The Problem with the Trinity

[Aristotle]

According to this doctrine, God exists in three Persons—Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit—each of whom is distinct from each of the others: the Father is not the Son, and the Holy Spirit is not the Father or the Son. At the same time the doctrine requires that each of the three are God: The Father is God, The Son is God, and The Holy Spirit is God. the problem here is when we apply this doctrine to traditional Christian theology (monotheism). According to the Athanasian creed "all three are not gods but are one God."

However I think even after acknowledging that fact, the problem lies in explaining the relationship of the divine persons to one another. In one instance, it seems that the relationship is identity (e.g each being is divine therefore there is only one divine being). On the other hand the relationship must be distinction--as the name suggest, the three seem to posses different qualities for example: The Father begets, The Son is begtotten, The Holy Spirit proceeds. But to me, no multiple things can be both identical and distinct at the same time.

Argument of Pro-Trinitarians

A Christian philosopher may argue for the trinity as Peter Abelard did in his major work Theologia 'Summi Boni' in that "divine persons are the same in virtue of their substance or essence, but differ in virtue of what is proper to each." By substance I believe he (Abelard) argued that the substance of the trinity is one as in numerically one. For example the substance of a sword or blade, or this guy down the street or another guy or this dog or a cat their substance within them are the same.

A typical philosophical argument from a pro-trinitarian would be:

"Some things are the same even though they are distinguished by their properties. That is because their properties remains so unmixed that a property of one, is never participated by the other even though the substance of each is completely the same number."

An example of this would be a house. The house, that is the matter that composes the entire house is numerically one substance. Although the properties of the house share the common substance of matter, however the matter from which several properties of the house are made, do not share the common properties of each other since matter from paint is not made from matter (that is paint is not made from paint).

The Problem

Infinity does not proceed from infinity. In order to understand the Oneness of God one must understand that philosophically, God being the supreme essence, one must understand that nothing proceeds from God. According to the trinity although arguing sameness and difference, the Father contains qualities that the Son and Holy Spirit do not possess. The Trinity, being comprised of Hylomorphic compounds, is flawed. The Father that begets the Son is not begotten. The Son that is begotten does not beget the Father, and the Son and Father do not proceed from the Holy Spirit nor does the Holy Spirit beget the Father and/or The Son. In addition the Trinity fashions itself in a hierarchy. The Son not possessing the qualities of the Father is still infinitely equal to the Father in substance (think of substance as divine quality). Going back to the house example even though the wall has much importance as the foundation, a closet serves less of a vital function than a sink or shower. Just as the Father serves an important function for the Son as the Father begets the Son,The Son serves in seemingly subordinate fashion to the Father and the Holy Spirit to the previous two. this therein lies the problem.

 

[LittleNipper]

According to this doctrine, God exists in three Persons—Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit—each of whom is distinct from each of the others: the Father is not the Son, and the Holy Spirit is not the Father or the Son. At the same time the doctrine requires that each of the three are God: The Father is God, The Son is God, and The Holy Spirit is God. the problem here is when we apply this doctrine to traditional Christian theology (monotheism). According to the Athanasian creed "all three are not gods but are one God."

However I think even after acknowledging that fact, the problem lies in explaining the relationship of the divine persons to one another. In one instance, it seems that the relationship is identity (e.g each being is divine therefore there is only one divine being). On the other hand the relationship must be distinction--as the name suggest, the three seem to posses different qualities for example: The Father begets, The Son is begtotten, The Holy Spirit proceeds. But to me, no multiple things can be both identical and distinct at the same time.

Argument of Pro-Trinitarians

A Christian philosopher may argue for the trinity as Peter Abelard did in his major work Theologia 'Summi Boni' in that "divine persons are the same in virtue of their substance or essence, but differ in virtue of what is proper to each." By substance I believe he (Abelard) argued that the substance of the trinity is one as in numerically one. For example the substance of a sword or blade, or this guy down the street or another guy or this dog or a cat their substance within them are the same.

A typical philosophical argument from a pro-trinitarian would be:

"Some things are the same even though they are distinguished by their properties. That is because their properties remains so unmixed that a property of one, is never participated by the other even though the substance of each is completely the same number."

