What Christians Believe: The Foundation Series Volume One


Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online What Christians Believe: The Foundation Series Volume One file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with What Christians Believe: The Foundation Series Volume One book. Happy reading What Christians Believe: The Foundation Series Volume One Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF What Christians Believe: The Foundation Series Volume One at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF What Christians Believe: The Foundation Series Volume One Pocket Guide.


See a Problem?

In this book he is having entire conversations with people just to erase their memory of it when he is done. Asimov would be rolling over in his grave if he realized how his legacy was tainted by his greedy survivors. Apr 27, C.

Early Christianity

Conner rated it did not like it. This book is annoying on many levels: Overall thoughts - this was not a journey where the reader is carried along by a quest and comes to a resolution by the end. This was a "glad it's over" story. A book should be a collection of words greater than the sum of the total. Foundation and Chaos was the opposite. Asimov gives the sensation of a rich and vast universe with his Foundation series. With this book the words are there but the meaning is lost and the reader is left looking through a small p This book is annoying on many levels: Overall thoughts - this was not a journey where the reader is carried along by a quest and comes to a resolution by the end.

With this book the words are there but the meaning is lost and the reader is left looking through a small peephole with no understanding of what is happening.

Government

The characters were one dimensional and there were no clear antagonists. Those who were seemed to vacillate between motives. What I found particularly disturbing was that everyone in this book seemed to know the purpose of robots and that robots were trying to steer humanity along a path.

This premise does not conform with the way Asimov wrote his series. Robots had, by design, fallen out of the collective conscious of humanity. And at the climax of the story multiple characters were able to break into an Imperial government building with ease. I find this very implausible and believe the author either didn't care or ran out of time to be thorough.

With an author of this reputation one would think grammar, punctuation and word meaning would not be an issue. This was not the case. There were multiple minor annoyances that added up to make this a bad book: The author had a penchant for ending paragraphs using ellipsis. The author should have reviewed the use of ellipsis and when to add an additional period. For some reason he liked to use the word "ceil" in place of "ceiling. He also used "mathist" in place of "mathematician.

It seems to me he spent maybe five minutes thinking of names or else put on a blindfold and threw darts at a board filled with random words. One of my favorite weird names he came up with was "Crib of the Accused. And there was also his use of parenthesis inside a quotation. The author should review the proper use of parenthesis. Which brings me to his phrase "keeping literally tens of millions of balls in the air at once To author - please review the use of "literal" versus "figurative.

I would not recommend this book to anyone. I believe you should respect the original author if you are going to "go into his house. This book does just that and fails miserably at continuing the universe that Asimov created. Does some damage control on what Benford did to the series in the first book before it gets going but I'd give this series a pass unless you're a fanatical completionist.

I finished reading "Foundation and Chaos" by Greg Bear. This is an authorized part of the Asimov Foundation series. Once again we get into the details, filling out the story about how the Foundation got started. The original series started off rather abruptly with a new character, placed on trial and an older character that seems to know what is going on.

The judgement is exile and suddenly you are on another planet, wondering how it all happened. Foundation and Chaos provides that information, outlining the trial and a lot of the back story of the characters who were only names in the book "Foundation". I liked the book. This is a different author and I think he did an able job.

Lots of excitement even though I know how it will turn out in the end. Getting there is half the fun and he provides that fun including tying up some of the sadder aspects of the story and smoothing them out. I was gratified. The book also suggested how the main "bad guy" in the original Foundation series might have come about. There is one more novel in this particular set Foundation's Triumph. Each of the novels stands alone, I am told. Certainly I could have read these first two in opposite order without too much of a problem.

View 1 comment. Feb 06, Smaniam rated it liked it. I read the Foundation Series as a teenager and with "Foundation and Earth" I thought there could be nothing more that could be achieved beyond that book. So, when I came across the books that were published ostensibly as an authorised extension to the foundation saga - It was something amounting to sacrilege!! I could barely control myself whenever I caught a glimpse of any of the pretenders. It was like Mammon had won the battle and Asimov's legacy would soon be muddled.

