Difficulties with the Trinity Doctrine.

[belorg]

What is considered logical by humans is not always correct. By logic using logic, the world was believed to be flat. Logic can only explain things when one has the necessary mental capacity and the vital evidence to explain whatever the mystery is. Currently, we can not explain the origin of the universe or the origin of everything. Logic may never solve these mysteries.

Humans make mistakes, of course they do, but if, using logic, something turns out to be a contradiction, it is a contradiction until proved it isn’t. So, the Trinity entails a contradiction just as clearly as a square circle.

And that by using logic, the wolrd was believed to be flat is false. the world was perceived flat by (erroneous) observation, not by logic.

 

[da_nolo]

Humans make mistakes, of course they do, but if, using logic, something turns out to be a contradiction, it is a contradiction until proved it isn’t. So, the Trinity entails a contradiction just as clearly as a square circle.

And that by using logic, the wolrd was believed to be flat is false. the world was perceived flat by (erroneous) observation, not by logic.

Neither. if the world concept of ‘flat’ or not was to ever be truly observed, then it would be observed that ships would rise and fall in the distance at a bizarre curving angle. they do not just get smaller, but portions of the ship disappear, almost shrinking into the oceans.

this was never observed or considered to be of concern towards the idea that the world may be round or flat.

 

[oval]

In the past I have accepted the Trinity Doctrine on faith, but the more I read the Bible, the more I am having trouble accepting this belief. This is a problem for me because it is one of the most important doctrines to Catholicism. I have also been reading about other views of the trinity and Jesus lately (Pentecostal Oneness, the views of JWs, Christian Science, and Unitarians on Jesus). None of these doctrines make sense to me, but it does not make the trinity doctrine any easier.

My issues (some with related verses):

1. There is only one god. The father is God. Jesus is the Son, not the father. If the father is God how can two other persons (Jesus and the Holy Spirit) also be God? (1 Cor 8:6, Eph 4:6)
2. Jesus prays to God. I know this is a common argument, but I have never heard a good refutation for it.
3. Jesus is the Mediator between man and God. (1 Tim 2:5). A mediator by definition is a third party.
4. Jesus is not equal to the father. (John 8:54 and 14:28). If the father and son are both God, how can they not be equal?
5. (Related to 4) The father has greater knowledge than Jesus does. (Mark 13.32). If they are both God, why do they not have equal knowledge?
6. (Related to 4 and 5) Jesus was not on his own mission, but the mission of the father. He came to do his father’s will, not his own. (John 7:16 and John 14:10). He is obedient to the father, but he is following a plan that was not of his design.
7. Prior to the resurrection, the disciples did not seem to think of Jesus as God. After the resurrection, they seemed to have an even higher opinion of Jesus than before, but I am still not sure that they ever believed that he was God.

Acts 3:13-15 states that God, not Jesus himself, raised Jesus from the dead.

1 John 4:12 states that no one has seen God. If Jesus is God, how is this possible?

I know there are a lot of issues here. If anyone can address any or all of them, it would be greatly appreciated. This is a troubling issue for me. I am looking for help, not an argument.

Thanks,
JK

Its very very simple…first Jesus didn’t come with a protractor or vision screen to show things because it would spoil the nurturing of reason, and we would all be still bowling with Fred and Barnie in Bedrock…( just a polite guess

Actual self…known self…societal self ( thats us guys

God…Holy Spirit…Jesus.

I don’t want to suggest an exact order implied in above , but that is what I thought of and works for myself.

In life we must unify our three principal likeness’s which allow and express unity in social all at once…this is the chief directive…our set up gives the open door to becoming God-like with the social and the Divine idea toward

Its best to approach these things from a rough shaping in the fundamental important and known…we are not sketched out nor would we do well to not…wonder about things. No one wants to know everything about another plus its impossible…maybe we restrict ourselves and man will learn more in time, who knows

 

[da_nolo]

Actual self…known self…societal self ( thats us guys

God…Holy Spirit…Jesus.

our spirit …mind…body

You have an interesting explanation. good post

 

[oval]

Your far too kind for saying and the mysteries are very interesting…God seems to be interested in unity and harmony, so it would seem reasonable to include these things in his nature I think. Maybe I will drop by next weekend again. I’m trying to read-up on things and have a job as well.

