Is each person of Trinity necessary?

[Sursum-Corda]

YOu must accept basic anthropomorphism otherwise no point in talking.

 

[Sursum-Corda]

There are three beings in the one God.
Each of them is a God completely.

The entire construct amounts to a singular God of three Persons.

If any of the three persons did not have being then they could not have personhood.

Being is an essential constituent of personhood.

 

[STT]

Apparently Wesrock does not agree with you since he is talking about one being but three persons. You can check it at post #24.

 

[porthos11]

Could we agree that God as a necessary being exist in all possible worlds? You are excluding something from Father, Son and Holy Spirit. This means that they do not exist in all possible worlds therefore they are not God.

Nothing is excluded from any of the three persons. That is not possible because then they would not be God. They differ in their generation but they are fully God. No Person has something the any of the others lack. They persons are Not parts of God and not individual gods and they do not combine into God. There is only one God and this God is absolutely simple.

Again i refer you to the Trinitarian shield.

 

[Theo2]

There is only one God with 3 persons. We will never understand God. God said I Am. He just is and it is foolish to talk as if He was human and He could exist without a leg.

 

[STT]

Nothing is excluded from any of the three persons. That is not possible because then they would not be God. They differ in their generation but they are fully God. No Person has something the any of the others lack. They persons are Not parts of God and not individual gods and they do not combine into God. There is only one God and this God is absolutely simple.

Again i refer you to the Trinitarian shield.

If your claim was true then each person of Trinity was complete. Son is in fact Object of Knowledge. Remove Him and you will find that God cannot have knowledge. The same for Holy Spirit who is Love.

 

[porthos11]

porthos11:

Nothing is excluded from any of the three persons. That is not possible because then they would not be God. They differ in their generation but they are fully God. No Person has something the any of the others lack. They persons are Not parts of God and not individual gods and they do not combine into God. There is only one God and this God is absolutely simple.

Again i refer you to the Trinitarian shield.

If your claim was true then each person of Trinity was complete. Son is in fact Object of Knowledge. Remove Him and you will find that God cannot have knowledge. The same for Holy Spirit who is Love.

You are incorrect. The object of knowledge is not the Son, but the Father himself, that is to say, God knows himself and forms an Idea of himself. The Son is the Idea/Image (Gk. eikon) of the Father.

And that is why the Son necessarily cannot not exist. Because we don’t start with the existence of the Son. We start with the fact that God is Knowledge (and we know this because God has revealed himself to be so). Because God is Knowledge, he MUST have an Idea of himself, and the Idea, that Image MUST be fully adequate, but no Image of God is adequate unless that Image is as Perfect and Infinite as God himself. So the Son, MUST necessarily exist. And because there is only one Perfect and Infinite, which is God, so too must the Son be God. So you cannot attempt to remove the Son because that is not possible.

Likewise the Holy Spirit. Because the Son MUST necessarily exist, it is likewise impossible that the Father and the Son cannot love each other because God is Love (he has revealed this to us too). And this Love between the Father and the Son cannot be inadequate because if that were so, they would be sharing something incomplete, which is impossible in God. Therefore, this Love cannot be anything less than Perfect and Infinite. And since there can be only one Perfect and Infinite, that Love must also necessarily be God.

So the Father is God, unbegotten. The Son is the same God, but begotten. The Spirit is the same God, but proceeding. There is only ONE God, not three. God is absolutely Simple; he has no parts (the three Persons are not parts of God).

So your argument here fails because first of all, God’s knowledge is not contingent on the existence of the Son because the first object of God’s knowledge is God himself. God (the Father) is the object of knowledge, the Son is the Logos as a result of that knowledge. The Son must necessarily exist because the Father knows himself.

 

[STT]

You are incorrect. The object of knowledge is not the Son, but the Father himself, that is to say, God knows himself and forms an Idea of himself. The Son is the Idea/Image (Gk. eikon) of the Father.

The idea of something is an abstract object and it cannot be a person.

Likewise the Holy Spirit. Because the Son MUST necessarily exist, it is likewise impossible that the Father and the Son cannot love each other because God is Love (he has revealed this to us too). And this Love between the Father and the Son cannot be inadequate because if that were so, they would be sharing something incomplete, which is impossible in God. Therefore, this Love cannot be anything less than Perfect and Infinite. And since there can be only one Perfect and Infinite, that Love must also necessarily be God.

There is no need for Holy Spirit if we accept that Father and Son are Love unless you claim that they are not Love which means that they could not be God.

So the Father is God, unbegotten. The Son is the same God, but begotten. The Spirit is the same God, but proceeding. There is only ONE God, not three. God is absolutely Simple; he has no parts (the three Persons are not parts of God).

Are you saying that 3=1?

 

[Wesrock]

Could we agree that God as a necessary being exist in all possible worlds? You are excluding something from Father, Son and Holy Spirit. This means that they do not exist in all possible worlds therefore they are not God.

God being Triune is said to be necessary to God by revelation, not because it’s been deduced by natural philosophy alone. By revelation, there is no possible world in which God is not Triune (and, in fact, if Possible World A had God A and Possible World B had God B, it would logically follow that either God A and God B are actually identical and the same or neither is actually God).

 

[STT]

God being Triune is said to be necessary to God by revelation, not because it’s been deduced by natural philosophy alone. By revelation, there is no possible world in which God is not Triune (and, in fact, if Possible World A had God A and Possible World B had God B, it would logically follow that either God A and God B are actually identical and the same or neither is actually God).

Is Son Love? If yes, there is no need for Holy Spirit. If no, He cannot be God since He does not exist in all possible world.

 

[Wesrock]

porthos11:

So the Father is God, unbegotten. The Son is the same God, but begotten. The Spirit is the same God, but proceeding. There is only ONE God, not three. God is absolutely Simple; he has no parts (the three Persons are not parts of God).

Are you saying that 3=1?

No, he is not saying that. He is not saying 3 beings = 1 being, or 3 natures = 1 nature, or 3 essences = 1 essence, or 3 persons = 1 person. He’s saying there is one being who is three persons.

 

[Gorgias]

Man mirrors the Trinity. We were created in His image:

Body
Soul
Mind

Body = Christ
Soul = Holy Spirit
Mind = God

As an analogy, it kinda works. From a philosophical perspective, it’s inaccurate. I get that you’re saying that the Holy Spirit kinda looks like ‘soul’ … but is He the soul of God? I get that Jesus Christ has a body… but is He the body of God? I get that God the Father seems like ‘mind’… but is He the mind of the Trinity?

I don’t believe God is absolutely simple?

Are you saying that you think that God is made up of parts? Such that you can point to one part of God and say “this is the ‘Love’ part” or “this is the ‘Holy Spirit’ part”?

I’m sorry but we are made in His image and to me this is how it manifests.

I think that we would say that being made in His image and likeness have less to do with our bodies (after all, God is not physical), and more to do with our immortal soul.

Are we NOT one even while being three parts??? Because I dunno about you but despite having a mind, soul and body I feel like one person.

Sure – the Church teaches that we are a body/soul composite. But, that’s the whole game, right there! We’re composite, not simple!

I do not believe that each part is separate and not part of me

But… isn’t the question “are you made up of parts?” and not “do those parts make up a cohesive whole?”…?

I think analogies are great building blocks to higher theological ideas.

They are. That’s the whole point of them – they use an imperfect comparison in order to start comprehending the topic. Then, we move past them and seek more complete truth.

If you study the history of the Church, you’ll find that we went through this whole period early on where we were trying to wrap our heads around who and what God is. Many people came up with many analogies. They were useful, in that they tried to express a truth about God, but – as analogies – they necessarily were slightly off the mark in one way or another. It took a few councils to sort it all out. But, each time, we as a Church came to an agreement on what we believe (and what we don’t believe). It was a pretty intense process.

Well, no. Which is why a significant blow to the brain can cause distinct personality changes in a person.

I tend to see things through a more-or-less Thomistic lens. I think I’d say that our intellect – which is not physical! – expresses itself through the body. If the body is damaged, it’s not an indication that the mind (that is, the intellect) is damaged – it’s just a sign that the physical interface is damaged.

 

[Wesrock]

Wesrock:

God being Triune is said to be necessary to God by revelation, not because it’s been deduced by natural philosophy alone. By revelation, there is no possible world in which God is not Triune (and, in fact, if Possible World A had God A and Possible World B had God B, it would logically follow that either God A and God B are actually identical and the same or neither is actually God).

Is Son Love? If yes, there is no need for Holy Spirit. If no, He cannot be God since He does not exist in all possible world.

They are all Knowledge, they are all the same Love, they are all the same Good, they are all same Power, where Knowledge, Love, Good, and Power all are actually the same thing.

Even as Aquinas contemplated the Trinity, the Son isn’t knowledge. There is a paternity and a filiation in the intelligible act of Intellect. There is a spiration in the intelligible act of willing.