Well, time does mellow o I read the Foundation Series as a teenager and with "Foundation and Earth" I thought there could be nothing more that could be achieved beyond that book. Well, time does mellow ones feelings and also introduces newer perspectives. Messrs Bear, Grin and Benford have done a commendable job in trying to add a bit of Science to what was essentially a s plot to make it palatable for contemporary hard sci-fi readers.

I would recommend that this series should be read separately after completing a reading of the original series. Jan 20, Roddy Williams rated it liked it Shelves: science-fiction , psi-powers , space-opera , posthumous-sequel , robots , galactic-empire , eugenics. But R Daneel Olivaw, the brilliant robot entrusted with this great mission, has discovered a potential enemy. The reader was never in any doubt that the Seldon plan would succeed.

It was just a matter of trying to work out how. Here, the robots take centre-stage and their millennia-spanning plans and behind-the scenes manipulations are put into a different perspective. Humans are the creators. They breathed life into the robots in a far more evidential way manner than God breathed life into Adam.

This means that the evolved humans now having abandoned their Gods, it is time for the Robots to do the same. The concept of a Galactic Empire is also one which modern writers approach at their peril, but here, given its cosy familiarity from the Asimov legacy seems — along with the robots — not out of place. Bear, following on from Benford, fleshes out the power-structures and goes a long way toward making the Empire, and the complex power struggles which pervade it, a plausible entity.

One of the best scenes involves two of the robots travelling to the secret robot base at Eos, a small blue moon of a green gas giant, orbiting a double star. View 2 comments. Dec 29, C. Wright rated it really liked it. This book adds background and detail to the trial scene at the beginning of Asimov's 'Foundation' and brings some real depth to the character of Hari Seldon who, in the orginal trilogy is given no background at all, despite being the driving force behind the creaion of the Foundation itself.

The author does not try to imitate Asimov's style, something I was grateful for as it seldom goes well when writers do that. Please don't make me think of the abyssmal conclusion to the Dune series! I thro This book adds background and detail to the trial scene at the beginning of Asimov's 'Foundation' and brings some real depth to the character of Hari Seldon who, in the orginal trilogy is given no background at all, despite being the driving force behind the creaion of the Foundation itself.

I throoughly enjoyed reading this work andwould recommend it to anyone who wants a bit more of the Foundation universe. Mar 21, Eoghann Irving rated it liked it Shelves: science-fiction. Foundation and Chaos is book two of the Second Foundation Trilogy is rather different to book one. For a start Bear sticks more faithfully to the Foundation universe as described by Asimov. How important that is will vary depending on the reader. More importantly, the plot of this book feels more cohesive, resulting in a more entertaining read. The Second Foundation Trilogy covers the life of Hari Seldon, his invention of psychohistory and his setting up of the two Foundations.

This particular bo Foundation and Chaos is book two of the Second Foundation Trilogy is rather different to book one. This particular book concentrates on the period of his life when he was put on trial by the crumbling Empire. Although Hari Seldon is the main character of the trilogy and thus this particular book large parts of it are witnessed through the eyes of other characters.

This is both interesting and frustrating at the same time. On the one hand we get to explore Trantor from various perspectives. On the other, I found Seldon to be one of the most interesting characters and wanted to spend more time in his head. There is an overarching plot to this trilogy, the exact nature of which is not clear yet. In the first book, there were sections which seemed totally irrelevant to the main thrust of the book. During this book, the various strands become rather more entwined. Even so the significance is not at all clear. Plotwise, perhaps the most significant change from book one to book two is the portrayal of R Daneel Olivaw.

In this book he seems less human. A not unnatural condition for a robot as old as he is by this point. He also seems a little too free at manipulating people. As I mentioned this book is more faithful to the Foundation Universe. This book reads and feels more like an Asimov Foundation story. The themes are very much those which Asimov used throughout his Foundation writing too. Unfortunately there is still something missing.

The book is well written, the characters interesting and the setting well developed. Its good, its just not quite Foundation. Oct 26, Ash rated it did not like it. This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here. This is such a super rubbish book. I am actually very disappointed I read it. But it was a mistake to bother with this at all. If anything it has tainted my lasting images of Asimov's wonderful time-spanning saga. Daneel is much crueler in this than in any Asimov story, he's ruthless and really is laid out as a blight on humanity.

