Can you be a Christian if you don't believe in Jesus? - Page 3 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#61 of 130 Old 11-16-2010, 07:23 PM
 
mum4vr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 415
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Learning_Mum View Post

I'm not sure why I want to be a Christian. It's what I've always known? I want to start exploring religion and going to church and it's the easiest option?

 

I guess one of the problems I've always had is that he's the 'son of God' but he's not God but he is God. Does that make sense? To me he's either the earthly form of God or he's the son of God. I don't understand how he can be both. Also, God says in the bible to worship none other than Him but then he sends down someone that all Christians now worship instead of God....? See why I'm confused by this?

and
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Learning_Mum View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by Tradd View Post




Your siggy says it all - "It's complicated!" ;-) It took several centuries and several ecumenical councils to explain it properly.

 

The Holy Trinity - Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. All are God. Three in One, and One in Three. The Father is Eternal, the Son is begotten, and the Spirit proceeds (from the Father). Christ is the Son of God because He's begotten from the Father, but He's also God - second person of the Trinity. "The Word became flesh and dwelt among us" (John 1) - this is the Incarnation of Christ that many have had issues with through the centuries.


Do you think you could dumb this down even more for me? Basically God, The Holy Spirit and Jesus and all God in different forms?
 


Hi OP-- dumbing down or at least simplified explaining as requested, but first, I wish you the very best as you explore and grow your beliefs :Hug

 

Anyway-- I always had a problem w the egg and or apple explanation-- I am a pretty precise person, and even as a child realized that an eggshell does not an egg make! Yet I was told that Christ was fully God and fully human-- it didn't jive w me. Then I came across a brilliant idea (when it was my turn to teach Bible at church camp, LOL) the trinity is more like water-- yes, water. Ice is water, liquid water is water and steam is water. All are fully water, but have different characteristics and forms, yet all are water. I think even the "son of God" does not mean son in the same way as my DSs are my sons-- it was presented for our human brains to try to wrap around, IMO-- after all we are sheep-brained... 



Quote:
Originally Posted by Learning_Mum View Post

So after reading the link above and then doing some more research I have confirmed that I don't believe in the Holy Trinity.

 

So I guess I can't call myself a Christian. Which kind of leaves me stuck as to how to progress in my spiritual journey. I identify with Judaism. It feels right in my heart but I don't think that I could ever convert.


 
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shami View Post

Have you tried asking Jesus if He is God?  Or if your not comfortable praying to Jesus, ask God if He is Jesus.  I could give you all kinds of verses, but that's not how I found out that Jesus is God.  I found out by asking, Jesus are you real?...

  

So even though you said up thread that believing in the Trinity wasn't for you, maybe you might consider praying to God and asking Him to show you who He is.  You may not get a lightening bolt answer, but gradually you may get your answers.  I would also encourage you to read the Bible starting with the book of John in the New Testament.  Even if you've already read it, try reading it again.  The more I re-read the Bible the more I get from it.


:yeah

 

ita with at least some form of prayer that you are comfortable with to seek an answer to your quandry.

 

blessings

 

 

To all the PPs who have joined the discussion:

Quote:
Originally Posted by treespeak View Post

Donning my flame-proof suit to offer another perspective.  Historically, not all followers of Christ have professed belief in the Nicene Creed, the doctrine of Jesus as "only son of God". As Tradd pointed out up thread, this doctrine was "hammered out" in fourth and fifth centuries (precisely because there was dissent), so hundreds of years after Jesus' life and generations after the the lives of his early followers.  Keep in mind that the term "Christian" was not likely used by the early followers, most of whom still identified with Judaism...


actually, Jesus is called the son of God in the scripture written far before the Nicean council, in fact written long before he himself was born a "son of man" on earth! (see Isaiah).

 

Also, Christians were called "Christians" in the NT (acts 11.26, 26.28, 1 peter 4.16) by contemporaries of Christ (Luke and Peter)



Quote:
Originally Posted by Smokering View Post

... The problem I have with that statement is that it ignores a LOT of what Jesus said. Sure, he said plenty of nice, compelling, ethically-interesting "generic" things, if you like, about social justice and religious puffery and humility and all that jazz. But he ALSO said some pretty darn specific, controversial, theological things. Like, you know, "he who has seen me has seen the Father". :p ...


ita
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by CherryBomb View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by umsami View Post

 Even the whole divinity of Jesus was not decided upon until the 4th century.

 

This is not true.  I'm assuming you're referring to is the first Council of Nicea, which was called together as a response to the heresy of Arianism.  Just because a council was called to officially reject a heresy does not mean the Divinity of Christ was just pulled out of thin air in the 4th century.


right-- as also addressed above...



Quote:
Originally Posted by pammysue View Post

... 

The point is (sorry to butt in Smokering) that Jesus claimed to be God. If Jesus was a great guy who taught important messages about truth and goodness but was not God, how do you reconcile that with Jesus' claims to BE God? He claimed the title "I AM" many times in the book of John (whose point was to establish the divinity of Christ and His place in the Trinity, [written around 95AD]) which to the Jews He was speaking to would be clearly God, the Father. 
 

 CS Lewis:

Quote:
A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic - on the level with a man who says he is a poached egg - or he would be the devil of hell. You must take your choice. Either this was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us."

that exactly-- sorry I messed up your quote, but your point is still valid c:   :yeah



Quote:
Originally Posted by Smokering View Post

...

"2)how you interpret "he who has seen me has seen the father.""

 

Yes, but then, that verse isn't the only one in which Jesus claims divinity. He doesn't correct the disciple who calls him "My Lord and my God", which is extremely significant - He certainly should have, if He wasn't. In John 13:13 He goes so far as to say (re the title Lord) "that is what I am". He claimed to be the Son of God on numerous occasions - and there is no indication that He meant a generic "we're all children of God" - certainly the Jews didn't believe He meant that, as they considered it blasphemy and making Himself equal with God. He claims the authority to forgive sins (Mark 2:1-12), which is something His audience knew was something only God could do. And that's the obvious stuff... there are plenty of other indications, like His statement to Pilate that "my kingdom is not of this world", the "I AM" parallels, and so on. If you want to figure out whether or not you want to follow Jesus - and I realise you don't, but the OP seems to be dealing with this issue - you can't just ignore those verses. (And of course, depending on your view of the other NT scriptures, there are plenty more claims to Jesus' divinity there. It's kind of... the whole point.)

...

right-- he would not have been tried for blasphemy if he was not very clearly claiming to be God.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Linda on the move View Post

When I hear some one say they are a "christian," I assume they believe something special about Jesus. Exactly what seem to vary a great deal.

 

If someone told me they were a Christian but didn't believe anything was special or unique about Jesus, I would wonder what they meant by "christian." It really wouldn't be very clear.


OP-- this is really my only question as well.
 

mum4vr is offline  
#62 of 130 Old 11-16-2010, 08:32 PM
 
Shami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Fairborn, Ohio
Posts: 1,270
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Wow, mum4vr.  Way to put it all together.  Wish I new how to do quotes like that!

 

Forgive me for posting so often.  I am really hoping the OP is still reading along.  I like the water, ice, steam  analogy. 

 

Re: more on the need for God to be one yet three, to get Himself into man

 

Disclaimer:  For all the theologians, I am not a modalist.  I believe the three Persons of the Godhead have existed and coexist from eternity past to eternity future.  I DO NOT believe that once Christ came, the Father stopped existing.  All three exist together forever and ever.  But for His move on the earth, He had to become a man, which is a process, and He had to become the Spirit that Jesus breathed into the disciples, which is a further processing to get into man.  Hope this makes sense.

 

In the Old Testament, God functioned and revealed Himself primarily outside of man.  He was in the cloud in the wilderness and in the burning bush. Sometimes He was an audible voice.  I think He actually visited Abraham and had lunch with him??  God dwelt in unapproachable light and Moses had to be veiled to read the law.  He was not indwelling man, yet.  He was outside of man.  However, His intention was to dispense His life and nature into people so that He would have an expression on the earth so that the gospel could be released.

 

God is not static.  He is always moving and flowing.  He loved man so much that He flowed Himself right into a man called Christ Jesus, the first God-man.  In the beginning was the Word and the Word was God and the Word became flesh and tabernacled among us (John 1:1, 14).  Christ was fully God and fully human without sin.  God had to become a man in order to reach man.  Only the perfect sinless blood of Jesus could atone our sins.  No other blood, not all of the animal offerings, could take away the sin of the world.

 

When God became a man Christ Jesus, He mingled divinity with humanity.  When Jesus was in Mary's womb, divinity was mingled with humanity.  God had to reach man and get inside of man, incarnation.

 

Skip ahead.

 

After His crucifixion and resurrection, He ascended all the way up to the Father bringing His uplifted  sinless humanity to the Father making a way for anyone who believes into Him to also be resurrected to be with the Father for eternity.  God cannot be joined to sin, so He made a way for us through Christ Jesus' sinless blood to join Himself to man.  Christ is the Head and all of the believers are His real body on earth.  Divinity and humanity joined.

 

After His resurrection and ascension, He became a life giving Spirit (1 Cor 14:45)  Now the Lord Jesus is the Holy Spirit.   The reason He had to become the Spirit is because Christ Jesus as a man cannot get inside of you.  It is physically impossible,  but His Spirit can get inside of you (John 20:22).

 

So this is the processed divine Trinity.  God became a man, Christ Jesus, and then went through a further process to become a life giving Spirit, in order to flow Himself into your human spirit so that you could possess the eternal life and nature of God, thereby expressing God and cooperating with God to carry out His purpose on the earth to usher in the second coming of Christ.  And the bonus is (drum roll please)  you get to be with a loving God for eternity.bouncy.gif

 

Obviously this is my opinion based on my study of the Bible, and you should only agree with me if you already know this to be true for your self. lol.gif


DH, and Me plus baby girl (10/07)
Shami is offline  
#63 of 130 Old 11-17-2010, 06:36 AM
 
Bluegoat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 2,619
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Shami View Post

 

Disclaimer:  For all the theologians, I am not a modalist.  I believe the three Persons of the Godhead have existed and coexist from eternity past to eternity future.  I DO NOT believe that once Christ came, the Father stopped existing.  All three exist together forever and ever.  But for His move on the earth, He had to become a man, which is a process, and He had to become the Spirit that Jesus breathed into the disciples, which is a further processing to get into man.  Hope this makes sense.


Ha, that is funny, as I was reading the steam analogy, I was thinking - that sounds like modalism!

 

Really, all of the analogies we use with children - eggs, clovers, whatever - are inaccurate.  It is pretty hard to get a good visual representation for something like the Trinity, especially when you are trying to explain it to kids without the full ability to think abstractly.


 I like the mind to be a dustbin of scraps of brilliant fabric, odd gems, worthless but fascinating curiosities, tinsel, quaint bits of carving, and a reasonable amount of healthy dirt.
Bluegoat is offline  
#64 of 130 Old 11-17-2010, 07:52 AM
 
Shami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Fairborn, Ohio
Posts: 1,270
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluegoat View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by Shami View Post

 

Disclaimer:  For all the theologians, I am not a modalist.  I believe the three Persons of the Godhead have existed and coexist from eternity past to eternity future.  I DO NOT believe that once Christ came, the Father stopped existing.  All three exist together forever and ever.  But for His move on the earth, He had to become a man, which is a process, and He had to become the Spirit that Jesus breathed into the disciples, which is a further processing to get into man.  Hope this makes sense.


Ha, that is funny, as I was reading the steam analogy, I was thinking - that sounds like modalism!

 

Really, all of the analogies we use with children - eggs, clovers, whatever - are inaccurate.  It is pretty hard to get a good visual representation for something like the Trinity, especially when you are trying to explain it to kids without the full ability to think abstractly.


 

Hmmm, you may be right about the steam analogy.  I hadn't applied the modalism test to it. lol

 

How about the same man can be a father, a brother, a son, a husband.  In essence the same person, but functionally distinct.  What do you think?

 

ETA:  Edna helped me see my mistake in the bolded sentence.  I should have said, In essence one God, but in function, distinct Persons.


DH, and Me plus baby girl (10/07)
Shami is offline  
#65 of 130 Old 11-17-2010, 11:14 AM
 
Bluegoat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 2,619
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Shami View Post


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluegoat View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by Shami View Post

 

Disclaimer:  For all the theologians, I am not a modalist.  I believe the three Persons of the Godhead have existed and coexist from eternity past to eternity future.  I DO NOT believe that once Christ came, the Father stopped existing.  All three exist together forever and ever.  But for His move on the earth, He had to become a man, which is a process, and He had to become the Spirit that Jesus breathed into the disciples, which is a further processing to get into man.  Hope this makes sense.


Ha, that is funny, as I was reading the steam analogy, I was thinking - that sounds like modalism!

 

Really, all of the analogies we use with children - eggs, clovers, whatever - are inaccurate.  It is pretty hard to get a good visual representation for something like the Trinity, especially when you are trying to explain it to kids without the full ability to think abstractly.



Hmmm, you may be right about the steam analogy.  I hadn't applied the modalism test to it. lol

 

How about the same man can be a father, a brother, a son, a husband.  In essence the same person, but functionally distinct.  What do you think?



Hmm.  Still no good, because it says that how we experience or relate to God determines his nature. 


 I like the mind to be a dustbin of scraps of brilliant fabric, odd gems, worthless but fascinating curiosities, tinsel, quaint bits of carving, and a reasonable amount of healthy dirt.
Bluegoat is offline  
#66 of 130 Old 11-17-2010, 11:52 AM
 
Shami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Fairborn, Ohio
Posts: 1,270
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

But don't we experience the Lord in different ways?  On God's side His essence never changes.  His divine life and nature don't change.   However, the OT believers experienced God differently than we do by virtue of the fact that He had not become a man, Christ Jesus, in time.  The disciples experienced the physical presence of the Lord Jesus and eventually only His spiritual presence after He resurrected and ascended.  Although He did have a spiritual body for Thomas to put his finger in the Lord's nail print.  Now we experience the Lord's Spirit in an invisible way.  We experience His invisible presence.   Sometimes we hear His speaking and it is so strong it seems almost audible.  Or maybe we experience Him in visions.

