-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The Trinity
- Thread starter Atruthseeker
- Start date
Jordan St. Francis
Well-Known Member
I didn't disagree with Sojourner.
kepha31
Active Member
Children are full of imagination. Religion utilizes the imagination, some more than others.
From the role of the monks to art and architecture, from the university to Western law, from science to charitable work, from international law to economics, How the Catholic Church Built Western Civilization delves into just how indebted we are as a civilization to the Catholic Church, whether we realize it or not.
How the Catholic Church Built Western Civilization
That is not what wikipedia says. Read your own quote:
The Trinity did not "came about almost the same time as a canonized standard NT" It was CLARIFIED. Big difference. You make it sound like Nicae invented the Trinity.
Key word "developed". But I don't expect you to understand what we mean by "development of doctrine" so I will explain it to you.
By development of doctrine, we mean that some divinely revealed truth
has become more deeply understood and more clearly perceived than it
had been before. Under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, whom Christ
promised to send to teach us, the Church comes to see more deeply
what she had always believed, and the resulting insights find
expression in devotion of the faithful that may have been quite
uncommon in the Church's previous history. The whole spectrum of
Christology and Mariology has witnessed such dogmatic progress.
Adoration of the Eucharist, therefore, is simply another, though
dramatic, example of doctrinal development.
Always implied in such progress is that, objectively, the revealed
truth remains constant and unchanged. But through the light of the
Holy Spirit, the subjective understanding of the truth becomes more
clear, its meaning becomes more certain and its grasp by the
believing mind becomes increasingly more firm.
http://www.ewtn.com/library/homelibr/historea.txt
Jordan St. Francis
Well-Known Member
Well, I would say the definition of the Trinity evolved out of reflections on the many contours and facets of the Christian experience and memory as preserved, remembered and lived in the Church and Her people.
It emerged from speculation, from prayer, from a desire to better formulate the message of the Christian Church that, as Israel's heir and Israel's universalization, has always proclaimed alongside it "Hear O Israel, the Lord your God, the Lord is one".
What to do with this twofold conviction? That God is one, yet in this person, "the stone that has become the capstone", the "fullness of the Deity dwells in bodily form" or that "though He was in the form of God, he did not regard his equality with God a thing to be grasped."
Who is this person who promises his abiding presence forever, saying "Lo, I am with you, even unto the end of the age" or appears invisibly within us and between us, as "where two or three gather in my name, I am there" or who declares He is the very image of the Unseen,"He who has seen me has seen the Father", or that He alone is the way to being saved, "abide in Me", that we must bring Him inside us and become Him, "unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood, you have no life in you".
What to do with the actions and promises of Jesus which appear to us, in every way, identical with the action of God Himself, God who alone is Israel's Redeemer, Saviour, Bridegroom, Kyrios, Adonai, Lord? Yes, God has used human beings and angelic creatures to bear his word, but what does it mean to say that now the messenger is identical to the message
The Trinity arises out of asking questions like this, and others like "what is the nature of redemption?" How exactly does the Incarnation, (The Word became flesh and dwelt among us), help us or save us?
Of course, these are by no means the only considerations. I won't deny that there may have been political concerns as well. Such is the nature of the Christian Church, though a pilgrim on her way, fed from heaven and marching towards an otherwordly end, she must also eat of the stuff of history and culture and is never encountered as an abstract, apolitical, ahistorical institution.
Ultimately, I am convinced that if one, neglecting faith, examined the content of the Christianity of the first four centuries, one will see ample germs and seedlings of Nicea. It is the Church who, once and for all, bound the Christian people who do have faith to this Trinitarian understanding through the divine authority and with the divine assistance promised to her.
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
So which church is he talking about?
Jordan St. Francis
Well-Known Member
I believe he is Anglican. On many issues, his views and mine are similar or the same. For example, Anglicans accept the Seven Ecumenical Councils as normative for the understanding of Revelation.
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Well that's part of the problem right there, saying "the church" has authority on such and such matter is far too vague.
Of course I'm going to disagree with a statement like that, regardless of My own beliefs.
outhouse
Atheistically
what I see is a religion desperatley grasping at a method to keep their monotheistic values.
They knew they had a good thing and didnt want to revert backwards by breaking the monotheistic tradition.
They created a problem when the NT and jesus came to be, and in my opinion its not settled,, or defined properly for even a grade school child when fully religious and christian witnessed the issue and called them on it. The first time I heard someone explain the trinity was a nail in the coffin. Simular to seeing dad putting presents under the tree late at night spoiled santa.
it doesnt stand on its own and its obviously not a real attempt to define a deity no one knows anything about.
there is a father and there is a son, they are not the same NOR were they ever written the same in fact gospels state the exact opposite.
outhouse
Atheistically
No I rejected the bible as being truthfull as a child. I still held onto faith but it was slowly lost as I became more educated. Only with my historical religious education do I look at the abraham god as a complete fabrication by ancient hebrews. This picture to me is crystal clear. Im afraid there is no turning back once you have a true picture of the history
No one really wants to believe santa isnt real, but one day you wake up.
outhouse
Atheistically
its not just a metaphor. Its someone telling me what I should teach my children and their children.
I will not misinform a stranger let alone family
Jordan St. Francis
Well-Known Member
Well, I am not asking you to accept the Trinitarian doctrine as true or to accept the authority of the Church. I am only arguing that the relationship between the Father and Son in scripture, early tradition and early theology makes the Trinity one possible interpretation of the data.
The Scriptures are not God's theology manual to us.
If one doesn't believe in God, of course, you will only see a schizophrenic, purely human text and you will explain it that way, and you should be wary if you start to think, on these premises, it says or means any one thing.
It is only belief in God that can take up the words of the Bible into the Word.
In like way, it is belief/ love/ adoration that turns the many into the one,
the grains into bread,
gives to unity fragmentation
turns discord into diversity.
Like in Christ, the divinity is veiled in the humanity,
In the Eucharist, the Body and Blood veiled in the appearance of bread and wine,
In the Cross, triumph and victory veiled in the image of shame and defeat,
In Christ, riches and treasures and strength veiled in poverty and meekness---the King appearing as a servant...
So, in the Scriptures, it is behind the human hand, within human activity, that we see the Spirit of God at work.
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
I thought we were talking about the trinity.
outhouse
Atheistically
I was going to agree but there is scripture that goes against the whole concept of the trinity, maybe 10 -20 pages back you will see the passage.
Im listening. what are they bud?
for me I dont believe there is no god, I know. Big difference. With a little history work on ancient hebrew culture and how the semetic speaking people migrated to the holy land and soon after created a deity and religion, based on previous gods and theistic values from previous religions in the levant and threw it all in a melting pot and after 250 years as a culture. They started writing about their gods.
so in your premise/context that I dont believe, I still dont think like that. I know and have lived the positive value's in the book.
the divinity is also veiled in reality.
I like that
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
In a theological debate, if my opinions have a more solid theological ground, then yes.
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
How? He's not part of the church. He doesn't believe in God. Therefore, he has nothing to do with the constructs of God -- nor does he have any real voice in either adding to or subtracting from those constructs. It's like saying that those who live in the United States who dis the laws of the USSR negate their authority, when that clearly is not the case.:cover:
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
They aren't going to listen...
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
A pretty large indicator that, perhaps, you don't know what you're talking about when it comes to arguing the Trinity...
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
And after you wake up, hopefully you grow up and realize that Santa is real as an attitude and as an avatar for fostering hope, wonder and joy.