Questions about Trinity

  • Thread starter Thread starter javid
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Samuel,

Sorry if I appeared to be talking down to you, I get a gut reaction whenever I witness some kind of denigration of her by non-catholic Christians…force of habit? Anyway, I just wanted to clarify catholic view of Mary.

Yes, Our Lady is holy and filled with every virtue. To us, no one can be as Christ-like as she, which is what we are all destined to be- Christ-like or saint. Catholic theology places her above the highest Angels that are closest to God! The Church says of her Holiness that it is so great that under God (here we always include Christ’s humanity as well because Christ is God)…under God, none greater can be imagined. Basically, if the individual stars in the universe represented saints, Mary would be several galaxies. So yes, you’re right- She was not God, but neither was she ordinary.

What you’re describing is Our Lady suffering, But her suffering was tainted not by the slightest selfish motive. She suffered solely for pure love of Christ- He was her love, her life, her everything and so his slightest suffering caused her to suffer. But about her expecting worldly ambitions? I don’t believe so. She knew Jesus, had raised him, she was in constant prayer- What Mary had was total faith in darkness, akin to Abraham- A faith that expects nothing, desires nothing, a faith that simply obeys- Mary knew that no one knows the ways of YHWH, no one knows his mind, and she always knew (having been trained well by Christ perplexing her in his childhood) that only God knows the plan, her part is to obey and remain faithful- And that was her mind, not a mind filled with ideas and expectations of kingly glory- She knew that Jesus’ life had never fit into earthly greatness- She simply watched what God did and obeyed perfectly.

Peace.
 
Marybeloved said:
Samuel,

"We are all destined to be Christ-like or saints… She was not God, but neither was she ordinary… She had "total faith in darkness, akin to Abraham.

A faith that expects nothing, desires nothing, a faith that simply obeys. Mary knew that no one knows the ways of YHWH, no one knows his mind, only God knows the plan, her part is to obey and remain faithful. And that was her mind, not a mind filled with ideas and expectations of kingly glory. She knew that Jesus’ life had never fit into earthly greatness. She simply watched what God did and obeyed perfectly."

Peace.
Click to expand...
Marybeloved,

I hope you don’t mind my quoting you this way, but I do agree Mary was a saint, and we are all destined to be Christ-like.

The widow’s son was the love of her life. Who could not help but love him?

By “total faith in darkness,” you mean of course, total faith in Jesus, even though she did not understand him, for he was divine as well as human - the son of woman(Mary).

I disagree with lack of expectation, lack of desire, and unhelpful submission to the world, which the rest of us are trying to do something about. This spirit of defeatism was not Mary. She may have been a bit stoic, but she was always steadfast. Despite her natural motherly concern, she never wavered in her obedience to the requirements of her indwelling spirit of God, in submission to the cross of Jesus.

I believe she saw/felt it coming. She tried to influence her son, because she thought he could just perform another miracle, and everything would be alright. She loved Jesus, despite the fact that she did not understand why it had to turn out that way. He could have performed a miracle, but it wouldn’t be right, and the Father concurred with Jesus plan, in as much as it also fulfilled his will to teach his children on earth a lesson, heavy with meaning and emotional significance.

Mary had faith that Jesus knew the mind and the will of the Father, and she knew that he was one with the Father in their Spirit. She did not have our books, so yes, she “watched what God did and obeyed perfectly,” but she suffered because she did not understand him, and the exclusively spritual nature of his mission 2011 years ago.

Let’s face it, what happened to her son, broke Mary’s heart, and she suffered terribly because she did not understand.

It is only in his return as Christ - the almighty supreme oversoul of all humankind (other religions included, if they will), that Mary’s vision will be fulfilled, and there will be an age of light and life - peace and harmony.

Samuel Stuart Maynes
www.trinityabsolute.com
 
Mary,

I also hope you will be interested in a further elaboration on the definition of the Trinity Absolute - One God in three persons - one in spirit, universal in reason, and unified in will saying, I am:
  1. Deity Absolute Primogenitor - Father/Benefactor,
  2. Universe or “Universal” Absolute Supreme Being/Son - Christ almighty supreme oversoul of all humankind,
  3. Unconditioned Absolute Spirit Synthesis of Source and Synthesis - All That Is.
Notice that the Trinity is not just the Supreme Being. The Trinity is not one person, but three persons, so technically, the Trinity cannot say “I am” (that would be pre-Trinity thinking). Nevertheless, such a forgiveable distortion tends to occur in shrinking the three persons into one, more simplified, concept of God as one person - the I am.

This leads into speculation on the original condition of the Father, before he begot the Son. But at that purely hypothetical time, he would have been All That Is or was then, which some Zen Buddhists call the great “emptiness.” The Spirit of All That Is certainly includes and proceeds partly from, but is not only, the spirit of the Primogenitor (Allah/Abba/Brahma).

By definition of the words themselves, there never was a time before the Primogenitor was Father of the Son. Furthermore, the Deity’s primordial act of creation, which makes him the Primogenitor, involved also their Spirit as well as his Son, as co-creators. He is first of the three co-equal persons of the Trinity, but purely by definition of necessary reason.

