This Come Out Of Her post reviews a video by Scroll Publishing called What the Early Christians Believed About the Trinity
Someone commented on the Holy Trinity Deception study, and said “I have gleaned from many of your studies, but am not finding myself able to agree with this one. Curious, have you ever looked into the earliest pre-nicene teachings/writings/understanding of the Trinity?”
This post gives me a place to give the big picture of the early church fathers and the context of the Nicaean Creed.
The narrator of the video, David Bercot of Scroll Publishing, seems to understand that the Father is the Most High Elohim and that Messiah is separate from Him. He seems to believe that Messiah is divine, but that he was begotten by the Father and subservient to Him.
David cites early church fathers and the Nicaean Creed to show that they proclaimed something that is very different than the Holy trinity doctrine that most Protestant Christians believe today. I absolutely agree!
But David seems to miss the mark as he points to Messiah being created out of the essence of the Father, but puts aside the declaration of Scripture which say that Messiah was the first born of creation, though whom the heavens and earth were created.
David seems to get stuck on Messiah being created and claims that is the heresy of Arius.
But does Messiah being created by His Father to carry out His divine plan of redemption, diminish Messiah’s divinity? No! Does it diminish our reverence for our beloved Messiah who came in the flesh, to live a sinless life and to die for our sins? No!
Does Scripture describe the Father as the Most High Elohim and the Elohim of Messiah? Yes! Does Scripture describe Messiah as separate and subservient to His Father? Yes!
I think that David Bercot teaches a lot of Scriptural truth in this video, but he’s keeping his bias, his refusal to believe that Messiah was created, from allowing him to see what Scripture is declaring.
Video description: The Trinity is one of the central doctrines of Christianity. Probably most Christians have heard of the Nicene Creed, and they think they hold to its teachings on the Deity of Christ. However, as Bercot explains in this message, most Christians today hold to a view of the Trinity that is not in accordance with either the Nicene Creed or the early Christian doctrine of the Trinity.
David Bercot says that the early church fathers believed the Nicaean Creed.
The problem is that some of the people who are deemed as ‘early church fathers,’ especially those in Alexandria, were philosophers who were perverting the Scriptural faith with manmade doctrine.
The Nicaean Creed was formed by the unbelieving Emperor Constantine, a known worshipper of the pagan gods of Rome; and Roman bishops, who sought to create a religious system to control the world by combining manmade concepts of pagan god worship with the veneer of the Scriptural faith.
This is very significant because they codified Romanism, which is the false Christian religion that’s designed to push people away from Scriptural truth.
This doctrine has been promoted ever since by the harlot church of Rome and it’s been promoted by Protestant Churches who continue in the manmade traditions of Romanism, such as celebrating the pagan-based Easter and Christ-mass, which serve to hide the Heavenly Father’s seven Holy Feast Days which Messiah is fulfilling to redeem the set-apart saints.
We should not place our beliefs in doctrine which was formed by Roman bishops or people called ‘early church fathers.’ We should base it on what Scripture which define the relationship of the Father and the Son.
David Bercot points to Alexander and Athanasius, who opposed Arius and called him a heretic at the Council of Nicaea.
This begs the question, who are Alexander and Athanasius?
Alexander I of Alexandria was the 19th pope and patriarch of Alexandria. Alexander is venerated as a saint in the Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria, the Eastern Orthodox Church, and the Catholic Church.
Athanasius I was the 20th pope of Alexandria, who was called Athanasius the Great. Athanasius is considered one of the four great Eastern Doctors by the Catholic Church.
That’s not a good sign, as the Roman Catholic Church is the harlot church of Revelation 17, who teaches a false gospel of works through the sacraments and that Mary is the intercessor to the Father, which has misled billions of Catholics. So if the Roman Catholic Church esteems them, then I consider them suspect.
When you study what took place during the first few centuries, the Scripture manuscripts took two primary paths.
The True Path – Believers in Antioch, Syria collected the Holy Scriptures, which formed the New Testament. Antioch is where followers of Christ were first called Christians. They made many copies of the scriptures and shared them with other churches, and many believed in Jesus through their witness.
The Corrupt Path – Satan countered by having philosophers in Alexandria, Egypt change the Syrian texts to fit their beliefs. Unbelieving philosophers in Alexandria Egypt, such as a man named Origen, who did not accept the Bible as the Word of God or Jesus as the Son of God; amended, added to and deleted many portions of the true text and then palmed off their work as the Word of God. As a result, their Greek manuscripts either changed words, deleted words, or deleted entire verses, where a text validated the deity of Jesus.
The people called early church father’s in Alexandria were teaching manmade concepts.
