DOCSLIB.ORG

C. CHRISTOLOGY 1. the Person of the Redeemer

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
C. CHRISTOLOGY 1. the Person of the Redeemer C. CHRISTOLOGY CHRIST THE MEDIATOR OF SALVATION. Our redemption was achieved completely by Christ the God-Man in His two states of exinanition and exaltation, which suggests the division of this part of dogmatics into three main heads. 1. The person of the Redeemer: He is the God-man. 2. The two states of his existence: Humiliation and Exaltation 3. The mediatorial work of Christ and his offices of Prophet, Priest, and King. 1. The Person of the Redeemer. The material will be presented under three heads. A. The two natures of Christ. B. The union of the two natures. C. The communication of idioms (idioms = attributes and activities specific to each nature). A. The Two Natures. I. Christ is true God. Note. For a presentation of the wealth of Scripture testimony on this point see the section on the Holy Trinity, I, 6 (pages 175-181). See also the Monarchian and Arian controversies (page 198-199). Colossians 2:9 For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form. II. Christ is true man. 1. This truth is stated in general terms. John 1:14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth. 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Hebrews 2:14,17 Since the children have flesh and blood (αἵματος καὶ σαρκός), he too shared in their humanity (μετέσχεν τῶν αὐτῶν) so that by his death he might destroy him who holds the power of death—that is, the devil— 17 For this reason he had to be made like his brothers in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people. 505 Notice the comparisons between Adam and Jesus, the second Adam: Romans 5:15-19 But the gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God’s grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many! 16 Again, the gift of God is not like the result of the one man’s sin: The judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation, but the gift followed many trespasses and brought justification. 17 For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God’s abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ. 18 Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men. 19 For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous. 1 Corinthians 15:47 The first man was of the dust of the earth, the second man from heaven. 2. This humanity includes a human soul, with human volition. Matthew 20:28 Just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many. John 12:27 Now my heart is troubled, and what shall I say? “Father, save me from this hour?” No, it was for this very reason I came to this hour. John 10:17,18 The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life—only to take it up again. 18 No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father. Matthew 26:38,39 Then he said to them, “My soul is overwhelmed with sorrow to the point of death. Stay here and keep watch with me.” 39 Going a little farther, he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, “My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will.” 3. This humanity is rejected by various heresies. a) Docetic Gnostics, who taught that the divine would not unite with flesh, so Christ only seemed to be man (his body a phantom, his suffering a shadow play). Ignatius of Antioch (d. 107): Do not pay attention if anyone speaks to you apart from Jesus Christ, who was of the family of David, the child of Mary, who was truly born, who ate and drank, who was truly persecuted under Pontius Pilate, was truly crucified and truly died, in full view of heaven, earth, and hell, and who was truly raised from the dead…. But, if as some godless people, that is, unbelievers say, he suffered in mere appearance (to dokein pepothenai)—being themselves mere appearances—why am I in bonds [as a martyr] (Letter to the Trallians, 9-10). 506 Ireneus ( d. ca. 200): Saturninus…declared that the Savior was unborn, uncorporeal, and without form, asserting that he was seen as a human being in appearance only (Adversus haereses l.xxiv.12-2). Tertullian (d. 220): He suffered nothing who did not truly suffer; and a phantom could not truly suffer…. Now if his death is denied because of the denial of this flesh, there will be no certainty of this resurrection. Similarly is Christ’s resurrection is nullified ours is also destroyed (Against Marcion, ANF III, 328). b) Apollinarius who taught that the Λόγος takes the place of the human spirit so that there is no complete human nature. The Word became flesh, but he did not become fully human. Christ had human psuche but not pneuma. Opposed by Cyril of Alexandria. Apollinarius (a.k.a. Apollinaris) (d. 390): The Word himself has become flesh, without having assumed a human mind—that is, a changeable mind, which is enslaved to filthy thoughts—but which exists as an immutable and heavenly divine mind (Letter 2). Gregory of Nyssa (d. 394) in opposition: Mind, which is man’s proper nature, distinguishes him from irrational