There could not have been a time when there was nothing, or there would be nothing now. All That Is would not be who he is, if there was something pre-Trinity. It is doubtful that the Trinity itself appeared out of nothing, and by definition, All That Is knows no other. More likely the Trinity has always existed, like reason itself, “hiding in plain sight,” as I say on my website.

4.0 TRINITY: THE ONE INEVITABILITY

The ‘Absolute’ is an expression that has been used with various shades of meaning by many philosophers, but its modern definition and signification are due to the great idealist philosopher Georg Hegel.

“In philosophy, the Highest is called the Absolute, the Idea… that which we call the Absolute has a meaning identical with the expression God.” – Hegel quoted in Philosophy of Religion – J. E. Smith. P.107.

“(Hegel also held that)… the totality of all things… is the Absolute Idea.” Four Philosophies – J. D. Butler. P.135.

Hegel held that the Absolute is the Highest, the Absolute Idea is the “totality of all things,” and that which we call Absolute is God. But experientially, the totality of all things is the Universe Absolute, and this is the antithesis of the existential Absolute God or the Deity Absolute. On the other hand, if by “the totality,” Hegel means both the mundane and the divine, then he is referring to the Unconditioned Absolute, or totality of “All That Is,” which is not the one, nor the other, but the synthesis or fusion of both.

Making things even more confusing, it must be noted that in addition to the totality of the Universe and the totality of the Unconditioned “All That Is,” there might be said to be also the totality of the Trinity Absolute as a corporate entity – not one person, but a ‘gestalt’ of personal consciousness in a systematic unity – One multi-dimensional God.

Regardless of conceptual intricacies, it is impossible to over-emphasize the importance of the dichotomy of existential versus experiential consciousness, and their synthesis. By many and fair-seeming arguments, for convenience of speaking, and because reason demands a beginning and a Creator; we contrast the thesis of the Deity Absolute with the equally specious argument that science demands no absolute beginning – only universal contingency – which is the Universe Absolute scientific antithesis of theology. Then, by the laws of dialectical logic, we construct a third argument – the Unconditioned Absolute synthesis, which is ultimately based on the other two, and finally incorporated in the Trinity of all three.

Whereas some philosophers emphasized duality as the foundation of metaphysics, Hegel saw through the dialectic of duality to the triad of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis as the necessary fundamental creative equation. Thus, in terms of the Absolute, we arrive at the philosophical inevitability of the Trinity of the three Absolutes of Creation, i.e. thesis: the transcendent Deity Absolute; antithesis: the immanent Universe or “Universal” Absolute; and synthesis: the ultimate Unconditioned Absolute.

Trinity Absolute is the Prime Paradigm and a metaphysical basis for a General Theory of Everything. Trinity Absolute is the first systematic unity of theology, science, and all that is. Trinity is a logical inevitability."

Excerpt from The Trinity Absolute: a Constructive Interpretation of World Religions and a Metaphysical “Blueprint for Peace” - SSM,p.137.

Samuel Stuart Maynes
trinityabsolute.com
 
Mary,

I know that you are not saying that an individual should have no expectations, no desires, only submission and obedience. This sounds more like Buddhism than Christianity, and I begin to think that you really are both (or at have a lot in common), in your psychological predilections.

So, I perceive that you may have been pulling my leg with that business of “only one way,” and not understanding.

Perhaps you are already half-way sympathetic to a religious pluralism reflecting One God, and believe in pro-active ecumenism and interfaith dialogue, a lot more than I thought at first.

Peace,

Samuel Stuart Maynes
www.trinityabsolute.com
 
Mary,

Regarding the contradiction between any expectations and humble submission - I feel that you are discounting the powerful hope in Jesus that all Christians naturally harbour, and that Mary represents, having lived with him.

According to my own theory, there should be an idea of a synthesis or mixture of our views. Then, there may be a word adequate to the potential goodness of that union of concepts and spirits.

Please help me find that word, and don’t say frustration or exasperation, unless you want to get back to the larger question at hand - Trinity.

Samuel
 
Hello, Samuel,

There’s a whole mystical theology of the saints in our Church- The process by which we go from Slaves of Sin and Prisoners of the flesh, the World and the Devil, to Christ-like, also called sanctification. It’s from this wisdom of the Saints and the Doctors of the Church, that I was writing about Mary, the Mother of Jesus who to us is the Saint of Saints. I’ve been quiet because I see a great gap between our minds, I don’t know how we can bridge it:shrug:. I don’t know where to start explaining my meaning so that you understand it from my perspective.

