Trinitarian just told me........
 

God exists as a diferientiated infinite unity that is triune - 3 in 1, but not triplex - 3 in parts

The Athanasian Creed explicitly rejects tritheism.


....he then goes on to say....

the true teaching of the trinity is a oneness doctrine.

That trinitarian seems confused and "differentiated infinite unity that is triune" is really vague. How is the unity differentiated? Isn't differentiating the unity dividing it into parts?

Does it? Consider this portion of that Creed: "For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every Person by himself to be God and Lord; So are we forbidden by the catholic religion to say; There are three Gods or three Lords."

Not if he's basing it on the Athanasian Creed. It's true that there is not a great degree of difference between some versions of modern oneness doctrine and the trinity doctrine of the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed but there is no way one can rightly claim that modern versions of the trinity doctrine are oneness. Maybe the guy meant that the trinity doctrine is a monotheistic (one God) doctrine, which would be a true statement at least with regard to the trinity doctrine of the Nicene-Constantinople Creed and the beliefs of the Nicene and Ante-Nicene fathers.

Do you really think the Anthanasian Creed is that far from the original thoughts?

I think you have to take the creed in context - making it relevant to the time frame of which it was written.....

I dont have a huge issue with the Anthanasian Creed

Yes, particularly since Athanasius had nothing to do with writing it!

The Athanasian Creed is a sixth century document. Here's an English translation of it:

1. Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith;

2. Which faith except every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly.
3. And the catholic faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity;
4. Neither confounding the persons nor dividing the substance.
5. For there is one person* of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Spirit.
6. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit is all one, the glory equal, the majesty coeternal.
7. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Spirit.
8. The Father uncreated, the Son uncreated, and the Holy Spirit uncreated.
9. The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, and the Holy Spirit incomprehensible.
10. The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Spirit eternal.
11. And yet they are not three eternals but one eternal.
12. As also there are not three uncreated nor three incomprehensible, but one uncreated and one incomprehensible.
13. So likewise the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, and the Holy Spirit almighty.
14. And yet they are not three almighties, but one almighty.
15. So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God;
16. And yet they are not three Gods, but one God.
17. So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, and the Holy Spirit Lord;
18. And yet they are not three Lords but one Lord.
19. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every Person by himself to be God and Lord;
20. So are we forbidden by the catholic religion to say; There are three Gods or three Lords.
21. The Father is made of none, neither created nor begotten.
22. The Son is of the Father alone; not made nor created, but begotten.
23. The Holy Spirit is of the Father and of the Son; neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding.
24. So there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; one Holy Spirit, not three Holy Spirits.
25. And in this Trinity none is afore or after another; none is greater or less than another.
26. But the whole three persons are coeternal, and coequal.
27. So that in all things, as aforesaid, the Unity in Trinity and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshipped.
28. He therefore that will be saved must thus think of the Trinity.
29. Furthermore it is necessary to everlasting salvation that he also believe rightly the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ.
30. For the right faith is that we believe and confess that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and man.
31. God of the substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds; and man of substance of His mother, born in the world.
32. Perfect God and perfect man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting.
33. Equal to the Father as touching His Godhead, and inferior to the Father as touching His manhood.
34. Who, although He is God and man, yet He is not two, but one Christ.
35. One, not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh, but by taking of that manhood into God.
36. One altogether, not by confusion of substance, but by unity of person.
37. For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man, so God and man is one Christ;
38. Who suffered for our salvation, descended into hell, rose again the third day from the dead;
39. He ascended into heaven, He sits on the right hand of the Father, God, Almighty;
40. From thence He shall come to judge the quick and the dead.
41. At whose coming all men shall rise again with their bodies;
42. and shall give account of their own works.
43. And they that have done good shall go into life everlasting and they that have done evil into everlasting fire. 44. This is the catholic faith, which except a man believe faithfully he cannot be saved.

*The Latin word here is "persona," of which "person" is an inappropriate English translation since the Latin word "persona" has an identical equivalent (the English word "persona").


I reject every development in the trinity doctrine after the Council of Ephesus' prohibition against any further changes to the Nicene Creed (the most recent version at the time having been the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed of 381 A.D.) - though I agree with Nestorius that those things pertaining to Jesus' divinity do not pertain to His humanity and those things pertaining to His humanity do not pertain to His divinity. I also accept the Confession of the Synod at Mar Aqaq (486 A.D.) except that I would delete the phrase "the copies of": "But our faith in the dispensation of Christ should also be in a confession of two natures of Godhead and manhood, none of us venturing to introduce mixture, commingling, or confusion into the distinctions of those two natures. Instead, while Godhead remains and is preserved in that which belongs to it, and manhood in that which belongs to it, we combine the copies of their natures in one Lordship and one worship because of the perfect and inseparable conjunction which the Godhead had with the manhood. If anyone thinks or teaches others that suffering and change adhere to the Godhead of our Lord, not preserving - in regard to the union of the parsopa of our Savior - the confession of perfect God and perfect man, the same shall be anathema."

If his "true trinity teaching" proposes Jesus is not the Father, and that He and the Father and Spirit existed before time began, eternally, then it cannot be oneness doctrine.

One can't hold to the eternal sonship doctrine and have true Christian Montheism.

Do NOT confuse them with the facts.

Old Paths posted the AG, GoG, and others articles of faith and all of them defined the Trinity as three separate and distinct persons or beings.

so what? What is theologically wrong with that Epley....

the problem that I can see is his overall attitude. I really hope he doesn't treat his saints in this fashion

thank for responding Bro Blume.

As I said in an earlier post, "It's true that there is not a great degree of difference between some versions of modern oneness doctrine and the trinity doctrine of the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed but there is no way one can rightly claim that modern versions of the trinity doctrine are oneness."