Understanding the Trinity

[chaunceygardner]

I believe I already offered a suggestion as to why the Church codified the basic concepts of the Trinity. As for God, why would anyone be surprised that understanding the nature of God would be beyond our means?

Because the message of Jesus, although somewhat obscure in some places, is generally very straightforward and clear. And perhaps the fact that He did not spend any time explaining the Trinity means that it is not important in our quest for salvation and what is essential to being a Christian.

Do you understand what is was like for God to never have a beginning? Can you even grasp that? We know it is True, yet we can’t imagine HOW it is true. Same with the Trinity. We understand the basic facts (which God revealed to us out of Love) yet we don’t know HOW it can be. God want us to know him for Himself, not as something we conjure up in our own limited minds.

You are correct that I can not comprehend that, although I have tried. But an eternal God and the Trinity are really not that similar, and our definition of the latter comes from man. Isn’t it something we did “conjure up in our own limited minds” to explain a concept that was and is a mystery? I still wonder why it is essential to “the idea of being a Christian”?

 

[AmbroseSJ]

chaunceygardner:

I still wonder why it is essential to “the idea of being a Christian”?

It isn’t essential for us to understand the Trinity, but it is essential for us to believe in the Trinity. Christianity teaches that Jesus is the Son of God. That he IS in fact God. Jesus himself defines himself as both God and Son. He says that He and the FAther are ONE. We already have two persons right there. The Holy Spirit is also God according to Christianity. We are baptized in the Name of the Trinity by the order of Jesus Christ Himself. It is absolutely central to Christianity.

Today we have MANY churches that claim to be Christian, but they are far removed from Christianity. Some claim to be Christian by the mere fact that they believe Jesus is some sort of God person.

Christianity (or more properly the Church) is the City on the Hill. It is the way to Truth. The more one denies the full truth the less Christian they are.

 

[humblelurker]

Three “persons” = three individuals = three Gods. Maybe it is a mystery only because we made it that way.

If Jesus as the Second Person has always existed, for what purpose did He exist prior to His incarnation? Did the Holy Spirit always exist? Which was “first”? If they have one nature and one substance (if indeed God does have substance) then are we not talking about One God who appears to us and communicates in various ways, including via the Incarnation?

Maybe I am hung up on the term “persons”, which makes it sound like there are three distinct individuals.

Is it a mystery because God did not give us the wherewithal to understand or is it a mystery because we turned it into one? The OP asks about understanding the Trinity, and the apparent answer is we can’t. But the Church seems to have reasons and explanations for just about everything else.

Think about the “Lord’s Prayer”, the one that Jesus gave us. One God, no mention of a Triune God. Then look at the Creed, invented by people, with “I believe in One God” as the start, but then we say we believe in two others who are also God.

So if someone said that they believed in ONE God who could and has manifested Himself in different ways (Jesus, Holy Spirit) that would be wrong. But to say we believe in THREE Gods but really only mean one, that is supposed to be right. Hmmmmm.

It is a mystery because we are finite and God is infinite. The Second Person’s Purpose before the incarnation is love, for God is love and love is self giving. None of the Trinity was created first They are God uncreated. There are Divine Mysteries that as Catholics we believe on faith, such as:

The incarnation of the infinite God becoming a finite human person and yet remaining infinite God is another Divine Mystery that Christians accept on faith. Can an infinite God becoming a finite human person and yet remaining infinite God? Christians say yes because God is infinite.

We understand our limited natures as human people and accept Divine Revelation on faith. We believe the Trinity is a Divine Revelation from God and NOT from Man. We don’t say we believe in THREE Gods but only really mean one. We say we believe in ONE God in THREE Persons. Please don’t tell us what we believe. It is rude. Furthermore Catholics are not “Bible Only” Christians, for we believe that the Bible is only part of the deposit of faith, not all of it.