An example of this would be a house. The house, that is the matter that composes the entire house is numerically one substance. Although the properties of the house share the common substance of matter, however the matter from which several properties of the house are made, do not share the common properties of each other since matter from paint is not made from matter (that is paint is not made from paint).

The Problem

Infinity does not proceed from infinity. In order to understand the Oneness of God one must understand that philosophically, God being the supreme essence, one must understand that nothing proceeds from God. According to the trinity although arguing sameness and difference, the Father contains qualities that the Son and Holy Spirit do not possess. The Trinity, being comprised of Hylomorphic compounds, is flawed. The Father that begets the Son is not begotten. The Son that is begotten does not beget the Father, and the Son and Father do not proceed from the Holy Spirit nor does the Holy Spirit beget the Father and/or The Son. In addition the Trinity fashions itself in a hierarchy. The Son not possessing the qualities of the Father is still infinitely equal to the Father in substance (think of substance as divine quality). Going back to the house example even though the wall has much importance as the foundation, a closet serves less of a vital function than a sink or shower. Just as the Father serves an important function for the Son as the Father begets the Son,The Son serves in seemingly subordinate fashion to the Father and the Holy Spirit to the previous two. this therein lies the problem.

John 20:28



You may wish to read the following: What does it mean that Jesus is God's only begotten son?

 

[emilynghiem]

since you are more guided by practical wisdom as in the tradition of Greek ethics and analysis
would either of these help you

1. Confucianism
Jen
Yi
Li

Jen = Supreme Virtue or Benevolence for all
so this is the level of God being infinite source of goodness

Yi = highest principles embodied in man
the level of laws morals and standards by conscience

Li = outward expression of morals for social order and propriety
the level of physical manifestation

So all three are coming from the same laws of truth/goodness/justice universal to all humanity

the highest level is the supreme collective or infinite level of truth love and goodness
the bottom level is the finite level of man's experience on earth in the physical
and the middle level is the level of laws or conscience joining the other two in harmony

does this explain the relations in the trinity?

2. an even simpler way if this helps
first person
second person
third person
the way you can tell the same story using
first second or third person
and it's different perspectives on "the same story"
it's still one story but manifested in different perspectives or angles
you can get a connection with God's truth and love directly as the receiving party [first person]
you can get a connection with this truth and love by going through a second party indirectly [second person]
or you can see the same connection between two third parties sharing this truth and love with each other [third person]\

3. another simple way
Let's look at how love is expressed in different relationships
* "father-son" having a fatherly relationship with all humanity as his children as creator of all things with loving good purpose
* "husband-wife" having a protective relationship with all humanity as his wife or bride as the governing role of the law and govt
under "social contract" like a "marriage" between people and govt
* "neighbors" or "brother-sister/family" having neighborly or extended family relations with community, society or all humanity to bring healing and comfort and peace in our relations on earth
These are all expression of "LOVE"
which are manifested through all three roles, yet the roles are distinct and yet the spirit of humanity is all ONE.

since I have seen as many different ways to represent and explain these sme patterns of relationships
if you can imagine that all are attempts to reflect and capture an analogous image of the one God who is infinitely greater than any such symbolism
and imagine the collective of all these attempts
that is still trying to capture the relationship between man and God
even though God is still greater than that.

but we know all these paths follow the same pattern
some level that represents the finite/physical or individual level of man
some level that represents the collective abstract or global level
and some intermediary level that joins these other two as one in harmony

According to this doctrine, God exists in three Persons—Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit—each of whom is distinct from each of the others: the Father is not the Son, and the Holy Spirit is not the Father or the Son. At the same time the doctrine requires that each of the three are God: The Father is God, The Son is God, and The Holy Spirit is God. the problem here is when we apply this doctrine to traditional Christian theology (monotheism). According to the Athanasian creed "all three are not gods but are one God."

However I think even after acknowledging that fact, the problem lies in explaining the relationship of the divine persons to one another. In one instance, it seems that the relationship is identity (e.g each being is divine therefore there is only one divine being). On the other hand the relationship must be distinction--as the name suggest, the three seem to posses different qualities for example: The Father begets, The Son is begtotten, The Holy Spirit proceeds. But to me, no multiple things can be both identical and distinct at the same time.

Right. the conflict lies in thinking this means they have to be "identical" which is NOT true.
so of course this causes a conflict, because this is NOT the meaning of them being all one.

the three branches of government are one govt.
They are NOT identical. nor are they three differnt govts.
they are different authorities of the one govt.

