Last Sunday, June 7th, was celebrated in the life of the Church as the Feast of the Holy Trinity. During my many years in the parish ministry, observing the church year, I always regarded Trinity Sunday as a very important day. It was historically one of the Church's major Feast days. Growing up in an LCMS congregation I remembered Trinity Sunday as the Sunday we began by singing the great hymn of the Church "Holy, Holy, Holy." Trinity Sunday is the culmination of the festival portion of the church year. The focus of the day is not about events but simply about the greatness and wonder of our God: Father, Son and Holy Spirit -- a fitting climax in response to the saving acts of God in Christ Jesus. The Doctrine of the Trinity, defining the Triune (three in one) nature of God, is the identifying mark of the Christian Church.
Groups such as Jehovah Witnesses, Oneness Pentecostals and Unitarians reject the doctrine, claiming that the word "Trinity" or "Triune" are not found in the Bible but were a later invention. Mormons also claim that this doctrine was made up by men, voted on and changed over centuries of debate. Instead, Mormons believe in the Godhead — God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost, as three distinct beings. They claim that is 1820, God the Father and his Son Jesus appeared to Joseph Smith while he was praying in a grove of trees. Rather than being monotheists (one God), Mormons are polytheists. It is the hope of every Mormon to become a god in his own right and rule his own universe. Groups who reject the Doctrine of the Trinity are not considered to be a part of the Holy Apostolic Christian Church but are cults or sects.
While it is true that that words "Trinity" or "Triune" are not found in the Bible, the doctrine is a necessary definition based upon what IS in the Bible.. The Bible teaches Monotheism. There is one God! The Great Shema of of Deuteronomy 6:4 declares: "Hear, (shema in Hebrew) O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one." This is the necessary starting point.
Jesus claimed to be God. He said, "I and the Father are one (John 10:30). When Philip asked Him to reveal the Father, Jesus replied, "If you have seen me, you have seen the Father." (John 14:9) To the Pharisees Jesus declared, ."Very truly I tell you, before Abraham was born, I am." (John 8:58) The very words "I am" is the name of God or Yahweh. Because Jesus claimed to be God the Pharisees conspired to kill him, "For this reason they tried all the more to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God." (John 5:18) The prologue of John's Gospel declares that "The Word was God." (John 1:1)
Jesus promised to His disciples "another Comforter" or "Advocate" who would be distinct from the Father and from Jesus. Jesus said, "And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Advocate to help you and be with you forever." (John 14:9) "But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.." (John 14:26)
These truths drawn from Scripture produced many controversies and heresies in the first 250 years of Christian history. There were numerous groups proposing their own notions as to the person of Jesus Christ. The Docetists claimed that Jesus did not have a physical body but was a phantasm. The Sabellians suggested that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are merely three modes of God existence (modalism). The Marcionites taught that the God of the Old Testament was not the same God of the New Testament. The Adoptionists believed that Jesus was adopted as the Son of God in His Baptism. The prominent heresy at the beginning of the fourth century was Arianism. Arius, a prelate from Alexandria, taught that Jesus was inferior to the Father and came into existence at a point in time. He promoted his beliefs, not merely by written proposition, but by composing little choruses or jingles in which he set his heresy to some of the popular tunes of the day. It has been suggested that since Alexandria was a major seaport, some of the sailors were singing the tunes of Arius, and the heresy spread from port to port.
God intervened in this situation in a most unique manner, requiring the leaders of the Church to come together by the decree of the Roman Emperor and settle the issue. God works in mysterious ways. Here is how it happened:
After Emperor Diocletian (who had been a fierce persecutor of Christians) stepped down in 305, the battle for the throne was between Constantine and Maxentius. In October of 312, their armies engaged in battle at the Milivian Bridge, an important bridge over the Tiber River leading to Rome. This battle would change the course of history.
While their are varied reports, the church father Eusebius (265-340) claims to have received his information from Constantine himself. Eusebius reports that Constantine's army was marching when Constantine looked up to the sun and saw a cross of light above it, and with it the Greek words "Εν Τούτῳ Νίκα," translated into Latin as "in hoc signo vinces," meaning "in this sign, conquer." At first he was unsure of the meaning of the vision, but in the following night he had a dream in which Christ explained to him that he should use the sign against his enemies. Either the cross or the Chi-Rho, the first two letters in Greek for "Christ," were painted on the schields and the standards. Constantine won the battle and in 313 issued the Edict of Milan, declaring Christianity to be an official religion in the Roman Empire. Constantine eventually converted to Christianity and was baptized by Eusebius on his death bed.
Because of the disunity that existed within the Christian Church, especially the issue of Arianism, Constantine called for the first ecumenical council to meet in the city of Nicea in modern day Turkey in 325 to resolve the issues. About 300 bishops from the East and the West attended. After a careful and prayerful study of Scripture, they were led to the conclusion that there is a singular Divine essence, thus preserving monotheism, shared by three distinct and separate person - the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. God is Triune, three persons sharing a singular Divine essence. In defining the person of Jesus Christ, the creed of Nicea declared that He was "God of God, Light of Light, Very God of Very God, begotten, not made" and being of the same substance as the Father. Arianism was rejected as a heresy. When you put together the monotheism of the Old Testament together with the statements of Jesus regarding Himself and the Holy Spirit, while it is a mystery, there is no other way of defining the essence of God.
The Council of Nicea theologically settled the issue of Arianism. What Arius taught, that Jesus was inferior to the Father and begotten at a point in time, was condemned as heresy, even though many of the common folk held to his teaching and continued to sing his popular jingles. As in the words of Martin Luther's explanation of the second article of the Apostles' Creed, Nicea declared that Jesus Christ was, "true God, begotten of the Father from eternity and also true man, born of the Virgin Mary." Jesus is both fully God and fully man. He possesses both a human and a divine nature.
For the early church, questions still remained regarding the manner in which the divine and human natures of Jesus, the Son of God, interacted. Were there times when Jesus acted only according to His human nature when he wept, hungered, slept and died? Were there times when Jesus acted only according to his Divine nature when he performed miracles which only God could do? Were these two natures in Christ distinct and separate or was there a hypostatic union, the union of the two natures in the essence of the one person, Jesus, the Son of God. Nestorius, the Archbishop of Constantinople, rejected the popularly held belief that the Virgin Mary was the theotokos, God-bearer, or the "Mother of God" suggesting that Jesus was not really God. He also taught that the two natures, the Divine and the human were distinct and separate. Another group, referred to as the monophysites, meaning "one nature," generally taught that the human nature of Jesus was assumed or absorbed into His Divine nature. Talk about confusion! Lest you at this point dismiss all these matters and declare "who cares?" let me assure you that these are very important issues that have an impact upon the assurance of your forgiveness of sins.
Without going into great detail, the Council of Ephesus in 431 and Chalcedon in 451 dealt with these issues. The views of both Nestorius and the various Monophysites were condemned as heresy. The position of Nicea was confirmed that the two natures, the Divine and the human, are united in the one person Jesus, the Son of God. The council went on to confirm that the attributes of the Divine nature are communicated to or shared with the human nature. This is technically referred to as the communicatio idiomatum or the "communication of properties." Therefore, Mary is "the mother of God" and the Son of God, according to both nature, suffered and died on the Cross. It can be properly stated that "God suffered for the sins of the world," and "God died." This was not a new idea coming out of the fifth century but the early church fathers Ignatius of Antioch (50-117 AD?) and Tertullian (155-240 AD?) spoke in the same manner about "the blood of God," "the suffering of God" etc.
Have you ever wondered how it was possible that the suffering and death of Jesus on the Cross was sufficient to pay the price for the sins of the entire world: past, present and future? After all, I am sure that in the annals of history there have been other innocent people, such as Christian martyrs, who have been tortured, beaten and murdered exceeding the suffering of Jesus on the Cross (not taking into consideration the fact that Jesus was bearing the sins of the world).Consider the scales of justice. If you put into the one pan all of the sins of humanity, what would it take to put into the other pan to balance, or exceed the balance whereby the justice of God would be satisfied and the sins of the world forgiven? Would it be sufficient to say that Jesus only suffered and died according to His human nature or must God be included in the mix? The assurance and certainty of the forgiveness of our sins is that God accomplished it on the Cross. The Son of God who manifested his Divine glory on the Mount of Transfiguration is the same Son of God who suffered and died on the Cross. It was not a different Jesus stripped down to his mere humanity.. As the hymn writer put it, "How can it be that thou, my God, shouldst die for me?”
At the time of the Reformation, Lutherans and Calvinists disagreed over the mode of Christ's presence in the Sacrament. Lutheran theologians embraced the communication of the attributes of the divine nature to the human nature and thus Christ, who filled heaven and earth according to both natures, was omnipresent and therefore present in the Sacrament. Calvinists rejected this understanding, claiming that Christ was spiritually present in the Sacrament and localized at the right-hand of God. This led to the consequence that Calvinists rejected the communication of attributes, concluding that Jesus only died on the Cross according to his human nature, Noted Reformed (Calvinist) theologian R.C. Sproul writes: "Likewise, the person of Christ died on the cross, but Jesus experienced death according to His human nature, for the divine nature is not subject to death and decay." Again he says, "We should shrink in horror from the idea that God actually died on the cross. The atonement was made by the human nature of Christ." (See Internet articles by Sproul "A Communication of Attributes," and "Did God Die on the Cross.)
