Curious- How do you understand The trinity?

[Tangible]

Did you read down to the last sentence in my post?

Oops, I guess not. I just saw a red flag and jumped!

 

[Tangible]

In fact, I regard it as an unnecessary distraction to one who sincerely seeks God.

As long as you make sure you are indeed seeking the true God. Also, it can be problematic when your faith becomes primarily about you and your seeking, and not that the true God has sought out and found you, saved you and preserves you in the one true faith.

 

[JackRT]

As long as you make sure you are indeed seeking the true God. Also, it can be problematic when your faith becomes primarily about you and your seeking, and not that the true God has sought out and found you, saved you and preserves you in the one true faith.

And that of course is another interpretation.

 

[Khalliqa]

I can well understand your confusion. I am a very well educated person and even I find it very problematic. You must understand that it is a concept of a third and fourth century Greek speaking gentile world. The classical understanding (the Athanasian Creed) is incomprehensible if you don't understand Greek philosophy and only slightly easier if you do.

Some time ago I discovered that in the original formulation of the trinity, the word in Greek which we traditionally have interpreted to mean "persons", as in "three persons in one God" is actually the same word used to designate the mask worn by actors in Greco-Roman theater. We cannot call this a "person" but we can certainly call it a "persona". This insight has put a totally new spin on the entire concept for me. We finite creatures cannot possibly hope to describe our transcendent God, but we can speak of the modes or roles or personae that assist our understanding. God as creator/father, God as spirit/sustainer, and the glimpse of God we obtain in the life and teaching of Jesus. In other words, trinity is not a description of God but is, rather, a description of the human experience of God in the language of fourth century Greek speaking Christianity. We are not limited to just these three. Any persona that promotes our understanding of and our relationship to God is completely acceptable. God could be mother as well as father. God could be Wisdom / Sophia / Word / Allah /
Krishna / Manitou. God's possibilities are endless. These are merely our human images of God. God is, as always, ONE.

This, of course, is the modalist heresy but I am content with it.

I can respect this..

 

[ViaCrucis]

Is there a single understanding by which all, the majority or most denominations agree is "correct"?

Yes, all mainstream Christian churches are in agreement over the doctrine of the Trinity; though there may be many Christians (including clergy) who have been improperly taught.

In the West (Catholic and Protestant) about as official as one can get is the Athanasian Creed. It is an official creed of the Catholic, Lutheran, Anglican, Presbyterian, and other denominations.

Here is the relevant portion of the Athanasian Creed concerning the Trinity:

"And the catholic faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; Neither confounding the Persons; nor dividing the Essence. For there is one Person of the Father; another of the Son; and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is all one; the Glory equal, the Majesty coeternal. Such as the Father is; such is the Son; and such is the Holy Ghost. The Father uncreated; the Son uncreated; and the Holy Ghost uncreated. The Father unlimited; the Son unlimited; and the Holy Ghost unlimited. The Father eternal; the Son eternal; and the Holy Ghost eternal. And yet they are not three eternals; but one eternal. As also there are not three uncreated; nor three infinites, but one uncreated; and one infinite. So likewise the Father is Almighty; the Son Almighty; and the Holy Ghost Almighty. And yet they are not three Almighties; but one Almighty. So the Father is God; the Son is God; and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet they are not three Gods; but one God. So likewise the Father is Lord; the Son Lord; and the Holy Ghost Lord. And yet not three Lords; but one Lord. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity; to acknowledge every Person by himself to be God and Lord; So are we forbidden by the catholic religion; to say, There are three Gods, or three Lords. The Father is made of none; neither created, nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone; not made, nor created; but begotten. The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son; neither made, nor created, nor begotten; but proceeding. So there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; one Holy Ghost, not three Holy Ghosts. And in this Trinity none is before, or after another; none is greater, or less than another. But the whole three Persons are coeternal, and coequal. So that in all things, as aforesaid; the Unity in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity, is to be worshipped."

The Eastern Church's (Eastern and Oriental Orthodox) do not use this creed in their liturgies or confession, but there is nothing* here that would objectionable to the Eastern Church's.

*the one exception might be the following statement: "The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son" This comes down to a longstanding dispute over what is known as the Filioque Controversy. Which is a deeply complicated issue both historically and theologically. But if we avoid this one niggling issue then there is universal consent and agreement among all orthodox, mainstream Christian churches regardless of denomination--the only ones who would disagree would be heterodox or heretical groups like Mormons or Jehovah's Witnesses.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Khalliqa]

Yes, all mainstream Christian churches are in agreement over the doctrine of the Trinity; though there may be many Christians (including clergy) who have been improperly taught.

