fortheDeclaration:
The Father in terms of “relationship” as in the eternal order of the Trinity [Father], the Father is viewed as the Source of Trinity, but that does not say Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are “not equal”. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are equal in Nature and Divinity but the Son and Holy Spirit are distinct and thus “not called Father”
So in the Latin version of the Creed, it expresses first the consubstantial communion of Father and Son and states that the Holy Spirit Proceeds from both.
Christ as the “Word” and “Son” relate to the same Divine Person, so your making distinctions there is problematic.
Your statement:
“The Sonship of Christ is a function of the Plan, which has a hierarchal structure in the Trinity”
Ok, again, some “redflags” here “Functional Trinitarianism” is similar to Modalism which has as [Our Sunday Visitors Catholic Encylopedia notes, pp.677-678] its basic error, denying that the processions of the Son and Holy Spirit are the source of real distinctions among the Three Divine Persons. Modalism in general, understands the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit to be roles, functions or modes adopted by by the unpersonal Godhead for the purposes of the economy of salvation.
One can see in Modalism, the notion that the Godhead can’t be known as God only appears in 3 modes for the benefit of humanity. So in this context, one can see in your statement Christ (as we know him) in eternity was The Word, not the Son, which then suggest Christ before he became Incarnate was and is unkowable to us even after Christ was incarnate and born of the Blessed Virgin Mary and revealed God to us. Thus, while the Holy Trinity is always an eternal Mystery, Christ via the Incarnation revealed the Holy Trinity to us and thus allows us to get a small glimpse into what is an eternal mystery.
My friendly suggestion is for you to perhaps reevaluate your Trinitarian Theology and get away from the group you are affiliated with. Obviously, I would first suggest you become Catholic or next Eastern Orthodox. IF that is to big an adjustment, I would suggest you go to one of the Confessional Protestant Groups who still hold to the Truths of the Creed.
Regards
No one said they weren't equal.
That distinction did not occur in eternity, it occured in time.
If there is an 'unbegotten God' He would be superior to the 'begotten God'.
So in the Latin version of the Creed, it expresses first the consubstantial communion of Father and Son and states that the Holy Spirit Proceeds from both.
The sending of the Holy Spirit occured in TIME.
Are you saying that the Holy Spirit proceeded in eternity from both?
Christ as the “Word” and “Son” relate to the same Divine Person, so your making distinctions there is problematic.
No, the problem is ignoring what the Bible says.
There was no 'Son' in eternity, He became the Son in time.
Before He was begotten in time, the Word was the member of the Trinty, who became the Son.
And the Word did not come from anyone.
The Nicene Creed has the Son coming from the Father in eternity
Your statement: “The Sonship of Christ is a function of the Plan, which has a hierarchal structure in the Trinity'
Ok, again, some “redflags” here “Functional Trinitarianism” is similar to Modalism which has as [Our Sunday Visitors Catholic Encylopedia notes, pp.677-678] its basic error, denying that the processions of the Son and Holy Spirit are the source of real distinctions among the Three Divine Persons. Modalism in general, understands the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit to be roles, functions or modes adopted by by the unpersonal Godhead for the purposes of the economy of salvation.
The 'red flags' come from your inability to read simple English.
I didn't say the Trinity was 'functional', I stated there was a hierachial structure to the Trinity, The Father sent the Son, the Father and the Son send the Holy Ghost.
There are three distinct members in the Godhead, and none came from the other in eternity, which is what the Nicene Creed states.
One can see in Modalism, the notion that the Godhead can’t be known as God only appears in 3 modes for the benefit of humanity. So in this context, one can see in your statement Christ (as we know him) in eternity was The Word, not the Son, which then suggest Christ before he became Incarnate was and is unkowable to us even after Christ was incarnate and born of the Blessed Virgin Mary and revealed God to us. Thus, while the Holy Trinity is always an eternal Mystery, Christ via the Incarnation revealed the Holy Trinity to us and thus allows us to get a small glimpse into what is an eternal mystery.
Again, Christ, who is the Word, became the Son in TIME, not eternity.
So, you are simply attempting to raise up a strawman by attempting to make it appear that I am denying the Trinity.
If there was in eternity, a moment when the other members of the Trinity didn't exist, but came from the 'unbegotten God' they would be inferior to that God.
All three members of the Trinity always existed together, and none were begotten in eternity.
My friendly suggestion is for you to perhaps reevaluate your Trinitarian Theology and get away from the group you are affiliated with. Obviously, I would first suggest you become Catholic or next Eastern Orthodox. IF that is to big an adjustment, I would suggest you go to one of the Confessional Protestant Groups who still hold to the Truths of the Creed.
I would suggest you learn to read English and see what your Creed is actually teaches, that it is making Christ a 'lesser God' than the the Father by making Him begotten in eternity.
Putting up phony strawman arguments won't change that fact.