Trinity and Mathematics?

[lelinator]

Just to remind you, I’m a solipsist. So in some sense what you’re saying makes sense, yet in another sense it doesn’t.

It isn’t made of different matter and it doesn’t exist in a different location. There is no distinction between God’s essence as knowing and as known. They are by identity of what they are the same, only relationally distinct. But in the essence there is the knowing (generating) and being known (the generated). The knower and the known are the same object

As you may recall I believe that three things can be known to exist, consciousness, context, and cause.

To me, consciousness would be equivalent to what you refer to as the knower, and context would be the equivalent of what you refer to as the known. And to me, the two are, as you say, the same object. So in some sense I can understand what you’re saying.

But you’ve only described two things, the knower and the known, so what’s the third part of the trinity? The one that I would refer to as the cause, and the one that you seem to hint at…the one that generates the Son.

To me, the knower isn’t the cause, but just as with the trinity, the knower is inseparable from the cause, just as the known is.

But what’s the cause? I’ve been trying to figure that out for a long time, and you’re the only person that I’ve ever come across that has given me some hope of understanding what that cause is.

So anything that you’ve got to add, I’m all ears.

 

[Vico]

Vico:

No, the relations are eternal – no beginning or end.

That’s why I didn’t say “generated”, I said “generates”. If the Father generates the Son, doesn’t that mean that the Father causes the Son, even if that’s an eternal event, doesn’t the Father still cause the Son?

Not like in creatures. St. Thomas Aquinas wrote in Summa Theologiae > First Part > Question 27 > Article 2:

… “in God the act of understanding and His existence are the same, as shown above (I:14:4). Hence the procession of the Word in God is called generation; and the Word Himself proceeding is called the Son.”

http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1027.htm#article2

 

[lelinator]

@Wesrock,

Here’s the best that I’ve ever been able to come up with to describe the trinity from my perspective as a solipsist.

There’s existence, there’s the knowledge of that existence, and there’s the knowledge of what that existence consists of.

• I am
• I know that I am
• And I know what I am

That’s the best that I’ve ever been able to do. Those are the three things that I believe are knowable. And it’s impossible to take away any one of the three.

+++ Included in the knowledge of what I am, is the knowledge of what I am not, because to know one, is by necessity, to know the other. +++

And so to me, as a solipsist, everything is necessary, because everything is a necessary part of what I am.

 

[SeekerOfTruth7]

The way I have understood the Blessed Trinity is this:

God does not exist as a three dimensional being. In fact for Him to be God, God must exist as a hyper-dimensional Being or better said, a Being outside of all dimensions. Therefore, since God is not bound by the three dimensions like we are, He can exist as Three Divine Persons in One Being without it being some sort of contradiction. But as the Holy Catholic Church has said, the Blessed Trinity is overall a divine mystery, our human minds can get a grasp on it, but once we dig deeper into the Nature of God’s Existence, we loose ourselves in the infinite that is God.

Hope this helps, God bless!

 

[mhmtas63]

Jesus Christ has two wills, one divine and the other human. The sixth Council of Constantinople decreed that it must be said that there are two wills in Christ.

God is three persons and one of that persons has two wills. Hımmm. That makes it very complex.

God’s will is divine but not temporal. Jesus had never preached about a divine will for himself but always the Father’s will!

God has divine will and that is one. If that divine will would be shared by three persons so there would be many chaoses in works. But universe is run by one will.

 

[Vico]

Vico:

Jesus Christ has two wills, one divine and the other human. The sixth Council of Constantinople decreed that it must be said that there are two wills in Christ.

God is three persons and one of that persons has two wills. Hımmm. That makes it very complex.

God’s will is divine but not temporal. Jesus had never preached about a divine will for himself but always the Father’s will!

God has divine will and that is one. If that divine will would be shared by three persons so there would be many chaoses in works. But universe is run by one will.

John 8

23 And he said to them: You are from beneath: I am from above. You are of this world: I am not of this world.
24 Therefore I said to you that you shall die in your sins. For if you believe not that I am he, you shall die in your sin.
25 They said therefore to him: Who art thou? Jesus said to them: The beginning, who also speak unto you.
26 Many things I have to speak and to judge of you. But he that sent me, is true: and the things I have heard of him, these same I speak in the world.
27 And they understood not that he called God his Father.
28 Jesus therefore said to them: When you shall have lifted up, the Son of man, then shall you know that I am he and that I do nothing of myself. But as the Father hath taught me, these things I speak.
29 And he that sent me is with me: and he hath not left me alone. For I do always the things that please him.
30 When he spoke these things, many believed in him.

 

[Dovekin]

But you’ve only described two things, the knower and the known, so what’s the third part of the trinity? The one that I would refer to as the cause, and the one that you seem to hint at…the one that generates the Son.

To me, the knower isn’t the cause, but just as with the trinity, the knower is inseparable from the cause, just as the known is.

Cause is a problematic word to use here, though it does suggest the relationship. Generates and spirates are used with the understanding that they are not causing what is generated. What that means is at the heart of the Trinity.

The analogy I like is speaker, word and breath, though like any analogy it is not quite right. A speaker only exists if a word has been spoken; a word is spoken only if it was spoken by a speaker; uniting word with breath is the act of speaking that is done by a speaker. Unlike our usual understanding that the speaker is the same being as the silent one before the speaking, the Speaker exists only in relation to the word and spirit he generates.

If that does not help, never mind.

 

[lelinator]

The analogy I like is speaker, word and breath, though like any analogy it is not quite right. A speaker only exists if a word has been spoken; a word is spoken only if it was spoken by a speaker; uniting word with breath is the act of speaking that is done by a speaker. Unlike our usual understanding that the speaker is the same being as the silent one before the speaking, the Speaker exists only in relation to the word and spirit he generates.

I can understand that there’s a necessary relationship between the speaker and that which is spoken, just as there is with Wesrock’s analogy of the knower and the known. It’s self-evident that you can’t have one without the other. But it’s in the attempt to explain the third element of the Trinity that analogies always fall short for me. None more so than with Aquinas’ description of the Holy Spirit as the love between the Father and the Son. To me that just seems like a very contrived effort to force a Trinitarian viewpoint where one isn’t readily apparent. It just doesn’t seem as necessary or self-evident to me, as it is with the knower and the known, or the speaker and the spoken.

If that does not help, never mind.

I do appreciate the effort, even if I don’t find it compelling, because I’m hoping that at some point someone will give me an analogy that will just be so bloody obvious that I’ll wonder how I missed it. So far that hasn’t happened, but I keep hoping.

 

[Wesrock]

But you’ve only described two things, the knower and the known, so what’s the third part of the trinity? The one that I would refer to as the cause, and the one that you seem to hint at…the one that generates the Son.

To continue from St. Thomas’ speculative theology, I’ve explained the generation of the Son/Logos as being related to the intelligible act of knowing. It’s understood, even well before St. Thomas, that the second procession is related to the intelligible act of willing.

St. Thomas writes, “The procession of the Word is by way of an intelligible operation. The operation of the will within ourselves involves also another procession, that of love, whereby the object loved is in the lover; as, by the conception of the word, the object spoken of or understood is in the intelligent agent. Hence, besides the procession of the Word in God, there exists in Him another procession called the procession of love.”

This second procession is that by which the Holy Spirit proceeds.

For those more familiar with the topuc, an objection here would be to point out that I said God’s essence is his Intellect is his Will. He is Simple. This is what he is essentially. When we speak of the Intellect and Will we are not referring to separate parts, but to his one simple essence. On that, St. Thomas makes the point that while this is true, notionally the will follows the intellect, one must first know something (in order of dependence) before one wills something. While there is only one eternal act of God, intelligibly or notionally there is a distinction between knowing and willing, which is why we have two processions.

Can the Son generate another Son such that we have more persons? No. This misconceives the Son kind of as a separate being. If hypothetically there was a separate act of intellection in God on top of the first, it would be identical and non-distinct from the first procession. But if there is absolutely no difference between God’s two intellible acts of intellection then they are the factually the same act. The same goes for the Will. St. Thomas actually explains this better than me, I think, even with outdated English translated from Latin. So you cannot have more processions or relations in God.

But what’s the cause? I’ve been trying to figure that out for a long time, and you’re the only person that I’ve ever come across that has given me some hope of understanding what that cause is.

I’m not going to nitpick on the word cause. I assume you mean the “cause” of the processions instead of the cause of God. The reason for the processions is because it is his essence to be his Intellect and Will. It is simply essential to God that these processions be in him. We can deduce from natural theology (I know you object on epistemological grounds, but I’ll continue anyway) that there must be a First Cause and it must know and will. That we know God experiences himself as a community of persons (in a way) is known only because he told us so through divine revelation.

 

[Eric_Hyom]

We are asked to be as ‘One’, in the same way as the Father and Son are as ‘One’; there has to be a simple explanation.

John 17 -

21 so that they may all be one, as you, Father, are in me and I in you, that they also may be in us, that the world may believe that you sent me. 22 And I have given them the glory you gave me, so that they may be one, as we are one,

 

[JimG]

http://www.ignatiusinsight.com/features2011/fsheed_trinityts_may2011.asp

 

[Wesrock]

The Trinity: Three Persons in One Nature | Frank Sheed | From "Theology and Sanity" | Ignatius Insight

I used to have this same text bookmarked, but the website it was on disappeared. Thanks for this.

 

[mhmtas63]

John 8

23 And he said to them: You are from beneath: I am from above. You are of this world: I am not of this world.
24 Therefore I said to you that you shall die in your sins. For if you believe not that I am he, you shall die in your sin.
25 They said therefore to him: Who art thou? Jesus said to them: The beginning, who also speak unto you.
26 Many things I have to speak and to judge of you. But he that sent me, is true: and the things I have heard of him, these same I speak in the world.
27 And they understood not that he called God his Father.
28 Jesus therefore said to them: When you shall have lifted up, the Son of man, then shall you know that I am he and that I do nothing of myself. But as the Father hath taught me, these things I speak.
29 And he that sent me is with me: and he hath not left me alone. For I do always the things that please him.
30 When he spoke these things, many believed in him.

Just notice the emphasis and strong words.

 

[SeekerOfTruth7]

The will of all the Three Divine Persons is the same. They have no difference or desire. Since they are all the Eternal, Good, and Perfect God, the Three Persons have the same will for all things. If they had a difference in will then they wouldn’t be God.
Now the point about the two wills of the Son comes from first, Scriptural indications of this, for instance when Scripture says that the Son does not know the day or the hour, yet later, St. Peter says that Jesus knows all things in John 21. So, we have here the human nature and will, which wouldn’t know the day or the hour, and yet we have the Divine will which does know all things. How can we fully understand this? We can’t, hence the Church calling it a mystery. But we can gain an understanding, limited, but something. In the end, since God is infinite, hyper-dimensional, timeless, we can’t expect God to be bound by our three dimensions and human minds. So this is where faith comes in, when we can’t understand beyond the unknown of God, for in God being God, we will never be able to comprehend completely anything about God since we are finite and he is infinite.
A quote I heard years ago was, “I will not worship a God I can fully understand. For that is not a real god but a false god, a human god.” And I agree fully with that.

God Bless

 

[SeekerOfTruth7]

I don’t think you have a proper understanding of the Son of Man. This doesn’t just mean that Jesus is human, it does mean that but not only. Read Daniel 7:13-14
13 I beheld therefore in the vision of the night, and lo, one like the son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and he came even to the Ancient of days: and they presented him before him.

14 And he gave him power, and glory, and a kingdom: and all peoples, tribes and tongues shall serve him: his power is an everlasting power that shall not be taken away: and his kingdom that shall not be destroyed.

The primary reason Jesus is called the Son of Man is to point back to Daniel. Jesus is being identified with Daniel 7.

And lastly, you can’t divorce Jesus title of Son of Man with His title Son of God. the Gospels clearly show that Jesus is the Son of God, which shows full divinity. therefore, using these two titles, Jesus is fully God, and fully Man. Two natures, and two wills.

 

[Vico]

…

Jesus refers sometimes to the prophecy of Daniel (7:13-14), which was viewed by all as messianic:

“I saw coming with the clouds of heaven one like a son of man. … He received dominion, splendor and kingship; all nations, peoples and tongues will serve him.”

Haydock Commentary, John 8

Ver. 28. When you shall have lifted up, &c. That is, have put me to the death of the cross; (see John iii. 14. and xii. 32.) you, that is, many of you, shall know, and believe in me, as your Messias. Wi.

 

[EndTimes]

I said “ generates ”. If the Father generates the Son, doesn’t that mean that the Father causes the Son, even if that’s an eternal event, doesn’t the Father still cause the Son?

Generates… God the Father generates God’s WORD

Ourselves and our words … are very inter-connected… Yes?

They are distinct… That’s Church Teaching…

AGAIN – It’s a lot of food for mediation… and thus for Understanding

254 The divine persons are really distinct from one another. "God is one but not solitary."86 “Father”, “Son”, “Holy Spirit” are not simply names designating modalities of the divine being, for they are really distinct from one another: "He is not the Father who is the Son, nor is the Son he who is the Father, nor is the Holy Spirit he who is the Father or the Son."87 They are distinct from one another in their relations of origin: "It is the Father who generates, the Son who is begotten, and the Holy Spirit who proceeds."88 The divine Unity is Triune.

255 The divine persons are relative to one another.

Because it does not divide the divine unity, the real distinction of the persons from one another resides solely in the relationships which relate them to one another:

"In the relational names of the persons the Father is related to the Son, the Son to the Father, and the Holy Spirit to both. While they are called three persons in view of their relations, we believe in one nature or substance.

Indeed "everything (in them) is one where there is no opposition of relationship."

"Because of that unity the Father is wholly in the Son and wholly in the Holy Spirit; the Son is wholly in the Father and wholly in the Holy Spirit; the Holy Spirit is wholly in the Father and wholly in the Son."

 

[mhmtas63]

4. Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD: ( Deuteronomy 6)

12:29. And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord: (Mark)

Do could any one point a verse which imply anything about three?

 

[mhmtas63]

Jesus refers sometimes to the prophecy of Daniel (7:13-14), which was viewed by all as messianic:

“I saw coming with the clouds of heaven one like a son of man. … He received dominion, splendor and kingship; all nations, peoples and tongues will serve him.”

Jesus always point the Father as Lord and God. Jesus confirmed that he was just a prophet.
4. But Jesus said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, but in his own country, and among his own kin, and in his own house. (Mark 6)

 

[mhmtas63]

I don’t think you have a proper understanding of the Son of Man. This doesn’t just mean that Jesus is human, it does mean that but not only. Read Daniel 7:13-14
13 I beheld therefore in the vision of the night, and lo, one like the son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and he came even to the Ancient of days: and they presented him before him.

14 And he gave him power, and glory, and a kingdom: and all peoples, tribes and tongues shall serve him: his power is an everlasting power that shall not be taken away: and his kingdom that shall not be destroyed.

The primary reason Jesus is called the Son of Man is to point back to Daniel. Jesus is being identified with Daniel 7.

And lastly, you can’t divorce Jesus title of Son of Man with His title Son of God. the Gospels clearly show that Jesus is the Son of God, which shows full divinity. therefore, using these two titles, Jesus is fully God, and fully Man. Two natures, and two wills.

8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. (Romans)

I think I am also Son of God.