Trinity and oneness

[billcu1]

Athanasian Creed

1. Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith;
2. Which faith except every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly.
3. And the catholic faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity;
4. Neither confounding the persons nor dividing the substance.
5. For there is one person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Spirit.
6. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit is all one, the glory equal, the majesty coeternal.
7. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Spirit.
8. The Father uncreated, the Son uncreated, and the Holy Spirit uncreated.
9. The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, and the Holy Spirit incomprehensible.
10. The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Spirit eternal.
11. And yet they are not three eternals but one eternal.
12. As also there are not three uncreated nor three incomprehensible, but one uncreated and one incomprehensible.
13. So likewise the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, and the Holy Spirit almighty.
14. And yet they are not three almighties, but one almighty.
15. So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God;
16. And yet they are not three Gods, but one God.
17. So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, and the Holy Spirit Lord;
18. And yet they are not three Lords but one Lord.
19. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every Person by himself to be God and Lord;
20. So are we forbidden by the catholic religion to say; There are three Gods or three Lords.
21. The Father is made of none, neither created nor begotten.
22. The Son is of the Father alone; not made nor created, but begotten.
23. The Holy Spirit is of the Father and of the Son; neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding.
24. So there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; one Holy Spirit, not three Holy Spirits.
25. And in this Trinity none is afore or after another; none is greater or less than another.
26. But the whole three persons are coeternal, and coequal.
27. So that in all things, as aforesaid, the Unity in Trinity and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshipped.
28. He therefore that will be saved must thus think of the Trinity.
29. Furthermore it is necessary to everlasting salvation that he also believe rightly the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ.
30. For the right faith is that we believe and confess that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and man.
31. God of the substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds; and man of substance of His mother, born in the world.
32. Perfect God and perfect man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting.
33. Equal to the Father as touching His Godhead, and inferior to the Father as touching His manhood.
34. Who, although He is God and man, yet He is not two, but one Christ.
35. One, not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh, but by taking of that manhood into God.
36. One altogether, not by confusion of substance, but by unity of person.
37. For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man, so God and man is one Christ;
38. Who suffered for our salvation, descended into hell, rose again the third day from the dead;
39. He ascended into heaven, He sits on the right hand of the Father, God, Almighty;
40. From thence He shall come to judge the quick and the dead.
41. At whose coming all men shall rise again with their bodies;
42. and shall give account of their own works.
43. And they that have done good shall go into life everlasting and they that have done evil into everlasting fire.
44. This is the catholic faith, which except a man believe faithfully he cannot be saved.

Oh my that’s complicated. I’ve never seen the points your quoting before. It’s enough for me to follow and understand Jesus’ 10 commandments and the pontiff’s (whichever one it was) 7 deadly sins and the 7 virtues.

 

[bzkoss236]

Thanks, and several things. First, that is not Church teaching, but is simply an encyclopidia article talking about person. Second, most of the article was really about the hypostatic union, and not personhood. Third, there was no agreement on what constituted a person as the idea of it related to the hypostatic union.

All I’m saying is a person is a fiction. It’s an idea. A being can have more than one person, as seen in the Trinity. But the Trinity is comprised of persons as complete individuals. They share the same Being because that Being is God - Holy, Eternal, One. The Persons of the Trinity are God, and having that nature, are One in Being. Yet the idea of personhood extends to mankind, being made in the image and likeness of God.

And man, sharing in that divine nature, has the ability to create persons, but not beings, and we do.

A man is body and soul, not body and person. The soul is that part of a man who is held judicially accountable to God, whereas his person is that fiction imposed on him by others so they can communicate with him.

I realize I might be completely wrong about all of this. But I can honestly say I have very thoroughly thought about all of what I’m saying, and I find no contradiction to Church teaching. It serves me well in helping to understand the world and my place in it.

The article is from the Catholic Encyclopedia and is in line with Church teaching.
It defines a person as a complete individual, this would include that of a human person.

 

[Jozefo]

Oh my that’s complicated. I’ve never seen the points your quoting before. It’s enough for me to follow and understand Jesus’ 10 commandments and the pontiff’s (whichever one it was) 7 deadly sins and the 7 virtues.

