|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Trinitarianism
|
Bean Sidhe
Shipmate
# 11823
|
Posted
I said 16th century, I meant 17th.
--------------------
How do you know when a politician is lying?
His lips are moving.
Danny DeVito
Posts: 4363 | From: where the taxis won't go | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bean Sidhe
Shipmate
# 11823
|
Posted
The point I was making, is that - as I understand it - and I'm ignorant here so don't ask me to justify this, google it - thinking now is that our own consciousness is not as unitary as we intuitively feel/believe it to be. So where's any problem with God being likewise?
--------------------
How do you know when a politician is lying?
His lips are moving.
Danny DeVito
Posts: 4363 | From: where the taxis won't go | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
Yes. A good point.
If we are made in the divine image, why not?
Being three distinct hypostasis that are still one has repercussions for social acceptance of variety and of ecclesiology too.
Why must the church be the same all over the world? It is one by nature of its base in the one God (one substance)- yet difference is okay (three hypostases).
Unity in diversity is a particularly trinitarian theology.
And one of the reasons I think Anglicanism is an expression of divinity. It tries to hold unity in diversity. ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Difference may be more "unholy" in Greek monism.
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tabernacle
Apprentice
# 17393
|
Posted
Unity in diversity huh?
Right.
Posts: 17 | From: Seattle | Registered: Oct 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Bean Sidhe:
The point I was making, is that - as I understand it - and I'm ignorant here so don't ask me to justify this, google it - thinking now is that our own consciousness is not as unitary as we intuitively feel/believe it to be. So where's any problem with God being likewise?
No problem at all. But we are not three (or more)
persons.
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
Well no; but we are not the same, er, species that God is either. Sort of like being a reflection of him in a lesser dimension, the way a square is of a cube. Flatland is good on this.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
Well no; but we are not the same, er, species that God is either. Sort of like being a reflection of him in a lesser dimension, the way a square is of a cube. Flatland is good on this.
It wasn't my analogy - but I agree with you, we are a sort of reflection of God, made in God's image.
I do not think God is made up of three separate persons, and I don't see the need to jump through hoops to explain such. Father, Son and Holy Spirit describe characteristics of God imo.
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
Well, take out "separate" and I think you've got the Trinitarian position described there. Three persons, but not separate. For humanity, of course, "person" always goes with "separate." well usually...
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
When Jesus promised the Holy Spirit for the disciples he said that he was going to send another counsellor/comforter/paraclete.
That word 'another' means another 'of the same kind.' The Holy Spirit is of the same kind as the Son but is not the same 'person'.
Jesus also spoke of 'him' in referring to the Spirit - he could have said 'I'; he could have said when I come I will lead you into all truth, had the Spirit and the Son been the 'same'.
He also spoke of himself and the Father and said 'we'. Had Jesus been the incarnation of God as one unity all incarnated as you say, why would he say 'we'?
So, Father and Son are 'we', The Holy Spirit is 'he'. That suggests to me three persons who are of the same kind. Not one divine person.
[ 04. November 2012, 13:24: Message edited by: Mudfrog ]
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Once again we are treading beyond the economical to the eternally ineffable with mere words it seems.
God is revealed as a being of beings. A synergistic gestalt. A mystery.
And even if that is so, it is heresy. Whatever we say about God is. Which includes ALL of scripture, ALL dogmata. Which must be embraced, accepted in all of the dogmatic, the exclusive, the excluding. To no end but inclusion of the other. Of those who declare themselves our enemies.
And I'm a late a very grateful convert to Trinitarianism.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
Once again we are treading beyond the economical to the eternally ineffable with mere words it seems.
God is revealed as a being of beings. A synergistic gestalt. A mystery.
And even if that is so, it is heresy. Whatever we say about God is.
Unless they are words that have been given to us by revelation - words we may use at God's command.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
What command? What words? What meaning?
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349
|
Posted
I think the problem is the term "person".
When we say that God is Three persons, we have to be remember that how the term "person" is understood differently from our modern, individualistic conception. "Person" in the context of the Trinity denotes "One in a relationship."
The Church's worship and discipline declares that you can't understand the Father without the Son, nor can you understand the Son without the Father. You also can't understand the Holy Spirit alone, for who is he, but the Spirit of the Father and the Son.
