Philips Revelation

John 14:8-9 Philip saith unto him, Lord, show us the Father, and it sufficeth us.

Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?

 We got to give Philips some credit for his hunger to know the truth. I think he was trying to reason with all laws given by his forefathers and apply them to the revelation that’s being played in his very own eyes. We don’t hear the rest of disciples asking so I figure they either have it or just being silence for fear of what might confound their own belief structure of who Jesus is. This is exactly what many of us are doing, either were intimidated to ask for fear of what we will find out or too scared to challenged what we’ve always believe on who Jesus is. Philip took courage and asks the lord to show the Father. No doubt in Philip’s mind he was already have preconception on who Jesus is and naturally see more than one just as our friends who hold the doctrine of multiple persons in Godhead.

 His question prompts Jesus to ask a question we should all ask our self and use it as a guide to our conception on who Jesus is. He said, “How sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?” In plain term, how do you create separation of the Father and Himself in your mind? Remember, our words are expressions of what we formulate in our minds that’s communicated by our speech so our listeners could perceive what our minds trying to relay. Jesus knew what he was thinking and He gave him the answer many refuse to hear even now.” “he that hath seen me hath seen the Father;”

Many people today are hungry just like Philip; they want to know who Jesus really is and how He related to the Father and HG. They have to see Jesus through the eyes of creeds that were formulated from the councils of the post apostolic church. With this, they already have structural ways of interpretation in mind before they look at the text such as John 17 and quickly see a pre-existent son of God. A lot of them are sincere and truth full in their approach in discussion just like Philip but as long as creeds continued being the major factor and filter of understand of who Jesus is then there is no turning for them.

The revelation of who Jesus is begins when we differentiate the Jesus of the Bible from Jesus of historical Christianity. I’m not saying that there are two Jesus but what I’m saying is that, the Jesus whom the orthodox Christianity has portrayed has been Smothered with blood of the martyrs, as a power seeking, rude and ill treatments caused by those who self proclaimed themselves to be the center of the Christendom and abused its power by solicit the name of God for their own benefits and iron clawed the creeds with the tip of the sword…

    
 Jesus of the bible rebuked peter for using a sword Matt 26:52, He came to seek and save the lost, Luke 19:10, He didn’t come to judge, John 12:47. This is how we should see Jesus not the way the history has painted Him as a warrior, conqueror and an Iron clawed fist ruler who wanted to take over this world.

Much was done by the early church to make sure everyone will agree and follow the doctrine that is agreed on and set forth by the councils. Throughout the century many laws were assembled to forbid anyone to teach anything which is contrary to what Catholic Church (Universal Church) said to be the truth.

 Philip was looking into Jesus through the eyes of his traditions and was confronted with the idea of more than one personality in God. Jesus asked the question and brought Philip back to the reality of one God. We should ask our friends the same, how do you that? A good and honest question for the seeker of Jesus would be something align to what Jesus said, Why do I see distinct personality in the Godhead? Why do I see more than one persons in one being of God? Am I believing this way because I was taught to or is this a structural set interpretation I attained in my quest to know who Jesus is? Can I know who Jesus really is?

The answer would be yes, anyone can know who Jesus is and it can only be revealed to us by Himself if we sincerely and honestly willing to lay down our stronghold and prejuduce and seek Him with honesty. Another thing, One can be sincere in his approach just like Philip but still be misguided in his understanding. We must be willing to accept the truth just like Saul (Paul) .

Matthew 16:17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

 Luk 10:21-22 In that hour Jesus rejoiced in spirit, and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes: even so, Father; for so it seemed good in thy sight. All things are delivered to me of my Father: and no man knoweth who the Son is, but the Father; and who the Father is, but the Son, and he to whom the Son will reveal him.

I grew up in an Evangelical Trinitarian denomination, I believed in Trinity until I was 26. It was a general understanding where I grew up. Passed down by traditions, Songs and knowledge everyone agrees on. We just naturally think of God as triune being though we didn’t understand all about it but was hoping someday God will tells us everything. And now I’m glad that I got the revelation just like Philip. God confronted my thoughts and revealed Himself to me, I saw Jesus only. Someday He says I will be His son and He will be my God and Father..

