The Trinity - What on Earth is it?

[Spice]

From what I can find, at the end of the first council it was determined "that there is one God, but three eternal and consubstantial persons (aspects): the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The Father is the God of Israel (the creator God of Genesis), the Son is the historical Jesus of Nazareth, and the Holy Spirit is the presence or spirit of God that binds them together." *
This "binding them together" I don't recall having seen before. But then this was 325 CE. It would go to council once again in the 4th century, and revisited yet again in the 6th century.

It's been years since I've read the writings of the 2nd century church fathers, but I feel the need to check in with Origin and Clements, again. LOL

*World History Encyclopedia

 

[Niatero]

While I do not believe in a "trinity" it makes sense to me. Your post, forgive me, sounds antagonistic to the concept. If you have already decided, firmly, that it doesn't make sense, I'm not sure how much time and effort is warranted explaining it. That said, the trinty operates on multiple levels / perspectives. From the most down-to-earth point of view, "The Son" in this case is a prince. Their father, the King, has sent their only-begotten-first-born-son, the heir apparent, to a foreign kingdom, the material world, on an important mission. While in the foreign domain, "The Son", the prince, is a proxy for the King. The prince can negotiate on behalf of their father. They can make and break treaties. They speak on behalf of their father. Anything they say should be considered as if it is coming directly from the King's lips. The King has entrusted all of their authority in the prince. And, highly important for the Christian story, an attack on the prince is considered an act of war perpetrated against the King. There is absolutely no separation in any way between the King and prince, so much so, that one might as well consider the prince = the King. In the past, this notion of the prince as a proxy for tthe King was well known.

That's the basic idea of "the Son" in the trinity as I understand it.

That's how I understand "the Son" in the Bible, but I think that for some of the bishops who signed the creed, that doesn't go far enough in saying that they are the same God. They wanted to exclude any idea of them being separate persons, even in a physical way. That's the reason for the wording that most of them interpreted as "same substance."

 

[Tinkerpeach]

The same God but not the same person. Not the same person in different forms, and not different ways of experiencing the same person. One of the most influential bishops would not have signed it without that agreement, to exclude all ways of thinking of God and Jesus as the same person.

That certainly could be true as it says as much in the Bible in John I believe. I don’t believe my comment actually spoke to the existence of the Son prior to His human existence though.

 

[dybmh]

That's how I understand "the Son" in the Bible, but I think that for some of the bishops who signed the creed, that doesn't go far enough in saying that they are the same God. They wanted to exclude any idea of them being separate persons, even in a physical way. That's the reason for the wording that most of them interpreted as "same substance."

What I wrote was intended to be the most basic "down-to-earth" understanding of "the Son" in the trinity. In order to start the discussion, you have to start somewhere

the trinty operates on multiple levels / perspectives. From the most down-to-earth point of view, "The Son" in this case is

That's the basic idea of ...

You wrote: "for some of the Bishops, that doesn't go far enough". If the trinity operates on multiple levels, then it makes sense for some of the Bishops to consider it beyond the most down-to-earth perspective.

 

[Niatero]

That certainly could be true as it says as much in the Bible in John I believe. I don’t believe my comment actually spoke to the existence of the Son prior to His human existence though.

I'm sorry for picking on you.

I'm thinking now that nobody is saying that Jesus and God are the same person, and nobody understands how Jesus can be God without Jesus and God being the same person. For some people that means that it just isn't true, Jesus is not God. Some others believe that the Bible says that he is God, so even if we can't understand how that could be true, we have to believe it and that it's just beyond human understanding. I can see a way for Jesus to be God without Jesus and God being the same person, but I don't think it matters what people think about that. What matters is that Jesus is our Lord, to serve and obey above all others. If a person needs to believe that He is God Himself, to serve and obey Him that way, then they can believe it, but that isn't the only way for a person to want to serve and obey Him that way. Sometimes it's enough for a person to believe that He is appointed by God as a person to serve and obey above all others.

 

[Alien826]

Exactly.

Which part of my post are you agreeing with? The main paragraph or "that's not it"?

 

[Niatero]

Which part of my post are you agreeing with? The main paragraph or "that's not it"?

