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

[Unveiled Artist]

What do you mean with 'they did not believe he was the creator'? Did they believe Jesus is God or not?

They believe

God the father/creator
God the son/savior
God the holy spirit/love etc

They cannot tell the difference so they are the same.

It depends on the Christian.

I'm not a theologian.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Holy Trinity - God - GCSE Religious Studies Revision - WJEC - BBC Bitesize

Relationship shows how these three entities have the same foundation-essence/divinity/god.

How people interpret it depends. The church also teaches the trinity is a mystery, so to me it can only be experienced in mass

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I feel like this thread is not working.

At all.

Catholics believe Jesus is God

Here is the part of the Nicene Creed - that nearly all Christians believe - that deals with it:

I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ,
the Only Begotten Son of God,
born of the Father before all ages.
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father;
through him all things were made.

And this part,

I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father,
who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified,
who has spoken through the prophets.

Is anyone other than God allowed to be adored and glorified?

Of course not.

If you're referring to me please read posts. The last one specifically. I wasn't indoctrinated and not a theologian so I don't speak christian lingo to describe the same thing they do.

Also, the red throws it off and counterproductive if you intended me to read this.

 

[Starlight]

I use relationship because tri already refers to three and unity describes the relationship they have with each other.

Seeing them as each other depends on the christian but biblically words like in/of/and/with/of prepositions show relationship.

I haven't read in the bible Jesus IS the creator. All christians I spoke with refer to it as shared essence and they cannot tell the difference between the three no less talk about them separately.

That's okay.

I just gave my thoughts on your OP...whatever you and christians believe is your choice. It makes no nevermind to me personally just by how I experienced it as a former catholic.

If they do not believe Jesus is the creator then they can not believe he is God. Because according to most christians in the world (and the offical trinity doctrine) God is the creator. And since christians only believe in one God, then of course that God is the creator.

So if they believe Jesus is not God then they do not believe in the trinity. They believe in a christian heresy called unitarianism

And if they believe Jesus is God but at the same time they believe Jesus is not the creator then they do not believe in the trinity. They believe in a christian heresy called tritheism

And by the way you do not understand the offical trinity doctrine.

 

[Starlight]

Holy Trinity - God - GCSE Religious Studies Revision - WJEC - BBC Bitesize

Relationship shows how these three entities have the same foundation-essence/divinity/god.

How people interpret it depends. The church also teaches the trinity is a mystery, so to me it can only be experienced in mass

Now you desribe tritheism. Christians do NOT believe in three beings/gods/entities.

Christians believe in only one God. Thay believe God is only one Being shared by three persons. Christianity is monotheism. Christianity is NOT polytheism.

Why can you not admit you are wrong?

 

[Rival]

If you're referring to me please ready posts. The last one specifically. I wasn't indoctrinated and not a theologian so I don't speak christian lingo to describe the same thing they do.

Also, the red throws it off and counterproductive if you intended me to read this.

Not just you, but there seem to be others who don't get it and it's endlessly frustrating because honestly this is basic Christian teaching. It's been 5 pages now and if folks are confused about basic stuff like Jesus being God then I honestly, really don't know what to say.

I don't know what kind of Catholics you've been around but with all kindness, I can assure you that that all believe Jesus is God and all things were created through him. If they don't they're effectively holding heretical beliefs.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

If they do not believe Jesus is the creator then they can not believe he is God. Because according to most christians in the world (and the offical trinity doctrine) God is the creator.

So if they believe Jesus is not God then they do not believe in the trinity. They believe in a christian heresy called unitarianism

And if they believe Jesus is God but at the same time they believe Jesus is not the creator then they do not believe in the trinity. They believe in a christian heresy called tritheism

And by the way you do not understand the offical trinity doctrine.

You're getting stuck on words.

http://catholicnewsherald.com/news/entertainment/101-news/faith/364-the-nicene-creed-and-its-origins

.... Jesus is in a unique relationship with God the Father. While Hebrew kings were sons of God symbolically (see Psalm 2), Jesus is the only Son of God by nature.

BORN OF THE FATHER BEFORE ALL AGES

Begotten has the meaning of born, generated, or produced. God the Son is born out of the essence of God the Father. Just as a child shares the same humanness as his or her parents, the Son shares the essential nature of God with the Father. Since God is eternal, the Son, being begotten of God, is also eternal.....

