Understanding the Trinity

[Servant19]

Forgive me, I was on my phone which auto corrects words I did not intend to say. It seems to me the only way you as a Bahai can define Trinity and Trinitarian, is to say anyone who believes in the Father Son and Holy Spirit. Muslims believe in the Father Jesus and the Holy Spirit, therefore they would be classified as Trinitarians per your view.

Now, you tell me I have not done a study on Hinduism. That I should go do your job and look up trinity within Hinduism. I’m sorry but you are the one making the assertion that Christians received their trinitarian theology from Hinduism and you are the one who needs to demonstrate it. Failure to do this, I think, means you are unable to back up the claim. The problem I see with such an effort is that you will have to read into hindu texts a trinity, you won’t see it naturally develop. You might find three figures depicted, they might even be called divine but how does that actually reflect trinity? When the fathers discussed the trinity, they discussed more than the surface of Father Son and Holy spirit, being one God, they went into detail about the relationship between the Father and the Son, the Holy Spirit’s procession from the father and the Son’s sending of the spirit. They were forced to use words in ways which had not been used before, like Hypostasis and Ousia in order to talk about the substance of God.

If the same trinitarian theology exists within Hinduism, then produce the fathers of hindu trinitarian reflection on the level of Gregory Nazianzus, Augustine, Athanasius and the like. I doubt you can, because you are doing what Christ mythicists do and reading into things which don’t exist.

But by all means prove me wrong. I shouldn’t have to do your homework.

As for what you have redefined, that should be obvious. It is the word trinity. You redefine a historic concept to be something wholly other than how it is used today and how it has been used in history. Trinity, you are argue is about the Father’s Glory in the son, the son being but a mirror, not the same essence as the father. This is not trinitarian, this is something akin to the Homoiousios position of those who rejected the Heteroousios position and Homoousios position. They were rejected and the term trinity came to be used by the advocates of Nicaea.

This is why i brought up the example of Islamic Tauwhid. Can I make it mean whatever I want it to mean? Can Tauwhid mean Orthodox Trinity? Only if I ignore that words have meaning. Subsequently I think Shogi didn’t explain the trinity at all, he sought to redefine it. The trinity had already been explained, it was Shogi’s duty to explain that the Trinity in Bahai is a false doctrine, not simply redefine it to something more Palatable.

Hi Ignatian,

Can you firstly show me where I stated that “Christians received their trinitarian theology from Hinduism” please?

No, in religion there is no copying from others. When a Divine Teaching is revealed it OFTEN overlaps previous Divine Teachings, because the Source is the same!
There is no need to copy Ignatian.

The concept of a Trinity in the cosmology of creation was initiated by Hinduism, albeit in simple elaboration, was further elaborated later on by Zoroaster (who OBVIOUSLY talks about a Father, eternal Son, and Holy Spirit, and also claims to be a Son of God (Ahura Mazda) btw) and then explored more fully in Christianity, and now the Baha’i Faith has explored it even more.

This is what Baha’is term “progressive revelation” and it relates to the evolving and progressive nature of Divine Revelation through the ages.

Christianity may have come up with some really flowery language for the relationships between Father, Son/Word/Logos and Holy Spirit, but the comprehensive exploration of the human element of the Son/Word/Logos is not as fully acknowledged, likely because of the Roman God culture into which these teachings were borne into…

Islam and Judaism focus almost exclusively on the human aspect of the Son/Word/Logos and its relationship with the Father, however, I firmly see the Baha’i Revelation has tied it all together, and explores fully the human and Divine aspects of the Son/Word/Logos.

.

 

[MartinJordan]

Christianity may have come up with some really flowery language for the relationships between Father, Son/Word/Logos and Holy Spirit.

It’s not language. It’s life and the Love of God to the fullest. Amen

MJ

 

[TonyBS]

It’s not language. It’s life and the Love of God to the fullest. Amen

MJ

Dear Martin they are weighty words to live up to

From my experience looking at the Life of Christ and what He chose, would not living Love to the fullest be Total Humility and total Selfless service to Mankind!

