Ashraf Schneider – Investigating the Trinity – Part 2

			Peace, blessings and mercy be upon y'all. Welcome back to our page. In part one of our series on the
God of Abraham, we focused on the overwhelming similarities between the God of the Jews, the God of
the early Unitarian Christians, and the God of the Muslims, the God of Abraham. In contrast, in
today's video, we will be focusing on and exploring how modern Judaism and Islam monotheistic
religions, by definition, compare and contrast with contemporary Trinitarian Christianity. It is
worth noting at this juncture that not all contemporary Christians are Trinitarian and that
Unitarian churches are still in existence. This comparison and contrast will be focusing
		

			specifically on Trinitarian Christian practices. In closing in part one of this video series, I
promise that today's video will be focusing on the history and paradoxical nature of the concept of
the Trinity in more detail, and we will, but if you haven't yet, I strongly advise you to watch part
one of this video series before continuing this video, so that you can appreciate the shared history
of the Abrahamic faiths that we've discussed there in and so that you can bear the Abrahamic faith
similarities in mind when approaching exploration today. In part one of the series, we established
that Judaism early and Unitarian Christianity and Islam have far more in common than mainstream
		

			media would lead you to believe. And while that's true, contemporary Trinitarian Christianity breaks
with the decidedly monotheistic Abrahamic tradition in favor of what one might call another kind of
polytheism. So, where in history that the streams of Abrahamic faiths diverge from uniformly
Unitarian or monotheistic to the divide we see today. How did the Trinitarian concept come to be so
widely accepted by contemporary questions? And how did it make its way into the Bible? Fasten your
seat belts because we are about to take a deep dive into ancient history. The concept of a Trinity
was first introduced to religious discussion in the second century, when the awfulness of Antioch
		

			use the Greek word three hours or three adults meaning Trinity, in his writing to a talk of this.
This is to say that the concept of the Trinity only entered the theological realm and discussion
long after Jesus Christ, peace and blessings be upon him ascended to the heavenly realm, and only
after the biblical text had already been compiled. That is why the word trinity cannot be found in
early copies of the compiled biblical texts. The concept hadn't even been invented yet when the
original book was being disseminated. nevermind the fact that the awfulness wasn't even referring to
a Triune God, or the popular God the Father, God, the Son, and God the Holy Spirit trio as
		

			referenced today. Rather, the awfulness use the word trinity to refer to God, His Word and His
wisdom. He wasn't even alluding to the polytheistic interpretation of the nature of God, rather use
it specifically to say that there were three things that existed prior to man, God, His Word, and
his wisdom. Thus, three, but not three, and one, no three gods or versions of God, or expressions of
God, but one God, who was in possession of eternal wisdom and power. It was another 100 years or so
later at the first Council of Nicaea in 325 ad, that the concept of the Trinity would first be used
to refer to a Triune God, or to propose that God's identity was polytheistic, thus marking the
		

			contemporary Christian departure from the strict monotheism of the Jewish faith which preceded it.
Thus the formal doctrine of the Trinity and divine sonship both sprang from the Council of Nicaea
and were incorporated into an industry and creed, a profession of faith agreed upon, although with
some misgivings because of its non biblical terminology, by the bishops of Nicaea to defend the true
faith against Arianism. Let's back up for a second. If you're wondering who areas from whence
Arianism is, Well, I'll tell you, Arias was a fourth century Unitarian, who derived his doctrine
directly from the Bible. As a result, he issued all references to polytheism and practice the strict
		

			monotheism. What the passage I just quoted uncovers is the fact that despite knowing that there was
no biblical basis for the concept of a triune or polytheistic God and being vaguely uncomfortable
with the fact then this Ian's willingly and with full malice of forethought, formalize the triune
doctrine, pronounced there's as the true faith and branded areas as a heretic. Why? Well, let's look
at the events leading up to
		

			Immediately following the first Council of Nicaea if you hadn't already guessed, just like in
today's day and age, everything is political. Essentially, during the years immediately preceding
the Council of Nicaea Emperor Constantine saw His Holy Roman Empire weakened by religious
infighting. Instead of focusing on warring with a national enemies, the Roman Empire was at war
within its own walls. Constantine thus sought to strengthen his empire by uniting his people under a
single unified Christian faith. He therefore called for the Council of Nicaea, to take place and
exerted and not insignificant amount of influence and power over its outcome. This is perhaps one of
		

			the first recorded incidences of the head of state, effectively declaring himself as the head of the
church. This despite the fact that Constantine wasn't baptized until he was on his deathbed, and he
had little to no theological education. Constantine was a politician through and through who sought
to use religion or theology for his own political gain. As a result, all disagreement over doctrine
became overtly political and public as opposed to private, and the state would often intervene in
church disputes, to serve their own ends. So for a brief spell all was hunky dory, right? Legally,
the whole of the Roman Empire had to be Trinitarian. Because Constantine effectively said it has to
		

