The Christian concept of the spiritual trinity originated in Africa. In ancient Egyptian eschatology (i.e., Ma'at) the original trinity was, Birth, Life, and Death, the unversal three-in-one. Here is the interpretation:

Birth is represented by the father, because there can be no birth without the father...

Life is represented by the Sun, because there can be no life without the Sun...

Death frees the spirit entombed in the flesh, thereby enabling it to return to the Source from which it emanated...

These and many other profound teachings were perverted through misinterpretation and mistransliteration, done mainly by the Jews, who developed their own version of the trinity as we know it today: “The Father, Son, and the Holy Ghost”...

sir,

please understand that the concept of the Trinity was not formed by the Jews. Also the intial prmise for such concept came from interpretation of the Bible. The Trinity concept did not occur in Christian doctrine until 180 A.D. Below you will find some infromation on the trinity and its origin as it eprtains to the bible:


The Trinity is the term employed to signify the central doctrine of the Christian religion -- the truth that in the unity of the Godhead there are Three Persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, these Three Persons being truly distinct one from another. Thus, in the words of the Athanasian Creed: "the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God, and yet there are not three Gods but one God." In this Trinity of Persons the Son is begotten of the Father by an eternal generation, and the Holy Spirit proceeds by an eternal procession from the Father and the Son. Yet, notwithstanding this difference as to origin, the Persons are co-eternal and co-equal: all alike are uncreated and omnipotent. This, the Church teaches, is the revelation regarding God's nature which Jesus Christ, the Son of God, came upon earth to deliver to the world: and which she proposes to man as the foundation of her whole dogmatic system.

In Scripture there is as yet no single term by which the Three Divine Persons are denoted together. The word trias (of which the Latin trinitas is a translation) is first found in Theophilus of Antioch about A.D. 180. He speaks of "the Trinity of God [the Father], His Word and His Wisdom ("Ad. Autol.", II, 15). The term may, of course, have been in use before his time. Afterwards it appears in its Latin form of trinitas in Tertullian ("De pud." c. xxi). In the next century the word is in general use. It is found in many passages of Origen ("In Ps. xvii", 15). The first creed in which it appears is that of Origen's pupil, Gregory Thaumaturgus. In his Ekthesis tes pisteos composed between 260 and 270, he writes:

There is therefore nothing created, nothing subject to another in the Trinity: nor is there anything that has been added as though it once had not existed, but had entered afterwards: therefore the Father has never been without the Son, nor the Son without the Spirit: and this same Trinity is immutable and unalterable forever (P. G., X, 986).

Now for a more bias view:


Trinity (theology), in Christian theology, doctrine that God exists as three persons—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—who are united in one substance or being. The doctrine is not taught explicitly in the New Testament, where the word God almost invariably refers to the Father; but already Jesus Christ, the Son, is seen as standing in a unique relation to the Father, while the Holy Spirit is also emerging as a distinct divine person.

The term trinitas was first used in the 2nd century, by the Latin theologian Tertullian, but the concept was developed in the course of the debates on the nature of Christ. In the 4th century, the doctrine was finally formulated; using terminology still employed by Christian theologians, the doctrine taught the coequality of the persons of the Godhead. In the West, the 4th-century theologian St. Augustine's influential work De Trinitate (On the Trinity, 400-16) compared the three-in-oneness of God with analogous structures in the human mind and suggested that the Holy Spirit may be understood as the mutual love between Father and Son (although this second point seems difficult to reconcile with the belief that the Spirit is a distinct, coequal member of the Trinity). The stress on equality, however, was never understood as detracting from a certain primacy of the Father—from whom the other two persons derive, even if they do so eternally. For an adequate understanding of the trinitarian conception of God, the distinctions among the persons of the Trinity must not become so sharp that there seems to be a plurality of gods, nor may these distinctions be swallowed up in an undifferentiated monism.


while your views are interesting, the concept that the trinity was derived from such teachings cannot be validated. If you would provide further evidence then i would be willing to listen...

If that were true it would seem that the trinity would have been a concept of Judaism as well. It is not. Thus, I would have to question your theories.Your observation is flawed. Judaism is the religion of the Jewish people. The knowledge and teachings of the ancient Egyptians of Africa were perverted through misinterpretation and mistransliteration, done mainly by the Jews, who developed their own version of the original concept of the trinity...i.e., “The Father, Son, and the Holy Ghost."

