Paidion wrote:
‘Candlepower wrote:Isaiah 9:6 tells us, "For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government is upon his shoulder, and his name is called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace." This is a clear prophecy about Our Lord Jesus Christ.’
Candlepower, if you believe this sentence to be true of Jesus, then you cannot be a Trinitarian. Trinitarians do not believe that Jesus is "the Everlasting Father". Rather they believe that He is one member of a compound God they call "The Trinity".’
First point: To say that the doctrine of the Trinity holds that Jesus is one “member” of a “compound” God is an extremely gross mis-understanding of the doctrine of the Trinity (and the mystery to which this doctrine points). A Trinitarian does not believe in a “compound” God; a Trinitarian, like all monotheists, believes in one God, who is perfectly simple (meaning, a God Who has no parts). From this, it also follows that a Trinitarian does not believe that Jesus is a “member” of God; for, the word “member” carries with it the notion of being a “part” of a whole. Again, God has no parts; He is perfectly one. “The Lord our God is one Lord.” (Deut. 6:4) Again, as has been stated before on this forum a number of times, but needs to be repeated, by the Blessed Trinity is meant one God in three Divine Persons (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit). This definition does not introduce any “parts” into God, nor does it make God a “compound”. [It should also be stated that, even if one does not believe this doctrine to be true—though it is the doctrine that is revealed by God in the divine Scriptures and has been handed down to us through the teachings of the Fathers and Councils of the Church—nevertheless, if one brings forth objections to this doctrine, one ought to understand what the doctrine actually
does assert, and what it does
not assert, i.e., it does not, in any way whatsoever, introduce “parts” into God or make God a “compound”. If one does not see this, one does not understand the doctrine; and if one does not understand the doctrine, one ought to be very careful in how one criticizes the doctrine (out of simple fairness towards those who do believe the doctrine, among other reasons).]
Second point: there is no difficulty in a single person being both a father and a son; for, the word “father” implies relation to another (i.e., it implies a relation of a given person to another person who is begotten of that given person). Thus, one can be a father in relation to one person, and a son in relation to another person (eg., I am my father's son, but I am my son's father). There is no difficulty in this. Thus, Jesus can be a Son in relation to God the Father, and He can be a father in relation to all those who, through grace, are begotten of Him (as the New Adam). Thus, there is no problem with Candlepower asserting that the prophecy of Isaiah 9:6 refers to Christ as an “everlasting father”.
Third point:
steve7150 wrote, “It seems to me to say Jesus is God is a similarly misleading statement as saying Mary is the mother of God.”
While I disagree with the opinion that the statements, “Jesus is God” and “Mary is the Mother of God”, are misleading statements (for, I believe that these statements proclaim fundamental truths of the Christian faith, being built upon the two fundamental doctrines of Christianity, namely, the doctrines of the Trinity and the Incarnation); nevertheless, I do agree with the inference that these two statements are very closely related. For, the truth of the statement, “Mary is the Mother of God” is founded upon the truth of the statement that, “Jesus is God”. If one believes the latter statement (“Jesus is God”), one must also hold to the former statement (“Mary is the Mother of God”). If one does not hold to the former statement ("Mary is the Mother of God"), then one cannot hold to the latter statement ("Jesus is God"). For, to believe in the Incarnation (i.e., to believe that Jesus is God) is also to believe that Mary is Mother to Him Who is God (i.e., She is Mother of God); and this is a holy belief (“By this we know the Spirit of God: every spirit that acknowledges Jesus Christ as having come incarnate is from God.” (1 John 4:3a)). On the other hand, to deny that Mary is Mother of Him Who is God (i.e., to deny that She is Mother of God) is to deny the Incarnation (i.e., it is to deny that Jesus is God); and this is an opinion condemned by the holy Scriptures (“Every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God; it is the spirit of antichrist.” (1 John 4:3b)), as it was also condemned at the Council of Ephesus in 431 (which condemned Nestorius as a heretic because he denied Mary the title of “Theotokos”, which means “God-bearer”, i.e., “Mother of God”; in so doing, he was essentially denying that Christ is God Incarnate). Thus, all honor paid to (and due to) Mary, the Mother of God, is founded upon (and subordinate to) the supreme worship that is paid to (and due to) Jesus, the God-Man Whom She, a pure and sinless virgin, because of Her great faith and virtue, was found worthy to bear (cf., Gen. 3:15; Is. 7:14; Ps. 44:10 ff.; Mt. 1:18, 20, 23, 25; Lk. 1:28, 30-31, 43, 45, etc.).
In Christ, the Son of God (and Son of Mary),
BrotherAlan
"To what angel did God ever say, 'Thou art my Son, today I have begotten thee'? Or again, 'I will be to him a father, and he shall be to me a son'?" (Hebrews 1:5)
“How does this happen to me, that my Lord's mother should visit me?....Blessed is she who believed.” (Luke 1:43, 45)
