PDA

View Full Version : Trinity



joedelsy
Mar 31st 2009, 03:58 AM
Im new here so I hope I dont cause any drama. Id like to start this out by asking what people perceive of the Trinity. I am a firm believer that Jesus is the Son of God and He sits at the right hand of God in heaven. Im trying to figure out why some believe that Jesus is God himself when Scripture clearly states they are a duality.


Mark ; "...He (Jesus) was received up into heaven, and sat down at the right hand of God." (16:19).

markedward
Mar 31st 2009, 05:08 AM
Are you taking into account that "God" refers to the Father, while Jesus is the Son? The Father is not the Son, yet both are God.

apothanein kerdos
Mar 31st 2009, 05:10 AM
One essence, three persons.

There is no easy way to explain it, only to explain it isn't a contradiction.

And just keep in mind - anyone who offers an analogy henceforth is offering a heresy. All analogies about the Trinity are heresies and analogies a heretical view. None of them come close to the actual view because there isn't anything within Creation - material or immaterial - that is like our Triune God.

shepherdsword
Mar 31st 2009, 05:14 AM
One essence, three persons.

There is no easy way to explain it, only to explain it isn't a contradiction.

And just keep in mind - anyone who offers an analogy henceforth is offering a heresy. All analogies about the Trinity are heresies and analogies a heretical view. None of them come close to the actual view because there isn't anything within Creation - material or immaterial - that is like our Triune God.

Exactly,any further definition is based on sheer opinion based conjecture.
Although I don't categorize such attempts as damnable ones it is still wise to steer clear of any further elaboration.

apothanein kerdos
Mar 31st 2009, 05:15 AM
Exactly,any further definition is based on sheer opinion based conjecture.
Although I don't categorize such attempts as damnable ones it is still wise to steer clear of any further elaboration.

Yeah, I probably should have been clearer on that point...

It's not like people are going to hell for the analogies; it's just that they all point to heresies about the Trinity, not about the Trinity.

joedelsy
Mar 31st 2009, 05:36 AM
I tried to be as clear as possible. Jesus is not God. Jesus is the Son of God as per Scriptures.Jesus was not talking to himself when He was here on earth.It seems as people interpret things differently and I dont know why. Jesus never claimed to be God himself. God himself had appeared several times on earth according to the OT, so this would rule out the theory of Jesus being God in human flesh.

Jesus said; "I am (he), and that I do nothing on my own; but as my Father has taught me, I speak these things." (John 8:28).

joedelsy
Mar 31st 2009, 05:38 AM
Are you taking into account that "God" refers to the Father, while Jesus is the Son? The Father is not the Son, yet both are God.


How are both God when Scriptures state that it was God that raised his son from the dead?

God sent His Son Jesus from heaven to earth to save the world from sin. (John 12:47)

apothanein kerdos
Mar 31st 2009, 05:43 AM
I tried to be as clear as possible. Jesus is not God. Jesus is the Son of God as per Scriptures.Jesus was not talking to himself when He was here on earth.It seems as people interpret things differently and I dont know why. Jesus never claimed to be God himself. God himself had appeared several times on earth according to the OT, so this would rule out the theory of Jesus being God in human flesh.

Jesus said; "I am (he), and that I do nothing on my own; but as my Father has taught me, I speak these things." (John 8:28).

He most certainly was God and He most certainly did claim to be God. One doesn't simply say, "Before Abraham, I AM" to a crowd of religious Jews for kicks and giggles.

Anyway, another syllogism...(people have to be sick of me by now...)

(1) The Trinity is one being (God) and three Persons (Father, Son, and Spirit).

