Tertullian's Rule of Faith

[keeblex]

We however as always, the more so now as better equipped by the Paraclete, that leader into all truth, believe (as these do) in one only God, yet subject to this dispensation (which is our word for "economy") that the one only God has also a Son, his Word who has proceeded from himself, by whom all things were made and without whom nothing has been

Comments

Idea of the trinity in the 19th century

[anonymous]

What is interesting about this is that we almost lost the idea of the Trinity in the 19th century in the hands of liberal theology (not to be confused with 'liberal' in politics, or general usage today). The idea was considered to be primitive and antiquated until the early 20th century when it was "rediscovered" I wish I could be more specific, but I don't know where my history of Christian thought textbook is.

--Matt

Re: Idea of the trinity in the 19th century

[keeblex]

No, you're absolutely right, and that's part of the problem! Between the Second Great Awakening and the Quests for the Historical Jesus, liberal protestant theologians discarded the Trinity in favor of a number of other errors and heresies. And while it is being 'rediscovered' by protestants, especially evangelicals, it's still such a distant and nebulous concept that it hardly impacts Christians anymore...

I just took an AWESOME Trinitarianism class last semester that helped me see and understand much of what is at stake here, hence my interest and insistence. It's not just some theologians that are in error here: popular Christian thought has become so greatly divorced from a right view of God, that we don't even realize it.

How's Italy?

Re: Idea of the trinity in the 19th century

[anonymous]

Italy is great :D

You are right about what is at stake (steak? mmm steak... er, sorry). Honestly I think that the whole nebulousness concerning the trinity is dwarfed by the feel-good nebulousness of popular Christian theology in general. Although sentiment and emotion definitely have their places (like passion for God!), I often end up being taken aback by the lack of actual substance. Of course the opposite of this is arrogant theological nitpicking which breeds serious bitterness in its stronger forms. What we need to encourage is a well-founded, disciplined, and /humble/ theological practice.

Well, sorry about hijacking your trinity post :D

Re: Idea of the trinity in the 19th century

[keeblex]

Apology not accepted! Apology not at all necessary!

You're right, and that is exactly what I'm trying to learn to do (from my nebulous experiential background :P). Doctrine is important, sincere belief isn't sufficient, unless your belief is accurate. On the other hand, I'm still in agreement about the theological nitpicking too! The fact that we have denominations divided over baptism is just that sort of nitpicking, to me. And it's silly.