Wikipedia cult apologist and other pages

Nontrinitarianism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Part of a series on
Christianity
Jesus depicted as the Good Shepherd


Jesus ·
 Christ
 [show]








Bible ·
 Foundations
 [show]










Theology[show]

















History ·
 Tradition
 [show]
















Related topics[show]














Denominations ·
 Groups
 [show]





























Christian cross Christianity portal
v ·
 t ·
 e
   
Nontrinitarianism (or antitrinitarianism) refers to monotheistic belief systems, primarily within Christianity, which reject the mainstream Christian doctrine of the Trinity, namely, the teaching that God is three distinct hypostases or persons who are co-eternal, co-equal, and indivisibly united in one being or ousia.
According to churches that consider ecumenical council decisions final, trinitarianism was definitively declared to be Christian doctrine at the 4th-century ecumenical councils,[1][2][3] that of the First Council of Nicaea (325), which declared the full divinity of the Son,[4] and the First Council of Constantinople (381), which declared the divinity of the Holy Spirit.[5]
Some councils later than that of Nicaea but earlier than that of Constantinople, such as the Council of Rimini (359), which has been described as "the crowning victory of Arianism",[6] disagreed with the Trinitarian formula of the Council of Nicaea. Nontrinitarians disagree with the findings of the Trinitarian Councils for various reasons, including the belief that the writings of the Bible take precedence over creeds (a view shared by the mainline Protestant churches, which on the contrary uphold the doctrine of the Trinity) or that there was a Great Apostasy prior to the Council. Church and State in Europe and the Middle East suppressed nontrinitarian belief as heresy from the 4th to 18th century, notably with regard to Arianism,[7][8] Catharism,[9] and the teaching of Michael Servetus.[10] Today nontrinitarians represent a minority of professed Christians.
Nontrinitarian views differ widely on the nature of God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. Various nontrinitarian views, such as Adoptionism, Monarchianism, and Subordinationism existed prior to the formal definition of the Trinity doctrine in A.D. 325, 360, and 431, at the Councils of Nicaea, Constantinople, and Ephesus.[11] Nontrinitarianism was later renewed in the Gnosticism of the Cathars in the 11th through 13th centuries, in the Age of Enlightenment of the 18th century, and in some groups arising during the Second Great Awakening of the 19th century.
Modern nontrinitarian Christian groups or denominations include Christadelphians, Christian Scientists, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Dawn Bible Students, Friends General Conference, Iglesia ni Cristo, Jehovah's Witnesses, Living Church of God, Oneness Pentecostals, Members Church of God International, Unitarian Universalist Christians, The Way International, The Church of God International and the United Church of God.
The Christian doctrine of the Trinity is not present in the other major Abrahamic religions, Judaism and Islam.


Contents  [hide]
1 Christianity 1.1 Modern Christian groupings
1.2 Unitarian Universalism
2 Judaism
3 Islam
4 History 4.1 Early Christianity
4.2 Following the Reformation
5 Points of dissent 5.1 Scriptural support
5.2 Questions over the alleged co-equal deity of Jesus 5.2.1 Views on allegedly Trinitarian passages in scripture 5.2.1.1 John 1:1
5.2.1.2 John 10:30
5.2.1.3 John 20:28-29
5.2.1.4 2 Corinthians 13:14
5.2.1.5 Philippians 2:5-6
5.2.1.6 Hebrews 9:14

5.3 Terminology
5.4 Holy Spirit 5.4.1 Unitarian and Arian
5.4.2 Binitarianism
5.4.3 Modalist groups
5.4.4 Latter Day Saint movement
5.4.5 Judaism
5.4.6 Other groups
5.5 Inter-religious dialogue
6 Purported pagan origins 6.1 Hellenic influences
7 Christian groups
8 People
9 See also
10 Notes
11 Further reading
12 External links

Christianity[edit]


 This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (November 2014)
The Christian Apologists and other Church Fathers of the 2nd and 3rd centuries, having adopted and formulated the Logos Christology, considered the Son of God as the instrument used by the supreme God, the Father, to bring the creation into existence. Justin Martyr, Theophilus of Antioch, Hippolytus of Rome and Tertullian in particular state that the internal Logos of God (Gr. Logos endiathetos, Lat. ratio), that is his impersonal divine reason, was begotten as Logos uttered (Gr. Logos proforikos, Lat. sermo, verbum) and thus became a person to be used for the purpose of creation.[12]
The Encyclopædia Britannica states, "To some Christians the doctrine of the Trinity appeared inconsistent with the unity of God....They therefore denied it, and accepted Jesus Christ, not as incarnate God, but as God's highest creature by Whom all else was created....[this] view in the early Church long contended with the orthodox doctrine."[13] Although the nontrinitarian view eventually disappeared in the early Church and the Trinitarian view became an orthodox doctrine of modern Christianity, variations of the nontrinitarian view are still held by a small number of Christian groups and denominations.
Various views exist regarding the relationships between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
Those who follow the life and teaching of Jesus but consider the question of divinity to be completely inconsequential and a distraction to the message that Jesus taught.[citation needed]
Those who believe that Jesus is not God, nor absolutely equal to God, but was either God's subordinate Son, a messenger from God, or prophet, or the perfect created human. Adoptionism (2nd century A.D.) holds that Jesus became divine at his baptism (sometimes associated with the Gospel of Mark) or at his resurrection (sometimes associated with Saint Paul and Shepherd of Hermas).
Arianism – Arius (A.D. c. 250 or 256 - 336) believed that the pre-existent Son of God was directly created by the Father, that he was subordinate to God the Father, and that only the Father was without beginning or end, but that the Son was also divine[citation needed]. Arius' position was that the Son was brought forth as the very first of God's creations, and that the Father later created all things through the Son. Arius taught that in the creation of the universe, the Father was the ultimate Creator, supplying all the materials, directing the design, while the Son worked the materials, making all things at the bidding and in the service of the Father, by which "through [Christ] all things came into existence". Arianism became the dominant view in some regions in the time of the Roman Empire, notably the Visigoths until 589.[14]
Psilanthropism – Ebionites (1st to 4th century A.D.) denied the virgin birth and believed the Son to be nothing more than a special human.
Socinianism – Photinus taught that Jesus, though perfect and sinless, and who was Messiah and Redeemer, was only the perfect human Son of God, and had no pre-human existence prior to the virgin birth. They take verses such as John 1:1 as simply God's "plan" existing in the Mind of God, before Christ's birth.
Many Gnostic traditions held that the Christ is a heavenly Aeon but not one with the Father.
Those who believe that the heavenly Father, the resurrected Son and the Holy Spirit are different aspects of one God, as perceived by the believer, rather than three distinct persons. Modalism – Sabellius (fl. c. 215) stated that God has taken numerous forms in both the Hebrew and the Christian Greek Scriptures, and that God has manifested himself in three primary modes in regards to the salvation of mankind. His contention is that "Father, Son, and Spirit" were simply different roles played by the same Divine Person in various circumstances in history.[15] Thus God is Father in creation (God created a Son through the virgin birth), Son in redemption (God manifested himself into the begotten man Christ Jesus for the purpose of his death upon the cross), and Holy Spirit in regeneration (God's indwelling Spirit within the Son and within the souls of Christian believers). In light of this view, God is not three distinct persons, but rather one Person manifesting himself in multiple ways.[15] Trinitarians condemn this view as a heresy. The chief critic of Sabellianism was Tertullian, who labeled the movement "Patripassianism", from the Latin words pater for "father", and passus from the verb "to suffer" because it implied that the Father suffered on the Cross. It was coined by Tertullian in his work Adversus Praxeas, Chapter I, "By this Praxeas did a twofold service for the devil at Rome: he drove away prophecy, and he brought in heresy; he put to flight the Paraclete, and he crucified the Father."
Those who believe that Jesus Christ is Almighty God, but that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are actually three distinct almighty "Gods" with distinct natures, acting as one Divine Group, united in purpose. Tri-theism – John Philoponus, an Aristotelian and monophysite in Alexandria, in the middle of the 6th century, saw in the Trinity three separate natures, substances and deities, according to the number of divine persons. He sought to justify this view by the Aristotelian categories of genus, species and individuum. In the Middle Ages, Roscellin of Compiegne, the founder of Nominalism, argued for three distinct almighty Gods, with three distinct natures, who were one in purpose, acting together as one divine Group or Godhead. He said, though, like Philoponus, that unless the Three Persons are tres res (three things with distinct natures), the whole Trinity must have been incarnate. And therefore, since only the Logos was made flesh, the other two Persons must have had distinct "natures", separate from the Logos, and so had to be separate and distinct Gods, though all three were one in divine work and plan. Thus in light of this view, they would be considered "three Gods in one". This notion was condemned by St. Anselm.
Those who believe that the Holy Spirit is not a person. Binitarianism – people through history who believed that God is only two co-equal and co-eternal persons, the Father and the Word, not three. They taught that the Holy Spirit is not a distinct person, but is the power or divine influence of the Father and Son, emanating out to the universe, in creation, and to believers.
Dualism
Marcionism – Marcion (A.D. c. 110-160) believed that there were two deities, one of creation and judgment (in the Hebrew Bible) and one of redemption and mercy (in the New Testament).
Other concepts Docetism comes from the Greek: δοκέω (dokeo), meaning "to seem." This view holds that Jesus only seemed to be human and only appeared to die.

Modern Christian groupings[edit]
American Unitarian Conference started as a reply to Unitarian Universalism becoming 'too theologically liberal'. They refrain from social activism and believe religion and science can improve the human condition. They have a deist population.[citation needed]
Associated Bible Students believe that the Father is greater than the Son in all ways, and that the Trinity doctrine is unscriptural. They hold to beliefs similar to Jehovah's Witnesses.[16][17][18]


Christadelphians hold that Jesus Christ is the literal son of God, the Father, and that Jesus was an actual human[19] (and needed to be so in order to save humans from their sins[20]). The "holy spirit" terminology in the Bible is explained as referring to God's power,[21] or God's character/mind[22] (depending on the context).
Church of God General Conference (Abrahamic Faith).[23]
Cooneyites are a non-Trinitarian Christian sect who split off from the Two by Twos sect in 1928 following Edward Cooney's excommunication from the main group. Cooneyites deny the Living Witness Doctrine; they have congregations in Ireland, England, Australia, New Zealand and the USA.
The Iglesia ni Cristo (Tagalog for Church of Christ) view is that Jesus Christ is human but endowed by God with attributes not found in ordinary humans, though lacking attributes found in God. They further contend that it is God's will to worship Jesus.[24] For Iglesia ni Cristo Christ has some divine attributes but it is not inherent to him, given only by the one true God, the Father. Iglesia ni Cristo contends that in the beginning Christ is "Logos" i.e. in the mind of God (reason for creation, a plan of God)before God sets the foundation of the world. Christ's existence or coming in the future (as the greatest messenger of God for all time) is already in the mind of God, planned by God and spoken it even in the Garden of Eden (the "seed of a woman" in Genesis 3:15) and later in the time of the prophets through the numerous prophecies about his existence or his coming in the 1st century. His existence only started at the womb of Mary prior to that he is still the "Logos" or a "Word of God". Later as mentioned in Revelation (Rev. 19:13), when the Logos or prophecies were fulfilled he was even called the "Word of God".[citation needed]
Jehovah's Witnesses teach that only God the Father, Jehovah, is the one true almighty God, even over his Son. They consider Jesus to be "the First-begotten Son", God's only direct creation, and the very first creation by God. They give relative "worship" or "obeisance" (homage, as to a king) to Christ,[25] pray through him as God's only high priest, consider Jesus Christ to be Mediator and Messiah, but they believe that only the Father is without beginning, and that the Father is greater than the Son in all things; only Jehovah the Father therefore is worthy of highest worship or "sacred service". They believe that the Son had a beginning, and was brought forth at a certain point, as "the firstborn of all creation" and "the only-begotten". They identify Jesus as the Archangel Michael, mentioned in the Bible at Jude 9. They believe he left heaven to become Jesus Christ on earth, and that after his ascension to heaven he resumed his pre-human identity. This belief is partly based upon 1 Thessalonians 4:16, in which "the voice of the resurrected Lord Jesus Christ is described as being that of an archangel". They also cite passages from the books of Daniel and Revelation in which Jesus and Michael take similar action and exercise similar authority, concluding these scriptures indicate them to be the same person.[26] They do not believe that the Holy Spirit is a person, but consider it to be God's divine active force.[27]
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, often referred to as Mormonism, teaches that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are distinct beings that are not united in substance, a view sometimes called social trinitarianism. Members of this church believe the three individual deities are "one" in will or purpose, as Jesus was "one" with his disciples, and that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit constitute a single Godhead or a Divine Council, and are united in purpose, in manner, in testimony, in mission.[28] Because their official belief is that the Father, Son, and Spirit are each "Gods" in one Godhead, Mormonism is said to hold a form of tri-theism. Some view Mormonism as a form of Arianism.[29][30][31] Like Arianism, Mormons believe that God created Christ,[29][30][31][32] that he is subordinate to God the Father[30][33] and that Christ created the universe.[33][34] However, Mormon doctrine varies significantly from the teachings of Arius.[35] Mormons also do not subscribe to the ideas that Christ was unlike the Father in substance,[36] that the Father could not appear on earth,[37] nor that Christ was adopted by the Father,[32] as found in Arianism.[34][38] Mormons assert that the classification of deity in terms of a substance was a post-apostolic corruption, and that God differs from humans not in substance, but in intelligence. While Mormons regard God the Father as the Supreme Being and literal Father of the spirits of all humankind, they also teach that Christ and the Holy Spirit are equally divine in that they share in the Father's "comprehension of all things".[39]
The Members Church of God International believes in the divinity of Christ but rejects the doctrine of Trinity. They believe in what appears to be a Subordationist viewpoint in which Jesus Christ, is the Father's only Begotten Son (in Romanized Greek: monogenestheos, meaning "only-begotten god") and thus is subject to the Father.[citation needed]
Oneness Pentecostalism is a subset of Pentecostalism that believes God is only one person, and that he manifests himself in different ways, faces, or "modes": "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (or Holy Ghost) are different designations for the one God. God is the Father. God is the Holy Spirit. The Son is God manifest in flesh. The term Son always refers to the Incarnation, and never to deity apart from humanity."[40] Oneness Pentecostals believe that Jesus was "Son" only when he became flesh on earth, but was the Father prior to his being made human. They refer to the Father as the "Spirit" and the Son as the "Flesh". Oneness Pentecostals reject the Trinity doctrine, viewing it as pagan and unscriptural, and hold to the Jesus' Name doctrine with respect to baptisms. Oneness Pentecostals are often referred to as "Modalists" or "Sabellians" or "Jesus Only".
Some forms of Quakerism hold universalist views.[clarification needed]
Denominations within the Sabbatarian tradition (Armstrongism) believe that Christ the Son and God the Father are co-eternal, but do not teach that the Holy Spirit is a being or person. Mainstream Christians characterise this teaching as the heresy of Binitarianism, the teaching that God is a "Duality", or "two-in-one", rather than three. Armstrong theology holds that God is a "Family", that expands eventually, that "God reproduces Himself", but that originally there was a co-eternal "Duality", God and the Word, rather than a "Trinity".
Swedenborgianism holds that the Trinity exists in one person, the Lord God Jesus Christ. The Father, the being or soul of God, was born into the world and put on a body from Mary. Throughout his life, Jesus put away all human desires and tendencies until he was completely divine. After his resurrection, he influences the world through the Holy Spirit, which is his activity. Thus Jesus Christ is the one God; the Father as to his soul, the Son as to his body, and the Holy Spirit as to his activity in the world.
Unitarian Christians and Unitarian Universalist Christians are Holy Spirit Unitarians[clarification needed].
Nontrinitarian doctrine often generates controversy among mainstream Christians, as most trinitarians consider it heresy not to believe in the doctrine of the Trinity. At times, segments of Nicene Christianity reacted with ultimate severity toward nontrinitarian views. Following the Reformation, among some Protestant groups such as the Unitarians and Christadelphians, the same views have been accommodated.
Unitarian Universalism[edit]
Members of Unitarian Universalism may or may not identify as Christian. Traditionally, unitarianism was a form of Christianity that rejects the doctrine of the Trinity. Unitarianism was rejected by orthodox Christianity at the First Council of Nicaea, an ecumenical council held in 325, but resurfaced subsequently in Church history, especially during the theological turmoils of the Protestant Reformation. In 1961, the American Unitarian Association (AUA) was consolidated with the Universalist Church of America (UCA), forming the Unitarian Universalist Association.
Judaism[edit]
In all branches of Judaism, the God of the Hebrew Bible is considered one singular entity, with no divisions, or multi-persons within, and they reject the idea of a co-equal multi-personal Godhead or "Trinity", as actually against the Shema. They do not consider the Hebrew word for "one" (that is "echad") as meaning anything other than a simple numerical one.[41][42] Citing examples for "echad" in the Hebrew Scriptures as being either just one king, one house, one garden, one army, or one man, etc. Also, they reject the notion that somehow there are "traces of the Trinity" in the Hebrew word "elohim". Which in given contexts simply means "God" in superlative majesty, not necessarily "multipersonal godhead". The Jewish polemics against the Trinity doctrine date almost from its very conception. Even in the Talmud, R. Simlai (3rd century) declared, in refutation of the "heretics," "The three words 'El,' 'Elohim,' and 'Yhwh' (Josh. xxii. 22) connote one and the same person, as one might say, 'King, Emperor, Augustus'" (Yer. Ber. ix. 12d).[43]
Islam[edit]
In Islam's holy book, the Quran, Allah (God) denounces the concept of Trinity (Qur'an 4:171, 5:72-73, 112) as an over-reverence by Christians of God's Word, the prophet and messiah Jesus Christ son of the virgin Mary, while maintaining Jesus as one of the most important and respected prophets and Messengers of God, (2:136) primarily sent to prevent the Jews from changing the Torah, (61:6) and to refresh and reaffirm his original message as revealed to Moses and earlier New Testament prophets. The creation of Jesus is framed similar to the creation of Adam out of dust, but with Jesus' birth meaning his creation excludes male human intervention rather than creation completely without human participation (3:59). Belief in all of the aforementioned about Jesus as a prophet (5:78), as well as belief in the original gospel and Torah and belief in Jesus' virgin birth (3:45) are core criterion of being a Muslim and Quranic criterion for salvation in the hereafter along with belief in the Prophet Muhammad and all the prior prophets. In short, God is seen as being both perfect and indivisible. He can therefore have no peer or equal. Jesus, being God's creation, can never be considered to be equal with God or a part of God. To do so is considered by Islam to be blasphemy.
History[edit]
Part of a series on the
History of
 Christian theology
Malmesbury Abbey's 1407 Bible from Belgium
Background
Theology · Early Christianity · Timeline · History of Christianity · Ecclesiastical polity · Trinitarianism · Nontrinitarianism · Restorationism · Christology · Mariology · Biblical canon · Deuterocanonical books
Ecumenical Creeds
Apostles' · Nicene
Chalcedonian · Athanasian
Patristics and Councils
Church Fathers · Augustine
Nicaea · Ephesus · Chalcedon
Post-Nicene development
Heresy · Monophysitism · Monothelitism · Iconoclasm · Gregory I · Alcuin · Photios · East–West Schism · Scholasticism · Aquinas · Anselm · Palamas
Reformation
Protestant Reformation · Luther · Melanchthon · Indulgences · Justification · Five solae · 95 Theses · Book of Concord · Predestination · Calvinism · Arminianism · English Reformation · Counter-Reformation · Trent
Since the Reformation
Pietism · Revivalism · John Wesley · Great Awakenings · Holiness movement · Restoration Movement · Existentialism · Liberalism · Modernism (Roman Catholicism) · Postmodernism · Vatican II · Radical Orthodoxy · Jean-Luc Marion · Hermeneutics · Liberation theology · Christian anarchism
P christianity.svg Christianity portal
v ·
 t ·
 e
   
Early Christianity[edit]
Most nontrinitarians take the position that the doctrine of the earliest form of Christianity (see Apostolic Age) was nontrinitarian, but (depending on which church) believe rather that early Christianity was either strictly Unitarian or Binitarian or Modalist, as in the case of the Montanists, Marcionites, and Christian Gnostics. Early Christianity eventually changed after the edicts of Emperor Constantine I and his sentence pronounced on Arius, which eventually resulted in the adoption of Nicene Christianity as the official religion of the Roman Empire during the reign of Theodosius I.[citation needed]



 The First Council of Nicaea depicted with Arius beneath the feet of Emperor Constantine and the bishops
Because they believe it was during a dramatic shift in Christianity's status that the doctrine of the Trinity attained its definitive development, nontrinitarians typically consider the doctrine questionable. Nontrinitarians see the Nicene Creed and the results of the Council of Chalcedon as essentially political documents, resulting from the subordination of true doctrine to state interests by leaders of the Catholic Church, so that the church became, in their view, an extension of the Roman Empire.[citation needed]
Although nontrinitarian beliefs continued to multiply, and among some peoples were dominant for hundreds of years after their inception—e.g. Lombards, Ostrogoths, Visigoths, Vandals—Trinitarians eventually gained prominence in the Roman Empire. Nontrinitarians typically argue that the early nontrinitarian beliefs of Christianity, e.g. Arianism, were systematically suppressed (often to the point of death),[44] and that many early Christian scriptural sources and so called heretical texts have been as thoroughly lost as if they had been systematically burnt.[citation needed] After the First Council of Nicaea, Roman Emperor Constantine I issued an edict against Arius's writings which included systematic book burning.[45] In spite of issuing this decree, Constantine soon ordered the readmission of Arius to the church, removed those bishops who, like Athanasius, upheld the teaching of Nicaea,[46] allowed Arianism to grow within the Empire and thus to spread to Germanic tribes on the frontier,[47] and was himself baptized into the Arian version of Christianity.[48] His successors as Christian emperors promoted Arianism, until Theodosius I came to the throne in 379 and supported Nicene Christianity.
The Easter letter that Athanasius issued in 367, when the Eastern Empire was ruled by the Arian Emperor Valens, defined what books belong to the Old Testament and the New Testament, together with seven other books not included in the biblical canon but appointed "for instruction in the word of godliness"; at the same time it excluded what Athanasius called apocryphal writings, falsely presented as ancient.[49] Elaine Pagels writes: "In AD 367, Athanasius, the zealous bishop of Alexandria... issued an Easter letter in which he demanded that Egyptian monks destroy all such unacceptable writings, except for those he specifically listed as 'acceptable' even 'canonical' — a list that constitutes the present 'New Testament'".[50][51] Some nontrinitarians say that the condemned writings were Arian books.[citation needed]
Some scholars investigating the historical Jesus assert that Jesus taught neither his own equality with God nor the Trinity (see, for example, the Jesus Seminar).
Nontrinitarians also dispute the veracity of the Nicene Creed based on its adoption nearly 300 years after the life of Jesus as a result of conflict within pre-Nicene early Christianity. Nontrinitarians (both Modalists and Unitarians) also generally say that Athanasius and others at Nicaea adopted Greek Platonic philosophy and concepts, and incorporated them in their views of God and Christ.[52] Nontrinitarians also cite scriptures such as Matthew 15:9 and Ephesians 4:14 that warn the reader to beware the doctrines of men.[citation needed]
The author H. G. Wells, later famous for his contribution to science-fiction, wrote in The Outline of History: "We shall see presently how later on all Christendom was torn by disputes about the Trinity. There is no evidence that the apostles of Jesus ever heard of the Trinity, at any rate from him."[53]
The question of why such a central doctrine to the Christian faith would never have been explicitly stated in scripture or taught in detail by Jesus himself was sufficiently important to 16th century historical figures such as Michael Servetus as to lead them to argue the question. The Geneva City Council, in accord with the judgment of the cantons of Zürich, Bern, Basel, and Schaffhausen, condemned Servetus to be burned at the stake for this and his opposition to infant baptism.
The Encyclopædia of Religion and Ethics describes the five stages that led to the formulation of the doctrine of the Trinity.[54]
1.The acceptance of the pre-human existence of Jesus as the (middle-platonic) Logos, namely, as the medium between the transcendent sovereign God and the created cosmos. The doctrine of Logos was accepted by the Apologists and by other Fathers of the 2nd and 3rd centuries, such as Justin the Martyr, Hippolytus, Tertullian, Ireneus, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Lactantius, and the 4th century Arius.
2.The doctrine of the timeless generation of the Son from the Father as it was articulated by Origen in his effort to support the ontological immutability of God, that he is ever-being a father and a creator. The doctrine of the timeless generation was adopted by Athanasius of Alexandria.
3.The acceptance of the idea that the son of God is homoousios to his father, that is, of the same transcendent nature. This position was declared in the Nicene Creed, which specifically states the son of God is as immutable as his father.
4.The acceptance that the Holy Spirit also has ontological equality as a third person in a divine Trinity and the final Trinitarian terminology by the teachings of the Cappadocian Fathers.
5.The addition of the Filioque to the Nicene Creed, as accepted by the Roman Catholic Church.
Following the Reformation[edit]
Main article: History of Unitarianism
Following the Protestant Reformation, and the German Peasants' War of 1524–1525, by 1530 large areas of Northern Europe were Protestant, and forms of nontrinitarianism began to surface among some "Radical Reformation" groups, particularly Anabaptists. The first recorded English antitrinitarian was John Assheton (1548). The Italian humanist "Council of Venice" (1550) and the trial of Michael Servetus (1553) marked the clear emergence of markedly anti-Trinitarian Protestants. Though the only organised nontrinitarian churches were the Polish Brethren who split from the Calvinists (1565, expelled from Poland 1658), and the Unitarian Church of Transylvania (1568-today). Nonconformists, Dissenters and Latitudinarians in Britain were often Arians or Unitarians, and the Doctrine of the Trinity Act 1813 allowed nontrinitarian worship in Britain. In America, Arian and Unitarian views were also found among some Millennialist and Adventist groups, though the Unitarian Church itself began to decline in numbers and influence after the 1870s.[55][56]
Points of dissent[edit]
Non-trinitarian Christians of Arian persuasion contend that the weight of Scriptural evidence leans more towards Subordinationism, that of the Son's total submission to the Father, and of Paternal supremacy over the Son in every aspect. They acknowledge and confess the Son's glorious and high rank, at God's right hand, but teach that the Father is still greater than the Son, in all things.
While acknowledging that the Father, Son, and Spirit are essential in creation and salvation, they argue that that in itself does not necessarily prove that they three are each co-equal or co-eternal. They also contend that the only number clearly ascribed to God in the Bible (both Testaments) is the number "one", and that the Trinity, literally meaning a set of three, ascribes a co-equal threeness to God that is not explicitly Scriptural.
Scriptural support[edit]
Critics argue that the Trinity, for a teaching described as fundamental, lacks direct scriptural support. Upholders of the doctrine declare that the doctrine is not stated directly in the New Testament, but is instead an interpretation of elements contained in it that are seen as implying the doctrine that was formulated only in the 4th century. Thus William Barclay says: "It is important and helpful to remember that the word Trinity is not itself a New Testament word. It is even true in at least one sense to say that the doctrine of the Trinity is not directly New Testament doctrine. It is rather a deduction from and an interpretation of the thought and the language of the New Testament."[57] And the New Catholic Encyclopedia says: "The doctrine of the Holy Trinity is not taught [explicitly] in the [Old Testament]", "The formulation 'one God in three Persons' was not solidly established [by a council]...prior to the end of the 4th century".[58]
Similarly, Encyclopedia Encarta states: "The doctrine is not taught explicitly in the New Testament, where the word God almost invariably refers to the Father. [...] 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".[59] Encyclopædia Britannica says: "Neither the word Trinity nor the explicit doctrine appears in the New Testament, nor did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict the Shema in the Old Testament: “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord” (Deuteronomy 6:4). [...] The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies. [...] by the end of the 4th century, under the leadership of Basil of Caesarea, Gregory of Nyssa, and Gregory of Nazianzus (the Cappadocian Fathers), the doctrine of the Trinity took substantially the form it has maintained ever since."[60] The Anchor Bible Dictionary states: "One does not find in the NT the trinitarian paradox of the coexistence of the Father, Son, and Spirit within a divine unity."[61]
Speaking of legitimate theological development, Joseph F. Kelly writes: "The Bible may not use the word 'Trinity', but it refers to God the Father frequently; the Gospel of John emphasized the divinity of the Son; several New Testament books treat the Holy Spirit as divine. The ancient theologians did not violate biblical teaching but sought to develop its implications. ... [Arius's] potent arguments forced other Christians to refine their thinking about the Trinity. at two ecumenical councils, Nicea I in 325 and Constantinople I in 381, the church at large defined the Trinity in the way now so familiar to us from the Nicene Creed. This exemplifies development of doctrine at its best. The Bible may not use the word 'Trinity', but trinitarian theology does not go against the Bible. On the contrary, Catholics believe that trinitarianism has carefully developed a biblical teaching for later generations."[2]
Questions over the alleged co-equal deity of Jesus[edit]


 This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (November 2011)