(2) The Father knows the future while the Son does not in at least one instance of Scripture (you can throw in any argument here that you want, such as "Jesus didn't talk to Himself," "God can't die," so on and so forth)

(3) The Spirit also seems to not know the future, even though the Father does

The above can be called {Group A}. I don’t see how there is a necessary or even implicit contradiction within this syllogism. The problem is that (2) comes with an inherent assumption:

(2′) Knowledge, including knowledge of the future, is known through being (again, we can add any argument you want to this mix)

If this is true, then the Trinity would be a contradiction. However, (2′) doesn’t seem to be true. Consider the following, we’ll label it {Group B}:

(4) Granite has being, but has no person

(5) A human has being and has one person

(6) Not all things with being have to have personhood
(6′) There is no conceivable limit to the number of persons in being x

When I say “person” I am using Boethius’ summarization of what “person” is in his Consolation of Philosophy:

Person - an individual substance of a rational nature

So I am relying on the ancient understanding of “personhood.” We don’t consider animals to be “persons” (unless we’re PETA, Hindus, or ill-informed) because they lack intelligence. Though they have personality and show emotions, they are not “persons” because they don’t have intellect.


So now we can apply (6) (with it’s implicit (6′)) to {Group A}. Once we do this, it then reads:

(1) The Trinity is one being (God) and three Persons (Father, Son, and Spirit).

(2) The Father knows the future while the Son does not in at least one instance of Scripture

(3) The Spirit also seems to not know the future, even though the Father does

(6) Not all things with being have to have personhood
(6′) There is no conceivable limit to the number of persons in being x

So what we need to explore is if our knowledge comes from our being or from our personhood. Being simply describes the essence of x - that is, what x is. The essence of a rock is hardness, lifelessness, or, more philosophically, rockness. However, we we saw before, a rock has no person, thus the other aspect of a rock is that it lacks person-ness.

A human is a much better example. Though all of us have some ontological similarities in our being, we are all different in our essence. There are certain attributes about us that, if taken away, we would no longer be who we are (ironically, all of these aspects are immaterial). P1 has essence x while P2 has essence y. Though similar, the two are still different.

What P1 and P2 share in common, however, is that both have personhood, though the personhood is tied up with both x and y respectively. What consists of personhood is what makes P1/P2 a distinct individual. Personhood is best described by the Latin words individua and substantia. In both is the concept of rationality, knowledge, planning, etc. While our essence simply gives a unique description of who we are, our personhood - though tied up to our essence - is what describes how we function.

We can take all the above and word it this way:
(7) The essence of P1 is separate from the person of P1, but both are unified by being a part of P1’s being

From this, we can move on to:

(8) The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are part of the unique essence of God, making God one in being and essence

(9) The Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Spirit, and the Spirit is not the Father, because all three are different persons of the same being

(10) Since knowledge is found in the person and not in the being, it is possible for each person of the same being to have different levels of knowledge, especially concerning the future

What this does is explain how the Trinity is not a contradiction in terms of its ontology and even epistemic outlook on the future. Just for a recap (keep in mind that each proposition has an explanation behind it):

(1) The Trinity is one being (God) and three Persons (Father, Son, and Spirit).

(2) The Father knows the future while the Son does not in at least one instance of Scripture

(3) The Spirit also seems to not know the future, even though the Father does

(6) Not all things with being have to have personhood
(6′) There is no conceivable limit to the number of persons in being x

(7) The essence of P1 is separate from the substance of P1, but both are unified by being a part of P1’s being

(8) The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are part of the unique essence of God, making God one in being and essence

(9) The Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Spirit, and the Spirit is not the Father, because all three are different persons of the same being

(10) Since knowledge is found in the person and not in the being, it is possible for each person of the same being to have different levels of knowledge, especially concerning the future

What this shows us is that, when applied logically, the Trinity fits the definition of a paradox - something that prima facie seems contradictory, but is not. This mean we can look at the Trinity, especially in regards to how each person relates to time and space, and realize that there is no contradiction facing is. We don’t know how the Trinity functions, we have no experiential knowledge of the essence of the Trinity (we only know what it is to be one being and one person, commonly called human), but we can know that the Trinity is not a contradiction.

