"}},"i":0}}]}" id="mwAns">
This threefold relation [of Father, Son and Spirit] soon found fixed expression in the triadic formulae in 2 Corinthians 13:14 [106] and in 1 Corinthians 12:4–6. [107] The form is first found in the baptismal formula in Matthew 28:19 Did., 7. 1 and 3. ... [I]t is self-evident that Father, Son and Spirit are here linked in an indissoluble threefold relationship. [108]
In Trinitarian doctrine, God exists as three persons but is one being, having a single divine nature. [109] The members of the Trinity are co-equal and co-eternal, one in essence, nature, power, action, and will. As stated in the Athanasian Creed, the Father is uncreated, the Son is uncreated, and the Holy Spirit is uncreated, and all three are eternal without beginning. [110] "The Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit" are not names for different parts of God, but one name for God [111] because three persons exist in God as one entity. [112] They cannot be separate from one another. Each person is understood as having the identical essence or nature, not merely similar natures. [113]
According to the Eleventh Council of Toledo (675) "For, when we say: He who is the Father is not the Son, we refer to the distinction of persons; but when we say: the Father is that which the Son is, the Son that which the Father is, and the Holy Spirit that which the Father is and the Son is, this clearly refers to the nature or substance". [114]
The Fourth Lateran Council (1215) adds: "Therefore in God there is only a Trinity, not a quaternity, since each of the three persons is that reality – that is to say substance, essence or divine nature-which alone is the principle of all things, besides which no other principle can be found. This reality neither begets nor is begotten nor proceeds; the Father begets, the Son is begotten and the holy Spirit proceeds. Thus there is a distinction of persons but a unity of nature. Although therefore the Father is one person, the Son another person and the holy Spirit another person, they are not different realities, but rather that which is the Father is the Son and the holy Spirit, altogether the same; thus according to the orthodox and catholic faith they are believed to be consubstantial. " [115] [116]
Clarification of the relationships among the three Trinitarian Persons (divine persons, different from the sense of a "human self") advanced in the Magisterial statement promulgated by the Council of Florence (1431–1449), though its formulation precedes the council: "These three persons are one God and not three gods, for the three are one substance, one essence, one nature, one Godhead, one infinity, one eternity, and everything (in them) is one where there is no opposition of relationship [relationis oppositio]". [d] Robert Magliola explains that most theologians have taken relationis oppositio in the "Thomist" sense, namely, the "opposition of relationship" [in English we would say "oppositional relationship"] is one of contrariety rather than contradiction. The only "functions" that are applied uniquely to the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit respectively in Scripture are the following: "Paternity" to the Father, "Filiation" (Sonship) to the Son, and "Passive Spiration" or that which is "breathed out", to the Holy Spirit. Magliola goes on to explain:
Because such is the case (among other reasons), Karl Rahner rejects the "psychological" theories of Trinity which define the Father as Knower, for example, and the Son as the Known (i.e., Truth). Scripture in one place or another identifies Knowing with each of the three Persons all told. Which is to say, according to the relationis oppositio, Knowing (in our example) does not define the Persons [qua individual Persons] at all, but the Unity of God instead. (Scripture's attribution of Knowing to any one Person at any one time is said to be just "appropriated" to the Person: it does not really belong to that unique Person). [117]
Magliola, continuing the Rahnerian stance, goes on to explain that the Divine Persons necessarily relate to each other in terms of "pure negative reference", that is, the three "Is Not" relations represented in the Scutum Fidei diagram are in each case a pure or absolute "Is Not". This is the case because the relationis oppositio clause disallows the Persons to "share", qua Persons, the unique role that defines each of them. Lest he be misunderstood, Magliola, in a subsequent publication, makes sure to specify that each of the three Persons, while unique as a Person, is nonetheless—because of the Divine "consubstantiality" and "simplicity"—the one Reality that is God. [118]
Perichoresis (from Greek, "going around", "envelopment") is a term used by some scholars to describe the relationship among the members of the Trinity. The Latin equivalent for this term is circumincessio. This concept refers for its basis to John 10:38,14:11,14:20, [119] where Jesus is instructing the disciples concerning the meaning of his departure. His going to the Father, he says, is for their sake; so that he might come to them when the "other comforter" is given to them. Then, he says, his disciples will dwell in him, as he dwells in the Father, and the Father dwells in him, and the Father will dwell in them. This is so, according to the theory of perichoresis, because the persons of the Trinity "reciprocally contain one another, so that one permanently envelopes and is permanently enveloped by, the other whom he yet envelopes" (Hilary of Poitiers, Concerning the Trinity 3:1). [120] The most prominent exponent of perichoresis was John of Damascus (d. 749) who employed the concept as a technical term to describe both the interpenetration of the divine and human natures of Christ and the relationship between the hypostases of the Trinity. [121]
Perichoresis effectively excludes the idea that God has parts, but rather is a simple being. It also harmonizes well with the doctrine that the Christian's union with the Son in his humanity brings him into union with one who contains in himself, in Paul's words, "all the fullness of deity" and not a part. [e] Perichoresis provides an intuitive figure of what this might mean. The Son, the eternal Word, is from all eternity the dwelling place of God; he is the "Father's house", just as the Son dwells in the Father and the Spirit; so that, when the Spirit is "given", then it happens as Jesus said, "I will not leave you as orphans; for I will come to you." [122]
The term "immanent Trinity" focuses on who God is; the term "economic Trinity" focuses on what God does. According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church,
The Fathers of the Church distinguish between theology (theologia) and economy (oikonomia). "Theology" refers to the mystery of God's inmost life within the Blessed Trinity and "economy" to all the works by which God reveals himself and communicates his life. Through the oikonomia the theologia is revealed to us; but conversely, the theologia illuminates the whole oikonomia. God's works reveal who he is in himself; the mystery of his inmost being enlightens our understanding of all his works. So it is, analogously, among human persons. A person discloses himself in his actions, and the better we know a person, the better we understand his actions. [123]
The whole divine economy is the common work of the three divine persons. For as the Trinity has only one and the same natures so too does it have only one and the same operation: "The Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are not three principles of creation but one principle." However, each divine person performs the common work according to his unique personal property. Thus the Church confesses, following the New Testament, "one God and Father from whom all things are, and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom all things are, and one Holy Spirit in whom all things are". It is above all the divine missions of the Son's Incarnation and the gift of the Holy Spirit that show forth the properties of the divine persons. [124]
The ancient Nicene theologians argued that everything the Trinity does is done by Father, Son, and Spirit working in unity with one will. The three persons of the Trinity always work inseparably, for their work is always the work of the one God. The Son's will cannot be different from the Father's because it is the Father's. They have but one will as they have but one being. Otherwise they would not be one God. On this point St. Basil said:
When then He says, "I have not spoken of myself", and again, "As the Father said unto me, so I speak", and "The word which ye hear is not mine, but [the Father's] which sent me", and in another place, "As the Father gave me commandment, even so I do", it is not because He lacks deliberate purpose or power of initiation, nor yet because He has to wait for the preconcerted key-note, that he employs language of this kind. His object is to make it plain that His own will is connected in indissoluble union with the Father. Do not then let us understand by what is called a "commandment" a peremptory mandate delivered by organs of speech, and giving orders to the Son, as to a subordinate, concerning what He ought to do. Let us rather, in a sense befitting the Godhead, perceive a transmission of will, like the reflexion of an object in a mirror, passing without note of time from Father to Son. [125]
According to Thomas Aquinas the Son prayed to the Father, became a minor to the angels, became incarnate, obeyed the Father as to his human nature; as to his divine nature the Son remained God: "Thus, then, the fact that the Father glorifies, raises up, and exalts the Son does not show that the Son is less than the Father, except in His human nature. For, in the divine nature by which He is equal to the Father, the power of the Father and the Son is the same and their operation is the same." [60] Aquinas stated that the mystery of the Son cannot be explicitly believed to be true without faith in the Trinity (ST IIa IIae, 2.7 resp. and 8 resp.). [126]
Athanasius of Alexandria explained that the Son is eternally one in being with the Father, temporally and voluntarily subordinate in his incarnate ministry. [127] Such human traits, he argued, were not to be read back into the eternal Trinity. Likewise, the Cappadocian Fathers also insisted there was no economic inequality present within the Trinity. As Basil wrote: "We perceive the operation of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit to be one and the same, in no respect showing differences or variation; from this identity of operation we necessarily infer the unity of nature." [128]
The traditional theory of "appropriation" consists in attributing certain names, qualities, or operations to one of the Persons of the Trinity, not, however, to the exclusion of the others, but in preference to the others. This theory was established by the Latin Fathers of the fourth and fifth centuries, especially by Hilary of Poitiers, Augustine, and Leo the Great. In the Middle Ages, the theory was systematically taught by the Schoolmen such as Bonaventure. [129]
Augustine "coupled the doctrine of the Trinity with anthropology. Proceeding from the idea that humans are created by God according to the divine image, he attempted to explain the mystery of the Trinity by uncovering traces of the Trinity in the human personality". [130] The first key of his exegesis is an interpersonal analogy of mutual love. In De trinitate (399–419) he wrote,
We are now eager to see whether that most excellent love is proper to the Holy Spirit, and if it is not so, whether the Father, or the Son, or the Holy Trinity itself is love, since we cannot contradict the most certain faith and the most weighty authority of Scripture which says: "God is love". [f] [131]
The Bible reveals it although only in the two neighboring verses 1 John 4:8.16, therefore one must ask if love itself is triune. Augustine found that it is, and consists of "three: the lover, the beloved, and the love." [g] [132]
Reaffirming the theopaschite formula unus de trinitate passus est carne (meaning "One of the Trinity suffered in the flesh"), [133] Thomas Aquinas wrote that Jesus suffered and died as to his human nature, as to his divine nature he could not suffer or die. "But the commandment to suffer clearly pertains to the Son only in His human nature. ... And the way in which Christ was raised up is like the way He suffered and died, that is, in the flesh. For it says in 1 Peter (4:1): 'Christ having suffered in the flesh' ... then, the fact that the Father glorifies, raises up, and exalts the Son does not show that the Son is less than the Father, except in His human nature. For, in the divine nature by which He is equal to the Father." [134]
In the 1900s the recovery of a substantially different formula of theopaschism took place: at least unus de Trinitate passus est (meaning "not only in the flesh"). [135] More specifically, World War II had an impact not only on the theodicy of Judaism with the Holocaust theology, but also on that of Christianity with a profound rethinking of its dogmatic theology. Deeply affected by the atomic bombs event, [136] as early as 1946 the Lutheran theologian Kazoh Kitamori published Theology of the Pain of God, [137] a theology of the Cross pushed up to the immanent Trinity. This concept was later taken by both Reformed and Catholic theology: in 1971 by Jürgen Moltmann's The Crucified God; in the 1972 "Preface to the Second Edition" of his 1969 German book Theologie der drei Tage (English translation: The Mystery of Easter ) by Hans Urs von Balthasar, who took a cue from Revelation 13:8 (Vulgate: agni qui occisus est ab origine mundi, NIV: "the Lamb who was slain from the creation of the world") to explore the "God is love" idea as an "eternal super-kenosis". [138] In the words of von Balthasar: "At this point, where the subject undergoing the 'hour' is the Son speaking with the Father, the controversial 'Theopaschist formula' has its proper place: 'One of the Trinity has suffered.' The formula can already be found in Gregory Nazianzen: 'We needed a ... crucified God'." [139] But if theopaschism indicates only a Christological kenosis (or kenotic Christology), instead von Balthasar supports a Trinitarian kenosis: [140] "The persons of the Trinity constitute themselves as who they are through the very act of pouring themselves out for each other". [141] This allows to clearly distinguish his idea from Subordinationism.
Furthermore, following the concepts developed by Scholasticism, the underlying question is whether the three Persons of the Trinity can experience self-love (amor sui), as well as whether for them, with the conciliar dogmatic formulation in terms that today we would call ontotheological, it is possible for aseity ( causa sui ) to be valid. If the Father is not the Son or the Spirit since the generator/begetter is not the generated/begotten nor the generation/generative process and vice versa, and since the lover is neither the beloved nor the love dynamic between them and vice versa, Christianity has provided as a response a concept of divine ontology and love different from common sense (omniscience, omnipotence, omnibenevolence, impassibility, etc.): [142] [143] an oblative, sacrificial, martyrizing, crucifying, precisely kenotic concept.