 

Sometimes I worship Him because He is my Father, my real Father and I have a moment of such appreciation that I am in His hands as His child.  Other times, I am confessing something I have done wrong and I experience the Lord Jesus' cleansing Blood. 

 

Our experience doesn't change the nature of God.  God simply meets our current need because He is all-sufficient and all-inclusive.  Because His nature is divine, He can do that.

 

 

In my analogy above (the man functioning as a father, son, brother, husband, yet his essence is the same) the man never changes, only His function based on the current need.


DH, and Me plus baby girl (10/07)
Shami is offline  
#67 of 130 Old 11-17-2010, 11:54 AM
 
EdnaMarie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,148
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

 

Quote:
In essence the same person, but functionally distinct.

 

That is the Sabellian heresy.  :D  One person.  Jesus is God, but He is God the Father, He just looks different at that point in time.


It's not that the stay-at-home-parent gets to stay home with the kids. The kids get to stay home with a parent. Lucky Mom to DD1 (4 y) and DD2 (18 mo), Wife to Mercenary Dad
EdnaMarie is offline  
#68 of 130 Old 11-17-2010, 11:59 AM
 
EdnaMarie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,148
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Oh, and FWIW... I personally would consider any person that considered Jesus to be God, a Christian, regardless of her understanding, heretical or nonexistent or whatever, of the trinity.  I have never heard it explained the same way once and I think that most Christians unknowingly hold heretical beliefs about it, LOL.  There was a popular televangelist, I forget who, a woman, who caused a big ruckus by basically propagating this massively heretical doctrine, I think it was that Jesus was not fully man? or something, and she had thousands and thousands of followers but she did not have a theological degree or anything.  And the Protestant Churches actually spoke up about it, like, hold on people!  You can't just make this up as you go along.  It's been decided.  Does anyone remember that?


It's not that the stay-at-home-parent gets to stay home with the kids. The kids get to stay home with a parent. Lucky Mom to DD1 (4 y) and DD2 (18 mo), Wife to Mercenary Dad
EdnaMarie is offline  
#69 of 130 Old 11-17-2010, 12:00 PM
 
Shami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Fairborn, Ohio
Posts: 1,270
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by EdnaMarie View Post

 

Quote:
In essence the same person, but functionally distinct.

 

That is the Sabellian heresy.  :D  One person.  Jesus is God, but He is God the Father, He just looks different at that point in time.


Never heard of the Sabellian heresy.  I do agree with your statement though.  But I would say it like this:  One God--three distinct persons.  Yes, Jesus is God the Father.


DH, and Me plus baby girl (10/07)
Shami is offline  
#70 of 130 Old 11-17-2010, 02:55 PM
 
Bluegoat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 2,619
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Shami View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by EdnaMarie View Post

 

Quote:
In essence the same person, but functionally distinct.

 

That is the Sabellian heresy.  :D  One person.  Jesus is God, but He is God the Father, He just looks different at that point in time.


Never heard of the Sabellian heresy.  I do agree with your statement though.  But I would say it like this:  One God--three distinct persons.  Yes, Jesus is God the Father.


Sabellianism is modalism again.

 

Oh, saying Jesus is the Father falls well outside of creedal Christianity.  They are distinct persons.  I think the Athanasian Creed is probably the most clear on the Trinity, if rather tedious - it is a good way to check if one is saying something outside the accepted doctrine, since he lays it all out.  Though the East doesn't use it - it is pretty much a Western statement.

 

WHOSOEVER would be saved / needeth before all things to hold fast the Catholic Faith.

2 Which Faith except a man keep whole and undefiled, / without doubt he will perish eternally.

3 Now the Catholic Faith is this, / that we worship one God in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity;

4 Neither confusing the Persons, / nor dividing the Substance.

5 For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, / another of the Holy Ghost;

6 But the Godhead of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost is all one, / the glory equal, the majesty co-eternal.

7 Such as the Father is, such is the Son, / and such is the Holy Ghost;

8 The Father uncreated, the Son uncreated, the Holy Ghost uncreated;

9 The Father infinite, the Son infinite, the Holy Ghost infinite;

10 The Father eternal, the Son eternal, the Holy Ghost eternal;

11 And yet there are not three eternals, but one eternal;

12 As also there are not three uncreated, nor three infinites, / but one infinite, and one uncreated.

13 So likewise the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, / the Holy Ghost almighty;

14 And yet there are not three almighties, but one almighty.

15 So the Father is God, the Son God, the Holy Ghost God;

16 And yet there are not three Gods, / but one God.

17 So the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, / the Holy Ghost Lord;

18 And yet there are not three Lords, / but one Lord.

19 For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity / to confess each Person by himself to be both God and Lord;

20 So are we forbidden by the Catholic Religion / to speak of three Gods or three Lords.

21 The Father is made of none, / nor created, nor begotten.

22 The Son is of the Father alone; / not made, nor created, but begotten.

23 The Holy Ghost is of the Father and the Son; / not made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding.

24 There is therefore one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; / one Holy Ghost, not three Holy Ghosts.

25 And in this Trinity there is no before or after, / no greater or less;

26 But all three Persons are co-eternal together, / and co-equal.

27 So that in all ways, as is aforesaid, / both the Trinity is to be worshipped in Unity, and the Unity in Trinity.

28 He therefore that would be saved, / let him thus think of the Trinity.

29 FURTHERMORE, it is necessary to eternal salvation, / that he also believe faithfully the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ.

30 Now the right Faith is that we believe and confess / that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is both God and Man.

31 He is God, of the Substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds; / and he is Man, of the Substance of his Mother, born in the world;

32 Perfect God; / perfect Man, of reasoning soul and human flesh subsisting;

33 Equal to the Father as touching his Godhead;/ less than the Father as touching his Manhood.

34 Who although he be God and Man, / yet he is not two, but is one Christ;

35 One, however, not by conversion of Godhead into flesh, / but by taking of Manhood into God;

36 One altogether; / not by confusion of Substance, but by unity of Person.

37 For as reasoning soul and flesh is one man, so God and Man is one Christ;

38 Who suffered for our salvation, / descended into hell, rose again from the dead;

39 Ascended into heaven, sat down at the right hand of the Father, / from whence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead.

40 At whose coming all men must rise again with their bodies, / and shall give account for their own deeds.

41 And they that have done good will go into life eternal; / they that have done evil into eternal fire.

42 THIS is the Catholic Faith, / which except a man do faithfully and stedfastly believe, he cannot be saved.

GLORY be to the Father, and to the Son, / and to the Holy Ghost;

As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be, / world without end. Amen.


 I like the mind to be a dustbin of scraps of brilliant fabric, odd gems, worthless but fascinating curiosities, tinsel, quaint bits of carving, and a reasonable amount of healthy dirt.
Bluegoat is offline  
#71 of 130 Old 11-17-2010, 03:33 PM
 
Shami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Fairborn, Ohio
Posts: 1,270
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shami View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by EdnaMarie View Post

 

Quote:
In essence the same person, but functionally distinct.

 

That is the Sabellian heresy.  :D  One person.  Jesus is God, but He is God the Father, He just looks different at that point in time.


Never heard of the Sabellian heresy.  I do agree with your statement though.  But I would say it like this:  One God--three distinct persons.  Yes, Jesus is God the Father.


 

I am quoting myself because in my haste,  I made another wrong statement.  Thanks Bluegoat!

Jesus is God, but I SHOULD NOT say that Jesus is God the Father.

The Bible says that Jesus and the Father are one, but not that Jesus is the Father.

 

If we say that Jesus is God the Father, then what happens to the Trinity.  One God, yet three distinct Persons in the Godhead.  There is such a fine balance of oneness and threeness.  One cannot be too much either way.

 

I was reminded of this verse:

Isaiah 9:6

6 For a child is born to us, A son is given to us; And the government Is upon His shoulder; And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.

 

The child here being Jesus will be called Eternal Father.  So, I don't know what to do with that.  Will read the creed, Bluegoat, after I return from the mall.


DH, and Me plus baby girl (10/07)
Shami is offline  
#72 of 130 Old 11-17-2010, 07:20 PM
 
TzippityDoulah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: DC area
Posts: 3,731
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

OP -- I didn't read every last comment but I skimmed them. Sounds like your Noachide to me.. at least by your definition of what you believe. (here is another wikipedia on it)


transtichel.gifMom of three - (2.5 yrs, 7yrs, and 11yrs). Birthing Doula, editor, and wife to my soulmate. I've had a c/s, hospital VBAC, UC and not yet decided what I'll do about this next little one

TzippityDoulah is offline  
#73 of 130 Old 11-18-2010, 11:19 AM
 
EdnaMarie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,148
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

 

Quote:
Your siggy says it all - "It's complicated!" ;-) It took several centuries and several ecumenical councils to explain it properly.

 

And frankly... that is probably one of the main reasons I became a heretic and then a universalist/transcendentalist/whatever.  I haven't met ONE, not ONE person that can explain it without using imperfect metaphors.  I have spoken to the Orthodox, Baptists, Lutherans, Episcopalians, Catholics, Quakers, Amish, lots and lots and lots of Christians and none of them can explain it any better than "He is three and one at the same time".

 

Maybe the Trinity is waiting for Its Albert Einstein to clarify it, but my issue is, if you can understand it through some form of Modalism, why make it harder?  Maybe the obscure questions that led to the clarification that we know as the current doctrine on the Trinity could be solved other ways.

 

The councils were very political.


It's not that the stay-at-home-parent gets to stay home with the kids. The kids get to stay home with a parent. Lucky Mom to DD1 (4 y) and DD2 (18 mo), Wife to Mercenary Dad
EdnaMarie is offline  
#74 of 130 Old 11-18-2010, 06:19 PM
 
Shami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Fairborn, Ohio
Posts: 1,270
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Edna Marie,

It sounds like you've been seeking for a long time.  I know that I experienced a long period of frustration and decided that I was atheist for years.  I am not sure by your post because I can't hear your voice or see your face, so I am wondering, are you frustrated and venting a little bit?  Or, are you still seeking some answers, and are you open to hearing more?

 

I am no expert.  I've just received a lot of help and fellowship from some who have both wisdom and experience that I would be happy to pass along to you.  Feel free to say, no thanks.

 

Sometimes I pray-read this verse when I am struggling to understand a point of Truth.  I really pray that God will help you.

 

Ephesians 1:17

17 That the 1aGod of our Lord Jesus Christ, the 2Father of glory, may give to you a 3bspirit of 4cwisdom and drevelation in the efull knowledge of Him,


DH, and Me plus baby girl (10/07)
Shami is offline  
#75 of 130 Old 11-18-2010, 07:12 PM
 
mum4vr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 415
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Shami View Post

Wow, mum4vr.  Way to put it all together.  Wish I new how to do quotes like that!


thanks-- haha. I just click multi-quote on each post I'd like to quote and click quote on the very last one to open the reply box... but it took me a long while to learn to do this-- I'm sometimes slower on the uptake, esp when they change the board C:



Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluegoat View Post
Really, all of the analogies we use with children - eggs, clovers, whatever - are inaccurate.  It is pretty hard to get a good visual representation for something like the Trinity, especially when you are trying to explain it to kids without the full ability to think abstractly.


Yes, all are inaccurate bc we are human and not God with perfect understanding. We use analogies to help wrap our limited minds around perfection, and it is difficult. Christ knew it well, so he used a LOT of imperfect analogies, too-- called the parables. Our analogies are surely far less accurate than Christ's  parables, but if it helps us understand and grow our faith, I think it is ok to say the Trinity is "like" something (water, steam, ice, clover, eggs, whatever), but is NOT the "same" as water, clover, whatever, wouldn't you agree?
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shami View Post
 

 

Our experience doesn't change the nature of God.  God simply meets our current need because He is all-sufficient and all-inclusive.  Because His nature is divine, He can do that.

 


True
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by EdnaMarie View Post

Oh, and FWIW... I personally would consider any person that considered Jesus to be God, a Christian, regardless of her understanding, heretical or nonexistent or whatever, of the trinity.  I have never heard it explained the same way once and I think that most Christians unknowingly hold heretical beliefs about it, LOL.  ...You can't just make this up as you go along.  It's been decided.  Does anyone remember that?



So would I, and no we can't just make it up as we go; we are each to work out his/ her own faith with fear and trembling.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by EdnaMarie View Post

 ... I haven't met ONE, not ONE person that can explain it without using imperfect metaphors.  I have spoken to the Orthodox, Baptists, Lutherans, Episcopalians, Catholics, Quakers, Amish, lots and lots and lots of Christians and none of them can explain it any better than "He is three and one at the same time"...

 

The councils were very political.


That's right-- it is the simplest and maybe best explanation... but some minds yearn for a concrete example, and thus many people try to make analogies to help them visualize a very abstract idea. Especially visual learners, hands-on learners and children want something they can pour gravy on (you know something concrete).

 

Yes, you are quite right! The councils were and ARE very political.

 

******************

One more note-- I just wanted to say to all the posters and the OP, that is is really refreshing to come on here and have a discussion about God without people being ugly or acting as if they are the only one who knows it all, etc. It is so welcome and so needed! I especially like your disclaimer, Shami-- that it is your understanding after studying scripture-- I should preface my ideas similarly bc I certainly don't claim to be an expert c:

 

Thanks to all!
 

mum4vr is offline  
#76 of 130 Old 11-19-2010, 11:49 AM
 
EdnaMarie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,148
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Yes, but since "three in one" is literally senseless in this universe, I think it's fair to expect a more detailed explanation or metaphorical comparison... but there are none.  "Three and one at the same time" is a contradiction in terms.  Usually we expect paradoxes to be explained.

 

 

Quote:
but some minds yearn for a concrete example, and thus many people try to make analogies to help them visualize a very abstract idea. Especially visual learners, hands-on learners and children want something they can pour gravy on (you know something concrete).

It's not that the stay-at-home-parent gets to stay home with the kids. The kids get to stay home with a parent. Lucky Mom to DD1 (4 y) and DD2 (18 mo), Wife to Mercenary Dad
EdnaMarie is offline  
#77 of 130 Old 11-19-2010, 11:53 AM
 
Smokering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 8,610
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)

"Three and one at the same time" isn't the best/most nuanced layman's definition, though. "Three in person but one in essence" is, and to my knowledge that isn't illogical or senseless, although undoubtedly hard to grasp.

mum4vr likes this.

If decomposition persists please see your necromancer.

Smokering is offline  
#78 of 130 Old 11-19-2010, 05:29 PM
 
Bluegoat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 2,619
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Yes and no.  Christian theology talks about the level to which we can come to a real understanding of God's mode of existence.  Ultimately, we are limited, and God is not, so it would be surprising if we could resolve all of the things that seem paradoxical about God's being.

 

But the other thing is, these kinds of illustrations are not meant to be more than pointers - there should never be any question that they are more than that.  If you want to get really into the theology of the Trinity or the Incarnation you are going to have to begin looking at the kind of things Smokering is talking about, or that you see in the Athanisian Creed.  What is a person?  A substance?  Nature?  And then it begins to lead in to questions about the Fall, about images, about Mariology...  most people are not interested with that level of detail.

 

But - and this is not directed at anyone here, it is just a general observation -   what I find odd is that often people are not interested in that, and yet seem to be annoyed that images about the Trinity as an egg, or as a family, are inadequate.  As if it ought to be simple.  I once had a conversation with a physicist about what bothered me about the idea of entropy.  He said he understood, but the problem was what I was talking about was really only a pale everyday language version of the real model, which was mathematical, and made a lot more sense.  I have no idea if that is true, because I haven't ever done enough mathematics to be able to find out.  But I would be clearly silly to assert that one ought to be able to explain it just as clearly without math, otherwise it couldn't be true. 

 

I am not sure why people think theology must be that way when they don't apply that method to other areas of thought.

mum4vr likes this.

 I like the mind to be a dustbin of scraps of brilliant fabric, odd gems, worthless but fascinating curiosities, tinsel, quaint bits of carving, and a reasonable amount of healthy dirt.
Bluegoat is offline  
#79 of 130 Old 11-19-2010, 08:25 PM
 
Shami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Fairborn, Ohio
Posts: 1,270
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluegoat View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by Shami View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by EdnaMarie View Post

 

Quote:
In essence the same person, but functionally distinct.

 

That is the Sabellian heresy.  :D  One person.  Jesus is God, but He is God the Father, He just looks different at that point in time.


Never heard of the Sabellian heresy.  I do agree with your statement though.  But I would say it like this:  One God--three distinct persons.  Yes, Jesus is God the Father.


Sabellianism is modalism again.

 

Oh, saying Jesus is the Father falls well outside of creedal Christianity.  They are distinct persons.  I think the Athanasian Creed is probably the most clear on the Trinity, if rather tedious - it is a good way to check if one is saying something outside the accepted doctrine, since he lays it all out.  Though the East doesn't use it - it is pretty much a Western statement.

 

WHOSOEVER would be saved / needeth before all things to hold fast the Catholic Faith.

2 Which Faith except a man keep whole and undefiled, / without doubt he will perish eternally.

3 Now the Catholic Faith is this, / that we worship one God in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity;

4 Neither confusing the Persons, / nor dividing the Substance.

5 For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, / another of the Holy Ghost;

6 But the Godhead of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost is all one, / the glory equal, the majesty co-eternal.

7 Such as the Father is, such is the Son, / and such is the Holy Ghost;

8 The Father uncreated, the Son uncreated, the Holy Ghost uncreated;

9 The Father infinite, the Son infinite, the Holy Ghost infinite;

10 The Father eternal, the Son eternal, the Holy Ghost eternal;

11 And yet there are not three eternals, but one eternal;

12 As also there are not three uncreated, nor three infinites, / but one infinite, and one uncreated.

13 So likewise the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, / the Holy Ghost almighty;

14 And yet there are not three almighties, but one almighty.

15 So the Father is God, the Son God, the Holy Ghost God;

16 And yet there are not three Gods, / but one God.

17 So the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, / the Holy Ghost Lord;

18 And yet there are not three Lords, / but one Lord.

19 For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity / to confess each Person by himself to be both God and Lord;

20 So are we forbidden by the Catholic Religion / to speak of three Gods or three Lords.

21 The Father is made of none, / nor created, nor begotten.

22 The Son is of the Father alone; / not made, nor created, but begotten.

23 The Holy Ghost is of the Father and the Son; / not made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding.

24 There is therefore one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; / one Holy Ghost, not three Holy Ghosts.

25 And in this Trinity there is no before or after, / no greater or less;

26 But all three Persons are co-eternal together, / and co-equal.

27 So that in all ways, as is aforesaid, / both the Trinity is to be worshipped in Unity, and the Unity in Trinity.

28 He therefore that would be saved, / let him thus think of the Trinity.

29 FURTHERMORE, it is necessary to eternal salvation, / that he also believe faithfully the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ.

30 Now the right Faith is that we believe and confess / that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is both God and Man.

31 He is God, of the Substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds; / and he is Man, of the Substance of his Mother, born in the world;

32 Perfect God; / perfect Man, of reasoning soul and human flesh subsisting;

33 Equal to the Father as touching his Godhead;/ less than the Father as touching his Manhood.

34 Who although he be God and Man, / yet he is not two, but is one Christ;

35 One, however, not by conversion of Godhead into flesh, / but by taking of Manhood into God;

36 One altogether; / not by confusion of Substance, but by unity of Person.

37 For as reasoning soul and flesh is one man, so God and Man is one Christ;

38 Who suffered for our salvation, / descended into hell, rose again from the dead;

39 Ascended into heaven, sat down at the right hand of the Father, / from whence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead.

40 At whose coming all men must rise again with their bodies, / and shall give account for their own deeds.

41 And they that have done good will go into life eternal; / they that have done evil into eternal fire.

42 THIS is the Catholic Faith, / which except a man do faithfully and stedfastly believe, he cannot be saved.

GLORY be to the Father, and to the Son, / and to the Holy Ghost;

As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be, / world without end. Amen.

This wasn't tedious at all.  I found most of it very enjoyable.  Then, again, I like declaring the divine facts, or chewing on it so it gets into me more.  It is quite thorough, but, like the Nicene Creed, it falls short of some divine facts. 

 

After ascension, the Lord became a life giving Spirit (1 Cor 15:45), so that, He could enter into man's human spirit.   Knowing that you have a human spirit that can contact God and contain God is the key to experiencing God, which is missing for many Christians.  Many Christians are dutiful and faithful, but struggle with contacting God.   It doesn't mention the fact that the Holy Spirit mingles with our human spirit to be one spirit,  (1 Cor 6:17).   It doesn't (unless I missed it) talk about the body of Christ, which is huge. And finally, it neglects to mention John 3, which states  that you must be born anew by Spirit and water in order to see and enter into the kingdom of God. 

 

Once we are  born anew of God (this doesn't have to be dramatic or emotional), the Holy Spirit and our human spirit are mingled/joined, which produces the literal body of Christ on the earth for His expression and to usher in the second coming of Christ.
 

 


DH, and Me plus baby girl (10/07)
Shami is offline  
#80 of 130 Old 11-20-2010, 09:32 AM
 
genifer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: In a land, far far away...
Posts: 1,223
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Whats more Shami, is that one cannot understand any of that unless they are born of the Spirit, or as we like to say 'Born Again'. I found that very interesting to read and thought it pretty much made perfect sense to me. I get it. Before I was saved, before I accepted Jesus as my Saviour, I simply could not. I understand how it could seem nonsense to some, but I get it.

genifer is offline  
#81 of 130 Old 11-20-2010, 09:42 AM
 
CherryBomb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Indiana
Posts: 8,143
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluegoat View Post


I am not sure why people think theology must be that way when they don't apply that method to other areas of thought.



Good point.

CherryBomb is offline  
#82 of 130 Old 11-20-2010, 10:28 AM
 
Bluegoat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 2,619
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

 

WHOSOEVER would be saved / needeth before all things to hold fast the Catholic Faith.

2 Which Faith except a man keep whole and undefiled, / without doubt he will perish eternally.

3 Now the Catholic Faith is this, / that we worship one God in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity;

4 Neither confusing the Persons, / nor dividing the Substance.

5 For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, / another of the Holy Ghost;

6 But the Godhead of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost is all one, / the glory equal, the majesty co-eternal.

7 Such as the Father is, such is the Son, / and such is the Holy Ghost;

8 The Father uncreated, the Son uncreated, the Holy Ghost uncreated;

9 The Father infinite, the Son infinite, the Holy Ghost infinite;

10 The Father eternal, the Son eternal, the Holy Ghost eternal;

11 And yet there are not three eternals, but one eternal;

12 As also there are not three uncreated, nor three infinites, / but one infinite, and one uncreated.

13 So likewise the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, / the Holy Ghost almighty;

14 And yet there are not three almighties, but one almighty.

15 So the Father is God, the Son God, the Holy Ghost God;

16 And yet there are not three Gods, / but one God.

17 So the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, / the Holy Ghost Lord;

18 And yet there are not three Lords, / but one Lord.

19 For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity / to confess each Person by himself to be both God and Lord;

20 So are we forbidden by the Catholic Religion / to speak of three Gods or three Lords.

21 The Father is made of none, / nor created, nor begotten.

22 The Son is of the Father alone; / not made, nor created, but begotten.

23 The Holy Ghost is of the Father and the Son; / not made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding.

24 There is therefore one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; / one Holy Ghost, not three Holy Ghosts.

25 And in this Trinity there is no before or after, / no greater or less;

26 But all three Persons are co-eternal together, / and co-equal.

27 So that in all ways, as is aforesaid, / both the Trinity is to be worshipped in Unity, and the Unity in Trinity.

28 He therefore that would be saved, / let him thus think of the Trinity.

29 FURTHERMORE, it is necessary to eternal salvation, / that he also believe faithfully the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ.

30 Now the right Faith is that we believe and confess / that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is both God and Man.

31 He is God, of the Substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds; / and he is Man, of the Substance of his Mother, born in the world;

32 Perfect God; / perfect Man, of reasoning soul and human flesh subsisting;

33 Equal to the Father as touching his Godhead;/ less than the Father as touching his Manhood.

34 Who although he be God and Man, / yet he is not two, but is one Christ;

35 One, however, not by conversion of Godhead into flesh, / but by taking of Manhood into God;

36 One altogether; / not by confusion of Substance, but by unity of Person.

37 For as reasoning soul and flesh is one man, so God and Man is one Christ;

38 Who suffered for our salvation, / descended into hell, rose again from the dead;

39 Ascended into heaven, sat down at the right hand of the Father, / from whence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead.

40 At whose coming all men must rise again with their bodies, / and shall give account for their own deeds.

41 And they that have done good will go into life eternal; / they that have done evil into eternal fire.

42 THIS is the Catholic Faith, / which except a man do faithfully and stedfastly believe, he cannot be saved.

GLORY be to the Father, and to the Son, / and to the Holy Ghost;

As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be, / world without end. Amen.

This wasn't tedious at all.  I found most of it very enjoyable.  Then, again, I like declaring the divine facts, or chewing on it so it gets into me more.  It is quite thorough, but, like the Nicene Creed, it falls short of some divine facts. 

 

After ascension, the Lord became a life giving Spirit (1 Cor 15:45), so that, He could enter into man's human spirit.   Knowing that you have a human spirit that can contact God and contain God is the key to experiencing God, which is missing for many Christians.  Many Christians are dutiful and faithful, but struggle with contacting God.   It doesn't mention the fact that the Holy Spirit mingles with our human spirit to be one spirit,  (1 Cor 6:17).   It doesn't (unless I missed it) talk about the body of Christ, which is huge. And finally, it neglects to mention John 3, which states  that you must be born anew by Spirit and water in order to see and enter into the kingdom of God. 

 

Once we are  born anew of God (this doesn't have to be dramatic or emotional), the Holy Spirit and our human spirit are mingled/joined, which produces the literal body of Christ on the earth for His expression and to usher in the second coming of Christ.
 

 

 

I think it would be very unlikely that it would include most of those ideas, since the Church in the 6th century did not believe them.


 I like the mind to be a dustbin of scraps of brilliant fabric, odd gems, worthless but fascinating curiosities, tinsel, quaint bits of carving, and a reasonable amount of healthy dirt.
Bluegoat is offline  
#83 of 130 Old 11-20-2010, 11:36 AM
 
EdnaMarie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,148
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

deBut personhood is not a question of function.  Personhood is a concept that is hard to hammer out, but most people would agree that it is self-consciousness.  The "I" so to speak.  If you can think, "I", you're a person.  Or something to that effect.  So I do not think that saying "one God but three Persons, which is to say, functions" is helpful.  Personhood does not have to do with function.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Person#Philosophy  (Though this is philosophy I think the overlap with the theological question of personhood is great enough to be sufficient.)

http://www.kheper.net/topics/person-purusha/definitions.html  (A less analytic, Western version of personhood)

 

So when we say "three persons, one God" we are really saying that that God is not a person.  See what I mean?  God is something else... three Persons.  But what unites those Three Persons (each God in and of Itself)?  Three Gods in One, so to speak.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shami View Post

 

 

ETA:  Edna helped me see my mistake in the bolded sentence.  I should have said, In essence one God, but in function, distinct Persons.



 

Quote:

But - and this is not directed at anyone here, it is just a general observation -   what I find odd is that often people are not interested in that, and yet seem to be annoyed that images about the Trinity as an egg, or as a family, are inadequate.  As if it ought to be simple.  I once had a conversation with a physicist about what bothered me about the idea of entropy.  He said he understood, but the problem was what I was talking about was really only a pale everyday language version of the real model, which was mathematical, and made a lot more sense.  I have no idea if that is true, because I haven't ever done enough mathematics to be able to find out.  But I would be clearly silly to assert that one ought to be able to explain it just as clearly without math, otherwise it couldn't be true. 

 

I am not sure why people think theology must be that way when they don't apply that method to other areas of thought.

 

Give me a mathematical model of the Trinity and I'll buy it.  ;~)

 

My problems are:

It's not expressly stated in the Bible.

There are other equally (and possibly more) compelling interpretations of the Bible.

It is anti-intuitive and there are internal contradictions to it for which we find no parallels in nature (though there are beautiful metaphorical parallels for many of the other mystical events / metaphysical explanations in the Bible).

And most importantly... it is not required for the rest of the story!  It seems totally arbitrary for me.  Jesus could be God the Father--they could be ONE in the truest sense of the word--and there would be no problems with this.

 

That is... provided you take a relative view of time.  However, our deepened understanding of spacetime has not altered at all this cludgy answer to the problem of how Jesus could be God and God could die but at the same time save Himeself.

 

I think that's pretty weak.  We should have another council.


It's not that the stay-at-home-parent gets to stay home with the kids. The kids get to stay home with a parent. Lucky Mom to DD1 (4 y) and DD2 (18 mo), Wife to Mercenary Dad
EdnaMarie is offline  
#84 of 130 Old 11-20-2010, 11:54 AM
 
Shami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Fairborn, Ohio
Posts: 1,270
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluegoat View Post

 

WHOSOEVER would be saved / needeth before all things to hold fast the Catholic Faith.

2 Which Faith except a man keep whole and undefiled, / without doubt he will perish eternally.

3 Now the Catholic Faith is this, / that we worship one God in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity;

4 Neither confusing the Persons, / nor dividing the Substance.

5 For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, / another of the Holy Ghost;

6 But the Godhead of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost is all one, / the glory equal, the majesty co-eternal.

7 Such as the Father is, such is the Son, / and such is the Holy Ghost;

8 The Father uncreated, the Son uncreated, the Holy Ghost uncreated;

9 The Father infinite, the Son infinite, the Holy Ghost infinite;

10 The Father eternal, the Son eternal, the Holy Ghost eternal;

11 And yet there are not three eternals, but one eternal;

12 As also there are not three uncreated, nor three infinites, / but one infinite, and one uncreated.

13 So likewise the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, / the Holy Ghost almighty;

14 And yet there are not three almighties, but one almighty.

15 So the Father is God, the Son God, the Holy Ghost God;

16 And yet there are not three Gods, / but one God.

17 So the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, / the Holy Ghost Lord;

18 And yet there are not three Lords, / but one Lord.

19 For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity / to confess each Person by himself to be both God and Lord;

20 So are we forbidden by the Catholic Religion / to speak of three Gods or three Lords.

21 The Father is made of none, / nor created, nor begotten.

22 The Son is of the Father alone; / not made, nor created, but begotten.

23 The Holy Ghost is of the Father and the Son; / not made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding.

24 There is therefore one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; / one Holy Ghost, not three Holy Ghosts.

25 And in this Trinity there is no before or after, / no greater or less;

26 But all three Persons are co-eternal together, / and co-equal.

27 So that in all ways, as is aforesaid, / both the Trinity is to be worshipped in Unity, and the Unity in Trinity.

28 He therefore that would be saved, / let him thus think of the Trinity.

29 FURTHERMORE, it is necessary to eternal salvation, / that he also believe faithfully the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ.

30 Now the right Faith is that we believe and confess / that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is both God and Man.

31 He is God, of the Substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds; / and he is Man, of the Substance of his Mother, born in the world;

32 Perfect God; / perfect Man, of reasoning soul and human flesh subsisting;

33 Equal to the Father as touching his Godhead;/ less than the Father as touching his Manhood.

34 Who although he be God and Man, / yet he is not two, but is one Christ;

35 One, however, not by conversion of Godhead into flesh, / but by taking of Manhood into God;

36 One altogether; / not by confusion of Substance, but by unity of Person.

37 For as reasoning soul and flesh is one man, so God and Man is one Christ;

38 Who suffered for our salvation, / descended into hell, rose again from the dead;

39 Ascended into heaven, sat down at the right hand of the Father, / from whence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead.

40 At whose coming all men must rise again with their bodies, / and shall give account for their own deeds.

41 And they that have done good will go into life eternal; / they that have done evil into eternal fire.

42 THIS is the Catholic Faith, / which except a man do faithfully and stedfastly believe, he cannot be saved.

GLORY be to the Father, and to the Son, / and to the Holy Ghost;

As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be, / world without end. Amen.

This wasn't tedious at all.  I found most of it very enjoyable.  Then, again, I like declaring the divine facts, or chewing on it so it gets into me more.  It is quite thorough, but, like the Nicene Creed, it falls short of some divine facts. 

 

After ascension, the Lord became a life giving Spirit (1 Cor 15:45), so that, He could enter into man's human spirit.   Knowing that you have a human spirit that can contact God and contain God is the key to experiencing God, which is missing for many Christians.  Many Christians are dutiful and faithful, but struggle with contacting God.   It doesn't mention the fact that the Holy Spirit mingles with our human spirit to be one spirit,  (1 Cor 6:17).   It doesn't (unless I missed it) talk about the body of Christ, which is huge. And finally, it neglects to mention John 3, which states  that you must be born anew by Spirit and water in order to see and enter into the kingdom of God. 

 

Once we are  born anew of God (this doesn't have to be dramatic or emotional), the Holy Spirit and our human spirit are mingled/joined, which produces the literal body of Christ on the earth for His expression and to usher in the second coming of Christ.
 

 

 

I think it would be very unlikely that it would include most of those ideas, since the Church in the 6th century did not believe them.



Precisely my point.  They missed it.  It's there in the Bible, but they missed it.  I don't fault them.  It's just a fact that they missed some crucial aspects of our Christians faith and our experience of that faith.  Now many Christians leave because it's not real to them...they can't contact God because they don't have these crucial divine facts.  It's very unfortunate.


DH, and Me plus baby girl (10/07)
Shami is offline  
#85 of 130 Old 11-20-2010, 11:57 AM
 
Bluegoat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 2,619
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by EdnaMarie View Post

deBut personhood is not a question of function.  Personhood is a concept that is hard to hammer out, but most people would agree that it is self-consciousness.  The "I" so to speak.  If you can think, "I", you're a person.  Or something to that effect.  So I do not think that saying "one God but three Persons, which is to say, functions" is helpful.  Personhood does not have to do with function.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Person#Philosophy  (Though this is philosophy I think the overlap with the theological question of personhood is great enough to be sufficient.)

http://www.kheper.net/topics/person-purusha/definitions.html  (A less analytic, Western version of personhood)

 

So when we say "three persons, one God" we are really saying that that God is not a person.  See what I mean?  God is something else... three Persons.  But what unites those Three Persons (each God in and of Itself)?  Three Gods in One, so to speak.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shami View Post

 

 

ETA:  Edna helped me see my mistake in the bolded sentence.  I should have said, In essence one God, but in function, distinct Persons.



 

Quote:

But - and this is not directed at anyone here, it is just a general observation -   what I find odd is that often people are not interested in that, and yet seem to be annoyed that images about the Trinity as an egg, or as a family, are inadequate.  As if it ought to be simple.  I once had a conversation with a physicist about what bothered me about the idea of entropy.  He said he understood, but the problem was what I was talking about was really only a pale everyday language version of the real model, which was mathematical, and made a lot more sense.  I have no idea if that is true, because I haven't ever done enough mathematics to be able to find out.  But I would be clearly silly to assert that one ought to be able to explain it just as clearly without math, otherwise it couldn't be true. 

 

I am not sure why people think theology must be that way when they don't apply that method to other areas of thought.

 

Give me a mathematical model of the Trinity and I'll buy it.  ;~)

 

My problems are:

It's not expressly stated in the Bible.

There are other equally (and possibly more) compelling interpretations of the Bible.

It is anti-intuitive and there are internal contradictions to it for which we find no parallels in nature (though there are beautiful metaphorical parallels for many of the other mystical events / metaphysical explanations in the Bible).

And most importantly... it is not required for the rest of the story!  It seems totally arbitrary for me.  Jesus could be God the Father--they could be ONE in the truest sense of the word--and there would be no problems with this.

 

That is... provided you take a relative view of time.  However, our deepened understanding of spacetime has not altered at all this cludgy answer to the problem of how Jesus could be God and God could die but at the same time save Himeself.

 

I think that's pretty weak.  We should have another council.



The word person in the theology of the Trinity is equivalent to hypostases.  I don't know if you find that helpful or not, but that is where they are going with it.

 

I'm not sure what you mean by they could be really one?  As far as the various other possibilities, there were reasons those ideas were rejected - most of them cause other kinds of problems.  But it isn't an easy subject to discuss on an internet discussion forum.


 I like the mind to be a dustbin of scraps of brilliant fabric, odd gems, worthless but fascinating curiosities, tinsel, quaint bits of carving, and a reasonable amount of healthy dirt.
Bluegoat is offline  
#86 of 130 Old 11-20-2010, 12:26 PM
 
imagine21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Posts: 474
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:

 

My honest question is: why would you want to be a Christian if you don't believe in Christ?

 

 


This

imagine21 is offline  
#87 of 130 Old 11-20-2010, 12:47 PM
 
Shami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Fairborn, Ohio
Posts: 1,270
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by EdnaMarie View Post
*snip*

 

That is... provided you take a relative view of time.  However, our deepened understanding of spacetime has not altered at all this cludgy answer to the problem of how Jesus could be God and God could die but at the same time save Himeself.

 

I think that's pretty weak.  We should have another council.

 

This is how it was explained to me.  You probably already know that Jesus has two natures, divinity and humanity.  Colossians says that all the fullness of the Godhead dwells in Him bodily.  And John says that the Word became flesh and tabernacled among us.  You also probably know that Jesus had no sin even though He was tempted by the devil himself. 

 

When Jesus went to the cross, God put all of the sin of the world on Jesus and terminated it in His humanity.  His divinity did not die.  Jesus did not save Himself because He was sent to carry out the will of the Father.  So, when Jesus cried out from the cross, My God, My God, why have you forsaken me, that may have been the point where God put all the sin of the world on Jesus.  Since God can not have anything to do with sin/darkness, maybe God had to forsake Jesus just for that purpose, to terminate/deal with sin.  I emphasize "may have" because I don't think anyone can know this for certain.  It did make sense to me as a possible explanation for why God would have forsaken Jesus.
 


DH, and Me plus baby girl (10/07)
Shami is offline  
#88 of 130 Old 11-20-2010, 01:57 PM
 
EdnaMarie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,148
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


No, that is not helpful, because it comes back to the question of what "three and one of the same thing at the same time" means.

 

A being is a being is a being.  If each Person is a Hypostasis, then God is also a Hypostasis, non?

 

I don't see how it could not be discussed on the Internet.  It was discussed by letters in the first place.

 

And the resolution of the problem of how God could save Himself (which was one reason that three Persons and distinct beings was originally postulated) using relative spacetime was not considered in the fourth century--Augustine was just a little too late, unfortunately.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluegoat View Post





The word person in the theology of the Trinity is equivalent to hypostases.  I don't know if you find that helpful or not, but that is where they are going with it.

 

I'm not sure what you mean by they could be really one?  As far as the various other possibilities, there were reasons those ideas were rejected - most of them cause other kinds of problems.  But it isn't an easy subject to discuss on an internet discussion forum.


It's not that the stay-at-home-parent gets to stay home with the kids. The kids get to stay home with a parent. Lucky Mom to DD1 (4 y) and DD2 (18 mo), Wife to Mercenary Dad
EdnaMarie is offline  
#89 of 130 Old 11-20-2010, 04:59 PM
 
Bluegoat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 2,619
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by EdnaMarie View Post


No, that is not helpful, because it comes back to the question of what "three and one of the same thing at the same time" means.

 

A being is a being is a being.  If each Person is a Hypostasis, then God is also a Hypostasis, non?

 

I don't see how it could not be discussed on the Internet.  It was discussed by letters in the first place.

 

And the resolution of the problem of how God could save Himself (which was one reason that three Persons and distinct beings was originally postulated) using relative spacetime was not considered in the fourth century--Augustine was just a little too late, unfortunately.

 

 

 

Re hypostasis - no.  I don't think the early Christians who developed the formula would say that.  But if you don't find it clarifies the meaning of persons for you, then that is fine.  I thought it might be helpful in clarifying what was meant by the use of the word "person" which is really not quite equivalent.

 

I don't find that it is very easy to get in depth information like this on the Internet, or at least in forums.  It is really too broken up and fragmentary.  If you just want to argue or discuss particular points it is OK, but not to really learn in depth about a complicated topic.  You may find that isn't so for you, but I find attempts seem to wander all over the place.

 

I disagree about relative space time.  What is it you feel we know now that is relevant and that the ancients didn't know?  I am also not sure what you think Augustine was too late for.
 


 I like the mind to be a dustbin of scraps of brilliant fabric, odd gems, worthless but fascinating curiosities, tinsel, quaint bits of carving, and a reasonable amount of healthy dirt.
Bluegoat is offline  
#90 of 130 Old 11-20-2010, 05:16 PM
 
Shami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Fairborn, Ohio
Posts: 1,270
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

idea.gif  Yep.  Me too Genifer.  I can't tell you how many times I tried to read Genesis Chapters 1 and 2 and went away feeling so confused and bummed.  I think it's like reading in the the dark.  It seems like once Jesus became real to me, then the Bible came alive.  I still have things I wonder about, but the difference is night and day.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by genifer View Post

Whats more Shami, is that one cannot understand any of that unless they are born of the Spirit, or as we like to say 'Born Again'. I found that very interesting to read and thought it pretty much made perfect sense to me. I get it. Before I was saved, before I accepted Jesus as my Saviour, I simply could not. I understand how it could seem nonsense to some, but I get it.


 


DH, and Me plus baby girl (10/07)
Shami is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off