This concept was then inculcated into Christian doctrine...

While your views are interesting, the concept that the trinity was derived from such teachings cannot be validated. If you would provide further evidence then I would be willing to listen.I can't say the same for the Eurocentric and/or Jewish concepts that you have proffered. It sounds as if the Greek and Roman priests, scribes and Jewish rabbis were attempting cover up a mistake! The truth is validation itself...

I acquired much of my knowledge of ancient Egyptian eschatology from reading The Egyptian Book of the Dead, which was the Bible of the ancient Egyptians of Africa. I have elucidated on this in much detail in my thread entitled, "The One-God Concept of the Ancient Egyptians." Please read for further edification...

thanks for the book title. i will read it....

while i did read the other thread i found it to be very interesting. as we have had discussion before i would hope that you know i always seek more information. whenceforth when i was speaking of validation i was asking for more proof. unfortunately it did not occur to me to relate the two post. i shall read the book as well...

always good to engage in healthy discussions...

also could you explain as to how the teachers of old attempted to cover up a mistake? Now one thing i am aware of is that religions are a culmination of many cultures but i am curious here. Plese don't tkae this question as incendiary but what exactly are you implying here? As stated before and by many neutral researchers and scholars, the Trinity concept was not originally a part of the Christian faith. It did, in fact, occur many years later. Although the scripture talks of three persons and the concept of the Trinity can be supported by scripture, the concept itself was not discussed until centuries later. Therefore my question to you is how can you assert that they teachers of such then inculcated into Christian doctrine...

just curious...

i shall look over that book you suggested and thank you...

Being Muslim and a student of both Islam and Christianity, I must first discuss the religious source of my comments, which is the Holy Qur'an, the Muslim holy book. The 74th ayat of the sura Al-Maidah reads as follows:

"They surely disbelieve who say, 'Allah is the third of the three,' there is no god but the One God. And if they do not desist from what they say, a grievous punishment shall surely befall those of them that disbelieve." (Sura 5:74)

The reference in this verse is to the doctrine of the Trinity, that mysterious and abstruse dogma of the three persons of the Godhead - the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost - co-existing and co-equal in all respects, combining to make one God and yet remaining three...

It was the Nicene Council - and especially the Athenasian Creed - that first gave the dogma its definite shape. The doctrine forms the basic article of the Christian religion.

hmmm, very true and i've heard this debate before over the same passage from the Qu'ran...very interesting...

thanks for the insight. i shall comment further at a later date...

just getting into work...

just like that night/morning in the chat room
i am thoroughly enjoying this my Brothers!

:toast:

Hi Destee...good2cu again! Hope all is well...the website is boomin'!

You're welcome, dnommo...

