Person Vs Nature

[JimG]

Identity.

The person is* who* we are.
The nature is* what* we are.

Or so I have read.

Exactly.

Nature can exist without person. But person cannot exist without nature.
For example, rocks and trees have the nature of rock and tree, but they are not persons.

Nature is essence, it is being. Person flows from nature, not as distinct being, but as expression of being. The nature of a rock is not expressed as a person. The nature of a human being is expressed as a person. The one nature (one being) of God, is expressed as three Persons.

 

[afthomercy]

Regarding the Definition of Person
A Human Being is the Material (as perceivable by humans) Version of the Person.
A Soul is the Immaterial (as God Knows It) Version of the Person.
The person is a body and mind with a will proceeding from the two.

Regarding Your Seeking to Understand the Holy Trinity, please consider the following:
In the Beginning, the Creator, a Distinct Person [soul with mind, body, and will] wanted to have others freely share in His Infinite Blessings.
Therefore, The Creator thought of a plan to achieve this Goal (Word)
The Creator ensured the Word was of His Nature (Word with God)
The Creator Willed the Word with His Being by becoming the Word (Word was God)
Therefore Everything that Happens is of the Creator’s Mind.
The Creator’s Body becoming Man is the Son, a Distinct Person Begotten Fully from God’s Being (In particular His Body)
The Creator’s Will becoming Man is the Holy Spirit, a Distinct Person which Fully Proceeds from the Creator and the Son.

Thoughts?

“The person is a body and mind with a will proceeding from the two.” So God has a body also?
“Creator, a Distinct Person” : Doesn’t He have a name?
“Creator became the Word”: Did this original creator continue to exist alongside the Word, or did He cease to exist?
“Creator’s Body became Man”: OK, so this Creator had a body? And this body became Man. So what happened to the original creator? He went from spirit plus body to pure spirit?
“Creator’s Will becoming Man is the Holy Spirit”: OK, that means that the Holy Spirit is a Man? And what about the original Creator’s will? Does He now become a will-less person?

My friend, you have to be very careful in your choice of words, otherwise you will be in all sorts of trouble!

 

[afthomercy]

Exactly.

Nature can exist without person. But person cannot exist without nature.
For example, rocks and trees have the nature of rock and tree, but they are not persons.

Nature is essence, it is being. Person flows from nature, not as distinct being, but as expression of being. The nature of a rock is not expressed as a person. The nature of a human being is expressed as a person. The one nature (one being) of God, is expressed as three Persons.

If I understand your formulations correctly, you mean to say that person is an expression of a nature. Take a dog. He is a pretty good expression of a canine nature. So would you say that a dog is a person? You need to clarify what exactly you mean by “expression of nature”, and it should not be a subjective definition.

 

[jochoa]

Please note: The only method of knowing the Complete Existence of God’s Being and God’s World* prior to Creation, can only be known through Divine Revelation.
*God’s World - The Space and Time prior to Creation. Since God is a Being in the image and likeness of us, He must exist in some concept of space and time.

My friend, you have to be very careful in your choice of words, otherwise you will be in all sorts of trouble!

Regarding Choice of Words
I am trying to present understandings which clearly demonstrate the Distinctions of God: God IS. God is I AM. God is Everything. God is Love. God is the Creator. God is the Father. God is the Son. God is the Holy Spirit…etc.
In my use of “became,” I am trying to demonstrate alignment with Catholicism. Perhaps it could be stated more clearly as “took on a human nature.”

“Creator, a Distinct Person” : Doesn’t He have a name?

Yes, His Name is God and I AM and the Father. I would also add, I think He is first God, since prior to creating the world, as we know it, He had no children. Then when He Wills the Word, He becomes God, the Father.

“Creator became the Word”: Did this original creator continue to exist alongside the Word, or did He cease to exist?

The Father continues to exist alongside the Word made Flesh. Just as He existed when He made the Word, He Exists as the Word Lives.

“Creator’s Body became Man”: OK, so this Creator had a body? And this body became Man. So what happened to the original creator? He went from spirit plus body to pure spirit?

