Wednesday, October 26, 2011

CHRIST AS AN ANGEL IN THE ANF BEFORE NICEA

Although this early Jewish-Christian sect of the Ebonites (circa. early 1st-2nd C.E.) was considered heretical, and their teachings on certain aspects have certainly deviated from pure Christian doctrine, what they said about Christ as an Angel is corroborative evidence of the antiquity of this tradition and teaching going back to the Earliest Christians and to the Jews themselves, as confirmed by writings among the DSS or Dead Sea Scrolls and Philo Judaeus.

Here is what Epiphanius had to say on what they taught in this regard:

GREEK TEXT: “...καὶ [16.] τούτου ἕνεκα Ἰησοῦν γεγεννημένον ἐκ σπέρματος ἀνδρὸς λέγουσι καὶ ἐπιλεχθέντα καὶ οὕτω κατὰ ἐκλογὴν υἱὸν θεοῦ κληθέντα ἀπὸ τοῦ ἄνωθεν εἰς αὐτὸν ἥκοντος Χριστοῦ ἐν εἴδει περιστερᾶς. οὐ φάσκουσι δὲ ἐκ θεοῦ πατρὸς αὐτὸν γεγεννῆσθαι, ἀλλὰ κεκτίσθαι ὡς ἕνα τῶν ἀρχαγγέλων [καὶ ἔτι περισσοτέρως], αὐτὸν δὲ κυριεύειν καὶ ἀγγέλων καὶ πάντων τῶν ὑπὸ τοῦ παντοκράτορος πεποιημένων...” - (Panarion 30.16, 4-5; Κατὰ Ἐβιωναίων, τῆς δὲ ἀκολουθίας. MPG.)

EPIPHANIUS OF SALAMIS (circa. 310-403 C.E.): “...And on this account they say that Jesus was begotten of the seed of a man, and was chosen; and so by the choice of God he was called the Son of God from the Christ that came into him from above in the likeness of a dove. And they deny that he was begotten of God the Father, but say that he was created as one of the archangels, yet greater, and that he is Lord of the angels and of all things made by the Almighty...” - (Pages 8-10, Panarion 30.16,4-5; Montague Rhode James in The Apocryphal New Testament, Oxford: Clarendon Press 1924)

EPIPHANIUS OF SALAMIS (circa. 310-403 C.E.):...They say that Christ was not begotten of God the Father, but created as one of the archangels ... that he rules over the angels and all the creatures of the Almighty...” - (Panarion 30.16,4-5; The Nazarenes of Mount Carmel Copyright © 1999-2006.)

My own translation:

EPIPHANIUS OF SALAMIS (circa. 310-403 C.E.): “...Wherefore on this account they also say, Jesus birth originated [only] out of [the] seed of a man and was called a son of God according to selection from above of the Christ that entered into him in the visible form of a dove. It is frequently alleged [that] he was not born of God [the] Father, but rather he was created as one of the Arch-Angels, yet extra-ordinary, [and that] he is Lord of all Angels and everything else that has been made by the ALL-MIGHTY...” - (Panarion 30.16,4-5; By Matt13weedhacker ( 26/6/09 ) Revised 27/6/09)

ALTERNATE VERSION:

EPIPHANIUS OF SALAMIS (circa. 310-403 C.E.): "... “...Wherefore on this account they also say, Jesus birth originated [only] out of [the] seed of a man and was called a son of God according to selection from above of the Christ that entered into him in the visible form of a dove. It is frequently alleged [that] he was not born of God [the] Father, but rather he was created as one of the Arch-Angels, yet greater than everything else that has been made by the ALL-MIGHTY [and that] he is holding Lordship over all Angels...” - (Panarion 30.16,4-5; By Matt13weedhacker Re-Revised 27/10/11)
[FOOTNOTE]: κυριεύειν = verb present infinitive active attic epic contr

COMPARE:

GREEK TEXT: “…κατὰ [146(b).] τὸν πρωτόγονον αὐτοῦ λόγον, τὸν ἀγγέλων πρεσβύτατον, ὡς ἂν ἀρχάγγελον, πολυώνυμον ὑπάρχοντα· καὶ γὰρ ἀρχὴ καὶ ὄνομα θεοῦ καὶ λόγος καὶ ὁ κατ’ εἰκόνα ἄνθρωπος καὶ ὁ ὁρῶν, Ἰσραήλ, προσαγορεύεται...” - (Chapter 27:146(b), ΠΕΡΙ ΣΥΓΧΥΣΕΩΣ ΔΙΑΛΕΚΤΩΝ, MPG.)

PHILO JUDAEUS (circa. 20 B.C.E to 50 C.E.): "...according to HIS FIRST-BORN WORD, THE ELDEST OF HIS ANGELS, AS THE GREAT ARCH-ANGEL OF MANY NAMES; for he is called, the Authority, and the name of god, and the Word, and Man according to God's image, and He who sees Israel..." - (p. 247, The Works of Philo, "On the Confusion of Tongues," translated by C.D. Yonge)

PHILO JUDAEUS (circa. 20 B.C.E to 50 C.E.): "...in relation to ( GOD'S ) FIRST-BORN AND ELDEST MESSENGER [GK., ( angelos )], THE WORD: THAT IS THE MULTI-NAMED ARCHANGEL (WHO WAS) AT THE BEGINNING. For he is also called "the Beginning" and THE "NAME OF GOD" and the "Word" and the "Man after his Image" and "Israel the Seer..." - (Philo, Confusion 145-146 (Perspective on the World of Jesus with new translations from primary texts 1999-2008 by Mahlon H. Smith)

PHILO JUDAEUS (circa. 20 B.C.E to 50 C.E.): "...according to [THE] FIRST ONE TO BE BORN, HIS LOGOS, THE OLDEST OF THE ANGELS, CERTAINLY AS [THE] ARCH-ANGEL HAVING MULTIPLE NAMES, WHO CAME INTO EXISTENCE FROM UNDER A BEGINNING. For he is also named: "Beginning" and "Name of God" and "Logos" and "Man according to His image" and "The Seer", "Israel"..." - (Philo Judaeus, Latin Tittle: "De Confusione Linguarum" Greek Tittle: ΠΕΡΙ ΣΥΓΧΥΣΕΩΣ ΔΙΑΛΕΚΤΩΝ or "Concerning [the] Confusion of Dialects" Translated by Matt13weedhacker 4/7/11-Revised 12/09/11)


PHILO JUDAEUS (circa. 20 B.C.E - 50 C.E.): “...If any one be not yet worthy to be called the son of God, yet endeavor thou to be conformed unto HIS FIRST-BEGOTTEN WORD, THE MOST ANCIENT ANGEL, THE ARCHANGEL WITH MANY NAMES; for he is called 'The Beginning,' 'The Name of God,' 'The Man according to the image of God,' 'The Seer of Israel'...” - (Page 96, “On The Confusion of Tounges,” The Works of John Owen: “An exposition of the Epistle to the Hebrews,” By John Owen, William H. Goold. 1854.)

PHILO JUDAEUS (circa. 20 B.C.E - 50 C.E.): “...But if there be any as yet unfit to be called a son of God, let him press to take his place under GOD'S FIRST-BORN, THE WORD, WHO HOLDS THE ELDERSHIP AMONG THE ANGELS, THEIR ARCHANGEL AS IT WERE. AND MANY OTHER NAMES ARE HIS, for he is called 'The Beginning,' and 'The Name of God,' and 'His Word,' and 'The Man after His image,' and 'He that sees,' that is Israel'. ... For if we have not yet become fit to thought of sons of God yet we may be sons of His invisible image, the most holy Word. For the Word is the eldest-born image of God...” - (Page 282, “On The Confusion of Tounges,” Reading John: A Literary and Theological Commentary on the Fourth Gospel By Charles H. Talbert. 2005.)

Also compare:

PHILO JUDAEUS (circa. 20 B.C.E to 50 C.E.): "...And the Father who created the universe has given to HIS ARCHANGELIC AND MOST ANCIENT [Gk., ( Logos )] WORD a pre-eminent gift, to stand on the confines of both, and separated that which had been created from the Creator. And this same [Gk., ( Logos )] Word is continually a suppliant to the immortal God on behalf of the mortal race, which is exposed to affliction and misery; and IS ALSO THE AMBASSADOR, SENT BY THE RULER OF ALL, to the subject race..." - (p. 293, The Works of Philo, "Who Is the Heir of Divine Things," translated by C.D. Yonge)

PHILO JUDAEUS (circa. 20 B.C.E to 50 C.E.): "...For as those who are not able to look upon the sun itself, look upon the reflected rays of the sun as the sun itself, and upon the halo around the moon as if it were the moon itself; SO ALSO DO THOSE WHO ARE UNABLE TO BEAR THE SIGHT OF GOD, LOOK UPON HIS IMAGE, HIS ANGEL [Gk., ( Logos )] WORD, AS HIMSELF..." - (p. 386, The Works of Philo, "On Dreams, I," translated by C.D. Yonge)

PHILO JUDAEUS (circa. 20 B.C.E to 50 C.E.): "...For God, like a shepherd and a king, governs (as if they were a flock of sheep) the earth, and the water, and the air, and the fire, and all the plants, and living creatures that are in them, whether mortal or divine . . . APPOINTING AS THEIR IMMEDIATE SUPERINTENDENT, HIS OWN RIGHT [Gk., ( Logos )] REASON, HIS FIRSTBORN SON, WHO IS TO RECEIVE THE CHARGE OF THIS SACRED COMPANY, AS THE LIEUTENANT OF THE GREAT KING; FOR IT IS SAID SOMEWHERE, "BEHOLD, I AM HE! I WILL SEND MY MESSENGER [ANGEL] BEFORE THY FACE, WHO SHALL KEEP THEE IN THE ROAD [Exo. 23:20]..." - (p. 178, The Works of Philo, "On Husbandry," translated by C.D. Yonge)

TAMPERING WITH ( ANF ) MANUSCRIPTS!