 

[STT]

They are all Knowledge, they are all the same Love, they are all the same Good, they are all same Power, where Knowledge, Love, Good, and Power all are actually the same thing.

You are saying that there is no distinction between them. Therefore we are dealing with one God and one person. Otherwise you need to find something which you can differentiate them from each other.

 

[Wesrock]

We’re dealing with one God who is three persons, where what is meant by person is something much different than what we mean by the word in common use. What you think we’re talking about by Trinity is not what is meant by the Church. There is a paternity and a filiation, which are references to the same essence but relationally really distinct, for paternity is not filiation or vice versa, and both proceed from a real intelligible act of the Intellect. Likewise with spiration, though of the will.

 

[porthos11]

The idea of something is an abstract object and it cannot be a person.

You’re limiting your thinking to human knowledge. For humans yes, which is why our idea of ourselves is indequate. Our idea of ourselves is like what we are but not quite what we are. For one thing, our idea of ourselves does not have a body and soul of its own, so our idea of ourselves is inherently inadequate.

It is impossible for anything to be inadequate in God. So the error here is assuming our limitations apply to God. They do not.

There is no need for Holy Spirit if we accept that Father and Son are Love unless you claim that they are not Love which means that they could not be God.

Your error that there is no need for the Holy Spirit. It is precisely because the Father is Love and the Son is Love, that they must necessarily love one another, each being the object of the other’s love. Because it is impossible that the Father and the So not love each other, there must necessarily be that Bond, if you will, between the Father and the Son. That Bond, if you will, must be perfect and infinite as befitting the Divine Nature, otherwise, such love would be inadequate, and there is nothing inadequate in God. This Perfect, Infinite Loving/Bond must also therefore be God. This Person we call the Holy Spirit. Because God is Love and the the Son is Love, the Holy Spirit must necessarily exist.

So the Father is God, unbegotten. The Son is the same God, but begotten. The Spirit is the same God, but proceeding. There is only ONE God, not three. God is absolutely Simple; he has no parts (the three Persons are not parts of God).

Are you saying that 3=1?

I do not use mathematical symbols and expressions to explain the divine, because mathematics is inherently limited (it is a human science). So I would not use that phrasing.

There are phrases that are deemed orthodox: Three in One and One in Three; Triune; Trinity; One God in Three Persons.

 

[porthos11]

Wesrock:

God being Triune is said to be necessary to God by revelation, not because it’s been deduced by natural philosophy alone. By revelation, there is no possible world in which God is not Triune (and, in fact, if Possible World A had God A and Possible World B had God B, it would logically follow that either God A and God B are actually identical and the same or neither is actually God).

Is Son Love? If yes, there is no need for Holy Spirit. If no, He cannot be God since He does not exist in all possible world.

Okay, I’ve explained it already that the Spirit is not the same as the divine Attribute that God is Love, but is the Love shared between the Father and the Son (the Bond so to speak). You’re having difficulty separating the attributes of God (power, knoweldge, love) from the generation of the Persons. The divine Persons are not personifications of his attributes but are necessary “consequences” of these attributes.

And for existing in all possible worlds, you’ve just derailed the whole thing, and just makes absolutely no sense for this discussion. This makes me realize that you’re not Catholic are you? You’re probably not even Christian. Mormon, perhaps?

 

[STT]

We’re dealing with one God who is three persons, where what is meant by person is something much different than what we mean by the word in common use. What you think we’re talking about by Trinity is not what is meant by the Church. There is a paternity and a filiation, which are references to the same essence but relationally really distinct, for paternity is not filiation or vice versa, and both proceed from a real intelligible act of the Intellect. Likewise with spiration, though of the will.

Do we have a law/principle which states that two things/beings which have exactly the same properties are identical? How three persons of Trinity could be different if they are all God and have the same properties?

 

[Canvas]

This thread is not a good faith thread. OP is just looking for an argument, not for a better understanding of the Holy Trinity.

 

[porthos11]

Wesrock:

We’re dealing with one God who is three persons, where what is meant by person is something much different than what we mean by the word in common use. What you think we’re talking about by Trinity is not what is meant by the Church. There is a paternity and a filiation, which are references to the same essence but relationally really distinct, for paternity is not filiation or vice versa, and both proceed from a real intelligible act of the Intellect. Likewise with spiration, though of the will.

Do we have a law/principle which states that two things/beings which have exactly the same properties are identical? How three persons of Trinity could be different if they are all God and have the same properties?

That’s why we use the term “distinct” rather than “different”.

Again, from the Athanasian Creed: “neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the essence.”