Understanding:
The Father
Son
Holy Spirit

by Juan Baixeras

 

Index


How did Jesus become God?

 

Neither Jesus nor his Apostles ever taught that Jesus was God. To most Christians this doctrine is of the utmost importance. It is the centerpiece of their belief system. Yet, isn’t it strange that something of such importance is not mentioned in the entire Bible. There are a few verses which people cling to that they say claim Jesus is God, but when you look at a few sentences before or after this verse, it is obvious that this is not what is meant. In the last part of this report we shall go over some of the most often quoted Scriptures to show you how they have been misinterpreted and/or mistranslated from Greek to English. It should be very interesting, and a guaranteed eye opener. As was mentioned earlier, a lot of Bible scholars also point to Old Testament Scriptures to show God’s plurality. Yet, the Jews who were God’s chosen people, whom God gave the Old Testament to for thousands of years before Jesus have never thought of God as being plural. Although the Jews failed to see Jesus as the Messiah, (even though he fulfilled over 300 Old Testament prophesies) they are still waiting for the Messiah to come. Interestingly, the Messiah to the Jews is supposed to be a man anointed by God, not God. Let us look at some of the Messianic Prophecies to confirm who the Messiah is supposed to be:

Isaiah 53: 3 states that the servant of God will be a man.

"A man of suffering, accustomed to infirmity..."

Isaiah 52: 14 states that his look was marred beyond that of man.

"So marred was his appearance beyond that of man."

Deuteronomy 18: 15 states that the Messiah will be like Moses and come from among their own brothers.

"The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your own brothers."

Daniel 9: 25 - 26 states that he will be anointed and a leader, and that the anointed shall be cut down.

Vv25: "Until one who is anointed and a leader..."

Vv26: "After the sixty - two weeks an anointed shall be cut down..."

Isaiah 11: 1 - 2 states that the Spirit of the LORD shall rest upon the shoot from the stump of Jesse (Jesse was David’s Father, and Jesus is of the line of David).

"But a shoot shall sprout from the stump of Jesse, and from his roots a bud shall blossom. The Spirit of the LORD shall rest upon him:"

Isaiah 42: 1 states that God will put His Spirit upon His servant, His chosen one with whom He is pleased.

"Here is my servant whom I uphold, my chosen one with whom I am pleased, Upon whom I have put my Spirit."

Psalms 89: 27 - 28 states how the anointed will call God his father, his God, his rock, his savior, and how God will make him the firstborn.

"He shall say of me, "You are my father, my God , my rock, my savior." And I will make him the firstborn."

Micah 5: 3 states that he shall shepherd his flock by the strength of the LORD his God. Emphasis on " his God."

"He shall stand firm and shepherd his flock by the strength of the LORD, in the majestic name of the LORD, his God..."

As you can see, the Messiah is supposed to have a God. He is not supposed to be God.

The Messiah is supposed to be a man anointed by God, not God in the flesh. Webster’s Dictionary and The Quest Study Bible, define Messiah as - anointed one. Which is exactly who Jesus is. Read Acts 10: 38 and Acts 2:22 if you have any doubts.

Jesus and his Apostles covered every aspect of Christian life in their teachings and writings. Would it not be fair to conclude that something as important and complicated as the trinity would have been given at least a few verses explaining this complicated relationship. Yet, Jesus nor his Apostles dedicate one verse of explanation to this subject in the entire Bible. Isn’t it odd that the greatest teacher of all would just completely overlook what is considered by some to be one of the most important concepts in Christianity. The entire Bible contradicts this theory. If you were to read the entire Bible from cover to cover without any preconceived ideas, you would never come up with the concept of the trinity. So how did this concept come to be?

There is other literature at this web site which will describe in detail how this concept developed, and spread.

What happened in a nutshell is that Greek philosophy, specifically Gnosticism, Stoicism, and Neo-Platonism influenced Christianity in the first few centuries. Almost all the Christian theologians in the first few centuries were educated in these philosophies. For example, Stoics believed that "logos" was the divine principle of life. This is basically a definition of God. Now with this definition in mind, imagine what kind of interpretation you are going to arrive at when you read John 1:1-3

 

"In the beginning was the Word (logos), and the Word (logos) was with God, and the Word (logos) was God."

