The Trinity - monotheistic or tritheistic?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Hashi_Al-Eritre
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hi Timur,
The trust in ONLY ONE God.We should read a lot my friend and the answer would be closer…

There you have expressed the route to understanding the Trinity! Without love there is no trust. Without trust there is no love.

Love is the one body that unites both the Trinity and all of us, His, our God’s, Children.
There are three distinct persons in the Trinity perfectly united in love in perfect harmony with one another. The Father shares everything with the Son except His Fatherhood as the Son was never a Father. The Son shares everything with the Father except His sonhood as the Father was never a son. The Father shares everything with The Holy Spirit including His Fatherhood. The Son shares everything with the Holy Spirit including His sonhood. But all three are united in one perfect love.

In the words of Jesus, a partial quote from my previous posting**,“Love is your key to unified oneness.”**
 
40.png
Trajik:
Peace be with you all,

I am new to the forum. In fact this is my first post. I am Catholic and am very very confused on the Trinity. Please be gentle. 🙂 I was fine until I made a couple of Muslim friends. 🙂 Now I am totally confused. :confused: What should a Catholic or any Christian do to get a better hold on this issue or question?? I have been praying, reading scripture, praying more and more. This is my birthday and I hate to feel so 😦 dwelling on this in my head. Any help would be apreciated.

Trajik
Click to expand...
I think this would be a better question for the apologetics forum. You must explain what you are confused about too.
 
Peace Jimmy,

Ok thanks for the post. 🙂 I guess I will try that route. Have a wonderful weekend.

Trajik 🙂
 
40.png
Trajik:
Peace Jimmy,

Ok thanks for the post. 🙂 I guess I will try that route. Have a wonderful weekend.

Trajik 🙂
Click to expand...
I will be there to help answer the questions.🙂
 
Im sorry i dont have time tonight to reply to the posts . I however ask itsjustdave to please if u can summarize ur belief regarding omnipresence because your reply was difficult for me to understand. However from the other posters, its clear the belief of God being omnipresent in all creation with His essence is predominate.
 
*the trinity is a misnomer. One god three attributes. just like someone can be a mother a sister and a daughter. simple as that
*I like that explanation. I hope it works for you Hashi. Or maybe “parts” instead of persons. Part of God was on earth through Jesus. Part of Him is still here through the Holy Spirit in the Church.
I suppose that if we were to go back in time, and sit down and chat with Abraham or Moses, maybe they would not like our “A.D. era” Trinitarian understanding of God. And, if that were the case, I suppose that would be ok. God had not revealed that to them.
With the coming of Christ, the writing of the books of the New Testament, and the Apostle’s (and Christ’s Himself’s) interpretation of the Old Testament, there was a profound enhancement of just “Who” God is and our knowledge of Him.

That is always how I looked at it.​

Jesus is an extension of God Himself, put into this world as a man to connect to man personally. The Holy Spirit is Gods spirit put into us.

Another good way of phrasing it, IMO. Holy Spirit, Jesus, Father and Trinity are all just words that mean God.
 
*Hashi: Questions like this cannot apply to Almighty God, because God cannot be compared or made similar to man or any other kind of creation. He is far above the characteristics of His creation. God himself is uncreated and unlike his creation, so how can he become a created thing? Questions of this nature cannot be asked or suggested or thought about regarding God.
  • Exactly.
Hashi: To be honest, i really couldnt make sense out of anything in that explanation.
Neither could I.
Hashi: This is exactly why the trinity is incomprehensible. You attribiute singularity to God, yet hes at different places (inside creation as well as outside) at the same time? this is like saying part of God is here, and another part of God is there, and another is somewhere else. Or are you suggesting an omnipresent God? Or are you just saying thats how it is without any way to understand how that is so?
*Hashi: Believing God is above the heavens and the earth maintains God’s perfection and Highness, and frees God from any limitations. As soon as you mix God with the creation, you limit Him to the laws and limitations of creation because you are forced to describe him with a created body and restricted place.
  • While the concept of (a single) God through the Trinity may be a difficult concept, it seems to me that you are placing limitations of time, space and other physical laws on God. Atheists do the same thing, IMO. Some argue that one can’t “prove” God, don’t they?
memnoch_lover: If your idea about God is a God who is always in heaven and our idea of God is a God who visit his people and express his love by becoming one of them let us keep that way. Here we go our separate ways.
Catholics are fools in believing this but so be it we are even called the fools of God. Any this is a faith given by By Jesus passed on by the Church stabled by him, its either you accept it or reject it. That is why it is faith because it seems irrational to wise people like you are.
Precisely. Thank you.
*Hashi: However, i see there is some disagreement among the posters here and in other threads regarding the manner in which God is omnipresent. Some are saying he is everywhere and in everything, and others (noteably itsjustdave) saying God isnt everywhere but he is present in holy places and where he chooses. I would like to see some consensus to this because it really is a vital part of your doctrine and how you call to belief in God.
  • They are both correct.
    *exo: I still don’t get the mindset Muslims have of how, if something is not understood completely by everybody in the exact same way it must not exist.
  • Agree
 
Hi–Acording to St. Thomas Aquinas in his “Summa Theologia” "Natural reason cannot discover thr Trinity of persons in God;…“Trying to prove the Trinity by reason would injure the faith by denying the surpassing dignity of it’s subject matter, making it a laughing-stock to unbelievers who would think our faith relied on such unconvincing arguments. The only way of proving matters of faith is to quote authorities who accept them; to those who don’t, we must be content to show that what the faith teaches is not impossible.”