Regards Tony

 

[MartinJordan]

Dear Martin they are weighty words to live up to

Yes and I here’s why, which I will state from your next comment,.

From my experience looking at the Life of Christ and what He chose, would not living Love to the fullest be Total Humility and total Selfless service to Mankind!

Nothing unclean enters Heaven. So yes, it’s really weighty. But as Jesus said “my yoke is easy, my burden light”. If one listens to him, that’s why it’s a work in progress for us. He did everything so that we can have eternal life. But our work continues, serving one another.

He humbled himself to show us how to be humble. He went through humility and came to serve to show us how to have those traits.

And we can ask St. Paul how he experienced Jesus.

“For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, will be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.”

Amen.

MJ

 

[Servant19]

It’s not language. It’s life and the Love of God to the fullest. Amen

MJ

Hi Martin, I would agree with you, but there is a reason it is called the “Word”…God’s Word is both flowery, resplendent and life and love all combined, plus lots lots more…



.

 

[TonyBS]

"For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, will be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord."Amen.MJ

Dear Martin - As a Baha’i I can tell you this is 100% so.

God Bless and Regards Tony

 

[hasantas]

JonNC:
Is it rational to hold an idea which came about 330 years above the original(Bible and Jesus).
I mean the Trinity must be supported by Bible and first Christians. But there is no obvious verses and records. Are there? If there are not then why make it so hard for everyone?

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

Hi Ignatian,

Can you firstly show me where I stated that “Christians received their trinitarian theology from Hinduism” please?

No, in religion there is no copying from others. When a Divine Teaching is revealed it OFTEN overlaps previous Divine Teachings, because the Source is the same!
There is no need to copy Ignatian.

The concept of a Trinity in the cosmology of creation was initiated by Hinduism, albeit in simple elaboration, was further elaborated later on by Zoroaster (who OBVIOUSLY talks about a Father, eternal Son, and Holy Spirit, and also claims to be a Son of God (Ahura Mazda) btw) and then explored more fully in Christianity, and now the Baha’i Faith has explored it even more.

This is what Baha’is term “progressive revelation” and it relates to the evolving and progressive nature of Divine Revelation through the ages.

Christianity may have come up with some really flowery language for the relationships between Father, Son/Word/Logos and Holy Spirit, but the comprehensive exploration of the human element of the Son/Word/Logos is not as fully acknowledged, likely because of the Roman God culture into which these teachings were borne into…

Islam and Judaism focus almost exclusively on the human aspect of the Son/Word/Logos and its relationship with the Father, however, I firmly see the Baha’i Revelation has tied it all together, and explores fully the human and Divine aspects of the Son/Word/Logos.

.

Demonstrate a recognisable trinitarian concept in Hinduism or Zoroastrianism. Take in mind, the word trinity doesn’t mean whatever you want it to mean (For instance, a quote about three gods or a quote about three entities does not make a trinity). It specifically talks about the relationship between the Father Son and Holy spirit, how they are the one God united in one essence.

If you cannot do this then why persist with the claim?

 

[Servant19]

Demonstrate a recognisable trinitarian concept in Hinduism or Zoroastrianism. Take in mind, the word trinity doesn’t mean whatever you want it to mean (For instance, a quote about three gods or a quote about three entities does not make a trinity). It specifically talks about the relationship between the Father Son and Holy spirit, how they are the one God united in one essence.

If you cannot do this then why persist with the claim?

Ignatian, are you actually claiming the WORD Trinity belongs ONLY to Christianity, defined only by Chrsitianity and no one else can use the word to mean a “relationship exists between Father/God/Allah and the Son/Word/Logos/Primal Will, and the Holy Spirit/Spenta Mainyu”???

You are basically saying that I cannot describe the relationship between a parent and its children unless defined by you first…

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Is it rational to hold an idea which came about 330 years above the original(Bible and Jesus).
I mean the Trinity must be supported by Bible and first Christians. But there is no obvious verses and records. Are there? If there are not then why make it so hard for everyone?