It isn't that the Church says "You must believe in the Trinity or else." It's even more, it's "You can't believe in the Trinity and do full justice to the truth of the Christian revelation." You cannot understand Jesus Christ without the Father, and you cannot understand the Father without the Son. Jesus Christ reveals the Father, and the Father in turn, glorifies the Son, and commands all creation to worship him as God.
Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by shamwari:
do a bit of biblical research for yourself.
Foul. Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean they haven't done any biblical research.
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
Jesus also spoke of 'him' in referring to the Spirit - he could have said 'I'; he could have said when I come I will lead you into all truth, had the Spirit and the Son been the 'same'.
Well, he did say "Behold I am with you until the end of the age." And then he left. But he sent the Spirit.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
I'm fine with that Gwai. As for interpretation!
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Latchkey Kid
Shipmate
# 12444
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Well, if one agrees with Newman, 'Firmly I believe and truly, God is Three and God is One' then God's very nature is Trinitarian and so one would necessarily be 'missing out' if one didn't believe and engage with that.
I think the Trinity is a useful metaphor, and being a metaphor is not true. The human makeup seems to tune in to threes a lot. So it is a useful number for a lot of things.
What does the phrase "God's very nature is Trinitarian" mean when God is the only example of a trinitarian nature we have?
For me, the value of the concept of a trinity is that God is God of relationships, and that people are in God's image when they are in relationship with others, themselves, and with God.
Spirituality is not a "Jesus and Me" thing or private and not public, but "you and me and God all together." YMMV.
[ 05. November 2012, 01:55: Message edited by: Latchkey Kid ]
--------------------
'You must never give way for an answer. An answer is always the stretch of road that's behind you. Only a question can point the way forward.'
Mika; in Hello? Is Anybody There?, Jostein Gaardner
Posts: 2592 | From: The wizardest little town in Oz | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Latchkey Kid
Shipmate
# 12444
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
And even if that is so, it is heresy. Whatever we say about God is.
I'll go with that as heresy here is simply opinion or approximation.
You aren't getting your jollies by calling someone else's beliefs a heresy.
--------------------
'You must never give way for an answer. An answer is always the stretch of road that's behind you. Only a question can point the way forward.'
Mika; in Hello? Is Anybody There?, Jostein Gaardner
Posts: 2592 | From: The wizardest little town in Oz | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
I think the problem is the term "person".
Yes.
St Augustine disliked the word when he was expounding his understanding of the doctrine. But he said it was better than nothing.
Some word was necessary to facilitate theological conversation.
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
When we say that God is Three persons, we have to be remember that how the term "person" is understood differently from our modern, individualistic conception. "Person" in the context of the Trinity denotes "One in a relationship."
Well the Cappadocian fathers actually combined the word person (prosopon - mask) with the word hypostasis to make an individual ontological reality.
They saw the unity and definitions of the persons of God as coming from the father and expressed in a system of flow where all worked together, whereas Augustine expressed the three persons as defined by relationships to each other. A bit different.
In the east, the son and spirit are more like God's "arms" whereas in the west they were much more kind of egalitarian like.
Something like that......I've actually got an exam on this next week. Two thousand years of trinitarian theology shoved into a two hour exam. ![[Ultra confused]](graemlins/confused2.gif) ![[Eek!]](eek.gif) ![[Help]](graemlins/help.gif)
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
And I'm a late a very grateful convert to Trinitarianism.
So am I. When thinking of concepts beyond the grasp of the human mind, we are best in accepting what is hinted at in Scripture, developed in the early Church, and accepted by all mainstream Christian churches. Even if it's only what we can grasp of reality, it's an effective working model.
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabbas62:
Historical Christianity has been confirmed as essentially Trinitarian since the 4th/5th Century Councils settled the issue out of controversy. Which is why the historical beliefs of Orthodox, Catholics and Protestants concur on this.
I'm sure someone will tell me if I'm courting heresy here, but I have a small problem with the word "essentially" as used here. The 14th century Bishop of Thessaloniki, St Gregory Palamas, said that it's important to distinguish between God's essence and His energies. His essence being unknowable to human reason. We know God only be His energies. So it seems logical that, if we can't know God's essence, we can't know that He is essentially Trinitarian.