You will come to an interpretation that was never intended by its Hebrew author. An explanation of this verse is included later on. Neo-Platonist believed God to be a triune God that was divided into three.

One / intelligence / Soul.

God / Word / Holy Spirit.

You can easily see how similar this view of God is to the Trinitarian view of God.

The influence started even as early as in Paul’s day. Paul and John wrote in their letters against some of these Gnostic teachings that were already trying to creep into the church. It was in the third and fourth centuries that the big infiltration of Greek philosophy into the early church started to change some core doctrines, the nature of Jesus being one of them. It was a false teaching that developed over two hundred years and was formulated as a formal doctrine in part at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD and then in its present state at the Council of Constantinople in 385 AD, three hundred and sixty years after Jesus.

The Council of Nicaea asserted that:

"Jesus was of the same substance as the Father,"

which laid the groundwork for later Trinitarian theology. For many years there had been much opposition on Biblical grounds to the developing idea that Jesus was God. To try to resolve the dispute, Roman Emperor Constantine summoned all the bishops to Nicaea. About 300, a fraction of the total attended.

Constantine was not a Christian. He worshipped the Unconquered Sun like his father had. He not only worshipped the Unconquered Sun, he held the title and role of High Priest of that religion. To see what kind of person Constantine was, let us take a quick look at just a few of his accomplishments. He became emperor by making war on his opponents. He murdered one of his sons, his brother in law, his nephew and possibly his second wife. This is the kind of person that presided over and decided the outcome of the council of Nicaea.

"By their fruit you will recognize them"(Matthew 7:16).

God definitely did not guide this man or this council. Constantine converted nearing the end of his life, but it was a military matter, not the grace of God. Constantine believed that victory in battle lay in the gift of the God of the Christians.

Constantine played a crucial role at this council. The Encyclopedia Britannica states:

"Constantine himself presided, actively guiding the discussions and personally proposed the crucial formula expressing the relationship of Christ to God in the creed issued by the council, "of one substance with the Father."

The American Academic Encyclopedia states:

"Although this was not Constantine’s first attempt to reconcile factions in Christianity, it was the first time he had used the imperial office to IMPOSE a settlement."

Pressured by the Emperor with forced exile, the bishops with only two exceptions signed the creed, many of them much against their inclination. A few years later when Arianism became popular, Constantine found it politically expedient to change sides and exiled all those who did not agree with him, which were the same ones who had agreed with him at the Council of Nicaea. I think this action clearly shows how much conviction Constantine had towards the idea that Jesus was God. As was mentioned earlier, he converted nearing the end of his life, and was baptized by the Arian Bishop of Nicodemia. He was not a Christian during the council, and in my opinion, (according to Bible standards) he never was. It is worth noting, that the Holy Spirit was not even considered at Nicaea. If the Apostles taught the trinity, then it should have been a constant teaching from the Apostles to Nicaea, and Nicaea should have just formalized the teaching. But as has been mentioned, the Holy Spirit was not included in Nicaea’s formula, which proves that this was not an established teaching of the times as people will have you believe. It was a developing doctrine, entirely man made. Debate over this continued for decades, then Emperor Theodosias established the creed of the Council of Nicaea as the standard for his realm and convened the Council of Constantinople in 381 AD to clarify the formula. The council agreed to place the Holy Spirit on the same level as God and Christ. For the first time Christendom’s Trinity became law for both church and state.

The Council of Chalcedon in 451 AD was responsible for the "official" definition of the person of Jesus. This is the creed that all the major denominations that claim to be Trinitarian follow. Thomas Hart, a Roman Catholic theologian writes:

"According to the Council of Chalcedon:

Jesus is fully God and fully man."Jesus is called "man" in the generic sense, but is not "a man." He has a human nature, but is not a human person. The person in him is the second person of the Blessed Trinity. Jesus does not have a human personal center. This is how the Council gets round the possible problem of split personality."

