Trinitarian Monotheism?

[Ceridwen]

The visitation of the three angels is an early vision/experience of the revelation of the Holy Trinity; the angels are not the Godhead itself.

Agreed. Now that we've hammered that out, we can proceed with the regularly scheduled program... ...so what exactly does our religion say about God? Select passages from the Athanasian Creed:

"19. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every Person by himself to be God and Lord;

20. So are we forbidden by the catholic religion to say; There are three Gods or three Lords.

26. The whole three persons are coeternal, and coequal.

27. So that in all things, as aforesaid, the Unity in Trinity and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshipped.

28. He therefore that will be saved must thus think of the Trinity."

Athanasian Creed

More like Islamic Monotheism, or Pagan Polytheism? Thoughts?

 

[Thekla]

Yeah, I don't know about that. The Russian Orthodox have been much more comfortable depicting members of the Trinity in their ecclesiastical art. The western-style Trinity of an Old Man, a Young Man, and a Dove is much more common in Russian art than in the classical (and canonical) iconography of Byzantium.

I'm not familiar with Rublev's intentions, but it wouldn't surprise me if he, or his immediate viewers, conceptually slipped from typological allusion to representative depiction.

Yes, the style you mention is more typical in Russian iconography than the other styles. And the pre-eternal Logos was also referred to in the early Ecumenical Councils as the "Angel-Logos" (both by those who held the orthodox position and those who held the 'heretical position), so the terminology is quite old. However, never has the Father nor the Holy Spirit carried a similar title nor have been known to reveal themselves to mankind as angels. Thus, the appearance to Abraham recorded in the icon cannot be said to be of the Holy Trinity, but a revealed typos of the revelation of the Holy Trinity.

 

[Thekla]

Agreed. Now that we've hammered that out, we can proceed with the regularly scheduled program... ...so what exactly does our religion say about God? Select passages from the Athanasian Creed:

"19. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every Person by himself to be God and Lord;

20. So are we forbidden by the catholic religion to say; There are three Gods or three Lords.

26. The whole three persons are coeternal, and coequal.

27. So that in all things, as aforesaid, the Unity in Trinity and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshipped.

28. He therefore that will be saved must thus think of the Trinity."

Athanasian Creed

More like Islamic Monotheism, or Pagan Polytheism? Thoughts?

neither.

the persons of the Godhead are distinct but relational and one thus "God is love" as John states. This is not the case with the Olympians (or other gods that I know of). Further, in discussing this issue, a list was made of the abilities etc. of the persons of the Holy Trinity in Scripture, and were found to have the same attributes with the exception that the Father originates, the Son is begotten, and the Holy Spirit proceeds. This is again not the case with the Olympians, etc.

 

[~Anastasia~]

Agreed. Now that we've hammered that out, we can proceed with the regularly scheduled program... ...so what exactly does our religion say about God? Select passages from the Athanasian Creed:

"19. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every Person by himself to be God and Lord;

20. So are we forbidden by the catholic religion to say; There are three Gods or three Lords.

26. The whole three persons are coeternal, and coequal.

27. So that in all things, as aforesaid, the Unity in Trinity and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshipped.

28. He therefore that will be saved must thus think of the Trinity."

Athanasian Creed

More like Islamic Monotheism, or Pagan Polytheism? Thoughts?

What is the point of trying to compare?

The Holy Trinity has in common with Islamic monotheism the understanding that the is One God - not three gods.

The Holy Trinity has in common with pagan polytheism that there are multiple Persons involved (which imo is weaker).

But that isn't saying much either way?

 

[Thekla]

What is the point of trying to compare?

The Holy Trinity has in common with Islamic monotheism the understanding that the is One God - not three gods.

The Holy Trinity has in common with pagan polytheism that there are multiple Persons involved (which imo is weaker).

But that isn't saying much either way?