But in the way He creates us, saves us and sanctifies us, He comes to us as a Trinity. So these are the energies by which we can know Him. I think this is the most we can say with any degree of confidence. God is beyond our reasoning, and great minds, in the light of human experience of the Incarnate God, have done what they can to put Him into words we can understand.
quote:
Originally posted by Garasu:
Sephirot
Nobody picked up on this, but Giovanni Pico della Mirandola, a 15th century Italian philosopher, learned Hebrew and studied Kabbalah, partly to convert Jews, by proving that their own mystical tradition reveals both Trinitarianism and the divinity of Christ. The 10 sefirot are considered to be atrributes of the one God. The supernal triad, at the top of the Tree of Life are Keter(crown), Chockmah(wisdom) and Binah(understanding). It is through the creative energy of Chockmah that all is made, and through the nurturing energy of Binah that it is sustained. Pico della Mirandola likened the supernal triad to the Trinity.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
k-mann
Shipmate
# 8490
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Garasu:
Sioni Sais said in another context that the "rejection of Trinitarianism is regrettable ... they miss out on a lot..."
I'm just wondering what it is that one misses out on by rejecting trinitarianism?
Christianity.
--------------------
"Being religious means asking passionately the question of the meaning of our existence and being willing to receive answers, even if the answers hurt."
— Paul Tillich
Katolikken
Posts: 1314 | From: Norway | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Drewthealexander
Shipmate
# 16660
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Garasu:
Sioni Sais said in another context that the "rejection of Trinitarianism is regrettable ... they miss out on a lot..."
I'm just wondering what it is that one misses out on by rejecting trinitarianism?
You would lose the profound concept of God, in the nature of his very being, living in eternal indivisible community.
Posts: 499 | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Garasu
Shipmate
# 17152
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by k-mann:
quote:
Originally posted by Garasu:
Sioni Sais said in another context that the "rejection of Trinitarianism is regrettable ... they miss out on a lot..."
I'm just wondering what it is that one misses out on by rejecting trinitarianism?
Christianity.
You're not selling it to me...
![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif)
--------------------
"Could I believe in the doctrine without believing in the deity?". - Modesitt, L. E., Jr., 1943- Imager.
Posts: 889 | From: Surrey Heath (England) | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Garasu
Shipmate
# 17152
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Drewthealexander:
You would lose the profound concept of God, in the nature of his very being, living in eternal indivisible community.
Again... why must it be a trinity to give me that?
--------------------
"Could I believe in the doctrine without believing in the deity?". - Modesitt, L. E., Jr., 1943- Imager.
Posts: 889 | From: Surrey Heath (England) | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
But it's the wrong question. "What do we lose without the Trinity?" is Bulveristic. We don't believe in the Trinity because of all the wonderful benefits we accrue therefrom. We believe in the Trinity because we think it makes the best sense of all the data.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ruudy
Shipmate
# 3939
|
Posted
Yes. What you would miss out on is an accurate assessment of reality.
--------------------
The shipmate formerly known as Goar.
Posts: 1360 | From: Gatorland | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Garasu:
quote:
Originally posted by k-mann:
quote:
Originally posted by Garasu:
Sioni Sais said in another context that the "rejection of Trinitarianism is regrettable ... they miss out on a lot..."
I'm just wondering what it is that one misses out on by rejecting trinitarianism?
Christianity.
You're not selling it to me...
No. I'm not surprised.
One thing that may be helpful here is to ask youself what/who you think Jesus is in relation to God.
Trinitarian theology is tightly linked to Christology.
The Holy Spirit is usually a later look in and never the main focus in disucssions.
So ask yourself what/who you think Jesus is and then the whole trinitarian thing might become clearer.
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349
|
Posted
Historically, I think trinitarian theology is inevitable in relation to liturgy. One of the first things I learned in seminary is that classical Christian theology begins with the liturgy of the Church. The theological rationale follows as justifications or explanations of the worship of the Church. The Trinity was not an idea that suddenly popped up in a single church father's head.
The early Church did worship Jesus Christ. Now of course we could debate about whether or not early Christians "really" believed that Jesus was equal to the Father. There were patristic writers, later deemed orthodox, who probably veered towards subordinationism, hesitating reluctantly to equate Jesus Christ to Theos. Yet, I think that if the Church Fathers were adamant that Jesus was not divine, they would have stomped on any slightest sign that veered in that direction. Christianity emerged out of Judaism with its staunch monotheism, it would not be out of the ordinary to simply proclaim that Jesus was "just a man."
