William Branham and the Trinity Doctrine: Difference between revisions

William Branham and the Trinity Doctrine (view source)

Revision as of 22:06, 7 October 2020

10,453 bytes removed , 3 years ago

→‎Must one believe in the Trinity to be a Christian?

Admin

Bots, Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, nuke, Suppressors, Administrators

11,141

edits

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{Top of Page}}
 {{Template:Trinity}}
-The Trinity is an explanation of the [[The Godhead]] that has historically been accepted by the vast majority of the world's Christian churches.  The word "Trinity" was first used circa. A.D. 200 by Tertullian, a Latin theologian from Carthage. It is acknowledged that the word "Trinity" does not appear in the Bible, but then neither does the word "rapture" which is used regularly by message followers.
-The doctrine of the Trinity is shown in John 14:23, when Jesus says:
+William Branham:
-:''If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and '''we''' will come unto him, and make '''our''' abode with him.<ref>The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), Jn 14:23.</ref>
+#believed the doctrine of the Trinity from the start of his ministry until 1958;
-<br>
+#rejected the doctrine of the Trinity sometime in 1958
+While William Branham initally accepted and taught the doctrine of the Trinity, in the latter stages of his ministry (1958-1965) he could not accept the concept of three persons in the Godhead.  This appears to have been the result of both his [[Lazy Theology|lazy theology]] and his desire to be seen as a prophet that was restoring long-forgotten truths to the church.  '''His argument against the Trinity is referred to as a "straw man" argument''', in that he constructs what he thinks Trinitarians believe (but which in fact they deny vehemently) and then attacks that incorrect view.
+:''Now we find in the Scripture that many people teaches that, "three personalities in the Godhead." So, you cannot have a personality without being a person. It takes a person to make a personality.
+:''...You cannot be a person without being a personality. And if you're a personality, you are one personality to yourself. You're a separate, individual being." <ref>WHO.IS.THIS.MELCHISEDEC_  JEFF.IN  V-5 N-10  SUNDAY_  65-0221E</ref>
+William Branham's rejection of the Trinity is not based on scripture, it is not based on sound reasoning and it is not based on what the church has historically taught.  He simply rejected it out of hand because '''he did not take the time to understand the concepts'''.
+A doctrine about the Godhead cannot be refuted simply because it "doesn't make sense".  The doctrine of the Trinity was not adopted by the church because it "makes sense".  It is considered orthodox because that is what comes our of considering the totality of scripture:
+:A. There is one God
+:B. The Father is God, the Son is God, the Holy Spirit is God
+:C. The three are distinct.
+All heresies relating to the Godhead are the result of attempting a "simpler" explanation by removing either A, B, or C above - the result being polytheism, Arianism, or Modalism - all of which must necessarily ignore something in scripture.  Much like the concept of eternity, the Trinity is difficult to wrap our heads around, but even harder to debunk with honest, responsible review of scripture.
+=William Branham believed in the Trinity initially=
+William Branham was ordained as an exhorter in the Pentecostal Baptist Church (see article on [[Roy Davis]]) and, early in his ministry, believed in the Trinity as evidenced by the following:
+:''And now, there are those sitting here who are feeble this afternoon, that's in need of physical healing. And we have chosen these few words to read from Thine. And may '''the Holy Spirit, the third Person of the Trinity''', come in now, the Promise, the Comforter, that You said You would send. And He would take the things of God and would show them to us.<ref>THE RESURRECTION OF LAZARUS  ERIE.PA  51-0729A</ref>
+:''Truly, we're not much in this world, we're looked down upon, but, God, we believe we're accepted in Christ Jesus, and He in return, has give us the Holy Ghost. We love Him, that great, '''third Person of the Trinity''' Who burns through our hearts. And we love Him. O Holy Spirit, I thank You for Your Divine leading...<ref>EARLY SPIRITUAL EXPERIENCES HAMMOND.IN 52-0713A</ref>
+:''The same God the Father was made manifest in flesh, and now in the Holy Spirit. That's the reason the baptism is in the Name of Father, Son, Holy Ghost (See?) '''the Trinity'''--the Trinity, not three gods, but '''three persons in one God'''...<ref>THE TESTIMONY OF JESUS CHRIST  CHICAGO.IL  53-0829</ref>
+:''Now, of course, we people today, '''we believe that there’s three, the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost is the three persons of the one true God.''' It’s three offices, not three Gods. But that same… Listen now, we think that was ridiculous in the Catholic church, but we brought it right down here at Pentecost and tore yourselves to pieces with it—set up another organization, started something else.<ref>William Branham, 57-0309B - I Will Restore, para. 32</ref>
+In his early ministry, William Branham was very inclusive and extended open arms to both Trinitarians and Oneness believers (see the vision of the [[Plum and Apple Trees]].
+In his sermon, ''The Godhead Explained'', William Branham tells of when he was confronted by ministers of both the Assemblies of God (Trinitarian) and the United Pentecostal Church (Oneness) and forced to clearly define his doctrine.  At the end of their discussion, William Branham had both representatives acknowledge that the other had the Holy Spirit.  He then explained his method of baptism, which both representatives accepted. In this same sermon, William Branham tells of another confrontation with a UPC minister.  This minister said ''"You know what we are going to do? We are drawing a little ring and drawing you right out of our circle."''  William Branham responded, ''"If you draw me out, I will draw you back in."''
+While William Branham's view of the Godhead was hard to accurately pin down, he did appear to have changed his beliefs fundamentally on this subject in 1958, as his last reference to a Trinitarian understanding of the Godhead was in March 1958.  He gradually became less and less tolerant of the Trinitarian view until he eventually classified anyone that believed in the Trinity doctrine as a non-Christian:
+:''I said, "Then you have to refuse Jesus Christ, for He is the revelation of God, God revealed in human flesh." Unless you see it, you're lost.  Jesus said, "Except you believe that I am He, you will die in your sins." He is the revelation of God, the Spirit of God revealed in human form. If you can't believe that, you're lost. '''You put Him a third person, second person, or any other person besides God, you're lost.'''  "Except you believe that I am He, you will die in your sins." A revelation! <ref>THE ANOINTED ONES AT THE END TIME  JEFF.IN 65-0725M</ref>
 =William Branham's flawed view of history=
@@ Line 76: / Line 110: @@
 ===Charles Spurgeon===
 :''I no more believe in three Gods than I believe in thirty gods. There is but one God to me, and therefore I am in that sense a Unitarian, and Socinians have no right to the name merely because they deny the Godhead of our Lord Jesus. We believe Father, Son, and Holy Spirit to be one God; but Jesus Christ is God, and whosoever casts that truth away casts away eternal life. How can he enter into heaven if he does not know Christ as the everlasting Son of the Father? He must be God, since he has promised to be in ten thousand places at one time, and no mere man could do that.<ref>C. H. Spurgeon, The Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit Sermons, Vol. XXX, 46 (London: Passmore & Alabaster, 1884).</ref>
-===C.S. Lewis===
-:''You know that in space you can move in three ways – to left or right, backwards or forwards, up or down. Every direction is either one of these three or a compromise between them. They are called the three Dimensions.
-:''Now notice this. If you are using only one dimension, you could draw only a straight line. If you are using two, you could draw a figure: say, a square. And a square is made up of four straight lines. Now a step further. If you have three dimensions, you can then build what we call a solid body: say, a cube – a thing like a dice or a lump of sugar. And a cube is made up of six squares.
-:''Do you see the point?
-:''A world of one dimension would be a straight line. In a two-dimensional world, you still get straight lines, but many lines make one figure. In a three-dimensional world, you still get figures but many figures make one solid body. In other words, as you advance to more real and more complicated levels, you do not leave behind you the things you found on the simpler levels: you still have them, but combined in new ways – in ways you could not imagine if you knew only the simpler levels.
-:''Now the Christian account of God involves just the same principle. The human level is a simple and rather empty level. On the human level one person is one being, and any two persons are two separate beings – just as, in two dimensions (say on a flat sheet of paper) one square is one figure, and any two squares are two separate figures. On the Divine level you still find personalities; but up there you find them combined in new ways which we, who do not live on that level, cannot imagine.
-:''In God’s dimension, so to speak, you find a being who is three Persons while remaining one Being, just as a cube is six squares while remaining one cube. Of course we cannot fully conceive a Being like that: just as, if we were so made that we perceived only two dimensions in space we could never properly imagine a cube. But we can get a sort of faint notion of it. And when we do, we are then, for the first time in our lives, getting some positive idea, however faint, of something super-personal – something more than a person. It is something we could never have guessed, and yet, once we have been told, one almost feels one ought to have been able to guess it because it fits in so well with all the things we know already.<ref>C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, p. 161-162</ref>
-=The Limitations of the Doctrine=
-The doctrine of the Trinity is the summary expression of what Christians have to say in answer to the question who God is and what God is in the divine life and in relation to what is not God.<ref>Colin E. Gunton, The Doctrine of Creation : Essays in Dogmatics, History and Philosophy (London;  New York: T&T Clark, 2004), 155.</ref>However, William Branham felt that he could reject almost 2000 years of thought and study out of hand:
-:''So they say... He said, "Well, Mr. Branham, you know, even the--the theologians can't explain it."
-:''I said, "That's exactly right. The Word don't come to a theologian." Uh-huh. I said, "The Bible is all tied into the Revelation, 'Upon this rock I'll build My Church, and the gates of hell can't prevail against It.'" See? Amen, there you are. See? But then when it comes to those things... Oh, my!<ref>WHO.DO.YOU.SAY.THIS.IS_  PHOENIX.AZ  V-6 N-9  SUNDAY_  64-1227</ref>
-However, it is important to understand that theologians believe that the doctrine of the Trinity is a very difficult issue:
-:''We do not think it open to full explication in human thought. It is not wise to attempt more than is attainable. Yet the manifest prudence of this law has often been violated in strivings after an unattainable solution of this doctrine. We shall not repeat the error. Still, the divine Trinity is so manifestly a truth of Scripture, and so cardinal in Christian theology, that the question cannot be omitted. If a full solution cannot be attained, the facts may be so presented as not to appear in contradictory opposition. With this attainment, nothing hinders the credibility of the doctrine on the ground of Scripture.''  <ref>John Miley, Systematic Theology, Volume 1, 223 (New York: Hunt & Eaton, 1892)</ref>
-:''How is it that the Father is God, that the Son is God, and that the Holy Ghost is God, and yet that there are not three Gods, but one God? I cannot tell you. I know it is so, for so it is revealed; but how it is so it is not for us to guess, because it is not revealed or explained. Our understanding can adventure as far as the testimony, and no farther. Many attempts have been made by divines to find parallels in Nature to the Unity and the Trinity of God, but they all seem to me to fail.
-:''Perhaps the very best one is that of St. Patrick, who, when preaching to the Irish, and wishing to explain this matter, plucked a shamrock and showed them its three leaves all in one—three, yet one. Yet there are flaws and faults even in that illustration. It does not meet the case. It is a doctrine to be emphatically asserted as it is expounded in that Athanasian Creed; the soundness of whose teaching I do not question, for I believe it all, though I shrink with horror from the abominable anathema which assert that a man who hesitates to endorse it will “without doubt perish everlastingly.” It is a matter to be reverently accepted as it stands in the Word of God, and to be faithfully studied as it has been understood by the most scrupulous and intelligent Christians of succeeding generations.
-:''We are not to think of the Father as though anything could detract from the homage due to him as originally and essentially divine, nor of the only begotten Son of the Father as though he were not “God over all, blessed for ever,” nor of the Holy Spirit proceeding from the Father and the Son, as though he had not all the attributes of Deity. We must abide by this, “Hear, O Israel, the Lord thy God is one Jehovah”; but we must still hold to it that in three Persons he is to be worshipped, though he be but one in his essence.<ref>C. H. Spurgeon, The Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit Sermons, Vol. LXII, 315-16 (London: Passmore & Alabaster, 1916).</ref>
-=Must one believe the Trinity in order to be a Christian?=
-Roger Olson, a well known Christian theologian and author (Foy Valentine Professor of Christian Theology of Ethics at George W. Truett Theological Seminary of Baylor University) stated the following:
-:''...'''the doctrine of the Trinity is not part of the gospel; it is not revealed truth. It is constructed out of revealed truth and constitutes necessary reflection on revealed truth in the light of heresies''' (subordinationism, adoptionism, modalism, tritheism, etc.). Once the doctrine of the Trinity was constructed and embraced by the church ecumenical (Orthodox, Catholic, Protestant) '''it could not and should not be set aside, ignored or rejected.''' '''But neither should it be confused with revelation itself or the gospel of Jesus Christ.'''
-:''...If the doctrine of the Trinity is not part of the gospel, what doctrine is? '''Central to the gospel are the deity and humanity of Jesus Christ (incarnation) and the atonement (the cross as saving sacrifice for sins). Also included are salvation by grace through faith and Jesus’ and our resurrections by the power of God. These are necessary beliefs, insofar as they are known and understood (however dimly), for being “Christian.” Part and parcel of the gospel is that God has come to us and for us as the Father of Jesus Christ and that Jesus Christ is God and savior and that the Holy Spirit is the personal power and presence of God in resurrection l'''ife.
-:''...'''How one can grasp the gospel and not believe in the doctrine of the Trinity is difficult to understand, but it happens.''' Many Christians simply cannot “wrap their minds around” the doctrine of the Trinity and so put it on a shelf, so to speak, and leave it there — neither believing it nor denying it. A few deny it simply because they misunderstand it and it’s difficult to blame them.  According to a famous statement often attributed to St. Augustine “If you deny the Trinity you lose your salvation but if you try to understand it you lose your mind.” That’s the difficulty many Christians find themselves in and they feel caught between having to believe a doctrinal formulation they can make no sense of and being threatened with losing their status as Christian (if not their salvation).
-:''...'''Please don’t get me wrong; I think belief in the Trinity, that God is Father, Son and Holy Spirit and yet one God, is essential to authentic Christianity.''' But someone who demurs from confessing the “one substance, three persons” for reasons other than denial of the deity of Christ and the Holy Spirit, are probably just confused, mystified, perplexed. I would not join a church that did not confess the doctrine of the Trinity in some form (at least implicitly if not explicitly), but I cannot deny the Christian status of someone who is genuinely confused and uncertain about it.
-:''A few years ago I visited a church that claims not to believe in the doctrine of the Trinity. A soloist sang a song titled “O Lamb of God” the first line of which says “From your side you sent your Son.” I tried to ask my friend who is an elder of the church how they can sing that song and mean it and at the same time deny the doctrine of the Trinity. He looked at me bemused and said “We believe whatever the Bible says.” Then I was bemused. My life experiences and reading of Brunner have led me to think that the doctrine of the Trinity, although extremely important as a landmark, if not a pillar, of Christian doctrine, is not essential to being Christian. But I suspect that if I could get any real Christian who claims not to believe in the Trinity alone in a room, one-on-one, for an hour long conversation about the matter I could convert them to belief in it.
-:''In sum, then, I am suggesting that the doctrine of the Trinity lies in a liminal position between or overlapping the borders of dogma and doctrine as I described these as two of three categories (the third being opinion) of Christian beliefs. '''“Dogma”''' is the category of essentials of the Christian faith, what is required to believe in order to be considered Christian. There I would place the deity and humanity of Jesus Christ (incarnation). '''“Doctrine”''' (in the sense of this taxonomy) is the category of important but not essential beliefs. There I would place, for example, universal atonement. '''“Opinion”''' is the third category in which I would place premillennialism.<ref>Must You Believe in the Doctrine of the Trinity to Be a Christian?, Roger E. Olson, published on www.patheos.com, February 5, 2015</ref>
-=The Historic Doctrine of the Trinity=
-So that we are all on the same page, a basic definition of the Trinity is necessary:
-:'''Within one Being that is God, there exists eternally three coequal and coeternal persons, namely the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.'''<ref>James White, The Forgotten Trinity, Bethany House Publishing, 1998</ref>
-Commonly referred to as "One God in Three Persons", the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are identified as distinct and co-eternal "persons" who share a single Divine essence, being, or nature.
-The doctrine of the Trinity was developed as a direct response to false doctrine that appeared in the church.  Initially, the church was not in the need for a clear doctrine on the Godhead.  But into the truth that Jesus and the Apostles left the church, error began to assert itself.  This error finally manifested itself in false doctrine and the church responded with "right teaching" ( which is what the word "orthodoxy" means).
-==Polycarp==
-The martyrdom of Polycarp, perhaps the oldest martyrdom of which we have a written account (ca. early 160s A.D.), pictures the dying Polycarp addressing God in a clear Trinitarian confession:
-:''“O Lord God Almighty, Father of your beloved Son Jesus Christ … I bless you because you have considered me worthy of this day and hour, that I might receive a place among the number of the martyrs … to the resurrection to eternal life … in the incorruptibility of the Holy Spirit”<ref>The Martyrdom of Polycarp 14:1–2</ref>
-==Justin Martyr==
-An early Ante-Nicene apologist for the Christian faith, Justin Martyr (110–165 A.D.) refers to Christ in a variety of ways, including “Lord,” “God the Son of God,” and “the Word.” As the “Word,” Jesus “carries tidings from the Father to men.” The power the Word exerts, however, is “indivisible and inseparable from the Father.” How so? Here Justin employs an illustration destined to appear again and again in the trinitarian thought of the fathers. Think, Justin asks his audience, of the sunlight that reaches the earth. While this light is distinct from the sun in the heavens, it is equally “indivisible and inseparable” from it. It is much the same with a fire igniting another fire. So it is with the begetting of the Son. The unbegotten Father begets the Son, “but not by abscission, as if the essence of the Father were divided.”<ref>Roger E. Olson and Christopher A. Hall, The Trinity, Guides to Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans, 2002), 21–22.</ref>
-==Origen==
-In On First Principles (De Principiis), Origen (c. 245 A.D.), the great Alexandrian exegete, provides important and interesting examples of a theologian’s attempts to understand the biblical testimony and rule of faith concerning Father, Son, and Holy Spirit and contributed to the development of trinitarian thinking.
-Origen understands that the Son was not created but was eternal:
-:''“For we do not say, as the heretics suppose, that some part of the substance of God was converted into the Son, or that the Son was procreated by the Father out of things non-existent, i.e., beyond His own substance, so that there was a time when He did not exist.”
-In a preview of coming debates, Origen wonders how anyone could assert “that there once was a time when He was not the Son.”  To assert that there was ever a time when the Son did not exist would be to contend “there was once a time when He was not the Truth, nor the Wisdom, nor the Life, although in all these He is judged to be the perfect essence of God the Father, for these things cannot be severed from Him, or even be separated from His essence… .”<ref>Roger E. Olson and Christopher A. Hall, The Trinity, Guides to Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans, 2002), 24.</ref>
-==Irenaeus==
-Irenaeus states that:
-:''“The Jewish Creator God is identical with the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.”<ref>Roger E. Olson and Christopher A. Hall, The Trinity, Guides to Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans, 2002), 27.</ref>
-==Tertullian==
-Tertullian (c. 155 – c. 240 A.D.) wrote a book, ''Against Praxeas,'' in which we find Tertullian pondering central trinitarian issues and responding to heterodox Christian views regarding the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. In his responses and formulations, Tertullian was the first writer to use the word '''“person”''' to the members of the Trinity and the first to apply the Latin word '''“trinitas” (Trinity)''' to God, and the first to develop the formula of "one substance in three persons.” Tertullian constructed his model of God as one substance (substantia) and three distinct persons (persona) in response to the threat of both gnostic polytheism and Christian modalism.<ref>Roger E. Olson and Christopher A. Hall, The Trinity, Guides to Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans, 2002), 29-30.</ref>
-==Athanasius vs. Arius==
-Arius argued that the Son was an exalted creature, elevated above all others, but still a creation of God. Arius writes, for instance, that “God was not always a Father,” “The Son was not always,” “the Word of God Himself was ‘made out of nothing,’ ” “once He was not,” “He was not before His origination,” and “He as others ‘had an origin of creation.’ ” “For God,” Arius taught, “was alone, and the Word as yet was not, nor the Wisdom. Then, wishing to form us, thereupon He made a certain one, and named him Word and Wisdom and Son, that he might form us by means of Him.”
-Athanasius’ writings are inseparably linked to his lifelong battle with Arianism. His "Four Discourses Against the Arians" provide us with many examples of how Athanasius read the Bible and applied its contents to a specific theological problem of great moment. Arian Christians refused to equate the Son with the Father, basing this rejection on philosophical, theological, and exegetical reasons.
-As the Son, Christ existed as “the Father’s Word and Radiance and Wisdom.” In the incarnation the Son willingly and lovingly took on the human flesh derived from “a Virgin, Mary, Bearer of God, and was made man.” The Word was “not external” to the humanity he had assumed. Rather, when the incarnate Son lived and ministered on earth, humanity and deity were both at work in an incomprehensible union. When Jesus healed the mother-in-law of Simon Peter, “He stretched forth His hand humanly, but He stopped the illness divinely.” When he healed the man born blind from birth, “human was the spittle which He gave forth from the flesh, but divinely did He open the eyes through the clay.” At the raising of Lazarus, “he gave forth a human voice, as man; but divinely, as God, did He raise Lazarus from the dead.”49 Athanasius sees the Son’s incarnate actions as manifesting the genuine union existing in his person between his humanity and his deity. If he grieved or expressed other human emotions, such was only proper. For “it became the Lord, in putting on human flesh, to put it on whole with the affections proper to it,” though Athanasius is uncomfortable with the idea that Christ’s human “affections” touched his deity.<ref>Roger E. Olson and Christopher A. Hall, The Trinity, Guides to Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans, 2002), 32-33.</ref>
 =Quotes of William Branham=
@@ Line 180: / Line 122: @@
 The Oneness doctrine was wrong:
+:''Now, of course, we people today, '''we believe that there’s three, the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost is the three persons of the one true God.''' It’s three offices, not three Gods. But that same… Listen now, we think that was ridiculous in the Catholic church, but we brought it right down here at Pentecost and tore yourselves to pieces with it—set up another organization, started something else.
+:''Instead of coming like brethren with brotherly love and with unity, the first one begin to see the—that the three Persons of the Godhead was in one Person, Christ Jesus; He was the manifestation of God in flesh, not another man. And then '''you set up and got the little dogmatic idea of the oneness''', so-called. Then you started on that, '''begin to harp on it, and you made God one like your finger, one, and you know that’s wrong.''' You better scholars know better than that. But what was it? It was because the palmerworm begin to eat first. Instead of setting and reasoning together when I come into the factions of the Pentecostals they set a table bigger than that, with their heads around, “You go this, and you can’t go to this. You preach for them, you can’t preach for me.”
+:''I said, “We are brethren. Absolutely.”
+:''And '''if the Oneness faction hadn’t have went off to one side''', and made an issue out of it, and would’ve stayed with their brethren, and let the Holy Ghost anoint them, that thing would’ve never spattered and broke up brotherhood the way it did. But what happened? The locusts begin to fly. It broke up brotherhood. You had to have a little unity of your own. Unity is not an isolated thing, brethren. Unity is for the whole body of Christ.<ref>William Branham, 57-0309B - I Will Restore, para. 32-33</ref>
 :''And you Oneness brethren, many of '''you get off the wrong track when you try to think that God is one like your finger is one. He can't be His Own Father.''' He can't be.<ref>59-0823, Palmerworm, Locust, Cankerworm, Caterpillar</ref>
+William Branham believed both Trinitarian and Oneness were wrong:
+:''Now, there is a group of people, call themselves '''the “Oneness” or the “Jesus Only.” I don’t agree with them upon their theory. Neither do I agree—agree with that trinitarian group''' that says that there are three different Gods, the extreme of the trinitarian. But I believe that the three, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, is One, that they are three offices of one God. He lived in the Fatherhood, in the Pillar of Fire; He lived in the Sonship, in Jesus Christ; and He lives now in the Holy Ghost, in His Church. The same Lord Jesus that was made flesh and dwelt among us, is with us this day, among us, in the form of the Holy Spirit.<ref>William Branham, 61-0827 - The Message Of Grace, para.37</ref>
 William Branham incorrectly believed that the doctrine of the Trinity did not exist prior to 325 A.D.: