Re: Seely's Views 2

From: George Murphy <gmurphy@raex.com>
Date: Sun Sep 12 2004 - 05:32:51 EDT

Original Message
From: Jim Armstrong
To: Glenn Morton
Cc: jwburgeson@juno.com ; asa@calvin.edu
Sent: Sunday, September 12, 2004 12:57 AM
Subject: Re: Seely's Views 2

Some 2d order butt-insky comments:

> Just a butt-insky comment or two - JimA
[big snip]

The Christian God is a Trinity for good reason.>...though the Trinity notion is not a Jesus-era articulation per se.

I don't know exactly what you consider the "Jesus era" but there is a good deal of Trinitarian language in the NT and the way Jesus speaks of his relationship with his Father is one factor that leads to trinbitarian concepts. Formalization of trinitarian dogma & ways of conceptualizing it of course took awhile to work out & in important ways are still going on.

 The HS is the
one that convicts and persuades. Not our vaunted logical capability.
    
I don't think the Muslims believe there is a HS. Who is right? Who is
wrong? We can't hardly have one and not have one at the same time,
unless the HS is quantum-mechanical.> Not all Christians have historically nor even now (though perhaps to a lesser extent) take the Holy Spirit to be a separate personification rather than one particular >expression of God. That might narrow the gap for some Christians.

"Not all" but modalism has generally been rejected. Unfortunately most of the trinitarian theology of the western church has tended too far toward modalism.

[snip]

Glenn: "Well, I picked the 57% figure out of the air, but if
the bad communication, in which God chooses to allow the
wrong message to get out, is actually true, then I would say
my confidence would plummet much lower than 57%. Why do we
want to believe something that makes our religion so
unbelievable? I simply don't understand the attitude. If I
felt that God acted like a used car salesman(whom I really
don't trust at all), why would I believe what He tells me?"

But Glenn. Believing in something outside of Christ is simply
a form of idolatry.
> Unless I am mistaken, the eastern branch of Christianity feels that the western branch has created "a form of idolatry" (heresy) by deciding to worship one begotten of >God rather than God Himself who preexisted the begotten one. Many/most western Christians take exception to that, but would we say the eastern branch is practicing >idolatry because their understanding of God and man's history with Him differs in this way?

This is historically incorrect. Nestorians rejected the belief that the person of Jesus could be identified with the eternal 2d person of the Trinity but not that that divine person had no connection with him. In any case the Nestorian position is not the view of "the eastern branch of Christianity" but of a relatively small part of it, & that view was rejected at Ephesus & Chalcedon. In general, both east & west agree in worshipping Christ as God because (a) the 2d person of the Trinity is "true God from true God" (Nicea) & (b) the single person born of Mary is the 2d person of the Trinity (Ephesus). It is not correct to say that the Father "preexisted" the Son in any temporal sense, the Arian view specifically condemned at Nicea.

Of course one can reject any or all of these claims but they are the historic views of the church catholic, east & west.

Shalom
George
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
Received on Sun Sep 12 06:10:10 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Sep 12 2004 - 06:10:10 EDT