I think…Yes, the Father had a Body, just like you and I. His Body could tell His Mind what it feels, and His Mind could tell His Body what it thinks. Once His Being (Body and Mind) decided to Share the Blessings* with Others, He created Us. To Create and Guide Us, He had to separate His Immaterial Spirit from His Material Being (He created the Heavens and the Earth). I also think…this is why the Spirit has an Image, and how the Son of God is Begotten Fully of the Father’s Being, And God going from a Single Person, Presently Immaterial, to the Holy Trinity-Three Persons in One Person, Presently Material.

“Creator’s Will becoming Man is the Holy Spirit”: OK, that means that the Holy Spirit is a Man? And what about the original Creator’s will? Does He now become a will-less person?

Yes, the Holy Spirit is/will be a Man; in particular, the Son of Man, who will proceed from The Father and the Son. No, the Holy Spirit is a Distinct Person from the Father, therefore, the Father still has His Will. And…the Father’s Will is the Power/Will of the Holy Spirit

Thank you very much for the challenging questions. Please share more.
Thoughts?

 

[afthomercy]

Please note: The only method of knowing the Complete Existence of God’s Being and God’s World* prior to Creation, can only be known through Divine Revelation.
*God’s World - The Space and Time prior to Creation. Since God is a Being in the image and likeness of us, He must exist in some concept of space and time.

Regarding Choice of Words
I am trying to present understandings which clearly demonstrate the Distinctions of God: God IS. God is I AM. God is Everything. God is Love. God is the Creator. God is the Father. God is the Son. God is the Holy Spirit…etc.
In my use of “became,” I am trying to demonstrate alignment with Catholicism. Perhaps it could be stated more clearly as “took on a human nature.”

Yes, His Name is God and I AM and the Father. I would also add, I think He is first God, since prior to creating the world, as we know it, He had no children. Then when He Wills the Word, He becomes God, the Father.

The Father continues to exist alongside the Word made Flesh. Just as He existed when He made the Word, He Exists as the Word Lives.

I think…Yes, the Father had a Body, just like you and I. His Body could tell His Mind what it feels, and His Mind could tell His Body what it thinks. Once His Being (Body and Mind) decided to Share the Blessings* with Others, He created Us. To Create and Guide Us, He had to separate His Immaterial Spirit from His Material Being (He created the Heavens and the Earth). I also think…this is why the Spirit has an Image, and how the Son of God is Begotten Fully of the Father’s Being, And God going from a Single Person, Presently Immaterial, to the Holy Trinity-Three Persons in One Person, Presently Material.

Yes, the Holy Spirit is/will be a Man; in particular, the Son of Man, who will proceed from The Father and the Son. No, the Holy Spirit is a Distinct Person from the Father, therefore, the Father still has His Will. And…the Father’s Will is the Power/Will of the Holy Spirit

Thank you very much for the challenging questions. Please share more.
Thoughts?

My friend, you are completely outside orthodox thought/teaching. I have never come across these propositions before. My serious advice for you would be to get in touch with your parish priest and discuss the same with him before you go on to hold them as valid.

 

[vz71]

Please note: The only method of knowing the Complete Existence of God’s Being and God’s World* prior to Creation, can only be known through Divine Revelation.
*God’s World - The Space and Time prior to Creation. Since God is a Being in the image and likeness of us, He must exist in some concept of space and time.

No, we are in the image of him.
And that does not mean we share all characteristics, or even more then 1 characteristic.
That we are limited to creation does not necessitate God being limited in the same fashion.

Yes, His Name is God and I AM and the Father. I would also add, I think He is first God, since prior to creating the world, as we know it, He had no children. Then when He Wills the Word, He becomes God, the Father.

No, it is a characteristic of God that he always was, is, and will be.
There is no point in which he is not God, there is no set of conditions possible in which he is not God.
God the Father always.
God the Son, always.
God the Holy Spirit, always.