Revelation 21:7 He that over cometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son. “ If I will be Jesus son, then that will make Jesus my FATHER.. There is only one Father

There is only one God, whom the OT calls Him Father, for He is the Father of Creation. This one God became our brother by being born into His creation, The Humanity. He was Emmanuel,”God with Us” to reconcile the world to HIMSELF and we named Him Jesus, The Mighty God in Christ…

• Malachi 2:10 Have we not all one father? hath not one God created us?

Proverbs 8:22 Daughter of God

• Proverbs 8:22-31 The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old. I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was. When there were no depths, I was brought forth; when there were no fountains abounding with water. Before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth: While as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields, nor the highest part of the dust of the world. When he prepared the heavens, I was there: when he set a compass upon the face of the depth: When he established the clouds above: when he strengthened the fountains of the deep: When he gave to the sea his decree, that the waters should not pass his commandment: when he appointed the foundations of the earth: Then I was by him, as one brought up with him: and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him; Rejoicing in the habitable part of his earth; and my delights were with the sons of men.

Wisdom here is being personified and being referred to as I as if she is a person and was there in the creation with God.The wisdom said she was By Him and With Him. Can we conclude that wisdom in this passage is another member of Godhead or daughter of God?

We would think so by the way the text read and by exegetical rules used by others. We cannot just come to the scripture and read them plainly to prove our preconceptions of what does says the word. But instead we need to reconcile all passages to get the best and acceptable, reasonable interpretation of the scriptures. see  2 Tim 3:16.

List of pronouns in Prov 8, 
• [LORD possessed me], [I was set up], [, I was brought forth], [he prepared the heavens, I was there], [Then I was by him], [and I was daily his delight], [and my delights were with the sons of men.]

A lot of people argued and insist that we have to look into the scriptures and read them plainly but in this case it would be foolish to do so. If we incorporate this type of exegesis then we will have to add another member into the Godhead.
In john 16 and 17 Jesus spoke many things in a veil language. We can see the disciples asking Him to speak in an openly manner without any restrictions for they too could not understand what Jesus was saying. Prov 8 along with many other passages are good example to show us the validity of the word of God and the Shemma. There was none beside God in the Beginning, He create all things by Himself without anyone to consult. 

Just as there is no God the Daughter, there is no clear evidence and scriptures to support the teachings of God the Son. All passages read to support such ideas cannot hold in relation to other text therefore fail to meet the qualification as a proper interpretation. 

There is only one God, whom the OT calls Him Father, for He is the Father of Creation. This one God became our brother by being born into His creation, The Humanity. He was Emmanuel,”God with Us” to reconcile the world to HIMSELF and we named Him Jesus, The Mighty God in Christ…
• Malachi 2:10 Have we not all one father? hath not one God created us?

Jesus as a Prophet

Prophecy and Parallels’ of Jesus and His earthly ministry

Parallel to Jesus ministry in the Old Testament

God sending Moses to speak His words to Pharaoh
• Exo 3:14 And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.

They will Hear moses voice but the words are the words of God
• Exo 3:18 And they shall hearken to thy voice: and thou shalt come, thou and the elders of Israel, unto the king of Egypt, and ye shall say unto him, The LORD God of the Hebrews hath met with us: and now let us go, we beseech thee, three days' journey into the wilderness, that we may sacrifice to the LORD our God.
Moses excuse kindle the LORDS anger
• Exo 4:1 And Moses answered and said, But, behold, they will not believe me, nor hearken unto my voice: for they will say, The LORD hath not appeared unto thee.
• Exo 4:10 And Moses said unto the LORD, O my LORD, I am not eloquent, neither heretofore, nor since thou hast spoken unto thy servant: but I am slow of speech, and of a slow tongue.

