@Touchofgrey
Some resources for you:
The pagan triads listed (e.g., Osiris, Horus, Isis; Zeus, Apollo, Athena)
are collections of three distinct deities, often grouped together due to
familial relationships, shared attributes, or functional roles. These triads do
not represent a single, unified Godhead, as in Christian theology, where the
Trinity is one God in three co-equal, co-eternal persons (Father, Son, Holy
Spirit). In contrast, pagan triads are polytheistic and lack the ontological
unity that defines the Christian Trinity. For example Osiris, Horus, and Isis
are three separate deities with individual roles and functions in Egyptian
mythology. There is no claim of unity or shared essence among them. This
contrasts sharply with the Christian doctrine, which insists on a single divine
essence shared among the three persons.
The claim that Christians "copied" pagan trinities is an example
of a post hoc fallacy—assuming that because pagan religions had triadic deities
first, the Christian Trinity must have been derived from them. Correlation does
not imply causation. Many human cultures independently arrived at the idea of
groupings of three, as the number three often symbolizes completeness or
balance, but this does not establish a causal connection. Even if there are superficial
parallels (e.g., groups of three), these do not imply doctrinal borrowing. The
Christian Trinity arises from divine revelation and is deeply rooted in Jewish
monotheism, which strictly opposed pagan polytheism.
The doctrine of the Trinity is derived from Scripture, not external
sources. The Old Testament hints at plurality within God's unity (e.g., Genesis
1:26; Isaiah 48:16), and the New Testament makes it explicit (e.g., Matthew
28:19; John 1:1-14; 2 Corinthians 13:14). While the formal articulation of the
Trinity occurred at councils such as Nicaea (325 AD) and Constantinople (381
AD), this was not the “invention” of a new doctrine but the clarification and
defense of what the Church had always believed. The apostles' writings already
affirm Christ's divinity (e.g., John 20:28; Philippians 2:6-11) and the Holy
Spirit's personhood (e.g., Acts 5:3-4).
The claim that the apostles did not subscribe to the Trinity is false.
While the term "Trinity" does not appear in the New Testament, the
concept is present. Jesus explicitly identifies Himself with the Father (John
10:30) and promises the Holy Spirit (John 14:26). The baptismal formula
(Matthew 28:19) invokes the three persons of the Godhead.
Early Christian writers like Ignatius of Antioch, Justin Martyr, and
Irenaeus (2nd century) affirmed the divinity of Christ and the Holy Spirit,
laying the groundwork for the later Trinitarian formulations. The Councils of
Nicaea and Constantinople did not invent the Trinity but responded to heresies
(e.g., Arianism) by affirming and clarifying the Church’s belief. The Trinity
was implicit in Christian worship and theology from the beginning, as seen in
early creeds and doxologies.
The claim that the Babylonians worshipped a Trinity of Venus, the moon, and
the sun is misleading. While Babylonian religion included celestial worship, it
did not describe these as three persons of a single divine essence. Instead,
they represented distinct celestial bodies.
Zeus, Athena, and Apollo are part of a vast pantheon with no unity of
essence. The notion that they "agree in one" is an invention with no
historical basis.
Jupiter, Mercury, and Venus were local adaptations of Roman gods, again
illustrating polytheistic worship rather than a monotheistic tri-unity.
The argument that Christian
doctrines, such as the Trinity, were "borrowed" from earlier pagan
religions often relies on identifying superficial similarities between
Christian beliefs and elements of pagan mythology. This approach, epitomized by
Alexander Hislop's The Two Babylons, assumes without sufficient
evidence that any resemblance automatically implies direct influence or "adoption". While this claim may appear persuasive at first glance, it is
fundamentally flawed because it commits the genetic fallacy.
The genetic fallacy occurs
when someone argues that the origin or source of an idea determines its truth
or validity. In essence, the fallacy attempts to dismiss or discredit a belief
based on its alleged origin rather than addressing the belief itself on its
merits. For example, saying that a moral principle is invalid simply because it
was first articulated by a flawed individual is a clear example of the genetic
fallacy.
In the case of the
"borrowed from paganism" argument, the fallacy lies in claiming that
because some pagan religions included triads or other superficially similar
concepts, Christian beliefs about the Trinity must be unoriginal, false, or
derivative. This reasoning sidesteps the theological, historical, and
scriptural basis of Christian doctrines and instead dismisses them purely based
on alleged parallels.
Identifying similarities
between two belief systems does not prove that one actually influenced the
other. Human cultures often develop similar ideas independently due to shared
human experiences and reasoning. For example, the concept of a divine triad in
pagan religions often reflects attempts to organize their pantheons into groups
for philosophical or symbolic reasons, which differ fundamentally from the
Christian Trinity as a revealed doctrine.
The argument frequently
overlooks significant theological differences between the Christian Trinity and
pagan triads. Pagan triads often represent three separate gods with distinct
roles, while the Christian Trinity asserts one God in three consubstantial
persons (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit). The Christian Trinity is uniquely
monotheistic, grounded in scriptural revelation, and distinct from the
polytheistic frameworks of pagan triads.
The claim of direct "borrowing" lacks historical evidence. The early Church Fathers explicitly
rejected pagan practices and beliefs, frequently critiquing them as
incompatible with Christian theology. If the Trinity were merely an adaptation
of a pagan concept, one would expect more explicit acknowledgment or
controversy about such “borrowing” in early Christian writings, but no such
evidence exists.
Hislop's method exemplifies
a predetermined agenda: to portray Christianity as corrupted by paganism. By
starting with the assumption that "borrowing" occurred, he interprets every
similarity as proof of his thesis, ignoring alternative explanations and evidence
that contradict his conclusions.
The claim that "historians of church dogma agree the Trinity was
not part of the first-century church" is false and misrepresents
scholarship. While the precise terminology developed later, the belief in the
divinity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit was integral to early
Christianity.
So the argument that Christianity borrowed the Trinity from pagan sources
collapses under scrutiny. The pagan triads cited are fundamentally different in
nature, purpose, and theology from the Christian Trinity. The doctrine of the
Trinity is uniquely Christian, rooted in divine revelation, and deeply anchored
in Scripture and the apostolic faith. Pagan trinities reflect human speculation
and polytheism, while the Christian Trinity reveals the mystery of the one true
God in three persons.
The "borrowed from paganism" argument is an oversimplification that fails to engage with the substantive theological, historical, and philosophical foundations of Christian doctrines like the Trinity. By committing the genetic fallacy, this argument distracts from the real questions of whether a belief is true or well-founded. Superficial similarities between Christianity and pagan religions do not prove borrowing, and the unique, revealed nature of Christian theology stands as evidence against such claims.