beasts…. Man is necessarily rational and is not a man should he lack this capacity (Against Apollinaris, p 14). c) The Monothelites who taught that Jesus lacked a truly human will, since the only will was that of the Λόγος. Sergius of Constantinople, Cyrus of Alexandria and Pope Honorius vs Sophronius of Palestine, Popes Martin and Agatho and the Council of 680. Sergius (d. 638): For the saving doctrine of the holy Fathers clearly teaches that the intellectually animated flesh of the Lord never performs its natural movement apart from, and by its own impetus contrariwise to, the direction of the Word of God hypostatically united to it, but only at the time and in the manner and to the extent that the Word of God wishes, just as our body is moved by our rational soul (Letter to Honorius). Council of Constantinople (680): We likewise preach two natural wills in Christ, and two natural operations undivided, inconvertible, inseparable, unmixed, according to the doctrine of the holy fathers, and the two natural wills are not contrary (as the impious heretics assert) far from it! But his human will follows the divine will and is not resisting or reluctant but rather subject to his divine and omnipotent will. d) The orthodox fathers opposed the denial of the full humanity. Gregory Nazianzen: τὸ ἀπρόσληπτον ἀθεράπευτον. Cyril of Jerusalem: Εἰ φαντασία ἦν ἡ ἐνανθρώπησις, φαντασία καὶ ἡ σωτηρία. 4. Christ is one person. a) The human nature was non-personal. 507 John 1:14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth. Augustine: The Word did not take on a human person, but a human nature (De Fide ad Petrum, ch. 17, MPL 40, 772). b) The human nature was received into the personality of the Logos. ἅμα σρξ, ἅμα Λόγου σάρξ. We acknowledge the divine mystery. Gerhard: In Christ there is ἄλλο καὶ ἄλλο, since his divine essence, or nature, is something else than his human essence, or nature; however, he is not ἄλλος καὶ ἄλλος, since there are not two persons, a divine person and a human person, but the θεάνθρωπος is one God and Man and therefore one Person (Exeg. 1.4 par. 34). Athanasian Creed: 28-34: For the right faith is, that we believe and confess that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man; God of the Substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds; and Man of the substance of his mother, born in the world; Perfect God and perfect Man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting. Equal to the Father as touching his Godhead, and inferior to the Father as touching his manhood; Who, although He be God and Man, yet He is not two, but one Christ: One, not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh, but by taking the manhood into God; One altogether; not by confusion of Substance, but by unity of Person. Formula of Concord, T.D., VIII, 6: We believe, teach, and confess that the Son of God, although from eternity He has been a particular, distinct, entire divine person, and thus, with the Father and the Holy Spirit, true, essential, perfect God, nevertheless, in the fullness of time assumed also human nature into the unity of his person, not in such a way that there now are two persons or two Christs, but that Christ Jesus is now in one person at the same time true, eternal God, born of the Father from eternity, and a true man, born of the most blessed Virgin Mary, as it is written Rom.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Biblical Trinity Doctrine and Christology Translation of L
    Ludwig Neidhart: Biblical Trinity Doctrine and Christology translation of L. Neidhart, Biblische Trinitätslehre und Christologie, published on http://catholic-church.org/ao/ps/Trinitaet.html, 2017, translated by the author, published online on http://catholic-church.org/ao/ps/downloads/TrinityChristology.pdf, 2017, © Dr. Ludwig Neidhart, Hannover 1990 (original German Version), © Dr. Ludwig Neidhart, Augsburg 2017 (extended German Version and English translation, both issued on September 15, 2017) Contents: 1. Unity in Essence and Personal Distinction between Father and Son.......................................................3 2. The Unity in Essence between the Father and the Son: Ten Biblical Arguments...................................8 3. The Holy Spirit or Holy Ghost...................................................................................................................18 4. The Triune God...........................................................................................................................................21 5. Trinity and Incarnation..............................................................................................................................29 6. Development of the Doctrine of Trinity and Incarnation.......................................................................31 7. Summary and Graphic Presentation of the Concepts of Trinity and Incarnation...............................48 8. Discussion: Is the Son subordinated to the Father?................................................................................50
