Trinity

[Floatingaxe]

Is Jesus God?

It is a very simple question.

The Truth is not ever so simple. Wish it were!

The simple Truth:

John 20: 26 Now a week later his disciples were again inside and Thomas was with them. Jesus came, although the doors were locked, and stood in their midst and said, "Peace be with you."

27

Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here and see my hands, and bring your hand and put it into my side, and do not be unbelieving, but believe."

28

17 Thomas answered and said to him, "My Lord and my God!"

[Ovedya]

Jesus Christ was completely human and within his physical vessel dwelt the fullness of God. He is the Son of God.

The fullness of God is God Himself. Jesus is God Himself.

Do you believe this or not?

[Ovedya]

I understand a bit of what you're saying and I agree. It is not as if we can expect new converts to explain all the tenets of Christianity to us. Obviously, for salvation, they would need to believe Jesus is God, that He died, rose again, was perfect, was born of a virgin, etc.

At the same time, what do we do with those who have had time to mature in their doctrine yet still deny the Trinity? I would argue that salvation never took place. The reason is, as you stated, the Trinity is revealed in scripture. When we rid ourselves of the Trinity, we either have to teach that God is quite a schizophrenic, or Jesus wasn't God. Logically, those are our only two conclusions.

This is not to say that the Trinity is logical from our perspective, but instead to say that though it is mystical in its nature, it still logically explains the Incarnation in the best way possible. A better sentence might be that it allows for consistency within our belief. If our belief becomes inconsistent, at some point, either our heresy or our salvation has to give.

I feel I am doing a horrible job of explaining my position on this, so I apologize if it seems muddled.

I understood you perfectly. I think that we agree on many points. I was actually thinking more about it this morning while showering (I do all my best theological thinking in the shower for some reason). Here's what I came up with:

From the Second Council of Constantinople:

1. If anyone will not confess that the Father, Son and holy Spirit have one nature or substance, that they have one power and authority, that there is a consubstantial Trinity, one Deity to be adored in three subsistences or persons: let him be anathema. There is only one God and Father, from whom all things come, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things are, and one holy Spirit, in whom all things are.

2. If anyone will not confess that the Word of God has two nativities, that which is before all ages from the Father, outside time and without a body, and secondly that nativity of these latter days when the Word of God came down from the heavens and was made flesh of holy and glorious Mary, mother of God and ever-virgin, and was born from her: let him be anathema.

3. If anyone declares that the [Word] of God who works miracles is not identical with the Christ who suffered, or alleges that God the Word was with the Christ who was born of woman, or was in him in the way that one might be in another, but that our lord Jesus Christ was not one and the same, the Word of God incarnate and made man, and that the miracles and the sufferings which he voluntarily underwent in the flesh were not of the same person: let him be anathema.

...

5 If anyone understands by the single subsistence of our lord Jesus Christ that it covers the meaning of many subsistences, and by this argument tries to introduce into the mystery of Christ two subsistences or two persons, and having brought in two persons then talks of one person only in respect of dignity, honour or adoration, as both Theodore and Nestorius have written in their madness; if anyone falsely represents the holy synod of Chalcedon, making out that it accepted this heretical view by its terminology of "one subsistence", and if he does not acknowledge that the Word of God is united with human flesh by subsistence, and that on account of this there is only one subsistence or one person, and that the holy synod of Chalcedon thus made a formal statement of belief in the single subsistence of our lord Jesus Christ: let him be anathema. There has been no addition of person or subsistence to the holy Trinity even after one of its members, God the Word, becoming human flesh.

6 If anyone declares that it can be only inexactly and not truly said that the holy and glorious ever-virgin Mary is the mother of God, or says that she is so only in some relative way, considering that she bore a mere man and that God the Word was not made into human flesh in her, holding rather that the nativity of a man from her was referred, as they say, to God the Word as he was with the man who came into being; if anyone misrepresents the holy synod of Chalcedon, alleging that it claimed that the virgin was the mother of God only according to that heretical understanding which the blasphemous Theodore put forward; or if anyone says that she is the mother of a man or the Christ-bearer, that is the mother of Christ, suggesting that Christ is not God; and does not formally confess that she is properly and truly the mother of God, because he who before all ages was born of the Father, God the Word, has been made into human flesh in these latter days and has been born to her, and it was in this religious understanding that the holy synod of Chalcedon formally stated its belief that she was the mother of God: let him be anathema.