 This article improperly uses one or more religious texts as primary sources without referring to secondary sources that critically analyze them. Please help improve this article by adding references to reliable secondary sources, with multiple points of view. (March 2012)
Nontrinitarians[who?] say that there is no clear Scriptural backing for the doctrine of the co-equal divinity of Jesus. They point to verses that purport to demonstrate that Jesus himself explicitly stated that "the Father is greater" than he (John 14:28);[17] that he disavowed omniscience as the Son (John 8:28; in Mark 13:32), that he "learned obedience" (Hebrews 5:8); questioned being called even "good" in deference to God in the parable of the rich young ruler (Matthew 19:16-17); they say that only the Father in Scripture is referred to as the "one God", and "out of (ex) whom all things are" (1 Corinthians 8:6); that Christ the Son is called the 'firstborn of all creation' (Colossians 1:15) and 'the beginning of God's creation' (Revelation 3:14); that Jesus referred to ascending to "my Father, and to your Father; and to my God, and to your God" (John 20:17) and that he referred to his Father as "the only true God." (John 17:3)
Additionally, Jesus quoted Deuteronomy 6:4 when saying in Mark 12:29 "'The most important [commandment] is this: Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one.'" It has been stated[by whom?] that in the original Greek in Mark 12, there are no "plural modifiers" in that Greek word there for "one" (eis), but that in Mark 12 it is simply a masculine singular "one". And that because of that, there is no valid reason to believe that the Hebrew word for "one" in Deuteronomy 6 ("echad") was necessarily a "plural one", rather than just simply numerical "one".
They also argue to show that "Elohim" (sometimes translated "gods") does not hint at any form of plurality, but rather to majesty pointing to the Hebrew dialect and grammar rules that render this title in nearly all circumstances with a singular verb.[43]
With regard to the New Testament, Raymond E. Brown, a Catholic and Trinitarian, wrote that Mark 10:18, Matthew 27:46, John 20:17, Ephesians 1:17, 2 Corinthians 1:3, 1 Peter 1:3, John 17:3, 1 Corinthians 8:6, Ephesians 4:4-6, 1 Corinthians 12:4-6, 2 Corinthians 13:14, 1 Timothy 2:5, John 14:28, Mark 13:32, Philippians 2:5-10, and 1 Corinthians 15:24-28 are "texts that seem to imply that the title God was not used for Jesus" and are "negative evidence which is often somewhat neglected in Catholic treatments of the subject"; that Gal 2:20, Acts 20:28, John 1:18, Colossians 2:2, 2 Thessalonians 1:12, 1John 5:20, Romans 9:5, and 2 Peter 1:1 are "texts where, by reason of textual variants or syntax, the use of 'God' for Jesus is dubious"; and that Hebrews 1:8-9, John 1:1, and John 20:28 are "texts where clearly Jesus is called God".[62]
Trinitarians (who hold that Jesus Christ is distinct from God the Father), and nontrinitarians who hold Jesus Christ as Almighty God (such as the Modalists), say that these statements are based on Jesus' existence as the Son of God in human flesh; that he is therefore both God and man, who became "lower than the angels, for our sake," (Hebrews 2:6-8) and that he was tempted as humans are tempted, but did not sin (Hebrews 4:14-16).
Some nontrinitarians counter the belief that the Son was limited only during his earthly life by citing "the head of Christ is God" (1 Corinthians 11:3), placing Jesus in an inferior position to the Father even after his resurrection and exaltation. They also cite Acts 5:31 and Philippians 2:9, indicating that Jesus became glorified and exalted after ascension to heaven, and to Hebrews 9:24, Acts 7:55, and 1 Corinthians 15:24, 28, regarding Jesus as a distinct personality in heaven, still with a lesser position than the Father, all after Christ's ascension.
Views on allegedly Trinitarian passages in scripture[edit]
Non-trinitarian Christians such as Jehovah's Witnesses argue that a person who is really seeking to know the truth about God is not going to search the Bible hoping to find a text that he can construe as fitting what he already believes. They say it is noteworthy at the outset that the texts used as “proof” of the Trinity do not explicitly teach co-equality or co-eternity in any clear formulation, and also that most of those Verses in question actually mention only two persons, not three; so nontrinitarians say that even if the trinitarian explanation of the texts were correct, these would not prove that the Bible teaches the Trinity.[63]
John 1:1[edit]
Main article: John 1:1
John 1:1 - The contention with this verse is that there is a distinction between God and the Logos (or "the Word"). Trinitarians contend that the third part of the verse (John 1:1c) translates as "and the Word was God", pointing to a distinction as subjects between God and the Logos but an equivalence in nature.[64][65][66][67] Some non-trinitarians (Jehovah's Witnesses, specifically) contend that the Koine Greek ("kai theos ên ho logos") should instead be translated as "and the Word was a god", or as what they see as the more literal word-for-word translation from the Greek as "and a God was the Word", basing this on the contention that the section is an example of an anarthrous, that is, "theos" lacks the definite article, meaning its use was indefinite - "a god", which could denote either Almighty God or a divine being in general. Nontrinitarians also contend that had the author of John's gospel wished to say "and the Word was God" that he could have easily written "kai ho theos ên ho logos", but he did not. In this way, nontrinitarians contend that the Logos would be considered to be the pre-existent Jesus, who is actually distinct from God. The argument being that the distinction between the Logos and the Father was not just in terms of "person", but also in terms of "theos".[68][self-published source] [69][70] Meaning that not only were they distinct persons, but also distinct "Gods", given the fact that the second occurrence of "theos" was an indefinite noun; and that only the Father was treated as the absolute "Theos" in John 1:1. The argument being that only one person is actually referred to as the Absolute God, "ho Theos", in John 1:1, that person being only the Father, not the Logos.[68][self-published source][70] Alternatively, others argue that the Greek should be translated as "and the Logos was divine" (with theos being an adjective), and the Logos being interpreted as God's "plan" or "reasoning" for salvation. Thus, according to Modalists, when "the Logos became flesh" in John 1:14, it is not interpreted to be a pre-existent Jesus being incarnated, but rather the "plan" or "eternal mind" of God being manifested in the birth of the man Jesus. Others still consider a suitable translation of the verse to be "What God was, the logos/word was." [71]
John 10:30[edit]
John 10:30 - Nontrinitarians such as Arians believe that when Jesus said, "I and the Father are one," he did not mean that they were actually "one substance", or "one God", or co-equal and co-eternal, but rather that, according to context, which was that of shepherding the sheep, he and the Father were "one" in pastoral work. The thought being a "unity of purpose" in saving the sheep. Arians also cite John 17:21 where Jesus prayed regarding his disciples: “That they may all be one, as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they may be in us,” adding “that they may be one even as we are one.” They point out that Jesus used the same Greek word (hen) for "one" in all these instances and assert that since Jesus did not expect for his followers to literally become "one" entity, or "one in substance", with each other, or with God, then it is said that Jesus also did not expect his hearers to think that he and God the Father were "one" entity either. Rather Arian nontrinitarians insist that the oneness meant in that context was a oneness in divine work, mission, love and purpose.
John 20:28-29[edit]
John 20:28-29 - "And Thomas answered and said to Him, "My Lord and my God!" Jesus said to him, "Thomas, because you have seen Me, you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed"". Since Thomas called Jesus God, Jesus's statement appears to endorse Thomas's assertion. Nontrinitarians typically respond that it is plausible that Thomas is addressing the Lord Jesus and then the Father. Another possible answer is that Jesus himself said, "Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?" (John 10:34) referring to Psalm 82:6-8. The word "gods" in verse 6 and "God" in verse 8 is the same Hebrew word "'elohim",[72] which means, "gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God; occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative",[73] and can also refer to powers and potentates, in general, or as "God, god, gods, rulers, judges or angels",[72] and as "divine ones, goddess, godlike one".[74]


 This paragraph possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original research should be removed. (December 2013)
The notion being that since Christ represented God the Father perfectly, and was given power and authority by the Father, therefore Christ was "God", over the circumstances, similar to how Moses was called "God" in Exodus 7:1, because Moses was given divine power, and was "Elohim" to the people, over the situation. And that therefore Jesus was a "God" to Thomas, or a powerful being in that situation, as a perfect reflection of the Father's divine power. But still not necessarily co-equal with the Father in everything, just as Moses wasn't. The first explanation is perhaps the most plausible, in that the Greek forms used in the text do not denote two descriptions of one personage, but two personages described separately. A nontrinitarian would link this witnessing of Thomas to Jesus's saying that, to paraphrase, "He who sees me, sees the Father", and would say that this text affirms the doctrine that Jesus is Lord but only God the Father is absolute deity, and hence the Lord of Jesus. Because "no one can come to the Father except through me (Jesus)", it is necessary however to call Jesus "Lord" (a requirement of belief in the New Testament), which is exactly what Thomas did when he believed.
2 Corinthians 13:14[edit]
2 Corinthians 13:14 - "The Grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the sharing in the Holy Spirit be with all of you." It's been argued by Trinitarians that since, in this verse, all three "Father, Son, and Spirit" are mentioned together in Paul's prayer for Grace on all believers, and are obviously essential for salvation, that they must make up one triune Godhead, and must therefore be co-equal or co-eternal. Nontrinitarians such as Arians reply that they do not disagree that all three are necessary for salvation and grace, but nowhere in the passage is it explicitly said that all three are co-equal or co-eternal, or even have to be. They argue that it is simply a circular assumption that just because they are mentioned together and are important, that they must ipso facto make up one co-equal Godhead.[75]
They point to other verses in the Bible that mention God, Christ, and the "Holy Angels" together in important solemn situations and oaths, and argue that no one believes that therefore the "holy angels" must be part of a co-equal Godhead, simply because they're mentioned along with Christ or God. And nontrinitarians remark that, though some passages mention Father, Son, and Spirit together, nowhere do those verses say that the Father is still not supreme or above all.[citation needed]
Philippians 2:5-6[edit]
Philippians 2:5-6 - "Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, [or "which was also in Christ Jesus",] who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped" (ESV). The word here translated in the English Standard Version as "a thing to be grasped" is ἁρπαγμόν. Other translations of the word are indicated in the Holman Christian Standard Bible: "Make your own attitude that of Christ Jesus, who, existing in the form of God, did not consider equality with God as something to be used for His own advantage" [or "to be grasped", or "to be held on to"].[76] The King James Version has: "Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God."[77] An Internet commentator criticizes the King James Version for conveying a thought basically opposite of what was actually said, and says the text means: "Let this mind be in you, which also was in Christ Jesus, who, being in the form of God, did not consider equality with God as something to be grasped after".[78]
Hebrews 9:14[edit]
Hebrews 9:14 - "How much more will the Blood of Christ, who through an eternal Spirit, offered himself without blemish to God, cleanse our consciences from dead works, that we may render sacred service to the living God?" Trinitarians and Athanasians have used this verse as a proof-text that since all three are mentioned together, and all are essential in the plan of salvation and atonement, that because of that, are each eternal God.[citation needed] Most nontrinitarians admit that the Holy Spirit had no beginning, but believe it is not an actual person like the Father is. Nontrinitarians also agree that all three are essential, but contend that it's obvious that God the Father is ultimate, and is the one who is ultimately reached, and therefore, although all are divine and essential, the "living God" the Father is still greater than the other two entities. And that a "co-equal trinity" is still not explicitly taught in the passage, but only inferred or assumed.[79]
Terminology[edit]


 This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (July 2010)
Nontrinitarians state that the doctrine of the Trinity relies on non-Biblical terminology, that the term "Trinity" is not found in Scripture and that the number three is never clearly associated with God necessarily, other than within the Comma Johanneum which is of spurious or disputed authenticity. They argue that the only number clearly unambiguously ascribed to God in the Bible is one, and that the Trinity, literally meaning three-in-one, ascribes a co-equal threeness to God that is not explicitly biblical.
Nontrinitarians cite other examples of terms not found in the Bible; multiple "persons" in relation to God, the terms "God the Son", "God-Man", "God the Holy Spirit", "eternal Son", and "eternally begotten". While the Trinitarianism term hypostasis is found in the Bible, it is used only once in reference to God [Heb 1:3] where it states that Jesus is the express image of God's person. The Bible does not explicitly use the term in relation to the Holy Spirit nor explicitly mentions the Son having a distinct hypostasis from the Father.
All agree that the First Council of Nicaea included in its Creed the major term homoousios (of the same essence), which was used also by the Council of Chalcedon to speak of a double consubstantiality of Christ, "consubstantial with the Father as touching his Godhead, and consubstantial with us as touching his manhood".[80] Nontrinitarians accept what Pier Franco Beatrice wrote: "The main thesis of this paper is that homoousios came straight from Constantine's Hermetic background. [...] The Plato recalled by Constantine is just a name used to cover precisely the Egyptian and Hermetic theology of the "consubstantiality" of the Logos-Son with the Nous-Father, having recourse to a traditional apologetic argument. [...] Constantine's Hermetic interpretation of Plato's theology and consequently the emperor's decision to insert homoousios in the Creed of Nicaea."[81]
Trinitarians see the absence of the actual word "Trinity" and other Trinity-related terms in the Bible as no more significant than the absence in the Bible of the words "monotheism", "omnipotence", "oneness", "Pentecostal", "apostolic", "incarnation" and even "Bible" itself.[82][83] and maintain that, "while the word Trinity is not in the Bible, the substance of the doctrine is definitely biblical".[2][57][84]
Holy Spirit[edit]
See also: Holy Spirit (Christian denominational variations)
Nontrinitarian views about the Holy Spirit differ in certain ways from mainstream Christian doctrine and generally fall into several distinct categories. Most scriptures traditionally in support of the Trinity refer to the Father and the Son, but not to the Holy Spirit.
Unitarian and Arian[edit]
Groups with Unitarian theology such as Polish Socinians, the 18th-19th Century Unitarian Church, Christadelphians conceive of the Holy Spirit not as a person but an aspect of God's power.[85] Christadelphians believe that the phrase Holy Spirit refers to God's power or mind/character, depending on the context.[22]
Though Arius himself believed that the Holy Spirit is a person or high-ranking Angel, that had a beginning, modern Arian or Semi-Arian Christian groups such as Dawn Bible Students and Jehovah's Witnesses believe, the same as Unitarian groups, that the Holy Spirit is not an actual person but is God's "power in action", like God's divine "breath" or "energy", which had no beginning, that he uses to accomplish his will and purpose in creation, redemption, sanctification, and divine guidance, and they do not typically capitalize the term.[86] They define the Holy Spirit as "God's active force", and they believe that it proceeds only from the Father.[86] A Jehovah's Witness brochure quotes Alvan Lamson: "...the Father, Son, and... Holy Spirit [are] not as co-equal, not as one numerical essence, not as Three in One... The very reverse is the fact."[87]
Binitarianism[edit]
Armstrongites, such as the Living Church of God, believe that the Logos and God the Father are co-equal and co-eternal, but they do not believe that the Holy Spirit is an actual person, like the Father and the Son. They believe the Holy Spirit is the Power, Mind, or Character of God, depending on the context. They teach, "The Holy Spirit is the very essence, the mind, life and power of God. It is not a Being. The Spirit is inherent in the Father and the Son, and emanates from Them throughout the entire universe". Mainstream Christians characterise this teaching as the heresy of Binitarianism, the teaching that God is a "Duality", or "two-in-one", rather than three.[88]
Modalist groups[edit]
Oneness Pentecostalism, as with other modalist groups, teach that the Holy Spirit is a mode of God, rather than a distinct or separate person in the Godhead. They instead teach that the Holy Spirit is another name for God the Father. According to Oneness theology, the Holy Spirit essentially is the Father, operating in a certain capacity or manifestation. The United Pentecostal Church teaches that there is no personal distinction between God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.[89][90][91]
These two titles "Father" and "Holy Spirit" (as well as others) do not reflect separate "persons" within the Godhead, but rather two different ways in which the one God reveals himself to his creatures. Thus, the Old Testament speaks of "The Lord God and his Spirit" in Isaiah 48:16, but this does not indicate two "persons" according to Oneness theology. Rather, "The Lord" indicates God in all of His glory and transcendence, while the words "His Spirit" refer to God's own Spirit that moved upon and spoke to the prophet. The Oneness view is that this does not imply two "persons" any more than the numerous scriptural references to a man and his spirit or soul (such as in Luke 12:19) imply two "persons" existing within one body.[92]
Latter Day Saint movement[edit]
See also: Holy Spirit in Mormonism and God in Mormonism
In the Latter Day Saint movement, a collection of independent church groups that trace their origins to a Christian primitivist movement founded by Joseph Smith in 1830, the Holy Ghost (usually synonymous with Holy Spirit.)[93] is considered the third distinct member of the Godhead (Father, Son and Holy Ghost),[94] and to have a body of "spirit,"[95] which makes him unlike the Father and the Son who are said to have bodies "as tangible as man's."[96] According to LDS doctrine, the Holy Spirit is believed to be a person,[96][97] with a body of spirit, able to pervade all worlds.[98]
Latter Day Saints believe that the Holy Spirit is part of the "Divine Council", but that the Father is greater than both the Son and the Holy Spirit.[98] According to official Latter-day Saint teaching, the Father, Son, and Spirit are three distinct "Gods" joined in purpose as "one Godhead". Because of this, some view Latter-day Saint theology as a form of "tri-theism".
However, a number of Latter Day Saint sects, most notably the Community of Christ (second largest Latter Day Saint denomination) and the Church of Christ (Temple Lot),[99] and those sects separating from the Community of Christ and Church of Christ, follow a traditional Protestant trinitarian theology.
Judaism[edit]
The "holy spirit" (also transliterated ruah ha-qodesh) is a term used in the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh) and Jewish writings to refer to the Spirit of Yehowah. (The expression in Hebrew is: יהוה .קָדְשְׁך) The Hebrew term ruakh kodeshka, without the definite article, also occurs. The Holy Spirit in Judaism generally refers to the divine aspect of prophecy and wisdom. It also refers to the divine force, quality, and influence of the Most High God, over the universe or over his creatures, in given contexts.[100] It is not considered a separate person of God, but rather God's divine wisdom, breath, or moving power.
Other groups[edit]
The Unity Church interprets the religious terms Father, Son, and Holy Spirit metaphysically, as three aspects of mind action: mind, idea, and expression. They believe this is the process through which all manifestation takes place.[101]
As a movement that developed out of Christianity, Rastafari has its own unique interpretation of both the Holy Trinity and the Holy Spirit. Although there are several slight variations, they generally state that it is Haile Selassie who embodies both God the Father and God the Son, while the Holy (or rather, "Hola") Spirit is to be found within Rasta believers (see 'I and I'), and within every human being. Rastas also say that the true church is the human body, and that it is this church (or "structure") that contains the Holy Spirit.
Inter-religious dialogue[edit]
The Trinity doctrine is integral in inter-religious disagreements with the other two main Abrahamic religions, Judaism and Islam; the former rejects Jesus' divine mission entirely, and the latter accepts Jesus as a human prophet and the Messiah but not as the son of God. The concept of a co-equal trinity is totally rejected, with Quranic verses calling the doctrine of the Trinity blasphemous.[102] Many[who?] within Judaism and Islam[citation needed] also accuse Christian Trinitarians of practicing polytheism—believing in three gods rather than just one.
Purported pagan origins[edit]


 This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (November 2010)



 Horus, Osiris, and Isis


 The Trimurti: Brahmā, Vishnu, and Shiva


 Altar depicting a tricephalic god identified as Lugus.
Those who argue for a pagan basis note that as far back as Babylonia, the worship of pagan gods grouped in threes, or triads, was common, and that this influence was also prevalent among the Celts, as well as in India, Egypt, Greece, and Rome.[citation needed] The ancient Egyptians arranged their gods and goddesses in groups of three, or trinities: there was the trinity of Osiris, Isis, and Horus, the trinity of Amen, Mut, and Khonsu, and the trinity of Khnum, Satis, and Anukis.
In ancient India, the concept of the trio—Brahma the creator, Shiva the destroyer, and Vishnu the preserver dates back to millennia before Christ.[103][104] This triad of 3 gods is regarded as Trimurti, meaning 'tri' = three and 'murti' = figure, manifestation. A number of triads can be found in Hindu scriptures such as Vedas, Upanishads, among others.[105]
Some nontrinitarians[who?] also say that a link between the doctrine of the Trinity and the Egyptian Christian theologians of Alexandria suggests that Alexandrian theology, with its strong emphasis on the deity of Jesus, served to infuse Egypt's pagan religious heritage into Christianity. They charge the Church with adopting these Egyptian tenets after adapting them to Christian thinking by means of Greek philosophy.[106]
They say that there was much pagan Greek and Platonic influence in the development of the idea of a co-equal triune Godhead, many basic concepts from Aristotelian philosophy being mixed and incorporated into the Biblical God. As one piece of evidence, they say that Aristotle himself wrote: "All things are three, and thrice is all: and let us use this number in the worship of the gods; for, as Pythagoreans say, everything and all things are bound by threes, for the end, the middle, and the beginning have this number in everything, and these compose the number of the Trinity."[107][108]
The words thus attributed to Aristotle differ in a number of ways from what has been published as the philosopher's original text in Greek,[109][110][111] which for instance has nothing corresponding to "let us use this number in the worship of the gods" before the mention of the Pythagoreans. They differ also from translations of the works of Aristotle by scholars such as Stuart Leggatt, W. K. C. Guthrie, J. L. Stocks, Thomas Taylor and Jules Barthélemy-Saint-Hilaire. The independent but concordant translations by Guthrie and Stocks of what Aristotle, in his On the Heavens, wrote about what he considered to be the only three dimensions are considered "good English translations",[112] and a comparison with them of the words above attributed to Aristotle shows how the latter diverges.
The Guthrie translation is: "Magnitude divisible in one direction is a line, in two directions is a surface, and in three directions is a body. There is no magnitude not included in these; for three are all, and 'in three directions' is the same as 'in every direction'. It is just as the Pythagoreans say, the whole world and all things in it are summed up in the number three; for end, middle, and beginning give the number of the whole, and their number is the triad. Hence it is that we have taken this number from nature, as if it were her laws, and we make use of it even for the worship of the gods."[113]
The Stocks translation is: "A magnitude if divisible one way is a line, if two ways a surface, and if three a body. Beyond these there is no other magnitude, because the three dimensions are all that there are, and that which is divisible in three directions is divisible in all. For, as the Pythagoreans say, the world and all that is in it is determined by the number three, since beginning and middle and end give the number of an 'all', and the number they give is the triad. And so, having taken these three from nature as (so to speak) laws of it, we make further use of the number three in the worship of the gods."[114]
Some anti-Trinitarians note also that the Greek philosopher Plato believed in a special "threeness" in life and in the universe. In Plato's work Phaedo, he introduces the word "triad" (in Greek τριάς),[115] which they translate as "trinity". Plato believed and taught that the Ultimate Reality was a "trinity of divine forms", of the One, Nous, Psyche.[citation needed] This was adopted by 3rd and 4th century professed Christians as roughly corresponding to "Father, Word, and Spirit (Soul)".[116] Non-trinitarian Christians contend that such notions and adoptions make the Trinity doctrine more suspect, as not being Biblical, but extra-Biblical in concept.
As evidence of this, they say there is a widely acknowledged synthesis of Christianity with Platonic philosophy evident in Trinitarian formulas appearing by the end of the 3rd century. Hence, beginning with the Constantinian period, they allege, these pagan ideas were forcibly imposed on the churches as Catholic doctrine rooted firmly in the soil of Hellenism. Most groups subscribing to the theory of a Great Apostasy generally concur in this thesis.
The early apologists, including Justin Martyr, Tertullian and Irenaeus, frequently discussed the parallels and contrasts between Christianity, Paganism and other syncretic religions, and answered charges of borrowing from paganism in their apologetical writings.
Hellenic influences[edit]
See also: Hellenization
Advocates of the "Hellenic influences" argument attempt to trace the influence of Greek philosophers, such as Plato or Aristotle, who, they say, taught an essential "threeness" of the Ultimate Reality, and also the concept of "eternal derivation", that is, "a birth without a becoming". They say that theologians of the 4th century A.D., such as Athanasius of Alexandria, then interpreted the Bible through a Middle Platonist and later Neoplatonist filter.
The argument is that many of these 3rd and 4th-century Christians mixed Greek pagan philosophy with the Scriptures, incorporating Platonism into their concept of the Biblical God and the Biblical Christ. These advocates point to what they see as similarities between Hellenistic philosophy and post-Apostolic Christianity, by examining the following factors:
Stuart G Hall (formerly Professor of Ecclesiastical History at King's College, London) describes the subsequent process of philosophical/theological amalgamation in Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church (1991), where he writes:

"The [Christian] apologists [such as Justin Martyr and Irenaeus] began to claim that Greek culture pointed to and was consummated in the Christian message, just as the Old Testament was. This process was done most thoroughly in the synthesis of Clement of Alexandria. It can be done in several ways. You can rake through Greek literature, and find (especially in the oldest seers and poets) references to ‘God’ which are more compatible with monotheism than with polytheism (so at length Athenagoras.) You can work out a common chronology between the legends of prehistoric (Homer) Greece and the biblical record (so Theophilus.) You can adapt a piece of pre-Christian Jewish apologetic, which claimed that Plato and other Greek philosophers got their best ideas indirectly from the teachings of Moses in the Bible, which was much earlier. This theory combines the advantage of making out the Greeks to be plagiarists (and therefore second-rate or criminal), while claiming that they support Christianity by their arguments at least some of the time. Especially this applied to the question of God."
The neo-Platonic trinities, such as that of the One, the Nous and the Soul, are not considered a trinity necessarily of consubstantial equals as in mainstream Christianity. However, the neo-Platonic trinity has the doctrine of emanation, or "eternal derivation", a timeless procedure of generation having as a source the One and claimed to be paralleled with the generation of the light from the Sun. This was adopted by Origen and later on by Athanasius, and applied to the generation of the Son from the Father, because they believed that this analogy could be used to support the notion that the Father, as immutable, always had been a Father, and that the generation of the Son is therefore eternal and timeless.[117]
The synthesis of Christianity with Platonic philosophy was further incorporated in the trinitarian formulas that appeared by the end of the 3rd century. "The Greek philosophical theology" was "developed during the Trinitarian controversies over the relationships among the persons of the Godhead."[118] Some assert that this incorporation was well known during the 3rd century, because the allegation of borrowing was raised by some disputants when the Nicene doctrine was being formalized and adopted by the bishops. For example, in the 4th century, Marcellus of Ancyra, who taught the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit were one person (hypostasis), said in his On the Holy Church, 9:
"Now with the heresy of the Ariomaniacs, which has corrupted the Church of God...These then teach three hypostases, just as Valentinus the heresiarch first invented in the book entitled by him 'On the Three Natures'. For he was the first to invent three hypostases and three persons of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and he is discovered to have filched this from Hermes and Plato."[119]

Christian groups[edit]


 This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (December 2011)
American Unitarian Conference
Arianism
Assemblies of Yahweh
Bible Students
Christadelphians
Church of Christ, Scientist (Christian Scientists)[120][121]
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church)
Church of the Blessed Hope (sometimes called "Church of God of the Abrahamic Faith")
Doukhobors
Friends of Man
Iglesia ni Cristo (Church of Christ)
Israelite Church of God in Jesus Christ
Jehovah's Witnesses
Members Church of God International
Molokan
Monarchianism
Muggletonianism
 New Church
Many members of the Non-subscribing Presbyterian Church of Ireland
Oneness Pentecostals
Polish Brethren
Some Quakers
Shakers
Socinianism
Swedenborgianism
The Way International
Two by Twos (sometimes called The Truth or Cooneyites)[122]
Unification Church
Unitarian Christians
Unitarian Universalism
United Church of God
Yahweh's Assembly in Messiah
Yahweh's Assembly in Yahshua

People[edit]


 This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (August 2011)
Sabellius, ~220 (Modalist: the eponymous heresiarch of Sabellianism, or "monarchic modalism")
Origen c. 230 (Ante-Nicene Father, subordinationist: considered the Son co-eternal with God, subject to the Father's will, but not inferior in essence)[123]
Paul of Samosata, 269
Arius, 336, bishop and presbyter of Alexandria, major theologian of doctrine in 4th century, Arianism. His teachings about the nature of the Godhead, which emphasized the Father's divinity over the Son,[124] and his opposition to co-equal or Athanasian Christology, made him a primary topic of the First Council of Nicea, convened by Roman Emperor Constantine in AD 325.
Eusebius of Nicomedia, 341, baptized Roman Emperor Constantine the Great
Constantius II, Byzantine Emperor, 361
Antipope Felix II, 365
Aëtius, 367
Ulfilas, Apostle to the Goths, 383
Priscillian, 385, considered first Christian to be executed for heresy
Muhammad, 632, see also Islamic view of Jesus, tawhid
Ludwig Haetzer, 1529
Michael Servetus, 1553, burned at the stake in Geneva under John Calvin
Sebastian Castellio, 1563
Ferenc Dávid, 1579
Justus Velsius, c. 1581
Fausto Paolo Sozzini, 1604
John Biddle, 1662
John Milton (poet), c. 1674[citation needed]
Thomas Aikenhead, 1697, last person to be hanged for blasphemy in Britain
John Locke, 1704[125]
Isaac Newton did not believe in Trinitarianism as documented in a letter to a friend, now preserved in The New College Library in Oxford, UK, Manuscript 361(4), Two Notable Corruptions of Scripture (part 1: ff. 1-41).[125] He listed "worshipping Christ as God" in a list of "Idolatria" in his theological notebook.[126] However, he never made a public declaration of his anti-trinitarian beliefs for fear of losing his position.[127]
 William Whiston, 1752, expelled from University of Cambridge in 1710 for Arianism; famous for translating Josephus
Jonathan Mayhew, 1766
Emanuel Swedenborg, 1772, eponymous founder of Swedenborgianism.
Benjamin Franklin, 1790, Deist[citation needed]
Joseph Priestley, 1804
Joseph Smith, 1805, monolatrist, founder of the Latter-day Saint movement (Mormonism)
Thomas Paine, 1809[citation needed]
Mary Baker Eddy, 1821, founder of Christian Science
Thomas Jefferson, 1826, Deist[citation needed]
James Madison, 1836, Deist[citation needed]
William Ellery Channing, 1842
Robert Hibbert, 1849
John Thomas (Christadelphian), 1871
Ralph Waldo Emerson, 1882
Robert Roberts (Christadelphian), 1898
Benjamin Wilson, 1900
James Martineau, 1900
Félix Manalo, 1914
Charles Taze Russell, 1916, founder of the Bible Student movement and Jehovah's Witnesses, author of Millennial Dawn
Eliseo Soriano, 1947
William Branham, 1965
Herbert W. Armstrong, 1986, founder of the Worldwide Church of God, a Sabbatarian Christian Church, and was an advocate of the doctrine of Binitarianism.