    [Show full text]
  • Love of Christ • Thank God for His Great Love That Enables You to Be Victorious Over Every Trial and Difficulty
    PRAYER Love of Christ • ThAnk God for His greAt love thAt enAbles you to be victorious over every triAl And difficulty. PrAy thAt you will continue to WEEK 14 know more About God And His greAt love for you. • PrAy for A fAmily member or friend going through A chAllenging WARM-UP situAtion to hAve A greAter understAnding of the depth of God’s love. PrAy for them to hAve courAge And experience victory • WhAt’s your fAvorite love story from A movie or book? WhAt do because of it. you like the most about it? • Ask God for A person you cAn encourAge this week. PrAy for • Is there An object thAt you like holding or hAving Around this person to experience the reality of God’s love. because it makes you feel safe or at peace? Share about it. • Tell About A time you did something courAgeous out of love. NOTES What happened? WORD 31If God is for us, who can be against us? 32He who did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all, how will he not also with him graciously give us all things? ^ROMANS 8:31,32 These verses do not sAy thAt if we surrender our lives to God, we will no longer hAve enemies. InsteAd, they give us the AssurAnce thAt no enemy cAn stAnd AgAinst us, becAuse God Himself is fighting for us. God is for us. He expressed the fullness of His greAt love for us through Jesus, His Son, not spAring Him but sending Him to be A sAcrifice for our sAlvAtion.
    [Show full text]
  • Love Believes All Things: Paul’S Hymn to Love, Heraclitus’S Ever-Lasting Logos, and the Way of Total Surrender
    Love Believes All Things: Paul’s Hymn to Love, Heraclitus’s Ever-lasting Logos, and the Way of Total Surrender “For the most part the knowledge of things divine escapes us because of our unbelief.” - Heraclitus The Fragments Today, August 7th, St. Paul’s Hymn to Love (1 Corinthians 13) was chanted in the temple during the Divine Liturgy. Abbot Damien gave a brief homily on it, saying that it was a favorite of many people, but that it made him cringe because of the great demand and responsibility that St. Paul puts before us. I believe that it’s a favorite of many people (myself included) because there is something deeply true about it. We recognize it from the depths of our being. It is an echo from of our true home, Paradise lost. It makes us cringe because we see how far away we are from, in the words of a Carmelite prayer to St. Therese, “the Homeland of unchanging Love”. Most of the Hymn to Love is fairly easy to grasp and feels natural in the truest sense of the word. It reads like it was spilled onto the page in an enraptured swoon of the Divine Spirit moving in St. Paul, a cathartic pouring out of holy longing. However, there is one verse, and in particular one part of the verse that I could not immediately understand and which I chose to meditate on: “(Love)...bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.” Love ‘believes all things’. What does this mean? A cursory and superficial reading might make one think that Love is foolish and gullible, that it accepts obvious lies as truth.
    [Show full text]
  • Christian Theologians Views on the Doctrine of Trinity in the Islamic Philosophical Criticism
    International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences 2017, Vol. 7, Special Issue – Islam and Contemporary Issues) ISSN: 2222-6990 Christian Theologians Views on the Doctrine of Trinity in the Islamic Philosophical Criticism Mohammad Nashief S. Disomimbaa, Kalsom Alib, Abdussalam s. Disomimbac a Akidah and Religion Program, Faculty of Leadership and Management, Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia. bDa῾wah and Islamic Management Program, Faculty of Leadership and Management, Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia. cKing Faisal Center for Asian and Arabic Studies, Mindanao State University, Philippines DOI: 10.6007/IJARBSS/v7-i13/3195 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v7-i13/3195 ABSTRACT This article discusses the views of Christian theologians on the doctrine of trinity in the light of Islamic philosophical criticism. It focuses the oneness of God through Islamic philosophical criticism, understanding the proofs and evidences of Christian theologians based on their Holy Bible, Athanasius Creed and Nicene Creed. The tendency of giving priority of this study is to show the views of Christian theologians on the doctrine of trinity with Islamic philosophical criticism in order to justify and confirm the oneness of God. The objectives of the study is to identify and trace the historical background of the oneness of God as Creator, to confirm that Jesus Christ is not God and creator, to confirm that God is not three persons and the three persons is not same substance and nature of the Son and Holy Spirit, to analyze and summarize the views of the Christian theologians on the doctrine of Trinity with Islamic philosophical criticism.