The two most prominent of the corrupt Alexandrian codices are called the Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus:
Codex Siniaticus (Aleph or a) was put in the trash heap by the monks of St Catherine’s Monastery. On nearly every page of the manuscript there are corrections and revisions, done by 10 different people. It is indeed worthless trash.
Codex Vaticanus (B) is kept by the Roman Catholic Church, which the Reformers properly identified as Antichrist.
In the gospels alone it leaves out 237 words, 452 clauses and 748 whole sentences.
The early believers rejected these manuscripts, so they were cast aside for a thousand years, until they were later dug up and called ancient manuscripts.’
Alexander and Athanasius were popes who were leading people in Alexandria that promoted false doctrine.
This is very problematic when it comes to Alexander debating Arius at the Council of Nicaea and promoting Catholic doctrine.
Who led the Council of Nicaea?
People proclaim that it was a ‘Christian’ council, but that is misleading. It was chaired by Emperor Constantine, a known worshiper of the pagan gods of Rome, primarily the sun god.
After centuries of persecution by the Roman Emperors through ten persecution periods, Satan found that the more that he used the Roman Empire to persecute the saints, the faster Messiah’s Ekklesia (church) grew.
So Satan caused Emperor Constantine to stop the persecutions, so that he could seek to destroy Messiah’s church from within. He did this by holding councils where they codified Roman Christianity. They combined the veneer of the Scriptural faith with manmade traditions.
They promoted their manmade holidays of Easter and Christmas, which are based on pagan gods Ishtar and Tammuz.
They pushed aside the Heavenly Father’s Holy Feast Days which Messiah is fulfilling to redeem the set-apart saints.
They pushed aside the Heavenly Father’s calendar which starts in spring, and is based on the sun and the moon; instead of starting it in the middle of winter and only basing it on the sun.
And they pushed the doctrine to hide the truth of the relationship of the Father and the Son, which steals glory away from the Holy Father.
The ‘falling away’ that the Apostle Paul foretold in 2 Thessalonians 2, took place in the fourth century, when the bishops of Rome created a false Christian religion. After harsh persecution, many of Messiah’s followers apostatized, fell away from the true faith and compromised to take positions of power in the Roman church.
Sadly, Satan’s agenda has been very effective, as the doctrine of the Roman bishops has misled billions of Catholics during the last 1600 years. And it still deceives Protestant Christians who follow manmade traditions.
Here’s a portrait of the attendees at the Council of Nicaea.
What do you see? Almost everyone is wearing a Catholic mitre hat, which symbolizes Dagon the pagan fish god. From the side, a mitre looks like an open fish mouth and the tail of the fish goes down their back. So this isn’t a ‘Christian’ council, it’s an anti-Christian council!
The doctrine of the Council of Nicaea codified the false Christian religion of Romanism for the antichrist beast Popes of Rome to lead the harlot church of Rome for the next 1600 years.
All of the Protestant Reformers rightly proclaimed that the office of the papacy, the Popes of Rome, fulfill Bible prophecy as the ‘little horn’ of Daniel 7, the ‘son of perdition’ of 2 Thessalonians 2, and the ‘beast’ of Revelation 13, who leads the ‘harlot’ church of Rome.
David Bercot cited early church father Tertullian.
Per Wikipedia, the concept of the trinity originated with Tertullian.
Tertullian has been called “the father of Latin Christianity” and “the founder of Western theology.” Tertullian originated new theological concepts and advanced the development of early Church doctrine. He is perhaps most famous for being the first writer in Latin known to use the term trinity (Latin: trinitas).
Citing a supposed ‘early church father’ who originated the concept of a trinity misses the mark!
It’s interesting that the word trinity is based on the Latin trinitas, as the antichrist beast popes teach in Latin as to hide truth and teach manmade doctrine.
The popes had the Scriptures translated into Latin, and then banned and burned the Greek manuscripts on the New Testament.
David Bercot says that almost every New Testament writer addresses the trinity.
Indeed they do, as they point to the Father as the Most High Elohim and the Son as being separate from His Father and subservient to Him.
John 17:3 declares that the Father is the only true Elohim.
“And this is everlasting life, that they should know You (the Father), the only true Elohim, and Yeshua Messiah whom You have sent.”
In John 20:17, Messiah calls His Father His Elohim.
“Yeshua says to her, Touch me not, for I have not yet ascended to my Father; but go to my brethren and say to them, I ascend to my Father and your Father, and to my Elohim and your Elohim.”
In Ephesians, the Apostle Paul points to the Elohim of Messiah.
“Blessed be the Elohim and Father of our Master Yeshua Messiah, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ.” Ephesians 1:3
“That the Elohim of our Master Yeshua Messiah, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of Him.” Ephesians 1:17
1 Timothy 2:5 declares that there is one Elohim, the Father; and one Mediator between Him and men. That makes no sense if Messiah is the same Elohim as the Father.
“For there is one Elohim, and one Mediator between Elohim and men, the Man Messiah Yeshua,”
In Revelation 3:12, Messiah calls His Father His Elohim four times.
“He who overcomes, I shall make him a supporting post in the Dwelling Place of My Elohim, and he shall by no means go out. And I shall write on him the Name of My Elohim and the name of the city of My Elohim, the renewed Jerusalem , which comes down out of the heaven from My Elohim, and My renewed Name.”
The New Testament writers do not proclaim that the Father, Son and Spirit are equal powers.
David Bercot says that Messiah was begotten not made.
This seems to be the major stumbling issue for him, as he notes that Arius proclaimed that Messiah was formed out of nothing and that he has not always existed.
But then he says the Son and Spirit originated from the Father, and that Messiah was begotten from the Father.
Messiah being begotten by the Father points to a time when that took place, so it points to a beginning of Messiah. The challenge is that we think in linear terms of existing, whereas the Father is outside of that.
The word begotten in the Old Testament is Strong’s Hebrew Dictionary word 3205 yalad: which means; to bear young; causatively, to beget; medically, to act as midwife; specifically, to show lineage:—bear, beget, birth((-day)), born, (make to) bring forth (children, young), bring up, calve, child, come, be delivered (of a child), time of delivery, gender, hatch, labour, (do the office of a) midwife, declare pedigrees, be the son of, (woman in, woman that) travail(-eth, -ing woman).
The word begotten in the Old Testament is Strong’s Greek Dictionary word 3439 monogenes; which means only-born, i.e. sole:—only (begotten, child).
Seth had a beginning as he was begotten from Adam.
And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters: Genesis 5:4
My question is this: why is it offensive to believe that Messiah was created by His Father before the heavens and earth were created? Does it diminish the deity of Messiah? Does it change our debt to Him as the Savior that His Father sent to die for our sins?
Is it deemed as heretical because it destroys one of the supposed tenants of the faith?
David Bercot said that the Son is of the same nature as the Father.
Indeed Messiah is of the same nature as His Father, but that doesn’t prove that they are equal as many Protestants believe. Here’s some verses which point to this perspective.
“My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all. And no one is able to snatch them out of My Father’s hand.” John 10:29
“But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Messiah; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Messiah is Elohim.” 1 Corinthians 11:3
“For He has to reign until He has put all enemies under His feet. The last enemy to be brought to naught is death. For “He has put all under His feet.” But when He says “all are put under Him,” it is clear that He who put all under Him is excepted. And when all are made subject to Him, then the Son Himself shall also be subject to Him who put all under Him, in order that Elohim be all in all.” 1 Corinthians 15:25-28
David Bercot cites Colossian 1:15 that Messiah is the firstborn of all creation, but then denies that Messiah was created.
Colossians 1:15-16 points to Messiah being the firstborn of every creature, which took place before the creation of the heaven and earth.
Who (Messiah) is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
I don’t understand how this is not seen as a clear statement?!?
Is this not pointing to Messiah being born out of the essence, out of the divinity, of His Father? Yes! Does it diminish the divinity and deity of Messiah? No!
David Bercot cites 1 Timothy 6:16 which says that the Father alone has immortality, but then denies that Messiah has a beginning.
Who (the Father) only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honor and power everlasting. Amen.
Again, I don’t understand how this is not seen as a clear statement?!?
In our space-time perspective, Messiah is immortal as He existed before the creation of the heavens and the earth. But Scripture declares that only the Father has immortality, no beginning.
If you believe in the doctrine of the Holy Trinity, how do you explain these verses?
“And this is everlasting life, that they should know You (the Father), the only true Elohim, and Yeshua Messiah whom You have sent.” John 17:3
“Yeshua says to her, Touch me not, for I have not yet ascended to my Father; but go to my brethren and say to them, I ascend to my Father and your Father, and to my Elohim and your Elohim.” John 20:17
“That the Elohim of our Master Yeshua Messiah, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of Him.” Ephesians 1:17
“For there is one Elohim, and one Mediator between Elohim and men, the Man Messiah Yeshua,” 1 Timothy 2:5
“He who overcomes, I shall make him a supporting post in the Dwelling Place of My Elohim, and he shall by no means go out. And I shall write on him the Name of My Elohim and the name of the city of My Elohim, the renewed Jerusalem , which comes down out of the heaven from My Elohim, and My renewed Name.” Revelation 3:12
If you’re being honest with yourself, there’s no way to excuse away the straight-forward meaning of those verses.
Read the Holy Trinity Deception
I recommend that you print out the study, as it contains a lot of verses. Read through it all and look at what Scripture declare, for that is the ruler that we use to measure the true faith, not the declarations of men.