Desire is not bad in itself, hopes and prayers are good. But perhaps you should understand the background first. I’ll tell you a story,

Our faith tells us that God made all things good- no blemish, no sin- It was just wonderful. In this original order, which is how things should be, The higher always reigned perfectly over the lower, the lower always yielded perfectly to the higher and everything was in perfect harmony with the will of God. In man, his spiritual faculties (reason and free will) had perfect rule over his passions, and over his body, and man as a whole had perfect rule over the material world about him, which was made for him and which yielded "happily’ to his rule. Man himself yielded to the highest Good, which is God, not only without struggle, difficulty or rebellion- But with an indescribable joy! You see, this happiness that came from perfect union with the Divine will is what man was created for- To be happy forever with God- This is the point of our existence. It can be found in one way and only one- perfect communion with God who is perfect happiness, perfect harmony with the Divine will, which requires yielding our own will to God’s will.

Adam and Eve messed it all up when they were tempted to “do their own thing”. The Devil told them that God was envious of them acquiring their own knowledge of good and evil- essentially he lead them to seek “independence” from God, to reject trusting God’s directives as small children in their mother’s arms, and to attempt deciding for themselves what was good and bad- This fateful decision was positively disastrous for them and us until Jesus came.

The moment they went against the divine will, they ruptured the union with him, like a baby’s severed umbilical cord from his mother. This severence ruined the perfect order of Man’s world- He discovered that he was no longer as free as he used to be, he was no longer the master of himself and his world, he no longer naturally, easily and freely tended to God, and his entire world became subject to death and decay. By his free decision to chose the rule of self-will over God’s will, he found that his will was also fallen like everything else in the world! It had gained a permanent “bent” inward to himself instead of the open perfect tending to God like a blossoming flower in the sun. As if this was not disaster enough, he found that his co-operation with God’s enemy had forged an undesirable “communion” with this enemy of human nature- He was now not the intimate friend of God, and master of the world, he was slave to the rebellions of his lower nature of passions and the body, to the world and to the Devil- For the first time, he knew suffering and pain.

This fallen nature is what he passed on to his descendants- You see you cannot give to your children what you don’t have. If you’re a cat, you’ll give birth to a cat, if you’re white, you’ll give birth to white children- you can only pass on the nature you have- But the nature that Adam passed on was a nature disordered, having lost its perfect harmony. Beyond this he had also lost the gift of that perfect communion of friendship with God, beyond that of Creator and his creature- and he lost it for us all as well- Why? Because our wills no longer retain the open straight natural yielding to God that makes it possible, we have only an echo- the distant memory of a creator, a hazy intuition of the divine- We know he exists and is good and that we should seek him and we try, but we are slaves to the self- to a willed bent inward and selfish. But God became a man, took the place of Adam, offered a perfect self-gift as God-man, restored the raptured friendship and earned the Divine life and sanctifying grace for us. Now the work of restoration of everything that was lost begins.

**
(Will continue in the next post**)
 
Samuel,

A soul is baptized in the name of the Blessed Trinity. Something he could never earn for himself is done to him- God has restored a umbilical code in him! Now his will is attached by God’s initiative to his own, and grace is poured into his soul- New life is born in him! This man frequents all the channels of grace (sacraments) that are established, he prays, practices ascetism- In this way, he co-operates with the work underway in his soul and does not hinder it or kill it. If he continues faithfully this way, he will find that a transformation is going on- Little attachments, addictions, bad habits, sins, strongly rooted faults- These are slowly but surely being swept away! The passions are being subjugated under the will, the will grows freer and freer of slavery and attachments and is able to love God more and more, The reason better illumined as to God’s truths, better and better. Many years later, he will not recognize himself any more- A new man will stand in the place of the old, this new man lives for the will of God alone, his happiness is no longer to do his own thing (He doesn’t even want to do anything but God’s will)- His meat and bread is to please God as God wants in god’s way- He is now what we call a Saint!- Man as he should be. He dies and goes to Heaven.

His body, unfortunately, will have to wait to the end of time for its restoration, unlike the glorified soul in heaven. At the end of time, the body will be reunited with the soul, resurrected and transformed into one like the resurrected body of Christ. The cosmos will likewise be transformed, and everything will be as it should be and it will be transformed into glory.

I told this long story so that you could understand this. Mary, to Catholics was saved from corrupted nature by a special privilege of God and made “full of grace” so that she would not hand on a fallen nature to Jesus’ Holy humanity, so that it would be perfect and untainted. She never experienced any separation from God or sin, She was like Adam and Eve before the fall, and she unlike them, was not disobedient. So what the Saints become after the work of a life-time- What Mother Teresa was at the end of her amazing life- Mary already was as a young teenage girl! And she grew in that life all her life- Can you imagine her doing anything other than the will of God? Our Apostolic Tradition, the source or treasure of our truths as handed by Apostles to the Church, it’s from this source that the New Testament scriptures were written, preserved and declared scripture, it’s from it that Trinity was taught and the dual nature of Christ in one Divine person (God-man)- This is the same source that teaches us that Mary was All-Holy and All-Immaculate.

I hope you understand why, to us, a saint’s will is perfectly conformed to God’s such that Christ himself lives in them- Can you imagine Jesus doing “his own thing” apart from the Divine will? The Saints are called other-Christs or Christ-like, because their will is conformed to God’s will like Christ’s human will to different extents. The highest Saint is Mary, the most perfectly conformed to Christ- Her life was the will of God, not her own.

