Two questions about the trinity

[God_I_Love]

Is Jesus equal to God the Father. I thought He said: “The Father is greater than I” in John 14:28.

Being begotten by the Love of the Father He is subordinate to the Divine Will of the Father. So the Father is greater in that sense. Yet being one ‘‘I and the Father are one’’ they are equal. It is why Jesus is begotten and not made. Yet that does not make Jesus separate from God. He Is in the Father and the Father in Him.

 

[javid]

What do you mean, “singly”?

Could you clarify your question.

It could be taken a number of ways.

Are you asking of a Divine Person can be a member of a trinity, or are you asking if a Single Divine Personhood can encompass a trinity

I mean, If God the son and the Holy Spirit did not exist, could God the father be a person of trinity?

 

[Vico]

Hi. As others said, there are Three Persons in One God.

I have a similar question. let me ask it here:

Question: Can a Divine Person be a Person of Trinity, singly?

God bless you

Not singly, since “personal distinction in God is constituted by the relations”. So there would be no distinction without the relations.

St. Thomas Aquinas wrote:55 Personal distinction in God through the relations

 Since distinction in the Godhead is accounted for by relations that are not accidental     but are subsistent, and since among beings subsisting in an intellectual nature personal     distinction is discerned, it necessarily follows that personal distinction in God is     constituted by the relations in question. Therefore the Father and the Son and the Holy     Spirit are three persons, and also three hypostases, since hypostasis means     "that which is subsistent and complete."

… five properties in all are attributed to the divine persons: innascibility, paternity, filiation, spiration, and procession.

 ... the notions constituting persons are three in number: paternity,     filiation, and procession. And these notions must be strict properties. For that which     constitutes a person must pertain to that person alone; individuating principles cannot     belong to several individuals. Therefore, the three notions in question are called personal     properties, in the sense that they constitute the three persons in the manner     described. The remaining notions are called properties or notions of the persons,     but not personal properties or notions, since they do not constitute a person.

(From: The Holy Trinity) ewtn.com/library/Theology/SIPLIGHT.HTM

This is also given in the Catechism:

252 The Church uses (I) the term “substance” (rendered also at times by “essence” or “nature”) to designate the divine being in its unity, (II) the term “person” or “hypostasis” to designate the Father, Son and Holy Spirit in the real distinction among them, and (III) the term “relation” to designate the fact that their distinction lies in the relationship of each to the others.

 

[Usagi]

I mean, If God the son and the Holy Spirit did not exist, could God the father be a person of trinity?

He would still be a Divine Person, indeed the only one, but He would not be a Person of the Trinity since there would be no Trinity. Indeed, there might never have been a need to ponder the distinction between Being and Person in that case.

Usagi

 

[javid]

Not singly, since “personal distinction in God is constituted by the relations”. So there would be no distinction without the relations.

St. Thomas Aquinas wrote:55 Personal distinction in God through the relations

 Since distinction in the Godhead is accounted for by relations that are not accidental     but are subsistent, and since among beings subsisting in an intellectual nature personal     distinction is discerned, it necessarily follows that personal distinction in God is     constituted by the relations in question. Therefore the Father and the Son and the Holy     Spirit are three persons, and also three hypostases, since hypostasis means     "that which is subsistent and complete."

… five properties in all are attributed to the divine persons: innascibility, paternity, filiation, spiration, and procession.

 ... the notions constituting persons are three in number: paternity,     filiation, and procession. And these notions must be strict properties. For that which     constitutes a person must pertain to that person alone; individuating principles cannot     belong to several individuals. Therefore, the three notions in question are called personal     properties, in the sense that they constitute the three persons in the manner     described. The remaining notions are called properties or notions of the persons,     but not personal properties or notions, since they do not constitute a person.

(From: The Holy Trinity) ewtn.com/library/Theology/SIPLIGHT.HTM

This is also given in the Catechism:

252 The Church uses (I) the term “substance” (rendered also at times by “essence” or “nature”) to designate the divine being in its unity, (II) the term “person” or “hypostasis” to designate the Father, Son and Holy Spirit in the real distinction among them, and (III) the term “relation” to designate the fact that their distinction lies in the relationship of each to the others.

He would still be a Divine Person, indeed the only one, but He would not be a Person of the Trinity since there would be no Trinity. Indeed, there might never have been a need to ponder the distinction between Being and Person in that case.