 

[JK8619]

1. why study other (false) thoughts on a subject you are not quite comfortable in knowing what the Catholic teaching is? that just adds confusion. then it will be hard to remember what is what.

Ill try to explain this without sounding hostile. On the internet you don’t get to hear voice tone or read body language, so I want you to know my answer is meant to be as respectful as possible.

I enjoy studying other religions as well. I don’t see the problem with that. It certainly is not going to confuse me. I am not a child. My brain is capable of understanding more than one idea at a time. My point was that I do have knowledge of other views of the nature of Christ, but that is not what is causing my difficulties in accepting the trinity. The numerous scriptural verses that appear to contradict the trinity doctrine is what I have difficulties with. If the Bible is contradicting the trinity doctrine, which it appears to me to do so, then I don’t know how I can accept it.

JK

 

[levinas12]

I know there are a lot of issues here. If anyone can address any or all of them, it would be greatly appreciated. This is a troubling issue for me. I am looking for help, not an argument.

I can tell from all your scripture citations that you have given the doctrine of the Trinity a lot of scrutiny. And I have to apologize that I can’t get into much detail right now in unpacking each of these citations. But I will try to explain Catholic teaching on the Trinity.

First, there is a distinction between nature and person. This distinction applies both to human beings and God (in an analogous way). You and I share the same human nature. But you and I are unique persons who are “unshareable” (if that is a word). A person is a singularity who cannot be defined by species and genus (but nature can be defined by species and genus).

Notice the use of “who”. “who” pertains to persons; “what” pertains to nature.

The 3 Persons of the Trinity share in the same nature but remain distinct persons. This would be analogous to you and I sharing in the same nature except for one big difference. According to Aristotle, the primary sense of “substance” is a “this something”, e.g., “this tree” is a primary substance. So, you as a primary substance, as “this human being”, are different from me “as a primary substance”.

This is not true of the 3 Divine Persons. They “are” the same primary substance.

Moreover, the 3 Persons have the same Divine Intellect and the same Divine Will.

This is way different from human beings. My intellect and will are not your intellect and will.

So, the Divine substance is one, and the Divine Intellect and Divine Will are one, then how can there be 3 distinct Persons?

Briefly, each Divine Person is a Relation that “stands out” from the other 2 Persons who are also Relations. Note that I say the Divine Person is a Relation, not that the Divine Person has a Relation.

And the Relation here is Love.

More on this later. I know it sounds opaque but really there are some interesting philosophical distinctions at work here.

 

[levinas12]

(continued from previous posting)

A “person” is a “relation” (both a human person and a Divine Person).

Now we are going to make use of some postmodern jargon.

As a “relation” that is not adequately accounted for either in terms of “nature”, “substance” or “matter”, we can say that the “relation” or the “person” is a “pure” difference analogous to Saussure’s differential theory of language.

In Saussure, language is a system of pure differences. For examples, letters (“a”, “b”, “c”, etc) have no solidity in themselves but are what they are only because one letter is “different” from all the other letters, e.g., “a” is “a” simply because it is “different” from “b”, “c”, etc.

A person, like Saussure’s “a”, “b”, “c”, etc, exists in a “space” of pure differences. Who I am is simply a “difference” from all the other “differences” who are themselves persons.

But this “difference” is powered by love (both on the Divine level and on the human level).

The 3 Persons of the Trinity are Pure Differences powered by Love which “brings” the Persons into an Absolute Unity which does not annul the Pure Differences.

Analogous to the Trinity, we are pure differences that God intends to bring together through love into a unity that does not annul the pure differences.

 

[levinas12]

My issues (some with related verses) …

A number of your biblical quotes must be understood in the context of the Incarnation. Jesus has two intellects (Divine and human) and two wills (Divine and human).

In some verses, what seems like inequality, etc, is really a reflection of the humanity of Jesus, not His Divinity. For example, when Jesus says, “not my will, but your will …”, He is speaking of His human will.