It seems to me that none of the arguments supporting the Trinity have any weight in themselves. I think Aquinas is right. If one wishes to believe in the Trinty, one must have faith–not depending on intellectual satisfaction. Faith is the substance of things unseen.–nicolo
 
This is from a related thread that you also contributed to, Hashi. I think it pretty well sums it up, at least for me:

*Now, I think it might be because, if you know God, you know Jesus, since He is one with God the Father. He always has been. Whether you understand the Trinity or not, if you truly do know God, you will also know Jesus, whether you know Him by name or not. This is what I believe. *
Also, isn’t faith a gift from God? Who am I to belittle anyone’s faith?

And I think that is the essence of the OP: do we worship the same God? The Catholic Church says we do. Islam may say otherwise.
Admittedly, the Trinity is fundamental to Christianity. But if we worship God (the creator, the father), why should muslims care how we get there?
I can only suppose that they take issue with the subject because we get there (to God) through Christ. And we believe that Christ revealed Himself as the same as the Father. And when He left He said we wouldn’t be left as orphans, and the Holy Spirit was sent.
So that is what I see the issue as : not the Trinity, but Christianity
 
40.png
nico1089:
Hi–According to St. Thomas Aquinas in his “Summa Theologica” "Natural reason cannot discover the Trinity of persons in God;…“Trying to prove the Trinity by reason would injure the faith by denying the surpassing dignity of it’s subject matter, making it a laughing-stock to unbelievers who would think our faith relied on such unconvincing arguments. The only way of proving matters of faith is to quote authorities who accept them; to those who don’t, we must be content to show that what the faith teaches is not impossible.”

It seems to me that none of the arguments supporting the Trinity have any weight in themselves. I think Aquinas is right. If one wishes to believe in the Trinity, one must have faith–not depending on intellectual satisfaction. Faith is the substance of things unseen.–nicolo
Click to expand...
While the Trinity can’t be proven by reason without revelation, it is also not contrary to reason. The CCC states:

[ 159](<A href=)Faith and science: "Though faith is above reason, there can never be any real discrepancy between faith and reason. Since the same God who reveals mysteries and infuses faith has bestowed the light of reason on the human mind, God cannot deny himself, nor can truth ever contradict truth."37 "Consequently, methodical research in all branches of knowledge, provided it is carried out in a truly scientific manner and does not override moral laws, can never conflict with the faith, because the things of the world and the things of faith derive from the same God. The humble and persevering investigator of the secrets of nature is being led, as it were, by the hand of God in spite of himself, for it is God, the conserver of all things, who made them what they are."38

237 The Trinity is a mystery of faith in the strict sense, one of the "mysteries that are hidden in God, which can never be known unless they are revealed by God."58 To be sure, God has left traces of his Trinitarian being in his work of creation and in his Revelation throughout the Old Testament. But his inmost Being as Holy Trinity is a mystery that is inaccessible to reason alone or even to Israel’s faith before the Incarnation of God’s Son and the sending of the Holy Spirit.

Conclusion: While the Trinity can’t be proven through the use of reason alone, once revealed, it cane be explained how it is consistent with reason.
 
Hi Maranatha,
“Conclusion: While the Trinity can’t be proven through the use of reason alone, once revealed, it cane be explained how it is consistent with reason.”

I totally agree. The Trinity is one of the reasons I am an ex-Catholic, although I was raised in the faith and believed in the Trinity, as I got older I examined my beliefs. The Trinity was never revealed to me. God has revealed himself in his works and in my own life. I could never deny God without going against my own consience.
Part of the problem with organized religions is the fact that they expect people to believe without revelation. And then they fight over it. I say, let God be God–it is his choice to reveal what he wills to whom he wills. Without God in one’s life, belief is less than faith.–nicolo
 
40.png
nico1089:
Hi Maranatha,
“Conclusion: While the Trinity can’t be proven through the use of reason alone, once revealed, it cane be explained how it is consistent with reason.”

I totally agree. The Trinity is one of the reasons I am an ex-Catholic, although I was raised in the faith and believed in the Trinity, as I got older I examined my beliefs. The Trinity was never revealed to me. God has revealed himself in his works and in my own life. I could never deny God without going against my own consience.
Part of the problem with organized religions is the fact that they expect people to believe without revelation. And then they fight over it. I say, let God be God–it is his choice to reveal what he wills to whom he wills. Without God in one’s life, belief is less than faith.–nicolo
Click to expand...
If God completely revealed himself to you then you would have no choice but to believe. This would take away your free will. God grants free will because He want His love returned freely. Love, not given freely, is not true love. Therefore God does not completely reveal himself to each individual.

God does love us. He wants us to know and love Him. Therefore, at specific points in history, He has slowly revealed parts of His nature. Without organized religion, there would be know way to maintain and communicate those revelations.
 
40.png
nico1089:
Hi–Acording to St. Thomas Aquinas in his “Summa Theologia” "Natural reason cannot discover thr Trinity of persons in God;…“Trying to prove the Trinity by reason would injure the faith by denying the surpassing dignity of it’s subject matter, making it a laughing-stock to unbelievers who would think our faith relied on such unconvincing arguments. The only way of proving matters of faith is to quote authorities who accept them; to those who don’t, we must be content to show that what the faith teaches is not impossible.”
Click to expand...
Thank you nicolo for pointing out to us these words of St. Thomas. I think these words of his should conclude this whole discussion weve been having on the rationale of the trinity as his words seem clear the trinity isnt something one should be proving through intellectual reasoning.
 
40.png
Maranatha:
If God completely revealed himself to you then you would have no choice but to believe. This would take away your free will. God grants free will because He want His love returned freely. Love, not given freely, is not true love. Therefore God does not completely reveal himself to each individual.

God does love us. He wants us to know and love Him. Therefore, at specific points in history, He has slowly revealed parts of His nature. Without organized religion, there would be know way to maintain and communicate those revelations.
Click to expand...
Hi Maranatha, Yes, God did not completely reveal himself to me, but quite enough that he is more real to me than anything else. I do use organized religion and reading to learn more, but I no longer feel pressured to join any particular church.
I can see from your answers that you have put some thought into your words. I thank you for that.I have met too many folks from organized religion that are confrontational and narrow minded. Now that I think of it, I was one of these! LOL! I feel that organized religions have much to learn from each other–revelations, it seems to me, are not the distinct property of just one limb of the body. Nowadays it appears that the body is beating itself up–arm against arm, etc., instead of glorifying the head.–May God grant us all peace, nicolo
 
Hashi Al-Eritre:
Thank you nicolo for pointing out to us these words of St. Thomas. I think these words of his should conclude this whole discussion weve been having on the rationale of the trinity as his words seem clear the trinity isnt something one should be proving through intellectual reasoning.
Click to expand...
We can turn this around. Can you prove God exists at all? No, it’s all a matter of faith.
 
Semper Fi:
We can turn this around. Can you prove God exists at all? No, it’s all a matter of faith.
Click to expand...
Hi Semper Fi–Well, St.Thomas in the “Summa” did try to prove God’s existsence. Darn good argument, too. I think it would be harder to prove that God didn’t exist!–nicolo
 
Semper Fi:
We can turn this around. Can you prove God exists at all? No, it’s all a matter of faith.
Click to expand...
I just want to put this out there, I don’t expect it to become a side topic or anything, but I believe that God’s existence can be proven.

Can you prove the existence of the sun, or trees, or other demonstrable “things?” You may disagree, but I believe you can prove their existence. Or for a person’s guilt or innocence in court? You argue for their existence or a person’s guilt/innoncence a certain way that is fitting to what you are trying to prove.

Can you prove the existence of air??? You would argue for it’s existence a certain way, perhaps a little different than existence of the road by your house.

In a similar way, there is a rational way to argue for God’s existence. Different than arguing for the existence of a tree. Like arguing for the existence of air, it’s an “impossibility of the contrary” type of argument. A little different than Anselm’s and Aquinas’ type of arguments.

I believe we’re left with more than “all on faith.” Supernatural faith is required, obviously, but the specific Christian God’s existence can be proven.

Ok, that’s all on that.
 
It is simple to understand the mystery of the Trinity.

It is not 1+1+1

It is 1x1x1

Each is in all and all are in each.
 
40.png
rdscheirer:
It is simple to understand the mystery of the Trinity.

It is not 1+1+1

It is 1x1x1

Each is in all and all are in each.
Click to expand...
This doesn’t work. Father+ Son +Holy Spirit is not 1x1x1. That’s like orange x apple x potato. Three different species.
 
40.png
nico1089:
This doesn’t work. Father+ Son +Holy Spirit is not 1x1x1. That’s like orange x apple x potato. Three different species.
Click to expand...
I guess you don’t like like the mystery of the body of Christ as well as the other examples given, but keep trying. Genesis 1:26 was very helpful for me,…it was right under my nose in the 26th verse. Who do you think God is talking about here right in the beginning as “us”? In verse 27, God says he made man in his own image,…so who is us?

26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

Does this King James Bible verson help, or has it been corrupted? For the others who have problems with the concept of the Trinity, don’t overlook this chapter.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top