Brain-fever to make mankind less innovative and This is such a super rubbish book. Brain-fever to make mankind less innovative and thus less troublesome to control? Are you kidding me? This is all just so bad. So many pointless robots and other new useless constructs.


  1. Product Info.
  2. God in Christianity.
  3. Dor que landes (Hors-Série) (French Edition).
  4. A Little Weird.
  5. Shiloh;
  6. Works of Henrietta Elizabeth Marshall.

Asimov would be gutted, I'm gutted. Once you've read Asimov's work on this series, consider it as over, that's it, let it go, don't be tempted to read this. Mar 18, Phil Giunta rated it really liked it. I completed Foundation and Chaos in a few weeks, reading mostly in the late evening or in stolen minutes during weekends. By contrast, I took months to finish the first entry in this trilogy, Foundation's Fear by Gregory Benford. Benford's plodding, tedious pacing and fragmented plot did not inspire confidence in the rest of the series but Greg Bear turned that around.

I was eager to return to Foundation and Chaos everyday and for as long as possible. Well conceived plot, excellent pacing, and s I completed Foundation and Chaos in a few weeks, reading mostly in the late evening or in stolen minutes during weekends. Well conceived plot, excellent pacing, and strong character development. Bear tackled the robots of Asimov's Galactic Empire head on, while minimizing Benford's influence from the first entry. I'm eager to begin Foundation's Triumph by David Brin.

Biblical Foundation Series, 12 books

Apr 11, Emma rated it liked it. Starting in the middle of a series is a crazy idea but read the book. You in a world of low intelligent thanks to a disease that kills any child of high intelligent. One of the main character Klis suffered as a child. Lucky for the robots she and a boy called Brann survived this. The robots they to get these two to help the change of the world. The story is deep and philosophy like.

A bit too deep to read. This book is better written than it's predecessor in the trilogy.


  • Firm Foundation, Volume 3 - Archive - Truth For Life.
  • What order should Asimov's Foundation series be read in? - Science Fiction & Fantasy Stack Exchange;
  • God in Christianity - Wikipedia;
  • It follows the characters more smoothly and one get's a feel for the complexity of what is happening. Unfortunately, the complexity also contributes to the difficulty I had following who the characters actually were. I found myself chapter after chapter flipping back through the book to find a character's name so I would know how to associate them with the current part of the plot. Never the less I found the character's more engag This book is better written than it's predecessor in the trilogy.

    Never the less I found the character's more engaging than some other installments of the epic. Bear's portrait of Seldon is among the best. He seems to have some difficulty writing women. They come across as confusing. Maybe that's a product of Bear's own masculinity, but it doesn't hamper all writers. The confluence of characters at the crisis of the story bears witness to the complexity built into the cast.

    The crisis itself became hard to follow, and between the machinations [ahem] of the robots, the politicians, the mentalics both rogue and protagonist, and the main characters the crisis became to protracted and dynamic to give the reader a sense of perspective. The situation is complicated by all the mental manipulation going on among characters. While the crisis was compact, it's presentation was disbursed. Then again, Voltaire and Joan were back. Not as prominently, and not as luridly, but there still. They did not jar as they did in the previous work, but I was disappointed that they were not gone.

    I suspect they still aren't, though I can't be sure. The strong role of the robots I found jarring too, but since they've been a part of IA's universe all along, they were a little more tolerable. Because it's part two of a trilogy, I would find it hard to recommend it as independent reading. In fact, I read it as part of an epic walk through the galactic empire. Some current authors are guarding their creations against fan fiction, and IA might have been wise to do the same. It's hard to call the level of writing these books display fan fiction, but that's really what they are, on a very grand scale.

    If it lasts, one could see the Foundation becoming an open source sub-genre all its own. In the mean time, endorsed, as this book is, it is part of canon, and therefore an authentic stone in the wall. I loved it! Great weaving together, I like his style of writing more than the first of this trilogy but all in all, books 1 and 2 fit together so well and carry the whole universe and storyline exceptionally!