 

[chaunceygardner]

It isn’t essential for us to understand the Trinity, but it is essential for us to believe in the Trinity. Christianity teaches that Jesus is the Son of God. That he IS in fact God. Jesus himself defines himself as both God and Son. **He says that He and the FAther are ONE. ** We already have two persons right there. The Holy Spirit is also God according to Christianity. We are baptized in the Name of the Trinity by the order of Jesus Christ Himself. It is absolutely central to Christianity.

I bolded some of your sentences, which exactly state what confuses me. We say that Jesus and the God (the Father) are ONE, so what is wrong with saying they are the SAME? But that seems to get some people excited (note humblelurker’s comment below). We say that they are ONE and that Jesus IS God, but then we say they are different and somehow separate.

The biblical source for the idea of Trinity comes mostly from the Gospel of John. But in John, does Jesus say that He is God, or even one-third of God? This is what He tells his disciples in John 14:

Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The words that I speak to you I do not speak on my own. The Father who dwells in me is doing his works. Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me

Is Jesus saying that He IS God, or that God the Father is within Him and acting and speaking through Him? Doesn’t that sound like what Jesus is saying?

And then to complicate things, a few sentences later Jesus tells us this:

On that day you will realize that I am in my Father and you are in me and I in you.

Okay, so now WE too are in God and God is within us. So what does that mean? If being one with the Father makes Jesus the Second Person of a Trinity, what does that statement make us? Equal to Jesus and to God? Or does it possibly mean that we are all one in God; that we are ALL contained within an infinite God? Which would also mean that He is within us as well? And that makes what Jesus says in John much clearer, and would make His other statements about the Kingdom of God being “here and now” also more understandable. The Kingdom of God is present within us.

I would agree that it is not essential for us to understand the concept of the Trinity, but we should also not let it obscure the underlying meaning of Jesus, and what He is telling us about God and His Kingdom.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

chaunceygardner:

I would agree that it is not essential for us to understand the concept of the Trinity, but we should also not let it obscure the underlying meaning of Jesus, and what He is telling us about God and His Kingdom.

There is no obscurity or confusion. Obscurity and confusion enter in when one tries to understand the Scriptures for oneself, as the Ethiopian eunuch understood very well. It is when we humble ourselves before God, admitting we need an interpreter, that we are given answers. That is why Jesus left us His Church, of which He is the Head. That Church is the Catholic Church.

 

[humblelurker]

FYI
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church
234 The mystery of the Most Holy Trinity is the central mystery of Christian faith and life. It is the mystery of God in himself. It is therefore the source of all the other mysteries of faith, the light that enlightens them. It is the most fundamental and essential teaching in the “hierarchy of the truths of faith”. The whole history of salvation is identical with the history of the way and the means by which the one true God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, reveals himself to men “and reconciles and unites with himself those who turn away from sin”.
253 The Trinity is One. We do not confess three Gods, but one God in three persons, the “consubstantial Trinity”. The divine persons do not share the one divinity among themselves but each of them is God whole and entire: “The Father is that which the Son is, the Son that which the Father is, the Father and the Son that which the Holy Spirit is, i.e. by nature one God.” In the words of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), “Each of the persons is that supreme reality, viz., the divine substance, essence or nature.”
254 The divine persons are really distinct from one another. “God is one but not solitary.” “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.” 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.” The divine Unity is Triune.
460 The Word became flesh to make us “partakers of the divine nature”: “For this is why the Word became man, and the Son of God became the Son of man: so that man, by entering into communion with the Word and thus receiving divine sonship, might become a son of God.” “For the Son of God became man so that we might become God.” “The only-begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed our nature, so that he, made man, might make men gods.”
460 is currently being discussed in the thread “Do men become God” in the main Apologetic Forum.

 

[humblelurker]

Catechism of the Catholic Church
221 But St. John goes even further when he affirms that “God is love”: God’s very being is love. By sending his only Son and the Spirit of Love in the fullness of time, God has revealed his innermost secret: God himself is an eternal exchange of love, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and he has destined us to share in that exchange.

In other words God the Son has always been God the Son within that exchange of eternal love, incarnation or not.

