Skip to comments.On the Errors of the Trinity
Posted on 06/19/2009 12:39:55 PM PDT by Alex Murphy
On the Errors of the Trinity Seven Books By Michael Serveto, alias Reves A Spaniard of Aragon MDXXXI
On the Errors of the Trinity
Michael Serveto, alias Reves
A Spaniard of Aragon
Due to the size of Servetus' book I will provide his arguments (as given by the translator) for each chapter (book). Below, you will find the links to Books VI and VII. Maybe? at some future date, I may add more. Book I
Any discussion of the Trinity should start with the man. That Jesus, surnamed Christ, was not a Hypostasis but a human being is taught both by the early Fathers and in Scriptures, taken in their literal sense, and is indicated by the miracles he wrought. He, and not the Word, is also the miraculously born Son of God in fleshly form, as the Scriptures teach - not a hypostasis, but an actual Son. He is God, sharing God's divinity in full; and the theory of a communicatio idiomatum is a confusing sophistical quibble. This does not imply two Gods, but only a double use of the term God, as is clear from the Hebrew use of the term. Christ being one with God the Father, equal in power, came down from heaven and assumed flesh as a man. In short, all the Scriptures speak of Christ as a man.
The doctrine of the Holy Spirit as a third separate being lands us in practical tritheism, even though the unity of God be insisted on. Careful interpretation of the usual proof-text shows that they teach not a unison of three beings in one, but a harmony between them. The Holy Spirit as a third person of the Godhead is unknown in Scripture. It is not a separate being, but an activity of God himself. The doctrine of the Trinity can be neither established by logic nor proved from Scriptures, and is in fact inconceivable. There are many reasons against it. The Scriptures and the Fathers teach one God the Father, and Jesus Christ his Son: but scholastic philosophy has introduced terms which are not understood, and do not accord with Scripture. Jesus taught that he himself was the Son of God. Numerous heresies have sprung from this philosophy, and fruitless questions have arisen out of it. Worst of all, the doctrine of the Trinity incurs the ridicule of the Mohammedans and the Jews. It arose out of Greek philosophy rather than from the belief that Jesus Christ is the Son of God; and he will be with the Church only if it keeps his teaching. Book II
CHRIST, the Son of man, who descended from heaven, was the Word by uttering which God created the world. He became flesh as God's firstborn, and was the Son of God. He was both human and divine. God's Spirit, moving all things, operates within us as the Holy Spirit, which is a person of the Godhead. It proceeds from the Son, not as a separate being but as a ministering spirit. It is holy, one of three persons in the Godhead, and sanctifies us by dwelling within us. Book III
The pre-existent Word, first uttered by God in creation, was afterwards incarnate in Jesus as the Son of God. Christ spirit manifested the power of God's Word in creation and in the world, and he derives our holy service; yet the Father did not suffer in Christ body. High praise is ascribed to Christ as the wisdom of God. The Word was not the Son, but a disposition of God, who is above all distinctions of time. Belief that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, is the essence of Christian faith, and the foundation of the Church. Book IV
God has manifest himself in three different dispositions. Of these, the Holy Spirit is his activity in the spirit of man, and is the minister of the Word. God is seen in the Person of Christ, represented in Scripture the imagery of angels; but the real image of God is Christ. The term Nature is appropriate only to God; the Word no longer exist; Person means a representation of another being; Christ incarnate, is the image of the Substance, but not of the Nature, of God. Book V
Examination of the Old Testament usage of the words for God - Elohim and Jehovah - shows that both refer to Christ, as centre of all, and the essence of all things.
The incomprehensible God is known through Christ, by faith, rather than by philosophical speculation. He manifests God to us, being the expression of his very being; and through him alone God can be known. The Scriptures reveal him to those who have faith; and thus we come to know the Holy Spirit as the divine impulse working in us.
The eternally begotten Son was a spoken word by which God made himself known. The Hebrew shows that the whole nature of God abode in Christ as Elohim, man being blended with God. The Word was a disposition of God, who begot the Son, a visible being. The Holy Spirit also is a real being as Christ was. The Word was an actual being, creating all things, manifesting God in bodily form.
The Holy Spirit as a third person of the Godhead is unknown in Scripture. It is not a separate being, but an activity of God himself. The doctrine of the Trinity can be neither established by logic nor proved from Scriptures, and is in fact inconceivable. There are many reasons against it. The Scriptures and the Fathers teach one God the Father, and Jesus Christ his Son: but scholastic philosophy has introduced terms which are not understood, and do not accord with Scripture. Jesus taught that he himself was the Son of God. Numerous heresies have sprung from this philosophy, and fruitless questions have arisen out of it. Worst of all, the doctrine of the Trinity incurs the ridicule of the Mohammedans and the Jews. It arose out of Greek philosophy rather than from the belief that Jesus Christ is the Son of God; and he will be with the Church only if it keeps his teaching.
You, of course, are not endorsing this, are you?
Is it? I don't see the problem with that point.
Your hero JC had him BURNED and EXECUTED for what he personally believed.The purpose of this thread is to address the question "What did Michael Servetus personally believe?"
As Daffy would say, "not this little black duck!" See comment #4 for the purpose behind posting it.
I dunno...Trinity always worked for me?
Of course, people immediately recognized that Sabelliuss teaching contradicted the historic faith of the Church, and he was quickly excommunicated. His heresy became known as Sabellianism, Modalism, and Patripassianism. It was called Sabellianism after its founder, Modalism after the three modes or roles which it claimed the one person of the Trinity occupied, and Patripassianism after its implication that the person of the Father (Pater-) suffered (-passion) on the cross when Jesus died.
Because Modalism asserts that there is only one person in the Godhead, it makes nonsense of passages which show Jesus talking to his Father (e.g., John 17), or declaring he is going to be with the Father (John 14:12, 28, 16:10) One role of a person cannot go to be with another role of that person, or say that the two of them will send the Holy Spirit while they remain in heaven (John 14:16-17, 26, 15:26, 16:1315; Acts 2:3233).
Modalism quickly died out; it was too contrary to the ancient Christian faith to survive for long. Unfortunately, it was reintroduced in the early twentieth century in the new Pentecostal movement. In its new form, Modalism is often referred to as Jesus Only theology since it claims that Jesus is the only person in the Godhead and that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are merely names, modes, or roles of Jesus. Today the United Pentecostal Church, as well as numerous smaller groups which call themselves "apostolic churches," teach the Jesus Only doctrine. Through the Word Faith movement, it has begun to infect traditionally Trinitarian Pentecostalism. Ironically, Trinity Broadcasting Network, operated by Word Faith preacher Paul Crouch, has given a television voice to many of these Jesus Only preachers (who are, of course, militantly anti-Trinitarian).
In the quotes that follow, the Fathers forceful rejection of Modalism is shown not only when they condemn it by name, but also by passages in which they speak of one person of the Trinity being with another, being sent from another, or speaking to another.
"Keep always in mind the rule of faith which I profess and by which I bear witness that the Father and the Son and the Spirit are inseparable from each other, and then you will understand what is meant by it. Observe, now, that I say the Father is other [distinct], and the Son is other, and the Spirit is other. . . . I say this, however, out of necessity, since they contend that the Father and the Son and the Spirit are the selfsame person" (ibid. 9:1).
"And I should have enough to do were I to endeavor to gather together all the passages [of the kind in the previous quotation] . . . since the divine Scripture, not so much of the Old as also of the New Testament, everywhere shows him to be born of the Father, by whom all things were made, and without whom nothing was made, who always has obeyed and obeys the Father; that he always has power over all things, but as delivered, as granted, as by the Father himself permitted to him. And what can be so evident proof that this is not the Father, but the Son; as that he is set forth as being obedient to God the Father, unless, if he be believed to be the Father, Christ may be said to be subjected to another God the Father?" (ibid.)
"But if they say, How can there be three persons, and how but one divinity? we shall make this reply: That there are indeed three persons, inasmuch as there is one person of God the Father, and one of the Lord the Son, and one of the Holy Spirit; and yet that there is but one divinity, inasmuch as . . . there is one substance in the Trinity" (ibid., 14).
"They [the Father and the Son] are one, not as one thing now divided into two, but really constituting only one, nor as one thing twice named, so that the same becomes at one time the Father and at another his own Son. This latter is what Sabellius held, and he was judged a heretic. On the contrary, they are two, because the Father is Father and is not his own Son, and the Son is Son and not his own Father" (Discourses Against the Arians 3:4 [A.D. 360]).
What kind of sophistry is this? Do Christians have to get the approval of Mohammedans and Jews in order to arrive at proper theology? NONSENSE! (As is the article.)
Denial of the Holy Trinity is the oldest trick in the book. This is nothing new.
Incorrect and possibly heretical. Acts Chapter 5:Act
5:3 Then Peter said, "Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit and have kept for yourself some of the money you received for the land?
Act 5:4 Didn't it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn't the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied to men but to God."
Sadly that old trick still works on some...
The Holy Spirit as a third person of the Godhead is unknown in Scripture.
Wont Jesus be surprised when He reads that...
And Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, Luke 4:1
Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, Matthew 28:19
But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost has never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation. Mark 3:29
for the Holy Spirit shall teach you in that very hour what you ought to say. Luke 12:12
But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you. John 14:26
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.