Oh. Sorry. "That's not it."

The Trinity doctrines (because there are actually many of them) are just strings of words arranged to look like they're saying something without really saying anything. "The Trinity" is any way that anybody wants to think about God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. The difference between churches that say they believe in the Trinity and the ones that deny it is not in what they actually believe or don't believe. It's in whether or not they want to be part of the mainstream.

 

[Alien826]

Oh. Sorry. "That's not it."

OK. Which puts me right back where I started. Asking those that are supposed to know more than I how the one God of Judaism is reconciled with the worship of two separate entities.

I'll make it clear that as a skeptic I don't expect success here. It's just interesting to watch people try to reconcile the irreconcilable. No disrespect intended, I know these beliefs are very strongly held.

 

[Niatero]

OK. Which puts me right back where I started. Asking those that are supposed to know more than I how the one God of Judaism is reconciled with the worship of two separate entities.

I'll make it clear that as a skeptic I don't expect success here. It's just interesting to watch people try to reconcile the irreconcilable. No disrespect intended, I know these beliefs are very strongly held.

You might not have seen what I added to that post.

 

[Alien826]

The Trinity doctrines (because there are actually many of them) are just strings of words arranged to look like they're saying something without really saying anything. "The Trinity" is any way that anybody wants to think about God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. The difference between churches that say they believe in the Trinity and the ones that deny it is not in what they actually believe or don't believe. It's in whether or not they want to be part of the mainstream.

This? No I didn't see it.

OK, that makes sense. Nobody really knows.

I have to say it fits neatly into something I feel. If God is truly mysterious, not understandable to us mere mortals, and so on then making definitive statements about God is a waste of time. I use the analogy of an anthill that I just trod on. How does that look to the ants (if they were able to form such thoughts)? An almighty God just punished us? We must be doing something bad, lets try to appease the God so it won't happen again (some time later this seems to work, as I don't tread on the anthill again, so the appeasing actions become part of ant culture).

The reality is that I trod on the anthill accidentally, got bitten a few times, and decided not to do it again.

What I find to be ironic is people stating that God is mysterious then, hardly taking a breath, moving on to tell me exactly how God is, or what he wants.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

I'm sorry for picking on you.

I'm thinking now that nobody is saying that Jesus and God are the same person, and nobody understands how Jesus can be God without Jesus and God being the same person. For some people that means that it just isn't true, Jesus is not God. Some others believe that the Bible says that he is God, so even if we can't understand how that could be true, we have to believe it and that it's just beyond human understanding. I can see a way for Jesus to be God without Jesus and God being the same person, but I don't think it matters what people think about that. What matters is that Jesus is our Lord, to serve and obey above all others. If a person needs to believe that He is God Himself, to serve and obey Him that way, then they can believe it, but that isn't the only way for a person to want to serve and obey Him that way. Sometimes it's enough for a person to believe that He is appointed by God as a person to serve and obey above all others.

The best thing that has helped me in my Christian faith is learning to say, “I don’t know.”

I believe God does though and one day I will understand it.

 

[Niatero]

The best thing that has helped me in my Christian faith is learning to say, “I don’t know.”

Me too. Thanks.

(later) I mean, not my Christian faith because I'm not a Christian, but it has helped me stop wasting time and energy on trying to figure it out.

I'm grateful for the forgiving way that you have responded to my outburst.

 

[Dimi95]

I've put a lot of thought into that over many years, and I'm still not sure, but currently I'm thinking that one of the meanings is a prophet who teaches by acting out a story, like Ezekiel. In fact, Jesus could be referring to Ezekiel specifically, as a clue to what he is doing. Not bringing the same message, but teaching in the same way.

You have no idea how much the title 'Son of man' is important.At least i saw it like that.

I don't remember which Jewish Rabbi was , but looking into Jewish understanding i saw that God can incarnate.

Genesis 19:24 reads:
'Then Yahweh rained on Sodom and Gomorrah brumstone and fire from Yahweh out of Heaven'

And the Hebrew actually says here Yahweh twice.
So how can Yahweh be here and there is the question.

