"One God in three Persons" is heresy?? since when?

[Cshuffle777]

God the Son is infinite and not human

What? I thought He was both completely human and completely divine, given to the human race forever.

 

[BobRyan]

What? I thought He was both completely human and completely divine, given to the human race forever.

That is His nature now - but before the incarnation He had no human nature.

 

[colen]

It would for humans - but God the Son is infinite and not human , not a creature, not created.

My Father was not infinite, was not God, was created... But if I try to impose those constraints on God the Father it is not a valid assumption.

What I say is that among the 3 they have relationship with each other in the form that they describe. You are trying to add extension and inference into the title "God the Son" in terms of physical birth that does not apply any more than "baby god" applies. you are still stuck trying to force all the human limits on the title of God the Son

So Jesus was always God the Son but was never begotten before? But then why was/is he called "Son"? Why should someone who has always existed be called "Son"?
Well, I believe that he was called "Son of God" only at his incarnation.

 

[th1bill]

Context: The assumption for this thread is that everyone agrees that the doctrine of the Trinity is correct:

So then - what does the "Catholic Herald" mean when it uses the term "trinity"?? (if someone knows ... please share with us)

Specifically on this thread --- What do you mean by that term "Trinity" when you use it?
===============================

In the article below it appears that at least the "Catholic Herald" does not accept the One God (Deut 6:4) in three persons (Matthew 28:19) definition.

Jan 9.. 2020 "Heretic of the week" article at Catholic Herald
Appears to object to the following:
"three separate Divine Persons rather than the orthodox doctrine of Trinity;"
Heretic of the week: Ellen G White - Catholic Herald

How about you? Do you accept the "three persons" aspect of the term "Trinity" or do you use/believe/accept something else as the correct definition for the term "Trinity"?

This is such an abused subject among folks counting themselves in the Ground Pounding Mighty Men of YHWH! Please note; Right upfront that the only thing I know about this subject is pure Scriptural Knowledge and because that knowledge is breathed to the Pens Men by YHWH and because He is all-mighty, perfect, and is able to do anything, His knowledge is being preserved. All of my versions agree that we serve One God, YHWH, that is revealed in three persons.

Can I explain this concept? Am I something that I can confront YHWH, Yashua ha'Mashiah, and Ruach? I can not explain the ideas and inner workings but because I have the Word of My Creator that it is Truth and that without the belief in that fact there is no salvation... I believe and I do not attempt to pour into this truth the things of my lying lips.

It is so simple I have watched children grow up with the Saving Knowledge some of my adult friends long for.

 

[Cshuffle777]

That is His nature now - but before the incarnation He had no human nature.

The word "nature" gets tossed about entirely too much, IMO. What Christ had both before and after the incarnation is and was too wonderful to be pigeon-holed by a word like "nature." "Essence" is bad enough (if not worse). In these discussions, the point is quickly reached when everyone needs to remove their sandals.

 

[Cshuffle777]

It's why we have the ridiculous, unresolved pre-fall/post-fall debate. (Not to mention that perfect sinlessness in Heaven and in Eden proved to be of no advantage whatsoever in overcoming sin.)

 

[colen]

The title "God the Son" is a reference to the way HE chooses to describe His way of relating to the Father and the Holy Spirit.

An almighty God who always existed describes himself to another almighty God who always existed as a son?

 

[BobRyan]

So Jesus was always God the Son but was never begotten before? .

another interesting "why is God thinking what He is thinking" sort of post

hmmm maybe... because... as God... He knew the future.??

 

[ViaCrucis]

Jesus only became the "Son of God" when he became a man, but what was he before and who?

He was always the eternal and only-begotten Son of the Father, the very Word of God without beginning, uncreated, of one Being with the Father as God of God. He didn't become the Son, He is, from all eternity, the only-begotten Son of the unbegotten Father.

-CrypoLutheran

 

[ViaCrucis]

An almighty God who always existed describes himself to another almighty God who always existed as a son?

Each is the same Almighty God.

This is not the place to debate the Trinity, the rules of General Theology state that participants here agree with the Nicene Creed.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[ViaCrucis]

Context: The assumption for this thread is that everyone agrees that the doctrine of the Trinity is correct:

So then - what does the "Catholic Herald" mean when it uses the term "trinity"?? (if someone knows ... please share with us)

Specifically on this thread --- What do you mean by that term "Trinity" when you use it?
===============================

In the article below it appears that at least the "Catholic Herald" does not accept the One God (Deut 6:4) in three persons (Matthew 28:19) definition.

