Now, the debate over the Father and the Son eventually extended to the Holy Spirit. For most of the fourth century, the status of the third Person in the trinity was not clear in the minds of many. As late as 380 A.D. Gregory of Nazianzus wrote that among the defenders of The Council of Nicea he said there are those who believe that He is just in our midst, or as a creature, or like God. Then there are those who just do not know who or what the other Person really is. The Arians spoke of three divine Persons, referring to the Scripture in Matthew 28:19, but to them only the Father was God, and the Son and Holy Spirit were lesser created Beings. Macedonius, bishop of Constantinople, similarly taught that the third Person in the trinity was a subordinate creature, and he had many followers in this belief.

Athanasius was the first theologian to devote extensive attention to the third part of the trinity as a distinct Person, and so the first to develop a truly trinitarian theology. He used Matthew 28:19 to support his belief.

Also, the three Cappadocians were powerful champions of the distinct personality and deity of the Holy Spirit. Gregory of Nazianzus claimed He was in the beginning hidden from the disciples but was gradually revealed to the church. He used for an example in an effort to prove his point the Scripture found in John 16:12-13, he taught that the Lord could not teach everything to His disciples but promised that the Spirit of truth would guide them into all truth. According to Gregory, one of the truths that the Holy Spirit subsequently revealed was His own personality and deity. The Cappadocians' definition and belief of the trinity eventually prevailed in the controversies over both the Son and the Holy Spirit.

Who were the Cappadocians? They were three prominent fourth-century theologians from Cappadocia, which was a province in Asia Minor, who developed the Trinitarian dogma that ultimately prevailed. With the aid of acceptable Greek philosophical concepts or beliefs, they refined the terminology of Athanasian trinitarianism to make it broadly acceptable. Their doctrinal synthesis is the basis of trinitarianism today.

There is a word-ousia-which is a Greek word, which means "substance, essence, or being" and originally was equivalent to hypostasis. The Council of Nicea said that the Father and the Son had the same ousia, or hypostasis. But, the Cappadocians used ousia to designate the abstract nature of deity that the three Persons of the trinity shared in common, while using hypostasis to mean what was distinctive to each Person. Therefore, the standard trinitarian formula is one ousia in three hypostases. So, it was the Cappadocians who were greatly involved in the earliest development of the trinity doctrine.

The council's contribution to the development of the trinitarian doctrine is very significant. It firmly rejected that the Logos was created and non-eternal with the Father, and established that the Logos was of the same substance with the Father. However, this later affirmation caused division once again in the coming years. Even at the Council of Nicea, many bishops were hesitant about the inclusion of the word homoousios because it appeared to be modalism. The council's decision can not be referred to as trinitarian, however, since it did not deal with the Holy Spirit. There is only one sentence in the creed about Him, but it only affirmed that they believed that He existed. It needs to be understood that the issue at the Council of Nicea was all about the relationship of the Logos to the Father, not to the Father and to the Holy Spirit. This issue would be taken up at the next ecumenical council.

Hello, my name is M. Lee Miller, I have a Doctorate in Theology and a Ph.D in Religious Studies. Being in the ministry for nearly 30 years, along with being a pastor for over nine years, there have been many problems, situations that have needed to be confronted in regards to what different people have to face in their lives. It has been very challenging, along with being very satisfying, to have a opportunity to be able to help an individual to cope, deal with the problems, situations that sometimes arises in our world. If I had my life to live over again, I have to say that I would still choose the position that I currently hold, that God has placed me in, and that is helping people to get through tough times in this life of ours.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=M._Lee_Miller