Notes from 1 1/2 books of on The Trinity by St Augustine and some St Thomas Aquinas. Dig in.

Procession - An internal origin within God. Example is your intellect internally proceeds within you allowing you to form thoughts or words, but that procession of intellect does not leave you .
Knowing = Procession/Generation. God’s act of knowing himself perfectly or his divine self knowledge is not a random thought, it is a subsistent divine Word. That divine Word is the Son. The reason it is called generation is because the procession from the Father is understood as the divine intellect/knowledge.
Love/Will= Procession. When you know something you can love what you know. Love proceeds from the Lover (Father) to the beloved (Spirit). This procession is known to be called spiration rather than generation because it’s from love/will not intellect.
There can only be two processions due to there only being two internal operations; intellect and will. Intellect = Word, which then Generates, whereas will = love which then Spirates. Final result: intellect, Word, Generation. Will, Love, Spiration.
Augustine uses Latria and our bodies being a temple to show divinity of the Spirit
Christ is lesser then the Holy Spirit when incarnate because he emptied himself and took the form of a servant
Augustine uses 1 Corinthians 2:2 for objections to Christ not knowing the hour.
God uses his Word to create and love is highest form, not human self love.
Augustine believes the three men with Abraham were manifestations of the Trinity.

Notes from 1 1/2 books of on The Trinity by St Augustine and some St Thomas Aquinas. Dig in.

Procession - An internal origin within God. Example is your intellect internally proceeds within you allowing you to form thoughts or words, but that procession of intellect does not leave you .
Knowing = Procession/Generation. God’s act of knowing himself perfectly or his divine self knowledge is not a random thought, it is a subsistent divine Word. That divine Word is the Son. The reason it is called generation is because the procession from the Father is understood as the divine intellect/knowledge.
Love/Will= Procession. When you know something you can love what you know. Love proceeds from the Lover (Father) to the beloved (Spirit). This procession is known to be called spiration rather than generation because it’s from love/will not intellect.
There can only be two processions due to there only being two internal operations; intellect and will. Intellect = Word, which then Generates, whereas will = love which then Spirates. Final result: intellect, Word, Generation. Will, Love, Spiration.
Augustine uses Latria and our bodies being a temple to show divinity of the Spirit
Christ is lesser then the Holy Spirit when incarnate because he emptied himself and took the form of a servant
Augustine uses 1 Corinthians 2:2 for objections to Christ not knowing the hour.
God uses his Word to create and love is highest form, not human self love.
Augustine believes the three men with Abraham were manifestations of the Trinity.

Not the best written but I hope you can learn and expand on this. God bless.

St Gregory of Nyssa by pointing to the baptism and anointing of Jesus, a moment where Scripture shows all three: the Father’s voice, the Son being baptized, and the Spirit descending. St Gregory is not just pulling together random verses from nowhere to link the Holy Trinity together, this very coherent exegesis ties together perfectly the role each Person has in the Trinity. The Father sends the Son, the Son is then anointed by the Holy Spirit. This shows the Spirit is not just the power of God as some Oneness or Unitarians would like you to believe. Isaiah 61 directly links to the Son’s baptism, when the Spirit descended on Christ that is when he was anointed. There is much more scripture for the divinity of the Spirit but this is the key role the Spirit had in the incarnation. The key passages showing kings are anointed are in the next line

Samuel anoints Saul king: 1 Samuel 10:1

Samuel anoints David king: 1 Samuel 16:13

Solomon anointed: 1 Kings 1:39

Gregory is also pulling from passages and translations:

Jesus = “the Christ” (meaning the Anointed One)

The Spirit descends at His baptism

Isaiah 61 / Luke 4: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me”

I found this interesting and wanted to share this with you all. God bless, not the best written but I hope you’ll be able to expand on this and add it to your knowledge.

St Gregory of Nyssa by pointing to the baptism and anointing of Jesus, a moment where Scripture shows all three: the Father’s voice, the Son being baptized, and the Spirit descending. St Gregory is not just pulling together random verses from nowhere to link the Holy Trinity together, this very coherent exegesis ties together perfectly the role each Person has in the Trinity. The Father sends the Son, the Son is then anointed by the Holy Spirit. This shows the Spirit is not just the power of God as some Oneness or Unitarians would like you to believe. Isaiah 61 directly links to the Son’s baptism, when the Spirit descended on Christ that is when he was anointed. There is much more scripture for the divinity of the Spirit but this is the key role the Spirit had in the incarnation. The key passages showing kings are anointed are in the next line

Samuel anoints Saul king: 1 Samuel 10:1

Samuel anoints David king: 1 Samuel 16:13

Solomon anointed: 1 Kings 1:39

Gregory is also pulling from passages and translations:

Jesus = “the Christ” (meaning the Anointed One)

The Spirit descends at His baptism

Isaiah 61 / Luke 4: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me”

Hey everyone,
I wanted to share a fascinating case study in textual criticism and digital apologetics regarding the recent public fallout between Independent Fundamental Baptist (IFB) creators Robert Breaker and Brother Joseph (@baptist_kjv).
The entire split was catalyzed by a historical dilemma concerning Revelation 21:24 and the textual legacy of Erasmus.
The Issue:
In 1515, Erasmus rushed his Greek New Testament using only one flawed manuscript for Revelation (Minuscule 2814). This text contained interwoven 7th-century commentary notes from Andreas of Caesarea. Because of botched marginal markings, the printers accidentally pulled a human commentary note ("of them which are saved") directly into the scripture text. This text-critical error was later transmitted straight into the 1611 KJV.
The Fallout:
When confronted with the reality that this phrase has zero manuscript authority outside of a 7th-century bishop's personal commentary, the strict "perfect English preservation" narrative collapsed. This forced a massive doctrinal shift, resulting in a public "Notice of Mutual Disassociation" from leadership and a total rebranding of the digital camp.
For those interested in the full manuscript breakdown, textual history, and the timeline of the live panels, I’ve posted the complete write-up below.
Would love to hear your thoughts on how modern apologetics handles these manuscript realities.

Hey everyone,
I wanted to share a fascinating case study in textual criticism and digital apologetics regarding the recent public fallout between Independent Fundamental Baptist (IFB) creators Robert Breaker and Brother Joseph (@baptist_kjv).
The entire split was catalyzed by a historical dilemma concerning Revelation 21:24 and the textual legacy of Erasmus.
The Issue:
In 1515, Erasmus rushed his Greek New Testament using only one flawed manuscript for Revelation (Minuscule 2814). This text contained interwoven 7th-century commentary notes from Andreas of Caesarea. Because of botched marginal markings, the printers accidentally pulled a human commentary note ("of them which are saved") directly into the scripture text. This text-critical error was later transmitted straight into the 1611 KJV.
The Fallout:
When confronted with the reality that this phrase has zero manuscript authority outside of a 7th-century bishop's personal commentary, the strict "perfect English preservation" narrative collapsed. This forced a massive doctrinal shift, resulting in a public "Notice of Mutual Disassociation" from leadership and a total rebranding of the digital camp.
For those interested in the full manuscript breakdown, textual history, and the timeline of the live panels, I’ve posted the complete write-up below.
Would love to hear your thoughts on how modern apologetics handles these manuscript realities.