Peace! I told this long story so that you could understand this. Mary, to Catholics was saved from corrupted nature by a special privilege of God and made “full of grace” so that she would not hand on a fallen nature to Jesus’ Holy humanity, so that it would be perfect and untainted. She never experienced any separation from God or sin, She was like Adam and Eve before the fall, and she unlike them, was not disobedient. So what the Saints become after the work of a life-time- What Mother Teresa was at the end of her amazing life- Mary already was as a young teenage girl! And she grew in that life all her life- Can you imagine her doing anything other than the will of God? Our Apostolic Tradition, the source or treasure of our truths as handed by Apostles to the Church, it’s from this source that the New Testament scriptures were written, preserved and declared scripture, it’s from it that Trinity was taught and the dual nature of Christ in one Divine person (God-man)- This is the same source that teaches us that Mary was All-Holy and All-Immaculate.

I hope you understand why, to us, a saint’s will is perfectly conformed to God’s such that Christ himself lives in them- Can you imagine Jesus doing “his own thing” apart from the Divine will? The Saints are called other-Christs or Christ-like, because their will is conformed to God’s will like Christ’s human will to different extents. The highest Saint is Mary, the most perfectly conformed to Christ- Her life was the will of God, not her own.

Peace!
 
Marybeloved said:
Now the work of restoration of everything that was lost begins.
Click to expand...
Mary,

Since this is the Trinity page, we should probably ask the administrator to move all this dialogue about Mary to a more suitable discussion forum. Better yet, I’ll reply to a recent posting I see on the “Philosophy - Was the Virgin wise?” page, you make a response, and we’ll pick up over there, right where we left off here.

In order to respect those expecting a conversation about Trinity, I’ve included another page from my book (see follow-up posting) currently previewing at www.trinityabsolute.com.

In the meantime, Yes that “original order” or age (before the experiential universe was created) is eternally existential, and still exists in heaven (more particularly on Paradise). I agree with you that there is only one Paradise, but your statement that it can be found in “only one way” is an obstacle to any movement toward the kingdom of multi-dimensional God on earth, represented by a World Council of Churches, or something very like it.

If you would rather wait for Christ to come back - OK - but please quit throwing up obstacles to his kingdom. A few postings back, I thought you were getting on-side with ecumenism and interfaith dialogue. It seems that reviewing your fundamentalist doctrine has caused you to slip back into elitist and exclusivist language again.

You are flirting outrageously with religious racism. Please at least quit using such darkly provocative words, and seriously consider the following adjustment of attitude, i.e.:

God may be found in many ways, but all normal humans have an indwelling spark of the spirit of God, and thus an inner circuit of communication with him, which would be even more perfect, if we always followed our conscience.

You say that through Adam’s sin, humankind have “lost the gift of that perfect communion of friendship with God.” I think conscience is never completely lost. They say that even a psychopath hears a voice inside saying: This is wrong, that’s for sure.

You suggest the problem is that we won’t listen to our conscience, and yield to the indwelling divine spirit. I agree that this is sometimes true. But it is only practical reason that moves the human will. So the pure reasons of moral duty have to be squared with universal utility (not personal advantage, but the best for everybody).

Everybody knows that you don’t lie if you can help it, but you don’t reveal the location of a victim to his would-be killer. All moral judgments are a trade-off between allegiance to pure duty and practical utility. Even when these conflict, some moral solutions minimize overall harm.

The last paragraph of this posting suggests a fatalistic attitude of surrender. Humans cannot be good because they are from evil seed, and have lost the ability to yield easily, and render unquestioned obedience. This ignores Adam’s (our) divine inheritance, and our indwelling divine sparks. We are not all genetically moral cripples. You are taking the significance of the Adam story too far.

Rational morality is hard, but not impossible to grasp. Please see my follow-up posting on the Proof from Moral Duty

Samuel Stuart Maynes
www.trinityabsolute.com
 
Mary,

Here is page 43 from my book, outlining the “rational moral duty” mentioned above.

1.4 THE MORAL DUTY ARGUMENT FROM THE CONCEPTION OF A CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE

This proof is from the conception of one absolute categorical imperative, as identified by Kant, and the understanding that the absolute idea is of God, as recognized by Hegel.

Immanuel Kant makes the case that space/time, cause/effect, mathematics, logic, and moral duty are part of the structure of pure theoretical reason and constitute certain knowledge. There is an absolute moral law discovered by pure a priori reason. The universal moral principle is: “Act as though the maxim of your action were, by your will, to become a universal law of nature” – the one categorical imperative. Kant then made the argument that ‘ought implies can’, and there would be no practical point in following any so-called absolute moral law unless the soul can achieve perfection, and this can only happen if the soul is free and immortal. God also gives the moral law divine sanction, and without Him moral duty exists only in disconnected theoretical terms relative to practical utility and the overwhelming human life concerns of self-advantage.

