Why the Trinity?

[Counterpoint]

“the Son is equal to the Father as God, He is less than the Father as the Son of man in the form of servant, who will hand over His Kingdom to the Father, and Himself be subject to the Father (1 Corinthians 15:24-28) when He brings all the faithful to the contemplation of the Three Divine Persons of the most Holy Trinity, thus completes and lays aside His office as mediator.” Augustine De Trinitate

Is that your conclusion to this story? We will need to resolve this first I do believe.

I equate the Christ with God’s self. But I do not equate Jesus exclusively with God’s self.

 

[Aloysium]

God’s self-actualization is a dialectical process. What has traditionally been called the “creation” is merely a epiphenomenon of that process.

This sounds like something a panentheist would say.

The term “self-actualization” cannot be applied to God.

I am not sure what you are trying to convey using the word “dialectical” to describe a self-actualizing process, but it sounds cool.

Creation is separate from God, who is Creator and perfect in Himself.

 

[orang]

Oh I donno…The Trinity doctrine was based on all the scripture writings not so much gathering the writings and making a philosophical suggestion, plus creation itself is a logical event. Economic and some of these terms may be good for man mode association but ( not to be disrespectful) Aquinas did go a bit nutsy and did say what he said which gives the good value of being able to believe the genuine in what he did say. The Trinity as it is is a logical syllogism, another form, would be illusory and an abstraction. Also there are many things in scripture which don’t come right out and say allowing for the important participation , individual translation and timeless feature in the holy writings.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Counterpoint;11948907]God’s self-actualization is a dialectical process

.

I thought you made the claim that you were a Trinitarian? There is no such dialectical process of God’s self actualization, when God is united one Trinity One being God. What is a dialectical process is how man perceives God in various ways. God has not revealed His presence through a dialectical process God is. His voice informed Moses who like you, was introduced to diverse concepts of deities through Pharaoh, had a dialectical concept of God. But God corrected Moses when He revealed who He was by His name “I AM”.

What has traditionally been called the “creation” is merely a epiphenomenon of that process

.

Now we are getting some where here. I don’t understand why you keep applying different formulas of “process” to God and creation?

Life and creation come from God because God is life and gives life to His creation. Creation and life cannot be a “epiphenomenon process”, when God is all and in all. Where ever life dwells, there is the presence of God in Trinity.

Now what is interesting in regards to your "epiphenomenon " opinion when applied to creation has a tendency to apply to the divine laws of God, that govern the universe and created beings, this we can have a discussion but it leads off topic. When applied to the moral laws of God in the Decalogue, one can reason with your invented process of "epiphenomenon ". Yet an off subject debate would preclude, because God’s Word is involved and God’s Word is the second living person of the blessed Trinity, so again your process “epiphenomenon” does not fit.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

I equate the Christ with God’s self. But I do not equate Jesus exclusively with God’s self.

Translation; " I equate the Christ with God’s self"= Jesus Christ fully divine; "But I do not equate Jesus exclusively with God’s self " = Jesus full humanity.

There now, that did not hurt your philosophical concept, which points to the revealed doctrine of Jesus nature being fully human and fully divine.

The nature’s of Christ, is why God revealed His presence in Trinity one God.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Yet we are talking one in proportionality, generation without “cause” and not only a implicit comparison, divinely revealed by God. Apology it wasn’t revealed quickly enough.

In the intellect the likeness is that which is understood. God the Father understands and enunciates Himself, a nature numerically the same is communicated. In God being and intellect are the same.

So yes the terminology is begotten, generate I believe in Latin as the analogy.

 

[Aloysium]

. . . Life and creation come from God because God is life and gives life to His creation. Creation and life cannot be a “epiphenomenon process”, when God is all and in all. Where ever life dwells, there is the presence of God in Trinity. . .

I’m not sure I would make the statement “God is all”.

God is the cause of all creation historically, in the actuality of the moment and as its destiny.
He is not His creation.
However, the Word emptied Himself to become one of us, that we may likewise empty ourselves in love for God and each other, and thereby be filled with Him and share in the eternal glory of the Beatific Vision.

Something like that.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

I’m not sure I would make the statement “God is all”.

God is the cause of all creation historically, in the actuality of the moment and as its destiny.
He is not His creation.
However, the Word emptied Himself to become one of us, that we may likewise empty ourselves in love for God and each other, and thereby be filled with Him and share in the eternal glory of the Beatific Vision.

Something like that.

I agree with you, that God is never His creation. But all of creation came through His Word.

“God is all” is a reflection of God’s name in the “I AM”. When God is anything and everything we need Him to be for us, when confirmed in Liturgy “In Him, with Him and through Him, all glory and honor is yours almighty Father”.

