Unitarianism vs Trinitarianism
- Thread starter RLT63
- 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!
- Status
“There is no reason why we could not have a living organism that could be truly human, or, to be more accurate, could possess a human nature, but not be a human person.”
(Tim Staples, “Is Jesus a Human Person?”)
timstaples.com
(Tim Staples, “Is Jesus a Human Person?”)
Is Jesus a Human Person? - TimStaples.com
After writing my last post, “When the Word was Made Flesh, Did God Change?” I received an excellent follow-up question. One of my readers still could not get past just how we can say Christ was truly and “fully man,” and yet not be a “human person.” He asked if we could say that somehow Christ...
timstaples.com
Yes, but it also says that he is not a human person.
Jesus cannot be, and isn’t, a human person in trinitarian theology. We have to know that before we can defend the doctrine of the Trinity.
What does it mean that Jesus is the Son of Man? | GotQuestions.org
What does it mean that Jesus is the Son of Man? Is “Son of Man” a Messianic title or does it mean that Jesus was truly a human being, or both?
www.gotquestions.org
What does it mean that Jesus is the Son of Man? | GotQuestions.org
What does it mean that Jesus is the Son of Man? Is “Son of Man” a Messianic title or does it mean that Jesus was truly a human being, or both?www.gotquestions.org
Does your article say that Jesus is a human person? No. Why?
He is human and he is more. Is it really necessary to define something to the nth degree that we are incapable of understanding anyway?
Last edited:
“Jesus is a human person” is an anti-trinitarian position.
The church in the 5th century was confronted with people like (and unlike) YOU. The Council of Chalcedon (AD 451) was necessary to defend trinitarianism - fully established in the Church since the Council of Constantinople (AD 381) - from assaults like this one.
“There is only one person who is Christ, and that person is divine. Thus, there is no human person named ‘Jesus of Nazareth.’”
(William Lane Craig, “Is Worship of Jesus Idolatry?)
www.reasonablefaith.org
(William Lane Craig, “Is Worship of Jesus Idolatry?)
Is Worship of Jesus Idolatry? | Reasonable Faith
Hello Dr. Craig, First, I want to thank you for all that you have done for the cause of Christ. You have been a powerful witness for the faith. I've continually been challenged in my thinking and knowledge by your writings and public discourses. You have taught me how to think critically and...
www.reasonablefaith.org
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
Submitted in defense of trinitarianism:
”… Christ possesses two ousaia. The first is the divine ousia which is and always has been hypostatic. The second is a human ousia which came into existence as an attached enhypostatic ousia. This is why theologians say that Christ is not a human person (which is a synonym for hypostasis) but that he is a divine person with a human nature. Another way to say this is that Christ’s human nature is not personal in and of itself, but is personalized by becoming part of the divine Logos (who is a personal).
(Tony Arsenal, “Anhypostasis, Enhypostasis, and Bears … Oh My”)
orthopathos.wordpress.com
Bold is mine.
Neglecting to tell you is the trinitarian clergy.
”… Christ possesses two ousaia. The first is the divine ousia which is and always has been hypostatic. The second is a human ousia which came into existence as an attached enhypostatic ousia. This is why theologians say that Christ is not a human person (which is a synonym for hypostasis) but that he is a divine person with a human nature. Another way to say this is that Christ’s human nature is not personal in and of itself, but is personalized by becoming part of the divine Logos (who is a personal).
(Tony Arsenal, “Anhypostasis, Enhypostasis, and Bears … Oh My”)
Anhypostasis, Enhypostasis, and Bears… Oh My
Today, I had a brief discussion with someone who had questions about the distinction between Anhypostasis, Enhypostasis, and how the terms function in Christology. I thought it would be beneficial …
orthopathos.wordpress.com
Bold is mine.
Neglecting to tell you is the trinitarian clergy.
Do you think the average person needs to get that in depth? Will it help them to be a better Christian? Maybe it’s not discussed that much from the pulpit because it’s over most people’s heads, it’s confusing, and I don’t think it will help sinners make a decision to repent or edify the body of ChristSubmitted in defense of trinitarianism:
”… Christ possesses two ousaia. The first is the divine ousia which is and always has been hypostatic. The second is a human ousia which came into existence as an attached enhypostatic ousia. This is why theologians say that Christ is not a human person (which is a synonym for hypostasis) but that he is a divine person with a human nature. Another way to say this is that Christ’s human nature is not personal in and of itself, but is personalized by becoming part of the divine Logos (who is a personal).
(Tony Arsenal, “Anhypostasis, Enhypostasis, and Bears … Oh My”)
Anhypostasis, Enhypostasis, and Bears… Oh My
Today, I had a brief discussion with someone who had questions about the distinction between Anhypostasis, Enhypostasis, and how the terms function in Christology. I thought it would be beneficial …
Bold is mine.
Neglecting to tell you is the trinitarian clergy.
* Why did the church in the 5th century think it was necessary? *
Yes, if the person wants to be a trinitarian and / or defend trinitarianism.
That’s takes care of Chalcedon, and almost all churches say they are Chalcedonian.
Let’s ask me the same question about Nicaea and Constantinople.
”Do you think the average person needs to get that in depth?”
Yes, if the person wants to be a trinitarian and / or defend trinitarianism.
I’ve already told you anecdotally why it’s not discussed from the trinitarian pulpit.
Would you like to hear my advice?
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
It’s always easier to do and believe what you are told with critically examining it. Thinking is hard. That’s why most people don’t do it.
- Status
Similar threads