Usagi

Thank you very much

But my question is not on ditinction. Yes personal distinction in God is constituted by the relations, But My question is on Three Divine Persons.

If second person and third person do not exist, then first person can’t be a person of trinity or one of three, although he is a divine person. Does it mean that the first person needs two other persons to be a person of Trinity?

 

[Vico]

Thank you very much

But my question is not on ditinction. Yes personal distinction in God is constituted by the relations, But My question is on Three Divine Persons.

If second person and third person do not exist, then first person can’t be a person of trinity or one of three, although he is a divine person. Does it mean that the first person needs two other persons to be a person of Trinity?

Yes. It there are no relations then there there are no distinctions and so no persons.

Catechism252 The Church uses (I) the term “substance” (rendered also at times by “essence” or “nature”) to designate the divine being in its unity, (II) the term “person” or “hypostasis” to designate the Father, Son and Holy Spirit in the real distinction among them, and (III) the term “relation” to designate the fact that their distinction lies in the relationship of each to the others.

 

[curtish1947]

1-How can all 3 members of the Trinity be the same person, when the Bible clearly identifies them as having their own individual identities?

2-Jesus prayed to obey the will of the Father. How could they be the same person, if Jesus was obedient to the father (which implied seperate identity) and implied they had different “wills”?

Hi,

1. The are not, but they are all, if you can understand this, composed of identical parts.
2. They are separate persons, they are not the same person. Love is why Jesus did The
   Father’s Will. Love is defined Biblically as: Doing The Will Of The One You Love. Jesus
   loved His Father, so He did His Father’s Will. You are implying, that Jesus has a Will
   of His Own. That is true. You have not asked if His own personal Will is different from the
   Father’s will. It can be at times, if He does not know what the Father wishes.

Dialog for this:
Augustine never met God. So he did not have to know God, and since God likes/loves faith (not having all the answers), it causes us to trust, which God loves. If Augustine to do something for God, needed to know God, he would because God would cause that.
Do you want to know what the Trinity is as seen in their essence?
Do you want to know who Jesus is in His Essence?
If you were told, would you understand?
The trinity, is like you in that three persons way, with a distinction, being begotten, Jesus is, and being sent The Holy Spirit is, The Father causing this to happen only used Himself as that is all He had to work with, in begetting and sending. Simple isn’t it?
Do you know that in the trinitarian way, you are that also? You are a little boy some of the time, to play. You are and adult with supressed emotions, to work. You are a parent, with a heart to guide and mold some of the time. And the Father of you manages the other two. Simple isn’t it?
Since now you know the Parent, child and adult parts of you, God made you like Him in that way, and at one time, Biblically it seems, He was only one person, just like you and I are now, but He changed all that in begetting His only Begotten son, and in sending out The Holy Spirit.
So, after The Holy Spirit descended upon me, but it was the Father’s Holy Spirit, not The Holy Spirit’s Holy Spirit, I realized years later that all the components, as I call them, are identical in each of them.
Thus, my experience tells me, that all though each component in each of them is identical, the same amount of each component is also in each of them as they are totally separate in personhood, if you will allow that idea, but they do only one job, as I call it, God.
When I saw the essence of God, as a gift from Mary to me, none of the three looked any different from the other one, and there was no personhood present, they were just God, together like a job, only my logic allowed me to figure out who was who, then, later, and now.
So in the role of God, just like Jesus said to Faustina one day, they are seemily totally different from their persons and personal roles. This is just repeating God as being a job, separate from their own personalities, when they are being God. Just like anyone of us has a job, and in that we are very much different than when we are being personable. And that is very much how I deal with God, on a regular basis. Simple isn’t it?
…Kate.

 

[javid]

Yes. It there are no relations then there there are no distinctions and so no persons.

Catechism252 The Church uses (I) the term “substance” (rendered also at times by “essence” or “nature”) to designate the divine being in its unity, (II) the term “person” or “hypostasis” to designate the Father, Son and Holy Spirit in the real distinction among them, and (III) the term “relation” to designate the fact that their distinction lies in the relationship of each to the others.

So, Is this true to say Persons need the relations to exist?

 

[Vico]

So, Is this true to say Persons need the relations to exist?

Yes, for the definition of person used by the Church.