That from which Sproul shrinks in horror is the very reality that grants to Christians the assurance of their forgiveness of sins because God did it! It is not strange, though, for a Calvinist such as Sproul to reject the Divine participation in the death of Jesus on the cross since assurance is not granted by the shed blood of the Divine Son of God but by election, which appears be the efficient cause of salvation. In the Westminster Confession of the Reformed and Presbyterian Churches, the doctrine of election is in third position taking precedent over the atonement. That which is vital for Lutherans appears to be secondary for Calvinists.
The Formula of Concord rejects the Calvinist notion "That only the mere humanity suffered for us and redeemed us, and that in the passion the Son of God had no communion with the human nature in fact, as though it did not concern him at all." (Tappert, T. G. (2000, c1959). The Book of Concord," The Formula of of Concord: 1, VIII, 31). Philadelphia: Fortress Press.)
The Doctrine of the Holy Trinity is a glorious truth. God the Father created us and sent His only Son into this world to redeem us. God the Holy Spirit brings us to faith through our Baptism and the proclamation of the Good News that the Divine Son of God took out place, was perfectly righteous on our behalf, and shed His Divine blood for the forgiveness of our sins. All praise to God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Amen and Amen!
While it is true that that words "Trinity" or "Triune" are not found in the Bible, the doctrine is a necessary definition based upon what IS in the Bible.. The Bible teaches Monotheism. There is one God! The Great Shema of of Deuteronomy 6:4 declares: "Hear, (shema in Hebrew) O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one." This is the necessary starting point.
Jesus claimed to be God. He said, "I and the Father are one (John 10:30). When Philip asked Him to reveal the Father, Jesus replied, "If you have seen me, you have seen the Father." (John 14:9) To the Pharisees Jesus declared, ."Very truly I tell you, before Abraham was born, I am." (John 8:58) The very words "I am" is the name of God or Yahweh. Because Jesus claimed to be God the Pharisees conspired to kill him, "For this reason they tried all the more to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God." (John 5:18) The prologue of John's Gospel declares that "The Word was God." (John 1:1)
Jesus promised to His disciples "another Comforter" or "Advocate" who would be distinct from the Father and from Jesus. Jesus said, "And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Advocate to help you and be with you forever." (John 14:9) "But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.." (John 14:26)
These truths drawn from Scripture produced many controversies and heresies in the first 250 years of Christian history. There were numerous groups proposing their own notions as to the person of Jesus Christ. The Docetists claimed that Jesus did not have a physical body but was a phantasm. The Sabellians suggested that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are merely three modes of God existence (modalism). The Marcionites taught that the God of the Old Testament was not the same God of the New Testament. The Adoptionists believed that Jesus was adopted as the Son of God in His Baptism. The prominent heresy at the beginning of the fourth century was Arianism. Arius, a prelate from Alexandria, taught that Jesus was inferior to the Father and came into existence at a point in time. He promoted his beliefs, not merely by written proposition, but by composing little choruses or jingles in which he set his heresy to some of the popular tunes of the day. It has been suggested that since Alexandria was a major seaport, some of the sailors were singing the tunes of Arius, and the heresy spread from port to port.
God intervened in this situation in a most unique manner, requiring the leaders of the Church to come together by the decree of the Roman Emperor and settle the issue. God works in mysterious ways. Here is how it happened:
After Emperor Diocletian (who had been a fierce persecutor of Christians) stepped down in 305, the battle for the throne was between Constantine and Maxentius. In October of 312, their armies engaged in battle at the Milivian Bridge, an important bridge over the Tiber River leading to Rome. This battle would change the course of history.
 |
| A coin depicting Constantine with a standard displaying the Chi-Rho |
Because of the disunity that existed within the Christian Church, especially the issue of Arianism, Constantine called for the first ecumenical council to meet in the city of Nicea in modern day Turkey in 325 to resolve the issues. About 300 bishops from the East and the West attended. After a careful and prayerful study of Scripture, they were led to the conclusion that there is a singular Divine essence, thus preserving monotheism, shared by three distinct and separate person - the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. God is Triune, three persons sharing a singular Divine essence. In defining the person of Jesus Christ, the creed of Nicea declared that He was "God of God, Light of Light, Very God of Very God, begotten, not made" and being of the same substance as the Father. Arianism was rejected as a heresy. When you put together the monotheism of the Old Testament together with the statements of Jesus regarding Himself and the Holy Spirit, while it is a mystery, there is no other way of defining the essence of God.