You can see also in Amos 4:11
'I have overthrown some of you, as Elohim overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah, and ye were as a firebrand plucked out of the burning: yet have ye not returned unto me, saith YHWH'.

The Hebrew word for 'God' in this verse is given the transliteration as ALEIM, which a form of ELOHIM , which, in turn, is a form of EL. It is used as a plural intensive, that is, the plural form is used as a singular in order to intensify the meaning, as in our English superior or superlative forms. The basic form is EL, which has the basic meaning of strength, might, power.

You might look into this:

Daniel 7:13
'In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man,coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence.'

But the old testament tells us that only YHWH comes in the clouds of heaven.

So again we have two God figures in some sence.

The interesting thing is Daniel 7:14:
'He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all nations and peoples of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.'

Again , we have 'worship'.
As you may know YHWH is a jealous God according to the OT.
Worship is mentioned in the Bible 100+ times and is due to God alone.

So again we have conflict between two figures , YHWH - Son of Man.

So who is YHWH and who is Son of Man.

We know who is YHWH by Exodus 3:14
אֶהְיֶה אֲשֶׁר אֶהְיֶה‎‎
'I am that I am' or just 'I am' as it is said "tell them that 'I am' has sent you.

So , we have Jesus claiming both 'Son of Man' and YHWH.

The term, Son of man, is used by Jesus 80 times as a way to refer to himself.
-32 times in Matthew
-14 times in Mark
-26 times in Luke
-10 times in a qualitatively different way from the Synoptic Gospels in John

In all these texts Jesus is the speaker; no one ever addresses him as Son of man.

So where is the connection between Son of Man and YHWH?

John 8
"Jesus replied, 'If I glorify myself, my glory means nothing. My Father, whom you claim as your God, is the one who glorifies me.Though you do not know him, I know him. If I said I did not, I would be a liar like you, but I do know him and obey his word.Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad.

'You are not yet fifty years old,' they said to him, 'and you have seen Abraham!'.

'Very truly I tell you,' Jesus answered, 'before Abraham was born, I am!' At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds."

And Mark 14 where the Sanhedrin adresses Jesus

"Then the high priest stood up before them and asked Jesus, 'Are you not going to answer? What is this testimony that these men are bringing against you?' But Jesus remained silent and gave no answer.

Again the high priest asked him, 'Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?'

'I am,' said Jesus. 'And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven."

I clearly see that in the accounts of the Gospels Jesus claims to be God.Clearly , that's not even a matter of opinion.

I see that also in the second part of the NT.

 

[Niatero]

You have no idea how much the title 'Son of man' is important.At least i saw it like that.

I don't remember which Jewish Rabbi was , but looking into Juwish understanding i saw that God can incarnate.

Genesis 19:24 reads:
'Then Yahweh rained on Sodom and Gomorrah brumstone and fire from Yahweh out of Heaven'

And the Hebrew actually says here Yahweh twice.
So how can Yahweh be here and there is the question.

You can see also in Amos 4:11
'I have overthrown some of you, as Elohim overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah, and ye were as a firebrand plucked out of the burning: yet have ye not returned unto me, saith YHWH'.

The Hebrew word for 'God' in this verse is given the transliteration as ALEIM, which a form of ELOHIM , which, in turn, is a form of EL. It is used as a plural intensive, that is, the plural form is used as a singular in order to intensify the meaning, as in our English superior or superlative forms. The basic form is EL, which has the basic meaning of strength, might, power.

You might look into this:

Daniel 7:13
'In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man,coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence.'

But the old testament tells us that only YHWH comes in the clouds of heaven.

So again we have two God figures in some sence.

The interesting thing is Daniel 7:14:
'He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all nations and peoples of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.'

Again , we have 'worship'.
As you may know YHWH is a jealous God according to the OT.
Worship is mentioned in the Bible 100+ times and is due to God alone.

So again we have conflict between two figures , YHWH - Son of Man.

So who is YHWH and who is Son of Man.

We know who is YHWH by Exodus 3:14
אֶהְיֶה אֲשֶׁר אֶהְיֶה‎‎
'I am that I am' or just 'I am' as it is said "tell them that 'I am' has sent you.

