Quote:
Originally Posted by ErikJohnson
If I’m understanding you correctly, you’re asking why Protestants rejected some aspects of Catholicism (e.g., authority via sacred tradition/apostolic succession, Purgatory, the canonical status of certain books labeled “Apocrypha”) but not all of them (e.g., the Trinity, the Incarnation/hypostatic union, ex nihilo creation, the canonical status of the 39 books of the Hebrew Bible and the 27 books of the New Testament).
|
Yes obviously that was my question. I don't know if you really answered it though. For instance, because celibacy is about as old as the Trinity (give or take a century), one might conclude that celibacy is a "core element of the Christian Faith" because it is very old. There is not sufficient evidence in the New Testament record to demonstrate that the Apostles taught the Trinity doctrine. The fact that they never explain it with anything like the Nicene verbiage ("One being, one essence, three persons, three aspects, etc) is very interesting. If that was the best way to describe the true nature of God, then it is interesting that they never say anything like it in the New Testament.
If we go by "Sola Scriptura" and use the Bible as our sole basis for establishing the core doctrines of Christianity, I can see this much being the foundation:
1.) "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."
2.) " 3 He was despised and rejected by men,
a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering.
Like one from whom men hide their faces
he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
4 Surely he took up our infirmities
and carried our sorrows,
yet we considered him stricken by God,
smitten by him, and afflicted.
5 But he was pierced for our transgressions,
he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was upon him,
and by his wounds we are healed. "
3.) "[18] And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
[19] Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
[20] Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen."
4.) Jesus of Nazareth came and ministered among the Jews. He was rejected and killed by them. Three days later he rose from the dead. The followers of Jesus passed along his teaching that this was the very purpose of his life. "To this end was I born."
5.) Forgiveness of our sins comes through Christ and Christ alone. Hope for Eternal Life and reward after this life comes about only through and because of Christ. Alone, we all come short of the Glory of God and are unworthy.
6.) Jesus Christ ascended into heaven and has all power, both in heaven and on earth. He is Omnipotent and Omniscient.
We could add to these as core elements of Christianity. But to call anything a "core element" of the Christian faith, you'd need to establish that it was taught by Jesus Christ and the Apostles. The Trinity cannot be demonstrated as such. Thus, my point stands -- why accept a doctrine that was decided upon (literally voted on) over 200 years after all Apostles were dead as irrefutable? Constantine and the members of the Council of Nicaea are welcome to pronounce whatever they like, but their authority to do so is no clearer than those who promoted celibacy in the Priesthood within that same era. They made the broad sweeping pronouncement that anyone who does not accept the nature of God as described by the doctrine of the Trinity to be heretical and unChristian. I would contend that they had no right to make such decisions and pronouncements, and that one must validate their claims based on Biblical writings. If the Bible does not contain their teaching of the Trinity, fully, completely, entirely, and unquestionably, then they were overstepping their authority (if they truly had any).
The fact that the Council of Nicaea happened at all is evidence enough that the followers of Christ were not united behind the teaching of the Trinity at that time, so you must make a great leap of faith to past hurdles of murder, conspiracy, plots, assassinations, worldly politics, Greek philosophical influence and many other things. Once you make that leap of faith and dismiss all the things that should lead any reasonable person to question the proceedings and history of it, you can come to "the Trinity is the only correct way to describe God the Father, his Son Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost" because Emperor Constantine said so. Not because Christ said so. Not because any of the Apostles said so. No, it is because Emperor Constantine said so.
I suppose it comes down to this: Many things can be accurately demonstrated to be core doctrines of Christianity as taught by Jesus and the Apostles. The Trinity is not one of them.
And by the way, I do enjoy the writings of C.S. Lewis. He certainly had a powerful way of defending and upholding Christianity.
More later ...