Question for non-Catholics: if then why not now...?

[joe370]

Post #23 gives a biblical defense of the Trinity. That is where the verses are given that show all three are said to be God. This one just speaks to a couple verses about the Holy Spirit.

Hey boastinjesus. I agree that those verses illustrate that all three are said to be God, but where does scripture claim that the Holy Spirit is one of the three Persons of the Trinity?

 

[JonNC]

I read the verses however those same verses have been read by Jehovah Witness, Mormons, Oneness Pentacostals, 7th Day Adventists and more…

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Nontrinitarian_denominations

Here is a group that says the Bible teaches one God and no Trinity

nontrinitarian.com/

and a historical parody

angelfire.com/pa/greywlf/trinity.html

Clear as mud and only clear if you accept that there is a Magesterium, the mystery hidden for all ages that defined, teaches and binds believers to accept Trinitarian Theology.

Otherwise you are just one fallible guy with a book.

Now if you are Trinitarian it is probably because Luther, Knox, Zwingli and Calvin were Trinitarian. I appreciate your accepting, believing and defending the Church teaching of Trinitarian Theology. The journey of a mile starts with one step.

No, it isn’t because Luther was trinitarian that I am. I am trinitarian (and Luther was) because the **whole **Church in council, all of the patriarchs, properly discerned the truth regarding the Trinity. Now, if you wish to claim this for the Magisterium, fine, I agree, but let’s be clear that it was the Magisterium of the Early Church, which was not in schism.

Jon

 

[CopticChristian]

No, it isn’t because Luther was trinitarian that I am. I am trinitarian (and Luther was) because the **whole **Church in council, all of the patriarchs, properly discerned the truth regarding the Trinity. Now, if you wish to claim this for the Magisterium, fine, I agree, but let’s be clear that it was the Magisterium of the Early Church, which was not in schism.

Jon

Thank you Jon,

I agree that it was the early Church. I perceive the Magesterium to be a bride. The Church is the Bride of Christ. Paul points out in Romans 7 that the spouse does not change if one dies. Schism is like Divorce or Death. Something happens to the other not the spouse. To say that the Church is in Schism suggests that it is a dynamic of the Church as opposed to an action by another. The Church does not Schism. People Schism from the Bride. The Bride does not change. Schismatics change.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

My question:

Did the 4th century Catholic Church leadership that formally, authoritatively and infallibly defined the Trinitarian dogma, in actuality possess the right to formally, authoritatively and infallibly define the Trinitarian dogma, and make it binding on the church universal?

If then why not now?

Trinity revealed in scripture;

Genesis 1; 26l Then God said: Let us make* human beings in our image, after our likeness.

Trinity eye witnessed;

Matthew 3;16* j After Jesus was baptized, he came up from the water and behold, the heavens were opened [for him], and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove [and] coming upon him. 17And a voice came from the heavens, saying, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.*

Trinity commissioned by the Church to baptize in one singular NAME;

Matthew 28:18* Then Jesus approached and said to them, “All power in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19h Go, therefore,* and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit,

Jesus gave the power and authority to His Church to bind and loose on earth. And when the Catholic Church exercised her divine authority to “bind and loose” the teachings of Arianism, these (Arian teachings) were “bind and loosed” in heaven.

When the Catholic Church “bind and loosed” the dogma of the blessed Trinity binding upon “all” Christians, heaven did "whatever you (The Church) bind and loose on earth shall be bound and loosed in heaven.

Matthew 16:17Jesus said to him in reply, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood* has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father. 18k And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church,* and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. 19l** I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven.* Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” **

Historical fact; Peter possessed the keys to the kingdom of heaven “singularly”. Thus the council of Nicea recieved the ratification of Pope Sylvester even though he was not present. None the less the Emperor in the East sought the Popes approval of the councils findings so that it becomes “binding on all Christians” especially in the Emperors domains.

Nicea I
When and where
325. (Now Iznik, Turkey, 70 miles from Constantinople on the Asiatic shore of the Bosporus)

**Crisis or controversy **Christ was a pure creature; made out of nothing; liable to fall; the Son of God by adoption, not by nature: Arianism.

Attendees
318 bishops, and the following notables:
Convened: Constantine I, Emperor;
Eusebius of Caesarea, historian;
St. Athanasius, theologian;
Ratified: Silvester I, Pope.

**Decrees and resolutions **The Nicene Creed;
The Consubstaniality of the Word: homousion with the Father;
Solved how the date of Easter should be calculated.

This biblical authority remains practiced in the Catholic Church today unchanged in the magisterium of the Catholic Church councils when the popes are never present, but ratify the councils findings in the keys the Popes possess in Peter’s chair to bind and loose on earth, heave binds and looses Infallible.

Note; A dogma is never pronounced binding unless an apostolic faith comes under attack