The Source of the Trinity

[LinkH]

We humans came into reality a short time ago.... God the Father has never experienced being created... If E = mc2 then we can divide and conclude that...

Mass (m) = Energy (E/c2)

Mass cannot be created or destroyed, it merely changes forms throughout the eternities. And these are the properties of God the Father, he cannot be created or destroyed. I have often thought on the following verse...

You don't believe the creation is eternal do you? The Bible says God created the heavens and the earth. The traditional Christian belief is in creation ex nihilo.

 

[LinkH]

The position of Augustine and Aquinas was to insist that the ultimate 'alpha point' or origin for the Holy Spirit is the Father, even when it may be said there are places in Scripture where it is reasonable to conclude in the immediate instance that the Holy Spirit has proceeded from the Son.

Any other position here seems to undo the Monarchical Position of the Father in which is seen the essence of the Unity of the Most Holy Trinity.

If I drink wine from the bottle, I may say that the wine has proceeded from the bottle. If I drink wine from the glass, I may say that the wine has proceeded from the glass, though I must also acknowledge that in the first instance the wine proceeded from the bottle.

Do you think the eastern and western versions of the creed interpret the concept of 'proceeding' to refer to different things?

 

[Constantine the Sinner]

But the question I have in the back of my mind is where and when did God reveal these details about Himself? Can we definitively answer these questions from something revealed through the prophets, through Christ, or through the apostles? Does the Bible say anything about it?

For those who take a definitive dogmatic stand, would you say that we should we consider the theological opinions of those who participated in ecumenical councils to be prophetic revelation like we do the Bible? If so, which council(s) and which participants?

The Bible says the Son is begotten of the Father, and the Spirit proceeds out of the Father.

Ecumenical Councils were never intended to be some new revelation, they are intended to confront people spreading lies as Christ's teachings, and to set the record straight.

 

[LinkH]

That statement is also contradictory with the statement He is, which usually is used to indicate God has always existed as He is.

Here is the definition for source from one online dictionary:
a : a generative force : cause
b (1) : a point of origin or procurement : beginning (2) : one that initiates : author; also : prototype, model (3) : one that supplies information

So is it 'orthodox' to use definition a) but not b)? It's difficult to talk about this subject because some words do imply origin at a certain point in time, or can. So we have to add adjectives or adverbs as in 'eternally generated.'

 

[LinkH]

We don't have an official position, since it was written in Latin, and no one in the East could read that.

Immigration must have been extremely limited. Maybe they could have taught one guy to read it back then.

 

[Constantine the Sinner]

Do you think the eastern and western versions of the creed interpret the concept of 'proceeding' to refer to different things?

Not really, since the RCC has held the stance since the Middle Ages that the Filioque means the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son as one principle, a term that is quite clear in Latin.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/principium

 

[Constantine the Sinner]

Immigration must have been extremely limited. Maybe they could have taught one guy to read it back then.

A handful of Eastern theologians bothered to learn Latin. Most just relied on translations. There wouldn't really be a translation of this, since Saint Athanasius wrote in Greek, and therefore the Greeks weren't looking for Latin works of his to translate into Greek.

 

[LinkH]

Not really, since the RCC has held the stance since the Middle Ages that the Filioque means the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son as one principle, a term that is quite clear in Latin.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/principium

If the Greeks had

The Bible says the Son is begotten of the Father, and the Spirit proceeds out of the Father.

Ecumenical Councils were never intended to be some new revelation, they are intended to confront people spreading lies as Christ's teachings, and to set the record straight.

There seems to be a lot more 'detail' in the Bible about the Son in relation to the Father. As far as the Bible goes, what scriptures point to the Spirit proceeding exclusively from the Father in the sense we are discussing? Maybe we could discuss them.

Someone from the RCC Anglican, or certain groups on the Protestant side could present scriptures they use for the Filioque if anyone it up to it. The Bible refers to the 'Spirit of Christ'.

 

[Constantine the Sinner]

If the Greeks had


There seems to be a lot more 'detail' in the Bible about the Son in relation to the Father. As far as the Bible goes, what scriptures point to the Spirit proceeding exclusively from the Father in the sense we are discussing? Maybe we could discuss them.

Someone from the RCC Anglican, or certain groups on the Protestant side could present scriptures they use for the Filioque if anyone it up to it. The Bible refers to the 'Spirit of Christ'.

Christ says the Spirit proceeds (in Greeks it means "come out of") from the Father in John 15:26. In John 14:26, Christ describes the Father as the sole origin for the sending of the Holy Spirit, although the sending is done in Christ's name (as in, through him). In John 14:16, Christ describes the Spirit as ultimately being given by the Father.