I think that creed is marvelous

 

[Jozefo]

The article is from the Catholic Encyclopedia and is in line with Church teaching.
It defines a person as a complete individual, this would include that of a human person.

Well, that’s not how I understood it. Again, the context was the hypostatic union and the nature of Christ.

Also, until there is official Church teaching that tells me I’m wrong, then I’m right as far as I’m concerned.

If others disagree, great! I’m truly happy for them having understood something that my puny mind has so much difficulty grasping.

 

[Bahman]

Do you mean that they are three different selves at the same time one? A self by definition is an entity with its own consciousness and free will. Either their consciousness and free will is one, one self, or they have three different consciousness and free will which are mutually exclusive then they are three different selves and as a result three different mutually exclusive beings.

 

[empther]

Do you mean that they are three different selves at the same time one? A self by definition is an entity with its own consciousness and free will. Either their consciousness and free will is one, one self, or they have three different consciousness and free will which are mutually exclusive then they are three different selves and as a result three different mutually exclusive beings.

Created beings must be separate selves, but this is not the case with God.

The three Persons are distinguished from each other only by relationship, not substance which they each fully have.

This has been discussed many times on this forum, by myself and others.
So it’s discouraging to see that in post one we have to start all over again from square one.
Does anybody around here remember anything?

 

[Richca]

What exactly is personage? I know man’s personage is one.

St Thomas Aquinas agreed with Boethius’ definition of person: a person is an individual substance of a rational nature. Consequently, human beings, angels and God are persons because they possess an intellectual nature. Animals, though they are substances, such as dogs, cats, lions, etc. are not persons because they do not possess an intellectual nature. Persons are not fictions or mere ideas.

 

[Bahman]

Created beings must be separate selves, but this is not the case with God.

The three Persons are distinguished from each other only by relationship, not substance which they each fully have.

This has been discussed many times on this forum, by myself and others.
So it’s discouraging to see that in post one we have to start all over again from square one.
Does anybody around here remember anything?

So it is one self. A part of my self could also have a relationship with other part of my self but I never call myself two persons, three persons,…

 

[bzkoss236]

So it is one self. A part of my self could also have a relationship with other part of my self but I never call myself two persons, three persons,…

How do you have a relationship with yourself? A relationship, by definition, requires multiple persons.

A person is a complete individual, not a part of an individual.

 

[Bahman]

How do you have a relationship with yourself?

I am aware of my self. You tell me how such a thing is possible if my self does not have a relationship with itself? I can close my eyes, forget that I even have a body, but there is an absolute certainty that I cannot escape from it which is, I experience my self/being. You need to go to state of psychopath and return safely to see how you could become different persons.

 

[SweetieVietnam]

Can someone help me a little bit with the doctrines of trinity and oneness? God is not one and having three parts right? The three are one. The scriptures say there are three that bear witness in heaven.

Sau m?t th?i gian bánh tráng bo Sweetie ra d?i, bên c?nh vi?c nh?n du?c r?t nhi?u s? ?ng h? t? m?i ngu?i, thì Sweetie cung dã vÃ* dang ti?p nh?n m?t s? góp ý c?a các b?n. VÃ* l?n nÃy, nh?m dáp ?ng nhu c?u c?a các anh ch? nhân viên van phòng, và các b?n h?c sinh, sinh viên b?n r?n, không có nhi?u th?i gian d? có th? thu?ng th?c món bánh tráng bo Sweetie cu?n. Nay Sweetie xin mang d?n cho m?i ngu?i m?t lo?i bánh tráng bo m?i - Bánh tráng bo tr?n.

NgoÃi uu di?m bánh tráng du?c tr?n s?n, phù h?p d? thu?ng th?c nhanh, trong th?i gian ng?n, bánh tráng bo tr?n Sweetie cung có m?t s? thay d?i v? thÃnh ph?n, dó lÃ* thay nu?c s?t me thÃnh hÃnh phi. Nhu v?y, thÃnh ph?n c?a m?t túi bánh tráng bo tr?n Sweetie s? bao g?m bánh tráng, bo, chà bông, hÃnh phi và mu?i.

Sweetie r?t hi v?ng s? ti?p t?c nh?n du?c s? ?ng h? c?a m?i ngu?i!