UNITED BIBLE SOCIETIES: “...Evidence for the citation of the Church Fathers has been taken almost wholly from printed editions of the Greek New Testament and has not yet been checked. These data are not always reliable since many of the patristic editions employed by earlier editors of the Greek New Testament are out of date. Moreover, a Church Father not infrequently quotes the same passage in more than one form, often from memory than by consulting a manuscript, and may therefore appear in support of differing readings. FURTHERMORE, THE MANUSCRIPTS OF THE CHURCH FATHERS - ( HAVE ) - SUFFERED THE USUAL TRANSCRIPTIONAL - ( MODIFICATIONS ) - TO WHICH ALL ANCIENT MANUSCRIPTS WERE SUBJECT; THIS WAS - ( ESPECIALLY TRUE ) - FOR BIBLICAL PASSAGES WHERE THE TENDENCY OF SCRIBES WAS TO - ( ACCOMMODATE READINGS TO ) - THE BYZANTINE TEXTUAL ( TRADITION )...” - (Page xxxvi, UBS Greek Text apparatus: Kurt Alan, Matthew Black, Carlo M. Martini, Bruce M. Metzger, and Allen Wikgren (eds.), The Greek New Testament, 3rd edition, United Bible Societies, 1983.)

Saturday, October 22, 2011

GREGORY OF THAUMTURGUS CALLED JESUS A "CREATURE" AND A "THING MADE" & RETROSPECTIVE APOLOGETICS & SATANIC INVOLVEMENT IN POST & EXTRA-BIBLICAL TRI{3}NITARIAN REVELATIONS


I have had the following Creed or “Declaration of Faith” put to me as proof that “Christians” supposedly taught Jesus was “...Un-Created...” and part of “...a Tri{3}nity...” in the 3rd Century:

GREGORY THAUMATURGUS (circa. 213-270 C.E.): “...There is one God, the Father of the living Word, who is His subsistent Wisdom and Power and Eternal Image: perfect Begetter of the perfect Begotten, Father of the only-begotten Son. There is one Lord, Only of the Only, God of God, Image and Likeness of Deity, Efficient Word, Wisdom comprehensive of the constitution of all things, and Power formative of the whole creation, true Son of true Father, Invisible of Invisible, and Incorruptible of Incorruptible, and Immortal of Immortal and Eternal of Eternal. And there is One Holy Spirit, having His subsistence from God, and being made manifest by the Son, to wit to men: Image of the Son, Perfect Image of the Perfect; Life, the Cause of the living; Holy Fount; Sanctity, the Supplier, or Leader, of Sanctification; in whom is manifested God the Father, who is above all and in all, and God the Son, who is through all. There is a perfect Trinity, in glory and eternity and sovereignty, neither divided nor estranged. [Gk., ( Οὔτε οὖν κτιστόν τι, ἢ δοῦλον ἐν τῇ Τριάδι )] Wherefore there is nothing either created or in servitude in the Trinity; nor anything superinduced, as if at some former period it was non-existent, and at some later period it was introduced. And thus neither was the Son ever wanting to the Father, nor the Spirit to the Son; but without variation and without change, the same Trinity abides ever...” - (“A Declaration of Faith.” Translated by S.D.F. Salmond. From Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 6. Edited by Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe. (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1886.) Revised and edited for New Advent by Kevin Knight.)

On the surface it could appear that this is indeed an early Tri{3}nitarian statement.

But I say to you - never ever - take Tri{3}nitarian claims on face value.

After doing some research, certain facts came to light about the circumstances from which this so-called Creed or “Declaration of Faith” came into existence and when.

First of all it should be noted that no one actually quoted these specific words or the actual Creed itself, until a very long time after Gregory's of Thaumaturgus death.

It is nowhere mentioned as being used or presented at all at the Council of Nicea where it most certainly would have been of great use to the Athanasian or future Tri{3}nitarian cause.

But, rather than me just telling you about how and under what circumstances this Creed first came to light, let Gregory of Nyssa himself tell us exactly how this Creed was revealed:

GREEK TEXT: “...Οὕτω [46.911] τοίνυν ὑπελθὼν τὸν ζυγὸν κατ' ἀνάγκην, πάντων μετὰ ταῦτα τῶν νομίμων ἐπ' αὐτῷ τελεσθέν των, καὶ βραχὺν χρόνον αἰτησάμενος παρὰ τοῦ τὴν ἱερωσύνην ἐπικηρύξαντος, πρὸς κατανόησιν τῆς κατὰ τὸ μυστήριον ἀκριβείας, οὐκέτι, καθώς φησιν ὁ Ἀπόστολος, σαρκὶ καὶ αἵματι προσανέχειν ᾤετο δεῖν, ἀλλὰ θεόθεν ᾔτει γενέσθαι αὐτῷ τὴν τῶν κρυφίων φανέρωσιν· καὶ οὐ πρότερον ἐπεθάρσησε τῷ τοῦ λό γου κηρύγματι, πρὶν διά τινος ἐμφανείας ἐκκαλυ φθῆναι αὐτῷ τὴν ἀλήθειαν. Σκοπουμένῳ γὰρ αὐτῷ ποτε ἐννύχιον περὶ τοῦ λόγου τῆς πίστεως, καὶ παν τοίους ἀνακινοῦντι λογισμούς· ἦσαν γὰρ δὴ καὶ τότε τινὲς, οἱ τὴν εὐσεβῆ διδασκαλίαν παραχαράττοντες, διὰ τῆς πιθανότητος τῶν ἐπιχειρημάτων, ἀμφίβολον ποιοῦντες πολλάκις καὶ τοῖς συνετοῖς τὴν ἀλήθειαν· ὑπὲρ ἧς τότε διαγρυπνοῦντι αὐτῷ καὶ φροντίζοντι φαίνεταί τις καθ' ὕπαρ ἐν ἀνθρωπίνῳ τῷ σχήματι, γηραλέος τὸ εἶδος, ἱεροπρεπὴς τῇ καταστολῇ τοῦ ἐν δύματος, πολλὴν ἐπισημαίνων τὴν ἀρετὴν τῇ περὶ τὸ [46.912] πρόσωπον χάριτι, καὶ τῇ καταστάσει τοῦ σχήματος. Τὸν δὲ καταπλαγέντα τῇ ὄψει, διαναστῆναι μὲν τῆς εὐνῆς καὶ ὅστις εἴη μαθεῖν ἐδεῖτο, καὶ ὑπὲρ τίνος ἥκοι. Ἐκείνου δὲ καταστείλαντος αὐτοῦ τὴν ταρα χὴν τῆς διανοίας ἐν ἠρεμαίᾳ φωνῇ, καὶ εἰπόντος θείῳ προστάγματι πεφηνέναι αὐτῷ τῶν ἀμφισβητου μένων παρ' αὐτοῦ χάριν, ὡς ἂν ἐκκαλυφθείη τῆς εὐ σεβοῦς πίστεως ἡ ἀλήθεια· θαρσῆσαί τε πρὸς τὸν λό γον, καὶ βλέψαι πρὸς αὐτὸν μετά τινος χαρᾶς καὶ ἐκπλήξεως. Εἶτα ἐκείνου κατ' εὐθὺ τὴν χεῖρα προ τείναντος, καὶ οἷον ὑποδεικνύντος αὐτῷ διὰ τῆς τῶν δακτύλων εὐθείας τὸ ἐκ πλαγίου φαινόμενον, συμ περιαγαγεῖν τοῦτον τῇ εὐθείᾳ τῆς χειρὸς τὸ ἴδιον βλέμμα, καὶ ἰδεῖν ἀντιπρόσωπον ἕτερον θέαμα τῷ ὀφθέντι, ἐν γυναικείῳ τῷ σχήματι, κρεῖττον ἢ κατὰ ἄνθρωπον· πάλιν δὲ καταπλαγέντα, συγκλιθῆναί τε πρὸς ἑαυτὸν τῷ προσώπῳ, καὶ ἀμηχανεῖν τῷ θεάματι, μὴ φέροντα τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς τὴν ἐμφάνειαν (καὶ γὰρ δὴ τὸ παράδοξον τῆς ὀπτασίας ἐν τούτῳ μάλιστα ἦν, ὅτι νυκτὸς οὔσης βαθείας, φῶς τοῖς ὀφθεῖσιν αὐτῷ συνεξέλαμψεν, ὥσπερ τινὸς λαμπρᾶς ἐξαπτομένης λαμπάδος). Ἐπεὶ οὖν οὐχ οἷός τε ἦν φέρειν τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς τὴν ἐμφάνειαν, ἤκουσε διὰ λόγου τινὸς τῶν ὀφθέντων αὐτῷ, πρὸς ἀλλήλους τὸν περὶ τοῦ ζητουμένου λόγον διεξιόντων· δι' ὧν οὐ μόνον ἐπαιδεύθη τὴν ἀληθῆ γνῶσιν τῆς πίστεως, ἀλλὰ καὶ διὰ τῶν ὀνομάτων τοὺς
ἐπιφανέντας ἐγνώρισεν, ἑκατέρου αὐτῶν διὰ τῆς οἰκείας προσηγορίας ἀνακα λοῦντος τὸν ἕτερον. Ἀκοῦσαι γὰρ λέγεται παρὰ τῆς ἐν γυναικείῳ φανείσης τῷ σχήματι παρακαλούσης τὸν εὐαγγελιστὴν Ἰωάννην, φανερῶσαι τῷ νέῳ τὸ τῆς εὐσεβείας μυστήριον· ἐκεῖνον δὲ εἰπεῖν, ἑτοίμως ἔχειν καὶ τοῦτο τῇ μητρὶ τοῦ Κυρίου χαρίσασθαι, ἐπειδὴ τοῦτο φίλον αὐτῇ· καὶ οὕτως εἰπόντα τὸν λό γον σύμμετρόν τε καὶ εὐπερίγραπτον, πάλιν μετ αναστῆναι τῶν ὄψεων. Τὸν δὲ παραχρῆμα τὴν θείαν ἐκείνην μυσταγωγίαν γράμμασιν ἐνσημήνασθαι, καὶ κατ' ἐκείνην μετὰ ταῦτα κηρύσσειν ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ τὸν λόγον, καὶ τοῖς ἐφεξῆς, ὥσπερ τινὰ κλῆρον τὴν θεόσδοτον ἐκείνην διδασκαλίαν καταλιπεῖν· δι' ἧς μυσταγωγεῖται μέχρι τοῦ νῦν ὁ ἐκείνης λαὸς, πάσης αἱρετικῆς κακίας διαμείνας ἀπείρατος. Τὰ δὲ τῆς μυσταγωγίας ῥήματα, ταῦτά ἐστιν· [CREED BEGINNING] “...Εἷς Θεὸς Πατὴρ Λόγου ζῶντος, σοφίας ὑφεστώ σης καὶ δυνάμεως, καὶ χαρακτῆρος ἀϊδίου, τέ λειος, τελείου γεννήτωρ· Πατὴρ Υἱοῦ μονογε νοῦς. Εἷς Κύριος, μόνος ἐκ μόνου, Θεὸς ἐκ Θεοῦ, χαρακτὴρ καὶ εἰκὼν τῆς θεότητος, Λόγος ἐνεργὸς, σοφία τῆς τῶν ὅλων συστάσεως περιεκτικὴ, καὶ δύναμις τῆς ὅλης κτίσεως ποιητικὴ, Υἱὸς ἀληθι νὸς ἀληθινοῦ Πατρὸς, ἀόρατος ἀοράτου, καὶ ἄφθαρτος ἀφθάρτου, καὶ ἀθάνατος ἀθανάτου, καὶ ἀΐδιος ἀϊδίου. Καὶ ἓν Πνεῦμα ἅγιον, ἐκ Θεοῦ τὴν ὕπαρξιν ἔχον· καὶ δι' Υἱοῦ πεφηνὸς, δηλαδὴ τοῖς ἀνθρώποις, εἰκὼν τοῦ Υἱοῦ τελείου τελεία, ζωὴ [46.913] ζώντων αἰτία, πηγὴ ἁγία, ἁγιότης ἁγιασμοῦ χορ ηγός· ἐν ᾧ φανεροῦται Θεὸς ὁ Πατὴρ, ὁ ἐπὶ πάντων καὶ ἐν πᾶσι· καὶ Θεὸς ὁ Υἱὸς, ὁ διὰ πάν των· Τριὰς τελεία, δόξῃ καὶ ἀϊδιότητι καὶ βασι λείᾳ μὴ μεριζομένη, μηδὲ ἀπαλλοτριουμένη. Οὔτε οὖν κτιστόν τι, ἢ δοῦλον ἐν τῇ Τριάδι, οὔτε ἐπείσακτόν τι, ὡς πρότερον μὲν οὐχ ὑπάρχον, ὕστε ρον δὲ ἐπεισελθόν. Οὔτε οὖν ἐνέλιπέ ποτε Υἱὸς Πατρὶ, οὔτε Υἱῷ Πνεῦμα· ἀλλ' ἄτρεπτος καὶ ἀναλ λοίωτος ἡ αὐτὴ Τριὰς ἀεί...” [CREED END] Ὅτῳ δὲ φίλον περὶ τούτου πεισθῆναι, ἀκουέτω τῆς Ἐκκλησίας, ἐν ᾗ τὸν λόγον ἐκήρυττεν, παρ' οἷς αὐτὰ τὰ χαράγματα τῆς μακα ρίας ἐκείνης χειρὸς εἰς ἔτι καὶ νῦν διασώζεται. Ταῦτ' οὐχὶ πρὸς τὰς θεοτεύκτους ἐκείνας πλάκας ἁμιλλᾶται τῇ μεγαλοφυΐᾳ τῆς χάριτος; ἐκείνας δὲ λέγω τὰς πλάκας, ἐν αἷς ἡ τοῦ θείου βουλήματος ἐνετυπώθη νομοθεσία. Ὡς γὰρ τὸν Μωϋσέα φησὶν ὁ λόγος, ἔξω τοῦ φαινομένου γενόμενον, καὶ ἐντὸς τῶν ἀοράτων ἀδύτων τῇ ψυχῇ καταστάντα (τοῦτο γὰρ ὁ γνόφος αἰνίττεται), μαθεῖν τε τὰ θεῖα μυστήρια, καὶ δι' ἑαυτοῦ τῆς θεογνωσίας παντὸς τοῦ λαοῦ καθηγήσα σθαι· τὴν αὐτὴν ἔστι καὶ ἐπὶ τοῦ μεγάλου τούτου κατιδεῖν οἰκονομίαν· ᾧ ὄρος μὲν ἦν, οὐκ αἰσθητόν τι ἢ γεώλοφον, ἀλλὰ τὸ ὕψος τῆς τῶν ἀληθινῶν δογμά των ἐπιθυμίας· γνόφος δὲ τὸ τοῖς ἄλλοις ἀχώρητον θέαμα· δέλτος δὲ ἡ ψυχή· τὰ δὲ ἐν ταῖς πλαξὶ γράμ ματα, ἡ τοῦ ὀφθέντος φωνή· δι' ὧν ἁπάντων αὐτῷ τε καὶ τοῖς παρ' ἐκείνου μυσταγωγουμένοις ἐγένετο ἡ τῶν μυστηρίων φανέρωσις...” - ([46.911-913] De vita Gregorii Thaumaturgi ΤΟΥ ΑΥΤΟΥ ΕΙΣ ΤΟΝ ΒΙΟΝ ΤΟΥ ΑΓΙΟΥ ΓΡΗΓΟΡΙΟΥ ΤΟΥ ΘΑΥΜΑΤΟΥΡΓΟΥ. MPG.)