(On to my next post)

apothanein kerdos
Mar 31st 2009, 05:53 AM
So, the Trinity is logically understandable. So any time you point to Scripture and say, "So how..." and proceed to try and show a contradiction, it doesn't work. The above syllogism shows a belief in the Trinity is logically sound.

But is it Scripturally sound?

Matthew 28:18 says we are to baptize all new converts in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. This indicates an equality among all three, showing all three are comprise the personhood of God. (I can go more in depth on this if you want).


You have the ever famous John 1 scenario, where we know that the Word was with God, the Word was God, and the Word came down and dwelt among man. If A then B; if B then C; A therefore C. There is the argument John is making in John 1.

John 10:29 points to the fact that Jesus and the Father have the same essence.

Matthew 12:31 says we can blaspheme against the Holy Spirit (how can you blaspheme someone who is not God?)

We are told we can grieve the Holy Spirit with our sin. How do you grieve a non-person? How do you grieve a force? I don't grieve gravity. I don't grieve electricity. I grieve persons.

Paul explains the roles of the persons in 2 Corinthians 13:13.

I could go on and on with multitudes of Scripture that both explicitly and implicitly show Christ to be God and the Spirit to be God and the Father to be God. Biblically, this is a sound belief.

Whenever you come across a contradiction, apply the syllogism I gave in my previous post.

joedelsy
Mar 31st 2009, 05:56 AM
You can twist the Scripture all you want.

1:2 John writes, he was testifying; the word of God and of Jesus.

Jesus said; "I am (he), and that I do nothing on my own; but as my Father has taught me, I speak these things." (John 8:28

Acts 7:56 "And said, "Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God."

markedward
Mar 31st 2009, 05:57 AM
1 John 5.20 And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true; and we are in him who is true, in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life.

2 Peter 1.1 Simeon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who have obtained a faith of equal standing with ours by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ.

Likewise, there is the oft-quoted John 1.1, "the Logos was with God, and the Logos was God" followed by 1.14, "and the Logos became flesh". The Logos is both God and with God. From that we arrive at "Logos = God". Then we're told the Logos became a man, which we are told is Jesus. Hence, "Logos = Jesus". So... "God = Logos = Jesus", is simplified to "God = Jesus".

Likewise, Hebrews 1 shows how Christ is not an angel (completely contradicting the Jehovah's Witnesses, who claim he was the [arch]angel Michael), and that he is not a mere man (contradicting certain other groups), and Hebrews 1.8 directly says, "Of the Son [God] says, 'Your throne, O God, is forever.'" Here, we are told that God called Christ God. He also applies a Psalm speaking of YHWH to Christ in verse 1.10, meaning, he is applying attributes of YHWH (the One God) to Christ. Christ is God.


You can twist the Scripture all you want. This seems to say it all. You show up, saying you don't want to cause trouble, but when you ask a question you simply accuse everyone of "twisting Scripture". Why bother showing up if you know no one is going to convince you?

Butch5
Mar 31st 2009, 06:01 AM
He most certainly was God and He most certainly did claim to be God. One doesn't simply say, "Before Abraham, I AM" to a crowd of religious Jews for kicks and giggles.

Anyway, another syllogism...(people have to be sick of me by now...)

(1) The Trinity is one being (God) and three Persons (Father, Son, and Spirit).

(2) The Father knows the future while the Son does not in at least one instance of Scripture (you can throw in any argument here that you want, such as "Jesus didn't talk to Himself," "God can't die," so on and so forth)

(3) The Spirit also seems to not know the future, even though the Father does

The above can be called {Group A}. I don’t see how there is a necessary or even implicit contradiction within this syllogism. The problem is that (2) comes with an inherent assumption:

(2′) Knowledge, including knowledge of the future, is known through being (again, we can add any argument you want to this mix)

If this is true, then the Trinity would be a contradiction. However, (2′) doesn’t seem to be true. Consider the following, we’ll label it {Group B}:

(4) Granite has being, but has no person

(5) A human has being and has one person

(6) Not all things with being have to have personhood
(6′) There is no conceivable limit to the number of persons in being x

When I say “person” I am using Boethius’ summarization of what “person” is in his Consolation of Philosophy:

Person - an individual substance of a rational nature

So I am relying on the ancient understanding of “personhood.” We don’t consider animals to be “persons” (unless we’re PETA, Hindus, or ill-informed) because they lack intelligence. Though they have personality and show emotions, they are not “persons” because they don’t have intellect.


So now we can apply (6) (with it’s implicit (6′)) to {Group A}. Once we do this, it then reads:

(1) The Trinity is one being (God) and three Persons (Father, Son, and Spirit).

(2) The Father knows the future while the Son does not in at least one instance of Scripture

(3) The Spirit also seems to not know the future, even though the Father does

(6) Not all things with being have to have personhood
(6′) There is no conceivable limit to the number of persons in being x

So what we need to explore is if our knowledge comes from our being or from our personhood. Being simply describes the essence of x - that is, what x is. The essence of a rock is hardness, lifelessness, or, more philosophically, rockness. However, we we saw before, a rock has no person, thus the other aspect of a rock is that it lacks person-ness.

A human is a much better example. Though all of us have some ontological similarities in our being, we are all different in our essence. There are certain attributes about us that, if taken away, we would no longer be who we are (ironically, all of these aspects are immaterial). P1 has essence x while P2 has essence y. Though similar, the two are still different.

What P1 and P2 share in common, however, is that both have personhood, though the personhood is tied up with both x and y respectively. What consists of personhood is what makes P1/P2 a distinct individual. Personhood is best described by the Latin words individua and substantia. In both is the concept of rationality, knowledge, planning, etc. While our essence simply gives a unique description of who we are, our personhood - though tied up to our essence - is what describes how we function.

We can take all the above and word it this way:
(7) The essence of P1 is separate from the person of P1, but both are unified by being a part of P1’s being

From this, we can move on to:

(8) The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are part of the unique essence of God, making God one in being and essence

(9) The Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Spirit, and the Spirit is not the Father, because all three are different persons of the same being

(10) Since knowledge is found in the person and not in the being, it is possible for each person of the same being to have different levels of knowledge, especially concerning the future

What this does is explain how the Trinity is not a contradiction in terms of its ontology and even epistemic outlook on the future. Just for a recap (keep in mind that each proposition has an explanation behind it):

(1) The Trinity is one being (God) and three Persons (Father, Son, and Spirit).

(2) The Father knows the future while the Son does not in at least one instance of Scripture

(3) The Spirit also seems to not know the future, even though the Father does

(6) Not all things with being have to have personhood
(6′) There is no conceivable limit to the number of persons in being x

(7) The essence of P1 is separate from the substance of P1, but both are unified by being a part of P1’s being

(8) The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are part of the unique essence of God, making God one in being and essence

(9) The Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Spirit, and the Spirit is not the Father, because all three are different persons of the same being

(10) Since knowledge is found in the person and not in the being, it is possible for each person of the same being to have different levels of knowledge, especially concerning the future

What this shows us is that, when applied logically, the Trinity fits the definition of a paradox - something that prima facie seems contradictory, but is not. This mean we can look at the Trinity, especially in regards to how each person relates to time and space, and realize that there is no contradiction facing is. We don’t know how the Trinity functions, we have no experiential knowledge of the essence of the Trinity (we only know what it is to be one being and one person, commonly called human), but we can know that the Trinity is not a contradiction.

(On to my next post)


Can you please define "being"?

BrckBrln
Mar 31st 2009, 06:01 AM
AK, so you're saying that the Holy Spirit doesn't know the future?

shepherdsword
Mar 31st 2009, 06:10 AM
I tried to be as clear as possible. Jesus is not God. Jesus is the Son of God as per Scriptures.Jesus was not talking to himself when He was here on earth.It seems as people interpret things differently and I dont know why. Jesus never claimed to be God himself. God himself had appeared several times on earth according to the OT, so this would rule out the theory of Jesus being God in human flesh.

Jesus said; "I am (he), and that I do nothing on my own; but as my Father has taught me, I speak these things." (John 8:28).

Not only is Jesus God,he has also stated that unless you believe that he is the "I AM" then you will die in your sins. Denying the deity of Christ IS a damnable heresy.

Joh 8:24 That is why I told you that you will die in your sins. For unless you believe that I am he, you will die in your sins."

The "he" isn't in the greek. The term "I am" in the greek for this is the exact term that God used in the Septuagint when instructing Moses on who to tell the Israelites what the name of the God was that sent him.

I AM

Unless you believe that Jesus is the "I AM" you will die in your sins. We can't play games with this one.

apothanein kerdos
Mar 31st 2009, 06:25 AM
Since I can tell the OP isn't interested in an actual discussion as he simply ignored everything I said, I'll move on to others.

Butch,


Can you please define "being"?

Doesn't this reply have a limit? :)

It really is a transcendental in philosophy, thus it's nigh impossible to give an exact definition. The best definition available is, "that whereby a thing is what it is." In other words, describing object x as what it actually is.

For instance, a human being has being, personhood, and accidents (not accidents as in, "oops," but accidents as in things that are a part of us, but not essential to our nature).

I tend to ascribe to Thomas Aquinas' view on being, that being/essence is the totality of x that is essential to x.

Thus, the being of God is mostly transcendental to us in that we really don't know what comprises His being, only in the attributes of God that He shares with us that we find in our being.

Brick,


AK, so you're saying that the Holy Spirit doesn't know the future?

In at least one instance. Jesus said that only the Father knows the time of the return of the Son. That part was poorly worded - but it still stands with the syllogism. There is at least one instance where the Spirit does not know the future.

THOM
Mar 31st 2009, 12:10 PM
Im new here so I hope I dont cause any drama. Id like to start this out by asking what people perceive of the Trinity. I am a firm believer that Jesus is the Son of God and He sits at the right hand of God in heaven. Im trying to figure out why some believe that Jesus is God himself when Scripture clearly states they are a duality.
Mark ; "...He (Jesus) was received up into heaven, and sat down at the right hand of God." (16:19).

Hello Joe,
Try this out:


[GOD IS GOD]
THE FATHER:

"In the beginning GOD created the heaven and the earth.
And the earth was without form,
and void;
and darkness was upon the face of the deep.
And THE SPIRIT of GOD MOVED upon the face of the waters.
And GOD SAID, 'LET THERE BE LIGHT: AND THERE WAS LIGHT'."
(Genesis 1:1-3 KJV)



[THE WORD of GOD IS GOD]
JESUS CHRIST---The SON:

"In the beginning was THE WORD,
and THE WORD was with GOD,
and THE WORD was GOD.
THE SAME was in the beginning with GOD.
All things were made by HIM;
and without HIM was not any thing made that was made.
In HIM was LIFE;
and THE LIFE was THE LIGHT of men.
And THE WORD was MADE FLESH,
and dwelt among us,
(and we beheld HIS GLORY,
THE GLORY as of THE ONLY BEGOTTEN of THE FATHER,)
full of GRACE and TRUTH."
(John 1:1-4, 14 KJV)



[THE POWER of GOD IS GOD]
The HOLY SPIRIT/GHOST:

"And The Angel answered and said unto her,
THE HOLY GHOST shall come upon you,
and THE POWER of THE HIGHEST shall overshadow you:
therefore also that HOLY thing
which shall be born of you shall be called THE SON of GOD."
(Luke 1:35 KJV)

Pilgrimtozion
Mar 31st 2009, 12:14 PM
Please review the Board Rules, which clearly state that any denial of the Trinity or debate thereof is not allowed on the board. Closing this thread for that reason.