Kant argued that there is no absolute subjection to moral duty unless we assume something the existence of which in itself has objective value… something which as an end in itself could be the ground of determinate laws… something having its source outside all causal chains. But, that “end in itself,” which is the ground of all laws based on the one categorical imperative, is part of the moral spirit of the Absolute, which we commonly call God. And all human souls have a divine spark of that moral spirit, which they commonly call conscience.

Pure practical moral wisdom combines the universal principle of pure reason and the greatest utility principle of practical reason. This provides the basis for all law between and among individuals. The highest morality is a righteous combination of duty and universal utility, truth and goodness, but without God duty cannot be absolute. Without God, the social principle of “one for all, and all for one,” is a political choice and not a moral duty. And without God, we cannot ascend to the higher morality of the positive expression of the Golden Rule, and the rarefied atmosphere of the challenge to “love your neighbour as yourself,” and even “love your enemy and forgive.”

If there is no God, then the only motivation to be good is the abstract satisfaction of the pursuit of perfection. But without God, perfection becomes an empty slogan, because there is no absolute perfection, and all morality is relative. And in the end, such rationalization is merely a form of cynical stoicism, which is a rather melancholy and unreliable substitute for real moral conviction." The Trinity Absolute: a Constructive Interpretation of World Religions - SSM (p.43).

Samuel Stuart Maynes
www.trinityabsolute.com
 
Marybeloved said:
Samuel,

This (Trinity-baptized) man frequents all the channels of grace (sacraments)… he prays, practices ascetism… co-operates… continues faithfully… a transformation is going on… slowly passions are being subjugated… able to love God more and more… this new man lives for the will of God alone… He is now what we call a Saint!… He dies and goes to Heaven. At the end of time, the cosmos will likewise be transformed, and everything will be as it should be.

Mary… was saved from corrupted nature by a special privilege… so that she would not hand on a fallen nature to Jesus’ Holy humanity… She was like Adam and Eve before the fall.
Click to expand...
Mary,

Nice recipe, but not enough emphasis on being worthy of the Supreme Being, and earning our place in the almighty oversoul of Christ in the resurrection.

I can agree that Mary was All Holy and All Immaculate, but she was not God. As you say, she was a SAINT - which is to say Christ-like, within human limitations. However, I think you are putting too much emphasis on the influence her qualities had on Jesus, when the most powerful influence must have been almost totally the other way around.

A lot of what Jesus said went right over Mary’s head, just as what I’m saying sometimes goes over yours. Of course, I’m sure Jesus connected with her, better than I ever will with you, because they were human mother and her son, and because Jesus was an incarnation of the Son of God.

By the way Mary, if you believe the Trinity is one in spirit, universal in mind, and three in person - Have you never thought that persons always have names? I’m not claiming to know all their names any better than you do, but what do you think about the following lightly provocative speculation on the names of God, from my book (P.64/5)?

Samuel Stuart Maynes
www.trinityabsolute.com
 
Mary,

Here is page 64/5 of my book. What do you think? Is this model of ecumenism, interfaith dialogue, and religious pluralism supportable by the Catholic Church?

AGREEMENT OF WORLD RELIGIONS

The Bible says “Know ye not that the spirit of God is within you… the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.” The Quran does not acknowledge the fatherhood of God, but agrees that the spirit of Allah is “closer to you than your jugular vein.” This agreement between the Quran and the Bible – that our God is One God whose spirit indwells all human beings – gives us hope that everything else is just a religious misunderstanding of the fundamental unity of God in three persona or characters.

It would be manifestly unfair to deny that Muhammad did some good when he called the Arab people back to the worship of the One God in His awesome austerity and majesty – the Deity Absolute in His first person. And by their own admission, Christians continue to worship One God in the Son of the Father – the Supreme Being – God in His second person or Universe Absolute manifestation. Nor is it possible to deny that Hindus worship what amounts to a third absolute manifestation of One God, which incorporates the spirit of the first two in transcendence and immanence – the Unconditioned or Unqualified Absolute Totality and Source/Synthesis of All That Is.

I cannot be accused of inventing anything, when I point out that Allah, Abba, and Brahma are a ‘de facto’ world representation of the divine Trinity of One God realized in three absolute religious manifestations, and unified in a threefold ‘persona’ encompassing the one, the many, and the all. More correctly, Allah, Abba, and Brahma are the first person of God in their respective religions, when looked at through the concept of God as (1) the existential Deity Absolute, (2) the experiential Universe Absolute Supreme Being, and (3) their ultimate Unconditioned Absolute Spirit of destiny consummation or All That Is.

Other major world religions seem to be variations on the third person, or cross-products of the first three Absolutes of Creation. However, these are not three brothers, but One God existential, experiential, and ultimate. They are not just thesis and antithesis, but synthesis in One God transcendent, immanent, and associative – not just one, nor many, but all.

As a Christian, I think Muslims are focused on the first person of One God (austere in His lonely splendour) worshipping One God in the majesty of His transcendent first persona – the Deity Absolute. Christians, on the other hand worship that person of One God who is Father of the Eternal Son, and who is also that same One God in His second and immanent persona – the Universe Absolute Supreme Being or Son. Christians may also see other religions as representing One God in a third persona, who is transcendent and immanent, indeed ultimate – the Unconditioned Absolute Holy Spirit.