GREGORY OF NYSSA (circa. 335-394 C.E.): “...So [28.] when he [Gregory of Thaumaturgus] had thus willy-nilly come under the yoke and later all the proper ceremonies had been carried out on him, and having requested a little time from the one who had summoned him to the priesthood to come to an understanding of the exact purport of the ( mystery ), he no longer, as the Apostle says, thought it right to pay heed “to flesh and blood,” but asked that he be given by God ( a manifestation of what is hidden ). And he did not feel confident in preaching the word until truth ( had been revealed to him in some visible way ). [29.] For while he was concentrating during the night on the doctrine of faith, and turning over all sorts of thoughts in his mind - for even then there were those who were falsifying the true doctrine, and through the plausibility of their proposals often making truth unclear to experts - to him then, as he was lying awake and pondering, ( someone appeared in a vision, in human shape ), elderly looking, very dignified in garb, displaying every virtue in the grace of his countenance and the calmness of his appearance. Astonished at ( the sight ), he got up from his bed to learn who this might be and why he had come. When the latter calmed his distress of mind with ( a quiet voice ) and said the he had ( appeared to him ) by divine command on account of the matters about which he was uncertain, so the truth [Gk., ( τῆς εὐσεβοῦς πίστεως )] of the orthodox faith might be disclosed, he took heart at the word and looked to him with joy and amazement. [30.] Then, as ( the figure ) suddenly extended his hand and by the line of his fingers indicated to him ( what appeared ) at his side, he turned his eyes to where the hand was pointing and saw, across from ( the one he had seen , - another vision ), in female form, larger than human size. Astonished once again he lowered his eyes to himself and was at ( the sight ), not able to bear to look at ( the manifestation ). For the paradox of ( the vision ) lay precisely in this, that although the night was far advanced, ( light illuminated the appearances ) for him, like something ( bright lighting a lamp ). Therefore since he was not able with his eyes to bear ( the vision ), he heard through ( a kind of word those who had appeared ) to him discussing with each other the doctrine about which he was pondering, so that he not only was instructed as to true knowledge of the faith but also recognised ( the ones who had appeared ) by their names, since each of them addressed the other by their proper name. [31.] For he is said to have heard from ( the one who appeared ) in female ( form ) as she urged the evangelist John to show the young man ( the mystery of the truth ); and that the latter said that he was ready to indulge the mother of the Lord also in this, since it pleased her. And when he had thus ( uttered the doctrine ), - balanced and clearly defined, - ( they again vanished from view ). And he is said to have written down ( that divine initiation ) as soon as possible, and afterwards to have used it as the basis for his preaching in the church and to have left that God-given teaching to ( his successors ) as a kind of inheritance, by which people there are initiated to this day, thus remaining unaffected by every heretical wickedness. [32.] Now the words of the initiation are these [CREED BEGINS]: “...One God: Father of the living Word, subsistent wisdom and power and eternal impress; perfect begetter of perfect; Father of only-begotten Son. One Lord: only from only; God from God; impress and image of the Godhead; effective Word; wisdom embracing the structure of the universe, and power which makes the entire creation; true Son of true Father; invisible of invisible, and incorruptible of incorruptible, and immortal of immortal, and eternal of eternal. One Holy Spirit: holding existence from God, and manifested through the Son (namely to human beings); perfect image of the perfect Son; life the cause of living things; holiness who makes sanctification possible; by whom is manifested God the Father, who is over all and in all, and God the Son, who is through all. Perfect Trinity: in glory and eternity and sovereignty neither divided nor estranged. Therefore there is nothing created or subserviant in the Trinity, nor anything introduced which did not exist before but came later. Therefore neither did the Son fall short of the Father, nor the Spirit of the Son; but the same Trinity remains always undisturbed and unaltered...” [CREED ENDS] Whoever would like to be ( convinced of this ) should listen to the church, in which he proclaimed the doctrine, where the very ( inscriptions of that blessed hand are preserved to this very day ). Do these not rival in the marvelous nature of their grace those divinely fashioned tablets of stone? I refer to those tablets on which the legislation of the divine will was engraved. For just as the word says that Moses, having left the world of appearances and calmed his soul within the invisible shrines (for this is what “the darkeness” stands for), learned ( the divine mysteries ), and in person instructed the whole people in the knowledge of God, ( the same dispensation ) is to be seen in the case of ( this Great One ). He had not some visible mountain of earth but the pinnacle of ardent desire for the true teachings; ( for darkness, the vision ) which others could not comprehend; for writing-tablet, the soul; for the letters graven on stone tablets, ( the voice of the one he saw ); through all of which both he and those initiated by him enjoyed ( a manifestation of the mysteries )...” - (Pages 52-55, Chapter 4, Gregory's Initiation Through A Heavenly Vision, Sections 28-32; “ON THE LIFE & WONDERS OF OUR FATHER AMONG THE SAINTS, GREGORY THE WONDER WORKER – By Gregory, Bishop of Nyssa,” in THE FATHERS OF THE CHURCH - St. Gregory Thaumaturgus: life and works, translated by Michael Slusser, 1998.)
[FOOTNOTE]: Emphasis added.

I will provide some scriptures for you to think about and compare with what was said by Gregory of Nyssa above.

Then you can decide how much you can trust the story above and make up your own mind.

Gk., ( ἕτερον εὐαγγέλιον ) “Goodnews of a different kind and nature”

Gk., ( παρ’ ὃ εὐηγγελισάμεθα ) “Goodnews beyond” or “besides” the one they received.

