Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
Transcript of 早期教會三一論發展（二）
Council of Nicaea
That there is nothing more honourable in my sight than the fear of God, is, I believe, manifest to every man. Now because it was agreed formerly that the synod of bishops should meet at Ancyra of Galatia, it hath seemed to us on many accounts that it would be well for
a synod to assemble at Nicaea, a city of Bithynia
, both because the bishops from Italy and the rest of the countries of Europe are coming, and because of the excellent temperature of the air, and in order that I may be present as a spectator and participator in those things which will be done. Wherefore I signify to you, my beloved brethren, that all of you promptly assemble at the said city, that is at Nicaea. Let every one of you therefore, regarding that which is best, as I before said, be diligent, without delay in anything, speedily to come, that he may be in his own person present as a spectator of those things which will be done by the same.
God keep you my beloved brethren.
奧古斯丁的三一論 De Trinitate
Let me remember you, let me understand you, let me love you. Increase these things in me until you reform me completely.
substance vs Accident
本質 vs 偶性
God is not Substance (trin. 7,10)
relation is accident!!
Person in Relation
No，not in God
ad aliquid relatiue
God is Love
上帝是simple and one，不可能改變 (accident)
(Gregory of Nyssa)
335- c. 395
(Basil the Great)
(Gregory of Nazianze)
In a brief statement, I shall say that
essence (ousia) is related to substance (hypostasis) as the general to the particular
. Each one of us partakes of existence because he shares in ousia while because of his individual properties he is A or B. So, in the case in question,
ousia refers to the general conception, like goodness, godhead, or such notions, while hypostasis is observed in the special properties of fatherhood, sonship, and sanctifying power.
If then they speak of persons without hypostasis they are talking nonsense, ex hypothesi; but if they admit that the person exists in real hypostasis, as they do acknowledge, let them so number them as to preserve the principles of the homoousion in the unity of the godhead, and proclaim their reverent acknowledgment of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, in the complete and perfect hypostasis of each person so named.
動態三一論 (dynamic trinity)
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Click me :)
27 years old
Flavius Valerius Aurelius Constantinus Augustus
(63 BC-14 BC)
凱撒大帝(100 BC- 44 BC)的甥孫和養子，亦被正式指定為凱撒的繼承人
Eusebius - Vita Constantini
289 Constantius Chlorus 與Helena分開，與Theodora結婚
君士坦丁與馬克森提兩軍在密爾維橋 Milvian Bridge 對峙，君士坦丁決定求助於唯一的神。在中午時，他看見雙交的光在太陽之前閃耀，並出現字樣 Εν Τούτω, Νίκα!，君士坦丁與他的士兵都看到此奇蹟。那天晚上，耶穌出現在他的夢中，並告訴他，將中午出現在天空的符號複製，並以此作防禦。最後其軍隊獲勝。
Diocletian (284-305 在位)
Constantius Chlorus - Constantine
Maximian - Maxentius
Athanasius of Alexandria
24 Oct 362 – 5 Sep 363
5 Oct 365 – 31 Jan 366
Basil the Great
尼撒貴格利 (Gregory of Nyssa)
社羣三一論 (Social trinity)
10. If, however, it is fitting that God should be said to subsist— (For this word is rightly applied to those things, in which as subjects those things are, which are said to be in a subject, as color or shape in body. For body subsists, and so is substance; but those things are in the body, which subsists and is their subject, and they are not substances, but are in a substance: and so, if either that color or that shape ceases to be, it does not deprive the body of being a body, because it is not of the being of body, that it should retain this or that shape or color; therefore neither changeable nor simple things are properly called substances.)— If, I say, God subsists so that He can be properly called a substance, then there is something in Him as it were in a subject, and He is not simple, i.e. such that to Him to be is the same as is anything else that is said concerning Him in respect to Himself; as, for instance, great, omnipotent, good, and whatever of this kind is not unfitly said of God.
But it is an impiety to say that God subsists, and is a subject in relation to His own goodness, and that this goodness is not a substance or rather essence, and that God Himself is not His own goodness, but that it is in Him as in a subject.
And hence it is clear that God is improperly called substance, in order that He may be understood to be, by the more usual name essence, which He is truly and properly called
; so that perhaps it is right that
God alone should be called essence
. For He is truly alone, because He is unchangeable; and declared this to be His own name to His servant Moses, when He says,
I am that I am
; and, Thus shall you say unto the children of Israel: He who is has sent me unto you. However, whether He be called essence, which He is properly called, or substance, which He is called improperly, He is called both in respect to Himself, not relatively to anything; whence to God to be is the same thing as to subsist; and so the Trinity,
if one essence, is also one substance. Perhaps therefore they are more conveniently called three persons than three substances.
