My point exactly Cubes,
Who is the one who sends and who is the one who is sent?
I've researched and edited this article which even as long as it is, still does not take up the webspace
that E-Maniac's dronings have. This information can be verified by secular history and
the records kept by the Vatican. So this is not me speaking but history itself and it really makes sense.
The Historical Development of the Trinity Doctrine
Most people who believe in the Doctrine of the Trinity claim that at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD, all the church did was to officially declare a doctrine that had always been the teaching of the church. But if this is true, ask yourself why? Why would the church have to make any kind of official declaration about a doctrine that was supposed to be established from the beginning? There is no doctrine on whether Jesus resurrected or not. It was an established teaching. The idea that Jesus was God, was not. This is why the Catholic church required an official declaration to formally establish this as orthodox. It was a developing idea. It was not a teaching of the early church that had been established by the apostles. An important thing to note in support of this fact is that even at Nicaea when with Emperor Constantine’s help, they rammed this doctrine through as orthodox, they did not include the Holy Spirit as part of the formula. Again, why not? How could they forget that the trinity included the Holy Spirit? Because it was a developing idea, and at this point in time (Nicaea), all the church was willing to concede to was a binity. It would have to wait until the Council of Constantinople in 381 AD to include the Holy Spirit in their formula and thus complete the trinity.
Tertullian of Carthage’s Letter:
An excellent proof that the Doctrine of the Trinity was not an established teaching of the early Christians is in a letter by one of the trinity’s greatest exponents, Tertullian of Carthage. Even though his understanding of it was that the Son was subordinate to the Father, which is contrary to today’s Doctrine of the Trinity, his writings were very influential in the development of this doctrine. He wrote about it profusely.
The fact that he believed the Son to be inferior to the Father can be easily seen in his letter Against Praxeas. In it, he states:
Chap. IX. “Thus the Father is distinct from the Son, being greater than the Son.”
Chap. VII. “And while I recognize the Son, I assert his distinction as second to the Father.”
Again, ask yourself why was his view of the trinity different from today’s view if it has always been taught by the church? The reason is because it was a developing idea.
Tertullian himself gives us the greatest proof of the fact that it was a developing idea in the same letter. He states:
Chap. III. vv. 1. “The majority of believers, are STARTLED at the Dispensation (of the Three in One)…They are constantly throwing out against us that we are preachers of two gods and three gods…While the Greeks actually REFUSE to understand the oikonomia, or Dispensation” (of the Three in One).
These are incredible statements! Tertullian is acknowledging that the majority of believers did not agree with the Doctrine of the Trinity. They accused him of being a polytheist. The Greeks (either Greek Christians or Christians that spoke Greek in different lands) refused altogether to believe him.
These statements are probably the best proofs that the Doctrine of the Trinity was not taught by the Apostles. If it had been taught by them, the majority of believers would have known about the Dispensation and would not have been startled by it, neither would they have accused him of worshipping two gods. This doctrine was something new, it was not the established belief of Christianity as you can see. It was starting to work itself out and trying to gain popularity, especially with Hellenized Christians. But it was not in the majority. In fact, it was very much in the minority.
The Doctrine of the Trinity was not an established teaching of the early Christians. It was a doctrine that developed and spread throughout Christianity between the 3rd and 4th centuries. There was much resistance to it from the majority of believers as Tertullian himself admits. But in the end, with the might of the Roman state to back up the state held Councils and the state imposed articles of faith, this new doctrine became the orthodox position of the church. Many thousands of people were killed by the state in the following centuries for their refusal to accept this doctrine as Biblical. Even as late as the 1700’s, people were still being burned at the stake for their denial of this man-made doctrine (Servetus was burned at the stake by Calvin for this reason). Does that sound like something that Jesus and his apostles would approve of? Did Jesus ever say,
“believe what I say or I will have you killed?” Of course not! But this was the only way to enforce this most unbiblical and most illogical pagan belief. If this doctrine is not the great apostasy that Jesus warned us about, then I do not know what else it could be.
This is an unpalatable aspect of history which is largely unknown, or
ignored, by the current generation of the Christians. END
Blessings to all,
Semmy 