See also[edit]
Bibliotheca antitrinitariorum
Consubstantiality
Servetism
Subordinationism
Tawhid
Unitarianism
Urantia Foundation
John 1:1
Notes[edit]
1.Jump up ^ The Trinity. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
2.^ Jump up to: a b c An Introduction to the New Testament for Catholics. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
3.Jump up ^ The Story of Christian Theology. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
4.Jump up ^ A Short History of Christian Doctrine. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
5.Jump up ^ Constantinople and the West. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
6.Jump up ^ The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
7.Jump up ^ "Theodosius I". Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
8.Jump up ^ http://www.fourthcentury.com/index.php/urkunde-33
9.Jump up ^ "Albigensian Crusade". Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
10.Jump up ^ http://www.xtimeline.com/evt/view.aspx?id=938690
11.Jump up ^ von Harnack, Adolf (1894-03-01). "History of Dogma". Retrieved 2007-06-15. "[In the 2nd century,] Jesus was either regarded as the man whom God hath chosen, in whom the Deity or the Spirit of God dwelt, and who, after being tested, was adopted by God and invested with dominion, (Adoptionist Christology); or Jesus was regarded as a heavenly spiritual being (the highest after God) who took flesh, and again returned to heaven after the completion of his work on earth (pneumatic Christology)"
12.Jump up ^ Justo L. González, The Story of Christianity: The Early Church to the Present Day, Prince Press, 1984, Vol. 1, pp. 159-161• Jaroslav Pelikan, The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine, The University of Chicago Press, 1971, Vol. 1, pp. 181-199
13.Jump up ^ Encyclopædia Britannica 1942 edition p.634 "Christianity"
14.Jump up ^ "HISTORY OF ARIANISM". Retrieved 5 March 2015.
15.^ Jump up to: a b David K. Bernard, Oneness and Trinity A.D. 100-300 - The Doctrine of God and Ancient Christian Writings - Word Aflame Press, Hazelwood Montana, 1991, p. 156.
16.Jump up ^ Encyclopedia of Protestantism, page 474, J. Gordon Melton, 2005: "... for his many departures from traditional Christian and Protestant affirmations including the Trinity and the deity of Christ. ... 1 (1886; reprint , Rutherford, NJ: Dawn Bible Students Association, nd)"
17.^ Jump up to: a b Watch Tower, October 1881, Watch Tower Reprints page 290 As Retrieved 2009-09-23, page 4, ""He gave his only begotten Son." This phraseology brings us into conflict with an old Babylonian theory, viz.: Trinitarianism. If that doctrine is true, how could there be any Son to give? A begotten Son, too? Impossible. If these three are one, did God send himself? And how could Jesus say: "My Father is greater than I." John 14:28. [emphasis retained from original]"
18.Jump up ^ Zion's Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Presence, July 1882, Reprints 370, page 3.
19.Jump up ^ Flint, James; Deb Flint. One God or a Trinity?. Hyderabad: Printland Publishers. ISBN 81-87409-61-4.
20.Jump up ^ Pearce, Fred. Jesus: God the Son or Son of God? Does the Bible Teach the Trinity?. Birmingham, UK: The Christadelphian Magazine and Publishing Association Ltd (UK). p. 8.
21.Jump up ^ Tennant, Harry. The Holy Spirit: Bible Understanding of God's Power. Birmingham, UK: The Christadelphian Magazine and Publishing Association Ltd (UK).
22.^ Jump up to: a b Broughton, James H.; Peter J Southgate. The Trinity: True or False?. UK: The Dawn Book Supply.
23.Jump up ^ Nelson's guide to denominations J. Gordon Melton - 2007 "Later in the century, various leaders also began to express doubts about the Trinity, and a spectrum of opinion emerged. ... Still others, such as the Church of God General Conference (Abrahamic Faith) specifically denied the Trinity ..."
24.Jump up ^ Manalo, Eraño G., Fundamental Beliefs of the Iglesia ni Cristo (Church of Christ) (Iglesia ni Cristo; Manila 1989)
25.Jump up ^ The Watchtower: 23. January 15, 1992. Missing or empty |title= (help)
26.Jump up ^ Insight on the Scriptures 2. Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania. 1988. pp. 393–394.
27.Jump up ^ Should You Believe in the Trinity?. Watch Tower Society. p. 20.
28.Jump up ^ Holland, Jeffrey R. "The Only True God and Jesus Christ Whom He Hath Sent". Retrieved 29 November 2013.
29.^ Jump up to: a b "Arianism". Southern Grace Church. Retrieved 29 November 2013.
30.^ Jump up to: a b c "Arianism". New World Encyclopedia. Retrieved 29 November 2013.
31.^ Jump up to: a b "What is Arianism?". Unity in the Body of Christ. Retrieved 29 November 2013.
32.^ Jump up to: a b "Jesus Christ: Firstborn in the Spirit". Encyclopedia of Mormonism. Retrieved 29 November 2013.
33.^ Jump up to: a b "Jesus Christ: Overview". Encyclopedia of Mormonism. Retrieved 29 November 2013.
34.^ Jump up to: a b "Arianism". Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry. Retrieved 29 November 2013.
35.Jump up ^ "Are Mormons Arians?". Retrieved 29 November 2013.
36.Jump up ^ "God the Father: Overview". Encyclopedia of Mormonism. Retrieved 29 November 2013.
37.Jump up ^ "First Vision". Encyclopedia of Mormonism. Retrieved 29 November 2013.
38.Jump up ^ "What is Arianism?". The Arian Catholic Church. Retrieved 29 November 2013.
39.Jump up ^ "'The Glory of God Is Intelligence' - Lesson 37: Section 93", Doctrine and Covenants Instructor's Guide: Religion 324-325 (PDF), Institutes of Religion, Church Educational System, 1981, pp. 73–74, archived (PDF) from the original on 2014-11-12
40.Jump up ^ "The Oneness of God". Archived from the original on 16 February 2008. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
41.Jump up ^ Patrick Zukeran - Judaism - Judaism Today. Retrieved 21 June 2013.
42.Jump up ^ The Trinity and Deity of Jesus: What the Bible Really Teaches - Retrieved 21 June 2013.
43.^ Jump up to: a b TRINITY: Jewish Encyclopedia. Retrieved 21 June 2013.
44.Jump up ^ Edict by Emperor Constantine against the Arians
45.Jump up ^ "In addition, if any writing composed by Arius should be found, it should be handed over to the flames, so that not only will the wickedness of his teaching be obliterated, but nothing will be left even to remind anyone of him. And I hereby make a public order, that if someone should be discovered to have hidden a writing composed by Arius, and not to have immediately brought it forward and destroyed it by fire, his penalty shall be death. As soon as he is discovered in this offense, he shall be submitted for capital punishment." - Edict by Emperor Constantine against the Arians. Athanasius (23 January 2010). "Edict by Emperor Constantine against the Arians". Fourth Century Christianity. Wisconsin Lutheran College. Retrieved 2 May 2012.
46.Jump up ^ Getting to Know the Church Fathers. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
47.Jump up ^ Encyclopedia of Barbarian Europe. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
48.Jump up ^ Early Controversies and the Growth of Christianity. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
49.Jump up ^ "NPNF2-04. Athanasius: Select Works and Letters". Retrieved 5 March 2015.
50.Jump up ^ Elaine Pagels, Beyond Belief: The Secret Gospel of Thomas (Random House, 2003), n.p.
51.Jump up ^ "NPNF2-04. Athanasius: Select Works and Letters". Ccel.org. 13 July 2005. Retrieved 21 January 2012.
52.Jump up ^ David Bernard's The Oneness of God, Word Aflame Press, 1983, ISBN 0-912315-12-1. pgs 264-274.
53.Jump up ^ Wells, H. G. (n.d.). The Outline of History: being a plain history of life and mankind. Forgotten Books 2. London, UK: The Waverley Book Company. p. 284.
54.Jump up ^ W. Fulton, ”Trinity”, Encyclopædia of Religion and Ethics, T. & T. Clark, 1921, Vol. 12, p. 459.
55.Jump up ^ Unitarians face a new age: the report of the Commission of Appraisal. American Unitarian Association. ed. Frederick May Eliot, Harlan Paul Douglass - 1936 "Chapter III CHURCH GROWTH AND DECLINE DURING THE LAST DECADE Year Book data permit the calculation of growth or decline in membership for 297 Unitarian churches which existed throughout the last decade and ..."
56.Jump up ^ Charles Lippy Faith in America: Changes, Challenges, New Directions p2 2006 "However, when the national interest in novel religious forms waned by the mid- nineteenth century, Unitarianism and Universalism began to decline.2 For the vast majority of religious bodies in America, growth continued unabated;"
57.^ Jump up to: a b The Apostles' Creed. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
58.Jump up ^ New Catholic Encyclopedia (1967) Volume XIV p.299
59.Jump up ^ John Macquarrie, "Trinity," Microsoft Encarta Reference Library 2005. © 1993-2004 Microsoft Corporation. Retrieved on March 31, 2008.
60.Jump up ^ "Trinity," Encyclopædia Britannica 2004 Ultimate Reference Suite DVD. Retrieved on March 31, 2008.
61.Jump up ^ Jouette M. Bassler, "God in the NT", The Anchor Bible Dictionary, Doubleday, New York 1992, 2:1055.
62.Jump up ^ "Theological Studies" (PDF). Retrieved 5 March 2015.
63.Jump up ^ Reasoning from Scriptures, Watch Tower bible and tract society page 411 para 4
64.Jump up ^ The Gospel According to John. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
65.Jump up ^ John (Understanding the Bible Commentary Series). Retrieved 5 March 2015.
66.Jump up ^ Earl Radmacher, Nelson's New Illustrated Bible Commentary (Thomas Nelson Inc. 1999) ISBN 978-1-4185-8734-5
67.Jump up ^ Commentary on John (Commentary on the New Testament Book #4). Retrieved 5 March 2015.
68.^ Jump up to: a b Patrick Navas - Divine Truth Or Human Tradition?: A Reconsideration Of The Orthodox Doctrine Of The Trinity in Light of the Hebrew and Christian Scriptures - AuthorHouse, 2007, 2011 - p 267.
69.Jump up ^ JOHN 1:1c: "God," "divine" or "a god" ? - onlytrugod.org. Retrieved 24 November 2014.
70.^ Jump up to: a b Kaiser, Dr. Christopher B., The Doctrine of God, A Historical Survey - Foundations For Faith - Westchester: Crossway Books, 1982, p. 31.
71.Jump up ^ The NET Bible. Biblical Studies Press. 2005. ISBN 9780737501117.
72.^ Jump up to: a b http://www.biblicalheritage.org/Linguistic/HL/1-A/-elohiym.htm
73.Jump up ^ "Strong's Hebrew: 430. אֱלֹהִים (elohim) -- God, god". Retrieved 5 March 2015.
74.Jump up ^ http://www.biblestudytools.net/Lexicons/Hebrew/heb.cgi?number=0430
75.Jump up ^ "2 Corinthians 13:14 – Trinity? - The Son of Jehovah". The Son of Jehovah. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
76.Jump up ^ Philippians 2:5-6
77.Jump up ^ Philippians 2:5-6
78.Jump up ^ "ERRORS IN THE KING JAMES VERSION NO. 4 - ROBBERY - Going to Jesus.com". Retrieved 5 March 2015.
79.Jump up ^ Is God a Trinity?. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
80.Jump up ^ "The Chalcedonian Definition". Retrieved 5 March 2015.
81.Jump up ^ The Word "Homoousios" from Hellenism to Christianity, by P.F. Beatrice, Church History, Cambridge University Press on behalf of the American Society of Church History, Vol. 71, No. 2, (Jun., 2002), pp. 243-272. (retrieved @ noemon.net)[dead link]
82.Jump up ^ "The word Trinity is not found in the Bible". CARM - The Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
83.Jump up ^ The Voice... Retrieved 5 March 2015.
84.Jump up ^ "Institute for Religious Research - The Biblical Basis of the Doctrine of the Trinity - Introduction". Institute for Religious Research. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
85.Jump up ^ The Unitarian: a monthly magazine of liberal Christianity ed. Jabez Thomas Sunderland, Brooke Herford, Frederick B. Mott - 1893 "We believe in the Holy Spirit, man's sole reliance for guidance, safety, or salvation, not as a separate person, entity, reality, or consciousness, existent apart from man or God, but as the recognizing sympathetic inter-communication in love between God and the human soul, the direct converse or communion of man's consciousness with Deity."
86.^ Jump up to: a b "Is the Holy Spirit a Person?". Awake!: 14–15. July 2006. "In the Bible, God’s Holy Spirit is identified as God’s power in action. Hence, an accurate translation of the Bible’s Hebrew text refers to God’s spirit as “God’s active force.”"
87.Jump up ^ "Is It Clearly a Bible Teaching?", Should You Believe in the Trinity?, ©1989 Watch Tower, p. 7.
88.Jump up ^ Who and What Is God? - Mystery of the Ages - Herbert W. Armstrong. Retrieved 19 May 2012.
89.Jump up ^ Peter Althouse Spirit of the last days: Pentecostal eschatology in conversation p12 2003 "The Oneness Pentecostal stream follows in the steps of the Reformed stream, but has a modalistic view of the Godhead"
90.Jump up ^ See under heading "The Father is the Holy Ghost" in David Bernard, The Oneness of God, Chapter 6.
91.Jump up ^ See also David Bernard, A Handbook of Basic Doctrines, Word Aflame Press, 1988.
92.Jump up ^ See under "The Lord God and His Spirit," in Chapter 7 of David Bernard, The Oneness of God.
93.Jump up ^ Wilson, Jerry A. (1992). "Holy Spirit". In Ludlow, Daniel H. Encyclopedia of Mormonism. New York: Mcmillan. p. 651. ISBN 0-02-904040-X. "The Holy Spirit is a term often used to refer to the Holy Ghost. In such cases the Holy Spirit is a personage.""
94.Jump up ^ McConkie, Joseph Fielding (1992). "Holy Ghost". In Ludlow editor-first= Daniel H. Encyclopedia of Mormonism. New York: Mcmillan. p. 649. ISBN 0-02-904040-X.
95.Jump up ^ D&C 131:7-8 ("There is no such thing as immaterial matter. All spirit is matter, but it is more fine or pure, and can only be discerned by purer eyes; We cannot see it; but when our bodies are purified we shall see that it is all matter.")
96.^ Jump up to: a b D&C 130:22.
97.Jump up ^ Romney, Marion G. (May 1974), "The Holy Ghost", Ensign
98.^ Jump up to: a b Millennial Star XII. October 15, 1850. pp. 305–309. Retrieved March 30, 2011.
99.Jump up ^ "Basic Beliefs Articles of Faith and Practice". Church of Christ. Retrieved 21 January 2015.
100.Jump up ^ Alan Unterman and Rivka Horowitz,Ruah ha-Kodesh, Encyclopedia Judaica (CD-ROM Edition, Jerusalem: Judaica Multimedia/Keter, 1997).
101.Jump up ^ http://www.unitypaloalto.org/beliefs/twenty_questions.html[dead link]
102.Jump up ^ The Holy Qur'an. 4:171.
103.Jump up ^ HINDU TRINITY Lord Brahma | Lord Vishnu | Lord Shiva - Rudra Centre - Retrieved 26 March 2014
104.Jump up ^ E. Washburn Hopkins - ORIGIN AND EVOLUTION OF RELIGION - THE HINDU TRINITY - urantia-book.org. Retrieved 26 March 2014.
105.Jump up ^ Rudolf V. D'Souza (1996). The Bhagavadgītā and St. John of the Cross: A Comparative Study of the Dynamism of Spiritual Growth in the Process of God-realisation. Gregorian Biblical. p. 340.
106.Jump up ^ 'At times he forms one of a trinity in unity, with Ra and Osiris, as in Fig. 87, a god with the two sceptres of Osiris, the hawk's head of Horus, and the sun of Ra. This is the god described to Eusebius, who tells us that when the oracle was consulted about the divine nature, by those who wished to understand this complicated mythology, it had answered, "I am Apollo and Lord and Bacchus," or, to use the Egyptian names, "I am Ra and Horus and Osiris." Another god, in the form of a porcelain idol to be worn as a charm, shows us Horus as one of a trinity in unity, in name, at least, agreeing with that afterwards adopted by the Christians--namely, the Great God, the Son God, and the Spirit God.'—Samuel Sharpe, Egyptian Mythology and Egyptian Christianity, 1863, pp. 89-90.
107.Jump up ^ "How Ancient Trinitarian Gods Influenced Adoption of the Trinity". United Church of God. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
108.Jump up ^ Michael Barber - Should Christianity Abandon the Doctrine of the Trinity? - Universal-Publishers, Nov 1, 2006 - Part Three - Page 78.
109.Jump up ^ "Περί Ουρανού/1". Retrieved 5 March 2015.
110.Jump up ^ "ARISTOTE : Traité du Ciel (livre I - texte grec)". Retrieved 5 March 2015.
111.Jump up ^ Bekker edition of Aristotle's works, volume II, p. 211
112.Jump up ^ The Philosophical Review, Vol. 108, No. 2 (April 1999), p. 285
113.Jump up ^ Plato's Magnesia and Philosophical Polities in Magna Graecia. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
114.Jump up ^ "The Internet Classics Archive - On the Heavens by Aristotle". Retrieved 5 March 2015.
115.Jump up ^ Phaedo (Second Edition). Retrieved 5 March 2015.
116.Jump up ^ Course of Ideas, pp 387-8.
117.Jump up ^ Select Treatises of St. Athanasius - In Controversy With the Arians - Freely Translated by John Henry Cardinal Newmann - Longmans, Green, and Co., 1911
118.Jump up ^ A. Hilary Armstrong, Henry J. Blumenthal, Platonism. Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved May 13, 2008, from Encyclopædia Britannica 2006 Ultimate Reference Suite DVD.
119.Jump up ^ Logan A. Marcellus of Ancyra (Pseudo-Anthimus), 'On the Holy Church': Text, Translation and Commentary. Verses 8-9. Journal of Theological Studies, NS, Volume 51, Pt. 1, April 2000, p.95
120.Jump up ^ Neusner, Jacob, ed. 2009. World Religions in America: An Introduction, Fourth Ed. Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press, p. 257. ISBN 978-0-664-23320-4
121.Jump up ^ Beit-Hallahmi, Benjamin. 1998. The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Active New Religions, Sects and Cults, Revised Ed. New York, New York: Rosen Publishing Group, p. 73. ISBN 0-8239-2586-2
122.Jump up ^ Walker, James K. (2007). The Concise Guide to Today's Religions and Spirituality. Eugene, Oregon: Harvest House Publishers. pp. 117–118. ISBN 978-0-7369-2011-7
123.Jump up ^ Whether Origen taught a doctrine of God that was or was not reconcilable with later Nicene Christianity is a matter of debate (Cf. ANF Vol 4), although many of his other views, such as on metempsychosis, were rejected. Origen was an economic subordinationist according to the editors of ANF, believing in the co-eternal aspect of God the Son but asserting that God the Son never commanded the Father, and only obeyed. This view is compatible with Nicene theology (as it is not held by Nicene Christians that the Son or Holy Spirit can command the Father), notwithstanding any other doctrines Origen held.
124.Jump up ^ Williams, Rowan (2002) [1987]. Arius (Revised ed.). Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans. p. 98. ISBN 0-8028-4969-5.
125.^ Jump up to: a b Avery Cardinal Dulles. The Deist Minimum. 2005.
126.Jump up ^ Pfizenmaier, T.C., "Was Isaac Newton an Arian?" Journal of the History of Ideas 68(1):57–80, 1997.
127.Jump up ^ Snobelen, Stephen D. (1999). "Isaac Newton, heretic : the strategies of a Nicodemite" (PDF). British Journal for the History of Science 32 (4): 381–419. doi:10.1017/S0007087499003751.
Further reading[edit]
Tuggy, Dale (Summer 2014), "History of Trinitarian Doctrines", Trinity, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
External links[edit]


 This article's use of external links may not follow Wikipedia's policies or guidelines. Please improve this article by removing excessive or inappropriate external links, and converting useful links where appropriate into footnote references. (June 2012)
Five Major Problems With The Trinity 21st Century Reformation by Dan J. Gill
The Trinity: True or False? by James H. Broughton & Peter J Southgate
The Origin of the Trinity: From Paganism to Constantine
An investigation of the trinity of Plato and of Philo Judaeus, and of the effects which an attachment to their writings had upon the principles and reasonings of the father of the Christian church, by Caesar Morgan, Cambridge University Press, 1853.
Antitrinitarian Biography; or, Sketches of the lives and writings of distinguished antitrinitarians, exhibiting a view of the state of the Unitarian doctrine and worship in the principal nations of Europe, from the reformation to the close of the seventeenth century, to which is prefixed a history of Unitarianism in England during the same period, Robert Wallace, 1850.


[hide]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Christianity


Jesus
Christ ·
 Jesus in Christianity ·
 Virgin birth ·
 Crucifixion ·
 Resurrection ·
 Son of God
 
Stained glass at St John's Ashfield, illustrating Jesus' description of himself, "I am the Good Shepherd", from the Gospel of John, chapter 10, verse 11.


Foundations
Church ·
 Creed ·
 Gospel ·
 New Covenant
 

Bible
Books ·
 Canon ·
 Old Testament ·
 New Testament
 

Theology
God ·
 Trinity  (Father ·
 Son ·
 Holy Spirit)
   ·
 Apologetics ·
 Baptism ·
 Catholicism ·
 Christology ·
 History of theology ·
 Mission ·
 Salvation
 


History and
tradition

Mary ·
 Apostles ·
 Peter ·
 Paul ·
 Fathers ·
 Early ·
 Constantine ·
 Ecumenical councils ·
 Augustine ·
 East–West Schism ·
 Crusades ·
 Aquinas ·
 Protestant Reformation ·
 Luther
 


Denominations
 and movements
 (List)



Western

Adventist ·
 Anabaptist ·
 Anglican ·
 Baptist ·
 Calvinist ·
 Charismatic ·
 Evangelical ·
 Holiness ·
 Lutheran ·
 Methodist ·
 Pentecostal ·
 Protestant ·
 Roman Catholic
 


Eastern

Eastern Orthodox ·
 Eastern Catholic ·
 Oriental Orthodox (Miaphysite) ·
 Assyrian Church of the East ("Nestorian")
 


Nontrinitarian

Jehovah's Witnesses ·
 Latter Day Saint movement ·
 Oneness Pentecostalism
 


Related topics
Art ·
 Criticism ·
 Ecumenism ·
 Liturgy ·
 Music ·
 Other religions ·
 Prayer ·
 Sermon ·
 Symbolism
 

CategoryCategory ·
 Portal icon Christianity portal ·
 WikiProjectWikiProject
 

  


Categories: Nontrinitarianism
Christianity-related controversies
Unitarianism
Schisms in Christianity
Christian terminology




































Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
العربية
Dansk
Deutsch
Ελληνικά
Español
Français
한국어
Bahasa Indonesia
Italiano
Kiswahili
Lietuvių
മലയാളം
Nederlands
Norsk bokmål
Polski
Português
Русский
Simple English
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Svenska
Tagalog
தமிழ்
Українська
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 29 May 2015, at 06:13.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
 

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nontrinitarianism














Nontrinitarianism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Part of a series on
Christianity
Jesus depicted as the Good Shepherd


Jesus ·
 Christ
 [show]








Bible ·
 Foundations
 [show]










Theology[show]

















History ·
 Tradition
 [show]
















Related topics[show]














Denominations ·
 Groups
 [show]





























Christian cross Christianity portal
v ·
 t ·
 e
   
Nontrinitarianism (or antitrinitarianism) refers to monotheistic belief systems, primarily within Christianity, which reject the mainstream Christian doctrine of the Trinity, namely, the teaching that God is three distinct hypostases or persons who are co-eternal, co-equal, and indivisibly united in one being or ousia.
According to churches that consider ecumenical council decisions final, trinitarianism was definitively declared to be Christian doctrine at the 4th-century ecumenical councils,[1][2][3] that of the First Council of Nicaea (325), which declared the full divinity of the Son,[4] and the First Council of Constantinople (381), which declared the divinity of the Holy Spirit.[5]
Some councils later than that of Nicaea but earlier than that of Constantinople, such as the Council of Rimini (359), which has been described as "the crowning victory of Arianism",[6] disagreed with the Trinitarian formula of the Council of Nicaea. Nontrinitarians disagree with the findings of the Trinitarian Councils for various reasons, including the belief that the writings of the Bible take precedence over creeds (a view shared by the mainline Protestant churches, which on the contrary uphold the doctrine of the Trinity) or that there was a Great Apostasy prior to the Council. Church and State in Europe and the Middle East suppressed nontrinitarian belief as heresy from the 4th to 18th century, notably with regard to Arianism,[7][8] Catharism,[9] and the teaching of Michael Servetus.[10] Today nontrinitarians represent a minority of professed Christians.
Nontrinitarian views differ widely on the nature of God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. Various nontrinitarian views, such as Adoptionism, Monarchianism, and Subordinationism existed prior to the formal definition of the Trinity doctrine in A.D. 325, 360, and 431, at the Councils of Nicaea, Constantinople, and Ephesus.[11] Nontrinitarianism was later renewed in the Gnosticism of the Cathars in the 11th through 13th centuries, in the Age of Enlightenment of the 18th century, and in some groups arising during the Second Great Awakening of the 19th century.
Modern nontrinitarian Christian groups or denominations include Christadelphians, Christian Scientists, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Dawn Bible Students, Friends General Conference, Iglesia ni Cristo, Jehovah's Witnesses, Living Church of God, Oneness Pentecostals, Members Church of God International, Unitarian Universalist Christians, The Way International, The Church of God International and the United Church of God.
The Christian doctrine of the Trinity is not present in the other major Abrahamic religions, Judaism and Islam.


Contents  [hide]
1 Christianity 1.1 Modern Christian groupings
1.2 Unitarian Universalism
2 Judaism
3 Islam
4 History 4.1 Early Christianity
4.2 Following the Reformation
5 Points of dissent 5.1 Scriptural support
5.2 Questions over the alleged co-equal deity of Jesus 5.2.1 Views on allegedly Trinitarian passages in scripture 5.2.1.1 John 1:1
5.2.1.2 John 10:30
5.2.1.3 John 20:28-29
5.2.1.4 2 Corinthians 13:14
5.2.1.5 Philippians 2:5-6
5.2.1.6 Hebrews 9:14

5.3 Terminology
5.4 Holy Spirit 5.4.1 Unitarian and Arian
5.4.2 Binitarianism
5.4.3 Modalist groups
5.4.4 Latter Day Saint movement
5.4.5 Judaism
5.4.6 Other groups
5.5 Inter-religious dialogue
6 Purported pagan origins 6.1 Hellenic influences
7 Christian groups
8 People
9 See also
10 Notes
11 Further reading
12 External links

Christianity[edit]


 This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (November 2014)
The Christian Apologists and other Church Fathers of the 2nd and 3rd centuries, having adopted and formulated the Logos Christology, considered the Son of God as the instrument used by the supreme God, the Father, to bring the creation into existence. Justin Martyr, Theophilus of Antioch, Hippolytus of Rome and Tertullian in particular state that the internal Logos of God (Gr. Logos endiathetos, Lat. ratio), that is his impersonal divine reason, was begotten as Logos uttered (Gr. Logos proforikos, Lat. sermo, verbum) and thus became a person to be used for the purpose of creation.[12]
The Encyclopædia Britannica states, "To some Christians the doctrine of the Trinity appeared inconsistent with the unity of God....They therefore denied it, and accepted Jesus Christ, not as incarnate God, but as God's highest creature by Whom all else was created....[this] view in the early Church long contended with the orthodox doctrine."[13] Although the nontrinitarian view eventually disappeared in the early Church and the Trinitarian view became an orthodox doctrine of modern Christianity, variations of the nontrinitarian view are still held by a small number of Christian groups and denominations.
Various views exist regarding the relationships between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
Those who follow the life and teaching of Jesus but consider the question of divinity to be completely inconsequential and a distraction to the message that Jesus taught.[citation needed]
Those who believe that Jesus is not God, nor absolutely equal to God, but was either God's subordinate Son, a messenger from God, or prophet, or the perfect created human. Adoptionism (2nd century A.D.) holds that Jesus became divine at his baptism (sometimes associated with the Gospel of Mark) or at his resurrection (sometimes associated with Saint Paul and Shepherd of Hermas).
Arianism – Arius (A.D. c. 250 or 256 - 336) believed that the pre-existent Son of God was directly created by the Father, that he was subordinate to God the Father, and that only the Father was without beginning or end, but that the Son was also divine[citation needed]. Arius' position was that the Son was brought forth as the very first of God's creations, and that the Father later created all things through the Son. Arius taught that in the creation of the universe, the Father was the ultimate Creator, supplying all the materials, directing the design, while the Son worked the materials, making all things at the bidding and in the service of the Father, by which "through [Christ] all things came into existence". Arianism became the dominant view in some regions in the time of the Roman Empire, notably the Visigoths until 589.[14]
Psilanthropism – Ebionites (1st to 4th century A.D.) denied the virgin birth and believed the Son to be nothing more than a special human.
Socinianism – Photinus taught that Jesus, though perfect and sinless, and who was Messiah and Redeemer, was only the perfect human Son of God, and had no pre-human existence prior to the virgin birth. They take verses such as John 1:1 as simply God's "plan" existing in the Mind of God, before Christ's birth.
Many Gnostic traditions held that the Christ is a heavenly Aeon but not one with the Father.
Those who believe that the heavenly Father, the resurrected Son and the Holy Spirit are different aspects of one God, as perceived by the believer, rather than three distinct persons. Modalism – Sabellius (fl. c. 215) stated that God has taken numerous forms in both the Hebrew and the Christian Greek Scriptures, and that God has manifested himself in three primary modes in regards to the salvation of mankind. His contention is that "Father, Son, and Spirit" were simply different roles played by the same Divine Person in various circumstances in history.[15] Thus God is Father in creation (God created a Son through the virgin birth), Son in redemption (God manifested himself into the begotten man Christ Jesus for the purpose of his death upon the cross), and Holy Spirit in regeneration (God's indwelling Spirit within the Son and within the souls of Christian believers). In light of this view, God is not three distinct persons, but rather one Person manifesting himself in multiple ways.[15] Trinitarians condemn this view as a heresy. The chief critic of Sabellianism was Tertullian, who labeled the movement "Patripassianism", from the Latin words pater for "father", and passus from the verb "to suffer" because it implied that the Father suffered on the Cross. It was coined by Tertullian in his work Adversus Praxeas, Chapter I, "By this Praxeas did a twofold service for the devil at Rome: he drove away prophecy, and he brought in heresy; he put to flight the Paraclete, and he crucified the Father."
Those who believe that Jesus Christ is Almighty God, but that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are actually three distinct almighty "Gods" with distinct natures, acting as one Divine Group, united in purpose. Tri-theism – John Philoponus, an Aristotelian and monophysite in Alexandria, in the middle of the 6th century, saw in the Trinity three separate natures, substances and deities, according to the number of divine persons. He sought to justify this view by the Aristotelian categories of genus, species and individuum. In the Middle Ages, Roscellin of Compiegne, the founder of Nominalism, argued for three distinct almighty Gods, with three distinct natures, who were one in purpose, acting together as one divine Group or Godhead. He said, though, like Philoponus, that unless the Three Persons are tres res (three things with distinct natures), the whole Trinity must have been incarnate. And therefore, since only the Logos was made flesh, the other two Persons must have had distinct "natures", separate from the Logos, and so had to be separate and distinct Gods, though all three were one in divine work and plan. Thus in light of this view, they would be considered "three Gods in one". This notion was condemned by St. Anselm.
Those who believe that the Holy Spirit is not a person. Binitarianism – people through history who believed that God is only two co-equal and co-eternal persons, the Father and the Word, not three. They taught that the Holy Spirit is not a distinct person, but is the power or divine influence of the Father and Son, emanating out to the universe, in creation, and to believers.
Dualism
Marcionism – Marcion (A.D. c. 110-160) believed that there were two deities, one of creation and judgment (in the Hebrew Bible) and one of redemption and mercy (in the New Testament).
Other concepts Docetism comes from the Greek: δοκέω (dokeo), meaning "to seem." This view holds that Jesus only seemed to be human and only appeared to die.

Modern Christian groupings[edit]
American Unitarian Conference started as a reply to Unitarian Universalism becoming 'too theologically liberal'. They refrain from social activism and believe religion and science can improve the human condition. They have a deist population.[citation needed]
Associated Bible Students believe that the Father is greater than the Son in all ways, and that the Trinity doctrine is unscriptural. They hold to beliefs similar to Jehovah's Witnesses.[16][17][18]


Christadelphians hold that Jesus Christ is the literal son of God, the Father, and that Jesus was an actual human[19] (and needed to be so in order to save humans from their sins[20]). The "holy spirit" terminology in the Bible is explained as referring to God's power,[21] or God's character/mind[22] (depending on the context).
Church of God General Conference (Abrahamic Faith).[23]
Cooneyites are a non-Trinitarian Christian sect who split off from the Two by Twos sect in 1928 following Edward Cooney's excommunication from the main group. Cooneyites deny the Living Witness Doctrine; they have congregations in Ireland, England, Australia, New Zealand and the USA.
The Iglesia ni Cristo (Tagalog for Church of Christ) view is that Jesus Christ is human but endowed by God with attributes not found in ordinary humans, though lacking attributes found in God. They further contend that it is God's will to worship Jesus.[24] For Iglesia ni Cristo Christ has some divine attributes but it is not inherent to him, given only by the one true God, the Father. Iglesia ni Cristo contends that in the beginning Christ is "Logos" i.e. in the mind of God (reason for creation, a plan of God)before God sets the foundation of the world. Christ's existence or coming in the future (as the greatest messenger of God for all time) is already in the mind of God, planned by God and spoken it even in the Garden of Eden (the "seed of a woman" in Genesis 3:15) and later in the time of the prophets through the numerous prophecies about his existence or his coming in the 1st century. His existence only started at the womb of Mary prior to that he is still the "Logos" or a "Word of God". Later as mentioned in Revelation (Rev. 19:13), when the Logos or prophecies were fulfilled he was even called the "Word of God".[citation needed]
Jehovah's Witnesses teach that only God the Father, Jehovah, is the one true almighty God, even over his Son. They consider Jesus to be "the First-begotten Son", God's only direct creation, and the very first creation by God. They give relative "worship" or "obeisance" (homage, as to a king) to Christ,[25] pray through him as God's only high priest, consider Jesus Christ to be Mediator and Messiah, but they believe that only the Father is without beginning, and that the Father is greater than the Son in all things; only Jehovah the Father therefore is worthy of highest worship or "sacred service". They believe that the Son had a beginning, and was brought forth at a certain point, as "the firstborn of all creation" and "the only-begotten". They identify Jesus as the Archangel Michael, mentioned in the Bible at Jude 9. They believe he left heaven to become Jesus Christ on earth, and that after his ascension to heaven he resumed his pre-human identity. This belief is partly based upon 1 Thessalonians 4:16, in which "the voice of the resurrected Lord Jesus Christ is described as being that of an archangel". They also cite passages from the books of Daniel and Revelation in which Jesus and Michael take similar action and exercise similar authority, concluding these scriptures indicate them to be the same person.[26] They do not believe that the Holy Spirit is a person, but consider it to be God's divine active force.[27]
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, often referred to as Mormonism, teaches that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are distinct beings that are not united in substance, a view sometimes called social trinitarianism. Members of this church believe the three individual deities are "one" in will or purpose, as Jesus was "one" with his disciples, and that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit constitute a single Godhead or a Divine Council, and are united in purpose, in manner, in testimony, in mission.[28] Because their official belief is that the Father, Son, and Spirit are each "Gods" in one Godhead, Mormonism is said to hold a form of tri-theism. Some view Mormonism as a form of Arianism.[29][30][31] Like Arianism, Mormons believe that God created Christ,[29][30][31][32] that he is subordinate to God the Father[30][33] and that Christ created the universe.[33][34] However, Mormon doctrine varies significantly from the teachings of Arius.[35] Mormons also do not subscribe to the ideas that Christ was unlike the Father in substance,[36] that the Father could not appear on earth,[37] nor that Christ was adopted by the Father,[32] as found in Arianism.[34][38] Mormons assert that the classification of deity in terms of a substance was a post-apostolic corruption, and that God differs from humans not in substance, but in intelligence. While Mormons regard God the Father as the Supreme Being and literal Father of the spirits of all humankind, they also teach that Christ and the Holy Spirit are equally divine in that they share in the Father's "comprehension of all things".[39]
The Members Church of God International believes in the divinity of Christ but rejects the doctrine of Trinity. They believe in what appears to be a Subordationist viewpoint in which Jesus Christ, is the Father's only Begotten Son (in Romanized Greek: monogenestheos, meaning "only-begotten god") and thus is subject to the Father.[citation needed]
Oneness Pentecostalism is a subset of Pentecostalism that believes God is only one person, and that he manifests himself in different ways, faces, or "modes": "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (or Holy Ghost) are different designations for the one God. God is the Father. God is the Holy Spirit. The Son is God manifest in flesh. The term Son always refers to the Incarnation, and never to deity apart from humanity."[40] Oneness Pentecostals believe that Jesus was "Son" only when he became flesh on earth, but was the Father prior to his being made human. They refer to the Father as the "Spirit" and the Son as the "Flesh". Oneness Pentecostals reject the Trinity doctrine, viewing it as pagan and unscriptural, and hold to the Jesus' Name doctrine with respect to baptisms. Oneness Pentecostals are often referred to as "Modalists" or "Sabellians" or "Jesus Only".
Some forms of Quakerism hold universalist views.[clarification needed]
Denominations within the Sabbatarian tradition (Armstrongism) believe that Christ the Son and God the Father are co-eternal, but do not teach that the Holy Spirit is a being or person. Mainstream Christians characterise this teaching as the heresy of Binitarianism, the teaching that God is a "Duality", or "two-in-one", rather than three. Armstrong theology holds that God is a "Family", that expands eventually, that "God reproduces Himself", but that originally there was a co-eternal "Duality", God and the Word, rather than a "Trinity".
Swedenborgianism holds that the Trinity exists in one person, the Lord God Jesus Christ. The Father, the being or soul of God, was born into the world and put on a body from Mary. Throughout his life, Jesus put away all human desires and tendencies until he was completely divine. After his resurrection, he influences the world through the Holy Spirit, which is his activity. Thus Jesus Christ is the one God; the Father as to his soul, the Son as to his body, and the Holy Spirit as to his activity in the world.
Unitarian Christians and Unitarian Universalist Christians are Holy Spirit Unitarians[clarification needed].
Nontrinitarian doctrine often generates controversy among mainstream Christians, as most trinitarians consider it heresy not to believe in the doctrine of the Trinity. At times, segments of Nicene Christianity reacted with ultimate severity toward nontrinitarian views. Following the Reformation, among some Protestant groups such as the Unitarians and Christadelphians, the same views have been accommodated.
Unitarian Universalism[edit]
Members of Unitarian Universalism may or may not identify as Christian. Traditionally, unitarianism was a form of Christianity that rejects the doctrine of the Trinity. Unitarianism was rejected by orthodox Christianity at the First Council of Nicaea, an ecumenical council held in 325, but resurfaced subsequently in Church history, especially during the theological turmoils of the Protestant Reformation. In 1961, the American Unitarian Association (AUA) was consolidated with the Universalist Church of America (UCA), forming the Unitarian Universalist Association.
Judaism[edit]
In all branches of Judaism, the God of the Hebrew Bible is considered one singular entity, with no divisions, or multi-persons within, and they reject the idea of a co-equal multi-personal Godhead or "Trinity", as actually against the Shema. They do not consider the Hebrew word for "one" (that is "echad") as meaning anything other than a simple numerical one.[41][42] Citing examples for "echad" in the Hebrew Scriptures as being either just one king, one house, one garden, one army, or one man, etc. Also, they reject the notion that somehow there are "traces of the Trinity" in the Hebrew word "elohim". Which in given contexts simply means "God" in superlative majesty, not necessarily "multipersonal godhead". The Jewish polemics against the Trinity doctrine date almost from its very conception. Even in the Talmud, R. Simlai (3rd century) declared, in refutation of the "heretics," "The three words 'El,' 'Elohim,' and 'Yhwh' (Josh. xxii. 22) connote one and the same person, as one might say, 'King, Emperor, Augustus'" (Yer. Ber. ix. 12d).[43]
Islam[edit]
In Islam's holy book, the Quran, Allah (God) denounces the concept of Trinity (Qur'an 4:171, 5:72-73, 112) as an over-reverence by Christians of God's Word, the prophet and messiah Jesus Christ son of the virgin Mary, while maintaining Jesus as one of the most important and respected prophets and Messengers of God, (2:136) primarily sent to prevent the Jews from changing the Torah, (61:6) and to refresh and reaffirm his original message as revealed to Moses and earlier New Testament prophets. The creation of Jesus is framed similar to the creation of Adam out of dust, but with Jesus' birth meaning his creation excludes male human intervention rather than creation completely without human participation (3:59). Belief in all of the aforementioned about Jesus as a prophet (5:78), as well as belief in the original gospel and Torah and belief in Jesus' virgin birth (3:45) are core criterion of being a Muslim and Quranic criterion for salvation in the hereafter along with belief in the Prophet Muhammad and all the prior prophets. In short, God is seen as being both perfect and indivisible. He can therefore have no peer or equal. Jesus, being God's creation, can never be considered to be equal with God or a part of God. To do so is considered by Islam to be blasphemy.
History[edit]
Part of a series on the
History of
 Christian theology
Malmesbury Abbey's 1407 Bible from Belgium
Background
Theology · Early Christianity · Timeline · History of Christianity · Ecclesiastical polity · Trinitarianism · Nontrinitarianism · Restorationism · Christology · Mariology · Biblical canon · Deuterocanonical books
Ecumenical Creeds
Apostles' · Nicene
Chalcedonian · Athanasian
Patristics and Councils
Church Fathers · Augustine
Nicaea · Ephesus · Chalcedon
Post-Nicene development
Heresy · Monophysitism · Monothelitism · Iconoclasm · Gregory I · Alcuin · Photios · East–West Schism · Scholasticism · Aquinas · Anselm · Palamas
Reformation
Protestant Reformation · Luther · Melanchthon · Indulgences · Justification · Five solae · 95 Theses · Book of Concord · Predestination · Calvinism · Arminianism · English Reformation · Counter-Reformation · Trent
Since the Reformation
Pietism · Revivalism · John Wesley · Great Awakenings · Holiness movement · Restoration Movement · Existentialism · Liberalism · Modernism (Roman Catholicism) · Postmodernism · Vatican II · Radical Orthodoxy · Jean-Luc Marion · Hermeneutics · Liberation theology · Christian anarchism
P christianity.svg Christianity portal
v ·
 t ·
 e
   
Early Christianity[edit]
Most nontrinitarians take the position that the doctrine of the earliest form of Christianity (see Apostolic Age) was nontrinitarian, but (depending on which church) believe rather that early Christianity was either strictly Unitarian or Binitarian or Modalist, as in the case of the Montanists, Marcionites, and Christian Gnostics. Early Christianity eventually changed after the edicts of Emperor Constantine I and his sentence pronounced on Arius, which eventually resulted in the adoption of Nicene Christianity as the official religion of the Roman Empire during the reign of Theodosius I.[citation needed]



 The First Council of Nicaea depicted with Arius beneath the feet of Emperor Constantine and the bishops
Because they believe it was during a dramatic shift in Christianity's status that the doctrine of the Trinity attained its definitive development, nontrinitarians typically consider the doctrine questionable. Nontrinitarians see the Nicene Creed and the results of the Council of Chalcedon as essentially political documents, resulting from the subordination of true doctrine to state interests by leaders of the Catholic Church, so that the church became, in their view, an extension of the Roman Empire.[citation needed]
Although nontrinitarian beliefs continued to multiply, and among some peoples were dominant for hundreds of years after their inception—e.g. Lombards, Ostrogoths, Visigoths, Vandals—Trinitarians eventually gained prominence in the Roman Empire. Nontrinitarians typically argue that the early nontrinitarian beliefs of Christianity, e.g. Arianism, were systematically suppressed (often to the point of death),[44] and that many early Christian scriptural sources and so called heretical texts have been as thoroughly lost as if they had been systematically burnt.[citation needed] After the First Council of Nicaea, Roman Emperor Constantine I issued an edict against Arius's writings which included systematic book burning.[45] In spite of issuing this decree, Constantine soon ordered the readmission of Arius to the church, removed those bishops who, like Athanasius, upheld the teaching of Nicaea,[46] allowed Arianism to grow within the Empire and thus to spread to Germanic tribes on the frontier,[47] and was himself baptized into the Arian version of Christianity.[48] His successors as Christian emperors promoted Arianism, until Theodosius I came to the throne in 379 and supported Nicene Christianity.
The Easter letter that Athanasius issued in 367, when the Eastern Empire was ruled by the Arian Emperor Valens, defined what books belong to the Old Testament and the New Testament, together with seven other books not included in the biblical canon but appointed "for instruction in the word of godliness"; at the same time it excluded what Athanasius called apocryphal writings, falsely presented as ancient.[49] Elaine Pagels writes: "In AD 367, Athanasius, the zealous bishop of Alexandria... issued an Easter letter in which he demanded that Egyptian monks destroy all such unacceptable writings, except for those he specifically listed as 'acceptable' even 'canonical' — a list that constitutes the present 'New Testament'".[50][51] Some nontrinitarians say that the condemned writings were Arian books.[citation needed]
Some scholars investigating the historical Jesus assert that Jesus taught neither his own equality with God nor the Trinity (see, for example, the Jesus Seminar).
Nontrinitarians also dispute the veracity of the Nicene Creed based on its adoption nearly 300 years after the life of Jesus as a result of conflict within pre-Nicene early Christianity. Nontrinitarians (both Modalists and Unitarians) also generally say that Athanasius and others at Nicaea adopted Greek Platonic philosophy and concepts, and incorporated them in their views of God and Christ.[52] Nontrinitarians also cite scriptures such as Matthew 15:9 and Ephesians 4:14 that warn the reader to beware the doctrines of men.[citation needed]
The author H. G. Wells, later famous for his contribution to science-fiction, wrote in The Outline of History: "We shall see presently how later on all Christendom was torn by disputes about the Trinity. There is no evidence that the apostles of Jesus ever heard of the Trinity, at any rate from him."[53]
The question of why such a central doctrine to the Christian faith would never have been explicitly stated in scripture or taught in detail by Jesus himself was sufficiently important to 16th century historical figures such as Michael Servetus as to lead them to argue the question. The Geneva City Council, in accord with the judgment of the cantons of Zürich, Bern, Basel, and Schaffhausen, condemned Servetus to be burned at the stake for this and his opposition to infant baptism.
The Encyclopædia of Religion and Ethics describes the five stages that led to the formulation of the doctrine of the Trinity.[54]
1.The acceptance of the pre-human existence of Jesus as the (middle-platonic) Logos, namely, as the medium between the transcendent sovereign God and the created cosmos. The doctrine of Logos was accepted by the Apologists and by other Fathers of the 2nd and 3rd centuries, such as Justin the Martyr, Hippolytus, Tertullian, Ireneus, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Lactantius, and the 4th century Arius.
2.The doctrine of the timeless generation of the Son from the Father as it was articulated by Origen in his effort to support the ontological immutability of God, that he is ever-being a father and a creator. The doctrine of the timeless generation was adopted by Athanasius of Alexandria.
3.The acceptance of the idea that the son of God is homoousios to his father, that is, of the same transcendent nature. This position was declared in the Nicene Creed, which specifically states the son of God is as immutable as his father.
4.The acceptance that the Holy Spirit also has ontological equality as a third person in a divine Trinity and the final Trinitarian terminology by the teachings of the Cappadocian Fathers.
5.The addition of the Filioque to the Nicene Creed, as accepted by the Roman Catholic Church.
Following the Reformation[edit]
Main article: History of Unitarianism
Following the Protestant Reformation, and the German Peasants' War of 1524–1525, by 1530 large areas of Northern Europe were Protestant, and forms of nontrinitarianism began to surface among some "Radical Reformation" groups, particularly Anabaptists. The first recorded English antitrinitarian was John Assheton (1548). The Italian humanist "Council of Venice" (1550) and the trial of Michael Servetus (1553) marked the clear emergence of markedly anti-Trinitarian Protestants. Though the only organised nontrinitarian churches were the Polish Brethren who split from the Calvinists (1565, expelled from Poland 1658), and the Unitarian Church of Transylvania (1568-today). Nonconformists, Dissenters and Latitudinarians in Britain were often Arians or Unitarians, and the Doctrine of the Trinity Act 1813 allowed nontrinitarian worship in Britain. In America, Arian and Unitarian views were also found among some Millennialist and Adventist groups, though the Unitarian Church itself began to decline in numbers and influence after the 1870s.[55][56]
Points of dissent[edit]
Non-trinitarian Christians of Arian persuasion contend that the weight of Scriptural evidence leans more towards Subordinationism, that of the Son's total submission to the Father, and of Paternal supremacy over the Son in every aspect. They acknowledge and confess the Son's glorious and high rank, at God's right hand, but teach that the Father is still greater than the Son, in all things.
While acknowledging that the Father, Son, and Spirit are essential in creation and salvation, they argue that that in itself does not necessarily prove that they three are each co-equal or co-eternal. They also contend that the only number clearly ascribed to God in the Bible (both Testaments) is the number "one", and that the Trinity, literally meaning a set of three, ascribes a co-equal threeness to God that is not explicitly Scriptural.
Scriptural support[edit]
Critics argue that the Trinity, for a teaching described as fundamental, lacks direct scriptural support. Upholders of the doctrine declare that the doctrine is not stated directly in the New Testament, but is instead an interpretation of elements contained in it that are seen as implying the doctrine that was formulated only in the 4th century. Thus William Barclay says: "It is important and helpful to remember that the word Trinity is not itself a New Testament word. It is even true in at least one sense to say that the doctrine of the Trinity is not directly New Testament doctrine. It is rather a deduction from and an interpretation of the thought and the language of the New Testament."[57] And the New Catholic Encyclopedia says: "The doctrine of the Holy Trinity is not taught [explicitly] in the [Old Testament]", "The formulation 'one God in three Persons' was not solidly established [by a council]...prior to the end of the 4th century".[58]
Similarly, Encyclopedia Encarta states: "The doctrine is not taught explicitly in the New Testament, where the word God almost invariably refers to the Father. [...] 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".[59] Encyclopædia Britannica says: "Neither the word Trinity nor the explicit doctrine appears in the New Testament, nor did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict the Shema in the Old Testament: “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord” (Deuteronomy 6:4). [...] The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies. [...] by the end of the 4th century, under the leadership of Basil of Caesarea, Gregory of Nyssa, and Gregory of Nazianzus (the Cappadocian Fathers), the doctrine of the Trinity took substantially the form it has maintained ever since."[60] The Anchor Bible Dictionary states: "One does not find in the NT the trinitarian paradox of the coexistence of the Father, Son, and Spirit within a divine unity."[61]
Speaking of legitimate theological development, Joseph F. Kelly writes: "The Bible may not use the word 'Trinity', but it refers to God the Father frequently; the Gospel of John emphasized the divinity of the Son; several New Testament books treat the Holy Spirit as divine. The ancient theologians did not violate biblical teaching but sought to develop its implications. ... [Arius's] potent arguments forced other Christians to refine their thinking about the Trinity. at two ecumenical councils, Nicea I in 325 and Constantinople I in 381, the church at large defined the Trinity in the way now so familiar to us from the Nicene Creed. This exemplifies development of doctrine at its best. The Bible may not use the word 'Trinity', but trinitarian theology does not go against the Bible. On the contrary, Catholics believe that trinitarianism has carefully developed a biblical teaching for later generations."[2]
Questions over the alleged co-equal deity of Jesus[edit]


 This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (November 2011)


 This article improperly uses one or more religious texts as primary sources without referring to secondary sources that critically analyze them. Please help improve this article by adding references to reliable secondary sources, with multiple points of view. (March 2012)
Nontrinitarians[who?] say that there is no clear Scriptural backing for the doctrine of the co-equal divinity of Jesus. They point to verses that purport to demonstrate that Jesus himself explicitly stated that "the Father is greater" than he (John 14:28);[17] that he disavowed omniscience as the Son (John 8:28; in Mark 13:32), that he "learned obedience" (Hebrews 5:8); questioned being called even "good" in deference to God in the parable of the rich young ruler (Matthew 19:16-17); they say that only the Father in Scripture is referred to as the "one God", and "out of (ex) whom all things are" (1 Corinthians 8:6); that Christ the Son is called the 'firstborn of all creation' (Colossians 1:15) and 'the beginning of God's creation' (Revelation 3:14); that Jesus referred to ascending to "my Father, and to your Father; and to my God, and to your God" (John 20:17) and that he referred to his Father as "the only true God." (John 17:3)
Additionally, Jesus quoted Deuteronomy 6:4 when saying in Mark 12:29 "'The most important [commandment] is this: Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one.'" It has been stated[by whom?] that in the original Greek in Mark 12, there are no "plural modifiers" in that Greek word there for "one" (eis), but that in Mark 12 it is simply a masculine singular "one". And that because of that, there is no valid reason to believe that the Hebrew word for "one" in Deuteronomy 6 ("echad") was necessarily a "plural one", rather than just simply numerical "one".
They also argue to show that "Elohim" (sometimes translated "gods") does not hint at any form of plurality, but rather to majesty pointing to the Hebrew dialect and grammar rules that render this title in nearly all circumstances with a singular verb.[43]
With regard to the New Testament, Raymond E. Brown, a Catholic and Trinitarian, wrote that Mark 10:18, Matthew 27:46, John 20:17, Ephesians 1:17, 2 Corinthians 1:3, 1 Peter 1:3, John 17:3, 1 Corinthians 8:6, Ephesians 4:4-6, 1 Corinthians 12:4-6, 2 Corinthians 13:14, 1 Timothy 2:5, John 14:28, Mark 13:32, Philippians 2:5-10, and 1 Corinthians 15:24-28 are "texts that seem to imply that the title God was not used for Jesus" and are "negative evidence which is often somewhat neglected in Catholic treatments of the subject"; that Gal 2:20, Acts 20:28, John 1:18, Colossians 2:2, 2 Thessalonians 1:12, 1John 5:20, Romans 9:5, and 2 Peter 1:1 are "texts where, by reason of textual variants or syntax, the use of 'God' for Jesus is dubious"; and that Hebrews 1:8-9, John 1:1, and John 20:28 are "texts where clearly Jesus is called God".[62]
Trinitarians (who hold that Jesus Christ is distinct from God the Father), and nontrinitarians who hold Jesus Christ as Almighty God (such as the Modalists), say that these statements are based on Jesus' existence as the Son of God in human flesh; that he is therefore both God and man, who became "lower than the angels, for our sake," (Hebrews 2:6-8) and that he was tempted as humans are tempted, but did not sin (Hebrews 4:14-16).
Some nontrinitarians counter the belief that the Son was limited only during his earthly life by citing "the head of Christ is God" (1 Corinthians 11:3), placing Jesus in an inferior position to the Father even after his resurrection and exaltation. They also cite Acts 5:31 and Philippians 2:9, indicating that Jesus became glorified and exalted after ascension to heaven, and to Hebrews 9:24, Acts 7:55, and 1 Corinthians 15:24, 28, regarding Jesus as a distinct personality in heaven, still with a lesser position than the Father, all after Christ's ascension.
Views on allegedly Trinitarian passages in scripture[edit]
Non-trinitarian Christians such as Jehovah's Witnesses argue that a person who is really seeking to know the truth about God is not going to search the Bible hoping to find a text that he can construe as fitting what he already believes. They say it is noteworthy at the outset that the texts used as “proof” of the Trinity do not explicitly teach co-equality or co-eternity in any clear formulation, and also that most of those Verses in question actually mention only two persons, not three; so nontrinitarians say that even if the trinitarian explanation of the texts were correct, these would not prove that the Bible teaches the Trinity.[63]
John 1:1[edit]
Main article: John 1:1
John 1:1 - The contention with this verse is that there is a distinction between God and the Logos (or "the Word"). Trinitarians contend that the third part of the verse (John 1:1c) translates as "and the Word was God", pointing to a distinction as subjects between God and the Logos but an equivalence in nature.[64][65][66][67] Some non-trinitarians (Jehovah's Witnesses, specifically) contend that the Koine Greek ("kai theos ên ho logos") should instead be translated as "and the Word was a god", or as what they see as the more literal word-for-word translation from the Greek as "and a God was the Word", basing this on the contention that the section is an example of an anarthrous, that is, "theos" lacks the definite article, meaning its use was indefinite - "a god", which could denote either Almighty God or a divine being in general. Nontrinitarians also contend that had the author of John's gospel wished to say "and the Word was God" that he could have easily written "kai ho theos ên ho logos", but he did not. In this way, nontrinitarians contend that the Logos would be considered to be the pre-existent Jesus, who is actually distinct from God. The argument being that the distinction between the Logos and the Father was not just in terms of "person", but also in terms of "theos".[68][self-published source] [69][70] Meaning that not only were they distinct persons, but also distinct "Gods", given the fact that the second occurrence of "theos" was an indefinite noun; and that only the Father was treated as the absolute "Theos" in John 1:1. The argument being that only one person is actually referred to as the Absolute God, "ho Theos", in John 1:1, that person being only the Father, not the Logos.[68][self-published source][70] Alternatively, others argue that the Greek should be translated as "and the Logos was divine" (with theos being an adjective), and the Logos being interpreted as God's "plan" or "reasoning" for salvation. Thus, according to Modalists, when "the Logos became flesh" in John 1:14, it is not interpreted to be a pre-existent Jesus being incarnated, but rather the "plan" or "eternal mind" of God being manifested in the birth of the man Jesus. Others still consider a suitable translation of the verse to be "What God was, the logos/word was." [71]
John 10:30[edit]
John 10:30 - Nontrinitarians such as Arians believe that when Jesus said, "I and the Father are one," he did not mean that they were actually "one substance", or "one God", or co-equal and co-eternal, but rather that, according to context, which was that of shepherding the sheep, he and the Father were "one" in pastoral work. The thought being a "unity of purpose" in saving the sheep. Arians also cite John 17:21 where Jesus prayed regarding his disciples: “That they may all be one, as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they may be in us,” adding “that they may be one even as we are one.” They point out that Jesus used the same Greek word (hen) for "one" in all these instances and assert that since Jesus did not expect for his followers to literally become "one" entity, or "one in substance", with each other, or with God, then it is said that Jesus also did not expect his hearers to think that he and God the Father were "one" entity either. Rather Arian nontrinitarians insist that the oneness meant in that context was a oneness in divine work, mission, love and purpose.
John 20:28-29[edit]
John 20:28-29 - "And Thomas answered and said to Him, "My Lord and my God!" Jesus said to him, "Thomas, because you have seen Me, you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed"". Since Thomas called Jesus God, Jesus's statement appears to endorse Thomas's assertion. Nontrinitarians typically respond that it is plausible that Thomas is addressing the Lord Jesus and then the Father. Another possible answer is that Jesus himself said, "Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?" (John 10:34) referring to Psalm 82:6-8. The word "gods" in verse 6 and "God" in verse 8 is the same Hebrew word "'elohim",[72] which means, "gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God; occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative",[73] and can also refer to powers and potentates, in general, or as "God, god, gods, rulers, judges or angels",[72] and as "divine ones, goddess, godlike one".[74]


 This paragraph possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original research should be removed. (December 2013)
The notion being that since Christ represented God the Father perfectly, and was given power and authority by the Father, therefore Christ was "God", over the circumstances, similar to how Moses was called "God" in Exodus 7:1, because Moses was given divine power, and was "Elohim" to the people, over the situation. And that therefore Jesus was a "God" to Thomas, or a powerful being in that situation, as a perfect reflection of the Father's divine power. But still not necessarily co-equal with the Father in everything, just as Moses wasn't. The first explanation is perhaps the most plausible, in that the Greek forms used in the text do not denote two descriptions of one personage, but two personages described separately. A nontrinitarian would link this witnessing of Thomas to Jesus's saying that, to paraphrase, "He who sees me, sees the Father", and would say that this text affirms the doctrine that Jesus is Lord but only God the Father is absolute deity, and hence the Lord of Jesus. Because "no one can come to the Father except through me (Jesus)", it is necessary however to call Jesus "Lord" (a requirement of belief in the New Testament), which is exactly what Thomas did when he believed.
2 Corinthians 13:14[edit]
2 Corinthians 13:14 - "The Grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the sharing in the Holy Spirit be with all of you." It's been argued by Trinitarians that since, in this verse, all three "Father, Son, and Spirit" are mentioned together in Paul's prayer for Grace on all believers, and are obviously essential for salvation, that they must make up one triune Godhead, and must therefore be co-equal or co-eternal. Nontrinitarians such as Arians reply that they do not disagree that all three are necessary for salvation and grace, but nowhere in the passage is it explicitly said that all three are co-equal or co-eternal, or even have to be. They argue that it is simply a circular assumption that just because they are mentioned together and are important, that they must ipso facto make up one co-equal Godhead.[75]
They point to other verses in the Bible that mention God, Christ, and the "Holy Angels" together in important solemn situations and oaths, and argue that no one believes that therefore the "holy angels" must be part of a co-equal Godhead, simply because they're mentioned along with Christ or God. And nontrinitarians remark that, though some passages mention Father, Son, and Spirit together, nowhere do those verses say that the Father is still not supreme or above all.[citation needed]
Philippians 2:5-6[edit]
Philippians 2:5-6 - "Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, [or "which was also in Christ Jesus",] who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped" (ESV). The word here translated in the English Standard Version as "a thing to be grasped" is ἁρπαγμόν. Other translations of the word are indicated in the Holman Christian Standard Bible: "Make your own attitude that of Christ Jesus, who, existing in the form of God, did not consider equality with God as something to be used for His own advantage" [or "to be grasped", or "to be held on to"].[76] The King James Version has: "Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God."[77] An Internet commentator criticizes the King James Version for conveying a thought basically opposite of what was actually said, and says the text means: "Let this mind be in you, which also was in Christ Jesus, who, being in the form of God, did not consider equality with God as something to be grasped after".[78]
Hebrews 9:14[edit]
Hebrews 9:14 - "How much more will the Blood of Christ, who through an eternal Spirit, offered himself without blemish to God, cleanse our consciences from dead works, that we may render sacred service to the living God?" Trinitarians and Athanasians have used this verse as a proof-text that since all three are mentioned together, and all are essential in the plan of salvation and atonement, that because of that, are each eternal God.[citation needed] Most nontrinitarians admit that the Holy Spirit had no beginning, but believe it is not an actual person like the Father is. Nontrinitarians also agree that all three are essential, but contend that it's obvious that God the Father is ultimate, and is the one who is ultimately reached, and therefore, although all are divine and essential, the "living God" the Father is still greater than the other two entities. And that a "co-equal trinity" is still not explicitly taught in the passage, but only inferred or assumed.[79]
Terminology[edit]


 This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (July 2010)
Nontrinitarians state that the doctrine of the Trinity relies on non-Biblical terminology, that the term "Trinity" is not found in Scripture and that the number three is never clearly associated with God necessarily, other than within the Comma Johanneum which is of spurious or disputed authenticity. They argue that the only number clearly unambiguously ascribed to God in the Bible is one, and that the Trinity, literally meaning three-in-one, ascribes a co-equal threeness to God that is not explicitly biblical.
Nontrinitarians cite other examples of terms not found in the Bible; multiple "persons" in relation to God, the terms "God the Son", "God-Man", "God the Holy Spirit", "eternal Son", and "eternally begotten". While the Trinitarianism term hypostasis is found in the Bible, it is used only once in reference to God [Heb 1:3] where it states that Jesus is the express image of God's person. The Bible does not explicitly use the term in relation to the Holy Spirit nor explicitly mentions the Son having a distinct hypostasis from the Father.
All agree that the First Council of Nicaea included in its Creed the major term homoousios (of the same essence), which was used also by the Council of Chalcedon to speak of a double consubstantiality of Christ, "consubstantial with the Father as touching his Godhead, and consubstantial with us as touching his manhood".[80] Nontrinitarians accept what Pier Franco Beatrice wrote: "The main thesis of this paper is that homoousios came straight from Constantine's Hermetic background. [...] The Plato recalled by Constantine is just a name used to cover precisely the Egyptian and Hermetic theology of the "consubstantiality" of the Logos-Son with the Nous-Father, having recourse to a traditional apologetic argument. [...] Constantine's Hermetic interpretation of Plato's theology and consequently the emperor's decision to insert homoousios in the Creed of Nicaea."[81]
Trinitarians see the absence of the actual word "Trinity" and other Trinity-related terms in the Bible as no more significant than the absence in the Bible of the words "monotheism", "omnipotence", "oneness", "Pentecostal", "apostolic", "incarnation" and even "Bible" itself.[82][83] and maintain that, "while the word Trinity is not in the Bible, the substance of the doctrine is definitely biblical".[2][57][84]
Holy Spirit[edit]
See also: Holy Spirit (Christian denominational variations)
Nontrinitarian views about the Holy Spirit differ in certain ways from mainstream Christian doctrine and generally fall into several distinct categories. Most scriptures traditionally in support of the Trinity refer to the Father and the Son, but not to the Holy Spirit.
Unitarian and Arian[edit]
Groups with Unitarian theology such as Polish Socinians, the 18th-19th Century Unitarian Church, Christadelphians conceive of the Holy Spirit not as a person but an aspect of God's power.[85] Christadelphians believe that the phrase Holy Spirit refers to God's power or mind/character, depending on the context.[22]
Though Arius himself believed that the Holy Spirit is a person or high-ranking Angel, that had a beginning, modern Arian or Semi-Arian Christian groups such as Dawn Bible Students and Jehovah's Witnesses believe, the same as Unitarian groups, that the Holy Spirit is not an actual person but is God's "power in action", like God's divine "breath" or "energy", which had no beginning, that he uses to accomplish his will and purpose in creation, redemption, sanctification, and divine guidance, and they do not typically capitalize the term.[86] They define the Holy Spirit as "God's active force", and they believe that it proceeds only from the Father.[86] A Jehovah's Witness brochure quotes Alvan Lamson: "...the Father, Son, and... Holy Spirit [are] not as co-equal, not as one numerical essence, not as Three in One... The very reverse is the fact."[87]
Binitarianism[edit]
Armstrongites, such as the Living Church of God, believe that the Logos and God the Father are co-equal and co-eternal, but they do not believe that the Holy Spirit is an actual person, like the Father and the Son. They believe the Holy Spirit is the Power, Mind, or Character of God, depending on the context. They teach, "The Holy Spirit is the very essence, the mind, life and power of God. It is not a Being. The Spirit is inherent in the Father and the Son, and emanates from Them throughout the entire universe". Mainstream Christians characterise this teaching as the heresy of Binitarianism, the teaching that God is a "Duality", or "two-in-one", rather than three.[88]
Modalist groups[edit]
Oneness Pentecostalism, as with other modalist groups, teach that the Holy Spirit is a mode of God, rather than a distinct or separate person in the Godhead. They instead teach that the Holy Spirit is another name for God the Father. According to Oneness theology, the Holy Spirit essentially is the Father, operating in a certain capacity or manifestation. The United Pentecostal Church teaches that there is no personal distinction between God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.[89][90][91]
These two titles "Father" and "Holy Spirit" (as well as others) do not reflect separate "persons" within the Godhead, but rather two different ways in which the one God reveals himself to his creatures. Thus, the Old Testament speaks of "The Lord God and his Spirit" in Isaiah 48:16, but this does not indicate two "persons" according to Oneness theology. Rather, "The Lord" indicates God in all of His glory and transcendence, while the words "His Spirit" refer to God's own Spirit that moved upon and spoke to the prophet. The Oneness view is that this does not imply two "persons" any more than the numerous scriptural references to a man and his spirit or soul (such as in Luke 12:19) imply two "persons" existing within one body.[92]
Latter Day Saint movement[edit]
See also: Holy Spirit in Mormonism and God in Mormonism
In the Latter Day Saint movement, a collection of independent church groups that trace their origins to a Christian primitivist movement founded by Joseph Smith in 1830, the Holy Ghost (usually synonymous with Holy Spirit.)[93] is considered the third distinct member of the Godhead (Father, Son and Holy Ghost),[94] and to have a body of "spirit,"[95] which makes him unlike the Father and the Son who are said to have bodies "as tangible as man's."[96] According to LDS doctrine, the Holy Spirit is believed to be a person,[96][97] with a body of spirit, able to pervade all worlds.[98]
Latter Day Saints believe that the Holy Spirit is part of the "Divine Council", but that the Father is greater than both the Son and the Holy Spirit.[98] According to official Latter-day Saint teaching, the Father, Son, and Spirit are three distinct "Gods" joined in purpose as "one Godhead". Because of this, some view Latter-day Saint theology as a form of "tri-theism".
However, a number of Latter Day Saint sects, most notably the Community of Christ (second largest Latter Day Saint denomination) and the Church of Christ (Temple Lot),[99] and those sects separating from the Community of Christ and Church of Christ, follow a traditional Protestant trinitarian theology.
Judaism[edit]
The "holy spirit" (also transliterated ruah ha-qodesh) is a term used in the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh) and Jewish writings to refer to the Spirit of Yehowah. (The expression in Hebrew is: יהוה .קָדְשְׁך) The Hebrew term ruakh kodeshka, without the definite article, also occurs. The Holy Spirit in Judaism generally refers to the divine aspect of prophecy and wisdom. It also refers to the divine force, quality, and influence of the Most High God, over the universe or over his creatures, in given contexts.[100] It is not considered a separate person of God, but rather God's divine wisdom, breath, or moving power.
Other groups[edit]
The Unity Church interprets the religious terms Father, Son, and Holy Spirit metaphysically, as three aspects of mind action: mind, idea, and expression. They believe this is the process through which all manifestation takes place.[101]
As a movement that developed out of Christianity, Rastafari has its own unique interpretation of both the Holy Trinity and the Holy Spirit. Although there are several slight variations, they generally state that it is Haile Selassie who embodies both God the Father and God the Son, while the Holy (or rather, "Hola") Spirit is to be found within Rasta believers (see 'I and I'), and within every human being. Rastas also say that the true church is the human body, and that it is this church (or "structure") that contains the Holy Spirit.
Inter-religious dialogue[edit]
The Trinity doctrine is integral in inter-religious disagreements with the other two main Abrahamic religions, Judaism and Islam; the former rejects Jesus' divine mission entirely, and the latter accepts Jesus as a human prophet and the Messiah but not as the son of God. The concept of a co-equal trinity is totally rejected, with Quranic verses calling the doctrine of the Trinity blasphemous.[102] Many[who?] within Judaism and Islam[citation needed] also accuse Christian Trinitarians of practicing polytheism—believing in three gods rather than just one.
Purported pagan origins[edit]