7 If anyone, when speaking about the two natures, does not confess a belief in our one lord Jesus Christ, understood in both his divinity and his humanity, so as by this to signify a difference of natures of which an ineffable union has been made without confusion, in which neither the nature of the Word was changed into the nature of human flesh, nor was the nature of human flesh changed into that of the Word (each remained what it was by nature, even after the union, as this had been made in respect of subsistence); and if anyone understands the two natures in the mystery of Christ in the sense of a division into parts, or if he expresses his belief in the plural natures in the same lord Jesus Christ, God the Word made flesh, but does not consider the difference of those natures, of which he is composed, to be only in the onlooker's mind, a difference which is not compromised by the union (for he is one from both and the two exist through the one) but uses the plurality to suggest that each nature is possessed separately and has a subsistence of its own: let him be anathema.

8 If anyone confesses a belief that a union has been made out of the two natures divinity and humanity, or speaks about the one nature of God the Word made flesh, but does not understand these things according to what the fathers have taught, namely that from the divine and human natures a union was made according to subsistence, and that one Christ was formed, and from these expressions tries to introduce one nature or substance made of the deity and human flesh of Christ: let him be anathema. In saying that it was in respect of subsistence that the only-begotten God the Word was united, we are not alleging that there was a confusion made of each of the natures into one another, but rather that each of the two remained what it was, and in this way we understand that the Word was united to human flesh. So there is only one Christ, God and man, the same being consubstantial with the Father in respect of his divinity, and also consubstantial with us in respect of our humanity. Both those who divide or split up the mystery of the divine dispensation of Christ and those who introduce into that mystery some confusion are equally rejected and anathematized by the church of God.

9 If anyone says that Christ is to be worshipped in his two natures, and by that wishes to introduce two adorations, a separate one for God the Word and another for the man; or if anyone, so as to remove the human flesh or to mix up the divinity and the humanity, monstrously invents one nature or substance brought together from the two, and so worships Christ, but not by a single adoration God the Word in human flesh along with his human flesh, as has been the tradition of the church from the beginning: let him be anathema.

10 If anyone does not confess his belief that our lord Jesus Christ, who was crucified in his human flesh, is truly God and the Lord of glory and one of the members of the holy Trinity: let him be anathema.

Although I do not necessarily disagree with everything above, I do take issue with the condemnation to hell of anyone who does not hold precisely to what is prescribed in this declaration. And although we as Protestants have been freed from the bondage of such condemnations, many of us are as guilty as the Roman church in that we have a tendency to label persons with beliefs that are different than ones held in our own denominations as being unbelievers or not truly a part of the flock.

At some level, yes, the revelation of who God is in His nature is revealed in the Scriptures. It simply cannot be denied by any mature believer that God is revealed in the Scriptures as being Triune. However, as believers we should hold to the revelation of the Scriptures first, before holding to any frail human definition or best attempt to explain that revelation.

Clear as mud?

[Fiosh]

So, you think that the Church had already messed up in 553 AD? It was still "your" Church as well as mine at that time.

But, you can go back further still and see that the Church professed belief in the Trinity.

First Council of Nicea (325) :

We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father the only-begotten; that is, of the essence of the Father, 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 both in heaven and on earth;

who for us men, and for our salvation, came down and was incarnate and was made man;

he suffered, and the third day he rose again, ascended into heaven;

If you profess to be a Christian, there is no question as to what you are called to believe.

To make it perfectly clear that Jesus is God, the 2nd Council of Constantinople professed:

" that the Word of God has two nativities, that which is before all ages from the Father, outside time and without a body, and secondly that nativity of these latter days when the Word of God came down from the heavens and was made flesh of holy and glorious Mary, mother of God and ever-virgin, and was born from her"

This is not in any way to glorify Mary, but to underline the reality that it was God who was born of a woman; not a man who was then "possessed" by God.

[hupo]

( From the Second Council of Constantinople: )

Although I do not necessarily disagree with everything above, I do take issue with the condemnation to hell of anyone who does not hold precisely to what is prescribed in this declaration. And although we as Protestants have been freed from the bondage of such condemnations, many of us are as guilty as the Roman church in that we have a tendency to label persons with beliefs that are different than ones held in our own denominations as being unbelievers or not truly a part of the flock.

At some level, yes, the revelation of who God is in His nature is revealed in the Scriptures. It simply cannot be denied by any mature believer that God is revealed in the Scriptures as being Triune. However, as believers we should hold to the revelation of the Scriptures first, before holding to any frail human definition or best attempt to explain that revelation.

Clear as mud?

What you are saying, to my understanding is, that it is not for us to condemn or judge others. That would be God's job.

We are here as witnesses through the way we live and abide by the Holy Spirit's teaching.

Revelation itself, rather than understanding it with our own minds and then defining it, is the way to go IMO

If that is what you are saying, I totally agree with you

Nice clean mud you are using, Ovedya