Forest Keeper, here is your answer to the conundrum of how can the Father be the cause of existence of both the Son and the Spirit and for all three to be co-eternal. That is—assuming this anthropomorphic story describes how God really is.
I hope all here realize that the Trinatrian doctrine is no less anthropomorphic then say, the Old Testament God, or the mythology of Greek pagan gods, which is why I say that I don't know of any other God(s) except the man-made one(s).
What Church Trinitarians did was a fantastic feat of rationalization that is nothing short of sophism, imo. They basically "personalized" aspects of a supposed divine being, such as this being's words or speech, or discourse, the way we may "personalize" our words or hands as tools that express our thoughts and the 'spirit' contained therein.
We can equally rationalze that our words or hands are all the same "person" that we are, sharing the same essence or nature as out thoughts and minds, just as some may equate emotions with our heart (even though, I hope, no one here seriously believes that the heart is the seat of emotions!). It is easy to see how such word games then can lead to concepts such as that the brain "creates" and the words "make," while the heart "leads," and how such 'make up" of a man-made God is throroughylo anthropomorphic, that is— a God made in our image.
I suggest in all earnest studying in detail the development of the concept of the logos, its use by Plato and Neoplatonists, by Aristotle as opposed by the Sophists, by the Stoics from whom much of Hellenized Christianity of John's Gospel appears to come from. It was Stoics from whom such essential Eastern Christian concept of sin being essentially an error of judgment, missing the mark, or hamartia comes from.
Also important is being familiar with the works of the Alexandrian Jewish philosopher by the name of Philo, who had a tremendous influence in the struggling Christian thought in the latter part of the 1st century, etc. He is the first to compare the logos ontologically to the OT God by about 45 AD. He is the one who introduced the divine or uncreated energies concept which are so prominent, actually essential in the Eastern Christian dogma of salvation, officially codified as the Palamite Doctrine, the official theology of the Eastern Orthodox Church since the 14th century.
It's almost impossible to fully understand John's Gospel without the context of the Greek mind set of the time and where Christianity was. The divine Logos doctrine was born in the post-Jamnian Christianity by Hellenizing the Jewish sect, which was eventually thoroughly remade in the terminology and concepts of Greek pagan philosophy (it was after all much more familiar and palatable to the pagan Greeks than Judaism, and the concept of logos, ill defined as it was was, however was also very much present in the Greek thinking of the 1st century).
But, that's only for those who want to know. Those who are "comfortable in their belief," as boatbums says, will believe what they want to believe and there is, as she says, comfort in it. I am different. If I only sought comfort in belief, then I would still believe in a Tooth Fairy, I guess.
There is much to the wisdom of the old adage: Ignorance is bliss.
Since the whole Christian system of theology and Scripture is manmade (with the assistance of the Holy Spirit, we believe), does that make it any less true? I think of Christianity as a language, no less than mathematics is a language, describing God in our own poor fashion. If God exists, does our own failures and shortcomings in description of Him, negate Him?
There is much to the wisdom of the old adage: Ignorance is bliss.
Actually the saying is: if ignorance be bliss, 'tis folly to be wise...
I never said anything about being "comfortable" in belief, I said confidence. Sure, there are millions who are comfortable in whatever religious system they were brought up in. They never think to question anything because, for many, they really don't care that much to seek out the truth, it isn't that important to them or they are too intimidated to question. On the other hand, many people (me, for instance) have a deep, intuitive sense that what they have been told all their lives needs to be confirmed so that they are not just comfortable, but confident in what they believe. It's the confidence in knowing not only what but why we believe what we do.
Kosta-””Also important is being familiar with the works of the Alexandrian Jewish philosopher by the name of Philo, who had a tremendous influence in the struggling Christian thought in the latter part of the 1st century, etc. He is the first to compare the logos ontologically to the OT God by about 45 AD. He is the one who introduced the divine or uncreated energies concept which are so prominent, actually essential in the Eastern Christian dogma of salvation, officially codified as the Palamite Doctrine, the official theology of the Eastern Orthodox Church since the 14th century.””
I read some of this awhile back. What do you and Kolo think of these sources?
http://www.sas.upenn.edu/religious_studies/rak/courses/999/philo.htm
http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/rak//courses/999/RYLE1.htm
“”It’s almost impossible to fully understand John’s Gospel without the context of the Greek mind set of the time and where Christianity was.””
I agree and think we have to view all scripture with this mind set
Kosta-””Those who are “comfortable in their belief,” as boatbums says, will believe what they want to believe and there is, as she says, comfort in it. I am different. If I only sought comfort in belief, then I would still believe in a Tooth Fairy, I guess.””
I understand Christianity as something that makes us struggle against our own selfishness and the battle to let go of ourselves even if it means pain because if we are to imitate Christ we must embrace crosses in our lives not just for our own damage done by our sins,but be willing to suffer for those who have offended Christ in hope that God will have mercy on them as well .
In other words, this is true love for fellow man as I see it.
Christianity to me is not easy,it costs us something.