Wherefore, if Holy Scripture proclaims that God is love, and that love is of God, and works this in us that we abide in God and He in us, and that hereby we know this, because He has given us of His Spirit, then
the Spirit Himself is God, who is love
. Next, if there be among the gifts of God none greater than love, and there is no greater gift of God than the Holy Spirit, what follows more naturally than that He is Himself love, who is called both God and of God? And if the love by which the
Father loves the Son, and the Son loves the Father
, ineffably demonstrates the communion of both, what is more suitable than that He should be specially called love, who is the Spirit common to both? For this is the sounder thing both to believe and to understand, that the Holy Spirit is not alone love in that Trinity, yet is not specially called love to no purpose, for the reasons we have alleged; just as He is not alone in that Trinity either a Spirit or holy, since both the
Father is a Spirit, and the Son is a Spirit; and both the Father is holy, and the Son is holy
—as piety doubts not. And yet it is not to no purpose that He is specially called the Holy Spirit; for because He is common to both, He is specially called that which both are in common. Otherwise, if in that Trinity the Holy Spirit alone is love, then doubtless the Son too turns out to be the Son, not of the Father only, but also of the Holy Spirit. For He is both said and read in countless places to be so—the only-begotten Son of God the Father; as that what the apostle says of God the Father is true too: Who has delivered us from the power of darkness and has translated us into the kingdom of the Son of His own love. He did not say, of His own Son. If He had so said, He would have said it most truly, just as He did say it most truly, because He has often said it; but He says, the Son of His own love. Therefore He is the Son also of the Holy Spirit, if there is in that Trinity no love in God except the Holy Spirit. And if this is most absurd, it remains that the Holy Spirit is not alone therein love, but is specially so called for the reasons I have sufficiently set forth; and that the words, Son of His own love, mean nothing else than His own beloved Son—the Son, in short, of His own substance. For the love in the Father, which is in His ineffably simple nature, is nothing else than His very nature and substance itself—as we have already often said, and are not ashamed of often repeating. And hence the Son of His love, is none other than He who is born of His substance. (trin. 15, 19, 37)
But whereas, in the same Trinity, some things severally are specially predicated, these are in no way said in reference to themselves in themselves, but either in mutual reference, or in respect to the creature; and, therefore, it is manifest that such things are spoken relatively, not in the way of substance. For the Trinity is called one God, great, good, eternal, omnipotent; and the same God Himself may be called His own deity, His own magnitude, His own goodness, His own eternity, His own omnipotence: but the Trinity cannot in the same way be called the Father, except perhaps metaphorically, in respect to the creature, on account of the adoption of sons. For that which is written, Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God is one Lord, ought certainly not to be understood as if the Son were excepted, or the Holy Spirit were excepted; which one Lord our God we rightly call also our Father, as regenerating us by His grace. Neither can the Trinity in any wise be called the Son, but it can be called, in its entirety, the Holy Spirit, according to that which is written, God is a Spirit; because both the Father is a spirit and the Son is a spirit, and the Father is holy and the Son is holy.
Therefore, since the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are one God, and certainly God is holy, and God is a spirit, the Trinity can be called also the Holy Spirit.
But yet that Holy Spirit, who is not the Trinity, but is understood as in the Trinity, is spoken of in His proper name of the Holy Spirit relatively, since He is referred both to the Father and to the Son, because the Holy Spirit is the Spirit both of the Father and of the Son. But the relation is not itself apparent in that name, but it is apparent when He is called the gift of God; for He is the gift of the Father and of the Son, because He proceeds from the Father, as the Lord says; and because that which the apostle says, Now, if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His, he says certainly of the Holy Spirit Himself. When we say, therefore, the gift of the giver, and the giver of the gift, we speak in both cases relatively in reciprocal reference.
Therefore the Holy Spirit is a certain unutterable communion of the Father and the Son
; and on that account, perhaps, He is so called, because the same name is suitable to both the Father and the Son. For He Himself is called specially that which they are called in common; because both
the Father is a spirit and the Son a spirit, both the Father is holy and the Son holy. In order, therefore, that the communion of both may be signified from a name which is suitable to both, the Holy Spirit is called the gift of both. And this Trinity is one God, alone, good, great, eternal, omnipotent; itself its own unity, deity, greatness, goodness, eternity, omnipotence.
that the Word (Logos) and the Father were not of the same essence (ousia);
that the Son was a created being (ktisma or poiema); and
that the worlds were created through him, so he must have existed before them and before all time.
However, there was a "once" [Arius did not use words meaning "time", such as chronos or aion] when He did not exist, before he was begotten of the Father.
Second Sirmium Confession 357
through the Son
in the Spirit
Godhead has an individual priority：
the Son has epistemological priority
the Father has ontic priority
the Spirit has metaphysical priority.
Maximus Confessor (d. 662)
John of Damascus (d. 749)