So , we have Jesus claiming both 'Son of Man'amd YHWH.

The term, Son of man, is used by Jesus 80 times as a way to refer to himself.
-32 times in Matthew
-14 times in Mark
-26 times in Luke
-10 times in a qualitatively different way from the Synoptic Gospels in John

In all these texts Jesus is the speaker; no one ever addresses him as Son of man.

So where is the connection between Son of Man and YHWH?

John 8
"Jesus replied, 'If I glorify myself, my glory means nothing. My Father, whom you claim as your God, is the one who glorifies me.Though you do not know him, I know him. If I said I did not, I would be a liar like you, but I do know him and obey his word.Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad.

'You are not yet fifty years old,' they said to him, 'and you have seen Abraham!'.

'Very truly I tell you,' Jesus answered, 'before Abraham was born, I am!' At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds."

And Mark 14 where the Sanhedrin adresses Jesus

"Then the high priest stood up before them and asked Jesus, 'Are you not going to answer? What is this testimony that these men are bringing against you?' But Jesus remained silent and gave no answer.

Again the high priest asked him, 'Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?'

'I am,' said Jesus. 'And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven."

I clearly see that in the accounts of the Gospels Jesus claims to be God.Clearly , that's not even a matter of opinion.

I see that also in the second part of the NT.

Thanks. That helped solve a puzzle for me.

(later) It didn't solve any puzzle for me after all. One problem I see with saying that "Son of Man" means incarnation of God is that that would mean that Ezekiel is also an incarnation of God.

 

[Niatero]

I don't see anything wrong with people thinking about God any way they want to if they think it helps them understand better what He says in the scriptures. The problem I see is people thinking that they KNOW something about God, and that any other way of thinking is wrong.
Conversations with people with delusions of infallibility

 

[Niatero]

I asked ChatGPT 3.5 to write a short paper for me about what it means if the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are three parts of God like the mind, the body and the spirit or like the body, the spirit and the soul, of a person:

**Title: The Trinity and Dialogue in the Gospels**

The concept of the Trinity, central to Christian theology, has often been likened to the components of human nature, such as body, mind, and spirit, or body, soul, and spirit. However, such analogies can raise intriguing questions when applied to the interactions depicted in the Gospels. If the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are understood as distinct yet unified aspects of the divine, then certain dialogues between Jesus and God, or the Father, take on a peculiar significance. Consider the following examples:

1. **Matthew 27:46** - "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" If Jesus is one with the Father, why does he address God as if separate from himself in his moment of anguish on the cross?

2. **Matthew 26:39** - "My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from me; yet not what I want but what you want." Here, Jesus appears to seek guidance and express submission to the will of the Father, indicating a distinct relationship.

3. **John 17:1-5** - In the high priestly prayer, Jesus speaks to the Father, requesting glorification that he shared with the Father before the world existed. This dialogue suggests a pre-existing relationship between the two, distinct yet intimately connected.

4. **Luke 22:42** - "Father, if you are willing, remove this cup from me; yet, not my will but yours be done." Again, Jesus demonstrates submission to the will of the Father, implying a relationship of distinct entities.

5. **John 12:28** - "Father, glorify your name." This prayer, uttered by Jesus, indicates a communication between him and the Father, with Jesus directing the Father to glorify himself.

6. **Matthew 11:25-26** - "I thank you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and the intelligent and have revealed them to infants." Here, Jesus acknowledges the Father as the source of revelation, affirming a relational dynamic.

7. **John 11:41-42** - "Father, I thank you for having heard me. I knew that you always hear me, but I have said this for the sake of the crowd standing here, so that they may believe that you sent me." Jesus speaks to the Father, expressing gratitude and emphasizing the Father's role in sending him.

8. **Matthew 26:53** - "Do you think that I cannot appeal to my Father, and he will at once send me more than twelve legions of angels?" Jesus implies a separation between himself and the Father, suggesting a distinct entity to whom he can appeal.

9. **John 5:19** - "Very truly, I tell you, the Son can do nothing on his own, but only what he sees the Father doing; for whatever the Father does, the Son does likewise." This statement emphasizes the unity of will between the Father and the Son, yet maintains their distinctiveness.

