Debate on the trinity, and three persons, and (dogs)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Odell
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
O

Odell

Guest
So in explaining from what I have read in Frank Sheed books that nature determines what I can do. I can raise my hand because that goes with human nature. I can eat and laugh. If I bite someone I do not poison them, because that does not go with human nature, but snake nature. Although my nature decides what actions are possible to me, it is “I”, the person that does them. The nature is the source of our operations, the person does them.

So the Trinity on nature three persons. Anways the respondent asked angels have natures so are they persons too? What about demons they have a nature? He even asked if his dog is a person because well it has dog nature. How would you respond to this??
 
Odell said:
So in explaining from what I have read in Frank Sheed books that nature determines what I can do. I can raise my hand because that goes with human nature. I can eat and laugh. If I bite someone I do not poison them, because that does not go with human nature, but snake nature. Although my nature decides what actions are possible to me, it is “I”, the person that does them. The nature is the source of our operations, the person does them.

So the Trinity on nature three persons. Anways the respondent asked angels have natures so are they persons too? What about demons they have a nature? He even asked if his dog is a person because well it has dog nature. How would you respond to this??
Click to expand...
I think there is more to it than just having a nature because everything has a nature so it would logically follow that everything is a person. I believe what separates persons from non-persons is that their nature contains an immaterial intellect and will (i.e. the ability to know and love, and I don’t mean sensation, imagination, and emotion which a dog would have). Angels and demons are persons because they have immaterial wills and intellects even though they lack bodies. Humans also are persons because they have rational souls which grant these immaterial powers. A dog would not be a person because its soul is only material. This, to my knowledge, is what Catholic teaching would say on the matter.

What Frank Sheed said still applies I think because there is definitely an I associated with our actions and the actions of angels and demons. There’s no I associated with dogs or other animals. They simply act on instinct; there’s no rational thinking behind their actions.

Inevitably, the direction the conversation will go next concerns whether there is a fundamental difference between the mind of a human and the mind of a dog which is a separate matter altogether.
 
All things have a “nature” (the word “nature” itself means the world around us). Rocks have a nature (a way they “behave”), though they have no will and no self-animation.

Animals with intelligence all act according to their own nature, with the one exception of humans. Dogs and cats are always true to their nature. We can train them to do things that dogs and cats don’t otherwise naturally do, but that simply reflects their ability to be trained, which is part of their nature.

It is impossible for an animal to be “evil” or to commit sin. Only man has this ability. The ability of man to be evil is sometimes called “original sin,” and it sets us apart from all other living creatures.
 
Odell said:
So in explaining from what I have read in Frank Sheed books that nature determines what I can do. I can raise my hand because that goes with human nature. I can eat and laugh. If I bite someone I do not poison them, because that does not go with human nature, but snake nature. Although my nature decides what actions are possible to me, it is “I”, the person that does them. The nature is the source of our operations, the person does them.

So the Trinity on nature three persons. Anways the respondent asked angels have natures so are they persons too? What about demons they have a nature? He even asked if his dog is a person because well it has dog nature. How would you respond to this??
Click to expand...
Frank Sheed is quite clear that all things have a nature. Rocks have a nature but they are not humans. Dogs have a nature but act solely on that nature unlike humans who have a free will
 
All entities have a nature. It tells us what they are.

Not all entities have natures which are expressed in personhood. One doesn’t ask a rock, “who are you?”
 
JimG said:
All entities have a nature. It tells us what they are.

Not all entities have natures which are expressed in personhood. One doesn’t ask a rock, “who are you?”
Click to expand...
What! I ask rocks what they are all the time, was I doing something wrong? :eek:

Though your point has some significance in the “expressed in personhood”. Is it possible that one doesn’t have to ask by words? If one is seeking a valued metal or material, with ones eyes and actions one does ask a rock what a rock is, don’t they? And by it’s presences and contents in it’s presence it is revealed to the asker what it is, hence answered.