God will put His word in Moses mouth

• Exo 4:11-12 And the LORD said unto him, Who hath made man's mouth? or who maketh the dumb, or deaf, or the seeing, or the blind? have not I the LORD? Now therefore go, and I will be with thy mouth, and teach thee what thou shalt say.


Moses Anger the LORD.

Exo 4:13 And he said, O my LORD, send, I pray thee, by the hand of him whom thou wilt send. And the anger of the LORD was kindled against Moses, and he said, Is not Aaron the Levite thy brother? I know that he can speak well. And also, behold, he cometh forth to meet thee: and when he seeth thee, he will be glad in his heart.

Moses will put the words in Aarons mouth
Exo 4:15a And thou shalt speak unto him, and put words in his mouth: 

God will be with Moses and Aarons mouth
Exo 4:15band I will be with thy mouth, and with his mouth, and will teach you what ye shall do.

Aaron will supply the mouth and Moses will be like a God to him to supply the words but the words are the word of God.
Exo 4:16 And he shall be thy spokesman unto the people: and he shall be, even he shall be to thee instead of a mouth, and thou shalt be to him instead of God.

This is a role of a prophet being demonstrated here. A true prophet only speaks what God tells him to say
• Deuteronomy 18:22 When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.


Jesus playing the role of a prophet; The man Christ Jesus

• Deu 18:18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.
• Deu 18:19 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.

This is a prophecy concerning Jesus as a man as a prophet whom God will raise. A man whom God will use to speak His words. He will only speak what God gives Him to say, not of His own. We know Jesus is the one spoken here, the man Born at Bethlehem.

Jesus speaks as a man (Prophet)

• Joh 12:47-49 And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world. He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day. For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak.

Throughout Jesus ministry, He never claimed anything to be God. He did everything as a man, He has to be a man in order to be a qualified kinsman redeemer. But what about the miracles He did? Although Jesus spake as a man, He was also God. As a man He hungered but as a God He fed the multitude. He did many things but never claimed any glory for it but rather He says that it was the Father in Him who does the works. 
• Joh 14:10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.
• Joh 7:16-18 Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me. If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself. He that speaketh of himself seeketh his own glory: but he that seeketh his glory that sent him, the same is true, and no unrighteousness is in him.

He claims the word He spake was not of Himself but of God. He speaks as a prophet as a man not a second member of trinity.
• Joh 8:47 He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God.
• Joh 8:50 And I seek not mine own glory: there is one that seeketh and judgeth.

The man Christ Jesus (The prophet) only do and say what He is told to say and do.
• Joh 5:19 Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.

Jesus speaks as a man and as a prophet
John 17:3; 7; 8; 14; 18 ; 

In John 17, Jesus was praying as a man, He spake in a role of the one sent on a mission, the prophet prophesied in the book of deuteronomy. He says, Igo to the Father, how can one Go to the Father? Isn't God an omnipresent being? There is no place we can go and the Father is not, but in a mans perspective, yes we can say that when we die we go to our Father, Jesus has to speak this way, He has to stay in His role as a man, as a our brother, the second adam, Our Kinsman redeemer.In these passages Jesus refers to the Father as the only true God and to Himself a a man playing the role of the prophet prophesied in Deu 18:18-19

Silence of trinity

Silence of trinity is probably a good way to describe how trinity was formulated and assembled to what it is now and it’s lacking in the language of the New Testament. One may ask, If the doctrine was that of importance then why didn’t Jesus explicitly teach it to His disciples? And if it was taught, then why we didn’t see Jews opposing to these new revelation? And how did it get by the Romans at that time? Romans did not allow any new religion other than that which is established already. Christians came under the umbrella of Jews religion and since it was not opposed by Jews as they are to Christianity today then it is safe to say that the Trinitarian doctrine their opposing today wasn’t a problem then, for it wasn’t taught but soon to come through many channels of Greecian philosophy.
Let me say this with all respect that many professing Christians are quick to articulate the authenticity of their views with regards to the original teachings of the New Testament as taught by the disciples of Jesus even Paul the champion of Christians. I have been told by the minister of SDA (Seven Day Adventist) that they are the only church who holds the original teachings. There are Baptist who says the same thing when debating others who hold a different views as they. Mainline evangelicals, Catholics and even Jehovah’s Witness confess to this idea, “they are the only one who holds the correct view in similarity to the ancient teachings of the New Testament Church”. There are others who have asserted publicly that the early Church was primitive and it was due to mature in time. Can all this arguments be true? Can we say that the early church was primitive in their understanding and the peak of Theological teachings and literatures were to be written later?

Jude 1:3 Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints. Jude the brother of James would disagree to this idea that the peak of theological teachings were to be written later. Jude exhorted the saints to look back to the faith which “WAS ONCE DELIVERED.” This to me sounds like the faith and the peak of theological teachings were already taught in the early Church and we are commanded to follow them. From this scripture in Jude 3 we see that even in the beginning, there were false doctrines that were emerging with the infant church. Jude 1:4 For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.

Gnosticism creeping into the church. 
Colossians 2:21-23 (Touch not; taste not; handle not; which all are to perish with the using ;) after the commandments and doctrines of men? Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body; not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh. Yes there were new doctrines that tried to destroy the early church but the disciples warned us to be aware of them and contend to the faith that was once delivered unto us. Jude 3 says “And exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.” What was the faith that was once delivered unto the saints or what were the original teachings of the ancient Church? There are many things that were taught by the disciples and one of them that we will discuss is the subject on who is Jesus and His relation to Father and the Holy Ghost biblically and its historical development.

Early Church Teachings 
In every denomination there are differences in their articles of Faith, others calls them creeds, but one teaching that is common is a belief in one God or monotheism. Muslims, Christians and Jews all claim to this believe found in Deuteronomy 6:4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD. As much as they are similar to this claim, there is a mass difference in the idea behind the one God teaching. The Muslims sees Christendom as pagan because of the beliefs of trinity; accepted by the majority of Christians. Also because of members worshiping statues in Catholic Church as well as images worship in Greek Orthodox.
Christians also see Muslims as pagans because of their worship of Allah (Moon god).1 Jews themselves would not acknowledge Christianity because of the doctrine of Trinity. Even in Christianity, there are wide differences in viewing the Godhead and the majority of them hold the doctrine of trinity. Is there a correct view or do we just ignore this controversy and move on with our differences? What was the original teaching in the first century church, were the first church Trinitarians or were they Oneness. Let’s go back and closely examine what was the acceptable doctrine in the first church.

Jesus and One God 
Deuteronomy 6:4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD: This passage clearly says that there is one God, the Jews knew this, and they were command to keep it, love it, and protect then to pass it on to the future generations. We can see over and over in the Bible that the children of Israel continue to proclaim it and they still do today. When Jesus was questioned by one of the scribes with an intention to trap Him “Which is the first commandments of all? Jesus replied and said, “The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord” Mark 12 28-29. Here we see Jesus making the one God teaching the first of all commandments to the hearers. Would He have given different answer today if He was asked the same question? Without any doubt we would get the same answer. Let me make this one point to summarize what I’m trying to say, “In all the teaching of Jesus throughout the new Testament you cannot find any language of trinity as how they confess to later on in the church history after much battles and decisions that were made in the councils.

Apostles and One God 
If we were given a chance to go back in time and asked the apostles to expound the one God, would they expound it in a Trinitarian point of view? Would they give an oneness position or would they says that we He was a unique son or a subordinate second person, God but not as the Father according to the Jehovah’s Witness and Unitarians? Let’s look at one portion of the scripture to find out. Matthew 4:10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.

Mathew would say that we need to worship God alone. With this in mind we continually seeing in the New Testament that the disciples worshiped Jesus calling Him God and He never once stopped or rebuked them for their actions.