 

[chaunceygardner]

FYI
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church
234 The mystery of the Most Holy Trinity is the central mystery of Christian faith and life. It is the mystery of God in himself. It is therefore the source of all the other mysteries of faith, the light that enlightens them. It is the most fundamental and essential teaching in the “hierarchy of the truths of faith”. The whole history of salvation is identical with the history of the way and the means by which the one true God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, reveals himself to men “and reconciles and unites with himself those who turn away from sin”.
253 The Trinity is One. We do not confess three Gods, but one God in three persons, the “consubstantial Trinity”. The divine persons do not share the one divinity among themselves but each of them is God whole and entire: “The Father is that which the Son is, the Son that which the Father is, the Father and the Son that which the Holy Spirit is, i.e. by nature one God.” In the words of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), “Each of the persons is that supreme reality, viz., the divine substance, essence or nature.”
254 The divine persons are really distinct from one another. “God is one but not solitary.” “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.” 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.” The divine Unity is Triune.

That is as clear as mud, and seems to be contradictory. Refer to the underlined parts, and tell us which one is it? I don’t see how it can be both. And if the trinity each has different points of origin, with one begetting another and the third proceeding from, then they did not all exist from the same moment of time. Yet if God is eternal and One, how could that be? Oh, that’s right, its a mystery.

460 The Word became flesh to make us “partakers of the divine nature”: “For this is why the Word became man, and the Son of God became the Son of man: so that man, by entering into communion with the Word and thus receiving divine sonship, might become a son of God.” “For the Son of God became man so that we might become God.” “The only-begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed our nature, so that he, made man, might make men gods.”

460 is currently being discussed in the thread “Do men become God” in the main Apologetic Forum.

Thanks, I will take a look at that thread and the Catechism, since the underlined words are shocking to me. I wonder if most Catholics know this and would accept that they could be gods? Sounds strangely pagan.

I still wonder if we are not dealing with a mystery created by man, and that God is really not that mysterious.

My final question is if belief in the Trinity is a requirement for being saved, since many were saved in the NT who had no concept of a Triune God? They believed in one God, our Father in Heaven, as Jesus taught them.

 

[mackbrislawn]

So, what would have happened if the Gospel of John never existed, or was lost, or if that first chapter was not included? What would our understanding be then?

Was the concept of “One God in Three Persons” a slam dunk or was it a way to reconcile divergent viewpoints found in the NT and held by different Christian communities in the early church? It sounds that way

What if the gospel of John had never existed?

Well, what if scripture hadn’t been written at all? I don’t know. However, John 1:1 isn’t the only verse used to point to the divinity of Jesus, so our understanding probably wouldn’t be a lot different. Furthermore, the idea that Jesus is God existed very early on. For example, Ignatius in his letters written about 110 AD calls Jesus God. Other early Christian writers do as well.

In a previous post, I mentioned the Docetists. John refers to them in his first epistle when he says, “…every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God.” 1John 4:2 Docetists were an early Christian heretical sect that denied that Jesus had come in the flesh. They denied that because they believed Jesus to be God, and since he was God, he had to be the Father. That is, Jesus and the Father were the same person. Since the Father couldn’t suffer and die, obviously Jesus didn’t suffer and die, it was in appearance only. Jesus didn’t really come in the flesh, but only seemed to.

I offer the above example as evidence of early, New Testament time, belief in Christ’s divinity, and of an early attempt to reconcile monotheism with it.

What if we didn’t have John’s gospel? It wouldn’t have made any difference. Since belief in Christ’s divinity was very early, this belief couldn’t have come from pondering over John’s gospel, or the New Testament, since the New Testament didn’t quite exist yet. Therefore, Christ’s divinity had to have been a teaching of the apostles to the first Christians. The apostles directly taught that Jesus was God, so even if John hadn’t written his gospel, or if it was lost, we would still have the relevant apostolic teaching.