Benjamin B. Warfield saw a principle of subordination in the "modes of operation" of the Trinity, but was also hesitant to ascribe the same to the "modes of subsistence" in relation of one to another. While noting that it is natural to see a subordination in function as reflecting a similar subordination in substance, he suggests that this might be the result of "an agreement by Persons of the Trinity – a 'Covenant' as it is technically called – by virtue of which a distinct function in the work of redemption is assumed by each." [144]
Today, several analogies for the Trinity abound. The comparison is sometimes made between the triune God and H2O. [145] [146] Just as H2O can come in three distinct forms (liquid, solid, gas), so God appears as Father, Son, Spirit. [145] [146] The mathematical analogy, "1+1+1=3, but 1x1x1=1" is also used to explain the Trinity. [145]
According to Eusebius, Constantine suggested the term homoousios at the Council of Nicaea, though most scholars have doubted that Constantine had such knowledge and have thought that most likely Hosius had suggested the term to him. [147] Constantine later changed his view about the Arians, who opposed the Nicene formula, and supported the bishops who rejected the formula, [148] as did several of his successors, the first emperor to be baptized in the Nicene faith being Theodosius the Great, emperor from 379 to 395. [149]
Christians confess that the Trinity is fundamentally incomprehensible, and thus Christian confessions tend to maintain the doctrine as it is revealed in Scripture, but do not attempt to exhaustively analyse it or set forth its essence comprehensively, as Louis Berkhof describes in his Systematic Theology.
The Trinity is a mystery, not merely in the Biblical sense that it is a truth, which is formerly hidden, but is now revealed; but in the sense that man cannot comprehend it and make it intelligible. It is intelligible in some of its relations and modes of manifestation, but unintelligible in its essential nature. [... The Church] has never tried to explain the mystery of the Trinity, but only sought to formulate the doctrine of the Trinity in such a manner that the errors which endangered it were warded off. [150]
Although all trinitarians agree that there exists one God in three persons, trinitarian theologians have differed with each other on how to explain the workings and relations of the persons of the trinity. Among the trinitarian topics which have been debated by trinitarian theologians throughout history are the eternal generation of the Son, [151] the functional subordination of the Son, [152] the eternal procession of the Spirit, [153] [154] the Filioque [155] and the ontological subordination of the persons of the trinity. [156] [157]
Among modern trinitarian debates, the issue of social trinitarianism is often discussed. [158] Although social trinitarianism is a diverse theological movement, many of its advocates argue that each of the persons of the trinity are to be defined as three centers of consciousness with each having their own individual volitions. [159] This is in contrast to what is often called "classical trinitarianism" due to its association with many classical theologians such as Augustine, which instead distinguishes the persons by their eternal relations of begetting and procession. [160] [161]
The doctrine of eternal generation is defined as a necessary and eternal act of God the Father, in which he generates (or begets) God the Son through communicating the whole divine essence to the Son. Generation is not defined as an act of the will, but is by necessity of nature. [162] [163] This doctrine has been affirmed by the Athanasian creed, [164] the Nicene creed [165] and by church fathers such as Athanasius of Alexandria, Augustine, Basil of Caesarea [166] [167] [168] [169] being mentioned explicitly first by Origen of Alexandria. [170] Those who teach the traditional doctrine of eternal generation have often used biblical texts such as Proverbs 8:23, [171] Psalm 2:7, Micah 5:2, John 5:26, John 1:18, 3:16, Colossians 1:15, 2 Corinthians 4:4 and Hebrews 1:3 to establish their understanding of eternal generation. [172] [173] However, Social trinitarianism often rejects the doctrines of eternal generation and procession, disputing the idea that these texts teach the doctrine of eternal generation. Social trinitarians such as William Lane Craig have argued that it introduces subordinationism into the trinity. [174] [175]
Nontrinitarianism (or antitrinitarianism) refers to Christian belief systems that reject the doctrine of the Trinity as found in the Nicene Creed as not having a scriptural origin. Nontrinitarian views differ widely on the nature of God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. Various nontrinitarian views, such as Adoptionism, Monarchianism, and Arianism existed prior to the formal definition of the Trinity doctrine in AD 325, 360, and 431, at the Councils of Nicaea, Constantinople, and Ephesus, respectively. [176] Following the adoption of trinitarianism at Constantinople in 381, Arianism was driven from the Empire, retaining a foothold amongst the Germanic tribes. When the Franks converted to Catholicism in 496, however, it gradually faded out. [86] Nontrinitarianism was later renewed in the Gnosticism of the Cathars in the 11th through 13th centuries, in the Age of Enlightenment of the 18th century, and in some groups arising during the Second Great Awakening of the 19th century. [h]
Arianism was condemned as heretical by the First Council of Nicaea and, lastly, with Sabellianism by the Second Ecumenical Council (Constantinople, 381 CE). [177] Adoptionism was declared as heretical by the Ecumenical Council of Frankfurt, convened by the Emperor Charlemagne in 794 for the Latin West Church. [178]
Modern nontrinitarian groups or denominations include Christadelphians, Christian Science, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Dawn Bible Students, Iglesia ni Cristo, Jehovah's Witnesses, Living Church of God, Members Church of God International, Oneness Pentecostals, La Luz del Mundo, the Seventh Day Church of God, Unitarian Christians, United Church of God, and The Shepherd's Chapel.
