|
Istilah ''Sabelianisme'' diambil dari nama [[Sabellius|Sabelius]], seorang presbiter dan teolog abad ke-3. Tidak satu pun karya tulisnya yang sintas, oleh karena itu segala sesuatu mengenai dirinya cuma dapat diketahui dari keterangan lawan-lawannya. Sebagian besar di antaranya yakin bahwa Sabelius percaya akan keilahian Yesus seraya mendustakan kejamakan pribadi di dalam hakikat kewujudan Allah, dan menganut akidah yang mirip dengan [[Monarkianisme Modalistis]]. Sabelius memang mengajarkan bahwa hanya ada satu oknum ilahi, tetapi menggunakan kata oknum sebagai sinonim hakikat:<blockquote>"Sabelius berpegang kepada keyakinan akan keesaan sederhana dari oknum dan hakikat Allah."<ref>{{Cite book|last=VON MOSHEIM|first=JOHN LAURENCE|url=https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=0l9M6PLRNcQC&pg=GBS.PA220&hl=en|title=HISTORICAL COMMENTARIES ON THE STATE OF CHRISTIANITY|date=1854|publisher=S. Converse |language=en}}</ref> </blockquote>Lantaran baik ''usia'' (hakikat) maupun ''hipostasis'' (oknum) bermakna ‘sesuatu yang maujud secara asasi’) dan baru dibedakan pada akhir abad ke-4,<ref>{{Citation|last=Lienhard|first=Joseph T.|title=Ousia and Hypostasis: The Cappadocian Settlement and the Theology of 'One Hypostasis'|date=2002|url=https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/10.1093/0199246122.001.0001/acprof-9780199246120-chapter-5|work=The Trinity|place=Oxford|publisher=Oxford University Press|doi=10.1093/0199246122.001.0001|isbn=978-0-19-924612-0|access-date=2021-12-08}}</ref> Sabelius menggunakan kata oknum dengan makna yang lain. Namun Sableius memang menyifatkan Allah sebagai tiga dari satu segi tetapi esa dari segi lain. Monarkianisme Modalistis pada umumnya dianggap muncul pada abad ke-2 dan ke-3, serta dibidatkan selepas abad ke-4, kendati anggapan semacam ini masih dipertanyakan sementara pihak.<ref>https://www.britannica.com/topic/Monarchianism "Monarchianism", Encyclopedia Britannica Daring</ref>
Mayoritas umat Kristen menolak Sabelianisme dan menganut [[Tritunggal]]isme, yang pada akhirnya didefinisikan sebagai keimanan akan tiga oknum berlainan, yang sederajat, yang sama-sama kekal, dari satu hakikat di dalam [[Kredo Athanasius|Syahadat Atanasius]], yang mungkin sekali disusun pada akhir abad ke-5 atau awal abad ke-6. Istilah Yunani ''ὁμοούσιος'' (''[[Homoousion|homousioshomoousios]]'', ('sehakikat') sudah lumrah dipakai sebelum diadopsi [[Konsili Nikea I]]. [[Gnostisisme|Golongan Gnostik]]lah yang pertama kali menggunakan kata ''ὁμοούσιος'' (''homousioshomoousios''), karena sama sekali tidak ada jejak pemakaian kata tersebut sebelum dipakai golongan Gnostik.<ref>{{Citation | first = Adolf | last = von Harnack | language = de | title = Dogmengeschichte | at = 1:284–85, n. 3; 2:232–34, n. 4}}.</ref><ref>{{Citation | first = Ignacio | last = Ortiz de Urbina | title = L'homoousios preniceno | journal = Orientalia Christiana Periodica |trans-title=The prenicene homoousios | volume = 8 | year = 1942 | pages = 194–209}}.</ref><ref>{{Citation | first = Ignacio | last = Ortiz de Urbina | title = El Simbolo Niceno | language = es|trans-title=The Nicene symbol | place = Madrid | publisher = Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas | year = 1947 | pages = 183–202}}.</ref><ref>{{Citation | first = Luis M | last = Mendizabal | language = es| title = El Homoousios Preniceno Extraeclesiastico | journal = Estudios Eclesiasticos |trans-title=Ecclesiastical studies | volume = 30 | year = 1956 | pages = 147–96}}.