In the icon, note that none of the angels is presenting only himself, but the subjects each gaze at another. In the New Testament - Christ points to the Father and the Holy Spirit, the Father to Christ and the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit to Christ and the Father. None are entirely self-referential, and are fully inter-relational and thus (again) demonstrate the movement of love etc. This is no way true of the Olympians, nor of the pagan gods in general, who typically engaged in intrigue aimed at one another (power plays, competing, etc.) using human lives as victims in the field of self-aggrandizing operations.

 

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

What is the point of trying to compare?

The Holy Trinity has in common with Islamic monotheism the understanding that the is One God - not three gods.

The Holy Trinity has in common with pagan polytheism that there are multiple Persons involved (which imo is weaker).

But that isn't saying much either way?

Darn tootin'.

 

[Ceridwen]

The Holy Trinity has in common with Islamic monotheism the understanding that the is One God - not three gods. The Holy Trinity has in common with pagan polytheism that there are multiple Persons involved (which imo is weaker). But that isn't saying much either way?

I think that is saying a lot, actually! I think this is the first opinion shared on this thread that actually answers the question posed. Your opinion is that Christian trinitarianism is more like Islamic monotheism than Pagan polytheism. That opinion is worthwhile.

However, I would like to ask, you say "Multiple Persons Involved" -- why might this be a small thing for you when compare the three forms of theology? Perhaps the interactive and relational nature of the Trinity ought to be more emphasized in our worship if we as Christians find Islam more familiar than paganism.

 

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

I think that is saying a lot, actually! I think this is the first opinion shared on this thread that actually answers the question posed. Your opinion is that Christian trinitarianism is more like Islamic monotheism than Pagan polytheism. That opinion is worthwhile.

However, I would like to ask, you say "Multiple Persons Involved" -- why might this be a small thing for you when compare the three forms of theology? Perhaps the interactive and relational nature of the Trinity ought to be more emphasized in our worship if we as Christians find Islam more familiar than paganism.

In order to emphasize our distinction from them? Interesting thought if I'm reading you correctly.

And hey, I liked my Zeus answer.

 

[Ceridwen]

The kind of polytheism we typically think of has separate gods who squabble with each other.

Squabbling with each other is actually proof of agreement amongst the gods rather than disagreement: "Quarrelling means trying to show that the other man is in the wrong. And there would be no sense in trying to do that unless you and he had some sort of agreement as to what Right and Wrong are." C. S. Lewis "Mere Christianity."

In their squabbles, the gods are distinct but relational. In their quarrels they acknowledge right and wrong. The politics of the Greek pantheon may have been rough and tumble rather than consensual, but is the outcome any different than the outcome of consensus? The Christian Trinity may have a unity of will, but isn't this unity a form of politics too, albeit a placid form of politics?

In the Gorgias, Socrates says: "In my opinion the unjust or doer of unjust actions is miserable in any case,-more miserable, however, if he be not punished and does not meet with retribution, and less miserable if he be punished and meets with retribution at the hands of gods and men." Would Socrates be wrong to say that "The Pantheon is Love?"

 

[All Souls]

You talk of Greek gods, but where does this fit in with Greek philosophy?

 

[Ceridwen]

You talk of Greek gods, but where does this fit in with Greek philosophy?

Socrates was a simple polytheist who believed in the Greek olympian pantheon, and therefore can serve as a model of Greek paganism rather than Greek philosophy. Western philosophy may have been sparked by him, but he was no philosopher. His last words were directing a sacrifice to one of the gods. ("Crito, we owe a rooster to Asclepius. Please, don't forget to pay the debt.") He denied having any knowledge or wisdom beyond the common person. ("I having no knowledge, don't think I have any." Apology.)

 

[All Souls]

What of Plato, and Plotinus?