When Jesus resurrected from the dead after three days, he appeared to his disciples and breathed upon them and it is recorded in the gospel of John, that Jesus commissioned the Church with power and authority to baptize all nations, peoples and tongues in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, with the power to forgive sin.

Thus you have the first Christians being taught by Jesus about the Trinity recorded in the scriptures in the first century. From 33 a.d the early Church Fathers began baptizing in the name of the Trinity = Father, Son and Holy Spirit = One God and no other.

In fact history proves that the Trinity was revealed and well into practice by baptism long before the new testament of the bible books were written. So the revelation of the Trinity predates the New Testament bible books.

Peace be with you

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

When Jesus resurrected from the dead after three days, he appeared to his disciples and breathed upon them and it is recorded in the gospel of John, that Jesus commissioned the Church with power and authority to baptize all nations, peoples and tongues in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, with the power to forgive sin.

Thus you have the first Christians being taught by Jesus about the Trinity recorded in the scriptures in the first century. From 33 a.d the early Church Fathers began baptizing in the name of the Trinity = Father, Son and Holy Spirit = One God and no other.

In conclusion the Trinity was revealed by Jesus in the first century and was well into practice long before the new testament was written.

Peace be with you

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

Ignatian, are you actually claiming the WORD Trinity belongs ONLY to Christianity, defined only by Chrsitianity and no one else can use the word to mean a “relationship exists between Father/God/Allah and the Son/Word/Logos/Primal Will, and the Holy Spirit/Spenta Mainyu”???

You are basically saying that I cannot describe the relationship between a parent and its children unless defined by you first…

Please show me where Muslims, Zoroastrians, Bhuddhists, Jews or Hindus used the word Trinity. When I google trinity I find the Christian doctrine. When I look it up in the dictionary, I find the Christian doctrine. When I see it first discussed, used liturgically, used in general worship, I see used only by Christians.

If the trinity is such a universal concept as you claim, you should be able to demonstrate these things. I see no attempt on your behalf to do so.

Still waiting on a recognizable trinitarian concept in hindu writings to be shown or demonstrated.

 

[MartinJordan]

Hi Martin, I would agree with you, but there is a reason it is called the “Word”…God’s Word is both flowery, resplendent and life and love all combined, plus lots lots more…



.

If you believe in the Trinity as was intended then Baptism would be a good option. The Church will welcome you in Jesus name. My self included to welcome you.

Blessings.

MJ

 

[MartinJordan]

Is it rational to hold an idea which came about 330 years above the original(Bible and Jesus).
I mean the Trinity must be supported by Bible and first Christians. But there is no obvious verses and records. Are there? If there are not then why make it so hard for everyone?

It will be good for you to furnish Islamic proof it understands how Christianity came about. Some passed down Tradition perhaps from Mohammed your prophet will be exemplary. Please provide this. For good orders sake and do it in good spirit.

MJ

 

[Vico]

Please show me where Muslims, Zoroastrians, Bhuddhists, Jews or Hindus used the word Trinity. When I google trinity I find the Christian doctrine. When I look it up in the dictionary, I find the Christian doctrine. When I see it first discussed, used liturgically, used in general worship, I see used only by Christians.

If the trinity is such a universal concept as you claim, you should be able to demonstrate these things. I see no attempt on your behalf to do so.

Still waiting on a recognizable trinitarian concept in hindu writings to be shown or demonstrated.

See trimurty, The Myths and Gods of India by Alain Daniélou, p. 24, Alain Daniélou presents the symbols connected with Hindu trimurty as: Siva the Progenitor is like Father, Vishnu the Protector with avatara is like Son, and Brahmaa represents rajas tendency (equilibrium of sattva and tamas gunas) is like Holy Spirit. But he states that the Trinity is a mystery in Scholastic philosophy but a fundamental in Hindu religious philosophy.