But they didn't. They ascribed the term "Lord", a term traditionally ascribed to YHWH, to Jesus. In the Synoptic Gospels, Jesus exercised several functions of YHWH, principally forgiveness of sins and control of the natural world. In the Johannine literature, Jesus is called "Word of God", "Bread of Life", "Light of the world", titles denoting divinity. In the Book of Revelation, the writer ascribes terms like "Alpha and Omega, the First and the Last", titles ascribed to YHWH in Isaiah to Jesus. Revelation specifically mentions God and the Lamb sharing a single throne, indicating equal honor and due veneration to both.
Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
@PaulTH
There's a difference between seeing Trinitarianism as essential to Christianity and seeing it as saying that the essence of God is knowable.
How the Cappadocian Fathers produced the Trinitarian paradigm requires a fair bit of historical reading but they were certainly all Orthodox in the sense of believing that God is unknowable in His essence.
I appreciate that's pretty abstract. Part of the problem is that Trinitarian belief does not define God; rather it provides a framework of wonder about the ways He has made Himself known.
It arose out of deep contemplation ("theoria") rather than profound logical analysis (leading to "theory"). Sometimes I think that Western Christianity has been confused about that distinction ever since.
I promise to get back to further unpacking when back from holiday!
[ 08. November 2012, 08:09: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nick Tamen
Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
In the Johannine literature, Jesus is called "Word of God", "Bread of Life", "Light of the world", titles denoting divinity.
John also has Jesus frequently saying "I Am" in a manner that is clearly intended to indicate more than simply a current state of being. This is especially clear in John 8:54-55, where Jesus says "Very truly, I tell you, before Abraham was, I am." That his hearers heard this as equating himself with YHWH is made clear by their reaction: gathering rocks to stone him.
--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott
Posts: 2833 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabbas62:
There's a difference between seeing Trinitarianism as essential to Christianity and seeing it as saying that the essence of God is knowable.
I agree, and have no problem with this. My natural instinct has always been to believe that in His essence, God is ONE, simple Spirit. From the Lateran Council IV, as quoted in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (202) we have
quote:
We firmly believe and confess without reservation that there is only one true God, eternal infinite (immensus) and unchangeable, incomprehensible, almighty and ineffable, the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit; three persons indeed, but one essence, substance or nature entirely simple.
"One essence, substance or nature entirely simple." I am perfectly compatible and comfortable with this explanation.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
The Trinity is the consequence of believing the Bible is true.* The Church reads in the Bible that the Son of Man has power to forgive sins, and that the Word was God, and knows that Jesus is God. Yet it also reads of Jesus praying to the Father and being with the Father in the beginning, and it knows that there must be a relationship between the Father and the Son.
This is all a Mystery, it cannot be denied. We can hardly say how both can be true. But that doesn't mean there is nothing to say at all, so we have this word as a sort of place holder- Trinity- which allows us to maintain both these assertions we find in the Bible. Think of it as "X" in an unsolved (and unsolvable) algebraic formula. We KNOW the formula obtains, even if we don't know what X is.
*Which is to say that one believes that the apostles have really (and truly) experienced Jesus and faithfully handed that experience on to the Church.
[ 09. November 2012, 02:43: Message edited by: Zach82 ]
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Latchkey Kid
Shipmate
# 12444
|
Posted
If it is a metaphor, then it is not true, but a useful picture.
If it is true, then we have only a limited understanding of what the Trinity is.
My preference is to see it as a metaphor. The trouble with that for me, is that I don't know what is being used as the metaphor. It should be something more than the clover-leaf IMO.
Perhaps I should move to it being true that God is a Trinity, and that some pictures give us a little bit of insight into what that might mean. It is very elusive. Words fail to explain it IMO. It is better to ponder it than to fight over it.
--------------------
'You must never give way for an answer. An answer is always the stretch of road that's behind you. Only a question can point the way forward.'
Mika; in Hello? Is Anybody There?, Jostein Gaardner
Posts: 2592 | From: The wizardest little town in Oz | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Quizmaster
Quick quipper
# 1435
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
Historical Christianity has been confirmed as essentially Trinitarian since the 4th/5th Century Councils settled the issue out of controversy.
This is where the Romans decided to tell people what to think instead of allowing discussion and interpretation. Many people have been telling others what to think ever since.
In the modern day the Chinese and North Korean governments tell their people what to think. Most of us would support the free thinkers who do not conform.
[ETA Codefix, DT, Purgatory Host]
[ 09. November 2012, 18:00: Message edited by: Doublethink ]
--------------------
The more questions I ask the more I ask fewer questions.
OR=========================================
The wise person does not know all the answers, but always asks the right questions.
Posts: 3326 | From: Exeter, Devon | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
At the risk of sounding like a broken record.......read Larry Hurtado's 'Lord Jesus Christ'. He literally blows the argument that the Trinity was an invention of the Christian councils out of the water. He is incredibly thorough, well researched and and as far as I can see presents the best and most water tight argument since Christianity began. If you read him as an historian, it's fascinating and enlightening. If you read him as a Christian his material is inspiring and faith changing. If you read him as a curious atheist he presents a certain challenge. He's horribly overlooked as a scholar, but really well worth the effort and easy to understand. There are moments when you read him and you think to yourself - 'Well thats been staring me in the face all these years, why haven't I noticed that before'. I've gushed about him before on....well, pretty much every Trinity thread since I boarded and I've outlined some of his arguments in some detail so I won't bore you again; but in essence he makes an incredibly strong case for a Trinitarian understanding of God in the Christian tradition and he takes a very different angle from the notion that it was a Christian council invention. Rarely should one ever say such things, but that book changed a lot of my own faith and I think if it had a wider readership it would certainly help to tighten up the weakness of Trinitarian theology in western Christian traditions.
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
The line between metaphor and mystery is that we (in Catholic Christianity) assume that God's relationship to humankind in the Bible actually reflects the inner life of God. That's the problem with the modalist heresy. It sees three persons in the Bible, but then says "Well, that's what God looks like to us, but that isn't what God is really like."
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
shamwari
Shipmate
# 15556
|
Posted
Zach
Where precisely does it say " Three persons in the Bible"?
Sorry ignore that. I misread you.
[ 09. November 2012, 10:53: Message edited by: shamwari ]
Posts: 1914 | From: from the abyss of misunderstanding | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
quote:
originally posted by Fletcher Christian:
read Larry Hurtado's 'Lord Jesus Christ'
I've read this book by Hurtado, and it was a major stepping stone on my way to accepting the Trinitarian position, which I'd previously found difficult. Among other things, he demonstates that worshipful devotion to Jesus as God , was there from the first days of Christianity, and wasn't something that developed over a period. I would agree with FC that Larry Hurtado is an underrated theologian who deserves to be read more, and I couldn't recommend this book more highly.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kwesi
Shipmate
# 10274
|
Posted
IMO Trinitarianism is an essential component of Christianity, because it rests on the proposition that "he who has seen me has seen the father." It provides a ballast to Christian theological speculation: that statements about God that are not compatible with the God revealed in Jesus Christ, however true they might prove to be, are not Christian. Unitarianism, for example, is not Christianity.
Posts: 1641 | From: South Ofankor | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
shamwari
Shipmate
# 15556
|
Posted
Good point Kwesi.
From my point of view all Trinitarian statements have one value which is to induce a sense of awe, wonder and mystery. Worship without these is pathetically inadequate and hardly possible.
Posts: 1914 | From: from the abyss of misunderstanding | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
The God revealed either side of Jesus, Son and Spirit at least and above Jesus in the Father's wrathful penal substitutionary atonement is not compatible with the God revealed in Jesus Christ.
(Which of you guys was it? This year or last, mortified at my pragmatic defense of that very God the Killer?)
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
I agree with fletcher christian about the historic roots of Trinitarian belief i.e. that they go back a long way and most certainly pre-date the councils.
What is also true is that there were lots of variations of understanding in the early church and much controversy about whether these were consistent with the teaching of the Apostles. No doubt also that John's gospel is key very early evidence of belief in the divine personhood of both Jesus and the Holy Spirit.
The early evidence (pre-dating the councils by a couple of centuries) that the variations were regarded as misleading and injurious to faith is found, most obviously in "Against Heresies".
What is clear from the second century writings of Irenaeus (you can certainly spot it in Against Heresies) is that he saw Jesus and the Holy Spirit as divine persons, saw the profound importance of John's gospel in the apostolic inheritance. I just don't think he "joined up the dots" (as the Cappadocian fathers did later, for example.) His trinitarian understanding, though implicit, was not fully articulated.
So for these reasons, and others, I think it is wrong to see Trinitarianism as a fourth century invention. It was a clarification after profound reflection - but the building blocks were there from very early on.
