Quick Reads #5 – How the Trinity happened

I once overheard a conversation that went like this….

“The reason we have a trinity is God’s fault..!’

“Why?” someone asked.

“Because if He had come himself we wouldn’t be having this debate..!”

As you can see it was getting a little tense and arguments about religion will sometimes do that. I imagine it was much the same at Nicaea in 325AD, when many learned men and bishops convened the Council, which produced the Nicaean Creed. While it was initially called by Constantine to arrive at a unity of belief for the new and growing Church, burdened by the onset of Gnosticism, it is mainly remembered for something, which wasn’t even on the agenda.

The first order of business was the Godhead, its nature, and where deity rested, in other words the debate sparked by Arius. Arius held the view the Father and Son were materially separate that the Father created the Son. In the opposing camp, Jesus was consubstantial with the Father therefore of the same essence. Part of the problem was due to Jesus having a natural birth yet a heavenly conception. That He walked amongst us in human form, with everyone knowing God could not be looked upon, He must be less than God. The other issue was finding a way to explain how Jesus could actually be God, let alone having to reconcile the Holy Spirit. So in the end, as not everyone was going to agree with everything, they arrived at a compromise.

All of this took place with the letters of Peter and Paul in existence, along with the evidence of Luke, John and Matthew, which they essentially ignored. If they were taken account of, especially the letters of John and Paul, they would have arrived at a different result regarding the deity of Jesus; too which Isaiah adds the definitive voice. As to the matter of a Paraclete, John’s depiction was eventually recognised by later Councils as a Holy Spirit. Though in terms of Jesus being both LORD and Christ it was a complete disaster; men so self-absorbed in their own theology that they couldn’t see the wood for the trees. But that was then.

They were faced with several stumbling blocks. The first was that Jesus referred to the Father on numerous occasions. That He had brothers and sisters, and was human in every way was also a problem. Their major dilemma being the baptism of Jesus by John: Jesus in the flesh, the sign of the Holy Spirit, and the voice of God all in attendance at the same time. As they saw it, the only possible explanation was three entities. The account of the transfiguration was dismissed. The likelihood of God being an omnipresent being outside our time and space gained little attention.

Another concern they had to deal with was pressure from Constantine to get the matter sorted. An earlier agreed upon Creed was thrown out and replaced twice, with the Nicaean Creed eventually succeeding, though not completely. In final voting five bishops were opposed, soon reduced to two, who were then branded heretics and removed. Any record as to their ‘heresy’ was later expunged. As much as it was a religious statement it was also politically expedient, as Constantine’s patience had by then run out. In 380AD, Theodosius decreed “Nicaean Christianity” the official religion of the Roman Empire, and then made it compulsory for every Roman citizen and household.

So there it is; convenience over the evidence of Scripture. Great swathes ignored even confirmation from Jesus that He and Father are one. But, if our friend had been a little more observant, armed in the knowledge that only God can forgive sin, he would have realized it really was Him that came; a human extension of Himself,