reasonable answer to question about Holy Trinity (Eastern Orthodox)

archer75 said:

What would you say, or what do you think is a good answer to the following, assuming that the person who asks these questions is a mainline "faith only," scripture-only Christian asking in entirely good faith?

"So, God the Father is the pre-eternal 'source'

Click to expand...

No pre-eternal source of God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.
It's one God--all eternal.

of God the Son and God the Holy Spirit, but He is never without them. There was never a time when the Son and the Holy Spirit didn't exist."

"But...who is the mother of God the Son??"

Click to expand...

God the Son Incarnate has two natures--human and divine<-------------- here, need answer here
in one person.
Mary is the mother of the human physical nature of God the Son Incarnate

There is no mother of the divine nature of God the Son Incarnate.
The divine God is Spirit. Spirits do not have mothers, because they do not have physical bodies which need mothers to generate them.

[talk about how the Theotokos is truly the mother of God because Jesus Christ is God

Click to expand...

Mary is the mother of Jesus' human nature and physical body.
She is not the mother of his divinity.

"But...that all happened in time, right?"

"Yes, it's part of real history..."

"But...you said God doesn't change...but before the Incarnation He didn't have a mother and then did? What does that mean?"

Click to expand...

The Son of God Incarnate has a mother of his humanity.<----------------- here as well
She is not the mother of his divinity.
That the eternal God the Son took on a human body did not "change" him.
Still the same God the Son. . .in a human body.

archer75 said:

What would you say, or what do you think is a good answer to the following, assuming that the person who asks these questions is a mainline "faith only," scripture-only Christian asking in entirely good faith?

"So, God the Father is the pre-eternal 'source' of God the Son and God the Holy Spirit, but He is never without them. There was never a time when the Son and the Holy Spirit didn't exist."

"But...who is the mother of God the Son??" <------ here, need answer here

[talk about how the Theotokos is truly the mother of God because Jesus Christ is God]

"But...that all happened in time, right?"

"Yes, it's part of real history..."

"But...you said God doesn't change...but before the Incarnation He didn't have a mother and then did? What does that mean?" <----------------- here as well

Click to expand...

There is a difference between incarnation - and procreation

.

archer75 said:

What would you say, or what do you think is a good answer to the following, assuming that the person who asks these questions is a mainline "faith only," scripture-only Christian asking in entirely good faith?

"So, God the Father is the pre-eternal 'source' of God the Son and God the Holy Spirit, but He is never without them. There was never a time when the Son and the Holy Spirit didn't exist."

"But...who is the mother of God the Son??" <------ here, need answer here

[talk about how the Theotokos is truly the mother of God because Jesus Christ is God]

"But...that all happened in time, right?"

"Yes, it's part of real history..."

"But...you said God doesn't change...but before the Incarnation He didn't have a mother and then did? What does that mean?" <----------------- here as well

Click to expand...

His divinity didn't change

Phronema said:

The Theotokos is the Mother to Him in His flesh as a man who was known as Jesus of Nazareth. Christ was created without a "Mother" otherwise as the Son, and has existed without beginning along with the Holy Spirit in a way that is incomprehensible to us. The Holy Trinity is outside of time, and space as we know it. I believe the incomprehensible portion is considered a mystery, and left at that.

Click to expand...

Shouldn't we be careful not to overly separate the human Jesus and divine Christ? The natures indeed remain distinct, but together they form a single Divine-Human person.

So it is not accurate to say that the Theotokos is not the Mother of Christ the Son, since Christ the Son is the same person as Jesus of Nazareth- Mary's son. Thus we should affirm that Christ/the Son/the Logos does indeed have a Mother, adding "according to his flesh/humanity" to clarify we mean that she is His Mother by virtue of His Incarnation and not pre-eternally.

Nick T said:

Shouldn't we be careful not to overly separate the human Jesus and divine Christ? The natures indeed remain distinct, but together they form a single Divine-Human person.

So it is not accurate to say that the Theotokos is not the Mother of Christ the Son, since Christ the Son is the same person as Jesus of Nazareth- Mary's son. Thus we should affirm that Christ/the Son/the Logos does indeed have a Mother, adding "according to his flesh/humanity" to clarify we mean that she is His Mother by virtue of His Incarnation and not pre-eternally.

Click to expand...

I deleted my post since it's confusing to at least one person, and seemingly inaccurate in the way that I've explained it.

archer75 said:

"But...who is the mother of God the Son??" <------ here, need answer here

[talk about how the Theotokos is truly the mother of God because Jesus Christ is God]

Click to expand...

Sounds like you were correct here- the Theotokos is indeed the Mother of God the Son.

archer75 said:

"But...you said God doesn't change...but before the Incarnation He didn't have a mother and then did? What does that mean?" <----------------- here as well

Click to expand...

I would ask why he believes that God the Son being born (and thereby having a mother) entails a change in his divine nature- i can't really see how it does so.

Clare73 said:

No pre-eternal source of God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.

Click to expand...

in Orthodoxy, we often call God pre-eternal because He is so beyond our understanding of timelessness.

so the pre-eternal Father is the pre-eternal source of the pre-eternal Son and the pre-eternal Spirit.

Phronema said:

I see what you're saying, but I made that distinction because the Theotokos wasn't present as far as we know in eternity when God, Christ, and the Holy Spirit came to be. You've explained it better.

I deleted my post since it's confusing to at least one person, and seemingly inaccurate in the way that I've explained it.

Click to expand...

FWIW I think you were on the right track with "in His flesh"- I find this stuff tricky myself!

Nick T said:

FWIW I think you were on the right track with "in His flesh"- I find this stuff tricky myself!

Click to expand...

I appreciate it. I do understand that even remotely disregarding the hypostatic union is potentially problematic which is I why I deleted the post, but since the hypostatic union is presupposed, and dogma I just assume that it goes without saying. Due to the nature of the question I made the distinction I guess.

Nonetheless you definitely explained it better than I did.

ArmyMatt said:

in Orthodoxy, we often call God pre-eternal because He is so beyond our understanding of timelessness.

so the pre-eternal Father is the pre-eternal source of the pre-eternal Son and the pre-eternal Spirit.

Click to expand...

Pre-eternal is a contradiction of terms, for eternal is without beginning or end.

BobRyan said:

There is a difference between incarnation - and procreation

Click to expand...

The incarnation was procreation.

Clare73 said:

The incarnation was procreation.

Click to expand...

The reason they are not the same word - is that they are not the same thing.

One deals with an existing being - changing into human form while still being the same person as before. The other is about a person coming into existence for the first time.

I don't know of any denomination that denies this fact.

Phronema said:

I see what you're saying, but I made that distinction because the Theotokos wasn't present as far as we know in eternity when God, Christ, and the Holy Spirit came to be.

Click to expand...

They didn't "come to be," they always were--without beginning or end.
That is the meaning of "eternal." Look it up.

You've explained it better.

I deleted my post since it's confusing to at least one person, and seemingly inaccurate in the way that I've explained it.

Click to expand...

BobRyan said:

The reason they are not the same word - is that they are not the same thing.

One deals with an existing being - changing into human form while still being the same person as before.
The other is about a person coming into existence for the first time.

Click to expand...

God didn't change his form, he had no form, he added human form to his being--incarnation
in the body of Jesus of Nazareth--procreation.
They are inexorably linked in Jesus of Nazareth, they cannot be separated, any more than the two natures in his one person can be separated.

I don't know of any denomination that denies this fact.

Click to expand...

I think the issue is your understanding of it, not the facts of it.

Clare73 said:

God didn't change his form, he had no form

Click to expand...

I don't find "God had no form" in scripture.

rather I find "let us make man in OUR OWN Image" in his likeness in Genesis 1. I don't know all the details of it - but I do know that "God has no form" is not in scripture.

The point remains that a pre-existing person simply takes on human form - in the definition of incarnation.

In procreation a new person comes into being.

Hence my point that we need to pay attention to the fact that this is about incarnation - not procreation

BobRyan said:

I don't find "God had no form" in scripture.

Click to expand...

Spirits have no form. God is Spirit.

rather I find "let us make man in OUR OWN Image" in his likeness in Genesis 1. I don't know all the details of it - but I do know that "God has no form" is not in scripture.

Click to expand...

In God's image is in righteousness, holiness and knowledge of him (Ephesians 4:24;
Colossians 3:10), not about physical form.

The point remains that a pre-existing person simply takes on human form - in the definition of incarnation.

In procreation a new person comes into being.

Click to expand...

He also took on human nature.

The one person of Jesus Christ had two natures, human and divine. . .that is a new person, and the only one in existence.

Hence my point that we need to pay attention to the fact that
this is about incarnation - not procreation

Click to expand...

It is about both, they are inexorably linked, they cannot be separated.

Clare73 said:

Pre-eternal is a contradiction of terms, for eternal is without beginning or end.

Click to expand...

I know what eternal means, my point is that there is a reason we use that term. this thread asked the Orthodox understanding.