huh?
It's clear enough: Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
End of discussion, end of debate
July 27, 2006
There has been much ado about naming the Trinity. The answer is simple enough that even theology professors ought to get it. If we believe that Jesus is fully human and fully divine, which is a tenet of the Christian faith, then, he ought to have the answer in addressing the Almighty. As I recall my Scripture, Jesus exclusively addresses God as "Father." That settles that portion of the Trinity question. Jesus was, in his incarnation, male. That settles the "Son" portion. In Acts 2:4 it clearly states "All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit ..." That settles the "Holy Spirit" portion. It's clear enough, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. End of discussion, end of debate. The defense rests.
Mike Jensen
Overland Park, Kan.
[wow...this was pulled from my humorous read of the layman online...it's likened unto the "it was settled at the councils" quote...is this as painful for you as it is for me?]
posted by Monica @ 3:52 PM
5 comments
5 Comments:
I found this humorous too. Clearly in the OT, God answers Moses' question of who God is with "I am who I am." If I recall my Scripture correctly God is represented by the unspeakable YHWH. Hmmmmmm. Maybe God doesn't truly worry about being named.
Yes, Jesus prays "Father" but it shows the relationality and in a patriarchal society, "Mother" wouldn't have flown. The Holy Spirit blows where it will and probably goes by whatever name it will.
The funny thing about this whole debate actually is the fact that in my estimation and understanding, the work group didn't ever set out to change the historic understanding or the baptismal formula. They were working to help the church expand its thinking. All those who are up in arms over all this first of all don't have to use any of the other names, but second have showed just how close minded they really are. Go figure.
Peace my friend!
scary
right on karen...and kat, i wasn't scared as much as i was a bit disturbed by the authoritative tone...this my friends is the type of logical thinking going on in our churches...for this, i am disheartened...
the bright side? i'm working on it...
This is what happends when you read the Layman.........
Really, the only reason to read that particular publication is to see how long it takes to find flat out WRONG statements. That's my game, anyway......
I wrote a truly lovely response to this post yesterday, but the library computer destroyed it. Alas... The gist of it all, as I recall, is about creating an exclusive community rather than an inclusive community, which seems to be indicative of the agenda generally displayed over at The Layman. I go there when I want my blood pressure to rise. It's amazing to me how we take a religious philosophy that was, from the get go, fundamentally about love for everyone and continue to turn it time and again into yet another exclusivist club with no room for alternative visions, alternative lifestyles, alternative ways of thinking. White bread. Vanilla ice cream. The Bible says it, I believe it, end of story. I think what the people who write into the Layman often lose sight of is what is truly foundational for Christianity. Is using the English noun "Father" exclusively with regard to the first person of the Trinity a foundational belief upon which all other beliefs rest? Is it the word itself, or is it the relationship denoted by the word? Is this foundational? Yet again, we are flattening poetry into prose, and the result is inflexibility with regard to language and interpretation. I find this truly appalling.
Post a Comment
<< Home