…the Father had a Body, just like you and I. His Body could tell His Mind what it feels, and His Mind could tell His Body what it thinks. Once His Being (Body and Mind) decided to Share the Blessings* with Others, He created Us. To Create and Guide Us, He had to separate His Immaterial Spirit from His Material Being (He created the Heavens and the Earth).

This has more in common with Morman teaching then with Catholicism.
God is not restricted by limitations as appears to be in this interpretation.

It may help if you took every characteristic one could identify with man and simply throw it out. Most do not apply to God.

 

[Benadam]

This is briefly how I’ve understood the term ‘person’.

Individual humans are a species unto themselves. Each human is a self determined being. This makes individual humans persons. A bear or a lion is not a self determined being. A bear is a bear is a bear. Bears are not persons.

A bee hive acts as a single mind. This singlemindedness is because bees are not persons.

There a three self determined persons that are divine. Their singlemindedness is determined by a free act of their wills.

 

[jochoa]

My friend, you are completely outside orthodox thought/teaching. I have never come across these propositions before. My serious advice for you would be to get in touch with your parish priest and discuss the same with him before you go on to hold them as valid.

Please note that I apologize for failing to indicate my intentions clearly and for seemingly proposing these reflections as Truth… My intentions for pondering and proposing these reflections and understandings is to grow myself and others closer to God - The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit and Catholicism, AND to subject these reflections to harsh criticisms regarding alignment with Catholicism, for it is the Truth. I have shared similar reflections with my priest and the local theologian a couple of weeks ago and am awaiting their thoughts on my reflections. I have come here to discuss and grow with apologists of the Church who have the time to reflect and share reflections on various understandings.
**Basically, please help me see where I am not in alignment with Catholicism…**so I can correct my thinking.

Thank you very much for your time and consideration. I look forward to hearing your thoughts.

 

[Benadam]

Please note that I apologize for failing to indicate my intentions clearly and for seemingly proposing these reflections as Truth… My intentions for pondering and proposing these reflections and understandings is to grow myself and others closer to God - The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit and Catholicism, AND to subject these reflections to harsh criticisms regarding alignment with Catholicism, for it is the Truth. I have shared similar reflections with my priest and the local theologian a couple of weeks ago and am awaiting their thoughts on my reflections. I have come here to discuss and grow with apologists of the Church who have the time to reflect and share reflections on various understandings.
**Basically, please help me see where I am not in alignment with Catholicism…**so I can correct my thinking.

Thank you very much for your time and consideration. I look forward to hearing your thoughts.

This is more in line with a Catholic understanding. The Cognizance of God is the Son. . The Word. Only God can know God fully and God knowing God is the Son eternally knowing the Father.

You’re ok you aren’t getting emotionally attached to your own musings.

 

[jochoa]

No, we are in the image of him.
And that does not mean we share all characteristics, or even more then 1 characteristic.
That we are limited to creation does not necessitate God being limited in the same fashion.

You are correct, we are in the image and likeness of Him. This is the second time I have made that mistake. I mean to say, “I think - since we are created in the image and likeness of God, God must have existed inside some concept of space and time, prior to the creation of the world, as we know it.”

No, it is a characteristic of God that he always was, is, and will be.
There is no point in which he is not God, there is no set of conditions possible in which he is not God.
God the Father always.
God the Son, always.
God the Holy Spirit, always.

This has more in common with Morman teaching then with Catholicism.
God is not restricted by limitations as appears to be in this interpretation.

I agree in the simplicity, however, I am trying to define a bit further as to How All Three Distinct Persons-Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, could co-exist, co-eternally in One Being or Spirit (“Spirit of God”, “One in Being with the Father”). I do not mean to present any limitations as to God’s Power or Being, I am only trying to make sense of a method He may go about doing things, and I assure you that I am heavily guided by Catholicism. If you recognize mis-alignment, please share and I will gladly update/alter my understandings.

It may help if you took every characteristic one could identify with man and simply throw it out. Most do not apply to God.

Absolute Faith is definitely a Noteworthy Cause. Unfortunately, I have always had the stubbornness of seeking reason and understanding throughout my life. Case in point, my father used to tell me quite often, “Son, is this another thousand and one question day?”