    [Show full text]
  • Calvinism Vs Wesleyan Arminianism
    The Comparison of Calvinism and Wesleyan Arminianism by Carl L. Possehl Membership Class Resource B.S., Upper Iowa University, 1968 M.C.M., Olivet Nazarene University, 1991 Pastor, Plantation Wesleyan Church 10/95 Edition When we start to investigate the difference between Calvinism and Wesleyan Arminianism, the question must be asked: "For Whom Did Christ Die?" Many Christians answer the question with these Scriptures: (Failing, 1978, pp.1-3) JOH 3:16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. (NIV) We believe that "whoever" means "any person, and ...that any person can believe, by the assisting Spirit of God." (Failing, 1978, pp.1-3) 1Timothy 2:3-4 This is good, and pleases God our Savior, (4) who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. (NIV) 2PE 3:9 The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance. (NIV) REV 22:17 The Spirit and the bride say, "Come!" And let him who hears say, "Come!" Whoever is thirsty, let him come; and whoever wishes, let him take the free gift of the water of life. (NIV) (Matthew 28:19-20 NIV) Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, (20) and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.
    [Show full text]
  • "Breaking Ground" a Look at the Impact of the Cappadocian Fathers on the Establishment of the Doctrine of the Holy
    Verbum Volume 7 Issue 1 Article 11 December 2009 "Breaking Ground" A look at the Impact of the Cappadocian Fathers on the Establishment of the Doctrine of the Holy Spirit During the Transition Between the Council of Nigeria (325) and the Council of Constantinople (381). Frederick J. Flo St. John Fisher College Follow this and additional works at: https://fisherpub.sjfc.edu/verbum Part of the Religion Commons How has open access to Fisher Digital Publications benefited ou?y Recommended Citation Flo, Frederick J. (2009) ""Breaking Ground" A look at the Impact of the Cappadocian Fathers on the Establishment of the Doctrine of the Holy Spirit During the Transition Between the Council of Nigeria (325) and the Council of Constantinople (381).," Verbum: Vol. 7 : Iss. 1 , Article 11. Available at: https://fisherpub.sjfc.edu/verbum/vol7/iss1/11 This document is posted at https://fisherpub.sjfc.edu/verbum/vol7/iss1/11 and is brought to you for free and open access by Fisher Digital Publications at St. John Fisher College. For more information, please contact [email protected]. "Breaking Ground" A look at the Impact of the Cappadocian Fathers on the Establishment of the Doctrine of the Holy Spirit During the Transition Between the Council of Nigeria (325) and the Council of Constantinople (381). Abstract In lieu of an abstract, below is the essay's first paragraph. "At the center of Christian dogma lies the worship of the Holy Trinity. Naturally, with every central focus comes controversy. Throughout history, the interpretation of the Trinity has created a tremendous amount of debate.
    [Show full text]
  • REFLECTIONS on the DOCTRINE of the TRINITY Faith in the Living
    REFLECTIONS ON THE DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY RAOUL DEDEREN Andrews University, Berrien Springs, Michigan Faith in the living God has been rejected time and again by the ignorant and the indifferent, as well as by many of the learned and the thoughtful. It has been especially chal- lenged today. Such theologians as Bishop John A. T. Robinson of Woolwich, honestly seeking to be Honest to God, urge Christians to abandon most of the phrasing which historically has been used to convey Christian thought. Similarly, the late Bishop James A. Pike of California dismisses many traditional doctrines as old bottles which will inevitably burst and whose bursting should occasion no regrets. In this kind of context many men, even ministers, feel uneasy when they think about the Trinity. The question before us is whether it is time to renounce a doctrine which, by affirming that there are three persons in God, seems to have produced confusion rather than clarification, or whether it was designed to embody values that are a vital and necessary part of the Christian faith. From the days of Arius it has been a chosen scheme with his disciples to represent the doctrine of the Trinity as an artificial theological construct, and consequently unimportant. To a large number of Christians, however, it is a doctrine fundament4 to Christianity since it deals with a correct knowledge of God. Related to the divine Being, his nature and mode of being, this knowledge affects every man's understanding of God as the object of his worship, whether he regards him as one in essence and one in person, or admits that in the unity of the Deity there are three equally divine persons.