</ref><ref>{{Citation | first = George Leonard | last = Prestige | title = God in Patristic Thought | place = London | publisher = SPCK | orig-year = 1936 | edition = 2d | year = 1952 | pages = 197–218}}.</ref><ref>{{Citation | first = Peter | last = Gerlitz | title = Aufierchristliche Einflilsse auf die Entwicklung des christlichen. Trinitatsdogmas, zugleich ein religions- und dogmengeschichtlicher Versuch zur Erklarung der Herkunft der Homousie | place = Leiden | publisher = Brill | year = 1963 | pages = 193–221}}.</ref><ref>{{Citation | first = Ephrem | last = Boularand | language = fr | title = L'heresie d'Arius et la 'foi' de Nicke |trans-title=The Arius’ heresy and the ‘faith’ of Nicke | volume = 2, La "foi" de Nicee | place = Paris | publisher = Letouzey & Ane | year = 1972 | pages = 331–53}}.</ref><ref>{{Citation | first = John Norman D | last = Kelly | title = Early Christian Creeds | edition = 3d | place = London | publisher = Longman | year = 1972 | page = 245}}.</ref><ref>{{Citation | first = Frauke | last = Dinsen | title = Homoousios. Die Geschichte des Begriffs bis zum Konzil von Konstantinopel (381) | language = de | type = Diss | place = Kiel | year = 1976 | pages = 4–11}}.</ref><ref>{{Citation | first = Christopher | last = Stead | title = Divine Substance | pages = 190–202}}.</ref> Kemungkinan besar para teolog Kristen Purba menyadari keberadaan konsep ini, dan oleh karena itu memahami doktrin [[Emanasionisme|emanasi]] yang diajarkan golongan Gnostik.<ref>{{Citation | first = Aloys | last = Grillmeier | title = Christ in Christian Tradition | volume = 1, From the Apostolic Age to Chalcedon (451) | place = London | publisher = Mowbrays | year = 1975 | page = 109}}.</ref><!-- Di dalam sastra Gnostik, kata ''ὁμοούσιος'' digunakan dengan makna-makna berikut ini:
* JatidiriJati daridiri hakikat di antara ''pencetusmuwalid dan cetusanmuwalad''.
* JatidiriJati daridiri hakikat di antara kewujudan-kewujudan yang ''terwujudmuwalad dari satu hakikat''.
* JatidiriJati daridiri hakikat di antara ''rekanmitra-rekan of amitra [[SyzygyAyon (GnosticismGnostisisme)|syzygysizigiai]]''.<!--
It has been noted that this Greek term ''homoousianhomousios'' ('same beingsewujud' oratau 'consubstantialsehakikat'), which [[Athanasius of Alexandria]] favoured, was also a term reportedly used by Sabellius—a term that many who held with Athanasius were uneasy about. Their objection to the term ''homoousian'' was that it was considered to be un-scriptural, suspicious, and "of a Sabellian tendency."<ref>''Select Treatises of St. Athanasius'' - In Controversy With the Arians - Freely Translated by John Henry Cardinal Newmann - Longmans, Green, and Co., 1911, footnote n.124</ref> This was because Sabellius also considered the Father and the Son to be "one substance", meaning that, to Sabellius, the Father and Son were one essential person, operating as different manifestations or modes. Athanasius' use of the word is intended to affirm that while the Father and Son are eternally distinct in a truly personal manner (i.e. with mutual love, per John 3:35, 14:31<ref name="Against the Arians, Discourse 3, paragraph 66">{{cite web|last1=Athanasius|first1=bishop of Alexandria|title=Against the Arians, Discourse 3, paragraph 66|url=http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf204.xxi.ii.iv.viii.html|website=ChristianClassicsEtheralLibrary|access-date=2 June 2017}}</ref>), both are nevertheless one being, essence, nature, or substance, having one personal spirit.
==History and development==
|