 This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (November 2010)



 Horus, Osiris, and Isis


 The Trimurti: Brahmā, Vishnu, and Shiva


 Altar depicting a tricephalic god identified as Lugus.
Those who argue for a pagan basis note that as far back as Babylonia, the worship of pagan gods grouped in threes, or triads, was common, and that this influence was also prevalent among the Celts, as well as in India, Egypt, Greece, and Rome.[citation needed] The ancient Egyptians arranged their gods and goddesses in groups of three, or trinities: there was the trinity of Osiris, Isis, and Horus, the trinity of Amen, Mut, and Khonsu, and the trinity of Khnum, Satis, and Anukis.
In ancient India, the concept of the trio—Brahma the creator, Shiva the destroyer, and Vishnu the preserver dates back to millennia before Christ.[103][104] This triad of 3 gods is regarded as Trimurti, meaning 'tri' = three and 'murti' = figure, manifestation. A number of triads can be found in Hindu scriptures such as Vedas, Upanishads, among others.[105]
Some nontrinitarians[who?] also say that a link between the doctrine of the Trinity and the Egyptian Christian theologians of Alexandria suggests that Alexandrian theology, with its strong emphasis on the deity of Jesus, served to infuse Egypt's pagan religious heritage into Christianity. They charge the Church with adopting these Egyptian tenets after adapting them to Christian thinking by means of Greek philosophy.[106]
They say that there was much pagan Greek and Platonic influence in the development of the idea of a co-equal triune Godhead, many basic concepts from Aristotelian philosophy being mixed and incorporated into the Biblical God. As one piece of evidence, they say that Aristotle himself wrote: "All things are three, and thrice is all: and let us use this number in the worship of the gods; for, as Pythagoreans say, everything and all things are bound by threes, for the end, the middle, and the beginning have this number in everything, and these compose the number of the Trinity."[107][108]
The words thus attributed to Aristotle differ in a number of ways from what has been published as the philosopher's original text in Greek,[109][110][111] which for instance has nothing corresponding to "let us use this number in the worship of the gods" before the mention of the Pythagoreans. They differ also from translations of the works of Aristotle by scholars such as Stuart Leggatt, W. K. C. Guthrie, J. L. Stocks, Thomas Taylor and Jules Barthélemy-Saint-Hilaire. The independent but concordant translations by Guthrie and Stocks of what Aristotle, in his On the Heavens, wrote about what he considered to be the only three dimensions are considered "good English translations",[112] and a comparison with them of the words above attributed to Aristotle shows how the latter diverges.
The Guthrie translation is: "Magnitude divisible in one direction is a line, in two directions is a surface, and in three directions is a body. There is no magnitude not included in these; for three are all, and 'in three directions' is the same as 'in every direction'. It is just as the Pythagoreans say, the whole world and all things in it are summed up in the number three; for end, middle, and beginning give the number of the whole, and their number is the triad. Hence it is that we have taken this number from nature, as if it were her laws, and we make use of it even for the worship of the gods."[113]
The Stocks translation is: "A magnitude if divisible one way is a line, if two ways a surface, and if three a body. Beyond these there is no other magnitude, because the three dimensions are all that there are, and that which is divisible in three directions is divisible in all. For, as the Pythagoreans say, the world and all that is in it is determined by the number three, since beginning and middle and end give the number of an 'all', and the number they give is the triad. And so, having taken these three from nature as (so to speak) laws of it, we make further use of the number three in the worship of the gods."[114]
Some anti-Trinitarians note also that the Greek philosopher Plato believed in a special "threeness" in life and in the universe. In Plato's work Phaedo, he introduces the word "triad" (in Greek τριάς),[115] which they translate as "trinity". Plato believed and taught that the Ultimate Reality was a "trinity of divine forms", of the One, Nous, Psyche.[citation needed] This was adopted by 3rd and 4th century professed Christians as roughly corresponding to "Father, Word, and Spirit (Soul)".[116] Non-trinitarian Christians contend that such notions and adoptions make the Trinity doctrine more suspect, as not being Biblical, but extra-Biblical in concept.
As evidence of this, they say there is a widely acknowledged synthesis of Christianity with Platonic philosophy evident in Trinitarian formulas appearing by the end of the 3rd century. Hence, beginning with the Constantinian period, they allege, these pagan ideas were forcibly imposed on the churches as Catholic doctrine rooted firmly in the soil of Hellenism. Most groups subscribing to the theory of a Great Apostasy generally concur in this thesis.
The early apologists, including Justin Martyr, Tertullian and Irenaeus, frequently discussed the parallels and contrasts between Christianity, Paganism and other syncretic religions, and answered charges of borrowing from paganism in their apologetical writings.
Hellenic influences[edit]
See also: Hellenization
Advocates of the "Hellenic influences" argument attempt to trace the influence of Greek philosophers, such as Plato or Aristotle, who, they say, taught an essential "threeness" of the Ultimate Reality, and also the concept of "eternal derivation", that is, "a birth without a becoming". They say that theologians of the 4th century A.D., such as Athanasius of Alexandria, then interpreted the Bible through a Middle Platonist and later Neoplatonist filter.
The argument is that many of these 3rd and 4th-century Christians mixed Greek pagan philosophy with the Scriptures, incorporating Platonism into their concept of the Biblical God and the Biblical Christ. These advocates point to what they see as similarities between Hellenistic philosophy and post-Apostolic Christianity, by examining the following factors:
Stuart G Hall (formerly Professor of Ecclesiastical History at King's College, London) describes the subsequent process of philosophical/theological amalgamation in Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church (1991), where he writes:

"The [Christian] apologists [such as Justin Martyr and Irenaeus] began to claim that Greek culture pointed to and was consummated in the Christian message, just as the Old Testament was. This process was done most thoroughly in the synthesis of Clement of Alexandria. It can be done in several ways. You can rake through Greek literature, and find (especially in the oldest seers and poets) references to ‘God’ which are more compatible with monotheism than with polytheism (so at length Athenagoras.) You can work out a common chronology between the legends of prehistoric (Homer) Greece and the biblical record (so Theophilus.) You can adapt a piece of pre-Christian Jewish apologetic, which claimed that Plato and other Greek philosophers got their best ideas indirectly from the teachings of Moses in the Bible, which was much earlier. This theory combines the advantage of making out the Greeks to be plagiarists (and therefore second-rate or criminal), while claiming that they support Christianity by their arguments at least some of the time. Especially this applied to the question of God."
The neo-Platonic trinities, such as that of the One, the Nous and the Soul, are not considered a trinity necessarily of consubstantial equals as in mainstream Christianity. However, the neo-Platonic trinity has the doctrine of emanation, or "eternal derivation", a timeless procedure of generation having as a source the One and claimed to be paralleled with the generation of the light from the Sun. This was adopted by Origen and later on by Athanasius, and applied to the generation of the Son from the Father, because they believed that this analogy could be used to support the notion that the Father, as immutable, always had been a Father, and that the generation of the Son is therefore eternal and timeless.[117]
The synthesis of Christianity with Platonic philosophy was further incorporated in the trinitarian formulas that appeared by the end of the 3rd century. "The Greek philosophical theology" was "developed during the Trinitarian controversies over the relationships among the persons of the Godhead."[118] Some assert that this incorporation was well known during the 3rd century, because the allegation of borrowing was raised by some disputants when the Nicene doctrine was being formalized and adopted by the bishops. For example, in the 4th century, Marcellus of Ancyra, who taught the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit were one person (hypostasis), said in his On the Holy Church, 9:
"Now with the heresy of the Ariomaniacs, which has corrupted the Church of God...These then teach three hypostases, just as Valentinus the heresiarch first invented in the book entitled by him 'On the Three Natures'. For he was the first to invent three hypostases and three persons of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and he is discovered to have filched this from Hermes and Plato."[119]

Christian groups[edit]


 This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (December 2011)
American Unitarian Conference
Arianism
Assemblies of Yahweh
Bible Students
Christadelphians
Church of Christ, Scientist (Christian Scientists)[120][121]
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church)
Church of the Blessed Hope (sometimes called "Church of God of the Abrahamic Faith")
Doukhobors
Friends of Man
Iglesia ni Cristo (Church of Christ)
Israelite Church of God in Jesus Christ
Jehovah's Witnesses
Members Church of God International
Molokan
Monarchianism
Muggletonianism
 New Church
Many members of the Non-subscribing Presbyterian Church of Ireland
Oneness Pentecostals
Polish Brethren
Some Quakers
Shakers
Socinianism
Swedenborgianism
The Way International
Two by Twos (sometimes called The Truth or Cooneyites)[122]
Unification Church
Unitarian Christians
Unitarian Universalism
United Church of God
Yahweh's Assembly in Messiah
Yahweh's Assembly in Yahshua

People[edit]


 This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (August 2011)
Sabellius, ~220 (Modalist: the eponymous heresiarch of Sabellianism, or "monarchic modalism")
Origen c. 230 (Ante-Nicene Father, subordinationist: considered the Son co-eternal with God, subject to the Father's will, but not inferior in essence)[123]
Paul of Samosata, 269
Arius, 336, bishop and presbyter of Alexandria, major theologian of doctrine in 4th century, Arianism. His teachings about the nature of the Godhead, which emphasized the Father's divinity over the Son,[124] and his opposition to co-equal or Athanasian Christology, made him a primary topic of the First Council of Nicea, convened by Roman Emperor Constantine in AD 325.
Eusebius of Nicomedia, 341, baptized Roman Emperor Constantine the Great
Constantius II, Byzantine Emperor, 361
Antipope Felix II, 365
Aëtius, 367
Ulfilas, Apostle to the Goths, 383
Priscillian, 385, considered first Christian to be executed for heresy
Muhammad, 632, see also Islamic view of Jesus, tawhid
Ludwig Haetzer, 1529
Michael Servetus, 1553, burned at the stake in Geneva under John Calvin
Sebastian Castellio, 1563
Ferenc Dávid, 1579
Justus Velsius, c. 1581
Fausto Paolo Sozzini, 1604
John Biddle, 1662
John Milton (poet), c. 1674[citation needed]
Thomas Aikenhead, 1697, last person to be hanged for blasphemy in Britain
John Locke, 1704[125]
Isaac Newton did not believe in Trinitarianism as documented in a letter to a friend, now preserved in The New College Library in Oxford, UK, Manuscript 361(4), Two Notable Corruptions of Scripture (part 1: ff. 1-41).[125] He listed "worshipping Christ as God" in a list of "Idolatria" in his theological notebook.[126] However, he never made a public declaration of his anti-trinitarian beliefs for fear of losing his position.[127]
 William Whiston, 1752, expelled from University of Cambridge in 1710 for Arianism; famous for translating Josephus
Jonathan Mayhew, 1766
Emanuel Swedenborg, 1772, eponymous founder of Swedenborgianism.
Benjamin Franklin, 1790, Deist[citation needed]
Joseph Priestley, 1804
Joseph Smith, 1805, monolatrist, founder of the Latter-day Saint movement (Mormonism)
Thomas Paine, 1809[citation needed]
Mary Baker Eddy, 1821, founder of Christian Science
Thomas Jefferson, 1826, Deist[citation needed]
James Madison, 1836, Deist[citation needed]
William Ellery Channing, 1842
Robert Hibbert, 1849
John Thomas (Christadelphian), 1871
Ralph Waldo Emerson, 1882
Robert Roberts (Christadelphian), 1898
Benjamin Wilson, 1900
James Martineau, 1900
Félix Manalo, 1914
Charles Taze Russell, 1916, founder of the Bible Student movement and Jehovah's Witnesses, author of Millennial Dawn
Eliseo Soriano, 1947
William Branham, 1965
Herbert W. Armstrong, 1986, founder of the Worldwide Church of God, a Sabbatarian Christian Church, and was an advocate of the doctrine of Binitarianism.

See also[edit]
Bibliotheca antitrinitariorum
Consubstantiality
Servetism
Subordinationism
Tawhid
Unitarianism
Urantia Foundation
John 1:1
Notes[edit]
1.Jump up ^ The Trinity. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
2.^ Jump up to: a b c An Introduction to the New Testament for Catholics. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
3.Jump up ^ The Story of Christian Theology. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
4.Jump up ^ A Short History of Christian Doctrine. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
5.Jump up ^ Constantinople and the West. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
6.Jump up ^ The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
7.Jump up ^ "Theodosius I". Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
8.Jump up ^ http://www.fourthcentury.com/index.php/urkunde-33
9.Jump up ^ "Albigensian Crusade". Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
10.Jump up ^ http://www.xtimeline.com/evt/view.aspx?id=938690
11.Jump up ^ von Harnack, Adolf (1894-03-01). "History of Dogma". Retrieved 2007-06-15. "[In the 2nd century,] Jesus was either regarded as the man whom God hath chosen, in whom the Deity or the Spirit of God dwelt, and who, after being tested, was adopted by God and invested with dominion, (Adoptionist Christology); or Jesus was regarded as a heavenly spiritual being (the highest after God) who took flesh, and again returned to heaven after the completion of his work on earth (pneumatic Christology)"
12.Jump up ^ Justo L. González, The Story of Christianity: The Early Church to the Present Day, Prince Press, 1984, Vol. 1, pp. 159-161• Jaroslav Pelikan, The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine, The University of Chicago Press, 1971, Vol. 1, pp. 181-199
13.Jump up ^ Encyclopædia Britannica 1942 edition p.634 "Christianity"
14.Jump up ^ "HISTORY OF ARIANISM". Retrieved 5 March 2015.
15.^ Jump up to: a b David K. Bernard, Oneness and Trinity A.D. 100-300 - The Doctrine of God and Ancient Christian Writings - Word Aflame Press, Hazelwood Montana, 1991, p. 156.
16.Jump up ^ Encyclopedia of Protestantism, page 474, J. Gordon Melton, 2005: "... for his many departures from traditional Christian and Protestant affirmations including the Trinity and the deity of Christ. ... 1 (1886; reprint , Rutherford, NJ: Dawn Bible Students Association, nd)"
17.^ Jump up to: a b Watch Tower, October 1881, Watch Tower Reprints page 290 As Retrieved 2009-09-23, page 4, ""He gave his only begotten Son." This phraseology brings us into conflict with an old Babylonian theory, viz.: Trinitarianism. If that doctrine is true, how could there be any Son to give? A begotten Son, too? Impossible. If these three are one, did God send himself? And how could Jesus say: "My Father is greater than I." John 14:28. [emphasis retained from original]"
18.Jump up ^ Zion's Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Presence, July 1882, Reprints 370, page 3.
19.Jump up ^ Flint, James; Deb Flint. One God or a Trinity?. Hyderabad: Printland Publishers. ISBN 81-87409-61-4.
20.Jump up ^ Pearce, Fred. Jesus: God the Son or Son of God? Does the Bible Teach the Trinity?. Birmingham, UK: The Christadelphian Magazine and Publishing Association Ltd (UK). p. 8.
21.Jump up ^ Tennant, Harry. The Holy Spirit: Bible Understanding of God's Power. Birmingham, UK: The Christadelphian Magazine and Publishing Association Ltd (UK).
22.^ Jump up to: a b Broughton, James H.; Peter J Southgate. The Trinity: True or False?. UK: The Dawn Book Supply.
23.Jump up ^ Nelson's guide to denominations J. Gordon Melton - 2007 "Later in the century, various leaders also began to express doubts about the Trinity, and a spectrum of opinion emerged. ... Still others, such as the Church of God General Conference (Abrahamic Faith) specifically denied the Trinity ..."
24.Jump up ^ Manalo, Eraño G., Fundamental Beliefs of the Iglesia ni Cristo (Church of Christ) (Iglesia ni Cristo; Manila 1989)
25.Jump up ^ The Watchtower: 23. January 15, 1992. Missing or empty |title= (help)
26.Jump up ^ Insight on the Scriptures 2. Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania. 1988. pp. 393–394.
27.Jump up ^ Should You Believe in the Trinity?. Watch Tower Society. p. 20.
28.Jump up ^ Holland, Jeffrey R. "The Only True God and Jesus Christ Whom He Hath Sent". Retrieved 29 November 2013.
29.^ Jump up to: a b "Arianism". Southern Grace Church. Retrieved 29 November 2013.
30.^ Jump up to: a b c "Arianism". New World Encyclopedia. Retrieved 29 November 2013.
31.^ Jump up to: a b "What is Arianism?". Unity in the Body of Christ. Retrieved 29 November 2013.
32.^ Jump up to: a b "Jesus Christ: Firstborn in the Spirit". Encyclopedia of Mormonism. Retrieved 29 November 2013.
33.^ Jump up to: a b "Jesus Christ: Overview". Encyclopedia of Mormonism. Retrieved 29 November 2013.
34.^ Jump up to: a b "Arianism". Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry. Retrieved 29 November 2013.
35.Jump up ^ "Are Mormons Arians?". Retrieved 29 November 2013.
36.Jump up ^ "God the Father: Overview". Encyclopedia of Mormonism. Retrieved 29 November 2013.
37.Jump up ^ "First Vision". Encyclopedia of Mormonism. Retrieved 29 November 2013.
38.Jump up ^ "What is Arianism?". The Arian Catholic Church. Retrieved 29 November 2013.
39.Jump up ^ "'The Glory of God Is Intelligence' - Lesson 37: Section 93", Doctrine and Covenants Instructor's Guide: Religion 324-325 (PDF), Institutes of Religion, Church Educational System, 1981, pp. 73–74, archived (PDF) from the original on 2014-11-12
40.Jump up ^ "The Oneness of God". Archived from the original on 16 February 2008. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
41.Jump up ^ Patrick Zukeran - Judaism - Judaism Today. Retrieved 21 June 2013.
42.Jump up ^ The Trinity and Deity of Jesus: What the Bible Really Teaches - Retrieved 21 June 2013.
43.^ Jump up to: a b TRINITY: Jewish Encyclopedia. Retrieved 21 June 2013.
44.Jump up ^ Edict by Emperor Constantine against the Arians
45.Jump up ^ "In addition, if any writing composed by Arius should be found, it should be handed over to the flames, so that not only will the wickedness of his teaching be obliterated, but nothing will be left even to remind anyone of him. And I hereby make a public order, that if someone should be discovered to have hidden a writing composed by Arius, and not to have immediately brought it forward and destroyed it by fire, his penalty shall be death. As soon as he is discovered in this offense, he shall be submitted for capital punishment." - Edict by Emperor Constantine against the Arians. Athanasius (23 January 2010). "Edict by Emperor Constantine against the Arians". Fourth Century Christianity. Wisconsin Lutheran College. Retrieved 2 May 2012.
46.Jump up ^ Getting to Know the Church Fathers. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
47.Jump up ^ Encyclopedia of Barbarian Europe. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
48.Jump up ^ Early Controversies and the Growth of Christianity. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
49.Jump up ^ "NPNF2-04. Athanasius: Select Works and Letters". Retrieved 5 March 2015.
50.Jump up ^ Elaine Pagels, Beyond Belief: The Secret Gospel of Thomas (Random House, 2003), n.p.
51.Jump up ^ "NPNF2-04. Athanasius: Select Works and Letters". Ccel.org. 13 July 2005. Retrieved 21 January 2012.
52.Jump up ^ David Bernard's The Oneness of God, Word Aflame Press, 1983, ISBN 0-912315-12-1. pgs 264-274.
53.Jump up ^ Wells, H. G. (n.d.). The Outline of History: being a plain history of life and mankind. Forgotten Books 2. London, UK: The Waverley Book Company. p. 284.
54.Jump up ^ W. Fulton, ”Trinity”, Encyclopædia of Religion and Ethics, T. & T. Clark, 1921, Vol. 12, p. 459.
55.Jump up ^ Unitarians face a new age: the report of the Commission of Appraisal. American Unitarian Association. ed. Frederick May Eliot, Harlan Paul Douglass - 1936 "Chapter III CHURCH GROWTH AND DECLINE DURING THE LAST DECADE Year Book data permit the calculation of growth or decline in membership for 297 Unitarian churches which existed throughout the last decade and ..."
56.Jump up ^ Charles Lippy Faith in America: Changes, Challenges, New Directions p2 2006 "However, when the national interest in novel religious forms waned by the mid- nineteenth century, Unitarianism and Universalism began to decline.2 For the vast majority of religious bodies in America, growth continued unabated;"
57.^ Jump up to: a b The Apostles' Creed. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
58.Jump up ^ New Catholic Encyclopedia (1967) Volume XIV p.299
59.Jump up ^ John Macquarrie, "Trinity," Microsoft Encarta Reference Library 2005. © 1993-2004 Microsoft Corporation. Retrieved on March 31, 2008.
60.Jump up ^ "Trinity," Encyclopædia Britannica 2004 Ultimate Reference Suite DVD. Retrieved on March 31, 2008.
61.Jump up ^ Jouette M. Bassler, "God in the NT", The Anchor Bible Dictionary, Doubleday, New York 1992, 2:1055.
62.Jump up ^ "Theological Studies" (PDF). Retrieved 5 March 2015.
63.Jump up ^ Reasoning from Scriptures, Watch Tower bible and tract society page 411 para 4
64.Jump up ^ The Gospel According to John. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
65.Jump up ^ John (Understanding the Bible Commentary Series). Retrieved 5 March 2015.
66.Jump up ^ Earl Radmacher, Nelson's New Illustrated Bible Commentary (Thomas Nelson Inc. 1999) ISBN 978-1-4185-8734-5
67.Jump up ^ Commentary on John (Commentary on the New Testament Book #4). Retrieved 5 March 2015.
68.^ Jump up to: a b Patrick Navas - Divine Truth Or Human Tradition?: A Reconsideration Of The Orthodox Doctrine Of The Trinity in Light of the Hebrew and Christian Scriptures - AuthorHouse, 2007, 2011 - p 267.
69.Jump up ^ JOHN 1:1c: "God," "divine" or "a god" ? - onlytrugod.org. Retrieved 24 November 2014.
70.^ Jump up to: a b Kaiser, Dr. Christopher B., The Doctrine of God, A Historical Survey - Foundations For Faith - Westchester: Crossway Books, 1982, p. 31.
71.Jump up ^ The NET Bible. Biblical Studies Press. 2005. ISBN 9780737501117.
72.^ Jump up to: a b http://www.biblicalheritage.org/Linguistic/HL/1-A/-elohiym.htm
73.Jump up ^ "Strong's Hebrew: 430. אֱלֹהִים (elohim) -- God, god". Retrieved 5 March 2015.
74.Jump up ^ http://www.biblestudytools.net/Lexicons/Hebrew/heb.cgi?number=0430
75.Jump up ^ "2 Corinthians 13:14 – Trinity? - The Son of Jehovah". The Son of Jehovah. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
76.Jump up ^ Philippians 2:5-6
77.Jump up ^ Philippians 2:5-6
78.Jump up ^ "ERRORS IN THE KING JAMES VERSION NO. 4 - ROBBERY - Going to Jesus.com". Retrieved 5 March 2015.
79.Jump up ^ Is God a Trinity?. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
80.Jump up ^ "The Chalcedonian Definition". Retrieved 5 March 2015.
81.Jump up ^ The Word "Homoousios" from Hellenism to Christianity, by P.F. Beatrice, Church History, Cambridge University Press on behalf of the American Society of Church History, Vol. 71, No. 2, (Jun., 2002), pp. 243-272. (retrieved @ noemon.net)[dead link]
82.Jump up ^ "The word Trinity is not found in the Bible". CARM - The Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
83.Jump up ^ The Voice... Retrieved 5 March 2015.
84.Jump up ^ "Institute for Religious Research - The Biblical Basis of the Doctrine of the Trinity - Introduction". Institute for Religious Research. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
85.Jump up ^ The Unitarian: a monthly magazine of liberal Christianity ed. Jabez Thomas Sunderland, Brooke Herford, Frederick B. Mott - 1893 "We believe in the Holy Spirit, man's sole reliance for guidance, safety, or salvation, not as a separate person, entity, reality, or consciousness, existent apart from man or God, but as the recognizing sympathetic inter-communication in love between God and the human soul, the direct converse or communion of man's consciousness with Deity."
86.^ Jump up to: a b "Is the Holy Spirit a Person?". Awake!: 14–15. July 2006. "In the Bible, God’s Holy Spirit is identified as God’s power in action. Hence, an accurate translation of the Bible’s Hebrew text refers to God’s spirit as “God’s active force.”"
87.Jump up ^ "Is It Clearly a Bible Teaching?", Should You Believe in the Trinity?, ©1989 Watch Tower, p. 7.
88.Jump up ^ Who and What Is God? - Mystery of the Ages - Herbert W. Armstrong. Retrieved 19 May 2012.
89.Jump up ^ Peter Althouse Spirit of the last days: Pentecostal eschatology in conversation p12 2003 "The Oneness Pentecostal stream follows in the steps of the Reformed stream, but has a modalistic view of the Godhead"
90.Jump up ^ See under heading "The Father is the Holy Ghost" in David Bernard, The Oneness of God, Chapter 6.
91.Jump up ^ See also David Bernard, A Handbook of Basic Doctrines, Word Aflame Press, 1988.
92.Jump up ^ See under "The Lord God and His Spirit," in Chapter 7 of David Bernard, The Oneness of God.
93.Jump up ^ Wilson, Jerry A. (1992). "Holy Spirit". In Ludlow, Daniel H. Encyclopedia of Mormonism. New York: Mcmillan. p. 651. ISBN 0-02-904040-X. "The Holy Spirit is a term often used to refer to the Holy Ghost. In such cases the Holy Spirit is a personage.""
94.Jump up ^ McConkie, Joseph Fielding (1992). "Holy Ghost". In Ludlow editor-first= Daniel H. Encyclopedia of Mormonism. New York: Mcmillan. p. 649. ISBN 0-02-904040-X.
95.Jump up ^ D&C 131:7-8 ("There is no such thing as immaterial matter. All spirit is matter, but it is more fine or pure, and can only be discerned by purer eyes; We cannot see it; but when our bodies are purified we shall see that it is all matter.")
96.^ Jump up to: a b D&C 130:22.
97.Jump up ^ Romney, Marion G. (May 1974), "The Holy Ghost", Ensign
98.^ Jump up to: a b Millennial Star XII. October 15, 1850. pp. 305–309. Retrieved March 30, 2011.
99.Jump up ^ "Basic Beliefs Articles of Faith and Practice". Church of Christ. Retrieved 21 January 2015.
100.Jump up ^ Alan Unterman and Rivka Horowitz,Ruah ha-Kodesh, Encyclopedia Judaica (CD-ROM Edition, Jerusalem: Judaica Multimedia/Keter, 1997).
101.Jump up ^ http://www.unitypaloalto.org/beliefs/twenty_questions.html[dead link]
102.Jump up ^ The Holy Qur'an. 4:171.
103.Jump up ^ HINDU TRINITY Lord Brahma | Lord Vishnu | Lord Shiva - Rudra Centre - Retrieved 26 March 2014
104.Jump up ^ E. Washburn Hopkins - ORIGIN AND EVOLUTION OF RELIGION - THE HINDU TRINITY - urantia-book.org. Retrieved 26 March 2014.
105.Jump up ^ Rudolf V. D'Souza (1996). The Bhagavadgītā and St. John of the Cross: A Comparative Study of the Dynamism of Spiritual Growth in the Process of God-realisation. Gregorian Biblical. p. 340.
106.Jump up ^ 'At times he forms one of a trinity in unity, with Ra and Osiris, as in Fig. 87, a god with the two sceptres of Osiris, the hawk's head of Horus, and the sun of Ra. This is the god described to Eusebius, who tells us that when the oracle was consulted about the divine nature, by those who wished to understand this complicated mythology, it had answered, "I am Apollo and Lord and Bacchus," or, to use the Egyptian names, "I am Ra and Horus and Osiris." Another god, in the form of a porcelain idol to be worn as a charm, shows us Horus as one of a trinity in unity, in name, at least, agreeing with that afterwards adopted by the Christians--namely, the Great God, the Son God, and the Spirit God.'—Samuel Sharpe, Egyptian Mythology and Egyptian Christianity, 1863, pp. 89-90.
107.Jump up ^ "How Ancient Trinitarian Gods Influenced Adoption of the Trinity". United Church of God. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
108.Jump up ^ Michael Barber - Should Christianity Abandon the Doctrine of the Trinity? - Universal-Publishers, Nov 1, 2006 - Part Three - Page 78.
109.Jump up ^ "Περί Ουρανού/1". Retrieved 5 March 2015.
110.Jump up ^ "ARISTOTE : Traité du Ciel (livre I - texte grec)". Retrieved 5 March 2015.
111.Jump up ^ Bekker edition of Aristotle's works, volume II, p. 211
112.Jump up ^ The Philosophical Review, Vol. 108, No. 2 (April 1999), p. 285
113.Jump up ^ Plato's Magnesia and Philosophical Polities in Magna Graecia. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
114.Jump up ^ "The Internet Classics Archive - On the Heavens by Aristotle". Retrieved 5 March 2015.
115.Jump up ^ Phaedo (Second Edition). Retrieved 5 March 2015.
116.Jump up ^ Course of Ideas, pp 387-8.
117.Jump up ^ Select Treatises of St. Athanasius - In Controversy With the Arians - Freely Translated by John Henry Cardinal Newmann - Longmans, Green, and Co., 1911
118.Jump up ^ A. Hilary Armstrong, Henry J. Blumenthal, Platonism. Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved May 13, 2008, from Encyclopædia Britannica 2006 Ultimate Reference Suite DVD.
119.Jump up ^ Logan A. Marcellus of Ancyra (Pseudo-Anthimus), 'On the Holy Church': Text, Translation and Commentary. Verses 8-9. Journal of Theological Studies, NS, Volume 51, Pt. 1, April 2000, p.95
120.Jump up ^ Neusner, Jacob, ed. 2009. World Religions in America: An Introduction, Fourth Ed. Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press, p. 257. ISBN 978-0-664-23320-4
121.Jump up ^ Beit-Hallahmi, Benjamin. 1998. The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Active New Religions, Sects and Cults, Revised Ed. New York, New York: Rosen Publishing Group, p. 73. ISBN 0-8239-2586-2
122.Jump up ^ Walker, James K. (2007). The Concise Guide to Today's Religions and Spirituality. Eugene, Oregon: Harvest House Publishers. pp. 117–118. ISBN 978-0-7369-2011-7
123.Jump up ^ Whether Origen taught a doctrine of God that was or was not reconcilable with later Nicene Christianity is a matter of debate (Cf. ANF Vol 4), although many of his other views, such as on metempsychosis, were rejected. Origen was an economic subordinationist according to the editors of ANF, believing in the co-eternal aspect of God the Son but asserting that God the Son never commanded the Father, and only obeyed. This view is compatible with Nicene theology (as it is not held by Nicene Christians that the Son or Holy Spirit can command the Father), notwithstanding any other doctrines Origen held.
124.Jump up ^ Williams, Rowan (2002) [1987]. Arius (Revised ed.). Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans. p. 98. ISBN 0-8028-4969-5.
125.^ Jump up to: a b Avery Cardinal Dulles. The Deist Minimum. 2005.
126.Jump up ^ Pfizenmaier, T.C., "Was Isaac Newton an Arian?" Journal of the History of Ideas 68(1):57–80, 1997.
127.Jump up ^ Snobelen, Stephen D. (1999). "Isaac Newton, heretic : the strategies of a Nicodemite" (PDF). British Journal for the History of Science 32 (4): 381–419. doi:10.1017/S0007087499003751.
Further reading[edit]
Tuggy, Dale (Summer 2014), "History of Trinitarian Doctrines", Trinity, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
External links[edit]


 This article's use of external links may not follow Wikipedia's policies or guidelines. Please improve this article by removing excessive or inappropriate external links, and converting useful links where appropriate into footnote references. (June 2012)
Five Major Problems With The Trinity 21st Century Reformation by Dan J. Gill
The Trinity: True or False? by James H. Broughton & Peter J Southgate
The Origin of the Trinity: From Paganism to Constantine
An investigation of the trinity of Plato and of Philo Judaeus, and of the effects which an attachment to their writings had upon the principles and reasonings of the father of the Christian church, by Caesar Morgan, Cambridge University Press, 1853.
Antitrinitarian Biography; or, Sketches of the lives and writings of distinguished antitrinitarians, exhibiting a view of the state of the Unitarian doctrine and worship in the principal nations of Europe, from the reformation to the close of the seventeenth century, to which is prefixed a history of Unitarianism in England during the same period, Robert Wallace, 1850.


