Where Did the Trinity Teaching Come From?

I think you may be overstating your case.

Mark 9:38-41

John said to Jesus, "Teacher, we saw someone casting out demons in your name, and we tried to stop him, because he was not following us." But Jesus said, "Do not stop him; for no one who does a deed of power in my name will be able soon afterward to speak evil of me. Whoever is not against us is for us. For truly I tell you, whoever gives you a cup of water to drink because you bear the name of Christ will by no means lose the reward.

 

The concept started in Genesis, "Let US make man in OUR image".

 

Paul7:

Your cherry-picked, partial quotation of Genesis 1:26 does nothing for Christendom's Trinity because there were already millions of spirit sons / angels in existence when Jehovah spoke those words.

Alter2Ego

 

To address the 3 of the questions (all but 3,4) - Every Bible concordance/dictionary - states that the Trinity Doctrine is not found in the NT.

Jesus himself states numerous times that the "Father" is someone other than himself - that the Father knows things he does not - and so on.


3) The apostles did not believe that Jesus was "The Father" - nor Jesus for that matter - nor did any of the early Church Fathers - all who believed that Jesus was "Subordinate" to the Father. Ignatius, Clement - Origin and so on - all were subordinatists.

4) The idea of a Godhead was in Platonic Philosophy I believe - and certainly the Gnostics had these ideas.

 

There is no modern Trinity Doctrine in Genesis - The ancient Israelites - and Abraham - believed in the existence of a Divine Pantheon - and this is what the term "US" is referring to.. made in "Our" image.

We also have numerous references to the "Son's of God" - which meant exactly that "Sons of God"

The God of Abraham "El" was reputed to have 70 son's.

 

'

Unfortunately the fabrication of Scripture happens well before the KJV - which as you suggest - is a horrible translation.

Modern Bibles use the Masoretic text (MT) which was created 700-900 AD - does some major editing - especially with respect to the mention of other Gods that was present in Older Bibles.

One good example is Deut 32:43

The first version of the passage is from the Septuagint (LXX). This is what was used by the early Christians. The LXX (roman numerals for 70) refers to the 70 Jewish scholars who translated the 5 books of Moses into Greek as early as the 3rd century BC.

Deut 32:43 (LXX)

"O heavens, rejoice with Him
Bow to Him, all sons of the divine
O nations, rejoice with His people
and let all angels of the divine strengthen themselves in Him.
For He’ll avenge the blood of His sons,
be vengeful, and wreak vengeance and recompense justice on his foes
And the Lord will Cleanse His people’s land"


The next is exactly the same passage in the Masoretic Text (MT) - the test most widely used as the basis for translation in Protestant Bibles.
This text comes from a group of Jews called Masorites and was compiled 1000 years after the LXX (700-900 AD)

"O nations, rejoice His people
For He’ll avenge the blood of His servants and wreak vengeance on His foes
And will cleanse His people’s land"

Holy editing out content Batman ! What happened to Sons of God -rejoicing with Gods in the heavens ? Where are the Angels - which are placed below man in the pecking order on earth.

Most of the meaning of the text is lost.. but if that is not enough - Modern Bibles manage to bastardize this verse even further.

"Rejoice, you nations, with his people,
for he will avenge the blood of his servants;
he will take vengeance on his enemies
and make atonement for his land and people."

All of a sudden it is no longer the peoples land - but God's land - the ownership of the land is changed.

The term "Cleanse" in the MT is referring to just that - Ethnic Cleansing - is changed to "atonement" which means something completely different.

 

One of whom was Yahweh, who the Jews worshipped/worship. That makes Jesus - if he was Gods Son - El's Grandson.. The Gospel writers put words into the preachers Jesus mouth, Although all Jews would claim to be A son of God - OT Teaching - anyone who claimed to be THE Son of God would have been shunned immediately. Jesus would have been ostracised the moment he said it. The Jewish Shema Hear O Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord is One". Something the Jewish children learned at the beginning of their study of the OT at the age of 5.The words supposedly put into his mouth and said by Jesus - and no-one was there except the Priesthood at the trial - was simply to get him out of the way when no other ruse had worked.

 

Yes - Each city had their own Patron God - and they each took their Gods out to battle with them- each would be either a Son of El - or a son of Enki - Els brother .. and the king named himself after the God of his City. Go through the history of Assyria/Babylon and you will find the Kings almost all have the names of either Enlil (EL) or one of Enlil's or Enki's sons ..

So one of the Cities of that time - Babylon - the kings name was Kadashman - Enlil I 1300 BC
Over in Assyria around this time you have Aššur-nērārī II after the God Assur the Sumerian Equivalent of Enlil 1400 BC. The God Assyria is named after ..