In other verses, it is helpful to understand what “second” means when we refer to the “Second Person” of the Trinity. The Father “begets” the Son, so the Son is the “Second Person”. But “begets” does not imply that the Son is a lesser being. Rather, “begets” explains the consubstantiality of the Son, i.e., the First Person and the Second Person are “united” together in one primary Divine Substance. Again,human language (“begets”, etc) is inadequate to convey the meaning.

Another clarification. The Son is the Second Person of the Trinity. As such, the Son has always existed, or, more precisely, has existed from eternity. Jesus is the Son assuming a human nature at a specific time in history. This union of Divine nature and human nature is now “permanent” so to speak. But the Second Person, after the union, is the same Second Person that existed before the union. This is why it is important to distinguish between “person” and “nature”. Jesus has 2 natures but is the same Person that has been eternally existing.

 

[da_nolo]

"JK8619:

I enjoy studying other religions as well. I don’t see the problem with that. It certainly is not going to confuse me. I am not a child. My brain is capable of understanding more than one idea at a time. My point was that I do have knowledge of other views of the nature of Christ, but that is not what is causing my difficulties in accepting the trinity. The numerous scriptural verses that appear to contradict the trinity doctrine is what I have difficulties with. If the Bible is contradicting the trinity doctrine, which it appears to me to do so, then I don’t know how I can accept it.

I get what you are saying, it is interesting. I was just concerned since it seemed as if you were looking for answers elsewhere, when that elsewhere would explain things in such a way that it would conflict and often (possibly) confuse concepts in which you were more concerned about learning.

in which case it is at times best to learn 1 before the other

My issues (some with related verses):

1. There is only one god. The father is God. Jesus is the Son, not the father. If the father is God how can two other persons (Jesus and the Holy Spirit) also be God? (1 Cor 8:6, Eph 4:6)

The Trinity does not split God into three different beings and is not described in that manner.
vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s2c1p2.htm#232
above quote:

253 The Trinity is One

1. Jesus prays to God. I know this is a common argument, but I have never heard a good refutation for it.

pray is a form of communication. you never talked to yourself?
ha ha ha ha ha ha!

Also, it is described as ‘persons’ in which they may interact with one another. I know its confusing, but this is simply part of the mystery. our brains may not be able to fully wrap around it.

It is simply a difficulty and shouldn’t be reason to throw it all away

Perhaps it is the meaning behind the prayer that is important as well?
vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2011/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20111130_en.html

1. Jesus is the Mediator between man and God. (1 Tim 2:5). A mediator by definition is a third party.

perhaps this would be good for the apologetic? you know, where you can ask a question and get people to answer who may know more

1. Jesus is not equal to the father. (John 8:54 and 14:28). If the father and son are both God, how can they not be equal?

John 8:23 And he said to them: You are from beneath: I am from above. You are of this world: I am not of this world. 24 Therefore I said to you that you shall die in your sins. For if you believe not that** I am he**, you shall die in your sin. 25 They said therefore to him: Who are you? Jesus said to them: The beginning, who also speak unto you. 26 Many things I have to speak and to judge of you. But he that sent me, is true: and the things I have heard of him, these same I speak in the world. 27 And they understood not that he called God his Father. 28 Jesus therefore said to them: When you shall have lifted up, the Son of man, then shall you know that I am he and that I do nothing of myself. But as the Father has taught me, these things I speak. 29 And he that sent me is with me: and he has not left me alone.

That’s all I could get through for today. its been an hour since I started. ha ha. thanks for the convo.

have a nice day.
have a nice time studying =)

 

[bmonk]

In the past I have accepted the Trinity Doctrine on faith, but the more I read the Bible, the more I am having trouble accepting this belief. This is a problem for me because it is one of the most important doctrines to Catholicism. I have also been reading about other views of the trinity and Jesus lately (Pentecostal Oneness, the views of JWs, Christian Science, and Unitarians on Jesus). None of these doctrines make sense to me, but it does not make the trinity doctrine any easier.