Titus 2:13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; John 20:28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God. Acts 9:5 And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.
Above a few scriptures that tell us that Jesus is that One God manifested in the Flesh. The first one is the epistle of Paul to Titus. Paul refers to Jesus as the Great God, sounds pretty different to what others called Him today as unique son or second person in trinity. He is the great God and our Savior. Second, John write the confession of Thomas calling Him my Lord and my God. He is the Lord and God according to John and Thomas. Third we see Paul on the road to Damascus being struck down by a bright light, Paul being a Pharisee of the Pharasee he knew that there is only one God. He said who art thou Lord and the voice said Jesus. Jesus is the one God according to the Apostles.
Here is a summary of what Jesus and the Apostles taught. We know for sure that there was no language of trinity being taught by Jesus neither His disciples. The Church had Jewish Christians who follow the strict law of Monotheistic society. Another thing to point out is that the Christians at this point had never received any accusation from the Jews for worshiping multiple gods. This also let us know that the Christians were not Trinitarians but were Oneness.


Early Church and One God 
Now that we have seen that Jesus made this confession and the Apostles being Jews who worship one God made the same confession but went further and saith that Jesus is that One God, let’s see what the early church fathers taught. To do this we’ll focus our study to two beliefs of one God, Oneness and Trinity. These two will be our main focus throughout the rest of this paper.

Definition by David K. Bernard, 
o The doctrine of Oneness can be stated in two affirmations: (1) God is absolutely and indivisibly one with no distinction of persons (Deuteronomy 6:4; Galatians 3:20). (2) Jesus Christ is all the fullness of the Godhead incarnate (John 20:28; Colossians 2:9). All the names and titles of the Deity, such as God, Jehovah, Lord, Father, Word, and Holy Spirit, refer to one and the same being. These various names and titles simply denote manifestations, roles, relationships to humanity, modes of activity, or aspects of God’s self-revelation. 2.

o Trinitarianism is the belief that there is “one God in three Persons or “three persons in one substance.” The unique names of these three persons are God the Father, God the Son (or Word), and God the Holy Ghost (or Holy Spirit). The three persons are distinctions in God’s very being, not simply manifestations or distinctions of activity. “There is in the Divine Being but one indivisible essence. In this one Divine Being there are three Persons or individual subsistence’s, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.” 3


It is clearly shown that the church was indeed oneness in the first century but what went wrong? How did the Trinity doctrine became dominant in the later church? Trinitarian scholars made statements during debates with Oneness scholars that the trinity was formulated over a time. Rob Bowman , editor for CRI (Christian research Institute) said in his debate with the former UPC scholar Robert Sabin, “The doctrine of trinity was formulated”4 and James White, Baptist scholar also made the same statement in his debate back in 2000 with Robert Sabin, (“doctrine of trinity was formulate) .”5

The teaching of three divine persons in the Godhead was never accepted by the Jews and so we’re not surprise to see that there were no such accusation on multiplicity of god but instead it was widely seen that the Christians were worshiping the one God but to them it was Jesus who was that one true God. There are many writings that gives a clear understanding of what the original and accepted belief in the first church was, and clearly it was Oneness. Below are some writings from the Post Apostolic Church fathers who speaks of the relationship of the Father and the Son without any suggestion or hints of co-equality in the Godhead.

No language of trinity: Justin Martyr (ca. 140 a.d.) 
“And to say that the power sent from the Father of all which appeared to Moses, or to Abraham, or to Jacob, is called an Angel because He came to men (for by Him the commands of the Father have been proclaimed to men); is called Glory, because He appears in a vision sometimes that cannot be borne; is called a Man, and a human being, because He appears strayed in such forms as the Father pleases; and they call Him the Word, because He carries tidings from the Father to men: but maintain that this power is indivisible and inseparable from the Father, just as they say that the light of the sun on earth is indivisible and inseparable from the sun in the heavens; as when it sinks, the light sinks along with it; so the Father, when He chooses, say they, causes His power to spring forth, and when He chooses, He makes it return to Himself.” 6

Justin use the analogy of the sun and the light to describe the relationship of the Father and Jesus to the Jews. Here we have a statement by the forerunner of the logos doctrine referring to them as one entity and inseparable. Jean Danielou analyzed this by saying , “The opinion attack is clear enough that the logos does not subsist as a separate entity, but is simply manifestation of the Father.”7 There is hardly any language of trinity in this dialogue but the idea is soon be formulate. Read elsewhere in all the writings of the church Fathers and you’ll find that even the ones who are seen or claimed as Trinitarian forerunners in the early church do not speak of trinity the way it is presented and seen today. Can I say that as we go further back toward the early church we see less and less idea of three in one, why? It is because the doctrine of trinity was developed over a time by gentile Christians who fuses the Greek philosophy with Jewish Christians.

