American Unitarian Conference Forum

Not being a student of theology I came across this reference in the AUC listed historical article - see News:
"On the Origin of the Doctrine of the Trinity" by Andrews Norton.  He mentioned that the trinity really took its final form at this conference (in addition to many severe and harmful edicts).  So, for another take on the Trinity topic...here goes:

http://www.ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/LATERAN4.HTM

1. Confession of Faith

"This holy Trinity, which is undivided according to its common essence but distinct according to the properties of its persons, gave the teaching of salvation to the human race through Moses and the holy prophets and his other servants, according to the most appropriate disposition of the times. Finally the only-begotten Son of God, Jesus Christ, who became incarnate by the action of the whole Trinity in common and was conceived from the ever virgin Mary through the cooperation of the holy Spirit, having become true man, composed of a rational soul and human flesh, one person in two natures, showed more clearly the way of life. Although he is immortal and unable to suffer according to his divinity, he was made capable of suffering and dying according to his humanity. Indeed, having suffered and died on the wood of the cross for the salvation of the human race, he descended to the underworld, rose from the dead and ascended into heaven. He descended in the soul, rose in the flesh, and ascended in both. He will come at the end of time to judge the living and the dead, to render to every person according to his works, both to the reprobate and to the elect. All of them will rise with their own bodies, which they now wear, so as to receive according to their deserts, whether these be good or bad; for the latter perpetual punishment with the devil, for the former eternal glory with Christ."

Forgive my musings on the above if ignorant but:
> Jesus...different than Jesus Christ?  Mere man vs divine being?  Identical?  "The only begotton son of God, Jesus Christ"...so I assume no.  But if Jesus was the pre-existing Son of God...."became incarnate by the action of the whole Trinity in common"....we are to assume all three personalities agreed that one personality would become wholly human...yet somehow remain wholly divine?
> The Son somehow became a fetus in Mary...but required the help of his other third...the Holy Spirit...what did the Father do?  What about Joseph and the claim of the House of David?  
> "True man, composed of a rational soul.." ? wait on here...another soul?  Does Jesus Christ - a part of the Godhead - have a soul?  How could that be?  What happened to it at his crucifixion?  Did the created soul of Jesus the man vanish?  What then of the man?
> "..and human flesh."  Again...wholly man or wholly divine?  Cannot be both.
> "One person in two natures".....what??  Again, the wholly man and wholly divine....impossible.
> "Although he is immortal and unable to suffer according to his divinity, he was made capable of suffering and dying..."  Wait on here....IF Jesus Christ (God) is immortal and unable to suffer...how does Jesus Christ (God) know what suffering is?  How can a divine INCAPABLE of something...a rather definitive statement...be "made capable"...who did the making?  Father and Holy Spirit?  Another impossibility.  
> "He descended in the soul..."...whose soul?  God has a soul?...if not..as noted above..what happened to it?  
> "..rose in the flesh..."  What about the soul?
> "...and ascended in both."  Now, the mysterious soul and human body combined....so we are to assume that 1/3 of God...has a soul and a human body...but God does not require a soul...souls are created by and subservient to God.

Talk about God by committee....I cannot believe any Christian...other the the most ardent theologians...can begin to try and explain such a concocted description of God.  Even the theologians cannot explain the above...after all...it is a mystery.

Jesus Christ, no pun intended!

That is an interesting point regarding Jesus's soul...if he as God Incarnate did he have one? And if so what happened to it?

Do you get the impression that the vast majority of Christians mouth agreement with the doctrines because that is what they have been taught but in reality have no functional understanding...(if they do..it is most likely heretical and they don't realize it)? Yet we are the ones considered in "error" by the orthodox. I am sure my neighbors could not explain any doctrine..yet some are regular members of the Catholic, Lutheran, Methodist etc. churches. I remember visiting a UCC church and asking one of the point people for newbies a doctrine Q and all I got was "Well, I know what I believe"....and that was the end of it.

"we are to assume all three personalities agreed that one personality would become wholly human...yet somehow remain wholly divine?"

Taken to its logical conclusion, it means that not only did God know that humanity would "fall" but its fall was necessary for the second person of the Trinity to fulfill his purpose, namely, as the savior of humanity. This makes us not sinners in need of rescue, but pawns in a strange cosmic game.

Most Christians are focused almost exclusively on Jesus alone, with the other two persons playing supporting roles; Christ is most often depicted in Christian art, the cross/crucifix is the symbol of the faith-not a dove or a patriarchal figure. I would argue that Jesus has become the de facto deity of choice for everyday Christians rather than the Trinity.

True....a face and a name go a long way. That certainly helped in the spread of the religion.....people in the Greco-Roman world associated human figures with their God's....to replace Zeus / Jupiter, Poseidon / Neptune, Artemis / Diana....etc. required a similar divine figure. Of note is that both Judaism and Islam have avoided making God anthropomorphic.... Islam has been successful converting without a similar divine person.