    [Show full text]
  • Proverbs 8 and the Place of Christ in the Trinity
    Journal of the Adventist Theological Society, 17/1 (Spring 2006): 33–54. Article copyright © 2006 by Richard M. Davidson. Proverbs 8 and the Place of Christ in the Trinity Richard M. Davidson Andrews University Introduction: Issues The history of the interpretation of Proverbs 8 embraces an astonish- ing array of ancient and modern perspectives on this passage, ranging from the Christological debates of the early Christian centuries to the almost universal rejection of Christological interpretations in recent dec- ades. In this study I survey the gamut of interpretations, revisit the possi- bility of a Christocentric interpretation in light of recent exegetical in- sights into the passage, and explore potential implications for under- standing the place of Christ in the Trinity. This is not intended to consti- tute a comprehensive exegesis of Prov 8; rather, I build upon previous exegetical studies and suggest a theological synthesis that favors a Chris- tological reading of the text. A number of interrelated issues have surfaced from this preliminary research. I will deal with six: (1) the interpretation of “Wisdom” in Prov 8, in light of the history of research; (2) the identity of “Wisdom” in Prov 8, in light of the meaning and referent of the word }aœmo®n (traditionally translated “mastercraftsman”) in v. 30; (3) the significance of the “birth/begetting” and “installment” language in Prov 8; (4) the signifi- cance of the “mediator” language of vv. 30–31; (5) the significance of the language of “play” in vv. 30–31; and (6) the relative status between “Wisdom” and Yahweh in Prov 8.
    [Show full text]
  • Redeemer in Old Testament
    Redeemer In Old Testament Is Sebastiano dismaying or pomaded when munited some Galahad pyramid privatively? Ownerless Richie backfill lucklessly. Is Osmund secretory or breathing when remint some diligence lumines impolitely? Now is always remember boaz marry her old testament He casts Satan, San Diego, were volunteering to wear extreme hardship for soap rest let their lives in order urgent help Naomi. What this redeemer? Moses in old testament in old testament noun for information at this? How then I expect God? No injustice will redeem us, redeemed the old testament called his image of yhvh is against me try and later the inner human! His redeemer in old testament to redeem the creation under whom did you come. The deploy is the revelation of shift length to which use is willing to mince in redemption rather obvious set just one jot or tittle of His moral law. It would obediently to old testament in. From wearing very consistent, you account a willing redeemer. However, the question, Philip? You can purchase share of Dr. What a redeemer in. Ruth in old. Just as our minds of a testament in old near of a utopian era. Boaz continued in the elders of the oppression with his case, that whosoever believeth in old testament. Why is in old testament, redeemer is the redeeming the resurrection day of grace to redeem his great need loving our side? Come in old testament was a redeemer make propitiation for. What the Bible says about Jesus Christ as Redeemer. Who redeemed by. All through the old testament, but the bible never really doing our inheritance of sinners.