GREEK TEXT: “...Θαυμάζω [6.] ὅτι οὕτως ταχέως μετατίθεσθε ἀπὸ τοῦ καλέσαντος ὑμᾶς ἐν χάριτι Χριστοῦ εἰς ἕτερον εὐαγγέλιον, [7.] ὃ οὐκ ἔστιν ἄλλο, εἰ μή τινές εἰσιν οἱ ταράσσοντες ὑμᾶς καὶ θέλοντες μεταστρέψαι τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ Χριστοῦ, [8.] ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐὰν ἡμεῖς ἢ ἄγγελος ἐξ οὐρανοῦ εὐαγγελίσηται [ὑμῖν] παρ’ ὃ εὐηγγελισάμεθα ὑμῖν, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω. [9.] ὡς προειρήκαμεν καὶ ἄρτι πάλιν λέγω· εἴ τις ὑμᾶς εὐαγγελίζεται παρ’ ὃ παρελάβετε, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω...” - (ΠΡΟΣ ΓΑΛΑΤΑΣ 1:6-9; Greek NT: Westcott/Hort with Diacritics)

COPTIC TEXT (BOHAIRIC): “...ⲁⲗⲗⲁ ⲕⲁⲛ ⳿ⲁⲛⲟⲛ ⲓⲉ ⲟⲩⲁⲅⲅⲉⲗⲟⲥ ⳿ⲉⲃⲟⲗ ϧⲉⲛ ⳿ⲧⲫⲉ ⳿ⲛⲧⲉϥϩⲓϣⲉⲛⲛⲟⲩϥⲓ ⲛⲱⲧⲉⲛ ⲥⲁⲃⲟⲗ ⳿ⲙⲫⲏⲉⲧⲁⲛϩⲓϣⲉⲛⲛⲟⲩϥⲓ ⳿ⲙⲙⲟϥ ⲛⲱⲧⲉⲛ ⲙⲁⲣⲉϥϣⲱⲡⲓ ⳿ⲛⲟⲩⲁⲛⲁⲑⲉⲙⲁ...”

(Coptic NT-Northern Dialect-Eng): “...But even if we, or an Angel from the heaven, preach good tidings to you outside of that which we preached to you, let him be an anathema...” - (Galations Chapter 1 Verse 8.)

(Coptic NT-Southern Dialect-Eng): “...But even if we, or an Angel out of the heaven, should preach to you beside that which we preached to you, let him become abominable...” - (Galations Chapter 1 Verse 8.)

GALATIONS (1:6-10): “...I am marvelling that in such a manner suddenly you are becoming of another mind and deserting from Him who called you in the sphere of Christ's grace to a message of good news diametrically opposed to the gospel, which message is not an alternative gospel. Only, there are certain ones who are troubling your minds and are desiring to pervert the gospel of Christ. In fact, even if we or a [Gk., ( ἄγγελος )] messenger from heaven should preach a gospel to you which goes beyond that which we preached to you as good news, let him be accursed. Even as we have said on a previous occasion, indeed, now again I am saying, If, as is the case, anyone preaches a gospel to you which goes beyond that which you took so eagerly and hospitably to your hearts, let him be accursed...” - (Wuests Expanded NT)

GREEK TEXT: “...φοβοῦμαι [3.] δὲ μή πως, ὡς ὁ ὄφις ἐξηπάτησεν Εὕαν ἐν τῇ πανουργίᾳ αὐτοῦ, φθαρῇ τὰ νοήματα ὑμῶν ἀπὸ τῆς ἁπλότητος [καὶ τῆς ἁγνότητος] τῆς εἰς τὸν Χριστόν. [4.] εἰ μὲν γὰρ ὁ ἐρχόμενος ἄλλον Ἰησοῦν κηρύσσει ὃν οὐκ ἐκηρύξαμεν, ἢ πνεῦμα ἕτερον λαμβάνετε ὃ οὐκ ἐλάβετε, ἢ εὐαγγέλιον ἕτερον ὃ οὐκ ἐδέξασθε, καλῶς ἀνέχεσθε...” - (ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥΣ Β΄ 11:3-4 Greek NT: Westcott/Hort with Diacritics)

2ND CORINTHIANS (11:3-4): “...But [3.] I fear, lest by any means, as the snake deceived Eve in his craftiness, your minds should be corrupted from your simplicity and purity which you express towards Christ. For, [4.] indeed, if, as is the case, he who comes proclaims another person as Jesus than the one whom we proclaimed, or you receive a spirit different in nature from the one you received, or a message of good news different in character from that message you received, you are most beautifully tolerant of him...” - (Wuests Expanded NT)

2ND CORINTHIANS (11:3-4): “...Yet [3.] I continue fearing lest somehow, as the serpent thoroughly deceived (or: seduces; fully deludes) Eve within its capability for every work (its cunning ability in all crafts and actions; its readiness to do anything), the results of directing your minds should be decayed (ruined; spoiled; corrupted) away from the singleness [of purpose] and simplicity [of being] – even the purity – which [focuses us] into the Christ. [4.] For if, indeed, the person periodically coming is habitually preaching (heralding; proclaiming) another Jesus – whom we do not preach (or: did not herald and proclaim) – or, [if] you folks are continuously receiving a different Spirit (or: are repeatedly haying hold of a spirit or attitude that is different in kind and nature) which you did not receive, or a different good-news (a message of ease and wellness which is different in kind and character) which you did not welcome and accept, are you repeatedly holding back from [him] in an ideal way? (or: you folks are beautifully putting up with and tolerant of [it]!)...” - (Jonathan Mitchell NT [An Expanded/Amplified version])

GREEK TEXT: “...τὸ μυστήριον τὸ ἀποκεκρυμμένον ἀπὸ τῶν αἰώνων καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν γενεῶν— νῦν δὲ ἐφανερώθη τοῖς ἁγίοις αὐτοῦ...” - (ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΛΟΣΣΑΕΙΣ 1:26 Greek NT: Westcott/Hort with Diacritics)

COLOSSIANS (1:26): “...the mystery that has been kept hidden for ages and generations, but is now disclosed to the saints...” - (New International Version (©1984))

COLOSSIANS (1:26): “...This message was kept secret for centuries and generations past, but now it has been revealed to God's people....” - (New Living Translation (©2007))

COLOSSIANS (1:26): “...the mystery hidden for ages and generations but now revealed to his saints...” - (English Standard Version (©2001))

COLOSSIANS (1:26): “...that is, the mystery which has been hidden from the past ages and generations, but has now been manifested to His saints...” - (New American Standard Bible (©1995))

COLOSSIANS (1:26): “...That mystery which was hidden from the world and from generations but now has been revealed to his Holy Ones...” - (Aramaic Bible in Plain English (©2010))

COLOSSIANS (1:26): “...In the past God hid this mystery, but now he has revealed it to his people...” - (GOD'S WORD® Translation (©1995))

COLOSSIANS (1:26): “...the truth which has been kept secret from all ages and generations, but has now been revealed to His people...” - (Weymouth New Testament)

GREEK TEXΤ: “...ῷ [25.] δὲ δυναμένῳ ὑμᾶς στηρίξαι κατὰ τὸ εὐαγγέλιόν μου καὶ τὸ κήρυγμα ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ, κατὰ ἀποκάλυψιν μυστηρίου χρόνοις αἰωνίοις σεσιγημένου, [26.] φανερωθέντος δὲ ( νῦν ), διά τε γραφῶν προφητικῶν κατ᾿ ἐπιταγὴν τοῦ αἰωνίου Θεοῦ εἰς ὑπακοὴν πίστεως εἰς πάντα τὰ ἔθνη γνωρισθέντος, [27.] μόνῳ σοφῷ Θεῷ διὰ ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ᾧ ἡ δόξα εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας· ἀμήν...” - (Romans Chapter 16 Verses 25-27.)

ROMANS (16:25-27): “...Now [25.] to Him who can strengthen you by my gospel, by the preaching of Jesus Christ, by revealing the secret purpose which after the silence of long ages [26.] has now been disclosed and made known on the basis of the prophetic scriptures ( by command of the eternal God ) to all the Gentiles for their obedience to the faith [27.] - ( to ) - the only wise God be glory - ( through ) - Jesus Christ for ever and ever: Amen...” - (MOFFAT'S NT)

ROMANS (16:25-27): “...Let [25.] us give glory to God! He is able to make you stand firm in your faith, according to the Good News I preach about Jesus Christ and according to the revelation of the secret truth which was hidden for long ages in the past. [26.] Now, however, that truth has been brought out into the open through the writings of the prophets; and by the command of the eternal God it is made known to all nations, so that all may believe and obey. [27.] - ( To ) - the only God, who alone is all-wise, be glory - ( through ) - Jesus Christ forever! Amen...” - (TEV-GOOD NEWS BIBLE)

GREEK TEXT: “...καὶ οὐ θαῦμα· αὐτὸς γὰρ ὁ σατανᾶς μετασχηματίζεται εἰς ἄγγελον φωτός...” - (ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥΣ Β΄ 11:14 Greek NT: Westcott/Hort with Diacritics)

LATIN TEXT: “...Et non mirum, ipse enim Satanas transfigurat se in angelum lucis...” - (NVLA)

COPTIC TEXT (BOHAIRIC): ”... ⲟⲩⲟϩ ⳿ⲛⲟⲩ⳿ϣⲫⲏⲣⲓ ⲁⲛ ⲧⲉ ⳿ⲛⲑⲟϥ ϩⲱϥ ⳿ⲡⲥⲁⲧⲁⲛⲁⲥ ⳿ϥϣⲓⲃϮ ⳿ⲙⲙⲟϥ ⳿ⲙ⳿ⲡ⳿ⲥⲙⲟⲧ ⳿ⲛⲟⲩⲁⲅⲅⲉⲗⲟⲥ ⳿ⲛⲧⲉ ⳿ⲫⲟⲩⲱⲓⲛⲓ...”