In the West (Catholic and Protestant) about as official as one can get is the Athanasian Creed. It is an official creed of the Catholic, Lutheran, Anglican, Presbyterian, and other denominations.

Here is the relevant portion of the Athanasian Creed concerning the Trinity:

"And the catholic faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; Neither confounding the Persons; nor dividing the Essence. For there is one Person of the Father; another of the Son; and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is all one; the Glory equal, the Majesty coeternal. Such as the Father is; such is the Son; and such is the Holy Ghost. The Father uncreated; the Son uncreated; and the Holy Ghost uncreated. The Father unlimited; the Son unlimited; and the Holy Ghost unlimited. The Father eternal; the Son eternal; and the Holy Ghost eternal. And yet they are not three eternals; but one eternal. As also there are not three uncreated; nor three infinites, but one uncreated; and one infinite. So likewise the Father is Almighty; the Son Almighty; and the Holy Ghost Almighty. And yet they are not three Almighties; but one Almighty. So the Father is God; the Son is God; and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet they are not three Gods; but one God. So likewise the Father is Lord; the Son Lord; and the Holy Ghost Lord. And yet not three Lords; but one Lord. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity; to acknowledge every Person by himself to be God and Lord; So are we forbidden by the catholic religion; to say, There are three Gods, or three Lords. The Father is made of none; neither created, nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone; not made, nor created; but begotten. The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son; neither made, nor created, nor begotten; but proceeding. So there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; one Holy Ghost, not three Holy Ghosts. And in this Trinity none is before, or after another; none is greater, or less than another. But the whole three Persons are coeternal, and coequal. So that in all things, as aforesaid; the Unity in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity, is to be worshipped."

The Eastern Church's (Eastern and Oriental Orthodox) do not use this creed in their liturgies or confession, but there is nothing* here that would objectionable to the Eastern Church's.

*the one exception might be the following statement: "The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son" This comes down to a longstanding dispute over what is known as the Filioque Controversy. Which is a deeply complicated issue both historically and theologically. But if we avoid this one niggling issue then there is universal consent and agreement among all orthodox, mainstream Christian churches regardless of denomination--the only ones who would disagree would be heterodox or heretical groups like Mormons or Jehovah's Witnesses.

-CryptoLutheran

Thank you. I actually tried to read and understand all of this. You are saying that essentially there is not a separation? That the trinity is representing one God? Then why the distinctions in the first place? If there is one why not say god? Why say Holy Ghost, father and son? The distinction is there for what purpose? And if there is a distinction then wouldn't that be modalism?

Also, somewhat to the left.. What about Judaism? How does their rejection of Jesus as anything beyond a prophet fit into this? Is this thought rejected? Is their view similar to what I think you were trying to say above?

 

[ViaCrucis]

Thank you. I actually tried to read and understand all of this. You are saying that essentially there is not a separation? That the trinity is representing one God? Then why the distinctions in the first place? If there is one why not say god? Why say Holy Ghost, father and son? The distinction is there for what purpose? And if there is a distinction then wouldn't that be modalism?

Modalism says there are no distinctions, there is no distinction between Father, Son, and Spirit; these are just faces God uses to relate to man.

The Trinity says there is a real distinction, the Father is Someone, the Son is Someone, and the Holy Spirit is Someone: there are three, real, actual Someones. God being God has always been about the Father, the Son, and the Spirit in relationship to one another.

There is distinction without separation; the Father, Son, and Spirit aren't separate and can never be separate. But they are distinct, they are distinct Someones.

Also, somewhat to the left.. What about Judaism? How does their rejection of Jesus as anything beyond a prophet fit into this? Is this thought rejected? Is their view similar to what I think you were trying to say above?

Judaism doesn't even believe Jesus was a prophet. Jesus is entirely irrelevant to Judaism. Judaism isn't Trinitarian since the doctrine of the Trinity depends on a belief in Jesus.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Khalliqa]

Modalism says there are no distinctions, there is no distinction between Father, Son, and Spirit; these are just faces God uses to relate to man.

The Trinity says there is a real distinction, the Father is Someone, the Son is Someone, and the Holy Spirit is Someone: there are three, real, actual Someones. God being God has always been about the Father, the Son, and the Spirit in relationship to one another.

There is distinction without separation; the Father, Son, and Spirit aren't separate and can never be separate. But they are distinct, they are distinct Someones.



Judaism doesn't even believe Jesus was a prophet. Jesus is entirely irrelevant to Judaism. Judaism isn't Trinitarian since the doctrine of the Trinity depends on a belief in Jesus.