Christians don't see the difference.

That's okay.

Relationship is still used and it's not a tritheism. That's not taught in the church.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Why can you not admit you are wrong?

I'm literally not debating and arguing with you.

1. It depends on the relationship a person has with christ

2. This is based on my former experience and what I read in the bible

3. I'm not a theologian

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Now you desribe tritheism. Christians do NOT believe in three beings/gods/entities.

Christians believe in only one God. Thay believe God is only one Being shared by three persons. Christianity is monotheism. Christianity is NOT polytheism.

Why can you not admit you are wrong?

I'm not sure where you got this, though.

I never said it was polytheism.

Tritheism isn't taught in the church.

What are you talking about?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Not just you, but there seem to be others who don't get it and it's endlessly frustrating because honestly this is basic Christian teaching. It's been 5 pages now and if folks are confused about basic stuff like Jesus being God then I honestly, really don't know what to say.

I don't know what kind of Catholics you've been around but with all kindness, I can assure you that that all believe Jesus is God and all things were created through him. If they don't they're effectively holding heretical beliefs.

I was catholic. I've talked with the priest before I even became Catholic and was involved in the church for a good amount of time before I was even initiated.

Since I was a convert I don't speak the same metaphoric poetic lingo to describe the same concept of the trinity.

 

[Starlight]

I was catholic. I've talked with the priest before I even became Catholic and was involved in the church for a good amount of time before I was even initiated.

Since I was a convert I don't speak the same lingo to describe the same concept of the trinity.

You was a catholic that misunderstood the trinity. When you try to explain the trinity you are in reality describing tritheism.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

@Rival we have a huge catholic church here. I used to go to mass daily, spoke with many of priests, retreats, personal prayer and reflection, and reading the bible.

Whether people agree with me or not is on them. It depends on the relationship people have with Christ. Catholicism is highly profound so if you're looking for commonly interpreted and text book definitions you can read all types of definitions but the OP wasn't looking for facts and I would highly assume she didn't expect everyone's answers to be the same.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

You was a catholic that misunderstood the trinity. When you try to explain the trinity you are in reality describing tritheism.

Tritheism isn't taught in catholicism so that's not how I understood it. I never even knew the word existed.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

...... Jesus is in a unique relationship with God the Father. While Hebrew kings were sons of God symbolically (see Psalm 2), Jesus is the only Son of God by nature.
BORN OF THE FATHER BEFORE ALL AGES
Begotten has the meaning of born, generated, or produced. God the Son is born out of the essence of God the Father. Just as a child shares the same humanness as his or her parents, the Son shares the essential nature of God with the Father. Since God is eternal, the Son, being begotten of God, is also eternal..........

I find in the Bible that the Father was Not born, but from everlasting (No beginning - Psalms 90:2 (Douay Psalm 89)
Whereas, pre-human Jesus was first heavenly born of every creature - Colossians 1:15
This is why gospel writer John could write at Revelation 3:14 that pre-human Jesus is the beginning of the creation of God.
In other words, only God was BEFORE the beginning, and pre-human Jesus was never BEFORE the beginning.
Jesus was "IN" the beginning but Never BEFORE the beginning as his God /Father was BEFORE the beginning.
And why at Revelation 4:11 Jesus gives the credit to his God.
Even the resurrected ascended-to-heaven Jesus still think he has a God over him - Revelation 3:12 (verse 12 Douay)

 

[Rival]

@Rival we have a huge catholic church here. I used to go to mass daily, spoke with many of priests, retreats, personal prayer and reflection, and reading the bible.

Whether people agree with me or not is on them. It depends on the relationship people have with Christ. Catholicism is highly profound so if you're looking for commonly interpreted and text book definitions you can read all types of definitions but the OP wasn't looking for facts and I would highly assume she didn't expect everyone's answers to be the same.

This is true but the RCC has strict definitions of what constitutes right belief and those are the answers one will be given to such questions.

 

[blü 2]

This is where, I would say, the Chalcedonian doctrine of Jesus's two natures (the Hypostatic Union of divine and human) gets complicated, because while there is only one undivided divine will for the one divine ousia (the Triune God), Jesus has a human will and mind according to his human nature, in addition to the Divine Will that he has in common with the Trinity, as the incarnation of the second person of God, as the Catechism of the Catholic Church notes.