Jan 9.. 2020 "Heretic of the week" article at Catholic Herald
Appears to object to the following:
"three separate Divine Persons rather than the orthodox doctrine of Trinity;"
Heretic of the week: Ellen G White - Catholic Herald

How about you? Do you accept the "three persons" aspect of the term "Trinity" or do you use/believe/accept something else as the correct definition for the term "Trinity"?

==========================

We believe in one living and true God who is the Creator of heaven and earth; who is eternal, almighty, unchangeable, infinitely powerful, wise, just and holy.

We believe that the one God eternally exists in three Persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit; and that these three are one God, co-equal and co-eternal, having precisely the same nature and attributes Matthew 3:16, 17; Matthew 28:19, 20; Mark 12:29; John 1:14; Acts 5:3, 4; II Corinthians 13:14.

My suspicion is the phrasing "separate Persons". The Trinity is not three separate Persons, but three distinct Persons. The Persons are not separate, but they are distinct.

That might sound pedantic to some, but it is a pretty critical point to make. There is no separation in the Trinity; but there is a distinction between the three Hypostases in that the Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Father, etc. But the Son is never separate from the Father, because of the essential unity of the undivided Being and the perichoresis of the Three Divine Persons.

They are distinct, but never separate.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[HARK!]

He was always the eternal and only-begotten Son of the Father, the very Word of God without beginning, uncreated, of one Being with the Father as God of God. He didn't become the Son, He is, from all eternity, the only-begotten Son of the unbegotten Father.

-CrypoLutheran

(CLV) Hb 1:5
For to whom of the messengers said He at any time, "My Son art Thou! I, today, have begotten Thee"? And again, "I shall be to Him for a Father And He shall be to Me for a Son"?


What day does eternity fall on?

 

[Pavel Mosko]

Context: The assumption for this thread is that everyone agrees that the doctrine of the Trinity is correct:

So then - what does the "Catholic Herald" mean when it uses the term "trinity"?? (if someone knows ... please share with us)

Specifically on this thread --- What do you mean by that term "Trinity" when you use it?
===============================

In the article below it appears that at least the "Catholic Herald" does not accept the One God (Deut 6:4) in three persons (Matthew 28:19) definition.

Jan 9.. 2020 "Heretic of the week" article at Catholic Herald
Appears to object to the following:
"three separate Divine Persons rather than the orthodox doctrine of Trinity;"
Heretic of the week: Ellen G White - Catholic Herald

How about you? Do you accept the "three persons" aspect of the term "Trinity" or do you use/believe/accept something else as the correct definition for the term "Trinity"?

==========================

We believe in one living and true God who is the Creator of heaven and earth; who is eternal, almighty, unchangeable, infinitely powerful, wise, just and holy.

We believe that the one God eternally exists in three Persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit; and that these three are one God, co-equal and co-eternal, having precisely the same nature and attributes Matthew 3:16, 17; Matthew 28:19, 20; Mark 12:29; John 1:14; Acts 5:3, 4; II Corinthians 13:14.

Your post was confusing because people in general have used "Trinity" to mean 3 persons in one Godhead. OF course, people would often use the Greek word hypostasis rather than person for exactness if they wanted to be really picky about using the original Greek terms etc. that are a little more exact.


The real problem of things comes from talking about Ellen White. She was advocating for something called Unitarianism according to the old definition of that terms, which would be called Arianism according to Early Church definitions. And Arianism is a bit different than most definitions of Trinitarianism.


Arianism - Wikipedia


Unitarianism - Wikipedia

Unitarianism (from Latin unitas "unity, oneness", from unus "one") is a Christian theological movement named for its belief that the God in Christianity is one person, as opposed to the Trinity (tri- from Latin tres "three") which in most other branches of Christianity defines God as one being in three persons: the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.[1] Unitarian Christians, therefore, believe that Jesus was inspired by God in his moral teachings, and he is a savior,[2][3] but he was not a deity or God incarnate. As is typical of dissenters, Unitarianism does not constitute one single Christian denomination, but rather refers to a collection of both existing and extinct Christian groups, whether historically related to each other or not, which share a common theological concept of the oneness nature of God. Unitarian communities have developed in Britain, South Africa, India, Canada, the United States, Jamaica, Nigeria, and Japan.



PS - actually this sounds like what is called Adoptionism.

Adoptionism, also called dynamic monarchianism, is a Christian nontrinitarian theological doctrine which holds that Jesus was adopted as the Son of God at his baptism, his resurrection, or his ascension.


Adoptionism - Wikipedia.

 

[colen]

He was always the eternal and only-begotten Son of the Father, the very Word of God without beginning, uncreated, of one Being with the Father as God of God. He didn't become the Son, He is, from all eternity, the only-begotten Son of the unbegotten Father.