As pointed out by Jonathan Israel, [179] the 17th Century Dutch Republic was more religiously tolerant than other European countries of the time, but its dominant Calvinist Church drew the line at groups who denied the Trinity; this was considered an intolerable aberration, and such groups were subject to various forms of persecution in the Netherlands.
John William Colenso argued that the Book of Enoch implies a Trinitarian-esque view of God, seeing the "Lord of the spirits", the "Elected one" and the "Divine power" each partaking of the name of God. [180]
This section may contain material not related to the topic of the article .(July 2023) |
Judaism maintains a tradition of monotheism that excludes the possibility of a Trinity. [181] In Judaism, God is understood to be the absolute one, indivisible, and incomparable being which is the ultimate cause of all existence.
Some Kabbalist writings have a Trinitarian-esque view of God, speaking of "stages of God's being, aspects of the divine personality", with God being "three hidden lights, which constitute one essence and one root". Some Jewish philosophers additionally saw God as a "thinker, thinking and thought", taking from Augustinian analogies. [182] The Zohar additionally says that "God is they, and they are it".
Philo of Alexandria recognized a threefold character of God, but had many differences from the Christian view of the Trinity. [183]
This section may contain material not related to the topic of the article .(July 2023) |
Islam considers Jesus to be a prophet, but not divine, [181] and God to be absolutely indivisible (a concept known as tawhid ). [184] Several verses of the Quran state that the doctrine of the Trinity is blasphemous.
Indeed, disbelievers have said, "Truly, Allah is Messiah, son of Mary." But Messiah said, "Children of Israel! Worship Allah, my lord and your lord." Indeed, whoever associates partners with Allah, surely Allah has forbidden them from Heaven, and fire is their resort. And there are no helpers for the wrongdoers. Indeed, disbelievers have said, "Truly, Allah is a third of three." Yet, there is no god except One God, and if they do not desist from what they say, a grievous punishment befalls the disbelievers. Will they not turn to Allah and ask His forgiveness? For Allah is most forgiving and merciful. Is not Messiah, son of Mary, only a messenger? Indeed, messengers had passed away prior to him. And his mother was an upright woman. They both ate food. Observe how we explain the signs for them, then observe how they turn away (from truth)!