In this universal view, the Hindu scriptures most closely represent the third manifestation of One God, which completes an Absolute Trinity of One God apprehended in three world bases of religious culture. The Muslim, Christian, and Hindu religions each have something around a billion believers, encompassing almost half the current population of the earth.

Other candidates for the third position in this world religious model of God may instead be further associative combinations, i.e. further reflections of God in the permutations of the Trinity; for example: Buddhist (Son and Spirit), Confucian-Taoist (Father and Spirit), Ancient Egyptian (Father and Son), and the Unknown Future God (Father, Son, and Spirit). Obviously, this progression of religious association, or something very like it, may easily go on to be all-inclusive, but forever open-ended.

Samuel Stuart Maynes
www.trinityabsolute.com
 
Trinity Forum Readers,

A spark of the divine spirit of God indwells all humankind, and this is the same spirit that is in the Father, in the Son, and glorified in the Holy Spirit of Father and Son.

The Trinity is united in spirit, universal in mind, and three in personality.

God’s nature reveals itself in the dynamic relations among the divines - “perichoresis” – the dancing around and parade or procession of the persons of the multi-dimensional Trinity, in a fellowship of interpenetrating personality interaction.

Consider their differing attitudes toward sin.

The Father hates sinners, but his greatest expression and strongest satisfaction is in loving all his children, and being loved by them, so he suffers them in mercy. The Son loves the sinner, but hates the sin, so he works with him graciously. The Spirit both suffers and forgives the sinner, so he bears with him faithfully. Then, we see that in Trinity, the first person of God can hate sinners (Islam), the second person can love sinners (Christianity), while the third person bears with and pardons sinners (Hinduism).

Differences between religions remain, but may be assimilated and transformed in a higher synthesis (the bigger picture). The Trinity is about freewill religious and political pluralism, not exclusivism. Not one way, but one world. Not globalism, but internationalism. Not ghettos, but true multi-culturalism. Religious pluralism and a United Nations under universal law (or something very like it) must be made to work. There is no practical substitute for building on what we’ve got.

Do the individual personna of the Trinity not have the prerogatives of freewill choice and personal moral responsibility, which distinguishes these multi-dimensional personalities from their unified spirit and universal mind? Do they not have the dignity of freewill persons in the sight of each other, even though they depend totally on each other – being joined at the hip, so to speak?

We may speculate that the tripartite human soul – personality/mind/spirit – is modelled on the Trinity as its only adequate metaphysical vehicle. However, in the Trinity there is a sharing and a perichoresis or “dancing around” of psychological characteristics, which are very similar in their united spirit, and universal mind, but differ excitingly in personality. It seems that individual humans may have a predisposition to adopt any one, any combination, or all of the members of the Trinity as a personal “psychological attitude of the absolute.”

It may be technically true that there is no way to the Father, except through the Son, because Jesus Christ will be the head of the Supreme Court that will hear our cases on Judgment Day. Perhaps, to some extent, Jesus shares that chair with Muhammad in the case of Muslims, Sankara or Gandhi for Hindus, Gautama for Buddhists, and so forth.

There is a Consummate Spirit that synthesizes diversity, and overcomes tensions between the existential Deity Absolute and the experiential Universe Absolute.

Some Christians say there is no way to the Father, except through the Son; but some Hindus and Buddhists say there is no way to the Son and Father, except through the Unconditioned Absolute Spirit of All That Is.

Personally, I find it easier to understand the Father and the Son, but not so easy to envision All That Is as only one Person. The best I can come up with is the Holy Host of angels. There may be one Archangel who can best represent the Spirit to us, but who? In world religions, I think that perhaps Michael (Vishnu) represents Jesus the Son of Abba (Father), Gabriel represents Muhammad the prophet of Allah (Brahma), and some angel of Destiny Consummation represents Sankara or Gandhi portraying the Holy Spirit (Shiva).

Angels? Although this seems like a fair speculation, it is only an analogy to the Spirit, which (let’s face it) is a bigger mystery to some of us, than the Father and Son.

The world recognition of One God apprehended in three absolute expressions (the third Absolute considered as including also their sum and their cross-products, their combinations and permutations) is not a surrender to a colourless culture of homogenized religions, that is neither hot nor cold, neither one thing nor the other. Rather it is a creative affirmation of the multi-dimensional reality that is One God, as humankind perceives that absolute in various coordinates of consciousness. This recognition also allows God to escape the awful fetters of His absoluteness, and to blossom in splendid colours of transcendence, immanence, and ultimacy. This closes the circle of creation in a triumph of pure practical reason, constituting the one necessary metaphysical basis of itself in three phases.

