The Theological Understanding Of God 's Life

In the Neo-modalism section of the New Catholic Encyclopedia, it is noted that after years of being left alone efforts were made to bring the “trinity” back to its original place of importance by Karl Barth, a Reformed theologian (198). God was seen as the event in which is revelation, and that the structure of this was “Trinitarian,” to Barth (198). Karl Barth concludes that, “God is the subject (Father), the content (Son), and the very happening (Spirit) of revelation” (198). The “trinity”, as faith in God, was based in Christology, not the other way around (198). God is conclusively “uni-personal,” “persons” according to Barth means

God become man, one of the profound mysteries of the Gospel and the Christian faith, is evidenced and affirmed throughout Scripture, yet it all too often is neglected in modern Christian thought and practice. In the work, The Incarnation of God, John Clark and Marcus Johnson do just the opposite. They bring the truth from scripture to robustly discuss a theology of the incarnation of God. Throughout their discussion, it becomes evident that the book strives to address the centrality of the incarnation, to the whole of the Christian faith, finding it’s support both in scripture and also the historic understandings of the catholic Church.

our confession as well as the implications of a God who is three in one. In the following essay, I

Introduction In his work, On the Incarnation of the Word, Athanasius of Alexandria provides a systematic approach to explaining why the Incarnation was needed and how to interpret the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Athanasius seeks to clear up any misconceptions as to why the Son of God needed to humble himself to become man, only to die a humiliating death, that would later be scorned. Athanasius ends with evidence as to the truth of which all Christians celebrate and seek to share with all who will listen. I will explain Athanasius logical approach to the Incarnation by explaining the need for God to respond to man’s sin, the manner in which God brought redemption, and the grace that can now be celebrated.

A Christian apologetic method is a verbal defense of the biblical worldview. A proof is giving a reason for why we believe. This paper will address the philosophical question of God’s existence from the moral argument. The presuppositional apologetic method of Reformed thinkers Cornelius Van Til and John Frame will be the framework. Topics covered here could undoubtedly be developed in more depth, but that would be getting ahead, here is the big picture.

Moltmann argued that the cross of Christ and death in God namely that Christ suffers death on the cross while God the father suffers the death of Jesus where he also states that God is in Christ to the point that God becomes the victim of victim and that on the death of Christ on the cross affected not only humanity, but also God himself. Moltmann emphasized, the suffering that the Son endured when He had been separated from the Father and the Spirit.

I see God working through the history of mankind and God working throughout the history of Israel as well. I believe one can see that God is at work in the church as well. He is working to fulfill God 's plans that has been in place before the foundation of the world. God’s plan as the Apostle Paul says is to redeem his people in Ephesians 1:6-7. The Apostle Paul said, “to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved. In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace, (Ephesians 1:6‭-‬7 ESV). It is Genesis chapter 3 that we see the broken state of mankind, but God offers grace to mankind when He tells Eve her child (Jesus) would crush the serpent (Satan).‬

John of Damascus was another prodigy of the early Church, having extensive knowledge of a wide range of subjects during his life, which spanned from the late 7th century to the mid-8th century. In this brief excerpt of his book, John of Damascus discusses the same fundamental ideas Augustine covers, namely the in-depth understanding of the Holy Trinity. His purpose, as previously stated, is to clarify misunderstandings the Trinity and to expel false teachings such as modalism and polytheism.

The Trinity consists of God, the Father, Jesus, the Son of God and the Holy Spirit. The Christian faith recognizes there is one God and He is one with His Son, Jesus and the Holy Spirit. The purpose of this essay is to describe the interrelationship of the three persons of the Trinity. This will include the concepts of the economic trinity, the essential trinity and the social trinity.

Martens started out in chapter three of Gods Design with a question that pertains to the people of Israel, how does Gods purpose unfold? (33) which he answers the question from the book of Exodus by stating the Old Testament story can be divided into three units namely, the pre-monarchical era, the age of the monarchy, and the post-monarchy period. What is to be said about the God Yahweh in view of Israel’s deliverance from Egyptian servitude? In the Song by the Sea, Yahweh is presented in the role of a warrior. The personal and relational dimension is highlighted in the designation of Yahweh as judge, king, ruler, warrior. The conclusion that nothing and no one is even remotely to be compared with Yahweh is important because of the polytheistic setting in which Israel lived. Thus, the Song of the Sea mentions the Edomites, Moabites, and Canaanites as trembling and dismayed in a terror derived from recognizing the greatness of Yahweh’s arm (Ex. 15: 14-16), which will figure so prominently in the Old Testament, is first used in connection with the Exodus event. But now to pursue the discussion of Yahweh as a warrior: He is a God of power.

Barth’s high view of the unique revelation granted to Christianity in the person of Jesus Christ leads to tension concerning how Judaism and Islam relate to God, apart from Jesus Christ. When discussing the failings of the church in the medieval era, Barth asks, “To what extent could heathen and Jews find … a power which was genuinely different…the power of God which humbles and therefore blesses all men, the power of the Gospel?” Barth lumps the Jewish people together with heathens, and relegates them both to the category of those who do not have an understanding of God and who will not experience said power because of the Church’s failings. This is a dangerous statement, as it undermines the significance of the relationship and covenant

The first conceptual difference of theological realm derives from the necessity of respecting not only the unity and oneness of the subject at issue (God) but also its simplicity that should be in conflict with any perspective of divisibility. The theological inapplicability of dualistic scheme relating to natural subsistence makes Gilbert speak about “essence” (essentia) referring to quo est and that’s the “divinity” (divinitas), and quod est designating the trinity (of one deus). Beyond the eventual theological and heretic questions, it is relevant to highlight that in Trinitarian doctrine the distinction of these two elements and the enumeration of the three persons are claimed to exclude any possibility of being not one quite in virtue of being three and not more.

Barth regularly discussed the flaws of 'man ' and how it is 'man ' whom Jesus saves.123 Although it shall be assumed when Barth refers to 'man ' instead of 'a man ', he will be discussing the entire of humanity, his choice of language alone poses issues in his theology. However, this is a complex matter and will be discussed shortly. Ambiguity is found again in Barth 's writings in his consistent writing of “we” and “our”.456 He does not

In his Trinitarian formulation, Augustine argued the Latin expressions of one essence (essentia), three persons (personae), was more precise than the Greek of one essence (ousia), and three substances (hypostases). Citing the Exodus passage of God naming Himself, “I AM that I AM” (The Holy Bible, 3:14), Augustine believed substance (hypostases) could not properly be predicated of God as if God were something in which accidental properties could subsist. The distinction between the persons of the Trinity (the usual starting place for Augustine) is found in causation. Augustine understood the distinction between persons according to eternal and immutable relation (Gilson 1960). He used a psychological analogy in which the unity of the Trinity is likened to the human soul composed of “the mind [intellect], and the knowledge by which it knows itself [memory], and the love by which it loves itself [will]” (Augustine and Stephen McKenna 2002). The intellect is not the will nor the memory; memory, neither the will nor intellect; and will, neither the intellect nor memory. Yet there is only one mind. Augustine moved from exterior realities of creations to the interior realities of the human souls in the hope of encountering God in the image of God (imago

As believers, we are constantly reminded that Jesus Christ died on the cross for our sins. His death and his resurrection are fundamental to our Christian faith. Without his death, the relationship between God and His creation would have remained broken. Unfortunately, many believers do not take the time to consider the complex and deep meaning of Jesus’ death. If I have learned one concept throughout this class is that if I do not have a personal comprehension of Jesus’ death, I will never be saved. His death signifies salvation. It motivates us to imitate Jesus’ life as he was completely human and never sinned, yet he died on the cross in the cruelest way. Personally, Jesus’ death means love, reconciliation, redemption, and victory.