My issues (some with related verses):

1. There is only one god. The father is God. Jesus is the Son, not the father. If the father is God how can two other persons (Jesus and the Holy Spirit) also be God? (1 Cor 8:6, Eph 4:6)
2. Jesus prays to God. I know this is a common argument, but I have never heard a good refutation for it.
3. Jesus is the Mediator between man and God. (1 Tim 2:5). A mediator by definition is a third party.
4. Jesus is not equal to the father. (John 8:54 and 14:28). If the father and son are both God, how can they not be equal?
5. (Related to 4) The father has greater knowledge than Jesus does. (Mark 13.32). If they are both God, why do they not have equal knowledge?
6. (Related to 4 and 5) Jesus was not on his own mission, but the mission of the father. He came to do his father’s will, not his own. (John 7:16 and John 14:10). He is obedient to the father, but he is following a plan that was not of his design.
7. Prior to the resurrection, the disciples did not seem to think of Jesus as God. After the resurrection, they seemed to have an even higher opinion of Jesus than before, but I am still not sure that they ever believed that he was God.

Acts 3:13-15 states that God, not Jesus himself, raised Jesus from the dead.

1 John 4:12 states that no one has seen God. If Jesus is God, how is this possible?

I know there are a lot of issues here. If anyone can address any or all of them, it would be greatly appreciated. This is a troubling issue for me. I am looking for help, not an argument.

Thanks,
JK

First, the Trinity is called a “mystery”–this is technical language. It means that it’s a truth too deep for the human mind to comprehend fully.

“The name mystery is given to ‘revealed truths that surpass the powers of natural reason’ (Catholic Encyclopedia). An example would be the Trinity. It is a truth that God revealed to us, that we could not have ever known simply with the powers of our reason. He had to tell us. As well, mysteries are truths that can be partially understood by us, but not fully understood. Some, we can understand and explain only with the use of analogies (the Trinity), and some we cannot understand at their inmost depths (the attributes of God).”

I like to distinguish “mystery” from “secret”: a secret is hidden knowledge, but once it is discovered, it is fully accessible like other human knowledge. A mystery is public, but we just cannot get the whole of it.

So, to address some specific concerns:

“1. There is only one god. The father is God. Jesus is the Son, not the father. If the father is God how can two other persons (Jesus and the Holy Spirit) also be God?” There is only one God, but God is revealed through Jesus as a community, united by love. This love is deeper and more complete than anything we can begin to comprehend. In fact, we cannot even begin to grasp the infinitesimal overflow of love that created, sustains, and redeems the world, God’s love for us. Indeed, had Jesus not revealed the Triune nature of God, we could never have come up with such a doctrine.

“2. Jesus prays to God.” Why not? Prayer is communicating with a spiritual being. The Father and Son were in constant communication before the Son took on human nature, and that communication continues as well. As a human, the Son also found advantage in expressing that communication in words also in some specific times and places.

“3. Jesus is the Mediator between man and God.” Perhaps we need such mediators, to be sure they have the best interests of all sides in mind. But God so loves us that we can trust that God has our best interests always in mind–and so having God as a mediator for God is not a contradiction. Furthermore, Christ’s effectiveness as mediator is in good part that he is accessible–a human person, able to express in human language and in a human presence, what will help us most to understand God as much as we can.

This means also that how Jesus describes God does make a difference–precisely because he does know the Father, and because he is best able to express what that is like in terms we can grasp.

4 and 5 I find hard to address, so I will take up 6, and hope it sheds light on the previous two: “6. (Related to 4 and 5) Jesus was not on his own mission, but the mission of the father. He came to do his father’s will, not his own. (John 7:16 and John 14:10). He is obedient to the father, but he is following a plan that was not of his design.” Jesus submits to the Father’s will, but from outside the Trinity, we cannot really say who’s plan it is. It is God’s plan, and all three Persons of God support it: Father, Son, and Spirit. That’s part of being a United God: they do not work in isolation or at cross purposes. Look at Homer: the Greek gods were divided, working against one another, in the Trojan War, Hera and Athena were on the Greek side, and Artemis and Aphrodite for Troy, Poseidon kept Odysseus from reaching home for ten years, and so on. They do not act together, and even when two are on the same side, they have different reasons and goals. But not the Trinity, who are always united in action, and in purpose. So, is the Son not equal to the Father? How would we know how to compare two infinite qualities?