2ND CORINTHIANS (11:14): “...And it is not a wonder. Satan also himself changeth himself into (the) form of an angel of (the) light...” - (Coptic NT-Northern Dialect-Eng)

2ND CORINTHIANS (11:14): “...And it is not a wonder; for himself the Satanas is wont to take form as angel of the light...” - (Coptic NT-Southern Dialect-Eng)

2ND CORINTHIANS (11:14): “...And no marvel, for even Satan disguises himself into an agent of light...” - (ACV)

2ND CORINTHIANS (11:14): “...For it is not surprising himself for Satan to change appearance into an angel of light...” - (ABP+)

2ND CORINTHIANS (11:14): “...And no wonder! For Satan himself transforms himself into an angel of light...” - (Complete Apostles' Bible)

2ND CORINTHIANS (11:14): “...And no marvel, for Satan himself is being transfigured into a messenger of light...” - (CLV)

2ND CORINTHIANS (11:14): “...And no wonder, for even Satan himself masquerades as a shining angel...” - (GSNT)

2ND CORINTHIANS (11:14): “...And no wonder ([it is] no marvel or cause for astonishment), for the adversary (opponent; satan) itself is repeatedly changing its outward fashion (transforming itself; or, as a pass.: being transformed and changed in its outward expression) into a messenger (or: agent) of light...” - (Jonathan Mitchell [Expanded/Amplified] NT)

2ND CORINTHIANS (11:14): “...And no marvel, for Satan himself changes his outward expression from one that comes from his inner nature and is representative of it, to one that is assumed from without and not representative of his inner being, masquerading as a messenger of light...” - (Wuest's Expanded NT)

2ND CORINTHIANS (11:14): “...And no wonder! For even HaSatan transforms himself into a malach ohr (an angel of light)...” - (OJB)

2ND CORINTHIANS (11:14): “...And in this there is nothing strange. For if Satan feigns himself an angel of light...” - (Rev. Murdock)

2ND CORINTHIANS (11:14): “...And no wonder; Satan himself can pass for an angel of light...” - (Knox NT)

GREEK TEXT: “...οὗ [9.] ἐστιν ἡ παρουσία κατ’ ἐνέργειαν τοῦ Σατανᾶ ἐν πάσῃ δυνάμει καὶ σημείοις καὶ τέρασιν ψεύδους [10.] καὶ ἐν πάσῃ ἀπάτη ἀδικίας τοῖς ἀπολλυμένοις, ἀνθ’ ὧν τὴν ἀγάπην τῆς ἀληθείας οὐκ ἐδέξαντο εἰς τὸ σωθῆναι αὐτούς...” - (ΠΡΟΣ ΘΕΣΣΑΛΟΝΙΚΕΙΣ Β΄ 2:9 Greek NT: Westcott/Hort with Diacritics)

2ND THESSALONIANS (2:8-10): “...the [9.] coming and presence of whom is according to the operation of Satan in the sphere of miracles demonstrating power and attesting miracles and miracles of a startling, imposing, amazement-wakening character which deceive, and whose coming [10.] and presence is in the sphere of every kind of wicked deception geared to those who are perishing, caused by the fact that they did not accept the love for the truth to the end that they might be saved...” - (Wuest's Epanded NT)

Much to think about.

According to these scriptures the “Mysteries” or “sacred secret” of the truth had been completely revealed in Pauls time.

So - why the need for another revelation from heaven? = None!

No one in the scriptures mentions a Tri{3}nity at all!

So - why the need for a message so fundementally Gk., ( heteros ) different in kind, nature, characther, and doctrine from the simple strait forward truth of the Bible! = None!

But as a final point, - note the contradictory statement - made below by Basil of Caesarea.

The facts are Gregory once held contrary veiws, to an “Un-Created” Christ, in fact he is on record as actually saying Jesus was a:

Gk., ( κτίσμα ) “CREATURE” 

and 

Gk., ( ποίημα ) “THING MADE”!

Which became very embarassing for Basil:

GREEK TEXT: “...Καθῆκαν [210.5] δέ τινα πεῖραν δι' ἐπιστολῆς καὶ πρὸς τὸν ὁμόψυχον ἡμῶν Ἄνθιμον τὸν Τυάνων ἐπίσκοπον, ὡς ἄρα Γρηγορίου εἰπόντος ἐν ἐκθέσει πίστεως Πατέρα καὶ Υἱὸν ἐπινοίᾳ μὲν εἶναι δύο, ὑποστάσει δὲ ἕν. Τοῦτο δὲ ὅτι οὐ δογματικῶς εἴρηται, ἀλλ' ἀγωνιστικῶς ἐν τῇ πρὸς Γελιανὸν ∆ιαλέξει, οὐκ ἠδυνήθησαν συνιδεῖν οἱ ἐπὶ λεπτότητι τῶν φρενῶν ἑαυτοὺς μακαρίζοντες. Ἐν ᾗ πολλὰ τῶν ἀπογραψαμένων ἐστὶ σφάλματα, ὡς ἐπ' αὐτῶν τῶν λέξεων δείξομεν ἡμεῖς, ἐὰν ὁ Θεὸς θέλῃ. Ἔπειτα μέντοι τὸν Ἕλληνα πείθων οὐχ ἡγεῖτο χρῆναι ἀκριβολογεῖσθαι περὶ τὰ ῥήματα, ἀλλ' ἔστιν ὅπη καὶ συνδιδόναι τῷ ἔθει τοῦ ἐναγομένου, ὡς ἂν μὴ ἀντιτείνοι πρὸς τὰ καίρια. ∆ιὸ δὴ καὶ πολλὰς ἂν εὕροις ἐκεῖ φωνὰς τὰς νῦν τοῖς αἱρετικοῖς μεγίστην ἰσχὺν παρεχομένας, ὡς τὸ κτίσμα καὶ τὸ ποίημα καὶ εἴ τι τοιοῦτον...” - (Page 163, Epistulae 210.τ ΤΟΙΣ ΚΑΤΑ ΝΕΟΚΑΙΣΑΡΕΙΑΝ ΛΟΓΙΩΤΑΤΟΙΣ MPG.)

BASIL OF CAESAREA (circa. 330 – 379 C.E.): “...They made an attempt too by letter on my dear friend Anthimus, bishop of Tyana, on the ground that Gregory had said in his exposition of the faith that Father and Son are in thought two, but in hypostasis one. The men who congratulate themselves [Page 251] on the subtilty of their intelligence could not perceive that this is said not in reference to dogmatic opinion, but in controversy with Ælian. And in this dispute there are not a few copyists’ blunders, as, please God, I shall shew in the case of the actual expressions used. But in his endeavour to convince the heathen, ( he ) [Gregory of Thaumaturgus] deemed it needless to be nice about the words he employed; ( he ) judged it wiser sometimes to make concessions to the character of the subject who was being persuaded, so as not to run counter to the opportunity given him. This explains [That is Basil's retrospective and apologetic explanation a hundred years later] how it is that you may find there many expressions which now give great support to the heretics, AS FOR INSTANCE [Gk., ( κτίσμα )] “CREATURE” AND [Gk., ( ποίημα )] “THING MADE” AND THE LIKE...” - (Pages 250-251, Letter CCX. [210 = 204 in some editions] BASIL: LETTERS AND SELECT WORKS. VOLUME VIII. A” SELECT LIBRARY OF THE NICENE AND POST-NICENE FATHERS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.” SECOND SERIES TRANSLATED INTO ENGLISH WITH PROLEGOMENA AND EXPLANATORY NOTES. Edited by PHILIP SCHAFF, D.D., LL.D., PROFESSOR OF CHURCH HISTORY IN THE UNION THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY, NEW YORK. AND HENRY WACE, D.D., PRINCIPAL OF KING’S COLLEGE, LONDON. T&T CLARK EDINBURGH WM. B. EERDMANS PUBLISHING COMPANY GRAND RAPIDS, MICHIGAN 1895.)
[FOOTNOTE]: Emphasis added.

Another partial translation of the same passage:

GREGORY OF NYSSA (circa. 335-394 C.E.): “...Besides, teaching a Gentile, he did not think it necessary ( to be accurate ) in his expressions ; for it was fit to yeild a little to a man that was to be brought over to the faith, that he might not reject the chief things : insomuch, that you may find there several words which afford the greatest advantage to the heretics ( of this time ); SUCH AS “CREATURE,” “MADE,” - AND – ( THE LIKE )...” - (Page 41, “Credibility of Gospel History” Part II. Chapter XLII. St. Gregory of Neocaesarea, A.D. 243., Vol 4, The works of Nathaniel Lardner.)

This is Basil's ( postumous ) excuse and retrospective apology for Gregory of Thaumaturgus.

Another letter to the same Congregation highlights Basil's akward predicament:

BASIL OF CAESAREA (circa. 330 – 379 C.E.): “...“...I have been driven to use these expressions by the urgency of my defence, that you may be taught to cast the beam out of your own eyes before you try to remove other men's motes. Nevertheless, I am conceding all, although there is nothing that is not searched into before God. Only let great matters prevail, and do not allow innovations in the faith to make themselves heard. Do not disregard the hypostases. Do not deny the name of Christ. Do not put a wrong meaning on the words of Gregory [of Thaumaturgus]. If you do so, as long as I breathe and have the power of utterance, I cannot keep silence, when I see souls being thus destroyed...” - (Section 4, Letter 207, Basil of Caesarea, Translated by Blomfield Jackson. From Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, Vol. 8. Edited by Philip Schaff and Henry Wace. (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1895.) Revised and edited for New Advent by Kevin Knight.)

Very interesting coments below on the passage before:

NATHANIEL LARDNER: “...Basil ( labors extremely ) in the rest of his answer. Since the passage insisted upon is genuine, what does it avail to say, there are faults in the transcribers, perhaps in things of little momnet only? Then he [Basil] owns that Gregory spoke in-accurately, at least in his [Basil's] judgement : nay, he makes Gregory disguise or conceal the truth, and thus cast a mist before ( honest ) heathen, in order to make a proselyte of him. This is ( not ) defending Gregory, but ( abusing him ) : that the Neocaesareans may be confuted, Gregory is villified. ( 5 ) As for the doctrine now held by the Neocaesareans, wether downright Sabellianism, or [Calling Jesus “...“Creature,” and “Made” and the like...” may be added] or somewhat differing from it ; I think that, considering the passages before the alleged, and the great respect they had for Gregory, it seems probable that ( there must have been some grounds in his writings ) for the doctrine [or doctrine(s)] which now obtained among them. It is not easy to suppose that a sentiment entirely different from Gregory's, in point of importance, should universally prevail in a church that greatly respected his memory; who were averse to novelty in all other matters, and had been all along blessed with bishops, who were great admirers of antiquity, and tenacious of ancient doctrines and customs...” - (Page 43, [522.] “Credibility of Gospel History” Part II. Chapter XLII. St. Gregory of Neocaesarea, A.D. 243., Vol 4, The works of Nathaniel Lardner.)