    Holes of knowledge and information in the original trilogy and following books are given, different perspectives and angles and that feel right. I think they have done an amazing job with this series! Onto the third and final. The last of them all! Jul 31, Tim rated it liked it.

    Now, I'm not going to say that this series is as ground-breaking as Asimov's puhlease , but I do highly recommend that all the haters go back and read some of the originals and reassess how they feel about these authors matching or not matching Asimov's "voice.

    An excellent and intriguing addition to Asimov's legacy. Greg Bear's contribution to this second trilogy carries Hari Seldon to the very cusp of the future. His writing skills most certainly do not disappoint. I hope that the trilogy's final novel by David Brin brings this saga to a satisfying close. Wonderful Any ScFi reader worth his salt knows Isaac foundation series They also miss his whole set of works fiction and non fiction.

    See What's New

    So,when a book rises up that brings a credible as Kinect to the series it's wonderful reading. Thank you Mr. For some reason, just couldn't connect with the characters. Maybe it was because there were too many interesting characters? I was just left with the feeling that I had watched something very interesting and was hoping for more? Sep 30, Rob Markley rated it liked it Shelves: scifi. I really had high hopes of what Bear could bring to Asimov. I like Bear the more but I regret that I feel instead of lifting Foundation Bear was dragged down from his lofty and brilliant science based fiction.

    Awesome read! Loved the way the book is integrated to the ones that came before in the series. Just like the others in this series, amazing how the multiple story lines merge together. No citation signs anywhere. But that could be because the whole book was a citation from Encyclopedia Galatcia. Anyway a good read, characteristic of Asimov's long sweeping scenarios. Nov 19, Christopher Page rated it liked it. This is the second Foundation based book I read. After this I read the original Foundation trilogy.

    In a way I am glad I read this first because it helped built up the story of Hari Seldon, and this book ends in the perfect place for the original Foundation trilogy to pick up. In my opinion you can skip Foundation's Triumph, and probably Foundation's Fear as well as neither are that great.

    Of the second Foundation trilogy this volume was by far the best, I found the story interesting and it kept This is the second Foundation based book I read. Of the second Foundation trilogy this volume was by far the best, I found the story interesting and it kept me wanting to read a little further. Compared with the novel that came before in this series , this one was phenomenal! It advances the story arc and sets up the crisis to be resolved in the third novel, without actually answering many questions itself.

    This novel was a faster read than Foundation's Fear Second Foundation Trilogy, 1 , and seemed to dovetail very nicely with the initial vignette in Foundation. I was thrilled to see Dors back Compared with the novel that came before in this series , this one was phenomenal! Raych is mentioned right at the start of this novel. Unlike the previous novel , he is remembered to exist!

    The worm holes, a rare science accuracy in a world of space fiction often called science fiction of the previous novel has just been killed off in order to return to Asimov's hyper drive ships. To those reviewers that found worm holes anti-cannon and unpalatable when reading the previous novel , this point in this novel must have been a wonder to behold. John of Damascus wrote: [50].

    It is impossible to portray one who is without body:invisible, uncircumscribed and without form. Around Charlemagne ordered a set of four books that became known as the Libri Carolini i. Although not well known during the Middle Ages, these books describe the key elements of the Catholic theological position on sacred images. To the Western Church , images were just objects made by craftsmen, to be utilized for stimulating the senses of the faithful, and to be respected for the sake of the subject represented, not in themselves.

    The Council of Constantinople considered ecumenical by the Western Church, but not the Eastern Church reaffirmed the decisions of the Second Council of Nicaea and helped stamp out any remaining coals of iconoclasm. Specifically, its third canon required the image of Christ to have veneration equal with that of a Gospel book: [51]. We decree that the sacred image of our Lord Jesus Christ, the liberator and Savior of all people, must be venerated with the same honor as is given the book of the holy Gospels.

    For as through the language of the words contained in this book all can reach salvation, so, due to the action which these images exercise by their colors, all wise and simple alike, can derive profit from them. But images of God the Father were not directly addressed in Constantinople in A list of permitted icons was enumerated at this Council, but symbols of God the Father were not among them.

