reasonable answer to question about Holy Trinity (Eastern Orthodox)

ArmyMatt said:

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

Click to expand...

Oops! Missed that. . .sorry.

Clare73 said:

Oops! Missed that. . .sorry.

Click to expand...

no worries!

Clare73 said:

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

Click to expand...

Right. I've had a long day mentally, and didn't do a decent job explaining things in this thread. So ignore my responses.

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...

The closest answer you're likely to find to question number one is the Holy Spirit, but we don't normally speak of the idea in those terms. In the gospel of the Hebrews, a non-canonical book, it has Jesus saying:

Even so did my mother, the Holy Spirit, take me by one of my hairs and carry me away on to the great mountain Tabor.

St. Jerome offered something of an apology for it in pointing out that the Holy Spirit is spoken of in feminine terms. I do not know if anything in that is heresy. But it is not something we hold as orthodox.

The answer to your second question is Mary, the Theotokas. She gave birth to Christ in his human form. The "But...you said God doesn't change..." is a non-sequitur. That Mary gave birth to Jesus is entirely unrelated to the pre-incarnate Word.

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...

Where you talking to a Muslim? Because it sounds like a Muslim argument

HTacianas said:

The closest answer you're likely to find to question number one is the Holy Spirit, but we don't normally speak of the idea in those terms. In the gospel of the Hebrews, a non-canonical book, it has Jesus saying:

Even so did my mother, the Holy Spirit, take me by one of my hairs and carry me away on to the great mountain Tabor.

St. Jerome offered something of an apology for it in pointing out that the Holy Spirit is spoken of in feminine terms. I do not know if anything in that is heresy. But it is not something we hold as orthodox.

Click to expand...

Could be from the Jewish understanding of Shekhinah (Divine Dwelling or Presence) as having feminine aspect...it is interesting that Maimonides regarded it as a distinct entity while Naḥmanides considered it the essence of God as manifested in a distinct form.

HTacianas said:

The closest answer you're likely to find to question number one is the Holy Spirit, but we don't normally speak of the idea in those terms. In the gospel of the Hebrews, a non-canonical book, it has Jesus saying:

Even so did my mother, the Holy Spirit, take me by one of my hairs and carry me away on to the great mountain Tabor.

St. Jerome offered something of an apology for it in pointing out that the Holy Spirit is spoken of in feminine terms. I do not know if anything in that is heresy. But it is not something we hold as orthodox.

The answer to your second question is Mary, the Theotokas. She gave birth to Christ in his human form. The "But...you said God doesn't change..." is a non-sequitur. That Mary gave birth to Jesus is entirely unrelated to the pre-incarnate Word.

Click to expand...

Interestingly, the Holy Spirit as the Mother of us believers is a common theme in Syriac literature, to the point that even some Orthodox fathers such as St Aphrahat make frequent use of the title. This is likely related to the fact that Spirit is a feminine word in Semitic languages, and also as Yeshua said the pre-existing Jewish tradition of seeing the Shekinah as feminine. However St Aphrahat also highlights maternal aspects in the Holy Spirit's character specifically- most notably that it/she is responsible for our spiritual birth at baptism and watches over and protects us afterwards.

In this sense I suppose one could try to justify the above passage by pointing to the Spirit's role in Christ's Incarnation (as the one through whom Christ became incarnate in Mary's womb) and baptism (though this was a demonstration of Christ's relationship with Father and Sprit, rather than the formation of that relationship as it is with us)- so maybe in these respects the Holy Spirit could be said to be the mother of the Incarnate Christ. But I think either way it can't relate to Christ's pre-incarnate relationship with the Spirit, unless the gospel of the Hebrews is really heretical, as that would upset the whole Trinitarian order. Of course as you say we don't believe in this gospel anyway, but its interesting to think about.

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...

The two natures of God the Son answers this. The Divine nature of the Son doesn't change. The human nature is added to His Personhood without changing Him in regards to His Divinity.

First we have to explain historical reasons as to why we say the Father was always the Father to the eternal God the Son.
Tertullian arguing to a bunch of gnostics said that before the incarnation there was no Father or Son. The two persons were God and His Logos, likewise before the fall there was no God as Judge.

Unfortunately this phrase was seized upon by the Arians to claim: "there was a time the Son was not", a phrase condemned as heresy.

The reason why we have the Father and Son but not a mother are many. We have already discussed the incarnation through the Theotokos. The earliest apostolic father Aristides wrote an apologetic in 125a.d. where he indirectly implies the incarnation may be tied to a correcting the abomination of the sons of God with women in Genesis 6:2-4 :

....He is called the Son of the Most High God it is said that God came down from heaven. He assumed flesh and clothed Himself with it from from a Hebrew virgin.. And the Son of God lived in a daughter of man.

Since scripture uses terms such as the "only begotten", one assumes a Father. Justin Martyr says Jesus being first begotten of all creation can only mean he is a Son to the Begetter.
In 130 a.d. the Apostolic Letter to Diognetus explained:
...God did not send to man any ruler, servant, or angel...Instead He sent the very Creator and fashioner.. As a king sends his son who is also a king, so God sent Him, who is also God...


...