[hide]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Christianity


Jesus
Christ ·
 Jesus in Christianity ·
 Virgin birth ·
 Crucifixion ·
 Resurrection ·
 Son of God
 
Stained glass at St John's Ashfield, illustrating Jesus' description of himself, "I am the Good Shepherd", from the Gospel of John, chapter 10, verse 11.


Foundations
Church ·
 Creed ·
 Gospel ·
 New Covenant
 

Bible
Books ·
 Canon ·
 Old Testament ·
 New Testament
 

Theology
God ·
 Trinity  (Father ·
 Son ·
 Holy Spirit)
   ·
 Apologetics ·
 Baptism ·
 Catholicism ·
 Christology ·
 History of theology ·
 Mission ·
 Salvation
 


History and
tradition

Mary ·
 Apostles ·
 Peter ·
 Paul ·
 Fathers ·
 Early ·
 Constantine ·
 Ecumenical councils ·
 Augustine ·
 East–West Schism ·
 Crusades ·
 Aquinas ·
 Protestant Reformation ·
 Luther
 


Denominations
 and movements
 (List)



Western

Adventist ·
 Anabaptist ·
 Anglican ·
 Baptist ·
 Calvinist ·
 Charismatic ·
 Evangelical ·
 Holiness ·
 Lutheran ·
 Methodist ·
 Pentecostal ·
 Protestant ·
 Roman Catholic
 


Eastern

Eastern Orthodox ·
 Eastern Catholic ·
 Oriental Orthodox (Miaphysite) ·
 Assyrian Church of the East ("Nestorian")
 


Nontrinitarian

Jehovah's Witnesses ·
 Latter Day Saint movement ·
 Oneness Pentecostalism
 


Related topics
Art ·
 Criticism ·
 Ecumenism ·
 Liturgy ·
 Music ·
 Other religions ·
 Prayer ·
 Sermon ·
 Symbolism
 

CategoryCategory ·
 Portal icon Christianity portal ·
 WikiProjectWikiProject
 

  


Categories: Nontrinitarianism
Christianity-related controversies
Unitarianism
Schisms in Christianity
Christian terminology




































Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
العربية
Dansk
Deutsch
Ελληνικά
Español
Français
한국어
Bahasa Indonesia
Italiano
Kiswahili
Lietuvių
മലയാളം
Nederlands
Norsk bokmål
Polski
Português
Русский
Simple English
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Svenska
Tagalog
தமிழ்
Українська
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 29 May 2015, at 06:13.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
 

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nontrinitarianism













Grace Communion International

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Worldwide Church Of God)
Jump to: navigation, search

Grace Communion International (GCI) is an evangelical Christian denomination based in Glendora, California, United States.
Founded in 1934 as The Radio Church of God, Pastor General Herbert W. Armstrong had a significant, and often controversial, influence on 20th-century religious broadcasting and publishing in the United States and Europe, especially in the field of interpreting biblical end-time prophecies. It was renamed The Worldwide Church of God. It was also very famous with its multilingual free publication The Plain Truth and The World Tomorrow radio and television broadcasts worldwide.
Within a few years after Armstrong's death in 1986, the succeeding church administration completely reversed the denomination's doctrines and teachings to be compatible with mainstream evangelical Christianity, while many members and ministers left and formed other churches that conformed to many, but not all, of Armstrong's teachings. In 2009, the church changed the name The Worldwide Church of God adopting its current name.[1]
The GCI is a member of the National Association of Evangelicals, and has 50,000 members in 900 congregations in about 100 countries.[2]


Contents  [hide]
1 History 1.1 Beginnings
1.2 1970s 1.2.1 Ambassador International Cultural Foundation
1.2.2 Scandal and conflict
1.2.3 Receivership crisis
1.3 Armstrong's death and doctrinal changes
1.4 Women's ordination
2 Beliefs and practices 2.1 Current teachings
2.2 Historical teachings under Armstrong
3 Structure 3.1 International
3.2 Regional and local
4 Finances
5 Related denominations
6 References
7 Notes
8 External links

History[edit]
Beginnings[edit]
The Radio Church of God began with Herbert W. Armstrong, who in 1931 was ordained by the Oregon Conference of the Church of God (Seventh-Day), an Adventist group, and began serving a congregation in Eugene, Oregon. On January 7, 1934, Armstrong began hosting a broadcast on a local 100-watt radio station KORE in Eugene. It was essentially a condensed church service on the air, with hymn singing featured along with Armstrong's message, and was the launching point for what would become the Radio Church of God. In 1933, the Church of God (Seventh-Day) split. Armstrong, who sided with the faction centered in Salem, West Virginia, fell out with the local congregation over various doctrinal issues, especially his espousal of British Israelism.
Although his views were rejected by the local congregation, he gained a growing following of his own, chiefly through his World Tomorrow broadcasts and the Plain Truth magazine. Armstrong moved to Pasadena, California. To facilitate the work of the growing church, he incorporated it on March 3, 1946, as the Radio Church of God. In 1947, Ambassador College was founded in Pasadena by the church, and the campus served as the church's headquarters.
The broadcast of The World Tomorrow went into Europe on Radio Luxembourg on January 7, 1953. In 1956, Armstrong published the booklet 1975 in Prophecy!, which predicted an upcoming nuclear war and subsequent enslavement of mankind, leading to the return of Jesus Christ. He explained that the book was written to contrast the spiritual condition of the world to the modern inventions that scientists were promising for the year 1975.
In 1971 Armstrong criticized teachings that Christ would return in 1975 and that the church should flee to a "place of safety" in 1972, as no man knew the time of Christ's return (Matthew 24:36 and 25:13). Armstrong wrote that 1975 would be the least possible year for Christ's return.[3]
Because of his strong emphasis on these prophetic dates, the church grew quickly in the late 1960s and, on January 5, 1968, was renamed the Worldwide Church of God.[4]
Armstrong's son, Garner Ted Armstrong, who had been given the responsibility to host the radio and later the television version of The World Tomorrow, was formally disfellowshipped by his father in 1972. While church members were told at the time that the reason was Ted Armstrong's opposition to some of his father's teachings, Ted Armstrong later admitted that the actual reason was his relationships with many women. Armstrong, who resumed the broadcasting duties of The World Tomorrow program, did not reconcile with Ted before his death.
Armstrong's church was both authoritarian and totalitarian in its treatment of the membership. To maintain member loyalty, Armstrong's ministers indoctrinated them that they had been "called" by God into the only true Christian church on Earth and that all other Christian churches were Satanic counterfeits. If a called member were to question church doctrines, the member would be in peril of losing salvation and being cast into the lake of fire on Judgment Day. Further, ministers could arbitrarily disfellowship suspect members for any type of disloyalty. Disfellowshipping was openly announced in Sabbath services on a weekly basis but the reasons were rarely given. Still the church grew on a worldwide scale.
Armstrong taught a strict doctrine of tithing to the members. Ten percent of a member's gross income was to be given to the church, and yet another ten percent was to be saved for traveling to one of the church's annual feast days, the Feast of Tabernacles. Every third year, members were commanded to give a third tithe, slated to care for the "widows and orphans" of the church. Finally, the church observed seven high holy days throughout the year, on which members were asked to give offerings while baskets were passed. Every month Herbert Armstrong would mail out a co-worker letter to millions of non-members, as well as his members, in which he would claim that the church was on the verge of financial collapse. In reality, the church headquarters in Pasadena rested on prime real estate and had been modestly estimated to value $300,000,000. Armstrong's mansion was on Orange Grove Boulevard, on the route of the annual Rose Parade. The church possessed several such mansions in that area, known as Millionaire's Row, and had built other large facilities on the thirty-acre property, leading up to the building of a spectacular concert hall dubbed Ambassador Auditorium.
Armstrong spared no expense in the building of his Auditorium. External walls were made of emerald onyx. The walls in the outer lobby were a rare pink onyx, and expensive chandeliers, including two that had been owned by the Shah of Iran, hung from the gilt ceilings. In the concert hall, the walls were decorated in rosewood, so delicate that visitors were forbidden to take flash photographs.
1970s[edit]
In 1970, the first of many groups to splinter from the Worldwide Church of God were founded. Carl O'Beirn of Cleveland, Ohio, led the group that may have been the first to leave, the Church of God (O'Beirn). Others followed that year, including John Kerley's Top of the Line Ministry in 1978; the Restoration Church of God; the Church of God (Boise City) in Boise City, Oklahoma; Marvin Faulhaber's Sabbatarian, a group also known as Church of God (Sabbatarian); and the Fountain of Life Fellowship of James and Virginia Porter. These factions survived well past Herbert Armstrong's death in 1986, most retaining the name Church of God because Armstrong had pointed out that this is the name God calls his true church in the Bible.
When the fall of 1972 came and the time to flee to a place of safety did not occur, there was yet another exodus of members. However, church leaders created a red herring to divert members from believing the prophecy had failed. They blamed the members themselves for not being faithful enough; then they proclaimed a new gospel—that Armstrong was to bring the gospel of Jesus Christ to every nation and kingdom on Earth, as commissioned in the last chapter of Matthew, before Jesus would return. Armstrong set about to do this with the help of some public relations aides and King Leopold of Belgium. Armstrong did end up meeting with many world leaders to whom he would present expensive gifts, then preach to them that there were "two ways"—one the way of giving and the other the way of getting. He preached this message until his death.
Ambassador International Cultural Foundation[edit]
During the sixties "Armstrong had sought to put into stronger action what he later termed God’s way of give".[5] To Armstrong and his students, this was generally said to include "the way of character, generosity, cultural enrichment, true education: of beautifying the environment and caring for fellow man." He began undertaking humanitarian projects in underprivileged locales around the world, which sparked the creation of the church-run Ambassador International Cultural Foundation (AICF) in 1975. The Foundation’s efforts reached into several countries, providing staffing and funds to fight illiteracy, to create schools for the disabled, to set up mobile schools, and to conduct several archaeological digs at significant biblical sites. The church auditorium hosted, at highly subsidized ticket prices, hundreds of performances by noted artists such as Luciano Pavarotti, Vladimir Horowitz, Bing Crosby, Marcel Marceau, and Bob Hope.[6] Nevertheless, ticket sales could still not pay for the appearances of world-renowned performers, so Armstrong used church tithe money to subsidize these performances without informing his congregation of how "God's holy tithe" was being spent.
Quest was a periodical that was published monthly by AICF from July 1977 to September 1981. Originally published under the title Human Potential, the project was directed by Stanley Rader as a secular outreach of the church-funded AICF. Quest publishers hired a professional staff unrelated to the church to create a high-quality, glossy publication devoted to the humanities, travel, and the arts. The original name and design of Human Potential were conceived in the aftermath of Armstrong's poorly received 1975 in Prophecy!, a publication which caused accusations of false prophecy to spread like wildfire. (The use of the year 1975 was defended by church ministers as a device to explain Biblical prophecy, by contrasting it with the scientific world's declaration of 1975 as the year of technological "Utopia".)
The AICF had become secular in its approach and thinking. Thus, the church began to cut back on its funding. Eventually, because the AICF was perceived to have strayed from its original goals, it was discontinued by Armstrong and its assets were sold to other interests.
Scandal and conflict[edit]
In 1972, many members were disappointed that the events predicted by Herbert Armstrong did not come to pass. Most were unaware that Herbert Armstrong had been predicting the end of the world on the radio as far back as World War II, when he had proclaimed Hitler and Mussolini the Beast and False Prophet of the Book of Revelation. After the war ended, Armstrong attended a meeting in San Francisco in which a proposal was made to create the United Nations. He had also read a quote from Winston Churchill proposing the creation of a United States of Europe. This was a springboard for a new set of prophecies in which the European Union would rise up to become the Beast Power. While the European Union was an idea in the making, the nations of Europe were far from united, as the union itself was still another 20 years in the future. Because church literature such as The Wonderful World Tomorrow, 1975 in Prophecy!, and many others had attempted to pinpoint the date of Christ's return, members continued to wait anxiously for the Second Coming. Armstrong cleverly never predicted a date in his sermons, but this did not prevent his evangelists (such as Gerald Waterhouse) from presenting detailed, step-by-step accounts of the Second Coming in their sermons, which included Armstrong himself as one of two witnesses of the Book of Revelation.[citation needed]
Herbert Armstrong began to speak openly and critically of his son. The senior Armstrong voiced disapproval of Garner Ted's practice of attributing specific dates to end-time prophecies. Garner Ted also spoke of greatly expanding the church's media ministry on the model of the Church of Christ, Scientist with its widely read Christian Science Monitor. Herbert W. Armstrong vehemently disagreed.[citation needed]
In a report in the May 15, 1972, edition of Time magazine, Herbert Armstrong was reported to have said that Garner Ted was "in the bonds of Satan." [7] The elder Armstrong did not elaborate, but it was speculated that Herbert was alluding to Garner Ted's alleged problems with gambling and adultery with Ambassador College co-eds, and to serious doctrinal differences. Garner Ted Armstrong was soon relieved of his star role within the church.
Garner Ted led a secret coup to gain control of the Church and displace his Father.[citation needed] But it was Garner Ted who was to be removed. While Garner Ted Armstrong was being removed, Stanley Rader was orchestrating the church's involvement in a number of corporations which Rader and Herbert W. Armstrong established. Critics saw Rader's moves as an attempt to seize control of the church.[citation needed] Rader characterized his involvement as that of an advisor and claimed that his advice was opening doors for Armstrong that a strict theological role would not have allowed for. Herbert Armstrong claimed that he did not approve of the establishment of the AICF, which Rader set up ostensibly to give the elder Armstrong a role as the "Ambassador for World Peace without portfolio".[citation needed]
As the church was experiencing internal crises, its external, public face was also crumbling.[citation needed] Church followers had anticipated the removal of the church faithful to Petra, Jordan, to await the prophesied apocalypse.
Despite the scandals of 1972, the church continued to grow in the 1970s, with Herbert Armstrong still at the helm. In 1975, Armstrong baptized Stanley Rader, who until then had been a practitioner of Judaism despite his association with the church.
After being left a widower by the death of his wife, Loma, eleven years earlier, Armstrong married Ramona Martin, a woman nearly fifty years younger, in 1977 and moved to Tucson, Arizona while recovering from a heart attack. While Armstrong recuperated in his home in Arizona, he administered and guided church affairs through Stanley Rader and the church administration. The church continued to be headquartered in Pasadena.
With Garner Ted Armstrong resuming his role within the church, the rivalry between the younger Armstrong and Stanley Rader intensified. As the accusations of Garner Ted's past resurfaced, Herbert W. Armstrong started giving more responsibilities to Stanley Rader. This action was infuriating to the younger Armstrong, who thought it his birthright to take over as the leader of the Church. The adultery problems that reportedly had previously driven Garner Ted from the church allegedly continued unabated.[citation needed] In 1978, after a failed attempt to seize control of the Church from the Elder Armstrong, Garner Ted Armstrong was disfellowshipped a final time. Garner Ted moved to Tyler, Texas, and there founded a splinter group, the Church of God International. He later spearheaded a coalition of six ex-ministers who brought accusations of misappropriation of funds directed against Herbert W. Armstrong and Stanley Rader to the Attorney General of California. Contending that Herbert W. Armstrong and Stanley Rader were siphoning millions of dollars for their personal indulgences, the Attorney General's office seized the Pasadena Campus.[citation needed] This action was later determined to have been illegal.[citation needed]
Herbert Armstrong's daughter, Dorothy Matson, contacted her brother Ted prior to his final disfellowshipping and made a startling confession to him. She confessed that her father had molested her for ten years of her childhood until she finally was able to leave home. This infuriated Ted who met with his father to confront him. In a rage he shouted, "I could destroy you with this information!" This was how Armstrong described Ted being in the "bonds of Satan," "Just as Lucifer rebelled against God during his rebellion, so Ted has threatened me by rising up and saying, 'I could destroy you father.'" He conveniently left out why Ted could have destroyed him. This led to Ted's ousting. Distraught, Ted contacted fellow minister David Robinson who authored a book entitled Herbert Armstrong's Tangled Web, which included the story of Dorothy's molestation. Robinson met with Armstrong in his Tucson home and told him his book included the story of the incest. Armstrong admitted to Robinson that the story was indeed true. When Herbert's wife Ramona found out she immediately divorced him. Armstrong was cross-examined in court about the incest, but he pled the fifth, refusing to incriminate himself.[citation needed]
Receivership crisis[edit]
Garner Ted Armstrong blamed Stanley Rader for his two-time ousting from his father's church.[citation needed] Garner Ted and other former and discontented members of the Worldwide Church of God prompted the State of California to investigate charges of malfeasance by Rader and Herbert W. Armstrong. In 1979, California Attorney General George Deukmejian placed the church campus in Pasadena into financial receivership for a half year. The State of California went through the Church's records.[citation needed]
The matter gained the attention of Mike Wallace who investigated the church in a report for 60 Minutes. Wallace alleged that there had been lavish secret expenditures, conflict of interest insider deals, posh homes and lifestyles in the higher ranks, and the heavy involvement of Stanley Rader in financial manipulation.[citation needed] No legal charges were leveled against Herbert W. Armstrong, Stanley Rader, or the Worldwide Church of God. Wallace invited Rader to appear on 60 Minutes on April 15, 1979. Wallace showed Rader a secret tape recording in which Herbert Armstrong was purported to have alleged that Rader was attempting to take over the church after Armstrong's death, reasoning that the donated tithe money might be quite a "magnet" to some evangelists. Rader abruptly ended the interview.[8] This tape was later alleged to have been made about someone else, and illegally taped by one of the 6 embittered ex-members who had gone to the State of California with the accusations.[citation needed]
In the meantime, Herbert W. Armstrong switched the Worldwide Church of God Inc. corporations to "Corporate Sole" status, making him the sole officer and responsible party for the affairs of the corporations.
In referring to the investigation of the California Attorney General, Rader wrote Against the Gates of Hell: The Threat to Religious Freedom in America in 1980, in which he contended that his fight with the Attorney General was solely about the government's circumventing religious freedoms rather than about abuse of public trust or fraudulent misappropriation of tithe funds.
The California Second Court of Appeals overturned the decision on procedural grounds and added as dicta, "We are of the opinion that the underlying action [i.e., the state-imposed receivership] and its attendant provisional remedy of receivership were from the inception constitutionally infirm and predestined to failure."[9]
Stanley Rader left his positions within the church in 1981. While remaining a member, he left the public spotlight as an attorney, and retired.
Armstrong's death and doctrinal changes[edit]
On January 16, 1986, Herbert Armstrong died in Pasadena, California. Shortly before his death, on January 7, 1986, Armstrong appointed Joseph W. Tkach Sr. "... succeeding me as pastor general, in the difficult times ahead".
As early as 1988, Joseph W. Tkach Sr. began to make doctrinal changes. Doctrinal revisions were made quietly and slowly at first, but then openly and radically in January 1995. They were presented as new understandings of Christmas and Easter,[10] Babylon and the harlot,[11] British Israelism,[12] Saturday Sabbath,[13] and other doctrines.
In general, Tkach Sr. directed the church theology towards mainstream evangelical Christian belief. This caused much disillusionment among the membership and another rise of splinter groups. All these changes, the church admits, have organizationally brought about "catastrophic results," though they believe that it is spiritually the best thing that ever happened to them.[14] During the tenure of Joseph Tkach Sr., the church's membership declined by about 50 percent. His son, Joseph Tkach Jr., succeeded him after his death in 1995.
Eventually all of Herbert Armstrong's writings were withdrawn from print by the Worldwide Church of God. In the 2004 video production Called To Be Free, Greg Albrecht, former dean of WCG's Ambassador College, declared Herbert Armstrong to be both a false prophet and a heretic.[15]
Women's ordination[edit]
In 2007 the Worldwide Church of God decided to allow women to serve as pastors and elders.[16] This decision was reached after several years of study.[16] Debby Bailey became the first female elder in the Worldwide Church of God in 2007.[17]
Beliefs and practices[edit]
Current teachings[edit]
After Armstrong's death, the church's new leadership began a process of theological revision. The church now claims to be considered within the evangelical mainstream as shown by its acceptance into the National Association of Evangelicals. Its doctrinal summary highlights mainstream Protestant beliefs such as the Trinity, the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, that faith in him is the only way to receive salvation, and that the Bible is the inspired and infallible word of God.[18]
Historical teachings under Armstrong[edit]
Main article: Armstrongism
Until Armstrong's death, the Worldwide Church of God adhered to its founder's teachings.[citation needed] The most notable feature was Armstrong's version of British Israelism, which was based on reading the account of Jacob blessing his sons (Genesis 49) as end-time prophecy. Armstrong saw in it a description of national characteristics of contemporary descendants of Jacob, and deduced that the United States, the British Commonwealth and several countries situated in northwestern Europe were actually the Lost Tribes of Israel. Armstrong held that these countries played a central role in the end times that were about to begin.[citation needed]
Armstrong rejected the doctrine of the Trinity, regarding it as a pagan concept absorbed into mainstream Christianity.[19] Armstrong contended that God was not a closed Trinity but was instead building a family through the Holy Spirit, which Armstrong considered to be God's powerful unifying essence guiding and bringing to remembrance those things which Christ taught. Armstrong contended that the Spirit is not a distinct personality like the Father and the Son. Armstrong also taught that members of the church would actually become members of the God family themselves after the resurrection. Armstrong rejected as unbiblical the traditional Christian views of heaven, hell, eternal punishment and salvation.[20]
The church strictly observed the Saturday Sabbath, annual festivals described in the twenty-third chapter of Leviticus, and strongly advocated the clean meats of Leviticus 11. Members were encouraged to tithe and to follow a dress code during services. They were discouraged from marrying outside the church. In fact, these practices are still observed in several of the Church's remaining branches today. Herbert W. Armstrong summarized his teachings in his book Mystery of the Ages, published shortly before his death. This book was the centerpiece of a titanic struggle between the Philadelphia Church of God and the remnant of the Worldwide Church of God under Joseph Tkach Jr. The battle went as far as the United States Supreme Court.[citation needed] At that point, however, the leaders of the WCG decided to drop the case and give over not only Mystery of the Ages, but also several other works originally written by Armstrong.[citation needed]
Under Armstrong's leadership, the Worldwide Church of God was accused of being a cult with unorthodox and, to most Christians, heretical teachings.[21] Critics also contended that the WCG did not proclaim salvation by grace through faith alone, but rather required works as part of salvation. The late Walter Martin, in his classic The Kingdom of the Cults, devoted 34 pages to the group, claiming that Armstrong borrowed freely from Seventh-Day Adventist, Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormon doctrines.[22] Armstrong contended that all Church doctrine could be proved simply and effectively through the Bible, and that one did not need to "accept on faith" any of the Worldwide Church of God's doctrinal beliefs.
Structure[edit]
International[edit]
Grace Communion International has a hierarchical polity. The ecclesiastical policies are determined by the Advisory Council of Elders. Members of the Advisory Council are appointed by the President. The President, who also holds the title of Pastor General, is chief executive and ecclesiastical officer of the denomination. A Doctrinal Advisory Team may report to the Advisory Council on the church's official doctrinal statements, epistemology, or apologetics. The President may pocket veto doctrinal positions he determines to be heretical. However, the President is also a member of the Doctrinal Advisory Team, and so he is aware of and involved in the activities of that committee.[23] Historically, Presidents, as chairmen of the board of directors, have appointed their own successor. This and the President's power to appoint and remove members of the Advisory Council have remained areas of concern even among those who applaud the church's doctrinal changes.
The Church maintains national offices and satellite offices in multiple countries. Pastor General Joseph Tkach, Jr. periodically travels worldwide in personal appearance campaigns to congregations in diverse intercontinental areas, such as Great Britain, Africa, and the Philippines. However, membership and tithe income originate primarily from the eastern United States.
Regional and local[edit]
In the United States, denominational contact with local assemblies or local church home small group meetings, i.e., cell churches, is facilitated by district superintendents, each of which is responsible for a large number of churches in a geographical region (such as Florida or the Northeast) or in a specialized language group (such as Spanish-speaking congregations).
Local churches are led by a senior pastor, pastoral leadership team (with one person designated as a congregational pastoral leader), each of which is supervised by a district pastoral leader. Some senior pastors are responsible for a single local church, but many are responsible for working in two or more churches. Salary compensation for the paid local church pastor, if available, is determined by the local church.
Most local church groups retain the long-standing traditional policy of meeting in leased or rented facilities for meetings or services. The trend since 2000, however, has been to adopt a local church setting blending into the local milieu with headquarters retaining administrative oversight functions. As of 2005, the church established a new computer system of financial checks and balances for church budgets at the local level. Also, GCI now mandates a local Advisory Council, which includes a number of volunteer ministry leaders (some of whom are also called deacons), and often additional elders or assistant pastors.
Finances[edit]
The early Worldwide Church of God used a three-tithe system, under which members were expected to give a tithe or ten percent "of their increase," usually interpreted as a family's income.
The first tithe, 10 percent of a member's total income, was sent to church headquarters to finance "the work", which was all operations of the church, as well as broadcasting and publishing the church's message.
The second tithe was saved by the individual member to fund the member's (and his family's) observance of the annual holy days, especially the 8-day-long Feast of Tabernacles. Unlike the first tithe, these funds were not sent into the church but retained by the member.
A third tithe was required in the third and sixth years of a personal seven-year tithing cycle, and it was also sent to headquarters. The third tithe was used to support the indigent, widows, and orphans - distribution was decided privately at the discretion of the ministry.
In contrast to many other churches' religious services, the practice of WCG was not to pass around offering plates during weekly church services but only during holy day church services (seven days each year). These funds were considered "freewill offerings" and regarded as entirely separate from regular tithes. The church also gathered funds in the form of donations from "co-workers," those who read the church's free literature or watched the weekly TV show but did not actually attend services.
Under Joseph W. Tkach Sr., the mandatory nature of the church's three-tithe system was abolished, and it was suggested that tithes could be calculated on net, rather than gross, income. Today, the GCI headquarters has downsized for financial survival. The denomination sold much of its property, including sites used for festivals, campsites built for teenagers, its college campuses, and private aircraft.[citation needed] They discontinued publishing all the books, booklets and magazines published by Armstrong.
To further economize, the church sold its properties in Pasadena and purchased an office building in Glendora, California. Formerly, the church's membership—meeting in rented halls on Saturdays such as public school buildings, dance halls, hotels and other venues—sent all tithe donations directly to the denomination. Under the new financial reporting regime, local churches are permitted to use 85% of funds for locally for ministry, including constructing local church buildings for use by the congregations. As of 2007, 85 percent or more of all congregational donations stay in the local area, with 15 percent going to the church's headquarters in Glendora for ministerial training and support, legal services, and denominational administration.[citation needed]
Related denominations[edit]
From the 1970s through to the 1990s several of the Sabbatarian Churches of God that adhered to some of Armstrong's teachings separated from WCG. Due to the significant doctrinal changes which occurred in WCG throughout the 1990s, the largest percentage of ministers and members left WCG during this decade. This resulted in the formation of many denominations. There is significant overlap in their teachings with those of Herbert W. Armstrong. Most claim to teach "all" of the truths restored through Herbert W. Armstrong, most notably the Philadelphia Church of God (1989). The "PCG" purchased the copyright to several of the books and booklets of Herbert W. Armstrong and systematically changed both the wording, content and meaning of what Armstrong wrote. They maintain that Armstrong was right and that they are preaching and teaching the very same teachings and are in fact a continuation of the parent WCG.
Worldwide Church of God organizational splits resulted in the establishment of the Global Church of God, the Living Church of God (1993, 1998), United Church of God (1995), and the Restored Church of God (1998).[24] The United Church of God (UCG) is the largest of these denominations.[25]
Denominations resulting from various splits includeChurch of God International (org. 1978)
Philadelphia Church of God (org. 1989)
Twentieth Century Church of God (org. 1990)
Church of God (Philadelphia Era) (org. 1991)
Church of the Great God (1992)
Global Church of God (1992)
United Church of God (1995)
Church of God Fellowship (1992)
Living Church of God (1998)
Restored Church of God (1998)
Church of God, an International Community (1998)
Pacific Church of God (2009)
Church of God, a Worldwide Association (2010)
Most teach that they are the continuation of the WCG and many have also rewritten Armstrong's books and booklets. Some have altered them to fit the splinter church's particular church doctrines.
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ "Worldwide Church of God Announces Name Change". Worldwide Church of God. Grace Communion International. Retrieved 15 September 2012.
2.Jump up ^ "Our Story". Grace Communion International.
3.Jump up ^ "HWA Preached to Students in 1971 Why 1975 Could Not be the Year of Christ's Return". The Radio Church of God. COGTV. Retrieved 2 January 2014.
4.Jump up ^ "1968 Certificate Of Amendment Of Articles Of Incorporation Of Radio Church Of God". The Radio Church of God. The Painful Truth. Retrieved 15 September 2012.
5.Jump up ^ Flurry, Stephen (October 30, 2006). Raising the Ruins:The Fight to Revive the Legacy of Herbert W. Armstrong. Philadelphia Church of God. pp. 23–24. ISBN 978-0-9745507-1-8.
6.Jump up ^ Flurry, pp. 25-26
7.Jump up ^ "Religion: Garner Ted Armstrong, Where Are You?". Time Magazine Monday, May 15, 1972 (TIME). 15 May 1972. Retrieved 15 September 2012.
8.Jump up ^ "Stanley Rader on "Sixty Minutes" with Mike Wallace". 60 Minutes. The Painful Truth. Retrieved 15 September 2012.
9.Jump up ^ PEOPLE EX REL. DEUKMEJIAN v. WORLDWIDE CHURCH OF GOD, 127 CA3d 547 (Court of Appeals of California, Second Appellate District, Division Two December 9, 1981).
10.Jump up ^ "A Call for Tolerance on Christmas and Easter". Grace Communion International. Worldwide Church of God. Retrieved 15 September 2012.
11.Jump up ^ "Who Is "Babylon"?". Grace Communion International. Worldwide Church of God. Retrieved 15 September 2012.
12.Jump up ^ "Anglo-Israelism and the United States & Britain in Prophecy". Grace Communion International. Worldwide Church of God. Retrieved 15 September 2012.
13.Jump up ^ "Is Leviticus 23:3 a Command to Have Worship Services on the Weekly Sabbath?". Grace Communion International. Worldwide Church of God. Retrieved 15 September 2012.
14.Jump up ^ "Armstrongism". Apologetics. Ankerberg Theological Research Institute. Retrieved 1 September 2012.
15.Jump up ^ "Called To Be Free". (video, point 61:57) by Living Hope Video Ministries
16.^ Jump up to: a b "When churches started to ordain women". Religioustolerance.org. Retrieved 2010-11-19.
17.Jump up ^ WCG has gotten around to ordaining its first woman according to its Jan 31 update
18.Jump up ^ "The GCI Statement of Beliefs". Grace Communion International. Worldwide Church of God. Retrieved 15 September 2012.
19.Jump up ^ Kellner, Mark A. "Worldwide Church of God Joins NAE". Christianity Today Library. Christianity Today. Retrieved 15 September 2012.
20.Jump up ^ Covington, David. What is the Worldwide Church of God? Quoted at http://www.apologeticsindex.org/w01.html, accessed 03-13-2007
21.Jump up ^ "Worldwide Church of God (WCG)". Apologetics Index. Retrieved 15 September 2012.
22.Jump up ^ Tucker, Ruth. "From the Fringe to the Fold". 7/15/1996. Christianity Today. Retrieved 15 September 2012.
23.Jump up ^ "U.S. Church Administration Manuals". Grace Communion International. Worldwide Church of God. Retrieved 15 September 2012.
24.Jump up ^ "Worldwide Church of God Organizational Splits". Grace Communion International. Worldwide Church of God. Retrieved 15 September 2012.
25.Jump up ^ Christianity Today, July 15, 1996.
Notes[edit]
Frank S. Mead, Samuel S. Hill, and Craig D. Atwood, Handbook of Denominations in the United States. Abingdon Press, 2001. ISBN 0-687-06983-1.
J. Michael Feazell, The Liberation of the Worldwide Church of God. Zondervan, 2003. ISBN 0-310-25011-0.
Gerald Flurry, Malachi's Message to God's Church Today. "A thorough explanation of how and why the Worldwide Church of God rejected Herbert Armstrong's teachings, and how to hold fast to Herbert Armstrong's teachings."
Walter Martin, The Kingdom of the Cults. Revised and Updated Edition, Bethany House, 2003. ISBN 0-7642-2821-8. See Appendix A, pp. 471–494.
Larry Nichols and George Mather, Discovering the Plain Truth: How the Worldwide Church of God Encountered the Gospel of Grace. InterVarsity Press, 1998. ISBN 0-8308-1969-X
Joseph Tkach, Transformed by Truth. Multnomah Publishers, 1997. ISBN 1-57673-181-2
http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/relmove/nrms/philcog.html
Tarling, Lowell R. (1981). "The Armstrong Churches". The Edges of Seventh-day Adventism: A Study of Separatist Groups Emerging from the Seventh-day Adventist Church (1844–1980). Barragga Bay, Bermagui South, NSW: Galilee Publications. pp. 41–62. ISBN 0-9593457-0-1.
External links[edit]
Grace Communion International official website
Statement of beliefs
Writing of H.W. Armstrong
Archive of the Ambassador Report publication published from 1975 through 1999
Exit & Support Network—aiding those spiritually abused by Worldwide Church of God and offshoots
God's Work NOW Holding fast to the teachings of Herbert W. Armstrong
Herbert W. Armstrong Searchable Library
Bad News Religion: The Virus That Attacks God's Grace by Greg Albrecht, World Publishing (2004), ISBN 0-529-11954-4
Journal: News of the Churches of God independent non denominational monthly newspaper.
Word of His Grace Ministries Support and Biblical Backing for ex-'Armstrong' members.
"Called to be Free" Documenting how the doctrinal changes in WWCG occurred after Armstrong's death. From the point of view of current WWCG leadership.