-CryptoLutheran

Okay. That was very helpful. :-D Thanks for the correction re: modalism and Judaism. For some reason I've been under the impression that Judaism looked at Jesus as a prophet.

 

[ViaCrucis]

The following is an icon depicting the three visitors which Abraham received as guests as recorded in Genesis ch. 18

"The LORD (YHWH) appeared to Abraham by the oaks of Mamre, as he sat at the entrance of his tent in the heat of the day. He looked up and saw three men standing near him. When he saw them, he ran from the tent entrance to meet them, and bowed down to the ground. He said, “My lord, if I find favor with you, do not pass by your servant. Let a little water be brought, and wash your feet, and rest yourselves under the tree. Let me bring a little bread, that you may refresh yourselves, and after that you may pass on—since you have come to your servant.” So they said, “Do as you have said.” And Abraham hastened into the tent to Sarah, and said, “Make ready quickly three measures of choice flour, knead it, and make cakes.” Abraham ran to the herd, and took a calf, tender and good, and gave it to the servant, who hastened to prepare it. Then he took curds and milk and the calf that he had prepared, and set it before them; and he stood by them under the tree while they ate."

The icon has frequently been used and understood as a symbol of the Trinity. There are three seated around a table in communion. Just as the Trinity is Three who are in relationship together in the unity of their Being; one God three Someones. The Father with the Son and the Spirit; the Son with the Father and the Spirit, the Spirit with the Father and the Son. Perfect communion and unity in the Divine Being.

What the Father is, the Son and the Spirit is also because the Son and the Spirit are what the Father is: God, the one God. Not three gods, but one.

The Father is God.
The Son is God.
The Holy Spirit is God.

The one and only God, without division, separation: one, unitary, whole.

The Father is not the Son or the Spirit, He's the Father.
The Son is not the Father or the Spirit, He's the Son.
The Spirit is not the Father or the Son, He's the Spirit.

Thus there are Three who are One, One who is Three.
Trinity in Unity and Unity in Trinity, neither confusing the Persons nor dividing the Substance.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[ViaCrucis]

Okay. That was very helpful. :-D Thanks for the correction re: modalism and Judaism. For some reason I've been under the impression that Judaism looked at Jesus as a prophet.

That's a common misconception I've found. But Judaism has nothing to say when it comes to Jesus, Jesus is to Judaism what Buddha or Zoroaster are to Christianity--not relevant as far as the religion is concerned.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[FireDragon76]

The implications of the Trinity comes through in traditional Christian theology. If a person has a typical American attitude of practicality and pragmatism, it might not be obvious why this is important.

I disagree that God is completely transcendent and incomprehensible. Christians believe that Jesus Christ reveals something about God's nature. The doctrine of the Trinity flows out from that revelation we see in the Scriptures. It doesn't limit God, but it does mean we can relate to God, similar to a Father-Son relationship, through Jesus Christ.

 

[JackRT]

Judaism doesn't even believe Jesus was a prophet. Jesus is entirely irrelevant to Judaism.

JESUS of NAZARETH: HIS LIFE, TIMES AND TEACHING ( 1925 ) by Joseph Klausner:

"In his ethical code there is a sublimity, distinctiveness and originality in form unparalleled in any other Hebrew ethical code; neither is there any parallel to the remarkable art of his parables. The shrewdness and sharpness of his proverbs and his forcible epigrams serve, in an exceptional degree, to make ethical ideas a popular possession. If ever the day should come and this ethical code be stripped of it's wrappings of miracle and mysticism, the Book of the Ethics of Jesus will be one of the choicest treasures in the literature of Israel for all time."

 

[ViaCrucis]

JESUS of NAZARETH: HIS LIFE, TIMES AND TEACHING ( 1925 ) by Joseph Klausner:

"In his ethical code there is a sublimity, distinctiveness and originality in form unparalleled in any other Hebrew ethical code; neither is there any parallel to the remarkable art of his parables. The shrewdness and sharpness of his proverbs and his forcible epigrams serve, in an exceptional degree, to make ethical ideas a popular possession. If ever the day should come and this ethical code be stripped of it's wrappings of miracle and mysticism, the Book of the Ethics of Jesus will be one of the choicest treasures in the literature of Israel for all time."

