To say that all formulations of the Trinity doctrine are not the same is an understatement. While church historians warn that one should not overly emphasize the differences between western and eastern versions of the Trinity, I believe the divine essence is uniquely fundamental for Augustine, who is the chief representative of the western church. That is, Augustine appears to stress the essence of God when he reflects on the three persons rather than their putative status as divine persons. Edmund Fortman writes that Augustine "thought rather of one single divine nature subsisting in three Persons" (The Triune God, pp. 140-141). Furthermore, notice that Fortman quotes from Augustine's De Trinitate on p. 141 (second paragraph):
"Each person of the Trinity is God, and all together are One God. Each is the full essence, and all together are One essence."
Again from Fortman, we read: "And by presenting the divine essence with all its absolute perfections as existing identically in each of the three Persons . . ." (p. 141).
See other quotes on pp. 141-142 of Fortman.
Augustine writes in De Trinitate 7.2.3:
Therefore the Father and the Son together are one essence, and one greatness, and one truth, and one wisdom. But the Father and Son both together are not one Word, because both together are not one Son. For as the Son is referred to the Father, and is not so called in respect to Himself, so also the Word is referred to him whose Word it is, when it is called the Word. Since He is the Son in that He is the Word, and He is the Word in that He is the Son. Inasmuch, therefore, as the Father and the Son together are certainly not one Son, it follows that the Father and the Son together are not the one Word of both.
John1:18NASB1995"No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God(Monogenes Theos) who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him."
ReplyDeleteJohn1:1LSB"No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God(monogenes Theos)who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him."
1Corinthians8:6NASB"yet for us there is only one God, the Father, from whom are all things, and we exist for Him;..."
Augustine wrote Tractates on John's Gospel where he interacted with John 1:18. I don't find his arguments compelling but Augustine and other theologians have tied to use John 1:18 as proof of Christ's deity rather than see the text as contravening evidence. The same with 1 Cor. 8:6 although this is another instance of them stretching credence.
ReplyDeleteThe astounding lack of self awareness is what I find most noteworthy about trinitarian polemics,i.e it's not just that don't seem to be paying attention my reasoning, they don't even seem to be paying attention to their own statements and the logical implications therof.
DeleteWhen time permits, I plan to share more info in the future related to Trinitarian thinking. It will really make you take that they're not paying attention to their own statements/implications.
ReplyDeleteCompare with Gregory of Nyssa's model, their models differed significantly, at least in my reading. (Gregory of Nyssa was a better theologian in my estimation, Augustine a better writer though, the confessions are absolutlely beautiful).
ReplyDeleteHi Roman, I think we have to admit that Gregory of Nyssa's model of the Trinity is different from Augustine's although since Lewis Ayres' study, church historians have been cautioned about exaggerating the differences between East and West. I agree that the Confessions are beautiful; Augustine was a rhetorician like Tertullian, and he had the philosophical background. The Confessions also is supposed to be the first autobiography or it was at least an attempt at the genre. Michael Molloy writes that no theologian was more important than Augustine in the West between the fifth through the sixteenth century.
ReplyDeleteMy recommendation: controversies(old and new) within trinitarian academia.
ReplyDeleteLast night, I saw a paper written by a Trinitarian that encourages readers to embrace the "contradictions" connected with the Incarnation teaching. Whether that comment can be taken at face value is another question.
ReplyDeleteIt seems to be a theme emanating from some quarters for a while now,that the attempted resolutions to the contradictions are a bigger problem than the contradictions themselves,if we want to be faithful to the doctrine we must embrace the tensions inherent in it.
Delete