10. **Matthew 6:9** - "Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name." In the Lord's Prayer, Jesus instructs his disciples to address God as "our Father," indicating a relational model that extends beyond himself.

These examples from the Gospels highlight the complexity of the relationship between Jesus and God, or the Father, within the framework of the Trinity. While the Trinity is often conceptualized as a unity of three persons, the dialogues depicted in scripture suggest a nuanced interaction between distinct entities, challenging simplistic analogies to human nature.

 

[Niatero]

Here's where I am today, in my thinking about the Trinity.

I'm thinking that God Himself is telling us that worshipping Jesus and the Holy Spirit is not violating His command against worshipping other gods, but He is not telling us how that can be true, because there isn't any way that we can possibly understand it, and we don't need to know. All we need to know is that it's okay to worship Jesus and the Holy Spirit. We might not be violating any commandment if we try to think of different ways that it could be true, but it is not okay with Him at all to denounce or disparage other people for thinking about it in other ways. He might like it even better if we just trust Him that worshipping Jesus and the Holy Spirit is not against His rules, and not speculate, argue and debate about it at all.

Here's what ChatGPT 3.5 says about it:

Your reflection aligns with the spirit of humility and reverence found in the Bible regarding the mystery of the Trinity. While the Bible affirms the worship of Jesus and the Holy Spirit as part of worshiping the one true God, it also acknowledges the limitations of human understanding when it comes to comprehending the nature of the Trinity.

Your point about God not explicitly revealing the intricacies of the Trinity because they are beyond human understanding resonates with biblical themes of God's transcendence and the finite nature of human knowledge. As you mentioned, God may not provide explicit explanations because they are beyond our capacity to fully grasp, and He may simply ask us to trust in His revelation and worship Him in faith.

Furthermore, your emphasis on not denouncing or disparaging others for their beliefs or interpretations is in line with biblical teachings on love, respect, and unity among believers. The Bible encourages humility, gentleness, and patience in our interactions with others, especially on matters where there may be differences of opinion or understanding (Ephesians 4:2-3).

Ultimately, your perspective emphasizes the importance of trust in God, humility in our approach to divine mysteries, and love in our interactions with others. These are indeed central themes in the Bible, reflecting a deep respect for the sovereignty and wisdom of God, as well as a sincere desire for unity and harmony among believers.

 

[Dimi95]

Thanks. That helped solve a puzzle for me.

(later) It didn't solve any puzzle for me after all. One problem I see with saying that "Son of Man" means incarnation of God is that that would mean that Ezekiel is also an incarnation of God.

Jesus always called Himself 'the Son of Man,' as in the only one there is. In using the definite article, Jesus contrasts Himself with other personalities in the Bible associated with the same term.Ezekiel is never called 'the son of man'; he is always just a 'son of man,' as in one among many.

In Daniel it says : 'one like a son of man,' that is, one who is apparently human, yet, this individual was 'coming with the clouds of heaven.'

 

[Niatero]

Here's where I am now in my thinking about the Trinity.

God counts worshipping Jesus as worshipping Him. That's all I need to know. I don't need to know how that's possible without the Son and the Father being the same person. It might not be wrong for people to try to find ways to explain it, but it seems wrong to me for anyone to think they KNOW the TRUTH about it, and even if they do, it seems wrong to me for them to be denouncing and scolding people who disagree with them.

 

[Dimi95]

Here's where I am now in my thinking about the Trinity.

God counts worshipping Jesus as worshipping Him. That's all I need to know. I don't need to know how that's possible without the Son and the Father being the same person.

Well ok , but the Son and the Father are different persons , as both are different titles.

Just out of curiousity , have you ever read the doctrine of the Trinity?

It might not be wrong for people to try to find ways to explain it, but it seems wrong to me for anyone to think they KNOW the TRUTH about it, and even if they do, it seems wrong to me for them to be denouncing and scolding people who disagree with them.

In Christian theology truth is considered a person in Christ as in John 14:6 Jesus says : 'I am the way and the truth and the life.'

Regardless , one should always seek for the truth alone.
We are just sharing ideas here , nothing personal.

Take care