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.
Maybe you want to consider asking one of your instructors, if this is too difficult for you.
Many posts back I gave you ‘an explanation’ which you didn’t receive, so now you pretend there has not been an answer. Typical
It did not address the issue. Slinging a verse out of context like ealgeone and others have done is not an explanation. If you want to sling a verse, then be prepared to explain in detail how it answers the question.
Applying human criteria to God is NEVER going to work.
God explained it in the simplest terms we have within our comprehension to give us some kind of an idea of Himself.
It's impossible for the finite, human, mortal mind to comprehend the infinite, immortal God.
Only God can understand God. nothing else in all creation will ever be able to do that, even for all eternity.
If your acceptance of Jesus is going to be based on your criteria of proof that nobody can ever meet, then give it up now and go out and eat, drink, and be merry.
God's given you the best He has, His Son, Jesus, who died for your sins that if, you turn to Him, He will save you.
But He's not going to dance to your tune. If you really want a reason to reject Him, you've set up enough to give you what you think is an excuse.
But it's not going to hold water when you stand before Him and try to hold Him responsible for where you end up.
Um, which post was the “it”? You can’t even be honest enough to cite a correct post to which your spittle is addressed! LOL, typical
Then feel free to repost. Your latest attempt was 1 Cor 2:14, which I POSTED IN IT’S ENTIRETY.
Your post 102 "I don’t understand what you are asking, of course I believe in the Father, The Son and The Holy Spirit. I simply don’t believe they are the same being." All parts of God are the same being and here is how to understand that truth.
If you are a two spatial dimension being (living on a plane of only length and width, no height), could you sense a ball or a pencil? ... Only where that three spatial object intersects you tow spatial variable plane.
Philip said to Jesus, 'Just show us the Father Almighty and that will be enough that we know you are Messiah.'
Jesus answered Philip, 'Have I been so long with you and you and you still do not understand that all you can see of The Father is what you see in me? I am in the father and the Father is in Me. If you have seen me you have seen the Father, for all that you can sense of the father is where He intersects your limits of spacetime. And Philip, that is Me.'
Jesus IS God, intersecting the limits of our sensing. When He appears to take belivers to The Father's House, we will be less limited and we will see Him as He IS. [1John3]
Tell me where this addresses the chronology issue. Are you and any of your parents the same age?
And if you8 are so enamoured of verga’s posts, try reading his post #116, this thread, which explains why your agitpoopery of trying to put before and after on the relationship of God The Father and God The Son is not ‘flying’ on this forum. Even in error, verga is far more savvy than you ...
My grandfather cautioned me about wrestling with a pig, but people like you are a needed reminder of the mud that persists in this world; enjoy your faux victimhood.
Your 'teacher(s) must have left the Thomist works off of your extremely limited curricula.
First off No one said a word about communism, second The issue is not Verga it is the Trinity, none of you agreed with his post so I want to hear your alternatives.
And since you denied Verga’s post, let’s hear your alternative.
Hey what ever you want to do in the privacy of your own home, is your business. But remember just because something is legal in West Virginia, doesn't make it so for the rest of the county.
You are the one claiming some sort of graduate level knowledge.
Where I come from graduate level means that you have enough competency to teach the material. So TEACH: Chronologically children are younger than their parents. How can the Son be eternal if he is younger than the Father? Are any of you the same age as any of your parents?
Maybe you want to consider asking one of your instructors, if this is too difficult for you.
You continue to want to argue from an earthly perspective.
From an earthly perspective Jesus was around 33 yrs old when He was crucificed. However, that does not negate the statement John makes in 1:1-2 nor Jesus' statement in John 8:58 regarding His Heavenly existense.
1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was in the beginning with God. John 1:1-2
John's use of the Greek in John 1:1-2 makes this clear.
The verb "was" is in the indicative mood, imperfect tense, third person singular.
The indicative is the mood of assertion, or presentation of certainty. Wallace notes this is a declarative indicative which is routinely used to present an assertion as a non-contingent (or unqualified) statement. (Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, pp448-449)
Wallace notes the imperfect tense captures the action much like a motion picture, protraying the action as it unfolds. With reference to time the imperfect is almost always past.(Wallace, p541)
John's opening to his Gospel is stating that the Son was. John is also stating God also was. If the Logos was in the beginning and was with God, God has to be in the beginning also.
There is no suggestion by John of "when the second being instantly became sentient" or "when God came into existence" in his opening statement as verga stated in his #160 post.
Indeed, verga's post and your question flies counter to all that John says in 1:1-2 and the Christian understanding of the eternal existence of God.
John is operating under the understanding that God and the Logos have always existed.
Recall, John is moved by the Holy Spirit to pen these words. The Holy Spirit has also existed.
John's wisdom is coming from above and not below.
56“Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad.” 57So the Jews said to Him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?” 58Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am.” 59Therefore they picked up stones to throw at Him, but Jesus hid Himself and went out of the temple. John 8:56-59
The Pharisees clearly understood what Jesus was saying in His conversation with them. He was equating Himself with the great I AM. He is saying He has always existed.
He was there with Abraham.
He was there before Abraham.
He has always been before whatever your mind can conceive of as time or existence.
Our human minds are incapable of grasping this completely.
The primary question is, do you believe Jesus has died for your sins and that by believing in Him you will have forgiveness of your sins and eternal life?
Even verga knows that it is foolish to make the argument of 'before' or 'after' --as in the parent must preceed the son-- but the poster is playing at gotcha, so even verga's clear phrasing in #116 is rejected in favor of the charade in play.
YOU are the one arguing from the earthly perspective. I am talking about the "eternal" existence. How can Jesus be the "Son" and still be eternal? Sonship from a chronological perspective implies a delay. So again the question is clear. How is the Son the Son and the Father the Father if they are both eternal and both God?
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.