Although I hope I did not come across as God becoming a creature in himself. Because God is all and in all, reflects that all creation came from God, through His Word. God is all and in all because God’s presence and Word sustains all of creation, when all of creation submits to the divine creation laws God gives to sustain the order of creation from chaos.

I fear if we hint at creation ever being or existing without God, we placed God’s omnipotence in a box and limit God to His graces and mercy.

In conclusion, God’s Word never returns void to Him. The visible creation came from the invisible. And because we were created by the procession of the Trinity through His Word, NO one goes to the Father except through the Son.

Life derives from God who gives life according to His divine Will. Life cannot create life on it’s own. God has ordained life to reproduce after it’s own seed. Although God’s essence is not in creation, creation yearns for God’s presence, that is “Why the Trinity” reveals God’s presence to creation.

God is all, does not bring down God’s Essence into creation, The Trinity of God’s presence enters creation for all of creation comes from the procession of the Trinity reveals One God.

peace be with you

 

[jochoa]

Or, more to the point, the issue is whether God has compatibiliist free will or libertarian free will. (Those are only two logical possibilities.)

Ok, God has compatibilist free will, in that God has absolute free will, where God freely determines his will.

What exactly is your point?

Although the understanding you present is valid, it is limited and circularly confined within human understanding. It does not account for God’s perspective.

There is something that you are not grasping here about the dialectical antithesis between “being” and "not being,’ namely, that (pure) “being” (that is what
God is said to be in Thomistic metaphysics…pure “being”), upon analysis, is indistinguishable from “not being.”

I understand dialectical antithesis as the concept of being is indistinguishable from not being, which I can agree with. However, this is an incomplete understanding of Thomistic pure being. Thomistic pure being has substance, which is clearly distinguishable from “pure” not being, which has no substance.

IOW, to make some kind of distinction is to make some kind separation. (I am not you; you are not me. We are distinct persons, separate persons. Right?)

Not necessarily. In the Holy Trinity, there is only one God who is the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Each person is the one God without separation because there is only one God and not three gods.

The “dialectic” and the “logos” are interchangeable terms. The logos was revealed through philosophy. In fact, Christianity (indirectly) co-opted the concept and applied it to Christ.

Although I like the “dialectic” process from a human perspective, the Logos is a fuller understanding of God because of the creative aspect, which recognizes a living all-powerful God. The “dialectic” process limits God to a non-living entity with limited power.

My friend, you have such great intellect, far greater than mine! But your lack of recognizing God’s free decision to create is causing you to miss out on so much love. You mentioned, “…for the Church to formulate the doctrine - a formulation that was based on philosophical reflection.” More so than philosophical reflection, it was Biblical reflection, aka divine revelation. You also mentioned, “Eternally begotten means eternally procreated.” Eternally begotten is clearly defined as not made, aka not created. And you also mentioned, “But I do not equate Jesus exclusively with God’s self.” Jesus is God, exclusively. He loves you so much that He came to earth to show you exactly how much He loves you. IOW, He would die for you.

Thanks for the very interesting discussion! I look forward to more!

 

[Counterpoint]

This sounds like something a panentheist would say.

I am a panentheist.

The term “self-actualization” cannot be applied to God.

Why not? Catholics have no problem asserting that the Son is “eternally begotten.” I don’t see why they should object to the idea that God’s “Self” as “eternally actualized” (especially when Thomism considers God to be “pure act”).

I am not sure what you are trying to convey using the word “dialectical” to describe a self-actualizing process, but it sounds cool.

“Love separates for the sake of union.” - Rumi

Creation is separate from God, who is Creator and perfect in Himself.

God’s creation is His “Self” (metaphorically referred to as the Son). That being said, the creation simultaneously involves a separation and a reconciliation.

 

[Counterpoint]

In short “Why the Trinity”? Love is the short the answer. The Trinity is the avenue by which God’s presence is known in all of creation. God’s Essence, which you may be seeking and the Muslims seek is not attainable this side of death.

God’s essence (nature) is love.

“God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him.” 1 John 4:16

 

[Counterpoint]

.
I thought you made the claim that you were a Trinitarian? There is no such dialectical process of God’s self actualization, when God is united one Trinity One being God.

Traditional Christianity actually holds that there is. It’s called “eternal generation and procession.”

.
Now we are getting some where here. I don’t understand why you keep applying different formulas of “process” to God and creation?

Because I consider the “eternal generation” to be the real creation.

 

[GaryTaylor]

God’s creation is His “Self” (metaphorically referred to as the Son). That being said, the creation simultaneously involves a separation and a reconciliation.

A. Right so “procreation” in non sequitur. We reached consensus.

B. We are not talking creation with God. We are speaking past each other on this point with your insistence you are right. But you have no law only fringe theory.

No absolute. God cannot be separate from Himself in essence. He can particulate His nature which is numerically itself as one. In God being and intellect are the same. There is no reduction of the essence from a particulate nature communicated by the intellect., Since He is known to Himself, as Himself ,who IS Himself.

Procreation is far stretch of the imagination. The essence of God isn’t different from God, You cannot claim on the one hand that God is in the world and the world is in God, and then claim that you are speaking of Gods essence. If God is nature, then why use the term God? You’ll have to prove matter is eternal and God is matter.

How did something arrive from nothing? You have no answer for the universal gravity which “proceeded”. Matter can only have potential energy when in a gravitational field, thus converts to kinetic energy. So we are still at kinetic and potential and “Universal gravity” and do you have all the math equated and proven for this?

 

[Counterpoint]

Translation; " I equate the Christ with God’s self"= Jesus Christ fully divine; "But I do not equate Jesus exclusively with God’s self " = Jesus full humanity.

There now, that did not hurt your philosophical concept, which points to the revealed doctrine of Jesus nature being fully human and fully divine.

The nature’s of Christ, is why God revealed His presence in Trinity one God.

There is a misunderstanding here. I’m speaking as a Course student. And from the perspective of the Course, Jesus is a human being who realized the Christ within him by recognizing the Christ in his fellow human beings.

 

[GaryTaylor]

There is a misunderstanding here…

Only with your unproven theory that God created Jesus Christ, and God is in and is everything.

I’m speaking as a Course student…

I know I took the course in the 70’s. Love does have an opposite, its called the lack of love.

And from the perspective of the Course,.

We have many issues and contradictions, in fact I do believe the author in another section equates fear to the opposite of love.

Jesus is a human being who realized the Christ within him by recognizing the Christ in his fellow human beings.

And of course this is pure speculation and opinion diminishing God to man and then all of us to matter, such as dirt, which you are created from, then life was breathed into the “matter”. For none existed in it, nor does it today. I don’t see cohesion, many proposals without cohesion. I do believe that’s One Point for Catholicism.

Why did it take so long till 1970 for this divine revelation, or admittedly this is another double standard? Just asking, why can’t I insist on instant gratification? Since everything is God, what need is there for God? We just call God “everything”.

And if God is in everything, then too God is in evil. “Love does not have an opposite”

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

God’s essence (nature) is love.

“God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him.” 1 John 4:16

No God’s nature is Spirit and the second person of the blessed Trinity took on our human nature.

In these Love proceeded from Love via the Trinity of persons in the presence of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

You are confusing the Essence of God which does not come down to us with the presence of God who reveals who God is LOVE.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Counterpoint;11950222]Traditional Christianity actually holds that there is. It’s called “eternal generation and procession.”

Again you are confusing the eternal generation of the One who begets and One who is begotten, which is revealed in the procession of the Trinity when God’s Essence is hidden in each person of the Trinity, when both remain a mystery to things seen and unseen.

We profess the Son is eternally begotten of the Father “not made”, this procession does not define the Essence of God but God accuring as Lord, moving and acting from His Love in Love.

The procession of the Trinity of persons is an eternal procession outside of time and space. The presence of the Trinity of persons makes the eternal procession present in time and space in the presence of God.

Keeping in mind not division or separation in the things divine and eternal from what is consubstantial of all three persons divine. God the Father proceeds from no one. The procession of the Trinity gives name to the Father who begets and the Son is the only begotten of the Father and the Holy Spirit proceeds from both.

You are equating the name (singular) Father, Son and Holy Spirit as created beings from the Father, this is never the case in the Trinity.

For the Trinity reveals the name, Father, Son and Holy Spirit in the divine economy relating to the procession of persons.

The one Father who begets the only begotten Son is an eternal begetting, because the procession of the begetting is eternal not made.

I would suggest a reflection of the things which are eternal which remain a mystery on this side of death and the things revealed in space and time from the eternal.

It appears your newly invented concepts try and force God to become created and not the creator. True your concepts do not hold to the Traditions of how God reveals His presence to our humanity and as our creator. Your concepts are new in this age and time, but are disguised from pagan false concepts of God, which you appear to be repeating from ancient pagan traditions, who placed God in a box and confined their deities to creation.

Because I consider the “eternal generation” to be the real creation.

Why do you take what God has revealed to our humanity of the “eternal begetting or generation” professed by the Church of Jesus Christ and try and change it?