 

[rockytopva]

You don't believe the creation is eternal do you? The Bible says God created the heavens and the earth. The traditional Christian belief is in creation ex nihilo.

The m (mass) = E/c2 (plasma) is eternal. Who knows the many times the mass has disassociated into plasma and re-associated into mass as the Father has willed it? The mass of the universe will soon disassociate into plasma one more time...

But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. -2 Peter 3:10

And he will use that plasma and do something else with it. I want to be there when he re-creates a new heaven and earth!

 

[Constantine the Sinner]

The m (mass) = E/c2 (plasma) is eternal. Who knows the many times the mass has disassociated into plasma and re-associated into mass as the Father has willed it? The mass of the universe will soon disassociate into plasma one more time...

But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. -2 Peter 3:10

And he will use that plasma and do something else with it. I want to be there when he re-creates a new heaven and earth!

You don't think God created plasma?

 

[aus22]

The Trinty has been defined by the Roman Catholic Church as the Son being equal to the Father. I understand the Eastern Church has another definition where the Son came from the Father only at the Incanation

 

[Constantine the Sinner]

The Trinty has been defined by the Roman Catholic Church as the Son being equal to the Father. I understand the Eastern Church has another definition where the Son came from the Father only at the Incanation

No, the Orthodox Church says the Son is eternally begotten of the Father.

 

[Philip_B]

Do you think the eastern and western versions of the creed interpret the concept of 'proceeding' to refer to different things?

I think that is very possible.

 

[Constantine the Sinner]

I think that is very possible.

Not if we take it to mean what it is officially intended to mean by both parties.

 

[LinkH]

One may be referring to 'Source', and the other to through Whom the Spirit is believed to proceed.

 

[Constantine the Sinner]

One may be referring to 'Source', and the other to through Whom the Spirit is believed to proceed.

No, since the official RCC explanation of the Filioque, which existed since the Middle Ages, says it means the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son as one principle, which, in Latin, unequivocally means source or basis for existence in this context.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/principium

 

[Philip_B]

Not if we take it to mean what it is officially intended to mean by both parties.

I fear to tread here, however I suspect that the intent of the filioque in the west was to some extent political and part of the campaign of the Carolingian Dynasty against the weight of the Byzantine Empire. I believe that theologically they had no intent to change the meaning of the creed.

However as the filioque poorly expresses the notion of procession, the opportunity for it to be misunderstood was present, and despite the warnings of the Holy Fathers from the East, the West with some purpose carried on, and as the did the meaning became somewhat distorted.

The matter of sustained control is part of the matter, because if the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father there is a wider and wilder embrace for those moments when the Spirit might be ascertained, however if we confine the procession to the Son, and presumably his body the Church, then the Spirit can be discerned only within the prescribed parameters. This I think then leads to the error (in my mind at least) outside the Church there is no salvation.

The spirit moved on the face of the water at the beginning what God was already creating the heavens and the earth. And I believe the Holy Spirit of God moved in this ancient land (Australia) long before any white man stepped ashore to proclaim the Sovereignty of England and the Gospel of Jesus Christ, with men in chains!

The Latins I believe, when they are speaking correctly speak of procession as point of departure and the Greeks I believe, when they are speaking correctly speak of procession as the point of origin. You can not read Augustine and Aquinas and think that they did not get this. They clearly did.

It is possible they the true origin of the filioque is some poor overworked (or maybe a little hungover) copy monk on the Iberian peninsular copied the phrase from the line below and just basically did what we would call a typo. And somehow it escaped, and then someone defended it when challenged, and somehow the implausible was somehow accepted. The like a drop of water forming on the mountainside it rolled along until it got its own life at the Synod of Frankfurt.

I think that in there end there was little intent, certainly little theological intent, and the whole escapade has way too much politics in it to be holy. I think we in the west need to give it (the filioque clause in the Nicene Creed) up, less law more love, and more looking to God and all that he does in our world.

We don't hold God in the Church, we find God in Church in order that we might recognise him in the world.

 

[Constantine the Sinner]

I fear to tread here, however I suspect that the intent of the filioque in the west was to some extent political and part of the campaign of the Carolingian Dynasty against the weight of the Byzantine Empire. I believe that theologically they had no intent to change the meaning of the creed.

Whatever their intent, they did theologically change the meaning of the creed, and made it official in the Second Council of Lyon where they gave a dogmatic explanation of what the Filioque meant.

 

[Constantine the Sinner]

The Latins I believe, when they are speaking correctly speak of procession as point of departure

The thing is, "principle", in Latin, means origin, and there is no possible way to get around that.