    Prior to the 10th century no attempt was made to use a human to symbolize God the Father in Western art. A rationale for the use of a human is the belief that God created the soul of Man in the image of His own thus allowing Human to transcend the other animals.

    It appears that when early artists designed to represent God the Father, fear and awe restrained them from a usage of the whole human figure. Typically only a small part would be used as the image, usually the hand, or sometimes the face, but rarely a whole human. In many images, the figure of the Son supplants the Father, so a smaller portion of the person of the Father is depicted.

    By the 12th century depictions of God the Father had started to appear in French illuminated manuscripts , which as a less public form could often be more adventurous in their iconography, and in stained glass church windows in England. Gradually the amount of the human symbol shown can increase to a half-length figure, then a full-length, usually enthroned, as in Giotto 's fresco of c. The "Gates of Paradise" of the Florence Baptistry by Lorenzo Ghiberti , begun in use a similar tall full-length symbol for the Father. The Rohan Book of Hours of about also included depictions of God the Father in half-length human form, which were now becoming standard, and the Hand of God becoming rarer.

    At the same period other works, like the large Genesis altarpiece by the Hamburg painter Meister Bertram , continued to use the old depiction of Christ as Logos in Genesis scenes. In the 15th century there was a brief fashion for depicting all three persons of the Trinity as similar or identical figures with the usual appearance of Christ. Daniel In the Annunciation by Benvenuto di Giovanni in , God the Father is portrayed in the red robe and a hat that resembles that of a Cardinal.

    However, even in the later part of the 15th century, the symbolic representation of the Father and the Holy Spirit as "hands and dove" continued, e. In Renaissance paintings of the adoration of the Trinity, God may be depicted in two ways, either with emphasis on The Father, or the three elements of the Trinity. The most usual depiction of the Trinity in Renaissance art depicts God the Father using an old man, usually with a long beard and patriarchal in appearance, sometimes with a triangular halo as a reference to the Trinity , or with a papal crown, specially in Northern Renaissance painting.

    In these depictions The Father may hold a globe or book to symbolize God's knowledge and as a reference to how knowledge is deemed divine. He is behind and above Christ on the Cross in the Throne of Mercy iconography. A dove, the symbol of the Holy Spirit may hover above. Various people from different classes of society, e. They are depicted as floating in heaven with angels who carry the instruments of the Passion. Representations of God the Father and the Trinity were attacked both by Protestants and within Catholicism, by the Jansenist and Baianist movements as well as more orthodox theologians.

    As with other attacks on Catholic imagery, this had the effect both of reducing Church support for the less central depictions, and strengthening it for the core ones. In the Western Church , the pressure to restrain religious imagery resulted in the highly influential decrees of the final session of the Council of Trent in The Council of Trent decrees confirmed the traditional Catholic doctrine that images only represented the person depicted, and that veneration to them was paid to the person, not the image.

    Artistic depictions of God the Father were uncontroversial in Catholic art thereafter, but less common depictions of the Trinity were condemned. In Pope Benedict XIV explicitly supported the Throne of Mercy depiction, referring to the "Ancient of Days", but in it was still necessary for Pope Pius VI to issue a papal bull condemning the decision of an Italian church council to remove all images of the Trinity from churches. God the Father is symbolized in several Genesis scenes in Michelangelo 's Sistine Chapel ceiling , most famously The Creation of Adam whose image of near touching hands of God and Adam is iconic of humanity, being a reminder that Man is created in the Image and Likeness of God Gen God the Father is depicted as a powerful figure, floating in the clouds in Titian's Assumption of the Virgin in the Frari of Venice , long admired as a masterpiece of High Renaissance art.

    In some of these paintings the Trinity is still alluded to in terms of three angels, but Giovanni Battista Fiammeri also depicted God the Father as a man riding on a cloud, above the scenes. In both the Last Judgment and the Coronation of the Virgin paintings by Rubens he depicted God the Father using the image that by then had become widely accepted, a bearded patriarchal figure above the fray. While representations of God the Father were growing in Italy, Spain, Germany and the Low Countries, there was resistance elsewhere in Europe, even during the 17th century.

    In most members of the Star Chamber court in England except the Archbishop of York condemned the use of the images of the Trinity in church windows, and some considered them illegal. In the 43rd chapter of the Great Moscow Council specifically included a ban on a number of symbolic depictions of God the Father and the Holy Spirit, which then also resulted in a whole range of other icons being placed on the forbidden list, [65] [66] mostly affecting Western-style depictions which had been gaining ground in Orthodox icons.

    However some icons continued to be produced in Russia, as well as Greece , Romania , and other Orthodox countries. The Christian characterization of the relationship between God and humanity involves the notion of the "Kingship of God", whose origins go back to the Old Testament, and may be seen as a consequence of the creation of the world by God.

    The term " Kingdom of God " does not appear in the Old Testament, although "his Kingdom" and "your Kingdom" are used in some cases when referring to God. France points out that while the concept of "Kingdom of God" has an intuitive meaning to lay Christians, there is hardly any agreement among scholars about its meaning in the New Testament. Interpretations of the term Kingdom of God have given rise to wide-ranging eschatological debates among scholars with diverging views, yet no consensus has emerged among scholars. By the middle of the 20th century realized eschatology which in contrast viewed the Kingdom as non-apocalyptic but as the manifestation of divine sovereignty over the world realized by the ministry of Jesus had gathered a scholarly following.

    Hebrews refers to "God the Judge of all" and the notion that all humans will eventually " be judged " is an essential element of Christian teachings. A number of gospel passages warn against sin and suggest a path of righteousness to avoid the judgement of God. In early Christianity , the concept of salvation was closely related to the invocation of the "Father, Son and Holy Spirit". The term "Trinity" does not explicitly appear in the Bible , but Trinitarians believe the concept as later developed is consistent with biblical teachings.

    The general concept was expressed in early writings from the beginning of the 2nd century forward, with Irenaeus writing in his Against Heresies Book I Chapter X : [78]. Around AD in Adversus Praxeas chapter 3 Tertullian provided a formal representation of the concept of the Trinity , i. Tertullian also discussed how the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. The First Council of Nicaea in AD and later the First Council of Constantinople in AD defined the dogma "in its simplest outlines in the face of pressing heresies " and the version used thereafter dates to Bernhard Lohse states that the doctrine of the Trinity does not go back to non-Christian sources such as Plato or Hinduism and that all attempts at suggesting such connections have floundered.

    The doctrine of the Trinity is considered by most Christians to be a core tenet of their faith. Strictly speaking, the doctrine is a mystery that can "neither be known by unaided human reason", nor "cogently demonstrated by reason after it has been revealed"; even so "it is not contrary to reason" being "not incompatible with the principles of rational thought". The doctrine was expressed at length in the 4th-century Athanasian Creed of which the following is an extract: [19] [20].

    We worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; Neither confounding the persons nor dividing the substance. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Spirit. The 20th century witnessed an increased theological focus on the doctrine of the Trinity, partly due to the efforts of Karl Barth in his fourteen volume Church Dogmatics.

    The emergence of Trinitarian theology of God the Father in early Christianity was based on two key ideas: first the shared identity of the Yahweh of the Old Testament and the God of Jesus in the New Testament , and then the self-distinction and yet the unity between Jesus and his Father.

    The concept of fatherhood of God does appear in the Old Testament, but is not a major theme. The paternal view of God as the Father extends beyond Jesus to his disciples, and the entire Church, as reflected in the petitions Jesus submitted to the Father for his followers at the end of the Farewell Discourse , the night before his crucifixion. In Trinitarian theology, God the Father is the "arche" or "principium" beginning , the "source" or "origin" of both the Son and the Holy Spirit, and is considered the eternal source of the Godhead.

    The Son is eternally born from God the Father, and the Spirit eternally proceeds from the Father, [26] [96] and, in the Western tradition, also from the Son. Yet, notwithstanding this difference as to origin, Father is one with, co-equal to, co-eternal, and con-substantial with the Son and the Holy Spirit, each Person being the one eternal God and in no way separated, who is the creator: all alike are uncreated and omnipotent. Trinitarians believe that God the Father is not pantheistic , in that he is not viewed as identical to the universe, but exists outside of creation, as its Creator.

