The Source of the Trinity

Graham Dull · Sep 12, 2016

.

Constantine the Sinner said:
My question is, what is the sentiment today about this?

Regardless of question of who was the author of the Athanasian Creed, I accept its thoughts regarding the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

ATHANASIAN CREED
"The Father uncreated, the Son uncreated, and the Holy Spirit uncreated."
"The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Spirit eternal."

Constantine the Sinner · Sep 12, 2016

david.d said:
I just detailed the 3 distinct existences. Modalism believes the Son didn't exist before the virgin birth and the Spirit didn't exist before Pentecost. I do believe they have always existed. Your logic is a bit flawed, as water, ice, and steam are 3 distinct existences of H2O. I don't know how else to explain it, but I do not follow modalism. I believe when God walked in the Garden of Eden, that was Jesus. When David begged God not to take away His holy Spirit, that was the Holy Spirit he was speaking of.

Modalism doesn't suggest any person of the Trinity is created.

Constantine the Sinner · Sep 12, 2016

Philip_B said:
The position of Augustine and Aquinas was to insist that the ultimate 'alpha point' or origin for the Holy Spirit is the Father, even when it may be said there are places in Scripture where it is reasonable to conclude in the immediate instance that the Holy Spirit has proceeded from the Son.

Any other position here seems to undo the Monarchical Position of the Father in which is seen the essence of the Unity of the Most Holy Trinity.

If I drink wine from the bottle, I may say that the wine has proceeded from the bottle. If I drink wine from the glass, I may say that the wine has proceeded from the glass, though I must also acknowledge that in the first instance the wine proceeded from the bottle.

Sadly I suspect that is true, we stand up on Sunday and say the words in the book. I think that Christians should be concerned to know what they are saying they believe. I know when I went through the creed again, and explored this matter I concluded that the Filioque is an inappropriate insertion (perhaps well intentioned) however it is a really inelegant expression of processional theology, and certainly does not give a proper voice to what Augustine was saying. I now take a breath while the congregation filioques away.

I'm going off the official RCC position on what the Filioque means, which dates from the Middle Ages and continues today, which is that the Father and Son are one alpha point for the Spirit's procession.

Graham Dull · Sep 12, 2016

Ephesians 2:18-22
18 For through him (Christ) we both have access to the Father by one Spirit.
19 Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and strangers, but fellow citizens with God’s people and also members of his household, 20 built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone. 21 In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord. 22 And in him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit.

Constantine the Sinner · Sep 12, 2016

Graham Dull said:
.

Regardless of question of who was the author of the Athanasian Creed, I accept its thoughts regarding the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

ATHANASIAN CREED
"The Father uncreated, the Son uncreated, and the Holy Spirit uncreated."
"The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Spirit eternal."

I don't think anyone here is disputing those two assertions.

Constantine the Sinner · Sep 12, 2016

Graham Dull said:
Ephesians 2:18-22
18 For through him (Christ) we both have access to the Father by one Spirit.
19 Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and strangers, but fellow citizens with God’s people and also members of his household, 20 built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone. 21 In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord. 22 And in him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit.

It's not a question of whether the Spirit is Christ's, since all things that are the Father's are also the Son's. It's a question of whether or not the Holy Spirit's existence is contingent solely on the Father.

Graham Dull · Sep 12, 2016

Constantine the Sinner said:
I don't think anyone here is disputing those two assertions.

To clarify my position, I'm not disputing anything.

I'm simply expressing my sentiments, and waiting for the discussion to develop. At this stage I follow it with interest.

Graham Dull · Sep 12, 2016

Constantine the Sinner said:
It's a question of whether or not the Holy Spirit's existence is contingent solely on the Father

The Holy Spirit's existence is eternal, and thus his existence is equal to that of the Father and the Son.

ATHANASIAN CREED
"The Father uncreated, the Son uncreated, and the Holy Spirit uncreated."

Constantine the Sinner · Sep 12, 2016

Graham Dull said:
The Holy Spirit's existence is eternal, and thus his existence is equal to that of the Father and the Son.