— Quran 5:72–75 [185]
Interpretation of these verses by modern scholars has been varied. Verse 5:73 has been interpreted as a potential criticism of Syriac literature that references Jesus as "the third of three" and thus an attack on the view that Christ was divine. [186] Another interpretation is that this passage should be studied from a rhetorical perspective; so as not to be an error, but an intentional misrepresentation of the doctrine of the Trinity in order to demonstrate its absurdity from an Islamic perspective. [187] David Thomas states that verse 5:116 need not be seen as describing actually professed beliefs, but rather, giving examples of shirk (claiming divinity for beings other than God) and a "warning against excessive devotion to Jesus and extravagant veneration of Mary, a reminder linked to the central theme of the Qur'an that there is only one God and He alone is to be worshipped." [184] When read in this light, it can be understood as an admonition, "Against the divinization of Jesus that is given elsewhere in the Qur'an and a warning against the virtual divinization of Mary in the declaration of the fifth-century church councils that she is 'God-bearer'." Similarly, Gabriel Reynolds, Sidney Griffith and Mun'im Sirry argue that this Quranic verse is to be understood as an intentional caricature and rhetorical statement to warn from the dangers of deifiying Jesus or Mary. [188] [189]
The Trinity is most commonly seen in Christian art with the Spirit represented by a dove, as specified in the Gospel accounts of the Baptism of Christ; he is nearly always shown with wings outspread. However depictions using three human figures appear occasionally in most periods of art. [190]
The Father and the Son are usually differentiated by age, and later by dress, but this too is not always the case. The usual depiction of the Father as an older man with a white beard may derive from the biblical Ancient of Days, which is often cited in defense of this sometimes controversial representation. However, in Eastern Orthodoxy the Ancient of Days is usually understood to be God the Son, not God the Father (see below)—early Byzantine images show Christ as the Ancient of Days, [191] but this iconography became rare. When the Father is depicted in art, he is sometimes shown with a halo shaped like an equilateral triangle, instead of a circle. The Son is often shown at the Father's right hand (Acts 7:56). He may be represented by a symbol—typically the Lamb ( agnus dei ) or a cross—or on a crucifix, so that the Father is the only human figure shown at full size. In early medieval art, the Father may be represented by a hand appearing from a cloud in a blessing gesture, for example in scenes of the Baptism of Christ. Later, in the West, the Throne of Mercy (or "Throne of Grace") became a common depiction. In this style, the Father (sometimes seated on a throne) is shown supporting either a crucifix [192] or, later, a slumped crucified Son, similar to the Pietà (this type is distinguished in German as the Not Gottes), [193] in his outstretched arms, while the Dove hovers above or in between them. This subject continued to be popular until the 18th century at least.
By the end of the 15th century, larger representations, other than the Throne of Mercy, became effectively standardised, showing an older figure in plain robes for the Father, Christ with his torso partly bare to display the wounds of his Passion, and the dove above or around them. In earlier representations both Father, especially, and Son often wear elaborate robes and crowns. Sometimes the Father alone wears a crown, or even a papal tiara.
In the later part of the Christian Era, in Renaissance European iconography, the Eye of Providence began to be used as an explicit image of the Christian Trinity and associated with the concept of Divine Providence. Seventeenth-century depictions of the Eye of Providence sometimes show it surrounded by clouds or sunbursts. [194]
The concept of the Trinity was made visible in the Heiligen-Geist-Kapelle in Bruck an der Mur, Austria, with a ground plan of an equilateral triangle with beveled corners. [195]
The Trinity has traditionally been a subject matter of strictly theological works focused on proving the doctrine of the Trinity and defending it against its critics. In recent years, however, the Trinity has made an entrance into the world of (Christian) literature through books such as The Shack , published in 2007 and The Trinity Story, published in 2021.
Arianism is a Christological doctrine which rejects the traditional notion of the Trinity and considers Jesus to be a creation of God, and therefore distinct from God. It is named after its major proponent, Arius. It is considered heretical by most modern mainstream branches of Christianity. It is practiced by a minority of modern denominations, although some of these denominations practice related doctrines such as Socinianism, and some shy away from use of the term Arian due to the term's historically negative connotations. Modern mainstream denominations sometimes connected to the teaching include Jehovah's Witnesses, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, some individual churches within the Churches of Christ, as well as some Hebrew Roots Christians and Messianic Jews.
In Christian theology, Sabellianism is the belief that there is only one Person in the Godhead. For example, Hanson defines Sabellianism as the "refusal to acknowledge the distinct existence of the Persons" and "Eustathius was condemned for Sabellianism. His insistence that there is only one distinct reality (hypostasis) in the Godhead, and his confusion about distinguishing Father, Son and Holy Spirit laid him open to such a charge." Condemned as heresy, Sabellianism has been rejected by the majority of Christian churches.
Nontrinitarianism is a form of Christianity that rejects the orthodox Christian theology of the Trinity—the belief that God is three distinct hypostases or persons who are coeternal, coequal, and indivisibly united in one being, or essence. Certain religious groups that emerged during the Protestant Reformation have historically been known as antitrinitarian.
