Arianism and Protestantism

[andrewstx]

I have brought up God the Son vs Son of God several times now and never had even one reply. Why?

I have seen a triangular diagram with the word God in the center and Father, Son, and Sprit at each point of the equilateral triangle Father, Son and Spirit are God but not each other. Also expressed in the Athanasion creed in many more words.

Perhaps sola scriptura Protestants avoid the term “God the Son” because it is not verbatim in the bible but Son of God is?

I avoid Son of God alone because it seems to make Jesus and second class member of the Holy Trinity instead of an equal relationship with the Father and the Holy Spirit.

This is important to me as an Orthodox Christian we have worked out Christology and the Holy Trinity in several Ecumenical Counsels.

 

[Kliska]

I have brought up God the Son vs Son of God several times now and never had even one reply. Why?

I have seen a triangular diagram with the word God in the center and Father, Son, and Sprit at each point of the equilateral triangle Father, Son and Spirit are God but not each other. Also expressed in the Athanasion creed in many more words.

Perhaps sola scriptura Protestants avoid the term “God the Son” because it is not verbatim in the bible but Son of God is?

I avoid Son of God alone because it seems to make Jesus and second class member of the Holy Trinity instead of an equal relationship with the Father and the Holy Spirit.

This is important to me as an Orthodox Christian we have worked out Christology and the Holy Trinity in several Ecumenical Counsels.

I use God the Son all the time on a well-trafficked evangelical protestant website, and so do the people there. It comes up the most when we are discussing the Trinity with atheists and agnostics. The Trinity is a fundamental belief that a vast majority of mainstream Evangelical Protestants have, not to mention Anglicans, and Lutherans. It is a gross misunderstanding that Protestants somehow don’t preach and teach a strong Trinitarian belief set, including the way we pray; To the Father, with the help and intercession of the Spirit, in the name of the Son.

We are Christians who believe and profess God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit, and the vast majority of our prayers and baptisms reflect that fact.

 

[steido01]

I have brought up God the Son vs Son of God several times now and never had even one reply. Why?

I have seen a triangular diagram with the word God in the center and Father, Son, and Sprit at each point of the equilateral triangle Father, Son and Spirit are God but not each other. Also expressed in the Athanasion creed in many more words.

Perhaps sola scriptura Protestants avoid the term “God the Son” because it is not verbatim in the bible but Son of God is?

I avoid Son of God alone because it seems to make Jesus and second class member of the Holy Trinity instead of an equal relationship with the Father and the Holy Spirit.

This is important to me as an Orthodox Christian we have worked out Christology and the Holy Trinity in several Ecumenical Counsels.

Then why object to the filioque?

 

[ltwin]

I have brought up God the Son vs Son of God several times now and never had even one reply. Why?

Evangelical Protestants on this thread have already responded to the accusation that they do not teach a strong Trinitarian faith. Your assertion that evangelicals don’t use “God the Son” is just so off based and unsupported besides your own personal observation that it’s not really our top priority in “proving” to you that we do in fact believe that Jesus is God the Son.

Simply put, we believe that Jesus is God the Son and we do call him that. I’m not sure what you’re experience or background with Protestants has been, but on this issue, it does not reflect general evangelicalism where belief in the Trinity is quite alive and well.

For example, in the Baptist Faith and Message (the belief statement of the Southern Baptist Convention) there is a section dedicated to “God” and then 3 subsections dedicated for each member of the Trinity entitled: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit.

Highly respected evangelical Albert Mohler wrote:

Our task is to bear witness to the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob–to God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. No matter what the world may say, the true church must tell of His greatness, His holiness, and His sovereignty.

 

[andrewstx]

OKay. I was raised in a part Southern Baptist and part “churches of Christ” family. Mostly churches of Christ and they dunked me when I was already 16 years old. They say they are THE church as in one and only even though they have only existed since 1906. They do not call themselves non-denominational they call themselves UN-denominational.

In that sect they avoid the word “Trinity” using the word “godhead” instead. They are the most sola scriptura denomination in existence.
every and anything done or believed in that sect has to have permission from the bible to be valid. It is like a game to them, “bible may I, no you may not”. For that reason they have no music in their churches except for vocal only. They believe that evefything must be “authorized” by their paper and ink idol.

One of the founders of that group, a Barton Stone was frankly an Arian and denied the Holy Trinity altogether. That has continued to this day, and still they often refuse to use the word Trinity.

Honestly I have not read the Faith and Message. I was going by my own experience and that of my family. They truly never say God the Son, they only say the Son of God only. That was the only thing I never heard from them, both sides off the family.

I am extremely glad to hear that Evangelicals have orthodox doctrine in RE the Holy Trinity and Christology. It’s just not what I grew up with.

 

[Kliska]

OKay. I was raised in a part Southern Baptist and part “churches of Christ” family. Mostly churches of Christ and they dunked me when I was already 16 years old. They say they are THE church as in one and only even though they have only existed since 1906. They do not call themselves non-denominational they call themselves UN-denominational.

