Ancient Monarchians and Trinitarians

BobDylan

1. The fully developed doctrine of the trinity was referenced in these early church writing from the first two centuries... (writing a., writing b. and writing c.)...

The trinity was first referenced by Justin Martyr and Tertullian in (I think) the 2nd century...

I would argue that even today there is no such thing as "fully developed doctrine" because even to trinitarians it isn't the most sensible statement (3 persons in 1 person, etc.)

2. The doctrine of the trinity was established as the official dogma of the "real" church (by that time the Roman Catholic chruch) by the Council of Constantinope in 381 AD....

it was officially adopted in 325 AD at Nicea and added to in 381 at Constantinople...

both to eliminate Arians (it didn't work in 325)... Both to confirm the oneness of God...

3. Between the years of 400AD to 1500AD the real believers were called _________ and were located ________ (etc. etc. etc.)

This isn't answerable by him or you... HOWEVER, the way the church structure worked, there was never universal absolute agreement between "churches" (read: cities) until much later... Really, not even today is there completely 100% agreement between churches in different regions within the Roman Catholic Church (and that isn't even including the Greek Orthodox and Russian Orthodox and all the other Catholic splits that exist)...

It would be really easy for a church to preach what most Protestant groups preach by and large thorugh most of the dark ages and not get found out...

I'm not sure they could have preached what we preach and not been found out, though....

(I know these weren't addressed at me, but I'm really interested in this topic and have wanted to jump in for a couple days now...)

Originally Posted by BobDylan

They were considered heretics by the Roman Catholic church. WE (oneness) were considered heretics by the Roman Catholic church. I think WE (oneness) have alot more in common with the Paulicians that we do the [Roman Catholic] "church" that accused them of heresy. I know at least two oneness studenst of history, both PhD.s, that believe the Paulicians were oneness.

YOU would be hard pressed to prove that Iraneaus was a trinitarian! You would also be hardpressed to prove that Polycarp, Clement of Rome (95AD), and Ignatius were anything BUT monarchian!

"WE" (meaning oneness) weren't considered anything by the Roman Catholics until the 1900s... You could argue that we are similar to Monarchians, but that doesn't mean we are monarchians... we're not...

we might be considered heretics (I'm not even sure) but we weren't considered anything until we existed (recently)

[BobDylan]

Originally Posted by redeemedcynic84

"WE" (meaning oneness) weren't considered anything by the Roman Catholics until the 1900s... You could argue that we are similar to Monarchians, but that doesn't mean we are monarchians... we're not...

we might be considered heretics (I'm not even sure) but we weren't considered anything until we existed (recently)

We may not be "modalists", but we are all (oneness believers that is) "monarchian" by definition. The word monarchian simply means "one ruler". In other words, YOU sir are either monarchian, dualist, tritheis, trinitarian, arian etc.... "oneness" is a 20th century term that means "monarchian".

All oneness (monarchians) WERE considered heretics by the Roman Catholic church.

[BobDylan]

Believer, consider this resource:

Modalism was sparked in the 3rd century (c. 215 AD) by a presbyter from Ptolemais named Sabbellius who stood in the belief that God is “one indivisible substance, but with three fundamental activities, or modes[1], appearing successively as the Father (the creator and lawgiver), as the Son (the redeemer), and as the Holy Spirit (the maker of life and the divine presence within men).”[2] This belief is also known as Modalistic Monarchian or Patripassian. Monarchian is a term taken from the Greek words mono + arche, which literally means “one-ruler”. This heresy surfaced in the time when the Church was refuting tritheism (worship of three gods). They were also called Patripassian because their teaching implies that “Father must have died on the cross”.[3] In effect they are really saying (although they will disagree with me) that Jesus the Son, is not God[4] but only the man the Father (the eternal Spirit) dwelt into. Another form of Monarchianism surfaced through the person of Theodotus (c. 190 AD) and Paul of Samosata (c. 260 AD). It was called Dynamic Monarchianism. The Theodotians taught, “Jesus was a man who became the Christ only after his baptism,”[5] while the Paulicians taught, “the Logos came to dwell in Jesus at baptism, but that Jesus possessed no extraordinary nature above other men, the Logos being entirely an attribute of God.”[6]


http://thebereans.net/arm-modal.shtml

This website identifies Paulicians correctly as "dynamic monarchian". This means that they WERE onenss (monarchian). Some call the dynamic monarchians "adoptionists", but this really is a micharacterization of what dynamic monarchians really believe. Dynamic monarchianism is simply a form of oneness that emphasizes the humanity of Christ, whereas Modalistic Monarchianism emphases the deity. Either way, the Paulician were not dualist (two-God), they were monarchian (ONE GOD) people.