			be so and that's that, right? Well, no. See, Constantine had two sons, Constantius, and constants.
And like most brothers, the two that don't always see eye to eye, so while constants acknowledge and
propagates it his father's in the sea and greed even after Constantine's death, his brother
Constantius was the rebel who challenged the status quo he declared for Arianism, or monotheism. And
while two brothers attempted to reconcile their views at the Council of South Africa, in 343 ad,
they ultimately failed, as they were each ruling half of their deceased father's Empire at the time,
you would think their powers would be evenly matched, but unfortunately, that was not the case
		

			constant, the Trinitarian brother was more powerful, and so he placed orthodox Trinitarian bishops
in positions of power throughout the empire. Despite his brother's objections, his victory was short
lived, however, as consensus I'd loved his brother and reverse constants as policies, declaring
Arianism as the religion of the round at the tsunami of cerium and remaining in 359. Essentially,
we've now witnessed the Roman Empire declare for polytheism alternative Arianism, only to revert
back to monotheistic or Unitarian practices. Still with me so far. What follow constancies rule was
that of the new emperor Julian who attempted to reestablish and once again bring the ancient pagan
		

			cult to power. He in turn was followed by another Christian emperor Jovian, who like Constantine had
two sons, who ruled following his the Mayans, one son who declared for the Nicene Creed and the
other who declared for Arianism syncing a pattern here. It was their successor, Theodosius the great
who rule between 375 to 383, who finally put an end to the Roman Empire's back and forth between
paganism, monotheism, and the new established polytheistic doctrine of the Trinity. He's the Emperor
ultimately responsible for establishing Christianity as the state religion, denying all others the
right to exist in the year 381. See, he called together the Council of Constantinople, at which the
		

			Nicene Creed was confirmed, and Trinitarian Christianity was established as Orthodox. It is also at
the first council of Constantinople, where the relationship between the Father, the Son, and the
Holy Spirit as one substance, overseer, and three co equal persons hypostasis was formally ratified.
Talk about a mouthful, right? It's a complex and convoluted history that only started after Jesus,
peace and blessings be upon him and his disciples were no more the concept of modern Trinitarian
polytheism would have flown in the face of these devout Jewish men. Right? So let's step back into
the present. What our trip through history has then served to illustrate is that it was not Jesus
		

			peace and blessings be upon him, who introduced the concept of a Trinity to the theological
discussion, right? It was later politicians and ultimately translators who impose their views and
philosophies on the ancient texts, and essentially created the concept of eternity for political and
personal gain. Isn't that precisely why as religious writer AW Tozer acknowledges in his book, The
knowledge of the holy, the Trinity remains an incomprehensible mystery. It tends to understand the
Trinity, he writes, must remain forever futile, but that it hasn't stopped churches from continuing
to preach this doctrine, even without pretending to understand it. Verse despite the fact that a
		

			warning came from the same God of Abraham in the seventh century already, warning the people of the
Book
		

			To commit no access in the religion, nor say of God, anything but the truth God warned his people
and express in so many words that Christ Jesus, the son of Mary was no more than a messenger of God,
and His Word, which he bestowed on Mary, and his spirit preceding from him. So believe in God and
His messengers. Do not say Trinity, desist, it is better for you, for God is one God, Glory be to
Him, fire exalted as he about having a son. To Him belongs all that is in the heavens and on the
earth, and enough is God as the disposer of affairs, but they did not listen. Despite God's wanting
not to exceed in your religion the bounds of what is proper trespassing beyond the truth and
		

			following the vain desires of people who went wrong in times gone by the Trinitarian church has
continued to grow throughout the centuries, despite the fact that as we've already noted, the
Trinity remains an incomprehensible mystery that the church propagates without even pretending to
understand it. The fact as we know them then confirms that the original biblical scriptures present
no finished Trinitarian statement. But the doctrine of the Trinity as such is not revealed in either
the old or the New Testament, and that Jesus Christ, peace and blessings be upon him never claimed
to be son of nevermind co equal to God. The Bible, in its original incarnation largely corresponds
		

			with the overwhelming Abrahamic understanding of God, as outlined in part one of this video series,
the Torah, the Bible and the Karana. All, after all, talking about one God, the God of Abraham, and
as far as I can see, it is only the interference of man in Revelation that has created the
artificial divide between the monotheistic Abrahamic faiths, and the Trinitarian Christian doctrine.
If you'd like to know more about what Unitarian Christianity, Judaism and Islam have in common, and
you haven't yet, I'd highly recommend you to go have a look at part one of this video series, which
explores the similarities in more detail. As always, if you have any questions about any of the
		

			content I've shared with you today, please feel free to contact me via our page, and I'd be more
than happy to share some additional resources with you. Alternatively, I'm always happy to engage in
constructive and mutually respectful conversation in the comment sections below. Until next time,
all the best blessings upon you and your loved ones, Zack Allah here