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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Yes Scot, I think we know that. It was after all the Roman Catholics that thought it up about 300 years after the crucifixion. So the first 300 years (which is a lot of generations in those days) took place without this concept at all!Scott1 said:OOOH! OOOH!
We do.....:shout
Aqualung said:LDS and JW at least don't.[
thank you, it is a very strange concept. How do both of these traditions you mention reconcile the relationship then between God, Jesus, and the Holly Ghost, bearing in mind there is only one God.
Hogwash.... the divinity of Christ was proclaimed from the begining of the Church... the formal defintion may have come at a later date, but writings from early Church fathers (Tertullian, Justin, Tatian the Syrian, Athenagoras, Ignatius of Antioch) show the foundation of Trinitarian theology before the close of the year 200AD.Merlin said:Yes Scot, I think we know that. It was after all the Roman Catholics that thought it up about 300 years after the crucifixion. So the first 300 years (which is a lot of generations in those days) took place without this concept at all!
Well, that is slightly confusing in the names, but as long as you all know who you are it will be okay.Maize said:Unitarian Christians, (not to be confused with Unitarian Universalists) do not.
Merlin said:We look at God the Father as THE God. The New Testament calls Jesus God and at the same time we find Jesus calling His Father the only God. We tend to think of "God" as more a title than a name, and the "Godhead" fits better for me. They are all members of the Godhead and all carry the title God, but God the Father is the one referred to when generally speaking of God. There is only one God the Father, but the Bible is repleat with other mentions of people carrying the title god. Some insist that they are lowercase and are therefore different, but the Hebrew words are identical - eloheim. There is one Godhead, and it is made up of three individuals. They are all one in purpose, will and perfection; but they are seperate and distinct entities.Aqualung said:LDS and JW at least don't.[
thank you, it is a very strange concept. How do both of these traditions you mention reconcile the relationship then between God, Jesus, and the Holly Ghost, bearing in mind there is only one God.
Well, I'm not quite sure what the Holly ghost is ...Merlin said:thank you, it is a very strange concept. How do both of these traditions you mention reconcile the relationship then between God, Jesus, and the Holly Ghost, bearing in mind there is only one God.
Merlin said:Well, that is slightly confusing in the names, but as long as you all know who you are it will be okay.
How do you reconcile the relationship then between God, Jesus, and the Holly Ghost, bearing in mind there is only one God.
That seems to have struck a raw nerve, Scott. It was not intended to offend. I did not think there was any doubt that the Trinity was formally defined in 325 AD. Yes, everybody accepts that things were written down possibly as early as 160 AD, and that is why it had to be resolved at the council in 325.Scott1 said:Hogwash.... the divinity of Christ was proclaimed from the begining of the Church... the formal defintion may have come at a later date, but writings from early Church fathers (Tertullian, Justin, Tatian the Syrian, Athenagoras, Ignatius of Antioch) show the foundation of Trinitarian theology before the close of the year 200AD.
Ok Merlin, I'm hesitant in quoting early church fathers concering the Trinity in the first 300 years because I'm not sure what good it will do. I would say that I think matters of highly abstract, difficult philosophical theology concerning the Trinity would not be something everybody fully understands how it works. What is it exactly that you are looking for a early writer to say? That Christ is God?It was after all the Roman Catholics that thought it up about 300 years after the crucifixion. So the first 300 years (which is a lot of generations in those days) took place without this concept at all!
You got me there Maize. I know less than nothing about your faith, so I do not know if you even believe in Jesus Christ, therefore I cannot know whether the question is sensible for you?Maize said:
Are you asking me as a UU or do you want the Unitarian Christian response? And the names are not confusing at all if you understand the movements' history.
Nah... was it the "hogwash" comment? I just like to say that.Merlin said:That seems to have struck a raw nerve, Scott.
Earlier...Yes, everybody accepts that things were written down possibly as early as 160 AD, and that is why it had to be resolved at the council in 325.
Merlin said:You got me there Maize. I know less than nothing about your faith, so I do not know if you even believe in Jesus Christ, therefore I cannot know whether the question is sensible for you?
If you do, do you believe He was divine?
I am not inventing a question here, Victor. If there had not been a serious semantic difficulty, the learned people of the day would not have made the difficult journey to attend the council. I am sure you will also agree it is a difficult concept. Even today not everybody accepts it.Victor said:Ok Merlin, I'm hesitant in quoting early church fathers concering the Trinity in the first 300 years because I'm not sure what good it will do. I would say that I think matters of highly abstract, difficult philosophical theology concerning the Trinity would not be something everybody fully understands how it works. What is it exactly that you are looking for a early writer to say? That Christ is God?
~Victor
OK, when the Gospel becomes "highly abstract, difficult philosophical theology" it's usually because someone's trying to justify a doctrine that is not true. I've read all the creeds, I've seen the explanations, and it's a jumble of contradictions and flowery prose meant to do nothing but confuse, thus the layman is unworthy of figuring out spiritual affairs in that he cannot understand this doctrine - he had better not worry about reading the Bible or trying to understand it; it would be better for him to just listen to whatever his minister tells him. I believe that was the logic that spawned the reformation (amidst other things, of course). If the Catholic church ahd it her way we would still be without Bibles, listening to a minister tell us that it says this and this is what it means, but all in Latin. Funny how the universal church of Christ couldn't even salvage its own language.Victor said:I would say that I think matters of highly abstract, difficult philosophical theology concerning the Trinity would not be something everybody fully understands how it works.
And note that the word Elohim is plural if I'm not mistaken.Dan said:Some insist that they are lowercase and are therefore different, but the Hebrew words are identical - eloheim.
Sounds very festive to me... I can't wait for the Holidays!Aqualung said:Well, I'm not quite sure what the Holly ghost is ...
You are not mistaken. Fascinating isn't it?jonny said:And note that the word Elohim is plural if I'm not mistaken.