Giá:

• 25.000 VND /1 túi

Liên h?:
D?a ch?:

1. 66 Tân M? F. Tân Thu?n Tây Q.7
2. 2A/7 Nguy?n Th? Minh Khai F.Da Kao Q.1 (g?n c?u Th? Nghè, d?i di?n c?ng vÃo S? THÚ, k? bên ngân hÃng Quân D?i ( MB Bank))
   D?t tru?c 1 ngÃ*y d? luôn có s?n ph?m m?i.
   Trên 100k thì mình m?i giao nhé (có ship)
   Trên 250k thi mình s? free ship.
   Giao trong qu?n 1-3-4-7.

Liên l?c:
SDT: 01212.789.689
Website: sweetie.vn/shop/food/banh-trang-bo-tron/
Facebook: facebook.com/sweetievietnam

H?n s? d?ng:

• T? 3-4 ngÃ*y

Chú ý:

• B?o qu?n các thÃ*nh ph?n trong bao zipper.
• Bo ph?i b?o qu?n trong nhi?t d? phòng ( không d? bo trong t? l?nh)
• Nên dùng h?t t? 1-2 ngÃ*y sau khi dã m? bao.

V?i bánh tráng bo tr?n thì trên 4 túi Sweetie s? giao có tÃ*nh ship nha m?i ngu?i.
Trên 10 túi thi Sweetie s? free ship ^^.

 

[empther]

Let’s take a look at Bahman’s post 28

\Quote:
Originally Posted by empther View Post
Created beings must be separate selves, but this is not the case with God.

The three Persons are distinguished from each other only by relationship, not substance which they each fully have.

This has been discussed many times on this forum, by myself and others.
So it’s discouraging to see that in post one we have to start all over again from square one.
Does anybody around here remember anything?

\

So it is one self. A part of my self could also have a relationship with other part of my self but I never call myself two persons, three persons,… :bigyikes:

Well, friends, there you have it.
He cynically twists words around to an impossibility, a human being having selves related to each other which has nothing to do with God’s mode of existence,
and makes what I said look wrong.
He makes a mockery of a serious subject.

If there’s anybody out there who wants to think for himself, instead of depending on this nonsense,
look up what Aquinas says about the Trinity and then decide for yourself.
Here. I’ll give you a head start:

Question 27. The procession of the divine persons
newadvent.org/summa/1027.htm

Question 28. The divine relations
newadvent.org/summa/1028.htm

Question 29. The divine persons
newadvent.org/summa/1029.htm

Question 30. The plurality of persons in God
newadvent.org/summa/1030.htm

Question 31. The unity or plurality in God
newadvent.org/summa/1031.htm

Question 32. The knowledge of the divine persons
newadvent.org/summa/1032.htm

Question 33. The person of the Father
newadvent.org/summa/1033.htm

Question 34. The person of the Son
newadvent.org/summa/1034.htm

Question 35. The Image
newadvent.org/summa/1035.htm

Question 36. The person of the Holy Ghost
newadvent.org/summa/1036.htm

Question 37. The name of the Holy Ghost–Love
newadvent.org/summa/1037.htm

Question 38. The name of the Holy Ghost, as Gift
newadvent.org/summa/1038.htm

Question 39. The persons in relation to the essence
newadvent.org/summa/1039.htm

Question 40. The persons as compared to the relations or properties
newadvent.org/summa/1040.htm

Question 41. The persons in reference to the notional acts
newadvent.org/summa/1041.htm

Question 42. Equality and likeness among the divine persons
newadvent.org/summa/1042.htm

Question 43. The mission of the divine persons
newadvent.org/summa/1043.htm

 

[bzkoss236]

I am aware of my self. You tell me how such a thing is possible if my self does not have a relationship with itself? I can close my eyes, forget that I even have a body, but there is an absolute certainty that I cannot escape from it which is, I experience my self/being. You need to go to state of psychopath and return safely to see how you could become different persons.

I think we are using different definitions of relationship.

I would define relationship to mean the interaction between multiple persons our things. This would then exclude one having a relationship with themselves since they are themselves. And I think self awareness comes from comprehension of self, like a baby moving their arm to understand that they are controlling it and it is not a foreign object
Also, I don’t think people with multiple-personality disorder actually have multiple persons. And I believe there are studies which appear to indicate that people with the disorder are really just displaying variations or different parts of the same personality, like extremes of their own personality.