I'm not sure how that changes what I said. The opinions of a single person doesn't change the fact that Judaism regards Jesus as little more than, at best, a footnote in history. As a Christian I can have a high regard for the ethical teachings of Siddhartha, that doesn't mean he, as Buddha, has any place in my religion beyond being an historical individual with some good ethical ideas that I can agree with because they also conform to what I already hold to be true as a Christian. Jesus, as a Jewish teacher, taught within the context of Jewish law, which is why so much of what He said echoes, for example, Hillel the Elder; or that when He speaks on the matter of divorce He actually departs from the House of Hillel and seems to agree more with the House of Shammai which was far more strict on divorce than the House of Hillel which permitted a man to leave his wife over something as minor as a burned meal. Herein Jesus, agreeing more with Shammai than Hillel. Jesus is a Jew and fully steeped in the teachings and traditions of Judaism, and so His teachings frequently flow from that context; to that end Jews probably wouldn't take much issue when and where Jesus says things that are in agreement with already established and well accepted norms of Jewish orthopraxy. But that would still make Jesus nothing more than an interesting figure in the long history of Judaism who, as a claimed messiah was a failed, false one who, like so many other Jews of His time, ended up being put to death by the Romans. At best a non violent Judah of Galilee or Bar Kochba--a failure with, perhaps, some interesting ideas.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[JoeP222w]

Wondering how do Christians of varying denominations approach or not approach the concept of the trinity?

As the Bible teaches:

Within the one Being that is God, there exists eternally three coequal and coeternal persons, namely, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit [James R. White, The Forgotten Trinity, p. 26]

How do you rectify Jesus and God and the Holy Spirit being "one" or signs of the other or manifestations of one?

The Father is fully God. The Father is not the Son. The Father is not the Holy Spirit.
Jesus is fully God. Jesus is the Son. The Son is not the Father. The Son is not the Holy Spirit.
The Holy Spirit is fully God. The Holy Spirit is not the Father. The Holy Spirit is not the Son.

3 Persons in one Being. Not 3 gods. Not 3 "manifestations" (which leads to Modalism). The Father is not 1/3 God. The Son is not 1/3 God. The Holy Spirit is not 1/3 God. Each person of the Trinity is fully God.

 

[Khalliqa]

What is the difference between 3 persons in one being and 3 manifestations?

 

[Waggles]

Wondering how do Christians of varying denominations approach or not approach the concept of the trinity?

I am from an Australian Pentecostal church - The Revival Fellowship.

15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.
16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;
17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it sees him not, neither knows him: but ye know him; for he dwells with you, and shall be in you.
20 At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.
23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.
John 14:
But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceeds from the Father, he shall testify of me: John 15:26
And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high. Luke 24:49

My understanding of the Trinity is that God the Father and God the Son are co-existent and yet the Son is subject to the Father.
Jesus is the first-born of creation. Before the angels I presume this is referring to.
The Alpha and the Omega - the beginning of the purpose of salvation and the end (judgment?) of salvation.
The scriptures declare that the physical universe, and our world, and all living organic life was made through Jesus.
Jesus is often referred to as Wisdom in Proverbs and chapter 8 describes his presence in the creation.

Continued on next thread posting.

 

[Waggles]

Jesus is active in the creation of our physical universe of 4 major easily experienced dimensions -
length x breadth x height x time
Jesus comes into our world and interacts with humans, for example: Adam & Eve, Abraham, Moses, Daniel.

God the Father is outside of our universe and Jesus is the intermediary between Earth and Heaven.
Angels have a role in this as well.

When God the Father intercedes in our space-time world, it is not by Himself coming down into the world as
Jesus seems able to readily do; but rather His operative power working in the world is the Holy Spirit.
Hence, the many scriptural references about sending my Spirit upon people or into your hearts, etc...
by my Spirit I will accomplish ... ...
The Holy Spirit is the operative power of God in Heaven doing work within people (believers mostly) and in
creation, healings, miracles and the like.

Anyway, in the end believers need to believe the full gospel preached by Jesus and the Apostles and be willing to obey.
Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins,
and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.
Acts 2:38-39
When a person believes the gospel and is born new by water and the Spirit, then one is filled with the indwelling Holy Spirit. When a believer is baptized in the Holy Spirit, they also have the Father and the Son dwelling within as well.
For through him [Jesus] we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.
Ephesians 2:18

 

[Waggles]

 

[zippy2006]

What is the difference between 3 persons in one being and 3 manifestations?

It means that there are three distinct persons, not three different manifestations of one and the same person. That is to say, it is not just one and the same reality manifesting itself in different ways. There are actually three different persons.

ViaCrucis' posts are very good, and represent mainstream Christianity.

 

[Tangible]

Jesus is the first-born of creation.

This is problematic. Sounds like Arianism.