catholics, orthodox, and protestants: can you explain the trinity?

firedragon · Sep 1, 2021

metis said:
The above is not logical statement-- but whatever.

What is illogical about that statement? Can you please explain? You mean the English is a problem in that statement? If that is so, I am sorry. What I mean to say is, you have answered a question that was not relevant to your answer or any response from that point onwards.

metis · Sep 1, 2021

firedragon said:
What is illogical about that statement? Can you please explain? You mean the English is a problem in that statement? If that is so, I am sorry. What I mean to say is, you have answered a question that was not relevant to your answer or any response from that point onwards.

It's no big deal, so take care.

pearl · Sep 2, 2021

Unfortunately, most of us don't take the Trinity terribly seriously. For most Christians, including most Catholics, the doctrine of the Trinity functions as a sort of divine, test of faith, as though God were saying. 'I'll tell them I'm one God in three Persons, and if they can believe that, they can believe anything." The Trinity doesn't make much difference to people. I have often remarked to students that if I and my fellow preachers mounted our pulpits some Sunday and announced that we had a letter from the Vatican saying that there are not three Persons but four, most people in the pews would simply groan. "Oh, when will these changes stop?" But to most of them it would cause no problem other than having to think about how to fit the fourth one in when making the sign of the cross. The Trinity is not an item in the creed but rather the basic form of the creed. We do not say that we believe in the Trinity along with a number of other doctrines. Instead, we say that we believe in the doctrines of Christianity in terms of the Trinity: "We believe in God the Father who . . ." and then we profess faith in the doctrines of creation and providence, "and in the Son who . . ." and then we proclaim the incarnation and redemption, "and in the Holy Spirit who..." and then we affirm the Church, the sacraments and the eschatological doctrines. We never actually say that we believe in the Trinity. The Trinity is not a doctrine next to other doctrines of the faith; it is the only doctrine, and all the others are expansions and explanations of it.
excerpted from Rev Michael Himes BC

metis · Sep 2, 2021

pearl said:
Unfortunately, most of us don't take the Trinity terribly seriously. For most Christians, including most Catholics, the doctrine of the Trinity functions as a sort of divine, test of faith, as though God were saying. 'I'll tell them I'm one God in three Persons, and if they can believe that, they can believe anything." The Trinity doesn't make much difference to people. I have often remarked to students that if I and my fellow preachers mounted our pulpits some Sunday and announced that we had a letter from the Vatican saying that there are not three Persons but four, most people in the pews would simply groan. "Oh, when will these changes stop?" But to most of them it would cause no problem other than having to think about how to fit the fourth one in when making the sign of the cross. The Trinity is not an item in the creed but rather the basic form of the creed. We do not say that we believe in the Trinity along with a number of other doctrines. Instead, we say that we believe in the doctrines of Christianity in terms of the Trinity: "We believe in God the Father who . . ." and then we profess faith in the doctrines of creation and providence, "and in the Son who . . ." and then we proclaim the incarnation and redemption, "and in the Holy Spirit who..." and then we affirm the Church, the sacraments and the eschatological doctrines. We never actually say that we believe in the Trinity. The Trinity is not a doctrine next to other doctrines of the faith; it is the only doctrine, and all the others are expansions and explanations of it.
excerpted from Rev Michael Himes BC

It's really a "theological construct" that, as the article above basically says, are not at the same level as the actual beliefs that congregants hopefully have about God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit.

Matter of fact, the Nicene Creed actually has a compromise within it so as to have brought the Aryans aboard by appeasing them, thus there's a bit of illogic within it.

pearl · Sep 3, 2021

metis said:
It's really a "theological construct" that, as the article above basically says, are not at the same level as the actual beliefs that congregants hopefully have about God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit.[/QUOT

And there is and has been a developing trinitarian theology from the earliest times. St Paul writes “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the holy Spirit be with all of you” (13:13).
There is an interesting book by Ann Hunt, 'The Trinity and the Paschal Mystery. Have not found any official Catholic review.

metis · Sep 3, 2021

pearl said:
And there is and has been a developing trinitarian theology from the earliest times. St Paul writes “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the holy Spirit be with all of you” (13:13).

There is an interesting book by Ann Hunt, 'The Trinity and the Paschal Mystery. Have not found any official Catholic review.

Thanks for the heads-up on the book. The one I use quite a bit on things like this is "The History of the Catholic Church" by Hitchcock, and he spends pretty much an entire chapter on the Council of Nicea.

URAVIP2ME · Sep 3, 2021

Dogknox20 said:
URAVIP2ME I must say right up front you are wrong..
Adam did not love God!
Adam was removed from Paradise because he did not love!
2 And the Lord God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.”.
US.. Plural more then one! God is more then one he is THREE!