[hide]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Sabbath-keeping churches


Adventist
Seventh-day Adventist Church ·
 General Conference of the Church of God (Seventh-Day) ·
 Seventh Day Adventist Reform Movement ·
 True and Free Seventh-day Adventists ·
 Adventist Church of Promise
 

Non-Adventist
Church of the Great God ·
 Living Church of God ·
 Philadelphia Church of God ·
 Seventh Day Baptists ·
 United Church of God ·
 Global Church of God ·
 World Mission Society Church of God ·
 Grace Communion International ·
 Church of God International (USA) ·
 Church of God, a Worldwide Association ·
 Restored Church of God ·
 Church of God Fellowship ·
 True Jesus Church ·
 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Strangite)
 

Observe both Saturday and Sunday
Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church ·
 Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church
 

  


Categories: Church of God (Armstrong)
Christian radio
Religious organizations established in 1933
Church of God denominations
Christian denominations established in the 20th century
Christianity in Los Angeles, California
1933 establishments in California
Members of the National Association of Evangelicals
Evangelical denominations in North America







Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
العربية
Deutsch
Français
Bahasa Indonesia
Shqip
Svenska
Edit links
This page was last modified on 6 April 2015, at 22:35.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
 

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grace_Communion_International#Related_denominations












Grace Communion International

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Worldwide Church Of God)
Jump to: navigation, search

Grace Communion International (GCI) is an evangelical Christian denomination based in Glendora, California, United States.
Founded in 1934 as The Radio Church of God, Pastor General Herbert W. Armstrong had a significant, and often controversial, influence on 20th-century religious broadcasting and publishing in the United States and Europe, especially in the field of interpreting biblical end-time prophecies. It was renamed The Worldwide Church of God. It was also very famous with its multilingual free publication The Plain Truth and The World Tomorrow radio and television broadcasts worldwide.
Within a few years after Armstrong's death in 1986, the succeeding church administration completely reversed the denomination's doctrines and teachings to be compatible with mainstream evangelical Christianity, while many members and ministers left and formed other churches that conformed to many, but not all, of Armstrong's teachings. In 2009, the church changed the name The Worldwide Church of God adopting its current name.[1]
The GCI is a member of the National Association of Evangelicals, and has 50,000 members in 900 congregations in about 100 countries.[2]


Contents  [hide]
1 History 1.1 Beginnings
1.2 1970s 1.2.1 Ambassador International Cultural Foundation
1.2.2 Scandal and conflict
1.2.3 Receivership crisis
1.3 Armstrong's death and doctrinal changes
1.4 Women's ordination
2 Beliefs and practices 2.1 Current teachings
2.2 Historical teachings under Armstrong
3 Structure 3.1 International
3.2 Regional and local
4 Finances
5 Related denominations
6 References
7 Notes
8 External links

History[edit]
Beginnings[edit]
The Radio Church of God began with Herbert W. Armstrong, who in 1931 was ordained by the Oregon Conference of the Church of God (Seventh-Day), an Adventist group, and began serving a congregation in Eugene, Oregon. On January 7, 1934, Armstrong began hosting a broadcast on a local 100-watt radio station KORE in Eugene. It was essentially a condensed church service on the air, with hymn singing featured along with Armstrong's message, and was the launching point for what would become the Radio Church of God. In 1933, the Church of God (Seventh-Day) split. Armstrong, who sided with the faction centered in Salem, West Virginia, fell out with the local congregation over various doctrinal issues, especially his espousal of British Israelism.
Although his views were rejected by the local congregation, he gained a growing following of his own, chiefly through his World Tomorrow broadcasts and the Plain Truth magazine. Armstrong moved to Pasadena, California. To facilitate the work of the growing church, he incorporated it on March 3, 1946, as the Radio Church of God. In 1947, Ambassador College was founded in Pasadena by the church, and the campus served as the church's headquarters.
The broadcast of The World Tomorrow went into Europe on Radio Luxembourg on January 7, 1953. In 1956, Armstrong published the booklet 1975 in Prophecy!, which predicted an upcoming nuclear war and subsequent enslavement of mankind, leading to the return of Jesus Christ. He explained that the book was written to contrast the spiritual condition of the world to the modern inventions that scientists were promising for the year 1975.
In 1971 Armstrong criticized teachings that Christ would return in 1975 and that the church should flee to a "place of safety" in 1972, as no man knew the time of Christ's return (Matthew 24:36 and 25:13). Armstrong wrote that 1975 would be the least possible year for Christ's return.[3]
Because of his strong emphasis on these prophetic dates, the church grew quickly in the late 1960s and, on January 5, 1968, was renamed the Worldwide Church of God.[4]
Armstrong's son, Garner Ted Armstrong, who had been given the responsibility to host the radio and later the television version of The World Tomorrow, was formally disfellowshipped by his father in 1972. While church members were told at the time that the reason was Ted Armstrong's opposition to some of his father's teachings, Ted Armstrong later admitted that the actual reason was his relationships with many women. Armstrong, who resumed the broadcasting duties of The World Tomorrow program, did not reconcile with Ted before his death.
Armstrong's church was both authoritarian and totalitarian in its treatment of the membership. To maintain member loyalty, Armstrong's ministers indoctrinated them that they had been "called" by God into the only true Christian church on Earth and that all other Christian churches were Satanic counterfeits. If a called member were to question church doctrines, the member would be in peril of losing salvation and being cast into the lake of fire on Judgment Day. Further, ministers could arbitrarily disfellowship suspect members for any type of disloyalty. Disfellowshipping was openly announced in Sabbath services on a weekly basis but the reasons were rarely given. Still the church grew on a worldwide scale.
Armstrong taught a strict doctrine of tithing to the members. Ten percent of a member's gross income was to be given to the church, and yet another ten percent was to be saved for traveling to one of the church's annual feast days, the Feast of Tabernacles. Every third year, members were commanded to give a third tithe, slated to care for the "widows and orphans" of the church. Finally, the church observed seven high holy days throughout the year, on which members were asked to give offerings while baskets were passed. Every month Herbert Armstrong would mail out a co-worker letter to millions of non-members, as well as his members, in which he would claim that the church was on the verge of financial collapse. In reality, the church headquarters in Pasadena rested on prime real estate and had been modestly estimated to value $300,000,000. Armstrong's mansion was on Orange Grove Boulevard, on the route of the annual Rose Parade. The church possessed several such mansions in that area, known as Millionaire's Row, and had built other large facilities on the thirty-acre property, leading up to the building of a spectacular concert hall dubbed Ambassador Auditorium.
Armstrong spared no expense in the building of his Auditorium. External walls were made of emerald onyx. The walls in the outer lobby were a rare pink onyx, and expensive chandeliers, including two that had been owned by the Shah of Iran, hung from the gilt ceilings. In the concert hall, the walls were decorated in rosewood, so delicate that visitors were forbidden to take flash photographs.
1970s[edit]
In 1970, the first of many groups to splinter from the Worldwide Church of God were founded. Carl O'Beirn of Cleveland, Ohio, led the group that may have been the first to leave, the Church of God (O'Beirn). Others followed that year, including John Kerley's Top of the Line Ministry in 1978; the Restoration Church of God; the Church of God (Boise City) in Boise City, Oklahoma; Marvin Faulhaber's Sabbatarian, a group also known as Church of God (Sabbatarian); and the Fountain of Life Fellowship of James and Virginia Porter. These factions survived well past Herbert Armstrong's death in 1986, most retaining the name Church of God because Armstrong had pointed out that this is the name God calls his true church in the Bible.
When the fall of 1972 came and the time to flee to a place of safety did not occur, there was yet another exodus of members. However, church leaders created a red herring to divert members from believing the prophecy had failed. They blamed the members themselves for not being faithful enough; then they proclaimed a new gospel—that Armstrong was to bring the gospel of Jesus Christ to every nation and kingdom on Earth, as commissioned in the last chapter of Matthew, before Jesus would return. Armstrong set about to do this with the help of some public relations aides and King Leopold of Belgium. Armstrong did end up meeting with many world leaders to whom he would present expensive gifts, then preach to them that there were "two ways"—one the way of giving and the other the way of getting. He preached this message until his death.
Ambassador International Cultural Foundation[edit]
During the sixties "Armstrong had sought to put into stronger action what he later termed God’s way of give".[5] To Armstrong and his students, this was generally said to include "the way of character, generosity, cultural enrichment, true education: of beautifying the environment and caring for fellow man." He began undertaking humanitarian projects in underprivileged locales around the world, which sparked the creation of the church-run Ambassador International Cultural Foundation (AICF) in 1975. The Foundation’s efforts reached into several countries, providing staffing and funds to fight illiteracy, to create schools for the disabled, to set up mobile schools, and to conduct several archaeological digs at significant biblical sites. The church auditorium hosted, at highly subsidized ticket prices, hundreds of performances by noted artists such as Luciano Pavarotti, Vladimir Horowitz, Bing Crosby, Marcel Marceau, and Bob Hope.[6] Nevertheless, ticket sales could still not pay for the appearances of world-renowned performers, so Armstrong used church tithe money to subsidize these performances without informing his congregation of how "God's holy tithe" was being spent.
Quest was a periodical that was published monthly by AICF from July 1977 to September 1981. Originally published under the title Human Potential, the project was directed by Stanley Rader as a secular outreach of the church-funded AICF. Quest publishers hired a professional staff unrelated to the church to create a high-quality, glossy publication devoted to the humanities, travel, and the arts. The original name and design of Human Potential were conceived in the aftermath of Armstrong's poorly received 1975 in Prophecy!, a publication which caused accusations of false prophecy to spread like wildfire. (The use of the year 1975 was defended by church ministers as a device to explain Biblical prophecy, by contrasting it with the scientific world's declaration of 1975 as the year of technological "Utopia".)
The AICF had become secular in its approach and thinking. Thus, the church began to cut back on its funding. Eventually, because the AICF was perceived to have strayed from its original goals, it was discontinued by Armstrong and its assets were sold to other interests.
Scandal and conflict[edit]
In 1972, many members were disappointed that the events predicted by Herbert Armstrong did not come to pass. Most were unaware that Herbert Armstrong had been predicting the end of the world on the radio as far back as World War II, when he had proclaimed Hitler and Mussolini the Beast and False Prophet of the Book of Revelation. After the war ended, Armstrong attended a meeting in San Francisco in which a proposal was made to create the United Nations. He had also read a quote from Winston Churchill proposing the creation of a United States of Europe. This was a springboard for a new set of prophecies in which the European Union would rise up to become the Beast Power. While the European Union was an idea in the making, the nations of Europe were far from united, as the union itself was still another 20 years in the future. Because church literature such as The Wonderful World Tomorrow, 1975 in Prophecy!, and many others had attempted to pinpoint the date of Christ's return, members continued to wait anxiously for the Second Coming. Armstrong cleverly never predicted a date in his sermons, but this did not prevent his evangelists (such as Gerald Waterhouse) from presenting detailed, step-by-step accounts of the Second Coming in their sermons, which included Armstrong himself as one of two witnesses of the Book of Revelation.[citation needed]
Herbert Armstrong began to speak openly and critically of his son. The senior Armstrong voiced disapproval of Garner Ted's practice of attributing specific dates to end-time prophecies. Garner Ted also spoke of greatly expanding the church's media ministry on the model of the Church of Christ, Scientist with its widely read Christian Science Monitor. Herbert W. Armstrong vehemently disagreed.[citation needed]
In a report in the May 15, 1972, edition of Time magazine, Herbert Armstrong was reported to have said that Garner Ted was "in the bonds of Satan." [7] The elder Armstrong did not elaborate, but it was speculated that Herbert was alluding to Garner Ted's alleged problems with gambling and adultery with Ambassador College co-eds, and to serious doctrinal differences. Garner Ted Armstrong was soon relieved of his star role within the church.
Garner Ted led a secret coup to gain control of the Church and displace his Father.[citation needed] But it was Garner Ted who was to be removed. While Garner Ted Armstrong was being removed, Stanley Rader was orchestrating the church's involvement in a number of corporations which Rader and Herbert W. Armstrong established. Critics saw Rader's moves as an attempt to seize control of the church.[citation needed] Rader characterized his involvement as that of an advisor and claimed that his advice was opening doors for Armstrong that a strict theological role would not have allowed for. Herbert Armstrong claimed that he did not approve of the establishment of the AICF, which Rader set up ostensibly to give the elder Armstrong a role as the "Ambassador for World Peace without portfolio".[citation needed]
As the church was experiencing internal crises, its external, public face was also crumbling.[citation needed] Church followers had anticipated the removal of the church faithful to Petra, Jordan, to await the prophesied apocalypse.
Despite the scandals of 1972, the church continued to grow in the 1970s, with Herbert Armstrong still at the helm. In 1975, Armstrong baptized Stanley Rader, who until then had been a practitioner of Judaism despite his association with the church.
After being left a widower by the death of his wife, Loma, eleven years earlier, Armstrong married Ramona Martin, a woman nearly fifty years younger, in 1977 and moved to Tucson, Arizona while recovering from a heart attack. While Armstrong recuperated in his home in Arizona, he administered and guided church affairs through Stanley Rader and the church administration. The church continued to be headquartered in Pasadena.
With Garner Ted Armstrong resuming his role within the church, the rivalry between the younger Armstrong and Stanley Rader intensified. As the accusations of Garner Ted's past resurfaced, Herbert W. Armstrong started giving more responsibilities to Stanley Rader. This action was infuriating to the younger Armstrong, who thought it his birthright to take over as the leader of the Church. The adultery problems that reportedly had previously driven Garner Ted from the church allegedly continued unabated.[citation needed] In 1978, after a failed attempt to seize control of the Church from the Elder Armstrong, Garner Ted Armstrong was disfellowshipped a final time. Garner Ted moved to Tyler, Texas, and there founded a splinter group, the Church of God International. He later spearheaded a coalition of six ex-ministers who brought accusations of misappropriation of funds directed against Herbert W. Armstrong and Stanley Rader to the Attorney General of California. Contending that Herbert W. Armstrong and Stanley Rader were siphoning millions of dollars for their personal indulgences, the Attorney General's office seized the Pasadena Campus.[citation needed] This action was later determined to have been illegal.[citation needed]
Herbert Armstrong's daughter, Dorothy Matson, contacted her brother Ted prior to his final disfellowshipping and made a startling confession to him. She confessed that her father had molested her for ten years of her childhood until she finally was able to leave home. This infuriated Ted who met with his father to confront him. In a rage he shouted, "I could destroy you with this information!" This was how Armstrong described Ted being in the "bonds of Satan," "Just as Lucifer rebelled against God during his rebellion, so Ted has threatened me by rising up and saying, 'I could destroy you father.'" He conveniently left out why Ted could have destroyed him. This led to Ted's ousting. Distraught, Ted contacted fellow minister David Robinson who authored a book entitled Herbert Armstrong's Tangled Web, which included the story of Dorothy's molestation. Robinson met with Armstrong in his Tucson home and told him his book included the story of the incest. Armstrong admitted to Robinson that the story was indeed true. When Herbert's wife Ramona found out she immediately divorced him. Armstrong was cross-examined in court about the incest, but he pled the fifth, refusing to incriminate himself.[citation needed]
Receivership crisis[edit]
Garner Ted Armstrong blamed Stanley Rader for his two-time ousting from his father's church.[citation needed] Garner Ted and other former and discontented members of the Worldwide Church of God prompted the State of California to investigate charges of malfeasance by Rader and Herbert W. Armstrong. In 1979, California Attorney General George Deukmejian placed the church campus in Pasadena into financial receivership for a half year. The State of California went through the Church's records.[citation needed]
The matter gained the attention of Mike Wallace who investigated the church in a report for 60 Minutes. Wallace alleged that there had been lavish secret expenditures, conflict of interest insider deals, posh homes and lifestyles in the higher ranks, and the heavy involvement of Stanley Rader in financial manipulation.[citation needed] No legal charges were leveled against Herbert W. Armstrong, Stanley Rader, or the Worldwide Church of God. Wallace invited Rader to appear on 60 Minutes on April 15, 1979. Wallace showed Rader a secret tape recording in which Herbert Armstrong was purported to have alleged that Rader was attempting to take over the church after Armstrong's death, reasoning that the donated tithe money might be quite a "magnet" to some evangelists. Rader abruptly ended the interview.[8] This tape was later alleged to have been made about someone else, and illegally taped by one of the 6 embittered ex-members who had gone to the State of California with the accusations.[citation needed]
In the meantime, Herbert W. Armstrong switched the Worldwide Church of God Inc. corporations to "Corporate Sole" status, making him the sole officer and responsible party for the affairs of the corporations.
In referring to the investigation of the California Attorney General, Rader wrote Against the Gates of Hell: The Threat to Religious Freedom in America in 1980, in which he contended that his fight with the Attorney General was solely about the government's circumventing religious freedoms rather than about abuse of public trust or fraudulent misappropriation of tithe funds.
The California Second Court of Appeals overturned the decision on procedural grounds and added as dicta, "We are of the opinion that the underlying action [i.e., the state-imposed receivership] and its attendant provisional remedy of receivership were from the inception constitutionally infirm and predestined to failure."[9]
Stanley Rader left his positions within the church in 1981. While remaining a member, he left the public spotlight as an attorney, and retired.
Armstrong's death and doctrinal changes[edit]
On January 16, 1986, Herbert Armstrong died in Pasadena, California. Shortly before his death, on January 7, 1986, Armstrong appointed Joseph W. Tkach Sr. "... succeeding me as pastor general, in the difficult times ahead".
As early as 1988, Joseph W. Tkach Sr. began to make doctrinal changes. Doctrinal revisions were made quietly and slowly at first, but then openly and radically in January 1995. They were presented as new understandings of Christmas and Easter,[10] Babylon and the harlot,[11] British Israelism,[12] Saturday Sabbath,[13] and other doctrines.
In general, Tkach Sr. directed the church theology towards mainstream evangelical Christian belief. This caused much disillusionment among the membership and another rise of splinter groups. All these changes, the church admits, have organizationally brought about "catastrophic results," though they believe that it is spiritually the best thing that ever happened to them.[14] During the tenure of Joseph Tkach Sr., the church's membership declined by about 50 percent. His son, Joseph Tkach Jr., succeeded him after his death in 1995.
Eventually all of Herbert Armstrong's writings were withdrawn from print by the Worldwide Church of God. In the 2004 video production Called To Be Free, Greg Albrecht, former dean of WCG's Ambassador College, declared Herbert Armstrong to be both a false prophet and a heretic.[15]
Women's ordination[edit]
In 2007 the Worldwide Church of God decided to allow women to serve as pastors and elders.[16] This decision was reached after several years of study.[16] Debby Bailey became the first female elder in the Worldwide Church of God in 2007.[17]
Beliefs and practices[edit]
Current teachings[edit]
After Armstrong's death, the church's new leadership began a process of theological revision. The church now claims to be considered within the evangelical mainstream as shown by its acceptance into the National Association of Evangelicals. Its doctrinal summary highlights mainstream Protestant beliefs such as the Trinity, the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, that faith in him is the only way to receive salvation, and that the Bible is the inspired and infallible word of God.[18]
Historical teachings under Armstrong[edit]
Main article: Armstrongism
Until Armstrong's death, the Worldwide Church of God adhered to its founder's teachings.[citation needed] The most notable feature was Armstrong's version of British Israelism, which was based on reading the account of Jacob blessing his sons (Genesis 49) as end-time prophecy. Armstrong saw in it a description of national characteristics of contemporary descendants of Jacob, and deduced that the United States, the British Commonwealth and several countries situated in northwestern Europe were actually the Lost Tribes of Israel. Armstrong held that these countries played a central role in the end times that were about to begin.[citation needed]
Armstrong rejected the doctrine of the Trinity, regarding it as a pagan concept absorbed into mainstream Christianity.[19] Armstrong contended that God was not a closed Trinity but was instead building a family through the Holy Spirit, which Armstrong considered to be God's powerful unifying essence guiding and bringing to remembrance those things which Christ taught. Armstrong contended that the Spirit is not a distinct personality like the Father and the Son. Armstrong also taught that members of the church would actually become members of the God family themselves after the resurrection. Armstrong rejected as unbiblical the traditional Christian views of heaven, hell, eternal punishment and salvation.[20]
The church strictly observed the Saturday Sabbath, annual festivals described in the twenty-third chapter of Leviticus, and strongly advocated the clean meats of Leviticus 11. Members were encouraged to tithe and to follow a dress code during services. They were discouraged from marrying outside the church. In fact, these practices are still observed in several of the Church's remaining branches today. Herbert W. Armstrong summarized his teachings in his book Mystery of the Ages, published shortly before his death. This book was the centerpiece of a titanic struggle between the Philadelphia Church of God and the remnant of the Worldwide Church of God under Joseph Tkach Jr. The battle went as far as the United States Supreme Court.[citation needed] At that point, however, the leaders of the WCG decided to drop the case and give over not only Mystery of the Ages, but also several other works originally written by Armstrong.[citation needed]
Under Armstrong's leadership, the Worldwide Church of God was accused of being a cult with unorthodox and, to most Christians, heretical teachings.[21] Critics also contended that the WCG did not proclaim salvation by grace through faith alone, but rather required works as part of salvation. The late Walter Martin, in his classic The Kingdom of the Cults, devoted 34 pages to the group, claiming that Armstrong borrowed freely from Seventh-Day Adventist, Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormon doctrines.[22] Armstrong contended that all Church doctrine could be proved simply and effectively through the Bible, and that one did not need to "accept on faith" any of the Worldwide Church of God's doctrinal beliefs.
Structure[edit]
International[edit]
Grace Communion International has a hierarchical polity. The ecclesiastical policies are determined by the Advisory Council of Elders. Members of the Advisory Council are appointed by the President. The President, who also holds the title of Pastor General, is chief executive and ecclesiastical officer of the denomination. A Doctrinal Advisory Team may report to the Advisory Council on the church's official doctrinal statements, epistemology, or apologetics. The President may pocket veto doctrinal positions he determines to be heretical. However, the President is also a member of the Doctrinal Advisory Team, and so he is aware of and involved in the activities of that committee.[23] Historically, Presidents, as chairmen of the board of directors, have appointed their own successor. This and the President's power to appoint and remove members of the Advisory Council have remained areas of concern even among those who applaud the church's doctrinal changes.
The Church maintains national offices and satellite offices in multiple countries. Pastor General Joseph Tkach, Jr. periodically travels worldwide in personal appearance campaigns to congregations in diverse intercontinental areas, such as Great Britain, Africa, and the Philippines. However, membership and tithe income originate primarily from the eastern United States.
Regional and local[edit]
In the United States, denominational contact with local assemblies or local church home small group meetings, i.e., cell churches, is facilitated by district superintendents, each of which is responsible for a large number of churches in a geographical region (such as Florida or the Northeast) or in a specialized language group (such as Spanish-speaking congregations).
Local churches are led by a senior pastor, pastoral leadership team (with one person designated as a congregational pastoral leader), each of which is supervised by a district pastoral leader. Some senior pastors are responsible for a single local church, but many are responsible for working in two or more churches. Salary compensation for the paid local church pastor, if available, is determined by the local church.
Most local church groups retain the long-standing traditional policy of meeting in leased or rented facilities for meetings or services. The trend since 2000, however, has been to adopt a local church setting blending into the local milieu with headquarters retaining administrative oversight functions. As of 2005, the church established a new computer system of financial checks and balances for church budgets at the local level. Also, GCI now mandates a local Advisory Council, which includes a number of volunteer ministry leaders (some of whom are also called deacons), and often additional elders or assistant pastors.
Finances[edit]
The early Worldwide Church of God used a three-tithe system, under which members were expected to give a tithe or ten percent "of their increase," usually interpreted as a family's income.
The first tithe, 10 percent of a member's total income, was sent to church headquarters to finance "the work", which was all operations of the church, as well as broadcasting and publishing the church's message.
The second tithe was saved by the individual member to fund the member's (and his family's) observance of the annual holy days, especially the 8-day-long Feast of Tabernacles. Unlike the first tithe, these funds were not sent into the church but retained by the member.
A third tithe was required in the third and sixth years of a personal seven-year tithing cycle, and it was also sent to headquarters. The third tithe was used to support the indigent, widows, and orphans - distribution was decided privately at the discretion of the ministry.
In contrast to many other churches' religious services, the practice of WCG was not to pass around offering plates during weekly church services but only during holy day church services (seven days each year). These funds were considered "freewill offerings" and regarded as entirely separate from regular tithes. The church also gathered funds in the form of donations from "co-workers," those who read the church's free literature or watched the weekly TV show but did not actually attend services.
Under Joseph W. Tkach Sr., the mandatory nature of the church's three-tithe system was abolished, and it was suggested that tithes could be calculated on net, rather than gross, income. Today, the GCI headquarters has downsized for financial survival. The denomination sold much of its property, including sites used for festivals, campsites built for teenagers, its college campuses, and private aircraft.[citation needed] They discontinued publishing all the books, booklets and magazines published by Armstrong.
To further economize, the church sold its properties in Pasadena and purchased an office building in Glendora, California. Formerly, the church's membership—meeting in rented halls on Saturdays such as public school buildings, dance halls, hotels and other venues—sent all tithe donations directly to the denomination. Under the new financial reporting regime, local churches are permitted to use 85% of funds for locally for ministry, including constructing local church buildings for use by the congregations. As of 2007, 85 percent or more of all congregational donations stay in the local area, with 15 percent going to the church's headquarters in Glendora for ministerial training and support, legal services, and denominational administration.[citation needed]
Related denominations[edit]
From the 1970s through to the 1990s several of the Sabbatarian Churches of God that adhered to some of Armstrong's teachings separated from WCG. Due to the significant doctrinal changes which occurred in WCG throughout the 1990s, the largest percentage of ministers and members left WCG during this decade. This resulted in the formation of many denominations. There is significant overlap in their teachings with those of Herbert W. Armstrong. Most claim to teach "all" of the truths restored through Herbert W. Armstrong, most notably the Philadelphia Church of God (1989). The "PCG" purchased the copyright to several of the books and booklets of Herbert W. Armstrong and systematically changed both the wording, content and meaning of what Armstrong wrote. They maintain that Armstrong was right and that they are preaching and teaching the very same teachings and are in fact a continuation of the parent WCG.
Worldwide Church of God organizational splits resulted in the establishment of the Global Church of God, the Living Church of God (1993, 1998), United Church of God (1995), and the Restored Church of God (1998).[24] The United Church of God (UCG) is the largest of these denominations.[25]
Denominations resulting from various splits includeChurch of God International (org. 1978)
Philadelphia Church of God (org. 1989)
Twentieth Century Church of God (org. 1990)
Church of God (Philadelphia Era) (org. 1991)
Church of the Great God (1992)
Global Church of God (1992)
United Church of God (1995)
Church of God Fellowship (1992)
Living Church of God (1998)
Restored Church of God (1998)
Church of God, an International Community (1998)
Pacific Church of God (2009)
Church of God, a Worldwide Association (2010)
Most teach that they are the continuation of the WCG and many have also rewritten Armstrong's books and booklets. Some have altered them to fit the splinter church's particular church doctrines.
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ "Worldwide Church of God Announces Name Change". Worldwide Church of God. Grace Communion International. Retrieved 15 September 2012.
2.Jump up ^ "Our Story". Grace Communion International.
3.Jump up ^ "HWA Preached to Students in 1971 Why 1975 Could Not be the Year of Christ's Return". The Radio Church of God. COGTV. Retrieved 2 January 2014.
4.Jump up ^ "1968 Certificate Of Amendment Of Articles Of Incorporation Of Radio Church Of God". The Radio Church of God. The Painful Truth. Retrieved 15 September 2012.
5.Jump up ^ Flurry, Stephen (October 30, 2006). Raising the Ruins:The Fight to Revive the Legacy of Herbert W. Armstrong. Philadelphia Church of God. pp. 23–24. ISBN 978-0-9745507-1-8.
6.Jump up ^ Flurry, pp. 25-26
7.Jump up ^ "Religion: Garner Ted Armstrong, Where Are You?". Time Magazine Monday, May 15, 1972 (TIME). 15 May 1972. Retrieved 15 September 2012.
8.Jump up ^ "Stanley Rader on "Sixty Minutes" with Mike Wallace". 60 Minutes. The Painful Truth. Retrieved 15 September 2012.
9.Jump up ^ PEOPLE EX REL. DEUKMEJIAN v. WORLDWIDE CHURCH OF GOD, 127 CA3d 547 (Court of Appeals of California, Second Appellate District, Division Two December 9, 1981).
10.Jump up ^ "A Call for Tolerance on Christmas and Easter". Grace Communion International. Worldwide Church of God. Retrieved 15 September 2012.
11.Jump up ^ "Who Is "Babylon"?". Grace Communion International. Worldwide Church of God. Retrieved 15 September 2012.
12.Jump up ^ "Anglo-Israelism and the United States & Britain in Prophecy". Grace Communion International. Worldwide Church of God. Retrieved 15 September 2012.
13.Jump up ^ "Is Leviticus 23:3 a Command to Have Worship Services on the Weekly Sabbath?". Grace Communion International. Worldwide Church of God. Retrieved 15 September 2012.
14.Jump up ^ "Armstrongism". Apologetics. Ankerberg Theological Research Institute. Retrieved 1 September 2012.
15.Jump up ^ "Called To Be Free". (video, point 61:57) by Living Hope Video Ministries
16.^ Jump up to: a b "When churches started to ordain women". Religioustolerance.org. Retrieved 2010-11-19.
17.Jump up ^ WCG has gotten around to ordaining its first woman according to its Jan 31 update
18.Jump up ^ "The GCI Statement of Beliefs". Grace Communion International. Worldwide Church of God. Retrieved 15 September 2012.
19.Jump up ^ Kellner, Mark A. "Worldwide Church of God Joins NAE". Christianity Today Library. Christianity Today. Retrieved 15 September 2012.
20.Jump up ^ Covington, David. What is the Worldwide Church of God? Quoted at http://www.apologeticsindex.org/w01.html, accessed 03-13-2007
21.Jump up ^ "Worldwide Church of God (WCG)". Apologetics Index. Retrieved 15 September 2012.
22.Jump up ^ Tucker, Ruth. "From the Fringe to the Fold". 7/15/1996. Christianity Today. Retrieved 15 September 2012.
23.Jump up ^ "U.S. Church Administration Manuals". Grace Communion International. Worldwide Church of God. Retrieved 15 September 2012.
24.Jump up ^ "Worldwide Church of God Organizational Splits". Grace Communion International. Worldwide Church of God. Retrieved 15 September 2012.
25.Jump up ^ Christianity Today, July 15, 1996.
Notes[edit]
Frank S. Mead, Samuel S. Hill, and Craig D. Atwood, Handbook of Denominations in the United States. Abingdon Press, 2001. ISBN 0-687-06983-1.
J. Michael Feazell, The Liberation of the Worldwide Church of God. Zondervan, 2003. ISBN 0-310-25011-0.
Gerald Flurry, Malachi's Message to God's Church Today. "A thorough explanation of how and why the Worldwide Church of God rejected Herbert Armstrong's teachings, and how to hold fast to Herbert Armstrong's teachings."
Walter Martin, The Kingdom of the Cults. Revised and Updated Edition, Bethany House, 2003. ISBN 0-7642-2821-8. See Appendix A, pp. 471–494.
Larry Nichols and George Mather, Discovering the Plain Truth: How the Worldwide Church of God Encountered the Gospel of Grace. InterVarsity Press, 1998. ISBN 0-8308-1969-X
Joseph Tkach, Transformed by Truth. Multnomah Publishers, 1997. ISBN 1-57673-181-2
http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/relmove/nrms/philcog.html
Tarling, Lowell R. (1981). "The Armstrong Churches". The Edges of Seventh-day Adventism: A Study of Separatist Groups Emerging from the Seventh-day Adventist Church (1844–1980). Barragga Bay, Bermagui South, NSW: Galilee Publications. pp. 41–62. ISBN 0-9593457-0-1.
External links[edit]
Grace Communion International official website
Statement of beliefs
Writing of H.W. Armstrong
Archive of the Ambassador Report publication published from 1975 through 1999
Exit & Support Network—aiding those spiritually abused by Worldwide Church of God and offshoots
God's Work NOW Holding fast to the teachings of Herbert W. Armstrong
Herbert W. Armstrong Searchable Library
Bad News Religion: The Virus That Attacks God's Grace by Greg Albrecht, World Publishing (2004), ISBN 0-529-11954-4
Journal: News of the Churches of God independent non denominational monthly newspaper.
Word of His Grace Ministries Support and Biblical Backing for ex-'Armstrong' members.
"Called to be Free" Documenting how the doctrinal changes in WWCG occurred after Armstrong's death. From the point of view of current WWCG leadership.


[hide]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Sabbath-keeping churches


Adventist
Seventh-day Adventist Church ·
 General Conference of the Church of God (Seventh-Day) ·
 Seventh Day Adventist Reform Movement ·
 True and Free Seventh-day Adventists ·
 Adventist Church of Promise
 

Non-Adventist
Church of the Great God ·
 Living Church of God ·
 Philadelphia Church of God ·
 Seventh Day Baptists ·
 United Church of God ·
 Global Church of God ·
 World Mission Society Church of God ·
 Grace Communion International ·
 Church of God International (USA) ·
 Church of God, a Worldwide Association ·
 Restored Church of God ·
 Church of God Fellowship ·
 True Jesus Church ·
 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Strangite)
 

Observe both Saturday and Sunday
Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church ·
 Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church
 

  


Categories: Church of God (Armstrong)
Christian radio
Religious organizations established in 1933
Church of God denominations
Christian denominations established in the 20th century
Christianity in Los Angeles, California
1933 establishments in California
Members of the National Association of Evangelicals
Evangelical denominations in North America







Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
العربية
Deutsch
Français
Bahasa Indonesia
Shqip
Svenska
Edit links
This page was last modified on 6 April 2015, at 22:35.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
 

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grace_Communion_International#Related_denominations













Branch Davidians

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search



 This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (October 2013)
Branch Davidians
Waco Branch Davidians Flag.png
A painting of the Branch Davidian flag, by Matthew Wittmer.

Founder
Benjamin Roden
Regions with significant populations

Branch Davidian Seventh Day Adventists

Mount Carmel
Elk, Texas[1]
Mount Carmel, Texas, U.S.

Scriptures
Isaiah 9:7, Ezekiel 9, Hosea 1-2, Micah 6:9, Micah 7:14, Matthew 20, Revelation 7:6, Revelation 13, Revelation 14
The Branch Davidians (also known as "The Branch") are a religious group that originated in 1955 from a schism in the Davidian Seventh-day Adventists ("Davidians"), a reform movement that began as an offshoot from the Seventh-day Adventist Church ("Adventists") around 1930. Some of those who accepted the reform message had been removed from membership of the Seventh-day Adventist Church because of their supplemental teachings.
From its inception in 1930, the reform movement believed themselves to be living in a time when Bible prophecies of a final divine judgment were coming to pass as a prelude to Christ's Second Coming. The name "Branch Davidian" is most widely known for the Waco siege of 1993 on their property (known as the Mount Carmel Center) near Waco, Texas. The 51-day siege, by the ATF, FBI, and Texas National Guard, resulted in the deaths of the Branch Davidians' leader, David Koresh, as well as 82 other Branch Davidian men, women, and children, and four ATF agents.[2][3]
Today, the original Davidian Seventh-day Adventists and the Branch Davidian Seventh-day Adventists are two different and distinct groups. The doctrinal beliefs differ on such teachings as the Holy Spirit and its nature, the feast days and requirements, and who had the prophetic office since Victor Houteff's death.


Contents  [hide]
1 Early history
2 Waco siege
3 See also
4 References
5 External links

Early history[edit]
In 1929 Victor Houteff, a Bulgarian immigrant and a Seventh-day Adventist Sabbath School teacher in a local church in Southern California, claimed that he had a new message for the entire church. He presented this message in a book, The Shepherd's Rod: The 144,000—A Call for Reformation.[4] The Adventist leadership rejected Houteff's message as contrary to the Adventists' basic teachings and disfellowshipped (removed from membership) Houteff and his followers. However, there was some controversy over the method the leadership took to disfellowship Houteff.
In 1935 Houteff established his headquarters to the west of Waco, Texas.[5] After Houteff died in 1955, the segment of the group loyal to Houteff continued as the Davidian Seventh-day Adventists.
But a splinter group, the Branch Davidian Seventh-day Adventists, was begun by Benjamin Roden and headed after Roden's death by his wife Lois Roden. After Lois Roden died a bitter power struggle ensued between Lois Roden's son George Roden and her designated successor David Koresh (then still using his birth name of Vernon Howell), eventually won by Koresh.
Waco siege[edit]
Main article: Waco siege
By the time of the 1993 Waco siege, Koresh had encouraged his followers to think of themselves as "students of the Seven Seals" rather than as "Branch Davidians." During the standoff one of his followers publicly announced that he wanted them to thereafter be identified by the name "Koreshians".[6]
It is claimed that Koresh was never authorised to use the name "Branch Davidians" for his breakaway sect,[7] and that the church of that name continues to represent that part of the Branch church which did not follow him.
See also[edit]
Unintended Consequences (novel)
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Smyrl, Vivian Elizabeth. "Elk, Texas". Handbook of Texas - Texas State Historical Association. Retrieved 25 November 2012.
2.Jump up ^ Gazecki, William; Gifford, Dan; McNulty, Michael. "Waco: The Rules of Engagement (1997)". Film Documentary. IMDb - Internet Movie Database. Retrieved 25 November 2012.
3.Jump up ^ Newport, Kenneth G.C. (June 22, 2006). "The Branch Davidians of Waco: The History and Beliefs of an Apocalyptic Sect". Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0199245741. 
4.Jump up ^ The General Association of Branch Davidian Seventh Day Adventists. "The Shepherd's Rod, Vol. 1". The-branch.org. Retrieved 2011-03-18.
5.Jump up ^ Pitts, William L. "Davidians and Branch Davidians". Handbook of Texas - Texas State Historical Association. Retrieved November 25, 2012.
6.Jump up ^ "Mr. Ricks [FBI negotiator] said today that Ms. Schroeder had told him that members of the sect, a renegade offshoot of Seventh-day Adventists, henceforth wanted to be known as Koreshians." By Robert Reinhold, Published: March 15, 1993 New York Times [brackets added].
7.Jump up ^ The General Association of Branch Davidian Seventh Day Adventists,
External links[edit]
The General Association of Branch Davidian Seventh Day Adventists
"The Great Controversy Over 'The Shepherd's Rod'" by Victor T. Houteff, giving his version of events surrounding his defellowshipping


[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Branch Davidians













































































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Sabbath-keeping churches





































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Mass suicide
















































Coordinates: 31.596089°N 96.98804°W
  


Categories: Branch Davidianism
Adventism
Christian denominations established in the 20th century
United States private paramilitary groups
Religious paramilitary organizations
Christian new religious movements








Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
Български
Català
Čeština
Deutsch
Español
فارسی
한국어
Bahasa Indonesia
Italiano
Lietuvių
Bahasa Melayu
Nederlands
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Polski
Português
Русский
Simple English
Suomi
Svenska
Українська
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 1 May 2015, at 17:00.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
 

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Branch_Davidians













Branch Davidians

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search



 This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (October 2013)
Branch Davidians
Waco Branch Davidians Flag.png
A painting of the Branch Davidian flag, by Matthew Wittmer.

Founder
Benjamin Roden
Regions with significant populations

Branch Davidian Seventh Day Adventists

Mount Carmel
Elk, Texas[1]
Mount Carmel, Texas, U.S.

Scriptures
Isaiah 9:7, Ezekiel 9, Hosea 1-2, Micah 6:9, Micah 7:14, Matthew 20, Revelation 7:6, Revelation 13, Revelation 14
The Branch Davidians (also known as "The Branch") are a religious group that originated in 1955 from a schism in the Davidian Seventh-day Adventists ("Davidians"), a reform movement that began as an offshoot from the Seventh-day Adventist Church ("Adventists") around 1930. Some of those who accepted the reform message had been removed from membership of the Seventh-day Adventist Church because of their supplemental teachings.
From its inception in 1930, the reform movement believed themselves to be living in a time when Bible prophecies of a final divine judgment were coming to pass as a prelude to Christ's Second Coming. The name "Branch Davidian" is most widely known for the Waco siege of 1993 on their property (known as the Mount Carmel Center) near Waco, Texas. The 51-day siege, by the ATF, FBI, and Texas National Guard, resulted in the deaths of the Branch Davidians' leader, David Koresh, as well as 82 other Branch Davidian men, women, and children, and four ATF agents.[2][3]
Today, the original Davidian Seventh-day Adventists and the Branch Davidian Seventh-day Adventists are two different and distinct groups. The doctrinal beliefs differ on such teachings as the Holy Spirit and its nature, the feast days and requirements, and who had the prophetic office since Victor Houteff's death.


Contents  [hide]
1 Early history
2 Waco siege
3 See also
4 References
5 External links

Early history[edit]
In 1929 Victor Houteff, a Bulgarian immigrant and a Seventh-day Adventist Sabbath School teacher in a local church in Southern California, claimed that he had a new message for the entire church. He presented this message in a book, The Shepherd's Rod: The 144,000—A Call for Reformation.[4] The Adventist leadership rejected Houteff's message as contrary to the Adventists' basic teachings and disfellowshipped (removed from membership) Houteff and his followers. However, there was some controversy over the method the leadership took to disfellowship Houteff.
In 1935 Houteff established his headquarters to the west of Waco, Texas.[5] After Houteff died in 1955, the segment of the group loyal to Houteff continued as the Davidian Seventh-day Adventists.
But a splinter group, the Branch Davidian Seventh-day Adventists, was begun by Benjamin Roden and headed after Roden's death by his wife Lois Roden. After Lois Roden died a bitter power struggle ensued between Lois Roden's son George Roden and her designated successor David Koresh (then still using his birth name of Vernon Howell), eventually won by Koresh.
Waco siege[edit]
Main article: Waco siege
By the time of the 1993 Waco siege, Koresh had encouraged his followers to think of themselves as "students of the Seven Seals" rather than as "Branch Davidians." During the standoff one of his followers publicly announced that he wanted them to thereafter be identified by the name "Koreshians".[6]
It is claimed that Koresh was never authorised to use the name "Branch Davidians" for his breakaway sect,[7] and that the church of that name continues to represent that part of the Branch church which did not follow him.
See also[edit]
Unintended Consequences (novel)
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Smyrl, Vivian Elizabeth. "Elk, Texas". Handbook of Texas - Texas State Historical Association. Retrieved 25 November 2012.
2.Jump up ^ Gazecki, William; Gifford, Dan; McNulty, Michael. "Waco: The Rules of Engagement (1997)". Film Documentary. IMDb - Internet Movie Database. Retrieved 25 November 2012.
3.Jump up ^ Newport, Kenneth G.C. (June 22, 2006). "The Branch Davidians of Waco: The History and Beliefs of an Apocalyptic Sect". Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0199245741. 
4.Jump up ^ The General Association of Branch Davidian Seventh Day Adventists. "The Shepherd's Rod, Vol. 1". The-branch.org. Retrieved 2011-03-18.
5.Jump up ^ Pitts, William L. "Davidians and Branch Davidians". Handbook of Texas - Texas State Historical Association. Retrieved November 25, 2012.
6.Jump up ^ "Mr. Ricks [FBI negotiator] said today that Ms. Schroeder had told him that members of the sect, a renegade offshoot of Seventh-day Adventists, henceforth wanted to be known as Koreshians." By Robert Reinhold, Published: March 15, 1993 New York Times [brackets added].
7.Jump up ^ The General Association of Branch Davidian Seventh Day Adventists,
External links[edit]
The General Association of Branch Davidian Seventh Day Adventists
"The Great Controversy Over 'The Shepherd's Rod'" by Victor T. Houteff, giving his version of events surrounding his defellowshipping


[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Branch Davidians













































































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Sabbath-keeping churches





































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Mass suicide
















































Coordinates: 31.596089°N 96.98804°W
  


Categories: Branch Davidianism
Adventism
Christian denominations established in the 20th century
United States private paramilitary groups
Religious paramilitary organizations
Christian new religious movements








Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
Български
Català
Čeština
Deutsch
Español
فارسی
한국어
Bahasa Indonesia
Italiano
Lietuvių
Bahasa Melayu
Nederlands
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Polski
Português
Русский
Simple English
Suomi
Svenska
Українська
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 1 May 2015, at 17:00.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
 

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Branch_Davidians









NRM apologist

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Cult Apologist)
Jump to: navigation, search

A new religious movement apologist (NRM apologist or cult apologist) is a person who offers arguments in defense of controversial new religious movements (pejoratively called cults).[1][2] Sociologists Ben Zablocki and Thomas Robbins say the term is used by critics of new religious movements to devalue scholars whose writings they consider too sympathetic or tolerant of such groups.[3]


Contents  [hide]
1 Responses
2 Positive use
3 References
4 Further reading
5 External links

Responses[edit]
Scholars accused of being cult apologists reply to the criticism in various ways, including expressing their concern for religious freedom and tolerance. Douglas E. Cowan wrote that he had been referred to as a cult apologist, along with Eileen Barker, Massimo Introvigne, Jeff Hadden, Irving Hexham, Anson Shupe, David G. Bromley, and Gordon Melton.[4] Cowan stated that he felt this characterization was "inaccurate and insulting", and that these individuals actually stand for the values of religious tolerance.[4]
Cowan and Bromley have stated that the use of the cult apologist label was part of a response by the anti-cult movement, notably the American Family Foundation (now the International Cultic Studies Association) and the old Cult Awareness Network, to the lack of academic support for the brainwashing hypothesis, and employed as a strategy to undermine social scientists' credibility.[5] Cowan also refers to the term as a "pejorative" with potentially unhelpful consequences.[6] Michael Kropveld agrees with Cowan that the term "cult-apologist" is pejorative but also adds "Anti-Cult Movement", "Pro-Cult Movement", and "anti-cultist" to a list of divisive labels that are not constructive towards productive dialogue between academics, and should be avoided.[7]
Gordon Melton also dismisses these criticisms by stating that the usage of the term "cults" by what he calls "anti-cultists" reflects the negative evaluation that new religious movements have endured.[8] He also objects to being personally labeled an "apologist" by the "anti-cult movement".[9]
Anson Shupe has defined cult apologist as a "derogatory term employed by anticultists to refer to scholars and civil libertarians whose research conclusions and views disagree with the anticult movement's own suspicions or conclusions, to wit, that many religious movements are necessarily subversive to society and dangerous to individuals who join them."[10]
Positive use[edit]
The expression "cult apologist" was used by the evangelical Christian countercult movement writer Walter Martin in 1955, in Martin's Christian handbook The Rise of the Cults. Martin used the neologism in a positive and self-referential way to identify ministries that evangelize to cult members. He used the expression again in his next book The Christian and the Cults (Zondervan 1956, p. 6). Positive use of the term "cult apologetics" is found in Answers to the Cultist at Your Door, by Robert and Gretchen Passantino,[11] and in Alan Gomes's contributory chapter in the first posthumous edition of Martin's The Kingdom of the Cults.[12]
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Robbins, Thomas (2004). "Introduction: Alternative Religions, the State and the Globe". In Philip Lucas. New Religious Movements in the Twenty-First Century: Legal, Political, and Social Challenges in Global Perspective. Routledge. p. 15. ISBN 0-415-96577-2.
2.Jump up ^ Lewis, James R. (2004). "Introduction". In James R. Lewis. The Oxford Handbook of New Religious Movements. Oxford University Press. p. 7. ISBN 0-19-514986-6.
3.Jump up ^ Zablocki, Benjamin; Robbins, Thomas. Misunderstanding Cults, Introduction, p. 26, University of Toronto Press, ISBN 978-0-8020-8188-9
4.^ Jump up to: a b From Parchment to Pixels: The Christian Countercult on the Internet, Douglas E. Cowan, Center for Studies on New Religions, 2001, Conference, London.
5.Jump up ^ Bromley, David G.; Cowan, Douglas (2007). "The invention of a counter-tradition". In Lewis, James R.; Hammer, Olav. The Invention of Sacred Tradition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-86479-8.
6.Jump up ^ Cowan, Douglas E. "Cult Apology: A Modest (Typological) Proposal", Paper presented to the 2002 Society for the Scientific Study of Religion Conference “Boundaries and Commitments in NRM Research” November 1–3, 2002, Salt Lake City, Utah, p. 3.
7.Jump up ^ Kropveld, Michael (June 2002). "An Example for Controversy: Creating a Model for Reconciliation" (DOC). American Family Foundation Annual Conference. Orlando, Florida: International Cultic Studies Association.
 The use of terminology such as “Anti-Cult Movement” (ACM) and “Pro-Cult Movement” (PCM), “anti-cultist” and “pro-cultist” or “cult apologist” are examples of divisive labels that are hardly conducive to encouraging dialogue or discernment.
8.Jump up ^ Melton, Godon J., Modern Alternative Religions in the West. pp.610, Penguin (1997), ISBN 0-14-013599-5
9.Jump up ^ Combatants in Cult War Attempt Reconciliation: Peacemaking conference is held near Seattle, San Francisco Chronicle, Don Lattin, May 1, 2000.
10.Jump up ^ Shupe, Anson; Darnell, Susan E. (2006). Agents of Discord. New Brunswick (U.S.A.), London (U.K.): Transaction Publishers. p. xv. ISBN 0-7658-0323-2.
11.Jump up ^ Passantino, Robert (1981). Answers to the Cultist at Your Door. Harvest House. p. 13.
12.Jump up ^ Martin, Walter (1997). The Kingdom of the Cults. Bethany House Publisher. p. 333.
Further reading[edit]
Amitrani, Alberto and Di Marzio, Rafaella: Blind, or Just Don't Want to See? Brainwashing, Mystification, and Suspicion
Benjamin Beith-Hallahmi: O Truant Muse': Collaborationism and Research Integrity, in Zablocki and Robbins (ed.): Misunderstanding Cults, 2001, ISBN 0-8020-8188-6
Janja Lalich: Pitafalls in the Sociological Study of Cults, in Zablocki and Robbins (ed.): Misunderstanding Cults, 2001 ISBN 0-8020-8188-6
Susan J. Palmer: Caught up in the Cult Wars: Confessions of a Canadian Researcher, in Zablocki and Robbins (ed.): Misunderstanding Cults, 2001
Thomas Robbins: Balance and Fairness in the Study of Alternative Religions, in Zablocki and Robbins (ed.): Misunderstanding Cults, 2001 ISBN 0-8020-8188-6
External links[edit]
Reflections on Louisville: The Countercult in Conversation by Douglas Cowan


[hide]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Opposition to new religious movements


Secular groups
APA Task Force on Deceptive and Indirect Methods of Persuasion and Control ·
 Cult Awareness Network ·
 International Cultic Studies Association - ICSA (Formerly: the AFF, American Family Foundation) ·
 The Family Survival Trust - TFST (Formerly: FAIR - Family Action Information and Rescue) ·
 Fight Against Coercive Tactics Network ·
 Cult Information Centre
 

Secular individuals
Carol Giambalvo ·
 Steven Hassan ·
 Galen Kelly ·
 Michael Langone ·
 Ted Patrick ·
 Rick Ross ·
 Tom Sackville ·
 Jim Siegelman ·
 Margaret Singer ·
 Louis Jolyon West ·
 Cyril Vosper ·
 Lawrence Wollersheim
 

Religious groups
Reachout Trust ·
 Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry ·
 Christian Research Institute ·
 Dialog Center International ·
 Personal Freedom Outreach ·
 Watchman Fellowship ·
 New England Institute of Religious Research ·
 Midwest Christian Outreach ·
 Institute for Religious Research ·
 Spiritual Counterfeits Project ·
 Wellspring Retreat and Resource Center
 

Religious individuals
Johannes Aagaard ·
 Alexander Dvorkin ·
 Ronald Enroth ·
 Hank Hanegraaff ·
 Paul R. Martin ·
 Walter Ralston Martin ·
 Robert Passantino
 

Governmental organizations
European Federation of Centres of Research and Information on Sectarianism ·
 Centre contre les manipulations mentales ·
 Union nationale des associations de défense des familles et de l'individu ·
 MIVILUDES ·
 Parliamentary Commission on Cults in France
 

Individuals in government
Catherine Picard
 

Concepts
Cult ·
 NRM apologist ·
 Deprogramming ·
 Freedom of religion ·
 Heresy ·
 Mind control ·
 New religious movement
 

Historical events
About-Picard law ·
 Governmental lists of cults and sects ·
 Persecution of Bahá'ís ·
 Persecution of Falun Gong ·
 Persecution of Jehovah's Witnesses ·
 Anti-Mormonism ·
 Scientology in Germany
 

  


Categories: Anti-cult terms and concepts
Pejorative terms for people


Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages

Edit links
This page was last modified on 19 March 2015, at 02:30.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
 

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NRM_apologist













NRM apologist

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Cult Apologist)
Jump to: navigation, search

A new religious movement apologist (NRM apologist or cult apologist) is a person who offers arguments in defense of controversial new religious movements (pejoratively called cults).[1][2] Sociologists Ben Zablocki and Thomas Robbins say the term is used by critics of new religious movements to devalue scholars whose writings they consider too sympathetic or tolerant of such groups.[3]


Contents  [hide]
1 Responses
2 Positive use
3 References
4 Further reading
5 External links

Responses[edit]
Scholars accused of being cult apologists reply to the criticism in various ways, including expressing their concern for religious freedom and tolerance. Douglas E. Cowan wrote that he had been referred to as a cult apologist, along with Eileen Barker, Massimo Introvigne, Jeff Hadden, Irving Hexham, Anson Shupe, David G. Bromley, and Gordon Melton.[4] Cowan stated that he felt this characterization was "inaccurate and insulting", and that these individuals actually stand for the values of religious tolerance.[4]
Cowan and Bromley have stated that the use of the cult apologist label was part of a response by the anti-cult movement, notably the American Family Foundation (now the International Cultic Studies Association) and the old Cult Awareness Network, to the lack of academic support for the brainwashing hypothesis, and employed as a strategy to undermine social scientists' credibility.[5] Cowan also refers to the term as a "pejorative" with potentially unhelpful consequences.[6] Michael Kropveld agrees with Cowan that the term "cult-apologist" is pejorative but also adds "Anti-Cult Movement", "Pro-Cult Movement", and "anti-cultist" to a list of divisive labels that are not constructive towards productive dialogue between academics, and should be avoided.[7]
Gordon Melton also dismisses these criticisms by stating that the usage of the term "cults" by what he calls "anti-cultists" reflects the negative evaluation that new religious movements have endured.[8] He also objects to being personally labeled an "apologist" by the "anti-cult movement".[9]
Anson Shupe has defined cult apologist as a "derogatory term employed by anticultists to refer to scholars and civil libertarians whose research conclusions and views disagree with the anticult movement's own suspicions or conclusions, to wit, that many religious movements are necessarily subversive to society and dangerous to individuals who join them."[10]
Positive use[edit]
The expression "cult apologist" was used by the evangelical Christian countercult movement writer Walter Martin in 1955, in Martin's Christian handbook The Rise of the Cults. Martin used the neologism in a positive and self-referential way to identify ministries that evangelize to cult members. He used the expression again in his next book The Christian and the Cults (Zondervan 1956, p. 6). Positive use of the term "cult apologetics" is found in Answers to the Cultist at Your Door, by Robert and Gretchen Passantino,[11] and in Alan Gomes's contributory chapter in the first posthumous edition of Martin's The Kingdom of the Cults.[12]
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Robbins, Thomas (2004). "Introduction: Alternative Religions, the State and the Globe". In Philip Lucas. New Religious Movements in the Twenty-First Century: Legal, Political, and Social Challenges in Global Perspective. Routledge. p. 15. ISBN 0-415-96577-2.
2.Jump up ^ Lewis, James R. (2004). "Introduction". In James R. Lewis. The Oxford Handbook of New Religious Movements. Oxford University Press. p. 7. ISBN 0-19-514986-6.
3.Jump up ^ Zablocki, Benjamin; Robbins, Thomas. Misunderstanding Cults, Introduction, p. 26, University of Toronto Press, ISBN 978-0-8020-8188-9
4.^ Jump up to: a b From Parchment to Pixels: The Christian Countercult on the Internet, Douglas E. Cowan, Center for Studies on New Religions, 2001, Conference, London.
5.Jump up ^ Bromley, David G.; Cowan, Douglas (2007). "The invention of a counter-tradition". In Lewis, James R.; Hammer, Olav. The Invention of Sacred Tradition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-86479-8.
6.Jump up ^ Cowan, Douglas E. "Cult Apology: A Modest (Typological) Proposal", Paper presented to the 2002 Society for the Scientific Study of Religion Conference “Boundaries and Commitments in NRM Research” November 1–3, 2002, Salt Lake City, Utah, p. 3.
7.Jump up ^ Kropveld, Michael (June 2002). "An Example for Controversy: Creating a Model for Reconciliation" (DOC). American Family Foundation Annual Conference. Orlando, Florida: International Cultic Studies Association.
 The use of terminology such as “Anti-Cult Movement” (ACM) and “Pro-Cult Movement” (PCM), “anti-cultist” and “pro-cultist” or “cult apologist” are examples of divisive labels that are hardly conducive to encouraging dialogue or discernment.
8.Jump up ^ Melton, Godon J., Modern Alternative Religions in the West. pp.610, Penguin (1997), ISBN 0-14-013599-5
9.Jump up ^ Combatants in Cult War Attempt Reconciliation: Peacemaking conference is held near Seattle, San Francisco Chronicle, Don Lattin, May 1, 2000.
10.Jump up ^ Shupe, Anson; Darnell, Susan E. (2006). Agents of Discord. New Brunswick (U.S.A.), London (U.K.): Transaction Publishers. p. xv. ISBN 0-7658-0323-2.
11.Jump up ^ Passantino, Robert (1981). Answers to the Cultist at Your Door. Harvest House. p. 13.
12.Jump up ^ Martin, Walter (1997). The Kingdom of the Cults. Bethany House Publisher. p. 333.
Further reading[edit]
Amitrani, Alberto and Di Marzio, Rafaella: Blind, or Just Don't Want to See? Brainwashing, Mystification, and Suspicion
Benjamin Beith-Hallahmi: O Truant Muse': Collaborationism and Research Integrity, in Zablocki and Robbins (ed.): Misunderstanding Cults, 2001, ISBN 0-8020-8188-6
Janja Lalich: Pitafalls in the Sociological Study of Cults, in Zablocki and Robbins (ed.): Misunderstanding Cults, 2001 ISBN 0-8020-8188-6
Susan J. Palmer: Caught up in the Cult Wars: Confessions of a Canadian Researcher, in Zablocki and Robbins (ed.): Misunderstanding Cults, 2001
Thomas Robbins: Balance and Fairness in the Study of Alternative Religions, in Zablocki and Robbins (ed.): Misunderstanding Cults, 2001 ISBN 0-8020-8188-6
External links[edit]
Reflections on Louisville: The Countercult in Conversation by Douglas Cowan


[hide]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Opposition to new religious movements


Secular groups
APA Task Force on Deceptive and Indirect Methods of Persuasion and Control ·
 Cult Awareness Network ·
 International Cultic Studies Association - ICSA (Formerly: the AFF, American Family Foundation) ·
 The Family Survival Trust - TFST (Formerly: FAIR - Family Action Information and Rescue) ·
 Fight Against Coercive Tactics Network ·
 Cult Information Centre
 

Secular individuals
Carol Giambalvo ·
 Steven Hassan ·
 Galen Kelly ·
 Michael Langone ·
 Ted Patrick ·
 Rick Ross ·
 Tom Sackville ·
 Jim Siegelman ·
 Margaret Singer ·
 Louis Jolyon West ·
 Cyril Vosper ·
 Lawrence Wollersheim
 

Religious groups
Reachout Trust ·
 Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry ·
 Christian Research Institute ·
 Dialog Center International ·
 Personal Freedom Outreach ·
 Watchman Fellowship ·
 New England Institute of Religious Research ·
 Midwest Christian Outreach ·
 Institute for Religious Research ·
 Spiritual Counterfeits Project ·
 Wellspring Retreat and Resource Center
 

Religious individuals
Johannes Aagaard ·
 Alexander Dvorkin ·
 Ronald Enroth ·
 Hank Hanegraaff ·
 Paul R. Martin ·
 Walter Ralston Martin ·
 Robert Passantino
 

Governmental organizations
European Federation of Centres of Research and Information on Sectarianism ·
 Centre contre les manipulations mentales ·
 Union nationale des associations de défense des familles et de l'individu ·
 MIVILUDES ·
 Parliamentary Commission on Cults in France
 

Individuals in government
Catherine Picard
 

Concepts
Cult ·
 NRM apologist ·
 Deprogramming ·
 Freedom of religion ·
 Heresy ·
 Mind control ·
 New religious movement
 

Historical events
About-Picard law ·
 Governmental lists of cults and sects ·
 Persecution of Bahá'ís ·
 Persecution of Falun Gong ·
 Persecution of Jehovah's Witnesses ·
 Anti-Mormonism ·
 Scientology in Germany
 

  


Categories: Anti-cult terms and concepts
Pejorative terms for people


Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages

Edit links
This page was last modified on 19 March 2015, at 02:30.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
 

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NRM_apologist