N
Nick_A
Guest
Leaving opinions within Christendom out of it for a moment, what is meant by the following expression of the Trinity for Christianity? How can this have any meaning without the Trinity?
Exposing The Trinity
- Thread starter Azure24
- Start date
A common and erroneous assumption, evidenced here, is that the Councils of the Church spin doctrines out of thin air, as if they all got together for no reason at all, and rather than go home having done nothing, decided to invent a new doctrine for the hell of it, just to make life interesting.
The Councils of the Church can be found here.
The English expert in the field is Fr Norman P Tanner, and he has produced an excellent little history.
To repeat: Councils are called only when error threatens the life and faith of the Church (for example Pope John XXIII's decision to call what became the Second Vatican Council in 1960s was met with a resounding 'why?').
The council documents:
1 — assert the faith it is believed;
2 — highlight the dangers/errors that threaten the faith;
3 — pronounce the original belief more emphatically so that the error can be seen more clearly and avoided.
The sometimes go on to call exegetes and theologians to make further inquiry into certain areas highlighted, for the benefit of the Church.
Thus, whilst the earliest councils make scant reference to the Holy Spirit, that's not because the Church didn't believe in the Holy Spirit, but because the Holy Spirit wasn't being disputed – the nature of Christ was the cause of the dispute.
Likewise, no Council has ever debated reincarnation, because it has never been an issue within the Church.
A point totally missed, is that it is not necessary to convene a council to make an infallible definition of dogma.
In 1950 for example, the Church declared the Dogma of the Assumption, the belief that the Blessed Virgin was assumed, body and soul, into heaven. This belief dates at least to the fifth century, and in the liturgies of the Eastern Church, is even older (the Dormition).
It has never been the subject of Council deliberation because it has never been disputed. It was declared true on the following basis:
(The belief in the Assumption was not being questioned, but as Pope Pius explained, he had certain reasons to believe its pronouncement was timely.)
Thomas
The Councils of the Church can be found here.
The English expert in the field is Fr Norman P Tanner, and he has produced an excellent little history.
To repeat: Councils are called only when error threatens the life and faith of the Church (for example Pope John XXIII's decision to call what became the Second Vatican Council in 1960s was met with a resounding 'why?').
The council documents:
1 — assert the faith it is believed;
2 — highlight the dangers/errors that threaten the faith;
3 — pronounce the original belief more emphatically so that the error can be seen more clearly and avoided.
The sometimes go on to call exegetes and theologians to make further inquiry into certain areas highlighted, for the benefit of the Church.
Thus, whilst the earliest councils make scant reference to the Holy Spirit, that's not because the Church didn't believe in the Holy Spirit, but because the Holy Spirit wasn't being disputed – the nature of Christ was the cause of the dispute.
Likewise, no Council has ever debated reincarnation, because it has never been an issue within the Church.
A point totally missed, is that it is not necessary to convene a council to make an infallible definition of dogma.
In 1950 for example, the Church declared the Dogma of the Assumption, the belief that the Blessed Virgin was assumed, body and soul, into heaven. This belief dates at least to the fifth century, and in the liturgies of the Eastern Church, is even older (the Dormition).
It has never been the subject of Council deliberation because it has never been disputed. It was declared true on the following basis:
Munificentissimus Deus
(The belief in the Assumption was not being questioned, but as Pope Pius explained, he had certain reasons to believe its pronouncement was timely.)
Thomas
M
mee
Guest
very true i am glad to say that JEHOVAHS WITNESSES have not taken the manmade trinity doctrine on board , they stick to what the bible REALLY teaches.
and one thing is for sure the bible does not teach the TRINITY , but manypeople have been misled down through the centuries, and now people in this day and age even think that the bible teaches it .
but JEHOVAHS WITNESSES have not been misled
B
Bandit
Guest
LOL!! I am sure you weren't expecting peace & humility in another trinital debate anyway
shawn
Well-Known Member
That would be expecting too much.LOL!! I am sure you weren't expecting peace & humility in another trinital debate anyway
They have it all figured out....they think.
When I was in seminary, I got into a discussion with a Hindu and he informed me that the biggest stumbling block of the christian movement from his perspective was the fact that here is a monotheistic religion which preaches unity and love, yet look at the fruit and see the division (how many denominations?) and the strife over the basic fundamentals.
This does not go unnoticed by the people whom the christians are trying to convert.