God The Father , Then You Have Humanity As His Children , And The Holy Ghost Are The AngelicBeings , You Are Useing 1John 5 ; 7 As If It Is Authentic When In Fact It Has Been Proven To Be A Distorted Scripture Nor Does It Exist In Any Of The Original Manuscripts I Don't Try To Discredit AnyThing Or AnyOne I Just State The Facts , And I Am Only Interested In The Facts . To Answer Your Question . When The Bible Was In Its Original Language Of Aramaic ( Hebrew ) Arabic And Galilean Arabic , The Verse 1John 5 ; 7 , That Has Become The Foundation For The 3 Beings In 1 Concept Called The Trinity DID NOT EXIST , It Also DID NOT EXIST IN GREEK , The Distortion With The Onset Of The Roman Catholic Church The Roman Catholic Inserted The Trinity Verse When They Translated The Bible From Greek To Latin I Purposely Said '' Inserted '' And Not '' Translated '' Because , As I've Already Said The Original Greek Did Not Have This Verse . HowEver , You Will Find Some Greek Translation Have Either The Whole Trinity Verse Or Only A Portion Of It , 1John 5; 7 Is Surround In Controversy Because There Are Two Versions Of This Verse Your Bibilical Scholars Say 1John 5; 7 . That Is Used In Most Bibles Today . Is Either Not The Origian Verse . Or They Say That Its Only Partially Genuine . There Have Been Many Arguments Between Scholars On This Subject When In Fact There Shouldn't Be Any Arguments Because The Original Aramaic And The Greek Manuscripts Don't Have This 1John 5 ; 7 , In It . The Problem Is They Really Don't Want To Admit That The Trinity Really Has No Basis In The Teaching Of Yashua , Making The Trinitarian Churches And Any Other Sect That Believe In This 3 In 1 Concept Obsolete , FurtherMore , In The Ancient Eastern Manusripts By George M Lamsa Which Is A Bible That Is Translated From The Original Aramaic And Syriac Language On Page 1222 , In 1John 5 ; 7 , You Will See That The Orginal Verse Says This ;...
Original Verse <> And The Spirit Testifies That That Very Spirit Is The Truth
Mistraslation <> This is he who came by water and blood , even Jesus Christ , not by water only , but water and blood , And theSpirit testifies that that very Spirt is the truth . And there are three to bear witness the Spirit and , the water and the blood ; and these three are one ,
Now , When You Read 1 John 5 ; 7 In Your Standard Bible , You Will Read This ,
1John 5 ; 7 <> For there are three that bear , Record in heaven , the father , the Word , and the holy ghost ; And these three are one . Do You See How The Verse Were Distorted ? They Are Both 1John 5 ; 7 , But They Don't Say The Same Thing ! That's Because In Your Standard Or Revised Edittion Bible , You Will Find The Original , Verse 5; 7 Has Been Actually Pushed Up To Merge With Verse 5; 6 . Now LQQk At 1John 5 ; 6 Below
'' This is he that came by water and , Blood , even Jesus Christ ; not by Water only , but by water and Blood And It Is The Spirit That Beareth Witness Because The Spirit Is Truth '' ;...The Underlined Segment Is Really The Original 1John 5 ; 7 By Combining The Original Verse 5 ;6 And 5 ; 7 Together , This Left Verse 5 ; 7 Made It Conviently Free To Insert The False '' Trinity '' Verse . Just In Case You Think I Made This Up . Clarke's Commentary Also States That In The Very Early Bibles , This Verse Didn't Exist Clarke's Commentary Says This About 1John 5 ; 7 ;... '' But It Is Likely This Verse Is Not Genuine . It Is Wanting ( Missing ) In Every M .S . ( Manuscript ) Og This Epistle Written Before The Invention Of Printing . One Expecyed . The Condex Montfortii , In '' Trinity College , Dublin ; The Others Which Omit , This Verse Amount To One Hundred And Twelve . It Is Wanting ( Missing ) In Both The Syriac . All The Arabic , Ethiopic , The Coptic , Sahidic .Armenian , Slavonian , In A Word , In All The Ancient Versions . But The Vulgate And Even Of This Version Many Of The Most Ancient And Correct , MSS . Have It Not .. It Is Wanting ( Missing ) Also In All Ancient Greek Father , And In Most Even Of The Latin So What About Those Who Say A Portion Of The Quote Is True , Then There Are Those Scholars Who That Only Part Of This Quote Is Genuine Once Again , Let's Go Back To 1John 5 ; 7 In Your Standard Bible . < '' For There Are Three That Bear Record In Heaven , The Father , The Word , And The Holy Ghost , And These Three Are One > The Underlined Part Of This Quote Is The Part That Your So - Called Scholars Say Is Genuine . Some Bibles Are Equipped With Notes And Small Commentaries To Help You OverStand The Verses You Are Reading . If You Have Such A Bible . It Will Most Likely Say The Same Thing . For Instance , On Page 1776 In The Ryrie Study Bible It Says ;
Verse7 For there are three that bear record in heaven , The father the word , and the Holy Ghost and these three are one .
Commentary 5 ; 7 - 8 Should end with the word record The remander of Verse 7 And part of Verse 8 , Are Not In Any Ancient Greek Manuscript . Only In Later Latin Manuscripts .
Now , They Say Verse 7 And Verse 8 Is Only Partially Genuine . There Are Even Some Greek Translation That Also Supports This Version , But That's Because They Were Translated From English Back Into Greek 1John 5 ; 7 Was Just Another Way To Confuse And Add Another False Sect And Belief . It Is One Of Those Things That Are Kept Quiet Because That Would Be The End Of Some People's Faith And That Is Something That People Who Promote Religion For A Profit Can't Afford To Do . :geek: :deal: :nono: