Evolution Of The Dogma Of Trinity Of G-d It is a matter of dispute b/w Unitarian sects of Christianity and Trinitarian sects Of Christianity

whether Ante Niecean Fathersbelieved in Eternity Of Logos or not. Iit is true that some portions of a work of an Ante Necean supporsts the former and some portions of the same work supports the latter in general. But a care full study reviels the following facts. WHAT ANTE NICEAN FATHERS APPEAR TO BELIEVE:THE DOINGS AND ACTS OF THE SUPREME BEING NAMELY IAHUVAH / IHVH ARE NEITHER MADE NOR ETERNAL. For example Supreme Being namely IHVH SEES. THE DOING OF SEEING is not eternal. For if THE SUPREME BEING IHVH SEES A PERSON P at time t the doing of seeing the person at time t is not eternal since it occured at time t and not in ETERNITY.But the Divine Doing of SEEING is also not MADE Since The Divine Doing is Done and Not Made. The DOING OF SEEING is emanated and done but not made. CONCLUSION;The act / doing of SEEING OF SUPREME BEING at time t IS NOT ETERNAT since it occurred at time t and not in ETERNITY, AND ALSO NOT MADE SINCE it did not occurred out of [Ousia ] of SUPREME BEING and not in OUSIA OF SUPREME BEING. A made thing is made out of SUPREME BEING AND NOT in the SUPREME BEING.For example SUPREME BEING MADE HEAVEN AND EARTH out of the OUSIA [ESSENCE,SUBSTANCE,NATURE,FORM GODHEAD] OF SUPREME BEING namely IHVH.NEITHER THE HEAVEN NOR EARTH IS IN THE OUSIA OF SUPREME BEING NAMLY IHVH]. BUT the Divine Doings Occurs in the Divine Ousia i.e Ousia Of the Supreme Being.These Divine Doing occur and emanate in the Divine Ousia and exist in Alio. THE NATURE OF A DOING OF A SUPREME BEING IS DISTINCT FROM THE NATURE OF THE NATURE OF SUPREME BEING WHICH IS NOTHING BUT THE OUSIA , THE SUBSTANCIAL ESSENCE and the FORM of the SUPREME BEING. They do not come into BEINGNESS [ thingness/ existence ] out of Supreme Being from Nothing, BUT COME in Existence/ beingness in The Ousia Of The Supreme Being from the Ousia OF THE SUPREME BEING mentioned above.. Thus these Divine Doings are neither Substances nor Subsistents, neither Suppositums/ supposita nor Hypostatic Persons. They are some what analogous to the supposed human nature of Chistos in the 2nd Hypostatinc Person in theOusia of G-d theTrinity, IN THE HYPOSTATIC UNION.

A doing of THE SUPREME BEING is not a Subsistence, not Per Se Seorsumsubsistens.HOW EVER UNLIKE THE SUPPOSED human nature of Christ which is also supposed not to be exist per se seorsum, but in alio, in the HYPOSTATIC Personality of the SUPPOSED Second Hypostatic Person namly logos/saying, which in turn is supposed to be in Ousia Of GOD THE TRINITY As according to Trinitarians forming a Hypostatic Union, the Divine doings were believed to be Directly in the Ousia forming OUSIAIC UNION INSTEAD. They were also BELIEVED TO BE communicated BUT by EMANATION AND NOT BY ASSUMPTION. That is why they did not say Supreme Being became a Divine Doing. The following may make clearity for a Divine Doing, (a) A DIVINE DOING IS NOT Substantia-- ; (b) IT IS Completa-- it forms a

complete nature; that it is not a part. (c)Divine Doings are not per se subsistens--; (d) DIVINE DOINGS exist in another THAT IS OUSIA OF SUPREME BEING. IT appears that they further supposed that if the Ousiaic Union ceased to be these Doings shall immeadiately cease to be. This is contrary to the believe that if the supposed Human Nature Of Christ is Supposed to be ceased, the supposed nature would be upgraded to a Person immediately. Adoing of the Supreme Being may continue to EXIST In Alio [ in Ousia] and in this regard may be declaired that they possess Some specific QUALITIES ANALOGUS TO THE QUALITIES OF SUPPOSED HUMAN NATURE IN THE SECOND HYPOSTASIS AS ACCORDING TO THE TRINITARIANS. THE DIVINE DOINGS LIKE SEEING, WILLING,SAYING,HEARING,PROPOSING IDEAS AND ALL SUCH DOINGS WERE ALL SUPPOSED LIKE THIS BY THEM. BUT THE DID NOT CONSIDERD A DIVINE DOING AS A GENERAL CASE BUT TOOK THE PARTICULAR SASEIOF SAYING AND SAID WORDS. THEY USED THE WORD GENERATION OR BEGETTING FOR THIS SORT OF THINGS.BUT THEY NEVER INTNDED THAT THEY ARE ETERNAL. HOW EVER THEY BELIEVED THAT A DOING IS POTANTIALLY ETERNAL. THAT POTANTIALLY OF A DOING IS ETERNAL.How ever they opined that the Divine Doings have a distinct nature, and the nature of each doing overlaps the doing.
IN THE WORK Second ApologyJustin Martyr (ca. 150 A.D) SAYS:-

