On the Holy Trinity

  • Thread starter Thread starter Limno
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

Limno

Guest
I was thinking about the Holy Trinity. As Christians, we believe in one God, that is three persons at the same time. That used to trouble me a little, till I came with the following analogy. It is a poor metaphor though, since I compare God with something physical, but there it goes:

The Holy Trinity is similar to the sea. At least, that helped me to understand Him a little bit more ;).

God the Son is like an iceberg, which became “solid” and revealed to us so we could interact with Him. However, from Jesus we only saw the very tip of the iceberg. We saw the material human Jesus that was made below Angels. What we don’t physically see is his full potential as God. Like the gigantic icebergs that can easily make cruisers crash.

http://yourbodyraks.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/iceberg.jpg

God the Holy Spirit is like the marine breeze, that shows us that the ocean (God) is very real, and reminds us that He is close to us even if we don’t see Him. He guides us to the right direction in crucial moments, gives us peace, comfort (and a lot much more). However He can also act with violence like a Typhoon, as when He makes people fall to the floor, speak in tongues, etc.

God the Father is like the ocean. Huge, limitless, all powerful. The Creator that started it all and from who we all depend. And even if we see God in three different persons, He is the same God, like water would be still H20 even in its gas, solid or liquid.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

What do you think?
 
One God in three modes is the Modalism/Sabellianism heresy. Your description is one of the most commonly used Modalist/Sabellianist descriptions. See: orthodoxwiki.org/Sabellianism

We believe that God is three Persons (Hypostases) in one Essence (Ousia). St Basil the Great (a Doctor of the Church) teaches that… Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy are three persons in one essence (Man). Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three persons in one essence (God). 👍

This may be a deep reading on the Trinity but, it is thoroughly orthodox Catholic:
  1. Of all nouns the sense of some, which are predicated of subjects plural and numerically various, is more general; as for instance man. When we so say, we employ the noun to indicate the common nature, and do not confine our meaning to any one man in particular who is known by that name. Peter, for instance is no more man, than Andrew, John, or James. …] Suppose then that two or more are set together, as, for instance, Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy, and that an enquiry is made into the essence or substance of humanity; no one will give one definition of essence or substance in the case of Paul, a second in that of Silvanus, and a third in that of Timothy; but the same words which have been employed in setting forth the essence or substance of Paul will apply to the others also. Those who are described by the same definition of essence or substance are of the same essence or substance when the enquirer has learned what is common, and turns his attention to the differentiating properties whereby one is distinguished from another, the definition by which each is known will no longer tally in all particulars with the definition of another, even though in some points it be found to agree.
  2. …] It is customary in Scripture to make a distinction of this kind, as well in many other passages as in the History of Job. When purposing to narrate the events of his life, Job first mentions the common, and says “a man;” then he straightway particularizes by adding “a certain.” As to the description of the essence, as having no bearing on the scope of his work, he is silent, but by means of particular notes of identity, mentioning the place and points of character, and such external qualifications as would individualize, and separate from the common and general idea, he specifies the “certain man,” in such a way that from name, place, mental qualities, and outside circumstances, the description of the man whose life is being narrated is made in all particulars perfectly clear. If he had been giving an account of the essence, there would not in his explanation of the nature have been any mention of these matters. The same moreover would have been the account that there is in the case of Bildad the Shuhite, and Zophar the Naamathite, and each of the men there mentioned. Transfer, then, to the divine dogmas the same standard of difference which you recognise in the case both of essence and of hypostasis in human affairs, and you will not go wrong. Whatever your thought suggests to you as to the mode of the existence of the Father, you will think also in the case of the Son, and in like manner too of the Holy Ghost…
 
As I understand the OP, this is but a working model to meditate on some aspects of the glory of God. Obviously the OP is not advancing this as absolute truth, by witness of the statement, “It is a poor metaphor though, since I compare God with something physical, but there it goes:”

If this were being advanced by the OP as Absolute Truth, or was being offered in addition to or in place of church teachings, then I would be more concerned about the heretical aspects of it.

When you get right down to it, any model we have of God is insufficient, and without some model (or “image”) the whole thing is too abstract for the human mind to appreciate. They are only idols if we accept them as Absolute Truth. If the OP were suggesting we should worship this model of God, I would have been much more concerned. That said, I thought the information on the heresy was interesting.

But let’s face it. There is NO description of God that can be even formulated in human words, that is adequate to explain God. The Cloud of the Unknowing shows this very clearly. You can get Shakespeare out here to describe God, and the words will fail. That’s because the “Cloud of Knowing” of all humanity – including our belief systems and languages – are individually and collectively insufficient, as the entire “Cloud” is but a infinitesimal speck compared to the glory of God, so the only way we humans with our human thinking can access God is to at least get into the Cloud of the Unknowing. And if we come up with models that stretch our ways of thinking, or give us new insights we may not have thought of before (whether or not they are “literally” true) then we have stretched our “wineskins” by venturing into the Cloud if the Unknowing, and if done so with proper reverence and devotion and self-effacement, invites contemplation whereby the Lord gifts us with Real Truth – truth that cannot be explained but only very poorly imitated by human words, photos, videos, models, or anything tangible. Hence I applaud the OP for stating that this model is clearly insufficient.

To the OP: other than the model itself as you have explained it, have your thoughts on it given you any interesting ideas about God that you wouldn’t have otherwise come across?

Oops I’d try to phrase my question better but I gotta go take kids to school.