“7. Prior to the resurrection, the disciples did not seem to think of Jesus as God. After the resurrection, they seemed to have an even higher opinion of Jesus than before, but I am still not sure that they ever believed that he was God.” How about Thomas’ confession, John 20:28: “My lord and my God!” And St. Paul certainly considers Jesus as God, for example the Hymn of Phil 2:5-11, where Jesus is “equal to God” at the beginning, and is “Lord” at the end–a title of God.

“1 John 4:12 states that no one has seen God. If Jesus is God, how is this possible?” John 6:46 says, “Not that anyone has seen the Father except the one who is from God; he has seen the Father.” So 1 John 4:12 seems to be speaking more of us mere humans seeing the Father, while Jesus is the bridge: now that we recognize Jesus as the “human face of God,” we have seen God, in a sense–but we still cannot see God fully, not in this life at least.

 

[Shlomo]

Jesus, Apostles, Prophets etc never evoked the concept of Trinity.

All the above mentioned were content with worshiping God, trying to understand His will and to win His benevolence.

What happened to the Church that it got preoccupied with trying to understand what God is?

Man needs to understand/explain something in order to control it.

By the time of Nicaean Council which coined the term “Trinity” the Church started to merge with the State, and its focus became power. By assuming the right to define what God Himself is the Church virtually became more important than God, thus securing for itself unquestionable authority.

All your arguments are valid and the list could be extended.

It is true that God is beyond human understanding, that’s why trying to give an explanation what He is equals to a creature’s attempt to exchange positions with the Creator.

The trick with the concept of Trinity is that when you accept it by faith, you subdue to the Church, not to God.

 

[ranbesaint]

The Supreme Being Exist in Trinitarian Relationship
If anything exists, a Supreme Being exists who caused it to be by creating it for its own purpose. The Supreme Being is pure existence that subsists in itself, “I AM." The Supreme Being has no potential for betterment or change. The Being derives its supremacy by reason that it possesses the fullness of being; its essence is that of perfection and completeness. (CCC 206)
A Supreme Being does not determine its own reality, but exists because of it, and is reality itself. Everything about it is true, real, and logical. It can only act accordingly to its nature. The definition of “good” derives from what is true and real. Therefore, the Supreme Being is all-good. It cannot have any self-contradictions, or defects or act arbitrarily. Defect, error, contradiction, incompleteness, and all falsifications of reality are the essence of evil.
There can only be one Supreme Being because it possesses all reality; it encompasses all that is. Any other being only exists at the will of, and for the purpose of the Supreme Being. A Supreme Being possesses internal relationships. Its concept of itself is the perfect embodiment of who it is, lacking in nothing of itself. The self-concept, or Word, is so perfect that it is the personification of the Supreme Being itself, begotten of the thinker. The relationship is that of a Father begetting a Son. The Son is totally dependent on the Father’s self-awareness. Since the Father can only know itself as it is, there can only be one Son. There is yet another relationship, that of mutual admiration: the Father loving his Son, who reflects that same love back to the Father, out of which proceeds the personification of that mutual love, the Holy Spirit. In the Supreme Being, there can only be these three relationships: Father begetting Son, out of whose mutual love proceeds the Holy Spirit. (CCC 254-255)
To clarify this fact, can the Supreme Being be schizophrenic wanting to think of himself in other than he really is? Ridiculous! Can a thought say to the thinker, I want to think on my own; I don’t need your intellect any more? Absurd! Can the beloved who is totally dependent on its lover, say: “I’d rather just love myself; I don’t need your love any more? Preposterous!
Jesus has revealed his Trinitarian relationship with his Father and the Holy Spirit in Sacred Scriptures. The Catholic Church has dogmatically defined, and teaches us this Trinitarian relationship in its catechisms and creeds. This is what we say every time we recite the Apostles Creed. It is the central mystery of our Faith.
ranbesaint

 

[Charlemagne_II]

Mathew 28:19

“Go you therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatever I have commanded you: and, see, I am with you always, even to the end of the world. Amen.”