You only confuse your self when you take the infinite things of God and force change on them to fit our finite understandings. God’s ways are not our ways, and God’s thoughts are not our thoughts.

Maybe from this foundation, ones intellect is raised from carnal knowledge to the eternal spiritual realities.

God Himself (Essence) is incomprehensible by human standards. When a person wills to be known, that person reveals His identity. of who He is and makes His presence known. Another person (humans) cannot reveal another’s identity (God).

Now in regards to the Trinity, each person gives witness to one another, because all three persons distinct in revelation or persons and procession is God. For God does not accept testimony from man of who God is, only God can give testimony of God, this is the testimony from God who reveals Himself in Trinity.

God said; “Thou art my beloved Son; with thee I am well pleased” after the Holy Spirit descended upon Him in bodily form as a dove, and again it is revealed.

Again in Hebrews 5:5…“Thou art my Son, today I have begotten thee”

Can’t leave out Luke who writes the testimony of the **five eyewitnesses **in the transfiguration; God said; “This is my beloved Son, Listen to Him”.

It’s ok to introduce new Words to the revelations of God, so long as they do not change the revelations of God.

Peace be with you

 

[GaryTaylor]

Doesn’t the question become, not why the Trinity, but why one God. Seems to me the assertion is we are all gods and evil is of the ego.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

There is a misunderstanding here. I’m speaking as a Course student. And from the perspective of the Course, Jesus is a human being who realized the Christ within him by recognizing the Christ in his fellow human beings.

Ok, I lost you. Christ= anointed by God the Messiah. Christ does not mean God.

Your not making the claim that we are all Messiah’s?

If I could translate your opinion with a Catholic understanding = Jesus full Humanity is the Sacrament of God, Jesus administers His Sacrament to His body the Church in HIs sacrament of Baptism.

Jesus does not recognize the baptized as Messiah’s. Jesus Sacrament of Baptism makes us adopted sons in the Son of God.

God did not reveal Himself to your Course. How can your Course speak of the things of God as if God revealed Himself to your Course. Opinions, theory, philosophy including theology do not give witness of who God is, these are only reflections of what is known. For it is the Spirit of God who makes God known.

Only God Himself can give testimony of who God is. 1Cor.2:10-16… God has revealed to us through the Spirit…for what person knows the a man’s thoughts except the spirit of the man which is in Him? So also NO ONE comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God…and we impart this (understanding) in words not taught by HUMAN wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who possess the Spirit"…(parenthesis mine).

For we possess God’s Spirit by virtue of our sacrament of baptism in that ONE NAME Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

It is written; “God Himself will teach you”.

Peace be with you

 

[orang]

In opinion as usual, The God in All or all in God proposal ( objectively speaking) alongside the absence of a clear distinction between creator and creation is a profound difference to the very definition of a God.

God in all, or all in God provides an escape route where all is lovely or all is within love. Unfortunately ( and I’m not saying I know for a fact) but unfortunately it may seem at face value to be a romanticism with existence and so on, but the problem is Bundy and all becomes delovely. The spiritual idea contains, this is not heaven on earth.

Objective morality which can be explained and demonstrated using everything man knows including the order of nature, instinctive knowns and attributes of consciousness becomes wishy washy. There is no distinguishing true justifying or what could be called measure for state of the soul because All is delovely or delovely is in all. Whats left is idea’s of a physical God in keeping with a finite world who may simply be casting off some kind of idea in ‘dead cells’ our of the disordered darksome ones but none the less very essential and needy to the understood God. For some reason the system from what Ive read is very interested in including Christianity in its scheme. As mentioned I donno , I’m not God but scripture from 100dreds of years of study outlined in Catholic teaching shows The Trinity not to be a possible philosophical potential but a truth out of the exact writings in scripture themselves. The pantheism is new in my opinion because its a wishy washy culture and the idea would of been slam dunked in earlier years ( and again I do not know, but the rational thinking shows to be away from possibility) As the teaching mention a God would not be dependent on creation to form up his aware consciousness, I forget exactly how its worded.

Well I wouldn’t write this except it is a public forum and there are contradictions.

I am a panetheist
You guys don’t understand, its a course. ( motive)

What I understand is these things take time no matter how much knowledge is jammed into the brain. ( another subject) Wisdom cannot be learned, it can be admired and inspired and set as a value for a goal, but that brain needs to be properly wired and respected. Order, no contradictions. No sweeping under the carpet, no railroads no trickery. Life is not easy it is a tough cookie and its all a go along with virtue esp humble. I could get nailed for some off or illogical things, good…