This is from a conversation on facebook. My name is Matt. Carl is a lapsed Catholic, please pray for him. Was I right in correcting them? Am I wrong for referring to the Second Person of the Holy Trinity as “God the Son”? Any suggestions on how I could have handled it differently?
Matt This may be bordering a departure from orthodoxy…God the Father is God; God the Son is God; God the Holy Spirit is God; yet there are not three God’s, but One.
Carl I agree with that. However, Catholic theology often presents God as Three separate and distinct entities, or persons. This is biblically incorrect.
Carl One God Who has revealed Himself in many ways is a far more accurate description of the Lord, and harmonizes perfectly with God’s description of Himself, found in the Bible.
Joe Matt, it is interesting to note that the scripture never uses the expression, “God the Son”. The expression used by scripture writers is “son of God”. What do you think is the difference in “God the Son” and “son of God”?
Matt you would be better off reading the Catechism or St. Augustine then asking me.
Joe The Apostles Creed: 1. I believe in God the Father, Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth:
And in Jesus Christ, his only begotten Son, our Lord:
Who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary:
Suffered under Pontius Pilate; was crucified, dead and buried: He descended into hell:
The third day he rose again from the dead:
He ascended into heaven, and sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty:
From thence he s come to judge the quick and the dead:
I believe in the Holy Ghost:
I believe in the holy catholic church: the communion of saints:
The forgiveness of sins:
1l. The resurrection of the body:
- And the life everlasting. Amen.
Joe This is a good creed, developed early in church history, perhaps around 180 A.D. There is no mention of a character known as “God the Son” in it. Since scripture does not mention anyone called “God the Son”, I believe the idea is spurious. It appears to me to be to have a pagan derivation, since God does not relate to anyone or anything as its son. I believe this to be the holy, universal (catholic) Christian view: God is One. As to Person, He is One. As to the way He relates to us, He is our Father. That is one Person. As to His Character, He is holy (basically meaning “different”. As to nature, He is a Spirit. So we call our Father “the Holy Spirit” (or “the Holy Ghost” if we translate through German). So He relates to us as Father and He is a Spirit. This is not two persons but only one Person. Now I do not see in the Person of God any such character as would be identified as “God the Son”. I do not see God as a son of anything. Neither do the Apostles nor prophets, for it is not recorded anywhere in the texts of scriptures that God is the son of something. I do not read in any of the Apostles’ writings that Jesus was ever referred to as “God the Son”. No, it isn’t there. That is a later invention of sophistry. Rather, Jesus is known as “the son of God” and more explicitly as “the only begotten son of God”. Rather than seeing the expression, “son of God”, as an identifier of some aspect of God’s character, it seems to be the Apostles’ doctrine that the son of God was a man, but a man in whom God put Himself in His fullness. That is, “God was in Christ,” as the apostles said. So, it seems to me that God our Father begat a son, using the Virgin Mary as a vessel. The son of God was a man, not God, by virtue of his relationship to God as His son. But Jesus was God by virtue of the Holy Spirit that was fully in Him. That is, “God was in Christ,” and “in Him was the fullness of the godhead bodily,” and “God was manifest in the flesh.” Jesus was human as to his sonship, but He was Divine as to His relationship to us as our Father. He is the Creator and Father of us all. All of this is to say that the expression in the sophists’ trinity doctrine, “God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Ghost” is against Apostolic doctrine.