Then it is okay to discuss differing theology in the "non-Christian" sections, eh?
More on the deity of Christ
- Thread starter KUWN
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
As a Bible Unitarian, I don't like Jehovah Witnesses and their lifestyle. Shunning people for going to college is unforgiveable. They really do this.
- Aug 10, 2012
- 6,029
- 7,413
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
The faith selected under our profile determines if one needs to be in agreement with the SOF publicly.
Non-christian sections are for non-christians to ask questions or initiate debate and get a response from Christians.
Thanks. I’m not registered as a Christian member. (I’m a Jewish monotheist, not a trinitarian. I have no posting privileges in “Christians Only” forums and I’m fine with that.) As I understand the new rules, members who are registered as Christian and affirm the Trinity are allowed to speak with me (and other members who aren’t registered Christian) about the Trinity; members registered as Christian who don’t affirm the Trinity are not allowed to discuss the Trinity with anyone.
It’s my desire and intention to abide by the new rules. I haven’t started any threads about the Trinity and don’t have any plans to.
SOF -> Statement of Faith. It’s located in the Community Announcement forum.
??? I think they are allowed to discuss it in the "non-Christian" forums. I suspect theological discussion is not allowed only on the "Christian" forums. Perhaps I should identify as Unitarian only.
I think it’s simple: Members registered as “Christian” cannot speak against the Trinity.
There is no registration option available for “Unitarian Only”. You would have to change your registration to “Other Faith”. The downside is that if you decide to do that you won’t be allowed to post in forums marked “Christian Only”.
Everyone knows, or should, that the creed of Judaism is unitarian.
The God of Jewish monotheists is only one person, the Father.
Jesus of Nazareth is alive and well. If for some reason he wanted to register as a member, would he register as “Other Faith” or “Christian”? It’s a theoretical question.
Jesus is a Jew. His God is only one person, the Father. “Other Faith” would be a logical choice @KWUN.
Christianity began as a sect of and within Judaism. He founded the sect so it would also be a logical choice for him to register as “Christian”.
- Aug 10, 2012
- 6,029
- 7,413
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
That is right. Other faith members are allowed to post against the Trinity in the non-Christian section that they have access to.
There are limits to what would be allowed according to the other rules that have been around for years. In general be respectful to other members. Do not blaspheme against any of the persons in the Godhead, regardless of if you believe them divine or not.
What do you mean by blaspheme? To me, it means to slander something even a non-religious entity.
- Aug 10, 2012
- 6,029
- 7,413
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
Any derogatory remarks about God (including the Son and Holy Spirit)
Brakelite
Well-Known Member
I'm a seventh day Adventist. Our pioneers did not accept the Trinity as taught by mainstream churches of the time, nor the creeds. Today however our church has changed. Only a relatively few continue to accept the pioneer's view, while the official church teaching includes the Trinity, or at least a modified version of it.
I believe in the Father, the Source of all things... The Son, through Whom all things come... And the Spirit, also a person Who glorifies God in bringing man to Him. So I'm not completely anti Trinitarian or Godhead, but do stridently object to the assumptions made concerning their union and how they are ,"one".
I will not deny my faith in order to discuss certain aspects of it. I'm a Christian. Seventh Day Adventist is a Christian denomination regardless the very public protestations and objections by many to that appellation.
One assumption made by many is the belief that it is essential to believe in the traditional Trinity teaching in order to affirm the divinity of Christ. This is where I set myself apart from both Unitarian camps and Trinity camps. I firmly and without reservation believe the Son is as much God as the Father, only without the rank. How are they United as one God? Except for character and purpose, I don't know. We aren't told. What we do know is that there aren't 2 or 3 God's. We are told in scripture there is only one true God. The Father. The Father tells us the Son is God. Does that make 2 Gods? Or one God? What of the holy Spirit? It is the Spirit of Christ and of God according to Romans. It... He... Belongs to both. There are texts which powerfully suggest the Spirit of also not only a person, but a divine person. How the above fits together was the question there early church was trying to answer when they came up with the creeds. Frankly, I think they went too far. There's nothing wrong with
"I don't know".
Brakelite
Well-Known Member
Pleased to meet you.
True, it doesn't. But it does for with the teachings of some early Christian evangelists, such as Wulfilas.
I, Wulfila, Bishop and Confessor, have always believed thus and in this sole and true faith I make my journey to my Lord,
I believe
that there is only one God the Father, alone unbegotten and invisible, and in His only-begotten Son, our Lord and God, creator and maker of all things, not having any like unto Him. Therefore there is one God of all, who is also God of our God, And I believe in one Holy Spirit, an enlightening and sanctifying power. As Christ says after the resurrection to his Apostles: "Behold I send the promise of my Father upon you; but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem until ye be clothed with power from on high." (Luke 24.49) And again: "And ye shall receive power coming upon you by the Holy Spirit." (Acts 1.8) Neither God nor Lord, but the faithful minister of Christ; not equal, but subject and obedient in all things to the Son. And I believe the Son to be subject and obedient in all things to God the Father.
A “trinitarian” who believes there was a time when the Son did not exist isn’t in the fold of orthodoxy. The new rules require such a person either not to speak about the Trinity or change their registration to “Other Faith”.
Confirmation from your own lips that you know that what you believe isn’t orthodox.