Thus Jesus announced, without using the word “Trinity,” the doctrine of the Trinity.

Why is that so difficult to understand?

 

[RobbyS]

This is a query that has come up since time immemorial in the Church and the lives of Christians and non-Christians alike. The notorious case with Arius and Arianism comes to mind. You have been struggling with this, as have many, myself included, and I’m sure you have heard the story of the heresy that I refer to. And no, you’re not a heretic for having doubts, no. It is ok to have doubts and questions; they will eventually make your faith stronger.
There is a problem when we try to impose a natural and human criteria to things spirtual and sacred mysteries. Sometimes, and always, it will confuse us due to the obvious conflict that will arise. It will be good if we read parts of the book, “Born Fundamentalist, Born Again Catholic” by David B. Currie:
“Not until Rationalism (and its first born child scepticism) had started to transform the thinking of Europe would any movement call into question…” “With Rationalism, something that could not be unterstood through reason was rejected. It has been said that mystery is an embarrassment to the modern mind.” “Protestantism is at its very core a child of Rationalism” The Church Fathers understood that some things are impossible to understand rationally but that they are nonethless true. It is a mystery. “That the impossible is no problem for God can be seen … when he fed the five thoudand. Modern sceptics, who are more consistent than Evangelicals, reject that miracle, as well.” “On a practical level the Evangelical has reduced the soul of man to little more than his intellect.”
Bill Loader says about the Trinity: Yet it is an attempt to hold together some essential ideas which don’t fit together well and yet which seem to belong. On the one side, all our talk about God in Jesus must never lead to the idea that there is more than one God. On the other side, Jesus cannot be described just simply as God; otherwise he is hardly a human being. The third figure, the Spirit, is also sometimes spoken of separately: for example, God sent the Spirit. The one we meet in all is the one God, yet the language allows for three figures to be spoken of.

In many ways the problem seems easier to solve with the Spirit which is perhaps best taken as just another way of speaking of God in a particular mode of relating. The word, Spirit (old English used ‘Ghost’), goes back to Greek and Hebrew words which mean spirit, breath and wind. Spirit can be a more intimate way of speaking of God, like God’s breath. Traditionally it is also a way of describing God’s creative power bringing about new possibilities and realising future hopes and visions.

With Jesus things are considerably more complicated. Is he a combination of a human being and something else, namely, God? Did he have two personalities? I find most of this rather meaningless speculation. Perhaps we shall never be able to offer an adequate explanation. I prefer to understand Jesus’ relationship to God, exemplified by his praying to God, primarily as one of total human devotion and to avoid theories which demand some kind of shared combination of beings in the human Jesus. It was precisely because he was such an in-touch human being that God shone through his life so brightly.

Yet in general people make no difference between Jesus and God when they think about the present living Jesus. One person prays to Jesus, another to God, the Father. Really both are praying to God. This has made it easier for people to say simply, Jesus is God. To be in touch with Jesus is to be in touch with God. Thinking of Jesus in history leads us to stress his humanity, while thinking of Jesus in the present leads to a stronger emphasis on his divinity. The creeds of the church seek to hold onto both aspects.

Some people get excited by abstract models of God as a single community of beings, but I must say I find this too abstruse. I’m happier with what some of the traditional structures are meant to affirm than I am with what people think they affirm when they work with them in a more literal way. A lot of the problems which have arisen in such speculative discussions have come about because of the popularity of one particular model of thought about Jesus in the time leading up to when the creeds were written, especially from the second century of Christianity onwards." wwwstaff.murdoch.edu.au/~loader/DKJesus.htm

The council chose to use the term rendered in Latin terms as” consubstantial" to rebute Arius’ contention that Jesus was only a man. Arius wanted to save the “concept” of God from the reality that in Christ Jesus the Jews had encountered face to face the God of Abraham and Moses, But almost as soon as the council ended, the theologians ran away from the concrete to the dualism of semi-Arianism and its efforts to exchange the real Jesus for the “idea" of him. In truth, of course, that God can speak to Abraham and partially reveal his person to him, in the form of an angelic being, is not less “impossible” to believe than that God could present himself as a man like ourselves. The God of the Enlightenment is very much like the God of Arius–so distant, so remote–and as we can much like Lewis Carrol’s Ceshire Cat, which fade away until nothing is left but the smile. No wonder the Pascal rejected this God of the philosophers.

