>from Vishnu, Brahma, and can't think of the other gods name,
Siva (or Shiva)

>Or my favorite, is that in 325 A.D. the catholic church along >with Constantine (who was not a Theologian and could care less)
No Constantine wasn't a theologian, but as emporer he had influence in the Church, and he desperately wanted unity in his realm. He knew there was a division among the Greek speaking bishops and the Latin speaking bishops as to the realtionship of the Son to the Father. In 325 he called for the council of bishops at Nicea, which was in the Greek speaking part of the empire. Somewhere between 350 and 318 bishops showed up, which was only a minority of the bishops, and the majority of them were from the Greek speaking region, so the council was biased. After fierce debates, the Nicene Creed came out with a HEAVY bias toward Trinitarian thought. Debate continued to rage on for decades, more councils were called, more emporers got involved, and eventually banishment was used to force conformity. (Can you believe that? Believe in the Trinity, or you are banished from the empire...WOW.)

>(Even though there are first and
>second century Church Fathers such as Melito of Sardis who
>believed in the Deity of Christ).

And I can name a bunch who knew and understood that Jesus was not God:
Justin Martyr said that Jesus was "other than the God who made all things", and that Jesus "never did anything except what the Creator willed him to do."

Iranaeus said that Jesus is not equal to the "One true and only God".

Clement of Alexandria said that the Son "is next to the ONLY omnipotent Father" but not equal to him.

Tertullian taught "The Father is different from the Son, as he is GREATER; as he who begets is different from him who is begotten; he who sends, different from him who is sent." He also said "There was a time when the Son was not...Before all things, God was alone."

In the book "The Church of the First Three Centuries", historian Adam Lamson wrote "that is, to all Christian writers for three centuries after the birth of Christ, It is true, they speak of the Father, Son, and...holy spirit, but NOT AS CO-EQUAL, NOT AS ONE NUMERICAL ESSENCE, NOT AS THREE IN ONE, IN ANY SENSE NOW ADMITTED BY TRINITARIANS. The VERY REVERSE is the fact.

>And finally, the word Trinity is not found in the Bible
I don't use this argument, but I do find it odd that the IDEA of the Trinity ISN'T EVEN IN THE BIBLE!! Not in the Old Testament or the New:

"The Encyclopedia of Religion" ADMITS:Theologians today are in agreement that the Hebrew Bible does not contain a doctrine of the Trinity."

Jesuit Edmund Fortman ADMITS in his book "The Triune God" the following: "The Old Testament...tells us nothing EXPLICITLY or by necessary IMPLICATION of a Triune God who is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit...THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT ANY SACRED WRITER EVEN SUSPECTED THE EXISTENCE OF A TRINITY WITHIN THE GODHEAD...Even to see in the Old Testament suggestions or foreshadowings or veiled signs of the trinity of persons, IS TO GO BEYOND THE WORDS AND INTENT OF THE SACRED WRITERS."

Yale professor E. Washburn Hopkins affirmed: "To Jesus and Paul the DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY WAS APPARENTLY UNKNOWN...THEY SPEAK NOTHING ABOUT IT".

In the book "The Paganism in Our Christianity"(WHAT A TITLE!!!) Religious Historian Arthur Weigall, speaking of the trinity doctrine notes "Jesus Christ NEVER MENTIONED SUCH A PHENOMENON...The idea was ONLY adopted by the church THREE HUNDRED YEARS after the death of our Lord."(hmmm, right about the time of the Nicea...)
You mean to tell me, out of 66 books of the Bible NOT ONE CLEARLY EXPLAINS THE TRINITY?!?! GET OUTTA HERE WITH THAT TRICKNOWLEDGY.

>The problem is that many people do not fully understand what
>the trinity is saying, nor understand how to defend it.
YOU GOT THAT RIGHT, INCLUDING TRINITARIANS CLERGYMEN!!! For instance:
"A Dictinary of Religious Knowledge" reads: "Precisely what that doctrine is, or rather how it is to be explained, Trinitarians are not agreed among themselves."

Cardinal John O'Connor states "We know that it is a very profound mystery, which we don't begin to understand."

And Pope John Paul II calls it "the inscrutable mystery of God the Trinity"(THE POPE DOESN'T UNDERSTAND THE TRINITY!!! THE POPE!!!)

I don't woship a "mystery god". Sounds like a bunch of ADMITTED CONFUSION TO ME. And 1 Corinthians 14:33 says "God is NOT a God of confusion".


>hopefully, when I am finished explaining what it really
>means there will be no confusion.
I doubt it...I doubt it VERY SERIOUSLY. TRINITARIAN CLERGYMEN AND SCHOLARS (who can't even agree on the doctrine themselves) have been trying to explain it for almost 1700 years, and haven't been able to do so adequately, but you think you are gonna do it in a few minutes on okayplayer.com? RIIIIGHT....