolers contain alcohol, but they do. So the absence of a claim in the Bible doesn't mean it's false.
And even those who believe the bible is the only inspired word of God believe that passages have to be interpreted, often in ways that contradict what they explicitly say. For example, "I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, she must be silent." And "Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle but also to the cruel." I hope you don't argue that those things mean precisely what they say and are binding on all who believe the bible is the inspired word of God.
The evidence still suggests that other sources make the trinity a consistent theme and the bible does not provide any explicit or clear rejection of this theme such that it would be reasonable to interpret it as explicitly rejecting the theme.
The bible does disprove the Trinity. Jesus said "the father is greater than I am" at John 14:28 of bothers were God then they would be equal.
That's a completely silly argument. Yes, they would be equal in that sense, but not equal in literally all senses. If they were equal in literally all senses, then they would be precisely identical which would mean there was no trinity at all.
I'm afraid we can't blame the doctrine of the Trinity on the Catholics or on any old myths that happen to have three of something.
Jesus himself made it very clear that He and the Father were one and He referred to himself as the Son of God.
First of all back up and see it says God "sent" his son. You can "send" yourself you only send others.
Also notice what Jesus said about being "one" woth God.
"11 “I am no longer in the world, but they are in the world, and I am coming to you. Holy Father, watch over them on account of your own name, which you have given me, so that they may be one just as we are one."
Notice Jesus said his desciples would be one in the same manner that he and God are one. Are we all the same person? Jesus surely wasn't saying we were all part of one organism, but he was saying we would be one in thought, and belief. So him and God are one just as we are one.
No. The doctrine of the Trinity says "God in three persons, not the same person" And yes, in the next life we will be children of God and part of that same oneness.
But Jesus said just as we "are" this is present tense. Why is Jesus one with God before ascending to heaven? Apparently Jesus was one with God while human (one in thought, same goals) and we can be too by thinking inline with his word.
Yes! Jesus was simultaneously fully God and fully man. Google "hypostatic union".
That said, there were certain prerogatives of deity he lay down before his resurrection. One of them was certain knowledge of when he would return, for example. Quite a mystery, I'll admit.
Fantastic post. I agree. I also hope to lead others to this simple truth. Thank you.
Upvoted
Hi! This post has a Flesch-Kincaid grade level of 8.6 and reading ease of 71%. This puts the writing level on par with Leo Tolstoy and David Foster Wallace.