The Pulling the Thread Podcast

Jesus the Jew within Judaism – Tracing Jesus Beyond Christianity – A Jewish Reclamation of Jesus!


How Was The Doctrine of The Trinity Invented?

The doctrine of the Trinity, which teaches that God is one being in three persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, was invented and developed over time. The development of the Trinity doctrine unraveled amid a tapestry woven with historical events and theological debates.

A critical juncture in this narrative is marked by the Johannine Comma, a textual addition introduced by a scribe long after the purported era of Jesus. Its absence in the oldest manuscripts raises suspicions of deliberate textual manipulation, suggesting a bid to harmonize scriptures with evolving beliefs.

Within the diverse landscape of early Jewish Christian sects, such as the Ebionites and Nazarenes, firmly anchored in monotheistic convictions, a departure from the divine characterization of Jesus is evident. Their steadfast adherence to the oneness of God challenges the later Trinitarian framework, casting doubt on the authenticity of positing three distinct persons as being God at the same time.

The Greek practice of apotheosis did influence the Roman Catholic and early Church Fathers to elevate Jesus to divine status. Apotheosis was the process by which the Greeks would elevate a human being to the status of a god. This was usually done after the person’s death, and it was seen as a way to honor and remember them.

In ancient Greece, apotheosis referred to the elevation of a mortal to divine status, often after death. Heroes and exceptional individuals, such as Hercules, were believed to ascend to the realm of the gods. The early Christians were familiar with the Greek practice of apotheosis. This was similar to the way that the Greeks believed that their gods had ascended to Mount Olympus after they had died.

The Hellenistic period saw the spread of Greek culture throughout the Mediterranean, influencing various societies, including the Roman Empire. This cultural diffusion, known as Hellenization, created a cultural backdrop that influenced religious and philosophical thought.

In Roman culture, emperors sought to legitimize their rule by associating themselves with divine figures. Apotheosis became a way for emperors to present themselves as semi-divine, reinforcing their authority.

The ancient world witnessed a syncretism of beliefs, where different religious and philosophical ideas blended. The early Christian community existed in this diverse cultural landscape, and elements of Hellenistic thought likely influenced the conceptualization of Jesus’ nature.

The early Church Fathers also used the idea of apotheosis to explain the divinity of Jesus. They argued that Jesus was the Son of God, and that he was therefore equal to God the Father. This was a controversial view at the time. The doctrine of the Trinity, was also influenced by the Greek practice of apotheosis.

The epithets “Son of Man” and “Son of God,” initially devoid of divine connotations, underwent a transformation with the advent of Modalism in the Roman second century. Justin Martyr’s Platonic Hierarchical Modalism exemplifies this shift towards a hierarchical paradigm, complicating the theological landscape.

Tertullian, a pivotal figure in this theological odyssey, diverged from Modalism, steering toward a triadic comprehension of the divine. Rejecting the notion of a Father being subject to mortality or a Father transforming into a Son, he introduced the groundbreaking concept of three distinct beings, coining the the Latin word “trinitas” (Trinity) for the first time.

The Council of Nicaea in 325 CE played a crucial role in defining the divinity of Christ. The Nicene Creed affirmed that Jesus is “of the same substance” (homoousios) as the Father, a term borrowed from philosophical discourse to articulate the equality of their divine nature.

In the realm of theological discourse, Alexandria became a battleground around 320 CE when Arius challenged the established understanding of God’s nature. Arius proposed a concept where God begot God at a specific point in eternity, adding layers of complexity to the unfolding doctrinal narrative. The Council of Nicaea in 325 CE emerged as a watershed moment in crystallizing the tenets of the Trinity, spurred by political pressures orchestrated by Constantine.

Emperor Constantine convened the Council of Nicaea to address the Arian controversy. The Nicene Creed was formulated, affirming the divinity of Christ and asserting that he is “of the same substance” (homoousios) as the Father. While this helped establish a more unified Christological doctrine, the full Trinitarian formula was not yet defined.

Constantine’s influential sway, particularly through the persuasive efforts of Bishop Alexander, tipped the scales in favor of the Trinitarian perspective during the Council. However, the aftermath of Constantine’s demise in 337 saw his son Constantius II embracing Arianism, leading to a fractured theological landscape.

Jerome’s poignant assertion that the world became Arian reflects the persistent ideological struggles encircling the Trinity. This highlights the intricate interplay of political forces, theological debates, and historical contingencies that collectively shaped the formulation of this complex doctrine.

Theological debates persisted in the post-Nicene period, with various theologians proposing different understandings of the relationship between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The terms “ousia” (essence) and “hypostasis” (person) became crucial in these discussions.

Basil the Great, Gregory of Nyssa, and Gregory of Nazianzus, known as the Cappadocian Fathers, played a crucial role in refining the doctrine. They clarified the terms “ousia” and “hypostasis” and emphasized the equality and distinctiveness of the three persons within the Godhead.

These Councils of Ephesus (431) and Chalcedon (451) addressed Christological issues, confirming the Nicene Creed and refining the understanding of the relationship between the divine and human natures in Christ. While these councils focused on Christology, they contributed to the broader theological framework that would be central to Trinitarian doctrine.

Augustine of Hippo and Boethius in the West contributed significantly to the formulation of Trinitarian theology. Augustine, in particular, emphasized the unity of the Trinity and the relational aspects between the three persons.

The filioque controversy of Synod of Toledo (589), concerning the phrasing of the Nicene Creed regarding the procession of the Holy Spirit, led to the addition of the term “filioque” (and the Son) in the West. This further differentiated Western and Eastern Christian perspectives on the Trinity.

It is important to note that there is no single definition of the Trinity that is universally accepted by all Christians. There are a variety of different theological models that have been developed to try to explain the Trinity.



Leave a comment

Podcast available on Spotify, Stitcher, Pandora, Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Amazon Music, Audible, TuneIn, iHeartRadio, Deezer, Radio Public, Cast Box, and many more…

About The Pulling the Thread Podcast

Pulling the Thread is a captivating podcast that delves into a plethora of thought-provoking topics. With its engaging episodes and insightful discussions, it offers a fresh perspective on various subjects, serving as a valuable source of inspiration and knowledge. Whether you’re a seasoned podcast enthusiast or a curious newcomer, Pulling the Thread guarantees to captivate your mind and keep you coming back for more. So, gear up and embark on an intellectual journey with this exceptional podcast!

The Pulling the Threads Podcast’s primary objective is to study and analyze Jesus within his Jewish context through the lens of Judaism before Christianity. Our primary objective is to study and analyze Jesus within his Jewish context, specifically from a pre-Christianity perspective. Seeking a Jewish Reclamation of Jesus, relying on Jewish and secular biblical scholars who specialize in Second Temple Judaism, the Qumran community, the Parting of Ways around 90 CE, the Historical Jesus, and Textual Criticism. Some notable scholars mentioned include Geza Vermes, Hyam Maccoby, Alan Segal, Carol Harris-Shapiro, Lawrence Kushner, Samuel Sandmel, Bart Ehrman, James Tabor, Robert Eisenman, Paula Frederiksen, and Hugh Schonfield.

The site aims to approach the New Testament using the historical-critical method and textual criticism within the realm of secular Jewish scholarship, reflecting the perspectives of mainstream Judaism today. Engaging in scholarly and polemical discussions, the group seeks to question and challenge established Christian doctrines. The main goal is to establish an independent Jewish understanding of Jesus, emphasizing his significance within a Jewish context and distancing him from centuries of Christian interpretations. Furthermore, the group aims to conduct a comprehensive historical examination of Jesus, employing textual criticism to counter Christianity’s claims regarding the New Testament. The focus is on understanding Jesus within Judaism based on the Torah and Talmud.

This is about Jewish and Secular Scholarship into the New Testament using the Historical Critical method and Textual Criticism within Jewish scholarship. For us Jews, the Tanakh and Talmud inform our view of scripture. In the modern age, as Jews, we struggle with texts with an academic approach. The site is pro-Tanakh and will explore history, archaeology, and textual criticism to comprehend the development of the Jesus movement before the parting of ways with Judaism. It aims to emphasize that Jesus and his followers were seen as Jewish and part of Judaism, and that the conversion of Gentiles to Judaism by the community of James and Peter continued, with some Jewish followers remaining distinctly Jewish for centuries. It is important to note that this is not a study of Jewish-Christians, but rather an examination of Jews who followed Jesus within Judaism before the emergence of Christianity. Anti-Judaism is not welcome in this group, which focuses on Jewish perspectives within an academic framework.

This is an attempt to work out the Jewish Reclamation of Jesus, trying to understand him within Judaism before Christianity existed. The group’s objective is to understand Jesus within Judaism before the influence of Christian perspectives during the historical Jesus movement. It seeks to reclaim Jesus within Judaism, separate from Christianity, Messianic, or Hebrew Roots movements. The study incorporates textual criticism, historical Jesus research, and Jewish scholarship into the New Testament to assert the following beliefs:

  • The New Testament lacks historical accuracy.
  • The New Testament is not divinely inspired.
  • The New Testament has not been divinely preserved.
  • The New Testament was written by individuals decades and even millennia after the events it portrays.
  • Original autographs of the New Testament do not exist.
  • Consequently, the New Testament is not the most reliable source for understanding the historical Jesus as a Jewish figure.
  • To ascertain historical accuracy, we rely on modern Jewish and secular scholarship and engage in historical reconstruction.
  • Through textual criticism, we strive to identify the potentially most authentic sayings of Jesus, following the Q hypothesis in relation to the synoptic gospels.
  • The New Testament bears the influence of Roman culture and language, making it a non-Jewish text with glimpses of Jewish source material.
  • Greco-Roman influences, including Hellenistic, Stoic, Gnostic, and paganistic elements (e.g., Zoroastrianism) and the Roman imperial cult, have shaped New Testament ideas of salvation and hell in a manner contrary to Jewish tradition, resulting in a narrative distinct from the Jewish religion.
  • Both Jewish and secular scholarship acknowledge approximately 500,000 textual errors among the 5,800 New Testament manuscripts. These variations include theological revisions that were added by later editors and were not believed by the original followers.
  • The seven most authentic epistles of Paul were written prior to the gospels, with the gospels reflecting the addition of Pauline theology.
  • Jesus might have been an actual person, with the only point of agreement among Jewish scholars being that he was baptized by John for the repentance of sins and was crucified.
  • Jewish scholars concur that Jesus was not born of a virgin, was not resurrected, is not a savior, may be considered a false prophet, and failed as the Messiah.
  • Judaism represents the religion of Jesus, while Christianity is a religion centered around Jesus.
  • The term “Jewish-Christian,” used to describe the early understanding of Jesus in Judaism, is a misnomer.

Understanding Jesus within Judaism can aid us in grappling with a culture in which Christianity has altered the Jewish message. Given the history of crusades, pogroms, the Holocaust, and inquisitions that have harmed the Jewish people, recognizing Jesus within a Jewish context becomes crucial.

The Catholic Church, in Nostra Aetate, ceased evangelizing Jews and acknowledged them as a covenant people within Judaism. In response, Jewish scholars released Dibre Emet, recognizing the place of Righteous Gentiles, including the offspring of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, in Olam HaBa (the world to come). While agreement may not be necessary, it is important to foster understanding and coexistence.

Newsletter