I agree with with you that Adam did NOT love God.
Adam chose Eve over their God, so at that point Adam loved Eve more than God.
Yes, they were removed from their paradisical garden due to lack of love (obeying God) .
Thankfully, through Jesus mankind will see the return of that Paradise when Jesus comes -> Revelation 22:2
Mankind will see the return of the 'Tree of Life' as was found in paradisical Eden

Yes, the 'us' is more than one. God was speaking to His heavenly pre-human Son at Genesis 1:26 (us)
US does Not have to be more than TWO.
I accept what Douay 3rd Kings 8:27 says: The heaven and the heavens of heavens can Not contain God....
- 1 Kings 8:27
So, if the heaven of heavens can Not contain God, then how could God be in Mary's womb for 9 months______
Jesus never claimed he was he was God whole and entire but a subordinate position to His God and Father.
- Matthew 26:39; Mark 13:32; John 20:17; 1 Corinthians 15:27-28,
And even after Jesus appears in Heaven (Hebrews 9:24) Jesus did Not appear in front of himself.
Even Jesus' apostles describes the Father as having a separate or superior position in connection to Jesus.
- 1 Corinthians 11:3; 1 Corinthians 15:20; 1 Corinthians 15:24-28; 1 Peter 1:3; 1 John 2:1; 1 John 4:9-10

URAVIP2ME · Sep 3, 2021

Dogknox20 said:
Simply.. God is PERFECT! If he does anything not perfectly he would not be God! Perfect love is .. Love for another!

Yes, have love for another as Jesus taught in his New Commandment found at John 13:34-35.
We are to have that same self-sacrificing love for another as Jesus has.
So, love others is placed in a relative position to love of God.
Mark 12:30-31 (Luke 10:27) Love of God is placed in an absolute position, or in first position.
So, perfect love is both Love for God (first) and love for another (second).
Showing practical love for another as Jesus taught at Luke 10:30-36.
We are to widen out, or broaden out in showing practical love on a one-on-one basis for another as Jesus taught.

Muffled · Sep 3, 2021

IndigoChild5559 said:
Well, and that's the big question: was Jesus the messiah? Did he fulfill all the prophecies in the Tanakh? The answer is clearly no. He did not i.e. usher in an era of world peace, or bring all the Jews back to the Promised Land, or rule from Jerusalem... Heck I only needed to provide you with one prophecy he didn't fulfill to prove he is not the messiah, and I've given you three.

I believe He does not need to fulfill all the prophecies since many of them are for the second coming.

Muffled · Sep 3, 2021

Meandflower said:
Quite different in what sense?

The Athansian creed sees the Trinity as three persons and the Nicene does not.

IndigoChild5559 · Sep 3, 2021

Muffled said:
I believe He does not need to fulfill all the prophecies since many of them are for the second coming.

When you allow for this possibility, then ANYONE can claim to be the Messiah, even you and me, and simply say,"Hey I'm the messiah, I'll fulfill the prophecies next time I come." It's ridiculous.

URAVIP2ME · Sep 6, 2021

IndigoChild5559 said:
When you allow for this possibility, then ANYONE can claim to be the Messiah, even you and me, and simply say,"Hey I'm the messiah, I'll fulfill the prophecies next time I come." It's ridiculous.

To me the coming 'Glory Time' found at Matthew 25:31-33 is Not about past fulfilment.
Past fulfillment is leading up to the coming ' time of separation ' fulfillment to take place on Earth.
The ' final signal ' of 1 Thessalonians 5:2-3 is still ahead of us.
When the powers that be will be saying, " Peace and Security..." that is what will prove to be the precursor to the coming great tribulation of Revelation 7:14,9.
Then Jesus will fulfill the promise found at Revelation 22:2 that there will be ' healing ' for earth's nations.
Healing in that ALL families of Earth will be blessed and ALL nations of Earth will be blessed.
- Genesis 12:3; Genesis 22:18
Blessed with the benefit of healing to the point that No one will say, " I am sick...." - Isaiah 33:24

URAVIP2ME · Sep 6, 2021

pearl said:
Unfortunately, most of us don't take the Trinity terribly seriously. For most Christians, including most Catholics, the doctrine of the Trinity functions as a sort of divine, test of faith..........

I do wonder how a person can take the trinity terrible seriously.
Yes, it would be a sort of divine, test of faith (or credulity ).
Consider this:
Some workers make a request of their supervisor, but he says that he does Not have the authority to grant the request. If his statement is true, the supervisor has wisely displayed a awareness of this limitations or power.
If it Not true and he Can grant the request but he simply chooses Not to do so, then he has been deceptive.
Now, how did Jesus respond when two of his apostles desired positions of prominence in that Jesus told them:
' .....this sitting down at my right hand and at my left hand is Not mine to give, but it belongs to those for whom it has been prepared by my Father ' - Matthew 20:23
So, if Jesus was really God would that mean that Jesus lied. Instead, Jesus deferred to the One with greater authority.

