A chapter on The Trinity
As I work my way through the history of Judaeo-Christian salvation, I have drafted a chapter on The Trinity and early Christology. As before, I am seeking corrections, advice, and suggestions.
The chapter is available at: http://www.jwstudies.com/Formative_Christianity_s_Christological_Combats.pdf
While preparing this chapter, I realised that I am not looking at the "evolution" of soteriology. Rather, I am uncovering "revolutions" and upheavals. So I have amended the Study's title and the names of each major section to reflect this.
I have updated the Draft of the overall material to include this latest chapter. This is available at: http://www.jwstudies.com/Take_a_look_over_my_shoulder.pdf
Many thanks for your interest and help,
Hey, Doug Mason.
Formative Christianity's page 17, Subheading In the eastern empire, Constantine ... In two major battle in 324 ...
Page 24, Subheading In 381, the emperor imposed the Nicene faith ... It was sweeping document ... a
Now, to the cornbread of the matter, as it were.
Isn't it ironic that a ruler of the very empire that had Jesus of Nazareth executed was forced to convene a council to settle a dispute among His followers as to His nature?
And, the dispute was never really resolved, but continues to this very day?
We humans are a peculiar lot, are we not?
I have been looking for a doc. Like this forever. Excellent !
A lot to digest, a bit over my head to make any serious contributions right now, only to say it's now on my iPad, for my next (very soon) long flight back to Ireland.
Fair Dinkum mate :)
ps. There is a thread on the JW Topixs forum on *who is Jehovah* by a self proclaimed arrogant JW *annoined* named Samson, you may want to put it out there for review.
Sylvia And, the dispute was never really resolved, but continues to this very day?
yup ...it seems Jesus put it out there, as such ! :)
If he (Christ) being his (David's) Lord, how is he his son !
it seems pretty easy to see the Christ as a prophetic figure *to come * in flesh, (from a Unitarian point of view) however, the BIGGIE is how WAS he David's *LORD* lord! Lord as an angel, or personified WORD, or YHWH ?
or maybe even *LIFE itself* not just *A LIFE*
*I am the LIFE*, the *eternal life* (quality) with the father ! NOT *IMMORTAL LIFE* from eternity ..he became immortal in a New Creation....apparently
seems like IMMORTALITY relates to *exterior stuff* like body / environment, and eternal LIFE relates to *quality* !?!?
just my thoughts ...
Good thoughts they are, my brother.
I can grasp the pros and cons of the Trinity.
What I can't understand is how a sinless Child could be born from a sinful mother.
For instance, in order for Jesus of Nazareth to be a descendant of David, He would have to inherit David's DNA.
The DNA from Mary, in that one case, must have been purged clean of any trace of Adamic sin.
Since God can't dwell in any unclean place, that is probably what happened.
I look forward longingly to the time when we will learn the answer.
Also, He is a descendant of Adam, yet without defect.
There must be something inherently - intrinsically? - different in the male sperm in contrast to the female ovum.
Yet, ALL have sinned ...
Sylvia The DNA from Mary, in that one case, must have been purged clean of any trace of Adamic sin.
YA ...here are my thoughts on that ....
the Body without the spirit is DEAD. (James ..somewhere lol lol)
the body is controlled by our mind/thoughts/motivation. I belive the goal of Adam and Eve was first and foremost to be in control of the their natural MORTAL bodies and its natural desires, as they *walked* (fellowshipped) with God.
The *FALL* affected their MINDS (the spirit in their minds Ephesians 4:23) God gave them over to imperfect/depraved (wrong motives) minds ( Romans ..somewhere lol )
So the Word made flesh ( John somewhere ) had no effect on HIS MIND. He had the same mortal body as Adam but under his control... He overcame temptation, evil, sin and death in a mortal body, and died as a righteous man.
For what the law was powerless to do because it was weakened by the flesh, God did by sending his own Son in the **likeness of sinful flesh ** to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in the flesh Romans 8:3
Some groups like SDA even suggest Christ's fleshly body was a state of Falleness / sin infected.
My thoughts are that Christ fleshly body inherited the consequences *likeness of sinful flesh* from Mary, but the main driving force is his mind and motivation from his father. A POWER, we must have, if we *WILL* to rule *self* and be like him, a perfect image of God. Galatians 2:20
As Jesus said somewhere the *flesh is of NO VALUE* it's the spirit that gives life !
So Mary was no biggie, it's the powerful motivation he now has to offer mankind, if we WILL it. 1 John 5:9-13 ..
Romans 1 and John 1.
James 2 and John 6.
I think you will find that other Roman emperors were responsible for persecuting Christians.
Constantine had a dream (vision) which included a Christian symbol. He said that if he won the battle against his enemy the following day, he would become a Christian. In reality, he was not baptised until he was on his death bed - and the ceremony was performed by an Arian Christian (not by a Trinitarian).
It is absolutely my pure guess and assumption that Constantine's support for Christianity was deeply influenced by his mother Helena (Helen). Read the article at Wiki about her:
As emperor, Constantine's main interest lay in maintaining peace throughout the Empire, so the dissensions within the eastern part of Christianity deeply troubled him, especially as he could not understand why the eastern churches were embroiled in the minor matter of the nature of God and of Jesus Christ.
When he convened the Council of Nicaea, hardly any of its delegates came from the western church, and the Bishop of Rome played no part in it or in its outcomes.
Theology will agree with you that the expression "eternal life" speaks of the quality of life, and that it is experienced here and now. In other words, the expression means sharing in the life of the Eternal one. Look particularly at the present tenses in 1 John 5:10-12, and similar.
Let me give you a purely personal unjustifiable hypothesis: "Death created Sin".
By that I mean that some ancient community asked: "Why did the gods not sustain their creation and permit people to die?". They explained something had happened which displeased the gods, and the name they gave to this cause was "sin".
But that does not resolve the problem of why the execution of a Rabbi provides the reversal of death for others. Does the Bible explain, or does it simply assert? Origen's model lasted for 1000 years until Anselm came up with his model.
If God "gave his Son", then Judas, the High Priests, and the Romans were the good people, doing God's work.