Also doesn’t all creation including rocks respond to the Word of God, the Presence and fulfillment thereof?
Lk:19:38: Saying, Blessed be the King that cometh in the name of the Lord: peace in heaven, and glory in the highest.
39: And some of the Pharisees from among the multitude said unto him, Master, rebuke thy disciples.
40: And he answered and said unto them, I tell you that, if these should hold their peace, the stones would immediately cry out.
How could stones cry out without some kind of personage or response to the Presence of the Power of Life?
 
D_Martin said:
What! I ask rocks what they are all the time, was I doing something wrong? :eek:

Though your point has some significance in the “expressed in personhood”. Is it possible that one doesn’t have to ask by words? If one is seeking a valued metal or material, with ones eyes and actions one does ask a rock what a rock is, don’t they? And by it’s presences and contents in it’s presence it is revealed to the asker what it is, hence answered.

Also doesn’t all creation including rocks respond to the Word of God, the Presence and fulfillment thereof?
Lk:19:38: Saying, Blessed be the King that cometh in the name of the Lord: peace in heaven, and glory in the highest.
39: And some of the Pharisees from among the multitude said unto him, Master, rebuke thy disciples.
40: And he answered and said unto them, I tell you that, if these should hold their peace, the stones would immediately cry out.
How could stones cry out without some kind of personage or response to the Presence of the Power of Life?
Click to expand...
The question is not WHAT a rock is, the question is WHO it is!
Every rock has a what. No rocks that I’m personally acquainted with have a who.
 
Gospel of Thomas:

(30) Jesus said, “Where there are three gods, they are gods. Where there are two or one, I am with him.”

On the subject of rocks:

(66) Jesus said, “Show me the stone which the builders have rejected. That one is the cornerstone.”

(77) Jesus said, “It is I who am the light which is above them all. It is I who am the all. From me did the all come forth, and unto me did the all extend. Split a piece of wood, and I am there. Lift up the stone, and you will find me there.”
 
Michael42 said:
Gospel of Thomas:

(30) Jesus said, “Where there are three gods, they are gods. Where there are two or one, I am with him.”

On the subject of rocks:

(66) Jesus said, “Show me the stone which the builders have rejected. That one is the cornerstone.”

(77) Jesus said, “It is I who am the light which is above them all. It is I who am the all. From me did the all come forth, and unto me did the all extend. Split a piece of wood, and I am there. Lift up the stone, and you will find me there.”
Click to expand...
catholic.com/quickquestions/why-isnt-the-gospel-of-thomas-in-the-bible
 
JimG said:
The question is not WHAT a rock is, the question is WHO it is!
Every rock has a what. No rocks that I’m personally acquainted with have a who.
Click to expand...
Wild life aren’t “WHOS” they are whats in the eyes of men, unless they have a relationship with one like pets, or domesticated beasts, but in general animals birds and bugs so on and so forth, are living creators that are whats, not whos in the eyes of men. Since when is what is man’s view the correct view of the creation around him?

Sorry there bud, I’ll go with the Lord’s view on this one. The hair on your head may be a what to you but the Creator and Judge knows of every one of them, even if by number. Just as the Creator and Judge is aware of the demise of every creature.
 
D_Martin said:
Wild life aren’t “WHOS” they are whats in the eyes of men, unless they have a relationship with one like pets, or domesticated beasts, but in general animals birds and bugs so on and so forth, are living creators that are whats, not whos in the eyes of men. Since when is what is man’s view the correct view of the creation around him?

Sorry there bud, I’ll go with the Lord’s view on this one. The hair on your head may be a what to you but the Creator and Judge knows of every one of them, even if by number. Just as the Creator and Judge is aware of the demise of every creature.
Click to expand...
Well, yes, I agree, God knows everything. But we were discussing the Trinity, specifically the difference between Person, which answers the question ‘who’ and Nature, which answers the question ‘what.’

