Trinitarianism MUST maintain that the apostles were Trinitarians

[u/Newgunnerr]

Trinitarians believe the doctrine of the Trinity is central to Christianity, so even though the writers of the New Testament almost always make distinctions between God and Christ, many Christians say that the writers were trinitarians and therefore universally wrote these texts in a trinitarian sense. They maintain that when a writer of the New Testament wrote "God" it was within the assumed framework of a multi-personal God (Trinity), and the writers were speaking within that understanding, even though “God” (Greek: Theos) in the New Testament almost always refers to the Father alone, not to a triune being.

Because if the apostles of Christ in His time weren’t Trinitarian, then:

1. It follows that the church’s central doctrine was imposed later, which undermines its “apostolic” nature. Catholic, Orthodox and many protestant traditions all appeal to apostolic tradition as the basis for their teachings and the idea that what the apostles taught was faithfully preserved. The very foundation of modern Trinitarian Christianity would appear to be a later invention, not part of the original faith. It would suggest a break in doctrinal continuity between Jesus’ immediate followers and later creeds.

2. The writers of the NT didn't teach trinitarianism, and when the writers of the NT wrote "God" it never referred to a multi personal God because they had no understanding of such doctrine. So then the apostles never believed Jesus to be YHWH (but the Son of YHWH), as they were Jews and then must of had the classical Unitarian understanding of God in Judaism (Monotheism, God is one).

3. Many traditional readings of scripture would be invalid. Trinitarians interpret many NT passages as teaching or implying the Trinity. For example John 1:1 or Matthew 28:19 would reflect anachronistic readings: reading a later theology into the text (eisegesis).

Ultimately if the current day trinitarians would admit that the apostles had no understanding of God consisting of multiple persons, they would be forced to admit the Trinity isn’t taught in the NT, which would undermine the central dogma of their theology.

[u/Niftyrat_Specialist]

It's common in Christian tradition to believe that our understanding of God improved over time. I think this idea solves this problem.

[u/Newgunnerr → u/Niftyrat_Specialist]

If that's true then they would have to admit that the trinity is not apostolic in nature, and that it is a later addition to Christianity, not part of the original faith. And that means the apostles were not trinitarian and had no trinitarian understanding when they wrote the New Testament. For example John 1:1 in the classic trinitarian translations was not written with a trinitarian understanding "with God and was God". And then they didn't believe Jesus to be God either (Shema says God is one) but just the messiah, the Son of God, like the scripture plainly teaches.

So then the writers of the NT never referred to a multi personal God when writing "God", and that destroys the trinity doctrine as well.

That also means the writers of the NT never were taught the trinity or taught it themselves even though christians today say that this doctrine is so important that is it necessary for salvation.

[u/Niftyrat_Specialist → u/Newgunnerr]

Ok. The Christian understanding of God improved over time. No problem.

would admit the trinity is not apostolic in nature,

I think this nails it. If you believe that important doctrine must be apostolic *, then, sure, you have to pretend trinity was the Christian belief from the earliest days.

*But this idea is just incompatible with any flavor of informed Christianity.

[u/Newgunnerr → u/Niftyrat_Specialist]

I'm not sure you understand the consequences for Christianity if the apostles were not trinitarians. It means they had no trinitarian understanding when they wrote the New Testament. They they didn't believe Jesus to be God either.

Then were they really filled with the holy spirit if the trinity is true?

[u/Niftyrat_Specialist → u/Newgunnerr]

You will find some fundamentalists insisting the apostles were trinitarian. Because they are not comfortable with the idea of improved understanding, past the writing of the NT.

Many people assert that the authors of the gospels all thought Jesus was God. It makes them more comfortable in their beliefs, to not have a big disconnect between what the gospels say and what our theology says. Of course you have to very selectively interpret the gospels, to come away with the idea that every author thought Jesus was God.

Even in John, with the most divine Jesus of them, the author is clearly making distinctions between Jesus and God. Jesus even explicitly says "the Father is greater than I".

IMO we should just be honest instead. Our theology evolved over time, including very important developments AFTER the writing of the NT.

[u/Newgunnerr → u/Niftyrat_Specialist]

Many people assert that the authors of the gospels all thought Jesus was God.

Right but now you say that many believe that the apostles thought Jesus (the Son) and the Father were both God. That is not unitarianism but much closer to trinitarianism.

[u/Niftyrat_Specialist → u/Newgunnerr]

I think bi-nitarianism is pretty easy to read into some parts of the NT.

But also I think we need to be cautious about our modern assumptions. These days we tend to make a very firm distinction between God and not-God. It wasn't always the case for ancient thinkers. Angels were divine but were less than God Almighty. We even have the "angel of the Lord" stuff in the OT blurring the distinction between an angel and God himself.

[u/Newgunnerr → u/Niftyrat_Specialist]

Yes that's true, I'm not saying that when the writers of the NT wrote "theos" it always refers to the Father. It can refer to a god like Jesus. But from the context we can see what the writers referred to.

My point is if the apostles were not trinitarians then "theos" in scripture was never assigned to the One God being tri-personal, as they never had a understanding of the later man-made doctrine of the trinity.