In that sect they avoid the word “Trinity” using the word “godhead” instead. They are the most sola scriptura denomination in existence.
every and anything done or believed in that sect has to have permission from the bible to be valid. It is like a game to them, “bible may I, no you may not”. For that reason they have no music in their churches except for vocal only. They believe that evefything must be “authorized” by their paper and ink idol.

One of the founders of that group, a Barton Stone was frankly an Arian and denied the Holy Trinity altogether. That has continued to this day, and still they often refuse to use the word Trinity.

Honestly I have not read the Faith and Message. I was going by my own experience and that of my family. They truly never say God the Son, they only say the Son of God only. That was the only thing I never heard from them, both sides off the family.

I am extremely glad to hear that Evangelicals have orthodox doctrine in RE the Holy Trinity and Christology. It’s just not what I grew up with.

Ah, that explains a lot. Most of us would describe a group like that as “Solo Scriptura.” They won’t even use a word that is not explicitly in scripture; so even if the concept of the Trinity is in scripture, they won’t use the word because it isn’t there, but “Godhead” is.

 

[andrewstx]

Ah, that explains a lot. Most of us would describe a group like that as “Solo Scriptura.” They won’t even use a word that is not explicitly in scripture; so even if the concept of the Trinity is in scripture, they won’t use the word because it isn’t there, but “Godhead” is.

It was never my intention to insult or “look down my nose” at anyone in this thread. It was hard growing up in what many speak of as a cult. I never really fit into that denomination and was kicked out the very night I graduated HS. They are or at least were very serious about being the only church with the only Christians in it and that everyone who does not believe their version of THE Gospel is going to hell.

This is not a trivial group, throughout the South and Southwest they are in a tie for popularity with the Southern Baptists and the United Methodists. I have not set foot in one of their “auditoriums” since my Father died nearly 20 years ago. They may have lightened up a little. Who knows? I am just plain not interested frankly.

 

[Kliska]

It was never my intention to insult or “look down my nose” at anyone in this thread. It was hard growing up in what many speak of as a cult. I never really fit into that denomination and was kicked out the very night I graduated HS. They are or at least were very serious about being the only church with the only Christians in it and that everyone who does not believe their version of THE Gospel is going to hell.

This is not a trivial group, throughout the South and Southwest they are in a tie for popularity with the Southern Baptists and the United Methodists. I have not set foot in one of their “auditoriums” since my Father died nearly 20 years ago. They may have lightened up a little. Who knows? I am just plain not interested frankly.

As is the case with several groups that think the same, it usually depends on the specific congregations. I know several of the less mainstream protestant churches that are like that with the Trinity specifically. Some congregations within the same denomination believe Jesus was divine, but not God, and some believe He was indeed God. It gets confusing and is one of those cases where you kind of just have to ask people that belong to those congregations what their specific belief is. There are also some Messianic Congregations that accept Jesus as Messiah, but not as God.

 

[Matt_Guitar_Man]

Protestantism appears to me or more accurately an adherence to sola scriptura can not help but devolve into relativism, that is, creating a god & church of one’s own design even if they use the scriptures to do so. Just look at the fringe sect’s such as JW, SDA, LDS etc.
The thread posters comments on what would appear to be main stream protestant church’s excepting gay marriage etc reinforces the fact that this tendency can’t be helped.
So no Protestantism will not go the way of Arianism because in the long run it allows it’s followers to eventually worship the creature rather than the creator and the temptation to do this has a strong and alluring pull that has been with us since Adam and Eve.

 

[EIF5A]

I have brought up God the Son vs Son of God several times now and never had even one reply. Why?

I have seen a triangular diagram with the word God in the center and Father, Son, and Sprit at each point of the equilateral triangle Father, Son and Spirit are God but not each other. Also expressed in the Athanasion creed in many more words.

Perhaps sola scriptura Protestants avoid the term “God the Son” because it is not verbatim in the bible but Son of God is?

I avoid Son of God alone because it seems to make Jesus and second class member of the Holy Trinity instead of an equal relationship with the Father and the Holy Spirit.

This is important to me as an Orthodox Christian we have worked out Christology and the Holy Trinity in several Ecumenical Counsels.

Is it true that God the Father is the Source of God the Son and God the Spirit?

I’ve read that Jesus and the Holy Spirit are like two arms of the Father extending out to humanity. But that makes it seem as though arms are “less” than the entirety of a Person.

And Jesus prayed to the Father…but maybe that was the human will and not His divine side?

Anyways, when I attended Protestant churches, I think I remember hearing God the Son…or at least there wasn’t insistence on only using Son of God.

 

[ltwin]

The thread posters comments on what would appear to be main stream protestant church’s excepting gay marriage etc reinforces the fact that this tendency can’t be helped.