Argument of Pro-Trinitarians

A Christian philosopher may argue for the trinity as Peter Abelard did in his major work Theologia 'Summi Boni' in that "divine persons are the same in virtue of their substance or essence, but differ in virtue of what is proper to each." By substance I believe he (Abelard) argued that the substance of the trinity is one as in numerically one. For example the substance of a sword or blade, or this guy down the street or another guy or this dog or a cat their substance within them are the same.

A typical philosophical argument from a pro-trinitarian would be:

"Some things are the same even though they are distinguished by their properties. That is because their properties remains so unmixed that a property of one, is never participated by the other even though the substance of each is completely the same number."

An example of this would be a house. The house, that is the matter that composes the entire house is numerically one substance. Although the properties of the house share the common substance of matter, however the matter from which several properties of the house are made, do not share the common properties of each other since matter from paint is not made from matter (that is paint is not made from paint).

The Problem

Infinity does not proceed from infinity. In order to understand the Oneness of God one must understand that philosophically, God being the supreme essence, one must understand that nothing proceeds from God. According to the trinity although arguing sameness and difference, the Father contains qualities that the Son and Holy Spirit do not possess. The Trinity, being comprised of Hylomorphic compounds, is flawed. The Father that begets the Son is not begotten. The Son that is begotten does not beget the Father, and the Son and Father do not proceed from the Holy Spirit nor does the Holy Spirit beget the Father and/or The Son. In addition the Trinity fashions itself in a hierarchy. The Son not possessing the qualities of the Father is still infinitely equal to the Father in substance (think of substance as divine quality). Going back to the house example even though the wall has much importance as the foundation, a closet serves less of a vital function than a sink or shower. Just as the Father serves an important function for the Son as the Father begets the Son,The Son serves in seemingly subordinate fashion to the Father and the Holy Spirit to the previous two. this therein lies the problem.

A, first of all, the trinity is a finite representation of God being infinite
since the trinity is a finite representation of course
you are going to run into limitations.

the point is to try to represent the "relationship" between God and man

the photograph or verbal description of a person is
not going to do full justice to the real person in real life

this is only a representation we are dealing with

the point is to understand in symbolism the relationship between God and man

of course God being infinite is still going to be greater
than any human finite representation we can make of God

if the three branches of govt does not help

how about understnding the relationship between the
* individual on the physical level
* the collective level or abstract level of all truth or all humanity as one
* and the intermediate level connecting these two
where someone's mind or conscience is both affected in the physical world
and on the collective abstract level of perceptions of things beyond the physical

So this three part pattern represents the relationship
between man on the physical finite level and
God on the infinite colelctive level
joined by conscience or Christ
or understanding of the laws coinnecting the two other levels.

for human nature
I am one person though I am
body/mind/spirit

these three are one, but have three distinct levels not the same as each other.
the point is for the mind to be in harmony so all three levels are in harmony

so that is a microcosm of our relationship with god
to be in harmony on all levels joining the local level to the global level.

the point is to understand the harmony and unity
between the levels, and understanding what causes them to be
divided and not in harmony so we can restore healthy balance and relations.

are you okay with individual people
being body/mind/spirit where the three are in harmony?
And the collective of this for ALL HUMANITY combined
is what God/Christ/HolySpirit represents.
that man is made in God's image
so if we understand human nature
and how to live in harmony
that is a reflection of the levels that God manifests

does this help?

 

[fyrenza]

As idiotic as this is going to sound,

I caught a glimpse of the meaning of this from a Star Trek movie.

No shit.

But, it was like Kirk and the on-board computer trying to explain to another being about how they were ALL the Enterprise ~
any of the one's, without the others, WEREN'T the Enterprise,

even though the entity of the Enterprise, could stand alone,

without the others, it wasn't the Enterprise.

Taken in the context of how this other being would interpret it all, I finally got it.

Who says God doesn't move in mysterious ways? lol

 

[emilynghiem]

As idiotic as this is going to sound,

I caught a glimpse of the meaning of this from a Star Trek movie.

No shit.

But, it was like Kirk and the on-board computer trying to explain to another being about how they were ALL the Enterprise ~
any of the one's, without the others, WEREN'T the Enterprise,

even though the entity of the Enterprise, could stand alone,

without the others, it wasn't the Enterprise.