So, we believe that God the Son assumed a human nature complete with its own rational human soul, that constitutes one person with a single centre of consciousness, the subject of which is the Divine Word:


Catechism of the Catholic Church | Catholic Culture

III. TRUE GOD AND TRUE MAN

464 The unique and altogether singular event of the Incarnation of the Son of God does not mean that Jesus Christ is part God and part man, nor does it imply that he is the result of a confused mixture of the divine and the human. He became truly man while remaining truly God. Jesus Christ is true God and true man...

468 After the Council of Chalcedon, some made of Christ's human nature a kind of personal subject. Against them, the fifth ecumenical council, at Constantinople in 553, confessed that "there is but one hypostasis [or person], which is our Lord Jesus Christ, one of the Trinity."93 Thus everything in Christ's human nature is to be attributed to his divine person as its proper subject, not only his miracles but also his sufferings and even his death: "He who was crucified in the flesh, our Lord Jesus Christ, is true God, Lord of glory, and one of the Holy Trinity."94​

470 Because "human nature was assumed, not absorbed", 97 in the mysterious union of the Incarnation, the Church was led over the course of centuries to confess the full reality of Christ's human soul, with its operations of intellect and will, and of his human body. In parallel fashion, she had to recall on each occasion that Christ's human nature belongs, as his own, to the divine person of the Son of God, who assumed it. Everything that Christ is and does in this nature derives from "one of the Trinity".

The Son of God therefore communicates to his humanity his own personal mode of existence in the Trinity. In his soul as in his body, Christ thus expresses humanly the divine ways of the Trinity: 98

The Son of God. . . worked with human hands; he thought with a human mind. He acted with a human will, and with a human heart he loved. Born of the Virgin Mary, he has truly been made one of us, like to us in all things except sin. 99​

471 Apollinarius of Laodicaea asserted that in Christ the divine Word had replaced the soul or spirit. Against this error the Church confessed that the eternal Son also assumed a rational, human soul. 100

472 This human soul that the Son of God assumed is endowed with a true human knowledge​

One scholar described the implications of this doctrinal formulation, as follows (in laymen's terms):

"The second person of the Trinity does not simply have access to the mind of Jesus. He is Jesus.

The person of the Word takes the place of what would be a human person in the incarnate Word, and that person is the centre of the human consciousness and will of the incarnate Word. It is not the human mind that knows or the human will that wills, but the divine person who knows using the human mind, and the divine person who wills using the human will. Because it is the person who acts, knows, and wills, the person of the Word knows himself (and not someone else) to be acting, knowing, and willing in the actions of Jesus.

But because there are two natures (with two minds and wills), the same person acting as the one centre of consciousness experiences himself in two different ways (as human and as divine)."​

Thanks once more.

But I still don't get the part where Jesus has to withdraw into the garden and pray to the Father and to submit to the Father's will, when according to the formula above the Father has nothing Jesus doesn't already have.

Which is the same problem Jesus has on the cross; he can't forsake himself, presumably he won't forsake himself, in this formulation though not in the NT he knows this, and yet he's forsaken. Non sequitur.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

This is true but the RCC has strict definitions of what constitutes right belief and those are the answers one will be given to such questions.

I mentioned I was speaking from my experience, what I've learned, and reading the bible. I liken the experience as with the Eucharist. The idea is that before consecration, there is just bread and wine and after consecration its jesus christ. Catholics don't separate the two. I see that as with the trinity-you have creator, human, and spirit but those who profoundly believe in this, they can't differentiation the two. The Church has called it a mystery, and from what I gather the Othorodox Catholic, unlike Roman, decide not to figure it out and let it be.

 

[blü 2]

On that point, in relation to the New Testament, it's indisputably the case that it does not use words like ousia (consubstantial, of one essence or being), persons or Trinity.

The first to use quasi-Trinity language as we know it today, was St. Theophilus of Antioch in 169 A.D.

Yet whilst the 'language' used is post-biblical, it is nevertheless still an attempt to articulate ideas that can be found in the New Testament but not yet 'phrased' in the philosophically sophisticated ontology of Greek and Latin scholars.

The New Testament authors were Jews relying upon Hebraic phraseology (in Greek, which Hellenistic Jews had been using for quite some time by then) to express these same basic, underlying concepts in the way that they had available to them.