Looking back at the question posed in the first post, one can say that every entity has a nature, but not every entity has the aspect of personhood. Human beings are persons. So are angels and demons. But not rocks or asteroids or planets. And God is a single entity (one God) in three Persons.
 
JimG said:
Well, yes, I agree, God knows everything. But we were discussing the Trinity, specifically the difference between Person, which answers the question ‘who’ and Nature, which answers the question ‘what.’
Click to expand...
That’s not really the point is it? If you noticed you are the one who brought up the subject about rocks and they in your view, have no personage. What’s the problem? Wasn’t I supposed to question that statement you made, as to whether it is true or not?
Looking back at the question posed in the first post, one can say that every entity has a nature, but not every entity has the aspect of personhood. Human beings are persons. So are angels and demons. But not rocks or asteroids or planets. And God is a single entity (one God) in three Persons.
Click to expand...
Living things have one thing in common, they are in their presence, and speak or express themselves in their presence. They are (one) and in their presence (two) and speak in their presence, (three)

“in the beginning, God” hence God (one) “Spirit of God moved” hence the Presence of God (two) and “And God said” hence God spoke in His Presence. All three are One. Just as you are in your presence and speak in your presence and all three are one. Not three different persons. And in the case of God, Revelation of the Great and Almighty Power of God, yes. Father Son and Holy Spirit are One the Son the only begotten is as John wrote: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life; and the life was the light of men.”

And when God spoke in the third Verse of Gen:1 is the one and the same who came into the flesh, in the Presence of God His Father who is in Heaven.

Not sure about the statements in the original theology of the trinity, I do believe it dates back to the three or four hundreds not very long after the Church was permitted by Constantine to be the religion of the Roman Empire. From the Greek orthodox side of the Catholic organization then. But don’t hold me to that. The subject always comes up how it is that God is One but His Presence and His Word has so much power, its might be difficult to understand He is still One being. Your presence or mine doesn’t have the power to be all over the surface of the earth, but God’s Presence does even if it’s by virtue of the fact that space doesn’t have control over Him and His ability like it does with other creatures, and still if a rock can express itself in its presence, according to the Lord Jesus who is correct in all things, then who is to say a rock doesn’t have personage in the Presence of God?
 
Well, I’m not sure what the objection is, other than perhaps you do not believe in the traditional doctrine of the Trinity.

The original post made reference to Frank Sheed’s books (“Theology for Beginners,” “Theology and Sanity,” in particular discuss this doctrine.) I wrote to clarify Sheed’s distinction between nature and person.

If you object to Trinitarian doctrine of one God in Three Persons, I suppose that’s a subject for another thread.

Constantine did nothing more than issue the Edict of Toleration, but that’s also off topic.
 
JimG said:
Well, I’m not sure what the objection is, other than perhaps you do not believe in the traditional doctrine of the Trinity.

The original post made reference to Frank Sheed’s books (“Theology for Beginners,” “Theology and Sanity,” in particular discuss this doctrine.) I wrote to clarify Sheed’s distinction between nature and person.

If you object to Trinitarian doctrine of one God in Three Persons, I suppose that’s a subject for another thread.

Constantine did nothing more than issue the Edict of Toleration, but that’s also off topic.
Click to expand...
the OP asked

So the Trinity on nature three persons. Anways the respondent asked angels have natures so are they persons too? What about demons they have a nature? He even asked if his dog is a person because well it has dog nature. How would you respond to this??

Hence a part of the subject at hand, which also includes the subject of the Trinity, Frank Sheed’s version or not. Isn’t that so?

You know, maybe you should do a little more reading about the church you seem to be convinced you are an expert on. Emperors used to assign popes such as St. Gregory the Great was for example, and roman emperors after the church began to form were protectorates, for the lack of a better term, back in those days before cardinalis voted their choice for popes. And these things and Constantine’s involvement by virtue of being Emperor are well documented, on secular and Catholic web sites which Is contrary to what seems to be your self perceived great knowledge, sorry I don’t perceive it. Have a nice day.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top