 

[billcu1]

I don’t quite understand what persons are? I know my parents are pentecostal and must practice what the church calls modalism or Sebellianism. It sure sounds like it. There is one in three right?

 

[Hypnotoad]

http://www.fcwa.org/story_of_water/images/animation/3forms.gif

Steam is not ice, nor is ice steam; and liquid is neither ice nor steam and neither are these liquid.

Yet all of them are…

wait for it…

WATER!!!

 

[bzkoss236]

http://www.fcwa.org/story_of_water/images/animation/3forms.gif

Steam is not ice, nor is ice steam; and liquid is neither ice nor steam and neither are these liquid.

Yet all of them are…

wait for it…

WATER!!!

But this is essentially modalism because they are states of water. Trinitarianism would be better understood as a collection of water that exists as solid, liquid, and gas at the same time. Not a collection of water that has solid, liquid, and gas states, but that IS solid, liquid, and gas at the same time.

 

[Richca]

I don’t quite understand what persons are? I know my parents are pentecostal and must practice what the church calls modalism or Sebellianism. It sure sounds like it. There is one in three right?

Billcu1,
Yes, there is one God in three persons. The Trinity is difficult to understand for sure. If it hadn’t been revealed to us by God, we would never know of it. The Trinity cannot be known by the natural light of reason, though the existence of God can be.
As I said in a previous post, God is one because there is but one substance, essence or nature of the Godhead. God is three because of the Trinity of the persons. There is one intellect, one will, and one power in the Trinity. Each of the three divine persons possess or share in this one power as well as all the other attributes of the one Godhead. So, their are not three divine natures in God, as you would have three human natures in three men as well as three intellects and three wills. I believe this is St Thomas Aquinas’ understanding of the Trinity. You can correct me if I’m wrong.

 

[Hypnotoad]

But this is essentially modalism because they are states of water. Trinitarianism would be better understood as a collection of water that exists as solid, liquid, and gas at the same time. Not a collection of water that has solid, liquid, and gas states, but that IS solid, liquid, and gas at the same time.

I would say you over analyze things way too much, since you’re never going to find a perfect model of the Trinity in nature. Make do with what you have.

 

[bzkoss236]

I would say you over analyze things way too much, since you’re never going to find a perfect model of the Trinity in nature. Make do with what you have.

That may be, but it has become habit after having used the same analogy myself and others charging me with the same offense. So, I apologize for doing the same to you.

 

[petersomething]

the three Persons of the Trinity are manifestations of the Godhead, the Divine Essence of the pure Absolute, which, as the Ultimate Reality, transcends all properties, qualities and descriptions, including both being and non-being as well as even the Persons of the Trinity.

According to Meister Eckhart:

"In so far as He is One and Indivisible, He is neither Father, Son, nor Holy Ghost and yet is something which is neither this nor that.”

“For though the Godhead has in it all things, it has them all in one, not piecemeal. It begets not, so it is not Father; it receives not, so it is not Son nor Holy Ghost.”

“The Godhead is an abstract simple thing, omnipotent above all Persons as well as having the power of the inseperate three Persons: giving to none, receiving from none, save as therein subsisting.”

This position concerning the Godhead or Divine Essence vis a vis the Persons of the Trinity does not conflict with Christian orthodoxy. The Athanasian Creed speaks of the single, undivided Essence of the Divine Persons which is the basis for the Unity within the Trinity. The Fourth Lateran Council also confirm that the Divine Essence does not beget, nor is begotten nor proceeds:

“We, however, with the approval of this sacred and universal council, believe and confess with Peter Lombard that there exists a certain supreme reality, incomprehensible and ineffable, which truly is the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, the three persons together and each one of them separately. Therefore in God there is only a Trinity, not a quaternity, since each of the three persons is that reality – that is to say substance, essence or divine nature – which alone is the principle of all things, besides which no other principle can be found. This reality neither begets nor is begotten nor proceeds; the Father begets, the Son is begotten and the Holy Spirit proceeds.”

Christian thinkers articulated the emergence of Being from Beyond-Being using the analogy of the spoken word. Father, Son and Holy Ghost are different modes of the Divine Word.