Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

13

It depends on who you ask. That's because it depends upon how you interpret the meaning of certain Biblical passages. Both Trinitarians and Non-trinitarians feel very strongly that their doctrine is taught clearly in the Bible. Trinitarians will answer, "Yes, Jesus did teach the doctrine of the trinity." Non-trinitarians will answer, "No, Jesus never ...


12

It seems virtually undisputed that Theophilus of Antioch (d. 183) is your man. He wrote in Greek: [God's creations on the first three days--light, sky, and vegetation--] are types of the Trinity, of God, and His Word, and His wisdom. And the fourth [day, the creation of the moon and stars,] is the type of man, who needs light, that so there may be God, ...


9

This is one of the popular misconception of trinity and incarnation. Jesus as Logos (The Word) is divine. He existed in that form for eternity in the Trinity. But the humanity of Christ did NOT exist before incarnation. Humanity of Christ consists of his human soul and body. Humans are made up of soul and body, so when Christ became human, ie., when he took ...


9

There is one God who has revealed himself in three persons. The vast majority of Christians across all major sects agree that Jesus is both the Son of God and God. This has been articulated many mays, but is not easy to explain in the confines of language. He is not the "son" as is a physical offspring as the result of sexual relations, but in another ...


8

John Byl, in his article "Newton and the Trinity", paints a clear picture that Newton was non-trinitarian. Newton's published works do not contain clear statements of this nature. In his private notebooks however, some of which were not examined completely until the mid 20th century, Newton committed a significant amount of effort to criticizing the Church's ...


7

Regarding the term ἐκπορεύομαι We have to keep in mind that Trinitarian doctrine and the technical terminology surrounding it did not stabilize until the Fourth Century A.D. The creed commonly called the Nicene Creed would be better termed the “Nicene-Constantinopolitan” Creed, since it incorporates material that was elaborated not only in the ...


7

Trinitarians believe that Jesus being human does not contradict his status as God (or as the Spirit). Even though Jesus is God, he made himself into physical human being, and through this he was able to experience life fully as a man. Philippians 2:5-8 KJV Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it ...


6

Fr. Hardon's Modern Catholic Dictionary gives this definition of Semi-Arianism: The teaching of certain theologians who, after the Council of Nicaea (A.D. 325), sought a compromise between Arianism and the doctrine of Christ's consubstantiality with the Father. They were led by Basil, Bishop of Ancyra, and their sympathies were toward orthodoxy, although ...


6

I don't think I could improve upon the summary at the Orthodox Wiki: Objections on doctrinal grounds It is contrary to Scripture, particularly in John 15:26: "But when the Helper comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify of Me." Thus, Christ never describes the Holy Spirit ...


5

How many Gods do we have? One and only one! How many persons are there in God? Three and only three! Who are them? Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:19, NIV) Do we worship them separately? NO! Because they are ONE. ...


5

1.The Jewish and Islamic concept of God is the same: one God, one person, one mind.This is same in Talmud, a central text of Rabbinic Judaism written between 200 CE/AD- 500 CE/AD.Thus it is different from the Triune God of Trinitarian Christianity, God as three persons, three minds, co-equal and co-eternal, one in essence, nature, power, action, and will. ...


4

Aquinas addresses the question from different angles a number of places in the Summa Theologica, in various parts of the "Treatise on the Most Holy Trinity" (First Part, Questions 27–43). The fundamental question is answered more or less directly in Question 27, "The Procession of the Divine Persons". Article 2 of this question, "Whether any ...


4

I would like to add some theological background to this answer from the Catholic perspective (and naturally, I would invite Orthodox readers to contribute their own perspective). First, some historical background: As the original question points out, the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed was originally written in Greek. Although the fundamental concepts in ...


4

Firstly, if Jesus is God, it is of course impossible for Him to blaspheme against His own law. Secondly, Jesus did not overtly claim to be God directly and consequently inevitably stumble the lost sheep of Israel that He was sent to. He answered the question: The high priest said to him, “I charge you under oath by the living God: Tell us if you are ...


4

The question, as it stands, really isn't soluable. Reason #1: The Crucifixion raises other Trinitarian questions First and foremost, the Trinity itself is hard enough to understand. There is no good analogy and any attempt to make one will necessarily fail by over emphasizing oneness or threeness. Worse, the Crucifixion and death of Christ means that ...


4

Answer from a specifically Catholic viewpoint: The Catechism of the Catholic Church has many references to humans as images of God, but only a few that I have found to Jesus as the image of God: At the time appointed by God, the only Son of the Father, the eternal Word, that is, the Word and substantial Image of the Father, became incarnate; without ...


4

Revelation 3:21 To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne. This verse shows that the throne belongs to Jesus Christ along with his father. We interpret it through this verse. Kind of a short answer but it gets the point accross.


4

Yes. In fact, one of Barth's lasting contributions was a recovery of the doctrine of the Trinity as central for theology, in reaction to German liberalism's denial or, at best, sidelining of the topic (Schleiermacher's The Christian Faith is a prime example of this—in an 800 page systematic theology, the Trinity only merits 14 pages tagged on at the end). ...


4

The term the Nicene Creed uses for substance is homooúsios. This term was intentionally chosen to separate the Creed from various forms of Arianism that denied the divinity of Jesus. The Nicene Creed is arguing that Jesus is fully divine just like the Father. The common forms of nontrinitarianism at the time commonly denied the divinity of Christ by arguing ...


4

I've seen a few candidates put forward. Valentinus the Gnostic (100 - 160) Writing about two hundred years later against the Arian heresy, Marcellus of Ancyra (himself possibly a Sabellian) wrote: These then teach three hypostases, just as Valentinus the heresiarch first invented in the book entitled by him On the Three Natures. For he was the first to ...


3

Yes, it's long! Yes, I know this is a long answer. Sorry about that! However, given the huge amount of ink (and pixels) that has been expended on the doctrine of the Trinity for almost two thousand years now, I do not see how justice can be done to the subject in the brief answers that are preferred here on StackExchange. I therefore ask for your patience ...


3

I believe you're misunderstanding something here. According to the review, The category “Word of God” is larger than Scripture because Scripture “does not exhaust the word of God” (p. 47). Therefore Frame defines “word of God” as “God himself, understood as communicator” and “the sum total of his free communications with his creatures” (p. 49). Thus, ...


3

From John Gill's exposition of this passage: For he shall not speak of himself: as Christ, the Son, spoke not of himself in opposition to the Father, so the Spirit speaks not of himself in opposition either to the Father, or the Son, but in perfect agreement with both; being, as of the same nature and essence, power and glory, so of the same mind, ...


3

Jesus did not blaspheme his own law. "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth:" The context of "likeness" refers to idol worship. Jesus' coming to earth was a fulfillment of prophecy, not a contradiction to the 10 ...


3

God is not a Man It seems that the impetus for the question relies on the meaning of Numbers 23:19 Numbers 23:19 (NASB) (emphasis added) God is not a man, that He should lie, Nor a son of man, that He should repent; Has He said, and will He not do it? Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good. What is God attempting to communicate? The context ...


3

Edit: removed old answer I think this link will help explain what you are asking: Was Jesus Limited While On Earth? For future reference if that site or page disappears from the internet it is quoted below: Was Jesus Limited While On Earth? Wednesday, January 29th, 2014    tags:The Holy Spirit,Theology Q. I have a question ...


3

Catholic teaching and understanding is that Christ has two wills, divine (of which, there is only one1) and human - without the human, to my understanding, he couldn't have redeemed in the manner he redeemed [cf. Heb 5:8 & Phil 2:7-9]. 1. In the Godhead the essence, will, and action are but one. - cf. The divine unity in The Blessed Trinity | New ...


3

The phrase “God of God” means that a person came from a person ( like an offspring from a parent) and that they are of same nature. It is analogous to the phrase “Human of Human,” That is, a human offspring of a human parent. To beget is to produce someone to have one’s nature. Seth is begotten of Adam. Seth and Adam are of same nature. A human person ...


2

Matthew 24:36 But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only. We do know that Jesus did not have all of the knowledge of the Father. Philippians 2:6-7 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a ...


2

Actually the answer is very simple. The confusion lays in the meaning of the word "revelation". It can be taken as "disclosure of earlier not known truths" which was to John for sure BUT it can by understood as "portion of facts and doctrines" which God the Father decided to reveal to humanity and passed it on through Jesus to John. In that sense it was NOT ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible