Athanasian Creed - The Man-Made Doctrine

[2timothy316]

For clarity, is the Athanasian Creed found here https://www.crcna.org/welcome/beliefs/c ... sian-creed the accepted belief of the trinity for all trinitarians?
If not what is? Who is reading this creed for the first time? Who considers it to be holy scripture?

The creed ends with "one cannot be saved without believing it firmly and faithfully."
If it isn't scripture...How do they have the authority to say such a thing?

[2timothy316]

Question: does the Athansian Creed, the source of the trinity, come from God? Whatever you answer here should answer all of your questions.

The Athanasian creed speaks about more doctrines than just the Trinity. Regarding the doctrine of the Trinity, it is NOT the source of the Trinity but a reflection of it, from its source, which is the Bible which is from God.

We will circle back to where does everyone get their trinity doctrine later.
Can I finally get an answer to ' as a whole is the Athanasian Creed man-made or not'? Don't cut it up into bits a pieces. Once you do that, you're no longer referring to the creed as a whole.

Can I get an answer on this?

[2timothy316]

Sadly no other trinitarians are willing to touch this thread.

These comments didn't age well.

And yet you didn't say if the Athanasian creed was made made or not. This is what isn't being touched. Would you like to be the first to say if it is a man-made creed or not? No one seems to want to commit one way or the other. They keep chopping up the Creed into parts.

[onewithhim]

Show me where in the Bible the Holy Spirit is called "God." While you're at it, show me where it says that Jesus is "God."

3 Then Peter said, “Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit and have kept for yourself some of the money you received for the land? 4 Didn’t it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn’t the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied just to human beings but to God.”

Bold for obvious emphasis.

Tell me, who are the two entities that are being lied to in this scripture?

It's almost funny that you can't see---Jesus himself said that his Father alone was God (John 17:3).

So, my response to that would be this..

Rev 15:4

“Great and marvelous are your deeds,
Lord God Almighty.
Just and true are your ways,
King of the nations.[a]
4 Who will not fear you, Lord,
and bring glory to your name?
For you alone are holy.

Question: Who is being referred to here as "holy", the Father, or the Son?

This is a trick question

The Father is being referred to here.

Right...it says "you alone are holy", referring to (according to you) the Father.

Yet, Mark 1:24

“What do you want with us, Jesus of Nazareth? Have you come to destroy us? I know who you are—the Holy One of God!”

Jesus is identified as Holy.

So, how can the Father alone be holy, when Jesus is also holy.

And the list goes on and on with Jesus being called holy throughout the NT.

Kinda hard to reconcile if Jesus wasn't holy as God is..

Which is why this harmonizes with scripture already shared with me you...with Jesus being called the perfect representation of God (Heb 1:3)...and also with Jesus saying to see him is to see the Father (John 14:9).

Jesus is holy because the Father made him so by His commands to His Son which the Son obeyed. (Philippians 2: 8-11) Yes, and Jesus was God's perfect representation. Therefore he could be said to be holy. That must align with other scriptures, and no other scriptures hint that Jesus is God. To see Jesus and the Father as one, that simply means that Jesus and his Father were carbon copies, if you will....like Father, like Son. They agreed on everything, and again, Jesus was a perfect reflection of his Father.

[The Tanager]

We will circle back to where does everyone get their trinity doctrine later.
Can I finally get an answer to ' as a whole is the Athanasian Creed man-made or not'? Don't cut it up into bits a pieces. Once you do that, you're no longer referring to the creed as a whole.

I was hiking a bit of the Appalachian Trail with my beautiful wife or I would have responded earlier. The last time you asked this I asked for clarification on what, exactly, you mean by "man-made" so that I can get you that answer. If you clarify your terms, then I can give you my answer.

[2timothy316]

We will circle back to where does everyone get their trinity doctrine later.
Can I finally get an answer to ' as a whole is the Athanasian Creed man-made or not'? Don't cut it up into bits a pieces. Once you do that, you're no longer referring to the creed as a whole.

I was hiking a bit of the Appalachian Trail with my beautiful wife or I would have responded earlier. The last time you asked this I asked for clarification on what, exactly, you mean by "man-made" so that I can get you that answer. If you clarify your terms, then I can give you my answer.

Isn't the definition in the word itself? I don't know how it could be clearer.

[The Tanager]

Isn't the definition in the word itself? I don't know how it could be clearer.

I have no problem saying that the Bible is both inspired by God and "man-made". Human authors wrote down the original Biblical texts and, so, made them. That's one sense of "man-made". In that sense, like the Bible, the Athanasian creed is "man-made" and I have no problem with that sense, but I don't think this is your sense.

I think you want to use it as an antonym to "inspired by God." But then what it means depends on what "inspired by God" means. With that term one could be saying that "inspired by God" is a synonym for "true" and could even include things like scientific truths, moral truths, historical truths that are not found in the Bible. This would mean that "man-made" is a synonym for "false". In that sense, I think part of the Athanasian creed is "inspired by God" and part of it is "man-made".

If "inspired by God" means a special work God has marked out to guide our theological doctrines (and all other works, even if they contain some truth shouldn't be viewed in the same light), then "man-made" would mean just one of these other works. In this sense, the Athanasian creed is man-made and the bit that correctly reflects the inspired Bible are true, while the bit that doesn't is false.

There are three different answers to three different meanings. If you mean something else, then describe it and I'll give my answer to that possible meaning.

[2timothy316]

Isn't the definition in the word itself? I don't know how it could be clearer.

I have no problem saying that the Bible is both inspired by God and "man-made". Human authors wrote down the original Biblical texts and, so, made them. That's one sense of "man-made". In that sense, like the Bible, the Athanasian creed is "man-made" and I have no problem with that sense, but I don't think this is your sense.

I think you want to use it as an antonym to "inspired by God." But then what it means depends on what "inspired by God" means. With that term one could be saying that "inspired by God" is a synonym for "true" and could even include things like scientific truths, moral truths, historical truths that are not found in the Bible. This would mean that "man-made" is a synonym for "false". In that sense, I think part of the Athanasian creed is "inspired by God" and part of it is "man-made".

If "inspired by God" means a special work God has marked out to guide our theological doctrines (and all other works, even if they contain some truth shouldn't be viewed in the same light), then "man-made" would mean just one of these other works. In this sense, the Athanasian creed is man-made and the bit that correctly reflects the inspired Bible are true, while the bit that doesn't is false.

There are three different answers to three different meanings. If you mean something else, then describe it and I'll give my answer to that possible meaning.

You're making this WAY too complicated. Didn't you already say that the Athanasian creed isn't scripture? So why compare it to the Bible at all?

[historia]

Who considers it to be holy scripture?

Literally no one.

Scripture is defined as: the sacred writings of a religion.

So, the trinity doctrine isn't sacred. Thanks.

That's a complete non sequitur.

Whether a particular writing is Scripture or not doesn't tell us whether the concept that writing is discussing is sacred (or true) or not.

Consider, for example, onewithhim's post above saying that the Holy Spirit is a force. Using your 'logic' here, I could argue that, because onewithhim's post is not Scripture, therefore the doctrine that the Holy Spirit is a force is not sacred.

This is simply a logically fallacy.

[The Tanager]

You're making this WAY too complicated. Didn't you already say that the Athanasian creed isn't scripture? So why compare it to the Bible at all?

Here is an attempt to simplify things, then. Do you believe this link is scripture? https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesse ... s-beliefs/.

[2timothy316]

You're making this WAY too complicated. Didn't you already say that the Athanasian creed isn't scripture? So why compare it to the Bible at all?

Here is an attempt to simplify things, then. Do you believe this link is scripture? https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesse ... s-beliefs/.

Why change the subject? I have said this before. This thread isn't about what I believe. The title of this thread isn't about what the JW website says either. Start your own thread about the JW website. I'm growing tired of pulling teeth for an answer. Getting questions in answer to questions isn't a real answer. If you REALLY wanted to simplify things then answer yes or no to 'Is the Athanasian Creed a man-made creed'?