Oneness Pentecostalism is a nontrinitarian religious movement within the Protestant Christian family of churches known as Pentecostalism. It derives its name from its teaching on the Godhead, a form of Modalistic Monarchianism commonly referred to as the Oneness doctrine. The doctrine states that there is one God―a singular divine spirit with no distinction of persons―who manifests himself in many ways, including as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. This stands in sharp contrast to the mainstream doctrine of three distinct, eternal persons posited by Trinitarian theology.
God the Father is a title given to God in Christianity. In mainstream trinitarian Christianity, God the Father is regarded as the first Person of the Trinity, followed by the second person, Jesus Christ the Son, and the third person, God the Holy Spirit. Since the second century, Christian creeds included affirmation of belief in "God the Father (Almighty)", primarily in his capacity as "Father and creator of the universe".
In orthodox Mormonism, the term God generally refers to the biblical God the Father, whom Latter Day Saints also refer to as Elohim or Heavenly Father, while the term Godhead refers to a council of three distinct divine persons consisting of God the Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost. However, in Latter Day Saint theology the term God may also refer to, in some contexts, the Godhead as a whole or to each member individually.
God the Son is the second Person of the Trinity in Christian theology. According to Christian doctrine, God the Son, in the form of Jesus Christ, is the incarnation of the eternal, pre-existent divine Logos through whom all things were created. Although the precise term "God the Son" does not appear in the Bible, it serves as a theological designation expressing the understanding of Jesus as a part of the Trinity, distinct yet united in essence with God the Father and God the Holy Spirit.
Hypostasis, from the Greek ὑπόστασις (hypóstasis), is the underlying, fundamental state or substance that supports all of reality. It is not the same as the concept of a substance. In Neoplatonism, the hypostasis of the soul, the intellect (nous) and "the one" was addressed by Plotinus. In Christian theology, the Holy Trinity consists of three hypostases: that of the Father, that of the Son, and that of the Holy Spirit.
Binitarianism is a Christian theology of two persons, personas, or aspects in one substance/Divinity. Classically, binitarianism is understood as a form of monotheism—that is, that God is absolutely one being—and yet with binitarianism there is a "twoness" in God, which means one God family. The other common forms of monotheism are "unitarianism", a belief in one God with one person, and "trinitarianism", a belief in one God with three persons.
In Christian theology, the incarnation is the belief that the pre-existent divine person of Jesus Christ, God the Son, the second person of the Trinity, and the Logos was "made flesh," "conceived by the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary," also known as the Theotokos. The doctrine of the incarnation then entails that Jesus was at the same time both fully God and fully human.
Subordinationism is a Trinitarian doctrine wherein the Son is subordinate to the Father, not only in submission and role, but with actual ontological subordination to varying degrees. It posits a hierarchical ranking of the persons of the Social Trinity, implying ontological subordination of the persons of the Son and the Holy Spirit. It was condemned as heretical in the Second Council of Constantinople.
Modalistic Monarchianism, also known as Modalism or Oneness Christology, is a Christian theology upholding the unipersonal oneness of God while also affirming the divinity of Jesus. As a form of Monarchianism, it stands in contrast with Dynamic Monarchianism (Adoptionism), which limits the divinity of Jesus to a moment in time when God adopted or exalted him into the Divine Nature. The term Modalism was first used by Trinitarian scholar Adolf von Harnack, referencing this belief.
In Christianity, God is the eternal, supreme being who created and preserves all things. Christians believe in a monotheistic conception of God, which is both transcendent and immanent. Christians believe in a singular God that exists in a Trinity, which consists of three Persons: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. Christian teachings on the transcendence, immanence, and involvement of God in the world and his love for humanity exclude the belief that God is of the same substance as the created universe but accept that God the Son assumed hypostatically united human nature, thus becoming man in a unique event known as "the Incarnation".
Debate exists as to whether the earliest Church Fathers in Christian history believed in the doctrine of the Trinity – the Christian doctrine that God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are three distinct persons sharing one homoousion (essence).