URAVIP2ME · Sep 6, 2021

metis said:
This reminds me of Gandhi's oft spoken words, namely "God is Love" and "God is Truth".

I also like that Mohandas Gandhi (who hated violence) stated that 'suppose a man runs amuck and goes furiously about, sword in hand, and killing anyone that comes in his way, and No on tries to capture him alive.
Anyone who captures this lunatic will earn the gratitude of the community and be regarded as a benevolent man.'
So, to me Gandhi saw the need for ' force ' under some given circumstances.
So, like a benevolent man, a benevolent God would Not misuse ' force '.
God's direct orders to kill the Canaanites shows God can and will use 'justified force' for the sake of the righteous.
Justified force truly shows 'love' for the righteous ones who will inherit the Earth - Psalms 37:38

pearl · Sep 7, 2021

URAVIP2ME said:
So, if Jesus was really God would that mean that Jesus lied. Instead, Jesus deferred to the One with greater authority.

First, Jesus is never God the Father. And lets not forget that Jesus was wholly human begging the question how much did the earthly Jesus know.
2nd, is the expression of the ineffable mystery of love glimpsed in the experience of salvation. Through the centuries this gift of life from the living God has been expressed through forms of speech characteristic of the discourse of peoples, tribes, and nations in the service of the Gospel. The vocabulary of the early church to do with person, nature, substance, subsistence and the gathering into trinitarian theology provides example, being an expression of belief in a nonbiblical philosophy characteristic of Hellenistic culture.
Conscious of the threefold experience at the great of Hindu as well as Christian faith, Raimundo Panikkar interprets holy mystery as source, being, and return to being, which is analogous to the biblical affirmation that God is "above all, through all, and in all" (Eph 4:6).
All ways that are attempts to speak of the trinitarian God as the mystery of salvation in a way that avoids personal imagery with its accompanying misunderstandings.
Walter Kasper envisions three modes in which divine love subsists as a giver, a receiver, and giver and a receiver, or a source, a mediation, and a term of love.
Anthony Kelly proposes the analogy of the triune God as Being-in love, a giver, a gift and a giving all signifying a love that burns with such intensity it veers into incomprehensible mystery.
excerpted from 'Quest for the Living God' Elizabeth Johnson

Dogknox20 · Sep 7, 2021

URAVIP2ME said:
Yes, have love for another as Jesus taught in his New Commandment found at John 13:34-35.
We are to have that same self-sacrificing love for another as Jesus has.
So, love others is placed in a relative position to love of God.
Mark 12:30-31 (Luke 10:27) Love of God is placed in an absolute position, or in first position.
So, perfect love is both Love for God (first) and love for another (second).
Showing practical love for another as Jesus taught at Luke 10:30-36.
We are to widen out, or broaden out in showing practical love on a one-on-one basis for another as Jesus taught.

.
We must love as Jesus taught and did! Yes I agree....
18 No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.

Jesus is prefect.. He cannot sin or he would not be God!

metis · Sep 7, 2021

URAVIP2ME said:
I also like that Mohandas Gandhi (who hated violence) stated that 'suppose a man runs amuck and goes furiously about, sword in hand, and killing anyone that comes in his way, and No on tries to capture him alive.
Anyone who captures this lunatic will earn the gratitude of the community and be regarded as a benevolent man.'
So, to me Gandhi saw the need for ' force ' under some given circumstances.
So, like a benevolent man, a benevolent God would Not misuse ' force '.
God's direct orders to kill the Canaanites shows God can and will use 'justified force' for the sake of the righteous.
Justified force truly shows 'love' for the righteous ones who will inherit the Earth - Psalms 37:38

I am not a believer in complete non-violence as Gandhi did, but I do accept the Just-War Theory approach in general: Just war theory - Wikipedia

URAVIP2ME · Sep 8, 2021

Dogknox20 said:
.
Jesus is prefect.. He cannot sin or he would not be God!

Yes, if Jesus could Not sin or he would not be God.
Since Jesus could be tempted by Satan, then that shows 'Jesus could sin' if he chose to.
( It would be No temptation if he could Not be tempted )
Jesus was a corresponding ransom - Matthew 20:28 - Not to God but to Adam.
Jesus balanced the Scales of Justice for us by God sending Jesus to Earth to undo what Adam did.
Jesus was the last Adam according to Romans chapter 5, Not the last God.