However, I would say that the consensus of modern scholars is that the roots - in crude and primitive form (not yet expressed with the penetrating philosophical and technical acumen of the later Church Fathers) - of the later Trinity are already implicit in the New Testament, in the form of a Binitarianism with a triadic discourse in relation to God.

Jesus is already cast in Pauline epistles like Corinthians and Romans, and in the Gospel of John and Epistle of the Hebrews, as the earthly incarnation of the pre-existent divine Word / Son, who always existed in relation to the Father in eternity, and through whom the universe was created.

And this Father - Son dynamic within the one reality of God, is always spoken of in relation to the Spirit, even though the latter is not yet fully personified in the NT.

The 'Son' is referred to as the Image of God ("who being the brightness of His glory and the express image of His being" (Hebrews 1:3)) and also as 'begotten' (first-born, begotten means to be 'born') in a number of NT texts. “Monogenes” is the Greek word used for “begotten” in John 3:16, John 3:18, John 1:14, John 1:18 and 1 John 4:9.

In every scriptural verse where John employs the word MONOGENES, it is in a context in which he simultaneously relies on the term GENNAO “new birth” (see John 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; 1 John 4:9). That is no accident. The Johannine author is intentionally making a distinction between the new birth that believers experience and the Son’s unique begottenness from the Father.

(John 1:14 YLT) And the Word became flesh, and did tabernacle among us, and we beheld his glory, glory as of an only begotten of a father, full of grace and truth.

[Jhn 1:14 MGNT] (14) καὶ ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο καὶ ἐσκήνωσεν ἐν ἡμῖν καὶ ἐθεασάμεθα τὴν δόξαν αὐτοῦ δόξαν ὡς μονογενοῦς παρὰ πατρός πλήρης χάριτος καὶ ἀληθείας

"The Son is the image [eikon] of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For in Him all things were created" (Colossians 1:15)

"For to which of the angels did God ever say,

“You are my Son;
today I have begotten you”?" (Hebrews 1:5)​

So, the basic concept and even terminology of God being one, yet having within this one reality a relation of Father and Son, whereby the latter is the begotten self-image of the former and both are one Creator God, is already there.

And the latter theologians relied upon the exegesis of such verses to define Trinitarian theology at the councils.

Consider this from the Epistle of Alexander, Bishop of Alexandria, to Alexander, Bishop of Constantinople, dated 324, the year before the Council of Nicaea, as an example of how they did so:

“In their [referring to Arius and his followers] ignorance and want of practice in theology they do not realize how vast must be the distance between the Father who is unbegotten (ἀγεννήτος), and the creatures, whether rational or irrational, which He created out of the non-existent; and that the only-begotten nature (φύσις μονογενής) of Him who is the Word of God, by whom the Father created the universe out of the non-existent, standing, as it were, in the middle between the two, was begotten of the self-existent Father (ἐξ αὐτοῦ τοῦ ὄντος πατρὸς γεγέννηται), as the Lord Himself testified when He said, ‘Every one that loveth the Father, loveth the Son that is begotten of Him (τὸν υἱὸν τὸν ἐξ αὐτοῦ γεγεννημένον)’ [1 John 5:1]” (NPNF2 3.39 modified).​

The trouble is that Paul says Jesus is not God, the Jesus of Mark says he's not God, the Jesus of Matthew says he's not God, the Jesus of Luke says he's not God and the Jesus of John says he's not John.

And not one of them ever steps forward and says, "Hey, folks, I'm God." For example ─

1 Corinthians 8:6 yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.

Philippians 2:11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Mark 12:29 Jesus answered, “The first is, ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one; [...] 32 And the scribe said to him, “You are right, Teacher; you have truly said that he is one, and there is no other but he,

Matthew 20:23 He said to them, “You will drink my cup, but to sit at my right hand and at my left is not mine to grant, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared by my Father.”

Matthew 24:36 “But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only.”

Luke 18:18 And a ruler asked him, “Good Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” 19 And Jesus said to him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone.”

John 5:19 “the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing”

John 8:42 Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I proceeded and came forth from God; I came not of my own accord, but he sent me.

John 14:6 “No one comes to the Father but by me."

John 17:3 “And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.”

1 John 4:12 No man has ever seen God​

So there's the problem that if Jesus is really God all along, his ministry is one long deception.

But the obvious conclusion from this and other evidence is that the Trinity doctrine arises out of later church politics and becomes doctrine only in the 4th century; and the authors of the NT had never heard of it ─ surely?