It seems also proper to argue that these arguments over truth and meaning became part of various struggles over power and authority within the church; that battle certainly was part of the backdrop to the work of the councils.
As I said earlier, studying early church history (rather than caricaturing it) can illuminate this subject rather well.
I plan to write another post on the abiding value of the belief for worship and understanding.
[ 11. November 2012, 07:45: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
As far as I recall there are third century documents that use the word 'Trinitas' which is more than simply joining up the dots I think.
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Garasu:
quote:
Originally posted by k-mann:
quote:
Originally posted by Garasu:
Sioni Sais said in another context that the "rejection of Trinitarianism is regrettable ... they miss out on a lot..."
I'm just wondering what it is that one misses out on by rejecting trinitarianism?
Christianity.
You're not selling it to me...
It's not there for me to sell it to you, or anyone else. It's for you to accept, freely, like everything else He offers.
(btw, I never thought a trivial dig at the JWs would start this. Must be more careful with throwaway lines in future)
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
A promised post.
On current value for worship, the terms we use for expressing how God has made Himself known to us;
Father of Creation;
Son, Jesus Christ, His only Son our Lord
Spirit; the Lord, the Giver of Life; the indweller
provide a wonderful, rich and varied source of worship. The God who made the Heavens and the earth. The God who made us. The incarnate God who shows us how to live and is with us to the end of time. The crucified and risen God who is for us. The God who is in us, who teaches and convinces about "all things".
Trinitarian belief serves as a reminder of of all the above, saying further that it is the same God who brings us awe and wonder in these different "expressions" of Himself. When we worship the Three in One in Spirit and in Truth, we worship God in His fullness - and know that we do not know it all.
By doing this, our worship becomes both richer and better balanced than it would be if we focused primarily on one of these three "expressions". Somehow saw one as more important than the others. That has often been a failing in visible congregations. The Transcendent dominates the Incarnate and Indwelling. The Incarnate dominates the Transcendent and Indwelling etc. Or you get "two out of three" combinations.
So far as understanding is concerned, Trinitarianism keeps us, necessarily, humble. A reminder that it is both stupid and blasphemous to think we have God all figured out. In all its paradoxes it is a constant reminder that God is "above and beyond our understanding" (thinking of a line from a song by Tim Hughes), hidden in entirety from us "only by the Splendour of Light" as a much older hymn puts it. To know that we really do know in part, but that which we do know is awesome and wonderful produces a humble reverence. Not only for God in worship. This reverence may then spill over into reverence and respect for life, for the world, the universe. For one another.
I am not saying that these benefits are based on a precise interpretation of the meaning of the Trinity; nor that some of them, maybe all of them, might not be arrived at by different considerations. That would be assuming far to much. But I am saying that Trinitarian belief has, within itself, the power to guide us in these very helpful and fruitful ways. It is as rich and creative in its content today as it ever was.
[ 12. November 2012, 17:10: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Garasu
Shipmate
# 17152
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
It's not there for me to sell it to you, or anyone else. It's for you to accept, freely, like everything else He offers.
Even if freely offered it doesn't seem unreasonable to ask what I'm accepting.
--------------------
"Could I believe in the doctrine without believing in the deity?". - Modesitt, L. E., Jr., 1943- Imager.
Posts: 889 | From: Surrey Heath (England) | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Garasu:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
It's not there for me to sell it to you, or anyone else. It's for you to accept, freely, like everything else He offers.
Even if freely offered it doesn't seem unreasonable to ask what I'm accepting.
What you are accepting is the Truth revealed to us by the Holy Spirit.
Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Garasu:
Even if freely offered it doesn't seem unreasonable to ask what I'm accepting.
The scriptures. There is this perception that the Trinity is a foreign doctrine imposed on the Bible by Greek philosophers. This isn't the case. It was a doctrine the developed to draw out the propositions that Church discerned in the scriptures.
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Latchkey Kid
Shipmate
# 12444
|
Posted
While we may be accepting something we may find in the scriptures, that is not the same as accepting the scripture (and what that means, I am sure, varies enormously among shippies that call themselves Christian).
Conversely, not accepting the trinity does not mean that the scriptures are not accepted (again with the proviso that there are various understandings of this.)
--------------------
'You must never give way for an answer. An answer is always the stretch of road that's behind you. Only a question can point the way forward.'
Mika; in Hello? Is Anybody There?, Jostein Gaardner
Posts: 2592 | From: The wizardest little town in Oz | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