 

[MartinJordan]

See trimurty, The Myths and Gods of India by Alain Daniélou, p. 24, Alain Daniélou presents the symbols connected with Hindu trimurty as: Siva the Progenitor is like Father, Vishnu the Protector with avatara is like Son, and Brahmaa represents rajas tendency (equilibrium of sattva and tamas gunas) is like Holy Spirit. But he states that the Trinity is a mystery in Scholastic philosophy but a fundamental in Hindu religious philosophy.

Did he link any connection to the Catholic church or Jesus getting ideas from Oriental culture (however unlikely that is) ?

MJ

 

[eddie_too]

Jesus never taught anything about the “three aspects” of God.

writing He did teach about the “three aspects” of God comes from pure ignorance of Jesus Christ and His teachings…

writing Jesus taught about the “three aspects” of God indicates that the writer is clueless about the teachings of Jesus Christ.

it also makes clear my point that anyone claiming a special connection to God while simultaneously proclaiming the Holy Trinity to be something different from what Jesus taught is revealing that they are preaching their own gospel and not the Gospel of Jesus Christ. instead, they are rejecting the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

we have numerous, even thousands, examples of human beings taking the Gospel of Jesus Christ and changing it to fit their agendas.

the idea that there are “three aspects” to God and this explains the Trinity was rejected by the apostles and their successors long ago.

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

See trimurty, The Myths and Gods of India by Alain Daniélou, p. 24, Alain Daniélou presents the symbols connected with Hindu trimurty as: Siva the Progenitor is like Father, Vishnu the Protector with avatara is like Son, and Brahmaa represents rajas tendency (equilibrium of sattva and tamas gunas) is like Holy Spirit. But he states that the Trinity is a mystery in Scholastic philosophy but a fundamental in Hindu religious philosophy.

I do not have access to this book, so I would ask you quote the relevant section for us. What I want to see is a decisive hindu tradition of trinitarian reflection like that we see in Christianity. Is there a scripture or set of scriptures upon which a Hindu bases this interpretation? Were there subsequent Hindu interpreters who found in this a genuine trinitarian theology?

Saying Shiva is Like the Father, or Vishnu is like the son, doesn’t in my mind equate to a trinitarian concept. is the essence of Shiva the same as the essence of Vishnu? Are they homousious? If there was a Hindu writer that believed that, did they limit divinity to these three only or (as I imagine the case to be) believe divinity is in all things (ie pantheism)?

 

[Vico]

I do not have access to this book, so I would ask you quote the relevant section for us. What I want to see is a decisive hindu tradition of trinitarian reflection like that we see in Christianity. Is there a scripture or set of scriptures upon which a Hindu bases this interpretation? Were there subsequent Hindu interpreters who found in this a genuine trinitarian theology?

Saying Shiva is Like the Father, or Vishnu is like the son, doesn’t in my mind equate to a trinitarian concept. is the essence of Shiva the same as the essence of Vishnu? Are they homousious? If there was a Hindu writer that believed that, did they limit divinity to these three only or (as I imagine the case to be) believe divinity is in all things (ie pantheism)?

It is not equivalent to the Trinity, and there are at least 70 schools (sampradaya) of philosophical thought. In ancient time, before Brahmanism, in the Vedas the main deities are Indra, Agni, Soma, and Surya. In some conceptualizations Brahma is the creator, Vishnu is the preserver, and Siva is the destroyer/transformer. Daniélou became a Saivite (or which there are more than one school) and they are known to have a well elaborated philosophy.

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

It is not equivalent to the Trinity, and there are at least 70 schools (sampradaya) of philosophical thought. In ancient time, before Brahmanism, in the Vedas the main deities are Indra, Agni, Soma, and Surya. In some conceptualizations Brahma is the creator, Vishnu is the preserver, and Siva is the destroyer/transformer. Daniélou became a Saivite (or which there are more than one school) and they are known to have a well elaborated philosophy.

I don’t see how that is a trinitarian concept.