Thank you for the re-direction to proper wording and for your time and consideration. I look forward to hearing more of your thoughts.

 

[vz71]

“I think - since we are created in the image and likeness of God, God must have existed inside some concept of space and time, prior to the creation of the world, as we know it.”

Because he is God, space and time need not be there. God depends upon nothing.
It is a mystery how this can be, likely becausse we simply cannot relate to God in this way.

I agree in the simplicity, however, I am trying to define a bit further as to How All Three Distinct Persons-Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, could co-exist, co-eternally in One Being or Spirit (“Spirit of God”, “One in Being with the Father”). I do not mean to present any limitations as to God’s Power or Being, I am only trying to make sense of a method He may go about doing things, and I assure you that I am heavily guided by Catholicism. If you recognize mis-alignment, please share and I will gladly update/alter my understandings.

Welcome to the mystery that is the Holy Trinity.
I am afraid this side of the resurrection there will be very little towards understanding it.

 

[4Horsemen]

When we say that the Second Person holds two natures, viz. one divine and one human, we are making a distinction between the person and his nature. Again, when we say that the 3-divine persons hold one undivided nature, we are making the same distinction. So the question is, what distinguishes the person from his nature, or, what is there in the “person” that is not there in the “nature” and vice versa?

God’s nature is God-ness – being God – the “What”. You might call His nature His essence.

His existence is Three Persons:

God’s authority as person is Father of all His creatures – 1st Person of the Godhead.
God’s personhood is manifested in Jesus – 2nd Person of the Godhead.
God’s spirit is His breath realized by the Holy Spirit – 3rd Person of the Godhead.

Nonetheless, each Person is within the other two Persons yet distinguishable.
A mystery, to be sure.

 

[afthomercy]

This is briefly how I’ve understood the term ‘person’.

Individual humans are a species unto themselves. Each human is a self determined being. This makes individual humans persons. A bear or a lion is not a self determined being. A bear is a bear is a bear. Bears are not persons.

A bee hive acts as a single mind. This singlemindedness is because bees are not persons.

There a three self determined persons that are divine. Their singlemindedness is determined by a free act of their wills.

You need to explain what is meant by “self-determined being”. You say that animals aren’t self-determined beings, but humans and God are. Your meaning isn’t clear.

 

[Benadam]

You need to explain what is meant by “self-determined being”. You say that animals aren’t self-determined beings, but humans and God are. Your meaning isn’t clear.

We participate in our own creation. Man is the only creature God made for his own sake. Love requires freedom. We actively determine what our ultimate end will be, making our end our own responsibility. This is part and parcel of being a creation directly from God as oppossed to being made by earthly processes like the souls of other animals.

 

[tonyrey]

Agreed that we cannot analyse the Supreme Reality precisely, but we can make some logical assumptions based on whatever little has been revealed. I also agree with you that the relationships of the three Persons within the Godhead are beyond human understanding, and so I don’t try to understand/explain the same. All I’m saying is that the Godhead reconciles its three identities/personhoods by building a very specific relationship between them, a relationship that it alone understands.

Human beings are not wired to hold more than one core identity at any given point of time, but that limitation does not apply to the Godhead, or we can say that the Godhead gets over that “limitation” by building a peculiar relationship matrix around its three identities.

Surely that relationship is primarily one of Love…

 

[afthomercy]

Surely that relationship is primarily one of Love…

Sir, this doesn’t quite sit well with your statement in post #17 that ““relationship” is a human category which doesn’t apply to God.”

Anyway, let’s ignore that and concentrate on the main thing, viz. what is it about the Divine Persons that sets them in opposition to each other? For the Catechism says that everything in them is one, except where there is opposition of relationship [CCC255]. The only source of opposition that I can think of is the difference of IDENTITY.

 

[afthomercy]

Thank you very much for the direction! From the start of my work, I have been guided by Prayer, the Catechism, the Summa Thelogica, and Dr. William Lane Craig’s Doctrines on Existence and Holy Trinity. I had not been directed to study the Exposition of the Trinity, and I am grateful you shared.