Being an Arian, he would quickly run into trouble here under the new rules.
P.S.
Are you familiar with the term “elemental trinitarianism”?
“If we take the New Testament writers together they tell us that there is only one God, the creator and lord of the universe, who is the Father of Jesus … They give us in their writings a triadic ground plan and triadic formulas. They do not speak in abstract terms of nature, substance, person, relation, circumincession, mission, but they present in their own ways the ideas that are behind these terms. They give us no formal formal or formulated doctrine of the Trinity, no explicit teaching that in one God there are three co-equal divine persons. But they do give us an elemental trinitarianism, the data from which such a formal doctrine if the Triune God may be formulated.
To study the gradual transition from an unformulated Biblical witness to the Father, Son and Holy Spirit to a dogmatic formulation of a doctrine of the Triune God, we look first to the Eastern Church where most of thus development took place place.”
(Edmund J. Fortman, The Triune God: A Historical Study of the Doctrine if the Trinity, pp. x, xvi)
Fortman was a Roman Catholic scholar.
You and the Bishop you quoted would theologically fall into his category of “elemental trinitarianism”. Ironically, so would I.
Father Fortman knew orthodoxy is a post-biblical development. (That’s what his book is about.) He isn’t the only one. The process and time frame is well-preserved in church history.
”There was a time when the Son did not exist with the Father” -> welcome to the infamous hallway of heresy.
The new rules allow non-trinitarian Christians to register as “Christian”, but with a catch -> non-trinitarian Christian members are prohibited from speaking with any other member about the Trinity. (Non-trinitarian Christians who wish to do so are offered an alternative - they may change their registration to “Other Faith”.) Defining the Trinity in an unorthodox manner is speaking against orthodoxy, which is precisely and expressly what the new rules were designed to prohibit “Christian” members from doing.
As someone who doesn’t affirm historical orthodox trinitarianism but is registered as “Christian”, are you concerned about a moderator enforcing the new rules against you for speaking about the Trinity?
Are there any ethical issues in your mind connected with you being registered as “Christian” and not abiding by the new rules?
Last edited:
Runningman
Active Member
If we can't discuss it outright then let the Bible make your arguments for you.
John 17
1When Jesus had spoken these things, He lifted up His eyes to heaven and said, “Father, the hour has come. Glorify Your Son, that Your Son may glorify You. 2For You granted Him authority over all people, so that He may give eternal life to all those You have given Him. 3Now this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom You have sent.
John 17
1When Jesus had spoken these things, He lifted up His eyes to heaven and said, “Father, the hour has come. Glorify Your Son, that Your Son may glorify You. 2For You granted Him authority over all people, so that He may give eternal life to all those You have given Him. 3Now this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom You have sent.
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
More Scripture that @Matthias reminded me of, Moses is declared to be God by God:
Exod. 4:16 He will speak to the people for you, and he will be a mouth for you, and you will be God to him.
Exod. 7:1 Yahweh said to Moses, “Behold, I have made you God to Pharaoh, and Aaron your brother will be your prophet.
“It is a simple and undeniable historical fact that several major doctrines that now seem central to the Christian faith - such as the doctrine of the Trinity and the doctrine of the deity of Christ - were not present in a full and well-defined, generally accepted form until the fourth or fifth centuries. If they are essential today - as all of the orthodox creeds and confessions assert - it must be because they are true. If they are true, then they must always have been true; they cannot have become true in the fourth or fifth century. But if they are both true and essential, how can it be that the early church took centuries to formulate them?”
(Harold O.J. Brown, Heresies, Heresy And Orthodoxy In The History Of The Church, p. 20)
Dr. Brown was a trinitarian scholar who dedicated his life to bringing people to embrace historical orthodox trinitarianism.
This book of his is one of my favorites. I recommend it to one and all, trinitarian and non-trinitarian alike.
Unfortunately, I never met him or corresponded with him. If I had I would have asked: What about all of those Christians who lived and died in the centuries prior to the formulation of those doctrines and knew nothing of them? They weren’t Nicene Christians. The earliest among them were Jewish monotheists, but there were also Christians living and dying before the formulations were completed who were neither Jewish monotheists nor Nicene Christians.
(Harold O.J. Brown, Heresies, Heresy And Orthodoxy In The History Of The Church, p. 20)
Dr. Brown was a trinitarian scholar who dedicated his life to bringing people to embrace historical orthodox trinitarianism.
This book of his is one of my favorites. I recommend it to one and all, trinitarian and non-trinitarian alike.
Unfortunately, I never met him or corresponded with him. If I had I would have asked: What about all of those Christians who lived and died in the centuries prior to the formulation of those doctrines and knew nothing of them? They weren’t Nicene Christians. The earliest among them were Jewish monotheists, but there were also Christians living and dying before the formulations were completed who were neither Jewish monotheists nor Nicene Christians.
From my X / Twitter “For you” feed. A follow-up from James White on his recent discussion of the letters of Ignatius. There will be further discussion on the letters tomorrow.
The update from Dr. White includes a link to a standard source on Ignatius used in seminaries and Bible colleges.
No one should appeal to them in conversation with anyone without being aware of - which I presume the OP is - and pointing out the massive and blatant corruption problems with them.
Similar threads