Originally Posted by BobDylan

We may not be "modalists", but we are all (oneness believers that is) "monarchian" by definition. The word monarchian simply means "one ruler". In other words, YOU sir are either monarchian, dualist, tritheis, trinitarian, arian etc.... "oneness" is a 20th century term that means "monarchian".

All oneness (monarchians) WERE considered heretics by the Roman Catholic church.

for one, you can't replace monarchian with oneness because you think that we fit with that...

for two, trinitarians believe in one rule, too... See, at the end of the day, the trinity still affirms that there is only one God in heaven...

Originally Posted by BobDylan

Believer, consider this resource:

Modalism was sparked in the 3rd century (c. 215 AD) by a presbyter from Ptolemais named Sabbellius who stood in the belief that God is “one indivisible substance, but with three fundamental activities, or modes[1], appearing successively as the Father (the creator and lawgiver), as the Son (the redeemer), and as the Holy Spirit (the maker of life and the divine presence within men).”[2] This belief is also known as Modalistic Monarchian or Patripassian. Monarchian is a term taken from the Greek words mono + arche, which literally means “one-ruler”. This heresy surfaced in the time when the Church was refuting tritheism (worship of three gods). They were also called Patripassian because their teaching implies that “Father must have died on the cross”.[3] In effect they are really saying (although they will disagree with me) that Jesus the Son, is not God[4] but only the man the Father (the eternal Spirit) dwelt into. Another form of Monarchianism surfaced through the person of Theodotus (c. 190 AD) and Paul of Samosata (c. 260 AD). It was called Dynamic Monarchianism. The Theodotians taught, “Jesus was a man who became the Christ only after his baptism,”[5] while the Paulicians taught, “the Logos came to dwell in Jesus at baptism, but that Jesus possessed no extraordinary nature above other men, the Logos being entirely an attribute of God.”[6]


http://thebereans.net/arm-modal.shtml

This website identifies Paulicians correctly as "dynamic monarchian". This means that they WERE onenss (monarchian). Some call the dynamic monarchians "adoptionists", but this really is a micharacterization of what dynamic monarchians really believe. Dynamic monarchianism is simply a form of oneness that emphasizes the humanity of Christ, whereas Modalistic Monarchianism emphases the deity. Either way, the Paulician were not dualist (two-God), they were monarchian (ONE GOD) people.

why in the world would you claim a group that claimed that Jesus wasn't diety until after his baptism as what you are???

[BobDylan]

Here is a link to a website that profoundly represents early monarchians...

http://www.earlychurch.org.uk/monarch.php

[BobDylan]

Originally Posted by redeemedcynic84

for one, you can't replace monarchian with oneness because you think that we fit with that...

for two, trinitarians believe in one rule, too... See, at the end of the day, the trinity still affirms that there is only one God in heaven...

The term "monarchian" was coined by Hippolytus (who is trinitarian) to refer to the "one-God" people that opposed his trinitarian theology. In other words, in history, the trinitarians called the one-god people (you and I) monarchian.

[BobDylan]

Originally Posted by redeemedcynic84

why in the world would you claim a group that claimed that Jesus wasn't diety until after his baptism as what you are???

They don't claim that Jesus wasn't deity until after his baptism.... that is a misrepresentation of what they claim.... the one thing that IS historically accurate, that they claimed, was they there was ONE God... and they DO believe that Jesus was divine (i.e. that one God)

[BobDylan]

Originally Posted by redeemedcynic84

BobDylan



The trinity was first referenced by Justin Martyr and Tertullian in (I think) the 2nd century...

I would argue that even today there is no such thing as "fully developed doctrine" because even to trinitarians it isn't the most sensible statement (3 persons in 1 person, etc.)



it was officially adopted in 325 AD at Nicea and added to in 381 at Constantinople...

both to eliminate Arians (it didn't work in 325)... Both to confirm the oneness of God...



This isn't answerable by him or you... HOWEVER, the way the church structure worked, there was never universal absolute agreement between "churches" (read: cities) until much later... Really, not even today is there completely 100% agreement between churches in different regions within the Roman Catholic Church (and that isn't even including the Greek Orthodox and Russian Orthodox and all the other Catholic splits that exist)...

It would be really easy for a church to preach what most Protestant groups preach by and large thorugh most of the dark ages and not get found out...

I'm not sure they could have preached what we preach and not been found out, though....

(I know these weren't addressed at me, but I'm really interested in this topic and have wanted to jump in for a couple days now...)

Correct, it wasn't until about 150 AD that the "trinity" was even alluded to... this was not a foundational doctrine of the apostles, or of the 1st or 2nd century chruch. It didn't even become a widely accepted doctrine until the 3rd century. But this time, power was being grappled away from the primative monarchians (one-God), and into the hands of the logos people (Arians and pretrinitarians) and the trinitarians. The kicker about this is that while the Arians and Trinitarians had power and control in many key areas, one writer (I believe it was Tertullian) stated that by far the majority of believers were the monarchians.