You’re right, it wasn’t a slam dunk, it took a long time before the Council of Nicea hammered out the Trinitarian formula, One God in Three Persons, which does reconcile different biblical viewpoints. Indeed, different, non-orthodox, Christian communities held different opinions. Monophysites emphasized Christ’s divinity at the expense of his humanity; Nestorians emphasized his humanity at the expense of his divinity; Arians considered him to be a creature; plus there were Modalists, Adoptionists, Docetists, Gnostics, and so on.

The Trinity, then, is the balance of all scripture verses plus traditional apostolic teaching.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

chaunceygardner:

My final question is if belief in the Trinity is a requirement for being saved, since many were saved in the NT who had no concept of a Triune God? They believed in one God, our Father in Heaven, as Jesus taught them.

You can rest assured that NT Christians ALL believed in the Holy Trinity.

 

[StrawberryJam]

You can rest assured that NT Christians ALL believed in the Holy Trinity.

I don’t know with as much certainty that all did, but I do agree that there is overwhelming evidence as seen in the catacombs that they did.

Edit to add to chauncygardner:

you noted: " Sounds strangely pagan"

Doesn’t the epic of Gilgimesh also sound strangely familiar?

Want me to go on?

Not a good argument my freind.

 

[Silyosha]

I’m not sure if this has been posted already, but I heard a great explanation on an EWTN broadcast–can’t remember what it was called. Anyway, the Trinity was described in one sense as the different parts of love. The Father is “that which loves”, the Son is “the beloved”, and the Holy Spirit is “the love”. And “each” has existed since before time began.

 

[StrawberryJam]

I’m not sure if this has been posted already, but I heard a great explanation on an EWTN broadcast–can’t remember what it was called. Anyway, the Trinity was described in one sense as the different parts of love. The Father is “that which loves”, the Son is “the beloved”, and the Holy Spirit is “the love”. And “each” has existed since before time began.

It sounds good to me, but the problem here is that you have a person who seems to need this to not only make sense to them in human terms but also be explicit, not implicit in the bible.

You are dealing with a person who wants no mystery at all in the supernatural. I don’t know how you can approach that.

 

[Ralph4454]

It sounds good to me, but the problem here is that you have a person who seems to need this to not only make sense to them in human terms but also be explicit, not implicit in the bible.

You are dealing with a person who wants no mystery at all in the supernatural. I don’t know how you can approach that.

You mean something like, Why is the sky blue? Why is the color blue called blue?

 

[humblelurker]

That is as clear as mud, and seems to be contradictory. Refer to the underlined parts, and tell us which one is it? I don’t see how it can be both. And if the trinity each has different points of origin, with one begetting another and the third proceeding from, then they did not all exist from the same moment of time. Yet if God is eternal and One, how could that be? Oh, that’s right, its a mystery.

Thanks, I will take a look at that thread and the Catechism, since the underlined words are shocking to me. I wonder if most Catholics know this and would accept that they could be gods? Sounds strangely pagan.

I still wonder if we are not dealing with a mystery created by man, and that God is really not that mysterious.

My final question is if belief in the Trinity is a requirement for being saved, since many were saved in the NT who had no concept of a Triune God? They believed in one God, our Father in Heaven, as Jesus taught them.

Did those people and councils who drew up the Canon of Sacred Scripture also believe in a Trinitarian God? If they are wrong on a Trinitarian God then they can be wrong on the New Testament Canon, right? Furthermore, are you telling us that something must be fully comprehended by your finite mind before you will believe it?

Chew on this:

“For neither the centurion nor that poor woman who for twelve years was wasting away with a bloody flux, had believed in the mysteries of the Trinity, for these were revealed to the Apostles after the resurrection of Christ; so that the faith of such as believe in the mystery of the Trinity might have its due preeminence: but it was her singleness of mind and her devotion to her God that met with our Lord’s approval: ‘For she said within herself, If I do but touch his garment, I shall be made whole.’ This is the faith which our Lord said was seldom found. This is the faith which even in the case of those who believe aright is hard to find in perfection. ‘According to your faith, be it done unto you,’ says God. I do not, indeed, like the sound of those words. For if it be done unto me according to my faith, I shall perish. And yet I certainly believe in God the Father, I believe in God the Son, and I believe in God the Holy Ghost. I believe in one God; nevertheless, I would not have it done unto me according to my faith.” Jerome, Against Luciferians, 15 (A.D. 382).

