Announcement

Collapse

Theology 201 Guidelines

This is the forum to discuss the spectrum of views within Christianity on God's foreknowledge and election such as Calvinism, Arminianism, Molinism, Open Theism, Process Theism, Restrictivism, and Inclusivism, Christian Universalism and what these all are about anyway. Who is saved and when is/was their salvation certain? How does God exercise His sovereignty and how powerful is He? Is God timeless and immutable? Does a triune God help better understand God's love for mankind?

While this area is for the discussion of these doctrines within historic Christianity, all theists interested in discussing these areas within the presuppositions of and respect for the Christian framework are welcome to participate here. This is not the area for debate between nontheists and theists, additionally, there may be some topics that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream evangelical doctrine that may be more appropriately placed within Comparative Religions 101 Nontheists seeking only theistic participation only in a manner that does not seek to undermine the faith of others are also welcome - but we ask that Moderator approval be obtained beforehand.

Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 or General Theistics 101 forum without such restrictions. Theists who wish to discuss these issues outside the parameters of orthodox Christian doctrine are invited to Unorthodox Theology 201.

Remember, our forum rules apply here as well. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Churchgoer Understanding of the Trinity?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    We teach the trinity in our membership classes and we discuss it every now and then in regular adult classes. I haven't recently heard of in depth discussion recently (before coronavirus) but I'd been spending a lot of time with toddlers and pre-K (although they do ask now and then and we try).

    As for tongues, we are AOG and do believe in the gift as well as initial evidence of the baptism of the Holy Spirit. We also follow the commands about control and order of service. Once upon a time there was a man who spoke with passion about Christ and claimed to prophesy. However he was openly critical about our display of the Cross and spoke against other things. He was told to leave because of his disruption. God is no author of confusion.
    Watch your links! http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/fa...corumetiquette

    Comment


    • #17
      I wish all could speak in tongues, more so that all could prophesy.

      I'm glad the Trinity discussion arises in the classes. It does seem that the topic still does not get enough attention. I think that the awareness of Trinitarian concepts may keep people more accurately understanding Christ as Deity. It helps to discuss the Spirit ... but there probably are church groups that fear this leads to charismatic "extremes." I do believe some people prophesy and some people do miracles of God. But this mostly seems significant in missionary work. Yet, God seems to address the worship/interaction expectations his children expect. Still, the Spirit seems to be relegated to less prominence. This would be largely because Christ came as the man walking among us, as the one to point us to God. The Father is understood most directly as God -- that we are being pointed back to the heavenly -- the unseen God.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by DesertBerean View Post
        We teach the trinity in our membership classes and we discuss it every now and then in regular adult classes. I haven't recently heard of in depth discussion recently (before coronavirus) but I'd been spending a lot of time with toddlers and pre-K (although they do ask now and then and we try).

        As for tongues, we are AOG and do believe in the gift as well as initial evidence of the baptism of the Holy Spirit. We also follow the commands about control and order of service. Once upon a time there was a man who spoke with passion about Christ and claimed to prophesy. However he was openly critical about our display of the Cross and spoke against other things. He was told to leave because of his disruption. God is no author of confusion.
        One of my best pastor friends was an older AOG pastor -- he told me one of his greatest challenges is allowing the freedom of the Holy Spirit, while 'policing the nuts', because there are people drawn to the emotional aspect, who are not, in his opinion, motivated by the Spirit. He has removed people from his services on occasion, as you rightly say - God is not the author of confusion.
        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by hedrick View Post
          In fact all major theologians, even in the liberal tradition, are trinitarians. But I don't think we've done a very good job of making the doctrine look like it matters or even makes sense. When someone asks they get buried in antique philosophical terms.
          These "antique philosophical terms" can admittedly seem a bit esoteric and hard to understand for anyone who hasn't had time to familiarize themselves with their meaning (perhaps even if you've had the time to familiarize yourself with them!), and according to me it would probably have been much better if they were never needed. But since all sorts of heresies and delusions has risen up against the orthodox faith past Christians have obviously felt the need to put names to concepts that are found in the Bible, but are never explicitly given a name, in order to facilitate refutation of these heresies. Had these heresies never arisen, the need to for these "antique philosophical terms" would never have arisen either.

