Posted on 05/24/2016 6:49:46 AM PDT by Salvation
Many of you know that I write the Question and Answer column for Our Sunday Visitor. Given the celebration of Trinity Sunday this past Sunday, I thought I might reproduce here on the blog a question/answer regarding the Trinity. It is a fairly common question; perhaps you have it, too. Remember that my answers in the column are required to be brief.
We read in a recent Sunday Gospel (May 1, 2016) that Jesus says that the Father is greater than He (Jn 14:28). Since we are all taught that each Divine Person of the Blessed Trinity fully possesses the nature of God, equally to be adored and glorified, what did Jesus mean by such a statement?” – Dick Smith, Carrolton, TX.
Theologically, Jesus means that the Father is the eternal source in the Trinity. All three persons of the Trinity are co-eternal, co-equal, and equally divine. But the Father is the Principium Deitatis (the Source in the Deity).
Hence, Jesus proceeds from the Father from all eternity. He is eternally begotten of the Father. In effect, Jesus is saying, “I delight that the Father is the eternal principle or source of my being, even though I have no origin in time.”
Devotionally, Jesus is saying that He always does what pleases His Father. Jesus loves His Father; He’s crazy about Him. He is always talking about Him and pointing to Him. By calling the Father greater, He says (in effect), “I look to my Father for everything. I do what I see Him doing (Jn 5:19) and what I know pleases Him (Jn 5:30). His will and mine are one. What I will to do proceeds from Him. I do what I know accords with His will.”
So although the members of the Trinity are all equal in dignity, there are processions in the Trinity, such that the Father is the source, the Son eternally proceeds from Him (Jn 8:42), and the Holy Spirit eternally proceeds from the Father and the Son as from one principal (Jn 15:26).
St Thomas speaks poetically of the Trinity as follows:
Genitori, Genitoque … Procedenti ab utroque … compar sit laudautio
(To the One Who Begets, and to the Begotton One, and to the One who proceeds from them both, be equal praise.)
The Athanasian Creed says the following regarding these processions:
The Father is made by none, neither created nor begotten.
The Son is of the Father alone, neither made nor created, but begotten.
The Holy Spirit is of the Father and of the Son, not made, nor created, nor begotten, but he proceeds from them.
So although equal, processions do have an order. The Father is “greater” (as source), but is equal in dignity to Son and Holy Spirit.
Please consider subscribing to Our Sunday Visitor. I also write for the National Catholic Register. These are two great publications that deserve your support.
And while I am pointing out my “extra-blogical” activities, I also ask you to consider coming to the Holy Land in March of 2017 with me and Patrick Coffin of Catholic Answers.
John 3:13 No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man who is in heaven.[
______________________________________________________
I don’t imagine there is anyone here reading this thread that does not agree with that statement. The same will be true for all of us, we came from Heaven and will hopefully return there some day.
The Word, or Son, is eternally begotten. The terms are not mutually exclusive.
You are not entitled to believe that the terms "eternal" and "begotten" are mutually exclusive, because you are not the arbiter of what the words mean.
The Holy Spirit was also seen descending in the form of a dove. So the Water, steam and ice were all in different places at the same time, it wasn’t the same water in all three places.
Can your body and soul be in two different places at the same time???
_________________________________________________________
My body and soul cannot be in two places at the same time until I am dead. When we are resurrected our body and soul will be forever reunited and again will not be able to be in two places at the same time.
Our Spirit is in the Body of Jesus, in heaven instantly as we trust Jesus as Savior. The Holy Spirit takes the place of our Spirit to be our friend and teacher/comforter. Our soul is left here to be sanctified and our bodies will die to be replaced with an eternal glorified body. The fight for our soul should be our main goal on earth, but The Bible tells us He will finish the work He started either way. We will receive a new body upon entering the heavenly realm. There is much discussion about whether or not our bodies will be taken or left in the Rapture, but IMHO, our empty bodies will be left on the ground to be replaced with the glorified one leaving those left behind thinking there was mass death here on Earth.
There is but one God in multiple forms. God appeared to us as a burning bush, a cloud, pillar of fire, Melchizedek, the "Angel" left with Abraham at Sodom and Gomorrah, The "Angel" with Gideon, ect. "The Angel of the Lord" spoken of many times was always capitalized and in various subsequent verses referred to as "Lord". It was in fact God in angelic form. You can always tell God from an angel, as the angel always told the seer not to worship him. Jesus was God in the fleshly form. God is Spirit, but can be any form He chooses. Our final form will be to live in Heaven with God as the angels do now.
Is Satan an angel, an evil spirit, or a snake? In the final days, we will see a Beast, a false prophet, and an evil spirit as the counterfeit of the Holy Triune. It's all evil, and connected, however. Explaining Spiritual things to the flesh has always proven difficult. There have always been splits in the Body over some of these things. If a Muslim were to capture you, you should be able to explain that you worship one God, but if you insist on having 3, you will lose your head. John 17 makes it perfectly clear that Jesus and the Father are ONE. There is but one God, but in 3 forms. Please don't say we have 3 Gods. Just as we have ice, water, and steam, it's all H2O. If you ask a chemist what the symbol for ice is, it will still be H2O.
You are not entitled to believe that the terms “eternal” and “begotten” are mutually exclusive, because you are not the arbiter of what the words mean.
_______________________________________________________
The definition of eternal:
“without beginning or end; lasting forever; always existing”
The definition of begotten:
“Something is begotten when it’s been generated by procreation — in other words, it’s been fathered”
Christ referred to God many times as His Father. You can’t have “no beginning” if you have a Father. Christ says He is the Alpha and the Omega, or from the Alpha to the Omega, the beginning and the end. With God The Father there is no beginning, certainly at least in time, yet for Christ there is and He says so in His own words.
So, while I can believe anything I want that does not make it so, but the dictionary makes the terms mutually exclusive.
You did not consult a theological dictionary. You can’t resolve a theological question with a standard desk dictionary.
There is but one God in multiple forms.
___________________________________________________
Let me say, everything I say are my beliefs. Everyone is entitled to their own beliefs, our beliefs don’t make it so and I realize that my beliefs don’t “make it so” but, I work hard to figure it out and follow Christ to the best of my abilities. I’ve been doing this for a very long time, I first started trying to figure out why the Holy Bible didn’t agree with the preacher in very early 60’s. With age often comes wisdom, I hope my understanding is true, I believe my understand is true but would never begrudge someone else their belief but I might be willing to point out what I think is obvious error.
And that is where the argument started. While it is true that John said that Christ and God The Father are one, He did not say they were the same. It is always dangerous to prove something with a snippet of Scripture. John also said in 17:21 that the Apostles must be one with Christ just as He (Jesus) is One with God The Father. So right away your argument using that verse is totally blown away. Later Christ says that all the Saints must be one with Him(Christ) just at He (Christ) is one with The Father.
There is only one Queen Elizabeth of England on earth right now but her son, the idiot, I mean Charles is also Royal. There is only one “God”, God The Father, Elohim. Christ Jesus is His Son and also Divine. While I realize many people pray to God The Father, to Jesus Christ and even to The Holy Ghost and some pray to the Saints, I personally believe that we are instructed in the Bible to pray to God the Eternal Father and do it in the name of Jesus Christ.
Perhaps he was reinforcing the first of the Ten Commandments: “I am the Lord your God. You shall have no other gods before me.”
Simple answer: the teaching is wrong. Of course that's a real "no go" zone right there. People get really worked up defending the trinity doctrine. After all, it's been around so long, who could possibly question settled doctrine.
Matthew 9:1-7
1 And he entered into a ship, and passed over, and came into his own city.
2 And, behold, they brought to him a man sick of the palsy, lying on a bed: and Jesus seeing their faith said unto the sick of the palsy; Son, be of good cheer; thy sins be forgiven thee.
3 And, behold, certain of the scribes said within themselves, This man blasphemeth.
4 And Jesus knowing their thoughts said, Wherefore think ye evil in your hearts?
5 For whether is easier, to say, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and walk?
6 But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (then saith he to the sick of the palsy) Arise, take up thy bed, and go unto thine house.
7 And he arose, and departed to his house.
"son of man" = human being ב"א (בֵּן-אדם) ben adam, the first entry on this dictionary (abbreviations) page.
Not that complicated. See all the billions of words and quoted texts used to build the trinity sandcastle doctrine? Not one stone will be left upon another. High tide incoming. Time really is quite short.
A certain human could come right along and say to the sick, demoralized, and broken-hearted, "your sins are forgiven", and yet the power behind that statement would surely anger a lot of folks. Those scribes (ha, the very people writing down all the words of Scripture over and over and over) were none too pleased with the "obvious" blasphemer in their midst.
History repeats.
In case the above is falsely used by someone as evidence of omniscience...
Example: Who, when relating a seemingly unbelievable report to another, and then seeing the unspoken reaction (facial expression, body language) -- the raised eyebrows, the look of scorn or suspicion -- wouldn't then be inclined to remark, "Okay, I know what you're thinking, but..."
It would be pretty nutty for the person who doubts to say, "You know my thoughts? Oh, so you must be God then."
Yet much Biblical interpretation depends on nutty disconnects like that. Confusion takes hold and then experts keep it going with, "It's an incomprehensible mystery so you just have to take it on faith". Well why all the repeated teachings pounded in.
Kind of like swallowing maintenance meds [that do God knows what in the long-run] instead of making lifestyle changes that would rectify a lot of damage and prevent further destruction. Many are unwilling to make a change to fresh wholesome food and a little exercise.
Constantine did no such thing. Theodosius the Great made Catholicism the state religion of Rome, but that was 50 years after Constantine was dead and gone.
to not sign on to it in writing meant that you would be excommunicated and possibly executed.
The idea of heresy as a capital crime started in medieval Europe. The first millennium heretics, like Arius or Nestorius, weren't executed. At worst they could be banished to a remote part of the empire.
There were church leaders who went into hiding after the 385 council rather than be executed.
Name them.
The Non-Trinitarians did not as a whole think Christ any less divine than God The Father
Wrong. The Arians sang a song that included the line "there was a time when He was not," which clearly indicates that they viewed the Son as only a created being less than God.
they only believed they were not the same person
Trinitarianism says that the Father and the Son are not the same person.
that they could be three places at one time.
??
You have bad theology because you believe in a lot of made-up false "history" that never happened.
Trinitarians do not believe that God is "three separate beings".
Think in the sacrificial realm.
There is no true, God pleasing sacrifice without flesh and blood. OT times avoided eating the flesh and drinking the blood of to YAHWEH. Christ turned that on its head; now we eat the flesh and drink the blood of His true sacrifice.
While Christ was “in the flesh”, He was headed for a sacrifice that pleased His Father. His Father, God the Father, was pre-emminent while Jesus was in the flesh.
Accordingly, Jesus taught that “He who sent me” was above Him according to His flesh but equal according to His
Godhead (Athanasian Creed).
Yup.
I don’t see how people that believe in the Trinity (3 separate people)
Squares that with
“Thou shall have no other Gods before me”.
With respect, I do not find an answer in your reply.
No need to follow up.
Thank you for your reply.
Blessings.
Please recognize that in your citation of 1Corinthians, Paul is waxing eschatological. At that time, Christ had ascended, filling the Earth with His being.
Looking back at the Gospels, Christ was neither crucified nor risen nor ascended. Being “of the flesh” He was necessarily less than the Father but, as it concerns His Godhead, he was co-equal.
In perspective with the Athanasian Creed, Genesis 1 and +John 1 explain it beautifully.
My two cents on your post:
>>>” I believe the terms eternal and begotten are mutually exclusive. “
Eternal in this theological sense means outside time, time does not apply. So neither does ‘before’ or ‘after’ .
>>>”I personally find these statements illogical.”
Transcendent God means God transcends physical senses and reason/logic. There is a difference between transcending logic and contradicting logic. If we take ‘eternal’ as defined above, then logic is not violated - even if we cannot use logic to fully comprehend it.
God must transcend logic or else (He) is not God; we would have a philosophy not a religion.
The Most Holy Trinity is eternal; however, God chose to become incarnate, in time. These are not mutually exclusive. Nor or they illogical. As a weak analogy of outside time and incarnate: the laws of physics exist without any matter to ‘incarnate’ in; when matter exists, the laws ‘incarnate’ in them.
Thanks for your post.
I think you make good point worth notice:
>>>>Too many people (watch this thread do it .. ) can’t help but add; “In other words ... “ .... words
Words are abstractions, always less than the thing described; how much more so for God? God fully describable in words would not be be God.
The purpose of the councils was to combat heresy, more to describe what was in error in saying God is; not intended to fully capture God in words, but to draw boundaries beyond which error lay.
Dissenting bishops indeed went into hiding after the first Nicean council but Constantine relented and forgave them and didn't enforce the edicts of Nicea 325. Their excommunications and executions did not take place until the 385 council. After 385 you either renounced your beliefs in doctrines other than Nicean 325 Trinitarianism or you died. After the 385 council there were no more opportunities for forgiveness, if you were caught teaching the unapproved doctrine you were accused of soccery, excommunicated and then executed.
When Maximus came to be Emperor he harshly enforced the council edicts of 385 although not with the Pope's blessing and Priscillia was the first Bishop to be executed, his followers continued with his teachings for another 250 years or so in Spain.
The bishop of Aix-en-Provence, Lazarus had to run for his life after the Pope tried to have him silenced. The bishop of Arles, Herod had the same problem. There are many, many others. I'm not going to make a list of many names of those who were excommunicated, banished or even executed, you can do some simple searches and find those names.
Prior to 385 the “Arian” theology as you call it was openly practiced and promoted by a large percentage of the Western Church. Recall that The trinitarian view held today came from Greece, then considered The East. After 385 this could no longer be done and the Popes came down hard on not just Arians but anyone who did not tow the official trinitarian line.
You may disagree all you want but this is well known history documented in many places. I don't care what your priest told you but these are the facts.
History can be ugly, the people of the times when history happened however thought they had good reasons for their actions or would not have done the things they did.
I'm not condemning the actions of these leaders any more than I would condemn George Washington for owning slaves, that was what they did then and thought right.
Today as a society, as lay people we have far more access to facts than people had in the past, we don't share the same excuses. I refuse to be forced to believe something I cannot make sense of just because a Roman emperor who was not even a Christian at the time in 325 was made to believe it. I suspect I am much more learned than Constantine or Athanasius who started all this so I will make up my own mind thank you. I will use what we have left of the scriptures after the councils of 325 and 385 destroyed much of what was considered scripture at the time because they did not support the trinitarian doctrine of the new day.
>>>While it is true that John said that Christ and God The Father are one, He did not say they were the same.
Would it be accurate to say that you do not believe Christ is God; you don’t believe in the divinity of Christ?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.