Aquinas discussed the historical use of the term person in Summa Theologica, I, Q29, A4.: Hence, this word “person” was used just as any other absolute term. But afterwards it was applied to express relation, as it lent itself to that signification, so that this word “person” means relation not only by use and custom, according to the first opinion, but also by force of its own proper signification.

and

Reply to Objection 3. In God the individual–i.e. distinct and incommunicable substance–includes the idea of relation, as above explained.
newadvent.org/summa/1029.htm

 

[javid]

Yes, for the definition of person used by the Church.

Aquinas discussed the historical use of the term person in Summa Theologica, I, Q29, A4.: Hence, this word “person” was used just as any other absolute term. But afterwards it was applied to express relation, as it lent itself to that signification, so that this word “person” means relation not only by use and custom, according to the first opinion, but also by force of its own proper signification.

and

Reply to Objection 3. In God the individual–i.e. distinct and incommunicable substance–includes the idea of relation, as above explained.
newadvent.org/summa/1029.htm

Is Person perfect God, in this definition? If yes why The Person needs relations to exist?

 

[Usagi]

Is Person perfect God, in this definition? If yes why The Person needs relations to exist?

“Person” in that definition is purely a relational term and has no effect on God’s existence or nature. The Persons are defined in relation to one another, so that there would be no “God the Father” if there were no “God the Son” for Him to beget – but there would still be God, with all His essential attributes intact.

Usagi

 

[javid]

“Person” in that definition is purely a relational term and has no effect on God’s existence or nature. The Persons are defined in relation to one another, so that there would be no “God the Father” if there were no “God the Son” for Him to beget – but there would still be God, with all His essential attributes intact.

Usagi

Dear Usagi

Do you mean that “God the Father” and “God the Son” need each other to exist?

 

[Usagi]

Dear Usagi

Do you mean that “God the Father” and “God the Son” need each other to exist?

Well, yes, because those names describe relationships. The only reason we say “God the Father” and “God the Son” instead of just “God” is that there is more than one Person. They share one substance, one mind, and one will; literally the only distinction between them is that they are not each other.

That is very much not the same thing as saying that God needs something outside Himself to exist.

Usagi

 

[Vico]

Is Person perfect God, in this definition? If yes why The Person needs relations to exist?

Without each other the Divine Persons, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, could not be perfect.

Divine person signifies a relation as subsistent. The being who exists essentially or by identity within his essence is subsistent.

 

[javid]

Well, yes, because those names describe relationships. The only reason we say “God the Father” and “God the Son” instead of just “God” is that there is more than one Person. They share one substance, one mind, and one will; literally the only distinction between them is that they are not each other.

That is very much not the same thing as saying that God needs something outside Himself to exist.

Usagi

Dear Usagi

Do you mean God may be needy but He needs something inside Himself to exist? I think the word “need” can’t be used for God, because He is needless.

 

[javid]

Without each other the Divine Persons, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, could not be perfect.

Divine person signifies a relation as subsistent. The being who exists essentially or by identity within his essence is subsistent.

Dear Vico

Divine person must be Abstract Being or Real Being. Absolutely Divine person is not Abstract Being. So as Real Being, He must be Self-exist or creature. If He be a creature, So we can’t say that The person is God.(Father is God, Son is God, Holy spirit is God)

So, as a self-exist, How can we say that without each other they could not be perfect? A self-exist needs no thing to be perfect, if else, he can’t be a God.

 

[Vico]

Dear Vico

Divine person must be Abstract Being or Real Being. Absolutely Divine person is not Abstract Being. So as Real Being, He must be Self-exist or creature. If He be a creature, So we can’t say that The person is God.(Father is God, Son is God, Holy spirit is God)

So, as a self-exist, How can we say that without each other they could not be perfect? A self-exist needs no thing to be perfect, if else, he can’t be a God.

Relation as referred to the essence does not differ therefrom really, but only in our way of thinking.

 

[Tomdstone]

They are separate persons, they are not the same person.

Muslims say that there is one God and one person and that it is a contradiction to say that one God is three persons.

 

[javid]

Relation as referred to the essence does not differ therefrom really, but only in our way of thinking.

Dear Vico

I’m talking about the Persons & Persons are really three, not only in our way of thinking. So my main problem is: “How needless Divine Persons could not be perfect Without each other?”

Please give me a good answer for this.

All the best

 

[Seraphim73]

Guys yall have spent hundreds of posts going around and around on this. It would be great to have one thread on the Trinity that’s not a Vico/javid ping pong extravaganza.