But to the Father of all, who is unbegotten, there is no name given. For by whatever name He be called, He has as His elder the person who gives Him the name. But these words, Father, and God, and Creator, and Lord, and Master, are not names, but appellations derived from His good deeds and functions. And His Son, who alone is properly called Son, the Word, who also was with Him and was begotten before the works, when at first He created and arranged all things by Him, is called Christ, in reference to His being anointed and God's ordering all things through Him; this name itself also containing an unknown significance; as also the appellation "God" is not a name, but an opinion implanted in the nature of men of a thing that can hardly be explained. Tatian (165 A.D) Says:-

And by His simple will the Word sprang forth, and the Word, not coming forth in vain, became the firstbegotten work of the Father . Him [the Word] we know to be the Beginning of the world. HE FURTHER SAYS:I myself, for instance, speak [words], and you hear, yet, certainly, I who converse do not become destitute of my word, by the transmission of speech, but by the utterance of my voice I endeavour to reduce to order the unarranged matter in your minds. And as the Word begotten in the beginning, begat in turn our world, having first created for himself the necessary matter, so also I, in imitation of the Word, being begotten again, and having become possessed of the truth, am
AYS:-

trying to reduce to order the confused matter which is kindred with myself. For matter is not, like God, without beginning, nor, as having no beginning, is of equal power with God, it is begotten, and not produced by any other being, but brought into existence by the Framer of all things alone (Address to the Greeks) Athenagoras (ca. 175 A.D) SAYS:, He is the first product of the Father, not as having been brought into existence (for from the beginning, God, who is the eternal mind [nous], had the Logos in Himself, being from eternity instinct with Word, but inasmuch as He came forth to be the idea and energizing power of all material things, which lay like a nature without attributes, and an inactive earth, the grosser particles being mixed up with the lighter.
Theophilus of Antioch (ca. 175 A.D) SAYS:-

God made all things out of nothing, for nothing was coexisting with God, but He being His own place, and wanting nothing, and existing before the ages, willed to make man by whom He might be known, for him, therefore, He prepared the world. For he that is created is also needy, but He that is uncreated stands in need of nothing. God, then, having His own Word internal within His own bosom, begat him, emitting him along with His own wisdom before all things. He had this Word as a helper in the things that were created by Him, and by him He made all things. He [the Word] is called "the Beginning" [arche],1 because he rules, and is Lord of all things fashioned by him. He, then, being Spirit of God, and arche, and wisdom, and Power of The Highest, came down upon the prophets, and through them spoke of the creation of the world and of all other things. For the prophets were not when the world came into existence, but the wisdom of God which was in him, Clement of Alexandria (ca. 200)SAYS:The nature of the Son, which is nearest to Him who is alone the Almighty One, is the most perfect, and most holy, and most powerful, and most noble, and most kingly, and most esteemed. This is the highest excellence, which orders all things in accordance with the Father's will. (Stromata, Book VII, 2). ORIGEN SAYS:There Either they deny that the Son has a distinct nature of His own besides that of the Father, and make Him whom they call the Son to be theos all but the name, or they deny the divinity of the Son, giving Him a separate existence of His own, and making His sphere of essence fall outside that of the Father, so that they are separable from each other. To such persons we have to say that God on the one hand is autotheos (God of Himself); this tendency evoluted first into eternity of the particular act say Saying and FINALLY EVOLUTED TO THE DOGMA OF TRINITY OF GOD. Example. The Suprewme Being says. Let there be light. These words are Not Eternal But not Made but done. How ever these sayings continue to exist in the Ousia OF THE SUPREME BEING AS LONG AS THE ARE IN Ousia of Supreme Being.

The Supreme Being namely IHVH did not said LET THERE BE THE SAYING LET THERE BE THE LIGHT . [This saying as mensioned above was Neither made Nor Eternal, did not occurred Out Of Supreme Being But In The Ousia Of Supreme Being.] Hence the proper term for acts/doings like seeing ,hearing,willing,saying,proposing an idea ,is emation, doing,occurring in Ousia, and even begetting but not making or manufacruting or creating., In this perspective one may see the evalution of dogma of Trinity Of GOD. They Trinitarian fathers changed the temporal act of emanation /generation into an eternal act and incorrectly ascribed Trinitarian concept who never thought it in there wildest dreams. To be continued..