Okay.

 

[ViaCrucis]

(CLV) Hb 1:5
For to whom of the messengers said He at any time, "My Son art Thou! I, today, have begotten Thee"? And again, "I shall be to Him for a Father And He shall be to Me for a Son"?


What day does eternity fall on?

As the New Testament uses that passage, the "today" is the day Christ rose from the dead. But that isn't the day He became the only-begotten Son, He has always been the eternal Son of the Father, begotten before all ages.

If you disagree with that statement, then you disagree with the Nicene Creed.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Jipsah]

So then - what does the "Catholic Herald" mean when it uses the term "trinity"?? (if someone knows ... please share with us)

Easy enough:
I believe in one God the Father Almighty,
Maker of heaven and earth,
And of all things visible and invisible:
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God,
Begotten of his Father before all worlds,
God of God, Light of Light,
Very God of very God,
Begotten, not made,
Being of one substance with the Father,
By whom all things were made;
Who for us men, and for our salvation came down from heaven,
And was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary,
And was made man,
And was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate.
He suffered and was buried,
And the third day he rose again according to the Scriptures,
And ascended into heaven,
And sitteth on the right hand of the Father.
And he shall come again with glory to judge both the quick and the dead:
Whose kingdom shall have no end.
And I believe in the Holy Ghost,
The Lord and giver of life,
Who proceedeth from the Father and the Son,
Who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified,
Who spake by the Prophets.
As I understand it, Mrs. White viewed the Trinity as three coequal, seperate partners who act as one. And yeah, that's different than what we confess in the Nicene Creed, as may be seen above.

Specifically on this thread --- What do you mean by that term "Trinity" when you use it?

Just what I confess at every service, as read in the Nicene Creed.

How about you? Do you accept the "three persons" aspect of the term "Trinity" or do you use/believe/accept something else as the correct definition for the term "Trinity"?

"Three persons" gives one a lot of lattitude, does it? Three people working as a committee (polytheism), one God working in three diferent "persons" or modes (modalism), three unequal partners with different authorities and purviews but one in purpose (don't have a name for that offhand), one God supreme and two other subordinate persons who act solely as He wills, ad infinitum.

Might be handiest for you to just say how your belief differs from that confessed in the Nicene Creed.

 

[Jipsah]

I see three "persons" in that post. I don't see how you can avoid it.So then... where is the "heresy"??

As usual, the devil's in the details.

 

[1watchman]

Well, regardless of the speculation about the Trinity, it remains as Holy Scripture clearly teaches:

Our God: calling self: Jehovah (ever self-existing and immutable holy one) is the triune only holy Creator - of the Godhead ---as "Father"; and is the triune holy Savior for man - of the Godhead ---"Jesus, the Christ of God" come down to be Savior of souls by suffering for sins on the Cross of judgment; teacher, authority over man and the ONLY object and personage now for redeemed souls for care to eternity and a home in Heaven; and our God is the triune "Holy Spirit" for man - of the Godhead --- as our God working spiritually and quietly in the mind and soul of redeemed man to guide them in a Godly path by the Word of God; and reveal truth contrasted with ungodly ways; and seeking to turn man to trust God in all things. We can appropriate all this truth by receiving God's "...beloved Son" as our Savior and Lord of our life. Now the universal question is: when will we do this?

 

[1watchman]

Well, regardless of the speculation about the Trinity, it remains as Holy Scripture clearly teaches:

Our God is the triune holy Creator - of the Godhead ---as "Father"; and is the triune holy Savior for man - of the Godhead ---"Jesus, the Christ of God" come down to be Savior of souls by suffering for sins on the Cross of judgment; teacher, authority over man and the ONLY object and personage now for redeemed souls for care to eternity and a home in Heaven; and our God is the triune "Holy Spirit" for man - of the Godhead --- as our God working spiritually and quietly in the mind and soul of redeemed man to guide them in a Godly path by the Word of God; and reveal truth contrasted with ungodly ways; and seeking to turn man to trust God in all things. We can appropriate all this truth by receiving God's "...beloved Son" as our Savior and Lord of our life. Now the universal question is: when will we do this?

 

[BobRyan]

BobRyan said: ↑
So then - what does the "Catholic Herald" mean when it uses the term "trinity"?? (if someone knows ... please share with us)

Easy enough:
I believe in one God the Father Almighty,
...
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God,
..
Very God of very God,
...
And I believe in the Holy Ghost,
The Lord and giver of life,
Who proceedeth from the Father and the Son,
Who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified,
Who spake by the Prophets.

How is that not "three persons"

One
and One
And one

???

"Three persons" gives one a lot of lattitude, does it?