 

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

Socrates was a simple polytheist who believed in the Greek olympian pantheon, and therefore can serve as a model of Greek paganism rather than Greek philosophy. Western philosophy may have been sparked by him, but he was no philosopher. His last words were directing a sacrifice to one of the gods. ("Crito, we owe a rooster to Asclepius. Please, don't forget to pay the debt.") He denied having any knowledge or wisdom beyond the common person. ("I having no knowledge, don't think I have any." Apology.)

All of that said, Socrates was a brilliant intellectual who certainly was no representative of the Homeric and Hesiodic conception of the gods or the cultus of the polis.

 

[~Anastasia~]

I think that is saying a lot, actually! I think this is the first opinion shared on this thread that actually answers the question posed. Your opinion is that Christian trinitarianism is more like Islamic monotheism than Pagan polytheism. That opinion is worthwhile.

However, I would like to ask, you say "Multiple Persons Involved" -- why might this be a small thing for you when compare the three forms of theology? Perhaps the interactive and relational nature of the Trinity ought to be more emphasized in our worship if we as Christians find Islam more familiar than paganism.

What I meant when I said it was weaker is that while the Holy Trinity shares with pantheism the idea that multiple Persons are involved, the interaction between those Persons is SO very different between the Christian God and the pagan gods that even that point of similarity is more like a difference - and so a very weak similarity, IMO.

I did not mean to imply any small thing in the relational aspect of the Holy Trinity. You asked specifically for points of similarity, and IMO that point was weak - that was what I meant.

 

[hedrick]

Even the pagan polytheists Socrates and Euthyphro believed that there was concord among the gods about the most important things. There were differences, but not about the fundamentals of right and wrong: "all the gods would be agreed as to the propriety of punishing a murderer: there would be no difference of opinion about that." According to them, the Olympic Pantheon have a different will with respect to minutia.

OK, so they weren't always squabbling. My point was that the pagan pantheon, was (except in the most sophisticated versions) a number of entities with separate wills who acted individually, though one hopes cooperatively.

I think this is different from the Trinity, which functions as a single actor, with one will. By "one will" I don't mean that the Trinity always agrees, but that there is literally only one will. I believe there is also just one mind.

Similarly, in the Incarnation, there are two wills and two actions, with a separate human will (which however always agrees with and works together with the divine will). Denying this is the monothelite heresy.

To me the standard terminology of "three persons" can be misleading in this context, since we normally think of a person as what I'd call a separate actor, someone with his own will who takes his own actions. But that's not true of the three persons in the Trinity.

 

[Thekla]

Squabbling with each other is actually proof of agreement amongst the gods rather than disagreement: "Quarrelling means trying to show that the other man is in the wrong. And there would be no sense in trying to do that unless you and he had some sort of agreement as to what Right and Wrong are." C. S. Lewis "Mere Christianity."

In their squabbles, the gods are distinct but relational. In their quarrels they acknowledge right and wrong. The politics of the Greek pantheon may have been rough and tumble rather than consensual, but is the outcome any different than the outcome of consensus? The Christian Trinity may have a unity of will, but isn't this unity a form of politics too, albeit a placid form of politics?

In the Gorgias, Socrates says: "In my opinion the unjust or doer of unjust actions is miserable in any case,-more miserable, however, if he be not punished and does not meet with retribution, and less miserable if he be punished and meets with retribution at the hands of gods and men." Would Socrates be wrong to say that "The Pantheon is Love?"

Love is serial cheating on your wife ?

the Olympians were pretty solidly human in their foibles (writ large) ...

Love = politics ?

I suppose so, if the Olympians were the apex of love ...

 

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

Love is serial cheating on your wife ?

the Olympians were pretty solidly human in their foibles (writ large) ...

Love = politics ?

I suppose so, if the Olympians were the apex of love ...

Yeah, seriously. Zeus' recounting of his various conquests in the Iliad is a particularly good (and hilarious, taken as human satire of the divine) example of how the gods in no superior moral position to humans.