Majority of believers 
The simple, indeed, (I will not call them unwise and unlearned,) who always constitute the majority of believers, are startled at the dispensation (of the Three in One), on the ground that their very rule of faith withdraws them from the world's plurality of gods to the one only true God; not understanding that, although He is the one only God, He must yet be believed in with His own oikonomia. The numerical order and distribution of the Trinity they assume to be a division of the Unity; whereas the Unity which derives the Trinity out of its own self is so far from being destroyed, that it is actually supported by it. They are constantly throwing out against us that we are preachers of two gods and three gods, while they take to themselves pre-eminently the credit of being worshippers of the One God; just as if the Unity itself with irrational deductions did not produce heresy, and the Trinity rationally considered constitute the truth. We, say they, maintain the Monarchy (or, sole government of God).8

As much as he wanted to put out the teachings of Oneness and the champion Praxeas , Tertullian eventually became one of the best sources and a hostile witness to the majority of the believers in the early church history before the doctrine of trinity finally peaked its formulation and gained acceptance by anathematizing her opponents and preserved to what it is today. Tertullian is called the father of the Trinitarian doctrine, he is the first to speak of the identity of substance, first to speak of the persons in the godhead, first to speak of the economy of Godhead, he used the word patripassian (Father suffered) to refer to the oneness believers. Tertullian gave us a clue to what was the church like in his days when he says, “who always constitute the majority of believers.” So if oneness was the majority of the believers then it makes more sense when we read from the writings of Ireneaus, Justin and other early fathers who would not boldly call the oneness as heretics.


A reputable church historian, Adolf Harnack notes,

 “…. It is extremely surprising to notice how mildly the (Alogi) party was criticized and treated by Ireneaus as well as by Hippolytus”9. Oneness scholar William Chalfant also says that “…true orthodoxy were Alogi or monarchians, who were in the majority ,this is why Irenaeus was reluctant to name them heretics in c.190 and Hippolytus some 45 years later was also reluctant to call them Heretics.”10

Influence on Christianity 
As the church started to become more popular, many gentiles were converted into the church. With pagan influence, the church sought ways to accommodate this mass conversion and many turns to Greek philosophy to seek to win them not only in spirituality but also philosophy. Among many who influenced the Christianity, Philo who was deeply influence in Greek philosophy and tried to reconcile the Christianity with the Greek philosophy of logos. He was successful. Below are some of the writers from different denominations who see the substantiation of the silence of teaching of Trinity in the early church. Although we don’t agree with them on Christology but we do have in common of seeking to understand the original teachings of the Apostolic Church in the first two century.

Scott, Kenneth Latorette 
o Platonism had a mark influence on Christianity, it entered from many channels. Among them a Hellenistic Jew, Philo. Who has utilized by early Christian writers, and through Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, Origin, Augustine and the writers which bore the name of Dionysius. Te term logos which was extensively employed by the Christians came as a thought of relation of Christ to God, came from Greek philosophy perhaps by way of both stoicism and Platonism. 11

Rufus M Jones 
o Where the first church Christian teach to begin the formation of the definite doctrine. The Apologist who were at one with the predecessor Philo, the Jew of Alexandria with the contemporary thinkers of the school of philosophy. The supreme revelation of God they called logos, here cletus of Ephesus first used the term logos 500 years before Christ. Philo the famous Hellenist in the first half of the first century fused the Greek and Hebrew conceptions into one single blend of immense importance and momentous future influence. Logos is a divine agent, the image of God, the first born son of God, sometimes called by Philo, and the later writers , ,Theros, Theos , the second God. 12