A leading Protestant Oliver Quick, D.D., who wrote Doctrines of the Creed states:

"If we affirm that Jesus was a human person, we are driven into an impossible conception of double personality in the incarnate Son of God."

This Council denies that Jesus was a human person, "does not have a personal human center." Hebrews 2: 17 states:

"For this reason he had to be made like his brothers in EVERY way."

We (his brothers) are all 100% human. John, the Apostle, instructs us to apply the theological test. This yardstick is to measure our own understanding of the person of Jesus. Who is the real Jesus? The test is as follows:

This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God:

"Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God. Many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist" (1 John 4:2, 2 John vv. 7).

Your next question should be, what exactly does "come in the flesh mean?" Let us turn for help to the Translator’s New Testament, a fine document produced by thirty-five scholars, seventeen being New Testament specialist in universities and theological colleges, and eighteen missionary linguist (published by the British and Foreign Bible Society, 1973). Here is their rendering of 2 John vv. 7:

"Many deceivers have gone into the world who do not accept that Jesus came as a human being. Here is the deceiver and the antichrist."

Strong’s Greek Dictionary of the New Testament defines flesh as follows: (spec.) a human being.

Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words defines flesh as follows: In the totality of all that is essential to manhood.

How does this vital test apply to your understanding of Jesus? These creeds that have been mentioned are the creeds which the majority of Christians believe to be true. But are they Biblical, or man made?

In the 6th century, Emperor Justinian produced a decree that imposed the death penalty for all that did not accept the Doctrine of the Trinity. Does this doctrine with its penalties sound like something that God or His Son Jesus would approve of? Did Jesus or the Apostles ever kill anyone because they did not agree with them?

Trinitarians (of which I was one) have conformed the Scriptures to their thought, instead of conforming their thought to the Scriptures.

The fact that it had to be changed into this at all, should tell you that it was not that way in the beginning. And the closer you get to the beginning, the closer you get to Jesus and the Apostles, and true Christianity. The Doctrine of the Trinity is man made. It is not from God, but from man. Hence, a pagan emperor after two months of furious debate intervened in favor of those who said that Jesus was God. A Short History of Christian Doctrine states:

"Constantine had basically no understanding whatsoever of the questions being asked in Greek theology."

What he did understand was that religious division was a threat to his empire, and he wanted to solidify his domain.

I encourage everyone to do their own research on this matter. It is really quite easy. However, lets see what some well known books and educational references have to say on this subject.

The Encyclopedia Americana: "Fourth century Trinitarianism did not reflect accurately early Christian teaching regarding the nature of God; it was, on the contrary, a deviation from this teaching."

A Dictionary of Religious Knowledge: "Many say that the trinity is a corruption borrowed from the heathen religions, and ingrafted on the Christian faith."

The Paganism in Our Christianity: "The origin of the trinity is entirely pagan."

The New chaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge: "The doctrines of the Logos and the trinity received their shape from Greek Fathers, who were much influenced, directly or indirectly, by the Platonic philosophy. That errors and corruptions crept into the church from this source cannot be denied."

The Church of the First Few Centuries: "The Doctrine of the Trinity was of gradual and comparatively late formation. It had its origin in a source entirely foreign from that of the Jewish and Christian Scriptures. It grew up, and was ingrafted on Christianity, through the hands of the Platonizing Fathers."

Outlines of the History of Dogma: "Church doctrine became rooted in the soil of Hellenism (pagan Greek thought). Thereby it became a mystery to the great majority of Christians."

"See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ" (Colossians 2: 8).

The trinity depends entirely on human tradition and basic principles of this world rather than on Christ. This is a simplistic explanation of how it got started, there is much more information to be studied on where the concept originated and why it was successful in gaining popularity. But in order to find this information one must get out of their seat and do a little legwork. I assure you it is not that hard at all, pick up The Encyclopedia Britannica and look up "Platonism" and read the effects on the early church. Then look up all the names which that section mentions. Look up "Trinity" in various encyclopedias. This is just the start. You will be amazed!


Index

 

This page copyright © 2000 by Juan Baixeras