V
Vico
Guest
Incarnation has been Christian belief since the time of Jesus Christ, such as baptism in the Jordan, raising the dead and healing the sick, transfiguration, resurrection, and ascension.God is three eternal coexistent persons! That seems very conflictive. When you say"He is not the Father who is the Son, nor is the Son he who is the Father, nor is the Holy Spirit he who is the Father or the Son." but that means you talk about three persons and three gods. The fact is that: God is one person and one.
The problem with Aquinas(Trinity) is that: St Thomas Aquinas said God has three persons and those persons emerge from relations. If Thomas said God has three persons then there maybe not problem. But Thomas assume those three persons to have apart fact or presence from one same eternal essence. It could be supposed that God has generally three relations and those are called Father, Son and Holy Spirit. But if you say those persons are different in anyway that means God is not one anymore.
Thomas tried too much to support that God is one and I know that Christians believe in one God. Problem is to think that Jesus was God and struggles to explain that with philosophical doctrines . Did Thomas can explain incarnation? When did Christians start to believe that?
No, the persons do not emerge from relations, the persons are the relations founded in the essence, so do not bring any composition. St. Thomas and the Church teach that God is absolutely simple without any composition. There is never talk of three gods, only one. As stated in the Summa Theologica, Q39, A1: Whether in God the essence is the same as the person?
Objection 2: Further, simultaneous affirmation and negation of the same things in the same respect cannot be true. But affirmation and negation are true of essence and of person. For person is distinct, whereas essence is not. Therefore person and essence are not the same.
Reply to Objection 2: As essence and person in God differ in our way of thinking, it follows that something can be denied of the one and affirmed of the other; and therefore, when we suppose the one, we need not suppose the other.