I am not simply telling you "what I believe”

Yahchristian

Well-known member
I asked TW what he believed because it was obvious he was writing "what he believes." I am not simply telling you "what I believe," I'm telling you what the Historic Christian Faith teaches as found in the creeds and early ecumenical councils which Catholics, Orthodox and Protestants used to stand, are Barth said, should to shoulder on.

So... when you meet Jesus...

Will Jesus ask you what you believe?

Or...

Will Jesus ask you what Augustine believes?

I expect Jesus will ask what I believe. Which is...

GOD is spirit and is the only one who is eternal. GOD is also in the universe as spirit and as a human. GOD in the universe as spirit is called the Spirit of God, GOD in the universe as a human is called the Son of God, and eternal GOD is called God the Father.
 

Yahchristian

Well-known member
I'm not so sure he will ask that question. Rather he will look at your works as proof of what you claimed to believe. Rev 20, 21 Matt 7, James 2:18-26

Right, what YOU CLAIM to believe as evidenced by your actions.

Rather than what AUGUSTINE CLAIMED to believe.

So you might as well say “I believe...” rather than “Augustine believed...” IMO.
 

cjab

Active member
Right, what YOU CLAIM to believe as evidenced by your actions.

Rather than what AUGUSTINE CLAIMED to believe.

So you might as well say “I believe...” rather than “Augustine believed...” IMO.
I agree. What Augustine believed is a different question to what you believe. Augustine must be, primarily, a subject of academic inquiry rather than a role model, like Paul. For what he believed changed over time, as those who have read all his works testify to; and it was of also of questionable orthodoxy, given his highly irregular life and the novelty of some of his doctrines.

Better to stick to the role models in the bible.
 

Binyawmene

Active member
GOD is spirit and is the only one who is eternal. GOD is also in the universe as spirit and as a human. GOD in the universe as spirit is called the Spirit of God, GOD in the universe as a human is called the Son of God, and eternal GOD is called God the Father.

Hello Yahchristian,

You have a logical conjunction: "God is both spirit and human".

Do you believe there is a distinction between "spirit and human"?

If yes, then "God is existing in two distinct ways simultaneously"?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nic

Our Lord's God

Well-known member
So... when you meet Jesus...

Will Jesus ask you what you believe?

No.


Or...

Will Jesus ask you what Augustine believes?

No.


I expect Jesus will ask what I believe. Which is...

GOD is spirit and is the only one who is eternal. GOD is also in the universe as spirit and as a human. GOD in the universe as spirit is called the Spirit of God, GOD in the universe as a human is called the Son of God, and eternal GOD is called God the Father.
 

TheLayman

Member
So... when you meet Jesus...

Will Jesus ask you what you believe?

Or...

Will Jesus ask you what Augustine believes?

I expect Jesus will ask what I believe. Which is...

GOD is spirit and is the only one who is eternal. GOD is also in the universe as spirit and as a human. GOD in the universe as spirit is called the Spirit of God, GOD in the universe as a human is called the Son of God, and eternal GOD is called God the Father.
Yahchristian:

That less than honest streak in you shows up yet again...notice how you have not only changed the context of what I said but tweaked it to imply that the "Historic Christian Faith" is what Augustine believes rather than the "Historic Church" of that time (and I don't recall but I don't believe I ever brought up Augustine as he did not author the doctrine of the Trinity, though he held it to be true). The context was that "the Doctrine of the Trinity," whether you agree with it or not, has an objective definition. Unfortunately, in forums like this, one might not know that as it often suffers from the same relativism that everything else in this post modern culture does...including "what the Bible says."

At any rate, this is a forum called the "Trinity" which I assume is for defending the actual "Doctrine of the Trinity," not just what someone makes up and calls the doctrine of the Trinity (I believe that Mormons claim to be Trinitarians and yet they are clearly polytheists). People take words used in theology, such as substance/essence/nature, and basically turn them into homographs (this is done in commentaries and seminaries for that matter). And in the post from which this was taken I was saying it is only fair to let people know if you are departing from the "Historic Christian Faith" as the doctrine of the Trinity is not simply what "I believe" or "you believe," it has an objective definition that was established long ago. If you disagree with it, just say so. If you think YOU have something new, better, improved (like you for example), then own that, but don't mislead people that may read and actually believe that you are representing that actual doctrine of the Trinity when you are not.

So when I say I am an orthodox Trinitarian and subscribe to Chalcedonian Christology (and the corollary doctrines of both), then someone should automatically know that I believe Jesus is the actual Son of God incarnate and that He remained as omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent from the moment of conception on as He was before it. That is actually a very different Jesus from the depotentiated kenotic Jesus that began with kenotic theories in the 1800's and now permeates the postmodern evangelicalism of today.

I would also add that we know that Paul refuted Jews and gnostics among others; John refuted Cerinthians and Docetists, Peter spoke of false teachers, and so on.

2Timothy 4:1-5

I charge you therefore before God and the Lord Jesus Christ, who will judge the living and the dead at His appearing and His kingdom: 2 Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching. 3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; 4 and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables. 5 But you be watchful in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry.


Once again, maybe you do not believe the Trinity is sound doctrine, or perhaps you believe sound doctrine is relative to each individual interpretation of Scripture...just own that. There are orthodox doctrines of Theology and Christology which both Catholics and Protestants have "stood shoulder to shoulder on" (the Historic Christian Faith) and that is saying a great deal. The point is, these doctrines are objective, not subjective. That said, I will not play you game as you spin this off into another half dozen misrepresentations.