 

[Thekla]

Socrates was a simple polytheist who believed in the Greek olympian pantheon, and therefore can serve as a model of Greek paganism rather than Greek philosophy. Western philosophy may have been sparked by him, but he was no philosopher. His last words were directing a sacrifice to one of the gods. ("Crito, we owe a rooster to Asclepius. Please, don't forget to pay the debt.") He denied having any knowledge or wisdom beyond the common person. ("I having no knowledge, don't think I have any." Apology.)

Homer's Gods, Plato's Gods

 

[Thekla]

The place of God in the Platonic system has been the subject of long controversy among scholars. Too often the tendency has been to regard the idea of God as an undigested concept in Plato's mind, an afterthought, or, at best, a symbolic expression for the idea of the good. Yet, a study of the later dialogues, notably the Philebus, shows that God plays a necessary role in the Platonic metaphysics, and one distinct from that of the ideas. In the earlier dialogues God is mentioned rather incidentally; and a student who takes up the later dialogues after he has formed his views upon the basis of the earlier ones, is liable to interpret all references to God as implied references to the ideas. But it is not a question of how far one can go in interpreting one conception in terms of another, but of what Plato himself believed; and an unprejudiced reading of the later dialogues suggests that God, in Plato's mind, stands only for Himself, and is not a name for anything else. A question of this sort cannot be settled by a mechanical comparison of words and passages; Plato is at no point explicit on the connection of God with the good; one has to steep oneself in Plato and get, if possible, the pattern, the 'feel' of his mind. Clearly, to Plato religion is a genuine personal experience; in his references to God there is a suggestion at once of reverence and of intimacy; God seems to have been for him not an abstract conception but an immediate intuition. To reduce God to the ideas is to fail to do justice to the religious nature of Plato as distinct from his detached contemplative attitude. We will say then that for Plato God is coordinate with the Ideas, and even distinct from them, in so far as ultimates may be said to be distinct from one another. God is the energy of creation; the ideas, the pattern of creation; matter, the stuff of creation. God finds a chaos and transforms it into a cosmos.
Why did God make the world?

"Let me tell you, then, why the creator of the world generated and created this universe. He was good, and no goodness can ever have any jealousy of anything. And being free from jealousy, he desired that all things should be as like himself as possible. This is the true beginning or creation and of the world, which we shall do well in receiving from the testimony of wise men: God desired that all things should be good and nothing bad as far as this could be accomplished."


- Raphael Demos, introduction to Plato Selections
Plato
​

 

[Ceridwen]

In certain renditions of Greek polytheism, the gods are benign and wise (at least after they have argued, negotiated, deliberated and compromised). They do not ever curse, but always bless, even though their punishment may be painful. ("From the gods who sit in grandeur grace comes somehow violent." Aeschylus, Hymn to Zeus).

There is no room for old and false stories of the gods that picture them being vicious or cruel. Humans must disbelieve certain stories about the gods. "We shall have to repudiate a large part of those fables which are now in vogue; and especially, of what I call the greater fables, -- the stories which Hesiod and Homer tell us. In these stories there is a fault which deserves the gravest condemnation; namely when an author gives a bad representation of gods and heroes. We must condemn such a poet, as we should condemn a painter, whose pictures bear no resemblance to the objects which he tries to imitate." Republic.

You may say that Socrates was a reformer, and indeed he was. But Socrates was no less a polytheistic pagan for being a reformer than Martin Luther was a Trinitarian Christian for the same.

But polytheism is dead and gone... The time to pick fights with paganism is over -- the victory is won. There is a new threat to Christianity, and I feel that rather than plant a flag in defense of the Three Persons, Christians are capitulating and wanting to prove that we are as monotheistic as them. If we are not proud of Three Persons, if we do not want to make a defense of it, if we are embarrassed by the icon of the Trinity, if we want to set distance between us and only paganism, if we want our Godhead pictured only as an abstraction, then there will be no reason for our Children to set Christianity aside for the barren alternative.