          Then again, it's hardly necessary for the ordinary Christian to familiarize themselves with all of the terms, as long as the biblical concepts that these philosophical terms describe and support are properly understood. Obviously it's not the terms themselves that are the important part, but what they teach and point towards.
          Last edited by JonathanL; 05-23-2020, 07:56 AM.

          Comment


          • #20
            Christians who are Trinitarian typically understand this from our NT.

            Now the Trinity is fundamental to God. God being the uncaused reality in which all things have their existence.
            Now God as Creator requires Him being an uncause cause. Which is two things, an uncaused reality and a cause.

            Uncaused Reality and Uncaused Cause are two.

            Both being Uncaused requires them to be one Uncaused in essense.
            The third being one Uncaused Essense.

            There is a Biblical foundation for this. Who God is, Exodus 3:14-15. By whom God creates, John 1:3, Ephesians 3:9, Colossians 1:16-17. And as to what God is, John 4:24, see also as whom He is as Persons, Romans 8:9, Romans 8:16. Matthew 28:19.

            Knowing all three Persons are the One Who God is, Exodus 3:14-15.

            We who are Christians know God personally through His Christ.
            Last edited by 37818; 07-11-2020, 10:29 AM.
            . . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV

            . . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV

            Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV

            Comment


            • #21
              The antique philosophical language had a big advantage when it was used. Those were terms that were meaningful to people at the time. Today they’re not.

              While traditional terms act as a shibboleth (a way to reject “liberals”), I doubt that very many people actually use them in their normal Christian life. I think for many evangelical Christians the traditional doctrine is effectively replaced by the statement “Jesus is God.” For example, at another site, there are people who object to Chalcedon (some members are from traditional Eastern non-Chalcedonian churches), but no objection is allowed to “Jesus is God.”

              It’s hard to know just what people mean by that, but for many I fear it is probably docetic in one way or another.

              But unless we’re willing to have at least some difference in perspective, we’ll never be able to do anything other than repeat traditional terms. No translation into a different philosophical framework will be precisely identical, even if it’s as good an explanation of the NT.

              Comment


              • #22
                The Trinity represents one thing that is not spelled out in scripture yet we have to teach it so that people don't fall for the common mistakes. So, it helps to speak the confessions in church gatherings and to teach the meaning occasionally. The effort to understand the Trinity is the process of excluding the ideas which don't make sense of scripture. Then we have the narrow path which integrates the set of ideas by which we comprehend God.

                Probably the main thing to recognize is that the sacrificial death of Christ could not mean anything if Christ were only 100% God who only appeared as a man. Nor could this death mean anything if Christ were merely a man, since many people have died for certain causes. He had to be fully God and fully Man for the atoning death to have sacrificial relevance.

                A church group can survive without an exact knowledge of the Trinity. However it is easier for people to fall for some other teaching unless properly equipped with this knowledge, at least in the confessional sense. It is great to know some places where this knowledge is known in the church body. I think it helps to keep people from falling for false Christianity.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by mikewhitney View Post
                  The Trinity represents one thing that is not spelled out in scripture yet we have to teach it so that people don't fall for the common mistakes. So, it helps to speak the confessions in church gatherings and to teach the meaning occasionally. The effort to understand the Trinity is the process of excluding the ideas which don't make sense of scripture. Then we have the narrow path which integrates the set of ideas by which we comprehend God.

                  Probably the main thing to recognize is that the sacrificial death of Christ could not mean anything if Christ were only 100% God who only appeared as a man. Nor could this death mean anything if Christ were merely a man, since many people have died for certain causes. He had to be fully God and fully Man for the atoning death to have sacrificial relevance.

                  A church group can survive without an exact knowledge of the Trinity. However it is easier for people to fall for some other teaching unless properly equipped with this knowledge, at least in the confessional sense. It is great to know some places where this knowledge is known in the church body. I think it helps to keep people from falling for false Christianity.
                  What creed acknowledges death of Christ's soul on the cross prior to His physical death? And that His soul was alive when by His own will died bodily? And in both deaths did not cease being God.
                  . . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV

                  . . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV

                  Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by 37818 View Post
                    What creed acknowledges death of Christ's soul on the cross prior to His physical death? And that His soul was alive when by His own will died bodily? And in both deaths did not cease being God.
                    This detail is a bit beyond what I was thinking of. The creeds present the specific understanding of the unity of the 3 persons in the Godhead. The relationship of the Trinity doctrine to the atoning death would be an additional study. Christ's death on the cross just helps to understand some of the significance of the Trinitarian doctrine.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by mikewhitney View Post
                      This detail is a bit beyond what I was thinking of. The creeds present the specific understanding of the unity of the 3 persons in the Godhead. The relationship of the Trinity doctrine to the atoning death would be an additional study. Christ's death on the cross just helps to understand some of the significance of the Trinitarian doctrine.
                      More to the subject, all the ancient creeds fail in a most important point of the Trinity, how the Son is fully God in a most important way, in that the Son is God the Father's sole agent as Creator. Without the Son, nothing is caused, John 1:3, Ephesians 3:9.
                      . . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV

                      . . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV

                      Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Maybe it is a good idea to include points that you mentioned into a creed. However, the creeds still clarifies major points that have to be recognized in order to differentiate the basic Christian orthodoxy from the most troublesome views. The creeds address the bigger heresies encountered in the distant past. These creeds are not to identify all critical doctrines.

                        No severe problem exists solely on someone's lack of clarity about the Trinity. That person may still have become justified in Christ. However, if whole congregations are lacking aware of the understanding of the Trinity, they are missing a critical point of knowledge and are susceptible to errant teachings. Nor do I want an atheist pastor who just teaches concepts of deity to please the congregation.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by 37818 View Post
                          More to the subject, all the ancient creeds fail in a most important point of the Trinity, how the Son is fully God in a most important way, in that the Son is God the Father's sole agent as Creator. Without the Son, nothing is caused, John 1:3, Ephesians 3:9.
                          Nicea says “by whom all things were made.” Is that what you’re thinking of?

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            I've never belonged to a church that recites a creed or confession, or even discusses them. My ELCA cousins recite the Apostles' Creed. Some of them can do it in German, having learned it from the previous generation when their church -- purportedly the oldest Transylvanian Saxon Lutheran church in America -- did a lot of the service in German.

                            I would suspect that *many* modern Christians, if asked to *explain* the Trinity and the Incarnation, would end up qualifying as heretics -- docetists, Arians, Eutychians, etc.
                            Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.

                            Beige Federalist.

                            Nationalist Christian.

                            "Everybody is somebody's heretic."

                            Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.

                            Proud member of the this space left blank community.

                            Would-be Grand Vizier of the Padishah Maxi-Super-Ultra-Hyper-Mega-MAGA King Trumpius Rex.

                            Justice for Ashli Babbitt!

                            Justice for Matthew Perna!

                            Arrest Ray Epps and his Fed bosses!

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              I remember doing a course on heresies and discovering that some of my beliefs were borderline heretical.
                              "For I desire mercy, not sacrifice, and acknowledgment of God rather than burnt offerings." Hosea 6:6

                              "Theology can be an intellectual entertainment." Metropolitan Anthony Bloom

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by NorrinRadd View Post
                                I've never belonged to a church that recites a creed or confession, or even discusses them. My ELCA cousins recite the Apostles' Creed. Some of them can do it in German, having learned it from the previous generation when their church -- purportedly the oldest Transylvanian Saxon Lutheran church in America -- did a lot of the service in German.

                                I would suspect that *many* modern Christians, if asked to *explain* the Trinity and the Incarnation, would end up qualifying as heretics -- docetists, Arians, Eutychians, etc.
                                At first I thought by "cousins" you were talking about a Lutheran group different from "yours." Now I see you are Full Gospel. That is where I started out ... long story.

                                I think I only heard the Trinity doctrine addressed once in 20 years when I was in an SBC church. Maybe there were other times before that church and in that church that the concept came up. I'm in a group that in normal services will have us recite one creed or another. It may be a bit much to recite every time but maybe once a month is good -- but people may only come once a month and might miss that day.

                                I think there should be a class once a year on it so people can be reminded of the Trinity doctrine. This proposal got more significance when I heard how missionaries reached communities and established churches only to be overtaken by cult groups when the missionaries were not there.

                                Comment

                                widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                                Working...
                                X