Except that the groups you call “mainstream” (commonly called “mainline” in the US context) aren’t really that mainstream or the mainline anymore (unless you consider “mainstream” in America to be white, aging, and losing members at record rates). The mainline denominations that accept gay marriage have been experiencing declension for years now.

The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, the Presbyterian Church (USA), the Episcopal Church, the United Church of Christ, and the American Baptist Churches USA are the mainline churches that at present officially approve or unofficially allow member churches to approve of homosexuality either in marriage or the clergy. According to the 2012 Yearbook of American and Canadian Churches, these churches combined membership only come to 11.2 million. In other words, the most liberal churches in America are smaller combined than the 16.1 million member Southern Baptist Convention, the largest evangelical denomination in the country.

Even if you throw in the United Methodist Church (the largest mainline denomination that as of now does not accept homosexuality), the total mainline Christian membership is only 18.9 million. And all of these denominations are in persistent terminal decline. Just one example, the Presbyterian Church (USA) closed from 75 to 80 churches per year and lost 60,000 members per year from 2008-2011 and the statistics have not improved since then. In 1983, the Presbyterian Church (USA) had claimed 3.1 million members. Today, only 1.8 million.

In short, mainline Protestantism is by no means mainstream Protestantism. At least not anymore. If current trends continue, some of these churches would cease to exist in about 30 years.

 

[JonNC]

OKay. I was raised in a part Southern Baptist and part “churches of Christ” family. Mostly churches of Christ and they dunked me when I was already 16 years old. They say they are THE church as in one and only even though they have only existed since 1906. They do not call themselves non-denominational they call themselves UN-denominational.

In that sect they avoid the word “Trinity” using the word “godhead” instead. They are the most sola scriptura denomination in existence.
every and anything done or believed in that sect has to have permission from the bible to be valid. It is like a game to them, “bible may I, no you may not”. For that reason they have no music in their churches except for vocal only. They believe that evefything must be “authorized” by their paper and ink idol.

Then again, that would not be recognized as a classic understanding of the practice of sola scriptura.

Also expressed in the Athanasion creed in many more words.

Perhaps sola scriptura Protestants avoid the term “God the Son” because it is not verbatim in the bible but Son of God is?

Sola scripturists such as Lutherans accept and confess the Athanasian Creed. In fact the three creeds make up the very first section of the Book of Concord.

Jon

 

[Nicea325]

Wow… all I can say is that I hope there are Catholics on these forums that would like to come along and help dispel the misunderstandings about Protestants that are cropping up in this thread. It always seems to go over better if we protestants don’t defend ourselves. All I will say is what you described does not match 98% of protestants I know of. The Trinity and seriousness of sin are in no way ignored by the vast majority of protestants.

I most certainly would not say mainline Protestants are post-Arianist. However, the issue I view with Protestants is the fact since there exist many denominations, they really do not have apologists to defend Protestantism.

 

[JonNC]

I most certainly would not say mainline Protestants are post-Arianist. However, the issue I view with Protestants is the fact since there exist many denominations, they really do not have apologists to defend Protestantism.

Of course not. However, there are Lutherans who defend Lutheranism, Anglicans who defend Anglicanism, Baptists who defend the Baptist teachings, etc.
I don’t consider myself an apologist, but if I were, I would see no need to defend Protestantism, though in the same spirit as the protestors at the 2nd Diet of Speyer in 1529, I continue to protest attempts by government to limit free religious exercise.

Jon

 

[Kliska]

I most certainly would not say mainline Protestants are post-Arianist. However, the issue I view with Protestants is the fact since there exist many denominations, they really do not have apologists to defend Protestantism.

In the world we tend to be more focused on defending the gospel of Christ; His existence, Who He is, life, death, resurrection, what it all accomplished, what it all means for the person, etc… As for inter-Christian apologetics we tend to be more focused on defending certain doctrines rather than defending “Protestantism” as a monolithic thought, because it isn’t monolithic, often even within varying denominations.

 

[Nicea325]

Of course not. However, there are Lutherans who defend Lutheranism, Anglicans who defend Anglicanism, Baptists who defend the Baptist teachings, etc.
I don’t consider myself an apologist, but if I were, I would see no need to defend Protestantism, though in the same spirit as the protestors at the 2nd Diet of Speyer in 1529, I continue to protest attempts by government to limit free religious exercise.

Jon

Indeed…indeed. Each specific denomination will defend its views and beliefs and it is perfectly understandable.

 

[Nicea325]

In the world we tend to be more focused on defending the gospel of Christ; His existence, Who He is, life, death, resurrection, what it all accomplished, what it all means for the person, etc… As for inter-Christian apologetics we tend to be more focused on defending certain doctrines rather than defending “Protestantism” as a monolithic thought, because it isn’t monolithic, often even within varying denominations.

Yes. It is not uncommon to defend common doctrines,etc,etc.