 

[D_Martin]

There are three things about the Lord our God, like you, there is you, your presence, and your word. There is God, God’s Word and God’s Presence (Holy Spirit) in creation God, God’s Presence in His creation and God speaking, in His Presence in creation. The Father Son and Holy Spirit is also demonstrated in Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The father Abraham, Isaac the son who was offered up or sacrificed, and Jacob of which was renamed Israel and the rest are Children of Israel (note many preach being born of the Holy Spirit, of which they be children of) (also note the church started with twelve Apostles and the Children of Israel also started with twelve) also note: that Jesus is the Word:

Jn:1:1: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2: The same was in the beginning with God.
3: All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

And only of God is God’s Word, hence the only begotten of God, that is life, gives life, and is alive. Just as powerful as God the Father but of God the Father. And also note in God’s Presence for the word of God is of God therefore of His Presence.

Jesus Christ is God’s Word in the Presence of God, in the flesh (the temple that was to be torn down and rased up in three days), hence Jesus saying things like He is with the Father and the Father is with Him, and He is in the Father and the Father is in Him.

 

[Love4All]

Jesus, Apostles, Prophets etc never evoked the concept of Trinity.

All the above mentioned were content with worshiping God, trying to understand His will and to win His benevolence.

What happened to the Church that it got preoccupied with trying to understand what God is?

Man needs to understand/explain something in order to control it.

By the time of Nicaean Council which coined the term “Trinity” the Church started to merge with the State, and its focus became power. By assuming the right to define what God Himself is the Church virtually became more important than God, thus securing for itself unquestionable authority.

All your arguments are valid and the list could be extended.

It is true that God is beyond human understanding, that’s why trying to give an explanation what He is equals to a creature’s attempt to exchange positions with the Creator.

The trick with the concept of Trinity is that when you accept it by faith, you subdue to the Church, not to God.

God is clearly a Trinity of Persons. If not, then God the Father is not God or God the Son is not God or God the Holy Spirit is not God, and as the Church struggled to reconcile the contradictions that appeared in considering each of these possibilities, she finally came to the resolution of the dilemma — or trilemma as it were — by recognizing that each of the Three Persons is God, and there is only one God, without contradiction. Thus, the Trinity, Three in One, One in Three.

It is the most natural thing in the world to want to understand someone you love. I believe the Saints’ love for God adequately explains their zeal to understand Him as well as they might. I also believe God’s revelation of Himself is a magnificent proof of His Love for us, and His desire to be understood by us insofar as it is possible for us. He already understands us completely, and He loves us, so naturally He desires to reciprocate to us and to help us to understand Him.

And our continually expanding understanding of Him as a community is expressed in what we call Catholic Theology.

The Apostles all baptized their converts explicitly in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, since that is what Our Lord commanded them. To point out the obvious, it is the Holy Trinity who is named. So it false to state that the Apostles did not know the Trinity. They did not call Him the Trinity, the called Him the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. But it is the same thing.

You cynical stance towards the disciples as power hungry possibly reflects something in you. It might be a good idea to examine.

 

[Love4All]

By any human logic the trinity doctrine is a paradox. I know it can’t be explained, especially by dubious analogies. My problem is not the paradox because I know that not everything can be explained logically. My issue is that the bible seems to contradict the trinity doctrine.

There are only two verses in the entire bible that I believe really support the trinity while there are dozens more in addition to the ones I listed that seem to contradict it. There are also plenty of arguments that the versus, such as John 1:1, that support the trinity could be mistranslated.