ATHANASIAN CREED
"The Father uncreated, the Son uncreated, and the Holy Spirit uncreated."

It's not a matter of the Spirit being created. The Spirit always existed, because the Father always endowed the Spirit's existence. Just like the Son always existed, because the Father always begot the Son.

Larry Wilgus · Sep 12, 2016

Constantine the Sinner said:
A quick history lesson for those of you not familiar with it: in the Middle Ages, the Pope added what is called the "Filioque" to the Nicene Creed, which is the clause that says "and from the Son" regarding the procession of the Holy Spirit. This caused a major controversy, since in the West it was intended to mean that the Holy Spirit's existence is endowed from the Father and the Son as one principle (this is still the position of the Catholic Church). This directly conflicted with Eastern theology, which says that the Father is sole source of the Trinity, the will is furnished by the Father alone, and the existences of the Son and the Holy Spirit are furnished by the Father alone. Thus, the Father's hypostasis, alone, is the bedrock of the entire Trinity. This controversy contributed greatly to the schism (the main issue causing the schism was the Pope's authority over the Church, although this is not the thread to discuss that).

My question is, what is the sentiment today about this? Particularly among Christians who are neither Catholic nor Orthodox. Is the Father alone generally seen as the source of the entire Trinity?

The Christian concept of the Trinity can be easily understood when you recognize all three persons as God, but each with a different task. The Father is the originator of the plan; Jesus is the executor of the plan, and the Holy Spirit is the revealer of the plan to man. There is subordination within the Trinity. Scripture shows the Holy Spirit is subordinate to the Father and the Son, and the Son is subordinate to the Father - Jn 14:16, 14:26, 16:13-14. Lk 22:42, Jn 5:36, 1 Jn 4:14.

The plural noun - Hebrew "Elohim" meaning us, is used in Gen 1:26,3:22, 11:7, Is 6:8, Matt 3:16-17, 2 Cor 13:14. The Father is the ultimate source or cause of the universe 1 Cor 8:6, Rev 4:11; salvation Jn 3:16-17, divine revelation Rev 1:1, Jesus' human works Jn 5:17 and 14:10.

I don't believe anyone can say the Father is the sole source when all three persons have always been. I was raised a catholic but departed 40+ years ago over false doctrines from my upbringing.

Constantine the Sinner · Sep 12, 2016

Larry Wilgus said:
The Christian concept of the Trinity can be easily understood when you recognize all three persons as God, but each with a different task. The Father is the originator of the plan; Jesus is the executor of the plan, and the Holy Spirit is the revealer of the plan to man. There is subordination within the Trinity. Scripture shows the Holy Spirit is subordinate to the Father and the Son, and the Son is subordinate to the Father - Jn 14:16, 14:26, 16:13-14. Lk 22:42, Jn 5:36, 1 Jn 4:14.

The plural noun - Hebrew "Elohim" meaning us, is used in Gen 1:26,3:22, 11:7, Is 6:8, Matt 3:16-17, 2 Cor 13:14. The Father is the ultimate source or cause of the universe 1 Cor 8:6, Rev 4:11; salvation Jn 3:16-17, divine revelation Rev 1:1, Jesus' human works Jn 5:17 and 14:10.

I don't believe anyone can say the Father is the sole source when all three persons have always been. I was raised a catholic but departed 40+ years ago over false doctrines from my upbringing.

All three persons have always been because the Son's and the Spirit's existences were always endowed from the Father.

david.d · Sep 12, 2016

Constantine the Sinner said:
Modalism doesn't suggest any person of the Trinity is created.

It suggests they are basically modes of God, which means they all can't be at the same time. If I follow modalism, how can I believe David was praying to the Father and asking Him not to take away the Holy Spirit from him?

Constantine the Sinner said:
It's not a question of whether the Spirit is Christ's, since all things that are the Father's are also the Son's. It's a question of whether or not the Holy Spirit's existence is contingent solely on the Father.

Consider when Christ was baptized and the Holy Spirit descended like a dove and the Father said He was pleased. They are 3 parts, contingent on the one. 2/3 of one is not one. There has to be 3. Together they make one.

