-
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 Holy Foursome?
- Thread starter Eddi
- Start date
There was a heresy in the Middle Ages that did tend in the direction of a sort of divine "quaternity" of Father, Son, Holy Spirit and "essence".
The Fathers of the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215 decisively and unilaterally rejected this notion as being well beyond the pale of Christian orthodoxy, not least because it offends the unicity of God having one single, undivided divine essence which each of the three just is whole, entire and undivided: three "distinct manners of subsisting" of that same divine essence, entity, being and mind in relation to Itself.
A few excerpts:
Fourth Lateran Council : 1215 Council Fathers - Papal Encyclicals
We firmly believe and simply confess that there is only one true God, eternal and immeasurable, almighty, unchangeable, incomprehensible and ineffable, Father, Son and holy Spirit, three persons but one absolutely simple essence, substance or nature {1} .
The Father is from none, the Son from the Father alone, and the holy Spirit from both equally, eternally without beginning or end; the Father generating, the Son being born, and the holy Spirit proceeding; consubstantial and coequal, co-omnipotent and coeternal; one principle of all things, creator of all things invisible and visible, spiritual and corporeal; who by his almighty power at the beginning of time created from nothing both spiritual and corporeal creatures...
This holy Trinity, which is undivided according to its common essence but distinct according to the properties of its persons...
He asserts from this that Peter Lombard ascribes to God not so much a Trinity as a quaternity, that is to say three persons and a common essence as if this were a fourth person...
We, however, with the approval of this sacred and universal council, believe and confess with Peter Lombard that there exists a certain supreme reality, incomprehensible and ineffable, which truly is the Father and the Son and the holy Spirit, the three persons together and each one of them separately. Therefore in God there is only a Trinity, not a quaternity, since each of the three persons is that reality — that is to say substance, essence or divine nature-which alone is the principle of all things, besides which no other principle can be found. This reality neither begets nor is begotten nor proceeds; the Father begets, the Son is begotten and the holy Spirit proceeds.
The Father is from none, the Son from the Father alone, and the holy Spirit from both equally, eternally without beginning or end; the Father generating, the Son being born, and the holy Spirit proceeding; consubstantial and coequal, co-omnipotent and coeternal; one principle of all things, creator of all things invisible and visible, spiritual and corporeal; who by his almighty power at the beginning of time created from nothing both spiritual and corporeal creatures...
This holy Trinity, which is undivided according to its common essence but distinct according to the properties of its persons...
He asserts from this that Peter Lombard ascribes to God not so much a Trinity as a quaternity, that is to say three persons and a common essence as if this were a fourth person...
We, however, with the approval of this sacred and universal council, believe and confess with Peter Lombard that there exists a certain supreme reality, incomprehensible and ineffable, which truly is the Father and the Son and the holy Spirit, the three persons together and each one of them separately. Therefore in God there is only a Trinity, not a quaternity, since each of the three persons is that reality — that is to say substance, essence or divine nature-which alone is the principle of all things, besides which no other principle can be found. This reality neither begets nor is begotten nor proceeds; the Father begets, the Son is begotten and the holy Spirit proceeds.
There is nothing else that one could construe a "fourth" relation in God from in Christian theology or scriptural exegesis that I can think of, or else I'm sure theologians in the Patristic era would have teased it out.
In the one supreme reality of God for Christians there is essence, attributes and relations of the one essence to itself. And the Christian tradition has been clear and unvarying since the Patristic age that there is but one and only one divine essence/being and three and only three relations of that selfsame Being to Itself.
So, in brief, it's not an "open" question from the standpoint of Christian orthodoxy.
Brian2
Veteran Member
Baha'u'llah of the Baha'i faith claims to be the Glory of God and says that he is a manifestation of God and that Jesus is also a manifestation of God. A manifestation of God in the Baha'i sense however does not seem to be the same thing as being in the Godhead.
Logically it is the disciples of Jesus (“Christian”), who according to the Bible are also one with God.
that they may all be one; even as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be one in us; that the world may believe that you sent me.
John 17:21
SeekerOnThePath
On a mountain between Nietzsche and Islam
I've got better:
- The Mother Of God (Mary)
- The Father
- The Holy Spirit/Shekinah/Sophia
- YHWH
- Satan
- The Son (Christ)
- The Bride Of Christ (all of humanity)
The 7inity.
They are all we can know of God. Even the Manifestation does not know the Essence of God.
The first cause sent out from God is the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit is all the Names of God, all the Messengers, the First and Last, Beginning and End, Alpha and Omega.
This passage says it in detail;
"... The Bearers of the Trust of God are made manifest unto the peoples of the earth as the Exponents of a new Cause and the Revealers of a new Message. Inasmuch as these Birds of the celestial Throne are all sent down from the heaven of the Will of God, and as they all arise to proclaim His irresistible Faith, they, therefore, are regarded as one soul and the same person. For they all drink from the one Cup of the love of God, and all partake of the fruit of the same Tree of Oneness.
These Manifestations of God have each a twofold station. One is the station of pure abstraction and essential unity. In this respect, if thou callest them all by one name, and dost ascribe to them the same attributes, thou hast not erred from the truth. Even as He hath revealed: “No distinction do We make between any of His Messengers.” For they, one and all, summon the people of the earth to acknowledge the unity of God, and herald unto them the Kawthar of an infinite grace and bounty. They are all invested with the robe of prophethood, and are honored with the mantle of glory. Thus hath Muḥammad, the Point of the Qur’án, revealed: “I am all the Prophets.” Likewise, He saith: “I am the first Adam, Noah, Moses, and Jesus.” Similar statements have been made by Imám ‘Alí. Sayings such as these, which indicate the essential unity of those Exponents of Oneness, have also emanated from the Channels of God’s immortal utterance, and the Treasuries of the gems of Divine knowledge, and have been recorded in the Scriptures. These Countenances are the recipients of the Divine Command, and the Day Springs of His Revelation. This Revelation is exalted above the veils of plurality and the exigencies of number. Thus He saith: “Our Cause is but One.” Inasmuch as the Cause is one and the same, the Exponents thereof also must needs be one and the same. Likewise, the Imáms of the Muḥammadan Faith, those lamps of certitude, have said: “Muḥammad is our first, Muḥammad is our last, Muḥammad our all.”
The Father is but a Name, a Tiltle just as was the Son of God. Thus Baha'u'llah Is the Father, the Glory of God, as promised by the Son Christ.
Regards Tony
What's the difference?
SeekerOnThePath
On a mountain between Nietzsche and Islam
Christians themselves are not unanimous about whether YHWH is the Father or the Son. Some say YHWH is the Son, others say YHWH is the Father.
Christian theology nonetheless usually tries pretty hard to swerve around dealing with HaShem anyway.
Brian2
Veteran Member
Logically it is the disciples of Jesus (“Christian”), who according to the Bible are also one with God.
that they may all be one; even as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be one in us; that the world may believe that you sent me.
John 17:21
The disciples of Jesus are one with each other, not with God.
Brian2
Veteran Member
Jesus has the name YHWH and also the Father and Holy Spirit.
Brian2
Veteran Member
The Son reveals the Father to us and so knows the Father fully.
The Father is the actual Father of His Son. They are more than titles.
Jesus did not promise anything about the coming of Baha'u'llah.
Baha'u'llah is not the Father, the Father is God. It is the Son who reveals the Father to people. Nobody can come to the Father except through the Son. (John 14:6)
Claims that Jesus prophesied Baha'u'llah are useless is the prophecies you point to do not actually say what you claim they do.
Jesus says in John 17:21 “they also may be one in us”. What do you think it means, if not “one with God”?
I see the Father Jesus the Christ was talking about, is God, as revealed through the Manifestation of Baha'u'llah.
We have no direct knowledge of God by via the Holy Spirit and that Holy Spirit is all the Names of God, which God sends in all the Names of the Messengers.
I see that was why Muhammed was seen as the seal of the Prophets after Christ known as the Son of God. All the Messages up to Muhammad were preparing us for the Day of God, when the Father would be with us, God's Kingdom on Earth as it is in Heaven, etc.
Baha'u'llah which means the Glory of God, or Glory of the Lord, came as the Father, Baha'u'llah is Christ in the promised New Name, who brought the New Jerusalem and now sends the law out from Zion from the Arc of the Covernant from Mt Carmel.
What you can consider Brian2, if you so wish to, is how did both the Islamic Faith and the Baha'i Faith come forever part of the promise of Israel, if they are not of God. How is it they for with Bible Prophecy, just as easy as Christianity, if they are not of God.
God works His plan, as God so chooses and we must ask our own selves as to why most of us miss the Glory of God, in every age God gives a Messenger, that is given of God, with a new Name and new law.
Regards Tony
Agreed. I see that as 100% True
More than happy to show you they do point to Baha'u'llah.
It is also logical the Son returns as the Father. What we talk about here is the Holy Spirit that comes in a New Name. Why a New name is required is that God sends the Holy Spirit in a New Human Body.
The biggest issue for Christians and many Muslims is they expect the exact same Jesus to return. That will never happen.
I see many Hindu and Buddhist will not have such a barrier, their barrier is tied in with man's concepts of reincarnation, which Baha'u'llah has said is the return of spiritual attributes.
Always happy to discuss, only if you are interested, if not, best we leave it alone.
Regards Tony
I see Peter had the correct veiw of who Jesus was and Jesus said it was that view of which the Church would be built.
Matthew 16:13-20, Mark 8:27–30 and Luke 9:18–20.
Mathew tells the story more vividly.
"... 13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?
14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.
15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."
Notice Peter knew Jesus was Christ, Christ means Annointed One, Jesus was Annointed with the Holy Spirit and that is why Jesus was the Christ the Son.
Notice the Father, Baha'u'llah is in heaven and Jesus is yet to send the Father.
Look at Acts 7:55 for the concept,
"... But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God."
The Glory of God (Baha'u'llah) and Jesus (Christ) on the right of God.
The spiritual worlds can only be explained in material metaphors, thus a big topic, a wonderful topic.
God bless and Regards Tony
syo
Well-Known Member
I don't see there is a reason for a forth element.
Brian2
Veteran Member
That Christians are united by the Holy Spirit into one Church, one Body of Christ.
Brian2
Veteran Member
Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. Jesus was the Christ because He was chosen by God to be the Christ to save the whole world from their sins. There are no series of Christs. Jesus was the Christ before He was anointed with the Holy Spirit, it is just who He is.
Baha'u'llah made up a story that Jesus promised his coming when what He promised was the coming of the Holy Spirit. That promise was fulfilled at Pentecost about 7 weeks after Jesus was killed.
The promise Baha'u'llah wants to twist is in John's gospel and is easy to see cannot refer to Baha'u'llah if you want to look with me at what Jesus said about the Spirit of Truth and the Comforter and the Holy Spirit in John 14,15 and 16. It is easy to see there that the Holy Spirit is the Comforter and in the Spirit of Truth and He is promised to the disciples Jesus was speaking to and that He would be with them always and remind them of what Jesus had said to them.
Baha'u'llah was just a man and was not even in existence when Jesus was on earth, and there are no Biblical prophecies about him.
The idea of the "Glory of God" being a person was not meant at Acts 7:55. Read the next verse and you will see that.
Acts 17:55 But Stephen, full of the Holy Spirit, looked intently into heaven and saw the glory of God and Jesus standing at the right hand of God. 56 “Look,” he said, “I see heaven open and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God.”
Brian2
Veteran Member
Please do.
Jesus did say that He would return.
John 14:3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come back and take you to be with me that you also may be where I am.
This is not the only place that Jesus promised that. Most other places have "the Son of Man" instead of Jesus and Baha'is want to say that this refers to Baha'u'llah even though Jesus identified Himself as the Son of Man.
There are even more places in the New Testament Epistles and Acts and Revelations where Jesus is mentioned specifically to be returning.