The pre-existence of Christ asserts the existence of Christ prior to his incarnation as Jesus. One of the relevant Bible passages is John 1 where, in the Trinitarian interpretation, Christ is identified with a pre-existent divine hypostasis called the Logos. There are nontrinitarian views that question the aspect of personal pre-existence, the aspect of divinity, or both.
Christian theology is the theology – the systematic study of the divine and religion – of Christian belief and practice. It concentrates primarily upon the texts of the Old Testament and of the New Testament, as well as on Christian tradition. Christian theologians use biblical exegesis, rational analysis and argument. Theologians may undertake the study of Christian theology for a variety of reasons, such as in order to:
The Jesus' name doctrine or the Oneness doctrine upholds that baptism is to be performed "in the name of Jesus Christ," rather than using the Trinitarian formula "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." It is most commonly associated with Oneness Christology and the movement of Oneness Pentecostalism; however, some Trinitarians also baptise in Jesus' name and interpret it as on the authority of Jesus' name which most of mainstream Christendom justifies as referencing the existence of a Trinitarian Christian deity through the Great Commission among other precepts such as instances in the Old Testament.
For the majority of Christian denominations, the Holy Spirit, or Holy Ghost, is believed to be the third divine person of the Trinity, a triune god manifested as God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit, each being God. Nontrinitarian Christians, who reject the doctrine of the Trinity, differ significantly from mainstream Christianity in their beliefs about the Holy Spirit. In Christian theology, pneumatology is the study of the Holy Spirit. Due to Christianity's historical relationship with Judaism, theologians often identify the Holy Spirit with the concept of the Ruach Hakodesh in Jewish scripture, on the theory that Jesus was expanding upon these Jewish concepts. Similar names, and ideas, include the Ruach Elohim, Ruach YHWH, and the Ruach Hakodesh. In the New Testament the Holy Spirit is identified with the Spirit of Christ, the Spirit of Truth, and the Paraclete (helper).
The different Denominations of Christianity have variations in their teachings regarding the Holy Spirit.
The eternal generation of the Son is a Trinitarian doctrine, which is defined as a necessary and eternal act of God the Father, in which he generates God the Son through communicating the whole divine essence to the Son. Generation is not defined as an act of the will, but is by necessity of nature. To avoid anthropomorphistic understandings of the doctrine, theologians have defined it as timeless, non-bodily, incomprehensible and not as a communication without but within the Godhead. The view is affirmed by the Roman Catholic Church, Eastern Orthodoxy and Protestantism as is evident in the Westminster Confession the London Baptist Confession and by Lutheran confessions among others.
Nature answers the question what we are; person answers the question who we are. [...] Nature is the source of our operations, person does them.
Trinitarian formulas are found in New Testament books such as 1 Peter 1:2; and 2 Cor 13:13. But the formula used by John the mystery-seer is unique. Perhaps it shows John's original adaptation of Paul's dual formula.
The Armenian manuscripts, which favour the reading of the Vulgate, are admitted to represent a Latin influence which dates from the twelfth century
Popular analogies for the Trinity abound. The comparison is sometimes made between the triune God and H2O. Just as H2O can come in three distinct forms (liquid, solid, gas), so God appears as Father, Son, Spirit. Or just as the sun cannot be separated from its rays of light and its felt heat, so the Son is the ray of the Father and the spirit is the heat of God. Or, to use a mathematical analogy: 1+1+1=3, but 1x1x1=1.
Christians have always used various analogies to help make sense of the Trinity. Water, for example, can exist in three different states, as liquid, steam or ice. It is once substance (H2O) yet appears in three distinct forms.
The eternal generation of the Son is commonly defined to be an eternal personal act of the Father, wherein by necessity of nature, not by choice of will, he generates the person (not the essence) of the Son, by communicating to him the whole indivisible substance of the Godhead, without division, alienation, or change, so that the Son is the express image of His Father's person, and eternally continues, not from the Father, but in the Father, and the Father in the Son
[In the 2nd century,] Jesus was either regarded as the man whom God hath chosen, in whom the Deity or the Spirit of God dwelt, and who, after being tested, was adopted by God and invested with dominion, (Adoptionist Christology); or Jesus was regarded as a heavenly spiritual being (the highest after God) who took flesh, and again returned to heaven after the completion of his work on earth (pneumatic Christology)
sabellian heresy council constantinople.