    Since early Christianity , a number of titles have been attributed to Jesus, including, Messiah Christ and the Son of God. The narrative of the gospels place significant emphasis on the death of Jesus, devoting about one third of the text to just seven days, namely the last week of the life of Jesus in Jerusalem. The two Christological concerns as to how Jesus could be truly God while preserving faith in the existence of one God and how the human and the divine could be combined in one person were fundamental concerns from well before the First Council of Nicaea The Chalcedonian Creed of , accepted by the majority of Christians, holds that Jesus is God incarnate and " true God and true man " or both fully divine and fully human.

    Jesus, having become fully human in all respects, suffered the pains and temptations of a mortal man, yet he did not sin. As fully God, he defeated death and rose to life again. More recently, discussions of the theological issues related to God the Son and its role in the Trinity were addressed in the 20th century in the context of a "Trinity-based" perspective on divine revelation. In mainstream Christianity , the Holy Spirit is one of the three divine persons of the Holy Trinity who make up the single substance of God; that is, the Spirit is considered to act in concert with and share an essential nature with God the Father and God the Son Jesus.

    The Holy Spirit's presence was especially felt following the ascension of Christ, although not to the exclusion of an early presence as attested by the Old Testament and throughout the New Testament.

    In Christian theology Holy Spirit is believed to perform specific divine functions in the life of the Christian or the church. The action of the Holy Spirit is seen as an essential part of the bringing of the person to the Christian faith.

    Christian Foundations Collection (7 vols.) | Bible Study at its best - Logos Bible Software

    The Holy Spirit enables Christian life by dwelling in the individual believers and enables them to live a righteous and faithful life. He acts to convince unredeemed persons both of the sinfulness of their actions and thoughts, and of their moral standing as sinners before God. In Eastern Orthodox theology , essence of God being that which is beyond human comprehension and can not be defined or approached by human understanding.

    Most Protestant denominations and other traditions arising since the Protestant Reformation , hold general Trinitarian beliefs and theology regarding God the Father similar to that of Roman Catholicism. This includes churches arising from Anglicanism , Baptist , Methodism , Lutheranism and Presbyterianism. Some Christian traditions reject the doctrine of the Trinity, and are called nontrinitarian. Nontrinitarianism goes back to the early centuries of Christian history and groups such as the Arians , Ebionites , Gnostics , and others. The Nicene Creed raised the issue of the relationship between Jesus' divine and human natures.

    While the Witnesses acknowledge Christ's pre-existence, perfection, and unique "Sonship" with God the Father, and believe that Christ had an essential role in creation and redemption, and is the Messiah, they believe that only the Father is without beginning. In the theology of God in Mormonism , the most prominent conception of God is the Godhead, a divine council of three distinct beings: Elohim the Father , Jehovah the Son, or Jesus , and the Holy Spirit. The Father and Son are considered to have perfected, material bodies, while the Holy Spirit has a body of spirit.

    Mormonism recognizes the divinity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, but believes they are distinct beings, united not in substance but in will and purpose, and they are each omniscient, omnipotent, and omni-benevolent. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Part of a series on Christianity Jesus Christ. Jesus in Christianity Virgin birth Crucifixion Resurrection appearances. Bible Foundations. History Tradition. Related topics.

    Denominations Groups. Main article: Names of God in Christianity. Main article: Attributes of God in Christianity.

    What Christians Believe: The Foundation Series Volume One What Christians Believe: The Foundation Series Volume One
    What Christians Believe: The Foundation Series Volume One What Christians Believe: The Foundation Series Volume One
    What Christians Believe: The Foundation Series Volume One What Christians Believe: The Foundation Series Volume One
    What Christians Believe: The Foundation Series Volume One What Christians Believe: The Foundation Series Volume One
    What Christians Believe: The Foundation Series Volume One What Christians Believe: The Foundation Series Volume One
    What Christians Believe: The Foundation Series Volume One What Christians Believe: The Foundation Series Volume One

Related What Christians Believe: The Foundation Series Volume One



Copyright 2019 - All Right Reserved