1984 Lindbeck, George A. (b.?-?), Professor of Historical Theology, Yale University. 
o In order to argue successfully for the unconditionality and permanence of the ancient Trinitarian Creeds, it is necessary to make a distinction between doctrines, on the one hand, and on the terminology and conceptuality in which they were formulated on the other. . . .Some of the crucial concepts employed by these creeds, such as “substance”, “person”, and “in two natures” are post biblical novelties. If these particular notions are essential, the doctrines of these creeds are clearly conditional, dependent on the late Hellenistic milieu.13

Rusch,William G. 
o No doctrine of the Trinity in the Nicene sense is present in the New Testament . . . .There is no doctrine of the Trinity in the strict sense in the [writings of the] Apostolic Fathers, but the trinitarian formulas are apparent. The witness of this collection of writings to a Christian doctrine of God is slight and provides no advance in synthesis or theological construction beyond the biblical materials.14

1967 The New Catholic Encyclopedia. 
o The formulation “one God in three Persons” was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century. But it is precisely this formulation that has first claim to the title the Trinitarian dogma. Among the Apostolic Fathers there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective.15



Frederick Clifton 
o Considering how strongly conscious the Jews were of their monotheism, it is interesting to note that as far as the N[ew] T[estament] evidence goes the Jewish opposition did not charge the Christians movement with tritheism or polytheism, a common Jewish criticism later.16

1957 The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, 
o The doctrines of the Logos and the Trinity received their shape from Greek Fathers, who. . .were much influenced, directly or indirectly, by the Platonic philosophy. . . .That errors and corruptions crept into the Church from this source can not be denied.17

Jesus asked His disciples the question that has been asked throughout the church history and answer still remain the same. “Christ, the Son of the living God.” Jesus said, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. This is the key to understand the nature of Christ and His relationship with the Father. Jesus said, “Flesh and Blood hath not revealed it unto thee.” No man or will of human being can earn the understanding of who Jesus is. We may debated and write monumental books to the ever learning of who Jesus is but if It’s not directed by the Spirit of God then all will not come even close to the revelation of the Mighty God in Christ. Luke wrote the word of Jesus in the gospel that bear his name,10:22 All things are delivered to me of my Father: and no man knoweth who the Son is, but the Father; and who the Father is, but the Son, and he to whom the Son will reveal him. No man can know who Jesus is unless it be revealed to him by the guiding of the Spirit of God. Some says that we will never understand the nature of Christ as God until we get to Heaven. But according to Jesus Himself in the writings of Luke, “and he to whom the Son will reveal him.” We can understand the Oneness of God. “: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.” God Himself will reveal this truth to us when we humbly asked and desired to know the truth according to the scriptures and not what man said.

There are many who have debated or write against the teaching of one God, Mighty God doctrine, and uses the date of which the organization was formed as a proof that this Oneness teaching is a new revelation and not the original from the scriptures. Here’s a part of dialogue I had with a Trinitarian apologist,


Trinitarian Apologist: “The "Oneness" doctrine you espouse was formulated after 1913.
My response Oneness: I guess I would say it was a time where trinitarians could not stop the oneness doctrine because they were over hundred trinitarians who got the revelation of Jesus Name Baptism and One God. Earlier they were persecuted,Labeled as heresy and pronounced as
Heretics, killed etc. But if you are going to argue that oneness doctrine originated in the early 1900 then you need to pick some history books because there are overwhelming evidence throughout the Church ages. Were there oneness before the early 1900, yes. and the doctrine was
not formulated but was finally understood by Trinitarian pastors. The only thing that happened in 1913 was the seperation of the oneness pentecostals and the trinitarian pentecostals. All were still pentecostals. They were trinitarians who became oneness. Not one, Not 2 but over hundred .