Peace and joy,
Alan
 
I understand that, Alan. I thought I’d point out the issue with using h2o because many people accidently use that to explain the Trinity. Many of the Orthodox, Catholic, and Protestants have written on the h2o analogy as being modalist heresy. I thought it would be benificial to share what Doctor St Basil the Great used since his teaching is accepted by the Catholic Church. I did not think that the OP meant any harm by his post but, I feel the need to point out the truth concerning this. No hard feelings were meant by my post. 🙂
 
Zekariya said:
I understand that, Alan. I thought I’d point out the issue with using h2o because many people accidently use that to explain the Trinity. Many of the Orthodox, Catholic, and Protestants have written on the h2o analogy as being modalist heresy. I thought it would be benificial to share what Doctor St Basil the Great used since his teaching is accepted by the Catholic Church. I did not think that the OP meant any harm by his post but, I feel the need to point out the truth concerning this. No hard feelings were meant by my post. 🙂
Click to expand...
Thanks for sharing that. This was another reason of why I posted it, to see if anybody has thought that way before. However I only intended it “as a poor metaphor”, since we’ll never understand the Trinity. I believe in St. Augustine story. This was just me using my imagination to try to meditate on God, who is far superior to anything we can ever imagine. I had no idea that there where some people who believe in that way as an absolute truth though.
 
AlanFromWichita said:
As I understand the OP, this is but a working model to meditate on some aspects of the glory of God. Obviously the OP is not advancing this as absolute truth, by witness of the statement, “It is a poor metaphor though, since I compare God with something physical, but there it goes:”

If this were being advanced by the OP as Absolute Truth, or was being offered in addition to or in place of church teachings, then I would be more concerned about the heretical aspects of it.

When you get right down to it, any model we have of God is insufficient, and without some model (or “image”) the whole thing is too abstract for the human mind to appreciate. They are only idols if we accept them as Absolute Truth. If the OP were suggesting we should worship this model of God, I would have been much more concerned. That said, I thought the information on the heresy was interesting.

But let’s face it. There is NO description of God that can be even formulated in human words, that is adequate to explain God. The Cloud of the Unknowing shows this very clearly. You can get Shakespeare out here to describe God, and the words will fail. That’s because the “Cloud of Knowing” of all humanity – including our belief systems and languages – are individually and collectively insufficient, as the entire “Cloud” is but a infinitesimal speck compared to the glory of God, so the only way we humans with our human thinking can access God is to at least get into the Cloud of the Unknowing. And if we come up with models that stretch our ways of thinking, or give us new insights we may not have thought of before (whether or not they are “literally” true) then we have stretched our “wineskins” by venturing into the Cloud if the Unknowing, and if done so with proper reverence and devotion and self-effacement, invites contemplation whereby the Lord gifts us with Real Truth – truth that cannot be explained but only very poorly imitated by human words, photos, videos, models, or anything tangible. Hence I applaud the OP for stating that this model is clearly insufficient.

To the OP: other than the model itself as you have explained it, have your thoughts on it given you any interesting ideas about God that you wouldn’t have otherwise come across?

Oops I’d try to phrase my question better but I gotta go take kids to school.

Peace and joy,
Alan
Click to expand...
The “iceberg” metaphor helped me on Jesus, as not many realize how great and powerful He is, since people only focus on what they saw of Him on this planet, but not on what He has always been doing from Heaven, as fully God. On the Holy Spirit it helps me to imagine how He guides us on earth, it doesn’t matter how spiritually far we are from the Father (the ocean in my metaphor). He will always help the faithful return to the right way. Other thing is, that as the aquatic scientist that I am, I’m aware on how we all depend on the ocean for clean air, food, water supply, and so on. Which is similar with God, spiritually and physically as He is the Creator of both realms. And as you stated, I totally agree that this model is clearly insufficient to explain God.

Thanks for your comment!
 
Limno said:
The “iceberg” metaphor helped me on Jesus, as not many realize how great and powerful He is, since people only focus on what they saw of Him on this planet, but not on what He has always been doing from Heaven, as fully God. On the Holy Spirit it helps me to imagine how He guides us on earth, it doesn’t matter how spiritually far we are from the Father (the ocean in my metaphor). He will always help the faithful return to the right way. Other thing is, that as the aquatic scientist that I am, I’m aware on how we all depend on the ocean for clean air, food, water supply, and so on. Which is similar with God, spiritually and physically as He is the Creator of both realms. And as you stated, I totally agree that this model is clearly insufficient to explain God.

Thanks for your comment!
Click to expand...
I like that! I totally get the issue of everybody focused on Jesus Who walked the earth. That was just a calibration point for us; He has left us with a helper who guides us in all ways. There is where we will find “answers” and guidance for the here and now. We cannot simply mimic Jesus’s actions on the earth and think we’re doing it right, because the beauty is in the transformation that the Word has on us as our faith grows. 🙂

Also I like models that emphasize the mystery of God, which to me calls upon our apophatic traditions in the manner of the Cloud of the Unknowing. Too many models are more like a Tower of Babel. We think we know which way we need to build, when what we really need to do is more like “unthinking.” 😉

People think the way to God is to learn more head knowledge. Really it’s more about setting aside imperfect head knowledge, and learning to fully trust in God. Two suppositions give me that trust: 1) trust that God’s will IS done on earth, and 2) trusting that the Holy Spirit really does have things under control.

1 Cor 1:17-25
For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, and not with the wisdom of human eloquence, so that the cross of Christ might not be emptied of its meaning. The message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

For it is written:
“I will destroy the wisdom of the wise,
and the learning of the learned I will set aside.”

Where is the wise one? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made the wisdom of the world foolish? For since in the wisdom of God the world did not come to know God through wisdom, it was the will of God through the foolishness of the proclamation to save those who have faith.

For Jews demand signs and Greeks look for wisdom, but we proclaim Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, but to those who are called, Jews and Greeks alike, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.

Alan
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top