Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars
| PentecostalTheology.com
V. Historical Boundaries and Their Purpose
Development without an invented history
The Church’s doctrinal vocabulary developed through debate. Early writers were not uniform in terminology, and later precision must not be projected backward onto every earlier expression. The claim that the councils sought to protect biblical revelation is a theological judgment defended by this study, not a denial that the councils made substantive interpretive decisions.
Our aim is to understand the errors the boundaries excluded. Historical controversy tests our explanation; it does not replace Scripture as its foundation or make opposition to a modern movement the organizing purpose.
Modalism: preserving genuine distinction
Tertullian’s Against Praxeas argues against identifying Father and Son in a way that makes the Father Himself the one born and crucified. He seeks distinction without division, although some of his developing language should not be equated with every later Nicene formulation.6
5 Real Academia Española and ASALE, Diccionario de la lengua española, “deidad”: https://dle.rae.es/deidad; RAE, Diccionario del estudiante, “divinidad”: https://www.rae.es/diccionario-estudiante/divinidad. For the adjective’s range, see https://dle.rae.es/divino.
6 Tertullian, Against Praxeas 1–3. This is a polemical source and evidence of developing terminology, not a neutral transcript of every opponent’s view. https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0317.htm
Our phrase Truly Distinct must therefore mean more than distinguishable tasks. Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are eternally distinct, not simply names or roles assumed in salvation history.
Modern teachings should be examined in their own terms rather than assumed to reproduce every detail of ancient modalism.
Nicaea: the Son is not a creature
The creed of Nicaea in AD 325 confesses the Son as begotten rather than made and of one substance with the Father. Its concluding anathemas exclude the claims that the Son once did
not exist or is a creature. The term homoousios served to exclude an inferior or created deity.7
Our phrase Fully Divine requires the same boundary: the Son is eternal and uncreated. His deity is not a promotion. Begotten in this doctrinal setting does not describe biological reproduction or an event bringing a previously nonexistent Son into existence.
Constantinople: the Spirit is fully divine
The creed associated with Constantinople in AD 381 confesses the Spirit as Lord and life-giver, worshiped and glorified with Father and Son. The council’s first canon rejects the Pneumatomachian position among teachings contrary to Nicene faith. The Spirit is not a lesser servant or an impersonal instrument.8
The creed’s confession of procession belongs to its account of eternal relationship, not to a temporal beginning of the Spirit. This introductory study does not attempt to resolve the later East–West dispute over the added phrase “and the Son.”
Tritheism and partialism: protecting the undivided Godhead
Gregory of Nyssa’s On “Not Three Gods” addresses the difficulty of confessing Father, Son, and Spirit without counting three Gods. His appeal to inseparable action does not describe independent deities who cooperate; it supports the confession of undivided deity.
Partialism is used here as a label for a misleading explanation, not as the name of a historical movement equivalent in scale to Arianism. Its error is to treat the Three as components of God. Fully Divine excludes that division.
Adoptionist explanations that make Jesus merely a human being subsequently elevated to divine sonship are also incompatible with the eternal Word’s becoming flesh. The error must be
defined rather than used as a catch-all label for every disputed Christology.
7 First Council of Nicaea (325), creed and concluding anathemas. The text confesses the Son as begotten, not made, of one substance with the Father. https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3801.htm
8 Creed associated with the First Council of Constantinople (381), and canon 1. The text reproduced here has procession from the Father; the later Western addition must not be silently read into the 381 wording. https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3808.htm
The historical word person
Historic Trinitarian use of person protects genuine distinction without intending three
independent Gods. Our preference for contemporary teaching language must preserve that intention. We cannot reject the meaning while merely retaining agreeable words.
Our confession is a concise teaching summary, not an exhaustive replacement for Nicene theology. Its accompanying explanation must state that the distinctions are eternal, the deity uncreated, and the divine being indivisible. The fixed wording is useful precisely when these meanings govern its reading.
Troy Day
@@followers @Terry Wiles @John Mushenhouse @Bishop Bernie