The Council of Nicea theologically settled the issue of Arianism. What Arius taught, that Jesus was inferior to the Father and begotten at a point in time, was condemned as heresy, even though many of the common folk held to his teaching and continued to sing his popular jingles. As in the words of Martin Luther's explanation of the second article of the Apostles' Creed, Nicea declared that Jesus Christ was, "true God, begotten of the Father from eternity and also true man, born of the Virgin Mary." Jesus is both fully God and fully man. He possesses both a human and a divine nature.
For the early church, questions still remained regarding the manner in which the divine and human natures of Jesus, the Son of God, interacted. Were there times when Jesus acted only according to His human nature when he wept, hungered, slept and died? Were there times when Jesus acted only according to his Divine nature when he performed miracles which only God could do? Were these two natures in Christ distinct and separate or was there a hypostatic union, the union of the two natures in the essence of the one person, Jesus, the Son of God. Nestorius, the Archbishop of Constantinople, rejected the popularly held belief that the Virgin Mary was the theotokos, God-bearer, or the "Mother of God" suggesting that Jesus was not really God. He also taught that the two natures, the Divine and the human were distinct and separate. Another group, referred to as the monophysites, meaning "one nature," generally taught that the human nature of Jesus was assumed or absorbed into His Divine nature. Talk about confusion! Lest you at this point dismiss all these matters and declare "who cares?" let me assure you that these are very important issues that have an impact upon the assurance of your forgiveness of sins.
Without going into great detail, the Council of Ephesus in 431 and Chalcedon in 451 dealt with these issues. The views of both Nestorius and the various Monophysites were condemned as heresy. The position of Nicea was confirmed that the two natures, the Divine and the human, are united in the one person Jesus, the Son of God. The council went on to confirm that the attributes of the Divine nature are communicated to or shared with the human nature. This is technically referred to as the communicatio idiomatum or the "communication of properties." Therefore, Mary is "the mother of God" and the Son of God, according to both nature, suffered and died on the Cross. It can be properly stated that "God suffered for the sins of the world," and "God died." This was not a new idea coming out of the fifth century but the early church fathers Ignatius of Antioch (50-117 AD?) and Tertullian (155-240 AD?) spoke in the same manner about "the blood of God," "the suffering of God" etc.
At the time of the Reformation, Lutherans and Calvinists disagreed over the mode of Christ's presence in the Sacrament. Lutheran theologians embraced the communication of the attributes of the divine nature to the human nature and thus Christ, who filled heaven and earth according to both natures, was omnipresent and therefore present in the Sacrament. Calvinists rejected this understanding, claiming that Christ was spiritually present in the Sacrament and localized at the right-hand of God. This led to the consequence that Calvinists rejected the communication of attributes, concluding that Jesus only died on the Cross according to his human nature, Noted Reformed (Calvinist) theologian R.C. Sproul writes: "Likewise, the person of Christ died on the cross, but Jesus experienced death according to His human nature, for the divine nature is not subject to death and decay." Again he says, "We should shrink in horror from the idea that God actually died on the cross. The atonement was made by the human nature of Christ." (See Internet articles by Sproul "A Communication of Attributes," and "Did God Die on the Cross.)
That from which Sproul shrinks in horror is the very reality that grants to Christians the assurance of their forgiveness of sins because God did it! It is not strange, though, for a Calvinist such as Sproul to reject the Divine participation in the death of Jesus on the cross since assurance is not granted by the shed blood of the Divine Son of God but by election, which appears be the efficient cause of salvation. In the Westminster Confession of the Reformed and Presbyterian Churches, the doctrine of election is in third position taking precedent over the atonement. That which is vital for Lutherans appears to be secondary for Calvinists.
The Formula of Concord rejects the Calvinist notion "That only the mere humanity suffered for us and redeemed us, and that in the passion the Son of God had no communion with the human nature in fact, as though it did not concern him at all." (Tappert, T. G. (2000, c1959). The Book of Concord," The Formula of of Concord: 1, VIII, 31). Philadelphia: Fortress Press.)
The Doctrine of the Holy Trinity is a glorious truth. God the Father created us and sent His only Son into this world to redeem us. God the Holy Spirit brings us to faith through our Baptism and the proclamation of the Good News that the Divine Son of God took out place, was perfectly righteous on our behalf, and shed His Divine blood for the forgiveness of our sins. All praise to God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Amen and Amen!
No comments:
Post a Comment