Please note: my intention for sharing is to draw me and others closer to God through Jesus and the Catholic Church and to subject the understandings to Harsh Criticisms regarding mis-alignment with Catholicism.

With that said, please share your thoughts.

The first three things that you listed, viz. prayer, the Catechism and the ST cannot put you as far outside orthodox teaching as you presently are, so I feel that the fourth one is the culprit, viz. William Lane Craig’s doctrines. Apparently this worthy received his theological instruction at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, which does not subscribe to Catholic doctrine. Craig did his Ph.D under Prof. John Hick. Hick has notably been criticized by then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (the present Pope), when he was head of the Holy Office. Ratzinger had examined the works of several theologians accused of relativism, such as Jacques Dupuis and Roger Haight, and found that many, if not all, were philosophically inspired by Hick.

When it comes to purity of doctrine, there is nothing like the Catholic Church, so I urgently suggest that you remove all non-catholic sources from your bookshelf till you become sufficiently rooted in orthodox doctrine.

 

[jochoa]

Because he is God, space and time need not be there. God depends upon nothing.
It is a mystery how this can be, likely becausse we simply cannot relate to God in this way.

Though I know there is no way of understanding it without Divine Revelation, please consider the following: If we are created in His Image, then He has an Image. The only Image which would not require a concept of space would be a solid color.

Welcome to the mystery that is the Holy Trinity.
I am afraid this side of the resurrection there will be very little towards understanding it.

Fair Enough!

 

[jochoa]

The first three things that you listed, viz. prayer, the Catechism and the ST cannot put you as far outside orthodox teaching as you presently are, so I feel that the fourth one is the culprit, viz. William Lane Craig’s doctrines. Apparently this worthy received his theological instruction at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, which does not subscribe to Catholic doctrine. Craig did his Ph.D under Prof. John Hick. Hick has notably been criticized by then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (the present Pope), when he was head of the Holy Office. Ratzinger had examined the works of several theologians accused of relativism, such as Jacques Dupuis and Roger Haight, and found that many, if not all, were philosophically inspired by Hick.

When it comes to purity of doctrine, there is nothing like the Catholic Church, so I urgently suggest that you remove all non-catholic sources from your bookshelf till you become sufficiently rooted in orthodox doctrine.

I should have also listed Scripture and Life Experience. What I do not understand is why you claim I am outside orthodox teaching. As I pray the Nicene Creed, I personally find great alignment, however, I could either be accidentally blind or perhaps my reflections are poorly stated or misunderstood. As I read your posts regarding the "I"s of God, my reflections seem in alignment with yours.

Please share where you see inconsistencies, and I will do my best to fix the issues.

 

[jochoa]

The first three things that you listed, viz. prayer, the Catechism and the ST cannot put you as far outside orthodox teaching as you presently are, so I feel that the fourth one is the culprit, viz. William Lane Craig’s doctrines. Apparently this worthy received his theological instruction at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, which does not subscribe to Catholic doctrine. Craig did his Ph.D under Prof. John Hick. Hick has notably been criticized by then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (the present Pope), when he was head of the Holy Office. Ratzinger had examined the works of several theologians accused of relativism, such as Jacques Dupuis and Roger Haight, and found that many, if not all, were philosophically inspired by Hick.

When it comes to purity of doctrine, there is nothing like the Catholic Church, so I urgently suggest that you remove all non-catholic sources from your bookshelf till you become sufficiently rooted in orthodox doctrine.

I appreciate your redirection to the ST and to not consider Craig’s Works until I have greater understanding. From further reflection, please consider the following:
I think…confusion arises in timeliness of the timelessness - There is God - the unmoved mover, the matterless source of all matter, the potential-less state of all potential, the formless, and there is God - the word, the uncreated form, the two persons in one being, the three persons in one God, where one person proceeds from the other two, the all-powerful and potential, Creator.
I am trying to propose reflections for the latter, for the initial state of God can only be known through Divine Revelation.

Thoughts?