“We have said elsewhere that those things are predicated Specially in the Trinity as belonging severally to each person, which are predicated relatively the one to the other, as Father and Son, and the gift of both, the Holy Spirit; for the Father is not the Trinity, nor the Son the Trinity, nor the gift the Trinity: but what whenever each is singly spoken of in respect to themselves, then they are not spoken of as three in the plural number, but one, the Trinity itself, as the Father God, the Son God, and the Holy Spirit God; the Father good, the Son good, and the Holy Spirit good; and the Father omnipotent, the Son omnipotent, and the Holy Spirit omnipotent: yet neither three Gods, nor three goods, nor three omnipotents, but one God, good, omnipotent, the Trinity itself; and whatsoever else is said of them not relatively in respect to each other, but individually in respect to themselves. For they are thus spoken of according to l essence, since in them to be is the same as to be great, as to be good, as to be wise, and whatever else is said of each person individually therein, or of the Trinity itself, in respect to themselves. And that therefore they are called three persons, or three substances, not in order that any difference of essence may be understood, but that we may be able to answer by some one word, should any one ask what three, or what three things? And that there is so great an equality in that Trinity, that not only the Father is not greater than the Son, as regards divinity, but neither are the Father and Son together greater than the Holy Spirit; nor is each individual person, whichever it be of the three, less than the Trinity itself.” Augustine, On the Trinity, 8 Pref (A.D. 416).

Special Thanks to John Salza at scripturecatholic.com for providing these quotes really fast.

 

[humblelurker]

Did those people and councils who drew up the Canon of Sacred Scripture also believe in a Trinitarian God? If they are wrong on a Trinitarian God then they can be wrong on the New Testament Canon, right? Furthermore, are you telling us that something must be fully comprehended by your finite mind before you will believe it?

Chew on this:

“For neither the centurion nor that poor woman who for twelve years was wasting away with a bloody flux, had believed in the mysteries of the Trinity, for these were revealed to the Apostles after the resurrection of Christ; so that the faith of such as believe in the mystery of the Trinity might have its due preeminence: but it was her singleness of mind and her devotion to her God that met with our Lord’s approval: ‘For she said within herself, If I do but touch his garment, I shall be made whole.’ This is the faith which our Lord said was seldom found. This is the faith which even in the case of those who believe aright is hard to find in perfection. ‘According to your faith, be it done unto you,’ says God. I do not, indeed, like the sound of those words. For if it be done unto me according to my faith, I shall perish. And yet I certainly believe in God the Father, I believe in God the Son, and I believe in God the Holy Ghost. I believe in one God; nevertheless, I would not have it done unto me according to my faith.” Jerome, Against Luciferians, 15 (A.D. 382).

“We have said elsewhere that those things are predicated Specially in the Trinity as belonging severally to each person, which are predicated relatively the one to the other, as Father and Son, and the gift of both, the Holy Spirit; for the Father is not the Trinity, nor the Son the Trinity, nor the gift the Trinity: but what whenever each is singly spoken of in respect to themselves, then they are not spoken of as three in the plural number, but one, the Trinity itself, as the Father God, the Son God, and the Holy Spirit God; the Father good, the Son good, and the Holy Spirit good; and the Father omnipotent, the Son omnipotent, and the Holy Spirit omnipotent: yet neither three Gods, nor three goods, nor three omnipotents, but one God, good, omnipotent, the Trinity itself; and whatsoever else is said of them not relatively in respect to each other, but individually in respect to themselves. For they are thus spoken of according to l essence, since in them to be is the same as to be great, as to be good, as to be wise, and whatever else is said of each person individually therein, or of the Trinity itself, in respect to themselves. And that therefore they are called three persons, or three substances, not in order that any difference of essence may be understood, but that we may be able to answer by some one word, should any one ask what three, or what three things? And that there is so great an equality in that Trinity, that not only the Father is not greater than the Son, as regards divinity, but neither are the Father and Son together greater than the Holy Spirit; nor is each individual person, whichever it be of the three, less than the Trinity itself.” Augustine, On the Trinity, 8 Pref (A.D. 416).