TheLayman
 

Yahchristian

Well-known member
So when I say I am an orthodox Trinitarian and subscribe to Chalcedonian Christology (and the corollary doctrines of both), then someone should automatically know that I believe Jesus is the actual Son of God incarnate and that He remained as omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent from the moment of conception on as He was before it.

Okay, but...

Which part of the Chalcedonian Creed below defines the Trinity (three Persons in one Being)...

“We, then, following the holy Fathers, all with one consent, teach people to confess one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, the same perfect in Godhead and also perfect in manhood;
truly God and truly man, of a reasonable [rational] soul and body;
consubstantial [co-essential] with the Father according to the Godhead, and consubstantial with us according to the Manhood;
in all things like unto us, without sin;
begotten before all ages of the Father according to the Godhead, and in these latter days, for us and for our salvation, born of the Virgin Mary, the Mother of God, according to the Manhood;
one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, only begotten, to be acknowledged in two natures, inconfusedly, unchangeably, indivisibly, inseparably;
the distinction of natures being by no means taken away by the union, but rather the property of each nature being preserved, and concurring in one Person and one Subsistence, not parted or divided into two persons, but one and the same Son, and only begotten, God the Word, the Lord Jesus Christ;
as the prophets from the beginning [have declared] concerning Him, and the Lord Jesus Christ Himself has taught us, and the Creed of the holy Fathers has handed down to us.”
 

Yahchristian

Well-known member
So when I say I am an orthodox Trinitarian and subscribe to Chalcedonian Christology

So...

Do you agree with the Chalcedonian Creed below that Mary should be called “the Mother of God”?

“We, then, following the holy Fathers, all with one consent, teach people to confess one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, the same perfect in Godhead and also perfect in manhood;
truly God and truly man, of a reasonable [rational] soul and body;
consubstantial [co-essential] with the Father according to the Godhead, and consubstantial with us according to the Manhood;
in all things like unto us, without sin;
begotten before all ages of the Father according to the Godhead, and in these latter days, for us and for our salvation, born of the Virgin Mary, the Mother of God, according to the Manhood;
one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, only begotten, to be acknowledged in two natures, inconfusedly, unchangeably, indivisibly, inseparably;
the distinction of natures being by no means taken away by the union, but rather the property of each nature being preserved, and concurring in one Person and one Subsistence, not parted or divided into two persons, but one and the same Son, and only begotten, God the Word, the Lord Jesus Christ;
as the prophets from the beginning [have declared] concerning Him, and the Lord Jesus Christ Himself has taught us, and the Creed of the holy Fathers has handed down to us.“
 

TheLayman

Member
Okay, but...

Which part of the Chalcedonian Creed below defines the Trinity (three Persons in one Being)...

“We, then, following the holy Fathers, all with one consent, teach people to confess one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, the same perfect in Godhead and also perfect in manhood;
truly God and truly man, of a reasonable [rational] soul and body;
consubstantial [co-essential] with the Father according to the Godhead, and consubstantial with us according to the Manhood;
in all things like unto us, without sin;
begotten before all ages of the Father according to the Godhead, and in these latter days, for us and for our salvation, born of the Virgin Mary, the Mother of God, according to the Manhood;
one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, only begotten, to be acknowledged in two natures, inconfusedly, unchangeably, indivisibly, inseparably;
the distinction of natures being by no means taken away by the union, but rather the property of each nature being preserved, and concurring in one Person and one Subsistence, not parted or divided into two persons, but one and the same Son, and only begotten, God the Word, the Lord Jesus Christ;
as the prophets from the beginning [have declared] concerning Him, and the Lord Jesus Christ Himself has taught us, and the Creed of the holy Fathers has handed down to us.”
Have you ever heard someone say, "there is no such thing as a stupid question"? They were wrong, and this is evidence of that. Now, allow me to quote myself:

That said, I will not play you game as you spin this off into another half dozen misrepresentations.

TheLayman
 

TheLayman

Member
So...

Do you agree with the Chalcedonian Creed below that Mary should be called “the Mother of God”?

“We, then, following the holy Fathers, all with one consent, teach people to confess one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, the same perfect in Godhead and also perfect in manhood;
truly God and truly man, of a reasonable [rational] soul and body;
consubstantial [co-essential] with the Father according to the Godhead, and consubstantial with us according to the Manhood;
in all things like unto us, without sin;
begotten before all ages of the Father according to the Godhead, and in these latter days, for us and for our salvation, born of the Virgin Mary, the Mother of God, according to the Manhood;
one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, only begotten, to be acknowledged in two natures, inconfusedly, unchangeably, indivisibly, inseparably;
the distinction of natures being by no means taken away by the union, but rather the property of each nature being preserved, and concurring in one Person and one Subsistence, not parted or divided into two persons, but one and the same Son, and only begotten, God the Word, the Lord Jesus Christ;
as the prophets from the beginning [have declared] concerning Him, and the Lord Jesus Christ Himself has taught us, and the Creed of the holy Fathers has handed down to us.“
Mary is the mother of God (and pointing this out identifies the error of Ebionites, Adoptionists, Arians, and so forth).

Galatians 4:4-5 (NKJV)
4 But when the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the law,
5 to redeem those who were under the law, that we might receive the adoption as sons.

Allow me to quote myself from my first response:

That said, I will not play you game as you spin this off into another half dozen misrepresentations.

As I have said many times now, my comments were pointing out that the orthodox Theology (the Trinity) and Christology (the incarnation) are objective doctrines, not subjective musings. But you continue on doing whatever it is you think you are doing, playing your game, for purposes known only to you.

TheLayman
 
Top