Jesus said,



“Upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” When we look into history we see writings, edict and laws being set up against anyone who would dare to come against what they claimed to be the faith of the historic orthodox church, which is trinity. We see this actions and we know that they didn’t write them just for the sake of future intervention when such heresy should arise but we know they wrote them because there were men and woman who knew truth and would not believe the doctrine that was formulated and assembled in the four councils and put to action with fire and the edge of the sword. There were such men like Praxeas, Sabelius, Servetus and many more throughout the century who hold to these truth and would not bow to any new teachings. There were convictions in these man and woman and they would rather die than to renounce the truth about their Lord and Messiah, Jesus Christ. Just as it was in the early years of the church, it is still the same today. There are many young men and woman in the oneness movement would not bow to any new doctrine but stand for the truth of Oneness, the Mighty God in Christ Doctrine.

Footnotes: 
1. THE ERROR AND ORIGINS OF THE MUSLIM RELIGION – ISLAM, Dr.Robert Morey, edited by M.Blume
2. Bernard p.9-10 Definition of oneness, Oneness and Trinity, A.D. 100-300/ WAP Bernard p.13.
3. Ibid p.13
4. Oneness and trinity debate between Robert Sabin and Rob Bowman.
5. Oneness and trinity debate, James white debate with Robert Sabin 2000, www.aomin.org/BriefHistoryAO.html
6. Ante-Nicean Fathers Vol.1 Dialogue of Justin, Philosopher and Martyr, with Trypho, a Jew.
7. Fall of apostolic church, W. Chalfant, p.5 / Jean Danielou, History of early Christian doctrine, Vol II. Phil.,Westminister press, 1973, p.355
8. Against Praxeas, Writings of Tertullian chap. 3/ Catholic Encyclopedia, Newadvent.org
9. Adolf Van Harnack, History of Dogma vol.III p.19
10. Fall of apostolic church, W. Chalfant, p.9
11. Latorette, Kenneth Scott. A History of Christianity.1953, p.260-261
12. Ireneaus and Tertullian, Rufus M Jones
13. 1984 Lindbeck, George A. (b.?-?), Professor of Historical Theology, Yale University. The Nature of Doctrine: Religion and Theology in a Post Liberal Age. 1st Edition. (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, c1984), p. 92. BT19 .L55 1984 / 83-027332.
14. 1980 The Trinitarian Controversy. From the Series: Sources of Early Christian Thought. Rusch, William G. (b.?-?), Director of the Commission of Faith and Order, National Council of Churches of Christ in the U.S.A., translator and editor. (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, c1980),introduction, pp. 2, 3. BT109 .T74 / 79-008889.
15. 1967 The New Catholic Encyclopedia. Prepared by an editorial staff at the Catholic University of America, Washington, D.C. (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967-c1989), vol. XIV [14], p. 299 (italics theirs). BX841 .N44 1967 / 66-022292.
16. 1963 Dictionary of the Bible. Hastings, James (b.1852-d.1922), Editor. Revised Edition by: Grant, Frederick Clifton (b.1891-d.1974) and Rowley, Harold Henry (b.1890-d.?). (New York:
Scribner, 1963), pp. 337, 338. BS440 .H5 1963 / 62-021697.
17. 1957 The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, Embracing Biblical, Historical,Doctrinal, and Practical Theology and Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Biography from the Earliest Times to the Present Day, Based on the Third Edition of the Real encyklopäädie Founded by J. J. Herzog, and Edited by Albert Hauck, Prepared by More than Six Hundred Scholars and Specialists Under the Supervision of Samuel Macauley Jackson (editor-in-chief) with the assistance of Charles Colebrook Sherman and George William Gilmore (associate editors) and [others including: Herzog, Johann Jakob (b.1805-d.1882); Schaff, Philip (b.1819-d.1893); Hauck, Albert (b.1845-d.1918); Jackson, Samuel Macauley (b.1851-d.1912), editor; Sherman, Charles Colebrook (b.1860-d.1927), joint editor; Gilmore, George William (b.1858-d.1933), joint editor]. 13 vols. (New York; London: Funk and Wagnalls Company, 1908-c1914), vol. IX [9], p. 91. BR95 .S43 / 08-020152.



Ray Haruzi