Special Thanks to John Salza at scripturecatholic.com for providing these quotes really fast.

Or this:

“All those Catholic expounders of the divine Scriptures, both Old and New, whom I have been able to read, who have written before me concerning the Trinity, Who is God, have purposed to teach, according to the Scriptures, this doctrine, that the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit intimate a divine unity of one and the same substance in an indivisible equality; and therefore that they are not three Gods, but one God: although the Father hath begotten the Son, and so He who is the Father is not the Son; and the Son is begotten by the Father, and so He who is the Son is not the Father; and the Holy Spirit is neither the Father nor the Son, but only the Spirit of the Father and of the Son, Himself also co-equal with the Father and the Son, and pertaining to the unity of the Trinity. Yet not that this Trinity was born of the Virgin Mary, and crucified under Pontius Pilate, buried and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven, but only the Son. Nor, again, that this Trinity descended in the form of a dove upon Jesus when He was baptized; nor that, on the day of Pentecost, after the ascension of the Lord, when there came a sound from heaven, as of a rushing mighty wind,’ the same Trinity sat upon each of them with cloven tongues like as of fire,’ but only the Holy Spirit. Nor yet that this Trinity said from heaven, Thou art my Son,’ whether when He was baptized by John, or when the three disciples were with Him in the mount, or when the voice sounded, saying, I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again;’ but that it was a word of the Father only, spoken to the Son; although the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, as they are indivisible, so work indivisibly. This is also my faith, since it is the Catholic faith.” Augustine, On the Trinity, I: 4,7 (A.D. 416).

Special Thanks to John Salza at scripturecatholic.com for providing these quotes really fast.

 

[humblelurker]

I choose Augustine and Jerome on purpose given their rivalry over the Canon of Sacred Scripture, but they both believe in the Holy Trinity. Hmmmmmmmmmm…interesting. Catholic Christians and non-Catholic Christians also have a rivalry over the Canon of Sacred Scripture, but most of them also believe in the Holy Trinity. Hmmmmmmmmmm…interesting.

 

[mackbrislawn]

… it took a long time before the Council of Nicea hammered out the Trinitarian formula, One God in Three PersonsQUOTE]

Oops, it wasn’t the Council of Nicea–thathe Council of Nicea dealt with the divinity of Jesus, not the personality and divinity of the Holy Spirit.

 

[chaunceygardner]

You can rest assured that NT Christians ALL believed in the Holy Trinity.

Sorry, but I must respectfully disagree with that statement. If you had said “most” or “eventually” I would not question it. But we know that our current concept of the Trinity took a few hundred years to be hammered out and about as long to be promulgated to all corners of Christianity. In the NT and certainly for decades following there were Christians who would not have known what that meant, and some, especially Jewish Christians, would likely have denied it. Converted pagans would have less of a problem accepting the idea of a Trinity.

 

[chaunceygardner]

It sounds good to me, but the problem here is that you have a person who seems to need this to not only make sense to them in human terms but also be explicit, not implicit in the bible.

You are dealing with a person who wants no mystery at all in the supernatural. I don’t know how you can approach that.

Thank you for telling me what I think. And it is not “making sense in human terms”, or being “explicitly in the Bible” that is important to me. It is that the explanation/definition/doctrine we currently have is a man made invention that was developed to fight off the various heresies that threatened a unified Christianity. It is a patchwork doctrine that doesn’t really explain anything. And mystery is quite fine; in fact it would be preferable if the Church just said “The Trinity is a mystery” and leave it alone. But we are asked to believe in an unintelligible doctrine, and if we don’t we are “not Christian”. That makes even less sense. (hint: it appears that some of our first Apostles would not have made the cut either, based on that criteria).