God is absolutely true in one respect, supremely true in another, ultimately true in their synthesis, and eternally true in the Trinity Absolute of One God. The Trinity Absolute is a systematic unity reflected in world religions, demonstrated in science, echoed in psychology, and composed in the three absolutes of creation, i.e.:
  1. The existential Deity Absolute Primogenitor Father/Benefactor – represented in religions by Allah, Abba (or Father, as Jesus called him); Brahma, and others.
  2. The experiential Universe or “Universal” Absolute Supreme Being/Son - the gestalt of human consciousness (Oversoul), which we expect will be the “body of Christ” (Mahdi, Messiah, Krishna), in the second coming - represented in history by Muhammad, Jesus, Sankara or Gandhi, and others.
  3. The associative Unconditioned or “Unqualified” Absolute Spirit “Synthesis of Source and Synthesis” - All That Is - the ultimate Destiny Consummator, who is expected to be Allah/Abba/Brahma glorified.
Samuel Stuart Maynes
www.trinityabsolute.com

PS: Please post a question or reply, to which I can respond.
 
javid said:
First: How can more than one unlimited being exist?

I mean if God the father is unlimited, so there is no for another person to be unlimited.

Thank you.
Click to expand...
Very logical question. 👍

Note what the Catholic Encyclopedia says:
“The impression could arise that the Trinitarian dogma is in the last analysis a late 4th-century invention. In a sense, this is true . . . The formulation ‘one God in three Persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century.”—New Catholic Encyclopedia (1967), Volume 14, page 299.

So the teaching wasn’t taught by Jesus or his apostles. It didn’t show up for hundreds of years.

What does the Bible say?
“Stephen, filled with the Holy Spirit, gazed into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at God’s right hand. ‘Look! I can see heaven thrown open,’ he said, ‘and the Son of man standing at the right hand of God.’”—Acts 7:55, 56, (The New Jerusalem Bible.)

What did this vision reveal? Filled with God’s spirit, Stephen saw Jesus “standing at God’s right hand.” Clearly, then, Jesus did not become God again after his resurrection to heaven but, rather, a distinct spiritual being. There is no mention of a third person next to God in this account.

Despite attempts to find passages of Scripture to support the Trinity dogma, Dominican priest Marie-Émile Boismard wrote in the book At the Dawn of Christianity—The Birth of Dogmas
: “The statement that there are three persons in the one God . . . cannot be read anywhere in the New Testament.”

The Bible (God’s inspired word) does not teach the Trinity. That fact answers your question!. 🙂
 
Regardless said:
Very logical question. 👍

Note what the Catholic Encyclopedia says:
“The impression could arise that the Trinitarian dogma is in the last analysis a late 4th-century invention. In a sense, this is true . . . The formulation ‘one God in three Persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century.”—New Catholic Encyclopedia (1967), Volume 14, page 299.

So the teaching wasn’t taught by Jesus or his apostles. It didn’t show up for hundreds of years.

**This is simply not true. Go read the writings of disciples of the Apostles. You should be able to find out their names, they are (mis)used by the WTBS all the time in their publications.

Where does the bible mention “paradise earth”? How about Jesus being Michael the Archangel? Christ returning invisibly in 1914? This is just scratching the surface on what the WTBS teaches that is not explicit in scripture. Your argument is not valid.

**

What does the Bible say?

“Stephen, filled with the Holy Spirit, gazed into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at God’s right hand. ‘Look! I can see heaven thrown open,’ he said, ‘and the Son of man standing at the right hand of God.’”—Acts 7:55, 56, (The New Jerusalem Bible.)

What did this vision reveal? Filled with God’s spirit, Stephen saw Jesus “standing at God’s right hand.” Clearly, then, Jesus did not become God again after his resurrection to heaven but, rather, a distinct spiritual being. There is no mention of a third person next to God in this account.

Despite attempts to find passages of Scripture to support the Trinity dogma, Dominican priest Marie-Émile Boismard wrote in the book At the Dawn of Christianity—The Birth of Dogmas
: “The statement that there are three persons in the one God . . . cannot be read anywhere in the New Testament.”

Regardless, what did Fr. Boismard write in between your proof text?

The Bible (God’s inspired word) does not teach the Trinity. That fact answers your question!. 🙂

**The bible does not teach that a sect started 1900 years later would be the true Church founded by Christ.

There are many teachings of the JW’s that are not spelled out explicitly in Scripture, so this argument doesn’t hold water.

**
Click to expand...
 
Answers given here are an immense help to us all.

Also, the answers given by Rev MacDaid at the site below I think will clear up these questions as well as others you may have. We should be inspired in faith knowing that the elect will have revealed mysteries reserved for them:

“As God subsists in three distinct Persons, the blessed see these Persons, and have a clear understanding of what we on earth call the mystery of the Blessed Trinity, which is indeed a mystery to us, but to the blessed in heaven is an evident fact.”

catholicpamphlets.net/pamphlets/HEAVEN.pdf

Andy 🙂
 
javid said:
Hi, I am Christian and I believe in Jesus as son of God, But I have several logical questions about Trirnity. I would ask the one by one.

First: How can more than one unlimited being exist?

I mean if God the father is unlimited, so there is no for another person to be unlimited.

Thank you.
Click to expand...
This is a mystery of faith. You are not a Christian if you do not accept the trinity. St Thomas Aquinas puzzled over this very issue the story is that he was walking on a beach thinking about the trinity when a man came up to him and asked him if he could measure all the grains of sand on the earth. before he could answer the man vanished. this is traditionally understood as a angel coming and telling St Thomas Aquinas basically what i told you. its a deep mystery that goes beyond human understanding.
 
40.png
T_More:

So are you admitting the central doctrine of Christianity: ie the Trinity, isn’t in the Bible?​

But that doesn’t matter because some minor things Jw’s believe are only arguably explained in the scriptures? 😃
 
Regardless said:
So are you admitting the central doctrine of Christianity: ie the Trinity, isn’t in the Bible?

For the umpteenth time, Regardless, why did Thomas refer to Jesus as “My God” in John 20:28? The word “Trinity” is not in there, but neither much of what you consider important dectrine, such as “New Light”.
But that doesn’t matter because some minor things Jw’s believe are only arguably explained in the scriptures? 😃

**Minor? Take away 1914, my friend, and where are you as a religion? Hnece the reason for generation overlap doctrine recently promulgated. Is “generation overlap” taught in the bible the way the JW’s use it? I think not.

Why do you come around here, Regardless? You and I have been going back and forth for quite a long time and you keep asking the same questions over and over again and are shown the errors of the JW’s. Is it to count time?

**
Click to expand...
 
T_More said:
Why do you come around here, Regardless? You and I have been going back and forth for quite a long time and you keep asking the same questions over and over again and are shown the errors of the JW’s. Is it to count time?
Click to expand...
T. More,

I don’t get it either. Instead of responding to my last posting (see page 5), “Regardless” tries to bury it, by going back to the question that started this whole thread, and you fall for his diversionary tactic.

That question was well-answered on pages 1& 2, yet the new issues raised in my postings (pages 2-5) remain largely unaddressed. Please have a look at my website www.trinityabsolute.com, and give me some constructive feedback regarding my thesis that the Trinity maps directly onto the psychology of world religions and the human soul.

Who can deny that multi-cultural religious pluralism could be a metaphysical “blueprint for peace?” A philosophical meeting-ground for all peoples and their religions, in a freely interacting systematic unity of theology, science, and the psychology or spirit of all that is?

The triune arguments from physics, psychology and world religions are a logical construction of transformational proportions, promoting pluralism, but not humbling any legitimate individual predilection or religion.

The systematic unity of theology, science, and all that is provides the basis of a “theory of everything” in their coordinate respects – the one inevitability so compelling that it brings about its own existence.

As I say on my website, the Trinity Absolute is a philosophical inevitability and a metaphysical revelation that has been “hiding in plain sight.” The central ideas are preposterously obvious, though unknown in relationship from eternity.

Together with the testimony of philosophy and science, the arguments from psychological dispositions and world religions close the circle of metaphysical creation, defining and demonstrating for all practical purposes, the existence of One God in a Trinity of absolute ideality, supreme manifestation, and ultimate consummation.

Then, authorized and guided by orthodox theology, we may come closer to knowledge of the Soul of One God by observing the dazzling display of perichoresis or “dancing around” of the prerogatives of this threefold creativity, a reflection of which we increasingly perceive in the varied culture of world religions and the manifold metaphysics of science, as well as in the differing psychologies of the human soul.

This God is of course reflected in our own souls, as our only adequate metaphysical vehicle; and thus human reason eventually and inevitably rises to a divine concept of universal pure practical moral duty, which requires freewill and can only be perfected in a sequence of lives, with the help of God.

Morality is the driver of social reality and the reward of the Good, and thus the whole conception approaches something more Absolute in rational meaning and emotional significance – the pursuit of the supreme, ultimate, and absolute Good.

While merely a rational construct, the comprehensive supremacy of this conception authorizes us to stake our lives on the principle of universal moral duty – the one categorical imperative – the Golden Rule and the three postulates of practical reason: freewill, God, and immortality.

Don’t you agree that the truth is not just because God and scripture say it, but because it is rational?

Samuel Stuart Maynes
www.trinityabsolute.com
 
Regardless said:

So are you admitting the central doctrine of Christianity: ie the Trinity, isn’t in the Bible?​

But that doesn’t matter because some minor things Jw’s believe are only arguably explained in the scriptures? 😃
Click to expand...
We use many words that are not found in the Bible, such as the theological words Trinity, omniscience, omnipotence, etc., to describe ideas that we can either derive or infer from specific passages in the Bible. (I think that the word Bible is also a word not found in the Bible.) Even in the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ very own Bible (New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures), the concept of the Trinity can be found:

“Go therefore and make disciples of people of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy spirit” (Matthew 28:19).

“The undeserved kindness of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the sharing in the holy spirit be with all of YOU” (2 Corinthians 13:14).

“One body there is, and one spirit, even as YOU were called in the one hope to which YOU were called; 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism; 6 one God and Father of all [persons], who is over all and through all and in all” (Ephesians 4:4-7)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top