Dogknox20 · Sep 8, 2021

URAVIP2ME said:
Yes, if Jesus could Not sin or he would not be God.
Since Jesus could be tempted by Satan, then that shows 'Jesus could sin' if he chose to.
( It would be No temptation if he could Not be tempted )
Jesus was a corresponding ransom - Matthew 20:28 - Not to God but to Adam.
Jesus balanced the Scales of Justice for us by God sending Jesus to Earth to undo what Adam did.
Jesus was the last Adam according to Romans chapter 5, Not the last God.

URAVIP2ME very good, I believe we are on the same page! I like what you said!

Adam sinned; the first perfect man made a choice.. Freely "He decided to sin"! His sin was "Not loving God"! Doing what God commands is loving God! (scriptures)

URAVIP2ME A small point.... God commanded Adam "Do not eat"! God said nothing about touching the tree.. Nada.. Zero.. God did not say to Adam, "Don't touch the tree"! Fact is "Eve was not yet built; God commanded Adam BEFORE he created Eve! Look.....below

15 The Lord God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. 16 And the Lord God commanded the man, “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.”
18 The Lord God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.”
WHAT...

URAVIP2ME all that Eve knew about the Tree came from Adam.. It was Adam that Commanded Eve "Don't even touch the stinking tree"!!! (Paraphrase)

Genesis 3:2 The woman said to the serpent, “We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, 3 but God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.’”

Clearly Eve refused to listen to her husband thus showing us.. Eve did not love Adam! One more point.. Adam did not love Eve... ALL....

URAVIP2ME all know it is the Mans job to protect the family.. All know snakes are bad news, all know it's the Mans Job is to get rid of any danger!
Look at this verse....6 When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it.

Adam did not protect Eve from the snake! AND..
12 The man said, “The woman you put here with me—she gave me some fruit from the tree, and I ate it.”

God can put them together but he cannot force them to love! It would not be "True Love" if God forced them! God would NOT be perfect if God forced them to love! He had to remove them from heaven because only those with LOVE can enter! Only those people who Love God can enter!

God removed them before they could eat from the Tree Of Life! Eat and live forever in heaven! Jesus is the Way the truth & "The LIFE"! All who eat the living forever flesh of Jesus will have Life eternally; They .. Will live forever
53 Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. 56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them. 57 Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me. 58 This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your ancestors ate manna and died, but whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.”

URAVIP2ME · Sep 10, 2021

Dogknox20 said:
......URAVIP2ME A small point.... God commanded Adam "Do not eat"! God said nothing about touching the tree.. Nada.. Zero.. God did not say to Adam, "Don't touch the tree"! Fact is "Eve was not yet built; God commanded Adam BEFORE he created Eve! Look.....below

15 The Lord God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. 16 And the Lord God commanded the man, “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.”
18 The Lord God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.”
WHAT...

URAVIP2ME all that Eve knew about the Tree came from Adam.. It was Adam that Commanded Eve "Don't even touch the stinking tree"!!! (Paraphrase)

Genesis 3:2 The woman said to the serpent, “We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, 3 but God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.’”

Clearly Eve refused to listen to her husband thus showing us.. Eve did not love Adam! One more point.. Adam did not love Eve... ALL....

URAVIP2ME all know it is the Mans job to protect the family.. All know snakes are bad news, all know it's the Mans Job is to get rid of any danger!
Look at this verse....6 When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it.

Adam did not protect Eve from the snake! AND..
12 The man said, “The woman you put here with me—she gave me some fruit from the tree, and I ate it.”

God can put them together but he cannot force them to love! It would not be "True Love" if God forced them! God would NOT be perfect if God forced them to love! He had to remove them from heaven because only those with LOVE can enter! Only those people who Love God can enter!

God removed them before they could eat from the Tree Of Life! Eat and live forever in heaven! Jesus is the Way the truth & "The LIFE"! All who eat the living forever flesh of Jesus will have Life eternally; They .. Will live forever
53 Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. 56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them. 57 Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me. 58 This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your ancestors ate manna and died, but whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.”

Thank you for your reply.
I find at Genesis 2:17 the word ' touch ' is Not there, but we find the word ' touch ' at Genesis 3:3.
Eve quotes what was given to Adam, which she told the Serpent included Not touching God's tree.
Since Adam and Eve had Not yet sinned, Eve was Not lying to the Serpent.
If Eve was lying it would have been easy for Satan to point out to Eve that she was wrong in what Eve stated at Genesis 3:3 ( shall Not touch it (tree) )

catholics, orthodox, and protestants: can you explain the trinity?

Veteran Member

aged ecumenical anthropologist

Well-Known Member

aged ecumenical anthropologist

Well-Known Member

aged ecumenical anthropologist

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Jesus in me

Jesus in me

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

aged ecumenical anthropologist

Veteran Member

Well-Known Member

Veteran Member