Taken in the context of how this other being would interpret it all, I finally got it.

Who says God doesn't move in mysterious ways? lol

Great story!
Your example reminds me of the point in the movie Excalibur
where Percy is the last knight searching the world over for
the Holy Grail that will give the king his power to save the land from ruin

and he returns with the secret that
the land and the king are one

so when the king's spirit to live and rule is renewed
then the land is renewed with it.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

God specifically Commands us to follow ONLY one God. If Jesus and the holy spirit are also god he violates his own commandment.

 

[fyrenza]

Explaining CONCEPTS ...

How do you do it?
And not just for your current audience,
but for EVERYone, in ALL of time?

THAT's what makes The Bible such an astonishing book,
and what makes the truly "great" authors live throughout time.

 

[emilynghiem]

God specifically Commands us to follow ONLY one God. If Jesus and the holy spirit are also god he violates his own commandment.

So they are not other gods, but manifestation of the same God.

We only have one government, but we have judicial legislative and executive
branches that are all part of this one government. they are not the same as each other,
they are distinct from one another, and yet they are not three governments but all ONE.

Aristotle; let's try this going the other way.
let's start with how YOU see relationships and
then try to relate this to the trinity.

how do YOU see the relationsihp between
* people/individuals
* the law of the land
* the government/authority

how would you describe how the people and the government are one?

 

[fyrenza]

God specifically Commands us to follow ONLY one God. If Jesus and the holy spirit are also god he violates his own commandment.

They're Each different, AND the same,

and it's a CONCEPT that goes beyond our ability to explain, in words.

 

[fyrenza]

God specifically Commands us to follow ONLY one God. If Jesus and the holy spirit are also god he violates his own commandment.

They're Each different, AND the same,

and it's a CONCEPT that goes beyond our ability to explain, in words.

That's one of the most important things that liberal education has robbed us of ~

the very ability to conceptualize ... ANYthing.

It's a fucking sad day, in Muddville, folks.

 

[emilynghiem]

God specifically Commands us to follow ONLY one God. If Jesus and the holy spirit are also god he violates his own commandment.

They're Each different, AND the same,

and it's a CONCEPT that goes beyond our ability to explain, in words.

That's one of the most important things that liberal education has robbed us of ~

the very ability to conceptualize ... ANYthing.

It's a fucking sad day, in Muddville, folks.

1. I don't think it is impossible to explain in words, I thought you did a good job using the Enterprise as a parable. The point is to explain these are just parables symbolizing the
relationships.

the part that is not possible is expecting the same explanation to work for all people.
each person comes to an understanding of God through Christ using their own path.
their own words experiences and understanding. so we can't be God to all people,
only God can do that. by the time this is expressed in human form, it is diverse
as the people on the planet.

the most we can know is have faith it is still all pointing to the same God
even though the exprssions are diverse and as unique as each person

2. as for today's liberal education, the arts and media should be used to expand on people's perceptions across cultures. look at the parables both you and I made.
both based on MOVIES and TV. so these things CAN be used to teach and reach people
on teh level of concepts. I even use scripts to explain how people can have free will
and be following a pre-written script at the same time, that both are going on.
so there is plenty of tools there for communicating and teaching unifying concepts

3. now back to how to explain the trinity to people who are more secular like Aristotle:

how about this Big A:

Can we use America or Boston as a microcosm or symbol of the bigger relationship.

For America, "we" are several states all independent but joined as one union by
the law of the land we are all under. we are still one nation under one law.
so the spirit of the law keeps us united as one, though of course we remain
diverse as states and individuals. does this help explain the realtionship of
law as joining th eindividuals and the collective level as one? by conscience?

For Boston, again, look at all the diverse people coming together in unity
as one city, Boston, joined in spirit.

So in either case, if you can understand how the individual level
and the collective level are joined as one in spirit or by conscience.

can you see this as a mini version of what the trinity means
that the people as one body are joined to God's infinite love and truth by the middle level of Christ as the law "embodied in man" but coming from God at the same time.

does this help?

that by embracing the laws by conscience which is what Christ means
then the people become one with God by the laws which is what it
means for Jesus or divine laws of justice to be "incarnated in man"

if you can understand this with secular laws joining the people and govt as one
this is what it means for the sacred laws to join the people as the church body
with God through Christ as the laws embodied by conscience

A if you can get this, I bet you a million to one,
you can explain it back to me 100 times better than how I just bungled it up.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I am going to ignore the drivel you posted in an attempt to redefine the doctrine of the trinity in terms that make it possible for you to prove that the Trinity does not exist, and simply deal with your misunderstanding of science and math.

The Problem

Infinity does not proceed from infinity.

I am not even sure what it is you are trying to say here, but you obviously do not understand the mathematical concept of infinity. Our brains tell is that there are more numbers in an infinite counting sequence than the are between 0 and 1. After all, the numbers between 0 and 1 are a subset of all the numbers. The problem here is that our brains are wrong, both are actually equal because both are infinite. We can take 10,000,000,000,000 sets of infinite numbers and combine them in one huge pile we will still have the exact same infinite set of numbers. Alternatively, we can take the infinite set of numbers between 0 and 1 and divide it by 1,000 and end up with the exact same amount, infinity. Mathematicians had to find a way to deal with the fact that the cardinality of different infinities could be different, yet still equal.

Until we accept the fact that our brains, quite literally, cannot grasp infinity we cannot discuss it. Infinity can actually proceed from infinity, and both can still be infinite.

In order to understand the Oneness of God one must understand that philosophically, God being the supreme essence, one must understand that nothing proceeds from God.

That is only true if we accept your definition of God.

I do not.

According to the trinity although arguing sameness and difference, the Father contains qualities that the Son and Holy Spirit do not possess. The Trinity, being comprised of Hylomorphic compounds, is flawed.

What makes you think the Trinity is hylomorphic?

Even if we accept that premise, how does that make the Trinity inherently flawed?

The Father that begets the Son is not begotten. The Son that is begotten does not beget the Father, and the Son and Father do not proceed from the Holy Spirit nor does the Holy Spirit beget the Father and/or The Son. In addition the Trinity fashions itself in a hierarchy. The Son not possessing the qualities of the Father is still infinitely equal to the Father in substance (think of substance as divine quality). Going back to the house example even though the wall has much importance as the foundation, a closet serves less of a vital function than a sink or shower. Just as the Father serves an important function for the Son as the Father begets the Son,The Son serves in seemingly subordinate fashion to the Father and the Holy Spirit to the previous two. this therein lies the problem.

Essentially, you are saying that the problem with the Trinity is that you cannot adequately explain it without tossing out your assumptions about the Nature of God.

Could that be because you are trying to impose the Aristotelian ideal upon a confused notion of what you think God is?

 

[fyrenza]

LOTS of blah, blah, blah

<~ sitting and STFU'ing

psst


psst!

your allegory of us/US was a MUCH better parable than mine!


<~ stfu'ing, again

 

[Vandalshandle]

Monotheism advocates found themselves in big trouble when they had to decide how can God be both the Father and the Son, as well as the Creator, so they came up with the Trinity, which said, in effect, that there are three Gods, but they are one. Amazingly enough, Christians bought into this oxymoron in a big way, and today, it is carved in stone. Personally, it reminds me of the old song, with these lyrics:
"...It rain'd all night the day I left, The weather it was dry, The sun so hot I froze to death..."

 

[fyrenza]

Your father is applauding your response,
even as he sees the ignorance of it, and laughs at your feeble attempts to put forth his word.

 

[The Irish Ram]

Right. the conflict lies in thinking this means they have to be "identical" which is NOT true.
so of course this causes a conflict, because this is NOT the meaning of them being all one.

the three branches of government are one govt.
They are NOT identical. nor are they three differnt govts.
they are different authorities of the one govt.

Nice job, Em.

And Sarge,

God specifically Commands us to follow ONLY one God. If Jesus and the holy spirit are also god he violates his own commandment.

That's like saying water can only be water. It can't be ice or steam and be water too. But it can.

 

[fyrenza]

Y'all are good!!!

 

[The Irish Ram]

night.

 

[fyrenza]

Au contraire, mon cher ~ Good Morning!

 

[The Irish Ram]

Mais il est ma chère.
The Irish Ram is the name of a great great grandfather's ship. And my disposition, according to my Dad.
Bonjour, mon ami/e?