Constantine the Sinner · Sep 12, 2016

david.d said:
It suggests they are basically modes of God, which means they all can't be at the same time.

No, it doesn't suggest God cannot take three forms simultaneously.

Consider when Christ was baptized and the Holy Spirit descended like a dove and the Father said He was pleased. They are 3 parts, contingent on the one. 2/3 of one is not one. There has to be 3. Together they make one.

You're saying they're each 1/3 of infinity?

Graham Dull · Sep 12, 2016

Constantine the Sinner said:
The Spirit always existed

.
The Scriptures describe the different roles of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

Neither the Father, nor the Holy Spirit died for the sins of mankind. The Son did. This is obvious and explanatory as only through his incarnation could he even become subject to death.

The Three take different roles in respect to man's salvation.

But the Holy Spirit's existence is no more contingent on the Father, than the Father's existence is contingent on the Holy Spirit. Or any other way you might express it.

All Three are equal, self-existent and eternal.

Constantine the Sinner · Sep 12, 2016

Graham Dull said:
.
The Scriptures describe the different roles of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

Neither the Father, nor the Holy Spirit died for the sins of mankind. The Son did. This is obvious and explanatory as only through his incarnation could he even become subject to death.

The Three take different roles in respect to man's salvation.

But the Holy Spirit's existence is no more contingent on the Father, than the Father's existence is contingent on the Holy Spirit. Or any other way you might express it.

All Three are equal, self-existent and eternal.

If the Son's existence isn't contingent upon the Father's, then how could he be begotten of the Father? And if the Spirit's existence isn't contingent upon the Father's, then how could come from out of the Father?

Graham Dull · Sep 12, 2016

Constantine the Sinner said:
If the Son's existence isn't contingent upon the Father's, then how could he be begotten of the Father?

The Son existed in the person of Jesus Christ, born of Mary, crucified, died, was buried, and raised again to life. He (Jesus) existed prior to this -- as the Pre-incarnate Christ. The selfsame person, always God, and now also man.

Please quote a verse from Scripture regarding 'the Son's existence being contingent upon the Father's to allow me to comment further.

Constantine the Sinner · Sep 12, 2016

Graham Dull said:
The Son existed in the person of Jesus Christ, born of Mary, crucified, died, was buried, and raised again to life. He (Jesus) existed prior to this -- as the Pre-incarnate Christ. The selfsame person, always God, and now also man.

Please quote a verse from Scripture regarding 'the Son's existence being contingent upon the Fathers' to allow me to comment further.

Hebrews 1:6

How could the Word be the Father's Firstborn if his existence is not contingent on the Father's? Certainly Christ is not called the Son on account of his human incarnation, otherwise he'd be called the Son of the Holy Spirit (which conceived him), not the Son of the Father. He was always the Son, even prior to his incarnation.

Constantine the Sinner · Sep 12, 2016

Also, Proverbs 8:22-31 is talking about the pre-incarnate Word, and it shows a clear contingency of existence, while at the same time showing the Word always existed.

Graham Dull · Sep 12, 2016

Constantine the Sinner said:
Also, Proverbs 8:22-31 is talking about the pre-incarnate Word, and it shows a clear contingency of existence, while at the same time showing the Word always existed.

All of Proverbs 8 refers to 'Wisdom.' Wisdom here is personified. It is not talking about the 'pre-incarnate Word.'

Proverbs 8:1-2
Does not wisdom call out?
Does not understanding raise her voice?
2 At the highest point along the way, where the paths meet, she takes her stand.
.

Constantine the Sinner · Sep 12, 2016

Graham Dull said:
All of Proverbs 8 refers to 'Wisdom.' Wisdom here is personified. It is not talking about the 'pre-incarnate Word.'

1 Corinthians 2:7-8

The Wisdom of God is synonymous with the Word of God.

The Source of the Trinity

In God’s grace

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

In God’s grace

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

In God’s grace

In God’s grace

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

In God’s grace

Well-Known Member

In God’s grace

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

In God’s grace

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency