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.
Yet you have failed to offer a single alternative and resorted to insults. What does that say about you?
You continue to persist in arguing that the Son must follow the Father. Chronology as you are arguing is not applicable in this case. This is why I say you are arguing from an earthly perspective. The Bible does not make such an assumption as you make.
I've given you the NT perspective from John on this.
Additional information on your question may be found here.
http://www.gotquestions.org/only-begotten-son.html
The last paragraph in the reply captures the problem with your understanding of the relationship between Father and the Son.
The bottom line is that terms such as "Father" and "Son," descriptive of God and Jesus, are human terms that help us understand the relationship between the different Persons of the Trinity. If you can understand the relationship between a human father and a human son, then you can understand, in part, the relationship between the First and Second Persons of the Trinity. The analogy breaks down if you try to take it too far and teach, as some Christian cults (such as the Jehovah’s Witnesses), that Jesus was literally "begotten" as in “produced” or “created” by God the Father.
Quite simple, really...The Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are 3 forms of the same God...If ever there was a beginning, they (He) began all at the same time...
Phil 2:6-7 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:We also are eternal if we look to the future but if we look at the past, we are finite. Half of infinity is still infinite.
“Half of infinity is still infinite.” Um, if you can divide something in half, it is not infinite in either direction.
What Verga was wrong about was part of his statement in post 160 that seemed to say God had a beginning. He hasn't clarified yet if those were his own words or if he copied them from some other source. Why aren't you asking him this question?
Are you implying that someone can explain an infinite concept to you sufficiently that you will be convinced and forsake your Agnostic/metatheist position? I'm not convinced even if that were possible going by what you have been saying on these threads. If even the smartest, deepest theological minds over the whole world from all time have failed to adequately and exhaustively explain all there is to know of the infinite, Almighty God, why think anyone can do better?
You have already been told what Christianity has believed about the Triune God and the creeds that have been developed to try to comprehensively and concisely define what that belief is as far as possible. That's the best we can do. Almighty God had ALWAYS existed. He had no beginning and has no end. He is outside of time as we know it. Jesus is the Son of God who took on human form (incarnated- made flesh) so that He could make propitiation for the sins of world. The Son of God - because He IS God - has always existed and will always exist. The same with the Holy Spirit. To try to confine God to human comprehension and thoughts about "chronology" are pointless - it doesn't apply to Him. God used terms like "Father" and "Son" to help us relate to Him both in terms of our relationship with Him as well as His relationship with the Godhead. Even the use of a male pronoun and the gender of nouns for Him only go so far - God certainly has no genitals. In Scripture, He even uses feminine terms sometimes to describe our relationship to Him.
So...sorry if "It's a mystery." or "You must take it on faith." are inadequate to answer you but that is what it boils down to. We don't have an infinite mind to take in infinite information. There are things about our OWN bodies and our world that we take on faith - how much more the infinity of the Creator and sustainer of all that was, is and ever will be?
Oh, it's good enough an answer from Catholics about their faith, but not for non-Catholics.
Typical.
How ironic that a self-proclaimed agnostic is demanding answers and then sitting in judgment on those answers that he receives as not being good enough for him.
You know what? NOTHING is going to be good enough for you.
We've met your type before and all the do is sit there demanding answers and when they get them, reject them offhand for one reason or another.
I could spend the rest of my life chasing down answers for you that you will likely never accept.
It's just jerking people around, having them run in circles trying to appease the unappeasible.
I've see that type of tactic before.
I'm not playing your games.
You'll find God when you want to. You'll find the answers you're looking for when you look for them with an honest and open heart instead of making gotcha games for non-Catholics.
Troll somewhere else on someone else's time.
There sure is a lot of effort being expended in deflecting the attention from that post 160, isn’t there?
2 Corinthians 4:4 King James Version (KJV)
4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.
The silence on the requested proof of the assertion is condemning.
Truly spoken.
Indeed.
There’s been nothing but deflection.
It’s as if the comment had never been made, it’s been so totally ignored.
The word is “operandi” The is twice I have had to correct you. Just so we are clear, you can’t answer the question, so you resort to name calling and then leave the discussion when you are called on your behavior.
You might want to direct this post to your buddy who won’t answer the questions put to him.
Sure I do; but you've shown nothing that would indicate you'd accept ANY answer given to you.
True, but it illustrates why you'd not be able to recognize the answer.
Are any of you the same age as any of your parents?
Shouldn't you first have to show how it did NOT answer the question?
Perhaps it was 2 or maybe 3...
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.