 

[Clara Tea]

He was quoting the first verse of Psalm 22. The last verse of the Psalm is as follows "They shall come, and shall declare his righteousness unto a people that shall be born, that he has done this".

In attributing these words to him, the Gospel writers may be said to imply that Jesus was human, and that being human, he despaired; that he was fulfilling Old Testament prophecy; that he was conversant with Hebrew scripture; and that his message would be heard by a people yet to come.

I've heard this before. Thank you for reminding me.

Here are a few other ideas from the internet:

Why did Christ say 'God, why have you forsaken me'? - Quora

"When Christ called out, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”, it was because Jesus sensed that his Father had withdrawn his protection so that his integrity might be tested to the limit without any special assistance from his father."

Understanding the Seven Last Words of Jesus Christ

"Jesus was about to be briefly parted from the Father and the Holy Spirit. At this moment, he felt the abandonment of God as the sins of the world were now upon Him to which He wold pay the penalty."

"David prophesied this in Psalm 22:1 to which talks about the crucifixion of Jesus. Psalm 22 talks in detail of the crucifixion of Christ years before crucifixion would be invented by the Persians and perfected by the Romans."

"Because at the moment that at the cross that the sins of the world were upon the Savior, God could not look at sin (Habakkuk 1:3)."

 

[Starlight]

The hypostatic union in Christianity is the one ousias of three hypostasis. Not Jesus. Jesus is one of the hypostasis.



Dharma means teaching. Kaya means body. And it is one aspect of the Buddha in the Mahayana teachings, unlike the trinity.



This is not like the trinity.

IN the trinity of the athanasian creed, God, son and spirit are one but three separate beings altogether with one usia. So your explanation is similar to a Christian heresy called Modalism.

@Meandflower

The trinity is not one person in three modes like the Thrikaya in Mahayana Buddhism. I think you may of course know all of this. But the concept of the trinity is that it is one ousia or essence in three separate beings, vis a vis, the father, son and Holy Spirit. The father is NOT the son, the son is not the father, the Holy Spirit is neither of them. They are separate beings, but of the same essence or usia so they are not three lords. In the church history, believing the trinity is three modes of the same person like the Thrikaya spoken of above is called modalism. Its a very serious heresy and you can be excommunicated for believing in such a thing. I will cut and paste part of the Athanasian creed for you from Marquess's translation directly.

"So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet they are not Three Gods, but One God. So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, and the Holy Ghost Lord. And yet not Three Lords but One Lord. For, like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every Person by Himself to be God and Lord, so are we forbidden by the Catholic Religion to say, there be Three Gods or Three Lords. The Father is made of none, neither created, nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone; not made, nor created, but begotten. The Holy Ghost is of the Father, and of the Son neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding.

So there is One Father, not Three Fathers; one Son, not Three Sons; One Holy Ghost, not Three Holy Ghosts. And in this Trinity none is afore or after Other, None is greater or less than Another, but the whole Three Persons are Co-eternal together, and Co-equal. So that in all things, as is aforesaid, the Unity is Trinity, and the Trinity is Unity is to be worshipped. He therefore that will be saved, must thus think of the Trinity."

Yes i know the trinity doctrine is not one God in three temporal modes of being. That is a heresy called modalism or sebellianism.

Definition of modalism:
: the theological doctrine that the members of the Trinity are not three distinct persons but rather three modes or forms of activity (the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) under which God manifests himself

But @Windwalker wrote that in Mahayana Buddism Buddha exist eternally in three modes of being. Windwalker desbribed that Buddha always exist in three different modes at the same time. That explanation is very similar to the trinity doctrine since the trinity doctrine is that God exist eternally in three different persons. In the trinity doctrine God always exist in three different persons at the same time.

In modalism God is temporary in three different modes of being. In modalism the different modes is not eternal. In modalism God is just one person and one being who temporally manifest himself in three different modes, manifestations or forms of activity (The Father, Son, Holy spirit)

In the trinity doctrine God is eternally three different persons who share one Being. The three persons in God can communicate with each other and is loving each other but at the same time they share the same Being.

You are wrong about the trinity. The trinity doctrine is not a belief in three beings.

The trinity doctrine is that God is only one Being shared by three persons.

Jews, muslims, baha'is believe God is only one Being and one person.