Later Kings will have Marduk in their name Marduk-apla-iddina II - 700 BC Marduk is the Son of Ea - Enki.

Nebochadnezzar "Nebo" son of Enlil is Father Nebopolasar

The Israelite God was YHWH - Son of El - hence the name of "Israel" "one who struggles with the most high"

The meaning of names such as Samu-EL - were no secret to anyone in the Near East ..
"According to the Holman Bible Dictionary, Samuel was a "[p]ersonal name in the Ancient Near East meaning, 'Sumu is God' but understood in Israel as 'The name is God,' 'God is exalted,' or 'son of God"

So when in Psalm 82 - the Council of EL - we know what this is referring to - everyone knew what this was referring to - be it an Assyrian, Babylonian, or Canaanite - religious group to which the Israelite religion was most affiliated to at the time .. in close proximity so they would have had many battles .. hence why YHWH is depicted as battling with Marduk and Baal in the Bible -

The Geographical location of Jerusalem was not a place wanted by anyone at the time -- sparse - not good crop- land - no one cared about it.. which is why they existed for so long as an entity with major powers such as the Hittites, Babylon, Assyria, and Egypt surrounding them - who were always warring with each other - Israel was allied with one side or another in these squabbles - and often was a vassal state.

Ps 82:1 "YHWH - one being stationed in the Council of EL"

YHWH is passing judgement on the "wicked ones"

82:6 "I have said Ye are Gods - all of you Sons of the "Supreme one" - translated "most high" in modern Bibles.

82:7 "But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes 8 Arise, O God, judge the earth: for thou shalt inherit all nations"

So YHWH defeats these other Gods - and inherits the Earth - which is exactly what Marduk did defeating the God of Chaos -becoming chief of the Gods - and Usurping the Position of El as Chief Deity on Earth .. The longer procession being ANU - Enlil -Marduk

Or in this case Anu-Enlil- YHWH .. who becomes El YHWH

The interesting thing about this passage is that there is no way to squirm out of

1) El being mentioned by Name - and not used as Lord "El Shaddai" and reference to the Council of El.
2) That the Sons of Gods - are actual Gods - sitting in this Council - which is obviously not on Earth / not accessible to men .. it is the council of the Gods - and everyone living in the near east at the time knows exactly what the Council of El is - so you would never write this in a religious text - having it mean something else.

3) Who is the Supreme one ? - cause it is not YHWH - as these Gods are obviously not YHWHs Children .. They are Children of El - the Supreme one. YHWH is not depicted as "The Supreme one"

Even though all these towns had their own God - who might have ascended to "Chief of the Gods" .. this was Chief of the God's and the affairs of Gods on Earth - they still regarded El as the Most High .. Everyone .. be it Assyrian, Babylonian, Israelite, Canaanite - regarded El as the Most High - while worshiping who they regarded to be the Chief of the God's on Earth.

So yes .. YHWH is a Son of El - who defeats these "Wicked" sons of El and becomes Chief of the Gods .. usurping what used to be the position of El - way back - and everyone knows the story - including the Creation story of Genesis - in one form or another - all very similar.

Yes .. I think you are correct here .. Jesus referred to himself as the Son of Man. The interesting difference here is that Jesus is not depicted as a "Son of God" as per the OT a Son produced by the union of two Gods .. but from the Union of God and a Human.

So if we are deciding to capitalize one S - in the word Son- over the other "son" we should probably be referring to the others as "Sons of God" - and Jesus as a "son of God" - not quite being on the same level as the others .. being half human half God .. instead of having two Gods as Parents.

 

The Ugarite pantheon and 'religion' has El putting Yahweh in charge of Israel. Ugarite scriptures and Jewish scriptures cross over in various books like Psalms and Proverbs. The same thoughts are expressed in different ways but still obviously associated. El was worshipped in Shiloh by the Northern kingdom until the Assyrian exile. Yahweh was worshipped in Jerusalem until Babylon. They also had other gods. It seems that when the northern kingdom was beaten the remnants were invited to worship in Jerusalem. During the Babylonian exile Yahweh was given all the attributes of El and worshipped as ONE God. Marduk, of course, goes way back into the past . Hammurabi's code was given him by his god - Marduk. Other codes like the 10 commandments were also given by their respective god.

Jesus was depicted as half human/half god. But there is no evidence that he was more than a Jewish evangelist. It's simply what the Gospel writers wanted. The 2 nativity stories celebrated at Christmas are simply nonsense to anyone who has studied them against the time, Roman and Jewish laws and traditions. The OT scriptures used are simply ripped from their context in the OT.

Ooops. It's just about midnight. I'm off to bed