The Trinity, in perspective

[RickC]

I don't remember saying this. I am not even sure what it means. Which lecture are you paraphrasing? Could you transcribe my actual words that you have paraphrased, so that I can let you know whether you are understanding the point I was making or not? Thanks!

First, I embellished a bit there.
Perhaps I could have called it The New Revised RickC Paraphrased Version?

I can't recall exactly what you said (along these lines)--what lecture it was from. But I'm relatively sure it was from the Knowing God series.

You were discussing the doctrine of the trinity with special reference to the divinity of Jesus. You said (something like) the doctrine of the trinity wasn't something that Jesus spelled out, so to speak. By this 'spelling out' I mean the fully developed doctrine which didn't reach its final form till the 4th century.

To try to be clearer: What you were emphasizing was that an understanding of the doctrine of the trinity--that is, in terms of all of its fully developed intricacies--wasn't something that Jesus specifically taught. (That stuff happened later, as history shows).

OK, wait!
Now I think I recall what you said (but it may not your exact words).
Whichever lecture it was, you said that Jesus never told anyone, "Just make sure you know I'm the 'Second Person of the Trinity'," if I'm not mistaken.

So, when you said that, I pictured it in my mind how Jesus also never told anyone he was of the same, and not of a similar substance, as the Father <--- which was one of the later controversies as to Jesus' 'nature' as the doctrine of the trinity developed and was being fleshed out.

Did I get it right?
And I hope this makes sense.
(Me just home from work this morning) . . . Thanks!

[Paidion]

Why do I feel more comfortable saying "Jesus is God" than "God is Jesus?"

Probably for the same reason you feel more comfortable saying "Tk is Man" rather than "Man is TK".
Trinitarians don't actually believe that God is Jesus, since God is thought of as a compound being consisting not only of Jesus, but also of the Father and the Holy Spirit. But if you were a Modalist, you would probably feel equally comfortable with "Jesus is God" and "God is Jesus" since they believe that God is a single, divine Individual, whose name is "Jesus".

[Paidion]

IF PETER HAD BEEN A TRINITARIAN, Matthew 16:13-17 may have been written something like this:


Jesus said, “Who do people say that I am?” His disciples replied, “Some say you are John the Baptist returned from the dead; others say Elijah or another of the prophets.”

Jesus replied, “But who do you say that I am?”

Peter answered and said, “Thou art the Logos, existing in the Father as his rationality and then, by an act of his will, being generated, in consideration of the various functions by which God is related to his creation, but only because Scripture speaks of a Father, a Son and a Holy Spirit, each member of the Trinity being coequal with every other member and each acting inseparably with and interpenetrating every other member, with only an economic subordination within God, but causing no division which would make the substance no longer simple.”

And Jesus answered, saying, “What?”