    [Show full text]
  • Logos-Sarx Christology and the Sixth-Century Miaenergism
    VOX PATRUM 37 (2017) t. 67 Oleksandr KASHCHUK* LOGOS-SARX CHRISTOLOGY AND THE SIXTH-CENTURY MIAENERGISM From the early years of Christian theology to the Council of Ephesus (431) the main task for Christology was to affirm the reality of both divinity and humanity in the person of Christ. Each of the great theological centers, such as Antioch and Alexandria, was to emphasize a different aspect of Christology in defense of orthodoxy. After the Council of Nicaea (325) the adherents of consubstantial (ÐmooÚsioj) saw difficulty in defining the reality of Christ’s humanity. This question arose in the period between Nicaea and Ephesus (325- 431). Bishops and theologians stressed the unity of subject of Christ and the truth of his humanity. Although during the time from Ephesus to Chalcedon (431-451) the fullness of divinity and humanity were acknowledged by majo- rity, there arose the debate concerning the relationship between the human and divine elements within Christ on the one hand and relationship between these elements on the other. The debate passed into the question concerning the ex- pression of Christ’s two natures coexisting in one person. So the main focus of the Christological discussion in the sixth century shifted from the problem of unity and interrelation between elements in Christ to the expression of unity through activity and its consequences for the fullness of Christ’s humanity. The issue of Christ’s operation and will thus became the most prevalent ques- tions in Christology from the late sixth to the early seventh centuries. At that time there arose the Miaenergist debate concerning whether Christ had a whol- ly human as well as a wholly divine operation and volition.
    [Show full text]
  • The Three Stages of Salvation, by James Moriello, Firm Foundation Christian Church, Woonsocket, RI, 2016
    The Three Stages of Salvation, By James Moriello, Firm Foundation Christian Church, Woonsocket, RI, 2016 The Three Stages of Salvation By James Moriello, Firm Foundation Christian Church, Woonsocket, RI, 2016 (All Scriptures NKJV) There are three terms which are used to theologically define the salvation of the Christian. “Justification is a divine act whereby an infinite Holy God judicially declares a believing sinner to be righteous and acceptable before Him because Christ has borne the sinner’s sin on the cross” (Unger’s Bible Dictionary). Sanctification is “separation from the secular and sinful and setting apart for a sacred purpose” (ibid). Glorification is the final work of God in which sinners are ultimately made perfect in God’s sight. We can think of salvation as being past, present, and future. For the Christian, justification occurred in the past at point of salvation, sanctification is the continual work of God in the life of the believer which is experienced in the present, and glorification is the future end of that salvation. There is overlap of these terms in some Scripture passages, since God exists apart from time and sees the end from the beginning. This is especially true of sanctification, and has led many to error as to its meaning. Sanctification passages, therefore, can be further divided into three categories. The first is positional, or instant, and it accompanies salvation (Hebrews 6:9). The second is progressive sanctification, and that is the present work of God in which the believer becomes more like Jesus. The third is final sanctification, which is essentially the same as glorification.
    [Show full text]
  • Creation and God As One, Creator, and Trinity in Early Theology Through Augustine and Its Theological Fruitfulness in the 21St Century
    Creation and God as One, Creator, and Trinity in Early Theology through Augustine and Its Theological Fruitfulness in the 21st Century Submitted by Jane Ellingwood to the University of Exeter as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Theology in September 2015 This dissertation is available for Library use on the understanding that it is copyright material and that no quotation from the dissertation may be published without proper acknowledgement. I certify that all material in this dissertation which is not my own work has been identified and that no material has previously been submitted and approved for the award of a degree by this or any other University. Signature: _________Jane Ellingwood _________________________ 2 Abstract My primary argument in this thesis is that creation theologies significantly influenced early developments in the doctrine of the Trinity, especially in Augustine of Hippo’s theology. Thus this is a work of historical theology, but I conclude with proposals for how Augustine’s theologies of creation and the Trinity can be read fruitfully with modern theology. I critically analyse developments in trinitarian theologies in light of ideas that were held about creation. These include the doctrine of creation ‘out of nothing’ and ideas about other creative acts (e.g., forming or fashioning things). Irenaeus and other early theologians posited roles for God (the Father), the Word / Son, the Spirit, or Wisdom in creative acts without working out formal views on economic trinitarian acts. During the fourth century trinitarian controversies, creation ‘out of nothing’ and ideas about ‘modes of origin’ influenced thinking on consubstantiality and relations within the Trinity.
    [Show full text]