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.
Well; the Book says, "...let US create Man in OUR..."
(You are probably aware of the rest.)
The second person of the Godhead did not take on flesh until about 2000 years ago; thus AFTER all the other stuff had taken place.
I'm sorry if the quite human words of 'father' and 'son' are used.
Them old dudes back then probably just wanted to confuse certain folks.
Uh...
...that he's probably originally from West Virginia?
Dang!
I shudda read ahead.
HMMMmmm...
I hope you are also self correcting.
RIF
Here is John 1: 1-5 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.
No where does this describe how you can have two (or three) non generated eternal infinite beings.
A protestant is offering the possibility of God having a beginning. He is saying it is possible that God is not eternal. I am wondering how long it will take for the rest of the protestants to condemn is cool for this.
BTW ealgeone the link you posted also leads to this blog post: http://www.blogos.org/theologyapologetics/trinity.php. It points out the modalism error that iscool made in his post. It's also important to emphasize what the Trinity is not. God is not three beings in one being, or three persons in one person. Nor is God three deities cooperating as one, or one God acting through three different offices at different times. The Trinity is not God elevating one of His creations to godhood. Nor is it One God splitting Himself into parts at various times. The Trinity does not imply that 1+1+1=1, but that 1x1x1=1.
Please show me where I said that.
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.
I am not an agnostic. I am an agnostic /metatheist. Let me see if I can explain this to you in very simple terms. One of the eternal questions is: Does God exist? The atheist declares: God does not exist! The agnostic says: I am not sure if God exists. The deist/ Christian emphatically states: He does indeed exist and we need to worship Him. On the other hand the metatheist does not accept the proposition: God exists.
Now read that very carefully. I do not deny the existence of God I do not reject the existence of God, I do not accept the proposition. To a metatheist God is existence. To say that God exists is to put a limitation on the beingness of God.
You know what? NOTHING is going to be good enough for you.
What a coincidence because "nothing" is exactly what I have gotten from YOU!
Does this verse mean anything to you: 1 Peter 3:15 15 But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect,
I ask sincere question and all yhou do is spew venom.
A protestant is offering the possibility of God having a beginning. He is saying it is possible that God is not eternal. I am wondering how long it will take for the rest of the protestants to condemn is cool for this.
You're a whacko...
Kind of a New Ager...You are your own god...You admittedly are not a Christian...You have no spiritual knowledge nor wisdom...You're talking yourself right into hell...Why are you here, to try to drag people along with you???
I get crawled all over for using human terms and then you insult me when you use even less specific terms.
If it weren't for double standards, the non-Catholics wouldn't have any at all.
BTW, you're being crawled over for the false doctrine you posted in #160.
Perhaps verga is just being fithful to the religion he has chosen, which, like Joseph Smith's followers, he believes and has been taught is true Christianity.
With Joseph Smith, he claimed he was restoring true Christianity. With Catholicism the magicsteeringthem claims Christianity as they proclaim it has evolved, adding many 'traditions' and dicta over the centuries. Now, the current head of Catholicism is working to build ecumenism, and sweep up lots more deluded souls into the pagan pageantry.
When God came into existence there was nothing else all was void. His first thought must have been self awareness. The only possible outcome of an omnipotent being becoming self aware would be for that awareness to be a mirrored reflection or that omnipotent perfection.
When the second being instantly became sentient there was no longer the void, There was only the "Father." The "Father" loved the "Son" with a perfect all powerful love and the "Son" loved the "Father" with an identical love. The love that proceeded from both the "Father" and the "Son" was also Omnipotent and perfect. As the "Father" and "Son" are both sentient there love must be sentient as well. This sentience is the Holy Spirit.
From the look of it, what verga was posted in 160 and then claimed The Nicean Council affirmed is not false doctrine in the other religion, known as Catholicism. That rekligion does create new dogma and doctrine periodically (I could post a long list of their fabrications handed down by their magicsteeringthem, with dated years of origin), taking it further from Christianity, from the Ekklesia Jesus established and continues to build.
Perhaps vergapost #160 and following is just being faithful to the religion he has chosen, which, like Joseph Smith's followers, he someone believes and has been taught is true Christianity.
With Joseph Smith, he claimed he was restoring true Christianity. With Catholicism the magicsteeringthem claims Christianity as they proclaim it has evolved, adding many 'traditions' and dicta over the centuries. Now, the current head of Catholicism is working to build ecumenism, and sweep up lots more deluded souls into the pagan pageantry.
There now, that's generalities enough ...
There’s nothing like being lectured by an agnostic about the things of God is there?
There’s the height of arrogance at work.
Someone who doesn’t know anything about something arguing as if an expert in the field.
Nor did Iscool posit God had a beginning as verga did. And *If* statement is not a statement of fact as verga made.
I agree. "If" is a lot different than "when".
It is indeed a spiritual blindness. A stubborn decision to not see the truth in the face of God who would have ALL saved and come to repentance.
Finally you explain your label of choice! Only thing is, it's clear as mud. Do y'all have an official organization and statement of faith/non-faith or are you a church of one?
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.