There is another thing that should be noted and taken into consideration ; as brought out by another translation of Gregories revelation:

GREGORY OF NYSSA (circa. 335-394 C.E.): “...If any are desirous of farther satisfaction about this matter, let him inquire of the Church, in which Gregory preached that doctrine, and with whom it is still preserved in the hand-writing of that blessed man...” - (Page 30, “Credibility of Gospel History” Part II. Chapter XLII. Vol 4, The works of Nathaniel Lardner.)

To say it was the fault of copyist's "blunders," in copies of Gregory's writings by Basil, when Basil's own brother, Gregory of Nyssa, said that the originals in Gregory of Thaumaturgus very own hand writing - ( still existed ) - ( in his and Basils time ) - makes his argument highly dubious!

And to think this very letter being to the very congregation where Gregories original writings came from? And these very originals were now stored? 

Why warn them of copies? 

Sure signs of anachronistic attempts at covering over the actual truth.

Another side point to take into consideration was this congregation where Gregory of Thaumaturgus came from were at great odds with Basil of Caesarea, the majority of them considering him an enemie of the congregation. Once it was reported he set the whole town in uproar when it was discovered he was in a nearby town - so great was the contention between them.

One also has to ask too – why -- is it directly implied that "...THE HEATHEN..." or Pagan "...GENTILES..." somehow possessed an “Arian” doctrine that Christ was “Created or “Made”?

This seems ridiculous to me that they had - any - clearly defined doctrine about the Christ - at all - let alone whether he was created or not!

Whether you actually believe Basil's explain aways or Gregory of Nyssa account - is up to you!

The whole story and circumstances surrounding it, plus the contradictions found in Basil, make it very clear that this "Creed" and Extra-Biblical "Revelation" - to say the very least - are highly suspect.

It also smacks of demonic influence and it reminds me very much of Joseph Smith's encounter in the first chapter of the Book of Mormon about him and the “Angel” Moroni's so-called extra-biblical “revelation.”

Its just another example of Satanic influence on the Great Apostacy of “...later periods of time...” and the very dubious nature of many so-called Tri{3}nitarian proof texts. 

[FOOTNOTE]: To see further reasons why this account in Gregory of Nyssa on Gregory of Thaumaturgus is not to be trusted see William Whistons account in his “Primitive Christianity Reviv'd” Volume 4 at the link below:

 

Tuesday, October 18, 2011

YET AGAIN - MORE BIBLE TAMPERING BY TRINITARIANS!

SIR ISAAC NEWTON (circa. 1642-1727 C.E.): “...Hincmare in the place mentioned in the former Letter, tells us [a2] [ LATIN TEXT: "...Quidam autem [sc. Hæretici] ex ijsdem scripturis quædam crasini de quibus reven{illeg} timebant, sicut constat Arianos de Evangelio erasisse quod Salvator ait: Quia Deus spiritus est quem credere nolebant quod Spiritus S. Deus esset omnipotens..." Hincmar Opusc. 33. cap. 18. ] that the Arians rased out of the Gospel this text. Quia Deus spiritus est, Because God is a spirit, & that they did it least they should be compelled to confess that the Holy Ghost is God Omnipotent. He means not the words Spiritus est Deus in Iohn 4, which all men understand of the father, but those which D. Ambrose cites [b3] [ Quod natum est. Ambros. de Spir. sancto Lib. 2, cap. {illeg} & cap. 12. & De Fide Lib. 3, c. 8. ] divers times out of Iohn 3.6, after this manner: Quod natum est ex carne caro est quia de carne natum est, et quod natum est ex spiritu spiritus est quia Deus spiritus est. That which is born of the flesh is flesh because it is born of the flesh, & that which is born of the spirit is spirit because the spirit is God. For in one of the places where D. Ambrose thus cites this text he complains with Hincmarus that the Arians had here blotted out the words quia Deus spiritus est, & that they had done it not only in their private books but also in the public books of the Churches. His words are: [c4] [ LATIN TEXT: "...Sed etiam ipse Dominus dixit in Evangelio: Quoniam Deus Spiritus est. Quem {illeg} ita expresse Ariani testificant esse de Spiritu, ut eum de vestris codicibus auferant. Atque utinam de vestris et non etiam de Ecclesiæ codicibus tollent. Eo enim {illeg} est. Et fortasse hoc etiam in Oriente fecistis. Et literas quidem potuistis abolere, sed fidem non potuistis auferre. Plus vos illa litura prodebat: Plus vos illa litura damnabat. Neque enim vos poteratis oblinire veritatem, sed illa litura de libro vitæ vestra nomina radebat. Cur auferebatur, Quoniam Deus Spiritus est, si non pertinebat ad spiritu..." Ambros. ] "...Yea & the Lord himself said in the Gospel. Because God is a spirit. Which place the Arians so so expresly testify to respect the Spirit that ye take it out of your books. And I could wish that ye took it out of your own books only & not also out of the Books of the Church. For at that time when that man of impious infidelity Auxentius took possession of the Church of Millain by arms & an army, or the Church of Sirmium upon the inclination of her Priests was invaded by Valens & Vrsacius this false & sacrilegious thing was found done in the Ecclesiastical books. And perhaps you have also done the same thing in the East. And truly, the letters ye could blot out but ye could not take away the faith. That blot betrayed you the more, that blot condemned you the more. ffor ye could not wipe out the truth, but that blot rased your names out of the book of life. Why were the words, because God is a Spirit, taken away if they did not belong to the Holy Ghost?..." Thus does Ambrose go on to discourse about this text, quoting it a little after at large with the context out of the discourse between Christ and Nicodemus, Iohn 3.6. So then its certain by the testimony of Ambrose, that before the Emperor Constantius conquered the West, & called the Council of Sirmium, & made Auxentius, the predecessor of Ambrose, Bishop of Millain, some of the Latine Churches for proving the Deity of the Holy Ghost, had inserted the clause, quia Deus spiritus est, into the discourse between Christ & Nicodemus, in the publick books of their congregations. I do not say, into one book only, but into their books in general: for this is the language of Ambrose. Its certain also that this clause, quia Deus spiritus est, was here erroneously inserted by the Latines, & therefore justly struck out by the Eusebians; & that Ambrose & Hincmare were mistaken in charging them with falsification for striking it out. For this clause is wanting to this day in all the Greek MSS & in all the Versions both ancient & modern. Which shews that the Latines (however Ambrose declaim against the Eusebians for striking it out) were ashamed to insert it into their books any more..." - (“Two Notable Corruptions of Scripture” (Part 4: ff. 70-83) by Isaac NewtonSource: Ms. 361(4), ff. 70-83, New College Library, Oxford.)

The two Oldest Greek MSS or Manuscripts extant today of John 3:6 give a text ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY TO NEARLY TWO HUNDRED YEARS - ( OLDER ) THAN - the ones mentioned by Ambrose of Milan (circa 337-397 C.E.). 

Go to the link below for a picture of the P66 - MSS.






JOHN 3:6 - P66 (circa 200 C.E.) GREEK TEXT: "...ΤΟ ΓΕΓΕΝΝΗΜΕΝΟΝ ΕΚ ΤΗΣ ΣΑΡΚΟΣ ΣΑΡΞ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΚΑΙ ΤΟ ΓΕΓΕΝΝΗΜΕΝΟΝ ΕΚ ΤΟΥ ΠΝΣ ΠΝΕΥΜΑ ΕΣΤΙΝ..."

John 3:6 starts on the third line from the bottom. “Spirit” is abreviated to Gk., ( ΠΝΣ ) for Gk., ( ΠΝΕΥΜΑΤΟΣ ) on the bottom line, (with a line above to indicate the abbreviation).

Go to the link below for a picture of the P75 - MSS.

http://chrles.multiply.com/photos/album/53/Bible_Papyrus_p75#photo=17

JOHN 3:6 - P75 (circa 200-250 C.E.) GREEK TEXT: "...ΤΟ ΓΕΓΕΝΝΗΜΕΝΟΝ ΕΚ ΤΗΣ ΣΑΡΚΟΣ ΣΑΡΞ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΚΑΙ ΤΟ ΓΕΓΕΝΝΗΜΕΝΟΝ ΕΚ ΤΟΥ ΠΝΣ ΠΝΑ ΕΣΤΙΝ..."

John 3:6 starts on the twelth line from the bottom. “Spirit” is abreviated twice to Gk., ( ΠΝΣ ΠΝΑ ) for Gk., ( ΠΝΕΥΜΑΤΟΣ ΠΝΕΥΜΑ ) with a line above to indicate the abreviation.

Go to the link below for a picture of the Codex Vaticanus 03 - MSS. 

http://chrles.multiply.com/photos/album/165/Bible_Codex_03_Vaticanus_NT#photo=139 

JOHN 3:6 - CODEX VATICANUS 03 (circa 300 C.E.): The text is a bit small but it is the same reading as a we have in the standard NT texts. 

Below is how it looks today in the printed texts, which we are usually familiar with, in modern Greek fonts.

GREEK TEXT: “...τὸ γεγεννημένον ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς σάρξ ἐστιν καὶ τὸ γεγεννημένον ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος πνεῦμα ἐστιν...” - (John 3:6 New Testament)

Greek Transliteration Strong's Morphology English
τὸ to 3588 T-NSN the
γεγεννημένον gegennēmenon 1080 V-RPP-NSN which is begotten
ἐκ ek 1537 PREP out of
τῆς tēs 3588 T-GSF of the
σαρκὸς sarkos 4561 N-GSF flesh
σάρξ sarx 4561 N-NSF flesh
ἐστιν estin 2076 V-PAI-3S is
καὶ kai 2532 CONJ and
τὸ to 3588 T-NSN the
γεγεννημένον gegennēmenon 1080 V-RPP-NSN which is begotten
ἐκ ek 1537 PREP out of
τοῦ tou 3588 T-GSN of the
πνεύματος pneumatos 4151 N-GSN Spirit
πνεῦμα pneuma 4151 N-NSN Spirit
ἐστιν estin 2076 V-PAI-3S is



ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 3:6 Greek NT: Westcott/Hort with Diacritics
τὸ γεγεννημένον ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς σάρξ ἐστιν καὶ τὸ γεγεννημένον ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος πνεῦμα ἐστιν.


ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 3:6 Greek NT: Greek Orthodox Church
τὸ γεγεννημένον ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς σάρξ ἐστιν, καὶ τὸ γεγεννημένον ἐκ τοῦ Πνεύματος πνεῦμά ἐστι.


ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 3:6 Greek NT: Tischendorf 8th Ed. with Diacritics
τὸ γεγεννημένον ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς σάρξ ἐστιν, καὶ τὸ γεγεννημένον ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος πνεῦμά ἐστιν.


ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 3:6 Greek NT: Stephanus Textus Receptus (1550, with accents)
τὸ γεγεννημένον ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς σάρξ ἐστιν καὶ τὸ γεγεννημένον ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος πνεῦμά ἐστιν


ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 3:6 Greek NT: Byzantine/Majority Text (2000)
το γεγεννημενον εκ της σαρκος σαρξ εστιν και το γεγεννημενον εκ του πνευματος πνευμα εστιν


ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 3:6 Greek NT: Textus Receptus (1894)
το γεγεννημενον εκ της σαρκος σαρξ εστιν και το γεγεννημενον εκ του πνευματος πνευμα εστιν


John 3:6 Hebrew Bibleהנולד מן הבשר בשר הוא והנולד מן הרוח רוח הוא׃

John 3:6 Aramaic NT: Peshittaܡܕܡ ܕܝܠܝܕ ܡܢ ܒܤܪܐ ܒܤܪܐ ܗܘ ܘܡܕܡ ܕܝܠܝܕ ܡܢ ܪܘܚܐ ܪܘܚܐ ܗܘ ܀

Latin: Biblia Sacra Vulgata
quod natum est ex carne caro est et quod natum est ex Spiritu spiritus est


(Bohairic): ⲡⲓⲙⲓⲥⲓ ⳿ⲉⲃⲟⲗ ϧⲉⲛ ⳿ⲧⲥⲁⲣⲝ ⲟⲩⲥⲁⲣⲝ ⲡⲉ ⲡⲓⲙⲓⲥⲓ ⳿ⲉⲃⲟⲗ ϧⲉⲛ ⲡⲓⲡ͞ⲛⲁ̅ ⲟⲩⲡ͞ⲛⲁ̅ ⲡⲉ.

(Coptic NT Northern Dialect-English): “...That which is born (lit. the birth) of (the) flesh is flesh: that which is born (lit. the birth) of the Spirit is spirit...”

(Coptic NT Southern Dialect-English): “...That which was begotten out of the flesh is [a] flesh, and that which was begotten out of the spirit is [a] spirit..."

By far the Majority of NT MSS whether in Greek or Latin or Syriac/Aramaic or any other language have absolutely no trace of this counterfeit reading.

It cannot even be found as a variant reading in the critical apparatus or footnotes of the authoratative UBS or United Bible Socities critical text of the New Testament either, which shows that those trying to push for this corrupted version of John 3:6 are on very shaky ground indeed and are the despratley grasping at straws.

A very few minor Latin or Syriac MSS of late date and of no real authority are reported by advocates to have the reading. 

And among these readings found in these MSS and Patristic citations there are several variations, not only in wording, but doctrinal content as well, which is always a dead give away of MSS tampering.

Earlier ANF writers than Ambrose, that is nearly TWO HUNDRED YEARS EARLIER than him, give the recieved text reading that we have in our NT today as seen above:

LATIN TEXT: “...Quod si lex saneta est, sanctum est matrimonium. Mysterium ergo hoc ad Christum et Ecclesiam ducit Apostolus: quemadmodum quod ex carne generatur, caro est; ita quod ex spiritu, spiritus, [John 3:6] non solum in pariendo, sed etiam in discendo...” - (Caput XII.— Verba Apostoli 1 Corinthians 7:5, 39-40, Aliaque S. Scripturæ Loca Eodem Spectantia Explicat. The Stromata (Book III) Source. Translated by William Wilson. From Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 2. Edited by Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe. (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1885.) Revised and edited for New Advent by Kevin Knight.)

CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA (circa. 150-220 C.E.): “...That if the law is holy, marriage is holy. The mystery of Christ and the Congregation, therefore, this leads to the Apostle: “as that which is generated from the flesh, is flesh, so that from out of the spirit, [is] spirit, bringing forth not only in [John 3:6], but also in learning. …” - (Caput XII.— Verba Apostoli 1 Corinthians 7:5, 39-40, Aliaque S. Scripturæ Loca Eodem Spectantia Explicat. The Stromata (Book III) translated by Matt13weedhacker 18/10/11.)

HIPPOLYTUS OF ROME (circa. 170-235 C.E.): “...No more than two, in truth, have been put in trust to give the account of His generation after the flesh; and are you then so bold as to seek the account (of His generation) after the Spirit, which the Father keeps with Himself, intending to reveal it then to the holy ones and those worthy of seeing His face? Rest satisfied with the word spoken by Christ, viz., “That which is born of the Spirit is spirit,” just as, speaking by the prophet of the generation of the Word, He shows the fact that He is begotten, but reserves the question of the manner and means, to reveal it only in the time determined by Himself. For He speaks thus: From the womb, before the morning star, I have begotten You...” - (Chapter 16, Against Noetus. Translated by J.H. MacMahon. From Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 5. Edited by Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe. (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1886.) Revised and edited for New Advent by Kevin Knight.)

In another work of his he quotes it again:

HIPPOLYTUS OF ROME (circa. 170-235 C.E.): “...This is the Christ who, he says, in all that have been generated, is the portrayed Son of Man from the unportrayable Logos. This, he says, is the great and unspeakable mystery of … This, he says, is ocean, generation of gods and generation of men ever whirled round by the eddies of water, at one time upwards, at another time downwards. But he says there ensues a generation of men when the ocean flows downwards; but when upwards to the wall and fortress and the cliff of Luecas, a generation of gods takes place. This, he asserts, is that which has been written: I said, You are gods, and all children of the highest; If you hasten to fly out of Egypt, and repair beyond the Red Sea into the wilderness, that is, from earthly intercourse to the Jerusalem above, which is the mother of the living; [Galatians 4:26] If, moreover, again you return into Egypt, that is, into earthly intercourse, you shall die as men. For mortal, he says, is every generation below, but immortal that which is begotten above, for it is born of water only, and of spirit, being spiritual, not carnal. But what (is born) below is carnal, that is, he says, what is written. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the spirit is spirit. [John 3:6] This, according to them, is the spiritual generation. This, he says, is the great Jordan [Joshua 3:7-17] which, flowing on (here) below, and preventing the children of Israel from departing out of Egypt— I mean from terrestrial intercourse, for Egypt is with them the body—Jesus drove back, and made it flow upwards...” - (Chapter 2. Naasseni Ascribe Their System, Through Mariamne, to James the Lord's Brother; Really Traceable to the Ancient Mysteries; Their Psychology as Given in the Gospel According to Thomas; Assyrian Theory of the Soul; The Systems of the Naasseni and the Assyrians Compared; Support Drawn by the Naasseni from the Phrygian and Egyptian Mysteries; The Mysteries of Isis; These Mysteries Allegorized by the Naasseni. Refutation of All Heresies Book V, Translated by J.H. MacMahon. From Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 5. Edited by Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe. (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1886.) Revised and edited for New Advent by Kevin Knight.)

Tertullian (circa. 145-225 C.E.) who was a cult follower of the False Prophet Montanus and his "NEW PROPHECY" movement characterised by frenzied behaviour and speaking in tounges proposed his new hypothetical theory of a "Tri{3}nity" Ltn., ( trinitas ) after he joined the movement and seperated himself from real Christianity.

Montanus revelations were spoken of as being inspired by the demons who had possessed Montanus, and his female Prophetesses Maximilla and Priscilla, by writers like Irenaeus and early church historian Eusebius and many others in the second and third centuries. 

Montanus actually claimed to be “THE PARACLETE” or "HOLY SPIRIT" himself, (as Simon Magus had done earlier, along with Mani and others through history) and that his revelations superseded those of the Apostles and even of Christ himself.

Tertullian does quote John 3:6 correctly, but, he then adds his interpretation (no doubt according to Montantist revelation) and coments by adding Ltn., ( quia Deus spiritus est, et De deo natus est ) “... because God is a Spirit, and He was born of God..."

He is the first known of any - professed - Christian writer to call the holy spirit "God." Take note that when Tertullian refers to the holy spirit (as a Montantist) that he is in fact refereing to Montanus himself as being the holy spirit in his - post true Christian - Montantist writings such as De Carne Christi and Adv. Praxaes cited below. Take note also that no other genuine Christian writer (that I know of) called the holy spirit "God" for nearly another two hundred years.

LATIN TEXT: “...si [5.] non ex semetipso sed ex alio, iam hinc tracta ex quo magis credere congruat carnem factum verbum nisi ex carne in qua et factum est, vel quia ipse dominus sententialiter et definitive pronuntiavit, Quod in carne natum est caro est quia ex carne natum est. sed si de homine tantummodo dixit, non et de semetipso, plane nega hominem Christum et ita defende non et in ipsum competisse. 'Atquin subicit, Et quod de spiritu natum est spiritus est, quia Deus spiritus est, et De deo natus est: [6.] hoc utique vel eo magis in ipsum tendit si et in credentes eius.' si ergo et hoc ad ipsum, cur non et illud supra? Neque enim dividere potes, hoc ad ipsum, illud supra ad ceteros homines, qui utramque substantiam Christi et carnis et spiritus non negas. [7.] ceterum si tam carnem habuit quam spiritum, cum de duarum substantiarum pronuntiat conditione quas in semetipso gestabat non potest videri de spiritu quidem suo de carne vero non sua determinasse. ita cum sit ipse de spiritu dei (et spiritus deus est) ex deo natus, ipse est et ex carne hominis et homo in carne generatus...” - (Chapter 18:5-7; Q. SEPTIMII FLORENTIS TERTULLIANI DE CARNE CHRISTI LIBER Ernest Evans(ed), Tertullian's Treatise on the Incarnation. S.P.C.K. 1956.)

TERTULLIAN (circa. 145-225 C.E.): “...And [5.] if not from itself, but from something else, from what can we more suitably suppose that the Word became flesh than from that flesh in which it submitted to the dispensation?[258] And (we have a proof of the same conclusion in the fact) that the Lord Himself sententiously and distinctly pronounced, "that which is born of the flesh is flesh,"[259] even because it is born of the flesh. But if He here spoke of a human being simply, and not of Himself, (as you maintain) then you must deny absolutely that Christ is man, and must maintain that human nature was not suitable to Him. And then He adds, "That which is born of the Spirit is spirit,"[260] because God is a Spirit, and He was born of God. [6.] Now this description is certainly even more applicable to Him than it is to those who believe in Him. But if this passage indeed apply to Him, then why does not the preceding one also? For you cannot divide their relation, and adapt this to Him, and the previous clause to all other men, especially as you do not deny that Christ possesses the two substances, both of the flesh and of the Spirit. [7.] Besides, as He was in possession both of flesh and of Spirit, He cannot possibly, when speaking of the condition of the two substances which He Himself bears, be supposed to have determined that the Spirit indeed was His own, but that the flesh was not His own. For as much, therefore, as He is of the Spirit ( He is God the Spirit ), and is born of God; just as He is also born of the flesh of man, being generated in the flesh as man.[261]...” - (Chapter 18. The Mystery of the Assumption of Our Perfect Human Nature by the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity. He is Here Called, as Often Elsewhere, the Spirit. ON THE FLESH OF CHRIST Translated by Peter Holmes. From Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 3. Edited by Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe. Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1885.)
[FOOTNOTE 258]: Literally, "in which it became flesh."
[FOOTNOTE 259]: John iii. 6.
[FOOTNOTE 260]: John iii. 6.
[FOOTNOTE 261]: A very perspicuous statement of the Incarnation is set forth in this chapter.

In another place he quotes the text differently, according to the recieved reading we have today, without the added text, which in fact confirms that the reading of “... because God is a Spirit, and He was born of God...” is really his own expalnation/interpretation or comentary.

LATIN TEXT: “...disce [14.] igitur cum Nicodemo quia quod in carne natum est caro est, et quod de spiritu spiritus est. neque caro spiritus fit neque spiritus caro: in uno plane esse possunt. ex his Iesus constitit, ex carne homo ex spiritu deus, quem tunc angelus ex ea
parte qua spiritus erat dei filium pronuntiavit, servans carni filium hominis dici. [15.] sic et apostolus etiam dei et hominum appellans sequestrem utriusque substantiae confirmavit...” - (Page 125, TERTULLIAN'S TREATISE AGAINST PRAXEAS.)
http://www.tertullian.org/latin/adversus_praxean.htm

TERTULLIAN (circa. 145-225 C.E.): “...Learn, therefore, with Nicodemus that: “what is born ( in ) flesh is flesh, and what is ( from ) spirit is spirit” Neither does flesh become spirit nor does spirit become flesh. But they can, to be sure, be present in one. Of these Jesus consisted, as man, of flesh, as God, of spirit. In respect of that ( part ) which was spirit, the angel then declared Him “Son of God,” keeping for the flesh the name “Son of Man.” So also the Apostle by calling him “mediator between God and men,” established his double nature...” - (Page 108; Chapter 27, “AGAINST PRAXEAS,” Translations Of Christian Literature. Series II, Latin Texts. By Alexander Souter. Society For Promoting Christian Knowledge. London, The Macmillan Company. New York 1920.)

Notice the un-scriptural idea of a double nature and the twisting and wrenching of scripture here. This is the "NEW" interpretation or "PROPHECY" of Montanus that is expounded in Against Praxaes, whom he mentions by name in Chapter 2.

Cyprian (circa. 200-258 C.E.) - Tertullians disciple and greatest admirer, it is said, would not pass a day without reading the works of Tertullian.

When he quotes John 3:6 he parrots word for word his “...Master...” Tertullian (as seen below).

From there it was open season for the Tri{3}nitarian interpretation.

Gk., ( Ἐπίδος τὸν διδάσκαλον ) “...give me the Teacher...”

Ltn., ( Da Magistrum ) “...hand me my Master...”

Jerome, De Viris Illustribus, Chapter 53. (Written in Bethlehem in 392 or early 393 C.E.)

LATIN TEXT: “...Cyprianum absque Tertulliani lectione unum diem praeterisse, ac sibi crebro dicere, [Gk., ( Ἐπίδος τὸν διδάσκαλον )] Da magistrum: Tertullianum videlicet significans. [4.] Hic cum usque ad mediam aetatem presbyter Ecclesiae permansisset, invidia postea et contumeliis clericorum Romanae Ecclesiae, ad Montani dogma delapsus, in multis libris Novae Prophetiae meminit. [5.] Specialiter autem adversum Ecclesiam texuit volumina, de pudicitia, de persecutione, de jejuniis, de monogamia, de ecstasi libros sex, et septimum, quem adversum Apollonium composuit. Ferturque vixisse usque ad decrepitam aetatem, et multa quae non exstant opuscula condidisse...” - (Migne, J.P., Patrologia Latina 23 (1845), Col 661-664, with a couple of amendments from Biblioteca Patristica 12, 1988.)

JEROME (circa. 347-420 C.E.): “...Cyprian was accustomed never to pass a day without reading Tertullian and would frequently say to him, “...HAND ME THE MASTER...” meaning, of course, Tertullian. [4.] This one was a presbyter of the church until his middle year, but later, because of the envy and reproaches of the clergy of the Roman church, he had lapsed into Montanism, and he makes mention of the New Prophecy in many books. [5.] In particular, he composed against the church the works On Modesty, On Persecution, On Fasting, On Monogamy, six books On Ecstasy and a seventh [added] which he composed Against Apollonius.  He is said to have lived to a very old age and to have composed many works which are not extant...” - (From Halton, Thomas P., Saint Jerome: On Illustrious Men, Fathers of the Church 100, Catholic University of America Press (1999), pp.74-6. Checked)

JEROME (circa. 347-420 C.E.): “...Cyprian would never let a day pass without reading Tertullian, and that he often said to him 'GIVE ME MY MASTER', clearly meaning Tertullian. Tertullian was a priest of the church until middle age, but then, because of the envy and insults of the clergy of the church of Rome, he lapsed into Montanism and refers to the New Prophecy in many treatises. In particular, he directed against the church discussions of modesty, of persecution, of fasting, of monogamy, and of divine possession (in six books, with a seventh against Apollonius). He is said to have lived to an advanced age and published many tracts which are no longer extant...” - (Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers Roberts & Donaldson.)

CYPRIAN OF CARTHAGE (circa. 200-258 C.E.): “...Nemesianus of Thubunae said: That the baptism which heretics and schismatics bestow is not the true one, is everywhere declared in the Holy Scriptures, since their very leading men are false Christs and false prophets, as the Lord says by Solomon: He who trusts in that which is false, he feeds the winds; and the very same, moreover, follows the flight of birds. For he forsakes the ways of his own vineyard, he has wandered from the paths of his own little field. But he walks through pathless places, and dry, and a land destined for thirst; moreover, he gathers together fruitless things in his hands. And again: Abstain from strange water, and from the fountain of another do not drink, that you may live a long time; also that the years of life may be added to you. [Proverbs 9:19] And in the Gospel our Lord Jesus Christ spoke with His divine voice, saying, Unless a man be born again of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. [John 3:5] This is the Spirit which from the beginning was borne over the waters; for neither can the Spirit operate without the water, nor the water without the Spirit. Certain people therefore interpret for themselves ill, when they say that by imposition of the hand they receive the Holy Ghost, and are thus received, when it is manifest that they ought to be born again in the Catholic Church by both sacraments. Then indeed they will be able to be sons of God, as says the apostle: Taking care to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body, and one Spirit, as you have been called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God. [Ephesians 4:3-6] All these things speaks the Catholic Church. And again, in the Gospel the Lord says, That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit; because God is a Spirit, and he is born of God. [John 3:6] Therefore, whatsoever things all heretics and schismatics do are carnal, as the apostle says: For the works of the flesh are manifest, which are, fornications, uncleannesses, incest, idolatries, witchcrafts, hatreds, contentions, jealousy, anger, divisions, heresies, and the like to these; concerning which have told you before, as I also foretell you now, that whoever do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. [Galatians 5:19-21] And thus the apostle condemns, with all the wicked, those also who cause division, that is, schismatics and heretics. Unless therefore they receive saving baptism in the Catholic Church, which is one, they cannot be saved, but will be condemned with the carnal in the judgment of the Lord Christ...” - (The Seventh Council of Carthage Under Cyprian. Concerning the Baptism of Heretics. The Judgment of Eighty-Seven Bishops on the Baptism of Heretics.Translated by Robert Ernest Wallis. From Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 5. Edited by Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe. (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1886.) Revised and edited for New Advent by Kevin Knight.)

Later writers after Nicea seized upon this - ( interpretation ) - inspired by Montanus and some actually had the audacity (as Sir Isaac Newton points out) to add it into their Gk., ( τοῖς [-]διορθώτοις ἀντιγράφοις ) “...THE CORRECTED COPIES...” (as mentioned by Epiphanius) of the Bible in Latin and perhaps a few individual Greek MSS

We know of Cyprians influence on later tri{3}nitarian writers from one of these writers long eulogy in praise of Cyprian and his teaching.

But as Sir Isaac Newton realised and as was eventually made known to the world that this counterfeit reading in John 3:6 was nothing but an un-scrupulous forgery instituted to bolster a false doctrine, the Tri{3}nity, and that it was just one among very many that have indeed occurred.

BROOKE FOSS WESTCOTT (circa. 1825-1901 C.E.): “...Of the Spirit] Or, of spirit. While the term is essentially abstract and expresses spirit as spirit, the quickening power is the Spirit. The idea of nature passes into that of Person. The water is not repeated, because the outward rite draws its virtue from the action of the Spirit. Many early authorities (Lat. vt., Syr. vt.) add the gloss, quia Deus spiritus est et de (ex) Deo natus est. Ambrose (‘De spir.’ III. § 59) accuses the Arians of having removed the words quia Deus spiritus est from their MSS. THE CHARGE IS AN ADMIRABLE ILLUSTRATION OF THE GROUNDLESSNESS OF SUCH ACCUSATIONS OF WILFUL CORRUPTION OF SCRIPTURE. THE WORDS IN QUESTION HAVE NO GREEK AUTHORITY AT ALL, AND ARE OBVIOUSLY A COMMENT...” - (John 3:6, Coment, THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. JOHN with Introduction and Notes By Brooke Foss Westcott, D.D., D.C.L.)