The ratio of verses for or against really doesn’t matter. As long as there are verses that contradict the trinity, it is hard to take the ones that support it seriously.

I hope that I can help you, I will try. I will confine my arguments to the Scriptures you referenced.

Mark 13.32 "But of that day or hour, no one knows, neither the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.

Jesus became fully human, and in His human nature He accepted human limitations.

John 7:16 Jesus answered them and said, "My teaching is not my own but is from the one who sent me.

His teaching was not human but Divine.

John 8:54 Jesus answered, "If I glorify myself, my glory is worth nothing; but it is my Father who glorifies me, of whom you say, ‘He is our God.’

The Father glorifies the Son, as the Son glorifies the Father.

John 14:10 Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The words that I speak to you I do not speak on my own. The Father who dwells in me is doing his works.

The Trinity cannot be divided.

John 14:28 You heard me tell you, ‘I am going away and I will come back to you.’ If you loved me, you would rejoice that I am going to the Father; for the Father is greater than I.

The Father is Lord of All, including the Son.

Acts 3:13-15 The God of Abraham, (the God) of Isaac, and (the God) of Jacob, the God of our ancestors, has glorified his servant Jesus whom you handed over and denied in Pilate’s presence, when he had decided to release him. 14 You denied the Holy and Righteous One and asked that a murderer be released to you. 15 The author of life you put to death, but God raised him from the dead; of this we are witnesses.

Jesus is here called the Author of Life, who can only be God. God indeed raised Jesus from the dead. The Apostles were explaining to the Jews what had happened. There is nothing contrary to the Trinity in this.

1 Cor 8:6 yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom all things are and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things are and through whom we exist.

The Father is here differentiated from the Word, but the Father and the Word and the Spirit are yet one God.

Eph 4:6 one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.

God the Father is God.

1 Tim 2:5 For there is one God. There is also one mediator between God and the human race, Christ Jesus, himself human,

The Second Person of the Blessed Trinity because man.

1 John 4:12 No one has ever seen God. Yet, if we love one another, God remains in us, and his love is brought to perfection in us.

God the Father has no appearance. It is God the Son who manifests God. Thus the Prophets all testified, “The Word of God came to me.” There would be no revelation at all apart from the Word, for the Father is unmanifest, whereas the Word is manifest.

This may go some way toward a better understanding of the Most Holy Trinity. The Father is the Origin of All, including the Son. The Son is the Manifestation of the Father. The Son is the Father’s Knowledge of Himself, and since God is Pure Being, His Knowledge of Himself is His Being, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God. Thus is the Father unbegotten and the Son begotten. And God not only knows Himself but also loves Himself, and the Love of the Father for the Son and the Son for the Father is spirated from them both, and is the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of Love.

Mathematically, Zero (Origin) begets One (Word), and between these two is Infinity (Spirit), and all is contained in One (God.)

 

[tonyrey]

A solitary Person would be the apotheosis of egoism! The command to love your neighbour as yourself would have no rational basis. The principles of liberty, equality and fraternity would not reflect life in heaven…

The fact that Jesus was like us in all things except sin implies that He had human limitations while He was in this world.

 

[wmw]

I’m not trying to convince or argue, but I’ve had a thought from reading the defenders of the Trinity in this thread and decided to share.

God’s name is YAHWEH translated means the one who is Eternal - who always existed, always exists, and always will exist. This is from the name God has spoken of Himself and given Moses at the burning bush “I AM WHO I AM.”

God is the one who breathes the eternal soul into man in Genesis. Thus, He shares his “Existence” as he has with us, the Angles and all that “is”, but I’m thinking that he has/does/will do forever and more perfectly shared this total Godliness in the three Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

The totality of this shared equality in Existence and Power and Knowledge except when purposely suspended by their own infinite ability by choice results in each of them being all that God is in three persons where none was before another nor did any one choose to make the others, but each are all God and the three are of one perfect whole Godly oneness.

So, I’m not confounded that there is more than one person in the God head, but maybe a small question in my limited head remains, why not infinite persons of God?, but I am guessing that somehow they picked the right number not I.